Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 8th May 2005, 07:37 PM   #11
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M.carter
Nope, the Ayyubid family was kurdish, but the ayyubid armies were mainly Syrian and egyptian garrisons, no kipchaqs. The Kipchaqs and circassians came much later, during the mamluk period.
First of all I apologize if my statements are going to be incorrect, and I truly hope to be corrected.

My understanding was that Saladin died in 1193, and by 1250-1260 Ayyubids were mostly outed by rebelling mameluks (which does not seem to be much later than Salahadin's reign) - who formed the next dynasty, Bahri (which was a kipchaq dynasty). During the reign of Saladin he, and his commanders were very often of kurdish origin, but the army was already predominantly mamluk, the practise which started basically in 10th century with black mamluks (Nubians etc.). I think 1169, the battle of Cairo is considered the foundation of mameluks as a cast - the black mameluks were slaughtered by the order of Salahadin, and replaced by "white" mameluks - Kipchaqs from northern Caucasus and surrounding steppes, Circassians and other northern tribes. Since then, "blacks" were barred from being mameluks.
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.