![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Al-Biruni's works were virtually unknown in medieval Europe - so what is the origin of his supposed Latin name Alberonius?
A search in Google Books does not give any hits earlier than 2012. AstroLynx ( talk) 15:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
This is an old translation should be free some where Sachau, C.E. The chronology of ancient nations. Рипол Классик. ISBN 9785871979549. Retrieved 19 July 2015. J8079s ( talk) 01:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 ( talk) 14:28, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Al-Biruni →
Biruni – "Al-Biruni" is the Arabic form of his actual Persian name "Biruni". Being a Persian, I believe his correct Persian name needs to be used here, without the Arabic "Al-" attached to it. According to the
GBooks ngraph, "Biruni" ranks on top and is on the rise in recent times. Credible sources such as
Encyclopædia Iranica also use "Abu Rayhan Biruni".
Biruni means "one who is from the outer-district" in
Persian, and derives from the Persian word birun meaning outside, itself derived from bērōn in
Middle Persian (Please see MAcKENZIE, D. (1971). A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary (p. 18). OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS).
Grinevitski (
talk)
00:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Most of the works of Al-Biruni are in Arabic. Furthermore, this is English (not Persian) Wikipedia. Most English reliable secondary and tertiary sources use the form "Al-Biruni". As an example, Encyclopædia Britannica also uses "Al-Biruni" [1]. The lunar crater named after him is also named Al-Biruni (crater), hence the academic name is "Al-Biruni". Khestwol ( talk) 04:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Comment We use common names and terms in English. Al-Biruni is common in English sources and references. His ethnicity, original name (non-Arabic form), and his spoken languages are not important for this case. For example, see Avicenna. We don't use Arabic/Persian variant of his name. We can't use uncommon names, even if those uncommon names are more accurate than common names. Because the article's content should match with cited references. -- Zyma ( talk) 16:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Comment
Khestwol: Your point is flawed. There is a crater on the moon called
Albategnius but the man is currently called
Al-Battani in Wikipedia. Other examples include
Abul_Wafa_(crater),
Alfraganus_(crater) and
Alpetragius (crater) whose namesakes in Wikipedia are named
Abu al-Wafa,
al-Farghani and
al-Bitruji respectively.
The prefix al- does NOT exist in ANY Iranian language, including the one spoken in the medieval land of Choresm (Khwarezm). He is called "Abu Rayhan Biruni" (ابوریحان بیرونی) in every Iranian language. As for the language of his published works, that has no bearing on his name (which is clearly Iranic). The scientific language of the Muslim world at the time was Arabic, much the same way in Europe scientific work was published in Latin (Principia Mathematica of Newton, Disquisitiones Arithmeticae of Gauss, etc.).
Encyclopædia Iranica, not Britannica, is the most relevant source here because it is in line with modern works especially among Iranologists. Furthermore, there needs to be consistency; if you want to keep Latin names such as Avicenna and Averroes, then we'd have to move Al-Biruni to Albirunius, Al-Farabi to Alfarabius, Al-Razi to Rhazes, etc. But if you want Arabic, then we must move Khayyam to al-Khayyam, etc. The trend in modern scholarly sources is NOT to Arabicize (or Latinize) names. I can cite many contemporary authors who have begun using the correct Iranian names ( C. E. Bosworth, T. Daryaee, etc.). That is the increasingly established modern practice in all historical fields. Grinevitski ( talk) 10:55, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
then we'd have to move Al-Biruni to Albirunius": "Albirunius" is uncommon in English reliable sources, hence the current title is best. Khestwol ( talk) 10:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
[Choresmians] are a branch from Persian tree". While the term "Biruni" is Persian, the Chorasmian variety would have been very similar nevertheless. Linguistically Choresmian is similar to Sogdian, and in Sogdian outside is byqkr'n, which shares the same root as Pahlavi bērōn, probably from Avestan paru (پَرو), itself derived from pra- (same as in Lithuanian and Sanskrit, pro- in Greek, fra- in Pahlavi). Please see the Avestan dictionary (فرهنگ واژه های اوستا) by Fereydoun Joneidi, Sogdian-English Dictionary by B. Gharib. Grinevitski ( talk) 23:42, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Should we restore this revision of lead section? An editor changed it to current revision, see the related diff. I think the older revision is more accurate than the current revision. For example, Iranica article mentions that he was related to Khwarezmian Afrighids. The old revision (Persian-Khwarezmian) matches with all cited references. Also, it was an accepted revision for a long time. -- Zyma ( talk) 22:23, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
... was a [[Khwarezmian language|Khwarezmian]] [[Iranian peoples|Iranian]] [[Muslim]] scholar and polymath." Khestwol ( talk) 08:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Henry Miers Elliot and his outdated 1850 book are WP:FRINGE. Per WP:WEIGHT, WP:PSTS and WP:OR; you must find expert sources to support such claims. How many expert historians cited the Elliot's claims about al-Biruni? Or do they have similar views like Elliot? You need these reliable/expert/scholary sources: First, prove a different birth place. Second, prove a non-Iranian/Iranic origin of al-Biruni. Otherwise we can't change a whole article just because of such dubious single outdated source or similar sources. Bogus claims, personal analysis/commentary, original research, fringe theories and pseudo-science are against WP:SOAP. -- Zyma ( talk) 09:49, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Khestwol. I think Khwarezmian Iranian (just like Afrighids article) is better. Because it matches with references (his native language and ethnicity). Unfortunately, we don't have an article about ethnic Khwarezmian-speaking. Only language article is available. If someone write an article for them, there is no need to mention ethno-linguistic/meta-ethnicity term (Iranian/Iranic). Anyway, if other editors prefer [[ Khwarezmian-only revision, I have no problem with it. But "Khwarezmian" should link to Khwarezmian language article, because both Khwarezm and Khwarezmian do not clarify his ethnicity. -- Zyma ( talk) 10:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
“ | Months of the Chorasmians: The Khwarizmians, although are a branch of the great tree of the Persian nation, imitated the Sogdians as to the beginning of the year and the place where they add the Epagomenae. |
” |
I suggest adding his native name to the lead as follows:
( Chorasmian/ Persian: ابوریحان بیرونی Abū Rayḥān Bērōnī; New Persian: Abū Rayḥān Bīrūnī)
In Middle Persian (check MacKenzie's dictionary), East Iranian languages, as well as (early) New Persian, his name was pronounced as Bērōnī, and was gradually garbled into Bīrūnī. Interestingly, Edward Sanchau also points this out in the intro to his book:
“ | In our time the word is pronounced Biruni (or Beerooni), e.g. in Teheran. but the vowel of the first syllable is majhul, which means that in more ancient times it was pronounced Beron (or Bayroon)... That the name was pronounced in this way in Central Asia about the author's time, we learn from indisputable statement regarding our author from the pen of Alsam'ani, a philologist and biographer of high repute. | ” |
It is best to include both the more archaic form, as well as the more recent and commonly used transliteration (as given in Encyclopædia Iranica). Grinevitski ✍ 03:55, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
To avoid the danger of oversimplification, and to be consistent with the articles on other scientists, I am removing his religion from the opening paragraph. It is often an oversimplification to describe a scholar with a simple and value-laden label. Religious convictions are typically more complicated and need to be discussed at length in the article itself, and they do not appear in the opening. Telementor (N.M.) ✍ 02:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hind cannot be 'India' as the word is currently understood. It can even be Pakistan and north India (Hindi hinterland).
It is possible that his work on the native scholarship connects mainly to the minuscule percentage higher castes, who might be good in Sanskrit. If that be true, he might have missed totally the presence of the so-called lower castes who were not allowed admittance into 'Hindu' temples and right to learn or listen to Sanskrit scriptures.
Beyond that, the work might be about the north and north-western parts of the subcontinent. To translate 'Hind' into India, might require the help of a lot of years of Indian schooling system.
The article seems to miss pointing out whether the social issues of the non-Hindu (Non-Arayan) castes has been discussed by Al Baruni.
A book that does take that also into focus is a relatively recent work by Edgar Thurston's OMENS and SUPERSTITIONS OF SOUTHERN INDIA. Here also the word INDIA is a misnomer, if attempts are made to connect the book to the nation of India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.95.52 ( talk) 11:39, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
The Wikipedia article on Second credits Al-Biruni with coining the term (as a unit of time), but this isn't mentioned in this article. 87.198.117.91 ( talk) 15:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Although his death date has been largely known as 1048, according to more recent publications he died later. According to some in 1050, according to some others in 1061. Would it be possible to consider updating the article accordingly?-- Basak ( talk) 14:52, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Your guess is as good as mine. Clearly his date of death is estimated, and the EoI reference I have presented includes a quote. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:48, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Please let me share what i found in another Turkish source ( Turkish Encylopedia for Islamic Studies, related article published in 1992). In this encylopedia article written by Prof. Günay Tümer, it's explained that there were different dates given for Al-biruni's death date. Tümer says "Since Biruni himself told that he was over 80, the hijri year 440 (1048) could not be his death date. He must have lived the year hijri 443 (1051). The death date given by Yaqut al-Hamawi is 403 (1012). If we accept that it was a copying mistake and change it to 453, we could accept that the death date is 1061." You can find the document here (in page 209). Wikaviani, Wario-Man, Kansas Bear -- Basak ( talk) 11:22, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi IamNotU and thank you for your recent contributions to this article. I added back one of the two "Gomez links" since it appears to contain some referenced content, please let me know if you think i'm mistaken. Cheers.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 15:04, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
He is descendant from Central Asian Iranian People speaking Iranian language. As you all know, Turkic Tribes started migrating after Biruni died, that is why some people think he is Turkic which is wrong? What do you think between the terminology here? Especially we get edits from Uzbek people, modern Uzbek people are not the same as Khwarezmian people.
Similar people to Khwarezmians and the Sogdian people. They are also Iranian people. I would love to hear some feedback Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 17:09, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
In his writing he called Khwarezmians Persians, but I believe he meant to say IRANIAN. There is no word distinguish Persian and Iranian at that time. Just lump them as Persians. I was wondering if a Sogdian Muslim was the scientist would you call him Persian? Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 08:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you talking to me? Who you calling fake russian? Did you see me claim he was Arab or Turkish, I'm not even Arab or Turkish nor are they my kin. Where is the pan-Islamist fantasy world. This is your first edit in Wikipedia and you start like this Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 03:33, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
No Beruni was Uzbek.Not persian not iranian.he had a turkic descent Turano'g'lu ( talk) 12:33, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Although he wrote in arabian or he spoke persian he was a uzbek turk.Persians were not in Uzbekistan Turano'g'lu ( talk) 12:35, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
No, I never did something like that. And it would be nice if you apologized for such accusations. Üzgäreş ( talk) 16:57, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
What are you talking about ? i don't know what all your above babbling about Vercingetorix means. Biruni was definitely not a Turk or an Arab, but it's obvious that a civilization like the Iranian civilization influenced many areas and peoples all around Iran and the Turks are not an exception. Keep in mind that all the great Turkish dynasties, like Ottomans, Seljuks, Ghaznevids, etc ... were persianate and deeply influenced by the Iranian civilization. Let's follow what reliable sources say about this and please drop your nationalistic stick.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 17:14, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
This contradiction does not make sense to me. I can agree that Al-Biruni's insights about India were very detailed (hence his title 'Al Ustaad'), but since he served to the patronage of a ruler who left a very polarised legacy in India (Mahmud of Ghazni), how reliably can we say that his judgement was impartial? I've discussed this with a famous Indologist; his take on this is that some of Al-Biruni's writings have some very negatively-biased details against certain Indian groups. Please do have a look at this and let me know. I'll search for resources to support this claim if we can have a consensus here that this matter is worth a look (I'm not too active here these days, hence this request for consensus first).
Ayan.rakshit ( talk) 14:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"he attacks the immutability of the celestial spheres;[44] and so on"
"and so on" is not factual. It should be removed or elaborated. Else, it could mean he proved the 70% dark energy in the universe. 83.227.96.139 ( talk) 18:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Half of the sources cited next to the word "Iranian" call Al-Biruni "Persian".... Come on people... clearly they are not interchangeable, or the Persian is wrong, Iranian is correct in my opinion thread above wouldn't exist. Can we just write "Persian/Iranian" (or "Persian or Iranian") to reflect the difference in sources?? It is complete OR to be supporting information like this. Aza24 ( talk) 19:45, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Should the Muslim scientist Al-Biruni (973–1050) be described in the lead as " Khwarazmian" or " Kwarazmian Iranian" rather than just "Iranian" as is the case currently [9]? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 08:30, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
"About his ancestry and childhood nothing is known."[10] Wiqi (55) 21:47, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Summary. Thank you all. It looks like " Khwarazmian Iranian" is the preferred term per community consensus. @ Wikaviani: are you OK to close this RfC? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 19:37, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
References
In a celebrated preface to the book of Drugs, Biruni says, "And if it is true that in all nations one likes to adorn oneself by using the language to which one has remained loyal, having become accustomed to using it with friends and companions according to need, I must judge for myself that in my native Khwarezmian, science has as much as chance of becoming perpetuated as a camel has of facing Kaaba.
his native language was the Khwarizmian dialect
Page 7: "The Iranian scholar al-Biruni says that the Khwarazmian era began when the region was first settled and cultivated, this date being placed in the early 13th-century BC)" page 141 "the Khwarazmian al-Biruni'"
The contribution of Iranians to Islamic mathematics is overwhelming. ..The name of Abu Raihan Al-Biruni, from Khwarazm, must be mentioned since he was one of the greatest scientists in World History
He was born of an Iranian family in 362/973 (according to al-Ghadanfar, on 3 Dhu'l-Hididja/ 4 September – see E. Sachau, Chronology, xivxvi), in the suburb (birun) of Kath, capital of Khwarizm....was one of the greatest scholars of mediaeval Islam, and certainly the most original and profound. He was equally well versed in the mathematical, astronomic, physical and natural sciences and also distinguished himself as a geographer and historian, chronologist and linguist and as an impartial observer of customs and creeds. He is known as al-Ustdadh, 'the Master'.in Bearman, Bianquis & Bosworth 2007
It is generally accepted that he was Persian by origin, and spoke the Khwarizmian dialect
A Persian by birth, Biruni produced his writings in Arabic, though he knew, besides Persian, no less than four other languages.
A Persian by birth, a rationalist in disposition, this contemporary of Avicenna and Alhazen not only studied history, philosophy, and geography in depth, but wrote one of the most comprehensive Muslim astronomical treatises, the Qanun Al-Masu'di.
The Persian polymath, al-Birüni, a younger contemporary of Abu'l-Wafa', calculated the perimeters of inscribed and ...
I have a small edit in the info box Al-Biruni He had many professions, you didn't mention some of them So I will rewrite Al-Biruni's professions again : Philosopher, chemist, geographer, encyclopedist, mathematician, cartographer, astronomer, translator, anthropologist, physicist, astrologer, historian, Linguist, Indologist, writer, pharmacist and botanist
If you are wondering how true I am, I have a source , You can go to search ( البيروني ) On Wikipedia once you paste it And if you do not understand the words, you can translate it on Google and it will show you the same as what you wrote Good luck! Lamo jostar 2 ( talk) 23:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change Astrolabe in his works to a better one. Shahpour Nosrati ( talk) 11:42, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
The article says, "His calculated radius for the Earth of 3928.77 miles was 2% higher than the actual mean radius of 3847.80 miles." Yet in the article Earth radius (and elsewhere in Wikipedia) the actual mean radius of Earth reported is 3959 miles. None of the 21 "published values" given in a table converts (from km) to less than 3936 miles. Unfortunately I don't have access to the cited reference to examine. Nonetheless, the mean radius should be uniform across Wikipedia, and some clarification or attribution given when it is not. Additional reliable sources might also be explored. As we all know, factual conflict reduces the credibility of the encyclopedia. — βox73 (৳alk) 07:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Avicenna should be replaced by ibn Sina, since that is the actual name Hamdsain ( talk) 16:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I propose a change in the description of a picture. Change "Sun (far right) – Earth (far left) and Lunar phases" to "Sun (far right) – Full moon (far left) and other Lunar phases. Earth is missing, it should be placed in the centre of the circle of Lunar phases." /info/en/?search=Lunar_phase JUDr. David Uhlir ( talk) 08:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Al-Biruni's works were virtually unknown in medieval Europe - so what is the origin of his supposed Latin name Alberonius?
A search in Google Books does not give any hits earlier than 2012. AstroLynx ( talk) 15:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
This is an old translation should be free some where Sachau, C.E. The chronology of ancient nations. Рипол Классик. ISBN 9785871979549. Retrieved 19 July 2015. J8079s ( talk) 01:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 ( talk) 14:28, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Al-Biruni →
Biruni – "Al-Biruni" is the Arabic form of his actual Persian name "Biruni". Being a Persian, I believe his correct Persian name needs to be used here, without the Arabic "Al-" attached to it. According to the
GBooks ngraph, "Biruni" ranks on top and is on the rise in recent times. Credible sources such as
Encyclopædia Iranica also use "Abu Rayhan Biruni".
Biruni means "one who is from the outer-district" in
Persian, and derives from the Persian word birun meaning outside, itself derived from bērōn in
Middle Persian (Please see MAcKENZIE, D. (1971). A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary (p. 18). OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS).
Grinevitski (
talk)
00:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Most of the works of Al-Biruni are in Arabic. Furthermore, this is English (not Persian) Wikipedia. Most English reliable secondary and tertiary sources use the form "Al-Biruni". As an example, Encyclopædia Britannica also uses "Al-Biruni" [1]. The lunar crater named after him is also named Al-Biruni (crater), hence the academic name is "Al-Biruni". Khestwol ( talk) 04:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Comment We use common names and terms in English. Al-Biruni is common in English sources and references. His ethnicity, original name (non-Arabic form), and his spoken languages are not important for this case. For example, see Avicenna. We don't use Arabic/Persian variant of his name. We can't use uncommon names, even if those uncommon names are more accurate than common names. Because the article's content should match with cited references. -- Zyma ( talk) 16:14, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Comment
Khestwol: Your point is flawed. There is a crater on the moon called
Albategnius but the man is currently called
Al-Battani in Wikipedia. Other examples include
Abul_Wafa_(crater),
Alfraganus_(crater) and
Alpetragius (crater) whose namesakes in Wikipedia are named
Abu al-Wafa,
al-Farghani and
al-Bitruji respectively.
The prefix al- does NOT exist in ANY Iranian language, including the one spoken in the medieval land of Choresm (Khwarezm). He is called "Abu Rayhan Biruni" (ابوریحان بیرونی) in every Iranian language. As for the language of his published works, that has no bearing on his name (which is clearly Iranic). The scientific language of the Muslim world at the time was Arabic, much the same way in Europe scientific work was published in Latin (Principia Mathematica of Newton, Disquisitiones Arithmeticae of Gauss, etc.).
Encyclopædia Iranica, not Britannica, is the most relevant source here because it is in line with modern works especially among Iranologists. Furthermore, there needs to be consistency; if you want to keep Latin names such as Avicenna and Averroes, then we'd have to move Al-Biruni to Albirunius, Al-Farabi to Alfarabius, Al-Razi to Rhazes, etc. But if you want Arabic, then we must move Khayyam to al-Khayyam, etc. The trend in modern scholarly sources is NOT to Arabicize (or Latinize) names. I can cite many contemporary authors who have begun using the correct Iranian names ( C. E. Bosworth, T. Daryaee, etc.). That is the increasingly established modern practice in all historical fields. Grinevitski ( talk) 10:55, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
then we'd have to move Al-Biruni to Albirunius": "Albirunius" is uncommon in English reliable sources, hence the current title is best. Khestwol ( talk) 10:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
[Choresmians] are a branch from Persian tree". While the term "Biruni" is Persian, the Chorasmian variety would have been very similar nevertheless. Linguistically Choresmian is similar to Sogdian, and in Sogdian outside is byqkr'n, which shares the same root as Pahlavi bērōn, probably from Avestan paru (پَرو), itself derived from pra- (same as in Lithuanian and Sanskrit, pro- in Greek, fra- in Pahlavi). Please see the Avestan dictionary (فرهنگ واژه های اوستا) by Fereydoun Joneidi, Sogdian-English Dictionary by B. Gharib. Grinevitski ( talk) 23:42, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Should we restore this revision of lead section? An editor changed it to current revision, see the related diff. I think the older revision is more accurate than the current revision. For example, Iranica article mentions that he was related to Khwarezmian Afrighids. The old revision (Persian-Khwarezmian) matches with all cited references. Also, it was an accepted revision for a long time. -- Zyma ( talk) 22:23, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
... was a [[Khwarezmian language|Khwarezmian]] [[Iranian peoples|Iranian]] [[Muslim]] scholar and polymath." Khestwol ( talk) 08:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Henry Miers Elliot and his outdated 1850 book are WP:FRINGE. Per WP:WEIGHT, WP:PSTS and WP:OR; you must find expert sources to support such claims. How many expert historians cited the Elliot's claims about al-Biruni? Or do they have similar views like Elliot? You need these reliable/expert/scholary sources: First, prove a different birth place. Second, prove a non-Iranian/Iranic origin of al-Biruni. Otherwise we can't change a whole article just because of such dubious single outdated source or similar sources. Bogus claims, personal analysis/commentary, original research, fringe theories and pseudo-science are against WP:SOAP. -- Zyma ( talk) 09:49, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Khestwol. I think Khwarezmian Iranian (just like Afrighids article) is better. Because it matches with references (his native language and ethnicity). Unfortunately, we don't have an article about ethnic Khwarezmian-speaking. Only language article is available. If someone write an article for them, there is no need to mention ethno-linguistic/meta-ethnicity term (Iranian/Iranic). Anyway, if other editors prefer [[ Khwarezmian-only revision, I have no problem with it. But "Khwarezmian" should link to Khwarezmian language article, because both Khwarezm and Khwarezmian do not clarify his ethnicity. -- Zyma ( talk) 10:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
“ | Months of the Chorasmians: The Khwarizmians, although are a branch of the great tree of the Persian nation, imitated the Sogdians as to the beginning of the year and the place where they add the Epagomenae. |
” |
I suggest adding his native name to the lead as follows:
( Chorasmian/ Persian: ابوریحان بیرونی Abū Rayḥān Bērōnī; New Persian: Abū Rayḥān Bīrūnī)
In Middle Persian (check MacKenzie's dictionary), East Iranian languages, as well as (early) New Persian, his name was pronounced as Bērōnī, and was gradually garbled into Bīrūnī. Interestingly, Edward Sanchau also points this out in the intro to his book:
“ | In our time the word is pronounced Biruni (or Beerooni), e.g. in Teheran. but the vowel of the first syllable is majhul, which means that in more ancient times it was pronounced Beron (or Bayroon)... That the name was pronounced in this way in Central Asia about the author's time, we learn from indisputable statement regarding our author from the pen of Alsam'ani, a philologist and biographer of high repute. | ” |
It is best to include both the more archaic form, as well as the more recent and commonly used transliteration (as given in Encyclopædia Iranica). Grinevitski ✍ 03:55, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
To avoid the danger of oversimplification, and to be consistent with the articles on other scientists, I am removing his religion from the opening paragraph. It is often an oversimplification to describe a scholar with a simple and value-laden label. Religious convictions are typically more complicated and need to be discussed at length in the article itself, and they do not appear in the opening. Telementor (N.M.) ✍ 02:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hind cannot be 'India' as the word is currently understood. It can even be Pakistan and north India (Hindi hinterland).
It is possible that his work on the native scholarship connects mainly to the minuscule percentage higher castes, who might be good in Sanskrit. If that be true, he might have missed totally the presence of the so-called lower castes who were not allowed admittance into 'Hindu' temples and right to learn or listen to Sanskrit scriptures.
Beyond that, the work might be about the north and north-western parts of the subcontinent. To translate 'Hind' into India, might require the help of a lot of years of Indian schooling system.
The article seems to miss pointing out whether the social issues of the non-Hindu (Non-Arayan) castes has been discussed by Al Baruni.
A book that does take that also into focus is a relatively recent work by Edgar Thurston's OMENS and SUPERSTITIONS OF SOUTHERN INDIA. Here also the word INDIA is a misnomer, if attempts are made to connect the book to the nation of India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.95.52 ( talk) 11:39, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
The Wikipedia article on Second credits Al-Biruni with coining the term (as a unit of time), but this isn't mentioned in this article. 87.198.117.91 ( talk) 15:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Although his death date has been largely known as 1048, according to more recent publications he died later. According to some in 1050, according to some others in 1061. Would it be possible to consider updating the article accordingly?-- Basak ( talk) 14:52, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Your guess is as good as mine. Clearly his date of death is estimated, and the EoI reference I have presented includes a quote. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:48, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Please let me share what i found in another Turkish source ( Turkish Encylopedia for Islamic Studies, related article published in 1992). In this encylopedia article written by Prof. Günay Tümer, it's explained that there were different dates given for Al-biruni's death date. Tümer says "Since Biruni himself told that he was over 80, the hijri year 440 (1048) could not be his death date. He must have lived the year hijri 443 (1051). The death date given by Yaqut al-Hamawi is 403 (1012). If we accept that it was a copying mistake and change it to 453, we could accept that the death date is 1061." You can find the document here (in page 209). Wikaviani, Wario-Man, Kansas Bear -- Basak ( talk) 11:22, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi IamNotU and thank you for your recent contributions to this article. I added back one of the two "Gomez links" since it appears to contain some referenced content, please let me know if you think i'm mistaken. Cheers.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 15:04, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
He is descendant from Central Asian Iranian People speaking Iranian language. As you all know, Turkic Tribes started migrating after Biruni died, that is why some people think he is Turkic which is wrong? What do you think between the terminology here? Especially we get edits from Uzbek people, modern Uzbek people are not the same as Khwarezmian people.
Similar people to Khwarezmians and the Sogdian people. They are also Iranian people. I would love to hear some feedback Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 17:09, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
In his writing he called Khwarezmians Persians, but I believe he meant to say IRANIAN. There is no word distinguish Persian and Iranian at that time. Just lump them as Persians. I was wondering if a Sogdian Muslim was the scientist would you call him Persian? Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 08:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you talking to me? Who you calling fake russian? Did you see me claim he was Arab or Turkish, I'm not even Arab or Turkish nor are they my kin. Where is the pan-Islamist fantasy world. This is your first edit in Wikipedia and you start like this Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 03:33, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
No Beruni was Uzbek.Not persian not iranian.he had a turkic descent Turano'g'lu ( talk) 12:33, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Although he wrote in arabian or he spoke persian he was a uzbek turk.Persians were not in Uzbekistan Turano'g'lu ( talk) 12:35, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
No, I never did something like that. And it would be nice if you apologized for such accusations. Üzgäreş ( talk) 16:57, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
What are you talking about ? i don't know what all your above babbling about Vercingetorix means. Biruni was definitely not a Turk or an Arab, but it's obvious that a civilization like the Iranian civilization influenced many areas and peoples all around Iran and the Turks are not an exception. Keep in mind that all the great Turkish dynasties, like Ottomans, Seljuks, Ghaznevids, etc ... were persianate and deeply influenced by the Iranian civilization. Let's follow what reliable sources say about this and please drop your nationalistic stick.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 17:14, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
This contradiction does not make sense to me. I can agree that Al-Biruni's insights about India were very detailed (hence his title 'Al Ustaad'), but since he served to the patronage of a ruler who left a very polarised legacy in India (Mahmud of Ghazni), how reliably can we say that his judgement was impartial? I've discussed this with a famous Indologist; his take on this is that some of Al-Biruni's writings have some very negatively-biased details against certain Indian groups. Please do have a look at this and let me know. I'll search for resources to support this claim if we can have a consensus here that this matter is worth a look (I'm not too active here these days, hence this request for consensus first).
Ayan.rakshit ( talk) 14:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"he attacks the immutability of the celestial spheres;[44] and so on"
"and so on" is not factual. It should be removed or elaborated. Else, it could mean he proved the 70% dark energy in the universe. 83.227.96.139 ( talk) 18:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Half of the sources cited next to the word "Iranian" call Al-Biruni "Persian".... Come on people... clearly they are not interchangeable, or the Persian is wrong, Iranian is correct in my opinion thread above wouldn't exist. Can we just write "Persian/Iranian" (or "Persian or Iranian") to reflect the difference in sources?? It is complete OR to be supporting information like this. Aza24 ( talk) 19:45, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Should the Muslim scientist Al-Biruni (973–1050) be described in the lead as " Khwarazmian" or " Kwarazmian Iranian" rather than just "Iranian" as is the case currently [9]? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 08:30, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
"About his ancestry and childhood nothing is known."[10] Wiqi (55) 21:47, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Summary. Thank you all. It looks like " Khwarazmian Iranian" is the preferred term per community consensus. @ Wikaviani: are you OK to close this RfC? पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 19:37, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
References
In a celebrated preface to the book of Drugs, Biruni says, "And if it is true that in all nations one likes to adorn oneself by using the language to which one has remained loyal, having become accustomed to using it with friends and companions according to need, I must judge for myself that in my native Khwarezmian, science has as much as chance of becoming perpetuated as a camel has of facing Kaaba.
his native language was the Khwarizmian dialect
Page 7: "The Iranian scholar al-Biruni says that the Khwarazmian era began when the region was first settled and cultivated, this date being placed in the early 13th-century BC)" page 141 "the Khwarazmian al-Biruni'"
The contribution of Iranians to Islamic mathematics is overwhelming. ..The name of Abu Raihan Al-Biruni, from Khwarazm, must be mentioned since he was one of the greatest scientists in World History
He was born of an Iranian family in 362/973 (according to al-Ghadanfar, on 3 Dhu'l-Hididja/ 4 September – see E. Sachau, Chronology, xivxvi), in the suburb (birun) of Kath, capital of Khwarizm....was one of the greatest scholars of mediaeval Islam, and certainly the most original and profound. He was equally well versed in the mathematical, astronomic, physical and natural sciences and also distinguished himself as a geographer and historian, chronologist and linguist and as an impartial observer of customs and creeds. He is known as al-Ustdadh, 'the Master'.in Bearman, Bianquis & Bosworth 2007
It is generally accepted that he was Persian by origin, and spoke the Khwarizmian dialect
A Persian by birth, Biruni produced his writings in Arabic, though he knew, besides Persian, no less than four other languages.
A Persian by birth, a rationalist in disposition, this contemporary of Avicenna and Alhazen not only studied history, philosophy, and geography in depth, but wrote one of the most comprehensive Muslim astronomical treatises, the Qanun Al-Masu'di.
The Persian polymath, al-Birüni, a younger contemporary of Abu'l-Wafa', calculated the perimeters of inscribed and ...
I have a small edit in the info box Al-Biruni He had many professions, you didn't mention some of them So I will rewrite Al-Biruni's professions again : Philosopher, chemist, geographer, encyclopedist, mathematician, cartographer, astronomer, translator, anthropologist, physicist, astrologer, historian, Linguist, Indologist, writer, pharmacist and botanist
If you are wondering how true I am, I have a source , You can go to search ( البيروني ) On Wikipedia once you paste it And if you do not understand the words, you can translate it on Google and it will show you the same as what you wrote Good luck! Lamo jostar 2 ( talk) 23:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change Astrolabe in his works to a better one. Shahpour Nosrati ( talk) 11:42, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
The article says, "His calculated radius for the Earth of 3928.77 miles was 2% higher than the actual mean radius of 3847.80 miles." Yet in the article Earth radius (and elsewhere in Wikipedia) the actual mean radius of Earth reported is 3959 miles. None of the 21 "published values" given in a table converts (from km) to less than 3936 miles. Unfortunately I don't have access to the cited reference to examine. Nonetheless, the mean radius should be uniform across Wikipedia, and some clarification or attribution given when it is not. Additional reliable sources might also be explored. As we all know, factual conflict reduces the credibility of the encyclopedia. — βox73 (৳alk) 07:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Avicenna should be replaced by ibn Sina, since that is the actual name Hamdsain ( talk) 16:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Al-Biruni has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I propose a change in the description of a picture. Change "Sun (far right) – Earth (far left) and Lunar phases" to "Sun (far right) – Full moon (far left) and other Lunar phases. Earth is missing, it should be placed in the centre of the circle of Lunar phases." /info/en/?search=Lunar_phase JUDr. David Uhlir ( talk) 08:33, 27 October 2023 (UTC)