Talk:Harun al-Rashid/Archive 1

Archive 1

Yellow Star.

Odd that the article does not mention that Harun al-Rashid was the first ruler (of any religion) to force Jews to wear the Yellow State - which he did in 807.2.26.103.72 (talk) 13:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

-What is the source of such a claim? --Yevlem (talk) 12:35, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Famous Men

The original version of this page looks like it was taken from:

Famous Men of the Middle Ages

By John H. Haaren, LL.D., District Superintendent of Schools The City of New York, and A. B. Poland, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools Newark N.J.

This text is in the public domain and is part of the Gutenberg etext colloction.

Public domain text should still be acknowledged. Otherwise it is plagiarism. Wikipedia requires acknowledgment for its own content used elsewhere and applies that standard to content copied here from other sources. Wells50 09:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)wells50

Mistakes

Well first the names of places and the links in the text do not match. The Heraklea in the text is near Black sea but the link takes you to an article about a city near Adriatic Shore... I corrected the link about Scutari myself. Second I think myth and fact is a little too mixed. 15 000 men walking at least 1000 miles into enemy territorry, meeting 125,000 men army and not only winning, but killing 40,000 of them seems a little off. Also, not only his encounter with the Roman empress is a little too anecdotal, it is not much relevant either. The same goes with much of the other anecdotes.

well, about the numbers you wrote .. it's well known about muslims - in the first 800 years after the death of prophet Muhammed and even in his life- that they used to achieve amazing military victories with little numbers and little equipments. that happends in many major and minor combats through the early and mid islamic era. Dr B2 (talk) 06:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

This article needs improvements

1. Where are the sources? WP:CITE
2. What is legend, what is disputed and what is historical facts?
3. Subsections would increase readability.

--itpastorn 15:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

It is worthy of note that the Jafar link given in the text of the article goes to the Wikipedia entry for the character of Jafar from the Disney movie Aladdin (1992 film). - April 13, 2006

There is no distinction made here between legend and history; for instance, his sword cutting through a bundle of swords "without turning the edge of his own sword" is highly unlikely to be true, barring excellent documentation. --Ramidel 04:54, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Two references that lend veracity to the possibility of such a sword: link: "M Reibold et al, Nature, 2006, 444, 286" [1] and [2]

I would strongly encourage the use of primary sources for such articles. I have added at Tabari. It could be noted that ibn Khaldun another significant source discounts the romantic reason given for the fall of the influential Barmaki family.Gallador 01:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that facts from primary sources should be the core of the article. However, even secondary sources should be mentioned, as they have influenced people's views of Harun over centuries. Mlewan 08:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The so called "factual" story about the clock gift by Harun that made a noise at each hours is clearly fictional. The author gave the reference as the same "Thousand Nights" referemce that his next sentence discredits. Joeseph Needham and Robert Temple documented clearly that the first mechanical clock was made in China by S. Sung in 1092. So the 799 date is completely wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webvip (talk • contribs) 16:14, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

NPOV

There are some clearly pov statemenets in this article, especially in regards to the invasions of Byzantium. --Eupator 15:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Good Article

Actually this is one of the few Abbasid-related articles that is close to be precise in describing hisotorical events & has not been modified...keep up the good work...193.6.158.33 09:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Removing Tag

Actually this tag seems old; I have not reread every detail, and the article in general looks good. If anyone still has a concern, perhaps they could state it specifically, or even edit to correct the article. I am now removing the tag. Gallador (talk) 23:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Given name

Throughout the article he is referred to as Harun, but isn't this his given name. --Philip Stevens (talk) 07:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

So what? It is the right thing to do to call a monarch by his first name. Str1977 ^(talk) 22:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Persian

Could the people battling over if the Persian form of his name should be mentioned, please sort it out here on the talk page instead of through an edit war. Mlewan (talk) 10:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no point of mentioning the Persian language, his name is Arabic, he is from an Abbasid family, I have no Idea why some members insist to put the Persian Language as his name, even so, what is the difference? You will mention the Arabic name instead of the Persian….. because his name is Arabic. Again just because he born in Iran that doesn’t mean he is Iranian. I might be wrong but if you have a useful Convincing thing to add, please do. Mussav (talk) 20:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop reverting without giving any convincing reasons. Mussav (talk) 22:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Please calm down ... adding the name of a person in any language does not have any thing to do with the person's nationality! Adding the Persian form of the name was to provide a help for researchers who are searching for a name in Persian language. In contrast to Arabic,in Persian pronunciation , many does not use/pronounce the "Al" and the name is read as Harun-e-Rashid. So when the name of Harun is written in many Persian language texts, it may be mentioned in the article:as an example , see the page on Sibawayh that his name in Persian and Arabic is different:his name in Persian means the "Smell(perfume) of apple" and pronounced as Sibouye , in contrast of Arabic Sibwayh. So both Persian and Arabic form should be included.شکرا--Alborz Fallah (talk) 23:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You can change any Arabic "Al" to -e-, so? This doesn’t explain the Persian language? Harun Al-Rashid has an Arabic name, I can't see the connection between Harun Al-Rashid and the Persian one, even so the Persian one won't change the meaning of the name, so what is the point of adding the Persian language? Mussav (talk) 11:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

First , I don't think any Arabic "Al" is interchangeable with Persian -e- . In Persian language, (-e-)is used only in two occasions: to show father ship and to show adjective. Many Arabic names never have such a change in Persian, as no one ever change the Rass-al-khaymeh (راس الخیمه)to Rass-e- Khaymeh(راس خیمه). Second, the point of adding Persian form is to help the reader (English-language one) correlate the name he finds in the Persian texts to the one that is introduced here only in Arabic. Wikipedia is mainly for informing the ordinary people and not the experts: what if that ordinary person doesn't know the fact that Persian and Arabic form of this name are identical?--Alborz Fallah (talk) 12:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't say that I convinced yet, but it seems there is no harm to let it be like the way it is now. :) Mussav (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

the picture !!

i strongly disagree with the picture in the top of article ... it is not suitable for a king like Harun who was ruling such an empire, and just compare it with the second imaginary picture of Julius Köckert !!!

i really prefer not putting any picture rather than that humiliating one in the top Dr B2 (talk) 06:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Wow

This article really needs some work. Are there so few englishwriting wikipedians interested in this guy? Sad. Starting with the lede, why is the clock-thing so significant?

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

translation?

Is this article a translation? If so, it needs work from somebody who understands both the source and English because it reads clumsily in a number of places. In English, you don't "reign from your father" though you might inherit a throne from your father. 4.249.63.2 (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Childish speculation

Is this unsourced primary school essay, consisting for the most part of irrelevant speculation, really considered to be worth a B-class rating? If I seriously thought this was the quality Wikipedia aspired to, I would never consult the encyclopedia again. The article needs to be completely rewritten by somebody who knows something rather more about al-Rashid than the fact that he features in the Arabian Nights. He also features in Flecker's Hassan, by the way (not mentioned).

I believe Toos is normally spelled Tus.

And surely the House of Wisdom was founded by al-Mansur, not al-Rashid?

Djwilms (talk) 08:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

He is an Arab

Both of his parents are Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula.DesertDagger (talk) 06:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Readability

An interesting article. Would be great if someone with some subject knowledge could further improve readabilty though. I was loath to make grammar changes in case I unintentionally altered any data. Tiddy (talk) 07:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Article Base Page

If almost the first thing you say on a given page is that the name ON the page is spelled something OTHER than what the URL shows, perhaps we should consider moving everything over to the correctly spelled name rather than redirecting the correctly spelled name to the misspelled name? Just a thought. I realize that doing it without discussing it would be the 'audacious' thing to do, but I'd rather get some input from others before I do something 'stupid'. Blackfyr (talk) 06:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

• The problem is that while his name is technically spelled ar-Rashīd, standardized English usage unfortunately seems to be al-Rashid. Elrith (talk) 23:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

• While that may be true (though not with the trustworthy news organizations), it says to me that the redirect should come from the incorrectly spelled inquiry, not the correctly spelled one. Blackfyr (talk) 00:31, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Source?

Like many articles about the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphates, this article is a mess. Instead of going through all the problems, let me point out one thing. The source for this sentence, "He began his reign by appointing very able ministers, who carried on the work of the government so well that they greatly improved the condition of the people." is this: "New Arabian nights' entertainments, Volume 3." Is this a joke? An 1826 version of a fictional tale is used as reference? I suppose it doesn't matter there is no page cite. Who would look this up anyway? Did no one have the Classics Illustrated version of Arabian Nights to source this article from?AnthroMimus (talk) 02:08, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Title

I fixed the title to standard transliteration per WP:MOSAR. The section on definite article states Arabic has only one definite article, "ال" ("al-"). However, if it is followed by a solar letter (listed in the table right), the "L" is assimilated in pronunciation with this solar letter and the solar letter is doubled. Since "R" is also a solar letter the standard transliteration is to assimilate "al-" and change it into "ar-", so I moved the title into "Harun ar-Rashid". The previous title "Harun al-Rashid" was inaccurate and yet not a primary transcription of the name either, so it had to be moved to the current title. Khestwol (talk) 13:47, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello! While correct as far as correct transliteration is concerned, the overriding concern here is WP:COMMONNAME, and in English, it is "Harun al-Rashid", a use favoured by most scholars I know of as well as the Encyclopaedia of Islam ([3]). Constantine ✍ 14:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Per WP:MOSAR the guideline is to use standard transliteration unless there is a primary transcription. In the section on primary transcription it states A word has a primary transcription (anglicization) if at least 75% of all references in English use the same transcription, or if a reference shows that the individual self-identified with a particular transcription, and if that transcription does not contain any non-printable characters (including underscores). I do not think that "Harun al-Rashid" is used in at least 75% of all references in English because many variations of his name in English can be commonly seen (incl. "Harun Rashid", "Haroon Rasheed", "Harun er-Rashid", "Harun ar-Rashid", "Haroon-ur-Rasheed", "Haroon Ur Rasheed", and many others). So we have to revert to using a standard transliteration i.e. "Harun ar-Rashid". Khestwol (talk) 14:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

For Arabic titles, we have to use either primary transcriptions when they exist (e.g. Cairo, Mecca, etc.), or use standard transliterations (e.g. Muhammad, Baghdad, etc) as per MOSAR. In the case of Harun ar-Rashid there is no primary transcription, so using the standard transliteration seems the only option. Khestwol (talk) 14:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Not quite. COMMONNAME is a policy page, and overrides MOSAR, which is a style guideline. And GBooks results seem pretty conclusive as to usage. Plus it is used by the EI, as said, and by scholars like Tayeb El-Hibri, Hugh Kennedy, CE Bosworth, et al. and works like the Cambridge History of Islam, the Cambridge History of Iran, the modern collaborative translation of al-Tabari, etc. As someone who has been engaged in reading such sources and writing articles about the period, I very rarely have seen the "ar-Rashid" form used. Constantine ✍ 15:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Cplakidas, sorry I disagree. The page you referred to WP:COMMONNAME also clearly states in the section "Foreign names and anglicization" Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese, or Russian names, must be transliterated. You do not appear to have read what you linked. Khestwol (talk) 15:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I've read what I linked, thanks very much. "Harun al-Rashid" is also a transliteration from Arabic; what the policy refers to is that the article should not be in the Arabic form, هَارُون الرَشِيد, or translated, e.g. "Aaron the Just". The disagreement here is which form of transliteration is the more prevalent, and here common usage is very clear. Besides, if a slew of expert Arabicists and the most notable scholarly publications are content to use "al-Rashid", then I hardly think that anyone could argue that it is a wrong transliteration... Constantine ✍ 16:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

My objection to that title was that it was not standard transliteration but an inaccurate one. I could have still accepted it if it was a primary transcription, however it very likely is not a primary transcription because of a variety of different spellings being used, "Harun Rashid", "Haroon Rasheed", "Harun er-Rashid", "Harun ar-Rashid", "Haroon-ur-Rasheed", "Haroon Ur Rasheed", to name a few. It is not like Mecca where we have a clear primary transcription as "Mecca". I can only accept a standard transliteration in this case. Khestwol (talk) 17:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I really fail to see how the transliteration used by a ton of scholars and the best reference works can be regarded as "not" a primary transliteration. The difference between transcribing "al-Rashid" and "ar-Rashid" is minimal; all the other transliterations you mention are rather uncommon. And as for "inaccurate", MOSARAB itself admits that "Both the non-assimilated ("al-") or the assimilated ("ad-") form appear in various standards of transliteration", so "al-" is perfectly valid. Therefore I repeat that we have a choice between two equally valid ways of transliterating, one of which enjoys considerably greater use, including by the best and most notable reference works in the field of Arabic and Islamic studies, and one which is considerably less common, although phonetically closer to the actual pronunciation. The trumping concern here is, as with all cases where there are competing transliteration systems, COMMONNAME. Constantine ✍ 19:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

It would be a primary transcription only if at least 75% of all references in English had used the spelling "Harun al-Rashid". But I do not think that requirement for primary transcription is fulfilled. Yes I can agree that "Harun al-Rasid" is more common but it is not primary. Also it is not standard either. MOSAR has clearly favored "ar-" as standard. When such a situation arises in my opinion the solution is to favor the standard transliteration. Khestwol (talk) 19:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

MOSAR is not law, it is a guideline, and one limited to Wikipedia at that. And frankly, "only if at least 75% of all references in English had used the spelling "Harun al-Rashid"" is a meaningless argument because you apply double standards. Meanwhile, in the actual world, prevalent usage is both clear, and supported by the best of sources. Sorry, but "in my opinion" carries no weight when an array of first-class academic references is perfectly happy to use the "al-" form. Wikipedia follows usage, it does not create it. I sympathize with striving for phonetic accuracy in transliterations, but this is a case where usage is so overwhelming that this debate is pointless. Anyhow, long story short, if you don't agree with keeping the old name, this calls for a WP:RM. Constantine ✍ 20:53, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Harun al-Rashid. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/217737/civilization-v-field-report-2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:52, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Reworking the biography

I read a biography, and found it to be a mess - his death was described twice, as was Yahya's role as Vizier, and there's two or three paragraphs on the Barmakids before we talk abotu what Harun himself did. Even Abul-Abbas the elephant has a clearer biography.

So, I split it up in several subsections, to organize the existing content a bit. Those sections may still need a bit of reworking (so far, I mostly merged the two descriptions of his death).

Comments welcome!

Selection of the image: Gold dinar

I decided to replace the previous photo of Harun's gold dinar with another one. The main reason is Harun's coinage was numerous and full of the different variants. The previous photo though struck during his rule and attributed correctly to him, actually didn't have his own name of the title. It was a variant struck in the name of his heir and son -al-Amin. I believe for the illustration of the article, a coin bearing Harun's own name would fit better. Therefore I uploaded a photo of the rarer type of Harun's dinars: one, struck in AH 171 and having in the field of the reverse the following text: Muhammad rasul Allah/mima amara bihi 'abd Allah /Harun amir al-muminin, which is translated as Muhammad is Messenger of God /from those ordered by salve of God/ Harum commander of faithful I strongly believe it is a better illustration and kindly ask to keep it, unless someone finds this or similar type in better condition.

BTW, we do not say anywhere, that his name was spelled in his time without Aif. He is always هَرُون and never هَارُون

--Yevlem (talk) 13:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 August 2019 and 9 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Macaellaemma.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Consorts

There was so many wives and concubines who's been listed but there was no source to back them up. I kept the wives and important concubine names. The names i listed out are-

• Ri'm
• Irbah
• Sahdhrah
• Khubth
• Rawah
• Dawaj
• Kitman
• Hulab
• Irabah
• Ghadid
• Ghusas
• Sukkar
• Rahiq
• Shajar
• Khzq
• Haly
• Aniq
• Samandal
• Zinah

If anyone wants to mention so many of them I think one should create a- Personal life/Wives abd Children section. The children mentioned here were also shown from only 1 source that's no longer working! Ishan87 (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

The one's I still kept are:

• Zubaidah bint Ja`far
• Azizah bint al-Ghitrif bin Ata
• Ghadir
• Umm Muhammad bint Salih al-Miskin
• Abbassah bint Sulayman bin Abi Ja`far
• Jurashiyyah bint Abdullah al-Uthmanniyah
• Marajil bint Ustadh (concubine)
• Marida bint Shabib (concubine)
• Inan bint Abdallah (concubine)
• Qasif (concubine)

Because the Early Life section mentions 6 marriages, and the other 4 of these concubines are mothers of important princes or future caliphs Ishan87 (talk) 19:50, 2 August 2021 (UTC)