Dress and Dress Code in Medieval Cairo: A Mamluk Obsession 9004684972, 9789004684973

Citation preview

Dress and Dress Code in Medieval Cairo

Handbook of Oriental Studies Handbuch der Orientalistik section one The Near and Middle East Edited by Maribel Fierro (Madrid) M. Şükrü Hanioğlu (Princeton) D. Fairchild Ruggles (University of Illinois) Florian Schwarz (Vienna)

Volume 176

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/ho1

Dress and Dress Code in Medieval Cairo A Mamluk Obsession By

Doris Behrens-Abouseif

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Cover illustration: Detail of Episode from the life of St. Marc, by Giovanni Mansueti, Scuola Grande di San Marco, Venice. Wikimedia Commons, Picture by M0tty. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, author. Title: Dress and dress code in medieval Cairo : a Mamluk obsession / by  Doris Behrens-Abouseif. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, [2024] | Series: Handbook of Oriental  Studies. Section 1: The Near and Middle East, 0169-9423 ; volume 176 |  Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2023034022 (print) | LCCN 2023034023 (ebook) |  ISBN 9789004684973 (hardback : acid-free paper) | ISBN 9789004684980 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Clothing and dress—Egypt—History. |  Mamelukes—Egypt—History. | Mamelukes—Social life and customs. |  Egypt—History—1250-1517. Classification: LCC GT533 .B45 2024 (print) | LCC GT533 (ebook) |  DDC 391.00962—dc23/eng/20230828 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023034022 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023034023

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. issn 0169-9423 isbn 978-90-04-68497-3 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-68498-0 (e-book) Copyright 2024 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Schöningh, Brill Fink, Brill mentis, Brill Wageningen Academic, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Böhlau and V&R unipress. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Requests for re-use and/or translations must be addressed to Koninklijke Brill NV via brill.com or copyright.com. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Idhā shiʾta an taḥyā ḥayātan saʿīdatan wa-yastaḥsina al-aqwāmu minka al-muqabbaḥā Tazayya bi-ziyyi ‘l-turki wa-iḥfaẓ lisānahum wa-illā fa-jānibhum wa-kun mutaṣawliḥā [If you want to lead a happy life and people to praise your wrongdoing, Dress like the Turks and speak their language or avoid them and stay uncorrupted.] Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Khāliq ibn al-Furāt

∵

Contents Acknowledgement xi List of Figures xii Note to the Reader xvi 1

Introduction: Subject, Sources, and Terminology 1 1 Studies 3 2 Material Evidence 5 3 Archival Sources 5 4 Narrative Sources 6 5 Visual Sources 6 6 Terminology 7

2

Religion, Traditions, and Customs 9 1 Religion 9 2 Sufism 14 3 Dreams 15 4 Urban Customs 17 5 Manners and Rituals 19

3

The Sultanate and Its Historians 22 1 The Sultans’ Perspective 22 2 The Historians’ Perspective 26

4

The Designer Sultans (1250–1380s) 30 1 Al-Ẓāhir Baybars (r. 1260–77) 30 2 Al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn (r. 1278–90) 32 3 Al-Ashraf Khalīl (1290–3) 33 4 Al-Nāṣir Muḥammad (1293–4, 1299–1309, 1310–41) 34 5 Al-Ashraf Shaʿbān (r. 1363–77) 35 6 Al-Ṣāliḥ Hājjī (r. 1389–90) 37

5

The Circassian Revision (1380s–1517) and the Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code 38 1 Al-Ẓāhir Barqūq (r. 1382–9, 1390–99) 39 2 Al-Nāṣir Faraj (r. 1399–1405) 43 3 Al-Ashraf Barsbāy (r. 1422–38) 44

viii

Contents

4 5 6 7 8

Al-Ẓāhir Jaqmaq (r. 1438–53) 46 Al-Ẓāhir Khushqadam (r. 1461–7) 47 Al-Ashraf Qāyṭbāy (r. 1468–96) 47 Al-Ashraf Qānṣuh al-Ghawrī (r. 1501–16) 49 The End of the Mamluk Dress Code 50

6 The Khilʿa: Institution and Ritual 52 7 The Khilʿa as a Garment 65 1 The Caliph and the Sultan 65 2 The Military Establishment in the Bahri Period 66 2.1 Nuwayrī’s List 71 2.2 al-Dawādārī’s List 71 3 The Military Establishment in the Circassian Period 72 3.1 The Double-Faced Over-Cloak and the aṭlasayn 73 3.2 Gold and Tiraz 74 3.3 The salārī 75 4 The Civilian Dignitaries 77 5 The Kāmiliyya: A Circassian Innovation 79 8

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art 85 1 Production 85 2 Administration 87 3 Tirāz and Mamluk Art 92

9

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy 102 The Sultan (Fig. 16) 102 1 2 The Mamlūks 106 3 The Headdress 109 3.1 Kalawta and Takhfīfa 109 3.2 Taqiyya and Zamṭ 122

10

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners 132 1 The Civilian Elite 132 2 The Sufis 135 3 The Commoners 136 3.1 The Malūṭa and Other Garments 143

Contents

11

Women’s Clothing 149 The Palace 149 1 2 The Street 155 3 Wardrobe Miscellenia 158 4 Fashions 161 5 Regulation and Transgression 167 6 European Eyewitnesses 169

12

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image 172 1 Artefacts 172 1.1 Mamluk Manuscripts 178 1.2 Renaissance Images (Figs. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 47, 48, 49) 181

13

Social Order and Mobility 184

14

Industry, Trade, and Assets 194 The Markets of Cairo 197 1 2 Hoards, Assets, and Security 202

15

Epilogue 207 Bibliography 211 Index 223

ix

Acknowledgement I am grateful to Rosalind Wade-Haddon and Seif El-Rashidi for their pertinent comments on the first draft of my text, to Bora Keskiner and Nikolaos Vyryzidis for useful references and to Harry Neale for being an inspiring copyeditor.

Figures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

16 17 18 19

Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, manuscript, dated 1334, showing a judge to the left. © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, A.F.9., fol.30b 10 Frontispiece of the manuscript of Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1334. © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, A.F.9 67 Mamluk silk with gilded threads, inscribed with sultan’s titles, 15th century. © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1939.40 94 Fragment of a silk coat from Egypt, 14th century. Metropolitan Museum of Art 31.14a, Alamy PA93T7 95 Mamluk silk fragment, lampas weave, circa 1400. © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1982.130 96 Mamluk silk fragment, circa 1400. © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1918.189 97 Mamluk silk fragment, late 14th century. © Art Institute Chicago, 1983. 747 98 Mamluk silk with gold fragment, lampas, circa 1500. © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1929.87. 99 Inscription (ṭirāz) on the façade of the complex of Sultan Qalāwūn (Photo courtesy of Bernard O’Kane) 100 Brass Bowl with Inscriptions praising the art of ṭirāz, 14th century. Courtesy of the Museum of Islamic Art, Qatar, Inv.no. MW-93-99-HU 101 Inscription on Mamluk pen box praising the art of ṭirāz. Private collection 101 Attendant of an enthroned figure, detail from the Palmer Cup. British Museum WB53, 1200–1250, © Trustees of the British Museum 110 Three Mamlūks, folio from a furūsiyya manuscript, dated 1330. © Aga Khan Museum AKM12 111 A Mamluk horseman with lance. © British Library, Nihāyat al-sūʾl, manuscript, dated 1371, add. Ms 18866, fol. 13b 111 A Cupbearer from a Mamluk illustrated manuscript of Jazarī’s Kitāb fī maʿrifat al-ḥiyal al-handasiyya, dated 1315. David-Collection, Copenhagen. http://www .davidmus.dk/en/collections/islamic/materials/miniatures/art/20-1988 112 A Mamluk sultan sitting in state, engraving, Arnold von Harff. © Bodleian Library-MS-Bodl-972 00129, print dated 1554, fol. 64b 113 Mamluk Dignitaries, Arnold von Harff. © Bodleian Library MS Bodl. 972, print, dated 1554, fol. 67b 114 Brigandine in the name of Sultan Jaqmaq © Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence, no. 1244M, (photo Azmi 1244) 115 ‘St. Marc healing Anianus’, by Giovanni Mansueti, 1516. © Gallerie dell’Academia, Venice, cat., 569. Wikimedia Commons 116

Figures 20 21 22 23 24

25 26

27 28

29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

xiii

Episode from the life of St Marc by Giovanni Mansueti, Scuola Grande di San Marco, Venice. Wikimedia Commons, (Picture by M0tty) 117 Reception of a Venetian embassy by Sultan al-Ghawrī, by an anonymous artist, Bellini School. © Musée du Louvre 117 Portrait of Sultan al-Ghawrī, in Vecellio Cesare, Degli habiti antichi …, 1590. © Gallica, Bibliothèque Nationale de France 118 ‘The Stoning of St. Stephen’ by Vittore Carpaccio, 1520. Staatsgalerie Stuttgart, Germany. Photo Alamy 084-HR7MH1 120 The battle of Marj Dābiq, miniature from the Selīmnāme, first half of the 16th century. Topkapı Library, MS Hazine 1597-8, fol. 235a. Courtesy of the Directorate of National Palaces of the Presidency of the Republic of Turkey (T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Milli Saraylar İdaresi Başkanlığı) 121 Mamluk soldier wearing a zamṭ, Arnold von Harff, © Bodleian Library MS Bodl. 972, print dated 1554, fol. 72b 124 Musicians wearing a zamṭ, a malūṭa, and boots, detail of Vittore Carpaccio’s ‘Baptism of the Selenites’. © Scuola di San Giorgi degli Schiavoni, Venice, Wikimedia Commons 125 A Mamluk Training with a Lance, fol. from a furūsiyya manuscript 19/2001, late 15th century. © David Collection, Copenhagen 126 Mamluk horsemen in military exercise, late 15th century, folio from a furūsiyya manuscript, courtesy of Bonhams. Islamic and Indian Art, 28 April 2018, lot 7. https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/24623/ 127 Mamluk silk cap, 1985.5 © Cleveland Museum of Art, Wikimedia, https:// clevelandart.org/art/1985.5 128 Mamluk silk cap. © Cleveland Museum of Art, Wikidata, https://www.cleve landart.org/art/1950.510 129 Mamluk silk cap. © Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg (2) (36351944664) Richard Mortel from Riyadh, Wikimedia 130 Mamluk silk cap. © The Madina Collection of Islamic Art, Alamy ID TX0RJ9 131 Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, mns dated 1337. © Bodleian-Ms-Marsh 0458-45, fol. 45a 133 Silk trousers excavated in Egypt, dated to 1300–1400. Is.Tx0106. ImageStudio © Royal Museums of Art and History, Brussels 139 Silk trousers excavated in Egypt and fragment of a silk jacket, dated to 1200–1300. © Victoria and Albert Museum, 763.1898 and 778.1898 140 Man of the working class, detail from a Mamluk copy of Kalīla wa-Dimna, ms Bodleian-Library-MS-Pococke-400_00050_fol-24a 147

xiv 37

Figures

Groom with elephant, detail from a fresco in the courtyard of Castello Sforzesco, Milan. Commune of Milan, all rights reserved, (Photo Fabio Saporetti) 148 38 Relief with an Oriental leading a camel, Palazzo Mastelli, Venice (Photo courtesy of Daniel C. Vaughan) 148 39 Woman with musician on a camel, Medallion on a Mamluk basin, © Victoria and Albert Museum, 2734-1856 150 40 Queen, woman and maid, Kitāb al-Ḥayawān by al-Jāḥiz, 14th century. Bibliotheca Ambrosiana Ar.A.F.D.140 Inf. 069-c-29b ©Veneranda Biblioteca-Ambrosiana 151 41 Scene in a tavern, Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1334. © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna A.F.9, fol. 42a 152 42 Female Musicians, Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1337, detail from frontispiece. © Bodleian Library, Ms Marsh 458, fol. 4a 153 43 Woman in indoor dress, Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1337. © Bodleian Library, MS-Marsh-458 00132, fol. 65b 153 44 Woman in outdoor dress, Maqamāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1337. © Bodleian Library, Bodleian-Library, MS-Marsh, 458 00132 fol. 28a 156 45 Woman in outdoor dress, Kalīla wa-Dimna, dated 1354. © Bodleian-Library-MS-Pococke-400_00163_fol-80b 157 46 Woman and physician, Risālat daᶜwat al-aṭibbā’, dated 1273, Bibliotheca Ambrosiana, cat. no. LXX, fol. 24b © Giancarlo Costa/Bridgeman 158 47 Gentile and Giovanni Bellini, St. Marc preaching in Alexandria, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, late 16th century. Wikipedia 163 48 Woman on a donkey, Arnold von Harff. © Bodleian-Library-MS-Bodl-972 00150, print dated 1554, fol.74b 163 49 Women of Cairo in outdoor (left) and indoor dress, by Pierre Belon (1557) 164 50 Icon from the Church of St. Barbara in Cairo, Coptic Museum in Cairo, 3451. © Hans Hondelink 166 51 Horseman on the Blacas Ewer at the British Museum 1866,1229.61. © The Trustees of the British Museum 173 52 Detail of a bottle of enameled glass, late 13th century. © Metropolitan Museum of Art MET_DP170374 174 53 Detail of a bottle of enameled glass, late 13th century. © Metropolitan Museum of Art MET_DP170374 174 54 The ‘Baptistère de St. Louis’, detail of the exterior. © 2009 Musée du Louvre/Hughes Dubois 175 55 The ‘Baptistère de St. Louis’, detail of the exterior. © 2009 Musée du Louvre/Hughes Dubois 176

Figures 56

xv

Detail of an enameled glass bottle, 13th century, at the British Museum, no. 1869,0120.3. © The Trustees of the British Museum 177 57 Detail from ‘Baptism of the Selenites’ 1514, by Vittore Carpaccio. © Scuola di San Giorgi degli Schiavoni, Venice, Wikimedia Commons 182 58 Sculpture of an Oriental at the Campo dei Mori in Venice. Wikipedi8.Org 183 59 The ‘silk market’ at the complex of Sultan al-Ghawrī by David Roberts 1839, (Photo by Wellcome Collection Gallery. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w /index.php?curid=35996700) 200

Note to the Reader The reader will find the text replete with technical terms and foreign names of garments and textiles. In the absence of a precise interpretation of such terms, it is preferable to keep these terms as names in their original wording and interpret them whenever possible, rather than impose a translation that could be confusing and may be debatable. This will allow the reader to relate the terms to their context and to follow their evolution, which is an essential aspect of this study. Terms that cannot be explained or translated are followed by a question mark. The term ‘Mamluk’ has been used without transliteration when it refers to the period and the institution and its culture in the general sense. ‘Mamlūk’ with transliteration is used to describe specifically the military recruits under the system.

Chapter 1

Introduction: Subject, Sources, and Terminology The significance of dress and dress code in Mamluk history-writing is a remarkable phenomenon that goes even beyond the traditional ‘obsession’ with textiles in the Muslim world.1 If, as Lisa Golombek stated, ‘textiles in Islamic society fulfilled far more than the functions normally expected in other societies,’ the Mamluk approach to textiles, especially to dress, could be described as an obsession. This phenomenon is evident in the wealth of information provided by all chroniclers of the time on ceremonial outfit, dress code, and dress. As the textile historian Louise Mackie put it, ‘Mamluk society was saturated with textiles.’2 However, this book is not about Mamluk textiles. It is about political selfrepresentation and social identities under Mamluk rule as they were manifested in the clothing culture of that time. Without the material evidence of surviving garments, we are left almost completely at the mercy of the chroniclers, with all the limits and biases their views may imply, to inform us about Mamluk dress culture. This book is a response to what I perceive as a crucial message which Mamluk chroniclers were keen to convey to the world and to posterity. The meanings they associated with clothing reveal a wide scope of Mamluk urban culture spanning ceremonial as well as everyday life. As elsewhere in medieval societies, dress was meant to define various layers of identity such as gender, religion, rank, ethno-geographic origin, profession, and affiliations at the same time as individual character, thus reflecting and documenting its social environment as it evolved. ‘The wearing of an item of clothing is fundamentally an act of meaning that goes beyond modesty, ornamentation, and protection. It is an act of signification and therefore a profoundly social act right at the very heart of the dialectic of society’, wrote Roland Barthes.3

1 Lisa Golombek, ‘The Draped Universe of Islam’ in Priscilla P. Soucek, ed., Content and Context of Visual Arts in the Islamic World. Papers from a Colloquium in Memory of Richard Ettinghausen (Pennsylvania/London 1988), pp. 26–38. 2 Louise Mackie, ‘Towards an Understanding of Mamluk Silks. National and International Considerations’, Muqarnas 2 (1984), p. 127. 3 Roland Barthes, The Language of Fashion, eds. Andy Stafford and Michael Carter, trans. Andy Stafford (London 2006), pp. 90–1.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_002

2

Chapter 1

This book is based on a diachronic perspective, which aims at linking the evolution of dress culture with its historical context. This perspective will confirm the differences that cannot be overemphasized between the Bahri sultanate (1250–1390) which, since 1279, was ruled by the Qalāwūnid dynasty and the later Circassian period ushered in by the interrupted reign of Sultan Barqūq (1382–89, 1390–99). The book begins with a look at the role of religion and other traditions in shaping the basic features of dress culture in Mamluk Cairo. The chapter that follows links the peculiar Mamluk type of ruling aristocracy with the sultanate’s emerging vision of self-representation. This vision is complemented by the chroniclers’ own vision of regal representation and its vestiary aspects. A chronological review of Mamluk sultans that is focused on their attitude to clothing culture is presented in the next two chapters, dealing respectively with the earlier ‘designer’ sultans who established the Mamluk dress code and with the Circassian sultans who modified and adapted these rules to the realities of their time. The bestowal of a robe of honor, khilʿa, a symbol of the bond between the ruler and his subjects, is a subject that accompanies and punctuates all political events in the Mamluk chronicles; its narrative unfolds a panorama of Mamluk society in Cairo. It is discussed in two chapters, 6 and 7, dealing respectively with its institutional and material aspects, following the changes it underwent over the entire period. The next chapter on the Dār al-Ṭirāz in Alexandria, the only court workshop of the sultanate, which was concerned with the production of honorific textiles, connects its history to the city of Alexandria and demonstrates for the first time its significance in the history of Mamluk art. Chapters 9 and 10 document respectively the ceremonial dress code of the military and civilian elites formulated in Ibn Faḍl Allāh al-ʿUmarī’s Masālik and its practical implementation as described in the chronicles. The next chapter on the dress of urban commoners is followed by a chapter on women’s dress and the controversies the creation of fashions caused in the city. Chapter 12 shows the discrepancies and consistencies between the representations of Mamluk dress in the visual sources, artefacts, manuscripts, and Renaissance art and the historians’ accounts. Social mobility, a highly controversial subject in the chronicles, was manifested in dress behavior. The Mamluk regime, however, was creative and pragmatic in dealing with new developments as Chapter 13 demonstrates. The economic situation following the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad and the Black Death is usually described as obscured by a series of crises, industrial and agricultural decline, and currency devaluation. Chapter 14 argues that these

Introduction: Subject, Sources, and Terminology

3

are not directly reflected in the modes of consumption and lifestyle, especially regarding the court and the upper classes. Rather, it seems that economic crises increase the significance of clothes and textiles as assets to be treasured and hoarded. Owing to accidental material loss, the art of clothing has been invisible in the history of Mamluk art and material culture as it is conveyed in modern studies and through the showcases of museums and exhibitions. This book calls on the testimony of the Mamluk historians to fill this gap, emphasizing the significance of clothing as a collective as well as individual symbol of identity and as a major artistic and esthetic expression of its time. 1

Studies

Numerous studies have been dedicated in recent years to pre-modern dress culture in general social and ceremonial contexts, including in the Muslim world and with reference to the Mamluk period. Nevertheless, only a few studies have focused on the Mamluk period. Leo A. Mayer’s seminal book, Mamluk Costume, published seven decades ago is so far the only monograph dedicated specifically to Mamluk dress and has been of great use to my research. However, its synchronic perspective leaves questions open to a new diachronic approach. Aḥmad ʿAbd ar-Rāziq’s book on Mamluk women includes a chapter on dress and a glossary of related terms, and Albrecht Fuess’s dedicates an article to late Mamluk turban fashion.4 Albert Arazi’s lexicographic study based on al-Suyūṭī’s treatise on the ṭaylasān is a significant documentation of the clerics’ vestiary code in Mamluk academic circles.5 4 Aḥmad ʿAbd ar-Rāziq, La Femme au Temps des Mamlouks en Égypte, Cairo 1973; Albrecht Fuess, ‘Sultans with Horns. The Political Significance of Headgear in the Mamluk Empire’, Mamluk Studies Review XII/2 (2008), pp. 71–94; Patricia Lesley Baker’s unpublished Ph.D. thesis, A History of Islamic Court Dress in the Middle East, Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Faculty of Arts), 1986, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. ProQuest Number: 11010439, deals with terminology and includes a pertinent chapter on the Mamluk period based on secondary sources. 5 Albert Arazi, ‘Noms de vêtements et vêtements d’après al-Aḥādīth al-ḥisān fī faḍl al-ṭaylasān d’al-Suyūṭī’, Arabica 23/2 (1976), pp. 110–51; Judith Kindinger, ‘Bidʿa or sunna. The ṭaylasān as Contested Garment in the Mamlūk Period (Discussions between al-Suyūṭi and Others)’, in Antonella Ghersetti, ed., Al-Suyūṭī, a Polymath of the Mamlūk Period, (Leiden/London 2016), pp. 64–80, is based on Arazi’s article.

4

Chapter 1

Stewart Gordon’s edited book6 on robes of honor in the Middle Ages points to the universal significance of this institution and thus contributes to putting the Mamluk case in perspective. Monika Springberg-Hinsen’s monograph deals with the khilʿa across regions and periods of the Muslim world7 and Werner Diem’s monograph8 concentrates on the khilʿa as a component of the investiture procedure in the pre-Mamluk and Mamluk periods. Both studies explore the political and institutional context of investiture and its ceremonial aspect. Eiren Shea’s enlightening book on Mongol Court Dress9 adopts a panoramic perspective covering global-commercial, artistic, ceremonial, and cultural aspects of clothing in the Yuan Empire. This perspective has indirectly provided me with interesting comparative material to emphasize the peculiarities of the Mamluk sultanate in this matter. Studies on textiles have greatly expanded in recent years to reveal the technological and artistic interactions activated by the global commercial network. Mamluk trade history, amply documented in Italian archives, is a significant source for the study of Mamluk material culture, as the classic studies of Wilhelm Heyd and Eliahu Ashtor and, more recently, publications on Mediterranean trade history and its interaction with the Muslim world, including Jacobi and Marco Spallanzani on textiles, and Benjamin Arbel and Georg Christ on the Venetian connection with the sultanate, have reiterated. Nonetheless, these archives have not yet been exploited in research focused on Mamluk textiles. Recent studies based on textile fragments in museum collections and secondary sources have been mainly concerned with stylistic and technical categorization and comparisons.10 Louise Mackie’s article on Mamluk silk and Esin Atıl’s catalogue on Mamluk art, both published more 6 7 8 9 10

Stewart Gordon, ‘A World of Investiture’, in Gordon Stewart, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture (The New Middle Ages) (New York 2001) pp. 1–19. Monika Springberg-Hinsen, Die Ḫilʿa. Studien zur Geschichte des geschenkten Gewandes im islamischen Kulturkreis, (Mitteilungen zur Sozial- und Kulturgeschichte der islamischen Welt 7) (Würzburg 2000). Werner Diem, Ehrendes Kleid und ehrendes Wort, Studien zu Tašrīf in Mamlūkischer und Vormamlūkischer Zeit, (Würzburg 2002). Eiren L. Shea, Mongol Court Dress, Identity Formation, and Global Exchange (New York/ London 2020). Bethany Walker, ‘Rethinking Mamluk Textiles’, Mamluk Studies Review 4 (2000), pp. 167– 215; Shireen El Kassem, ‘Foreign Aesthetics and their Impact on Mamluk Textiles’ in Bethany Walker and Abdelkader Al-Ghouz, eds., History and Society during the Mamluk Period (1250–1517) (Studies of the Anne-Marie Schimmel Institute for Advanced Study III) (Bonn 2021) pp. 257–84; Maria Sardi, ‘Foreign Influences on Mamluk Textiles. The Formation of a New Aesthetic’, in Nikolaos Vryzidis, ed., The Hidden Life of Textiles in the medieval and Early Modern Mediterranean (Turnhout 2020), pp. 83–118.

Introduction: Subject, Sources, and Terminology

5

than four decades ago, continue to be useful references. What Esin Atıl wrote then that, ‘the history and development of Mamluk textiles have not yet been properly studied’, is still valid.11 2

Material Evidence

It is an unfortunate fact that not a single complete outfit or garment survives from the period to convey a tangible enough image of Mamluk ceremonial or even ordinary dress to match the chroniclers’ accounts.12 The fact that textiles were not merely for clothing but fulfilled many other functions in furnishing, horse-trappings, and ceremonial paraphernalia, makes it difficult to identify the surviving textile fragments with the rich variety of garments and clothing items mentioned in the chronicles. Most importantly, owing to the importation of fabrics from India and Europe that took place on a large scale for both common and upmarket use, the testimony of fabrics alone, whether made in Egypt or Syria, remains limited. For the same reason, textiles in European collections and European sacerdotal vestments made of Mamluk fabrics cannot reveal much about dress culture in medieval Cairo. The evidence of fragmentary fabrics alone has limited relevance to the scope of this book, which is focused on dress code and the wider meaning of clothing in a specific period in the Egyptian capital. However, the images of Mamluk silk fragments that I have included in this book should convey a sense of the textile esthetics of the period. 3

Archival Sources

No archival sources of the kind available to scholars of Ottoman history and culture are available to Mamluk historians. However, Italian archives have provided a wealth of material on commercial interactions between the Mamluks and Italian cities. The exceptional Ḥaram documents in Jerusalem that contain estate inventories provide some unique information about the clothing of ordinary people and about the socio-economic significance of clothing and textiles in that region in the late 14th century, as Huda Lutfi’s studies on Jerusalem have

11 12

Esin Atıl, Renaissance of Islam. Art of the Mamluks (Washington, D.C. 1981), p. 223. See Mackie, ‘Towards and Understanding’; Atıl, Renaissance, pp. 223–5, 229–41; L.A. Mayer, Mamluk Costume (Geneva 1952), pp. X–XI.

6

Chapter 1

revealed.13 However useful it is, this source cannot fully mirror the situation in the capital. Waqf deeds do not provide information relevant to our subject. The Geniza documents are an important source about clothes in the Fatimid and Ayyubid periods but less so for the Mamluk period.14 4

Narrative Sources

All major Mamluk narrative sources report extensively about dress and dress code in courtly and official circles. It is a phenomenon in Mamluk historiography in general and not specific to individual historians. ʿUmarī’s Masālik, partly repeated in Qalqashandī’s Ṣubḥ, both compiled in the context of chancery, is our major source on the Mamluk dress code in its early and formative phase. Among the historians, only Maqrīzī in his description of Cairo’s markets gives a glimpse of customers’ attitudes in matters of dress and fashion. Ḥisba literature or manuals for market inspectors and related literature dealing with market regulations are already well known and frequently cited for the information they provide about religious and ethical precepts involving clothes and textiles and about commercial practices. An interesting source on the meaning of textiles and clothes in Mamluk society is the text compiled by the Mamluk emir and scholar Khalīl al-Ẓāhirī on the interpretation of dreams. Although the subject is based on religious traditions, Ẓāhirī’s book stands out for the extensive and detailed information it provides about the symbolism of textiles and clothes. The 14th-century Mamluk text of the 1001 Nights reveals information on the clothes of urban commoners that cannot be found elsewhere. 5

Visual Sources

Unlike other Islamic rulers, the Mamluk sultans did not patronize the art of the illustrated book, with the result that pictorial material on clothing from this 13 See Donald P. Little, ‘The Ḥaram Documents as Sources for the Arts and Architecture of the Mamluk Period’, Muqarnas 2 (1984), pp. 61–72; Huda Lutfi, Al-Quds al-Mamlūkiyya. A history of Mamlūk Jerusalem based on the Ḥaram documents (Berlin 1985); idem, ‘A Documentary Source for the Study of Material Life. A Specimen of the Ḥaram Estate Inventories from al-Quds in 1393 A.D.’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 135/1(1985), pp. 213–26. 14 Yedida K. Stillman, ‘The Importance of the Cairo Geniza Manuscripts for the History of Medieval Female Attire’, International Journal of Middle East Studies vol. 7, no. 4 (1976), pp. 579–89.

Introduction: Subject, Sources, and Terminology

7

period is limited. Figural representations on artefacts of metal and enameled glass fill some gaps in the Bahri period but they are no longer available for the 15th century. Observations made by European travelers of late medieval Cairo and ‘Orientalism’ in Italian Renaissance paintings of the late 15th and early 16th centuries add impressionistic touches to the chroniclers’ accounts. 6

Terminology

Names of textiles are often of diverse origin, reflecting the wide commercial network of the medieval Muslim world; however, they are rarely self-explanatory. Arabic dictionaries are not very helpful when it comes to specifying time and space, though Dozy’s Dictionnaire des Vêtements, even after 180 years, is still valuable because of its extensive use of primary sources, many of which are Mamluk, and his Supplément aux Dictionnaires Arabes fills many gaps. Arazi’s more specialized study ‘Noms de vêtements’ points to mistakes in some of Dozy’s interpretations. Despite its age and focus on the earlier period, Serjeant’s book on Islamic textiles is useful for referring to textual sources and for his interpretation of some technical terms.15 Terms describing clothes should not be interpreted universally; rather their meanings vary largely between regions and periods. Old inherited terms can refer to contemporary types of clothes that look very different from their predecessors. Already the long lexicographic discourse in al-Suyūṭī’s treatise on the ṭaylasān, studied by Arazi, attests to the problem Mamluk scholars faced when they tried to define the features of a garment mentioned in the Prophet’s tradition, a term may continue to refer to an item that has substantially changed over time, and conversely, various terms across time and space may have been used to describe the same type of item. Within a period of more than two and a half centuries of Mamluk history, terms evolved as well as the objects they designated, not always equally or simultaneously. Most terms used for garments and their fabrics in the 14th century, such as the ‘qabāʾ tatarī’ and the ‘bughluṭāq’, were no longer in use in the 15th century. The ‘malūṭa’ in the 14th century designated a plain garment worn by commoners; however, in the later period, it was worn by emirs and the sultan himself, changing a commoner’s garment to a common style of garment. Conversely, some textiles, like the block-printed cotton imported from India, amply represented in museum collections,16 are not documented in 15 R.B. Serjeant, Islamic textiles. Material for a history up to the Mongol conquest (Beirut 1972). 16 See Ruth Barnes, Indian Block-Printed Textiles in Egypt. The Newberry Collection in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 2 vols. (Oxford 1997).

8

Chapter 1

the chronicles, which merely refer to ‘Indian cotton’, so that their use remains unknown. The historian Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī in the 14th century describes costumes in different terms than those used a century later by Maqrīzī or Ibn Taghrībirdī in their account of the same event, and his contemporary Nuwayrī also uses a different vocabulary. The term ‘kūfiyya’ describes two different types of head cover, a bonnet worn by Mamlūks and a kind of scarf. While the Egyptian chroniclers of the 15th century use the term ‘kāmiliyya’ for a certain type of robe of honor lined with sable, this term is not used by the contemporary Syrian chronicler Ibn Ṭūlūn when he refers to the same thing. When Ṣayrafī uses the unusual term ‘janda’ (pl. jandāt) once to describe a robe of honor with sable or squirrel we may assume that he is referring to a kāmiliyya.17 Sometimes the name of a garment was abbreviated to describe only its fabric, like the ‘aṭlasayn’ instead of ‘qabāʾ aṭlasayn’, ‘fawqānī’, ‘khanjī’, and ‘shāsh.’ The nuanced meaning and evolution of the term ‘qumāsh’ for textile reveals the increasing significance of textiles as assets. Only an analysis of a term’s context in time and space, like Mayer and Dozy did, and as I have also attempted to do in this book, can help identify the item behind the word. Although the headdress of the Mamluk class resembled a turban, both being composed of a cap wrapped with fabric, the chroniclers never refer to it by the term ‘ʿimāma’, which is the term reserved for the turban of the religious establishment and other civilians described as ‘muʿammamūn’. Nevertheless, modern historians describe it indiscriminately as a turban. This is perhaps the best example for demonstrating the complexity of terminology. 17

ʿAlī ibn Dāwūd al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr bi-abnāʾ al-ʿaṣr, ed. Ḥasan al-Ḥabashī (Cairo 1970), pp. 264, 324.

Chapter 2

Religion, Traditions, and Customs 1

Religion

Despite regional and cultural peculiarities, dress in all Muslim societies was, and still is, guided by religious rules and mainly by the Prophet’s tradition. Modesty is strictly required for men and women, i.e., to cover most parts of the body in public, and according to some interpretations this includes women’s faces as well. The Prophet’s dress is described as simple and is thus a model for Muslims. It consisted of a shirt (qamīṣ) and drawers, above which either a jubba or a qabāʾ open in the front with buttons and sometimes also a burda, or woolen wrap, around the shoulders would be worn. His turban was white or black with its tip hanging on the back.1 According to some accounts, he also wore a kind of shawl or veil called ṭaylasān or tarḥa that could be wrapped around the chin or hanging on the shoulders. Although Hadith texts mention the ṭaylasān as part of the Prophet’s habitual dress, it was also known as a garment Jews commonly wore. For this reason, scholars of the four Sunni schools of religious law held an academic debate (documented by al-Suyūṭī) to distinguish between the non-canonical ṭaylasān of the Jews and the one worn by the Prophet which served as model for the emblematic shawl the Abbasid caliphs and Shāfiʿī jurists wore.2 (fig. 1) Qamīṣ and sirwāl were everybody’s basic dress garments as was also the case in the Mamluk period. The term ‘qamīṣ’ is the only specific item of clothing mentioned in the Qurʾan (12:18). The Prophet’s model is also a reference for the final dress. His shroud consisted of three items: drawers, a combination of a mantle (ridāʾ)3 and a wrap (izār),4 with no mention of shirt or turban. A shirt and a turban may be added; however, the number of items for a shroud should not exceed five and not include silk. Women’s shrouds at the time of the Prophet consisted of five items: a shirt, a head-cover (khimār), and a pair of white wraps. Although

1 R.P.A. Dozy, Dictionnaire détaillé des noms des vêtements chez les Arabes (Amsterdam 1845), pp. 7, 107–9. 2 Kindinger, ‘Bidʿa or sunna’; Arazi, ‘Noms de vêtements’. 3 See Arazi, ‘Noms de vêtements,’ pp. 117–24. 4 Dozy, Dictionnaire pp. 24–38.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_003

10

Figure 1

Chapter 2

Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, manuscript, dated 1334, showing a judge to the left © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, A.F.9., fol.30b

women, unlike men, are allowed to wear silk, their shrouds should not include silk. A minimal shroud is a robe (thawb) covering the entire body.5 Following a Hadith stating that, whoever wears silk will not wear it in the afterlife, Orthodox opinion, shared by all four schools of Sunni law, forbids men to wear silk clothes. In the Qurʾanic description of Paradise, the believers will be wearing silk.6 These guidelines were issued by the ḥisba, an institution that regulated public order and market practices represented by the market inspector, the muḥtasib. Although it is generally attributed to the religious disciplines, it combined religious law with secular rules of government (siyāsa). 5 Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad al-Qurashī Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Kitāb maʿālim al-qurba fī aḥkām al-ḥisba (Cairo 1976), p. 103. 6 Dozy, Dictionnaire, p. 6.

Religion, Traditions, and Customs

11

Besides the required modesty, simplicity was an ideal of Muslim ethics, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn, an epitome of Muslim heroism and modesty, is reported to have worn only linen, cotton, and wool, implying that he rejected silk.7 To be content with cotton clothes if one could afford more was an expression of humility, as in the case of the emir Aydughdī al-ʿAzīzī (d. 1265), an epitome of virtue and modesty, who would not wear any fabric but Indian and Baʿalbakī cotton.8 However, in the practice of government and in urban society this ideal was mostly disregarded. Silk occupied a major place in Mamluk society and was a major trade item owing to its use in ceremonial apparel. However, some sultans and emirs abstained from wearing it and many dignitaries of the religious and judicial establishments rejected it. A judge is even mentioned as having refused to sit on furnishings made of silk.9 Ibn al-Ḥājj (d. 1331), a religious scholar of the Mālikī law school and author of al-Madkhal, a manual of Muslim ethics that covers issues dealt with in ḥisba manuals, dedicates a long chapter to clothing.10 Referring at length to Hadith texts and to hagiographic narratives, he preaches modesty and condemns ostentation in the strongest terms. Nonetheless, citing Qurʾan: 7:31, he recommends that a Muslim should be well dressed when visiting the mosque, to which he adds the occasions of the two major religious feasts.11 Ibn al-Ḥājj discusses the turban extensively. He compares the Persian with the Arab turban, stating that, the latter is the Islamic one, whereas the Persian turban, which has no opening (ḥanak),12 belongs to the ‘turbans of the devil’. The Arab and Islamic turban has an open end with a visible tail or tip, dhuwwāba, hanging either on the chest or on the back. However, not all theologians are of the same opinion regarding this matter. The Mālikī school, to which Ibn al-Ḥājj adhered, was represented in Lower Egypt and partly in the south, whereas the predominant rite among the Egyptian population was Shāfiʿism, while Ḥanafism was favored by the Mamluk rulers. Ibn al-Ḥājj’s critiques and condemnations also reveal some of the fashions and transgressions of his time, which was the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad. 7

Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab, eds. Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Hādī Shaʿīra et al (Cairo 1992–1998), XXXIII, p. 438. 8 Abū l-Maḥāsin Yūsuf ibn Taghrībirdī, al-Manhal al-ṣāfī wa-l-mustawfī baʿd al-wāfī, ed. Muḥammad Muḥammad Amīn (Cairo 1984), III, p. 160. 9 Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad al-Maqrīzī, Kitāb al-sulūk li-maʿrifat duwal al-mulūk, eds. M. Ziyāda and S. ʿĀshshūr (Cairo 1934–73), II, p. 612. 10 Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-ʿAbdarī al-Mālikī al-Fāsī Ibn al-Ḥājj, al-Madkhal, Cairo 1981, I, pp. 130–56; André Raymond and Gaston Wiet, Les Marchés du Caire. Traduction annotée du texte de Maqrīzī (Cairo 1979), pp. 78–80. 11 Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, IV, p. 26. 12 It is not clear what the ‘mouth of the turban’ describes.

12

Chapter 2

Among the signs of extravagance, also mentioned in the chronicles, were the long female garments dragging on the floor and their over-wide sleeves.13 His list of restrictions regarding women is long.14 On several occasions, Ibn al-Ḥājj condemns the use of silk for men. However, he does not go as far as the Syrian Shāfiʿī scholar Najm al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Zarʿī, who condemned even fur, which was widely used in the Mamluk period.15 According to Ibn al-Ḥājj, men should take care that their drawers, when made of thin transparent fabric, do not reveal their private parts.16 Scholars should preferably dress like ordinary people rather than be distinguished by special garb.17 Their ṭaylasān, a kind of shawl or cape worn over the head and falling over the shoulders or wrapped around the neck, should not be made of pure silk, and it should not be rolled up to reveal the embroidery on the sleeves. He further criticizes the men who ‘strangle’ themselves with the ṭaylasān, which compels them to rotate their heads to both sides to be able to speak to others, making them move like women speaking behind their veils, thereby contravening the Prophet’s prohibition against men and women looking alike.18 For the same reason men should not use pins, as women do to fix their veil to their headdress, to attach their ṭaylasān to their turbans.19 Tailors should refrain from making extravagant clothes for scholars, such as garments with sleeves that are too long or too wide, or sell silk garments to men.20 Ibn al-Ḥājj’s criticism did not spare the Sufis who wore the expensive kind of headdress called ‘jumjum’21 and extravagant frocks, called ‘muraqqaʿa’, made of colored luxury textiles.22 Muraqqaʿa is the term commonly used in Mamluk texts for the woolen patchwork garment the Sufis wore. While the muraqqaʿa describes the physical garment, the term ‘khirqa’, also referring to the Sufi frock, is used in the symbolic sense of the induction into a Sufi order or the path of a shaykh. Ḥisba manuals of the Ayyubid al-Shayzarī (d. 1193) and the Mamluk Ibn al-Ukhuwwa (d. 1329), which are almost identical, dictate which materials should be used or banned in the production of textiles. They recommend that 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, III, p. 193. See Chapter 10. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, pp. 420–1. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, p. 146. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, p. 139. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, pp. 139–40. On the ṭaylasān, see Chapter 7. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, p. 145, IV, pp. 21, 24. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, IV, pp. 24–5. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, IV, pp. 23–4; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 189–90.

Religion, Traditions, and Customs

13

clients inscribe their names on their clothes before delivering them to be dyed to prevent the dyers from renting them out to third parties.23 The practice of renting out their customers’ clothes seems to have been common also among menders, indicating that there must have been a market for renting clothes. Tailors should use fine needles and weigh the silk fabrics delivered to them before sewing. They should sew small rather than broad stitches,24 cut collar openings carefully, and keep hems straight. Dealers should not starch silk fabrics or treat them with fat to increase their weight25 or cheat their customers by using fabrics made of processed rags, or mixing old with new cotton or the superior Egyptian linen from Giza with linen from Nablus.26 Dealers were also forbidden to label their goods with a false provenance or attribute them to a different workshop to increase their value, which points to the practice of brand imitations.27 Among the duties of the market inspector was the enforcement of the so-called ʿUmar regulations, applied throughout the entire Muslim world. Among other things, it dictated that non-Muslims should be recognizable by their dress28 and that they were not allowed to ride horses or carry arms. The turbans of Christians and Jews were recognizable by their color, blue and yellow respectively, which also applied to their women’s headdress. As Mayer pointed out, on the basis of multiple travelers’ observations, apart from the zunnār, a belt worn by Christians, color was the main feature in the commoners’ dress that distinguished between Muslims and others.29 It regularly happened that the regulations had to be reinforced, which implies that they tended to be neglected.30 Those among the religious minorities who occupied high administrative positions were often accused of arrogance, particularly when the size of their turbans was inflated, provoking the authorities, as happened in 1353, to regulate the length of the turban gauze to a maximum of ten cubits. Later, these regulations were further revised, restricting the length of the gauze to seven cubits. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Naṣr al-Shayzarī, Nihāyat al-rutba fī ṭalab al-ḥisba, ed. al-Sayyid al-Bāz al-ʿArīnī (Cairo 1946), p. 72; Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Maʿālim, p. 224. Shayzarī, Nihāyat al-rutba, p. 67; Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Maʿālim, p. 219. Shayzarī, Nihāyat al-rutba, p. 71; Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Maʿālim, p. 223. Shayzarī, Nihāyat al-rutba, pp. 69–70; Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Maʿālim, p. 226. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, IV, p. 29. Mayer, Costume, pp. 65–7. Arnold Von Harff, The Pilgrimage of Arnold von Harf, ed. and trans. Malcolm Letts (London 1946), p. 113. Maqrīzī, Sulūk IV, pp. 486, 495; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Abū l-Muḥāsin Yūsuf, al-Nujūm al-zāhira fī mulūk miṣr wa-l-qāhira (Cairo 1963–71), XV, p. 407, XVI, pp. 281–2.

14

Chapter 2

Particularly in periods of crisis such as plague, famine, and other disasters, fear of God and divine punishment prompted the authorities to reinforce religious commandments including the ʿUmar regulations. Maqrīzī expresses how irritating it was in 1348, during the Black Death, to see Christians strutting with their fine gowns worth 300 dirhams apiece, their servants wrapping their heads with fabrics worth 80 dirhams, their slaves riding mules, the grand mansions where they resided, surrounded by beautiful Turkish slave-girls, and most of all to witness their control over the sultan’s administration and their arrogant behavior.31 Sometimes sultans and emirs interfered directly with edicts regarding dress code and issues of morals and modesty.32 When in 1419 Sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh learned that the Ethiopians were ill-treating their Muslim population, he renewed the dress restrictions for Christians in the sultanate.33 Nevertheless, religious zeal in times of duress was not confined to the NonMuslims, it addressed Muslims as well, notably women. The harsh measures taken against women by the emir Manjak during the reign of Sultan Ḥasan should be seen in connection with the Black Death that was raging at the time. 2

Sufism

Clothes could acquire a sacral and talismanic meaning when associated with a holy person. Following the death of a certain venerated ascetic Sufi shaykh who used to dress humbly, his disciples competed to acquire the clothes he was wearing, bidding the highest possible price. The sum paid for his clothes is reported to have amounted exactly to the stipend he had received during his entire tenure at the monastery of the emir Shaykhū.34 For the funeral of Sultan Khushqadam, a Sufi robe (muraqqaʿa) was laid on his coffin in acknowledgement of his affinity with Sufis.35 The coffin of his wife who was a Sufi had likewise a ‘khirqa muraqqaʿa’ instead of the brocaded bed-curtain traditionally dedicated to princesses.36

31 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 810–1, 921–2. 32 Aḥmad Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr fī waqāʾiʿ al-duhūr, ed. M. Muṣṭafā (Wiesbaden/Cairo 1961–75), I/2, pp. 448–9. 33 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XIV, pp. 81, 823. 34 Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ghumr bi-anbāʾ al-ʿumr (Beirut 1986), VIII, p. 123. 35 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 307. 36 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 346.

Religion, Traditions, and Customs

15

The symbolism of clothes in Mamluk culture found an extraordinary spiritual expression in the Mantle Ode, al-Burda. It was composed by al-Būṣīrī (d. 1295),37 an Egyptian poet of Moroccan Berber origin, who worked as a copyist and clerk in various administrations in the lower Egyptian province. His poem, already famous in its time, is of the madīḥ genre, in praise of the Prophet. Būṣīrī himself said that he composed it out of gratitude for his recovery from partial paralysis after the Prophet appeared to him in a dream, covering him with his own cloak. The poem became immensely popular throughout the Muslim world. Its verses, equivalent to invocation prayers, are recited on religious occasions to solicit blessing and healing and are inscribed on amulets to protect against disease. The burda in this poem is a universal symbol of blessing and divine protection. 3

Dreams

Besides Hadith, various popular traditions contributed to defining features and preferences in dress culture, such as the symbolism of colors. The symbolism of colors is mentioned in the literature dealing with the interpretation of dreams, which is based on religion and other traditions and deals with all kinds of things pertaining to material culture. Although the same interpretations continued to be transmitted by different authors over the centuries, the Mamluk emir and historian Khalīl al-Ẓāhirī (d. 1468) composed his own book, Ishārāt, on this subject. More than the classic book attributed to Ibn Sīrīn (d. 720), and the later text of ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī (d. 1731),38 Ẓāhirī’s includes a large section on textiles and clothes, which demonstrates the outstanding significance of this subject in Mamluk culture. The picture he conveys is complex. Clothes in general tend to have auspicious meanings such as security, livelihood, prosperity, and glory.39 In contrast, nakedness and the exposure of the body are bad omens and predict disaster, destitution, and shame.40 However, the meaning of garments and textiles in dreams varies according 37 Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Aybak al-Ṣafadī, al-Wāfī bi-l-wafayāt, Deutschen Morgenländische Gesellschaft (Beirut 1991–2004), III, pp. 105–13. 38 See ʿAbd al-Ghanī al-Nābulusī, Taʿṭīr al-anām fī taʿbīr al-manām, and in the margin, Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn, Muntakhab al-kalām fī tafsīr al-aḥlām, 2 vols., ed. Ṭaha ʿAbd al-Ra‌ʾūf Saʿd (Damascus n.d.). 39 Ghars al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Shāhīn al-Ẓāhirī, al-Ishārāt fī ʿilm al-ʿibārāt, ed. Sayyid K. Ḥasan (Beirut 1993), p. 385. 40 Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, p. 391.

16

Chapter 2

to their context in the dream and depending on their colors and materials.41 Types of garments are interpreted individually. The farajiyya in a dream foretells satisfaction and pleasure unless it is yellow, which predicts illness.42 The qabāʾ is auspicious if it is green or white; if yellow, it predicts illness, and if blue, it bodes disaster. Green is generally auspicious and the emblematic color of the descendants of the Prophet. White is auspicious, while red has various meanings ranging from symbolizing power to frivolity. An old qabāʾ foretells sorrow, a new one success and happiness, a silk one promises honor and prestige. The jubba symbolizes a woman, and its interpretation depends on the circumstances of its occurrence in the dream.43 Embroidery and embroidered clothes have negative associations.44 The meaning of silk in dreams depends on its color and use. It can be auspicious, being mentioned in the Qurʾan in connection with Paradise, especially if it is white or green; red silk is not auspicious, and black silk is a bad omen. Red clothes have a variety of mostly auspicious meanings.45 White clothes in a dream promise relief from sorrow, and blue clothes signify that the dreamer lacks virtue.46 Cotton has positive meanings such as protection and dignity, and white linen is more auspicious than yellow linen.47 The author also dedicates a section of his book to the various types of fur.48 Although they may have influenced some pious or orthodox individuals, nothing suggests that these interpretations had a decisive relevance to Mamluk social life. The emblematic color of the Abbasid Caliphate was black despite the negative associations of this color. Despite orthodox opinion, red silk satin was throughout the Bahri period used for the ceremonial garments of the ruling aristocracy. Yellow had traditionally negative associations and was the color imposed on the Jews for their turbans, and Subkī admonishes men not to wear fabrics dyed with saffron or safflower (muzaʿfar and muʿaṣfar).49 Even so, yellow was the Mamluk emblematic color displayed on their silk banners and other insignia. Although the sultans forcefully advocated orthodoxy, in the material culture of self-representation and manifestation of power, 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, pp. 384–5. Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, p. 381. Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, p. 381. Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, pp. 389, 560. Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, p. 387. Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, p. 387. Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, p. 561. Ẓāhirī, Ishārāt, pp. 390–1. ʿAbd al-Wahhāb Tāj al-dīn al-Subkī, Muʿīd al-niʿam wa-mubīḍ al-niqam, eds. Muḥammad al-Najjār, et al (Cairo 1948), p. 136; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 6–7.

Religion, Traditions, and Customs

17

political criteria prevailed over others. The ruling class wore red and yellow silk robes woven with gold, although red, silk, and gold are not orthodox. The chief judge and head of the chancery who read the investiture document of Sultan Baybars in the name of the Abbasid caliph, wore on that occasion a gown of yellow silk.50 Although green was generally auspicious and associated with the Prophet, in ceremonial practice it was used for the lowest category of robes. The actual value of textiles did not necessarily coincide with popular traditions or religious associations. Except for some puritans, it can be assumed that’ Mamluk officials and ordinary people wore all colors. 4

Urban Customs

Textiles and clothes were intimately connected to urban life and popular culture. In medieval Cairo it was customary on special occasions when the sultan or an important dignitary rode in the city, to spread silk and brocade fabrics under the hooves of his horse and allow people to collect them after he had passed. Clothes and textiles were symbols of victory; in 1471 when the emir Yashbak min Mahdī returned from the battle against the Dhū l-Qadr ruler Shāh Siwār, the streets and shops of Cairo were decorated with lights as well as bed-curtains and sumptuous clothes of silk, kamkha,51 velvet, and nakhkh.52 Nakhkh was a superior quality of silk brocade.53 The following episode reported by Maqrīzī shows how garments could communicate a popular experience. When in the late 1360s two great columns were found buried under the former Fatimid palace in the center of Cairo, Sultan Shaʿbān ordered their transfer to the building site of his madrasa near the Citadel. It was a difficult undertaking that required the expertise of the sultan’s master of the navy to drag the columns with his hoisting equipment across the city to their destination. A cheering crowd with drums and trumpets accompanied the columns, songs and poems were composed. Textiles contributed 50 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 453. 51 According to Serjeant, kamkha is a kind of silk, perhaps Chinese and introduced by the Mongols. Islamic Textiles, pp. 31, 69, 218, 248; He cites Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, who wrote that it was produced in Baghdad, Tabriz, Nishapur, and China. Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, Riḥla, ed. ʿAlī al-Muntaṣar al-Kittānī (Beirut 1986), I, p. 334. ‘Kamkha’ was known in Europe as ‘camaca’, a rich silk fabric. 52 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 319. 53 Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd al-ʿAynī, al-Sulṭān Barqūq muʾasis dawlat al-mamālīk al-sharākisa min khilāl makhṭūṭ ʿIqd al-Jumān fī tārīkh ahl-al-zamān, li-Badr al-ʿAynī, ed. Imān ʿUmar Shukrī (Cairo 2002), p. 488; R.P.A. Dozy, Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes, 2 vols. (Paris 1881); Serjeant, Islamic Textiles, al-Din p. 31.

18

Chapter 2

to celebrate the occasion with embroidered kerchiefs and an Alexandrian silk fabric designed for women that in commemoration of the event, was labelled ‘hoist of the column’ ( jarr al-ʿamūd).54 Another fabric was labelled to caricature an episode reported tongue-incheek by Ibn Ṭūlūn among the events of 1481 in Damascus. After declaring his disbelief in the veracity of the scandalous rumor (ishāʿa fāḥisha) he was about to reveal about the intimate relationship between two chief judges, hoping however that it might not be true, and cursing the one who might have falsely spread it, and after proclaiming that ‘there is no power nor strength unless from God,’ Ibn Tūlūn succinctly informs the reader that people have commemorated this affair by naming a garment ‘judge over judge.’55 Little is reported about carnivals or masquerades under the Mamluks. Unlike the Fatimids, who officially celebrated the Coptic feasts, which had a carnival character, the Mamluks did not tolerate such celebrations in public or at least after 1385, when Sultan Barqūq terminated the Coptic New Year celebration known as nawrūz, with the argument that it attracted masses of riff-raff mixing and drinking, indulging in promiscuity, and disturbing public order and access to the markets with their games of spraying water and wine and throwing eggs at each other. The main attraction of that event was the appearance of ‘the emir of nawrūz’ riding naked on a donkey with a straw ṭarṭūr on his head, knocking at people’s doors to collect donations. The sultan sent his men to arrest, beat, and cut the hands of wrongdoers.56 Years later Barsbāy prohibited the games but nothing more is reported of the emir of the nawrūz.57 However, despite criticism from the religious authorities, the yearly Nile festival could not be prevented and it continued to be celebrated in the Ottoman period and even under the occupation by Napoleon’s troops. In terms of masquerade, the chroniclers mention only the lancer parades that used to take place during the Maḥmal festival that celebrated the departure of the pilgrimage caravan. Mamluk horsemen in funny red costumes and masked as ‘devils’ (ʿafārīt), with bells and other instruments attached to their horses, performed equestrian spectacles to entertain the masses. Because of 54 Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad al-Maqrīzī, Kitāb al-mawāʿiẓ wa-l-iʿtibār bi-dhikr al-khiṭaṭ wa-l-āthār, ed. Ayman Fūʾād Sayyid (London, 2002–3), II, p. 344; idem, Sulūk, III, pp. 251–2. 55 Muḥammad Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākahat al-khillān fī ḥawādith al-zamān, ed. Muḥammad Muṣṭafā (Cairo 1962), I, p. 39. 56 This episode is only briefly mentioned in M. Mostafa’s edition of Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 363. However, Dozy published a longer version from a manuscript where Ibn Iyās refers to Maqrīzī as his source. Dictionnaire, pp. 270–2. Maqrīzī, Ḳhiṭaṭ, II, pp. 600–3; Boaz Shoshan, Popular Culture in Medieval Cairo (Cambridge 1993), pp. 42–9. 57 Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, VIII, p. 369.

Religion, Traditions, and Customs

19

the disturbance they caused, their performances were often cancelled by the authorities.58 As in medieval Europe, sometimes criminals had to wear a special headdress of shame, a bonnet (ṭarṭūr), while being paraded through the streets.59 In late Mamluk Damascus, the ṭarṭūr al-masākhir or ‘bonnet of mockery’ is mentioned in connection with the arrest of a slave-girl who had murdered her master; her apprehenders pulled down the cap (ṭāqiyya) she was wearing and forced the bonnet on her head before torturing her to death.60 Usually, however, disgraced men were paraded bare-headed on their way to jail.61 5

Manners and Rituals

Universal and inherited traditions regarding manners and social intercourse involved garments to express feelings and symbolize attitudes. In the 1001 Nights, tearing one’s clothes is a sign of mourning.62 It can also mean despair for various other reasons.63 In modern Egyptian colloquial speech to ‘tear one’s clothes’ is a verbal expression of shock and dismay. The uncovering of the head had many negative associations, one of which was the expression of mourning. When Sultan al-Muʾayyad Aḥmad died in 1461, his family mourned with their heads uncovered.64 Cutting one’s hair is also mentioned in Mamluk circles as an expression of mourning. Sultan Qalāwūn who was devastated by the death of his son and heir to the throne, al-Ṣāliḥ, asked his entourage not to wear mourning clothes and not to cut their hair.65 He himself expresses his grief about the loss of his favorite son in a spectacular and poignant manner. He shouted: ‘My son’, took his kalawta off his head and threw it down. When his emirs saw him bareheaded, they took off their own kalawtas and wept with him. His deputy Ṭuranṭāy then picked up the kalawta’s gauze (shāsh) from the floor and handed it to the emir Sunqur al-Ashqar who, also bare-headed, kissed the floor before the sultan 58 Shoshan, Popular Culture, p. 72; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 123; idem, Ibn Taghrībirdī, Abū l-Maḥāsin Yūsuf, Ḥawādith al-duhūr fī madā l-ayyām wa-l-shuhūr, ed. W. Popper (Berkeley 1930–42), p. 180. 59 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 42; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 172. 60 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 173. 61 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 409. 62 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla min uṣūlih al ʿarabiyya al-ūlā, ed. Muḥsin Mahdī (Leiden 1984), p. 624; ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān, 1989, p. 99; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 796. 63 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 156. 64 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 250. 65 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 744.

20

Chapter 2

and returned it to him. The sultan rejected it with the words ‘what use is kingship to me without my son?’ The other emirs kissed the floor before him and kept imploring him to put on his kalawta until he finally complied and did so. For the funeral ceremony Qalāwūn was dressed in white, following eastern custom.66 However black was the color of mourning, as is still the case today in Egypt and elsewhere.67 Grieving over the resignation of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad from the throne and his departure to al-Karak, one of his emirs took off his kalawta and threw it on the floor. His fellow emirs were shocked and one of them picked it up and placed it back on his head.68 The loss of the headdress was perceived as a shame. When during a polo game, Sultan Qāytbāy’s horse bolted, causing him to fall and lose the gauze of his headdress, the sultan stood up swiftly and climbed back on the horse. Although no harm was done, the historian writes that he fell into a grieving and melancholy mood.69 A man would take off his headdress to express shame and repentance.70 The act of pulling down someone’s headdress was meant to humiliate him, which the sultans al-Ashraf Shaʿbān, al-Ẓāhir Jaqmaq, and al-Ghawrī are reported to have inflicted on wrongdoers.71 In one case, the accused was paraded through the streets on his way to prison. In another case the sultan ordered his kāmiliyya cloak to be taken off him and his malūṭa to be unbuttoned. However, when a woman was executed, which rarely happened, as in the case of a Greek slave who killed her mistress, she was hanged covered by her coat (izār) and facemask.72 The kerchief (mandīl) is associated with several symbolic gestures. Mamluk sources refer to the mandīl al-āmān or ‘kerchief of pardon’ or mandīl al-ṣafā, usually described as white, with which the person would cover his or her head in a situation of surrender or redemption.73 In a gesture of redemption and begging for pardon, the majordomo Zayn al-Dīn Yaḥyā appeared in front of sultan Jaqmaq wearing a while malūṭa and a kerchief of pardon over his turban.74 66 Northtrup, Slave to Sultan, p. 280; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 307; Ibn Ḥabīb, Tadhkirat al-nabīh fī ayyām al-Manṣūr wa-banīh, ed. Muḥammad Muḥammad Amīn, Cairo 1976, I, p. 115. 67 Dozy, Dictionnaire, p. 19. 68 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 10. 69 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 283. 70 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 343. 71 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 409; ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1989), p. 622; Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sakhāwī, al-Tibr al-masbūk fī dhayl al-sulūk, eds. H. Muṣṭafā Kāmil and L. Ibrāhīm Muṣṭafā (Cairo 2002), II, p. 140; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 17. 72 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ ibn Khalīl, Nayl al-amal fī dhayl al-duwal, I (Beirut 2002), p. 185. 73 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 362; Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 440. 74 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith (Cairo ed.), II, p. 458 (paragraph missing in Popper’s edition).

Religion, Traditions, and Customs

21

Arrested Mamluks appeared with white mandīls wrapped around their necks and white belts.75 A sultan’s garment was imbued with his authority and glory. Al-Ẓāhir Baybars responded to the request of the Rasulid ruler of Yemen in 1267 to have one his shirts as a token of protection and peace, by sending him one of his suits of armour, along with other gifts, with the message: ‘We sent you objects of peace and war that were next to our body in the time of jihad.76 Qalāwūn responded to a similar request by sending the Rasulid ruler one of his shirts inscribed with such an oath.77 In the 15th century, sultans offered garments from their own wardrobe as a special honor to the recipient.78 Clothes belonged to a person’s character features. Biographical entries and obituaries usually mention, with praise or critique, a man’s appearance as a combination of his physical looks and his dress. They speak of ‘the beauty of looks and dress’ (ḥusn al-shakla wa-l-bazza),79 ‘dress and body’ (al-thawb wa-l-badan),80 ‘dress, mount, and appearance’ (malbasuh wa-markabuh wa-manẓaruh),81 ‘tidiness of dress and body’ (naẓīf al-thawb wa-l-badan),82 and ‘perfect character, handsome looks, fine dress, and mount’, (kāmil al-khalq, ḥasan al-ziyy, wa-l-malbas, wa-l-markab).83 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 164. Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, al-Rawḍ al-zāhir fī sīrat al-malik al-Ẓāhir, ed. ʿAbd alʿAzīz al-Khuwayṭir (Riyadh 1976), p. 290; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p, 563. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 702. see also n. 6. See Chapter 6. Sakhāwī, Tibr, III, p. 80. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 450. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 456. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 444. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXIII, p. 32.

Chapter 3

The Sultanate and Its Historians 1

The Sultans’ Perspective

The Mamluk ruling establishment interpreted their base origin, being recruited by purchase like slaves, as the quintessence of their aristocracy. Their legitimacy to rule was earned with their military achievements and their merit as orthodox Muslims rather than lineage. To be a ‘Mamlūk’ meaning ‘owned’, implied being purchased in the Kipchak steppes and later in the Caucasus, as a military recruit to defend Islam. This entitled them to the aristocracy status that could also be described as an oligarchy from which the sultans were selected. The Mamlūks’ status was distinct from that of the slaves defined as ʿabd, ʿabīd, raqīq, who were purchased in Africa and sold in the markets at prices affordable to commoners. Unlike the Mamlūks, slaves were never allowed to carry arms; they occupied a low and marginal place in society performing menial jobs. The Mamlūks were not cheap merchandise, and some went for considerable sums. They were purchased by high-ranking and wealthy merchants who were themselves affiliated with the military aristocracy.1 Although there had been a public market in Cairo for the sale of Mamlūks, Maqrīzī reports without further explanation that Sultan Barqūq ordered its closure.2 The Mamluk aristocratic status applied to the one-generation of recruits who were not allowed in principle to legate their status and perpetuate their succession through progeny but rather through the continuous purchase of new Mamlūks. Unlike the Yuan Mongols, as documented by Eiren Shea,3 the Mamluks, who did not enter the scene as conquerors, did not introduce noticeable artistic or material-cultural elements from their countries of origin. They did not represent a specific national or cultural identity but rather identified themselves with the task they were recruited for, which was the defense and consolidation of Islam through the continuity of Ayyubid-Abbasid traditions as demonstrated by al-Ẓāhir Baybars. With the elimination of the Fatimid Shīʿī caliphate of Cairo and restoration of Abbasid orthodoxy, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn intended 1 Julien Loiseau, Les Mamelouks. XIIIe–XVIe siècle. Une expérience du pouvoir dans l’Islam médiéval, (Paris 2014), pp. 58–68. 2 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, II, p. 246. 3 Shea, Mongol Court, Chapter 1.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_004

The Sultanate and Its Historians

23

to eliminate all traces of their ideology and along with it their regal protocol, which he replaced with that of his patron, the ruler of Mosul and Syria, Nūr al-Dīn al-Zankī under the supremacy of the Abbasid caliphate.4 The Mamlūks having been initially a corps in the army of the last Ayyubid sultan, al-Ṣāliḥ Najm al-Dīn (r. 1240–9), were trained in this tradition. Once the Abbasid Caliphate of Cairo was established, Qalāwūn was free to introduce his own innovations which are obvious in the unprecedented architecture of his religious-funerary complex. Despite their political and religious integration, the first-generation of Bahri Mamlūks bore Turkish or Mongol names and so did their Circassian successors. With this ‘label’ they advertised themselves as the men selected in foreign remote lands for their military virtues, which distinguished them from their subjects. The ruling class never fully mastered the Arabic language, and even in the Circassian period, continued to speak Turkish among themselves. This seems even to have been expected in aristocratic circles; Ibn Taghrībirdī criticized a majordomo for not being worthy of his position and not being able to speak Turkish.5 Amitai Reuven who has explored the possible persistence of Steppe culture among Mamlūks, concludes that apart from a sense of and pride in being ethnically distinct from their subjects, the Mamluks’ adherence to Islamic values rather prevailed in their sense of identity.6 At the same time, owing to the substantial presence of Mongols in the army and at the court, including inter-marriage,7 and the association of Turkic with Mongol culture, there was a fascination with Mongols in the Bahri period, which was also expressed in courtly literary circles of the time.8 With the diplomatic exchanges

4 Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad al-Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ al-aʿshā fī ṣināʿat al-inshā (Cairo 1914–28), IV, pp. 5, 39. 5 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 354. 6 Reuven Amitai, ‘Echoes of the Eurasian Steppe in the Daily Culture of Mamluk Military Society’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series, 26, 1/2, (2016) The Mongols and PostMongol Asia. Studies in Honour of David O. Morgan, pp. 261–70; idem, ‘Mamluks of Mongol Origin and their Role in Early Mamluk Political Life’, Mamluk Studies Review XII/1 (2008), pp. 119–37. 7 Peter Holt, ‘An-Nāṣir Muḥammad b. Qalāwun (684–741/1285–1341). His Ancestry, Kindred and Affinity’, in U. Vermeulen and D. De Smet, eds., Egypt and Syria in the Fatimid, Ayyubid and Mamluk Eras (Leuven 1995), pp. 313–24. 8 Ulrich W. Haarmann, ‘Alṭun Ḫan und Čingiz Ḫān bei den ägyptischen Mamluken’, Der Islam 51 (1974), pp. 1–36; idem, ‘“Grosser Vater Mond” und “Schwarzer Löwenjunge”. Eine mongolischkiptschakische Ursprungssage in arabischer Überlieferung,’ in Stephan Conermann and Hans Kusbergeds, eds., Die Mongolen in Asien und Europa, Frankfurt, 1997, pp. 121–37. Julien Loiseau, Les Mamelouks, pp. 183–202.

24

Chapter 3

between al-Nāṣir Muḥammad and the Ilkhanid ruler of Tabriz Abū Saʿīd,9 at a time when the Mongol Ilkhanid court of Iran was at its apogee while the Mamluk sultanate had yet to reach its own, the Mongol fascination acquired a Persian component which inspired ideas and artistic patterns in architecture and the decorative arts, though perhaps not to the extent of ‘dependence’ as described by J.M. Rogers.10 Persian influences continued to be perceived in Mamluk art in the later period.11 Rather than the Mamlūks’ origin in the Kipchak Steppe, the Mongol fascination along with other regional factors is likely to have played a role in the design of Mamluk costume as is the case with the ‘tatarī’ cloak. In the 15th century, it was the Qalāwūnid innovations that had become the normative tradition to which their successors were expected to adhere. After defeating the Mongols and the Crusaders, the sultanate enjoyed a prosperous period in the 14th century. The brilliance of the Mamluk court was designed to impress the Muslims and the world around them and to inspire awe in rivals and enemies. European travelers were unanimously impressed by Cairo, its great monuments, its thriving cosmopolitan markets, and the elegance of its people on the street. To the Muslim world, the Mamluk court was represented as the seat of the Abbasid caliphate, the guardian of the Holy Cities of Mecca and Medina, and the patron of Sunni Islam. Muslim scholars and students from the entire Muslim world joined the lavishly sponsored religious institutions under Mamluk patronage. To Christian Europe, it was the headquarters of the spice transit trade and the gate to the Christian pilgrimage sites. The Mamluk chronicles report with pride of the breadth of the sultanate’s diplomatic network, hailing the arrival of embassies loaded with magnificent gifts to honor their sultan. The reception of foreign envoys was a great occasion for the court to stage a grand spectacle in the city and at the Citadel with a special mawkib, or parade, and a lavish ceremony during which the envoys were given sumptuous robes of honor. For the reception of the embassy sent by the Ilkhanid ruler Ghazān in 1301, Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad ordered soldiers to be posted along the way from the Citadel entrance to his palace 9

See Donald P. Little, ‘Notes on Aytamiš, a Mongol Mamluk’, in Die Islamische Welt zwischen Mittelalter und Neuzeit. Festschrift für Hans Robert Roemer zum 65. Geburtstag (Beirut 1979), pp. 387–401. 10 J.M. Rogers, ‘Evidence for Mamluk-Mongol Relations’, in Colloque international sur l’histoire du Caire (1969) (Cairo 1972), p. 387. 11 Doris Behrens-Abouseif, Mamluk Perceptions of Foreign Arts’, in Doris Behrens-Abouseif, ed., The Arts of the Mamluks in Egypt and Syria Evolution and Impacts, (Mamlukische Studien) (Bonn 2012), pp. 301–18.

The Sultanate and Its Historians

25

wearing their most sumptuous outfit with the golden ṭirāz and the brocaded headdress (kalawta). The historian al-ʿAynī comments that the envoys were stunned with awe and deference by what they saw (ra‌ʾaw mā adhhalahum min al-ḥishma wa-l-hayba) and that the sultan treated them with munificence and benevolence.12 Despite intensive commercial and diplomatic relations with European powers, confrontations and threats did not end with the eviction of the Crusaders from the Holy Land in 1291; rather, they continued on a regular basis, provoking Mamluk historians’ unwavering animosity toward Europeans. Piracy in the Mediterranean, mainly by the Catalans and their allies, the Lusignan sack of Alexandria in 1365 followed by the sack of several Syrian cities, the ensuing revenge of the Mamluk conquest of Cyprus in 1426 and the failed Mamluk invasion of Rhodes in 1444, and finally, the Portuguese advances in the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean, confirmed for them that the era of the Crusades had not ended in Acre. European travelers in Mamluk territory had to reckon with people’s animosity in the streets, while the sultans were under pressure from the religious establishment and the masses to distrust their Christian population. Although they were generally not admitted inside mosques, European travelers and pilgrims who visited Cairo were given access to the Citadel and to the sultan’s court, which they often described. This hospitality was evidently intended to impress and inspire awe. As the Ottoman menace grew during the last years of the Mamluk sultanate, it was for the Ottoman envoys that Sultan al-Ghawrī intensified his zeal for ceremonial spectacles and lavish gifts of honorific robes. Like all aristocracies, that of the Mamluks was conceived to be exclusive and recognizable in its appearance to distinguish it from other elements of the population. In addition to the dress and, most importantly, the headdress, they held the exclusive privilege of bearing arms, riding horses, and using blazons as symbols of their offices.13 In the streets of Cairo it was easy to tell who the masters were. Just as the medieval European aristocracy, anxious to hold on to its social privileges, used the sumptuary laws with economic arguments to contain the excessive display of luxury and extravagance and shield the social hierarchy 12 Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd al-ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān fī tārīkh ahl-al-zamān, ed. Muḥammad Muḥammad Amīn (Cairo 1992), IV, p. 132. 13 The blazon, which is a characteristic feature of Mamluk material culture, was a prerogative of the emirs. It is, however, rarely mentioned by historians and there is not an evident or systematic rule regarding its use. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, pp. 61–2; L.A. Mayer, Saracenic Heraldry (Oxford 1933), p. 3; Michael Meinecke, Zur Mamlukischen Heraldik (Mainz/Rhein 1972), pp. 215–6; Loiseau, Les Mamelouks, pp. 146–55.

26

Chapter 3

from upstarts and parvenus,14 the single-generation Mamluk aristocracy, had at least as much motivation to create and monitor a dress code. Apparel was an effective medium for the Mamluks to introduce the newly established sultanate to their subjects and the world and to publicize their supremacy as a military elite. Advertising status and hierarchy were a matter of vital political concern, which explains the sultanate’s decisive involvement from the outset in the design and regulation of the dress code for the state apparatus. ʿUmarī’s encyclopedic compendium Masālik al-abṣār, which in the following century was integrated by Qalqashandī into his own chancery compendium and was extensively cited by Maqrīzī, is the main source to document the dress code at the Mamluk court in the 14th century. Similar descriptions of court ritual and dress code had been compiled in the Abbasid and Fatimid periods,15 and they all have many features in common also with the 10th-century Byzantine Book of Ceremonies.16 2

The Historians’ Perspective

Since this study relies mainly on the chroniclers’ accounts, it is important to look at their general attitude regarding the meaning of dress and dress code for which they spilled so much ink. In the global context of mankind, Ibn Khaldūn associated dress with sedentary culture or civilization (ḥaḍāra), tailoring, sewing, and other crafts related to clothes being aspects of sedentary culture. By contrast, the Muslim pilgrim when visiting the house of God returns to natal simplicity by wearing the unsewn burda.17 From this point of view the Mamluk sultanate was equipped with all the trappings of ḥaḍāra. Notwithstanding their occasional ambivalent attitude toward a foreign ruling class of base origin,18 the historians of the period were overall grateful to their sultans for being the representatives and defenders of Islam. Although 14 Françoise Piponnier and Perrine Mane, Dress in the Middle Ages (New Haven1997), p. 83. 15 See Paula Sanders, ‘Robes of Honor in Fatimid Egypt’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture (New York 2001), pp. 225–39. 16 Constantine Porphyrogennetos, The Book of Ceremonies, trans. Ann Moffat and Maxeme Tall (Leiden/Boston 2012). 17 Ibn Khaldūn, al-Muqaddima, ed. ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad al-Darwīsh (Beirut 2005), II, p. 109. 18 Ulrich W. Haarmann, ‘Ideology and History, Identity and Alterity. The Arab Image of the Turk from the Abbasids to Modern Egypt’, International Journal of Middle East Studies (IJMES) 20 (1988), pp. 181–5.

The Sultanate and Its Historians

27

they might take different stances in their assessments of the individual sultans, as was the case with Maqrīzī and Ibn Taghrībirdī, for example, one may say that they invariably viewed regal manifestations as the obligatory expression of the sultanate’s power and glory, and they took pride in pageantry as serving the Muslim image in the world.19 Most information they provide on clothes is about courtly and official circles; the clothing of commoners receives only occasional attention. Considering the place they occupy on the chroniclers’ pages, regal performances and their paraphernalia embodied the major visual arts of the Mamluks and served as national symbols where artistic achievements were concentrated and intensively perceived. Not only their own outfit, but also the way their subjects appeared to foreign visitors on the streets was a matter of pride to the ruling establishment. The emir Ghars al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Shāhīn al-Ẓāhirī, who compiled a book on the Mamluk sultanate that contains descriptions of its regal culture, refers explicitly to the Mamluks’ pride in their rich array of clothing, especially vis-à-vis foreigners, which he illustrates with the following episode. During a diplomatic mission in Cairo, an envoy of Timur, a major rival and deadly enemy of the Mamluk sultanate, while standing at the window of the royal guesthouse where he was lodged, watching people on the street below, was amazed at the sight of the great variety of costumes displayed before his eyes. He expressed his astonishment to the Mamluk Chief of Protocol (mihmandār), telling him that no such variety of costume existed in his own country where people dressed almost alike. When the chief of protocol reported this conversation to Sultan Barqūq, the sultan told him to inform the envoy that what he saw was only a small fraction of the wealth and variety of costume in this realm and that there were still more variations depending on the occasion and season.20 Khalīl al-Ẓāhirī goes on to emphasize the importance of identifying the over 100 existing social groups (ṭāʾifa) by their specific dress; otherwise there would be confusion. Dress thus meant order in plurality. Ẓāhirī’s book on the interpretation of dreams, mentioned earlier, which includes a major section on clothing and textile items, confirms the significance of dress in historiography and at the Mamluk court.21

19

See Jo Van Steenbergen, ‘Ritual, Politics and the City in Mamluk Cairo. The Bayn al-Qaṣrayn as a Mamluk “lieu de mémoire”, 1250–1382’, in A. Beihammer, S. Constantinou and M. Parani, eds., Court Ceremonies and Rituals of Power in Byzantium and the Medieval Mediterranean (Leiden/Boston 2013), pp. 225–76. 20 Ghars al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Shāhīn al-Ẓāhirī, Zubdat kashf al-mamālik, ed. Paul Ravaisse (Paris 1893) reprinted (Frankfurt 1993), p. 88. 21 See Chapter 3.

28

Chapter 3

A contemporary of Ẓāhirī, the historian and son of an emir, Ibn Taghrībirdī (d. 1470) saw in the opulence of ceremonial dress a major expression of regal and political representation and a testimony to the sultanate’s glory (ubbahat al-salṭana),22 which he was eager to monitor and defend against negligence and oblivion. Speaking of their courtly magnificence and outfit, Qalqashandī (d. 1418) noted that the Mamluks adopted the best things from other kingdoms, improving and elaborating them so that they surpassed all others in perfection and magnificence.23 In a 15th-century eulogy of the ‘blessings brought to Egypt by the Turks’, Abū Ḥāmid al-Qudsī (d. 1483) reckoned among the numerous virtues of the Mamluks their elegance and the beauty of their attire, especially their large turbans (takhāfīf ) with horns and long tails (ʿadhabāt), the colors and variety of their kalaftāt (sing. kalafta),24 their kawāfī (sing. kūfiyya) and zumuṭ (sing. zamṭ), their dress made with furs, silk, wool, and exquisite jūkh,25 their luxurious Baʿalbakī cotton and fabrics from Baghdad, Mosul, and other places, their elegant garments such as the salāriyya and the kāmiliyya, their belts of gold and silver, and their elaborate saddles and ornamented swords. Abū Ḥāmid adds that the dress of the ‘Turks’, referring to the Mamluk aristocracy, was the most beautiful and glamorous among all nations.26 The historian and jurist Ibn Ḥajar (d. 1449), obviously ill-informed, alleged that it was the Egyptians who introduced dress culture to Christian Ethiopia. He writes that the Ethiopians used to be naked until they were ‘civilized’ and taught to dress sumptuously and display regal paraphernalia by a Coptic secretary from Egypt who had entered the service of their king. Furthermore, they were taught military skills by a Circassian Mamluk emir who imported weapons to their country.27 According to ʿUmarī (d. 1349), the members of the Mamluk establishment competed in the display of their fine clothes, ornamented saddles, and luxury apparel.28 He further includes textiles and brocades among the achievements 22 23 24

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 256. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 6. The chronicles use the terms kalafta and kalawta, kalafta being the earlier version, the fā being replaced with a wāw. For the sake of simplification kalawta will be used throughout. 25 Jūkh was a woolen fabric imported from Europe. 26 Abū Ḥāmid Muḥibb al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Qudsī, Kitāb duwal al-islām al-sharīfa al-bahiyya wa-dhikr mā ẓahara lī min ḥikam Allāh al-khafiyya fī jalb ṭāʾifat al-Atrāk ilā l-Diyār al-Miṣriyya, eds. Subḥī Labīb and Ullrich Haarmann (Beirut 1997), p. 116. 27 Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, VIII, pp. 196–7. 28 Ibn Faḍl Allāh al-ʿUmarī, Masālik al-abṣār fī mamālik al-amṣār, ed. Ayman Fuʾād al-Sayyid, (Cairo 1985), p. 33.

The Sultanate and Its Historians

29

on which the sultanate prided itself along with the production of weapons, jewels, and damascene metal wares.29 In a memorandum attributed to Sultan Qalāwūn that was often cited in the 15th century, the items needed most by a sultan were male and female slaves, silk, coins, satin, silver ingots, and golden brocade.30 Ibn Iyās (d. 1522) in the introduction to his chronicle, where he enumerates the virtues ( faḍāʾil) of Egypt, dedicates a paragraph to her textile production, referring to the fabrics of Alexandria along with others from the towns of Manzala, Bahnasa, and Tanis. He praises specifically Egypt’s brocaded and embroidered silks and her wool production.31 Commenting on the meaning of the ceremonial dress code, Ibn Iyās attributes a purpose to such rules which was to demonstrate the dignity and order (ḥurma wa-niẓām) of the sultanate.32 Ibn Iyās’s most expressive statement about the glamor of Mamluk apparel is found in his poignant lamentation of its loss at the hands of the Ottoman conquerors. Describing the celebration of the Feast of Breaking Fast (ʿīd al-fiṭr) in 1518, the year following the fall of the Mamluk sultanate, when the emir Khāyrbak, the governor appointed by the Ottomans, walked accompanied by the high dignitaries to perform the ritual prayer at the mosque of the Citadel, he writes: The procession of the feast dispersed as if it had not taken place. The governor did not bestow any robe on any emir or official or chief judge or bureaucrat, not even on the great secretary Qāytbāy. The ʿīd tradition with all its glorious ceremonies of robes and cloaks and its prestigious insignia, the broad Yalbughā ṭirāz embroideries, the green silk over-cloaks and many of the regal emblems were no longer. Ibn Iyās then concludes with a poem of his own composition that ends with a verse meaning: ‘Egypt lost the glamor that had dazzled the world.’33 29 ʿUmarī, Masālik, p. 27. 30 Clément Onimus, Les maîtres du jeu. Pouvoir et violence politique à l’aube du Sultanat mamlouk circassien (784–815/1382–1412), (Paris 2019), p. 91. 31 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 45. 32 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 32. 33 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, pp. 275–6.

Chapter 4

The Designer Sultans (1250–1380s) 1

Al-Ẓāhir Baybars (r. 1260–77)

Unlike the Ayyubid sultans who ruled during the lifetime of the caliphate of Baghdad and were thus from the outset integrated as a sultanate within it, the Mamluks did not deal with the caliphate’s supremacy except for the short period of its final eight years. The reign of sultan al-Ẓāhir Baybars, who is commonly seen as the great military hero in the wars against the Mongols and Crusaders and at the same time the founder of the Mamluk Sultanate, reveals the need of the new regime to advertise continuity by associating its image with the Ayyubid predecessors to whom it owed its presence, and, like it, enjoy the political and spiritual blessing of the Abbasid Caliphate of Baghdad. Following the fall of the Caliphate in 1258, Baybars invited a member of the overthrown Abbasid dynasty to reside in Cairo as a caliph with ceremonial functions. His major role was to invest and thus legitimize the Mamluk sultan and, with his presence, to bless other solemn events.1 It was customary for the Ayyubid sultans to be invested in their office with a khilʿa along with other paraphernalia dispatched by the caliph in Baghdad and delivered by his envoy who would read the investiture document, wearing the caliph’s gold-embroidered robe,2 a black gold-embroidered turban, and a studded gold pectoral or necklace (ṭawq). However, unlike the caliph of Baghdad, whose political authority was based on religious values and the notion that the caliphate is rooted in the Prophet’s tradition (al-khilāfa min al-nubuwwa)3 as symbolized in his investiture ceremony by the ‘the sword of the Prophet’ along with ‘the burda of the Prophet’ and the Qurʾan manuscript attributed to the caliph ʿUthmān, the caliph of Cairo needed to be invested by the Mamluk sultan. This took place in the presence of the judicial dignitaries.4 The mutual investiture with its ceremonies was maintained through the entire Mamluk period, and black, the emblematic color of the Abbasid Caliphate, continued to be the color of the caliph’s and the sultan’s investiture robe on 1 Much has been written about the Abbasid caliphate of Cairo, see recent study by Mustafa Banister, The Abbasid Caliphate of Cairo. Out of the Shadows, (1261–1517), (Edinburgh 2022). 2 Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXIX, pp. 42, 135, 256, 315. 3 Ṣābiʾ, Rusūm dār al-khilāfa, p. 5. 4 Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, III, p. 276; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 452, II, pp. 8–11.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_005

The Designer Sultans ( 1250–1380s )

31

these occasions. It was also the color of the Kaʿba curtain that was sent from Cairo to Mecca. Al-Ẓāhir Baybars adopted another Abbasid ceremonial item, which was the sirwāl, or trousers, of the futuwwa, to be formally handed to him by the caliph.5 The sirwāl tradition, which goes back to earlier history, was revived in the late Abbasid period. It belonged to the rituals of the futuwwa, a military movement with religious-mystic associations about whose complex history much has been written and debated.6 The word futuwwa, deriving from ‘fatā’, meaning youth, was an attribute of the Caliph ʿAlī, the patron saint of the movement who was considered to be the first fatā; it signifies ‘chivalry’ in the military as well as the moral sense of the word. The futuwwa began as a volunteer movement of young men organized in paramilitary groups to assist a regular army. It was at times associated with guilds. The initiation ceremony of the fatā included the bestowal of trousers and a belt on the novice, as equivalent to a khilʿa. The movement was revived by the late Abbasid caliph al-Nāṣir (r. 1180–1225), who assumed leadership of it and controlled its regulations and admission criteria. In 1210 he issued an order to the rulers within the caliphate to demonstrate their allegiance to him by drinking from the cup of the futuwwa and mentioning his name while wearing the sirwāl.7 The caliph himself used to wear the futuwwa trousers. The sirwāl ritual was practiced by the regiment of the crossbow archers who formed an elite corps in the army under the caliph’s special patronage. Subsequent Abbasid caliphs continued to send the futuwwa trousers to the Ayyubid sultans together with the investiture documents and the robe.8 It is not established whether the futuwwa was in any way related to the Crusades. However, Baybars’s life-long warfare against the Crusaders may well have been a motivation for him to recall this tradition. He performed the ritual with the reception of a sirwāl from the newly installed caliph in Cairo. The ceremony is no longer mentioned under his successors, with the exception of an episode during the reign of al-Ashraf Khalīl who, responding to the request 5 ʿIzz al-Dīn Muḥammad Ibn Shaddād, Tārīkh al-Malik al-Ẓāhir, ed. Aḥmad Ḥuṭayṭ (Cairo 2009), p. 182; Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, Rawḍ, p. 111; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, pp. 459, 495–6, 502. 6 See Franz Taeschner, ‘Die islamischen Futuwwabünde. Das Problem ihrer Entstehung und die Grundlinien ihrer Geschichte’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 87/1–2 (1934), pp. 38–40; Gerard Salinger, ‘Was the Futūwa an Oriental Form of Chivalry?’, in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 94/5 (1950), pp. 481–93.; Robert Irwin, ‘Futuwwa. Chivalry and Gangsterism in Medieval Cairo’, Muqarnas 21 (2004), (Essays in Honor of J.M. Rogers), pp. 161–70. 7 Taeschner, ‘Futuwwa’, p. 36, n. 2; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I p. 207; Abū l-Fidāʾ, al-Mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al-bashar, III (Cairo 1907), p. 113. 8 Springberg-Hinsen, Die Hilʿa, pp. 150–1.

32

Chapter 4

of the Kurdish ruler of Hakkar, sent him a sirwāl.9 The Mamluk crossbow regiment, which also enjoyed an elite status that was due to their superiority in the warfare against the Crusaders, continued for a while to perform the sirwāl ritual until it was abandoned at some point during the 14th century.10 The movement was strongly opposed by the religious establishment of the Shāfiʿī and Ḥanafī schools and notably by Ibn Taymiyya.11 The chroniclers of the early Mamluk period, including the reign of al-Ẓāhir Baybars, are not as informative as their successors about daily material culture. There is no mention at that time of any major reform scheme regarding the formal dress code inherited from the Ayyubid predecessors. However, the chroniclers refer to military parades and tournaments on a grand scale in Cairo as occasions when the sultan lavished luxurious robes on the participants.12 2

Al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn (r. 1278–90)

After al-Ẓāhir Baybars established the foundation of the Mamluk sultanate, al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn set out to design its profile to be legated to his successors who were to be his descendants. The sultan and his successors al-Ashraf Khalīl, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, and al-Ashraf Shaʿbān dedicated great attention to the military uniform. Much of what ʿUmarī reported as practice during the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad seems to have been established already by his father. Qalāwūn’s design for the official and ceremonial dress of the army emphasized opulence at the same time as hierarchical order. He is credited with introducing the over-cloak known as ‘qabāʾ islāmī’ along with the tatarī13 cloak to be worn underneath alongside the gauze to wrap the kalawta and the silver belt to replace the ones made of fabric.14 The qabāʾ islāmī and the wrap around the kalawta may have been intended to add an Islamic note to the outfit. Qalāwūn also dedicated particular interest to the Dār al-Ṭirāz, the state manufacturer of ceremonial textile the production of which was directly connected to his reforms. 9 10 11 12 13

Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, XII, pp. 274–5. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IX, p. 255. Taeschner, ‘Futuwwa’, p. 40. Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, Rawḍ, p. 213. The chronicles write ‘tatarī’ and ‘tatariyya’, with /t/ as well as with /ṭ/. ‘Tatarī’ will be used throughout. 14 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 329.

The Designer Sultans ( 1250–1380s )

33

The sultan’s funerary complex with a monumental domed mausoleum, a madrasa, and a hospital built and decorated in a novel style that departed from the artistic traditions that had prevailed under Baybars, was designed to fulfill ceremonial functions. The sultan designated the mausoleum chamber to be the venue for the high-profile ceremony of investiture of the governors of Syria. To this purpose he did not shy away from transferring this ceremony from its initial dedicated venue, which was the mausoleum of the last Ayyubid sultan, al-Ṣāliḥ Najm al-Dīn. This event would be celebrated with a solemn procession in the heart of Cairo. On that occasion, the newly appointed emir wore the festive headdress called sharbūsh instead of the habitual kalawta, and robes of honor were given to the departing emir and his retinue.15 Moreover, unlike any other princely mausoleum, this one was reported to include a dedicated place for the defunct sultan’s wardrobe. After Qalāwūn’s death, his eunuchs held regular ceremonies in his memory on the premises.16 No further detail is provided regarding this ritual which does not seem to have become customary. Unlike the Ottomans who preserved the clothes of their dead sultans that can still be seen today in their original glamor,17 no such tradition is associated with the Mamluk sultanate. 3

Al-Ashraf Khalīl (1290–3)

Khalīl is credited with adding brilliance to the Mamluk military outfit by increasing the amount of its brocade (zarkash) including that of the horses’ caparisons. He also introduced the maʿdanī type of silk satin for the emirs’ over-cloaks (qabāʾ) alongside other fine fabrics,18 and he is credited with changing the color of the kalawta from yellow to red.19 Khalīl’s concern with the outfit of the army was so passionate that it may even have played a role in his assassination. The sultan accused his deputy, the emir Baydara, of diverting for his own purposes the textile production of Alexandria that should have been sent to him to supply the army. Offended by

15 Shams al-Dīn al-Shujāʿī, Tārīkh al-malik al-Nāṣir Muḥammad ibn Qalāwūn al-Ṣāliḥī, ed. Barbara Schäfer (Wiesbaden 1978), pp. 236, 239. 16 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, IV, p. 520. 17 See Bahattin Yaman, ‘Fit for the Court. Ottoman Royal Costumes and their Tailors from the Sixteenth to Eighteen Century’, Ars Orientalis 42 (2012), pp. 89–101. 18 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 511; idem Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 327, 375. 19 Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, pp. 39–40.

34

Chapter 4

the sultan’s harsh and insulting interrogation, Baydara felt provoked to kill him with the support of fellow emirs.20 4

Al-Nāṣir Muḥammad (1293–4, 1299–1309, 1310–41)

As in all other aspects of Mamluk material culture, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s long and prosperous reign consolidated the glamor of the sultanate and bequeathed an ineffaceable impact on the material culture of the subsequent period. He complemented his father’s innovations to the military outfit by creating the urban theater to stage novel and elaborate ceremonies. To this purpose he transformed Cairo and its Citadel,21 the residence of the sultan and his court, using the opportunity to eliminate many of his predecessor’s monuments. By refashioning the great hippodrome beneath the Citadel that the main royal palace, al-Qaṣr al-Ablaq, overlooked, both of which connected with the stables located between them, al-Nāṣir established a major urban landmark and a forum where the court met with the city for great public events such as tournaments and parades as well as for the prayers of the two major religious feasts. The seasonal ceremonial distribution of robes of honor was also scheduled there. In Siryāqūs, a village in the northern outskirts of Cairo, al-Nāṣir founded a combined religious and pleasure complex to be another theater of regal ceremonial connected to the city with processions. There, near a hunting ground, he built a hippodrome and a large monastery for the Sufis that included his own mausoleum.22 All ceremonies were scheduled in dedicated venues, and each required a specific outfit. Among his ceremonial innovations, al-Nāṣir added a pair of mounted pages to his processions, wearing a yellow silk brocaded cloak and a brocaded headdress, called kūfiyya, that had the shape of a bowl.23 Al-Nāṣir has been described by the historians as an esthete who sought glamor and refinement in all aspects of his reign. Indeed, some of the most exquisite art objects in Islamic history were produced under his rule. He further developed uniforms and official attire, dedicating special attention to enhancing the headdress and the belts that were made of silver, gold, and 20 Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXI, pp. 259–60; ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān, I, pp. 201–04. 21 Nasser O. Rabbat, The Citadel of Cairo. A New Interpretation of Royal Mamluk Architecture (Leiden/New York/Köln 1995), from p. 181. 22 Eventually, al-Nāṣir was instead buried in his madrasa in the city. 23 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 56; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 8.

The Designer Sultans ( 1250–1380s )

35

studded with gems, according to rank.24 The formal and ceremonial dress code of the military and civilian elite described by ʿUmarī during the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad and the fabulous sums reported to have been spent on clothes and apparel, mirror the zeal dedicated to dress culture at that time. Al-Nāṣir used clothes as an incentive to serve his political schemes. To earn the loyalty of the Bedouin tribes in his territory, he lavished on their chieftains riches and sumptuous clothes on an unprecedented scale. He replaced the red bonnets (ṭarṭūr) wrapped in Syrian cotton and the gowns of kanjī and muṣmat25 fabric they wore previously with garments of silk satin, golden brocaded ṭirāz, embroidered gauze and other luxury textiles from Alexandria. He even included their women in his liberality by giving them fine jewelry, Alexandrian fabrics, and brocaded face veils (burquʿ).26 Luxury garments and jewelry for the ladies at the court were included as well among the diplomatic gifts he sent to foreign rulers. Members of embassies were offered robes of honor similar to those of the Mamluk emirs.27 When in 1338 a Marinid princess arrived from Morocco on her way to Mecca, he offered her and her retinue a variety of robes and precious textiles including satin, ṭard waḥsh, muqaḍḍab(?), patterned muṣmat, striped (ʿattābī)28 and 219 garments of the bughluṭāq type.29 During al-Nāṣir’s reign, one of his prominent emirs, Salār, introduced a new style of cloak to replace the existing bughluṭāq, which was probably Qalāwūn’s tatarī; it had sleeves and was named ‘salāriyya’ after him, along with other fashions.30 However, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad himself always dressed simply. 5

Al-Ashraf Shaʿbān (r. 1363–77)

Al-Ashraf Shaʿbān ascended the throne as a child two years before Lusignan devastated Alexandria in 1365. However, he was credited for introducing stability and prosperity, thanks to his efforts to promote trade and industry. He explicitly declared it as his goal that ‘the crafts may not decline under my rule 24 25 26 27 28

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, pp. 10, 11. According to Serjeant, muṣmat is a monochrome fabric, Islamic Textiles, p. 256. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 527–8. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXIII, p. 62. A fabric made in a quarter of that name in Baghdad, Serjeant, Islamic Textiles, p. 28. The term could also refer to a fabric made elsewhere in the same style. 29 Shams al-Dīn Abī ʿAbd Allāh al-Jazarī, Tārīkh ḥawādith al-zamān wa-anbāʾih wa-wafayāt al-akābir wa-l-aʿ yān min abnāʾih, ed. ʿUmar ʿAbd al-Salām Tadmurī (Beirut 1998), II, p. 1029. 30 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm IX, pp. 19–20; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 328; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/1 p. 436.

36

Chapter 4

and in my lifetime.’31 Indeed, great efforts were spent to eliminate the effects of the disaster of Alexandria and help the city recover, notably his visit there and his inspection of the Dār al-Ṭirāz.32 The newly introduced bonus to be distributed on the sultan’s return from the seasonal hunt in the Buḥayra province to his entire Mamluk entourage across ranks, suggests that the textile production of Alexandria was recovering. On that occasion, the highest-ranking emirs received silk over-cloaks with a collar of sable and brocade and the lower-ranking emirs blue silk over-cloaks with a broad brocaded ṭirāz. The bonus also included a horse with a golden saddle and a brocaded caparison.33 The pilgrimage of Shaʿbān’s mother, Khawand Baraka, became legendary in Mamluk history for the luxury she displayed on this occasion, and similarly, the preparation for the sultan’s own pilgrimage, which he never performed, earned long descriptions of its luxurious equipment.34 Shaʿbān’s reign introduced new dress fashions. In 1371 the sultan ordered a green badge, as a sign of distinction, to be worn by the ashrāf, persons descended from the Prophet and his family. The badge was to be worn on men’s turbans and women’s dresses. This initiative earned the sultan high praise.35 Ibn Iyās, who wrote more than a century later, credited Shaʿbān, moreover, for introducing the white cloak (qabāʾ) of Baʿalbakī cotton with golden ṭirāz to be worn by emirs and soldiers on solemn occasions, as well as the woolen double-faced cloak alongside other fashions. The double-faced qabāʾ made of wool or silk became henceforth a regular feature of robes of honor.36 Ibn Iyās adds that the ashrafiyyāt, named after the sultan’s title and describing the qabāʾs of white Baʿalbakī, were usually worn over a white garment called ‘kibr’ or ‘kibra’ (plur. kabūr).37 Other fashions during Shaʿbān’s reign were attributed to the mighty emir Yalbughā al-ʿUmarī al-Khāṣṣakī (d. 1366) who acted as regent when the sultan was a youth, after having served under Sultan al-Nāṣir Ḥasan.38 Yalbughā was 31 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XI, p. 82. 32 See below Chapter 8. 33 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 205, 282; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XI, pp. 58, 81–2; Ahmad al-Bayrūtī, History of the years 1366–78, being some middle part of a longer work, MS. Marshall Or. 36, Bodleian Library, fl.c. 1378, dated Ramaḍān 788/1386, fol. 113a, b. 34 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 177; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 303–4. 35 ʿAynī, al-Sulṭān Barqūq, pp. 179–80; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 199. 36 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 403. 37 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 182. This is not mentioned by Maqrīzī or Ibn Taghrībirdī. See also Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 173. 38 Jo Van Steenbergen, ‘The Amir Yalbughā al-Khāṣṣakī, the Qalāwūnid Sultanate, and the Cultural Matrix of Mamlūk Society. A Reassessment of Mamlūk Politics in the 1360s’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 131/3 (2011), pp. 442–3.

The Designer Sultans ( 1250–1380s )

37

one of the most powerful and wealthiest emirs of his time and owned a considerable number of Mamlūks among whom was Barqūq who became sultan.39 Among his reforms to the Mamluk outfit that added brilliance to the image of the establishment, was a new, enlarged style of ṭirāz to be applied on honorific robes. Named after the emir, the ṭirāz yalbughāwī was applied to robes of the highest category till the end of the Mamluk era.40 He also increased the size of the Mamluks’ headdress, which changed its name from kalawta nāṣiriyya to kalawta ṭarkhāniyya41 and kalawta yalbughāwiyya.42 6

Al-Ṣāliḥ Hājjī (r. 1389–90)

The last sultan of the dynasty of Qalāwūn was a child who ruled less than a year in 1389–90 during the interregnum of the first Circassian sultan Barqūq. In this short period, faithful to his predecessors’ tradition, Ḥājjī tried to introduce his own ideas of costume design and appointed for this purpose a commoner to the post of ‘sultan’s tailor’. This initiative, however, was brutally cut short by his regent, the emir Yalbughā al-ʿUmarī al-Nāṣirī (d. 1390),43 who gave the order to beat the tailor and confiscate his robe of investiture. The frustrated sultan complained in vain: ‘what sultanate is this if I am unable to issue an order regarding a tailor?’44 Ḥājjī’s lament that he was not a true sultan because he had no authority over issues of dress symbolizes ironically the significance of costume in the history of the Qalāwūnids. 39 40 41 42 43 44

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, XII, pp. 157–62; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 328. Mayer, Costume, p. 34. ‘ṭarkhāniyya’ refers to young Mamlūks. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 328, 704; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 40. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, XII, pp. 162–71, this Yalbughā is not to be confused with Yalbughā al-Khāṣṣakī who died during the reign of Shaʿbān. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, II, pp. 331–2; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XI, p. 331; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 638.

Chapter 5

The Circassian Revision (1380s–1517) and the Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code The Qalāwūnid sultans had created a tradition of self-representation that was maintained and reinforced through dynastic succession. Their Circassian successors, however, were not related to each other except by the bond of patronage. Ethnic affinity seems to have played less of a role owing to the diverse origins of the ‘Circassian’ army and establishment.1 Their sultans pursued rather a more individual vision of self-representation. By that time the sultanate no longer needed an introduction to the world, and over time, new priorities and changing tastes generated new practices. The Circassian period, beginning with the reign of al-Ẓāhir Barqūq, himself a Circassian recruit under the Bahri sultanate, is usually associated with political instability, economic decline, and inflation. Writing in the Circassian period, Maqrīzī dedicates a chapter of his Khiṭaṭ to the Mamluk army and its material culture, focusing on the Bahri period, which he nostalgically viewed as the bygone golden age. Referring to the military ceremonies and uniforms of that period as ‘outfit and customs’ (ziyyuhā wa-ʿawā’iduhā), his descriptions are based on al-ʿUmarī, to which he adds his comment that, in his own day, most of the customs established by the Qalāwūnid dynasty were abandoned and their rules forgotten. Maqrīzī’s description of Cairo’s markets is equally gloomy as he mourns their riches and goods that vanished during the first decade of the 15th century. There is a great deal of nostalgia and perhaps also exaggeration in these statements. As will be shown, the economic situation was not directly reflected in a decline of material culture when it came to princely patronage and the lifestyle of the upper class. The goods that ceased to be produced were often replaced by imported ones. Some goods and their markets disappeared, but even Maqrīzī’s own account indicates that new ones emerged. Ceremonial culture continued to flourish and evolve in new directions with new trends and fashions, and along with them the styles of clothing, while their vocabulary adapted to the new developments. By the late 15th century, 1 See Clément Onimus, Les maîtres du jeu. Pouvoir et violence politique à l’aube du Sultanat mamlouk circassien (784–815/1382–1412) (Paris 2019), pp. 206–12; Robert Irwin, ‘How Circassian were the Circassian Mamluks?’, in Reuven Amitai and Stephan Conermann, eds., The Mamluk Sultanate from the Perspective of Regional and Word History (Bonn 2019) pp. 111–24.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_006

Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code

39

Cairo, the stage of Mamluk ceremonial, was a different city in architecture and cityscape from the one bequeathed by the Bahri sultans. The hippodromes with their major performances were shifted to new locations. The great emirs had transformed the suburbs and expanded the city with ambitious urban projects, such as Jānibāy’s garden with a zāwiya and a palace along the Nile during the reign of Khushqadam, and under Qāytbāy, Yashbak min Mahdī’s pleasure complex in the northern suburb and Azbak’s new quarter to the west. At the Citadel, many ceremonies were transferred from al-Nāṣir’s complex to the inner quarter called ‘Ḥawsh’ that was previously occupied by the sultan’s harem and was eventually transformed by a series of refurbishments and additions.2 In the new urban and palatial environments fashions and apparel changed as well. 1

Al-Ẓāhir Barqūq (r. 1382–9, 1390–99)

Maqrīzī attributed to Barqūq the end of some of the regalia established by his predecessors3 and in the same vein, Ibn Taghrībirdī lamented that the sultan had abandoned the ceremonies that used to be held at the hippodrome and that his son Faraj had abolished those of Siryāqūs, thus terminating some of the finest insignia of royalty (shiʿār al-mulūk), adding that their successors continued to reduce the regal traditions established in the past. Scornfully he further commented that the only remaining difference to distinguish the sultanate of Egypt from the governorate of Iblistīn was the kalawta worn by the Mamluks in their parades!4 However, Barqūq’s reign was not austere, as some of Maqrīzī’s and Ibn Taghrībirdī’s comments might suggest. Maqrīzī’s critique of Barqūq’s policy of minting huge quantities of copper coins to meet increasing military costs and to spend on his dignitaries5 may contradict the idea that austerity was on the sultan’s agenda. Rather, after consolidating his power, following factionalism and revolts in the army, he introduced ceremonial reforms and innovations, which expressed the restoration of the sultan’s power, following the decades of the late weak Qalāwūnids.6

2 Doris Behrens-Abouseif, ‘The Citadel of Cairo. Stage for Mamluk Ceremonial’, Annales Islamologiques XXIV (1988), pp. 25–79. 3 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 379. 4 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XII, pp. 69–70. 5 Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad al-Maqrīzī, Ighāthat al-umma bi-kashf al-ghumma, ed. Karam Ḥilmī Faraḥāt (Cairo 2007), p. 145. 6 Onimus, Les Maîtres, pp. 139–40, 156–62.

40

Chapter 5

The shift in the recruiting system of Mamluks to replace the initial Kipchak Turks with Circassians from the Caucasus was an important initiative taken by the sultan, himself a Circassian, that changed the identity of the ruling circles and with it the culture of the Mamluk court.7 It is difficult, however, at this stage to assess the extent of such reforms as no systematic or radical measures were explicitly reported in this regard. Rather, the chroniclers reported the changes one by one as they occurred rather than as a programmatic concept. It may have been a significant initiative of Barqūq to close the market where Mamlūks used to be publicly displayed for sale. No substitute for this market is mentioned so that we may assume that Mamlūks were henceforth traded in a more discreet manner, unlike ordinary slaves. Moreover, Barqūq’s transfer of the maẓālim court, dedicated to the audition of people’s petitions, from the Great Iwān of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad to the loggia of the royal stables (al-Isṭabl) adjoining his own former residence as master of the stables, was meaningful. The revival of the maẓālim court of civil justice, which was on Barqūq’s political agenda, was a source of worry to the dignitaries, who feared that it would allow the rabble to take over.8 Security concerns might have contributed as well to some of the changes in ceremonial practices such as the transfer of the customary prayers of the religious feasts from the hippodrome of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad at the foot of the Citadel to the royal mosque within the fortification.9 Already during his tenure as al-Ṣāliḥ Ḥājjī’s deputy, Barqūq had ordered an extraordinary ceremonial tent in Damascus carried by 180 camels to be deployed in the great square beneath the Citadel.10 However, when the whole area beneath the Citadel, including the mosque of Sultan Ḥasan, became a battleground for warring military factions, an alternative venue for ceremonial events began to be mentioned in the chronicles, i.e., the Maṭʿam al-Ṭayr, or ‘Feeding Ground of the Birds’, also called Masṭaba in reference to the benches it included for spectators. This was a breeding place for falcons and a hunting ground located in the northern suburbs of Cairo. Although its founder is not named, Barqūq is likely to have upgraded the venue to host festive events that were previously held at the Citadel’s hippodrome.11 There he hosted a spectacular reception to honor Sultan Uways, the Jalayirid ruler of Tabriz, who came to Cairo seeking support 7

Loiseau, Les Mamelouks, p. 200; Behrens-Abouseif, Cairo, p. 27; idem, ‘The Citadel’, pp. 62–4; Onimus, Les Maîtres, pp. 139, 149–57. 8 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 566, 943; idem, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 666. 9 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 739–41. 10 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 441. 11 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, IV, p. 622; ʿAlī ibn Dāwūd al-Ṣayrafī, Nuzhat al-nufūs wa-l-abdān fī tawārīkh al-zamān, ed. Ḥasan al-Ḥabashī (Cairo n.d.), I, p. 869; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, p. 434.

Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code

41

after Timur’s invasion of his country. Through most of the 15th century, the Maṭʿam continues to be regularly mentioned as the venue where the sultans twice a year rode in a grand procession from the Citadel to celebrate the inauguration of the new season with the distribution of new clothes to the emirs. This ceremony does not seem to have been of the same significance in the Bahri period when it was held at the hippodrome beneath the Citadel. In the Citadel, Barqūq renewed the carpets of the two main palaces (the Great Īwān and the Qaṣr) and restricted the access of soldiers to the premises.12 The Italian pilgrim Simone Sigoli, who seems to have been well connected and particularly well informed about Egypt and the sultan’s biography, witnessed in 1384 a hunting excursion of Barqūq in Siryāqūs followed by the distribution of lavish robes of honor, which he described as woven with gold and silver according to rank.13 He was the last sultan to perform this ceremony in this venue. Barqūq upgraded the outfit of the judicial establishment. The historian Ibn al-Furāt was astonished in 1397 to see the judge and secretary of the army, al-Damāmīnī, walk in a procession wearing a green woolen farajiyya; no chief judge or any of the turbaned men had ever been seen before wearing any other color but white, cotton, or wool, even on informal occasions. The historian continued inquiring until he learned that indeed the sultan had issued an order for the turbaned men to wear colored wool.14 According to Ibn Ḥajar’s version, it was the sultan’s private secretary, Badr al-Dīn al-Kalastānī, who had requested from the sultan permission for turbaned men to wear colored wool, which the sultan granted.15 Colored fabrics were more valuable than white fabrics. In any case, this reform confirms Barqūq’s willingness to honor the judicial establishment. Barqūq’s reforms to the political-administrative system required a renovation of the ceremonial outfit as well. A new style of kalawta was created, larger than the previous and with a slant, which became known as the Circassian kalawta.16 He also introduced a new style of jubba with ṭirāz as an honorific robe for the vizier and the high-ranking bureaucrats that continued to be widely used during his son Faraj’s reign.17 In the case of Saʿd al-Dīn Ibn Ghurāb 12 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 530–1. 13 Simone Sigoli, Viaggio al monte Sinai, ed. Basilio Puoti (Naples 1831) (Google books), p. 35. 14 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 460; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, pp. 877–8; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 875–6. Dozy, Dictionnaire, p. 82, mentions a text in a manuscript of Ibn Iyās’s chronicle which states that the sultan consulted his private secretary, who gave his consent. 15 Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, III, pp. 325–6. 16 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 704. 17 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 739.

42

Chapter 5

(d. 1405), who was secretary of the army and the privy purse, it is described as a double-faced red-green silk jubba with a golden ṭirāz 1.8 cubits wide.18 The novelty here was the addition of the ṭirāz, the double-faced style, and the silk fabric, which did not belong to the traditional civilian’s jubba. For the military establishment, Barqūq reintroduced in 1399 the ceremonial cloak (qabāʾ) made of nakhkh muqaṭraḥ(?), which had been abandoned in the last fifteen years. Nonetheless, the sultan himself is reported to have refrained from wearing silk.19 It is also most probable that Barqūq introduced the golden saddle among the investiture paraphernalia that accompanied the robe of honor, while the bejeweled belt of the Bahri period was abandoned. Under Barqūq the use of fur increased substantially, and it became a regular adornment of all robes of honor. Whereas under the Bahri sultans, it had been reserved for the robes of high-ranking dignitaries (according to Maqrīzī, ermine was worn only by the sultan and his wives), its use became widespread even among commoners. Ordinary soldiers and minor bureaucrats, as well as women, would wear garments with sable, lynx, grey squirrel, and ermine.20 The fashion of fur attributed to the sultan himself may have been a premeditated initiative rather than a random whim to give a distinctive cachet to his court. To what extent fur adornment replaced embroidery is difficult to tell. Throughout the entire 15th century, the chroniclers mention fur as being among the gifts the emirs offer to the sultan, as valuables to be hoarded, and as a regular commodity the price of which is indicated on a routine basis to signal the economic situation. People wore fur on cold winter days, which indicates that it was also used to make garments and not only as an ornament.21 During Barsbāy’s reign fur was one of the basic commodities mentioned alongside wheat, barley, beans, clover, Baʿalbakī cotton, copper, and iron22 the prices of which are listed as indicators in the economic barometer. Notwithstanding the crises of Barqūq’s reign, the number of looms operating in Alexandria in the 1390s was estimated to be 14,000, suggesting that the city had fully recovered from the disaster of 1365.23 This seems to be confirmed by the fact that the sultan could afford to send silk weavers as a diplomatic gift to the Rasulid court of Yemen.24 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 1056. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 73. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 342. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, IX, p. 8. Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd al-ʿAynī,ʿIqd al-Jumān fī tārīkh ahl-al-zamān (815–824), and (824–50/ 1421–47), ed.ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Ṭanṭāwī al-Qarmūṭ (Cairo 1989), p. 252. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 38. ʿAlī ibn Ḥasan al-Khazrajī, al-ʿUqūd al-luʾluʾiyya fī tārīkh al-dawla al-rasūliyya (Cairo 1911), II, p. 158; Eric Vallet, ‘Du Système mercantile à l’ordre Mamelouke. Les ambassades entre

Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code

43

Barqūq’s involvement in matters of ceremonial dress is further confirmed in his decision to buy robes of honor directly from the producers and thus eliminate the mediation of the dealers.25 His esthetic reforms extended to the pilgrimage parade, by adding to the Mahmal a yellow silk fabric with an embroidered band inscribed with the sultan’s name. He is also credited with introducing the gold-embroidered ṭirāz to the Kaʿba curtain that hangs over its door.26 Despite Maqrīzī’s and Ibn Taghrībirdī’s critiques, and although no historian explicitly credits Barqūq with major ceremonial reforms as in the case of the Qalāwūnids, scattered information in the chronicles demonstrates the sultan’s interest in and his direct involvement with ceremonial outfit. In his obituary the historians agree in depicting him as a ruler who more than any other performed charitable deeds, showed reverence to the judicial and religious scholars, involved himself personally in dispensing justice and in handling petitions, and was attentive to popular needs, even of the lowest strata of society including non-Muslims.27 Considering this character portrait, it is likely that Barqūq also adopted a different, less exclusive, interpretation of the dress code. 2

Al-Nāṣir Faraj (r. 1399–1405)

Owing to unrest within the Mamluk army that continued during the reign of Sultan Faraj the son of Barqūq, and most of all owing to Timur’s invasion of Syria and a series of ensuing economic crises, little is reported about ceremonial material culture and accoutrement at that time. Nonetheless, when the sultan prepared for a military campaign to confront Timur, his soldiers were equipped with golden and bejeweled saddles and other luxurious horse trappings.28 Regarding the sultan’s attitude to ceremonial traditions, Maqrīzī notes critically that al-Nāṣir Faraj used to ride out of the Citadel in his audience outfit, which was an unprecedented breach of the rules, regarding which Ibn Taghrībirdī comments that Maqrīzī referred to the fact that the sultan was not

l’Egypte mamelūke et Yemen rasūlide (VII–IXe/XIIIe–XVe siècle)’, in Les relations diplomatiques au Moyen Âge. Formes et enjeux. XLIe Congrès de la SHMESP (Paris 2011), p. 296. 25 See chapters 6 and 7. 26 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, p. 74. 27 ʿAynī, al-Sulṭān Barqūq, pp. 495–8; Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, IV, p. 54; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 43–6; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XII, pp. 107–13; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, pp. 498–501. 28 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XIII, pp. 133–4.

44

Chapter 5

wearing the kalawta.29 The latter blamed Faraj for being the first to depreciate (tarakhkhaṣa) the ceremonial processions of royal excursions by appearing without kalawta or qumāsh.30 A century later, Ibn Iyās also recalled that Faraj would make public appearances with his emirs while not wearing the proper formal outfit.31 As a rare sign of austerity due to economic constraints, Sultan Faraj was the first sultan to wear a garment described as qamjūn made of jūkh, a muchdisdained wool fabric, without lining or facing. However, jūkh became fashionable thereafter as other dignitaries followed suit, and the jūkh market expanded with imports from Europe.32 According to Maqrīzī, it was Sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh who introduced the tradition of celebrating the new season when the Mamluks would swap the winter outfit of colored wool for the white linen and cotton of the summer and conversely.33 This continued to be a major event in most of the Circassian period and was accompanied by a grand procession across the city between the Citadel and the northern outskirts. 3

Al-Ashraf Barsbāy (r. 1422–38)

Barsbāy is renowned for his controversial monopoly over major trades and industries that had a negative impact on production and commerce. The imposed textile monopoly in 1428 had a disastrous effect on the cities of Mosul and Hama whose cotton products were mostly directed toward Mamluk consumption.34 The producers rejected the imposed prices as inacceptable and refrained from delivering their goods.35 In the long run, the industrial decline did not necessarily result in diminishing consumption but rather in increasing imports from India and Europe.36 In Alexandria, the census of 1434 revealed that, of the 14,000 silk looms that were registered in 1394 under Barqūq, only 800 looms were still active. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, IV, p. 1221; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XIII, p. 68. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 345. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, p. 467. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 326. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 622. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, pp. 792–2, 800. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 155. Aḥmad Darrag, L’Egypte sous le règne de Barsbay 825–841/1422–1438, Damascus 1961, pp. 155–6.

Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code

45

Ibn Taghrībirdī attributed this recession to the greed and despotism of the authorities.37 The scarcity of descriptions of ceremonial pomp under Barsbāy indicates that the Cyprus war, a plague epidemic, and most of all, the sultan’s interference regarding industry and trade monopolies were taking their toll on material culture as well.38 When in 1434 Barsbāy gave the governor of Aleppo a lavish robe of honor, Maqrīzī described it as ‘great splendor, considering the time’ (tajammul ḥasan bi-l-nisba ilā l-waqt), alluding to the dire economic situation.39 It was a departure robe consisting of a tatarī with sable and an over-cloak of nakhkh with ermine. The economic crisis could not be overlooked when the sultan held a meeting with his jurists to consider imposing supplementary levies for a possible military confrontation with the Timurid Shāh Rūkh, provoking one of them to remind him of the extravagant outfit worth 30,000 dīnārs that his wife wore the day of their son’s circumcision.40 Fortunately, however, Barsbāy’s conquest of Cyprus that led to her vassalage in 1427 earned him the benefit of wool being part of the yearly tribute-in-kind to be delivered to Cairo.41 Barsbāy dedicated little attention to his own appearance; he would ride out in his indoor clothes.42 It was a rare sight, when he once appeared in a procession described as ‘glorious’, wearing the proper outdoor outfit, which was a green over-cloak with a red collar (maqlab) and a kalawta in the same style worn by Barqūq.43 The economic crisis could not, however, be allowed to disturb too much of the upper circles’ lifestyle or spoil individual appetite for luxury. It was during Barsbāy’s reign that the emir Taghrībirdī ibn ʿAbd Allāh, the governor of Damascus who was renowned for his good looks and elegant dress and mount, introduced the fashion of wearing a large headdress, called takhfīfa, among the emirs.44

37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 38. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, pp. 678, 1032–3. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 416; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 913; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 284. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 68. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 792. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 679. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 851. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 180.

46 4

Chapter 5

Al-Ẓāhir Jaqmaq (r. 1438–53)

Sultan al-Ẓāhir Jaqmaq stands out in the history of the Mamluk sultans as a remarkably stern character. He is described as austere and puritanical in all things including his clothes. When in 1440 he rode with his retinue in a grand procession for a sumptuous picnic on the shore of the Zaʿfaran canal in the northern outskirts of Cairo, Maqrīzī and Ibn Taghrībirdī repeated their earlier critique of the previous sultans, Faraj, al-Muʾayyad Shaykh,45 and Barsbāy,46 by noting that the sultan breached the protocol established in the past by appearing in the outfit dedicated to audiences ( julūs), rather than in the parade outfit (qumāsh al-mawkib),47 which had to include an over-cloak ( fawqānī).48 The same negligence was committed by Jaqmaq’s successor, Īnāl, on his first excursion.49 He never wore any garment of red color and was seen only once wearing a kāmiliyya with fur. The only time he used a golden saddle was on the day of his enthronement. His entire summer outfit was estimated to be worth no more than ten dīnārs.50 He wore only short gowns and forbade his emirs to wear long ones. Those who did not obey were beaten. He took this matter so much to heart that, on a ceremonial occasion, he felt provoked to go himself before the audience and cut the gowns of his disobedient courtiers.51 He cancelled several traditional ceremonies scheduled at the Citadel that required the ceremonial outfit with kalawta, which Ibn Taghrībirdī lamented, describing it as unprecedented.52 In spite of his austerity in matters of court ceremonial and his own appearance, Jaqmaq was extravagant in distributing robes of honor made of silk, Baʿalbakī fabric, colored velvet (mukhmal), and velvet embroidered with gold dīnārs, gold-brocaded kerchiefs from Alexandria, and fur.53 Keen to dismiss the members of his predecessor’s establishment and replace them with his own choice of new dignitaries, he was criticized by Ibn Taghrībirdī for bestowing robes of honor on persons who were not entitled to them.54 The historian also criticized the sultan for wasting too many patterned velvet kāmiliyyas with 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, pp. 1216, 1221. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, pp. 655, 679, 753, 766, 794; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 345. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 345. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 301. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 78. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, pp. 457–8. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, IV, p. 296. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 117–9. Sakhāwī, Tibr, III, p. 89. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, pp. 263, 295.

Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code

47

sable collars and broad brocaded ṭirāz on beggars and riff-raff.55 On one occasion, he reported that the sultan spent in one day the amount of 10,000 dīnārs on khilʿas and horse trappings for dignitaries.56 Maqrīzī likewise reproached the sultan for squandering on the Mamluks the plentiful treasury that his predecessor Barsbāy had bequeathed him.57 5

Al-Ẓāhir Khushqadam (r. 1461–7)

Although he was acknowledged as being one of the few glamorous sultans of the Circassian period, Khushqadam made some initial blunders that could not escape Ibn Taghrībirdī’s scrutiny.58 After these incidents, however, he adhered to the protocol regarding his outfit at outdoor events, with the exception of some less formal occasions, when he would be seen without kalawta, cloak, or belt.59 He reinforced the regulation that no soldier should be allowed to draw his salary unless he appeared at the ceremony in the proper accoutrement with coat, kalawta, and sword.60 In his obituary of Khushqadam, Ibn Taghrībirdī praises the sultan for having been all his life, ever since he was a simple soldier, concerned with the esthetics of his looks and clothes (mutajammil). He had exclusive taste, always selecting the finest quality of dress and mount, and he would never wear a Baʿalbakī cotton shirt worth less than 30 dīnārs.61 6

Al-Ashraf Qāyṭbāy (r. 1468–96)

Although he was, along with al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, the greatest patron of architecture and urbanism and all arts, Qāytbāy does not seem to have been particularly concerned with ceremonial matters and outfit issues. This may have been due to the dire economic and financial situation and the military campaigns that overshadowed his reign since its first day.62 Already at his enthronement ceremony, Qāytbāy decided to break the rule of awarding his atābak, the chief 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 295. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 385. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 1229. See Chapter 5. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 760. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 417. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 307; idem, Ḥawādith, p. 447. Carl F. Petry, Protectors or Praetorians? The last Mamlūk Sultans and Egypt’s Waning as a Great Power (New York 1994), pp. 102–20.

48

Chapter 5

of the army and sultan’s deputy, with the customary two robes of honor, one for carrying the parasol behind him in the procession and the second one for his own investiture on the same occasion. The deputy, Yashbak min Mahdī, had to be content with only one robe.63 To the regret of the historians Ibn Iyās and Ṣayrafī, the sultan cancelled a number of regal ceremonies that required a dedicated outfit such as the parades at the Citadel, the processions across the city, which included the Opening of the Canal to celebrate the flood, the sultan’s navigation on the golden barge for Nile festivals, the inauguration of the seasons at the Maṭʿam al-Ṭayr, and other representational paraphernalia.64 He inaugurated the summer season at the Duhaysha palace within the Citadel without a solemn parade, wearing merely a white salārī of Baʿalbakī cotton while breaking at the same time another rule by not scheduling it on a Friday. Like most of his Circassian predecessors, Qāytbāy would ride out without formal outfit (shāsh and qumāsh), even when he was accompanied by a sumptuous procession.65 Ibn Iyās recalls on this occasion that the last sultan to have followed the traditional regal protocol was Khushqadam. However, while he was absent traveling, he ordered his deputy, Azbak, to distribute the winter clothes in his place, in accordance with the ‘sultans’ tradition’.66 On his return from pilgrimage,67 Qāytbāy crossed the city in a grand procession with full pomp, wearing a white Baʿalbakī over-cloak with a black ṭirāz and riding a horse with a golden saddle and a brocaded caparison.68 This was of course a significant event as a demonstration of the sultan’s piety. His departure, however, had taken place secretly without anyone noticing.69 Nevertheless, Qāytbāy’s character was not austere; rather, he was selective regarding priorities. His reign saw the revival and flourishing of many arts and crafts to an unparalleled degree, even in comparison with the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad. The boost of exports might have been a motivation behind some of his promotion initiatives. The carpets of that time are among the finest ever produced in the Muslim world and were highly cherished in Europe.70 The 63 64 65 66 67

Ibn Taghrbirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 394. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, pp. 179–80, 330; Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 67. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 32; Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 18. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 135. Before Qāytbāy, only al-Ẓāhir Baybars and al-Nāṣir Muḥammad performed the pilgrimage to Mecca during their reign. 68 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 76; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 162. 69 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 160. 70 Marco Spallanzani, Carpet Studies. 1300–1600 (Genoa 2016), pp. 27, 75–82,181–94; Carlo Maria Suriano, ‘The Mamluk Landscape. Carpet Weaving in Egypt and Syria Under Sultan Qaitbay’, Hali 134/35 (2004), pp. 94–105. Atıl, Renaissance, pp. 238–48.

Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code

49

variety and novelty of styles and techniques in architecture and the decorative arts of his reign were unprecedented. 7

Al-Ashraf Qānṣuh al-Ghawrī (r. 1501–16)

Qānṣuh al-Ghawrī’s reign saw the fall of the Mamluk sultanate. Yet the sultan’s penchant for ceremonial pomp seems to have increased over the years while the Ottoman conquest was approaching. This increase of his ceremonial zeal may not have been a mere frivolity but rather the naïve hope of inspiring enough respect and awe in his enemies to deter them. Although Ibn Iyās criticizes al-Ghawrī for several ceremonial blunders, as in 1507 when for some unexplained reason, the robes distributed on Feast of Breaking Fast were made of cotton and without ṭirāz, worth no more than three dīnārs,71 and the following year when he made a public appearance without the required shāsh and qumāsh,72 shabbiness was not at all al-Ghawrī’s style. Rather his reign was characterized by a great sense of ceremonial grandeur.73 This included the restoration of some of the customs that had been cancelled from the list of Qāytbāy’s representational priorities. Ibn Iyās ultimately praised the sultan for bringing back lost glamor by reviving forgotten regal traditions, such as the parades at the Citadel and the ceremonial apparel (shāsh and qumāsh).74 Even for the celebration of the Prophet’s birthday, al-Ghawrī ordered his courtiers to appear in shāsh and qumāsh, although it was not customary, in order to impress his guest, the Ottoman refugee prince Qurqud,75 who on this occasion was given a robe ‘brilliant like lightning’ made in a workshop known as ‘al-Qāʿa’, the Hall.76 This workshop which produced gold-woven fabrics, not mentioned before, points to his patronage of luxury textiles.77 To impress the numerous envoys who came to his court, al-Ghawrī restored al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s hippodrome beneath the Citadel after a long period of neglect, adding to it a garden with imported trees and a pool surrounded by pavilions and loggias thus turning the venue into a residential and pleasure 71 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 104. 72 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 143. 73 Christian Mauder, In the Sultan’s Salon. Learning, Religion, and Rulership at the Mamluk Court of Qāniṣawh al-Ghawrī (r. 1501–1516) (Leiden/Boston 2021), II, pp. 958–82, deals extensively with cultural life under Sultan al-Ghawrī, using unpublished sources. 74 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 392, 439, 453. 75 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 154, 157, 206–7, 213, 214, 220. 76 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 154–5, 186, 395. 77 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 154–5, 186, 395.

50

Chapter 5

complex where he spent much of his time, while carrying out official duties such as holding audiences and receiving embassies.78 Al-Ghawrī himself designed some of his regal symbols such as the new polychrome marble throne to replace the portable bench used by his predecessors,79 and he introduced the golden crescent to replace the traditional bird in the regal parasol along with other innovations. His dress was particularly refined, he wore a golden belt instead of the draped one of Baʿalbakī cotton, and unlike any of his predecessors would wear rings with precious stones. 8

The End of the Mamluk Dress Code

In 1516, on the battlefield of Marj Dābiq near Aleppo, Sultan al-Ghawrī and the caliph who accompanied him were each wearing a white malūṭa and a small takhfīfa, and they carried axes on their shoulders.80 This was the dress of the soldiers as they are depicted in late Mamluk furūsiyya manuscripts.81 In Cairo, which Sultan Selim entered in 1517, when the last acting Mamluk sultan al-Ashraf Ṭumānbāy (r. 1516–7) was hanged, he was dressed as an Egyptian commoner with a red shirt and blue drawers, both made of jūkh under a white malūṭa with large sleeves.82 Some Mamluks tried to escape the great carnage by disguising themselves as Ottomans wearing caftans and turbans with a bonnet.83 The conquerors, however, were quick to issue orders forcing the previous military aristocracy to wear malūṭas and zamṭs. Once the carnage of Cairo had subsided, the Ottomans moved on to govern Egypt with their usual pragmatism. Selim appointed a Mamluk emir, Khāyrbak, the former governor of Aleppo under al-Ghawrī, as the first governor of the Egyptian province of the Ottoman Empire. What was left of the Mamluk army was integrated into a newly created Mamluk corps within the Ottoman army which continued to exist until Muḥammad ʿAlī Pasha abolished it. When Khāyrbak received a former Mamluk emir dressed in the local outfit (ziyy al-ʿarab) described as a malūṭa and a zamṭ, he honored him in the Ottoman fashion with a caftan of tamāsīḥ velvet and an Ottoman turban. 78 79 80 81 82 83

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 56, 60, 102, 110, 137, 157, 165, 172, 269. Behrens-Abouseif, ‘Sultan al-Ghawri’, pp. 73–4. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 68. See Chapter 9. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 176. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 187.

Ottoman Termination of the Mamluk Dress Code

51

The Ottoman robes of honor for judges and bureaucrats were caftans of blue jūkh.84 Those of the higher dignitaries were made of velvet with gold (mudhahhab), the top category was made of tamāsīḥ.85 Khāyrbak himself wore on solemn occasions a caftan of red jūkh.86 Regarding women, rumors spread that the Ottoman judge was considering new regulations for them which included abolishing their entitlement to allowances and a clothing budget from their husbands that they had hitherto received and limiting the husband’s obligation to provide clothes for his wife to merely two shirts and a jukha per year. The jukha is likely to have been made of the type of wool called ‘jūkh’. The men hailed the judge’s decision while the women were dismayed. However, this scheme does not seem to have materialized. Another regulation was to forbid women from hiring donkeys for their transport as they used to and obliging them instead to use mules, as was done in Istanbul.87 Regarding women’s clothing, continuity is likely to have prevailed with gradual changes following the fashions of the time. 84 85 86 87

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 215. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 172, V, pp. 166, 193. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 326. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, pp. 461–2.

Chapter 6

The Khilʿa: Institution and Ritual The tradition of the robe of honor predates Islam and it is not confined to the Muslim world.1 Even so, as a medium of the state’s self-representation, its peculiarities in time and space are highly significant, as the Mamluk case demonstrates. The bestowal of the khilʿa or robe of honor by the sultan to invest officials and honor individuals was one of the most significant rituals at the Mamluk court and the most frequently practiced and reported. The reign of a sultan began with his own investiture with a khilʿa handed to him by the Abbasid caliph of Cairo. The caliph himself would have been previously invested with the caliphal robe by the sultan ruling then. Although the Mamluk tradition was based on the Abbasid tradition,2 which itself had much older (probably eastern) roots,3 the extent and significance of the khilʿa practice as it is described in the chronicles may have exceeded all previous and contemporary Islamic norms.4 In his chapter on the Abbasid khilʿa in Baghdad, al-Ṣābiʾ mentions only a few occasions where the investiture with a khilʿa took place.5 However, in the Mamluk sultanate all solemn events attended by the sultan, whether they were customary, occasional, or singular, were concluded with the distribution of honorific robes.6 Ibn Taghrībirdī’s and Ibn Iyās’s chronicles convey the impression that much of the sultan’s time was dedicated to the distribution of robes. In the index of technical terms compiled by Mohamed Mustafa for the chronicle of Ibn Iyās, the entry for ‘khalaʿa ʿalā’ fills fifteen pages. Interpreted in terms of appointing, dismissing, confirming in office, and other forms of interaction between the ruler and his subjects, the khilʿa signified regulation and patronage. Although ʿUmarī lists only three categories of recipients of robes of honor, the military establishment, the judicial and administrative officials, and the scholars, robes were given to a wide range of other persons including commoners of various groups and occupations. 1 2 3 4

See Sprinberg-Hinsen, Die Ḫilʿa. Sprinberg-Hinsen, Die Ḫilʿa, pp. 59–83. Gordon, ‘A World of Investiture’. On the investiture and its association with the khilʿa in procedure and in bureaucracy, see Diem, Ehrendes Kleid. 5 Abū l-Ḥusayn Hilāl ibn al-Muḥsin al-Ṣābiʾ, Rusūm Dār al-khilāfa, ed. Mikhāʾīl ʿAwwād (Beirut 1986), pp. 90–2. 6 For occasions when khilʿas were granted, see also Diem Ehrendes Kleid, pp. 41–7.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_007

The Khil ʿ a: Institution and Ritual

53

The term khilʿa is used in the chronicles for a robe of honor and as a synonym of ‘tashrīfa’ meaning investiture, promotion, and award. The tashrīfa was the bureaucratic act in which the khilʿa complemented the function of the investiture document. The verb ‘labisa’ meaning ‘to wear’ or ‘to dress’ is used in the chronicles in the sense of being appointed to a post and ‘khalaʿa ʿalā’ or ‘albasa’ were synonymous with ‘to appoint’. However, the bestowal of the khilʿa was not confined to the initial act of investiture, rather it was repeated on a regular basis to confirm tenure. It was a ‘customary gift’, as described by Mayer,7 granted by the sultan to the members of the military, judicial, and administrative establishment, as well as to foreign envoys, and to professionals and common individuals. The khilʿa ceremony was not an event confined to a specific date; rather, it was a routine practice that belonged to the sultan’s regular duties. Through the ritual of granting robes of honor, the sultan enacted his patronage of institutions and their leadership at the same time as he reiterated political and social hierarchy, symbolized in the scale of the robes whose design, fabric, color, and amount and quality of ṭirāz and fur were measured according to the recipient’s rank.8 The robes were thus a continuous reference to hierarchy and patronage and hence an implementation of social order. At the same time, the prodigality in the award of honors practiced by the Mamluk sultans strengthened the bond between them and their subjects. As G. Hambly describes the khilʿa universally, it was a ‘ubiquitous symbol of bonding between superior and inferior’.9 The khilʿa as a cloth to cover a person’s body also symbolized protection, as the poet Būṣīrī experienced when he was healed by his dream of the Prophet covering him with his own burda. The sultan gave a khilʿa as a token of patronage, but himself was not given one, except for the black sultanate khilʿa which he received from the caliph on the day of his enthronement. Although the sultan accepted gifts of sewn and raw textiles from his emirs and from other rulers, these were never described as ‘khilʿa’. When the Timurid Shāh Rūkh sent Sultan Barsbāy a crown and a khilʿa with the request to mint coins in his name, the message was a declaration of his claim to the suzerainty over Egypt which meant Barsbāy’s vassalage. The offence was answered with the torture of the envoy and messenger.10 The Mamluk sultans sent khilʿas accompanying diplomas of investiture to allied 7 8 9 10

Mayer, Costume, p. 57. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 450. Gavin R.G. Hambly, ‘From Baghdad to Bukhara, from Ghazna to Delhi. The Khilʿa Ceremony in the Transmission of Kingly Pomp and Circumstance’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture (New York 2001), p. 215. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, pp. 73–4; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 969.

54

Chapter 6

foreign rulers who would mention them in the khuṭba and strike their name on the coinage as a sign of vassalage in a protectorate. Although the quality and style of robes of honor granted by the sultan belonged to a ceremonial category,11 they set the criteria and the hierarchy for the regular formal dress worn every day. Honorific robes were festive garments made of sumptuous textiles of silk with gold threads, fur and ṭirāz embroidery, and brocade inscribed with the sultan’s name and titles – or merely with titles. These robes were worn on all solemn occasions involving the sultan’s presence and other festive events.12 However, some of the garments mentioned as belonging to the honorific outfit were also worn on ordinary and regular occasions such as the salārī of the Mamlūks and the farajiyya and ṭaylasān of the religious establishment, but probably not the complete outfit, which was not used as a working dress. The robe bestowal ceremony itself required that the dignitaries in the audience appear in their most festive outfits. In 1512 an official reprimand was issued in Cairo and sent to Damascus to the chamberlain there for not having worn his festive outfit at the investiture ceremony for the chief of the Turcoman tribes.13 Because it was a matter of the central government, the robes of honor for the governor and the military and civilian establishment of Syria were dispatched from Cairo and described as the ‘sultan’s robes’.14 The governor of Damascus would enter the city wearing the investiture robe given to him by the sultan in Cairo in a dedicated ceremony prior to his departure. In Damascus in the late 15th century, during the inaugural ceremony, the governor would receive four more robes from the Shāfiʿī and the Ḥanafī judges, the emir of the citadel of Damascus, and the chamberlain. The first is described as a robe with sable together with a salārī worth 100 dīnārs.15 It is not said where these robes were made. The robe sent from Cairo was of red silk with ermine. Like the sultan in Cairo, the provincial governors bestowed robes of honor on the dignitaries of their governorate. Reporting from Damascus, Ibn Ṭūlūn mentions the khilʿas together with the specification of their occasion and their color. This indicates that not all robes received by the same person were of the same style or color; this depended

11 12 13 14 15

ʿUmarī, Masālik, pp. 69–72; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 735–9; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, pp. 52–54. Diem, Ehrendes Kleid, pp. 67–70. Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 368. Jazarī, Tārīkh, II, p. 590; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 12; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 76; Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, pp. 100, 225. Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 223.

The Khil ʿ a: Institution and Ritual

55

rather on the occasion. The robe of investiture of a provincial governor was superior to that of his departure.16 Occasional references to a ‘badla kāmila’ or ‘tashrīf kāmil’ suggest that a robe of honor might vary between a single cloak or a complete outfit that would include a set of cloak with an over-cloak and sometimes also a shawl, scarf (tarḥa), or kerchief (mandīl).17 The ‘khilʿa’ mostly implied more than garments, including also a mount, a horse or a mule, with ceremonial trappings. The civilian dignitaries were given mules with plain saddles made of jūkh.18 Secretaries and high-ranking bureaucrats received a pen-box.19 Members of his military establishment received, as part of the investiture paraphernalia, a horse with luxury trappings that included a golden saddle, golden trappings, and a gold-brocaded velvet caparison.20 On the eve of a solemn occasion the emirs received a khilʿa so that they could wear it for the event.21 The robes of the Mamluk court and the army were supplied by the market, not by court workshops as was the case in other Muslim courts. However, the Dār al-Ṭirāz in Alexandria, which was the only Mamluk institution that had the status of a court workshop, provided the fabrics and embroideries for the ceremonial robes. There is no indication that they were tailored there. Maqrīzī writes that since the Fatimid period, the robes of honor for the court were sold at the Sharabshīyīn market.22 The market acquired its name under the Bahri Mamluks after the sharbūsh, a headdress that went back to an earlier tradition but acquired a particular ceremonial function in that period. This passage makes clear that the complete outfit was commissioned in the market. The text further indicates that it was also tailored there. The nāẓir al-khāṣṣ, or secretary of the privy purse, of sultan Barqūq used to buy the robes of honor for the court from the merchants of the Sharabshīyīn market until the sultan ordered the elimination of the dealers’ mediation so that the manufacturing workshops would deliver the robes directly and exclusively to the court. During the reign of Qāytbāy in the late 15th century, the robes were produced in the workshop of al-Bāqī about which no further information is given.23 This seems to confirm that Barqūq’s order to acquire the robes directly from the 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 913; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 284. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXI, p. 324; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 406. ʿUmarī, Masālik, p. 51. ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1992), pp. 315, 365; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 36. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 753. Shujāʿī, Tārīkh, p. 129. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 327–8. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, pp. 273, 413.

56

Chapter 6

producer rather than in the market continued to be valid under Qāytbāy. The Mamluk robes of honor were initially stored in a dedicated place at the Citadel. However, in Maqrīzī’s time this had changed following Sultan Barqūq’s order to allocate that place for other purposes and move the storage of the robes to the residence of the secretary of the privy purse instead.24 Already at the Abbasid court, the caliphs would lavish robes on courtiers, guests, and the envoys who came to their court, and on a variety of individuals on occasions that were not necessarily connected to investiture.25 The occasions for granting robes of honor were innumerable. The major ones, as indicated in the Mamluk chancery texts, besides the sultan’s enthronement, were hunting excursions, tournaments and games, and the reception of visiting and traveling dignitaries from other provinces including the great merchants. The merchants who dealt with the sultan were granted a robe of honor in addition to the price of their merchandise and their expenses.26 The historians praised Baybars’s liberality in bestowing honorific robes. Following his hunting excursions, even the meanest servants received a robe, and when none was left, cash was distributed instead.27 The robes of Baybars’s reign are described as having included golden belts, brocaded kalawtas, fabrics described as ‘mukharram’, which may mean ‘embroidered with à-jour work’,28 and white gold-woven gauzes.29 On a hunting excursion, Baybars awarded every hunter who shot a gazelle with a bughlutāq fitted with squirrel; those who shot an ostrich were granted a horse with trappings.30 One of the eminent emirs, Sayf al-Dīn al-Rashīdī, received on a monthly basis, among other things, two brocaded kalawtas worth 50 dīnārs apiece.31 The regular mention of golden belts as part of the honorific outfit provided by Baybars seems to contradict Maqrīzī who attributes the use of such belts to the Qalāwūnid reform. Suyūṭī confirms the use of belts of precious metal in Baybars’s reign when he mentions that the sultan was once rebuffed by a judge when he tried to obtain a fatwa to raise a levy for his warfare against the Mongols. The judge’s argument was that the sultan should first economize on the golden belts of his soldiers and the jewels of his slave-girls before requesting 24 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 735. 25 Speingberg-Hinsen, Die Ḫilʿa, pp. 62–99. 26 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 738–9, 740–1; ʿUmarī, Masālik, p. 74; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, pp. 52–3. 27 Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, Rawḍ, p. 264. 28 Serjeant translates ‘mukharram’ as ‘embroidered’, p. 254. 29 Ibn Shaddād, Tārīkh, p. 297; Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXX, p. 154. 30 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 584; Mayer, Costume, p. 24. 31 Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, Rawḍ, p. 166.

The Khil ʿ a: Institution and Ritual

57

such a fatwa.32 Likewise, the mention of brocaded kalawtas seems to contradict Maqrīzī who credits al-Ashraf Khalīl for introducing them. However, it may be that the golden belt and the brocaded kalawta under Baybars were provided on special occasions before the Qalāwūnids in the following period introduced them as regular items in the military outfit. Citing ʿUmarī, Qalqashandī writes that the budget of the honorific paraphernalia at the court could be excessive, and that the sultan’s liberality imposed a heavy burden on the resources of his successors. Although the sultan is not named, it is evident that ʿUmarī meant al-Nāṣir Muḥammad.33 The numbers of robes involved in some events could be considerable. Baybars distributed between 500 and 2,300 robes34 to participants in his various hunts and tournaments. In the second interregnum of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s reign, when al-Muẓaffar Baybars was enthroned in his place, he distributed 1,200 khilʿas at the ceremony of his investiture.35 Despite his general enthusiasm for regal pomp, Ibn Taghrībirdī disagreed with Sultan Khushqadam’s excesses in the distribution of robes to too many undeserving people. He attributed this inflation of honor to political disorder at the time rather than to the sultan’s generosity,36 implying that the sultan sought to ingratiate himself with the establishment by being prodigal. Among the customary occasions, the sultans distributed honorific robes to their officials twice a year at the beginning of the season. The return of the yearly pilgrimage caravan was a major festive event for the entire population that earned the appointed emir of the caravan a robe.37 Other seasonal occasions were the yearly opening of the canal dike to celebrate the Nile flood when the attendant of the Nilometer and even the boatmen were awarded with robes. Over time, following the sultans’ initiatives, other events that included the distribution of robes were added, such as the recitation of Saḥīḥ al-Bukhārī at the Citadel during the month of Ramadan, which is credited to al-Ashraf Shaʿbān.38 Sultan Barsbāy offered on this occasion cloaks made of an undefined

32

Jalāl al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Suyūṭī, Ḥusn al-muḥāḍara fī akhbār Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira II (Cairo 1968), p. 105. 33 Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 52. 34 Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXX, p. 192; Aynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān, II, p. 155. 35 Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar wa-jāmiʿ al-ghurar, IX, ed. H. R. Römer (Cairo 1960), p. 160. 36 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 763. 37 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 107. 38 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 223.

58

Chapter 6

kind of wool called ‘murabbaʿ ’39 to the members of the religious and judicial establishment and jubbas to the judges, with shawls, according to their rank.40 Other occasions for the sultan to bestow robes of honor were the confirmation or extension of someone’s tenure in office (istimrār), the departure of emirs to their governorate, and their return or visit to Cairo (qudūm, mulāqāh). The governor of Damascus on his arrival in Cairo, being always heavily loaded with the customary gifts for the sultan, was honored with multiple robes (khuliʿa ʿalayhi mukarraran).41 Robes were given as a gesture of pardon and rehabilitation (riḍā),42 to celebrate the sultan’s recovery from illness, or to congratulate a dignitary on his recovery (ʿāfiya, ʿiyāda),43 to reward an individual for an achievement or a service rendered such as successful medical treatment of the sultan,44 the organization of a princess’s trousseau, good advice from a soothsayer,45 the delivery of a gift or good news by a messenger. When the construction of his palace complex at the Citadel was completed in 1314, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad offered a total of 2,500 robes to the master-builders, masons, marble-workers, carpenters, and painters. The supervisors of the construction works were awarded with robes of mutammar silk and kāmiliyyas,46 the craftsmen received silk gowns and the simple builders were awarded with cash. Weddings and circumcisions in the sultan’s family were celebrated with the distribution of robes to the high dignitaries.47 When Sultan Qāytbāy was informed that a son was born to his great secretary, the emir Yashbak min Mahdī, he sent him, together with other gifts, a kāmiliyya with sable.48 On the occasion of his marriage to the daughter of the bureaucrat Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Sultan Jaqmaq gave the judge who presided over the marriage a kāmiliyya with

39 40

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

The word murabbaʿ literally means ‘rectangular’. According to Subkī, the murabbaʿ wool was red and dyed with blood, Muʿīd, p. 136. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 55; al-Ẓāhiri, Zubda, pp. 90–2; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 63; Carl F. Petry, ‘Robing Ceremonials in Late Mamluk Egypt. Hallowed Traditions, Shifting Protocols’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture (New York 2001), p. 365. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, IX, p. 132. Petry, ‘Robing Ceremonials’, pp. 370–1. ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1989), p. 585. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 274. Mufaḍḍal ibn Abī l-Faḍāʾil, Ägypten und Syrien zwischen 1317 und 1341 in der Chronik des Mufaḍḍal ibn Abī l-Faḍāʾil, ed. Samira Kortantamer (Freiburg 1973), pp. 101, 102, 257, 259. For kāmiliyya, see Chapter 7. Mufaḍḍal, Chronik, p. 10, Arabic text, p. 71. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 283.

The Khil ʿ a: Institution and Ritual

59

sable.49 Al-Ghawrī distributed robes to the entourage who accompanied him on a Nile excursion. After he received gifts from his emirs to celebrate his recovery from illness, he reciprocated with kāmiliyyas of red velvet with sable.50 Valuable gifts from his emirs and high-ranking bureaucrats were reciprocated with robes of special lavishness. Following his abdication of the throne and the end of his first reign, Sultan Barqūq gave farewell robes (khilʿat al-widāʿ) to his deputies.51 It also happened that to give a robe to an emir on his dismissal (ʿazl). This happened to Salār, the deputy of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, for his collaboration with al-Muẓaffar Baybars who usurped power during the sultan’s absence. On his return to the throne, before condemning Salār to prison, al-Nāṣir mischievously bestowed on him a robe described as more lavish than the one he had received for his appointment as sultan’s deputy!52 The sultan might give a person more than one robe on the same occasion as, for example, when an official’s appointment combined two different posts.53 A provincial governor received on his appointment two robes within a few days, one for his investiture as governor and the other as khilʿa of departure to his governorate.54 Following a polo game, al-Manṣūr Ḥājjī gave his vizier a robe of brocaded nakhkh and days later when he went again to play polo he gave him another one of violet silk with a brocaded ṭirāz.55 It was customary, before Qāytbāy abolished this rule, that on the enthronement of a sultan, the designated head of the army and sultan’s deputy would receive two robes of honor, one for carrying the sultan’s parasol and the other for his own investiture with his office.56 In the 15th century, a prominent scholar would receive two kāmiliyyas with sable every year, one for the recitation of al-Bukhārī during the month of Ramadan at the Citadel and the other as acknowledgment for his work as supervisor of endowments. After his death, each of his sons and successors in office were entitled to receive a robe for the Bukhārī reading sessions at the Citadel.57 When Sultan Īnāl gave the secretary of the privy purse a robe of honor made of red velvet and sable along with a horse with brocaded textiles and a golden 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Sakhāwī, Tibr, III, p. 90. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 337. ʿAynī, al-Sulṭān Barqūq, p. 245. Mayer, Costume, p. 61, Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 11. Mayer, Costume, p. 60; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 100. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 418. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 446–7. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, pp. 221, 254, 394. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, pp. 485–6.

60

Chapter 6

saddle, the honoree gave the robe and the horse to the sultan’s second secretary. The next day when the same secretary of the privy purse met with the sultan, he received again a similar robe and a horse, which Ibn Taghrībirdī believed was well-deserved.58 In 1453 Sultan Īnāl gave two high-ranking bureaucrats each a kāmiliyya with sable for tasks fulfilled and promised them two more khilʿas in the next few days for their respective promotions to vizier and majordomo.59 The sultan might confiscate a khilʿa previously granted. When Jaqmaq received incriminating information about a judge who had just received a khilʿa made of murabbaʿ wool, he immediately sent an official after him to confiscate the robe he was still wearing.60 There were occasions when the honoree received additional robes from the emirs as well. When the emir Buluk, the master of the wardrobe, announced Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s recovery from an illness, he received several robes of honor from the emirs.61 A century later, in 1438, the emir of the pilgrimage caravan, Khāyrbak, received on his return several robes and gifts from fellow emirs and dignitaries as acknowledgement for his excellent leadership during the journey and also as a gesture to please the sultan.62 The members of a choir of Qurʾan readers at the sultan’s court received each nearly 20 robes from the audience.63 The great emirs and other high-ranking officials were entitled to give robes to those attached to their service.64 When Ānūk, the son and heir to the throne of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, married the daughter of the emir Baktamūr he presented a lavish dowry to his father-in-law, who responded with the distribution of robes of honor of the highest quality to emirs and Mamluks of various ranks.65 When the emir Yashbak min Mahdī, Qāytbāy’s great secretary, head of the army, and the sultan’s deputy, appointed officials he gave them a khilʿa.66 Upon his departure to fight the Dhū l-Qadr vassals in Anatolia, he was empowered by the sultan with full governing authority there, and to that purpose he carried with him a thousand khilʿas of various categories.67 The emir Yalbughā al-Yaḥyāwī who enjoyed unparalleled privileges under Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad that included gifts of robes of silk satin, belts, and 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 209. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 271, 272. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 110. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 355. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 527–8; idem, Nujūm, IX, p. 107. Sakhāwī, Tibr, I, p. 56. Mayer, Costume, p. 63. Dawādārī, Kanz, IX, p. 358. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 703. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 269.

The Khil ʿ a: Institution and Ritual

61

brocaded ṭirāz, would share some of these with his protégés.68 Abū l-Fidāʾ, the Ayyubid vassal of Hama, upon receiving a gift from the sultan brought to him by an emir, awarded this emir in turn with a robe of ṭard waḥsh and a brocaded kalawta.69 Al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s secretary of the privy purse, Karīm al-Dīn, abused the privilege of his office by excessively bestowing robes of honor.70 An anecdote regarding the governor of Damascus Aydughmish (d. 1355), described him as excessively generous in granting robes to the extent that he would give a robe to someone simply for having greeted him!71 Christians and Jews who converted to Islam were awarded with a robe.72 When a Samaritan Jew in late-15th-century Damascus converted, the dignitaries of the city gave him khilʿas.73 Envoys, regardless of their religion, received robes for themselves and other members of their embassy.74 Pero Tafur, who was sent by the king of Cyprus to Barsbāy, described the robe he received as olive green and red, worked with gold, and lined with ermine.75 Sultan Jaqmaq, keen to improve his relations with the Timurid Shāh Rūkh, demonstrated unprecedented affability to his envoy in 1440 by offering him a robe of double-faced red and green silk velvet with brocaded ṭirāz containing as much as 500 mithqāls of gold, along with other precious Alexandrian textiles and horse trappings.76 On one occasion, Khushqadam refrained from giving an Ottoman envoy a robe so as to punish him for having refused to kiss the floor at it his feet.77 Nevertheless, for his departure he offered him a silk double-faced over-cloak with brocaded ṭirāz.78 Sultan Īnāl had given a similar cloak to the Ottoman envoy sent to announce the conquest of Constantinople; the other members of the embassy each received a salārī.79 When the Mamluk embassy in turn traveled to the Ottoman court they were dressed in the Ottoman style.80 The pride of receiving robes was considerable as is clearly expressed by the historian and Ayyubid ruler of Hama, al-Malik al-Ṣāliḥ Muʾayyad ibn 68 69 70 71

Ibn Qāḍī Shuhba, Ṭārīkh Ibn Qāḍī Shuhba, ed. ʿAdnān Darwīsh (Damascus 1994), II, p. 538. Abū l-Fidāʾ, Mukhtaṣar, IV, p. 77. See below. Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Aybak al-Ṣafadī, Aʿyān al-ʿaṣr wa-aʿwān al-naṣr, eds. ʿAlī Abū Zayd et al. (Damascus/Beirut 1998), I, p. 654. 72 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 548. 73 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 157. 74 Mayer, Costume, p. 64; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 741; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 147. 75 Pero Tafur, Travels and Adventures 1435–1439 (London 1926), p. 76. 76 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 344. 77 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 471. 78 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 473. 79 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 473. 80 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 82; idem, Ḥawādith, p. 450.

62

Chapter 6

al-Afḍal Abū l-Fidāʾ (r. 1310–32), who on several occasions describes the robes Qalāwūn and al-Nāṣir Muḥammad bestowed on him to confirm his investiture and vassalage. Because the granting of honorific robes was a widespread practice and a routine matter, potential recipients had good reason to worry when their expectation was not met, as this usually signaled disgrace or dismissal. When on a certain occasion the judge al-Sirrī ibn al-Shiḥna did not receive from Sultan Qāytbāy his customary robe with sable, there was, as Ṣayrafī writes, ‘great concern, and people began to spread rumors.’81 The recipients of honorific robes were not confined to the ruling Mamluks and bureaucrats but included professionals and other commoners of different status who earned acknowledgement and gratification for fulfillment of tasks and services rendered. When during his terminal illness Sultan Barsbāy showed some signs of recovery, people saw in this a blessing for the sultan and a higher reward for having previously honored his physicians with robes of honor. However, when the sultan’s health worsened, he ordered the physicians to be whipped.82 The belief in causality between the award and the recovery suggests that the bestowal of a robe was equivalent to an act of charity that would return blessings to the donor. Thus, the khilʿa culture integrated popular traditions and became equivalent to charity. Sheer fun could also be a reason to give someone a khilʿa as on the occasion when Barsbāy gave a robe of honor to a Mamlūk for being bald! In an episode that Ibn Iyās describes as ‘strange’, a Mamlūk uncovered his head by accident in front of the sultan, who could not help laughing at the sight of his bald skull, to which the Mamlūk responded by asking the sultan to appoint him ‘chief of the bald’. This was granted to him at the same time as a khilʿa. The result was that the Mamlūk began uncovering men’s heads on the streets, asking the bald ones for cash and causing much annoyance among the public. The incidents were eventually reported to the amused sultan, who took it lightly and reestablished order.83 Barsbāy also gave a robe of honor with a double ṭirāz to a Mamlūk for his stunning performance of walking a tightrope stretched between a palace in the Citadel and the minaret of Sultan Ḥasan’s mosque.84 The khilʿa culture was a universal phenomenon that related to the notion of promotion through investiture, as for example in the case of the Sufi khirqa 81 82 83 84

Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 264. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 411. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, p. 114. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 73.

The Khil ʿ a: Institution and Ritual

63

mentioned earlier. Whether it was practiced in the Mamluk artisans’ milieu is difficult to tell, as no reliable source on Mamluk guilds is known. However, the khilʿa seems to have had a popular burlesque parallel. Leo Africanus, who was not inclined to exaggerations, and who reports that it was common in Cairo to celebrate artisans for the achievement of an outstanding work with a procession in the streets accompanied by music, in which the laureate wore a golden robe of honor. He himself witnessed such an event to honor a man who had managed to tie a flea to a chain!85 The common practice of granting khilʿas eventually raised concerns about laxity in handling what was expected to be a special honor. Not only Ibn Taghrībirdī and occasionally other historians express their discontent about the ubiquity of robing; concerns were also voiced as public opinion. When in 1470 a modest commoner named Ibn al-Zaytūnī from the suburb of Ṭabbāla, who earned his living in a small notary shop and composed popular songs and poems but was unable to repay the debts on his house, received a robe of honor with squirrel fur, many were puzzled. They were told that the man had connections to the clan of the Ibn al-Jīʿān scholars and enjoyed the patronage of one of them. This explanation was not found satisfactory and could not prevent a reaction of dismay about ‘such a base and vile’ individual (safīh, waḍīʿ)’ receiving such an honor.86 Although Christian envoys were given most sumptuous robes, which indicated that religious discrimination was not involved in the concept of the robe, the author has not come across indigenous Christians or Jews receiving a Mamluk khilʿa unless they had converted to Islam, with the exception of Master Yaʿqūb, the Jewish master of the mint under al-Ghawrī. Whereas the Jews, who were a much smaller minority, were rarely mentioned in hostile terms, the Christians as co-religionists of the Crusader enemy were customarily referred to by the chroniclers in contemptuous terms and their faith described with dismissive adjectives. However, we cannot exclude the possibility that on exceptional or singular occasions non-Muslims may have been awarded with a robe for an achievement or and outstanding service. If so, the chroniclers preferred not to report it to posterity. Women also received robes of honor on occasion; the cases mentioned are from the Circassian period. Khushqadam offered a robe, along with Alexandrian textiles, to Sāra Khātūn, the mother of Uzūn Ḥasan, the Turkoman 85

Leo Africanus (al-Ḥasan ibn Muḥammad al-Wazzān al-Fāsī), The History and Description of Africa, ed. Robert Brown, trans. John Pory (London 1896), p. 884. 86 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ, pp. 264–5; Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sakhāwī, al-Ḍawʾ al-lāmiʿ li-ahl al-qarn al-tāsiʿ (Cairo, 1896), VI, p. 327.

64

Chapter 6

Aq Qoyunlu ruler of Tabriz, when she came to Cairo as her son’s envoy to offer the sultan the keys of the City of Khartbert that her son had just conquered as a vassal of the Mamluk sultanate.87 Qāytbāy honored a woman, Sitt Sāda, the mother of the judge Yūsuf ibn Kātib Jakam, with a kāmiliyya of tamāsīḥ with sable as acknowledgement for a donation she made or rather was compelled to make.88 Sultan al-Ghawrī’s wife herself offered robes to the physicians who treated her husband’s eye disease. These were in addition to the robes they received from the sultan himself and his emirs.89 87 88 89

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 515. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, pp. 46–7. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 332.

Chapter 7

The Khilʿa as a Garment 1

The Caliph and the Sultan

As noted by Mayer, the outfit of the caliph and the sultan on their respective investiture belonged to the category of costume reserved for the religious establishment and was distinct from that of the military class of the Mamlūks.1 On the occasion of his investiture, the caliph received from the sultan a black cloak and a black embroidered turban with a tip hanging half a cubit down and a black embroidered shawl or ṭaylasān.2 The caliph’s turban is sometimes called ‘baghdādiyya’, referring to its origin. The cloak of the caliph al-Mustaʿīn bi-llāh in 1412 is described by Qalqashandī as a garment (kāmiliyya) with narrow sleeves, open on the back near the hem and worn over another cloak referred to as ‘qabāʾ ’, likewise with narrow sleeves. He wore a pectoral or necklace as his predecessors in Baghdad had done.3 On ordinary occasions, however, the caliph dressed in the fashion of men of the pen, and the robes of honor he received from the sultan on various occasions followed mostly the fashion of the time for the judicial and religious dignitaries, usually a black cloak and a veil or shawl (tarḥa or ṭaylasān). On the investiture of the caliph Zakariyyā ibn al-Mustaʿṣim in 1386, Barqūq gave him a robe that was ‘not that of the caliphate’ (ghayr khilʿat al-khilāfa). However, on the following day, the caliph received the caliphate robe at the same time as he was granted the privilege of supervision of the shrine of Sayyida Nafīsa, as a source of income.4 In the 15th century, the caliphs were honored with silk robes like those of the emirs. When al-Manṣūr ʿUthmān the son of Sultan Jaqmaq was enthroned in 1453, the caliph received during the following celebration ceremony a robe of honor of mutammar silk satin, similar to the one given to the sultan’s deputy and head of the army, in addition to a horse with golden trappings and cash worth 1,000 dīnārs.5 In 1461, when the investiture document of Sultan Aḥmad the son of Īnāl was read in the inaugural ceremony, the sultan honored the caliph with a doubled-faced over-cloak of green and white silk with brocaded 1 Mayer, Costume, pp. 12–14; Qalqashandī, Subḥ, III, p. 276; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, 452, II, 8–11. 2 Mayer, Costume, pp. 12–14; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, III, p. 276; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, pp. 220, 226. 3 Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, Rawḍ, p. 36; Ṣābiʾ, Rusūm, pp. 93–4. 4 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XI, p. 202. 5 Sakhāwī, Tibr, IV, p. 79.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_008

66

Chapter 7

ṭirāz and a horse with a golden saddle and a brocaded caparison; the attending judges received each a kāmiliyya with sable.6 The same style of silk robe was granted to the caliph on the enthronement of Sultan Khushqadam.7 When al-Ghawrī gave the caliph a salārī from his own wardrobe, he was treating him as a Mamluk dignitary. The chronicles always dedicate a few lines to the description of the sultan’s appearance for his investiture. This was the only occasion when the sultan’s outfit was predominantly black. The caliph presented him a khilʿa consisting of a gold-brocaded turban with tips hanging between the shoulders, a violet or green over-cloak (durrāʿa, farajiyya) over a black silk robe ( jubba) with a golden pectoral which he wore before appearing to the audience.8 The black khilʿa and turban are described as ‘marqūma’, meaning ‘inscribed’.9 In 1342, when al-Manṣūr Abū Bakr, son of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, was enthroned, he wore the black khilʿa over a green cloak referred to as ‘kanjī ’ and a black turban with a cap made of a fragment from a Kaʿba curtain.10 Abū Bakr, however, was dethroned and replaced in the same year by his brother al-Nāṣir Aḥmad, whose investiture robe was similar. However, this time the historian uses the term farajiyya instead of kanji, which refers to the fabric of which the farajiyya was made, and he indicates that the patch of the Kaʿba curtain was sewn into the farajiyya.11 2

The Military Establishment in the Bahri Period

The major component of a robe of honor for a member of the Mamluk establishment was the silk over-cloak (qabāʾ), an abbreviation of ‘qabāʾ fawqānī’, which indicates that it was an over-cloak and must be identical with the qabā islāmī attributed to Qalāwūn. The fawqānī was a prerogative of sultans and emirs. (fig. 2) The robes of the top-ranking emirs during the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad were made of a red silk satin (aṭlas).12 Usually the over-cloak is described as made of ‘aṭlasayn’, meaning double silk satin, rather than mere aṭlas. ʿUmarī

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 226. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 254. Mayer, Costume, pp. 15–6. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, III, pp. 276–7; For the investiture of Baybars, see Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 452. Shujāʿī, Tārīkh, p. 130. Shujāʿī, Tārīkh, p. 204. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 735–6; ʿUmari, Masālik, pp. 69–70; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, pp. 52–4; Mayer, Costume, pp. 56–64. The chronicles mostly use the term aṭlasayn, or double satin.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

Figure 2

67

Frontispiece of the manuscript of Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1334 © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, A.F.9

calls the fabric ‘aṭlas rūmī’ which suggests that it may have been imported from Byzantium or made in the Byzantine style. This over-cloak was adorned with a brocaded ṭirāz band and lined with squirrel fur and included beaver elements as well.13 The cloak or qabāʾ worn 13

The text is not quite clear here, referring to a ‘sajaf ’ (?) on the outside and a ‘ghisha‌ʾ ’ of beaver. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 735.

68

Chapter 7

underneath was of yellow rūmī silk. The kalawta was gold-brocaded, adorned with gold fittings, and wrapped in a gauze (shāsh) of fine Alexandrian muslin14 with a white silk bordure inscribed with the sultan’s titles and decorated with brilliant ornaments of colored silk. In some prominent cases the gauze was entirely made of silk. This higher category of outfit included a golden belt studded with pearls, emeralds, and other gems and three studded emblematic rings (bikāriyyāt). The governor of Damascus, who belonged to the highest rank, received in addition to the usual honorific outfit, a tarkība, or fitting of gold brocade, running all around his over-cloak. The one the emir Ṭashtamur received for his investiture as governor in 1342 was described as ‘special’, with brocaded ṭirāz and a brocade fitting (tarkība zarkash) of a quality ‘beyond the ordinary’.15 The next in rank had belts without gems, and further down the ranks the belt had only one ring. A sword and a horse belonged to the honorific apparel. The next category further down the ranks was a robe made of ṭard waḥsh, a kind of silk brocade produced in the Dār al-Ṭirāz of Alexandria as well as in Cairo and Damascus. The term ṭard waḥsh literally means ‘beasts of prey hunt’, suggesting that the fabric was decorated with such motifs, usually as a frieze, which can indeed be seen on many textile fragments.16 ʿUmari describes the ṭard waḥsh as ‘mujawwakh with jākhāt’17 and adorned with inscriptions, hunting motifs (ṭard waḥsh), and gold brocade. Other ornaments filled the space between the jākhas that may have included hunting motifs. According to Dozy, a jākha is a band. One may speculate here that the expression refers to the ribbon-work of cartouches that is very common in the Mamluk decorative arts. This type of colored cloak was adorned with a ṭirāz band of gold-embroidered or brocaded inscriptions in the name of the sultan and might include fur. The ṭirāz was made with goldthreads (muqaṣṣab). The garment under the over-cloak was made of Alexandrian mufarraj(?).18 Another type of brocaded silk fabric for the higher ranks was the nakhkh,19 produced in the Dār al-Ṭirāz of Alexandria, with inscriptions containing the sultan’s name and titles as well as gold-threaded embroideries.20 Nakhkh is rarely mentioned in the 14th century, but it seems to replace the ṭard waḥsh 14 15 16 17 18

Mousseline is Dozy’s translation in his Supplément of the term ‘lānis’ used here. Shujāʿī, Tārīkh, p. 205. Dozy, Supplément. Dozy, Supplément. ‘min al-mufarraj al-iskandarānī al-tarḥ’. Mufarraj could mean perhaps open-work. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 732. 19 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 328; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 220–1 n. 1. 20 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 736.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

69

in the 15th century. Maqrīzī’s description of the Sharabshīyīn market refers to nakhkh as an alternative to ṭard waḥsh. The category of garment for those further down the echelons of the military class was, according to ʿUmarī, a robe made of a two-colored fabric called ‘kamkha’, lined with squirrel and beaver fur. Dozy defines this fabric as chenille woven with gold and silver.21 In this middle category the gauze of the headdress and the belt would not be inscribed but rather patterned in green and golden-yellow colors, and the belt was without a clasp. Still further down the ranks was a robe of kanjī fabric, lined with squirrel and beaver, a kalawta with little gilding and no belt. Kanjī was a mixture of cotton with silk.22 The gauze used for the headdress and the belt was adorned with green and yellow jākhas without inscriptions; the belt likewise had no inscription and no emblematic rings. ʿUmarī here lists the kanjī and the kamkha in the reverse order of that used by Maqrīzī. Further down in rank were cloaks of monochrome mujawwam(?) fabric over a blue or green cloak, and further down, the use of fur diminished or was eliminated altogether, and different fabrics were used. From this hierarchy it appears that inscribed ṭiraz and embroidered inscriptions were reserved for the highest-ranking robes as were red and multi-colored fabrics. The color green came next, followed downwards by blue fabrics for the lower echelons. ʿUmarī’s description of the dress code is complemented by the chroniclers’ accounts of contemporary practice they witnessed on the ground. A robe of honor bestowed by Sultan Qalāwūn on the emir Abū l-Fidāʾ (d. 1332), the governor of the province of Hama, who enjoyed a privileged status in the hierarchy of the sultan’s deputies, consisted of an over-cloak of red satin (aṭlas) with a brocaded ṭirāz lined with squirrel and adorned with a border of beaver. It was worn over a cloak of yellow silk. A cut of gauze described as tasāʿī, meaning that it was nine cubits long,23 and a brocaded kalawta, a golden belt and a golden sword, a talkash(?) of amber, which may be a belt, belonged to the khilʿa in addition to a gown with embroidered ṭirāz and a libās or trousers. The honoree also received a horse with golden trappings.24 Abū l-Fidāʾ also received robes from Qalāwūn’s son and successor, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, which he describes in similar but not identical terms.25 These 21 22 23 24 25

Dozy, Supplément. Maqrīzī adds that it was made of kanjī, a fabric originally from Kanja. Dozy, Supplément. Abū l-Fidāʾ, Mukhtaṣar, IV, p. 20. Abū l-Fidāʾ, Mukhtaṣar, IV, p. 93.

70

Chapter 7

included ceremonial robes of embroidered silk brocade from the Dār al-Ṭirāz of Alexandria and golden belts studded with gemstones. In one case he even specified the amount of gold that was woven in a cloak. On that occasion, he was given three khilʿas; one of them consisted of an over-cloak of red satin with brocaded ṭirāz alongside a yellow cloak and a brocaded kalawta with a tasāʿī gauze. The second khilʿa was an over-cloak with brocaded ṭirāz containing 100 mithqāls of gold and lined with ermine, and the third was the khilʿa of departure, which was an over-cloak described as ‘bi-l-sharaj’(?).26 On another occasion he specified that that the gauze of the kalawta was woven with gold and the belt was studded with rubies and pearls weighing 30,000 dirhams. The studded belts are not mentioned in connection with Qalāwūn’s robe, and indeed the use of gems in belts is attributed to al-Nāṣir’s reform. In 1320 Abū l-Fidāʾ’s confirmation in office was celebrated with the distribution of 130 robes to his retinue, 13 of which were made of satin and the others made either of kanjī fabrics from the Dār al-Ṭirāz or of ṭard waḥsh.27 Bahri Mamluk emirs would wear on their investiture the sharbūsh, a headdress for solemn occasions with a gown of nakhkh or ṭard waḥsh. An emir’s sharbūsh could be brocaded and studded with pearls.28 When al-Nāṣir Muḥammad appointed his favorite son, Ānūk, as emir, he gave him a robe of red satin with brocaded embroidery and a brocaded sharbūsh shaped as a crown.29 Maqrīzī and Ibn Taghrībirdī report that when in 1332, Abū l-Fidāʾ’s son al-Afḍal Muḥammad was appointed governor of Hama as his father’s successor, he was offered a robe of aṭlasayn with a golden ṭirāz, a golden belt with three emblematic rings, and a golden sharbūsh. His emirs were honored each with an aṭlasayn with a golden ṭirāz.30 No gems are mentioned on this occasion. The event was celebrated at Qalāwūn’s mausoleum as was customary at that time. When 46 of al-Nāṣir’s Mamlūks were promoted to the rank of emir they were paraded through the city, wearing the sharbūsh; the historian commented that ‘it was a magnificent day’.31 The sharbūsh, which was known in Abbasid and Ayyubid times, but may have been modified and upgraded by the Bahri Mamluks, was abolished under the Circassians.32 Likewise, the belts of gold and silver and those studded with precious stones, which were part

26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Abū l-Fidāʾ, al-Mukhtaṣar, IV, pp. 76, 79. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 202. Abū l-Fidāʾ, Mukhtaṣar, IV, p. 89. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 99. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, pp. 100–1; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 345. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 117. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 328.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

71

of the khilʿa of the Bahri period, were abandoned in the first quarter of the 15th century.33 The hierarchy of robes was defined not only by the recipient’s status but by the occasion as well. When Sultan Īnāl offered the deputy of Tripoli as ‘robe of departure’ an over-cloak with brocaded ṭirāz, Ibn Taghrībirdī remarked that protocol dictated a lower-level robe of nakhkh and ermine.34 2.1 Nuwayrī’s List Another detailed hierarchy of the robes in the first half of the 14th century is provided by Nuwayrī (d. 1333) in his comments on the ostentatious behavior of the secretary of the privy purse, Karīm al-Dīn, during the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad. The secretary who would grant honorific robes on a grand scale made it a point to outdo the sultan’s largess by exaggerating the value of his own robes. In cases when the sultan would give a robe of color, Karīm al-Dīn would give one of muṣmat brocade; instead of muṣmat he would give one of ṭard waḥsh; instead of ṭard waḥsh his robe would be woven with gold threads (muqaṣṣab), instead of the muqaṣṣab, maʿdanī satin and brocaded ṭirāz, and instead of that, a robe brocaded and studded with pearls and gems!35 Nuwayrī’s enumeration of robe categories, which is not identical to that of his contemporary ʿUmarī, complicates the picture with more varieties. 2.2 al-Dawādārī’s List Another list of robes is provided by Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī (d. 1335). His terminology regarding contemporaneous events is more differentiated than that used by the later historians Ibn Taghrībirdī and Maqrīzī, who mention only robes of aṭlasayn and ṭard waḥsh. On multiple occasions, Dawādārī refers to the bughluṭāq. In his description of the ceremony where Aḥmad a son of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad was invested as emir in 1331, he reports that he received a robe of kanjī muṣmat while other emirs received robes of various categories: a complete satin outfit, a complete ṭard waḥsh outfit, red kanjī, bughluṭāqs, and washshāqī bughluṭāqs.36 Describing the same investiture ceremony of al-Afḍal Muḥammad as governor of Hama, mentioned above, Dawādārī writes that the governor and his highest-ranking emirs were given complete robes of aṭlas, others received complete robes of ṭard waḥsh, there were also kanjī, blue 33 34 35 36

Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 325; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, p. 440. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 416. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXII, p. 54. Dawādārī, Kanz, IX, pp. 357, 365; see also p. 298. Washāqī probably refers to washaq which is lynx fur that would have characterized the bughlutāq. Dozy, Dictionnaire, p. 359.

72

Chapter 7

muṣmat, blue kanjī, qarḍiyya (?) bughluṭāq, red kanji, and washshāqī muṣmat.37 The order of the enumeration does not seem to indicate hierarchy and thus does not contribute to clarifying the rank of the robes. Although it confirms the variety of robes on such occasions, Dawādārī’s vocabulary is difficult to harmonize with that of ʿUmarī and Nuwayrī. The term bughluṭāq, which according to Dozy is Persian and known only from Mamluk sources to describe a garment, is more likely to be rather of Turkish or Mongol origin. Dawādārī calls it on one occasion bughluṭāq tatarī,38 which suggests that it was identical with the qabāʾ tatarī attributed to Qalāwūn. The adjective tatarī ceased to be mentioned in later sources as was also the case with the term bughluṭāq. One may therefore speculate that the qabāʾ tatarī or bughluṭāq, was replaced by the salāriyya or salārī which is continuously mentioned till the end of the Mamluk period. One may speculate that it was a garment with a straight, rather than diagonal, Oriental opening. It is not surprising that the term tatarī was abandoned as the Mongol influence declined over time. Maqrīzī and other later historians reporting on the same ceremonies do not use the term bughluṭāq, which may have been more familiar to Dawādārī who was a Turk. Dawādārī also uses the adjective kāmil, meaning ‘complete’, to indicate when robes of honor consisted of a complete outfit rather than a singular garment. 3

The Military Establishment in the Circassian Period

Although we lack for the Circassian period the kind of dress code that ʿUmarī compiled in the first half of the 14th century, the chronicles provide ample information about dress code practices. Though new terms emerged, their novelty does not necessarily suggest that they always referred to a new garment style, as they could also simply indicate a terminological development. The evolution of the terminology of robes of honor is revealed in the list of robes provided by Khalīl al-Ẓāhirī (d. 1468) when compared with ʿUmarī’s. Ẓāhirī mentions the over-cloaks ( fawqāniyyāt) in the Yalbughā style with large brocaded ṭirāz, one-and-a-half cubits wide, the aṭlasayn mutammar worn underneath, the kāmiliyya which he describes as ṭarsh(?),39 the qabāʾ made of 37 This may refer to a velvet garment with lynx fitting. 38 Dawādārī, Kanz, IX, p. 182. 39 The term is also used by ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1989), p. 657, who mentions a kāmiliyya bi-sammūr ṭarsh. See also Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, p. 105. Dozy mentions the word in the Supplément but cannot explain it.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

73

nakhkh with ermine, the jubba with a broad ṭirāz, the aṭlasayn shādhiḥ(?).40 He notes that each category had its own design and sub-categories. These were followed in descending order by the qabāʾ of Tabriz style, which is not explained, the embroidered ‘ʿFYN’ (?) the ṭard waḥsh, and the muṣmat.41 The terms kāmiliyya, ‘ʿFYN’, and Yalbughā-style ṭirāz do not belong to the vocabulary of the Qalāwūnid period. Later in the 15th century, Ṣayrafī mentions salārīs, kāmiliyyas, and fawqāniyyāt, or over-cloaks, as varieties of honorific robes.42 3.1 The Double-Faced Over-Cloak and the aṭlasayn Barqūq’s robes of honor differed from their predecessors’ mainly through the description of the over-cloak as ‘double-faced’, which was an innovation. When during his absence in Syria in 1391, the sultan sent the emir Sūdūn as his messenger to his courtiers in Cairo, Sūdūn was honored on his arrival by the royal majordomo with a double-faced cloak of nakhkh decorated with a golden ṭirāz and other similar cloaks sponsored by other courtiers.43 Ibn Iyās, writing more than a century later, however, attributed the doubleface fashion to al-Ashraf Shaʿbān, which would date it only a few years earlier. The double-faced silk over-cloak with a broad ṭirāz was dedicated to the highest-ranking emirs. This is what Sultan Barqūq’s son Faraj was given as emir and heir to the throne. The over-cloak was also defined as ‘fawqānī l-imra’ or the upper-cloak of the emirate, indicating that it continued to be reserved for emirs.44 Lower ranks received woolen cloaks with either ṭirāz or sable.45 In the case of the highest-ranking honorees, the double-faced over-cloak with golden ṭirāz was paired with a robe of gold-woven aṭlasayn mutammar with brocaded ṭirāz.46 It was awarded to the high-ranking dignitaries such as the sultan’s deputy and the ustādār, or royal majordomo.47 Sultan al-Ashraf Īnāl awarded the emir of the pilgrimage caravan, who in this case was his son,

40 shādhiḥ may be a corruption of sādhij, meaning ‘simple’. According to Dozy, Supplément, shādhij and sādhij are equivalent. It could also mean ‘without gold’, Serjeant, Islamic Textiles, p. 258. 41 Ẓāhirī, Zubda, p. 109. 42 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, p. 269. 43 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh IX/2, p. 262. 44 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 263. 45 Ibn al-Furāt, IX/2, pp. 295, 303, 411. 46 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 1002; idem, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 736; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 445, XVI, pp. 23, 59, 115, 154, 220, 254; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, IV, p. 283; Costume, p. 14 n. 4; Sakhāwī, Tibr, IV, p. 26. Although aṭlasayn designates a fabric rather than a garment, the chroniclers of the 15th century use the shorter term aṭlasayn to denote the robe altogether. 47 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 736–8; Mayer, Costume, p. 14 n. 4.

74

Chapter 7

with such a robe,48 and the custom continued under Qāytbāy.49 This type of khilʿa was the equivalent of the over-cloak that in ʿUmarī’s time was made of red rūmī satin to be worn over the yellow satin cloak. To celebrate the conquest of Cyprus, Barsbāy honored the upper echelon of his military commanders with a robe of aṭlasayn mutammar50 and a horse. It is not mentioned whether it was combined with an over-cloak as one would expect. The next in rank received an over-cloak of the kamkha type made of silk of red, green, and violet color with brocaded ṭirāz.51 On the governor of Aleppo’s departure, Barsbāy presented him with an overcloak of nakhkh with ermine together with a tatarī with sable, which Maqrīzī notes was extravagant, considering ‘the time’; Ṣayrafī who reports the same episode writes that this robe was similar to that of the emir’s investiture.52 3.2 Gold and Tiraz Although the value of robes was defined by rank, we often read in both the Bahri and Circassian periods about robes of outstanding lavishness. This was manifested mainly in the amount of the gold used in their brocade and embroidery.53 In the 14th century, when the daughter of the eminent emir and governor of Damascus, Tankiz, married the emir Baktamūr, sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad honored the bride’s father with a robe and an over-cloak worth 50,000 silver dirhams (2,500 dīnārs).54 In the 15th century the Yalbughā ṭirāz is regularly mentioned as a sign of special acknowledgement.55 This ṭirāz style goes back to the years when Yalbughā (d. 1366) was regent of Sultan Shaʿbān, which attributes it to the late Bahri period. However, it is under the Circassians that the use of this ṭirāẓ of especially large format for high quality robes is regularly mentioned. The emir of the pilgrimage at that time was entitled to receive, on the return of his caravan, an over-cloak with a broad Yalbughā-style ṭirāz and a robe of nakhkh with ermine,56 while the lower emir and commander of the ‘first pilgrimage caravan’ was entitled to a robe made of red satin or wool.57 Although the main ṭirāz 48 49 50

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 115. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 497. The chroniclers use both the terms muthammar and mutammar, the latter, which is more frequent, is used here. 51 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XIV, p. 302. 52 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 913; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 284. 53 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 41. 500 mithqals of gold in the sultan’s over-cloak. 54 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 289. 55 ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1989), p. 182; idem, ʿIqd al-Jumān (2002), p. 453. 56 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 256. 57 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 441.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

75

decoration seem to have been applied around the upper sleeves, outstanding robes might have additional bands; Ibn Ṭūlūn describes ṭirāz bands with various terms that might refer to categories: special, magnificent, golden (khāṣṣ, ḥāfil, mudhahhab, dhahab).58 During his short and exceptional tenure as sultan, the Caliph al-Mustaʿīn ʿAbbās, in 1412, gave the emir and future sultan, Shaykh, a robe described as ‘magnificent’ with an extraordinary ṭirāz worth 500 dīnārs.59 A special khilʿa could include a brocaded kalawta with a gem.60 Sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh gave his emirs a special khilʿa with ṭirāz embroidery ‘reaching down to their fingers’.61 In 1459 Sultan Īnāl gave the emir Jānibak al-Ẓāhirī, the governor of Jedda, a khilʿa with a ṭirāz embroidered with 800 mithqāls of gold.62 An extraordinary robe given by Sultan Janbalāṭ in 1500 to his chancellor consisted of a double-faced silk over-cloak, blue and green on the outside, decorated with a Yalbughā-style ṭirāz band two-and-a-half cubits wide and three cubits long made with 800 mithqāls of Venetian gold, ‘the like of which was never seen or heard of’.63 3.3 The salārī Although the salāriyya/salārī, created by the emir Salār in the early 14th century, is not mentioned in ʿUmarī’s description of the khilʿa, it regularly figures in the chronicles of the 15th century as a khilʿa or part of the khilʿa granted to members of the Mamluk class. At the same time, however, it was a garment commonly worn by the sultans and the emirs, at times with an over-cloak.64 When the son of Sultan al-Ghawrī took off his over-cloak to offer it to one of his officials, he revealed a salārī of white Baʿalbakī cotton. The fact that on this occasion he was wearing a small takhfīfa indicates that he was in his everyday dress.65 The salārī could be made of silk, Baʿalbakī cotton, or wool, in various colors, embroidered or adorned or lined with sable, but other furs are also mentioned. Its value varied considerably according to its materials.66 It could have short 58 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, pp. 128, 202, 211, 221, 286, 299; II, p. 17. 59 Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd al-ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān fī tārīkh ahl-al-zamān (815–824), and (824–50/ 1421–47) ed.ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Ṭanṭāwī al-Qarmūṭ (Cairo 1985), p. 133. 60 Dawādārī, Kanz, IX, pp. 215, 228. 61 ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1985), p. 347. 62 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 319. 63 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 450. 64 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 416; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 913; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 284. 65 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 478–9. 66 Mayer, Costume, p. 24; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 368, V, p. 17; Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 496.

76

Chapter 7

sleeves, which is a modified version of the original model created by Salār,67 be fitted with fur, and embroidered, depending on rank.68 One of al-Ghawrī’s salārīs was made of white wool with a face (wajh) of green wool; however, usually the salārī is not described as double-faced. The difference between the salārī and the tatarī is not clear. Nonetheless, since Maqrīzī writes that the salārī replaced the bughluṭāq, all three must have served similar purposes with variations in style, and all three seem to have been garments of varying length worn directly on the body under the over-cloak. The honorific salārī was offered to members of the military class on various occasions.69 After the lancers’ parade that would take place in the pilgrimage season, the master of the lancers, at that time the emir and future sultan Qāytbāy, received from Sultan Khushqadam a red velvet kāmiliyya with sable, and each of the four commanders below him, a salārī either of green wool with sable or of red wool with lynx.70 Sultan Qāytbāy gave a woolen salārī with sable as robe of honor to the Dhū l-Qadr Turcoman prince and son of Shāh Būdāq when he came to Cairo after losing his territory to his brother.71 The ceremony celebrating the maturity (rushd) of sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad the son of Qāytbāy, which confirmed his qualification to rule, included the distribution of salārīs with fur to the sultan’s private guard.72 Both salārīs and kāmiliyyas were distributed at the same time to conclude festive events.73 As a garment worn by the sultans, the salārī acquired a special significance in the late Mamluk culture of gratification, when it became customary that the sultan would take it from his own wardrobe. The tradition of the salārī from the sultan’s wardrobe seems to have begun in the second half of the 15th century with Sultan Jaqmaq.74 Qāytbāy gave his own salārī to an emir at the same time as he promoted him.75 Sultan al-Ghawrī is mentioned on multiple occasions as having made a similar gesture. His son offered his own fawqānī to the emir and master of the stables.76 Ibn Iyās commented that al-Ghawrī exaggerated his kindness toward the Ottoman envoy by giving him at each of the multiple meetings they had 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 359, V, p. 17. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 41. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 79, 103, 250. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 456. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 496. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 345. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 106, 270. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, p. 290; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 115. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, pp. 344–5. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 478–9.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

77

one of his own salārīs with sable, each worth 200 dīnārs.77 But other envoys78 and even refugees from the Ottoman sultan’s court also received the honor of a salārī from the sultan’s wardrobe.79 The salārī seems to have been in principle reserved for the Mamluk aristocracy. A rare case where a non-Mamluk received a salārī of al-Ghawrī’s own clothes was the caliph al-Mutawakkil Muḥammad; it was a special one of pistachio-green wool whose sable alone was worth 300 dīnārs.80 Likewise, Sultan Khushqadam awarded Ibn Abī l-Raddād, the attendant of the Nilometer, for announcing an auspicious reading of the Nile flood level, with his own woolen salārī with squirrel,81 which was an extraordinary honor for a commoner. The exception was, however, justified by the fact that the good news came after a period of draught and anxiety. The salārī was not the only garment from the sultan’s wardrobe to be offered as a gift. Bureaucrats received kāmiliyyas with sable also from the sultan’s wardrobe, as happened after a party on the Nile hosted by al-Ghawrī.82 In this case, Ibn Iyās does not describe them as ‘khilʿas’, using instead the neutral term ‘albasa’, meaning ‘to dress.’ However, the lines between the khilʿa and such gifts were blurred, and this case may not be meant to be read differently. The practice of giving a used personal garment as an official gift was common in many cultures. When the Ilkhanid sultan Abū Saʿīd took the initiative to end hostilities with the Mamluks, he sent a message with gifts that included his own turban.83 In 1427, the Ottoman sultan Murād II sent Barsbāy the clothes he was wearing including his turban.84 4

The Civilian Dignitaries

According to ʿUmarī, the highest-ranking dignitaries of the judicial and administrative establishment, viziers and secretaries who were men of the pen, were honored in the Bahri period with a cloak made of white kamkha. ʿUmarī does not mention ṭirāz in this context.

77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 166, 197, 395. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 145, 220, 253. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 166, 289. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 292. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, p. 395. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 276. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXIII, p. 12; Mufaḍḍal, Chronik, p. 11. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha III, pp. 128–29.

78

Chapter 7

Whereas the kamkha fabric belonged to the third category in the hierarchy of robes of honor for the military establishment, it was the highest to which the civilian dignitaries were entitled. This hierarchy encapsulated the concept of the Bahri Mamluk dress code. The civilian’s khilʿa consisted of an over-cloak lined with fur, including the sleeves, and worn over a green under-kamkha. Rather than a gold-brocaded ṭirāz band, it was embroidered ‘with an embroidered inscription of plain silk’ (muṭarraz bi-raqam ḥarīr sādhij).85 A turban made of Damietta linen and a shawl belonged to the outfit.86 The next robe down the echelon was without fur, and further down, the robe was without the scarf or shawl described here as ‘tarḥa’. Further down, the cloak was made of colored kanjī over another cloak made of a fabric called ‘tarḥ’. Maqrīzī describes the robe of the vizier, the highest-ranking civil servant, as a ‘zinnārī of silk satin’.87 The zinnārī was a mantle or wrap. The 1001 Nights describes a very lavish one made of red silk and studded with pearls and gems.88 Other references of the 15th century indicate that the vizier’s honorific outfit was composed of a kāmiliyya with sable and a shawl or veil (tarḥa) together with a brocaded cap and a necklace or pectoral (qilāda).89 The robes of the higher-ranking judges and preachers were made of wool without embroidery and consisted of a white over-cloak with a green cloak and a scarf. Whereas silk robes were given to bureaucrats and initially also to men of the judicial religious establishment, the latter eventually rejected it.90 According to Suyūṭī, it was the eminent Shāfiʿī chief judge Shaykh Taqiyy al-Dīn ibn Daqīq al-ʿĪd (d. 1302) who first condemned the tradition of bestowing silk robes on jurists and succeeded in having it replaced with wool, which continued to be the case ever after. This reform also included the fabric of the ṭaylasān/ṭarha of the jurists.91 The tarḥa, going back to Abbasid tradition, was an honorific shawl for religious dignitaries worn above their head or shoulders. (see fig. 1)

85 Serjeant translates ‘raqm’ as ‘embroidery and embroidered inscription’, Islamic Textiles, p. 257. 86 ʿUmarī, Masālik, p. 72; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 737–8. 87 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 828. 88 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 380; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 196–7. 89 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 192. 90 Mayer, Costume, p. 62. 91 Suyūṭī, Ḥusn, II, p. 168; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 393.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

79

According to al-Suyūṭī, the rounded ‘ṭaylasān muqawwar’ was the canonical one associated with the Prophet.92 Suyūtī presents arguments in defense of the ṭaylasān that the jurists of the Shāfiʿī school had adopted to distinguish themselves from their colleagues in other schools. The rectangular ṭarḥa, which he rejects, was the one Jews wore.93 However, jurists of other schools, such as Ibn al-Ḥājj, rejected the ṭarḥa/ṭaylasān altogether as innovation or because of its Jewish associations. It is not clear whether the ṭarhā/ṭaylasān was an integral part of the khilʿa of the religious establishment. It is sometimes mentioned separately as an additional bonus to an honorific outfit.94 Sometimes the tarḥa was granted separately to a chief-judge.95 We may assume that the quality of the tarḥa, as with all other garments, varied according to status. For his investiture, the private secretary of Sultan Barsbāy, Shihāb al-Dīn, who was a chief judge and the naqīb al-ashrāf, the head of the ‘sharīfs’, who belonged to the Prophet’s genealogy, received with his khilʿa a green tarḥa with golden inscriptions.96 The tarḥa is also mentioned in connection with the sultan’s own investiture robe when he appeared in ecclesiastic outfit, as in the case of Sultan Faraj ibn Barqūq.97 ʿUmarī’s documentation shows that the difference between the ceremonial robe and the ordinary formal outfit was more pronounced in the case of the military class than in the case of the turbaned men. The preachers for example, who belonged to the lower category of the civilian dignitaries, were given a black robe that they would wear to perform their habitual sermons.98 The emergence of the kāmiliyya among the categories of robes of honor of the Circassian period had a significant impact on the civilian elite’s status and outfit. 5

The Kāmiliyya: A Circassian Innovation

Since the reign of Sultan Barqūq, the term kāmiliyya was regularly used to designate a type of honorific robe. It is not explicitly explained what is specific about it, and it does not seem to be a substitute for another term. 92 93 94 95 96 97 98

Arazi, ‘Noms de vêtements’, p. 140; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 254–62. Arazi, ‘Noms de vêtements’, pp. 140–1. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXIII, p. 261; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 398. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 264. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 167. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, III, p. 277. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 139.

80

Chapter 7

Perhaps its earliest mention as a robe of honor was during the reign of Sultan al-Manṣūr ʿAlī (r. 1377–81). This kāmiliyya is described as being of particularly high value and made of green Alexandrian kamkha silk with ermine. It was presented to a high-ranking secretary regarding which Maqrīzī comments that no turbaned man had ever been so highly honored before.99 The kāmiliyya mentioned on some rare occasions in the 14th-century chronicles had a very different meaning. When al-Nāṣir Muḥammad escaped to the fort of al-Karak at the end of his first reign, he is reported to have been disguised in a kāmiliyya, which is described as a Bedouin garment.100 The historian also uses this term to refer to the outfit worn by an emir without a post (baṭṭāl) in the year 1309.101 Both cases suggest that it was a simple commoner’s type of cloak with no prestigious associations. When in the late 15th century Ibn Iyās used the term kāmiliyya for a robe of honor in the context of the 14th century he was using the terminology of his own time and thus committing an anachronism.102 The Geniza documents mention kāmiliyyas in the list of trousseaus of Jewish women in the late Mamluk period: one is described as Alexandrian, another as red, and one as blue with brocade.103 A Ḥaram document mentions a kāmiliyya as a garment a butcher ordered from a tailor.104 Qalqashandī described the dress of the caliph on solemn occasions during the rule of Barqūq’s son al-Nāṣir Faraj in the first decade of the 15th century, as a kāmiliyya with narrow sleeves, open on the lower back and worn over a qabāʾ with narrow sleeves.105 However, this differed from the kāmiliyya mentioned subsequently as a robe of honor which was not an over-cloak. The kāmiliyya did not replace the aṭlasayn mutammar or the double-faced qabāʾ fawqānī of the high-ranking emirs but was used alongside them. The jubba was the garment of the religious and bureaucratic establishment which, according to ʿUmarī, did not have a brocaded ṭirāz but merely a plain silk embroidery. It was worn under an over-cloak, referred to as ‘farajiyya’, comparable to the Mamlūks’ qabāʾ tatarī and salārī which were worn under the upper qabāʾ. Ṭirāz did not belong initially to the civilians’ robes. In 1394 Sultan Barqūq honored two great overseas merchants, who bore the title of ‘qāḍī’ meaning ‘judge’, with a jubba with a brocaded ṭirāz for each of them 99 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 401. 100 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 609. 101 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 68. 102 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, pp. 424, 445, 464. 103 Eliyahu Ashtor, Histoire des prix et des salaires dans l’Orient médiéval (Paris 1969), p. 349. 104 Lutfi, al-Quds, p. 300. 105 Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, III, p. 376.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

81

in acknowledgement for a loan of a million dirhams they had given him.106 Barqūq’s jubba with ṭirāz was therefore the innovation which Maqrīzī attributed to him when he reported that he had introduced an honorific jubba for the vizier and the high-ranking bureaucrats that continued to be widely used under his son Faraj.107 While the use of the term kāmiliyya spread, the term jubba was rarely mentioned, which suggests that the kāmiliyya was an upgraded jubba. Although the kāmiliyya is occasionally associated with ṭirāz, it is mostly mentioned with sable (kāmiliyya bi-sammūr), and sometimes other fur, probably as lining. Ibn Taghribirdī describes it once as ‘bi-maqlab sammūr’, meaning with a sable lapel. In some cases, the khilʿa consisted of a kāmiliyya together with an over-cloak adorned with ṭirāz. The robes of honor under Barqūq’s reign are described either as cloaks of the qabāʾ type or as kāmiliyyas.108 While the qabāʾ was reserved for the Mamluks or a high-ranking person,109 the kāmiliyya with sable became the most frequently mentioned type of robe of honor throughout the entire 15th century. It was granted to members of the military as well as the civilian elite and to foreign envoys.110 It was either of velvet or wool, the former being superior. Barqūq is also reported to have given badlas, or sets, consisting of an aṭlasayn over-cloak together with a qabāʾ lined with fur.111 On the inauguration of his religious complex he distributed to his mamluks a complete badla of brocaded silk or ṭard waḥsh.’112 In 1423, following the Ramadan reading sessions of al-Bukhārī at the Citadel, Sultan Barsbāy gave a judge a green kāmiliyya with sable and the Qurʾan readers each a robe of murabbaʿ wool with squirrel.113 The kāmiliyya sent to a Turcoman vassal was made of silk with sable and combined with a doublefaced over-cloak with a large ṭirāz band.114 The governor of Tripoli received one made of green velvet and sable.115 However, the governor of Damascus and other highest ranking emirs received the more prestigious outfit of an aṭlasayn

106 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 379. 107 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 739. 108 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, pp. 400–1. 109 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, 299. 110 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 271; Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, pp. 76, 429. 111 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, 161, 164, 211; ʿAynī, al-Sultān Barqūq, p. 192. 112 ʿAynī, al-Sulṭān Barqūq, p. 192. 113 ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1989), p. 236. 114 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 264. 115 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 101.

82

Chapter 7

with Yalbughā ṭirāz and the over-cloak known as ‘qabāʾ fawqānī’. According to Ibn Ṭūlūn, they were mostly of red color. Under Barsbāy’s successor, Jaqmaq, the majordomo and the secretary of the privy purse each received a kāmiliyya with sable for fulfilled tasks.116 When in 1446 the majordomo Zayn al-Dīn Yaḥyā brought lavish gifts to the sultan he was reciprocated with a double-faced velvet kāmiliyya with a Yalbughā ṭirāz.117 He was the first civilian to occupy this post initially reserved for the military aristocracy.118 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ ibn Khalīl (d. 1450),119 a judge and high-ranking bureaucrat since the reign of al-Muʾayyad Shaykh, who promoted his career by presenting lavish gifts to the sultans he served, received from Jaqmaq on several occasions white kāmiliyyas with sable,120 some of which were ‘made of white wool similar to silk’ with sable described as ‘magnificent’. In 1439, while sultan Jaqmaq was still newly in office, he gave ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ’s eldest son an unspecified robe of velvet with sable and his two younger brothers each a robe of silk with ermine,121 which was probably more than protocol entitled them to. Sultan Qāytbāy honored Sultan Jaqmaq’s son for whom he had great respect and even affection, with a kāmiliyya of green velvet with sable.122 On another occasion, he gave him the same type of kāmiliyya together with a double-faced over-cloak with brocaded ṭirāz,123 which confirms that the kāmiliyya was worn under an upper garment. Two emirs released from jail received from Qāytbāy each a kāmiliyya with sable, one was of red velvet and the other of green wool. The official who accompanied them received the same, though its color is not mentioned.124 Such kāmiliyyas were also given to men of the religious establishment and secretaries such as the supervisor and the rector of the monastery of Siryāqūs.125 The messenger who brought the news to Cairo of Yashbak’s victory against the rebellious Dhū l-Qadr Turcomans received the same treatment in addition to robes from emirs and dignitaries as well.126 116 Sakhāwī, Tibr, III, p. 89. 117 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, IV. p. 325. 118 See Daisuke Igarashi, ‘The Office of Ustādār al-ʿĀliya in the Circassian Mamluk Era’, in Yuval Ben-Bassat, ed., Developing Perspectives in Mamluk History. Essays in Honor of Amalia Levanoni (Leiden 2017), pp. 126–7. 119 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, VII, pp. 136–42; Sakhāwī, Tibr, III, pp. 60–3. 120 Sakhāwī, Tibr, I, pp. 162, 223; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm XV, p. 357. 121 ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1989), p. 547. 122 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 65; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 706. 123 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 62. 124 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, pp. 440–1. 125 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr: n. 122–126 p. 18. 126 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 365.

The Khil ʿ a as a Garment

83

Sultan al-Ghawrī also honored high-ranking emirs with a kāmiliyya of red velvet with sable together with an over-cloak of green silk with Yalbughā ṭirāz.127 On the occasion of his son’s wedding, he gave his deputy a velvet kāmiliyya with sable and one made of wool to each of the imams and the four judges.128 The first was most likely made of velvet. This distinction appears also on the sultan’s visit to Alexandria, when he distributed kāmiliyyas of red velvet with sable to the high-ranking emirs and the master of the shipyard and kāmiliyyas of wool with sable to the lower ranking emirs. He himself was dressed like his emirs, probably in a similar manner to those of high rank. The chief judge and the caliph who accompanied him were given kāmiliyyas of white wool with sable,129 which was the norm for the turbaned class. That of the Jewish head of the mint, Master Yaʿqūb, was blue with sable.130 The kāmiliyya presented by al-Ghawrī to the Ottoman envoy is described as ‘magnificent’ (muʿaẓẓama), woven with gold, and trimmed with a superior kind of sable, along with an over-cloak of green silk with broad Yalbughā ṭirāz; it was produced in the al-Qāʿa workshop. Other members of the embassy received wool salārīs with superior sable.131 The son of sultan al-Ghawrī, who was emir, received a kāmiliyya made of tamāsīḥ,132 a type of velvet woven with gold.133 The robe of honor the Venetian ambassador Domenico Treviso received is described in the account of the embassy as made of red velvet with a collar and lining of ermine.134 The kāmiliyya belonged also to the garments worn by a sultan. Ibn Taghrībirdī, commenting on Sultan Jaqmaq’s austere appearance, noted that he was seen only once wearing a kāmiliyya with sable.135 The kāmiliyya thus appears to define a type of garment which was initially worn by commoners and was eventually gentrified and adopted in the design of robes of honor. It is often mentioned alone but occasionally together with an over-cloak, which indicates that it was worn directly over the body as the tatarī, the aṭlasayn mutammar, the bughluṭāq, and the salārī were. It was made of different colors and furs and involved a wide range of hierarchical categories 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 451. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 407. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 292–3, 294, 322. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 469. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 395. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 439. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 47, IV, p. 172, V, pp. 166, 193. Zaccaria Pagani, Voyage du magnifique et très illustre chevalier et procurateur de Saint Marc Domenico Trevisan, ed. Ch. Schefer (Paris 1884), reprinted in Le voyage d’outre-mer (Égypte, Mont Sinay, Palestine) de Jean Thenaud suivi de La relation de l’ambassade de Domenico Trevisan au près du Soudan d’Égypte 1512 (Paris 1884), repr. Elibron Classics 2006, p. 206. 135 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 457.

84

Chapter 7

signified by the use or absence and the size and quality of ṭirāz and brocade.136 It is interesting to note, however, that the Syrian chronicler Ibn Ṭūlūn, who settled in Damascus, does not use the term kāmiliyya in the context of honorific robes but refers merely to khilʿas with sable, which suggests that the term may have been particular to Cairo. While the kāmiliyya was granted to both civilians and Mamlūks, the highestranking dignitaries of the Mamluk class enjoyed the exclusive privilege to receive at the same time an over-cloak with ṭirāz, which in the Circassian period is described as double-faced. As a robe shared by high-ranking civilians and middle-ranking Mamlūks, the kāmiliyya introduced a new intermediary dimension in the khilʿa culture without, however, eliminating the distinction between Mamlūks and civilians. This was a significant departure from the clear-cut distinction established under the Qalāwūnids between the military aristocracy’s and the civilians’ ceremonial clothes and their nomenclature, which reflects the socio-political reality of the Circassian era and the expanding place of civilians in government and society.137 Regarding the physical design of the khilᶜa, we are not informed about who was involved in its creation. Some features were evidently inherited through tradition. Others are likely to have been determined by the market situation. We may also presume that the sultans and emirs had a say there and that the nāẓir al-khāṣṣ would contribute with practical and technical expertise in collaboration with designer masters from Dār al-Ṭirāz and the tailoring workshops. 136 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 411. 137 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, IV/1 p. 346.

Chapter 8

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art 1

Production

The khilʿa is intimately connected with the eminent institution of Dār al-Ṭirāz, which produced its fabrics and its quintessential element, the ṭirāz embroidery. The outstanding significance of this institution in the Mamluk sultanate is evident in the fact that it was the only manufacturer to be established in a court workshop and therefore the only artisanal workshop to earn the chroniclers’ attention. The Dār al-Ṭirāz specialized in designing, weaving and embroidering the luxury fabrics dedicated to courtly consumption, to be worn or granted as robes of honor and diplomatic gifts. According to Ibn Khaldūn, tents and costumes belonged to the state regalia, and the ṭirāz institution belonged to the insignia of royalty conceived to convey the sultan’s glory (ubbaha).1 Qalqashandī equated the ṭirāz with the coinage and the khuṭba as a medium to propagate the sultan’s name.2 Ibn Khaldūn noted that the Mamluks, unlike other rulers, did not house the Dār al-Ṭirāz on the palace premises, but elsewhere in dedicated royal workshops working with silk and gold to produce what is called the ‘muzarkash’ or brocaded fabrics. Qalqashandī, who also describes the embroideries of the Dār al-Ṭirāz as insignia of royalty, dates its history in Egypt to the Umayyad period.3 Whereas the Fatimids had branches of the Dār al-Ṭirāz in Tanis, Damietta, and Alexandria, in the Mamluk period it was confined to Alexandria. Ibn Iyās, in the early 16th century, includes the ceremonial gowns of the Dār al-Ṭirāz in Alexandria among the blessings ( faḍāʾil) of Egypt that he lists in the introduction to his chronicle.4 Besides its initial generic meaning of ‘embroidery,’ the term ṭirāz or ṭarz, whose origin is Persian, described specifically the embroidered bands applied on a ceremonial garment. Ṭarz in Arabic also means ‘style’. The ṭirāz was brocaded or embroidered with gold and silver threads, sometimes also with pearls and precious stones according to rank, fulfilling the function of military 1 2 3 4

Ibn Khaldūn, Muqaddima, I, pp. 452–3. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, III, p. 276. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 7. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 45.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_009

86

Chapter 8

decoration on uniforms.5 Ibn Khaldūn mentions that the dress of the Mamluks was ‘muʿallam/muʿlam’, meaning labelled or marked, in the sense of signed, referring to the sultan’s names and titles as a form of distinction.6 Such formulas were created in the chancery for all princely objects, including architecture, and their use was strictly regulated by the chancery. The term ṭirāz is also used for inscription bands on artefacts and architecture. Inscribed ṭirāz on robes and other objects of material culture and art advertised Mamluk aristocratic identity. The same strict regulations were applied to the use of such formulas in all media. When Maḥmūd, the majordomo of sultan Barqūq, was accused of possessing a pen-box inscribed with his name accompanied by ‘sultanic’ titles (mithl alqāb al-salṭana al-sharīfa) he was reportedly beaten with more than 400 lashes.7 Qalqashandī reports that the Dār al-Ṭirāz provided silks and various types of fabrics including the muqaṭrah, the gold-woven (mukhawwaṣṣ bi-l-dhahab), ornamented tafāṣīl,8 the fine linen and other fabrics the like of which existed nowhere else in the world, for the use of the sultan, his courtiers, and dignitaries, and to be sent as diplomatic gifts. Regarding the fabrics sent as diplomatic gifts, he lists ʿatābī, satin (aṭlas), musharbash, muqandas (fitted with beaver), mutammar, along with a variety of ṭirāz types including the zarkash and the bāhī.9 Ṭirāz bands were separate elements that could be acquired individually and attached to a garment,10 being highly valuable in themselves as assets and collector’s items. The value of ṭirāz elements and embroideries is attested in the ḥisba manuals for market regulation where the menders (qaṣṣārīn) are admonished not to remove the embroidery from a luxury fabric they are given to repair, as they were reputed to do, and not to work on such an item unless in the presence of its owner.11 One of the specialties of the Dār al-Ṭirāz, ‘zarkash’, meaning ‘brocade’, is often mentioned together with ṭirāz which itself is often described as brocaded. Ṭirāz and zarkash were epitomes of luxury not only in dress but in furnishing 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 7; XI, pp. 425–6. Serjeant’s translation of muʿlam and muʿallam is: ‘with border, marked’, Islamic Textiles, pp. 254, 255. Ibn Khaldūn, Muqaddima, I, pp. 452–3. ʿAynī, al-Sulṭān Barqūq, p. 412. Tafāṣīl seems to mean a specific cut of fabric. Serjeant translates it as ‘garments’, Islamic Textiles, p. 260. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, XI, pp. 89, 93–4. See Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 485; al-ʿAynī, al-Sulṭān Barqūq, p. 397; Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/1, pp. 51, 100. Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Maʿālim, p. 221.

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

87

as well. Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad furnished the apartments of his wife, the daughter of the emir Tankiz, with zarkash covering all the walls.12 Palanquins were made of zarkash and brocaded blazons were applied on tents.13 A princess’s trousseau is described as including ten trays (aṭbāq) filled with zarkash.14 When Qāytbāy’s daughter died, her bier displayed her bed-curtain (bashkhāna) made of zarkash, as was common in princesses’ funerals.15 2

Administration

Al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn was the first sultan to have dedicated special attention to ṭirāz production and to have used ṭirāz textiles as a major item among the gifts he sent to other rulers. In a memorandum addressed to his son and heir to the throne, al-Ṣāliḥ, Qalāwūn refers to the Dār al-Ṭirāz and to the necessity of its funding and supervision to secure the continuity of its production and the adequate delivery of vestments inscribed with the sultan’s titles.16 The political significance attached by Qalāwūn to inscriptions is evident in the gift package he sent in 1287 to the Mongol ruler of the Golden Horde,17 which included 200 embroidered white gowns from the Dār al-Ṭirāz, half of which were embroidered with gold inscribed bands ‘in the name of the Sultan’ and the other half embroidered with silk bands containing honorific titles; another 150 gowns belonged to an unspecified type of Alexandrian textile18 also embroidered with inscribed bands of gold and silk, and another 150 other gowns were made of Damietta fabric adorned with inscriptions of gold and silk with the ‘usual titles’ (bi-alqāb al-ʿāda). Another 150 gowns were adorned with unspecified inscription bands of silk and gold. Qalāwūn sent at the same time masons and decorators with their equipment and materials, to carve his name and titles on the mosque he sponsored in the city of al-Qiram (Sarai).

12 13 14 15 16

17 18

Shujāʿi, Tārīkh, p. 74. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 429. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 514. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 288. Shāfiʿ ibn ʿAlī, Šāfiʿ Ibn ʿĀlī’s Biography of the Mamluk Sultan Qalāwūn, ed. Paulina B. Lewicka (Warsaw 2000), pp. 365–6; Linda S. Northrup, From Slave to Sultan. The Career of Al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn and the Consolidation of Mamluk Rule in Egypt and Syria (678– 689 A.H./1279–1290 A.D.) (Stuttgart 1998), pp. 211, 280. Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, VIII, p. 51. The terminology used is difficult to understand.

88

Chapter 8

While it provided fabrics, embroideries, brocades and fittings, there is no evidence that the Dār al-Ṭirāz was in charge of the final tailoring of robes of honor. This took place in Cairo at the Sharabshīyīn market and would be organized by the secretary of the privy purse. Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad created the office of the secretary of the privy purse, nāẓir al-khāṣṣ, and placed the Dār al-Ṭirāz under his supervision. One of the privy purse’s major sources of revenue was the city of Alexandria whose wealth was largely based on textile production. The secretary of the privy purse oversaw the purchase of the materials and fabrics required for the honorific robes and the diplomatic gifts along with other materials required by the Dār al-Ṭirāz and of controlling quality and prices. He had to be knowledgeable in matters of investiture and hierarchy,19 which implied knowledge of chancery and protocol matters, to be able to formulate the official titles inscribed in the ṭirāz and to oversee the design of the robes according to hierarchy. The secretary of the privy purse was also in charge of the organization of princesses’ trousseaus20 and the pilgrimage wardrobe of the sultan’s wife. The first secretary appointed to this office by al-Nāṣir Muḥammad was Karīm al-Dīn whose skill and knowledge increased so that he eventually became the sultan’s deputy and enjoyed an outstanding high status equivalent to that of a vizier. As his power expanded, he made many enemies who persuaded the sultan that he was squandering his money and extorting people, which led to his arrest in 1323 and to the confiscation of his property that included textiles and belts worth 60,000 dīnārs. His assets in Alexandria were worth 500,000 dīnārs.21 Considering the wealth and the magnitude of the task involved, it may not be totally surprising that the nāẓir al-khāṣṣ had means and opportunities to make illicit personal gains through the trade of Alexandrian products. The customary gifts presented by the governors of Alexandria to the sultan included a substantial share of textiles, as in 1395, under Sultan Barqūq, when it amounted to 300 pieces of fine fabrics.22 Following the sack of Alexandria in 1365 by Pierre de Lusignan, Sultan Shaʿbān went to visit the ṭirāz factory there to promote its recovery. He is reported to have watched with great interest the weavers working at their looms, dedicating particular attention to those working on patterned fabrics with bird motifs and to the embroiderers of brocaded silk garments for the 19

Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, XI, pp. 89, 93–4; Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXII, pp. 49–56; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 704, 723, 735. 20 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 191. 21 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 232, 241–5. 22 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 404.

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

89

court. During his visit to the factory, the sultan made a remarkable gesture of solidarity with its workers by reaching for a water jar standing there from which he filled the same cup that the weavers drank from.23 Soon after the sack of the city by Pierre de Lusignan, great efforts were spent to aid its recovery and secure the needs of the court, and this seems to have been successful. Only a few years after the sack, Sultan Shaʿbān introduced an additional bonus consisting of brocaded silk textiles to be distributed yearly on the occasion of his hunting excursion to the entire Mamluk military establishment across ranks. This innovation would have been unlikely if the Alexandrian production had not already recovered. The disaster the sack caused for the textile industry may have been after all limited, considering that the population and the authorities had been aware of Pierre’s advance and were able to remove gold and silver from the public treasury housed in the government building, which the Cypriot troops eventually set on fire. The Dār al-Ṭirāz building, which likewise burnt down, may also have been evacuated and its valuable tools and raw materials removed. Moreover, the subsequent revenge on the part of the authorities, who confiscated Europeans’ and Christians’ possessions is reported to have been highly lucrative. When historians speak of textile supply problems in the 15th century, they mostly refer to repressive regulations issued by the sultans, as in the case of Barsbāy’s monopolies, rather than to a decline of the Alexandrian state manufacturer. Some scholars have written that the Dār al-Ṭirāz went out of use because of the sultan’s intervention, which is partly based on a misunderstanding of Maqrīzī’s text in which he reports that Barqūq ordered the robes of honor to be acquired directly from the producers in the markets of Cairo, without the dealers’ mediation.24 This measure did not concern the Dār al-Ṭirāz, which was not involved in the final production of the robes but mainly with the production of its fabrics and embroideries. The number of silk looms registered in Alexandria in 1394 during Barqūq’s reign amounting to 14,000, was visibly higher than the 12,000 looms recorded during al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s first 23 Muḥammad ibn Qāsim ibn Muḥammad al-Nuwayrī al-Iskandarānī, Kitāb al-Ilmām bi-l-iʿlām fī mā jarat bihi al-aḥkām wa-l-umūr al-maqḍiyya fī waqʿat al-Iskandariyya, eds. ʿAzīz Sūryāl ʿAṭiya and Etienne Combe (Hyderabad 1968–73), VI, pp. 6–10. 24 Eliyahu Ashtor, ‘The Economic Decline of the Middle East during the Late Middle Ages. An Outline’, in Eliyahu Ashtor, Technology, Industry and Trade. The Levant versus Europe, 1250–1500, ed. B.Z. Kedar (Oxford 1992), p. 273; Subhi Labib, Handelsgeschichte Ägyptens im Spätmittelalter (1171–1517) (Wiesbaden 1965), p. 420; Mackie, ‘Towards an Understanding’, p. 56; Martina Müller-Wiener, Eine Stadtgeschichte Alexandrias von 564/1169 bis in die Mitte des 9./15. Jahrhunderts. Verwaltung und innerstädtische Organisationsformen (Berlin 1992), p. 239; Walker, ‘Rethinking’, pp. 169–70; Georg Christ, Trading Conflicts. Venetian Merchants and Mamluk Officials in Late Medieval Alexandria (Leiden/Boston 2012), pp. 66–7, 182.

90

Chapter 8

interregnum in 1295.25 It is not known, however, whether the silk-weavers sent in 1396 from Alexandria as part of Barqūq’s diplomatic gifts to the Rasulid sultan of Yemen26 were there on a temporary or permanent basis. There is nothing in the chronicles to corroborate the end of the Dār al-Ṭirāz because of the economic crisis. Arts and crafts related to courtly patronage did not necessarily decline with the general economy. The emir Khalīl al-Ẓāhirī, who was governor of Alexandria during the reign of Barsbāy, wrote in his Zubda about the city’s wealth and its famed textile industry and other productions ‘that would take him volumes to describe’. However, he does not mention specifically the Dār al-Ṭirāz.27 Textiles continued to be produced in Alexandria to supply the court; whether they were concentrated in an institutional building or scattered in individual workshops is difficult to tell. Although the numbers of weaver workshops eventually diminished in the 15th century, the city of Alexandria continued to be mentioned till the end of the Mamluk period as a major production center for luxury embroidered and brocaded textiles to meet the court’s considerable demand, and the institution of a state manufacturer for ceremonial textiles continued. There may have been a restructuring of the production, perhaps its decentralization and dissemination among individual workshops, which is suggested by the fact that later sources speak of ‘Alexandrian’ textiles rather than the Dār al-Ṭirāz, but this on the other hand could simply be a way of speaking. The fact that the great merchant Badr al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Damāmīnī (d. 1425) had to migrate to Gulparga because of the debts he could not repay due to the ‘controversy’ of the silk production in Alexandria points to the possibility of the institution being reshuffled.28 Emmanuel Piloti, a Venetian merchant from Crete, who lived in Egypt in the first quarter of the 15th century and visited it again later, writes that Alexandria was deserted and many of its mansions were decaying, as other travelers also noted. However, at the same time, he describes the city as still a major entrepot for international trade and a center of silk textile manufacturing for the sultan’s court and for export to North Africa and the Levant.29 According to Maqrīzī, the Timurid raids in Iraq and Anatolia (notably the devastation of Baghdad in 1430, then ruled by the 25 26 27 28 29

Jazarī, Tārīkh, I, p. 282. Khazrajī, ʿUqūd, II, p. 158; Vallet, ‘Du système’, p. 296. Ẓahiri, Zubda, p. 31. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 129. Emmanuel Piloti, L’Égypte au comencement du quinzième siècle d’après le Traité d’Emmanuel Piloti de Crète (Incipit 1420), ed. P.H. Dopp (Cairo 1950), pp. 36, 58, 76–8.

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

91

Qara Qoyunlus) during Shāh Rūkh’s campaign in the region led to the city’s depopulation and the emigration of all its weavers,30 some of whom may have moved to Egypt. There was at that time a quarter of ‘eastern’ weavers in Cairo.31 On several occasions attempts to halt or evict the large number of eastern migrants are reported.32 However, it is not known whether they were also present in Alexandria. In 1502 Peter Martyr, the envoy of the Spanish court, confirmed the decline of the city and described its miserable condition as being due to the tyranny and corruption of the rulers, though at the same time he notes its significance as a commercial center.33 The Alexandrian production was still active at the arrival of the Ottomans. Following the fall of Constantinople, as observed by Giovanni Curatola, Alexandria held for a while its position as important trading center’ in the East Mediterranean and continued to be a cosmopolitan city.34 The Dār al-Ṭirāz was not the only supplier of ceremonial textiles for the court. Al-Ghawrī’s gifts to the sharīf of Mecca, during his visit in Cairo in 1505, were particularly lavish and included many precious items, such as Alexandrian silks, coats of Manzala fabric, gold-woven fabrics, colored velvet, and patterned fabrics from Bursa with golden threads and various kinds of fur.35 Through the entire Mamluk period, products of the Dār al-Ṭirāz were among the diplomatic gifts sent to foreign rulers everywhere. Not only robes but also rolls or pieces of raw fabric and embroidery, furnishings, and horse textiles were among the prestigious gifts. In 1520 the first governor of Egypt under Ottoman rule, the former Mamluk emir Khāyrbak, sent his new master in Istanbul a lavish gift package that included a large quantity of silk fabric, garments from Alexandria, and fine muslin, some pieces of which were 120 cubits long.36

30 31 32 33

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 837. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 414. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, pp. 436, 610, 1206; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 316–7. Pedro De Anglería Mártir, Una embajada de los Reyes Católicos a Egipto según la “Legatio Babylonica” y el “Opus epistolarum” de Pedro Mártir de Anglería, ed. and trans. Luis Garcia y Garcia (Vallodolid 1947), pp. 78–80; idem, (Petrus Martyr Anglerius), Legatio Babylonica. Die Gesandschaft nach Babylon, ed. and trans. Hans Heinrich Todt (Wiesbaden 2015), pp. 211–3, 229. 34 Giovanni Curatola, ‘Venetian Merchants and Travellers in Alexandria’, in Anthony Hirst and Michael Silk, eds., Alexandria, Real and Imagined (London 2004), p. 191. 35 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 456. 36 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, pp. 330–1.

92 3

Chapter 8

Tirāz and Mamluk Art

Ibn Khaldūn associates the Islamic tradition of rulers inscribing their names woven with gold threads on their silk garments to a pre-Islamic Persian tradition. The Sassanian kings adorned their robes with images of power, which the Muslims eventually substituted with inscriptions. It is most likely that the regal status of the ṭirāz, the art most intimately associated with the sultan and his court, qualified it as a model for other artefacts, such as metalwork, inspiring its ‘official’ and epigraphic style in the Qalāwūnid era and ‘iconizing’ the sultan’s name as a principal decorative theme. Inscriptions dominated the arts throughout the entire Bahri period. Qalāwūn’s concern for inscriptions was decisive in shaping the iconography of Mamluk art in the Bahri period. Inscriptions with the sultan’s name were emblematic. Since the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad and throughout the entire Mamluk period, the sultan’s blazon, a circle divided horizontally in three sections, contained the sultan’s name, unlike the emirs’ blazons, which contained icons. Although no complete Mamluk ceremonial outfit has survived, save for a few non-representative garments,37 leaving us without a clear picture of the full epigraphic program involved in ceremonial dress, the significance of inscriptions with royal titles is documented in other artefacts of the Bahri period. For example, a kind of generic inscription on 14th-century silver-inlaid vessels with the titles of an unnamed sultan reads: Glory to our lord the sultan, the king, the knowledgeable, the just, the holy warrior, the defender, the protector of the frontiers, the God-confirmed, the conqueror, the victorious, may his triumph be glorified. The ṭirāz-inscribed band had been an esthetic ideal in clothing already long before the Mamluks. Figural illustrations on Fatimid luster pottery and in Abbasid book illustrations depict people from all classes wearing garments with decorative bands around their upper sleeves, a tradition which was maintained in Mamluk miniature paintings and metal ware. Such embroideries on sleeves and other parts of garments are reported in the 1001 Nights.38

37 See the silk caps and trousers below, and Mackie, ‘Towards an Understanding’, Plate 14, p. 135. 38 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 544.

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

93

The 10th-century Abbasid author al-Washshā includes in his book dedicated to the culture of social refinement, poems, most of which are about love, composed to be inscribed on clothes and specifically in the ṭirāz bands around the sleeves of men and women.39 Geniza documents mention that Jews in Fatimid and Ayyubid times would wear ṭirāz-like bands on their clothes.40 It is not clear whether this fashion was inspired by the ceremonial ṭirāz on honorific robes or, conversely, the embroideries on the robes belonged to a long tradition of decorating sleeves. While calligraphic inscriptions are a universal feature of Islamic art, inscriptions on early Mamluk artefacts such as glass, metalwork, and sgraffiato pottery, display princely names and titles as their principal decorative motif. By describing the main inscription band on the façade of Qalāwūn’s complex as a ‘gilded ṭirāz’, Maqrīzī demonstrates the significance of epigraphic embroidery as a reference in Mamluk esthetics.41 (fig. 10) The ṭirāz-embroidered inscriptions made an impression in Renaissance Italy, where they appear on many works of art in association with religious subjects, such as filling the halo of the Virgin or adorning the hem of her gown.42 A well-known testimony of the iconic significance of the ṭirāz is Antonio Pisanello’s sketch in 1438–9 depicting what has been described as the apparel of the Byzantine emperor John VIII Palaiologos. It shows a Mamluk inscription on a gown in the name of Sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh (r. 1412–21), which has been interpreted as a Mamluk diplomatic gift sent to the Byzantine emperor.43 Besides inscriptions, the multitude of surviving textile fragments from the Mamluk period display a large array of patterns that varied according to material and technique, many of which, as already noted by L. Mackie, are exclusive

39 Abū l-Ṭayyib Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq al-Washshāʾ, al-Muwashshā, aw, al-ẓurf wa-l-ẓurafāʾ (Beirut n.d.), pp. 252–5. 40 Lisa Golombek and Veronica Gervers, ‘Tirāẓ Fabrics in the Royal Ontario Museum’, in Veronica Gervers, ed., Studies in Textile History in Memory of Harold B. Burnham (Toronto 1977), p. 89; S.D. Goitein, A Mediterranean Society. The Jewish communities of the Arab world as portrayed in the documents of the Cairo Geniza, vol. IV. Daily Life (Berkeley/ London 1987), pp. 161–2. 41 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, IV, p. 697; See also Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 239. 42 Rosamond E. Mack, Bazaar to Piazza. Islamic Trade and Italian Art, 1300–1600 (Berkeley/ London 2002), pp. 63–71. 43 David Alexander, ‘Pisanello’s hat. The Costume and Weapons Depicted in Pisanello’s Medal for John VIII Palaeologus. …’ Gladius XXIV (2004), figs. 1, 2, p. 146.

94

Figure 3

Chapter 8

Mamluk silk with gilded threads, inscribed with sultan’s titles, 15th century © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1939.40

to specific fabrics and not shared by other media (figs. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). However, as also rightly noted by Mackie, some similarities with the decoration of metalwork are likely to have been inspired by the art of textiles.44 44 Mackie, ‘Towards an Understanding’, pp. 130, 132; Walker, ‘Rethinking’, pp. 170–1.

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

Figure 4

95

Fragment of a silk coat from Egypt, 14th century Metropolitan Museum of Art 31.14a, Alamy PA93T7

Owing to diplomatic and commercial relations with the Ilkhanids in Iran and the Yuans, textiles, like all artefacts of the 14th century, book illumination, pottery and enameled glass, adopted Chinese floral motifs or Chinoiseries in their decorative vocabulary45 (figs. 3, 4). As elsewhere in the medieval world, because of cross-fertilization, as formulated by David Jacoby,46 Mamluk luxury textiles display international features, which make a provenance attribution often difficult.

45 Rogers, ‘Evidence’, p. 387; Walker, ‘Rethinking’, p. 179. 46 David Jacoby, ‘Silk Economics and Cross-Cultural Artistic Interaction. Byzantium, the Muslim World, and the Christian West’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol. 58 (2004), p. 240.

96

Figure 5

Chapter 8

Mamluk silk fragment, lampas weave, circa 1400 © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1982.130

The only art designers to be mentioned in a Mamluk chronicle are the rassāmīn whose workshops created ‘the patterns of silk and gold embroideries’ that might have been used at the Dār al-Ṭirāz and perhaps in other media as well.47 They were settled in the vicinity of the textile markets in Cairo. This rare reference to designers at the same time as their association with textiles points to the outstanding status of textiles in Mamluk material culture. Like the master calligraphers who set trends in writing, the rassāmīn by designing textiles and embroidery patterns may have created the patterns and set the trends for craftsmen working with other media. Unexpected evidence is given 47 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 92, 335, 346.

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

Figure 6

97

Mamluk silk fragment, circa 1400 © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1918.189

by an unusual engraved Mamluk brass bowl datable to the 14th century.48 (fig. 10a, b) Its awkwardly formulated inscription covering two cartouches contains good wishes followed by the words: ‘fā ʾl-khayr fī naqsh al-ṭirāz innamā khayr al-fiʿāl / al-ṭirāz al-bāhī al-muʿallam’ which means: ‘Crafting ṭirāz is the best of works, the brilliant (bāhī) and inscribed ṭirāz’. The term bāhī could mean literally ‘brilliant’ or ‘radiant’, though Qalqashandī uses it to describe a 48

Museum of Islamic Art, Doha, Inv. No. MW-93-99-HU.

98

Figure 7

Chapter 8

Mamluk silk fragment, late 14th century © Art Institute Chicago, 1983. 747

category of ṭirāz embroidery.49 Interestingly, the engraved decoration of this bowl differs from the usual patterns used for metal vessels and seems rather to have been inspired by embroidery. It shows a medallion with a bird of prey attacking another bird, and a cartouche engraved with an unusual dense floral motif. 49

Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 94.

99

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

Figure 8 Mamluk silk with gold fragment, lampas, circa 1500 © Cleveland Museum of Art, 1929.87

100

Figure 9

Chapter 8

Inscription (ṭirāz) on the façade of the complex of Sultan Qalāwūn Photo courtesy of Bernard O’Kane

A similar text is inscribed on a 15th-century pen-box (fig. 11).50 The penbox may have belonged to a rassām to contain drawing, rather than writing, tools: ‘faʿl-ḥusn fī naqsh al-ṭirāz wa-innamā ḥusn al-fiʿāl ṭirāz al-? al-ṭirāz al-muʿallam’. Another engraved bowl of the same period at the Metropolitan Museum of Art is inscribed with a grammatically deficient vernacular text formulated in the first person saying: ‘labbasūnī (sic) al-ṣunnāʿ thawba jamāl/wa ṭirāz al-badīʿ fīhi bunyānī’/‘The craftsmen have dressed me with a beautiful gown and a magnificent ṭirāz (unclear meaning).’51 Similar inscriptions comparing the decoration of the object with a garment occur elsewhere on Mamluk metal ware. A very common inscription, common on Mamluk metal vessels says: ‘I have a ṭarz full of (good) meanings.’

50 Sotheby’s Arts of the Islamic World, London, 8 October 2008, lot 122. 51 Atıl, Renaissance, p. 105. No. 37. The reading in the catalogue is not correct.

The Dār al-Ṭirāz and Mamluk Art

Figure 10 Brass Bowl with Inscriptions praising the art of ṭirāz, 14th century Courtesy of the Museum of Islamic Art, Qatar, Inv.no. MW-93-99-HU

Figure 11 Inscription on Mamluk pen box praising the art of ṭirāz. Private collection

101

Chapter 9

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy 1

The Sultan (Fig. 16)

In his documentation of the dress code for the ruling establishment, ʿUmarī describes in separate sections two categories of outfit: the honorific khilʿas granted by the sultan and worn on ceremonial occasions; and the ordinary formal dress discussed here. The dress code applied in the first place to the sultan himself whose presence per se conveyed a solemn character at any event. His outfits were defined by the activities he assumed and the kind of events he hosted. Different types of audiences, hunting excursions, equestrian games, parades, and processions each required a specific type of outfit of specific material and color for the sultan and all participants. There were several types of audiences ( julūs) given by the sultan that were scheduled at specific times in dedicated venues and ruled by their specific protocol.1 Some of the garments he wore during his official duties belonged to the type included in the khilʿa, such as the kāmiliyya with sable and the salāriyya.2 The historians use the term ‘hayʾa’, in the sense of outfit to describe the sultans’ appearance when taking part in regular or special events in the palace and outdoors. Over time, changes took place, some practices were abandoned while new fashions were introduced. The sultans’ individual character and style of government played a role in their implementation of the protocol. Apart from the occasion of their investiture, the sultans did not dress differently from their high-ranking emirs, as ʿUmarī and Qalqashandī stated, and as foreign eyewitnesses also observed. Most sultans seem to have preferred a rather unpretentious dress. Notwithstanding the culture of opulence he promoted, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad preferred to dress frugally, wearing mostly an ordinary cotton garment with a plain silver belt that did not cost more than 100 dirhams; his horse trappings were likewise simple.3 However, the sultan’s frugality regarding his appearance was not followed by his sons and successors, petty rulers who are described as having rather indulged in luxury. When the Ilkhanid prince Damirdāsh presented him a gift of one-hundred horses loaded with sumptuous textiles, he accepted 1 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 632, 659–62, 666–70; ʿUmarī, Masālik, pp. 36–41. 2 See Chapter 8. 3 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 739, idem, Sulūk, II, p. 534. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_010

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

103

only a satin cloak studded with gems and returned everything else.4 However, on his triumphant return to Cairo in 1310 to begin his third reign al-Nāṣir was wearing a white satin qabāʾ with a brocaded ṭirāz described as being of ‘miṣrī ’ style.5 ‘Miṣrī’ can be translated as ‘Egyptian’ but in medieval vocabulary it also referred to Fusṭāṭ, the southern suburb of Cairo; in this case it may describe a style of brocade associated with this place.6 Although the robes of honor granted to the aristocracy were colored as symbols of prestige, white seems to have been the working outfit of the Mamluk class in the 15th century. Special occasions required a designated outfit. The sultan was supposed to wear the kalawta on the following occasions: Friday prayer, hunting excursions, travels, polo games, and other events at the hippodromes.7 One of the routine ceremonies at the court was the mawkib, a military parade combined with an audience given by the sultan in the palace, for which the formal outfit ‘qumāsh al-mawkib’ was mandatory. The ceremony, ‘al-khidma bi-l-kalawta’, was named for the kalawta, referring to the headdress that the participants had to wear on the occasion.8 Solemn apparel was required when he entered the cities of Damascus, Aleppo, and Cairo; for other cities the travel outfit sufficed. Sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh broke this rule by overdressing on a visit to Syria, when he appeared in a double-faced velvet kāmiliyya with sable and a kalawta.9 This was not interpreted as a mistake, however, but rather as a premeditated political gesture to affirm his seizure of power and authority that ended rebellious activities in the province. During his visit in Cairo, the Venetian ambassador Domenico Trevisan met Sultan al-Ghawrī seven times; only on two occasions did the sultan appear wearing the great headdress known as ‘takhfīfa’ with horns half a cubit tall, as also did his retinue. On the other occasions, he and his emirs wore a tall headdress without horns.10 When in 1496 Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad the son of Qāytbāy appeared for Friday prayer wearing a small headdress (takhfīfa) instead of the kalawta, his emirs were displeased.11 The symbolic significance of the sultan’s appearance 4 5 6

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 294. Dawādārī, Kanz, IX, p. 176. Serjeant interprets ‘Miṣrī’ as a kind of wool; Islamic Textiles, p. 254. This translation, however, does not fit here. 7 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 446–7. 8 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 118, 128; idem Nujūm, XVI, p. 297. 9 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 11. 10 Pagani, Relation, pp. 184, 189, 190, 195. 11 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 339.

104

Chapter 9

in public is illustrated by a strange episode that occurred in 1500 when the sultan al-Ẓāhir Qānṣūh (r. 1498–1500) inaugurated the summer season, which coincided that year with the Feast of Breaking Fast. He appeared at prayer wearing a white silk outfit with white leather boots and a kalawta with a white cap, riding a white horse with silver trappings. It was an extraordinary sight which the historian describes as a bad omen that predicted his dethronement shortly afterwards.12 The sultan had to escape his opponents disguised in women’s clothes.13 Beginning the new season with new clothes acquired particular significance in the 15th century when it was transferred from the hippodrome beneath the Citadel to the hippodrome-cum-falconry known as ‘Maṭʿam al-Ṭayr’ in the northern suburb. This event required the sultan to wear specific garments with designated fabrics and colors. For the winter season, it was a double-faced overcloak ( fawqānī), of red velvet and green wool, brocaded boots, and a kalawta.14 However, when in 1457, Sultan Īnāl appeared on that occasion wearing this outfit made of wool instead of the customary velvet, Ibn Taghrībirdī noted the blunder, noting that wool was for the emirs, not the sultan.15 Sultan Īnāl broke another rule when he invested the deputy of Damascus in a pavilion attached to the palace known as ‘al-Qasr al-Ablaq’ instead of holding the ceremony within the palace as he ought to have done.16 Sultan al-Ashraf Khushqadam likewise had a record of blunders that Ibn Taghrībirdī recorded. In 1463 he held the inauguration ceremony of the winter season in the main palace (al-Qaṣr) at the Citadel, instead of the dedicated venue at Maṭʿam al-Ṭayr. Moreover, he did so while wearing a salārī and no kalawta. Ibn Taghrībirdī comments by recalling that events at the Maṭʿam al-Ṭayr required the sultan to wear the kalawta. He adds that the sultan had previously consulted him on this matter but did not follow his advice.17 The historian further recalls that the previous year, meaning 1462, when Khushqadam rode to the cemetery to inspect the construction of his funerary madrasa, he was wearing the winter ceremonial outfit with a green and violet over-cloak instead of the customary green and red and moreover without the proper brocaded footwear.18 The event was concluded with the distribution of robes of honor, described as kāmiliyyas with fur and brocaded ṭirāz, to the participants.19 On 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, pp. 432–3. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 436. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 530. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 307. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, pp. 79–80; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 738. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 446–7. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 437. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 447–8.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

105

the next occasion, the sultan tried to make up for his mistake and ordered the secretary of the privy purse to prepare an over-cloak with the appropriate colors. However, the secretary could not get hold of the right green velvet on time and used instead a dark yellow (zaytī) fabric. Under these circumstances the sultan preferred to hold the inauguration ceremony within the palace; however, this gave a wrong signal to the public, leading to the spread of rumors and speculations about the reason for his public absence.20 Shortly thereafter, to make up for the wrong impression he had previously created and in order to stop the rumors, Khushqadam appeared on a falcon hunt at the Maṭʿam in the proper outfit. In periods of crisis and disaster, the sultans showed themselves in humble garb. Following Timur’s devastation of Syria, Sultan Faraj was seen wearing a garment made of jūkh, a woolen fabric imported from Europe that had been hitherto looked down upon. The fabric eventually increased in value and became even fashionable and was listed in the 15th century among the possessions of the wealthy.21 Although a complex agenda of occasions dictated a likewise complex hierarchy of outfits, it seems that there was not much difference between the outfit of the sultan and that of the highest-ranking emirs from among whom the sultan was selected. A Florentine envoy at the court of Sultan Barsbāy observed that he wore the same kind of tunic everyone wore at the Citadel, which was a full-length tunic, either of fine muslin or heavier fabric, with light blue embroideries on the arms.22 Von Breydenbach, in 1486, described Qāytbāy’s clothes as white,23 which was also the color of al-Ghawrī’s and his entourage’s outfit when they met with the Venetian embassy of Domenico Trevisan.24 During a drought season in 1419, sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh, dressed as a Sufi wearing a white woolen robe (described by Ibn Taghrībirdī as a malūṭa without belt), a ‘very small turban’ with a tail (ʿadhaba) hanging on the left side, and a shawl (miʾzar) on his shoulders, and rode a horse with plain trappings without silk or gold to lead a public supplication prayer in the cemetery.25 A similar scenario took place a year later on the occasion of a plague epidemic. This 20 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 447. 21 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 394, 405. 22 Felice Brancacci and Yousefzadeh, Mahnaz trans., Florence’s Embassy to the Sultan of Egypt. An English Translation of Felice Brancacci’s Diary (New York 2018), pp. 67, 68. 23 Bernhard von Breydenbach, Les Saintes Pérégrinations de Bernard De Breydenbach. Extraits relatifs à l’Égypte suivant l’édition de 1490, trans. F. Arrivaz, (Cairo 1904), p. 61. 24 Pagani, Relation, p. 195. 25 ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1985), p. 362; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, pp. 487–8; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XIV, pp. 78–9.

106

Chapter 9

time the shawl is called ‘shamla’ by Maqrīzī and described by Ibn Taghrībirdī as made of wool.26 Emergency situations compelled sultans to disguise themselves. When al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, while still an adolescent, decided to escape the political unrest in Cairo and move to the fort of al-Karak in what is today Jordan, which was his first interregnum, he rode out dressed as an Arab Bedouin with a turban and a mask.27 Sultan al-Ashraf Shaʿbān, trying to escape his assassins, hid in a woman’s house, disguised as a woman. Al-Ashraf Qānṣuh did the same in a similar situation. Qāytbāy disguised as a Maghrebi for less compelling reasons when he went incognito to the Azhar Mosque to hear what people thought of him.28 2

The Mamlūks

Prior to Qalāwūn, following Ayyubid tradition, the formal dress of the military establishment consisted of a cloak (qabāʾ), either white or blue-and-red patterned, with tight sleeves and a belt of colored Baʿalbakī fabric which was later replaced with the silver and gold belt.29 The fabric belt (kamrān)30 was closed with a ring and a clasp. The headcover (kalawta) was of yellow silk described by Maqrīzī as muḍarraba taḍrīban ʿarīḍan, which might mean ‘shaped in a horizontal format’ and the footwear was of black Russian leather with gaiters above. They carried large bags with a three-cubit long kerchief or scarf. Their long hair was braided and wrapped in a silk pouch of red or yellow color. It is not always easy to distinguish between the ceremonial and the regular outfit of the soldiers under the Qalāwūnids. Qalāwūn is credited with reforming the headdress of the Mamlūks,31 with a Mongol type of cloak (tatarī), which could be made of a variety of fabrics32 and another undefined garment referred to as ‘talkawāt’33 above which an Islamic over-coat was worn.

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1985), p. 383; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 531; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XIV, p. 97. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 609. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 121. Qalqashandī, Subḥ, IV, pp. 39–43; Ẓāhirī, Zubda, p. 407; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ III, pp. 327, 703–5. Dozy, Dictionnaire, p. 389. ʿUmarī, Masālik, pp. 34–5; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ III, pp. 327, 703–5; Qalqashandī, Subḥ, IV, p. 40; Qudsī, Duwal, p. 46. Mayer, Costume, p. 22. This term is a rare, if not singular, occurrence in a Mamluk source. Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 99–100; Mayer, Costume, p. 20 n. 6.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

107

The qabāʾ tatarī must be a garment with diagonal fastening on one side of the waist, often depicted in miniatures and on artefacts, which is a characteristic feature of Oriental dress. (figs. 2, 13, 14). The tatarī cloak is rarely mentioned in the following period, as it is replaced by the equivalent salāriyya/salārī. The term tatarī is used instead to describe a woolen garment worn by the soldiers on their travels and hunting excursions.34 The belt for the military uniform became a matter of great attention to the Qalāwūnid sultans, who are said to have replaced the fabric belt with one made of precious materials of increasing value to indicate hierarchy. However, golden belts were already mentioned as being presented by Baybars with the robes of honor to his Mamlūks. Qalāwūn established a hierarchy of belts; those of the high-ranking emirs were worth 300 dīnārs, followed by 200, 170, and 150 dīnārs. Al-Nāṣir Muḥammad introduced yet a higher category of belts made of gold and studded with precious stones. As pointed out by L.A. Mayer, the belt was the only bejeweled item for men tolerated by Muslim religious opinion.35 The market for the production and sale of belts was located next to the Sharabshiyyīn market where the ceremonial robes were manufactured.36 Around 1300, a golden belt (ḥiyāṣa) cost 200 dīnārs and a good horse cost 300 dīnārs.37 Belts of precious metals were assets that were hoarded, as revealed in the account of confiscated possessions of the vizier Ibn Zanbūr that included 6,000 of them.38 The valorization of the belt was another sign of distinction between the military class and the civilians. The Irish monk Symon Semeonis, who visited Cairo in 1323, during al-Nāṣir’s reign, writes that ‘the ‘Saracens’, meaning the indigenous population, rarely or never wore belts, instead they wind a towel around their waist, which they lay before them when going to prayer. ‘Only the nobles and horsemen make use of belts, which are broad like those of the ladies and made of silk adorned with gold and silver, of which they are very proud’.39 It thus seems that the belt belonged to the uniform and was not merely for solemn occasions. In the summer the Mamlūks wore traditionally white and in the winter, colored wool and silk with sable. The summer boots were white and those worn in the winter were of yellow leather. Embroidered ṭirāz and damascened stirrups were reserved for the higher echelons. 34 35 36 37 38 39

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 291. Mayer, Costume, pp. 25–6. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 329–30. ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1992), pp. 20–1. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 330, 704. Symon Semeonis, The Journey of Symon Semeonis from Ireland to the Holy Land, CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts: a project of University College, Cork College Road, Cork, Ireland. http://www.ucc.ie/celt (2017), p. 60.

108

Chapter 9

In the Circassian period, the Mamlūks’ costume underwent changes. The traveler Anselme Adorno who visited Egypt during the reign of Qāytbāy describes the costume of the military class as heavy and elegant and distinct from that of ordinary people, especially the headdress.40 He also notes the lavishness of their silk embroidered horse textiles as does Van Ghistele also a few years later, who found the horse trappings studded with gems ‘beyond description’.41 Arnold von Harff in the 1490s described the dress of the Mamlūks, probably the ordinary soldiers, as a tight white frock and a tall red hat which could be adorned with fur for persons of higher rank. This frock could be the salārī or the bughluṭāq or the malūṭa mentioned below. (figs. 16, 17) Martyr notes that its cut was similar to that of all other people in the country and also to that of the Arabs’ dress in Spain. Difference in status could be recognized only by the sleeves, which were tight and short for the dignitaries, whereas ordinary people wore them long and reaching to the fingers. Their wide over-cloak was tied with a belt and reached to the ankles, and the cloak underneath was of the same width.42 The only Mamlūk garment that has survived in an informative condition is the brigandine in the Bargello Museum in Florence (fig. 18).43 Mayer mentions it in his chapter on arms and armors because it indeed belongs to a military, and not to the civilian, outfit. It is a kind of life-vest made of iron laminae clad with a fabric of red silk velvet woven over linen and lined with blue silk. This brigandine has preserved only the fabric upper shell, the iron element did not survive. The velvet surface is decorated with rosettes made of brass that may have originally been gilded. Inscriptions run along the collar and the upper sleeves. The first is inscribed with the words: ‘Glory to our Lord the sultan al-Malik al-Ẓāhir Abū Saʿīd Jaqmaq, may God confirm his triumphs’ which is the usual glorification formula of the sultan on princely artefacts. Along the bands of the sleeves, beginning on the right-hand side, the inscription reads: naṣrun min allāhi wa-fatḥun qarībun wa-bashshir al-muʾminīn (Qurʾan 61:13), promising victory and swift breakthrough from God and good news to the believers. Brigandines of red velvet, sometimes sleeveless, are mentioned as ‘qarqal’ by the chroniclers in the context of military uniforms.44

40 Adorno, Anselme, Itinéraire d’Anselme Adorno en Terre Sainte (1470–1471) (Paris 1978), pp. 200–1, see note xx. 41 Joos Van Ghistele, Le Voyage en Egypte 1482–1483, (IFAO) (Cairo 1975), p. 39. 42 Pedro Mártir, Embajada, pp. 104–6; idem, Legatio, p. 241. 43 Mayer, Costume, pp. 40–1; Eredità dell’ Islam, cat. 194, pp. 330–1. 44 Mayer, Costume, cites Ibn Taghrībirdī; see also Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, as I/2, pp. 467, 520; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, II, p. 136.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

109

Regarding footwear, artefacts and manuscripts of the Bahri period depict soldiers with boots. However, Peter Martyr (1502) mentions explicitly that the Mamlūks and courtiers wore no boots but rather a kind of sandals like those of the Franciscan friars.45 His description is confirmed in European images of the late-15th and early-16th centuries that do not show any boots but only slip-on footwear. Mansueti depicts a cobbler sitting on the floor with his tools and several pairs of such shoes in front of him (see figs. 19, 20). However, if boots went out of fashion in the later period, soldiers in service understandably continued to wear them, as can be seen in later furūsiyya manuscripts. In Mamluk society, whose ruling aristocracy consisted of military cavalry men, outfit and horse trappings belonged equally to a man’s accoutrement. The trappings of their mounts were part of a person’s outfit and followed detailed rules according to rank. Maqrīzī writes on the markets of stirrups and bridles, describing their various adornments of gold and silver for Mamluks and the less elaborate ones of the civilians.46 In the early period, stirrups were made of gold and silver; however, by the 15th century, gold was no longer used, and silver became rare. However, Barqūq introduced changes to the shape of the saddle,47 and the bejeweled saddle is increasingly mentioned in the 15th century as a symbol of status; it was included among the diplomatic gifts sent by the Mamluk court to foreign rulers. 3

The Headdress

3.1 Kalawta and Takhfīfa The headdress had always been a significant symbol of manhood, identity, and status. This is also evidenced in the significance of the turban in Mamluk society and the classification of ‘mutaʿammamūn’ or turbaned class, to distinguish the judicial and administrative establishment from the Mamluk class. The headdress was an item that, more than any other, was the subject of new fashions and stimulated creativity. Besides changes and elaborations to old models, new styles were created whose origins cannot always be traced. Various types of headgear with different names were worn by the Mamluk class. Al-Nāṣir Muḥammad reformed the kalawta worn by the military by introducing the kalawta nāṣiriyya on his return from pilgrimage.48 Having had to 45 46 47 48

Pedro Mártir, Embajada, p. 106; idem, Legatio, p. 241. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 324–5. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 325–6. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 328, 704; ʿUmarī, Masālik, pp. 34–5; Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, pp. 6, 40.

110

Chapter 9

Figure 12 Attendant of an enthroned figure, detail from the Palmer Cup British Museum WB53, 1200–1250, © Trustees of the British Museum

shave his hair for the ritual, he was inspired with the idea of making it a general rule for the soldiers to cut their hair, which required a new design for their headdress. Al-Nāṣir performed pilgrimage three times during his third reign in 1312, 1320, and 1332. It is not clear on which of the three occasions he introduced the headdress reform. Manuscript illustrations continue to show Mamlūks with long hair. The headdress of the attendants flanking an enthroned figure on the Palmer cup, datable to the mid-13th century, (fig. 12), three Mamlūks in a manuscript dated 1334 (fig. 13), the enthroned figure and the flutist in the frontispiece of the Vienna Maqāmāt (fig. 2), a lancer on a furūsiyya manuscript dated 1371 (fig. 14) is worn over long hair, i.e., it predates al-Nāṣir’s reform. It is shallow and consists of a small cap wrapped in gauze whose tip, unlike the civilian’s turban, points upwards. However, the cupbearer in an automata manuscript dated 1315 (fig. 15), like other similar figures on Mamluk copies of

111

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

Figure 13 Three Mamlūks, folio from a furū­ siyya manuscript, dated 1330 © Aga Khan Museum AKM12

Figure 14 A Mamluk horseman with lance © British Library, Nihāyat al-sūʾl, manuscript, dated 1371, add. Ms 18866, fol. 13b

112

Chapter 9

Figure 15 A Cupbearer from a Mamluk illustrated manuscript of Jazarī’s Kitāb fī maʿrifat al-ḥiyal al-handasiyya, dated 1315. David-Collection, Copenhagen. http://www.davidmus.dk/en/collections/islamic/materials/miniatures/art/20-1988

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

113

Figure 16 A Mamluk sultan sitting in state, engraving, Arnold von Harff © Bodleian Library-MS-Bodl-972 00129, print dated 1554, fol. 64b

automata manuscripts, is wearing a different elaborate headcover that cannot be connected to those mentioned in contemporary texts. Unlike the kalawta, the contemporary sharbūsh, which resembled a threepointed crown, seems to have been exclusive to the upper echelons for highly solemn occasions such as the investiture of the governors of Syria at Qalāwūn’s mausoleum until it was abolished by the Circassians. The reign of Barqūq saw a ‘Circassian kalawta’,49 and at about the same time, the takhfīfa appeared. Whether this was a new design or a new name for the Circassian kalawta is difficult to guess. The takhfīfa was composed of a cap wrapped in a voluminous gauze structure and was initially worn alternately with the kalawta, which was eventually abandoned. Belonging to a lower category than the takhfīfa, the kūfiyya with beaver was worn by minor emirs. A kūfiyya for commoners is also mentioned, though it seems to have been a different type of headdress. 49 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 704.

114

Chapter 9

Figure 17 Mamluk Dignitaries, Arnold von Harff © Bodleian Library MS Bodl. 972, print, dated 1554, fol. 67b

Although its name, takhfīfa, suggests that it may have been a light structure, this is not confirmed by its description, and although it is described as a kind of turban, it is never identified verbally as an ʿimāma nor was it perceived as such. After the emir Taghrībirdī ibn ʿAbd Allāh (d. 1433), the chief of the army in Damascus under Barsbāy, introduced the fashion of the large takhfīfa for the emirs,50 the size of the takhfīfa increased to the point of exaggeration. Ibn Taghrībirdī describes it as wrapped like the kalawta and resembling a huge dish (ṭabaq). Although he himself did not approve of it, the historian admits that there are many paths to pleasure (li-l-nās fīmā yaʿshaqūn madhāhib). Such a large takhfīfa was worn by the emir Yashbak min Mahdī (d. 1480) and was placed on his severed head when it was paraded after his decapitation in Edessa where he was leading a military expedition against rebelling Turcomans.51 When Qāytbāy promoted an emir to the rank of ‘emir of a thousand’ he offered him, along with the robe, a piece of gauze (shāsh) for the 50 51

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 180; idem, Manhal, IV, 54. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 173.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

115

Figure 18 Brigandine in the name of Sultan Jaqmaq © Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence, no. 1244M, (photo Azmi 1244)

great takhfīfa.52 Qāytbāy himself may have worn a headdress of this style; the Flemish pilgrim Van Ghistele describes his headdress as a white turban with a large wrap, like a diadem, with multiple points.53 Anselme Adorno, notes the difference between the turbans of the emirs made of fine plaited gauze with five or six tips, according to rank, pointing high upwards, and the sultan’s turban which had seven tips.54 The multi-pointed headdress has been depicted as a royal headdress by Mansueti (figs. 19, 20) and by the anonymous painter of the Venetian embassy at al-Ghawrī’s court (fig. 21). The great takhfīfa with a pair of long horns was a later fashion introduced by some high-ranking emirs, which Ibn Iyās dates precisely to October 1496, less than three months after Qāytbāy’s death, during the reign of his son al-Nāṣir Muḥammad. Under al-Ghawrī the size of the horns kept increasing to an 52 53 54

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, pp. 158, 179. Van Ghistele, Voyage, pp. 26, 38. I could not find the meaning of this word in this context.

116

Chapter 9

Figure 19 ‘St. Marc healing Anianus’, by Giovanni Mansueti, 1516 © Gallerie dell’Academia, Venice, cat., 569. Wikimedia Commons

extent described by the historian as excessive.55 Its description indicates that it differed from the multiple-pointed one mentioned under Qāytbāy’s reign. The multi-pointed turban worn by Sultan al-Ghawrī in the anonymous later painting showing him receiving a Venetian embassy, and the one depicted in an Orientlistic painting by Mansueti must have been based rather on images from Qāytbāy’s reign. Al-Ghawrī’s takhfīfa was nicknamed ‘al-naʿūra’ which means ‘waterwheel’. Considering the protruding double-horn of the takhfīfa, it is difficult to imagine the point of similarity with the waterwheel. Ibn Iyās writes that it became 55

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, pp. 340, 359.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

117

Figure 20 Episode from the life of St Marc by Giovanni Mansueti, Scuola Grande di San Marco, Venice Wikimedia Commons, (Picture by M0tty)

Figure 21 Reception of a Venetian embassy by Sultan al-Ghawrī, by an anonymous artist, Bellini School © Musée du Louvre

118

Chapter 9

Figure 22 Portrait of Sultan al-Ghawrī, in Vecellio Cesare, Degli habiti antichi …, 1590 © Gallica, Bibliothèque Nationale de France

the equivalent of the crown of the Sassanian kings and recalls that traditionally the crown of the Arab kings was a turban. The Venetian envoy Domenico Trevisan describes al-Ghawrī’s naʿūra as having two horns half an arm tall.56 (fig. 22) The naʿūra was not exclusive to the sultan, as it was also worn by the highranking emirs,57 who usually shared the same outfit with the sultan. The novelty about it was the size of the horns rather than the horns themselves which, 56 Fuess, ‘Sultans with Horns’, p. 78. 57 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 372.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

119

as we have seen, are already documented in 1334 on the frontispiece of the Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī manuscript in Vienna in figure 2. These horns must have been the tips of the gauze, which, in the case of the civilian’s turbans, hung down on their shoulders.58 There is no sound evidence to assume that the use of horns was intended to refer to Alexander the Great59 described in the Qurʾan as ‘Dhū l-Qarnayn’, meaning, ‘the one with horns’, although it was alluded to at the time, a posteriori, and in rather satirical terms. The reference to Alexander as a regal ideal was not as common in Mamluk culture as it was in Iran. While suffering an eye disease that lasted several months, Sultan al-Ghawrī was unable to attend solemn occasions wearing the naʿūra, which must have been burdensome but appeared instead with the small takhfīfa. On his recovery, he was congratulated explicitly ‘for wearing the great takhfīfa.60 Peter Martyr dedicates a long passage to the Mamluk headdress, emphasizing the variety of its shapes which contrasted with the rather uniform cut of their body garment. The headdress varied not only according to religion, but also between Mamluks and civilians and again within the Mamluk class itself between ranks. Martyr confirms, however, what other travelers had noticed, that the sultan’s outfit did not differ from that of his high-ranking emirs. The sultan’s guard wore a span-tall, heavy and stiff hat of wool or mohair, black at the top and green in the lower part. Ordinary soldiers and Mamlūks in the service of emirs wore a red hat, one cubit tall, with a fur bordure. Regarding the headdress of the emirs, which he describes as a turban, the style of its wrap is quite distinct from that of ordinary people. Whereas the latter is wound simply in a circular shape around the head, which Martyr finds pleasing, the wrap of the emirs’ headdress, which he finds ‘totally ridiculous’ winds and turns in multiple directions. As for the headdress of the highest-ranking emirs, including the sultan himself, its fine gauze, as long as 60 or 70 cubits he was told, turned and spiraled around the head in multiple folds to culminate in a pair of horns at the top. At the base of this turban six other horns, shorter than a span but ‘thicker than an arm’ projected. Martyr, who had never seen anything like this before, describes it as foolish and recalling the appearance of snails. When he asked the dragoman Taghrībirdī about the sense of such a heavy headdress that hampered the head’s movement and compelled the person to turn the whole body instead, he was told that this was precisely the main intention behind the big headdress, which was to prevent a man from making a wrong or

58 59 60

ʿUmarī, Masālik, p. 50. This is Fuess’s interpretation, ‘Sultans with Horns’, p. 79. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 332.

120

Chapter 9

Figure 23 ‘The Stoning of St. Stephen’ by Vittore Carpaccio, 1520. Staatsgalerie Stuttgart, Germany Photo Alamy 084-HR7MH1

unsuitable movement that would make him loose his dignity. The other reason was to get him accustomed to the helmet he would wear in time of warfare.61 The variety of headdress shapes in the late Mamluk period and the winding and interlacing wraps of turbans is documented in Italian Renaissance paintings (fig. 23), and it also seems to have attracted the attention of the Ottoman conquerors. A miniature in the Selīmnāme, produced in the first half of the 16th century, which celebrates Selim’s military exploits and his conquest of Egypt depicts the encounter between both armies. The Mamluks are shown wearing headdresses in a variety of shapes including red bonnets for the soldiers, unlike the Ottomans who show only two types. (fig. 24) 61

Pedro Mártir, Embajada, pp. 106–8; idem, Legatio, p. 243.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

121

Figure 24 The battle of Marj Dābiq, miniature from the Selīmnāme, first half of the 16th century. Topkapı Library, MS Hazine 1597–8, fol. 235a Courtesy of the Directorate of National Palaces of the Presidency of the Republic of Turkey (T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Milli Saraylar İdaresi Başkanlığı)

122

Chapter 9

Although the headdress of the Mamluks resembled a turban, both being composed of a cap wrapped with fabric, the chroniclers never refer to it with the term ʿimāma. The distinction between the headdress of the Mamluks, be it a kalawta or a takhfīfa, and the civilians’ ʿimāma is demonstrated by the following episode. Sultan al-Ghawrī, irritated by his judges about some legal issue, reacted by declaring that he no longer wished to see any person with a turban! His entourage took it literally and no one dared to appear before him wearing a ʿimāma. To avoid the sultan’s fury, Qurʾan readers who had an appointment at the court, arrived wearing a wrapped zamṭ instead. When a market inspector and a judge appeared at the same time before the sultan, wearing the Mamluk takhfīfa instead of their turban, the sultan, amused at the odd sight of civilians in takhfīfa, said to the judge, ‘now you look like a Circassian Mamluk!’62 The takhfīfa was thus exclusive to the Mamluks of the Circassian period and a sign of their identity. When, at the end of his first reign, Sultan Barqūq was reported to have worn an ʿimāma with a ṭaylasān’, it was not his usual dress of a Mamlūk but a symbolic gesture in a specific exceptional situation. During the civil war that terminated his first reign and brought al-Ṣāliḥ Ḥājjī to the throne in 1389, Barqūq was forced to escape from the Citadel and to seek refuge among some of his trusted dignitaries. These could not but persuade him to surrender himself to the emirs in power. On that occasion, he wore a turban or ʿimāma wrapped in a ṭaylasān. Wearing this headdress reserved for the men of religion, the sultan went to surrender himself to the leaders of the rebellion, who eventually sent him to the al-Karak jail.63 He wore that turban as a sign of humility when declaring his surrender, which is similar to the cases when emirs wore the white kerchief of pardon (mandīl al-āmān). 3.2 Taqiyya and Zamṭ With the beginning of the 15th century a new headdress fashion emerged with the ṭāqiyya. Maqrīzī describes the ‘Circassian ṭāqiyya’ as a type of bonnet worn without wrap that became popular during the reign of Sultan Faraj, ‘among emirs, Mamlūks, and soldiers, and those who emulate them.’ They wore the ṭāqiyya everywhere ‘in the streets, markets, mosques, and processions, knowing that taking off the turban is a shame and a scandal’. The height of the ṭāqiyya kept increasing from the initial 1.6 cubits to 2.3 cubits while its profile

62 63

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 340, 347. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 408; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XI, p. 11.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

123

changed from being curved in the upper part and flat at the top to a rounded profile with a bordure 1.8 cubits high of black beaver at the base. It was made of green, red, blue, and other colors and had a double shell, with paper filling the space between the inner and the outer shell to keep it upright. Maqrīzī goes on to say that women followed suit and began themselves to wear these ṭāqiyyas while embellishing them with silk, silver, gold, and gems.64 He explains this unisex fashion, which is forbidden in Islam, as resulting from the widespread homosexual inclinations of the period, which led women to adopt it to please the men (li-yastamilna qulūb rijālihin). The ṭāqiyya may have been the origin of the female tall bonnet of the later period, referred to as ʿiṣāba, which was likewise filled with paper to hold it upright.65 The ṭāqiyya seems to have merged with the later zamṭ, which was likewise a bonnet without a wrap.66 The zamṭ is first mentioned in the first half of 15th century as a bonnet of red color worn by commoners.67 When in 1436 Sultan Barsbāy issued an order to ban the red zamṭ ‘which is worn by the Arabs and is also called shāshia’,68 he provoked the protest of the wool merchants, the Bedouins of the camel brigade, and others, though to no avail. Ibn Iyās explains that this ban, which was a security measure to prevent the infiltration of disguised spies, affected the peasants and servants in particular.69 However, the zamṭ continued to be worn by Bedouins as well as by urban commoners.70 To inflict a punishment on his son Muḥammad, Sultan Qāytbāy forced him to wear an old zamṭ and rough clothes and sent him to sweep the floor of the barracks.71 Whereas the zamṭ under Barsbāy seems to have been specific to Bedouins and peasants, later in the 15th the term zamṭ described a headdress worn by commoners as well as Mamluks. It is mentioned by European travelers and depicted by Renaissance painters alongside the white takhfīfa (figs. 19, 20, 21,

64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 343–4; idem, Sulūk, III, p. 618. See Chapter 11. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 137. Mayer, Costume, p. 32, see also the photo of a zamṭ in the Coptic Museum in Cairo, fig. 11. For ‘shāshia’, see Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 240–4. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, VIII, p. 414; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 1000; Ibn Iyās Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, pp. 172–3. Ibn Iyās’s explanation is not quite clear. Ibn Iyās Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 324–5. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 308.

124

Chapter 9

Figure 25 Mamluk soldier wearing a zamṭ, Arnold von Harff © Bodleian Library MS Bodl. 972, print dated 1554, fol. 72b

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

125

Figure 26 Musicians wearing a zamṭ, a malūṭa, and boots, detail of Vittore Carpaccio’s ‘Baptism of the Selenites’ © Scuola di San Giorgi degli Schiavoni, Venice, Wikimedia Commons

25, 26). In the furūsiyya manuscripts of the late 15th century the soldiers always wear such a headdress (figs. 27, 28).72 Anselme Adorno notes that some Mamlūks wore barrettes and others wore high red bonnets with fur.73 In 15th-century France the ‘barrette’ was a tall red 72 Chevaux et cavaliers arabes dans les arts de l’Orient et d’Occident, (exhibition catalogue), l’Institut du Monde Arabe (Paris 2002), pp. 102–7. 73 Adorno, Itinéraire, p. 200.

126

Chapter 9

Figure 27 A Mamluk Training with a Lance, fol. from a furūsiyya manuscript 19/2001, late 15th century © David Collection, Copenhagen

bonnet for men, made of wool and sometimes lined with fur.74 The traveler Georges Lengherand mentions a red hat in 1485–6 and describes it as the headdress the Mamlūks wore together with their white garment.75 Benjamin Arbel has found that at the turn of the 16th century, hats described in archive sources as barete were imported from Venice on a large scale and the number of workshops that produced them there increased substantially, probably to meet Mamluk demand.76 Indeed, this was the time when the zamṭ was adopted on 74 Florent Véniel, Le Costume médiéval de 1320 à 1480 (Saint-Martin-des Entrées 2021), p. 154. 75 Georges Lengherand, Voyage de Georges Lengherand à Venise, Rome, Jérusalem, Mont Sinaï & Le Kayre 1485–1486 (Paris 1861), p. 180. 76 Benjamin Arbel, ‘The Last Decades of Venice’s Trade with the Mamluks. Importations into Egypt and Syria,’ Mamluk Studies Review VIII/2 (2004), p. 55.

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

127

Figure 28 Mamluk horsemen in military exercise, late 15th century, folio from a furūsiyya manuscript Courtesy of Bonhams. Islamic and Indian Art, 28 April 2018, lot 7. https://www .bonhams.com/auctions/24623/

a large scale in Mamlūk circles. Its hierarchical order is not clear, however. It is possible that the zamṭ had more than one origin and that Mamlūks introduced their own version. The case of the ẓamṭ is comparable to that of the malūṭa,77 indicating a trend in the later Circassian period to gentrify common garments. A few Mamluk caps have survived in museum collections.78 They are made of quilted silk, have a short conical profile, and are curved in the upper section. The cap in fig. 29 has a design consisting of stripes with three different patterns of yellow color on a black background, an inscription glorifying a sultan 77 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 177, 235. 78 Atıl, Renaissance, cat. 117, p. 234.

128

Chapter 9

Figure 29 Mamluk silk cap, 1985.5 © Cleveland Museum of Art, Wikimedia, https://clevelandart.org /art/1985.5

with the title al-Nāṣir, a series of yellow crescents on a dark background, and running quadrupeds like the animal frieze on metalwork. The caps in figs. 30 and 31 are very similar and include the word ‘al-sulṭān’ woven in large format. The cap in fig. 32 has an overall geometrical design in rich colors. The use of

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

129

Figure 30 Mamluk silk cap © Cleveland Museum of Art, Wikidata, https://www.clevelandart.org/art /1950.510

these caps and the Mamluk terms describing them cannot be matched with information available in the sources. However, one may speculate that they were skull caps that would have been wrapped with gauze. Since they are all made of silk it is likely that they belonged to a kalawta or a takhīfa worn by Mamlūks.

130

Chapter 9

Figure 31 Mamluk silk cap © Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg (2) (36351944664) Richard Mortel from Riyadh, Wikimedia

Dress and Dress Code of the Mamluk Aristocracy

Figure 32 Mamluk silk cap © The Madina Collection of Islamic Art, Alamy ID TX0RJ9

131

Chapter 10

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners 1

The Civilian Elite

The dress of the civilian elite was evidently less opulent, less varied, and it is also less well documented than that of the Mamluks. According to ʿUmarī’s dress code for the turbaned administrative and judicial establishment, the turban advertised rank through its size and decoration.1 It consisted mainly of a long gauze wrapped around a skull cap with long tips or tails (dhawāʾib) hanging between the shoulders. The turbans of the highest-ranking civilians had the tip of the gauze reaching down on their back as far as their saddles. It seems from a Mamluk illustration and figures in the Maqāmāt that the tail of the turban could be wrapped around the neck (fig. 33) or left hanging on the back. Some turban gauze was made of silk satin, and sometimes a shawl was wrapped instead. Apart from the turban, which was highly symbolic of status, most of the outfit’s components of the turbaned groups were shared by the middle-class urban population, varying in detail and value. The outfit consisted of an over-cloak ( farajiyya) made of kanjī fabric. This was a large and long cloak with big sleeves, without a front opening but an opening at the shoulders instead. ʿUmarī mentions that the turbaned men of higher status had a ‘wind-catcher’ (bādhahanj) in their sleeves, a term used otherwise in architecture, which may refer to this opening. A kind of farajiyya was worn also by commoners of both sexes, with buttons on the front.2 The next in rank among the men of the pen, according to ʿUmarī, wore a buttoned farajiyya with wide sleeves and a similar kind of turban as the previous group, however with the tip hanging down merely to the shoulders. The farajiyya of the lower-ranking men of the pen had long sleeves and no opening or bādhahanj. Some wore a ṭaylasān/tarḥa, an elaborate shawl or veil (fig. 1). We have seen that the ṭaylasān/tarḥa was part of the khilʿa presented to men of the religious

1 ʿUmarī, Masālik, pp. 50–1; Qalqashandī, Subḥ, IV, pp. 40–2. ʿUmari reckons the scholars as a third group next to the men of the sword and the men of the pen. 2 Ashtor, Histoire des prix, p. 349.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_011

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

133

Figure 33 Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, mns dated 1337 © Bodleian-Ms-Marsh 0458-45, fol. 45a

establishment, including the caliph, but it was not confined to this purpose, rather it seems to have been part of the jurists’ formal outfit. The tarḥa/ṭaylasān was initially a privilege of the Shāfiʿī jurists alone; however, Baybars allowed judges of the other three schools of law to wear it as well. It seems that this permission did not last, as it is related that, in 1371, a Ḥanafī shaykh requested permission to wear the tarḥa, though he died before receiving an answer to his request.3 According to another source, the shaykh’s request concerned the farajiyya style.4 The cloaks of the jurists differed slightly between the four schools, the Ḥanafīs and the Shafiʿīs having a higher status than the Mālikīs and Ḥanbalīs, which can also be seen in the allocation and size of their rooms in Mamluk madrasas in Cairo. 3 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 540; Suyūṭī, Ḥusn, II, pp. 304, 320; Mayer, Costume, p. 51; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 255–7. 4 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl al-amal, I/2, p. 33.

134

Chapter 10

The garment worn under the farajiyya was either a bughluṭāq or a jubba open on the back. The difference between the two is not indicated. We have seen that Dawādārī describes a lower category of robe of honor given to lowerranking emirs as bughluṭāq. Although Dozy, following Maqrīzī, identifies the bughluṭāq with the salārī,5 the bughluṭāq seems to have been a universal garment common across classes and sexes, whereas the salārī was a male garment exclusive to the military class.6 In the 1001 Nights, a satin bughluṭāq is mentioned as a women’s garment with a hem embroidered in the miṣrī style.7 A commoner’s bughluṭāq would be worth 20 dirhams and a princely one over 3,000.8 ʿUmarī writes that the average secretaries and bureaucrats dressed like the scholars and differently from the judges and the judicial staff.9 They wore a farajiyya and a jubba open in the back and produced in Alexandria. The higher-ranking among them had wind-catchers in their sleeves, which a century later, according to Qalqashandī, was abolished in the ordinary costume and reserved only for the honorific robes.10 Their summer outfit was of white Baʿalbakī cotton; the footwear was white in the summer and made of colored wool in the winter. The turbaned class did not wear silk gowns. Initially they did not wear any other color but white, except at home, until Sultan Barqūq allowed them to wear colored wool.11 ʿUmarī commented that the Egyptian dress of the turbaned class was less elaborate than that of their Syrian fellows, which is interesting in that it reveals that differences existed between Cairo and Syrian cities. He writes that the Copts might appear in humble outfits in their offices, but in their homes they would indulge in wearing finer clothing. The merchants and other groups of the population, including the poor, wore a variety of garments.12 The preachers in the mosques wore black gowns with hierarchical differentiation. Following the takhfīfa of the Mamluk class, the ʿimāma worn by the men of the pen increased considerably in size during the 15th century. Shaykh Shams al-Dīn al-Rūmī’s turban (d. 1451) weighed as much as 10 Egyptian raṭls and the gauze measured more than a whole roll (thawb) of Baʿalbakī fabric.13 Already 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 81–4. Ashtor, Histoire des prix, p. 349. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 108. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, V, p. 161. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, pp. 94, 162, 176, 213, 412; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 14. Qalqashandī, Subḥ, IV, p. 42. See Chapters 5 and 7. ʿUmarī, Masālik, p. 52. Sakhāwī, Tibr, III, p. 139; Mayer, Costume, p. 49. n. 6.

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

135

in the 14th century the Moroccan traveler Ibn Baṭṭūṭa was amazed by the turban of a scholar in Alexandria the like of which he had not seen before in the East or in the West. He describes it as so large that it almost filled the mihrab vault behind him.14 The turban could be used like a pocket or a purse to keep cash or other objects. Some used them to keep a protective charm in the form of a paper with a talismanic inscription.15 When Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Basit, who held multiple administrative offices, was arrested by Sultan Jaqmaq and stripped naked, his turban was found to include such talismans and a piece of leather believed to be from the Prophet’s slipper.16 2

The Sufis

The Sufis, or mystics, belonged to the religious groups but not necessarily to the establishment. Although Sufism was widely spread among all social groups of the population including the ruling establishment, some dedicated Sufis were confined to their own circles or orders around their zāwiyās while others were attached to the foundations established by sultans and emirs. ʿUmarī calls the Sufis ‘zuhhād’ (‘asectics’, ‘renunciants’), although the mystics were not necessarily ascetics, this was rather the exception. However, the Sufis assumed the title ‘faqīr’ to identify themselves with the poor, at least in the spiritual sense. Their characteristic garment is generally known as the ‘khirqa’ which literally means ‘rag’. Mamluk texts, including ʿUmarī and Qalqashandī,17 use the term ‘muraqqaʿa’, meaning ‘patched’ for the Sufi frock. Both terms, muraqqaʿa and khirqa, refer to a woolen gown comparable to the Christian monk’s frock, whose tradition goes back to early Islam. The term ṣūfī itself has been interpreted as deriving from ṣūf, meaning ‘wool’, although this interpretation is not certain. As mentioned elsewhere, some Sufis wore elaborate muraqqaʿas made of fine colored textiles.18 However, it seems that not all Sufis wore such a garment. According to ʿUmarī, they wore a turban with a short dhawwāba or tail hanging on the left shoulder. A century later Qalqashandī wrote that like the scholars, they wore a dilq, less wide and with tighter sleeves.19 The term khirqa is used in Mamluk sources mostly in the abstract and symbolic sense, referring to the investiture of a disciple by his master with a 14 15 16 17 18 19

Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, Riḥla, I, p. 38. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, pp. 255, 279. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, p. 219. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 43. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, IV, pp. 23–4; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 189–90. Qalqashandī, Ṣubḥ, IV, p. 143.

136

Chapter 10

binding oath to adhere to his spiritual chain of authority. In this investiture procedure, the khirqa was equivalent to the robe of honor in that it served a purpose similar to that of the certificate (ijāza) used in academic circles to qualify a student to teach a specific subject.20 As in the case of the ijāza, a disciple may acquire several khirqas from different masters.21 Sometimes two persons shared a khirqa.22 Sufi women are also mentioned to have earned a khirqa.23 The affiliation with a certain order or a certain shaykh occurred on a private and individual level, as was the case with the academic ijāza. The khirqa is usually connected with the order or ṭarīqa to which the Sufi belongs.24 However, not all orders adopted the khirqa; the Shādhiliyya, for example, who played a major role in Egypt, did not.25 Although biographical dictionaries refer to the khirqa tradition in the Mamluk period,26 it is not clear whether this involved a material khirqa or was meant only symbolically to refer to the accreditation of a Sufi. The khanqāhs or monasteries sponsored by the ruling establishment were not identified with specific Sufi orders and their waqf deeds do not refer to a khirqa or a muraqqaʿa. 3

The Commoners

Regarding the dress of the social groups who did not belong to the elite, the chroniclers have little to say unless they had an opportunity to report of unusual situations or transgressions against public order. There is no explicit code regarding the commoners’ dress apart from the religious and moral guidelines set by the market inspector and the political authorities. It can be assumed that outside the establishment of both military and civilian groups, commoners’ clothing, except for that of the religious minorities, was not subject to much scrutiny and that its hierarchy was a matter of financial means. Most likely the urban middle class dressed according to the same lines as the 20 See Jamal J. Elias, ‘The Sufi Robe (Khirqa) as a Vehicle of Spiritual Authority’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture (New York 2001), pp. 275–90. 21 Nathan Hofer, The Popularisation of Sufism in Ayyubid an Mamluk Egypt, 1173–1325 (Edinburgh 2015), p. 152, notes 17, 18. 22 Sakhāwī, Tibr, IV, p. 42. 23 Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, XII, p. 14. 24 Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, III, p. 123. See Hofer, Popularisation, pp. 110, 115, 131; Éric Geoffroy, Le Soufisme en Égypte et en Syrie sous les derniers Mamelouks et les premiers Ottomans. Orientations spirituelles et enjeux culturels (Damascus 1995), pp. 195–6. 25 Hofer, Popularisation, pp. 145–6. 26 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 318; Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, I, p. 282; idem, Tibr, II, pp. 113, 215, 224.

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

137

civilian elite, the lower class in a simpler manner. ʿUmarī writes that merchants and others wore distinctive dress, and that the poor were recognizable by the frugality of their dress that associated them with the Sufis.27 However, he does not include the mercantile class in his description of the official dress code. Merchants and shop owners were a substantial element in urban society, which is also reflected in the protagonist role they are given in the tales of the 1001 Nights, where they move in royal circles and marry daughters of kings. Some merchants belonged to the upper class through their wealth, which could reach legendary proportions among those involved in the overseas spice and slave trades. Patrician merchants owned industrial enterprises and urban estates, assumed banking activities, and lent the sultan money. Some enjoyed a lifestyle similar to that of the emirs, surrounded by a multitude of slaves and Mamluks. The sultan himself entered into commercial partnerships with merchants and employed them as officials in his apparatus to manage his investments.28 Many held high bureaucratic and academic positions recognizable by their titles, and some founded religious institutions. These are likely to have dressed in the manner of high-ranking state officials and bureaucrats. The Mamluk text of the 1001 Nights refers to the dress of urban merchants, the middle-class, and commoners. It mentions ‘ziyy awlād al-tujjār’29 and ‘libs al-tujjār’, i.e., merchants’ outfit, described as opulent and adorned with a double ṭirāz, which is a sign of high distinction.30 A merchant’s outfit included a libās or drawers, a farajiyya cloak commonly worn by the civilians, a turban (shāsh), and a dagger.31 In a remarkable contrast to the highly complex vocabulary of costume used by the chroniclers, the terminology of the 1001 Nights is limited and reveals little about hierarchy, which mirrors the setting of the tales and the milieu of their audience. The text uses mostly generic terms for men’s and women’s dress such as atwāb or tiyāb (athwāb, thiyāb, sing. thawb).32 However, an elegant male outfit is described as a ‘qabāʾ cloak’ with a double gold embroidered band (ṭirāzayn) and a cap of miṣrī style in the shape of a bowl (ṭāsa).33

27 28 29 30 31

ʿUmarī, Masālik, p. 52. Ira M. Lapidus, Muslim Cities in the Later Middle Ages, (Cambridge 1984), pp. 117–30. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 136. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, pp. 576, 579. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, pp. 251, 255. Farajiyya is replaced by fawqāniyya in the second citation, suggesting that it was an over-cloak. 32 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 350. The singular ‘thawb’ is also used in the chronicles to describe a roll of fabric, which it continues to mean in colloquial Arabic in Egypt today. 33 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 114.

138

Chapter 10

The Geniza documents of the Jewish community use the term ‘thawb’ to describe any common or modest form of clothing for both sexes.34 This is also the case in the Mamluk text of the 1001 Nights. However, some of the terms used in the Geniza documents, such as the headdress described as ‘qajīja’ or the garments called ‘jukāniyya’ and others,35 are not mentioned in Mamluk chronicles, the Ḥaram documents, or in the 1001 Nights text. Unlike other source, the 1001 Nights includes many references to underwear, indicating that the shirt (qamīṣ) and the trousers or drawers (sirwāl) were the basic underwear for men and women,36 most probably across all social groups. Both garments functioned as underwear and at the same time as a kind of pajama or nightwear.37 Apart from Ibn al-Ḥājj’s moral instructions, Mamluk texts say little about the etiquette of trousers.38 A pair of Mamuk trousers of striped silk, excavated in Egypt and attributed to the 14th or 15th century,39 must have been tied by a band. Its front opening indicates that it was for men’s use (fig. 34). A similar and most likely contemporary one at the Victoria and Albert Museum, also found in Egypt, is attributed there to the 12th–13th century (fig. 35). The latter is accompanied by the fragment of a vest of the same material, having embroidered silk buttons attached to it that are very similar to the ones made for contemporary caftans and jallābiyyas. Although we are less informed about the esthetics and design of the commoners’ dress, the fabrics they used are known. Whereas some fabrics are mentioned exclusively in connection with the upper class, others such as cotton, linen, and wool were used in general by all groups in various categories and styles. Silk and velvet in a variety of categories were also used by the middle class. Wool was regularly used for the coats (ʿabāʾ)40 and over-cloaks of the upper and middleclass.41 In the Bahri period, jūkh, a kind of coarse wool, was imported from Europe for furnishings and mule saddles. Only commoners, Europeans, and some Alexandrians used it for clothing. The upper class used it only to protect themselves from the rain. However, after the economic crisis at the turn of the 15th century, it became widespread among all social groups including 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

Ashtor, Histoire des prix, pp. 147, 151. Ashtor, Histoire des prix, pp. 346–59; Stillman, ‘Geniza,’ p. 585. Lutfi, al-Quds, pp. 48–9. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, pp. 249, 250, 251, 276, 350–1, 357, 523; Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, p. 25. Mayer, Costume, p. 70; ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, p. 233. Musée Royal Museum d’Art et d’Histoire, TS.Tx0106; Mayer, Costume, fig. 27. Lufi, al-Quds, pp. 49–50. Lutfi, al-Quds, pp. 44–5.

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

139

Figure 34 Silk trousers excavated in Egypt, dated to 1300–1400. Is.Tx0106. ImageStudio © Royal Museums of Art and History, Brussels

the upper echelons. Even Sultan Faraj himself was seen wearing a kind of shirt he calls ‘qamjūn’42 made of this fabric. It is described as a short-sleeved robe with no lining or other covering fabric (ghishāʾ).43 A jūkha was a commoner’s garment probably made of such material. When a beggar was surprisingly found to possess 170 gold dīnārs, Sultan al-Ghawrī confiscated his fortune in 42 Dozy, Supplément. 43 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 326.

140

Chapter 10

Figure 35 Silk trousers excavated in Egypt and fragment of a silk jacket, dated to 1200–1300 © Victoria and Albert Museum, 763.1898 and 778.1898

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

141

exchange for a daily allowance of two silver niṣfs and an outfit consisting of a jūkha, a shirt, and a turban.44 Although the word tarḥa means ‘scarf’, ‘shawl’, or ‘veil’ the term tarḥ described a type of fabric and a sleeveless garment that was probably made of it,45 which Mayer describes as a fine Alexandrian fabric.46 It was used to make the milʾā, a wrap for women, and other wraps as well as malūṭas.47 Linen was produced in Egypt in high quantity and quality. That of Giza was viewed as the best. Unlike cotton, it was always available on the market, though its price could rise in critical times. Baʿalbakī cotton from Syria was a common fabric used across classes. Already in the 14th century, Indian cotton is mentioned alongside Baʿalbakī as among the most widespread fabrics.48 Although Egypt produced cotton, it mostly came from Syria and is regularly listed in the price list of basic commodities as an indicator of the economic situation.49 It was also the fabric used for shrouds, which made it scarce in times of pandemics.50 Indian cotton was also widely used for modest clothing.51 Although block-printed Indian cotton had been sold in Egypt since Fatimid times and is documented in museum collections,52 its use in Mamluk Cairo is not documented in the chronicles. Leo Africanus, who visited Cairo during the Ottoman campaign, writes that, ‘citizens are clad in garments of cloth lined with cotton: In summer they wear fine shirts over which some put on linen garments curiously wrought with silk, and others wear garments of camelot, and upon their heads they carry great turbans covered with cloth of India’.53 As mentioned, since Barqūq’s reign, fur became widespread among the Cairene population of the 15th century. In book illustrations of the 14th century, commoners are depicted wearing a straight, simple garment, occasionally with a bordure around the collar, the sleeves, and the hem. Although miniature paintings and figural representations in the decorative arts show people of various social groups almost invariably 44 45 46 47

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 250–1. Lutfi, Documentary source, p. 222. Mayer, Costume, p. 50. Adam Abdelhamid Sabra, Poverty and Charity in Medieval Islam. Mamluk Egypt 1250–1517 (Cambridge 2000), p. 111; Lutfi, ‘Documentary Source’, p. 222. 48 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, III, p. 160. 49 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, pp. 70, 106. 50 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 287. 51 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, III, p. 160. 52 See Barnes, Block-Printed, II, pp. 104–7. 53 Leo Africanus, Description, p. 882.

142

Chapter 10

with ṭirāz-like bands around their upper sleeves, the chroniclers do not mention this feature, which does not mean, however, that it was not a common practice. It is, however, mentioned in the Mamluk 1001 Nights.54 Unlike contemporary dress in Europe, Mamluk dress, whether common or upper-class, seems to have been simply tailored, as one can see today with the Arab dishdāsha or the jallābiyya. Sophistication was rather revealed in the fabric, the added ornaments such as belts, embroidery, and ṭirāz, as well as in the elaborate headdress. The kerchief (mandīl) always occupies a prominent place in Islamic traditional outfit, as documented by Franz Rosenthal in an enlightening essay on this subject.55 It was used by all social groups with multiple purposes. For persons of rank, it was an item of adornment, being listed among the valuable gifts and treasured assets of the upper classes as it was made of precious fabrics woven and embroidered with gold. For commoners, it served as towel, napkin, tablecloth, or as bag or purse with which to wrap objects or hold cash. It might be worn as a scarf, head-covering, or tied around a cap.56 The kerchief belonged to the military outfit of the early Mamluk period and was attached to soldiers’ bags. During the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, Salār the emir, who created the fashion of the salāriyya cloak, was also credited for designing a new style of mandīl.57 The mandīl has been celebrated in Arabic poetry of various periods.58 The tradition of the mandīl lasted until recently. In 1949 the Egyptian singer ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Maḥmūd composed a love song titled ‘mandīl al-ḥilw’ (the kerchief of the beautiful one). Although there is no information on children’s dress, miniatures show that boys dressed like adults. Poor orphan boys received as charity a malūṭa, a shirt, drawers, a cap, sometimes an upper-cloak, and clogs. Sometimes a jubba is mentioned instead of the malūṭa,59 which suggests that they fulfilled similar purposes or may even have been identical. Commenting on the dress people on the streets wore, Symon Semeonis, in the 14th century, writes that the upper class wore silk adorned with gold 54 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 544. 55 Franz Rosenthal, ‘A Note on the Mandīl’, in Franz Rosenthal, ed., Four essays on art and literature in Islam. The L.A. Mayer Memorial Studies in Islamic Art and Archaeology 2 (Leiden 1971), pp. 163–99.; Ashtor, Histoire des prix, pp. 346–7. 56 Rosenthal, ‘Mandīl’, p. 87. 57 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm IX, pp. 19–20; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ (II, p. 99); Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/1 p. 436. 58 Rosenthal, ‘Mandīl’, pp. 94–5. 59 Sabra, Poverty, pp. 110–11.

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

143

while the commoners wore clothes of various categories of linen and cotton. He compared their cloak with that of the Franciscan Friars Minor except that it had no cowl and was shorter. They bound around their heads a white cloth of linen or cotton, which did not cover their necks. They did not wear boots but wide trousers and red slippers that left their heels uncovered. The horsemen, meaning the Mamlūks, commonly wore red or white boots reaching to the knees.60 Frescobaldi, in his description of Cairo (1385), describes men on the street as wearing long cloaks without trousers, mostly of white silk, fine cotton,61 or fine linen.62 Simone Sigoli’s account in 1384 describes men’s clothes as made of finest white silk or boccaccini fabric, which looked like silk, depending on the person’s means. Their cloaks were long and large and had wide sleeves, their turban was wrapped in gauze that could be 25 to 30 ‘braccia’ long.63 He adds that some wore a gown he describes as ‘batolo’ which resembled what the priest wears for a great mass; this may refer to the over-cloak or qabāʾ fawqānī of the emirs or the farajiyya of the bureaucrats. All men held a scarf or kerchief in their hands or over their shoulders.64 The scarves are confirmed in Renaissance paintings with Mamluk figures, showing them widely used by men. In the late 15th century, Anselme Adorno described men on the street as well-dressed, wearing voluminous turbans and long gowns of silk, cotton, or linen depending on status.65 3.1 The Malūṭa and Other Garments The malūṭa, like the jubba, was a simple garment widespread among ordinary people ranging from middle-class to poor.66 It is likely that it was also equivalent to the kibr/kibra which appears in similar contexts and the thawb mentioned in the 1001 Nights.67 The word ‘kibr’ describes originally a fabric, from

60 Semeonis, The Journey, p. 60. 61 The term used here is boccasini which, according to Heyd, is the name of a fine linen fabric as glossy as silk. Commerce, I, pp. 458, pp. 702–3. 62 Frescobaldi, Viaggio di Lionardo di Niccolò Frescobaldi in Egitto e Terra Santa (Rome 1818), p. 73. 63 A braccia is a measure amounting to roughly two feet. 64 Sigoli, Viaggio, p. 18. 65 Adorno, Itinéraire, pp. 171, 192–3. 66 Lutfi, al-Quds, p. 300. 67 See Chapter 3.

144

Chapter 10

which the garment’s name is derived; like the malūṭa, it was worn with a zamṭ. It is also mentioned as a woman’s garment in 15th-century Damascus.68 When Sultan Selīm paraded the captured Mamluk emirs of the Citadel to celebrate the triumph of his conquest, they appeared fettered, riding donkeys or mules, and wearing old kibrs and kūfiyyas without gauze.69 To describe a period of extreme inflation, Maqrīzī writes that a used malūṭa that had been washed twice was sold for as much as 2,200 dirhams.70 In the late 15th century, a commoner’s (ʿāmmī) dress was described as consisting of a turban, a malūṭa, and a tarḥa.71 Impoverished Mamluk soldiers who had no income from their land tenure wore a malūṭa and a turban.72 However, there were also higher categories of malūṭa made of tarḥ.73 In the late 15th century, the malūṭa begins to be mentioned as a garment of Mamluk soldiers, worn for example by the bodyguard of a princess together with a kūfiyya fitted with beaver.74 Referring to the Mamlūks’ outfit, Ibn Taghrībirdī mentions briefly that the malūṭa was worn all year.75 The malūṭa is most likely the garment depicted in furūsiyya manuscripts of the late 15th century (figs. 27–28) worn by soldiers together with a zamṭ. The malūṭa and the zamṭ are mentioned together as the dress of a convicted eunuch being led to his execution.76 When in 1497 two Mamluk emirs were released from prison, they arrived before the sultan wearing malūṭas made of tarḥ; the sultan reinstated them with regular robes.77 Following his military triumph against the rebelling vassals of the Dhū l-Qadr Turcomans in 1472, the emir Yashbak captured their ruler Shāh Siwār and brought him to Cairo where he was paraded in the streets together with his fettered retinue, all of them wearing white malūṭas and turbans.78 Siwār himself was wearing a khilʿa which was taken off him and swapped with a white malūṭa in which he was executed.79 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 173. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 169. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 1170; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 412–3. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 359. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 490. Lutfi, al-Quds, pp. 59–62. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 445. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 299. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 465. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 347. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 76. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 77.

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

145

When the chief of the army and sultan’s deputy, the emir Azbak, went to meet Sultan Qāytbāy, wearing a white malūṭa and a small turban, his outfit was probably meant to demonstrate humility and submission to the sultan at a time when a rebellion was brewing in the army.80 The sultan invited him to pray with him in a formal outfit (shāsh and qumāsh). In the following events, Azbak presented the sultan with his resignation from office and declared his intention to move to Mecca in pious retirement; he then traveled wearing simply a white malūṭa and a small turban.81 At the turn of 16th century, the malūṭa had acquired such respectability that even the Mamluk aristocracy would wear it. When in 1501 the leading emirs went to see al-Ghawrī, then chancellor, to offer him the throne, which he was reluctant to accept, he was wearing a malūṭa.82 He also died in a malūṭa.83 On the battlefield in Marj Dābiq where he fell, he and the caliph are reported to have worn malūṭas,84 which indicates that it had become a garment for soldiers. Contemporary emirs also wore it; in one case it is mentioned as having buttons.85 This category of garment was characterized by simplicity, unlike the elaborately sewn luxury garments with collars, lining and fur. It may have been comparable to the Egyptian jallābiyya of today. Craftsmen at work wore a blue coarse shirt.86 In 14th-century book illustrations, the garment worn by men of the working class is always short, a kind of long shirt or tunic, showing their bare lower legs (fig. 36). In Italian Renaissance paintings with Mamluk motifs, men of the working class are similarly shown wearing a short and plain garment, sometimes striped. A fresco by an anonymous artist in 1480s, in the courtyard of Castello Sforzesco in Milan, shows a barefoot dark-skinned groom with an elephant, which probably commemorates a diplomatic gift sent by Qāytbāy, wearing a turban and a long blue cloak with a belt, whose front opening shows another garment underneath (fig. 37). Similarly, a sculpture at the Campo dei Mori in Venice shows a man of Middle-Eastern appearance carrying a chest or basket on his shoulders, wearing a short garment with a belt. At the Palazzo Mastelli, also in Venice, a marble relief panel shows a working-class Middle Eastern man with a loaded camel similarly dressed (fig. 38). When the young son of Barsbāy was smuggled out of 80 81 82 83 84 85 86

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 312; Mayer, Costume, p. 24. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 314. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 2. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 485. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, p. 68. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 41, 468, 485. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, pp. 278, 340–2, See also p. 292.

146

Chapter 10

the Citadel during the succession fights that followed his father’s death, he was disguised as cook’s aide wearing a turban and a shirt over a pair of trousers.87 A poor man’s clothing in the 14th century was confined to drawers, a shirt, a turban,88 and a woolen mantle or wrap (ʿibāʾa).89 The kūfiyya, which is mentioned as a ceremonial headdress for pages, seems to have been also a widespread head covering among urban commoners. Besides being used by men, it is mentioned in the 1001 Nights as a women’s elegant scarf made of daqq al-maṭraqa, a textile woven with glittering gold or silver coins.90 Today the term kūfiyya refers to a kind of scarf, like the one worn by Palestinians. The emir Ḥusām al-Dīn Lājīn who spent 16 years in jail under al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, would weave beautiful woolen kūfiyyas that were highly popular. He sold them and donated the money to charity.91 87 88 89 90

Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, IV, p. 79. Lutfi, al-Quds, p. 53. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 479. This reference to the Nights is in Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 391–4, see p. 392 n. 1; Dozy suggests a European origin for the term, related to ‘coiffe’. In the edition of Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 243 the daqq al-matraqa is a fabric used for festive robes. Perhaps we are dealing here with a merge of two different headdress traditions. 91 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 398.

The Dress Code of the Civilian Elite and the Commoners

147

Figure 36 Man of the working class, detail from a Mamluk copy of Kalīla wa-Dimna, ms BodleianLibrary-MS-Pococke-400_00050 _fol-24a

148

Chapter 10

Figure 37 Groom with elephant, detail from a fresco in the courtyard of Castello Sforzesco, Milan. Commune of Milan, all rights reserved Photo Fabio Saporetti

Figure 38 Relief with an Oriental leading a camel, Palazzo Mastelli, Venice Photo courtesy of Daniel C. Vaughan

Chapter 11

Women’s Clothing 1

The Palace

As to be expected, official and ceremonial dress and dress code do not refer to women. When the chroniclers speak of women’s dress it is either to describe the glamor of Mamluk princesses as a manifestation of the sultan’s prestige or to report what was viewed by the authorities as extravagance of women on the streets and the ensuing intervention and penalties imposed on them.1 The ladies of the aristocracy did not attend official court ceremonies, and unlike the Ottomans, they were not allowed to pray in the mosque. However, they may have attended tournaments, as Symon Semeonis writes about a tournament that al-Nāṣir Muḥammad and his wives attended.2 Among the rare occasions for ladies of the court to be seen outside the Citadel, were excursions or outdoor parties on the outskirts of the city and the pilgrimage to Mecca. Pilgrimage, for which there is no restriction regarding women, was perhaps the greatest opportunity for women of the court to be seen outdoors in full glamor, crossing the city in fabulous palanquins, accompanied by a large retinue. The sultans’ wives and mothers’ palanquins earned special mention on the occasion. The palanquin was equivalent to the saddle for the men and was often described as a prestigious item with brocade and precious fabrics. Women of the harem of Sultan al-Kāmil Shaʿbān (r. 1345–6) took the opportunity of their pilgrimage as an outing that allowed them to display their apparel and compete among themselves about the luxury of their palanquins, the trappings of their camels, and the lavishness of their silk and brocaded garments. They even went so far as to bestow robes made of ṭard waḥsh brocade on their guards and watercarriers, causing a scandal and provoking the reprimand of the preacher in the Friday sermon at the mosque of the Citadel.3 A rare Mamluk depiction of a woman can be seen in a medallion on a silver-inlaid brass basin at the Victoria and Albert Museum, datable to the 13th century. The unveiled figure sits on a camel with a tambourine player at

1 See Mayer, Costume, pp. 69–74; ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, Chapter 3. 2 Semeonis, The Journey, p. 78. 3 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 693; see Mounira Chapoutot-Remadi, ‘Femmes dans la Ville Mamelūke,’ JESHO 38/2 (1995), pp. 145–64.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_012

150

Chapter 11

Figure 39 Woman with musician on a camel, Medallion on a Mamluk basin © Victoria and Albert Museum, 2734-1856

the rear, suggesting that she might represent a singer; the other medallions on the basin contain entertainment motifs (fig. 39).4 Regarding their excursions, princesses are reported under al-Nāṣir Muḥammad to have gone racing on horses and played polo, dressed in yellow silk satin and wearing pointed bonnets (ṭarāṭīr) made of Russian leather and studded with gems and pearl. The concubines wore a garment described as ‘kāmiliyya’.5 However, when under the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s son al-Muẓaffar Ḥājjī, who was known for his dissolute lifestyle and his passion for black slave-girls, harem women went racing on their Arab horses dressed in colored silk satin and wearing their tall bejeweled bonnets, the chroniclers commented with disapproval criticizing the sultan’s degenerate government.6

4 Inv. 2734-1856. 5 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, X, p. 97. It is not clear what a women’s kāmiliyya looked like, this term mostly refers to a ceremonial robe of honor. 6 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 678–9, 715.

Women ’ s Clothing

151

Figure 40 Queen, woman and maid, Kitāb al-Ḥayawān by al-Jāḥiz, 14th century. Bibliotheca Ambrosiana Ar.A.F.D.140 Inf. 069-c-29b © Veneranda Biblioteca-Ambrosiana

Whereas the bonnet known as ‘ṭarṭūr’ is mentioned in connection with the princesses’ excursions, the historians refer more often to a headdress known as ‘ʿiṣāba’.7 This term applies to a band tied around the forehead to hold the veil, as in figures 40, 41, and 42, which could be embroidered or otherwise decorated or bejeweled as it seems to be in figure 41. Women of higher society had them studded with gems in the manner of a crown or a diadem. In the mid-14th century, the matter of Ittifāq, the black slave-girl and musician, had become notorious. She had been purchased at the slave market for less than 400 dirhams, trained as a singer, and promoted to a royal concubine, enjoying ‘happiness and fortune like no other woman before.’ Her estate included 40 badlas studded with gems, 16 brocaded badlas and, 80 face-masks (miqnaʿa) worth between five and 20,000 dirhams.8 Most of all, Ittifāq’s ʿiṣāba was famous. Three consecutive sultans and lovers, al-Ṣāliḥ Ismāʿīl, al-Kāmil Shaʿbān, and al-Muẓaffar Ḥājjī, contributed to embellish this ʿisāba with gifts of gems, increasing its value until it reached more than 100,000 gold dīnārs, thus making it a thorn in the side of the courtiers. Eventually in 1348, after al-Muẓaffar 7 Mayer, Costume, p. 71. 8 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 462, 715.

152

Chapter 11

Figure 41 Scene in a tavern, Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1334 © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna A.F.9, fol. 42a

Ḥājjī had been admonished for his scandalous behavior, Ittifāq, together with two other slave-girls, was banned from the Citadel. They were allowed to carry their clothes with them but no jewelry.9 Although they themselves were rarely seen publicly, the glamor of ladies of the aristocracy was a subject of public interest. The opulence enjoyed by royal wives, daughters, and concubines contributed to the brilliance of the sultanate, which the chroniclers relished in documenting in superlative terms. Such descriptions belonged to the tropes they used to glorify the status of the sultan and the sultanate. A fabulous harem was one of the symbols of royalty. It was customary for the trousseaus of princesses to be paraded in a procession that might take several days and displayed in the couple’s house for

9 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 725.

Women ’ s Clothing

Figure 42 Female Musicians, Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1337, detail from frontispiece © Bodleian Library, Ms Marsh 458, fol. 4a

Figure 43 Woman in indoor dress, Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1337 © Bodleian Library, MS-Marsh-458 00132, fol. 65b

153

154

Chapter 11

visitors to see and historians to report on.10 Ibn Taghrībirdī compared various trousseaus he had witnessed, recalling the most remarkable ones with their marvels (tuḥaf ) and precious textiles (qumāsh).11 The value of the trousseau was a symbol of status and hierarchy for the bride’s father. Female luxury items were often included in the lists of confiscated treasures and possessions and among princely gifts. When the estate of the emir Aqbughā ʿAbd al-Wāḥid was auctioned, following Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s death, it included a pair of female trousers sold for 10,000 gold dīnārs, shoes for more than 3,000 dīnārs, and a suit (badla) for 100,000 silver dirhams (50,000 dīnārs).12 There were also golden anklets and necklaces studded with gems, and clogs (qabāqīb, sing. qubqāb) of gold with precious stones. Tankiz presented his daughter, on the occasion of the birth of her child with Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, a veil and a face-veil worth 7,000 dīnārs.13 On the occasion of her son’s circumcision, Barsbāy’s wife wore a badla worth 30,000 dīnārs,14 and Īnāl’s wife owned a shirt (qundura) worth 12,000 dīnārs.15 One of Jaqmaq’s wives left a considerable estate of clothes that included a studded forehead band or diadem worth 15,000 dīnārs.16 With the quantity of gems used by upper-class women, some female clothing items were equivalent to jewels. The customary gifts sent by the emir Manjak, the governor of Damascus, to Sultan Shaʿbān in 1372 included three pairs of women’s clogs worth 8,000 gold mithqāls.17 Al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s daughter and wife of the emir Ṭāz owned a pair of studded clogs worth 40,000 dirhams, equivalent to 2,000 dīnārs.18 Although some of the prices indicated here may seem unimaginable, they point to the high degree of luxury the Mamluk aristocracy seems to have enjoyed.19

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, pp. 17–8, 138–9; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 97–8, 138–9, 153–4, 357, 481–3, 508–9; idem, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 199. See, for example, Ibn Taghrībirdī on the display of the trousseau of Jaqmaq’s daughter in 1450. Ḥawādith, p. 67. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 194. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 564. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 433. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 68. ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, p. 248. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 360. ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl al-amal, II, p. 46. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 814. See Doris Behrens-Abouseif, Cairo of the Mamluks. A history of the Architecture and its Culture (London 2007), pp. 47–8.

Women ’ s Clothing

2

155

The Street

According to some religious opinions, women’s presence in the streets was not to be tolerated save in exceptional cases. Notwithstanding, in medieval Cairo, this opinion was generally ignored. Occasionally, condemnations and bans were issued to restrict the occasions of women’s public appearance but to no avail in the long run.20 Ordinary urban women of various social groups had many occasions to be seen outdoors,21 visiting friends and relatives, shopping in the markets, and going to the bath, which fulfilled the function of today’s spa and wellness club. They visited their dead in the cemeteries and the shrines of the saints, although such practices alarmed the puritanical jurist Ibn al-Ḥājj who warned against the temptations such occasions provided for women to sin. Parades and processions that regularly passed through Cairo’s streets,22 notably that of the pilgrimage caravan and other religious events including the two main religious feasts and saints’ birthdays, drew mixed crowds, as did the yearly Nile festival that began with opening the dike of the Cairo Canal in the summer. Outdoor festivities and gatherings over several days attracted great crowds of people along the shores of the canal and the ponds, which provoked the criticism of the religious establishment as being an opportunity for scandalous and immoral behavior. The 1001 Nights depicts women all over the city. Professionals such as midwives, epilators, corpse washers, nurses and governesses for children, merchants, peddlers, textile workers, singers, musicians and music teachers, agents, and others necessarily interacted with men.23 Leo Africanus noted the freedom enjoyed by Cairene women, who used to go out to ‘solace themselves’, while their husbands were absent, dressed up and perfumed to walk in the city and meet with friends and relatives.24 Women figure in the chronicles and biographical books as scholars, Sufis, and teachers; they would have gathered in private circles or dedicated institutions. In private celebrations such as weddings, births, and circumcision, women were among themselves as is still the case in some conservative Islamic societies.

20 Amina Elbendary, Crowds and Sultans. Urban Protest in Late Medieval Egypt and Syria (Cairo 2015), pp. 172–4. 21 See ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, pp. 35–41. 22 Van Steenbergen, ‘Rituals’. 23 ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, pp. 48–9, 33–87; see also Chapoutout-Ramadi, ‘La femme dans la ville mamlūke’. 24 Leo Africanus, Description, p. 883.

156

Chapter 11

Figure 44 Woman in outdoor dress, Maqamāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1337 © Bodleian Library, Bodleian-Library, MS-Marsh, 458 00132 fol. 28a

While being present on the streets, ordinary urban women were not really seen behind their veils and wraps. Not being able to show their physical beauty in public, they intensified the ornamentation of the visible parts of their clothes. The wealthy among them extended the use of gold and precious stones to be displayed on their mantles and wraps, their tall hats, and the rim of their trousers and dresses, using gold-woven fabrics studded with gems and pearls. Precious stones were major import items in the Mamluk sultanate. In the 1001 Nights, the izār of wealthy women,25 a large wrap covering the body and tied under the arm, is described as made of gold-brocaded silk.26 The less affluent used at least embroidery. Mamluk miniatures and Belon’s engravings show women indoors wearing a short veil hiding their hair and hanging down to the chest; outdoors they wore a larger wrapping garment (figs. 44, 45, 46).

25 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 319; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, IV, p. 303; ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, p. 236; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 24–38 ; Mayer, Costume, pp. 70–1. 26 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 483.

Women ’ s Clothing

157

Figure 45 Woman in outdoor dress, Kalīla wa-Dimna, dated 1354 © Bodleian-Library-MS-Pococke-400_00163_fol-80b

Islamic law does not impose on slave-women the same rules of morality and modesty and does not require them to hide their face behind a veil.27 In practice, the appearance of slaves is not easy to describe; most likely, it depended on their social status and on their functions, whether they were bought to be concubines or servants for household tasks. Mamluk female slaves seem to have covered their face.28 Slave-girls who were displayed and purchased in the market were visible in public, as the buyer was entitled to inspect the merchandise before purchase. In the 19th century, Lane reports that the buyer could try out the slave for three days.29 In the love stories of 1001 Nights, the slave-girl plays the role of the woman who seduces and inspires love by the mere sight of her beauty. On artefacts and in miniatures female musicians are usually unveiled.

27

Omar Anchassi, ‘Status Distinctions and Sartorial Difference. Slavery, Sexual Ethics, and the Social Logic of Veiling in Islamic Law’, Islamic Law and Society 28 (2021) pp. 125–55. 28 ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La femme, pp. 242–3. 29 Edward W. Lane, An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians (The Hague/London 1895), repr. Cairo 1978, p. 186.

158

Chapter 11

Figure 46 Woman and physician, Risālat daᶜwat al-aṭibbā’, dated 1273, Bibliotheca Ambrosiana, cat. no. LXX, fol. 24b © Giancarlo Costa/Bridgeman

3

Wardrobe Miscellenia

Women across all classes wore a sirwāl, or trousers, and a shirt as underwear and nightwear. In some places in the 1001 Nights, the term libās is mentioned for sirwāl, which is also the modern term for knickers or drawers. It was tied around the waist with a ribbon (dikka, tikka). Women who could afford to do so would hang a gem from the tip of the ribbon.30 A sirwāl that earned fame in the annals of Mamluk history as well as in popular memory, was that worn by the queen Shajarat al-Durr at the time of her death. She was for a few months the first sultan of the Mamluks (r. 1250), during which she had her husband, a Mamluk emir, assassinated. His followers avenged him by throwing her down from the Citadel wearing only her underwear, a shirt, and a sirwāl.31 Her sirwāl was described as tied with a ribbon, at the tip of which a pearl was attached. 30 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, pp. 584, 681; Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 96–7. 31 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, I, p. 404; Mayer, Costume, p. 70; ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, p. 212.

Women ’ s Clothing

159

In an erotic scene of the 1001 Nights, the lover finds the beloved woman in bed wearing only a Venetian (bunduqī) shirt and no sirwāl; he opens the collar of her shirt to reveal her full beauty.32 Arnold von Harff (1497) writes that when men and women slept together ‘they only undress so far as to keep on white shirts’.33 Evidently, there is no general rule in this matter; The tales of the 1001 Nights and illustrations of sleeping couples in the Maqamāt al-Ḥarīrī indicate otherwise. Elsewhere in the 1001 Nights, the Venetian shirt is adorned with a double ṭirāz or embroidered band of Maghrebi gold and bordures in the miṣrī style around the neck, the sleeves and the hem are inscribed with love poetry.34 The izār, or body wrap, for women may have been a continuation of the Greek ‘himation’. In the Mamluk period it was made of various colors and fabrics.35 In the 20th century before modern Islamic dress took over, it was known as the ‘milāyat laff ’ (wrapping milāya) of black color worn by urban women of traditional background. It was often seen in Egyptian films of the 1940s and 50s and associated with popular female sex-appeal. Maqrīzī mentions that the milāʾat made of tarḥ fabric was worn by prostitutes who also wore shoes of red leather known as ‘sarāfīl’ (sing. sarfūl). These were imposed as identity markers.36 The daughter of a sugar-maker in late 14th-century Jerusalem left in her estate a white linen shirt, a white Baalbakī qabāʾ (cloak), a shamla37 embroidered with blue silk and gold thread, an izār, a Venetian shirt, two Alexandrian silk drawers, a zakīna (?) embroidered with blue silk, and two kerchiefs.38 In the terminology of the Ḥaram documents, the qabāʾ and the jubba, which, according to ʿUmarī and the chroniclers, describe garments associated respectively with the male military aristocracy and turbaned class, refer instead to garments belonging to a middle-class woman.39 The 1001 Nights mentions the badla as a garment in the sense of a complete outfit for both sexes as well as for the textile outfit of horses.40 When a 32 33 34 35 36

Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 548. Von Harff, Pilgrimage, p. 112. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 544. Ashtor, Histoire des prix, pp. 345, 349. Maqrīzī explained the word as of Persian origin. Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 319–20, n. 1; see also p. 243, n. 1. 37 According to Dozy the shamla is a Bedouin garment. Dictionnaire, pp. 122–3. Serjeant translates it as ‘blanket’, ‘carpet’, or ‘burda’. Islamic Textiles, p. 259. 38 Lutfi, al-Quds, pp. 41–3. 39 Lutfi, ‘Documentary Source’, pp. 217–8. 40 Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, pp. 143, 159, 245.

160

Chapter 11

slave-girl is presented to a king she is wearing a perfumed dress (ghilāla),41 a wrap (izār), trousers, and a headdress described as ʿiṣāba rayḥānī, a Yemeni face-cover (yamanī), and necklaces and anklets (khalākhīl).42 As an alternative to a shirt with trousers, women might wear a dress (thawb, ghilāla) long enough to conceal their legs. In the 1001 Nights, a foreign princess is described as wearing a caftan (qufṭān) of ṭard waḥsh brocade adorned with fur over another gold-brocaded caftan.43 It is not clear whether the tafṣīla often mentioned in chronicles was a garment or a piece of fabric.44 The term rather suggests a garment; Dozy interprets it as a piece of fabric cut to shape for a garment.45 In a tale of the 1001 Nights, a beautiful woman, wearing ‘a magnificent izār, a magnificent ʿiṣāba, and a powerful perfume’ goes to a shop to buy a tafṣīla of ṭard waḥsh offered for the price of 1,200 dirhams.46 The tafṣīla is described in the same text as a piece of qumāsh. Ibn Iyās praises the tafāṣīl made in Alexandria as belonging to the maḥāsin of Egypt, meaning their qualities that made them worthy of being offered as diplomatic gifts.47 The faṣadiyya48 is mentioned in the 1001 Nights as a kind of scarf to cover women’s hair, made of Iraqi silk with floral patterns and a bordure of miṣrī brocaded silk.49 The description of a wedding ceremony in the 1001 Nights shows the bride changing her dress seven times, each of a different color, beginning with a golden dress patterned with birds and animals of prey (al-ṭayr wa-l-waḥsh) whose eyes and beaks are studded with gems. She then changes into a red, and then a blue, dress. The text does not indicate the color of the other dresses except that the sixth was green.50 I have witnessed this practice in popular circles in Egypt decades ago. Simone Sigoli mentions this custom in 1384, though in his narration, the bride wears the seven dresses at the same time, one over the other.51

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 319–23. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 669. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 591. Lutfi, al-Quds, p. 289. Dozy, Supplément. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 294. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 45; I/2, pp. 399, 465. Dozy, Supplément. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 612. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, pp. 245–7. Sigoli, Viaggio, p. 21.

Women ’ s Clothing

4

161

Fashions

‘Sleeves and headdresses were particularly favored aspects of women’s clothing’.52 Although this observation is about medieval European women whose outfit increased in sophistication with economic growth in the 14th century, it fully applies to women in Mamluk Cairo as well whose creativity in matters of fashion, especially regarding sleeves and headdress, is well documented in the chronicles. In his ḥisba manual, Ibn al-Ukhuwwa criticized women for being worse than men in their indulgence in dress fashions and for their ‘innovations that would not occur to a devil’s mind’! (aḥdathanna min al-malābis mā lā yakhṭuru li-l-shayṭān fī ḥisāb).53 In the 1350s during the reign of Sultan Ḥasan, the ladies of the court and their slave-girls introduced the fashion of long dresses dragging behind them on the floor with wide sleeves hanging down to their feet. This garment, known as ‘bahṭala’(?) cost as much as 1,000 dirhams. The fashion spread among ordinary women in the city, all of whom without exception, according to Maqrīzī, dressed in this manner.54 The historian further comments that with these fashions ordinary women sought to emulate royals and grandees.55 The fashion of fur that was initially confined to princely circles eventually spread among commoners including women so that ‘one may say that there is not a single woman of the well-to-do class who does not wear sable and other furs.’56 Around the year 1378, which corresponds to the reign of al-Ṣāliḥ Ḥājjī, a new fashion of headdress, known as ‘shāsh’, was introduced. The term shāsh initially meant gauze or muslin and refers to the fabric used for turbans and headdress. Maqrīzī describes this headdress as stretching between the forehead and the back and resembling the hump of a Bactrian camel. The parallel with the Bactrian camel suggests a double structure; however, this is not confirmed elsewhere. The shāsh acquired a new dimension when, a few years later, in 1385, a woman was reported to have seen in a dream the Prophet telling her to stop wearing the ‘shāsh’. The woman did not pay attention to the dream and continued to wear her shāsh. The Prophet reappeared to her in a second dream, this time to warn her that she would die as a Christian. Disturbed by this dream, she consulted the prominent judge and scholar Sarāj al-Dīn al-Bulqīnī and on his advice she then went, accompanied by her daughter, to a church to pray to 52 53 54 55 56

Piponnier and Maine, Middle Ages, p. 79. Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Maʿālim, p. 157. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 810. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 750. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 342.

162

Chapter 11

God for forgiveness. There, she suddenly fell dead; her terrified daughter ran away and abandoned her to be eventually buried by the Christian community, which, as Ṣayrafī commented, was the most awful thing that could happen.57 No further comments are given regarding this episode. Two decades later, during the reign of Sultan Faraj, women began to adopt the fashion of the tall bonnet referred to as ‘ṭāqiyya’, a tall headdress that continued to characterize women’s appearance even beyond the Mamluk period, which, as mentioned earlier, was initially introduced in male Mamlūk circles, and was eventually adopted by women as well.58 In the 15th century it was known as ‘ʿiṣāba’, which is also the term used for the forehead band that holds the veil. It has been described by travelers and illustrated by European artists (figs. 20, 47, 48, 49). It consisted of a high bonnet from which an elaborate veil was suspended to hang down over the shoulders. It could be highly decorated with gold and pearls.59 This description recalls the Spanish mantilla which is fixed on the head by a kind of tall comb (peinata) rather than a bonnet. Under Qāytbāy the bonnet was filled with paper to hold it upright, as was the case with the earlier ṭāqiyya described by Maqrīzī. The paper had to bear the sultan’s stamp, and orders were accordingly issued to the paper-dealers. It thus seems that in the late 15th century, the ‘shāsh’, the ṭāqiyya, and the ʿiṣāba had been combined. Women’s headdress continued to evolve and attract attention. For an unknown reason, in 1472, Sultan Qāytbāy issued the order to forbid women from wearing the sarāqūsh, a type of hat or bonnet like the one Mongols wore60 as well as the ‘ʿiṣāba muqanzaʿa’, an elaborate headdress resembling headcovers to protect against the sun.61 Disobedient women would be publicly beaten and forced to hang bells around their neck. Eventually women complied by wearing only a tall ʿiṣāba outdoors and keeping the more elaborate one for indoors. After a while, however, they managed to have it their own way and no repercussions were mentioned again.62 The tall headdress emerged in the early Circassian era. In travelers’ accounts of the late 15th century and in Renaissance representations of Mamluk women, it characterizes women’s appearance. Two decades after the Ottoman conquest, Pierre Belon described it as remarkable and ‘antique,’ and looking like a tower.63 57 58 59 60 61

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 534–5; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, pp. 120–1. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 344; idem, Sulūk, III, p. 618. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 362; Mayer, Costume, pp. 71–2. Mayer Costume, pp. 22, 30–1, 72. Mayer translates muqanzaʿ as ‘crested’, Costume, p. 72. I could not find the source of this translation. Dozy’s translation is more convincing. Supplément. 62 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 388; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, pp. 67–8. 63 Belon, Pierre du Mans, Le Voyage en Egypte (1547), ed. Serge Sauneron (Cairo 1969), pp. 105a–107a.

Women ’ s Clothing

Figure 47 Gentile and Giovanni Bellini, St. Marc preaching in Alexandria, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, late 16th century. Wikipedia

Figure 48 Woman on a donkey, Arnold von Harff © Bodleian-Library-MS-Bodl-972 00150, print dated 1554, fol. 74b

163

164

Chapter 11

Figure 49 Women of Cairo in outdoor (left) and indoor dress, by Pierre Belon (1557)

This tall headdress is not mentioned in texts or depicted anywhere in Bahri Mamluk figural representations, either in miniatures or in the decorative arts,64 where the headcover is invariably shown as shallow, perhaps containing a shallow cap to support the veil hanging over the shoulders. One may wonder about the reason for the authorities’ concern regarding the tall bonnet, considering that it does not breach any Islamic decency rule. The episode of the dream where the Prophet appears to warn a woman against its use, and her eventual punishment with death in a church and burial among Christians, suggests a European connection. It is interesting to know that in Europe at about the same time, a similar development in women’s headdress was taking place. It should be recalled that European women then, for religious reasons and by law, had to cover their hair, and religious authorities there also interfered in such matters.65 At the end of the 14th century, at the same time as the ṭāqiyya emerges, the balzo, a big bonnet made of heavy fabric, similar to a turban, appeared in Italy, and in the 1430–40s it emerged also in France. In the 15th century, women’s headdresses in Europe increased in size and sophistication. Variations with a twin-cone were condemned by moralist circles, 64 See Chapter 12. 65 Véniel, Costume, pp. 217–9.

Women ’ s Clothing

165

motivated by concern for social order, economic necessity, and Christian morality.66 Is Maqrīzī’s comparison of the shāsh with a Bactrian camel’s hump also referring to a double structure? In the 1470–80s, which corresponds to the appearance of the sarāqūsh and the ʿiṣāba muqanzaʿa in Cairo, a conical headdress with a fluttering veil attached to it became widespread in and around Burgundy, and it was depicted by Flemish artists. These fashions were led by the aristocracy and followed by the ascending bourgeoisie.67 One can only speculate about possible influences and their modalities. Mamluk circles in the Circassian period, as demonstrated by Robert Irwin,68 included many European individuals from different places frequently mentioned by travelers and reported to have lived with European wives and families. Some came on their own, others were captured during the frequent raids in the Mediterranean. Europeans also came through other channels. Following the final Mamluk conquest of Sis, the last king of Cilicia, Leon V of the Lusignan dynasty, was captured and brought with his family and retinue to Cairo where he spent the years between 1375 and 1378. His wife Marguerite de Soissons and their daughter died in Cairo and are buried in an Armenian church in Fusṭāṭ.69 Julien Loiseau has shown that Frankish captives and their families continued for several generations to dwell in Cairo where they maintained their own identity.70 During Qāytbāy’s reign, European artisans were allowed to work in Cairo.71 The Venetian Domenico worked on the production of cannons for Qāytbāy’s son al-Nāṣir Muhammad.72 Such expatriates may have been accompanied by their families. The sultan’s own brother, who had lived in Cyprus for thirty years, moved to Cairo with his sons, who joined the Mamluk establishment.73 Considering that ethnic groups would be recognizable by their dress, Cairo’s population would have been familiar with foreign fashions. Moreover, in a commercial center with worldwide connections like the Mamluk capital, where European textiles were imported on a large scale, it is likely that manufactured garments arrived as well, as we have seen in the case of the hats for men, mentioned by B. Arbel. Bunduqī, meaning ‘Venetian’, described a silk fabric for shirts and perhaps also a style. A 15th century icon from the Coptic 66 67 68 69

Piponnier and Maine, Middle Ages, pp. 83–7. Véniel, Costume, pp. 227–31; Piponnier and Maine, Middle Ages, pp. 79–80. Irwin, ‘How Circassian were the Circassian Mamluks?’ The main source on Leo V’s captivity in Cairo is Jean Dardel, Chronique d’Arménie; Frescobaldi, Viaggio, p. 103. 70 Loiseau, ‘Frankish Captives’. 71 Doris Behrens-Abouseif, ‘European Arts and Crafts at the Mamluk Court’, in Doris Behrens-Abouseif and Anna Contadini, eds., Essays in Honor of J.M. Rogers, Muqarnas 21 (2004), pp. 49–52. 72 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ, III, pp. 365–8, 375. 73 Ibn Iyās, Badā’iʿ, III, pp. 308, 346, 361, 374, 378, 387–89, 401–3.

166

Chapter 11

Figure 50 Icon from the Church of St. Barbara in Cairo, Coptic Museum in Cairo, 3451 © Hans Hondelink

Church of St Barbara in Cairo shows the saint represented and dressed in the European manner74 (fig. 50). It is therefore quite likely that Cairene women would have been acquainted with fashions from Italy and France. 74

I thank Julien Auber de Lapierre for this information and for the picture.

Women ’ s Clothing

5

167

Regulation and Transgression

Much Mamluk ink was spilled on prohibitions regarding women’s dress. In his manual on ethics and market practices, Ibn al-Ḥājj, who describes women as lacking brains and faith,75 admonishes them not to wear tight dresses or short ones reaching only to the knees and showing their bare legs. Neither should they wear large sleeves that uncover their breasts and other parts of their body.76 Their trousers (sirwāl) should conceal what the shortness of the dress might reveal, and they should be tied around the waist and not beneath the navel as some do; the part of the body between the navel and the knee should not be visible even by persons of the same sex, applying to both men and women. For this reason, women should also wear their trousers at home.77 This does not mean, however, that they were not expected to maintain their beauty to be seductive to their husbands. According to Ibn al-Ḥājj, the husbands should buy their wives’ clothes and jewels to avoid shameful situations in the market,78 regarding which, G. Wiet commented that, indeed, in the tales of the 1001 Nights, dalliance often takes place in the textile market.79 In periods of economic crisis and epidemics, the authorities’ zeal increased to reinforce regulations and punish those who transgressed religious and ethical rules.80 The harsh reaction of the authorities against the fashion of dresses with wide sleeves, mentioned earlier, must have been due also to its timing in 1350, in the aftermath of the Black Death. The emir Manjak, who at that time held the post of vizier under Sultan Ḥasan, had consulted the chief judges in the presence of the sultan, before issuing orders to forbid women from wearing such sleeves that cost more than 1,000 dirhams with the izār (mantle or wrap) worth 1,000 dirhams that had replaced the ordinary Baghdad-style one. Shoes worth between 100 and 500 dirhams were also condemned. To deter women from this kind of extravagance, he posted on the city walls effigies of women in such clothes being hanged. He even sent policemen to check the laundries and cut the dresses there that were not tailored according to regulation. Dealers in the markets were forbidden to produce such clothes and shoemakers to sell forbidden shoes, otherwise they would lose all their money to the sultan. Even the sale of silk buttons was prohibited. Such regulations crippled commercial

75 76 77 78 79 80

Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, IV, p. 241. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, pp. 242–243. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, p. 241. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Madkhal, I, p. 245. Raymond and Wiet, Marchés, pp. 79–80. See for example Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 303.

168

Chapter 11

activity in the markets so that eventually it was difficult to find a customer even for an izār of only 720 dirhams.81 In the year 1391, during the absence of Sultan Barqūq in Aleppo, his deputy the emir Kumushbughā, having been informed that a women had a shirt, or perhaps a dress, ‘tailored with a cut of bunduqī silk 92 cubits long and 3.5 cubits wide, sent his men with knives to trim such garments wherever they spotted them, causing great panic in the streets. He issued orders that women should not use more than 12 cubits of Venetian fabric for their shirts.82 Maqrīzī comments with dismay that such a fabric would cover an area of 320 sq cubits. By the time Sultan Barqūq had returned, and the deputy was no longer in power, women had gone back to dressing as they liked. However, shirts tailored in the Kumushbughā style could still be seen years later.83 A severe plague epidemic during the reign of Sultan Barsbāy in 1437 inflamed the religious mood so that the sultan scheduled a meeting with men of the religious establishment to ponder the sins that could have provoked God’s punishment. They concluded that women’s behavior and their appearance in public by day and night was the cause, which resulted in a total ban on their presence in the streets under the threat of capital punishment. The possibility of an exemption for old women and slaves from the ban was rejected. Women abstained indeed from leaving their houses, including those who practiced a profession (man kāna lahā ṣināʿa). The measures ended in an economic disaster, causing a recession in the markets, notably in the trade of clothes and perfume.84 When eventually, following complaints and petitions, the ban was eased, only female slaves were allowed on the streets on the condition that they would circulate unmasked to prevent free women from going out disguised as slaves. Ultimately, the authorities could not persevere in their zeal to contain women’s freedom of movement because of the detrimental effect their absence from the markets would have. As women in Islam are entitled to their own fortune, with the right to manage and invest it and to practice commercial activities, in an affluent commercial city such as Cairo, they seem to have been indeed an economic factor to reckon with.

81 Mayer, Costume, p. 69; Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, IV/1, p. 303; idem, Sulūk, II, pp. 810–1; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 536; ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, p. 236. 82 Mayer, Costume, p. 69; Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh IX/2, pp. 267–8; ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (2002), p. 340; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 750. Maqrīzī indicates the limit of sleeve width as 14 cubits. 83 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XII, p. 32; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 750. 84 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha III, pp. 404–5; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 1032; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, pp. 93–5.

Women ’ s Clothing

6

169

European Eyewitnesses

European travelers agree in the praise of women’s dress in Mamluk Cairo. Symon Semeonis who came during the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, describes it as a ‘strange and wonderful fashion of dress’, their linen or cotton mantles being ‘whiter than snow’. They were veiled and covered up so that their eyes could hardly be seen through the very narrow opening of their black mask. Their clothes were made of silk, linen, or cotton, woven in various fashions according to their social status. They all wore a short tunic reaching only to the knees over trousers. The trousers were very fine and made of silk adorned with gold, reaching down to the ankles ‘after the fashion of horsemen’. It was in the splendor of their trousers that women advertised their status. Semeonis adds, ‘these trousers, boots, and other ornaments give them a close resemblance to the fictitious devils seen in miracle-plays.’ Around their ankles and wrists, they wore ‘wide rings like fetters, which are usually of gold or silver, on which are engraved words’. Semeonis’s interpretation that these inscriptions were from the Qur’an is erroneous; normally good wishes or poetry were inscribed on garments. He goes on to report that they dyed the nails of their hands and feet, and wore earrings, and some of them even wore rings hanging from their noses.85 A Jewish Italian traveler, Meshullam Ben Benahem, noted that it was the women and not the men who wore trousers.86 Some women wore slippers, some red boots, and others white ones. Christian and Jewish women adorned themselves similarly except that they were compelled to wear black boots. The Italian pilgrim Simone Sigoli who visited Egypt in 1384 writes that he was told by his dragoman that women would spend as much as 400 or 500 ducats for underwear and trousers embroidered with pearls and precious stones. Their gold-woven shirts reaching to the knees with wide sleeves might include gold worth as much as 200 ducats.87 Frescobaldi (1385) describes women’s basic dress as ‘cloaks of fine quality underneath which the wealthy wore fabrics from Reims, or Alexandrian linen; the commoners wore short dresses down to the knees and a wrap in the ancient Roman style. He also noted that only their eyes could be seen through their veils. Women of the upper class had a black veil before their eyes that allowed them to see through without being seen. They wore white boots and trousers reaching to the heels, richly decorated around the rim according to 85 Semeonis, The Journey, p. 63. 86 ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, La Femme, p. 233. 87 Sigoli, Viaggio, pp. 9–10.

170

Chapter 11

their status and either embroidered with silk or with gold and silver or studded with gems and pearls.88 The merchant and nobleman Anselme Adorno (1471) describes the dress of women on the street as consisting of a coat of white linen over either trousers or a long garment of fine linen, revealing underneath, rich ornaments of gems like the one that can be seen on their tall headdress made of silk. He saw women in the markets and public places opening their coat slightly to show off, and commented that, like the women in his country, they came to these places to see and be seen. Their footwear was golden and sometimes complemented with gaiters of scented leather reaching to the knees, like those worn by women in Portugal and Spain, which he found a very elegant and refined way to cover their legs.89 Although his descriptions refer to Alexandria, he notes that Cairo was no different. Two years later Arnold von Harff notes that women wore white coats with black veils hiding their faces. He mentions leather trousers, perhaps referring to gaiters, a tall headdress resembling a goblet wrapped with fine fabric and ornaments, which he depicts in an engraving (fig. 48).90 Peter Martyr, writes that women on the streets wore boots and trousers reaching to their calves.91 Leo Africanus (1517) also noticed women’s opulent jewelry on ‘their foreheads and necks with frontlets and chains of pearl; on their heads they wear a scarf and a slender bonnet of a span high, being very precious and rich’. Over their woolen embroidered dresses, they wear veils of ‘most excellent fine cloth of India’. Their heads and faces are covered with a black veil, their fine footwear is in the Turkish style.92 Pagani describes women’s clothes as made of white cotton and covering them entirely. He noticed that their hands and nails were painted red, referring to the henna custom, adding that, according to his dragoman, women spent fortunes on clothes and perfumes.93 There is no indication that the cut of women’s dresses was elaborate or sophisticated, it was surely not tight on the body but seems rather to have been a kind of wide female ‘jallābiyya’ falling straight to the knees above the trousers or down to the feet. The marks of prestige would have been mainly in the quality of the fabric, the width of the sleeves, the headdress, and the various 88 89 90 91 92 93

Frescobaldi, Viaggio, p. 73. Adorno, Itinéraire, p. 171. Von Harff, Pilgrimage, pp. 123–4. Pedro Mártir, Embajada, p. 124; idem, Legatio, p. 257. Leo Africanus, Description, pp. 883–4. Pagani, Relation, p. 211.

Women ’ s Clothing

171

ornaments. Female representations on Fatimid artefacts such as ivory carving and pottery, show them wearing dresses mostly with wide sleeves.94 Before the high bonnet of the Circassian period, the dress and headcover of ordinary women was, in its basic features, like the contemporary Islamic look of women in Cairo today. 94 See Trésors des Fatimides du Caire, (exhibition catalogue), l’Institut du Monde Arabe (Paris 1998), cats. 35, 81.

Chapter 12

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image 1

Artefacts

In a continuation of the Ayyubid artistic tradition, Mamluk artefacts of the 13th and 14th century were decorated with figural representations that partly contribute to filling some gaps in our image of dress in that period. However, these images have a very limited scope, dealing mostly with entertainment and equestrian motifs. Representations of horsemen and enthroned figures with their attendants show men wearing a small turban-like headcover and a garment with a diagonal front opening (figs. 2, 13, 14, 51, 52, 55). These features remain constant between the early 13th and 14th centuries despite the reform attributed to Qalāwūn and his successors regarding the kalawta and the tatarī. Whereas according to Qalqashandī and Maqrīzī, the Mamluk soldiers would wear a woolen hat called kalawta without wrap until the gauze was added by Qalāwūn, who also introduced the tatarī or Mongol cloak, artefacts reveal that the turban-like headcover and the garment with Oriental opening existed already earlier. The garment with the diagonal fastening at the waist points to an eastern origin, being common in China since ancient times and among various Central Asian peoples as well. This type of Oriental garment appeared on artefacts already prior to the arrival of the Mongols in the Muslim world.1 With the influx and integration of Central Asians into Muslim territory it became widespread as is documented in 10th-century luster pottery from Iraq,2 Fatimid pottery,3 Saljuk Minai pottery, Qubadabad tiles in Anatolia,4 and on Artuqid and Ayyubid metal ware from Iraq and Syria. On the Blacas ewer in the British Museum, made in Mosul in 1232 and signed by its maker, a medallion shows a horseman wearing this style of garment as well as a shallow turban-like headdress (fig. 51). This is very similar to the outfit worn by courtiers on either side of an enthroned figure, depicted on the Palmer Cup in the British Museum (fig. 12), probably from Syria and likewise datable to the 13th century. Some of them wear the eastern garment with a diagonal fastening extension and 1 Baker, Court Dress, pp. 113–5; Rogers argues that the right fastening should be interpreted as Turkish and the left as Mongol: ‘Evidence’, pp. 391–2. 2 Royal Ontario Museum, no. DSC04809. 3 Abberg Stiftung Bern no. 3.101.68. 4 Konya Karatay Ceramics Museum, no. 52003. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_013

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image

173

Figure 51 Horseman on the Blacas Ewer at the British Museum 1866, 1229.61 © The Trustees of the British Museum

others the one with a straight opening. Another early Mamluk bottle of enameled glass at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (figs. 52, 53) shows horsemen wearing the eastern-style cloak, revealing underneath, a garment of a different color; their belt has an extension hanging from the waist.5 This garment is very similar to that worn by a horseman in a Mamluk furūsiyya manuscript dated 1330 (fig. 14).6 Their headdress on this bottle shows two different types; one is a hat, which could be Mongol, the other is a shallow turban-like headgear. However, the furūsiyya manuscript of 1330 shows three Mamlūks wearing the same headdress, a cap wrapped in a gauze tied with a lateral band.7

5 Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 41.150.AV2. 6 British Library, Add 18866 f. 113b. 7 AKM12.

174

Chapter 12

Figure 52 Detail of a bottle of enameled glass, late 13th century © Metropolitan Museum of Art MET_DP170374

Figure 53 Detail of a bottle of enameled glass, late 13th century © Metropolitan Museum of Art MET_DP170374

The ‘Baptistère de St Louis’ is an exceptional and remarkable visual source for the unusual realism of its imagery and the details its scenes of hunt, warfare, and parades reveal.8 The iconography of the basin does not follow a standard pattern but seems to document a specific moment that points to the 8 First published by D. S. Rice, The Baptistère de Saint Louis. A Masterpiece of Islamic Metal Work (Paris 1953).

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image

175

Figure 54 The ‘Baptistère de St. Louis’, detail of the exterior © 2009 Musée du Louvre/Hughes Dubois

reign of Sultan al-Ẓāhir Baybars.9 The layout in which the monumental figures are represented echoes the wall paintings that are reported to have decorated Baybars’ s palaces, showing his Mamlūks engaged in warfare and tournaments (figs. 54, 55). In the three segments of its outer walls, the basin unfolds a procession of Mamluks on foot interrupted by three medallions containing horsemen. The flaring inner wall contains scenes of horsemen involved in hunt and warfare. The men are represented as two groups with distinct physical features. In the group in figure 54, the men are bearded and look older and hence higher-ranking than the beardless men of the other group in fig. 55. Both groups are wearing patterned garments reaching to their boots. One side of the cloak in figure 55 extends diagonally to the waist where it is fastened in the Oriental fashion. The diagonal fastening is shown in both directions indiscriminately. The enthroned figures in the medallions of the inner side wear a garment with a straight opening. The bearded men who evidently represent courtiers in a ceremony, wear a kind of cape hanging down on their back and tied in the front below the neck. Their headdress displays a variety of patterns which are difficult to identify with the kalawta, sharbūsh, and kūfiyya 9 Behrens-Abouseif, Cairo of the Mamluks, p. 38; idem, ‘The Baptistère de St. Louis. A Reinterpretation’, Islamic Art III (1988–1989), pp. 3–13.

176

Chapter 12

Figure 55 The ‘Baptistère de St. Louis’, detail of the exterior © 2009 Musée du Louvre/Hughes Dubois

mentioned in the literary sources. The crown-like hat,10 which is also worn by the enthroned figure in a medallion on the inner wall, may be a sharbūsh, the pointed one may be a Mongol hat. Some have their head covered with a soft fabric knotted and hanging on the side. The beardless men in figure 55 are similarly dressed but without the cape, and they wear a belt with an extension hanging from the waist to the hem. This group wears the same style of headdress resembling a shallow turban tied with a diagonal band as in figures 13 and 41, which is similar to the headdress of the soldier on the early 13th-century Blacas ewer (fig. 51). All men have long hair tied on the neck. The cape worn tied around the neck by the elder group, cannot be identified with any Mamluk garment. Neither is it very common in Islamic imagery. However, this cape belongs to Crusaders’ clothing, and it can be seen worn by horsemen depicted on Syrian artefacts of the Crusades period, probably made for a European clientele and pilgrims. They appear on a Syrian bottle of enameled glass in the British Museum, described as a pilgrim bottle,11 (fig. 56) as well as on a Syrian enameled glass beaker for pilgrims in the Walters Museum of Art,12 and on the silver-inlaid bottle, described as a canteen, at the Smithonian 10 See Chapter 6. 11 British Museum, no. 1869,0120.3. 12 The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore, no. 4718.

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image

177

Figure 56 Detail of an enameled glass bottle, 13th century, at the British Museum, no. 1869,0120.3 © The Trustees of the British Museum

collection from Syria or Iraq,13 all three datable to the 13th century. This cape is likely to have been worn also by Muslims until it was replaced by the qabāʾ islāmī (fig. 2) as part of Qalāwūns reforms, the adjective ‘islāmī’ being perhaps meant to distinguish it from the European-style cape. Figural representations on the artefacts of the pre-Mamluk and early Mamluk periods are not detailed enough to reveal the changes attributed by the chroniclers to the first Qalāwūnids.14 However, the devil being in the details, these reforms may not have involved the invention of new designs that would be visible on this kind of media, but must have rather modified and enhanced existing patterns. The headdress of horsemen and courtiers depicted on artefacts reveals more variations and individuality than the texts suggest, as is also the case with the manuscript illustrations discussed below. It is also interesting to note that, unlike the Fatimids who depicted women on various media and the Ayyubids who depicted women as musicians on glass and metal ware, images of women gradually disappear in Mamluk artefacts. The musicians on the so-called ‘Vasselot bowl’ in the Louvre, decorated by the same artist who designed the Baptistère and datable to the late 13th century, are all male. 13 14

Smithonian National Museum of Asian Art, no. F1941.10. Qalqashandī attributes the added gauze to Khalīl whereas Maqrīzī attributes it to Qalāwūn but credits Khalīl for the replacement of the woolen kalawta with a brocaded one. See Chapter 9.

178

Chapter 12

1.1 Mamluk Manuscripts15 The miniatures of the Mamluk period, which are limited to the 13th and 14th centuries, followed closely the inherited tradition of the Abbasid school of painting in the choice of the subjects they illustrate as well as in their style. To depict subjects that are not contemporary to the Mamluk period but refer to other times and places, the artists may have followed the iconographic conventions of their prototypes rather than having depicted scenes in a realistic contemporary setting. The reliability of this material is therefore limited. In the Mamluk copy of Jazarī’s manual on automata in the Freer Gallery, dated 1354, an orchestra is represented as composed of men dressed in the Mamluk style and wearing hats and turbans16 over their long hair, a combination that is difficult to reconcile with contemporary texts. The frontispiece of the Mamluk manuscript of the Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, dated 1334, provides some interesting information that confirms the Qalāwūnid innovations (fig. 2). An enthroned figure is depicted surrounded by courtiers and musicians, attending a spectacle with an acrobat or a dancer in the lower middle of the image. All figures appear to be Asian. The enthroned central figure wears a red cap wrapped with a white fabric, which should be the kalawta, topped with a pair of small horns. He is the only one to wear this headdress. These horns precede the taller horns that characterize the much later takhfīfa of Sultan al-Ghawrī. However, no horns are mentioned in the sources of the 14th century. The tips of the wrapping gauze of this headdress are decorated with what seems to be embroidery. The figure wears an open patterned cloak with short sleeves which can be identified with the ‘qabāʾ islāmī’. The garment underneath is also patterned and with long, tight sleeves and is tied diagonally at the waist on the figure’s left-hand side. The open over-cloak is a new feature, not common in Abbasid miniatures. Only one other figure, a flutist on the left-hand side of the image, is wearing an over-cloak; his white headdress resembles a shallow turban tied diagonally, which can be identified with the kalawta of earlier images. The over-cloak is depicted in other images in the same manuscript as a sign of prominence on central figures (fig. 41).17 The belt worn by the main figure on the frontispiece appears to be golden as does the bordure that runs along the 15 For references to illustrations in manuscripts see the list of illustrations. 16 Kitāb fī maʿarifat al-ḥiyal al-handasiyya (The book of Knowledge of Ingenious Mechanical Devices) authored by a Ismāʿīl ibn ar-Razzāz al-Jazarī (d. 1206). A folio from another manuscript dated 1354 at the Isabelle Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston (P19W52), depicting the same subject, also shows the figures wearing headdress of various shapes. 17 See also image in the same manuscript, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, AF 9, fol. 36b; Alain F. George, ‘The Illustrations of the “Maqāmāt” and the shadow play’, Muqarnas 28 (2011), pp. 1–42, fig. 4, p. 7.

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image

179

under-cloak. Inscribed golden bands adorn the upper sleeves of both cloaks and a bordure in the same style runs along the hem of his cloak. Another figure wears a similar, but colored, headdress. A pair of musicians on the right-hand side wear Mongol hats. The pair of winged figures floating above the central figure wear a three-pointed crown, suggesting a sharbūsh, trousers under their cloaks, and anklets around their bare feet. All figures have in common the patterned surface and the golden ṭirāz bands around the upper sleeves. There seems to be no rule regarding on which side of the waist their cloak is tied, the images show both sides, even on the same object. With the Asian physical features of all figures, the Mongol musicians, the over-cloak, and the sumptuousness of the clothes, all adorned with bordures that look golden, this frontispiece reflects the reign of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad during which it was produced.18 Unlike the ceremonial character of the frontispiece, a miniature in the same manuscript showing Abū Zayd visiting a judge depicts urban civilians (fig. 1). The judge is wearing a monochrome brown robe and a white shawl, which is probably the traditional tarḥa or ṭaylasān belonging to a judge’s outfit. Such tarḥas figure also in earlier Abbasid manuscripts.19 However, Mamluk chronicles report that the judges were always dressed in white until Sultan Barqūq allowed or ordered them to wear colored garments. The artist may have taken the liberty here to add color to his picture. The other figures wear a monochrome garment and a small turban and footwear that appears to be slippers. Their garment, which has no visible opening, is adorned with a bordure around the neck and a hem and ṭirāz-like bands around the upper sleeves. Images in manuscripts and artefacts indicate that the ṭirāz band around the upper sleeves has a long tradition prior to the Mamluk era. This feature can be seen on figural representations on Fatimid luster pottery20 including women’s and commoners’ dress and a Christian priest’s frock.21 It also appears outside Egypt on Saljuk and Minai luster pottery of the 13th century in Kashan.22 Manuals on horsemanship ( furūsiyya) can be trusted to depict Mamlūks in their actual dress. As practical manuals on equestrian and warfare skills, their scope is confined to the representation of soldiers in exercise. They follow their own stylistic conventions that provide no further details besides the basic technical information required for a manual. A comparison between the numerous furūsiyya manuscripts from the Bahri and the Circassian periods 18 19 20 21 22

Richard Ettinghausen, Arab Painting (New York 1977), p. 149. Fol. 30b., Ettinghausen, Arab Painting, p. 150. Abberg Stiftung Bern, no. 3.101.68. Victoria and Albert Museum, C.49-1952. MIA no. 1975.1.1643, no. 57.36.5.

180

Chapter 12

reveals that soldiers’ dress changed substantially over time. The Mamluks’ garments in manuscripts of the 14th century are always depicted, such as on enamel painted glass and inlaid metal ware, as a patterned cloak with narrow short sleeves revealing a garment with longer narrow sleeves underneath. The upper cloak has a diagonal opening extension fastened on the waist and a belt. Beneath the belt, the over-cloak is always depicted unfolding to show a garment of different color underneath (fig. 14). The headdress is always the shallow turban-like kalawta, which sometimes reveals the red cap behind the wrapping fabric. This outfit is quite distinct from the one depicted in 15th century furūsiyya manuscripts where the Mamluks wear a plain and mostly monochrome garment, sometimes with a belt (figs. 27, 28). In some cases, a monochrome under-garment is also visible through the opening around the neck and under the short sleeves. The Oriental diagonal opening and the patterned fabrics completely disappeared in the later period. The headdress is a bonnet without wrapping, a ṭāqiyya or zamṭ, with varying shapes. However, in a manuscript at the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, dated 1470, the soldiers wear a red colored cap wrapped in a fabric with a hanging loose tip.23 Another significant difference revealed by a comparison between the manuscripts of both periods is the fact that the Asian appearance with slanted eyes in the Vienna manuscript, indicating the predominantly Asian origins of the Bahri Mamluks, is replaced by Caucasian features in the later period. The comparison between Bahri and Circassian furūsiyya manuscripts confirms what literary sources indicate, that the soldiers’ dress has changed. The change is quite substantial here; the Circassian dress is far less elaborate than its predecessor. The illustrations themselves are of a much poorer quality than those of the Bahri period. The manuscript illustrations depict various simultaneous styles of headdress for the horsemen of the Bahri period, whereas the chronicles mention only the kalawta, the sharbūsh, and the kūfiyya. It is likely, therefore, that these categories included a variety of sub-categories. The tradition of illustrated manuscripts came almost to an end under the Circassian rulers,24 so that images of women are no longer available from the later Bahri period, when the bonnet fashion emerged. Figural representation no longer belongs to the repertoire of artefacts in the Circassian period.

23 Muḥammad ibn Yaʿqūb Abū ʿAbd-Allāh ibn akhī Khuzām, Kitāb al-makhzūn wa-jāmiʿ al-funūn, MS. Arabe 2824, Bibliothèque Nationale de France. 24 Atıl, Renaissance, pp. 250–65; idem, ‘Mamluk Painting in the Late Fifteenth Century’, Muqarnas 2 (1984), pp. 159–71.

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image

181

Artefacts and manuscripts agree in their depiction of women’s costume, either with a long dress and a veil that covers the head and the upper body or with a shorter dress over trousers.25 Often boots complement the trousers in covering the legs. 1.2 Renaissance Images (Figs. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 47, 48, 49) We have no Mamluk manuscripts or artefacts to document women’s costume in the Circassian period. This is partly compensated for by European illustrations of the late 15th and early 16th centuries. The well-known and often-published representations of Mamlūks by the artist Erhard Reuwich, who illustrated Breydenbach’s account of his pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the late 15th century, were copied by Italian Renaissance artists. In his study of Orientalist representations in Renaissance painting, J. Raby observes that the Italian artists, Vittore Carpaccio, Mansueti, V. Giovanni Bellini, Gentile Bellini, and V. Belliniano, use Mamluk costume to depict figures in scenes, most of which are religious in content, taking place in an Oriental or pagan environment and that they continued to use these motifs even in the decades that followed the fall of the sultanate.26 These representations cannot be used as a reliable scientific source of information on Mamluk dress, mainly because they rely on earlier templates. Their architectural setting, as is evident in the anonymous embassy painting of the Venetian embassy at the Mamluk court, are mostly based on views of Syria rather than Cairo. Nonetheless, the use of Mamluk costume by Renaissance artists confirms the general impression of opulence that it made on outsiders, as it is also conveyed in travelers’ accounts. Confirming Anselme Adorno’s observation, Mamluk garments in Italian Renaissance paintings appear voluminous and stately. A main and striking feature of these representations is the variety and complexity of the turbans. Carpaccio’s ‘Stoning of St Stephen’ is a display of Mamluk turbans from different perspectives (fig. 23) and in his ‘Baptism of the Selenites’, the artist has even depicted a detached elaborate turban lying on the floor in the foreground of the painting, next to his signature, thus using a scene of devotion to display Orientalist fantasy (fig. 57). The Oriental figure seen in a Venetian stone sculpture at the Campo dei Mori (fig. 58) is a three-dimensional translation of these images. It shows a man wearing a very large elaborate turban and a shawl. However, embroidery

25 Atıl, Renaissance, p. 258, fig. 6; Mns Bodleian Library, Kalīla wa-Dimna, Ms Pococke, 400-00163, dated 1354, fol. 80b. 26 Julian Raby, Venice, Dürer, and the Oriental Mode (London 1982).

182

Chapter 12

Figure 57 Detail from ‘Baptism of the Selenites’ 1514, by Vittore Carpaccio © Scuola di San Giorgi degli Schiavoni, Venice, Wikimedia Commons

is not shown on European images, and neither they nor Mamluk illustration confirm the significance of fur in Mamluk clothing reported in the texts. In Mansueti’s paintings, most men are wearing a scarf, generally white. Evidently, these paintings do not allow much distinction between social groups. Some men wear tall bonnets, as depicted in von Harff’s travelogue, which is the zamṭ mentioned in the chronicles and in other travelers’ accounts of that period. Lower working-class men are recognizable by their short and striped garments and their headdress in the shape of a cap tied with a narrow white fabric, such as the two attendants accompanying a horseman on the Venetian embassy painting in the Louvre (fig. 21) and the cobbler and peddler in Mansueti’s ‘Episode from the Life of St. Marc’ (fig. 19). Women in Renaissance images are represented invariably dressed in white and wear a long veil suspended from a tall bonnet over their long dress as can be seen in the illustrations of Arnold von Harff’s travelogue and in Bellini’s and Mansueti’s paintings and others (figs. 19, 20, 47, 48, 49). Their headcover differs from that of women in Bahri Mamluk miniatures, which show their veil hanging either straight from their head without cap or perhaps over a shallow, invisible cap. This confirms the chronicles which attribute the tall bonnet to a fashion created in the 15th century.

Mamluk Dress between Text and Image

Figure 58 Sculpture of an Oriental at the Campo dei Mori in Venice. Wikipedi8.Org

183

Chapter 13

Social Order and Mobility Whereas the religious dress discrimination between Muslims and others was a fundamental principle and a matter of course, in the Mamluk state’s perspective, the principal distinction to be applied in clothing lay between the men of the sword who were the ruling class composed of Mamlūks and the turbaned men of the pen. This distinction was de rigueur, and it was immediately recognizable to outsiders. The lines that separated these two classes also marked the ethnic separation between the foreign Mamlūks and the indigenous Arabic-speaking population, whereby both groups were mixed in their own way. The recruitment of Mamlūks was not confined to Turks and Circassians but included several other ethnic groups that varied over time. The Arabic-speaking population was mainly Egyptian and Syrian, but it also included people from other Arabicspeaking and Muslim countries. On the supremacy of the Mamluk class and their clothing, the scholar and poet Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Khāliq ibn al-Furāt (d. 1402) composed the following couplet:1 Idhā shiʾta an taḥyā ḥayātan saʿīdatan wa-yastaḥsina l-aqwāmu minka al-muqabbaḥā, Tazayya bi-ziyyi l-turki wa-iḥfaẓ lisānahum wa-illā fa-jānibhum wa-kun mutaṣawliḥā If you want to lead a happy life and people to praise your wrongdoing, Dress like the Turks and speak their language or avoid them and stay uncorrupted. The historians refer to the dress of the men of the sword, i.e., the Mamlūks, as the Turks’ dress (ziyy al-atrāk)2 or soldiers’ dress (ziyy al-ajnād),3 the latter being the most common term. Although not many explicit regulations are known regarding other social groups outside the military and the judicial-administrative and religious 1 Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, V, p. 28. 2 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 755, II, 15, 162. 3 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 363.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_014

Social Order and Mobility

185

establishments, the chroniclers leave no doubt that all groups of society were identifiable by their dress. As mentioned earlier, the Mamluk text of the 1001 Nights explicitly mentions the merchants’ outfit. Arab Bedouins,4 peasants,5 members of the working class (ziyy al-ʿāmilīn),6 and physicians (ziyy al-ḥukamā’) were also recognizable by their clothes.7 The 1001 Nights refers to a slave’s and a slave-girl’s dress (atwāb al-ʿabd, libs al-jawār).8 Prostitutes were obliged to be dressed in a manner that made them recognizable,9 and convicts were forced into garments of shame. Foreigners, either visitors or residents, such as the Turcomans and Anato­ lians, wore their own national dress.10 Sufis from Iran dressed differently from their local counterparts, with a tall bonnet similar to a ṭarṭūr and ribbed turbans.11 The fact that Sultan Qāytbāy, disguised in a Maghrebi outfit, went to pray at the Azhar Mosque to learn what people said about him, confirms that foreigners residing in Cairo maintained their national dress.12 Ibn Khaldūn is reported to have kept his Maghrebi dress even during his entire tenure as a judge in Cairo.13 The conversion of a Christian or a Jew to Islam, which was always celebrated by the Muslim community, was immediately advertised by the white turban for which the convert exchanged the imposed blue or yellow one.14 Maqrīzī mentions that Christian Europeans, who converted to Islam in his own time, dressed as men of the sword,15 which indicates that they were integrated into the Mamluk establishment. This was also the case with prisoners of war among whom the fittest were selected to serve as Mamlūks in the sultan’s army, which made them eligible for an eminent career. The emir and son-in-law of Sultan Īnāl, Bardabak, was initially a captive from Cyprus who became the property of the sultan and eventually the chancellor in the Mamluk state. European travelers regularly reported their encounters with many Mamlūks of European background.16 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, V, pp. 111, 135, 215. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 46, V, p. 208. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 340. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 664. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla, p. 59, pp. 121, 122, 143, 159, 187, 245, 628, 629. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 319–20. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 364. Mufaḍḍal, Chronik, p. 82. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 121. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 754. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, pp. 392–3. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 713. See Irwin, ‘How Circassian were the Circassian Mamluks?’.

186

Chapter 13

In a society where social groups were identified by their dress, whoever needed to disguise would dress in the manner of another group, as foreign spies were reported to have done. Criminals often chose the military outfit.17 The French traveler and pilgrim Bertrandon de la Brocquière who traveled in Syria in 1432–3 writes that he was advised by his guide to dress like a local, adding that the Franks had obtained permission from the sultan to do so for their own safety.18 A person’s formal dress was not forever fixed but might change during their life and career. Individuals who were promoted or shifted career were expected to swap their official outfit. When in 1393 the Armenian convert ʿAbd al-Rāziq ibn Abī l-Faraj, who began his career as money-changer in the market with the title master (muʿallim), usually reserved to craftsmen and traders, ascended to the position of judge that led him to a higher governmental position, he earned the privilege of wearing the qabāʾ and the kalawta, and carrying a sword and being addressed as an emir.19 However, an official of common background who was authorized to wear the prestigious Mamlūk’s dress to which his office entitled him, was not necessarily entitled to keep this privilege for life but might have to return to his previous dress once he was no longer in this office.20 When in 1409 the secretary of the royal stables Tāj al-Dīn Ibn al-Hayṣam was promoted to the office of the sultan’s majordomo, which was initially reserved for the men of the sword, he swapped his secretary’s dress for that of an emir,21 and when the secretary of the privy purse and majordomo Ibn al-Bashīrī was dismissed in 1413, he returned to his civilian’s dress.22 When the emir Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Naṣr Allāh, who came from a civilian background, became the sultan’s private secretary, which was a civilian office, he abandoned the ‘Turkish’ outfit of emirs and took on the secretaries’ round turban and the farajiyya and was eventually addressed by the title, ‘qāḍī’ (judge), instead of emir.23 Nonetheless, the situation of a civilian shifting to Mamluk status was not equal to that of a Mamlūk becoming a civilian. When an emir who had been a Mamlūk by recruitment, became vizier, i.e., shifted from military to civilian status, he maintained his initial privilege as an aristocrat: his investiture robe was not the ordinary vizierate robe but 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 137. De La Brocquière, The Travels of Bertrandon de La Brocquière … during the Years 1432 & 1433 (London 1807), p. 120. ʿAynī, al-Sultān Barqūq, p. 396; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 516. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, II, p. 190. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm XIII, p. 96. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XIV, p. 8. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, pp. 83, 218–9; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 386.

Social Order and Mobility

187

the aṭlasayn reserved for emirs.24 The discrimination between the two cases indicates that a born-civilian might earn the emir’s status through promotion but the status was temporary, linked to the office and ending with it, whereas an emir recruited as Mamlūk would always maintain his privileged aristocratic status even in a civilian’s position. In the first decade of the 15th century, ʿAbd al-Wahhāb Ibn al-Jabbās, who owned a spice and drug shop (ʿaṭṭār) and whose name indicates that his father was involved in the production of gypsum, managed to hold the post of market inspector of the Fusṭāṭ suburb and later in Cairo itself, a position traditionally held by high-ranking bureaucrats and sometimes by emirs.25 Aḥmad Ibn al-Shahīd (d. 1410) was in the fur trade before he became vizier. Under Sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh, the chief judge al-Harawī, an Iranian from Herat, changed his dress style four times in his lifetime. He initially dressed as an Iranian with the tip of his turban gauze hanging on the left side. As a chief-judge he wore the civilian jubba cloak26 and a large turban with the tip of the gauze hanging between his shoulders. Upon his appointment as the sultan’s private secretary, he took on the outfit of the secretaries and wore a smaller round and fluted turban (dhāta aḍlāʿ). On his return to the office of judge he changed his dress back again accordingly. Unlike many turbaned men, he did not refrain from wearing silk and gold. Maqrīzī, who disliked him and was irritated by his Persian accent, describes him as large, looking ridiculous like a jester, and comments, ‘there are so many hilarious things in Egypt!’27 Ibn Ḥajar describes him as wearing white silk with a silk shawl (tarḥa), and riding a horse with a golden saddle.28 The purchase of offices that was common and practically legal practice during most of Mamluk history, but seemed to increase or became more noticeable in the 15th century, allowed wealthy civilians, including converted Christians, to join the higher echelons of the state apparatus. With the increasing tendency of outsiders to access positions previously reserved for the Mamluk aristocracy, the dress code became more flexible. Most importantly, the patronage of the sultan and emirs opened venues for social mobility. Already in the 14th century, princely patronage played a role in allowing social mobility. Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad had a vizier called Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Shaykhī whose career had begun as a headdress-maker. However, his 24 25 26 27 28

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 281. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, V, p. 291. Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 110–1. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, pp. 448, 670–1. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, VIII, p. 41.

188

Chapter 13

ambitions led him to dress as a Mamlūk, which helped him find support in high places and eventually be hired for an administrative position from where he was able to climb further in rank until he was appointed vizier, the highest position in the Mamluk bureaucracy.29 On his return from his second pilgrimage in 1320, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad held a celebration audience during which he gave his secretary of the privy purse, Karīm al-Dīn, a robe of double satin (aṭlasayn) and a golden belt reserved for the Mamluk dignitaries, which was described as an unprecedented honor for a man of the pen. According to Nuwayrī, Karim al-Dīn at the beginning of his career used to receive robes of plain kanjī until he was promoted to the rank that entitled him to a patterned kanjī and again higher to a robe of white maʿdanī satin with an under-cloak (taḥtānī) of green satin and a brocaded ṭirāz band ‘along the two openings’.30 A remarkable case of patronage is revealed in Sultan Barqūq’s marriage to the daughter of his master-builder and contractor, Master Aḥmad al-Ṭulūnī, who began his career as a stonecutter and mason. The sultan promoted him to the rank of junior emir (emir of ten), which allowed him to dress accordingly. After divorcing his daughter, Barqūq married a second time in Aḥmad’s family, while another daughter of Aḥmad married the secretary of the army (nāẓir al-jaysh).31 The secretary of the privy purse under Qāytbāy, Ibn al-Maqsī, who exploited his office to accumulate tremendous wealth and acquire extraordinary privileges, maintained a retinue of black slaves and even Mamlūks who rode fine horses with golden saddles, wore colored textiles made of silk, brocade, and wool with squirrel and sable. Even his secretary’s outfit was worth 100 dīnārs. When one day this secretary appeared before Sultan Qāytbāy to deliver a message from his master, wearing a Baʿalbakī gown with fur, the sultan commented ironically: ‘tell your master to make one of these for us!’32 In 1497, the son of Sultan Qāytbāy, al-Nāṣir Muḥammad, was blamed for appointing a commoner to the office of master of the hunt reserved for a Mamluk emir, allowing him to dress ‘like the Turks’ and to swap his turban, malūṭa, and tarḥa for the short-sleeved salārī and the takhfīfa with horns.33 A commoner could rise to higher circles through the favors of a princess, as did the secretary and judge Hānī, whose life began as a sojourner at the Azhar Mosque, offering his services to the royal eunuchs who worked for the wealthy 29 30 31 32 33

ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān, IV, pp. 359–60; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 14. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXIII, p. 50; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 75. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, IV, p. 37. Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, pp. 394–5. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 359.

Social Order and Mobility

189

princess Fāṭima the daughter of Sultan Ṭaṭar and widow of Sultan Barsbāy. Thanks to his connections with the palace eunuchs, Hānī managed to be hired as Fāṭima’s secretary. Henceforth his social and financial status kept rising, allowing him to ride horses. The princess ‘purchased official posts for him, he wore fine garments (aqmisha), boots, and stirrups and a necklace around his neck after having been a fallāḥ sojourning at the aforementioned mosque’. Fāṭima herself died poor and heavily indebted.34 Riding horses was a privilege exclusive to the Mamluk military class; however, in practice, the rule was not always strictly followed and it was not uncommon to see bureaucrats riding horses. This was taken as a provocation by the young Mamluk recruits who in the 15th century were in an almost constant state of frustration and rebellion regarding their rights and privileges and for whom the sight of turbans on horses was a usurpation of their privilege. It frequently happened that they took to the streets to pursue trespassers by pulling them down from their mounts to compel them to ride donkeys. Some jurists complained that they were treated like ‘dhimmīs’, meaning the non-Muslims!35 Economic and political decisions, which led in the 15th century to the increasing employment of local civilians, some of whom were Christian con­ verts, in offices formerly reserved for the Mamluk class,36 contributed to social mobility. Men of the judicial establishment could attain high-ranking secretarial positions and even rise to the status of emirs, enjoying all the trappings that came with it. Civilians eventually became courtiers37 who owned Mamlūks38 and inter-married with Mamluk families.39 They acted as patrons of religious foundations all over the city, including Friday mosques,40 and commissioned artefacts in the same style as the emirs.41 34 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, pp. 132–3. 35 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 76, 78, 205, 457. 36 Jean-Claude Garcin, ‘The Regime of the Circassian Mamlūks’, in Carl F. Petry, ed., The Cambridge History of Egypt, Volume One. Islamic Egypt (Cambridge 2008), pp. 304–7; Igarashi, ‘Office’. 37 Bernadette Martel-Thoumian, Les civils et l’administration dans l’État militaire mamlūk, IXe/XVe siècle (Damascus 1992), pp. 156–60. 38 Martel-Thoumian, Les Civils, pp. 168–71. 39 Martel-Thoumian, Les Civils, p. 367. 40 Loiseau, ‘The City’; Doris Behrens-Abouseif, ‘Craftsmen, Upstarts and Sufis in the late Mamluk period’, BSOASc 74/3 (2011), pp. 375–95; Martel-Thoumian, Les Civils, pp. 376–9, 404–14. 41 Carine Juvin, ‘Civilian Elite and Metalwork. A view from the Edge’, in Bethany Walker and Abdelkader Al-Ghouz, eds., History and Society during the Mamluk Period (1250–1517), Studies of the Anne-Marie Schimmel Institute for Advanced Study III (Bonn 2021), pp. 285–318.

190

Chapter 13

Ibn Taghrībirdī often complains about outsiders who took on the dress they were not entitled to, such as scholars who dressed as Mamlūks or commoners who dressed as scholars.42 He deplores the fact that posts that were formerly reserved for the Mamluk aristocracy were increasingly being taken over by bureaucrats and tradesmen43 and rages about those he viewed as upstarts, like the butcher whom he describes as ignorant and illiterate, who made a fortune as a wholesale meat-trader and was eventually appointed vizier, which entitled him to swap his ‘smelly outfit’ of a blue coarse shirt for the farajiyya and turban of the secretaries.44 Ibn Taghrībirdī’s outrage was particularly virulent against the coppersmith Abū l-Khayr al-Naḥḥās who, thanks to Sultan Jaqmaq’s personal support, combined multiple administrative posts in the state apparatus until he became the second highest authority in the sultanate.45 Although Abū l-Khayr was not illiterate, having acquired a madrasa education, Ibn Taghrībirdī disliked his bazaar manners. The fact that cases of social climbing, such as that of Abū l-Khayr, had become possible and even acceptable must be credited to the intensive princely patronage of madrasas by the Mamluk establishment that made higher education accessible to a wide spectrum of society, producing a class of educated commoners who could fill high financial and administrative offices. Another case during Sultan Jaqmaq’s reign was Aqbars, an amber dealer in the market, who studied, became deputy judge, and managed to enjoy the sultan’s patronage and eventually to hold high administrative posts.46 Not all historians adopted Ibn Taghrībirdī’s dismissive attitude toward social mobility. The historian Sakhāwī, who came from a family of villagers, writes in his biographical entry of a scholar and poet, whom he praises for being pious, charming, and of good humor, without criticizing that he used to dress as a Mamlūk.47 Such cases are reported by other historians as well.48 Fluidity between social groups allowed ambitious individuals of the local Egyptian or Syrian population who aspired to be associated with the military aristocracy, and who managed to earn their patronage, to be acknowledged as worthy of dressing in their manner. The shift may not have been too difficult for well-established bureaucrats as indicated by the case of a vizier’s son, himself

42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm XV, pp. 487, 501; XVI, p. 20. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 42, XVI, pp. 74–6. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, pp. 278, 340–2. See also p. 292. See Behrens-Abouseif, ‘Upstarts’. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 388. Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, III, p. 191. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, IV, pp. 39, 329.

Social Order and Mobility

191

a scholar and a market inspector, who decided to dress like a Mamlūk.49 Dress was evidently one of the most rewarding aspects of a successful career. Sufis and men of religion could be highly venerated in Mamluk circles and enjoy special status, notwithstanding their origin or social background. Shaykh Naṣr Allāh al-ʿAjamī, whose name indicates an eastern origin, was an ascetic who had traveled in many places and arrived in Egypt in his coarse wool clothes. He eventually managed to penetrate the upper circles of society, where he gathered many adepts around him who believed in his supernatural powers. Sultan Faraj himself promoted him generously so that he eventually swapped his ascetic dress for wool and fur.50 The son of a Mamlūk, who became a Sufi and went to dwell in the cemetery, still preferred to keep his Mamluk dress rather than wear the Sufi muraqqaʿa.51 However, not all civilians were eager to dress like Mamlūks; some refrained from doing so even when they were entitled to, such as the scholar who, after holding several high-ranking administrative positions, eventually chose to return to his academic career and remain faithful to his origins and to his initial style of dress.52 When in 1401 Ibrāhīm Ibn Ghurāb was promoted to the rank of emir and was supposed to exchange his secretary’s outfit for that of an emir,53 he asked a friend for his opinion regarding his new look as emir and received the reply that his old secretary’s outfit suited him better, he declined the emir’s robe.54 In his biographical entry of Ibn Ghurāb, Ibn Taghrībirdī writes that he wore the kalawta and carried the sword only once, on the day of his investiture. The dress upgrade was signaled by the honorific robe an individual received upon his appointment to a new post, though he had the choice not to make use of it. During the reign of Barqūq, the vizier Shams al-Dīn Ibrāhīm Urnān, who in spite of having been born a Christian was praised for his extreme modesty and integrity, agreed to return to his office of vizier, though only on his own conditions, one of which was not to be obliged to wear the official outfit (tashrīf al-wizāra) but to be free to keep instead the outfit of a chief judge, i.e., a woolen cloak and a shawl.55 In 1445 Shams al-Dīn al-Qayātī accepted the office of judge but rejected the investiture robe. Sultan Jaqmaq agreed to exempt him and

49 50 51 52 53 54 55

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 843. ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān, (1989), pp. 385–6. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, V, pp. 39–40. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, III, p. 404. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 1056; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I/2, p. 742. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Manhal, I, pp. 111–2. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, pp. 60–3.

192

Chapter 13

allowed him to leave the investiture ceremony wearing a white cloak and a ṭaylasān, which was viewed as odd.56 When the bureaucrat Zayn al-Dīn Yaḥyā, a Christian convert, was appointed majordomo by Sultan Jaqmaq, he also preferred to keep his bureaucrat’s dress, i.e., the turban and the farajiyya cloak, rather than wear the emir’s dress his new post entitled him to. This prompted Ibn Taghrībirdī to criticize him for not being suitable for the position, adding that he could not speak Turkish and that he was not worth the privilege anyway.57 Because of the outfit issue, Ibn Taghrībirdī did not include Zayn al-Dīn in his list of the emirs in government, as his post entitled him to, but listed him instead among the administrative staff, i.e., as a man of the pen.58 The rejection of the Mamluk dress expressed the pride that the men of the pen had in their status. It even happened that a Mamlūk, known for his piety, chose to swap his Mamluk outfit for that of a secretary.59 A rare case of a member of the Mamluk aristocracy who chose to dress like a commoner, was a former emir of the hunt, Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn Īnāl, whom Ibn Taghrībirdī describes as eccentric and out of his mind, adding that people were confused about his incongruous appearance when he walked in the streets with his big moustache and long beard, wearing a commoner’s turban and a wide robe like a Bedouin of the Buḥayra province and holding a bird of prey in his hand.60 Extraordinary situations upset the dress order. During the Black Death, when many emirs died, their land tenure grants (iqṭāʿ) kept changing hands until they ended up in the possession of commoners such as tailors and shoemakers, who were eventually emboldened to begin riding horses and wearing a qabāʾ cloak and a kalawta!61 In times of epidemics, when prices went down, commoners had the opportunity to buy textiles that were normally out of their reach.62 When the assets of dignitaries were confiscated, which happened regularly, their possessions were auctioned to dealers and commoners to the benefit of the public treasury, i.e., the sultan. The sultan himself reused the robes of honor of emirs whose estates were confiscated to honor others with them. Other qumāsh items were

56 57 58 59 60 61 62

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, II, p. 248. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XV, p. 354. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm XV, p. 451. Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-ghumr, VIII, p. 209. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, pp. 216–8. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, X, p. 209. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, X, p. 210.

Social Order and Mobility

193

auctioned.63 The second-hand markets offered opportunities for the less prosperous to buy what the rich had to give up. This happened when ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, who was one of the mightiest and wealthiest bureaucrats of his time, came under scrutiny and increasing pressure so that he began to sell off many of his possessions to ‘pretend bankruptcy’, thus flooding the market with luxury clothes and other valuables.64 Social mobility occurred not only in an upwards direction but also downwards. In Mamluk society, where offices in the state bureaucracy were purchased in the hope of the benefits they would eventually return, wealth acquired too fast and in too much quantity might arouse the sultan’s suspicion. Bankruptcy or insolvency, which resulted from extortion or other forms of duress compelled the wealthy to sell their clothes. Sometimes even the sultan would dismiss someone for a higher bid offered for his position from a competitor. High-ranking emirs accused of betrayal by Sultan Barqūq ended up in poverty dressed in a plain woolen gown (ʿibāʾa).65 Abū l-Khayr al-Naḥḥās, the coppersmith who became sultan Jaqmaq’s treasurer and deputy, accumulated immense wealth, and built a domed mausoleum for himself, ended in misery, buried in a shroud donated out of charity by a fellow citizen.66 The Mamluk dress code designed to segregate between Mamlūks and civilians may have been the ideal concept of the founding sultans; nevertheless, it needed to adapt in the face of economic and political developments. Necessities and practices of a pragmatic government permitted social mobility to penetrate the system and counteract aristocratic elitism. 63 64 65 66

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 730, 731. Sakhāwī, Tibr, III, p. 62. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 479. Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, VII, p. 65.

Chapter 14

Industry, Trade, and Assets The significance of textiles is imbedded in Islamic history and urban culture. Textiles had been a major economic factor in the Muslim world since the beginning of its history which encompassed Mediterranean, Eastern, and FarEastern legacies and covered a worldwide commercial network. Textiles from the Muslim world were imported in medieval and Renaissance Europe as luxury items and for ecclesiastic use. The commercial network of the Mamluk sultanate which extended to the Far East, Africa, and the entire Mediterranean was determined by its control of the transit trade of spices and other luxury goods between Asia and Europe. Textiles belonged to the major items of diplomatic gift exchange, and it can be imagined that there was no noteworthy fabric in the world that had not been seen in Cairo. The Mamluk sultanate exported textiles and, at the same time, like all the great Islamic capitals, Cairo was a major consuming center for imported luxury goods and an avid importer of textiles from Europe and Asia. Alexandria, second city of Egypt and a major overseas commercial harbor till the end of the Mamluk period, was famous worldwide for its markets and notably for its textile industry.1 Its silk production, which was partly owned by the state Dār al-Ṭirāz and also privately, was exported to Europe.2 The importance of the textile industry in the city is demonstrated in the rebellion of 1327 that began with a brawl between a European and a local individual and eventually inflated into a popular upheaval against the authorities, involving arson, many casualties, and entailing military intervention, brutal punishment, confiscation, and extortion; the textile dealers were in the foreground of the events and among the major victims of the consequences.3 Silk was traditionally also woven in other Egyptian cities4 and largely in Syria as well. In the 14th century it was shipped from Syrian cities to Italy

1 Labib, Handelsgeschichte, pp. 297–8; Heyd, Histoire, II, p. 694. 2 Labib, Handelsgeschichte, p. 309; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 788; David Jacoby, ‘Oriental Silks go West. A Declining Trade in the Later Middle Ages’, in Catarina Schmidt Arcangeli and Gerhard Wolf, eds., Islamic Artefacts in the Mediterranean World (Venice 2010), p. 76. 3 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 284–6; Mufaḍḍal, Chronik, pp. 37–8; Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXIII, pp. 232–4; Jazarī, Tārīkh, II, pp. 186–9; Müller-Wiener, Stadtgeschichte, pp. 39–42; Labib, Handelsgeschichte, pp. 229–31. 4 Labib, Handelsgeschichte, p. 307.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_015

Industry, Trade, and Assets

195

via Beirut alongside silk from Tabriz, Nishapur, and Baghdad.5 Silks from Alexandria and Damascus inspired Italian imitations. According to Italian archive sources, Timur’s raid on Damascus stopped the production of silk there for two decades; however, imports from Damascus resumed, and imports from there and Alexandria continue to be mentioned in the 15th century. By the middle of the century, however, Florentine and Venetian silks were exported to the Levant.6 Egypt was a major producer of fine linen, whereas Syria was the main source of cotton,7 and its cotton textiles were a major export item to Europe.8 Piloti attributes the widespread use of white clothes in Cairo to the high-quality linen produced in Egypt in large quantity.9 The markets of Damascus and Aleppo abounded with luxury textiles of cotton, linen, and silk, and also boccasini, a linen fabric described as fine and glossy as silk, with the result that it could be mistaken for silk. The fine cotton muslin of Baʿalbak is constantly mentioned throughout the Mamluk period as a high-quality prestigious fabric used by the aristocracy and the urban bourgeoisie. The monopoly over the transit trade of spices between Asia and Europe allowed the Mamluks to afford importing goods on a large scale. With spices also came a great variety of textiles, gems, and exotica from the East, which Europe purchased in exchange for its ever-advancing industrial products and for raw materials. Wool was always imported from Europe, and, after the conquest of Cyprus in 1427, the Cypriots had to deliver wool as part of the yearly tribute to the Mamluks. In the 15th century, silk was no longer an exclusive production of the Orient but was also increasingly imported from Europe alongside a large variety of other textiles including manufactured products such as hats.10 The consumption of imported fur increased to the extent that it characterized the dress of the Mamluks and the urban bourgeoisie. For luxury consumption, import of a variety of items was a necessity. In the 15th century, while the local production of luxury metal wares diminished, imported Chinese porcelain became a highly sought after possession, not only in the

5 6 7 8

Jacoby, ‘Oriental Silk,’ pp. 76, 78–9. Jacoby, ‘Oriental Silk,’ pp. 79–81. Labib, Handelsgeschichte, pp. 311–2. Heyd, Histoire, I, pp. 458, 702–3; Darrag, l’Egypte, pp. 70–2; Ashtor, ‘Economic Decline’, pp. 263–4. 9 Piloti, L’Égypte, p. 35. 10 Heyd, Histoire, II, pp. 709–10; Ashtor, ‘Economic Decline,’ p. 267; idem, ‘L’évolution des prix dans le Proche-Orient à la Basse-Époque,’ JESHO 4 (1961), pp. 35–44; Arbel, ‘Last Decades,’ pp. 51–4.

196

Chapter 14

sultan’s and emirs’ households. Imported glass, amber, and gems belonged to the regular assets and collectibles of the wealthy.11 Much has been written about the industrial decline in the Middle East following the Black Death. Timur’s invasion of Syria in 1400–1401 followed by agricultural setbacks, continuous warfare between military factions, endless currency crises, and inflation, as well as several heavy epidemics, contributed to the gloomy image of the 15th century, which was the Circassian period of the Mamluk sultanate. However, the decline of Mamluk textile industry in the 15th century and the increasing imports from Europe should not necessarily be interpreted as a decline in dress culture or luxury consumption. As in the case of paper,12 which although it was imported from Italy, as it was cheaper than the locally produced paper, did not prevent book production from continuing to be as vibrant as ever and even book prices from being lower in the sultanate than in Italy, the import of textiles did not imply a substantial decline of consumption. For the court and its wealthy upper-class clientele, the stagnation in technology and investments and in local industries, be it in quality or quantity, did not necessarily diminish their consumption. Rather it entailed the substitution of local goods with imports. Mamluk consumption culture was always cosmopolitan, in prosperous times as well as in times of distress.13 In prosperous times the demand for international luxury goods increases, as can be seen today in the highstreets of the great industrial capitals. When Mamluk industrial production contracted, imports filled the gaps. There is no indication in the chronicles that the lifestyle of the upper classes was significantly degraded by the increase of the cost of living in the 15th century.14 European travelers continued to convey a prosperous image of Cairo’s streets. As J.M. Rogers wrote, ‘consumers of luxuries are tenacious and imaginative in their efforts to keep up their standards of living.’15 The consequences of the inflation were rather perceived by the lower social groups. Maqrīzī mourns the many markets that vanished at the turn of the 15th century, but new ones emerged, such as the fur market. The fact that some symbols of luxury, like the golden and studded belts distributed with the robes of honors, were abandoned under the Circassians does not mean that this was an austerity measure; instead, golden bejeweled saddles begin to be mentioned. Yet 11 Arbel, ‘Last Decades’, p. 55. 12 Arbel, ‘Last Decades,’ p. 61. 13 See J.M. Rogers, ‘To and Fro. Aspects of Mediterranean Trade and Consumption in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, in Villes au Levant. Hommage à André Raymond. Revue du Monde musulman et de la Méditerranée 56 (1990–1992), pp. 57–74. 14 Ashtor, Histoire des prix, pp. 345, 369, 371; idem, ‘L’évolution’, p. 40. 15 Rogers, ‘To and Fro’, p. 66.

Industry, Trade, and Assets

197

it appears from scattered information in the chronicles and the illustrations in the furūsiyya manuals that the soldiers’ outfit that had been a matter of great pride to the Qalāwūnids became less elaborate under the Circassians. However, Qāytbāy’s soldiers won the battle (1485–91) against Bayāzīd’s Ottoman army and secured the integrity of Mamluk territory even in a period of economic difficulty, unlike Sultan al-Ghawrī, whose court was glamorous but his soldiers went ill-equipped and in insufficient number to the terminal battlefield. The late Mamluk sultanate not only imported luxury goods but exported some as well, though perhaps not in the same proportion. The carpets produced during that period, the production of which Sultan Qāytbāy probably promoted, if not initiated, continued to be exported long after the Ottoman conquest, and are among the finest of their time and the pride of European museums. Likewise, the contemporaneous exquisite metalwork dedicated to the European market, reveals a remarkable artisanal and artistic creativity in a period that scholars tend to identify with decline.16 1

The Markets of Cairo

Maqrīzī’s description of Cairo shows that already prior to the Mamluks, the markets for clothes and textiles occupied a major place in the city, either in shops along the streets or in dedicated commercial buildings. The textile markets were specialized according to the raw materials they traded such as wool, silk, luxury fabrics, fur, and according to the goods they produced such as headdresses, footwear, military and equestrian equipment and outfits along with tailored, ready-made, and second-hand clothes. Auctions for clothes were also held there.17 The market of Amīr al-Juyūsh housed weavers, tailors, shops for ready-made clothes, and furnishing textiles, alongside workshops for repair and mending and laundries.18 The market of the button-makers, which Maqrīzī describes as a beautiful sight, was a major complex of shops owned by ‘fine people’ (bayāḍ al-nās). It included workshops where masters trained numerous apprentices of Turkish origin. This market was among those that disappeared following the economic crisis of the early 15th century.19

16 Mack, Bazaar to Piazza, pp. 88–92, 139–67. 17 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 326–8, 335, 339–40, 343–4; See Raymond and Wiet, Marchés; Labib, Handelsgeschichte, pp. 293–5. 18 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 335. 19 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 300.

198

Chapter 14

Luxury textiles were available to ordinary customers as second-hand items. One of the major markets was for second-hand clothes (khulaʿīyīn),20 where people could buy clothes once worn by the upper class. There were also outlets for rented clothes. We have seen in the ḥisba regulations that it was forbidden for dyers and menders to rent out their client’s clothes.21 The qaṣṣārīn specialized in the repair of textiles.22 When in 1436 a cargo ship on its way from India to Jedda sank in the Red Sea, submerging masses of gauze and other textiles, these were able to be recovered even after six days in the water and brought to the qaṣṣārīn, who restored them to their original condition.23 The market housed designer workshops (rassāmīn) which created ‘the patterns of silk and gold embroideries’, perhaps to be used at the Dār al-Ṭirāz and for other media as well.24 They seem to have occupied many shops. There were also suburban markets like the Maydān al-Qamḥ, previously a location for trading wheat, where weavers and ‘Eastern tailors’ (al-mashāriqa al-ḥuyyāk) from Iran were settled.25 The expansion of the fur trade was reflected in the bazaar, where, according to Maqrīzī, it occupied a dedicated central location. In the late 15th century, Sakhāwī mentions also a quarter called Farrāyīn in the western suburb on the way to the port of Būlāq, which suggests that furrier workshops were established in the area.26 Ibn Iyās mentions a Pond of the Furriers (Birkat al-Farrāyīn),27 none of which is documented by Maqrīzī. The Pond of the Furriers may be identical to the ‘Pond of the Tanners’,28 mentioned by Evliya Çelebi, near which tanner workshops were established. European travelers have noted with some astonishment the significance of fur for Egyptians, which continued in the Ottoman period, although it was by then declining.29 Fur was imported from Europe and exempted from customs. It came via Venice from Germany, Russia, and Scandinavia.30 Knowing the Mamluk taste, or per20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 344. See Chapter 2. Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Maʿālim, pp. 221–2. Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, III, p. 351. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 92, 335, 346. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, p. 414. Sakhāwī, Tibr, p. 39. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 280. Evliya Çelebi, Seyahatnamesi, X, p. 158. Raymond and Wiet, Marchés, p. 196, n. 3. Wilhelm Heyd, Histoire du commerce du levant au moyen âge (Leipzig 1885–86), II, pp. 175–6; Arbel, ‘Last Decades,’ pp. 54–55; Eliyahu Ashtor, Levant Trade in the Later Middle Ages (Princeton NJ 1983), p. 163.

Industry, Trade, and Assets

199

haps even upon explicit request, foreign rulers regularly included fur in their diplomatic gifts to the Mamluk sultan. The governors of Syria also included loads of fur in their customary gifts to the sultan. Leo Africanus’s description during Selim’s campaign in 1517, shows the changes that the major markets underwent after Maqrīzī. It seems that by building his religious complex straddling the main street, with a mosque and a mausoleum attached to a khānqāh overlooking a marketplace with shops and booths, Sultan al-Ghawrī attracted prestigious trades to locate there, thus boosting the revenue of his foundation. Leo was impressed with the wealth of textiles he saw there.31 He mentions the fine Baʿalbakī cotton and Mosul fabrics for the upper class to make shirts and scarves, the fine linen, the fabrics from Italy such as silk, brocade, gold-woven, and velvet the like of which he had never seen, not even in Italy itself, as well as other fabrics from Venice, Florence, and Flanders. This market was still dedicated to fine textiles in the 19th century when David Roberts depicted it under the label of ‘silk market’ (fig. 59). The Khān al-Khalīlī market, located further north along the main street, where Qāytbāy had established a stately commercial building, which Leo compares with a palace, housed Iranian merchants who traded imported luxury goods including spices, gems, and fabrics from India.32 Pagani, the reporter of Trevisan’s embassy in Cairo, made similar observations in 1512.33 Although the bazaar of Cairo housed facilities of manufacture as well as wholesale and retail trade of raw fabrics and ready-made clothes alongside money-changing and banking facilities, it can be assumed that there was also a parallel informal market that operated though personal networks where customers could commission and personalize their requirements from individual home-based workers like weavers, embroiderers, and seamstresses. Apart from the Dār al-Ṭirāz’s production of ceremonial textiles, the court did not have its own workshops. Rather it was supplied with most of the goods it consumed from the markets, including military uniforms,34 horse trappings,35 and weapons. However, the urban market was largely controlled by the state and its officials. On some occasions workshops were instructed to work exclusively on special commissions for the court, for example when al-Nāṣir Muḥammad and al-Ashraf Shaʿbān planned their pilgrimage. As 31 32 33 34 35

Leo Africanus, Description, pp. 871–3. Leo Africanus, Description, p. 882. Pagani, Relation, pp. 211–2. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 329–30; idem, Sulūk, II, pp. 413–4. Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 324–5.

200

Chapter 14

Figure 59 The ‘silk market’ at the complex of Sultan al-Ghawrī by David Roberts 1839 Photo by Wellcome Collection Gallery. https:// commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid =35996700

mentioned earlier, Sultan Barqūq ordered the tailors of ceremonial robes who were located in the market to work exclusively for him.36 The state had a great impact on the production of textiles it needed, not only through the state 36 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ III, p. 328.

Industry, Trade, and Assets

201

manufacturer of Dār al-Ṭirāz but also through the involvement of the sultan and the emirs in trade and their control of a large share of the urban estates and commercial structures as property or as assets endowed to their religious foundations and at the same time to their families.37 Through the office of the privy purse that served the needs of the court, the sultan was heavily involved in the trade and industry of Alexandria and the textile industry altogether. Although little is reported about the manufacture of robes of honor, considering the scale of its consumption in the sultanate it must have been a major industry through the entire period. Likewise, little is written about Mamluk textile workers; however, the traditional and universal involvement of women in the production of textiles as spinners, weavers, and embroiderers, as had been the case in other ancient and medieval societies, is well documented. In her study of the Ḥaram documents, Huda Lutfi demonstrates women’s contribution to textile production. They mostly worked from home as indicated by the presence of tools and raw material of cotton and flax in 30 percent of all women’s estate inventories under study.38 Yossef Rapoport provides further references in the chronicles to the role of women in the production of textiles.39 To alleviate some of the fiscal burdens on the population during the reign of Sultan Qāytbāy, the chancellor Yashbak min Mahdī issued the order to exempt some crafts from taxes, among these were the female weavers. The specific mention of female weavers as a distinct group identifiable to the fiscal authorities points to their importance.40 These are likely to have worked from home for the market and for private commissions. We can assume that not only women, but spinners and weavers in general may have worked from their homes. Miriam Frenkel has shown that this was the case among the Jewish community of Alexandria.41 A rare illustration showing a woman behind a spinning wheel, included in a manuscript of Maqamāt al-Ḥarīrī, dated 1236–7 and illustrated by al-Wāsiṭī in Iraq, confirms the role of women in the textile industry beyond Egypt and Syria.42

37 Lapidus, Muslim Cities, p. 188. 38 Lutfi, al-Quds, pp. 297–8. 39 Yossef Rapoport, Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society (Cambridge 2007), pp. 34–7. 40 Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-haṣr, p. 39. 41 Miriam Frenkel, ‘Medieval Alexandria – Life in a Port City’, Al-Masāq (2014) 26/1, pp. 25–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/09503110.2014.877194. 42 Bibliothèque Nationale de France, mns. arabe 5847, fol. 15b.

202 2

Chapter 14

Hoards, Assets, and Security

According to some economic historians, hoarding by the wealthy was a widespread phenomenon in the Middle East and is said to have eventually contributed to economic decline by freezing assets instead of investing them.43 In Mamluk society, where rank and wealth depended more on patronage than inheritance or investment, hoarding was common, and by the same token, confiscation and dispossession were regular. Brocades, embroideries and valuable textiles for clothing, furnishing, and horse trappings were assets and collectibles alongside gems, precious metals, and Chinese porcelain.44 They were better securities than cash in a period when currency devaluation was a recurrent problem. The estate of the emir Salār (d. 1308) contained rugs, tents, and hangings, 300 silk qabāʾ with ermine, the same number with squirrel and 400 without fur, 1,000 garments (tafṣīla) made of the ṭard waḥsh silk brocade of Alexandria, and 300 colored robes of honor, in addition to precious stones, gold, and silver.45 In 1339 the confiscated estate of the disgraced vizier al-Nashw included besides the usual precious goods, 400 new and 80 used badlas or complete outfits, 60 brocaded garments of the bughluṭāq type, brocaded kerchiefs, crates filled with Alexandrian textiles destined as diplomatic gifts and other valuable textiles from the estates of deceased and convicted dignitaries, 20 brocaded embroidery pieces (ṭirāz), alongside gems and other precious items.46 The treasury of the emir Tankiz (d. 1340) included in terms of clothing, 100 studded belts, 200 brocaded turbans, 260 embroidered kerchiefs, and 2,000 gowns or rolls of fabric (thawb) of red satin.47 The confiscated treasure of the vizier Ibn Zanbūr in 1352, a few years after the Black Death, included 6,000 rugs, a large quantity of male and female garments, 6,000 belts, 6,000 kalawtas, 6,200 farajiyyas for himself, and 300 pieces of gauze, 500 badlas, in addition to slaves, animals, land and urban estates, gold, silver, pearls and precious stones, crystal, and Chinese porcelain.48 The estate of the emir Baktamūr (d. 1373) included 500 honorific robes of various types including mutammar and colored silk.49

43 44 45 46 47 48 49

Ashtor, ‘L’évolution des prix,’ p. 428. Shujāʿī, Tārīkh, p. 216; Maqrīzī, Sulūk II, p. 880. Ṣafadī, Aʿyān, II, pp. 492–4; Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, pp. 97–8; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 437. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, IX, p. 139. Shujāʿī, Tārīkh, p. 89. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 880. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 464.

Industry, Trade, and Assets

203

When the possessions of al-Ghawrī’s treasurer, the emir Khāyrbak, were disclosed, they were found to include precious metals, gems, marvelous exotica (tuḥaf fākhira) worth 100,000 dīnārs, a thousand rolls of Baʿalbakī cotton, wool, fur of different kinds such as sable, lynx, and squirrel, salārīs and woolen shawls ( janīniyāt, sing. janīna)50 worth 50,000 dīnārs alongside brocaded bed curtains, women’s clothes and jewelry from confiscated estates of ladies of the aristocracy, in addition to urban properties and livestock, making a total of almost 400,000 dīnārs.51 When in 1515 a robbery at the mint deprived Sultan al-Ghawrī of more than 8,000 dīnārs that he urgently needed to pay his soldiers, he opened the palace treasuries where the estates of dead princesses were stored. They included amber, crystal, porcelain, precious textiles, brocaded bed curtains, buttons, gauze, Baʿalbakī fabric, and Cypriot wool. The Sultan compelled the merchants to purchase it all for the arbitrary sum of 50,000 dīnārs.52 The customary gifts presented by the governors of Syria to the sultan which were a de facto duty and not just an occasional spontaneous gesture, included, alongside Mamluks, slaves, and animals, fur and a wide range of textiles. Tankiz’s gifts to the sultan contained gems worth 30,000 dīnārs and brocades worth 20,000.53 A royal gift for an emir’s wedding in 1352 consisted of cash and 200 pieces of qumāsh.54 Mamluk narrative sources use the term qumāsh, which originally meant fabric, as it is also used today in colloquial speech, in the sense of valuable items and assets, investment and capital. Sultan Barqūq in the late 14th century received the Jalayirid sultan Aḥmad ibn Uways, who came to Cairo escaping Timur’s invasion of his territory and offered him 200 pieces of Alexandrian qumāsh.55 Sultan al-Muʾayyad Shaykh granted the governor of Damascus before his departure qumāsh worth 2,000 dīnārs in addition to horses and camels.56 When the majordomo Zayn al-Dīn was coerced into making a compensation payment to sultan Jaqmaq, he sold his qumāsh and furniture.57 In a dedicated appendix, Mayer noticed the frequency of the expression ‘shāsh and qumāsh’ in the chronicles and in his attempt to explore its precise 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Dozy, Dictionnaire, pp. 125–6. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 405–6. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, pp. 443–3. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 461. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 892. ʿAynī, al-Sultān Barqūq, p. 377. ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān (1985), p. 284. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, XVI, p. 83.

204

Chapter 14

meaning, he concluded that the term qumāsh was a synonym of ‘ceremonial cloak’.58 Although this interpretation is convincing, there is more to it. Qumāsh refers to a wide range of valuable fabrics of different provenance including the ceremonial golden textiles of horses.59 Writing in the early 13th century, Mufaḍḍal ibn Abī l-Faḍāʾil, speaks of ‘zarkash and qumāsh’, i.e., brocade and textiles to describe the robes he received from the sultan in connection with his investiture and confirmation in office. In the 15th century, Ibn Iyās and Ibn Ṭūlūn use the combined term of shāsh wa-qumāsh. Neither ʿUmarī nor other authors of the 14th century had used this expression in that sense before. The word shāsh, which initially meant gauze, referred to the fabric wound around the skull cap to form a turban or tied around the waist as a belt. The composite term ‘shāsh wa-qumāsh’ thus described a complete apparel,60 including horse’s textiles.61 When Ibn Iyās credited Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad for being the one who introduced the shāsh wa-qumāsh for the soldiers with silver and gold inlaid swords, studded belts for emirs, brocaded embroidery, plumes, and hats adorned with various types of fur,62 he referred to the festive ceremonial outfit at the sultan’s court. In periods of pandemic the prices of industrial commodities increased and in periods of currency crisis, shāsh and qumāsh acquired the status of gold, leading people to transfer their savings therein, as an individual in late Mamluk Damascus did whose estate is described as consisting of more than 100 garments of high-quality processed cotton fabrics.63 The significance of textiles as assets is confirmed by their importance in robbery and crime, the involvement of the sultan himself in such cases, and the harshness of the ensuing punishment. In times of crisis, even ordinary textiles increased in value and became a major target for burglars and robbers so that orders were issued for the merchants to remove their qumāsh from their shops and transfer it to a safer place.64 A house ‘full of qumāsh’ attracts burglars to break in.65 Qumāsh was also easier to fence than gems, Chinese porcelain, and

58 Mayer, Costume, pp. 77–80. 59 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 1046; Ṣayraf, Nuzha, I, pp. 91, 92. 60 Shujāʿī, Tārīkh, pp. 103, 136, 186; Ibn Iyās’, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, pp. 491, 499; I/2 pp. 3, 346; III, pp. 4, 158. 61 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 436. 62 Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, I, p. 481. 63 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, I, p. 180. 64 Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, p. 628. 65 Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, II, p. 457.

Industry, Trade, and Assets

205

art objects. When in 1420 rioters in Alexandria went to destroy the Franks’ wine stocks, they also looted the ‘houses’ of the silk merchants.66 The chroniclers regularly report gangs, often soldiers, snatching people’s turbans and headdress on the streets. When in 1458 three slaves were caught plundering textiles in the market, Sultan Īnāl condemned them to a severe beating after which they were nailed on boards and paraded through the streets before finally being hanged.67 When stability or security was at stake in the markets, the sultans were themselves involved and administered harsh punishments. In 1455, as prices rose out of control and people complained, Sultan Īnāl ordered the market inspector to interfere to halt the inflating prices of Baʿalbakī fabric and zamṭs.68 When Sultan al-Ghawrī heard that insecurity in the streets and increasing robberies and burglaries had led the emirs to transfer their qumāsh to caches outside their homes, he forbade them from doing so while threatening severe punishment for any breach of security and order.69 There were a variety of harsh punishments for burglary in the markets, for example, in 1386 a gang of 60 robbers raided the Jamalūn market and killed two people; they were paraded through the streets with their feet nailed to wooden clogs.70 An amusing case is that of the governor of Cairo, the emir Aydakīn, who in 1334 went on a robbing spree. He rode at sunset to a public park in the countryside that offered visitors huts for their leisure, where he snatched people’s clothes, leaving them naked. He then sold the booty on his own terms to the dealers, earning 1,500 dirhams.71 Although no further detail is indicated, it can be speculated that the park with huts was a meeting place for licentious encounters, which facilitated the theft of clothes.72 Another episode of stripping people of their clothes was reported in 1474. The perpetrators this time were Bedouins who waited for their prey on the road; even an emir found himself deprived of his salārī.73 It is interesting that in both these robbery episodes the historians mention only clothes, not referring to cash or other valuables. Even shrouds were not safe from robbers. During a plague epidemic in 1498, a robber went to steal the shrouds of the buried. He was eventually caught 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

Maqrīzī, Sulūk, IV, p. 503. Perhaps Maqrīzī meant the shops or stores. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 330. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, p. 229. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, IV, p. 313. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, III, pp. 542–3. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 374. Maqrīzī, Sulūk, II, p. 703. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 102.

206

Chapter 14

and Sultan al-Nāṣir Muḥammad the son of Qāytbāy ordered his punishment to be scalping alive followed by being paraded through the streets leading to the southern gate, Bāb al-Naṣr, where he was to be hanged ‘until he died’.74 Textiles were, as they still are, objects for charitable donations. When al-Nāṣir Muḥammad’s secretary of the privy purse Karīm al-Dīn fell terminally ill, he ordered the distribution of shirts to the hospital. A huge crowd gathered to get hold of a shirt, causing thirteen deaths.75 It was common practice for the patrons of charitable primary schools to distribute clothes to the orphans on festive occasions.76 As compensation for a carpenter who died as victim of an accident during his work at the Citadel, Qāytbāy offered his family cash and a roll of Baʿalbakī fabric for the shroud.77 74 75 76 77

Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 391. Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, XXXII, p. 52. Sabra, Poverty, pp. 110–1. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr, III, p. 70.

Chapter 15

Epilogue When Mark Twain spoke his proverbial words ‘clothes make the man; naked people have little or no influence on society’, referring to Shakespeare’s maxim ‘the apparel oft proclaims the man’ which itself may have referred to yet older wisdom, he certainly did not say anything that the Mamluks did not already believe and practice. The intent of this book has been to follow the agenda of the chroniclers rather than ask them for answers to conceptual questions. Their obsession with dress and dress code is unparalleled even within the framework of Mamluk culture. When speaking of dress code and dress they depicted the sultanate. Art historians could only dream of finding information about what they describe as Mamluk art comparable to what the chroniclers report about clothes and textiles. The chroniclers do not name any of the workshops or craftsmen that we know from occasional signatures on other artefacts, though, three workshops are mentioned, referring to textiles. One of them, already well known to carpet historians, is the workshop of al-Sharīf at Fusṭāt which produced luxury carpets in the 14th century.1 The two others were the workshop of al-Bāqī which tailored robes of honor for Qāytbāy, and the workshop, al-Qāʿa, which produced gold-woven textiles for Sultan al-Ghawrī. Another rare craftsman’s name in a chronicle is Master Bahrām who produced studded saddles and caparisons.2 This is telling: In the Mamluk chronicles the visual arts worth speaking of were pageantry and apparel, and Cairo was the stage for this spectacle. As a commercial junction between Asia and Europe, ‘a crossroad for embassies’,3 a city of art and literature, a center of Muslim patronage, the Egyptian capital was a vibrant metropolis that maintained much of its dynamism to the end of Mamluk history.4

1 Maqrīzī, Khiṭaṭ, III, pp. 237–8; Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, I, p. 135. 2 Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīkh, IX/2, p. 454. 3 Mamluk Cairo a Crossroad for Embassies is the title of Frédéric Bauden and Dekkiche’s edited book on Mamluk diplomacy. Frédéric Bauden and Malika Dekkiche, eds., Mamluk Cairo a Crossroads for Embassies. Studies on Diplomacy and Diplomatics (Leiden 2019). 4 See Christian Mauder, The Sultan’s Salon, on intellectual activities; Robert Irwin, ‘Gunpowder and Firearms in the Mamluk Sultanate Reconsidered’, in Michael Winter and Amalia Levanoni, eds., The Mamluks in Egyptian and Syrian Politics and Society (London/Boston 2004),

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2024 | doi:10.1163/9789004684980_016

208

Chapter 15

Like architecture, clothing served outdoor display. The early Mamluk sultans used dress code as a major medium to define their identity as the ruling aristocracy for their own subjects and for foreigners and at the same time to label the social groups that constituted their population. The sultan was regularly visible in the streets of Cairo performing his functions as absolute ruler. His outfit and that of his retinue were a major subject of interest and public concern. A wrong outfit might cause the public to worry. The khilʿa or robe of honor was a major medium of communicating the sultan’s blessing to the institutions of his realm and its individuals. It allocated people’s place in society, thus embodying hierarchy and social order. Its ubiquity in political life is a remarkable trait of Mamluk rule. Yet the dress code was not static or detached from social developments. The Mamluk regime was pragmatic enough over time to adapt the dress code from an initial binary concept of aggrandizing the Mamluk aristocracy in relation to the civilians, to a more differentiated vision, without, however, breaching the supremacy of the military class. Social fluidity is also manifest in the garments that initially belonged to a common social stratum and were eventually adopted by the upper strata. Besides being a matter of group identity, dress was also a personal choice that characterized individuals and advertised status. Owing to Muslim ethics and the preoccupation with privacy, status could not be advertised in private homes, which remained mostly concealed to outsiders’ eyes. Therefore, clothes were the principal symbol of status to be shown publicly. Regulations, religion, and traditions that defined the basic features of clothing did not prevent individuals from expressing their personality in the style of their appearance nor could they prevent innovations. Fashions were mostly created by men and women of the aristocracy and the upper class, or at least these were the ones reported by the chroniclers. Despite the religious imperative of modesty, which was a police matter, women were present in the streets and markets where they could express their taste and display elegance and style. European eyewitnesses agree in their descriptions of Cairene women’s fine and richly ornamented clothes, while the chroniclers present them as keen on fashions and avid consumers of luxury goods whose spending power had a significant leverage on the market. Our main source, the chroniclers, are too unbalanced, with their fixation on the court and the elite, to convey a fair picture of the commoners’ material culture. While economic problems inevitably hit the lower classes harder, in pp. 117–42; Doris Behrens-Abouseif, ‘Sultan al-Ghawri and the Arts’, Mamluk Studies Review 6 (2002), pp. 71–94.

Epilogue

209

the upper social strata, consumption of luxury goods followed its own mechanisms, which blur, rather than reflect economic and political reality. Sultan al-Ghawrī’s court at the ebb of Mamluk power may not have been less lavish than that of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad at the zenith of the golden age. Luxury textiles and clothes, either locally produced or imported, continued to be assets and investments among all urban classes. Owing to the dependence of its prosperity on international trade, Cairo’s cosmopolitan markets adapted to worldwide industrial and commercial developments. Even European fashions reached Cairene consumers. At the end of the Mamluk sultanate, men’s and women’s clothes had undergone substantial transformations. While attesting to a vibrant society, these changes reveal at the same time the Mamluk ability to the last to adapt to social movements and interact with global developments. Hence, echoing Roland Barthes’ view, we may conclude that Mamluk dress culture was indeed at the very heart of the dynamics of its society.

Bibliography

Primary Sources including Travelers’ Accounts

ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ ibn Khalīl, Zayn al-Dīn, Nayl al-amal fī dhayl al-duwal, 4 vols., Beirut 2002. Abū l-Fidāʾ, ʿImād al-Dīn Ismāʿīl, al-Mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al-bashar, vols. III–IV, Cairo 1907. Adorno, Anselme, Itinéraire d’Anselme Adorno en Terre Sainte (1470–1471), Paris 1978. al-ʿAynī, Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd, al-Sulṭān Barqūq muʾasis dawlat al-mamālīk al-sharākisa min khilāl makhṭūṭ ʿIqd al-Jumān fī tārīkh ahl-al-zamān, li-Badr al-ʿAynī, ed. Imān ʿUmar Shukrī, Cairo 2002. al-ʿAynī, Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd, ʿIqd al-Jumān fī tārīkh ahl-al-zamān, 4 vols., ed. Muḥammad Muḥammad Amīn, Cairo 1987–1992. al-ʿAynī, Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd, ʿIqd al-Jumān fī tārīkh ahl-al-zamān (815–824), and (824–50/1421–47), 2 vols., ed. ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Ṭanṭāwī al-Qarmūṭ, Cairo 1985, 1989. Baybars al-Mansūrī al-Dawādār, Zubdat al-fikra fī tārīkh al-hijra, ed. Donald S. Richards, Beirut 1998. al-Bayrūtī, Aḥmad, History of the years 1366–78, being some middle part of a longer work, MS. Marshall Or. 36, Bodleian Library, fl.c. 1378, dated Ramaḍān 788/1386. Belon, Pierre du Mans, Le Voyage en Egypte (1547), ed. Serge Sauneron, Cairo 1969. Brancci, Felice, see Yousefzadeh, Mahnaz (trans.). Breydenbach, Bernhard von, Les Saintes Pérégrinations de Bernard De Breydenbach. Extraits relatifs à l’Égypte suivant l’édition de 1490, trans. F. Arrivaz, Cairo 1904. Dardel, Jean, Chronique d’Arménie, eds. Charles Schefer and Louis De Mas Latrie, in Recueil des Historiens des Croisades. Documents Arméniens, 2 vols. Paris, 1906, pp. 274–1038. al-Dawādārī, Ibn Aybak, Kanz al-durar wa-jāmiʿ al-ghurar, Vol. IX, ed. H.R. Römer, Cairo 1960. De La Brocquière, The Travels of Bertrandon de La Brocquière … during the Years 1432 & 1433, London 1807. Evliya Çelebi, Seyahatnamesi, vol. X, eds. S.A. Kahraman, Y. Dagli, R. Dankoff, Istanbul 2007. Frescobaldi, Viaggio di Lionardo di Niccolò Frescobaldi in Egitto e Terra Santa, Rome 1818. Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, al-Rawḍ al-zāhir fī sīrat al-malik al-Ẓāhir, ed. ʿAbd alʿAzīz al-Khuwayṭir, Riyadh 1976. Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, Riḥla, 2 vols., ed. ʿAlī al-Muntaṣar al-Kittānī, Beirut 1986. Ibn akhī Khuzām, Muḥammad ibn Yaʿqūb Abū ʿAbd Allāh, Kitāb al-makhzūn wa-jāmiʿ al-funūn, MS. Arabe 2824, Bibliothèque Nationale de France.

212

Bibliography

Ibn al-Furāt, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥīm, Tārīkh, Vol. IX, eds. Qusṭanṭīn Ruzayq and Najlāʾ ʿIzz al-Dīn, Beirut 1938. Ibn Ḥabīb, Ḥasan ibn ʿUmar, Tadhkirat al-nabīh fī ayyām al-Manṣūr wa-banīh, Vol. I, ed. Muḥammad Muḥammad Amīn, Cairo 1976. Ibn al-Ḥājj, Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-ʿAbdarī al-Mālikī al-Fāsī, al-Madkhal, 4 vols., Cairo 1981. Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ghumr bi-anbāʾ al-ʿumr, 9 vols., Beirut 1986. Ibn Iyās, Aḥmad, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr fī waqāʾiʿ al-duhūr, ed. M. Muṣṭafā, Wiesbaden/ Cairo 1961–1975. Ibn Khaldūn, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Muḥammad, Muqaddima, 2 vols., ed. ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad al-Darwīsh, Beirut 2005. Ibn Qāḍī Shuhba, Tārīkh Ibn Qāḍī Shuhba, 2 vols., ed. ʿAdnān Darwīsh, Damascus 1994. Ibn Shaddād, ʿIzz al-Dīn Muḥammad, Tārīkh al-Malik al-Ẓāhir, ed. Aḥmad Ḥuṭayṭ, Cairo 2009. Ibn Shāhīn, see al-Ẓāhirī. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Abū l-Muḥāsin Yūsuf, al-Nujūm al-zāhira fī mulūk Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira, 16 vols., Cairo 1963–1971. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Abū l-Maḥāsin Yūsuf, Ḥawādith al-duhūr fī madā l-ayyām wa-l-shuhūr, ed. W. Popper, Berkeley 1930–1942; also ed. Muḥammad Kamāl al-Dīn ʿIzz al-Dīn, Cairo 1990. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Abū l-Maḥāsin Yūsuf, al-Manhal al-ṣāfī wa-l-mustawfī baʿd al-wāfī, 13 vols., ed. Muḥammad Muḥammad Amīn, Cairo 1984. Ibn Ṭūlūn, Muḥammad, Mufākahat al-khillān fī ḥawādith al-zamān, 2 vols., ed. Muḥammad Muṣṭafā, Cairo 1962. Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad al-Qurashī, Kitāb maʿālim al-qurba fī aḥkām al-ḥisba, Cairo 1976. al-Jazarī, Shams al-Dīn Abī ʿAbd Allāh, Tārīkh ḥawādith al-zamān wa-anbāʾih wa-wafayāt al-akābir wa-l-aʿ yān min abnāʾih, 4 vols., ed. ʿUmar ʿAbd al-Salām Tadmurī, Beirut 1998. Kitāb alf layla wa-layla min uṣūlihi al-ʿarabiyya al-ūlā, ed. Muḥsin Mahdī, Leiden 1984. Lengherand, Georges, Voyage de Georges Lengherand à Venise, Rome, Jérusalem, Mont Sinaï & Le Kayre 1485–1486, Paris 1861. Leo Africanus (al-Ḥasan ibn Muḥammad al-Wazzān al-Fāsī), The History and Description of Africa. And of the Notable Things Therein Contained, ed. Robert Brown, trans. John Pory, London 1896. al-Khazrajī, ʿAlī ibn Ḥasan, al-ʿUqūd al-luʾluʾiyya fī tārīkh al-dawla al-rasūliyya, 2 vols., Cairo 1911. al-Maqrīzī, Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad, Ighāthat al-umma bi-kashf al-ghumma, ed. Karam Ḥilmī Faraḥāt, Cairo 2007.

Bibliography

213

al-Maqrīzī, Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad, Kitāb al-mawāʿiẓ wa-l-iʿtibār bi-dhikr al-khiṭaṭ wa-l-āthār, 4 vols., ed. Ayman Fū’ād Sayyid, London, 2002–2003. al-Maqrīzī, Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad, Kitāb al-sulūk li-maʿrifat duwal al-mulūk, 4 vols., eds. M. Ziyāda and S. ʿĀshshūr, Cairo 1934–1973. Mártir, Pedro De Anglería, Una embajada de los Reyes Católicos a Egipto según la ‘Legatio Babylonica’ y el ‘Opus epistolarum’ de Pedro Mártir de Anglería, ed. and trans. Luis Garcia y Garcia, Vallodolid 1947. Martyr Anglerius, Petrus, Legatio Babylonica. Die Gesandschaft nach Babylon, ed. and trans. Hans Heinrich Todt, Wiesbaden 2015. Mufaḍḍal ibn Abī l-Faḍāʾil, Ägypten und Syrien zwischen 1317 und 1341 in der Chronik des Mufaḍḍal ibn Abī l-Faḍāʾil, ed. Samira Kortantamer, Freiburg 1973. al-Nābulusī, ʿAbd al-Ghanī, Taʿṭīr al-anām fī taʿbīr al-manām, and in the margin Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn, Muntakhab al-kalām fī tafsīr al-aḥlām, 2 vols., ed. Ṭaha ʿAbd al-Ra‌ʾūf Saʿd, Damascus n.d. al-Nuwayrī, Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad, Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab, Vol. XXX, eds. MuḥammadʿAbd al-Hādī Shaʿīra and Muḥammad Muṣṭafā Ziyāda; Vol. XXXI, ed. al-Bāz al-ʿArīnī, Cairo 1992; Vol. XXXII, ed. Fahīm Muḥammad ʿUlwī Shaltūt, Cairo 1998; Vol. XXXIII, eds. Muṣṭafā Ḥijāzī and Muḥammad Muṣṭafā Ziyāda, Cairo 1997. al-Nuwayrī al-Iskandarānī, Muḥammad ibn Qāsim ibn Muḥammad, Kitāb al-Ilmām bi-l-iʿlām fī mā jarat bihi al-aḥkām wa-l-umūr al-maqḍiyya fī waqʿat al-Iskandariyya, 7 vols., eds. ʿAzīz Sūryāl ʿAṭiya and Etienne Combe, Hyderabad 1968–1973. Pagani, Zaccaria, Voyage du magnifique et très illustre chevalier et procurateur de Saint Marc Domenico Trevisan, ed. Ch. Schefer, Paris 1884, reprinted in Le voyage d’outre-mer (Égypte, Mont Sinay, Palestine) de Jean Thenaud suivi de La relation de l’ambassade de Domenico Trevisan au près du Soudan d’Egypte 1512, Paris 1884, repr. Elibron Classics 2006. Piloti, Emmanuel, L’Égypte au comencement du quinzième siècle d’après le Traité d’Emmanuel Piloti de Crète (Incipit 1420), ed. P.H. Dopp, Cairo 1950. al-Qalqashandī, Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad, Ṣubḥ al-aʿshā fī ṣināʿat al-inshā, 14 vols., Cairo 1914–1928. al-Qudsī, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥibb al-Dīn Muḥammad, Kitāb duwal al-islām al-sharīfa al-bahiyya wa-dhikr mā ẓahara lī min ḥikam Allāh al-khafiyya fī jalb ṭāʾifat al-Atrāk ilā l-Diyār al-Miṣriyya, eds. Subḥī Labīb and Ullrich Haarmann, Beirut 1997. al-Ṣābiʾ, Abū l-Ḥusayn Hilāl ibn al-Muḥsin, Rusūm Dār al-khilāfa, ed. Mikhāʾīl ʿAwwād, Beirut 1986. al-Sakhāwī, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, al-Ḍawʾ al-lāmiʿ li-ahl al-qarn al-tāsiʿ, 12 vols., Cairo, 1896. al-Sakhāwī, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, al-Tibr al-masbūk fī dhayl al-sulūk, 4 vols., ed. H. Muṣṭafā Kāmil and L. Ibrāhīm Muṣṭafā, Cairo 2002.

214

Bibliography

al-Ṣafadī, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Aybak, Aʿyān al-ʿaṣr wa-aʿwān al-naṣr, 6 vols., eds. ʿAlī Abū Zayd, Nabīl Abū ʿAshama, Muḥammad Mawʿid, Maḥmūd Sālim Muḥammad, Damascus/Beirut 1998. al-Ṣafadī, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Aybak, al-Wāfī bi-l-wafayāt, 30 vols., Deutschen Morgenländische Gesellschaft, Beirut 1991–2004. al-Ṣayrafī, al-Jawharī, ʿAlī ibn Dāwūd, Inbāʾ al-haṣr bi-abnāʾ al-ʿaṣr, ed. Ḥasan al-Ḥabashī, Cairo 1970. al-Ṣayrafī, ʿAlī ibn Dāwūd, Nuzhat al-nufūs wa-l-abdān fī tawārīkh al-zamān, 4 vols., ed. Ḥasan al-Ḥabashī, Cairo 2010. Semeonis, Symon, The Journey of Symon Semeonis from Ireland to the Holy Land, CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts: a project of University College, Cork College Road, Cork, Ireland. http://www.ucc.ie/celt (2017). Shāfiʿ ibn ʿAlī, Šāfiʿ Ibn ʿĀlī’s Biography of the Mamluk Sultan Qalāwūn, ed. Paulina B. Lewicka, Warsaw 2000. al-Shayzarī, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Naṣr, Nihāyat al-rutba fī ṭalab al-ḥisba, ed. al-Sayyid al-Bāz al-ʿArīnī, Cairo 1946. al-Shujāʿī, Shams al-Dīn, Tārīkh al-malik al-Nāṣir Muḥammad ibn Qalāwūn al-Ṣāliḥī, ed. Barbara Schäfer, Wiesbaden 1978. Sigoli, Simone, Viaggio al monte Sinai, ed. Basilio Puoti, Naples 1831. (Google books). al-Subkī, Tāj al-dīn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb, Muʿīd al-niʿam wa-mubīḍ al-niqam, eds. Muḥammad al-Najjār, Abū Zayd Shalabī, and Muḥammad Abū l-ʿUyūn, Cairo 1948. al-Suyūṭī, Jalāl al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, Ḥusn al-muḥāḍara fī akhbār Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira, 2 vols., Cairo 1968. al-Suyūṭī, Jalāl al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, Ḥusn al-muḥādara fī akhbār Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira, 2 vols., Cairo 1868. al-Suyūṭī, Jalāl al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, Aḥādīth al-ḥisān fī faḍl al-ṭaylasān, ed. Albert Arazi, Jerusalem 1983. Tafur, Pero, Travels and Adventures 1435–1439, London 1926. al-ʿUmarī, Ibn Faḍl Allāh, Masālik al-abṣār fī mamālik al-amṣār, ed. Ayman Fuʾād al-Sayyid, Cairo, 1985. Vecellio, Cesare, De gli habiti antichi e moderni di diversi parti del mondo, Venice 1540. Gallica, Bibliothèque Nationale de France. Van Ghistele, Joos, Le Voyage en Egypte 1482–1483, (IFAO) Cairo 1975. Von Harff, Arnold, The Pilgrimage of Arnold von Harf, ed. and trans. Malcolm Letts, London 1946. al-Washshāʾ, Abū l-Ṭayyib Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq, al-Muwashshā, aw, al-ẓurf wa-lẓurafāʾ, Beirut n.d. Yousefzadeh, Mahnaz trans., Florence’s Embassy to the Sultan of Egypt. An English Translation of Felice Brancacci’s Diary, New York 2018.

Bibliography

215

al-Ẓāhirī, Ghars al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Shāhīn, Zubdat kashf al-mamālik, ed. Paul Ravaisse, Paris 1893, reprinted, Frankfurt 1993. al-Ẓāhirī, Ghars al-Dīn Khalīl ibn Shāhīn, al-Ishārāt fī ʿilm al-ʿibārāt, ed. Sayyid K. Ḥasan, Beirut 1993.



Studies

ʿAbd ar-Rāziq, Aḥmad, La Femme au Temps des Mamlouks en Égypte, Cairo 1973. Alexander, David, ‘Pisanello’s hat. The Costume and Weapons Depicted in Pisanello’s Medal for John VIII Palaeologus ….’ Gladius XXIV (2004), pp. 135–86. Allsen, Thomas T., Commodity and Exchange in the Mongol Empire. A Cultural History of Islamic Textiles, Cambridge 1997. Amitai, Reuven, ‘Mamluks of Mongol Origin and their Role in Early Mamluk Political Life’, Mamluk Studies Review XII/1 (2008), pp. 119–37. http://mamluk.uchicago.edu /MSR_XII-1_2008-Amitai-pp119-137.pdf. Amitai, Reuven, ‘Echoes of the Eurasian Steppe in the Daily Culture of Mamluk Military Society,’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society Third Series, 26, 1/2, (2016) The Mongols and Post-Mongol Asia. Studies in Honour of David O. Morgan, pp. 261–70. Amitai, Reuven and Conermann, Stephan, eds., The Mamluk Sultanate from the Perspective of Regional and Word History, Bonn 2019. Anchassi, Omar, ‘Status Distinctions and Sartorial Difference. Slavery, Sexual Ethics, and the Social Logic of Veiling in Islamic Law’, Islamic Law and Society 28 (2021) pp. 125–55. Arazi, Albert, ‘Noms de vêtements et vêtements d’après al-Aḥādīth al-ḥisān fī faḍl al-ṭaylasān d’al-Suyūṭī’, Arabica 23/2 (1976), pp. 110–51. Arbel, Benjamin, ‘The Last Decades of Venice’s Trade with the Mamluks. Importations into Egypt and Syria’, Mamluk Studies Review VIII/2 (2004), pp. 37–86. Ashtor, Eliyahu, Levant Trade in the Later Middle Ages, Princeton NJ 1983. Ashtor, Eliyahu, ‘L’évolution des prix dans le Proche-Orient à la Basse-Époque,’ Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient (JESHO) 4 (1961), pp. 15–46. Ashtor, Eliyahu, Histoire des prix et des salaires dans l’Orient médiéval, Paris 1969. Ashtor, Eliyahu, ‘The Economic Decline of the Middle East during the Late Middle Ages. An Outline’, reprinted in Eliyahu Ashtor, Technology, Industry and Trade. The Levant versus Europe, 1250–1500, ed. B.Z. Kedar, Oxford 1992, pp. 254–86. Atıl, Esin, Renaissance of Islam. Art of the Mamluks, Washington, D.C. 1981. Atıl, Esin, ‘Mamluk Painting in the Late Fifteenth Century’, Muqarnas 2 (1984), pp. 159–71.

216

Bibliography

Baker, Patricia Leslie, A History of Islamic Court Dress in the Middle East, Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Faculty of Arts), 1986, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. ProQuest Number: 11010439. Baker, Patricia L., Islamic Textiles, London 1995. Banister, Mustafa, The Abbasid Caliphate of Cairo. Out of the Shadows (1261–1517), Edinburgh 2022. Barnes, Ruth, Indian Block-Printed Textiles in Egypt. The Newberry Collection in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 2 vols., Oxford 1997. Barthes, Roland, The Language of Fashion, eds. Andy Stafford and Michael Carter, trans. Andy Stafford, London 2006. Bauden, Frédéric and Dekkiche, Malika, eds., Mamluk Cairo a Crossroads for Embassies. Studies on Diplomacy and Diplomatics, Leiden 2019. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, ‘The Citadel of Cairo. Stage for Mamluk Ceremonial’ , Annales Islamologiques XXIV (1988), pp. 25–79. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, ‘The Baptistère de St. Louis. A Reinterpretation’, Islamic Art III (1988–1989), pp. 3–13. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, ‘European Arts and Crafts at the Mamluk Court’, in Doris Behrens-Abouseif and Anna Contadini, eds., Essays in Honor of J.M. Rogers, Muqarnas 21 (2004), pp. 45–54. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, Cairo of the Mamluks. A history of the Architecture and its Culture. London 2007. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, ‘Craftsmen, Upstarts and Sufis in the late Mamluk period’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (BSOAS) 74/3 (2011), pp. 375–95. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, Practising Diplomacy in the Mamluk Sultanate. Gifts and Material Culture in the Medieval Islamic World, London/New York 2014, revised paperback edition, 2017. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, ‘Mamluk Perceptions of Foreign Arts,’ in Doris BehrensAbouseif, ed., The Arts of the Mamluks in Egypt and Syria. Evolution and Impacts, (Mamlukische Studien), Bonn 2012, pp. 301–18. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, ‘Sultan al-Ghawri and the Arts’, Mamluk Studies Review 6 (2002), pp. 71–94. Chapoutot-Remadi, Mounira, ‘Femmes dans la Ville Mamelūke,’ Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient (JESHO) 38/2 (1995), pp. 145–64. Chevaux et cavaliers arabes dans les arts de l’Orient et d’Occident, (exhibition catalogue), l’Institut du Monde Arabe, Paris 2002. Christ, Georg, Trading Conflicts. Venetian Merchants and Mamluk Officials in Late Medieval Alexandria, Leiden/Boston 2012. Porphyrogennetos, Constantine, The Book of Ceremonies, trans. Ann Moffat and Maxeme Tall, Leiden/Boston 2012.

Bibliography

217

Curatola, Giovanni, ‘Venetian Merchants and Travellers in Alexandria’, in Anthony Hirst and Michael Silk, eds., Alexandria, Real and Imagined, London 2004, pp. 185–98. Darrag, Aḥmad, L’Egypte sous le règne de Barsbay 825–841/1422–1438, Damascus 1961. Denoix, Sylvie, Depaule, J.P., Tuchscherer, M., eds., Le Khan al-Khalili, un centre commercial et artisanal au Caire du XIIIe au XXe siècle, 2 vols., Cairo 1999. Dols, Michael W., The Black Death in the Middle East, Princeton 1977. Diem, Werner, Ehrendes Kleid und ehrendes Wort, Studien zu Tašrīf in Mamlūkischer und Vormamlūkischer Zeit, Würzburg, 2002. Dozy, R.P.A., Dictionnaire détaillé des noms des vêtements chez les Arabes, Amsterdam 1845. Dozy, R.P.A., Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes, 2 vols., Paris 1881. Elbendary, Amina, Crowds and Sultans. Urban Protest in Late Medieval Egypt and Syria, Cairo 2015. Elias, Jamal J., ‘The Sufi Robe (Khirqa) as a Vehicle of Spiritual Authority’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture, New York 2001, pp. 275–90. El Kassem, Shireen, ‘Foreign Aesthetics and their Impact on Mamluk Textiles’ in Bethany Walker and Abdelkader Al-Ghouz, eds., History and Society during the Mamluk Period (1250–1517) (Studies of the Anne-Marie Schimmel Institute for Advanced Study III), Bonn 2021, pp. 257–84. Ettinghausen, Richard, Arab Painting, New York 1977. Frenkel, Miriam, ‘Medieval Alexandria  – Life in a Port City’, Al-Masāq (2014) 26/1 pp. 5–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/09503110.2014.877194. Fuess, Albrecht, ‘Sultans with Horns. The Political Significance of Headgear in the Mamluk Empire’, Mamluk Studies Review XII/2 (2008), pp. 71–94. Garcin, Jean-Claude, ‘The Regime of the Circassian Mamlūks’, in Carl F. Petry, ed., The Cambridge History of Egypt, Volume One. Islamic Egypt, Cambridge 2008, pp. 290–317. Geoffroy, Éric, Le Soufisme en Égypte et en Syrie sous les derniers Mamelouks et les premiers Ottomans. Orientations spirituelles et enjeux culturels, Damascus 1995. George, Alain F., ‘The Illustrations of the “Maqāmāt” and the shadow play’, Muqarnas 28 (2011), pp. 1–42. Goitein, S.D., A Mediterranean Society. The Jewish communities of the Arab world as portrayed in the documents of the Cairo Geniza, vol. IV. Daily Life, Berkeley/London 1987. Golombek, Lisa, ‘The Draped Universe of Islam’ in Priscilla P. Soucek, ed., Content and Context of Visual Arts in the Islamic World. Papers from a Colloquium in Memory of Richard Ettinghausen, Pennsylvania/London 1988, pp. 26–38. Golombek, Lisa and Gervers, Veronica, ‘Tirāẓ Fabrics in the Royal Ontario Museum’, in Veronica Gervers, ed., Studies in Textile History in Memory of Harold B. Burnham, Toronto 1977, pp. 82–126.

218

Bibliography

Gordon, Stewart, ‘A World of Investiture’, in Gordon Stewart, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture (The New Middle Ages), New York 2001, pp. 1–19. Haarmann, Ulrich W., ‘“Grosser Vater Mond” und “Schwarzer Löwenjunge”. Eine mongolisch-kiptschakische Ursprungssage in arabischer Überlieferung’, in Stephan Conermann and Hans Kusbergeds, eds., Die Mongolen in Asien und Europa, Frankfurt, 1997, pp. 121–37. Haarmann, Ulrich W., ‘Alṭun Ḫan und Čingiz Ḫān bei den ägyptischen Mamluken’, Der Islam 51 (1974), pp. 1–36. Haarmann, Ulrich W., ‘Ideology and History, Identity and Alterity. The Arab Image of the Turk from the Abbasids to Modern Egypt’, International Journal of Middle East Studies (IJMES) 20 (1988), pp. 175–96. Haddawy, Husain, trans., The Arabian Nights. Based on the Text Edited by Muhsin Mahdi, New York/London 1990. Hambly, Gavin R.G., ‘From Baghdad to Bukhara, from Ghazna to Delhi. The Khilʿa Ceremony in the Transmission of Kingly Pomp and Circumstance’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture, New York 2001, pp. 193–222. Heyd, Wilhelm, Histoire du commerce du levant au moyen âge, 2 vols., Leipzig 1885–86. Hofer, Nathan, The Popularisation of Sufism in Ayyubid an Mamluk Egypt, 1173–1325, Edinburgh 2015. Holt, Peter, ‘An-Nāṣir Muḥammad b. Qalāwun (684–741/1285–1341). His Ancestry, Kindred and Affinity’, in U. Vermeulen and D. De Smet, eds., Egypt and Syria in the Fatimid, Ayyubid and Mamluk Eras, Leuven 1995, pp. 313–24. Igarashi, Daisuke, ‘The Office of Ustādār al-ʿĀliya in the Circassian Mamluk Era’, in Yuval Ben-Bassat, ed., Developing Perspectives in Mamluk History. Essays in Honor of Amalia Levanoni, Leiden 2017, pp. 115–42. Irwin, Robert, ‘Futuwwa. Chivalry and Gangsterism in Medieval Cairo’, Muqarnas 21 (2004), (Essays in Honor of J.M. Rogers), pp. 161–70. Irwin, Robert, ‘How Circassian were the Circassian Mamluks?’, in Reuven Amitai and Stephan Conermann, eds., The Mamluk Sultanate from the Perspective of Regional and Word History, Bonn 2019, pp. 111–24. Irwin, Robert, ‘Gunpowder and Firearms in the Mamluk Sultanate Reconsidered’, in Michael Winter and Amalia Levanoni, eds., The Mamluks in Egyptian and Syrian Politics and Society, London/Boston 2004, pp. 117–42. Jacoby, David, ‘Oriental Silks go West. A Declining Trade in the Later Middle Ages’, in Catarina Schmidt Arcangeli and Gerhard Wolf, eds., Islamic Artefacts in the Mediterranean World, Venice 2010, pp. 71–88. Jacoby, David, ‘Silk Economics and Cross-Cultural Artistic Interaction. Byzantium, the Muslim World, and the Christian West,’ Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol. 58 (2004), pp. 197–240.

Bibliography

219

Juvin, Carine, ‘Civilian Elite and Metalwork. A view from the Edge’, in Bethany Walker and Abdelkader Al-Ghouz, eds., History and Society during the Mamluk Period (1250–1517). Studies of the Anne-Marie Schimmel Institute for Advanced Study III, Bonn 2021, pp. 285–318. Kindinger, Judith, ‘Bidʿa or sunna. The ṭaylasān as Contested Garment in the Mamlūk Period (Discussions between al-Suyūṭi and Others)’, in Antonella Ghersetti, ed. Al-Suyūṭī, a Polymath of the Mamlūk Period, Leiden/London 2016, pp. 64–80. Labib, Subhi, Handelsgeschichte Ägyptens im Spätmittelalter (1171–1517), Wiesbaden 1965. Lane, Edward W., An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, The Hague/London 1895, repr. Cairo 1978. Lapidus, Ira M., Muslim Cities in the Later Middle Ages, Cambridge 1984. Little, Donald P., ‘The Ḥaram Documents as Sources for the Arts and Architecture of the Mamluk Period’, Muqarnas 2 (1984), pp. 61–72. Little, Donald P., ‘Notes on Aytamiš, a Mongol Mamluk’, in Die Islamische Welt zwischen Mittelalter und Neuzeit. Festschrift für Hans Robert Roemer zum 65. Geburtstag, Beirut 1979, pp. 387–401. Loiseau, Julien, Les Mamelouks. XIIIe–XVIe siècle. Une expérience du pouvoir dans l’Islam médiéval, Paris 2014. Loiseau, Julien, ‘The City of Two Hundred Mosques. Friday Worship and its Spread in the Monuments of Mamluk Cairo’, in Doris Behrens-Abouseif, ed., The Arts of the Mamluks in Egypt and Syria. Evolution and Impact, Bonn 2012, pp. 183–202. Loiseau, Julien, ‘Frankish Captives in Mamlūk Cairo’, al-Masāq 23/1 (2011), pp. 37–52. Lutfi, Huda, Al-Quds al-Mamlūkiyya. A history of Mamlūk Jerusalem based on the Ḥaram documents, Berlin 1985. Lutfi, Huda, ‘A Documentary Source for the Study of Material Life. A Specimen of the Ḥaram Estate Inventories from al-Quds in 1393 A.D.’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 135/1 (1985), pp. 213–26. Mack, Rosamond E., Bazaar to Piazza. Islamic Trade and Italian Art, 1300–1600, Berkeley/London 2002. Mackie, Louise, ‘Towards an Understanding of Mamluk Silks. National and International Considerations’, Muqarnas 2 (1984), pp. 127–46. Martel-Thoumian, Bernadette, Les civils et l’administration dans l’État militaire mamlūk, IXe/XVe siècle, Damascus 1992. Mauder, Christian, In the Sultan’s Salon. Learning, Religion and Rulership at the Mamluk Court of Qāniṣawh al-Ghawrī (r. 1501–1516), 2 vols., Leiden/Boston 2021. Marzouk, Muhammad Abdelaziz, History of Textile Industry in Alexandria, 331 B.C.– 1517 A.D., Alexandria 1955. Mayer, L.A., ‘Das Schriftwappen der Mamlukensultane,’ Jahrbuch der Asiatischen Kunst 2/2 (1925), pp. 183–7.

220

Bibliography

Mayer, L.A., Saracenic Heraldry, Oxford 1933. Mayer, L.A., Mamluk Costume, Geneva 1952. Meinecke, Michael, Zur Mamlukischen Heraldik, Mainz/Rhein 1972. Micklewright, Nancy, ‘Clothes make the Man’, Ars Orientalis vol. 47 (2017), New Research on Dress Across Asia, https://www.jstor.org/stable/i40226201. Müller-Wiener, Martina, Eine Stadtgeschichte Alexandrias von 564/1169 bis in die Mitte des 9./15. Jahrhunderts. Verwaltung und innerstädtische Organisationsformen, Berlin 1992. Northrup, Linda S., From Slave to Sultan. The Career of Al-Manṣūr Qalāwūn and the Consolidation of Mamluk Rule in Egypt and Syria (678–689 A.H./1279–1290 A.D.), Stuttgart 1998. Onimus, Clément, Les maîtres du jeu. Pouvoir et violence politique à l’aube du Sultanat mamlouk circassien (784–815/1382–1412), Paris 2019. Pedani, Maria Pia, Gentile Bellini and the East, Venice 2016. http://www.levantine heritage.com/pdf/Venetian_Mamluk_mode_and_Gentile_Bellini.pdf. Petry, Carl F. ‘Robing Ceremonials in Late Mamluk Egypt. Hallowed Traditions, Shifting Protocols’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture, New York 2001, pp. 353–377. Petry, Carl F., Protectors or Praetorians? The last Mamlūk Sultans and Egypt’s Waning as a Great Power, New York 1994. Petry, Carl F., The Mamluk Sultanate. A History, Cambridge 2022. Piponnier, Françoise and Mane, Perrine, Dress in the Middle Ages, New Haven 1997. Rabbat, Nasser O., The Citadel of Cairo. A New Interpretation of Royal Mamluk Architecture, Leiden/New York/Köln 1995. Raby, Julian, Venice, Dürer, and the Oriental Mode, London 1982. Rapoport, Yossef, Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society, Cambridge 2007. Raymond, André and Wiet, Gaston, Les Marchés du Caire. Traduction annotée du texte de Maqrīzī, Cairo 1979. Rice, D.S., The Baptistère de Saint Louis. A Masterpiece of Islamic Metal Work, Paris 1953. Rogers, J.M., ‘Evidence for Mamluk–Mongol Relations’, in Colloque international sur l’histoire du Caire (1969), Cairo 1972, pp. 385–403. Rogers, J.M., ‘To and Fro. Aspects of Mediterranean Trade and Consumption in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, in Villes au Levant. Hommage à André Raymond. Revue du Monde musulman et de la Méditerranée 56 (1990–1992), pp. 57–74. Rosenthal, Franz, ‘A Note on the Mandīl’, in Franz Rosenthal, ed., Four essays on art and literature in Islam (The L.A. Mayer Memorial Studies in Islamic Art and Archaeology 2), Leiden 1971, pp. 163–99. Rosenthal, Margaret F., ‘Cultures of Clothing in Later Medieval and Early Modern Europe’, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, downloaded from http://

Bibliography

221

read.dukeupress.edu/jmems/article-pdf/39/3/459/435933/JMEMS393-01_Rosenthal .pdf0, 27 October 2021. Sabra, Adam Abdelhamid, Poverty and Charity in Medieval Islam. Mamluk Egypt 1250–1517, Cambridge 2000. Salīm, ʿAbd al-Azīz, Tārīkh al-Iskandariyya wa-ḥaḍāratihā fī l-ʿaṣr al-islāmī, Alexandria 1982. Salinger, Gerard, ‘Was the Futūwa an Oriental Form of Chivalry?’ in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 94/5 (1950), pp. 481–493. https://www.jstor.org /stable/3143614. Sanders, Paula, ‘Robes of Honor in Fatimid Egypt’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture, New York 2001, pp. 225–39. Sardi, Maria, ‘Foreign Influences on Mamluk Textiles. The Formation of a New Aesthetic’, in Nikolaos Vryzidis, ed., The Hidden Life of Textiles in the medieval and Early Modern Mediterranean, Turnhout 2020, pp. 83–118. Sauer, Rebecca, ‘The Textile Performance of the Written Word: Islamic Robes of Honour (khilaʿ)’, in Susanne Enderwitz and Rebecca Sauer, eds., Communication and Materiality. Written and Unwritten Communication in Pre-Modern Societies, Berlin/Boston 2015, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110371758-008. Serjeant, R.B., Islamic textiles. Material for a history up to the Mongol conquest, Beirut 1972. Shea, Eiren L., Mongol Court Dress, Identity Formation, and Global Exchange, New York/London 2020. Shoshan, Boaz, Popular Culture in Medieval Cairo, Cambridge 1993. Sotheby’s (Firm), Arts of the Islamic World, London 2018. Sourdel, Dominique, ‘Robes of Honor in ʿAbbasid Baghdad during the Eighth to Eleventh Centuries’, in Stewart Gordon, ed., Robes and Honor. The Medieval World of Investiture, New York 2011, pp. 137–45. Spallanzani, Marco, Carpet Studies. 1300–1600, Genoa 2016. Spallanzani, Marco and Bruscoli, Fransco Guidi, Tessuti di Seta tra Frienze e Il Levanti (ca 1350–1550). Le Fonti, Florence 2023. Springberg-Hinsen, Monika, Die Ḫilʿa. Studien zur Geschichte des geschenkten Gewandes im islamischen Kulturkreis (Mitteilungen zur Sozial- und Kulturgeschichte der islamischen Welt 7), Würzburg 2000. Stillman, Yedida K., ‘The Importance of the Cairo Geniza Manuscripts for the History of Medieval Female Attire’, International Journal of Middle East Studies vol. 7, No. 4 (1976), pp. 579–89. Stillman, Yedida K. and Sanders, Paula, ‘Ṭirāz’, Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd edition) vol. X, Leiden 2000, pp. 534–8. Stillmann, N.A., ‘Khilʿa’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, (2nd edition) vol. V, Leiden 1986, pp. 6–7.

222

Bibliography

Stilt, Kristen, Islamic Law in Action: Authority, Discretion and Everyday Experiences in Mamluk Egypt, Oxford 2011. Suriano, Carlo Maria, ‘The Mamluk Landscape. Carpet Weaving in Egypt and Syria Under Sultan Qaitbay’, Hali 134/35 (2004), pp. 94–105. Taeschner, Franz, ‘Die islamischen Futuwwabünde. Das Problem Ihrer Entstehung und die Grundlinien ihrer Geschichte’, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 87/1–2 (1934), pp. 6–49. Trésors des Fatimides du Caire, (exhibition catalogue), l’Institut du Monde Arabe, Paris 1998. Vallet, Eric, ‘Du Système mercantile à l’ordre Mamelouke. Les ambassades entre l’Egypte mamelūke et Yemen rasūlide (VII–IXe/XIIIe–XVe siècle)’, in Les relations diplomatiques au Moyen Âge. Formes et enjeux. XLIe Congrès de la SHMESP, Paris 2011, pp. 269–301. Van Steenbergen, Jo, ‘Ritual, Politics and the City in Mamluk Cairo. The Bayna al-Qaṣrayn as a Mamluk “lieu de mémoire”, 1250–1382’, in A. Beihammer, S. Constantinou, and M. Parani, eds., Court Ceremonies and Rituals of Power in Byzantium and the Medieval Mediterranean, Leiden/Boston 2013, pp. 225–76. Van Steenbergen, Jo, ‘The Amir Yalbughā al-Khāṣṣakī, the Qalāwūnid Sultanate, and the Cultural Matrix of Mamlūk Society. A Reassessment of Mamlūk Politics in the 1360s’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 131/3 (2011), pp. 423–43. Véniel, Florent, Le Costume médiéval de 1320 à 1480, Saint-Martin-des Entrées 2021. Walker, Bethany, ‘Rethinking Mamluk Textiles’, Mamluk Studies Review 4 (2000), pp. 167–215. Wiet, Gaston, Répertoire chronologique d’épigraphie arabe, Paris 1934. Yaman, Bahattin, ‘Fit for the Court: Ottoman Royal Costumes and their Tailors from the Sixteenth to Eighteen Century,’ Ars Orientalis 42 (2012), pp. 89–101.

Index Page numbers in bold refer to illustrations. Arabic terms are listed in their singular forms. Abbasid caliphate emblematic color of 16, 30–31 establishment of 22–23 futuwwa ceremony and 31 khilʿa practice of 52, 56 Mamluk sultanate and 24, 30 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ ibn Khalīl 81–82, 193 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Qāḍī 58, 135 ʿAbd ar-Rāziq, Aḥmad 3 ʿAbd al-Rāziq ibn Abī l-Faraj 186 Abū Bakr, al-Manṣūr, Mamluk sultan 66 Abū l-Fidāʾ, emir 61–62, 69–70 Abū l-Khayr al-Naḥḥās 190, 193 Abū Saʿīd, Ilkhanid ruler 24, 77 administrative dignitaries clothing of colors of 51, 134 Egyptian vs. Syrian 134 farajiyya 134 ʿimāma 132, 134–135 khilʿa for in general 41–42, 80, 134 Ottoman 51 receiving of 59–60, 77–78, 82 rejecting official outfits 191–192 social mobility of 186–188, 189, 190 see also viziers Adorno, Anselme 108, 115, 125, 143, 170, 181 al-Afḍal Muḥammad, emir 70, 71 Aḥmad, al-Muʾayyad, Mamluk sultan 19, 65 Aḥmad, al-Nāṣir, Mamluk sultan 66, 71 al-ʿAjamī, Naṣr Allāh 191 Alexander the Great 119 Alexandria Lusignan’s sack of 35–36, 88 rebellion of 1327 194 textile industry in. See Dār al-Ṭirāz; textile industry Ānūk (son of al-Nāṣir Muḥammad) 60, 70 Aqbars (amber dealer) 190 Aqbughā ʿAbd al-Wāḥid, emir 154 Arazi, Albert 3, 7 Arbel, Benjamin 4, 126, 165

architecture 34 archival sources 5–6 Ashtor, Eliahu 4 Atıl, Esin 4–5 aṭlas (red silk satin) 66–67, 71 aṭlasayn (double silk satin) mutammar 73–74 robes of 70, 71, 81–82, 187, 188 use of term 8, 66 Aydakīn, emir 205 Aydughdī al-ʿAzīzī, emir 11 Aydughmish, governor 61 al-ʿAynī, Badr al-Dīn Maḥmūd 25 Azbak, emir 145 Baʿalbakī cotton clothing of 48, 75 fabric 36, 141, 195, 203, 206 production/trade 195 wearing of, as sign of humility 11 bādhahanj (‘wind-catcher’) 132, 134 badla (sets of cloaks & over-cloaks) 81 bāhī, use of term 97–98 Bahrām, Master 207 Bahri sultanate/period 30–37 in general 2, 38 clothing during in general 30–31, 32–35, 36–37 vs. Circassian period 179–180 of dignitaries 77–78 footwear 109 fur in 42 military aristocracy 66–72 names of 23 textiles during, jūkh 138 Baktamūr, emir 60, 74, 202 balzo (bonnets) 163–164 Baptism of the Selenites (Carpaccio) 181, 182 Baptistère de St Louis basin 174–175, 175, 176 al-Bāqī workshop 55, 207 Barbadak, emir 185 Barqūq, al-Ẓāhir, Mamluk sultan bans by on Mamluk markets 22, 40 on nawrūz 18 on zamṭ 123

224 Barqūq, al-Ẓāhir, Mamluk sultan (cont.) influence of on ceremonial practices 40–41, 43 on Mamluk dress culture 27, 39, 41–43, 80–81 on saddle shape 109 khilʿa and bestowing of 41, 59, 65, 73, 80–81 buying of 43, 55 outfits of 122 patronage by 188 reforms by 40, 41 barrettes (French headdresses) 125–126 Barsbāy, al-Ashraf, Mamluk sultan bans by, on nawrūz 18 conquest of Cyprus by 45, 74 influence of, on trade and industry 44– 45, 89 khilʿa and, bestowing of 45, 57, 62, 74, 79, 81 outfits of 105 Shāh Rūkh and 53 wife of 154 Barthes, Roland 1 bashkhāna (bed-curtains) 87 Baybars, al-Muẓaffar, Mamluk sultan 57, 59 Baybars, al-Ẓāhir, Mamluk sultan 21, 22, 30–32, 56 Baydara al-Manṣūrī, emir 33–34 bed-curtains (bashkhāna) 87 Bedouins, clothing of 80, 123, 185 Bellini, Gentile 163, 181, 182 Bellini, V. Giovanni 163, 181, 182 Belliniano, V. 181 Belon, Pierre 156, 162, 164 belts of commoners 145 with extensions 173, 174, 176, 176 of gold 56–57, 68, 69, 70, 107, 188, 196 of honorific outfit 56–57, 69–70 of military uniforms 69, 106–107, 111, 126, 127, 180 bestowing of khilʿa in general 24 Abbasid practice 52, 56 as charitable donations 62 on dismissal as deputy 59 failure to materialize 62

Index for fun 62 guilds and 63 investiture of sultans and 30, 53 laxity in 63 more than one robe 59–60 occasions for 56, 57–59 origins of 52 purpose of 53 refraining from 61 as repeating practice 53 retrieving of 37, 60 by sultans/dignitaries Barqūq 41, 59, 65, 73, 80–81 Barsbāy 45, 57, 62, 74, 79, 81 Baybars 56 emirs 60–61 al-Ghawrī 59, 76–77, 83 governors 54, 61 Īnāl 59–60, 61, 71, 73–74, 75 Janbalāṭ 75 Jaqmaq 46–47, 58–59, 61, 82 Khushqadam 57, 61, 63–64, 76, 77 al-Manṣūr Ḥājjī 59 Muḥammad, al-Nāṣir 34, 57, 58, 59, 69–70, 74 al-Mustaʿīn bi-llāh 75 Qalāwūn 33, 69, 87 Qāyṭbāy 47–48, 58, 64, 76, 82, 114–115 Shaykh, al-Muʾayyad 75, 82 from sultan’s wardrobe 76–77 to Syria 54 Blacas ewer 172, 173, 176 black as color for clothing of Abbasid caliphate 16, 30–31 of Mamluk sultanate 16, 65–66 of mourning 20 of women 159, 169, 170 Black Death 14, 192 blue 16, 69, 145, 159 bonnets balzo 163–164 ʿiṣāba 123 ṭāqiyya 117, 122–123, 162, 163, 164, 182 ṭarṭūr 19, 150–151 zamṭ 28, 50, 116, 117, 123, 124, 125–127, 125, 126, 127

Index The Book of Ceremonies (Porphyrogennetos) 26 boots 109, 125, 143, 169, 170 bowls 97–98, 100, 101 Breydenbach, Bernhard von 105, 181 brigandines 108, 115 brocade (zarkash) 33, 68, 86–87, 204 see also nakhkh; ṭard waḥsh; ṭirāz/ṭirāz bands brocade fittings (tarkība zarkash) 68 Brocquière, Bertrandon de la 186 bughluṭāq (cloaks) 35, 71–72, 134 see also salāriyya/salārī al-Bulqīnī, Sarāj al-Dīn 161 Buluk, emir 60 bunduqī, use of term 165 al-Burda (Mantle Ode) 15 burda (woolen wraps) 15, 26, 30, 53 bureaucrats. See administrative dignitaries burglaries/robberies 203, 204–206 al-Būṣīrī 15, 53 caftans (qufṭān) 50–51, 160 Cairo in general 207–209 Citadel of 24, 34, 41, 49–50 conquest by Ottomans 50–51 textile markets of 196, 197–201, 209 Cairo Geniza, documents from 6, 80, 93, 138 caliphs, clothing of 16–17, 30–31, 65–66, 80 see also Abbasid caliphate; under specific caliphs caps. See kalawta caps, of silk 127–129, 128, 129, 130–131 carnivals 18 Carpaccio, Victor 120, 125, 181 carpets 41, 48, 197, 207 ceremonial practices bestowing of khilʿa. See khilʿa Citadel of Cairo’s role in 24, 34, 41, 49–50 influences on of Barqūq 40–41, 43 of al-Ghawrī 49–50 of Qāyṭbāy 48 certificates (ijāza) 136 charitable donations 62, 206 children, clothing of 142

225 Chinoiseries 94, 95, 95 Christ, Georg 4 Christians converting to Islam 61, 185, 189 dress regulations for 13–14 receiving of khilʿa by 61, 63 social mobility of 189 Circassian sultanate/period 38–50 clothing during in general 41–42, 44, 46–47, 48, 49 vs. Bahri period 179–180 changes in 108 of civilian dignitaries 77–79 European influences on 165 kalawta 41, 113 kāmiliyya. See kāmiliyya of military aristocracy 72–77 takhfīfa 122 ṭāqiyya. See ṭāqiyya language of 23 sultans of. See under specific sultans Citadel of Cairo 24, 34, 41, 49–50 civilians. See administrative dignitaries; commoners; judicial dignitaries; religious dignitaries; women cloaks/over-cloaks sets of. See badla see also bughluṭāq; farajiyya; qabāʾ fawqānī; qabāʾ islāmī; qabāʾ tatarī; salāriyya/salārī clogs 154 clothing/garments archival sources of 5–6 of Bedouins 80, 123, 185 of caliphs 16–17, 30–31, 65–66, 80 character features and 21 as charitable donations 206 of civilian elite administrative dignitaries. See administrative dignitaries judicial dignitaries. See judicial dignitaries religious dignitaries. See religious dignitaries colors of. See colors of commoners. See commoners with diagonal fastening 107, 110, 111, 172–173, 173, 174, 176

226 clothing/garments (cont.) as diplomatic exchanges. See under diplomatic exchanges in dreams 15–16 during epidemics/pandemics 192, 204–206 European style 164–165, 166 footwear. See footwear of foreigners 185 headdresses. See headdresses inscriptions on. See inscriptions jewels on 151, 154, 156 on Mamluk artifacts 172–177, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177 in Mamluk mss 178–183 material evidence of 5 of men. See men’s clothing of military establishment. See military uniforms narrative sources on 6 price inflation and 205 renting out of 13, 198 repairing of 198 rituals and 19–21, 31 stealing of 204–205 of Sufis. See under Sufis of sultans. See under sultans as symbol of status 26, 132, 169, 208 tailoring of 13, 88, 89, 142, 170 talismanic meaning of 14 tearing of 19 terminology of. See terminology urban customs and 17–19 visual sources on 6–7 of viziers 59, 60, 77, 78 of women. See women’s clothing see also under specific names of garment coinage 54, 85 colors in clothing caftans 51 of civilian elite 17, 41, 51, 81, 82–83, 134 of commoners 145, 159 to distinguish non-Muslims 13 kalawta 33, 106 kāmiliyya 75, 83 khilʿa 54–55

Index malūṭa 50, 142–143 qabāʾ 36, 103 salāriyya/salārī 48, 75–76 symbolism of 15–16 of women 159, 169, 170 see also black; blue; green; white; yellow commoners clothing of in general 136, 208–209 bughluṭāq 134 children 142 colors in 145, 159 craftsmen 145–146, 147, 148 European eyewitnesses on 142–143 European illustrations of 116, 182 fabrics used for 138–139, 141 farajiyya 132 jūkha 139, 141 kūfiyya/kawāfī 90, 146 malūṭa 125, 143–144 mandīl 142 merchants 137 terminology of 137–138 ṭirāz-like bands on 141–142 trousers 138, 139, 140 social mobility of 189–190 converts, to Islam 61, 185, 189 cotton. See Baʿalbakī cotton; kanji fabric couples, sleeping 159 craftsmen 145, 207 criminals 19, 204–205 cupbearers 110, 112 Curatola, Giovanni 91 al-Damāmīnī, Badr al-Dīn Muḥammad 41, 90 Damirdāsh, Ilkhanid prince 102 Dār al-Ṭirāz (Alexandria) in general 32, 194 economic crises and 89–90 final tailoring of clothing and 55, 88, 89 nāẓir al-khāṣṣ and 88 production at of fabrics 86 importance of 87 of khilʿa 55 restructuring of 90

227

Index Dār al-Ṭirāz (Alexandria) (cont.) production at (cont.) of ṭirāz 85–86 of ṭirāz bands 86 of zarkash 86–87 Qalāwūn and 32, 87 Shaʿbān and 36 see also Sharabshīyīn market al-Dawādārī, Ibn Aybak 8, 71–72, 134 designer workshops (rassāmīn) 96–97, 198 dhawāʾib (tips or tails) 132 diagonal fastening, clothing with 107, 110, 111, 172–173, 173, 174, 176 Dictionnaire des Vêtements (Dozy) 7 Diem, Werner 4 diplomatic exchanges in general 23 of clothing by al-Ghawrī 83, 91 by Muḥammad, al-Nāṣir 35, 83 by Shaykh 93 by governors of Syria 203 products of the Dār al-Ṭirāz as 91 diplomatic networks 24 disguises 185, 186 dishdāsha 142 Domenico (Venetian) 165 double silk satin. See aṭlasayn Dozy, R.P.A. 7, 68, 69, 72, 134, 146n90, 159n37, 160 drawers. See sirwāl dreams, interpretation of 15–16 dress code/culture of Christian Ethiopia 28 of Islam 9–12 of Mamluks. See Malumk dress code dresses (ghilāla) 160 droughts 105 dying, of fabrics 13 embroidery, epigraphic. See ṭirāz/ṭirāz bands emirs clothing of 70–71, 119 hoarding by 202–203 khilʿa and, bestowing of 60–61 see also governors; under specific emirs epidemics/pandemics 105–106, 192, 204–206 epigraphic embroidery. See ṭirāz/ṭirāz bands

Episode from the Life of St. Marc (Mansueti) 117 Ethiopia 28 Europeans clothing styles of 164–165, 166 Mamluk class and 25, 185 in Mamluk sultanate 165 extravagance in men’s clothing 11 in women’s clothing 12, 151–152, 168, 169 fabrics. See textiles/fabrics Faraj, al-Nāṣir, Mamluk sultan 43–44, 105, 139, 191 farajiyya (cloaks) 16, 41, 66, 132, 134 faṣadiyya (scarfs) 160 Fāṭima (widow of Barsbāy) 188–189 Fatimid caliphate/period 18, 85, 171, 177 floral motifs, Chinese 94, 95, 95 footwear 109, 125, 143, 154, 169, 170 foreigners, clothing of 185 Frenkel, Miriam 201 Frescobaldi 143, 169 funerals 14, 20, 87 funerary complexes 23, 33, 104 furnishings, of zarkash 86–87 furs as basic commodity 42 trade in 195, 198–199 using/wearing of in general 182 in cloaks 67 condemnation of 12 in dreams 16 increase in 42 by women 161 furūsiyya manuscripts in general 179–180 boots in 109 headdresses worn over long hair in 110, 111 malūṭa in 50 takhfīfa in 50 zamṭ in 125, 126, 127 futuwwa (chivalric military movement) 31 gaiters 106, 170 gems. See jewelry/jewels

228 al-Ghawrī, al-Ashraf Qānṣuh, Mamluk sultan battle dress of 50 bestowing of khilʿa by 59, 76–77, 83 burglaries/robberies and 205 craftsmen employed by 207 diplomatic gifts by 83, 91 influence of on ceremonial practices 25, 49–50 on dress code 49–50 outfits of 103, 115–116, 118, 119, 145 palace treasuries and 203 religious complex of 199, 200 salāriyya/salārī of 76 on turbaned men 122 wife of 64 mention of 20 Ghazān, Ilkhanid ruler 24 ghilāla (dresses) 160 Ghistele, Joos Van 108, 115 gold/golden belts 56–57, 68, 69, 70, 107, 188, 196 brocade 68 saddles 42, 43, 46, 48, 55, 59–60, 66, 188 used in fabrics 99 ṭirāz 42, 43, 70, 73, 74–75, 87, 179 Golombek, Lisa 1 Gordon, Stewart 4 governors gifts to sultan 88, 91, 154, 199, 203 khilʿa and bestowing of 54, 61 receiving of 45, 54–55, 59, 68, 70, 71–72, 74, 75, 81–82 robbing spree of 205 see also emirs; under specific governors green as color of clothing of civil elite 41, 81, 82 of military 69 of sultans 66 symbolism of 16 symbolism of 16 grooms 145, 148 guilds 63 ḥaḍāra (sedentary culture) 26 hair length 67, 110, 110, 111, 112, 176

Index Ḥājjī, al-Muẓaffar, Mamluk Sutan 150, 151–152 Hājjī, al-Ṣāliḥ, Mamluk sultan 37 Hambly, G. 53 Ḥanafī jurists 132 Ḥanbalī jurists 133 Hānī (judge) 188–189 Ḥaram documents 5–6, 80, 138, 159, 201 al-Harawī (chief judge) 187 Harff, Arnold von 108, 113, 114, 124, 159, 163, 170, 182 hayʾa, use of term 102 head bands (ʿiṣāba) 151, 151, 152, 153 head-cover (khimār) 9 headdresses bonnets. See bonnets of civilians European women 164–165 French 125–126 ʿimāma. See ʿimāma Mamluk women. See under women’s clothing Sufis 12 of military/aristocracy hair length and 67, 110, 110, 111, 112, 176 kalawta. See kalawta on Mamluk artifacts 174, 175, 176 multi-pointed 115, 116, 116, 117 naʿūra 28, 45, 103, 115–116, 118–119, 118 sharbūsh 33, 55, 70, 113, 175–176, 175, 176, 180 silk caps 127–129, 128, 129, 130–131 as symbol of status 109 takhfīfa. See takhfīfa ṭāqiyya 122–123, 162, 163, 164, 182 variety of shapes 119–120, 120, 121 zamṭ 50, 116, 117, 123, 124, 125–127, 125, 126, 127 taking off of 19–20 worn by criminals 19 see also ʿimāma heads, uncovering of 19–20 hierarchy of khilʿa in general 53 for civilians 77–79

Index hierarchy (cont.) of khilʿa (cont.) for military, in Bahri period 66–72 for military, in Circassian period 72–77 of military uniforms 107 hippodromes 34, 39, 49, 104 ḥisba guidelines 6, 10, 11, 12–13, 86, 161, 198 hoarding 202–203 honorific robes. See khilʿa horse riding 189 horse trappings 43, 108, 109 see also saddles horsemen on Baptistère de St Louis basin 175 on Blacas ewer 172, 173, 176 on bottle of enameled glass 173, 174 in furūsiyya manuscripts 179–180 in mss 111, 127 on pilgrim bottles 176, 177 horses, as part of khilʿa 55 humility 11, 122, 144–145 hunting motifs. See ṭard waḥsh Ibn Abī l-Raddād 77 Ibn Baṭṭūṭa 17n51, 134 Ibn Daqīq al-ʿĪd, Taqiyy al-Dīn 79 Ibn al-Furāt, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥīm 41 Ibn Ghurāb, Ibrāhīm, emir 191 Ibn Ghurāb, Saʿd al-Dīn 41–42 Ibn Ḥajar 28, 41 Ibn al-Ḥājj, Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad 11, 12, 79, 128, 155, 167 Ibn al-Hayṣam, Tāj al-Dīn 186 Ibn Iyās, Aḥmad on ban on zamṭ 123 on Dār al-Ṭirāz 85 on double-faced cloaks 73 on Faraj 44 on fur trade 198 on al-Ghawrī 49, 77 on kāmiliyya 80 on khilʿa 52, 62 on Qāyṭbāy 48 on Shaʿbān 36 on shāsh wa-qumāsh 204 on tafṣīla 160

229 on takhfīfa with horns 115, 116, 118–119 on textile production 29 Ibn al-Jabbās, ʿAbd al-Wahhāb 187 Ibn Khaldūn, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Muḥammad 26, 85, 86, 92, 185 Ibn al-Maqsī 188 Ibn al-Shahīd, Aḥmad 187 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Abū l-Muḥāsin Yūsuf on Arabic language 23 on Barqūq 39 on Barsbāy 45 on ceremonial dress 28 on Faraj 43–44 on Īnāl 104 on Jaqmaq 46–47, 83 on kāmiliyya 81 on khilʿa 52, 57, 63, 70, 71 on Kushqadam 47 on malūṭa 106, 144 on rejection of official outfits 192 on social climbing 190 on takhfīfa 114 terminology of 8 on trousseaus 154 Ibn Taymiyya 32 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Muḥammad 8, 18, 54, 75, 82, 84, 204 Ibn al-Ukhuwwa, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad 12–13, 161 Ibn Zanbūr 107, 202 Ibn al-Zaytūnī 63 Ibrāhīm Urnān, Shams al-Dīn 191 ijāza (certificates) 136 Ilkhanid dynasty 24, 95, 102 ʿimāma (turbans) in general 8, 122 of administrative dignitaries 132, 134–135 Arab vs. Persian 11 of judicial dignitaries 132 long tips or tails hanging from 132, 133 of non-Muslims 13 Ottoman 50 of the Prophet 9 protective charms and 135 as sign of humility 122 significance of 109 weight of 134

230 Īnāl, Mamluk sultan dealing with thieves 205 khilʿa and, bestowing of 59–60, 61, 71, 73–74, 75 outfits of 104 price inflation and 205 wife of 154 mention of 46 inflation 144, 196, 205 inscriptions on bowls 97–98, 100 on clothing, before dyeing 13 on facade of sultan Qalāwūn’s complex 93, 100 on pen boxes 100, 101 in praise of ṭirāz 100, 101 of sultan’s names in general 92–93 on brigandine 108, 115 on silk 94 on ṭirāz bands 86, 87, 92–93 see also ṭirāz/ṭirāz bands investiture. See tashrīfa Irwin, Robert 165 ʿiṣāba (head bands) 151, 151, 152, 153 ʿiṣāba (tall bonnets) 123, 162 Islam converts to 61, 185, 189 dress code in 9–12 Ismāʿīl, al-Ṣāliḥ, Mamluk sultan 151 Ittifāq (black slave-girl and musician) 151–152 izār (wraps) 9, 156, 159 Jacoby, David 95 jallābiyya 142, 145, 170 Janbalāṭ, Mamluk sultan 75 janda, use of term 8 Jānibak al-Ẓāhirī, emir 75 Jaqmaq, al-Ẓāhir, Mamluk sultan khilʿa and bestowing of 46–47, 58–59, 61, 82 retrieving of 60 name inscribed on clothing 108, 115 outfits of 83 patronage by 190 wives of 154 mention of 20

Index al-Jazarī, Ismāʿīl ibn ar-Razzāz 112, 178 jewelry/jewels on belts 107 on clothing 151, 154, 156 on saddles 28, 43, 109, 196 of women 35, 170 Jews 13, 61, 63, 185 John viii Palaiologos, Byzantine emperor 93 jubba in general 9 in dreams 16 with ṭirāz 41–42, 80–81 use of term 81, 159 wearing of by administrative dignitaries 41–42, 80–81, 134 by boys 142 by judicial dignitaries 58 by religious dignitaries 80 without ṭirāz 80 see also malūṭa judicial dignitaries clothing of colors in 17, 41, 51, 81, 134, 179 Egyptian vs. Syrian 134 fabrics used for 41 farajiyya 41, 132 ʿimāma 132 jubba 58 ṭaylasān/tarḥa 10, 78–79, 132–133 khilʿa for Ottoman 51 receiving of 78, 81–83 silk replaced by wool 79 ṭaylasān/tarḥa 132–133 rejecting official outfits 191–192 social mobility of 188–189 jūkh (woolen fabric) 28, 44, 51, 105, 138 jūkha 139, 141 jumjum (Sufi headdress) 12 Kaʿba curtain 66 kalaftas 28 al-Kalastānī, Badr al-Dīn 41 kalawta (caps) in general 180 brocaded 57

231

Index kalawta (caps) (cont.) Circassian 41, 113 colors of 33, 106 expression of mourning and 19–20 gauze to wrap 19, 32, 49, 68, 70, 161 nāṣiriyya 109–110 occassions for wearing of 103 reform of 109–110 with small horns 67, 178 use of term 28n24 wearing of 39, 68 see also military uniforms Kalīla wa-Dimna (Bodleian ms) 157 kāmiliyya (khilʿa with fur) bestowing of 46–47, 58–60, 66, 76, 77, 81–83 as Circassian innovation 79–84 colors of 75, 83 definition of 83–84 description of 80 with sable 81, 82 use of term 8, 79–80, 81 of velvet 83 of viziers 60, 78 wearing of 65 kamkha (silk fabric) 17, 69, 77–78 kanji fabric 66, 69, 71–72, 188 Karīm al-Dīn 61, 71, 88, 188, 206 kawāfī. See kūfiyya/kawāfī kerchiefs (mandīl) 20–21, 55, 142 Khalīl, al-Ashraf, Mamluk sultan 31–32, 33–34 khanqāh (monasteries) 136 Khawand Baraka (Mother of sultan Shaʿbān) 36 Khāyrbak, emir 29, 45, 50, 60, 91, 203 khilʿa (robes of honor) in general 2, 208 belts in 56 bestowing of. See bestowing of khilʿa buying of 43, 55 colors of 54–55 content of 55 gold used in 74–75 hierarchy of. See hierarchy materials of 54 occasions for wearing 54

production of 55, 201 receiving of. See receiving of khilʿa retrieving of 60 storage of 56 studies on 4 use of term 53, 72–73 khimār (head-cover) 9 khirqa (Sufi frocks) 12, 14, 135–136 khulaʿīyīn (second-hand clothes) 198 Khushqadam, al-Ẓāhir, Mamluk sultan in general 47 funeral of 14 funerary complex of 104 influence of, on dress code 47 khilʿa and, bestowing of 57, 61, 63–64, 76, 77 outfits of 104–105 khuṭba 54, 85 kibr/kibra, use of term 143–144 Kipchak Turks 22, 40 Kitāb fī maʿrifat al-ḥiyal al-handasiyya (al-Jazarī) 112, 178 Kitāb al-Ḥayawān (al-Jāḥiz) 151 kūfiyya/kawāfī (headdresses) 28, 113, 146, 180 Kumushbughā, emir 168 Lājīn, Ḥusām al-Dīn, emir 146 lampas weave 96, 99 Lane, Edward W. 157 Lengherand, Georges 126 Leo Africanus 63, 141, 155, 170, 199 Leon v, king of Cilicia 165 linen 141, 143, 195 Loiseau, Julien 165 Lutfi, Huda 5–6, 201 Mackie, Louise 4–5, 93–94 maʿdanī (silk fabric) 33 al-Madkhal (Ibn al-Ḥājj) 11 madrasas, patronage of 190 Maḥmal festivals 18, 43 Maḥmūd, ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz 142 Mālikī jurists 11, 133 malūṭa (plain garments) in general 7, 127 colors of 50, 142–143

232 malūṭa (plain garments) (cont.) wearing of by aristocracy 145 by boys 142 by commoners 125, 143–144 by Mamluk soldiers 144 as sign of humility 144–145 see also jubba Mamluk artifacts, clothing on 172–177, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177 Mamluk class cultural identity of 22–23 dress code. See Mamluk dress code Europeans and 25, 185 horse riding and 189 names of 23 recruitment of 40, 184 supremacy of 184 see also military Mamluk Costume (Mayer) 3 Mamluk court dress culture at. See Mamluk dress code importance of 24 languages spoken at 23 Mongol fascination with 23–24 reception of diplomatic missions at 24–25 royal workshops of. See Dār al-Ṭirāz textile industry and 199–201 Mamluk dress code in general 25–27 distinction of class and 184–185 elegance and beauty of 28–29 end of 50–51 during epidemics 192–193 identity and 1, 208 influences on of Barqūq 27, 39, 41–43, 80–81 of Barsbay 44–45 of Baybars 30–32 of al-Ghawrī 49–50 of Hājjī 37 of Jaqmaq 46–47 of Khalīl 33–34 of Kushqadam 47 Muḥammad, al-Nāṣir 24–25, 34–35, 107, 109–110, 204 of Qalāwūn 32, 106–107, 122

Index of Qāyṭbāy 47–48 of Shaʿbān 17–18, 36, 73 of Yalbughā al-ʿUmarī al-Khāṣṣakī 36–37 pride in 27–28 rejecting of 191–192 social mobility and 186–193 studies on 3 Mamluk manuscripts, clothing in 178–183 Mamluk sultanate Abbasid caliphate and 24, 30 court of. See Mamluk court diplomatic network 24 dress code of. See Mamluk dress code emblematic color of 16, 65–66 Europeans living in 165 khilʿa practice of. See khilʿa legitimizing of 30 origins of 22 prohibition of Coptic feasts by 18 social mobility in. See social mobility sultans of. See under specific sultans trade in. See trade mandīl (kerchiefs) 20–21, 55, 142 Manjak, emir 167 Mansueti, Giovanni 109, 115, 116, 116, 117, 181, 182 al-Manṣūr Ḥājjī, Mamluk sultan 59 al-Manṣūr ʿUthmān, Mamluk sultan 65 mantle (ridāʾ) 9 Mantle Ode (al-Burda) 15 manuals of horsemanship. See furūsiyya manuscripts Maqamāt al-Ḥarīrī (bndf ms) 201 Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī (Bodleian ms) 133, 153, 156 Maqāmāt al-Ḥarīrī (Vienna ms) 10, 67, 119, 132, 133, 152, 178–179 al-Maqrīzī, Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad on clothing Christian 14, 185 and fashion 6 jubba 81 kalawta 57 milāyat laff 159 salāriyya/salārī 76 ṭāqiyya 122–123 women’s 161, 168

233

Index al-Maqrīzī, Taqiyy al-Dīn Aḥmad (cont.) on al-Harawī 187 on horse trappings 109 on khilʿa belts in 56 civilian 78 hierarchy in 70 selling of 55 storage of 56 on market for Mamlūks 22 on sack of Baghdad 90–91 on sultans Barqūq 39 Barsbāy 45, 74 Faraj 43 Jaqmaq 46–47 al-Muʾayyad Shaykh 44 terminology of 8 on textile markets 196, 197, 198 on textiles in urban customs 17–18 Marguerite de Soissons 165 Martyr, Peter 91, 108, 109, 119 Masālik al-abṣār fī mamālik al-amṣār (al-ʿUmarī) 6, 26 masquerades 18–19 Maṭʿam al-Ṭayr/Masṭaba (Cairo) 40–41, 104 material evidence, of clothing/textiles 5 Mayer, Leo A. 3, 13, 53, 65, 107, 108, 141, 203–204 maẓālim court 40 men’s clothing burda 15, 26, 30, 53 cotton and 11 descriptions of 143 in European illustrations 181 expression of humility and 11, 122, 144–145 extravagance in 12 footwear 109, 125, 143 gaiters 106 jubba. See jubba kūfiyya/kawāfī 28, 113, 146, 180 malūṭa 144 modesty in 9–12 qabāʾ fawqānī. See qabāʾ fawqānī qabāʾ islāmī 32, 33, 67, 152, 177, 178 qabāʾ tatarī 24, 32, 106–107, 172 qufṭān 50–51

salāriyya/salārī. See salāriyya/salārī silk and 10–11, 12 sirwāl 138, 139, 140 ṭāqiyya 122–123 ṭaylasān. See ṭaylasān/tarḥa turbans. See ʿimāma use of pins in 12 Venetian shirts 159, 165 see also military uniforms; women’s clothing merchants 137, 185 Meshullam Ben Benahem 169 milāyat laff (body wraps) 159 military hair length of 67, 110, 110, 111, 112 khilʿa for in Bahri period 66–72 in Circassian period 72–77 see also Mamluk class military uniforms in Bahri period 109 belts. See belts brigandines 108, 115 changes in 179–180 in Circassian period 108 with diagonal fastening 107, 110, 111, 172–173, 173, 174, 176 footwear 109 formal dress 106–107 headdresses. See under headdresses hierarchy of 107 horse trappings. See horse trappings; saddles influences on. See Mamluk dress code kalawta. See kalawta kūfiyya/kawāfī 28, 113, 146, 180 malūṭa 7, 50, 125, 127, 144 mandīl 142 sharbūsh. See sharbūsh see also military miṣrī style 103 modesty 9–12 monasteries (khanqāh) 136 Mongol cloaks 24, 32, 106–107, 172 Mongol Court Dress 4 Mongol hats 162, 173, 174, 176, 176 Mongols 23–24 mourning 19–20

234 Mufaḍḍal ibn Abī l-Faḍāʾil 204 Muḥammad, al-Nāṣir, Mamluk sultan dealing with thieves 206 diplomatic gifts of 23, 35 furnishing wife’s apartment 86–87 influence of on architecture 34 on dress code 24–25, 34–35, 107, 109–110, 204 khilʿa and, bestowing of 34, 57, 58, 59, 69–70, 74 outfits of 102–103, 106 patronage by 188 resignation of 20 wearing of kāmiliyya by 80 wives of 149, 154 Muhammad, Prophet 9, 15, 30, 53, 161–162 Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn Īnāl 192 Muḥammad ibn Naṣr Allāh, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn, emir 186 Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn 15 mujawwam fabric 69 mules 55 Murād ii, Ottoman sultan 77 muraqqaʿas (Sufi frocks) 12, 14, 135–136 al-Mustaʿīn bi-llāh, caliph & sultan 65, 75 al-Mutawakkil Muḥammad, caliph 77 al-Muwashshā, aw, al-ẓurf wa-l- ẓurafāʾ (al-Washshāʾ) 92 al-Nābulusī, ʿAbd al-Ghanī 15 nakhkh 1 nakhkh (silk brocade) 17, 68–69 narrative sources, on clothing/textiles 6 al-Nāṣir, Abbasid caliph 31 Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Shaykhī 187–188 naʿūra (headdresses) 28, 45, 103, 115–116, 118–119, 118 nawrūz celebration 18 nāẓir al-khāṣṣ (secretaries of the privy purse) in general 82 abusing of power by 61, 71, 88 see also under specific secretaries non-Muslims, dress regulations for 13–14 Nūr al-Dīn al-Zankī 23 al-Nuwayrī, Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad 8, 71, 188

Index opulence. See extravagance Ottoman Empire 33, 50 over-cloaks. See cloaks/over-cloaks Pagani, Zaccaria 170, 199 palace treasuries 203 Palmer Cup 110, 110, 172 pandemics/epidemics 105–106, 192, 204–206 parades 18, 43 pardon, kerchiefs of 20–21 patronage khilʿa practice and 53–54 of madrasas 190 social mobility and 187–189, 190 pen box 100, 101 Pierre i, King of Cyprus (Lusignan) 88–89 pilgrimages 36, 149 Piloti, Emmanuel 90, 195 Pisanello, Antonio 93 porcelain, Chinese 195–196 princesses. See women, aristocratic protective charms 135 al-Qāʿa workshop 49, 83, 207 qabāʾ, use of term 159 qabāʾ fawqānī (over-cloaks) in general 9, 46, 72–73 colors of 36, 103 double-faced 36, 73 in dreams 16 as part of khilʿa 55 reintroduction of 42 sets of 81 of silk 66–67 wearing of 65, 66, 67 qabāʾ islāmī (over-cloaks) 32, 33, 67, 152, 177, 178 qabāʾ tatarī (Mongol cloaks) 24, 32, 106–107, 172 see also salāriyya/salārī Qalāwūn, al-Manṣūr, Mamluk sultan on Dār al-Ṭirāz 87 expression of grief by 19–20 funerary complex of 23, 33 gifting garments for own wardrobe 21 influence of, on dress code 32, 106–107, 122

235

Index Qalāwūn, al-Manṣūr, Mamluk sultan (cont.) inscriptions and 92 khilʿa and, bestowing of 33, 69, 87 memorandum of 29 al-Qalqashandī, Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad on ceremonial dress 28 on clothing of caliphs 65 on Dār al-Ṭirāz 85, 86 on kāmiliyya 80 on khilʿa 57 on khuṭba and ṭirāz 85 Ṣubḥ al-aʿshā fī ṣināʿat al-inshā 6 on Sufi clothing 135 on ‘wind-catchers’ 134 qamī (shirts) 9, 138 Qānṣuh, al-Ashraf, Mamluk sultan 106 al-Qaṣr al-Ablaq (Cairo) 34 al-Qayātī, Shams al-Dīn 191–192 Qāyṭbāy, al-Ashraf, Mamluk sultan charitable donations by 206 craftsmen employed by 207 influence of on ceremonial practices 48 on dress code 47–48 on trade and industry 48–49 khilʿa and bestowing of 47–48, 58, 64, 76, 82, 114–115 receiving of 76 losing headdress 20 outfits of 105, 106, 115, 185 al-Qudsī, Abū Ḥāmid 28 qufṭān (caftans) 50–51, 160 qumāsh 8, 49, 203–204 Qurʾan verses 7:31 11 12:18 9 61:13 108 Raby, J. 181 Rapoport, Yossef 201 rassāmīn (designer workshops) 96–97, 198 receiving of khilʿa by administrative dignitaries 59–60, 77–78, 82 by caliphs 65 by governors 45, 54–55, 59, 68, 70, 71–72, 74, 75, 81–82 by judicial dignitaries 78, 81–83

by non-Muslims 61, 63 pride of 61–62 by scholars 59 as token of patronage/vassalage 53–54 withholding of 62 by women 63–64 red silk satin (aṭlas) 66–67, 71 redemption 20–21 rejection of wearing official outfits 191–192 silk 11, 78 ṭaylasān/tarḥa 78 religious dignitaries 65, 79, 80, 82–83, 132–133 see also caliphs, clothing of; Sufis renting out, of clothing 13 Reuven, Amitai 23 Reuwich, Erhard 181 ridāʾ (mantle) 9 Risālat daᶜwat al-aṭibbā’ (Bibliotheca Ambrosiana ms) 158 Roberts, David 199, 200 robes of honor. See khilʿa Rogers, J.M. 24, 196 Rosenthal, Franz 142 royal workshops. See Dār al-Ṭirāz; workshops al-Rūmī, Shams al-Dīn 134 Sāda, Sitt (mother of Yūsuf ibn Kātib Jakam) 64 saddles bejeweled 28, 43, 109, 196 of gold 42, 43, 46, 48, 55, 59–60, 66, 188 as part of khilʿa 42, 55 al-Sakhāwī, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd alRaḥmān 190, 198 Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn, Ayyubid sultan 10, 22–23 Salār al-Manṣūrī, emir 35, 59, 142, 202 salāriyya/salārī (cloaks) bestowing of 66, 76–77 colors of 48, 75–76 description of 75–76 introduction of 35 as ordinary garment 75, 76 as part of khilʿa 75 receiving of 48 wearing of 48

236 al-Ṣāliḥ Najm al-Dīn, Ayyubid sultan 23, 33 sandals 109 Sāra Khātūn (mother of Uzūn Ḥasan) 63–64 Sayf al-Dīn al-Rashīdī, emir 56 al-Ṣayrafī, ʿAlī ibn Dāwūd 8, 48, 73, 74 scarfs (faṣadiyya) 160 scholars 59 sculptures, stone 181–182, 183 second-hand clothes (khulaʿīyīn) 198 secretaries of the privy purse (nāẓir al-khāṣṣ). See nāẓir al-khāṣṣ sedentary culture (ḥaḍāra) 26 Selīm, Ottoman sultan 50, 144 Selīmnāme (Topkapı Library ms) 120, 121 Semeonis, Symon 107, 142–143, 149, 169 Serjeant, R.B. 17n51 Shaʿbān, al-Ashraf, Mamluk sultan influence of on dress code 17–18, 36, 73 on trade and industry 35–36, 88–89 outfits of 106 mention of 20 Shaʿbān, al-Kāmil, Mamluk sultan 149, 151 Shādhiliyya 136 Shāfiʿī jurists 79, 133 Shāh Rūkh, Timurid ruler 45, 53, 61, 91 Shāh Siwār 144 Shakespeare, William 207 Sharabshīyīn market 55, 69, 88 sharbūsh (festive headdress) 33, 55, 70, 113, 152, 175–176, 175, 176, 180 al-Sharīf workshop 207 shāsh gauze for kalawta 19, 32, 49, 68, 70, 161 use of term 204 women’s headdress 161–162 shāsh wa-qumāsh, use of term 204 Shaykh, al-Muʾayyad, Mamluk sultan celebration of new season and 44 diplomatic gifts by 93 dress restrictions of 14 khilʿa and bestowing of 75, 82 receiving of 75 outfits of 103 al-Shayzarī, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Naṣr 12–13 Shea, Eiren 4

Index Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Khāliq ibn al-Furāt 184 Shihāb al-Dīn (head of the sharīfs) 79 shirts (qamī) 9, 138 shrouds 9–10, 205–206 Sigoli, Simone 41, 143, 169 silk caps of 127–129, 128, 129, 130–131 cloaks of 66–67 double silk satin. See aṭlasayn fragments of 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99 kamkha 17, 69, 77–78 maʿdanī type of 33 nakhkh 17, 68–69 production of 194 red satin 66–67, 71 ṭard waḥsh 68–69, 70, 71, 160 trade in 194–195 using/wearing of by men 10–11, 12 rejection of 11, 78 in shrouds 9–10 by women 10 weavers of 42, 88–89, 90, 194 zarkash 33, 86–87, 204 see also kanji fabric silk weavers’ rebellion 194 al-Sirrī ibn al-Shiḥna 62 sirwāl (trousers/drawers) in futuwwa ceremony 31–32 wearing of by men 138, 139, 140 by Prophet 9 by women 138, 158, 167, 169–170 Siryāqūs 34 skull caps 127–129, 128, 129, 130–131 slave-women 157, 160, 168 slippers 143, 169 social mobility in general 2, 208 criticism of 190 in downwards direction 193 dress code/culture and 186–193 patronage and 187–189, 190 in upwards direction 186–192 soldiers, clothing of. See military uniforms Spallanzani, Jacobi 4 Spallanzani, Marco 4

Index spices 195 Springberg-Hinsen, Monika 4 St. Marc Healing Anianus (Mansueti) 116 stone sculptures 181–182, 183 Stoning of St Stephen (Carpaccio) 120, 181 studies, on clothing/textiles 3–5 Ṣubḥ al-aʿshā fī ṣināʿat al-inshā (al-Qalqashandī) 6 Sūdūn, emir 73 Sufis clothing of in general 185 frocks 12, 14, 135–136 headdresses 12 sultans in 105 special status of 191 sultans clothing of 113 bestowing of own worn 21, 76–77 color white in 103, 104, 105 depending on occasion 102–103 as disguise 106 in emergency situations 105–106 inscribing of names on 86, 87, 92 kalawta 103 kāmiliyya 83 new season new 104 preserving of 33 symbolic significance of 103–104 worn during investiture 30–31, 66 wrong choice made in 104–105 governors’ gifts to 88, 91, 154, 199, 203 investiture of. See tashrīfa khilʿa and. See khilʿa robbery of clothing and 204–205 see also under specific sultans summer outfits 44, 104 Sunqur al-Ashqar, emir 19 Supplément aux Dictionnaires Arabes (Dozy) 7 al-Suyūṭī, Jalāl al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān 3, 7, 56–57, 78–79 Syria enameled glass from 176–177, 177 metal ware from 110, 172 textiles from 141, 194–195 Timur’s invasion of 196

237 tafṣīla, use of term 160 Taghrībirdī ibn ʿAbd Allāh, emir 45, 114 tailors/tailoring 13, 88, 89, 142, 170 takhfīfa (headdresses) in general 50 with horns (naʿūra) 28, 45, 103, 115–116, 118–119, 118 multi-pointed 115, 116, 116, 117 without horns 103, 113–115 worn by wrong persons 122 Tankiz, emir 154, 202 ṭāqiyya (bonnets) 117, 122–123, 162, 163, 164, 182 ṭard waḥsh (brocaded silk) 68–69, 70, 71, 160 tarḥ (fabric) 141 tarḥa, use of term 141 see also ṭaylasān/tarḥa tarkība zarkash (brocade fitting) 68 ṭarṭūr (bonnets) 19, 150–151 tashrīfa (investiture) of caliphs/sultans 30–31, 65–66 of emirs 70–71 use of term 53 see also khilʿa tatarī, use of term 72, 107 ṭaylasān/tarḥa (shawls) Ibn al-Ḥājj on 12 Jewish 9, 79 of judicial dignitaries 10, 78–79, 132–133 of Prophet 9, 79 of religious dignitaries 65, 132–133 treatise on 3, 7 terminology 7–8, 137–138 textile industry in Alexandria decline of 44–45, 90–91, 196 recovery of 42, 88–89 weavers’ rebellion 194 see also Dār al-Ṭirāz Ibn Iyās on 29 Mamluk court and 199–201 textile markets of Cairo 197–201, 209 designer workshops in 198 for furs 198 as part of al-Ghawrī’s religious complex 199, 200

238 textile markets (cont.) for second-hand clothes 198 vanishing of 196 textile workers 42, 88–89, 90–91, 194, 201 textiles/fabrics in general 194 archival sources of 5–6 cotton. See Baʿalbakī cotton dealers in 13 dying of 13 hoarding of 202–203 international features of 95 linen 141, 143, 195 markets in. See textile markets material evidence of 5 mujawwam 69 narrative sources on 6 patterns on 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99 in general 93–94 designers of 96–97 production of. See textile industry silk. See silk studies on 4 supply problems 44–45, 89 tarḥ 141 terminology of 7–8 urban customs and 17–19 velvet. See velvet visual sources on 6–7 of wool. See wool thawb (robes/dresses) 10, 137–138, 160 1001 Nights bughluṭāq in 134 dalliance in 167 faṣadiyya in 160 kūfiyya in 146 merchants clothing in 185 merchants in 137 as narrative source 6 outdoor dresses in 156 public appearances of women in 155 qufṭān in 160 slave-women in 157, 185 tearing of clothes in 19 terminology of clothing in 137 ṭirāz bands on clothing in 92, 142 Venetian shirts in 159 wedding ceremonies in 160 zinnārī in 78

Index three-pointed crown. See sharbūsh Timur/Tamerlane 18, 27, 195, 196, 203 tips or tails (dhawāʾib) 132 ṭirāz/ṭirāz bands in book illustrations 141–142 civilian clothing and 80 compared to coinage 85 enlarged style of (yalbughāwī) 37, 74–75, 81–82, 83 inscriptions in praise of 97–98, 100, 101 inscriptions of sultan’s name on 86, 87, 92 jubba with 41–42 long tradition of 179 production at Dār al-Ṭirāz 85–86 significance of 93 use of, before Mamluks 92–93 value of 86 see also inscriptions trade in general 4 in furs 195, 198–199 in luxury goods 195–196, 197 networks 194 in textiles 194–195 Trevisan, Domenico 83, 103, 105, 118 trousers. See sirwāl trousseaus 153–154 al-Ṭulūnī, Aḥmad 188 Ṭumānbāy, al-Ashraf, Mamluk sultan 50 turbans variety of shapes of 181, 182 see also ʿimāma Turkish language 23 Twain, Mark 207 ʿUmar regulations 13 al-ʿUmarī, Ibn Faḍl Allāh on Egyptian vs. Syrian clothing 134 on jubba 80 on khilʿa 52, 57, 69–70 on Mamluk finery 28–29 Masālik al-abṣār 6, 26 on merchant’s clothing 137 on red silk satins 66–67 on Sufi clothing 135 on sultan’s outfit 102 on ṭard waḥsh 68 on ‘wind-catchers’ 132

Index unisex fashion 123 Uways, Jalayirid sultan 40–41 Uzūn Ḥasan 63–64 vassalage 53–54 veils 35, 156, 169, 170, 182 see also head bands velvet brigandine of 108, 115 kāmiliyya of 46, 76, 82–83, 103 Ottoman robes of 50–51 Venetian shirts 159, 165 visual sources, on clothing/textiles 6–7 viziers assets of 202 clothing of 59, 60, 77, 78 hoarding by 202 social mobility of 186–188, 190 see also under specific viziers vocabulary. See terminology al-Washshāʾ, Abū l-Ṭayyib Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq 92 weavers 42, 88–89, 90–91, 194, 201 wedding ceremonies 160 white as color of clothing of civilian elites 41, 134, 179 of commoners 142–143, 159 kāmiliyya 75 malūṭa 50, 144–145 for mourning 20 of Prophet 9 qabāʾ 36, 103 salāriyya/salārī 48, 75–76 of sultans 103, 104, 105 of summer outfits 107, 134 symbolism of 16 Wiet, G. 167 ‘wind-catcher’ (bādhahanj) 132, 134 winter outfits 44, 104 women in general 149–150, 150 aristocratic bestowing of khilʿa by 64 excursions made by 149–150 funerals of 87 luxury items of 154

239 patronage by 188–189 pilgrimages of 149 receiving of khilʿa by 63–64 trousseaus of 153–154 banned from streets 168 clothing of. See women’s clothing European 164–165 fashion sense of 165–166, 208 jewelry of 35, 170 non-aristocratic public appearances of 155–156 slave-women 157, 160, 168 regulations for 14, 51 shrouds for 9–10 veiling of 157 working in textile industry 201 women’s clothing bejeweled 151, 154, 156 cloaks/over-cloaks 134 color of 159, 169, 170 dresses ghilāla 160 indoor 153, 156, 164 outdoor 156, 156, 157, 158, 164 qufṭān 160 thawb 160 with train 161 wide sleeves in 161, 167–168 European eyewitnesses on 169–171 European illustrations of 116, 117, 163, 164, 181, 182 extravagance in 12, 151–152, 168, 169 fashions in 161–166 footwear 154, 169, 170 fur and 161 gaiters 170 headdresses head bands 151, 151, 152, 153 kūfiyya 146 shāsh 161–162 tall bonnets 117, 123, 162, 163, 164, 164, 182 ṭarṭūr 150–151 veils 35, 156, 169, 170, 182 in Mamluk mss 181 regulations for 162, 164, 167–168 scarfs 160 silk and 10

240 women’s clothing (cont.) tailoring of 170 trousers 138, 158, 167, 169–170 Venetian shirts 159 worn by aristocracy 149–154 brides 160 slave-women 157, 160 urbanites 155–156 wraps 156, 159 see also men’s clothing wool clothing of burda 15, 26, 30, 53 kalawta. See kalawta kāmiliyya 82–83 salāriyya/salārī 76, 77 fabrics of, jūkh 28, 44, 51, 105, 138 trade in 195 wearing of clothing of by commoners 138 by judicial dignitaries 41, 78 by military 76 by religious dignitaries 78, 82 working class people. See commoners workshops in general 90, 197, 198, 199 of al-Bāqī 55, 207

Index of al-Qāʿa 49, 83, 207 rassāmīn 96–97, 198 of al-Sharīf at Fusṭāt 207 see also Dār al-Ṭirāz wraps. See burda; izār; milāyat laff; zinnārī Yalbughā ṭirāz 37, 74, 81–82, 83 Yalbughā al-ʿUmarī al-Khāṣṣakī, emir 36– 37, 74 Yalbughā al-ʿUmarī al-Nāṣirī, emir 37 Yalbughā al-Yaḥyāwī, emir 60 Yaʿqūb, Master 63, 83 Yashbak min Mahdī, emir 17, 48, 58, 60, 114, 144, 201 yellow 16–17, 69, 106 Yūsuf ibn Kātib Jakam 64 al-Ẓāhir Qānṣūh, Mamluk sultan 104 al-Ẓāhirī, Khalīl, emir 6, 15–16, 27, 72–73, 90 Zakariyyā ibn al-Mustaʿṣim, caliph 65 zamṭ (bonnets) 28, 50, 116, 117, 123, 124, 125–127, 125, 126, 127 al-Zarʿī, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān 12 zarkash (brocade) 33, 68, 86–87, 204 see also ṭirāz/ṭirāz bands Zayn al-Dīn Yaḥyā, emir 20, 82, 192, 203 zinnārī (mantles or wraps) 78 Zubdat kashf al-mamālik (al-Ẓāhirī) 90