The many wives .....

Page

pyaaribehna

@pyaaribehna

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

US had many wives. So too MP. according to history. More than what they show here.

Chief consort or wife is only one. Who stands with him in all religious ceremonies.

But if a king marries many times these women are still his wives. I read in Wikipedia that MP truly only loved Ajabdeh and the rest were all political alliances.

It is good to love your wife and be faithful to her. Does that mean the rest of the women out there are all just there because of some kind of compulsion which made the king marry them ?

Does that mean that even if all these women are the wives of the king they still "sing the love story of the king and the chief queen? "

Is it not the duty of the king to treat all his wives if not equally at least as what they are his wives? Even if a king marries many times for political reasons all these women are human too and they do not have any other husband. of course not. Isn't it not the duty of the king to be nice to all his wives and try to treat them as his wives rather than human beings who have to listen to the "love tales" of their husband and the chief queen?

I don't think it happened like that in real life. While the chief queen gets the respect as the chief wife the rest of the them at least get the affection and care from their husbands.

It is not fair to show like this on TV. and US loves only JB and the rest of them are content to hear their love story. or that US does not bother about them and only loves JB .

When a king any king marries second time he does not ask his first wife or the chief queen and she in return is never happy when her husband marries anyone else other than her.

So why do they show this kind of scenario in MP when it did not happen in real life.? Polygamy is not right does not mean they show this way to justify polygamy that happened ages ago.

Those days when women did not even have the right to choose their husbands they get married off as tenth wife to a big king and since they get married they "sing' about the "prem" of the chief queen and their own husband? How unfair on these ladies?

But if they had to commit sati then they still would give their lives wouldn't they? as dutiful wives?

Quote

Frequent Posters

geetpagli

@geetpagli

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

first of all you gotta get your facts clear my dear😊

firstly dont blindly believe whatever is shown in the serial😆history is totally distorted there..nothing is accurate...moreover fully character assassination😡ya coming to your point the kings had many wives...but it was not necessary that all of them were jerks😆some of them used to give them rights as queens...the wives were provided with all luxury and facilities ...but ya if they were lucky enough they did get the king z attention...but that would be in the initial stages of their marriage...though they were given rights in palace and in the courts...off course the chief queen had all the rights...

but what they have shown in the regarding US loving JB...thats utter blunder...according to history US never loved JB...infact inspite of being the maharani she was never one in the actual sense...it was only always DB...he used to simply dance to her tunes...that is the reason JB never lived in the palace...but at her maternal home...also pratap never got the love of his father...as US was too busy with jagmal...

and as far as favourite wife is concerned...ya completely agree with you...the other wives were reduced to pawns in political alliances...but then again...a person cannot be in love with so many women...offcourse there has to be shall we say true love...as in MPz case...😳and here again i would like to make a point its not that the chief queen or the maharani was very lucky and that she enjoyed all powers...you should also understand the responsibilities she had...and you cannot go about giving it to some tom dock ot harry...cause if you notice they was a large difference in age groups between the queen for instance in VBz case she married US...when JB was already a mother to a 15 16 year old son...so obviously JB would have more experience and more knowledge of what is to be done...

and technically according to hindu tradition though the first wife is said to be the lawful dharm patni...there were times when all the queens were allowed to take part in religious ceremonies...

but ya i completely agree with u on the part that it was unfair ...that the other queens never got any care or affection from their king...and when they dont they end up being like DB...😆what to do our history is like that...it has its pros and cons😊

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

Fatima

@Fatima_Q

Sparkler

+ 4

Posted: 10 years ago

I don't care how many wives the real MP had...or for what reasons. I just don't want to see him marrying anyone other than Ajabde in the serial 🤢

I remember when Ajabde had agreed to marry Touranmal...Pratap made a big deal about her not marrying him because he was already married. So I just hope the CVs don't show the return of Phool or anyone else just to marry MP...I mean if they are distorting history...then let them over look this part of his life too. 🤔

Quote

myviewprem

@myviewprem

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

You are right

pratap had 11 wives

udai singh had more than 20 wives and 40 children

Man singh had 60 wives

Rao Maldeo had more than 40 wives and cocubbines

Akbar had 300 wives out of which 36 were chief wives

Now I am sure all had their favourites but does that mean they only love one wife and all others just name sake wives no relationship. I do not think it happened like that. But I am sure lot of jealousy was there and infighting between wives to get closer to husband and make him listen to them. Like how dheerbai is being shown here. But I refuse to believe others were doves and did not do any kitchen politics. If they are not street smart they must be having some advisors to guide them on this kitchen politics front for sure. Add to this cocubbiness too they also must be trying to gain the kings attention so that their status increases. So it must have been pretty intense kitchen politics.

But I am pretty sure all these kings had few favourite wives not one as being potrayed because that was 16th century not 21st century patni vratha stree type men these all are. So they have a few favourites who will get much more benefits and their waaris also come from them and they get titles etc compared to not so favourite wives.

This deception of loving only one wife is for us 21st century people who cannot think of a man loving more than one wife at a time.

I can think of only three men who were infatiuated with their one wife baz bahadur with roopmati, jehangir with nur jahan and shah jahan with mumtaz despite having many other wives. But this also shows how much these women had controlled their husbands to ignore other wives (like dheerbaiji) and we assume that it is love. History is a big mystery.

Edited by myviewprem - 10 years ago

Quote

Mirage09

@Mirage09

Dazzler

+ 6

Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: pyaaribehna
US had many wives. So too MP. according to history. More than what they show here.
Chief consort or wife is only one. Who stands with him in all religious ceremonies.

But if a king marries many times these women are still his wives. I read in Wikipedia that MP truly only loved Ajabdeh and the rest were all political alliances.

It is good to love your wife and be faithful to her. Does that mean the rest of the women out there are all just there because of some kind of compulsion which made the king marry them ?

Does that mean that even if all these women are the wives of the king they still "sing the love story of the king and the chief queen? "

Is it not the duty of the king to treat all his wives if not equally at least as what they are his wives? Even if a king marries many times for political reasons all these women are human too and they do not have any other husband. of course not. Isn't it not the duty of the king to be nice to all his wives and try to treat them as his wives rather than human beings who have to listen to the "love tales" of their husband and the chief queen?

I don't think it happened like that in real life. While the chief queen gets the respect as the chief wife the rest of the them at least get the affection and care from their husbands.

It is not fair to show like this on TV. and US loves only JB and the rest of them are content to hear their love story. or that US does not bother about them and only loves JB .

When a king any king marries second time he does not ask his first wife or the chief queen and she in return is never happy when her husband marries anyone else other than her.

So why do they show this kind of scenario in MP when it did not happen in real life.? Polygamy is not right does not mean they show this way to justify polygamy that happened ages ago.

Those days when women did not even have the right to choose their husbands they get married off as tenth wife to a big king and since they get married they "sing' about the "prem" of the chief queen and their own husband? How unfair on these ladies?

But if they had to commit sati then they still would give their lives wouldn't they? as dutiful wives?

Ok, I kind of agree with you that the other wives are also wives and that they should also be given the same respect and be treated equally. MP, unlike his father was not a person who would run behind any woman or wage a war for her. MP is known for his patriotism towards his motherland, extreme valor, a kind ruler with a generous heart. Do you really think he would not have treated his wives equally or without respect ?

He was first married to Ajabdeh Punwar when he was just 17 and she was 15. I or for that matter nobody knows whether they both really had any love story before marriage. The stupid love triangle shown by the CVs is just to attract viewers attention which was a success. Going by the fact that they got married at a young age, it is but obvious that they were great friends and at such an age one needs to have a good friend to share their problems, happiness etc. Forget those days, even today, if one does not have a best friend at the age of 15 or 17, he/she tends to remain aloof.

A bond of friendship or of any relation which forms at such an age goes a long way and even if broken can never be forgotten. In 16th century, when such a relation is formed between a boy and a girl after they get married (dont go by the show) you can imagine the kind of relation between them. It will have the mutual trust, companionship, and deep love and a very strong support towards each other.

Certain facts state that MP started marrying other princesses only after 1562 when Akbar was given the hand of Jodha by the king of Amer. Some small kingdoms would have allied with Mewar and to cement such an alliance they would have given their daughters' hand in marriage to MP. Rajputs of those times follow the tradition of child marriage so obviously those daughters' age would have been around 14 to, say, 17 years ?

These young girls went on to become MP's wives one after the other. Obviously, these wives had a certain age gap with MP and hence might not have had the same wavelength with him.

Now again, it depends on the readers choice on how to look at the scenarios...certain readers will conclude that the alliances were political and certain others will conclude that MP married to save the princesses from going to the harem. The fact that he spent the first 5 years of his marriage life with Ajabdeh (married her in 1557) only, itself proves that this person was not any womanizer, but a loving husband and a true gentleman.

True, women were always the biggest pawns in the politics of those times. The perfect example for this is Jodhabai. True that any woman will be jealous of hearing the love tales of the king and his first wife. In case of MP, he did not have the time to concentrate on his wives, and his wives would have accepted his nature graciously. Even if he had a love tale, it would have been with Ajabdeh only and such things would have spread like wildfire in other kingdoms. The other princesses would have known about his gentleman nature and his love for Ajabdeh. They would have been well aware of the fact that kitchen politics is not applicable in MP household as MP is not a person who could be easily influenced like his father. Also they would have received the desired respect and position in his family, and hence MP's personal life was harmonious unlike other kings. Bcoz, if it was not it would have been definitely recorded in history.

This show has dramatized and distorted the events to no extent. Instead of going by the history, they are again building up a love story for the elder version of Pratap and Ajabdeh.

Sati cannot be forced. But as per hindu traditions, the first wife is required to commit sati, but I dont think it is compulsory as JB did not commit sati when US died. But I have no idea what they will show in the serial as u can always expect the unexpected.

P.S. I know I have written a ramayan lol and maybe not straight to the point, but the above assumptions are strictly my POV. Though tamatars welcome.😆 & DO NOT TRUST WIKIPEDIA IN CASE OF HISTORY.😆

Quote

pyaaribehna

@pyaaribehna

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

I don't trust wikipedia for history. and I also feel that all wives take part in all functions regardless of how manyth they are . and chief wife has many powers. Everything is true.

What I am trying to say is why do they show that MP however much principled he was still married many wives even for political reasons still if he married more than Ajabdeh these people who write this kind of story or those who post in wikipedia cannot claim that he loved only Ajabdeh.

That would be again undermining the great historical character that was MP. Because a person who marries more than one wife can give official position to his chief wife but cannot say that he loves only his first wife.

Neither that this justifies polygamy which anyway has taken place nor does it show whoever it is in good light. Because he is not monogamist anyways and being polygamist he is not being nice to his other wives who married him even as pawns in political game.

How fair is it on these ladies when your own husband who is a great magnanimous historical character says that you do not even exist for him only his first wife exists for him as she is his true love.

They can even show in the serial MP did not marry for many years after he married his first wife and chief queen Ajabdeh. May or many not be true.

But if marrying many women was in practice then he did too. and it would be better to say that he treated them well to may be he had a special relationship with Ajabdeh.

Wouldn't that be better?

Quote

angelpureness

@angelpureness

Dazzler

+ 4

Posted: 10 years ago

It was a practise then to make alliances through marriage... 90% of the marriages werepolitical alliances and was a common practise in the era.

Wiki is not a site to be used for research... Best try scholarly articles, journals and books.

Quote

pyaaribehna

@pyaaribehna

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: angelpureness
It was a practise then to make alliances through marriage... 90% of the marriages werepolitical alliances and was a common practise in the era.

Wiki is not a site to be used for research... Best try scholarly articles, journals and books.

I know it is not just wiki ----- it is the whole attitude of US towards his other wives.

Just think initially he was ignoring JB and spent all his time with DB. And DB lady was the villain of the show.----at that time.

Then DB suffered jail term which made matters different or so it was made to seem. Suddenly now JB became the favorite of US. So much so he "had to marry" VB under "compulsion" but he would "ignore" VB because he "only" "loved" JB. Does ignoring VB erase the fact that US married her even under pressure? After marrying the poor girl under pressure even as that made JB angry how is ignoring VB going to justify the fact that US married VB?

We are not even going into history okaay... Just the number of wives they show here. When they are showing the three of them here none of them married US of their own free will. How US married DB is not shown here. But when the serial started out they showed that he was smitten with DB and but for the existence of MP JB was not getting any attention from US.

Suddenly one punishment of DB by US has made US the ideal pati for JB . Now he had to get married again according to story and he is ignoring VB just so that the cvs can show that US is having love for only JB.

C'mon US married all of them . He has to treat all of them as wives. Chief queen will have more powers as first wife and official queen.

Even considering US or any other king for that matter married all these women for political reasons would not these ladies' families irked by the fact that US is ignoring their daughter?

That does not show the king US in good light. A king has to be just to his subjects. Marrying many wives was in practice then . When you take a vow in a wedding you must keep that promise and treat these women as wives not ignore them for another wife.

JB was not pleased with US marrying VB. Still he married her. Now ignoring VB is it going to please JB? or make her any happier? If that is so why did he not "ignore" DB earlier to "please" JB? At that time he was not concerned for JB's happiness. Now how come he is?

MP too later he may marry many wives. Probably there was something special between Ajab and MP. But he cannot become a better person by saying that he only loved Ajab and the rest were "just there" political alliances or whatever.

By showing this way the cvs are not glorifying MP or US. rather they are showing them as exibiting favoritism even as they used their other marriages for their own political benefit. which kind of undermines their image.

I do not know about US anyways he is not important here but for MP they had better show him as just and impartial towards his wives.

If he and Ajab had a special bond that is great . But if they show him as ignoring other wives as US does for VB that wouldn't come across as a good thing.

Edited by pyaaribehna - 10 years ago

Quote

The many wives .....

Related Topics

Explore Topics