2 user

The Brahma Diamond (1909)

An unscrupulous tourist plots to steal the famous diamond, "The Light of the World," tricking a young woman into helping him. She is caught and imprisoned, while he prepares to sell the diamond and make his getaway.





Add Image Add an image

Do you have any images for this title?



Credited cast:
Harry Solter ...
A Tourist
George Gebhardt ...
A Guard
The Guard's Sweetheart
The Guard's Sweetheart's Father
An Unscrupulous Hindu
Rest of cast listed alphabetically:
Native Servant
Anita Hendrie ...
Dancer (unconfirmed)
Tourist (as Herbert Yost)
A Guard / A Servant / Hotel Manager


It was at the City of Cawnpore on a feast day that the faithful assembled in the temple to worship at the shrine of Brahma, the first person of the Hindu triune God, comprising Brahma, Vishnu and Siva, sometimes called the Brahmin Trinity. In this Hindu pantheon there gathered natives of the Ganges Valley of all castes, with the priests, their wives, and houris; also a generous sprinkling of Western tourists, they being drawn thither by their thirst for sight-seeing. Most kaleidoscopic was the scene as out of its midst towered the stately idol Brahma. In the forehead of the idol there was embedded a mammoth diamond of fabulous value. This was termed the "Light of the World." Among the tourists there is one who, a stranger in a strange land, finds himself in a depleted condition as regards finances. Extravagant and improvident, he is piling up a bill at the Cawnpore Hotel without funds to meet it. The sight of this diamond at once arouses his cupidity and he determines to secure it at ... Written by Moving Picture World synopsis

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis







Release Date:

4 February 1909 (USA)  »

Company Credits

Show more on  »

Technical Specs


Sound Mix:

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1
See  »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

The Cinematic Daniel Defoe
15 October 2004 | by See all my reviews

In all of these short films that the 34 year old D.W. Griffith made in 1909, he created a vocabulary for film-making like Daniel Defoe did for novel writing. I don't particularly like this offering in the same that I didn't like 'Robinson Crusoe', but I did feel that I could do it better in the same way that I felt that I could rewrite 'Crusoe' in an improved way. What this film needed was a trans-valuation of viewpoint so that it could be digested more easily for contemporary audiences. As it stands, it is unpalatable, not because of the period or the subject matter, but just the point of view. Opinions will always shift from generation to generation, but what may have been acceptable to Griffith's generation is not so now.

0 of 6 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you? | Report this
Review this title | See all 2 user reviews »

Contribute to This Page