|
Dimensions of the French Blue per Bernard Morel “Revue de
Gemmologie a.f.g.,” Sept 85, citing Brisson “Imprimerie Royale,” Paris,
1787, p. 68 and 69, says the French Blue (FB) is 31x24.81x12.78 and
weighs 69.00 modern metric carats. The historical drawing of the Golden
Fleece shows a stone too narrow (30.96 x 26.19) and does not support
Brisson’s measurements of 31x24.81.
The templates used to cut the FB replica were generated
by starting with a line drawing of the stone in the Golden Fleece, and
then stretched to satisfy Brisson’s measurements. Successive iterations
result in a template measuring 30.96x24.87, an error rate of around 0.2%
compared to the reported 31x24.81. This keeps the stone to Brisson’s
dimensions, as I consider the drawing less accurate compared to the
measuring equipment at the time.
|
 |
 |
|
Drawing of French Blue from Fleece |
Stretched Model |
Another point of contention: Others feel that the break
facets, those along the girdle, are vertically split, so where you see
one facet there are actually two. This is based on her stone-cutter’s
judgment as the break facets on the pavilion are split, and this allows
them to match up. Because the French Blue was cut so perfectly, this
maintains a certain artistic symmetry.
I disagree. The drawing clearly shows that the break
facets are not split. The Golden Fleece drawing is extremely detailed,
and inferred to be accurate. If the break facets were split, they would
have been drawn that way. However, in the discussion above, I feel the
drawing is clearly in error in the stone’s proportions, so perhaps the
artist made a mistake here also. I’m not thinking so, as getting the
proportions slightly off is easy. Indicating split facets is even
easier, just the addition of one line per facet, so these would have
been included if observed.
Split breaks version
Others say split, I say unsplit. This demonstrates some
of the nuances when attempting to tease reality out of vague historical
references, and will continue to be a cause for debate. Again, no right
or wrong, just a difference of opinion.
As an aside, the split version is more brilliant than the
unsplit version, plus it is easier to cut. Keep this in mind if you
intend on cutting a replica.
For more
discussions related to the French Blue, see the
Hope Diamond and the
Tavernier Blue.
December 2007
My wife, Karen, and I traveled to London for the opening of the “The
Vault” exhibit at the Natural History Museum in London, and then went on
to Paris to take care of some business with the very gracious and
accommodating Dr. Francois Farges, Professor of Mineralogy at the Museum
national d’Histoire naturelle (Paris). Francois was our tour guide for
the four days we spent in Paris, and he made our trip absolutely
wondrous.
One morning Francois escorted us to Versailles. It was scheduled to be
open at 9 am, but by 10:30 it still hadn’t opened (due to a civic
function). We decided to tour the magnificent gardens.
At
one point during our walk, Francois made the comment that it was
unfortunate that we didn’t have the CZ replica of the French Blue
diamond with us (his museum was currently in the process of acquiring
the replica for display). He explained that Versailles was the original
site of where Kings Louis XIV through Louis XVI wore the original stone.
He thought it would be very philosophically poetic to be able to take
pictures of the return of the French Blue to its place of origin. The
stone had been stolen in 1792, never to reappear.
My
wife, bless her heart, opened her backpack and pulled out a Tupperware
container with the replicas I had brought to France (Great Table,
Tavernier Blue, French Blue, and Hope). Francois almost cried as he
watched the French Blue being unwrapped, as this was a project of great
importance to him. He then promptly scolded my wife for carrying them
with her due to their value, but her tongue-in-cheek retort was, “Look
at me Francois. I’m a dumpy looking middle-aged woman American tourist
dressed in jeans with a ratty backpack. Does it look like I’m worth
mugging!?”
We
took a series of pictures of Francois holding the stone with Versailles
in the background. It was fantastic. We were like three kids in a candy
store!
Photo by Scott Sucher
As
we were walking out of the gardens, we passed a series of fountains and
came upon a famous bronze statue of three cherubs. Francois noted that
it would be a wonderful picture to place the FB into the cupped hands of
one of the cherubs.
I
told him we could do that, but he pointed to a sign in French that read
“Do not step on the grass” that separated our sidewalk from the statue
which was about 6 feet away. I, having very long legs, explained that it
would require only one step to place it there, and then that same step
retrieve it. The grass hardly would be disturbed. And so, without any
fanfare or interruption, we captured the beautiful shot. Thank you,
Francois!
Photos by Scott Sucher
|
|
