Nandini really existed - Page 2

Originally posted by: aishwish

You know prem I just don't get it how you manage to "doubt" everything which you contradict and be "SURE" about your points put forward.

Firstly historians never suggest anything about nandini's age because for them she don't exist or non exist ...thanks to bindusaar historians agree that CGM had a lady in his life must be his wife who was the mother of his son.No historian accept that her name was durdhara. Even with helena the name comes from Jaishankar prasad's drama called chankaya. ..it is generally held that CGM married a daughter of Seleucus though it is nor warranted by known facts.

Secondly child marriage was not prevalent in 4 century BC...not all historians except it. Many of them on the contrary has a view that child marriage in India started around 1000 years ago with muslim invavsion.

Historians accept that CGM killed nand before he ascended throne at the age of 20 so why would he wait to be 32 years to marry nand's daughter(in case he married) is just plain unintelligible to me.

And please I have said this on your previous thread (which I doubt you bothered to check) and still saying megasthanese , abul fazal and their likes are NOT historians and neither their works are history they are merely ACCOUNTS!! Not even chanakya's arthashatra

The topic maker just merely shared a piece of information that she found ...she is time and again accepting that facts are hazy, we are all for that matter...and its high time that you accepted it as well that when it comes to CGM accepted textbook history has very less to offer and historians very less to say...we can't safely assume anything!! Just because you are adding at the end of every point you present "historians accept it" will not make it historians accept it. Kindly next time try quoting the historian with his/her name and when I say historians I mean HISTORIANS

@Siva: thanks for the information ...it always is good to know what different versions have to present!! Though I said and you said as well everything is hazy and its interesting to see so many interpretation

Originally posted by: Avantika1115

this chandra nandini is a very beautiful concept.The romance is good but now its hazy..Cvs I dont know why makes all characters like nand And Malay as baffoon and Apama she irritates me a lot.
Again this week,Cgm blames Nandini...She is with shackles atleast once in 15 days.../


patalgram track...was epitome of love and affection...
I really see those tracks again and again in vimeo..thanks to Paulomi.who takes pain to upload..Infact for another month I am going to check Paulomi thread and At thread to see any chandini scenes..
Rest all character scenes it really pisses me out..Apama character behaves like silly villain. Chanakya disappoints me a lot...
I love Yashomati... I want her to thrash Chanakya so that he would use his Brains?
😆

Originally posted by: aishwish

You know prem I just don't get it how you manage to "doubt" everything which you contradict and be "SURE" about your points put forward.

Firstly historians never suggest anything about nandini's age... because for them she don't exist or non exist ...thanks to bindusaar historians agree that CGM had a lady in his life must be his wife who was the mother of his son.No historian accept that her name was durdhara. Even with helena the name comes from Jaishankar prasad's drama called chankaya. ..it is generally held that CGM married a daughter of Seleucus though it is nor warranted by known facts.

Secondly child marriage was not prevalent in 4 century BC...not all historians except it. Many of them on the contrary has a view that child marriage in India started around 1000 years ago with muslim invavsion.

Historians accept that CGM killed nand before he ascended throne at the age of 20 so why would he wait to be 32 years to marry nand's daughter(in case he married) is just plain unintelligible to me.

And please I have said this on your previous thread (which I doubt you bothered to check) and still saying megasthanese , abul fazal and their likes are NOT historians and neither their works are history they are merely ACCOUNTS!! Not even chanakya's arthashatra

The topic maker just merely shared a piece of information that she found ...she is time and again accepting that facts are hazy, we are all for that matter...and its high time that you accepted it as well that when it comes to CGM accepted textbook history has very less to offer and historians very less to say...we can't safely assume anything!! Just because you are adding at the end of every point you present "historians accept it" will not make it historians accept it. Kindly next time try quoting the historian with his/her name and when I say historians I mean HISTORIANS

@Siva: thanks for the information ...it always is good to know what different versions have to present!! Though I said and you said as well everything is hazy and its interesting to see so many interpretation

Originally posted by: Avantika1115

this chandra nandini is a very beautiful concept.The romance is good but now its hazy..Cvs I dont know why makes all characters like nand And Malay as baffoon and Apama she irritates me a lot.
Again this week,Cgm blames Nandini...She is with shackles atleast once in 15 days.../


patalgram track...was epitome of love and affection...
I really see those tracks again and again in vimeo..thanks to Paulomi.who takes pain to upload..Infact for another month I am going to check Paulomi thread and At thread to see any chandini scenes..
Rest all character scenes it really pisses me out..Apama character behaves like silly villain. Chanakya disappoints me a lot...
I love Yashomati... I want her to thrash Chanakya so that he would use his Brains?
😆

Originally posted by: aishwish

You know prem I just don't get it how you manage to "doubt" everything which you contradict and be "SURE" about your points put forward.

Firstly historians never suggest anything about nandini's age... because for them she don't exist or non exist ...thanks to bindusaar historians agree that CGM had a lady in his life must be his wife who was the mother of his son.No historian accept that her name was durdhara. Even with helena the name comes from Jaishankar prasad's drama called chankaya. ..it is generally held that CGM married a daughter of Seleucus though it is nor warranted by known facts.

Secondly child marriage was not prevalent in 4 century BC...not all historians accept it. Many of them on the contrary has a view that child marriage in India started around 1000 years ago with muslim invavsion.

Historians accept that CGM killed nand before he ascended throne at the age of 20 so why would he wait to be 32 years to marry nand's daughter(in case he married) is just plain unintelligible to me.

And please I have said this on your previous thread (which I doubt you bothered to check) and still saying megasthanese , abul fazal and their likes are NOT historians and neither their works are history they are merely ACCOUNTS!! Not even chanakya's arthashatra

The topic maker just merely shared a piece of information that she found ...she is time and again accepting that facts are hazy, we are all for that matter...and its high time that you accepted it as well that when it comes to CGM accepted textbook history has very less to offer and historians very less to say...we can't safely assume anything!! Just because you are adding at the end of every point you present "historians accept it" will not make it historians accept it. Kindly next time try quoting the historian with his/her name and when I say historians I mean HISTORIANS

@Siva: thanks for the information ...it always is good to know what different versions have to present!! Though I said and you said as well everything is hazy and its interesting to see so many interpretation

Originally posted by: aishwish

You know prem I just don't get it how you manage to "doubt" everything which you contradict and be "SURE" about your points put forward.

Firstly historians never suggest anything about nandini's age... because for them she don't exist or non exist ...thanks to bindusaar historians agree that CGM had a lady in his life must be his wife who was the mother of his son.No historian accept that her name was durdhara. Even with helena the name comes from Jaishankar prasad's drama called chankaya. ..it is generally held that CGM married a daughter of Seleucus though it is nor warranted by known facts.

Secondly child marriage was not prevalent in 4 century BC...not all historians accept it. Many of them on the contrary has a view that child marriage in India started around 1000 years ago with muslim invavsion.

Historians accept that CGM killed nand before he ascended throne at the age of 20 so why would he wait to be 32 years to marry nand's daughter(in case he married) is just plain unintelligible to me.

And please I have said this on your previous thread (which I doubt you bothered to check) and still saying megasthanese , abul fazal and their likes are NOT historians and neither their works are history they are merely ACCOUNTS!! Not even chanakya's arthashatra

The topic maker just merely shared a piece of information that she found ...she is time and again accepting that facts are hazy, we are all for that matter...and its high time that you accepted it as well that when it comes to CGM accepted textbook history has very less to offer and historians very less to say...we can't safely assume anything!! Just because you are adding at the end of every point you present "historians accept it" will not make it historians accept it. Kindly next time try quoting the historian with his/her name and when I say historians I mean HISTORIANS

@Siva: thanks for the information ...it always is good to know what different versions have to present!! Though I said and you said as well everything is hazy and its interesting to see so many interpretation

Originally posted by: siva06

Nandini really existed
----------------------------
Nandini (Niadrus)- First wife of Chandragupta Maurya - Daughter of Dhanananda - Princess of Chandravanshi Clan and Nanda Dynasty - 337 BC - 265 BC Queen Nandini - Queen Nia

iadrus - or Chandravansham Chandra Nandini or Niadrus' is considered as the princess of Chandravanshi Clan Nanda Dynasty and daughter of Nanda Dynasty. Queen Nandini was one of the three daughters of , the ruler of the Great Nanda Dynasty which ruled Northern India around 322 BC.

CVS made some changes
But some think that CN story is a complete fantasy
CGM's history is so old, happened around 2300 years back,,hence so much confusion
Bindusaaar is son of Durdhara who died when given birth to him
But Nandini was with her hubby till his death
Nandini helped her husband In every war ,they both won almost all the wars & CGM kingdom extended upto Afghanistan

According to reference in Jain Literatures Queen Nandini was married to Chandragupta Maurya as a war compensation and Dhanananda was sent to exile in the forest, became a Jain Monk. According to Megasthenes reference from Indika (greek: Indica) Niadrus was an exceptional warrior and a great leader. Niadrus was the eldest of all descendants of Dhanananda.

Niadrus was also the advisor of militia and an able army commander. Niadrus had a fleet of 2000 Elephants and 4000 Chariots
Nandini may have girl child actually it's not mentioned in history
Nandini was warrior princess but CVs made her cry baby
(narrated by a history student)