India Says It Wants One of the Crown Jewels Back From Britain
By NIDA NAJAR

NEW DELHI — The Indian government has begun a campaign for the return of a historic 105.6-carat diamond that was either a gift to Queen Victoria from the maharajah of Punjab in 1849 or stolen by the British, depending on some widely divergent perspectives.

After some indecision, the Indian Culture Ministry said on Tuesday evening that it would make “all possible efforts” to arrange the return of the diamond, the Koh-i-Noor, now residing in the Tower of London, where it is a centerpiece of the British royal family’s crown jewels.

As with the Elgin marbles, the Parthenon sculptures and other artifacts that Greece has long tried to reclaim from Britain, the ownership of the diamond has been a contentious issue for decades.

For many Indians, the Koh-i-Noor — or Mountain of Light — is a symbol of colonial subjugation and three centuries of exploitation that began with the East India Company in the early 17th century, culminated in the absorption of India as a colony after a major uprising in 1857 and ended with the independence, and partition, of India in 1947.

Whether it was a gift or not, Britain says the diamond came into its possession after the defeat of Punjab in the Anglo-Sikh wars of the 1840s and was moved to Britain in 1850. As recently as 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron said the diamond would “stay put.”

But critics in India say the British version of the story has been sanitized.

The diamond originated in the Golconda mines, in what is now the state of Andhra Pradesh. It passed through the hands of Mughal, Persian and Afghan rulers before landing with Maharajah Ranjit Singh, the ruler of the Sikh kingdom in Punjab, who died in 1839.

His death led to a struggle and, in 1843, the installation of his 5-year-old son. In the power vacuum, the East India Company rapidly extended its control over the once-powerful kingdom, annexing it in 1849, after its victory in the Second Anglo-Sikh War, said Anita Anand, a journalist and a co-author of a forthcoming book on the diamond. The jewel was then surrendered, she said, as part of an agreement ending the war and signed by the boy king.

“It was a cynical exploitation, at a time of flux in the Sikh kingdom,” Ms. Anand said by telephone.

The controversy may even extend beyond India. In Pakistan, a lawyer filed a petition in the Lahore High Court in February arguing that the diamond belonged to territory that is now part of Pakistan, and that the Pakistani government should seek its return.

The issue was raised this week by a private group that was seeking a court order requiring the Indian government to request the diamond’s return. The Indian solicitor general, Ranjit Kumar, at first argued against the suit, saying that the gem was a gift and that the government had no reason to seek its return. This ignited a firestorm on social media, and did not appear to sit well with some of the judges.

“We have not colonized any other country and taken out their artifacts,” Chief Justice T. S. Thakur said, according to the Kolkata newspaper The Telegraph. “What are you worried about?” After that, the government seems to have had a change of heart.

Some Indian commentators said the issue was a political distraction. “Let it remain where it is, a shining example of our selflessness,” Pritish Nandy, a politician and writer, wrote on Twitter on Monday, calling the claim “not worth pursuing.”

Shekhar Gupta, a columnist for the newspaper The Business Standard, wrote on Twitter that the case was “a reminder to higher courts to be selective with what deserves attention.”

Most analysts say there is little chance that Britain will part with the Koh-i-Noor, which is embedded in a crown, crafted in 1937, that was most recently used by the Queen Mother, who died in 2002 at 101. Mr. Cameron said during a 2010 visit to India that if one request was yielded to, “you suddenly find the British Museum would be empty.”

Nevertheless, the Indian Culture Ministry said it hoped for an “amicable outcome whereby India gets back a valued piece of art.”

英王冠巨鑽「光之山」 印度：致力帶回國

印度檢察長庫瑪日前聲稱英國王冠上的「光之山」巨鑽是印度大君「贈予」英國，引起印度輿論憤怒，印度文化部趕緊發出聲明，指印度仍致力把這顆巨鑽帶回國。

正當英國女王伊麗莎白二世明天將慶祝90大壽之際，印度與巴基斯坦分別出現團體向法院提出訴願，要求英國歸還王冠上105克拉的「光之山」（Kohinoor）巨鑽。

印度人權與社會正義陣線（India Human Rights & Social Justice Front）先前向法院遞交訴願書，要求印度政府追回「被英國奪走」的「光之山」鑽石，案件打到最高法院。

印度檢察長庫瑪（Ranjit Kuma）18日代表中央政府陳述立場時表示，「光之山」鑽石是旁遮普大君朗吉特（Ranjit Singh）的繼承人1849年以作為英國與錫克教王國戰爭的「自願補償」，「送給」英國，不是被英國奪走或盜取。

庫瑪的言論似乎暗示印度中央政府可能放棄主張對「光之山」鑽石的擁有權，立刻在印度輿論界，尤其是社群媒體引發討論，許多印度人對此說法都感到憤怒。

印度文化部隔天緊急發出聲明說，印度政府仍致力「以友好的方式把『光之山』帶回國」。

印度文化部還說，庫瑪的言論不代表政府。

現在正在英國倫敦塔（Tower of London）展出的「光之山」鑽石，是英國19世紀與印度錫克教徒建立的旁遮普王國戰爭並取得勝利後，向旁遮普大君取得；但這顆巨鑽一直被印度和巴基斯坦人認為，是英國在殖民時代強奪。

印度聖雄甘地的曾孫圖夏甘地（Tushar Gandhi）2009年就曾表示，「光之山」鑽石回歸印度，代表英國「對殖民史贖罪」。

在印度與巴基斯坦分家後，旁遮普省被化分為兩部份分屬印巴，因此印度和巴基斯坦都有人主張國家繼承旁遮普大君的遺產，包括「光之山」鑽石在內；但英國已明確表示，無意歸還「光之山」。

印度副檢察長庫瑪先前表示，英國后冠上的「光之山」（Koh-i-Noor）巨鑽是印度給英國的贈禮，但如今印度政府又表示，將「竭盡所能」要回這顆鑽石，招致出爾反爾的指控。

法新社報導，英國是於19世紀取得這顆108克拉的耀眼巨鑽，但鑽石所屬有歷史爭議，包括印度與巴基斯坦在內的至少4個國家都宣稱鑽石為其所有。

庫瑪（Ranjit Kuma）18日告訴印度最高法院，這顆鑽石已送給英國，並非如許多印度人所認為般地被英國奪走。

這顆鑽石的所有權轉移，載入了1850年簽訂的和平條約。當時英國取得了旁遮普（Punjab）的錫克（Sikh）帝國控制權，如今旁遮普分屬印度和巴基斯坦兩國。

錫克大君朗吉特（Ranjit Singh）則是從奔赴印度尋求庇護的阿富汗國王手中取得鑽石。如今這顆鑽石鑲嵌在英國伊麗莎白太后的后冠上，她就是現任英國女王伊麗莎白二世的母親。太后2002年過世後，后冠即陳列在倫敦塔。

印度政府昨晚發表聲明說，將以「友好方式」，「竭盡所能要回」這顆鑽石。

美國有線電視新聞網CNN引述英國王室資料指出，「光之山」巨鑽產自印度中南部戈爾孔達礦場（Golconda），先後由蒙兀兒王子（Mughal princes）、伊朗武士、阿富汗統治者及旁遮普大君擁有，最終於1849年落入英國之手。

原文參照：
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/world/asia/india-britain-koh-i-noor-diamond.html

2016-04-20 聯合新聞網 中央社 新德里20日專電