Were Jodha and Prtap related???? - Page 23

yes,pari.ok lets assume akbar to be cruel according to you.writers weren't allowed to write against him.so don't you think this logic should apply to all the rulers? why just akbar?

Originally posted by: Pari117

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/akbar_vs.html
then read this too. I like rajat tokas since PRC. But here i'm debating abt real history so pls read some real facts as well.

see pari,both you and i are intelligent enough to know this source of information isnt authentic ...just another site intolerant of islam
its just dat if i'll write abt myself i'll nva write bad, so does history is. Akbar courtiers can nva write wrong or rude deeds of him. But some hindu books of other reign mentions dat. So we can't blind ourselves without looking both sides of coin

Someone said in previous pages that MP chose to fight whereas Raja Bharmal chose to surrender. If all Rajputs would have decided surrender to Mughal or other invaders then we wouldn't have been knowing any Prithviraj Chauhan, Rana Sanga or Maharana Pratap. History remembers only fighters not d one who surrendered ... No matter for wat caused them to put down d weapons.

MP wasn't d only one who fought for his land. We had Jhansi ki Rani, Shivaji, Chandragupta Maurya, etc... They all fought for their right, for justice. That's y v and our history remembers them.

I read dat Mughals didn't looted our country but Britishers did. Yes, Britishers looted us, even Mughals did. Akbar wasn't cruel, he had bad temper but he was diplomat. That's y he shaded tears on MPs death.
If Mughals gave us art, praised our talent to compensate d damage wat they did, then even Britishers gave us many things like higher education, knowledhe of English, New techniques, constructions,they promoted girl education, widow remarriage, ban on Sati, etc...

Those who come and invades in ur space is always has been known as Invader... V shud not forget wat bad they did wid our country.

And members of this forum seems to b more interested in Akbar and wives than in MPs life. I guess there is a forum to discuss abt THE GREAT AKBAR & his lady,loves...

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

My source of information isn't wrong I have read books that are referred for civil services examinations. although its from wiki, it is pretty authentic. I'm dead sure of that.

The link you have sent is anti-muslim.

You also mentioned that Nur jahan was remembered.. she was a cunning woman who knew how to use men's weaknesses.. There are many women like that who are remembered.. like hurram sultana.. a coccubine who eventually broke the 300 year old tradition, became a queen.. and her son ascended the throne

Interestingly, again in the same time period.. sulieman the magnificent.. who had good relations with Akbar

see as i said the source you refer have influence of mughal and mine had influence of hindu. Both are correct in its own way, akbar's courtiers couldn't recite wrong deeds of him so wrote lots of appreciations, and hindus couldn't bear what akbar did to them so mentioned his wrong side. I am not saying akbar was bad, i'm saying like every king he had gud as well as bad side

@cherryberry
mughals didn't loot us.if they did,kindly enlighten me about the same.

Originally posted by: Pari117

its just dat if i'll write abt myself i'll nva write bad, so does history is. Akbar courtiers can nva write wrong or rude deeds of him. But some hindu books of other reign mentions dat. So we can't blind ourselves without looking both sides of coin

Originally posted by: cherryberry293

Someone said in previous pages that MP chose to fight whereas Raja Bharmal chose to surrender. If all Rajputs would have decided surrender to Mughal or other invaders then we wouldn't have been knowing any Prithviraj Chauhan, Rana Sanga or Maharana Pratap. History remembers only fighters not d one who surrendered ... No matter for wat caused them to put down d weapons.

MP wasn't d only one who fought for his land. We had Jhansi ki Rani, Shivaji, Chandragupta Maurya, etc... They all fought for their right, for justice. That's y v and our history remembers them.

I read dat Mughals didn't looted our country but Britishers did. Yes, Britishers looted us, even Mughals did. Akbar wasn't cruel, he had bad temper but he was diplomat. That's y he shaded tears on MPs death.
If Mughals gave us art, praised our talent to compensate d damage wat they did, then even Britishers gave us many things like higher education, knowledhe of English, New techniques, constructions,they promoted girl education, widow remarriage, ban on Sati, etc...

Those who come and invades in ur space is always has been known as Invader... V shud not forget wat bad they did wid our country.

And members of this forum seems to b more interested in Akbar and wives than in MPs life. I guess there is a forum to discuss abt THE GREAT AKBAR & his lady,loves...

sorry khyati i shouldn't have been giving attention towards other topics than our Maharana Pratap. Guys i end it up here, my main aim was to re-alive this forum and make my every school and clg friend know about what great Pratap did. I won't reply back. For me warriors like Pratap deserves salute, and fire he ignited brought many revolutions in us, even today we take example of him. I'll let that fire ignited in my heart and if possible will do everything to make my fellow beings aware abt pratap's whole life. Its my last reply of topic. Jai hind jai bharat jai Pratap

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

That is where you are wrong my dear. Babur and Humayan very proudly wrote of their misdeeds. It was very honest.. accepting the fact that he was cruel.

Read their biographies and you will see.

Akbar's coins also represented his modern outlook, his stepson practices hindusim.. wrote poetry praising Lord krishna.. how can you say that? He founded a syncretic religion to promote religious harmony.

Historians aren't foolish to go about believing every written word. There is a lot of evidence to support that.

exactly. people weren't foolish to title him with the name 'Akbar' and neither are the modern people to give him 'The Great' suffix.

Originally posted by: Mini.S

@cherryberry
mughals didn't loot us.if they did,kindly enlighten me about the same.

When i say Mughal, it includes d entire dynasty right from Babur till Auranjeb.
Some of d Mughal emperors were good like Humayun & Akbarbbu d rest were not so kind and generous.

Aurangjeb literally looted Maratha empire. The way he killed Sambhaji speaks enough abt him.

Originally posted by: cherryberry293

Someone said in previous pages that MP chose to fight whereas Raja Bharmal chose to surrender. If all Rajputs would have decided surrender to Mughal or other invaders then we wouldn't have been knowing any Prithviraj Chauhan, Rana Sanga or Maharana Pratap. History remembers only fighters not d one who surrendered ... No matter for wat caused them to put down d weapons.

MP wasn't d only one who fought for his land. We had Jhansi ki Rani, Shivaji, Chandragupta Maurya, etc... They all fought for their right, for justice. That's y v and our history remembers them.

I read dat Mughals didn't looted our country but Britishers did. Yes, Britishers looted us, even Mughals did. Akbar wasn't cruel, he had bad temper but he was diplomat. That's y he shaded tears on MPs death.
If Mughals gave us art, praised our talent to compensate d damage wat they did, then even Britishers gave us many things like higher education, knowledhe of English, New techniques, constructions,they promoted girl education, widow remarriage, ban on Sati, etc...

Those who come and invades in ur space is always has been known as Invader... V shud not forget wat bad they did wid our country.

And members of this forum seems to b more interested in Akbar and wives than in MPs life. I guess there is a forum to discuss abt THE GREAT AKBAR & his lady,loves...