[Illustration]
THE LAST PUNIC WAR
[Illustration: THE BEY OF TUNIS.
Reproduction by Maclure & Macdonald.]
THE LAST PUNIC WAR
* * * * *
TUNIS, PAST AND PRESENT
WITH A NARRATIVE OF THE FRENCH
CONQUEST OF THE REGENCY
BY
A. M. BROADLEY
BARRISTER-AT-LAW
CORRESPONDENT OF THE ‘TIMES’ DURING THE
WAR IN TUNIS
IN TWO VOLUMES.—VOL. I.
_WITH ILLUSTRATIONS_
WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS
EDINBURGH AND LONDON
MDCCCLXXXII
_All Rights reserved_
TO
THE RIGHT HON’BLE. EARL DE LA WARR
These Volumes
ARE GRATEFULLY AND RESPECTFULLY
DEDICATED
PREFACE.
* * * * *
I have associated with my narrative of the French conquest of Tunis the
title of Punic War, partly from the fact of the invasion having taken
place on the spot which once witnessed three famous contests of
antiquity so called, and partly on account of the consistent _Punica
fides_[1] displayed in the web of tortuous diplomacy which has
practically put an end to Tunisian independence.
If my reader will open the _Almanach de Gotha_ for 1881, at page 1029,
he will find the following passage:—
“TUNIS (RÉGENCE).”
“Depuis 1575 sous la souveraineté de la Turquie. Le Sultan a réglé, par
firman du 25 Octobre 1871 (9 Chabân 1283), les conditions de la
souveraineté de la Sublime-Porte sur Tunis et il a renoncé à l’ancien
tribut. D’après ce firman la situation de Tunis est à présent celle-ci:
Le ‘Bey’ reçoit l’investiture de Constantinople, il ne doit sans
l’autorisation du Sultan ni faire la guerre, ni conclure la paix, ni
céder du territoire. Il ne doit faire de négociations diplomatiques avec
l’étranger que sur des questions intérieures. Il est obligé de frapper
la monnaie au nom du Sultan et de mettre ses troupes à la disposition de
la Sublime-Porte en cas de guerre.”
Within four months from the time when this clear and unmistakable
definition of the political status of the Regency of Tunis appeared in
the celebrated _Annuaire genéalogique, diplomatique et statistique_, the
government of the French Republic, without any declaration of war,
either against the Bey of Tunis or the Sultan of Turkey, invaded the
country, compelled the Bey, by moral if not physical duress, to accept a
Protectorate, and finally effected a complete military occupation of the
Regency from the Khamír mountains to the frontiers of Tripoli. The
virtual extinction of Moslem power in Tunis, after an unbroken duration
of more than twelve centuries, is in itself an occurrence of no small
political importance, but when considered in connection with its actual
and possible consequences, not only in Tunis itself but throughout the
whole of North Africa, the “last chapter in the history of the Moors”
seems to be likely to excite a durable, and perhaps an increasing,
interest. This belief has prompted me to attempt to write the chronicles
of the French Invasion, and to briefly sketch, by way of introduction,
the more recent chapters of Tunisian annals.
In 1880 the Moslems of North Africa had almost forgotten the shock
occasioned to their religious susceptibilities by the conquest of
Algeria, and prior to the events of which I am about to speak,
Panislamism had in that region a theoretical rather than a practical
existence. Tunis has always been an intact Moslem state, and it contains
Holy Kairwán, after Mecca perhaps the most hallowed of Moslem cities.
The invasion of the Regency, and the occupation of the shrine, at once
converted this sentimental Panislamism into a stern and uncompromising
reality.
To these causes must undoubtedly to a certain extent be attributed the
rising in Algeria, the so-called insurrection in Tunis itself, the wide-
spread agitation in Tripoli, and the crisis in Egypt. So much for the
consequences of the “Last Punic War,” as far as they concern the World
of Islam. In Europe its effects have been hardly less momentous; Italy
has become the avowed enemy of France, England no longer believes in the
peaceful intentions of the Government of the Republic, Spain is
hankering after Morocco, and Germany is posing as the champion of the
Caliphate. In Italy the Ministry of Signor Cairoli fell twice within a
month, because it was unable to stay effectually the tide of French
Diplomacy, while in France M. Ferry succumbed to the unpopularity which
attends a failure, and M. Gambetta was wrecked in the storm to a great
extent occasioned by his injudicious support of M. Roustan. All this and
much more has resulted from the taking of Carthage. While France has her
hands full in Tunis, both Turkey and Italy are openly and almost
ostentatiously watching their opportunity. These patent facts can but
enhance the historical importance of the events which are related in
these volumes.
The policy of England as regards the Tunisian Question has been almost a
diplomatic enigma. She sang a song of triumph over the Firman of 1871,
still declared Tunis “an integral part of the territory of the Sublime
Porte in 1880, then told the Bey just one year later to cheerfully
assist at his political suicide, and finally, just six days _after_ the
convention of Kasr-es-Said, promulgated an Order in Council, to be cited
as _the Ottoman (Tunis) Order of_ 1881, the preamble of which justifies
its existence by the consideration that “by treaty, capitulation, grant,
usage, sufferance, and other lawful means, Her Majesty the Queen has
power and jurisdiction in relation to Her Majesty’s subjects and others
_in the Ottoman Dominions!_”
I have endeavoured to tell the story of recent events in Tunis
essentially from an English point of view, and to mete out impartially
the share of praise and blame ascribable to the different contending
parties. In all probability I shall please neither of them. The present
result of the expedition in the Regency itself can be described in a
word, _chaos_. Mr. Whitaker has very fairly summed up the situation in
his useful Almanac for 1882: “Last year,” he writes, “Tunis was a
tributary province of the Ottoman Empire, and in a state of profound
peace. At the present time, it may be considered as a turbulent,
informally annexed dependence of France, nominally under the dominion of
the Bey, but really under the control of a French Resident.” The prime
mover of the mischief, M. Théodore Roustan, has quitted the scene of his
exploits, and M. Paul Cambon reigns in his stead. Upon him will fall the
arduous task of evolving order out of chaos, and cleansing an Augean
stable of no small dimensions. He promises well, and Europe will await
with pardonable curiosity and some impatience the initiative which must
sooner or later follow his study of existing difficulties. It must be
remembered in England that the indemnity to the pillaged and bombarded
Maltese of Sfax yet hangs fire, that none of the families of the British
subjects massacred in cold blood at Oued Zerga or on the Kairwán road
have been recompensed for their irreparable loss, and that no
satisfaction has been given, or even proposed, for the judicial murder
of the British Consular Agent’s servant at Hammamet. In these serious
matters it is to be hoped that M. Paul Cambon will pour oil on the
troubled waters.
I once and for all disclaim any intention of criticising in a hostile
manner the conduct and bearing of the French troops. Their work has been
performed well and honestly, and the marches of General Forgemol, as
well as the organisation of the Susa column by General Étienne and
Colonel Moulin, are deserving of all praise. To the French diplomacy
concerning the Regency both at Paris and Tunis, I uncompromisingly take
exception, and I fear that the political history of the “Last Punic War”
throws its military achievements entirely into the shade. I believe that
both M. Saint-Hilaire and M. Roustan “have deserved ill of the
Republic,” in contriving and promoting the invasion and occupation of
this country. At any rate, it is to be hoped that the numerous and
serious complications which have been engendered by the “Last Punic
War,” will serve as a memorable lesson to strong Powers endowed with
absorptive tendencies as regards their weaker neighbours, and that the
pitiful spectacle of the Paris Assize Court will prove a warning to
Political Agents inclined to imitate the diplomatic vagaries of M.
Roustan.
I desire to express my obligations to the kindly interest and assistance
of the Earl De la Warr, to Colonel Frederick Burnaby for many excellent
suggestions, to Colonel Moulin and Commandant Coyne for much assistance
in the matter of detail concerning the military movements at Tunis and
Kairwán, and to Mr. Vice-Consul Galea, who was good enough to lend me
his diary of the siege of Sfax. The reproductions of the curious Spanish
pictures illustrating the expedition of Charles V. have been reduced
from large photographs in the possession of H.M. the Queen, which were
taken from the original paintings by H.R.H. the late Prince Consort, and
a few copies of which were printed by special permission for Lieutenant
Colonel Playfair, the learned author of “Travels in the Footsteps of
Bruce.”
I have to ask the readers indulgence for irregularities that he may
discover in the spelling of Tunisian and other proper names; as distance
from England, and the necessity of sending these volumes to press, have
prevented me from finally revising the proof-sheets.
TUNIS, _June_ 20, 1882.
CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
* * * * *
CHAP. PAGE
I. TOPOGRAPHY OF TUNIS 1
II. THE DWELLERS IN TUNISIA 15
III. NINE CENTURIES OF POWER, A.D. 648-A.D. 1535 30
IV. THE CONQUEST OF TUNIS BY CHARLES V. 36
V. SPANISH SUPREMACY 45
VI. THE TRIUMPH OF THE TURKS 48
VII. THE DOMINATION OF THE DEYS (A.D. 1590-1705) 51
VIII. THE BEYS OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 68
IX. TUNIS BETWEEN 1800 AND 1837 82
X. THE REIGNS OF AHMED BEY AND HIS COUSIN MUHAMED BEY 97
XI. MUHAMED-ES-SADEK 114
XII. THE BEGINNING OF THE END 148
XIII. BEFORE THE STORM 181
XIV. THE ACUTE STAGE OF TUNISIAN POLITICS 194
XV. THE OUTBREAK OF HOSTILITIES 214
XVI. AN INTERVIEW WITH THE BEY 232
XVII. FRUITLESS APPEALS 247
XVIII. A FORTNIGHT AMONGST THE KHAMÍRS 255
XIX. AT BIZERTA 278
XX. THE THREE WEEKS’ WAR 286
XXI. AT KASR-ES-SAID 308
XXII. THE EARLY DAYS OF THE PROTECTORATE 320
XXIII. HOW THE FRENCH TOOK MATER 333
XXIV. THE CHASSE AUX KHAMÍRS 344
* * * * *
ILLUSTRATIONS TO VOLUME I.
THE BEY OF TUNIS _Frontispiece._
CHRISTIAN SLAVES AT TUNIS _To face page_ 36
SIEGE OF GOLETTA BY CHARLES V. 36
LANDING OF CHARLES V. 36
BATTLE BETWEEN TUNIS AND GOLETTA 36
TAKING OF TUNIS BY CHARLES V. 36
MAP OF TUNIS _At the end._
TUNIS PAST AND PRESENT.
* * * * *
CHAPTER I.
TOPOGRAPHY OF TUNIS.
The coast-line of Northern Africa runs almost due east as far as Cape
Bon, the Mercurii Promontorium of the Romans, at which point it takes an
abrupt turn southwards till it reaches the island of Jerba, famous in
history as the fabled abode of the lotus-eaters, and close to the lower
extremity of the Gulf of Gabes, once known as the Lesser Syrtis. From
this point the shore of the Mediterranean again resumes its easterly
course towards Alexandria and the Nile.
The tract of country which occupies the angle thus formed is the Regency
of Tunis. As its very name denotes, the _Regency_ of Tunis never had any
pretensions to be more than a quasi-independent state. The dominion of
Tunis is, or rather was, a Regency or fief of the Turkish Empire, and
the Beys of Tunis were both politically and religiously vassals of the
Sublime Porte. French historians, more candid than French diplomatists,
have admitted this both before and after the eventful 12th May 1881,
when a French general, _manu militari_, by a stroke of the pen
substituted the suzerainty of the French Republic for that of Abdul
Hamid. Only a few months ago, the well-known writer on Algerian
subjects, Commandant Villot, wrote as follows:—“The religious tie is so
powerful amongst Muhamedans, that the successors of Heussein (the common
ancestors of the Beys of Tunis) have never omitted to obtain a firman of
investiture from the head of Islamism, nor has any money ever been
current except that which bears his name.”[2] More than this, the Beys
of Tunis have resisted repeated efforts put forth by Western Powers to
induce them to shake off the yoke of their natural lord. M. Thiers, who
endeavoured to persuade Ahmed Bey to take this step, was fortunately
obliged to abandon his intention, for France has no interest in
weakening the authority of the Porte. The dangerous policy of M. Thiers
has been almost unanimously condemned by historians, and especially by
M. Guizot in his “Mémoires pour servir à l’Histoire de mon Temps.” In
1877 M. Desfossés says in his pamphlet entitled “La Tunisie”:—“_Le
Pachalik_ de Tunis est toujours sous la souzerainté de la Turquie.”
Thirty years ago Pellissier, in his elaborate and almost complete
“Description de la Régence de Tunis,” remarks that “the suzerainty of
the Grand Signor is recognised by law, but more in a theological than in
a political point of view. The money is struck in his name, and each day
at noon his glory and virtues are proclaimed by a herald before an empty
armchair which represents his throne.”[3] A few days before Kairwán fell
I happened to go to the Bardo palace. The French Protectorate was then
six months old, but the herald and his attendant drummers went through
the ceremony as heretofore, and invoked the protection of Allah for the
Sultan and Caliph.
The most northerly part of Tunis is only divided by some eighty miles of
sea from Sicily. Indeed, a line of rocks beneath the waves, known as the
Ferki reefs, forms a junction between that island and the Atlas
mountains of the African mainland. It is this strait or channel which
separates the eastern and western basins of the Mediterranean.
“This Tunis,” as Shakespeare says, “was Carthage.”[4] It afterwards
became in turn Africa Propria, Zeugitania, and Byzacium. Numerous
authors have handed down to posterity the history of its remote
antiquity, but the Tunis of to-day was little better than a _terra
incognita_ when the events of the French invasion forced the fact of its
existence on the attention of Europe and England. The Gulf of Tunis and
the now land-locked harbour of Bizerta command the passage of the narrow
sea before them, and hence arises the maritime importance of Tunis in
the past, the present, and the future. All writers, except modern
diplomatists, fully recognise this fact; but unfortunately the statesmen
of to-day are not only intent on deceiving each other, but are forced by
the exigencies of party to know as little as possible. If the position
of Tunis had been as familiar to Englishmen in 1878 as it is now, we
might never have witnessed the events of 1881. “If the Tunis lake were
only dredged and deepened,” writes Commandant Villot, “and the coast
fortified, and if a powerful navy were stationed in the Tunisian
roadstead, not only the path to Egypt, but the road to India through the
Suez Canal, would once more be closed to the people of the West.”[5] A
concession to dredge and deepen the Tunis lake has, as a matter of
course, followed the Treaty of Kasr-es-Said, and although M. Barthélemy
Saint-Hilaire wrote to Lord Granville on the 16th May 1881 that “France
has no more desire to annex Bizerta than any other part of Tunis,” a
project for the restoration of its port by French capitalists is now
receiving the serious consideration of the French Government. Mr. Perry
in his work on Tunis sums up very fairly the state of the case in a few
words. “Tunis,” he writes, “has the finest position in North Africa.
Commercial preponderance and the control of the Mediterranean are the
attractions for the Powers which dispute with each other for its
possession or its neutralisation.”[6]
The Regency of Tunis is bounded on both the north and east by the
Mediterranean, on the west by Algeria, on the south by the Sahara of the
Touaregs, and on the south-east by Tripoli. It has an area of about
sixty thousand square miles, and a sea-coast 550 miles in length. The
population of the whole country does not far exceed 1,500,000 souls. The
configuration of Tunis is almost identical with that of Algeria. Like
Algeria, Tunis has its mountains, its plains, and its coast (_sahel_).
Like Algeria, its mineral wealth is almost unequalled. The rocks of
Tunis yield nearly all minerals except gold. Its chief river is the
Roman Bagradas—the modern Medjerdah, which rises in the Algerian
province of Constantine, and after a tortuous course of over three
hundred miles reaches the Mediterranean at Porto-Farina near the city of
Tunis. The streams in the south of the Regency are comparatively
unimportant, and generally end in the great marsh-lakes or Sebkhas of
Kairwán, Faráoun, or El Medir.
The face of the country can be conveniently divided into four regions or
districts, viz., the Volcanic or mountainous, the Tell or highlands, the
Coast, and the Desert. In the neighbourhood of Kef, in Western Tunis,
the traces of extinct volcanoes and lava are unmistakable. Mount Betoum
in the Khamír or Khroumír country emitted smoke and flames forty years
ago. The north and especially the north-west part of the Regency is very
hilly, and the richness of its luxuriant oak forests vies with that of
the unexplored iron and lead mines which are known to lie beneath them.
The coast is generally low and sandy, but the land which immediately
borders it is almost invariably fertile and productive. The salient
features of the Tunisian Tell are vast expanses covered sometimes with
esparto grass and sometimes with a layer of thin soil. In the winter the
vegetation is abundant and luxuriant; in the summer everything is
scorched up by the pitiless African sun. The Tell slopes gradually
towards the great marsh-lakes of the far south. The Tunisian Sahara is
perhaps richer than any part of the desert in fertile oases.
To follow the course of recent events, some slight description of the
interior of the country is indispensable. Each of its four natural
divisions must be considered briefly in respect of its inhabitants and
its resources.
The volcanic or mountainous district consists almost entirely of the
basin of the Medjerdah river, which first enters the Regency in the
vicinity of Kef. During the winter rains the Medjerdah becomes a wild
mountain torrent, and carries down to the Mediterranean with the noise
of distant thunder large quantities of mud and stones. As it approaches
the sea it traverses a series of fertile valleys, which bear the names
of Dakhla, Maïcera, Bizerta, and Tebourba. Another river, the Oued Tin,
rises near Beja (the Roman Vaga or Vacca), and finds its way across the
fruitful plains of Mater into the Chott Eshkel or inner Bizerta lake
(the ancient Sisara Lacus). The town of Mater is built on rising ground
and commands the surrounding country. It in no way merits any further
description. Roman ruins abound in its vicinity. The tribes which dwell
on the banks of the Tin belong to the great Algerian clan of Ali Ben
Amar.
Ascending the Medjerdah from the often bombarded town of Porto-Farina,
the traveller first arrives at Fondouk, a great centre of inland trade.
Beyond Fondouk is Bon Shatar, which was once Utica. It was here that
Cato the Younger died. The traces of Carthage’s most powerful rival
still convey to the spectator a tolerable idea of its extent and
magnificence. The sea which once washed its quays is now barely visible
from the site of its citadel. The ruins of its cisterns are now used as
stables, while sheep graze peacefully in its ruined amphitheatre. A
learned Frenchman has written a charming volume in which he mentally
rebuilds Utica,[7] the soil of which still continues to yield an
apparently inexhaustible harvest to the excavator. Beyond Bon Shatar are
the small towns of Jedeïda and Tebourba. In the former General Hamida
Ben Ayad, a great Arab landowner, whose family has for half a century
enjoyed British protection, has attempted to construct irrigation works
on a somewhat large scale. In the latter is the great Moslem college of
Sidi Ghars Allah.
Medjez-el-Bab, Testour, and Teboursak, other towns in the Medjerdah
valley, will be described in connection with the story of the French
expedition. Still farther to the west is Beja, the market-town of the
Khamír tribesmen. Like most Tunisian cities, it is built on a hill, and
is surrounded by a crenelated wall flanked with small towers. Portions
of these fortifications are evidently of Byzantine origin, and the
mosque of Sidi Aïssa appears to have once served as a Christian church.
The mountainous districts which lie north and north-west of Beja are the
abode of the Khamírs, who are popularly supposed to have occasioned the
French invasion of the Regency. Khamír-land and the Khamírs will be
spoken of at length in the course of the narrative of the war. Some few
miles west of Beja the Medjerdah receives the waters of its principal
tributary, the Oued Mellégue. In the valley through which this stream
passes is Kef (the Roman Sicca Veneria), a place which has played an
important part in Tunisian history, and which is situated at a distance
of some thirty miles from the Algerian frontier. It was formerly
considered almost impregnable, but its powerful fortifications are now
nearly in ruins, and it is susceptible of easy attack from the
neighbouring heights. The _Zaouias_ or convent-sanctuaries of Kef are
still much frequented, and its markets are thronged by Algerian as well
as by Tunisian Arabs.
Another Tunisian stream reaches the Gulf of Tunis near the little town
of Rades, close to the Tunisian Piræus of the Goletta, and within sight
of the capital itself. It is called the Oued El Kebir (Great River), and
near its mouth bears also the name of the Oued Miliana. Rades, as the
Roman Addir, once witnessed the great victory of Regulus over the
Carthaginians. The Oued Kebir was then the Flumen Catada. Following its
course in a south-westerly direction one reaches the modern ruin of the
Mohammedia. Ahmed, Bey of Tunis, built a great palace and a town there
forty years ago. His greatest pleasure seems to have been to reside
there surrounded by his army of 30,000 men. He died in 1855, and both
town and palace were abandoned. The timber, the marble, the ironwork,
and the tiles have disappeared, and the place has the appearance of a
second Pompeii. The great Roman aqueduct close at hand is in far better
repair. Its majestic arches still stretch in an unbroken line across the
plain, and its canal still brings the famed water of Zaghouán into Tunis
itself. On the right bank of the Great River rises the majestic peaks of
Zaghouán and Djougár, visible alike from Tunis, Susa, and Holy Kairwán.
At the foot of the former mountain is a town bearing its name, built of
Roman materials, amidst verdant fruit gardens and running water.
Zaghouán has its Roman gateway, as well as a ruined temple. Its limpid
spring rises from a Roman vault. Mr. Hodgson, R.A., has immortalised the
beauties of Zaghouán in the picture he exhibited in the Royal Academy of
1875.
The coast towns of the Regency are so intimately connected with the
story of the last days of its independence that I need say little of
them here. Tabarca, Bizerta, Porto-Farina, Galippia, Nebel, Hammamet,
Susa, Monastir, Mehdia, Sfax, Mahrés, Gabes, Jerba, Zerzis, and the
Tripolitan frontier will all be spoken of at length hereafter. The
history of the central district of Tunis will be told with that of its
capital—Kairwán.
The Saharian portion of the Tunisian Regency comprises the countries of
the Beni Zid, the Nefzaoua, and the Djerid. The mountainous territory of
the Beni Zid lies between the lake-marsh or Sebkha Faráoun (by some
believed to be the classical _Palus Tritonis_) and the Great Desert. It
possesses many fruitful oases, as does also the district of the
Nefzaoua, which borders the Faráoun Chott.
The Chott or Sebkha Faráoun almost joins the Chotts of Algeria, and has
given rise to one of the most celebrated geographical enigmas of the
present century—the _quæstio vexata_ of the Saharian Inland Sea, about
which some scores of pamphlets have been written since 1870. The Chott
is divided into three distinct portions by the Debdeb or natural
bridges. Archæologists would have the uninitiated distinguish in three
sheets of water the Palus Tritonis, the Palus Pallac, and the Palus
Libyæ of Ptolemy, but any complete and satisfactory identification is of
extraordinary difficulty. During the past ten years France has sent two
exploring parties to investigate the matter, while Italy has also
despatched a special commission, and the conclusion now generally
accepted is, that the creation of the inland sea is impossible, and that
even if it were practicable, the benefit its existence might confer on
North Africa would be very problematical. Sir Richard Wood, C.B.,
G.C.M.G., Her Majesty’s Agent and Consul-General at Tunis from 1856 to
1878, has written an interesting brochure on the subject.[8] According
to Sir Richard Wood, not only is the execution of the scheme prevented
by insurmountable natural difficulties, but the attempted identification
of the inland marsh-lakes with the lake of Triton is wholly erroneous.
He argues with great show of reason that the scene of Jason’s adventure
was really the little gulf in the Mediterranean between the island of
Djerba and the mainland, which for many reasons may be easily mistaken
for an inland sea.
The Djerid, an alternation of sandy plains and green oases, is the
abiding place _par excellence_ of the date-palm. Its chief towns are
Nefta, Tozer, and Gafsa, and the province is undoubtedly one of the
richest in the Regency.
I have endeavoured to describe in as few words as possible the dominion
of Tunis. The main object of this book is to furnish the last chapters
in its annals, and to tell more particularly the story of its conquest.
The unrivalled associations which surround this lately obscure province
would naturally tempt one to be discursive at the onset. The chronicles
of Carthage, the rise and fall of Roman power on its ruins, the
invasions of the Greeks and Vandals, the legends of the African
Churches, the Moslem conquest of Tunis from Arabia and of Spain from
Tunis, the Crusade of St. Louis, the expedition of Charles V., and yet
untold _gesta_ of the Knights of St. John on this part of the African
littoral, are one and all a legitimate portion of Tunisian history. My
concern is alone with Moslem Tunis. Down to the year 1830 its story has
been ably written from a French point of view.[9] Since that time I am
not aware that anything like a continuous narrative of events has been
attempted. I shall therefore endeavour to take up the thread of M.
Rousseau’s story by way of introduction to the more immediate subject of
this book. Some knowledge of the previous political history of the
Regency is essential to the just appreciation of the events of 1881.
Before that time I shall content myself with the briefest résumé, except
when I am able to place before the reader certain information which I
have gathered from a careful examination of the ancient archives of Her
Majesty’s Consulate General at Tunis, and which I trust will be both
novel and interesting.