Talk:Shah Jahan

message: Ali Pasha, Saladin, Akbar, Shah Jahan, Yusuf ibn Tashfin, Hyder Ali have all been accused of incest, bisexuality, and clearly the worst of moral behavior by almost every European chronicler who came across them...
Therefore this issue regarding Shah Jahan and Jahanara Begum is no different than the depictions of the Prophet Muhammed, in medieval or modern times...it's all a very nasty attempt to defame and malign the reputation of almost everyone who happens to be Muslim.        — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.36.48 (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: How European chroniclers defamed Muslim rulers

message: Jahanara Begum was trying to help her isolated and ailing father Shah Jahan, accusing anyone of incest is morally and ethically negative, she was later married and her tomb exists till today.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.121.123 (talk) 10:34, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Allegations

message: Dear Wiipedia,
Please add this amazing picture of Shah Jahan found in:
(http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/201104/in.the.shade.of.the.royal.umbrella.htm)
and
(http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/201104/popup.htm?img=images/umbrella/umbrella-china2-lg.jpg)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.57.100 (talk) 19:54, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Add this picture

message: Dear Wikipedia,
how is possible for the Mughal Emperors who, were the descendent's of Mongol Hordes from the steppes of Asia to be direct descendants of: Western European kings and emperors such as Emperor Charlemagne, the King of the Franks, King of the Lombards and the Emperor of the Romans???.
No such presumptions have ever been made by Mughal historians (this is a very important and realistic fact that should be noted down).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.182.22.9 (talk) 14:15, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Descendant

message: Can JASpencer provide references to his edits regarding Shah Jehan related genocide and incestuous relationships. Jay 06:53, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to second that request. AxelBoldt 20:46, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Genocide and incest

message: I have changed the supposed full title "Padshah Shah Jahan I" to Shah Jahan. I've never heard of such a title. Google also returns only Wikipedia-related sites. Jay 18:53, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Hi AxelBoldt, why have you put back the image ? Any idea why it was removed in the first place ? Jay 18:53, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know why it was removed and there's no record in the article's history. I have restored it because it seems relevant. AxelBoldt 11:12, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: "most Mughal Emperors killed their fathers upon succession." What is the basis for this statement ? Jay 07:13, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Not their fathers but their brothers, and not necessarily upon succession but before if possible. The problem was that Islamic law of inheritance demands the division of property, so princes would have to divide the kingdom on the death of the king. The presence of more than one son invariably led to war between the scions. Jahangir had no brother left when he succeeded. Shah Jahan killed his elder brother Khusrau in 1622, and his younger brother Shahriyar upon accession in 1628. Another brother had died from drinking too much. Shah Jahan tried in vain to install his eldest son Dara Shukoh as heir apparent. His other sons refused to agree and fought until Aurangzeb won. He killed Dara Shukoh and his younger brother Murad, not without legalizing it. Another brother fled to Burma. The same happened with Aurangzeb's sons. Curryfranke (talk) 13:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Fratricide

message: as far as i know, the picture shown is not Shah Jehan but Jehangir... Antares911 16:11, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  image 

message: How is it actually spelled? The first paragraph uses two spellings, شاہ جحاں and شاہ جہان
the first one is correct. it is a heh doachashmee, not the Heh.Dlayiga 05:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urdu/Persian Spelling of Shah Jahan 

message: Here's what I blanked:
Religious intolerance
Despite the fact that his mother was Hindu, Shah Jahan did not follow the liberal religious policy instituted by his grandfather, Emperor Akbar. In particular he ordered the destruction of recently built Hindu temples. 
There are some claims that Hindu scriptures dating back 500 years prior to Shah's birth lay beneath markings in the Taj Mahal suggesting the great wonder was actually a Hindu temple . However, most historians and archeologists refute this claim as baseless.
I can find no references AT ALL to Shah Jahan ordering the destruction of recently built Hindu temples.
The Taj reference is so non-credible it doesn't deserve being played out anywhere, although it is discussed thoroughly in the Taj Mahal article...but in ANY CASE, credible or not, IT IS NOT RELEVANT TO SHAH JAHANS RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE.
Shah Jahan made a half-hearted attempt to reinstate the Jizya (a tax on Non-muslims prescribed by the Sharia), but this was more an indication of a ruler trying to find yet another revenue source.
From all accounts I find, once instated as emperor, Shah Jahan couldn't care about Religion one way or the other. His interests lay elsewhere...mostly marble, jewels, and females.
If you take out the non-documented information, you are left with the information that Shah Jahan's mother was hindu. Not really enough to support a section on religious intolerance.
If somebody wants to document religious intolerance by EVIDENCE (see the Aurangzeb article and discussion for exammple), then by all means put something here. Right now, it's just tissue paper with no substance.
:::I forgot to sign this comment when I made it on 5 Aug 2006--Nemonoman 22:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious Intolerance Blanking 

message: can someone do it?--D-Boy 21:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  move the pic into the info box 

message: I came across this wikipage: Princess Manmati, Which states that she is Jahan's mother. However, this article gives Jahan's mother a very different name. Can anyone check this out, and if it checks out, introduce correct links into this article? Omegastar (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's OK. Manmati was her personal name, Princess Jagat-Gosaini was her title as daughter of the maharajah of Jodhpur. When she married Jahangir, she was styled Taj Bibi, and when she died, she was given the posthumous name Bilqis-Makani, i.e. "having the same rank (in paradise) like Bilqis (the wise queen of Sheba)". Curryfranke (talk) 13:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mother 

message: Why is Shah Jahan's name translated into Urdu (based off Perso-Arabic script) before Persian? Shah Jahan was 'Persianic' and his name is literally Persian which is what Urdu is based off of. The other Mughl rulers, Akbar, Humuyan, etc are all named in Persian but this wikipage has Urdu. Change this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ditc (talk • contribs) 09:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Urdu before Persian?

message: "...about 2/10 the size of modern India." Apperentely the area is much larger then 2/10  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.237.223.243 (talk) 21:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: took away

message: This passage makes no sense: 
After she died an accidental death while giving birth to her 14th child, when emperor shajahan travelled Balapur fort to Burhanpur mother of Mirza Azam and elder daughter of Shahzada Badi uz-Zaman Mirza,"alis" Shah Nawaz Khan, of the Safawi dynasty Dilrus Banu wife of Auranzeb along with Mumtaz and cousin brother shah beg khan along with milatary three fold night stay near argaon at Hiwarkhed before the 14th child birth. Shahanshah Shah Jahan never remarried.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwend (talk • contribs) 05:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsensical passage 

message: iblogger.org is on the blacklist so images from it should not be used.  See also the whitelist discussion|
Graeme374 (talk) 04:27, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images from greatestbattles.iblogger.org 

message: ...says nothing about the woman. It tells of how Jahan became closer to his father. Either change the section title or put something in there about her.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:779A:FC0:9E5:D63A:33BC:5B1F (talk) 17:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nur Jahan 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture :File:Rosette, Titles of Sha Jahan.jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for January 5, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-01-05. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Rosette, Titles of Sha Jahan.jpg]] scheduled for POTD 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: What’s the name of the movie 186.179.192.123 (talk) 22:24, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What’s the name of shah jahan wife 

message: The sub-section →Nur Jahan in Early Life section only mentions about both of them separately. The part that talks about him has nothing to do with Nur Jahan while the part about Nur Jahan doesn't seem to be associated with Shah Jahan.
I suggest/request that the sub-section to either be removed or mention incident(s) involving both of them. Manavati (talk) 13:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nur Jahan Section 

message: There are many problems with this section.
1. mostly relies on Primary Sources.
2. Secondary Sources were written during the British Raj
3. Joannes de Laet, Peter Mundy and Tavernier mention the rumor of incest, but have never seen it in perion. The only contompery sources needed to be mentioned are Bernier and Manucci, who saw the relationships within the Royal Family. 
Therefore I am rewriting this section as in the Jahanara Begum article. SKAG123 (talk) 05:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accusation of incest rewrite