File 600/1905 Pt 1 'Aden Hinterland: Treaty with Dthala' [‎452v] (166/174)

8
2. The Haushabi border may be divided by natural features and tribally into tw "
sections* (\) from J. Mimtar, where the Amiri boundary ends, to Basesa, on the Amatna
mn-e thence across the Ad-Dareja Valley to Ras Namis, just under Jalisa, on the spur of
I-ibal Jarban * and (2) from Ras Namis across the comparatively open ground to a point,
on the south-east slopes of J. Nabi Shaib, called J. Muharraka, where, according to the
Haushabi contention, their border ends and the Subaihi border he^ins^
3 From J. Mimtar to Ras Namis the inhabitants on the British side are pure
Haushabi while from Ras Namis to J. Muharraka they belong to the Haushabi sub-tribe
of ’ Amri ? who, though originally tribally distinct from the Haushabi, have for a long
time back been merged in the latter, and acknowledged the jurisdiction of their Sultan,
paving him the tithes and other dues. r /i\ tt *
' On the Turkish side of the Haushabi border are the tribe ot (1) Humar, from
J Mimtar to the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Warazan and included administratively in the canton of Kama’ira;
(21 the tribe of Badu, from the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Warazan to Dar Wetid and S. Lassab; (3) the
tribe of Yusufiyin from S. Lassab to Nijd Baru, or the col between J. Kurra and J. Nabi
Shaib; and (4) the tribe of Kubati, whose territory extends from Nijd Baru to
j Muharraka and thence along the Subaihi border to Al Ja’ama in the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Sihr.
4. The actual interference of the Turks, or the tribes under their influence, along
the ’Amri portion ot the Haushabi border have been, relatively speaking, insignificant,
and it is in the valley north of Ad-Dareja that Muhammad Nasir Mukbil, during recent
years and subsequent to his appointment by Hussein Hilmi Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. (ex-Wali of Yaman and
now Chief Inspector of Reforms in European Turkey) as Mudir of the nahia, or canton,
of Kama’ira, began the series of encroachments that led up to the incident of July 1901,
and, in fact, to the present work of demarcation.
5. Muhammad Nasir Mukbil had pushed the Turkish border well down into the
Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Fakir and to the village of Ad-Dareja, while, as appears from the Commission
diary of the 21st December, the territory claimed by him extended to the junction of the
Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Ziyak and the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Warazan. Certain Turkish claims at Kudash, the building of
the tower at Nijd Musamma, the fact that Turkish access to the Yusufiyin and Kubati
country lay through the W adi Hawemi and Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Hidaba in Amri territory, a route which
has been actually used by Turkish troops in the past, the evidently inspired claim to
the Juhaili country and the Madraja Pass from Haushabi into subaihi tenitoiy (vide
Commission diary entries of the 2nd February and the 3rd February), combined with
certain verbal statements of the natives, pointed to the existence of the intention ot
Muhammad Nasir Mukbil to gradually absorb the’Amri portion ot Haushabi territory,
comprised within a line drawn from the junction of the Wadis Ziyak and Warazan to
Minjara and from Muharraka along the now 7 recognized Haushabi boundary to Ras
l
Namis. .
The Ad-Dareja incident thwarted this plan ; but if the lurks had been successful in
absorbing the ’Amri country they would, no doubt, have claimed it on the ground that
the ’Amvi were distinct from the Haushabi. Undoubtedly the present Haushabi Sultans
regime, commented on in the Commissioner’s diary of the 17th, 22nd, and 28th January,
and the 17th February, 1904, was not of a nature to win the sympathy of his subjects and
counteract Turkish designs, while their Agent, Muhammad Nasir Mukbii, took fu i
advantage of such state of things.
6. His policy was to use intrigue, threats, and force to compel the people to accep
“ the sway of the Khalifa Abdul Hamid,” and he secerns to have met with a certain
success, as is clear from the translations of documents attached to this Report. ie
latter shows that some time back the authority of the Haushabi Sultans extended up to
the crest of the Amama and Jarban range, immediately south of the village oi^ Mavia.
This fact is also borne out by the investigations on the spot between 1877 and 1880 or ie
Italian explorer, Manzoni, who, from information compiled from Turkish sources, showe
the Turkish boundary as passing just south of Mavia. (Vide Map of Yaman, publishe hi
1885 by the “Institute Cartografico Italiano,” Rome; as also Map B, accompanying
Commission’s letter of the 25th May, 1903.) ,
7. On the arrival of the Commission at Ad-Dareja, on the 25th December las , ®
villagers on the south of the Amama-Jarban range began to evidence a desire to
included in the British Protectorate, basing their claim on their old tributary relations o
the Haushabi Sultans. They seemed, however, to be actuated more by the wish a
escape from Turkish rule than to come under that of the present Haushabi bulta •
They number in all about 1,000 souls, and fall under the grouping of th ® ' Va) '
villagers, inhabiting the southern slopes of J. Amama as far as Shabwa, and the Shame ,
Hanba (tribally knowm as Shijri) and Daba villagers on the south-eastern s rn
J. Jarban. Though formerly closely allied to the Haushabi, they are tribally distinc i