The Harfush dynasty (also spelled Harfouche, Harfuch, Harfouch, or most commonly Harfoush) was a family that came from the Khuza'a tribe. This tribe helped during the time of Muhammad in conquering Syria. The Harfush were the most well-known Shiite group in Ottoman-era Lebanon. They controlled the Baalbek District and parts of the Bekaa Valley. Their Shia religious identity caused conflict with the Druze Maan family in Lebanon.
Shia leaders like the Harfush rulers of Baalbek and the Bekaa Valley were important middlemen for the Ottoman government. Later, the Hamadas took power. In the 1600s, the Hamadas controlled tax farms in the countryside near Tripoli through complicated relationships with Ottoman officials and non-Shia communities. Both the Harfush and Hamadas were Shia Muslims in Lebanon. The Harfush ruled the Bekaa Valley, and the Hamadas ruled Mount Lebanon. Together, they challenged the power of the Druze rulers in the Shuf region. Unlike the Druze, Shia leaders were often criticized for their religion and faced persecution based on Ebu's-Suud’s definition of (Kızılbaş) heretics.
The Harfush family had been powerful in the region since the early Mamluk period. They supported local Shia shrines and religious scholars. Because of this, the Ottomans often chose Harfush leaders for important jobs, such as the military governor of the Homs sub-province. These appointments were meant to balance the growing influence of the Druze rulers.
History
The late Mamluk historian Ibn Tawq mentions an Ibn Harfush as a leader of the Anti-Lebanon villages al-Jebbeh and Assal al-Ward as early as 1483. Later, Ibn al-Himsi and Ibn Tulun note that someone from the Harfush family served as a deputy (na'ib) of Baalbek in 1498. An unnamed Ibn Harfush appears in an Ottoman record from 1516, where he and other local leaders signed a letter offering their loyalty to Sultan Selim I. However, he was executed in 1518 by Janbirdi al-Ghazali as a rebel.
There is no record of Musa Harfush’s later involvement in the Yemen campaign, which targeted Zaydi Shiite forces. In later years, the Harfush family was appointed sancak-beğs of Homs and Tadmur instead of Sidon. In 1568, a Harfush leader was chosen to lead a tribal group in exchange for an official governorship, more than 20 years before the Ma‘n family received their emiral title. This shows how the Ottoman government used money and military roles to include non-Sunni tribal leaders in local administration. However, their success depended on their ability to manage local affairs, raise money, and adapt to economic changes in western Syria. The Harfush emirs were among the first in the region to be included by the Ottoman state, but they eventually faced competition from other local groups.
Ottoman administrative units like sancaks, eyalets, and tax farms were not always clearly defined and could change based on government needs or the importance of the person in charge. In 1585, the Ottomans briefly considered making Sidon-Beirut a beğlerbeğlik under ‘Ali Harfush. From 1590 onward, Fakhr al-Din Ma‘n and his sons held positions as sancak-beğs of Safad and Sidon-Beirut for many years.
In the early 1600s, Emir Yunus al-Harfush clashed with Fakhr al-Din, a Druze leader, over control of the Bekaa Valley. Fakhr al-Din moved to the Bekaa during the conflict. The Harfush family tried to take over the Ma‘n family’s territory during Fakhr al-Din’s absence. Yunus Harfush had an ally, Mustafa Pasha, the governor of Damascus, who supported his effort to take the sanjak of Safad from Fakhr al-Din. However, Fakhr al-Din returned from Italy, marched through the Bekaa, captured Mustafa Pasha, and defeated the Harfush emir.
Information about the Bekaa Valley before and after the Battle of ‘Anjar comes from a register of tax assignments for Damascus from 1616 to 1635. This document shows the Harfush family’s decline and the rise of the Shihabis of Wadi Taym as new leaders in the region. For example, in 1618, Yunus Harfush faced pressure to give up income from the village of ‘Aytha, which had been claimed by the mufti of Damascus (a native of ‘Aytha) to help repopulate the area. Even later, the village remained outside the Harfush family’s control. The register also explains the conflict between the Harfushes and Ma‘ns in 1623–24. It supports claims that Fakhr al-Din offered 100,000 gold coins to the sultan for the Baalbek tax concession, but it questions whether the governor of Damascus ignored the offer or followed orders. Fakhr al-Din’s offer was matched by Yunus Harfush, and the tax rights were confirmed to his son, ‘Ali Harfush, by officials in Damascus and Baalbek after the Battle of ‘Anjar.
During the Ottoman period, there was an Imami scholar named Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Harfushi (died 1649) from Karak Nuh. He was a cloth-maker, grammarian, and poet who was persecuted in Damascus for his beliefs and later moved to Iran, where he received a government position.
By 1702, the Harfush family was again in control of Baalbek, as local records show a Christian leader from Mt Lebanon working as a secretary for Emir Husayn Harfush due to his Turkish language skills. In 1711, French reports suggest that Husayn Harfush helped Haydar Shihabi by providing 2,500 troops to defeat his Druze rivals in the Battle of Ain Dara and claim leadership of the Shuf region.
The Ottoman court historian Raşid (died 1735) described events in his official account but omitted details about violence against Shiaa villagers. The Hamadas, supported by the Harfush family and the ʿAwjan, were caught in heavy snow while fleeing to Baalbek, and about 150 men died. The Khazins prevented further killing by claiming they had no permission to leave the Tripoli region. However, Ali Paşa continued hunting the Hamadas and their allies, leading to villages being burned, women enslaved, and heads brought back to Tripoli. In late August, Ali Paşa sent another army to pillage farms in the Ftuh region. In late October, Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi visited Tripoli and found Ali Paşa still fighting the Hamada faction.
Like the Hamadas, the Harfush emirs were involved in selecting church officials and managing monasteries. Some Christians left Baalbek in the 18th century for Zahle due to the Harfushes’ harsh rule, but other studies suggest that the Harfushes were allies of the Ma‘luf family of Zahle and that Baalbek’s decline was due to multiple factors, including Zahle’s growing economy. Repression by the Harfushes did not always target Christians; for example, the Shiite ‘Usayran family also left Baalbek to avoid being forced to give up their land, later becoming prominent in Sidon and serving as Iran’s consuls.
A Christian historian wrote in 1841 about the siege of Zahle: "The Harfushes supported the Christians in Lebanon and helped them defeat the Druze in the Battle of Zahle. The Christians would have been humiliated if they had lost the battle, as the Druze had previously won in Deir Al Qamar."
In 1865, the Ottoman government exiled the last Harfush emirs to Edirne, Turkey. Most later returned to Baalbeck, but some remained in Constantinople. Emir Ahmad bin Mohamad
Present
Today, the Harfushes still own large areas of land in Baalbek. The main cemetery in Baalbek and two villages are named after them: Harfouche village and Mrah el Harfouch village. The name of Yunus al-Harfouche is carved on the oldest mosque in the city of Baalbek. Now, people in the city often refer to the family as the Al Harfouch family instead of the Harfouch dynasty. However, local families in the Bekkaa region still honor the Al Harfouch family by upholding their high standards as brave protectors of the region and its people.