The Mahas region in the 1820s and 1830s

During the troubled period of 1822-23, the far north of Sudan seems to have escaped the devastation accompanying the revolts within central Sudan and their bloody suppression. From an early date the far north, including the Mahas region seems to have important mainly as the route linking Sudan to the Egypt, a route along which troops and officials moved, as well as the trade in slaves and cattle.  Whether there was any significant presence on the cataracts, to facilitate river transport through the rapids, as part of more general attempts to enhance river transport system (Hill 1959: 61) remains unknown.

The region’s government varied with changing status of provinces, with the incorporation of Dongola province under the control of the Khartoum government in 1833 (Hill 1959: 35), and later experiments in decentralisation and recentralisation.  Whether this had any significant impact at a local level remains unknown.

The area also seems to have suffered from the relatively high rates of saqia and land tax (al-jad’a) imposed on Dongola province, markedly higher than those in Berber province (Hill 1959: 41).  These new taxes inspired an armed revolt in April 1833.  While a relatively minor affair for the government, significant numbers of Mahasi seem to have been killed during its suppression, and it may have caused major disruptions in some areas. For the revolt, we are fortunate to have some quite good information, recorded by Hoskins, who was just about to leave Hafir for the Mahas when news of the revolt reached the Kashef of Hafir with whom he was staying.  About its final suppression and aftermath, we have as yet, little information.  

The immediate cause of the revolt seems to have been these increased taxes.  Hoskins recorded that the traditional tax rates on saqias, which equalled 30 piastres (1 dollar in money, 2 pieces of linen cloth, a sheep) had been raised tenfold (to 15 dollars in cash, and 5 dollars in grain),  with the refusal of the officials to take cloth in payment (1835: 232).   The burdens of the cash impositions were particularly difficult in the Mahas are where, as he observed, “there are no markets, little or no commerce and that generally carried on by exchange” (1835: 220).  Threats of torture and mutilation by the Egyptian officer collecting the taxes in the end prompted Bakhit to attack the Kaimacan and three soldiers, killing three of them and leaving one for dead.

By the end of April there were reported to be some 1500 insurgents with Bakhit and the Qadi Isa against whom a force of some 150 troops with another 120 volunteers, 500 ‘Hassaneyeh’ and ‘Funge’ and 500 men with Melek Tombol, were sent, supported by one 8lb cannon. The Mahas forces attacked their camp ‘a little below Hannek’ on May 4th.  However, they were poorly armed, with only about 150 guns, mostly old matchlocks and with little ammunition, lances, shields, some German swords as well as local acacia wood swords ‘about four feet long’ (1835: 227).  They were easily defeated and some 120 killed with Bachit going into hiding.  A general pardon was proclaimed but the rebels defied this and by May 21 reports were coming in that Bakhit’s forces were again regrouping and he had some 100 men at Fagirinfenti (‘Fagir el Bint’).  He later set up camp ‘on a steep rock on a large island near Hannek’, but was again defeated in a second battle in early June when some  170 were killed and 30 prisoners taken  - Hoskins saw 105 pairs of ears cut from the dead! (1835: 240-41).

Who exactly was Bakhit?            Who was Qadi Eisa?

©David Edwards 2002                                                                                                                     Index page