Created

Last reply

Replies

52

Views

8.6k

Users

18

Likes

116

Frequent Posters

myviewprem thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 11 years ago
#51

Originally posted by: dmg2c

Yes he was a great womanizer i mean casanova as i mentioned in starting posts.
I had read he ordered his nobels wife to be sent to him in Delhi her name Daulat Shad and her brother-in-law in anger shot an arrow at him when he was in Delhi market(shown in movie Jodha Akbar as Agra market). Is it meena bazaar you are talking of as some debauchery festival???? Because what i heard in meena bazaar if akbar liked any woman anyone's wife/daughter/sister they had to send to him. He was morally highly corrupt till almost 40 years of age where he would set sight on any girl they would be in trouble. Women had a tough time in his rule. He was even jealous of his son's maturing and liking/marrying girls - reverse opeidus syndrome i guess read it in some book. So i agree Akbar was a great womaniser till his children became adults and even then he never hesitated to marry any girl. In 1595 he married 12 rajput princesses on a single day in kashmir. Whether marriage was political but still does not justify marrying girls who are almost three decades younger. That was the age he was already grandfather of Salim's four children and his other children's inumerable kids. So we can make out he was a womanizer till late age.
Jehangir had a huge harem inherited from his father- this cocubbines/maids etc would be inherited by next king. But per say Jehangir was not a womanizer in the sense like his father or son Shah Jahan.

viji-iyer thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#52
Hello, I am new to forum. I have been a silent reader. But what is said degradation of history is true. Whatever one say "Bharat ka veer putra" MP. but please do understand you cannot tell wrong things in history. History itself is past wherein you cannot change anything.
The CVs are creating problems in history itself & the future generation, when they see such type of history & when they read in books which is quite different will be in confused state to accept it. So, what was there in past is to be shown rather than trying to increase TRPs.
Regarding legends, MP & AK, both are completely different. Whereas in long run, Akbar concentrated for the whole Hindustan while MP was concentrating on united Rajvanshivs. Both were equal in their own way.
642126 thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#53
Anarkali or haremare not issue here. Question is how true is it that a princess called Phool Kanwar was cause of rivalry between MP and Akbar?
I do not think they were so petty so to fight over only a girl!

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".