Hypocrisy thy name is royalty - Page 2

Originally posted by: PutijaChalhov

I read somewhere that Mughals were very particular that their Heirs and main Queens had Royal blood however many concubines secondary wives or/and harem women they had and their off spring had no right to throne

Originally posted by: myviewprem

No in Mughals son and daughter born of cucubbine and maid had equal rights as that of royal born sons and could be kings

Originally posted by: myviewprem

Here anarkali is only a dancer who dances on special occasion, Akbar has no relationship with her whatsoever neither any other man. Anyway I doubt anarkali was his cocubbine as Salim would not go all out to get his fathers cocubbine and face society ridicule.

When Akbar can get Daulat Shad to divorce her husband and leave her kid and go to him as his secondary wife(as he had many wives) so why Salim cannot marry anarkali?

Also if you read akbarnama and other Mughal books you realize that Akbar used to tell his gaurds to raid nobels and others houses to get him pretty women and some he kept as his secondary wife. So why Salim cannot marry anarkali and keep her as his secondary wife atleast?

Originally posted by: devkidmd

Hey Prem, can you tell me the vol and page# that this is written in Akbarnama? The Akbarnama is not very easy to read so I must have missed this part. Also can you give me the names of the other Mughal books that says that Akbar told his guards to raid his Nobles' houses to get the pretty women.

Thanks!

Devki

Originally posted by: ghalibmirza

prem the bottom line is that akbar had many women at his disposal and he was no lover boy either, his love and passion was his ambition was to rule hindustan wherever his sword could go!...and as far as his chief wives and heirs are concerned they were all from royal blood and not rakaasas!

i do not know what might have happened in reality but lets say if anar was akbar's concubine then this is the battle of male egos..now salim trying to steal one of akbar's concubine would have made akbar mad with rage and would have gotten her killed right away and if there was such thing this might have happened..anar must have vanished in thin air and end of story..now with MEA this story was exploited and commercialized to evoke drama and tragic love ..and now further ekta is taking that to another level😆..which no one can imagine..that is all i can say!..u keep watching ektanama and pl do not relate that to akbarnama as that is an insult to fazal's writings..now maan bai jagat and anar are friends...now what is that if you are taking ektanama literally

Originally posted by: myviewprem

I do not belive she was akbra's cocubbine why because as per that british traveler who wrote she was Akbar cocubbine and buried in anarkali tomb raised by jehangir. In 1599(when that tomb date states) and a few years before that Salim was in battle in rajputhana and then he went to capture the agra khazana and then moved to Allahabad and stayed there. So when he is not in Lahore for long how can he have affair with anarkali? That is a gossip or imagination mandy.

Actually, in those days people did not have Bollywood, serials, magazines etc so royals were the glamour quotients and people would gossip. Have you not heard a few days before a movie releases always the hero heroine are in love something similar case. And you know a gossip if it goes to ten ears its changes completely, they dad their own versions and it becomes history later on as some traveler wrote in his letters

(Episode 409 - December 31, 2014)
even when jodha and salim allowed rakhasas to perform in anniversary he was not happy with it