[27] The Ascent and Decline of The Ottoman Empire: [Emergence of The First Saudi State]

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sultan Mahmud II [1223 – 1255 AH /1808 – 1839 CE]

He ascended to the throne at the age of twenty-four and gained valuable insights during his house arrest with Salim III, who acquainted him with various reform initiatives. Initially, he was forced to acquiesce to the demands of the Janissaries, resulting in the annulment of all reforms to placate them until a more favourable time for their execution.. He demonstrated patience, biding his time to free himself from the Janissaries, who represented a considerable threat to the Ottoman state. Regrettably, this opportunity eluded him for several years, particularly as his reign was characterised by wars and significant events that consumed much of his energy and resources.

The War With Russia

A peace treaty was concluded with England in 1224 AH / 1809 CE, and efforts were made to forge a similar agreement with Russia; however, these attempts were unsuccessful, culminating in a conflict between the two nations. The Ottomans suffered defeat, resulting in the Russians seizing several strategic positions. As a consequence, Grand Vizier Dhiya Yusuf Pasha was dismissed and succeeded by Ahmad Pasha, who successfully repelled the Russians and reclaimed the occupied territories. Concurrently, relations between France and Russia soured, edging them toward war. In light of this, Russia sought to establish peace with the Ottoman Empire, leading to the signing of the Treaty of Bucharest in 1237 AH / 1812 AD. This treaty ensured that Wallachia, Moldavia, and Serbia would remain under Ottoman sovereignty. The resulting peace enabled Sultan Mahmud to pursue various reforms and address the revolts and insurrections occurring within the empire. Upon learning of the Treaty of Bucharest and their reestablished subjugation to the Ottoman Empire, the Serbians launched a rebellion. Nevertheless, the Ottoman military quelled the uprising with considerable force, leading the movement’s leaders to seek refuge in Austria. Among these leaders, Theodore Futch exhibited allegiance to the Ottomans and accepted their dominion, which resulted in him being granted special privileges by the state.

The Abolition of the Janissaries: The Janissaries experienced a decline in their character, their ethical standards shifted, and their original mission was altered, ultimately rendering them a source of disaster for the state and its subjects. They began to meddle in governmental affairs, driven by an insatiable desire for power, engaging in indulgent and illicit behaviours. They were forced to march through the harsh winter, imposed with royal tributes, and gravitated towards looting and pillaging during their military campaigns. They strayed from the foundational purpose of their establishment, succumbing to excessive alcohol consumption. Their actions led to military defeats, as they neglected religious laws, doctrines, and principles, distancing themselves from the true elements of success. They played a pivotal role in the deposition and assassination of sultans, including Uthman II. Throughout the reign of Sultan Murad IV, they persisted for a decade in their misguided ways, deeply entrenched in their oppressive rule. They were instrumental in his ascension to the throne, thereby seizing control over governance. They also suffocated Sultan Ibrahim I when he sought to liberate himself from their dominance. Their conduct plunged the state into disorder, as they eliminated sultans and placed their young heirs, such as Sultan Mehmed IV, on the throne. This chaos enabled foreign powers to seize portions of the territory, prompting the Grand Vizier and scholars to step in and remove him from power.

During the reign of Sultan Salim II, the Janissaries revolted, leading to enemy forces invading and occupying parts of the state. The Janissaries deposed several sultans, including Mustafa II, Ahmed III, and Mustafa IV, until Allah granted Sultan Mahmud II the opportunity to rid the state of their influence in the year 1241 AH. The Sultan summoned a meeting of the state’s dignitaries and high-ranking Janissary officials at the residence of the Grand Mufti. During this gathering, Grand Vizier Salim Ahmad Pasha articulated the diminished and disreputable condition of the Janissaries, while stressing the urgent need for modern military reforms. His persuasive discourse resonated with the attendees, leading the Mufti to issue a fatwa that authorised measures against the insurgents. While the Janissary officers publicly voiced their concurrence, they privately nurtured dissent. Recognising the impending threat to their privileges and the possible restriction of their activities, they began to strategise a rebellion, seeking support from segments of the general populace.

On the 8th of Dhu al-Qi’dah in the year 1241 AH, a faction of the Janissaries initiated harassment against the soldiers during their training sessions, which soon escalated into a full-scale rebellion. In response, the Sultan summoned the scholars to discuss the situation, who urged him to take decisive action against the uprising. Consequently, he ordered the artillery to prepare for engagement, balancing a conciliatory stance with concerns over the potential intensification of the rebels’ hostility. On the morning of the 9th of Dhu al-Qi’dah, the Sultan proceeded with the artillery units in tow, accompanied by scholars and students, towards the At Meydani square, where the insurgents had congregated to foment disorder.

The artillery encircled the battlefield and seized the elevated positions, targeting the Janissaries with their shells. In a desperate attempt to charge the cannons, the Janissaries encountered a relentless barrage that compelled them to take refuge in their barracks to avoid certain death. However, these shelters were set ablaze and ultimately collapsed upon them, including the Bektashi lodges, resulting in their defeat. The following day, a royal edict was issued to eliminate their ranks, uniforms, terminology, and name from the state. Those who survived and fled to the provinces faced either execution or exile. Consequently, Hussain Pasha, who was instrumental in their destruction, was appointed as the Commander-in-Chief (Serasker), signaling the onset of a new military system.

Sultan Mahmud subsequently acquired the autonomy to enhance his military forces, aligning with the principles of Western military. He replaced the traditional fez with the turban and adopted European clothing, mandating this style as the official uniform for all military and civilian state personnel. Additionally, he instituted an order known as the Order of Distinction, becoming the first Ottoman sultan to do so. The measures implemented by Sultan Mahmud, including the replacement of the fez with the turban and the enforcement of European attire among military ranks, signify his deep sense of psychological defeat. We will examine the underlying reasons for this, InShaAllah.

Muhammad Ali Pasha, the Governor of Egypt:

Muhammad Ali was a figure known for his infamous reputation, characterised by his brutality and stern disposition. The Ottoman Empire sent him to enforce discipline in villages that were slow to fulfill their financial responsibilities. He would establish his camp with his punitive troops around the village, partaking in acts of plunder, theft, and instilling terror among the defenseless inhabitants. As a result, the villagers frequently determined that it was more advantageous to pay the required amounts, despite the considerable strain it placed on them. His fixation on opulence approached the realm of insanity. He entered Egypt leading a group of Rumelians with the objective of driving out the French troops. Utilizing his astuteness and strategic thinking, he successfully earned the confidence of the Egyptian scholars. He resorted to underhanded and deceptive tactics to remove his competitors for the governorship of Egypt, ultimately achieving the title of Wali on the 20th of Rabi’ al-Awwal in the year 1220 AH, corresponding to June 18, 1805 CE.

Muhammad Ali showed strong eagerness to act as a devoted servant to the Sultan, frequently articulating sentiments of submission and respect towards both the Sultan and his rulership. Nevertheless, the Sultan began to grasp the potential consequences of these declarations, which raised his concerns about this new governor. As a result, he commanded Muhammad Ali’s transfer from the governorship of Egypt. However, the intervention of scholars prompted the Sultan to issue a subsequent decree reaffirming Muhammad Ali’s authority in Egypt on the 24th of Sha’ban in the year 1221 AH, which corresponds to November 6, 1806 CE. He began to strengthen his personal position and consolidate the authority within his own lineage. This raises numerous questions that require answers, such as: What was the true nature of Mohamad Ali’s role in serving French and British interests? Who was responsible for the downfall of the First Saudi State and the annexation of the Levant to Egypt? These are inquiries we seek to address through a thorough historical study.

The historian Abdur Rahman Al-Jabarti describes Muhammad Ali: Al-Jabarti described Muhammad Ali “as a deceitful individual, characterised by dishonesty and false oaths. He is depicted as unjust, devoid of integrity and accountability, and filled with malice, all while exercising oppression and tyranny under the guise of promising justice. Consequently, some have likened Muhammad Ali to Machiavelli or suggested that he was influenced by Machiavellian principles, which assert that the ends justify the means”. He was intent on enhancing his image in the eyes of the West and followed their lead in modernisation, even claiming to think with a “European mind while wearing the Ottoman cap.” On behalf of France, Britain, Russia, Austria, and other European nations, Muhammad Ali dealt significant blows to the Islamic direction in Egypt, the Arabian Peninsula, the Levant, and the Ottoman Caliphate. These actions contributed to the preparation of the Islamic world for Western ambitions. After consolidating his power, he surrounded himself with a cadre of advisors, including Greek and Armenian Christians, as well as scribes from the Copts and Jews. He also recruited Mamluks to serve as governors of the provinces. Al-Jabarti described this situation by stating, “He opened his doors to the Christians from the Greeks and Armenians, allowing them to take the lead, while the lower classes were elevated. He had a penchant for control and dominance, showing little tolerance for opposition.” He confiscated land from farmers, imposed a tax known as the “shakra,” or an alternative tax. He significantly increased the prices of essential goods, imposed unbearable taxes, and monopolised all economic activities. This led to widespread resentment among the people.

The implementation of this policy resulted in a profound animosity among the peasants towards him and his associates, leading many to abandon their agricultural lands and flee their villages in response to the oppressive measures. Consequently, there was a notable reluctance to enlist in his army, with reports indicating that in the year 1831 alone, approximately six thousand peasants had escaped. In urban areas, particularly in Cairo, al-Jabarti notes that when Muhammad Ali tasked the populace with the reconstruction of the city, ten vices emerged among the people. These included sorcery, exploitation, labour costs, humiliation, degradation, the tearing of garments, monetary demands, the gloating of enemies, disruption of their livelihoods, and the fees for public baths. Al-Jabarti was a contemporary of the oppressive policies enacted by Muhammad Ali against the Muslim population in Egypt, who suffered the loss of their rights and resources. He opened the doors wide for European traders to enter Egypt and dominate its economy, transforming the country into a farm that supplied European markets with agricultural products. This led to a significant cultural and commercial connection between Egypt and Europe. The emerging merchant class in Egypt became economically and politically dependent on European markets, while proponents of European culture gained control over intellectual life, effectively stifling advocates of Islamic ideals. This shift was further exacerbated by the cessation of religious-based educational curricula, a move aligned with Napoleon’s Masonic policies. This situation was corroborated by the English historian Arnold Toynbee, who stated that Muhammad Ali was a dictator capable of turning Napoleonic ideas into effective realities in Egypt. European colonialism achieved its objective of exploiting the facilities and material reforms instituted by Muhammad Ali. Meanwhile, the Muslim population of Egypt was engulfed in despair, paying a heavy price that far exceeded the extent of any reforms, namely the destruction of its cultural identity shaped by Islam, which had distinguished its role throughout the Islamic eras. The call for nationalism and patriotism was initiated, while simultaneously imposing restrictions on advocates of Islam among scholars. This approach aligned with efforts aimed at achieving independence for Egypt, thereby distancing it from the ties to the Islamic Caliphate. This direction received support from Masonic lodges, which viewed this movement as integral to their objectives.

Salafi Call By (Imam) Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, masy Allah have mercy upon him:

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab Ibn Sulayman Ibn Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Rashid al-Tamimi was born in the year 1115 AH / 1703 CE in the town of Al-Uyaynah, located approximately seventy kilometers north of Riyadh, or roughly that distance to the west. He grew up with a passion for knowledge, pursuing it from a young age, and exhibited remarkable talent and distinction. He memorised the Quran and studied Hanbali Fiqh, Tafsir and the science of hadith. He was greatly influenced by the works of (Shaikh Al-Islam) Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, in jurisprudence, creed, and opinions, and he held them in high regard. Additionally, he was inspired by the writings of (Imam) Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn Urawah al-Hanbali, and other prominent figures from this Salafi fountain. In his quest for knowledge, he traveled to Makkah, Madina, Basra, and Al-Ahsa, where he faced numerous trials when he openly expressed his views in Iraq, before eventually returning to Najd. Upon his return to Huraymilah in Najd, he commenced his mission by promoting virtue and prohibiting vice, engaging in scholarly pursuits, education, and advocating for the pure creed of Islamic monotheism. He cautioned against polytheism, its dangers, and its various forms. He faced an assassination attempt from certain individuals in Huraymilah. Subsequently, he moved to his hometown of Al-Uyaynah, where the local ruler welcomed him and encouraged his efforts in the call to faith. He established Islamic law, enforced legal penalties, and dismantled shrines. His stay in Huraymilah was brief due to pressure from the Amir of Al-Ahsa on the Amir of Huraymilah to eliminate Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, prompting him to leave on foot to Al-Dariyah.

The alliance with Muhammad Bin Saud: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab successfully formed an alliance with Prince Muhammad bin Saud, who utilised his wealth and resources to support the call for monotheism. This partnership was established on solid foundations, enabling the Shaikh to continue his mission through education, correspondence, and preaching. He diligently taught, wrote letters, and fortified his arguments with evidence and reasoning to substantiate his claims. His efforts included advocating for the eradication of wrongdoing, the dismantling of grave structures, the prevention of idolatry, and the affirmation of servitude to Allah alone. The call remained peaceful and measured, gently reaching out to hearts and inviting people to the path of Allah with wisdom and good counsel. He continued to educate those who attended his lessons, clarifying his beliefs and explaining the principles of his call to all, regardless of their background. However, he recognised that gentleness was often met with harshness, truth with falsehood, and good counsel with conspiracies.

Consequently, it became necessary to enter a phase of Jihad and to confront wrongdoing with strength. The Shaikh, with the assistance of Prince Muhammad bin Saud, began to prepare the necessary resources, including men and weapons, to mobilise the fighters from Diriyah beyond its borders. The aim was to spread the call and solidify its foundations both within the island and beyond. The Shaikh personally oversaw the training of the men, the organisation of the armies, and the dispatch of smaller units, all while continuing his studies, teaching, corresponding with the people, and receiving and bidding farewell to guests. Allah granted him knowledge, prestige, dignity, and authority after a prolonged struggle. He possessed keen political insight and extensive experience in matters of war and governance.

The conflicts between the supporters of the call and their adversaries persisted for many years, with the proponents of the call often emerging victorious. Villages fell one after another. In the year 1178 AH / 1773 CE, Riyadh was captured under the leadership of Prince Abdul Aziz Muhammad bin Saud, while its previous ruler, Dhahham bin Dawwas, fled. Dhahham was a tyrannical ruler who repeatedly oppressed the callers to Tawhid and violated the agreements he had made with those leading the call. Following the conquest of Riyadh, the territory under the influence of the call expanded significantly, and many people willingly accepted the call to Tawhid. The obstacles that had previously hindered their acceptance were removed, leading to a period of relief after hardship, with prosperity following adversity. Wealth increased, conditions improved, and the people found security under the nascent Islamic state, which had deprived them of the blessing of safety during its absence.

Following the death of Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, the call ontinued, receiving strong support from the Al Saud family, who wielded significant authority. They shifted their focus to the Hijaz region, which was under the control of Sharif Ghalib bin Musaid. The Sharif initiated military and religious attacks against the Saudis. This conflict persisted until the year 1803, when the Saudis entered Makkah without facing any resistance from Sharif Ghalib, who chose to flee to Jeddah. Two years later, the Saudis captured Madina. The influence of the Salafi call extended across much of the Arabian Peninsula, prompting Britain to recognise the threat this posed to its interests. The First Saudi State established its dominance over the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea, bringing the Qawasim in the Arabian Gulf under its control. Its influence reached into southern Iraq, affecting the overland route between Europe and the East. Moreover, the religious foundations upon which this state was built made it impossible for Britain to manipulate or negotiate agreements with it, as opposition to foreign influence in the region was one of the primary objectives of this state. The Qawasim, supported by Saudi strength, were able to deliver significant blows to the English fleet in 1806, resulting in their control over the waters of the Gulf. During the reign of Saud bin Abdul Aziz, the state reached its political zenith, extending its influence to Karbala in Iraq and Hauran in the Levant, with the entire Arabian Peninsula coming under its authority, except for Yemen.

Conspiracies Against The Salafi Call: The malevolent minds among the European descendants contemplated the consequences of the continued existence of the First Saudi State. They recognised that its persistence would undermine their interests in the East as a whole. Consequently, they deemed it essential to dismantle this state, employing various insidious methods to eradicate the influence of the Salafi call, including:

First: There was a concerted effort to sway public opinion within the Islamic state against the teachings of Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. Those who adhered to Bidah and superstitions, mistakenly believing them to be integral to Islam, actively opposed the Shaikh’s call. This resistance was not limited to a single faction or group; rather, it emerged from various quarters and individuals. It was particularly pronounced among scholars who relied on the influence granted to them by the general populace and the uneducated, seeking to preserve their practices rooted in Bidah and superstitions, which they erroneously considered part of the faith. These individuals included caretakers of graves and those who profited from offerings, as well as those who thrived on the food and funds provided during commemorations of the deceased. They also believed that Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab introduced a new religion that contradicted their established customs. This opposition was widespread throughout the Ottoman Empire and across the entire Islamic world, exacerbated by the dissemination of fatwas issued by corrupt scholars, which were propagated by the English and French, adversaries of Islam, to discredit the teachings of Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab.

Secondly: There was a campaign of intrigue and discord between the call of Shaikh and the leadership of the Ottoman Empire. The British, French, and others instilled in Sultan Mahmud II the belief that Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s movement aimed for the independence of the Arabian Peninsula, a separation from the Ottoman Caliphate, the unification of the Arab world, the seizure of the banner of the caliphate, and the establishment of an Arab caliphate. Sultan Mahmud II succumbed to the malicious whispers of his adversaries, a course of action that was unwarranted. It would have been more prudent for him to question this deceitful counsel and to dispatch trustworthy officials to investigate the matter. The Sultan of the Muslims failed to recognise the peril of believing this fabricated news regarding a genuine Islamic call and acquiesced to the enemies’ suggestions to eliminate it before it could gain strength, resulting in significant expenditures of both resources and manpower to suppress it.

The Ottoman Empire devised a strategy to combat the First Saudi State, intending to delegate this responsibility to the governors of neighboring regions. This approach aimed to achieve two objectives: first, to eliminate Saudi expansion in the Arab East, and second, to weaken these governors and deplete their resources, ensuring their continued subservience to the Empire. Initially, the focus was on the governor of Baghdad, as he was the closest to Najd. However, this governor was preoccupied with local disturbances in his province, and his military forces were too weak to confront the Saudis effectively. He faced multiple failures in repelling their incursions along the Iraqi borders. Consequently, the Empire turned to the governor of Syria, hoping he would succeed where the governor of Iraq had failed, but his outcome was even more disastrous. After losing faith in the capabilities of the governors in Baghdad and Syria, the Empire directed its attention to Egypt, requesting Governor Muhammad Ali in 1807 to launch a campaign against the Arabian territories to reclaim the holy sites from Saudi control and restore the Empire’s authority, which was waning in the Arabian Peninsula. However, Muhammad Ali did not respond to the Empire’s request until 1811, after he had dealt with the Mamluk beys in the Citadel massacre.

The followers of the Salafi call did not seek the caliphate, nor did they express any objections to its authority. However, the disagreement was confined to two main issues. The first was the Salafis’ insistence on the necessity for pilgrims to adhere to the principles of Islam and to refrain from any actions that would contravene them. The second issue was the Ottoman Empire’s sense of embarrassment and vulnerability in light of the control over the holy cities in Hijaz by the helpers of Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, as they recognized that this situation undermined their prestige and political standing. Al-Jabarti indicated that the stance of the helpers of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab regarding the pilgrims from the Levant was that they should only come under the conditions they imposed, which included arriving without the palanquins, drums, flutes, weapons, or any other items that contradicted Islamic law. Upon hearing this, the pilgrims returned without performing the pilgrimage and did not abandon their objectionable practices. He also noted a similar position regarding the Egyptian pilgrimage procession.

The decree issued by the Ottoman Sultan, which called for war against the Saudis at the behest of Muhammad Ali and influenced by the letters from the Sharif of Jeddah, as well as encouragement from the British, was limited to the objectives of reclaiming the sacred cities. This request was reiterated, focusing solely on the liberation of the sacred sites. Following the military’s successful conquest of the Hijaz, after enduring several defeats against the followers of Shaikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, Sultan Mahmud II sent a decree to Egypt to be read in mosques, announcing the restoration of the sacred cities. This indicates that the Ottoman Sultan’s primary aim was the reestablishment of Ottoman sovereignty over the Hijaz.

The war could have concluded at this point, as Muhammad Ali’s forces had taken control of the cities in Hijaz. Muhammad Ali appointed a new Sharif for the region, who was compelled to travel there and subsequently expelled Sharif Ghalib, who had supported his forces and facilitated their entry into Hijaz. Additionally, the leaders of the Saudi Salafi call proposed a peace agreement; however, Muhammad Ali imposed conditions that were exceedingly difficult to fulfill for the acceptance of peace. In his response to the peace request, he included a threat, as narrated by al-Jabarti, stating: “As for the peace, we do not reject it under conditions that require us to be reimbursed for all expenses incurred for the troops from the beginning of the war until this date, and to return all that was taken and received from the treasures and supplies that were in the sacred chamber, as well as the value of what was consumed. After that, he must come and meet with me, and we will formalise our peace agreement. If he refuses to do so and does not come, we will proceed to him.”

The Reality of Muhammad Ali’s Campaign in Hijaz and Najd: The conflict between Muhammad Ali and the followers of Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was not a war between two forces both adhering to Islam, nor was it an Arab war, as some may describe it. Rather, this conflict represented a struggle between a Saudi Islamic force, which had no political ambitions but demonstrated a fervent commitment to returning to the fundamental principles of Islam, and an opposing force sent by the governor of Egypt. This opposing force was not Egyptian in nature; it primarily consisted of Albanians, some Turks, Christians, and a few French officers. Most of its leaders bore only the name of Islam. The historian al-Jabarti illustrates the nature of this force through the account of a pious and devout observer, who witnessed the initial defeat of these troops at the hands of the followers of the Salafi call: “The question of our victory arises, especially when many of our soldiers do not adhere to our faith. Among them are those who do not practice any religion or follow our creed. They are accompanied by containers of alcohol, and there is no call to prayer in our midst, nor are the obligatory prayers performed. The faithful gather in orderly lines behind a single Imam, demonstrating humility and reverence. When the time for prayer arrives, even amidst the chaos of battle, the Mu’adh-dhin calls for prayer, and they perform the prayer of fear. One group advances to engage in combat while another remains behind to pray. Our troops are astonished by this practice, having neither heard of it nor witnessed it before. They call out in their camp, urging one another to confront the polytheists, those who shave their beards, indulge in fornication and sodomy, and consume alcohol. Upon examining many of the fallen soldiers, they discovered that they were uncircumcised. When they reached Badr and took control of it, along with the surrounding villages and territories inhabited by the best of people and learned individuals, they plundered them, seizing their women, daughters, and children, as well as their books”.

Muhammad Ali did not adhere to the Shariah in his warfare; rather, he acted in opposition to divine commandments, transgressing the boundaries set by the Almighty and showing disregard for Islamic rulings. His army engaged in killing, destruction, plundering, and violating the rights of the monotheistic Muslims. In the Battle of the Camel, Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, instructed his companions: “Do not pursue a commander, nor finish off the wounded, and whoever lays down his weapon is safe.” He also cautioned: “Beware of women, even if they insult your honor and curse your leaders, for a man may strike a woman with a stick or a club, and he will be reproached for it, as will his descendants thereafter.” Abu Umamah Al-Bahili, may Allah be pleased with him, reported: “I witnessed the Battle of Siffin, where they did not finish off the wounded, nor did they kill those who turned to flee, nor did they loot the slain.”

The Ottoman Sultan was primarily concerned with the submission of the Hijaz to his rule, and the attack on Dariyah was not an urgent or necessary demand for the Ottoman state. Muhammad Ali was inflexible in his terms for peace, indicating his desire to prolong the conflict; his objective in this war was to further his expansionist ambitions within the framework permitted by British political goals in the region. The Saudi state had become a significant threat to British interests across the entire area, including the Red Sea, the Arabian Gulf, and the overland route through Iraq. Consequently, Britain felt a genuine threat to its interests in the East, which justifies the characterisation of this campaign as a crusade cloaked in Islamic guise.

When Tosun Pasha, under Muhammad Ali, was defeated by Prince Abdullah bin Saud, resulting in the destruction of half his army, Muhammad Ali personally ventured to the Hejaz in 1813. He apprehended Sharif of Makkah Ghalib bin Musaid, accusing him of conspiring with the Saudis. Muhammad Ali confiscated all of Ghalib’s possessions, including his wealth, furniture, and belongings, effectively making the Sharif an employee of Muhammad Ali in the Hejaz. Subsequently, in January 1815, Muhammad Ali achieved victory over Saudi forces, a conflict regarded by some as one of the most significant events and a crucial battle in the military history of Egypt.

Muhammad Ali did not remain in the Arabian Peninsula to oversee the victory he had achieved; instead, he returned to Egypt, leaving his son Tosun in Hijaz. Soon after, Tosun succeeded in inflicting a new defeat on the Saudis for the first time and quickly advanced into the northern region of Najd, reaching the city of Al-Rass. He then occupied Al-Shabiyah, thereby opening the route to Al-Dariyah. In response, Prince Abdullah hastened to request the initiation of negotiations to prevent bloodshed and protect the towns and villages. Negotiations commenced between the two parties regarding a peace agreement under the following condition

1 – The occupation of the Egyptian forces in Diriyah. 2 – Prince Abdullah is to place himself at the disposal of Tosun Pasha, traveling to the location he deems appropriate. 3 – Prince Abdullah must ensure the safety of the pilgrimage routes and remain subject to the governance of the city by Muhammad Ali until an agreement on the peace terms is reached.

These conditions, if agreed upon, shall not take effect until they are ratified by Muhammad Ali. However, these conditions were not accepted by Prince Abdullah, who decided to send a delegation to Egypt to negotiate directly with Muhammad Ali regarding the terms of peace, but the delegation’s efforts were unsuccessful due to the pasha’s rigidity, and the Saudis prepared for war and combat. Consequently, Muhammad Ali dispatched a new campaign in 1816, led by his son Ibrahim Pasha.

Ibrahim Pasha advanced his forces from Hijaz towards Najd, successfully capturing the cities of Unayzah, Buraydah, and Shuqra, thereby subjugating the entire Qassim region. In his campaign, Ibrahim employed a conciliatory approach towards the tribes, a strategy that endeared him to many in Najd. He frequently convened councils and distributed gifts to the populace, initially adopting a method that appealed to the tribes by prohibiting looting and pillaging. With the assistance of his French military advisors, he continued his advance until he laid siege to Dir’iyyah, which was known for its strong defenses. This siege lasted from April 6 to September 9, 1818, culminating in the surrender of Prince Abdullah bin Saud and Ibrahim’s entry into Dir’iyyah. From there he dispatched the Saudi prince under heavy guard to Egypt, who was subsequently sent from Cairo to Istanbul. In Istanbul, Prince Abdullah was publicly displayed for three full days before being ordered to be executed by hanging. The truth of his execution will be revealed on the Day of Judgment. He had called for peace among the people of the island through a message sent by Shaikh Ahmad al-Hanbali to Tosun, in which they acknowledged the authority of the Ottoman Sultan and affirmed their loyalty to the caliphate. Therefore, why was there a persistent insistence on directing forces to the Arabian Peninsula? Thus, the lives of Muslims were lost at the hands of one another, a consequence of the machinations of their enemies. The inhabitants of the island supported the Muslims of Egypt during the French occupation; therefore, what is the reason for this deliberate aggression? Muhammad Ali was able, through the leaders associated with Islam, to persuade many ordinary people that their actions were in compliance with the orders of the Caliph of the Messenger of Allah to whom they owed their obedience and allegiance. However, the issue of loyalty and disavowal was entirely absent in the actions of Muhammad Ali. This is evidenced by his allegiance to the enemies of Islam, allowing them to lead him and guide the nation towards its demise.

The joy in Britain was immense upon learning of the fall of Dir’iyyah, the capital of the First Saudi State, to the forces of Ibrahim Pasha. This state was a Salafi entity that had supported the Qawasim in their struggle against British interests in the Arabian Gulf, which posed a threat to British interests in India. It is pertinent to consider, particularly in light of the events that unfolded in the Islamic world during its modern history, what might have transpired had the armies of Muhammad Ali and the Ottoman Empire collaborated with the First Saudi State instead of opposing it. Together, they could have stood against European ambitions in general, and British interests in particular. Such a collaboration could have altered the course of history, especially since the Saudi state was a Muslim entity founded on the correct Salafi principles, which the Islamic world desperately needed at that time. Regardless, Britain recognised the potential benefits of this situation and quickly extended congratulations to Ibrahim Pasha, motivated by its own self-interests. Captain George Forster Sadler was dispatched to convey these congratulations to Ibrahim Pasha for his conquest of Dir’iyyah while also seeking to establish a framework for coordination between Pasha’s land forces and the British naval forces for a joint military operation against the Qawasim, followers of the First Saudi State.

The relationship between Britain and Muhammad Ali is longstanding. At the onset of his rule, he engaged in negotiations with them that lasted four months, during which he demonstrated his seriousness and sincere desire to establish a connection with them. He even requested to place himself under their protection. This is corroborated by the report from Fraser, who was responsible for the negotiations. Their eventual acceptance of his proposal led to their abandonment of their alliances with the Mamluks. The report prepared by Fraser, who negotiated with Muhammad Ali’s envoys and sent to General Moore on October 16, 1807, outlined the key aspects of these negotiations. It stated: “I hope you will allow me to clarify for you the essence of a conversation that took place between the Pasha of Egypt, Major General Shryock, and Captain Philows during their mission with His Excellency. I have reason to believe that this conversation, along with many other private communications I had with him, indicates that he is earnest and sincere in his proposals. Muhammad Ali Pasha expressed his desire to place himself under British protection, and we promised to relay his suggestions to the leaders of the British forces, so they could present them to the English government for consideration. In return, Muhammad Ali committed to preventing the French, Turks, or any army from another state from entering Alexandria by sea, and he pledged to maintain Alexandria as an ally.”

The French consul, Drugeti, commented on the information he received regarding the agreement between Muhammad Ali and the British, suggesting that this treaty represented a type of agreement that, if concluded, would fulfill the objectives the British sought by sending their campaign to Egypt. However, its impact might exceed what they anticipated from this military expedition. The British chose not to disclose all the terms of this agreement following its signing, the evacuation of Alexandria, and its handover to the Pasha of Egypt. Britain deemed it necessary to exercise caution in this regard due to the explicit declaration of hostility towards the Ottoman Empire contained within the agreement, as it supported a ruler seeking independence at a time when British diplomacy had significant interests with the empire and aimed to benefit from its new ally to extend its influence in the region, if possible. [An Excerpt from “Ad-Dawlah Al-Uthmaaniyyah Awamil An-Nuhud Wa Asbab As-Suqut 6/375-400]

Read: The State of the Region of Najd, Arabia in the Time of Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb and the First Saudi State- By Shaikh Abu Khadeejah, may Allah preserve him. https://abukhadeejah.com/the-state-of-the-region-of-najd-arabia-in-the-time-of-ibn-%CA%BFabdul-wahhab-and-the-first-saudi-state/

Did Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhāb rebel? The First Saudi State. https://abukhadeejah.com/did-shaikh-muhammad-bin-%CA%BFabdul-wahhab-rebel-the-first-saudi-state/