1) A dear friend recently asked me about the sincerity of Philby’s Islam—Harry St. John, later Abdullah. Since only God knows what lies within hearts, and since we are commanded to refer disputes to God and His Messenger, I explained to him that it is impermissible to cast doubt on the Islam of anyone who has uttered the two testimonies of faith, performed the pilgrimage to the Sacred House for many consecutive years (in the company of King Abdulaziz, may God have mercy on him), led his companions in prayer during his many journeys across Arabia, and requested to be buried in a Muslim cemetery if he were to die outside the Peninsula (perhaps because he knew that many Muslims doubted his Islam even more than non‑Muslims did).
The Prophet ﷺ became angry with his beloved companion Usama ibn Zayd when he doubted the sincerity of a man who had been fighting among the polytheists but then uttered the testimony of faith—Usama assumed he said it only out of fear of the sword and killed him. The Prophet ﷺ replied: “Did you split open his heart?” until Usama wished he had not embraced Islam before that moment, so that he might be forgiven.
2) It is narrated that the poet Khalid al‑Faraj—may God forgive him—expressed his doubt in verse, saying: “I asked Philby… he said: my secret is in my heart.” He even reversed the letters of “Philby” to form “Yablif,” may God forgive them both (as cited by al‑Zirikli).
Al‑Zirikli himself appears to have doubted Philby, and—like many biographers and historians—his judgments are unreliable. In his entry on King Saud, he did not mention a single virtue, forgetting the king’s countless worldly achievements: the first university, the first housing projects, the first road across the Peninsula toward Mecca, and many more. His religious achievements were even greater—though al‑Zirikli ignored them—such as the first international Islamic university, the first College of Sharia in Mecca (the nucleus of Umm al‑Qura University), the first College of Sharia in Riyadh (the nucleus of Imam University), the first publication of Ibn Taymiyyah’s jurisprudence (Majmu‘ al‑Fatawa), and the first Saudi expansions of the Prophet’s Mosque and the Sacred Mosque. The list is very long.
3) There is no doubt that Philby contributed to the blessed land and state far more than al‑Zirikli ever did. As for King Saud—may God have mercy on him—he is considered the sixth great renewer in religion and worldly affairs after Muhammad ibn Abd al‑Wahhab, Muhammad ibn Saud, Abdulaziz ibn Muhammad, Turki ibn Abdullah, and Abdulaziz ibn Abdulrahman. Al‑Zirikli and those like him are not qualified to appreciate his true stature.
Abdullah Philby—may God have mercy on him—was the first and most prolific writer on the blessed land and the blessed state. God guided him to Islam, and he migrated to its land, residing there for nearly forty years, as he explains in his book Forty Years in the Wilderness.
Despite the poor translation and commentary on the book, when Philby stated that a pilot had deviated from the correct route and that he guided him back, the commentator wrote sarcastically: “As if Philby were an aviation expert.”
I once saw a pilot consult Philby after losing his way near the Shaqra airport forty years ago. The pilot had already passed Shaqra and did not want to turn back for a single passenger (the author). This required not aviation expertise but knowledge of the land—and I do not believe any Saudi knew the terrain as Philby did. Many examples in his writings show the prejudice of many Arabs and their lack of verification before judging others, contrary to God’s command.
4) I have seen many Arabs—especially among the Muslim Brotherhood, particularly Palestinians—during the Iraqi Ba‘ath occupation of Kuwait spreading rumors and slander against the best rulers of the Arabs and Muslims (since the early centuries), claiming they were of Jewish origin. They themselves often do not understand their own noble Arab lineage.
How can they forget that many of the greatest Companions were once idol‑worshippers, and that this did not diminish their reward? What matters is one’s ending.
These rulers alone were distinguished by God in the last three centuries for reviving the prophetic path, adhering to it, and spreading it.
How can the slanderers not realize that they themselves descend from Jewish, Christian, or pagan ancestors, and that they have deviated from the way of the Prophet ﷺ and his Companions? They do not call to pure monotheism, nor to the Sunnah, nor do they forbid shirk or innovations. They are born, live, and die among shrines and tomb‑worship, surrounded by innovations in their mosques and rituals.
The leader of Hamas even venerates the idol of Khomeini, offering flowers to his shrine and calling him their “spiritual father.”
They inherited from their Shi‘i forefathers the idea of revolting against rulers. They claimed participation in the Egyptian revolution, were accused of killing Prime Minister al‑Nuqrashi, and of attempting to assassinate Gamal Abdel Nasser.
When Ibn al‑Wazir assassinated Imam Yahya in Yemen and seized power, no Muslim or non‑Muslim state supported him—only the Muslim Brotherhood sent a delegation, bringing misfortune with them.
5) Abdullah Philby—like Muhammad Asad—loved Arabia, whose worldly life had remained unchanged for centuries. King Abdulaziz was astonished that Muhammad Asad preferred to travel from Hijaz to Najd by camel, and that Philby preferred to travel from Taif to Mecca by mule or donkey along al‑Hada road.
Both men embraced Islam—the first from Judaism, the second from Christianity. Both were close to King Abdulaziz and his advisory council. Neither used this position as a profession or a means of income, unlike many Arabs who were chosen for such roles, except for the chief adviser Prince Abdullah bin Abdulrahman—may God have mercy on him.
The commentator on Philby’s book erred when he doubted Philby’s statement that he never received a monthly salary from the Saudi government. Philby mentioned receiving occasional financial assistance from King Abdulaziz—this is different from a salary. Many others, including Muhammad Asad, received similar occasional support.
Both men wished that the emerging oil wealth would not undermine the independence and simple lifestyle of the Bedouin (and townspeople), nor overwhelm their culture with Western consumerism. A noble wish, but impossible to realize—most people complain even when given, so how would they react if not given? “And few of My servants are truly grateful.”
6) Muhammad Asad did not remain long in the blessed land, nor did he compete for wealth. He devoted himself to writing—incorrectly labeled “Islamic thought”—and thus avoided rivalry and conflict. Prince Salman—may God preserve him—told me that the rulers maintained contact with him in Morocco and later with his family after his death.
7) Philby, however, possessed traits—along with commercial and political competition—that earned him hostility, suspicion, and discomfort wherever he went, except in a few places.
He opposed the British government during World War II in a way that embarrassed it (and embarrassed the Saudi state he had chosen to migrate to). His own government accused him of defeatism and disloyalty, spied on his letters to his mother, daughter, and wife, monitored his political movements, and even decided to arrest him (based on British intelligence documents from 1929–1948, released after fifty years and published in Asharq Al‑Awsat in 1423 AH).
8) Philby was born in Ceylon (Sri Lanka) to an English father—a tea planter. His wealthy father sent him to England, where he studied at Cambridge and excelled in languages. He was selected for service in India, then the jewel of the British Empire, and rose to Assistant British Commissioner in Punjab.
He later became adviser to the Ministry of Interior in Baghdad during the British occupation, then High Commissioner in Jordan.
While Lawrence of Arabia bet on the Hashemites—especially Faisal bin Hussein—to unify Arabia, Philby bet on Abdulaziz bin Saud—may God have mercy on them all. British politicians did not believe him. When he tried to convince them one last time, Lord Curzon called him insane. Philby left the meeting saying to himself: “We shall see.”
Soon after, urgent telegrams reached the Foreign Office confirming that Ibn Saud’s army had become an unstoppable force across Arabia. The Foreign Office summoned Philby, and Curzon personally met him and sent him as Britain’s envoy to offer Ibn Saud a grant of £60,000 in exchange only for peace and restraint.
9) Philby states in Forty Years in the Wilderness (p. 149) that he resigned from his post in Jordan after Britain broke its promise to allow the people to choose their own government by installing Faisal and Abdullah, sons of Hussein bin Ali, as kings of Iraq and Jordan.
British documents say that Ibn Saud ignored British warnings and entered Mecca—just as Philby had predicted. Britain then decided that the only person qualified to represent it before King Abdulaziz was Philby.
During one of his visits to the king, Philby left the royal council to telegraph his resignation to London, severing all official ties.
British intelligence, the Foreign Office, and the Home Office all described him as eccentric, claimed he encouraged Ibn Saud to take a firm stance against Britain in the 1928 negotiations and on the Palestinian issue, and concluded that he had lost loyalty to his homeland.
10)
The Arabs would not have been satisfied with him, for he believed they should accept the international partition plan and even accept the settlement of 150,000 Jewish immigrants on the condition that immigration cease thereafter. Nor would the Jews have accepted such a proposal.
Had Philby lived to the present day, he would have said: “After fifty years, the Arabs now wish they could obtain even less than the borders of the original partition plan.”
And had President Sadat—may God have mercy on him—lived, he would have said: “They now wish they could obtain even less than what I negotiated on their behalf.”
Egypt, however, gained the entirety of Sinai through his negotiations, with all its strategic significance. A quarter of a century later, the Palestinians obtained through the Oslo Accords only the smallest portion of the land (in the West Bank and Gaza). The Muslim Brotherhood then contributed to dividing that territory, enabling the emergence of a shadow‑state unrecognized by anyone, after having pursued such a state for half a century.
11) Philby loved King Abdulaziz and his land just as Muhammad Asad did. Philby worked tirelessly to introduce the world to the King and to Arabia more than any Arab or foreigner of his time. The Royal Geographical Society in Britain recognized the magnitude of his contributions and awarded him its Medal of Honor.
Sana’a and Hadramawt accused him of attempting to persuade King Abdulaziz to annex Hadramawt to Saudi Arabia due to his extensive travels in the region. Yet the only tangible result of his efforts was his book The Sisters of Sheba.
There is no doubt that he wished King Abdulaziz’s rule could extend into Yemen. During the peace negotiations between Saudi Arabia and Yemen following the Saudi army’s occupation of al‑Hudaydah, Philby stood at the edge of King Abdulaziz’s council weeping as the King ordered the withdrawal of his forces and the return of all captured territory to Yemen solely through negotiation—not because Philby loved war, but because he believed King Abdulaziz was better for Yemen and for the Arabs as a whole.
12) Philby was frank, stubborn, and argumentative—traits that, like many people, led him to admire his own opinions to the point that some accused him of arrogance. These qualities often brought him trouble.
In 1940, British intelligence placed in his file a report describing his criticism and disdain for the British government past and present, his defeatism, disloyalty, and opposition to the war.
In 1939, a British aircraft made an emergency landing in Hadramawt, and the local tribes killed all its passengers. Philby defended their actions, arguing that the aircraft had been sent to kill them.
He declared that the Allies should not have entered the war, that they would not achieve victory, that Britain had become a dictatorship no different from Germany, and that it had prosecuted 11,000 citizens who refused to fight on moral grounds. He described British news bulletins as base and miserable, and claimed that the casualty figures they broadcast regarding enemy shipping losses were false.
He launched a vigorous political campaign to dissuade the British Labour government from dividing the newly‑established Saudi state and from supporting opponents of King Abdulaziz.
[The author adds: The most prominent and dangerous of those opponents was Faisal al‑Duwish, whose final refuge was a British warship in the waters of the Arabian Gulf. Muhammad Asad confirms this in The Road to Mecca, where he recounts that King Abdulaziz tasked him with investigating the matter. Asad followed the trail to Kuwait and witnessed evidence of al‑Duwish’s involvement in a British plot to partition Saudi Arabia into small states incapable of resisting British influence. Historian Muhammad al‑‘Ubayd also documented these events based on eyewitness accounts.
Historian Felix Mangan, in The History of Egypt under Muhammad Ali, recounts that al‑Duwish’s grandfather had been one of Ibrahim Pasha’s greatest collaborators in the Ottoman‑Egyptian campaign against the First Saudi State, providing camels, supplies, and men in exchange for a promise to appoint him ruler of al‑Dir‘iyyah. After the destruction of al‑Dir‘iyyah, however, Ibrahim Pasha demanded five years of back taxes instead of granting him rule. Al‑Duwish outwardly complied, but once he reached safety, he told the Ottoman envoys: “Tell your master that my contribution to the fall of al‑Dir‘iyyah was no less than that of his army, yet he repaid me with ingratitude. If he wants anything from the chief of Mutayr, let him come himself to take it from me in the heart of my tribe.” Mangan notes that al‑Duwish could have defeated the Ottomans and saved Najd, but chose betrayal out of ambition—just as his grandson would do a century later.]
13) Philby remained for nearly forty years close to the Saudi consultative circle in an unofficial capacity. He engaged in trade—cars, tents (which came to be known, with slight distortion, as “Thalabiyyāt”), toys, and other goods—while pursuing his passion for geography, history, and archaeology.
He disagreed with King Abdulaziz more openly than any other adviser and endured the King’s occasional rebuke, such as calling him “crazy” or “a liar.”
King Abdulaziz, however, tolerated disagreement and was patient, even when angered. Al‑Zirikli recounts that one adviser (Hasan al‑Hakami) provoked the King with persistent opposition. The King said: “So I understand nothing?” The adviser replied: “On the contrary, Your Highness, you understand—but so do we.” The King left the council for nearly fifteen minutes, then returned as if nothing had happened.
After the King’s death—or three years earlier, according to Philby, and five years earlier according to Hamad al‑Jasir, when Crown Prince Saud assumed administrative authority—Philby no longer participated in advisory meetings, even unofficially.
Philby admired King Abdulaziz not only for his well‑known qualities—chief among them being a leader devoted to the Qur’an who unified most of Arabia—but also because the King disliked social formalities, detested smoking and the moral decay of the age, and was happiest when sitting on the ground among his people.
Philby’s love for the King and for the natural simplicity of Bedouin life—shared by many townspeople—made it difficult for him to accept any change after the King’s death. He began expressing his discontent publicly, which was the gravest of his errors.
14) In April 1954, only months after King Abdulaziz’s death, Philby published an article in Foreign Affairs filled with complaints, pessimism, and predictions of decline for a reign that had barely begun. He accused senior officials of prioritizing personal wealth over national interest and compared the character of King Abdulaziz with that of his successors in a tone lacking tact—and fairness.
There is no doubt that King Abdulaziz’s character and achievements were exceptional and globally recognized. Yet the reigns of his sons were a continuation of his legacy, and their preparation for leadership was among his greatest accomplishments.
15) King Saud—may God have mercy on him—was the first to assume the throne after his father. He spent twenty years preparing for his reign as Crown Prince and then as King. He saved his father’s life during an assassination attempt while the King was performing tawaf.
God blessed the Kingdom’s modest revenues at the time (one million barrels of oil per day at $1.80 per barrel at best), enabling King Saud’s immense energy and unmatched enthusiasm to combine two missions:
- continuing the Saudi state’s unique religious role—reviving Islam by returning it to the way of the Prophet ﷺ and his Companions
- and building a modern state with administrative systems and educational, health, cultural, and social institutions
Many of these institutions and regulations remain in place today.
Hamad al‑Jasir recounts that King Saud urged him, when he was responsible for education in Najd, to accelerate the opening of modern schools. When al‑Jasir apologized for the lack of teachers, the King reminded him that every town had a mosque, an imam, and a muezzin—and that a school in its early stages needed little more than a teacher (the imam) and a caretaker (the muezzin) until the Colleges of Sharia in Mecca and Riyadh and the religious institutes could begin graduating trained teachers.
16) King Saud responded to Philby’s public criticism with a mild rebuke—not for his pessimism, but for airing grievances publicly—out of respect for Philby’s affection for his father.
Philby did not learn from this mistake. In early 1955, he published a book about his life in Saudi Arabia that worsened matters. The gap between him and the other advisers widened.
The third and final blow came later that same month when he delivered a series of lectures to employees of the Arabian American Oil Company (ARAMCO) about his thirty years of travel in the Kingdom.
Instead of limiting the response to reprimand—as in the first incident—or banning the sale of the translation—as in the second—the government asked Philby to leave the country after he refused to publish a retraction.
17) He settled in Lebanon until Prime Minister Hussein al‑Oweini persuaded him to apologize and persuaded King Saud to accept the apology and allow Philby to return to his home and family in Saudi Arabia after nearly four years of absence.
Like Rafik Hariri later, al‑Oweini had gained wealth through his work in Saudi Arabia before becoming Prime Minister of Lebanon.
The Lebanese and Omanis, in my experience, were the only Arabs who preserved loyalty and gratitude, unlike many others—especially those around al‑Aqsa Mosque—who forgot that Saudi Arabia had provided them with support unmatched by any other state, even appointing the Palestinian representative as its delegate to the United Nations before Palestine had its own seat.
Philby contributed to Saudi negotiations with oil companies, with the Marconi Company for telegraph communications, and in managing relations with Britain when it controlled most of the Gulf and much of the Arab world—though he was not the sole negotiator, despite how he portrayed himself.
Although he returned to reside in Saudi Arabia, God decreed that he would die and be buried in Lebanon during one of his many journeys in 1380 AH (1960). May God have mercy on him and guide those who come after him.
(Written in 1431 AH)