Sherif of Mecca
The Sherif of Mecca ( Arabic أشراف مكة aschrāf Makka , DMG ašrāf Makka ) were an extensive network of sherif families who ruled Mecca from approx. 968 to 1925. Common to these families was the Hasanid origin, so they traced their family tree back to the prophet's grandson al-Hasan ibn ʿAlī . The ruling Sherif has been knownas the " Emir of Mecca" (amīr Makka) since the beginning of the Mamluk rulein Egyptdesignated. Often times, the various branches of the family contested and struggled for power. At times, however, they also shared rulership. Until the second half of the 14th century, the Sherifs of Mecca were Zaidite Shiites , after which they switched to Sunni Islam.
Most of the time, the rulership of the Sherif of Mecca extended not only to the city of Mecca and its surroundings, but also over large parts of the Hejaz with the cities of Ta'if , Jeddah , Yanbu ʿ and Medina . Although the Sherif of Mecca almost consistently recognized the supremacy of various Islamic dynasties, they had their own armed forces and levied their own taxes by working with allied Bedouins . As compensation for recognizing their supremacy over the holy city and ensuring the protection of the Hajj caravan, the rulers of the Islamic empires in question sent them subsidy payments and gifts. From the 15th century to the early 19th century, the Meccan Sherif also engaged in maritime trade on the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean .
In Ottoman documents of establishment, the Makkan ruling family has been referred to as the " Hashimite dynasty" (sulāla Hāšimīya) since the 16th century . In European descriptions, the ruling Sherifes from the middle of the 19th century onwards are usually called Großscherifen to distinguish them from other Sherifs , a designation that has no counterpart in Arabic sources. The present dynasty of the Hashimites of Jordan emerges from the descendants of the penultimate Sherif Hussain I ibn Ali , who proclaimed himself King of the Arabs in 1916 .
Internal classification and descent of the Sherif families
Altogether there are four different family branches among the Sherif of Mecca: 1. Jafarids, 2. Sulaymanids, 3. Hashimids (Arabic Hawāšim ) and 4. Qatādids (Arabic Banū Qatāda ). The common progenitor of all these Sherif families was Mūsā al-Jaun (no. 7 in the family tree), a brother of the Hasanid rebel Muhammad an-Nafs az-Zakīya (d. 762). The Jafarids are named after Abū Jaʿfar Muhammad (No. 25), whose son Abū Muhammad Ja (far (No. 28) seized power in Mecca in the 960s and bequeathed power to his descendants. After their ancestor Mūsā ath-thānī (Mūsā II), a grandson of Mūsā al-Jauns, the Jafarids are also called Mūsāwids in some historical works, in contrast to the Sulaimānids, the descendants of Sulaimān ibn ʿAbdallāh (No. 14), a brother of Mūsā II, were. The Hāschimids were actually also Mūsāwids, but in contrast to the Jafarids, they were not descended from Abū Jā sondernfar Muhammad, but from his brother Abū Hāschim Muhammad (No. 27). Both brothers were sons of al-Husain al-Amīr, a grandson of Mūsā II.
The Qatādids, who ruled Mecca for the longest time, are named after Qatāda ibn Idrīs (No. 43), who ruled Mecca at the beginning of the 13th century. The Qatādids were also Mūsāwids, although they did not descend from al-Husain al-Amīr, but from his brother ʿAbdallāh (No. 22). The Qatādids, who ruled Mecca until the early 20th century, were divided into the three clans Dhawū ʿAbdallāh, Dhawū Barakāt and Dhawū Zaid in the 17th century. The Dhawū ʿAun, who made up the last sherif of Mecca, are a sub-branch of the Dhawū ʿAbdallāh.
history
Rule of the Jafarids (968-1061)
Beginnings
The Sherif rule over Mecca began around the same time with the death of the Egyptian ruler Kāfūr (968), when the Hasanid Abū Muhammad Jaʿfar ibn Muhammad usurped power in the holy city. The background to this was the fighting between Hasanids and Hussainids in Medina , as a result of which Jafar ibn Muhammad moved to Mecca and took possession of the city.
In 969, Jafar ibn Muhammad recognized the new Fatimid ruler of Egypt al-Muʿizz as the overlord of Mecca by letting the Chutba speak for him . Al-Muʿizz then installed him as governor of Mecca. A few years later, in January 975, al-Muʿizz presented a delegation of Sherif and other notables from the hijaz with a premium of 400,000 dirhams . Then in August 975 the supplication for al-Muʿizz was said for the first time during the Hajj . Since ʿĪsā, the son and successor of Jafar, shortly afterwards refused to pay homage to the new Fatimid caliph al-īAzīz , the Egyptians besieged Mecca during Hajj in 976, forcing the khutba to be held at the pilgrimage in the name of the Fatimid caliph. In the following years, the Egyptian pilgrim caravans again carried rich monetary gifts for the Sherif (ṣilāt al-ašrāf) , which suggests a normalization of the relationship between Fatimids and Sherif.
The Caliphate Ambitions of the Abū l-Futūh
From 994 sā's brother Abū l-Futūh al-Hasan ibn Jaʿfar ruled Mecca. In the year 1000, on the instructions of the caliph al-Hākim bi-amr Allāh, he also brought Medina into his power and put an end to the rule of the Hussainid Banū l-Muhannā who ruled there. When al-Hākim had his vizier ʿAlī al-Maghribī murdered in 1010, his son Abū l-Qāsim ibn al-Maghribī fled to Ramla at the court of the Jarrahid ruler Mufarridsch and incited him to rebel against the Fatimids. He advised him to contact the Sherif of Mecca and to propose the imamate to him, since, unlike the Fatimids, he has "no flaws in his family tree". Ibn al-Maghribī himself went to Mecca, and the Sherif Abū l-Futūh was proclaimed caliph by his family members with the throne name ar-Raschīd li-dīn Allāh (Guided by the religion of God). Abū l-Futūh then moved with his relatives and a large number of black slaves, girded with the sword Dhū l-Faqār , to Ramla, where he entered Ramla on September 13, 1012. Formally, the rule of the Sherif counter-caliph extended to Palestine between Pelusium and Tiberias and also included Jerusalem , where he installed a new patriarch, Theophilus , and allowed Christians to rebuild the Church of the Holy Sepulcher , which had been destroyed two years earlier .
However, the uprising, led by the Sherif counter-caliph, quickly collapsed. Al-Hākim appointed Abū t-Taiyib Dāwūd, a Sulaymanic relative of Abū l-Futūh, as the new governor of Mecca, who besieged the city. In addition, al-Hākim sent large sums of money to the jarrahids in order to induce them to surrender the counter-caliph. The jarrahids were moved by this to leave the cause of the Abū l-Futūh. Mufarridsch wrote to al-Hākim mediating a general reconciliation. Abū l-Futūh returned to Mecca in October 1012 and let the Chutba speak for al-Hākim again. In a letter to the Fatimid caliph he made excuses and asked for mercy, which the caliph also granted him. After this uprising, the Sherifs remained loyal to the Fatimid caliphs for almost 70 years.
Rule of the Hashimids (1063-1200)
Between Fatimids and Abbasids: Abū Hāschim's Chutba policy
In 1061 the Sherif Shukr ad-Dīn died childless, whereupon fighting broke out among the various Hasanid families of Mecca. First, with Hamza ibn Wahhās, a member of the Sulaymani sherif prevailed. Then, however, the Shiite ruler of Yemen Ali as-Sulaihi intervened in Mecca and appointed the Sherif Abū Hāschim Muhammad as the new governor. He was a descendant of the brother of the same name of the first Sherif Jafar ibn Muhammad and founded the Sherif line of the Hashimids. Abū Hāschim had the Chutba speak again in the name of the Abbasids in 1069 and also took the Seljuq Sultan Alp Arslan into the sermon, for which he received a gift of 30,000 dinars from the Sultan and the promise that he would receive a gift of 10,000 annually Dinars and a robe of honor. However, this arrangement only lasted a few years. Since the Fatimid caliph al-Mustansir sent an even larger sum from Egypt for the pilgrimage of 1075 , Abū Hāschim abolished the sermon for the Abbasids and had the sermon again for the Fatimids. The next year, however, he switched back to the Abbasid side. This interplay continued in the following years: in 1078 he had prayers for the Fatimids, in 1080 again for the Abbasid caliph. The Seljuks, tired of this interplay, sent Turkish troops to Mecca in 1092, who plundered the Holy City and then withdrew. Abū Hāschim retaliated by robbing pilgrims who came to Mecca under the leadership of a Turkish emir two years later.
The later Hashimids
The descendants of Abu Hashim ruled Mecca until the beginning of the 13th century, but were often in dispute with one another. After Saladin had conquered Egypt and eliminated the last Fatimid caliph al-ʿĀdid , he sent his brother Turansha to Yemen in 1173 to bring this area under Aiyubid control. On the way there Tūrānschāh stopped in Mecca and confirmed the ruling Sherif ʿĪsā ibn Fulaita in his office, thereby expressing the Aiyubid supremacy over Mecca.
The travelogue of Ibn Jubair , who visited Mecca in 1183 and 1185, shows that the Sherif were Zaidite Shiites at that time . He explains that they inserted the Shiite formula Ḥaiya ʿalā ḫairi l-ʿamal ("On to the best work!") In the call to prayer and in the Iqāma and did not take part in the prayer with the others on Fridays. Ibn Jubair also reports that the Sherif levied customs duties on the pilgrims. He himself was detained in Jeddah because he could not pay the customs duty.
The House of Qatāda between the major Islamic powers (1201–1517)
The rise of the house of Qatada
At the beginning of the 13th century, Qatāda ibn Idrīs, the descendant of another Sherif family, ruled Mecca. The special historical significance of Qatāda lies in the fact that he is the ancestor of all later Sherif of Mecca. Qatāda came from Yanbu ʿ and was a descendant of ʿAbdallāh ibn Muhammad, a great grandson of the first Meccan sherif Jafar ibn Muhammad. He first took possession of the areas south of his hometown and conquered Mecca between 1201 and 1203. A little later he also subjugated Ta'if and had a fortress built in Yanbuʿ. Overall, he was able to extend his rule to the area between Medina and Yemen. Qatāda left the daily political affairs to a vizier . Qatāda pursued a policy of splendid isolation from the Islamic powers of the north, the Aiyubids and Abbasids . In his will, he is said to have given his relatives the recommendation not to enter into too close relationships with foreign powers, because God had protected them and their country through its inaccessibility. He maintained closer contact only with the Zaidis in Yemen. There he supported the efforts of the Hasanid al-Mansour to found a new Zaidite imamate .
Political wandering between Rasulids, Mamluks and Ilchans
After Qatāda's murder (1220), the Yemeni Aiyubide al-Mas -ūd was able to bring Mecca under his control. He ousted the Sherif from power in 1222 and installed his own general ʿAlī ibn Rasūl as governor. After al-Masʿūd's death in 1228, sovereignty over Mecca passed to his father al-Kāmil , who installed his general Tughtikin as governor. But when the Rasulids made themselves independent in Yemen in 1232 , they reunited with the sons of Qatāda and sent one of them with an army to Mecca. This Rādschih ibn Qatāda ruled Mecca until 1241. Only under Abū Numaiy I Muhammad ibn Abī Saʿd ʿAlī and Idrīs ibn Qatāda, who came to power without outside help in 1254, the Sherif were able to regain greater independence from the major Islamic powers. So powerful was Abu Numaiy that he was able to take tribute from the pilgrim caravans in 1256. For each camel in the Yemeni caravan, 30 dirhams had to be paid, for each camel in the Egyptian caravan 50 dirhams. However, the two Sherif emirs submitted to the suzerainty of the Mamluk sultan az-Zāhir Baibars in 1268 , who rewarded them with the promise of annual subsidy payments.
After the death of Abū Numaiy in 1301, the Egyptian Mamluks tried to completely subordinate the Sherif to their suzerainty , but they did not succeed because many Sherif were more sympathetic to the other major Islamic powers. The Sherif Humaida ibn Abī Numaiy, for example, who seized power in Mecca in the spring of 1314, had the Chutba speak for the Rasulid al-Mu'aiyad Dāwūd ibn Yūsuf (ruled 1296-1322). And when the three brothers Thaqaba, Sanad and Mughāmis, the sons of the Sherif Rumaitha ibn Abī Numaiy, were excluded from power and driven out of Mecca in 1349, they allied themselves with the Rasulid ruler Mujāhid (r. 1322-1363). With him they made their entry into Mecca in early 1351.
Some Sherif also worked with the Ilkhan rulers. The Sherif Humaida fled to the court of Öldscheitü in 1316 , who sent him to Mecca with a well-equipped Mongol army to bring the Hejaz under Ilyhanid control. However, the company failed due to the untimely death of Öldscheitü. When Humaida briefly regained control of Mecca in May 1318, he submitted to the supremacy of the Ilkhan ruler Abū Saʿīd (r. 1316-1335). In 1330, Ahmad, son of the Sherif Rumaitha, was appointed ruler of the Shiite city of Hilla in Iraq by Abū Saʿīd . Based on the Arab tribes in the area, he was also able to bring Kufa under his control until he was murdered by the Jalairid Hasan Bozorg in 1342 .
Contemporary sources show that the Sherif maintained an army of black military slaves (ʿabīd) , which was led by a commander ( qāʿid ) . At times, the Sherif were able to extend their territory beyond the Hejaz. Around the middle of the 14th century, Sawakin on the African Red Sea coast was temporarily under their rule.
The relationship between the Sherifs and the Egyptian Mamluks, on the other hand, remained tense. When the leader of the Egyptian pilgrim caravan was killed in fighting with the Sherif's military slaves in 1330 , the Mamluk sultan An-Nāsir Muhammad ibn Qalāwūn announced that he wanted to send one of his emirs to Mecca to drive the Sherif and their slaves out of Mecca. However, his chief Qādī al-Qazwīnī, who reminded him of the duty to honor the haram , stopped him. When in 1360 the soldiers of a Turkish-Egyptian garrison stationed in Mecca were driven out by the Sherif and sold in the slave market of Yanbuʿ, Sultan an-Nāsir al-Hasan gave the order to exterminate all the Sherif. But even this order was not carried out because an-Nāsir al-Hasan was deposed by his soldiers a few days later and replaced by al-Mansur Muhammad II .
Consolidation of the Egyptian supremacy
Under ʿAdschlān ibn Rumaitha, who held sole rule over Mecca from 1361 to 1375, the relationship between the Sherif and the Egyptian Mamluks improved. In January 1365, the Mamluken Sultan al-Kāmil Shabān proclaimed in a decree the abolition of the import duties that the ruling Sherif had previously imposed on food and livestock, and as compensation offered the Emir of Mecca an annual salary of 160,000 dirhams . Only dealers from Iraq and Yemen should be exempt from this perk. The text of the decree was inscribed on three pillars of the Holy Mosque.
During the reign of ʿAdschlān's son al-Hasan, who was appointed Emir of Mecca by az-Zāhir Barqūq in Cairo in August 1395 , the relationship with the Egyptian Mamluks initially strengthened. The Sherif used the prestige of the Mamluk support to push back local opponents who threatened his rule. Al-Malik an-Nāsir Faraj appointed al-Hasan as vice-sultan (nāʾib as-salṭana) for the entire areas of the Hejaz in August 1408 and officially recognized his two sons Barakāt and Ahmad as co-regents. The Mamluk supremacy over the Hejaz, on the other hand, was usually only shown "seasonally" during the Hajj and the Umra , when Egyptian troops came to the region with the pilgrim caravans. The rest of the time the Sherif had a free hand. Al-Hasan was also very successful in capitalizing on merchanting in the Red Sea. However, when he began to confiscate goods from traders in Jeddah in 1410, he came into conflict with both the Mamluks and the Rasulids. They began to support his relative Rumaitha ibn Muhammad, who contested Hasan's power in the Hejaz. In May 1415, Sultan al-Mu'aiyad deposed Sheikh al-Hasan and his two sons and appointed Rumaitha as the new Emir of Mecca. Since al-Hasan did not vacate his position without a fight, it was not until the next pilgrimage season in February 1416 that Rumaitha could move into Mecca. Al-Hasan then started an initiative to regain Mamluk support. In November 1416 he was reinstated in his office, with the stipulation that 30,000 Mithqāl be paid annually to the Mamluk Sultan. In March 1417 he recaptured Mecca with his own troops. Due to his large financial resources, al-Hasan was able to donate a madrasa , a hospital (bimāristān) and a ribāt in Mecca during his reign .
During the reign of Hasan's son Barakāt I (1426-1455), a permanent garrison of 50 Turkish horsemen was stationed in Mecca, who were commanded by an emir. In addition, new financial regulations were made. It was stipulated that the ruling Sherif should receive a quarter of the value of ships sunk in the Red Sea, a quarter of all gifts sent from outside to the “inhabitants of Mecca” and a tenth of all imported goods, including cargo of Indian ships that landed in Jeddah. He also received wealth from foreigners who died in Mecca without an heir. The Zakāt collected from the Bedouins also went to the Sherif. Half of the income thus obtained he had to distribute to other senior members of the Sherif families. The ruling Sherif's lifestyle was relatively simple. A large turban was the only thing that set him apart from other Meccan residents. He only wore his broad-sleeved and brocade-trimmed robe on ceremonial occasions. Despite his position as ruler, the Sherif was usually addressed in a simple and direct manner by his people, especially when they were Bedouins. Under Barakāts son Muhammad (r. 1455-1497), whose reign largely coincides with that of Sultan Qāytbāy , Mecca experienced a period of great prosperity.
Overall, the Sherif were able to greatly expand their spiritual prestige in the Islamic world in the 15th century. Their position as the rulers of Mecca acquired an "almost sacrosanct" character during this period. Local historiographical texts report that the Sherif minted their own dirham coins in the 15th and early 16th centuries . So they had a certain monetary autonomy.
Transition of the Sherif to Sunni Islam
The realignment of foreign policy was accompanied by a religious change among the Sherif. Abū Numaiy I and most of his direct descendants were still Zaidite Shiites. The call to prayer in the great mosque was accordingly carried out according to the Shiite rite in its time, and the Zaidis had their own prayer group in the Holy Mosque , which was led by a Zaidite imam. As early as the beginning of the 14th century, the Mamluk sultans asked the Sherif to suppress the Shiite call to prayer in Mecca and to withdraw the Zaidite imam from the Holy Mosque. But most of the Sherif held on to the Zaidi-Shiite creed. Humaida's alliance with the Ilkhan Öldscheitü also had a Shiite background. Öldjeitü had previously converted to the Shia, and after the successful conclusion of Humaida's campaign in the Hejaz in 1316, the bones of the two caliphs Abū Bakr and ʿUmar ibn al-Chattāb , who were hated by the Shiites , were to be removed from the tomb of Mohammed in Medina .
In particular Rumaitha ibn Abī Numaiy, who was co-regent from 1321, showed sympathy for the Zaidīya. He even had the prayer said for Muhammad ibn al-Mutahhar (r. 1301-1327), the Zaidi imam of Yemen. His brother ʿUtaifa, who ruled alone from 1326, forcibly expelled the Zaidite imam from the Holy Mosque, but this was not done out of inner conviction, but only in compliance with a decree of the Mamluk sultan. As the Mamluk author Ibn Fadlallāh al-ʿUmarī (d. 1348) reports, the son of ʿUtaifa confided to him that the emirs of Mecca felt obliged to obey the Zaidite imam of Sanaa and that they regarded themselves as his representatives. With the rulers of Egypt, he declared, they only cooperated because they were afraid of them and received from them the mortgage; They flattered the Rasulid rulers of Yemen in order to continue receiving gifts and charities from them.
In the second half of the 14th century the transition of the Meccan Sherif to Sunni Islam was announced. From'Adschlān ibn Rumaitha, the 1346-1361 intermittently and then to 1375 continuously held the rule in Mecca, reports Ibn Taghribirdi : "In contrast to his forefathers and relatives he loved the Sunnis and supported them against the Shiites. It has also been said that he followed the Shafiite madhhab . ”ʿAdschlān was also the first sherif to establish a madrasa in Mecca . His son al-Hasan, who, apart from two brief interruptions, ruled Mecca from 1396 to 1426, was also firmly connected to the Sunni tradition. Like his father, he founded a madrasa in Mecca. Shams ad-Dīn as-Sachāwī (d. 1497) reports that he studied hadith with a number of Egyptian and Syrian scholars and received an ijāza from them . All subsequent Sherif rulers of the 15th century also received training in the Sunni hadith.
Even if the later Sherif officially accepted the Shafiite school of instruction, to which most of the Meccans also belonged, the call to secretly follow Zaidite teachings was not shaken for a long time. Even in the early 19th century, when Jean Louis Burckhardt visited Mecca, he was told that the sherifers living in Mecca avoided legal discussions in which Zaidite teachings were disapproved and that the sherifers outside the city openly admitted that they belonged to the Zaidis.
Under Ottoman rule (1517–1798)
Relationship to the Ottoman state authority
.jpg)
After the Ottomans had conquered Cairo in 1517, the Sherif Barakāt (ruled 1497–1525) sent his very young son Abū Numaiy II to Egypt, who offered submission to Sultan Selim I on his father's behalf. The Sultan accepted this solution, and the Sherifs continued to be recognized as dependent princes. The territory of the Sherif was not fully integrated into the Ottoman state as Vilayet , but remained “a state within a state”. When a Sherif died, the Porte usually appointed whoever the people of Mecca wanted to succeed him. The investiture was carried out by sending an honorary robe and a certificate of appointment (Emāret Berātı) . In the document of appointment for the Sherif Hasan ibn Abī Numaiy of 1566, he was given authority over Mecca, Jeddah, Medina, Yanbuʿ, Chaibar , Haly and all areas of the Hejaz, "from Chaibar to Haly and the Najd ". However, in the second half of the 16th century, the Ottomans installed their own governor in Jeddah, with whom the Sherif had to share rule there.
Otherwise, the Sherif enjoyed extensive autonomy on their territory. In an appointment letter of the Sultan for the Sherif Abū Tālib ibn al-Hasan from the year 1601 it is stated that he is given “power over those places” (imārat tilka l-maʿāhid) , “including all troops, high and low, as well as of officials and dignitaries, districts and ranks. ”At the end of the letter it says:“ We installed him to take our own place there, and gave him the power to terminate and conclude contracts and the sultan badge. ”In Mecca outside of the pilgrimage season, the Ottoman state was only present with a qad and a small unit of Egyptian soldiers. However, the Sherif also often performed judicial functions, so that the office of the Qādī was usually limited to "worthless leisure". However, the Sherif had to carry out some tasks relating to the holy places in Mecca together with the Ottoman governor in Jeddah, who as administrator (mutawallī) was responsible for all the pious foundations for the maintenance of the holy places, which is reflected in his title “Sheikh of Haram ” (šaiḫ al-ḥaram) was expressed. At the time of the pilgrimage, the governor of Jeddah was also regularly present in Mecca.
Even in the Ottoman period, the Sherifs were able to fall back on a relatively large force of allied Bedouins . In 1585 this comprised 20,000–30,000 men. With these fighters they made several forays into the Najd and the oases of the central Arab region in the 16th and 17th centuries in order to be able to control the interior of the Arabian Peninsula. In the opinion of the Ottoman central authority, the Sherif and their fighters should above all prevent attacks by the Bedouins on the pilgrim caravan. However, the Sherif sometimes relied on their fighters when they came into conflict with the Ottoman caravan commanders.
According to the official protocol described by Ignatius Mouradgea d'Ohsson , the Sherif had to receive the caravan of pilgrims on arrival at the head of his Bedouin army. While the pilgrims performed the pilgrimage rites in Mecca, ʿArafāt and Minā , his troops, armed with rifles, pistols, lances and javelins, were supposed to form a security cordon that protected the pilgrims from external dangers. In addition, these troops should also act as an internal police force and maintain order among the pilgrims. At each Hajj, the installation ceremony was repeated with the handover of the robe of honor and the presentation of a letter of appointment to the Sherif. The one who brought the robe of honor was called Kaftan Ağası (" Kaftan - Agha "). Conversely, the Sherif sent annually with the Müjdeci Başı (" messenger of joy ") a letter of reply to the Sultan, which was regularly given to the Sultan on the Prophet's birthday in the Sultan Ahmed Mosque . The Sherif wore his dress of honor mainly on official occasions. It also differed from the other Sherifs in the shape of its turban . It was studded with tassels , the gold threads of which fell on his shoulders.
As a financial basis, the Sherif continued to use the customs revenue of the port of Jeddah during the Ottoman period, which they had to share with the Ottoman governor. A British report from 1787 on trade in the Red Sea states that the Sherif of Jeddah and the Sherif of Mecca both imposed heavy taxes on goods imported from India by traders and pilgrims. In addition, the sultan made large pension payments to all the Sherif.
Exchange of embassies with the rulers of Mughal India
From the middle of the 16th century to the middle of the 18th century, the Sherifs also maintained closer ties with the rulers of Mughal India . For example, the Mughal ruler Akbar I (r. 1565-1605) sent a pilgrim caravan 100,000 rupees and other generous gifts to the Sherif of Mecca as compensation for having sent a footprint of the Prophet Mohammed to India. In 1580 Akbar again sent exquisite materials for the Sherif and other Meccan dignitaries, and in 1582 he commissioned them to distribute funds for the needy residents of Mecca and Medina. In the following years, however, the Sherif-Mogul relations deteriorated because the Ottoman Sultan Murad III. instructed the Sherif to discourage Indian pilgrims from staying in Mecca for long periods of time and to forbid the distribution of alms from India in Mecca. This led Akbar to sever relations with the Sherifs. In 1607 the Sherif Idrīs ibn al-Hasan sent an embassy to India in order to revive the friendly relations with the Mughal empire after the accession of Jahangir . The Sherif envoy, who brought a curtain on the Kaaba door as a gift, received an audience with Jahangir and was able to return to Mecca with gifts worth 100,000 rupees for the Sherif, but the new Mughal ruler showed no interest in maintaining relationships the rulers of the Hejaz.
A real intensification of the Mughal-Sherif relations came during the reign of Shah Jahan (r. 1627-1658). The Mughal ruler not only resumed the tradition of the annual Hajj caravan, but also sent several embassies to Mecca with gifts and contributions for the Sherif Zaid ibn Muhsin (r. 1631–1667), in 1637, 1645, 1650 and 1653. The Conversely, Sherif sent an envoy to India in 1643, who gave Shah Jahan a key of the Kaaba as a gift and received gifts from Shah Jahan in return. In total, Shah Jahan made cash payments of more than 300,000 rupees to the Sherif during his reign. Aurangzeb , who dethroned his father Shah Jahan in 1658 and seized power in the Mughal Empire, sent an embassy a year later with a donation of over 600,000 rupees for the Sherif families of Mecca in the Hejaz. However, the Sherif Zaid is said to have refused to accept the money because he viewed Aurangzeb's rule as illegitimate. It was not until 1662, when a new Mughal delegation met him, that he accepted the gift. To thank him, he himself sent a delegation to Aurangzeb, who brought him three Arab horses and a broom from the tomb of the prophet in Medina as a present .
The successors of the Sherif Zaid sent several other delegations to Aurangzeb in the following decades, but the Mughal ruler was no longer quite so generous on these occasions; later he even openly expressed his indignation at the greed of the Sherifs. An embassy that the Sherif Barakāt ibn Muhammad (r. 1672-1682) sent to Aurangzeb in the early 1680s, traveled to Banda Aceh after a long in vain wait for an audience with the ruler , where she was received by the Sultana of Aceh . She felt very honored by the visit from Mecca and made generous gifts to the emissaries. In 1683 the delegation returned to Mecca laden with 3 qintār gold, three ratl camphor , aloe wood and five golden lamps for the Kaaba .
Relations with the Mughal rulers improved again after Aurangzeb's death. The Mughal rulers Bahadur Shah I (r. 1707–1712) and Farrukh Siyar (r. 1713–1719) gave the Sherifs annual subsidies of 100,000 rupees. After that, the Mughal rulers could no longer maintain their financial support at this level for economic reasons, but the Mughal-Sherif relations remained friendly until the middle of the 18th century.
Relationship to the Meccan patriciate and the Bedouins
In the 16th and 17th centuries, a number of long-established families lived in Mecca, whose members were traditionally reserved for many of the liturgical and legal offices in Mecca. The most important of these families, called Dhawū l-buyūtāt , were the Banū Zahīra, the Tabarīyūn and the Zamzamīyūn. In a way they formed a kind of urban patriciate . These families with ancestry and noble descent legitimized their primacy in the Holy City . ʿAlī at-Tabarī (d. 1660), a member of the Tabarīyūn, who wrote his own historical work about Mecca, deals in a separate chapter with the rules (qawāʿid) that the Sherif had to observe towards the Dhawū l-buyūtāt . This included all kinds of honorary displays, such as the fact that the ruling Sherif had to reserve certain seats for members of these families at meetings and to attend their funeral prayers in the event of death, but also the obligation to fill certain administrative and protocol offices from their ranks. At-Tabarī even imposed the duty on the Sherif to choose a “companion” (muṣāḥib) from among the Dhawū l-buyūtāt . He should stay close to him at all times and read to him from scientific and literary books. As a justification he referred to the fact that his father ʿAbd al-Qādir at-Tabarī (d. 1623) had performed this function with the Sherif Hasan ibn Abī Numaiy (r. 1566-1601).
The Sherif cultivated the relationship with the Bedouins in the area by withdrawing all the boys, including the sons of the ruling Sherif, from their mother shortly after the birth and entrusting them to a Bedouin tribe of the desert so that they could be educated by them. The children did not return to their families until they were ten, twelve or even later. This custom, which was traced back to Mohammed himself, had the advantage of familiarizing the sherif with the language and customs of the Bedouins from an early age and of establishing lasting links with these families. Throughout their lives, the Sherif's pupils showed their former foster family awe and friendship and considered them their relatives. Often they even preferred their foster parents to their real parents, some of whom they had never seen. The sons of the ruling Sherif were usually brought up in the tribe of the Udwān; the other Sherif families usually sent their children to the camps of the Hudhail, Thaqīf or Banū Saʿd or sometimes to the Quraish or Harb. Many Sherifs were also married to girls from the Bedouin tribes in the area.
Rivalries between different Sherif clans
From 1631 three different clans of the Sherif's house, the Dhawū ʿAbdallāh, the Dhawū Barakāt and the Dhawū Zaid, rivaled for power over the city and its hinterland. From 1631 to 1671 the Dhawū Zaid were the emirs of Mecca. In 1672 the Maghrebian scholar Muhammad ibn Sulaimān brought the Dhawū Barakāt to power as the Ottoman envoy. From the beginning, however, they were required to pay three quarters of their income to the other Sherif families. When in 1683 the delegation sent by Barakāt ibn Muhammad returned from Aceh laden with many presents, heated disputes broke out among the Sherif over the distribution of these presents, as the Sherif Saʿīd ibn Barakāt was not prepared to transfer three quarters of them to the other Sherif families .
In 1684 members of the Dhawū Zaid came to power again, and with the exception of only a few interim periods when members of the Dhawū Barakāt again ruled Mecca, they provided almost all other ruling Sherifs of Mecca in the 18th century. However, the Dhawū Zaid had to deal with other Sherif families at this time. At the beginning of the 1740s, sherifers from the descendants of al-Hasan II. Ibn ʿAdschlān (r. 1394–1425), who settled five day trips south of Mecca, unexpectedly claimed control of the Holy City and threatened the pilgrims from Yemen . To fight this Dhawū l-Hasan, the Sherif Masʿūd bin Saʿīd sent a Sherif army under the leadership of his nephew to the south in 1742. It besieged the fortresses of the Dhawū l-Hasan, who then fled to the mountains of the Banū Sulaim . The Sherif army followed them and was finally able to seize the leader of the Dhawū l-Hasan, a certain ʿAssāf, along with his closest followers. They were brought to Mecca in chains and imprisoned there. There they later died of smallpox .
In 1770 the Dhawū Barakāt made one last attempt to regain power in Mecca. With the support of the Egyptian Mamluk emir Ali Bey al-Kabir , who sent his Mamluk Abū dh-Dhahab with troops to Mecca, ʿAbdallāh ibn Husain, a member of her family, was able to take control of the holy city in June 1770, but he was already four Months later, after the Egyptian troops had withdrawn from Mecca, ousted by the Dhawū Zaid by Ahmad ibn Saʿīd.
According to Jean Louis Burckhardt's report , the various Sherif families in Mecca had a great deal of power until the reign of Surūr ibn Musāʿid (1773–1788). Each Sherif had 30 to 40 armed slaves in his home and, moreover, powerful friends among the Bedouins . Many of them held sinecure positions with the ruling Sherif, but without respecting his orders. Some also acted as highwaymen with their followers and slaves and robbed the pilgrims on the access roads to Mecca. It was only Surūr, Burckhardt reports, who made the sherif lawful and ensured fair conditions in Mecca. He expanded the fortress of Mecca, kept a large corps of slaves and Bedouins, which he financed from his trading activities in Yemen, and forced the most powerful Sherif families to emigrate. The Dhawū Barakāt withdrew after their disempowerment in Yemen, sometimes in various valleys of the Hejaz. Charles Didier compared Surūr due to his strengthening of the central power of the Sherifian emir with Louis XI. and Richelieu .
First clashes with the Wahhabis
In the course of the 18th century the rigorous reform movement of the Wahhabis became increasingly noticeable in Mecca. Already the Sherif Masʿūd ibn Saʿīd (r. 1734-1759) was concerned about this movement and sent a letter to the Sublime Porte , in which he informed them about the appearance of the heretic Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb in inner Arabia . Because of their teaching, which was regarded as heretical by the Sherif and the Sublime Porte, the Wahhabis were in principle excluded from participating in Hajj . From the 1760s onwards, the Wahhabis, supported by the Saudi emir of Dirʿīya in the Najd , sent several delegations to the Sherif to - with varying degrees of success - ask permission to take part in the pilgrimage.
In 1790 the Wahhabis again sent a delegation to Mecca, but they could not convince the Sherif Ghālib, who had ruled since 1788, of the orthodoxy of Wahhabi teachings. Because in the second half of the 1780s two Bedouin tribes in the immediate vicinity of the Hejaz had joined the Wahhabis, Ghālib felt increasingly threatened by them in his sphere of influence. Therefore, in 1791 he sent his brother alAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Musāʿid with troops to the Najd, who besieged a Wahhabi village there. These battles marked the beginning of a major military confrontation, as the Wahhabis responded to the siege with a call for jihad , which many of their followers followed.
In the spring of 1793 Ghālib sent a delegation to Istanbul to brief the Porte on the occurrence of the Wahhabis, but they paid no attention to the matter there. Although the Sherif troops were joined by various Bedouin factions who had given up their allegiance to the Wahhabis, in 1796/97 the Wahhabis were able to conquer Bīsha and Ranya, two strategically important places in eastern Hejaz, which had previously belonged to the territory of the Sherif. In the spring of 1798, Saud I ibn Abd al-Aziz , the son of the Emir of Dirʿīya, brought Ghālib at Churma to a severe defeat. The Sherif was finally forced to enter into negotiations with Abd al-Aziz I , the Emir of Dirʿīya. In 1799 a ceasefire agreement was signed that determined the spheres of power of the two sides and gave the Wahhabis access to the cities of Mecca and Medina .
The Sherif Ghālib between the French, British and Wahhabis (1798–1813)
Ghālib was a particularly wealthy and ambitious Sherif ruler. He owned extensive estates in the vicinity of Mecca and Ta'if and maintained a small merchant fleet that was active in the coffee trade and also went to Indian ports. In Jeddah he owned several houses and caravanserais which he rented to foreigners. He was also able to take full control of the customs income from the port of Jeddah, which he actually had to share with the Ottomans. Other traders who called their ships at the ports of Jeddah or Yanbuʿ had to pay an increased customs fee to him. At the height of his power, his annual income was about £ 350,000 . With his fortune, Ghālib maintained an army consisting of 400 Yemenis, 400 Yāfiʿ Bedouins, 400 Hadramites , 400 Maghrebians and 400 Afghans.
Ghalib also sought greater independence from the Sublime Porte . In the various places of the Hejaz he set up his own governors who carried the title of vizier. He forced Ottoman pashas accompanying the pilgrim caravan to recognize his right of precedence in all affairs. And he spread throughout the Hejaz that he was higher in rank than any Ottoman official and that in Constantinople, according to strict etiquette, even the sultan had to stand up before him and greet him. After Napoleon Bonaparte occupied Egypt in 1798 , Ghālib saw this as a welcome opportunity to shake off Ottoman rule. Ali Bey , who visited Mecca in the early 19th century, observed that the Ottomans in Mecca "cannot interfere in anything as far as the administration is concerned, which is entirely in the hands of the Sherif, who rules as an independent sultan." Ghālib maintained a friendly relationship with the French and also received French envoys at his court. The French assured him that they would maintain the Egyptian subsidy payments for Mecca.
Fearing that Ghālib might make common cause with the French, the British government in India sent Admiral John Blankett to Jeddah in early 1800 to contact the Sherif. Ghālib was rather hostile to him because he suspected that the British would work to restore Ottoman rule over Mecca. As at the end of 1800 concretized the plans for a British occupation of Egypt, the British sent a delegation led by Home Riggs Popham to Jeddah to negotiations on the establishment of a British-Indian trading post to lead in Jeddah with Ghālib. The negotiations turned out to be very difficult, however, since Mecca was dependent on the grain supply from Egypt and the Sherif expected that the French would remain the masters of Egypt. Since Ghālib remained unyielding in the negotiations in the spring of 1801, the Nawab Mahdī ʿAlī, who was involved in the negotiations on the British side, proposed that Ghālib be replaced by his brother, who had ruled for only a few months in 1788 which has been advocated by the British government in India. However, the withdrawal of French troops from Egypt meant that the plan was no longer implemented.
Meanwhile, looked increasingly to attacks by Wahhabi Ghālib in his domain irregulars faced. To renegotiate the peace of 1799, he sent his vizier and brother-in-law ʿUthmān ibn ʿAbd al-Rahmān al-Mudāyifī to Dirʿīya in 1801. However, there he placed himself in the service of the Saudi emir. With the support of the Wahhabi Emir of Bīsha, ʿUthmān conquered the city of Ta'if in February 1803 and later Qunfudha. Meanwhile, Saud , who took over the leadership of the Wahhabis in the same year, marched with an army against Mecca. Ghālib tried in vain to induce the leaders of the pilgrimages to intervene against the Wahhabis. Due to the hopeless situation, he withdrew to the heavily fortified city of Jeddah in March 1803 . Saud took Mecca without a fight in April 1803, installed Ghālib's brother ʿAbd al-Muʿīn as emir and stationed a small garrison of Wahhabis in Mecca. Then he moved against Jeddah, but could not take the city and withdrew with his army to his home country. Ghālib continued the resistance against the Wahhabis and was able to recapture Mecca in July 1803.
Soon the balance of power changed again in favor of Saud, who was able to conquer Medina in 1804. After months of siege Mecca by ʿUthmān, Ghālib finally surrendered in February 1806. By order of Saud, all Sherif soldiers had to leave Mecca and his authority was annulled. Ghālib had to accept the supremacy of the Emir of Dirʿīya and recognize Wahhabism as the only valid Islamic teaching. According to various European reports, he even converted to the Wahhabi faith himself. In October 1806 he was able to return to Mecca, where he had a new fortress built for himself on the Hindī Mountain. Ghālib remained in office as emir of Mecca, engaged in sea trade and sent ships to Mocha , Muscat and Surat in India. He was also able to extend his rule to Sawakin and Massaua on the African Red Sea coast.
Egyptian Intermediate Period (1813-1840)
In 1811 the Egyptian viceroy Muhammad Ali Pasha went to war against the Wahhabis on behalf of the Ottoman Sultan. He took Mecca in 1813, ousted Ghālib and exiled him to Egypt and later to Saloniki , where he died of the plague in 1816. Yahyā ibn Surūr, a nephew of Ghālibs, was appointed the new emir in 1813. The pasha put him on a wage of £ 800 to support his troops and household, and took over all other sources of income for the emirate, including the customs revenue of the port of Jeddah. The new emir was accompanied by an Egyptian pasha and only exercised nominal power. Shanbar ibn Mubārak was now responsible for negotiating with the Bedouins and Sherif; he came from the sherif family of the Manāʿima, who had been excluded from the government for centuries. The Sherif's influence also diminished at the judicial level . All processes have now been decided in regular courts. The Qādī of Mecca, appointed by Muhammad Ali , also occupied the courts of Jeddah and Ta'if.
Jean Louis Burckhardt , who visited Mecca in 1814, describes in his travelogue the clothes that the ruling Sherif and the other Meccan Sheriffs wore in his time: “The Sherif dresses in the same way as all the heads of the Sherif families Mecca; he usually wears an Indian silk skirt, over this a white abba , from the most beautiful manufacture of al-Ahsa on the Persian Gulf, a cashmere scarf around his head and yellow slippers or sometimes sandals on his feet. ”Burckhardt reports that the Scherifen Meccas, as a sign of differentiation from non-Sherif, did not wear a green turban , but a tall woolen hat of green color, around which they wrapped a cashmere or a white muslin scarf. When the ruling Sherif rode out, a rider accompanied him with a Chinese-style parasol with silk tassels , which he held over him whenever the sun bothered him. This was the only emblem that distinguished the Sherif when he appeared in public. However, at the time when Burckhardt was in Mecca, only a few Sherifs were to be seen there: 300 of them had been exiled to Egypt together with Ghālib, others had fled to the Wahhabis or to Yemen. The few who remained in the Hejaz had been employed as leaders in Muhammad Ali's army or had been incorporated by him into a small Bedouin corps led by the Sharif Rajih.
In order to break the power of the Dhawū Zaid, Muhammad Ali promoted the Dhawū ʿAbdallāh and in 1827 appointed one of them, Muhammad ibn bAbd al-Muʿīn, as the new Emir of Mecca. Almost all of the following Mecca Sherifs were descendants of Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn. After his grandfather ʿAun ibn Muhsin, the members of this branch of the Dhawū ʿAbdallāh family are called Dhawū ʿAun. After a conflict with the Egyptian governor Ahmad Pasha, Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn was ordered to Cairo in 1836 and interned there. In the period up to 1840 the Hejaz was under direct Egyptian rule.
Second Ottoman supremacy (1840-1914)
The changed relationship with the Ottoman authorities
After the Ottomans had regained supremacy over the Hejaz through the Treaty of London in 1840 , they reinstated the Sherif Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn. They also sent a kaymakam to Jeddah and informed the Sherif of its establishment.
In order to ensure the good behavior of the ruling Sherif, the Ottoman authorities took his sons hostage to Istanbul. The stay in the capital also served to familiarize the future Sherif rulers with Ottoman customs and to brief them on the internal and external politics of the state. As the Tunisian scholar Muhammad Bairam (1840–1889) reports, the Sherif's sons held the rank of vizier during their stay in Istanbul and were also members of the state Shura Council. The sons of Sherif Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn were also awarded the rank of Pasha one after the other from 1848 .
Other members of the Sherif family were therefore held in honor in Istanbul in order to keep unpleasant rivals from the ruling Sherif or to quickly have a replacement at hand in the event that the Sherif should prove to be unreliable. In 1851, for example, the Ottomans replaced the Sherif Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn with ʿAbd al-Muttalib ibn Ghālib from the rival family of the Dhawū Zaid. When there was an uprising in Mecca in 1855 because of the ban on the slave trade and ʿAbd al-Muttalib headed it, in 1856 they reinstalled Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Mu vonīn of the Dhawū ʿAun, who had been in exile in Istanbul in the meantime .
The Swiss writer Charles Didier , who visited the Sherif ʿAbd al-Muttalib in Ta'if in 1854 and published a report on it in 1857, said that the real Sherifat had already ended with Ghālib, because all the following Sherif emirs appointed by the Porte only remained Officials of the Ottoman government are said to have only retained “a shadow of power”. Recent studies have shown, however, that the autonomy of the Sherif was subject to great fluctuations during the second Ottoman rule. In 1869 the Ottomans introduced a municipal council (maǧlis idāra) and a council for the administration of justice (maǧlis at-tamyīz) in Mecca and in the other cities of the Hejaz as part of the Tanzimat policy . However, these bodies appear to have existed only formally.
The British, the Dhawū ʿAun and the vision of a Sherif Caliphate
Unlike the Dhawū Zaid, the Dhawū ʿAun, who had ruled Mecca since 1856, were on friendly terms with the British and Europeans. Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn's son ʿAbdallāh ibn Muhammad, who ruled from 1858 to 1877, opened the Hejaz to European trade. The Sherif al-Husain ibn Muhammad (r. 1877-1880) showed a particularly British-friendly attitude. When the Afghan emir Shir Ali caused problems for the British because he did not want to tolerate a British representation in Kabul , the British consul in Jeddah James Zohrab was able to obtain a proclamation from al-Husain, in which this Shir Ali called for cooperation with the British. In addition, Husain campaigned for the interests of Muslims from British India who came to Mecca for Hajj. Since at the same time the Ottoman Sultan was very weak because of the defeat in the Russo-Ottoman War , high hopes were directed towards al-Husain. The British writer Wilfrid Scawen Blunt reports that the Arabs at the time spoke openly about making al-Husain caliph instead of the sultan.
Al-Husain, however, was murdered in March 1880 by an Afghan disguised as a dervish . British diplomats attributed this to Husein's Christian-friendly and pro-British attitude, in particular because shortly afterwards the Ottomans announced that they would reinstate the anti-British ʿAbd al-Muttalib of the Dhawū Zaid as sherif. According to Blunt, the general impression prevailed that al-Husain's murderer came from Turkey, and many believed that the "Stamboul Camarilla " and the Sultan had commissioned the murder. Although Mahmud Nedim Pasha and also Austen Henry Layard , British ambassador in Istanbul, warned against the reinstatement of ʿAbd al-Muttalib with reference to his role in the uprising of 1855, the Sultan was not dissuaded from his plan, so that ʿAbd al-Muttalib , who was almost 90 years old at the time, was able to take up office again in May.
During this period, James Zohrab emphasized in letters to the British government that it was England's duty to support the ʿAun family, because they had always held a protective hand over the British in the Hejaz. Zohrab also demanded that the British no longer give the Ottoman Sultan the privilege of choosing the Sherif, arguing that England had four times more Muslims under her rule than the Sultan. In 1881 Blunt dreamed of a “transfer of the seat of spiritual power from Constantinople to Mecca” and emphasized that in view of the dying Ottoman Empire, the “mass of Mohammedans” in the Sherif family of Mecca were looking for a representative of their supreme leadership and the caliphate. The Sherif family should replace the Ottomans as a "new dynasty" and thus enable the establishment of a "Muslim theocracy". Politically, so said Blunt, the "Caliph in Mecca" will be less important than the one on the Bosporus , but religiously he will have a much more stable standing because he is descended from the Quraish . Blunt linked the future Meccan caliphate with the hope that it would contribute to a "reconciliation of the schismatics, the Ibadites and the Shiites with the (Sc. Sunni) orthodoxy " and a general reformation of Islam. However, he said that only a Sherif from the “liberal” Dhawū ʿAun could fulfill this role.
Osman Pasha's initiative to disempower the Sherif
ʿAbd al-Muttalib wrote a letter to the Sublime Porte in 1881 accusing the Dhawū ʿAun of spreading riot. At the same time rumors arose that ʿAbd al-Muttalib was plotting against the Ottoman Empire with Muhammad al-Mahdī as-Sanūsī , the leader of the Sanūsīya order. The Ottoman Sultan then sent the young General Topal Osman Nuri Pasha with 2,000 soldiers on a "special mission" in the Hejaz. The aim of this mission was to limit the powers and privileges of the Sherif. An adjutant, who arrived in Mecca before the general, proclaimed in Mecca in November 1881 that the Sherif would no longer have jurisdiction over the jurisdiction in Mecca and that responsibility for the Bedouins would be transferred to the Ottoman governor . Osman Nuri Pasha, who was appointed governor of the Hejaz after his arrival, took over all government affairs there and in February 1882 sent a comprehensive memorandum to the Sublime Porte on a restriction of the Sherif's powers. Osman Pasha recommended that the Sherif no longer have any judicial functions and should no longer have an army of his own except for a small number of Zabtiya forces, which the Ottoman Vâlî would assign to him. In addition, the Sherif was to hand over a number of other responsibilities to the Ottoman Vâlî: responsibility for the affairs of the Haram and the foundations in the Hejaz, the right to appoint the muftis of the four schools of law , the head of the Sherif (naqīb al-ašrāf) , of the Muhtasib , the chiefs of the guilds, the chiefs of the various districts and the sheikhs of the various Bedouin tribes. All of these people should be appointed by the Vâlî in the future. The Sherif should only have a say in the distribution of the annual donations to the Bedouin tribes and in the settlement of disputes between these tribes. Osman Pasha's goal was to strip the Sherif of his worldly power and reduce him to the role of a "high priest".
Osman Pasha's memorandum was well received by the Sublime Porte, and the Sultan ordered that these restrictions on Sherif power should be mentioned in any future appointment letter from a Sherif. The Sherif ʿAbd al-Muttalib tried to escape the increasing pressure by asking in June 1882 to be released from his office as Emir of Mecca and to be allowed to retire to Medina. Osman Pasha did not allow this, however, because he suspected that ʿAbd al-Muttalib wanted to ally with the Āl Rashīd from Ha'il and place them under a British protectorate . When at the end of August 1882 couriers with letters from ʿAbd al-Muttalib were intercepted, allegedly confirming this suspicion, Osman Pasha accused him of rebellious intentions, deposed him and arrested him. ʿAun al-Rafīq, another son of Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn, was installed as the new Sherif in September. The British were very relieved about the dismissal of ʿAbd al-Muttalib, also because they saw in him an ally of their opponent Ahmed Urabi Pasha .
In order to destroy the Sherif's power base in Jeddah, Osman Pasha had their agent ʿUmar Nasīf arrested and sentenced to 15 years in prison. In 1884 Osman Pasha took on the old title of "Sheikh of Haram" (šaiḫ al-ḥaram) and was raised by the Sultan to Muschīr ("Marshal"). He now brought the ʿUlamā ' and servants of the haram completely under his control. According to reports from the British consulate in Jeddah, "Osman Pasha's word was law in all matters large and small." ʿAun al-Rafīq, the new Sherif, was aware of the loss of power from his office and largely withdrew from public life. He only received general visitors on Fridays, on other days he was only open to friends. However, resistance came from the scholars and notables who did not agree that the Ottoman governor had appropriated the powers of the Sherif. Eight of them were exiled by Osman Pasha. In addition, Osman Pasha used his oversight of the salaries of the scholars and sheriffs to put pressure on them.
The restoration of the Sherifat after Osman Pasha's recall
Osman Pasha not only put pressure on the local scholars and notables, but also tried to intimidate the Bedouin tribes. In the summer of 1883 there was a major confrontation between the strongest of them, the Banū Harb, who controlled the route between Mecca and Medina, and Osman's troops, as a result of which he withheld the annual grain deliveries from the tribe. This policy made Osman Pasha very unpopular in the Hejaz, so that an opposition formed against him in Mecca. At the end of 1885, tensions increased when Osman Pasha announced his plan to the Mecca town council to introduce a new system of district administration with elected mayors . He brushed aside objections to this plan with the remark that “Mecca is no better than Istanbul”. As a result, notes were posted on the gates of the Holy Mosque, on which an “Islamic Association” cursed Osman Pasha and called for his murder.
The Sherif ʿAun al-Rafīq now headed the opposition movement against Osman Pasha and sent several letters and telegrams to Istanbul in which he complained about the disrespectful behavior of the Ottoman governor towards the scholars and the Bedouin tribes. At the same time, 27 leading scholars and sherifers sent a petition to the Sultan, in which they complained about the suppressive behavior of the governor and hinted at the threat of emigration from the Hejaz. In the autumn of 1886 the Sherif finally moved to Medina and from there sent an embassy to the Sublime Porte with the request that either he or the Wālī be deposed because a return to Mecca would be impossible for him as long as Osman was up to mischief there. The power struggle between the two opponents ended with the Sultan transferring Osman Pasha to Aleppo at the end of 1886. The measure was a sign that the Ottoman policy to disempower the Sherif had failed.
ʿAun al-Rafīq emerged stronger from the power struggle. After his return to Mecca, he had the words engraved above the door of his palace: "Office of the noble emirate and the exalted government" (Dāʾirat al-amāra al-ǧalīla wa-l-ḥukūma as-sanīya) . Because of his close connection to the Bedouin tribes in the area, he continued to play an important role in organizing the pilgrim caravan. He had a decisive influence both in the choice of routes and in setting the camel rental prices. He used a Hajj officer (maʾmūr al-ḥaǧǧ) to accompany the caravan and a taxator (muqauwim) to provide the necessary camels. In addition, the Grand Sherif was able to build relationships with high-ranking Muslim personalities during the pilgrimage. "Muslim princes from India, emirs from Arabia, great sheikhs from different tribes, people of high rank, are his guests at these religious festivals," writes a contemporary Arab observer. Until the end of the 19th century, an investiture letter from the Ottoman sultan for the Sherif was brought to Mecca every year with the Syrian caravan , which was then read out publicly during the pilgrimage in Minā . This ceremony was usually attended by the Vālī, the Ottoman military commander, and the city's notables and scholars. Then the Sherif was given a sultan's robe of honor and those present congratulated him. In addition, the Sherif received fixed salary payments from the Egyptian surra in the amount of 479.50 Egyptian pounds. The main source of income for the Sherif, however, were the taxes he levied on the camels of the Hejaz.
However, ʿAun al-Rafīq developed over time more and more into a despotic and exploitative tyrant to whom everyone was powerless. Like Uthman Pasha before him, he acted harshly and without respect against scholars, sheriffs and Bedouin sheikhs and withheld the Ottoman government's money payments and grain deliveries intended for these circles. He also imposed high taxes and fees on pilgrims, which were felt to be arbitrary. This also included the payment of "donations" for the Hejaz Railway . It is reported that he had the pilgrims detained in Mecca until all had paid 1 riyal ; He arrested those who refused to pay. He also collected fees from the mutauwifūn for their authorization to look after the pilgrims in a certain area, and introduced licenses for all those who were active in the "Hajj service industry". In this way the pilgrimage became more expensive for the pilgrims, while at the same time, as a result of the poor relationship between the Sherif and the Bedouin sheiks, the paths became less secure.
At the turn of the 20th century, complaints about ʿAun al-Rafīq increased in Egypt, India and Southeast Asia. Despite these complaints, however, the Ottoman Sultan Abdülhamid II held on to the Sherif. Ibrāhīm al-Muwailihī, a well-known Egyptian journalist, suspected that the Sultan was doing this because he wanted to make known "the misdeeds of the Prophet's descendants" so that people turned away from them. In this way he could recover from the saying, which was repeated over and over again, that the imams must belong to the Quraish . Al-Jawā'ib , a newspaper published by Chalīl Mutrān , reported that one of the courtiers had proposed that the Sultan dismiss ʿAun al-Rafīq, but he refused on the grounds that he would use it as a "warning and example" for those who find the "tyranny of the caliph of the Turks" a nuisance, so that they would know what the "tyranny of the caliph of the Arabs" would look like.
The Development of the Sherifical-British Relations
Although ʿAun al-Rafīq belonged to the Dhawū ʿAun, his relationship with the British was also not good. His appointment as Sherif in September 1882 was actually very much welcomed by the British. However, the high expectations soon turned into disappointment because ʿAun al-Rafīq shied away from contact with the British and squeezed large sums of money from the pilgrims from British India . British-Sherif relations reached a low point in 1895, when Abdur Razzack, the long-time British Vice Consul in Jeddah, was murdered by Bedouins outside the city and the Sherif made no effort to solve the crime. Before that, there had been violent protests by pilgrims and the local population in connection with the introduction of disinfection facilities by the Ottoman authorities. During this time, Ahmed Muhtar Pasha , Ottoman High Commissioner in Egypt, proposed to dismiss the emir and transfer all power in the Hejaz to the Ottoman governor .
It was not until the beginning of the 20th century that the Sherif-British relations improved again, which was also due to the fact that ʿAun al-Rafīq twice called on doctors from the British consulate. During this time, the British developed a close relationship with ʿAun's nephew ʿAlī Bāscha ibn ʿAbdallāh, whom they viewed as his potential successor. The improvement of the Sherifish-British relations was viewed with suspicion on the Ottoman side. Salih Münir Paşa, the Ottoman ambassador in Paris, expressed the assumption in August 1903 that the British were striving to gradually remove Arabia with the Najd and the Hejaz from the rule of the Ottoman government and to transfer the caliphate to the Sherif, which was then under British Influence would eventually take Arabia, the Najd and Iraq under British protection and make them colonies, as they had done before with Aden and other areas.
At the request of the British, ʿAlī Bāscha was appointed the new Grand Sherif in 1905. Although he was dismissed three years later because of his hostile attitude towards the new Young Turkish government, he was replaced by another nephew of ʿAuns, who was no less friendly to the British, namely Hussain ibn ʿAlī . This Grand Sherif, who had lived in Istanbul for many years before he was appointed to his office in November 1908, endeavored to increase the influence of the Sherifate on the Arabian Peninsula, and immediately after taking power sent delegations to the ʿAsīr and to al- Qasīm to get in contact with the tribes living there. Like his two predecessors, Husain opposed Ottoman centralization efforts and did everything in his power to prevent the Hejaz Railway from being extended beyond Medina to Mecca.
The role of Sherif Husain during the First World War
In September 1914, shortly after the outbreak of the First World War , the Great Sherif became an important topic for German policy on the Orient. Max von Oppenheim , who later became the main organizer of the German jihad propaganda, reported during this time that the British were striving to make the Grand Sherif independent of the Ottoman caliphate and, if possible, to elevate him to caliphate. Some Pan -Arab Arabs, he said, shared this desire. Although von Oppenheim admitted that the Sherif had some influence in the Islamic world, he believed that the British plans he had learned of were unrealistic because he believed that Sherif Husain would remain loyal to the Ottoman government. The German diplomat Curt Max Prüfer assessed the situation similarly . He said that the Ottoman governor in the Hejaz would control the Sherif, and told Oppenheim that the Sherif was entirely on the British side, but was "fortunately powerless and in our hands". A different assessment emerged only through Bernhard Moritz , who traveled to Jeddah at the end of 1914 to set up a German propaganda and news office there, but was arrested by the Sherif. After he was released, he reported to his superiors in Berlin in January 1915 about the Sherif's ambitions for power and the Ottoman loss of control in the Hejaz. The German consul in Damascus then suggested that Germany should strive to unite the Āl Saʿūd and the Āl Raschīd under Turkish leadership as a counterbalance to the Sherif . However, the plan failed.
In May 1915 von Oppenheim met with Faisal , the Sherif's son, in Constantinople. He assured him that his father did not work with the British. Thereupon Oppenheim regained confidence in the loyalty of the Sherif to the Central Powers . Hans von Wangenheim , the German ambassador in Constantinople, stated in a letter of May 22nd to the German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg that Oppenheim's negotiating skills not only made a replacement of the Grand Sherif superfluous, but also the relationship between him and improved the Turks. Wangenheim, however, warned against further German propaganda activities in the Hejaz, because this could lead to an increase in distrust among the Groß-Scherifen.
On his departure from Constantinople, the Turkish Minister of War Enver Pascha gave Faisal an order that his father should support Turks and Germans by sending a Bedouin contingent for another Turkish attack on Egypt. However, the Sherif ignored this request. When Max von Oppenheim traveled to the Hejaz disguised as a Bedouin in autumn 1915, he was expelled by the Sherif, so that he had to hurry back to Damascus. In mid-February, the Sherif and the British concluded their negotiations for an alliance, and the Sherif was preparing for an Arab uprising against Turkey. At the beginning of April he called on the Ottoman government to release various Arab political prisoners in Syria, to set up a decentralized Turkish administration in Syria and Iraq, to recognize his rule in the Hejaz as hereditary and to confirm his traditional status and privileges, which the Ottoman leadership did, however not received. When Husain learned that a Turkish-German expedition ( Stotzingen mission ) was about to pass the Hejaz on its way to Yemen, he officially proclaimed the Arab revolt on June 5, 1916 .
Sultan Mehmed V then deposed Husain in July 1916 and appointed the Sherif ʿAlī Haidar Pascha of the Dhawū Zaid, who lived in Istanbul, as his successor. ʿAlī Haidar Pasha traveled with a retinue of Ottoman soldiers to see Fahreddin Pasha in Medina, where he made a public statement accusing Husain of selling himself to the British and surrendering the holy places to a Christian power. A planned Ottoman reconquest of Mecca failed. On October 28, 1916, the Sherif Husain declared himself “King of the Arab countries” on the initiative of his son ʿAbdallāh . The British only recognized him as King of the Hejaz , but gave him military support. ʿAlī Haidar Pascha returned to Istanbul via Syria in 1917 due to the hopeless situation, but was still regarded by the Ottoman side as the rightful Emir of Mecca. Husain's forces took Damascus in October 1918 with the help of a small staff of British military advisors, including the noted TE Lawrence , and a group of former Ottoman officers from Iraq. After the armistice of Moudros , Husain's son Faisal , who had commanded part of the Arab troops, formed a national Arab government in Damascus , from which the Kingdom of Syria later developed. In view of the new political situation, the Sublime Porte dismissed the Sherif ʿAlī Haidar Pascha from his office on May 8, 1919 and abolished the title of "Emir of Mecca" (emîr-i Mekke) .
Proclamation of the caliphate and the end
Whose sons Husain Faisal and'Abdallāh had in 1921 gained control of Iraq and Transjordan, agreed after the abolition of the Caliphate by Atatürk in spring 1924 caliphs . As a result, however, he largely isolated himself in the Islamic world, as his caliphate was almost nowhere recognized outside of the areas ruled by him and his sons. His worst adversary, the Saudi emir Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud , attacked the Hejaz with his Wahhabi warriors. After the loss of Mecca, Husain ceded the title of king to his son Ali ibn Hussein in 1924 . However, the Āl Suʿūd did not want to accept a Hashimite king, so Ali had to abdicate on December 20, 1925. On January 8, 1926, Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud was crowned the new king of the Hejaz .
The former Sherif ʿAlī Haidar Pasha died in Beirut in 1935. To this day, many Dhawū Zaid families still live in Saudi Arabia. A number of family foundations in Mecca and the surrounding area provide financial support . Some of these foundations were established as early as the 19th century.
Ruler list
The given rulership dates are mainly based on Eduard von Zambaur's list of governors and sheriffs of Mecca and have been converted into Christian times on this basis. Please note the legend in each case ! The background colors denote various branches of the Sherif family.
Sherif rulers until 1200
| Local Sherif rulers Legend: yellow = Hāschimids, green = Jaʿfarids, red = Sulaimānids |
Relationship with foreign political powers |
|---|---|
| Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn al-Husain al-Amīr (966 / 8–980) | 969 recognizes the Fatimid caliph al-Muʿizz as overlord |
| ʿĪsā ibn Jafar (980-994) | |
| Abū l-Futūh al-Hasan ibn Jaʿfar (994 - Sept. 1012) | In 1011 he leads an anti-Fatimid uprising in Palestine and accepts the title of caliph himself |
| Abū t-Taiyib Dāwūd ibn ʿAbd ar-Rahmān (Sept. 1012 - Oct. 1012) | Installed by the Fatimid caliph al-Hākim bi-amr Allaah |
| Abū l-Futūh al-Hasan ibn Jaʿfar (1012-1039) | Submits again to the Fatimids |
| Shukr ad-Dīn ibn Abī l-Futūh (1039-1061) | |
| Hamza ibn Wahhās (1061-1063) | |
| Abū Hāschim Muhammad ibn Jaʿfar (1063-1094) | Installed by the Sulaihid ruler Ali al-Sulaihi , his loyalty changes several times between Fatimids and Abbasids |
| Abū Fulaita Qāsim ibn Muhammad (1094–1123) | |
| Fulaita ibn Qāsim (1123–1132) | |
| Hāschim ibn Fulaita (1132-1154) | |
| Qāsim ibn Hāschim (1154–1160) | |
| ʿĪsā ibn Fulaita (1160–1174) | Is confirmed in office by the Ayyubid Tūrānschāh in 1173 . |
| Dāwūd ibn ʿĪsā (1174–1175) | |
| Mukthir ibn ʿĪsā (1175–1176) | |
| Dāwūd ibn ʿĪsā (1176–1189) | |
| Mukthir ibn ʿĪsā (1188–1201) Mansūr ibn Dāwūd (1196–1201) |
Qatāda and his descendants until 1525
| Local rulers, subordinate co-regents, are preceded by a dash (-). |
Relationship with foreign political powers |
|---|---|
| Qatāda ibn Idrīs (1201 / 3–1220) | |
| Hasan ibn Qatāda (1220-1222) | |
| Rajih ibn Qatada (1231-1241) | Seizure of power with military support from the Rasulids |
| Abū Saʿd Hasan ibn ʿAlī (1241 - Sept. 1253) | |
| Dschammāz ibn Hasan (Oct 1253 - Jan 1254) | |
| Rādschih ibn Qatāda (Jan - April 1254) | Supported by the Rasulids |
| Ghānim ibn Rādschih (April - Nov 1254) | |
| Abū Numaiy Muhammad I ibn Abī Saʿd (Nov 1254 - Oct 1301) Idrīs ibn Qatāda (Nov 1254 - Nov 1270) |
Confirmed in office in 1268 by the Mamluken Sultan az-Zāhir Baibars |
| Rumaitha ibn Abī Numaiy (Oct 1301 - July 1302) Humaida ibn Abī Numaiy (Oct 1301 - July 1302) |
Installed by the Mamluken Sultan an-Nāsir Muhammad ibn Qalāwūn |
| Abū l-Ghaith ibn Abī Numaiy (July 1302 - June 1305) ʿUtaifa ibn Abī Numaiy (July 1302 - June 1305) |
Installed by An-Nāsir Muhammad |
| Rumaitha ibn Abī Numaiy (June 1305 - March 1314) Humaida ibn Abī Numaiy (June 1305 - March 1314) |
Installed by An-Nāsir Muhammad |
| Abū l-Ghaith ibn Abī Numaiy (March 1314 - May 1314) | Installed by An-Nāsir Muhammad |
| Humaida ibn Abī Numaiy (May 1314 - Nov 1315) | Submit to the Rasulids |
| Rumaitha ibn Abī Numaiy (Nov. 1315 - March 1318) | Installed by An-Nāsir Muhammad |
| Humaida ibn Abī Numaiy (March 1318 - June 1318) | Ousts Rumaitha and subordinates himself to the Ilkhan ruler Abū Saʿīd |
| ʿUtaifa ibn Abī Numaiy (Febr. 1319 - Oct. 1330) Rumaitha ibn Abī Numaiy (Jan 1321 - 1226) |
Installed by An-Nāsir Muhammad |
| Rumaitha ibn Abī Numaiy (Oct. 1330 - Oct. 1345) | |
| ʿAdschlān ibn Rumaitha (Oct. 1346 - 1347) | Appointed by al-Kāmil Shabān in Cairo |
| ʿAdschlān ibn Rumaitha, Thaqaba ibn Rumaitha (1347 - April 1359) at times together, at times apart |
|
| Sanad ibn Rumaitha (April 1359 - Sept 1361) Muhammad ibn ʿUtaifa (April 1359 - Oct 1360) Thaqaba ibn Rumaitha (Oct 1360 - Aug 1361) |
|
| ʿAdschlān ibn Rumaitha (Sept 1361-1375) - Ahmad ibn ʿAdschlān (Sept. 1361-1375) |
|
| Ahmad ibn ʿAdschlān (1375 - Oct 1386) | |
| ʿInān ibn Mughāmis (Dec 1386 - Dec 1387) | |
| ʿAlī ibn ʿAdschlān (Oct 1387 - July 1395) | Assume rule with the assistance of az-Zāhir Barqūq |
| Muhammad ibn ʿAdschlān (July 1395 - Jan 1396) | |
| Al-Hasan ibn ʿAdschlān (Feb 1396 - Jan 1416) - Barakāt ibn al-Hasan (May 1407 - Jan 1416) - Ahmad ibn al-Hasan (1408 - Jan 1416) |
Al-Hasan was installed in Cairo by az-Zāhir Barqūq as early as August 1395, but did not move into Mecca until February 1396. In 1408 he was entrusted by al-Malik an-Nāsir Faraj with the governorship for the entire area of the Hejaz. |
| Rumaitha ibn Muhammad (Feb 1416 - March 1417) | Appointed by al-Mu'aiyad Sheikh in March 1415 |
| Al-Hasan ibn ʿAdschlān (March 1417--1424) | Reinstatement in office by al-Mu'aiyad Sheikh in Nov 1416 |
| ʿAlī ibn ʿInān, ʿAlī ibn ʿAdschlān (1424 - Oct 1425) | Supported by the Mamluk Amīr Qurqmās |
| Al-Hasan ibn ʿAdschlān (Oct 1425 - May 1426) | |
| Barakāt ibn al-Hasan (May 1426 - Dec 1441) | Is ordered to Egypt by Sultan Barsbay and named Emir of Mecca. |
| ʿAlī ibn al-Hasan (Dec 1441 - Feb 1443) | |
| Abū l-Qāsim ibn al-Hasan (March 1443--1446) | |
| Barakāt ibn al-Hasan (1446-1455) | |
| Muhammad ibn Barakāt (1455-1497) | |
| Barakāt ibn Muhammad (Aug 1497 - May 1501) | |
| Hazzāʿ ibn Muhammad (May 1501 - Nov 1501) | |
| Barakāt ibn Muhammad (Nov 1501 - March 1503) | |
| Ahmad Jazan ibn Muhammad (March 1503 - Dec 1503) | |
| Qaitbāy ibn Muhammad, Barakāt ibn Muhammad (June 1504 - April 1512) | |
| Barakāt ibn Muhammad (April 1512 - Aug 1525) - Muhammad Abū Numaiy ibn Barakāt (Oct 1512 - Aug 1525) |
1517 Beginning of Ottoman rule |
Abū Numaiy II and his descendants (1525–1925)
| Local Sherif rulers legend: yellow = ruler of the Dhawū Zaid, green = ruler of the Dhawū Barakāt, red = ruler of the Dhawū ʿAun, subordinate co-rulers are preceded by a dash (-). |
Relationship with foreign political powers |
|---|---|
| Muhammad Abū Numaiy II ibn Barakāt (Aug 1525 - 1584) | |
| Hasan ibn Abī Numaiy (1584–1601) | |
| Abū Tālib ibn al-Hasan (1601–1603) | |
| Idrīs ibn al-Hasan (November 1603 - October 1624) - Fuhaid ibn al-Hasan (November 1603 - 1610) - Muhsin ibn Husain (November 1603 - October 1624) |
|
| Muhsin ibn Husain (October 1624 - May 1628) | |
| Ahmad ibn ʿAbd al-Muttalib (May 1628 - September 1629) | |
| Masʿūd ibn Idrīs (September 1629 - November 1630) | |
| ʿAbdallāh ibn Hasan (November 1630 - August 1631) | |
| Zaid ibn Muhsin (August 1631 - May 1667) Muhammad ibn ʿAbdallāh (August 1631 - February 1632) Nāmir ibn ʿAbd al-Mutallib (February 1632 - June 1632) ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Idrīs (February 1632 - June 1632) |
Extensive donations from Mughal rulers Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb |
| Saʿd ibn Zaid (May 1667 - March 1672) Ahmad ibn Zaid (1669 - March 1672) |
|
| Barakāt ibn Muhammad (March 1672 - April 1682) | Sending an embassy to Aurangzeb and the Sultana of Aceh |
| Saʿīd ibn Barakāt (April 1682 - December 1683) | |
| Ibrāhīm ibn Muhammad (1683–1684) | |
| Ahmad ibn Zaid (October 1684 - April 1688) | |
| Ahmad ibn Ghālib (1688–1690) | |
| Muhsin ibn al-Husain (April 1690 - September 1691) | |
| Saʿīd ibn Saʿd (September 1691 - August 1692) | |
| Saʿd ibn Zaid (1693–1694) | |
| ʿAbdallāh ibn Hāschim (July 1694 - November 1694) | |
| Saʿd ibn Zaid (1694–1702) | |
| Saʿīd ibn Saʿd (March 1702 - July 1704) | |
| ʿAbd al-Muhsin ibn Ahmad (July 1704) | |
| ʿAbd al-Karīm ibn Muhammad (July 1704 - March 1705) | |
| Saʿīd ibn Saʿd (March 1705 - October 1705) | |
| ʿAbd al-Karīm ibn Muhammad (October 1705 - December 1711) | |
| Saʿīd ibn Saʿd (December 1711 - December 1716) | |
| ʿAbdallāh ibn Saʿīd (December 1716 - April 1718) | |
| ʿAlī ibn Saʿīd (April 1718 - October 1718) | |
| Yahyā ibn Barakāt (October 1718 - May 1720) | |
| Mubārak ibn Ahmad (May 1720 - September 1722) | |
| Yahyā ibn Barakāt (September 1722 - September 1723) | |
| Barakāt ibn Yahyā (September 1723) | |
| Mubārak ibn Ahmad (October 1723 - January 1724) | |
| ʿAbdallāh ibn Saʿīd (February 1724 - May 1731) | |
| Muhammad ibn ʿAbdallāh (May 1731 - October 1732) | |
| Masʿūd ibn Saʿīd (1732–1733) | |
| Muhammad ibn ʿAbdallāh (1733–1734) | |
| Masʿūd ibn Saʿīd (February 1734 - January 1752) | |
| Musāʿid ibn Saʿīd (January 1752 - April 1770) Jafar ibn Saʿīd (July-August 1760) |
|
| Ahmad ibn Saʿīd (April 1770 - June 1770) | |
| ʿAbdallāh ibn Husain (June-Sept 1770) | Seizure of power with the support of Ali Bey al-Kabir |
| Ahmad ibn Saʿīd (Sept 1770 - Jan 1773) | |
| Surūr ibn Musāʿid (Jan 1773 - Jan 1788) | |
| ʿAbd al-Muʿīn ibn Musāʿid (Jan 1788) | |
| Ghālib ibn Musāʿid (Feb. 1788 - April 1803) | from 1798 loosening of ties to the Ottoman overlord, development of a friendly relationship with the French |
| ʿAbd al-Muʿīn ibn Musāʿid (April 1803 - July 1803) | by Saud I. ibn Abd al-Aziz used |
| Ghālib ibn Musāʿid (July 1803 - Oct 1813) | 1806 recognition of Saudi sovereignty |
| Yahyā ibn Surūr (Oct 1813 - February 1827) | |
| ʿAbd al-Muttalib ibn Ghālib (July-August 1827) | |
| Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn Ibn ʿAun (1827-1851) | From 1836 to 1840 he was forced to stay with Muhammad Ali Pascha in Cairo , then returned to Mecca and recognized Ottoman rule. |
| ʿAbd al-Muttalib ibn Ghālib (1851-1856) | |
| Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Muʿīn Ibn ʿAun (1856-1858) | |
| ʿAbdallāh ibn Muhammad (March 1858 - June 1877) | |
| al-Husain ibn Muhammad (August 1877 - March 14, 1880) | Develop a close relationship with the British |
| ʿAbd al-Muttalib ibn Ghālib (May 1880 - August 1882) | |
| ʿAbd al-Ilāh ibn Muhammad (September-October 1882) | |
| ʿAun al-Rafīq ibn Muhammad (November 1882 - July 1905) | |
| ʿAlī Bāsha ibn ʿAbdallāh (September 1905-1908) | Appointed at British instigation |
| Husain I. ibn ʿAlī (November 1908 - 1924) | after the beginning of the Arab revolt in July 1916, deposed by the Ottoman side and replaced by the Sherif ʿAlī Haidar Pascha, who lives in Istanbul, then self-proclaimed "King of the Arab countries" in October 1916 |
| ʿAlī ibn Husain (1924–1925) | without control over Mecca |
literature
European and Arabic sources
- Ali Bey : Travels of Ali Bey: in Morocco, Tripoli, Cyprus, Egypt, Arabia, Syria, and Turkey. Between the years 1803 and 1807 . James Maxwell, Philadelphia, 1816. Vol. II, pp. 130-145. Digitized
- Wilfrid Scawen Blunt : The Future of Islam . Kegan Paul, London 1882. pp. 90-131. Digitized
- John Lewis Burckhardt : Travels in Arabia . Henry Colburn, London, 1829. pp. 405-443. Digitized - German translation under the title Johann Ludwig Burckhardt's Reisen in Arabien . ( New library of the most important travelogues to expand geography and ethnology ; 54) Verl. D. Large Saxon. priv. Landes-Industrie-Comptoirs, Weimar, 1830. pp. 328–359. Digitized
- Charles Didier : Séjour chez le Grand-Chérif de la Mekke . Hachette, Paris, 1857. Digitized - German translation by Helene Lobedan under the title A stay with the Grand Sherif of Mecca . Schlicke, Leipzig, 1862. Digitized
- Aḥmad Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām fī bayān umarāʾ al-balad al-ḥarām . Maṭbaʿa Ḫairīya, Cairo, 1887. Website with PDF other, more readable, but in places incorrect edition
- Ignatius Mouradgea d'Ohsson : Tableau général de l'empire othoman: divisé en deux parties, dont l'une comprend la législation mahométane, l'autre, l'histoire de l'empire othoman vol. III. Paris, 1790. pp. 276-281. Digitized - German translation by Christian Daniel Beck under the title General Description of the Othoman Empire Weidmann, Leipzig, 1793. Vol. II, pp. 163-165. Digitized
- Raḍī ad-Dīn al-Mūsawī al-Makkī: Tanḍīd al-ʿuqūd as-sanīya bi-tamhīd ad-daula al-Ḥasanīya . Ed. as-Saiyid Mahdī ar-Raǧāʾī. Maʿhad ad-Dirāsāt li-taḥqīq ansāb al-ašrāf, Qom, 1431 dH (= 2009/10). Digitized
Secondary literature
- Muhammad Abdul Bari: The early Wahhabis and the Sherifs of Makkah in Journal of the Pakistan Historical Society 3 (1955) 91-104.
- M. Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca during the French Invasion of Egypt, 1798-1801 in The Journal of the Royal Asian Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1/2 (1965) 33-42.
- Butrus Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca (1880-1900) in Asian and African Studies 9 (1973) 1-21.
- Saleh Muhammad Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914: Ottoman Vali, the Sharif of Mecca, and the growth of British influence . Riyad: Riyad Univ. Press, 1978.
- Suraiya Faroqhi: ruler of Mecca. The story of the pilgrimage . Artemis, Munich / Zurich, 1990. pp. 197–203.
- Naimur R. Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations between Mughal India and the Ottoman Empire, 1556–1748. Idarah-i Adabiyat-i Delli, Delhi, 1989. pp. 107-143.
- Gerald de Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . Dorset Press, New York, 1954. Digitized
- Heinz Halm : The Caliphs of Cairo. The Fatimids in Egypt, 973-1074 . Beck, Munich, 2003. pp. 228-235.
- Michael Christopher Low: The Mechanics of Mecca: The Technopolitics of the Late Ottoman Hijaz and the Colonial Hajj . PhD thesis, Columbia University 2015. pp. 263-332. Digitized
- Donald M. Mckale: German Policy toward the Sharif of Mecca, 1914-1916 in Historian 55/2 (1993) 303-314.
- John L. Meloy: Imperial power and maritime trade: Mecca and Cairo in the later Middle Ages . Middle East Documentation Center, Chicago, 2010. pp. 81-112.
- Richard T. Mortel: The Genealogy of the Ḥasanid Sharifs of Mecca in Journal of the College of Arts, King Saud University 12 (1985) 221-250.
- Richard T. Mortel: Zaydi Shiʿism and Ḥasanid Sharifs of Mecca in International Journal of Middle East Studies 19 (1987) 455-472.
- Keiko Ota: The Meccan Sharifate and its diplomatic relations in the Bahri Mamluk period in AJAMES: Annals of Japan Association for Middle East Studies 17.1 (2002) 1-20.
- Esther Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. Investigations on the reconstruction of the early history of the Wahhābiyya. Steiner, Beirut 1993. pp. 286-320.
- Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje : Mecca . Volume I: The city and its masters. The Hague 1888. Digitized
- Jo van Steenbergen: Caliphate and kingship in a fifteenth-century literary history of Muslim leadership and pilgrimage . Brill, Leiden / Boston, 2016. pp. 16–24.
- Rita Stratkötter: From Cairo to Mecca: Social and economic history of the pilgrimage according to the reports of Ibrāhīm Rifʿat Bāšā: Mirʾāt al-Ḥaramain . Schwarz, Berlin, 1991. pp. 107-111. Digitized
- Joshua Teitelbaum: The Rise and Fall of the Hashimite Kingdom of Arabia . Hurst, London, 2001. pp. 9-12.
- İsmail Hakkı Uzunçarşılı: Mekke-i mükerreme emirleri . 2nd edition Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, Ankara, 1984.
- AJ Wensinck and CE Bosworth: Makka. 2. From the ʿAbbāsid to the Modern Period in The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition Vol. VI, pp. 147b-152a.
- Ferdinand Wüstenfeld : History of the city of Mecca, edited from the Arabic chronicles. Leipzig 1861. Digitized
- Ferdinand Wüstenfeld: The Sherif of Mecca in the XI. (XVII.) Century: Continuation of the history of the city of Mecca with a genealogical table of the Sherif . Dieterich, Göttingen, 1885. Digitized
supporting documents
- ↑ Steenbergen: Caliphate and kingship . 2016, p. 19.
- ↑ Compare with Uzunçarşılı: Mekke-i mükerreme emirleri . 1984, pp. 31-34 reproduced documents.
- ↑ The term is found for the first time in Didier: Séjour chez le Grand-Chérif de la Mekke . 1857.
- ↑ For the designation "Grand Sherif" as a European invention, see also David Georg Hogarth: Hejaz before World War I. A Handbook. Oleander Press, Cambridge, 1978. p. 50.
- ^ Mortel: The Genealogy of the Ḥasanid Sharifs of Mecca . 1985, pp. 229-242.
- ↑ a b c Cf. Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 16.
- ^ Mortel: The Genealogy of the Ḥasanid Sharifs of Mecca . 1985, p. 243.
- ↑ Wüstenfeld: History of the City of Mecca . 1861, pp. 215f.
- ↑ a b Wüstenfeld: History of the City of Mecca . 1861, p. 216.
- ↑ Al-Maqrīzī : Ittiʿāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ bi-aḫbār al-aʾimma al-fāṭimīyīn al-ḫulafāʾ. Ed. Ǧamāl ad-Dīn aš-Shaiyāl. Wizārat al-Auqāf, Cairo, 1996. Vol. I, p. 216. Digitized
- ↑ Al-Maqrīzī: Ittiʿāẓ al-ḥunafāʾ bi-aḫbār al-aʾimma al-fāṭimīyīn al-ḫulafāʾ. 1996. Vol. I, p. 225.
- ^ Halm: The Caliphs of Cairo. 2003, p. 229.
- ↑ Wüstenfeld: History of the City of Mecca . 1861, p. 218.
- ↑ Abū Shuǧāʿ ar-Rūḏrāwarī: Ḏail Taǧārib al-umam . Ed. H. Fr. Amedroz. Cairo, 1916. pp. 235f. PDF
- ^ Halm: The Caliphs of Cairo. 2003, pp. 228, 233.
- ↑ a b Wüstenfeld: History of the City of Mecca . 1861, p. 219.
- ^ Halm: The Caliphs of Cairo. 2003, p. 233.
- ↑ a b Halm: The Caliphs of Cairo. 2003, p. 234.
- ^ Halm: The Caliphs of Cairo. 2003, p. 234f.
- ↑ Wensinck / Bosworth: Makka in EI² Vol. VI, p. 148b.
- ↑ Wüstenfeld: History of the City of Mecca . 1861, p. 222f.
- ↑ Mortel: Zaydi Shi'ism and Ḥasanid Sharif of Mecca . 1987, p. 460.
- ↑ Ibn Ǧubair: Riḥla . Ed. William Wright. Brill, Leiden, 1907. pp. 101f. Digitized - Ger. Translated from R. Günther Stuttgart, 1985. pp. 70f.
- ↑ Ota: The Meccan Sharifate and its diplomatic relations . 2002, p. 7.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, family tree I (before p. 25).
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, pp. 75f.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, p. 78.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, p. 77.
- ↑ Wüstenfeld: History of the City of Mecca . 1861, pp. 236-238.
- ↑ a b Mortel: Zaydi Shiʿism and Ḥasanid Sharifs of Mecca . 1987, p. 461.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 438n.
- ↑ Wüstenfeld: History of the City of Mecca . 1861, p. 241.
- ↑ a b c Mortel: Zaydi Shiʿism and Ḥasanid Sharifs of Mecca . 1987, p. 463.
- ↑ Ota: The Meccan Sharifate and its diplomatic relations . 2002, p. 13.
- ^ A b Ota: The Meccan Sharifate and its diplomatic relations . 2002, p. 5.
- ↑ Ota: The Meccan Sharifate and its diplomatic relations . 2002, p. 6.
- ↑ al-Maqrīzī: as-Sulūk li-maʿrifat duwal al-mulūk. Ed. Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Qādir ʿAṭā. Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmīya, Beirut, 1997. Vol. IV, pp. 139f. Digitized
- ↑ Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 33.
- ↑ Hassan M. El-Hawary, Gaston Wiet: Matériaux pour un Corpus inscriptionum Arabicarum. Inscriptions et monuments de la Mecque: Ḥaram et Ka'ba. 1.1. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale, Cairo, 1985. pp. 155–159.
- ^ Meloy: Imperial power and maritime trade . 2010, pp. 94-102.
- ^ Meloy: Imperial power and maritime trade . 2010, pp. 102-112.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 107.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 108.
- ↑ Wensinck / Bosworth: Makka in EI² Vol. VI, pp. 149b-150a.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 110f.
- ^ John L. Meloy, Money and Sovereignty in Mecca: Issues of the Sharifs in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries in Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 53/5 (2010) 712-738.
- ↑ Mortel: Zaydi Shi'ism and Ḥasanid Sharif of Mecca . 1987, p. 462.
- ↑ Mortel: Zaydi Shi'ism and Ḥasanid Sharif of Mecca . 1987, p. 464.
- ↑ Mortel: Zaydi Shi'ism and Ḥasanid Sharif of Mecca . 1987, p. 465.
- ↑ Ibn Taġrībirdī: an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira fi mulūk Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira . Al-Muʾassasa al-miṣrīya alʿāmma, Cairo, 1972. Vol. XI, p. 139. Digitized
- ^ Richard Mortel: "Madrasas in Mecca during the Medieval Period: A Descriptive Study based on Literary Sources" in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 60/2 (1997) 236-252. Here p. 242f.
- ↑ Mortel: Zaydi Shi'ism and Ḥasanid Sharif of Mecca. 1987, p. 468.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, pp. 430-32.
- ↑ a b Faroqhi: Ruler of Mecca. 1990, p. 197.
- ^ Teitelbaum: The Rise and Fall of the Hashimite Kingdom of Arabia . 2001, p. 12.
- ↑ a b Mouradgea d'Ohsson: Tableau général de l'empire othoman . 1790, Vol. III, p. 278.
- ↑ Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 55.
- ↑ Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 62.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 432f.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 434, German transl. P. 353.
- ^ Mouradgea d'Ohsson: Tableau général de l'empire othoman . 1790, Vol. III, p. 280.
- ↑ a b c Faroqhi: Ruler of Mecca. 1990, p. 198.
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. p. 308.
- ^ Mouradgea d'Ohsson: Tableau général de l'empire othoman . 1790, Vol. III, pp. 276f.
- ^ Mouradgea d'Ohsson: Tableau général de l'empire othoman . 1790, Vol. III, p. 279.
- ^ Mouradgea d'Ohsson: Tableau général de l'empire othoman . 1790, Vol. III, p. 277.
- ↑ Faroqhi: Ruler of Mecca. 1990, pp. 200f.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, p. 33.
- ^ Carsten Niebuhr : Travels through Arabia, and other Countries in the East . Translated into English by Robert Herron. 2 Vols. Edinburgh 1792. Vol. II, pp. 26f. Digitized
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, pp. 115, 136f.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, p. 116f.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, pp. 118f.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, pp. 120f, 138f.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, pp. 121-123.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, pp. 123-125.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, p. 125f.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, pp. 127f.
- ↑ a b Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 104f.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, p. 126f.
- ^ Farooqi: Mughal-Ottoman relations: a study of political & diplomatic relations . 1989, p. 127f.
- ↑ Patrick Franke : The Ego of the Mullah: Strategies of Self-Representation in the Works of the Meccan Scholar ʿAli al-Qārī (d. 1606) in Ralf Elger and Yavuz Köse (eds.): Many Ways of Speaking about the Self. Middle Eastern Ego-Documents in Arabic, Persian, Turkish (14th – 20th century). Wiesbaden 2010. pp. 185-200. Here p. 186.
- ↑ ʿAlī Ibn-ʿAbd-al-Qādir aṭ-Ṭabarī: Al-Araǧ al-miskī fi t-tārīḫ al-Makkī wa-tarāǧim al-mulūk wal-ḫulafāʾ . Ed. Asraf Aḥmad al-Ǧammāl. Al-Maktaba at-Tiǧārīya, Mekka, 1996. pp. 192-200. Digitized
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, pp. 424-428.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, pp. 118f.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, pp. 165f.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, pp. 125f.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 168.
- ↑ Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 192.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 412.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, pp. 172-174.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, pp. 413-415.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 407.
- ↑ Didier: A stay with the Grand Sherif of Mecca. 1862, p. 213.
- ↑ Suleyman ʿİzzî: Târîh-i ʿİzzî . Istanbul 1785. p. 207b, line 16ff digitized
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. pp. 289-295.
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. pp. 287-289.
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. pp. 286f.
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. pp. 298f.
- ↑ Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 263.
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. pp. 300f.
- ^ Abdul Bari: The early Wahhabis and the Sherifs of Makkah . 1955, p. 99.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, p. 147.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, pp. 436-438.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, p. 96.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, p. 35.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 418.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, pp. 420f.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, p. 37.
- ^ Ali Bey: Travels of Ali Bey . 1816. Vol. II, p. 141.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, p. 41.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, p. 36f.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, pp. 36f, 39.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, p. 38.
- ^ Abir: Relations between the Government of India and the Sharif of Mecca . 1965, p. 40.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, p. 148.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 185.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, p. 149.
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. p. 318.
- ↑ Peskes: Muḥammad b. ʿAbdalwahhāb (1703–92) in conflict. 1993. p. 319.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, p. 150.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 187.
- ↑ See Ali Bey: Travels of Ali Bey . 1816. Vol. II, p. 141, which, however, incorrectly states the year 1807.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . 1888, Vol. I, pp. 151-152.
- ↑ Cf. Didier: A stay with the Grand Sherif of Mecca. 1862, p. 238 and Blunt: The Future of Islam . 1882, p. 121.
- ↑ Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 293.
- ^ Ali Bey: Travels of Ali Bey . 1816. Vol. II, pp. 141, 162.
- ↑ a b Didier: A stay with the Grand Sherif of Mecca. 1862, p. 243f.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, pp. 417, 436.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 406.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, pp. 155-157.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 435.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 419. - See German translations p. 340.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, pp. 419f.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 420.
- ^ Burckhardt: Travels in Arabia . 1829, p. 428f.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, pp. 158f.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, pp. 161f.
- ↑ RY Ebied and MJL Young: An Unpublished Letter From ʿAlī Pasha, Ottoman Governor of Iraq, To the Sharif of Mecca in Die Welt des Islams 17 (1976) 58-71.
- ↑ Muḥammad Bairam: Ṣafwat al-iʿtibār bi-mustaudaʿ al-amṣār wa-l-aqṭār . Dār Ṣādir, Beirut, 1980. Vol. V, p. 14.
- ↑ Ibn Zainī Daḥlān: Ḫulāṣat al-kalām . 1887, p. 314.
- ↑ Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje: The revolt in Arabia . Putnam, New York & London, 1917. p. 23. Digitized
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, pp. 165-168.
- ↑ Didier: A stay with the Grand Sherif of Mecca. 1862, p. 244.
- ^ Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, p. 25.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, p. 173.
- ↑ Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914 . 1978, pp. 201f.
- ↑ Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914 . 1978, p. 205.
- ↑ Blunt: The Future of Islam . 1882, p. 122f.
- ↑ Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914 . 1978, pp. 205f.
- ↑ Blunt: The Future of Islam . 1882, p. 125.
- ^ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdulhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca (1880-1900) . 1973, p. 7.
- ↑ Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914 . 1978, pp. 206f.
- ^ A b Blunt: The Future of Islam . 1882, p. 128.
- ↑ Blunt: The Future of Islam . 1882, p. 129.
- ↑ Blunt: The Future of Islam . 1882, pp. 130f.
- ↑ Blunt: The Future of Islam . 1882, p. 127f.
- ↑ Cf. to him Metin Hülagü: Topal Osman Nuri Paşa (1840–1898), Hayatı ve Faaliyetleri in Ankara Üniversitesi Osmanlı Tarihi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Dergisi (OTAM) 5 (1994) 145–153. Digitized
- ↑ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 9f.
- ↑ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 10f.
- ↑ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 11.
- ^ Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, p. 49.
- ↑ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 12.
- ^ Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, p. 50.
- ↑ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdulhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 13.
- ↑ a b Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 17.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, p. 178f.
- ↑ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 14f.
- ↑ a b Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 15.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, pp. 185, 222-224.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, p. 184.
- ^ Snouck Hurgronje: Mecca . Vol. I, p. 185.
- ^ Stratkötter: From Cairo to Mecca . 1991, p. 108.
- ↑ Selim Faris: The Decline of British Prestige in the East . T. Fisher, London 1887. p. 137. Digitized
- ↑ a b c Stratkötter: From Cairo to Mecca . 1991, p. 107f.
- ↑ Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 19.
- ^ Stratkötter: From Cairo to Mecca . 1991, p. 108f.
- ^ Stratkötter: From Cairo to Mecca . 1991, p. 111.
- ^ Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, pp. 315-319.
- ↑ a b Abu-Manneh: Sultan Abdülhamid II and the Sharifs of Mecca . 1973, p. 20.
- ↑ For a complaint from Madras from 1892 cf. Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, pp. 263–266.
- ↑ Quotation in Maǧallat al-Manār 7/2 (April 2, 1904) p. 72. Digitized .
- ↑ Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914 . 1978, p. 209.
- ^ Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, pp. 224–228.
- ↑ M. Talha Çiçek: Negotiating power and authority in the desert: the Arab Bedouin and the limits of the Ottoman state in Hijaz, 1840–1908 in Middle Eastern Studies 52/2 (2016) 260–279, here p. 262.
- ↑ Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914 . 1978, pp. 211f.
- ↑ a b Al-Amr: The Hijaz under Ottoman rule 1869-1914 . 1978, p. 212f.
- ↑ Gökhan Çetinsaya: The Ottoman View of British presence in Iraq and the Gulf: The Era of Abdul Hamid II in Middle Eastern Studies 39/2 (2003) 194-203. Here p. 200.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 262.
- ^ Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, p. 342.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, pp. 305f.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, pp. 306f.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, p. 306.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, p. 307.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, p. 308.
- ↑ a b Mckale: German Policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, p. 309.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, p. 310.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, p. 311.
- ↑ McKale: German policy toward the Sharif of Mecca . 1993, p. 313.
- ↑ a b c d Uzunçarşılı: Mekke-i mükerreme emirleri . 1984, p. 145.
- ^ Teitelbaum: The Rise and Fall of the Hashimite Kingdom of Arabia . 2001, p. 83f.
- ↑ Gaury: The Rulers of Mecca . 1954, p. 272.
- ^ Low: The Mechanics of Mecca . 2015, p. 344.
- ↑ Cf. Masʿūd Muḥammad Āl-Zaid: Tārīḫ Makka al-Mukarrama fī ʿahd al-Ašrāf Āl-Zaid (1041 / 1299h - 1631 / 1881m) . Dār al-Qāhira, Cairo, 2005. pp. 295–297.
- ^ Eduard von Zambaur: Manuel de généalogie et de chronologie pour l'histoire de l'Islam . Lafaire, Hannover 1927. pp. 19-23.
- ^ Name corrected according to family table II in Snouck Hurgronje: Mekka. Vol. I, after p. 74.
- ^ Meloy: Imperial power and maritime trade . 2010, p. 86.
