Search

Copyright of Cappadocia Journal of History & Social Sciences is the property of CAHIJ and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In the University of Glasgow Library's copy of Pius II's Epistolae familiares (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, 16 Sept. 1481), recorded on leaf 1–1v one can find a copy of a letter addressed to Pope Innocent VIII that starts with the heading "Soldanus pontifici Romano pro Restauracione Iunioris filii senioris Turchi". The letter's sender, who is referred to in the text as the "Sultan of Babylon", was the Caliph of Cairo, al-Mutawakkil II (Abdul Aziz ibn Yaʿqub ibn Muhammad). The present text discusses the content of the letter and the issues regarding the question of its authorship. To ensure a comprehensive presentation of the argumentation, the paper not only discusses the content of the letter but also explores the wider context in which it was produced, situating it against the wider history of the Mamluk state and Mamluk diplomacy as well as the late medieval tradition of the exchange of correspondence (both real and fictitious) between the Christian and Muslim worlds. It needs underlining that not only has the content of the letter in question hitherto been substantially unknown to scholars, but the letter is furthermore the first discovered correspondent from an ʿAbbasid Caliph sent to the head of Western Christianity. The paper offers a contribution to research on intercultural communication. The paper comes with three appendices: a transliteration and a translation of the letter and a facsimile of the original record. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question that led to the research and writing of this article was created by the information that Ibn Battuta gave in his travel book about a lantern he saw when he set out on his travels but that was later destroyed. The scope of this article is about the history of the Lighthouse of Alexandria based on medieval Islamic period literature. More specifically, the main issue that determined the scope is to reveal what happened to the Lighthouse of Alexandria particularly the structural problems and repairs until its collapse in the Mamluk period. The study wanted to find out when and how this lighthouse was finally destroyed. This event took place in the Mamluks period and ultimately resulted in the disappearance of the lighthouse and the construction of a castle in the Qaitbay period. In this study, Islamic period sources, which provided information about the lighthouse from the 9th to the 15th centuries, were used. The method used to solve the determined problem was through evaluating and comparing historical literature. When and how was the Lighthouse of Alexandria destroyed during the Mamluk period? The lighthouse, one of the ancient wonders of the world, fell victim to the devastating earthquakes that Egypt was subjected to. In the period between 796-1480, Egypt was exposed to about 57 major and minor earthquakes, and about 22 of them affected the Lighthouse of Alexandria. Earthquakes of 796, 884, 956, 1303, 1334, 1341, 1348 caused the Alexandria Lighthouse to collapse. As we learned from historic records, Egyptian rulers had the lighthouse repaired at different times. For example, one of them was Mamluk Sultan Baibars. The historic literature revealed the fate of the Lighthouse of Alexandria occurred in 1375 when a severe earthquake caused it to collapse completely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Oriental Studies (Al-Farabi Kazakh National University) / Kazahskij Nacional'nyj Universitet Imeni Al'-Farabi Vestnik Seriâ Vostokovedeniâ is the property of Al-Farabi Kazakh National University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Eskişehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Theology is the property of Journal of Eskisehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Theology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A scholar known as "Mubārakshāh" features in sources from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries as a teacher of a number of prominent early Ottoman scholars, and of the influential Persian scholar al-Sayyid al-Sharīf al-Jurjānī (d. 816/1413). According to these sources, Mubārakshāh taught in Cairo in the mid- to late fourteenth century. Yet, despite the large number of Mamluk historical works covering this period, the precise identity of this scholar has so far proven elusive. The present article reviews the evidence and makes an identification that, though circumstantial, may be more satisfying than those that have been offered so far. It suggests that "Mubārakshāh" was a nickname, and that he can plausibly be identified with Maḥmūd b. Quṭlūshāh al-Sarāʾī, who taught in Cairo from 1358 until his death in 1373. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of History Studies (13094688) is the property of History Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Relation between any two rulers is usually determined by common interests, which may or may not last for long. Those common interests may disintegrate if a party breaches the conditions for one reason or another. Historians addressing the relation between the Mamluk Sultan Al-Zahir Baibars (ruled between 658 AH/ 1260 CE and 676 AH/ 1277 CE) and the Mongol Berke Khan noticed how this relation fluctuated between good and troubled at times. This fluctuation is maintained throughout the current research to reveal the historical truths regarding this relation. Many writers described this relation between Al-Zahir Baibars and the Mongol Berke Khan as good and unblemished overall, which was further strengthened when Berke Khan converted to Islam1 and waged many wars against his cousin Hulagu, especially in the year 653 AH (1255 CE), which was probably the most well-known war between the two. After Berhe Khan's accession, Al-Zahir Baibars treated him according to Muslim codes of conduct with true support and friendliness to the extent of naming his eldest son Berke. This research will address the details of their relation, and how it was affected, positively or negatively. Moreover, the research will probe into Al-Zahir Baibars' alliance with Berke Khan and others and the incidents that clearly displayed Baibars' admiration for Berke Khan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Electronic Turkish Studies is the property of Electronic Turkish Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Le dimanche 3 ramaḍān 702/21 avril 1303, à Šaqḥab, une localité située à une quarantaine de kilomètres au sud de Damas, les Mamelouks vainquirent l’armée ilkhanide après deux jours de rudes combats. Cette nouvelle défaite des Mongols ilkhanides marqua la fin de tout espoir pour ces derniers de reconquérir un jour la Syrie. Outre la victoire, la manière par laquelle les Mamelouks battirent leurs ennemis, plus nombreux, démontre, à bien des égards, leur supériorité tactique sur le champ de bataille. À partir du croisement des sources narratives et didactiques, cet article tente de faire la lumière sur un des aspects de l’art de la guerre des Mamelouks baḥrites. On Sunday 3 ramaḍān 702/21 April 1303, at Šaqḥab, a locality situated at forty kilometers from the South of Damascus, the Mamluks vainquished the Ilkhanid army after two days of hard fights. This new defeat of the Ilkhanid Mongols marked the end of all hope for the latter to ever reconquer Syria. Besides victory, the manner in which the Mamluks defeated their more numerous enemies demonstrated, in many ways, their tactical superiority on the battlefield. From the intersection of narrative and didactic sources, this article attempts to shed light on one aspect of the Mamluk baḥrites art of war. This article is in French. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present article investigates the complex dynamics of the relationship between the Mamluk sultans and Qaramanid rulers in the second half of the fifteenth century. Based on the revealing of an unpublished corpus of letters (MS ar. 4440, BnF, Paris), which preserved copies of the correspondence exchanged between sultan Īnāl and Ibrāhīm II after the Qaramanids' Rebellion in 860–862/1456–58 and their capture of the Mamluk fortresses in Tarsus and Gülek. After briefly sketching the history of their contact and alliances, I then concentrate on the Qaramanid Rebellion itself, presenting the new data provided by the corpus and analysing the stakes and extent of the Qaramanids' threat to Mamluk policy in the Anatolian context. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of bilig: Journal of Social Sciences of the Turkish World is the property of bilig: Journal of Social Sciences of the Turkish World and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article portrays the life of Al-Sit Nafisa Khatun al-Muradiyya, originally taken captive in Georgia and sold into slavery in Cairo, who rises from life as a concubine to become the wife of the Mamluk leader Murad Bey in the late eighteenth century. In the process, Nafisa became chief of the Mamluk Harem and acquired substantial wealth, but her fate would take a turn for the worse after Muhammad Ali Pasha consolidated his control of Egypt and began his efforts to annihilate the Mamluks, culminating in the famous Cairo Citadel massacre of 1811. As her life in various ways mirrored that of Egypt's Mamluks, this study uses the example of Nafisa to understand the extent to which large social, economic and political changes impacted the lives of individuals who lived through them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is usually accepted among modern scholars that the Mamluk period marked a drastic decline in the position of non-Muslims. Jews and Christians were exposed to increasing persecutions and, inter alia, could not serve as great physicians unless they converted to Islam. Against these assumptions, the article discusses new data regarding three Jewish court physicians from the first half of the 8th/i4th century. Despite being under a strong pressure to convert, these doctors gained honorable positions and a high social status in the Mamluk sultanate. As erudite physicians and skillful practitioners, they were integrated with the highest circles of the political, military and especially intellectual Muslim elite of their time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay examines a legal opinion (fatwā) by the accomplished fifteenth-century polymath, Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505). In his treatise, the author investigates the issue of whose stipend should be given priority in endowed institutions that receive funding from the state Treasury in times of financial crisis. He argues that the scholar should have priority in deference to his learning, even if he does not fulfill the obligations stipulated in the endowment. I argue that al- Suyūṭī's fatwā, viewed within the context of personal conflicts in his own life, reveals much about the jurist's efforts to assert moral and persuasive authority, as well as about larger struggles between different sectors of late Mamluk society. Both in his writing and in practice, al-Suyūṭī defends the role of the righteous scholar against the worldly power of the state and against the corruption of the Sufi students under his supervision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Médiévales is the property of Presses Universitaires de Vincennes and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The taqarīz were part of an established system of academic recognition and the ulama patronage networks and at times, they could also be a powerful satirical weapon used by the learned elite members to denigrate and exclude a colleague. The large collection of the satire taqariz written for the panegyric Biography composed in 819/1416 by Šams al-Dln Muhammad b. Nahid for the Mamluk sultan al-Mu'ayyad Šayh is explored in this article as a supplementary source to the historical narratives for the study of the ulama milieu during the strained period of the transition from Turkish to Circassian sultanate (784/1382). Placing these taqariz in the context of the increasing social insecurity entailed by the political reshuffles, reveals the growing anxiety of the incumbent learned elites over their positions and status in the administration of justice, the academe (madāris) and the waaf institution--the spheres where they exercised their hegemony of knowledge and religious power--and the strategies they adopted for their social survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study, Bâbertî's treatise, small in terms of volume, a but very valuable in terms of substance to the madhab of Abu Hanifa and the other madhabs, including the reasons for the choice and the Turks preferred this madhab, contains based on "en-Nüketü'z-Zarîfetü fîTercîhi Mezhebi Ebî Hanîfe" The purpose of writing treatises is, provide information on the Abu Hanifa against the claims raised against Hanafi Madhab and Abu Hanifa and strengthen the position of appearing weak the Hanafi madhab in the eyes of the people and ensure that the knowledge of people in many countries belonging to the Hanafi madhab and it is a study which claims past and future generations are in need his sect. Bâberti, summarized his wiews in three sections; introduction, purpose and result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the careers of craftsmen and other commoners, who succeeded in joining the bureaucratic system and occupying high positions in the Mamluk administrative establishment, eventually acquiring great power and even political authority. At the same time Sufi shaykhs, also men of common origin and beneficiaries of Mamluk philanthropy, emerged as mighty and authoritative figures, venerated equally by the aristocracy and the populace. The newly privileged groups also figure as founders of Friday mosques following a flexible new attitude on the part of the authorities. This social fluidity, often criticized by historians of the period, was the result of the pious patronage of the Mamluk aristocracy, which brought academic education to the reach of a large part of the populace. Towards the end of the Mamluk period, the structure of religious institutions had itself been levelled: the Friday mosque with Sufi service replaced the earlier madrasas and khanqāhs. The article also discusses how the visual arts of the period mirror the social changes with new aspects of artistic patronage. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Islamic law provides for the "waqf" (Islamic endowment) as a virtuous legal instrument that will bring the endower "closer to the God (qurba)." However, the popularity of the waqf system throughout the premodern Islamic world cannot be attributed simply to its characteristics as a "charitable act" supported by altruism and benevolence. Waqfs have proven to have been established by people out of more realistic and self-interested motives. By using original waqf-related documents, the author of the present article examines the actual state of the instrument, as utilized by Mamluk amir Qijmas (d. 1487), from three perspectives: 1) the types of assets Qijmas endowed as waqfs and the process of creating those assets, 2) the contexts and purposes of establishing waqfs by comparing the data gained from the documents with Qijmas' life history reconstructed from literary sources, and 3) how his personal relationships, especially within the Mamluk class, reflected the character of his waqfs. Through this examination, the author shows that Qijmas established waqfs with various motives, including the preservation of his wealth, working for the public good in accordance with his social status, enhancing the regime's or his own personal prestige, and practicing his piety and philanthropy. The author also shows that 1) the Mamluk's choices of establishing waqfs were heavily influenced not only by his current personal situation, but also by broader social and economic contexts, 2) personal relationships with his intimate Mamluk friends, such as the Sultan and his subordinates, were reflected in the character of his waqfs, and 3) these relationships were maintained and improved by the very act of establishing the waqfs. These characteristics demonstrate the meaning of establishing waqfs for a Mamluk who lived under very difficult circumstances in the late Mamluk period, while providing a glimpse of Qijmas's view of life and death. They also reveal the multifaceted and complex functions performed by the waqf, as well as how the waqf system was strategically and selectively utilized, depending on the personal and social circumstances of the endower. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many explanatory suppositions have been offered to account for the civil disorder that struck so many Arab countries in the first six months of 2011. The popular term for this multi-nation upheaval is the Arab Spring. Most of these theories, however, have lacked a mechanism for linking the challenges to existing governments to the specific Arab societies that experienced them. The approach that will be advanced here is that the Arab Spring represented a failure of legitimacy on the part of a particular political formation -rule by military officers and their families, which bore the brunt of the popular uprisings of the Arab Spring. Why did the legitimacy of this system of rule suffer simultaneous collapse while other Arab regimes, in particular the monarchies, did not? I term this political formation neo-Mamluk rule to connect it to precursor regimes that go back to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Only by tracing the origins of neo-Mamluk rule can one discover the keys to the crisis of legitimacy that has been manifest in recent months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of International Social Research is the property of Journal of International Social Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of the Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences is the property of Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Palace of sultans and government buildings were located in Kalat al-Cabal in Cairo which is the center of Mamluk State. There were residences of Sultans like taşthâne, firâşhâne, rikâbhâne, zeredhâne, matbah and divisions like tablhâne. Fundementally this state has a military character and composed of soldiers named as “mamluk”. For this reason, sultan, palace and vicinity were consisting of mamluk originated soldiers and commander. In this hierarchical organization. Sultan has the absolute domination. When mamluk amir was become Sultan, umara and mamluks under his suite or cooperating with him, were promoted. For this reason sultan was in central palace, it was important to depend and obey him. In this article we handled hilat, horse, money, house and feedings which are granted by memluk sultans to associates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uncovers the close relations the Georgian mamluks of Egypt maintained with their homeland in the late eighteenth century. On the basis of a wide range of archival and published sources, including a series of four unique letters from Ibrahim Bey al-Kabir and important members of his household, the authors conclude that these Georgian mamluks retained their native language, were aware of the politics of the Caucasus region, received frequent visits from their parents or other relatives, and sent gifts to family members or gave money to build useful structures (a defensive tower, or even a church) in their native villages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]