Page:Studies in Mughal India.djvu/8

of faithless courtiers, or in stupefying themselves with intoxicants, — men whose animal existence was never ennobled by intellectual exercise or spiritual musing, æsthetic culture or the discipline of work. Such is the Sultan (or Rajah) of nearly every English novel, with his jewelled turban, curled up moustaches, bloodshot eyes, nose high up in the air, and a small arsenal thrust into his waist-band. This idea has been impressed on the general public of Europe by popular writers, who sacrifice truth to literary effect, and whose ignorance of Eastern history is only equalled by their pride in everything Western.

But a little reflection will show that this view cannot possibly be true. From Akbar to Aurangzib we had four great rulers, who reigned in unbroken succession for a century and a half (1556-1707), extended their dominion, maintained peace at home and respect abroad, developed an administrative system in all its branches, and carried many arts towards perfection. Could this work have been done by sleepy voluptuaries? The world is not so easily governed. Inefficiency has a very short lease even in the East. An empire like that of the "Great Mughals" in its best days could not have been a dead machine; administration, arts and wealth could not have developed, as they did develop in that period, if we had had only faineants on the throne, in the council-chamber, and at the head of armies.

Happily the contemporary Persian histories fully describe the Emperor's daily routine of work as