No description available.

Modern breech-loading rifles flooded into Arabia and the region around the Persian Gulf between 1880 and World War I. This work examines in detail, and analyzes, the introduction of modern arms to Arabia, the origin of those arms, the trade patterns by which they were moved, and the international and local political factors that affected the trade. The international arms trade was driven by three major factors. First, the rapid technological development of small arms in the nineteenth century fed the market, resulting in the availability of hundreds of thousands of obsolete military rifles for resale. Each time new rifles were adopted by the armies of Europe, old stocks were dumped on the private arms market. Second, international politics and European colonial rivalry contributed to the growth and maintenance of the arms trade. The French Consul at Muscat protected the trade in the Persian Gulf, while French arms dealers commanded a substantial portion of the trade. British efforts to slow the flow of arms through Muscat was hampered by European politics. Third, the internal politics of the region created a demand for the modern arms. Inside Arabia, the resurgent Saudis fought Rashidis and Hashimites in a series of wars, while other tribal raids and wars further built the demand for modern rifles: if one group had modern weapons, its enemies felt a need for them also. Outside Arabia, a strong demand for weapons in Persia and on the Northwest Frontier of India helped pull weapons to the markets of the Gulf. This thesis deals first with the changing technology of weapons in the nineteenth century, so that the military impact of the new weapons can be understood. The types of modern rifles introduced to the Peninsula is then reviewed, finding that the Peabody-Martini and the Martini-Henry, and their numerous variations, were the weapons most commonly imported in the decades around the turn of the century. With this information as background, the international politics of the arms trade are examined. Emphasis is on the Anglo-French rivalry at Muscat that gave treaty protection to French arms dealers. European fears that modern arms would reach Africa and make colonial control of the continent difficult or impossible led, in 1890, to the arms control provisions of the General Act of Brussels. The Act did not, however, extend to Arabia. The heart of the work is a detailed examination and analysis of the arms trade in and around Arabia. The arms trade in the region was centered in two main entrepots, Djibouti in French Somaliland and Muscat in southeast Arabia. By the late l890s, the bulk of the trade was passing through the Suez Canal before transshipment at one of these ports. Just over half of the arms reaching Muscat were exported to Persia and the Northwest Frontier, with the remainder reaching Arabia or Mesopotamia. The patterns of the private arms trade were complex, both at sea and on land, and are discussed at length. The political use of weapons by the Ottoman Government, and by European states, contributed to the flood of guns into Arabia. The Ottomans, in particular, used their stocks of obsolete weapons to arm their client tribes in Arabia. Ottoman purchases of Sniders, Martinis, and finally Mausers, gave them a constant supply of older rifles for distribution. The arms trade in Arabia was controlled by international and local political developments, and fed by the availability of modern arms on the international market. The trade was complex and impossible to prevent so long as the European states and the Ottomans continued to sell or distribute obsolete rifles as new guns were adopted.

This dissertation aims to formulate a view of Arabian tribalism in the pre- Islamic period and its development in Islamic times. The first part assesses the historical usability of the literary source material of the Jahiliya. The focus is on oral historical traditions - the ayyam al- carab. These are found to have remained textually fluid until the time of their recording. This fluidity may have affected style and form but did not substantially affect certain historical elements. The more inter-tribal and less local the account was, the more reliable it is likely to be historically. A sample comparison between tribal hostility and tribal distribution showed that the accounts seem to be highly consistent. The second part of the thesis is concerned firstly with establishing a Jahili profile for two tribal groups; secondly with tracing the affairs of their descendants into the Umayyad period. The tribal groups of Taghlib and Ghatafan were picked for examination. Both were strong cohesive groups in the pre-Islamic period. In Islamic times, Taghlibis lose importance since they opted to remain Christian, thus, Taghlibis are virtually impossible to trace. Ghatafanis did join Islam on a far greater scale and are often mentioned in the Islamic period. After the second civil war Ghatafanis are only ever mentioned as individuals. Close kin continued to cooperate but cooperation above this level was only conducted within the Qaysi faction. The third part discusses changes in the tribal system. A review of the functions of modern tribal genealogies illuminates the process by which genealogies can change in order to reflect changing realities. Early Arabic genealogies are clearly seen to be also naturally dynamic and the subject of deliberate change. New links reflected new realities, particularly the political alliances forged under the Umayyads. A belief in a single progenitor led to a move towards creating genealogical links to one ancestor, while the conditions of the conquests let to a regionalization of tribalism. The professionalization of the Marwanid army enabled cross-regional tribal co-operation which resulted in dividing in two the Umayyad army and Arab genealogies.

Note: / As a result of its military campaigns for religious and political reform during the latter half ot the eighteenth century, the Su'udi principality at the al-Dir'iyah developed into a powerful state. It first brought the districts of central Arabia under its control and later annexed the region of al-Hasa. [...]

Note: