Dynastic History of Morocco

[Moon]

The current Moroccan Royal family is part of the Alaouite Dynasty. Morocco was a monarchy way before the Alaouite dynasty which is the 7th Moroccan dynasty so far. The first one was the Idrisside.

The following are names of the Dynasties that ruled Morocco:

1 Idrisside dynasty:
2 Almoravide dynasty
3 Almohade dynasty
4 Merinide dynasty
5 Wattaside dynasty
6 Saadi Dynasty
7 Alaouite Dynasty: 1631-Present

The first king in the Alaouite Dynasty and grand-grand--father of M6 is My Ali Cherif. And the current king Mohamed VI (M6) is the 23rd Monarch in the Alaouite Dynasty. It seems to me that the Kingdom of Morocco is not a new country created by France or Britain (2 majors colonizes of past centuries)..The following links give pictures of all the kings of this Dynasty since 1631- present:

1: http://www.mincom.gov.ma/french/gene...eAlaouite1.htm

2: http://www.mincom.gov.ma/french/gene...eAlaouite2.htm

[abir]

Originally Posted by Moon

It seems to me that the Kingdom of Morocco is not a new country created by France or Britain (2 majors colonizes of past centuries)..

"It seems to me that The Kingdom of Morocco is not a new country", I would just to say this is a real historical fact than an impression.
The name of the country has changed several times since the Phoenicians.

[abir]

Al-Hashimi, Al-Alaoui, ... are names which correspond to the men who were related to the Prophet Mohamed (as they said).

[Ipi Tombe]

this might not be thread to ask this but it is my understanding that the morrocan royal family are descendants of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) but their link is much 'stronger' to the Prophet's lineage than the Hashimites. For some reason, I keep thinking that the Hashimite linkage is pretty convultued not as 'direct' as the Morrocan link. Anyone know????

[abir]

Reply to Ipi Tombe. Here is a link to Morocco Royal family tree.

http://www.usa-morocco.org/images/genealogie.jpg

[igniya]

All of the descendents of the Prophet Mohammed's (peace upon him) are from Fatima and Ali. Some are descendent through his grandson Hassan (the Hashimites) and some through his grandson Hussein ( the Morrocan's I think).

[Veram98]

Originally Posted by Ipi Tombe

this might not be thread to ask this but it is my understanding that the morrocan royal family are descendants of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) but their link is much 'stronger' to the Prophet's lineage than the Hashimites. For some reason, I keep thinking that the Hashimite linkage is pretty convultued not as 'direct' as the Morrocan link. Anyone know????

Sorry, but your opinion is not backed by the historical realities. Both dynasties have common ancestors: the Prophets’s daughter Fatima and her husband Ali (Prophet Mohammed’s - PBUH - first cousin and later the fourth caliph, for the Shiites the first Imam), their elder son Hassan, Hassan’s son Hassan al-Musanna and whose son Abdullah al-Kamil. The Hashimites are the descendants of Abdullah al-Kamil’s son Musa, the Moroccan Alaouites claim to be the descendants of one of his numerous other sons: al-Qasim. As many other Sherifian families they left Mecca and the Hijaz and settled later in Morocco. At the end of the 16th century this Alaouites (then called the Hassani-Shorfa) controlled the valley of Tafilalet in southeast Morocco with the city Sijilmassa at the border of the Sahara, at that time a rich place, because it was an important base for the caravans crossing the Sahara and a center for the slave trade (the city doesn’t exist anymore, but there is still the tomb of Moulay Ali Sherif, the forefather of the actual royals, which became a place of pilgrimage). After the decline of the then ruling (also Sherifian or “Shorfa”) Saadian dynasty the Hassani-Shorfa (now called Alaouites) could gain control of the whole Morocco by force (in the 1670s) and became the sultans of this country (in 1956 Mohammed V changed the title to King).
Meanwhile Musa’s descendants stayed in Mecca as the rulers of the holy city and parts of the Hijaz (from the 10th to the early 20th century), more or less dependent of the respective caliph. During World War I Sherif Hussein bin Ali from this lineage, the holder of the title “sherif of the sherifs” of that time and Emir of Mecca (since 1904) started the Arab revolt against the Ottoman Empire as an ally of the British-French alliance against the Turkish-German coalition, dreaming of a great Arab kingdom. He actually became King of Hijaz. While his eldest son Ali was already in 1925 deposed as king and driven out of the Hijaz by Ibn Saud, two of his other sons were more successful: in the early 1920s Faisal became the first King of Iraq after a short unsuccessful intermezzo as king of Syria, and Abdullah Emir of Transjordan (since 1950 King of Jordan). Their name “Hashemites” or al-Hashimi derives from Hashim bin Abd al-Manaf, the great-grandfather of both the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) and of his cousin and son-in-law Ali bin Abi Talib.

[Veram98]

Originally Posted by Monalisa

As for the 3d world country thing,I don't agree that is related to that,the alaouite family monarchy is older more than 1000years,and it's normal that their wealth is big,it's not like some families especially middle eastern one who came from nowhere in the last century,and took the power,and now they are the wealthiest in the world...

The history of the Alouite family is not identical with the history of the Moroccan monarchy, which is indeed more than 1000 years old. There were a lot of different dynasties ruling this country in that period of time, one following the other by ousting by force and often exterminating the predecessors. Most of these dynasties had a fresh start with a new capital, new palaces etc. This was also the case with the Alaouites. They took advantage of the decline of the Saadian dynasty in the 17th century, could gain control of the country by force in the 1670s and became then the sultans of Morocco (in 1956 Mohammed V changed the title to King).

[Monalisa]

Originally Posted by Veram98

The history of the Alouite family is not identical with the history of the Moroccan monarchy, which is indeed more than 1000 years old. There were a lot of different dynasties ruling this country in that period of time, one following the other by ousting by force and often exterminating the predecessors. Most of these dynasties had a fresh start with a new capital, new palaces etc. This was also the case with the Alaouites. They took advantage of the decline of the Saadian dynasty in the 17th century, could gain control of the country by force in the 1670s and became then the sultans of Morocco (in 1956 Mohammed V changed the title to King).

The alaouite dynasty is a moroccan/arab wealthy powerful family who is from the area of Tafilelt and seateled there from the 13th century,they didn't come from nowhere or from an other country to take power in Morocco.

They took power on 1631(Mohammed I (1631-1635)),and technically,since that,all what belonged to the the other moroccan dynasties(Idrissides,Almoravides,Almohades,Saadyines then Alaouite),became automatically an Alaouite property...

[Veram98]

Originally Posted by Monalisa

The alaouite dynasty is a moroccan/arab wealthy powerful family who is from the area of Tafilelt and seateled there from the 13th century,they didn't come from nowhere or from an other country to take power in Morocco.
They took power on 1631(Mohammed I (1631-1635)),and technically,since that,all what belonged to the the other moroccan dynasties(Idrissides,Almoravides,Almohades,Saadyines then Alaouite),became automatically an Alaouite property...

The first alaouite sultan of Morocco was Moulay al-Rashid, who marched in 1666 into Fez and took then the title sultan. Later on he was able to capture Marrakesh in 1669 and to subjugate the rest of the country. It was his father Moulay Ali Cherif who took power in Tafilalt around 1630, succeeded there by his other son Moulay Mohammed. Both were only local rulers.
Moulay Ismail, al-Rashid’s brother and successor in 1672, was able to stabilize the power of the new dynasty, he destroyed the palaces of his Saadian predecessors (for example in Marrakesh) and extended and improved Meknes as his new capital with his own brand-new palaces.

The Alaouites were Moroccans yes, in 1666 already settling for several centuries in Morocco like many other Sherifian families whose ancestors left Mecca and the Hijaz for the Maghreb.

[amina1]

Is it true that the current family is a direct descended from the prophet Mohamed, and that's why they are in power since a generation to another? (and i guess the same goes to JR family)
Thanks.

[Veram98]

Originally Posted by amina1

Is it true that the current family is a direct descended from the prophet Mohamed, and that's why they are in power since a generation to another? (and i guess the same goes to JR family)
Thanks.

Both dynasties (the Moroccan Alaouites and the Jordanian Hashemites) have common ancestors: the Prophets’s daughter Fatima and her husband Ali (Prophet Mohammed’s - PBUH - first cousin and later the fourth caliph, for the Shiites the first Imam), their elder son Hassan, Hassan’s son Hassan al-Musanna and whose son Abdullah al-Kamil. The Hashimites are the descendants of Abdullah al-Kamil’s son Musa, the Moroccan Alaouites claim to be the descendants of one of his numerous other sons: al-Qasim. As many other Sherifian families they left Mecca and the Hijaz and settled later in Morocco. At the beginning of the 17th century this Alaouites (then called the Hassani-Shorfa) controlled the valley of Tafilalet in southeast Morocco (as I mentioned in my other post) with the city Sijilmassa at the border of the Sahara, at that time a rich place, because it was an important base for the caravans crossing the Sahara and a center for the slave trade (the city doesn’t exist anymore, but there is still the tomb of Moulay Ali Sherif (or Cherif), which became a place of pilgrimage). I recalled in my earlier post how they became sultans and kings of Morocco.
Meanwhile Musa’s descendants stayed in Mecca as the rulers of the holy city and parts of the Hijaz (from the 10th to the early 20th century), more or less dependent of the respective caliph. During World War I Sherif Hussein bin Ali from this lineage, the holder of the title “sherif of the sherifs” (or Grand Sherif) of that time and Emir of Mecca (since 1904) started the Arab revolt against the Ottoman Empire as an ally of the British-French alliance against the Turkish-German coalition, dreaming of a great Arab kingdom. He actually became King of Hijaz. While his eldest son Ali was already in 1925 deposed as king and driven out of the Hijaz by Ibn Saud (the founder of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia), two of his other sons were more successful: in the early 1920s Faisal became the first King of Iraq after a short unsuccessful intermezzo as king of Syria, and Abdullah Emir of Transjordan (since 1950 King of Jordan). Their name “Hashemites” or al-Hashimi derives from Hashim bin Abd al-Manaf, the great-grandfather of both the Prophet Mohammed and of his cousin and son-in-law Ali bin Abi Talib.

For both families the descendance from the prophet is part of their claim to power and legitimacy of their rule.

[Monalisa]

Originally Posted by Veram98

The first alaouite sultan of Morocco was Moulay al-Rashid, who marched in 1666 into Fez and took then the title sultan. Later on he was able to capture Marrakesh in 1669 and to subjugate the rest of the country. It was his father Moulay Ali Cherif who took power in Tafilalt around 1630, succeeded there by his other son Moulay Mohammed. Both were only local rulers.
Moulay Ismail, al-Rashid’s brother and successor in 1672, was able to stabilize the power of the new dynasty, he destroyed the palaces of his Saadian predecessors (for example in Marrakesh) and extended and improved Meknes as his new capital with his own brand-new palaces.

This is off topic but the first Alaouite ruler was Mohammed I,My Rashid was the 3d one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._of_Morocco.my point about talking about all the moroccan dynasties who are older from 787,so older than 1000years(1218years),so their story is old and it's normal that their wealth should be big.

The Alaouites were Moroccans yes, in 1666 already settling for several centuries in Morocco like many other Sherifian families whose ancestors left Mecca and the Hijaz for the Maghreb.

Yes like all arabs of Morocco,they technically come from Middle East,as original Moroccans are not arabs but berbers,and by the way,not all sherifian families left Hijaz to rule otherwise,it's the case for the jordanian and iraqi who was brought by british to help kicking out of the ottomans,but the sherifian Alaouite family come there in 13th century not to rule,but for trades and the first Sherifian Alaouite who come to Morocco was l-Hesn d-Dakhl, who lived then in the town of Yanbu in the Hejaz, was brought to Morocco by the inabitants of Tafilalet to be their Imām. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaouite_Dynasty

[Toledo]

One fascinating family. The way they disposed of the rival Dynasties reminds me what I read in a book about the old practices in the Ottoman Empire, sometimes exagerated, that the Sultan that took over used to get rid of any male rivals on the spot. No mercy, very much like the lions taking over a Pride pack and removing the cubs of other lions.

[Veram98]

Originally Posted by Monalisa

This is off topic but the first Alaouite ruler was Mohammed I,My Rashid was the 3d one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._of_Morocco.my point about talking about all the moroccan dynasties who are older from 787,so older than 1000years(1218years),so their story is old and it's normal that their wealth should be big.

Yes like all arabs of Morocco,they technically come from Middle East,as original Moroccans are not arabs but berbers,and by the way,not all sherifian families left Hijaz to rule otherwise,it's the case for the jordanian and iraqi who was brought by british to help kicking out of the ottomans,but the sherifian Alaouite family come there in 13th century not to rule,but for trades and the first Sherifian Alaouite who come to Morocco was l-Hesn d-Dakhl, who lived then in the town of Yanbu in the Hejaz, was brought to Morocco by the inabitants of Tafilalet to be their Ima¯m. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaouite_Dynasty

The Saadian rule in Morocco ended definitively in 1659 with the reign of Sultan Ahmad II in midst of a political chaos in the country. My Rashid took advantage of this chaos. He had started his ascent with a small army in the east of Morocco and had been able to expand his power and first seized Taza. In 1666 he conquered with Fez one of the old capitals of the country that let him take the title of Sultan. Only afterwards he subjugated the rest of the country. His Alaouite predecessors were only rulers of smaller parts of Morocco; My Rashid regained the unity of Morocco lost under the last Saadians and was the first Alaouite ruler of the whole country; My Ismael was afterwards the one who consolidated this unity and the Alaouite rule in the 55 years he reigned (even on wikipedia sites you will find this facts although historical events are often portrayed there in too simplified terms).

Your first post on the theme was a bit unclear and suggested that the Alaouite monarchy was “more than 1000 years old”. But the Alaouites were not among the first Arabs to conquer the Maghreb and not yet in Morocco when the (Arab) monarchy was founded there (as you mentioned meanwhile yourself). But this does not mean that it is in any way a problem for me or anybody else that they were not “Arabs of the first hour” there but arrived centuries later. This was by the way nothing unusual. The Islamic world has always witnessed a lot of mobility, even, esp. in the Golden Age of Islam, between Mashreq and Maghreb.

By the way I missed in your dynasty list the Merinides (while studying Islamic history I got a special interest in that dynasty, maybe because I like so much their striking beautiful medersa buildings of the 14th century).

[Veram98]

Originally Posted by Monalisa

by the way,not all sherifian families left Hijaz to rule otherwise,it's the case for the jordanian and iraqi who was brought by british to help kicking out of the ottomans,but the sherifian Alaouite family come there in 13th century not to rule,but for trades[/URL]

Of course, many Sherifian families stayed in the Hijaz (and still do). Since the 10th century the heads of one of them: of the Hashemite family were even rulers/governors (esp. the guardians of the Holy Places of Islam) here till the 1920s, when Mecca was taken by the Wahabites under Ibn Saud (some of the princes of this family lived though at least for a while in the Ottoman capital Istanbul-Constantinople like the future king Abdullah I of Jordan, i.a. as a deputy for Mecca and sometime vice-chairman of the Ottoman parliament).
To discuss their further history this is maybe not the right thread.

[Monalisa]

Originally Posted by Veram98

By the way I missed in your dynasty list the Merinides (while studying Islamic history I got a special interest in that dynasty, maybe because I like so much their striking beautiful medersa buildings of the 14th century).

You are right,I forgot to mention the Merinides dynasty before the Saadyines,but also two others dynasties who made a slight apparition in the history of dynasties of Morocco(the Maghrawa after the Idrisides dynasty and before Almoravides,and the Wattasides dynasty after the Merinides and before the Saadyines)

* The Idrissides dynasty (788-974)

*The Maghrawa dynasty (987-1070)

*The Almoravides dynasty (1073-1147)

*The Almohades dynasty (1147-1269)

*The Merinides dynasty (1258-1420)

*The Wattassides dynasty (1420-1547)

*The Saadyines dynasty (1554-1659)

*The Alaouite dynasty (1631 - current)

[Monalisa]

The Merinides (while studying Islamic history I got a special interest in that dynasty, maybe because I like so much their striking beautiful medersa buildings of the 14th century).

Personally I have an interest for the two berber dynasties (Almoravides and Almohades)who ruled for a while in Spain.

And also I am a big fan of the era of reign of The Saadyines dynasty,which was called "the golden era of Morocco",where it was stronger than ever and was the lonely Islamic/arabic country which could resist against the Ottomans' Empire invasion.

[Veram98]

Originally Posted by Monalisa

Personally I have an interest for the two berber dynasties (Almoravides and Almohades)who ruled for a while in Spain.

And also I am a big fan of the era of reign of The Saadyines dynasty,which was called "the golden era of Morocco",where it was stronger than ever and was the lonely Islamic/arabic country which could resist against the Ottomans' Empire invasion.

The Almoravides and Almohades who also subjugated al-Andalus were for my taste too strict in their religious behavior, too much moralists, restricting therefore a bit the thriving culture, philosophy and art of al-Andalus. But without their help the Christian Reconquista would have conquered al-Andalus much earlier.

Yes the Saadians were the only Arab Muslim dynasty to resist the Ottomans; something that makes the history of Morocco so unique compared with that of any other Arab country (one of the reasons for the fact that most of the others have got their actual borders only in the 20th century has a lot to do with first the Ottoman rule and second the circumstances of the fall of the Ottoman Empire).
You are right this is something to think highly of them.
Unfortunately, they started later to fight each other that lead to the temporary division of the country in several principalities.

[reynard]

Yes. The King's wife is not styled as "Queen"