History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c33.s5.17

v3.c33.s5.17

Turning now to the consideration of the blemishes in Mahmud's character, Mahmud's avarice, we think, has been greatly exaggerated. The very fact that he amassed riches as no man in history did, impels people to believe that he was avaricious. The story that he wept in the moment of death at the sight of those incalculable treasures he was going to part with, is probably an invention and a calumny. Mahmud was too religiously minded to weep at the inevitable lot of mankind, especially when we remember that he left behind him sons to whom man in his frailty is always willing and glad to resign his own acquisitions. He was no doubt not a spendthrift as princes who inherit vast riches usually are. But there is not the least doubt that he was generous as even the Vizier of Seljuk observed, a testimony more reliable than that of later writers. He spent every year vast sums on the encouragement of letters and had founded a well endowed college with salaried professors where students were fed at state expense near the Jami Masjid he had built, as already stated (Utbi p. 466). The story told about Firdusi that he was promised one thousand gold dirhams for every one thousand verses and offered silver dirhams when the work (Shahnāma) was completed with 60000 verses, has probably confirmed, if it has not actually originated this imputation of avarice to Mahmud. This story is also, we think, a later invention as "much of the traditional life of Firdusi is rejected by modern scholars". (Encyclopaedia Britannica). Indeed the current story would, in our view, rather prove the avarice and anger of Firdusi than the avarice and anger of Mahmud. In any case that same story shows the great encouragement which Mahmud gave to literature and the preservation of the ancient history of Persia. The fact that Firdusi, though a Shia and perhaps a heretic, was entrusted with this work of immortalising the history of fire-worshipping Persian kings brings out Mahmud's unalloyed love of letters. "Mahmud himself a Sunni and a fanatical Moslem still extended patronage to Persian literature and learning and developed it even at the expense of Arabic institutions". (ditto). In this love of learning and knowledge for their own sake, Mahmud may be said to have even surpassed Akbar who encouraged the study of Sanskrit; for Akbar was not a rigid Mahomedan. Mahmud already had directed the completion of Persian legendary history commenced by the Samanides themselves but finally entrusted the work to Firdusi, a native of Tus in Khorasan, the home of Persian poets, seeing that he was best fitted for it by his wonderful poetical talents and his intimate knowledge of the folklore of the ancient Persians. And Mahmud's patronage of Al-Beruni shows that he did not object even to the study of Sanskrit literature, philosophy and science. At any rate the galaxy of learned men, poets, and philosophers of unique ability, like Firdusi and Al-Beruni which illumined the court of Mahmud should make him as renowned as Akbar of modern and Vikramāditya of ancient fame. For these reasons we are disposed to attach not much value to the general imputation of avarice to Mahmud.