Draft:Government in Africa

Government in Africa contributes to the build up and breakdown of narratives and practices within African civil society.

Africa
Traditional African government is based on the most fundamental aspect commonly found within the social systems of Africa, which is the African family unit. Customary law and family origin in Africa serve as the basis for deciding the privileges and rights of African individuals. The identity of the African individual is an identity that is inherently linked with the identity of the African community, and the rights and duties of the African individual is tied to the African community.

Ancient Egypt


The pharaoh was the absolute monarch of the country and, at least in theory, wielded complete control of the land and its resources. The king was the supreme military commander and head of the government, who relied on a bureaucracy of officials to manage his affairs. In charge of the administration was his second in command, the vizier, who acted as the king's representative and coordinated land surveys, the treasury, building projects, the legal system, and the archives. At a regional level, the country was divided into as many as 42 administrative regions called nomes each governed by a nomarch, who was accountable to the vizier for his jurisdiction. The temples formed the backbone of the economy. Not only were they places of worship, but were also responsible for collecting and storing the kingdom's wealth in a system of granaries and treasuries administered by overseers, who redistributed grain and goods.

Much of the economy was centrally organized and strictly controlled. Although the ancient Egyptians did not use coinage until the Late period, they did use a type of money-barter system, with standard sacks of grain and the deben, a weight of roughly 91 g of copper or silver, forming a common denominator. Workers were paid in grain; a simple laborer might earn $5 1/2$ sacks (200 kg or 400 lb) of grain per month, while a foreman might earn $7 1/2$ sacks (250 kg or 550 lb). Prices were fixed across the country and recorded in lists to facilitate trading; for example a shirt cost five copper deben, while a cow cost 140deben. Grain could be traded for other goods, according to the fixed price list. During the fifth centuryBC coined money was introduced into Egypt from abroad. At first the coins were used as standardized pieces of precious metal rather than true money, but in the following centuries international traders came to rely on coinage.

The head of the legal system was officially the pharaoh, who was responsible for enacting laws, delivering justice, and maintaining law and order, a concept the ancient Egyptians referred to as Ma'at. Although no legal codes from ancient Egypt survive, court documents show that Egyptian law was based on a common-sense view of right and wrong that emphasized reaching agreements and resolving conflicts rather than strictly adhering to a complicated set of statutes. Local councils of elders, known as Kenbet in the New Kingdom, were responsible for ruling in court cases involving small claims and minor disputes. More serious cases involving murder, major land transactions, and tomb robbery were referred to the Great Kenbet, over which the vizier or pharaoh presided. Plaintiffs and defendants were expected to represent themselves and were required to swear an oath that they had told the truth. In some cases, the state took on both the role of prosecutor and judge, and it could torture the accused with beatings to obtain a confession and the names of any co-conspirators. Whether the charges were trivial or serious, court scribes documented the complaint, testimony, and verdict of the case for future reference.

Punishment for minor crimes involved either imposition of fines, beatings, facial mutilation, or exile, depending on the severity of the offense. Serious crimes such as murder and tomb robbery were punished by execution, carried out by decapitation, drowning, or impaling the criminal on a stake. Punishment could also be extended to the criminal's family. Beginning in the New Kingdom, oracles played a major role in the legal system, dispensing justice in both civil and criminal cases. The procedure was to ask the god a "yes" or "no" question concerning the right or wrong of an issue. The god, carried by a number of priests, rendered judgement by choosing one or the other, moving forward or backward, or pointing to one of the answers written on a piece of papyrus or an ostracon.

Kerma culture
Until recently, the Kerma civilisation was known only from the townsite and cemeteries of its metropolitan centre and smaller sites in Kerma, Sudan. However, recent survey and excavation work has identified many new sites south of Kerma, many located on channels of the Nile, now dry, which lay to the east of the modern course of the river. This pattern of settlement indicates a substantial population and for the first time provides us with some sort of context in which we can place Kerma itself. Survey work in advance of the Merowe Dam at the Fourth Cataract has confirmed the presence of Kerma sites at least as far upriver as the Abu Hamad/Mograt Island area.

Kerma was evidently a sizable political entity - Egyptian records speak of its rich and populous agricultural regions. Unlike Egypt, Kerma seems to have been highly centralized. It controlled the 1st to 4th Cataracts, which meant its domain was as extensive as ancient Egypt.

Numerous village communities scattered alongside fields of crops made up the bulk of the realm, but there also seems to have been districts where pastoralism (goat, sheep and cattle) and gold processing were important industries. Certain Kerma towns served to centralize agricultural products and direct trade. Analysis of the skulls of thousands of cattle interred in royal Kerma tombs suggest that stock were sometimes brought vast distances, from far districts, presumably as a type of tribute from rural communities on the death of Kerma's monarchs. This parallels the importance of cattle as royal property in other parts of Africa at later times.

Only the centres of Kerma and Sai Island seem to have had contained sizable urban populations. Possibly further excavations will reveal other regional centres. At Kerma and Sai, there is much evidence of wealthy elites, and a class of dignitaries who monitored trade in merchandise arriving from far-off lands, and who supervised shipments dispatched from administrative buildings. Evidently, Kerma played an important intermediary role in the trade of luxury items from the Central African interior to Egypt.

Kingdom of Kush
The monarchs of Kush ruled the Kingdom of Kush.

Ancient Carthage
Before the fourth century, Carthage was most likely a monarchy, although modern scholars debate whether Greek writers mislabeled political leaders as "kings" based on a misunderstanding or ignorance of the city's constitutional arrangements. Traditionally, most Phoenician kings did not exercise absolute power, but consulted with a body of advisors called the Adirim ("mighty ones"), which was likely composed of the wealthiest members of society, namely merchants. Carthage seems to have been ruled by a similar body known as the Blm, made up of nobles responsible for all important matters of state, including religion, administration, and the military. This cabal included a hierarchy topped by the dominant family, usually the wealthiest members of the merchant class, which had some sort of executive power. Records indicate that different families held power at different times, suggesting a non-hereditary system of government dependent on the support or approval of the consultative body.

Carthage's political system changed dramatically after 480 BC, with the death of King Hamilcar I following his disastrous foray into the First Sicilian War. The subsequent political upheaval led to a gradual weakening of the monarchy; by at least 308 BC, Carthage was an oligarchic republic, characterized by an intricate system of checks and balances, a complex administrative system, civil society, and a fairly high degree of public accountability and participation. The most detailed information about the Carthaginian government after this point comes from the Greek philosopher Aristotle, whose fourth-century BC treatise, Politics, discusses Carthage as its only non-Greek example.

At the head of the Carthaginian state were two sufetes, or "judges", who held judicial and executive power. While sometimes referred to as "kings", by at least the late fifth century BC, the sufetes were non-hereditary officials elected annually from among the wealthiest and most influential families; it is unknown how elections took place or who was eligible to serve. Livy likens the sufetes to Roman consuls, in that they ruled through collegiality and handled various routine matters of state, such as convening and presiding over the Adirim (supreme council), submitting business to the popular assembly, and adjudicating trials. Modern scholarly consensus agrees with Livy's description of sufetes, though some have argued the sufetes held an executive office closer to that of modern presidents in parliamentary republics, in that they did not hold absolute power and exercised largely ceremonial functions. This practice may have originated from plutocratic arrangements that limited the suffetes' power in earlier Phoenician cities; for example, by the sixth century BC, Tyre was a "republic headed by elective magistrates", with two suffetes chosen from among the most powerful noble families for short terms.

Unique among rulers in antiquity, the suffetes had no power over the military: From at least the sixth century BC, generals (rb mhnt or rab mahanet) became separate political officials, either appointed by the administration or elected by citizens. In contrast to Rome and Greece, military and political power were separate, and it was rare for an individual to simultaneously serve as general and suffete. Generals did not serve fixed terms, but instead served for the duration of a war. However, a family that dominated the suffetes could install relatives or allies to the generalship, as occurred with the Barcid dynasty.

Most political power rested in a "council of elders", variably called the "supreme council" or Adirim, which classical writers likened to the Roman Senate or Spartan Gerousia. The Adirim perhaps numbered thirty members and had a broad range of powers, such as administering the treasury and conducting foreign affairs. During the Second Punic War it reportedly exercised some military power. Like the sufetes, council members were elected from the wealthiest elements of Carthaginian society. Important matters of state required unanimous agreement of the sufetes and of council members.

According to Aristotle, Carthage's "highest constitutional authority" was a judicial tribunal known as the One Hundred and Four (𐤌𐤀𐤕 or miat). Although he compares this body to the ephors of Sparta, a council of elders that held considerable political power, its primary function was overseeing the actions of generals and other officials to ensure they served the best interests of the republic. The One Hundred and Four had the power to impose fines and even crucifixion as punishment. It also formed panels of special commissioners, called pentarchies, to deal with various political matters. Numerous junior officials and special commissioners had responsibilities over different aspects of government, such as public works, tax collection, and the administration of the state treasury.

Although oligarchs exercised firm control over Carthage, the government included some democratic elements, including trade unions, town meetings, and a popular assembly. Unlike in the Greek states of Sparta and Crete, if the suffetes and the supreme council could not come to an agreement, an assembly of the people had the deciding vote. It is unclear whether this assembly was an ad hoc or formal institution, but Aristotle claims that "the voice of the people was predominant in the deliberations" and that "the people themselves solved problems". He and Herodotus portray the Carthaginian government as more meritocratic than some Hellenistic counterparts, with "great men" like Hamilcar being elected to "royal office" based on "outstanding achievements" and "special merit". Aristotle also praises Carthage's political system for its "balanced" elements of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. His Athenian contemporary, Isocrates, elevates Carthage's political system as the best in antiquity, equaled only by that of Sparta. "It is noteworthy that Aristotle ascribes to Carthage a position among the Greek states, because the Greeks firmly believed that they alone had the ability to found 'poleis', whereas the barbarians used to live in tribal societies ('ethne'). It is therefore remarkable that Aristotle maintained that the Carthaginians were the only non-Greek people who had created a 'polis'. Like Crete and Sparta, Aristotle considers Carthage as an outstanding example of an ideal society." Confirming Aristotle's claims, Polybius states that during the Punic Wars, the Carthaginian public held more sway over the government than the Romans did over theirs. However, he regards this development as a fatal flaw, since it led the Carthaginians to bicker and debate while the Romans, through the more oligarchic Senate, acted more quickly and decisively. This may have been due to the influence and populism of the Barcid faction, which, from the end of the First Punic War until the conclusion of the Second Punic War, dominated Carthage's government and military.

Carthage reportedly had a constitution of some form. Aristotle compare's Carthage's constitution favorably to its well-regarded Spartan counterpart, describing it as sophisticated, functional, and fulfilling "all needs of moderation and justice". Eratosthenes (c. 276 BC – c.  194 BC), a Greek polymath and head of the Library of Alexandria, praises the Carthaginians as among the few barbarians to be refined and "admirably" governed. Some scholars suggest the Greeks generally held Carthage's institutions in high regard, regarding the Carthaginians as close to equal.

Carthage's republican system appears to have extended to the rest of its empire, though to what extent and in what form remains unknown. The term sufet was used for officials throughout Carthaginian colonies and territories; inscriptions from Punic era Sardinia are dated with four names: the sufetes of the island as well as those of Carthage. This suggests some degree of political coordination between local and colonial Carthaginians, perhaps through a regional hierarchy of sufetes.

Traders of Carthage were secretive in ways to keep trade routes from the Greeks. Most conflicts from Carthage lasted from 600 BC to 500 BC with Greece and its trade routes. Greek goods were no match to Carthage goods and their goal was to export to African harbors while keeping Greek goods out. The people of Carthage spoke Punic, which had its own alphabet and would later continue through trade routes and grow into Africa. Carthage was also highly influenced by Egyptian culture. Amulets and seals coming from those of Egyptian religion were found about Carthage as well as the use of scarabs. These scarabs, in Egyptian culture, were for funerals and to expose them to the afterlife. Finding these and many pictures carved into clay, stone and other specimens was a big connection between Egypt's ties to Carthage.

Like the republics of the Latin and Hellenistic worlds, Carthage may have had a notion of citizenship, distinguishing those in society who could participate in the political process and who had certain rights, privileges, and duties. However, it remains uncertain whether such a distinction existed, much less the specific criteria. For example, while the Popular Assembly is described as giving a political voice to the common people, there is no mention of any restrictions based on citizenship. Carthaginian society consisted of many classes, including slaves, peasants, aristocrats, merchants, and various professionals. Its empire consisted of an often-nebulous network of Punic colonies, subject peoples, client states, and allied tribes and kingdoms; it is unknown whether individuals from these different realms and nationalities formed any particular social or political class in relation to the Carthaginian government.

Roman accounts suggest that Carthaginian citizens, especially those allowed to run for high office, had to prove their descent from the city's founders. This would indicate that Phoenicians were privileged over other ethnic groups, while those whose lineage traced back to the city's founding were privileged over fellow Phoenicians descended from later waves of settlers. However, it would also mean that someone of partial "foreign" ancestry could still be a citizen; indeed, Hamilcar, who served as a sufete in 480 BC, was half Greek. Greek writers claimed that ancestry, as well as wealth and merit, were avenues to citizenship and political power. As Carthage was a mercantile society, this would imply that both citizenship and membership in the aristocracy were relatively accessible by ancient standards.

Aristotle mentions Carthaginian "associations" similar to the hetairiai of many Greek cities, which were roughly analogous to political parties or interest groups. These were most likely the mizrehim referenced in Carthaginian inscriptions, of which little is known or attested, but which appeared to have been numerous in number and subject, from devotional cults to professional guilds. It is unknown whether such an association was required of citizens, as in some Greek states such as Sparta. Aristotle also describes a Carthaginian equivalent to the syssitia, communal meals that were the mark of citizenship and social class in Greek societies. It is again unclear whether Carthaginians attributed any political significance to their equivalent practice.

Carthage's military provides a glimpse into the criteria of citizenship. Greek accounts describe a "Sacred Band of Carthage" that fought in Sicily in the mid-fourth century BC, using the Hellenistic term for professional citizen-soldiers selected on the basis of merit and ability. Roman writings about the Punic Wars describe the core of the military, including its commanders and officers, as being made up of "Liby-Phoenicians", a broad label that included ethnic Phoenicians, those of mixed Punic-North African descent, and Libyans who had integrated into Phoenician culture. During the Second Punic War, Hannibal promised his foreign troops Carthaginian citizenship as a reward for victory. At least two of his foreign officers, both Greeks from Syracuse, were citizens of Carthage.

Blemmyes
Both Blemmye inscriptions in Greek and records from Greeks and Romans refer to the Blemmyes as having βασιλισκοι and βασιλῆς, which terms usually refer to kings. Because of this, the Blemmyes are often described as having had a kingdom. Some historians are skeptical: László Török writes that "the term should not be interpreted narrowly, it is doubtful that there ever existed one centralised Blemmyan kingdom; more likely there were several tribal 'states' developing towards some sort of hierarchical unity"

Blemmye writings mention various royal officials who seemed to be arranged in a hierarchy. Beneath the kings were phylarchs, who were chiefs of separate tribes. Other officials include sub-chiefs, court officials, and scribes. The Blemmyes kings had the power to levy taxes and grant exemptions as well as authority over the territory.

From the historical record, the following Blemmye kings are known:
 * Tamal (early 4th or 5th century)
 * Isemne
 * Degou
 * Phonen (c. 450)
 * Pokatimne
 * Kharakhen
 * Barakhia

Ptolemaic Kingdom
To legitimize their rule and gain recognition from native Egyptians, the Ptolemies adopted the title of pharaoh, alongside the Greek title of basileus, and had themselves portrayed on public monuments in Egyptian style and dress; otherwise, the monarchy rigorously maintained its Hellenistic character and traditions. The kingdom had a complex government bureaucracy that exploited the country's vast economic resources to the benefit of a Greek ruling class, which dominated military, political, and economic affairs, and which rarely integrated into Egyptian society and culture. Native Egyptians maintained power over local and religious institutions, and only gradually accrued power in the bureaucracy, provided they Hellenized. Beginning with Ptolemy I's son and successor, Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the Ptolemies began to adopt Egyptian customs, such as marrying their siblings per the Osiris myth, and participating in Egyptian religious life. New temples were built, older ones restored, and royal patronage lavished on the priesthood.

From the mid third century BC, Ptolemaic Egypt was the wealthiest and most powerful of Alexander's successor states, and the leading example of Greek civilization. Beginning in the mid second century BC, dynastic strife and a series of foreign wars weakened the kingdom, and it became increasingly reliant on the Roman Republic. Under Cleopatra VII, who sought to restore Ptolemaic power, Egypt became entangled in a Roman civil war, which ultimately led to its conquest by Rome as the last independent Hellenistic state. Roman Egypt became one of Rome's richest provinces and a center of Macedonian culture. Greek remained the language of government and trade until the Muslim conquest in 641 AD. Alexandria remained one of the leading cities of the Mediterranean well into the late Middle Ages.

Numidians
The Numidians were composed of two great tribal groups: the Massylii in eastern Numidia, and the Masaesyli in the west. During the first part of the Second Punic War, the eastern Massylii, under their king Gala, were allied with Carthage, while the western Masaesyli, under king Syphax, were allied with Rome. The Kingdom of Masaesyli under Syphax extended from the Moulouya river to Oued Rhumel.

Mauretania


Mauretania existed as a tribal kingdom of the Berber Mauri people. In the early 1st century Strabo recorded Maûroi (Μαῦροι in greek) as the native name of a people opposite the Iberian Peninsula. This appellation was adopted into Latin, whereas the Greek name for the tribe was Mauroúsii (Μαυρούσιοι). The Mediterranean coast of Mauretania had commercial harbours for trade with Carthage from before the 4th century BC, but the interior was controlled by Berber tribes, who had established themselves in the region by the Iron Age.

King Atlas was a legendary king of Mauretania credited with inventing the celestial globe. The first known historical king of the Mauri, Baga, ruled during the Second Punic War of 218–201 BC. The Mauri were in close contact with Numidia. Bocchus I ([fl.] 110 BC) was father-in-law to the redoubted Numidian king Jugurtha.

After the death of king Bocchus II in 33 BC Rome directly administered the region from 33 BC to 25 BC. Mauretania eventually became a client kingdom of the Roman Empire in 25 BC when the Romans installed Juba II of Numidia as their client-king. On his death in AD 23, his Roman-educated son Ptolemy of Mauretania succeeded him. The Emperor Caligula had Ptolemy executed in AD 40. The Roman Emperor Claudius annexed Mauretania directly as a Roman province in AD 44, placing it under an imperial governor (either a procurator Augusti, or a legatus Augusti pro praetore).

Nobatia
Together with the two other Nubian kingdoms, Makuria and Alodia, it succeeded the kingdom of Kush. After its establishment in around 400, Nobadia gradually expanded by defeating the Blemmyes in the north and incorporating the territory between the second and third Nile cataract in the south. In 543, it converted to Coptic Christianity. It would then be annexed by Makuria, under unknown circumstances, during the 7th century.

Alodia
While information about Alodia's government is sparse, it was likely similar to that of Makuria. The head of state was the king who, according to al-Aswani, reigned as an absolute monarch. He was recorded to be able to enslave any of his subjects at will, who would not oppose his decision, but prostrated themselves before him. As in Makuria, succession to the Alodian throne was matrilineal: it was the son of the king's sister, not his son who succeeded to the throne. There might be evidence a mobile royal encampment existed, although the translation of the original source, Abu al-Makarim, is not certain. Similar mobile courts are known to have existed in the early Funj sultanate, Ethiopia and Darfur.

The kingdom was divided into several provinces under the sovereignty of Soba. It seems delegates of the king governed these provinces. Al-Aswani stated that the governor of the northern al-Abwab province was appointed by the king. This was similar to what Ibn Hawqal recorded for the Gash Delta region, which was ruled by an appointed Arabophone (Arabic speaker). In 1286, Mamluk emissaries were sent to several rulers in central Sudan. It is unclear whether those rulers were actually independent, or if they remained subordinate to the king of Alodia. If the latter was the case, this would provide an understanding of the kingdom's territorial organization. The "Sahib" of al-Abwab seems certain to have been independent. Apart from al-Abwab, the following regions are mentioned: Al-Anag (possibly Fazughli); Ari; Barah; Befal; Danfou; Kedru (possibly after Kadero, a village north of Khartoum); Kersa (the Gezira); and Taka (the region around the Gash Delta).

State and church were intertwined in Alodia, with the Alodian kings probably serving as its patrons. Coptic documents observed by Johann Michael Vansleb during the later 17th century list the following bishoprics in the Alodian kingdom: Arodias, Borra, Gagara, Martin, Banazi, and Menkesa. "Arodias" may refer to the bishopric in Soba. The bishops were dependent on the patriarch of Alexandria.

Alodia may have had a standing army, in which cavalry likely projected force and symbolized royal authority deep into the provinces. Because of their speed, horses were also important for communication, providing a rapid courier service between the capital and the provinces. Aside from horses, boats also played a central role in transportation infrastructure.

Emirate of Nekor
The Emirate of Nekor, or Salihid Emirate, was an emirate centered in the Rif area of present-day Morocco. Its capital was initially located at Temsaman, and then moved to Nekor. The dynasty was of Himyarite Arab descent from a certain companion of Uqba ibn Nafi (d. 683). The emirate was founded in 710 CE by Salih I ibn Mansur through a Caliphate grant. Under his guidance, the local Berber tribes adopted Islam, but later deposed him in favor of one az-Zaydi from the Nafza tribe. They subsequently changed their mind and reappointed Ibn Mansur. His dynasty, the Banū Sālih, thereafter ruled the region until 1019.

In 859, the kingdom became subject to a 62 ship-strong group of Vikings who defeated a Moorish force in Nekor that had attempted to interfere with their plundering in the area. After staying for eight days in Morocco, the Vikings returned to Spain and continued up the east coast.

The Nekor kingdom comprised part of the Moroccan Rif and included the tribes of Zouagha and Djeraoua of Ibn Abī l-ʻAys, about five days' journey from Nekor. This area was flanked by the territory of the Matmata, Kebdana, Mernissa, Ghassasa of Mount Herek, and Quluʻ Jarra belonging to the Banū Urtendi. On the west, it extended to the Banū Marwan of Ghomara and the Banū Humayd and bordered the Mestassa and Sanhaja. Behind these lay the Awraba, the band of Ferhun, the Banū Walīd, the Zenata, the Banū Irnian and the Banū Merasen of the band of Qāsim, Lord of Sa. In the north, it was bounded by the sea, some five miles from Nekor.

Barghwata
The Barghwata were a Berber tribal confederation on the Atlantic coast of Morocco, belonging to the Masmuda confederacy. After allying with the Sufri Kharijite rebellion in Morocco against the Umayyad Caliphate, they established an independent state (AD744-1058) in the area of Tamesna on the Atlantic coast between Safi and Salé under the leadership of Tarif al-Matghari.

Barghawata kings
 * Tarif al-Matghari
 * Ṣāliḥ ibn Tarīf (744-?), who declared himself prophet in 744 and went away at the age of 47, promising to return.
 * Ilyas ibn Salih (?792-842), who is said to have professed Islām publicly but Ṣāliḥ's religion secretly, and died in the 50th year of his reign.
 * Yunus ibn Ilyas (?842-888), who made Ṣāliḥ's religion official and fought those who would not convert (killing 7770 people, according to Ibn Khaldun's sources, some at a place called Tamlukeft). Curiously enough, he is also said to have performed the Hajj. He died in the 44th year of his reign.
 * Abu-Ghufayl Muhammad (?888-917), who may also have been called a prophet (according to a poem Ibn-Khaldun cites) and who had 44 wives and more sons. He died in the 29th year of his reign.
 * Abu al-Ansar Abdullah (?917-961), buried at Ameslakht. He died in the 44th year of his reign.
 * Abu Mansur Isa (?961-?), who was 22 when he became king.

Sijilmasa
Sijilmasa was a medieval Moroccan city and trade entrepôt at the northern edge of the Sahara in Morocco. The ruins of the town extend for five miles along the River Ziz in the Tafilalt oasis near the town of Rissani. The town's history was marked by several successive invasions by Berber dynasties. Up until the 14th century, as the northern terminus for the western trans-Sahara trade route, it was one of the most important trade centres in the Maghreb during the Middle Ages.

Rustamid dynasty
The Rustamid dynasty was a ruling house of Ibāḍī imāms of Persian descent centered in present-day Algeria. The dynasty governed as a Muslim theocracy for a century and a half from its capital Tahert (present day Tagdemt ) until the Ismaili Fatimid Caliphate defeated it. Rustamid authority extended over what is now central and western Algeria, parts of southern Tunisia, and the Jebel Nafusa and Fezzan regions in Libya as far as Zawila.

Rustamid Imams
 * Abd al-Rahman ibn Rustam (Bānū-Bādūsyān) (776-788)
 * Abd al-Wahhab ibn Abd al-Rahman (788-824)
 * Aflah ibn ʿAbdi l-Wahhab (824-872)
 * Abu Bakr ibn Aflah (872-874)
 * Muhammad Abu l-Yaqzan ibn Aflah (874-894)
 * Yusuf Abu Hatim ibn Muhammad Abi l-Yaqzan (894-895)
 * Yaʿqub ibn Aflah (895-899)
 * Yusuf Abu Hatim ibn Muhammad Abi l-Yaqzan, again (899-906)
 * Yaqzan ibn Muhammad Abi l-Yaqzan (906-909)

Idrisid dynasty
The Idrisid dynasty were an Arab Muslim dynasty from 788 to 974, ruling most of present-day Morocco and parts of present-day western Algeria. Named after the founder, Idris I, the Idrisids were an Alid dynasty descended from Muhammad through his grandson Hasan. Their reign played an important role in the early Islamization of Morocco and also presided over an increase in Arab immigration and Arabization in major urban centers.

Aghlabids
The Aghlabids were an Arab dynasty from the tribe of Banu Tamim, who ruled Ifriqiya and parts of Southern Italy, Sicily, and possibly Sardinia, nominally on behalf of the Abbasid Caliph, for about a century, until they were overthrown by the new power of the Fatimids.

Aghlabid ruler


 * Ibrahim I ibn al-Aghlab ibn Salim (800–812)
 * Abdallah I ibn Ibrahim (812–817)
 * Ziyadat Allah I ibn Ibrahim (817–838)
 * al-Aghlab Abu Iqal ibn Ibrahim (838–841)
 * Abu 'l-Abbas Muhammad I ibn al-Aghlab Abi Affan (841–856)
 * Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Aghlabi (856–863)
 * Ziyadat Allah II ibn Abil-Abbas (863)
 * Abu 'l-Gharaniq Muhammad II ibn Ahmad (863–875)
 * Abu Ishaq Ibrahim II ibn Ahmad (875–902)
 * Abu 'l-Abbas Abdallah II ibn Ibrahim (902–903)
 * Abu Mudhar Ziyadat Allah III ibn Abdallah (903–909)

Fatimid Caliphate
Prior to the Fatimid rise to power, a large part of the Maghreb including Ifriqiya was under the control of the Aghlabids, an Arab dynasty who ruled nominally on behalf the Abbasids but were de facto independent. In 893 the Abu Abdallah al-Shi'i first settled among the Banu Saktan tribe (part of the larger Kutama tribe) in Ikjan, near the city of Mila (in northwestern Algeria today). However, due to hostility from the local Aghlabid authorities and other Kutuma tribes, he was forced to leave Ikjan and sought the protection of another Kutama tribe, the Banu Ghashman, in Tazrut (two miles southwest of Mila). From there, he began to build support for a new movement. Shortly after, the hostile Kutama tribes and the Arab lords of the nearby cities (Mila, Setif, and Bilizma) allied together to march against him, but he was able to move quickly and muster enough support from friendly Kutama to defeat them one by one before they were able to unite. This first victory brought Abu Abdallah and his Kutama troops valuable loot and attracted more support to the 's cause. Over the next two years Abu Abdallah was able to win over most of the Kutama tribes in the region through either persuasion or coercion. This left much of the countryside under his control, while the major cities remained under Aghlabid control. He established an Isma'ili theocratic state based in Tazrut, operating in a way similar to previous Isma'ili missionary networks in Mesopotamia but adapted to local Kutama tribal structures. He adopted the role of a traditional Islamic ruler at the head of this organization while remaining in frequent contact with Abdallah. He continued to preach to his followers, known as the Awliya' Allah ('Friends of God'), and to initiate them into Isma'ili doctrine.

Upon assuming power in Raqqada, Abu Abdallah inherited much of the Aghlabid state's apparatus and allowed its former officials to continue working for the new regime. He established a new, Isma'ili Shi'a regime on behalf of his absent, and for the moment unnamed, master. He then led his army west to Sijilmasa, whence he led Abdallah in triumph to Raqqada, which he entered on 15 January 910. There Abdallah publicly proclaimed himself as caliph with the regnal name of, and presented his son and heir, with the regnal name of al-Qa'im. Al-Mahdi quickly fell out with Abu Abdallah: not only was the over-powerful, but he demanded proof that the new caliph was the true. The elimination of Abu Abdallah al-Shi'i and his brother led to an uprising among the Kutama, led by a child-, which was suppressed. At the same time, al-Mahdi repudiated the millenarian hopes of his followers and curtailed their antinomian tendencies.

The new regime regarded its presence in Ifriqiya as only temporary: the real target was Baghdad, the capital of the Fatimids' Abbasid rivals. The ambition to carry the revolution eastward had to be postponed after the failure of two successive invasions of Egypt, led by al-Qa'im, in 914–915 and 919–921. In addition, the Fatimid regime was as yet unstable. The local population were mostly adherents of Maliki Sunnism and various Kharijite sects such as Ibadism, so that the real power base of Fatimids in Ifriqiya was quite narrow, resting on the Kutama soldiery, later extended by the Sanhaja Berber tribes as well. The historian Heinz Halm describes the early Fatimid state as being, in essence, "a hegemony of the Kutama and Sanhaja Berbers over the eastern and central Maghrib". In 912 al-Mahdi began looking for the site of a new capital along the Mediterranean shore. Construction of the new fortified palace city, al-Mahdiyya, began in 916. The new city was officially inaugurated on 20 February 921, though construction continued after this. The new capital was removed from the Sunni stronghold of Kairouan, allowing for the establishment of a secure base for the Caliph and his Kutama forces without raising further tensions with the local population.

The Fatimids also inherited the Aghlabid province of Sicily, which the Aghlabids had gradually conquered from the Byzantine Empire starting in 827. The conquest was generally completed when the last Christian stronghold, Taormina, was conquered by Ibrahim II in 902. However, some Christian or Byzantine resistance continued in some spots in the northeast of Sicily until 967, and the Byzantines still held territories in southern Italy, where the Aghlabids had also campaigned. This ongoing confrontation with the traditional foe of the Islamic world provided the Fatimids with a prime opportunity for propaganda, in a setting where geography gave them the advantage. Sicily itself proved troublesome, and only after a rebellion under Ibn Qurhub was subdued, was Fatimid authority on the island consolidated.

After al-Aziz's unexpected death, his young son al-Mansur, 11 years old, was installed on the throne as al-Hakim. Hasan ibn Ammar, the leader of the Kalbid clan in Egypt, a military veteran, and one of the last remaining members of al-Mu'izz's old guard, initially became regent, but he was soon forced to flee by Barjawan, the eunuch and tutor of the young al-Hakim, who took power in his stead. Barjawan stabilized the internal affairs of the empire but refrained from pursuing al-Aziz's policy of expansion towards Aleppo. In the year 1000, Barjawan was assassinated by al-Hakim, who now took direct and autocratic control of the state. His reign, which lasted until his mysterious disappearance in 1021, is the most controversial in Fatimid history. Traditional narratives have described him as either eccentric or outright insane, but more recent studies have tried to provide more measured explanations based on the political and social circumstances of the time.

Among other things, al-Hakim was known for executing his officials when unsatisfied with them, seemingly without warning, rather than dismissing them from their posts as had been traditional practice. Many of the executions were members of the financial administration, which may mean that this was al-Hakim's way of trying to impose discipline in an institution rife with corruption. He also opened the Dar al-'Ilm ("House of Knowledge"), a library for the study of the sciences, which was in line with al-Aziz's previous policy of cultivating this knowledge. For the general population, he was noted for being more accessible and willing to receive petitions in person, as well as for riding out in person among the people in the streets of Fustat. On the other hand, he was also known for his capricious decrees aimed at curbing what he saw as public improprieties. He also unsettled the plurality of Egyptian society by imposing new restrictions on Christians and Jews, particularly on the way they dressed or behaved in public. He ordered or sanctioned the destruction of a number of churches and monasteries (mostly Coptic or Melkite), which was unprecedented, and in 1009, for reasons that remain unclear, he ordered the demolition of the Church of the Holy Sephulchre in Jerusalem.

Al-Hakim greatly expanded the recruitment of Black Africans into the army, who subsequently became another powerful faction to balance against the Kutama, Turks, and Daylamis. In 1005, during his early reign, a dangerous uprising led by Abu Rakwa was successfully put down but had come within striking distance of Cairo. In 1012 the leaders of the Arab Tayyi tribe occupied Ramla and proclaimed the sharif of Mecca, al-Ḥasan ibn Ja'far, as the Sunni anti-caliph, but the latter's death in 1013 led to their surrender. Despite his policies against Christians and his demolition of the church in Jerusalem, al-Hakim maintained a ten-year truce with the Byzantines that began in 1001. For most of his reign, Aleppo remained a buffer state that paid tribute to Constantinople. This lasted until 1017, when the Fatimid Armenian general Fatāk finally occupied Aleppo at the invitation of a local commander who had expelled the Hamdanid ghulām ruler Mansur ibn Lu'lu'. After a year or two, however, Fatāk made himself effectively independent in Aleppo.Al-Hakim also alarmed his Isma'ili followers in several ways. In 1013 he announced the designation of two great-great-grandsons of al-Mahdi as two separate heirs: one, Abd al-Raḥīm ibn Ilyās, would inherit the title of caliphate as the role of political ruler, and the other, Abbās ibn Shu'ayb, would inherit the imamate or religious leadership. This was a serious departure from a central purpose of the Fatimid Imam-Caliphs, which was to combine these two functions in one person.

Al-Hafiz was the last Fatimid caliph to rule directly and the last one to ascend to the throne as an adult. The last three caliphs, al-Zafir (r. 1149–1154), al-Fa'iz (r. 1154–1160), and al-Adid (r. 1160–1171), were all children when they came to the throne. Under al-Zafir, an elderly Berber named Ibn Masal was initially vizier, per the instructions left by Al-Hafiz. The army, however, supported a Sunni named Ibn Sallar instead, whose supporters managed to defeat and kill Ibn Masal in battle. After negotiating with the women of the palace, Ibn Sallar was installed as vizier in 1150. In January 1153, the Crusader king Baldwin III of Jerusalem besieged Ascalon, the last remaining Fatimid foothold in the Levant. In April, Ibn Sallar was murdered in a plot organized by Abbas, his stepson, and Abbas's son, Nasr. As no relieving force arrived, Ascalon surrendered in August, on the condition that the inhabitants could leave safely for Egypt. It was on this occasion that the head of Husayn was allegedly brought from Ascalon to Cairo, where it was housed in what is now the al-Hussein Mosque. The next year (1154), Nasr murdered al-Zafir, and Abbas, now vizier, declared his 5-year-old son 'Isa (al-Fa'iz) the new caliph. The women of the palace intervened, calling on Ṭalā'i' ibn Ruzzīk, a Muslim Armenian governor in Upper Egypt, to help. Tala'i drove out Abbas and Nasr from Cairo and became vizier that same year. Afterwards he also conducted renewed operations against the Crusaders, but he could do little more than harass them by sea. Al-Fa'iz died in 1160 and Tala'i was assassinated in 1161 by Sitt al-Qusur, a sister of al-Zafir. Tala'i's son, Ruzzīk ibn Ṭalā'i', held the office of vizier until 1163, when he was overthrown and killed by Shawar, the governor of Qus.

As vizier, Shawar came into conflict with his rival, the Arab general Dirgham. The internal disorder of the Caliphate attracted the attention and meddling of the Sunni Zengid ruler Nūr ad-Dīn, who was now in control of Damascus and a large part of Syria, and of the King of Jerusalem, Amalric I. The Crusaders had already forced Tala'i ibn Ruzzik to pay them a tribute in 1161 and had made an attempt to invade Egypt in 1162. When Shawar was driven out of Cairo by Dirgham in 1163, he sought refuge and help with Nur al-Din. Nur al-Din sent his general, Asad al-Din Shirkuh, to seize Egypt and reinstall Shawar as vizier. The accomplished this task in the summer of 1164, when Dirgham was defeated and killed.

Shawar's remaining years continued in chaos as he made shifting alliances with either the King of Jerusalem or with Nur al-Din, depending on circumstances. In 1167 the Crusaders pursued Shirkuh's forces in to Upper Egypt. In 1168 Shawar, worried about the possible Crusader capture of Cairo, infamously set fire to Fustat in an attempt to deny the Crusaders a base from which to besiege the capital. After forcing the Crusaders to leave Egypt again, Shirkuh finally had Shawar murdered in 1169, with the agreement of Caliph al-Adid. Shirkuh himself was appointed as al-Adid's vizier, but he died unexpectedly two months later. The position passed to his nephew, Salah ad-Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub (known in the West as Saladin). Salah ad-Din was openly pro-Sunni and suppressed the Shi'a call to prayer, ended the Isma'ili doctrinal lectures (the majālis al-ḥikma), and installed Sunni judges. He finally and officially deposed al-Adid, the last Fatimid caliph, in September 1171. This ended the Fatimid dynasty and began the Ayyubid Sultanate of Egypt and Syria.