Citation preview

By courtesy of Sir Fu’ad Hamzah MUHAMMAD AMIN AL-TAMIMI'S GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILIES OF 3U‘UD AND OF MUHAMMAD I3N-‘A3D AL-WAHHA3 Printed in 1562/1945 by the Egyptian GoverrTment Surveying Department, at the order of King Faruq, for presentation to King *Abd al-‘Azxz and his retinue

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


(^ s y R l ' Bayly Winder

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of Princeton University in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


'** -I v

Recommended for Acceptance by the Department of Oriental Languages and Literatures January, 19=50

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Riding on one of those periodic waves of religious enthusiasm diverted into political channels, the Najdi Unitarians between 17^5 and 1810 swept over their immediate locale, surged on to occupy alKijaz, and even spilled over into ‘Uman, al-‘Iraq, and Syria.


1811, obeying orders from the Porte, the Egyptian viceroy, Muhammad ton the generalogy in Appendix B. Since it is almost unbelievable that ibn-Bishr would not have known the ancestry of this Mushari and since he says that Turki is the uncle of this_Mushari (If the ancestry given by ibn-Bishr were correct, Mushari would be the uncle- of Turki), we assume that the two generations were omitted either by a copyist or a printer. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 1-9, 48; Musil, 271; Philby.. Arabia. 108. See below,

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

ibn-*Abd al-Wahhab (B 2), who was also an author and a teacher .1 The Imam Turki Is reported to have been extremely pleased at the arrival of 'Abd al-Rahman, whom he made qadi in al-Riyad. In addition to these two key appointments, Turki also made a number of other appointments at about this time In an effort to put men who were favorable to him in key positions. These appointments Included those of Ahmad ibn-Nasir al-gani* as chief of the treasury ( JL)leu*. ) of Sudayr, and 'Umay ibnO Muhammad Ibn-'Ufaygan as amir of al-Kharj. It was also probably at this time that Yahya ibn-Sari was appointed amir of alMlhmal.

He was later discharged and replaced by 'Abdullah

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 20, 62. Wallin, JRGS (1854), 186, states that this man was *Abd al-Rahman ibn-Hasan ibn-'All ibnMuhammad ibn-' Abd al-Wahhab;*however., *despi te the fact that Wail in was in Arabia shortly after., this time, it is more probable that ibn-Bishr and al-Tamlmi are right; especially in view of the fact that Ibn-Bishr expressly states that the Shaykh was the grandfather of 'Abd al-Rahman. ^Wallin reports that 'Abd al-Rahman was still a qatjl in al-Riyad in. 1845, and Palgrave, II, 1§, describes him as court chaplain in 1278-9/ 1862. Many shaykhs studied f i q h u n d e r 'Abd alrRahman, includ­ ing: his son 'Abd al-Lagff (0 5)» *Abd al-Rahman ibn-gusayn ibn-al-Shaykh (B 5)» his brother Hasan (B 3)# biB blather 'Abd al-Mallk (B 4)* gusayn ibn-gamad ibn-^uaayn ibn-alShaykh (C 15), gusayn ibn-'All ibn-gusayn ibn-al-Shaykh (0 14), 'Abdullah ibn-gasan ibn-gusayn lbn=al-3haykh (C 9), 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn-'Uthman ibn-'Abd al-Jabbar ibn-Shabbanah, ‘Abdullah ibn-Nasir, Nasir ibn-'Id, Muhammad ibn-Sultan, ^Abd al-Rahman ibn-gamad al-Thumayrl, gamad*ibn-'Atlq, 'Abdullah ibn-Jabr, Muhammad ibn-Ibrahim lbn-Sayf, 'Abd al-*Azlz ibngasan ibn-Yahya, Mugammad ibn-Ibrahim ibn-'UJlan, 'Abdullah ibn-'All ibn-Markhan, gamad ibn-'Abd al-‘Azlz Ibn-Mugammad ibn-'Abd al-'Aziz, and 'Abd al-Ragman ibn-' Adwanw All of these men were qadis in Najd either during the. reign of Turki, or of his son Pay sal. In addition to these, ibn-Bishr gives the names of many I both from the family of the Shaykh and other­ wise/, who studied under 'Abd al-Rahman but who did not become qadis; see Vol. II, 20-2. See also‘Musil, 271. _ 2 Ibn- Bishr, II, 18-19. See above, {=>• £&. Al-Sani/ died In 1255/1839-^0; ibn-Bishr, II, 89.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


ibn-Dakhll (Dukhayl)

Unravelling the facts as to who was

amir of al-Washm is difficult because ibn-Bishr contradicts himself; however, it is clear that during Turki's reign the amir ate was held by two men:

Muhammad ibn-* Abd al-Karlm al— o Bawaridi and Hamad ibn-Ya£ya lbn-Ghayhab. Two other events took place in the year 1240/1824-5 which strengthened Turki's general position by weakening his enemies. _ _ 3 _ 4 _ In Ramadan or Shawwal/April-June, 1825 at Jirab, Mash* an ibn-Mughayli th ibn-Hadhdhal, chief of the al-fAmmar at sub­ section of the ‘Anazah. tribe attacked and plundered a caravan bringing supplies from the region of al-Basrah to Najd.^

Mash* a n

and his Bedouins took their spoil across the Peninsula and. camped at al-Shimasiyah in al-Qasim.

Here they were attacked

by Faysal al-Dawish and his Mutayr tribesmen, supported by Egyptian cavalry,



and .some contingents from the Hijazi tribe,


Mash* an was killed during the fighting, but the men of •7 ‘7t ‘Anazah held their ground and won the day*' The second event

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 62. _ 2 Ibid.; dee below, p. 6 7 The qadi of al-Washm was ‘Abdullah ibn-* Abd al-Rahman abu-Buta$a; ibn-Bishr, II, 65 . 3 Musil, 271 and Philby, Arabia, 108, wrongly date this event in 1824. 4 Spelled by Philby, loc. cit., "Jarrab”* See Wahbah, 239. 5 There is nothing in ibn-Bishr to support M u sil’s claim, 271, that these supplies were destined for the Mutayr tribe and that they attacked the ‘Anazah for revenge after the latter had loot­ ed the caravan. 6 These S h o t s , troops constitute the only known incursion Into Najd at this time. It is presumably to them that Hogarth, Penetration. 118, refers when he speaks of "a column sent Inland 7 . . i n 1824." 7 Ibn-Bishr, II, 18-19.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


took place j.ate in 1240/1825 when Ahmad. Pasha,

accompanied by several

Makkan sharlfs, set out from Juddah with regular troops for a punitive

o expedition into *Asxr, where Sa*Id ibn-Maslat was leader." 3

Most accounts

agree that the Egyptians were defeated by the tfAsxris;^ however, Weygand,

the French general, in his undocumented history of Muhammad *Ali’s army reports a complete victory for Ahmad Pasha and gives a complete itinerary A of his route. In either case the fact that such an expedition was necess ary relieved much pressure that might have been applied towards Najd, and in fact it is reported that late in 1826, the Unitarians were raiding as .far west as

the suburbs of Makkah.^

1 See above, pp. $1-2.

Dahlan, Khulasat, 50H-, dates this attack, in 1259* 2 Ibn-3ishr, II, 19 • Sa*iLd died the following year and was succeeded by *Ali ibn-Mujaththal; ibn-Bishr, II, 20. See below, p. 94. 5 dahlan, Khulasat, JOk; luAsxr," El; Euting, I, 164; Zehme, 570; Tamisier

II, 149- Tamisier, loc. cit., actually reports the terms of a treaty between the *Asxris and the Egyptians. However, he dates the expedition September 24, and it is not certain whether or not he refers to the same expedition or to an earlier one. Ibn-Bishr., II, 19, gives a fanciful, almost 3iblical, account of why they were defeated. He says.that while the Egyptian troops were encamped in Wadi al-Sarh in. the ‘Asxr tihamah, a violent electrical storm, accompanied by heavy, hail, hit them and that most of them perished from it, only about fifty being able to save them­ selves. The Unitarian soldiers of *AsIr, who were near-by, were,.however, miraculously untouched. Jt^VoI. I. l68?-9» (Weygand's account follows Planat,' 258-50). The route was: Juddah, Makkah, al-Ta*if, Kulakh, BTshah, "Zebrani1 1 [?], "Macheit, [?] (where he says 10,000 Unitarians were routed), Najlah, Milahah, "Tamis1' [?], “Taheb” [?], Hali, "Kouz" [?], al-Qunfudhah, and Juddah. According to Weygand the expedition lasted about a year. 5 Weygand, Vol. I, I69.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


The Imam Turki also took advantage of this opportunity to let the Bedouin tribes know that they could not have the freedom of action and immunity from punishment to which they had become accustomed since the fall of al-Dir'iyah to the Egyptians nine years previously.

Early in 123/4/2.826-7 he

sent Mushari ibn-*Abd al-Rahman^ northwards.

Mushari found

and attacked a section of the banu-Khalid under *All A1 *Ubayd _ p — Allah camped at Hafr al-*At(j. Although Mushari was slightly wounded, his raiders captured both sheep and equipment from the tribesmen.-^

In the following year, 1243/l827-8> when

Turkl learned that the banu-Ehalld were collecting troops to _


fight him, he commanded- Muhammad ibn-*Abdan, amir of Sudayr,


to fill in the wells at Umm-al-Jama Jim on which the Bedouins depended; however they soon dug them up again.^

In the same

year .Turkl himself raided the Hutaym Bedouins and others with g 7 them in al-Washm. Again much was captured. Then Turki turned

1 See above, _ 2 Located north of al-* Arid at the outlet of a pass on the al-Nufud side of the Tuwayq mountains, £afr al-*Atq (*Atk, or *Ats ?) is one of the strategic places for defending Najd from the east. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 26-7. 4 Ibn-Bishr does not say what had happened to Hamad ibn-^ahya ibn-Ghayhab, but presumably be was -transferred’to the amlrate of al-tyashm; see above, p, 60 ; below,p.I* 7 ; ibn-Bishr, II, 62. Hamad was succeeded for a brief time in 1242/1828-9 by M u hammad ibn-*Abdullah of .Burma; ibn-Bishr, II, 27, 62. Muhammad ibn‘Abdan, a native of al-Alisa*, followed him in this post In the same year; Ibn-Bishr, 11* 28, 62. In one place, II, 62, IbnBishr says that Ibn-*Abdan died; in another, II, 33* that he was dismissed. In any event. Turki appointed Ahmad ibn-Nasir alSani* to take Ibn-* Abdan* s place in 1244/l82§-9. Ahmad also retained his position as treasurer of the district; ibn-Bishr, 33, 62 ; see above, p. 65 . 5 Ibn-Bishr, ± 1, 32 .

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


his attention to a group of Bedouins of al-Dawasir who were in al-Qara* in.

They submitted without fighting and paid two

year’s back taxes .1

In this year he also defeated the al-*UJman

tribe at Baban, and the al-Mala' ibah section of Mutayr, under — p al-Suwayqi, somewhere in the Summam desert. Another event which took place in the year 1243/1827-8 which was of importance for the future of Najd. was the escape of Fay sal ibn-Turki (E 8 ) from Egypt and his return to his 3 father at al-Riyad. Faysal was destined to become the greatest —

of the Su'uds in the second period.


The number of delegations which came to the Imam Turkl during this period were a measure of the progress he had made In subduing the country.

In 1243/1827-8 'Isa ibn-'All,5 the

amir of Jabal Shammar came personally In the company of notables of his district and recognized Turki*s authority over Jabal

6 Hutaym Bedouins are known to collect poor Bedouins of other tribes about them; consult Doughty, II, 242. Hutaym do not normally come as far east as al-Washm. 7 Ibn-Bishr, II, 30. 1 Ibid. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 32-33. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 32. 4 It may be noted that the present king of Saudi Arabia is known officially as ^Abd alr *Aziz^ibn-'Abd al-Rahman al-Faysal (or Al Faysal) al-Su'ud (or Al Su'ud), the name Faysal referring toTurki’s son* Nallino, 4. _ 5 Philby gives hiB full name as 'Isa lbn-Muhammad Ibn-'Abd alMuhsln ibn-'All; Arabia. 130. Philby. Arabia. 132, also says that w h e n Ha* 11 submitted to the Unitarians at this time, 'Isa left and joined the Egyptians, leaving his uncle Salih to re­ present the family. There Is nothing in ibn-Bishr1s account to bear out this incident, for he says that 'Isa came personally to pay allegiance to Turki.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



In the same year some of the leading men of al-

Qasim came, at Turki*s request, and.paid homage to him.


authority had become so firm there that shortly after he was recognized by al-Qasim, he was able to discharge Muhammad Al 'All from the important governorship of Buraydah and put *Abd _ _ o al-*Aziz lbn-Muhammad ibn-'Abdullah ibn-Hasan in his place.

‘Abd al-*Aziz had all of al-Qaglm as his province except for •3

the large town of *Unayzah, which had its own governor.


was Yahya ibn-Sulayman ibn-Zamil, but Turki subsequently dis-


missed him and replaced him with Muhammad ibn-Nahld.


goes so far as to say that early in Rabl' Second, 1243/late in October, 1827, “les detachments ouahhabitesetalent ma'itres de Medina, de la Meeque, d ’El Tayef; et Ahmed pacha, enferme dans les ports de la cotey reclamalt lnstamment. des seoours en homme s e t en ravltalllement.11**

In spite of this account it

is probable that the authority of Turki did not extend beyond the western confines of al-Qasim; however, he did control both al-Qasim and Jabal Shammar for the rest of his reign.

The year

also saw the results of the campaigns against the Bedouins, for

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 32/ Hamzah. Qalb. 336. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 32; Musil, .271; Philby, Acabig., 108. As a precaution, however, Turki brought Muhammad Al *Ali to alRiyad and kept him there until 'Abd al-'Aziz had consolidated his position in the town; ibn-Bishr. loc. clt. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 62. _ . _ ■ „ 4 Ibid. See above> p. 60 . The'qadi of al-Qasim was Qurnas, the governor of al-Rass; ibn-Bishr, II, 63 . 5 Vol. I, 273. Weygand goes on to say, “Le Vice-roi ^Muhammad *All/ forma de nouveau batillons avec les hommes evacues de la Morie et avec plusieurs mllliers de recrues enleve'esaux champs et aux manufactures. II les envoya en Arable dans les derniers jour3 de fevrier 1828."

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


the chiefs of Subay*, al-Suhul, al-* UJman, Mutayr and Qahtan all sent delegates to the Imam, who in turn sent his represent­ atives to these tribes to collect the taxes.1

In reference to * Isa ibn-*All, it may be noted at this point that, shortly after al-Dir*iyah fell to Ibrahim Pasha, ‘Isa successfully defended his rule in Jabal Shammar against the pretensions of ‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid, chief of the family second in importance to that of * Isa.

When ‘Abdullah was

defeated by *Isa, he fled north via Wadi al-Sirhan to Damascus and after some time came back to Najd, offered his services to Turki, and developed a firm friendship with Fay sal ibn-Ttirki.^ Apparently during Turki*s reign * Isa shared the amirate with his uncle Salih lbn-*Abd al-Muhsln ibn-* A l l .^ • • •

Later as:a reward

for services rendered to Faysal ibn-Turkl, ‘Abdullah received the amlrate of Jabal Shammar and thus became the founder of the Rashid dynasty, which then rose to an all important position c in Arabian affairs.

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 33. 2 Both the *All and Rashid families were from the Ja* far clan of the al-Rabl* ah subsection of the *Abdah section of the Shammar tribe. Since the early thirteenth/late eighteenth century the ‘All family had held the chief place. Contemporaneously with the Amlr Muhammad ibn-*Abd al-Muhsin ibn-*All, lived . ‘All ibnRashld, hea& of the second family. The two were friendly, and *All’s sons, ‘Abdullah, and * Ubayd (Allah), were also friendly with Muhammad .*s son_ ‘Isa. Muhammad even gave_his daughter in marriage to ‘Abdullah. Nevertheless, ‘Abdullah had ambitions of his own. For more details on these families, consult Philby, Arabia. 130-1, followed by ffamzah. Q,alb. I4l. _ ■_ 3 Philby, Arabia, 130-1* suggests that ‘Abdullah ibn-Rashld joined Turki, while both were exiles* in .the lower Euphrates region. Philby also says that ‘Abdullah’s skill with the tribes was largely responsible for Jabal Shammar*s submission to Turki. See also Palgrave, Tt-.r.vsls, I, 120-1,' Hamzah, Qaib, 341-2. I 4 Consult ibn-Bishr, il, 62. 5 See above, p. ; below, f?R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


The consequences of Turki*s victories were being felt in ‘Uman also.

As early as 1236-7/1821 Sa*d ibn-Mutlaq, son of

the former Unitarian commander in-‘Urn'in,'*' re-occupied al-Buraymi. He was recognized by the inhabitants of inner *Uman and .went as far as ’’Behla" £ ~ w h e r e he attacked the Bedouins who had 2 murdered his father. "Whether Sa‘d had any real connection with Turki at this time is not clear> for, when this raid was over, he apologized to the Sayyid Sa* id, ruler of coastal * Uman, for disturbing the peace.

In any event, in the year 1244/1828-9

messages came to Turki from; the Unitarians of *Uman asking for troops and a qadi.

Turki sent *Umar Ibn-Muhammad ibn-*Ufaysan

at the head of an army and Shaykh Muhammad ibn-* Abd al-* Aziz Ma* usa jl as qadi.

When these forces reached *Uman, they were

recognized by the people of the interior region, which was known as al-^ahirah, and even, by some of the people of the coast, which was called in contradistinction al-Batlnah.^ The fort of al-Buraymi was once again made part of the Su*udiUnitarlan outer defense line.

At about this same time Turkl

was making overtures to all the local leaders of the Persian Gulf.4 |

"While Turki was making his rale secure, Unitarian ideas



were once more expanding in Influence.

This is perhaps most


I I I 1

clearly seen in ibn-Bishr *s description of Turkl*s procedure

1 See above, p. Iff. 2 Badger, lxxxi-lxxxii. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 33. 4 Aitchison (1933)* 183.


^ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


when he, somewhat later, captured al-Ahsa* .

He gave orders

that all should pray, that the prescriptions of religion should he carefully followed, and that the Ignorant should be instructed in the roots of Islam and in the "five pillars."1 Several shaykhs received appointments as qadi s.?

The usual

procedure in appointing qadis was to give permanent posts in the central provinces and to rotate appointments in such dis­ tant places as *Uman, al-Qatif^ and Jabal Shammar. The tem3 porary appointees usually served about a year. After the return of Shaykh *Abd al-Rahman ibn-Hasan ibn-Muhammad ibn*Abd al-Wahhab to Na jd,

Jt he

issued an epistle to the Unitarians

in which he exhorted all, especially the religious and political leaders, to return to true Unitarian!sm and to leave the poly­ theistic actions of other so-called Moslems.

In this epistle

'Abd al-Rahman used the biography of his grandfather as an C ^ example of real faith. The Imam himself wrote an epistle for

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 37. 2 Includlng^Muhammadibn-Muqran, who was made qadi of al-Mihmal j and 'Abdullah ibn-*Abd al-Ra$man abu-Butayyin (Wahbahi 229, vowels the name, to read butayn; Musll, 275, to read b u t a w l n . Butavn is a diminutive of batn TbellyJ. Butayyin is a dim­ inutive of batln £ ”big-belliedr/“and, being’a not uncommon Bedouin name,'i s •probably correct.), whose "diocese" was extend­ ed to include not only al-Washm (see above,_ ), but also Sudayr after_.its qadi, *Abdullah ibn-Sulayman ibn-Muhammad.ibn'Abd al-Raianan ibn-Muhammad ibn-* Ubayd (see above, * ), died. Later, *Abd allRahman Abn-gamad al-Thumayri was appointed qadi of Sudayr, and abu-Buta$n returned to al-Washm by Itself. See ibn-Bishr, II, 18, 20,*32, 62-3. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 63 . 4 See above, p $».€35 The epistle is quoted by ibn-Bishr, II, 23-6. In it, p. 24, there occurs a curious sentence-which reads as follows: "May God’s mercy be on this Shaykh, whom He promoted to the place^of, His messengers and prophets in the calling to His religion" (

^ j




a*13I (vJJI A jA il I o a

aU I ^

This kina of exaltation of Muhammad ibn-* Abd at-Wahhab must ! Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


distribution among his people*

In it he advised them to fear

God and to show their fear by believing in His Unity, by pray­ ing, and by ps^Lng zakah.

He stressed the importance of these

three as well as the Importance of the individual's responsibility not only for his own behaviour but for that of the group.


epiBtle dilates at some length on the evil of usury,^ and warns the people against trying to evade this forbidden pursuit.


further instructed all governors and amirs to standardize weights and measures in their districts, and urged that any bargain, once made, be kept Inviolable, "even though it be made with 2 — DhlTnmia" ( £• LUUJI :IS ). The amirs were also to watch the company the people kept, to prevent the use of tobacco or snuff * to encourage studjr, to rebuild mosques, and to report those who did not attend prayer.

Finally the amirs

were told to advise an offender before they punished him, and to exile any wrongdoer who resisted correction*

As a guard

against unjust amirs, the Imam warned that he. would help the oppressed.^ As an example of the type of religious discussion which took place in Hajd, we might cite an exchange of correspondence

certainly have made other Moslems suspicious of the orthodoxy of Uni tar iani sm. 1 Consult Koran, 30s38. and passim* for the prohibition of usury. 2 That is, the protected adherents cf. revealed religions other than Islam; Koran, 2:59* 5:73* 103:3* etc. Consult Hitti, 233. 3 This epistle is quoted by al-Alusi, pp. 97-100.

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


which ibn-Blshr report s between himself and *Abd al-Rahman ibn£asan.

In it ibn-Bishr is twice corrected by Shaykh *Abd al-

Rahman for making mistakes of doctrine.

The first time ibn-

Bishr says in his letter that God "is powerful over what He

will//"to be powerful over_7 H (

*LAg U ^

a;I )- *Abd al-

Rahmian answers that this is loose usage, that it limits God's power, and that the correct Koranic phrase is that God "is powerful over everything" (j~JS



a;I), I. e., not Just

over those things that He will* to be powerful over.

In the

second example ibn-Bishr refers to those of God's attributes ( o. iLo ) which only He knows.

Again *Abd al-Rahman rebukes

him in a friendly way and points out that the attributes them­ selves are known to all, but that their modality ( i s S ) is known only to God.'*’ In Sha*ban, 1242/March, 1827 another of the famous Unitarian clerics and teachers died.

He was 'Uthman ibn-'Abd al-Jabbar

ibn-Hamad Ibn-Shabbanah al-Wuhaybi, who was

a learned house."


descendant; of

‘Uthman had been qadi in such distant plac«&>

as ‘Uman and *Asir during the first period of the empire.


his return to Najd, he remained qadi in Munaykh, al-Ghat,- and al-ZIlfi until he died.

He was succeeded in thfs post by his

1 This correspondence is quoted by ibn-Bishr, II, 22-3. _ 2 Ibn-Bishr^ II, 29;_see above, p. *n._l . The son of * Uthman, ‘Abd al-'Aziz, was qadi In Munaykh, al-Ghat, and al-Zllfl during Turkl*s reign and in the early part of Faysal's.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

75 — i son, ‘Abd al-*Azlz.

In the field of literature, the chief prose examples are those of ibn-Bishr and of the epistles just quoted. of the latter is simple, sincere, and forceful.

The style

It is free of

the euphuisms that characterize much contemporary Arabic prose. The epistles are liberally scattered with quotations from the Koran and the-iiadith.

As for poetry, it was during Turkl's

reign, chiefly exemplified by the poetry of Rahmah ibn-Jabir, the famous pirate, ^ and of the religious poet, *Abd al-*Aziz Ibn-Hamad ibn-Nasir lbn-Mu* ammar, who died in al-Bahrayn in 1244/1828-9.^

One of the most stirring of the poems of these

men is a qasldah by the latter on the fate of al-DIr*iyah.


translation of part of it follows: To Thee, 0 Lord of the throne, I complain imploringly and pray in calamity. Lord. How many a youth of the truthful party they killed, advisors, contented ones, worshipful, kneeling. How many an abode -- inhabited — they destroyed, for they left the homes in ruins. The cherished things were for them but bootyj they made the orphans hungry and thirsty. The householder fled from his homestead; companionship in society broke;

Yes, these passed, end their days passed, but they left praise and a fragrant memory which lasts. May the generous God reward them with mercy. Paradise and His pleasure in them. For, verily, though our bodies disperse, for the loving souls a gatherer comes.

May God, Oifliay He, support ou#' faith and bind in us the broken. ^ And build our fAith and our homes_destroyed and open wide ways to guide us.5

1 Ibn-BlChr,_II, 63^ 2 Dr. Jibra*il Jabbur of the American University of Beirut lag! the author of this opinion. R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

This peotry is not particularly distinguished, and contains some faults of meter, hut takes its place in the literary revival started under the auspices of Unitarian!sm.1 During Turki*s rule cholera invaded Najd with the usual epidemic results.

Ibn-Bishr reports that it first struck in

5 See above, • Ht Ibn-Bishr, II, 34. For a more complete version_of this poem and for examples of the poetry of Ralpmah Ibn-Jabir consult_ibn-Bishrs II, 28, 34-5. I am Indebted to Dr. Jlbra’il Jabbur for assistance in the translation of this selection; its text follows; 4 Lo^ 4 1JL&

L«iL a m **s y Ij I-aJI 1^5/ uif Ic i p w s Ij La* I *•“ ?i| y IS V_*J 1

Lft^naJ jS

1^5 j j * Lw

1—*^I aJJI

Ul^Yt^5 Lis L* jy IS y* y tl»J


")lI y *


Jj j y I y f > f 'f " * Lf lc % 0 i« 1^ 1 ^ 0 4

L JjO? «i5 I* L* y * f y ’


^ ^61^ ^s/* O 4 !j/*J



I— * . - ^ * * 4 ^ .3 ^ I t

A**9 ^>hJ I 4Lt




Lww J from the smaller unit, the real proper, to the larger> the peso or dollar* Since the end of the eighteenth century the chief currency circulating in Arabia (and elsewhere in the eastern Mediterranean region,, esp; -Eritrea and-Ethlopia) has been the Maria Theresa, or Levant, dollar Issued in Austria after 1780. . This coin contains 28 grams of silver, .832 fine. All payments referred to in this work whether referred to as dollars or riyals indicate this currency. The Saudi Arabian riyal of today preserves the name. Consult Spalding, “Eritrea"; "Riyal," El; "Dollar," E B : Webster?s Collegiate Dictionary (5th ed.), s. v. "Dollar"; aas* Doughty, index, s. v. HReal>"and Musil, 3-4. 5 The capacity of the §ja* varied from two to five pints according to Doughty, II,’132. According to Mengin, II, 172, the sa* would be approximately equivalent to six pints. Its capacity undoubtedly varied from place to place. 6 Ibn-Bishr, I, 219; II, 34.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


The following year, with heavy rains, the price of wheat dropp1 ed still further to a rlyal for thirty-five sa*s, and this price

continued through the year 1248/1832-3 .2 fell equally rapidly —

The price of dates

from airlyal for three or four waznahs^

in 1238/ 1819-20 to a riyal for seventy waznahs in 1248/1832-3.^ This wide fluctuation within a decade reflects first the effect

of the war on the local economy and second the sensitiveness of an isolated economy of this type to any change in conditions.

The Imam Turki, having organized the central districts, turned his attention to further expansion of his realm -- partic ularly to the east in al-Ahsa* province.

In 1245/1829-30 he

sent Muhammad ibn-* Ufaysan to raid al-Ahsa*. Ibn-*Ufaysan ' 5 attacked a caravan coming from the port of al-*Uqayr, and got 6 away with much spoil. This raid only represented a continua­ tion and extension of the exchanges which had already been tak— 7 lng place between Turkl*s forces and those of the banu-Khaid,

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 38. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 45. 3 The word waznah means weight and is also used to designate a measure of weight. Its value no doubt varied, as did that of the sa* from place to place ; based on the figures given by Mengin II, 172, it was approximately equivalent to a pound and thirteen ounces. 4 Ibn-Bishr, I, 219; II, 45. 5 See above, p. 19, n. 6 . 6 Ibn-Bishr, II, 35. • See above, p. 67.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

who had by now been more or leas ruling al-Ahsa* for a decade.'1'

H o w e v e r a showdown was about to take place.

In the same year,

both Muhammad ibn-* Uray* lr and his brother Majid set out from al-Ahsa* with all their fighting men to invade Najd.

While they

were stopping at Khafisah al-Mihmarl, they were joined by Fuhayd ibn-Mubarak al-Suyayfi, chief of the Subay* j Duwayhi al-Faghm, -

chief of the al-Suhbah; Mazyad ibn-Muhalhl 1 ibn-Hadhdhal



his men of ‘Anazah; and Mutlaqribn-Nukhaylan of the banu-gusayn. When Turki learned of this invasion, he called up the militia and the Bedouins under his control:

Mutlaq al-Maskh and his

followers of Subay*, *Assaf abu-Ithnayn and his of Subay* , Duwayhi ibn-Khuzayn ibn-Lihyan and his of al-Suhul, Muhammad ibn-Hadi ibn-Qarmalah and his of Qahtan, Ghaydan and his of

Al Shamir, the al-*Ujman, and Sultan ibn-Q,uwayd and his followers of al-Dawasir.

Turki placed his son Fay gal in charge of the

whole force and ordered it to intercept the banu-Khalld and their allies.

Faysal maneuvered his force between the enemy

and the watering place from which they were drinking , and! violent battles took place for a number of days.

Time and again

the Bedouin allies charged the hard core of Unitarian townsmen

1 See above, pp. 34-5. _ 2 Presumably the brother of Mash* an; see above, p. 65.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


tut were beaten back.

The first hint of the final result came

on the first day of Ramadan/middle of March, 1830 when Majid ibn-* Ur ay* Ir was killed.

As soon as Faysal knew of this, he

notified his father and asked him for reinforcements.


left al-Riyad with a small group from his bodyguard andy having mobilized Hashr ibn-Wurayk, chief of the *Asim family of Qah^an, joined his son toward the end of Ramadan.

Turki pitched his

tent directly opposite that of Muhammad ibn-* Uray* ir.


armies again clashed, and the Unitarian Mutlaq al-Maskh was killed.

However, the Bedouin allies were near flight.

On the

morning of the twenty-seventh of Ramadan the Unitarian fdrees moved to the attack for the first time and overwhelmed their enemies, who fled pell-mell. escaped as units. —

Only a few sections of the MuJ-ayr

The Unitarians captured the enemy camp intact

everything from sheep to Jewels*

Turki and Faysal stayed in

the neighborhood overseeing the distribution of the booty, and collecting the fifth part of it which was reserved for the govern­ ment

This signal victory against numerically superior forces

settled, in effect, the question of whether Al Su* ud or Al *Uray* ir

1 The aceount of this battle is all based on ibn-Bishr, II, 35-7; see also Musil, 271 (followed_by Philby, Arabia. 108), who says that Turki was helped by Salih ibn-*Ali, amir of Jabal Shammar.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


were to rule al-Ahsa* .

The inevitable result- of Turki*s victory was that he occupied

al-Ahsa* province.

Muhammad ibn-*Uray4ir tried to

prepare for the defense of al-Hufuf by repairing the castles and frontier forts ( Turki*

but when he was actually faced by

s army, which camped at al-Huwayrat, many of the banu-Khalid

were panic stricken and fled.

Turki entered the town without

a fight and received a large delegation of the townsmen who came to render him homage.

Meanwhile Muhammad ibn-* Uray* ir had

barricaded himself in the famous fort of al-Kut^ in the middle of the town.

Turkl sent him word that if he did not surrender

he would have to face the consequences.

Muhammad surrendered.

The Imam treated him kindly, for, besides granting a safe-conduct, he gave him horses, camels, and furniture.

The occupation of

al-Hufuf meant the control of the whole province,

Turki and

Faysal stayed there about forty days reorganizing the a d m in ls -

tration of the area.

Unitarian religious usage was re-established;

a local Imam was appointed In each village to lead the prayer; — _ 3

and *Abdull.ah al-Wuhaybi was appointed qadi of the province.

1 This word,_mueh used for place names in the Persian Gulf and lower al-*Iraq^ (Al-Kuwayt Is a diminutive of al-kut.), and usually refers^at least in the beginning, to a fort, is said by Wahbah, 70, n. 1, to have a Portuguese origin and to date from the days when the Portuguese were active In the Persian Gulf. However, the etymology given in "Kut al-JiAmara," El, is considerably more likely. The author derives kut from the.Hindu­ stani word kot meaning fortress. 2 See above, f9?* *7/“2. 3 Shaykh *Abdullah al-Wuhaybi continued in this office until he died in 1262/1845-6; ibn-Bishr, II, 62.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Turki received the submission of the delegates from al-Qatif,

and sent *Umar ibn-Muhammad ibn-' U fays an with a detachment of troops to punish those members of the banu-Khalid who had fled with Talal ibn-Barghash ibn-Hammu^as their leader.


caught them in the desert, where they abandoned their equipment in their haste to flee.

The property of the .banu-Khalld was

appropriated, and their palms treasury.


were turned over to the local

When affairs seemed in good order, Turki returned

to al-Riyad.

Later he transferred 'Umar ibn-'Ufaygan from the

amlrate of al-Kharj to that of al-Aglp-sa* The consequences of the re-occupation of al-Ahsa* by the Unitarians were not limited to that province alone.


Turki was still in al-Hufuf, delegates from *Uman and R a ’s al4 Khaymah came to confer with him. His newly acquired prestige was an attraction to all who lay outside the borders of his empire.

Even earlier, the animosity between the Sayyld Sa*id,

ruler of *Uman, and the 'Atbah rulers of al-Bahrayn was Turki in the struggle for control of the coast.


In 1243-4/1828

1 Mahmud al-Farisi was appointed qadi of al-Qatif; ibn-Bishr, II, 63 2 The Bedouins in this area, as in others, frequently own palms in the oases. At harvest time they repair to these in order to assure an honest distribution of the dates. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 37-8, 62; Musi-1, 271; Philby, Arabia, 108. See above, p. €4*-. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 38. These may be the presents_and acknowledge­ ment which Badger, lxxxlli, says the Sayyld Sa^id sent to Turkl in 1&30. Sultan ibn-Saqr, chief of the al-Qawasim tribe, is classified by* ibn-Bishr, II, 62, as amir of *Uman.


R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

the Sayyid Sa*Id tried to conquer al-Bahrayn and sent messengers to al-RIyad in order to seek help from the Unitarians .1


bably little was done about this request, but Unitarian pressure on 'Uman continued.

In 1 2 4 8 / 1 8 3 2 Faysal prepared a force

under Sa*d ibn-Muhammad ibn-Mu*ayqil to attack *Uman.

He also

ordered *Umar ibn-*Ufaysan to mobilize the troops of al-Ahsa* and,as commander in chief of the united army, to ^oin the others. — o This invasion was too strong for the S a y y i d Sa* i d to resist.

Finding the Integrity of his dominions thus seriously menaced, the Imaum £ Sayyld Sa*id__7 . . . . considered it his best policy to form a closer connection with the Wahabee Chief. It was accordingly agreed b y h i m /"as stated in a letter written by himself to the Resident in the Persian Gulf, dated 23 May, 1833_7 /""preceding bracket s are Badger *b_7 to pay a tribute of 5,000 German crowns per annum to the Wahabee Chief, that each should hold possession of his own coast, according to the limits then existing -- the Imaum* s . . . . extend­ ing to Jaalan and the Wahabee's to Kateef; and, further, an engagement was entered into, binding thent reciprocally to assist in putting down any rebellion arising in their respective territories.^

1 Badger, lxxxii. It is doubtful that Sa*id acknowledged Turki' s supremacy or Intimated readiness to pay tribute to Turki at this time as Badger, l o e . cit., suggests, and it is certain that the ruler of al-Bahrayn did not submit to Turkl's domination. 2 The chronology given in the text assumes that the attack which ibn-Bishr, II, 42, dates in 1248/1832-3 is the same as that which Wellsted, Travels, I> 200, and Altchison (1933)» 184, date in 1830 and 1&31*respectively, 3 Precis Regarding Muscat and its Relations with the Wahabee Power, quoted by Badger, lxxxvi-Ixxxvii. See also Blunt, 2(52. It is presumably -to this of fer of-tribute that Al tchi son, ( 1^53), 183 refers when he speaks of the Sayyld Sa* id agreeing to pay tribute in 1831. Furthermore, Altchison, loc-. cit., undoubtedly over­ states the case when he says that at this time Turki controlled the whole coast from Raf s al-Hadd to al-Kuwayt. His control of the *Umanl coast would have been at most very Indirect. Miles,

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Unitarian power was reviving to such an extent that at some time in this period Turki expressed a desire to enter into relations with the 3ritish government, a fact which certainly indicates his independence from Ottoman control.

To this

request, "a reply in general but friendly terms was returned."1 Turki was now at the height of his power.

were the usual problems in Najd itself. p be dealt with.

However, there

Local quarrels had to

Furthermore, in that year Turki marched against

al-Aflaj on a punitive expedition.

In Sha*ban, 1246/January-

February, 1851 he turned toward the north and scoured the desert near Hafr al-Batin • •

but found

little to attract

his attention.

On this trip Turki received presents from Jabir ibn-*Abdullah ibn-5abah, ruler of al-Kuwayt, and many Bedouin tribes sent _

delegations to pay homage to the Imam.


However, while he was

gone, Turki learned that Mushari ibn-*Abd al-Rahman, —

had appointed governor of Mahfuhah several had revolted.


whom he


Turki, it seems, did not take the matter



II, 55^-j says that this agreement was negotiated by the Sayyid Sa*id on British advice, but that the British disapproved the last clause "as leading to possible embarrassments." He reports that the agreement was concluded in November, 1855 an(d that the Unitarian representative in the negotiations was Sa*d ibn-Mutlaq, son of the former Unitarian commander in *Uman (see above, p.18). »ilson's analysis, 198, of the situation is perhaps the best general statement. He says that "by 1855 the whole coast of the Rersian Gulf acknowledged Wahabi rule and paid tribute." 1 Aitchison (1955), 184. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 55. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 58. 4 See above, p. 65.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


seriously, for he permitted his forces to disperse, reached al-Rlyad, Mushari had already fled.

"When he

In succession

Mushari tried to get the backing of Mandil ibn-Ghunayman of Mutayr, of the leaders of al-Qasim, and of the *Anazah tribe. Apparently none were prepared to Jeopardize the newly won security of the country.

Mushari then went to al-HiJaz and

tried to Inveigle the Sharif of Makkah, Muhammad ibn-* Awn, into supporting him.

The latter was sympathetic, and gave

the refugee sanctuary but refused any help.

Early in 1248/

spring-summer, 1832 Mushari headed back to Najd.

Before he

presented himself to Turki, he got some of his friends to intercede for him with Turki.

Turki pardoned him and Intern­

ed him in comfortable quarters with his family.1

Annual raids, which, as in Umayyad times,


kept the army

seasoned and trained, and which in addition served as tax

collecting expeditions, also occupied the Su*uds.

In §afar,

1247/July-August, 1831 Faysal led a mixed force of town militia and Bedouins west to Upland Najd, where he attacked and dispersed a group of ‘Utaybah Bedouins watering, at falal.

The Unitarians

1 Ibn-Bishrj. II, 38-9, 45, 48-9, 54; Musil, 271, mistakenly places Mushari* s attempted revolt during the al-Ahsa* campaign. Philby, Arabia. 108. follows Musil, and In addition he. Arabia. 367^ n. 1,date 3 the event in 1827, some two years before the al Ahsa* campaign. 2 Hitti, 199.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


began to gather the booty.

But the *Utaybah asked for help

from another nearby group of their tribesmen, who counterattack­ ed the distracted Unitarians and routed them.

Faysal led

his defeated force to al-*Uray*iyah and permitted them-to return to their homes.1

Later in the same year Turkl collected his

troops and moved to al-Rumhiyah on al-‘Armah plateau and stayed about forty days.

Many of the northern Arabs sent presents

and delegates to him.

In fact, even *A11,^ the Pasha of

Baghdad, reeognized his growing importance to the extent of entering into correspondence with him. Yahya ibn-G-hayhab of Shaqra*

Turki sent gamad ibn-

with presents for the Pasha.

While the Unitarians were at al-Rumhlyah, the al-*UJman refused to pay their customary tribute, but later they reversed their —

decision, and Turki returned to al-Riyad.


In the next year, 1248/1832-3, Turki led his forces against —


Falah ibn-Hithlayn



of the al-*UJman, camped at Umm-Rabi* ah.

The Bedouins were forewarned and fled.

However, while Turki

was at Umm-Rabi*ah, al-Murdif, chief of the Al Murrah tribe,

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 39. 2 Presumably *All Rida Pasha, who headed the Baghdad government from 1831-1842; consult Longrigg, 282. 3 See above* pp. 53; 61; 67, n. 4. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 42. 5 Hithi in according to Wahbah, 282. Falah ibn-Hithlayn is an ancestor of the. two ibn-Hithlayns who participated in the revolt of the Ikhwan against King *Abd al-* Aziz in 1347-8/1929; Wahbah, 282-3; Philby, Arabia, 346, 351-2, 354. See above, p. 27, n. 1.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


came to him and mad© peace.

'When ibn-Hithlayn learned of his

colleague's submission, he was frightened and came to Turki without an aman.

The Imam kept him in confinement at Umm-

Rabi* ah for seven days and then sent him to al-Riyad where he was temporarily imprisoned.

Turki then moved his camp to

al-Bayad,1 the desert region outside al-Qatif.

He stayed there

about two weeks* receiving the homage and presents of *Abdullah -


ibn-Ghanim, the governor of al-Qatif.



Moving on to al-Hufuf,

Turki married a daughter of Hadi ibn-Mldhwad, chief of the Al

Kathlr tribe, and after a month's stay returned with her to al-Riyad.^

Perhaps one of the best bits of evidence of the Imam Turk!*s character and of his theory of government is furnished by his procedure a£ a conference of

the governorsand amirs

called in this same year while .camping in al-Dahna,.

which he This meet­

ing is important enough to Justify quoting ibn-Bishr, the only source that mentions it, at length:

1 Wahhah, 72, refers to this area as Bayad is located north and west of al-Qatif. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 62. ' 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 43-4.

(not al-Bayad)..It

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Then when they were present, he [Turki] stood amongst them ana reminded them of the blessing of God on them in their gathering after dispersion, in brotherhood after enmity, and in wealth after poverty. He acknowledged . . . the favors of God to him, and his weakness, impotence, shortcomings, and low opinion of himself. Then he became harsh toward them, menaced them, and threatened them about tyranny toward the people and about taking that which was not lawful from the people. He said, “Verily, whenever my order reaches you for a raid, you lay increased burdens on the people for your own benefit. Take care not to do that, for nothing prevents me from putting on the people . . . an increased [claim] for camels in the raids except compassion for them, and I lay on them a smaller claim than he who preceded me used to lay on them.. . . . Verily, whenever my order reaches you, you are happy about it because you find something in it for yourselves. You are like those who watch a palm tree and rejoice' when a strong wind blows because more [dates] fall.

Now know that I shall not allow you to take anything from the people. He among you who commits injustice toward his flock, his punishment will not be dismissal but exile from his country." Then he said to the people, "If any amir oppresses you, inform me of it." Then the governor of Buraydah. *Abd al-*Aziz ibn-Muhammad ibn-‘Abdullah ibn-Hasan, stood up and said,“0 Imam of the Moslems, be specific, and not general, in your speech. If you have been angry at any one of us, tell him of his deeds." Then Turki said, "The speech refers only to you and those like you who believe that you possess these districts by your swords, while [actually] they were taken and subdued for you by the sword of Islam and because you agreed on an imam.? And when he had finished his speech, he said, "You are in the trust of God and in His peace. So let each of you go to his town." Then they returned to their districts. Such words,reminiscent of the Orthodox Caliphs1, would be impressive from any statesman.

1 See above, p. 69 » 2 Vol. II, 44.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission


Despite the fact that Turk! had rebuilt an empire, he was destined to be assassinated in the following year, 1249/


His fall came largely as a result of the rancor which

Mushari ibn-4Abd al-Rahman bore him,^ and possibly also because

the Egyptians were once more preparing to occupy Arabia. However, somewhat before Turki*s death a strange episode had taken place in al-HiJaz and in 4A sir.

Since the Egyptian

expedition of 1240/1825 to 4Asir,^ and the Unitarian pressure _


on al-Hljaz in 1243/1827, Ahmad Pasha had received reinforce4 ments from Egypt, Shortly after these arrived, Ahmad was re5 called to Cairo and replaced by Khurshid Bey. Also in the year 1243/1827 Yahya, the Sharif of Makkah, was killed, and Muhammad *Ali gave his place to Muhammad ibn-4Abd al-Muin ibn‘Awn, who retained it until 1267-8/1851.^

At the beginning of

1248/spring, 1832 some cavalry officers, stationed in Juddah,

1 See above, pp. 86-7. 2 See above, p. 66. 3 The *Asirls had also revolted in 1243; consult Recueil de firmans. no. 496; Zehme, 320. 4 The reinforcements, which arrived in 1828, consisted of five battalions of infantry and one thousand North African cavalry; Weygand,_I, 169. 5 Khurshid had formerly beenYa~T5amluk of Muhammad *Ali; Tamisier,

I, 364, n. 1 . See above, p.131; below, uz z'. 6 Philby, Arabia, 112; Dahlan^X304; Tamisier, II, 85-6. Tamisier lo£. oit.. describes Muhammad ibn-4Awn, the grandfather of the. late Sharif Husayn ibg-^ljU as being five feet seven-inches tall, having** black^eyes^and an aquiline nose; having an in­ telligent smile, being proud and vigorous, using many gestures, and having a face which runs the gamut of expressions frompride to humility.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

revolted because of arrears In pay.-3-

The revolt received some

local support because Ibrahim P a s h a ’s army was held up at — o *Akka, and the Hijazis expected the defeat of the Egyptians. The leadership of the revolt passed into the hands of a Georgian

cavalry commander, Muhammad Agha, who was surnamed Turkce ■3


and who was assisted by a n Albanian infantry commander, 4

"Zemin1* Z ”?_7 Agha.

The m a i n forces at the disposal of the

rebels were seven hundred Albanians, five hundred cavalry, and eight hundred infantry, the two latter groups mostly being made up of Georgians and Turks.^ Turk 9e Bilmez first demanded that Khurshid pay the arrears, but Khurshid could not pay the sum without reference to Muham­ mad fAli.

Tiirkpe Bilmez and his followers agreed with Khurshid

1 Wellsted, C ity. I, 384. Gf. Weygand, II, 86 , who says that they revolted "sous le pretexte habituel q u ’ils n'etalent p as payes.” 2 Wellsted, Pity. I, 384. Wellsted dates the revolt_ln the spring of 1831, but Is obviously wrong because Ibrahim did not move on ’Akka until the autumn of 1831; Rustum and Zurayk, 392. 3 In old Turkish the n a m e means " h e does not know Turkish.1' This man had been a mamluk of Mustafa Bey. Muhammad 'Ali’s brother-in-law. When Mustafa died, Tdrkce replaced him as commander of a cavalry unit and was sent to itakkah^Mengin, Hiatolre sommalre. 35. ' 4 Wellsted, C i t y . I, 384; Weygand, II, 8 6 ; Mengin,- Histoire sommaire. 34 , mentions a "Zenar" Agha, possibly the same as Wellsted* s "Zemin.*1 Dr. A. J. Rustum, who edited the docu­ ments relating to the Egyptian expedition into Syria told me that the official documents relating to the Egyptian expeditions into Arabia are In Cairo but unpublished. If available, these documents would clarify many aspects o f the Egyptian occupation of Arabia, including such details as the spelling of "Zemin's" name. I have been unable to locate official Ottoman records with the exception of the few referred to. 5 Wellsted, City. I, 384,5.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


and the few loyal troops to refer the matter to Muhammad ‘All. At length a messenger arrived from Cairo "bearing instructions to settle the claims.

However, the rebels, who had seized

the messenger, found on him a second, secret dispatch in which Khurshid was directed to seize the ringleaders and send them to Egypt.

There was now no turning back for Turkce Bilmez and his men. 1 They helped themselves to the treasury, appro­

priated the ships in the harbor, and forced Khurshid to em­ bark for Egypt.2

Turkce proclaimed himself governor of al-

Hijaz and marched on Makkah.

Here Colonel Isma'Il Bey*s

ninth Egyptian infantry division defeated the rebels and forced them back to Juddah.


Even so, Sultan Mahmud II, smarting over

defeat in Syria at the hands of his Bupposed lieutenant, Muham_ /C. _ mad ‘All, confirmed Turkce as governor of al-HiJaz. But^SulJ.an1s

defeat also cut off almost all hope of escape for the rebels, who had hoped to go to Syria and Join the Ottoman forces there. Furthermore, Muhammad * All, in order to protect his flank and his prestige reeallad-Ahmad Pasha, from the Ministry of War and again appointed him governor of al-Hijaz.

Because Juddah.was

in hostile hands, he was dispatched to Yanbu* with an infantry

1 2 3 4

Wellsted. city. I, 385. Wellsted. City. I. 386: Mengin. Hlstolre sommaire. 35. Weygand, II, 86-7. Wellsted, City. I, 387; Mengin, Hlstolre sommaire. 38 .

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



regiment and 1,630 cavalrymen.-1,

Tiirkge feared that he could

not defeat this force and, therefore, took the only way out — to the south.

Sending part of his force down the coast in the

captured ships, with another column paralleling them on shore, 2 Turkce's troops successively occupied al-Qunfudhah and alHudaydah, and in 1248-9/1833 reached Mukha^ (Mocha), the famous 4 coffee port of al-Yaman. Here he proceeded to interfere with Red Sea trade> even removing the cargoes of ships.


first the rebels had the support of the *Asir and Alma* tribes, both of which were strongly Unitarian.

Furthermore, Turkce

made a special effort not to disturb British property in Mukha; but, even so, his position was deteriorating.

He was running

short of money, and in time the Bedouins, under the leadership 5 — of *Ali ibn-MuJaththal of the banu-Mughid family, quarreled with the Turks.^

Eventually, hostilities started between them,

1 Weygand, II, 87; Hurgron.1 e .. Mekka. 161; Mengln, Hlstolre sommaire. 36, 38. • 2 Mengln. Hlstolre sommaire. 38. and Weygand, II, 87, say that the governorYof al-Qunfudhah put his town in a state of siege and forced Turkce to by-pass it. 3 Spelled according to Hitti, 49, 58; ibn-Bishr, II, 46, gives al-Mukha: Hava gives Makha. 4- Mengln. Hlstolre sommaire. 40. 63 . 5 This name means kinky-haired. It is rendered by all European sources as Mu(d).lessen (e. gI"~Mengln. Hlstolre sommaire, 64), thus revealing-the operation of two phonetic tendencies? 1. the tendency o f ^ to be pronounced as s, and 2. the tendency of J and £ to be interchangeable in speech. '3-s above 6 Zehme, 371, mistakenly thinks that *All ibn-Muj*aththal in­ stigated the revolt against the Egyptian forces.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

and a desparate fight developed.

The Bedouins Began to "besiege

Mukha on the ninth of December, 1833# having already seized the neighboring town of Zabld (?).

The defenders were protect­

ed by a half-moon shaped fortification, on one side of which was the sea, at each tip of which was a tower, and at the other side of which was a wall.

Wellsted, the British explorer, who

was at this time in the harbor of Mukha on a ship, tells the story of the battle thus; A & f o u r P. M. on the 13th, their the Bedouin*s_J7 numbers having increased to 20,000 men, they commenced storming the town. Extending their line in every direction, they attacked at all points, having no scaling ladders, but climbing the walls like cats. The Turks nobly defended themselves, and their artillery swept off great numbers of the Bedowins; but nowise daunted, their place w a s immediately supplied by others; and at half-past eight they effected a lodgement on the roofs of some of the houses^ These were repulsed, but a second, and permanent foothold was gained.

Tttr^ce Bilmez and a few others saw -that the

battle was lost and fled to the north tower where they got a small boat and gained the protection of a British warship, the o Tiger, in the harbor. Wellsted continues; In the meantime the contest on shore raged unabated; repeated charges-^ of cannon continued until noon ^f*the next day/# when it was perceived that the largest fort on the land side had surrendered, and that was followed by a tremendous explosion; a Turk, it is thought, fired a magazine beneath the custom house, and with thirty or forty of his companions, blew about a thousand Bedowins,

1 Qity, I, 391-2. 2 Turkce Bilmez and his friends were taken by this ship to Bombay, whence they eventually got back to Constantinople; Wellsted, City. I, 395.


Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


who had clustered in great numbers on the spot, into the air. This concluded that affair: every Turk the Bedowins could lay hands on was put to the sword.1 ~ Ibn-Bishr's account of this same battle reveals both his strength and weakness as a chronicler. - His account is as follows In / “the year 1249/l833_7 the tribes of ‘A sir and Alma* marched to al-Mukha,2 the well-known town in al-Yaman, which Turkish soldiers had captured and were ruling, to save it from the Turks. There were about two thousand ■ In this foree of *Aplr and their followers. They wore their shrouds / “o ^ J 7 to show that they were prepared •for death if need be. They aimed for the walls / b f the town_7 and scaled them. Most of them were killed on the walls, but the determination of the remainder was not broken, and they descended into /“the town_7 . . . . and took it forcibly from the hands of the Turks. They captured a limitless wealth of booty. And the chief of the *Aslr /“ tribe_7, the leader of this affair, was *All Ibn-Mu^aththal. A man who entered alMukha after the battle reported to me that a Turk said to the men of 'Aslr, after they had entered the town and taken It, "There are in this khan four hundred boxes of money, and linen, and weapons; come with me and I will show them to you." Then a large number went with him, and when they reached / “the khan_7, he fired on one of the boxes with a pistol. It caught fire and burned, and / “all the other// boxeB caught fire. Further­ more, since the boxes.were full of powder and bullets, many people perished.^ Ibn-JBAsbr..has*_asnsual* toldthe details -of ;the story with considerable accuracy and in providing details of the explosion which followed the battle, has even amplified the picture given

1 City, I, 393. 2 See above, p. 94,“ n. 3, for the spelling of the name. 3 Cf. above.,p.95; Zehmf 371» puts the figure at forty thousand. Ibn-Bishr* s two thousand sounds more likely. 4 Vol. II, 46.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


by an eyewitness.

His account., on the other hand, shows that

he had no idea that the "Turks" who were defeated had been, for the previous year, fighting against the UnitarianS real enemy, Muhammad *Ali.

The incident further illustrates the

fact that the lack of national consciousness, in the modern sense, prevented these Unitarians from joining Tttrkce Bilmez' rebels, and allowed them to dissipate their strength in a useless fight. The incident closes with the Bedouin's continuing to plunder the town for several days.

Many of the townswomen

were sold as slaves, and bodies rotted in the streets for several weeks.-*-

A little later Muhammad ‘All's army finally'

laid its hands on some ships and occupied the town without re si stance ; for by that time the Bedouins had left.2

Even so,

the Egyptian forces were in the end driven back once more.^

1 Wellsted, Olty. I, 394-5. 2 Weygand's account, II, 87; of the defeat of tfurkce Bilmez, which follows closely that of Mengin. Hlstolre sommaire; 64-5, de serve s to be mentioned because of the author's posltion as the military historian of Muhammad *All, but it seems to be at variance with the facts. He maintains that A^tmad Pasha sent a force, which worked conjointly with *Ali;;ibn-Mu jaththal, to Mukha and that the two groups attacked the town-together. He says that Ti&kce Bilmez had only five hundred men left, and that one hundred &nd twenty of them escaped to the British ship. Since neither Wellsted nor ibn-Bishr mention any Egyptian force at this time, Weygand and Mengin are undoubtedly mistaken. See also Euting, I, 164/ Tamisier, 149 ff. 3 See below, p f . 126-3.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


j i |

98 *Ali ibn-Mu ja th th&l died in the same year (1249/1833) and was succeeded by his nephew, *A* id ibn-Mar*i, who ruled in ‘A sir for 20 years*

After his death in 1272-3/1856, he was

succeeded by his son, Muhammad.1 In the year 1248/1832-3 while the Egyptians were trying to stabilize their position in al-Hljaz, a curious incident took place in Najd.

A man claiming to be Khalid ibn-Su*ud

(E 24) went from Egypt to Buraydah.

When the Imam Turki heard

of his arrival, he ordered the people of that town to respect him and to give him what he needed from the treasury.


when this "Khalid:11 came to al-Rlyad and was seen by people who had known the real Khalid ibn-Su*ud in Egypt, they said that this man was an impostor. to Egypt.2

Having been exposed, he fled back

Whether he was some sort of Egyptian spy or only

an adventurer is not clear. In the following year while Turki was preoccupied with his preparations to fight *Abdullahi the co-ruler of al-Bahrayn, a great Bedouin war took place arouhd al-Marba* the town of al-MIdhnab.

a well near

The protagonists were Muhammad ibn-

Faysai al-Dawi sh chief of Mu$ayr-* and Zayd lbn-Mughayllth lbn-

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 47-8; Zehme, 371-4; ,uAslr," El; Wahbah, 41. 2 Ibn-Bishr, IIA 45. 3 Fay sal al-Dawlsh had died In 1248/1832-3 and his son Muhammad, surnamed abu-* Umar, succeeded him; ibn-Bishr, II, 44.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Hadhdhal chief of 'Anazah.1

The former were camped around a

watering place called 'Ayn al-Suwayni', the latter around

another called al-Thulayma (Thulaymah ?).

The two sides

fought for about, forty days until finally the Mutayr cavalry broke through the lines of the 'Anazah, who first wavered and then fled.

But the 'Anazah did not leave much booty behind

for the victors, and in fact two members of the Dawish family 2 were killed. In the same year, 1249/1833-4-* Turki sent his son Pay sal —


to repulse a concerted attack by ‘Abdullah ibn-Ahmad*^ of the

1 In addition to these chiefs, and their men, Mutayr counted as allies the banu-Salim of Harb under Dhiyab Ibn-Ghanlm ibn- _ Madyah, some ^Utaybah under Sultan ibn-Rubay' an, the al-Dahamlshah of 'Anazah under Ghazi ibn-X>abyan, and a part of A1 Hablan of 'Anazah under Mazyad lbn-Muhalhll ibn=Hadhdhal; and ‘Anazah had among their allies^another part^of A l g a b l a p , a n d those of al-Dahamlshah tinder-"Qa'id. ibnaMiilad, the__al-Ghadawlrah of Wuld Sulayman, some of the ban^gaqr (pi. al-§uqur)_under ibnWudayhan, the Rawalah underi;SSl?n al-Duray' 1 ibn-Sha'lan, the banu-* All of Harb under alr (Jhurm, some of al-Barzan of Mutayr under Husayn abu-Shuwayrlbat, and Shammar under 'Adwan IbnTuwalah. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 46-7. Musll, 271, followed by Phllby, Arabia. 108, implies that the 'Anazah tribe was specifically helping Turki against the Egyptian-supported Mutayr. Ibn-Bishr. ioc. clt.-. definitely says that the only reason that Turki allowed this Bedouin fighting to continue was because he was preoccupied with other affairs. M u s i l ’s and Phllby* s implication is pro­ bably connected with the fact that they misdate the next Egypt­ ian invasion of Najd; see below, [a. 3 ‘Abdullah shared the rule o f al-Bahrayn with his nephew Khalifah and with Muhammad lbn-Khalifah pntll 1843 at which time Muhammad ibn-Khalifah drove 'Abdullah from the islands. _ ‘Abdullah was the founder of the 'Abdullah branch of the Khalifah family, now resident In Saudi Arabia. -See the genealogy of the Khalifah family with notes. (In Arab!af) which is in the possession of the Arabian American Oil Co*

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


ruling house of al-Bahrayn, who had his headquarters in alDammam,^ against the Unitarians on the mainland.

The Khalifah

forces had already occupied the small islands of Tarut and Darin located about two miles offshore, almost directly opposite al-Qatif.

The Khalifahs had also laid siege to Sayhat, a small - 2 town about five miles south of al-Qatiif. The opposing army

under Faysal gathered at al-Rumhiyah on the al-*.Armah plateau, and then marched to al-Qa$if, which it captured after a short siege.

Faysal then moved south to a watering place called

al-Murayqib about one mile to the west of Sayhat, which town was defending itself against both the Bahraynis and the Unitarians. The warriors from al-Bahrayn spent the night on their ships and descended to fight during the day.^

Finding that they were

1 ‘Abdullah ibn-Ahmad seems to have taken over this center after the defeat o f Rahmah ibn-Jabir and his sons; see’ above, p. 20 and_n. 1. * * 2 Al-Nabhani, "Al-Bahrayn," 154. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 48.* Ibn-Bishr Interprets this action as being the original goal of__the expedition, Implying that the dis­ obedience of 'Abdullah ibn-Ghanim, governor o f al-Qatif, had provoked It. Probably thls governor was sympathetic*with the forces from al-Bahrayn, but the. attacks from these Islands were no doubt the real*cause of Turki*s defensive measuresv See below, n. I. 4 Al-Nabhani, "Al-Ba£rayn>" 154. It was during this phase of the fighting that Khalifah Ibn-Salman ibn-Ahmad lbn-Khalifah died. His body__was taken back to al-Bahrayn* and buried there j consult al-Nabhani, loo. cit.. and the’genealogy of the Khalifah family referred to above, p. 99* n. 3.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


fighting a two-front war, the inhabitants of Sayhat, under their governor, ibn-* Abd al-Rahlm^ decided after some forty days, to surrender to ‘Abdullah ibn-Ahmad and thus gain the protection of one side against the other;.

The fact that they

were Shi* ites undoubtedly was a determining factor in their decision as scs to which side to Join, for the Khalifah family, although itself Sunnite, ruled the Shi* ite population of alBahrayn.1

‘Abdullah occupied Sayhat and the fighting continued 2 for some time with this new alignment of forces. The struggle ended, however, with dramatic suddenness

when Fay gal learned that his father, the Imam Turki, had been murdered in al-Riyad by men under the orders of Mushari ibn*Abd al-Rahman.

Turki was murdered on Friday, the last day of 3 dhu al-HiJJah, 1249/second week of May, 1 8 3 Faysal immediate ly broke off the fighting and went to al-Hufuf, without telling

any of his troops what had happened.


In al-Hufuf he prepared


1 Al-Nahani, 'UfcL-Bahrayn, ” 154-5. 2 The account of ibn-Bishr, II, 48, does not agree with that of al-Nabhani at all points. The-former for instance does not mention the occupation of Tarut by ‘Abdullah*s forces. Further ibn-Bishr says that after Faysal saw the agreement between ‘Abdullah and Sayhat, he strengthened the fortifica­ tions in al-Qatif and placed a garrison on Tarut island. It may be that Faysal had recaptured the island. 3 Ibn-Bishr, 11^ 48.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

for his revenge.1 The murder of Turki was brought about by an ungrateful man, Mushari ibn-* Abd al-Rahman.

Generously received when he

returned from captivity in Egypt,2 generously pardoned when he tried to revolt,^ Mushari, nevertheless had a morbid desire to rule and had his benefactor murdered in cold blood.


some authorities claim that Mushari had Turki murdered with

Egyptian connivance,- there is little evidence to support the 4 claim. The details of the murder were as follows.

While Mushari

was in al-Riyad after his unsuccessful attempt to revolt, he had secret conversations with various people there and aroused

their sympathies over his dismissal from the governorship of Manfuhah.

They agreed to murder Turk! as he came out of the

mo sque after the Friday prayer;

At the end of the prayer,~

Turki came out of the mosque by a special door which had been built to facilitate his entry and exit.

Three men" nonchalantly

1 Al-Nabhani, ’'Al-Bahrayn'1, 155; ibn-Bishr, II, 48. According to al-Nabhani, loc. c i t ., this battle was called^"the Battle of Sayhat’’ In al-Bahrayn, and "the War of al-Qatif" In Najd. After Faysal had withdrawn, ‘Abdullah ibn-Ahmad* appointed a new governor in Sayhat and withdrew to al-Bahrayn; al-Nabhani, "Al-Bahrayn," 1 5 5 - o . At the time of Faysal's withdrawal from Sayhat \ ‘Abdullah did not k now of Turki* s murder, nor did he learn, for some time;, of the subsequent fighting in Najd. When he did learn o f it, he planned to attack al-Qatif again, but before he could execute his plans, disputes arose between him and his sons, and he had to settle them. Sayhat was soon lost to him. 2 See above, 3 See above, j>^.86=7. 4 Al-Haribali, 44; ibn-Bishr, II, 49; ef. Musil, 272; Phllby, Arabia. 109-10. See above, ___ 5 One of these was a slave named Ibrahim ibn-Hamzah; ibn-Bishr II, 49.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


maneuvered themselves into position and surrounded him — on each side and one in front of him* attention. the Imam.


Turki was paying no

One of the men suddenly pulled a pistol and shot No sooner had he done so than Mushari appeared from

the mosque and drew his sword, both promising and threatening the other worshipers.

"And the people knew that the scheme

had been prepared in secret.

Thus ended the reign of the

man who had restored the power of his faith and his family. It was a sorry ending, and, as Sir Fu*ad Hamzah, the present Saudi Arabian Minister of State, has pointed out, it was "the first political crime of its kind in /"the history of__7


Su'ud family."2 For the time and place Turki was a good ruler', and he had some qualities which would have entitled him to be a ruler at any time in any place.

He used force when he felt it was-

necessary but also refrained from it when he could.

His kind­

ness and lack of vindictiveness are illustrated, rather ironically, by his early forgiving of Mushari, his murderers. He was also

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 49. See also al-Haribali, 44; Musil, 272; Philfby, A r a b i a . 108; Shaykhu, 178* Stuhlman, 208, and Ztoemer, Arabia. 198, erroneously give 1831 as the date of Turki's death. 2 ^alb . 236 . Contrast, for example, the history of the Rashid dynasty.



R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


well known for his personal generosity to orphans and to the 1 2 poor. The ideals which Turki expressed to his own appointees show that he had the welfare of his people at heart.

That he

was a religious man is self-evident; as long as he lived, he attended classes devoted to religious s t u d i e s . ^

Turki*s abil­

ities might be more accurately measured in terms of his achieve­ ments.

When he began to assume power, Najd was occupied by

foreign troops and badly disunited.

Although he was hardly


responsible for the withdrawal of these troops, he certainly hastened it, and no individual hand did as much as his to restore unity.

Under his guidance the Unitarians came in eleven years

to control all that they had formerly controlled with the ex­ ception of al-Hijaz.

It is barely possible that had Turki lived,

he would have been able to forestall some of the difficulties 4 which were to beset the country in the coming nine years.

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 56. 2 See above, f. ^0 . Turki had attributed to himself the ability to cure diseases, a common attribute of famous men in primitive communitiesj see al-Hariball, 44. Even Shaykhu, 178, saya that "he had studied medicine a little." 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 56. 4 For a general survey of Turki's character see ibn-Bishr, II, 54-7.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.




The assassination of the Imam Turk! brought in its train nine years of unrest in Najd during which there ruled four members of the Su'ud family, Mushari ibn-*Abd al-Rahman (F 2),

Faysal ibn-Turki (E 8), Khalid Ibn-Su'ud (E 24), and 'Abdullah ibn-Thunayyan (E 29).

These n i n e years also saw a renewal of

Muhammad 'All's occupation of Na^d.

This period ended with the

resumption of authority by Fay gal, who then ushered in the long est and most prosperous Su'udi reign between the fall of alDir'Iyah to the Egyptians and the rise to power of the present king.

The reign of Mushari ibn-'Abd al-Rahman, if indeed it can be called a reign,


lasted only forty days.


Continuing the

story of events in al-RIyad,^ we find that as soon as Turki

was shot, his slave Zuwayd


attempted to defend his master

and actually woundedbne of Mushari fs men, but when he found no one else to help him, he fled to the castle.^

Mushari and his

1 See Phllby, Arabia. 367 , n. 1. 2 Al-garibali, 4 4 j ibn-Bishr, II, 48, 51 . 3 See above, p. 103. 4 This man is referred to by ibn-Bishr, e. £., II, 49, as Zuwayd al-‘Abd, Whether al-'Abd means the slave, or the negro. or Is to be considered part of his name Is not clear. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 49.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


henchmen followed and, having Imprisoned the slave, called on the general public for recognition.

The male members of

the Shaykh's family were still in the mosque and refused to

leave its sanctuary without an am an.

When this guarantee had

been granted, they recognised Mushari.^

The body of Turki was

taken to the house of Zuwayd and thence to the cemetary of alRiyad, where, after the * asr prayer, it was prayed over and buried.2

Mushari then began to take control in earnest.

He order­

ed the families of Turki and Faysal from the castle and took possession of it.

This transfer completed, he distributed

largess to the people —

in weapons, money, and clothes ~

and was acknowledged by the townsmen.^ also immediately recognized Mushari.

The Egyptian forces Their recognition of him

was natural in view of Turki*s independent attitude, even if they had not encouraged Mushari to kill Turk! in the first place.^ Zuwayd, in the meantime 9 had escaped and fled to inform Fay gal of events.

Ibn-Bishr says that Mushari did not believe that

1 Ibn-Blshr, II, 49-50. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 50. 3 Ibid. 4 See above, p. 102; Musil, 272; Philby, Arabia, 108; Williams, 44.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Faysal would venture to contest the fait accompli or that he could get popular support if he tried .1

However, upon reeeivO ing the news of his father’s assassination, Faysal immediately returned from Sayhat to al-Hufuf.^

As has already been said,

he kept the news of the assassination from his men until they had all reached al-Hufuf,

Here Faysal called together his 4 loyal supporters and told them what had happened. The most important of those who supported Faysal were: 'Abdullah ibn_ C _ *Ali ibn-Rashid^ of Jabal Shammar, 'Abd al-*Aziz ibn-Muhammad ibn-*Abdullah lbn-Hasan^ governor of Buraydah, Turki al-Hazzanl — 7 amir of al-gariq, Hamad Ibn-Yahya ibn-Ghayhab,' and 'Umar ibn-

Muhammad ibn-'U fay pan® ami r of al-A^taa*.

Faysal informed the

assembled leaders of what had happened and told them that he was going to take revenge.

All of them—

they had all been

loyal followers of the Imam Turki ~ rose and recognized Faysal — o as the rightful imam. Furthermore, they showed their loyalty

1 Vol. II, 50. 2 Whether Faysal first heard of the murder from Zuwayd is not known, but probably he did, 3 See above, 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 50. Wallin, JRGS (1854), 180, mistakenly says that Faysal kept the secret while en route from al-Hufuf to alRiyad. 5 See above, p. 70. 6 See above* p. ; below, J3* 7 See above, pp^T, v. 8 See above, p • 54*7 9 Ibn-Bishr, II, 50.


R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Py agreeing to an immediate inarch on al-Riyad. Most modern accounts place undue emphasis on the part play­ ed by ‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid in these events.

This emphasis

probably results from the undeniably Important role that ‘Abdullah did play in the capture of alRiyad from Mushari and from the fact that most Western accounts draw their material from Ha*il For example, according to Musil ,1 2 the Czechoslovakian explorer, and Palgrave, the British advent­

rather than from al-Riyad.

urer, it was ‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid who advised Fay gal to return from al-Hufuf to al-Riyad immediately, with the forces at hand, rather than to gather a larger army and at the same time to give Mushari an opportunity to consolidate his position in Najd.


account even goes so far as to say that Faygal fled to the Qa$tan •; Bedouins, and that ‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid, refusing to recognize Mushari, attacked and killed the usurper on his own.

This fanci­

ful account goes on to tell how Faysal then returned to al-Riyad, pardoned ibn-Rashid for the murder of Salih, ibn-* Ali and appoint­ ed him amir of Jabal Shammar.^

Ibn-Bishr merely mentions ibn-

1 P. 272. 2 Vol. I, 123. 3 G-uarmanl, 1 2 0 . Guarmani probably got this story from Rashidi sources. As suggested above, p. 108, it is probable that because in the latter half of the nineteenth-century, when most of the preliminary exploration of inland Arabia was carried out, Jabal Shammar was more accessible than al-‘Arid, ‘Abdullah's part in the story was generally exaggerated.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Rashid as one of Faysal's supporters .1

The decision to march was Immediately put into effect. The attackers managed to conceal their movements well enough to prevent Mushari's knowing their whereabouts and reached al-Riyad at night on the nineteenth of Muharram, 1250/last week of May, 1834.


In other words eighteen days after Turki was murdered,

Faysal had gotten word o f the tragedy,- held a conference in alHufuf, and moved his army to al-Riyad.

The rapidity of his

movement suggests comparison with Khalid ibn-al-Walld*s famous march to Damascus. surprise.

It is no wonder that Mushari was taken by

Faysal sent those members of his army who were from

al-Riyad into the town first because the townsmen would be less likely to oppose their fellow citizens.^

These troops immediately

came upon Mushari's pickets, who, when they realized the identity of the intruders, said nothing and allowed them to seize strong points around the castle.

Thus the first that Mushari knew of

the whole operation was the sound of firing.^

He immediately

barricaded the castle and prepared for. a siege although his

1 Vol. II, 50 . 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 50. This would be the night of the eighteenth of Muharram according to European reckoning. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 51 . Of. al-Rihani. Ta»rlkh. 79. who says that a delegation of the townsmen came out to Faysal and asked him not to allow non-Riyadi troops in. This possibility is largely eliminated when one_ considers that the approach of Faysal*s army was unknown to Mushari and presumably therefore to the residents of al-Riyad a a well. 4- Ibn-Bishr, II, 51.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


situation seems to have been hopeless from the beginning.


the morning of the nineteenth of Muharram, Faysal entered the city and personally directed the attach on the castle_.


defenders, who were well provisioned with food and ammunition, consisted of about 140 men, including Suwayd, the governor of Jala.JII, who found himself there by chance.-

seige day and night.

Faysal pressed the

The first break came on the ninth of Safar

about three week® after the seige had begun> when some of the defenders, of the Subay* tribe, saw that further resistance was useless and forsook Mushari.

Others of like opinion went to

Suwayd and asked him to seek ama» from Faysal.

On the eleventh

of Safar, Suwayd sent to Faysal requesting aman for all in the castle except those directly Implicated in the murder of Turki. Having received the message* Faysal took counsel and decided to grant the request because he was afraid of closing the state funds which were in the castle and also because he feared dis­ cs sension among the people should he refuse. Once the aman had been granted, a group of forty men under ‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid; Bada£, the chief of the A1 Jaysh section

1 Ibid. Suwayd was in the castle as a result of the fact that he had come to pay his respects to Turki, not knowing of the latter* s murder. When Suwayd reached al-Riyad, he was met by Mushari, who forced him to stay in the castle; al-Rihani, Ta*hikh. 79 . Al-Rlhanl, l o c . clt.. spells the name Suwayyad TT). For more information on Suwayd, see above, pp. 3 6 5 n. Z; & 3 . Huber, Journal. 152, spells the name "Aswayd"; Huber*s mistake in spelling shows the same mistake as: that m a d e by the Americans of the Arabian American Oil Co. who write 11Abqayq** when designst ing the name of the Oil fields southwest of Dhahran. This name should properly be Buqayq, but a slight aspiration before the Initial consonant, plus a shortening — almost a disappearance of the Initial vowel in the speech of the Arabians, give; rise to both errors. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 51-2. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


of al-'Ujmanj and ‘Abdullah ibn-Khamis, a foster brother (


of Turki went to the foot of the castle wall where Suwayd and his friends threw ropes to them.

One can Imagine these forty

warriors scrambling up the ropes in the dead of the night. , They entered the castle, killed Mushari and five of his supporters,,, and took his head and body out of the castle to prove their victory and set an example.

Faysal then entered the castle."^

1 Ibn-Bi shr, II, 51-2. Although *Abdullah ibn-Rashid did play an Important part in the capture of the castle and the revenge on Mushari, his part has been overly stressed. Huber, Jom*nal. 151- 8, for example, gives a very garbled version_of this in­ cident . Among o ther things he make s ibn-Thunayyan the murderer of Turki and makes Su'ud the father of Faysal! He says_that the reason for the daring attempt of *Abdullah. Ibn-Rashid was that Faysal *s Bedouin force was beginning to disperse; a fact which necessitated immediate action. He has 4Abdullah ibnRashid enter the castle on two successive nights, on the second of which Faysal accompanied him. He also_relates how when ‘Abdullah was wrestling with “ibn-Thunayyan*s" favorite slave, an e specially strong man, he called on Faysal for assistances "Feiyal, tout pr#t, arriva et comprit vite* la position; palpsfeit l ’un des deux, II demanda a Abdullah: *Est-ce t o n ventre qud Je tiens? — Hon, repondit ce dernier. Et 1A dessus, FeJtcal enfonca son polgnard dans le ventre de I ’esclave* et la fendlt sn duexi"_ _ Al-Rihani* s version, Ta> rikh. 79-80. also differs greatly_ from that of ibn-Bishr. According to it, ‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid went to one tower of the castle where he saw Suwayd (see above, p. 110, n. 1) and_called to him, asking, “What is your relation­ ship with the Su*ud family?” Suwayd answered, I am funder com­ pulsion.” Then ‘Abdullah asked> “If I bring you an aman from Faysal, will you throw us a rope so that we can climb to the castle?" Suwayd replied, “I am one of Turk!*s men and I will help you on condition that Faysal give me the aman and grant me the palms of al-Dahinah.“ They agreed on this, Suwayd threw

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


A picture of these same events as seen from Inside the castle is given in a letter received by ibn-Bishr from Shaykh Muhammad ibn-Ibrahim ibn-Sayf,^

in which he describes Mushari's

last days as follows:

When it was Tuesday, the-ninth of dhu al-Khayr £~a nickname, for Safar_7 , two or three people descended from the castle, after the exhaustion of good reason jT for f i g h ting^ and after the reinforcements had shown them­ selves negligent in coming and in fighting. On Wednes­ day eleven people descended from the castle together, and when those inside saw what the condition was, theirfears increased until each of them thought he would perish. Then when the dark night of Thursday, the eleventh of Safar des­ cended, Suwayd secured aman for those who were in*the castle, —


m _________-- n —


-f/ •

down a rope, and ‘Abdullah climbed, up with twenty soldiers. In the fight which followed ‘Abdullah was wounded.in the hand, but he and the. twenty, men captured the castle, and surrounded and killed Mushari and his followers. According to Palgrave, I, 123-5, on the twenty-first night of the siege ibn-Rashid became impatient with the delay and, accompanied by two of his kinsmen from Jabal Shammar, went to the walls where an ”old retainer” let them in. After a wild West struggle in which Mushari shot the two kinsmen and one of them_saved ‘Abdullah with his last move, ‘Abdullah killed Mushari, went to the walls and threw the dead man* s head into Fay sal’s camp, which knew nothing of the whole affair, Zehme, 377, follows Palgrave* s version* _ Musil, 272, also has ‘Abdullah slay Mushari. Phllby, Arabia. 109,_more or less follows ibn-Bishr* s. account, but adds that ibnRashid ”avenged the murder of Turki by slaying Mi#shari_wi th his own hand." Wahbah, 223, does not even mention ‘Abdullah ibnRashid* s part in the incident. _ The persistent tradition that ‘Abdullah personally killed Mushari may have some basis in fact, but in view of the lack of evidence must not be uncritically accepted. See above, p. let, n. 3 . Hamzah, Qalb. 236, -wrongly dates Mushari* s death in 1246. See also al-Hanball, 44. 1 See above, *p. ^’f’, n./.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

with the exception of those who had been present at the murder, who had given orders /""in connection with it_7 , who had connived in it, or who had /"actuallyJ participat­ ed in the killing. And the instigator of the trouble, with three others, was inside the castle in ignorance, and the treason of their army was unknown to them until an unlooked-for punishment befell them. When the usurper . . . . awoke to it, he realized that his covetousness had been his undoing and his death. Then whenever he ascended to a tower in the castle, hoping that they would admit him, they would say to him, "Return; it is better for you." In fact they chased him away. Then when his friends had given him up, he and those with him went to the meanest place in the castle and hid therein. His troops, who were in the towers, permitted men from the army of the oppressed one /""FaysalJ to ascend /"to the castle_7 , and then those men descended / ” into the castle 7 to kill him. Thereupon the fighting and the striking continued — see- sawing. They* they killed Mushari *s friends before him and-, when they had gotten rid of them, faced him .and made him their aim.And when they had wounded him heavily and troublously, he hid in the -room £~under_7 the stairs and sought an interview with* hi s^ cousin; but they refused him. When he asked for a drink of water, they did not bring it.Then he came out /^of his hiding place_7 . •• . defeated by tyranny* after which they kindled in him the fire of salt and. lead and took revenge . . . with the sword . . . . And the total of those killed with him and after him were six men. Faysal then alighted at the castle and the Muslims gathered round him . . .3

1 j,allI Jil. This i s a euphemistic reference to the latrine 2 . Latrines of this type are two storey structures. One who wants to use the latrine climbs a flight of stairs to the second floor. The lower floor is the refuse pit. Apparently after he had been wounded, Mushari sought refuge in the alcove under the stairs. Dr. Jibra*il Jabbur helped in interpreting this passage. 3 Quoted by ibn-Bishr, II, 52-3.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Faysal was immediately recognized as Imam.

His first

offical act was to invite the qadis of the various districts to come to al-Riyad, a procedure which suggests the religious basis of Unitarian society. for more than a month.

The (Jadis were Faysal*-s guests

He showed them his confidence by gen­

erously bestowing presents on them.^

Further, he wrote an

epistle for general distribution among his people in which he urged all to be faithful to Islam and to each other.

Then the

amirs, governors, and Bedouin chiefs came to Faysal and pledged their allegiance.

When they returned to their respective homes,

the Imam ordered, his agents to go to each tribe to collect the ■3


Faysal*s first task was to try to consolidate his internal position.

He commenced by sending a force under Hamad ibn-

*Abdullah lbn-'Ayyaf into Wadi al-Dawasir, where the people 4 had become unruly and were fighting each other. The expedition lasted about a month and successfully restored order in that district.

A little later the Imam himself mobilized his troops - 5 and, after minor skirmishes with Bedouins, he camped at 3ha*ra*,

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 65 . 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 66. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 66-7. 5 This town is about ninety miles southwest of Shaqra* on the direct route from Shaqra* to Makkah. It is described by Hafiz Wahbah, 147, n. 1 , as "thefirstvillage of Najd / “coming_7 from the region of al-Hijaz." Wahbah, loc. cit., and ibn-Bishr, II, 67, call it al-Sha*ra* : Hamzah, Qalb, 371 and Philby, Heart. I, 147, merely call it Sha* r a * .

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


where he stayed about forty days.-1- While there, Faysal learned that the Qa^tan under ibn-al-Dujma had fled from the tax collect ors.

He Immediately attacked this disobedient tribe, which.

in the ensuing battle lost about sixty men.

After Faysal had

returned to Sh* ra*, he received delegates from Muhammad lbnQarmalah,2 chief of the Qa-jjitan.

Muhammad, and with him the

people of Wadi al-Dawasir, sought forgiveness for what they —

had done.

Most important, Muhammad ibn-Faysal al-Dawish,

chief of the Mutayr tribe, also came to Sha*ra* to make his submission.

This tribe had long been sympathetic to the Egypt­

ian cause and the fact that it now allied itself with the Unitarians shows the power of the latter.^ At the beginning of the year 1251/early May, 1835 while

Faysal was still at Sha*ra*, he dismissed Salih ibn-*Abd al5

Muhsin ibn-* All


from the amirate of Jabal Shammar and appoint­

ed *Abdullah ibn-Rashid to succeed him.^

But Salih did not

give up his ancestral patrimony without resistance:.

When ibn-

Rashid went to Ha* il to take control, trouble gradually arose

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 67. Ibrahim ibn-Sayf accompanied Faysal on this expedition. 2 See above, p. 91, 3 See above, p. Il¥. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 67; Musil, 272. 5 See above, Z*l. ' _ _ 6 Ibn-Bishr, II, 67. *Abd_al-*Az^z ibn-* Uthman ibn-* Abd alJabbar accompanied ‘Abdullah as qadi, and stayed in Ha’ll about three months, after which time Faysal permitted him to return to his home; see above, p^.’Uf-A**.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

between the Rashid; and ‘All factions until one day at Friday prayer an argument took place at which swords were drawn.


congregation restrained the contestants from actual fighting in the mosque, but- Salih rose with his followers and entered his fort.

In answer, ‘Abdullah collected his troops, forced

Sali£ from Jabal Shammar, and destroyed the family stronghold. Salih and his family fled and headed for Buraydah, probably en route to al-gijaz.

‘Abdullah then wrote Fay gal to inform him

of the Incident and to establish the guilt of §alih as aggressor. The reply was that the fugitives had already been captured in al-Qaslm and killed.^

However, Salih's nephew ‘Isa had managed

to escape and to Join the Egyptians.^

‘Abdullah, now well en­

trenched in his capital, entrusted a lot of the fighting, through out his reign to his younger brother ‘Ubayd, who, though he never was amir, outlived ‘Abdullah and was very famous for his prowess at war. Another version of ‘Abdullah's rise to the position of amir of Jabal Shammar has gained currency among modern writers. According to it, ‘Abdullah Ibn-Rashid was appointed governor of Jabal Shammar immediately after Mushari's death in gratitude 3

for the help he had given Fay sal In regaining his throne.


1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 67-8. 2 Hamzah, Qalb. 342. 3 Philby, Arabia. 109. According to Palgrave, I, 125, Faysal named ‘Abdullah "absolute governor of his native province, Shomer with right of succession, supplied him with troops and all other

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Bishr's version, in which it will have been noticed that Faysal

waited a year before dismissing Salih is less romantic but more probable. Nevertheless, it remains true that by a Su‘u d ’s hand was founded the famous Rashid dynasty at Ha* il — . a dynasty which was, about half a century later, to overcome that of the Su‘uds completely and to remain in power well into the reign of the present Su*udi ruler, ‘Abd al-*Aziz. After Faysal had settled the internal affairs of his domain, he directed his attention to the more distant provinces.


RabA* Second, 1251/August, 1835 the Imam removed Ibn-Ghanim from the governorship of al-Qatlf and appointed Zuwayd1 in his place.

Faysal no doubt gave this position to Zuwayd in gratitude

means for the establishment of his rule.” Huber’s story, Journal. 158, seems to be more accurate than that of others, but_varies considerably_from ibn-Bishr* s, for he says that ‘Abdullah remain­ ed in al-Riyad for a year until Salih came to bring Faygal trib­ ute. Both were then sent back to ga’il aa co-amirs, after which ‘Abdullah soon made himself master^ See also, Euting, I, 167; Hamzah, Qalb. 342; al-Rlhanl, Ta* rlkh. 80. According to Wallin, JRGS (1854), 181, although Faysal appointed ibn-Rashid amir im­ mediately after Musharl*s death, Faysal was not yet strong enough to give his friend any troops. Nevertheless, Wallin reports, ibn-Rashid went alone to Jabal Shammar and, while hiding in Jabal A 3ai» gradually built up the strength of his party in Ha*il and Qifar. When he felt that his strength was sufficient, *he_vanquish­ ed Salih, who fled with his three brothers towards al-Madinah, _ where they hoped to get help from the Egyptian governor. *Abdullah^ brother ‘Ubayd caught them at a village called Qasr al-Sulayml, and killed all but one, ‘Isa. This ‘Isa, who later made a brief return to Ha’il as amir, escaped to al-Madlnah, where: the E gyp tian pashavreeeived him kindly and promised him troops. However, ‘Abdullah had also sent ‘Ubayd to al-Madinah, and’he was able to buy the neutrality of the pasha {for two thousand, camels, money, and other presents). ‘Isa was retained as a "guest” in al-Madinah in order to make ‘Abdullah fulfill his promised. 1 See above, pp. ld^-6.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


for the latter's loyalty to Turki.

Zuwayd took a force of one

hundred men with him to ensure his being accepted by the people of al-Qatif.

Ibn-Ghanim’3 son and 'Abd al-Rahlm, the governor

of Sayhat,1 both sent representatives to al-Riyad to show their 2 — — compliance. Further, even ‘Abdullah ibn-Khalifah, of al-Bahrayn, sent his sons as delegates to Faysal.^ Nor did the Unitarians forget 'Uman.

It was in the winter

of 1835- 6 that Wellsted was attempting to travel through 'Uman under the protection of its ruler, the Sayyid Sa'Id.


notes that the banu-abti-'All, who had been very strong before 4 their defeat at British hands in 1235-6/1820, maintained their belief in the tenets of Muhammad ibn-'Abd al-Wahhab and that,9 • although they were less "fanatic" than f o r m e r l y , ^ they still wished to remove all semblance of the Sayyid Sa'Id's rule*-During this winter Ibn-Mutlaq, with two thousand men, joined hands with the Sayyid Sa'Id in besieging Suhar, which seaport, along with the town of Rastaq, was in the hands of Sa'id’s

1 See above, p. 162, n. I. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 68. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 69 . 4 See above, p. \S . 5 Wellsted, Travels. I, 64; Hogarth. Penetration. 136. 6 Wellsted, Travels. I, 64. Wellsted says that In November, 1835 the Sayyid Sa' Id was fifty-two years old and that he had reigned twenty-seven years; he describes him as a very liberal and fine man; Travels. I, 6.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


rebellious kinsman, Hammud.

This Joint campaign presumably

resulted from invoking the mutual defense treaty of 1833.1

Ibn-Mutlaq's force ravaged the surroundings of Suhar and besieg­ ed Hammud in the port on the land side; the Sayyid Sa'id block­ aded it by sea,

gammud's position had become desparate, when

he managed to convince Sa* id that ibn-Mutlaq meant to annex t Suhar into Faysal*s realm once the town fell, Sa'id, therefore, 2 broke off the siege. Hie Unitarians were also reported in the ‘Umani town of Suwayk (?■).

All the interior region, centering

on al-Buraymi. was Unitarian, as was the Pirate Coast.^ says of al-Buraymi:


"Become a Wahabi stronghold and the resi­

dence of the representative of Riad, it rejected the authority of the Sultan of Oman; and not till the temporal power of,the Sa'ud dynasty had so far declined before the rising star of Hail, that it no longer maintained its influence on the Gulf coasts, could the Maskat government assure anyone* s safety beyond the Batina coast.

It will also be remembered that

in the last year of Turkirs reign, the Sayyid Sa'id had been forced to pay tribute to al-Riyad,^ and Philby's statement that

1 See above, T»2 Badger, lxxvii; Miles, II, 339; Wellsted, Travels. I, 219, 2234, 231. 3 Wellsted. Travels. I, 190, 235, 238, 257: Hogarth, Penetration, 140-1. “ 4 Penetration. 230. 5 See above, "p. 8 S'.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

"the Wahhabi power was never again / ”after the Egyptian conquest_7 effectively established in any part of Oman or on the pirate c o a s t i s not accurate.

In fact, according to Wellsted, the

knowledge that Sa' id was supported by the British prevented the _

Unitarians from overturning all of 'Uman.


To the west the foes of Unltarianism suffered more setbacks, for in 1249/1833-4 Muhammad 'All’s forces, under the command of Ahmad Pasha and ibn-'Awn, the Sharif of Makkah, marched south into 'Asir Just after Tiirk^e Bilmez had been defeated.


Egyptians seemed-to have chosen a n auspicious time for their ■3

attack, but even so, they were driven back. - One interesting maneuver of the Viceroy in this expedition —

a maneuver which

he repeated shortly afterwards in the case of Khalid ihn-Su'ud (E 24) — was that he sent Dawsarl, a son of the famous abte4 Nuqtah, with the expedition and named him governor of 'Asir should that province be conquered i

Aged thirty-five at the

time, Dawsari was. one of the deportees who had been educated 5 in Cairo by Muhammad 'All. It was- the latter’s hope that the good name of Dawsarl’s father would help divide opinion in 'Asir and thus facilitate the invader’s progress.

1 Arabia. 110. 2 Travels. I, 403. 3 Tamisier, I, 370; H'Asir,” El; Wahbah, 41. 4 See above, f• 5 Tamisier, II, 82-3, describes Dawsari lbn-abi-Nuqtah as having bronze skin, piercing eyes, and a nonchalant bearing.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Tamisier-, a Frenchman in Muhammad *Ali*s service, records a significant conversation which, he had with Dawsari. the conversation Tamisier said:


"Les Ouahabies seuls me paraiss-

ent destines a relier entre elles les peuplades eparses de votre peninsule; ils ont ete arretes malheureusement au miller de leur premier ^lan; 11 s recommenceront sans doute plus tard." To this statement Dawsari made a reply that is remarkable con­ sidering the time and the place:

"C*est la notre espoir; quoi-

que je ne suis pas un de leur sectaires, je me rejouirais de leur avenement a la puissance, car

suis Arabe avant tout.

In 1251/1835 Muhammad *All once more decided to attempt —

the conquest of *Aslr, which he considered the key to Arabia.


He reinforced his army in al-Hijaz by sending Ibrahim KttcUk Pasha,


who was his nephew and the brother of Ahmad Pasha,


with three regular infantry regiments and two thousand cavalry­ men, bringing the total Egyptian forces in Arabia to eighteen thousand.^

Iticflk and ibn-*Awn led the expedition.

But the former


allowed his regiments to fight separately, and as a result the

1 Tamisier,. I, 362; Italics are mine. Elsewhere, speaking for himself, Tamisier says of Muhammad ‘All: ”11 devait alors craindre tout developpement^du ouahabltisme, puisque ces sectaires avaient le desaein bien arretS de reconstituer sur des bases nouvelles la nationality arabev; vol. I, 360. 2 Cattaul, III.* go. 45. 3 "Little" Ibrahim_Pasha, a nickname given this man to avoid confusion with Ibrahim Pasha, the son of Muhammad ‘All. The word KttgiSk: equals old Turkish :1s borrowed from Persian 4 Oattaui, II, rfo. 88; both were sons of one of Muhammad *Ali*s sisters; a third brother Husayn Bey was a nonentity. 5 Mengin, Histoire aommaire. 93; Tamisier, I, 360, n. 1; Weygand, II, 88. !

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


men of 'Asir once more slaughtered the Egyptians,^

Kiicilk 9

retired to al-Qunfudhah, leaving behind him two thousand sick 2 — — and wounded. The *Aslris sent the Imam Pay gal a large quantity of weapons and horses after their v i c t o r y . 3

Muhammad ' A l l

was thoroughly disgusted with this second rout in as many years, and he recalled both Ahmad Pasha and Ibn-*Awn to Cairo in 1251/1836.

The latter was kept there for some time on a

pension; the former returned to Arabia soon after.



to guard against further defeats, Muhammad *Ali sent Khurshid Pasha,^ with two new regiments and some artillery^ to take command of the- army J

As a result of Khurshid's arrival, the

1 Mengin, Hlstolre sommafcrea 93-5: Tamisier, I, 360, n. 1; Weygand, II, 88 . 2 Weygand, II, 88 . It was this fighting which prevented Wellsted from taking his projected trip into *Aslr and deflected him to 'Uman; Travels. I, 2. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 68 . According to ibn-Bishr, loc. olt.. when • the Egyptians reached *Asir, they asked for nominal obedience only. When the natives agreed, the Invaders began to take much ; more than they had asked for, and the 'Asix^s decided to revolt By pretending to approach the Invaders to engage In sports with them, the Unitarians caught the Egyptians off guard, and so de­ feated them. 4 According to Hurgronje, Mekka, I, 161, Muhammad *A1I accepted the suggestlon_of Ahmad Pasha that he return alone. He promised to conquer *Asir in* three, months. According to Ibn-Bishr, II, 68, the recall of Ahmad was only a maneuver to trick Ibn-‘Awn, whom Muhammad /All did not trust, into coming to Egypt. See also Mengin, Hlstolre sommalre. 95/ and Weygand, II, 88, neither of whom mention the return of Ahmad to ai-Hljaz; however, that he continued to be stationed in’Arabia is evident because In Safar, 1254/April, 1838 he wrote a report to ^usayn Pasha, the Viceroy's first aide-de-camp, in which he refers to himself as "general in chief of the army of al-Hijaz"; Cattaui, III, no. 44 bis. 5 This Is the same person who, as Khurshid Bey^ had been expelled from Juddah by Tiirkce Bilmez; see above, pj». 4 \ff. 6 Mengin, Hlstolre sommaire, 95. _ _ 7 The exact relationship between Khurshid Pasha's and Ahmad Pasha’s authority is difficult...to determine. Mengin, H i s t o l r e ^ H W sommaire. 95, says that Khurshid was named governor, as doe Phllby, Arabia, 112. f d l I R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


respite that the Imam Faysal had gained by the victories of his

*Asir coreligionists was destined to be short-lived. In-Najd Faysal was carrying on the usual business of his realm, but he must also have had an inkling of what was going on in al-Hijaz for Dawsarl appeared in Najd on behalf of the Egyptian authorities in al-Hijaz asking Fay gal for tribute. Faysal immediately dispatched his brother Jalwi with "presents" for Ahmad Pasha, who was in Makkah.

When Jalwi returned, he

found Faysal camping in al-Dahna*, where he was receiving 2 delegations and collecting taxes from the tribes. That he was —

able to collect taxes from the ‘Anazah in al-Qasim his authority there was unquestioned.


shows that

At the same time the

people of al-Qagim requested Faysal to send Shaykh ‘Abdullah ibn-*Abd al-Rahman abu-Butayyln,^ who was living in Shaqra*, as qadi of the-province.

Faysal accepted the request and

ordered him to *Unayzah.

After abu-Butayyin had been there a

while, the people asked him to bring his family and to live 5 there permanently, which he did. In this year prices rose sharply —

wheat to a riyal for five or six sa* s and dates to

a riyal^ for fifteen waznahs.

In Jabal Shammar, to the north,

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 68; ibn-Bishr does not specify what the claims were, but probably they were for camels. See below, p. 124. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 69. 3 Ibid. 4 See above, p . T Z , n. Z . 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 69. 6 Ibn-Bishr, II, 69; see above, p#.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid was consolidating his position.


addition to having rid himself of the rival 'All family, he had begun construction of a large castle in the Barzan quarter of Ha*il,' made Unitarianism the official religion of the Jabal, and encouraged Najdi mutaygwi*s^to come to Ha*il. However, all activities directed toward extension of Unitarian rule were soon brought to an end.

The primary mission

of Khurshid Pasha, who had Just reached al-^ijaz, had been to occupy 'Asir.

On arriving In Juddah, however, he had found

that no camels were available for transport.


the mission of Dawsari ibn-abi-Nuqtah to Faysal

In all probability


represented an

attempt to remedy this deficiency by demanding camels as tribute. When this method of procurement failed, Muhammad *All sent -4 -

G-eneral Ismail Bey, former chief of the Cairo police, with some four thousand irregular troops to aid Kuurshid.^


force, which left Cairo in Raba* First-Rabi* Second, 1252/July, 1836, was to have the dual purpose of reducing the new Su'udl state and of getting camels for Khurshid.

It appears that when

1 Literally, "those who cause obedience," i. e., to God. This title is equivalent in_NaJdi usage to the word faqlh elsewhere. Consult "Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad Ibn-*Abd al-Wahhab, " alZahra*. 424, n. 1; Palgrave’l, 79, 201, 317. 2 Mengin, Hlstoire sommaire. 95; Weygand, II, 88. Mengin, loc. clt.. says that Khurshid required ten thousand camels. 3 See above, p. I£3. 4 Cattaul, II, ho. 35; this source estimates the force at twentyfour hundred men; ibn-Bishr, II, 70, puts it at two thousand.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

125 Faysal heard of the impending Invasion, he offered to furnish five thousand camels to the Egyptians if they would agree not to Invade Najd.

He was told that fifteen thousand would spare

him the

invasion, but he seems to have refused to furnish such

a large

number.^ Accompanying Isma'il Bey was Khalld Ibn-Su* ud

(E 24),

who as a member of the original ruling branch of the

Su* ud family waslikely to gain the loyalty of

many previously

loyal to his father Su*ud (D 14) and his brother ‘Abdullah (E 11)^ Like Dawsari in *Asir, Khalld was to divide the country and to be its governor after its capture.

Some in Najd might have wel­

comed a return to this branch of the family, but the quisling­ like nature of Khalld’s position was so obvious that he could not have attracted many. Faysal learned of this force as soon as it reached the Red Sea port of al-Yanbu* , and he immediately sent an envoy, - 3 Muhammad ibn-Nahid al-Harbl, the governor of Qasr al-Bassam, to give the Egyptians presents and to scout out the situation. 4 Al-Harbl seems to have accomplished little, for the army pro— — u ceeded on to al-Madinah and thence to al-^&nakiyah.

1 Cattaui, II, No. 67; in this correspondence Faysal is referred to as the Shaykh of al-Dlr*Iyah. See also Blunt, 262; Zwemer, Arabia. 198. _ 2 See Appendix B for genealogical tables. This Khalld was the youngest son of Su*ud, the third Imam, and hence a brother of *Abdullah, who surrendered to Ibrahim Pasha. He had been de­ ported to Egypt along with his other brothers after the fall of al-Dir*lyah and educated there by Muhammad *Ali. See above, H- Z6t 123; ibn-Bishr, II, 69-70; al-Hanbali, 46. 3 According to a native of Buraydah with whom I talked, this small town is located two day’s march to the west of Buraydah. Ibn-Bishr, II, 70, writes it Qasr Bassam. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 70. 5 Ibid.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Confronted by this advance, Faysal began to mobilize his army.

‘Abdullah ibn-Rashid advised him to act immediately —

to march to al-Qasim and occupy it before the Egyptians could get there and before Khalld could be recognized as ruler by the people.^ By early dhu al-Qa‘dah, 1252/middle of February, 183? 9 Faysal's warriors had come in from all the districts, and he departed for al-Qasim.

He pitched camp at ~al-Tunnumah and

waited there until Khalld and Isma* 11 reached al-Rass, the gateway to al-Qasim from al-Hijaz.

After enlisting Yahya ibn-

Sulayman, governor of *Unayzah, and *Abd al-*Azlz, governor of Buraydah, and their respective contingents, Faysal skirmished with the invaders, "but killing did not take place between themV^ Despite the fact that the two forces had not really clashed,; Faysal*s army seems to have lacked any will to fight.

At one

stage in the maneuvering, when for tactical purposes Faysal ordered his heavy equipment back to ‘Unayzah, some of his warriors became panic-stricken.^

The one at tack, which the

Unitarians did launch was not effective, and finally their whole force fell back on ‘Unayzah, reaching that town on the a

twenty-fourth of dhu al-EIiJjah, 1252/about April first, 1837•

1 2 3 4

Ibid. Ibid. Ibn-Bishr, II, 70-1. Ibn-Bishr, II, 71.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



seeing that he could not stand before the Egyptians,

disbanded his army and returned to al-Rlyad with a few followers whom he could trust absolutely — Fafc4

mostly from al-Kharj and al-

Some of the inhabitants of al-Riyad, who no doubt sensed

what was happening, were openly hostile to the Imam, and when skirmishes broke out in the capital itself, Faysal had to quiet the offenders by distributing largess*

Ev e n so, he took what

he wanted from the castle secretly and posted a guard of the faithful to ensure his personal safety when he left the castle. Having made a getaway, Faysal, and four hundred followers, went immediately to al-Kharj.


They spent ten days there and then

proceeded to al-Hufuf, where Faygal's governor, 4Umar ibn4U f a y s a n ,

^ moved out of the castle of al-Kut in order to allow

Fay gal to use it.

4Umar promised his personal support, as did

other leaders of the area.

Faysal remained in al-Hufuf from

the eleventh of Muharram to the end of Rabi4 First, 1253/middle of Api^il tp early July, 1837*

While there* he received dile-

gatlons from the Mutayr, al-4Ujman, al-Suhul, and Subay4 tribes.

1 Muhammad ibn-Qarmalah, a Qahtan chief, (see above, -S\t belw, $ accompanied Faysal as far as Thadiq, but was dismissed when they reached that town; ibn-Bishr, II, 71. 2 Mengin, Hlstolre sommalre. 95. 3 See above, | l e i . 4 The foregoing account of Faysal*s movements from the time of the fighting in al-Qasim until*he reached al-Hufuf is based on ibn-Bishr, II, 69-72,*the only source which gives any details. Palgrave, II, 65, who mistakenly places Khurshid in direct com­ mand of the Egyptian troops, says that the Egyptian attack was so unexpected that Faysal scarcely had time to get away. Philby, Arabia. 112, has him fiy to al-gawtah. Blunt, 262, and Shaykhu, 179, agree with ibn-Bishr in having him go to al-Ahsa*. However, Shaykhu*s statement l o c . c l t ., that, after reaching al-Alisa*,

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Meanwhile Isma* Il Bey and Khalld ibn-Su‘ud were making rapid progress.

As soon as Faysal evacuated ‘Unayzah, the

Egyptians attacked it, and after a short campaign Yahya ibnSulayman capitulated.

'Abd al-'Azlz of Buraydah and the rest

of al-Qasim followed suit and recognized Khalid.^ step was to deal with *Abdullah ibn-Rashid.

The next

Yahya ibn-Sulayman,

now co-operating with the invaders, gathered his local levies and, supported by Ibrahim al-Mu* awin an Egyptian in command of regular troops, set out for Jabal Shammar accompanied by 'Isa lbn-'Ali.

'Isa was head of the Shammari family previously de­

posed by 'Abdullah ibn-Rashid,^ and was to take over as the proEgyptian amir.

This force had hoped to surprise ibn-Rashid, but

he learned of'the-plan and fled,^ as did many other people of the di strict

After making monetary exactions, Ya]£ya and Ibrahim

returned to al-Qasim leaving 'Isa as amir with a garrison of one hundred Egyptians.^

A few months later, after the defeat, of the

Egyptians at al-gulwah,^'Abdullah and his supporters returned to Jabal Shammar and using 0,1far as a base, successfully fought 'Isa 7 and for the second time expelled him from the district.*

Fay gal assumed a disguise, made the pilgrimmage, and then went to Damascus and studied Hanbali law is without any foundation In fact. 1 Musil, 272. 2 See above,pp. 70, 17. 3 He hid during this short period of exile in the oases of alJubbah In the middle of the al-Nufud; Hamzah, Q a l b , 342. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 72. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 72; Musil, 272;Philby, Arabia, 112. 6 See below, PP* I32-^. 7 Ibn-Bishr, II, 78.Hamzah. Qalb. 342.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Khalid's prestige rose rapidly.

Al-Riyad sent him dele­

gates while he was still in ‘Unayzah, and "Najd obeyed him except for al-Kharj and al-Far* ."■**

In al-Qasim Khalid and

Isma‘11 sent out appraisers for tax purposes, but in other districts the Egyptian hold on the country was still so pre­ carious that they had to rely on local appraisals.


temporarily secured themselves, Khalid and the Egyptians set out for al-Riyad, which they reached on Saturday, the seventh of Safar, 1253/second half of May, 1837.

Khalld and Ismaf'ilp.—

entered the palace, and the various governors came to acknowledge the new ruler.2

Faysal's first rule, which had lasted from

1250/1834 until 1253/1837, was officially at an end.


the men who had fled from al-Riyag wi t h Faysal, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn-gasan (B 2), ‘All ibn-Husayn (B 6), ‘Abd al-Malik ibn-gusayn (B 4), and gusayn ibn-Hamad ibn-Husayn (C 15) *— Shaykh's family —

all from the

fled to the southern districts, where they

encouraged resistance to Khalid.^ One of the most interesting aspects of this Egyptian in­ vasion is the rapidity with which the Najdis deserted and even turned on Faysal once Khalid and the Egyptians had entered their territory.

Their actions undoubtedly result to Borne extent from

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 72. See also Musil, 272; Wahbah, 224. 2 Ibn-Bishr.* II, 72. Mengin*s statement, Hlstolre sommalre. 95, that Khalld and Isma'il entered al-Dir*iyah after hard marches and fights is hardly accurate; Weygand, II, 88, follows Mengin. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 73.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


the fact that Khalld ibn-Su*ud had prestige in the country. But more significantly they reveal the lack of nationalism In the modern sense of the word.

Later, when the people of

Najd began to feel once more the results of foreign occupation, they struggled against the Egyptians, but for the moment they were content to avoid a second devastation of the country and to support the winning side. The reign of Faysal*s successor, Khalid ibn-Su'ud (E 24), was not successful.

Khalid relied increasingly on Egyptian

support^ received increasingly less popular support, and was finally driven from Najd by his kinsman ‘Abdullah ibn-Thunayyan (E 29).

Khalid had a veneer of European education and tastes,

which he had received during his long exile in Egypt,^ but this fact probably hurt him in the eyes of the Najdi Unitarians. The Najdl chronicler al-ganbali, for instance, not only accuses him of "walking on the road of the ,Egyptians," but says that O his love of amusement caused his prestige to diminish. The four and a half years during which he held sway, from §afar, 1253/May, 1837 until Shawwal, 1257/November-December, 1841, were marked mostly by raid and eounterraid, by intrigue and violence.^

1 Avril, 25. 2 Pp. 45-6; al-Hanbali says that Khalid*s mother was an Abyssinian; the*chronicler admits that he was intelligent — even brilliant. 3 Consult Blunt, 262.

- :- K .

.as R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Khalid. and Isma'il's first concern was to try to secure the submission of the southern districts of al-Hawtah and alHariq.

A letter to Turki al-Hazzani, amir, of the latter dis­

trict, calling on. him to come to al-Riyad, brought the follow­ ing blunt answer characteristic of the sturdy folk of the south­ ern oases:

"If it is / ”really_7 your show


, and

Turkish /~I. e., Egyptian_7 soldiers do not come to our region, we are your subjects; but If It Is a Turkish affair, /~well_7 we are fighting them."1

Isma*il ordered preparations for an

attack on these non-conformists, and Khalld mobilized the militia 2 of those districts which obeyed him. Their combined Egyptian and Arabian force, estimated by ibn-Bishr at about seven thousand men, left al-Riyad on the first day of Rab£* Second, 1253/ early July, 1837.^

The southern coalition that opposed it

consisted of the m e n of al-garlq under Turki al-Hazzani, those of al-Hawtah under Ibrahim ibn-*Abdullah Ibn-Ibrahlm, those of Na* am under Zayd ibn-Hilal, those of al-gulwah under Muhammad Ibn-Kharif, and Bedouins of the Al-Murshid subsection of banu-

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 72; Wahbah, 223. 2 The leaders Included Muhammad Ibn-*Abd al-Karim al-Bawaridl,_ amir of al-Washm, and Hamad ibn-Mubarak (see above, p. £8), amir of al-Mihmal. It was at this time that Khalld appointed Ahmad al-Sudayri as amir of Sudayr. Ahmad was generally recognized as a fine man, and his family still serves that o f the Su*uds today. Alunad did not bring his warriors because of a drought which was*so severe that many of the people of Sudayr were forced to move to al—Basrah and al-Zubayr. Consult ibn-Bishr, II, 73* 79-80. * 3 Ibn-Bishr, II,_73. 4-drbid' . On the Al~MarBhld,i— oonoult I.Iamzali, d a l b .—*133. 5 Owe abu^e," p.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Tamlm under Fawzan ibn-Muhammad.^ When the Egyptian army reached al-Kharj, it was joined by Fahd ibn-* Ufaysan. At al-Khafs a halt was called for consul_ _ _ 2 tation. Ibrahim al-Mu*awin advised first filling in the wells upon which the recalcitrants depended and then making a single united attack, but his opinion was overruled by that of al-Muraykhi, a Bedouin chief, who suggested a surprise attack on the key town of al-gulwah.

The Egyptiantroops accordingly set out for al-

$ulwah, which, In expectation of an attack, had already evacuat­ ed its women and children. misguiding

However, due either to deliberate

or at best poor guiding the army missed the right


They finally came to a halt on a lava hill somewhere out4 side the town. The scene was laid for one of the greatest

defeats experienced by the Egyptians In their attempts to occupy Najd. No sooner had the Egyptians halted than they were attacked by the forces from al-gulwah.

But these were not strong enough

to defeat them and had, In fact, to retreat into their town wi t h losses.^

At this crucial moment Turki al-Hazzani and Ibrahim

1 Ibid. O n the A1 -Murshid, consult Hamzah, Q a l b . 133. 2 See above, p. IZ9. 3 See Appendix A. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 73. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 74, says that they retreated as far as al-Jabal al-Shamal.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

ibn-* Abdullah appeared with strong reinforcements for the Hulwites and respectively attacked the Egyptian right and left flanks.

The Egyptian left^on the top of the hill where the

artillery was also located.

Simultaneously the Hulwites countex*-

attacked those Egyptians who had penetrated the town. now increased in intensity.

The battle

At length Ibrahim ibn-'Abdullah

and his followers from al-Hawtah threw the Egyptians from the hill and captured the cannons.

This advance was the turning

point of the battle, for when the hill was lost, the Arab aux­ iliaries who were with the Egyptians began to flee.

The mood

was contagious and soon the whole army of the invaders was in full flight.

In the melee many of the Bedouins seized the horses

of the Egyptian cavalry and fled. equipment on the field *

The losers left all their

Lost in that wild and unfamiliar

country, almost the whole force perished — killed, died of thirst.

those who were not

Khalld, Isma' il Bey, Ibrahim al-Mu* awlh,

a lone group of about two hundred Egyptian cavalrymen, and some of the TTaJdis were the only ones to escape.

These made their

way to al-Dilam and thence to al-Riyad, where they Joined the garrison of two .hundred which had been left there.

The victors

helped themselves to the enormous spoil which they f o u n d . T h e


1 The details of this battle are all taken from Ibn-Bishr, II, 74, the only source which gives them. For a discussion of a rather serious mistake made by a l m o ®bve*!al Eu r opsan historians In reporting this Unitarian victory, see Appendix A. See also Musil, 272; Philby, Arabia, 112; Weygand, II, 88; Wahbah, 224.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


expedition for camel procurement had ended disastrously.


date was the middle of RabA* Second, 1253/second half of July, 1837.1 As soon as Faygal, who was still in al-Hufuf, heard the news of this victory, he marched with his forces to al-Khar^.


Here, realizing the over-all weakness of the Egyptian position, he decided to attack and, therefore, convoked the militia from the southern districts and marched on al-Riyad.

When, on the

first of Jumada Second, 1253/early September, 1837, they reach­ ed al-Mugani*, a town some five miles south of al-Rlyad, they were met by the Egyptians and Rlyadis.

But Faysal had prepared

an ambush which worked well, and the*;enemy was forced back into the castle of alRiyad. Faygal's force occupied the rest of the 3 — town. Manfufciah recognized Faysal's authority, and he also had enough support to mobilize the militia-of al-Mt$mal and Sudayr. A siege now took place which lasted for more than two months.

During it the defenders were reduced to dire straits

for want of food, but continued to hold on,^

By the seventh of

Sha*ban/early November, Faysal's supporters had begun to get

1 It took this news a long time to filter back to Cairo. On September 6, 1837 the Russian consular report commented that up until that time the expedition to Najd had not procured any camels. The report of October 4, 1837 said that Isma*il*s force had been defeated with "horrible butchery," and that his personal fate was- not yet known; Cattaui, II, nos. 1-36* 149. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 74-5; Musil, 272. 3 For the details of this battle, consult ibn-Bishr, II, 75. 4 For the details of this siege, consult ibn-Bishr, It, 75-6; see also Musil, 272.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

135 restless, perhaps "because they feared strong reprisals,^* and a decision was reached to assault the castle directly In a final effort to take It.

While the attack was going on, however,

Faysal* s man were attacked from the rear by the Subay* tribe under Fuhayd al-^uyayfi and the Qa^tan under Qasi ibn-*Udayb. By the twelfth of Sha*ban Faysal had been forced to retire to — p Manfuhah. His opportunity to drive the Egyptians from Najd was slipping away.^ Having reached a stalemate, Faysal and Khalid tried to negotiate some sort of agreement.

They exchanged letters and

on the seventeenth of the month held a conference midway between Manfuhah and al-Riyad. flared up once more.^

But they could not agree, and fighting By the end of Sha*ban the beleagured

defenders of al-Riyad were in touch with other Egyptian elements which had come up to al-Qasim.^

The Subay* and Qahtan tribes­

men managed to run sheep into the city despite a sharp fight.^ On the twelfth of Ramadan/second week of December the Riyadl’s made a successful sortie to gather wood.

Again there was an

1 As Musil, 272, states. 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 7 6 j Philby, Arabia, 112. 3 Palgrave, II, 65 , gives a garbled account of these events. He thinks that Khalld abdicated at this time and that Faygal resumed control of Najd. Actually Khalid*s rule lasted in one form or another until 1257/1841. See below, PP4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 78. Musil, 272, is wrong in saying that they did not reach an agreement. 5 The Russian consular report that, immediately after the defeat of Isma* il and Khalid at al-gulwah, the Unitarians advanced toward al-Madinah where they*were checked by Khurshid Pasha’s army corps, is undoubtedly inaccurate. Probably this report misinterpreted some locg.1 Bedouin activity. See Oattaui, II, no. 149. 6 For further details consult ibn-Bishr, II, 76.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


inconclusive "battle, and losses occurred on both sides,'1' weeks later an Egyptian scout, ibn-‘Umran by name,


slipped by

Faysal*s blockade with more than three hundred Bedouins and took a large sum of money to the defenders.

The bloekade

runners also brought news of reinforcements which had reached al-Qasim but which were afraid that Faysal* s troops would destroy them should they try to continue to al-Riyad. reason they had not gone to al-Riyad.

For this

The besieged finally

decided that Ibrahim al-Mu* awin should return to al-Qasim with Fuhayd al-Suyayfi and the newly arrived Bedouins in order to guide and protect the reinforcements.

When this force reached

al-Qasim, they heard for the first time of the arrival of Khurshid Pasha.^

Khuztehid now had in his train ‘Abdullah al-

Sharif, governor of al-Yanbu* Khurshid appears to have thought at first that he could reach an agreement with Faysal and.thus avoid risking a desert campaign.

In order to Implement his peace offensive, Khurshid

had ordered *Abdullah to seek out Faysal, who was in Manfuhah. ‘Abdullah reached Manfuhah in Shawwal, 1253/January, 1838. Apparently,

some sort of agreement was reached by which Faysal

1 Among_Faysal*s supporters, Badah, a famous warrior of the al-*UJman tribe, was killedin this action; ibn-Bishr, II, 77. See above, pp. 110-Jl. 2 Dahlan, a 312v; gamzah, Qalb. 342; Ibn-Bishr, II, 77. 3 Ibn-Bi shrX II, 77.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


was allowed to take his property from al-Riyad and to maintain himself in the south without Egyptian interference in return C—

for abandoning the siege of the capital, leaving al-Arid, and perhaps furnishing camels to Khurshid.^

Whether this agreement

was a trick on the part of the Egyptians, as ibn-Bishr says,^ or merely an agreement which was later violated, it appears to have been a strategic error on Faysal*s part.

He gave up territ­

ory, denied himself the use of the militia of the central dis­ tricts, and gained nothing concrete in return.

In any case

Faysal got his belongings from the castle, dismissed the warriors, and took up his residence in al-Dilam, one of the main towns in the district of al-KharJ.^ Najd was, for the moment, partitioned between Faysal and Khalid, and each did his best to strengthen his own rather pre­ carious situation.

Khalld took steps to restore his authority

by sending tax collectors to the districts of Sudayr and alMihmal.

Faysal in turn ordered *Umar ibn-* Ufaysan to return to

al-Hufuf and sent gamad ibn-Yagya ibn-Ghayhab to *Uman "to watch the borders".^

Furthermore, on the first of dhu al-Qa*dah, 1253/

1 See above,pp. ibn-Bishr, II, 77. 2 Vol. II, 77 . 3 Philby, Arabia. 112. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 78j in addition Faysal appointed al-Zuhayri as amir of Wadi al-Dawasir and Muhammad ibn-* Abdullah ibn-Jalajil as amir of al-AflaJ.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


late January, 1838 Faysal sent his hr other Jalwi with "presents'* of horses, *Umani riding camels,^ and she-eamels to Khurshid Pasha, who was in al-Madinah.

These presents were either in

fulfillment of the agreement, or an attempt to win the friend­ ship of Khurshid, or both.

Khurshid accepted the gifts, but 2 — “ apparently nothing resulted from them. Khurshid, in fact, re­ tained Jalwi under open arrest as a hostage.^ By the beginning of the year 1254/1838-9 Khurshid had ad­ vanced to al-Hanakiyah, with Faysal.

He was poised to invade Najd and deal

His subordinates, Khalid and Isma*ll, were in al-

Riyad, and Faysal was in the south using al-Dilam as his head­ quarters.

Drought,^ and accompanying high prices, continued to

affect Najd.

With Khurshid within striking distance of Najd,

Khalid had no trouble in gaining the recognition of the amirs of the districts surrounding al-'Arid, or in collecting taxes^ especially after reinforcements, tender the command of a Kurd named Mulla Sulayman, reached al-Riyad from al-Qagim.


troops, who were accompanied by a gasan al-Mu* awin, brought

1 *Umani camels are especially esteemed; Hitti, 22. 2_Musil, 272^ Philby, Arabia, 112-13; Ibn-Bishr, II, 77; &1Rihani, Ta’rlkh. 80. 3 Musil, 272. 4 See above, p. 13 1, n. Z.; ibn-Bishr, II, 79. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 79.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


with them orders for Isma* 11 and the remnants of his troops to return to Egypt.

After their unfortunate experiences the

soldiers were undoubtedly more than happy to comply.1 Khurshid Pasha now came to Najd itself.

On the third of

Safar, 1254/last week of May, 1838 he left al-$anakiyah, still retaining Jalwi, for 'Unayzah, which he reached without opposition on the twentieth of Safar.

'Abd al-'Aziz, the governor of

Buraydah, and the other leaders of al-Qasim submitted to Khurshid immediately with the exception of Yahya, the governor of 'Unayzah. 2 Yahya also submitted after some delay. The only incident which marred this peaceful advance was a quarrel which took place between the 'Unayzites and Khurshid* s soldiers over a local citizen murdered by a soldier.

This fray resulted in a three.'

day battle during which Khurshid* s artillery pounded the town for two days.

As he was about to order an assault on the town,

the Inhabitants reconsidered and asked for peace, a request which the Pasha granted.^

That procuring camels for transport was still

one of the Egyptian .considerations in Invading Hajd, is apparent from the references to them in Khurshid* s communique from 'Unayzah.^

1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 79. See also Mengin, Hlstolre sommaire, 96; Weygand, II, 88. 2 Cattaui, III, no. 53 bis; ibn-Bishr, II, 80-; Wahbah, 224. 3 Ibn-Bishr's account* II* 80-1, of this incident varies slightly from that given by Khurshid in his report to Muhammad 'All's aide-de-camp, dated the fourth of Rabi* First, 1254 in 'Unayzah (quoted by Cattaui, III, no. 53 bis). Among other differences Khurshid claims that his losses were twelve killed and eighteen wounded and that the losses of the 'Unayzites reached four hundred In killed and wounded; ibn-Bishr says that Egyptian losses were ninety killed and that the townsmen lost fifty. 4Quoted by Cattaui, III, no. 53 bis.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Khurshid stayed in 4Unayzah for five months, and the city "became the rear base for the Egyptian armies in Na^d.^ his stay, he built up support from local leaders. of these was 'Abdullah ibn-Rashid.


Most important

It will be remembered that

after a short rule as the protege of Isma'Tl Bey, 'Isa ibn-4All had again lost the emirate of Jabal Shammar to 'Abdullah ibn_





After Khurshid had reached 'Unayzah, 'Abdullah, fearing

renewed Egyptian support for 'Isa, visited the Pasha.

They ex­

changed presents, and an agreement was reached whereby Khurshid recognized 'Abdullah's fait accompli submit to Egyptian suzerainty.^

and 'Abdullah agreed to

Thus Khurshid sanctioned the

final downfall of the ibn-'All family.^ It was while 'Abdullah was returning from this visit that a quarrel broke out between his followers and the inhabitants of Buraydah.

In the fight which followed ibn-Rashid lost both

men and camels.

He went back to Khurshid, who made up for his 5 losses with gifts, and then returned to Ha*il. This fight was

undoubtedly an important factor in forming that animosity between Buraydah and Jabal Shammar which later developed into open civil

1 Musil, 272; Philby, Arabia. 112. 2 See above, p. Ilf. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 81; Musil, 272; Philby, Arabia, 112. 4 Hamzah, ftalb. 336. 342; at this turn of events 'Isa Ibn-'All fled for al-Madinah, as he had once before (see above, p. 116, n. 3) but like his relatives before him was killed on the road before arriving. 5 For further details, consult ibn-Bishr, II, 81.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


war and thus weakened the S u fHdi st a t e d

fAbdullah ibn-Rashid's seeming

desertion of his old friend Faygal was not as blameworthy as it appears. It represents rather a successful application of an appeasement policy. With an Egyptian army interposed between them, fAbdulla£h was in no position to help Faygal effectively; later when he was in such a position, he was not p _ found lacking. In addition to ibn-Rashld, Muhammad al-Dawish, chief of the Mutayr tribe, which had had a long tradition of supporting the Egyptians,^ came to ^Unayzah to offer his support as did Fahd al-Suyayfi,^ chief of the Subay^ tribe.^

Ahmad al-Sudayri also responded to Khurshid's invitation to

come to rUnayzah.^

Furthermore, Khurshld rebuilt the ruined fort of al-Safa* ^ ♦

and placed a garrison in it. It was during Khurshid's stay in ^Unayzah that Jalwi escaped from him and returned to Faysal.

Jalwi asked the Pasha for permission to go to Buraydah

on an errand, but, when he arrived there, he went directly to Faysal in alKharj instead of returning.

Jalwi was convinced that appeasement on Faysal's

part would be of no avail and that Khurshld was determindd to force

1 See below, j,j,.\f3 2 See below, 1*3-^. 3 See above, pp. 26-7; 9S?»n. 1. Presumably the same man asthe one that ibn-Bishr earlier calls Fuhayd al— Suyayfi; see above, pp. I55-6. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 81; Musil, 272; Philby, Arabia. 112. 6 Ibn-Bishr, II, 81. 7 See above, p. 54. 101. 6 Ibn-Bishr, II, 109. 7 Ibn-Bishr, II, 110.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


From al-Dammam Faysal went to al-Hufuf where he stayed forty days receiving delegates from the Bedouins including ibn-Suwayt, chief of the


al-Zafir, and some delegates from as far away as 'Uman.

1 During this

stay the Imam appointed 'Abdullah ibn-Sa rd al-Mudawi governor of alQa^.tf and Ahmad ibn-Muharamad al-Sudayri as amir of al-A^sS'.

The final

reduction of the tribes of this province, particularly the al-'Ujman, would take place within two years.


From al-Hufuf Faysal returned to

al-Riyad and gave his warriors permission to disband.^ The return to centralized Unitarian control was not, however, com­ pletely peaceful in al-AhsS1.

'Abdullah, the new governor of al-Qatlf,

took advantage of his position to kill *Ali ibn-'Abdullah ibn-Gh£nim alRafi^i, former governor of the town.^

One suspects that he did this in

order to rid himself of a potential rival, but he may have had a better reason.

When Fay§al heard of the Incident, he dispatched the negro,

BalSl ibn-Salim al-Haraq, to take ^Abdullah's place and ordered 'Abdullah to come to al-RiySiJ.

When he arrived, he apologized to the.ImHm and gave

his reasons for killing ibn-GhSnim.

Faysal was satisfied with the ex­

planation and allowed 'Abdullah to resume his post in al-Qatlf.


instated, 'Abdullah participated in fighting against al-Bahrayn and against the ^Ama'ir Bedouins.^ Ibid. 2 See below,pp. Vll-81. Palgrave, II, 70~2, places the defeat of the al’UjmSn before that of the towns; Philby, Arabia, 114, foilers Palgrave. See also Musil, 275. 3 Ibn-Bishr, II, 110. 4- See above, p. 160. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, U O . . 1

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Having brought the towns of al-Ahsa 1 firmly under his control, Faysal did not neglect his outpost in *IJmSn.

In the same year 1260/1845-

4, he sent an army uhder S a rd ibn-Mufclaq al-Mutayri^ to al-Buraymi to help ensure the Unitarian position in *Uman and to back up a renewed claim for tribute.^

The tribute from *Uman had naturally lapsed during

the disorders in N & jd.

Ibn-Mutlaq asked at the beginning for an annual

tribute of 25,000 r i y S l s T h u w a y n i ,

acting as regent in ‘Uman for his

father, the Sayyid Sa*Td, who was in Zanizibar at the time, consulted the British Resident at B u s h i r e T h e

Resident advised him to accept

any reasonable demand and at the same time remonstrated with both Faysal and ibn-Mutlaq against the excessive demand.

Meanwhile Thuwayni had

asked ibn-Mutlaq for time to consult the Sayyid Sa'ld.

But ibn-Mutlaq

became impatient with the delay and laid waste the district of Su^ar, executing the garrison of Mujis (?), a fort to the north of SuljSr.


then threatened to invade Musqat itself if his demands were not met.^ Eventually the Sayyid Sa^Id authorized an annual tribute of 5*000 riyals, with a 2,000 riyHl present for ibn-Mutlaq personally. amount that rUmSn had agreed to pay in 1248/1855*^

This was. the same

Faced with the growing

1 2 5 4 5

See above, pp. 118-19, 146. Miles, II, 544 j ibn-Bishr, II, 110. Miles, II, 544. Corruption of Ar. abu-Shahr. Miles, II, 544. 6 Aitchison (1955), 184. 7 See above, pr85«

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


unity of the ^TJinani tribes in the face of invasion and with British protests, ibn-Mutlaq accepted this offer and evacuated the Suhsr area^

and then returned to Najd.

No other Unitarian activity in ^UiaSn is

mentioned before 1265/187* in which year a force under *Abd al-Rahman

ibn-IbrShtm of Manfuhah was dispatched to al-Buraymi.^ The following year, Faysal sent another expedition to *Uman under Sa'd ibn-Mutlaq al-Mutayri.

Sa'd's column was opposed by Sa'xd ibn-

TahnUn, governor of abu-Zabi, who had occupied al-Buraymi and stirred up all the surrounding country against the Unitarians.^


plan was to ambush Sa'd's force on the road before it reached al—Buraymi. Maktum, the Unitarian governor of Dubay, on the Pirate Ooast, and another

1UmSni Unitarian, Sultan ibn-Saqr, ^ tried to warn ibn-Mutlaq of the trap, but their messenger went astray. al-Oinikah, worked perfectly. Others died of thirst.

The ambush, sprung at a place called

Many of the Unitarians were killed.^

The survivors made first for Dubay, where Maktum

received them honorably, and then they pushed on to nearby al-ShEriqah. There both Sultan ibn-Saqr and Maktum joined them with their own troops. The combined army marched on ibn-Tahnun, who was in the fort at alBuraymi and expelled him from it.

The Unitarians continued to harass

ibn-Tahnun's followers until they had made up their losses at al-'Anikah,^

1 Aitchison (1955), 184; Miles, II, 544; Badger, lxxxviii, xci; Blunt,


2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 117. 5 Ibid. > ^ See above, p. 84, n. 5« _ • 5_Including the imEm of ThSdiq, *Abd al-Rahman■ibn-^Izaz, who was the |adi and religious leader of the force; ibn-Bishr; II, 118. 6 Ibn-Bishr, II, 118.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


The determination of the Unitarians to accomplish their ends is well illustrated in this campaign which began with a rout and ended with a victory.

Despite the ultimate victory, however, the Imam Faysal was

angry at 5a*d ibn-Mutlaq for the poor leadership he had shown and in 1266/1849-50 dismissed him from his position.

In one of the few acts

of cruelty reported about him, Faygal tortured ibn-Mutlaq until he died .1 Faysal's expansionist policy in the east is also seen in the fighting which took place in 1260/1845-4 between ^Abdullah al-MudSwi, Faysal's governor in al-Qa^iff and the rulers of the islands of al-Bahrayn.


islands, which had been to some extent subject to Egyptian control when Khurshld Pasha was in Najd,^ came again under Unitarian influence at about this tima.^ Faysal had, therefore, in a very short time, completely restored his father's boundaries in the east.

Al-Ahsa', fyman, and al-Bahrayn

were all reduced to those degrees of submission that they had respect­ ively accepted under Turki.

The ImSm was in contact with the British

government, through its Resident in the Persian Gulf, not only in con­ nection with Unitarian interests in *UmSn, but also for a general agreement on amicable relations between the Unitarians and the British.


1 Ibn-Bishr, II, 129.

2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 110. 5 See above, p. I 56 and n. 4. 4 Wilson, 246j Blunt, 265. 5 Precis Regarding Muscat and its Relations with the Wahabee Power, 10—11, cited by Badger, lxxxviii.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


In 1261/1845 FalEh ibn-Hithl&yn,1 of the al-fyjman tribe, furnished the Imam Faysal with an excellent reason for breaking the power of the al-'Ujman, which is traditionally one of the important forces in aiAhsa1 politics.

This chief made the mistake of attacking and plunder­

ing the yearly caravan of pilgrims from al-Hufuf, in a year when the caravan was a particularly large one and included many Persians.2


Unitarian leader could not have been expected to allow such an affront to his authority to pass unchallenged, particularly when it also involved interference with prescribed religous duties and with the income which pilgrims customarily bring to Arabian governments. Faysal called his warriors together and by dhu al-Qa*dah/November, accompanied by Shaykh *Abd al-Rahman ibn-Hasan (B 2), had assembled them near guraymilah.

Faysal then led his army eastward in order to find the

offenders and en route^ was joined by Mut*ib ibn-^AbdullSn ibn-Rashid, who brought additional troops from Jabal Shammar and tribute in the form of twelve horses and a number of camels.^

Meanwhile when ibn-Hithlayn

learned of Faysal!s plans, he fled into the traditional grazing grounds



J ) of the banu-Khalid tribe.

When Faysal and his troops arrived

in that area, some of the chiefs of the al-^UjmHn and Subay** came to him, claimed that they were not guilty of participating in the raid on the Pilgrims, and asked for forgiveness.

The ImSm forgave them and granted

them ten days to leave the lands of the banu-KhSlid.^

1 See above, p. 88, n. 5« 2 Ibn-Bishr, II, 111. 5 At a place called al-Kuzaymah; ibn-Bishr, II, 111. 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 111-12. ’ 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 112. Ibn-Bishr was with Faysal during part of this raid and mentions the prayer sessions which were held in the ImSm 1a tent. Ibn— Taymlyah's Siyasat al-SharIrah (legal polity) was the text; vol. II, 11514. On ibn-Taymlyah, see above, p. 5»

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Deserted by a considerable number of his supporters, ibn-Hithlayn fled to seek protection and help from his fellow chief, Muhammad ibn-

Hadi ibn-Qarmalah,3- who was camped at al-Hafs on the al-^Armah plateau. Faysal set out after this pair, but when they fled into the desert, the Imam temporarily abandoned the attempt to catch them and dismissed his

O troops.

In the following year (1262/1845-6) ibn-Hithlayn reappeared

and made another attempt to take his tribe into the banu-Khalid country. He first tried to enlist the support of al-Hamidi (Humaydi ?) ibn-Faysal al-DawIsh of the Mutayr*tribe.

This chief pretended to accept ibn-

^ithlayn's proposition and invited him to stay with the Mutayr.^


al-Dawish went to Faysal in al-Riyad and reported what had happened.


Imam could not forgive ibn-Hithlayn his attack on the pilgrims and accord­ ingly dispatched a force to accompany al-Dawish back to his camp and take ibn-Hithlayn prisoner.

This plan was executed without difficulty, and

the refractory chief was turned over to Ahmad al-Sudayri in al-Hufuf. 'Diere he was executed.^

The remaining chiefs of the tribe sought for­

giveness from the ImSm and promised to deliver to him what had been taken from the pilgrims.^

The attempt of the al-*Ujman to assert tribal

independence was over,^ and in al-Ahsa' the authority of al-RiyS^ was now

1 2 5 4 5

See above, p p . "81j 115J 127, n. 1. Ibn-Bishr, II, 112. Ibn-Bishr, II, 11J. Ibid. Ibn-Bishr, -II, 114. 0 Ibn-Bishr does not record any active revolt on the part of the banuKhSlid at this time, as is reported by Philby, Arabia, 115, following Palgrave, II, JO, Palgrave, II, 70-1, is completely wrong in his state' ments that Faysal's son, rAbdullah, led the troops against al-'Ujman, that 'AbdullahJ defeated the tribe in a big pitched battle, and that after the battle he exterminated two-thirds of all male members of the tribe. See also Palgrave, II, 147—8.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


unchallenged by any group. During the period in which al-Ahsa' province was being brought under Unitarian control, the ImSm Faysal was also engaged in various other activities.

Among the most important of these was the ra-ftatahl


of order in the unruly southern districts of al-AflSj and Wadi al-Dawasir. In 1261/1845 he was forced to lead his troops to al-Aflaj to put down some obscure local quarrels which had broken out at the instigation of Shaykh Muhammad ibn-Muqran and 1Abd al-*Aziz. the governor of Buraydah. Why either of these men should cause trouble in al-AflSj is not clear The ImEtm was so angry that he imprisoned *Abd al-*AzIz for several months. 'Abd al-'AzIz was finally released as a result of the intercession of his friends, and he accompanied Faysal on the punitive raid.

When Faysal and

his troops reached Layla, chief place of al-Aflaj district,.he sent for the local leaders and punished those he deemed guilty of causing the trouble.^ Later in the same year fighting in the town of Sayh Sl-Hamid in WSdi al-Dawasir necessitated another expedition to the south. brother Jalwi was placed in command of the troops.

The Imam's

When this force

reached the refrac&teiy town, a violent battle took place in which a number of men were killed.

But the forces from al-Riya$ were victorious, and

the town recognized Faysal's suzerainty.^

It was probably at this time

that Faysal ordered construction of the fortress called abu-Tawq at alDam, one of the chief towns in Wadi al-DawSsir. This fortress, which 1_ housed a garrison to oversee security in the district, was ruined after Feysal's reign.^

1 See Ibn-Sishr, II, 111. 2 For further details on this incident consult ibn-Bishr, II, 111. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 111; among those killed in this raid was Ibrahim ibn ^bdullSh ibn-Ibrahim, governor of al-yaw'/tah. 4 Philby, Heart. II, 194. ^ R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


At the end of Ramadan, 1261/September, 1845 another round took place in the fight between al-QasIm and Jabal Shammar .1

It will be remembered

that the town of ’Unayzah in al-Qa§Im had co-operated with ibn-Rashid at the time Faysal was regaining his throne.

However, this brief peaceful

interlude ended a short while later when ’Abdullah ibn-Sulayman ibn-Zamil, governor of ’Unayzah^ took some Shammari camels.

When ibn-Zamil refused

to return the camels, rUbayd ibn-*Ali ibn-Rashid, brother of the amir of Jabal Shammar, retaliated by leading three hundred men to raid a large flock of sheep just outside '"Unayzah.

The people of the town resisted,

but 'Ubayd caught them in an ambush and routed them with great slaughter.^ He took a number of prisoners, including ibn-Zamil himself and other members of his family.^

^Ubayd then broke the desert convention of respect

for the person of a prisoner and had ibn-ZSmil and the other captured members of his family killed.^

Thus two consecutive governors of ’Unayzah

1 See above, pp. 140-1, 155-4, 164-5. 2 See above, p. I 65, n. 4. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 112; Doughty, II, 42. Doughty, .loc. cit., records the fact that rUbayd composed an ode on the subject of this victory. Doughty’s translation of that part of the ode that he could remember follows: " ’By this hand are failed of the enemies ninety men. Smitten to death the Kusmah L Qu§man, a Bedouin plural referring to the inhabitants of al-QasImc/perish­ ed before me, until the evening, when my fingers could not be loesed from the handle of the sword; the sleeve of my garment was stiffened with the blood of war.*" 4 Ibn-Bishr, II, 112. 5 is the word used by ibn-Bishr to describe this breach of customary law; vol. II, 112. Ojbayd sent the remaining prisoners to his brother 'Abdullah in Ha'il. Later Shaykh ’Abd al-rAzIz ibn-rAbdullah abu-Butayyin (see above, pi I65) went from ’Unayzah to Ha'il and asked ’Abdullah Ibn— Hashld to release them. Ibn-Rashid graciously consented; ibn-Bishr, 11,112. This incident would seem to bear out Palgrave's very harsh judgement

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


and brothers as well —

had been killed by members of the family of

ibn-Rashid.^* In 1262/1846 Faysal made several appointments.

*Abd al- Otzlz ibn-

Mu9hari ibn- *Ayyaf^ was designated amir of Wadi al-Dawasir and later his brother, Hasan, was given the same position in al-Aflaj.5

rAbdullah ibn-

3attal al-Mutayri was sent to al-Hufuf as commander of the garrison there _


Finally, Muhammad ibn-Ibrahim ibn-Sayf-^ was ordered to be the qa^i in


Jabal Shammar.'

of fUbayd's character, I, 205 ff * Palgrave. says of 'Ubayd: "His mind found in the fanaticism of Nejed its congenial element, and he plunged into it heart and brain . . . . An excellent warrior, of undisputed skill and vigour, versed alike in all the resources of deceit and violence, of bloodshed and perjury, he was eminently qualified to become the apostle of his sect in Shomer . . . . With his own hand, if report say true, he had slain no less than eight hundred 'infidels1 (that is, enemies) . • • •" Wallin's report would, seem to bear out Palgrave, for he speaks, JRG-S (1854), 182, of Ijbayd's "roughness and cruelty." In contrast to Palgrave's view is that expressed by Blunt and Doughty. Blunt, 194, says that he heard nothing of *Ubayd to justify his bad repu­ tation with Palgrave, and that in fact he was "the principal hero of the Shammar tradition," with a reputation for courage, generosity, and hos­ pitality. Blunt says that 'Ubayd died in 1285-6/1869, having been paralyzed from the waist down for some months before his death. Blunt relates a story to the effect that before ^Ubayd died, he gave away all his possessions except his sword, his mare, and his young wife and requested that none of the three be used again. Muhammad broke the request only in reference to the third item. Doughty's estimate, II, 4l-2, of *Ubayd was as follows: Abeyd was conductor of the military power of J. Shammar, in Abdullah his brother and in his nephew. Telal 1s days. He was a martial man and a Wahaby • * • . He was a master of the Arabian warfare, a champion in the eyes of the discomfited Aarab. Abeyd, as said, was an excellent kass£d, he indit­ ed of all his desert warfare; his boastful rimes, known wide in the wilder­ ness, were ofttimes- sung for me, in the nomad booths." According to Doughty, 42, HJbayd died about 1286-7/1870; according to Musil, 241, in the spring of I869. It seems clear, whatever ^Ubayd's character may have been, that his fervent Unitarianism, coupled with his position of authority in Jabal Shammar, made him a strong factor for keeping Jabal Shammar within the Unitarian state. See above, p. 116; Zehme, 581* 1 See above, p p «IJbl-54; 165, n. 4. See-above;, -p4-. 1'5$?»> 3 btb'hrBishr, II, 115. ^ , p. 112 . See' above, ]]!! followed by Philby, Arabia, 117, completely distorts these events for he reports the action against al-DahSmishah as though it were the central incident. Neither Musil or Philby connect it in any way with the revolt of al-Qasim. 2 See above, p. 194. 5 ibn-Bishr, II, 12J. Theoretically, *Abd al-'AzIz was in the wrong and morally h.e was largely in the wrong. However, Faysal did not use very good judgement in sending ^Abdullah to attack the al-DahSmishah, for, first, they were camped in al-QasIm and, second, were, or at least in the past had been allied with al-QasTmj see above, p. 1^4, and n. 1 and 4. Considering these two facts, the people of al-Qasim might have teen skeptical as to Faysal's good faith. 4 Ibn-Bi3hr, II, 12^; al-Yatimah is located between al-Shimasxyah (see above, p. 65) and al-Tu’mah.

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. F urth er reproduction prohibited without permission.


Meanwhile, 'Abdullah had sent, a messenger to inform his father of the results of the raid on the al-Dahamishah®

The messenger had found

the tracks of 'Abd al-'Azxz's army .and had returned to inform 'Abdullah of the fact.

^Abdullah held counsel.

HadhdhaH ibn-Busays^ advised caution:

"Let us pass to the right or left of them.

If they follow us, we will 2 fight them; if they leave us, we will leave them." 'Abdullah, however, decided that his force could win and that the rebels should be taught a 5 lesson.

He, therefore, made his plans and advanced.

The two forces soon met, and the battle of al-Yatxmah developed into a slaughter.

Despite their numerical inferiority, the forces under fAbdullSh

routed the Qaslmi s.

So many of the latter were being killed that, out of

pity, ^Abdullah called off his troops.

'Abd al-'AzTz and a group of his

followers fled to the nearby castle of al-Tu^amlyah to try to make another stand.

Some of 'Abdullah'.s men advised him to besiege it, but he said,

"what befell them is enough for them, booty, to join his father.

and moved on, with much valuable

The army of al-QasIm dispersed to ^Unayzah and

Buraydah. When 'Abd al-^Aziz reached 'Unayzah, he tried to encourage the people to continue the revolt, but the terrible defeat at al-Yatxmah had eompletely broken their morale.

They began to disobey his orders.

On the

day after his arrival in ^Unayzah, *Abd al-rAzxz wrote a letter to his

1 See above, p. 191, n. 5. 2 Quoted by ibn-Bishr, II, 125. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 125. ^ Quoted by ibn-Bishr, II, 124. more than one hundred. 5 Ibn-Bishr, II, 12^.

Ibn-Bishr estimates the QasTmi dead at

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Furth er reproduction prohibited without permission


brother, 'Abd al-Muhsin, in. Buraydah in which he said, "Sa'd al-Tuwayjari, 'Ali ibn-Wasir, sor.-and-so {_

__/, and so-and-so remained behind us

in the flight and entered the town [_ Buraydah_/; therefore, send them to I W us." 'Abd al-Muhsin answered as follows* "henever I advised you or •


disagreed with you about anything, you told me I was crazy. those whom you mentioned all died in the battle. self, and left them.

You fled, saved your­

The claim which you had on them yesterday is gone,

and the judgement of fate has been passed on them. on you —

[_ Well

They now have a claim

to bury their bodies and sympathize with their children.”


al-'Azxz tried for a while longer to move the warriors of al-Qasim to some sort of offensive action, but nothing was accomplished.

Meanwhile Faysal

desisted from any offensive action against either *Unayzah or Buraydah. Had he attacked the two cities, he would have strengthened the hand of 'Abd al-'Aziz.

By imposing a blockade between al-Qasim and Najd, Faysal

could wait for the revolt to die a natural death. At length Shaykh 'Abdullah ibn-'Abd al-Rahman abu-Butayyin, chief

qadi went to 'Abd al-'AzIz to mediate between him and the ♦ of al-Qasim, • 5 weary people. Ibn-Bishr, quotes %> other close relative of Sultan ibn-Saqr (see above, pp. 84, n. 4j 177) • 4 Miles, Ii; 550. ? Palgrave, II, p. 280. 0 4 port some forty-five miles south of Suhar. 7 Palgrave, II, 280.

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.


his vigorous remonstrances induced Abdulla bin pTais&l to alter his tone and abate his pretensions."^

The Resident carried on his negotiations

through the good offices of Sa^ad ibn-Tahnun.

Meanwhile ^Abdullah’s

force met increasing resistance from the mountaineers south of al-Buraymi, and an advance party Under Zamil of ^Unayzah came to terms with them rather than risk the hazards of fighting in mountainous defiles


addition Thuwayni, despite the fact that he may have requested a Unitarian army in the first place, now realized the danger in which the aggressive Unitarian ar^my placed his realm, and he began to organize its defenses. Furthermore, the frightened local population momentarily forgot its internal quarrels and united to defend itself.


Faced with all these obstacles, ^Abdullah relinquished whatever plans he may have had for occupying all ^Uman and came to terms.

It was with

some difficulty that he persuaded Khalid ibn-Saqr to withdraw his forces from the coast, but the latter was forced to comply, because he could not face the *Umanis alone.^

The terms of the final agreement between

'AbdullSh and Thuwayni were as followBS tribute of

1. ^Uman was to pay an annual

12,000 riyals as well as the 6,000 riyals of arrears.^ 2.

Thuwayni agreed to allow a Najdi garrison to stay in al-Buraymi, but this qarrison was to be in Thuwayni*s pay and under his orders.


1 Miles, II, 550. See above, p. 201. 5 Palgrave, II, 281-5. One cannot take very seriously Palgrave’s assertion, —00• Sit*, that the Najdi warriors succumbed to the wiles of the HUmani women and were thus seduced from their main purpose. Doughty, II, 462, . says that Zamil first showed his military ability on this expedition. J Palgrave, II, 284. 5 Ibid. 6 file’s, II, 550. Of. StUhlmann, 208.

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. F urth er reproduction prohibited without permission


agreed to accept about three hundred Najdis into his personal service.


Khalid ibn-Saqr was to withdraw from the coastal plain and restrict

himself to his previous territory around al-Shariqah. Unitarian army was to be withdrawn from Alman.^ led his army back to Na jd.

5 . The main

In 1269-70/1855 'Abdullah

Ahmad al-Sudayri's authority, previously re­

stricted to the anarate of al-Ahsa* only, was now also extended to the


Unitarian sphere in Ajman. ■ The Unitarians continued to try to extend their authority in Ajman throughout Faysal*s reign.

These attempts, however, met with one source

of opposition which was constant, inflexible, and strong —


British imperial

The British, who had just saved Alman from the probability

of occupation by the Unitarians, were soon to get another chance.

In 1272-5/1856 the Sayyid SaAEd died, and his ddath caused serious repercussions.

At the time of his death S a ‘id's oldest son Thuwayni

was governor of Ajman proper, his second son I® jid ruled in Zanzibar, and

Turki,^ a third son, ruled the Sufyar district of Ajman.^

The arrangement

1 Palgrave, II, 284. Whether these terms are completely accurate, or partially the product of Palgrave »s fancy cannot be detemined on the basis of available evidence, but they are at least va 1 & r outlines. According to Badger, xcii, an additional , and its was later added to the Afcaani tribute because the port of uh surroundings had come under the Sayyid Sa xd a au o r i y . , statement 2 Miles, II, 550; ibn-Bishr, II, !%>', Palgrave, II, _284. Fhilbys st^e Arabia, 122, S a t "the land side L of AJman/ etxlixncl:ine 160, 267•

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


ople were of poor quality.

Therefore, the Porte protested and at least

nominally prohibited the export of horses for four years.^

The slave

trade no doubt still played an important part in the economy of Najd, but was decreasing as a result of British efforts in the Persian Gulf.


Since the Unitarian government never had a mint of its own, a variety of currency was used within its borders. The most important _ 5 was the Maria Theresa dollar or riyal. The English sovereign was also current.

For small change, Palgrave reports the use of a debased silver

coin about the size of a sixpence piece, which appeared to have come from an Egyptian mint, and which was approximately equal to fourpenee (English) in value.^

This was called the jadidah.

The smallest coin, _ 5 according to Palgrave was the khurdah. of which thirty made one jadidah. He describes this coin as consisting of “little irregular copper bits, now square, now round, sometimes triangular, often polygonal; these are the melancholy productions of the Basrah mint, at a date of two or three hundred years back."

Ottoman currency passed only in the northern

province of Jabal Shammar. In al-Ahsa' different currency was used, mostly Indian.

In addition

to rupees and annas, however, the people of the coast used the tawilah, a copper coin mixed with a small proportion of silver.

It consisted of

a thin bar about three inches long folded over so that the ends did not meet and were slightly opened.

Along one or both sides of he coin ran

a kufic inscription which was presumably stamped at the same time the

1 Guarmani, 42; Pelly, JRGS (I865)* 188. Palgrave's account of Najdi horses, II, 92-7» Has been subjected to severe criticism, for which consult Hogarth, Penetration, 249, n. lj Blunt, I, 255; II, 2-5. 2 Consult Philby, Arabia, 120. 5 See above, p. 79» n » 4. 4 Vol. II, 178. 5 Ibid. 6 Vol. II, 179. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

bar was folded.

Palgrave and Zwemer believe these coins to have been

struck by the Qarmatians of the tenth century.

It appears that there

were formerly gold and silver coins of he same shape. worth about three English farthings«

The tawilah was

The Persian gold and silver tuman

also passed in al-Ahsa'.^ The Imam Faysal's personal character was in large measure responsible for the success of his rule.

As has been suggested before he was

neither a pugnacious nor aggressive man, but was not afraid to use force when he considered it necessary.

He was in addition generous to the poor

and made orphans his special concern.

The late rIsa ibn-*Ali, ruler of

al-Bahrayn, is reported, during his pilgrimage in the year 1278/1861-2, to have seen the Imam Faysal visiting the special hostel which he had built in al-Riyad for orphans. •



Faysal was respected by all who knew •

Even Palgrave could say of Faysal: Of a naturally mild and not unamiable disposition, prudent and wary even to excess, moderate in his opinions, gifted with singular foresight and per­ spicacity, of a prepossessing exterior and a very eloquent tongue, there was much in him to conciliate the affection and loyalty of his hereditary subjects, and to promise a ruler alike powerful and good.^ The exact circumstances of Faysal's death are not known beyond the

fact that he died a natural death. Dates given for his death range from k 1281-2/1865 to 1285-4/1867, but an examination of the facts connected

1 On currency in general, consult Palgrave, II, 178-9; Zwemer, Arabia,

115-16 . 2 Wahbah, 225. 5 Vol. II, 64. For other summaries of Faysal's character, consult Pelly, JRGS (1865), 185; Wallin, JRGS (1854), 182; Wahbah, 225; al“ Alusi, 96 ; al-Rihani, Ta'rxkh, 82; Palgrave, II, 64, 70, 72. 4 Dates are given for Faysal*s death in the following places among otherssStuhlmann, 208; Wahbah, 227; Zwemer, Arabia, 198; al—Rlhani, Ta'rlkh, 85; Philby, Arabia, 126; Musil, 274; al-Hanbali, 47; ftamzah, Qalb, 557.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

2 55

with affairs in the Persian Gulf reveal that he must have died between Ramadan, 1282/February, 1866 and the fifth of dhu al-Qa*dah, 1282/twentyfirst of April, 1866.

The former date is that on which expired the

time limit of the British ultimatum. to Faysal concerning the looting of S u r t h e latter is that of ^Abdullah. ibn-Faysal's declaration to the British Resident, which was delivered shortly after ^Abdullah became _ 2 imam. Faysal was certainly alive on the first date and dead by the 5 second. In conclusion it may again be said that the Imam Faysal's reign ws-s 4 by far the most important in the period covered by this work. Indeed, it was his reign which gave form and coherence to the dynasty from the time of Muhammad fAli's invasion of Arabia until the present century when Faysal's grandson, *Abd al-Olziz, regained what Faysal's sons had lost —

and much more.


sighted enough to realize that he could

not convert the whole world to Unitarianism, and that he would bring ruin on his head if he tried to, the Imam contented himself with maintain­ ing that degree of peace and prosperity of which he and his people were capable.

Faysal was a devout Unitarian, but, instead of attacking Karbala',

he received a British diplomat in his capital.

1 See above, pp. 212-1J. Aitehison says, (1955)* that Faysal died just after the Sur affair. 2 See below, 5 According to a brief conversation which I held with Mr. Jgmes Knight of the Research and Translation Division of the Arabian American Oil Company, who has recently had the opportunity of studying Su*"udi history through the archives of the Government of India, those sources indicate that Faysal did die in 1865* but that ^Abdullah continued to use his father's‘seal and to forge his name until 1866 in an attempt to deceive the British. Since I have neither seen the documents which Mrs * Knight used nor seen a written statement of his conclusions, I feel unqualified to judge their validity. 4 See above, p. 172.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.




’Abdullah ibn-Faysal became imam of Najd in 1282/1866.

3y 1^08/

1891 the Unitarian state had ceased to exist for a second time, and Muhammad ibn- ’Abdullah ibn-Rashid of Jabal Shammar place of the Su^uds.

The two chief reasons why the S u ’Gd family lost

its pre-eminent position in Arabia were: of Faysal*s sons,

ruled supreme in

the irreconcilable ambitions

’Abdullah and S u ’ud; and the astuteness displayed by

Muhammad ibn-Rashid. •

Within that quarter of a century following Faysal* ♦

death, three of his sons attempted to stay the rising power of the Rashids, and ’’Abdullah, the eldest, ruled twice.

From the point of

view of the welfare of the country, the decline of the S u ’uds was com­ pensated for by the very able rule of Muhammad ibn-Rashid.

1 Subjoined is an abbreviated tree of the ibn-Rashid family, adapted from Musil, 2^4: CAli ibn-Rashid


:— 1 ^Abdullah

2 Talal

5 Mut^ib

5 Muhammad [ _ * 6 ’Abd al - ’Aziz 7 Mut *ib 10 Su ’ud 4 3andar Badr"~Na^jif 12 ’Abdullah


‘Ubayd (Allah)

Hammud ’ 8 Sultan



9 Su*ud


11 ’'Abdullah

15 Muhammad

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


In addition to his experience in practical administration,


ibn-Faysal at the time of his accession to the rule was favored by two important factors.

# .

He had been legally appointed imam by conservative A

religious views had won him wholehearted support from the backbone of the Unitarian community, concentrated in the towns of Najd.

That Muhammad

and *Abd al-Rahman, Faysal's third and fourth sons, supported ‘Abdullah • • also helped him.

His chief obstacles were his rather harsh personality

and his brother Su^ud's ambition and popularity with the Bedouins.^- Another disadvantage which ‘Abdullah had was the fact that Pelly, the British Resident in the Persian Gulf, did not like him and, therefore, favored •• 2 Su^ud.

Apparently, from the very beginning of ‘Abdullah's reign,

Su'ud had avowed his intention of usurping ^AbdullSh's position. It may also be true that ^Abdullah damaged his popularity by trying to centralize the administration of his territory more than had previously been the case.

5 v;ahbah says that he was guilty of appointing

many people to government positions who were not from the localities involved.

This practice irritated important local families who were

used to receiving such positions themselves.

Further, according to

Wahbah, ‘Abdullah gave his officials larger powers than had previously fVJLoU-e-'-


been customary, which!annoyed the local dignitaries even more. A

1 For brief character sketches of ^Abdullah and Su^ud, see above, pp. 242-5. 2 Hogarth, Penetration, ^>lh. 5 P. 227. 4 Ibid.

‘••y....... a Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

That ‘"Abdullah felt his position, to be insecure may be inferred from two steps which he took soon after the death of Faysal.

The first

was to send a declaration to Pelly avowing his friendship with the British government and promising not to molest those areas which had fallen under British influence or control.

The declaration follows:

I, Mahomed bin Abdullah bin Maneh (_ Mani^ ?_/, am certain of the following points: — I am authorizedMEmaum Abdullah bin Fysul to request the Sahib, the Resident in the Persian Gulf, to become the medium of friendship between Imaum Abdullah bin Fysul and the British Government; Secondly. — I assure the Resident in the Persian Gulf on the part of Imaum Abdullah bin Fysul that he will not oppose or injure British subjects residing in territories under the authority of Abdullah bin Fysul; and Thirdly. — I assure the Resident in the Persian Gulf on the part of Imaum Abdullah bin Fysul that he will not injure or attack the territories of the Arab tribes in alliance with the British Government, _ specially on the Kingdom of Muscat i.. e^., ^Qman_/, ' further than in receiving the zukat that has been custom­ ary of old. Written by my hand at Bushire,_on Saturday, the day of Zilhejeh /_ dhu al-Hijjah_/ (21st day of April 1866). * ± Mahomed Bin Abdullah Bin Maneh. This declaration served for ‘Abdullah the threefold purpose of trying to get British recognition and support for his rule, of answering British protests over the Unitarian looting of Indians at Sur in the closing days of Faysal*s reign,


■ — and of helping to offset the favor which S u ‘ud

had found in Pelly's eyes.

1 Quoted by Aitchison (1955)» 206. See also Badger, cv; Hogarth, Penetration, ^lb-15• 2 See above,fp. 212 ff. The 3ritish considered ‘"Abdullah's declaration to be a sufficient answer to their protests and the affair of Sur was dropped; Aitchison (1955)» 185•

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

The second step that Abdullah took in an attempt to bolster himself against Su/ud was to send an agent to sound out the inclinations of the Ottoman authorities in Baghdad.^

The results of this, his first approach

to Baghdad, are not recorded, but it may have paved the way for ’"Abdullah latter appeals,

after Su*ud had become Imam.

Exactly when and where S u ’ud first openly unfurled the banner of revolt against his brother is not recorded, but apparently he did not wait long.

Several preliminary battles took place,


presumably in the

southern districts where Su'ud had long been amir, and finally at a place called al-Mu^tala.

^Abdullah managed to win the first round, for

he routed Su'ud,^ who was wounded and fled to Oi.slr.^

In 'Asir, Su^ud

made an unsuccessful attempt to gain supporters for his cause from the family of ^A'id. ibn-Mar^i,^ which was in control there J

Hie ’AsTris'

refusal to join Su*ud probably resulted from the fact that it was dis­ tasteful for them to fight against the legal ruler of the Unitarian state and probably also indicates preoccupation with local affairs.

Failing to

make any progress in *Asir, Su*ud returned to Najran where he opened negotiations with the al-ftjjman and Al Murrah.

The former was partic-

ularly disposed to help him because of his family relationship with them

1 Longrigg, 502. 2 See below, 16 f. 5 Al-Nabhani, ”A1-Bahrayn", 259* It was probably during the opening stages of their fighting that rAbdullah built the large fort at alMiz’al, a town to the south of Manfuhah. This fort was.designed, to protect al-Riyad from the south. Consult Philby, Heart, I, 5^7* 4 Al-Rlhani, Ta *rlkh, 84. _ 5 Al-NaShani, "Al-Baij.rayn", 259 J al-Alusi, 96 ; Doughty, II, 455* 6 See above, p. 98. _ 7 Hamzah, Qalb, 557• Doughty, II, 455» says that 'Abdullah did get some men from WSdi Bxshah in rAsIr and also from Wadi al-Dawasir. 8 See above, p. 242, n. 4.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


and because 'Abdullah had twice inflicted severe defeats on them a few years previously.^"

Three years later, when his wounds were cured, the

pretender moved on to the Persian Gulf area and from it entered alRiyad triumphantly. In the meantime, however, events were moving as rapidly in Ha'il as they were in al-Riyad. • 1284/March, 1868), Shammar.

Following the death of Talal (dhu al-Qa^dah, •

his brother Mut^ib succeeded him as amir of Jabal

Mut^ib, however, having ruled only ten months, was assassinat­

ed in. January, I869 by Talal's son, Bandar, who resented having been passed over in the succession and who had gathered a considerable number of supporters for his claim to rule.^

In fear of Bandar, *Ubayd and

Muhammad, brother and son respectively of 'Abdullah ibn-Rashid, the original amir, fled to al-Riyad seeking the protection of ^Abdullah ibn-Faygal.

Bandar, either to bring the two exiles within his grasp

or to propitiate them, invited both to return to Ha'il.

*Ubayd, then

eighty years old, died in the spring of 1285-6/1869 while still in al- 4 Riyad.

Muhammad, who had ambitions of his own, did not immediately

return to Ha'il.

From a safe distance he negotiated with Bandar for

permission to lead one of the regular goods caravans to al-'lraq.

1 2 5 4

See above, p. 255* See above, pp. 251-2. Musil, 240; Doughty, II, 29; Philby, Arabia, See above, p. 182, n. 5*



R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


the caravan returned to Ha'il, Muhammad returned with it accompanied by a large number of al-Zafxr tribesmen.

Whether by plan or by accident,

outside the gates of HS'i^a battle took place between Bandar and Muhammad in which Muhammad was completely victorious and Bandar was » • killed.

Following the battle Muhammad ruthlessly tracked down Bandar's

five brothers. Although conceived in blood, the reign of Muhammad ibn-'Abdullah ibn-Rashid marked "the dawn of an era accounted one of the brightest, most peaceful and most prosperous in the annals of Arabia."^


ibn-Rashid's reign lasted until the first half of Rajab, December, 1897*


He, it was, whose rise to the overlordship of Arabia

coincided with the second eclipse of the house of Su^ud. Dynastic troubles in the Persian Gulf area also entered into Najdi politics in the late sixties. of al-Bahrayn,

Among the members of the Khallfah family

^Tsa ibn-'Ali had, during a short period in which the

^Abdullah branch of his family had gained control of the islands, fled to seek sanctuary from the Imam ^A-bdullah.^ •"isa returned to al-Bahrayn as r u l e r H e

After a short stay, however, seems not to have appreciated

^Abdullah's hospitality for in 1288/1870 he fought with Su'nd against

1 Philby, Arabia, 140. For further details on Muhammad ibn-Rashid's accession, consult Musil, 2^0-2; Philby, Arabia, 1^6-4l; Doughty, II, 29* According to Huber, "Voyage", 550, Muhammad ibn-Rashxd was one meter, sixty-five centimeters tall; he had*an energetic and expressive face, with piercing and continually moving eyes which made him look worried; and he had a soft, easy smile, and liked to talk and joke. See also Doughty, passim. 2 Al-Nabhani, "Al-Bahrayn", 191 (if correctly paginated, 195)J 'Isa ruled al-Bahraynr until his retirement in 1545-4/1925. Another member of the Khallfah family, Jabir ibn-Muhammad ibn-Khalxfah ibnSalman was in al-Riya$ at the same time. Consult also the genealogy of the -Khallfah family in the possession of the Arabian American Oil Company. See above, p. 215» 5 After '"isa returned to al-Bahrayn, the 'Abdullah branch of the family again installed themselves on the coast of al-Ahsa'; al-Nabhani, "A14Ba hrayn" lyl (if correctly paginated, 195). R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


i —


/_ In 'Uman, it will be remembered that Thuwayni had been murder

ed by his son Salim in Ramadan-Shawwal, 1282/February, 1866.^

But Salim'

reign did not last long, for in Jumada Second-Rajab, 1285/October, 1868 'Azzan ibn-Qays ibn-Hsmmud, the governor of Rastaq, revolted for a second



' „ On this occasion he was completely successful and drove Salim

out of the country.

Both 'Azzan and 'Isa ibn-'Ali soon figured in

Unitarian affairs. Early in 1285-6/1869 Salim, the deposed ruler of 'Uman landed at Dubay on the Pirate Ooast and formed a coalition with the Unitarian commander there.


However, this officer was killed a short time later

in an engagement with the Qawasim tribe at al-Shariqah.


Meanwhile it

appears that Olzzan ibn-Qays had not paid the customary tribute to alRiyad, and the Imam *Abdullah sent a demand for it. from 'Azzan.®

There was no reply

In June, I869 the al-Na^im tribe, which had a grudge

against the Unitarians, invited '^zzan to join them in wresting from the Unitarians their *Umani stronghold of al-Buraymi J town fell.®

In July the

^Abdullah immediately began to make plans to recover it, and

1 2 5 4 5

See above, p. 214. See above, p. 212. Badger, cxiv; Aitchison (I892), 45* Badger, cxiv. Badger, cxv. 6 Aitchison (1892), 45* 7 Ibid. 8 Badger, cxv; Aitchison, (1892), 45*

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


in January, 1870 he was reported to be advancing with a considerable




(Azzan and his brother immediately went to Barqah (?), about A

fifty miles up the coast from Masqat, to prepare a defense for their newly won position.

Here they were joined by (Abdullah’s brother Su(id, o who had come from Najran. /^number of difficulties then combined to make the Imam abandon jt -

the expedition.

The lack of water on the way was a harship, and Sa’id

ibn-Tahnun, governor of abu-Zabi,^ was known to be allied with ^Azzan. •

Finally news of intrigues in al-Riyad favoring 3u*ud convinced (Abdullah to return and defend himself at h o m e ( A b d u l l a h 1s retreat marked the permanent end of Unitarian political influence in (jman. It was perhaps on the way back to Najd that (Abdullah contemplated attacking al-Bahrayn in conjunction with Qasim ibn-Thani, who had recently become amir of Qatar.

This plan was inspired by the fact that

Su(ld, having unsuccessfully tried to enlist (Azzan's assistance in a direct attack on Najjd, had proceeded from (Oman to al-Bahrayn in order to interest (Csa ibn-(Ali in his schemes.^

When ^Abdullah and Qasim

realized that (Esa was fully capable of defending himself, they abandon­ ed their abortive plan and decided to attack the al-Na*Tm tribe, which

1 2 5 4 5

Ibid. Badger, cxv; al-Rxhani, Ta’rlkh, 84^'al-Nabhani, "Al-Baljrayn", 2J9* See above, pp. 177-8 Aitchison (1892), 45; Badger, cxvi. Al-Rlhani, Ta'rlkh. 84.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


had. so lately cost 'Abdullah the fortified town of al-Buraymi.^


combined Najdi-Qatari force provea too much for the Bedouins, who were routed and fled to the fortress of Rabljah. the al-Na^Im into an unconditional surrender.

A brief siege there forced QSsim ibn—Thani then

appropriated all their flocks and other possessions.

The Bedouin remnants

fled to the coast where ^ s a ibn-Olli picked them up in ships and took them to al-Bahrayn.


Su^ud's opportunity to fulfill his ambition was now at hand.


when he returned from al-Bahrayn to the mainland is nowhere stated, but apparently he did not tarry long, and in addition he brought with him the full approval and support of ^Tsa ibn-*Ali.^

Landing somewhere in

al-Ahsa*, Su^ud mobilized all his supporters, who included — Bahraynis — •

besides the

Rakan ibn-Hithlayn's Bedouins of al-^Ujman, and the Al •


Murrah, which two groups made up the bulk of Su ud's army.


In addition

to these fighters Su*ud had gained the support of a considerable number of the members of his own family.


1 Whether the al-Na^im tribe was divided into two parts, one centered around al-Buraymi and the other in Qatar; or whether the tribe was basically from Qatar and only went to al-Buraymi in order to raid it is not clear. 2 The story of Abdullah1s plan to attack al-Bahrayn and his subsequent victory over the al-Ha'Im is told only by al-Nabhani, "Al-Bahrayn," 259-40, Al-Nabhani does not date these events beyond saying that they took place in 1287/1870-1. 5 Al-Rihani, Ta'rikh, 84; Hamzah, Qalb, 557? Musil, 274; Philby, Arabia, 142. * ■ ■ 4 Wahbah, 228; al-Rlhani, Ta'rikh, 84; Hamzah, Qalb, 557; Musil, 274; Philby, Arabia, 142.* * ^ 5 According to al-Hanbali, 47, these included Su^d'sjarother *Abd alRahman; his cousins Fahd ibn-Sunaytan (F 25), ^Abdullah ibn-Thunayyan (0*58) and Thunayyan_(G 65 ?); and Mushari's family. It is doubtful whether 'Abd al-Rahman sided with Su'Hd.


■: l R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Once hia army was assembled, Su'ud moved on the provincial capital of al-Hufuf, where Ahmad al-Sudayri was still governor in ^Abdullah's name,^ and besieged it.

In al-Riyad 'Abdullah and his brother Muhammad •

reacted to this attack by ordering a mobilization of the Najdi troops. The response to this order was weak, but, nevertheless, Olbdullah and Muljammad started for al—Hufuf with the small force at hand.


managed to hold out in al-Hufuf for several weeks, but when Su'tld threaten­ ed to cut down the palm groves surrounding the town, Ahmad had to surrender. Musil tells concisely the remainder of the story of 'Abdullah's loss of power: ^Abdallak learned of the fall of the town when he was halfway from ar-Rijad to al-Hufhuf, and resolved to revenge it. He divided his warriors into several bands and ordered them to hasten by^different routes to the watering place of al-Gude /_ al-Judah_7» • where the main body of the enemy was stationed,, to arrive at that place on the appointed night, and to join him again and attack the enemy at sunrise. But his opponents, who had occupied all the watering places of a wifle area, scattered the different bands, killed over 2J00 of 'AbdallSh'8 faithful followers, and drove him to.a hurried flight.2 Sa'ud, supported by Great Britain, now advanced with his followers against the seat of his family, ar-Rijad, and at the end of 18705 entered it as

1 See above, p. 207* 2 Given by al-Rlhani, Ta'rikh, 84 j by Wahbah, 228j and by Hamzah, Qalb, 557, as Jlidah, not al-JOdah. 5 According to al-Rlhani, Ta'rikh, 84, treachery in ^Abdullah's army helped account for his defeat. Further, al-Rihani, loc. cit., estimates the dead of both armies at about four hundred, a more likely figure than twenty-three hundred. 4 According to Doughty, II, 5^8, ihe Resident sent hundreds of sacks of rice to Su'ud, thereby naturally enough incurring 'Abdullah's hatred. See also above, p. 255» 5 The date on which Su^ud entered al-Riyad, like other dates of this period, for which there are almost no primary sources, is difficult to determine exactly. In one place, Arabia, 142, Philby gives the date as late as 1870 j in another, Arabia, 5^7, as I869. Hamzah, Qalb, 557?gives the date as 1288/1870, hut fails to realize that the Moslem year 1288 does not overlap with the Christian year 1870. Al-Rihani, Ta'rikh, 84, gives 1288/1871 which is almost certainly too late.% In agreement with, Musil that the date was 1287/1870 are Aitchison $81$ , 45J al—Hanbali, 47 J and Wahbah, 229. R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


lord. Various settlements, however,_still resisted — in particular al-Barra f_ alBarrah_7 which "Abdullah also tried to assist, again stiffering defeat.-*"AbdulISh was still not without friends, but some of the more important of them proved to be broken reeds.

Loading his personal

valuables on some one hundred camels, and accompanied by a group of personal retainers, he set off to seek the help of Zamil, who had taken advantage of the Su’uda1 quarrels to make ""llnayzah completely independent.

The patriot of "Unayzah did not want to give Su"%d any

pretext for interference in al-Qastm and, after allowing ’’Abdullah a 2 few day's respite, told him to leave. The fugitive prince then went to Jabal Shammar, with no better results.

Muhammad ibn-Rashxd allowed

him to wander a while with the Shammar tribesmen, presented him with what personal effects he was in need of, including one of his sisters as a wife, but refused to let him enter Ha'il itself.^

Finally, "Abdullah

I P . 274} also consult al-Hanbali, 48, who states that "Abdullah first fled to the Qahtan tribes and fought against Su’ud with no success. For other general accounts of the last weeks of "Abdullah's first reign, most of which follow Musil closely, consult Wahbah, 228-9; Hamzah, Qalb, 559? Philby, Arabia, l4l-2j al-Rlhani, Ta'rikh, 84. ^•1-Rihani, loc. cit., says that Muhammad ibn-Faysal was captured by 3u"ttd and jailed in al—Qatxf. Al—ftihani states that Su’ud was re­ cognized at first only by'the province of al-Ahsa' and that he did not advance oT^al—Riyad until after Midhat Pasha had occupied al—Ahsa' (see below, pp. , which event he places before the battle o£ al— Barrah. There seems to be no foundation to this story. 2 Musil, 275? Wahbah, 229; Philby, Arabia, 142. 5 Doughty, II, 50* According to Doughty, loo, cit., Muhammad ibnRashxd 's sister died soon after "Abdullah married her; he then married a sister of Hammud ibn-"Ubayd ibn-Rashxd. Of. Musil, 275, followed by Wahbah^ 2^9, and Philby, Arabia, 142, who says that "Abdullah entered Ha'il.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


found, sanctuary with Sultan al-Dawish, and Oissaf ibn-Thunayn, re­ spectively chiefs of the Mutayr and Subay*".

These two did not like

Su*ud, probably because of his patronage of the rival al- 'Uijman and Si Murrah and, therefore, received ^Abdullah.^ to give him any armed help,

However, they refused

amd ^Abdullah, finding no support in

Arabia, turned to Midhat Pasha, newly appointed governor of the Ottoman walayah of BaghdSd, for help. Midhat Pasha had already made a name for himself as an energetic wSli in the Balkans and when in 1286-7/1870 he was appointed to the walayah of BaghdSd he found an unusual opportunity to add new territory to Ottoman jurisdiction and new renown to his name.


The loss of al-Ahsa* to the Ottomans was undoubtedly the most important event in Su^ud’s reign.

It was probably in Rama^an-Shawwal,

1287/December, 1870^ that ^Abdullah. first sent overtures to Midhat

1 Musil, 275; Wahbah, 229; Hamzah, Qalb, 557J Philby, Arabia, 142. 2 Musil, 275. 5 Ottoman claims to rule al-Ahsa* were not without precedent. The background of Ottoman claims -£0 al-Ahsa* are best set forth by Longrigg, 58, n. 1; 111, n. 5i 501;302» Turkey had claimed the allegiance of al-Ahsa' since the time of Sulayman the Magnificent, but it was "base­ less and unreal . . . , in the Turkish manner, unsupported by history • . • •" (Longrigg, 58, n. 1») Longrigg continues, saying that by the middle of the 17th century al-Ahsa* "was clearly considered part of the Basrah principality / which was itself semi-independent_/; but such attachment was nominal." (Longrigg, 111, n. 5} addition to these historical arguments, Midhat's internal reform could command more popular support if coupled with external expansion, and "lastly and the deepest reason, was the .persistent, unceasing land-hunger of the Turks, ever grasping at useless and embarrassing possessions, ever willing to annex fresh hostile subjects and barren sands." (Longrigg, 502*) A final aspect of the situation was that, as Su*ud enjoyed a certain amount of support from Great Britain, it was natural for '"Abdullah to turn to the only other power capable of combating the British, namely the Ottoman. From the Ottoman point of view, the situation was an opportunity to contest the increasing prestige of the British in the Persian Gulf. There can be little truth in the assertion, 55“^, of Midhat, the son and biographer of Midhat Pasha, that Su*” ud was threaten-

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Pasha asking for help in regaining his throne and probably promising to pay tribute in return.^-

His emissary was ‘Abd al-‘Az!z ibn-*Abdullah 2 ibn-‘Abd al-Rahman abu-3utayyin. Apparently Midhat immediately accepted ‘Abdullah's propositions, but he made careful plans before actually

attacking the province. Having obtained the authorization of ‘Kli Pasha, Sultan £Abd al‘Aziz's Grand Vizier, Midhat's next move was to send out spies to alAhsa' disguised as merchants.''

Meanwhile he had issued a proclamation

assuming Ottoman sovereignty in Najd and referring to ‘Abdullah as qa'im maqam^

of the province; the proclamation also stated that an

Ottoman force would be sent "to restore order, and to maintain the said Oaimakam [qa’im maqam] against his rebellious brother."7 Midhat prepared some five battalions^ of regular troops under General

ing to encroach on al-flraq in the manner of the first Su‘udi state. It is, however, probable that ‘Abdullah tried to frighten Midhat into thinking that such raids might take place. Consult also the Foreign Office pamphlet, Arabia, 19; Musil, 275; al-Rash?d, II, 29; Midhat, 56-7; 31unt, II, 266. 4 Musil, 275; Longrigg, $02. 1 Longrigg, 502; Philby, Arabia, 142. 2 Musil, 275; Wahbah, 229. See above, pp. 165; 182, n. 5* 5 Midhat, 56. 4 According to the Ottoman "Law of Walayahs" of 1284/1867, Article III, a qa’im maqam had jurisdiction over a qada*, which was a sub­ division of a sanjaq; de Testa, VII, 484. 5 Blunt, II, 266-7. 6 31unt, II, 266, gives the figure of four or five thousand; Longrigg, 502, of "se'/eral thousand."

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Nafidh^ Pasha and in addition counted on the following as firm allies: 1) ^Abdullah and his personal supporters; 2) the banu-Khalid tribe which had formerly ruled al-Ahsa1 and hoped for more independence under the Ottomans than they had had under the Su'uds; 5) 'Abdullah ibn-Sabah (and his younger brother Mubarak), ruler of al-Kuwayt; and 4) Nasir Pasha ibn-Sa'dun, chief of the al-Muntafiq tribe, one of the —

most powerful in lower al-^Iraq.


This coalition was placed under the

_ 5 over-all command of Nafidh Pasha and set out in May, 1871*

The plan of operations is not completely clear, but it appears that the Ottoman regulars were transported partially in Ottoman ships and partially in Kuwayti ships.

^Abdullah ibn-Sabah was in command


the sea force, while his brother Mubarak commanded the land force, made up principally of Bedouins.


The sea force joined the main

Kuwayti navy at Ra's Tannurah, at which place the imperial soldiers debarked.


The troops then proceeded to al-Qatlf.

The townsmen did

1 Following the spelling of al-Rashxd, II, 29, and'Hamzah, Qalb, 558. Of. Musil, 275, who spells the name to read flafiz. 2 For further details on Midhat's enlistmen of aid from these sources, see Musil, 275; Philby, Arabia, 144; Wahbah, 229; al-R&shTd, II, 29; al-Rlhani, T a 1rikh, 84; Midhat, 57* Blunt, II, 266, says rAbdullSh, supported by the Qahtan tribe, had tried a separate operation against Su'ud, but that when’he was defeated, he fled to the Turkish camp. This might be a reference to the battle of al-Barrah (see above, p. 264). 5 Longrigg, 502. Of. Musil, 275, and Philby, Arabia, 144, who givea June, 1871 • Blunt, II, 266, says that the army landed in al-Ahsa1in June, 1871* 4 Al-Rashld, II, 29; Midhat, 57J Musil, 275; Philby, Arabia, 144. 5 Al-Rashld, II, 29; Midhat, 57; Longrigg, 502. Of. Musil, 275, followed by Philby, Arabia, 144, who says that the force landed at al-liqayr. Blunt, II, 266, gives al-Qatlf as the disembarkation point.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout permission.


not resist at all, and Ahmad al-Sudayri, who seems to have been trans­ ferred from al-Hufuf to al-Qatxf by Su*ud, surrendered the castle after a short siege.

Al-Sudayri was given aman for himself, his men, and

the weapons in the castle.^- The small neighboring town of al-Dammam in fell soon after al-Qatxf, and only/the island of Tarut was any serious resistance encountdred.

The superiority of the attacking

force, however, was able to decide the issue in its favor. The land force under Mubarak ibn-Sabah saw no action in the area of al-Qatxf because it did not arrive until after the towns had all fallen. After the fall of al-Qatxf and the surrounding territories, the coalition force marched overland to al-Hufuf and was paralleled off shore by the Kuwayti fleet.

No battle was actually fought at al-Hufuf because

Su'ud's negro governor surrendered the town rather than face the force which surrounded it.

Thus by the middle of 1288/1871 the occupation

of al-Ahsa* had been completed, and the quarreling Su‘uds had lost one of the fairest provinces of their disintegrating empxre.


According to Midhat Pasha's son, the conquest of al-Ahsa* was the most important event in his father's governorship of Baghdad.^


1 Al-Rashld, II, 2p. See also Midhat, 57; Longrigg, 502. 2 Al-Rashxd, II, 50. Al-Rashxd records the fact that the troops began to plunder on Tarut, but that ‘Abdullah ibn-Sabah took measures to prevent them. 5 Al-Rashxd, II, 5°. 4 Al-Rashxd, II, 5°* for other statements of the occupation of alAhsa*, consult Hamzah, Qalb, 553; Wahbah, 72, 229; Wilson, 247; Midhat, 57* Philby, Arabia, 144, states that the al-‘Ujman and A1 Murrah tribes, deserted Su‘ud at the crucial moment when the Turks attacked him. This may be true but there is nothing to indicate that Su‘ud made any serious attempt to defend al-Ahsa’. 5 Midhat, 55*

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Pasha received formal recognition for his services from both ‘Ali Pasha, the Grand Vizier, and from the Sultan himself.^- The Ottomans retained al-Ahsa* until the eve of the first World War when they were about to

disappear forever, and m o d e m Saudi Arabia was rising like a phoenix. Al-Ahsa*, as a result of its change in fortune, became an Ottoman

qada* called "Ha ja,11 and ‘Abdullah ibn-Faysal was named qa’im m a q a m . ^ For a short period the change in regime was well received in al-Ahsa’, but new taxes to which the inhabitants were unaccustomed^ and the in­ ability of the new regime to keep the Bedouins from attacking the townspeople


soon brought ill-feeling in their train.

Furthermore, disease

and the lack of supplies made life difficult for all concerned.



planned to visit the new qada* as soon as his regime had been installed, but a revolt of the ‘Iraqi branch of the Shammar tribe forced him to stay in Baghdad.^ Later in the year Midhat did visit al-Ahsa’,^ but ‘Abdullah, who by now had realized that the Turks were merely using him as a tool to further their own ends, fled and, despite Midhat's 1 From ‘Ali Pasha, in a letter dated the twenty-third of Jumada First, 1288, came congratulations i.or the "brilliant successes" in "Najd." From the Sultan, Midhat received a sword of honor, set in diamonds, with "Najd" engraved on it; Midhat, 61-2. 2 Longrigg, 502; Musil, 275, Fhilby, Arabia, 144. Midhat, 57, says that ‘Abdullah was made mutasarrif of the walayah of "Najd." This state­ ment is wrong because there is no indication that the Turks contemplated turning their new territory into a walayah. It is furthermore illogical because according to the "Law of Walayahs" of 1284/1867) Arjjticle II, each/walayah was divided into sanjaqs, and the mutasarrif was'the admin­ istrator of the sanjaq, not of the walayah; de Testa, V, 484. Midhat's account is full of many minor mistakes of this sort. Wahbah, 229, and Hogarth, Penetration, 258, also say that al-Ahsa* became a walayah. Call­ ing the new province Najd undoubtedly reflects Midhat Pasha's desire to incorporate inner Arabia into the Ottoman empire. Blunt reports, II, 266, that when ‘Abdullah ibn-Turki (S 9) forced Su*ud out of al-Riyad. (see below, p. 275)) the former was named director (mudir) of the city,"Spending the arrival there of Abdallah ibn Feysul ."' Also consult Wahbah, 229. 5 Midhat, 59• 4 Harrison, 170. 5 Longrigg, 50?» 6 Midhat,' .57• 7 Midhat, 60; Longrigg, 5^5* R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


assurances, refused to return.^- The wali of Baghdad was probablypleased,

In any case, he announced that as a result of a peitition

from "Najd" the Su^ud family no longer reigned.^

The district was then

5 made a sanjaq, and Nafidh Pasha was appointed mutasarrif.

It so

happened that at the time of Abdullah's flight, his uncle, 'Abdullah ibn-Turki (E9) had succeeded in ousting S u A d from al-Riyad.


ibn-Faysal, went to the capital, but stayed only a very short time r 4 until Su'ud again ousted him. Before Midhat Pasha had time to give any more of his attention to Arabia, he was recalled from the Baghdad walayah and replaced in 1289/ 1872 by Ra^uf Pasha, who was not much concerned with expanding the Empire.^

Ra^uf did manage to get his'hands on 'Abd al-Rahman ibn-

Faysal, who had aligned himself with Su*ud and had been sent to negotiate in Baghdad, where RCL'uf held him as "envoy and hostage"^ until 1291/ 1874 .7

1 Midhat, 59-60; Longrigg, 505* 2 Blunt, II, 266. 5 Midhat, 60; Longrigg, 505» According to Longrigg, loc» cit., Midhat brought fresh troops to relieve the original garrison. 4 See below, pfr-. 5 Blunt, II, 267; Musil, 275; Philby, Arabia, 145. 6 Philby, Arabia, l45« 7 Blunt, II, 267; Wahbah, 2J0; see also al-Hanbali, 49. According to Musil, 275, Abdullah rather than S u rud had sent A b d al-Rahman to Baghdad, but this statement is probably inaccurate. Philby, Arabia, 145, goes even farther astray in saying, that R&'uf maintained a "nominal hold on Najd through the refugee rAbdullah, whose youngest brother, 'Abdul Rahman, was sent to represent him at Baghdad . . . Abdullah had no "hold" himself.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


In 1289-90/1875 dislike of the Ottoman regime had grown so strong in al-Aljsa* that some sort of local revolt took place in al-Hufuf. Nasir Pasha ibn-Sa^dun, who had by this time been made wali of the newly constituted walayah of al-Basrah (on which the sanjaq of "Najd" now depended) sent a force jointly under his son FSlih and under Bazi*" ibn-*Uray^ir, of the banu-Khalid ruling family.^ d*

After order had been



restore, Bazi' was made mutasarrif, and the paramount house of the _ 5 _f banu-Khalid ruled once more in their ancestral domains. Bazi, however made himself unpopular with town and tribe alike, and a desire for the restoration of Unitarian control of the province began to make itself heard.^

In 1291/1874 *Abd al—Rahman ibn-Faysal was permitted to leave •


When he reached al-Ahsa1 and realized how unpopular the

Turkish regime had become there, he resolved to try to liberate the province on his own^ — the undertaking.

naturally he had the full support of Su*ud in

Gathering a heterogeneous force composed of the local

malcontents, the al-*Ujman, and Si Murrah, he defeated many of the local garrisons and besieged Bazi*" in the fort of al-Kut at al-Hufuf.^

1 Philby, Arabia, 147* Musil, 276, says that Nasir himself also accompanied the expedition. 2 In addition to the former mutasarrif*s inability to maintain order, another reason for the change in administration was, according to Longrigg, 50J» the necessity to cut expenses. Accordingly, the regular Ottoman troops were withdrawn and replaced by that Ottoman constabulary force known as dabitlyah. See also 31unt, II, 267* Longrigg, loc. cit., spells Bazik's name "Barrak" (?)• 5 See above, p. 22. 4 Musil, 276j Philby, Arabia, 147-8. 5 Wahbah, 2J0; Musil, 276; Philby, Arabia, 148. _ 6 Blunt, II, 267; Musil, 276; Philby, Arabia, 148; al-Rihani, Ta 1rikh, 85* Of. Wahbah, 2^0, who says that *Abd al-Rahman*s force actually occupied the castle of al-Kut.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


At the crucial moment Bazi*" was saved by the appearance of Nasir Pasha, who, with Bazik's supporters from the banu-Khalid, broke up the revolt and reoccupied all the lost towns.'*’ Nasir is reported to have pillaged and looted on a large scale in "restoring order"j when he returned to al-Basrah, he left his son Mazyad as mutasarrif. *Abd _ 3 al-Rahman went to al-Riyad after his defeat. The opportunity for the -

Unitarians to regain al-Ahsa' had passed. The establishment of Mazyad in al-Ahsa1 almost coincides with the death of 3u*ud ibn-Faysal.

Aside from the events in al-Ahsa', little

of importance had occupied his reign.

What little there was, reveals

a further decline in the Unitarian state. By the time that Su'ud had come to power, al-Qasxm and Jabal Shammar could no longer be considered effective parts of the state, for there is ho indication that either of them contributed anything to - 4 the government in al-Riyad.

Further with the loss of al—Ahsa' to the

Ottomans, the Unitarian state no longer had access to the Persian Gulf provinces — . Qatar, the Pirate Coast, and *Uman.

Naturally, all

1 Blunt, II, 267j Longrigg, 5°5; Musil, 276; Philby, Arabia, 148; Wahbah, 230; al-Rihani, Ta'rlkh,85. 2 Blunt, II, 267; tongrigg, 505; Musil, 27^,; ^Philby, Arabla,_l48; see also Jung, 49 ff• According to Musil, loc. cit., when Nasir reached al-Bagrah, his enemies there protested to the capital’about his cruelty and the amount of booty he had collected, "with the result that he was deposed and brought to Constantinople, where he died." Philby, Arabia, 148, gives the same information about Nasir's fate as does Musil, The latter has not been cited separately here because of his extreme dependence on the former. 5 Blunt, II, 267; Wahbah, 2^0; al-Rlhani, Ta*rikh, 85» 4 Huber, "Voyage," 495; Doughty, in letter quoted by Hogarth, Life, 211; Philby, Arabia, l45«

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


immediately stopped paying tribute. By the end of the first year of his reign, therefore, Su^ud had lost al-Qasxm, Jabal Shammar, alAhsa1., and the other maritime provinces.

His popularity and prestige

accordingly declined in the regions still subject to his control ~ the more so since he relied almost exclusively on the al-'Ujman to maintain his authority and thus irritated the villagers and townsfolk.*" Hemmed in on all sides, central Najd also began to suffer economically, 2 and food became very scarce. In 1287-8/1871 Su'ud's position had deteriorated to such a degree that his uncle, 'Abdullah ibn-Turki, gathered enough support to force Su'ud from Najd.

Sufud -went first to al-Dilam in al-Kharj, and thence

to al-Ahsa', where he made his only effort to contest that province with the Turks.

He stirred up the al-fyjman and Al Murrah tribes, bub,

because the tribes deserted him, was defeated at a place called alHuwayrah.’^

Meanwhile 'Abdullah ibn-Faysal, thinking to profit by his

broth er's loss, went to al-Riyad, where he was received without opposition.^

After al—Huwayrah, Su'ud returned to al-Aflaj, enlisted

some warriors from Wadi al-Dawasir in his cause, and defeated an


1 Musil, 275-6; Philby, Arabia, 142; Wahbah, 229. 2 Al-Rihani, Ta'rikh, 85* 5 Al-RIhSni, Ta'rikh, 85; Blunt, II, 266; Musil, 276; Philby, Arabia, 142; WaRbah, 229._ 4 Al-Rlhini, Ta'rikh, 85; Musil, 278; Hamzah, 558* 5 Al-RIhani, Ta?rlkh, 85? Blunt, II, 266; Wahbah, 229.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


led by *Abdull5h ibn-Turki, Muhammad ibn-Faysal, and other S u % d s at al-Dilam.



'Abdullah :ibn-Turki was taken prisoner in the battle and

died a few days later.^

Su'ud then pressed on, forced the submission

of Durma and Huraymilah, and advanced on al-Riyad. •

^AbdullSh ibn-

Faysal came out to the town of al-Jaz'ah^ to oppose Su*ud's entry, but was decisively^defeated and fled to al—Kuwayt.^

Thus in-1288-9/

I872 Su^ud once more entered al-Riyad at the head of his troops and was recognized as imam, but on this occasion, because of the failure of his government, he had almost no popular support. In


1290/1875 Su*ud tried to strike at his brother ^Abdullah by

raiding the latter's hideout, al-Kuwayt.

However, when he reached

al-Wafara and learned of the defensive preparations made by Mubarak ibn-Sabah, he turned back.^ • •

Su^ud could have ill afforded a defeat.

In his internal government, the Imam was forced to parcel out the government to other members of his family, who had supported him,^ and it may be guessed that each controlled his own area with a considerable degree of independence.

-According to al-Hanbali those members of the

royal family who received fiefs included the following:

In al-Khar j,

Thunayyan ibn-'Abdullah ibn-Thunayyan (F 56); in al-'Arid, Su'ud ibnJalwi ibn-Turki (F

14); in al-Farr, Fahd ibn-Sunaytan (F 25) j in al-

1 Al-Ri]jani, Ta'rikh, 85* 2 A ruined town in WSdi Hanxfah, about seven miles south of al-Riyad; consult Philby, Heart, II, 7- 8 , who spells it Jizar. 5 Al-Rxhani, Ta'rikh, 85; Wahbah, 229- 50 . 4 Al-Ri&ani, Ta'rikh, 85; W a h b a h , 229-50; Musil, 276. 5 Al-Rashld, II, 55. 6 Al-Hanbali, 48 .

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Riyad, *Abd al-Rahman ibn-Faysal;^ in control of Su^Gd's armed forces were his sons, Muhammad (G 54), ^AbdullSh (G 55)» Sa^d (G 57)* ‘Abd al-Rahman (G 58) » and.*Abd al-*Azxz (G 56)»

well as Nasir ibn-

Faysal ibn-Nasir (E JO), Ibrahim ibn-'Abdullah (G 5 9 ) The decentral­ ization was in itself a sign of the times.^ Su'ud1s own destruction was wrought by that very class whose strength had brought him into power —

the Bedouins.

who were allies of 'Abdullah ibn-Faysal,

The 'Utaybah,

took advantage of Su'ud's

weakness to encroach to the east as far as the western limits of al— 'Arid.^

Accordingly, in the winter of 1290-1/1875—4? Su^ud, in an

attempt to re-establish himself, led an expedition against the ^Utaybah, who were under Mas1at ibn-Rub ay *an.

The battle took place at the Sakha

wells, which are on the Najdi pilgrim road at the bottom of a large horseshoe hollow.^

With an army made up of tribesmen of al-*Ujman,

Al Murrah, Dawasir, Qahtan, and Mutayr, Su'ud reached the wells unkno wn to the enemy, but rested his men overnight before attacking.^

1 That is after his return from Baghdad. ^ 2 pp. 48-9* Al-Hanbali also says that 'AbdullSh ibn-'Abdullah ibnThunayyan (F 57)*was given control of"al-Ahsa', al-Qatlf, Qatar, the country of al-Bahrayn, and • • • the sides *of.rUmSn.11 This must have been a rather theoretical appointment as Su'ud.no longer had a shred of control in any of those areas. 5 In the former Unitarian province of *Asir, the opening of the Suez Oanal in 1286/1869 had_exposed the mountaineers to new Ottoman aggression. Despite Muhammad ibn— ^A'id's (see above, p. 257) resistance in 1286-8/ 1870-1, he was defeated by troops under Radlf Pasha and murdered after surrendering. Consult " ’’Aslr", EIj Philby, Arabia, 205* 4 Doughty, II, 51, 455. 5 Wahbah, 250; Musil, 2J6; Philby, Arabia, l45» 6 On the Sakha wells, consult Philby, Heart, I, 154—5? 7 Doughty, II, 455.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


The battle which took place the next day reveals Bedouin treachery at its worst.

In its early stages, while the defending 'utaybah were

beating off the Mutayr's attacks, the Qahtan suddenly turned on the / * ** 1 "tlanks of Su'ud 1s personal cavalry and captured most of his horses.

The. Qahtan then switched their attack against the Mutayr, and a freefor-all developed.

At length the Qahtan withdrew with their booty.

Meanwhile Su ’ud had been surrounded in the hollow and was wounded.


the melee, the Imam was carried out by his slaves, but his wound was to prove fatal, and the ^Utaybah remained “masters of the field.” Su^ud spent the rest of his life in the castle at al-Riyad, where, after a long struggle against the illness brought on by his wound, he 5 ^ died. 'Abdullah, whose chance was now to come again, had, from his refuge in al-Kuwayt, made a treaty with the dying Imam's sons.


ing to it, 'Abdullah should return to Najd after Su'ud*s d e a t h A l t h o u g h reports are conflicting, Su'ud's death seems to have come about in the early summer of 1291/1874.


S It appears that 'Abd al-Rahman took over

1 Blunt_reports, II, 2, that by 1878 the fraternal wars of Su'ud and 'Abdullah had disipated all but about one-twentieth of Faysal!s stud. 2 Doughty, II, 454. Doughty, loc. cit., estimates Su'tid's*losses at three hundred men. See also Musil, 276; Wahbah, 250; Philby", Arabia, 145 j Hamzah, Qalb, 558* 5 Musil, 276 ; Wahbah, 25O; Philby, Arabia, 14^. Doughty, II, II. 455, says that Surud died "of an old malady." _ 4 Musil, 276; Philby, Arabia, 145* Of. al—Batanuni, 92, who says that ^Abdullah had to fight against Su'ud's sons before a truce was arranged, between them. Philby, Arabia, 146, says that Muhammad ibn-Rashid helped to'negotiate the agreement. See below, p. 5. The most authoritative sources for this date are al—Hanbali (who was alive at the time) and Musil, 276. The date is also given by Hamzah^ Qalb, 558; al-Rihani, Ta'rXkh, 85; Stuhlmann, 209; Wahbah, 250. The date of 1877» given by Philby, Arabia, 145,,is probably taken from a letter of Doughty (quoted by Hogarth, Life, 211-12), dated February first, 1877, in which the explorer_says, "Of* the princes in east Najd Saund and Abdullah uterine brothers [_ they were_ not; see above, p. 242, n. 4; 245* n, 1J contested the Sultanat [_ sic / Sauud victorious is the present Ruler others say Abdullah they are both living." In a postscript Doughty adds, "Sauud the Wahab'y chief I learn from a well-informed merchant is Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


the government in the interval between Su’ud1a death and the arrival of* ’Abdullah.^' Su’ud could not, on his death bed, haye surveyed his accomplishments with any pride. by his father,


By refusing to accept the group principle enunciated he had caused the Unitarian state to become a mere shell.

Muhammad ibn-Rashid had taken no hostile action against Su’ud, but he could afford to bide his time, which soon came.

dead . • . ." Although Doughty wrote this letter from Mada^in Salih , on the Damascus pilgrim road, far from al-Riyad, it is, nevertheless, . strange that he should have thought Su’ud to have been alive, if actually he had been (lead for two and one-half years. At the same time , it is even less understandable that al—Hanbali, a Najdi and an intimate of the Su’ud family, could have made an’error of three years, and one is forced-to accept the testimony of a contemporary native even over that of Doughty relying on secondhand informants, Blunt, II, 267, gives


Philby, Heart, I, 100, 296, gives a badly garbled version of Su’ud's reign, which he does not repeat in his later book, Arabia. 1 Wahbah, 2J0, suggests that there had been no agreement between ’AbdullSh and other members of the family and says that rAbd alRahman ruled in al-Riyad almost a year before ’Abdullah put in an appearance and announced himself as imam, a procedure to which ‘Abd al-Raljman agreed -Jb© for the sake of peace. Al-Rihani, Ta'rikh, .86, says that on Su’ud's death, ’Abd al-RahmSn took over as ruler and that ’Abdullah and the third brother, Muhammad^were living with the ’Utaybah tribe. Al-Rnhani continues, saying that Muhammad came to al-Riyad with an armed'force, which was opposed by ’Abd al-RaJjman and another force composed of Riyadis, Khar3is, and Bedouins of Mutayr and al’Ujman, and including the sons of Su’ud. The two forces met at Jharmida', where, after an indecisive battle, they came to terms. When Su'ud’s sons learned of the truce, they, turned on ’Abd al-Rahman, who went-to see ’Abdullah, still with ’Utaybah. The brothers then returned together to fight Su’ud's sons, but.the latter had already fled to al—Khar3. Philby, Arabia. 147, speaks of skirmishes at Tharmida* between Muhammad and ‘Abd al-RahmSn, and 'Abdullah, as does Huber, "Voyage," 495* *The chronicler, al-Hanbali, writing shortly after Su’ud's death says, 49-50» that Najd was parcelled out among various members of the Su’ud family, no one of whom could get the allegiance of all. Each group.of Su'uds had Bedouins supporting it. According to al-Hanbali, loc. cit., the division was as followss ’AbdullSh had the support of the Subay’, alSuhul, and some sections of ’Utaybah; Su’ud's children and 'Abd alRahman were supported by the YSm tribes;.and the Thunayyan branch of the family had the backing of the south, particularly al-DawShir^ and the people of al-Far1-. Consult also Blunt, II, 267; §amzah, Al-Bilad, 4; Dalian, Khulagat, 515* 2 See above, p. 1^4 , R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


When, in 1291/1874, Abdullah finally came to power for the second time, he established a reasonably friendly relationship with his brothers Muhammad and *Abd al-Raljman; and, despite the fact that they may have opposed him at the beginning,^- both gave up their own ambitions and took part in governing the much reduced realm.


With Su’ud’s sons,

‘Abdullah had, for a while at least, a working arrangement.

But they

took the precaution of living in al-Kharj, where their father had been amir, in order to discourage any inclination on ’Abdullah’s part to 3 liquidate them. Having momentarily put an end to the family feuding, ’Abdullah was now able to bring about order in the central districts,



in addition to their purely political problems, had lately been under5 going a virtual famine. But his. attempts to reassert Unitarian

1 See above, p. 277» n. 1. _ 2 Musil, 276, claims that when ’’Abdullah first entered al-RiyaiJ, he did not trust the natives of the town and, accordingly, made his brother Muhammad his representative while he himself lived outside. According to Hamzah, Al-Bilad, 4, ‘Abd al-Raljman_acted as rAbdullah's adviser. Blunt, II, 267 » says that r4bd al-Rahman was his brother's "chief minister". Al-RShani, Ta1rikh, 86, says that Muhammad and rAbd al-RaljmHn were obedient to r4bdullSh. 5 Musil, 276; Philby, Arabia, 147. Su’ud's sons were: Muhammad (surnamed Ghazlah), Fahd (G 55) » ’^Abdullah, Sa^d, rAbd al-Rahman, and rAbd al-’Azizj see above, p. X"i £ . Of. Musil,- loc. cit., who does not mention ’Abd al—Rahman. Musil says that Muhammad was "most capable." 4 Musil 278. Of. filunt, II, 268, who says that ’Abdullah exercised little authority outside of al-Riyad. 5 Philby, Arabia,. l47» Doughty, Il£ 21, says that wheat (in 1294—5/ 1877-8) sold for three sars per riyal; of. above,pp. 79-80. Further, with the breakdown of the central government, the tribes reverted to their, former anarchy, with adverse affects on the townsmen? Doughty, II, 424.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


authority elsewhere were-a failure.

He may have contemplated trying to

recover al-Ahsl* from the Turks,^ but, if so, his plans got little beyond the contemplation stage. in

In al-Qasxm he made little more progress

1292- 5/1876 he took his army into that province with the consent of

Zamil of *Unayzah, who was willing to accept his suzerainty as a counter­ weight against Muhammad ibn-Rashxd.

But Buraydah would not accept him,

because for some unknown reason, the Imam had reversed his father’s policy of supporting Muhanna* *s family and insisted on the return of the rUlayyan family to power there.


The. new governor of the town, Hasan

5 ibn-Muharma 1:, commonly known as walad (child of) Muhanna*, naturally balked and appealed to Muhammad ibn-Rashxd for help. immediately came from Ha'il to protect his ally,



but neither side was

1 As Musil, 276, and Philby, Arabia, 147-8, state. Blunt, II, 268, says •Abdullah received overtures from the Ottoman government about his be­ coming governor of Najd in its name, but that he did not respond to them. 2 Philby, Arabia, l48j Doughty, II, 5^4— 5; 592J see above,^p. 219-20. 5 The date of gasan's succession, as a result of vendetta, to power is not known exactly, but was. probably about 1290-1/1874. The circumstances as related by Doughty, II, 547-8, are as follows. While Hasan waB with the Buraydah militia in the desert, the sons of *"AbdullSh ibn-rAbd al*AzTz, who had been in rUnayzah since the murder of their father by Muhanna* (see above, p . .219, n. 2), went into Buraydah by night and the following morning killed Muhanna 1 on his way to prayers. Someone immediately went to inform Hasan and his raiders of what had happened, and they, quickly rode for home, hoping to arrive- that night. However, by evening IJasan's brother, Abdullah, had surrounded "the young homi­ cides," who actually got little support from the frightened populace, in a house. A desperate struggle ensued, in which Abdullah*o supporters blew up the house killing all within. A little later when Hasan arrived, the town was secure, and he was governor. Huber, "Voyage",*484, describe Hasan (in 1880) as a man of fifty-two years, illiterate, unintelligent looking, and vulgar in appearance. 4 For some years from this date the normal power alignment saw al-Riyad and *Unayzah, supported by the Mutayr and rUtaybah against H S ’il and Buraydah, supported by the Harb. *In addition to being drawn together by mutual self-interest, MuSammad ibn-Rashxd and Hasan of Buraydah were allied by marriage, for Hasan's sister was one of’Muhammad's wives and one of Hamud ibn-*Ubayd Ibn-Rashxd*s wives was Hasan's daughter; Doughty, II, 57.* "

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


anxious for a showdown*

After some half-hearted skirmishing, the _ 1 Imam sent 'Abdullah ibn-'Abd al-Rahman ibn-3&ssam, .accompanied by his 2 _ scribe and another 'Unayzite, to treat with ibn-Rashxd* Doughty

reports, their conversation as follows: l_ Ibn-Bassam:__/ “0 Child of Abdullah • we of Aneyza would to God that no difference should grow to be an occasion of warfare between Mo'slen&i: we desire to be a mean of peace betwixt you.” Mohammed Ibn Rasliidt “For this also am I come out, that there might be peace." — In the end it was accorded among them, that Ibn Saud would withdraw from these parts; and then would Ibn Rashid return home.5 The net result, therefore, of the Imam's attempt to regain authority in , ■ • 4 al-Qasxm was that he had been forced to renounce it formally. *Abdullah on his return to al-Riyad was faced with a bleak picture Hisrealm

was now definitely restricted to the central districts and

there was little that he could do about the situation.

And even at

home, his loss of al-Qaslm so dissatisfied his supporters that they 5 threatened to switch their allegiance to

Su^Qd's sons in al-Kharj.

1 See above, p. 200, n. 5» 2 The fact that all the representatives were from ^Unayzah, rather than from 'Abdullah's force, may indicate either that 'Unayzah was actually the senior partner in the undertaking, or alternatively that there was more chance of success if rUnayzites did the negotiating. 5 Vol.. II, 577. 4 Musil, 277, followed by Philby, Arabia, 143-9, dates this treaty in 1879 instead of I876. Doughty who is writing in the spring of 1878 says, II, 577, that the negotiations had taken place "two years before". See also Hamzah, Qalb, 558. 5 Musil, 277; Philby, Arabia, 148-9.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Doughty has painted a melancholy picture of the Imam's position. The town of er—Riath with her suburbs, and the next village country about, Is all that now remains of the Wahaby dominion; which is become a small and weak principality* — such as Boreyda. Their great clay town, lately the metropolis of high Arabia, is_silent; and the vast guest-hall is forsaken /_ the Wahaby Prince/s clay castle is greater than the Kasr_at Hayil_/_ /_ preceding brackets are Doughty1s__/: Ibn Saud's servants abandon his unfortunate -stars and go (as we have seen) to hire themselves to Mohammed Ibn Rashid. No Beduins now obey the Wahaby; the great villages of East Nejd have sent back Abdullah's tax-gathers; but they all cleave inseparably to the. reformed religion. "Abdullah has, they say, grown an over-fat man and unwieldy. The actual events of the next decade in Najd are extremely confus ed and difficult to unravel because there are no contemporary sources for them beyond a few scattered notes by Huber, the French naturalist, 3

and Euting, an orientalist from Strasbourg, Arabia in 1885.

both of whom travelled in

Philby, at his best in vividly analyzing a general

situation, sums it up as follows: The events of the next eight"years are exceedingly difficult to follow through the maze of conflicting accounts which have arisen out of local legends and unrecorded memories of people still living or but recently dead. It is certain, however, that the Wahhabi territ­ ories now experienced a period of chaotic un­ rest, through which runs almost discemibly a strand of intrigue emanating from the astute brain of "the ruler of Jabal Shammar,4 who be­ gan more and more openly to take charge of a situation of which rAbdullah was rapidly losing control, while the latter, to maintain his position among the still loyal sections of his

1 Vol. II, 455. For similar sent iments consult Blunt, I, 119; V - : , II, 268; Huber, J o u r n a l , 114. 2 On whom, consult Hogarth, Penetration, 252, and passim. 5 On whom, consult Hogarth, Penetration, 255» aud passim. 4 See also Blunt, I, 222,on ibn-Rashtd's' fostering of discontent.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


people, had. to make a show of opposing the growing and much-feared influence of IbnRashxd. It was an extraordinary situation, in which neither of the protagonists, who were allied by the marriage of '’Abdullah to Muhammad's sister, desired to appear in open conflict with the other; while the one coveted the throne which the other was increasingly unable to hold.^ The only fact that seems clear for the first few years after 1298/1880 is that (AbdullSh's allies, the *Utaybah continued to harass ibn-Rashid‘a Shammar and their allies, the Harb. 3 -



The Imam's brother

Muhammad took a prominent part in the tltaybah raids as he seems to have gained the particular favor of that tribe.


Musil reports that

once the 'Utaybah even penetrated to some settlements just south of _



although in general they confined themselves to. the Harb.


Ramadan-Shawwal, 1300/July-August, 1885, the 'Utaybah attacked ibn-Rashld own troops but they were surprised and routed near the hill of al-'Arwa.

1 See above, p. 264. 2 Arabia. 1 5 Musil, 277; Doughty, II, 56, 51, 507, 515, 558, 594, 456; Philby, Arabia, 150; Hamzah, Qalb, 558; al-RIhani, Ta 1rlkh, 87• It is at about this time in the .story, of-events in Najd that Philby, in his Arabia, begins to use al-Rihani'3 Ta'rxkh Najd. a'Jti his chief source instead of Musil's Northern Ne&i. 4 Huber, Journal, 162; Musil, 277• 5 P. 277. 6 Musil, 2JJ, Huber, Journal, 158, reports that in Ramadan/July Muhammad ibn-Rashxd was campaigning in the. south against the Su'uds. Writing from Damascus in Shawwal/August Huber also reports, Journal, 15, that "de graves evenements viennent de se passer au N£gd. La guerre aurait eclat6 entre Ebn Rejfid et Ebn Saoud. C'est le premier qui aurait perdu la partie. Hamoud ibn-'Ubayd ibn-Rashxd_/ serait prisonnier." The victory which Huber reports may have been in a Skirmish before the battle of al-'Arwa, or it may have been a false report. In any case it is certain.that Hammud was not made a prisoner for any length of time.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Their chiefs then challenged ^Abdullah. to raise an army so that to­ gether they might avenge the defeat.^- While he was preparing to take up the challenge hostilities continued.

Huber reports that in the

middle of Safar, 1501/December, 1885» Abdullah surprised the Aslam section of Shammar, who, nevertheless, repulsed the Unitarians with 2 heavy losses. About two weeks later a Shammari chief told Huber of

Al-Rxhani, T a ’rxkh. 87 (Philby, Arabia, 149-51) dates the battle of al-*Arwa after that of al-Hamadah (see belovr, p* 2 8 ? )• I have followed Musil*s chronology because it corresponds more' closely with Huber’s reports. According to al-Rxhani and Philby, loc. cit., in 1298/1881 the town of al-Majma rah in*Sudayr revolted against rAbdullah and when he came from his camp, at Durma, al-Ma jma rah called on ibnRashid for help, as Buraydah had earlier done. Ibn-Rashxd immediately advanced on the town supported by Hasan of Buraydah, and /Abdullah, fearing that powerful coalition, retreated to al—Riyad. Tbn—HaRhxd * did'-hottocpupy'thesdistrict butnappointeddone ofchisDSwhimendasVgcvdrnor andiieftij Theriwq authorsvrcohtinue^lsaying ^at6ih3l5O0/1885i./Alidullah tried to reassert himself in al-Ma jma rah, but that ibn-Rashxd again answered the town*s call for help and defeated ^Abdullah on the plain of al-Hamadah. After this victory the Shammari Amir occupied the districts of Sudayr and al-Washm, and made his own men governors in all the towns. The Imam had fled to al-Riyad. Next rAbdullah is said to have sent his brother Muhammad to treat with ibn-Rashid, who agreed to evacuate the two districts, after which evacuation ’Abdullah re­ occupied them. Al-Rihani, loc . cit., says that this action really worsened the situation between ^ a ’il and al-Riyad because the one was given the power which the other clearly gave only on sufferance. Both' authors then say that S u ’u d ‘s sons, taking advantage of the Imam’s apparent weakness, raised an army on their own and attacked ibn—Rashid, who was once more victorious at al— *Ar|a^. There may be elements of truth and error in both Musil’s and al-Rxhani‘s accounts. On the location of al-*Arwa, consult Philby, Heart. I, 146-7* 1 Musil, 277. 2 Journal. 162. £uting, II, 2, reports that at this time the ’"Anazah were also raiding the Shammar.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

repulsing another Su*udi raid.^ In Jumada First,

1501/March, 1884 Abdullah tried to fulfill his

promise to the /utaybah chiefs.^

Prom his camp on the plain of al-

Hamadah,^ under the western escarpment of Jabal Tuwayq, a few miles east of al-Ma jma‘ah, the Imam was surprised and completely defeated. According to Musil, he was surprised because the thirty-five scouts,


sent to reconnoiter the position of ibn—Rashid's troops, were them— selves betrayed and killed.

In Huber's version the surprise came as

a result of Bedouin treachery, for he says that an 'Utaybah tribesman (the 'Utaybah camp was some two kilometers from that of Abdullah's militiamen) saw a camel wandering in the desert. which led to the approaching Shammar army.

He followed its tracks

The Bedouin, apparently

overawed by the strength of the force, raced back to his camp, and warned his fellow^s, who all fled.

The Imam's army was thus left, un­

advised, to face the oncoming e n e m y B o t h accounts agree that he was badly defeated.

The battle of al-Hamadah represented Abdullah's last

chance to redeem and reassert himself.

Prom then on it was only a

matter of favorable circumstances and ibn-Rashid's inclination until Ha'il, completely overpowered al-Riyad.

1 Huber, Journal; I69. 2 Musil, 277, says that the battle of al-Hamadah took place at the end of 1884. Huber, Journal, 405, 458, 589-90, discusses a battle taking place "pres du G. Toue'ik." It is possible that there were two large battles in the same place but not likely. 5 For a description of the plain of al-Hamadah, consult Philby, Heart, I, 525 j Arabia*. 150. 4 Under the leadership of Fayhan ibn-Khidr of the Utaybah tribe* Musil, 277. 5 P. 277. 6 Journal, 589-90.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Muhammad ibn-Rashid did not immediately follow-up his victory militarily, but he waged effective psychological, warfare by sending messengers, who at public sessions read a communique proclaiming the great Shammari victory, to all tribes within reach.^

Meanwhile, in

Jumada-Second, 1JO1/April, 1884, the Imam sent the governor of Sadus, 2 Muhammad, one of the famous ibn-Mu’ammar family as an envoy to ibnRashxd.^

Although the results of ibn-Mu'ammar1s mission are not known

it may have been a factor in preventing further expansion by ibnRa.shxd at this time.

It may also be that Muhammad still hesitated

to attack the central Najdi townsfolk directly, bub his victory definitely showed ^Abdullah's Bedbuin allies which way the wind was blowing, and they hastened to change sides.

Huber reports a steady

stream of Bedouin delegations to the Amir of Jabal Shammar.

On the

twenty-fourth of April, 1884 a Qahtan chief and thirty-eight men, formerly with the Su'uds, came to congralutate ibn-Rashid on his victory.


On the sixty of May, il arrive . • . beaucoup de mondera l'emir, des sexkh 'Atelbeh, Mteyr et de M e g m ' a . 5 Tous demandent la paix. Aux Mteyr l'emir impose des conditions tres dures. Outre la tribut pour cette anee, ils devront rendre aux Harb toutes les betes razees depuis deux ana, sans que les Harb aient a rendre celles volees aux Mteyr. II a renvoye les seikh en leur dormant 15 jours de reflexion.6

1 Huber, Journal, 405» 4J8. 2 See. above,k-p. J2 ff; Philby, Heart. II, 190 (and n. 1) - 192. J Huber, Journal, 551 j It may be that this is the mission to which al-RDjani, Ta'rikh. 87, and Philby, Arabia. lJO—1, refer when they speak of a mission to ibn-Rashxd undertaken by Muhammad, the brother of ^bdullahj see above, p. 282, n. 6. 4 Journal. 589* 5 See above, p. 282, n. 6 ^ for al-Rihani’s and Philby's statements about al—Majma'ah. Huber s statement implies that ibn-Rashid controled the district of Sudayr. 6 Journal, 6JJ.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


On the thirteenth of* May all the Ataybah seem to have submitted.^" On the eighteenth “une trentaine de seifch 'Ateibeh soumis d'hier." Although, on the fifth of June, Huber reports that the al-Ruqah section of Ataybah still resisted,^ in general it may be said that the tribe had submitted to its nev; master. One of the most important events for the future histpry of Arabia which took place during the days when Abdullah, was losing an empire was the birth of A b d al-’Aziz ibn-1Abd al-Rahman ibn-Faysal (G 4l), the present king of Saudi Arabia.

According to Sir Fu'ad Hamzah, the

future monarch was born on the eleventh of dhu al-Hijjah, 1299/later 4 part of October, 1882. His mother was Sarah, the daughter of Ahmad alSudayri.^

At the age of seven ’"Abd al— 'Aziz was given as tutor a qadi

named 'Abdullah al-Kharji, who was residing in al-Riyad.


reports that the. princeling was not a very apt student because he was more interested in leading other boys in sports, but that, never­ theless, he finished his Koran studies at the age of eleven.^ Abdullah's final overthrow as ruling Imam came after the battle of al—Hamadah, as the result of an insurrection by SuAd's sons in al—Kharj.

The date of this event cannot be determined' with any accuracy.

1 Journal. 650 . 2 Journal, 670. 5 Journal, 720. 4 A l-Bilad. 5» Musil, 278 , dates A b d al-^Aziz's birth in 1285-4/1867• This date would make the King eighty-two years of age at present (1949) which undoubtedly he is not. Consult also N&llino, 4. 5 Hamzah, Al-Bilad, 5> Sarah died in I 527/I 9IO. 6 Al-Bilad. 5 .

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Al—Rihani, the Lebanese—American traveller and author, places it in 1502/1884.


Musil gives the date as the spring of 1504/1887*



have followed the latter1s chronology chiefly because he was in Arabia nearer to the time when the revolt took place than anyone else.


fact, even prior to the revolt, Najd was probably a chaos in which the tribes clamored for independence and raided as of old, while different members of the Su'ud family fought one a n o t h e r . Perhaps in the hope that they could gain British support, as their father had previously.^

Su*ud1s sons, led by Muhammad, marched on the

capital, where after a brief siege, they made 'Abdullah their prisoner.^ fAbdull5h, who seems not to have learned the lesson which the loss of al-Ahsa' should have taught him, appealed to Muhammad ibn-Rashid for h e l p N e e d l e s s to say, Muhammad did not hesitate to pluck the fruit for the ripening of which he had patiently waited.

Early in IJO^/ls-te

in 1887^ he reached al-Riyad with an overwhelming army, claiming that

1 Ta'rikh, 87j followed by Philby, Arabia, 151. 2 P. 277j followed by Wahbah, 250. 5 Musil, 277; see also the comments of al-Hanbali which are noted above, pp. 274-5. * 4 Consult Blunt, II, 268. In 1880 the British had decided that Najdi affairs should come under the cognizance of the Political Agent in Turkish Arabia, rather than of the Resident in the Persian Gulf; Aitchison (18^2), 5» _ 5 Musil, 277; Philby, Arabia, 151; al-Rihani, Ta'rikh, 88; Wahbah, 250; Hamzah, Qalb, 558. In addition to nake d *power-seeking and the family feuds, Surud's sons had probably been irritated into action by various tactless acts on '’ Abdullah's part. An example may be found_in his having razed the premier town of the Layla oasis (in al-Aflaj) as a punishment for its having supported Su'ud in the first civil vfar; Philby, Heart, II, 76-7. 6 Musil 277; Philby, Arabia, 151• 7 Following Musil's chronology.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


he only wanted, to restore the rightful ruler.

He was met outside the

city walls by *Abd al— Rahman and a group of the elders who asked his intentions.

Muhammad is reported to have answered, “By God, my aim

is only to liberate 'Abdullah from prison and to return the rule of 2 your country /_ -iL _J to your hands, 0 Al Su'ud." Faced by ibn_




Rashid1s army and by hostile public opinion, Muhammad ibn-Su'lid and his brothers sought aman from ibn-Rashid.

Still moving cautiously

ibn-Rashid granted their request, and they returned to al-Kharj. Furthermore,


^Abdullah was liberated from prison, but he was liberated

only to be taken to H a 1il as the permanent guest of Muhammad.


effect MuHammad ibn-Rashid had conquered the Unitarian state.


Philby has written, "though he

/_ Muhammad_/

gave 'Abdullah no assistance

in his campaigns against the Hasa and Qasim, he never himself took advantage of his weakness, and in the end only superseded him on the throne of Arabia when he had proved not only unworthy of it, but .4 utterly unable to maintain himself on it." King

*Abd a l - ‘Aziz is quoted as having given three reasons for

‘Abdullah's downfalls First, because of the presence of the sons of his brother in al-Kharj and their inciting of the tribes against him. Second, because of his support of the ‘Ulayyan family, former amirs of al-Qasim in their enmity toward the Muhanna' family, the actual rulers at that time. This was ignorance on rA-bdullah's part because he was in a period of weakness, and it is not wise to side with a defeat­ ed house. Thus he weakened his influence in al-Qasim•

1 2 5 4

Musil, 277J Philby, Arabia, 151; al-Rihani, Ta'rikh, 88. Quoted by al-Riljani, Ta'rikh, 88. Al-Rihani, T a 1rikh, 88; Philby, Arabia, 1^2; Musil, 278; Wahbah, 230. Arabia, 146—7* See also Nolde, 78-7*

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Third, because of the appearance of Muhammad ibn-Rashxd, who sought to rule Najd. And he allied himself with the abu-al-Khayl family (part of the Muhanna* family), and all of them were united against ibn-Su*ud. Despite his clear ?-cut position as the de facto ruler of inner Arabia, Muhammad ibn-Rashxd did not take any harsh measures in alRiyad.

He took *Abdullah, who was still called Imam, to He/il, but he

left *Abd al-Rahman ibn-Faysal as amxr of al-Srid and Muhammad ibnFaysal as military commander.


However, ibn-Rashxd did take the pre­

caution of putting a garrison of slaves in. al-Riyad under the command _

of Salim ibn-Subhan, one of hi3 maternal uncles.


The next stage in the elimination of ibn-Rashxd's potential enemies was the assassination of Su^ud's sons.

They had continued to foment un­

rest against the new regime from their seat in al-Kharj and Salim ibnSubhan determined to get rid of an enemy, already dangerous to the 4 puppet regime in al-Riyad, and potentially dangerous even to ibn-Rashxd. Some accounts also say that the populace of al-Kharj had protested 5 against the tyranny of the sons there.

In the summer of 1505/1838

Salim went to al-Kharj, and either because he was angered by the attitude of Su*ud's sons.or because he had already planned their liquidation, he

1 Al-Rxhani, T a ’rxkh, 2 Musil, 298; Hamzah, ed by Philby, Arabia, members of the family *Abd al-Azxz ibn-*Abd 5 Al-Rxhani, Ta'rxkh, 4 Musil, 278. 5 Al-Rxhani, Ta’rxkh,

86. Al-Bilad, 6. Of. Al-Rxhani, Tafrxkh, 88, follow­ I52, who states that /Abd al-Rahman and ten other were sent to Ha’il. Philby, loc ♦ cit says that al-Rahman was also sent. 88; Musil, 278; Philby, Arabia, 1^2. 88; Philby, Arabia, 152-5•

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


had th e m killed.

One of the sons,

''Abd al-'Azxz, was spared and sent

with t h e families of the others to join rAbdullah in confinement at Ha'il.^

As Musil has pointed out, "by this stroke the power of Prince

'Abdarrahman was in appearance strengthened; but in reality he fell into still greater dependence on Salem and Eben Rasxd. It appears that shortly after the elimination of Su'trd's sons from t he scene, ibn-Rashxd recalled Salim and replaced him with Fahhad ibn-Rakhls.^

At about this same time rAbd al-Rahman went on


a visit to H a ’il where he found the "Imam" ill.

According to Fu'Sd

✓ o Hamzah,

a practitioner £

was with a passing pilgrim

caravan, diagnosed '’Abdullah's disease as dropsy and reported to ibn-Rashxd that he would not. live long.

Therefore, the Amxr promised

'Abdullah that he would be governor in al-Riyad and allowed him to return with

''Abd al-Rahman.^

In the year 1307/1389,

after he had returned,'* the "ImSm" died.


very shortly

'Abdullah's frustrated

but dogged attempts to be ruler of the Unitarians ended with his being permitted to return to al—Riyad as a governor in ibn-Rashxd's name. The death of Olbdullah left

'Abd al-Rahman ibn-Faysal as the

1 Al-Rxhani, Ta'rikh, 88 ; Musil, 278; Philby, Arabia, 153* 2 P. 278. 3 Of one_of the chiefly Shammar families; see Musil, 30-1, 35, 47, 238. 4 A l-Bilad, 6 . According to Musil, 278, ibn-Rashid allowed rAbdullah to return because r'Abd al-Rahman was becoming too powerful, and the Amxr wanted to stir up trouble. According to al-RxhSni, Ta'rikh, 88— 9, and Philby, A rabia, 153 both brothers had been in Ra'il all the time and we r e allowed to return together. See above, p. 289, n. 2. 5 Three days according to hamzah, Al-Bilad, 6 ; fifteen days according to Hamzah, Q a l b , 338; one day according to Wahbah, 230. Al-Rxhani gives the date of his death as 2 R a b x r Second, 1307/la-te November, 1889. Musil, 278, says that he died early in 1890.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


most prominent member of the Surttd family1 and, although he had little

power, he did try twice to assert himself.

rAbd al-Rahman did not

immediately make any break with ibn—Rashid, but rather seems to have

applied himself, with considerable success to constructive improvements

such as the restoration of order, and encouragement of agriculture and



Meanwhile Salim ibn-Subhan had returned to al-Riyad as Rashxdi •

agent there.


This situation, in which Olbd al-Rahman governed al-^Arid under the

supervision of Salim, continued until the simmer of 1307-9/1890.

At that

time^ ^Abd al-Rahman led a revolt against the Rashxdi garrison and seized 5 control of the city.

As soon as Muhammad ibn-Rashxd heard what had

happened, he gathered an army to retake the city.

It appeared for a

while that ^Unayzah and even Buraydah might join the Su*%ds, but either

1 Muhammad, ’'Abd al-Rahman1s older brother, had apparently given up his claims to the family' leadership; Musil, 278; Philby, Arabia. 1542 Musil, 278; Wahbah, 231. _ 3 According to Hamzah, Al-Bilad. 6, Salim had returned at the same time that rAbduilSh had; Philby, Arabia, 153 indicates that Sctlim return­ ed after fAbdullah’s death. 4 Musil, 279, dates it in the autumn. 5 Details connected with this revolt are confused. Musil, 278-9, attributes it to the energetic striplings of the Su’ud family, led by *Abd al-rAziz ibn-’Abd al-Rahman. _Such a hypothesis is possible only if a very early date for *Abd al— ^Aziz’s birth is accepted (see above, p. 286, n. 4). further Musil says^that the Riyadis besieged the Rashxdi garrison' in the R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Because ibn-Rashxd promised them concessions to remain neutral1 or be­ cause they felt their strength to be insufficient,2 the Qasimis took no action.

Ibn-Rashid soon appeared before al-Riyad but, with the

troops then at his disposal, was not able to force an entry into the 3 town. After a siege of about a month, some Bedouin chiefs, includ­ ing ibn-Rubay*an of the *Utaybah, mediated between the two contestants, and a conference was arranged between them.^

The negotiators from al-

Riyad included Muhammad ibn-Faysal, and ^Abdullah ibn-Ovbd al-Latxf C (D 10), as representative of the Shaykh’s family. The Riyadis were *




also accompanied by CAbd al-Rahman*s young son, *Abd al-^Aziz, "who thus appears for the first time in the history of the Arabia he would one day rule as king."^

According to Philby, Arabia, 153-4, Salim, on the occasion of ^Id al-Adha, 1307/late July, 1890 paid a ceremonial visit to rAbd al-Rahman and requested that all male members of the Su*ud family should appear to hear a message from ibn-Rashid. Fearing a repetition of Salim*s exploits with the sons of S u rud ibn-Faysal (see above, pp. 289-90), the members all appeared, but instead of waiting for Salim's message, killed him and most of his retinue. See also Wahbah, 231, who says that SSlim was made a prisoner. Hamzah, Al-Bil5d. 6, follows Wahbah. 1 As al-Rxhani, Ta'rxkh. 88-9, followed by Philby, Arabia; 154, says. According to al—RlhShi, loc. cit., ibn-Rashxd promised them the desert ranges of the Mutayr tribe, and increased benefit from the tribute im­ posed on pilgrims. 2 As Musil, 279, implies. 3^Musil, 279, says that the young rebels all fl-ed before ibn-Rashid1s force, leaving the older heads to beg for aman, which ibn-Rashxd, temporarily weak, immediately granted. 4 Hamzah, Al-Bilad, 7; al-Rxhani, Ta1rxkh, 89; Philby, Arabia, 154. 5 Ibid. 6 Philby, Arabia, 154= According to Hamzah* s dating of Osbd al-*"Azxz* s birth (see above, p. 286 and n. 4), he would have been just under eight years old at this time. Al-Rxhani, Ta*rxkh, 89, says that he was eleven Philby, loc. cit., that he was ten. Hamzah, Al-Bil~~ad, 7, reports havin asked the King if he met Muhammad ibn-Rashxd on the occasion of these negotiations, to which question 0i.bd al— *Aztz replied, "Yes, I met him, and he consoled me for £ t h e recent loss of~7 my brother Faysal /^~^Abd al-*Azxz*s older brother (not shown in Appendix B), who had recently died_/; and he said that perhaps God would make me a substitute for him, and by God, He made me that." b.0

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


The result of the negotiations was that 'Abd al-Rahman was given somewhat more authority in the districts of al-*Arid, al-Kharj, al-Aflaj, al—Mihmal, and al—Sha^ib, and the Rashidi garrison seems to have been withdrawn; however,

*Abd al-Rahman still had to acknowledge the over­

all suzerainty of ibn-Rashid.^ The fact_ that Muhammad ibn—Rashid did not take stern measures after « this revolt against his authority was interpreted, not only in Najd but also in al—Qasnm, as weakness on his part and thereby paved the way for the battle of Mulaydah, which has been described as "the greatest in Central Arabian history since the


triumph of Islam.'*-


In al-Qasim, •

both ’Unayzah and Buraydah were now thoroughly aware that ibn-Rashid represented the only real threat to their independence. began increasingly to support Oibd al-Rahman.

Th^y,. therefore,

By the winter of 1308/1890-


1 the Su*uds and the leaders of al-QasTm, supported by the f’Utaybah and Mutayr tribes, had formed what amounted to a confederation.

Its purpose

» — 3 was to make a final grand attaupt to overthrow Muhammad ibn-Rashid. Beginning early in the year 1891^ the Qasimis, still commanded by the famous Zamil, took the field.

This time Muhammad could not afford

1 Hamzah, Al-Bil5d. 7j al-RIhani, Ta *rikh. 89; Wahbah, 231. Hamzah, loc. cit., and Wahbah, loc. cit.,* say in addition that Olbd al-Rahman agreed to release Salim ibn-Subhah (see above, p. 291, n. 5-). 2 Hogarth, History of Arabia, 116. Ibn-Rashid*s leniency may have been motivated by the respect in which he held the Su^uds. Consult Nolde, 76-7 3 Nolde, 69. According to Hamzah, Al-3ilad, 7, a more specific reason why ,'Abd al-Rahman was disposed to attack was that he had intercepted letters from ibn-Rashid in which the latter said that the previous peace had only been made in order to_await a more favorable opportunity for completely eliminating the Su^uds. Apparently Zamil took precedence over *Abd al-Ratunan in the confederation; Nolde, 75. 4 According to Musil, 279, in February, 1891; according to Philby, Arabia, 155, in January, 1891; according to al-Rihani, Ta *rikh, 89, in JumSds First, 1308/December, 1890; according to Hogarth, Penetration, in 1892; History of Arabia, in 1891.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


to gather any small force which was available, for this time his enemies

t were formidable.

ject to him.

He, therefore, did his utmost to mobilize every man sub­

According to Musil, he "sent forty messengers on forty she-

camels covered with black tent cloths to the various Sammar clans who at that time were encamped between Kerbela and al-Basra.

The black covers

were to express clearly to all subjects of Prince Muhammad that their t*'' contenances and their honor would be covered with black shame if they did not immediately hasten to the aid of their lord."'*' The two armies met at al-Mulaydah in the vicinity of Buraydah, apparently before Olbd al—Rahman had had time to bring his troops to help the Qasimis.

Zamil's men held some low hills, while ibn-Rashid's 3

tribesmen had to be content with the plain known as al-Qara^a. exact number of men involved is hard to estimate. more than fifty thousand;



Hogarth puts it at

' 5 other estimates, at sixty thousand.


it to say that more men were under arms than there had been in Arabia since the days of the Egyptian conquest. The actual fighting lasted more than a month and went initially in favor of the allies.


Musil records one picturesque incident in which

the "flag of Prince Eben Rasid would have been captured by his enemies had

1 P. 279. 2 According to Wahbah, 232, the allies won an initial victory, after ’which ibn-Rashid "surprised" them at al—Mulaydah. Musil, 279* is the only source which says that rA b d .al—Rahman's force .participated in the battle. Musil's account of events preceding the battle varies from that given here. 3 Philby, Arabia, 155. 4 Benetration, 288. 5 "WahhabTya," El. _ 6 Musil, 279; Philby, Arabia, 155; "WahhSbiya," El; Nolde, 75; al-Rihani, Ta'rikh, 89-90.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission


not the young slave *Abdallah al Freh /~Furayh_7hewed his way through the foe to his father Mubarek, the standard bearer.

Mub&rek fell dead,

but his young son seized the flag, saved it, and in 1915 was still carry­ ing it."

Finally ibn—Rashid was able to break through Zamil’s position

by massing several thousand camels in the center and driving them forward by setting fire to the bundles of brush which had been tied to those in the rear.

The camels were followed by infantry, and the flanks attack­

ed simultaneously; Zamil*s whole position was destroyed, and his army cut down.

The Qasxmi losses in killed were estimated to have b.een more

than one thousand. were killed.

Zamil himself, his son, and five others of his house 3 Hasan ibn-Muhanna* lost his hand. *

Meanwhile C/Vbd al-Rahman had mobilized his own troops and was at al-Khafs en route to join ZSEmil. at al-Mulaydah, he immediately with



When he heard the news of the disaster c turnedback and fled foral-Ahsar. And, 6


many othermembers of


j ■;

$ § 3 ■}

the family followed.

As Philby has put it, the battle of al-Mulaydah "proved


to be the last twitch of the dying Wahhabi state."

1 P. 279. 2 Musil , 279j Philby, Arabia, 1555 "VJahhabiya," EIj Nolde, 755al-Rlhani,'EL,rHdi,89^Q» 3 Musil,’ 280; Philby, Arabia, 155; al—Rlhani, T a ’rikh, 90. According to Wahbah, 232, ibn-Muhanna’ was also killed. 4 Hamzah, Al-Bilad, 7; Philby, Arabia. 155* 5 According to Musil, 280, (see above, p. 294, n. 2), *Abd al-Rahman and Muhammad were both captured, but the former was. soon liberated and made governor of al-Riyad under Salim ibn-Subhan. Musil, loc. cit.. claims that it was only later, when fAbd al-RahmSn found his secondary position intolerable, that he fled. 6 Who became ibn-Rashid’s agent in al-Riyad; Hamzah, Qalb, 340; Wahbah, 232. 7 Arabia, 155.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



It is not necessary to trace in detail the wanderings of ^Abd al-Rahman and his son, ^Ibd al-Otzxz."1" Suffice it to say that after staying in various places, refusing an offer to become Ottoman governor _

of al-Riyad,


and once even briefly retaking the former capital,


father, son, and other members of the family finally settled in alKuwayt under the protection of Muhammad ibn-Sabah al Sabah, the ruler of that territory.


Ottoman government granted the exiles a small

pension to ke.ep them quiet.^

¥ithin ten years after the battle of al-

Mulaydah the young •’Abd al-^Azxz was taking the

first steps to regain

his patrimony, which process constitutes the story of the third period iii S u ^ d i history.

The self-seeking o.uarrels of ^Abdullah ibn-Faysal and

Su'ud ibn-Faysal had wrecked an empire, •

but Faysal's grandson proved cap•

able of rebuilding it.

1 For details, consult Wahbah, 232; Hamzah, Al-Bilad, 8-9I Philby, Arabia, 156; Musil, 280; al-Rxhani, Ta'rxkh,*91. 2 For details, consult al-Rthani, Ta *rxkh, 90. Cf. Musil, 280. 3 For details, consult Hamzah, Al-Bilad, 8; Wahbah, 232. 4 Al-Hxhani, T a 1rxkh,91j Hamzah, Al-BilSd, 9-

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.




The average person who has any knowledge at all of contemporary Saudi Arabia seems to have the impression that the country, thrown into relief by its oil resources and the personality of its king, sprang forth full grown from its own remote fastnesses.

Actually it

is more apt to compare it with the phoenix than with Athena. twice it has risen from its own ashes —


after Muhammad ^Ali’s armies

crushed its first elan in the second decade of the last century, and again -when its own dynastic quarrels led it to submit to the Rashids of Ha’il in the last decade of that century.

Saudi Arabia has, there­

fore, been in existence for some two centuries despite the two inter­ ruptions.

In this connection it should be noted that in modern times

the Su*udi state was the first independent Arab state and that Unitarianism was the earliest successful attempt to reform Islam, even though its reform looked to the past rather than to the future.


may seek the explanation for both of these phenomena in the geography of the Peninsula, but that does not negate the facts. Despite the fact that Arabia under the Su*nds xiras the earliest independent Arab realm in modern times, one fact brought out very clearly by this study is that‘''the people had almost no political loyalty —

much less nationalism in the current sense of the word.

The bewildering ease with which an individual or a community changed sides in the various power struggles which went on in the Peninsula

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout permission.


are actually confusing to one who is used to thinking in terms of loyalties which survive both victory and defeat.

One may legitimately

ask, then, what was the criterion for joining one of two contending groups.

The answer is that in general a man supported the force which

had power in the place where the man found himself at any particular time.

Long-standing enmities were one factor working against this

general rule, and there was of course a minority which was not guilty of such extreme opportunism, but on the whole the generalization proved true. In view of the fact that there were almost no constant loyalties among the Arabian populace, one might next ask why it was that the state survived its various vicissitudes for two centuries.

In its

broadest form the answer to this question must be sought in the fact that the people of Najd were firmly persuaded of the value of Unitarianism.

And almost from its inception Unitarianism had been in­

extricably bound up with the house of Su*ud.

Thus it was that even

after the impetus of the original Su^TIdi-Unitarian thrust had been checked and beaten back by Muhammad f'Ali’s armies, the Najdis were willing to regroup around a man who offered them Unitarianism and the name Su*ud —

provided of course that he was also competent and offered

a reasonable amount of stability.

The second of these conditions was

not met at the end of the last century, and thus the Rashids came’to power.

Conversely, the reason why the Rashid dynasty could not last

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


vras that it had nothing on which to focus the consciousness of the people except the ability of the rulers.

When that failed, there

was nothing else. The statement that the Najdi would normally favor Su*udi-Unitarian government would seem to contradict the earlier proposition that he had nothing which might be called national loyalty.

However, this seeming

contradiction can be reconciled if it is realized that the people had a generally favorable orientation towards the reformed faith and the traditional ruling family, but that, when faced with a particular situation calling for sacrifice, the short range advantages outweigh­ ed other considerations. In addition to the general acceptance of Su*udi-Unitarian control, two other factors have contributed to the continued existence of this dynasty in Arabia. ludes

First is the fact that, except for two brief inter-

and for one longer period,

tremely able rulers.

the Su *Gd family has produced ex­

And it is to be especially noted that in the

period in which the family did not produce capable leaders and in which dynastic dissension broke into open war for a considerable period of time —

namely the period in which ^Abdullah ibn-Faysal fought

Su^ud ibn-Faysal^ —

1 See above,

ibn-Rashid, the other leading contender for

|»}». i&J’-IS,


2 See above, eh. V, passim. 3 Ibid.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission


power in Arabia, exploited the situation and made himself master. The second factor is-the geography of the country.

Inner Arabia has such

a forbidding terrain as to discourage outside interference, and its position was of little commercial or strategic value until recent years. These facts take on added importance when coupled with what seemed to be a complete lack of valuable raw materials prior to the discovery of gold and oil in the last two decades. r

In addition to helping us to understand the attitudes of the Arabian people towards the Su*udi government, this thesis also helps correct a -widespread and erroneous impression; namely, that Su^udiUnitarian control depended on the Bedouins for the maintenance of its authority.

In fact, Unitarianism, like other religious movements,

drew its strength almost completely from settled people and not from nomads.

This statement of course does not imply that any S u % d

hesitated to use the Bedouins to further his ends or that Bedouins never believed in Unitarianism; for, particularly when other factors combined to give the government an aggressive prosperity, and thus to give the Bedouin an opportunity to win booty, he took his place in the forefront of the Unitarian army.

However, during most of the

period covered by this study one of the main functions of the army was to keep the tribes from insolently molesting the towns and to force them into paying taxes.

The Unitarian militia, frequently

mentioned in the preceding pages, had townsmen for its backbone. Furthermore, it was in the towns that the reform movement had

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


its most loyal adherents and where what incipient nationalism that existed was concentrated.

This fact is brought out clearly in the

persons of the descendants of the founder of Unitarianism, Muhammad ibn-'Abd al-WahhSb, who was himself a townsman.

For instance, at

the time of Khalia's and Isma'Tl's entrance into al-Riyad they fled to the south rather than submit and in addition encouraged the fighters of al—Hulwah to turn back the invading army.^” "While on the subject of Bedouin relations within the nineteenth century Su’udi state, it is worthwhile to point out that it was in this period that the balance of power between tribe and town began seriously to shift.

In past ages mobility had given the Bedouins an advantage

over the townsmen although the latter, when united, had always been more than a match for the former.

The coming of modern rifles put

into the hands of the settled people an instrument which could hold its own against mounted warriors.


Motor transport, not to mention

air power, has of course completely eliminated the Bedouin from the picture in recent years.

Ibn-Rashid*s empire gave the Bedouins their

last fling of glory, and even in that case the amir united in his person the patriarch of the towns as well as that of the tribes. The most important change which took place in the period between 1818 and 1890 was the gradual relaxation of "the violence and intoler3 . ance" which had characterized the Unitarians prior to the Egyptian

1 See above, pp. 129,132-4* 2 Philby, Arabia, 321. 3 Gibb, 26.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



The shock of defeat, sobered the Unitarians and must have

made the most fervent realize that, at least some of the time, God was on the side with the most artillery.

In the last two decades of

course this tendency has been accelerated by the introduction of modern media of transportation and communication as well as by vastly in­ creased contact between Arabian and outsider. It is futile to speculate in detail on the future of a rapidly changing political unit such as Saudi Arabia, but in gauging the future of such a unit it is important to remember that people change slowly and that their patterns persist.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Palgrave, II, 63-4* tells a story which, he dates early in the reign of the Imam

Turki, in which "Hoseyn Basha," an officer of

Muhammad fAli, is treacherously led astray in "an arm of the Great Desert . . .

which separates Hareek from Yemamah" by Bedouin guides.

Husayn*s mission was to root out a group of Bajdi rebels who had taken refuge in al—Hariq.. »

However, according to Palgrave,

Under the pretext of conducting the Egyptians by nearer and securer tracks, the He jdeans led them astray amid the sand-hills south-west of §areek, and there left them to per­ ish of thirst in the burning labyrinth. All, in fact, so perished} and when the villagers, who were only at a few hours' distance, crossed the sand-ridges to see the work of death, they found (the tale was told to me by an eye-witness) nothing but corpses, convulsed in the death-agonies of drought and despair. They were counted and their number was above four thousand. Philby, Arabia. 107» writes as follows: But these operations ^lurki5s fortification of al-Riyad, shortly after having moved his capital there^ were in-* terrupted by the arrival of Husain Bey Bhahir, who had relieved Khalid and made a fortified base at Tharmida to crush the rebellion by brute force* Plundering and destroy­ ing far and wide, he alienated the whole population} but on his approach Turki, whose fortifications were not yet completed, deemed it prudent to evacuate Riyadh and seek a temporary refuge in the southern wilds about Hariq.} whither Husain relentlessly pursued him. The treachery of his guides, however, led the army into the heart of a waterless maze of sand-dunes, and there left it to perish of thirst al­ most to a man . . . . Philby is not the only author to have followed Palgrave in this error, for the same story is repeated almost verbatim by Jung, 50} Zehme, 3771 and Shaykhu, 178.

Only Musil, 272, has followed ibn-

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission


Bishr, II, 72-5* carefully enough to avoid error, and Musil merely mentions the incident.

Actually, the Egyptian army was lost during

Faysal* s first reign, the events took place nearer to al—Hulwah than •


to al-Hariq., and a fierce "battle was fought "before any one began to die of thirst.

Ibn-Bishr nowhere states that the Egyptian army was

deliberately misguided, and in fact he simply says that they "went off the right road" (II, 73)*

Probably the tradition of treacherous

guides grew up as a folk rationalization and had already become part of the legend of the land when Palgrave first heard the story.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Introduction to the Genealogies

The basis of the "union genealogy” of the Su'ud family is the Surudi branch of the tree prepared by Muhammad Amin al—Tamxmi, a photograph of which appears as the frontispiece of this study,, — copy According to Sir F u ’ad Hamzah, who loaned me his personal^of the richly colored original, the tree was prepared by order of King Faruq. of Egypt for presentation to King ^Abd al— *jLziz on the occasion of the latter*s visit to Cairo in 1365/1946* The system which has been devised for giving a comparative view of the available genealogiew is to show those names given on al—Tamimi tree in a solid rectangle*

Inside this rectangle are placed symbols

(see Legend) representing concurrence on the part of other genealogies Where other genealogies show names not given by al-Tamimi, they are enclosed in broken rectangles, again with the appropriate symbols in­ cluded* Therefore, it is possible to see where all, or some, or no authors have concurred and to reconstruct any particular'author* s genealogy*

In a very few cases of obvious absurdities names have

been omitted*

Al—Tamimi's genealogy was chosen as the basis because

it i3 more complete than any other and more accurate.

I have retained

his own rather fanciful legend of "those who wielded authority" and "famous p e o p l e / in chivalry, /and people/ of broad learning" (



I )*

Any person on the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



can be designated by co-ordinating the letter of his gener­

ation with his number within that generation. Essentially the same procedure has been followed for the genealogy Muhammad ibn— *Abd al—Wahhab; however, there is only one source of any value for his descendeipts, namely the tree of Muhammad Amin al-?am!mi.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



iHARM 1_ f-

-. tr— L


1 ij— L


| AHM-'

; Ir.AS»N




te±n fcpfn fcU5HARI | |WCGBAN I Ua^wwwj faaAL'AZTzl

[ 3 | M U HARI


R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


s I I I s I *• I [ cO ~j 1FA>t>jki_] j tsh^up j 1** n~ j

life Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


rfET l 1£»F A^H D

Uh a h h a p I


r > A' p

i 1


^ -j1 I Mj"A N■S U^R 1

f 1 *> A *b

1m u h 1 h 3





fw U a H A w l

I * a o S ip

u .j.a ; F^rr—1 ; I 1.


z~\ n‘ I I, ' It“n* If“V M

[ i » w m * w w »1


} m » » « » C h .




1» 1*

?c r o w o



I j i w i

3> j ‘ 0p

>1 ■ |


| H u a w » a >

E ~ H

|-A M * u - V i* i] I K h S u id I

|v m w iti.K H ~ l I ' w I p b ] |“ V a y s a i" | 1*~hh&ud



t« ]





j a ^ h a o ~ " |


| ' a p h h a K w


1'm u S A ‘IO 1

f7A&P0U.AH "]

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.





Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


i'ftANPAR ;


permission of the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited w ithout permission.





th IV a v I a l

1 r 'V . k

I rM m jln B li> l

P m jtia

'-:; r\:•

t~ V ».W .L ~{ r w u w w n tttl

« i "V

f i r t i ~~l L*??>i.v3

{"‘^ U lu V lT l

1 I"

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout permiss.on



J b h


Notes on the Su*udi Genealogy


"He became amir in the region (


of al—Aflaj R e a d i n g not

certain^ and died there*” This quotation and those which follow are taken from Rashid ibn-fAli al-Hanbali» s Muthir al-Wa.i d, B

"The Amir Thunayyan ibn-al-Amir ’'Abdullah became amir in the district (


oL ) of al-Kharj."

"The Amir ’Abdullah ibn—al—Amir ^Abdullah was named after his father, who died while he was in his mother’s womb; so when he was b o m , he was named after his father."

This man suggested to Rashid ibn— ’A l i

al-Eanbali that he write Muthir al-Wajd (see al-Hanbali, 4). D

"The Amir ’’Abdullah al—Thunayyan Al Su’ud, amir of Najd and chief of its tribes* If God wills, his biography will reach you, and you will mention him under his heading

( 3/51 J ) £ " ?_7*"

E "The Amir Su rud ibn-Jalwi became amir of al—Riyad, and he took office


during the amir ate of Al Rashid*" m* mm* "The Amir Ibrahim ibn— ’Abdullah studied Arab sciences and arts, arid he speaks Arabic, Turkish, Greek, and Prench, and he was apt in mechanics; and he first became an assistant in the senate of the Ottoman state, and Galipoli, Turkey (

ext not cleeo^, and he became mutasarrif in

t^ IoL ), and he died in Constantinople

and was buried in Befikta^ Jji. suburb of Constantinople; see "Beshiktash El7» and he has not offspring." G

Musil makes these two the son and grandson respectively of an ’Abdullah ibn-Thunayyan ibn-Sufud. Philby mistakenly spells the name "Suhaitan"; Hamzah spells it"Da3»-tan*"


Musil makes these two the son and grandson respectively of an *Abdullah ibn—Thunayyan*

He omits Nasir ibn-Thunayyan ibn—Su’ud. Philby follows


R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



Musil assigns two sons to Hasan ibn—Mushari, namely Muhammad and *Abd al-Rahman.

To the latter he assigns as son Mushari (who

murdered the Imam Turki). Philby follows Musil.

He omits Mushari ibn-Hasan ibn-Mushari.

This omission is-probably correct, and the

Mushari family, from generation 3 down, should be moved up one generation.

Musil and Philby are probably both following ibn-

Sishr, II, 10, as is al-Alusi.

Also according to ibn-Bishr, loc.

cit., Hasan ibn-Mushari ibn-Surud had other sons who were all “™ 'T • killed in the war against the Egyptians, L

Musil gives Jalwi ibn—Turki a son named Su'ud; perhaps a confusion with Safd.


Musil makes Salman and Turki sons of rAbd al-rAziz ibn-Sufud ibn Faysal ibn-Turkio


Hamzah, who gives a genealogical essay rather than a genealogy, says specifically that this 'Abdullah had no descendants. gives only living members of the

family in the later generations.


Hamzjth, 74» makes Faysal the son of a Parhan. • • •


In al—Hanbali, 31» there is a note which says that Manif al-Dirriyah, al-Hasa*, al-Qat iff, Qalar




Al—Hanbali inserts fAli


inserts Aklabbetween


? 7» Qatr, and rHman."

Rabi^ah and Asad.

between Bakr and Sa^b.


AlwHanbali inserts Murr between Munqidh and Rabi'ah.


This Mushari* who is given by Philby as the son of Turki ibn-Sufud ibn-'Abd al-fAzifz, is undoubtedly the same an the Mushari given by Musil as a soil of Nasir ibn-Su*ud ibn-rAbd al-rAziz.

Philby has

presumably made a typographical error. U

Philby gives these five as the sons of Thunayyan ibn— 'Abdullah ibnThunayyan ibn—Ibrahim ibn-Thunayyan instead of as the sons of his brother ''Abdullah.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.



'These two brothers (?) are given as the sons of Mushari ibn-*Abdullah ibn—Jalwi ibn—Turki ibn—rAbdullah ibn—Sufud in the genealogy which appears in de Gaury*s Arabia Phoenix.


These three brothers (?) are given in the genealogy which appears in de Gaury’s Arabia Phoenix as the sons of Fahd ibn—Musha(l/P) ibn—Surud ibn-Jalwi ibn-Turki ibn-*Abdullah ibn-Muhammad ibn-Surud. Hamzah gives the same relationship for them, and it may therefore be more accurate than that shown on this chart; however, it may also mean that Hamzah was following the original of de Gaury's genealogy, which is in Juddah.


De Gaury* s genealogy names this person Zayd; the discrepancy is probably due to a confusion of the Arabic script.


De Gaury's genealogist confuses the less important descendants of the original Su^ud. For instance, Thunayyan ibn—Su^ud i3 omitted completely and his name occurs only once, as the name of a son of rAbdullah ibn-Muhammad ibn~Sufud! In the Mushari branch Hasan and Mushari, the son and grandson of.the first Mushari, are eliminated, Ibrahim ibn-Mushari ibn-Hasan ibn-Mushari is made the son of the first Mushari. The genealogist then confuses Muhammad ibn-Ibrahim *

ibn-rAbd al—Muhsin ibn-Ibrahim ibn-Mushari ibn-Hasan ibn-Mushari • • with-Muhammad ibn—Mushari ibn—^Abd al—Rahman ibn—Mushari ibn-Hasan • • • ibn-Mttshari, and assigns to the former the descendants of the latter. 2 De Gaury*s genealogy reads Safd; probably a confusion of the Arabic script. AA De Gaury*s genealogy reads SarXd; probably a confusion of the Arabic script-* AB

De Gaury* s genealogist is also confused about the descendants of FarhSn ibn—Sufddj To begin with, he makes Nasir, whom he calls Hasr. ar.d who is the great—great—grandson of the original Farhan, » *

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission


into the son of this same Farhan.

He then makes the two children

(Fahd and rAbdullah.) of Faysal ibn-Turki ibn-Sufud ibn—Farhan ibn— • •*.. Surud ihn—Farhan into the children of Faysal ihn— Su*"ud ibn—Nasir —




ibn-Su*ud ibn—Farhan ibn-3urud ibn-Farhan. •

Finally- he makes. fAbd

al— *Aziz ibn— rAbdulXah ibn—Nasir ibn—Sufud bin-Farhan ibn—Su^ud — # • ibn-Farhan into the son Of rAbdullah ibn-Su^ud ibn-Nasir ibn-Surud *— *• — # i*bn~Farhan ibn—Sufud ibn-Farhan® •

The genealogy which de Gaury includes in Arabia Phoenix has been treated at some length because it is taken from an Arabic orig­ inal, but in some cases the original seems to have been based on mere hearsay* AC

The descendants of King rAbd al— fAziz are not given on the chart. They would represent a separate study in. themselves.


complete information is given in the genealogies of al—Tainimi, Philby, and Hamzah A3)

According to ibn-Bishr, II, 8, these men were killed in the war against the Egyptians.


According to ibn-Bishr, II, 8, these men weredeported after thewar against the Egyptians.


It might benoted here


al—Alusi’s genealogy follows that of ibn-Bishr name for name. IbnBishr differs only slightly, and that in the lessor branches, from the chart. AF

According to ibn-Bishr, I, 220.


According to ibn-Bishr, II, 11J


Philby gives this name as "Hijrin."

Apparently, Philby was following

Musil*s genealogy without understanding Musil’s system of transliter­ ation.

Musil's "Mezren” (-

Oj**) looks superficially as though it

might be the equivalent of Mijrin according to Philby* s system of transliteration and thus he has rendered it!

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Bibliography for the Su*udi Genealogy (for full details see main bibliography)

Alusi, al-, Ta'rxkh Na,jd, ca», p. 95* Bishr, ibn-, eUnwan al-Ma.jd fi Ta'rxkh Na .id, II, pp. 5“10 an-w*o I






i S»»SH:iww»i jisSCI jwwarjf a r yjET! !■»»

„ i _ i I“i _ r~tn iSwW’ ri&







w*»«3*j}iM ■!■


iVw'1 '1

'a$u*2V1^* >*^"v


• \ Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.





310-31* Hartmann, Richard. ”Die Wahhabi ten,” Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, LXXVTII (Neue Folge, III, 1924), pp* 176-213*

Hava, J. G. Arabio—English Dictionary for the Use of Students /Al— Fara*id al—Durriyah fi al-Lughatayn al— ^Arabiyah wa al-Inkiliziyah wa huwa Kitab Madrasi 7 * Hilprecht, H. V. Century.

Beirut: Catholic Press, /T91J^7*

Explorations in Bible Lands during the Nineteenth

Philadelphia: A. J. Holman and Co., 1903*

R eproduced with p e rm is s io n o fth e c o p y rig h t owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Hitti, Philip K.

History of the Arabs,

Londons MacMillan and Co,,

Ltd., 3rd ed., 1943* Hogarth* D. G.


Oxfords Clarendon Press, 1922.

"Gertrude Bell's Journey to Hayil," Geographical Journal, LXX (1927), PP. ————~


The Life of Charles Iv!« Doughty. Garden Ciiy: Doubleday, Doran,

and Co., Inc.,


-— — 1 The Hearer East. —

Hew Yorks D. Appleton and Co., 1915*

The Penetration of Arabia,

Houtsma, M. Th* Huart, Cl.


Hew Yorks P. A. Stokes Co., 1904.

Encyclopaedia of Islam, The.

Hi3toire des Arabes. vols. I-II. Paris: Librairie Paul

Geuthner, 1912-13. Huber, Charles.

Journal d ’un voyage en Arabie (1883-84). Paris:

Imprimerie Nationale, 1891. ——

"Voyage dans 1*Arabie centrale, Hamad, Sammar, Qagia, Hedjaz," separately bound excerpts from articles in Bulletin de _la socidtd de gdographie, 3® trimestre (1884). Pariss 1884-5*

Hurgronje, C« Snouck. — —

Bilder aus Mekka. Leydens

E. J. Brill, 1889.

— Mekka, vols. I—II. The Hague: Martinus Nijoff, 1888-9« —

The Revolt in Arabia. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917*

Hussein, Taha ^Taha Husayn^» 1*r » Martin Sprengling, "Literary Life in ■flu. Arabic Peninsula,"

The Open Court, XLVI (1932), pp. 828-46.

Ingrass, Harold.

Arabia and the Isles.

Jacob, Harold P.

Kings of Arabia.

Jawdat, Ahmad.

London: John Murray, 1946.


Mills and Boon, Ltd.,1923.

Waqa>if Dawlati^ulya, vols. I-IX. Constantinople, 1271-92

Jomard, Edme Francois.

Etudes geographiques et historiques sur

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


1*Arable, accompagndea d*une carte de l*Asyr et d*une carte generals de 1* Arabie: suivies de la relation du voyage de Mohammed—Aly dans le Fazoql, avec des ohservations sur l*dtat des affaires en Arable et en Egypte. Jung, Eugene.

Paris: Librairie de Firmin Didot Freres, 1859*

Les Puissances devant la revoltcarabe. Paris: Librairie

Hachette et Gie., 1906. Jurji, Edward J., ed.

The Great Religions of the Modern World.

Confucianism. Taoism. Hinduism, Buddhism. Shintoism, l 3lam, Judaism. Eastern Orthod-oxy, Roman Catholicism, Protestantism. Princeton: Princeton ITniversity Press, 1947*

Keane, J. F. My Journey to Medinah. —— —

Six Months in the He.jaz.

Khalifahi family genealogy.

London: Tinsley Brothers, 1881.

London: Ward and Downey, 1887*

See Arabian American Oil Company.

Kiernan, Reginald H. The Unveiling of Arabia.

London: George G. Harrap

and Co. , Ltd., /l93j7« Klein, F. A.

The Religion of Islam.

London: Kegan, Paul, Trench

Triibner and Co., Ltd., 1906. Kleist, Oberstleutnant v.

"England in Arabien,"


Zeitschrift. XII (1906), pp. 425-59*. Kurd rAli, Muhammad. "Asl al-^/ahhabiyah,” AI-Qadim wa al-Hadith. Cairo: Al-Matba^at al-Rahmaniyah., 1545*

Landau, Rom.


Arberry, A. J.

Lane, Edward William.

An Arabic-Engllsh Lexicon. Derived from the

Best and Most Copious Eastern Sources: ’Comprising a Very Large Collection of Words and Significations Omitted in the Kamoos, with Supplements to its Abridged and defective Explanations, Ample Grammatical and Critical Comments.' and Examples in Prose and Verse, book I, parts I—VIII*


Williams and iTorgate,


Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Lane-Poole, Stanley.

The Mohammadan Dynasties.



Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1925* La Tour, Jean Imbart de.

"Le Nationalisme arabe," Ann ales des

sciences politiques, XXI (1906), pp. 1~110 Laoust, Henri.

Contribution_a une etude de la inethodologie canonique

de Taki-d-Din Ahmad b. Taimiya. Traduction annotee; 1)du M a farig al-Wusul ila M a frifat anna IJsul ad-Din wa Fururahu Had Bayyanaha ar—Rasul et 2) d’Eiyas fi— 3— 3arf al—Islami.

Cairo: Imprimerie

de l'Institut franjais d ’archeologie orientale, 1939. Longrigg, Stephen Hemsley.

Four Centuries of Modern Iraq..


Clarendon Press, 1925.

MacDonald, Duncan B.

Development of Muslim Theology, Jurisprudence

and Constitutional Theory. Hew York: Charles Scribner*s Sons, 1903. Maokie, J. 3.

"Hasa: An .Arabian Oasis," Geographical Journal, LXIII

(1924), p p . 139-207. Mahay ini, Rafiq. al-. Al-Bahth Tawhid.

Muhammad ibn-yAbd al-Wahhab wa al-

Manuscript thesis at the American University of Beirut,

Beirut, Lebanon. Marriott, J. A. R*.

Dated 25 January, 1941* The Eastern Question, An Historical Study in

European Diplomacy.

Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1947*

Mason, A. de Witt and Barney, Frederick J. Mission.

New York:

in America, Mengin, Felix.

History of the Arabian

The Board of Foreign Missions, Reformed Church

1926. Histoire de l*Egypte sous le gouvernement de Mohammed-

Aly. vols. I—II.

Paris: Arthus Bertrand, Librairie, 1823.

Histoire sommaire de l*Egypte sous le gouvernement de MohammedAly ou recit des principaux evenements qui ont eu lieu de l*an 1823 & 1*an 1838.

Precede d*une introduction et service d* etudes

geographlques et historique3 sur 1*Arabie, par M. Jomard, membre

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

522 d-Q 1*institut da France, accompagnee de la relation de voyage de Mohammed—Aly au. Fazoql, d*une carte de 1* Asyr et d*une carte generale d*lrabie par le meme$ sur les affaires de l'Egypte.

terminee par des considerations Paris: Librairie de Firmin Didot

Freres, 1359• Midhat, Ali Haydar.

The Life of Midhat Pasha, a Record of his

Services, Political Reforms, Banishment, and Judicial Murder. London: John Murray, 1905* Miles, S. B. The Countries and Tribes of the Persian Gulf. London: Harrison and Sons, 1920. Montgomery, James A.

”Arabia Today," Journal of the American Oriental

Society, XL (1927), pp. 97-152. Moritz, Bernard.


Goographie des Landes.

Studien zur physikalischen und historischen Hannover: Orient-Buchhandlung Heinz Lafaire,

1923. — — — - 3ilder aus Palastina, IIord-Arabien und dem Sinai.


Dietrich Reimer, 1916. Mouriez, Paul.

Histoire de Mehemet—Ali, vice—roi dfeEgypte, vols.

I-I7. Paris: Louis Choppe, 1855^58. Musil, Alois o northern Negd, a Topographical Itinerary. Hew York: American Geographical Society, 1928.

Nabhani, Muhammad ibn-Khalifah al-.

"Al-Bahrayn," Al-Tuhfat al—

Habhaniyah fi Ta^rikh al— Jazirat al— fArabjyah.

Cairo: al-Matbarat

al-Mahmudiyah, 1342.

-- - "Al—Basrah,” ibid. ITahoum, Haftn /Raylm Hahuc^.


Nallino, C. A.

scritti editi

Raccolta di

Sa*udiana (1958)*"

Recueil de firmans. e inediti, vol.I, "L*Arabia

Rome: iBtituto per lOriente, 1959*

Hasif, Husayn ibn—Muhammad. o • . /Cairo ?7, 1349.

Madial—H i j a z w a Hadiruhu, vol. — ‘Vl 1— — S------


Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Niebuhr, Carsten.

Description de 1 *Arabie d* apres les observations

et recherches faites dans le pays mf?me. Copenhagen! . Nicolas Moller, i?75. — —

■ Voyage en Arabie.

Noldeke, Theodor.


S. J. Baalde, 1776.

Sketches from Eastern History, tr. J. S. Black.

London* Adam and Charles Black, 1892. Nolde, Eduard. Brunswick*

Palgrave, W. G.

Seise nach Innerarabien« Kurdistan und


Druck und Verlag von Friedrich Vieweg und Sohn, 1895.

Narrative of a. Yea r* s J ourney .through Central and

Eastern Arabia (1862-65), vols. I-II.

London* MacMillan and

Co., 1865* Panckoucke, C. L. F.


Philby, H. St« J. B.



Description de 1*Egypte.

Arabia of the Wahhabis.

London* Ernest Benn, Ltd., 1950. London* Constable and Co., Ltd., 1928.

The Heart of Arabia, vols. I—II. London* Constable and Co., Ltd., 1922. — — - Southern Na.jd. Planat, Jules.

Cairo* Government Press, 1919*

Histoire de la regeneration de l*Egypte. Paris*

Poole, Lane, Stanley.

See Lane-Poole, Stanley.

Rashid, fAbd al— ^Aziz al— . Ta^rikh al—Kuwayt, vols. I—II. Baghdad* al—Matbafat al- rAsrl'jH 344/1926. * .A Raymond, Jean.

Memoire sur 1* origine des Wahabys. Cairo* Societe

royale de geographie d»Egypte, 1925» Recueil de finnans imperiaux ottomans actresses aux Yalis et aux Khedives d» Egypte. 1006 H. - 1322 H . (1597 J.-C.---

1904 Jv-C.).

reunis sur 1*ordre de sa majeste Fouad Ier, roi d»Egypte. ed. Haim Ha&oum.

^ a r i s / s L* Institut franjais d ,archeologie orientale

du Caire, 1934*

R eproduced with permission of the copyright o w n e rT F u rth e r reproduction prohibited without permission.


Rent3, George Snavely.

Muhammad! ibn ’’Abd al—'ffahhab ( 1703/04-1792)

and the Beginnings of Unitarian Empire in Arabia.


thesis at the University of California, Berkely, California. Bated 4 August, 1948. Rihani, Ameen ^AmTn al—Rihani/•

Arabian Peak and Desert. London:

Constable and Co., Ltd., 1950. Around the Coasts of Arabia.

London: Constable and Co., Ltd.,

1930. — —

Ibn Sa'* pud of Arabia, his People and his Land. London:

Constable and Co., Ltd., 1928. —

Muluk al— *Arab.

Beirut* al-Matbarat al— fIlmiyah, 1929*

Ta>rlkh Uajd al-Hadith wa Mulhaqatihi. Beirut* al-Matbarat al-^Ilmiyah, 1928. Roloff, Max.

Arabien und seine Bedeuting fur die Erstarkung des

Osmanenreiches. Leipsig* Yeit and Co., 1915. Rosen, G. "Guarmani’s Reise nach aem Uegd,"

Zeitschrift fur allgemeine

Erdkunde, XVIII (Ueue Polge, 1865), pp. 201-18. Rousseau, Jean Baptiste Louis Jacques.

"Notice sur la secte des

Wdhabis," EundgrubeM des Orients ^/alternative titles* Mines de 1*Orient, and Makhzan al-Kunuz al-Mashriqiyah 7 , I (1809), pp. —— —


"Tableau des possessions territoriales de l'emir Sehoude, prince

actuel des Wahabis, avec les noms des principales tribus qui lui sont soumises," ibid.,

II (1811), pp. 155-60.

Rustum, A. J. and Zurayk, C. K.

Provisional Readings in the History

of the Arabs and Arabic Culture. ^Beirut/s Printed for Private Circulation, /l94j2^« Rutter, Eldon.

The Hol£ Cities of Arabia. London: G. P. Putnam’s

Sons, Ltd., 1928.

Scheltema, J.F. "Arabs and Turks," Journal of the American Oriental Society, XXXVII (1917), pp. 153-61.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Seetzen, Ulrich Jasper.

Reis eg durch Syrien, Palastina, Phonicien,

die Tranaj ordan-Lander, Arabia Petraea und unter-Aegypturn, vols. I—IV.


G. Reimer, 1854—9*

•'Sbaykh al-l3lam Muhammad ibn-*Abd al-Wahhab,"

Al-Zahra> , III (1545),

PP. 417-51.

Shaykhu, Luwis _£Louis Cheikhe^. "Hawl Jazirat al— fArab," Al—Mashriq /Il-Machrig7. XVIII (1920), pp. 20-35, 107-17, 178-84, 282-7,

332- 8, 425-9* Smith, Wilfred Cantwell.

M o d e m Islam in India, a. Social Analysis.

London: Victor Goilancz, Ltd. ,


Dictionary of the Y/orld1s Currencies and

Spalding, William P.

Foreign Exchanges. London: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1928. Sprenger, Aloys. "Ein Beitrag zur Statistik von Arabien,” Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlSndischen Gesellechaft» XVII (1863)', pp. 214-26 Sprengling, Martin. •'Mysterious Arabia Modernizes," The Open Court, XLVI (1932), pp. 793-805. Stuhlmann, Franz.

Der Kampf urn Arabien zwischen der Tiirkei und

England. Brunswick: George Westermann,

Tamimi, Muhammad Amin al-. Family tree ,in Arabic showing lineage

of Su^ud family and that of the family of Muhammad ibn-fAbd alWahhab. Cairo:

Maslahat al-Masahat al-rMisriyah, 1946. •

Tamisier, Maurice.

Voyage en Arable, vols. I—II. Paris: Louis

Desessart, 1840. Taylor, Bayard.

Travels in Arabia.

New York: Charles Scribner's

Sons, 1893*

Testa, I. de.

Recueil des traitds de la Porte ottomane avec les

puissances etrangeres depuis le premier traite conclu, en 1556 , entre Suleyman I et Francois _I jusqu1^ nos jours, vols. I-VIII. Paris: Amyot; Muzardj Ernest Leroux, 1864—94* Thomas, Bertram.

Alarms and Excursions in Arabia. London: George Allen

and Unwin, Ltd., 1931.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Arabia Felixs&cross the Empty Quarter of Arabia. London:


■Jonathan Gape, — -—

The Arabs. Londons Thornton Butterworth, Ltd., 1940.

Turkey in Asia.

Great Britain, Foreign Office, Historical Section.

London: H. M Stationery Office, 1920. Twitchell, K. S.fWathen, A. L.j and Hamilton, J. G. Taqrir al-Bafthat al-Amrikiyat al-Zirafiyat allati Wufidat ila al-Mamlakat al-*Arabiyat al— Su^udiyah /Report of the Hnited States Agricultural Mission to Saudi Arabia ~ - -- 7 . Twitchell, K. S.

Cairo: Matbarat Misr 1945® • , # Musahamah Misrxyah, ^

Saudi Arabia, with an Account of t!he Development of

its Hatural Resources. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1947.

V iel, Durand.

See Durand-Viel.

Wahbah, Hafiz.

Jazirat al-^Arab fi al-Qarn al-fIshrin.

Matbarat Lajnat al-Ta'lif wa al-Tarjumah wa al-Nashr,


1365/ 1946.

MAl—Wahhabiyah,” Al-Zahra', II (1345), PP® 8198. 7/aj di, Muhammad Farid. "Al-Wahhabiyah," Da> irat M a farif a l - Q a m al-^Ishrin (al—Rabir fAshr). Cairo: Matbarat Da'irat al—Mafarif, 1925® Wallin, George Augustus,

"narrative of a Journey from Cairo to Medina

and Mecca, by Suez, Araba, Tawila, al-Jauf, Jubb€, Hail, and ITejd, in 1845,'* The Journal of the Royal Geographical Society, XXIV (1854), PP® 115-207® —

"notes Taken during a Journey through Part of Northern Arabia in 1848," ibid., XX (1850), pp. 293-339®

v7asiri, fAbd al-Wasir ibn-Yahya al-, al—Yamani.

Ta^rikh al-Yaman

al—Musamma Farj at al-Humum wa al-Huzn fi Hawadith wa Ta"*rikh al-Yaman.

Cairo* al—Matbarat al-Salafiyah, 154^.

Wathen, A. L. See Twitchell, K. S.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.


Wavell, A. J. B. A: M o d e m Pilgrim in Mecca and a Siege in Sanaa. London:

Constable and Co., Ltd., 1918.

Y/eber, Otto. Eduard Glasers Forschungreisen in Sudarabien. Leipsig: J . C . Hinrichs, 1909. Webster*s Collegiate Dictionary.

Springfield, Massachusetts: G.

and C. Merriam Co., 1936. Wellsted, J . R. Travels in Arabia.

London: John Murray, 1858.

— Travels to the City of the Caliphs. London: Henry Colburn, 1840. Wetztein, J . G.

"Nordarabien und die syrische 7/G.ste nach den

Angaben der Eingebomen,"

Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Erdkunde,

XVIII (neue folge, 1865), pp. 241-82, 408-98. Weygand, Le General. ses fils.

Histoire militaire de Mohammed Aly et de

Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1936.

Wherry, E. M. See Zwemer, S. M. Wiet, G. "Les r^voltes en Arabie," Bulletin du comite de l^Asie frangai.se, IX (1909)» pp. 291-7* Williams, Kenneth.

Ibn Saru d , the Puritan King of Arabia. London:

Jonathan Cape, 1933* Wilson, Arnold T. The Persian Gulf.

Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1928.

7/inder, Bayly. "Al— •’’ A wamil allati Sa^adat rala Tawtid al-Mulk al-



Su^udi" ^"Factors which Helped Establish Saudi Power^7, Al—Abhath, I (1948), pp. 3-14. Wiistenfeld, Ferdinand.

Bahrein und Jemama. Gottingen: Bieterischen

Buchhandlung, 1874*

Yaqut, Shihab al-Bin abi-*’Abdullah, ibn-fAbdullah al-Hsmawi al-Rumi '

al-Bsghdadi. Kitab M u ra.jam al—Bui dan, ed. Ferdinand Wiistenfeld, V 0I 3 . I—VI.

Leipsig: In Commission bei F. A. Brockhaus, 1866- 70 .

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission


Yazbak, Yusuf . "Ta^rikh al-Mamlakat al- rArabIyat al-Su^udiyah,” Muhadarat al-Nadwah /Zee Conferences du cenaclej9 III (1947)» pp. 145-63. Yust, Walter.

See Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Zaki, rAbd al—Rahman. Al-Jaysh al-Misri fi rAhd Muhammad ’’Ali Basha al-Kabir. Cairo: Matbafat Hi.iazi, 1959. Ta^rikh al-Jaysh al-Misri. Bulaq: Matbarat al-Amlriyah. 1939. Sehme, Albrecht.

Arabien und die Araber seit hundert Jahren. Eine

geographische und gescfaichtliche Skizze.

Hailes Verlag der Buch-

handlung des Waiserihauses, 1875* Zurayk, C. K.

See Rustum, A. J.

Zwemer, S. M. Across the World of Islam. New Yorks Fleming H. Revell Co., 1929. Arabiat the Cradle of Islam.

New Yorks Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

----, Barton, J. L. and Wherry, E. M. eds. The Mohammedan World of Today. New Yorks Fleming H. Revell Co., 1906. --- "Three Journeys in Northern Oman,” The.Geographical Journal. XIX (1902), pp.

54- 64.

'"The Wahabiss their Origin, History, Tenets, and Influence,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, XXXIII (1901), pp. 311-30.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.