[1][2] While the initial support for the potential overthrow of the sultan began in Egypt, movement of Egyptian ideological agitators to Syria eventually caused the actual planned uprising to take place in Damascus in 1386.
[5] Although not all those taking part in the revolt accepted the views of the Zahiri school of law, the term was used to denote all of those willing to participate in armed conflict against the Mamluk sultan.
[6] The suppression of the revolt both practically and ideologically has been described as a sign of the Mamluk authorities' intolerance for non-conformist ideas and willingness to interfere in religious issues normally considered the domain of theologians in Muslim empires.
[11] Khalid informed the Citadel's commanding officer of the plot, claiming not only to have the backing of local bedouin tribes and urban Damascenes but also to have located a suitable candidate for a new caliph.
A second Hanbalite jurist, Amin ad-Din Ibn al-Najib of Baalbek, was also arrested as a co-conspirator; while he was not directly involved in the conspiracy, he had openly opposed the sultan in the past.
This set off a chain reaction; local Damascenes, taking pity on the fallen politicians and clerics, began demonstrating at the construction sites in opposition to both the forced manual labor and the Burji administration in general.
Burhan was defiant, verbally accusing Barquq of misrule by appropriating taxes which had no textual basis in Islamic law and asserting his demand for a Qurashi leader.
[23] While the revolt gained early momentum from Zahirite ideas, it is today viewed more in terms of the political agitation against the Mamluks and general displeasure with the marginalization of the caliphate.