110 SOCIAL SCIENTIST A crucial difference between Tipu Sultan and his contemporaries was his understanding of the forces responsible for European superiority. UnMke many he had no illusion that European strength lay in military training and discipline. Instead he saw science and technology as the sources of European progress and success. Consequently, he tried to acquire that knowledge through a mission he had sent to France, so that he could initiate a process of modernizing his kingdom. As the author has pointed out, he was 'not merely conversant with world politics but had also imbibed the nationalist thought and philosophy which were sweeping Europe. He was aware of the new European age of reason, the age of Voltaire, Rousseau, Didevot and the Encyclopaedists.' In contrast to the stories invented by colonial historians and recently propagated Hindu communal ideologues, Tipu had a cultivated mind, familiar with Indian and European languages and at ease with theology as well as modern sciences. In all discussion about 'Muslim' rulers a standard question is about their fanaticism and cruelty. Curiously such a question is not raised in respect of Hindu rulers, even when their practice of state craft was very much based on violence and intolerance of opposition. Tipu Sultan has been the target of such a communal bias which has painted him in the image of a monster and a bigot who relentlessly persecuted the members of other communities. Fernandes persuasively argues that the Sultan's policies and practice do not been out such an assessment. In his public policies Tipu did not act in a sectarian manner by discriminating one community against another. Moreover, his administrative arrangements took cognizance of the religious faith of the subjects: each province had a kazi and a pandit and the high court of appeal had a Hindu and a Muslim judge. It is well known that several important positions in Tipu's administration were manned by Hindus. It become significant when contrasted to the administration of the Nizam which had no Hindus in the higher echelons and of the Peshwa which had no non-Hindu in it. That Tipu donated money and land to temples and Hindu religious institutions is common knowledge. Yet an incident narrated by Fernandes is worth recounting. In 1791 Raghunath Rao Patwardhan, the 'Hindu' Maratha general, had 'invaded Sringeri, plundered the monastry, killed a number of Brahmins and committed the sacrilege of displacing the holy image of the Goddess Sharda'. The person to whom the Shankaracharya appealed for assistance was none other than the 'muslim fanatic* Tipu. Tipu immediately sent money, grain and other articles necessary for the re-consecration of the idol and received prasad and shawls in return. The action of Raghunath Rao against his own religious savant reflects on what Tipu did to the Nairs of Malabar and the Christians of Kanara. The Nairs of Malabar were his political foes and the Christians of Kanara actively cooperated with the British. Without,