Sujamal - The real history - Page 2

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

myviewprem

@myviewprem

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

#11

Originally posted by: Shweta16

But Bhagwan Das had many sons apart from Maan Singh ! So how come the king had only daughters ? I do not know about the rest of the generation of Royal House of Jaipur so I won't comment on it but I'm quite sure that BD had sons apart from Maan Singh 😊

Ok, but that is what they say i am not sure when curse started. If you go to trip in jaipur fort they say same story too as i have visited there. So are you saying they have male kids in every generation?

I doubt because even British papers had a story saying a servant's son was adopted as next heir of jaipur(he is current raja) and royal family members did not like the choice of adoption and mentions the curse etc So i am not sure if some generations had sons but majority did not have sons/heirs(like Mysore royal family curse same issue)

Quote

sunram

@sunram

Explorer

Posted: 10 years ago

#12

Started with ancient times and old history will show you this Legends myths Mahabharata Ramayana have all covered this the quest to usurp father's brother's throne directly indirectly through someone all the behavior patterns of all type of humans are present, including warfare(though this is a long shot here) thats why the saying history repeats itself

Quote

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

myviewprem

@myviewprem

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

#13

Originally posted by: ngayou
Is this really true 😲

yes my relative done PHD and teaching unviversity students in US he told me this about surajmal(not sujamal). they teach this in college so will be true. And this is all researched for many years before put in syllabus in colleges. In indian univ history is usually biased and real story and history are twisted usually to satisfy all stake holders. First britishers did it to make all indian kings villan to make their rule look legitemate and now too same thing followed in univ.

Even archeology documents are twisted to satisfy all stake holders so cannot be trusted fully and completely. Anyways victors write history so documents collected by them are usually one sided. Lots of research from independent party can only give out truth after researching all aspects of victor and vanquished.

US historians usually have no stake in Indian history so they do not try and distort much as they are neutral usually. So this version is correct and truth. We have to check out some indian sources may be from Tanwar family sources they may have written it truthfully too as Surajmal was maternal grandson of their family.

Edited by myviewprem - 10 years ago

Quote

MyExiledSoul

@MyExiledSoul

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#14

Originally posted by: myviewprem

Ok, but that is what they say i am not sure when curse started. If you go to trip in jaipur fort they say same story too as i have visited there. So are you saying they have male kids in every generation?

I doubt because even British papers had a story saying a servant's son was adopted as next heir of jaipur(he is current raja) and royal family members did not like the choice of adoption and mentions the curse etc So i am not sure if some generations had sons but majority did not have sons/heirs(like Mysore royal family curse same issue)

See as I said before I do not know about the later generations and hence I really can't comment on it but if the curse theory is true and its somewhere linked to Sujamal then I have doubts on it. Because even if there are proofs for the later generations being heirless and hence they opt for adoption, Bhagwan Das had many sons, so he adopted Man Singh because he was heirless does not hold good. So even if it is a curse, then it must not have started from BD and Maan Singh. 😊

Quote

myviewprem

@myviewprem

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

#15

Originally posted by: Shweta16

See as I said before I do not know about the later generations and hence I really can't comment on it but if the curse theory is true and its somewhere linked to Sujamal then I have doubts on it. Because even if there are proofs for the later generations being heirless and hence they opt for adoption, Bhagwan Das had many sons, so he adopted Man Singh because he was heirless does not hold good. So even if it is a curse, then it must not have started from BD and Maan Singh. 😊

May be it started after Man Singh. I have to check it out but they have a curse is confirmed many times by many sources like paper, magazine etc. But i feel that curse may be linked to how they treated Surajmal and his mother OR i have read in some places it started after Chittorgarh fort massacre. Anyways they have a curse when or how is to be researched by some historian because we can only guess why?

If you ask me personally i do not beleve a curse can last so long so it may be some story made up by someone just because boys are not born

Edited by myviewprem - 10 years ago

Quote

Viji Sridhar

@vijisridhar

Dazzler

+ 5

Posted: 10 years ago

#16

Originally posted by: myviewprem

Not as per real history

he stayed from small age with maternal grandparents and never was treated like family by ratan singh and bharamal or askaran. He and his mom were more like outcasts in their own family and did not even allowed to stay in main palace after his father's death.

Neither any historical evidence is there that he and jodha ever met after childhood she was a baby less than 5 when he was sent off to his maternal grandmother's house and after that he was not allowed back to amber fort.

This brother-sister relationship is movie/serial creation not reality. I dount they both ever met after childhood. Surajmal was never invited to any family functions and not welcome at jaipur nor his mother. They lived with her parents all life.

So Sujamal was known as Surajmal is it..?

As much as I like both your views, there seems to be a difference here. Which one is correct..? afterall, someone has done PhD and is being taught so in colleges.

I think, it will be nice if Abhay comes here to rescue us from the confusion.

Thanks
Viji

Quote

myviewprem

@myviewprem

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 10 years ago

#17

Originally posted by: vijisridhar

So Sujamal was known as Surajmal is it..?

As much as I like both your views, there seems to be a difference here. Which one is correct..? afterall, someone has done PhD and is being taught so in colleges.

I think, it will be nice if Abhay comes here to rescue us from the confusion.

Thanks
Viji

Yes his name is Surajmal no Sujamal

The story of Surajmal is correct as per US historians not sure about indian historians...bias exists towards some empires or Kings and to potray them as good hide/distort some facts. As per them Jodha never met Surajmal after childhood because he never lived in amber or went to agra etc after her marriage. He lived and died in grandmom house. Neither was he and his mom invited for any function, wedding etc of amber or agra so how can jodha meet him let alone tie rakhi or learn sword fighting etc

In this matter we cannot trust Mughal and Amber chroniclers because they may want to potray no wrong done by Bharamal as Akbar potrayed as just king(although in some cases he was not) and amber family anyways will make him villan to hide their betrayal. I am not sure about indian archeologist what they say but anyways i usually trust neutral prespective.

But this is twisted and given as a great rakhi brother-sister story which is completely false and lay people believe whatever is shown in movie/serial. But in all this movie exaggeration purnamal's heroics of helping humayun many times and their friendship and surajmal's justified claim to throne shown as bhagoda will make heroes as villans and villans into heroes. I think purnamal and surajmal were good humans and heroes and not some minor character and villans as potrayed wrongly. Just wanted whoever is interested to know too so they do not have wrong idea of real history.

Majority of facts i have written till today in forum are all taken from US(and other international univ and research) perspective a neutral one. I just wanted to upload the neutral prespective whether indian/asian audience accept it or not its left to them. But i believe this is actually story. I have the articles and books on this but they cannot be uploaded because of strict copyright issues. They all are neutral prespective of indian history.

Edited by myviewprem - 10 years ago

Quote

Deepa

@spvd

Trailblazer

+ 4

Posted: 10 years ago

#18

whoa thanks for this new news...interesting...

Quote

Abhay

@history_geek

Rocker

+ 5

Posted: 10 years ago

#19

Originally posted by: myviewprem

Not as per real history

he stayed from small age with maternal grandparents and never was treated like family by ratan singh and bharamal or askaran. He and his mom were more like outcasts in their own family and did not even allowed to stay in main palace after his father's death.

Neither any historical evidence is there that he and jodha ever met after childhood she was a baby less than 5 when he was sent off to his maternal grandmother's house and after that he was not allowed back to amber fort.

This brother-sister relationship is movie/serial creation not reality. I dount they both ever met after childhood. Surajmal was never invited to any family functions and not welcome at jaipur nor his mother. They lived with her parents all life.

For your points in bold.

My dear this is something which is a total falsification of the history.
I wrote this ONE line statement about HK and Sujamal, b'coz i have READ something about their relation.

I need not read what the scholars have written about them coz my info comes directly from many well-established sources.😊

I am too much pre-occupied right now. But there are EVIDENCES as per actual history.

1. Sujamal was the bravest of all Amerians, this is as per HK's viewpoint.(though unfortunately he was denied the throne.) My friend Lizzy is missing from the forum, otherwise she would have given more info on this particular statement, with references from Indian historical Records itself.

Records mention of incidents of Rakhi ceremony between Suja and HK.
And such documentation i have NOT read for any of her another brothers, but ONLY Sujamal.😊

So, the clause that historically they did not share any affectionate brother-sister relation is not correct. Coz i and many others have read this.
No matter where Suja resided is other issue but they DID have a great bro-sister relation.

And he can NOT be an outcast because he was the son of the princess of Marwar and they commanded great respect and WERE powerful as well.

Bharmal was NOT a moron that he would take the risk of sidelining the strong Marwari Clan.
Btw, Bharmal was the son of Rajmata Bala Bai.

2. Secondly, this word "outcast" is very serious term. Every one is NOT an outcast..!. .

In one your earlier posts you had referred MUZ as an outcast in her OWN family of Amer.😕
Yes, that article you had posted was ALSO from an article from Internet Site, named -> "The Real Mariam Zamani". 🥱

If she was an outcast in her own family, then.?..

I do not understand why Akbar sent his son Daniyal to the family of MUZ who was SAID to be an outcast in her own FAMILY.?..????>...😉 (as per that article.??...)

Was Akbar NOT worried about security of his son.?.😲...That he sent his son to the family of MUZ in Amer to be brought up IF SHE was an outcast in her OWN FAMILY..😕.??..😲

What i want to say is..::::::--->>>>
Some issues and SOURCES should be CheckeD as far as REAL history is concerned.😊

Secondly since, i read just now mentioned about a trip to Jaipur Fort, then i feel this issue of outcast would have been cleared. As she was NOT an outcast. This term is not suitable here.😊

********************************************************************************************

And regarding your point that Amer had NO heir after Puranmal.
I have an interesting Event to share.
Also This issue of NO heir after Puranmal is not correct.😊

Suja was son of Puranmal.
Puranmal died 19 Jan, 1534.

Succeeded by Bhim Singh, his bro, who died 22 July 1537.

He was succeeded by his son Ratan Singh, died 15 May 1548, killed by saazish of his Step bro Askaran.(this is DOUBTFUL)😕 Askaran was crowned on 16 May 1548. But sat on throne only for 15 nights and 16 days.🤓

Askaran went on a pilgrimage for 11 years after this. And returned around 1559. So, he had very less to do anything with Suja or Amer family.😊

Later during Akbar's time, Askaran was made the ruler of Naarwaad/Naarwaar.(Akbarnama,V3, Page-925)

After Askaran, Bharmal was made the King on 1/2 June 1548. He died 17 Jan 1574.

********************************************************************************************

Also, the story which is mentioned in the post about that heir-less thing is not correct.

This CURSE is not associated with Puranmal.😊

The issue arised EITHER after the Battle of Chittor in 1567/8 or after the battle of Haldighati in 1576. And, the reason given is that, the Amer Clan had supported Akbar in both the battles.
Infact, the advice of Bhagwan Das was very important in getting through the STRONG fort of Chittor for Akbar. Bhagwan Das knew what was the strategy needed to cross the Strong Fort of Chittor.

And, hence Amer Clan got "shraap or curse"🤓 from the Mewar clan, for helping Akbar.
Though this is said to be a story.

But this is NOT associated with Puranmal as you mentioned in your post.😊

********************************************************************************************

Also, the info in your post that Sujamal DID NOT meet Sharifuddin is also NOT correct.
Sujamal DID MEET Sharifuddin.
Akbarnama , Volume 2 , Page-241, Chapter 39
And, many other contemporary chronicles like Rajputana Gazetteers, etc..😊

********************************************************************************************

Also, few days back it was shown that Sujamal occupied Mewat from Mughals.
Yes, this was ALSO a TRUE event.
Sujamal with the help of few forces of Marwaar(called Land of Death), and handful of Bhils defeated Mughal Forces.
The event was very much TRUE.

********************************************************************************************

@Shweta

Yes. Man Singh had many sons, and his son Bhav Singh succeeded him to the throne after his death on 6 July 1614. He was son of his Queen Rani Sahadra Gaur.

Though some foreign authors say Man Singh to be a adopted son.!.
But, even i have read the same what you have, as per ROYAL RECORDS, Man Singh is mentioned as the son of Rani Bhagwati Ji Sahiba, the Queen of Bhagwan Das. 🤓

********************************************************************************************

Btw, in your reply you mentioned that Hk was around/less than 5 years when Sujamal was banished. May i know the DOB of HK .?.😊

Finally, Suja and HK had a good relation.Is all i want to say .!.

Rest is upto others to believe or neglect.

BTW,, i have verified many foreign sources on Indian History and pretty much sure now, where is the difference. The depth upto which Rajputana history runs is NOT easy to dig. 😊

I would have given more views on the info shared in the post but due to lack of TIME and sources right now, stopping here.😊.

Edit:😊
Correcting the Link of this post.:
https:// www.india-forums.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=3959686&TPN=3&#p103330410

Edited by history_geek - 10 years ago