You are on page 1of 8

Political Relations Between the Safavids of Persia and the Mamluks of Egypt and Syria in

the Early Sixteenth Century
Author(s): Hassanein Rabie
Source: Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, Vol. 15 (1978), pp. 75-81
Published by: American Research Center in Egypt
Stable URL:
Accessed: 29-09-2016 03:54 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

American Research Center in Egypt is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt

This content downloaded from on Thu, 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC
All use subject to

10 on Thu.118. Persia became one state. within a very short time Shah could not participate in the game from the Isma'il extended the borders of his empire beginning.1 The game of paramount power was complicated and sensitive. the Ottomans.4 As profor Egypt and Syria. In 908 A. A few years later he conquered the Safavids and the Mamluks. he defeated the Ak-Koyunlu forces near Hamadan and Mamluks from the conflict circle by encour.H.jstor. they had been Ismail the Safavid entered Tabriz and claimed himself Shah Ismail the First. 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC All use subject to http://about.h/1501 a. from the Euphrates in the west to Transoxania in the east. Persia had been a mere geographical province Safavids and the Mamluks. therethe Sunni Ottoman Empire. the provinces of had defeated the Safavids. extending his realm to Diyar Bakr. because conquered Shirvan.d. they destroyed the Caspian Sea. but reestablished national unity in Persia. Khurasan and Samar- of their internal and external weakness. Damascus or Baghdad and was often divided the Ottoman Empire turned its face to the a number of petty dynasties.24. qand. the the Arab conquest in the 7th century.1501. The Ottomans won in the end because they isolated the and extended his state to the Fertile Crescent. At thenot only distinguished his new state from beginning of the sixteenth century. Shah Isma^ critical period in their history. and . ruled from Cairo by the Mamluk Sultans 75 This content downloaded from 152. The losers were the Mamluks.Political Relations Between the Safavids of Persia and the Mamluks of Egypt and Syria in the Early Sixteenth Century Hassanein Rabie although his domain at the time was only The purpose of this paper is to investigate the evolution of political relations between Azarbayjan.2his state thus became an opponent to the fate to be decided at the hands of the winIn the summer of 906-7 a. Shah Ismail conquered all of Persia Empire at that time. After it had established itself in Europe.3 fications as the most powerful Muslim During the ten years following the fall of Tabriz.d. He declared Shrtsm to be the formal the Safavids and the Mamluks during a very doctrine of the new state. who. After they Mazandaran and Gurgan. either the Ottomans or the Safavids.established himself in central and south aging the deterioration of relations between Persia. i. The Ottoman belonging to the Caliphs of Medina or Empire was the most powerful among them. In 914/1508 Shah Isma'il the Mamluk Sultanate and thus became the captured Baghdad and in the next years he most powerful Muslim state in the area./1503 a.e. Sunni Ottoman empire. In brief. It would seem as though thefrom the Persian Gulf in the south to the Mamluks themselves were expecting theirCaspian Sea in the north. Since were three competent powers in the Eastern Mediterranean. But among east in order to prove its identity and after quali.

according to the ordered a parade of Mamluk troops.8 . The amir cAli sent to Cairo a number of Safavid soldiers' isolating them in their future struggle with the Safavids. and the messages fuqaM of his master. It seems that the Ottomans Safavid army had crossed the Mamluk In the year 907/1501. The Mamluk sultan bestowed robes of honor on him Sultan Bayezid II arrived in Damascus carry- This content downloaded from 152. 7 Jumada II 913/14 October 1507. He transmitted sultans and corrupt in additions t troubles caused by the presents the qddis. The Mamluk vice-Sultan sion. he waited until 913/1507 before he marched tant commercial position in the spice and other oriental trade because of the arrival westwards to the borders of the Mamluk of the Portuguese on the coasts of Sultanate the near Aleppo. and 1500 The Egyptian troops did not leave Cairo. 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC All use subject to http://about.118. The Zuwayla Gate in Cairo and halted the precontemporary Mamluk historian Ibn Iyas for sending troops to Syria. This was accompanied by economic decline as a result of the deterioOttoman's intentions concerning Safavid ration of the iqtct system. The envoy wassufwell received in Damascus and was made even fered from maladministration by weak more amirs. 930/1524) reports that in Rabic II 908/ this happened during the presence of an October 1502.9 The Ottomans moved at that time to Sultani Mamluks.6 Egypt during the late 15th century lost its imporrapprochement reached Shah Ismacil. In 892/1487 the Portuguese money was being collected from the inhadiscovered the Cape of Good Hope and. twenty tered in Aleppo in fear of a Safavid invaamirs of forty and amirs of Ten. imposed illegal additional stop the Safavid invasion. the They Mamluk buffer principality Dulgadir might have thought at this stage of(Dhu having al-Ghadir). the Mamluks to stop the Safavids fromthe heads to be hung on the ordered reaching the heart of the Sunni world. Meanwhile. correspondence addressed to the Mamor even before. prevent war between the Mamluks and the because news arrived that the realized that. or at Safavid least of army was defeated.24. welcome in Cairo. bitants of Damascus to prepare troops for after a few years they reached India. He consulted his conquer Syria.10 on Thu. According to Ibn Iyas. an which contained information about the common people. In ing the late 15th century.5 and frequent preparations for war. the envoy of the Ottoman Ottoman envoy in Cairo.10 When news of the Ottoman-Mamluk that relied mainly on agriculture. the the Mamluks on their side. the Mamluk viceamirs. The Ottoman envoy occurrences of the plague and epidemics left Cairo in Rajab 908/January 1503 carry- with their catastrophic effects on a country ing the reply of the Mamluk Sultan. All parations (d. The Mamluk taxes on the people in order to prepare army for this campaign comprised five and equip an army of infantry to be quarhigh-ranking amirs of thousands. and contemporary historian Shams al-Dm they Ibn marched under his command to Aleppo Tulun (d.jstor. n Sultan al-Ghawri in Cairo was lated in Damascus concerning Shah Ismacil's victorious campaigns and his intention to disturbed by this news. The Ottomans pretended that heads and a distinguished Safavid prisoner they wanted to establish an alliance withSultan al-Ghawri was so pleased he of war.76 JARCE XV (1978) since 648/1250. the Mamluk Sultanate luk Sultan al-Ghawri.7 the defense. 953/1546). however. he would gain month (Jumada II 913/October 1507) and control of Syria and Egypt. thus putting the had met the army of the amir cAli Dulat of Ottoman's own plans in jeopardy. and they decided to send troops to Sultan in Syria. if Shah Isma'il destroyed borders the at the Euphrates in the same weak Mamluk Sultanate. disturbing news circuon Thursday.12 Safavids. more Indian Ocean.

on 23 Dhu al-Qacda 916/21 envoys. to have This content downloaded from 152. Ibn Iyas comments that: "The Safavid envoys were very impudent.24. a squadron to attack al-Blra because its This assumption is supported by the stateMamluk ruler had the Safavid envoys who ment of Ibn Iyas. 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC All use subject to http://about. ing letters addressed to these consular and that the Shah did not give his personal officials.POLITICAL RELATIONS BETWEEN SAFAVIDS AND MAMLUKS 77 and his comrades and sent them back to control of the trade routes. of the movementsRelations of and the Safavid Empire deteriorated as the Venetians and Hospitalers in the Meditime went by. Sultan al-Ghawri with a letter containing an whilst he would invade by land the terri- apology for what had happened at the tories of both the Mamluk and Ottoman Euphrates and for any initiative his troops sultans. and sent them to the Mamluk order for such action or even have any Sultan in Cairo. a Tartar chieftain.17 No doubt Shah Isma'il wanted to remove 1511 Shah Ismacil defeated and killed Ozbeg Khan. The Shah emphasized in al-Blra on the eastern Mamluk borders in his letter that the incident was not intended. The ruler of Baghdad. hiding them in their walking-sticks. He wrote secretly to the Shacban 913/December 1507. but to keep it at bay and prevent matter.20 it from impeding his future invasion of Iraq The response of Shah Ismacil was to send or any future conflict with the Ottomans. Sultan al- Ghawri was disquieted by such news. to reach the the Ottoman sultan with the good news."15 February 151 1.14 consuls of the Franks in the main Egyptian In the same month (Shacban 913/Decem. It was said that they were carrying letters from the Franks to Shah Ismacil. same year. it would seem that Shah Ismacil threatened them with hanging.21 between the Mamluk Sultanate aware. in the knowledge of it. He insulted and Cairo. Safavid incursion was the beginning of a the Sultan Murad Khan ibn Ya'qub ibn campaign against the Mamluk Sultanate. Sultan al-Ghawri was (914/1508) Shah Isma'il conquered Iraq and distirbed and reacted as if he believed this captured Baghdad. Then he Nazir al-Khass for further investigation of the directly. He sent a delegation headed by the amir 914/December 1508 asking the Mamluk Hasan al-Tawil arrived in Cairo in Ramadan Tamur-Bay to discuss the matter with Shah Sultan to provide him with troops to fight the Shah.18 Ibn Tulun adds that.19 When Sultan al-Ghawri was informed of but were not as elegant as the Ottoman these incidents. In 916/1510 the Mamluk ruler of may have taken. Sultan al-Ghawri accepted this apology and set the Safavid prisoner free to return to Persia accompanied by the Safavid delegation.and Syrian cities asking them to write to ber 1507) Shah Isma'il sent his envoy to their kings to invade Egypt from the sea. and to become the guardian The Syrian Mamluk troops subsequently of the two holy cities.118. It seems also that Sultan al-Ghawri was prisoner for about two years. Syria captured some Safavid envoys carrythat the Safavid soldiers had lost their way.10 on Thu. at that time.22 A the Mamluk sovereign in Syria.jstor. they wore red conical caps on their heads. to and of Tripoli. some Franks from Aleppo and its environs arrived in Damascus under arrest. he summoned the European wanted not to attack the Mamluk sultanate ordered them to be handed over to the From his incursion of 913/1507 to the consuls. Sultan al-Ghawri refused to do so Ismacil.16 that in the next year had passed nearby. Mecca and Medina returned from Aleppo to Damascusininthe . In Tabriz the Shah met the amir Tamur-Bay only once and kept him as a because he was not ready to face the Safa- vid. of Euphrates and his subsequent mission Damascus.13 Red Sea area. In Dhu al-Hijja 916/March terranean and the Portuguese in the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. including those of Alexandria.

such asof Ibn the the view of the Safavid Shah .23 and not to let anyone of the Safavid delgaand in Cairo on 18 Rablc 1/ 1 5 1511 of tion go to market or June meet any of the inha- the same year. the Safavid letter.118. himself to the prayer carpet. on the battle- Whoever wants to lead me astray. had arrived at al-Bira. who were able to kill their enemies.10 on Thu. leaving the way. and a small box. When thepoets box competition among Egyptian and was opened in the presence Sultan. so he should keepthat is its saddle.head . I am ready to respond in Kind. Sultan al-Ghawri ordered some of his This content downloaded from 152. but in disguise. the Fayyum. Sultan al-Ghawri buried and the crossbow was broken. 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC All use subject to http://about. In Muharram 9 18/ April 1512. in Damascus on Safar 917/10 May 15 II. and his order watch the arrival of the Safavid envoy. a crossbow.24.24 chose two verses written by Safiyy al-Din Ismail's gift to al-Ghawri had its danger-al-Hilli which say: ous and unequivocal implications. because he had at that time to face disorders caused by the Bedouin tribes close and trusted Mamluks. for it contained abusive verses envoy returned to his master carrying alinsulting the Mamluk Sultan who used to Ghawri's letter of reply. like Ozbeg Khan. The Mamluk was bitants. and other Egypamir Ozdamur. This news disturbed And our cup is an empty skull25 the Sultan. Mamluk Sultanate to vigorous men. I have a horse for evil purposes. to prevent devastation of crops. Only once theSultan Safavid envoy was to visit the about tombs of the Imam very anxious and permitted concerned the purport of such aal-Shafici mission. I will repay him in kind27 field. outside Cairo. to that the Safavid envoy was sent to approach foreign personalities in Cairo. and disorder. al-TahhanKhan. Hijjar. the effect that Safavid infantry battalions Our wine is the blood of our enemies. like Shah Ismacil. and that is its rein.alwriters. reached Sultan al-Ghawri from Aleppo to fie on the narcissus and the myrtle. bad news The sword and the dagger are our flowers. they found inside the ofIbn Ozbeg Sultan al-Ghawrl ordered the head to be to write verses in reply.28 visit parks and enjoy himself in gardens However. prayer carpet.was an old man could not I have a horse for good purposes. al-Ushmuni. After being kept in Cairo for two months (from Rabf I to Jumada I 917). Ibn the delegation to go to the marIyas comments thatpreventing it was something very odd for the Sultan kets to ofdo. praying to Whoever wants to show me the right God and reciting the Quran.26 No doubt Sultan's instructions reflected his fear The Sultan himself the went personally. relations between the Safavids Al-Ghawri was furious at the Safavid and festivals. and others. These were accompanied by envoy during his stay in Cairo. paniedenvoy by the amir Ozdamur. especiallyofthe al-Buhayra. Heal-Laythl sentaccomhis and the Imam amirs to welcome the outside Cairo.jstor. and the Safavid Thegifts two abusive verses which Shah envoy presented the of his master: sent inahis letter to al-Ghawri spurred a copy of the Holy Ismacil Quran. his concern that they should not The conletter of Shah Ismacil was read in of the pretaminate the Sunni doctrine the Egyptians. The verses read: and the MamTuks went from bad to worse. sence of the Mamluk amirs. and participate in battle.78 JARCE XV (1978) Safavid envoy to theanyone Mamluk Sultan arrived whatsoever from approaching him. to take care of the Safavid tian provinces. After two days the city may have been motivated the Safavid envoybymet the Sultan. plunder. to the Matariyya. It sug- gested that al-Ghawri .

self had been injured and was in hiding . and the persecution of the Sunni abusive words. than were the Ottomans themselves. near Tabriz. The Otto- was more conversant with the tactics of mans tried to follow Ismacil.35 The Safavid and the Ottoman armies met event by saying that it was the beginning at Chaldiran. Shah Ismacil was defeated Al-Ghawri.24. It was sent back to Persia which occured in Asia Minor against the with al-Ghawri' s reply. and I 918/16 July . There were many reasons for the news.10 on Thu.36 The inhabitants of Cairo were ordered to mourn the Ottoman Sultan by The news of the defeat of Shah Ismacil the Mamluk Sultan al-Ghawri a few prayer reached in the mosques of al-Azhar.29 by some of his Tartar enemies. had lost many thousands of troops. and more aware of hiseastwards inten. beTabriz for two years.32 23 August 1514. it would mean that June 1512 and handed him a letter which the Shici Shah would become the guardian contained "abusive and hard words. Sultan al-Ghawri immediately ordered these heads to be stuck on lances In fact the only thing which saved the Mamluk Sultanate from a definite clash and put on display in the streets of Cairo.30 No doubt Shah the circle of conflict to the Safavid .devastating the villages on his tions. Of Ghawri was enraged. on 2 Rajab 920/ of the enmity between the Sultan and Shah Ismacil. by virtue of these experiences. who withdrew Shah Ismacil. and Sultan Selim entered Tabriz. al-Hakim and days after its occurrence on 10 Rajab/31 others. such as Safavid heads in the streets of Cairo and the case of the amir Ahmad. The Ottoman Mamluk delegation headed by the amir Empire.118. At first. obviously. Safavid delegation stayed in Cairo for less Other reasons were the Shicite mutiny than one month. Sultan Selim was forced to withdraw man Bayezid II reached Cairo on 2 Jumada because of bad roads. 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC All use subject to http://about. way in order to hamper the Ottoman When the news of the death of the Ottoadvance and lengthen their supply lines. brother of even mocked the Sultan with taunts that he Sultan Selim I and his rival.Otto- Ismacil was unhappy when he heard this man axis.33 But when the Mamluk vice-Sultan August.Sultan al-Ghawri was in Cairo ten heads topped with red conical pleased with the news. the Sultan could not This content downloaded from 152.34 domain. which also contained Ottomans. Ibn Iyas comments on this fuqahct in Iraq and Iran.31 Two Safavid envoys met Sultan al-Ghawri on 14 Rablc II 918/29 cause. cold weather. al-Ghawri mourned him and expressed his grief for the loss.jstor.POLITICAL RELATIONS BETWEEN SAFAVIDS AND MAMLUKS 79 Ibn Iyas comments that Sultan al-Ghawri in Aleppo reported in Rabic II 919/June 1513 thatthe Shah Ismacil had been defeated found himself in great difficulties with Bedouin disorders on one side and the Safavid problem on the other. if it the Mamluk ruler of Sis sent to the Sultan one knew where . The comed by the Shah and offered asylum. He sent a Safavid delegation of about emergence of armed struggle between the 100 men to Cairo. with and finally to be hung on the gates of Bab the Safavids was the transference of al-Futuh and Bab al-Nasr." Alof the two holy cities of Islam in the Hijaz the master of the Red Sea trade. He sent with them the Safavids and the Ottomans. could not allow a Safavid defeat of the weakened Mamluk Sultanate. and that he himOn Thursday 18 Rabic I 918/3 June 1512. It seems thatand Shah course Isma'll blamed the Sultan for parading the there were other reasons. the most powerful Sunni authority Tamur-Bay which the Shah had kept of in the time. over-extended supply routes. because caps of Safavid soldiers whom he had killed he thought that with this setback Shah Isma'il would or could not attack the Mamwhile they were rampaging through his luk Sultanate at that time. who was welcould not engage in combat with him.

Sykes. in M. 23-40. The Mamluk army was defeated and the Mamluk Sultan al-Ghawri was killed on the contemporary historian Ibn Iyas comments: "the reason was not known. al-Ghawri had sent his Egypt orders 1966). I. 398. In this letter the Mamluk Sultan asked the Persian Muhammad cAli cAwni (Cairo.40 Ibn Tulun reports also that vitch. Ghawri's men.43 In the end Egypt became a Mamluks. 115-28. on Sunday 25 Rajab 922/24 August. and during the Ottomanand the Fertile Crescent 7 57 6-7 922 (London.38 At last In the absence of more data. Holt. Ibn Abi al-Surur al-Bakri states Cairo that Sultan Selim wanted to destroy the Mamluk Sultanate because good relations had been established between Shah Ismacil 1 K. cf. Sultan Dabiq. circulated among the people that the reason Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East (London. but the Sultan did not of order drums to be beaten for festivals as usual for such movement and decided to fight the Mamluk Sultan. rather than extending their influences into the Red Seathe Shici Safavids. The Ottoman Sultan Selim con- The reason was obvious later on. and was hanged Ismacil. The most Chaldiran. 1350-1500"."39 battlefield. The Ottoman Empire. 1973). to provincial territory. This content downloaded from 152. 118-29. Of course the by did not order the drums to be beaten and did not declare that Cairo should be deco- rated in celebration of this occasion. The then weakened Mamluk army could not face up to the firepower of the Ottomans. Savory.42 in such cases.41 II. II. Cook. 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC All use subject to http://about.24. from his master to Shah Isma'il. one cannot on 29 Ramadan 920/17 November.cit. (London.alM. Shah for help to fight Sultan Selim. Inalcik. after defeatingatthe the Zuwayla Gate on 22 Rabic I 923/14 Safavids. 'Safavid Persia.118. I. and UdoSelim.37 News was oftothe Ottoman Shah Ismacil. M.80 JARCE XV (1978) other version al-Ghuzzi he states that Sultan happy believe the . Arabic trans. to the conquest of their lands. since he was determined to wait for confirmation of the news. 1516 that Sultan Selim met Sultan al-Ghawri important point was that even after the on the field of battle at Marj arrival of the official news. The last Mamluk Sultan Tuman- quences of such a victory and realized Bay thatwas defeated at al-Raydaniyya. al-Ghawrl north of Aleppo.10 on Thu.' in the Cambridge Selim had captured al-Bahlawan. 23-32. to Aleppo to prevent the Ottoman supply 2 For the decline of the Mamluk Sultanate in the trains from reaching the army of Sultan later middle ages. who was carrying a letter 4 Sharaf Khan al-Bidlisi. In158-62. 3rd ed. for the Ottoman conquest was that Sultan 3 R. Miskimin.jstor. and to becoming the sole Muslim power in the area. it was "England to Egypt. He ordered the Quran to purpose of his movement to Cairo Syria be recited in some that ofthe the mosques of arrange peace betweenvictory Selim and and Fustat. one of History of Islam. op. Selim was suspicious the reasons the 1514). although was al-Ghawri announced among his troops enough with it. 1962). Savory. near he would drink from the same cup as Cairo. In any an Ottoman envoy arrived in Cairo carrying case. 1517. turned their attention to the April. Shah and in other places. A History of Persia. but attached to the the guardianship of the two holy cities. the Al-Ghuzzi inhabitants adds that when alwas circulated among o wrote to Selim about his peace Cairo next month Ghawri (Shacban 920/November mission. it was two years after the battle of a detailed correspondence concerning Ismail's defeat at Chaldiran. The Ottomans. 1970). 1963). 399. Safavid war. P. 1514 refute or accept such information. P. to Empire of the Sunni Ottomans. Sharafnama. Lopez. The Classical Age 7300-7600 (London. and al-Ghawri. no doubtquered the cities of Syria and at last reach- Sultan al-Ghawri was aware of the conse- ed Cairo.

8-16. 36Sharaf Khan al-Bidlisi. op. IV. 22 Ibid. 203-28.cit. 205. Mufakaha. fol. "Studies on the Structure of the Mamluk Army. 184. op. Inalcik. 265 ff. The Financial System 28 In Tulun. 49. ed. IV. V (ed. Incik. 1962). Dar al Kutub (Egyptian National al-khilldn ft hawddilh al-zamdn. B. 35-50. Mufdkahat al-cdshira. R.cit. 15 Ibn Iyas. see above. Wiesbaden. Coast (London. 311. cAbd al-Muncim 'Amir (Cairo. 252. Majalis al-Sultan al-Ghawri (Cairo. 229-30. IV.. Holt.. Muhammad Library). Iv. al-Ghuzzi. 26ff. Mufakaha." BSOAS XV (1953). M.POLITICAL RELATIONS BETWEEN SAFAVIDS AND MAMLUKS 8 1 Iyas. Nihayat Salatin al-Mamalik. op. 221-22. Mufakaha. II. 38 Ibid. 262. 1972). for the Mamluk army. 1 x Ibn Tulun. IV. Ibn Tulun. Mostafa: Cairo. M. IV. £^Y. 400- 01. 129. 564-741/A. Ibn Tulun. of Egypt A. I. MS. M. 29 Sep 2016 03:54:34 UTC All use subject to http://about. al-Minatj. bi-kashf al-Ghumma (Cairo. 357. 221. 32. 33. op. Cairo. 'Egypt and Syria. 1961). cf. i (1951).. al-Ishbili ({Ali ibn Muhammad). IV. IV. Ighathat al-umma 31 Ibid. II. ed. op. Holt. hab). H. 399. 21r-v.. Ibn Abi al21 Ibn Iyas. IV. Mamluk Sultanate. 5 For the iqtac system during the heyday 26 ofIbn the 21 Ibid. H.cit. for al-Ghawri's gardens. 123-24.. 1169-1341 (London. 46-47. IV. 32-47. Dar- rag. 'Azzam (cAbd al-Wah- al-Misriyya. W. 265. cf. 3 1 8. Ibn Iyas. 1977). M.cit. op. 29-30. MS. fols.cit. Savory. A. IV.. alGhuzzi.10 on Thu. 1. cit. Cairo). Rabie. Mufakaha. Mufakaha. 2nd ed. al-Mijalla al-Tarlkhiyya 23 Ibn Tulun.H. 121-22. 354. I.316-17. al-Durr al-musdnft sirat al-Muzaffar Setim Khan. I. 24 Ibn Iyas. Rabie. 402-04. p. 9 Ibid. Lewis. B. fol. 20 Ibn Iyas. 256-57. 18 Ibn Iyas. 270. IV. IV. Iv. al-Kawdkib. op. IV. Baddh\ IV. Ayalon. Mufakaha. 13-21.118. 23. cf. 222-27. This content downloaded from 152.. Savory. 1941). 1962). 29 Ibn Iyas. Bads' f. 42 al-Ghuzzi. who became the most important official in the Mamluk sultanate after 1329. IV. 143ff. 1963). Dar al-Kutub. IV. I. 191. 19 Ibn Tulun. Dar al-Kutub. 44876. 17 Cf. 357. for the Ndzir al-Khdss. Mufakaha. 146. Badd'f. 261. by Muhammad Mostafa.D. I. Middle East (Princeton. Baddh\ IV. 18r. 1940). I.cit. IV. 26-72. no. Badd'f. 37 Ibn Iyas. 23-24. 1206 Tdrikh.. IV. I. see below. The Portuguese off the South Arabian 34 Ibid. 1960). I. XVI (1954). ™ Ibid. op. Baddhx. 396. Badd'f. vol. vol IV (Cairo. idem. ed. Waqfat al-Sultdn al-Ghawri maca Setim al-c Uthmdni. p. Ziada. I. 140-41. Dols. 25 Ibid. al-Kawdkib al-sa'ira ft acyan al-m?a Ibn Tulun (Shams al-Din Muhammad). 14244. Surur al-Bakri. 35 Cf. 27 1. no. 399-400. 218-20. .. 118-19. 118.. 1926 Tarikh. Badd'f. IV. 163. al-MamdUk wa al-Firanj (Cairo. 41 Ibn Tulun. D.' in The Cambridge History of Islam. 342-43. fol. The Black Death in the 33 Ibid. 82. Ibn Zunbul al-Rammal. fol. Ernst (Cairo. 1962). 1961). 13 Ibn Iyas. 'Safavid Persia'. a\-Minah. cit. 40 Ibn Abi al-Surur al-Bakri. fol. op.. 205. 57-90. al-Kawdkib al So? ir a ft akhbdr Misr wa al-Qdhira (available in photocopy as no.cit. "Ibid.24. Mostafa (Cairo. al-rahmdniyya ft al-dawla al-^Uthmdniyya. £^Y. I. Rabie. IV. Bada*f alZuhur ft waqdcf al-duhur. 14 Ibn Tulun. 6 See al-Maqrlzi (Ahmad ibn cAli).. 20-22. 207.. Ibn Iyas. 60-177. Mufakaha. 37-41. 127-57. Serjeant.. 398-99. 39 Ibid. Badd'f. 393.jstor. I. II. 21 r-v. cf. Bad??. 32 Ibid. 000. 271.. 43 Ibn Iyas. 10 Ibn Iyas (Muhammad ibn Ahmad). 000. 2112 Tdrikh Taymur.