Post LINK - When Akbar Rode a Horse to Stop a Forced Sati Practice - Page 3

Originally posted by: karkuzhali

Abhay,

You are giving very beautiful accounts of the historical events in this forum and I thank you for all your tireless endeavours.

I am not a History student but love to learn about the Indian History, particularly The Moghul period.

While browsing in the Library, I came across a Book titled "Moghul" by Alan Salvage ( pseudonym of the author byname Christopher John). I presume that the book is a historical fiction as seen from the disclaimer it contains.It says that it is about a couple of Englishmen, "who set off in 1524 in search of a legendary kingdom of Prester John and reached India but they discovered an exotic and capricious land whose wealth far exceeded wildest dreams".This itself is enough for me to go through the book. The Book speaks from the point of view of Thomas and Richard Blunts, who landed at Goa in search of the fabled kingdom.The book narrates the events during the period from the mughal invasion to the last mughul emperor.

I was interested in the Chapters "Akbar" and "Shah of shah" which speak about the greatness of Akbar.

While mentioning about Humayun's accidental death, the author says:

"The whole of Agra had been shaken by a slight earth tremor,but little damage was done save inside the Royal palace.Years later it would be learned that on this same day had occured the greatest earth quake known to history in the province of Shensi in China, where the earth had convulsed for two hours and eight hundred and thirty thousand people were killed.Only one had died in Agra, so many thousands of miles away.But that one was the great Moghul.."

And that was Humayun, who while," engaged in indexing his beloved Library, fell from the top of the ladder and cracked his skull..."

After learning about Humayun's death, "the youthful Sultan had been more distressed by his father's premature death than he had allowed anyone to know.As soon as his grief had dwindled,his nature, naturally sensitive and curious and controlled by a deep intelligence, had begun to consider not only his present situation but what he would inherit, when he had dealt with Hemu, supposing he could.He was keenly aware of his neglected upbringing, when he compared himself with the intellectual brilliance of his father and grandfather.He understood that it was now too late to catch up as regard to literacy, but he still wanted to learn , and during this time of waiting he set aside severalhours a day for long discussions, and not only with his muslim favourites, chiefly the two brothers Sheik Feizi and Abul Fazl ... but also with certain Hindus and Parsees, Jains and Buddhists, seeking to understand why they were all so different."

If the above statement is true, did Akbar have Sheik Feizi and Abul Fazl, in his Dharbar even during his early days?

The author of the book also says that Akbar was advised by Fazal and Feizi to keep Mahamanga and Hamida Bhanu Begam(?) away from influencing him in his politcal affairs. " Hamida Banu Baygam and Maham Anga were to be confined in honourable imprisonment for the rest of their lives, In fact, they both died quickly, of shame it was said..."

Was it a fact that both the mothers died before Akbar married Jodha?

The authors narrates about the marriage of Akbar and Jodha as " for a man who had never truly loved,it turned out to be a love match."

It was after Salim Murad and Danial were born ( he says Murad and Daniyal are Jodha's sons), that "It was to Jodhpur that Akbar rode two hundred and twenty miles in two days to prevent the Rajah from forcing his son's widow to commit suttee- the ghastly Hindu practice by which a widow was burned alive on her husband's funeral pyre."

About his relationship with Jodha the author says,

..."...The mutual affection of Emperor and Empress was plain for all to see, and was enjoyed by all their people. Jodha Bai never sought to interfere in affairs of state;although that she did have opinions and was not afraid to air them in the privacy of their imperial bedroom was obvious from many of Akbar's decisions..."

According to the author, Jodha Bai pre-deceased Akbar.

On a special occasion when Akbar sat with his friends, Abul Fazl presented his long-time-laboured work Ain -i -Akbari, a record of the Moghul's Life. "...Akbar turned the pages. He still could not read with any ease,but the very size and volume was impressive.

He smiled at them."Have I then done so much?"

It was a rhetorical question."

That was AKBAR.

Ahay, I still am not able to believe it is a fiction.

Saraswathi.

Originally posted by: karkuzhali

Abhay,

You are giving very beautiful accounts of the historical events in this forum and I thank you for all your tireless endeavours.

I am not a History student but love to learn about the Indian History, particularly The Moghul period.

Aunty,
Thank you for the appreciation. It is good to read your comment here. Glad to know about your interests which are same as mine. I too write, only due to love for history - Indian and the modern world history, reason being - there are many things which can be learnt from our past and applied to present day issues.

While browsing in the Library, I came across a Book titled "Moghul" by Alan Salvage ( pseudonym of the author byname Christopher John). I presume that the book is a historical fiction as seen from the disclaimer it contains.It says that it is about a couple of Englishmen, "who set off in 1524 in search of a legendary kingdom of Prester John and reached India but they discovered an exotic and capricious land whose wealth far exceeded wildest dreams".This itself is enough for me to go through the book. The Book speaks from the point of view of Thomas and Richard Blunts, who landed at Goa in search of the fabled kingdom.The book narrates the events during the period from the mughal invasion to the last mughul emperor.

I was interested in the Chapters "Akbar" and "Shah of shah" which speak about the greatness of Akbar.

This work is new for me. I am unaware of this book. I will try to get hold of it, if possible. Had this been a historical Mughal chronicle, most probably i would have read about it earlier.

However, the real name of this author - Christopher John, reminds me of a Danish botanist who was the founder member of the earliest society of Madras botanists in 1760's , which flourished under the aegis of the East India Medical Services.

Is this gentleman the same person by any chance ?

While mentioning about Humayun's accidental death, the author says:

"The whole of Agra had been shaken by a slight earth tremor,but little damage was done save inside the Royal palace.Years later it would be learned that on this same day had occured the greatest earth quake known to history in the province of Shensi in China, where the earth had convulsed for two hours and eight hundred and thirty thousand people were killed.Only one had died in Agra, so many thousands of miles away.But that one was the great Moghul.."
And that was Humayun, who while," engaged in indexing his beloved Library, fell from the top of the ladder and cracked his skull..."

Incredible.!

I had thought that this person was simply writing a novel without any adherence to history. But then, i am taken by surprise after reading this extract.

That earthquake happened in the modern day Shaanxi province of China. The date was 23rd January 1556.

According to the English translation of HumayunNama {Beveridge, Pg-54} - The date when Humayun fell from the stairs of his library was 24th January 1556.

Since Persian to Gregarion calendar translation normally involves an error of 1 day. So, the author has made no mistake and neither he indulges in any fancy as far as the dates are concerned from the POV of any serious history enthusiast.

But what has amused me more is HOW he co-related both these dates. I guess, we need to find the back ground of this novelist now. This is something very new for me.

After learning about Humayun's death, "the youthful Sultan had been more distressed by his father's premature death than he had allowed anyone to know.As soon as his grief had dwindled,his nature, naturally sensitive and curious and controlled by a deep intelligence, had begun to consider not only his present situation but what he would inherit, when he had dealt with Hemu, supposing he could.He was keenly aware of his neglected upbringing, when he compared himself with the intellectual brilliance of his father and grandfather.He understood that it was now too late to catch up as regard to literacy, but he still wanted to learn , and during this time of waiting he set aside severalhours a day for long discussions, and not only with his muslim favourites, chiefly the two brothers Sheik Feizi and Abul Fazl ... but also with certain Hindus and Parsees, Jains and Buddhists, seeking to understand why they were all so different."

If the above statement is true, did Akbar have Sheik Feizi and Abul Fazl, in his Dharbar even during his early days?

Interesting extract. I have read about the presence of Parsees and Jains in court of Akbar, though i did not remember Buddhists there. As far as question of the brothers is concerned --

Sheikh Faizi entered the Mughal court just at the time of the Battle of Chittor in October 1567. He was present in the battle field of Chittor along with Akbar throughout, and was an eye witness of the siege - his account of Battle of Chittor is extremely useful, though no reputed scholar has used that work as far as i have read. He has written the details of that fierce war in a VERY long poem.

Abu'l Fazl entered the Mughal court in 1574. He was introduced by his brother Faizi.


The author of the book also says that Akbar was advised by Fazal and Feizi to keep Mahamanga and Hamida Bhanu Begam(?) away from influencing him in his politcal affairs. " Hamida Banu Baygam and Maham Anga were to be confined in honourable imprisonment for the rest of their lives, In fact, they both died quickly, of shame it was said..."

Was it a fact that both the mothers died before Akbar married Jodha?

According to Akbarnama, Maham Anga died in May 1562.
According to Tabaqat i Akbari, Mahan Anga died in June 1564.
Most {not all} scholars believe Akbarnama's date to be true.

Akbar married the Princess of Amer in February 1562.

During this time, the senior ladies of the harem exercised lot of influence. This period till 1564 is termed Petticoat Government. I feel this term is inspired from the state of affairs of Soviets under their Czarina and the mysterious Rasputin.

Hamida Bano Begum died in August 1604.

From Akbarnama, nothing clearly appears to me about what Abu'l Fazl says about the intervention of ladies but it is clear that he talks about Maham Anga exercising lot of authority & refers her with terms like one who was having a "veil of chastity".

The authors narrates about the marriage of Akbar and Jodha as " for a man who had never truly loved,it turned out to be a love match."

It was after Salim Murad and Danial were born ( he says Murad and Daniyal are Jodha's sons), that "It was to Jodhpur that Akbar rode two hundred and twenty miles in two days to prevent the Rajah from forcing his son's widow to commit suttee- the ghastly Hindu practice by which a widow was burned alive on her husband's funeral pyre."

Interesting details. I feel this is the same event which the post talks about - as the lady under consideration in present post was the daughter of Raja of Jodhpur only. Akbar was on good terms with the Raja of Jodhpur that time.

As far as the bond of Jodha and Akbar is considered i have not the minutest of doubts about them. I have read many actions of Akbar till date, but it does not make me doubt this story. Akbar had to take certain actions considering the interest of his kingdom too. He was a ruler, and a human, afterall.

Same is for the mother of kids. From what i know they were her sons only - My opinion which i formed after enough digging for my own satisfaction, though there are authorities which believe otherwise too.

BTW, recently, this month only, i noticed a very interesting similarity between the faces of Salim and Daniyal in Mughal portraits. Almost a carbon copy of each other. Have not been able to see how Murad looked like. Just sharing here with you.

http://mariam-uz-zamani.blogspot.com/2015/09/akbar-heir-battle-salim-murad-khusrau.html

About his relationship with Jodha the author says,

..."...The mutual affection of Emperor and Empress was plain for all to see, and was enjoyed by all their people. Jodha Bai never sought to interfere in affairs of state;although that she did have opinions and was not afraid to air them in the privacy of their imperial bedroom was obvious from many of Akbar's decisions..."

Glad to read another extract of this kind. This has been the talk of centuries and it still continues. There are many who have written about it.

I made a post, earlier this year. It includes the notes by a Major General in British Army, who visited Fatehpur Sikri around 1830's. He notes something interesting about "Jodha Bai" and the tolerance of Akbar in his diary. I scanned the pages too as that would separate my views from the views of the original author. I am not sure if the hard copy is available now. A forum friend already read this account long back in a library.

http://mariam-uz-zamani.blogspot.com/2015/01/mariam-uz-zamani-forgotten-enigma-part-2.html

According to the author, Jodha Bai pre-deceased Akbar.

She died many years after Akbar as replied by Aunty on previous page. It is May 1623, while for Akbar, it is in October 1605.

On a special occasion when Akbar sat with his friends, Abul Fazl presented his long-time-laboured work Ain -i -Akbari, a record of the Moghul's Life. "...Akbar turned the pages. He still could not read with any ease,but the very size and volume was impressive.

He smiled at them."Have I then done so much?"

It was a rhetorical question."

This reminds me of something written on Akbar's tomb.
English Translation of some of the inscriptionS --
"
Written in the name of the King of Kings - The ruler of eternity, The one who is exempted from non existence..Out of Non existence, he produced existence..He Created two worlds, One he concealed from others and another he let remain open...If a heart possessed a secret, his fame displaced the secret and took possession of the whole heart...
"

That was AKBAR.

Ahay, I still am not able to believe it is a fiction.

Saraswathi.

Originally posted by: karkuzhali

Hello Coolpree,

I do not know your name, since you have not signed your mail/post. Anyway thank you for your comments.

As so many of you have pointed out in this forum, whenever I hear the name of Akbar, only Rajat's face comes to my mind. So it is very interesting for me to imagine him in the situations while I read any historical piece about him. Especially the last paragraph of my post , where Akbar innocently and surprisingly asks Abul Fazl , " Have I then done so much?"

I just imagined Rajat saying these words and I simply melted! I like to suggest that all of you can try this instead of regretting the downfall of Akbar in the show and blaming the CVs for that.

However I like to thank you all, especially, Abhay for taking time to respond to my post paragraph by paragraph. If you ask how I feel now,

I would say that it is the 'ehsaas' that Jalal feels when Jodha tells him that she no longer hated him since he started trusting her and she in return! The situation flashes back in his mind quite often!

I confess that all your writings and comments I find in this forum are making friends with me like we, in those days, had pen-pals.

Saraswathi Aunty.

Originally posted by: karkuzhali

Dear Shyamala,

I have not read the book fully, but it is difficult to believe that it is a fiction, since most of the incidents in Akbar's life seem to be very true and convincing. Let us wait for Abhay's comments.

Some years back, I watched a TV film "The Far Pavilions" where they showed a suttee scene, with the heart-rending back ground music. I could not forget the scene for many days since the music was very haunting. But in the film, a British Military Officer saves the girl and elopes with her. The film was based on the Book with the same title by MM Kaye.(Wickipedia)

Saraswathi.

Originally posted by: history_geek

What saddens me "sometimes" is the fact that despite introducing so many reforms for women in those times, when hardly anyone thought in such a direction ; he is still labelled as a womenazir at many places due to size of his harem, which is also exagerrated.. Having a large harem does not means he was after women all the time. He was known to have a robust constitution. He was quite moderate in his conduct. Till the very end of his life he was fit and fine. I think one should look into this aspect of his personality also before declaring him as a ...

Raja Ram Mohan Roy faced wrath of his own family for condemning such a practice after 250 years(1820's). Wonder Akbar's time.!!

Originally posted by: history_geek

Just adding something to this comment...

I was reading Aurangzeb and the chronicler of Aurangzeb compared some of his "reforms" with Akbar. Both made efforts to abolish the use of wine. Aurangzeb took harsh measures, but was not successful. Akbar did not ban but he did best to regulate the use of wine, and restricted it to 'medicinal' uses..