Ottoman North Africa History Course Outline PDF

UNIVERSITY OF CAPE COAST COLLEGE OF HUMANITIES AND LEGAL STUDIES FACULTY OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY SECOND SEMESTER, 2023-2024 ACADEMIC YEAR...

UNIVERSITY OF CAPE COAST COLLEGE OF HUMANITIES AND LEGAL STUDIES FACULTY OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY SECOND SEMESTER, 2023-2024 ACADEMIC YEAR HIS 205: OTTOMAN NORTH AFRICA, C.E. 1500-1830 GROUP E COURSE LECTURER: KWAME ADJEI ADJEPONG Course Description The course is designed to introduce students to the history of Ottoman North Africa in the Age of European Exploration. It briefly examines the establishment of Ottoman rule in North Africa and assesses the impact of the presence of the Ottoman Turks on the indigenous peoples of the region. It discusses the social, economic and political developments in North Africa at the height of the Ottoman Empire in the region. It analyses the nature and effects of Ottoman administration of North Africa, and interrogates the responses of the indigenous peoples and their involvement in the Ottoman administration of their states. Again, the course assesses Ahmad al-Mansur’s administration of Morocco and evaluates the succession crisis that bedevilled Morocco after al- Mansur’s death. It further analyses the reign of the Alawite dynasty in Morocco during the.E. 1668-1822 period. It examines the complex nature of trade and other relations, especially political, with European nations. Particularly, it examines the context in which the French invaded Egypt, and highlights the short-term and long-term implications of this development. Finally, this course examines Franco-Algerian relations from C.E. 1815 to C.E. 1830. Course Objectives This course is intended to: 1. Train students to develop the skill to analyse the important events that influenced social, political and economic developments in Ottoman North Africa during the period of European exploration. 2. Equip students with knowledge to be able to explain the background to succession crisis in Morocco from 1601 and its effects on Morocco. 3. Provide students with the knowledge and skill to trace the origins of the Alawite dynasty and explain its achievements and failures. 4. Offer students with the historical skill to explain the reasons for the French invasion of Egypt and Algeria and the responses of the invaded peoples to the invasions. 5. Equip students with the knowledge and skill to explain the cultural and demographic diversity that has come to characterise North Africa since C.E. 1500. Main Study Topics/Course Content The key themes that the course would explore and examine are: 1. The Land and Indigenous Peoples of North Africa 2. The Ottoman Empire: Origin and Expansion  3. Mulay Ahmed al-Mansur and the Making of Morocco, C.E. 1578-1603 4. Succession Crisis in Morocco after the death of Ahmad al-Mansur 5. The Alawite Dynasty in Morocco up to C.E. 1822 6. The French Invasion of Egypt 7. Muhammad Ali and the Modernisation of Egypt 8. Franco-Algerian Relations up to C.E. 1830. Pedagogy or Mode of Delivery and Assessment This course will be taught through a combination of lecturers and discussions or tutorial sessions. Students will be encouraged to participate in all activities and reflect on their learning and development in the course. Assessment of Level 200 History course is generally based on a combination of continuous assessment involving student output in lecture and tutorial attendance, written assignments (essays or other exercises) or short tests (quizzes) and an End-of-Semester examination. The continuous assessment carries 40% of the overall assessment for the semester with the End-of-Semester examination taking 60%. There will be two (2) or more written assignments or quizzes before the End-of-Semester examination. The tests or quizzes are expected to take place at the end of the 4th and 8th weeks of teaching respectively. If, for some reasons, we are not able to organise the quizzes at these suggested periods, then new dates for such exercises will be announced at the appropriate moments for all students to be aware and prepare for the exercises. Quizzes will normally take the form of asking students questions that will demand responses of the short and terse answer type. Most questions will, however, elicit higher order thinking from students. Selected Bibliography 1. Abun Nasr, Jamil M. History of the Maghrib, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. 2. Charles-Andre, J. History of North Africa: From the Arab Conquest to 1839. London: Cambridge University Press, 1970. 3. Curtain, P. et al. African History: From Earliest Times to Independence. Second Edition. London: Longman Groups Ltd., 1995. 4. Finkel, Caroline. Osman's dream: the story of the Ottoman Empire, 1300-1923. New York: Basic Books, 2007. 5. Goodwin, Jason. Lords of the Horizons: A History of the Ottoman Empire. New York: Picador, 2007. 6. Lambton Holt, P.M. The Cambridge History of Islam. Vol. 18, No. II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970. 7. Laroui, Abdallah. The History of Magrib: An Interpretive Essay. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1977. 8. Mercedes, García-Arenal. Ahmad al-Mansur: The Beginnings of Modern Morocco. London: Oneworld Academic, 2009. 9. 7. Roland, O. The Cambridge History of Africa from 1050 to 1600. Vol. III. London: Cambridge University Press, 1975. 10. Terrasse, Henri. History of Morocco. Translated by Hilary Tee. Casablanca: Éditions Atlantides, 1952.  TOPIC I THE LAND AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF NORTH AFRICA Introduction: Ottoman North Africa in Perspective The name Ottoman derives from the Arabic name Uthman. Uthman was the original name of the founder of what came to be known as the Ottoman empire. In many books, the name of this man is spelt as Osman. This man, Osman I (C.E. 1280-1326), founded the Ottoman empire in C.E. 1299 in Anatolia, what is known today as Turkey. In the course of time, the Ottoman empire expanded widely to cover parts of Asia, Europe and North Africa. Hence, the term Ottoman North Africa simply refers to the period of Ottoman rule and influence in the North Africa. Geographically, North Africa stretches from the western boarders of Egypt to the Atlantic. The area is bounded in the north by the Mediterranean Sea and to an extent in the south by the Sahara Desert. At present, North Africa is composed of five countries. These are, from east to west: Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco. The geographical area which these states occupy is often referred to as the Maghreb, meaning the West or the Land of Setting Sun. Note that the Arabic terms for East, West, North and South are Mashrik, Maghreb, Shimali and Yamin respectively. However, whenever the term Maghreb is used, it refers only to Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco without Egypt. Other sources of history refer to these North African states as the Barbary or the Land of the Atlas. The term Maghreb was introduced by Arab warriors who invaded the area west of present-day Egypt around the second half of the seventh century C.E. There are two main reasons for which Egypt is not included in the term Maghreb. The first reason is that whereas the predecessors of the indigenous people of Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco were light-skinned people, the predecessors of the inhabitants of ancient Egypt were black-skinned people. The second reason is that Egypt is located on the north-east, where there is no evidence that the predecessors of the other four countries lived. Meanwhile, because of the dominance of the indigenous people of Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco in North Africa, several scholars often use the collective term Berbers to refer to all the people who occupied North Africa without regard for the original black inhabitants of ancient Egypt. Hence, the term Berbers will be used throughout this study to refer to the indigenous people of North Africa. Nevertheless, for purposes of convenience, and in recognition of the dominant religious and cultural influence of Islam on the North African states, the term North Africa is used in this course, the focus will be on all the five states of modern-day North Africa. The Topography of the Area: Geographical Location and Impact North Africa extends over a coastal strip of about 4,200 kilometres, along the southern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. It is uniquely placed between the southern fringes of the Mediterranean Sea and the northern fringes of the Sahara Desert. This unique location exposes the area to the climatic and cultural influences of both the lands beyond the Mediterranean Sea and the peculiar conditions of the Sahara Desert. In the past, the position of North Africa, especially its position bordering the Mediterranean Sea, saw the area witnessing the intrusion of foreign powers and cultures such as the Greeks, the Phoenicians and Carthaginians, the Romans, the Ottoman Turkish Arabs and, finally, the French at various stages of their history. As a result, the Mediterranean Sea has always been an important outlet or channel of communication between North Africa and the outside world around it. All such foreign powers left imprints of their presence, with the Ottoman Turkish Arabs especially leaving lasting imprints in terms of the transfusion of their culture and religion up to this day. The unique location of North Africa, sandwiched between the Mediterranean Sea and the Sahara Desert, has also impacted the vegetation and the climatic conditions of the area. The areas closer to the Mediterranean Sea have active and vibrant vegetative life as well as a much more favourable climate. On the other hand, as one proceeds southwards, the impact of the Sahara Desert is felt at varying degrees or instances from the coast since the rainfall pattern begins to diminish. In effect, the known history of North Africa is essentially the product of the interplay of climatic and cultural influences reaching the area from the Mediterranean Sea to the north and from the Sahara Desert to the south. The Berbers of North Africa The people collectively referred to as the Berbers were light-skinned people who occupied the area of North Africa west of the Nile Valley. In the medieval times,1 Europeans generally referred to these people as the Moors. The term Moors was used in Europe in a broader sense to refer to any person of Arab or African descent. Originally, the indigenous people of North Africa did not call themselves by the name Berbers but instead were known as the Amazigh, which meant freeman. It must be noted, however, that whereas the Greeks called them Libyans, the Romans referred to them as Barbari, which meant foreigners. Therefore, the term Berber is a corruption of the Roman term Barbari. The Ottoman Turkish Arabs, who later invaded North Africa, referred to the entire coastland of North Africa as the Barbary Coast. There are three major divisions of the Berbers of North Africa. These are the Sanhaja, the Masmuda and the Zanata. For almost three thousand years the Berbers of North Africa have clung to their distinct identity and language, sheltering in the mountains and in desert oases from infringing invaders. At present, most of the North African population is originally of Berber stock that has been largely Arabised. There remain about 20 million people who are still distinctly Berbers, speaking their ancient dialects as a first language, although most Berbers are bi-lingual, and clinging to their old culture. There are some real differences between the Berbers and the Arabs, but they also have many cross-cultural links. Arabic is the official language of all the North African states, and it is also the language of their religion and culture. 1 The medieval era, often called the Middle Ages or the Dark Ages, began around C.E. 476 and ended between C.E. 1400 and C.E. 1450.  The origin of the Berbers is shrouded in mystery. Some scholars believe that they crossed over from the Iberian Peninsula many thousands of years ago, whereas others assume that they have always lived in North Africa. Many scholars, however, agree that by 8,000 B.C.E., the ancestors or, more appropriately, the predecessors of the Berbers were already occupying North Africa. The culturally distinct Berber communities of today survive in pockets in the mountains and in the Sahara Desert, scattered over a large area from the Siwa Oasis in Egypt to the Atlantic and from the Niger river and the Sahel in the south to the Mediterranean region. Their density increases from east to west, with Morocco being the state with most Berbers living in it at present. Features of Indigenous Berber Civilisation Living in a mountainous environment and in ethnical society divided by many dialects, there was originally much political fragmentation among the indigenous people of North Africa, who are collectively referred to as the Berbers. Over time, however, they developed an indigenous civilisation which had peculiar features, including the development of the monarchical system of government, religion, art works, Monarchical System of Government The indigenous Berber civilisation developed the political system of hereditary kingship or the monarchial system of government, with monarchs who were thought of as having been ordained to rule. Their pronouncements and orders were not challenged, as that would amount to challenging the will of the spirit powers. Succession to the throne was purely hereditary. The Berber kingship system was so well-organised that by the third century B.C.E., they had developed three great kingdoms in North Africa. These were the kingdoms of Mauritania to the extreme west, the Numidian kingdoms of Massaesylin in modern Algeria and Massylin in modern Tunisia. After 200 B.C.E., the two kingdoms of Massaesylin and Massylin united to form a single kingdom called the Numidia kingdom. Religion Religion played a major role in the Berber civilisation. Like the indigenous peoples of all other ancient civilisations of Africa, the Berbers were polytheistic, who believed in pantheons of gods, which manifest nature. This means that their religion was based on the worship of gods who lived on the sun, in mountains, rivers, trees etc. One of the deities of the Berbers was the Greek god, Athene, who was held in great awe by the people. Sacrifices were made to the gods in the form of animals and human beings. The Berbers of Numidia in eastern Algiers, for example, were known to have observed a custom whereby their first born children were sacrificed to their gods in order to gain favour and blessings. They made animal sacrifices to their gods. For example, the Ursifan Berbers sacrificed a black cow to their gods before they went to war. It must also be mentioned that the Berbers believed in the existence of evil forces. The belief made them to wear amulets like talisman for protection. Artistic Skills One most important feature of the indigenous Berber civilization was their enviable artistic impressions. The people were very innovative and indigenous as far as art and gallery was concerned, and their great artistic works abound in the Tassili caves in the North Africa. They had attractive and remarkable paintings and engravings which showed everyday life, animals and human beings. Cave paintings of horse-drawn chariots could be seen all over the place in Fezzan (Eastern Libya) and along the Trans-Saharan trade routes. They made beautiful potteries which were of complex designs and pictures. A good example is a five (5) part drinking vessel richly decorated with ritual symbols. This can be seen in a museum in Hamburg. One such vase from Cyrenaica (eastern Libya) which dates back to about 586 B.C.E. has pictures showing a wide range of Cyrenaica exports. Architectural skills The Berbers were also skilful in architecture. Evidence of their architectural skills can be found in monumental tombs scattered all over North-west of Africa. The most famous of these is the Tomb of the Christian Woman sited west of Algiers and built even before the rise of Christianity. The Berbers also carved symbolic figures for funeral purposes. An example is the funerary lions of Mactar found in North Africa. Their architectural skills enabled them to develop an urban civilisation as far back as 500 B.C.E. Economic Developments Another important feature of the indigenous Berber civilisation could be identified in their economic activities. The Berbers of North Africa were engaged mainly in agriculture and commerce. They cultivated a variety of food crops and also raised animals for both domestic and commercial purposes. This assertion implies that trade, both internal and external, were an important feature of the economic life of the Berbers. They also practised slave raiding and engaged in metal technology.2 Economic Activities of the Berbers As noted above, the Berbers of North Africa developed a sophisticated economic life. In this wise, they engaged principally in agriculture, trade and commerce, slave-raiding and metal technology. Agriculture Agriculture was the main occupation of the Berbers of North Africa. The Berbers reared domestic animals such as goats, sheep and cattle. Pastoralism was known to the Berbers by 1000 B.C.E. Food cultivation was also predominant in the plains and in the Sahara oases. Berber farmers living on the plains of Cyrenaica and the Maghreb produced livestock, wool, skins, wheat, horses and fruits. As a result, by the third century B.C.E., the Berber farmers of North Africa were supplying part of the grains needed to feed Carthage’s population of over 400,000 people. During the reign of King Masinissa (200-148 B.C.E.), agricultural production was highly encouraged. The Berber kings offered solid protection to the farmers against raids (attacks) from nomads. In order to curb those raids, armed men were sent round to ensure that peace prevailed in the territories. These armed men also collected taxes from the farmers for the ruler. Hence, agriculture became the main source of wealth for the Berber rulers. Trade and Commerce Trade was another important aspect of the Berber economy. With regard to internal trade, it is recorded that by the ninth century B.C.E., commercial relations had developed between the Berbers and Carthage. Over time, this trade expanded in scope so that the Berbers of North Africa traded with people in territories found far away from their own kingdoms. As the trade expanded, Berber towns became important market centers in North Africa. The rulers of the Berber kingdoms 2 These economic activities are explained below. obtained much revenue from taxes which they imposed on goods that entered North Africa. In the rural areas, taxes were paid in kind. This enabled the Berber kings to have the advantage of controlling the export of commodities like wool, livestock, skins, ivory and slaves. The Berber economy was also linked to trade with the outside world. Again, by the ninth century B.C.E., the Berbers had started taking part in the Mediterranean trade. Through the Phoenician merchants, the Berbers obtained goods like Greek pottery from Athens, perfume and Egyptian stones. In return, the Berber exported gold, hides and skins, and tusks. It is common knowledge that the Berbers also played a middlemen role in the trade between the peoples of the Western Sudan and North Africa. This trade was the famous trans-Saharan Caravan trade. The Berbers brought North African cowries, beads, silk, salt, mirrors and swords to the Western Sudanese markets. They, in return, exported West African commodities such as gold, feather, ivory, cola nuts and slaves. Slave-Raiding Yet another economic activity of the Berbers was slave-raiding. The raiding was usually done by a sub-group of the Berbers of the North Africa called the Garamantes. These Garamantes lived in the fertile areas of the Sahara desert called oases. As a result, they were strategically located at the crossroads of the trans-Saharan Caravan trade. They usually raided the Saharan region for more slaves. They used horse-drawn chariots to carry out their raiding activities. The purpose of the raid was to obtain slaves whom they could exchange for foreign goods like perfume, Greek pottery and Egyptian stones. They, thus, created settlements in the Fezzan (Eastern Libya), which they turned into international trade centres. Metal Technology The development of metal technology also helped the economic changes that took place among the Berbers of North Africa. Iron-working technology got to North Africa after 100 B.C.E. The technology was introduced by Greek and Phoenician traders who were trading along the coast of North Africa from the ninth century B.C.E. onwards. They also taught the Berbers the technology for exploiting the rich copper mine in Numidia. The Berbers learnt from the Phoenicians how to use iron to manufacture a wide range of tools and objects such as weapons, ploughs and cooking utensils. In addition, it was through the Phoenicians that the Berbers of North Africa learnt to import tin from Spain. It was added to the copper mined in Numidia to produce bronze. As a result, vessels and other goods were manufactured to help improve the Berber economy. Horse-drawn carts and chariots were manufactured to assist them in their wars. The metal weapons helped in their easy defeat of their enemies who lacked them, whiles the use of the chariots and carts facilitated the trans-Saharan Caravan trade. In fact, metal technology helped so much in the rise of the Berber kingdoms. The growth of the trans-Saharan Caravan trade was largely due to the development and use of carts and horse-drawn chariots during this period. Berber International Relations Between the twelfth century B.C.E. and the seventh century C.E., the Berbers of North Africa came into contact with various peoples and cultures. As a result, it is logical to say that the Berber civilisation of North Africa was involved in international relations. Genuinely, the Berbers had serious contacts with several peoples at different times. This was the order in which the contacts with foreigners occurred: the Greeks, the Phoenicians, the Romans and the Arabs. It must be emphasised that these successive contacts left their effects on the Berber civilisation of North Africa. Relations with the Greeks The first people to come into contact with the Berbers of North Africa were the Greeks. This contact started around 1200 B.C.E. however, the contact with the Greeks was more noticeable at the time that the Berber civilisation had reached its peak between the fifth and fourth centuries B.C.E. in any case, by the eighth century B.C.E., the Greeks, through external trade, had established colonies on the North African coast which they called Libya, a name believed to have derived from the Libu ethnic group of the Berbers of North Africa. As the trade became more lucrative, the economic life of the people improved tremendously. Because of the prosperity they enjoyed from this trade, the Berbers were encouraged to extend their commercial activities to Egypt and Phoenicia. The contact with the Greeks left some influences on the Berbers and their civilisation. In the first place, relations with the Greeks exposed the Berbers to the Greek civilisation which also reached its peak between the fifth and fourth centuries B.C.E. again, the Berbers learnt from the Greeks the technology of minting coins. Greek culture also influenced the Berbers. For example, the Berber kings began to manufacture and use crowns designed in the style of Greek kings. In addition, the Berbers were greatly influenced by Greek education. Some of the Berber kings gave their children Greek education. Berber court ceremonies were equally impacted. Berber kings often organised expensive banquets where Greek musicians were invited to grace the occasion with their brand of music. Relations with the Phoenicians and Carthaginians The Berbers of North Africa also established relations with the Phoenicians who established the colony of Carthage in North Africa. The original home of the Phoenicians was modern-day Lebanon and parts of present-day Israel and Syria. Their principal cities were Tyre and Sidon. The Phoenicians were sea traders. In order to facilitate easy trade links with Spain, the Phoenicians established colonies throughout the Mediterranean region. The oldest of these colonies was Utica. However, the greatest of these colonies was Carthage, which was situated near Tunis in the mid- ninth century. By 600 B.C.E., Carthage had developed to become one of the greatest Mediterranean powers with many colonies along the northern coast of Africa. The colony of Carthage initially paid annual land rent to the Berber rulers. This, however, ceased by the middle of the sixth century B.C.E. This was when the colony of Carthage became an empire and strong enough to resist continuous payment. Carthage, therefore, refused to pay the annual land rent she used to pay to the Berber Kings. Not only that, the people of Carthage also sacked the Greeks from the North African trade. Like the contact with the Greeks, the contact with the Phoenicians and, later, the Carthaginians also influenced the Berbers and their culture in several ways. For example, the Carthaginians introduced new farming systems or technologies to the Berbers of North Africa. It was from the Phoenicians that’s the Berbers learnt the science of growing grapes, called viticulture. Grain farming and the growing of olive trees also became popular in Tunisia. Moreover, the Carthaginians introduced the Berbers to iron-working and the use of bronze. The new technology enabled the Berbers, for the first time, to exploit the copper mine in Numidia. The Carthaginians also introduced to the Berbers Greek and Italian ceramics as well as Egyptian glassware. The Berbers also learnt to make pottery, leather goods and woolen clothes. Carthaginian influences could also be observed in Berber architectural styles. The palaces of the Berber rulers came to be adorned with Carthaginian-modelled silver dishes and baskets of gold. The Carthaginians also introduced the Egyptian form of architecture to the Berbers of North Africa. The Berbers were taught how to arrange blocks of stone without the use of mortar. The art of baking bricks in the sun and of making stucco (a kind of wall plaster for making decorations) was also introduced. Finally, in the field of religion, the Carthaginians influenced the Berber cults with the worship of their nature gods. The Berbers began to worship the Carthaginian god of harvest called Baal Hammon and their goddess of life and fertility known as Tanit. It was through the same Carthaginians that the Berbers accepted the worship of the Egyptian sun-god called Amon-Re and the Egyptian mother-goddess of fertility called Isis. Relations with the Romans In the third century B.C.E., Rome went to war with Carthage in an attempt to capture it. During the war, two Berber Kings, namely Massinissa and Syphax, fought on opposite sides. Massinissa fought on the side of Rome, while Syphax fought on the side of Carthage. Carthage was defeated in 200 B.C.E. and the land of Massaesylin was given to Massinissa, and the whole of Northern Africa became part of the Roman Empire in 146 B.C.E. As a result, the Berbers had relations with the Romans ad their empire from the second century B.C.E. The contact with the Romans revolutionised the culture of the Berbers. In C.E. 40, the Romans taught the Berber farmers of Numidia and Mauritania enhanced farming practices in order to increase food production. Roman rule also influenced the growth of industry among the Berbers. The Romans promoted the production of ceramics in the olive-producing districts. The growth of industry led to the development of many beautiful cities in North Africa and, as a result, population growth and urbanisation. Romans engineering specialists, known as aqilegi, were employed to search for water sources in order to undertake development activities, including irrigation for farming purpose and the supply of water to the towns. Further, the religion of the Berbers underwent change during the period of Roman rule of North Africa. Interestingly, the Romans retained the worship of the Carthaginian gods of Baal and Tanit. Baal was given a Roman name, Saturn, while Tanit was renamed Caelestis. After C.E. 393, when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, North Africa became a famous Christian centre. Around this period, North Africa produced about 600 bishops and great Church fathers, including St. Tertulian, St. Cyprian and St. Augustine. However, the Roman influence negatively affected the political, economic and social aspects of the Berber civilisation. In the first place, the extension of Roman control over Numidia and Mauritania led to the abolition of the indigenous Berber dynasties which had ruled the Berbers and their kingdoms for several years. Secondly, the Roman influence divided the Berbers of North Africa along distinct class lines. The main cause of this sharp division was that the ruling class of Roman administrators and wealthy Romanised Carthaginians lived in the towns and coastal cities. They owned large estates close to the towns and which they farmed with slave labourers made up of Berbers and captured Saharan nomads. Thirdly, the ordinary Berber population who lived in abject poverty were in addition made to pay heavy taxes. In spite of this oppression by the Romans, they remained distinctly Berber in language and culture. Relations with the Arabs After C.E. 150, the Roman empire suffered great depopulation at home which made it very difficult for them to employ people or soldiers to provide security and entrench their rule over North Africa. In view of this, 5500 locally born sons of legionnaires – Roman soldiers stationed in North Africa – were employed by Rome to form the Third Legion of Numidia and Mauritania for local defence. By the end of the fourth century C.E., Rome had hired a total of 22,500 Berbers to keep the peace in Numidia and Mauritania. In addition, the Barbarian invasions of the Roman empire in the fifth century C.E. weakened the power of Rome further. This eventually led to the invasion and conquest of Africa by the Arabs in the seventh century C.E. Following this invasion and conquest, North Africa became part of the Arab empire. It must be noted that Arabic rule of North Africa was greatly disliked by the Berbers because most of the Berbers were captured in wars and became slaves. They also worked on the farming estates of the Arab rulers. However, like the presence of earlier foreigners who had contacts with the Berbers of North Africa, the Arab presence in North Africa also influenced the culture of the Berbers in several ways. In the first place, the Arabs introduced Islam to the Berbers of North Africa so that by the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries C.E., the Berbers had become Arabised and Islamised. Consequently, the Berbers adopted the Arabic language, Arabic system of inheritance, marriage and dressing. Again, the Islamisation of North Africa led to the emergence of three independent Muslim states in North Africa in the thirteenth century C.E. These were the Marinid state based in Fez in Morrocco; the Abd-al-Wadid state at Tlemcen in Algeria; and the Hafsid state of Ifriqiya in Tunisia. In fact, it was these Muslim states that developed into the respective countries in which they were founded. In these Muslim states, all laws were fashioned in accordance with the Islamic holy law called the Sharia, and the Hadith, the traditions of Prophet Muhammed. These laws actually regulated the judicial and political lives of the people In the social field, the Arab contact influenced education in North Africa. The Hafsids, a class of educated Arabised Berbers, encouraged learning in North Africa. They established religious boarding schools called the Madrasas all over North Africa as centres of learning. By C.E. 1400, they had established about ten major Madrasas in North Africa, with the most famous one being Al-Zaytuna in Tunis. In the economic sector, a couple of industries emerged in several parts of North Africa. For example, paper mills were established in Tripoli in Libya and Fez in Morocco. Besides, the Arabs established other industries that manufactured pottery, metal products, soap and perfume. Further, Arab influence served as catalyst to the growth and development of trade and commerce in North Africa. It was during the period of Arab rule that merchants from Syria and Iraq began to arrive in North Africa to trade. The Berbers exported commodities like cereals, wool and leather. They, in turn, imported jewels, silk, spices, medicinal plants, metal ore and perfume from the Arab world. In addition, trading activities in North Africa led to the development of the banking system. Banks in Baghdad in Iraq set up their branches in North Africa to promote financial ties. In the course of time, cheques and letters of credit were introduced and used in parts of North Africa. These boosted trading activities in the region.  TOPIC II THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: ORIGIN, ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE, SOCIAL HIERARCHIES, AND EXPANSION TO NORTH AFRICA The Ottoman Empire in C.E. 1683 The Ottoman Empire at Its Greatest Extent Origin of the Ottoman Empire The Ottoman empire was an Islamic empire which rose in the thirteenth century C.E. and declined in the seventeenth century C.E. The founders of empire were known as the Ottoman Turks. The name of their leader was Osman I, who founded the dynasty in C.E. 1299. Osman’s name was corrupted into Ottoman. That is why his followers became known as the Ottomans. The Ottoman Turks were part of various Turkic-speaking people who spread westward from central Asia between the ninth and eleventh centuries C.E. The first of the Turkic-speaking people to rise to prominence were the Seljuk Turks. However, it is to the Ottoman Turks that credit is given for the founding the Ottoman empire. The Seljuk Turks, led by Seljuk Dey, had tried to establish an empire as early as the eleventh century C.E. they attempted to revive the declining Abbasid caliphate in Baghdad in Iraq. Later, the Seljuk Turks established themselves in the Anatolian peninsula – present-day Turkey – at the expense of the Byzantine empire. In the Seljuk empire, Turks served as warriors or administrator, while the peasants who tilled the farmland were mainly Greek. The Seljuk Turks were a tolerant and an inclusive dynasty. They allowed Muslims and Christians to live together peacefully. Nevertheless, the first attempt by the Seljuk Turks to establish an empire suffered destruction by the Mongols who invaded and destroyed the Seljuk capital, without seeking to occupy the area. However, in the late thirteenth century C.E., however, a new group of Turks, under the leadership of Osman, came into prominence and consolidated their power in the northwestern corner of the Anatolian peninsula. The Ottoman Turks were more aggressive and had an expansionist mindset than the Seljuk Turks. The land Ottoman Turks occupied was given to them by the Seljuk Turks as a reward for assisting to defend the Seljuk capital against the Mongols in the late thirteenth century C.E. At first, the Ottoman Turks lived peacefully with the Seljuk Turks. However, the Ottoman Turks took advantage of the decline of the Seljuk empire in the early fourteenth century. Osman I declared independence from the Seljuk Turks in C.E. 1299 and usurped the political position of the Seljuk Turks by embarking on wars of expansion. By the end of the fourteenth century, they had conquered most of Anatolia and the Balkans and were poised to become a major world power. Subsequently, they founded the Osman or Osmanli dynasty, later to be known as the Ottoman dynasty. The Ottoman dynasty, founded by Osman I, created the Ottoman empire, which lasted for well over 300 years. The Ottoman empire reached its greatest size in the late seventeenth century C.E., but it lasted until C.E. 1922. It was one of the largest and most long-lasting empires in world history. The Ottoman empire, together with the Safavid Muslim empire in Iraq and the Mughal empire in India, is referred to as gunpowder empire because, to a considerable extent, it owed its success to the mastery of the technology of firearms. After formation, the Ottoman empire conquered a vast territory incorporating southeast Asia, northeast Africa and southeast Europe, owing largely to its advantageous geographical location in the northwestern corner of the Anatolian peninsula from where the Ottoman Turks were able to expand westward to control areas lying between the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea. Several factors contributed towards the rapid expansion of the Ottoman Turks. In the first place, the Ottoman Turks, in comparison with the Seljuk Turks, were more militaristic and expansionist. Again, they took advantage of the Mongol invasions of Anatolia in the late thirteenth century. The Ottoman Turks were also good at administering the lands they conquered. In addition, the Ottoman Turks built a professional army which used superior weapons. They also established a well-structured bureaucracy which helped them to rule their empire more efficiently. Further, the Ottoman Turks emerged at a time when the Byzantine empire was declining. Finally, the powerful European states at the time of the rise of the Ottoman empire delayed in rising against the expansion of the Ottoman empire. The Structure of Ottoman Political Administration The Ottoman Turks set up the administrative capital of their empire at Constantinople, which is now Istanbul, present-day capital of Turkey. Constantinople was captured from the declining Byzantine empire in C.E. 1453. This year also marked the capture of Asia Minor – Turkey – by the Turks or Muslims. The Ottoman administrative system was based on four main pillars, namely, the Imperial Council of Elders, the military, the administration institution, and the religious institution and leaders. The Imperial Council of Elders was the highest level of Ottoman administration. This council was headed by the Sultan, who was also referred to as Dey. The Sultan was the supreme authority in both political and military senses. Both administrative and military powers were centralised under the Sultan, and the capital was located wherever the Sultan and his administration happened to be. The increase in the scope of the empire brought changes, and the status and prestige of the Sultan increased greatly relative to the ethnic group leaders, since the Sultan took on the trains of imperial rule. That is, the Sultan was the absolute ruler of the empire. The position of the Sultan was hereditary, with the position going to a son, although not necessarily the eldest. This hereditary succession led to chronic succession disputes, with the losing candidate of the dispute executed or imprisoned. In any case, the Sultan was assisted in his administration of the empire by a Council of Advisors known as the Divan. The Divan was composed of high-ranking officials, led by the chief minister known as the Grand Vizier, who was the prime minister of the empire. The Divan met four times in a week, and its meetings were chaired the Grand Vizier. The Ottoman Turks established a Professional Army that played a crucial role in the administration of the empire. The Sultan was the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The military administration included the Janissaries. The Janissaries were composed of young male, Christian slaves who were taken from wars in the Balkans – modern-day Albania, Macedonia, Serbia, Slovenia, among others. They were raised in the Islamic faith and either became administrators for the Sultan of the empire or members of the Sultan’s personal bodyguard and military. It was these troops that used new weapons, called harquebus, who made the Ottoman empire one of the first gunpowder empires. The army also included a cavalry wing and various specialised corps. The military was responsible for the security of the Sultan and his family. It was also responsible for collecting taxes and maintaining order in the provinces. The Ottoman empire was divided into provinces called eyalets for effective and efficient administration. As a result, a special Administrative Institution was established to oversee the day- to-day running of the empire. The administrative institution was headed by the Grand Vizier. The provinces were governed by governor-generals, known as beylerbeys, who combined both civil and military functions. These governor-generals were usually ethnic group leaders, who offered their loyalty to the Sultan based on their ability to provide spoils of war and grazing land. These provincial governor-generals collected taxes from areas under their control and sent one-fifth to the Sultan. The provinces were divided into sub-provinces, each administered by a lieutenant- governor responsible to the governor-general. These sub-provinces were each divided into districts. Finally, it must be noted that the Ottoman empire was multi-ethnic and multi-religious. However, Islam played a crucial role in the empire. Indeed, the Ottoman state based its authority on religion. The Ottoman Turks, therefore, established the Religious Institution to take care of the religious affairs of the empire. The religious institution was led by the Sunni Muslims. The head of the religious institution was the Chief Mufti, who was the highest religious authority in the empire. Particularly from the early sixteenth century C.E., the sultans themselves and the Sunni Muslims of the religious institution claimed the title of a caliph – defender of the faith or successor to the Islamic Prophet Mohammed. The religious institution was responsible for the administration of Islamic law. It was also responsible for the construction of mosques and schools. Ottoman Social Hierarchies Social stratification or class system existed in the Ottoman empire. The Ottoman empire organised society around the concept of the millet or nation. The millets were autonomous religious communities or communities of different religious and ethnic minorities. The millet system shows that clear boundaries between different social groups were important for Ottoman political control. There were even Ottoman laws that specified the kinds of clothing that people in different communities could wear. Despite this, it is hard to simplify a set of rules governing Ottoman society because the society was multi-ethnic and multi-religious. In terms of ethnicity, the Ottoman empire was composed mainly of Turks, Arabs, Kabyles, Berbers, Jews and Europeans. In religion, the empire consisted of Muslims and non-Muslim People of the Book – that is, Christians and Jews – and other religious minorities. Generally, however, bureaucrats, religious scholars, and military officials had the greatest social power. Warrior-aristocrats, who were mostly Muslim, benefited from tax exemptions and the timar system of land grants. Under this system, in return for military service, warriors were given land. The rest of society made up the lowest class. It included merchants, farmers, herdsman, manufacturers, and seafarers. Though they had the least official power, they powered the engine of the empire. They were the main producers of goods and revenues (through taxes). They supported the military, bureaucracy, and religious establishment. Hierarchy was important, but it was not totally rigid. Religious, gender, and economic differences put people into different groups. But there were a lot of overlaps. Commoners could be wealthy or poor. They could be peasants, townspeople, or nomadic pastoralists. People also were able to move across groups or gain social power. Merit was often rewarded regardless of wealth, lineage, or social status. In fact, enslaved or common people in the Ottoman military or bureaucracy, such as the Janissaries, often rose through the ranks. They ended up in some of the highest positions in society. Throughout the Ottoman empire’s history, women were dependent on the men in their families for money and social position. This was the case in many medieval societies. Generally, older women or women with children had relatively more power in a household. Women’s lives were relatively stable over the centuries. This is largely because religious ideas ruled gender relations. Islamic law granted women certain rights, like divorce and inheritance. It also allowed them to use their property and wealth to start and maintain institutions like schools and mosques. But religion was also used to limit women’s power. For example, women had different rights in the courts. Also, some interpretations of Islam were used to justify keeping women at home. The Ottomans under Suleyman the Magnificent From the rise to the fall of the Ottoman empire, a number of useful sultans took the reins of power. Among these were Osman I (C.E. 1280-1326), Orhan I (C.E. 1326-1360), Murad I (C.E. 1360- 1389), Bayezid I (C.E. 1389-1402), and Suleyman I or Suleyman “the Magnificent” (C.E. 1520- 1566). Among these sultans, Suleiman I is believed to be the greatest sultan. He was born in C.E. 1494-1495 and died in 1566. His parents were Sultan Selim and Hafsa. At the age of 7 years, he was sent to study science, history, literature and military tactics in Constantinople. At the age of 17 years, he was appointed as governor of Kafka. At the age of 27 years, he became the sultan of the of the Ottoman empire after the death of his father. He reigned for 46 years. Under Suleyman I, the Ottomans embarked on thirteen major military campaigns. His forces completed the conquest of the Balkans, defeated the Hungarians, captured much of the North African coast and added new possessions in the Middle East to the empire. Thus, under him, the size of the Ottoman empire doubled in size and ruled over 20 to 30 million people. He was known to the lands of Europe as the Grand Turk and also as the Magnificent. Among his own subjects, he was known as the Law Giver. In addition to his military exploits, Suleyman saw to the provision of justice for his people, codified Ottoman laws of the empire and saw to their enforcement. Again, he established a system of religious tolerance which allowed Muslims, Christians and Jews to live together peacefully. He was also a patron of the arts and sciences. He carried out an extensive infrastructural development. He built many mosques, palaces and libraries. He put up almost 400 new buildings, throughout the empire. Suleyman also supported the work of scholars and artists. In view of all this, his reign is considered as the golden age of the Ottoman empire. Ottoman Expansion to North Africa Within the first half of the sixteenth century C.E., the Ottoman Turks again went on the offensive, taking control of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Arabia. Within the next few years of capturing the holy cities of Islam, including Jerusalem, Mecca and Medina, the Ottoman Turks sought for further expansion westwards toward the North African coastline. The Ottoman expansion to North Africa was the result of an invitation for help extended to them by the Nasrids who were the ruling house of the Muslim-controlled Mediterranean territories of Granada and Malaga. Apart from this invitation, the Ottoman expansion to North Africa was also motivated by such factors as the desire to control the lucrative trade routes in the Mediterranean Sea, the need to protect the Ottoman empire’s borders from Christian powers, and the desire to spread Islam to new areas. In North Africa, they penetrated and went as far as the strait of Jerobrota. The success of the Ottomans saw them occupying Tripoli, Tunis and Algiers. In this westward expansion, it appears the Ottoman took advantage of the progressive disintegration of the Nasrid dynasty in Morocco which had lost its large foothold on the European continent when Granada fell to the rising power of Spain in C.E. 1492. They conquered parts of Morocco, but they were never able to fully control the country. The Ottomans became involved in the affairs of the North African states through the activities of Muslim privateers who operated on their own but in the context of the Spanish-Ottoman naval confrontation in the western Mediterranean. The Barbarossa Brothers and Their Role in Ottoman Expansion to North Africa Ottoman involvement in the affairs of the North African states was precipitated by the activities of the privateers Aruj Barbarossa and, his younger brother, Khair al-Din Barbarossa. The two brothers played a significant role in the Ottoman expansion to North Africa. They were born on the Greek island of Lesbos to a Turkish father and an Italian mother. In C.E. 1516, the Barbarossa brothers captured the city of Algiers with the help of the Ottoman empire. This victory gave the Ottoman Turks a foothold in North Africa, and it also made the Barbarossa brothers famous throughout the Muslim world. The Barbarossa brothers played several roles in North Africa. One was that they helped the Ottoman Turks to capture the city of Algiers in C.E. 1516. They raided Christian shipping in the Mediterranean Sea, which weakened Christian powers and helped to spread fear and anxiety among them. They also helped the Ottoman Turks to conquer other cities in North Africa, including Tunis and Tripoli. Afterwards, they established Ottoman rule in North Africa, which gave the Ottomans a strategic foothold in the region. Further, they helped to spread Islam to new areas, which increased the prestige of the Ottoman empire. However, Aruj was pursued and killed with his escort in the summer of CE. 1518 by the Spaniards. Khair al-Din served as the military commander and governor-general of Algiers from C.E. 1518 to 1534. During his administration of Algiers, he expanded the city’s fortifications, built a navy, and organised a system of taxation. He led the Ottomans to victory in several battles against the Spaniards and the Portuguese. He transformed the city of Algiers from just a place of anchorage into an important naval base. In C.E. 1534, Khair al-Din was appointed the Kapudan Pasha, or admiral of the Ottoman fleet. He played a key role in the Ottoman conquest of Tunisia in C.E. 1535. He died in C.E. 1564. Impact of Ottoman Rule on North Africa The impact of Turkish rule on the people of North Africa was relatively light. In North Africa, the Ottoman Turks preferred to administer their conquered regions through local rulers. Thus, the central administration in Constantinople ruled through appointed local rulers or political administrators called Pashas. The Pashas were responsible for the collection of taxes and were required to pay a fixed percentage as tribute to the central government. They were also responsible for the maintenance of law and order and were directly responsible to Istanbul. In North Africa, the Ottoman Turks ruled coastal cities like Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli. They made no attempts to control the interior beyond just maintaining the trade routes through the Sahara Desert to the trading centres along the Niger river. Within this period as well, the North African coast, that is, from Egypt to the Atlantic Ocean, also referred to as the Barbary Coast, suffered from the activities of both Christians and local Berber pirates who raided the ships that passed through the Mediterranean Sea. By the seventeenth century C.E., the administrative links established between the imperial corps in Constantinople and its appointed political representatives in the Turkish non-African regencies had started to decline. Some of the Pashas were dethroned by local elites, while others, such as the governor-general of Tunis, became hereditary rulers. Even Egypt, the most important country to the Turks in the region by virtue of its agricultural wealth and strategic control over the sea route to the Red Sea, gradually became autonomous under a new official class of Janissaries. Many of the appointed Janissaries became wealthy landowners by exploiting their official function to collect tax revenues far in excess of what they had to remit to Istanbul. Thus, by the eighteenth century C.E., the Ottoman Turks exercised only some minimum control due to the fact that, within this period, the Mamluks had returned to power and were pushing to enjoy their autonomy from Turkey. The Ottoman Turks only retained some minimum control through the appointment of a Viceroy from Istanbul.  TOPIC III MULAY AHMED AL-MANSUR AND THE MAKING OF MOROCCO Introduction Ahmed al-Mansur became the ruler of Morocco from C.E. 1578 to 1603. During his reign, he instituted reform measures that made Morocco a great North African state. However, the leadership of Morocco before Al-Mansur was characterised by a period of relative political instability and fragmentation. This section seeks to examine the situation of Morocco before and during the reign of Ahmed al-Mansur. The Period before Ahmed al-Mansur Morocco before the time of Ahmed al-Mansur was disunited along ethnic and religious lines and ruled by a number of ethnic group chiefs, all of whom had failed to present a formidable opposition to Portuguese expansion and acquisition of territories within the area. The Portuguese occupation of all the sea ports in the north angered the Muslims. By the fifteenth century C.E., however, this ethnic group system of government had exhausted itself and had gradually come to be replaced by a period of rule dominated by two religio-political entities. These were the Sharifian and the Sufi orders. The Sharifian cult had long operated under both the era of the Idrisid rule and much later the Marinid dynasty. The Sufi order had become a prominent religio-political sect through the activities of two Islamic scholars, that is, Abu Midian al-Ghawth and Abdul-Salam bin Mashish. The fifteenth century witnessed the Sufi sheikhs and Sharifs coming to the fore as symbols of disenchantment with ethnic group leadership and determination to foreign enemies of both the country and the Islamic faith. Although the Moroccan ethnic group system of government had outlived its usefulness by the fifteenth century C.E., these emergent religio-political entities still required the support of some ethnic groups to succeed as political leaders. The sixteenth century witnessed the dominance of two Sharifian families who ruled various parts of Morocco. These were the Sharifs of Jabal Alam and the Sardians. Both were projected by their respective Sharifian cults as symbols around which unity could be achieved. The Jabal Alam rule extended over the northern part of Morocco, whereas the Sardians extended their rule in the south. The Sharifs of Jabal Alam, however, lived under the shadows of both the Watasids and the Portuguese. The Sharifs of Jabal Alam were, thus, unable to fulfill the aim of driving the Portuguese away from Morocco. In circumstance, its rulers were able to survive only through coexistence with both the Portuguese and the Watasids The Saadians were the first dynasty of Sheriffs to rule Morocco. The Sheriffs were descendants of the clan of Prophet Mohammed. Muhammad al-Kaim bin Amr Allah, was the first important head of the dynasty to have attacked the Portuguese at Agadir in C.E. 1510. In C.E. 1524, his son, Ahmad al-Aaredj, captured Marrakesh from the Wattasids and became the head of the Saadian state. After a long struggle, he had to give way to his brother, Muhammad al Shaykh, who was installed as leader of Fez in C.E. 1549. Muhammad al-Shaykh had three sons, namely Abdalla al-Ghalib, Abd al-Malik and Mulay Ahmed, who later became Mulay Ahmed al-Mansur. Muhammad al-Shaykh was killed in C.E. 1557 by the Ottoman Turks. Abdalla al-Ghalib acceded to throne and ruled for 17 years. Over the course of the following decades, there were further struggles within the family over who should succeed whom. Mulai Muhammed al-Maslukh, also known as al-Mutawakkil, acceded to the throne in C.E. 1574, but his uncle, Abd al-Malik, who had taken refuge in Istanbul, succeeded in taking power away from him, with the aid of the Ottoman pasha of Algiers, in C.E. 1576. Mulai Muhammed then succeeded in coming to terms with both Philip I of Spain and, more importantly, Sebastian I, the young king of Portugal. Sebastian set sail for Morocco in C.E. 1578 and joined his forces with those of Mulai Muhammed. On August 14, 1576, these two allies came up against Abd al-Malik in what became known as the Battle of the Three Kings at al-Ksar al-Kabir. Mulai Muhammed and Sebastian were both killed, while Abd al-Malik, already sick, died the same day. Nonetheless, victory went to Abd al-Malik’s Saadian army. The Battle of the Three Kings was significant especially in terms of its effects or outcome. In the first place, all the three kings involved in the battle – Sebastian I of Portugal, Mulai Muhammed and Abd al-Malik, died. This is why the fight is often referred to as the Battle of the Three Kings. Secondly, Portugal was annexed by Spain in C.E. 1580 because there was no one to accede to the Portuguese throne. This was precipitated by King Sebastian’s inability to leave behind an heir to the Portuguese throne. Thirdly, the Portuguese were no longer able to project their power in Morocco, and they were forced to abandon their plans to conquer the country. This led to a period of political instability and decline in Portugal, which ultimately contributed to the country’s loss of its overseas empire. Again, there was an end to the internal succession crisis in Morocco. The reason is that the victory of the Saadian army at the Battle of the Three Kings led to the consolidation of power under the Saadian dynasty. The Saadians were able to defeat their rivals and establish themselves as the dominant power in Morocco. Finally, the Battle of the Three Kings enormously benefitted Mulay Ahmed, who did not even take part in the battle. He became the sultan and took the title al-Mansur, which means the Victorious. It was principally the coming to power of Mulay Ahmed al-Mansur that ended the internal succession crisis in Morocco. In essence, it was the Battle of the Three Kings that led to the rise of al-Mansur, who became one of the most powerful and influential rulers in Moroccan history. The Era of Mulay Ahmed al-Mansur in Morocco, C.E. 1578-1603 Mulay Ahmed al-Mansur was the fifth son of Muhammad al-Shaykh who was the first ruler of the Saadian dynasty of Morocco. He built a magnificent palace at Marrakesh called El Badi or the Marvelous. Significant developments before Mulay Ahmed al-Mansur’s accession to the throne helped to present al-Mansur’s reign with the needed political stability and favourable international climate based on which he was able to unite Morocco and implement his policies of breaking the yoke of foreign rule and interference. In the first place, in C.E. 1580, Portugal was annexed to Spain. This was because the Portuguese monarch, King Sebastian, who had died in the Battle of the Three Kings, had no heir. As a result, Portugal’s possessions in Morocco naturally passed off into Spanish hands. In Morocco’s favour, the Spanish were rather more committed to the preservation of the status quo than Portugal had been. However, the Ottoman Turks were not. Secondly, the Moroccan victory enhanced the international standing of the North African country, and this allowed Mulay Ahmed al-Mansur to draw considerable political and economic advantage from his country’s improved international standing owing to their defeat of a notable European country. Al-Mansur’s reign was marked out by the establishment of an efficient army, effective administrative set up, oppressive tax regimes, redefinition of the office of the Sultanate, military expeditions to the Western Sudan, and a foreign policy of co-operation with a few European nations. Effective Administrative Set Up When he acceded to the throne, al-Mansur created and implemented a highly efficient administrative unit. Although highly despotic in nature, this administrative unit was capable of ruling all of Morocco. He created the office of the Sultanate and took a personal interest in the everyday affairs of the government. He wielded absolute authority and implemented a sultanate based on grandeur and efficient oppression. He was very diligent in his administration. This reflected in the fact that he read all reports from the provinces, answered letters from the governors promptly and ensured his secretaries kept to fixed hours of works. His ministers and high government officials met the Divan every Wednesday to discuss important aspects of policy in his presence. Oppressive Tax Regimes His efficient administrative set up was complemented by an equally efficient but oppressive tax regime. Most of the proceeds were used to construct a magnificent palace in Marakish, which he named al-Badi. The palace was constructed over a period of 15 years by artisans from around the world. Thus, under him, the sultanate relinquished the use of the Qasba, used by his predecessors. When his subjects complained of the oppressive taxes, he responded by saying: The people of Morocco are lunatics and their mud houses consists of oppressions. Redefinition of the Sultanate Al-Mansur also ensured his administration was paid the due respect and recognition the office of the Sultanate deserved. He craftily achieved this by leading a life of seclusion and giving audiences by keeping himself concealed from his guests behind a curtain. He also introduced the custom that the sultans of Morocco should have a parasol held over their heads when they rolled out in the sun in order to underline the religious character of the dynasty and give it splendour. He held official ceremonies on both Prophet Mohammed’s birthday and the Id al-Fitr. These ceremonies included recitations of poetry in praise of both the Prophet and the Sultan to make the religious scholars and leaders an appendage to his regime. He regularly distributed gifts to the scholars and leaders as well as the poets and musicians who attended the ceremonies. Reorganisation of the Army One of the first measures al-Mansur took was to ensure the re-organisation, equipping and expansion of the army. In doing this, he relied mainly on the Turkish soldiers. Though the use of the Turkish soldiers who had served under his brother, Abd al-Malik, appear to present a paradox on the surface, a closer look at these soldiers reveals that they were not necessarily of Turkish origin and of Muslim extraction. Rather, they were mostly soldiers of fortune who had adopted the habit of the Turkish ruling class in Algeria for their personal interest. However, these soldiers were employed by the Sultan due to his conviction that the troops and their officers had spread a positive influence on the discipline and methods of warfare on the rest of the Moroccan army during the Battle of the Three Kings. They were, thus, made instructors, put in charge of the royal arsenals and others were also put in charge of the artillery divisions. In addition to this group were the only Moroccan regiment, from Sues and another foreign element such as the Zuwawa and the Anderlusians. Under al-Mansur, there was the widespread use of firearms by the army, and this is credited to Turkish influence. This facilitated the conquest of territories such as Songhai in the C.E. 1590’s. Under him, the army also retained the use of Turkish military titles and names such as the Beylerbey, the Pashas and the Spahis. Military Expeditions to the Western Sudan Al-Mansur’s only major military undertaking outside Morocco was his expedition to the Western Sudan. This was in line with the special interest which the Saadians held over the riches of the Western Sudan since the inception of their dynasty. Here, they were particularly interested in controlling the salt mines at Taghaza and the sources of the gold coming in to the Songhai empire. By controlling the chief source of salt in the Western Sudan, the Saadians would become the main importers of its gold, since in exchange of gold, no commodity was more valued than salt. After conquering Guarara and Tuat in C.E. 1583, al-Mansur, in C.E. 1591, turned his attention on Taghaza. When Askia Ishaq refuted the Saadian demand for a mithqal of gold on every load of salt extracted from the mines, al-Mansur tried to give a religious justification to this expedition. He explained that the Saadians deemed the mithqal of gold to be a contribution by the Muslim kings of Songhai to the war against the Christians. However, there were underlying reasons for the expedition to the Western Sudan. He sought to unite the Muslims in the Western Sudan with those of Morocco and remove the Askias who were considered as illegitimate Muslim princes. He was also seeking for an outlet for his expansionist ambition which was hampered by the presence to the Ottoman Turks in Algeria, coupled with his failure to strike an alliance with the English against Spain so as to annex southern Spain. Though, al-Mansur’s expedition to the Western Sudan did not lead to the permanent political annexation of Songhai to Morocco, it, nonetheless, led to the disintegration of the Songhai state. Foreign Policy On foreign policy, al-Mansur’s actions, before C.E. 1580, were marked by a period of avoidable friendly relations with Spain, in view of the Turkish threats to Morocco which he dreaded. Much later after C.E. 1580, his policies were geared towards seeking to replace Spanish friendship with that of the English by trying to take advantage of the latest endeavours to obtain Moroccan support for Don Antonio, the rightful Portuguese claimant to the joint Portuguese-Spanish throne. For al- Mansur and the Saadians, the policy of friendliness with Spain was an embarrassment centred around three main concerns: the Spaniards were after all Christians; they had a longer history of fighting the Moroccans than even the Portuguese; and they were also colonisers of North African lands. These factors made an open and more collaborative alliance between Morocco and the Spaniards more of a remote possibility. Under the circumstances, al-Mansur pursued another option – the English option. Under him, Anglo-Moroccan relations were characterised by trade and politics which were closely intertwined. The two countries traded over English items such as clothes, Moroccan sugar, salt petre, ammunition, naval timber, etc. In C.E. 1589, when the matter over Don Antonio’s claim came up again between the two nations, al-Mansur indicated to the British the terms on which he could offer his support. He wanted great assistance from the English in order to build and manage his own navy, an Anglo-Moroccan expedition against Spain, his own troops to be carried in English ships in order to take part in the offensive, and, finally, a treaty which would enable him to hire English marines when engaged in war. Since these terms were never fully met, al-Mansur’s attitude towards the English over Don Antonio’s issue continued to be evasive till C.E. 1595 when Antonio died. These difficulties made the Anglo-Moroccan alliance difficult to establish. However, English trade in Morocco grew. The Death of al-Mansur Al-Mansur died in C.E. 1603. It is believed that l-Mansur had the habit of saying: I was born in the month of Z’ul hajja, circumcised in it, attained the caliphate in it, and I think I shall die in the same month. And so it befell. According to sources, Fadl, son of Rabi, related the following: I accompanied Al-Mansur in the journey during which he died. When we had arrived at one of the stages of the March, he sent for me. I found him seated in his pavilion, with his face turned towards the wall. He said to me: “Have I not told you to prevent people coming into this room and writing doleful sentences upon the wall?” “What do you mean, Prince?” I asked. “Don’t you see what is written on the wall - Abu Jafar, thou art about to die; thy years are fulfilled: the will of God must be done. It is believed that al-Mansur died of a disease of the digestive system. The death of al- Mansur marked a turning point in the historical fortunes of Morocco. After his death, the Saadian dynasty was bedevilled with succession crisis, and this crisis led to the eventual overthrow of the Saadian dynasty, after which a new dynasty, called the Alawite dynasty, took over the reins of power in Morocco.  TOPIC IV SUCCESSION CRISIS AFTER MULAY AHMED AL-MANSUR AND ITS IMPACT ON MOROCCO, C.E. 1603-1668 Introduction The death of Ahmad al-Mansur in C.E. 1603 was a turning point in the fate of the Saadian dynasty. Despite the glorious years of the dynasty witnessed, especially under Al-Mansur, the post-1603 period saw a gradual reduction and eventual replacement of the power and rule of the Sandian dynasty in Morocco. Both internal and external factors combined to bring about a crisis situation in Morocco after the death of Al-Mansur. Internally, dynastic conflict for power arose among the three sons of Al-Mansur resulting, by C.E. 1613, in the division of the country in two parts, one ruled from Marrakesh and the other from Fez. Externally, by the late C.E. 1620, three important centres of opposition to the Saadian dynasty had emerged. These were the Andalusians of the Republic of Bu Ragrag; Abu Hassun al-Samlali; and the Dala’iyya. These succession disputes brought to the fore the religious chiefs as the champions and advocates of unity, the absence of which was now blamed on the Saadians. The Internal Succession Crisis After Ahmad al-Mansur’s death, the succession dispute which ensued resulted in the country being divided into two. In the north, the country ruled briefly by Mohammed al-Shaikh, one of the three sons of Al-Mansur who himself was later replaced by his son, Abdulla. The centre of their rule was in Fez. In the south, the territories were ruled by Zedan (Zidan), another son of Al-Mansur, and the centre of his administration was at Marrakesh. The two-opposing claimants to the throne respectively ruled till the late C.E. 1620’s by which time the fortunes of the Sandian dynasty had declined drastically and the dynasty was gradually taken over by three centres of opposition. As noted above, up to CE. 1613, the northern section of Morocco was ruled by Mohammed al-Shaikh. When he initially lost out in the battle for power, he took refuge in Spain. In 1610, he returned with a Spanish force, settled at Badis and summoned the Ulama of Fez. In the circumstance, many of the Ulama chose to flee. Those who went were intimidated upon arrival by the guns of the Spanish ships and were made to recognise Al-Shaikh as their ruler. As a gesture of his appreciation for the Spanish support, he facilitated the Spanish occupation of Larashe. This act severely compromised the legitimacy of the entire dynasty. Mohammed al-Shaikh was assassinated in C.E. 1613, and his son, Abdulla, who ruled the kingdom of Fez up to C.E. 1627, continued to bear the stigma of his father’s betrayal. As a result, the leaders of Old Fez refused to accept his rule and closed the gate of the town to him, just as important towns such as Meknes and Tatuan rebelled against him from C.E. 1619. In the south of the country where Zedan ruled, with his centre at Marrakesh, the fortunes of the Saadian dynasty were no better. Three years after coming to power, Zedan was driven out by a religious leader and scholar called Abu Machala from Sijilmasa. He exploited the outrage caused by Al-Shaikh’s ceding of Larashe to Spain to lead a rebellion against the Saadians. After claiming to be the Madhi, Abu Machala succeeded in taking Marakesh from Zedan. After that, Abu Machala married Zedan’s mother and settled down to establish his own rule in the south. In desperation, Zedan planned to seek help from Spain to dislodge Machala. However, he was saved from this choice by the help he received from Yahya B. Abdulla al-Hali, a religious chief of Mount Daran. With this help, Zedan was restored to the throne. However, the support he received in his reinstallation severely affected his reign as it made him subservient to the dictates of Yahya B. Abdulla al-Hali. Clearly, therefore, the death of Al-Mansur had brought a situation of political chaos and instability in Morocco. As a result, the political fortunes of the Saadian dynasty greatly diminished. Along with their diminishing fortunes came a period of economic decline. This was felt in the areas of trade between Morocco and the European nations, the supply of gold, Moroccan involvement in the trans-Saharan trade, and, finally, the country’s supply of sugar. Civil strife severely affected trade between Morocco and her European trade partners as a result of the unstable public life. Most European merchants later realised that the goods for which they had come to Morocco had increasingly become scarce and, thus, stopped coming to Morocco to trade. This affected the volume of trade. In addition to this, the regular gold supply Morocco received from the Western Sudan also severely declined during this period. Al-Mansur’s invasion of Songhai, leading to its subsequent fall, coupled with his successors’ inability to create a centralised political order in the Western Sudan, made the journey to Timbuktu by traders seeking for gold very dangerous and expensive. This is illustrated by the fact that, during Al-Mansur’s reign, he sent caravans to the Western Sudan every year to bring gold on which he levied taxes. As a result of the chaos that followed Al- Mansur’s death, this caravan trip was done rather once in three years. The serious nature of the situation after Al-Mansur is illustrated by the fact that, before C.E. 1603, the rate of the exchange of gold in relation to silver in Morocco was one-is-to-four (1:4). After CE. 1603, specifically around C.E. 1623, the rate shot up to one-is-to-twenty (1:20). Moreover, within the period of the succession crisis, a greater volume of the trans-Saharan trade was diverted away from Morocco to Algeria, Tunisia or to the French in Senegal. At the same time, the trans-Saharan trade also faced severe competition from the emergent trans-Atlantic slave trade on the West African coast. Under the circumstances, the sources of the economic worth of the country diminished. Finally, from the beginning of the seventeenth century, there was a decline in the production of sugar in Morocco. By C.E. 1610, many of the sugar mills were no longer functioning with the exception of that of Tuat. External Factors to the Succession Crisis From C.E. 1627 onwards, as the political fortunes of the Saadian dynasty were declining, three centres of opposition emerged in an attempt to replace the Saadians. These were the Andalusians, who were later led by Mohammed al-Ayashi; Abu Hassun al-Samlali in Sues; and the Dala’iyya. Of the three, it was the Dala’iyya who made efforts to unite Morocco under their rule and replace the Saadians. The Andalusians were Muslims expelled from Spain between C.E. 1609 and 1614. They settled in Morocco just by the River Bu Ragrag. Here, they established a republic ruled by an elected governor who served for just a year with the assistance of a Divan of elders. Their main occupation was piracy against Christians, especially the Spaniards. In the late CE. 1620’s, the Andalusians formed an alliance with Mohammed al-Ayashi, a rebellious Saadian governor in Azammur under Zedan’s reign who had succeeded in completely eliminating Saadian authority in the Gharb. Together, al-Ayashi and the Andalusians continued their piratical activities against the Spaniards. Having gathered a considerable following and warriors through his alliance, al-Ayashi gradually posed a formidable threat to the Saadians so that an army from Marakesh was sent to dislodge him from Sale. However, the Andalusians, led by al-Ayashi, lost out in their quest to replace the Saadians due to al-Ayashi’s oppressive rule over the Andalusians, who had gradually come to fear him more than the Christians. They, thus, resorted to sabotaging his efforts against the Spaniards. In C.E. 1641, Mohammed al-Ayashi was defeated and killed by the Dala’iyya army acting in alliance with the Andalusians. After this, the Andalusians were made to rule Sale under nominal Dala’iyya authority. The next attempt at replacing Saadian rule came from Abu Hassun al-Samlali. He took advantage of the Saadian dynastic conflict and took control of Sues after he had emerged victorious in the contest for Sues with Yahya al-Hali in C.E. 1626. Within a few years, he managed to expand his base and in C.E. 1621 crossed into the Oases of Tafilalt. It appears his ability to control the trade with the Sudan enabled him to be economically viable so as to obtain arms from the Europeans in Sues with which he carried out his activities. His effort was not successful because between C.E. 1640 and 1660, the Dala’iyya came up prominently and seemed to have been destined to become the real supplanters of the Saadian dynasty as well as the rulers of Morocco. The Dala’iyya were the Sahanja Berbers who belonged to the Majat ethnic group. They were the descendants of Abu Bakr who had founded a Zawiya at Dala’ in the 1560s. Abu Bakr’s family had become very important in Morocco as religious teachers to the extent that, under the Saadian Sultan, Mohammed al-Shaikh, they were exempted from the payment of taxes. This made them gain some good measure of reputation from the leaders of Morocco. However, the popularity of the Dala’iyya Sheikhs was not obtained only from the patronage of the ruling dynasty. Their popularity and subsequent political power was also as a result of the social services which they offered to the people. They founded two Zawiya (one by Abu Bakr and the other by his son Mohammed) to propagate the Jazuliyya doctrine and most importantly also to feed the poor. In addition to this, they built hostels for scholars to live in and study. These hostels also accommodated the poor where Mohammed al-Bakr is said to have fed 7,000 people a day. In the period of the chaos after Al-Mansur’s death, the services they offered enabled them to assume the functions of political leaders and the Berbers looked to them for leadership and arbitration in their conflicts. However, under their new leader Mohammed al-Hajj (C.E. 1636-1668), the Dala’iyya consciously began to seek for political power in Morocco. Al-Hajj constructed a fortified capital not far from the original Zawiya of the family immediately after coming to power. He then organised the Berber warriors into a regular army. When the Saadian Sultan Mohammed al-Shaikh realised this shift in the character of the Dala’iyya movement, he made attempts to appease them and subsequently through a dispatch sought to threaten them with the use of force if they failed to comply. In the resultant battle in C.E. 1638, the Dala’iyya comprehensively defeated the Saadian forces from Marrakesh. Al-Hajj then turned his attention to the coast, where he took possession of Meknes from al-Ayashi, in an effort to take control of Sale. In C.E. 1641, Al-Hajj killed Al-Ayashi whose followers dispersed to the Rif mountains from where they led the rebellion which, in the C.E. 1660s, led to the collapse of Dala’iyya power. Al-Ayashi’s death enabled the Dala’iyya to occupy Sale, after which Fez was taking during six months of attack. The rest of the important towns of Northern Morocco, including Tatuan, were also captured. In CE. 1651, Al-Hajj appointed his own son as governor of Sale. By this period, Dala’iyya power had grown to the extent that they even appointed an ambassador to carry out foreign relations with the Dutch. It should, however, be noted that, despite these impressive gains by the Dala’iyya, they were a Berber state in identity and orientation and their successes were due to the military strength of the Berbers of Morocco.  The political cohesion that the Dala’iyya achieved under Al-Hajj’s leadership happened at a time when Morocco was divided into principalities, fighting one another and divided among themselves. In the end, the Berber identity of this movement, to the exclusion of the Arabian groups in the political structure of the Dala’iyya led to the eventual collapse of this movement. In C.E. 1653, a former army chief of al-Ayashi that is, al-Khadr Ghailan, and an Arab, began a rebellion against the Dala’iyya in the north. His success, coupled with an uprising in Fez, led to a rebellion in Sale in 1660. The Dala’iyya tried unsuccessfully to hold onto power. By C.E. 1663, however, a new group that rather achieved success in its attempts to unite Morocco emerged to replace them. This was the Alawite group. The Alawites ruled Morocco between C.E. 1668 and 1822, and their descendants still ruled Morocco as recent as the C.E. 1970s.  TOPIC V THE ALAWITE DYNASTY Introduction During the period of the succession crisis in Morocco after Al-Mansur’s death, it was the Alawites who finally succeeded in uniting the country again under their rule. Their ancestors came to settle in Sijilmasa in the thirteenth century. By the beginning of the fifteenth century, they had started to establish a name in the country. One of their early activities was the offer of their military alliances and services. One such Alawite, Ali al-Sharif, in the 1430s, took part in the religious wars against the Portuguese in Ceuta and areas closer to Tangier. Apart from this, during the period of the Nasrid dynasty and their wars with the Castilians in Spain, he was invited by the former to join them for the purpose of a holy war. However, none of these activities engaged in by the Alawites granted them any noteworthy political status, until their political fortunes started changing in the first half of the seventeenth century. This session explains the administration of the Alawite dynasty in Morroco up to the end of Mawlay Ismail rule in C.E. 1727. Mawlay al-Sharif In C.E. 1635-1636, an Alawite, Mawlay al-Sharif, attempted to dislodge the forces of Abu Hassan from the Oases of Tafilalt during the period when the Dala’iyya were equally attempting to do the same. He made an incursion into the Oases and assumed the role of defending the Oases. This hardship attracted the appreciation of the religious chiefs of the Oases who began recognising him as Sultan. Mawlay al-Sharif attacked Tabu’sant where Abu Hassun had established a garrison in C.E. 1631. He failed and was taking into exile in Sues by Abu Hassun. Abu Hassun treated him well and gave him, among other gifts, a black African slave girl who bore him two sons. It was to one of these two sons, Mawlay Ismaili, that the successes and exploits of the Alawite dynasty are most credited. After Mawlay al-Sharif’s exile, he exercised no more political influence. His place was taken over by his son, Mohammed al-Sharif, who tried severally but unsuccessfully to establish the Alawites in Morocco. Mohammed al-Sharif Mohammed al-Sharif remained in the Oases and led its people to rebel against Abu Hassun in the C.E. 1640’s. He succeeded in driving out Abu Hassun’s agents on account of the fact that they were hated by the locals. After this, he proclaimed himself Sultan in place of his father. After this, the efficiency of his rule was, however, severely affected by the fact that, his rise to power coincided with the height of Dala’iyya power and influence in Morocco as well. In a Dala’iyya offensive in C.E. 1646, he was forced to recognise Dala’iyya authority and relinquished his claim over the lands between Sijilmasa and Dra’a. This effectively made Mohammed al-Sharif a Sultan without a Sultanate. This situation encouraged him more to look for other territories to occupy. However, his attempt to expand north-eastwards was met with Turkish resistance, which forced him to retreat to Siljilmasa. Mohammed al-Sharif again tried to take advantage of a rebellion in Old Fez against the Dala’iyya in an attempt to launch himself again. In June 1650, Old Fez rebelled against the Dala’iyya together with the leaders of the Arabian ethnic groups; they sent an open invitation to Mohammed al-Sharif to assist them against the Dala’iyya. In the same year, he entered Fez to offer his support. However, the leaders of the town made a quick U-turn and asked him to leave when the Dala’iyya army arrived and they concluded that Mohammed al-Sharif did not possess the capacity to successfully defend them. Mawlay al-Sharif died in C.E. 1659, and this caused a conflict between his two sons, Mawlay Rasheed and Mohammed al-Sharif. In the struggle, Rasheed emerged victorious after he had defeated and killed his brother in C.E. 1663-1664. He, therefore, realised the family’s ambitions of laying the foundations of a dynasty that soon supplanted the Dala’iyya and ruled Morocco. Mawlay Rasheed Mawlay Rasheed founded the Alawite state within less than a decade after his victory over his brother. By C.E. 1664, Dala’iyya authority had declined considerably. Following this development, Mawlay Rasheed cautiously set about to expand the fortunes of the dynasty. He won over the people of Angad and tackled the Sharaka Arabs. The Sharaka Arabs, who lived in Fez, were a distractive influence in Moroccan politics at the time. By offering these Arabs a career under his banners, he was able to control them and earned their gratitude. Rasheed’s control over the Sharaka Arabs was particularly important because they had previously carried out various acts of rebellion against the Dala’iyya authority on account of the fact that they were excluded from the administration of the Dala’iyya when they were in power. In early C.E. 1666, Rasheed managed to establish a base at Taza. In C.E. 1667, he captured Fez. In June the following year, Rasheed invaded the Dala’iyya territory where he met little resistance. He destroyed their capital and took their chief captive. Marakesh was captured in July. Despite these impressive gains during the era of Mawlay Rasheed, the proper structuring and stability necessary to ensure the survival of the Alawite dynasty in chaotic Morocco still proved to be elusive. Throughout Morocco’s history up to the period of the Alawites, the efficiency of successive governments had been based on the continued loyalty of the various ethnic groups and their leadership in Morocco. The leadership of the groups had to be formed into an exclusive and a privileged segment of the population. Previous Sultans had often had to rely on these exclusively for protection. The danger was that, they suffered being turned into victims of their whims as well as annihilating other powerful groups in the country. Various Sultans, including Mawlay Rasheed, had tried various method of ensuring the continued survival of their reign but with varied degrees of successes. The Alawite leader who managed to achieve this feat was Mawlay Ismail, who ruled Morocco from C.E. 1673 to 1727. It is to him that the consolidation of the Alawite dynasty is credited. Thus, he became the most efficient and successful Alawite Sultan in the history of Morocco. The Administration of Mawlay Ismail During the period of Rasheed’s reign, Ismail was made the governor of Meknes. He was a half- brother of Rasheed born by the black African slave mistress of the first Alawite ruler Mawlay al- Sharif. The success of the administration of Mawlay Ismail could be assessed from the areas of his military reorganisation, establishment of a new capital, territorial conquest and consolidation, law and order an economy based on piracy, and foreign relations with some European nations. Military Reorganisation One innovation of Ismail was the creation of a specialised military unit known as the Abid Regiment. The Abid Regiment was essentially the creation of a black army from the descendants of the slaves brought to Morocco since the days of Al-Mansur. The blacks who were still enslaved were bought from their owners and, together with free-born blacks, were enlisted as special regiment. This policy, which was of special interest to Ismail because he himself was half-black African, was a success since it produced a stable and reliable military basis for Ismail’s authority. The recruits were given three years special training in carpentry, house building, etc. from the age of ten, then five years of instruction in riding and the military arts. At the age of eighteen years, they were formally enlisted in the army, at which time each was given a wife from among black girls trained in the domestic arts in the royal palaces. They were encouraged to have children, and the males were subsequently recruited into the army. At the end of Ismail’s reign, the Abid Regiment was made up of 1,500 men. They were used greatly in instilling order and stability of power. The Abid regiment and the Sharaka warriors were used in fortifying the eastern boarders as well as the forts at Wajda. About 7,000 Abid forces were held as reserve in special barracks in or near the new capital at Meknes. Establishment of a New Capital Ismail also established Meknes into a new capital away from either Fez or Marakesh. Under his brother Rasheed, Ismail had served as the Governor of Meknes. A number of factors influenced Ismail’s choice of Meknes as the new capital of the Alawite state. In the first place, the Sultan is reported to have been in love with the fresh air and pure water [sweet water] of the town. Secondly, and more importantly, Ismail’s choice of the town was motivated by political stability and security. Mawlay Ismail wanted to avoid the cycle of dependence on the prominent ethnic groups in the two centers of power before his reign. To settle in either Fez or Marakesh would have identified his Sultanate with the interest of one group of the country’s established elites and their ethnic group allies to the exclusion of the other. The last factor of the choice of Meknes as the new capital was its comparatively advantageous geographical position than Fe and Marrakesh. The town was more central than either Fez or Marakesh, more remote than Fez in terms of access from Algeria and better situated than Marakesh for directing operation against potential centers of opposition such as the Sahanja Berbers. The Sultan transformed Meknes by building a large palace and four new major Mosques. Territorial Conquest and Consolidation Mawlay Ismail undertook military operations to protect and consolidate Moroccan territories. The first engagement was the suppression of a rebellion in Tatuan led by al-Kadr Ghailan and supported by the Turks. When Mawlay Rasheed died, this rebellion was joined by Fez and Marakesh. In September 1673, the rebellion was brought under control, and in the process, Ismail defeated and killed Ghailan. In October, Fez was forced to submit. In April 1678, Ahmed al-Delai, grandson of one of the last Dala’iyya chiefs, Mohammed al-Hajj, was defeated when he attempted to raise one final act of challenge and resistance. Ismail’s last military engagement was near Tarudant where he defeated Ahmed B. Mahriz in C.E. 1686, after which he killed all the chiefs of Tatuan who supported Mahriz. Establishment of Law and Order Under Mawlay Ismail, law and order was established in Morocco by brutal means. With the aid of the army, he had criminals killed in the cruelest ways and no mercy was shown to the vanquished, rebel or political opponent. Though these methods were harsh and unforgiving, they were, nonetheless, understandable because in Morocco at the time, for more than a century, the most efficient authority to control anarchy and civil strike was a Sultan’s use of high-handed suppression. Ismail’s methods instilled discipline, law and order in the Moroccan society. This made Moroccan routes more secured to the extent that Jews as well as Moroccans in general could travel across the country unaccompanied without being molested. The level of order Ismail brought to Morocco was great to such an extent that even those who reared horses hoping to ride them had to give them to the governor of their province without hesitation. In addition, the individual had to pay ten mitquals of gold for the purchase of the horse’s saddle. Economic Development This strictly regulated life brought general prosperity to Morocco during Ismail’s reign. There was abundance of cheap food and a vibrant internal trade. The economy of Morocco under Ismail revolved around commerce and most importantly piracy. Piracy under Ismail became a state enterprise towards the end of the seventeenth century. The areas of focus were Sala and Tatuan. The Sultan himself owned half of the vessels operating from the Moroccan ports. Together with the taxes levied on the profit of pirates working on their own, about 60 percent of whatever the pirates obtained went to the Sultan’s coffers. These activities, however, caused European commercial activities to start to decline from the beginning of the eighteenth century. Foreign Policy Finally, under Mawlay Ismail, Moroccan foreign policy targeted addressing both Turkish interference in Moroccan affairs and how to deal with the complex relations with the Christian European countries. Ismail used the country’s military power against hated outsiders. In this regard, the xenophobia of the Moroccans forced by years of Turkish and Christian threats, received an outlet in the Sultan’s foreign policies. He replied to Turkish encroachment by sending his forces into Algerian territory on three occasions in C.E. 1679, 1682 and 1696. These expeditions were not to conquer Algerian territory but to deter further Turkish interference in Moroccan affairs. It proved successful as peaceful relations were renewed on the condition that existing frontiers would be reserved. Although the Christian European nations were considered as the enemies of the fate of the country, relations with them, however, were complex and not straight forward. Ismail knew he could not do without dealing with the Europeans. Since he needed European merchandise, he had to allow Christian merchants to trade in Morocco. However, a treaty with France in an attempt to dislodge the Spaniards, the Portuguese and the English from areas they held proved futile largely on account of the Sultan’s encouragement of piracy. The End of Mawlay Ismail’s Administration Mawlay Ismail died in C.E. 1727. In the century that followed his death, specifically up to C.E. 1822, the successive Sultans struggled on the levels of authority they could bring to bear on the task of ruling the country. One factor which prevented an incident-free succession after Mawlay Ismail was the fact that Ismail left about 500 male children behind. Since it was believed in Morocco at the time that the Alawite dynasty, being of Arabian origin and classified as direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed, was the only one who had obtained the gift of Baraka – blessing – to rule, it was practically impossible for all the 500 male children all endowed with the Baraka and, therefore, fit to rule, to accede to the throne. This did not contribute to stability but rather created instability, conflict and short-terms in office for many sultans.  TOPIC VI THE FRENCH INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF EGYPT Introduction In C.E. 1798, the French Directory authorised Napoleon Bonaparte to invade Egypt. At this time, Egypt was ruled by the Mamluks who served under the Sultan of the Ottoman empire with little to no interference from the Sultan. On July 1, 1798, a French invasion force disembarked near Alexandria. The invasion force, which had sailed from Toulon on May 19, was accompanied by a commission of scholars and scientists whose function was to investigate every aspect of life in ancient and contemporary Egypt. The French forces occupied Egypt until 1801 when they left. In the end, however, this invasion became an exercise in futility. This section examines the context of the French invasion of Egypt in C.E. 1798. Egypt before the French Occupation Prior to the advent of the French invasion of Egypt, the country was under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Turks. Egypt came under the Ottoman Turks in C.E. 1517 after Sultan Salim had defeated the Mamluks at the Battle of Cairo. The Mamluks were a caste of ex-slaves of various races who established a dynasty in Egypt in C.E. 1249 and ruled the country as overlords. They were recruited from southern Russia and Turkey to a military expedition in North Africa. It must be noted that their defeat by Sultan Salim had little effect on their long-established authority. The Mamluks continued to wield effective power, though the Ottoman Sultan was posting viceroys as the legitimate rulers. The Ottoman government declined in the eighteenth century and this caused a spillover on Egypt following the ineffective rule of the appointed Pasha in Egypt. The Ottoman central government in Istanbul could not give much attention to administration in Egypt at that time because of its involvement in the continuing war with Russia and Austria. The Mamluk Beys were the most influential group in Egypt as the eighteenth century approached, and each ruled their respective areas. They were at odds with each other out of self-interest and finally caused the people’s welfare to be neglected while oppression was widespread. Objectives of the French Invasion of Egypt The French invasion of Egypt had some objectives. In the first place, Napoleon Bonaparte, who led the French invading force to Egypt, felt that there should be a universal law for all humans to enjoy the ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity. The invasion was, thus, intended to bring these principles to the Egyptians. Secondly, the invasion was to provide opportunity to send a team of scholars and experts to study the ancient monuments of Egypt. This gave birth to Egyptology. Thirdly, France wanted control of Egypt for its commercial and agricultural potential. During the eighteenth century, the principal share of European trade with Egypt was handled by French merchants. The French also looked to Egypt as a source of grain and raw materials. Finally, France invaded Egypt because of its strategic importance to the Anglo-French rivalry. The French invasion of Egypt was to check and weaken the Bri