Originally posted by: history_geek
Hi, @ jalludeewani Hi, @ history-geek
You are perhaps under a WRONG impression regarding taking / giving me time to reply, as i never post without proper homework.😃 Due to paucity of time, i could NOT reply earlier at ONCE. 😉 And, i have posted so many comments on this thread right from page-1, after thorough reading only to the best of my knowledge. I do NOT find it a point in repeating the views again here, as it deals more with the "directions", etc. stuff. Your doubt can be dispelled after little search of yours. BTW, what is this issue of BOLD and NOT BOLD in my previous comment. It was evident that a part was highlighted in the earlier comment to clear the meaning. Replying to the questions you have asked.under a WRONG impression not at all 😉 i know you do HOMEWORK before posting 😆 i can't read all pages comments beacsue of paucity of time even i don't want to repeat the views again no problem & no issue with BOLD & NOT BOLD the problem is with the highlighted sentence deul meaning & WRONG impression
1.
ASI was established in 1861, 43 years before the printing of book you quoted.thanks for the information thats i wanted to know
2.
The book you have quoted, was published in 1904 and that too is a part of ASI library, and i DO know about this in advance.😉 (The original text of the book you mentioned is present with the Delhi Chapter of ASI, Shelf number 913, vide number 9546. ) I am amazed to see why you are harping on one point that this info is present in the book you mentioned. If something is TRUE it is BOUND to present in more than one sources. NOTHING odd in this. It may be written in 'N' number of sources, as it is. This does NOT makes any difference.!.don't be amazed 😆 i was harping on book because i Didn't knew in advance that the context of the book is from ASI library thats why i asked you when ASI established remember in my previous post3.
BTW, the archives give MUCH MORE information than the book you have mentioned. These archives are accounts which are updated, as and when new excavations / discovery is made. For example: The archives of Fatehpur Sikri have been revised several times -- 1925, 1976, 1999, etc. to mention a few. ASI is also carrying out an excavation at Purana Quila, Delhi, RIGHT NOW and even those accounts will be updated soon.
thanks for the information is there any website they update the archeives ? i want to check them when ever i get free time let me know i'm in US 😊
Anyways, It's just, as i said before, i wanted to be concise, hence i mentioned few details. The book you mentioned dedicates ONLY 3-4 pages to Akbar's tomb. The info you have quoted is present on Pg-97-101, in the said book. BTW, this book was originally intended to be used as a part of an 'arts' course in the Calcutta University(that time Gov. School). This was around same time when, Lord Curzon revamped the Indian Educational System after passing the Indian Universities Act, 1904 on the basis of Ralley Commission's recommendations.(that's another story, but this was to tell you the background of the book you quoted.😉) And, if you go through the preface of the book, it says -> The text is NOT for historical or archaeological use but only as a guide. I have done my homework VERY NICELY 'already' , and posted ONLY verified info.yes i agree you have done your homework VERY NICELY 😆
4.
As you said, let me clear it that there is no question for ASI to dig up Akbar's grave to know the direction, but contemporary records do RUN in great depths. And, we get to know a lot from such sources. Even the measurements of his coffin are in records, which was gold round originally. On searching historical accounts, one can know more details. Just for info, Akbar's grave was opened up in 1691 by the attackers in Agra, and they set his remains on fire, after picking them out of the grave, and desecrated it before Shaistha Khan(Mughal Governor of Agra) could reach there. There was no question of opening the grave by ASI, as it would NOT have given any answer.
what the coffin information is from contemporary records 😆 i thaught it is a resarched fact 😆 i do remeber when i was discussing the akbar tomb with my friend brother he was a archaeologist he gave a lecture on this contemporary records,mathodology,archivel sources, comtemporary history changes contestly , the issues going on etc i was yawning 😆 i wished i asked him about MUZ grave but i forgot
so the ASI didn't dug the grave for any resarch & i think there is no need either because as you said the remains are already destroyed by the attackers in 1691 but shame on the attackers for desecrating a grave & i remember once a memebr commented for mughal emperor alamgir a tyrant attacker what a pity let me clear i'm not saying you said it 😳
5.
Kindly read some other accounts also rather than ONE particular book. 😊 If possible also go through the accounts of Fergusson, the book has been revamped and a new version (published in 1891 ) is available in 3 volumes. He has also written about Akbar's tomb, with beautiful details. 3 volumes 🥱 i can't read becasue of paucity of time & i'm not a history geek 😆
Following lines about Akbar's Tomb, in green are quoted from your previous comment. -->> "The whole structure gives the impression of a noble but incompleted idea; both in its greatness and in its incompleteness".
Try reading this LONG BULKY account i mentioned above, and you will perhaps get what was 'incomplete' or what Akbar wanted to do in this structure. 😉
what was incomplete or what Akbar wanted to do in this stucture only Akbar knows its gone with Akbar 😆 as far the researches most of the evidences are distroyed already when the attacker desecrated the grave
actually it was your sentence which give dual meaning 😉 i wanted to clear the WRONG impression that akbar grave is not per Islamic law so its confirm now Akbar grave & burial was as per Islamic law which is proved right so now no need of reading LONG BULKY accounts 😆i'm not much intrested in other history detail informations 🥱
peace 😊
Takbir : Allah U Akbar
Book Talk
Cricket
