Skip to item: of 82
Information about this record Back to top
Open in Universal viewer
Open in Mirador IIIF viewer

‘Memorandum respecting the frontier between Mohammerah and Turkey.’ [‎32r] (63/82)

This item is part of

The record is made up of 1 file (41 folios, 5 maps). It was created in 3 Apr 1912. It was written in English and French. The original is part of the British Library: India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. Records and Private Papers Documents collected in a private capacity. .

Transcription

This transcription is created automatically. It may contain errors.

Apply page layout

53
directed into the Shatt-el-Arab ; consequently Persia now claimed the left bank of the
Shatt-el-Arab below the Haffar, with the town and district of Mohammerah, as Persian
territory. The original mouth of the Karun, the Bamishere, was still open and
navigable, at least to vessels of moderate draught. The earlier mouths of this river to
the east of the Bamishere had been gradually deserted by it, and were silted up and
dry. In fact, the Karun had for centuries been forcing its way westwards until it
found a convenient outlet for the principal portion of its waters through the Haffar canal
into the Shatt-el-Arab.
The Porte contended, not without reason, that as the Euphrates was a Turkish
river, running through the dominions of the Sultan from its source, it was unjust, and
against universally recognised principles, to give to Persia the control of its outlet into
the sea, merely because a Persian stream had changed its course, and had invaded
a territory which did not appertain to the Shah. The command of the trade and
navigation of a great river, which had flowed for more than one thousand miles through
Turkish territory, would thus be transferred to a Power which might, if hostile to
Turkey, close that river at its mouth. The Bamishere, the Porte maintained, was
the true outlet of the Karun, and might without much trouble or expense be rendered
navigable to trading vessels of any size, and that consequently the possession of the
entrance to the Shatt-el-Arab was in no way necessary to Persia for the water
communication between the sea and the province of Khuzistan. It was further
able to show r , by ancient maps and documents, that the frontiers of Persia had never
reached the Euphrates, and that the whole of the delta between the mouth of that river
and the Bamishere had originally belonged to Turkey.
I considered the contention of the Porte just and well-founded. I consequently
proposed in my scheme, as a fair compromise, that the new frontier line should be
drawn through the desert country to the w T est of Hawizah, at some distance from
the Shatt-el-Arab, across the Haffar, and midway down the delta to the sea. Turkey
would have thus remained in possession of the banks of the Euphrates throughout the
whole of its course.
My suggestion, approved and adopted by Sir Stratford Canning, was submitted by
Lord Aberdeen to the Russian Government, w r hich declined to accede to it, and not only
upheld the claims of Persia to Mohammerah and the left bank of the Shatt-el-Arab from
the Haffar to the sea, but insisted upon the cession to her of territory on its east bank
{i.e., left bank), which she had not even claimed, almost to the junction of the
Euphrates and Tigris at Korna—thus giving her the control of the navigation of
both those rivers, which form the means of communication between the sea and
the south-eastern provinces of Asiatic Turkey.
Lord Aberdeen, who was desirous of deferring to Russia, accepted her views
and instructed Sir Stratford Canning to recommend them to the Porte. He sent for
me after the arrival of Lord Aberdeen's despatch to this effect. I found him walking
up and down his study, his brows knit, his thin lips compressed, and his delicate
complexion scarlet with anger. Without saying a word he handed me the despatch.
I read it, and remarked that I was deeply grieved to lind that Lord Aberdeen had come
to a decision which, in my opinion, w r as not consistent with justice and right, and w T as not
in the interests of England. He requested me to draw up an answer to Lord Aberdeen's
despatch, pointing out the objections to the arrangement proposed by Russia, the
injustice that would be done to the Porte, and the discredit that would fall upon
England as a mediator if she showed so flagrant a spirit of partiality to Persia.
I wrote the draft of a despatch in this sense, which was adopted by Sir Stratford
Canning. But it failed to produce the desired effect, and nothing remained to him but
to carry out the instructions he had received from Lord Aberdeen. The Porte protested
against the decision of the mediating Powers, and against the sacrifice of territory it was
called upon to make by it. But it was in the end compelled to yield,* in the face of the
threatening insistence of England and Russia.
1 was deeply impressed with the position of Mohammerah, and its great importance
to any Power having commercial and political interests in the East. It commands the
entrance to the Euphrates and Tigris, which are navigable to the very heart of the
Turkish dominions in Asia, and to that of the Karun, which flows through one of the
richest, though one of the most neglected, provinces of Persia. These rivers are
destined to become great military and trading highways. It is, consequently, to the
interest of England that their mouths should not fall into the possession of a Power
which might be hostile to her.
Turkey having been compelled to accept the Russian project for the settlement of
* In the Treaty signed at Erzeroum in 1847.
[2440 c—10]
P

About this item

Content

The memorandum concerns the border between Mohammerah [Khorramshahr] and Turkey, and was prepared by Alwyn Parker of the Foreign Office. There are a number of labels at the top of the first page: ‘Persia’, ‘Confidential’ and ‘Section 10’. The memorandum sections are as follows:

  • Part I. A preface (folios 1-5), introducing the points at issue, with two maps, the first being a sketch map of the Mohammerah district, with the proposed Turkish, Persian and mediating commissioner’s lines indicated (folio 2), and a map compiled from plane table surveys by Lieutenant Arnold Talbot Wilson in 1909, with the frontier as defined by the mediating commissioners in 1850 (folio 4);
  • Part II. An historical summary (folios 6-19) of British Government correspondence relating to the border dispute, with the chief focus being on correspondence exchanged during the period 1843-52, around the time of the Treaty of Erzeroum (c.1848). This part contains two copies of a map, a facsimile of a diagram of the disputed area, the original of which was enclosed by Colonel Williams in his despatch of 4 February 1850, indicating Turkish and Persian claims and the mediating commissioner’s proposal (folios 15, 19);
  • Part III. Conclusion (folios 20-28), with a further map (folio 23), an exact copy of that found on folio 4.

The appendices that follow are:

  • A: British assurances given to the Shaikh of Mohammerah, 1899 and 1902-10;
  • B. Protocol of December 1911 (in French) for the proposal settlement of the Turco-Persian frontier question;
  • C. An extract from Sir Austen Henry Layard’s Early Adventures in Persia, Susiana, and Babylonia , published in 1887. The extract is from volume 2, pp 431-439;
  • D. Rough notes made by General William Monteith when in Persia, on the frontier of Turkey and Persia, as communicated to the Foreign Office in 1843;
  • E. Observations by Sir Henry Rawlinson on a Persian memorandum relative to the situation of the cities of Mohammerah and Fellahiah [Fallāḥīyah], 1844;
  • F. Text of the Treaty of Erzeroum, 31 May 1847, in English and French translation;
  • G. Copy of a despatch from Sir Stratford Canning, the British Ambassador to Istanbul, to Lord Palmerston, Foreign Secretary, dated 30 May 1850;
  • H. Copy of a despatch from Lord Palmerston to Lord Broomfield, dated 12 July 1850.
Extent and format
1 file (41 folios, 5 maps)
Arrangement

The memorandum is arranged into three parts, labelled I, II and III, which are followed by eight lettered appendices, A-H. Historic correspondence referred to in the memorandum is referenced in the inside page margin.

Physical characteristics

Foliation: The foliation sequence commences at the first folio and terminates at the last folio; these numbers are written in pencil, are circled, and are located in the top right corner of the recto The front of a sheet of paper or leaf, often abbreviated to 'r'. side of each folio.

Pagination: The booklet contains an original typed pagination sequence.

Written in
English and French in Latin script
View the complete information for this record

Use and share this item

Share this item
Cite this item in your research

‘Memorandum respecting the frontier between Mohammerah and Turkey.’ [‎32r] (63/82), British Library: India Office Records and Private Papers, IOR/L/PS/18/B380, in Qatar Digital Library <https://www.qdl.qa/archive/81055/vdc_100024051501.0x000040> [accessed 18 December 2024]

Link to this item
Embed this item

Copy and paste the code below into your web page where you would like to embed the image.

<meta charset="utf-8"><a href="https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100024051501.0x000040">‘Memorandum respecting the frontier between Mohammerah and Turkey.’ [&lrm;32r] (63/82)</a>
<a href="https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100024051501.0x000040">
	<img src="https://iiif.qdl.qa/iiif/images/81055/vdc_100000000833.0x000376/IOR_L_PS_18_B380_0063.jp2/full/!280,240/0/default.jpg" alt="" />
</a>
IIIF details

This record has a IIIF manifest available as follows. If you have a compatible viewer you can drag the icon to load it.https://www.qdl.qa/en/iiif/81055/vdc_100000000833.0x000376/manifestOpen in Universal viewerOpen in Mirador viewerMore options for embedding images

Use and reuse
Download this image