26/05/0872:
On Thursday 26, the sultan told me personally that a Syrian ṭālib al-ʿilm had come to him and had informed him that he had got word of his sultanate at the city of Ghazza, that it was said in Damascus that somebody had seen a old silver dirham , coined in the name of al-Ẓāhir Timurbughā, and that this had happened several days before al-Malik al-Ẓāhir Timurbughā had actually assumed the sultanate. Moreover, a group of respected people testified that this had actually been seen.
The sultan asked me whether there had ever been in Egypt or in Syria a sultan with the same name as he himself, or with the same laqab that goes with (this) name. I said, ‘No.’ Then he said that this was a wonderful event.
Then I myself examined this case, and I found out that this was indeed rumoured throughout Damascus. But somebody said that Minṭāsh, the one who had a conflict with al-Ẓāhir Barqūq, had overcome Damascus, and that his name was Timurbughā al-ʾAfḍalī, but that he was called Minṭāsh.
I say, even if that were true, that is Timurbughā al-ʾAfḍalī gaining the upperhand over Damascus, he was still not known as al-Ẓāhir. So the ambiguity continues.
On Thursday 26, the sultan told me personally that a Syrian ṭālib al-ʿilm had come to him and had informed him that he had got word of his sultanate at the city of Ghazza, that it was said in Damascus that somebody had seen a old silver dirham , coined in the name of al-Ẓāhir Timurbughā, and that this had happened several days before al-Malik al-Ẓāhir Timurbughā had actually assumed the sultanate. Moreover, a group of respected people testified that this had actually been seen.
The sultan asked me whether there had ever been in Egypt or in Syria a sultan with the same name as he himself, or with the same laqab that goes with (this) name. I said, ‘No.’ Then he said that this was a wonderful event.
Then I myself examined this case, and I found out that this was indeed rumoured throughout Damascus. But somebody said that Minṭāsh, the one who had a conflict with al-Ẓāhir Barqūq, had overcome Damascus, and that his name was Timurbughā al-ʾAfḍalī, but that he was called Minṭāsh.
I say, even if that were true, that is Timurbughā al-ʾAfḍalī gaining the upperhand over Damascus, he was still not known as al-Ẓāhir. So the ambiguity continues.
RDF (2)
| crm:P140_assigned_attribute_to | https://ihodp.ugent.be/mpp/informationObject-metadata-summary-8680 | |
| crm:P3_has_note | 26/05/0872: On Thursday 26, the sultan told me personally that a Syrian ṭālib al-ʿilm had come to him and had informed him that he had got word of his sultanate at the city of Ghazza, that it was said in Damascus that somebody had seen a old silver dirham , coined in the name of al-Ẓāhir Timurbughā, and that this had happened several days before al-Malik al-Ẓāhir Timurbughā had actually assumed the sultanate. Moreover, a group of respected people testified that this had actually been seen. The sultan asked me whether there had ever been in Egypt or in Syria a sultan with the same name as he himself, or with the same laqab that goes with (this) name. I said, ‘No.’ Then he said that this was a wonderful event. Then I myself examined this case, and I found out that this was indeed rumoured throughout Damascus. But somebody said that Minṭāsh, the one who had a conflict with al-Ẓāhir Barqūq, had overcome Damascus, and that his name was Timurbughā al-ʾAfḍalī, but that he was called Minṭāsh. I say, even if that were true, that is Timurbughā al-ʾAfḍalī gaining the upperhand over Damascus, he was still not known as al-Ẓāhir. So the ambiguity continues. | |
Instances linking here (2)
| Group | Link |
|---|---|
| informationObject-8680 | |
| informationObject-metadata | informationObject-metadata-summary-8680 |