News and events
Search
Journal articles
Book reviews
About the Society
Society officers
Annual reports
Lecture summaries
Obituaries
Annual appeal
Membership
|
|
|
Book
review
Hadhrami Traders,
Scholars and Statesmen in the Indian Ocean, 1750s-1960s Ulrike Freitag and
William Clarence-Smith (Eds)
Pp. x + 392. Notes. Glossary. Maps. Bibliog. Index. Hb. £60.
The origins of this book lie in an
international gathering at S.O.A.S. in April 1995 of scholars working on the history of
Hadhramaut and its diaspora. The book comprises revised versions of some nineteen of the
thirty-one papers presented in 1995, plus three additional chapters. It is the only
comprehensive work of its kind to have been published to date and includes much
painstaking research on different themes and disciplines. In
his excellent introductory chapter, Hadhramaut and the Hadhrami Diaspora in the Modern
Colonial Era, Clarence-Smith skilfully draws together the substance of the published
papers. As he points out, Hadhrami emigration was limited almost exclusively to the Indian
Ocean in contrast to the case of other Yemenis who went as labourers to Europe and North
America. Nevertheless, the Indian Ocean basin covered a wide area stretching from
Egypt to Australia, and from South Africa to China. Within this immense region, Hadhramis
were especially active commercially, politically and as proselytisers of Sunni
Islam in what is now Indonesia and Malaysia, in south-western India and the Deccan,
on both shores of the Red Sea and in the Gulf ofAden, and on the East African littoral and
adjacent islands down to the Comoros. Clarence-Smith concludes that the history of
Hadhramaut during the past two centuries can only be understood in the context of its
far-flung diaspora, and that due to their successful networking Hadliramis played a much
greater role in their host societies than the small size and population of their homeland
might have suggested; they displayed a remarkable ability to blend with the local scene
while still retaining a distinct identity. Clarence-Smith mentions studies on Hadhrami
emigrants by Van den Berg (1886) and Ingrams (1937) but oddly omits any mention of the
important contribution of Salah al-Bakri, although there are references to Bakris
work in Alexander Knyshs paper on religious reformism in Hadhramaut. Bakri was born
in Java and together with intellectuals like Ali Ba Kathir became deeply involved in the
cultural, political and literary activities of the Hadhrami diaspora.
Syed Farid Alatas paper, Hadhramaut and the Hadhrami
Diaspora, deals largely with issues of historiography. He believes that Ibn
Khalduns concept of asabiyya is relevant to our understanding of the
role of the hawta (religious sanctuary). In discussing the social hierarchy of
Hadhrami communities in former times, he fails to mention the qabail
(tribes) and the freedmen a group which had a strong presence in India supplying
recruits for the Nizam of Hyderabads African Cavalry Guard (the
Risala-e-Huboosh). Perhaps he may have intended to club the former with the
mashayikh and the latter with the masakeen! Moreover,
hawtas were not merely associated with the saada but also with
some mashayikh, although not many. A point worth emphasising is that the Arabs
involved in the spread of Islam in the Far East were primarily from South West Arabia.
Friedhelm Hartwig has made a bold attempt in his paper, Expansion,
State Foundation and Reform: the contest for power in Hadhramaut in the nineteenth century
to introduce the waters of a sea into ajar and, like Freitag, Boxberger, Khalidi and
others, he has largely succeeded. He has used an impressive range of Arabic sources,
including Salim bin Muhammad bin Hamid al-Kindis Tarikh Hadhramaut (1991).
Hartwig, however, overlooks the reason why so many Yafais were willing to accompany
Badr bin Muhammad al-Marduf to Hadhramaut in 1705 AD. it was not gold nor land, for Badr
had neither to offer, but local Zaidi pressures and the fact that the (Sunni) Mansab
ofAinat had urged them to support Badr (the Mansabs family had enjoyed
spiritual influence inYafa since the time of Ali Harhara, a popular preacher who had
trained in Ainat). Incidentally, Hadhrami historians tend to refer to the lawless
conditions prevalent in the region without pointing out that no ruler, however
well-intentioned, could hope to bring warlike tribes to heel and control them without
funds. The high quality of Hartwigs paper does not immunise it from the odd factual
error. For example, the Aal Abdullah (Kathiris) did not buy al-Ghurfa from a
Yafai family but from a Tamimi clan called al-Qaraamisa. And it is wrong
to suggest that the Quaiti dynasty established themselves in Hadhramaut with
massive help from British forces. They did so inspite of British opposition to them
persisting almost to the very end of their needlessly prolonged struggle with the
Kasadi Naqib, and at tremendous cost. The British attitude was driven by the perception
that Quaiti rule would mean an expansion of the Nizam of Hyderabads influence
beyond the borders of India. Indeed, there is firm evidence (from the records of the
Bombay Presidency) that the only help which the British agreed to give the Quaitis
in the latters efforts to retrieve al-Shihr from the Kathiris in 1866 AD.
was limited to the sale of materials such as rope, lead and gunpowder! This,
moreover, was in return for Quaiti/Hyderabadi support for British India during the
Mutiny a crisis which had led the Bombay Presidency to telegraph, all is lost
if the Nizam goes. Later on, when the Quaitis and Kasadis quarrelled, the Aden
Residency initially supported the Kasadis. It was the Quaiti familys financial
strength and proven ability to police the region which ultimately won it British
acceptance (although the British remained unhappy about Quaiti links with
Hyderabad). Another misconception has been that the Quaitis because of their
littoral possessions were a coastal dynasty, whereas historically their seat of
power lay inland; their first involvement in Hadhrami affairs was in Wadi Hadhramaut where
they intervened to retrieve Tarim, Seiyun and Shibam for locally settledYafais who
had lost these towns to the Kathiris.
Linda Boxbergers paper, Hadhrami Politics (1888-1967), represents
an admirable effort to come to grips with this complex subject. Since she mentions the
monthly salary paid by the Quaitis to the paramount chief of the Hamum to compensate
him for the privations of good behaviour, this writer cannot resist pointing out that the
latters salary was one third (20 thalers) more than that paid by the parsimonious
British to the Quaiti Sultan!
With regard to the 1918 agreement between the Quaiti and
Kathiri Sultans to make Hadhramaut a single realm, it was not the Kathiri who objected but
his fellow clansmen enriched in the Far East (e.g. Bin Abdat) and with ambitions of
their own. It is noteworthy that for a long time security in Seiyun and Tarim was
maintained by Quaiti soldiers until Sultan Umar bin Awadli al-Quaiti
decided to trim expenditure and withdraw them.
Without wishing to detract from Harold Ingrams role as
peace-maker in the late 1 930s, I would like to mention that Sultan Umar bin Awadhs
tour of the interior in 1934 was the catalyst for the conclusion of a number of truces
which Ingrams was later able to extend or build upon. Miss Boxberger is to be
congratulated on being the first person to present an accurate account of the riot in
Mukalla over the appointment of Shaikh Gaddal as Minister during Colonel Bousteads
term as Resident Adviser and British Agent.
The paper presented by Engseng Ho, a young anthropologist of Malay
Chinese origin, Hadhramis Abroad in Hadhramaut: the Muwalladin, discusses the
tensions that often arose between pure Hadhramis back home and racially mixed
Hadhramis (muwalladin) overseas who were seen by some conservative leaders in
Hadhramaut as morally lax and a source of contamination. It is worth noting that
originally the term muwallad simply denoted those born outside (Wadi)
Hadhramaut (the people of the coast refer to the interior as Hadhramaut and
those oftheWadi refer to the coast as al-Sahel, although in former times the
coast was known as al-Shihr) and did not necessarily imply those born
abroad. For example, Sayyid Hamid al-Mihdhar in his biography (1983) of his grandfather
Sayyid Hussain, mentions that those born on the coast of Hadhramaut were also referred to
as muwalladin while those born in the interior referred to themselves as
wilayati. Thus the term muwalladin is, in general, purely a
reference to Hadhramis born beyond the Wadi and abroad; someone, for example, born of
mixed blood in Hadhramaut is not called a muwallad.
Freitags concluding chapter, The Diaspora since the Age
of Independence, discusses changes in the pattern of Hadhrami emigration in the
post-war and post-colonial period, notably the shift from settler migration to mostly
non-Arab countries, towards short-term labour migration to the Gulf states. She also draws
attention to the negative impact of Marxist rule in South Yemen on relations between
homeland and diaspora, and to the growing pressures on Hadliramis resident outside the
Arab world to assimilate at the expense of their cultural and linguistic heritage.
This book has much to offer both the general reader and the
specialist but its price places it beyond the reach of most private pockets. We must hope
that the publishers will soon make it more widely accessible by bringing out a paperback
edition.
GHALIB BIN AWADH AL-QUAITI,
November 1998
|