504 Moriscos
of the province in 1383. So at the beginning of the 15th
century, the Morea was divided into Neapolitan, Vene-
tian, and Catalan Company states or colonies. In 1430
the Byzantine governors of MISTRAmanaged to conquer
all of the Morea; but in 1460 it fell to the Ottomans.
Further reading:Harold E. Lurier, ed. and trans.,
crusaders as Conquerors: The Chronicle of Morea (New
York: Columbia University Press, 1964); Donald M.
Nicol, The Last Centuries of Byzantium, 1261–1453(Lon-
don: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1972); James R. R. Rennell, The
Princes of Achaia and the Chronicles of Morea, A Study of
Greece in the Middle Ages(London: E. Arnold, 1907).
Moriscos SeeFERDINANDII (V); GRANADA;ISABELI.
Morocco (Maghreb, the west) Morocco, also referred
to as the far Maghrib or al-Maghrib, was a region and is a
country in northwestern Africa. Under the Romans
Morocco was part of the province of Mauritania. Roman
culture and influence were superficial only affecting the
Mediterranean coast. The interior of the country was
inhabited by BERBERtribes who did not recognize any
authority. The VANDALconquest of 429 did not affect this
situation, which persisted during the Byzantine recon-
quest between 534 and 680. The ARABconquest, begun in
680 but completed only in 790 because of the fierce resis-
tance from the Berbers, caused real changes in local soci-
eties and political structures. Berber revolts continued to
be frequent and the UMAYYADS found the complete
Islamization of the region a difficult undertaking.
BERBERS, FEZ, ISLAMIZATIONA local revolt in 740 became a general uprising against
the distant caliphate. A caliphal army sent to destroy the
rebels was defeated in 742. Berber religious feelings
found expression among KHARIJITES, Islamic dissidents. A
Berber principality was established by the Banu-Madrar
family between 771 and 958 and was based on those doc-
trines. Orthodox Islam gained ground under the leader-
ship of the IDRISIDdynasty (789–985). About 790 Idris I
(r. 789–793) founded his capital the city of FEZ and
accepted the distant sovereignty of the ABBASIDcaliphs at
BAGHDAD. They enjoyed considerable independence. A
more complete Islamization was achieved in the 10th
century and the region enjoyed economic prosperity from
the GOLDtrade passing from the south to Europe.
DYNASTIC FLUCTUATIONDuring the 10th century the Spanish Umayyads and the
FATIMIDSfought for control, creating chaos by 985. The
ultimate victors were the ALMORAVIDS, who conquered
Morocco at the end of the 10th century. Berbers were
pushed back into the mountains and urban dwellers
accepted the orthodox Islamic beliefs of the Almoravids.
Fez and MARRAKECHbecame regional places of worship
and centers of learning characterized by impressive
architecture.
In 1243 the Almoravids were defeated by a rival
dynasty, the ALMOHADS, whose empire was centered
in Algeria. But by the end of the 13th century the Almo-
hads had shifted their center to Morocco. The later
Marinid line of the Almohads was defeated in Tunisia in
1348 and lost power to the Wattasids, though they
retained the royal title until 1415. The Wattasids, the last
Moroccan dynasty of the Middle Ages, ruled the region
from 1472; but with the rising power of PORTUGALand
SPAINalong the coasts, the Wattasids were driven into the
interior.
Further reading:G. S. Colin, G. Yver, and E. Levi-
Provençal, “Al-Maghrib” and “Al-Maghrib, al-Mamlaka,
al-Maghribiyya, Morocco,” Encyclopedia of Islam
5.1,183–1,209; Said Ennahid, Political Economy and Set-
tlement Systems of Medieval Northern Morocco: An Archae-
ological–Historical Approach (Oxford: Archaeopress,
2002); Thomas Kerlin Park, Historical Dictionary of
Morocco(Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 1996); Maya
Shatzmiller, The Berbers and the Islamic State: The
Marinid Experience in Pre-Protectorate Morocco(Prince-
ton, N.J.: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2000); Henri Ter-
rasse, History of Morocco,trans. Hilary Tee (Casablanca:
Éditions Atlantides, 1952).mortmain (dead hand) Mortmain was for SERFSthe
incapacity to perform any legal act. It also referred to the
properties that had passed into the hands of the church
and were henceforth inalienable. In other words, such
property fell under the dead hand of the church. The
term was based on the Latin words manusor “possession
of power” and mortuain the sense of “rigid and death-
like stiffness.”
Those burdened by the status of serfdom initially
could not dispose of any patrimony they might acquire
or earn. They could neither pledge themselves person-
ally nor buy property or movable goods. These handi-
caps of tenure or serfdom changed over the course of
the Middle Ages as the terms of servitude began to be
negotiated more often in the favor of agricultural work-
ers because of a tighter labor supply or more general
economic conditions unfavorable to the exploitative
powers of landlords.
In terms of the property of the church, any rights
or properties acquired became problematic for the state
in terms of taxation and the collection of other kinds of
obligations tied to them. Secular powers tried over the
course of the Middle Ages to reduce these limitations as
more and more properties fell into the hands of the
church and out of the fiscal control of the Crown and
the LAITY.