This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Radhanite article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Radhanite is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 1, 2006. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An excellent article.-- Wiglaf 19:56, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I doubt it, as per Mc Cormick harvard scholar author of 'economic history of the Middle ages' the main trade of the radhanites were slaves, boys, eunuchs and women, bought to the franks for 30 gramms of gold and sold for 300 in baghdad they cause the invention of the word 'slave' from 'slavs', which they were buying wholesale to the franks and vikings, then exporting them through venice and genoa, including the entire 'children crusade' which they bought wholesale and sold in baghdad. Europe could not export anything but slaves and swords carried by them in exchange for luxuries for aristocracies. The trade was massive and the real origin of Anti-semitism in the middle ages. None of this is explained, why? Plainly speaking this article is like an article about the Liverpool slave traders in which there is no mention about their merchandise slaves - just the quote here from the muslim scholar of the age - and it is all admiration about the bravery and innovation of slave traders that opened new routes of commerce with inland Africa. And on top that final sentence that someone has wisely removed, saying that those 'slave traders' were victims. This article and many similar ones are biased because they hide negative information about the culture that happens to 'own' the franchise.
I have commented on the peer review page. Isomorphic 28 June 2005 05:38 (UTC)
ok, I don't know a lot about the Radhanites, but, this I do know about the Roman Empire. Over 100 years BCE the Asians in the area of Modern Day China, the Han Dynasty folks, began -what I like to call- the " Silk Road" which led to them trading with the Romans who are considered Western by most people. Did the Chinese cease that trade? The answer is no, thus the statement "The Radhanites were the first Westerners to establish trade with China in centuries" s wrong. Also, "Many historians believe that it was these Jewish merchants, not Chinese prisoners-of-war, who introduced the art of paper-making to the Caliphate." is unsourced, speculative and odd. Chinese traders did come west, and the Radhanite folks were not the only ones going east, so the suggestion that the only possible way of paper-making getting to Baghdad was via the Radhanite or the POWs is dishonest and wrong. "Historically, medieval Jewish communities used letters of credit to transport large quantities of money without the risk of theft. This system may have been pioneered by the Radhanites; if so, they may be counted among the earliest modern bankers." - Incorrect, recommended reading = anything of the asian/Chinese banking systems and also the Pre-modern Banking set up in the Delhi Sultanate (There are books on that that are amazing to read). In short, source all claims made. -- Irishpunktom\ talk 16:07, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
It doesn't say they were the earliest bankers. I will assume in good faith that you are not setting up a straw man. The text of the article says they "may be counted among the earliest modern bankers"... -- Briangotts [[User Talk:Briangotts|(talk)]] 20:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
By the way, how could the Radhanites kept trade open over the Roman Empire from 600-1000 CE? Are they referring to the Eastern Roman Empire? If so, by the period in question it is more conventional to refer to that region as Byzantine. -- LeperColony
Someone, please enlarge on Gumilev's opinion that the Radhanites were shadowy architects of the early Russian foreign policy who stood behind Rus' early campaigns against their chief trade rival, Byzantium -- Ghirlandajo 14:33, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
The article on the Middle Ages is not consistent here, either, but this article uses once Early Middle Ages, and later early Middle Ages. What is the correct capitalisation (I'm not a big history editor)? jnothman talk 06:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
This seems strange for a name. Should it be "one who knows the way"? jnothman talk 06:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, you're right. Fixed. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Thoughts on including "external links" to the article? [1] [2] [3] Tom e r talk 11:11, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
I read this article during the Featured Article review process, where I opposed it. My objections there were entirely unanswered, and I'm still not clear, so I'm pursuing part of what I was asking about here. My central concern is that the article does not make it clear who the Radhanites were. The lead presents three statements that taken together cause my confusion:
On first reading, I took this to mean: "The Radhanites were Jewish merchants who dominated trade between the Christian and Muslim worlds during the early Middle Ages..." However, that's not what it specifically says. According to point 3., it's not clear who the Radhanites referred to exactly, so it may not be what the "Jewish merchants of the Early Middle Ages" were called, only perhaps what some of those merchants were called for some of that period. The rest of the article does not clarify the situation, and I am left not knowing exactly who the Radhanites were.
I'd really appreciate any clarification that's available... Thanks! -- Tsavage 04:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
I did some of the initial usual easy Google research, and already discovered in other accounts of Radhanites statements that seem to support my view that this article is at least unclear, if not misleading, as presented.
If you think I'm arguing here for anything but, as a WP editor, a continuation of my concerns and questions from FAC, you are mistaken. And, I have NO illusions of being able to become an instant scholar or expert on this topic, I am simply trying to deal with questions that are not being answered by adding some precision and specifics to the discussion. If my question really seems so completely incomprehensible to you, please let me know, and I will try to further clarify what my problem is... Thanks. -- Tsavage 19:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
I removed this sentence, which was the final sentence of the article:
I don't see how it contributes to the story of the Radhanites, and I find it unsettling in its broad, sensational and unreferenced comment on a vaguely defined period outside the scope of the article. -- Tsavage 22:34, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that when ibn Khordadbeh writes that "they take the route behind Rome", he actually talks about New Rome and not Rome which is linked in the article. Could anyone shed some light on this? Do referenced books touch the issue? Nikola 08:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
In case this hasn't been clarified yet -- although it appears that there's been some pertinent discussion on related matters in the article -- where Ibn Khordadbeh speaks of the "Roman" language, the link should be to Greek, not to Latin. The Arabs referred to the (Greek-speaking) Byzantines as "Romans" and their empire as "Rome" -- which is what Byzantium considered itself to be.
I nearly forgot: The same kind of issue may apply to the "Frankish" language, but with less certainty. The Arabs tended to call all Western Christians "Franks", and did that into the nineteenth century. Where Ibn Khordadbeh says that Radhanites spoke Frankish, he certainly was thinking of varieties of medieval French, but very likely meant his readers to understand that they spoke Western European languages. (Spanish was a distinct category for this writer because the Muslims ruled Spain in the 9th century; its languages were known to many Muslims.) The big picture: He's saying that they could communicate in the languages of the Western and Eastern Christians, and so forth. Readers of the article as it stands will normally misunderstand what the writer is getting at here. [User: Cy] 1 Feb 2006
What are the "limited number of primary sources" that use the term Radhanite? -- Iustinus 18:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
It's in the article.
"Besides ibn Khordadbeh, the Radhanites are mentioned by name only by a handful of sources. Ibn al-Faqih's early tenth century Kitab al-Buldan ("Book of the Countries") mentions them, but much of ibn al-Faqih's information was derived from ibn Khordadbeh's work. Sefer ha-Dinim, a Hebrew account of the travels of Yehuda ben Meir of Mainz, named Przemysl and Kiev as trading sites along the Radhanite route. In the early twelfth century, a French-Jewish trader named Yitzhak Dorbelo wrote that he travelled with Radhanite merchants to Poland.[14]"
I don't claim to be an expert. But I would also question the assertion that Rome really means Constantinople. Besides the fact that Constantinople is already mentioned by its real name, I don't see how a route from Constantinople through the land of the Slavs and the Khazars makes sense as a way to get to Central Asia. The article refers to Yehuda ben Meir of Mainz and his identification of Przemysl and Kiev as trading sites along the Radhanite route. In fact, the connection between these two sites is the most likely one for a route between the land of the Slavs and the Khazars. A plausible route starting in Italy would be Venice, Regensburg, Prague, Krakow, Przemysl, Kiev, and on to the Khazar capital on the Caspian Sea. The route includes major sites for trading with Slavs that are known to be important in the history of European Jews and provides a geographically reasonable overland path for making the trip. DnJake ( talk) 23:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
"During the Early Middle Ages the Islamic polities of the Middle East and North Africa and the Christian kingdoms of Europe often banned each others' merchants from entering their ports."
the article defines the "Early MIddle Ages" as "approx. 500-1000", so what exactly are these "Islamic polities of the MIddle East and North Africa" doing, centuries before the existence of Islam, or the birth of Mohammed, and before even the start of the first Crusade?
for a history article, such loose terminology, no matter how politically correct, or pretentious, is incorrect.
76.10.162.230 ( talk) 00:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Just found out there's a book called The corrupting sea: a study of Mediterranean history. I found an interesting passage in that book (pg. 162):
Were the Radhanites unique? Or were they, on one suggested (Persian) etymology of their name, not from Radhan in Mesopotamia, but simply 'those who know the trade routes' - know the best (177a, 268)?
I find this interesting. Komitsuki ( talk) 15:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Rum in Persian writings actually means Greece and to be more exact Anatolia, at least revise the reference to the city of Rome because this is a common misconception of Europeans in translating persian sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.57.214.16 ( talk) 20:14, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
That figurine is usually described as a Sogdian merchant. I wonder why it was put here... Anyway I got rid of it. 2602:306:C4CE:9AF9:CCAA:709:3521:C041 ( talk) 05:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Radhanite article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Radhanite is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 1, 2006. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An excellent article.-- Wiglaf 19:56, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I doubt it, as per Mc Cormick harvard scholar author of 'economic history of the Middle ages' the main trade of the radhanites were slaves, boys, eunuchs and women, bought to the franks for 30 gramms of gold and sold for 300 in baghdad they cause the invention of the word 'slave' from 'slavs', which they were buying wholesale to the franks and vikings, then exporting them through venice and genoa, including the entire 'children crusade' which they bought wholesale and sold in baghdad. Europe could not export anything but slaves and swords carried by them in exchange for luxuries for aristocracies. The trade was massive and the real origin of Anti-semitism in the middle ages. None of this is explained, why? Plainly speaking this article is like an article about the Liverpool slave traders in which there is no mention about their merchandise slaves - just the quote here from the muslim scholar of the age - and it is all admiration about the bravery and innovation of slave traders that opened new routes of commerce with inland Africa. And on top that final sentence that someone has wisely removed, saying that those 'slave traders' were victims. This article and many similar ones are biased because they hide negative information about the culture that happens to 'own' the franchise.
I have commented on the peer review page. Isomorphic 28 June 2005 05:38 (UTC)
ok, I don't know a lot about the Radhanites, but, this I do know about the Roman Empire. Over 100 years BCE the Asians in the area of Modern Day China, the Han Dynasty folks, began -what I like to call- the " Silk Road" which led to them trading with the Romans who are considered Western by most people. Did the Chinese cease that trade? The answer is no, thus the statement "The Radhanites were the first Westerners to establish trade with China in centuries" s wrong. Also, "Many historians believe that it was these Jewish merchants, not Chinese prisoners-of-war, who introduced the art of paper-making to the Caliphate." is unsourced, speculative and odd. Chinese traders did come west, and the Radhanite folks were not the only ones going east, so the suggestion that the only possible way of paper-making getting to Baghdad was via the Radhanite or the POWs is dishonest and wrong. "Historically, medieval Jewish communities used letters of credit to transport large quantities of money without the risk of theft. This system may have been pioneered by the Radhanites; if so, they may be counted among the earliest modern bankers." - Incorrect, recommended reading = anything of the asian/Chinese banking systems and also the Pre-modern Banking set up in the Delhi Sultanate (There are books on that that are amazing to read). In short, source all claims made. -- Irishpunktom\ talk 16:07, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
It doesn't say they were the earliest bankers. I will assume in good faith that you are not setting up a straw man. The text of the article says they "may be counted among the earliest modern bankers"... -- Briangotts [[User Talk:Briangotts|(talk)]] 20:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
By the way, how could the Radhanites kept trade open over the Roman Empire from 600-1000 CE? Are they referring to the Eastern Roman Empire? If so, by the period in question it is more conventional to refer to that region as Byzantine. -- LeperColony
Someone, please enlarge on Gumilev's opinion that the Radhanites were shadowy architects of the early Russian foreign policy who stood behind Rus' early campaigns against their chief trade rival, Byzantium -- Ghirlandajo 14:33, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
The article on the Middle Ages is not consistent here, either, but this article uses once Early Middle Ages, and later early Middle Ages. What is the correct capitalisation (I'm not a big history editor)? jnothman talk 06:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
This seems strange for a name. Should it be "one who knows the way"? jnothman talk 06:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, you're right. Fixed. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Thoughts on including "external links" to the article? [1] [2] [3] Tom e r talk 11:11, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
I read this article during the Featured Article review process, where I opposed it. My objections there were entirely unanswered, and I'm still not clear, so I'm pursuing part of what I was asking about here. My central concern is that the article does not make it clear who the Radhanites were. The lead presents three statements that taken together cause my confusion:
On first reading, I took this to mean: "The Radhanites were Jewish merchants who dominated trade between the Christian and Muslim worlds during the early Middle Ages..." However, that's not what it specifically says. According to point 3., it's not clear who the Radhanites referred to exactly, so it may not be what the "Jewish merchants of the Early Middle Ages" were called, only perhaps what some of those merchants were called for some of that period. The rest of the article does not clarify the situation, and I am left not knowing exactly who the Radhanites were.
I'd really appreciate any clarification that's available... Thanks! -- Tsavage 04:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
I did some of the initial usual easy Google research, and already discovered in other accounts of Radhanites statements that seem to support my view that this article is at least unclear, if not misleading, as presented.
If you think I'm arguing here for anything but, as a WP editor, a continuation of my concerns and questions from FAC, you are mistaken. And, I have NO illusions of being able to become an instant scholar or expert on this topic, I am simply trying to deal with questions that are not being answered by adding some precision and specifics to the discussion. If my question really seems so completely incomprehensible to you, please let me know, and I will try to further clarify what my problem is... Thanks. -- Tsavage 19:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
I removed this sentence, which was the final sentence of the article:
I don't see how it contributes to the story of the Radhanites, and I find it unsettling in its broad, sensational and unreferenced comment on a vaguely defined period outside the scope of the article. -- Tsavage 22:34, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that when ibn Khordadbeh writes that "they take the route behind Rome", he actually talks about New Rome and not Rome which is linked in the article. Could anyone shed some light on this? Do referenced books touch the issue? Nikola 08:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
In case this hasn't been clarified yet -- although it appears that there's been some pertinent discussion on related matters in the article -- where Ibn Khordadbeh speaks of the "Roman" language, the link should be to Greek, not to Latin. The Arabs referred to the (Greek-speaking) Byzantines as "Romans" and their empire as "Rome" -- which is what Byzantium considered itself to be.
I nearly forgot: The same kind of issue may apply to the "Frankish" language, but with less certainty. The Arabs tended to call all Western Christians "Franks", and did that into the nineteenth century. Where Ibn Khordadbeh says that Radhanites spoke Frankish, he certainly was thinking of varieties of medieval French, but very likely meant his readers to understand that they spoke Western European languages. (Spanish was a distinct category for this writer because the Muslims ruled Spain in the 9th century; its languages were known to many Muslims.) The big picture: He's saying that they could communicate in the languages of the Western and Eastern Christians, and so forth. Readers of the article as it stands will normally misunderstand what the writer is getting at here. [User: Cy] 1 Feb 2006
What are the "limited number of primary sources" that use the term Radhanite? -- Iustinus 18:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
It's in the article.
"Besides ibn Khordadbeh, the Radhanites are mentioned by name only by a handful of sources. Ibn al-Faqih's early tenth century Kitab al-Buldan ("Book of the Countries") mentions them, but much of ibn al-Faqih's information was derived from ibn Khordadbeh's work. Sefer ha-Dinim, a Hebrew account of the travels of Yehuda ben Meir of Mainz, named Przemysl and Kiev as trading sites along the Radhanite route. In the early twelfth century, a French-Jewish trader named Yitzhak Dorbelo wrote that he travelled with Radhanite merchants to Poland.[14]"
I don't claim to be an expert. But I would also question the assertion that Rome really means Constantinople. Besides the fact that Constantinople is already mentioned by its real name, I don't see how a route from Constantinople through the land of the Slavs and the Khazars makes sense as a way to get to Central Asia. The article refers to Yehuda ben Meir of Mainz and his identification of Przemysl and Kiev as trading sites along the Radhanite route. In fact, the connection between these two sites is the most likely one for a route between the land of the Slavs and the Khazars. A plausible route starting in Italy would be Venice, Regensburg, Prague, Krakow, Przemysl, Kiev, and on to the Khazar capital on the Caspian Sea. The route includes major sites for trading with Slavs that are known to be important in the history of European Jews and provides a geographically reasonable overland path for making the trip. DnJake ( talk) 23:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
"During the Early Middle Ages the Islamic polities of the Middle East and North Africa and the Christian kingdoms of Europe often banned each others' merchants from entering their ports."
the article defines the "Early MIddle Ages" as "approx. 500-1000", so what exactly are these "Islamic polities of the MIddle East and North Africa" doing, centuries before the existence of Islam, or the birth of Mohammed, and before even the start of the first Crusade?
for a history article, such loose terminology, no matter how politically correct, or pretentious, is incorrect.
76.10.162.230 ( talk) 00:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Just found out there's a book called The corrupting sea: a study of Mediterranean history. I found an interesting passage in that book (pg. 162):
Were the Radhanites unique? Or were they, on one suggested (Persian) etymology of their name, not from Radhan in Mesopotamia, but simply 'those who know the trade routes' - know the best (177a, 268)?
I find this interesting. Komitsuki ( talk) 15:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Rum in Persian writings actually means Greece and to be more exact Anatolia, at least revise the reference to the city of Rome because this is a common misconception of Europeans in translating persian sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.57.214.16 ( talk) 20:14, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
That figurine is usually described as a Sogdian merchant. I wonder why it was put here... Anyway I got rid of it. 2602:306:C4CE:9AF9:CCAA:709:3521:C041 ( talk) 05:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)