Why you need to marry alot ?? - Page 5

Originally posted by: .Vrish.

How was it coercion in the slightest?

Remember, in those days, daughters didn't succeed their fathers to thrones: they were simply given away in marriage to foreign princes or kings, and were then considered part of their married families, and their offspring too. The purpose here would have been matrimonial alliances. So under normal circumstances, had Chitravahana had a son, he'd have wanted to give Chintrangada to someone who could have made her a queen - a mother to a future king.

But since he didn't, he wanted his daughter to marry someone noble enough to be worthy of her, but not so high in stature that his son would automatically be expected to succeed him. Like had the proposal been for Chitrangada to marry Yudhisthir, that wouldn't have worked for Chitravahana, since any son of Yudhisthir would have been in the line of succession (say, had Pritivindhya and Yaudheya not been born). Which would have been fine had Chitravahana had a son, but not here.

W/ Arjun, he was getting everything he could have hoped for:

• His daughter married a prince, not some lesser kshatriya or brahmin;
• That prince agreed to his demand that his grandson would succeed him as king

What's more, his kingdom didn't take part in the war, despite the war involving the king's father!

The only downside, from a traditional/social POV was that Chitrangada wasn't able to fulfill her marital duties towards the likes of Kunti, Draupadi and other family elders. That didn't happen until the Ashwamedha yagna, when after the yagna, Uloopi and Chitrangada remained in Hastinapur w/ Arjun, Subhadra and rest of the Pandava family.

She would have done better to have had 2 sons from Arjun, and return the second to Arjun after the war, so that the Pandavas would have had a successor other than Parikshit w/o skipping a generation

I don't think chitrangadha s other son would have been considered because dwarak was more influential than manipur well as much as i know. So yeah prakishit always going to be the successor.

Yes had any of panchali s son survived things would have been different because panchals was a very influential kingdom too

Originally posted by: CaptainSpark

Abhimanyu too? 😉

Well Krishna was the reason Abhi was allowed on the battlefield (I hear Arjun wasn't too keen on it) so...😆

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Dury I meant was the ladki waala with her daughter married to Krishna's son, still he try to capture his samadhi

Tell me about that, my dad always teases me since I am very close to my Mamas.

Pandavas I mean Kunti Putras were lucky in this regard though

Their mama n mamaputra were their greatest support, not the same could be said about Shishupal though, if not mama hi mamaputra was the reason of his death

Krishna argues there that HE was the ladki wala to Arjun and hence the 50-50 settlement. Dury had the support of Balarama and a few other Yadava leaders also.

Yup Nakku-Sahu also benefited hugely from that one. 😃

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Mama to Ghatochkat Ka bhi Bura tha, fortunately he didn't live long enough to have some wrong influence on him.

By the way any idea how was Rukmi as a Mama

Tru dat. 😆

Rukmi married his daughter Rukmavati and then got killed in the reception of that marriage. 😆