El término mamlūk y la condición de esclavo durante el sultanato mameluco

Scholars of the Mamluk Sultanate generally maintain that the status of all the mamlūk was that of an elite, and that the mamlūk were proud of their slave origin even after manumission. It is here argued that these assertions are based on a misconception of the term mamlūk as used in Mamluk sources. The term mamlūk has a double meaning: slave and servant, and it frequently expresses subordination, obedience and servitude. It is never used to express pride in slave status or slave origin. There is no evidence that manumitted mamlūk were proud of their slave status. On the contrary, manumitted slaves with aspirations made great efforts to repress their servile past by claiming an exalted origin or by creating marital ties with established families. Mamlūks were considered property and they lacked a legal identity of their own. They were often manumitted only upon their master’s death. They perceived themselves as slaves for lacking family ties. Only an outstanding few succeeded in completely freeing themselves of their slave status and become members of a ruling elite with family ties. It seems that starting from al-Nāṣir Muḥammad b. Qalāwūn’s third reign the enslavement of Turkish mamlūks who had been sold by their families became more of a formality. On the other hand, non-Turkish mamlūks, who were generally Christian war captives, were subject to discrimination. They were disdained, manumitted at a later age and prevented from establishing marital ties with the Qalawunids and creating their own families at a young age. They were perceived by their contemporaries as being “more slaves” than the Turkish mamlūks.Los estudiosos del sultanato mameluco generalmente sostienen que todos los mamlūk formaban parte de una élite que se sentía orgullosa de su origen esclavo incluso después de ser liberados. En este artículo se argumenta que esas afirmaciones están basadas en una interpretación errónea del término mamlūk según su uso en las fuentes mamelucas. El término mamlūk tiene un doble significado: esclavo y sirviente, y expresa frecuentemente subordinación, obediencia y servidumbre. Nunca se utiliza como expresión de orgullo de la condición de esclavo o de un origen esclavo. No hay evidencias de que los mamlūk liberados se sintieran orgullosos de su anterior condición de esclavos; por el contrario, los esclavos liberados con aspiraciones hicieron grandes esfuerzos para borrar su pasado servil pretendiendo un origen elevado o creando lazos matrimoniales con las familias más tradicionales. Los mamlūk eran considerados como 《propiedades》 y carecían de una identidad legal en sí mismos. Por lo general eran liberados solo tras la muerte de su amo y se veían a sí mismos como esclavos por carecer de lazos familiares con sus amos. Solo unos pocos, excepcionalmente, conseguían una liberación completa de su estatus y conseguían convertirse en miembros de una élite dirigente con lazos familiares. Parece que desde el tercer reinado de al-Nāṣir Muḥammad b. Qalāwūn, la esclavización de los mamlūk turcos que habían sido vendidos por sus familias se convirtió en una formalidad. Por otro lado, los mamlūk que no eran turcos, generalmente cautivos de guerra cristianos, eran discriminados y despreciados; solo se les liberaba cuando eran ancianos y se les impedía establecer lazos matrimoniales con los Qalawuníes así como crear sus propias familias siendo jóvenes. Eran percibidos por sus contemporáneos como 《esclavos》 que los turcos mamlūk

Mamlūks of Jewish Origin in the Mamluk Sultanate

Students of the Mamluk Sultanate generally do not refer to the phenomenon of mamluks (i.e., slaves, and more specifically military slaves) of Jewish origin. David Ayalon noted that “there is hardly any trace of a Mamlūk of Jewish origin in the Mamlūk sultanate.” Moreover, it is thought that Jews were not considered suitable for warfare. This article surveys mamluks of Jewish origin that can be identified in Mamluk sources. Gaps in information about their geographical origin, which is usually lacking in Mamluk sources, will be filled with information given by European travelers or that can be deduced from the names given to them as slaves

Conditional inactivation of the NBS1 gene in the mouse central nervous system leads to neurodegeneration and disorganization of the visual system

Nijmegen breakage syndrome (NBS) is a genomic instability disease caused by hypomorphic mutations in the NBS1 gene encoding the Nbs1 (nibrin) protein. Nbs1 is a component of the Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 (MRN) complex that acts as a sensor of double strand breaks (DSBs) in the DNA and is critical for proper activation of the broad cellular response to DSBs. Conditional disruption of the murine ortholog of the human NBS1, Nbs1, in the CNS of mice was previously reported to cause microcephaly, severe cerebellar atrophy and ataxia. Here we report that conditional targeted disruption of the murine NBS1 gene in the CNS results in mal-development, degeneration, disorganization and dysfunction of the murine visual system, especially in the optic nerve. Nbs1 deletion resulted in reduced diameters of Nbs1-CNS-Δ eye and optic nerve. MRI analysis revealed defective white matter development and organization. Nbs1 inactivation altered the morphology and organization of the glial cells. Interestingly, at the age of two-month-old the levels of the axonal guidance molecule semaphorin-3A and its receptor neuropilin-1 were up-regulated in the retina of the mutant mice, a typical injury response. Electroretinogram analysis revealed marked reduction in a- and b-waves, indicative of decreased retinal function. Our study points to a novel role for Nbs1 in the development, organization and function of the visual system