The British gave two sons of Sheriff Husein (of Mecca) rule over the new political entities of Transjordan and Iraq after WWI. They were both born in the Hijaz (now in West Saudi Arabia), not the area they ruled. On the other hand, the political distinctions between these areas today did not exist in the early 20th century.

So I'm wondering to what extent were they seen as foreigners by the people they ruled over, and did that sentiment ever express itself in local politics?

  • Given that the (substantial) majority language of both countries is Arabic, I suspect that the overall reaction was essentially "Those damn Hashemite Sharif's again." Kurds, Turks, Shi'ites and Armenians may have had stronger reactions, but short of being able to declare and defend a tiny independent state had few options. – Pieter Geerkens Nov 8 '15 at 15:54
  • 1
    Arab society was deeply divided in tribes. Hashemites were essentially Hijazi tribe Banu-Hashim, a branch of greater clan Quresh. While Arabs do share a common language and heritage, Tribes still play an important role. Hijazis were rivals of Najdis, current royal house of KSA is a Najdi tribe. Similarly, The Iraqi tribes & Jordanian tribes had their own views regarding Hijazis. – NSNoob Dec 11 '15 at 13:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.