Khartoum Campaign, 1898; or the Re-Conquest of the SoudanBurleigh, Bennet
History
Khartoum Campaign, 1898; or the Re-Conquest of the Soudan
Burleigh, Bennet
Omdurman, Battle of, Omdurman, Sudan, 1898; Sudan -- History -- 1881-1899; Sudan -- History, Military
Mr Bennett's article was seemingly framed on the specious pretext of,
under a discussion of the principles of international law, questions
of belligerency, Geneva Convention rules, and so forth, to base
thereon a claim for the treatment of dervishes as combatants entitled
to all the amenities of civilised warfare. Several pages of his
composition are given up to treating upon that matter. For instance,
he says--"Moreover, it is worth remembering that the dervishes were
not 'savages' in the sense in which the word is applied to the
followers of a Lobengula or a Samory. On the contrary, they satisfied
all the requirements for recognition as an armed force." Now, that is
an aspersion upon Lobengula and Samory in particular. For unredeemed
devilishness, the dervishes have had no equals. The fact is, that the
Mahdists made it a constant practice to ruthlessly slaughter all
prisoners in battle, wounded or unwounded; to enslave, torture, or
murder their enemies, active or passive; to loot and to burn; to slay
children and debauch women. To set up a pretext that such monsters are
entitled to the grace and consideration of the most humane laws, is to
beggar commonsense and yap intolerable humbug. Yet British
self-respect was such, Mr Bennett to the contrary notwithstanding,
that the dervishes were treated as men, and not as wild beasts.
Started upon his false pursuit, Mr Bennett proceeds from error to
error, abounding in reckless misstatements, atrocious imputations, and
scattering charges void of truth. As briefly as possible, I will deal
with his accusations. One of his first deliverances is as
follows:--"It is, of course, an open secret that in all our Soudan
battles the enemy's wounded have been killed. The practice has, ever
since the days of Tel-el-Kebir, become traditional in Soudanese
warfare. After the battle of Atbara, it was announced that 3000
dervishes had been killed. There was practically no mention of the
wounded.... How, then, was it that no wounded were accounted for at
the Atbara?" Again he writes:--"But I cannot help thinking that if the
killing of the wounded had been sternly repressed at Tel-el-Kebir and
during the earlier Soudan campaigns, our dervish enemies would have
learned to expect civilised treatment," etc. Gaining courage, probably
from his own audacity, Mr Bennett had the hardihood to virtually
declare that the cruelties permitted by British officers made the
dervishes what they were.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account