Wiktenauer logo.png

Difference between revisions of "Matrakçı Nasûh"

From Wiktenauer
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Added footnotes to introductory section.)
Line 26: Line 26:
 
| below                =  
 
| below                =  
 
}}
 
}}
Despite being one of the most celebrated polymaths of the so called 16th century “Golden Age” of the Ottoman Empire, not much is known about Matrakçı Nasûh’s life for certain. We cannot verify his name, birth date, and birth location based on present source materials. The most common name throughout all treatises ascribed to him is Nasûh ibn ʿAbdallāh. Based on contemporaneous histories and prosopographies, his death date is most likely 958 AH/1551 CE. Overall, Nasûh is known for being a polymath during the reign of Suleiman I (r. 1520-1566 CE), authoring works in mathematics, poetry, travel, and martial arts and translating seminal Arabic language histories into Turkish. More recent studies have shown that while we can be certain that Nasûh authored the works of poetry, history translations, and his martial arts treatises ascribed to him, the other works are difficult to confirm as Nasûh’s.  
+
Despite being one of the most celebrated polymaths of the so called 16th century “Golden Age” of the Ottoman Empire, not much is known about Matrakçı Nasûh’s life for certain. We cannot verify his name, birth date, and birth location based on present source materials. The most common name throughout all treatises ascribed to him is Nasûh ibn ʿAbdallāh. Based on contemporaneous histories and prosopographies, his death date is most likely 958 AH/1551 CE <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pp. 7-8 </ref>. Overall, Nasûh is known for being a polymath during the reign of Suleiman I (r. 1520-1566 CE), authoring works in mathematics, poetry, travel, and martial arts and translating seminal Arabic language histories into Turkish. More recent studies have shown that while we can be certain that Nasûh authored the works of poetry, history translations, and his martial arts treatises ascribed to him, the other works are difficult to confirm as Nasûh’s <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pp. 9-16 </ref>.  
  
Biographies that appear more than 50 years after his passing ascribe Nasûh’s birthplace to the Balkans, more specifically modern-day Bosnia. It is clear that Nasûh was sent to the Enderun palace school in Constantinople during the reign of Sultan Bayezid II (r. 1481-1512 CE), during which time he studied under a notable poet. According to later histories, during this time Nasûh ostensibly became well versed in combative games to the point where he stood out among other students. Due to his success in martial arts, he was sent to Egypt to assess the troops there under a certain Hayr Bey (unknown), and to train them. Nasûh returned to Constantinople in 1530 in order to participate in the celebrations for the circumcision of the crown princes of Suleiman I. During this time, Suleiman I recognized Nasuh with a Title of Privilege  (Tur. ''Berat'') signifying him as a “leader of arms-masters” (Per./Tur. ''Silahşor'') in 936/1530. The document describes him (as “Nasûh the weapons-master, ''Nasūh-i ṣilāḥī'') as one who could not be bested by any of those he encountered while in Egypt. In fact, the Berat claims that Nasûh instructed those he defeated in “elegant Arabic.” While it documents Nasûh’s mastery of the sword, mace, javelin, and bow-and-sword (with the sword balanced in the shooting hand), the Berat showcases Nasûh’s greatness in lance exercises. All in all, the Berat hails Nasûh as the “ultimate master” (Tur. ''Üstad-ı ser-amed'') and “Head of (Martial) Artists (Tur. ''reis-i hünermend''). In honor of the circumcision ceremony, Nasûh wrote a work of cavalry combative exercises and overall strategy, which he published in 938-9 AH/1533 CE. Entitled ''Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt'' “Treatise dedicated to the Holy Warriors,” the 42-folio work was written mostly in Turkish with some sections in Arabic.  
+
Biographies that appear more than 50 years after his passing ascribe Nasûh’s birthplace to the Balkans, more specifically modern-day Bosnia. It is clear that Nasûh was sent to the Enderun palace school in Constantinople during the reign of Sultan Bayezid II (r. 1481-1512 CE), during which time he studied under a notable poet. According to later histories, during this time Nasûh ostensibly became well versed in combative games to the point where he stood out among other students <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pg. 8 </ref>. Due to his success in martial arts, he was sent to Egypt to assess the troops there under a certain Hayr Bey (unknown), and to train them. Nasûh returned to Constantinople in 1530 in order to participate in the celebrations for the circumcision of the crown princes of Suleiman I. During this time, Suleiman I recognized Nasuh with a Title of Privilege  (Tur. ''Berat'') signifying him as a “leader of arms-masters” (Per./Tur. ''Silahşor'') in 936/1530. The document describes him (as “Nasûh the weapons-master, ''Nasūh-i ṣilāḥī'') as one who could not be bested by any of those he encountered while in Egypt <ref> YURDAYDIN, ''Matrakçı Nasûh'', pp. 2-11, 70-71</ref>. In fact, the Berat claims that Nasûh instructed those he defeated in “elegant Arabic.” While it documents Nasûh’s mastery of the sword, mace, javelin, and bow-and-sword (with the sword balanced in the shooting hand), the Berat showcases Nasûh’s greatness in lance exercises. All in all, the Berat hails Nasûh as the “ultimate master” (Tur. ''Üstad-ı ser-amed'') and “Head of (Martial) Artists (Tur. ''reis-i hünermend'') <ref> YURDAYDIN, ''Matrakçı Nasûh'', pp. 70-71</ref>. In honor of the circumcision ceremony, Nasûh wrote a work of cavalry combative exercises and overall strategy, which he published in 938-9 AH/1533 CE. Entitled ''Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt'' “Treatise dedicated to the Holy Warriors,” the 42-folio work was written mostly in Turkish with some sections in Arabic.  
 
    
 
    
Nasûh then accompanied Suleiman on his campaign in Iraq in 940/1534, during which time he took to writing history and translating seminal Arabic language histories into Turkish. We can confirm from numerous sources that Nasûh passed away in 958/1551. Many works bearing his name, or various permutations, appear after his death – including mathematical works, travelogues, even miniature paintings for which Nasûh has become celebrated. Whether or not Nasûh authored them, or whether others with the fairly common name Nasûh penned the works cannot be determined given the available information.           
+
Nasûh then accompanied Suleiman on his campaign in Iraq in 940/1534, during which time he took to writing history and translating seminal Arabic language histories into Turkish. We can confirm from numerous sources that Nasûh passed away in 958/1551 <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pg. 8 </ref>. Many works bearing his name, or various permutations, appear after his death – including mathematical works, travelogues, even miniature paintings for which Nasûh has become celebrated. Whether or not Nasûh authored them, or whether others with the fairly common name Nasûh penned the works cannot be determined given the available information <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pg. 9 </ref>.           
  
Later historians describe Nasûh as having been a master of ''maṭraq'', a cane fighting art meant to train swordfigthing. Some even claim that he was its inventor. Nasuh’s association with the art became such that he is often called “Matrakçı Nasûh” or “Nasûh the Master of the art of ''maṭraq''.” essentially cane fighting meant to train one in the proper use of sword arts. While documents such as the ''Berat'' praise Nasûh’s exceptional performance in many different combat exercises, maṭraq or any similar art is not called out. Likewise, the cavalry-focused ''Tuḥfat al-ghuzāt'' does not feature exercises that resemble maṭraq.     
+
Later historians describe Nasûh as having been a master of ''maṭraq'', a cane fighting art meant to train swordfigthing. Some even claim that he was its inventor. Nasuh’s association with the art became such that he is often called “Matrakçı Nasûh” or “Nasûh the Master of the art of ''maṭraq''.” essentially cane fighting meant to train one in the proper use of sword arts <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pp. 7; YURDAYDIN, ''Matrakçı Nasûh'', pp. 2-3</ref>. While documents such as the ''Berat'' praise Nasûh’s exceptional performance in many different combat exercises, maṭraq or any similar art is not called out. Likewise, the cavalry-focused ''Tuḥfat al-ghuzāt'' does not feature exercises that resemble maṭraq.     
  
 
== Treatise ==
 
== Treatise ==
  
The mostly Turkish language “Treatise dedicated to the Holy Warriors” follows the genre-defining precedents that previous Arabic language martial arts texts have set. Recent scholarship has drawn on the three available manuscripts in collections in Turkey and Hungary as well as contemporaneous treatises featuring Ottoman cavalry exercise to present a critical edition, complete with limited illustrations. The work bears a colophon dating to 938-9 AH/1533 CE and has script that is consonant with Nasûh’s translations of Arabic language histories. By and large, Nasûh’s material is his own as far as scholars can tell, but he draws on several Arabic language works on ḥadīth and histories for certain sections. In others, he makes use of one Mamluk Arabic language treatise (Lāchin b. ʿAbdallāh al-Ṭarablūsī (738/1338) ''Ṭuhfat al-mujāhidīn fī-l-ʿamal bi-l-mayādīn'') and now lost Turkish-Arabic treatises that seem to be translations of Arabic ''furūsīya'' materials (''ʿUmdat al-ṣilāḥ'', and ''Ṣilāḥshurnāma''). Nasûh cites ''Ṭuhfat al-mujāhidīn'' by name throughout ''Ṭuḥfat al-ghuzāt'' to showcase his knowledge of ''furūsīya'' material and also to situate his own work within the lineage of masters who came before him.  
+
The mostly Turkish language “Treatise dedicated to the Holy Warriors” follows the genre-defining precedents that previous Arabic language martial arts texts have set. Recent scholarship has drawn on the three available manuscripts in collections in Turkey and Hungary as well as contemporaneous treatises featuring Ottoman cavalry exercise to present a critical edition, complete with limited illustrations <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pp. 17-40 </ref>. The work bears a colophon dating to 938-9 AH/1533 CE and has script that is consonant with Nasûh’s translations of Arabic language histories <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pg. 89 </ref>. By and large, Nasûh’s material is his own as far as scholars can tell, but he draws on several Arabic language works on ḥadīth and histories for certain sections. In others, he makes use of one Mamluk Arabic language treatise (Lāchin b. ʿAbdallāh al-Ṭarablūsī (738/1338) ''Ṭuhfat al-mujāhidīn fī-l-ʿamal bi-l-mayādīn'') and now lost Turkish-Arabic treatises that seem to be translations of Arabic ''furūsīya'' materials (''ʿUmdat al-ṣilāḥ'', and ''Ṣilāḥshurnāma''). Nasûh cites ''Ṭuhfat al-mujāhidīn'' by name throughout ''Ṭuḥfat al-ghuzāt'' to showcase his knowledge of ''furūsīya'' material and also to situate his own work within the lineage of masters who came before him <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pp. 37-40 </ref>.  
  
It is clear that Nasûh wrote this work to celebrate the circumcision festival of the crown princes of Suleiman I, and perhaps to cement his career among the palace guard. In terms of form and content, Nasûh clearly writes to place himself in the tradition of Arabic-language furūsīya authors, most notably Mamluk-era authors (r. 1250-1517 CE). In doing so, I would assert that Nasûh participates in efforts to legitimize the Ottomans as the new leading polity in the western Islamicate. Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt is meant to demonstrate that Ottoman cavaliers are successors to their defeated foes, most notably the Mamluks in Egypt after 1517 CE. It is also meant to be a work that supersedes previous treatises.   
+
It is clear that Nasûh wrote this work to celebrate the circumcision festival of the crown princes of Suleiman I, and perhaps to cement his career among the palace guard. In terms of form and content, Nasûh clearly writes to place himself in the tradition of Arabic-language furūsīya authors, most notably Mamluk-era authors (r. 1250-1517 CE) <ref> See: al-Sarraf, “Mamluk Furūsīyah Literature and Its Antecedents;” CARAYON, “La Furūsiyya Des Mamlûks” </ref>. In doing so, I would assert that Nasûh participates in efforts to legitimize the Ottomans as the new leading polity in the western Islamicate. Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt is meant to demonstrate that Ottoman cavaliers are successors to their defeated foes, most notably the Mamluks in Egypt after 1517 CE. It is also meant to be a work that supersedes previous treatises.   
  
In typical fashion for Furūsīya treatises, ''Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt'' begins with benedictions, an introduction praising those who support and participate in ''Jihād'', and lamentations over the state of soldiery. It offers general pedagogical exhortations to remedy such issues that can be gained by reading the treatise – summarized in an “Ode to Weapons-bearers” (''Qaṣīda-yi ṣilāhshurān''). Following convention, Nasûh’s work is organized into four chapters (Ar. faṣl) dealing with particular weapons —in order: Bow, Sword, Mace, and Lance— and one chapter on troop organization, deployment, and tactics. Each chapter on weapons has a history of the weapon and exercises (Tur. ''ḥovpare'') devoted to it meant to be performed by troops in the ''maydān'' – a space for military exercise in Constantinople’s Hippodrome (today’s Sultanahmet Meydanı in Istanbul). All exercises are performed on horseback, and assume that the riders are also utilizing shields (''kalkan'', ''ḥaddād'') that can be maneuvered around the body and held in the left hand while shooting a bow. Nasûh equates his Exercises (Tur. ''ḥovpare'') with Forms (Ar. ''band'', pl. ''bunūd'')—a term that Arabic-language authors have used to describe formulaic exercises that one carries out against a compliant or semi-compliant partner (not unlike paired ''kata'' in Japanese martial arts traditions).   
+
In typical fashion for Furūsīya treatises, ''Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt'' begins with benedictions, an introduction praising those who support and participate in ''Jihād'', and lamentations over the state of soldiery <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pp. 43-53 </ref>. It offers general pedagogical exhortations to remedy such issues that can be gained by reading the treatise – summarized in an “Ode to Weapons-bearers” (''Qaṣīda-yi ṣilāhshurān'') <ref> KARADENİZ, ''Tuhfetü’l-guzât'', pp. 54-55 </ref>. Following convention, Nasûh’s work is organized into four chapters (Ar. faṣl) dealing with particular weapons —in order: Bow, Sword, Mace, and Lance— and one chapter on troop organization, deployment, and tactics. Each chapter on weapons has a history of the weapon and exercises (Tur. ''ḥovpare'') devoted to it meant to be performed by troops in the ''maydān'' – a space for military exercise in Constantinople’s Hippodrome (today’s Sultanahmet Meydanı in Istanbul). All exercises are performed on horseback, and assume that the riders are also utilizing shields (''kalkan'', ''ḥaddād'') that can be maneuvered around the body and held in the left hand while shooting a bow. Nasûh equates his Exercises (Tur. ''ḥovpare'') with Forms (Ar. ''band'', pl. ''bunūd'')—a term that Arabic-language authors have used to describe formulaic exercises that one carries out against a compliant or semi-compliant partner (not unlike paired ''kata'' in Japanese martial arts traditions).   
  
 
Featured here is Nasûh’s section on the Sword. As the reader will notice, the exercises have far more to do with the use of the sword as a sidearm to the bow than they do with swordplay in and of itself. However, from a more general perspective, Nasûh features sword techniques that are relevant to the development of saber-play overall. Most notably, the so called “mangonel cut” (''manjanīq'', meaning in Arabic and Turkish in general a “catapult”) in Form 2 and Form 9 can be considered a kind of mimicry of a catapult or trebuchet arm – that is, a descending ''molinello'' from the shoulder after threatening first with an ascending cut from the right as a feint.       
 
Featured here is Nasûh’s section on the Sword. As the reader will notice, the exercises have far more to do with the use of the sword as a sidearm to the bow than they do with swordplay in and of itself. However, from a more general perspective, Nasûh features sword techniques that are relevant to the development of saber-play overall. Most notably, the so called “mangonel cut” (''manjanīq'', meaning in Arabic and Turkish in general a “catapult”) in Form 2 and Form 9 can be considered a kind of mimicry of a catapult or trebuchet arm – that is, a descending ''molinello'' from the shoulder after threatening first with an ascending cut from the right as a feint.       

Revision as of 14:13, 26 March 2024

Matrakçı Nasûh
Born Nasûh ibn ʿAbdallāh
late 15th/early 16th century
Modern day Bosnia
Died 958AH/1551CE
Pseudonym Matrakçı, Maṭraqī, Ṣilāhī, Naṣūhī
Occupation Janissary, Scholar
Nationality Ottoman Empire
Education Enderun Palace School, Constantinople
Influences
  • Mamluk Martial Arts Literature
  • Lāchin b. ʿAbdallāh al-Ṭarablūsī
Genres Military manual
Language Turkish, Arabic
Manuscript(s)
  • Süleymaniye Ktp., Esad Efendi Kol., Nr. 2205
  • Millet Ktp., Ali-Emiri-Askeriyye, Nr. 219
  • İstanbul Belediyesi Atatürk Kütüphanesi, Muallim Cevdet Yazmaları, O.50
  • The Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Török, Nr. O.128

Despite being one of the most celebrated polymaths of the so called 16th century “Golden Age” of the Ottoman Empire, not much is known about Matrakçı Nasûh’s life for certain. We cannot verify his name, birth date, and birth location based on present source materials. The most common name throughout all treatises ascribed to him is Nasûh ibn ʿAbdallāh. Based on contemporaneous histories and prosopographies, his death date is most likely 958 AH/1551 CE [1]. Overall, Nasûh is known for being a polymath during the reign of Suleiman I (r. 1520-1566 CE), authoring works in mathematics, poetry, travel, and martial arts and translating seminal Arabic language histories into Turkish. More recent studies have shown that while we can be certain that Nasûh authored the works of poetry, history translations, and his martial arts treatises ascribed to him, the other works are difficult to confirm as Nasûh’s [2].

Biographies that appear more than 50 years after his passing ascribe Nasûh’s birthplace to the Balkans, more specifically modern-day Bosnia. It is clear that Nasûh was sent to the Enderun palace school in Constantinople during the reign of Sultan Bayezid II (r. 1481-1512 CE), during which time he studied under a notable poet. According to later histories, during this time Nasûh ostensibly became well versed in combative games to the point where he stood out among other students [3]. Due to his success in martial arts, he was sent to Egypt to assess the troops there under a certain Hayr Bey (unknown), and to train them. Nasûh returned to Constantinople in 1530 in order to participate in the celebrations for the circumcision of the crown princes of Suleiman I. During this time, Suleiman I recognized Nasuh with a Title of Privilege (Tur. Berat) signifying him as a “leader of arms-masters” (Per./Tur. Silahşor) in 936/1530. The document describes him (as “Nasûh the weapons-master, Nasūh-i ṣilāḥī) as one who could not be bested by any of those he encountered while in Egypt [4]. In fact, the Berat claims that Nasûh instructed those he defeated in “elegant Arabic.” While it documents Nasûh’s mastery of the sword, mace, javelin, and bow-and-sword (with the sword balanced in the shooting hand), the Berat showcases Nasûh’s greatness in lance exercises. All in all, the Berat hails Nasûh as the “ultimate master” (Tur. Üstad-ı ser-amed) and “Head of (Martial) Artists (Tur. reis-i hünermend) [5]. In honor of the circumcision ceremony, Nasûh wrote a work of cavalry combative exercises and overall strategy, which he published in 938-9 AH/1533 CE. Entitled Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt “Treatise dedicated to the Holy Warriors,” the 42-folio work was written mostly in Turkish with some sections in Arabic.

Nasûh then accompanied Suleiman on his campaign in Iraq in 940/1534, during which time he took to writing history and translating seminal Arabic language histories into Turkish. We can confirm from numerous sources that Nasûh passed away in 958/1551 [6]. Many works bearing his name, or various permutations, appear after his death – including mathematical works, travelogues, even miniature paintings for which Nasûh has become celebrated. Whether or not Nasûh authored them, or whether others with the fairly common name Nasûh penned the works cannot be determined given the available information [7].

Later historians describe Nasûh as having been a master of maṭraq, a cane fighting art meant to train swordfigthing. Some even claim that he was its inventor. Nasuh’s association with the art became such that he is often called “Matrakçı Nasûh” or “Nasûh the Master of the art of maṭraq.” essentially cane fighting meant to train one in the proper use of sword arts [8]. While documents such as the Berat praise Nasûh’s exceptional performance in many different combat exercises, maṭraq or any similar art is not called out. Likewise, the cavalry-focused Tuḥfat al-ghuzāt does not feature exercises that resemble maṭraq.

Treatise

The mostly Turkish language “Treatise dedicated to the Holy Warriors” follows the genre-defining precedents that previous Arabic language martial arts texts have set. Recent scholarship has drawn on the three available manuscripts in collections in Turkey and Hungary as well as contemporaneous treatises featuring Ottoman cavalry exercise to present a critical edition, complete with limited illustrations [9]. The work bears a colophon dating to 938-9 AH/1533 CE and has script that is consonant with Nasûh’s translations of Arabic language histories [10]. By and large, Nasûh’s material is his own as far as scholars can tell, but he draws on several Arabic language works on ḥadīth and histories for certain sections. In others, he makes use of one Mamluk Arabic language treatise (Lāchin b. ʿAbdallāh al-Ṭarablūsī (738/1338) Ṭuhfat al-mujāhidīn fī-l-ʿamal bi-l-mayādīn) and now lost Turkish-Arabic treatises that seem to be translations of Arabic furūsīya materials (ʿUmdat al-ṣilāḥ, and Ṣilāḥshurnāma). Nasûh cites Ṭuhfat al-mujāhidīn by name throughout Ṭuḥfat al-ghuzāt to showcase his knowledge of furūsīya material and also to situate his own work within the lineage of masters who came before him [11].

It is clear that Nasûh wrote this work to celebrate the circumcision festival of the crown princes of Suleiman I, and perhaps to cement his career among the palace guard. In terms of form and content, Nasûh clearly writes to place himself in the tradition of Arabic-language furūsīya authors, most notably Mamluk-era authors (r. 1250-1517 CE) [12]. In doing so, I would assert that Nasûh participates in efforts to legitimize the Ottomans as the new leading polity in the western Islamicate. Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt is meant to demonstrate that Ottoman cavaliers are successors to their defeated foes, most notably the Mamluks in Egypt after 1517 CE. It is also meant to be a work that supersedes previous treatises.

In typical fashion for Furūsīya treatises, Ṭuhfat al-ghuzāt begins with benedictions, an introduction praising those who support and participate in Jihād, and lamentations over the state of soldiery [13]. It offers general pedagogical exhortations to remedy such issues that can be gained by reading the treatise – summarized in an “Ode to Weapons-bearers” (Qaṣīda-yi ṣilāhshurān) [14]. Following convention, Nasûh’s work is organized into four chapters (Ar. faṣl) dealing with particular weapons —in order: Bow, Sword, Mace, and Lance— and one chapter on troop organization, deployment, and tactics. Each chapter on weapons has a history of the weapon and exercises (Tur. ḥovpare) devoted to it meant to be performed by troops in the maydān – a space for military exercise in Constantinople’s Hippodrome (today’s Sultanahmet Meydanı in Istanbul). All exercises are performed on horseback, and assume that the riders are also utilizing shields (kalkan, ḥaddād) that can be maneuvered around the body and held in the left hand while shooting a bow. Nasûh equates his Exercises (Tur. ḥovpare) with Forms (Ar. band, pl. bunūd)—a term that Arabic-language authors have used to describe formulaic exercises that one carries out against a compliant or semi-compliant partner (not unlike paired kata in Japanese martial arts traditions).

Featured here is Nasûh’s section on the Sword. As the reader will notice, the exercises have far more to do with the use of the sword as a sidearm to the bow than they do with swordplay in and of itself. However, from a more general perspective, Nasûh features sword techniques that are relevant to the development of saber-play overall. Most notably, the so called “mangonel cut” (manjanīq, meaning in Arabic and Turkish in general a “catapult”) in Form 2 and Form 9 can be considered a kind of mimicry of a catapult or trebuchet arm – that is, a descending molinello from the shoulder after threatening first with an ascending cut from the right as a feint.

Additional Resources

The following is a list of publications containing scans, transcriptions, and translations relevant to this article, as well as published peer-reviewed research.

None.

Matrakçı Nasûh, Tuhfetü’l-Guzât: Bir Silahşorluk risalesi, Ümran KARADENİZ ed. (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2019) -pp 8-12 for biographical information on Nasuh -pp 62-64 on critical edition of sword section.

Hüseyin G. YURDAYDIN, Matrakçı Nasûh (Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, 1963) -pp. 2-11 for biographical information -pp. 70-71 for text of Berat

Shihab al-Sarraf, “Mamluk Furūsīyah Literature and Its Antecedents,” in Mamlūk Studies Review Vol. VIII, No. 1 (2004). -Overview of Furūsīya literature, core elements of the genre, and major authors:

Agnès CARAYON, “La Furūsiyya Des Mamlûks: Une élite sociale à cheval (1250-1517), Doctoral Thesis in History (Arab World, Muslim, and Semitic Studies), Université de Provence Aix-Marseille, June 26 2012. -Best catalogue to date concerning Arabic-language martial arts literature from the 9th – 16th cent.

References

  1. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pp. 7-8
  2. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pp. 9-16
  3. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pg. 8
  4. YURDAYDIN, Matrakçı Nasûh, pp. 2-11, 70-71
  5. YURDAYDIN, Matrakçı Nasûh, pp. 70-71
  6. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pg. 8
  7. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pg. 9
  8. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pp. 7; YURDAYDIN, Matrakçı Nasûh, pp. 2-3
  9. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pp. 17-40
  10. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pg. 89
  11. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pp. 37-40
  12. See: al-Sarraf, “Mamluk Furūsīyah Literature and Its Antecedents;” CARAYON, “La Furūsiyya Des Mamlûks”
  13. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pp. 43-53
  14. KARADENİZ, Tuhfetü’l-guzât, pp. 54-55