Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T00:39:58.064Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

British policy in Persia, 1892–1903—I1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

Rose Louise Greaves
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When Lord Salisbury's long administration came to an end in the summer of 1892, there ended also an era in British diplomacy. This was not immediately apparent because the development of the ‘new course’,2 different from Lord Salisbury's, took more than a decade. Lady Gwendolen Cecil has described Lord Salisbury's policy as ‘neighbourliness’. Dame Lillian Penson has called it ‘practical co-operation’. This policy had by 1892 secured for his country a position of political authority in Europe which was unique, in that it ‘owed nothing to military pre-eminence or that subtle manipulation of international jealousies, which was the chief weapon of Prince Bismarck's genius’. Its weakness was that it was his alone and depended for its success upon personal characteristics which could not be passed on to a successor.3

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , February 1965 , pp. 34 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

The following collections of private correspondence have been used in preparing this paper: the Ardagh papers in the Public Record Office; the Dufferin papers and the Hamilton papers, both collections in the India Office Library; the Hicks Beach papers at Coln St. Aldwyn; the Kimberley papers, at present not available for inspection; the Lansdowne papers in the Foreign Office Library; and the Salisbury papers in Christ Church Library, Oxford.

The following abbreviations appear: ADS for archives of the American Department of State; BDfor G. P. Gooch and Harold Temperley (ed.), British documents on the origins of the War, 1898–1914, II vols. (London, HMSO, 1926–1930); CAB for a series of Cabinet papers in the Public Record Office; FO for British Foreign Office Correspondence in the Public Record Office; and PD for The Parliamentary Debates, Official Report, Fourth Series, House of Lorda and House of Commons.

References

2 Penson, L. M., ‘The new course in British foreign policy, 1892–1902’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, Fourth Ser., XXV, 1943, 121–38; see especially pp. 121, 125, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Cecil, Lady Gwendolen, Life of Robert Marquis of Salisbury, London, 1921–1932, IV, 407–8.Google Scholar

4 Hardinge to Nicolson, private, 10 July 1907, BD, IV, 294.Google Scholar

5 31 August 1907; Grey, Viscount, Twenty-five years, 1892–1916, London, 1925, I, 165.Google Scholar

6 Recollections, London, 1917, II, 178.Google Scholar

7 Salisbury to Lascelles, private, 6 October 1891, Salisbury papers. See alao Greaves, R. L., Persia and the defence of India, 1884–1892, London, 1959, 14–15, 186, 225.Google Scholar

8 Proceedings of Special Council, 7 June 1904, concerning the question of Russia's financial and economic policy in Persia contained in Krasnyy Arkhiv, LVI, 49–50. I am indebted to the Central Asīan Research Bureau for translating this and other articles from the Russian.Google Scholar

9 Proceedings of Special Council, 12 August 1905, to consider the question of future relations between Russia and Persia; ibid., LVI, 56. In the years 1900–5 there were 9–46 roubles to the pound.

10 Through the kindness of Professor Lambton, I have read in manuscript her detailed study of the tobacco concession which is to be published in Studia Islamica.

11 Durand wrote that it was ‘possible’ as some say that the Ṣadr-i A'żam had since 1892 gone over to the Russians. But he ‘certainly was with us once’. See memorandum on the situation in Persia, 27 September 1895, FO 60$sol;566. Unpublished Crown Copyright material in the Public Record Office has been reproduced in this article by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office to whom I wish to express my thanks.

12 7 June 1900, Salisbury papers.

13 13 July 1900, ibid.

14 Salisbury to Lascelles, tel. no. 63, 24 December 1891, FO 60$sol;553.

15 Feuvrier, J. B., Trois ans á la cour de Perse, Paris, 1906, 306.Google Scholar

16 17 February 1892, Salisbury papers.

17 A son of NāṢir al-Dīn at that time in charge of the Persian army.

18 19 January 1892, Salisbury papers.

19 Memorandum on the past and present policy in Persia, 31 August 1895, FO 60$sol;566.

20 Govemor-General of India in Council to Lord G. Hamilton, secret, 4 August 1896, Inclosure 1 in No. 1, India Office to Foreign Office, 17 October 1896, FO 65$sol;1529; printed version in Fraser-Tytler, W. K., Afghanistan. Second edition, London, 1953, 324–5.Google Scholar

21 Particularly relevant are Kimberley to Ripon, private, 14 February 1883; Kimberley to Dufferin, private, 20 March 1885; and Kimberley to Lansdowne, private, 16 September 1892: Kimberley papers.

22 11 January 1893, Kimberley papers. For Lord Lansdowne's reply to Lascelles see Greaves, op. cit., 208–9.

23 Kimberley to Lumsden, 29 January 1885, Kimberley papers.

24 Kimberley to Lansdowne, 3 February 1893, ibid.

25 Minute submitted by the Political Department, 9 January 1893, FO 251$sol;58.

26 Note on Persian affairs by General T. E. Gordon, 18 January 1893, ibid.

27 Foreign Office memorandum by Bertie, 15 October 1893, ibid.

28 For the establishment of this company see Greaves, op. cit., 177–8.

29 Wolff to Salisbury and extract, no. 255, confidential, 30 June 1890, FO 60$sol;511.

30 Rabino to Lascelles, 16 February 1892, FO 60/532.

31 Kmentt to Houtum-Schindler, 29 December 1892, FO 60/576. See also Administration Reports of the Persian Gulf Political Residency and Muscat Political Agency for the years 1890–3.

32 Griffin to Eosebery, 26 October 1893, FO 60/576.

33 On 22 December 1893 the Financial News published a notice announcing that the relations of the Persian Bank Mining Rights Corporation with the Imperial Bank of Persia were to be wound up.

34 Minute by Currie dated 28 October 1893, FO 60/576.

35 20 December 1894, ibid.

36 Kimberley papers.

37 Lansdowne to Kimberley, secret, 19 June 1893, Kimberley papers.

38 PD, Commons, 30 July 1894, XXVII, 1344. Lansdowne wrote favourably of it to Ardagh, 7 Mareh 1894, PRO 30/40/2, Ardagh papers.Google Scholar

39 Greene to Kimberley, 11 April 1894, Kimberley papers.

40 Kimberley to Greene, 10 April 1894, ibid.

41 Kimberley to Ripon, 8 August 1884, ibid.

42 Kimberley to Durand, 29 January 1895, ibid.

43 Durand to Kimberley, 21 March 1895, ibid.

44 12 October 1893.

45 Durand, among others, argued that Lynch would not abandon this enterprise as it was more profitable than he said. Whether this is true or not, it is clear that the Karun enterprise was the chief base of British operations in the south. The Karun trade increaeed from £16,000 in 1891 to £141,901 in 1901. See ‘Report on the Karun question’ by Captain Sykes, 15 January 1897, FO 65/1547. Special article by Chirol, Valentine, ‘The Karun trade route into Persia’, Times, 23 12 1902.Google Scholar

46 Hamilton to Elgin, 6 December 1895 and 31 January 1896, Hamilton papers, part I, vol. i; Elgin to Hamilton, 8 January 1896, ibid., part I, vol. II.

47 Hamilton to Elgin, 7 February 1896, ibid., part I, vol. I.

48 Private memorandum on the situation in Persia, 27 September 1895, FO 60/566.

49 Government of India, Foreign Department, to the Secretary of State for India, no. 175, dated 21 September 1899, secret/external, FO 60/615. Extracts from this document have long been available in BD, IV, 356–63, and in Cd. 3882, Persia No. 1 (1908). The document is now reproduced in full in Hurewitz, J. C., Diplomacy in the Near and Middle East, Princeton, 1956, I, 219–49.Google Scholar

50 Secret letter from Govemment of India to the Secretary of State for India, 4 February 1904, printed for the Committee of Imperiál Defence, September 1904, CAB 6/1.

51 Lamsdorff's instructions to Speyer, 30 September/13 October 1904, with an introduction and notes by Popov, ‘Tsarist Bussia and Persia in the period of the Russo-Japanese War’, Krasnyy Arkhiv, LIII, 3 Google Scholar ff. A useful article on Russian policy in Persia at the close of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century is Kazemzadeh, F., ‘Russian imperialism and Persian railways’, Harvard Slavic Studies, IV, 1957, 355–73.Google Scholar

52 Salisbury to Dufferin, 7 August 1885, Dufferin papers, vol. XXXVI, Correspondence England November 1884–January 1887.

53 Salisbury to Dufferin, 14 September 1887, Dufferin papers. The view of the Lawrence school was that Russia's advance must be stopped by the ordinary working of European diplomacy, not by demonstrations in Asia.

54 Jefferson, Margaret M., ‘Lord Salisbury and the Eastern Question, 1890–1898’, Slavonic and East European Review, XXXIX, 1960, 50–1.Google Scholar This question is dealt with in Grenville, J. A. S., Lord Salisbury and foreign policy, London, 1964, 46–53, 78–83.Google Scholar

55 22 November 1895, Salisbury papers.

56 Letters of Victoria, Queen. Third series, London, III, 1932, 39.Google Scholar

57 Memorandum of conversation with the Czar. Sent to Prince of Wales, Lord Lansdowne, Duke of Devonshire, Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Goschen, Lord G. Hamilton. Mr. Balfour saw it at Hatfield. This paper was drawn up for Lord Salisbury's own satisfaction, not as a Cabinet paper, although he circulated it to those ministers whose departmente it immediately concerned. Salisbury papers. The full text is now reproduced by M. M. Jefferson, loc. cit., 216–22.

58 22 October 1896, Hamilton papers, part I, vol. I.

59 26 November 1896, ibid.

60 Salisbury to 0'Conor, 11 November 1896, Salisbury papers.

61 24 09 1897, Letters of Victoria, Queen.Third series, III, 201.Google Scholar

62 18 May 1899, Hamilton papers, part II, vol. IV.

63 McDonald to Olney, 4 May 1896, ADS, Persia, VIII.

64 Letter to the Times, 10 May 1896. See also Browne, , The Persian revolution of 1905–1909, Cambridge, 1910, 11–12;Google Scholar General Sir Gordon, T. E., ‘The reform movement in Persia’, Proc. Cent. Asian Soc., 03 1907, 13.Google Scholar On 15 August 1852 three Bābīs had in fact made an attempt on the life of NāṢir al-Dīn while he was out riding. For an account of this incident see Gobineau, Comte de, Les religions et les philosophies dans l'Asie Centrale, Paris, 1937, 231–4.Google Scholar

65 Durand to Salisbury, no. 35, confidential, 14 May 1896, FO 65/1528; Durand to Preece, 10 May 1896, FO 249/53. For Jamāl al-Dīn's career with special reference to Persia and his anti-British agitations see case volume FO 60/594. See also Browne, Persian revolution, ch. i.

66 Durand to Salisbury, no. 34, confidential, 14 May 1896; Salisbury to Durand, no. 51, confidential, 16 June 1896, FO 65/1529. An earlier telegram reads ‘Your proceedings are approved. No communieation had been received at noon from India: but we cannot wait longer. I concur with you that the recognition of the Vali Ahd should be made heartily and without delay if it has not been already made’. Draft tel. no. 19 in Salisbury's hand, 2 May 1896, FO 65/1529.

67 Durand to Salisbury, no. 42, 11 June 1896, ibid.

68 McDonald to Olney, 4 May 1896, ADS, Persia, VIII.

69 Lamsdorff, loc. cit. The following estimate of his character was given by the Russian minister, M. Vlassov, in 1903 when Muḥammad 'Alī was still Valī-'ahd.Hardinge reported that he had said: ‘The Vali Ahd was a man far more fitted to rule than his father. He was both avaricious and cruel, two characteristics of inestimable value in a Persian Sovereign, and his first act would probably be to dismiss or put to death the crowd of hungry retainers or sycophants who form the present Court’; Hardinge to Lansdowne, no. 208, 28 December 1903, FO 60/666.

70 FO 60/566.

71 See for example Sykes, P. M., History of Persia. Third edition, London, 1930, II, 374;Google Scholar Chirol, V., The Middle Eastern question, London, 1903, 50–1; and Times, 10 January 1907. It is not entirely clear why Muzaffar al-Dīn should have held such expectations in view of the history of the tobacoo concession and the fact that NāṢir al-Dīn had attempted to raise a loan in 1895.Google Scholar

72 Hardinge to Salisbury, tel. no. 76, 8 December 1897, FO 60/585. Durand to Salisbury, tel. no. 66, 7 June 1898, FO 60/596.

73 Hardinge to Salisbury, no. 140, 23 October 1897, FO 60/601.

74 Salisbury to Lascelles, secret tel., 22 April 1892 (draft in Salisbury's hand; endorsed Mr. Balfour, Mr. Goschen), FO 60/555.

75 Lascelles to Salisbury, decypher tel. no. 75, 15 May 1892, ibid.

76 For Hardinge's instructions see Salisbury to Hardinge, draft tel. no. 29, 15 October 1897, FO 60/585. For the Mushīr al-Douleh's assurance see Hardinge to Salisbury, no. 140, 23 October 1897, FO 60/601.

77 ibid.

78 Hardinge to Salisbury, tel. no. 72, 23 November 1897, ibid.

79 Salisbury to Hardinge, conf. tel. no. 32, 9 December 1897, ibid.

80 Hardinge to Salisbury, tel. no. 81, 11 December 1897, ibid.

81 Hardinge to Salisbury, tel. no. 85, secret, 17 December 1897, ibid.

82 Salisbury to Hardinge, tel. no. 39, 19 December 1897, ibid.

83 Hardinge to Salisbury, tel. no. 26, 20 February 1898, ibid.

84 When the Shah (NāṢir al-Dīn) visited England in 1889 he granted to the Persian minister (Mīrzā Malkūm Khān) a concession for the introduction of State lotteries into Persia. Shortly thereafter Malkūm Khān sold his rights to the Anglo-Asiatic Syndicate, Ltd. The news of this concession was received unfavourably in Persia. The Shah's ministers asked Malkūm Khān to return his rights to the Shah. Malkūm Khān replied that since he had already sold them he had no rights to return. This precipitated his dismissal from his post of minister. In December 1889 the Shah cancelled the concession without compensation. See Times 11 January, 26 April, 5 and 9 May 1892. See also FO 60/504 and FO 60/657.

85 Salisbury to Hardinge, tel. no. 19, 24 February 1898, FO 60/601.

86 Hardinge to Salisbury, tel. no. 35, 2 March 1898, ibid.

87 Salisbury to Hardinge, tel. no. 21, 5 March 1898; Keswick to Salisbury, 11 March 1898, ibid.

88 Treasury to Foreign Office, 16 March 1898, ibid.

89 Keswick to Sanderson, 18 March 1898; Hardinge to Foreign Office, tel. no. 42, urgent, 19 March 1898; Foreign Office to Hardinge, tel. no. 25, 21 March 1898, ibid.

90 Keswick to Sanderson, 21 April 1898; Keswick to Salisbury, 4 May 1898, ibid.

91 Memorandum on loan by Sanderson, 16 May 1898, ibid.

92 For approaches to Germany about a loan see Martin, B. G., German-Persian diplomatic relations, 1873–1912, 's-Gravenhage, 1959, 69–71.Google Scholar

93 Undated minute by Curzon filed between 14 and 17 May 1898, FO 60/601.

94 Hicks Beach to Curzon, 17 May 1898, ibid.

95 Memorandum by Sanderson, 16 May 1898, ibid.

96 Salisbury to Durand, tel. no. 34, 19 May 1898, ibid.

97 Hardinge to Durand, pte. tel., 21 May 1898; see also Imperial Bank to Foreign Office, 21 May 1898, ibid.

98 Durand to Salisbury, pte. tel., 26 May 1898, ibid.

99 Durand to Salisbury and minute by Sanderson, tel. no. 62, 26 May 1898, ibid.

100 Imperial Bank to Foreign Office and enclosures, 27 May 1898, ibid.

101 Salisbury to Durand, no. 35, confidential, 28 May 1898, ibid.

102 Rabino to Picot, 14 May 1898, ibid.

103 Durand to Salisbury, tel. no. 64, 31 May 1898, ibid.

104 Treasury to Sanderson, 1 and 17 June 1898, ibid.

105 Durand to Salisbury, tel. no. 70, 13 June 1898, ibid.

106 Salisbury to Sanderson giving Cabinet decision, 21 June 1898, ibid.

107 Salisbury to Durand, tel. no. 45, 3 July 1898, ibid.

108 Minute by Salisbury, 4 July 1898, ibid.

109 Treasury to Sanderson, confidential, 6 July 1898, ibid.

110 Minute by Salisbury, 8 July 1898, in bound volume entitled ‘Private secretary & memoranda, 1895–1900’, Salisbury papers.

111 Chirol, op. cit., 52.

112 PD, Commons, 22 January 1902, CI, 623–4.

113 Salisbury to Sir Charles Euan-Smith, 20 January 1892, Salisbury papers.