GEMOLOGY

Kohinoor: Why crown jewel is trending

in India after Queen Elizabeth II’s death

Shweta Sharma Fri, September 9, 2022 

Twitter users in India on Thursday set off the hashtag trend of the Kohinoor hours after the Buckingham Palace announced the history-defining moment of the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

Hundreds of Twitter users in India began raising the demand for return of the Kohinoor diamond — one of the world’s largest and most controversial — to the country.

The rare historical diamond is set in the crown of the British monarch which is on display in the Tower of London.

The return of the legendary gem stone appeared to remain the popular mood in the country as the hashtag Kohinoor continued to trend on Friday morning with more than 21,000 mentions on the microblogging site.

Kohinoor, also spelled as Koh-i-Noor, is a 105-carat gemstone which means “mountain of light” in Persian.

The diamond has been at the centre of political and legal controversy in India and dispute of ownership with claims just not from India but Pakistan as well.

It maintains a huge emotional connect with many Indians who believe that the diamond found in India in 14th century was “stolen” during the colonial regime.

The diamond was indeed passed through the hands of Rajput rulers, Mughal princes, Iranian warriors, Afghan rulers and Punjabi Maharajas before it ended in the crown of the British queen and found the longest home.

According to the UK Royal Palace, the Kohinoor was unearthed from Golconda mines in central southern India before it was handed to British monarchs in 1849.

It became the part of crown jewels of Queen Victoria along with hundreds of other gemstones that are said to have incalculable cultural, historical, and symbolic value and remain part of the royal collection.

The crown, which also features a purple velvet cap and ermine trim, was made in 1937 for Queen Elizabeth, consort of King George VI, to be worn on her husband’s coronation on 12 May 1937.

It is laden with 2,800 diamonds set into its platinum frame. The band comprises alternating clusters of diamonds forming crosses and rectangles, bordered by single rows of brilliant-cut diamonds.

In this file photo taken on 2 June, 1953 the Queen Elizabeth II poses on her Coronation day, in London (AFP via Getty Images)

Many believe the folklore that the Kohinoor carries a curse with its 750-year bloodstained history of murder, megalomania and treachery.

On Thursday, just as Buckingham Palace announced the tragic death of the queen, several people called on the royal family to use Britain’s longest serving monarch’s death as an opportunity to return the jewels.

“Journey of Kohinoor : From India to England. It should come back to its origin, the least UK can do towards the centuries of exploitation, opression, racism, slavery inflicted on people of the Indian subcontinent,” Twitter user Anushree said.

“Queen Elizabeth has died today... Can we get our #Kohinoor Diamond back, which was stolen by Britisher from #India. They created wealth on others death, famine, torchers & looting..” Vivek Singh, another user said.

Several people also demanded that prime minister Narendra Modi and president Droupadi Murmu get the Kohinoor back to India as the two leaders led the tribute to the Queen.

Mr Modi said: “Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will be remembered as a stalwart of our times. She provided inspiring leadership to her nation and people. She personified dignity and decency in public life. Pained by her demise. My thoughts are with her family and people of UK in this sad hour.”

In 2016, the diamond was at the centre of a court battle after an NGO filed a petition asking the court to direct the Indian government to bring back the diamond.

At that time the solicitor-general, representing India’s government, said the diamond was a “gift” to the East India company by the former rulers of Punjab in 184 and it was “neither stolen nor forcibly taken”.

However, the government took a U-turn later and the Indian ministry of culture “reiterated its resolve to make all possible efforts to bring back the Kohinoor Diamond in an amicable manner”.

For now, the famous Kohinoor-studded crown will be adorned by Prince Charles’ wife Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, who will become Queen Consort when her husband is King.

After Queen Elizabeth II's Death, Many Indians Are Demanding the Return of the Kohinoor Diamond

Chad de Guzman
Fri, September 9, 2022

INDIA-SHOW-DIAMOND
An Indian model shows a replica of the famous Indian diamond Kohinoor during a press meeting in Calcutta, 29 January 2002. 

Credit - DESHAKALYAN CHOWDHURY/AFP via Getty Images

Shortly after British monarch Queen Elizabeth II passed away on Sept. 8, the word “Kohinoor” began trending on Indian Twitter.

It was a reference to one of the world’s most famous gems. The Kohinoor diamond is just one of 2,800 stones set in the crown made for Elizabeth’s mother, known as the Queen Mother—but the 105-carat oval-shaped brilliant is the proverbial jewel in the crown.

In India, it is notorious for the way in which it was acquired by the British.

The history of the Kohinoor

When it was mined in what is now modern-day Andhra Pradesh, during the Kakatiyan dynasty of the 12th-14th centuries, it was believed to have been 793 carats uncut. The earliest record of its possession puts it in the hands of Moguls in the 16th century. Then the Persians seized it, and then the Afghans.

The Sikh Maharajah, Ranjit Singh, brought it back to India after taking it from Afghan leader Shah Shujah Durrani. It was then acquired by the British during the annexation of Punjab. The East India Company got hold of the stone in the late 1840s, after forcing the 10-year-old Maharajah Dunjeep Singh to surrender his lands and possessions.

The company then presented the gem to Queen Victoria. Prince Albert, her consort, asked for it to be recut and it was set in the crowns of Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary before being placed in the Queen Mother’s crown in 1937.

The Queen Mother wore part of the crown at her daughter’s coronation in 1953. The Kohinoor has been among the British crown jewels since then, but governments in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India have all laid claim to the diamond.

The crown of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, containing the famous Kohinoor diamond, pictured on April 19, 1994.Tim Graham Photo Library via Getty Images
Britain’s controversial possession of the Kohinoor diamond

While no plans for the future of the gem have been disclosed, the prospect of it remaining in the U.K. has prompted many Twitter users in India to demand its return.

“If the King is not going to wear Kohinoor, give it back,” wrote one.

Another said the diamond “was stolen” by the British, who “created wealth” from “death,” “famine” and “looting.”

It is not the first time that the diamond’s return has been sought. Upon India’s independence in 1947, the government asked for the diamond back. India made another demand in the year of Queen Elizabeth II’s coronation. These demands fell on deaf ears, with the U.K. arguing that there are no legal grounds for the Kohinoor’s restitution to India.

British-Indian author and political commentator Saurav Dutt says the chances of the U.K. returning the jewel are slim.

More from TIME
Read More: Why King Charles III Was an Unpopular Heir

True, the British recently facilitated the return of the Benin Bronzes—72 artifacts looted by British soldiers in the 19th century—to the Nigerian government. But Dutt says the British royal establishment is still “married to this romantic version of empire, even though it is long dead, and has lost its power.” The Kohinoor is a symbol of that power, Dutt argues, and in turning it over, he believes the Royals “would essentially be eviscerating themselves.”

At the very least, King Charles III must acknowledge the “black history” of the Kohinoor diamond, Dutt says.

“A recognition of the fact that it was obtained through stealth and deception would be a significant step at this stage, that lays the groundwork for the next generation to be able to give it back,” he tells TIME.

Many Indians may not have that patience. In the wake of the Queen’s death, there is only one demand on Indian Twitter: “Now can we get our #Kohinoor back?”

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/155/155-h/155-h.htm

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Moonstone, by Wilkie Collins 

All sorts of rough jests and catchwords were bandied about among them; and the story of the Diamond turned up again unexpectedly, in the form of a mischievous ...

Charles III is the new king, but who were Charles I and Charles II?

Ross McGuinness Fri, September 9, 2022 

Charles I, left, Charles II, centre, and Charles III, right. (PA)

The reign of King Charles III has begun.

He became king immediately after the death of Queen Elizabeth II, who passed away at the age of 96 at Balmoral on Thursday.

It is the first time there has been a new monarch for 70 years and the first time there has been a king called Charles for more than three centuries.

Read more: When is King Charles III's first address to the nation?

One of the first images of the new king, Charles III, at Aberdeen Airport on Friday. (PA)

He shares a name with two previous kings – a father and son – who presided over one of the most turbulent periods in British history.

The reigns of Charles I and Charles II spanned 1625 to 1685 and saw the overthrow and restoration of the monarchy, the English Civil Wars, the Great Fire of London and the plague.

Who was Charles I?

Charles I was king from 1625 up until his execution in 1649. (PA)

Charles I remains one of the most notable British monarchs as he is the only one to have been publicly tried and executed for treason.

He was an unpopular king whose reign led to the temporary downfall of the monarchy and the establishment of an English republic before it was restored, 11 years later, under his son, Charles II.

Read more: What happens next following the Queen's death?

Born in November 1600, Charles I moved to England from Scotland when his father, King James VI of Scotland, inherited the English throne in 1603.

He became heir apparent when his brother, Henry Frederick Prince of Wales, died at the age of 18 in 1612.

The reign of Charles I was dogged by civil war. (Getty Images)

Charles I married Henrietta Maria of France in 1625, the year he ascended to the throne, angering Protestant religious groups.

He also argued with parliament, which wanted to curb his powers, while many subjects opposed his policies which included levying taxes without parliamentary consent.

Watch: First images of the new king as Charles leaves Scotland

His attempts to force the church of Scotland to adopt Anglican practices also led to religious conflicts, which in turn resulted in the strengthening of English and Scottish parliaments, helping to pave the way for his eventual downfall.

Charles I fought the armies of the English and Scottish parliaments but was defeated in 1645 and captured. After a brief period of escape, he was recaptured and executed in Whitehall in 1649 after being tried and convicted of high treason.

Who was Charles II?

Charles II was forced into exile but returned to take up the throne from 1660 to 1685. (PA)

Known as the "Merry Monarch", Charles II spent many years in exile, fathering a dozen illegitimate children by numerous mistresses.

His reign featured the plague and the Great Fire of London.

Read more:

How 'Lilibet' became one of Britain's greatest ever monarchs – obituary

The Queen's 70 years of service in pictures

Charles II was proclaimed king of Scotland upon the execution of his father in 1649, and attempted to reclaim England, but was defeated by Oliver Cromwell at the Battle of Worcester in 1651 before fleeing to mainland Europe where he spent nine years in exile.

During the Interregnum (meaning "between reigns"), from 1649 to 1660, England became a republic for 11 years.

Charles II became king in 1660 after returning from exile. (Getty Images)

Following Cromwell’s death in 1658 and the resignation of his son, Richard, as Lord Protector the following year, parliament proclaimed Charles II king and invited him to return to England in 1660.

Five years later, Charles II fled London for Salisbury as the plague hit London, killing thousands.

The following year, in 1666, Charles II and his brother James joined and directed the firefighting effort during the Great Fire of London.

Read more:

What royal line of succession looks like after Queen's death

The newspaper front pages pay tribute to the Queen

Charles had no legitimate children, but had 12 children by seven mistresses, leading to the nickname “Old Rowley”, the name of his favourite racehorse stallion.

The present Dukes of Buccleuch, Richmond, Grafton and St Albans descend from Charles II, while Diana, Princess of Wales, was a descendent of two of Charles’s illegitimate sons – the Dukes of Grafton and Richmond.

This means that Diana and Charles III's eldest son, the Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge – who is now first in line to the throne – could become the first British monarch descended from Charles II.

 

Due to British colonialism, King Charles is now the monarch of 14 countries in addition to the UK following Queen Elizabeth's death

John Haltiwanger Thu, September 8, 2022 

Prince Charles at the State Opening of Parliament on May 10, 2022.BEN STANSALL/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

• Queen Elizabeth II died on Thursday at 96.

• Queen Elizabeth's son, King Charles III, succeeded her.

• He is now monarch over the UK and 14 other countries known as Commonwealth realms.

Queen Elizabeth II died on Thursday at 96, and her eldest son and the former Prince of Wales, Charles, immediately became the king of England upon her death. He is now recognized as King Charles III.

Due to British colonialism, which saw the British Empire invade and conquer regions across the world for centuries, King Charles is now the monarch and head of state of the UK and 14 other countries — known as Commonwealth realms.

The Commonwealth realms include: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu.

The king's role as monarch of these countries is largely symbolic, and he will not be directly involved in governing, as he is a head of state, not head of government.

It's possible that the number of Commonwealth realms could shrink during King Charles' reign. Last year, Barbados officially removed Queen Elizabeth as its head of state and became a republic. Officials in other current Commonwealth realms in the Caribbean have also signaled that they want out. Meanwhile, there is also an ongoing movement for independence in Scotland.

Though the Commonwealth realms are a sign of the enduring legacy of the British Empire, the current state of affairs between the British monarchy and such nations is also a reminder that Queen Elizabeth presided over a dwindling empire during her reign. She was head of state of 32 countries over the course of her time on the throne, but 17 ultimately cut ties during the same period.

In addition to Barbados, the 16 countries that removed Queen Elizabeth as head of state after she ascended the throne in 1952 are Sri Lanka, Fiji, The Gambia, Ghana, Guyana, Kenya, Malawi, Malta, Mauritius, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania (Tanganyika), Trinidad and Tobago, and Uganda.

Voices: I’m a French-Palestinian detained in an Israeli jail – here’s what’s really happening

Salah Hammouri Thu, September 8, 2022 

We Palestinians are still here, still hopeful, and still continuing to resist the injustices infringed upon us (AFP via Getty Images)

On 18 August, Israeli occupation forces raided and closed the offices of seven Palestinian civil society organisations (CSOs) in the West Bank, including the offices of Addameer, the prisoner’s rights organisation I used to serve as a lawyer.

The targeted CSOs include some of the most important human rights groups and popular organisations in Palestine, such as Al-Haq, which documents human rights violations and seeks accountability for Israeli crimes in international fora, and the Union of Agricultural Work Committees, which helps farmers and Palestinian communities made vulnerable by Israel’s destruction of agricultural lands and infrastructure.

These developments are the latest stage of a long-term Israeli policy to sabotage the development of Palestinian democracy and civil society, in order to prevent resistance to their settler colonial policies.

Following the end of the First Intifada and with the Oslo Accords of the 1990s, organised Palestinian political life under occupation was weakened, in contrast to a huge surge in non-governmental organisations reliant on conditional funding from European and other foreign donors.

Now, however, even NGOs whose focus is simply to document human rights abuses and initiate processes of accountability are being criminalised by Israeli occupation authorities as so-called “terrorists” and shut down.

It is a crackdown which escalated during the presidency of Donald Trump, in the context of US-Israeli efforts to advance the so-called “deal of the century” and to silence dissenting voices to a deal whose purpose as a political project is to end the quest for Palestinian national rights.

What we are witnessing, then, is an Israeli attempt to finally crush the Palestinians and their struggle, to drain the cause of any collective political content and reduce us to fragmented and individualised “humanitarian” or economic issues.

My own life experience corroborates this trajectory. First, my involvement as a student activist was banned by the Israelis, and I was arrested numerous times and held in detention without trial.

After my release from prison in 2011 I retrained as a lawyer, focusing in my work on political prisoners to provide legal and moral support to them and their families, despite the fact that the Israeli colonial military court system has proven to lack any sort of due process and is racist when ruling over Palestinians.

Yet even this has been criminalised by Israel. My family has been deported and I have been repeatedly harassed, spied on, and once again arrested and held without trial (since March of this year) in the Israeli prison from which I write this article.

On 4 September, Israeli occupation authorities – cruelly, and at the last minute – renewed my administrative detention for a second time, based on “secret information”, extending my arbitrary detention until 4 December.

Ultimately, Israel wants to remove Palestinians from our land by any means, and seeks international silence in which to accomplish this goal. We see this goal being advanced on a routine basis – such as in Jerusalem neighbourhoods like Silwan and Sheikh Jarrah, or Masafer Yatta in the West Bank.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment, sign up to our free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here

Joe Biden has yet to reverse many of Trump’s most egregious policies, or do anything to distance US policy from Israeli fascism. European states, meanwhile, despite expressing concern at recent developments, have yet to do anything substantive.

Instead, they continue to trade freely and promote ties with Israel, just like France – the country of which I am a citizen, that continues to do nothing for my freedom.

Indeed, it is extraordinary just how feeble French government efforts have been in my case. One of their own citizens, arbitrarily detained by a military court abroad for months, and targeted for illegal deportation.

An Israeli end game, however, will remain elusive as long as we Palestinians are still here, still hopeful, and still continuing to resist the injustices infringed upon us.

Salah Hammouri is a French-Palestinian lawyer and human rights defender

Global standards body approves new merchant code for gun sellers

FILE PHOTO: A woman shops for a handgun at Frontier Arms & Supply gun shop in Cheyenne

Fri, September 9, 2022 

By Ross Kerber

(Reuters) -An international standards body has approved creation of a merchant code for gun retailers, a representative said on Friday, following pressure from activists who say it will help track suspicious weapons purchases.

At a meeting this week, a subcommittee of the International Organization for Standardization approved what is known as a "merchant category code" for firearms stores, a spokeswoman said.

The decision by the Geneva-based nonprofit was long sought https://www.warren.senate.gov/oversight/letters/senator-warren-and-representative-dean-urge-bank-ceos-to-adopt-new-code-for-gun-and-ammunition-retailers by advocates of tighter gun regulation, such as U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren and other Democrats including New York City Mayor Eric Adams.

It clears the way for banks that process gun retailers' payments to decide whether to assign the new code to merchants. The code would help monitors track where an individual spends money, but would not show what specific items were purchased.

The codes were requested of the Swiss body known as ISO by Amalgamated Bank of New York, which calls itself a socially responsible lender and investor.

In a statement, Amalgamated Chief Executive Priscilla Sims Brown said the codes will allow financial institutions to use new tools to detect and report suspicious activity associated with gun trafficking and mass shootings, without impeding legal gun sales.

"This action answers the call of millions of Americans who want safety from gun violence," Brown said.

Some gun-rights activists had worried the new codes could lead to unauthorized surveillance.

Mass shootings this year including at a Texas elementary school that killed 19 children and two teachers have added to the long-running U.S. debate over gun control.

Several top U.S. pension funds had submitted shareholder resolutions asking payments companies to weigh in on the issue.

After the ISO decision was first reported by Reuters on Friday, a number of gun-control activists and politicians called for payment companies to adopt the new codes. Several cited news accounts https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/24/business/dealbook/mass-shootings-credit-cards.html of how mass shooters had bought high-powered guns on credit.

New York State Attorney General Letitia James wrote https://twitter.com/NewYorkStateAG/status/1568338548100587521 on Twitter that "credit card companies must now take the next step and flag suspicious transactions on gun and ammunition sales like they do for fraud and money laundering."

A representative for Mastercard Inc said that following ISO's approval, "We now turn our focus to how it will be implemented by merchants and their banks as we continue to support lawful purchases on our network while protecting the privacy and decisions of individual cardholders."

American Express Co, in a statement sent by a representative, said when ISO develops a new code the company works with third-party processors and partners on implementation.

"We are focused on ensuring that we have the right controls in place to meet our regulatory and fiduciary responsibilities, as well as prevent illegal activity on our network," the company said.

Representatives for Visa did not respond to questions.

(Reporting by Ross Kerber; Additional reporting by Pete Schroeder; Editing by Leslie Adler and Bill Berkrot)