The 13th century was a turning point for the Muslim countries of the Eastern Mediterranean. During this period, the powerful Rum (Seljuk) sultanate is declining, the Mongols are falling on the region, and in Egypt, the Ayyubids are replaced by Mamluks al-Bahri, Turks by origin. The Turkic-Mongolian world defines the history of the Eastern Mediterranean in the 13th century. Since the publication of De-Guignes J. Histoire generate des Huns, des Turcs, des Mongoles et des autres Tartares occidentaux in 1756-1758, it is believed that the term "türk" was usually used by the authors of texts to refer only to the dominant part of the Turkic society (Bernstam, 1946, p. 23, 84). that is, under the Turkic states were understood only those in which the military and political elite consisted of ethnic Turks. In the 13th century, there were two major Turkic states: Rum Sultanate and Egypt. They attempted to transfer the traditional Turkic political system to new living conditions. This inevitably led to its transformation: in the conditions of a region with a developed agricultural culture, nomads were moving to a sedentary lifestyle. The situation in Egypt is particularly interesting, since the existence of nomads among the Mamluks was impossible due to the specifics of this group. The weakening of nomadic traditions, the adoption of Islam by the Turks, remoteness from their ancestral territories, and close connection with developed cultures inevitably led to the transformation of the traditional Turkic nomadic system in all spheres, including in the sphere of public administration.

In the second half of the XIII century. Egypt became the leading power in the Middle East, stopping the advance of the Ilkhans and extending its power to Palestine, Syria and Upper Mesopotamia. Unfortunately, despite the abundance of sources [Semenova, 1966, pp. 8-17], this period is poorly studied.

The main source for writing this article is a fragment of the work of the early Mamluk period "Cream of Thought in the History of the Hijra" (Zubdat al-Fikra fi Ta'rich al-Hijra), covering the period from 650 to 658 AH (1252-1260). This chronicle was written at the beginning of the 14th century by one of the representatives of the Mamluk elite, the deputy of the sultan (na'ib al-sultan) in 1311 - 1312 - Baybars al-Mansuri an-Nasiri (d. 1325) [Richards, 1998, p. XVIII] (first published in 1998 in Arabic, it wasn't translated into Russian). All translations of dates from the chronology from the Hijri to the chronology from the birth of Christ were made according to the table of Kh. K. Baranov [Baranov, 2002, pp. 924-926].

The phrase "senior Emir" - al - ' amir al-kabir (plural - al-'umara' al-kibar) is mentioned in this fragment in six cases and concerns only the history of Egypt and the Rum Sultanate. There is no doubt that here we meet with an element of the Turkic-Mongolian political organization, as evidenced by the following facts::

page 136
1) The" Senior Emir " is not mentioned when describing events in other Muslim countries (Iraq, Syria, Maghreb) [Baybars al-Mansuri, 1998, pp. 1-55]; 2) In the system of the traditional Seljuk political organization, there was an institution of "big beks" - ulu bakalar (Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 116), the literal translation of this phrase is the Arabic "al-'umara' al-kibar". This phrase was based on the institute ulu γ (ordu, elig) beg (plural baglar)that existed in the ancient Turkic political system [Ancient Turkic Dictionary, 1969, p. 610, 170]; 3) Rashid ad-Din mentions "senior (singular - bozorg, Arabic translation - kabir) emirs" [Rashid ad-Din, vol. 2, 2002, p. 131], whose existence in the Great Steppe is recorded before the invasion of Genghis Khan [Rashid ad-Din, vol. 1, 2002, pp. 266-281]; 4) Konstantin Bagryanorodny in his work "On the Management of the Empire" mentions the existence of eight femes among the Panchakites (Pechenegs), each of them is headed by a "senior (μεγας) archon (αρχωυ)" [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, pp. 155-156], which translated into Arabic will give us al - ' amir al-kabir.

Thus, we record the existence of "senior emirs" among the Turkic peoples for a long period, which allows us to conclude that in this case we are dealing with an element of traditional Turkic political organization. The traditional Turkic state structure was a combination of tribal organization and political structure-el (el), which mutually complemented each other (Istoriya Vostoka, 2002, p.152). Which stratum are the "senior emirs" an element of - tribal or political, supra-tribal?

The use of the phrase uluy beg in the examples given by the Ancient Turkic Dictionary (articles "Uluy" and "Elig") suggests that this institution was associated with the horde and el, i.e., it was an element of the political structure of the Turkic organization of the state. In the Karakhanid state, "ulugh beks" invariably participated in khan's councils and were representatives of the military, rather than tribal nobility (Agadzhanov, 1991, p. 68).

Rashid al-Din uses the word "bozorg" when describing some emirs, which, as already mentioned, is semantically identical to the words "uluyy" and "kabir" (as well as μεγας). One of the strata of the Sasanian aristocracy was the bozorgan [Bozorgan, p. 427], which is the plural of the word bozorg. The Bozorgan (Var: wuzurgan) were separated from the other four divisions of the Sasanian aristocracy, including the azadegan - "noble" by blood [Bozorgan, p. 427]. In Farsi, the word dzadegan (singular azade) has retained its meaning of "noble person" [Persian-Russian Dictionary, 1382, p. 68]. Thus, the nature of the word chosen by Rashid al-Din suggests that he wanted to emphasize the fact that these emirs were not representatives of the tribal nobility.

The phrase chosen by Konstantin Bagryanorodny also clearly indicates the non-generic nature of this institution. The word "archon" is used by the author of the work "On State Administration" to refer to the rulers of states: Arab caliphs, ancient Russian princes, South Slavic rulers, etc. [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 51, 71, 73, 113, 161]. The name of the territories ruled by the Pecheneg "archons" - femes, i.e. administrative and political divisions-is also significant [Konstantin Bagryanorodny, 1989, p. 155].

For a pragmatic analysis, we used the already mentioned work of Rashid al-Din, and especially the "Memo on the Emirs of Tumans and Thousands and on the troops of Genghis Khan" [Rashid al-Din, vol. 1, 2002, pp. 266-281]. The use of this source seems to us quite correct, since Rashid ad-Din records the existence of" senior emirs " in the Great Steppe before the beginning of Genghis Khan's activity. After analyzing this text, we came to the following conclusions: : 1) The title "senior Emir" was not associated in any way with Genghis Khan's relatives; 2) "Senior Emirs" existed before Genghis Khan's conquests; 3)" Senior Emirs "could be appointed by Genghis Khan; 4)" Senior emis-

page 137
ry "headed" thousands " and "tumans" in the army of Genghis Khan on an equal basis with the emirs; 5) "Senior emirs", being thousand-year-olds in the army of Genghis Khan, had the right to appoint thousands of emirs (sic!) at your own discretion.

It can be concluded that in the traditional Turkic organization of the state, "senior emirs" were the heads of associations of several tribal groups. Such associations were political rather than tribal institutions.

Next, we need to try to determine the role of "senior emirs" in the governance system of Mamluk Egypt. We can distinguish the following cases of mentioning the "senior Emir" in the above fragment from the Cream of Thought in the History of the Hijra:

1) The Ayyubids bought Mamluks to " make them senior emirs and leaders of the army "(Baybars al-Mansurl, 1998, p. 3); 2) The meeting of Sultan Giyas al-Din and Malik Qutuz with their senior emirs before the decisive battle with the Mongols, in the first case before the battle of Qusedag [Baybars al- Mansurl, 1998, p. 21), in the second case before the battle of Ain Jalut [Baybars al-Mansurl, 1998, p. 50]; 3) Mention of the father and grandfather ("senior emirs") and title (bakalarbaki, or beylerbey) [Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 4]. 171] Sayf ad-Din Turuntai, who accompanied Sultan Ala ad-Din Kai-Kubad to Meng, and after the sultan's death became the ambassador of Sultan Izz ad-Din Kai-Kawus [Baybars al-Mansurl, 1998, p. 27]. The case of Sayf ad-Din Turuntai is also of interest for understanding the essence of the institution of "senior emirs", since it is well known that his family came from the Sultan's Ghulams [Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 106], and not from the Oghuz aristocracy; 4) The announcement of the jihad against the Tatars by the Sultan Izz ad-Din and the appointment of the head of the Emirate. one of the" senior emirs "for the post of commander of the troops [Baybars al-Mansurl, 1998, p. 31]; 5) A meeting of the" senior emirs " and the nobility of the army, which deprived Malik al-Mansur Nur ad-Din Ali of power and elevated Sayf ad-Din Qutuz to the throne, who took the throne name al- Mudzaffar (Baybars al-Mansuri, 1998, p. 46).

In cases where" senior emirs " are mentioned together, they decide on two issues: the choice of ruler and the conduct of war. In the traditional Turkic political system, the kurultai (huriltai, hurultai) was the collective body responsible for resolving such issues. As an element of the political system of the nomads of the Great Steppe, the Kurultai has been recorded since the first century AD (Kuriltai). Thus, it is necessary to build a model of the Kurultai and use it as an expert system for the Egyptian material. The most complete information about the Kurultai is contained in the work of Rashid al-Din "Collection of Chronicles". However, we need to build a model of the Kurultai among the Turks that is not affected by the institutions of Genghis Khan, so we will use various sources to describe the "ideal" Kurultai.

The modern Mamluk state of Egypt was the Rum (Seljuk) Sultanate. As mentioned above, Baybars al-Mansoori records the existence of an assembly of "senior emirs"in this state. The Kurultai was a characteristic element of the political system of the Rum Sultanate, as well as other Turkic states, and performed two major functions: the election of a new supreme ruler (Gumilev, 2003, p.88) and the resolution of important foreign policy issues (Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 172). The Kurultai was to be conducted in accordance with the toru, a set of unwritten rules of customary law (Agadzhanov, 1991, p. 25).

The Kurultai clearly had a sacred character. This is evidenced both by the nature of the ceremony of proclaiming the ruler, and by the Turks ' perception of the nature of his power. The supreme ruler could be elected only from one clan (from the Ashina clan in the Turkic Khaganates [Gumilev, 2003, p. 64-67, 514-517], from the Seljuk clan in the Seljukid state [Gordlevsky, 1960, p.79]. This was due to a certain sacred function of the ruler, who was "the high priest for the people and for the nobles" [Gumilev, 2003, p. 92], as well as the guardian of "törü" [Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 85]. T. D. Skrynnikova, using, however, Mongolian, but also pre-Genghis Khan-

page 138
However, Skrynnikov believes that the act of enthroning a new ruler was primarily an act of revitalizing and activating charisma( sülde), which was always associated with the place of burial of ancestors, i.e. with its sacredness (Skrynnikova, 2005, p.110). The sacredness of the ruler's power is also indicated by the special ceremonies held upon the accession of the new supreme ruler to the throne [Gumilev, 2003, p.60; Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 88]. The sacredness of the ruler as the" high priest " of the ancestral cult also determined the special sacredness of the ancestral territory of the ruler, since the ancestors were considered as intercessors and representatives before Heaven-Tengri [Gumilev, 2003, p.90-91]. The sacredness of these gatherings was also emphasized by the ceremonial feast that accompanied the accession of the supreme ruler to the throne and the discussion of military campaigns, at which tribal representatives received a piece of meat defined as "törü" (Gordlevsky, 1960, p.80; Rashid ad-Din, vol. 1, 2002, pp. 87-91). Participants in the Kurultai were beys (Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 88; Rashid ad-Din, vol. 1, 2002, p. 90) - tribal nobility (Istoriya Vostoka, 2002, p.152) and "senior beys" (Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 116), i.e. representatives of non-tribal nobility.

Thus, the kurultai can be defined as an intertribal meeting of the heads of ethno-social associations accompanied by a feast, held on the territory of the clan ruling in this confederation of ethno-social associations, having a sacred character, at which the charisma of the supreme ruler was received or confirmed, various foreign policy issues were resolved (primarily the organization of military campaigns) and regulations were introduced.

Now we will transfer this scheme to the situation in Mamluk Egypt according to the aforementioned source.

It should be noted that in Egypt, the concept of "senior emir" was filled with other content that was not related to blood or ethno-political relations. Since the Mamluks entered Egypt as slaves after the defeat of Desht-i Kipchak by Jochi troops and after the Mongol campaign of 1228-1229. [Pletneva, 1990, p. 170], it is natural that the preservation of tribal structures was impossible. The Mamluk organization tried to copy tribal ties through the formation of Mamluk beit houses based on corporate ties (Zelenev, 1999, p. 129). The Mamluks continued to feel their ethnic and tribal identity (for example, the first Mamluk Malik al-Mu'izz Izz al-Din Aibek had Nisbu at-Turkmani, t. E. Turkmen [Baybars al-Mansuri, 1998, p. 6], but, of course, there could be no question of reviving the Kipchak tribal organization in Egypt. The tribal organization was replaced by a system of corporate relations, in which military leaders became the heads of associations - emirs of hundreds, forty, ten and five Mamluks (Semenova, 1966, p. 51). During the war, the emirs of the hundred commanded, in addition to their own hundred, a thousand Khalq warriors, which is why Mamluk historians call them "commanders of the hundred, leaders of the thousand" [Semenova, 1966, p.52]. It can be assumed that" senior emirs " in Mamluk Egypt were called heads of houses, i.e. emirs of the senior division.

After constructing the Kurultai model, it is necessary to apply it in relation to the Egyptian material. The comparison will be based on three main parameters: venue, participants, and functions. The results are presented in the following table:

-

"Model"

Egyptian

Location of the event

Sacred ancestral territory

Depending on the situation

List of participants

Representatives of the ruling dynasty, senior emirs, emirs

Senior emirs, know the troops, emirs

Functions

Receiving or renewing charisma by the supreme ruler; State and military matters

Election of Malik from his own circle, discussion of military issues

page 139
It should be noted that in the conditions of Islamic society and the isolation of the Kipchaks from their ancestral territories, the Kurultai could not retain its sacred significance. An Islamic institution was erected over the Kurultai in the person of the caliph, who authorized the coming to power of a new ruler (through a special ceremony, sending special clothes and banners, as well as a drum and scepter [Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 54], and the rule of Islam, whose defenders the Mamluks declared themselves (Baybars al-Mansuri, 1998, p. 54). 1], could not allow the preservation of the sacred character of the Kurultai. The desacralization of the Kurultai has led to a rethinking in the Turkic Islamic states of this gathering, which begins to be thought of and called pir-shilan [Gordlevsky, 1960, p. 80; Barthold, 1963, p. 162-163] or is characterized descriptively ("gathered and agreed"). The desacralization of the Kurultai and the destruction of the tribal organization of the Kipchaks in Egypt led to the disappearance of the condition for choosing a ruler from only one clan. The ability to make decisions was also limited by sharia law and the need to obtain fatwas from the clergy.

In Mamluk Egypt, from the middle of the 13th century, the Kurultai lost its character of an supra-tribal association and became, in essence, a council of military commanders. "Senior emirs" turned into military commanders who headed associations based mainly on corporate ties, and the Kurultai was characterized by the following features::

1) loss of sacredness and connection with the ancestral territory;

2) expansion of the number of participants: in the case of the election of the ruler, the sanction of the caliph is required, in the case of the adoption of any regulations, the sanction of the Islamic clergy is required;

3) complete loss of the tribal character of the kurultai: it became a gathering of military commanders;

4) maintaining, with the participation of "senior emirs" and emirs, the function of electing a ruler (but not necessarily from the same clan), as well as the function of a military council;

5) blurring and disappearing of the concept of "Kurultai".

list of literature

Agadzhanov S. G. The Seljukid State and Central Asia in the XI-XII centuries. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1991.

Baranov Kh. K. Table of coordination of the Hijri years with the years of the Christian era / / Baranov Kh.K. Arabic-Russian dictionary. Vol. 2. Moscow: Russian Language, 2002, pp. 924-926.

Barthold V. V. Sochineniya, Vol. 2, part 1. Obshchie raboty po istorii Srednoi Azii [General works on the history of Central Asia], Moscow: Izd. vostochny lit., 1963.

Bernshtam A. Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskiy stroi orkhono-eniseyskikh tyurok VI - VIII vekov [Socio-economic structure of the Orkhon-Yenisei Turks of the VI-VIII centuries]. Vol. XLV. Moscow-L.: Akad Publishing House. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1946.

Gordlevsky V. A. Izbrannye sochineniya [Selected Works], vol. 1, Moscow: Izd. East lit., 1960.

Gumilev L. N. Ancient Turks. St. Petersburg: Kristall Publ., 2003.

Drevnetyurkskiy slovar ' [Ancient Turkic Dictionary], Nauka Publ., 1969.

Zakirov S. Diplomatic relations of the Golden Horde with Egypt, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1966.

Zelenev E. I. Egypt. The Middle Ages. New time. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University Publ., 1999.

Istoriya Vostoka v 6-ti tomakh [History of the East in 6 volumes]. Vostok v Sredniye veka [East in the Middle Ages], Moscow: Publishing House of the East Lit. Company of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2002.
Konstantin Porphyrogenitus. On the management of the Empire, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1989.

Persiansko-russkiy slovar ' [Persian-Russian Dictionary], vol. 1, ed. by Yu. A. Rubinchik. Tehran: Intesherat-e Javedan harad, 1382 (G. H., S. K.).

Pletneva S. A. Polovtsy, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1990.

Rashid al-Din. Collection of Chronicles, vol. 1, part 2; Vol. 2, part 1. Moscow: Ladomir Publ., 2002.

Semenova L. A. Salah ad-Din and the Mamluks in Egypt, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1966.

Skrynnikova T. D. Sakralnost ' pravitelya v srednevekovom mongol'skom obshchestve [The sacredness of the ruler in the medieval Mongolian society]. Parts II, III. Moscow: Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2005.

Baybars al-Mansuri. Zubdat al-Fikra fi Ta'rich al-Hijra. Berlin-Beirut: Das Arabische Buch, 1998.

Bozorgan // Encyclopaedia Iranica [Electronic resourse] // www.iranica.com

Kuriltai // Mongolia. Glossary [Electronic resourse] // http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/mongolia/mn_glos.html

Richards D. S. Introduction // Baybars al-Mansuri. Zubdat al-Fikra fi Ta'rich al-Hijra. Berlin - Beirut: Das Arabische Buch, 1998.

Permanent link to this publication: