Journal of Art History

Abstract

In the tradition of Islamic epigraphy, it is common to encounter laudatory expressions praising rulers, either as patrons (bânî) or simply as the reigning sultans of the time. In such cases, the inscriptions may also recount the sultan’s military campaigns and victories. Referring to the territories or peoples under the sultan’s rule is another rhetorical device employed to underscore the magnitude of his sovereignty. In this context, the number of nations governed and the vastness of the lands controlled are among the elements that signify the ruler’s power.
In the epigraphic material from the early period of Turkish-Islamic epigraphy -such as that of the Qarakhanids, Ghaznavids, and Great Seljuks- it is observed that Turkish rulers made little explicit reference to their own ethnic identity in inscriptions when mentioning the peoples, they governed. In contrast, the names of surrounding cultures appear more frequently in these texts. In this regard, both neighboring Muslim communities and, notably, non-Muslim groups are often included in such expressions.
Beginning with the Anatolian Seljuks and continuing into the Ottoman period, we begin to encounter explicit references to the term “Turk”. A similar emphasis on Turkish identity is also notable in the inscriptions of the Mamluk Sultanate, a contemporary Turkish state of the Ottomans.
The list, often extending with references such as Arab, Persian, Rûm (Anatolian), and Armenian, may at times conclude with a phrase such as “master of the rulers of all nations.” This expression serves as a summarizing formula, especially when the architectural space available for the inscription reaches its limit, replacing the enumeration of further ethnic or cultural groups with a comprehensive reference to “all peoples.”
Despite its specific origins and early usage, the term “Afranj”, which came to denote “Western” or “European” during the Mamluk period, broadly referred to all non-Muslims living in the western regions of the Islamic world. Although it appears only in a limited number of examples, the political implications of the geographical area it denotes are of particular significance.
Although the term “ʿAjam” underwent semantic expansion and shifts over different periods, in its narrower sense it refers specifically to Persians, while in a broader sense it can denote all foreign peoples, depending on the perspective of the user. However, within the context of Mamluk epigraphy -the focus of this article- the term ʿAjam most often signifies the Iranian people and the broader Persian cultural sphere.
The Daylamites -an Iran- centered ethnic group that ruled over the same geographical region- also appear among the communities mentioned in Mamluk epigraphy. In Mamluk inscriptions, the Turks are frequently mentioned in conjunction with the Daylamites.
This paper aims to examine the terms directly used to refer to the Turks in the inscriptions of the Mamluks -as a Turkish state- such as Turk and, occasionally, Rûm, which is employed based on geographical association.