![history of jodha akbar in urdu history of jodha akbar in urdu](http://www.sos-arsenic.net/images/akbar07.jpg)
Yet Fazl also writes about Alexander of Macedon, Prophet Mani, and Sassanid kings like Bahram before coming to the first Islamic conqueror, Muhammad bin-Qasim. Fazl’s guides in this seem to be the Shahnameh and the Zend Avesta, for many of those individuals mentioned belong to the Pishdadian dynasty, believed to be the first dynasty to rule over Persia, and whose stories are part of the Persian epic and the Zoroastrian holy book.
![history of jodha akbar in urdu history of jodha akbar in urdu](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClEHbMLVEAA7XSP.jpg)
![history of jodha akbar in urdu history of jodha akbar in urdu](https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Q1VeLA7kaxo/W8o1pXYlw1I/AAAAAAAAAOY/Dr81qg76EbUg89ukLLmRTm8CNdoO26xPQCEwYBhgL/s1600/akbar%2Bbiography.jpg)
The third volume of Ain-i-Akbari has an entire chapter (number 10) dedicated to people who came to India from outside. Abu’l Fazl shows great understanding of India of his time and before him in his monumental work, Akbarnama, of which Ain-i-Akbari is a part. But the Indian amnesia has more to do with the majoritarian bias against medieval Muslim rulers, which is of colonial vintage, than anything else.īut it seems this wasn’t always so. For instance, in Britain, there is little or no awareness about 73 foreign invasions that happened on British soil since 1066. And amnesia isn’t a preserve of Indians world over, we see such examples. The easiest way to explain this would be to blame it on general amnesia in India about history. In this discourse, Achaemenid invasions or the conquest of Alexander of Macedon, which predate Islam, rarely register. In Assam, this tale assumes a new form and becomes 17 Mughal invasions of Assam. Every Indian child grows up hearing tales of the 17 invasions of Mahmud of Ghazni. This was perfectly in sync with the assumption in India today of military invasions of South Asia being the handiwork of Islamic warriors alone. There was another problem too-the narration said the “loot and plunder” of India started from 1011 AD, an obvious reference to the plundering raids of Mahmud of Ghazni. The opening narration by Amitabh Bachchan, which condensed the history of Babur and Humayun down to a few seconds, declared that the Mughals had come to India in 1450-a good 75 years before they had actually arrived and a good 50 years after their great ancestor, Amir Timur or Tamerlane, had seized Delhi.
#History of jodha akbar in urdu movie
The best example of this pigeonholing was the movie Jodha Akbar, where Jodha, a Rajput princess, spoke in Sanskritised Hindi that one doesn't hear outside the confines of Doordarshan's newsroom, while Akbar speaks in chaste, Persianised Urdu that probably wasn't even developed during the real Akbar's reign.There were inaccuracies galore right from the beginning. This practice permeates our popular culture, where it is only the bearded Maulvi Sahab (cleric) or the tawaif (courtesan) who speaks Urdu, and no sentence is complete without infinite numbers of Subhan Allahs and Masha Allahs thrown in. The biased narrative of the Hindi chauvinists and the lip service of the so-called secularists have ensured that Urdu and Indo-Islamic culture have been ghettoised to an extent that they have become caricatures. More than Pakistan, the question of Urdu is crucial to understanding the contestations surrounding identity and secularism in post-independent India. Thus, undertaking the task of narrating this journey is in itself an act of courage and Tariq Rehman does it wonderfully well. The history of Urdu is not just a story of linguistic evolution, but of the evolution of culture, of societies and of communities. Hardly any language in the subcontinent has a history as contested as that of Urdu. AFRICA, LATIN AMERICA, CARIBBEAN AND UN.Memorandum of Association: Rules and Regulations.