Omani Invasion and Subsequent Instability
An Afghan invasion of Iran at the beginning of the 18th century resulted in the near collapse of the Safavid state. In the resultant power vacuum, Oman invade Bahrain in 1717, ending over a hundred years of Persian hegemony. The Omani invasion began a period of political instability and a quick succession of outside rulers took power with consequent destruction. According to a contemporary account by theologian, Sheikh Yusuf Al Bahrani, in an unsuccessful attempt by the Persians and their Bedouin allies to take back Bahrain from the Kharijite Omanis, much of the country was burnt to the ground. Bahrain was eventually sold back to the Persians by the Omanis, but the weakness of the Safavid empire saw Huwala tribes seize control.
In 1730, the new Shah of Persia, Nadir Shah, sought to re-assert Persian sovereignty in Bahrain, bring the island back under central rule and to challenge Oman in the Persian Gulf. He sought help from the British and Dutch, and he eventually recaptured Bahrain in 1736. In 1753, Bahrain was occupied by the Arabs of Abu Shahr of the Bushire-based Al Madhkur family, who ruled Bahrain in the name of Persia and paid allegiance to Karim Khan Zand.
The years of almost constant warfare and instability in the period led to a demographic collapse – German geographer Carsten Niebuhr found in 1763 that Bahrain's 360 towns and villages had, through warfare and economic distress, been reduced to only 60. The influence of Iran was further undermined at the end of the 18th century when the ideological power struggle between the Akhbari-Usuli strands culminated in victory for the Usulis in Bahrain.
Read more about this topic: History Of Bahrain
Famous quotes containing the words invasion, subsequent and/or instability:
“An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not the invasion of ideas.”
—Victor Hugo (1802–1885)
“And he smiled a kind of sickly smile, and curled up on the floor,
And the subsequent proceedings interested him no more.”
—Francis Bret Harte (1836–1902)
“What exacerbates the strain in the working class is the absence of money to pay for services they need, economic insecurity, poor daycare, and lack of dignity and boredom in each partner’s job. What exacerbates it in upper-middle class is the instability of paid help and the enormous demands of the career system in which both partners become willing believers. But the tug between traditional and egalitarian models of marriage runs from top to bottom of the class ladder.”
—Arlie Hochschild (20th century)