Talk:Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan

message: Robert Hoyland gives a very convincing argument that the figure in the so-called "Standing Caliph" coin of Abdulmalik represents not Abdulmalik but Muhammad. 
The first coin was minted in 74 AH / 693-694 CE and they were in circulation for three years. Afterwards imagery was dropped in coins. 
Muhammad died 10 AH, 632 CE and there were still some Companions alive who had seen Muhammad when the coins were minted. 
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/History/Islam/Coins/dinar3.html 
R. Hoyland, "Writing The Biography Of The Prophet Muhammad: Problems And Solutions", History Compass, 2007, Volume 5, pp. 13-14. 
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1478-0542.2007.00395.x/abstract 
Postscript: Muhammad or Abd al-Malik? 
In AH 72/AD 691 -92, having just successfully ended a long-running civil 
war (66 -72/685 -92) and completed the stunning Dome of the Rock in 
Jerusalem with its message to Christians to respect God's Oneness and 
Muhammad as God's Messenger, the caliph vAbd al-Malik decided to 
Islamicise a little the coins used in his realm, which had up till then been 
copies/imitations of the Byzantine and Iranian coin types. In particular, he 
removed the transverse bars of the crosses67 and introduced the Muslim 
profession of faith: 'There is no god but God alone; Muhammad is the 
Messenger of God'. The Byzantine emperor Justinian II (685-95, 705-11) 
responded with an even more startling innovation: he relegated the image 
of himself to the reverse of the coin and put on the front a human effigy of 
Jesus Christ, both unprecendented moves (Fig. 1): 
In retaliation Abd al-Malik placed an image of a standing human bearing 
a sword in a scabbard68 on the front of his coins, the earliest dated is 
74/693-9469 (Fig. 2): 
This is generally assumed to be a representation of the caliph himself and 
so the coins are known as the 'standing caliph' coins.70 However, there are 
a number of reasons to doubt this: 
Firstly, it ignores the war in visual and verbal propaganda going on 
between Justinian II and vAbd al-Malik and the wider issue of the use of 
religious images and slogans that was being hotly debated at this time.71 If, in response to Justinian's demotion of himself to the reverse of Byzantine coins in favour of Christ's effigy on the front, vAbd al-Malik had merely put his own image on the front of Muslim coins, it would have seemed a very feeble reply in the view of Christians; rather, the obvious move for him would have been to put an image that would challenge that of the image 
of Christ, which could only be that of the Prophet Muhammad himself. The 
very dramatic nature of these changes, their closeness in time, their evidently polemical overtones and enormous propaganda impact (coins circulate very widely) at a time of great tension (in particular, the Byzantines suffered a major defeat at Sebastopolis in 73/692-93) make it essential for these two innovations to be considered together. 
Secondly, it ignores the context of the Arab civil war of 685-92 in which 
religion had played a major role for diverse groups clamouring for greater 
social justice, and vAbd al-Malik saw the chance to steal their thunder and 
to heal the divisions among the Muslim community by putting Islam at the 
heart of the state. Henceforth, the name of the Prophet Muhammad, which 
had been absent from all state media (i.e. administrative documents, 
monumental inscriptions, etc.), became de rigeur on every official text and 
became pretty much standard in epitaphs and graffiti. This makes it unlikely 
that the image on the front of vAbd al-Malik's new coins was himself, which 
would have been condemned by Muslims as an imitation of infidel kings, 
and much more likely that it is a religious personage, again most obviously 
Muhammad himself. 
Thirdly, the iconography of the person on vAbd al-Malik's coinage is 
closer to that of Justinian II's Christ figure than to an emperor figure: both have long, flowing hair and are bearded,72 and both are without headgear (i.e. no turban or crown).73 
Fourthly, the standing-figure coins of Jerusalem, Harran and al-Ruha 
(Edessa) do not, unlike those of other mints, name the Prophet Muhammad 
and the Caliph vAbd al-Malik, but only mention Muhammad. As Clive Foss 
has remarked, 'ever since the inception of portrait coinage in the Hellenistic period, the image and superscription had gone together, that is, the inscription names the figure portrayed . . . I know of no coin where the 
obverse inscription refers to someone different from the figure portrayed'.74 
Fifthly, the objection sometimes raised, that Muslim religious authorities 
would have forbidden the image of the Prophet to be placed on the coins, 
is not really valid. It is certainly true that around this time, or shortly 
afterwards, the question of what images were admissible and in what context 
became a hot topic,75 and indeed the fifteenth-century Egyptian historian 
al-Maqrizi quotes a report to the effect that when the new coins of Abd 
al-Malik reached the surviving companions of Muhammad in Medina,'they 
disapproved of their engraving, for it contained an image, although Said 
ibn al-Musayyab (a famous lawyer of Medina) bought and sold with them 
finding no fault with them at all'.76 
BernardZ (talk) —Preceding undated comment added  11:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: According to A Mixed Arab-Sassanian And Arab-Byzantine Coin From The Time Of Caliph ʿAbd Al-Malik, 75 AH / 694-695 CE, has on the Reverse field, In the place of the usual fire-altar and the two attendants, a standing figure of the caliph, bearded and with his right hand resting on his sword-hilt in the attitude of the imām delivering a khutba. Kufic legends on sides running downwards khalfat (sic) Allāh / amīr al-mu'minīn ("khalifa of God, Commander of the Faithful"). This confirms that the person represented is the caliph (successor (of Muhammad)), and Commander of the Faithful (the leader of the believers), hence not Muhammad himself. https://www.islamic-awareness.org/history/islam/coins/drachm24.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taha b. Wasiq b. Hussain (talk • contribs) 12:16, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your "A Mixed Arab-Sassanian And Arab-Byzantine Coin From The Time Of Caliph ʿAbd Al-Malik" is apparently just a website/blog. Better sources would be needed. On the other hand, Robert Hoyland is a reputable historian publishing in peer-reviewed publications. His published analysis that this is probably an image of Prophet Muhammad can be read online freely: Writing the Biography of Muhammad. Contrary opinions can of course be added, on the condition that they are WP:RS. पाटलिपुत्र Pat  (talk) 13:00, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The conventional view is that the human figure portrayed in these so-called "standing caliph" issues is Caliph Abd al-Malik. Hoyland, who is indeed reputable in the field of Islamic history, is going against the grain, so to speak, by theorizing that this may in fact be a rendering of the prophet Muhammad—and he seems to be the only major Islamic historian to propose this view. The best thing is for a footnote elaborating that historians generally consider this figure to be Abd al-Malik, but that Hoyland argues it may be of Muhammad for this and that reason. I'll work on this during the course of this week or next if no one else does. --Al Ameer (talk) 16:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The photo in the coin