King ‘Abd Al-‘Aziz and The English
Connection:
Captain William Shakespear and His
Successors
H. St. J. B. Armitage
When King
‘Abd al-‘Aziz Ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Faisal al-Sa’ud –
Ibn Sa’ud – spoke of the English he often mentioned the first Englishman he had
met, Captain William Shakespear, the Political Agent in Kuwait, and sometimes
told the story of their remarkable friendship and Shakespear’s death. Their
relationship was one that benefited not only those Englishmen who followed
Shakespear to Riyadh and to friendship with Ibn Sa’ud, but also British
interests in general.
Eighty-four years ago (eighty-seven by the hijra year), on
4 February 1915 [Rabia ‘l-awwal 1333 H.], Ibn Sa’ud wrote to Sir Percy Cox, the
Political Resident in the Persian Gulf at Bushehr:
Our
declaration of war against bin Rashid, and our severance of relations with him,
have already been communicated to you. We have fought against him on the [?]
1333 at a place called Al Artawi [Artawiyyah], and a great battle ensued. They
were slaughtered and defeated; but it is a source of regret that our beloved
friend and rare well-wisher, Captain Shakespear, was hit from a distance by one
of the enemy’s shots and died. I offer my condolences on his death.
I request you
to advise HM’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and offer the exalted
government my sorrow and condolences for the death of our friend. We had
pressed him to leave us before the incident; but he persisted in refusing to do
so and in being present with us. Amongst other remarks, he said, ‘I have been
ordered to be with you. If I leave you now it will be a blemish to my honour,
and the honour of my country. Therefore excuse me. I must certainly be with
you.’ Accordingly we allowed him [to come] with us.
Now
I request you to advise the Secretary of State to acquaint them [the
Government], in detail, with all that we told him [Shakespear] in Arabic as to
what was required, or delegate somebody familiar with the Arabic language, in
order that we may verbally represent all that is required, so that he may
communicate the same to the illustrious government.
May God protect you.
‘Abd al-‘Aziz’.[i]
Who
was this Shakespear? – to whose letter from Cairo in 1914 [1332 H.], at the
completion of his journey across Arabia, Ibn Sa’ud had replied:
From our part, the honourable father al-imam al-kabir and
brothers Muhammad and Saad and Saud and ‘Abd-Allah, and the sons of all, ask
after you and hope always for your peace and happiness and tranquillity and
everlasting friendship. May god bless and guide you.
‘Abd al-‘Aziz bin
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Faisal
Prince of Nejd and Chief of all its tribes
Ar-Riyadh, 3 Dhu ’l-Qa’da 1332 [3 May 1914][ii]
William Henry Irvine Shakespear was born at Multan in the
Punjab in October 1878. His father was an official
in the Indian Forestry Service, and many of his family served in the Indian
Army throughout the nineteenth century. When he was nine years old, Shakespear
and his brothers went to England with their mother for schooling. He entered
the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst in 1895, and was commissioned in 1898,
having passed out eleventh of his course and gained a number of prizes in
military subjects.
He
joined the Devonshire Regiment in India, but soon transferred to the Bengal
Lancers regiment of the Indian Army, from which he transferred to the Indian
Political Department. In that service during 1901–2 he was put in charge of
large sectors of Bombay in fighting a plague epidemic during which nearly half
a million people died. He qualified in Urdu, Pushtu, Persian and Arabic, and,
in 1904, still only a second lieutenant, was posted as HM Consul in Bandar
Abbas. He returned to service in India in 1907, but soon departed on his first
leave to England for nine years. Having purchased a car in Bombay, he shipped
it to Bushehr, and from there made the first journey by car back to England.
When his leave ended he returned to India, but was posted back to Bushehr as
Cox’s assistant and then to Kuwait in 1909 as Political Agent, a post normally
reserved for a more senior officer.
There, after some initial disagreements, he established a
good relationship with the Ruler, Sheikh Mubarak, which was to lead to his
first meeting with Ibn Sa’ud and the beginning of their friendship nearly a
year later. Shakespear began at once to extend his knowledge of the country and
the tribes, the language and the customs. He became an experienced desert
traveller, getting to know the bedu, especially the shaiyukh (sheikhs) of the
Mutair and Ajman, and joining them in hunting with his own salukis and his
famous falcon ‘Shalwa’. He ‘gradually extended his influence into the interior
and by several excursions into the comparatively unknown hinterland had filled
up large blanks on the Map’.[iii]
Shakespear’s first journey at the end of 1909 took him
south through Burgan and Wafra between the coastal plain and the Wadi Shaqq.
East of Khafji he turned westwards to the Wadi, travelling north along it
before returning to Kuwait through Subaihiyah and Jahrah. Early in 1910 he made
a much longer journey, travelling to al-Safa and from there to Hafar al-Batin.
He then followed the Batin to the Zubair plain, before returning to Kuwait
through Safwan and Jahrah. His journey
had been marred by misfortune near al-Safa, where his party had been attacked
at night by men of the Mutair, and Khalaq, his rafiq, had been killed.
Before starting that journey, Shakespear had been informed
by Sheikh Mubarak that Ibn Sa’ud might possibly come to Kuwait for a visit, and
he had asked the Sheikh to let him know by special messenger of his arrival, as
he had ‘heard so much of him and should like the opportunity of meeting such a
distinguished man’.[iv] On his return to Kuwait on 28 February 1910
[Muharram 1328 H.] he found that Ibn Sa’ud had arrived, and with him his brothers
Sa’ud, Muhammad and Sa’ad and his son Turki.
Shakespear’s meetings with them were to give us the first sight of Ibn
Sa’ud through European eyes in both words and pictures. Shakespear reported:
They were much interested in the ways of foreigners
and the outer world. They dined with me
and appeared to appreciate a Western table and menu, and also submitted to the
camera. Ibn Sa’ud is a fair, handsome man, considerably above average Arab
height with a particularly frank and open face, and after the first shyness, a
genial and very courteous manner ... [he] is a broadminded, ‘straight’
man. His reputation is that of a noble,
generous and just man who does not descend to mean actions. He did not discuss
politics with me beyond remarking that he thanked God there were no Turks
nearer his capital than those in Al Hasa, and that the English, as the friends
and brothers of Mubarak as-Sabah, were thereby his friends and brothers. He had often heard Colonel Pelly’s visit to
Riadh spoken of, but had never seen a white man in the place nor in fact ever
in his life before the present occasion.
He offered me a welcome should I ever contemplate a tour so far afield
as Riyadh.[v]
The
two men seem to have found an immediate friendship. Shakespear was allowed to take the first
known photograph of Ibn Sa’ud. They were
to meet again a year later, when during the course of further desert
exploration through Summan to al-Haba, during March and April 1911 [1329.H.], Shakespear spent some days with Ibn Sa’ud in
camp at Thaj. They had long and intimate
discussions, which Shakespear later reported in detail to Sir Percy Cox, the
Political Resident at Bushehr. He began
with an account of the treatment he had been accorded and the reason for such a
detailed account:
He [Ibn Sa’ud] treated me most hospitably and in the most
genuinely friendly manner, sparing no pains to make my stay with him as
pleasant as possible. All my questions regarding their country, its customs,
resources, etc., were answered in the frankest manner whilst I was left free to
wander amongst the tents and converse with all and sundry. I frequently
discussed matters of doctrine, custom and religion and was always answered with
calm and intelligent reasoning ... My object in stating the above is to show that
my relations with the Al Sa’ud were of sufficiently intimate description to
leave no doubt of the sincerity in what passed between us: indeed, I was
habitually addressed as ‘Brother’ and if I had been one in fact I could not
have been treated more as one of the family.[vi]
Their
discussions were informal but of great importance. Ibn Sa’ud described his position and his
ambitions in great detail. He spoke at
length about the earlier relations of the al-Sa’ud with the British Government
from the time of the Imam Turki bin ‘Abd-Allah, about his own relations with
Turkey and about his attitude to the Trucial sheikhs.
In turn Shakespear cautioned Ibn Sa’ud against any thoughts
that merely because he had discussed political matters with a British
Government official, the British Government would do anything to disturb the
existing state of affairs by supporting any challenge to Turkish authority in
Arabia. He promised him to report their
discussions in full, but again warned him that he was unlikely to get any answer
of the nature that he desired. Ibn Sa’ud
replied that ‘whatever answer might be returned, it would be a true one’, and
he preferred ‘the truth from the English than the equivocation experience had
taught him to expect from the Turks’.[vii]
From his discussions with Ibn Sa’ud Shakespear ventured to
suggest that serious consideration should be given to the situation in Central
Arabia. On Ibn Sa’ud’s account of the
opposition to Turkish rule throughout Arabia, he opined ‘that a revolt is not
only probable but would be welcomed by nearly every tribe throughout the
Peninsula’[viii] and that with the al- Sa’ud established in al-Hasa
and in friendly relations British interests would be strengthened.
On
receipt of Shakespear’s report by the Foreign Office in London and by the
Government of India the question of policy towards the al-Sa’ud was again
considered. However, it was agreed that
it seemed preferable to hold to the existing policy unless the Government of
India reopened the question by proposing a departure from it. The Foreign Office’s reaction to Shakespear’s
next meeting with Ibn Sa’ud showed a hardening of that attitude. It should be remembered that at this time the
British and Ottoman Governments were engaged in negotiations about their
disputes and on various matters in the Gulf region that were to continue until
the ratification of the Anglo-Turkish Convention in June 1914.
Soon after the submission of his report Shakespear took
leave for England for the Coronation of King George V in May 1911 [Jumada ‘l-awwal
1329 H.]. He then visited India to
attend the Durbar, and returned to Kuwait at the end of January 1912 [Safar
1330 H.].
Shakespear was not to meet Ibn Sa’ud again until May 1913
[Jumada ‘l-awwal 1331 H.]; but meanwhile another English officer on leave from
India was to visit Ibn Sa’ud in Riyadh.
Captain Gerard Leachman made a private journey from Damascus to
Riyadh. Leachman was already well known
in the desert, but, unlike Shakespear, who always wore his British uniform,
Leachman dressed, and passed, as an Arab on his travels. In 1910 he had travelled with the Anaiza and
the Shammar and experienced the fighting between them, returned to Syria
through Kurdistan and Anatolia, and then ridden from Damascus to Baghdad in
nine days – a total distance of about 2,500 miles by horse and camel in less
than six months!
Leachman left Damascus in November 1912 [Dhu ‘l-Hijja 1330
H.] with 'agailat [a camel train] returning to Qasim. He hoped to travel to Riyadh through Rass and
western Qasim, but at Ayun he was told that he must go to Buraydah, as Ibn
Sa’ud was visiting that town. He arrived
there just after the latter’s departure.
Ibn Sa’ud had left for Riyadh. Leachman wrote that the Emir, Fahd bin
Mu’ammar, ‘was offended at my refusal to tell him what my business was with Ibn
Sa’ud although I should have been puzzled to tell him this, as in truth I had
none’.[ix] A messenger sent by bin Mu’ammar to Ibn Sa’ud
returned with instructions to send Leachman to Riyadh, and he travelled there
by the direct route through Shaqra, finding on his way that ‘Ibn Sa’ud had most
kindly issued orders for my comfort at every town on the road, which greatly
smoothed matters’.[x] He was
greeted on his arrival by Ibn Sa’ud, who ‘regretted that his palace could not
offer better quarters or more luxury, but said that since his arrival in Riyadh
ten years before ... [he] had had no leisure to add to or improve his palace’.[xi]
During his stay in Riyadh Leachman had a stream of visitors
in his room who, without exception, showed him the greatest courtesy. Sometimes he went into the town with Ibn
Sa’ud, who was occasionally asked why he was entertaining a Christian, and
would reply that ‘any Englishman, Christian or not, was his friend’.[xii] Ibn Sa’ud gave Leachman an account of his rise to power;
but if he mentioned Shakespear – and it would seem strange for him not to do so
– Leachman recorded no mention of his fellow-countryman. He was pleased to meet Ahmad al-Thunaiyan and
others, who, he found, were always ready to discuss with him the geography of
the country, and particularly the
direction and extent of the great wudian or dried-up water-courses. However, he
was disappointed when Ibn Sa’ud would not agree to his continuing his
exploration to Yabrin and the Rub’ al Khali.
Instead, he left for al-Hasa and the coast. At Hufuf he failed to persuade the Turkish
officers to allow him to penetrate the country to the south; and so he left for
Uqayr, from where he crossed to Bahrain.
In March 1913 [Rabia ‘l-thani 1331 H.], Shakespear set out
on a longer journey to al Majma’a and, on learning that Ibn Sa’ud was camped at
Khafs, joined him there for four days at the beginning of April [Rabia ‘l-thani
1331 H.]. He later reported that in the course of his four-day visit Ibn Sa’ud
had discussed with him his future policy with great frankness. According to Shakespear Ibn Sa’ud ‘had stated
that his power in Central Arabia had increased till he no longer feared any of
its shaikhs or rulers ... the Al Sa’ud were prepared to hold what they had
recovered of their ancient dominion’.[xiii] He explained that this would be comparatively easy
to do but for the menace of Turkish aggression from al-Hasa and the Hejaz. The al-Sa’ud were not strong enough to fight
on both fronts; but by evicting the Turks from al-Hasa they would secure their
eastern boundaries, and so be better able to defend the west. The al-Sa’ud had just grounds for their claim
to Qatif and al-Hasa, which had been recognized decades before both by Midhat
Pasha, for the Turks, and by Colonel Pelly, for the British. He said that the Arabs felt equal to evicting
the Turks from those areas, and asked that ‘if the situation is now altered and
Great Britain is not willing to preserve the former friendship, which is his
earnest desire, he may he definitely informed, so that he may look to his own
interests’.[xiv] Shakespear
concluded his report: ‘I have the honour to solicit your support for a
re-consideration of the whole question of our relations with the Amir of Najd
for I cannot avoid the impression that the matter will become an urgent one
before long and that it will he to our advantage to have reached beforehand
some definite decision in regard to our relations with Bin Sa’ud.’[xv]
In forwarding Shakespear’s report and commenting on it, Cox
also reported to the Government of India that since the meeting Ibn Sa’ud had
captured al-Hasa without opposition. He
suggested that Britain and Turkey should recognize Ibn Sa’ud ‘as autonomous ruler of Najd under the
suzerainty of the Porte, and that we [the British] should be accorded the right
to accredit an agent to him’.[xvi] This led to controversy between the Foreign Office
and the India Office. The latter, who
were concerned that British interests in the Gulf should not suffer, observed
that ‘it would he a pity if we said or did anything which would discourage the
local people [i.e. Cox and Shakespear] from saying what they think and
encourage them to say what they think they are wanted to say.’[xvii] However, the
Foreign Office view prevailed, and, for the sake of Anglo-Turkish relations, it
was decided that British policy should be ‘to abstain from intervention, direct
or indirect, in the affairs of Najd’[xviii] and that to follow Cox’s suggestion ‘with a view to
concluding direct agreements with Ibn Sa’ud as an autonomous ruler, would give
rise to [Turkish] suspicion and might have far-reaching and regrettable
effects’.[xix] The result of this debate in London was that the
following instruction, dated 10 June 1913 [5 Rajab 1331 H.], was sent to Cox
and repeated for information [and compliance] to Shakespear in Kuwait:
Policy of the British Government at present is to endeavour
to consolidate the dominions of the Porte in Asia Minor and to refrain as long
as possible from any intervention direct or indirect in Central Arabia. Should Abdul Aziz bin Saud make any overtures
[then the] Resident should communicate with Government and ask for
instructions.[xx]
Cox, the Resident, had to comply with that instruction
almost immediately, for on 13 June 1913 [8 Rajab 1331 H.], Ibn Sa’ud had written
to inform him of his capture of al-Hasa and Qatif. Shakespear had heard of this on his return to
Kuwait, and had reported the details to Cox, expressing his surprise at the
suddenness of Ibn Sa’ud’s move against the Turks, and commenting that he ‘could hardly have selected a better moment
or managed the affair more deftly, as he appears to have secured the support of
the responsible men of Hasa itself.’[xxi] In his letter Ibn Sa’ud suggested that there should
be a friendly understanding about the situation on the same terms as he
believed his grandfather, Faisal, had agreed with Pelly fifty-five years
before. Cox, observing his recent instructions, could only reply that ‘the
British Government considered it necessary to observe a strictly neutral
attitude towards both sides [the Porte and the Saudis].’[xxii] However, he
added a personal note expressing his own appreciation of the kind help and
assistance that Ibn Sa’ud had afforded to English travellers. In further exchanges during the year, Ibn
Sa’ud’s requests for a clearer explanation of the British attitude were
answered only with assurances that ‘the British Government will continue to
maintain the friendly relations which have been sustained in the past’.[xxiii]
But Cox did not want to lose contact with Ibn Sa’ud. Just before he left the Gulf in December 1913
[Muharram 1333H.], having been posted back to India as Secretary of the Foreign
Department, he arranged for a meeting to take place at ‘Uqayr later that month
between Ibn Sa’ud and the Acting Political Resident at Bahrain, Major Trevor,
representing the Political Resident, and accompanied by Shakespear. They later reported on the lengthy
discussions they had with Ibn Sa’ud during the two days they were his guests. Trevor wrote that they had arrived in a ‘boom’
provided by ‘Abd-Allah al-Gusaibi, Ibn Sa’ud’s agent in Bahrain, and continued:
A little before sunrise ... we saw Bin Sa’ud’s camp being
pitched on the sand hills about a mile east of the Custom House and Serai (the
only buildings or habitations of any description at ‘Uqair) ... We were
received by Bin Sa’ud with great politeness on the shore outside the
Serai. After a short interview in the
Serai Bin Sa’ud called for horses and we rode to the camp with him accompanied
by a large crowd of horsemen, who on the way gave us an ‘ardha’ or welcoming
ceremony.[xxiv]
Ibn Sa’ud recounted how his family had ruled over Nejd for
generations without interference from outside.
He had consolidated his authority in Central Arabia and taken al-Hasa
and Qatif. He outlined the terms of a
treaty proposed by the Turkish Government and how he would delay giving his
answer; he hoped that the British Government would see ‘his sincere desire to
arrive at a modus vivendi with them [the British]’.[xxv] He said that
he would be satisfied if the British would maintain the maritime peace along
his coast and recognize his position as de facto ruler. ‘If not, he would have to trust in his own
sword.’[xxvi]
Trevor concluded his despatch about this meeting:
I would observe that only Bin Sa’ud, Captain Shakespear and
myself were present at any of the interviews at which politics were discussed,
and I should like to say that the exceedingly frank and cordial attitude of Bin
Sa’ud at the meeting was due to his friendly feelings towards Captain Shakespear. The latter’s knowledge of the language and
ways of the Bedouin from Central Arabia was also most helpful and his presence
was mainly responsible for any favourable results which may follow from the
meeting.[xxvii]
Following his meeting with Ibn Sa’ud at Khafs, Shakespear
himself had been instructed not to meet him again under any circumstances
without prior government approval, and to confine himself to the territory
‘assigned to Kuwait under the Anglo-Turkish Convention’.[xxviii] He feared
that this would prevent his planned journey across Arabia to the Red Sea. British Government objections were based on
their desire not to upset the Turks.
However, in recommending that Shakespear should he permitted to attempt
the journey, the Viceroy of India wrote ‘It will be most unfortunate if for
political reasons, Englishmen are always to be excluded from exploration in
Central Arabia while the field is left open to foreigners.’[xxix]
In January 1914 [1332 H.] Shakespear received permission to
undertake his journey. The Political
Resident wrote to him ‘now you have got permission I think it is your duty to
your country and yourself to start without delay. God speed you in your great
enterprise.’[xxx] He left Kuwait on the 3 February [Rabia ‘l-awwal
1332 H.] and arrived in Riyadh five weeks later, where he was warmly greeted by
Ibn Sa’ud. His diary records meetings
with Ibn Sa’ud and the Imam Abd al-Rahman, but little detail of their
conversations. He spent much of his time
walking around Riyadh and the gardens and taking photographs. He witnessed Ibn Sa’ud making preparations to
leave Riyadh on a ghazu (razzia) and, when paying his farewell call on him two
days later, discovered that he was ‘to march with the standard’[xxxi] on the following day. He travelled with Ibn Sa’ud for four
days. During that time, he recorded that
he treated Ibn Sa’ud, who was not very well, spent time discussing history and
religion with him and others in the majlis, and took many photographs, which he
despatched to Kuwait. The night before
he left Ibn Sa’ud, not far from Huraymila, he noted that he had ‘another long discussion with him, got
letters for Buraydah, Anaiza and Shaqra, and sent off one to Shaikh Mubarak’.[xxxii]
He
was to spend another ten weeks travelling through Qasim and the Jabal Shammar, then
wide of Ha’il to Jawf and the Sirhan, and thence to Mudawwarah and Aqaba,
before crossing the Sinai to Suez. His
great expedition from Kuwait was a journey that took him four months, during
which he made eighty-seven camps on the way.
He wrote the following letter to Ibn Sa’ud from Cairo describing his
journey and thanking him for all the arrangements he had made:
After compliments:
Your Excellency will see from this letter that by the grace
of God your friend has safely reached Cairo and by the kindness of one of the
great ones of the Government is able to write to Your Excellency in Arabic.
I wrote to your Excellency in French from Buraydah and hope
your relative Ahmad bin Thunaiyan will have made clear to Your Excellency how
grateful I was for all the efforts and kindness which your amirs evinced for my
affairs.
I started with the Agheyl from Buraydah and we marched by
the route Labbah, watering at Haiyaniyah, to Jawf-al-Amr. The Agheyl were very kind to me while I was
with them, particularly Saleh al Mutawah of Buraydah, Bin Khalaf and Al Garawi
of Unayzah and Muhd Bin Rawaf of Damascus, also many others whose names I
cannot remember correctly.
On the road we beard of the murder of Zamil Ibn Sebhan, and
I grieved, for he was a good man and your friend – God knows what will now
happen to the affairs of Ibn Rashid.
Doubtless Your Excellency is aware that the Turkish Govt. has sent many
thousands of rifles, all magazine arms, to Ha’il, and it is commonly reported
among the Bedouin in the North that Ibn Rashid will shortly make war on Your
Excellency’s tribes. The matter is with
God Almighty, and I trust that he will strengthen your arm if there is
necessity.
The great ones of my government here are much interested in
news of you, and I have told them all I know; also, our friend the Resident at
Bushehr, Sir Percy Cox, whom you could not meet and in whose place I came with
Major Trevor to Ujair to meet you, is now in India with the Viceroy, and he
will certainly keep an eye on your affairs, which Inshallah will continue to
prosper.
After Jawf-al-Amr I reached the tents of Audeh Abu Tayy,
Sheikh of the Huwaytat & he gave me two rafiqs [guides and escorts] to take
me west to the Egyptian border, but he was different to all the other sheikhs
whom I met & was very greedy.
However we reached in safety the border, thank God, without seeing any
Turkish soldiers or officials, and thence I came on to Suez, where I took the
Egyptian Railway to Cairo. My journey was a very long one and we took 111 days
from Kuwait to Suez with 87 camps, but thanks be to God we all arrived safely,
both men and camels.
I have only been a few days in Cairo & not yet been
able to obtain the Arabic barometer you wanted, but Inshallah I shall not
fail. The field glasses I will obtain in
London, for which place I shall leave after three or four days.
I desire to express to Your Excellency my thanks & deep
obligation for all the arrangements made which made my journey easy & beg
to send my salaams to Your Excellency’s father the Imam ‘Abd al-Rahman
al-Faisal & Your Excellency’s brothers, Muhammad, Sa’ad, Saud and
‘Abd-Allah and to their sons.
May Your Excellency’s affairs prosper and may you be
preserved.[xxxiii]
In
England that summer Shakespear submitted a detailed report on Arabia and his
relationship with Ibn Sa’ud to the India Office. He concluded:
I am convinced that present Turkish methods in Arabia, if
persisted in, will end in disaster ... the probable result will be a
combination of all the Arab tribes, the expulsion of Turkish troops and
officials ... and the establishment of an independent Arabia with a loose form
of confederation of which Ibn Sa’ud will be the head.[xxxiv]
The India Office saw his report as a ‘most interesting
note. It will show that, in our
controversy with the F. O. [Foreign Office], we have not exaggerated the
importance of Bin Saud.’[xxxv] The report
drew no response; but it has to be remembered that at this time the British
were still most concerned with considerations of European policy and the
stability of the Ottoman Government, with whom they were engaged in
negotiations over their territorial disputes and various other matters in the
Gulf region. This position changed on
the outbreak of war with Germany, when it suddenly became important for Britain
to secure Ibn Sa’ud’s support in the event of Turkey’s entering the war as an
ally of Germany. It was decided that ‘in
return for his cooperation in the eviction of the Turks from Basra, Britain
would be prepared to recognise him as the independent ruler of Najd and Hasa and
enter into treaty relations with him, and guarantee him against attack by sea’.[xxxvi] In turn Ibn Sa’ud wrote to Cox in late November 1914
[Muharram 1333 H.] ‘agreeing to cooperate against Turkey if Britain would
conclude a treaty with him’.[xxxvii]
It was not possible to pursue this change of policy before
Shakespear’s return to Kuwait as Political Officer on special attachment to Ibn
Sa’ud, an appointment to which the latter had agreed when the news was conveyed
to him through Sheikh Mubarak of Kuwait.
Shakespear reached Ibn Sa’ud’s camp near Majma’a on 31
December 1914 [14 Safar 1333 H.] with orders to discuss the position, persuade
him to be Britain’s ally, bring him north and remain with him ‘should his [Ibn
Sa’ud’s] assistance be needed with the tribes beyond Basra’.[xxxviii] He also
carried letters to Ibn Sa’ud from Cox, which the former acknowledged the
following day, informing Cox that his news had given him ‘the hope that by your
occupation of this country [Iraq] we shall have cause for greater prosperity
than in the past, and that our country will become secure from the
high-handedness of the Turkish Government from which we used to suffer in the
past ... As to my affairs, I shall explain to you after conferring with Captain
Shakespear.’[xxxix]
In a long, detailed letter to Cox dated 4 January 1915 [18
Safar 1333 H.] Shakespear reported his discussions with Ibn Sa’ud, whom he had
found to have become distrustful of the British government because of the
general lack of response to his friendly overtures. He wrote that:
‘Abdul Aziz, who is
animated by an intense patriotism for his country, profound veneration for his
religion and a single-minded desire to do his best for his people by obtaining
for them lasting peace and security, now found himself in a difficult position. He trusted the British Government as he
trusted no other; he desired the closest relations with them and as proof of
his sincerity had continued to fence with the Turks, with some risk to himself
but without furthering their aims; he was now asked to commit himself to open
war with his most powerful and bitter enemies [the Turks] and that by the Power
which six months earlier had informed him it could not intervene on his behalf
and had left him free to make his own terms with the Turks.’[xl]
But he confirmed that Ibn Sa’ud, despite his
disillusionment, was anxious for a treaty that would give him some guarantee
against the Turks. Even so, there is
little doubt that it was Shakespear’s influence with Ibn Sa’ud and their mutual
regard that formed the first major step towards a draft that both met Ibn
Sa’ud’s requirements and was acceptable to the British. Shakespear remarked that the draft was to the
advantage of British interests, and suggested that, in view of the difficulty
in communication, time would he saved if he were empowered to negotiate with
Ibn Sa’ud over the clauses acceptable and not acceptable to the British
Government.
In a short message to Cox on 16 January 1915 [2 Rabia
'l-awwal 1333 H.] Shakespear reported that Ibn Sa’ud had 6,000 townsmen of his
own and of the Ajman, Mutair and Harb tribes with him, while Ibn Rashid with
700 townsmen and a large force of Shammar was about 25 miles away. He expected Ibn Sa’ud to move 15 miles
towards Ibn Rashid and then attack, and added that the ‘general belief was that
a victory for Ibn Sa’ud was certain’.[xli] Two days
before this he had written his last letter to his brother, an officer in the
Indian Army: ‘in a couple of days we should make a move for a biggish battle
with the other big chief of Central Arabia, Ibn Rashid. ... Abdul Aziz wants me
to clear out, but I want to see the show and I don’t think it will be unsafe
really.’[xlii]
As we now know, Shakespear persuaded Ibn Sa’ud that he
should stay with him. He refused the
latter’s request that he should wear Arab dress and so make himself less
conspicuous, and in this way he met his death at the battle of Jarrab. Afterwards his servants, including his cook,
who returned to the battlefield and saw his body, made statements to the
British authorities about his death. But
perhaps the most informative account was that recounted to ‘Abd-Allah Philby by
one Hussain, a master-gunner in charge of Ibn Sa’ud’s only gun. He said that Shakespear, who was with him on
the day of Jarrab:
‘… had been begged
by Ibn Sa’ud the night before to betake himself to Zilfi, seeing that the issue
of tomorrow’s battle was so uncertain, but resolutely declined to do so and
insisted on accompanying us. He stood up on a little eminence ... telling me
where to aim. I shouted at him not to expose himself, and begged him to take
off his topi, for he was not dressed like us, but in his British uniform.’ Hussain added that Shakespear was first
wounded in the thigh and unable to move, but went on directing his fire until
the enemy were too close for the gun to operate. He refused to leave the battlefield with
Hussain, who ‘saw the enemy [as they] came by, charging down upon Shakespear,
who, wounded as he was, stood up to receive them, and fell fighting’. ‘Two
months later’ [Hussain told Philby], ‘I went back and found the battlefield
strewn with corpses. I saw Skaishpeer chinna inqatil ams; by his side lay a
Shammari and, but a little way off, one of the badu of our side.’[xliii]
So ends the story of Shakespear – except in legend. Those Englishmen who followed Shakespear on
missions to Ibn Sa’ud benefited from the latter’s memory of their compatriot,
but none ever filled his place in either the heart or the mind of Ibn
Sa’ud. Philby’s epitaph for Shakespear was:
‘His death in this first encounter of ally and enemy in the deserts of Arabia
was a great loss to his country, but it was a disaster for the Arab cause. It must certainly be reckoned in the small
category of individual events, which would have changed the course of history.’[xliv]
Shortly after Shakespear’s death Leachman was nominated to
succeed him as Political Officer on Special Duty in Arabia by the Viceroy of
India; but in the event he was posted to Iraq.
However, Cox maintained long-range contact with Ibn Sa’ud by written
exchanges through the latter’s agent in Basra, ‘Abd al-Latif al-Mandil. He was
given discretion in respect of alternatives to the wording of the draft treaty
suggested by Ibn Sa’ud, and the Agreement was finally signed by him and Ibn
Sa’ud on Darin Island 26 December 1915 [1334 H.]. ‘A comparison of the initial draft treaty,
proposed by the British, with the emir’s corrected [amended] version shows that
Ibn Sa’ud’s observations were aimed at increasing his independence and
diminishing British control.’[xlv] They met again a year later, when Cox invited Ibn
Sa’ud to a Durbar in Kuwait at which Ibn Sa’ud, Sheikh Mubarak and the Sheikh
of Muhammerah were invested with British decorations. After the ceremonies Ibn Sa’ud was invited to
Basra, where he was presented with a sword of honour. Amongst those he met was Gertrude Bell, who
had visited Ha’il before the war and was now a Political Officer with Cox. She described how he inspected British and
Indian troops, travelled by railway and in a car, visited a military hospital
and saw an X-ray of his own hand, watched an artillery barrage and aeroplanes
in flight, and showed the interest of a man ‘who seeks to learn ... and [who]
justified to the officers who were his hosts the reputation he has gained in
Arabia for sound sense and distinguished bearing’.[xlvi]
But apart from those brief meetings it was nearly three
years after Shakespear’s death before any direct representation was to be
re-established with Ibn Sa’ud, although throughout that period there were many
written exchanges between him and the British in Kuwait, Bahrain and Iraq. But while the British pressed Ibn Sa’ud to
assume a more active role against Ibn Rashid, the main support for an Arab
effort against the Turks was directed to the Sharif of Makkah and the Arab
Revolt. It was not until late in that
year that it was decided to send a Political Officer to Ibn Sa’ud – primarily
to discuss ‘the possibilities of his being put in a position to make himself
more actively useful to us [the British]’[xlvii] – in other words, to attack Ha’il.
That decision was to lead to the longest relationship
between Ibn Sa’ud and an Englishman – H. St. J. B. Philby, who, thirteen years
later, on the Prophet’s birthday [1349H.], as ‘Abd-Allah Philby, a new convert
to Islam, was to make the 'umra under the guidance of Salih al ‘Anqari.
Philby arrived in Riyadh, after a ten-day journey from
‘Uqayr, on 30 November 1917 [Rabia ‘l-awwal 1336 H.] as head of a British
Mission representing Sir Percy Cox. With
him was Lieutenant Colonel Cunliffe Owen, an artillery officer representing the
Commander-in-Chief of the Mesopotamian Force.
They were met by Lieutenant Colonel R. E. A. Hamilton, the Political
Agent in Kuwait, who had arrived in Riyadh two weeks earlier after meeting with
Turki bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz in Buraydah to discuss ways of tightening the blockade
against Ha’il and al-Madinah.
Cox’s original intention had been to depute Hamilton to
lead the mission; but in a letter to the latter, delivered by Philby, Cox
explained that circumstances required that Philby should he his
representative. Hamilton’s duty would he
‘to represent the point of view and interests of the Sheikh of Kuwait in
respect of any past or existing differences between him and Ibn Sa’ud. He was given liberty to return to Bahrain or
Kuwait or pending further instructions’[xlviii] to organize measures for the prevention of the
leakage of supplies from Qasim. More
importantly, he was authorized to remain with Ibn Sa’ud if the latter wished to
have a Political Officer attached to him.
Many years later, Hamilton’s son wrote: ‘I cannot believe that my father
ever read that final paragraph of Cox’s letter.
The substitution of a junior officer in command of the Mission offended
him ... My father left the city [Riyadh] on December 6th. With his departure the duties outlined in all
three alternatives of Cox’s letter fell to Mr. Philby. Their performance founded his unmatched
Arabian reputation.’[xlix]
In the two weeks before Philby’s arrival, Hamilton had long
discussions almost daily with Ibn Sa’ud about the situation in Nejd, Ibn
Sa’ud’s requirements if he were to attempt to overcome Ibn Rashid, his quarrel
with the Sheikh of Kuwait about the Ajman joining the Shammar in opposition to
him, world affairs and religion. According
to Hamilton Ibn Sa’ud told him that he had a dream of capturing Damascus and
that he thought with some help he and his tribes could achieve that dream.
(Philby later wrote that Ibn Sa’ud had told him of a dream about Damascus and
said ‘That assuredly means that the British will capture Damascus, but not
without my help.’[l]) Ibn Sa’ud had also said that Shakespear had once
refused to believe that there could he a European war, but that ‘he showed him
a quotation from the quran or the traditions [hadith] that Muhammad had
foretold a world conflagration’.[li]
Whereas until the arrival of Philby, Hamilton kept an
interesting daily record of his life in Riyadh, he made only very brief entries
on two of his last four days there, mentioning only ‘interviews … a ride … a walk’[lii] without further detail. From Philby’s account it is clear that during
those four days Hamilton accompanied Philby at most of the many hours of
meetings with Ibn Sa’ud, but was not present when ‘the finishing touches were
put on the first stage of our negotiations in a tête-à-tête conference between
Philby and Ibn Sa’ud lasting five hours’.[liii]
However,
from his unpublished diary and other records it is obvious that Hamilton
enjoyed a warm relationship with Ibn Sa’ud after overcoming the latter’s
initial suspicions about the purpose of his visit. Hamilton mentioned that one day Ibn Sa’ud
gave a picnic in Hamilton’s honour at a cave in Wadi Hanifah, attended by many
of the al-Sa’ud. Philby described how, by
way of formal farewell, Ibn Sa’ud, many members of his family and his court,
all on horseback, visited Hamilton, who had set up camp near the Shamsiyya
gardens in preparation for his departure:
As we got clear of the walls [of Riyadh] Ibn Sa’ud, raising
himself to his full height on his stirrups and turning in the saddle towards his
following, intoned the verses of some stirring war-chant, which being taken up
by those in the rear the horsemen arranged themselves into two groups. At a
given signal the tournament began; at and through each other, and back and
through again and round about they rode at a hand-gallop with loud challenging
cries, with swords or rifles poised aloft as in Arab combat, but there was no
firing, for in Arabia, or at any rate in Central Arabia, ammunition has its
price and is not squandered in sham fights.[liv]
Ibn Sa’ud gave Hamilton a pair of oryxes for eventual
presentation to King George the Fifth.
More than two years later King George wrote to Ibn Sa’ud thanking him
for the gift, which had just arrived in England, unfortunately too late for him
to send his acknowledgement by Amir Faisal bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, who had just
ended his first visit to England.
After
his return to Kuwait Hamilton wrote to Ibn Sa’ud to thank him for all his
hospitality. He gave him news of the
revolution in Russia and of Japanese action against the Bolsheviks in Siberia,
and concluded:
As regards my private news I am returning to my family whom
I have not seen for some years. My
children are nearly grown up and I shall have to see about their future. I
shall often think of Kasim, Washm and Riadh, where I received such great
kindness from Your Excellency. Remember
me to your honoured father the Imam Abdurrahman, the friend of the British, to
your brave son Turki, beloved of all the tribes, to the gallant bin Jaluwi and
other members of the royal family of As Sa’ud.
May God preserve you and them.[lv]
Another British representative should have joined the
mission in Riyadh from Cairo to discuss co-operation between Ibn Sa’ud and
Husain bin Ali, but the latter had refused to allow him to proceed to Riyadh on
the ground that the journey was too dangerous.
Philby took advantage of this by suggesting to Ibn Sa’ud that, with a
party of his men, he should cross to the Hejaz and escort the representative
back to Riyadh and, in the process, prove the safety of the route under Ibn
Sa’ud’s protection. He sent a report to
Cox about his discussions with Ibn Sa’ud, recommending military and financial
aid. He also informed him of his
intention to go to Jeddah, but decided to leave Riyadh before any reply might
instruct him not to make the journey.
Leaving the military adviser, Cunliffe Owen, to return to Kuwait through
Qatif after a short visit to al-Kharj (he was the first Westerner to make such
a visit), Philby set off for Jeddah, arriving there three weeks later at the
end of December 1917 [Rabia ‘l-awwal 1336 H.]. Although he succeeded in his
crossing of Arabia, he failed in his personal mission. He was unable to persuade the British that
Ibn Sa’ud and not Husain bin Ali was Arabia’s man of destiny, a view shared by
Cox; and Husain would not allow Philby to return to Riyadh by land.
He travelled to Egypt and Palestine for discussions of the
situation in Arabia before returning by sea to Basra. There he received orders to return to Riyadh,
which he did via the isle of Batin in the company of Dhari bin Tawala, a
Shammari sheikh loyal to Ibn Sa’ud, arriving there in April 1918 [Rajab1336
H.]. He brought with him the good news
that the British would provide the weapons and a subsidy for an attack on Ha’il. Ibn Sa’ud suggested that this should be at
the beginning of August [Shawwal 1336 H.], so, rather than spending the
interval in Riyadh, Philby obtained his permission to visit Dawasir and the
southern districts of Nejd, the beginning of his exploration of unknown
Arabia. He returned to Riyadh two months
later in the middle of Ramadan, after which month he accompanied Ibn Sa’ud to
Buraydah. He wrote that there: ‘a
disappointment awaited me. In spite of
all my arguments, Ibn Sa’ud, remembering the fate of Shakespear, absolutely
refused to allow me to accompany him into battle.’[lvi]
Sadly Philby saw the force depart, and gladly received the
news ten days later of Ibn Sa’ud’s victory at Yatap. Having found Ha’il strongly defended, Ibn
Sa’ud decided to return to Buraydah to reorganize and re-supply his army before
renewing his attack. What Philby did not
know was that the feeling against him in London was growing because of his
support for Ibn Sa’ud, and that there were plans to replace him. On the way to Buraydah, at Tarafiya, he
received orders from Iraq tantamount to closing down his mission: he was to
withdraw a gift of rifles offered in replacement for an earlier gift of
worthless rifles, and Ibn Sa’ud was no longer to he urged to proceed with the
campaign against Ha’il, for fear his success might upset Husain bin Ali. This was an outcome that Philby had feared,
and he was ashamed at this change of policy.
He said that he would return to Baghdad and do what he could to redress
the situation. Ibn Sa’ud told him ‘But if you cannot arrange these matters come
not back, for I can no longer hold out
against the reason of my own people, and I will not accept another
representative.’[lvii]
They were not to meet again until two years later. It is from Philby’s first books that we have
the most complete accounts of life in Riyadh and the Nejd as seen through
Western eyes in the first half of the century.
Arriving in Kuwait, Philby heard that the war with Turkey
was over. Before he left for Baghdad he
was able to inform ‘Abd-Allah Nafisi, Ibn Sa’ud’s agent, that the gift of
rifles would be released. He wrote to
Ibn Sa’ud informing him of this, and then went to Baghdad, where he compiled
his report on his mission before leaving for England. In it he described Ibn Sa’ud as ‘invariably
frank and candid. I saw him daily, indeed, more than once in a day, and he
seemed to take pleasure in giving me his views and discussing politics, history
and the affairs of the world in general.’[lviii] In a
reference to Shakespear he wrote that ‘Ibn Sa’ud expressed profound regret for
the loss of one whom he regarded as a brother, and always referred to him with
respect and affection.’[lix]
In early March 1919 [Jumada ‘l-thani 1337 H.], soon after
his arrival, he was summoned to a crisis meeting of ministers and generals at
the Foreign Office to give his views on the possibility of King Husain’s
reoccupying Khurmah. He warned the
Foreign Secretary and his military and political advisers that they should not
support such an operation, and he suggested that the offer made by Ibn Sa’ud to
accept a boundary commission should be accepted. The general opinion was that King Husain
could deal with any threat from the Nejd, and that no British intervention was
necessary other than asking both sides to resolve their differences.
Philby’s views were totally rejected, although records show
that not all the officials agreed with their political masters. One senior diplomat wrote: ‘the sensible and
well balanced report which Mr. Philby recently sent in about his mission to Bin
Sa’ud predisposes me to think that his diagnosis of the present situation is
correct’.[lx]
Two months later, after ‘Abd-Allah bin Husain’s defeat at
Turabah, the Foreign Secretary asked Philby to act as mediator with Ibn Sa’ud
to halt further incursions into the Hejaz.
Philby agreed and got as far as Jeddah by ship, but Husain refused to
allow him to proceed any further, and three days later the Foreign Office
cancelled his mission. He wrote ‘So that
adventure came to an end, though I had the satisfaction of knowing that Ibn
Sa’ud had won the first round for the hegemony of Arabia.’[lxi]
Between 1918 and 1922 [1337 – 1341 H.] Ibn Sa’ud had only a
few meetings with British emissaries.
The first of these was in January 1920 [Rabia ‘l-thani 1338 H.] when
Colonel H. R. P. Dickson, the Political Agent in Bahrain, visited Hufuf on
behalf of the British Government, as a guest of Ibn Sa’ud, to discuss the
ikhwan, about whom so little was known.
This was the start of a friendship that was to last for thirty-three
years. They met again later in the year
on board ship at ‘Uqayr, when Sir Percy Cox, now High Commissioner in Iraq, was
returning to Basra from a visit to India.
Philby was returning to Iraq with him, having just spent three months
escorting Amir Faisal bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz on his first visit to England and to
the battlefields of the Great War.
In 1922 [1341 H.] Dickson was instructed by Cox to persuade
Ibn Sa’ud to come to ‘Uqayr for a conference on the frontier question. From Bahrain he opened correspondence towards
this end with Ibn Sa’ud, who agreed to a meeting in November [Rabia
‘l-thani]. He attributed Ibn Sa’ud’s
good will in this matter to the excellent work of his [Dickson’s] wife, who for
two months translated Reuter’s news sheets in French and sent them to Riyadh by
fast camel-rider, where Dr ‘Abd-Allah Damluji, Ibn Sa’ud’s adviser on foreign
affairs, translated them into Arabic.
The
main business of the ‘Uqayr conference was to settle the Iraq–Nejd
frontier. After argument lasting five
days, both this and the agreement between Nejd and Kuwait were settled
arbitrarily by Sir Percy Cox. His
decisions led to many years of frontier problems that might have been avoided
if the settlement had been based on tribal boundaries, as was suggested by Ibn
Sa’ud. Over the following years Dickson
and Ibn Sa’ud were to meet many times both officially and after Dickson’s
retirement from government service in 1936, when he continued to live in
Kuwait. It fell to Dickson to deliver
Faisal al-Duwish and his companions to Ibn Sa’ud after their surrender.
Another Englishman who met Ibn Sa’ud during those early
years was Major R. E. Cheesman, the first Westerner to visit Yabrin. At the ‘Uqayr conference Sir Percy Cox asked
Ibn Sa’ud if Cheesman, then his Private Secretary, could visit his country ‘in
order to shoot birds and collect skins’.[lxii] Ibn Sa’ud
replied: ‘He is welcome; but the birds are only common ones,’[lxiii] and instructed ‘Abd-Allah at Qusaibi to make all the
necessary arrangements for the visit.
Cheesman had already been allowed to survey the area
between ‘Uqayr and Salwa in April 1921 [Rabia ‘l-awwal 1339 H.] while
collecting fauna and searching for the ancient city of Gerra (Abu Zahmul), but
did not meet Ibn Sa’ud on that occasion.
On his second expedition he arrived in ‘Uqayr in November 1923 [Rabia
‘l-thani 1342] and proceeded to Hufuf, where he stayed until February 1924,
during which time he had several meetings with ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, who hoped to let
him go to Yabrin. It would seem that the
memory of Shakespear was still very much in Ibn Sa’ud’s mind. Just as things were ready for his departure,
on 8 February 1924 [Jumada ‘l-awwal 1342 H.], he sent Dr ‘Abd-Allah Damluji to
Cheesman with the message that he thought it would be better to cancel the
journey, as the Awamir had been raiding the al-Murra. He recalled the story of the death of
Shakespear, which ‘was even to-day a grief and painful memory to the Sultan
[Ibn Sa’ud]... a great tribute to Shakespear’s courage’.[lxiv] Cheesman told
Dr ‘Abd-Allah that he was not visiting in an official capacity, and that Ibn
Sa’ud would in no way be held responsible for any accident. He sent a note to Ibn Sa’ud to this effect,
and left Hufuf immediately, lest Ibn Sa’ud should have further thoughts and
forbid him to go.
Cheesman arrived in Yabrin via the Jafurah about a week
later, and spent a week in the area with the al-Murra before returning to
Hufuf. By that time Ibn Sa’ud had left
on an expedition to Qasim, and Cheesman was unable to await his return. In 1926 [1344 H.] Sir Percy Cox, now retired
in England, concluded his Foreword to Cheesman’s book In Unknown Arabia with a
tribute to Ibn Sa’ud:
Major Cheesman’s pages give us intimate glimpses of the
regime of His Highness Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, Sultan of Najd and its
Dependencies, and now in occupation of the Hejaz and its Holy Places, who at
the present time is such an outstanding figure in the Arab world, and for whom
the intercourse of fifteen eventful years has left me feelings of strong
personal affection for the man and the friend and profound admiration for the
great qualities of self-reliant courage and statesmanship which have
contributed so much to the shaping of his destiny.[lxv]
Elsewhere, Sir Percy Cox declared that he had never known
Ibn Sa’ud make a mistake. Philby
qualified that claim by saying that Ibn Sa’ud had probably made mistakes, but
that they were so few and far between as to be negligible against the
background of his achievement.
In 1924 [1342H.] Philby retired from government
service. He offered his services to King
Ali as an intermediary with Ibn Sa’ud, and arrived in Jeddah towards the end of
the year. However, he fell ill, and
during his illness discovered that Ibn Sa’ud had no intention of negotiating
with the Hashemites, so he returned to London.
Towards the end of 1925 [Jumada ‘l-awwal 1344 H.] he founded a private
company, Sharqieh Limited, with the intention of establishing it in
Jeddah. He obtained permission from King
Ali Ibn Husain to visit Ibn Sa’ud who had arrived in Makkah, and, against
British government wishes, travelled to Shumaisi via Rabigh and ‘Usfan for the
meeting. They discussed events since
their last meeting five years before, and the situation that confronted Ibn
Sa’ud at Jeddah and Madinah. They agreed to meet again after the
occupation of Jeddah. Rather than going
back to Jeddah, Philby went to Port Sudan from Rabigh and stayed there until
his return to Jeddah on 1 January 1926 [Jumada ‘l-thani 1344 H.], and a week later
sent a telegram to The Times giving the first news of Ibn Sa’ud’s being
publicly acclaimed after Friday prayer in the Great Mosque at Makkah as King of
the Hejaz. Until Ibn Sa’ud’s death twenty-seven years later, Philby was to
remain his confidant and friend, who never ceased to speak in support of Ibn
Sa’ud – that ‘majestic, very loveable presence’[lxvi] – and Saudi Arabia’s interests.
It was not until early in 1925 [Shawwal 1343 H.] that the
problems between Iraq and Nejd and Ibn Sa’ud’s advance on the Hejaz convinced
British officials of the need to seek a rapprochement with Ibn Sa’ud, who,
earlier in the year, had suggested that there should he a conference to solve
outstanding problems such as tribal raids and other frontier disputes. Sir Gilbert Clayton, who had recently retired
after thirty years service in Sudan, Egypt and Palestine, was invited to
undertake the mission to Ibn Sa’ud, which took place while the latter was still
investing Jeddah! For three weeks in October 1925 [Rabia ‘l-thani -- Jumada
‘l-awwal 1344 H.] Clayton negotiated with Ibn Sa’ud and his advisers in his
camp near Bahra, where they concluded the Treaty of Bahra in respect of the
Iraq–Nejd frontier and the Treaty of Hadda in respect of the frontier between
Nejd and Transjordan. On his return to
Jeddah Clayton paid a courtesy call on King Ali. He noted that ‘during the afternoon two
planes went out on a bombing flight [on Ibn Sa’ud’s forces]. They have refrained very scrupulously and
honourably from any hostile action during the course of our negotiations.’[lxvii]
Clayton returned to Jeddah on two later occasions. Early in 1927 [1345 H.] he negotiated the
Treaty of Jeddah between Britain and the Kingdom of the Hejaz and Sultanate of
Nejd and its Dependencies, which annulled the old agreement of 1915 [1335 H.].
In May the following year [Dhu 'l-Q'ada 1346 H.] he returned in an unsuccessful
attempt to resolve the tribal problems on the Iraq–Nejd frontier. On that occasion he was accompanied by
Captain J. B. Glubb, who was Frontier Officer in Iraq at the time. In writing about that visit, Glubb (later
Glubb Pasha) said: ‘If Shakespear had survived and remained with Ibn Sa’ud, the
course of history might well have been different, for they entertained a
remarkable regard for one another ... when I was on a mission to Ibn Sa’ud [AD
1928, 1346 H.], I heard him say with emphasis that Captain Shakespear was the
greatest Englishman he had ever known.’[lxviii]
In later recollections of that visit, Glubb Pasha spoke of
the informal meetings with Ibn Sa’ud, who would come on his own every evening
to visit the British in their rooms at the Kandara. He found him ‘a persuasive and inspiring
figure ... There was something very paternal and reassuring in his manner. I
fell under his spell as every one else had done.’[lxix]
This special mission of Clayton was perhaps the last
of its kind, marking a transition from the old custom of emissaries dealing
direct with the ruler to a lengthier process of communication between
governments. In June 1929 (Muharram 1348
H.] Ibn Sa’ud proposed that diplomatic relations should he established through
legations in Jeddah and London, and that all diplomatic communications should
pass through Jeddah. The British
Consulate was upgraded to a Legation, and Sir Andrew Ryan became His Majesty’s
Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary in Jeddah. Sheikh Hafidh Wahba was appointed the envoy
of Ibn Sa’ud in London. Henceforth,
diplomatic relations were mainly conducted in more formal fashion by those two
pioneers and their distinguished successors.
Philby had proposed in his 1919 report that ‘for many years to come, H.
M. Government should make their representation at the Wahhabi court as
unostentatious as is compatible with efficiency,’[lxx] and said that a series of
visits would be more politic than continuous residence. His idea became the practice more because of
Ibn Sa’ud’s wish than as a result of British policy, and, with one exception,
it was another sixty years before continuous residence in Riyadh, the capital,
became possible – and then it was for all diplomatic missions, not just the
British.
Philby’s successor as the only other Englishman ever to
reside as British government representative at Ibn Sa’ud’s court was Colonel
Gerald de Gaury, who had been Political Agent in Kuwait in the 1930s, and who
had accompanied Sir Andrew Ryan, the first British Minister, on his first visit
to Riyadh in November 1935 [Sha’ban 1354 H.]. Although nominally a member of
the Legation staff in Jeddah, he was sent out to Riyadh from London at the
outbreak of war in 1939 [1358 H.] as a liaison officer accredited to Ibn Sa’ud,
and remained there for many months. His
mission, as Shakespear’s had been, was to ensure that Ibn Sa’ud’s attitude to
the war favoured the British. The
situation seems to have reminded Ibn Sa’ud of his early relations with the
British for, in reporting their long discussions, de Gaury wrote that Ibn Sa’ud
himself had said that he ‘had not talked to anyone so much since his talks with
Sir Percy Cox’.[lxxi] Later, de
Gaury reported that he had been living in camp with Ibn Sa’ud, and in the
evenings after hunting had had long talks with the king, which had become less
formal than his formal audiences with him in his palace in Riyadh. In discussing his position in relation to
Britain and her allies, Ibn Sa’ud said many times that he had to think ‘always
and before all’[lxxii] of his religion, the preservation of his
independence unimpaired, the best interests of the Arab people and his own
maslaha [best interests] – an attitude identical with that perceived by
Shakespear a quarter of a century before.
With regard to possible aid to Ibn Sa’ud from Britain, de Gaury wrote:
‘He recently reminded me of Captain Shakespear’s mission to him in the last
war, in order to make the point that he would not receive without giving
something in return: “I gave my word [to Shakespear] and carried it out.”’[lxxiii] Obviously the war reminded Ibn Sa’ud of the earlier
world conflict and of those British emissaries who had then first sought his
alliance.
Since
the days of King ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Faisal al-Sa’ud, when the
number of English, both those resident in the Kingdom and its visitors at any
given time, could hardly be counted in tens, tens of thousands have lived and
worked here. And by their means has Saudi–British friendship flourished during
the hundred years now being celebrated.
So may it ever. Or, in the words of Ibn Sa’ud himself: ‘May
what we have built never fall down, and may there be no differences, as it is
founded on sincerity.’[lxxiv]