The Letter and Its Response: The Exchanges between the Qara Qoyunlu and the Mamluk Sultan : MS Arabe 4440 (BnF, Paris)
In their manuals, chancery scribes often discussed the differences between initial letters (ibtidāʾ) and their responses (ǧawāb), yet one question persists: which one was of higher status? Basing their reflections on literary criteria, secretaries were divided. Most of them granted the response more...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Brill
2016
|
| In: |
Arabica
Year: 2016, Volume: 63, Issue: 6, Pages: 579-626 |
| Further subjects: | B
Mamluk
Mamlouks
Qara Qoyunlu
Qara Qoyunlu
Diplomacy
diplomatie
Diplomatics
diplomatique
Letter-writing
documents épistolaires
Conquests
conquêtes
Fatḥ-nāma
Fatḥ-Nāma
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
| Summary: | In their manuals, chancery scribes often discussed the differences between initial letters (ibtidāʾ) and their responses (ǧawāb), yet one question persists: which one was of higher status? Basing their reflections on literary criteria, secretaries were divided. Most of them granted the response more value, since it required greater skill and literary dexterity from its author. While the mubtadiʾ had the entire choice of terms, structure, and prolixity, the muǧīb was challenged by the letter’s wording. Others, however, considered both tasks equal in difficulty, since all secretaries were required to act as both mubtadiʾ and muǧīb. Despite this debate among secretaries, initial letters and responses were different in nature and require distinction. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1570-0585 |
| Contains: | In: Arabica
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15700585-12341413 |