Great Leaders?
March 22, 2010
Rwail Sirmed
Tags: Baber, Ganges Khan, Hamayun, history, Moghals, Pakistan, Rwail Sirmed, Tamer the Lame
Moghals have become my fascination eversince I started reading different stories about them. They were descendents of Tamer Lame (ruler of the ancient city of Samarkand) and Mongol warrier Ganges Khan. I did not read much about Timur the Lame, but I like and hate Ganges Khan. I hate him because he killed so many people. And I like him because he was a very good administrator.
I have written this piece about Moghal king Hamayun because I am studying about him. My book tells that he was a very kind and just king. If a family was poor he would never take tax from them. That proves that Hamayun was a Just Emperor.
Hamayun was King Babur’s beloved son, his full name was Naseer-ud-din-Hamayun. Babur was his father whose empire was the largest the world has ever known. Babur told Hamayun to share his kingdom with his brothers, and he did this. He ruled Delhi, gave Kabul and Kandahar to his brother Kamran, and also gave his brothers Askari and Hindal parts of his kingdom.
Hamayun had a big drum called “Tabl-e-Adal” (drum of justice) placed outside his palace. Anyone who wanted to speak to him, used to come and strike the drum once. If a man owed money, and it was not paid to him he would strike the drum twice. A man whose things had been stolen would strike the thrice and four strokes on the drum meant someone had been killed.
Hamayun liked to do unique experiments. Once he made a floating garden!! He grew some flowers and plants on a boat!! and that boat used to go round the whole kingdom. All the people of the kingdom were shocked!!
Hamayun died accidentally of falling from the stairs.
I dont understand, if these people were great, why did they attack other sultanates and killed so many people?
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
4 Comments Add your own
Leave a Reply
Trackback this post | Subscribe to comments via RSS Feed
1.
Jaymin PANCHAL |
March 22, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Nice read.!!! to answer ur last para!! as human by its nature is nevr holier in totality nno 1 is bad in totality. Hence I advocate of judging actions in situations thn judging ppl generally (ofcourse this is nt possible all the time) bt it gves u fair chance to get answer to ur question.
– Jemin
2.
Shirin |
March 22, 2010 at 4:05 pm
like the question at the end….how about sharing your ideas on ‘greatness’ in your next blog
3.
Ketan |
March 22, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Hi!
People tend to have different abilities. Some people can be intelligent, but cruel, others could be unintelligent but kind.
One thing I have learned in life is that whenever we learn about a person who we ourselves can never meet (for example those who have died), we should never completely believe those accounts. Because, the one who gives us those accounts might have their own biases. For example, because kids love their parents, they will always say good things about them. But ultimately no one is perfect. So what I feel is when we learn about historical figures, we should try not to feel any emotions (either hatred or love) for them because we can never accurately determine what they were like.
At best we can learn from their mistakes and deeds of wisdom.
One more important thing about the world – kings, rulers and politicians are overrated. Even in case of Humayun, it must have been some court minister who must have been intelligent to have given drum’s idea, but because he was not the king his name would never be mentioned in history books.
Hope my experience of seeing world helps.
Take care.
4.
marvisirmed |
March 22, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Very apt I would say. History books are written by human beings and it is natural and normal for human beings to have one inclination or the other. Although I firmly believe that if we are historians, we need to record the facts with complete honesty, balanced view and keeping wide range of factors in the view.
For example, Ganges Khan you talked about. In this part of the world, he is panted as a villain because the rulers here at that time did not like him for wanting to take their kingdom from them. So, the history books mainly would not talk about good things about him. Like your daada ji tells us so many good stories about him!
Then there was Mohammad Shah, the Indian King. Who was fond of literature and arts especially performing arts. He hated war and blood. You would not see any war under him that he fought himself or allowed to happen. So, under him, the kingdom of India did not get bigger in terms of territory. Both of these points do not go very well with staunch Muslim historians, they paint him as a useless imbecile!
So, Ketan ji absolutely right when he says we need to be a bit careful in making firm opinions about these personalities. Firm opinions are not that good any way!
A good try sweetheart! Loved it, especially the last question. Keep it up! Love you.