Fra kalif til sultan: En analyse av teori og praksis rundt styreform og makt i middelalderen og i mamlukkperioden (1250-1517)

This thesis explores how the sultanate supplanted the caliphate as the most widespread system of government, the latter being perceived as the ideal governing institution by muslims of the Middle Ages. By studying a set of normative sources from the time period in question, the thesis sets out to explain how discoursive changes in the aformentioned texts can help us understand this significant change in the pre-modern system of government in the Middle Eastern Middle Ages. The writers of the normative sources from the "transitional" period are al-Māwardī (d. 1058) and al-Ghazālī (d. 1111), who both lived in a time when the Abbasid caliphate still was in effect. But when multiple warrior-dynasties from the steppes in the East rose up, the Abbasid caliph gradually lost his autonomy. It is also from this time period that the sultan first enters the stage, initially as a liege or "friend" of the caliph, but in reality the sultan was the de facto ruler of the caliph. The thesis also asks how normative writers from a sultanate responded to the relatively new system of government. The sultanate this thesis studies is the Mamluk sultanate (1250-1517). The Mamluks of Egypt and Syria were a caste of military slave soldiers who, after the death of their Ayyubid master in 1249, rose to power in their own right. The thesis then sets out to examine how two normative writers from the Mamluk period, namely Ibn Taymīya (d. 1328) and Ibn Khaldūn (d. 1406), wrote about the sultanate. Are there similarities between the writers of the caliphate period and the sultanate period, or did they write more in tune with their new historical reality? Another question is how did Ibn Taymīya and Ibn Khaldūn position themselves towards the sultanate, did they approve or disapprove of it? The last part of the thesis explores whether there was any resonance between the normative writers demands and expectations and how the Mamluk sultans administered the sultanate. For this part, the thesis analyzes a set of sources from the late 14th century and the 15th century from a historian who was close to the Mamluk sultans, namely Ibn Taghrībirdī (d. 1470). One example: Ibn Taymīya underscored justice as a value that had to be prevalent in the system of government, but how did the Mamluks themselves think of justice, did they share Ibn Taymīya's concerns? Finally, there are a couple of common themes throughout the thesis. The first I would like to mention is the relationship between the caliph and the sultan. This thesis examines firstly how the normative relationship between the two were stated in the sources, secondly it also examines the historical relationship between several caliphs and sultans from the Mamluk sultanate. Another common thread is how the normative writers justified the need for rulers and powerholders. This part of the thesis shows that Sunni writers justified this need in a similiar fashion over centuries, but with important variations. It also highlights how Sunni writers did not write in a vacuum, they were writing in contexts of competitive religious views within Islam, which materializes in their discussions