"دليل الخليج. مجلد I. القسم التاريخي. الأجزاء Iأ و Iب. ج.ج. لوريمر ١٩١٥" [‎١‎٥‎١‎٣] (١٧٨٢/١٦٦٨)

m\i
k -' »>'4«. .
i was!
me of as-
drfr;
ifi: 1
f* s
tk#''
1513
important in tbe aggregate. Many of them, too, even though actually in possession
of Turkish certificates of nationality (which documents are considered by Arahs as
purely administrative documents having no bearing on tribal questions) have the
right, handed down from father to son, to cultivate wheat lands in the Ahwaz district
and Arabs of thb Ka 'ab and Muhaisin tribes living in Abul Khasib and Zain will be
found in December and January ploughing their lands as far north as Wais.
We thus have the quaint anomally of Arab tribesmen, in possession of certificates
of Turkish nationality and liable to Turkish military service, training for which they
may have actually undergone, acknowledging simultaneously lia!>ility to service under
the Persian flag, and proceeding annually 100 miles and more from their homes
in Turkey to cultivate lands in Persia which they and their forefathers have tilled for
generations.
Questions of reciprocity seldom arise between Persia and Turkey, in regard to this
frontier at all events, in connection with the treatment of Arab tribes, since no Arab
tribes subject to Turkey reside in Persian territory, though, as has been shown, the
reverse is very extensively the case.
A number of questions of a general nature were agitated from time
to time between Turkey and Persia, and were all simultaneously pending
in 1S77, when war broke out between Turkey and Russia.
One of these was the interpretation to be placed on the Convention
of 1875 between Turkey and Persia in regard to the extra-territorial
jurisdiction of the consular representatives of either country in the
other. It seems to have been claimed by Persia that the rights of
jurisdiction conferred on her consular officers in Turkey was precisely
similar to those enjoyed by the Consuls of various European poweis
under Capitulations; but the contention was apparently denied by the
Porte, it was not supported by the British Government, and it failed to
be established.
A Persian grievance was the continued residence at Baghdad of Miiza
'Abbas, a fugitive brother of His Majesty the Shah, whom the Turkish
Government had, it was alleged, given a written promise to remove to
some other place. The matter being strongly pressed in 1877, when th^
Perisan Prince had already been *raany years at Baghdad, an assurance
was given that he would be obliged to make Constantinople his place of
residence; but he preferred to make his peace with the Shah and leturned
to Tehran.
Not long after the Shah's own pilgrimage to Turkish 'Iraq in 1870-
71, there was much indignation in Persia on account of annoyances in
flicted, and extortions practised, by officials of the Turkish Government
* According to one authority^ he had been there since the accession of Nasir-ud-Din Shah
to the Persian throne in 1848,
Persian
subjects,
refugees,
pilgrimages
and trade,
1877—78
■ ' .»1*
; ' ^ i