'Report on Najd Mission 1917-1918' [‎8v] (16/60)

12
It is unnecessary here to follow the varying fortunes of the struggle,,
wliich ended as already indicated, though not before Saud had succeeded in
wresting the crown from Abdulla to enjoy it for a brief space—a circumstance
of capital importance in the politics of Najd, in that on this temporary occu
pation of the throne by their ancestor not less than on the fact that the line
of Saud is the senior surviving branch of the dynasty—Abdulla having died
childless—the descendants of Saud base a claim to be the rightful rulers of
Najd, a claim, which lias been actually asserted by open but unsuccessful
rebellion against the present ruler on more than one occasion.
The pretenders have invariably been those members of the Saud branch,
who boast unbroken Ajman descent on the mother's side,—a fact, which
enables them to count on the loyal support of this vigorous and warlike tribe
in every venture upon which they embark against the present ruling branch,
whose title to rule rests on the merit of having recovered its ancestral dominions
from the foreign usurper rather than on seniority of descent, Abdul Rahman,
the father of the present ruler, being the fouth of Faisal's sons.
The most serious attempt of the pretending line to recover the throne
occurred about the year 1910, when Ibn Saud, surrounded by enemies, dealt
with a delicate situation in masterly style. He was, needless to say, engaged
at the time in war with Ibn E ash id, who successfully invited the co-operation
of the Sharif of Mecca. The latter advanced into the hills round Quai and,
surprising a small Wahhabi force under Saud, brother of Ibn Saud, had him
a prisoner before the latter could come to the rescue. Ibn Rashid simultane
ously threatened the Qasim on the north and news soon arrived that the
southern districts had declared for the Araif* pretenders, who had thought
the moment opportune for a bold stroke.
At a disadvantage with the Sharif owing to the fact that the latter held
his favourite brother, Saad, a prisoner, Ibn Saud consented to the unfavourable
terms and, obtaining the release of his brother, marched oft to meet Ibn
Eashid. Here again negotiations, resulting in a truce, relieved Ibn Saud of
all immediate danger and set him free for a brief campaign in the southern
districts, in the course of which he defeated the pretenders and wreaked a
terrible vengeance on the towns, which had helped them.
Again at the beginning of 1915, when Ibn Saud, accompanied by Captain
Shakespear and acting as our ally, met Ibn Eashid at the battle of Jarrab, it
was, according to his account, entirely or largely due to the treacherous deser
tion of the Ajman contingent at a moment, when their continued support would
in all probability have given him a decisive victory, that he had to be content
with a drawn battle, in which the honours undoubtedly rested with Ibn
Eashid, though he was unable to take any practical advantage of them.
This brings us to the final act in the Ajman tragedy, which was played
in 1916 in the Hasa, whither Ibn Saud led his forces to avenge himself on the
tribe for its perfidious desertion of him at Jarrab and other hostile acts. The
Ajman, finding themselves outnumbered, sued for an armistice, to which Ibn
Saud, generously enough, agreed on the condition that the contending parties
should meet on the morrow to consider arrangements for a permanent peace.
Ibn Saud's brother, Saad, was absent when the armistice was agreed to and, on
his return the same evening, found to his mortification that Jiostilities had
be-n suspended. Furious at the lenience of his brother he propounded a
scheme for a sudden attack on the unsuspecting tribesmen and Ibn Saud in a
weak moment yielded to his vehement pressure.
The Ajman, surprised and outnumbered, fought like wild beasts at bay
and not only were Ibn Saud's best troops worsted in the encounter but Saad
was counted among the dead and Ibn Saud himself was wounded, while the
victorious tribesmen lost no time in seeking refuge within the borders of Kuwait
territory from the vengeance, which was sure to pursue them.
Hinc illae lachrymae ! but there can be no doubt that the Ajman, who had
appeared up to the last act as the villains of the play, had right on their side
in the final denouement and that Saad, by his advocacy of a shameless act of
treachery, richly deserved the fate which overtook him.
Nevertheless Ibn Saud can scarcely be expected to accept the last arbitra
ment of iortune as final nor has he any intention of doing so, if one may judge
from Ihe way in which, on anything like a public occasion, he parades the
orphaned children of his favourite brother before the public gaze and delivers
himself of stirring homilies on the necessity of avenging the wrong done not
onl} to them and himself, but to the honour of his house,—ignoring, with
that feminine want of logic so characteristic of the Badawin Arab, the cardi
nal consideration that the whole responsibility for the tragedv rests on nobodv
but himself. /
Ihe descendants of Saud Ibn Faisal are known by this nickname owing to the fact
that after the battle of Raudhat al Muhanna (1908), in which Abdul Aziz Ibn Rashid was
defeated and killed by Ibn Saud, the exiled scions of that line were found among the booty
captured in the abandoned camp. The term Arifa or Arafa is commonly used to designate
livestock, especially camels, lost to and recaptured from an enemy.