Promotion of Learning in India during Muhammadan Rule (by Muhammadans) c3.9

c3.9

Maḥmūd seems also to have been unfortunate in his relations with Alberuni, the other immortal of the Sulṭān’s court. It should, however, be noted that the words quoted by Mr. Law in his first chapter, p. 13, from Sachau are only the latter’s inference from some remark of Alberuni. Alberuni does not, I understand, name Maḥmūd, nor accuse him of not doing his duty as a patron. It is just as likely that he is referring to the apathy of Indian Rajahs. Even if Maḥmūd be meant, it is to be remembered that he belonged to a hostile country, and that he owed his imprisonment and exile to Maḥmūd. This would not help to make him just to the Sulṭān. The probability is that Alberuni was very little at Ghaznī during Maḥmūd’s lifetime, and so had small opportunity of experiencing his bounty. His great work, the *Canon Masudicus*, was dedicated to Maḥmūd’s son, after returning from India, where he must have spent years. Here I should note that the *Canon Masudicus* is still unedited, though there are several copies in Europe, and also one in the Mullā Fīrūz Library at Bombay. It should also be noted that the name Anwar Khān, in the quotation from Ferishta on p. 12 of Mr. Law’s first chapter, is a mistake of Briggs’s for Abu Rihān.