It is a common error to suppose that Faizí (v. p. 479) was the first* Muhammadan who mastered the difficulties of the Sanskrit,— that language, “of wonderful structure, more perfect than Greek, more copious than Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either.”

Akbar's freedom from religious bigotry, his ardent desire for the cultivation of knowledge, and his encouragement of every kind of learning, and especially his regard for his Hindú subjects, imparted a stimulus to the cultivation of Indian literature, such as had never prevailed under any of his predecessors. Hence, besides Faizí, we have amongst the Sanskrit translators of his reign 'Abdu-l Kádir, Nakíb Khán, Mullá Sháh Muhammad, Mullá Shabrí, Sultán Hájí, Hájí Ibráhím, and others. In some instances it may admit of doubt, whether the translations may not have been made from versions previously done into Hindí, oral or written. The word Hindí is ambiguous when used by a Muhammadan of that period. Nizámu-d dín Ahmad, for instance, says that 'Abdu-l Kádir translated several works from the Hindí. Now, we know that he translated, amongst other works, the Rámáyana and the Singhásan Battísí.* It is much more probable that these were in the original Sanskrit, than in Hindí. 'Abdu-l Kádir and Firishta tell us that the Mahá-bhárata was translated into Persian from the Hindí, the former* ascribing the work chiefly to Nakíb Khán, the latter to Faizí.* Here again there is every probability of the Sanskrit being meant. In another instance, 'Abdu-l Kádir tells us that he was called upon to translate the Atharva Veda from the Hindí, which he excused himself from doing, on account of the exceeding difficulty of the style and ab­struseness of meaning, upon which the task devolved upon Hájí Ibráhím Sirhindí, who accomplished it satisfactorily. Here it is evident that nothing but Sanskrit could have been meant.* But though the knowledge of Sanskrit appears to have been more generally diffused at this time, it was by no means the first occasion that Muhammadans had become acquainted with that language. Even if we allowed that they obtained the abridgment of the Pancha Tantra, under the name of Fables of Bidpai, or Hitopadeśa, through the medium of the Pehleví,* there are other facts which make it equally certain that the Muhammadans had attained a correct knowledge of the Sanskrit not long after the establishment of their religion; even admitting, as was probably the case, that most of the Arabic translations were made by Indian foreigners resident at Baghdád.

In the Khalifate of Al-Mámún, the Augustan age of Arabian literature, the treatise* of Muhammad bin Músa on Algebra, which was translated by Dr. Rosen in 1831, and the medical treatises of Mikah and Ibn Dahan, who are represented to be Indians,* show that Sanskrit must have been well known at that time; and even before that, the compilations of Charaka and Susruta* had been translated, and had diffused a general knowledge of Indian medicine amongst the Arabs. From the very first, we find them paying particular attention to this branch of science, and encouraging the profession of it so much, that two Indians, Manka and Sálih by name,—the former of whom translated a treatise on poison into Persian,—held appointments as body-physicians at the Court of Hárúnu-r Rashíd.* The Arabians possessed during the early periods of the Khalifate several other Indian works which had been trans­lated into Arabic, some on astronomy,* some on music,* some on judicial astrology,* some on interpretation of dreams,* some on the religion and theogony of the Hindús,* some on their sacred scrip­tures, * some on the calculation of nativities,* some on agriculture,* some on poisons,* some on physiognomy,* and some on palmistry,* besides others, which need not be here enumerated.

If we turn our eyes towards India, we find that scarcely had these ruthless conquerors gained a footing in the land, than Bírúní exerted himself with the utmost diligence to study the language, literature, and science of India, and attained, as we have already seen, such proficiency in it, as to be able to translate into, as well as from, the Sanskrit. Muhammad bin Isráíl-al Tanúkhí also travelled early into India, to learn the system of astronomy which was taught by the sages of that country.* There seems, however, no good authority for Abú-l Fazl's statement in the Áín-i Akbarí,* that Abú Ma'shar (Albumazar) visited Benares at an earlier period;—and the visit of Ibn-al Baithár to India, four centuries afterwards, rests solely on the authority of Leo Africanus.*

Again, when Fíroz Sháh, after the capture of Nagarkot, in the middle of the fourteenth century, obtained possession of a valuable Sanskrit Library, he ordered a work on philosophy, divination, and omens to be translated, under the name of Daláil-i Fíroz-sháhí, by Mauláná 'Izzu-d dín Khálid Khání,—and to have enabled the trans­lator to do this, he must have acquired no slight knowledge of the original, before his selection for the duty.

In the Nawwáb Jalálu-d daula's Library at Lucknow, there is a work on astrology, also translated from the Sanskrit into Persian in Fíroz Sháh's reign. A knowledge of Sanskrit must have prevailed pretty generally about this time, for there is in the Royal Library at Lucknow a work on the veterinary art, which was translated from the Sanskrit by order of Ghiyásu-d dín Muhammad Sháh Khiljí. This rare book, called Kurrutu-l Mulk, was translated as early as A.H. 783 (A.D. 1381), from an original, styled Sálotar, which is the name of an Indian, who is said to have been a Bráhman, and the tutor of Susruta. The Preface says that the translation was made “from the barbarous Hindí into the refined Persian, in order that there may be no more need of a reference to infidels.” It is a small work, comprising only 41 pages 8vo. of 13 lines, and the style is very concise. It is divided into eleven chapters and thirty sections. The precise age of this work is doubtful, because, although it is plainly stated to have been translated in A.H. 783, yet the reigning prince is called Sultán Ghiyásu-d dín Muhammad Sháh, son of Mahmúd Sháh, and there is no king so named whose reign exactly corresponds with that date. The nearest is Ghiyásu-d dín 'Azím Sháh bin Sikandar Sháh, who reigned in Bengal from A.H. 769 to 775.* If Sultán Ghiyásu-d dín Tughlik be meant, it should date sixty years earlier, and if the King of Málwa who bore that name be meant, it should be dated 100 years later; any way, it very much precedes the reign of Akbar.* The translator makes no mention in it of the work on the same subject, which had been previously translated from the Sanskrit into Arabic at Baghdád, under the name of Kitábu-l Baitarat.

From all these instances it is evident that Faizí did not occupy the entirely new field of literature for which he usually obtains credit.* The same error seems to have prevaded the history of European scholarship in Sanskrit. We read as early as A.D. 1677, of Mr. Marshall's being a proficient in the language, and without mentioning the dubious names of Anquetil du Perron* and Father Paolino,* others could be named, who preceded in this arduous path the celebrated scholars of the present period. Thus, Holwell says that he read and understood Sanskrit, and P. Pons, the Jesuit (1740), knew the language. In such an inquiry as this also must not be omitted the still more important evidence afforded by the Mujmalu-t Tawáríkh, from which Extracts have been given in Vol. I. p. 100.