![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
|
![]()
Unfortunately, I can't find my books (so I have to apologize for not oftering references _yet_), so I have to rely on memory and Britannica:
Salahadin (himself a kurd) was from the family of atabegs - Turk-seljuk warlords, who were supposedly "protecting" Baghdad Caliphat. With time this family and its seljuk's was becoming more and more powerful. In 1169 Salahadin marched into Cairo, slaughtered around 40,000 black mamluks (Nubians etc.), their families, disbanded other parts of Cairo garrison and replaced it with his seljuks. Concerning Salahadin's "white" mamluks he was the first one to introduce them into Egypt. Till that time only seljuks used to purchase slave boys from Caucasus and Kipchak territories (eventually stretching from Khorezm to Hungary), and put them into service as "guard" units. With Salahadin this practise was greatly expanded, mostly through buying kipchaks from Cuman Kipchak regions (Modern Crimea and Ukraine) and northern caucasus kipchaks. Concerning the languages he spoke - it's certain he did speak arabic, I did not see the movie, but it seems natural for him to use arabic as a diplomatic language. Now concerning languages that were used by mamluks among themselves in general it was always their own language - turks spoke turkish dialects (kipchak), mongols I think spoke kipchak too, georgians spoke kartli, adighas- adighe, other caucasians (armenians, chechens etc.) spoke usually adighe or kartli, depending on which one was dominant. Concerning that only kipchaks and circassians were mamluks - Ali-Bey, Mehmed Beg and most of post XVII century mamluks were georgians (megrel tribe, western georgia), some of prominent mamluk leaders before were Mongol or Seljuk. It's important that in arabic literature word "cherkes" can mean anything from around Caucasus. It's interesting that mamluks were so isolated in their national community that very often they did not develop any islamic identity (great example is Rustam's memoirs and to some extent famous correspendence of XIX century mamluks with russian tzar and georgian kings). Last edited by Rivkin; 12th May 2005 at 12:46 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 84
|
![]()
Empu Gandreng tempering (nyepuhan) with his lips on the red hot blade for the infamous keris of Ken Aroek. Sorry guys, can't show you Empu Nyi sombro doing nyepuhan with her lips. I'll get banned from this forum!
![]() ![]() STOP! STOP! Can someone please tell this Malay prince that a keris is NOT a stabbing weapon but a holy talisman? ![]() These are screenshots of some of the best Malay movies produced in Singapore in the 1960s. You can see the keris in its (Malay) cultural context. Check out others at www.kampungnet.com.sg More to come... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 940
|
![]()
Thanks for the pics Rahman. Interesting the completely wrong (to my understanding at least) grip and thrust used in the second pic. Feel free to send me that pic of empu Sombro in a private e-mail.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Singapore
Posts: 84
|
![]()
No, there was no pic... just pulling your 'leg'
![]() That grip in the second pic is not unusual, but you can also see the normal grip in other pics in our gallery. The interesting thing is, I've been playing with the Jogja and Solo keris and I can easily pivot the hilt from a normal to a reverse grip as in the photo. But I can never do that with a Malay hilt. Guess there's still a lot more to learn... ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
|
![]()
On mamluks:
Here is the article of Bernard Lewis (very distinguished western scholar of Islam): http://www.venusproject.com/ecs/Slav...ddle_East.html See Chapter 9 for mamluks. Some quotes: "Ahmad b. Tulun (d. 884), the first independent ruler of Muslim Egypt, relied very heavily on black slaves, probably Nubians, for his armed forces; at his death he is said to have left, among other possessions, twenty-four thousand white mamluks and forty-five thousand blacks." "In 1169 Saladin learned of a plot by the caliph's chief black eunuch to remove him, allegedly in collusion with the Crusaders in Palestine. Saladin acted swiftly; the offender was seized and decapitated and replaced in his office by a white eunuch. The other black eunuchs of the caliph's palace were also dismissed. The black troops in Cairo were infuriated by this summary execution of one whom they regarded as their spokesman and defender. Moved, according to a chronicler, by "racial solidarity" (jinsiyya), they prepared for battle. In two hot August days, an estimated fifty thousand blacks fought against Saladin's army in the area between the two palaces, of the caliph and the vizier." P.S. I really doubt that there were any significant numbers of arabs in Salahadin's forces. Last edited by Rivkin; 12th May 2005 at 06:29 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 176
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
|
![]() Quote:
Most of the western sources seem to refer to him as "seljuk" leader, de-facto conquering Egypt from local rulers. While there can be some misunderstanding of this on my part, and to be honest - I've never seen an exact and detailed description of Salahadin's army (and among people I asked - no one seems to be able to quote one), so I personally believe that one should rely on indirect things, like the quote above - 50,000 Nubian slave (mamluk) soldiers of Cairo garrison seem to contradict "The only mamluks in Saladins army were his personal bodyguards. The rest of the army mainly came from barracks in Damascus, Aleppo and Cairo, all arab cities". |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Merseyside, UK
Posts: 222
|
![]() Quote:
The rest of Salaheddin's army was a mixture. he disbanded most of the old Fatimid army after he seized power in Egypt because their loyalty to him was suspect. His light cavalry would have been made of up Turcoman horse-archers who had settled in Syria and Northern Iraq. His heavy cavalry was made up of Kurds, free Turks who had settled in the cities of syria and Northern Iraq for one or two generations, sons of mamluks and a small number of Arabs from the bedouin tribes of Syria, Palestine and Egypt. he would have had some Arab heavy infantry from the Syrian cities as well as bedouin infantry. With regards to weapons, both straight swords and curved sabres were used. The Arabs and Kurds fought in the traditional way with sword and lance, they used straight swords. Troops of Turkish origin prefered curved sabres. there is a straight sword in the Topqapi Museum in Istanbul which is attributed to Salaheddin Yusef ibn Ayyub. The Topqapi Museum also has several Mamluk swords from the 14th and 15th centuries which are also straight. Arab miniature paintings and Coptic bibles from the 12th and 13th centuries invariably show straight swords with downcurved quillons and spherical pommels. The film interestingly shows Salaheddin using a sword with a divided point. One of the Prophet's Muhammad's swords was also said to have had a bifurcated point. Salaheddin was undoubtedly a very pious Muslim (of the old-fashioned tolerant kind, not like a modern wahabi), but I have no idea if he would have gone as far as using a sword modelled on the Prophet's. Finally Salaheddin is often described as wearing a mail-lined kazaghand and a mail coif over which he wore a yellow skullcap and a white head cloth. But he may have worn more elaborate armour on certain occasions. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|