Prisoners of the Mahdi by Byron Farwell

My review on Amazon.

Summary:


Prisoners of the Mahdi tells two stories set in late 19th century Sudan. The dramatic rise to religious and temporal power of the Mahdi, a Sudanese man claiming to be the redeemer of Islam, provides the first tale and sets the background for the second, the stories of three European captives each held for at least ten years under often brutal conditions. The Mahdi expels the Egyptian/Ottoman/British powers from the Sudan in 1884, a victory that includes the martyring death at Khartoum of General `Chinese' Gordon. The British return under Kitchener to avenge Gordon and retake control of the Nile form source to sea. A fascinating read about a now obscure, but previously hugely popular part of the history of the British Empire.


Full Review:

Prisoners of the Mahdi first traces the meteoric rise of an ordinary Sudanese Muslim. On June 29, 1881, this fellow, Muhammad Ahmed, proclaimed himself to be the Mahdi, the messianic redeemer of Islam, the second coming of the prophet in 1881. With his extreme religious fervor he managed to build an army of followers and begins to take control of the Sudan. At the time, the Sudan was nominally under control of the Ottoman Empire through the Khedive of Egypt. In reality, although the lines of authority were intentionally muddied, the British Empire had the final say through its consul in Cairo, the aptly titled `controller-general' Evelyn Baring.

The Khedive, exercising a modicum of independence had extended Egyptian (`Turco') authority into the Sudan and it was his fight against this authority that helped the Mahdi gain traction. The Mahdi's army of ansars (followers) has won some small skirmishes and then took control of Darfur after annihilating a British-led Egyptian army. Baring sensibly recommended that Egypt simply withdraw from the Sudan. The British didn't want it and there was little enough there for anyone.

Prime Minister William Gladstone agreed, but the war party within his own government managed to push the through the appointment of General `Chinese' Gordon to just go have a look around and oversee the Egyptian pullback. Baring twice refused to accept the appointment, but finally gave in - to the regret of many. A less suitable candidate for such a role than Gordon is difficult to imagine (George Patton?). (By the way, Chinese Gordon plays a prominent role in Flashman and the Dragon).

Once on the scene Gordon inevitably decided that Khartoum must be held at all costs. The Mahdi soon laid siege to the city. Gladstone dithered before sending a relief force that managed to arrive two days too late. Khartoum was sacked. Gordon was killed and attained a heroic martyr status that lasted in England for decades. (As Farwell tells it, Lytton Strachey's Eminent Victorians did for Gordon's reputation - deservedly so in my opinion). The sacking of Khartoum led to the sacking of Gladstone. The Sudan was now entirely in the hands of the Mahdi and became the Madihya.

At this point, Farwell turns to the second part of his story, the tales of three European captives of the Mahdi: Austrian soldier/adventurer Rudolph Slatin, Catholic priest Father Joseph Ohrwalder, and German merchant trader Charles Neufeld. (Farwell is also a captive of sorts because of source limitations; these three subjects provide very nearly everything that was known about their own captivity.) Each was held captive for 10 years. Farwell gives Slatin an extended treatment and deservedly so because Slatin's story holds the most interest by far. Slatin, who had quickly become a leading official in Egyptian-held Sudan, also quickly decided that the best course in captivity was total submissiveness (For example, he professed a conversion to Islam, possibly sincerely). It worked - more or less - and he held a seat close to the center of power especially under the Mahdi's successor or The Khalifa. He could observe, but was never really trusted by the Khalifa and lived in fear of his life.

Ohrwalder's and Neufeld's stories are told more briefly and hold interest primarily by demonstrating the depths of cruelty that humans will subject one another to if they have the power to do so and the ability of humans to endure prolonged cruelty and privation. Neufeld in particular refused to cooperate in any degree and suffered accordingly. Ohrwalder's exciting escape story, and Neufeld's poor treatment upon in release.

Ironically, their post-captivity lives mirrored their success in captivity. Slatin went to a much-decorated career, being told at one point by King Edward VII that he would have to pin the Slatin's next medal on his hindquarters. Ohrwalder's role in the church was limited (presumably due his taking two wives and fathering at least one child in captivity, a fact that Farwell mysteriously seems to miss). Neufeld was suspected as a collaborator, a 180 from reality. Perhaps these fates reflect the men's inherent ability to flourish (or not) in any society - or perhaps it reflects something about the nature of power.

Farwell closes the book by briefly relating how the British retook the Sudan. After a hiatus of some eleven years, the British sent in the army under Kitchener to retake the Sudan for reasons having more to do with the `scramble for Africa' and control of the Nile than anything else.

Prisoners of the Mahdi is an excellent telling of a now obscure, but once hugely popular bit of history. The book's main limitations are from limited source material and Farwell's now-somewhat anachronistic viewpoint (the book was authored in 1967). Bearing those two shortcomings in mind and the reader interested in history has a tremendously fascinating tale in store.

***

For more on Gordon:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/gordon_general_charles.shtml

http://www.firstworldwar.com/features/mostpopularwar_gordon.htm

http://www.remuseum.org.uk/biography/rem_bio_gordon.htm

Read Gordon's journals at "Kartoum" online:

http://www.archive.org/stream/journalsofmajorg00gorduoft

Use a piece of paper to view his face one-half at a time.

For more on Slatin:

http://www.yale.edu/glc/events/cbss/Deng.pdf

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Fire-And-Sword-In-The-Sudan/Rudolph-Slatin/e/9781590481394

The Fall of Paris: The Siege and the Commune 1870-71 by Alistair Horne

The Fall of Paris: The Siege and the Commune 1870-71 by Alistair Horne

English historian Alistair Horne [A Savage War of Peace: Algeria 1954-1962 (New York Review Books Classics)] tells the story - really two stories - of the Franco-Prussian War's impact on Paris. First came the siege of Paris, a valiant struggle in its own right. A then after the downfall of Paris and the Prussian (partial) withdrawal came the Commune.

Horne does an excellent job telling these fascinating stories. I was surprised to learn that prior to this war the Prussians were somewhat lightly regarded as a military force - seen almost as a caricature of itself. The French under Louis-Napoleon (Napoleon III) expected to win the war and instead lost Alsace-Lorraine. As Horne emphasizes, this annexation planted the seeds for continued warfare between France and Germany. Bismarck opposed the annexation on those grounds, but lost the argument to the generals. The war culminated with the unification of Prussia and Germany into the new German Empire. In a scene foreshadowing Hitler's 1940 visit to Paris, the unification ceremony and elevation of King Wilhelm of Prussia to Emperor Wilhelm of the German Empire took place at the Versailles.

Louis-Napoleon and his Second Empire were given the boot in September 1870 even before the final surrender and the Third Republic was born. The Prussians kept coming and put Paris under a siege that lasted some 120 days. About two months later the Commune came into being as the first workers' republic (albeit small and short-lived). The establishment of the Commune led to a Parisian civil war.

Horne makes good use of the available source to bring the despair, hunger, terrors, thrills, and heroics to life. My only quibble is Horne's clear antipathy to the leftists; he assigns more derogatory terms to the Communards than the forces of reaction despite the fact that those forces certainly executed far more Parisians than the Communards. Still, his bias doesn't seem to interfere with his objectivity and his writing made the book a joy to read.

***

Why was Horne Bush's favorite historian?