The opening session started with the speech of the workshop coordinator Büşra Sıdıka Kaya. Then the members of the organizing committee, Ertuğrul İ. Ökten and Halil İbrahim Erol also took the floor.
The first session titled “Fiqh Studies in the Mamluk Period” started with the introduction of the session participants after a short briefing by the session chair Tuncay Başoğlu.
Emin Canlı, who made the first speech with the title “Fiqh Literature on the Mamluks in the Modern Period”, stated that in his research, he focused on determining the boundaries of the fiqh literature on the Mamluks in the modern period and tried to describe and analyze how the Mamluk period is reflected in the current academia within the framework of fiqh science and history.
The session continued with Fatih Yalçın's speech titled “Jorgen S. Nielsen's Studies on the Judicial System of the Mamluks”, which tried to reveal Nielsen's position in atrocity studies, his basic theses in this field and the contribution of his studies to this field.
The third speech of the first session was delivered by Sümeyye Olgaç with the title “An Evaluation on the Mamluk Period Furuk and Kavaid Literature”. Olgaç stated that she tried to evaluate the modern studies on Izz ad-Din b. Abdissalam, the author of “Kavaid al-Ahkam fî Mesalihi al-Anam” and Karafî, the author of “Furuk”.
The first session ended with a discussion after the presentations.
The second session titled “Maqrizi and Hadith Studies in the Mamluk Period” started at 11:30 with Halit Özkan's speech.
In the first speech of the second session, Tuba İşçimen presented the title “Makrizi Studies in Mamluk Studies Review”. İşçimen made an evaluation of the researchers who studied Makrīzī and the articles they published in the journal Mamluk Studies Review published by the University of Chicago.
Then, Fatma Kübra Akyüz took the floor in the second speech of the session with the title “What does Maqrīzī say about the Kamiliyya and Shaykhūniye Dar al-Hadiths?”. Akyüz evaluated the treatment of the Kamiliyya and Shaykhūniyya Dar al-Hadiths, which were prominent during the Mamluk period, in modern studies, their approaches to the issue, differences, and problems.
The last speech of the second session was delivered by Nagihan Emiroğlu with the title “Being a Woman in the Mamluk Period as a Part of the Tradition of Hadith Narration”. Emiroğlu explained how the hadith narrations of women who grew up in the Ulama families and thus had the opportunity to receive education from a young age during the Mamluk period were the subject of studies in the modern period and from which perspectives they were addressed.
After the presentations of the speakers, the second session was discussed.
Abdurrahman Atçıl was the chairman of the third session titled “Ulema Studies in the Mamluk Period” which started at 13:00. After expressing his satisfaction with this workshop, which contributed to the studies of the Mamluk period, Atçıl introduced the participants of the session.
The first speech of the third session was titled “Studying the Mamluk Ulema through the Mansips: Different Approaches to the Relations of Scholars with the Mansip” by M. Enes Midilli. In his speech, Enes Midilli discussed the issues and differences of approach in modern studies on the relationship between scholars and manships in the Mamluk period within a chronological framework.
The second speech of the session was delivered by Büşra Sıdıka Kaya on “The Problem of the ‘Cradle Ulema’ Between Knowledge and Authority”. Kaya evaluated the problem of the ulema in Mamluk lands transferring the scholar's mansb to his child after him in order to maintain the continuity of his authority and position at the point of transmission of knowledge in the context of modern studies.
In the last speech of the third session, Gürzat Kami, “Scholarly Life and Ulema in Syria and Egypt in the Mamluk-Ottoman Transition Period: A Literature Review”. Kami presented the situation of the scholars of Egypt and Syria in the late Mamluk period and modern studies on the transformation of the judicial administration and organization, the financial resources and positions of the scholars, competition and patronage, and the production and transfer of knowledge.
After the discussion at the end of the session, the fourth session titled “Studies on Knowledge and Social Practice in the Mamluk Period” began. In his speech, session chair Fatih Yahya Ayaz emphasized the importance of discussing the studies on this subject on international platforms.
