Some queries

I seriously doubt about what has been shown in the yesterday(16/9/13)'s episode about Karnavati and Humayun. No where its written that HUmayun actually joined Bahadur Shah ont he eve of the second jauhar of Chittor. No doubt, the Mughal reinforcements came much later, as a result the Rajputs had to face defeat. But later on Bahadur Shah had to flee from CHittor as the Mughal army took charge. Its very surprising that the creatives have totally altered the plot in order to justify Uday Singh's grudge against the Mughals. Such distortion of historical fact is not at all expected from such a well researched project.

The history we got to read is totally distorted or modified. Mughals took over whole india and history is written by their advisers in the way they wanted. But MP has been doing lots of research works and they might have gathered informations from successors of sisodia clan and othe residents of udaypur who told real story. No doubt our history is not what is presented, i'm glad MP is putting forth real happenings, it was gud excuse written in net that humanyu reached late, reaching late is itself responsible for johur, but thankfully we got to know real face of humanyu yesterday

Originally posted by: Pari117

The history we got to read is totally distorted or modified. Mughals took over whole india and history is written by their advisers in the way they wanted. But MP has been doing lots of research works and they might have gathered informations from successors of sisodia clan and othe residents of udaypur who told real story. No doubt our history is not what is presented, i'm glad MP is putting forth real happenings, it was gud excuse written in net that humanyu reached late, reaching late is itself responsible for johur, but thankfully we got to know real face of humanyu yesterday

There can never be anything 'real' in history. It is constituted by different versions of different sides. And I am not talking about what has been cited in the net. If you want I can actually provide historical citations, if needed. We, as students of history, in any case don't take wikipedia accounts seriously as the authenticity is dubious.
Nevertheless, coming to the topic, if mughals commissioned such accounts of Humayun as u have mentioned, then the 'successors of sisodiya' clan also claim the authenticity of 'their' version of the past events. In any case, I am just worried that such one sided portrayal of such sensitive issues in a serial airing in a national channel might have different political and historical ramifications.

See you are history student but i'm history lover. For me, its not about whats written in books, inscriptions or anywhere. Its about what happened, humanyu recieved rakhi, but did he come on time? His gestures itself says that he himself made rani to committ johur. Now mughals presented this incident in their language, they couldn't defame themselves saying they backed out to root out rajputs dynasty and may be after whole rajputs were finished off mughals came to fight back, but mughals fought for winning to own a teritory not to defend them. So what is written in sites etc. Doesn't matter much, whatever the case was rani had to committ johur and humanyu was directly or indirectly responsible. No needs of proofs we read some distorted history and believe that, history has been written the way rulers wanted, its only end results which makes us realize who was at mistake. Rani died dats conclusion here, and we clearly know whom to be blamed for dat. No need to worry about protests, when authentic and researched things are shown ph can answer it back very well. They have nva taken any chance, this time also i belive they are showing genuine of which we are obscure

Some questions- How would you know what exactly has 'happened' in the past?

As you mentioned you are history student, my point was though i'm not history student but i love history. Did i attack you or ur love? I just mentioned that i love history and you are making such remarks urself. You better know about yourself and your love for history, how can i comment on it? And about happenings, I will again emphasize you to see the end results, then decide the path. Rani died in the end even after asking for help from such a strong mughal ruler, had humanyu been intended to help her, he would have taken any means to rescue her, but he didn't. I am noone to judge between right and wrong, we don't know what happened but we know who has to die, who has to suffer and who has to commit johur. So i'm sorry but humanyu is the culprit directly or indirectly who broke trust of his "so called sister" its my opinion you are free to believe what you want

problem is that yesterday they had shown that humayun had joined Bahadur Shah in the battle. This is where my problem lies.

I don't understand what happened actually, but what i feel is rani had to committ johur here lies my problem. May be initially humanyu didn't attack bahadur shah and rani felt de allied but later humanyu defeated bahadur shah just to win back a teritory. Its just dat humanyu played smart, ek teer se do nishane. And got what he wanted

Queen died. As per historical facts Humayun reached Chittor late and Karnawati had already performed Jauhar. I guess he must hav decided late to help Queen.

Uday Singh was too young when his mother died. They r showing Mughals were d invaders, so picture is like dat.

I agree dat History shud be shown as it was but now a days its not d case. These r shows made to earn profits , entertain various class of viewers, these r not history classes.if they start showing exactly as per books then I m sure no one will watch it, Bcoz v Indian viewers r fond of masala things, and if their won't b any viewership channel will scrap such shows despite of giving quality content and it will result into huge losses for d makers.

So they will modify few things as per d demand of storyline to stay in TRP race. Wat I wanna say ki instead expecting 100% purity in today's commercial world , v as viewers and history lovers shud look at d proportion I. E. Proportion of

ACTUAL FACTS :: MODIFICATION (OR FICTION)

If d ratio is 80:: 20 or 90 :: 10 then it shud not b a problem but if it is vic3-versa then yesss... It's not good.


This is completely my POV.

It is true that Humayun accepted the Rakhi and proceeded towards Chittor but later on he changed his mind on the way. Humayun decided not to interfere as it was against the traditions of Islam as well, because as Bahadur Shah was waging a holy war ( Jihad ) against Kafir . Bahadur Shah was confident that true to the traditions of Islam, Humayun would not attack him when he was engaged in war with a non-Muslim, Bahadur Shah 's advisers also argued that since he was waging a war against non-muslims , it would be contrary to the rules for a muslim king to attack him and he was right in his belief. So long as the siege of Chittor continued Humayun did not raise his finger against Bahadur Shah.