Course:HIST317/Empire - Abroad/Sam Document Analysis

The source undergoing analysis is an interview with Major-General Charles Gordon, published on 9 January 1884 in the Pall Mall Gazette. The interview concerns the role of the Soudan in British foreign policy, and took place shortly before Gordon was appointed Governor-General of that region for the second time. It offers invaluable insights into the motivations behind the Empire, the mindset of those who administered it and perceptions of the wider world in late Victorian Britain.

It is important to note that the text is not an exact record of the interview, but rather ‘a rough transcript of the substance of [Gordon’s] remarks’. It is entirely possible then that the reporter W.T. Stead has applied his own interpretation, or that some key elements have been left out. In light of Stead’s clear admiration for Gordon, however, it seems unlikely that the text strays too far from the initial conversation.

The source highlights the priorities of the British government. In this case the state has no direct interest in the Soudan, but the Mahdist Revolt there has made the security of Egypt a major issue, in light of the wider objective of finding a favourable resolution to the Eastern Question. These are the foreign policy objectives, but no mention is made here of the practical benefits of possessing Egypt to the British population at large. This could indicate a neglect of domestic affairs and a pre-occupation with overseas affairs in the minds of the elite. Admittedly, it is possible that the reasons are considered common knowledge at this time and have been omitted by Stead. However, it is also possible they have not been considered at all and the necessity of control is merely assumed. According to the source, the intention of the government is to relinquish control of Sudan in order to preserve resources for Egypt. Gordon’s position differs from this in that he advocates a more proactive policy, indeed a more imperialistic policy. Gordon’s disregard for his opponents is apparent throughout; he does not see fit to refer to any specific opponent such as Gladstone, but contemptuously addresses his words to ‘you’, as if delivering a lecture. This draws attention to the differing attitudes towards Empire and its purpose, as well as the tension the issue provoked within British society.

Gordon repeatedly stresses the damaging consequences of non-intervention for the Soudanese population. Several interpretations can be applied to this. Is Gordon being cynical, shielding selfish, aggressive motives behind professed sympathy? Or is it perhaps vice versa, with Gordon justifying his moral conviction in terms agreeable to the state? Most likely the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The general’s concern for the Soudanese does appear genuine, and his disdain for the government’s proposed retreat is clear. But his apparent compassion is extremely patronising, referring as he does to ‘the poor Soudanese’, and it harks of the relationship between parent and child. This assumption of British superiority, however benevolent, is clearly pervasive even amongst the more sympathetic sectors of society. This is supported by another aspect of the source. Gordon is referred to by his nickname ‘Chinese’ throughout, rather than by his first name. This name came about through the publicity that surrounded his military successes in the Taiping Rebellion. This label suggests that an Englishman can easily understand and then represent other nations, in this case China. It is a supremely confident assumption, and this universally accepted nickname provides a striking encapsulation of that.

The source is therefore of great relevance to our topic of Empire. It provides a contemporary view of the Soudan issue, which was of some significance in the area of foreign affairs. The source shows why Britain’s attention was on that distant part of the world, and also tellingly where its attention was absent. It also highlights the important position of the Empire in the minds of contemporaries, and the differing perceptions of its role. It brings to light the issue of assumed British superiority as well, which could manifest itself in different ways, such as Gordon’s misguided, seemingly fatherly concern for the well-being of the Soudanese, or in the casual and highly visible way exhibited by his nickname. It is an intriguing insight into Victorian thought.

W.T. Stead, “Chinese Gordon on the Soudan,” The Pall Mall Gazette (London, GB: 9 January, 1884) <http://www.attackingthedevil.co.uk/pmg/interview.php>