Asif-ud-Daulah was the Nawab of Oudh, not Murshidabad (i.e., Bengal). His territory never extended into Bengal. The Nawab of Murshidabad was Siraj-ud-Daulah and, subsequently, the traitorous Mir Jaafar and his progeny. Apparently, the progeny of the great Traitor are still around in Murshidabad. (Amita can correct me on that.)

Iskander Mirza the first president of pakistan was a descendant of Mir jafar.

wow u both are soo informative mannn ... ??

u people are from hyderabad ?

correctly said by Mr. Ahmed .. The palace of Siraj ud Daula in Murshidabad known as hazar dwari due because it has hundred gates is a tourist place in Murshidabad ..also u find there a mosque whcih was constructed in 1 day as per the orders of Siraj-ud-Daula.

Mita: Many thanks for this new information about General Iskander Mirza. This is proof that there is a distinct genetic component to human behavior. Only Mir Qassim in that family had a backbone but the poor guy died a pauper in the streets of Delhi.I am anxious to read the secret Agreement between the Directors of the EIC (led by Robert Clive) and Mir Jaafar - that was delivered by Mr Watts. I have seen the famous painting about it in the Victoria Memorial but not read the original text. Maybe RBSI can find it stuck somewhere. That is an important - but an infamous and ignominious - document.

Asad Ahmed : This article has an extract of the 'treaty between Robert Clive representing HEIC and Mir Jafar' upon being invested the Nawabship of Bengal (under the Chapter : Nawab Years). Most interesting... http://murshidabad.net/history/history-topic-mir-jafar.htm

Thank you, RBSI, for this wonderful, informative brochure about the history of Murshidabad. The most interesting place mentioned in this brochure is the "Nimak Haram Deorhi" - meaning 'abode of one who is unfaithful to his salt'. It is apparently written with a slant in favor of the present 'Nawabs' and does not mention the treachery of Mir Jaafar to its fullest extent . Also, I suspect some crucial parts of the treaty have been omitted in the translation from Persian. But it is a very informative brochure - I feel like making a special trip just to discover Murshidabad. Thank you.

informative RBSI ...Although out of context,I wonder if RBSI could provide some document on Pathans of Bhagalpur(Bihar).I have some very old hand written documents from my ancestral qutubkhana(library) but need to gather more information on that...please help

Rashid Khan : Try this : Structure and Change in Indian Society By Milton Singer, Bernard S. Cohn http://books.google.co.in/books?id=_g-_r-9Oa_sC&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=pathans+bhagalpur+caste&source=bl&ots=xCBNVM2jdZ&sig=7vZKjpWyPnLdMXCeUFLcDkGiHno&hl=en&ei=dRffTtqbD-qNiAe1yNyXBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&sqi=2&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=pathans%20bhagalpur%20caste&f=false

And this : Population, gender, and politics: demographic change in rural North India By Roger Jeffery, Patricia Jeffery http://books.google.co.in/books?id=-PadIxTMzoAC&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=pathans+bhagalpur+caste&source=bl&ots=IMr5CNqj1Y&sig=Ez_Jx-hTJX3ekWZIvnx4Gydxz3Y&hl=en&ei=dRffTtqbD-qNiAe1yNyXBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&sqi=2&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=pathans%20bhagalpur%20caste&f=false

And of course the Wiki : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtuns_in_Bihar

Thanks RBSI ... The books mentions only small facts about Bhagalpur, It seems that since the Pathan population is very small in Bhagalpur limited to few villages,it has not been captured substantially in books. The major population in the region is of Ahirs,the pathans(mostly Yousafzai) are limited to few villages like Tamouni where the people are mostly decendants from 3 Zamindar families.Although small in number you find the existence of pashtunwali code in the village.This village had faced a major blow in 1989 riots when it was completely looted.

Mr. Rashid Khan, the Hazar Duari palace was built in the 1820s. It never housed Siraj-ud-daula. The traitor, Mir Jaffar's descendants lived there, instead!

correct Mr. Kalyan.. my mistake

Amita: Thank you. Some travel books (like Murray's 'Handbook of Travel in India...') refer to a "Nawab's family" in Murshidabad. I assume that they are referring to the descendants of Mir Jaafar. Are there any known descendants of the authentic Nawab (Siraj-ud-daula) left in Murshidabad? Is there any Museum there? Thank you.

Thank you, Amita. I imagine Mir Jaafar's people may have eradicated every trace of Sirajuddaula's family. Yet they were related thru marriages! Such is the wicked lust for power. If only people would pause and think.

Amita: The link provided by RBSI re: 'Murshidabad History' has provided answers to all of my questions. Is states that all members of Sirajuddaula's family were massacred by Mir Jaafer and his wicked son Mir Miran. The brochure also gives the complete pedigree of Mir Jaafar until about 1960 when the Nawbaiyat came to an end. We are lucky that Murshidabad was exchanged for Khulna two days after partition by mutual agreement between India and East Pakistan.

So the tradition of wearning black had obviously not taken root in Awadh till that time in the majlis which is almost de rigour now.

Digvijay: Black is worn mostly by Shia women, not men, during Muharram. Also, to answer an earlier point raised by you, Shias (and indeed the Persian language) entered India mainly with Emperor Humayun on his return from Iran. There were none in India during the Sultanate.

Asad uncle: Qaul ( "Mann Kunto Maula") was elaborated/extrapolated by Amir Khusrau into a seperate genre of music much earlier to the Mughal conquest of India. Today it is the first to be sung in any sama mehfil. Although all the sil-silas of the Sufis begin with Maula Ali but there had to be takers and appreciation of the Qaul earlier too for him to do so. • Imam Hussain is believed to have said “ My caravan wouldn’t have met the fate it did had I been in India” In the 7th century few ladies from the household of prophet Mohammad after the battle of Karbala came to western Punjab (which is now part of Pakistan) . Prominent among them was Ruqaiyyah bint Ali, the daughter of Ali bint Abu Talib through his wife Ummul Banin. Ruqqaiyah bint Ali was the sister of Abbas ibnAli and wife of Muslim Bin Aqeel. Her shrine in Lahore is a place of pilgrimage and she is referred to as 'Bibi Pak Daman' The Shia community in India is as old as the Zorastrians ( both came to flee Sunni persecution) in fact their presence predates the first Sunni invasion into the Indian sub-continent.

Besides the Shias are derogatively referred to as Khatmal in India by other Muslims and solely because they wear black so black is worn in Moharram by both men and women among the Shias. In fact only with the Shias do we Rajasthani Rajputs share our 'sociology of colour' (except black of course). The mourning and observance of Moharram in India is more austere and longer in duration than even Iran .

im shocked and disgusted by the comments made here

Haider: I'd rather you attempt to give your version and 'set the record straight' if you disagree with what the participants have to say instead of taking offence.

yes Syed Haider ,, correct misconceptions if u r so sure

Diggy: no i will not put any record straight. but the way my family has been reviled is totally unfair.

Look Haider It is how you look at it . Not everything about a dynasty is worthy of admiration just as not all is condemnable either. That Mir Jaffar had resorted to strategem for pure selfish gains is irrefutable.That art culture, painting, letters and religion were patronised by the Murshidabad family is a fact. I am sorry but all who deserted the land of their ancestors for an 'El Dorado' based on religion are not looked upon favourably in this country (re: Iskander Meerza). Much has changed and today we can impartially attempt to understand and better appreciate our past even if we are descended from those dramatis personae from history ( I know it is difficult but not impossible)

Dear Digvijay: I had written a detailed response to your write-up but, at the last moment, it turned blue and instantly vanished into thin air! So, in a nutshell, you have some misconceptions especially in regards to the rift between sunnis and shias. Such a rift exists only in the minds of fanatical terrorists and corrupt politicians who hope to gain by creating such a divide. On the whole, I respect your comments but this time your conclusions are incorrect. You have not reviled anyone (as Mr Meerza feels) and your write-up is as enjoyable as always. Here I will ask you only one question. The Palestinians are almost 99% sunni, but their strongest supporters in their noble struggle for independence are the Hezbullah (100% shias) and Iran (~90% shias). If, in history, the shias had been persecuted and expelled by the sunnis, as you seem to imply, how could that be possible? The only expulsion I know of, from that area, is that of the Zoroastrians which is a blot on Islamic history and should never be repeated.

dont call him Diggy plz...fr watever reasons this name is not a happy one

Syed Haider Abbas Meerza : I agree that it is absolutely unfair and wrong to malign the descendants for the acts of a historical personality a few hundreds ago. Regret the offensive comments...but who would have imagined that a descendant of the subject of this discussion would be reading this thread !! ...I guess it happens only at RBSI !

The complete title of Digvijay Singh is "Mirza Digvijay Singh Kushwaha", a title originally granted by the Mughal court.

@thank you for understanding. it is distasteful to read that people hate the Murshidabad family so much so that they take pleasure in reading that the so called traitors grave is being desecrated. shame shame.

Syed Haider Abbas Meerza : That particular offensive comment has been deleted...and let me assure you that most members on RBSI would not even be aware of the Murshidabad family... let alone hate them. As I said earlier it is patently ridiculous to hate the descendants of anyone ! These extreme reactions naturally come about when discussing about historical events and inanimate characters. But once confronted with real people...such reactions just vaporize...as in this case. No offence meant.

On the other hand, an honorable descendant of a contemptible traitor should not be afraid to admit and acknowledge the mistakes committed by his ancestors. Did anyone ever apologize for the treacherous acts at Plassey? Did not a whole Nation suffer for a century for that evil action that fateful day?

Asad uncle: I am afraid you have touched upon a rather sensitive topic but it might interest you that this has been a subject of my intense study. The Jews have a pathological hatred for Islam and this feeling is mutual. They call the ‘sang-e-aswad’ a meteorite or an asteroid that the Muslims revere. They have had a historical enmity with the Muslims (Wasn’t the destruction of Khyber purely on the basis of religion at the hands of Maula Ali?) and are illicitly occupying Palestinian territory. You cannot come back two thousand years hence because you have been persecuted against (in the holocaust) and claim a land as justifiably yours because it had Once belonged to your ancestors. That is exactly what the Israeli claim is all about. Nobody is denying that the holocaust is the worst possible treatment on a section of humanity that has ever been perpetrated in history but the Israeli stance and the perpetuation of their regime and its support by the west ( at the cost of the Palestinians) is reprehensible ,more so in the enlightened 21st century. The Muslims do not share the same Degree of intensity of hatred against the Christians because the Abyssinian ( Ethiopian) Christian king had offered refuge to the earliest Muslims and had even broken down upon hearing their plight. To complicate matters the prophet ascended heaven ( mayraaj) from Jerusalem on the flying donkey. He was granted audience by Allah and hence his stature (according to the Muslims) is higher than Moses (whom God spoke to) and Jesus whom HE bestowed the power to revive the dead. An enemy’s enemy is a friend so the Hezbollah (a terrorist organization) is sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. The cause is genuine but the means of Hezbollah are not but then neither are the brutal means of repression adopted by the Israeli regime against the Palestinians. Iran ( implying the Shias of the world) and the present Saudi Regime ( meaning those who are in support of Abdul Wahab and his ideology that has given the world the dastardly wretched Taliban) have been at cross purposes even before Wahabism had come into its own. Why isn’t the Hezbollah sympathetic to the plight of Muslims in Chechnya or closer home to the unfortunate treatment of the Kurds in Iraq under Saddam Hussain ?

The difference between the Arabs and Iran ( Sunnis and Shias) can be attributed to the times of the ancient Persian empire. Persian empire of yore was one of the greatest that the world has ever seen. Art, culture, learning, letters, music, painting, dance, sculpture , cuisine ( including wine) astrology, astronomy and other branches of science were not only patronized by the Persians but had acquired an art form under them when the Zorastrians ruled . Arabs in comparison were nowhere even close. When the green armies of the prophet annexed Iran to Islam a strange situation be-fell them. Suddenly singing, dancing, music, astrology ,sculpture and drinking became taboo on account of a new austere religion in which all this was looked down upon. Iran (literal meaning ‘land of the Aryans’) thus had to evolve separately. Since there is no scope for dualism is Islam they had to find a way within the straitjacket of religion and look how admirably they did. Painting and sculpture ( so also in weaving both tapestries and carpets)in non religious context still thrives in Iran something which is un-thinkable in the Arab world. Until the Islamic revolution of 1979 when Iran was proclaimed an Islamic republic Iran had taverns and wine/liquor was not really forbidden there. Persian language and culture on account of its refinement was aped both to its west (The Ottoman empire ) and east ( earlier in times of the Sultanate and later the Mughals :"हाथ कंगन को आरसी क्या पढ़े लिखे को फारसी क्या ? ") Interestingly the Turks and the Mughals remained arch adversaries of the Persians but Persian culture they both adopted. Isn’t imitation the best form of flattery after all? The twelver Shiites (Ashna Ashari) thus are not just a religious development but actually a cultural movement of which the origins were in the Arab ( The Syeds are Hashemite) world but found refuge and patronage in Iran. Now coming to the question of persecution : Sunnis (and their sub-sects) comprise of 75-80% of the world Muslim population. Shias and the Sufis have throughout in the last 1400 years been persecuted and oppressed (NOT ALWAYS) under various Sunni regimes. If the aforementioned is Not true then how do you explain taqiyya ? For the uninitiated let me extrapolate that dissimulation (taqiyya) or concealment means that in order to avoid persecution, at times, one may conceal one’s Shi’ite identity, and a Shi ‘ite imam may submit to an illegitimate ruler just as Ali submitted to the first three Caliphs. Sufis fled to India and in time it became the greatest centre of Sufism. The Sufis interacted with the Hindu saints and that is how Yoga ( breathing exercises primarily ) found its way into Sufism. Kashmir is the only place where Sufi saints are referred to as Rishi !( and there have been scores of them) As stated above the ladies of the house of prophet Mohammad came to India in the 7th century not out of free will but fleeing Sunni persecution. The caretakers of the mausoleum of Maula Ali were being persecuted against and were welcomed by Aurangzeb. He offered the hand in marriage of his niece ( Dara Shikoh’s daughter) to them and that is how the Murshidabad dynasty came into being ( something that Haider Meerza will vouchsafe ) For enlightened Muslims there is no basis for a difference between Sunnis or Shi ‘ites as after all there is one Allah, one rasool , one Ali and one ummat but tensions and antagonisms arise between the two groups for many complex reasons and differences but primary among them are: • For Shi;ites what they perceive as the injustices done to Ali and Hussain aren’t simply past misfortunes to be forgotten. • In 1802, Wahhabi Sunnis (the same group dominant in Saudi Arabia today) destroyed the shrine of Imam Hussain in Karbala killing 2,000 people. They also destroyed the tombs of the four Shi’ite imams buried in Mecca • In countries where the Sunnis wish to impose Islamic law , Shi’ites suspect that the result will be that the Shi’ites will have to follow Sunni law • Some Shi’ite ritual practices , including the cursing of the first three caliphs , are highly offensive to the Sunnis. • Sunnis have at times accused Shi’ites of hypocrisy and immorality because of their practice of dissimulation and acceptance of Mu’tah ( temporary marriage). The Murshidabadi and Awadhi dynasty’s history are replete with Mu’tahi and Nikaahi wives ! • Because Saudi Arabia is a bastion of Sunni orthodoxy and Iran is the leading Shi’ite country, ancient tensions between Arabs and ‘Persians’ resurface in modern competition for leadership in the Muslim world No one should be deceived by a simple equation of Arab equals Sunni and Iranian equals Shi’ite. One cannot assume that all Shi’ites share the same political views for example , although Iraqi Shi’ites were oppressed by and hated president Saddam Hussain , they didn’t support Iran during its war with Iraq. Summing up it is imperative to understand and appreciate that Isl

FABULOUS!!

The example of Jerusalem was given because the Jews have in time become the favourite whipping boy for both Iran and the Arab world. Remember how the New York Stock Exchange returned the aid cheque the very day it reopened to the Arab Shaikh after 9/11 because the Shaikh had said unfavourable things (according to the NYSE officials)about the West's west Asia policy.Similarly Sadaam Hussain ( a Sunni) always kept threatening to wipe out Israel from the map of the world when his country was being chased and bombed by the allied powers. infact he did get fired scud missiles at Isreal during the days of the Gulf War. So cleansing 'holy Jerusalem' of Judaism and Christianity is a noble cause for all fanatical Muslims.

Digvijay: Although I have not read your dissertation completely, I can safely say that I totally disagree. This is probably because of the massive campaign of misinformation that is being fuelled by extremist groups all over.The Muslims have no hatred towards the Jews; whatever animosity there is - is political in nature and centred only and only around the occupation of the West Bank. If a State of Palestine is created along the 1967 borders (with minor adjustments) with East Jerusalem as the capital and a fair compensation to the Palestinian refugees, all differences will evaporate instantaneously.That I am 100% sure of. A Palestinian young man in Kuwait brought and showed me the ancient, rusted keys to his home in Haifa, Israel (from where he was expelled) - should they not be compensated for their abandoned homes? As William Prescott wrote in 'The Reign of Isabella and Ferdinand of Spain', the Muslims and Jews are similar in taste and tradition. That is why they joined hands immediately after the arrival of the Moors in Spain. You are wrong to say that there is an historical animosity. If you go to the older cities of India like Bulandshahr, Aligarh etc you will find a Mohalla in each called "Bani Israel". These mohallas were established by the Ghauris to fulfill a promise made to a Jewish adviser. I myself have relatives whose last name is 'Israeli' who live(d) in those mohallas, have Jewish features, were always scholarly (as an undergrad, I read commentaries on Shakespeare's Macbeth from my 'uncle's' notes), and were treated as the closest and dearest in our Muslim family. My Israeli uncle took me to school for admission and was furious when the heartless Head Master denied me admission claiming that my marks "were unrealistically high; they could not be real". Even here, two out of my three closest friends (all Americans) are Jewish. Where is the traditional hatred? Sorry, I will not comment on this matter further in this thread.