Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan  Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri

Uzun Kazım

doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

Araştırma Makalesi

DOI :10.26650/iutd.1082294 IUP :10.26650/iutd.1082294 Tam Metin (PDF)

Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri

Memlûk ve Altın Orda devletlerinin müşterek çıkarları hedefleyen ilişkileri ortak düşman söylemi etrafında şekillenmiş ve gelişmiştir. Buna bağlı olarak Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in üçüncü saltanat dönemine kadar taraflar bir müttefik görüntüsü çizmişlerdir. Ancak farklılaşan konjonktürün tesiriyle Sultan en-Nâsır politika değişikliğine giderek Altın Orda ve İlhanlı devletleri arasında bir denge siyaseti gütmeye çalışmıştır. İlhanlı sonrası dönemde ise Memlûk-Altın Orda ilişkileri bu defa başka bir ortak düşman söylemi etrafında yeniden canlandırılmaya çalışılmıştır. Bu çalışmada söz konusu münasebetler tüm yönleriyle tespit ve tetkike gayret edilmiş ve ayrıca bunların genelinin mahiyetine dair yeni bir yorum getirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Memlûk Devleti, Altın Orda, İlhanlılar, Timur, İttifak

DOI :10.26650/iutd.1082294 IUP :10.26650/iutd.1082294 Tam Metin (PDF)

The Political and Diplomatic Relations of the Mamluks and Golden Horde After the Third Enthronement of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad

Kazım Uzun

The relations between the states of the Mamluks and the Golden Horde aimed at common interests were shaped and developed around the discourse of the common enemy. Accordingly, the parties had drawn the image of allies until the third reign of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad. However, with the effects from differing conjunctures, Sultan al-Nasir made a policy change and tried to pursue a policy of balance between the Golden Horde and Ilkhanate states. In the post-Ilkhanid period, the attempt was made to revive Mamluk–Golden Horde relations, this time around another common enemy discourse. This study aims to determine these aforementioned relations, examine them in all their aspects, and also provide a new interpretation regarding their general nature.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Mamluks, Golden Horde, Ilkhanate, Timur, Alliance

GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET

Mamluk and Golden Horde relations began and developed toward common interests by virtue of the initiatives of Sultan Baibars. The Ilkhanid were pivotal to these relations as a common enemy, and the diplomatic agenda of the parties was shaped by a prospective joint operation against the Ilkhanid. The joint operation against the Ilkhanate remained and could even be claimed to have been exclusively kept on the agenda for nearly half a century. However, this study reveals no such operation was ever launched due to what beclouded the relationship between the parties and the policy the Mamluks adopted. Nevertheless, preserving the discourse on a possible joint expedition had well suppressed the Ilkhanate.

Until the third reign of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad, Mamluk–Golden Horde political and diplomatic relations remained within the above-mentioned framework, and the parties showed complete alliance, at least diplomatically. However, Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad’s ascension to the throne for a third time was a milestone in the course of this relationship and may be closely associated with Abu Said Bahadur Khan’s ascension to the Ilkhanid throne in 1317 and adoption of a different policy than the previous Ilkhanid rulers. The Ilkhanid abandoned their aggressive policies against the Mamluks and took a pro-peace stance, one which the Mamluks reciprocated. A peace treaty was signed in 1323 pursuant to negotiations. This treaty shifted the course of Mamluk–Golden Horde relations. Sultan al-Nasir had abandoned the traditional policy in which the Mamluks were fully allied with the Golden Horde and began following a policy of balance between the Golden Horde and the Ilkhanid states. This attitude fell far below the expectations of the Golden Horde and caused diplomatic problems between the two states. Despite these above-mentioned problems, the Mamluks and Golden Horde preserved their diplomatic relations.

The death of Sultan al-Nasir and Uzbek Khan and the end of the political existence of the Ilkhanate during this period also altered Mamluk–Golden Horde relations after the 1340s. Both parties leaned toward reestablishing and developing friendly relations and made diplomatic initiatives accordingly. However, the internal conflicts in both states and the absence of the threat of a common enemy hampered this construction for a while.

Akin to the Ilkhanid case, Timur’s rise and influence in the Iranian region grew into a new threat for both the Mamluk and Golden Horde states. As a common enemy, Timur encouraged a renewed alliance between the Mamluks and the Golden Horde. The measures and prospective joint operation against this new common enemy was at the core of the diplomatic contacts that had started becoming more frequent after 1385. However, Timur managed to be effective in the domain of the Golden Horde through his campaigns against Tokhtamysh Khan in the 1390s.

Timur was also a threat to political elements in Anatolia as well. Thus, diplomatic contacts were established among the Ottomans, Mamluks, and Kadi Burhan al-Din in order to form an anti-Timur front, with an alliance being established accordingly. Later, the scope of the alliance was expanded with the participation of the Golden Horde. These above-mentioned efforts suppressed Timur for a short period. However, Timur would later on enter Anatolia and Syria, which was under Mamluk domination.

Limited diplomatic contact is known to have occurred between the Mamluk and Golden Horde states in the first quarter of the 15th century. However, the collapse of the Golden Horde’s central authority after Tokhtamysh Khan hindered diplomatic relations and a strong alliance discourse from being reestablished. Eventually, Mamluk–Golden Horde political and diplomatic relations came to an end with few weak contacts in the late 1420s.

The diplomatic relations between the Mamluk and Golden Horde states had important consequences. The alliance established through these relations had through suppression prevented the Ilkhanid from concentrating all their power on the Mamluks or the Golden Horde. Therefore, this alliance in question in fact had significant results for both states. However, no joint operation against the Ilkhanate and later on against Timur was ever launched, despite being kept on the agenda in diplomatic correspondence. At this point, discussing the Mamluks’ political stance would be useful.

Despite their common origin, certain historical enmities had existed between the Golden Horde and the Ilkhanate. Both states claimed rights over the Azerbaijan region in particular, and these problems also frequently brought the two states into conflict. Thus, a permanent resolution could not be claimed to be achievable unless the Golden Horde or the Ilkhanid state renounced their claims and interests in the Azerbaijan region. The khans of the Golden Horde saw the suppression of the Ilkhanate as a political gain by virtue of the alliance established with the Mamluks, and they wanted to strengthen this alliance. However, the ultimate goal of the Golden Horde State was to completely get rid of the Ilkhanate by organizing a joint campaign against this enemy.

In their correspondence, the Mamluk and Golden Horde states had agreed on a strategy to launch a campaign against the Ilkhanate where one of these two states would advance from the north and the other from the south. As stated by other researchers, the long distance between these states and the dominance of Byzantium in a significant part of this distance had nevertheless made the communication and organization necessary for a joint operation against the Ilkhanate very difficult. However, whether the Mamluks could even have organized an expedition into the central lands of the Ilkhanate in practice should also be questioned.

The Euphrates River represented the eastern border of the Mamluk State, and the Mamluks’ sphere of influence and activity never exceeded Mesopotamia. Unlike the Golden Horde, the Mamluks claimed no dominance over Azerbaijan or Iran. Under these circumstances, organizing a campaign on the central lands or domination area of a strong state and leader like the Ilkhanid or Timur would not have been a very realistic goal for the Mamluks, nor would it have sounded easy or beneficial. What was essential for the Mamluks to protect their area of rule and interests from both the Ilkhanid and Timur. Instead of embarking on a common campaign, which would have been very difficult with uncertain results, the Mamluks developed a common operation discourse by virtue of the relations established with the Golden Horde. They tried to suppress the Ilkhanid and Timur by keeping this discourse on the agenda. Therefore, unlike the Golden Horde, the Mamluks attempted to protect their rule and interests by maintaining the discourse on a prospective expedition rather than directly organize a very difficult joint campaign. During the third reign of Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad, the Ilkhanate had to abandon their claims and actions in Mamluk Syria as a result of a peace treaty. Thus, Sultan al-Nasir changed his traditional Mamluk policy as he no longer needed an anti-Ilkhanid rhetoric by virtue of the peace treaty that had been signed. With this peace treaty, the sultan managed to protect Mamluk dominance and interests and began to follow a policy of balance between the Golden Horde and the Ilkhanid states. Although Uzbek Khan negatively reacted to this policy, Sultan al-Nasir did not abandon it. The Ilkhanid state, which had already been weakened, would come to an end shortly after. By reviving their relations, the Mamluk and Golden Horde states tried to establish a new alliance against Timur and to revive the discourse of a common operation. This discourse had a certain degree of diplomatic effect. However, carrying out a joint expedition was just as difficult as it had been in the time of the Ilkhanid and appeared just as useless and unrealistic for the Mamluks. Ultimately, it never happened.

Referanslar

Abdürrezzâk es-Semerkandî, Matla-ı Sa’deyn, c. I, tah. Abdulhüseyn Nevâî, Tahran 2004. google scholar
Ağat, Nurettin, Altınordu Paraları Kataloğu 1250-1502, İstanbul 1976. google scholar
Ahmed b. Muhammed-i Gaffârî-i Kazvînî, Tarih-i Cihan Âra, tah. Hasan Nerâkî, Tahran 1342. google scholar
Aka, İsmail, “Timurluların Azerbaycan İle Alakaları”, Türk Kültürü, sayı 345 (1992), s. 11-17. google scholar
Akkuş Yiğit, Fatma, “İktidar ve İzdivaç: Memlûk-Altın Orda-İlhanlı Üçgeninde Siyasi Evlilikler”, Karadeniz Araştırmaları, sayı 49 (2016), s. 103-120. google scholar
Amitai, Reuven, “The Resolution of The Mongol-Mamluk War”, Mongols, Turks, and Others Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World, ed. Reuven Amitai-Michal Biran, Leiden-Boston 2005, s. 359-390. google scholar
Ayalon, David, “Memlûk Devletinde Kölelik Sistemi”, çev. Samira Kortantamer, Tarih İncelemeleri Dergisi, sayı 4 (1989), s. 211-247. google scholar
, “The Great Yasa of Chingiz Khan. A Reexamination (Part C1)”, Studia Islamica, sayı 36 (1972), s. 113-158. google scholar
Aynî, Ikdu’l-CumânfîTarihiEhli’z-Zamân, CöopHUKMamepuanoB, omııocıımuvcıı k ucmopuu3onomoüopdhi (Altın Orda Tarihi İle İlgili Kayıtlar Derlemesi), ed. V. Tiesenhausen, c. I, Petersburg 1884, s. 475-534. google scholar
_________, Ikdu’l-Cumân fî Tarîhi Ehli’z-Zamân, Beyazıt Devlet Kütüphanesi Veliyyüddin Efendi Koleksiyonu, no. 2394; 2395; 2396. google scholar
________, Ikdu’l-Cumân fî Tarîhi Ehli’z-Zamân, neşr. Abdürrâzık et-Tantâvî el-Karmût, Kahire 1989. google scholar
Barker, Hannah, That Most Precious Merchandise: The Mediterranean Trade in Black Sea Slaves, 12601500, Philadelphia 2019. google scholar
Beitrage zur Geschichte der Mamlukensultane in den Jahren 690-741 der Higra nach arabischen Handschriften, ed. Karl Wilhelm Zettersteen, Leiden 1919. google scholar
Birzâlî, el-Muktefî alâ Kitâb er-Ravzateyn, c. IV, tah. Ömer Abdüsselam Tedmurî, Sayda-Beyrut 2006. google scholar
Broadbridge, Anne F., Kingship and Ideology in the Islamic and Mongol Worlds, Cambridge 2008. google scholar
Canard, Marius, “Un Traite Entre Byzance et l’ Egypte au XIIIe Siecle et les Relations Diplomatiques de Michel VIII Paleologue avec les Sultans Mamluks Baibars et Qala’un”, Melanges Gaudefroy-Demombynes, Kahire 1934-1945, s. 197-224. google scholar
Cezerî, Havâdisü’z-Zaman ve Enbâ’uhû ve Vefeyâtü’l-Ekâbir ve’l-Ayân min Ebnâ’ihî, c. II, neşr. Ömer Abdüsselam Tedmurî, Sayda-Beyrut 1998. google scholar
Ciociltan, Virgil, The Mongols and the Black Sea Trade in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries, çev. Samuel Willcocks, Leiden-Boston 2012. google scholar
Çetin, Altan, Memlûk Devletinde Askerî Teşkilât, İstanbul 2007. google scholar
________, “Akdeniz Ticaretinde Memlûklar Devri, Mısır-Anadolu Mal Mübadelesi”, Adalya, sayı XI (2008), s. 359-371. google scholar
DeWeese, Devin, Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde: Baba Tükles and Conversion to Islam in Historical and Epic Tradition, Pennsylvania 1994. google scholar
Ebû’l-Fidâ, Tarihu Ebi’l-Fidâ (el-Muhtasarfî Ahbâri’l-Beşer), c. II, neşr. Mahmud Deyyûb, Beyrut 1997. google scholar
Ebûbekr el-Kutbî el-Eherî, Ta’rikh-i Shaikh Uwais (History of Shaikh Uwais), neşr. ve İng. çev. Johannes Baptist van Loon, Lahey 1954. google scholar
Ebü’l-Fedâil, Âgypten undSyrien Zwischen 1317 und 1341 in der Chronik desMufaddalIbn Abî al-Fadâ’il, (en-Nehcü’s-Sedîd ve Dürrü’l-Ferîdfî mâ ba’d Tarîhi İbni’l-Âmîd, Havâdisu’l-Fetre Beyne sene 717-741 Hicriyye), ed. Samira Kortantamer, Freiburg 1973. google scholar
Ebü’l-Fedâil, Mufaddal b. Ebü’l-Fedâil, en-Nehcü’s-Sedîd ve Dürrü’l-Ferîd fî mâ ba’d Tarîhi İbni’lÂmîd, neşr. ve Fran. çev. E. Blochet, I. Kısım, Patrologie Orientale, c. 12, Turnhout 1982, s. 65-208 (407-550); III. Kısım, neşr. ve Fran. çev. E. Blochet, Patrologie Orientale, C. 20, Turnhout 1985, s. 1-267 (512-776). google scholar
el-Haccî, Hayat Nâsır, “el-Alâkatu beyne Devleti’l-Memâlîk ve Devleti Moğul el-Kıfçak, 658-741 H./1260-1341 M.”, Havliyyâtu Külliyetu’l-Edeb (Kuveyt), c. II, sayı VIII (1981), s. 9-68. google scholar
Esterâbadî, Bezm u Rezm, çev. Mürsel Öztürk, Ankara 2014. google scholar
Favereau, Marie, The Horde, Cambridge-London 2021. google scholar
Georges Pachymeres, Relations Historiques, c. I, ed. ve Fran. çev. Albert Failler-Vitalien Laurent, Paris 1984. google scholar
Gökbilgin, Özalp, “1313-1357 Yılları Arasında Altınordu Devleti”, Atatürk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Araştırma Dergisi, sayı 4 (1972), s. 1-52. google scholar
Hâfız-ı Ebrû, Zeyl-i Câmi’ü’t-Tevârîh-i Reşîdî, neşr. Hânbâbâ Beyânî, Tahran 1317. google scholar
, Zübdetü’t-Tevârîh, c. I, neşr. Seyyid Kemâl Hâc Seyyid Cevâdî, Tahran 2001. google scholar
Hamdullah el-Müstevfî el-Kazvînî, Tarih-i Güzîde, neşr., Abdülhüseyin Nevâî, Tahran 1387. google scholar
Hammâd Âşûr, Fayed, el-Alâkâtü’s-Siyâsiyye beyne’l-Memâlîk ve’l-Moğûl fî’d-Devleti’l-Memlûkiyyeti’l-Ûlâ, Kahire 1973. google scholar
Handmir, Tarih-i Habîbü’s-Siyer fî Ahbâri Efrâdi Beşer, c. III, neşr. Celaleddin Humâî, Tahran 1362. google scholar
Holt, P. M., Early MamlukDiplomacy (1260-1290). Treaties of Baybars andQalawun with Christian Rulers, Leiden-New York-Köln 1995. google scholar
İbn Arabşâh, Acâibu’l-Makdûrfî Nevâibi Teymûr, tah. Ali Muhammed Ömer, Kahire 1979. google scholar
İbn Battûta, İbn Battûta Seyahatnamesi, c. I, çev. A. Sait Aykut, İstanbul 2004. google scholar
İbn Dokmak, Nüzhetü’l-Enâm fi Tarihi’l-İslâm, CöopHUK MamepuaaoB, othocx^uxcx k ucmopuu 3onomoü opdhi (Altın Orda Tarihi İle İlgili Kayıtlar Derlemesi), ed. V. Tiesenhausen, c. I, Petersburg 1884, s. 315330. google scholar
İbn Fazlullah el-Ömerî, et-Ta’rîf bi-Mustelehi’ş-Şerîf, tah. Muhammed Hüseyin Şemseddin, Beyrut 1988. google scholar
İbn Hacer, ed-Durerü’l-Kâmîne fî A’yâni’l-Mieti’s-Sâmine, c. I, II, neşr. Abdülvâris Muhammed Ali, Beyrut 1997. google scholar
________, İnbâ’u’l-Gumr bi-Ebnâ’i’l-Umr, C. I, III, tah. Hasan Habeşî, Kahire 2009. google scholar
İbn Haldun, Kitâbu’l-'İberveDîvânu’l-Mübteda’ ve’l-Haber, c. V, tah. Halîl Şehâde, Beyrut 2005. google scholar
İbn Kadı Şuhbe, Tarihu İbn Kadı Şuhbe, c. III-III/2, tah. Adnan Derviş, Dımaşk 1995. google scholar
İbn Kesîr, el-Bidâye ve’n-Nihâye, c. XV-XVI, tah. Komisyon, Katar 2015. google scholar
İbn Nâzırü’l-Ceyş, Kitâbü Teskîfi’t-Ta'rîf bi’l-Mustalahi’ş-Şerîf, tah. Rudolf Vesely, Kahire 1987. google scholar
İbn Tagriberdî, en-Nucûm ez-Zâhire fî Mulûki Mısr ve’l-Kâhire, c. X, neşr. Muhammed Hüseyin Şemseddin, Beyrut 1992. google scholar
İbnü’d-Devâdârî, Kenzü’d-Dürerve Câmi'u’l-Gurer, c. IX, neşr. Hans R. Roemer, Kahire 1960. google scholar
İbnü’l-Furât, Tarihu İbnü’l-Furât, c. IX/1, neşr. Konstantin Zureyk, Beyrut 1936; c. IX/2, neşr. Konstantin Zureyk-Neclâ İzzeddin, Beyrut 1938. google scholar
Kafalı, Mustafa, “Özbek Han”, DİA, c. XXXIV, İstanbul 2007, s. 107-109. google scholar
________, Altın Orda Hanlığının Kuruluş ve Yükseliş Devirleri, İstanbul 1976. google scholar
Kalkaşendî, Meâsiru’l-İnâfe fî Meâlimi’l-Hilâfe, tah. Abdüssettâr Ahmed Ferrâc, Beyrut 2006. google scholar
_________, Subhu’l-A‘şâ fî Sınâati’l-İnşâ’, neşr. Muhammed Abdürresûl İbrâhim, c. VII-VIII, XIV, Kahire 1915, 1919. google scholar
Kamalov, İlyas, Moğolların Kafkasya Politikası, İstanbul 2003. google scholar
Kanat, Cüneyt, “Makrîzî’nin Kitâb es-Sulûk’undaki Osmanlılar İle İlgili Kayıtlar”, Türk Dünyası İncelemeleri Dergisi, sayı IV (2000), s. 225-256. google scholar
________, “Memlük Devleti’nde İktidar Değişikliği, Bahri Memlûklar’dan Burcî Memlûklar’a”, Prof. Dr. Işın Demirkent Anısına, haz. Abdülkerim Özaydın vd., İstanbul 2008, s. 541-545. google scholar
________, “Orta Doğu’da Hâkimiyet Mücadelesi (1382-1447), Memlûk-Timurlu Münasebetleri”, Türkler Ansiklopedisi, c. V, Ankara 2002, s. 134-143. google scholar
________, Memlûk-Timurlu Münasebetleri (1382-1447), Ege Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, İzmir 1996. google scholar
Kemaloğlu, İlyas, “Toktamış Han”, DİA, c. XLI, İstanbul 2012, s. 231-232. google scholar
Kılıç, Arslan, Nikiforos Grigoras’ın Romaiki İstoria Adlı Eserinin I.-VI. Bölümlerinin Çevirisi ve Değerlendirilmesi, İzmir Kâtip Çelebi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Basılmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İzmir 2019. google scholar
Kızıltoprak, Süleyman, “Türk Askerî Tarihinde Memlûk Sistemi”, Türkler ve Askerlik, ed. Süleyman Kızıltoprak, İstanbul 2009, s. 139-182. google scholar
Kortantamer, Samira, Bahrî Memlûklar’da Üst Yönetim Mensupları ve Aralarındaki İlişkiler, İzmir 1993. google scholar
Kurat, Akdes Nimet, IV.-XVIII. Yüzyıllarda Karadeniz Kuzeyindeki Türk Kavimleri ve Devletleri, Ankara 2002. google scholar
Labib, Subhi, “Eygptian Commercial Policy in the Middle Ages”, Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East, ed. M. A. Cook, New York 2014, s. 63-77. google scholar
________, “Eyyûbîler ve Memlûkler Devrinde Mısır’ın Ticaret Politikası”, çev. Altan Çetin, Nüsha, sayı 4 (2002), s. 139-156. google scholar
Lane-Pool, Stanley, Catalogue of Oriental Coins in the British Museum, c. VI, London 1881. google scholar
Levanoni, Amalia, A Turning Point in Mamluk History, The Third Reign ofal-Nâsir Muhammad Ibn Qalawun (1310-1341), Leiden 1995. google scholar
Makrîzî, Durerü’l-Ukûdi’l-Ferîde fî Terâcimi’l-A’yâni’l-Mufîde, c. II, tah. Mahmûd el-Celîlî, Beyrut 2002. google scholar
, es-Sulûk li-Ma'rifetiDüveli’l-Mülûk, c. II, tah. Muhammed Mustafa Ziyâde, Kahire 1942; c. III, tah. Saîd Abdulfettâh Âşûr, Kahire 1970; c. IV, tah. Saîd Abdulfettâh Âşûr, Kahire 1972. google scholar
Markov, A. K., Monembi dMyııidon: 3ojıomax Opda, mamapcKue xaHcmea, [Cuci Sikkeleri: Altın Orda, Tatar Hanlıkları], yayına haz. I. M. Mirgaliev, Kazan 2008. google scholar
Muhammed, Subhî Abdülmenam, Siyasetü’l-Moğûli’l-İlhâniyyîn Tucâhi Devleti’l-Memâlikfî Mısr ve’ş-Şam, H. 716-736 / M. 1316-1335, Kahire 2001. google scholar
Muinüddin Natanzi, Müntehabü’t-Tevarih-i Muînî, tah. Pervin İstahrî, Tahran 1383. google scholar
Musa el-Yûsufî, Nüzhetu’n-Nâzırfî Sîreti’l-Meliki’n-Nâsır, neşr. Ahmed Hutayt, Beyrut 1986. google scholar
Nizamüddin Şâmî, Zafernâme, çev. Necati Lugal, Ankara 1987. google scholar
Nuveyrî, Nihayetü’l-Ereb fî Funûni’l-Edeb, c. XXVII, XXXII, XXXIII, tah. Necip Mustafa Fevvâz - Hikmet Kaşlî Fevvâz, Beyrut 2004. google scholar
Özcan, Altay Tayfun, “Altın Orda Hanlığı Zamanında Karadeniz’in Kafkasya Sahillerinde Cenovalı Tüccarlar, Kolonileri ve Ticarı Yaşam”, MUTAD, VII/1 (2020), s. 91-105. google scholar
Remzî, Muhammed Murad, Telfîku’l-Ahbâr ve Telgîhu’l-A ’sârfî Vakâi’Kazan ve Bulgâr veMulûki’t-Tatar, c. I, Beyrut 2002. google scholar
Sağlam, Ahmet, “Memlûk-İlhanlı Diplomatik İlişkileri”, Belleten, LXXXII/293 (2018), s. 83-157. google scholar
________, “Nâsır Muhammed Dönemi Memlûk-Altın Orda Münâsebetleri: Stratejik İttifaklar”, Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 11/61 (2018), s. 324-331. google scholar
________, en-Nâsır Muhammed Devri Memlûk Türk Devleti, Ankara 2021. google scholar
Saray, Mehmet, “Altın Orda Hanlığı”, DİA, c. II, İstanbul 1989, s. 538-540. google scholar
Sayrafî, Nüzhetu’n-Nufûs ve’l-Ebdân fî Tevârîhi’z- Zamân, c. I, III, tah. Hasan Habeşî, Kahire 2010. google scholar
Schamiloglu, Uli, “Altın Ordu”, Türkler, c. VIII, ed. Hasan Celal Güzel-Kemal Çiçek-Salim Koca, Ankara 2002, s. 412-428. google scholar
Sehâvî, ed-Davu’l-Lâmî li-Ehli’l-Karni’t-Tâsi’, c. II, neşr. Abdüllatif Hasan Abdurrahman, Beyrut 2003. google scholar
Spuler, Berthold, İran Moğolları, çev. Cemal Köprülü, Ankara 2011. google scholar
________, The Muslim World, c. II, İng. çev. F. R. C. Bagley, Leiden 1969. google scholar
Sümer, Faruk, “Anadolu’da Moğollar”, Selçuklu Araştırmaları Dergisi, sayı I (1970), s. 1-147. google scholar
Şerefüddin Ali Yezdî, Emîr Timur (Zafernâme), çev. Ahsen Batur, İstanbul 2013. google scholar
Şucâî, Tarihu’l-Meliki’n-Nâsır Muhammed b. Kalâvûn es-Sâlihî ve Evlâdihi, neşr. Barbara Schafer, Wiesbaden 1977. google scholar
Tekindağ, Şehabeddin, Berkuk Devrinde Memlûk Sultanlığı, İstanbul 1961. google scholar
Tomar, Cengiz, Memlûk Devletinde Askerî Kölelik Sistemi (1250-1517), Marmara Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü, Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, İstanbul 2006. google scholar
Usta, Ahmet, Hilal İle Haç Arasında Hayatlar, Ortaçağ Akdenizi’nde Ticaret ve Tüccarlar, İstanbul 2022. google scholar
Uzun, Kâzım, “Başlangıcından Sultan En-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Saltanatına Kadar Memlûk - Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri”, Tarih İncelemeleri Dergisi, 36/2 (2021), s. 735-765. google scholar
Uzunçarşılı, İsmail Hakkı, “Emîr Çoban Soldoz ve Demirtaş”, Belleten, XXXI/124 (1967), s. 601-646. google scholar
Vassâf, Tahrîr-i Tarihi Vassâf, nşr. Abdulmuhammed Âyetî, Tahran 1346. google scholar
Vernadsky, George, The Mongols and Russia, New Haven 1951. google scholar
Yakubovskiy, A. Yu., Altın Ordu ve Çöküşü, çev. Hasan Eren, Ankara 1976. google scholar
Yuvalı, Abdülkadir, “XIII. Yüzyılda Önasya’daki Siyasi Bloklaşma”, Türk Kültürü Dergisi, sayı 262 (1985), s. 111-120. google scholar
Yücel, Yaşar, “XIV.-XV. Yüzyıllar Türkiye Tarihi Hakkında Araştırmalar II, Türkiye ve Yakındoğu Üzerinde 1393/94 Timur Tehlikesi”, Belleten, XXXVII/146 (1973), s. 159-190. google scholar
Zeynüddin b. Hamdullah Müstevfî Kazvînî, Zeyl-i Tarih-i Güzîde, tah. İrec Afşar, Tahran 1372. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın

DIŞA AKTAR

APA

Uzun, K. (2022). Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri. Tarih Dergisi, 0(77), 15-52. https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

AMA

Uzun K. Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri. Tarih Dergisi. 2022;0(77):15-52. https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

ABNT

Uzun, K. Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri. Tarih Dergisi, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 77, p. 15-52, 2022.

Chicago: Author-Date Style

Uzun, Kazım,. 2022. “Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri.” Tarih Dergisi 0, no. 77: 15-52. https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

Chicago: Humanities Style

Uzun, Kazım,. “Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri.” Tarih Dergisi 0, no. 77 (Apr. 2024): 15-52. https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

Harvard: Australian Style

Uzun, K 2022, 'Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri', Tarih Dergisi, vol. 0, no. 77, pp. 15-52, viewed 19 Apr. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

Harvard: Author-Date Style

Uzun, K. (2022) ‘Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri’, Tarih Dergisi, 0(77), pp. 15-52. https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294 (19 Apr. 2024).

MLA

Uzun, Kazım,. “Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri.” Tarih Dergisi, vol. 0, no. 77, 2022, pp. 15-52. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

Vancouver

Uzun K. Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri. Tarih Dergisi [Internet]. 19 Apr. 2024 [cited 19 Apr. 2024];0(77):15-52. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294 doi: 10.26650/iutd.1082294

ISNAD

Uzun, Kazım. “Sultan en-Nâsır Muhammed’in Üçüncü Cülûsundan Sonra Memlûk-Altın Orda Siyasi ve Diplomatik İlişkileri”. Tarih Dergisi 0/77 (Apr. 2024): 15-52. https://doi.org/10.26650/iutd.1082294

Sayı 772022, S. 15-52

ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ

Gönderim	03.03.2022
Kabul	24.06.2022
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma	20.07.2022

LİSANS

Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.

Tarih Dergisi