Page 115 - Su'udi Relations with Eastern Arabi & Uman (1800-1870)

turned over Suhar and its dependencies to them, but also urged the tribal
chiefs to repudiate the government of Masqat.960 Even so, the movement at
this stage and time had little appeal for the majority of the ‘UmanI tribesmen,
and actually posed no great threat to the government of Masqat.961 Humud
himself made no more attempts to popularize the movement, and retired to
al-Rustaq instead.
Thuwaynl, the regent of Masqat, was nonetheless alarmed; he feared that
the hostility of the Al Bu Sa‘id branch of Suhar and the institution of the
Imamate constituted potential threats to the rulers of Masqat and to the
prestige of the reigning branch of the Al Bu Sa‘Id.962 Acting on behalf of his
father, then in Zanzibar, Thuwaynl decided to eliminate the source of the
trouble. He enticed Humud to a meeting at Shinas under the ostensible pretext
of discussing Humud’s future participation with the shaykh of Abu ZabI
against the Su‘udls in al-Buraymi; instead, however, Thuwaynl seized him and
threw him into prison at Masqat, where he died shortly afterwards in April
1850.963 Hoping that his action would help him in annexing Suhar to Masqat,
Thuwaynl subsequently carried out an unsuccessful attack against the
former.964 The town was defended by Qays b. ‘Azzan, the governor of Rustaq.
Later, with the support of ‘UmanI tribes in the interior, Qays b. 'Azzan
captured Shinas and other coastal towns and distributed them among his
allies.965
Nonetheless, the government of Masqat continued its efforts to incorporate
Suhar, and Sa‘Id b. Sultan himself led an expedition against Qays b. ‘Azzan in
the following year. Sa‘Ia first attacked and regained control over Shinas, and
then continued by surrounding Suhar. Finding himself encircled by powerful
enemy troops, Qays made a settlement with Sa‘Id b. Sultan. The outcome was
that Suhar would be transferred to the government of Masqat, and Qays would
retire to the interior of‘Uman to control Rustaq and Hibi, receiving $MT 200
as a monthly subsidy from Masqat.966
During this time, although no hostilities were directed toward the Su‘udls
and their allies in ‘Uman, the government of Masqat does not seem to have
been fulfilling the financial obligation that had been claimed by the Su‘udi
state since the late 1840s. On account of the deterioration of the Su‘udl
position in the area, the government of Masqat apparently found it possible to
stop payment of the zakah.
In 1852-3, however, political circumstances improved for the Su‘udls; they
were now able to restore their influence in various parts of ‘Uman and
reconsider their relations with Masqat. ‘Abd Allah, the son and heir-apparent
of Amir Faysal, arrived in al-Buraymi announcing that he had come “in the
character of arbiter and redresser of wrongs suffered by his children (the
shaikhs) in ’Oman”,967 and consequently strengthened the Su‘udl position in
the area. As soon as he arrived, ‘Abd Allah had at his audience the shaykhs of
the coast of ‘Uman and the chiefs of al-Buraymi, leaders who eventually
reaffirmed their allegiance to the Su‘udl state.
After having established a strong base, ‘Abd Allah turned to the affairs of
Masqat. In an attempt to force the government of Masqat to revise its policy
toward the Su‘udis, resume the payment of zakah, and remit the arrears of
previous years, ‘Abd Allah presented Thuwaynl, the regent of Masqat, with a
set of ultimate demands. The latter was required to immediately return Suhar
to its legitimate chief, Qays b. ‘Azzan, to deliver the arrears of zakah, and to

111