![]() ![]() ![]() Here, we cannot ignore, in the case of existing of a contemporary historian and biographer of Nur al –Deen, he should have provided us with a valuable historical subject on that prominent leader who lived in the Era of Crusades, via his own association, then, to the center of the political decision. Those authorities cannot be compared with “al-nawaderal–Sultaniyyah” et al., On the other hand, a late historian of Nur al-Deen Mahmoud, Ibn Qadi Shahbah (1470), wrote Nur al-Deen’s biography, entitled “ al-Kawakeb al-Dorriyyah fi al –Seerah al –Nuriyyah”, in which he counted on contemporary authorities, such as Ibn al-Qalanisi’s (1160) work “ Thail Tareekh Dimashq”, and Ibn al-Atheer’s(1232) two books : “ al-Tarikh al –Baher” and “ al-kamil fi al-Tarikh “. We can discuss this problem via the following scopes:įirst: we do not have a biography of Nur al-Deen Mahmoud written by a contemporary historian of his age, contrary to Saladin (1174-1193) since he was contemporary of the judge and historian Bahhaa al-Deen Ibn Shaddad (1226), who wrote the great and enjoyable Saladin’s biography “al-nawader al-Sultaniyyah wa al-Mahasenal-yousoufiyyah”. In this paper, we will deal with what can be described as the problematic study of the history of Nur al-Deen Mahmoud (1146 -1174 A.D) that prominent leader in the era of the Crusades, for the object of estimating, via scholar objectivity, his own historical role. Nur ad-Din Mahmoud, Crusades, Problematic Study, Middle Ages Introduction ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |