The Shāfī qādilqudāt designation which was put into practice after the conquest of Egypt by Salāhaddin Ayyūbī (d. 589/1193) obtained a extensive form in the Mamluks period. In the early years of the this period, delegated judge/naibs were appointed from different Sunnī sections to help the Shāfī qādilqudāt in his missions. Practice of appointment the Shāfī qādilqudāt was abandoned by the order of Baybars I, when only the appointment of Shāfī qādis caused disagreements. The members of the four Sunnī sections were appointed first in the capital city of Cairo and thereafter appointed in other cities of Egypt gradually as judges to rule according to their own sections. This practice paved the way for the training of scholars and mudarris in the regions and they who took charge in the state level and became a historical figure and the historians who recorded the history wrote the biographies of them. Nuaymī and Ibn Tolun who student of Nuaymī are among the prominent figures of the Mamluk historians. One of the sources used by them in their biography works is Kitābu’t-Tawārīh which written by Necmeddin Tarsūsī who is the first person as verse to deal with the differences of thoughts between Hanafīs and Ash'arīs and stated that it is not necessary to be a Quraysh in the caliphate. The subject of the our study is source of Kitābu’t-Tawārīh for work ad-Dāris fī Tārīhi’l-Madāris which written by Nuaymī and work Qudātu Dimask and al-Kalāidu'l-Cavhariyya which written by Ibn Tolun. It’s aim in this study is to prove with examples and evidences that Kitābu’t-Tawārīh is a source for these works which are introduced as the history of Damascus in the sources. It’s method is the comparing related works in terms of content and text. Therefore, it is a moral obligation to state that Kitābu’t-Tawārīh is a source for this work, due to the intense similarities in Qudātu Dimask which no reference is made, while in two of these three works, the authors express their sources by citation method.