The Mahdi, the Mahdiyya, and the Mahdists: What are they to the South?

A North-South Dialogue

My compatriot, Mohamed Mudawi Mukhawi, read my opinion piece posted on this website and published elsewhere under the title: “Did Britain Divide Sudan, Africa?” He picked on two points for criticism; so let’s focus on them:

From the Critic (Mudawi) to the Criticised (Akol):

Akol quoted: “Let's be clear about a few things: What we now call was the British system of ‘Divide and Rule’ in Sudan is a misguided belief as far as our country was concerned. With regard to North-South relations, the two regions were never united any time before the British arrived.”

My comments:

To start with: let us agree that history is 'the facts that happened; and not the message we want to send, nor the impression we want to spread'. The British rule you are referring to came to Sudan in 1900; by that date the South was a genuine part of Sudan. But, when people talk of the South, about the south of what are they and were they talking? Of course, they are talking of the South of Sudan. Since 1821, that region was -as well as all other regions- of Sudan were occupied by the Turkish-Egyptian regime; and the whole of Sudan was officially considered as a mine of gold and a field for hunting slaves. The first raid in the Dinka land took place late in 1821, by the Turkish officer Toson Bey; who was delegated by Ibrahim Pasha -son of Mohamed Ali, the Turko-Egyptian monarch – in 1821. The outcome of the hunt was 600 slaves. At the same time, another raid was launched by Ismail Pasha -the younger son of the monarch- into Fazougli, and it resulted in capturing of 477 slaves. In fact raids to the other regions of Sudan, confronted fierce resistance that resulted in several massacres; henceforth, as a result the invaders stopped hunting for slaves in that regions; and in stead concentrated in collecting heavy taxes from the indigenous. According to that fact the slave trade was concentrated in the areas of low resistance, mainly non-Muslim areas. “The first regional Governor in Equatoria was appointed by the Khedive (monarch) was the British Samuel Baker in 1869. In August 1873 he was transferred and Ra'oof Bey replaced him until the advent of the new Governor of Equatoria the famous General Charles Gordon in 1874. The latter became Governor General of Sudan ten years later, -in 1884-; and continued till he was killed by the Mahdiya national rebels in Khartoum a year later... All above evidence prove the unity of Sudan eight decades before the coming of the British Condominium rule.

Akol quoted: “The Madhya era turned out to be one of the worst periods in the memory of Southerners. In spite of the fact that large parts of the South backed the Mahadists and fought against Turko-Egyptian rule, believing they (the Mahdists) would be fairer, slavery increased instead.”

My comments:

There was no single incidence of one single raid for hunting slaves by the liberation army of the Mahdiya: a part of which was formed of the Dinka warriors themselves as well as other southern tribesmen, who joined voluntarily. On the contrary, many of Southern dignitaries and tribal leaders migrated North during the revolution, especially to confirm their support for Imam Al Mahdi, who accepted them and sent them back with gifts including the blessed spears –the weapon used by the 'Ansar' rebels-, which were considered in the South as holy spears and later on worshiped by many tribes in some areas of Southern Sudan. The spears were the symbol resembling fighting for freedom by Ansar and till now it is the logo of Ansar and Umma Party. This is another evidence of historical and spiritual unity between regions and people of Sudan.

Moreover, the revolution was a liberation movement, which succeeded in achieving its goals. Although Imam Al Mahdi ruled Sud