Another
Flashman book. See also: Flashman, Royal Flash, Flash for Freedom, Flashman at the Charge, Flashman and the Great Game, Flashman's Lady , Flashman and the Redskins, Flashman and the Dragon, Flashman and the Angel of the Lord, Flashman and the Tiger, Flashman on the March, and the original source material Tom Brown's Schooldays by Thomas Hughes.
This book
finds Flashman in the middle of the first Sikh War (1845-1846).
Since I
knew absolutely nothing about the first Sikh War, I got quite an education from
this book. And being a history geek, I
enjoyed every minute of it. (If you like
history, these Flashman books are a real treat.)
There’s a
lot of interesting stuff in this book.
George MacDonald Fraser pulls off an exotic tale at the frontiers of British India that has plenty of espionage, intrigue and
bizarre twists, most of which actually turn out surprisingly to be historical.
George
MacDonald Fraser also highlights some of the more colorful European and
American adventurers in India
during the period, such as Alexander Gardner (W) and Josiah Harlan
(W), the latter of whom was the inspiration for Rudyard Kipling’s The Man Who Would Be King.
The book
also includes some very interesting descriptions of the great battles of the
Sikh War.
Something
that both George MacDonald Fraser and our narrator Flashman are at pains to
emphasize is that, contrary to common misconception, the Sikh War, and many of
the other British Imperial wars, were not fought against disorganized unarmed
savages, but instead fought against a well-armed army trained on the European
model. To quote from Flashman: “That was the thing about the Khalsa [Sikh
Army]: it was Aldershot
in turbans. It was an army.
That’s worth bearing in mind when
you hear some smart alec holding forth about our imperial wars being one-sided
massacres of poor club-waving heathen mown down by Gatlings. Oh, it happened, at Ulundi and Washita and Omdurman—but ….our detractors
never mentioned armies like the Khalsa, every bit as well-armed and equipped as
we were. So how did we hold India? You’ll see presently.” (p. 58)
The story
culminates, then, with some great battles involving heavy artillery that to me
seemed more like a Napoleonic battle than an Indian War. One of the battles is even described as the “Indian
Waterloo.”
If you’re
curious about this period of history, and you like a good exotic adventure
story, this book is a lot of fun to read.
Historical Accuracy
I know nothing about the Sikh
Wars, so don’t put too much stock into my opinions.
However
that being said, one criticism I have heard about the Flashman series in general is that George MacDonald Fraser relies
too much on sensationalist Victorian era reports instead of more sober and
balanced histories.
I suspect
that might be the case here. As always,
George MacDonald Fraser has everything in the book meticulously backed up by
historical endnotes, but some of the details in this book about the debauchery,
orgies, and intrigue in the court of Lahore seem to read like they may have
been exaggerated by credulous Victorians. (Although again, I really don’t know
anything, so I’m not in a position to make a judgment. This is just my suspicion.)
As with
some of the other books in the Flashman
series, this book is probably an example of orientalism (W)—the kind
of book that emphasizes the exoticness and strangeness of Eastern cultures to
create a more interesting story for Western audiences.
Of course
whether this is a negative point or not depends entirely on your
perspective. I have a good friend who is
a fellow Flashman fan, and when I mentioned this point to him he replied, “I’d
actually say that’s the best thing about the Flashman books. Some people
may criticize George MacDonald Fraser for using sensationalist Victorian
sources, but I’d praise him for it. He’s
correct to go back to the most exciting and interesting sources and use those
to make his story. That’s the kind of
history that’s the most interesting to read.”
And he may
be right. I just bring up the issue so
that a potential reader knows beforehand what they’re getting into. But if exotic oriental adventures sound more
your thing than a sober boring history, then this is the book for you.
The Politics
I’ve mentioned this before in
previous reviews, but it seems to me that the politics of these Flashman books have changed along the
way.
The first 5
books in the series seemed to be a criticism of the British
Empire and the imperial mindset.
Starting
with book 6, Flashman’s Lady, the
books actually became a defense of British (and sometimes American)
imperialism.
One of two things happened: either
1) George MacDonald Fraser got more conservative as he grew older, or 2) he had
actually been conservative all along, and I just thought the early books were
anti-imperial because I was mistakenly reading my own views into the
books. (At some point I should probably
re-read the early Flashman books and
see how they fare under a second reading.)
The early Flashman books focused on the British
disaster in Afghanistan, the
pointless bloodbath that was the Crimean War, and showed the results of British
misrule in India
during the Indian Mutiny.
In the
later Flashman books, George
MacDonald Fraser defends the British imperial legacy in Borneo, the second Opium
War, and in Ethiopia, (and
at least some aspects of the United
States policy against the American-Indians).
In this book, George MacDonald Fraser
defends the British policy during the Sikh Wars. He portrays the British government as simply
wanting peace and stability in the Punjab, and
forced into a war by the aggression of the Sikhs.
Sir Henry
Hardinge, who had hoped for a more peaceful resolution to the Sutlej
crisis, is represented as short-sighted and arrogant, and those favoring a more
aggressive British policy (George Broadfoot and Sir Hugh Gough) come off as
much more competent and far sighted.
George
MacDonald Fraser is aware that some other historians have placed the blame for
the origin of the Sikh War on the British government (he cites Cunningham’s
1849 work History of the Sikhs), but
he attempts to write a rebuttal of this in one of his appendixes:
It is easy to say that with a powerful,
arrogant Khalsa bent on invasion, war was inevitable; no one in the Punjab could restrain them (or wanted to), so what could
the British do but prepare to meet the storm? Something, according to
Cunningham, a most respected historian, who believed that, while the Khalsa
took the initiative, the British were “mainly to blame” for the war. His
conclusions have been eagerly seized in some quarters, but his argument boils
down to the suggestion that Britain,
“an intelligent power” faced with “a half barbarous military dominion”, should
have acted with more wisdom and foresight.
It is rather lofty, even for 1849, and perhaps “equally” or “partially”
would be fairer than “mainly.” (Appendix 1: The Sutlej
Crisis, p. 365)
Which view
is accurate? Someone who actually knows
their facts will have to answer this question.
I have no idea. For all I know,
George MacDonald Fraser may well be right.
And yet,
there are parts of this book which lead me to suspect that our narrator
Flashman (and our author George MacDonald Fraser) have started to view history
through a more belligerent and pro-imperial stance that would have been out of
place in the earlier books.
For
example, in one of the earlier Flashman
books, Flashman at the Charge, these
are Flashman’s thoughts as he surveys the wreckage after the battlefield at Crimea. (The
Crimean War occurred after the Sikh War, but it comes from an earlier Flashman
book because they are not always written in chronological order.) Here Flashman is talking about what he'd like to do to the War-mongers back in England who had started the whole slaughter.
The camp ground was littered with spent shot and rubbish and broken gear among the pools of congealed blood – my stars, wouldn’t I just like to take one of our Ministers, or street-corner orators, or blood-lusting, breakfast-scoffing papas, over such a place as the Alma Hills – not to let him see, because he’d just tut-tut and look anguished and have a good pray and not care a damn – but to shoot him in the belly with a soft-nosed bullet and let him die screaming where he belonged. That’s all they deserve.
Contrast
that, if you will, with Flashman’s thoughts after witnessing the slaughter of the
Sikhs in this book:
They say ten thousand Khalsa died in the Sutlej. Well, I don’t mind and I still don’t. They started it, and hell mend them, as old
Colin Campbell used to say. And if you tell me that every man’s death
diminishes me, I’ll retort that it diminishes him a hell of a sight more, and
if he’s a Khalsa Sikh, servers him right.
Knowing me, you won’t marvel at my
callousness, but you may wonder why Paddy Gough, as kindly an old stick as ever
patted a toddler’s head, hammered ‘em so mercilessly when they were beat and
running. Well, he had good reasons, one
being that you don’t let up on a courageous adversary until he hollers “Uncle!”,
which the Sikhs ain’t inclined to do—and I wouldn’t trust ‘em if they did. Nor
do you feel much charity towards an enemy who never takes prisoners, and
absolutely enjoys chopping up wounded, as happened at Sobraon and Ferozeshah
both. Even if Gough had wanted to stop the slaughter, I doubt if anyone would
have heeded him.
But the best reason for murdering
the Khalsa was that if enough of the brutes had escaped, the whole beastly
business would have been to do again, with consequent loss of British and Sepoy
lives. That’s something the moralists overlook (or more likely don’t give a dam
about) when they cry: “Pity the beaten foe!” What they’re saying, in effect, is
“Kill our fellows tomorrow rather then the enemy today.” But they don’t care to
have it put to them like that; they want their wars won clean and comfortable,
with a clear conscience. (Their consciences being much more precious than their
own soldiers’ lives, you understand.)
Well, that’s fine, if you’re sitting in the Liberal Club with a bellyful
of port on top of your dinner, but if you rang the bell and it was answered not
by a steward with a napkin but an Akali with a tulwar, you might change your
mind. Distance always lends
enlightenment to the view I’ve noticed. (p. 344-345—tulwar means Sikh sword in Hindi)
As Flashman is an anti-hero, I
suppose I should be cautious about assuming his views are synonymous with
George MacDonald Fraser (although Fraser will usually make a note in the
endnotes when he wants to disassociate himself from Flashman’s analysis, something
he doesn’t do here.) Either way, this is
a far cry from Flashman’s views in Flashman
at the Charge.
And so, as
with several of the previous Flashman
books, I’m not sure I entirely approve of the pro-imperial politics of this
book, but that didn’t stop me from enjoying the story.
Put this
down as another guilty pleasure.
[Lest I be unfair, there’s at
least one passage that harkens back to the old Flashman, the critic of
Victorian morality. Flashman is put in a
position where it may be to Britain’s
advantage if he can seduce a foreign princess and he notes with pleasure how
uncomfortable the whole thing makes his superiors. As Flashman relates: He [George Broadfoot] had the
conscience of his time, you see, Bible-reared and shunning sin, and the thought
that my success in Lahore
might depend on fornication set him a fine ethical problem. He couldn’t solve it—I doubt if Dr. Arnold
and Cardinal Newman could, either. (“I say, your eminence, what price Flashy’s
salvation if he breaks the seventh commandment for his country’s sake?” “That
depends, doctor, on whether the randy young pig enjoyed it.”) Of course, if it
had been slaughter, not adultery, that was necessary, none of my pious
generation would even have blinked—soldier’s duty, you see. (p. 49-50).]
Notes
* As you can see from some of the above quotes, Flashman our
narrator uses a lot of Indian words as he tells his story.
I suspect
this is to give the story more authenticity.
I’m told that the British community stationed in India picked up
a lot of the local words, which they would intermix with English in their
conversations with each other to develop a unique sort of expatriate
dialect. (The expatriate community in Japan does the
same thing, by the way, so I can easily imagine it). And George MacDonald Fraser spent some time
in India,
where he apparently acquired some of this lingo himself.
However, I’m
not sure I entirely sure I appreciated the linguistic education. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t find all those
trips back to the glossary a tad annoying.
* I have now finished all 12 Flashman books (see list above).
I read the books slightly out of order because I’m in Asia
and it was difficult to track the books down exactly in order. So I’m actually
finishing on book 9 out of 12, but this is nevertheless the end of the Flashman series for me. Although I’ve noted my quibbles with this or
that along the way, on the whole it’s been an enjoyable reading experience.
Although
this is the end of the official Flashman
series, Flashman and his family do reportedly make cameo appearances in some
other George MacDonald Fraser books: Mr.
American (A) and Black
Ajax (A). And Flashman also
reportedly pops up in yet other books by other writers (W).
I’m not sure
yet if I’ll get to these other books or not, but as always if I read them, I’ll
add them to my book review list.
It sure is a volatile time in the Syrian and Egyptian regions. Currently our church is supporting a Syrian Christian and Egyptian Christian as missionaries, and we pray for them regularly. Thankfully, they've been able to send messages regularly letting us know they're okay. It is a tough transitional place to be, and I pray for peace there regularly.
ReplyDeleteThanks for linking to my blog! Love your reviews, especially the Flashman ones. I suspect that you're writing what are among the best Flashman reviews online at the moment.
ReplyDelete>> I suspect that you're writing what are among the best Flashman reviews online at the moment.
ReplyDeleteOh, wow! High praise, but I'll take it, I suppose.
I stumbled onto your blog while searching the Internet for Flashman reviews, and it looks like we have a number of similar interests. I too am very interested in 19th Century history, so I enjoy your reviews which make me aware of many books I'm not aware of.