In contrast to the early Ottoman period, which in recent years has been intensely re-examined in a number of monographs, Seljuk Anatolia is still widely neglected by historians of the medieval Near East. Perhaps one of the most important reasons for this lack of interest is that the Turkish–Muslim principalities of Anatolia can hardly be integrated into the traditional canon of academic disciplines at European universities. Who is actually responsible for this hybrid cultural imbroglio with its strong Byzantine substrate, its Turkish ruling elite, its Persian–Arabic documents and literary sources, and its Muslim institutions? Of course, things are different in the modern Republic of Turkey, where the Seljuk period is considered the starting point for the formation of the Turkish nation in its newly acquired homeland. This ideological burden, however, seems to impede the development of fresh and innovative approaches. The two editors of the present volume bring together a number of contributions discussing crucial methodological issues and opening new trajectories for future research.

Focusing on the Seljuk court of Konya and its interaction with the multi-ethnic society of Asia Minor, mainly in the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, this book is divided in three thematic units examining matters of dynastic identity, the royal household of Konya, and the role of Sufism in the early Seljuk period. An introductory chapter gives a brief overview of the state of the art (pp. 1–22), while Gary Leiser's thoughtful conclusions (pp. 264–75) point out a broad spectrum of unanswered questions concerning the religious, social and economic history of the Seljuk period. He rightly underlines the importance of waqf documents which survive in considerable number and still await publication and analysis. The editors’ verdict about Turkish publications, the quality of which they characterize as “distinctly poor”, is perhaps a little too harsh. There is no doubt that dialogue between Turkish and European historians, owing to linguistic and ideological barriers, is not always easy, but it should not be forgotten that most nationalistic concepts prevailing in modern Turkish historiography draw on older European models, which took a long time and many painful experiences to overcome. Turkish scholars have published and translated an abundance of primary sources and, despite a certain stagnation in recent decades, attributable to the trend towards studying the Ottoman period and its rich archives, they have recently published useful manuals and comprehensive surveys, above all the richly illustrated two-volume Anadolu Selçukluları ve Beylikler Dönemi Uygarlığı edited by A. Y. Ocak and others (Ankara, 2006). Another point favoured by the editors is a sharp distinction between the Great Seljuk sultanate and the migratory Turkish groups intruding into Anatolia. Nevertheless, Alp Arslan and Malikshāh's policy of subjugating all Muslim principalities in the borderlands from Caucasia to Antioch heavily undermined the Byzantine defence system in the East and, in this sense, prepared the ground for the penetration of Anatolia by Turkmen warrior groups.

Oya Pancaroğlu's article on the dynastic self-identification of the Mengücek ruler Sayf al-Dīn Shāhanshāh (1171–96) is an exemplary study demonstrating the manifold insights to be gained from an accurate analysis of architectural and epigraphic evidence, as is reflected in the two surviving monuments of his patronage, the Kale Camii and the Sitte Malik mausoleum in Divriği. Inscriptions drawing on contemporary usages in Syria and Anatolia and stylistic particularities pointing to the craftsmanship of masters from Ahlat form the basis on which the ideological aspirations of the Mengücek dynasty were expressed. Dimitri Korobeinikov explores the official titles of the sultanate of Konya in search of the sources of inspiration and legitimacy. He concludes that the Seljuk of Rūm mainly resorted to Great Seljuk traditions, but it should not be forgotten that the choice of title words very much depended on the audience they were addressing. The Seljuk image projected towards the Muslim world did not prevent the sultanate of Konya from employing Byzantine elements when communicating with Christian lords. Another aspect of dynastic identity is the promotion of royal virtues and aristocratic attitudes through the presence of men of letters seeking a ruler's patronage. Sara Nur Yıldız examines Rawandī’s Rāḥat al-ṣudūr, a compilation of historical accounts and edifying material on adab and ethics dating from 1210, as a work expressing the ideals of Seljuk court life in order to support its author's gaining the favour of Sultan Ghiyāth al-Dīn Kaykhusraw I.

The second part, on the royal household, deals principally with women, specifically the Seljuk harem and the case of ʿIṣmat al-Dunyā wa-l-Dīn, a wife of Sultan ʿAlā’al-Dīn Kaykubād. Rustam Shukurov explores the close relationship of thirteenth-century sultans with Greek women, something that points to a strong Greek background and a sort of “dual identity” of the Seljuk court. Certainly, the co-existence of Greek and Muslim–Turkish elements can be observed on various levels in Seljuk public life and thus forms an important subject for further research. ʿIṣmat al-Dunyā wa-l-Dīn is an intriguing case of a sultan's wife involved in intra-dynastic conflicts, the patronage of building projects, and the ideological strengthening of dynastic claims. As narrative sources are silent about her, Scott Redford reconstructs her activities on the basis of architectural and epigraphic evidence surviving in the environs of Erzurum and in Uluborlu. The contributions on Sufism focus on the intersection between political and religious life and the relations of Sufi sheikhs with the Seljuk elite in particular. Ibn ʿArabī, Majd al-Dīn Isḥāq, Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī, and his son Sultan Walad represent different aspects of elite patronage and the close co-operation between Sufi orders and political leaders. In the concluding chapter Rachel Goshgarian examines an Armenian language futuwwa constitution compiled by Yovhannēs Erznkacʿi (1230–93) in Erzincan and its similarities to Muslim treatises, thus presenting a case-study of cross-cultural interaction between Muslims and Christian Armenians in north-eastern Anatolia. All in all, this is a thought-provoking collection of articles posing many new questions and offering innovative approaches to the complex field of Seljuk court life in Anatolia.