Abstract
Mamluk history is divided into two periods based on different dynastic lines: the Bahri Mamluks of Qipchaq Turkic, and the Burji Mamluks of Caucasian Circassian origin. After receiving instruction in Arabic, the fundamentals of Islam, and the art of warfare, slaves in the royal barracks were manumitted and given responsibilities in the Mamluk hierarchy. The following is a brief discussion of the rise and fall of the dynasty of these slave warriors.
Introduction
The Mamluks, originally bands of slave warriors, were the rulers Egypt and Syria from the year 1250 until 1517 AD; their dynasty brought down by the Ottomans after. The Mamluks first appear in history in the Abbasid caliphate in ninth century and long after they were overthrown by the Ottomans, Mamluks sustained to constitute an important portion of the Egyptian Islamic society and co-existed as a significant group till the nineteenth century. The Mamluks destroyed the crusading kingdoms of Outremer, and protected Syria, Egypt and Islamic places of the holy significance from the Mongols (Waterson, 2006). Their influence made Cairo one of the dominant cities of the Islamic realm in the late Middle-Ages. Under these apparently lesser known soldier-statesmen’s rule flourished art, craftsmanship, architecture and scholarly activities. However, the Mamluk dynasty remains obscure to many of the Western civilization.
Discussion
The Mamluk dynasty can be subdivided into two phases: from 1250 to 1381 the Bahri faction formed the Mamluk Sultanates; from the year 1382 to 1517 the Burgi Mamluks remained in power. These groups took their names from the last Mamluk regiments, the Bahirya regiment, based on a river island at the center of Cairo and the Burgi or Tower regiment, who served the last Ayyubid Sultan, Al-Salih, whom they later overthrew in 1250.
Mamluk general means ‘owned’ and Mamluks did not originally belong to Egypt but remained as slave soldiers, majorly as Qipchak Turks from regions like Central Asia. In Mamluk code, Mamluks were not allowed to pass property or title to their sons; in fact sons were in most cases denied the chance to join ranks in Mamluk regiments. Therefore the group had to be continually refilled with newer men. Bahri Mamluks were principally Russian natives from Southern regions and Burgi comprised mostly of Caucasians. The Mamluks had traditions similar to Mongols, due to their steppe origins, than with Syrians and Egyptians amongst whom they lived. They even kept their garrisons and barracks distinctively different, not intermixing with the local population (Waterson, 2006).
At the heart of Mamluk politics was bloodlust and brutality (Gordon, 2001). Mamluks were not entitled to inherit wealth or position beyond one generation but several rebellious attempts did occur to create lineages during the creation of every new generation. Impalement purges and crucifixion were common punishments against infidelity to the ruling Lords.
The Mamluks’ Rise to Power
The Mamluks’ chance to overthrow the ruling lords arrived at the end of 1240s, a period when Saladin’s Kurdish Ayyubid dynasty was suffering from internal conflicts, Crusades and skirmishes (Hillenbrand, 1999). The push came when the events in east began to impact the region. Mongols had begun invading the lands and overran any regions they encountered, leaving destruction in their wake. Al-Salih, the last ruler of the Kurdish Ayyubid dynasty had placed too many powers under the Mamluks during his reign (Holt, 1986). The Mamluks eventually forced Al-Salih’s widow Shajjar-ad-Durr to commit marriage with their commander Aybeg. This began the Bahri Mamluk dynasty in 1250, with Aybeg, with competition for power ever present, as its first sultan (Waterson, 2006).
Aybeg was later murdered on his wife Shajjar-ad-Durr’s orders. More political murders ensued, including Shajjar-ad-Durr herself getting murdered, till Qutuz, the vice-regent of the Mamluks, brought the factions under control with a lot of bloodshed and seized power in the year 1259. Meanwhile, the Mongols concluded their invasion of Syria by nearly annihilating of Assassin sects and the over-running of territories of Anatolia. What remained as Islamic territory was inside Egypt, a few cities in Syria and the Arabian Peninsula. The Mamluk sultanate showed low endurance and Qutuz was still consolidating his authority (Gordon, 2001).
Qutuz rule in Cairo was a short one, as Hulegu the Mongol came knocking at the gates of Egypt. Qutuz instrumentally defeated Helugu’s lieutenant, Kit Buqa and executed him. However, Qutuz was murdered by Baybars, his aide, while the victorious army returned to Cairo (Holt, 1986). This happening set the trend of succession for the Mamluk Empire. Interestingly only a handful of Sultans are known to have died of natural causes. The average reign of the sultans was a mere seven years. Despite all this, the Mamluk dynasty became one of the most stable rules of medieval Middle East.
Baybars opened up trade routes for the Spanish kingdom of Aragon and maintained friendly ties with Italian seaport states. He strategically sent emissaries to the Golden Horde; the Mongol tribe in Russia who were involved in a struggle with Hulegu’s Ilkhanate. This solved to purposes, it maintained the inflow of slaves from the Black Sea region for the upkeep of the Mamluk ranks and to build up an ever increasing pressure on Ilkhanate. In addition, Baybars sent raiding parties into Mongolian territories of Armenia, southern Taurus Mountains and the Seljuk Sultanate in Rum (Waterson, 2006). Although his primary priority was to defend Syria and hold Egypt his need for resources always proved a downside for him.
The Mamluk dynasty was secured Baybars, and remained in power until the sixteenth century. Struggle for the seizure of power prevented complete stability at the center, even after the Burji Mamluks over took the Bahri Mamluks in the mid-fourteenth century, factions and insecurity continued unceasingly. Following Timur Leng’s brief and destructive invasion of Syria in 1400s, the Mamluks managed the re-establishment of their Syrian powerbase effectively (Hillenbrand, 1999). However, these external attacks left the dynasty weakened, coupled with the Black Death that spread repeatedly through the Middle East from the mid-fourteenth century. Soon the Mamluks lost the valuable trade proceeds from Syria to the Portuguese as they opened up Europe’s Ocean trade and routes to India in the later fifteenth century. In the last years it took two merely two brief battles for Ottoman Sultan Selim I to annihilate the last Mamluk army to win the battle field outside Cairo near the Great Pyramids in the year 1517 (Gordon, 2001). The Ottoman army had the advantage of firearms and artillery and the Mamluks rode out to meet this army with only bow, lance and sword.
After Ottomans overthrew and hung the last Mamluk sultan in the year 1517, the defeat of Mamluks was lamented throughout Egypt. However, a large number of minor Mamluk functionaries remained in power to take care of the Turks’ new state.
Features of Mamluk Warfare and Administrative Skills
The Mamluks were a perfect match for the Mongols’ archery as they crafted bows and leather armor and with one horse each, they could tactically use the size of their steads to deliver charges like Norman knights coupled with the skill of mobile archery and a ‘Parthian shot’, delivered during withdrawals. The Mamluks were instrumental in averting the Mongol army attacks and destroying the army in the course at Ayn Jalut and later at Homs in 1281. Mongols being the most fearsome warriors of that age the Mamluks’ expertise and control methods must have been very skillful and impressive.
Communications within the Mamluk state were also well-organized. Harbors were improved and a four-day postal service established between Cairo and Damascus (Waterson, 2006).
Though warfare was the main objective for Mamluk slave soldiers, they gave unparalleled contribution to Islamic art and architecture (Blair and Bloom, 1986). A large number of the Mamluk sultans were fabulous builders, one example of finesse being Sultan Qalawun’s mausoleum complex in Cairo that includes a mosque, a madrasa and a hospital. The dynasty’s accomplishments in arts of literature, especially of Qur’an, are also remarkable (Abu-Lughod, 1991).
Art and Architecture under Bahris (1250–1382)
The Bahri Mamluks laid the foundation of art and architecture of the entire Mamluk period. Profits made from the east-west trade in silk and spices sustained the Mamluks' substantial patronage (Blair and Bloom, 1986). In spite of periods of internal struggle, there was virtually a never ending artistic and architectural activity all the time, developing the techniques once established by the Ayyubids and assimilating influences from other parts of the Islamic world. Refugees from different places also contributed to the momentum (Blair and Bloom, 1986). Mamluk decorative arts, especially including enameled and gilded glass, woodwork, inlaid metalwork and textile, were highly valued around the Mediterranean and European regions, where they had a deep influence on local products (Abu-Lughod, 1991). The impact of Mamluk glassware skills is evident on the Venetian glass industry.
Art and Architecture under Burjis (1382–1517)
The Burji Mamluk sultans tailed the artistic customs established by the Bahris. Although the dynasty was faced great external and internal threats in the early fifteenth century that included the devastating invasion of the Central Asian conqueror Timur, repeated famines, plague, and civil conflict in Egypt, patronage of art and architecture continued. Mamluk textiles and floorings were greatly valued in international markets. Architecturally, unmatched designs in public and pious foundations continued to be constructed. During this period, the Portuguese gained control of the Indian Ocean trade routes and barred the Mamluks from trade, their best source of income. Although the Mamluks were soon united into the Ottoman Empire, the distinctive Mamluk art culture continually inspired the Ottoman and other Islamic traditions.
Conclusion
The Mamluk Dynasty may have ruled for a little over two centuries, but their impact was great, not just in the realm of the Islamic world but in the European culture as well. The Mamluks began as a low slave warrior group and rose to the heights of building a highly intricate and rich dynasty, enriching the culture and tradition of the Middle East for many centuries that followed.
History is proof that time may prove to be the greatest hand in overturning empires and dynasties, and so it happened with the Mamluks. Though little is known about this culture, there is a lot to be learned from the Mamluks, not just in trade, art and architecture, but in strategic skills as well. The study of this Middle Age Middle Easter dynasty is an intriguing one and unearths more and more every time.
References
Abu-Lughod, Janet L. (1 February 1991). Before European hegemony: the world system A.D. 1250–1350. Oxford University Press US. ISBN 978-0-19-506774-3.
Blair, Sheila S. and Bloom, Jonathan (September, 1996). The Art and Architecture of Islam 1250-1800. The Yale University Press Pelican History
Hillenbrand, Carole (1999). The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives. Routledge, 2000
Holt, P. (1986). The Age of the Crusades: The Near East from the Eleventh Century to 1517.
Gordon, Matthew (2001). The Breaking of a Thousand Swords: A History of the Turkish Military of Samarra. (A.H. 200-275/815-889 C.E.). SUNY series in Medieval Middle East History. State University of New York Press.
Waterson, James (2006). The Mamluks. History Today Volume: 56 Issue: 3. Retrieved from http://www.historytoday.com/james-waterson/mamluks
