for the security and stability of the dominion of another. Yet even those who may maintain that the circumstances of country, birth, and education afford no palliation of the conduct pursued by Aurangzíb, must admit that this Prince is endowed with a versatile and rare genius, that he is a consummate statesman, and a great King[1].'
The hostile criticisms of travellers regard chiefly Aurangzíb's conduct as Prince: to his acts as Emperor they manifest little save admiration. Throughout his long reign of nearly fifty years no single deed of cruelty has been proved against him[2]. Even his persecution of the Hindús, which was of a piece with his puritanical character, was admittedly marked by no executions or tortures. Hypocrite as he was called, no instance of his violating the precepts of the religion he professed has over been produced, nor is there the smallest evidence that he ever forced his conscience. Like Cromwell, he may not have been 'a man scrupulous about words, or names, or such things, but he undoubtedly put himself forth for the cause of God,' like the great Protector, 'a mean instrument to do God's people some good, and God service.'
Aurangzíb was, first and last, a stern Puritan. Nothing in life – neither throne, nor love, nor ease – weighed for an instant in his mind against his fealty
