Anthroponymy in the worldview of Medieval Turkic Mamluks (Based on the “Kitāb-i maǧmūʿ-i tarǧumān-i turkī wa ʿaǧamī wa muġālī wa fārsī” (XIV century))


Views: 24 / PDF downloads: 5

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2026-2-151-175

Keywords:

historical anthroponymy, onomastics, Turkic-Mamluk anthroponymy, «Tarjumān» dictionary, ethnocultural identity, linguistic anthropology, jāriya (jawārī) names, personal name, nisba, nickname

Abstract

This article examines historical anthroponymy not merely as a system of linguistic nomination, but as a cultural structure reflecting historical memory, value systems, and social hierarchy. The study focuses on anthroponymic data recorded in a Turkic–Arabic dictionary compiled in medieval Egypt under conditions of Arabic linguistic dominance. Mamluk anthroponymy constitutes an important source for reconstructing the social structure and value system of a polyethnic and multilingual society, as it reveals the complex interaction between Turkic traditions and Arab-Islamic cultural frameworks. The primary source is the fourteenth-century Arabic–Turkic dictionary known as ‘Kitāb-i Majmūʿ-i Tarjumān-i Turkī wa ʿAjamī wa Mughalī wa Fārsī’ (Tarjumān), compiled in Egypt. Its twenty-second section contains personal names of Mamluks, jāriyas, and representatives of other social groups. In total, this section records 84 anthroponyms, of which 64 refer to men and 20 to women. This distribution reflects both the predominance of the military-administrative elite in the source material and the gender asymmetry characteristic of medieval society. Unlike narrative and official sources, the dictionary preserves anthroponyms used in everyday linguistic practice and, through Arabic translations and glosses, enables the reconstruction of their semantic content. The aim of this study is to identify the semantic and functional features of Turkic-Mamluk anthroponyms in the dictionary and to demonstrate the interpretive potential of personal names for reconstructing the worldview of the Turkic Mamluks through an analysis of socio-cultural naming practices. Methodologically, the study adopts an interdisciplinary approach integrating historical onomastics, ethnolinguistics, and linguistic anthropology. Anthroponyms are analyzed through semantic classification and contextual interpretation, with particular attention to military-status markers, zoonymic symbolism, strength-related semantics (e.g., iron, stone, gold), and apotropaic functions. Female anthroponyms are examined in relation to the social category of jāriya/jawārī and are interpreted within the framework of palace institutional structures, where they fulfilled aesthetic and symbolic functions. The scholarly contribution of this study lies in its comprehensive analysis of Turkic anthroponymy in the ‘Tarjumān’ not merely as lexicographic material, but as an integral element of the social and symbolic space of Mamluk society. For the first time, Turkic personal names are interpreted as mechanisms for preserving group identity among the military elite, symbolically legitimizing social status, and transmitting pre-Islamic cultural layers within an Islamic context. Furthermore, female anthroponyms associated with jāriyas are analyzed from a gendered and institutional perspective, revealing the close relationship between naming practices, power structures, and socialization processes. The study also differentiates between personal names, nisbas, and nicknames, situating anthroponyms within their broader historical and cultural context.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

B. Jubatova , Al-Farabi Kazakh National University

Doctor of Philology, Director of the Center for Arabic Studies

Reference

Баскаков Н.А., 1974. Историко-этимологический словарь тюркских языков. Общетюркские и межтюркские основы (А–Б–В). Москва: Наука. 560 с.

Березович Е.Л., 2009. Языковые образы мира: опыт системного описания. Москва: Языки славянских культур. 288 с.

Гаркавец А.Н., 2019. Китаб-и Маджмуʽ-и Тарджуман-и Турки ва ʽАджами ва Мугали ва Фарси («Сводная книга переводчика…») Халила бин Мухаммада бин Йусуфа ал-Кунави (при участии О.О.Туякбаева). Алматы: Баур. 600 с.

Гафуров А., 1987. Имя и история: Об именах арабов, персов, таджиков и тюрков. Москва: Наука. 224 с.

Гумилев Л.Н., 2021. Древние тюрки. Москва: Айрис-Пресс. 560 с.

Джафаров Б., Ганиева Б., 2025. Кодикологическая и лингвистическая структура Китабу Булгатил аль-Муштак фи Лугхат ат-Тюрк ва-л-Кифчак. Журнал тюркологии. 7(4). С.131–146. https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2025-4-131-146

Жұбатова Б., Аубакирова Қ., 2019. Мысырдағы мәмлүктер билігі тұсындағы түркі-араб мәдени-тілдік байланыстары (XIII–XV ғ.). Алматы: Қазақ университеті. 235 б.

Курышжанов А., 1970. Исследование по лексике старокыпчакского письменного памятника XIII в. «Тюркско-арабского словаря». Алма-Ата: Наука. 234 с.

Қыдырбаев Қ., Купешов К., 2022. Ортағасырлық қыпшақ-араб сөздіктерінің зерттелуі. Шығыстану сериясы, 3(102). Б.25-32. https://doi.org/10.26577/JOS.2022.v102.i3.03 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26577/JOS.2022.v102.i3.03

Махмуд ал-Кашгари, 2024. Диван лугат ат-Турк (пер. и предисл. З.-А. Ауэзовой; индексы сост. Р. Эрмерсом). Баку: Zәrdabi naşr MMC. 1376 с.

Мұхаммед Р., Төребекова С., 2022. Мәмлүк-қыпшақ ескерткіштеріндегі араб тіліне енген қыпшақ сөздері. Turkic Studies Journal. 3(4). P. 52–60. https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2021-4-52-60 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2021-4-52-60

al-Zabīdī Muḥammad, 1993. Tāj al-ʿArūs min Jawāhir al-Qāmūs. Vol. 6. Kuwait: Wizārat al-Iʿlām. 563 p.

Amitai R., 2016. Echoes of the Eurasian Steppe in the Daily Culture of Mamluk Military Society. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. Series 3.Vol. 26. Issue 2. P. 261–270. DOI:10.1017/S1356186315000358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1356186315000358

Aubakirova K., Mustafayeva A., Kamisheva G., 2022. Comparative Study of the Manuscript “Tarjuman” with Dictionaries in the Mamluk-Kipchak Language. Вестник Торайгыров университета. Филологическая серия. №2. 2022. С.19-30. https://doi.org/10.48081/UCQX1079 DOI: https://doi.org/10.48081/UCQX1079

Ayalon D., 2007. Eunuchs, Caliphs and Sultans: A Study in Power Relationships. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press. The Hebrew University. 360 p.

Boyraz E. A., 2015. Kitâb-i mecmû-i tercümân-i türkî ve acemî ve muġalî’de Türkmence. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching. P. 534-564. https://doi.org/10.18298/IJLET.324 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18298/ijlet.324

Cirit M., Yigitoğlu Ö., 2024. Memlûk-Kıpçak Sözlüklerinde Geçen Kadın Adları. Türk Dünyası Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1502869 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1502869

Dahmaan M.A., 1990. Mu’jam al-alfaaz at-ta’rikhiyya fi Misr al-Mamluki. Dimashq: Daar al-Fikr al-Mu’asir. 158 s.

Doerfer G., 1965. Türkische Elemente im Neupersischen. Bd. II. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner. 671 p.

Dirbas H., 2019. Naming of Slave-girls in Arabic: A Survey of Medieval and Modern Sources. Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik. №69. P. 26-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13173/zeitarabling.69.0026

Duranti A., 1997. Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 408 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810190

Flemming B., 1968. Ein alter Irrtum bei der chronologischen Einordnung des Tarǧumān turkī waʿaǧamī wa muġalī. Der Islam. № 44. P. 226-229.

Güner G., 2018. Memlük-Kıpçak sözlük gramerlerinde kişi adları. Dil Araştırmaları. №23. S.103-122.

Houtsma Th., 1894. Ein türkisch-arabisches Glossar. Leiden: Brill. 114 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004601192

Ibn Manẓūr, 1994. Lisān al-ʿArab, root j-r-y. Vol. 2. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir. 437 p.

İnan A., 1953. XIII–XIV yüzyıllarda Mısır’da Oğuz-Türkmen ve Kıpçak Lehçeleri ve ‘Hâlis Türkçe’. Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı – Belleten. №1. P. 53-7

Jackson P., 2017. The Mongols and the Islamic World: From Conquest to Conversion. New Haven & London: Yale University Press. 614 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300125337.001.0001

Jafarov B., Ganiyeva B., 2025. Codicological and linguistic structure of Kitabu Bulghatil al-Mushtaq f i Lughat at-Turk wa-l-Qifchaq. Turkic Studies Journal. 7(4). P. 131–146. https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2025-4-131-146 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2025-4-131-146

Kassymova M., 2021. Analysis of the words recorded as Turkmen in the Kitāb-I Mecmû-ı Tercümân-ı Türkî ve Acemî ve Mugalî’. Journal of Oriental Studies. №3(98). P. 30-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26577/JOS.2021.v98.i3.03

Khallaq Khasan, Sebagh Abbas, 1999. Al-Mu’jaam al-Jaami’ fi mustallakhaat al-Ayyubiyya wa al-Mamlukiyya wa al-‘usmaniyya zat al-usul al-‘arabiyyati waal-Farisiyyati wa at-Turkiyyati. Beyrut: Dar al-‘elm lilmalayin. 246 p.

Mnaidarova M., Sarseke G., Sahin I., 2025. Anthroponyms in the Kazakh and Turkish Languages: A Historical Review of Their Studies and Structural Features. Treatises and Documents: Journal of Ethnic Studies. Vol. 94 (no.1). P. 208–226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/tdjes-2025-0008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/tdjes-2025-0008

Peirce L. P., 1993. The Imperial Harem: Women and Sovereignty in the Ottoman Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 374 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195076738.001.0001

Sağol Yüksekkaya G., 2009. Türklerde Ölümün Algılanışı: ‘Ölmek’ Karşılığı Kullanılan Kelimelerden Hareketle. Uçmağa Varmak Kitabı. İstanbul: Kitabevi. S. 3-41.

Sülükçü Y., 2016. Kitâb-ı Mecmû-ı Tercümân-ı Türkî ve Acemî ve Mugalî’ Adlı Esere Yabancılara Türkçe Öğretimi Açısından Bir Bakış. International Journal of Language Academy. Vol. 4. S. 67-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18033/ijla.427

Toparlı R., Çögenli S., Yanık N., 2000. Kitabu'l Mecmu-i Tercumani Turki ua Acami ua Mugali. Ankara: Türk dili kurumu. 231 s.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-16

How to Cite

Jubatova Б. (2026). Anthroponymy in the worldview of Medieval Turkic Mamluks (Based on the “Kitāb-i maǧmūʿ-i tarǧumān-i turkī wa ʿaǧamī wa muġālī wa fārsī” (XIV century)). Turkic Studies Journal, 8(2), 151–175. https://doi.org/10.32523/2664-5157-2026-2-151-175

Issue

Section

Textology of Turkic Written Monuments