Page 136 - Su'udi Relations with Eastern Arabi & Uman (1800-1870)

and political achievement, enabling them to bring their principles of reform
more clearly into action in the holiest places of Islam before pilgrims from all
over the Muslim world. In so doing, they dispelled the arguments of their
opponents, who accused the Su‘udl-Wahhabi practices of contradicting the
mainstream of Sunni Islam, and also enhanced the dissemination of their views
into distant countries. Ironically, however, it was the conquest of Makkah and
al-Madinah that led to the downfall of the Su‘udl state. In establishing their
own authority, applying strict religious rules, and denouncing and eradicating
Turkish administrative, political, and religious traditions and practices in
al-Hijaz, the Su‘udls showed contempt for the Ottoman-Turkish government
and defiance toward the Ottoman Sultan and their custody of the Two Holy
Places. Furthermore, they eliminated the name of the Sultan from Friday
sermons, thus implying a denial of his political and religious authority over
those parts of the Muslim world. Indignant over such behaviour and
humiliated by the loss of Makkah and al-Madinah, the Sultan declared the
Su‘udls to be Kharijites and authorized a series of military expeditions against
them. Commanded by Muhammad ‘All Pasha and his sons, these expeditions
recovered al-Hijaz, penetrated into Najd, and finally made a successful assault
on al-Dir‘Iyah, putting an end to the Su‘udl rule in al-Hijaz and temporarily
eclipsing their dynasty in central Arabia.
The Su‘udl state was revived a few years later by Turk! b. ‘Abd Allah Al
Su‘ud, who expelled the remaining Egyptian garrisons, established his own
rule over Najd and al-Hasa, resumed relations with certain areas in eastern
Arabia, and recovered Su‘udl influence there. Turkl’s son Faysal preserved the
continuity of Su‘udl rule and maintained the integrity of his father’s domain.
Faysal’s long reign, however, was followed by estrangement and quarrels
between his two sons, ‘Abd Allah, the legitimate ruler, and Su‘ud, who aspired
to the throne. The quarrels developed into armed confrontations which
divided the house and the country, invited outside intervention, and gradually
led to the end of Su‘udl rule in Najd.
Su‘udl relations with eastern Arabia and ‘Uman and their expansion in those
territories were precipitated by various factors. The religious motivation
attached to the Su‘udl state since its inception played a major role in their
subsequent development and expansion in Najd and elsewhere. Convinced of
the universality of their reforms, the Su‘udl-Wahhabl leaders and followers
recognized no geographical boundaries or political divisions within the
peninsula. They resolved to enforce their views by totally subjugating certain
districts, or else by winning local chiefs to their side and enforcing the reform
practices through them. The acknowledgement of Su‘udl supremacy by local
rulers or tribal chiefs in eastern Arabia and ‘Uman entitled the Su‘udls to levy
zakah, take shares of spoils, and collect fines. In this way, the Su‘udl state
derived an income and the public treasury was increased. In securing their
positions in these regions, the Su‘udls were occasionally able to employ the
naval power of the maritime principalities against opposing elements or states
in the area, thus strengthening their prestige.
Both the amirs of al-Dir‘Iyah and their successors in al-Riyad followed the
same policy and employed a similar approach with varying degrees of success
in their relations with eastern Arabia and ‘Uman. In both periods, the Su‘udl
rulers put great emphasis on religion and regarded themselves as the supreme
temporal and religious authorities, who must be acknowledged by the chiefs

130

I