![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Quality is very high in this article, you can maybe ask for a review or something from editors to give it a featured article. Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 22:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Alexis Ivanov: I noticed you changed Lajin's ethnicity based on Yosef's source. Northrup and Nicolle are also highly reliable (in fact I would consider them veterans of Mamluk studies; Northrup had an excellent work on Qalawun and the Bahri dynasty in general). I think it would be best to include both views i.e. Circassian and Greek/Prussian. -- Al Ameer ( talk) 16:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
@
Al Ameer son: I highly disagree with the Greek and Prussian, they are indeed highly reliable, but Yosef backs up his words from (أعيان العصر وأعوان النصر), and when I checked Northrup she is referencing another secondary work (The Middle East in the Middle Ages : the early Mamluk sultanate, 1250-1382) by Irwin, I would have to check that work to be sure, but I'm 90% sure Lajin is Circassian, a relative to Baybars II. Both of whom represented the Circassian element in the Bahri Period, I will give you the benefit of the doubt he could be part Circassian, since it will take time for me to check these primary and secondary sources I will submit my edit later this month or maybe earlier based on the delivery of one of the books.
Alexis Ivanov (
talk)
22:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
in 1293, the murdered of Sultan Khalil a mongol by the name Baydara al-Mansuri became a sultan for one day, is missing here Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 09:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
He was officially a Sultan. He was na'ib of Egypt for Khalil before his ascendance, he murdered him in 1293 C.E., he took the title Malik al-Qahir. He is of Mongol Extraction and a Mamluk of Qalawun. Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 00:50, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
We have two sources who are showing different approach. One Circassian and one Prussian/Greek, I have analyzed the Circassian position to it's fullest meaning 100%, and in the coming weeks I will analyze the Prussian/Greek position which I have huge doubts.
@ Al Ameer son: Take not, to see the argument that Koby Yosef presented which is simply connecting the dots. On the book (أعيان العصر وأعوان النصر) by al-Ṣafadī On a chapter or semi chapter dedicated to Aqūsh Al-Afram, a high ranking Circassian Mamluk who was employed as Na'ibn of Shaam, we see the author saying that Aqūsh and Lajin are cousins, Lajin is the son of the maternal aunt (خالة) of Aqūsh the Circassian. On another book written by the famous (ابن تغري بردي) Ibn Taghrībirdī on the book called (المنهل الصافي والمستوفي بعد الوافي) we see the author saying Aqūsh Al-Afram and Baybars II are relative. There is no single indication to me that Lajin was Greek or Prussian in these sources. I will analyze the Prussian/Greek before reaching definitive 100% answer. Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 02:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I've removed a statement in the lead that said there were 47 sultans ( [2]), as this seems to be disputable (see below). I'm not sure if it was sourced or if it simply counted from the current list, which could contain errors or be missing individuals. It also implied that only three sultans had multiple reigns, but of course there are more than that (as evident in the list).
Depending on which reliable source is consulted, the total number of sultans differs. According to Carl F. Petry (2022, p.53), there were 44 sultans. In the list provided by Doris Behrens-Abouseif ( 2007, p.317-318), there appear to be 49, and likewise in Bosworth (1996, p.76-78; though it depends on whether you include al-Musta'in, Shajar ad-Durr, etc). In the list by André Clot ( 1996/2009, p.446-447), there seem to be 50.
It's likely that we're missing a couple of individuals in this list, but also that the number varies depending on who you count. I'd recommend that we simply avoid stating a total number as fact; it's unnecessary and is likely to contradict reliable sources in one way or another. Or, if we do give a total, we should note the differing numbers and inclusions that are found in reliable sources. R Prazeres ( talk) 01:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Quality is very high in this article, you can maybe ask for a review or something from editors to give it a featured article. Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 22:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Alexis Ivanov: I noticed you changed Lajin's ethnicity based on Yosef's source. Northrup and Nicolle are also highly reliable (in fact I would consider them veterans of Mamluk studies; Northrup had an excellent work on Qalawun and the Bahri dynasty in general). I think it would be best to include both views i.e. Circassian and Greek/Prussian. -- Al Ameer ( talk) 16:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
@
Al Ameer son: I highly disagree with the Greek and Prussian, they are indeed highly reliable, but Yosef backs up his words from (أعيان العصر وأعوان النصر), and when I checked Northrup she is referencing another secondary work (The Middle East in the Middle Ages : the early Mamluk sultanate, 1250-1382) by Irwin, I would have to check that work to be sure, but I'm 90% sure Lajin is Circassian, a relative to Baybars II. Both of whom represented the Circassian element in the Bahri Period, I will give you the benefit of the doubt he could be part Circassian, since it will take time for me to check these primary and secondary sources I will submit my edit later this month or maybe earlier based on the delivery of one of the books.
Alexis Ivanov (
talk)
22:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
in 1293, the murdered of Sultan Khalil a mongol by the name Baydara al-Mansuri became a sultan for one day, is missing here Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 09:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
He was officially a Sultan. He was na'ib of Egypt for Khalil before his ascendance, he murdered him in 1293 C.E., he took the title Malik al-Qahir. He is of Mongol Extraction and a Mamluk of Qalawun. Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 00:50, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
We have two sources who are showing different approach. One Circassian and one Prussian/Greek, I have analyzed the Circassian position to it's fullest meaning 100%, and in the coming weeks I will analyze the Prussian/Greek position which I have huge doubts.
@ Al Ameer son: Take not, to see the argument that Koby Yosef presented which is simply connecting the dots. On the book (أعيان العصر وأعوان النصر) by al-Ṣafadī On a chapter or semi chapter dedicated to Aqūsh Al-Afram, a high ranking Circassian Mamluk who was employed as Na'ibn of Shaam, we see the author saying that Aqūsh and Lajin are cousins, Lajin is the son of the maternal aunt (خالة) of Aqūsh the Circassian. On another book written by the famous (ابن تغري بردي) Ibn Taghrībirdī on the book called (المنهل الصافي والمستوفي بعد الوافي) we see the author saying Aqūsh Al-Afram and Baybars II are relative. There is no single indication to me that Lajin was Greek or Prussian in these sources. I will analyze the Prussian/Greek before reaching definitive 100% answer. Alexis Ivanov ( talk) 02:14, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
I've removed a statement in the lead that said there were 47 sultans ( [2]), as this seems to be disputable (see below). I'm not sure if it was sourced or if it simply counted from the current list, which could contain errors or be missing individuals. It also implied that only three sultans had multiple reigns, but of course there are more than that (as evident in the list).
Depending on which reliable source is consulted, the total number of sultans differs. According to Carl F. Petry (2022, p.53), there were 44 sultans. In the list provided by Doris Behrens-Abouseif ( 2007, p.317-318), there appear to be 49, and likewise in Bosworth (1996, p.76-78; though it depends on whether you include al-Musta'in, Shajar ad-Durr, etc). In the list by André Clot ( 1996/2009, p.446-447), there seem to be 50.
It's likely that we're missing a couple of individuals in this list, but also that the number varies depending on who you count. I'd recommend that we simply avoid stating a total number as fact; it's unnecessary and is likely to contradict reliable sources in one way or another. Or, if we do give a total, we should note the differing numbers and inclusions that are found in reliable sources. R Prazeres ( talk) 01:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)