Talk:Mumtaz Mahal

message: Many books have given the number of children as 14. Even the article on Gauhara Begum says Gauhara Begum (June 17, 1631-1706) was the fourteenth and final child of the Mughal emperor, Shah Jahan I, and his favorite wife, Mumtaz Mahal. Mumtaz Mahal died giving birth to her. '
Also many books say that the date is June 7th. Can some one please check  Doctor Bruno  18:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is possible that four of her fourteen kids's names are lost to history. 203.11.71.124 (talk) 03:44, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of children

message: Isn't the interpretation of her name a little bit too imaginative? As far as I know the Arabic word mumtaz just meens excellent.--84.217.192.83 (talk) 00:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's highly unlikely that her name means "beloved ornament of the palace".  This claim seems to come from Richard Bernstein's "The East, the West, and Sex" where it is also unattributed.  According to Google Translate for Persian, ممتاز (mumtaz) means - as it does in Arabic - simply "excellent" or "great".  محل (mahal) means "place" literally and could conceivably mean palace.  Following Arabic grammatical rules, which is a possibility, her name could mean "wonderful (one) of the palace".  Persian rules would produce an odd result, "excellent place".  Either way, there is nothing about a beloved ornament here.  --Agh.niyya (talk) 07:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: In the article, it is stated she died in a car crash. Is this correct?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.23.71.175 (talk) 11:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's just some vandalism typed in by a racist who doesn't even know the Mughal empire and its history... Heran et Sang'gres (talk) 02:43, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cause of death

message: I saw in a book about Mumtaz Mahal's hatred of Christianity. According to what I read, she was a fanatic, urging her husband to raze the Portugese colony at Hooghly (NE coast of India). And, as final proof, her sarcophagus was inscribed, "Lord, defend us from the tribe of unbelievers."
Can someone verify this? Heran et Sang'gres (talk) 02:41, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm. Begley, Wayne E.; Desai, Z.A. (Hardback). Taj Mahal — The Illumined Tomb. University of Washington Press. pp. 392. . is a good book. There's a section at the end entitled "European references to the character of Shah Jahan and Mumtaz Mahal". The introductory paragraphs contain the following:
Most of the European criticisms - whether of Shah Jahan, Mumtaz Mahal of Jahanara - are clealy based upon hearsay and gossip. The reliability of the criticisms is of course highly suspect, but perhaps not more so than the excessive falttery of the court histories.....
With that in mind, they then quote a contemporary italian traveller called Niccolao Manucci.
......[I, pp. 175-76] Finding himself undisputed king of Hindustan, Shah Jahan was compelled to make war against the portuguese of Hugli, for this was demanded by Taj Mahal, from whom the Portuguese had carried off two slave girls. He sent against them the general Qasim Khan, who, when he arived close to Hugli, made an arrangement with the Portuguese. These paid a large sum of money; whereupon he retired the distance of a day's journey, but again advanced towards Hugli, with the excuse that the King had ordered him to take the place.
They defended themselves as long as they could, but, unable to continue longer, they surrendered. Qasim Khan seized by lot 5,000 souls, among them some Augustinian and Jesuit fathers. It seemed as if God desired to chastise the Portuguese of Hugli, seeing that they were unable to escape with their ships by way of the river Ganges, on the banks of which the town referred to stands.
The water in the river had fallen, and the boats lay stranded, a thing that had nevere [sic] happened before or since.....Qasim Khan carried off the prisoners to court, but God willed that before they arrived there, the queen Taj Mahal, should die.....
[p.177] There cannot be the least doubt that if the Portuguese had reached the court in the lifetime of Taj Mahal, she would have orderered the whole of them to be cut into pieces after great tortures, for thus had she sworn when they did her the injury. All the same, they did not escape a sufficient amount of suffering; some abjured their faith, either from fear of torture or death, or through the desire of recovering their wives, who had been distributed by Shah Jahan among his officers. --Joopercoopers (talk) 16:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Her stance on Christianity 

message: In the intro someone states that her body remained at Burhanpur for 23 years until the completion of the Taj Mahal, but toward the end of the article it says her body was disinterred 6 months after her death and brought to Agra to await the building's completion. Which is correct? Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 15:49, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicting statements regarding her disinterment... 

message: Technically, nothing is wrong with the spelling here. Spelling rules had not yet been established. The rule was if the reader could understand it, it was spelled correctly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.121.204.129 (talk) 17:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  sic notes in final quote 

message: Delete this section?  All of it was cut-n-pasted on 18 September 2010 by User 183.177.124.7 from Citizendium, "Origins and architecture of the Taj Mahal", which had last been modified on 27 May 2010. --Wikiain (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted. --Wikiain (talk) 02:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mumtaz Mahal's funeral 

message: please aske any body expert in persian  or arabic language . Mumtaz  in both language means : the best- excellent super  and 
Mahal means place - region. so Mumtaz Mahal means  "the best or excellent or super of the region ")
please see book of Dr. hekmat e shrazi late ambassador to india.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maahmaah (talk • contribs) 04:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: My dear Maahmaah - we can't ask experts here - only quote them. We have multiple sources for the translation - if you have a contrary one, then please provide it. --Joopercoopers (talk) 21:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Mumtaz Mahal's meaning 

message: One of the images refers to the tomb as a "cenotaph."  This word specifically means a tomb in which there is no body.  Is this then the correct word?  Because the remainder of the article implies strongly that both husband and wife are buried in the Taj Mahal.  --Skb8721 (talk) 13:51, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "Cenotaph"?

message: Many of the other language WPs seem to think she was born in April 1593 (6 April, 15 April, or just April).  Why do we say 1 September?  --  Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Month of birth

message: Substituted at 00:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: A recent edit adds the Urdu (Nastaliq script) spelling of Mumtaz Mahal to her infobox. I don't read this script, but I tried tranliterating it in Google Translate. It returned "Mumtazhehel", which may or may not be correct. Would any editor who has familiarity with the Nastaliq script please verify that the recent IP edit gives the correct Nastaliq rendition of "Mumtaz Mahal"?--Quisqualis (talk) 07:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding her name in Urdu (Nastaliq)