Coll 6/16 'Future of: Royal Family. Probable happenings on the death of Ibn Saud.' [‎130r] (260/440)

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF l/lS BRIT£N1gIC MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT
— - jr'——— —
EASTERN (Arabia).
CONFIDENTIAL.
^ $ i
I J
l 1955
) April 8, 1935.
Section 6 .
E 2302/7/25]
No/ 1.
Sir A. Ryan to Sir John Simon.—{Received April 8.)
{No. 86.)
Sir, Jedda, March 22,1935.
I HAD the honour to inform you briefly in my telegrams Nos. 60 and 61 of
the 15th March of the attack on Ibn Sand and the heir apparent in Mecca that
morning. As usual on such occasions, the affair rapidly became the subject of a
mass of varying and often conflicting rumours, but none of the variants appeared
to me to be of sufficient importance to telegraph. I now enclose translations of
two communiques which were telegraphed to the foreign missions on the 15th and
20th March. Q These, especially the latter, are probably more trustworthy than
.any of the numerous other versions that have reached me.
2. The facts that the attempt was made within the precincts of the mosque
Rnd was made during the greatest festival of the Moslem year not only add to its
dramatic interest but invest it in the eyes of Moslems with a peculiarly
sacrilegious character. The religious law may be susceptible of different inter
pretations, but the broad principles may be summed up in the statement that
gratuitous bloodshed, whether of man or animals, is at all times forbidden in the
sacred precincts of Mecca and that the festival entails a sort of Truce of God
between enemies. The principles are so strongly held that the question may be
raised in quarters critical of Ibn Baud whether the slaying of his assailants in the
Holy Place was not more than was necessary to stay their impious hands and there
fore unlawful. The historical instances of bloodshed in the actual mosque would
appear to have been extremely rate. Indeed, one informant states that the only
case on record is that mentioned in Muir’s Life of Muhammad (p. 410 of the 1923
edition), and that that is doubtful.
3. Even the second communique leaves certain points indeterminate. It
is not clearly stated that the two policemen, who were struck down, lost their lives,
hut it is probable that one if not both were killed. The wound of the heir apparent
is understood to have been rather more serious than is implied, but in any case it
was not grave. It is tacitly suggested that the King suffered no hurt. I am
•assured, however, that he was slightly wounded in the leg by flying splinters. It
was thought at first that a bomb might have been thrown, but the more accredited
theory now is that the splinters were struck out of the marble pavement by the
firing of the guards. The communique discloses doubt regarding a point of some
importance, i.e., whether there was a fourth assailant, who got away.
4. There was some panic in Mecca and a great deal at Mina, where large
numbers of pilgrims were congregated for the festival. There is no doubt that
feeling in the King’s entourage was greatly inflamed. There was talk of a general
onslaught on Yemenis and of arresting Abdullah-al- Wazir Minister. , who, as you will
remember, came to the Hejaz last year for the peace negotiations and established
intimate personal relations with Ibn Baud and who is now back again as a greatly
honoured pilgrim. Happily, the King himself displayed both courage and good
sense. It appears to be true that he and the heir apparent completed the sevenfold
circuit of the Kaaba, though I believe that they abandoned the further rite of
passing the prescribed number of times between Safa and Marwa. The King,
moreover, gave stringent orders that there were to be no gratuitous reprisals. The
police are said to have made a good many arrests, and even to have used torture,
hut there was no promiscuous attack on Yemenis, which might have led to
massacre.
5. There have naturally been various theories as to the origin of the incident.
Some suggest that it was due merely to the indignation of the assailants at being
thrust aside by the guards to make way for the King. Yemenis are said to be very
quick with their daggers, when offended. This theory is possible, but on the whole
improbable, as, if the men had not gone to Mecca with the special object of making
P) Not printed.