At 08:51 AM 26/01/04 -0800, you wrote: >Searching for: > >HH Princes of Bhagirath Singh of Himmatnagar (Idar) >DOB +/- 1945 to date > If there's such a person in the Idar Royal Family, he could be a son or grandson of Maharaj Madan Singhji, born 4th February 1912, or of Maharaj Amar Singh, born 1919, who married Rani Surendra Kunwar of Osian. Cheers, Henry

At 11:29  25/01/04 -0800, you wrote: > >> There's still another rule or law that applies. >> Namely the fact that the ruler >> can make his own laws. Which is exactly what the M >> of J has done. He has given >> his son-in-law the title of Maharaj and has adopted >> his maternal grandson, >> flagrantly ignoring a thousand years of tradition. >> From a genealogical >> point of >> view I don't mind since the grandson is from the >> same sept as new grandfather, >> but its still disappointing to see. The son of >> Maharaj Mahendra Sinhji of >> Udaipur would have been a more appropriate choice >> IMHO. >> Cheers, >> Henry >> >/// > How does son of mahendra singh of mewar come into the picture? > Unfortunately he doen't. I gave him as an example of someone that the daughter of the M of J could have married instead of a 'commoner', I'm sure there are many other examples. Does anyone know 'Maharaj' Narendra Singh Rajawat's ancestry, at least beyond his father? Cheers, Henry

Henry Thanks for info. I studied at St Mary?s High School in Bombay 52 to 59 and there were three brothers - princes: Bhagirath, Ranvir but do remember the youngest. What is connection between Himmanagar and Idar (believe in Maharasthra state today) Trying to trace them for a school reunion to be held in Dec this year. Best regards Francisco -----Mensagem original----- De: Henry Soszynski [mailto:[email protected]] Enviada em: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:57 AM Para: [email protected] Assunto: Re: RES: [INDIA-ROYALTY] new user At 08:51 AM 26/01/04 -0800, you wrote: >Searching for: > >HH Princes of Bhagirath Singh of Himmatnagar (Idar) >DOB +/- 1945 to date > If there's such a person in the Idar Royal Family, he could be a son or grandson of Maharaj Madan Singhji, born 4th February 1912, or of Maharaj Amar Singh, born 1919, who married Rani Surendra Kunwar of Osian. Cheers, Henry ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Searching for: HH Princes of Bhagirath Singh of Himmatnagar (Idar) DOB +/- 1945 to date -----Mensagem original----- De: Sue [mailto:[email protected]] Enviada em: Sunday, January 25, 2004 8:40 AM Para: [email protected] Assunto: [INDIA-ROYALTY] new user searching for BILGRAMI & KHAN from Hyderabad from around 1800 to 1950 ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

> There's still another rule or law that applies. > Namely the fact that the ruler > can make his own laws. Which is exactly what the M > of J has done. He has given > his son-in-law the title of Maharaj and has adopted > his maternal grandson, > flagrantly ignoring a thousand years of tradition. > From a genealogical > point of > view I don't mind since the grandson is from the > same sept as new grandfather, > but its still disappointing to see. The son of > Maharaj Mahendra Sinhji of > Udaipur would have been a more appropriate choice > IMHO. > Cheers, > Henry > /// How does son of mahendra singh of mewar come into the picture? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

At 05:32 AM 24/01/04 -0800, you wrote: > The recent controversy following the jaipur adoption >has thrown up the question of the different succession >laws which are followed and also which should we >recognize. Different states follow different laws. >     The first Succession/adoption law is the aryan >law followed by the Rajput states which states -- >" You cannot adopt anyone whose mother you cannot >marry" . This leaves out adoption from any female side >of the family . Only children of male relatives could >be adopted. This was not done in Jaipur case. >      The second is the dravidian law which is exact >opposite . It states that your adopted son must be >preferably your own progeny. This was universally >followed in all maratha states . Most adoption were of >either sister's or daughter's children including the >current kolhapur one. >      So debate continues over validity of jaipur >succession. Which law shall we recognize? > There's still another rule or law that applies. Namely the fact that the ruler can make his own laws. Which is exactly what the M of J has done. He has given his son-in-law the title of Maharaj and has adopted his maternal grandson, flagrantly ignoring a thousand years of tradition. From a genealogical point of view I don't mind since the grandson is from the same sept as new grandfather, but its still disappointing to see. The son of Maharaj Mahendra Sinhji of Udaipur would have been a more appropriate choice IMHO. Cheers, Henry

Hello, I agree to your point of view. Y.S. Jaideepsinh of Kotharia. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henry Soszynski" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 1:34 PM Subject: Re: [INDIA-ROYALTY] Laws of Succession and adoption > At 05:32 AM 24/01/04 -0800, you wrote: > > The recent controversy following the jaipur adoption > >has thrown up the question of the different succession > >laws which are followed and also which should we > >recognize. Different states follow different laws. > > The first Succession/adoption law is the aryan > >law followed by the Rajput states which states -- > >" You cannot adopt anyone whose mother you cannot > >marry" . This leaves out adoption from any female side > >of the family . Only children of male relatives could > >be adopted. This was not done in Jaipur case. > > The second is the dravidian law which is exact > >opposite . It states that your adopted son must be > >preferably your own progeny. This was universally > >followed in all maratha states . Most adoption were of > >either sister's or daughter's children including the > >current kolhapur one. > > So debate continues over validity of jaipur > >succession. Which law shall we recognize? > > > There's still another rule or law that applies. Namely the fact that the ruler > can make his own laws. Which is exactly what the M of J has done. He has given > his son-in-law the title of Maharaj and has adopted his maternal grandson, > flagrantly ignoring a thousand years of tradition. From a genealogical > point of > view I don't mind since the grandson is from the same sept as new grandfather, > but its still disappointing to see. The son of Maharaj Mahendra Sinhji of > Udaipur would have been a more appropriate choice IMHO. > Cheers, > Henry > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > >

searching for BILGRAMI & KHAN from Hyderabad from around 1800 to 1950

> > Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 09:12:26 +1000 > To: "Steve Ruelberg" > From: Henry Soszynski > Subject: Re: INDIAN PRINCELY STATES - PALASNI > > At 06:55 21/01/04 -0800, you wrote: >> >> Looking at this state I am a little confused. The Indian Yearbooks in the >> 1930's list the ruler of Palasni as Chandrasinhji Jitsinhji b.1889 s.1929 & >> his two sons Sardarsinhji b.1919 >> & Veerbhadrasinhji b.1939.  Therefore I don't see how Indrasinhji b.1885 >> s.1907 could be the present ruler. If he did succeed to the state it could >> not have been in 1907. However I must admit I don't have any info here later >> then the 1930's. > > I'm cc'ing this to the list, hopefully someone may have further info. > This is confusing indeed. My source does show Indrasinhji as Thakur in 1944 > (Indian Annual Register by N.N. Mitra 1945), so unless my source is wrong or > I've noted the wrong heading I just don't know where if any error might be. > Regarding Tonk, the Nawab of Rampur, just mentioned in one of his e-mails > that the present Nawab is the brother-in-law of his predecessor, no further > info was provided. It is almost certain that the Nawab is agnatically > connected to the main line of the Nawabs. (The first Nawab had nine sons, all > of whom apparently had descendants). > I've received an e-mail from the grandson of the Nawab of Palanpur and there > are some minor additions to the family of the present Nawab (87 years old > this year).. > Cheers, > Henry

The recent controversy following the jaipur adoption has thrown up the question of the different succession laws which are followed and also which should we recognize. Different states follow different laws. The first Succession/adoption law is the aryan law followed by the Rajput states which states -- " You cannot adopt anyone whose mother you cannot marry" . This leaves out adoption from any female side of the family . Only children of male relatives could be adopted. This was not done in Jaipur case. The second is the dravidian law which is exact opposite . It states that your adopted son must be preferably your own progeny. This was universally followed in all maratha states . Most adoption were of either sister's or daughter's children including the current kolhapur one. So debate continues over validity of jaipur succession. Which law shall we recognize? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

Greetings, There are some minor additions to Surguja and Danta, thanks to Steve. Also, welcome to the latest list members. Feel free to post on Indian Royalty. Cheers, Henry

Hi, I am after anything in regards to my GGrandfather, Anthony Davis born Madras 25 June 1846, son of John and Sabina. Arrived in Australia about 1850 -1860. Regards Greg Davis 17 Turner Street Albany 6330 Western Australia

Greetings, There have been some minor additions and corrections to the following pages.... Anegundi (new page) Auwa Idar (new link to Sahaspur) Jammu and Kashmir Jaswan (addition of two photos) Jodhpur Porbandar Sahaspur (new link to Idar) Suket .... thanks to Govind Singh, H. Singh, Sundeepsinhji Manharsinhji Chudasama and Adhirath Singh. Cheers, Henry

Greetings, There's been a number of changes to the website. Kolhapur, Sandur, Baroda and Indore, (thanks to Akshay) Addition of a handful of Istimraris of Jodpur Updates to the Shekhawati Thikanas of Jaipur and more. The Nawab of Rampur has sent me some photos of himself and his wife as well as his parents. They can be seen in the Royal Photo Gallery. Cheers, Henry PS Does any know the defintion of a Taluq/Taluqdar?

Greetings, Sad to report that HH Maharajadhiraj Raj Rajeshwar Narendra Shiromani Maharajah Sri NARENDRA SINGH Bahadur, 25th Maharaja of Bikaner passed away at Singhania Hospital in Delhi on the 24th October 2003 from the complications of diabetes. He leaves his mother, wife, two sisters and two daughters. It is unclear who will become the next ceremonial Maharaja of Bikaner. Link (thanks to H. Singh):- http://www.hindu.com/2003/10/27/stories/2003102703790400.htm Wishing everyone a Healthy and Prosperous New Year, Cheers, Henry

Greetings, Some new info on Gangwal Taluk in Oudh. Rajkumari Purnima Singh of Gangwal, has married Tikka Saheb Rakesh Singh ji of Tharoch in Himachal Pradesh. Unfortunately I have very little info on Tharoch, so I don't know how he is related to the Rana. Cheers, Henry

Greetings, It seems that Nawabzada Shaharyar Khan of Kurwai has been promoted to the top job in Pakistani Cricket, hopefully he will bring more credibility to the board. http://www-aus.cricket.org/db/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2003/DEC/010783_PAK_09DE C2003.html Cheers, Henry

Greetings, A list member has sent the following URL (cut and paste if necessary), which may be of interest to you. Cheers, Henry http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:6GUoeeiGslcJ:164.100.24.208/ls/lsdeb/l s13/ses10/150702.html+%22mahendra+kumari%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Greetings, I have uploaded a major update to Rampur, based on information received. Discussion is welcome. Following is a link to an article regarding the late Bastar Maharaja. http://www.hindu.com/2003/10/17/stories/2003101708420300.htm Cheers, Henry

Greetings, The following pages have been updated.... UMRAOS: http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/misc/umraos.html TREES: http://www.uq.net.au/~zzhsoszy/ips/misc/trees.html (added the Naruka clan origins) As always, any corrections and additions are welcome. Cheers, Henry