Women’s resistance during the Ottoman campaigns against Diriyah and other regions of the First Saudi State, and later the Second Saudi State, was a hard test of society’s capacity to endure.
The confrontation was not confined to the battlefield. It spread across the social fabric, where women played a decisive role in preserving cohesion and sustaining the community under siege and in the face of destruction.
Dr. Fatmah bint Hussein Al Fardan Alqhtani, professor of history at King Saud University, told Asharq Al-Awsat that recognizing women’s presence in the resistance does not mean casting them in stereotypical combat roles. It means acknowledging the practical responsibilities imposed by society and by the historical moment itself.
Daily resilience under siege
During the Ottoman siege, Diriyah was not merely a battlefield. It was a community under total pressure, and women stood at its center.
They ran households in the absence of men, shielded children and property, tended the wounded, secured what food they could and held the social fabric together at a decisive existential moment.
Ottoman reports, Alqhtani noted, treated Diriyah not as an isolated military force but as a full society. That helps explain the sweeping captivity and deportation measures imposed on women and children after the city’s fall, an implicit recognition that resistance was not only about weapons but about a community that believed in its cause and defended it to the end.
Foreign accounts add another layer. Harford Jones, tasked by the British Empire in the region, cited French historian Felix Mengin, who was then at the court of Muhammad Ali Pasha and had access to correspondence related to Ibrahim Pasha's campaign.
According to that account, when Imam Abdullah bin Saud learned Ibrahim Pasha was absent from his camp, he ordered attacks on all Turkish lines. The battle raged for hours in searing heat, with sustained gunfire and fierce exchanges.
Amid the clash, women of the Saudi state were seen carrying water jars, moving through live fire to supply defending fighters. The image is stark: women not as distant symbols of morale, but as active participants in danger, embodying sacrifice and solidarity in defense of their state and identity.
From trenches to vigilance
Alqhtani pointed to events in Shaqra in 1233 AH (1818) as a clear example of women’s direct engagement during Ibrahim Pasha’s march toward Diriyah.
The town was encircled by a trench whose construction had begun in the days of Tusun Pasha before stalling. As the threat intensified, the emir ordered the trench completed in anticipation of a prolonged siege.
Men and women mobilized together. Women took part in digging and in support tasks, enduring harsh conditions. Their role, Alqhtani said, went beyond moral backing. They were physically involved in fortifying the town and safeguarding the community.
Women were also part of the broader security awareness of war. During the siege of Al-Rass, Ottoman forces attempted to tunnel under the city wall to infiltrate it at night. A woman grinding grain late into the night heard unfamiliar sounds near her home and sensed the danger.
She reported it to Sheikh Qurnas bin Abdulrahman bin Qurnas, Emir of Al-Rass. The alert enabled defenders to act swiftly. The sheikh ordered a counter-trench to block the attempt.
The episode, Alqhtani said, underscores that women’s role in resistance was neither emotional nor symbolic. It was vigilant, responsible and operational, part of a collective defense effort spanning all segments of society.
When survival meant bearing arms
Women’s involvement was not limited to endurance and support. A contextual reading of Najdi and Ottoman sources suggests that in moments of extreme peril, particularly during sieges, some women took part in armed defense.
“In besieged societies, where survival itself becomes a battle, carrying weapons was not absolutely confined to men,” Alqhtani said. “It could become a direct act of defending self and place.”
Although sources do not record specific female names in these instances, references to fighting inside the city and to the participation of the “people of Diriyah” in its defense allow for a broader understanding of women as part of an armed home front when necessary.
Alqhtani cited Ghalia Al-Baqamiyya as one of the most prominent examples of direct female military leadership during the Ottoman campaigns against the First Saudi State.
Felix Mengin, then the French consul in Cairo, described the circumstances surrounding the Ottoman advance, including the arrival of forces in Turbah and the three-day siege it faced in a bid to subdue it.
The town held firm. Ghalia Al-Baqamiyya played a central role, raising the morale of fighters from her tribe, Al-Buqum. Some sources indicate she went out at the head of a group of her men to confront the attackers.
The standoff coincided with the arrival of Saudi reinforcements, leading to the Battle of Wadi Al-Sulaym. The fighting was fierce and ended with Ottoman forces defeated and withdrawing toward Taif, leaving behind casualties and substantial spoils in one of the most severe setbacks of those campaigns.
The episode, Alqhtani said, makes one point clear: women were not on the margins of resistance. At pivotal moments, they assumed leadership roles that directly shaped the course of battle, embedding their presence in the history of defending the state and society.
