Mamluk-Timurd Case

The history of diplomatic contacts between the Mamluks and the Timurids was initiated in 787/1386, and characterized by an aggressive foreign policy from the Turco-Mongol Tīmūr Lang, that ended with his conquests of Aleppo and Damascus in 803/1400. While the Mamluks were able to recover their position in Syria and in the region after Tīmūr's death in 807/1405, their relations with the Timurid successor Shāh Rukh (r. 811-50/1409-47) continued to fluctuate between cordial entente (Muʾayyad Shaykh, r. 815-24/1413-21; Jaqmaq, r. 842-857/1438-1453) and increasing tensions (Barsbāy, r. 825-841/1422-38), as attested through more than twenty-years contacts between the two realms. Most of those contacts (828-48/1421-44, during Barsbāy and Jaqmaq's rules) dealt with the Timurid request to send the inner kiswah to the Kaʿbah in Mecca [Table 1: contacts during the period covered by the corpus]⁵. Surprisingly, not only Shāh Rukh, but also his son Muḥammad Jūkī (d. 848/1444-1445) and grandson ʿAlāʾ al-Dawlah (d. 865/1460), had taken part to the discussion and negotiation concerning the sending of the inner veil⁶.

(Table 2) Out of the ten letters in MS 4440 involving the Timurids, four actually concern Muḥammad Jūkī and ʿAlāʾ al-Dawlah. Due to a possible incorrect attribution of the copyist however, I will here exclude letter XLIII¹⁸. All three letters are Mamluk responses to Timurid letters: XXIV; LXII; and XLIV. It is of course unfortunate that the initial Timurid letters didn't reach us, but however, the way Mamluk responses are drafted allow us to reconstitute the initial message.

Letter XXIV

Jaqmaq's response to Muḥammad Jūkī's letter consists of congratulations for Jūkī's nomination as heir-apparent and it discusses the troubles caused by the Aq Qoyunlu amir Ḥamzah. Though the full context of that embassy is not known to us in details, chronicles however inform us of the presence of an emissary (not mentioned by name) of Muḥammad Jūkī during (26) Rabīʿ II 844/24 September 1440²¹. This embassy was there at the same time than another Timurid embassy sent by Shāh Rūkh, and therefore attracted less attention, except that chronicles felt the need to mention that the rules of precedence were respected: Muḥammad Jūkī's gifts were given to the sultan only after that of his father²².

[Narratio]: Mention of Jūkī's initial letter and confirmation that it was welcomed by the sultan. Compliment on its style and summary of the message:

- Annonce of Jūkī's nomination as Shāh Rukh's successor (akhadhanā ḥaẓẓunā mina ’l-bushrà bimā manaḥakum al-maqām al-sharīf al-muʿīnī (...) min takhṣīṣikum bi iṭlāqi ’smi ’l-sulṭān) and expression of the sultan's congratulations and good wishes towards him.

- Concerning the amir Ḥamzah: Jūkī vowed in favor of an union with Ḥamzah rather than opposition, this for the sake of Muslim unity and in order to avoid conflict. On this Jaqmaq reminds of Ḥamzah's actions and disapproves them: Ḥamzah wandered from justice and took the path of tyranny and brigandage: cutting the roads to traders and travelers, stealing from traders traveling between the two (Mamluk and Timurid) realms. Furthermore, Ḥamzah’s true faith is to be questioned as he had a church in Amid renovated while it was collapsing, while he acts badly against Muslims.

[Dispositio]: Jūkī asked for pardon and respect for the amir Ḥamzah, which the sultan cannot understand, given his lack of esteem to this rebel, unlike that he has for other Turkmen who follow the right path, and who, if asked, could put an end to Ḥamzah. The sultan admits that he was planning to send troops against the rebel (despite the fact that he does not like to fight his neighbours), after the latter had missed to apologize for the troubles he caused. However, at Jūkī's request, Jaqmaq agrees to hold on, and asks therefore to Jūkī to communicate the truce conditions to Hamza: return to the right path of justice, expression of regrets before God for his bad actions. On those two conditions, the sultan will give his pardon and send him a robe.

In conclusion: Jaqmaq reassure of the good reception given to the emissary (qāṣid) and mention that gifts (to be found in the list folded in the letter) were given to him. [the copyist has copied down some of those gifts: hunting tank, net and bonds.

This letter is quite exceptional as for the information it reveals concerning Timurid internal politics, as well as for the capacity in which Muḥammad Jūkī dealt with the Mamluks. Concerning Timurid politics, Muḥammad Jūkī was the youngest of Shāh Ruḳh's sons (born on 24 Ramaḍān 804/27 April 1402). He started his political career around 823-4/1420-1, during the first military campaign that opposed the Timurids with the Qara Qoyunlu Iskandar in Azerbaijan²³. Ten years later (833-1429-30), Shāh Rukh nominated him governor of the Khuttalan province (which was seen by his contemporary as rather late, compared to his siblings)²⁴. Nevertheless, from then on, he appears in most military campaigns of his father. He also then acted regularly as mediator and negotiator in the conflicts and tensions that were taking place between local rulers within the realm or at its frontiers (Transoxiana)²⁵. According to Persian sources, it seems that Jūkī never in fact left his father's court at Herat²⁶. And al-Samarqandī, Shāh Rukh's court historian, even reports, that despite his mother (Jawharshād)'s attempts to keep him away from the rule²⁷, Jūkī in fact had his father's favor²⁸. Was Jūkī’s nomination official or not within the Timurid court itself, it seems nevertheless that he had made quite an impression at the Mamluk courts, since he is the only member of Shāh Rukh's family who actually made it to the Mamluk chronicles during that period. Furthermore, as shown through the corpus, he was definitely recognized as a diplomatic participant.

The context of the second letter involving Muḥammad Jūkī is unfortunately unclear. Al-ʿAynī, al-Ṣayrafī and Ibn Iyās and others, report the arrival of an embassy from a son of Shāh Rukh²⁹, in Shaʿbān 846/December 1442³⁰, while Ibn Taghrībirdī, refers to an embassy from Shāh Rukh himself. Having in our corpus a letter from Shāh Rukh dating from the same time, we can assume that both embassies may have been present in Cairo at the same moment³¹. Or according to the contents of Jaqmaq's response, that the one sent by Jūkī slightly followed the embassy of his father.

Letter LXII

Jaqmaq's response to Muḥammad Jūkī's letter, confirming that the promise made to Shāh Rukh concerning the kiswah, was already accepted and made know to him [Sh.R.] through his emissary.

[Narratio]: Mention of the good reception of the letter followed by the customary courtesy (regarding style). Summary of the initial message:

- Jūkī's father, Shāh Rukh, wishes to provide the Kaʿbah with its inner veil (kiswah). The sultan informs Jūkī that a letter on the similar topic reached him from Shāh Rukh himself, and that the request has already been accepted.

[Dispositio]: Mention of the reception of Shāh Rukh's letter and confirmation of the agreements concluded between the two sultans. Shāh Rukh's emissary, al-Majdī, left already to transmit him the sultan's good intention and the agreements.

Mention that Jūkī's gift has been accepted.

Whereas Muḥammad Jūkī appears to have been actively involved in the negotiation concerning the Timurid sending of the inner kiswah (for and in parallel to his father), it seems that there was yet another actor that was to finalize the process. Indeed, while chronicles all report at length the arrival of the Timurid delegation bringing the kiswah in Shaʿbān 848/November 1444³², they kept silent about the identity of the initiator of the mission. That we now know thanks to a letter kept in the MS 4440: Jaqmaq's response to Shāh Rukh's grandson ʿAlāʾ al-Dawlah.

Letter XLIV

Jaqmaq's response to ʿAlāʾ al-Dawlah's letter, declaring the fulfillment of the promise made concerning the sending of the kiswah to the pilgrimage. The letter was given to the two shaykhs in charge of bringing the kiswah to Mecca.

[Narratio]: Mention of the good reception of the letter followed by the customary courtesy (regarding style). Summary of the initial message:

- Mention of the two shaykhs (Abū Isḥaq al-Kāzarūnī and Nūr al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Abharī) who had been dispatched to bring the inner kiswah to Cairo, so that they could benefit from the sultan's help in their mission. Confirmation of their arrival and the reception of the letter they brought, as well as confirmation of the good reception offered to them.

[Dispositio]: Mention of the sequence of events peculiar to the conveyance of the to Mecca:

- The shaykhs will be transferred to Mecca with the amir of the pilgrimage [along with the caravan];

- The Sharīfs in Mecca will make sure that the veil will be hung in the presence of the shaykhs, as well as all Timurid pilgrims, so that they will be able to witness what they saw back at home;

- Reminder of the exceptional character of this favor made to the Timurid sovereign [Shāh Rukh], in the name of the sultan's friendship. This won't occur for anyone else in the future.

- Mention of the good reception offered to the shaykhs before their departure.

- Mention that the letter is sealed.

Surprisingly, after twenty years of negotiation, the last Mamluk-Timurid exchanges concerning the sending of the inner kiswah, did not involve Shāh Rukh, but his grandson. Again, Timurid internal politics help us here further understanding this. At the end of 847/1443, Shāh Rukh had fallen badly ill, an illness that lasted until 848/March-June 1444. If his powerful wife Jawharshād was no fervent supporter of her son Jūkī, she was quite fond of her grandson ʿAlāʾ al-Dawlah, which she encouraged to proclaim sultan. Self-proclamation for which he received the allegiance of several important emirs (among which Fīrūzshāh)³³. It seems therefore that it is in the capacity of Timurid sultan that ʿAlāʾ al-Dawlah was able to enter in the sphere of diplomatic game with the Mamluks.

Muḥammad Jūkī, though apparently nominated by Shāh Rukh, did not reach Herat in time to contain ʿAlāʾ al-Dawlah's ambitions, and he also died unexpectedly in that year. On the other hand, Shāh Rukh would soon recover. He however did not seem to have entered in contact with the Mamluks after that date.

Mamluk-Qara Qoyunlu Case

Mamluk-Qara Qoyunlu contacts were initiated from the late 14th century by the founder of the dynasty Qarā Muḥammad (r. 782-792/1380-1390) and ended in the late 15th century (in 872/1467-8) with the reception in Cairo of Jahānshāh's head, sanctioning the end of the confederation by Uzun Hasan. Contacts between the two powers, however, seem to have ended a bit earlier since Mamluk chronicles do not record any more exchanges of embassies after 861/1457. During that century however contacts were not continuous, but instead there were many interruptions - or rather blanks - in the data available. Two periods are particularly well documented however: First, the beginning of the exchanges that took place in the context of Tīmūr's invasions in Iraq (that period sees the rapprochement of both powers, with Mamluk protection of Qarā Muḥammad, and for a while of his successor Qarā Yūsuf; r. 792-823/1390-1411). Soon however the latter's ambitions will oppose Mamluks' pretensions, and we witness then a second phase in the contacts between the two powers (first quite hostile and challenging - with Qarā Yūsuf/al-Muʾayyad Shaykh -; then tending towards rapprochement between Iskandar and Barsbāy - this by opposition to the Timurids).³⁴ A third set of contacts is also attested at a later period (847/1443; 850-861/1447-1457), which is recorded in the letters kept in the MS ar. 4440 (BnF). Those contacts involved on the one hand the Qara Qoyunlu ruler Jahānshāh (r. 843-872/1443-1467) and the Mamluk sultans Jaqmaq (r. 842-857/1438-1453) and Īnāl (r. 857-865/1453-1461); and on the other hand, Jahānshāh's son Pīr Būdāq (governor of Fars; d. 870/1466) and sultan Īnāl.

Jahānshāh had officially succeeded his brother Iskandar as head of the Qara Qoyunlu confederation in 841/1438 (after Iskandar's death). It must be reminded however that he was already governor in Eastern Anatolia (under Timurid authority) from 837/1434. And it is still as Timurid client that he ruled until Shāh Rukh's death in 850/1447. He seems to have stayed quite loyal to Shāh Rukh during most of the period in fact, and we have therefore barely no record of contacts between him and the Mamluks during that time. This of course does not mean that Mamluk historians ignored the events taking place in the Qara Qoyunlu domains. They have recorded for example the internal troubles peculiar to Iskandar's succession (in 842/1432)³⁷ or to Iraq (843/1439)³⁸. The first mention of the arrival of a Qara Qoyunlu mission in Cairo dates from 847/1443. Though chronicles do not describe its motives, nor provide any details as for its reception, it seems nevertheless that this embassy attracted quite a lot of attention and curiosity. Indeed, it was received before the Timurid embassy that had arrived at the same time; which truly defies the rule of precedence as set by Cairo:³⁹ If the reasons for this situation are probably due to the Timurid context in fact (e.g., the inner kiswah negotiation), we can however not deny other factors inherent to Jahānshāh's "awakening" and first claim towards independence. This comes even more clear when looking at the letter lxi kept in MS ar. 4440 (fols. 208a-210a).

Letter LXI (fols. 208a-210a)

Jaqmaq's response to Jahānshāh's letter: reciprocity of the friendship and congratulations of the recent victory against the enemy.

[Narratio]: Mention of the reception of Jahānshāh's letter through the intermediary of his emissary, Aḥmad, and of the good reception he was granted. Follows the customary courtesy (regarding style). Confirmation that the link of friendship that had existed in the past between the two rules are still shared.

- Joy of the sultan for the victory against the enemy and the news of Jahānshāh’s safe return.

[Dispositio]: Mention of the presence of the Mamluk emissary Jijukbughā at Shāh Rukh's court during the announcement of Jahānshāh's victory, and the joy that the Timurid sultan has expressed (when the emissary was back home).

- Mention that the emissary Aḥmad was given a letter of response that should confirm the sultan's good feeling towards Jahānshāh, as well as his wish to see the exchanges being continued.

- Sultan's request that Jahānshāh facilitates the roads for pilgrims and traders.

From the Mamluk response above, we can easily reconstitute the original message of Jahānshāh's initial letter (which was twofold). Firstly, it announced a resumption of contacts (since Iskandar) calling/asking for love and friendship between both realms- this on the memory of the past relation and link that had existed between the Mamluks and the Qara Qoyunlu. Secondly, the letter was the occasion for Jahānshāh to announce his victory against the enemy (unfortunately not identified). It must be said that Jahānshāh's double message in fact mirrors quite well Qarā Yūsuf and Iskandar's previous correspondences with the Mamluks at time of their aggressive independent policy: calling for friendship, but in the meantime reminding of their military power. This double message was, it seems, quite clear to the Mamluk as well, as illustrated in Jaqmaq's response. The first part of this response (narratio), which usually summarizes the initial letter, confirms the good reception of the letter and of the emissary (Aḥmad), as well as the reciprocity of friendship (similarly referring to the past relations). Furthermore, Jaqmaq congratulates Jahānshāh on his victory and shares his joy that he came back home safely. In a regular response to a letter of conquest (fatḥnamah), the second part of letter (dispositio) usually just keeps on with congratulation and words of friendship. Our letter is however quite different, since the dispositio has no other aim than reminding Jahānshāh of his position as Timurid client: Jaqmaq indeed makes a point to mention his emissary at the court of Shāh Rukh (therefore insisting on his good relation with the Timurid ruler), and the latter's joy on the announcement of this victory. The end of the message consists of another reminder to Jahānshāh to respect the peace and order in place: with a special request to facilitate the roads to travelers and pilgrims.

Whereas this first attempt from Jahānshāh towards the Mamluks can somehow be seen as a failure, it has in the practice no effect on him as far as his ambitions and pretentions are concerned. Indeed, if Jahānshāh stayed quiet for a little longer, Shāh Rukh's death in 850/1447 truly allow him to break his link to the Timurid dynasty, with his progressive taking over Timurid territory (850/1447: Baghdad; 851-852/1448-9: Sulṭāniyyah, Saveh, Hamadan, Qazvin)⁴⁰, but even more with the resuming of hostilities (starting 851/1448) with the Aq Qoyunlu Jahāngīr (r. 848-861/1444-1457)⁴¹, due to the latter's protection/asylum given to Jahānshāh's rebellious nephew Alvand. The 20 years long conflict that opposed the two confederations also involved the Mamluk sultanate in many ways,⁴² which of course produce many occasion for diplomatic contacts (both informal and formal)⁴³. Be that as it may, by 855/1451 (some 12 years after Jahānshāh's first letter to the Mamluks), Jahānshāh has truly emerged as an independent, recognized, and much welcomed diplomatic actor. This is well illustrated for example by the report of the reception of the embassy he dispatched that year to Cairo to discuss the future of Diyār Bakr⁴⁴.

The good relations between the two rulers would, however, soon deteriorate due to the treaty of Āmid signed with Jahāngīr⁴⁵. Interestingly enough, the news of this treaty reached Cairo in Muḥarram 856/February 1452, through a Qara Qoyunlu embassy sent by Jahānshāh’s son Pīr Būdāq, governor of Fars⁴⁶. Along with the letter, the emissary also presented the sultan the gifts he brought: a splendid mule, weapons, and silk fabrics⁴⁷. This represents the first embassy from Pīr Būdāq, that once more announces quite strong ambitions this governor had (to speak against his father and to set himself apart). If we do not know Jaqmaq’s response to Pīr Būdāq’s embassy, it is clear during this period that the Mamluks turned away from Jahānshāh and instead gave his attention to another rising figure: the Aq Qoyunlu Uzun Ḥasan (r. 861-882/1457-1478), who succeeded in seizing Āmid and returned it to Mamluk authority⁴⁸.

The deterioration in the Mamluk relation with Jahānshāh and the parallel rapprochement with his son Pīr Budāq can well be seen under Jaqmaq's successor, Īnāl (r. 857-865/1453-1461), especially through the account of Jahānshāh's embassy to Cairo in Dhū l-Ḥijja 860/November 1456 (rather negative)⁴⁹, and that of Pīr Būdāq on 20 Shaʿbān 860/24 July 1456 (positive)⁵⁰. While sources do not detail the ceremonies peculiar to the reception of this embassy, the initial letter sent by Pīr Būdāq and Īnāl’s response to it, both kept in MS ar. 4440, attest of a good state of relationship between the two⁵¹.

Letter XXXVI

Initial letter from Qara Qoyunlu Pīr Būdāq b. Jahānshāh to al-Ashraf Īnāl to open the correspondences and expression of the wish to maintain good relationships. Declaration of the forthcoming attack on the Timurid realm. Letter written at the end of Dhū ’l-Qaʿdah 859/early November 1455.

[Narratio]: Introduction praising the Mamluk sultan and his qualities of kindness and justice towards Muslims, that encourage Pīr Būdāq to write to him and send him an emissary. The latter is in charge of transmitting these feelings of friendship, and it is hoped to see those feelings reciprocated.

[Dispositio]: Pīr Būdāq has heard of the conflict that had in the past opposed Mamluks and Timurids. He has therefore decided to undertake a campaign against them to submit them.

- Mention of the upcoming departure of the troops to Khorasan.

- Invocation to God, so He would support the campaign. Request that the sultan support it as well, morally.

[No mention of gifts in the letter]

Letter XXXVII

Sultan Īnāl's response to Pīr Būdāq's letter, confirming the reciprocity of friendship and wishing the best regarding the future combats. [860/1456]

[Narratio]: Mention of the reception of the letter through Pīr Būdāq emissary, Yūsuf, who is now in charge of transmitting the sultan's response. Customary courtesy regarding the style of the letter. Confirmation of the reciprocity of the friendship.

- Summary of the letter: combat against the enemies and the submission of the tyrants. Expression of support and good wish, and invocation to God for His support.

[Dispositio]: Mention again of the emissary and his oral message, and of the reciprocity of the friendship.

- Mention of the good reception granted to the emissary as proof are the gifts that he is bringing back.

Letter XXXVIII

Initial letter of Pīr Būdāq to announce his victories in Khorasan, Sistan and against the Mushaʿshaʿ, and affirmation of his friendship towards the Mamluk sultan Īnāl.

[Narratio]: Introduction on the theme of the victory. Mention of the date of the drafting of the letter: early Jumāda II 861/end of April 1457.

Detailled account of the events. [N.B.: the victory was given by God in benediction of his father Jahānshāh]

[Dispositio] : Praise to God for the victory, and wish that its news would be spread to the world.

- Mention of the emissary (emir Ulū) and his mission: report to the sultan the event of the battle/victory and request to him that correspondences keep being exchanged between them and that their friendship gets stronger.

Letter XL

Mamluk sultan's response to Pīr Būdāq to congratulate him on his victory in the Khorasan and Sistan. The response was given to the emir Ulū in Dhū'l-Qaʿdah 861/October 1457.

[Narratio]: Mention of the reception of the letter through Pīr Būdāq emissary, emir Ulū. Customary courtesy concerning the letter's style and reminder of its theme (victory and declaration of friendship).

- Detailed summary of the letter's contents (quasi-verbatim from the initial letter)

[Dispositio]: Expression of joy regarding Pīr Būdāq's victory (no reference to Jahānshāh), with the help of God. Assurance that the news of the victory will be spread, so that the enemies will fear him and the others will be pleased.

- Mention of the emissary and the gifts he brought (all accepted)

- Mention of the good reception granted to the emissary and mention of the gifts offered.

We are quite lucky in this case to have both Pīr Būdāq's initial letters and Mamluk responses. The way Pīr Būdāq presents his project of war is quite interestingly framed: on the memory of the previous opposition between Mamluks and Timurids (which obviously was quite an outdated reference). He thus set himself as Mamluk defender and supporter, to which he asks for moral support. Unlike Īnāl's letter to Jahānshāh in 860/1456, his response to Pīr Būdāq is rather full of praise, friendship declaration and support. A year later, another letter - this time a victory letter - reached Cairo, describing in detail the battles and great accomplishment of Pīr Būdāq's troops. These were welcome in Cairo with great joy.

This corpus of letters represents the last testimonial we have of diplomatic contacts between the Mamluk sultans and the Qara Qoyunlu rulers. Indeed, Mamluk sources do not report any more reception of Turkmen embassies in Cairo after this date. As already mentioned, the contacts between Jahānshāh and Īnāl had already greatly deteriorated starting 860-861/1456-1457. Moreover, this ruler was afterwards kept busy in the eastern part of his realm against the Timurids and his own family. Contact with the distant Mamluks might not have been a priority then. On the other hand, Pīr Būdāq’s attempt for rapprochement with the sultan seems to announce this emir’s ambitions to the detriment of his father. Indeed, in the years following his victory in Khorasan and Sistan, Pīr Būdāq broke his link to his father (864/1458). In 865/1460-1461, Jahānshāh was able to dismiss him from the region of Fars and send him to Iraq instead⁵². This attempt to move Pīr Būdāq away from Iran would fail since the latter would, in fact, continue raiding in the region until 870/1466⁵³ when, after the three-years’ siege of Baghdad⁵⁴, his brother Muḥammad, who has been dispatched by their father, finally entered the city and murdered Pīr Būdāq.

After he managed the internal struggle caused by his sons, Jahānshāh was finally able to turn against his longstanding enemy Uzun Ḥasan and, breaking the truce concluded in 865/1461, to lead his troops to Diyār Bakr (871/1467)⁵⁵. The conflict turned to his disadvantage, however, and the Qara Qoyunlu ruler was killed in his sleep and decapitated by Uzun Ḥasan on Rabīʿ I 872/October 1467⁵⁶. The head was sent first to the Timurids and then to Cairo, where it was hung at Bāb Zuwayla⁵⁷ on Jumādā I 872/December 1467⁵⁸ or Jumādā II 872/January 1468⁵⁹. The Qara Qoyunlu dynasty would never rise again⁶⁰.

Bibliographical references

Sources

Manuscript sources

Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, MS ar. 4440.

Printed sources

ʿABD AL-BĀSIṬ B. KHALĪL - Nayl al-amal fī ḏayl al-duwal. Ed. ʿU. ʿA. al-Salām Tadmurī. 9 vols. Beyrouth: al-Maktabah al-ʿAṣriyyah, 2002.

AL-ʿAYNĪ - ʿIqd al-jumān fī tārīḫ ahl al-zamān. Ed. ʿA. al-R. al-Ṭanṭāwī. Cairo: al-Zahrāʾ li-l-iʿlām al-ʿarabī, 1989.

AL-ʿASQALĀNĪ, Ibn Ḥajar - Inbā’ al-ghumr bi-abnāʾ al-ʿumr fī ’l-taʾrīkh. Ed. Ḥ. Ḥabashī. 4 vols. Cairo: Lajnat iḥiyāʾ al-turāṯ al-islāmī, 1969-1998.

AL-BIQĀʿĪ - Tāʾrīkh al-Biqāʿī. Ed. M.S. Ibn Shadīd al-ʿAwfī. 3 vols. Jīzah: Hajar li ’l-

ṭibāʿa wa ’l-nashr wa ’l-tawzīʿ wa ’l-iʿlān, 1992.

AL-MAQRĪZĪ - Kitāb al-Sulūk li maʿrifat duwal al-muluk. Ed. M.M. Ziyādah. vols. 1-2. 3rd ed. Cairo: Dār al-Kutub, 2006-2007 (1^st ed. 1939-1958).

AL-MAQRĪZĪ - Kitāb al-Sulūk li maʿrifat duwal al-muluk. Ed. S.ʿA.-F. ʿĀšūr. vols. 3-4. 2^nd ed. Cairo: Dār al-Kutub, 2007 (1^st ed. 1970-1973).

AL-SAKHĀWĪ - Wajīz al-kalām fī ’l-dhayl ʿalà duwal al-islām. Ed. B.ʿA. Maʿrūf, Gh.F. al-Ḥarastānī, A. al-Khaṭīmī. 4 vols. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Risālah, 1995.

AL-SAKHĀWĪ - Al-Tibr al-masbūk fī dhayl al-Sulūk. Ed. S. ʿA.-F. ʿĀshūr. 4 vols. Cairo: Dār al-Kutub, 2002-2007.

AL-ṢAYRAFĪ - Nuzhat al-nufūs wa ’l-abdān fī tawārīkh al-zamān. Ed. Ḥ.Ḥabashī. 4 vols. Cairo: al-Hayʾah al-Miṣrīyah al-ʿĀmmah li ’l-Kitāb, 1970-1994.

IBN ḤIJJAH - Qahwat al-inshāʾ. Ed. R. Veselý. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2005.

IBN IYĀS - Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr fī waqāʾiʿ al-duhūr. Ed. M. Muṣṭafà. 2^nd ed. 6 vols, Cairo: Dār al-Kutub, 2008.

IBN TAGHRIBIRDĪ - Ḥawādith al-duhūr fī maḍà al-ayyām wa ’l-shuhūr. Ed. F.M. Shaltūt. Cairo: Lajnat iḥyāʾ al-turāth al-islāmī, 1990.

IBN TAGHRĪBIRDĪ - Al-Nujūm al-zāhirah fī mulūk Miṣr wa ’l-Qāhirah. 2^nd ed. 16 vols. Cairo: Dār al-kutūb, 2005-2006 (1^st edition: 1963-1971).