It seem Aabhas ji is either a editor of wikipedia or a loyal student !
If you read Prof. Athar Ali, he only complains how Khati Khan didnt give acknowledgement to the one he derived the info of Shah Jahan's reign.
He doesnt invalidate his work on Aurangzeb's reign
(1/n)
If you read Prof. Athar Ali, he only complains how Khati Khan didnt give acknowledgement to the one he derived the info of Shah Jahan's reign.
He doesnt invalidate his work on Aurangzeb's reign
(1/n)
No wikipedia warrior ! I know you copied this from.wikipedia !
Read what Prof. A.J. Syed says ;
He just calls it "confused" but on other line praises his account. Same Prof. says that Khafi had access to direct first hand information.
Self own🤦🏻♂️
(2/n)
Read what Prof. A.J. Syed says ;
He just calls it "confused" but on other line praises his account. Same Prof. says that Khafi had access to direct first hand information.
Self own🤦🏻♂️
(2/n)
Khafi Khan, an older & more authentic historian who has access till Aurangzeb (as said by A.J. Syed) mentions that he was charged with r∆pe.
Masar doesnt seem to be giving account of charges for it is very brief & we know any hukmnama is long.
(3/n)
Masar doesnt seem to be giving account of charges for it is very brief & we know any hukmnama is long.
(3/n)
Sir Jadunath Sarkar crticises those who have tried to corner persian sources.
Moreover, noe see english source on the character of sambhaji and the r∆pe of that brahmin women.
(4/n)
Moreover, noe see english source on the character of sambhaji and the r∆pe of that brahmin women.
(4/n)
@rattibha unroll
Loading suggestions...