Dardistan in 1866, 1886 and 1893

By Author	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Title	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Language

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Dardistan in 1866, 1886 and 1893
Author: Leitner, G. W.
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.

*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Dardistan in 1866, 1886 and 1893" ***

DARDISTAN
IN 1866, 1886 AND 1893

_Being
An Account of the History, Religions, Customs, Legends, Fables and
Songs of Gilgit, Chilas, Kandia (Gabrial) Yasin, Chitral,
Hunza, Nagyr and other parts of the Hindukush_,

_AS ALSO A SUPPLEMENT TO THE SECOND EDITION OF_
THE HUNZA AND NAGYR HANDBOOK

_And An Epitome of
PART III OF THE AUTHOR’S “THE LANGUAGES AND RACES
OF DARDISTAN”_

_By_
G. W. LEITNER M.A., PH.D., LL.D., D.O.L., ETC.

(_With appendices on recent events, a map and
numerous illustrations_)

[Illustration]

MANJUSRI PUBLISHING HOUSE
Kumar Gallery, 11, Sunder Nagar Market,
NEW DELHI (India)

PUBLISHED BY VIRENDRA KUMAR JAIN FOR MANJUSRI PUBLISHING HOUSE
KUMAR GALLERY, SUNDER NAGAR MARKET—NEW DELHI-110003 INDIA

[Illustration: MAP OF DARDISTAN AND THE PAMIRS

_E. G. Ravenstein_ _G. Philip & Son_]

CONTENTS.

PAGE

A MAP OF DARDISTAN AND OF THE PAMIRS

INTRODUCTION. A Note on Classical Allusions to the Dards and to Greek
Influence in India (4 pages)

LEGENDS, SONGS, CUSTOMS, AND HISTORY, OF DARDISTAN (with Illustrations)

A. Demons—Yatsh 1

B. Fairies—Barái 6

C. Wizards and Witches—Dayáll 7

D. Historical Legend of the Origin of Gilgit 9

The Feast of Firs and Songs 14

Bujóni—Riddles, Proverbs, and Fables 17

Songs—(Gilgiti, Astóri, Guraizi, and Chilási) 22

_Manners and Customs_:

(_a_) Amusements (Polo, Dances, etc.) 33

(_b_) Beverages (beer, wine) 38

(_c_) Birth Ceremonies 41

(_d_) Marriage Ceremonies (Song to the Bride) 42

(_e_) Funerals 46

(_f_) Holidays 48

(_g_) The Religious Ideas of the Dards 49

(_h_) Form of Government among the Dards 53

(_i_) Habitations 57

(_j_) Divisions of the Dard race 58

(_k_) Castes 62

Legends regarding Animals, and note thereon 64

_Genealogies and History of Dardistan (pages 67 to 111)_ 67

Rough Chronological Sketch from 1800 to 1872 70

Note on Events since 1872, and in 1891 and 1892 75

Introduction to “THE DARD WARS WITH KASHMÎR” 77

Routes to Chilás 79

I. Struggles for the Conquest of Chilás 80

II. Wars for the possession of Gilgit 88

III. Wars on Yasin, and the massacre of its inhabitants 95

IV. War with Nagyr and Hunza (1864) 98

V. War with Dareyl (Yaghistán) (1866) 101

Mir Wali and Mulk Aman (with a note on the murder of Hayward) 104

Account of Kashmîr atrocities 106

Remarks on Dardistan in 1893 108

Treaty of the British Government with Kashmîr 110

Note on the Hunza-Nagyr Genealogy 111

APPENDICES:

I. Hunza, Nagyr, and the Pamir Regions. (With an Autograph
Letter of the Tham of Nagyr, and other Illustrations) 24 pages

II. Notes on Recent Events in Chilás and Chitrál, with a
photograph of H. H. the present Mihtar of Chitrál,
Nizám-ul-Mulk, his former Yasin Council and Chitráli
Musicians 19 pages

III. Fables, Legends, and Songs of Chitrál (one in musical
notation), by H. H. Mihtar Nizám-ul-Mulk 14 pages

IV. Races and Languages of the Hindukush [The Kohistán,
Gabriál, etc.], with a Note on Polo in Hunza-Nagyr 18 pages

V. Anthropological Observations and Measurements 8 pages

VI. Rough Itineraries in the Hindukush and to Central Asia,
Routes i, ii, and iii 12 pages

VII. (_a_) A Secret Religion in the Hindukush and in the
Lebanon 14 pages

(_b_) The Kelám-i-pîr and Esoteric Muhammadanism 9 pages

VIII. On the Sciences of Language and of Ethnography, with
special reference to the Language and Customs of
Hunza (a separate pamphlet) 16 pages

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT.

1. Map of Dardistan and of the Pamirs (abridged from Dr.
Leitner’s large Map of Dardistan and a number of
Native Maps and Itineraries).

2. First Group of Dards, etc., taken in 1866. (Facing page 1.)

3. Group of Natives from Hunza, Yasin, and Nagyr,
listening to a Chitráli and a Badakhshi Musician. (Facing page 22.)

4. A Dance at Gilgit. (Facing page 36.)

5. Dr. Leitner’s Tibet Dog, “Chang.” (Facing page 66.)

6. “Our Manufactured Foes:” a Tangir Student, a
Nagyri Peasant, a Dareyli Herdsman, and a Hunza
Fighter (the first Hunza man taken to Europe in
1886). (Facing page 76.)

7. A Kashmir Soldier and a Balti Coolie. (Facing page 77.)

8. Two Chilásis and a Gilgiti. (Facing page 80.)

ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE APPENDICES.

_Appendix I.—(Hunza-Nagyr and the Pamir Regions.)_

9. Specimens of Burishkis of Hunza, Nagyr, and Yasin. (Facing page 1 of
Appendix I.) “Hunza and Nagyri Warriors, separated by Yasinis.”

10. Autograph Letter from the Chief (Tham) of Nagyr,
Za’far Khan. (Facing page 5.)

11. Dr. Leitner as a Bokhara Maulvi in 1866. (Facing page 17.)

_Appendix II.—(Recent Events in Chilás and Chitrál.)_

12. Mihtar Nizám-ul-Mulk and his Yasin Council in 1886. (Facing page 6.)

13. Chitráli Players and the Badakhshi Poet, Taighûn
Shah. (Facing page 7.)

_Appendix IV.—(Races and Languages of the Hindukush.)_

14. Group of Natives from Nagyr, Koláb, Chitrál, Gabriál,
Badakhshan, and Hunza. (Facing page 1.)

15. Heads of Natives from Dareyl, Gabriál, Hunza,
and Nagyr. (Facing page 2.)

_Appendix V.—(Anthropological Observations and Measurements.)_

16. Ethnological and Anthropological Groups. (Facing page 1.)

17. Jamshêd, the first Siah Pôsh Kafir taken to Europe
(in 1872). (Facing page 4.)

18. Comparative Table of Measurements of Dards and Kafirs.

A NOTE ON CLASSICAL ALLUSIONS TO THE DARDS AND TO GREEK INFLUENCE ON
INDIA.

THE DARDS.

Herodotus (III. 102-105) is the first author who refers to the country of
the Dards, placing it on the frontier of Kashmir and in the vicinity of
Afghanistan. “Other Indians are those who reside on the frontiers of the
town ‘Kaspatyros’ and the Paktyan country; they dwell to the north of the
other Indians and live like the Baktrians; they are also the most warlike
of the Indians and are sent for the gold,” etc. Then follows the legend
of the gold-digging ants (which has been shown to have been the name of a
tribe of Tibetans by Schiern), and on which, as an important side-issue,
consult Strabo, Arrian, Dio Chrysostomus, Flavius Philostratus the
elder, Clemens Alexandrinus, Ælian, Harpokration, Themistius Euphrades,
Heliodorus of Emesa, Joannes Tzetzes, the Pseudo-Kallisthenes and the
scholiast to the Antigone of Sophocles[1]—and among Romans, the poems of
Propertius, the geography of Pomponius Mela, the natural history of the
elder Pliny and the collections of Julius Solinus.[2] The Mahabharata
also mentions the tribute of the ant-gold “paipilika” brought by the
nations of the north to one of the Pandu sons, king Yudhisthira.

In another place Herodotus [IV. 13-27] again mentions the town of
Kaspatyros and the Paktyan country. This is where he refers to the
anxiety of Darius to ascertain the flow of the Indus into the sea. He
accordingly sent Skylax with vessels. “They started from the town of
Κασπάτυρος and the Πακτυική χώρη towards the east to the sea.” I take
this to be the point where the Indus river makes a sudden bend, and for
the first time actually does lie between Kashmir and Pakhtu-land (for
this, although long unknown, must be the country alluded to),[3] in other
words, below the Makpon-i-Shang-Rong, and at Bunji, where the Indus
becomes navigable.[4] The Paktyes are also mentioned as one of the races
that followed Xerxes in his invasion of Hellas (Herod. VII. 67-85). Like
our own geographers till 1866, Herodotus thought that the Indus from that
point flowed duly from north to south, and India being, according to his
system of geography, the most easterly country, the flow of the Indus was
accordingly described as being easterly. I, in 1866, and Hayward in 1870,
described its flow from that point to be due west for a considerable
distance (about one hundred miles). (The PAKTYES are, of course, the
Afghans, called Patans, or more properly PAKHTUS, the very same Greek
word). “Kaspatyros” is evidently a mis-spelling for “Kaspapyros,” the
form in which the name occurs in one of the most accurate codes of
Herodotus which belonged to Archbishop Sancroft (the Codex Sancroftianus)
and which is now preserved at Emmanuel College, Cambridge. Stephanus
Byzantianus (A.V.) also ascribes this spelling to Hekatœus of Miletus.[5]

Now Kaspapyros or Kaspapuros is evidently _Kashmir_ or “_Kasyapapura_,”
the town of _Kasyapa_, the founder of Kashmir, and to the present day
one may talk indifferently of the town of Kashmir, or of the country of
_Kashmir_, when mentioning that name, so that there is no necessity to
seek for the _town_ of Srinagar when discussing the term Kaspatyrus, or,
if corrected, Kaspapuros, of Herodotus.

Herodotus, although he thus mentions the people (of the Dards) as one
neighbouring (πλησιοχώροι) on Kashmir and residing between Kashmir and
Afghanistan, and also refers to the invasions which (from time immemorial
it may be supposed, and certainly within our own times) this people have
made against Tibet for the purpose of devastating the goldfields of the
so-called ants, does not use the name of “Dard” in the above quotations,
but Strabo and the elder Pliny, who repeat the legend, mention the very
name of that people as _Derdæ_ or _Dardæ_, vide Strabo XV., ἐν Διρδαις
ἔθνει μεγάλω τῶν προσεώων καὶ ὀρείνων Ἰνδῶν. Pliny, in his Natural
History, XI. 36, refers to “_in regione Septentrionalium Indorum, qui
Dardæ vacantur_.” Both Pliny and Strabo refer to Megasthenes as their
authority in Chapter VI., 22. Pliny again speaks of “_Fertilissimi sunt
auri Dardæ._” The Dards have still settlements in Tibet where they are
called Brokhpa (see page 60 of text). The Dards are the “Darada” of the
Sanscrit writers. The “Darada” and the “Himavanta” were the regions
to which Buddha sent his missionaries, and the Dards are finally the
“Dards, an independent people which plundered Dras in the last year,
has its home in the mountains three or four days’ journey distant, and
talks the _Pakhtu_ or DARADI language. Those, whom they take prisoners
in these raids, they sell as slaves” (as they do still). (Voyage par Mir
Izzetulla in 1812 in Klaproth’s Magasin Asiatique, II., 3-5.) (The above
arrangement of quotations is due to Schiern.)[6]

INFLUENCE OF GREECE ON ASIA IN GENERAL AND INDIA IN PARTICULAR.

The most important contribution to this question, however, is Plutarch’s
_Speech_ on Alexander’s fortune and virtue (περὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τύχης καὶ
ἀρετῆς), the keynote to which may be found in the passage which contains
the assertion that he Κατέσπειρε τὴν Ἀσίαν ἑλληνικοῖς τέλεσι, but the
whole speech refers to that marvellous influence.

That this influence was at any rate believed in, may be also gathered
from a passage in Aelian, in which he speaks of the Indians and Persian
kings singing Homer in their own tongues. I owe the communication of
this passage to Sir Edward Fry, Q.C., which runs as follows; Ὄτι Ἰνδοὶ
τῆ παρα σφίσιν ἐπιχωριά φωνη τά Ὁμήρου μεταγράψαντις ᾄδουσιν οὐ μάνοι,
ἀλλὰ καὶ οἲ Περσῶν βασιλεῖς εὶ τι χρη πιστεύειν τοῖς ὕπερ τούτων
ἱστοροῦσι.—Aeliani Variæ Historiæ, Lib. XII., Cap. 48. [I find from
a note in my edition that Dio Chrysostom tells the same story of the
Indians in his 53rd Oration.—E.F.]

I trust to be able to show, if permitted to do so, in a future note (1)
that the Aryan dialects of Dardistan are, at least, contemporaneous with
Sanskrit, (2) that the Khajuná is a remnant of a prehistoric language,
(3) that certain sculptors followed on Alexander’s invasion and taught
the natives of India to execute what I first termed “Græco-Buddhistic”
sculptures, a term which specifies a distinct period in history and in
the history of Art.

G. W. LEITNER.

P.S. in 1893.—The above, which appeared in “the Calcutta Review” of
January 1878, was also reprinted in the _Asiatic Quarterly Review_
of April 1893 with reference to Mr. J. W. McCrindle’s recent work on
“Ancient India: Its Invasion by Alexander the Great,” in which he omits
to draw attention to the importance of Plutarch’s _Speech_ on the
civilizing results of Alexander’s invasion, and makes no mention whatever
of the traces which Greek art has left on the Buddhistic sculptures of
the Panjab.

He only just mentions Plutarch’s speech on page 13 of his otherwise
excellent work, published by Messrs. Constable of 14 Parliament Street,
London. As that speech, which is divided into two parts, is, however, of
the utmost importance in showing what were believed to be in Plutarch’s
days the results of Alexander’s mission, I think it necessary to quote
some of the most prominent passages from it relating to the subject under
inquiry. I also propose to show in a monograph on the græco-buddhistic
sculptures, now at the Woking Museum, which I brought from beyond the
Panjab frontier, that Alexander introduced not only Greek Art but also
Greek mythology into India. I will specially refer to the “Pallas
Athene,” “the rape of Ganymede,” and “the Centaur” in my collection,
leaving such sculptures as “Olympian games,” “Greek soldiers accompanying
Buddhist processions,” “the Buddhist Parthenon,” [if not also Silanion’s
“Sappho with the lyre,”]—all executed by Indian artists—to tell their own
tale as to the corroborations in sculpture of passages in ancient Greek
and Roman writers relating to the genial assimilation of Eastern with
Western culture which the Great Conqueror of the Two Continents, “the
possessor of two horns,” the “Zu’l-Qarnein” (Al-Asghar) of the Arabs,
endeavoured to bring about.

The following passages from Plutarch’s Speech may, I hope, be read with
interest. The author endeavours to answer his question as to whether
Alexander owed his success “to his fortune or to his virtue” by showing
that he was almost solely indebted to his good qualities:

“The discipline of Alexander ... oh marvellous philosophy, through which
the Indians worship the Greek gods.”

“When Alexander had recivilized Asia, they read Homer and the children
of the Persians ... sang the tragedies of Euripides and Sophocles.”
“Socrates was condemned in Athens because he introduced foreign Gods ...
but, through Alexander, Bactria and the Caucasus worshipped the Greek
Gods.” “Few among us, as yet, read the laws of Plato, but myriads of men
use, and have used, those of Alexander, the vanquished deeming themselves
more fortunate than those who had escaped his arms, for the latter had no
one who saved them from the miseries of life, whilst the conqueror had
forced the conquered to live happily.”

“Plato only wrote one form of Government and not a single man followed
it because it was too severe, whereas Alexander founded more than
70 cities among barbarous nations and permeating Asia with Hellenic
Institutions....” Plutarch makes the conquered say that if they had not
been subdued “Egypt would not have had Alexandria nor India Bucephalia,”
that “Alexander made no distinction between Greek and Barbarian, but
considered the virtuous only among either as Greek and the vicious as
Barbarian” and that he by “intermarriages and the adaptation of customs
and dresses sought to found that union which he considered himself as
sent from heaven to bring about as the arbitrator and the reformer of the
universe.” “Thus do the wise unite Asia and Europe.” “By the adoption of
(Asiatic) dress, the minds were conciliated.” Alexander desired that “One
common justice should administer the Republic of the Universe.”

“He disseminated Greece and diffused throughout the world justice and
peace.” Alexander himself announces to the Greeks, “Through me you will
know them (the Indians) and they will know you, but I must yet strike
coins and stamp the bronze of the barbarians with Greek impressions.”
The fulfilment of this statement is attested by the Bactrian coins. I
submit that he who left his mark on metal did so also on sculpture,
as I have endeavoured to show since 1870 when I first called my finds
“græco-buddhistic,” a term which has, at last, been adopted after much
opposition, as descriptive of a period in History and in the history of
Art and Religion.

[The above quotations are all from the 1st Part of Plutarch’s oration;
the second is reserved for the proposed monograph.]

G. W. LEITNER.

For “Divisions of the Dard Race” and the countries which they occupy see
page 58.

[Illustration: FIRST GROUP OF DARDS, ETC., TAKEN IN 1866.

Gulam Muhammad, of Gilgit (A Shiah Muhammadan).

Gharib Shah and Friend, Both of Chilas (Sunni Muhammadans).

Mirza beg, of Astor (Sunni).

Kazim, From Skardo (Little Tibet). (Shiah).

Malek and Batshu (Kalasha and Bashgali Kafirs) (Subjects of Chitral).]

LEGENDS, SONGS, AND CUSTOMS OF DARDISTAN,[7]

(GILGIT, YASIN, HUNZA, NAGYR, CHITRÁL, &C., AND KAFIRISTAN).

1. Dardu Legends, _in Shiná_ (the language, with dialectic modifications,
of Gilgit, Astor, Guraiz, Chilas, Hódur, Dareyl, Tangîr, etc., and the
language of historical songs in Hunza and Nagyr).

(_Committed to writing for the first time in 1866, By DR. G. W. LEITNER,
from the dictation of Dards. This race has no written character of its
own._)

A.—DEMONS = YATSH[8] (YUECCI?).

Demons are of a gigantic size, and have only _one eye, which is on
the forehead_. They used to rule over the mountains and oppose the
cultivation of the soil by man. They often dragged people away into their
recesses. Since the adoption of the Muhammadan religion, the demons
have relinquished their possessions, and only occasionally trouble the
believers.

They do not walk by day, but confine themselves to promenading at night.
A spot is shown near Astor, at a village called Bulent, where five large
mounds are pointed out which have somewhat the shape of huge baskets.
Their existence is explained as follows. A Zemindar (cultivator) at
Grukot, a village farther on, on the Kashmir road, had, with great
trouble, sifted his grain for storing, and had put it into baskets and
sacks. He then went away. The demons came—five in number—carrying huge
leather-sacks, into which they put the grain. They then went to a place
which is still pointed out and called “_Gué_ Gutume Yatsheyn gau boki,”
or “The place of the demons’ loads at the hollow”—Gué being the Shiná
name for the present village of Grukōt. There they brought up a huge
flat stone—which is still shown—and made it into a kind of pan, “tawa,”
for the preparation of bread. But the morning dawned and obliged them
to disappear; they converted the sacks and their contents into earthen
mounds, which have the shape of baskets and are still shown.

1.—THE WEDDING OF DEMONS.

A Shikari (sportsman) was once hunting in the hills. He had taken
provisions with him for five days. On the sixth day he found himself
without any food. Excited and fatigued by his fruitless expedition, he
wandered into the deepest mountain recesses, careless whither he went
as long as he could find water to assuage his thirst, and a few wild
berries to allay his hunger. Even that search was unsuccessful, and,
tired and hungry, he endeavoured to compose himself to sleep. Even that
comfort was denied him, and, nearly maddened with the situation, he
again arose and looked around him. It was the first or second hour of
night, and, at a short distance, he descried a large fire blazing a most
cheerful welcome to the hungry, and now chilled, wanderer. He approached
it quietly, hoping to meet some other sportsman who might provide
him with food. Coming near the fire, he saw a very large and curious
assembly of giants, eating, drinking, and singing. In great terror, he
wanted to make his way back, when one of the assembly, who had a squint
in his eye, got up for the purpose of fetching water for the others.
He overtook him, and asked him whether he was a “child of man.” Half
dead with terror, he could scarcely answer that he was, when the demon
invited him to join them at the meeting, which was described to be a
wedding party. The Shikari replied: “You are a demon, and will destroy
me”; on which the spirit took an oath, _by the sun and the moon_, that
he certainly would not do so. He then hid him under a bush and went back
with the water. He had scarcely returned when a plant was torn out of the
ground and a small aperture was made, into which the giants managed to
throw all their property, and, gradually making themselves thinner and
thinner, themselves vanished into the ground through it. Our sportsman
was then taken by the hand by the friendly demon, and, before he knew
how, he himself glided through the hole and found himself in a huge
apartment, which was splendidly illuminated. He was placed in a corner
where he could not be observed. He received some food, and gazed in mute
astonishment on the assembled spirits. At last, he saw the mother of the
bride taking her daughter’s head into her lap and weeping bitterly at the
prospect of her departure into another household. Unable to control her
grief, and in compliance with an old Shîn custom, she began the singing
of the evening by launching into the following strains:

SONG OF THE MOTHER.

ORIGINAL:—

_Ajjeyn Biráni![9] mey palise, shíkk sanéy,_
(Thy) mother’s Biráni! my little darling, ornaments will wear,
_Inne Buldar Bútshe angai tapp bey hani,_
(Whilst) here at Buldar Bútshe the heavens dark will become,
_Nágeri Phall Tshátshe Kani miráni in,_
The Nagari (of race) Phall Tshátshe of Khans the prince will come,
_Téyn Mîrkân málose tshé gùm bagéy,_
Thy Mirkan father—from new corn will be distributed.
_Sálti Yabeo wey bo! Shadú Malik bojum théum._
Seven rivers’ water be! Shadu Malik a going will make,
_Tey Mirkann malo Tshe gi bage._
Thy Mirkann, father, now ghee will distribute.

TRANSLATION:—

“Oh, Biráni, thy mother’s own; thou, little darling, wilt wear
ornaments, whilst to me, who will remain here at Buldar Butshe,
the heavens will appear dark. The prince of Lords of Phall
Tshatshe race is coming from Nagyr; and Mirkann, thy father,
now distributes corn (as an act of welcome). Be (as fruitful
and pleasant) as the water of _seven rivers_, for Shadu Malik
(the prince) is determined to start, and now thy father Mirkann
is distributing ghee (as a compliment to the departing guest).”

The Shikari began to enjoy the scene and would have liked to have stayed,
but his squinting friend told him now that he could not be allowed to
remain any longer. So he got up, but before again vanishing through
the above-mentioned aperture into the human world, he took a good look
at the demons. To his astonishment he beheld on the shoulders of one a
shawl which he had safely left at home. Another held his gun; a third was
eating out of his own dishes; one had his many-coloured stockings on, and
another disported himself in pidjamas (drawers) which he only ventured
to put on, on great occasions. He also saw many of the things that had
excited his admiration among the property of his neighbours in his native
village, being most familiarly used by the demons. He scarcely could be
got to move away, but his friendly guide took hold of him and brought him
again to the place where he had first met him. On taking leave he gave
him three loaves of bread. As his village was far off, he consumed two
of the loaves on the road. On reaching home, he found his father, who
had been getting rather anxious at his prolonged absence. To him he told
all that had happened, and showed him the remaining loaf, of which the
old man ate half. His mother, a good housewife, took the remaining half
and threw it into a large granary, where, as it was the season of Sharó
(autumn), a sufficient store of flour had been placed for the use of the
family during the winter. Strange to say, that half-loaf brought luck,
for demons mean it sometimes kindly to the children of men, and only hurt
them when they consider themselves offended. The granary remained always
full, and the people of the village rejoiced with the family, for they
were liked and were good people.

It also should be told that as soon as the Shikari came home he looked
after his costly shawl, dishes, and clothes, but he found all in its
proper place and perfectly uninjured. On inquiring amongst his neighbours
he also found that they too had not lost anything. He was much astonished
at all this, till an old woman who had a great reputation for wisdom,
told him that this was the custom of demons, and that they invariably
borrowed the property of mankind for their weddings, and as invariably
restored it. On occasions of rejoicings amongst them they felt kindly
towards mankind.

Thus ends one of the prettiest tales that I have heard.

2.—THE DEMON’S PRESENT OF COALS IS TURNED INTO GOLD.

Something similar to what has just been related, is said to have happened
at Doyur, on the road from Gilgit to Nagyr. A man of the name of Phûko
had a son named Laskirr, who, one day going out to fetch water was caught
by a Yatsh, who tore up a plant (“reeds”?) “phuru” and entered with the
lad into the fissure which was thereby created. He brought him to a large
palace in which a number of goblins, male and female, were diverting
themselves. He there saw all the valuables of the inhabitants of his
village. A wedding was being celebrated and the mother sang:—

Gúm bagé déy, Buduléy Khatúni.
Gúm bagé déy, huh_á_ huhá!!
Gi bagé déy, Buduléy Khatúnise.
Gi bagé déy, huh_á_ huhá!!
Motz bagé déy, Buduléy Khatúni.
Motz bagé déy, huhá huhá!!
Mô bagé déy, huhá huhá!! &c., &c.

TRANSLATION:—

Corn is being distributed, daughter of Budal.
Corn is being distributed, hurrah! hurrah! (_Chorus._)
Ghee is being distributed, &c. (_Chorus._)
Meat is being distributed, &c. (_Chorus._)
Wine is being distributed, &c., &c. (_Chorus._)

On his departure, the demon gave him a sackful of coals, and conducted
him through the aperture made by the tearing up of the reed, towards
his village. The moment the demon had left, the boy emptied the sack of
the coals and went home, when he told his father what had happened. In
the emptied sack they found a small bit of coal, which, as soon as they
touched it, became a gold coin, very much to the regret of the boy’s
father, who would have liked his son to have brought home the whole
sackful.

B.—“BARAI,” “PERIS,” “FAIRIES.”

They are handsome, in contradistinction to the Yatsh or Demons,
and stronger; they have a beautiful castle on the top of the Nanga
Parbat or Dyarmul (so called from being inaccessible). This castle is
made of crystal, and the people fancy they can see it. They call it
“Shell-battekōt” or “Castle of Glass-stone.”

1.—THE SPORTSMAN AND THE CASTLE OF THE FAIRIES.

Once a sportsman ventured up the Nanga Parbat. To his surprise he found
no difficulty, and venturing farther and farther, he at last reached
the top. There he saw a beautiful castle made of glass, and pushing one
of the doors he entered it, and found himself in a most magnificent
apartment. Through it he saw an open space that appeared to be the garden
of the castle, but there was in it only one tree of excessive height, and
which was entirely composed of pearls and corals. The delighted sportsman
filled his sack in which he carried his corn, and left the place, hoping
to enrich himself by the sale of the pearls. As he was going out of
the door he saw an innumerable crowd of serpents following him. In his
agitation he shouldered the sack and attempted to run, when a pearl fell
out. It was eagerly swallowed by a serpent which immediately disappeared.
The sportsman, glad to get rid of his pursuers at any price, threw pearl
after pearl to them, and in every case it had the desired effect. At
last, only one serpent remained, but for her (a fairy in that shape?)
he found no pearl; and urged on by fear, he hastened to his village,
Tarsing, which is at the very foot of the Nanga Parbat. On entering his
house, he found it in great agitation; bread was being distributed to the
poor as they do at funerals, for his family had given him up as lost.
The serpent still followed and stopped at the door. In despair, the man
threw the corn-sack at her, when lo! a pearl glided out. It was eagerly
swallowed by the serpent, which immediately disappeared. However, the
man was not the same being as before. He was ill for days, and in about
a fortnight after the events narrated, died, for fairies never forgive a
man who has surprised their secrets.

2.—THE FAIRY WHO PUNISHED HER HUMAN LOVER.

It is not believed in Astor that fairies ever marry human beings, but
in Gilgit there is a legend to that effect. A famous sportsman, Kibá
Lorí, who never returned empty-handed from any excursion, kept company
with a fairy to whom he was deeply attached. Once in the hot weather the
fairy said to him not to go out shooting during “the seven days of the
summer,” “Caniculars,” which are called “Bardá,” and are supposed to be
the hottest days in Dardistan. “I am,” said she, “obliged to leave you
for that period, and, mind, you do not follow me.” The sportsman promised
obedience and the fairy vanished, saying that he would certainly die if
he attempted to follow her. Our love-intoxicated Nimrod, however, could
not endure her absence. On the fourth day he shouldered his gun and went
out with the hope of meeting her. Crossing a range, he came upon a plain,
where he saw an immense gathering of game of all sorts and his beloved
fairy milking a “Kill” (markhor) and gathering the milk into a silver
vessel. The noise which Kibá Lorí made caused the animal to start and to
strike out with his legs, which upset the silver vessel. The fairy looked
up, and to her anger beheld the disobedient lover. She went up to him
and, after reproaching him, struck him in the face. But she had scarcely
done so when despair mastered her heart, and she cried out in the deepest
anguish that “he now must die within four days.” “However,” she said,
“do shoot one of these animals, so that people may not say that you have
returned empty-handed.” The poor man returned crestfallen to his home,
lay down, and died on the fourth day.

C.—DAYALL = WIZARDS AND WITCHES.

The gift of second sight, or rather the intercourse with fairies, is
confined to a few families in which it is hereditary. The wizard is
made to inhale the fumes of a fire which is lit with the wood of the
_tshili_[10] (Panjabi = Padam), a kind of fir-wood which gives much
smoke. Into the fire the milk of a white sheep or goat is poured. The
wizard inhales the smoke till he apparently becomes insensible. He is
then taken on the lap of one of the spectators, who sings a song which
restores him to his senses. In the meanwhile, a goat is slaughtered,
and the moment the fortune-teller jumps up, its bleeding neck is
presented to him, which he sucks as long as a drop remains. The assembled
musicians then strike up a great noise, and the wizard rushes about
in the circle which is formed round him and talks unintelligibly. The
fairy then appears at some distance and sings, which, however, only the
wizard hears. He then communicates her sayings in a song to one of the
musicians, who explains its meaning to the people. The wizard is called
upon to foretell events and to give advice in cases of illness, etc.
The people believe that in ancient times these Dayalls invariably spoke
correctly, but that now scarcely one saying in a hundred turns out to
be true. Wizards do not now make a livelihood by their talent, which is
considered its own reward.

* * * * *

There are few legends so exquisite as the one which chronicles the
origin, or rather the rise, of Gilgit. The traditions regarding Alexander
the Great, which Vigne and others have imagined to exist among the people
of Dardistan, are unknown to, at any rate, the Shiná race, excepting in
so far as any Munshi accompanying the Maharajah’s troops may, perhaps,
accidentally have referred to them in conversation with a Shîn. Any such
information would have been derived from the Sikandarnama of Nizámi, and
would, therefore, possess no original value. There exist no ruins, as far
as I have gone, to point to an occupation of Dardistan by the soldiers
of Alexander. The following legend, however, which not only lives in
the memories of all the Shîn people, whether they be Chilasis, Astoris,
Gilgitis, or Brokhpá (the latter, as I discovered, living actually side
by side with the Baltis in Little Tibet), but which also an annual
festival commemorates, is not devoid of interest from either a historical
or a purely literary point of view.

D.—HISTORICAL LEGEND OF THE ORIGIN OF GILGIT.

“Once upon a time there lived a race at Gilgit, whose origin is
uncertain. Whether they sprang from the soil, or had immigrated from a
distant region, is doubtful; so much is believed, that they were Gayupí
= spontaneous, aborigines, unknown. Over them ruled a monarch who was
a descendant of the evil spirits, the Yatsh, that terrorized over the
world. His name was Shiribadatt, and he resided at a castle, in front of
which there was a course for the performance of the manly game of Polo.
(See my Hunza Nagyr Handbook.) His tastes were capricious, and in every
one of his actions his fiendish origin could be discerned. The natives
bore his rule with resignation, for what could they effect against a
monarch at whose command even magic aids were placed? However, the
country was rendered fertile and round the capital bloomed attractive
gardens.

“The heavens, or rather the virtuous Peris, at last grew tired of his
tyranny, for he had crowned his iniquities by indulging in a propensity
for cannibalism. This taste had been developed by an accident. One day
his cook brought him some mutton broth, the like of which he had never
tasted. After much inquiry as to the nature of the food on which the
sheep had been brought up, it was eventually traced to an old woman, its
first owner. She stated that her child and the sheep were born on the
same day, and losing the former, she had consoled herself by suckling
the latter. This was a revelation to the tyrant. He had discovered the
secret of the palatability of the broth, and was determined to have
a never-ending supply of it. So he ordered that his kitchen should
be regularly provided with children of tender age, whose flesh, when
converted into broth, would remind him of the exquisite dish he had once
so much relished. This cruel order was carried out. The people of the
country were dismayed at such a state of things, and sought slightly to
improve it by sacrificing, in the first place, all orphans and children
of neighbouring tribes! The tyrant, however, was insatiable, and soon was
his cruelty felt by many families at Gilgit, who were compelled to give
up their children to slaughter.

“Relief came at last. At the top of the mountain Ko, which it takes a
day to ascend, and which overlooks the village of Doyur, below Gilgit,
on the side of the river, appeared three figures. They looked like men,
but much more strong and handsome. In their arms they carried bows and
arrows, and turning their eyes in the direction of Doyur, they perceived
innumerable flocks of sheep and cattle grazing on a prairie between that
village and the foot of the mountain. The strangers were fairies, and had
come (perhaps from Nagyr?) to this region with the view of ridding Gilgit
of the monster that ruled over it. However, this intention was confined
to the two elder ones. The three strangers were brothers, and none of
them had been born at the same time. It was their intention to make Azru
Shemsher, the youngest, Rajah of Gilgit, and, in order to achieve their
purpose, they hit upon the following plan.

“On the already-noticed plain, which is called Didingé, a sportive calf
was gamboling towards and away from its mother. It was the pride of its
owner, and its brilliant red colour could be seen from a distance. ‘Let
us see who is the best marksman,’ exclaimed the eldest, and saying this,
he shot an arrow in the direction of the calf, but missed his aim. The
second brother also tried to hit it, but also failed. At last, Azru
Shemsher, who took a deep interest in the sport, shot his arrow, which
pierced the poor animal from side to side and killed it. The brothers,
whilst descending, congratulated Azru on his sportsmanship, and on
arriving at the spot where the calf was lying, proceeded to cut its
throat, and to take out from its body _the titbits, namely the kidneys
and the liver_.

“They then roasted these delicacies, and invited Azru to partake of them
first. He respectfully declined, on the ground of his youth; but they
urged him to do so, ‘in order,’ they said, ‘to reward you for such an
excellent shot.’ Scarcely had the meat touched the lips of Azru, than the
brothers got up, and vanishing into the air, called out, ‘Brother! you
have touched impure food, which Peris never should eat, and we have made
use of your ignorance of this law, because we want to make you a human
being,[11] who shall rule over Gilgit; remain therefore at Doyur.’

“Azru in deep grief at the separation, cried, ‘Why remain at Doyur,
unless it be to grind corn?’ ‘Then,’ said the brothers, ‘go to Gilgit.’
‘Why,’ was the reply, ‘go to Gilgit, unless it be to work in the
gardens?’ ‘No, no,’ was the last and consoling rejoinder; ‘you will
assuredly become the king of this country, and deliver it from its
merciless oppressor.’

“No more was heard of the departing fairies, and Azru remained by
himself, endeavouring to gather consolation from the great mission
which had been bestowed on him. A villager met him, and, struck by his
appearance, offered him shelter in his house. Next morning he went on
the roof of his host’s house, and calling out to him to come up, pointed
to the Ko mountain, on which, he said, he plainly discerned a wild goat.
The incredulous villager began to fear he had harboured a maniac, if no
worse character; but Azru shot off his arrow, and accompanied by the
villager (who had assembled some friends for protection, as he was afraid
his young guest might be an associate of robbers, and lead him into a
trap), went in the direction of the mountain. There, to be sure, at the
very spot that had been pointed out, though many miles distant, was lying
the wild goat, with Azru’s arrow transfixing its body. The astonished
peasants at once hailed him as their leader, but he exacted an oath of
secrecy from them, for he had come to deliver them from their tyrant, and
would keep his incognito till such time as his plans for the destruction
of the monster were matured.

“He then took leave of the hospitable people of Doyur, and went to
Gilgit. On reaching the place, which is scarcely four miles distant from
Doyur, he amused himself by prowling about in the gardens adjoining
the royal residence. There he met one of the female companions of
Shiribadatt’s daughter (_goli_ in Hill Punjabi, _Shadróy_ in Gilgiti)
fetching water for the princess, a lady both remarkably handsome, and of
a sweet disposition. The companion rushed back, and told the young lady
to look from over the ramparts of the castle at a wonderfully handsome
young man whom she had just met. The princess placed herself in a spot
from which she could observe any one approaching the fort. Her maid then
returned, and induced Azru to come with her on the Polo ground, the
“Shavaran,” in front of the castle; the princess was smitten with his
beauty and at once fell in love with him. She then sent word to the young
prince to come and see her. When he was admitted into her presence, he
for a long time denied being anything else than a common labourer. At
last, he confessed to being a fairy’s child, and the overjoyed princess
offered him her heart and hand. It may be mentioned here that the tyrant
Shiribadatt had a wonderful horse, which could cross a mile at every
jump, and which its rider had accustomed to jump both into and out of the
fort, over its walls. So regular were the leaps which that famous animal
could take, that he invariably alighted at a distance of a mile from the
fort and at the same place.

“On that very day on which the princess had admitted young Azru into
the fort, King Shiribadatt was out hunting, of which he was desperately
fond, and to which he used sometimes to devote a week or two at a time.
We must now return to Azru, whom we left conversing with the princess.
Azru remained silent when the lady confessed her love. Urged to declare
his sentiments, he said that he would not marry her unless she bound
herself to him by the most stringent oath; this she did, and _they became
in the sight of God as if they were wedded man and wife_.[12] He then
announced that he had come to destroy her father, and asked her to kill
him herself. This she refused; but as she had sworn to aid him in every
way she could, he finally induced her to promise that she would ask her
father _where his soul was_. ‘Refuse food,’ said Azru, ‘for three or four
days, and your father, who is devotedly fond of you will ask for the
reason of your strange conduct; then say, “Father, you are often staying
away from me for several days at a time, and I am getting distressed lest
something should happen to you; do reassure me by letting me know where
your soul is, and let me feel certain that your life is safe.”’ This
the princess promised to do, and when her father returned refused food
for several days. The anxious Shiribadatt made inquiries, to which she
replied by making the already-named request. The tyrant was for a few
moments thrown into mute astonishment, and finally refused compliance
with her preposterous demand. The love-smitten lady went on starving
herself, till at last her father, fearful for his daughter’s life, told
her not to fret herself about him, as _his soul was [of snow?] in the
snows_, and that he could only perish by fire. The princess communicated
this information to her lover. Azru went back to Doyur and the villages
around, and assembled his faithful peasants. Them he asked to take twigs
of the fir-tree or _tshi_, bind them together and light them—then to
proceed in a body with the torches to the castle in a circle, keep close
together, and surround it on every side. He then went and dug out a very
deep hole, as deep as a well, in the place where Shiribadatt’s horse used
to alight, and covered it with green boughs. The next day he received
information that the torches (_talên_ in Gilgiti and _Lome_ in Astori)
were ready. He at once ordered the villagers gradually to draw near the
fort in the manner which he had already indicated.

“King Shiribadatt was then sitting in his castle; near him his
treacherous daughter, who was so soon to lose her parent. All at
once he exclaimed, ‘I feel very close; go out, dearest, and see what
has happened.’ The girl went out, and saw torches approaching from a
distance; but fancying it to be something connected with the plans of her
husband, she went back, and said it was nothing. The torches came nearer
and nearer, and the tyrant became exceedingly restless. ‘Air, air,’ he
cried, ‘I feel very, very ill; do see, daughter, what is the matter.’
The dutiful lady went, and returned with the same answer as before. At
last, the torch-bearers had fairly surrounded the fort, and Shiribadatt,
with a presentiment of impending danger, rushed out of the room, saying
‘that he felt he was dying.’ He then ran to the stables and mounted his
favourite charger, and with one blow of the whip made him jump over the
wall of the castle. Faithful to its habit, the noble animal alighted at
the same place, but alas! only to find itself engulfed in a treacherous
pit. Before the king had time to extricate himself, the villagers had
run up with their torches. ‘Throw them upon him,’ cried Azru. With one
accord all the blazing wood was thrown upon Shiribadatt, who miserably
perished. Azru was then most enthusiastically proclaimed king, celebrated
his nuptials with the fair traitor, _and, as sole tribute, exacted the
offering of one sheep, instead of that of a human child, annually from
every one of the natives_.[13] This custom has prevailed down to the
present day, and the people of Shin, wherever they be, celebrate their
delivery from the rule of a monster, and the inauguration of a more
humane government, in the month preceding the beginning of winter—a month
which they call Dawakió or Daykió—after the full moon is over and the
new moon has set in. The day of this national celebration is called ‘nôs
tshilí,’ ‘the feast of firs.’ The day generally follows four or five
days after the meat provision for the winter has been laid in to dry. A
few days of rejoicing precede the special festivity, which takes place
at night. Then all the men of the villages go forth, having torches in
their hands, which, at the sound of music, they swing round their heads,
and throw in the direction of Gilgit, if they are at any distance from
that place; whilst the people of Gilgit throw them indifferently about
the plain in which that town, if town it may be called, is situated. When
the throwing away of the brands is over, every man returns to his house,
where a curious custom is observed. He finds the door locked. The wife
then asks: ‘Where have you been all night? I won’t let you come in now.’
Then her husband entreats her and says, ‘I have brought you property, and
children, and happiness, and everything you desire.’ Then, after some
further parley, the door is opened, and the husband walks in. He is,
however, stopped by a beam which goes across the room, whilst all the
females of the family rush into an inner apartment to the eldest lady of
the place. The man then assumes sulkiness and refuses to advance, when
the repenting wife launches into the following song:—

ORIGINAL:—

_Mù tútè shábilès, wó rajó tolyá._
I of thee glad am, oh Rajah’s presented with tolahs!
_Mù tútè shábilès, wó ashpa panu._
I of thee glad am, oh steed’s rider.
_Mù tútè shábilès, wó tumák ginu._
I of thee glad am, oh gun-wearer. [Evidently a modern interpolation.]
_Mú tútè shábilès, wó kangár ginu._
I of thee glad am, oh sword-wearer.
_Mú tútè shábilès, wó tshapàn banu._
I of thee glad am, oh mantle-wearer.
_Mú tútè shábilès, shá mul dé ginum._
I of thee glad am, pleasure’s price giving I will buy.
_Mú tútè shábilès, wó gúmy tshino._
I of thee glad am, oh corn-heap!
_Shábilès shá mul de ginum._
Rejoicing pleasure’s price giving I will buy.
_Mú tútè shábilès, wó giéy loto._
I of thee glad am, oh ghee-ball.
_Shábilès sha mul de ginum._
Rejoicing pleasure’s price giving I will buy.

TRANSLATION:—

Thou hast made me glad! thou favourite of the Rajah!
Thou hast rejoiced me, oh bold horseman!
I am pleased with thee who so well usest gun and sword!
Thou hast delighted me, oh thou who art invested with a mantle of
honour!
Oh great happiness! I will buy it all by giving pleasure’s price.
Oh thou [nourishment to us] a heap of corn and a store of ghee!
Delighted will I buy it all by giving pleasure’s price!

“Then the husband relents and steps over the partition beam. They all
sit down, dine together, and thus end festivities of the ‘Nôs.’ The
little domestic scene is observed at Gilgit; but it is thought to be
an essential element in the celebration of the day by people whose
ancestors may have been retainers of the Gilgit Raja Azru Shemsher, and
by whom they may have been dismissed to their homes with costly presents.

“The song itself is, however, well known at Gilgit.

“When Azru had safely ascended the throne, he ordered the tyrant’s palace
to be levelled to the ground. The willing peasants, manufacturing spades
of iron, ‘Killi’, flocked to accomplish a grateful task, and sang whilst
demolishing his castle:

ORIGINAL:—

_Kûro téyto Shiri-ga-Badàt djé kuró_
[I am] hard said Shiri and Badatt![14] why hard?
_Demm Singéy Khotó kúro_
Dem Sing’s Khotó [is] hard
_Na tshumáre kille téy ráke phala thèm_
[With] this iron spade thy palace level I do
_Tsháké! túto Shatshó Malika Demm Singéy_
Behold! thou Shatshó Malika Dem Singh’s
_Khotó kuró na tshumare killéyi_
Khotó hard; [with] this iron spade
_Téy rake-ga phalatém, tshaké_
Thy palace very I level, behold!”

TRANSLATION:—

“‘My nature is of a hard metal,’ said Shiri and Badatt. ‘Why
hard? I Khoto, the son of the peasant Dem Singh, am alone
hardy; with this iron spade I raze to the ground thy kingly
house. Behold now, although thou art of race accursed, of
Shatsho Malika, I, Dem Singh’s son, am of hard metal; for with
this iron spade I level thy very palace; look out! look out!’”

During the Nauroz [evidently because it is not a national festival] and
the Eed, none of these national Shîn songs are sung. Eggs are dyed in
different colours and people go about amusing themselves by trying which
eggs are hardest by striking the end of one against the end of another.
The possessor of the hard egg wins the broken one. The women, however,
amuse themselves on those days by tying ropes to trees and swinging
themselves about on them.

_BUJONI = RIDDLES, PROVERBS AND FABLES._

A. RIDDLES.

THE NAVEL.

1. _Tishkóreya ushkúrey halól._
“The perpendicular mountain’s sparrow’s nest.
The body’s sparrow’s hole.”

A STICK.

2. _Méy_ _sazik_ _heyn_, _súreo_ _peréyn_, _bás_ _darre_
my sister is at day [_she_] walks, at night door

_pató_; _búja._[15]
behind; listen!

“Now listen! My sister walks in the day-time and at night stands behind
the door.” As “Sas” “Sazik” also means a stick, ordinarily called
“Kunali” in Astori, the riddle means: “I have a stick which assists me in
walking by day and which I put behind the door at night.”

3. The Gilgitis say “méy káke tré pay; dashtea” = my brother has three
feet; explain now. This means a man’s two legs and a stick.

A RADISH.

4. _Astóri mió dádo dimm dáwa-lók; dáyn sarpa-lók, buja._
My grandfather’s body [is] in Hades; his beard [is in] this
world, [now] explain!

This riddle is explained by “radish” whose body is in the earth and whose
sprouts, compared to a beard, are above the ground. Remarkable above all,
however, is that the unknown future state, referred to in this riddle,
should be called, whether blessed or cursed, “Dawalók” [the place of
Gods] by these nominal Muhammadans. This world is called “Sarpalók,”
= the world of serpents. “Sarpe” is also the name for man. “Lók” is
“place,” but the name by itself is not at present understood by the
Shins.

A HOOKA.

5. _G._ _méy_ DADI _shishédji_ _agár_, _lúpenu_
my father’s mother on her head fire is burning.

The top of the Hooka is the _dadi’s_ or grandmother’s head.

A SWORD.

6. _Tutâng_ _gotéjo_ _rúi_ _nikai_
“Darkness from the house the female demon is coming out,”

viz., “out of the dark sheath the beautiful, but destructive, steel
issues.” It is remarkable that the female Yatsh should be called “Rûi.”

RED PEPPER.

7. _Lólo bakuró shé tshá lá há—búja!_
In the red sheep’s pen white young ones many are—attend!

This refers to the Redpepper husk in which there are many white seeds.

B. PROVERBS.

DOTAGE.

To an old man people say:

8. _Tú_ _djarro_ _môto_ _shûdung_
thou and old brains delivered,

“You are old and have got rid of your senses.”

Old women are very much dreaded and are accused of creating mischief
wherever they go.

DUTIES TO THE AGED.

9. (_G._[16]) _Djuwanie_ _keneru_ _digasus_, _djarvelo_ _betshumus_.
In youth’s time I gave, in old age I demand.

“When young I gave away, now that I am old you should support me.”

A BURNT CHILD, ETC., ETC.

10. _Ek damm agáru dáddo dugúni shang thé!_
Once in fire you have been burnt, a second time take care!

EVIL COMMUNICATIONS, ETC., ETC.

11. _Ek khatsh látshek bilo búdo donate she._
One bad sheep if there be, to the whole flock is an insult

= One rotten sheep spoils the whole flock.

12. _Ek khatsho manújo budote sha_ = _one_ bad man is to _all_ an insult.

ADVICE TO KEEP GOOD COMPANY.

13. A. _Mishto manújo—katshi béyto, to mishto sitshé_
_Katsho manujo—katshi béyto, to katsho sitshe_

When you [who are bad?] are sitting near a good man you learn good things.

When you [who are bad?] are sitting near a bad man you learn bad things.

This proverb is not very intelligible, if literally translated.

DIMMI CON CHI TU PRATTICHI, ETC., ETC.

14. _Tús máte rá: mey shughulo ró hun, mas tute rám: tu ko hanu_ = “Tell
me: my friend is such and such a one, I will tell you who _you_ are.”

DISAPPOINTMENT.

15. _Sháharè kéru gé shing shém thé—konn tshiní tey tshiní téyanú._

“Into the city he went horns to place (acquire), but ears he cut thus he
did. He went to acquire horns and got his ears cut off.”

HOW TO TREAT AN ENEMY.

_Dî dé, putsh kàh_ = “give the daughter and eat the son,” is a
Gilgit proverb with regard to how one ought to treat an enemy. The
recommendation given is: “marry your daughter to your foe and then kill
him,” [by which you get a male’s head which is more valuable than that of
a female.] The Dards have sometimes acted on this maxim in order to lull
the suspicions of their Kashmir enemies.[17]

C. FABLES.

THE WOMAN AND THE HEN.

16. _Eyk tshéekeyn kokói ek asílli; sése sóni thúl (hané) déli;

setshéy-se kokóïte zanmá láo wîi; tulé dù déy thé;
(food, grain) eggs two giving does;

sè ékenu lang bilí; kokói dêr páy, múy._
this one rid got; the hen’s stomach bursting, died.

MORAL.—_Anésey maní aní haní_ = the meaning of this is this:

_Láo_ _arém thé_ _ápejo_ _lang_ _biló_.
Much to gain the little lost becomes.

_Translation._

A woman had a hen; it used to lay one golden egg; the woman thought that
if she gave much food it would lay two eggs; but she lost even the one,
for the hen died, its stomach bursting.

MORAL.—People often lose the little they have by aspiring to more.

17. THE SPARROW AND THE MOUNTAIN.

“A sparrow who tried to kick the mountain himself toppled over.”

_Shunútur-se_ _tshíshe—sáti_ _pájja dem thé_ _náre_ _gó_.
The sparrow with the mountain kicked fall went.

18. THE BAT SUPPORTING THE FIRMAMENT.

The bat is in the habit of sleeping on its back. It is believed to be
very proud. It is supposed to say as it lies down and stretches its legs
towards heaven, “This I do so that when the heavens fall down I may be
able to support them.”

_Tilteò_ _ráte_ _súto—to_ _pey_ _húnte_ _angái—warì_ _theun_;
A bat at night sleeping its legs upwards heaven—ward does;

_angái_ _wáti—to_ _pêy—gì_ _sanarem theun_.
the heavens when falling with my feet uphold I will.

19. “NEVER WALK BEHIND A HORSE OR BEFORE A KING” as you will get kicked
in either case.

_ashpe_ _pataní_ _nè bó_; _rajó_ _mutshanì_ _nè bó_.
horse behind not walk; raja in front not walk.

20. UNION IS STRENGTH.

“A kettle cannot balance itself on one stone; on three, however, it does.”

_Ey pûtsh! èk gutur-yá dêh nè quriyein; tré[18] gútúrey á dek quréyn._
Oh son! one stone on a kettle not stops; three stones on a kettle stop.

The Gilgitis instead of “ya” = “upon” say “dja.”

“Gutur” is, I believe, used for a stone [ordinarily “bàtt”] only in the
above proverb.

21. THE FROG IN A DILEMMA.

“If I speak, the water will rush against my mouth, and if I keep silent I
will die bursting with rage.”

This was said by a frog who was in the water and angry at something that
occurred. If he croaked, he would be drowned by the water rushing down
his throat, and if he did not croak he would burst with suppressed rage.
This saying is often referred to by women when they are angry with their
husbands, who may, perhaps, beat them if they say anything. A frog is
called “manok.”

_Tós_ _thèm—to_ _áze—jya_[19] _wéy_ _bojé_; _né them_
Voice I do—if mouth in water will come; not do,

_to py_ _muos_.
then bursting I will die.

22. THE FOX AND THE UNIVERSE.

When a man threatens a lot of people with impossible menaces, the reply
often is “Don’t act like the fox ‘Lóyn’ who was carried away by the
water.” A fox one day fell into a river: as he swept past the shore
he cried out, “The water is carrying off the universe.” The people on
the banks of the river said, “We can only see a fox whom the river is
drifting down.”

23. THE FOX AND THE POMEGRANATE.

_Lóyn_ _danù_ _né utshàtte_ _somm_ _tshàmm_
The fox the pomegranate not reached on account sour,

_thù_: _tshùrko_ _hanú_.
spitting, sour it is.

“The fox wanted to eat pomegranates: as he could not reach them, he went
to a distance and _biting his lips_ [as “tshàmm” was explained by an
Astori although Gilgitis call it “tshappé,”] spat on the ground, saying,
they are too sour.” I venture to consider the conduct of this fox more
cunning than the one of “sour grapes” memory. His biting his lips and,
in consequence, spitting on the ground, would make his disappointed face
really look as if he had tasted something sour.

_SONGS._

THE GILGIT QUEEN AND THE MOGULS.

1. GILGITI SONG.

Once upon a time a Mogul army came down and surrounded the fort of
Gilgit. At that time Gilgit was governed by a woman, Mirzéy Juwāri[20]
by name. She was the widow of a Rajah supposed to have been of Balti
descent. The Lady seeing herself surrounded by enemies sang:

I. Mirzéy Juwāri = Oh [daughter of] Mirza, Juwāri!
Shakeréy piál; darú = [Thou art a] sugar cup; in the
Dunyá sang taréye = world [thy] light has shone
II. Abi Khānn[21] djālo = Abi Khān [my son] was born
Lamâyi tey! latshār tāro = [I thy mother] am thy sacrifice;
the morning star
Nikāto = has risen

The meaning of this, according to my Gilgiti informant, is: Juwari
laments that “I, the daughter of a brave King, am only a woman, a cup of
pleasures, exposed to dangers from any one who wishes to sip from it. To
my misfortune, my prominent position has brought me enemies. Oh, my dear
son, for whom I would sacrifice myself, I have sacrificed you! Instead of
preserving the Government for you, the morning-star which shines on its
destruction has now risen on you.”

SONG OF DEFIANCE.

2. GILGITI WAR SONG.

In ancient times there was a war between the Rajahs of Hunza and Nagyr.
Muko and Báko were their respective Wazeers. Muko was killed and Báko
sang:

_Gilgiti._

Ala, mardāney, Báko-se: má shos they!
Múko-se: má shos they!
Báko-ga dīn sajjéy
Múko mayáro they

_English._

Hurrah! warriors, Bako [says]: _I_ will do well
Muko [also says] _I_ will do well
And Bako turned out to be the lion
[Whilst] Muko was [its prey], a [mere] Markhōr [the wild
“snake-eating” goat]

[Illustration: GROUP OF NATIVES FROM HUNZA, YASIN, AND NAGYR LISTENING TO
MUSICIANS FROM CHITRÁL AND BADAKHSHÁN.]

LAMENT FOR THE ABSENT WARRIOR BY HIS MOTHER.

3. ANOTHER GILGITI WAR SONG.

_Biyashtëyn náng Kashíru_
A Paradise [is the lot of whoever is struck by] the bullet of Kashiru?

_Góu nélli,[22] áje Sahibe Khann_
He has gone, my child, mother of Sahibe Khann [to the wars].

_Suregga karé wey jill bey?_
And the sun when coming will it shining become?
(When will his return cause the sun again to shine for me?)

_Mutshútshul shong putéye_
Of Mutshutshul[23] the ravine he has conquered

_Híyokto bijéy, lamayi_
Yet my soul is in fear, oh my beloved child, [literally: oh my
sacrifice]

_Ardàm Dolója yujéy_
To snatch [conquer] Doloja[24] is [yet necessary = has yet to be done].

_Translation._

“The bullet of Kashiru sends many to Paradise. He has gone to the wars,
oh my child and mother of Sahib Khan! Will the sun ever shine for me by
his returning? It is true that he has taken by assault the ravine of
Mutshutshul, but yet, oh beloved child, my soul is in fear for his fate,
as the danger has _not_ passed, since the village Doloja yet remains to
be conquered.”

4. THE SHIN SHAMMI SHAH.

OLD NATIONAL SHINA SONG.

_Shammi Shah Shaîtingêy mítojo._
Shammi Shah Shaíting, from his courtyard.

_Djálle_ _tshâye_ _dûloe_ _dên_.
The green fields’ birds promenade they give.

_Nyé_ _tziréye_ _tshayote_ _kóy bijéy_.
They (near) twitter birds who fears?[25]

_Tómi tom_ _shiudóke_ _dên_.
From tree to tree a whistle they give.

_Alldátey_ _pótskeyn_ _mítojo_.
Alldát’s grandson’s from the courtyard.

_Djalle_ _tshaye_ _dúloe_ _dên_.
The green fields birds promenade give.

_Nyé_ _tziréye_ _tshayote_ _kóy bijey_.
They twitter birds who fears?[25]

_Tomi tom_; _shiudôke_ _den_.
From tree to tree; a whistling they give.

Shammi Shah Shaíthing was one of the founders of the Shín rule. His wife,
although she sees her husband surrounded by women anxious to gain his
good graces, rests secure in the knowledge of his affections belonging
to her and of her being the mother of his children. She, therefore,
ridicules the pretensions of her rivals, who, she fancies, will, at the
utmost, only have a temporary success. In the above still preserved song
she says, with a serene confidence, not shared by _Indian_ wives.

_Translation._

“In the very courtyard of Shammi Sha Shaîting.
“The little birds of the field flutter gaily about.
“Hear how they twitter; yet, who would fear little birds,
“That fly from tree to tree giving [instead of lasting love] a
gay whistle?
“In the very courtyards of Alldat’s grandson these birds flutter
gaily about, yet who would fear them?
“Hear how they twitter, etc., etc., etc.

5. A WOMAN’S SONG (GILGITI).

[THE DESERTED WIFE AND THE FAITHLESS HUSBAND.]

_The Wife_:

_Mey_ _kukúri_ _Patan_ _gayta_ _béyto_ _djék tòn_?
My kukuri Pathán going he sat what am I to do?

_Pípi_ _batzísse_ _garáo_ _dên_; _múso tshûsh_.
Aunt! from the family he absence has given; I cocoon.

_Gá_ _sikkìm_ _qatì_ _bring_ _báleo_ _dês_;
And coloured silk spinning animal bind do = could.

_Mió_ _dudélo_ _tshût_ _biló_!
My milk-sweet late has become!

_The Husband_:

_Anì_ _Azari_ _rey_[26]
That Azari, [is] a Deodar cedar[?]

_Rajóy_, _nà_ _sómmo_? _anì_ _Azareo_ _rôk_ _bilôs_.
Kingly, is it not so [my] love! That Azari illness I have.

_Anì_ _Wazíreyn_ _shuyi_ _gas-mall_, _na_ _sommo_!
This Wazîr’s child princess, not [so] love?

_Bálli_ _dapújo_ _gî_ _bem_; _anì_ _pâr_
Then from my waist (girdle) taking I’ll sit; this beyond

_tshísheyn_.
the mountains.

_Súri_ _war_ _tshîsheyn_ _djondjì_[27] _tzáe_ _bijôte_.
Sun this side’s mountain birch tree(?) to you both.

_Somm_ _tshinèm_; _anù_ _shëò_ _qoáreyn_ _kinì_—_ga_
Alike I love; This white hawk black and

_Tshikki_[28] _méy_ _begà_ _beìh_; _balli_ _pashéjo_
fragrant bag mine being sit; Then on my turban

_gi_ _beyim_.
wearing I will sit.

_Translation of “A Woman’s Song.”_

_The deserted wife sings_:—My Pathan! oh kukúri, far away from me has he
made a home; but, aunt, what am I to do, since he has left his own! The
silk that I have been weaving during his absence would be sufficient to
bind all the animals of the field. Oh, how my darling is delaying his
return!

_The faithless husband sings_:—[My new love] Azari is like a royal
Deodar; is it not so, my love? for Azari I am sick with desire. She is
a Wazeer’s princess; is it not so, my love? Let me put you in my waist.
The sun on yonder mountain, and the tree on this nigh mountain, ye both I
love dearly. I will recline when this white hawk and her black fragrant
tresses become mine; encircling with them my head I will recline [in
happiness.]

6. THE JILTED LOVER’S DREAM.

[IN THE ASTORI DIALECT.]

_Tshunni_ _nazdik_ _mulayi_.[29]
(Oh) Little delicate [maid] woman.

_Barêyo_ _báro_, _na_.[30]
The husband old is, [is he not?]

_Hapótok_ _thyayé_ _gé_.
With a bear done it going, [you have “been and gone and done it.”]

_Sómmi_ _rátijo_ _Sómmi_ _shakejo_ _Mey nish harayé_
In the sleep of night The sleep from the arm. My sleep awake

_gé_. _Mashàq_ _phirì_ _phùt_ _talósto_.
has gone. Turning round again opening hastily I saw.

_Méy laktéy_ _píribann_ _tshîtsho_ _häun_. _Datshîno_ _hata-jó_
My darling waistband variegated was. Right hand-from

_aina_ _giní_, _Tshakéoje_ _wazze_. _Nu_ _kabbo_ _hata-jó_
mirror taking, Looking she came. This left hand-from

_surmá_ _giní_. _Paléoje_ _wazze_.
antimony taking, Applying she came.

The above describes the dream of a lover whose sweetheart has married one
older than herself; he says:

_Translation._

“That dear delicate little woman has a frightful old husband.
“Thou hast married a bear! In the dead of night, resting on my arm,
“My sleep became like waking. Hastily I turned and with a quick
glance saw
“That my darling’s waistband shone with many colours,
“That she advanced towards me holding in her right a mirror into
which she looked,
“That she came near me applying with her left the antimony to her
eyes.”

7. MODERN ASTORI SONG.

This Song was composed by Rajah Bahadur Khan, now at Astŏr, who fell in
love with the daughter of the Rajah of Hunza to whom he was affianced.
When the war between Kashmir and Hunza broke out, the Astoris and Hunzas
were in different camps; Rajah Bahadur Khan, son of Rajah Shakul Khan, of
the Shíah persuasion,[31] thus laments his misfortunes:

_Lotshúko_ _sabäin_ _kên_ _nimâz_ _thé_ _duwá_
Early in morning’s time [usual] prayers done supplication

_them_ _Qabûl thé_, _Rahîma_ _Garìbëy_ _duwa_
I make Accept, oh merciful [God] of the poor the prayer.

_Dòn_ _mahî_—_yeen_ _dim_
[her] teeth [are] of fish bone = like ivory, [her] body

_puru_—_yeen_ _tshamûye_ _tshîké_ _hane_ _me_ _armán_
[like a] reed[32] [her] hair musk is. My longing

_tûte_ _hane_ _Bulbúl_ _shakàr_.
to you is [Oh] nightingale sweet!

_Chorus_ falls in with “_hai, hai, armân bulbúl_” = “oh, oh, the longing
[for the] nightingale!”[33]

_Translation._

After having discharged my usual religious duties in the early morning,
I offer a prayer which, oh thou merciful God, accept from thy humble
worshipper. [Then, thinking of his beloved.] Her teeth are as white as
ivory, her body as graceful as a reed, her hair is like musk. My whole
longing is towards you, oh sweet nightingale.

Chorus: Alas, how absorbing this longing for the nightingale.

8. GURAIZI SONGS.

This district used to be under Ahmad Shah of Skardo, and has since
its conquest by Ghulab Singh come permanently under the Maharajah of
Kashmîr. Its possession used to be the apple of discord between the
Nawabs of Astor and the Rajahs of Skardo. It appears never to have
had a real Government of its own. The fertility of its valleys always
invited invasion. Yet the people are of Shîná origin and appear much
more manly than the other subjects of Kashmîr. Their loyalty to that
power is not much to be relied upon, but it is probable that with the
great intermixture which has taken place between them and the Kashmîri
Mussulmans for many years past, they will become equally demoralized.
The old territory of Guraiz used in former days to extend up to Kuyam
or Bandipur on the Wular Lake. The women are reputed to be very chaste,
and Colonel Gardiner told me that the handsomest women in Kashmîr came
from that district. To me, however, they appeared to be tolerably plain,
although rather innocent-looking, which may render them attractive,
especially after one has seen the handsome, but sensual-looking, women
of Kashmîr. The people of Guraiz are certainly very dirty, but they are
not so plain as the Chilásis. At Guraiz three languages are spoken:
Kashmîri, Guraizi (a corruption of a Shiná dialect), and Panjabi—the
latter on account of its occupation by the Maharajah’s officials. I found
some difficulty in getting a number of them together from the different
villages which compose the district of Guraiz, the Arcadia of Kashmir,
but I gave them food and money, and after I got them into a good humour
they sang:

GURAIZI HUNTING SONG.

_Guraizi._ _English._

_Pere, tshaké, gazàri meyaru_ = Look beyond! what a fine stag!
Beyond, look! a fine stag.

Chorus. _Pére, tshaké, djôk maar = Chorus. Look beyond! how
âke dey._ gracefully he struts.
Beyond, look! how he struts!

_Pére, tshaké, bhapûri bay bâro_ = Look beyond! he bears twelve
Beyond, look! shawl wool 12 loads. loads of wool.

Chorus. _Pére, tshaké, djôk maarâke = Chorus. Look beyond! how
dey._ gracefully he struts.
Beyond, look! how he does strut!

_Pére, tshaké, dòni shilélu_ = Look beyond! his very teeth
Beyond, look! [his] teeth are of are of crystal.
crystal [glass]

Chorus. _Pére, tshaké, djôk maarâke = Chorus. Look beyond! how
dey._ gracefully he struts.

This is apparently a hunting song, but seems also to be applied to
singing the praises of a favourite.

There is another song, which was evidently given with great gusto, in
praise of Sheir Shah Ali Shah, Rajah of Skardo.[34] That Rajah, who is
said to have temporarily conquered Chitrál, which the Chilasis call
Tshatshál,[35] made a road of steps up the Atsho mountain which overlooks
Bûnji, the most distant point reached before 1866 by travellers or the
Great Trigonometrical Survey. From the Atsho mountain Vigne returned,
“the suspicious Rajah of Gilgit suddenly giving orders for burning the
bridge over the Indus.” It is, however, more probable that his Astori
companions fabricated the story in order to prevent him from entering an
unfriendly territory in which Mr. Vigne’s life might have been in danger,
for had he reached Bûnji he might have known that the Indus never was
spanned by a bridge at that or any neighbouring point. The miserable
Kashmîri coolies and boatmen who were forced to go up-country with the
troops in 1866 were, some of them, employed, in rowing people across, and
that is how I got over the Indus at Bûnji; however to return from this
digression to the _Guraizi Song_:

9. PRAISE OF THE CONQUEROR SHEIR SHAH ALI SHAH.

_Guraizi._ _English._

Sheir Shah Ali Shah = Sheir Shah Ali Shah.
Nōmega djong = I wind myself round his name.[36]
Ká kōlo shing phuté = He conquering the crooked Lowlands.
Djar súntsho taréga = Made them quite straight.
Kâne Makponé = The great Khan, the Makpon.
Kâno nom mega djong = I wind myself round the Khan’s name.
Kó Tshamūgar bòsh phuté = He conquered bridging over [the Gilgit
river] below Tshamûgar.
Sar[37] súntsho taréga = And made all quite straight.

I believe there was much more of this historical song, but unfortunately
the paper on which the rest was written down by me as it was delivered,
has been lost together with other papers.

“Tshamūgar,” to which reference is made in the song, is a village on the
other side of the Gilgit river on the Nagyr side. It is right opposite to
where I stayed for two nights under a huge stone which projects from the
base of the Niludâr range on the Gilgit side.

There were formerly seven forts at Tshamūgar. A convention had been made
between the Rajah of Gilgit and the Rajah of Skardo, by which Tshamūgar
was divided by the two according to the natural division which a stream
that comes down from the Batkôr mountain made in that territory. The
people of Tshamūgar, impatient of the Skardo rule, became all of them
subjects to the Gilgit Rajah, on which Sher Shah Ali Shah, the ruler of
Skardo, collected an army, and crossing the Makpon-i-shagaron[38] at
the foot of the Haramûsh mountain, came upon Tshamūgar and diverted the
water which ran through that district into another direction. This was
the reason of the once fertile Tshamūgar becoming deserted; the forts
were razed to the ground. There are evidently traces of a river having
formerly run through Tshamūgar. The people say that the Skardo Rajah
stopped the flow of the water by throwing quicksilver into it. This is
probably a legend arising from the reputation which Ahmad Shah, the most
recent Skardo ruler whom the Guraizis can remember, had of dabbling in
medicine and sorcery.[39]

CHILASI SONGS.

[The Chilasis have a curious way of snapping their fingers, with which
practice they accompany their songs, the thumb running up and down the
fingers as on a musical instrument.]

10. CHILASI.

Tù hùn Gítshere bódje sòmmo dímm bamèm
Mèy shahínni pashalóto dewà salám dáute
Rás; Aje góje bómto méy dùddi aje nush
Hargìnn Zúe déy mo bejómos
Samat Khánay sóni mó báshémm tutàk
Mùugà deyto; mó dabtar dèm

11.

A. Tshekòn thónn; tikki wéy nush, oh Berader
Adòn; thōn; madéy nush; ey Berader

B. Hamírey tshûki, púki thàs, palútos
Ni rátey ló ne bĕy, oh Berader!

The last word in each sentence, as is usual with all Shín songs, is
repeated at the beginning of the next line. I may also remark that I have
accentuated the words _as pronounced in the songs_ and not as put down in
my Vocabulary.

_Translation._

MESSAGE TO A SWEETHEART BY A FRIEND.

You are going up to Gitshe, oh my dearest friend,
Give my compliment and salute when you see my hawk.
Speak to her. I must now go into my house; my mother is no more
And I fear the sting of that dragon,[40] my step-mother—
Oh noble daughter of Samat Khan; I will play the flute
And give its price and keep it in my bosom.

The second song describes a quarrel between two brothers who are resting
after a march on some hill far away from any water or food wherewith to
refresh themselves.

_Younger brother._—Am I to eat now, what am I to say, there is, oh
my brother, neither bread nor water.
Am I to fetch some [water] what am I to say, there is no masak
[a water-skin], oh my brother!

_Elder brother._—The lying nonsense of Hamir (the younger brother)
wounds me deeply (tears off the skin of my heart).
There will be no day to this long night, oh my brother!

12. THE TRANSITORINESS OF THIS WORLD.

_Kàka_, _mosè_ _djò_ _râum_ | _Mèy_ _dássga_ _nè bèy_ | _Tàbàm_
Brother! I what am to say? | My choice it is not | In the

_aresà_ _dáro_ | _Módje_ _làshga_ _nè béy_ | _Dajála_
whole of the present time | To me shame is not | The next

_éle_ _jilto_ | _Jáko_ _udàsóne_ _han_
world near has come | People despairing will be

_2nd Verse._

_Watàn_ _dáro_ _zár_ | _Tu_ _mashahúre_ _billé_ | _Ash_
In my country famous | You famous have become | To-day

_bajóni_ _dégi_ _bárri_ _musafiri_ | _Zari_ _mójo_
to get you prepared on a great journey | Openly me

_lai langíddi_ = _íje_ | _Djíll_ _mey_ _hawallí_ | _Sín qatída_
much pains | My soul is in your keeping | The river

_phúne_ | _Sudà_ _chogarong_
is flowing, the large flower | Of silver colour.[41]

A PRAYER OF THE BASHGELI KAFIRS.

[_In the Kalásha dialect._]

The ideas and many of the words in this prayer were evidently acquired by
my two Kafirs on their way through Kashmir:

“Khudá, tandrusti dé, prushkári rozì de, abattì kari, dewalat man. Tu
ghóna asas, tshik intara, tshik tu faidá káy asas. Sat asmán tì, Stru
suri mastruk mótshe dé.”

_MANNERS AND CUSTOMS._

A. AMUSEMENTS.

The Chaughan Bazi or Hockey on horseback, so popular everywhere north of
Kashmir, and which is called Polo by the Baltis and Ladakis, who both
play it to perfection and in a manner which I shall describe elsewhere,
is also well known to the Ghilgiti and Astori subdivisions of the Shina
people. On great general holidays as well as on any special occasion of
rejoicing, the people meet on those grounds which are mostly near the
larger villages, and pursue the game with great excitement and at the
risk of casualties. The first day I was at Astor, I had the greatest
difficulty in restoring to his senses a youth of the name of Rustem Ali
who, like a famous player of the same name at Mardo, was passionately
fond of the game, and had been thrown from his horse. The place of
meeting near Astor is called the Eedgah. The game is called TOPE in
Astor, and the grounds for playing it are called SHAJARAN. At Gilgit
the game is called BULLA, and the place SHAWARAN. The latter names are
evidently of Tibetan origin.

The people are also very fond of target practice, shooting with bows,
which they use dexterously but in which they do not excel the people
of Nagyr and Hunza. Game is much stalked during the winter. At Astor
any game shot on the three principal hills—_Tshhamô_, a high hill
opposite the fort, _Demídeldèn_ and _Tshólokot_—belong to the Nawab of
Astor—the sportsman receiving only the head, legs and a haunch—or to his
representative, then the Tahsildar Munshi Rozi Khan. At Gilgit everybody
claims what he may have shot, but it is customary for the Nawab to
receive some share of it. Men are especially appointed to watch and track
game, and when they discover their whereabouts notice is sent to the
villages from which parties issue, accompanied by musicians, and surround
the game. Early in the morning, when the “Lóhe” dawns, the musicians
begin to play and a great noise is made which frightens the game into the
several directions where the sportsmen are placed.

The guns are matchlocks and are called in Gilgiti “_turmàk_” and in Astór
“tumák.” At Gilgit they manufacture the guns themselves or receive them
from Badakhshan. The balls have only a slight coating of lead, the inside
generally being a little stone. The people of Hunza and Nagyr invariably
place their guns on little wooden pegs which are permanently fixed to
the gun and are called “Dugazá.” The guns are much lighter than those
manufactured elsewhere, much shorter and carry much smaller bullets than
the matchlock of the Maharajah’s troops. They carry very much farther
than any native Indian gun and are fired with almost unerring accuracy.
For “small shot” little stones of any shape—the longest and oval ones
being preferred—are used. There is one kind of stone especially which is
much used for that purpose; it is called “Balósh Batt,” which is found
in Hanza, Nagyr, Skardo, and near the “Demídeldèn” hill already noticed,
at a village called Pareshinghi near Astor. It is a very soft stone and
large cooking utensils are cut out from it, whence the name, “Balósh”
Kettle, “Batt” stone, “Balósh Batt.” The stone is cut out with a chisel
and hammer; the former is called “Gútt” in Astori and “Gukk” in Gilgiti;
the hammer “toá” and “Totshúng” and in Gilgiti “samdenn.” The gunpowder
is manufactured by the people themselves.[42]

The people also play at backgammon, [called in Astóri “Patshis,” and
“TAKK” in Gilgiti,] with dice [called in Astóri and also in Gilgiti
“dall.”]

Fighting with iron wristbands is confined to Chilasi women who bring them
over their fists which they are said to use with effect.

The people are also fond of wrestling, of butting each other whilst
hopping, etc.

To play the Jew’s harp is considered meritorious as King David played it.
All other music good Mussulmans are bid to avoid.

The “Sitara” [the Eastern Guitar] used to be much played in Yassen, the
people of which country as well as the people of Hunza and Nagyr excel
in dancing, singing and playing. After them come the Gilgitis, then the
Astoris, Chilasis, Baltis, etc. The people of Nagyr are a comparatively
mild race. They carry on goldwashing which is constantly interrupted by
kidnapping parties from the opposite Hunza. The language of Nagyr and
Hunza is the Non-Aryan Khajuná and no affinity between that language and
any other has yet been traced. The Nagyris are mostly Shiahs. They are
short and stout and fairer than the people of Hunza [the Kunjûtis] who
are described[43] as “tall skeletons” and who are desperate robbers. The
Nagyris understand Tibetan, Persian and Hindustani. Badakhshan merchants
were the only ones who could travel with perfect safety through Yassen,
Chitral and Hunza.

DANCES[44]

Fall into two main divisions: “slow” or “Búti Harip” = Slow Instrument
and Quick “Danni Harip,” = Quick Instrument. The Yassen, Nagyr and Hunza
people dance quickest; then come the Gilgitis; then the Astóris; then the
Baltis, and slowest of all are the Ladakis.

When all join in the dance, cheer or sing with gesticulations, the dance
or recitative is called “thapnatt” in Gilgiti, and “Burró” in Astóri.

When there is a solo dance it is called “nàtt” in Gilgiti, and “nott” in
Astóri.

“Cheering” is called “Halamush” in Ghilgiti, and “Halamùsh” in Astóri.
Clapping of hands is called “tza.” Cries of “_Yú_, Yú dea; tza theá, Hiú
Hiú dea; Halamush thea; shabâsh” accompany the performances.

There are several kinds of Dances. The PRASULKI NATE, is danced by ten or
twelve people ranging themselves behind the bride as soon as she reaches
the bridegroom’s house. This custom is observed at Astor. In this dance
men swing above sticks or whatever they may happen to hold in their
hands.

[Illustration: A DANCE AT GILGIT (DR. LEITNER AND HIS PANJABI ATTENDANTS
LOOKING ON).]

The BURÓ NATT is a dance performed on the Nao holiday, in which both men
and women engage—the women forming a ring round the central group of
dancers, which is composed of men. This dance is called THAPPNATT at
Gilgit. In Dareyl there is a dance in which the dancers wield swords and
engage in a mimic fight. This dance Gilgitis and Astòris call the _Darelâ
nat_, but what it is called by the Dareylis themselves I do not know.

The mantle dance is called “GOJA NAT.” In this popular dance the dancer
throws his cloth over his extended arm.

When I sent a man round with a drum inviting all the Dards that were to
be found at Gilgit to a festival, a large number of men appeared, much
to the surprise of the invading Dogras, who thought that they had all
run to the hills. A few sheep were roasted for their benefit; bread and
fruit were also given them, and when I thought they were getting into
a good humour, I proposed that they should sing. Musicians had been
procured with great difficulty, and after some demur, the Gilgitis sang
and danced. At first, only one at a time danced, taking his sleeves well
over his arm so as to let it fall over, and then moving it up and down
according to the cadence of the music. The movements were, at first,
slow, one hand hanging down, the other being extended with a commanding
gesture. The left foot appeared to be principally engaged in moving or
rather jerking the body forward. All sorts of “pas seuls” were danced;
sometimes a rude imitation of the Indian Nátsh; the by-standers clapping
their hands and crying out “Shabâsh”; one man, a sort of Master of
Ceremonies, used to run in and out amongst them, brandishing a stick,
with which, in spite of his very violent gestures, he only lightly
touched the bystanders, and exciting them to cheering by repeated calls,
which the rest then took up, of “Hiù, Hiù.” The most extraordinary dance,
however, was when about twelve men arose to dance, of whom six went on
one side and six on the other, both sides then, moving forward, jerked
out their arms so as to look as if they had all crossed swords, then
receded and let their arms drop. This was a war dance, and I was told
that properly it ought to have been danced with swords, which, however,
out of suspicion of the Dogras, did not seem to be forthcoming. They
then formed a circle, again separated, the movements becoming more and
more violent till almost all the bystanders joined in the dance, shouting
like fiends and literally _kicking_ up a frightful amount of dust, which,
after I had nearly become choked with it, compelled me to retire.[45] I
may also notice that before a song is sung the rhythm and melody of it
are given in “solo” by some one, for instance

Dānă dāng dānŭ dăngdā
nădañg dānŭ, etc., etc., etc.

B. BEVERAGES.

BEER.

Fine corn (about five or six _seers_ in weight) is put into a kettle with
water and boiled till it gets soft, but not pulpy. It is then strained
through a cloth, and the grain retained and put into a vessel. Then it
is mixed with a drug that comes from Ladak which is called “Papps,” and
has a salty taste, but in my opinion is nothing more than hardened dough
with which some kind of drug is mixed. It is necessary that “the marks of
four fingers” be impressed upon the “Papps.” The mark of “four fingers”
make one stick, 2 fingers’ mark ½ a stick, and so forth. This is scraped
and mixed with the corn. The whole is then put into an earthen jar with
a narrow neck, after it has received an infusion of an amount of water
equal to the proportion of corn. The jar is put out into the sun—if
summer—for twelve days, or under the fire-place—if in winter—[where a
separate vault is made for it]—for the same period. The orifice is almost
hermetically closed with a skin. After twelve days the jar is opened and
contains a drink possessing intoxicating qualities. The first infusion
is much prized, but the corn receives a second and sometimes even a
third supply of water, to be put out again in a similar manner and to
provide a kind of Beer for the consumer. This Beer is called “Mō,” and is
much drunk by the Astóris and Chilasis [the latter are rather stricter
Mussulmans than the other Shiná people]. After every strength has been
taken out of the corn it is given away as food to sheep, etc., which they
find exceedingly nourishing.

WINE.[46]

The Gilgitis are great wine-drinkers, though not so much as the people
of Hunza. In Nagyr little wine is made. The mode of the preparation
of the wine is a simple one. The grapes are stamped out by a man who,
fortunately before entering into the wine press, washes his feet and
hands. The juice flows into another reservoir, which is first well
laid round with stones, over which a cement is put of chalk mixed
with sheep-fat which is previously heated. The juice is kept in this
reservoir; the top is closed, cement being put round the sides and only
in the middle an opening is made over which a loose stone is placed.
After two or three months the reservoir is opened, and the wine is used
at meals and festivals. In Dareyl (and not in Gilgit, as was told to
Vigne,) the custom is to sit round the grave of the deceased and eat
grapes, nuts and Tshilgōzas (edible pine). In Astor (and in Chilâs?) the
custom is to put a number of Ghi (clarified butter) cakes before the
Mulla, [after the earth has been put on the deceased] who, after reading
prayers over them, distributes them to the company who are standing round
with their caps on. In Gilgit, three days after the burial, bread is
generally distributed to the friends and acquaintances of the deceased.
To return to the wine presses, it is to be noticed that no one ever
interferes with the store of another. I passed several of them on my road
from Tshakerkōt onward, but they appeared to have been destroyed. This
brings me to another custom which all the Dards seem to have of burying
provisions of every kind in cellars that are scooped out in the mountains
or near their houses, and of which they alone have any knowledge. The
Maharajah’s troops when invading Gilgit often suffered severely from
want of food when, unknown to them, large stores of grain of every kind,
butter, ghi, etc., were buried close to them. The Gilgitis and other
so-called rebels, generally, were well off, knowing where to go for food.
Even in subject Astor it is the custom to lay up provisions in this
manner. On the day of birth of anyone in that country it is the custom
to bury a stock of provisions which are opened on the day of betrothal
of the young man and distributed. The ghi, which by that time turns
frightfully sour, and [to our taste] unpalatable and the colour of which
is red, is esteemed a great delicacy and is said to bring much luck.

The chalk used for cementing the stones is called “San Bàtt.” Grapes
are called “Djatsh,” and are said, together with wine, to have been
the principal food of Ghazanfar, the Rajah of Hunza, of whom it is
reported that when he heard of the arrival of the first European in Astor
(probably Vigne) he fled to a fort called Gojal and shut himself up in it
with his flocks, family and retainers. He had been told that the European
was a great sorcerer, who carried an army with him in his trunks and who
had serpents at his command that stretched themselves over any river in
his way to afford him a passage. I found this reputation of European
sorcery of great use, and the wild mountaineers looked with respect and
awe on a little box which I carried with me, and which contained some
pictures of clowns and soldiers belonging to a small magic lantern. The
Gilgitis consider the use of wine as unlawful; probably it is not very
long since they have become so religious and drink it with remorse. My
Gilgitis told me that the Mughullí—a sect living in Hunza, Gojal, Yassen
and Punyal[47]—considered the use of wine with prayers to be rather
meritorious than otherwise. A Drunkard is called “Máto.”

C. BIRTH CEREMONIES.

As soon as the child is born the father or the Mulla repeats the “Bâng”
in his ear “Allah Akbar” (which an Astóri, of the name of Mirza Khan,
said was never again repeated in one’s life!). Three days after the
reading of the “Bâng” or “Namáz” in Gilgit and seven days after that
ceremony in Astor, a large company assembles in which the father or
grandfather of the newborn gives him a name or the Mulla fixes on a
name by putting his hand on some word in the Koran, which may serve
the purpose or by getting somebody else to fix his hand at random on a
passage or word in the Koran. Men and women assemble at that meeting.
There appears to be no pardah whatsoever in Dardu land, and the women are
remarkably chaste.[48] The little imitation of pardah amongst the Ranis
of Gilgit was a mere fashion imported from elsewhere. Till the child
receives a name the woman is declared impure for the seven days previous
to the ceremony. In Gilgit 27 days are allowed to elapse till the woman
is declared pure. Then the bed and clothes are washed and the woman is
restored to the company of her husband and the visits of her friends. Men
and women eat together everywhere in Dardu land. In Astór, raw milk alone
cannot be drunk together with a woman unless thereby it is intended that
she should be a sister by faith and come within the prohibited degrees of
relationship. When men drink of the same raw milk they thereby swear each
other eternal friendship. In Gilgit this custom does not exist, but it
will at once be perceived that much of what has been noted above belongs
to Mussulman custom generally. When a son is born great rejoicings take
place, and in Gilgit a musket is fired off by the father whilst the
“Bâng” is being read.

D. MARRIAGE.

In Gilgit it appears to be a more simple ceremony than in Chilâs and
Astór. The father of the boy goes to the father of the girl and presents
him with a knife about 1½ feet long, 4 yards of cloth and a pumpkin
filled with wine. If the father accepts the present the betrothal is
arranged. It is generally the fashion that after the betrothal, which is
named: “_Shéir qatar wíye, ballí píye_, = 4 yards of cloth and a knife
he has given, the pumpkin he has drunk,” the marriage takes place. A
betrothal is inviolable, and is only dissolved by death so far as the
woman is concerned. The young man is at liberty to dissolve the contract.
When the marriage day arrives the men and women who are acquainted with
the parties range themselves in rows at the house of the bride, the
bridegroom with her at his left sitting together at the end of the row.
The Mulla then reads the prayers, the ceremony is completed and the
playing, dancing and drinking begin. It is considered the proper thing
for the bridegroom’s father, if he belongs to the true Shín race, to pay
12 tolas of gold of the value [at Gilgit] of 15 Rupees Nanakshahi (10
annas each) to the bride’s father, who, however, generally, returns it
with the bride, in kind—dresses, ornaments, &c., &c. The 12 tolas are not
always, or even generally, taken in gold, but oftener in kind—clothes,
provisions and ornaments. At Astór the ceremony seems to be a little more
complicated. There the arrangements are managed by third parties; an
agent being appointed on either side. The father of the young man sends
a present of a needle and three real (red) “múngs” called “lújum” in
Chilâsi, which, if accepted, establishes the betrothal of the parties.
Then the father of the bride demands _pro formâ_ 12 tolas [which in Astór
and Chilâs are worth 24 Rupees of the value of ten annas each.]

All real “Shín” people must pay this dowry for their wives in money,
provisions or in the clothes which the bride’s father may require. The
marriage takes place when the girl reaches puberty, or perhaps rather
the age when she is considered fit to be married. It may be mentioned
here in general terms that those features in the ceremony which remind
one of Indian customs are undoubtedly of Indian origin introduced into
the country since the occupation of Astór by the Maharaja’s troops.
Gilgit which is further off is less subject to such influences, and
whatever it may have of civilization is indigenous or more so than is the
case at Astór, the roughness of whose manners is truly Chilâsi, whilst
its apparent refinement in some things is a foreign importation.

When the marriage ceremony commences the young man, accompanied by twelve
of his friends and by musicians, sits in front of the girl’s house. The
mother of the girl brings out bread and Ghi-cakes on plates, which she
places before the bridegroom, round whom she goes three times, caressing
him and finally kissing his hand. The bridegroom then sends her back
with a present of a few rupees or tolas in the emptied plates. Then,
after some time, as the evening draws on, the agent of the father of the
boy sends to say that it is time that the ceremony should commence. The
mother of the bride then stands in the doorway of her house with a few
other platefuls of cakes and bread, and the young man accompanied by his
bridesman [“Shunèrr” in Astóri and “Shamaderr” in Gilgiti,] enters the
house. At his approach, the girl, who also has her particular friend,
the “Shaneróy” in Astóri, and “Shamaderoy” in Gilgiti, rises. The boy is
seated at her right, but both in Astór and in Gilgit it is considered
indecent for the boy to turn round and look at her. Then a particular
friend, the “Dharm-bhai”[49] of the girl’s brother asks her if she
consents to the marriage. In receiving, or imagining, an affirmative,
he turns round to the Mulla, who after asking three times whether he,
she and the bridegroom as well as all present are satisfied, reads the
prayers and completes the ceremonial. Then some rice, boiled in milk, is
brought in, of which the boy and the girl take a spoonful. They do not
retire the first night, but grace the company with their presence. The
people assembled then amuse themselves by hearing the musicians, eating,
&c.

It appears to be the custom that a person leaves an entertainment
whenever he likes, which is generally the case after he has eaten enough.

It must, however, not be imagined that the sexes are secluded from
each other in Dardistan. Young people have continual opportunities of
meeting each other in the fields at their work or at festive gatherings.
Love declarations often take place on these occasions, but if any evil
intention is perceived the seducer of a girl is punished by this savage,
but virtuous, race with death. The Dards know and speak of the existence
of “pure love,” “pâk âshiqi.” Their love songs show sufficiently that
they are capable of a deeper, than mere sexual, feeling. No objection to
lawful love terminating in matrimony is ever made unless the girl or the
boy is of a lower caste. In Gilgit, however, the girl may be of a lower
caste than the bridegroom. In Astór it appears that a young man, whose
parents—to whom he must mention his desire for marrying any particular
person—refuse to intercede, often attains his point by threatening to
live in the family of the bride and become an adopted son. A “Shîn” of
true race at Astor may live in concubinage with a girl of lower caste,
but the relatives of the girl if they discover the intrigue revenge the
insult by murdering the paramour, who, however, does not lose caste by
the alliance.

The bridegroom dances as well as his twelve companions. The girl ought
not to be older than 15 years; but at 12 girls are generally engaged.[50]

The Balti custom of having merely a _claim to dowry_ on the part of the
woman—the prosecution of which claim so often depends on her satisfaction
with her husband or the rapacity of her relatives—is in spite of the
intercourse of the Baltis with the Shîn people never observed by the
latter; not even by the Shîn colonists of little Tibet who are called
“Brokhpá.”

When the bridegroom has to go for his bride to a distant village he is
furnished with a bow. On arriving at his native place he crosses the
breast of his bride with an arrow and then shoots it off. He generally
shoots three arrows off in the direction of his home.

At Astór the custom is sometimes to fire guns as a sign of rejoicing.
This is not done at Gilgit.

When the bridegroom fetches his bride on the second day to his own home,
the girl is crying with the women of her household and the young man
catches hold of her dress in front (at Gilgit by the hand) and leads
her to the door. If the girl cannot get over embracing her people and
crying with them quickly, the twelve men who have come along with the
bridegroom (who in Astóri are called “hilalée” = bridegrooms and “garóni”
in Gilgiti) sing the following song:—

INVITATION TO THE BRIDE.

_Nikàstalì_ _quáray kusúni_ (_“astali” is added to the fem. Imp_).
Come out hawk’s daughter.

_Nikastali_ _ke_ _karaníliè_ (“_balanîle_,” in Gilgiti).
Come out why delayest thou!

_Nikastali_ _máleyn_ _gutíjo_.
Come out (from) thy father’s tent.

_Nikastali_ _ke_ _karaníliè_.
Come out why delayest thou.

_Né ro_ _tsharéyn_ _baráye_.
Do not weep waterfall’s fairy.

_Né ro_ _teyn_ _róng_ _boje_.
Do not weep thy colour will go.

_Né ro_ _jaro_ _shidati_.
Do not weep brethren’s beloved.

_Né ro_ _téy_ _róng_ _boje_.
Do not weep thy colour will go.

_Né ro_ _maleyn_ _shidati_.
Do not weep father’s beloved.

_Né ro_ _téy_ _róng_ _boje_.
Do not weep thy colour will go.

_Translation._

Come out, O daughter of the hawk!
Come out, why dost thou delay?
Come forth from thy father’s tent,
Come out and do not delay.
Weep not! O fairy of the waterfall!
Weep not! thy colour will fade;
Weep not! thou art the beloved of us all who are thy brethren,
Weep not! thy colour will fade.
O Weep not! thou beloved of fathers, [or “thy father’s darling.”]
For if thou weepest, thy face will grow pale.

Then the young man catches hold of her dress, or in Gilgit of her arm,
puts her on horseback, and rides off with her, heedless of her tears and
of those of her companions.

E. FUNERALS.

Funerals are conducted in a very simple manner. The custom of eating
grapes at funerals I have already touched upon in my allusion to Dureyl
in the chapter on “Wine.” Bread is commonly distributed together with
Ghî, etc., three days after the funeral, to people in general, a custom
which is called “Nashí” by the Astóris, and “Khatm” by the Gilgitis.
When a person is dead, the Mulla, assisted generally by a near friend
of the deceased, washes the body which is then placed in a shroud.
Women assemble, weep and relate the virtues of the deceased. The body
is conveyed to the grave the very day of the decease. In Astor there is
something in the shape of a bier for conveying the dead. At Gilgit two
poles, across which little bits of wood are placed sideways and then
fastened, serve for the same purpose. The persons who carry the body
think it a meritorious act. The women accompany the body for some fifty
yards and then return to the house to weep. The body is then placed in
the earth which has been dug up to admit of its interment. Sometimes the
grave is well-cemented and a kind of small vault is made over it with
pieces of wood closely jammed together. A Pîr or saint receives a hewn
stone standing as a sign-post from the tomb. I have seen no inscriptions
anywhere. The tomb of one of their famous saints at Gilgit has none. I
have heard people there say that he was killed at that place in order
to provide the country with a shrine. My Gilgiti who, like all his
countrymen, was very patriotic, denied it, but I heard it at Gilgit from
several persons, among whom was one of the descendants of the saint. As
the Saint was a Kashmiri, the veracity of his descendant may be doubted.
To return to the funeral. The body is conveyed to the cemetery, which
is generally at some distance from the village, accompanied by friends.
When they reach the spot the Mulla reads the prayers standing as in
the “Djenazá”—any genuflexion, “ruku” ‎‏رکوع‏‎and prostration are, of
course, inadmissible. After the body has been interred the Mulla recites
the Fatiha, [opening prayer of the Koran] all people standing up and
holding out their hands as if they were reading a book. The Mulla prays
that the deceased may be preserved from the fire of hell as he was a
good man, etc. Then after a short benediction the people separate. For
three days at Gilgit and seven days at Astor the near relatives of the
deceased do not eat meat. After that period the grave is again visited
by the deceased’s friends, who, on reaching the grave, eat some ghí and
bread, offer up prayers, and, on returning, slaughter a sheep, whose
kidney is roasted and divided in small bits amongst those present. Bread
is distributed amongst those present and a little feast is indulged in,
in memory of the deceased. I doubt, however, whether the Gilgitis are
very exact in their religious exercises. The mention of death was always
received with shouts of laughter by them, and one of them told me that a
dead person deserved only to be kicked. He possibly only joked and there
can be little doubt that the Gilgit people are not very communicative
about their better feelings. It would be ridiculous, however, to deny
them the possession of natural feelings, although I certainly believe
that they are not over-burdened with sentiment. In Astór the influence of
Kashmir has made the people attend a little more to the ceremonies of the
Mussulman religion.

In Chilâs rigour is observed in the maintenance of religious practices,
but elsewhere there exists the greatest laxity. In fact, so rude are the
people that they have no written character of their own, and till very
recently the art of writing (Persian) was confined to, perhaps, the Rajas
of these countries or rather to their Munshis, whenever they had any.
Some of them may be able to read the Koran. Even this I doubt, as of
hundreds of people I saw only one who could read at Gilgit, and he was a
Kashmiri who had travelled far and wide and had at last settled in that
country.

F. HOLIDAYS.

The great holiday of the Shîn people happened in 1867, during the
month succeeding the Ramazan, but seems to be generally on the sixth
of February. It is called the “Shinó náo,” “the new day of the Shîn
people.” The Gilgitis call the day “Shinó bazóno,” “the spring of the
Shîn people.” [The year, it will be remembered, is divided into bazono
= spring; walo = summer; shero = autumn; yono = winter.] The snow is
now becoming a little softer and out-of-door life is more possible. The
festivities are kept up for twelve days. Visits take place and man and
wife are invited out to dinner during that period. Formerly, when the
Shîns had a Raja or Nawab of their own, it used to be the custom for
women to dance during those twelve days. Now the advent of the Sepoys and
the ridiculous pseudo-morality of the Kashmir rule have introduced a kind
of Pardah and the chaste Shîn women do not like to expose themselves to
the strangers. Then there is the Naurôz, which is celebrated for three,
and sometimes for six, days.

There are now five great holidays in the year:

The I’d of Ramazân.
The Shinó-Náo.
The Naurôz.
Kurbanī I’d.
The Kùy Náo,[51] { Astóri.
Dúmniká, { Gilgiti.

On the last-named holiday the game of Polo is played, good clothes are
put on, and men and women amuse themselves at public meetings.

The Shîn people are very patriotic. Since the Maharaja’s rule many of
their old customs have died out, and the separation of the sexes is
becoming greater. Their great national festival I have already described
under the head of “Historical Legend of Gilgit” (pages 14 to 16).

G. THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF THE DARDS.

If the Dards—the races living between the Hindu-Kush and Kaghán—have
preserved many Aryan customs and traditions, it is partly because they
have lived in almost perfect seclusion from other Muhammadans. In
Chilâs, where the Sunni form of that faith prevails, there is little to
relieve the austerity of that creed. The rest of the Muhammadan Dards
are Shiahs, and that belief is more elastic and seems to be more suited
to a quick-witted race, than the orthodox form of Islam. Sunniism,
however, is advancing in Dardistan and will, no doubt, sweep away many
of the existing traditions. The progress, too, of the present invasion
by Kashmir, which, although governed by Hindus, is chiefly Sunni, will
familiarize the Dards with the notions of orthodox Muhammadans and will
tend to substitute a monotonous worship for a multiform superstition. I
have already noticed that, in spite of the exclusiveness of Hinduism,
attempts are made by the Maharaja of Kashmir to gather into the fold
those races and creeds which, merely because they are not Muhammadan,
are induced by him to consider themselves Hindu. For instance, the Siah
Posh Kafirs, whom I venture also to consider Dards, have an ancient form
of nature-worship which is being encroached upon by Hindu myths, not
because they are altogether congenial but because they constitute the
religion of the enemies of Muhammadans, their own bitter foes who kidnap
the pretty Kafir girls and to kill whom establishes a claim among Kafirs
to consideration. In the same way there is a revival of Hinduism in the
Buddhist countries of Ladak and Zanskar, which belong to Kashmir, and
ideas of caste are welcomed where a few years ago they were unknown. As
no one can become a Hindu, but any one can become a Muhammadan, Hinduism
is at a natural disadvantage in its contact with an advancing creed and,
therefore, there is the more reason why zealous Hindus should seek to
strengthen themselves by amalgamation with other idolatrous creeds. To
return to the Mussulman Dards, it will be easy to perceive by a reference
to my ethnographical vocabulary what notions are Muhammadan and what
traces there remain of a more ancient belief. The “world of Gods” is not
the mere ‎‏اخرة‏‎ which their professed religion teaches, nor is the
“serpent world” a Muhammadan term for our present existence. Of course,
their Maulvis may read “religious lessons” and talk to them of Paradise
and Hell, but it is from a more ancient source that they derive a kindly
sympathy with the evil spirits “Yatsh;” credit them with good actions,
describe their worship of the sun and moon, and fill the interior of
mountains with their palaces and songs. Again, it is not Islam that tells
them of the regeneration of their country by fairies—that places these
lovely beings on the top of the Himalayas and makes them visit, and
ally themselves to, mankind. The fairies too are not all good, as the
Yatsh are not all bad. They destroy the man who seeks to surprise their
secrets, although, perhaps, they condone the offence by making him live
for ever after in fairy-land. Indeed, the more we look into the national
life of the Dards the less do we find it tinctured by Muhammadan distaste
of compromise. Outwardly their customs may conform to that ceremonial,
but when they make death an opportunity for jokes and amusement we cannot
refuse attention to the circumstance by merely explaining it away on the
ground that they are savages. I have noticed the prevalence of caste
among them, how proud they are of their Shîn descent, how little (with
the exception of the more devout Chilâsis) they draw upon Scripture for
their personal names, how they honour women and how they like the dog, an
animal deemed unclean by other Muhammadans. The Dards had no hesitation
in eating with me, but I should not be surprised to hear that they did
not do so when Mr. Hayward visited them, for the Hinduized Mussulman
servants that one takes on tours might have availed themselves of their
supposed superior knowledge of the faith to inform the natives that they
were making an improper concession to an infidel. A good many Dards,
however, have the impression that the English are Mussulmans—a belief
that would not deter them from killing or robbing a European traveller in
some districts, if he had anything “worth taking.” Gouhar-Amán [called
“Gôrmán” by the people] of Yasin used to say that as the Koran, the word
of God, was sold, there could be no objection to sell an expounder of
the word of God, a Mulla, who unfortunately fell into his hands. I did
not meet any real Shîn who was a Mulla,[52] but I have no doubt that,
especially in Hunza, they are using the services of Mullas in order to
give a religious sanction to their predatory excursions. I have said
that the Dards were generally Shiahs—perhaps I ought not to include
the Shiah Hunzas among Dards as they speak a non-Aryan language unlike
any other that I know[53]—and as a rule the Shiahs are preyed upon by
Sunnis. Shiah children are kidnapped by Sunnis as an act both religious
and profitable. Shiahs have to go through the markets of Bokhara denying
their religion, for which deception, by the way, they have the sanction
of their own priests.[54] Can we, therefore, wonder that the Mulái Hunzas
make the best of both worlds by preferring to kidnap Sunnis to their
own co-religionists? A very curious fact is the attachment of Shiahs to
their distant priesthood. We know how the Indian Shiahs look to Persia;
how all expect the advent of their Messiah, the Imám Mahdi; how the
appointment of Kazis (civil functionaries) is made through the Mujtehid
[a kind of high priest] and is ratified by the ruling power, rather than
emanate direct from the secular authorities, as is the case with Sunnis.
The well-known Sayad residing at Bombay, Agha Khan, has adherents even
in Dardistan, and any command that may reach them from him [generally
a demand for money] is obeyed implicitly. Indeed, throughout India and
Central Asia there are men, some of whom lead an apparently obscure
life, whose importance for good or evil should not be underrated by the
authorities. [See my “Hunza and Nagyr Handbook, 1893.”]

What we know about the religion of the Siah-Posh Kafirs [whom I include
in the term “Dards”] is very little. My informants were two Kafir lads,
who lived for some weeks in my compound and whose religious notions had,
no doubt, been affected on their way down through Kashmir. That they go
once a year to the top of a mountain as a religious exercise and put a
stone on to a cairn; that the number of Muhammadan heads hung up in front
of their doors indicates their position in the tribe; that they are said
to sit on benches rather than squat on the ground like other Asiatics:
that they are reported to like all those who wear a curl in front; that
they are fair and have blue eyes, that they drink a portion of the blood
of a killed enemy—this and the few words which have been collected of
their language is very nearly all we have hitherto known about them.
What I have been able to ascertain regarding them, will be mentioned
elsewhere.[55]

H. FORMS OF GOVERNMENT AMONG THE DARDS.

Chilâs, which sends a tribute every year to Kashmir for the sake of
larger return-presents rather than as a sign of subjection, is said to be
governed by a council of elders, in which even women are admitted.[56]
When I visited Gilgit, in 1866, it was practically without a ruler, the
invading troops of Kashmir barely holding their own within a few yards
of the Gilgit Fort—a remarkable construction which, according to the
report of newspapers, was blown up by accident in 1876, and of which the
only record is the drawing published in the _Illustrated London News_ of
the 12th February 1870.[57] There is now (1877) a Thanadar of Gilgit,
whose rule is probably not very different from that of his rapacious
colleagues in Kashmir. The Gilgitis are kept quiet by the presence of
the Kashmir army, and by the fact that their chiefs are prisoners at
Srinagar, where other representatives of once reigning houses are also
under surveillance. Mansur Ali Khan, the supposed rightful Raja of
Gilgit is there; he is the son of Asghar Ali Khan, son of Raja Khan, son
of Gurtam Khan—but legitimate descent has little weight in countries
that are constantly disturbed by violence, except in Hunza, where the
supreme right to rob is hereditary.[58] The Gilgitis, who are a little
more settled than their neighbours to the West, North and South, and who
possess the most refined Dardu dialect and traditions, were constantly
exposed to marauding parties, and the late ruler of Yasin, Gouhar-Amán,
who had conquered Gilgit, made it a practice to sell them into slavery on
the pretext that they were Shiahs and infidels. Yasin was lately ruled
by Mir Wali, the supposed murderer of Mr. Hayward, and is a dependency
of Chitrál, a country which is ruled by Amán-ul-mulk. The Hunza people
are under Ghazan Khan, the son of Ghazanfar,[59] and seem to delight in
plundering their Kirghiz neighbours, although all travellers through that
inhospitable region, with the exception of Badakhshan merchants, are
impartially attacked by these robbers, whose depredations have caused the
nearest pass from Central Asia to India to be almost entirely deserted
(1866). At Gilgit I saw the young Raja of Nagyr, with a servant, also a
Nagyri. He was a most amiable and intelligent lad, whose articulation
was very much more refined than that of his companion, who prefixed a
guttural to every Khajuná word beginning with a vowel. The boy was kept
a prisoner in the Gilgit Fort as a hostage to Kashmir for his father’s
good behaviour, and it was with some difficulty that he was allowed to
see me and answer certain linguistic questions which I put to him. If he
has not been sent back to his country, it would be a good opportunity for
our Government to get him to the Panjab in the cold weather with the view
of our obtaining more detailed information than we now possess regarding
the Khajuná, that extraordinary language to which I have several times
alluded. [This was done on my second official mission to Kashmir in 1886.]

The name of _Rá_, _Rásh_, _Raja_, applied to Muhammadans, may sound
singular to those accustomed to connect them with Hindu rulers but it
is the ancient name for “King” at Gilgit (for which “Nawab” seems a
modern substitute in that country)—whilst Shah Kathor[60] in Chitrál,
Tham in Hunza and Nagyr, Mitérr (Mihtar) and Bakhté in Yasin and Trakhné
in Gilgit offer food for speculation. The Hunza people say that the
King’s race is Mogholote (or Mogul?); they call the King _Sawwash_ and
affirm that he is Aishea (this probably means that he is descended from
Ayesha, the wife of Muhammad).[61] Under the king or chief, for the time
being, the most daring or intriguing hold office and a new element of
disturbance has now been introduced into Dardistan by the Kashmir faction
at every court [or rather robber’s nest] which seeks to advance the
interests or ulterior plans of conquest of the Maharaja, our feudatory.
Whilst the name of Wazir is now common for a “minister,” we find the
names of the subordinate offices of Trangpá, Yarfá, Zeytú, Gopá, etc.,
etc., which point to the reminiscences of Tibetan Government and a
reference to the “Official Designations” in Part II. of my “Dardistan”
will direct speculation on other matters connected with the subject.

I need scarcely add that under a Government, like that of Chitrál,
which used to derive a large portion of its revenue from kidnapping,
the position of the official slave-dealer (Diwánbigi)[62] was a high
one. Shortly before I visited Gilgit, a man used to sell for a good
hunting dog (of which animal the Dards are very fond), two men for a
pony and three men for a large piece of pattú (a kind of woollen stuff).
Women and weak men received the preference, it being difficult for them
to escape once they have reached their destination. Practically, all
the hillmen are republicans. The name for servant is identical with
that of “companion;” it is only the prisoner of another tribe who is
a “slave.” The progress of Kashmir will certainly have the effect of
stopping, at any rate nominally, the trade in _male_ slaves, but it will
reduce all subjects to the same dead level of slavery and extinguish
that spirit of freedom, and with it many of the traditions, that have
preserved the Dard races from the degeneracy which has been the fate of
the Aryans who reached Kashmir and India. The indigenous Government is
one whose occasional tyranny is often relieved by rebellion. I think
the Dard Legends and Songs show that the Dards are a superior people
to the Dogras, who wish to take their country in defiance of treaty
obligations,[63] and I, for one, would almost prefer the continuance of
present anarchy which may end in a national solution or in a _direct
alliance_ with the British, to the _épicier_ policy of Kashmir which,
without shedding blood,[64] has drained the resources of that Paradise
on earth and killed the intellectual and moral life of its people. The
administration of justice and the collection of the taxes in Dardistan
are carried on, the former with some show of respect for religious
injunctions, the latter with sole regard to whatever the tax-gatherer can
immediately lay his hand upon.

I. HABITATIONS.

Most of the villages, whose names I have given elsewhere, are situate
on the main lines of roads which, as everywhere in Himalayan countries,
generally coincides with the course of rivers. The villages are sometimes
scattered, but as a rule, the houses are closely packed together. Stones
are heaped up and closely cemented, and the upper story, which often is
only a space shielded by a cloth or by grass-bundles on a few poles, is
generally reached by a staircase from the outside.[65] Most villages are
protected by one or more wooden forts, which—with the exception of the
Gilgit fort—are rude blockhouses, garnished with rows of beams, behind
which it is easy to fight as long as the place is not set on fire. Most
villages also contain an open space, generally near a fountain, where
the villagers meet in the evening and young people make love to each
other.[66] Sometimes the houses contain a subterranean apartment which
is used as a cellar or stable—at other times, the stable forms the
lower part of the house and the family live on the roof under a kind
of grass-tent. In Ládak, a little earth heaped up before the door and
impressed with a large wooden seal, was sufficient, some years ago, to
protect a house in the absence of its owner. In Dardistan bolts, etc.,
show the prevailing insecurity. I have seen houses which had a courtyard,
round which the rooms were built, but generally all buildings in
Dardistan are of the meanest description—the mosque of Gilgit, in which
I slept one night whilst the Sepoys were burying two or three yards away
from me, those who were killed by the so-called rebels, being almost
as miserable a construction as the rest. The inner part of the house
is generally divided from the outer by a beam which goes right across.
My vocabulary will show all the implements, material, etc., used in
building, etc. Water-mills and windmills are to be found.

Cradles were an unknown commodity till lately. I have already referred
to the wine and treasury cellars excavated in the mountains, and which
provided the Dards with food during the war in 1866, whilst the invading
Kashmir troops around them were starving. Baths (which were unknown till
lately) are sheltered constructions under waterfalls; in fact, they are
mere sheltered douche-baths. There is no pavement except so far as stones
are placed in order to show where there are _no_ roads. The rooms have a
fire-place, which at Astor (where it is used for the reception of live
coals) is in the middle of the room. The conservancy arrangements are
on the slope of the hills close to the villages, in front of which are
fields of Indian corn, etc.

J. DIVISIONS OF THE DARD RACES.

The name of Dardistan (a hybrid between the “Darada” of Sanscrit writings
and a Persian termination) seems now to be generally accepted. I include
in it all the countries lying between the Hindu Kush and Kaghan (lat. 37°
N. and long. 73° E. to lat. 35° N., long. 74° 30´ E.). In a restricted
sense the Dards are the race inhabiting the mountainous country of
Shináki, detailed further on, but I include under that designation not
only the Chilâsis, Astóris, Gilgitis, Dareylis, etc., but also the people
of Hunza, Nagyr, Yasin, Chitrál and Kafiristan.[67] As is the case with
uncivilized races generally, the Dards have no name in common, but
call each Dard tribe that inhabits a different valley by a different
name. This will be seen in subjoined Extract from my Ethnographical
Vocabulary. The name “Dard” itself was not claimed by any of the race
that I met. If asked whether they were “Dards” they said “certainly,”
thinking I mispronounced the word “dáde” of the Hill Panjabi which means
“wild” “independent,” and is a name given them by foreigners as well as
“yaghi,” = rebellious [the country is indifferently known as Yaghistan,
Kohistan and, since my visit in 1866 as “Dardistan,” a name which I see
Mr. Hayward has adopted]. I hope the name of Dard will be retained, for,
besides being the designation of, at least, _one_ tribe, it connects the
country with a range known in Hindu mythology and history. However, I
must leave this and other disputed points for the present, and confine
myself now to quoting a page of Part II. of my “Dardistán” for the
service of those whom the philological portion of that work has deterred
from looking at the descriptive part.

“SHIN are all the people of Chilâs, Astór, Dareyl or _Darèll_, Gôr,
Ghilghit[68] or _Gilìt_. All these tribes do not acknowledge the
‘Guraizis,’ a people inhabiting the Guraiz valley between Chilâs and
Kashmîr, as _Shîn_, although the Guraizis themselves think so. The
Guraizi dialect, however is undoubtedly Shiná, much mixed with Kashmiri.

“The Shîns[69] call themselves ‘Shin, Shiná lôk, Shinâki,’ and are very
proud of the appellation, and in addition to the above-named races
include in it the people of Tòrr, Hárben, Sazîn, [districts of, or rather
near, Chilâs]; Tanyire [Tangîr] belonging to Darell; also the people of
Kholi-Palus whose origin is Shîn, but who are mixed with Afghans. Some
do not consider the people of Kholi-Palus as Shîn.[70] They speak both
Shiná and Pukhtu [pronounced by the Shîn people ‘Postó.’] The Baltis, or
Little Tibetans, call the Shîn and also the Nagyr people ‘Brokhpá,’ or,
as a term of respect, ‘Brokhpá bábo.’[71] Offshoots of the ‘Shîn’ people
live in Little Tibet and even the district of Dras, near the Zojilá
pass on the Ladâk road towards Kashmîr, was once Shîn and was called by
them _Huméss_. I was the first traveller who discovered that there were
Shîn colonies in Little Tibet, viz.: the villages of Shingôtsh, Sáspur,
Brashbrialdo, Bashó, Danàl djúnele, Tâtshin, Dorôt (inhabited by pure
Shîns), Zungôt, Tortzé (in the direction of Rongdu) and Durò, one day’s
march from Skardo.”[72]

The Chilásis call themselves _Boté_.[73]
” ” ” their fellow-countrymen of Takk =
“_Kané_” or _Takke-Kané_.

[the _Matshuké_ are now an extinct race, at all events in
Dardistan proper.]

The Chilâsis call Gilgitis = _Gilîtí_.
” ” ” Astóris = _Astoríjje_.
” ” ” Gôrs = _Goríje_.
” ” ” Dureylis = _Darêle_.
” ” ” Baltis = _Palóye_. Gil. = _Polôle_.
” ” ” Ladáki = _Botì_. Pl. of Bôt.
” ” ” Kashmiris = _Kashîre_.
” ” ” Dogras = _Sikkì_ [Sikhs] now “Dôgréy.”
” ” ” Affghans = _Patáni_.
” ” ” Nagyris = _Khadjunì_.
” ” ” Hunzas = _Hunzíje_.
” ” ” Yasînis = _Poré_.
” ” ” Punyalis = _Punyé_.
” ” ” Kirghiz = _Kirghìz_.

NOTE.—The Kirghiz are described by the Chilâsis as having flat faces and
small noses and are supposed to be very white and beautiful, to be Nomads
and to feed on milk, butter and mutton.

The Chilâsis call the people between Hunza and the Pamêr [our Pamir] on
the Yarkand road = Gójál.

There are also other Gojáls under a Raja of Gojál on the Badakhshán road.

The Chílâsis call the Siah Pôsh Kâfirs = Bashgalí (Bashgal is the name of
the country inhabited by this people who enjoy the very worst reputation
for cruelty). They are supposed to kill every traveller that comes within
their reach and to cut his nose or ear off as a trophy.[74]

The Chilâsis were originally four tribes; viz.:

The Bagoté of Buner.
The Kané of Takk.
The Boté of the Chilâs fort.
The Matshuké of the Matshukó fort.

The Boté and the Matshuké fought. The latter were defeated, and are said
to have fled into Astor and Little Tibet territory.

A Foreigner is called “ósho.”

Fellow-countrymen are called “malêki.”

The stature of the Dards is generally slender and wiry and well suited
to the life of a mountaineer. They are now gradually adopting Indian
clothes, and whilst this will displace their own rather picturesque dress
and strong, though rough, indigenous manufacture, it may also render them
less manly. They are fairer than the people of the plains (the women of
Yasin being particularly beautiful and almost reminding one of European
women), but on the frontier they are rather mixed—the Chilâsis with
the Kaghanis and Astóris—the Astóris and Gilgitis with the Tibetans,
and the Guraizis with the Tibetans on the one hand and the Kashmiris on
the other. The consequence is that their sharp and comparatively clear
complexion (where it is not under a crust of dirt) approaches, in some
Districts, a Tatar or Moghal appearance. Again, the Nagyris are shorter
than the people of Hunza to whom I have already referred. Just before
I reached the Gilgit fort, I met a Nagyri, whose yellow moustache and
general appearance almost made me believe that I had come across a
Russian in disguise. I have little hesitation in stating that the pure
Shîn looks more like a European than any high-caste Brahmin of India.
Measurements were taken by Dr. Neil of the Lahore Medical College, but
have, unfortunately, been lost, of the two Shîns who accompanied me to
the Panjab, where they stayed in my house for a few months, together
with other representatives of the various races whom I had brought down
with me.[75] The prevalence of caste among the Shîns also deserves
attention. We have not the Muhammadan Sayad, Sheykh, Moghal, and Pathan
(which, no doubt, will be substituted in future for the existing caste
designations), nor the Kashmiri Muhammadan equivalents of what are
generally mere names for occupations. The following List of Dard Castes
may be quoted appropriately from Part II. of my “Dardistan”:—

K. CASTES.

“Raja (highest on account of position).

“Wazîr (of SHÎN race, and also the official caste of ‘Róno’).

“SHIN the highest caste; the Shiná people of pure origin, whether they be
Astóris, Gilgitis, Chilâsis, etc., etc.[75]

“They say that it is the same race as the ‘Moghals’ of India. Probably
this name only suggested itself to them when coming in contact with
Mussulmans from Kashmir or the Panjab. The following castes are named in
their order of rank (for exact details, see “Hunza Handbook”):

“_Yáshkunn_ [the great = a caste formed by the intermixture (?)
land-owning race between the Shîn and a lower [aboriginal?]
found in possession race. A Shîn may marry a Yáshkunn woman
by the invading [called ‘Yáshkûni;’] but no Yáshkunn can
Shîns.] marry a Shînóy = Shîn woman.
“_Tatshön_ = caste of carpenters.
“_Tshâjjá_ = weavers. The Gilgitis call this caste:
‘_Byêtshoi_.’
“_Akár_ = ironmonger.
“_Kûlál_ = potter.
“_Dôm_[76] = musician }
“_Kramìn_ = tanner? } (the lowest castes).

“_N.B._ The _Brokhpâ_ are a mixed race of Dardu-Tibetans, as indeed are
the Astoris [the latter of whom, however, consider themselves very pure
Shîns]; the _Guráïzis_ are probably Dardu-Kashmiris; but I presume that
the above division of caste is known, if not upheld, by every section
of the Shîná people. The castes most prevalent in Guraiz are evidently
Kashmiri as:

“Bhat. Lôn. Dâr. Wây. Râter. Thôkr. Bagâ.”

_LEGENDS RELATING TO ANIMALS._[77]

1.—A BEAR PLAYS WITH A CORPSE.

It is said that bears, as the winter is coming on, are in the habit of
filling their dens with grass and that they eat a plant, called “ajalí,”
which has a narcotic effect upon them and keeps them in a state of torpor
during the winter. After three months, when the spring arrives, they
awake and go about for food. One of these bears once scented a corpse
which he disinterred. It happened to be that of a woman who had died a
few days before. The bear, who was in good spirits, brought her to his
den, where he set her upright against a stone and fashioning a spindle
with his teeth and paws gave it to her into one hand and placed some wool
into the other. He then went on growling “mû-mû-mû” to encourage the
woman to spin. He also brought her some nuts and other provisions to eat.
Of course, his efforts were useless, and when she after a few days gave
signs of decomposition he ate her up in despair. This is a story based on
the playful habits of the bear.

2.—A BEAR MOURNS A GIRL.

Another curious story is related of a bear. Two women, a mother and her
little daughter, were one night watching their field of Indian corn
“makai,” against the inroads of these animals. The mother had to go to
her house to prepare the food and ordered her daughter to light a fire
outside. Whilst she was doing this a bear came and took her away. He
carried her into his den, and daily brought her to eat and to drink. He
rolled a big stone in front of the den, whenever he went away on his
tours, which the girl was not strong enough to remove. When she became
old enough to be able to do this he used daily to lick her feet, by which
they became swollen and gradually dwindled down to mere misshapen stumps.
The girl eventually died in childbirth, and the poor bear after vain
efforts to restore her to life roamed disconsolately about the fields.

3.—ORIGIN OF BEARS.

It is said that bears were originally the offspring of a man who was
driven into madness by his inability to pay his debts, and who took to
the hills in order to avoid his creditors.[78]

4.—THE BEAR AND THE ONE-EYED MAN.

The following story was related by a man of the name of Ghalib Shah
residing at a village near Astór, called Parishing. He was one night
looking out whether any bear had come into his “tromba” field.[79] He
saw that a bear was there and that he with his forepaws alternately took
a pawful of “tromba,” blew the chaff away and ate hastily. The man was
one-eyed [shéo = blind; my Ghilgiti used “Kyor,” which he said was a
Persian word, but which is evidently Turkish] and ran to his hut to get
his gun. He came out and pointed it at the bear. The animal who saw this
ran round the blind side of the man’s face, snatched the gun out of his
hand and threw it away. The bear and the man then wrestled for a time,
but afterwards both gave up the struggle and retired. The man, after he
had recovered himself went to look for the gun, the stock of which he
found broken. The match-string by which the stock had been tied to the
barrel had gone on burning all night and had been the cause of the gun
being destroyed. The son of that man still lives at the village and tells
this story, which the people affect to believe.

5.—WEDDING FESTIVAL AMONG BEARS.

A Mulla, of the name of Lal Mohammad, said that when he was taken a
prisoner into Chilás,[80] he and his escort passed one day through one
of the dreariest portions of the mountains of that inhospitable region.
There they heard a noise, and quietly approaching to ascertain its cause
they saw a company of bears tearing up the grass and making bundles of
it which they hugged. Other bears again wrapped their heads in grass,
and some stood on their hind-paws, holding a stick in their forepaws
and dancing to the sound of the howls of the others. They then ranged
themselves in rows, at each end of which was a young bear; on one side
a male, on the other a female. These were supposed to celebrate their
marriage on the occasion in question. My informant swore to the story and
my Ghilgiti corroborated the truth of the first portion of the account,
which he said described a practice believed to be common to bears.

6.—THE FLYING PORCUPINE.

There is a curious superstition with regard to an animal called
“Harginn,” which appears to be more like a porcupine than anything else.
It is covered with bristles; its back is of a red-brownish and its belly
of a yellowish colour. That animal is supposed to be very dangerous, and
to contain poison in its bristles. At the approach of any man or animal
it is said to gather itself up for a terrific jump into the air, from
which it descends unto the head of the intended victim. It is said to
be generally about half a yard long and a span broad. Our friend Lal
Mohammad, a saintly Akhunzada, but a regular Münchhausen, affirmed to
have once met with a curious incident with regard to that animal. He was
out shooting one day when he saw a stag which seemed intently to look in
one direction. He fired off his gun, which however did not divert the
attention of the stag. At last, he found out what it was that the stag
was looking at. It turned out to be a huge “Harginn,” which had swallowed
a large Markhor with the exception of his horns! There was the porcupine
out of whose mouth protruded the head and horns of the Markhor!! My
Ghilgiti, on the contrary, said that the Harginn was a great snake “like
a big fish called Nang.” Perhaps, Harginn means a monster or dragon, and
is applied to different animals in the two countries of Ghilghit and
Astor.

7.—A FIGHT BETWEEN WOLVES AND A BEAR WHO WANTED TO DIG THEIR GRAVE.

A curious animal something like a wolf is also described. The species
is called “Kō.”[81] These animals are like dogs; their snouts are of a
red colour, and are very long; they hunt in herds of ten or twenty and
track game which they bring down, one herd or one Kō, as the case may
be, relieving the other at certain stages. A Shikári once reported that
he saw a large number of them asleep. They were all ranged in a single
long line. A bear approached, and by the aid of a long branch measured
the line. He then went to some distance and measuring the ground dug it
out to the extent of the line in length. He then went back to measure the
breadth of the sleeping troop when his branch touched one of the animals
which at once jumped up and roused the others. They all then pursued him
and brought him down. Some of them harassed him in front, whilst one of
them went behind and sucked his stomach clean out. This seems to be a
favourite method of these animals in destroying game. They do not attack
men, but bring down horses, sheep and game.

* * * * *

The Flora and Fauna of Dardistan have been so minutely described in
Part II. of my “Languages and Races of Dardistan,” though mainly from a
linguistic standpoint, that I have nothing to say here about the products
and animals of that country. Nor need I say anything about the dress
of its people, except that its rolled-up woollen cap is, practically,
the sign of the brotherhood (sometimes like that of Cain) among all
members of the Dard race, and, at once, distinguishes them from Pathans,
Affghans, Kashmiris, and others. The beautifully-knit stockings are also
a Dard art, and seem to have suggested, rather than followed, Kashmir
patterns. Above all, the quasi-Celtic brass brooches of the women, and
the family axes of the Hunza-Nagyris denote the antiquity of the Dard
race. Curious is also the dress, light as air and softly warm, made of
the fluff of the white giant vulture or of that of the wild fowl. I
must also refer the reader who wishes to know details about the rivers,
mountains, etc., of Dardistan, and the occupations of its peoples, to
Part II. of my “Languages and Races of Dardistan,” and to the main
volume, of which this is a Supplement, namely, the so-called “Hunza and
Nagyr Handbook,” a volume of 247 folio pages.

[Illustration: DR. LEITNER’S TIBET DOG “CHANG.”]

GENEALOGIES AND HISTORY OF DARDISTAN.

I do not propose to do more in this place than give the roughest outline
of this subject, as sketched in 1866 and 1872, and now rapidly brought up
to date. My reason is to prevent those falsifications of History which
are inevitable when a conqueror annexes a new country and the vilest
in it naturally becomes his first friends, and fabricate their family
tree. Therefore, with all its errors, which subsequent enquiries have
corrected, there is an element of actuality in the following accounts
gathered from Dards in 1866, the value of which will become apparent when
I write the history of the events that are drawing Dardistan into the
devastating range of European influences and politics:

_GENEALOGY OF THE GILGIT, YASIN, CHITRAL, NAGYR, HUNZA, AND OTHER
DYNASTIES SINCE 1800._

I.—GILGIT

Gurtam Khan (1800), hereditary ruler of
| Gilgit, whose dynasty can be traced
| to the daughter of Shiribadatt, the
| last, almost mythical, pre-Muhammadan
| Raja of Gilgit. Killed in
| 1810 by Suleyman Shah of Yasin.
+-----------------------+------------------------------+
| | |
Raja Khan (?) died Muhammad Khan reigns till Abbas Ali, killed
| 1814. 1826 and is killed by in 1815 by Suleiman
| Suleyman Shah of Yasin. Shah.
+--------------------------+
|
Asghar Ali killed on his flight to Nagyr by Suleyman Shah.
|
Mansur Ali Khan,
(the rightful Raja of Gilgit, probably still a prisoner in Srinagar).

1827.—Azad Shah, Raja of Gakutsh, appointed ruler of Gilgit by Suleyman
Shah whom he kills in 1829.
Tahir Shah of Nagyr conquers Gilgit in 1834
| and kills Azad.
+--------------------------+---------------------------+
| | |
Sakandar Khan, killed Kerîm Khan, (Raja of Gôr), Suleyman Khan.
by Gauhar Aman of (calls in Kashmir troops
Yasin, in 1844. under Nathe Shah in 1844)
was killed in 1848 in Hunza.
|
+--------------------------+--------------+-------------+
| | | |
Muhammad Khan died Suleyman Khan. Sultan Muhammad. Rustam
in 1859 when on a Khan.
visit to Srinagar. |
| |
Alidád Khan (son of Muhammad Ghulam Hayder.
Khan’s sister).

II.—YASIN DYNASTY.

It is said that both the Yasin and the Chitral dynasties are descended
from a common ancestor “Kathôr.” The Gilgitis call the Yasînis “Poryalé”
and the Chitralis “Katoré.”

_Khushwakt_(?) died 1800(?) from whom the present dynasty derives the
name of “Khushwaktia.” [A Raja of that name and dignity often met me at
Srinagar in 1886.]

He had two sons _Suleyman Shah and Malik Amán Shah_. The former died
about 1829 and left four sons and a daughter whom he married to
Ghazanfar, the Rajah of Hunza. The names of the sons are Azmat Shah the
eldest, Ahmad Shah, Rahîm Khan and Zarmast Khan.

_Malik Amán Shah_ was the father of seven or, as some say, of ten sons,
the most famous of whom was GAUHAR AMAN, surnamed “Adam farosh” (the
man-seller) the third son. The names of the sons are: Khuda Amán Duda
Amán, Gauhar Amán, Khalîl Amán, Akhar Amán (who was killed by his nephew
Malik Amán, eldest son of his brother Gauhar Amán): ISA BAHADUR (son of
Malik Amán Shah by a concubine), Gulsher, Mahter Sakhi, Bahadur Khan (who
was murdered) and Mir Amán(?) of Mistuch(?)

_Gauhar Amán_ left seven sons: MALIK AMÁN (also called Mîr Kammu? now in
Tangîr?) Bahadur Amán, murdered by Lochan Singh, MIR VALI (who killed
Hayward), Mir Gházi, PAHLWAN (who killed Mir Vali), Khan Daurán and
Shajáyat Khan. [The Khushwaktia Dynasty has since been dispossessed by
the kindred dynasty of Chitrál in 1884.]

III.—CHITRAL OR “SHAH KATHORIA” DYNASTY.

SHAH KATHOR, the son of Shah Afzal, (who died about 1800) was a soldier
of fortune who dispossessed the former ruler, whose grandson Vigne saw in
the service of Ahmad Shah, the independent ruler of Little Tibet in 1835.
Cunningham considers that the name of Kathôr is a title that has been
borne by the rulers of Chitrál for 2,000 years.

_Shah Kathor_ had a brother, Sarbaland Khan, whose descendants do not
concern us, and four sons and a daughter married to Gauhar Amán of Yasin.
The names of the sons were: _Shah Afzal_ (who died in 1858), Tajammul
Shah who was killed in 1865 by his nephew Adam-khor—or man-eater—(so
called from his murderous disposition; his real name was Muhtarim Shah),
Ghazab Shah (who died a natural death) and Afrasiab (who was killed). The
murdered Tajammul Shah left two sons namely Malik Shah (who revenged his
father’s death by killing Adam Khôr), and Sayad Ali Shah.

_Shah Afzal_ left AMÁN-UL-MULK, his eldest son, the present ruler of
Chitrál [1872] Adam-khôr (who usurped the rule for a time); Kohkán Beg,
ruler of Drus; a daughter whom he married to Rahmat-ulla-Khan, chief of
Dîr; Muhammad Ali Beg; Yadgar Beg; Bahadur Khan; and another daughter
whom Gauhar-Amán married as well as Shah Afzal’s sister and had Pahlwan
by her.

Amán-ul-Mulk married a daughter of the late Ghazan Khan, chief of Dîr,
by whom he had Sardar (his eldest son), also called Nizam-ul-Mulk.
Amán-ul-Mulk’s other sons are Murad and others whose names will be found
elsewhere. One of his daughters is married to Jehandar Shah, the former
ruler of Badakhshán and the other to the son of the present Chief, Mîr
Mahmud Shah. [Full details are given elsewhere of the Yasin-Chitrál
house.]

IV.—The names of the principal chiefs of the Chilâsis and of the
Yaghistanis (the independent Hill tribes of Darêl, Hôdûr, Tangìr, etc.)
have already been given in my “history” of their “Wars with Kashmir.”
Just as in Chilâs and Kandiá, the administration is in the hands of a
Board of Elders. The Maharaja of Kashmir only obtains tribute from three
villages in Chilaz, _viz._, the villages of Chilás, Takk and Bundar.

V.—NAGYR,[82]

[is tributary to Ahmad Shah of Little Tibet about the beginning of this
century, but soon throws off this allegiance to Ahmad Shah under Alif
Khan.](?)

[See “Historical Legend of the Origin of Gilgit,” pages 9 to 16. The
Nagyr-Hunza Rajas or Thams similarly claim a divine origin and account
for it through the two fairy-brothers who disappeared at Gilgit. See
note on page 111.]

[“Nagyr,” which Col. Biddulph very properly writes “Nager” (like “Pamèr”)
is now spelt “Nag_a_r,” so as to confound it with the Indian “Nagar” for
“town,” from which it is quite different.]

Alif Khan. 1800(?)
|
Raja Za’far Khan Záhid (the present Raja of Nagyr).
|
|
Son (a hostage for his father’s adhesion to Kashmîr, whom I saw
at Gilgit in 1866). The names of his maternal uncles are Shah
Iskandar and Raja Kerîm Khan(?) the elder brother. (The full
genealogy of Hunza Nagyr is given elsewhere.)

VI.—HUNZA

Ghazanfar, died 1865.
|
Ghazan Khan, present ruler.[83] (1866)

VII.—BADAKHSHAN

_Sultân Shah._
|
+----------------+--------+
| |
Rejeb Shah. Mirza Kalán.
| |
Ahmad Shah. +-----------+--+----+
| | | |
| NIZAM-UD-DIN Yusuf Saad-ulla
| (surnamed Ali Khan.
+------+---------------+ MIR SHAH). Khan.
| | | |
Rahmat Shah MAHMUD SHAH [1872] +---------+-------+---------+----+
Shah. Ibrahim (present ruler of | | | | |
Khan. Badakhshan Shajá-ul JEHANDAR Suleyman Shahzada |
under Kabul) Mulk. SHAH, Shah. Hasan. |
stayed a long the former |
time with his ruler, Abdulla
maternal uncle, independent Khan (by
the ruler of Kunduz, of Kabul a concubine).
whence he (now (1872)
has often been a fugitive;
miscalled “a Sayad infests the
from Kunduz.” Kolab road).

Yusuf Ali Khan had seven sons: Mirza Kalán, surnamed Mir Jan; Hazrat Ján;
Ismail Khan; Akbar Khan; Umr Khan, Sultan Shah; Abdurrahim Khan (by a
concubine).

Saad-ulla Khan had two sons: Baba Khan and Mahmud Khan (by a concubine).

VIII.—DIR

Ghazan Khan (a very powerful ruler. Chitrál is said to have once
| been tributary to him).
|
Rahmat-ulla Khan and other eight sons (dispersed or killed in
struggles for the Chiefship).

The connection of Little Tibet with the Dard countries had ceased before
1800.

_ROUGH CHRONOLOGICAL SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF DARDISTAN SINCE 1800._

1800.—Gurtam Khan, hereditary ruler of the now dispossessed
Gilgit Dynasty, rules 10 years in peace; is killed in an
engagement with Suleyman Khan, Khushwaktia, great uncle of the
famous Gauhar Amán (or Gormán) of Yasin.

1811.—Muhammad Khan, the son of Gurtam Khan, defeats Suleyman
Khan, rules Gilgit for 15 years in peace and perfect
independence whilst—

1814.—(Sirdar Muhammad Azim Khan, Barakzai, is ruler of
Kashmir).

1819.—Ranjit Singh annexes Kashmir.

1826.—Suleyman Khan of Yasin again attacks Gilgit and kills
Muhammad Khan and his brother, Abbas Ali. Muhammad Khan’s son,
Asghar Ali, is also killed on his flight to Nagyr.

1827.—Suleyman Shah appoints Azad Khan(?), petty Raja of
Gakutsh, over Gilgit as far as Bunji; Azad Khan ingratiates
himself with the people and rebels against Suleyman Shah whom
he kills(?) in 1829.

1829.—Suleyman Shah, head of the Khushwaktia family of Yasin,
dies.

1833.—Gauhar Amán turns his uncle, Azmat Shah, out of Yasin.

1834.—Azad Khan is attacked by Tahir Shah of Nagyr and killed.
Tahir Shah, a Shiah, treats his subjects well. Dies 1839. Vigne
visits Astór in 1835, but Tahir Shah will not allow him to
cross over to Gilgit. At that time the Sikhs had not conquered
any Dard country. Ahmad Shah was independent ruler of Little
Tibet (Baltistan) and under him was Jabar Khan, chief of Astór
(whose descendants,[84] like those of Ahmad Shah himself and
of the Ladak rulers are now petty pensioners under Kashmir
surveillance). (The Little Tibet dynasty had once, under Shah
Murad, about 1660, conquered Hunza, Nagyr, Gilgit and Chitrál,
where that ruler built a bridge near the fort.) Zorawar Singh
conquers Little Tibet in 1840, but no interference in Dard
affairs takes place till 1841 when the Sikhs are called in as
temporary allies by the Gilgit ruler against Gauhar Amán of
Yasin.

1840.—Sakandar Khan, son of Tahir Shah, succeeds to the throne
of Gilgit and rules the country—with his brothers, Kerim Khan
and Suleyman Khan.

1841.—Gauhar Amán of Yasin conquers Gilgit. Its ruler, Sikandar
Khan, asks Sheikh Ghulam Muhi-ud-din, Governor of Kashmir on
behalf of the Sikhs, for help.

1842.—1,000 Kashmir troops sent under Nathe Shah, a Panjabi.

1843.—Sikandar Khan is murdered at Bakrôt at the instigation of
Gauhar Amán.

1844.—Gauhar Amán of Yasin re-conquers the whole country,
selling many of its inhabitants into slavery.

Nathe Shah, joined by Kerim Khan, younger brother of Sikandar
Khan and 4,000 reinforcements, takes Numal Fort, but his
subordinate Mathra Das is met at Sher Kila (20 miles from
Gilgit) by Gauhar Amán and defeated.

1845.—Karim Khan succeeds his brother as ruler (called “Raja,”
although a Muhammadan) of Gilgit and pays a small sum for the
retention of some Kashmir troops in the Gilgit Fort under Nathe
Shah. The Rajas of Hunza, Nagyr and Yasin [Gauhar Amán sending
his brother Khalil Amán to Sheikh Iman-ud-din] now seek to be
on good terms with Kashmir, especially as its representatives,
the tyrannical Nathe Shah and his equally unpopular successor,
Atar Singh, are removed by its Muhammadan Governor.

1846.—Karim Khan, Raja of Gor, another son of Tahir Shah,
calls in Nathe Shah and defeats Gauhar Amán at Basin, close
to Gilgit. A succession of officers of Ghulab Singh then
administer the country in connexion with the Raja of Gilgit
(Wazir Singh, Ranjit Rai, Bakhshu, Ali Bakhsh and Ahmad Ali
Shah, brother or cousin of Nathe Shah). By Treaty (see page
110):

“KASHMIR AND ITS DEPENDENCIES EASTWARD OF THE INDUS” are
made over by the British to the Hindu Ghulab Singh. Gilgit,
which lies to the _westward_ of the Indus, is thus excluded
from the dominions of that Maharaja. Gilgit was also,
strictly speaking, not a dependency of Kashmir, nor was
Chilás.

1847.—The Maharaja restores Nathe Shah, whilst confirming
his cousin Nazar Ali Shah as Military Commandant of Gilgit.
Raja Kerim Khan sends his brother Suleyman Khan on a friendly
mission to Srinagar, where he dies. Vans Agnew arrives at Chalt
on the Gilgit frontier towards Nagyr and makes friends with the
people, who at first thought that he came accompanied by troops.

1848.—Isa Bahadur, the half-brother of Gauhar Amán by a
concubine of Malik Amán Shah, is expelled from Sher Kila, a
Fort belonging to Punyal, a dependency of Yasin, and finds
refuge with the Maharaja, who refuses to give him up. Gauhar
Amán accordingly sends troops under his brother Akbar Amán and
captures the Bargu and Shukayôt Forts in Gilgit territory. The
Rajas of Hunza and Nagyr combine with Gauhar Amán and assisted
by the Gilgit people, with whom Kerim Khan was unpopular
because of his friendship for Kashmir, defeat and kill Nathe
Shah and Kerim Khan. Gauhar Amán captures the Gilgit and
Chaprôt Forts. The Kashmir troops re-invade the country and at
the beginning of

1849.—Wrest all the forts in Gilgit territory from Gauhar Amán,
and make over the rule of that country to Raja Muhammad Khan,
son of Kerim Khan, assisted by the Kashmir representative, Aman
Ali Shah as Thanadar, soon removed for oppression.

1850.—The raids of the Chilâsis on Astór is made the occasion
for invading the country of Chilâs, which, _not_ being a
dependency of Kashmir, is _not_ included in the Treaty of 1846.
(See page 110.) The Maharaja gives out that he is acting under
orders of the British Government. Great consternation among
petty chiefs about Muzaffarabad, regarding ulterior plans of
the Maharaja. The Sikhs send a large army, which is defeated
before the Fort of Chilâs.

1851.—Bakhshi Hari Singh and Dewan Hari Chand are sent with
10,000 men against Chilâs and succeed in destroying the fort
and scattering the hostile hill tribes which assisted the
Chilâsis.

1852.—The Maharaja’s head officers, Santu Singh and Ramdhan,
are murdered by the people of Gilgit whom they oppressed. The
people again assist Gauhar Amán, who defeats and kills Bhup
Singh and Ruknuddin (for details _vide_ Appendix), and drives
the Kashmir troops across the Indus to Astór.

1853.—The Maharaja now confines himself to the frontier,
assigned to him by nature as well as the treaty, at Bunji, on
the east of the Indus, but sends agents to sow discord in the
family of Gauhar Amán. In addition to Isa Bahadur, he gained
over two other brothers, Khalil Amán and Akbar Amán, but failed
with Mahtar Sakhi, although an exile. He also attracted to his
side Azmat Shah, Gauhar Amán’s uncle.

1854.—The Maharaja instigated Shah Afzal of Chitrál to attack
Gauhar Amán, and accordingly in

1855.—Adam Khor, son of Shah Afzal of Chitrál, drove Gauhar
Amán from the possession of Mistuch and Yasin and restricted
him to Punyal and Gilgit.

1856.—The Maharaja sends a force across the Indus under Wazir
Zoraweru and Atar Singh assisted by Raja Zahid Jafar of
Nagyr,[85] and Gauhar Amán thus attacked in front and flank,
retreats from Gilgit and dispossesses Adam Khor from Yasin and
Mistuch.

1857.—Gauhar Amán again conquers Gilgit and drives out Isa
Bahadur, officiating Thanadar of that place. Gauhar Amán and
the Maharaja intrigue against each other in Chitrál, Nagyr,
Hunza, etc.

1858.—Shah Afzal of the Shah Kathor branch, ruler of Chitrál,
dies.

Intrigues in Gilgit against Gauhar Amán, by Muhammad Khan,
son of Raja Karim Khan, assisted by Kashmir. Muhammad Khan is
conciliated by marrying the daughter of Gauhar Amán. The Sai
District of Gilgit beyond the Niludar range is still held by
the Sikhs.

1859.—Mir Shah of Badakhshan and Raja Ghazanfar of Hunza assist
Gauhar Amán in attacking Nagyr, which is under the friendly
Raja Zahid Jafar, and in trying to turn out the Sikhs from Sai
and even Bunji. Azmat Shah, uncle of Gauhar Amán, is expelled
from Chitrál where he had sought refuge.

Aman-ul-Mulk, King of Chitrál, dispossesses his younger
brother, Adam Khor, who had usurped the throne, from the rule
of Chitrál and joins Gauhar Amán against Kashmir.

1860.—The Maharaja instigates Adam Khor and Azmat Shah, who
were in the country of Dir with Ghazan Khan, a friendly chief
to Kashmir, to fight Gauhar Amán—Adam Khor was to have Yasin,
Asmat Shah was to take Mistuch and Sher Kila (Payal) was to be
given to Isa Bahadur, the Maharaja to have Gilgit. Intrigues of
the Maharaja with the Chiefs of Dir, Badakhshan, etc.

Gauhar Amán dies, which is the signal for an attack by the
Maharaja co-operating with the sons of Raja Kerim Khan of
Gilgit. Gilgit falls easily to Lochan Singh, who murders
Bahadur Khan, brother of Gauhar Amán, who was sent with
presents from Malik Amán, also called Mulk Amán, son of Gauhar
Amán. The Sikhs, under Colonels Devi Singh and Hushiara and
Radha Kishen, march to Yasin expelling Mulk Amán from that
country (which is made over to Azmat Shah) as also from
Mistuch. Isa Bahadur is reinstated as ruler of Payal, but Mulk
Amán returns and drives him and Azmat Shah out. The Kashmir
troops fail in their counter-attacks on Yasin, but capture some
prisoners, including Mulk Amán’s wife.

1861.—Malik Amán murders his uncle, Akbar Amán, a partisan of
Kashmir. Badakhshan, Chitrál and Dir ask the Maharaja to assist
them against the dreaded invasion of the Kabul Amirs, Afzal
Khan and Azim Khan. Amán-ul-Mulk tries to get up a religious
war (Jehád) among all the Muhammadan Chiefs. Hunza and Nagyr
make friends. Both Adam Khor and Amán-ul-Mulk, who have again
become reconciled, send conciliatory messages to the Maharaja,
who frustrates their designs, as they are secretly conspiring
against him.

Even Mulk Amán makes overtures, but unsuccessfully.

1862.—Kashmir troops take the Fort of Roshan. A combination is
made against Mulk Amán, whose uncle Gulsher and brother Mir
Ghazi go over to the Maharaja.

1863.—Mulk Amán advancing on Gilgit is defeated in a very
bloody battle at the Yasin Fort of Shamir. Massacre of women
and children by the Kashmir troops at Yasin.

1864.—Mir Vali and his Vazir Rahmat become partisans of the
Maharaja.

1865.—Ghazanfar, the Raja of Hunza and father-in-law of Mulk
Amán, dies, which causes Mirza Bahadur of the rival Nagyr to
combine for an attack on Hunza with Kashmir. Adam Khor murders
his uncle, Tajammul Shah, whose son, Malik Shah, murders

1866.—Adam Khor (some say at the instigation of his elder
brother, Amán-ul-Mulk). Malik Shah seeks refuge with the
Maharaja who will not give him up to Amán-ul-Mulk. Amán-ul-Mulk
then sprung the mine he had long prepared, and when the long
contemplated campaign against Hunza took place in 1866, all
the Mussulman Chiefs who had been adherents of the Maharaja,
including Mir Vali, fell away. The Kashmir troops which had
advanced on Nummal were betrayed, and defeated by the Hunza
people (now ruled by Ghazan Khan, son of Ghazanfar).

All the hill tribes combine against Kashmir and reduce the
Dogras to the bare possession of Gilgit, which however held
out successfully against more than 20,000 of the allied Dards,
headed by Amán-ul-Mulk, Ghazan Khan and Mir Vali. Very large
reinforcements were sent by Kashmir,[86] at whose approach the
besiegers retreated, leaving, however, skirmishers all over the
country.

Wazir Zoraweru followed up the advantage gained by invading
Dareyl. Whilst the place was yet partially invested, Dr.
Leitner made his way to the Gilgit Fort and frustrated two
attempts made against him by the employés of the Maharaja, who
ostensibly were friends.

1867.—Jehandár Shah of Badakhshan is expelled from his country
by the Governor of Balkh and seeks refuge in Kabul, where he
is restored a year afterwards to his ancestral throne by the
influence of Abdurrahman Khan, son of the Amir Afzal Khan and
by his popularity. His rival, Mahmud Shah, leaves without a
struggle. Mir Vali, joining Mulk Amán, made an unsuccessful
attack on Isa Bahadur and Azmat Shah, who beat them off with
the help of Kashmir troops from Gilgit. The consequence was
general disappointment among the Muhammadan Chiefs and the Hill
tribe of Dareyl (which had been subdued in the meantime) and
all opened friendly relations with Kashmir, especially.

1868.—Mir Vali rules Yasin with Pahlwan.[87] Mulk Amán flees to
Chitrál.

1869.—Mulk Amán takes service with Kashmir and is appointed on
salary, but under surveillance, at Gilgit.

1870.—Mr. Hayward visits Yasin in March; is well received by
the Chief, Mir Vali, but returns, as he finds the passes on
to the Pamir closed by snow—visits the country a second time
in July, after exposing the conduct and breach of treaty of
the Kashmir authorities, and is murdered, apparently without
any object, at Darkôt in Yasin, one stage on to Wakhan, by
some men in the service of his former friend, Mir Vali, who,
however, soon flies the country in the direction of Badakhshan,
then seeks refuge with the Akhund of Swat, and finally returns
to Yasin, where he is reported to have been well received by
Pahlwan. Whilst in Chitrál, he was seen by Major Montgomerie’s
Havildar and was on good terms with Amán-ul-Mulk, who is
supposed, chiefly on the authority of a doubtful seal, to
be the instigator of a murder which was not, apparently, to
his interests and which did not enrich him or Mir Vali with
any booty, excepting a gun and a few other trifles. Much of
the property of Mr. Hayward was recovered by the Kashmir
authorities, and a monument was erected by them to his memory
at Gilgit, where there is already a shrine, which is referred
to on pages 47 and 51.

1871.—Jehandár Shah, son of Mir Shah, who had again been turned
out of the rule of Badakhshan in October 1869 by Mir Mahmud
Shah with the help of the Afghan troops of Amir Sher Ali, finds
an asylum in Chitrál with Amán-ul-Mulk (whose daughter had
been married to his son) after having for some time shared the
fortunes of his friend, the fugitive Abdurrahman Khan of Kabul.
(Chitrál pays an annual tribute to the Chief of Badakhshan in
slaves, which it raises either by kidnapping travellers or
independent Kafirs or by enslaving some of its own Shiah and
Kafir subjects—the ruler being of the Sunni persuasion.)

1872.—Late accounts are confused, but the influence of Amir
Sher Ali seems to be pressing through Badakhshán on Chitrál
and through Bajaur on Swat on the one hand and on the Kafir
races on the other. The Maharaja of Kashmir on the one side and
the Amir of Kabul on the other seem to endeavour to approach
their frontiers at the expense of the intervening Dard and
other tribes. Jehandár Shah infests the Kolab road and would
be hailed by the people of Badakhshan as a deliverer from the
oppressive rule of Mahmud Shah, as soon as the Kabul troops
were to withdraw.

So far my “Dardistan,” in which a detailed “History of the Wars with
Kashmir” will be found. The events since 1872 need only to be indicated
here in rough outline, and, unfortunately, confirm my worst anticipations
as to the destruction of the independence of the Dardu tribes, of their
legendary lore, and, above all, of the purity of their languages,
including the prehistoric Khajuná or “Burishki” spoken in Hunza-Nagyr,
and a part of Yasin. What are the admitted encroachments of our Ally, the
Maharaja of Kashmir, have been utilized in our supposed interests, and
we have stepped in to profit, as we foolishly think, by his sins, whilst
he is tricked out of their reward. Falsely alleging that Hunza-Nagyr
were rebellious vassals of Kashmir, when Hunza at all events was under
Chinese protectorate, we have reduced their patriotic defenders to
practical servitude, and, by to-day’s _Times_ (21st November, 1892), are
starting, along with 250 rifles and two guns, some 100 men of a Hunza
levy to Chitrál to put down a trouble which our ill-judged interference
has created in another independent principality, where we have put
aside the rightful heir, Nizám-ul-Mulk, for his younger brother,
Afzul-ul-Mulk, on the pretext that the former was intriguing with the
Russians. I believe this allegation to be absolutely false, for I know
him to be most friendly to British interests. In 1886 he offered to send
a thousand men from Warshigum over the passes to the relief of Colonel
(now General Sir) W. Lockhart, then a temporary prisoner at Panjah Fort
in Affghan hands. As Padishah of Turikoh, Nizám-ul-Mulk was, in his
father’s life-time, the _acknowledged_ heir to the Chitrál throne, and
he was made by his father Raja of Yasin in succession to Afzul, who had
taken it in 1884 from Mir Amán, the maternal uncle of Pehliwán, who
was ruler of Yasin in 1880, when Colonel Biddulph wrote his “Tribes of
the Hindukush,” and with whom the Khushwaqtia dynasty, as such, came
to an end. This Pehliwan killed Mir Wali, the murderer of Hayward, but
Pehliwan made the mistake of attacking Biddulph in 1880, and was ousted
by Mir Amán. With Nizám-ul-Mulk, therefore, begins the rule over Yasin
by the Kathoria Dynasty of Chitrál. He is now a fugitive at Gilgit; had
he been intriguing with Russia he would certainly not have sought refuge
from his brother in the British lion’s mouth at Gilgit. All I can say is
that in 1886 he did not even know the name of Russia, and that when he
wrote to me in 1887 he referred to the advent of the French explorers
Capus, Pepin and Bonvalot, as follows: “they call themselves sometimes
French, and at other times Russians.” In the “Asiatic Quarterly Review”
of January, 1891, there is a paper from Raja Nizám-ul-Mulk on “the
Legends of Chitrál.” He is thus the first Central Asian prince whose
literary effusion has appeared in the pages of a British, or indeed of
any other, Review. His first letters, sent in the hollow of a twig, like
his latter ones sent through British officers, all breathe a spirit
of what might be called the sincerest loyalty to the Queen-Empress,
were he not an absolutely independent ruler. There will be an evil day
of reckoning when the “meddling and muddling,” which has created the
Russian Frankenstein, will be followed by the exasperation of princes and
people, within and beyond our legitimate frontier. To revert to Hunza
and Nagyr, Mr. F. Drew, an Assistant Master of Eton College, who was _in
the service of the Maharaja of Kashmir_, wrote in 1877 in his “Northern
Barrier of India”—which, alas! our practical annexation of Kashmir, and
our interference with the Hindukush tribes are breaking down—as follows:
“Hunza and Nagyr are two small INDEPENDENT RAJASHIPS. Nagyr has generally
shown a desire to be on friendly terms with the Dogras at Gilgit, while
Hunza has been a thorn in their side.” There is not a word here of these
States being tributaries of Kashmir, whilst Colonel Biddulph, who was
our Resident at Gilgit, shows that the last Hunza raid was committed in
1867, and that slavery and kidnapping were unknown in inoffensive, if not
“timid,” Nagyr. My article in the “Asiatic Quarterly Review” of January,
1892, shows that raiding and slavery had been recently revived in
consequence of alike Russian and English advances, and that the fussiness
and ambition of our officials have alone _indicated_ and _paved_ “the
nearest way to India.”

_Woking, 21st November, 1892._

P.S.—In correcting this proof of a paper on the Fairy-land that adjoins
“the Roof of the World,” which our imprudence has drawn within the
range of practical politics, I never anticipated that I should have to
refer to my “rough sketch of the History of Dardistan” brought down to
1872 as a refutation of the history written to order by some of our
leading journals which, to suit the policy of the moment, would make the
Amir of Affghanistan responsible for Badakhshan, and yet blame him for
interfering with Chitrál, as is hinted in a telegram in to-day’s _Times_.
I shall deal with this matter elsewhere. (See also Appendix II.)

_Woking, 29th November, 1892._

[Illustration: Our Manufactured Foes

A student from Tangir.

A Nagyri Peasant.

A Dareyli Herdsman. [_notice fine head and ample forehead_]

(_Already published_) A well-known Hunza Fighter, Brought to England by
Dr. Leitner in 1887.]

[Illustration: KASHMIR SOLDIER (HIGHLANDER), (Wearing a Great Lama’s Hat).

A BALTI COOLIE (LITTLE TIBET). (The Baltis are used as Coolies by the
Kashmir invaders.)]

_HISTORY OF THE DARD WARS WITH KASHMIR_

IN 5 CHAPTERS—(CHAPTER I. CHILÁS)

(_Committed to writing from the statements of a Sazíni Dard who took part
in many of the engagements._)

INTRODUCTION. (JUIN, 1893.)

Chilás has already been referred to in my “rough Chronological Sketch
of the History of Dardistan from 1800 to 1892.”[88] I now propose to
republish “the History of the Wars of the Dard tribes with Kashmir”
beginning with the account given to me by a Sazîni Dard in 1866 of the
first war with the Chilásis.[89] Its importance at the present moment,
consists in the fact that these wars with the Dards were almost all
provoked by Kashmir, as they, practically, now are by ourselves. The
attack on peaceful and pious Nagyr was excused by the usual calumnies
that precede and justify annexation, till their exposure comes too
late either to prevent aggression or to punish their authors, who, if
soldiers, obtain honours, and if writers, an evanescent popularity. Now
that the manuscripts of the Hunza Library have been sold by auction,
that its fairies have been silenced, that its ancient weapons have been
destroyed, that its language and religion have been assimilated to those
of its neighbours, a living chapter has disappeared of the most ancient
traditions of mankind safe in their mountain recesses for ages, till
English and Russian subalterns wanted promotion at the expense of the
safety of their respective Asiatic Empires. In 1866, I already pointed
out that the Legends and Customs of the Dards were gradually vanishing
before the incidental inroads of Orthodox Sunni Muhammadanism and that
their preservation was a duty of the civilized world. Now we have simply
killed them outright as also a number of interesting Aryan republics,
like Chilás and other picturesque and peaceful autonomies. In 1875, Mr.
Drew reported that the abhorrence of the Shin race to the cow, which
probably marked the almost pre-historical separation of the Dáradas, the
lowest of the twice-born, from the Brahmins of Kashmir, was ceasing,
and in 1886 I saw a son of the excellent Raja of Nagyr in European garb
all except the head-dress. Now that his country is practically annexed,
its Chief is called “patriarchal,” just as the Chilásis are now patted
on the back “as brave and by no means quarrelsome” by journals which
a few months ago termed them “raiders,” “kidnappers”, “robbers” and
“slave-dealers,” etc., forgetting that there exist the annual reports of
our Deputy Commissioners of Abbottabad speaking of them since 1856 as a
peaceable people. No doubt _before_ that date, the Sunni Chilásis raided
Shiah Astor, just as the Astoris raided what they could.[90]

The following account, it will be seen, and my own notes, do not, in
the least, palliate the shortcomings of the Dards, but I maintain that
there were _no_ raids since 1856, and that in 1866 _six_ Kashmir Sepoys,
(not 6,000, as alleged by a recent writer) kept the Astor-Bunji road in
a state of perfect safety; there were, no doubt, small detachments of
troops at these places themselves, _not_ to protect the road against the
puritanical peasantry of Chilás, but as Depôts for the _then_ War with
all the united Dard tribes _except Chilás_. Yet we are told by a recent
writer, ignorant of Dard Languages and History, that we took Chilás in
order to protect Kashmir from raids (which had ceased for 42 years),
that we spend less on the safety of the frontier than Kashmir, that the
Nagyr Raja was a slave-dealer, etc., etc. Fortunately, we have official
and other reports written before the passions of the moment obscured
historical truth, and these Reports will long bear witness against the
vandalism and folly by which our Northern Barrier of India was broken
down and a military road was constructed for an invader to the heart of
the Panjab. This road is the one from Abbottabad to Hunza, of which I
obtained the particulars in 1866 (when I was sent on a linguistic Mission
by the Panjab Government to Kashmir and Chilás), but which, for obvious
reasons, I did not publish. Now that the Indian papers constantly urge
and discuss its construction, I have no hesitation in giving the details
of this, as I have of other roads and as _now_ ought to be done of the
various means of communication throughout what was once called, and what
should, and could, for ever have remained, the “neutral zone” between
the British and the Russian spheres of influence or interference. The
first part of the projected road is to Chilás, and extends, roughly
speaking, for 125 miles, namely Abbottabad to Mansehra 16 miles; Mansehra
to Juba 10 miles; thence to Balakôt 12 miles; Kawaie 12, Jared 12,
Kaghan 12, Naran 14, Batakundi 6, Burawaie 6, Sehri 5, Lulusar (where
there is a fine lake 11,000 feet over the sea level) 5, Chilás 15. (For
details see elsewhere.) Of this 15 miles are on independent territory,
so that there was no occasion for the precipitate subjugation of an
inoffensive population, whose sense of security is so great that they
abandon their houses entirely unprotected during the hottest part of the
summer when they leave with their families for the cooler surrounding
hills. In another Dard republic, full of Arabic Scholars, Kandiá,
there are no forts, and weapons may not be carried. Major Abbott, from
whom Abbottabad so deservedly takes its name, reporting to the Lahore
Board of Administration in July 1855, when the Maharaja of Kashmir had
misinformed him of the successful conclusion of his campaign against
Chilás and had asked the British Government, “whether he was to hold it
with garrison, or to punish the people by burning their villages and then
to retreat,” gave as his opinion that the latter course would exasperate
the Chilásis into renewing their incursions, and that on the other hand
“the possession of Chilás by Jummoo would altogether destroy the hopes of
the Syuds of Kaghan. And as the odium of this very unpopular expedition
has been carefully attributed to the British Government by the Maharaja’s
Ministers, so much of advantage may possibly be derived from it.” I must
now allow my Sazîni and other Dards to give an account of Wars which not
only include the struggles for the conquest of Chilás, but detail the
expeditions to Hunzá-Nagyr, the massacre of women and children at Yasin,
the Dareyl and other conflicts, all interspersed with characteristic
anecdotes and the names of men and places that have, or may yet, come to
the front.

ROUTES TO CHILÁS.

The manners, tribal sub-divisions, and occupations of the Chilásis and
the names of the mountains, streams, products, etc., of the country, as
also the road from Takk to Kashmir by the Kanagamunn pass, Diúng, Shiril,
Koja, Ujatt, etc., are detailed in my “Dardistan,” where a Chilási
vocabulary, dialogues, songs, etc., will also be found. There are also
roads from Abbottabad to Chilás through Agrôr, of Black Mountain fame,
practicable for camels. Another road, fit for ponies, goes by Muzafarabad
by Sharidi and the lovely Kishenganga and Sargan Rivers in Kashmir, by
the Kamakduri Galli, to Niát in Chilás. As already mentioned, the easiest
road to our last conquest is by Kaghan through the Takk valley. There
is also the long and dangerous road on the banks of the Indus to Bunji,
which skirts, as its occupation would irritate, the Kohistani tribes
who are Pathans, not Dards, including the rival traders with Gilgit
of Koli-Palus. Thence, on that route, comes Jalkot and the road that
branches off into learned Kandiá, which I have described at length in
the _A.Q.R._ of July 1892. The road, such as it is, constantly crosses
and recrosses the Indus (by rafts), and at the Lahtar river is reached
the boundary between the true Kohistan and the Dard country, which is
there called Shináki, because it is inhabited by the ruling Shiná race.
We then come to pretty Sazín, from which my Sazîní informant. Opposite to
it runs the Tangir valley and country, whence there is a road to Yasin
to which Tangîr owed a sort of loose bond. We then continue by the right
bank of the Indus opposite Sazín, passing Shatiál and on to the Dareyl
stream, which comes from the Dareyl country that eventually joins on to
Gilgit. Crossing the Dareyl stream, we pass Harban on the left bank and a
few miles further on, the Tor village, and arrive at the Hôdur village,
whence we go on to Chilás, after as bad a road of about 200 miles as
it is possible to conceive. Besides, if we touch the independence of
these various republics _en route_, we shall constantly be in a hornets’
nest, and provoke the coalition of the Dard with the Pathan or Afghan
irreconcilable tribes, whereas, by keeping to the Kashmir route or, at
least, confining ourselves to the Kaghan-Chilás road, and prohibiting
our men from going to the right or to the left of it, we may yet resume
friendly relations with the harmless and religious Chilásis and keep the
road open for the eventual advance of Russian troops! In the meanwhile,
let us not destroy villages inhabited by hereditary genealogists, who,
before our advent, were the living historians of an irrecoverable portion
of, perhaps, the earliest Aryan settlements.

I. STRUGGLES FOR THE CONQUEST OF CHILAS.

“About twenty-three years ago there was a very strong fort at Chilás.
Two years before the outbreak of the wars, a man named Lassu came [on
the part of Kashmír?] to the frontier of Chilás. This man’s ancestors
had been in the service of the Dogras and for ninety years had possessed
property and the Sirdarship at Goré (?) (probably Guraïz) in the family.
It is not known why or whether he was dismissed the Kashmîr service, but
he came with his family in 1847 to Chilás and became the cause of all
the subsequent disturbances. This man had been renowned for bravery in
his youth, but when he came was old and feeble, though full of intrigue.
In the valley of Marungá is a place called Neyátt, where he established
himself with about twenty families of Kashmiris and others, who had
followed him from Guraiz. His two brothers were also with him. Where he
fixed his residence there is—at some distance below—a village of the
name of Gôsher, inhabited by the people of Takk. The valley is called
Karúngá at its exit. In these two years he cultivated his fields and the
friendship of the Chilásis. Purchasing also cattle and horses he became
a great chief, to whom the Chilásis used to pay visits of ceremony. He
also used constantly to visit them, and when he had acquired a decisive
influence, he assembled all the Lumberdars of Chilás and said, “What a
pity that Astór being so near, whose inhabitants are all Shiahs, you
should not attack them according to the Shera’ [religious Law].” The
ignorant Chilásis then began to go on plundering excursions in the
direction of Astor, which were often successful. When the Governor of
Astór became unable to resist these attacks, he requested the assistance
of the Maharaja of Kashmîr, who refused it to him, but himself advanced
direct on Chilás with an army. (In this war I was present for about a
month.) One day a battle began in the early morning and lasted till
the evening. The Maharaja’s army drove us right into the Chilás Fort.
We sent off men at once in all directions for help. For two days there
was no other engagement. On the 3rd day came allies of the valley of
Gîne, from Darêl, Jalkôt, Takk and Torr, Harbànn, Shatiál, Sazín, Hudúr,
Kóli, and 200 Tangîris (we were in all about 20 “thousand” men, women
and children, in that great fort[91]). They poured in all day, and by
evening the struggle was renewed in which, as I saw myself, women took
part. As the Sikhs were pressing on to the walls, the women threw
bedsteads and planks on their heads; stones and kitchen-utensils were
also used. The result was not decisive. A stream was flowing into the
fort in which we had four reservoirs kept filled in case of need. Hêmur,
a brave man, whose son Sadur is now a Chief, a Yashkunn,[92] sat there
giving a pumpkin full of water (about half a pint) to a man during the
day and a pint at night, as it was more quiet then. There was a row of
men stationed handing the gourd in and out and taking care that nobody
got more than his share. Often we went without food for two days. The
Chilási women cooked and cast bullets—the other women chiefly fought.
The besiegers diverted the stream from the fort into the valley. We then
drank the water of the reservoirs. This lasted for a month. We only lost
in killed about three or four a day, as we fought behind cover. The
enemy lost from 80 to 120 a day as they were in the open plain. When
their provisions failed and supplies did not reach them, they retired
with the loss of a third of their army, their treasury and goods. (300
women were appointed for the purpose of working and casting bullets all
day.) In the day time we used to exchange shots—at night we would attack
their camp, when they were tired or asleep. The walls were loopholed for
the guns, and altogether the management of the affair was very good.
We looted 100 mule-loads of powder: as much of lead, 40 tents—100 beds
(charpoys), 2 boxes filled with money (Chilkis[93])—50 sound muskets
and 150 injured muskets,—120 brass kettles—50 brass jugs—200 sheets
and 400 brass gharras (pitchers)—100 shawls, good and bad—200 Chaplis
(sandals)—20 chairs—5 loads of sticks—200 lances—200 bayonets—a heap of
100 swords—20 daggers—20 iron hammers, 130 tent pegs of iron and 800 of
wood—2 big guns—3 field guns, and miscellaneous property too numerous and
various to detail. Two days after the flight of the Dogras the people
assembled and began to divide the spoil. We began by giving 10 Chilkis to
each man, but it did not last for all; so, whoever got no money, took a
gun, lance, tent, etc. The big guns were put into the fort. I was shot in
the leg in that siege. We used to bury our dead in their clothes within
two or three days of their death. The Sikhs also used to burn, and the
besieging Muslims in their service to bury, the dead for some time. When,
however, the casualties increased, the besiegers gave up attending to the
dead. It was in the midst of summer; so the stench was very great and
disease also spread in the Sikh camp. Seven days after the flight of the
enemy, the tribes who had come to help left for their own places. The
following is the list of the Sirdars killed in the siege: Deyûri Khan,
a Shîn, one-eyed, Sirdar of Chilás; Hashm Shah, a Shîn, of Chilás; Nasr
Ali Khan, a Yashkunn, of Chilás; Malik Faulád, a Yashkunn, of Harbenn.
The following Sirdars survived: Rahmat Ulla, Shîn, Chilási; Akbari, Shîn,
Lamberdar of Takk; Murad Shah, Yashkunn of Tòrr; Adam Shah, Yashkunn of
Tòrr; Bahádur (Baghdúr), Shîn of Harbánn; Naik Numa, a Kamìn, Harbann;
Faizulla Khan, Shîn, Harbann; Mard Shah, Kamìn of Shatiál; Shah Jehán,
Kamìn of Shatiál; Malek Nazr-ud-din, Shîn of Sazin; Hajem Khan, Shîn
of Sazin; Lala Khan, Yashkkunn of Dareyl; Jeldár, Yashkkunn of Dareyl;
Izzat, Shîn of Phúgotsh (Dareyl); Rahmi, Shîn of Samagiál in Dareyl;
Matshar Khan (a great Sirdár) Shîn, Samagial; Losîn, Shîn of Barzîn;
Mirza Khan, Shîn, Barzîn; Shah Merdán, Shîn of Hudúr; Kazilbik, Yashkunn
of Búder.

[Illustration: TWO CHILÁSIS.

A GILGITI.]

After a year had passed, the Chilasis and the Yaghistánis[94] assembled
at Chilás with the intention of plundering Astór, whose Governors then
was Jabr Khan and Wazir Gurbúnd, subjects of Kashmîr and of the Shiah
faith, and therefore fit objects for the attack of orthodox Mussulmans
(Sunnis). We were in all about 108,000 Yaghistanis (the ideas of number
are very vague in those countries—though not so vague as in Lughmáni
where there is not a separate name for a number above 400, and the
foreign appellation of _hazár_ = 1,000 is the equivalent for 400. _Vide_
Lughmáni and Kandiá Vocabularies in which numeration is by twenties). The
Astóris were only 6,000, but we went in large numbers, as we counted on
having to meet the Dogras of Kashmir.

The following is the List of the confederate Yaghistanis: From Koli,
1,000; Palus, 4,000; Jalkót, 3,000; Sazin, 500; Shatiál, 500; Harbann,
1,000; Takk, 1,000; Chilas, 3,000; Torr, 1,000; Tangir, 4,000; Dareyl,
10,000; Gôrdjan, 5,000 (probably Gôr); Gîne, 100; Bûder, 100; Gormâni,
2,000 (probably auxiliaries from Gauhar-Amán, the ruler of Yasin,
popularly called Gôrmán); Gilgit, 5,000; Sai, 5,000.

(This only brings the allied Dard forces up to 48,200, perhaps only
19,000, as already explained. Since then the Dards have been more than
decimated, and the destruction of Gilgit with all its traditions, etc.,
is one of the saddest results of the Kashmir frontier war. There are,
however, Gilgit emigrants to be found in Sazîn and other places.) We
marched on to the mountains of Astor and Gauhar-Amán with 2,000 men
stopped at Jalkôt (j as in French) in the Sái territory, 6 koss far.
He told us that when the Dogras came up to assist Astor, he would at
once advance with more troops to that place. When we came near Astor,
the Governor was informed of our approach. Most of the Astoris fled,
many leaving their property behind. The 6,000 fighting men remained;
they had, however, sent most of their property away. The people of the
Astor village, Dashkin, had not heard of our arrival; so we surprised
it about midnight, killed 2 men and wounded 9—100 were captured (men
and women). We took 80 cows, 500 goats, clothes to the value of 400
Rupees, 40 hatchets, 100 swords, and 100 muskets. Out of the house of
the Wazîr Gorbúnd we got 8 kettles. There are many Yashkunns at Astor,
three-fourths being of that race and the remainder being half Shîns and
the other half Kamíns.[95] Our arrival at Astor was announced by a man
whom with his companion we surprised seated at the bridge of Sugarkôt.
A man of Shatiál killed the companion by throwing a stone at him; the
other effected his escape and enabled the Astoris to get away with their
property. The reason why we killed so few was because we wanted to make
the people our slaves, either to keep or sell; being Kafirs their lives
are forfeited to the Mussulmans, but it is harder on them to be slaves
than die and therefore we prefer to enslave them. Besides it is more
profitable. In the morning a rumour of the approach of the Maharajah’s
troops reached us. We were greatly surprised at this and retired on to
Hashu Gher (probably the Atsho pir, a very high mountain which overlooks
Bunji, on the Kashmir side of the Indus) by the Burderikôt road—a very
difficult one—on the way to Chilás, which we reached only the 6th day
after our retreat. We then divided the spoil. Some sold their slaves
in Chilás. Most took them to their homes. We did not lose any one in
killed or wounded on this excursion. Jabar Khan of Astor then went to
the Maharaja as a suppliant—saying he and his people were children and
subjects of Kashmir and implored help against the marauders, who, he
urged, should themselves be attacked and punished. The Maharaja advised
him to be quiet for a year, as he would then bring a large army. This
was satisfactory for Jabar Khan, who was intent on revenge. In fact,
14 months later, when he and his minister with 60 men again presented
themselves at Srinagar, in order to urge the fulfilment of the promise,
50,000 men (!!) were sent to Chilás. I was then at Minôr in the Gilgit
territory, but my father and brother went into the war and it is from
them that I have heard the following particulars. When the Sikh General
(whose name I forget) reached the Kashmîr river [the Kishnganga (?)] he
divided the Army into two parts—one to go by way of Guraiz, the other
by the Darau valley which goes straight to Chilas and actually reached
Takk. [From Takk there are 2 valleys—the one of Babuserr; the other of
Marungâ.] The reason of the division of the forces was that the Kashmîr
troops feared to trust their whole body into mountainous country where
they might all be cut up. Two days before the enemy came, we were at
Sîhil, below Takk, 1,000 strong. The Yaghistanis were collecting at
Chilás, but most were still on the roads or starting from their homes.
The news of the approach of the Maharajah’s troops had also frightened
away most of the tribes. Indeed there were only 500 besides the force
at Sîhil. The following came: 100 from Sazîn, 200 from Harbán, 40 from
Chitrál, 60 from Dareyl, 40 from Jalkôt, 100 from Tangîr, 200 from Tórr,
40 from Hudúr, 200 from Takk, 100 from Bûder. 800 had collected in Gôr,
but never came up, but were at Talpènn on the other side of the Indus, 4
kôs from Chilas. The following Chiefs came: Nazar Khan, Kasîm and Masta
Khan of Sazîn. The 2 former were Shîns, the other a Yashkunn. Ravîn,
a Yashkunn of Shatial; Der Jihan, Kamin, of Shatial; Alangîr, Kamin,
of Harbann; Tapa Khan, Kamin, of Harbann; Jeldar Mama and Sheithing
of Dareyl, Shins; Ametî, Yashkunn, Jalkôt; Keremo, Shin, Khairulla,
Yashkunn, Tangîr; Marat Shah Mama, Adam Shah, Great Sirdars of Torr,
Shins; Shahmard Kaka and his brother of Hudûr, Shins; Akbari and Azád,
Kamins, of Takk; Kizilbîk of Bûder, Yashkúnn; Sadar Khan, Yashkúnn, Gôr;
Wazîr Khan, Yashkúnn, Gôr; Ramanni, Yashkúnn, Gôr; Rahmat ulla Khan,
Nasir Ali, and Hasham Shah, Yashkúnns, Chilás.

When the Sikh troops came to the bridge of Sîhil, it was 6 A.M. (before
dawn). We were in ambush and rushed upon them sword in hand. There
was great fighting till the evening—such as had never been before in
Yaghistan. When night broke in, we were beaten and fled back into the
mountains. Then two Sirdars, Ameti Khan and Ser Endáz Khan of Jalkót,
rushed in alone on the army of the infidels and after killing some were
cut down. Ameti’s body fell into the water below the bridge and came up
again after one month at Jalkót on the river side, where Jalkót is. A
boatman of the name of Mehr Gul, came to the place but did not recognise
the body. He told the villagers, who went out with Mira Khan, the uncle
of Ametí, who had not gone to the wars as he was very old. Ametí’s wife
too went to the bank. Nobody recognised the corpse, when the wife knew
him from his pijámas. He was buried and a shrine was built over his
body, which is known by the name of the “shrine of the martyr.” Ametí
had said when about to charge the Sikhs that “if he should be killed
his body would still get to Jalkôt and be buried there.” Many Sirdars
testify to this. During the night, the enemy sleeping from fatigue, Mulla
Shemshêr, and Mulla Khandád and the Pir Padishah Mîa, a great Sayad,
rallied the Yaghistanis and told them of the advantage of assaulting the
infidels at night, which was accounted as a twofold righteousness in
this and the next world. When the Yaghis heard this Fatwa (authoritative
manifesto) their courage increased and they attacked the enemy’s camp
in a body. Our men went on slashing at their heads and other limbs. It
was winter and the blood clotted our hands and froze them to the sword
hilts. Rustam and Afrasiab’s wars would be forgotten as trifles, if I
could describe the terrors of that night. The slaughter lasted all night.
As the day approached and showed the smallness of our numbers we were
again defeated and fled from Sihil to Chilás which is at the distance of
6 kôs (or about 9 miles). We were followed by the enemy. Whenever they
came up to a suitable place, the fight was renewed and hundreds were
killed. At Dasur, Matshuko-Jal and in the valley of Chilás, there being
an open space, a stand was made, especially at the last place, which we
reached at noon and kept our ground fighting till far into the night
(10 o’clock). We were again defeated and fled into the fort, which was
surrounded by the Maharajah’s army. The following days and nights were
occupied in constant fighting. The enemy again cut off the stream. Then
the Yaghis again appointed Hemur to undertake the distribution of water
from the reservoirs and made the women cook and cast bullets for them, as
during the first siege. This siege, however, was greatly protracted—the
water became scarce and whilst formerly a man would get three gourdsful
(two during the night and one in the day) now only one gourdful was
distributed during the whole twenty-four hours. This lasted for three
months. At night assaults were made and shots were exchanged during the
day through the loopholes. When the enemy approached under the walls,
stones, etc., etc., were thrown on him. We did all we could, but were
still beaten—the reason God alone knows. Oh God! when the water became
scarce, the enemy also put poison into the reservoirs; so some died from
thirst and many from poison. When the enemy saw this, he had recourse to
another _ruse_. They tied stems of trees together with ropes and using
them as ladders, tried to mount on the fort, firing all the day. We
had not seen this before and in our surprise lost more men than perhaps
was necessary in defending ourselves. Neither water nor an escape was
destined for us; so the remainder consulted about evacuating the place
and getting into the hills. At midnight two-thirds of the men, taking
the women and children with them, left the Fort and began to fly. The
voices of the children roused the blood-thirsty enemy, who, like a wolf,
came after the lambs. Some of the Sikhs entered the Fort and killed those
they found; when they became exhausted with murdering, they took about
680 men, women and children as prisoners for the Sikh General and 120
were destined for the revenge of Jabar Khan and taken away with their
property. The fort was at once set on fire and burnt down. Such property
as they could take they did take. As for the fugitives, it was a running
slaughter till sunrise, when we reached Kitshóri. Here we rallied and
renewed the fight. Kitshóri is 2 kôs below Chilas and is a village on
the Indus. Our men fought, hungry and tired though they were, till noon
and were considerably thinned in numbers. It seemed now useless to us to
continue the fight, for we said that we should all be at last overpowered
and cut down to a man. We must therefore flee. We, therefore, retraced
our march in the direction of the mountains and were not followed up, as
the enemy did not perhaps, think it worth while, our numbers being so
reduced. The pursuers returned to the Chilás fort. When they got there
they agreed to return to Kashmir. As they reached the place where the
two roads branch off, [one for Astor, the other for Kashmîr] the Sikh
General gave leave to Jabar Khan, who took his prisoners with him. All
were in great joy. The following is the list of the Sirdárs who escaped
the slaughter: Alengir, Habba Khan, and Mîr Matta, of Harbenn; Rahmi, of
Darêl.

Aladdin of Shatial and Ahmeti and Sir Andaz of Jalkôt were killed; also
Azur, and Alahmun of Sazîn. Mard Shah Baba of Torr got away. Azad of Takk
was killed. Nasr Ali, Hashm Shah, Paulad and Anwarí of Chilas were all
killed. They were all Yashkunns. Serrkushu of Tangir was killed. M......
of Somer, a Shîn, my cousin, was killed by a bullet going through his
mouth. 500 were killed and 800 taken prisoners—200 escaped. Among the
prisoners was Sirdar Rahmat Ulla Khan, who was sent to Jammu. When he was
captured, a Sikh went into the fort after his daughter, who threw herself
off the walls in order to escape disgrace and was dashed to pieces on a
stone. There is no doubt that we were the first to be in fault, as we
attacked Astor without provocation and at the instigation of Lassu seven
times before the Maharaja went to war with us. I never joined these
plundering excursions but my cousin, M......, went every time and also
S......, my brother, who is still alive. Once they brought back a man and
6 women to Minôr—the whole razzia having secured 60 prisoners, 800 goats,
etc. Thinking it was “halál” or lawfully acquired property, they divided
it with great glee and they ate the goats also as “halál,” as they had
taken them from Shiahs.

There is a suspicion that Lassu was an agent of Kashmîr sent to foment
this discord and bring about the subjection of Chilás. In former times we
used to assist Astor, being our neighbour. There is also no difference
in our language. That of Khapul (Khapolór) is different. It is Tibetan:
they call a man “shîshek” and for “go there” say “gaz yut” and “bakhmula
gihrit” (there is a mistake here) and for “bury” say “sùmduk” and for
“does he go or not” “yidd mitt.” “Son” they call “bhúman.” [Some of
the words are Kashmîrî.] I remember these words, having once known the
language, as a woman of Khapul, called Miriam, had fallen to the lot of
my brother in the division of the booty. A neighbour of mine also had a
slave of the same place called Kolitsh, who used to come to see us. I was
very young then and could converse with both. A year after, my brother,
in consequence of his greed for money, took her to Kami, a village of
Tangîr and sold her to Batret Shah, Sirdar, the son of Babar Shah, for
8 tolas of gold (each tolah of the value of 9 Rupees 5 annas). This was
a good price as she was very good-looking, but she should not have been
sold.

* * * * *

When the Kashmîr troops attacked Chilas, Lassu joined us secretly and
although himself old and feeble told us what to do—but his two brothers
and two nephews openly fought on our side in the battle of the valley
of Chilás. Indeed at Sihil, Lassu fought himself and used to send the
Sirdars forward with his instructions. In short, as far as he was able,
he tried to injure the Sikhs. When the Sikhs had cut the water off the
fort, he had arranged about putting only one man in charge of it and
fixed the rate at which it should be distributed. He was ever ready
with advice. He used to allow the Sikhs to beat up supplies in villages
and then would cut them up while encumbered with them. This is how we
managed to be fed (the plundered supplies reaching us by a mountain road)
for three months. A relative of Lassu was in the Sikh Camp and told the
General about Lassú’s doings. The attention of the besiegers was then
directed towards capturing him, but in vain, and in both wars he escaped
being taken prisoner or receiving a wound. His younger brother was
shot in the palm of the hand. In short, after the conquest of Chilas,
Lassu again resided with his brothers at Neyátt and kept up his visits
to Chilas. When the Sirdars arranged to offer their submission to the
Maharaja at Jammu, they sent for Lassu and asked him to help them to
recover their friends and relatives who had been taken prisoners to
Kashmir. Lassu refused on the ground that he had left the Maharajah’s
service and had been his bitter enemy ever since and that therefore his
life was not safe if he ventured into his presence. Finally, Lassu was
prevailed upon to go. The following Sirdars went to Jammu to ask for
forgiveness: Hashm Shah, Sattari, Baland Khan, and Daria Khan, of Chilas,
with 36 Botés (poor people); Buyedad, Daru Khan, and Mir, Shîns of Bûder;
Azad and Sakhi, Shîns of Takk; Tatari, Kamìn, and Baghdùr, Shin, also of
Takk.

When the Maharaja saw the suppliants, and also noticed Lassu, it was
as if an arrow had pierced him. He was greatly indignant, having heard
everything from his General about Lassu often defeating his troops and
being the origin of the wars and of the numerous plans by which his
soldiers had been destroyed by thousands—for instance at the ambush at
Sîhil. Finally after a long talk, the Maharaja made the forgiveness of
the Chilasis conditional on the execution of Lassu. The Chilasis said “By
all means, if this man and his ancestors have not been your servants.
You expelled him and we received him. In gratitude for this he may have
given us sometimes advice, but he has never raised his hands against
you. Had he not given us even advice _we_ should have killed him. It
was his duty to do so. Let His Highness therefore pardon him.” The
Maharaja refused, and ordered his General to strike off his head there
and then, put the blood into a plate and give it to him to drink [this
was probably meant metaphorically, as a Hindu would not drink blood,
especially not that of a Muhammadan. However, the Chilasi Chiefs appear
to have understood the threat literally]. The Sirdars all interposed as
they could not witness his death. They offered to pay taxes, if he were
spared. [This was probably the object of this comedy.] Then the Maharaja
fixed an annual tribute of Rs. 2 per house, in lieu of the blood of
Lassu. The Chiefs thought it too much for their poor people, so at last
one Rupee per house was settled. He then dismissed them, but wanted them
again to appear next year with the tribute, viz. Balang Khan, Deryá Khan,
Matshar and Lassu. “When this is done, he added, I will send Lassu with
a khilat[96] to Guraiz and re-instate him as Governor and you shall also
receive presents.” This was accepted and the Chiefs returned with all the
people (men, women and children) who had been taken prisoners. He also
sent a letter to Jabar Khan of Astor to restore the 120 prisoners whom he
had taken to the Chilas Chiefs. This was done and nearly all returned,
excepting the few that had died in course of nature. Thus was Chilas
again re-peopled and is inhabited to the present day.

The following villages in Chilas became subject to Kashmir: Chilas, then
300 houses, now only 200, 100 having died out in consequence of disease
brought on by the bad water of that place, Bûder, 120 houses, Takk,
131 houses. The rest did not submit, nor will they ever do so, as they
have heard about the tyranny and oppression practised in Kashmir. We
Yaghistanis have thus become even greater enemies than before, but are
helpless. To revert to my story. After a year the following Sirdars went
with the tribute to Srinagar, viz.: Deryá Khan, Balang Khan, Satari,
Rahmat-ulla, Matshar and Lassu. The Maharaja gave each a present of 120
Rupees and made them stay a month at Jammu. Lassu was sent with much
honour to Guraiz and reinstated. On the expiration of the month the
Sirdars came to Srinagar and requested leave to go as the harvest-time
had come near. The Maharaja received them kindly and requested that in
future two Chilasis should come with the tribute and remain for a year
as servants (really hostages) when they would be allowed to return and
two others be appointed in their stead. The hostages were to receive some
pay from the Maharaja. The Sirdars then returned each to his own village.
This arrangement is still in force. (For a more chronological account of
the conquest of Chilás vide Historical Sketch, page 72.)

II.—WAR WITH GOUHAR AMAN FOR THE POSSESSION OF GILGIT.

A year later, the same Sikh General was despatched with 3,000 horse and
foot to Astor and fixed a tribute of one-third of the produce on all.
He also established a Thanna at Sógar, a village close to Astor. At the
Thanna he laid in ammunition, etc. Next year he went down with his troops
along the river of Astor to the Indus and established a Thanna at Bûnji,
which is on this side of the Indus and opposite to Sai. Duru was at that
time Governor of Bunji on behalf of Gouhar Aman, the ruler of Yasin and
Gilgit. He also crossed the Indus at Sai and arranged for a Thanna at
Jalkôt, but the Sai country was subject to Gouhar Aman who was residing
at Gilgit. When he heard of the encroachments of Kashmir he sent off men
to Dareyl and Tangîr, asking these tribes to come down on the Sikhs by
the mountain paths near Bunji, whilst he would take the road along the
Indus and attack Sai. He stated that as he and they were Sunnis, a Jihád
[religious war] on the Sikhs became their common duty. 5,000 young men
from Dareyl and Tangîr at once collected and came down to Bunji in 10
days. Gouhar Aman with 3,000 Gilgiti horse and 2,000 coolies, fell on
Sái at 2 o’clock in the afternoon of the day on which the mountaineers
reached in the morning. The following Yaghistani Chiefs came: From
Dareyl—Kalashmir, Lala Khan Izzetti, Bira Khan, Muhammad Khan, Shaithing,
Jaldár; from Tangir—Khairulla, Mansûr, Rustami, Nayûn.

The only son of Gouhar Aman who came was Mulk Aman—Gouhar Aman himself
being detained at Minôr by illness. The following also came: From Nómal
200 men, from Bhagrôt 2,000(!!), from Sakwal 100, and from Minôr 200.
These men carried loads of provisions and ammunition. They reached
the Niludár range on that day, one kos from the Sai District. Thence
preparations were made for an attack—the Sikhs having 8,000 men—the
battle began at Chakarkôt which is three kôs from the Indus. There is
a field there under cultivation where the fight began. It was summer.
The Sikhs had got into the Chakarkôt Fort which was surrounded by the
Gilgitis. Mulk Aman dashed into it with his horsemen. The Chakarkoti
villagers facilitated their entry and opened the gates for him. The fight
lasted all day and night within and without the Fort. The Sikhs were
defeated; most were killed fighting and some jumped off the walls and
were dashed to pieces. 100 only escaped crossing the river [Indus] back
to Bunji. Gouhar Aman only lost 60 horsemen and 40 Dareylis and Tangîris,
also Sirdar Muhammad Khan, a Shin of Darêl. Mulk Aman did not cross over
to Bunji and dismissed the mountaineers, telling them, however, to be in
readiness for renewed fighting. He then returned to Gilgit. A curious
circumstance occurred with two Sikhs who were taken away as prisoners by
the Dareylis. In taking them over the Jámu rocks,[97] which on account
of their difficulty, we call “ákho” (Atsho?), one fell into the Indus
and was never again seen, whilst the other slipped down and rose again
to the surface—an event never known to occur with any one who falls into
the Indus at that place where it is very rapid. He, however, made his way
over to Bunji, and just as he was reaching it, a stone fell on his head
and he was drowned.

* * * * *

A year had scarcely elapsed after the battle of Chakarkòt, when, in
the spring, about 20,000 Kashmir troops with the former General came
to Astor. He sent a letter of defiance to Gauhar Aman, challenging him
to do his worst, to assemble the mountaineers and to meet him on an
open plain. Gauhar Aman at once told the mountaineers that they should
quietly get into Jalkot (Sai District) by way of the valley of Kámberi,
over the mountain Hudurga, to the village Kirinjot, and get out by the
mountains of Puhût. This was done. Gauhar Aman again fell ill at Minôr.
His son just got there in time to meet the Sikhs (10,000 in number) near
the Niludar, the mountain ridge which is between Gilgit and Sai. It was
night, and so both armies encamped; in the morning the fight began. 7,000
Dareylis and Tangîris had come under Jeldar, and Lala Khan of Gaya in
Dareyl and Izzetí, Pátsha Khan of Phogutsh of Dareyl—also Matshar Khan
of Samagiál—Bitori, Kalashmir of another Samagial, Kusuti of Manekyál,
Arzennu of Dareyl—Rústami, Kâmi of Tangîr, Muhammad Mir, Adab Shah of
Gali, Khairulla of Jagôt—Karim, Moya Shah, Mawêshi, Matti of the Deyamur
village—Merdumi of Lúrak—Akbaro of Sheikho—[2,000 came from Tangir, 5,000
from Dareyl]. Gouhar Aman’s son had 3,000 infantry and 6,000 horsemen.
The Sikhs were on the roads below the mountains, whilst the Yaghistanis
were firing from the tops. The Sikhs necessarily wasted their shot in
such an encounter, whilst the mountaineers had it all their own way.
This lasted the whole day. All (10,000!!) were destroyed—only one sepoy
escaped to Bunji to tell the news to the other half of the army. The
General was not present in this as in the Chakarkót battles, but stayed
at Bunji. The Yaghis only lost 2 men, one from Phúgutsh and the other
from Samagial, viz.: Shahbaz, also called “Osmin,” and Uzet Shah. The
mountaineers then accompanied the victorious army back to Minôr and
Gilgit, where they consulted regarding the future safety from the Sikhs.
Gauhar Aman thought that the Gilgit Fort could not stand a siege and that
it should therefore be strengthened and the walls made higher. This view
was shared by the mountaineers who looked upon Gilgit as their centre: so
they all set to work to improve the fort and raised it twenty yards in
height and gave six yards of depth to the walls. Bullocks were constantly
treading down the stones as the walls were being raised. The Zamindars
also helped. The Mountaineers assisted and were fed during the month that
it took to strengthen the place. Then all left, when Gauhar Aman fell
very ill. He sent Mulk Aman, with 5,000 horsemen against Yasin to fight
Mahtar and A’smat Shah, sons of Suleyman Shah, descendants of Pátsha (?),
Shins. They came there on the fourth day and surrounded the place. Mahtar
would not fight, and surrendered on the tenth day, saying that they all
came from one stock and were subjects to Gauhar Aman. A’smat Shah fled to
Swat. Mahtar paid his respects with 1,000 young men and was apparently
received in a friendly manner by Mulk Aman, who said he wanted to talk to
him privately. There is a hall for the princes 100 yards from the Fort,
and to this he led Mahtar and after a conversation of two hours struck
off his head. Then he came out and killed 20 of Mahtar’s relatives and
friends. The rest he put into the Fort, as they were merely Zamindars.
He then asked Gauhar Aman to come to Yasin with his whole family. On the
good news reaching him he assembled the Gilgitis and told them that, as
his illness was sure to carry him off, he wanted to be buried in his own
country where also his ancestors reposed. In reality, he wanted to marry
the widow of Mahtar. When he came near Yasin, some one told him that his
son had married the widow. This rendered him furious and made him think
of killing his son. In this state of mind he reached Yasin, where he said
nothing but ascertained that the widow had been married eight days ago.
He then threw Mulk Aman into a prison which was at the top of the highest
tower of the Yasin fort and ordered that he should not receive sufficient
food. The woman was also placed under surveillance. He left Ghulam as
Wazir of Gilgit. Gauhar Aman remained ill for a year, being unable to
move and one side being shrivelled up. When he felt his death nigh, he
released Mulk Aman and made the woman over to him. A few days after he
died and Mulk Aman had accomplished the funeral rites, he ascended the
throne. When Isa Baghdùr [Isa Bahádur] and the fugitive A’smat Shah
heard this in Swat, they rejoiced as they did not think that Mulk Aman
was a hero like his father. Isa Bahadur of Sher Kila’ had also fled to
Swat having heard of the defeat of the Sikhs and being afraid of being
dispossessed by Gauhar Aman—an idea which was confirmed by Akbar Aman,
the brother on the father’s side of Gauhar Aman—(Isa Bahadur and Akbar
were cousins, sons of two sisters) (Isa Bahadur and Gauhar Amán were
tarburs ‎‏تربور‏‎, namely brothers’ children). There is a road from Swat
to Yasin which is much used and is near. Mulk Aman, wishing to conquer
other countries, enquired who had caused Isa Bahadur’s flight and offered
a reward for the information. Hayátulla, a servant of Gauhar Amán, told
him a month after about his uncle being the cause, as they were related
on the women’s side (the stronger tie; being related on the father’s side
is not a strong bond wherever polygamy is common). This convinced Mulk
Aman, for having taken the throne from his uncle to whom it by right
belonged, he always felt suspicious of him. However, he kept his own
counsel, when one day he invited Akbar Aman to go out shooting with him.
They went about one kôs from the Yasîn fort, where a fine plain comes in
view. Mulk Aman advised all retainers to get down from their horses as
he wanted to rest a little and then start the game which would come in
sight in that place. This they did not do, so he jumped from his horse,
pretending that he saw game in different directions and ran after it.
Then Akbar Aman also got down from his horse. He had scarcely moved about
for a few yards, when a ball, fired by Mulk Aman, struck him dead. Mulk
Aman then returned to govern in peace of mind. This news Isa Bahadur had
also heard in Swat. What with wishing to revenge Akbar and thinking of
the confusion which would be sure to follow the discord of the brothers
of Mulk Aman (Mîr Wali, Pahlivan, etc.) he and Asmár got ready and came
back—but I don’t know whether he came _via_ Kandiá [a hitherto unexplored
District, referred to elsewhere] or by what road. Anyhow he appeared at
Sai with the 20 followers whom he had taken with him from Sher Kila’
on his flight. There he found Sultan, the ex-Wazir of Pohordu Shah, a
descendant of the Queen Johari (Jowâri—_vide_ 1st Song, page 22) who in
ancient times was the ruler of Sai and whose descendants had fled from
Gauhar Aman into the hills. When Gauhar Aman died, all these fugitives
came back and so Sultan turned up at Sai. When Isa and Asmat met him
they contracted an alliance by oath and went together to Jammu by way
of Astor in order to offer their services to the Maharajah. Indeed,
they offered their allegiance, if he would help them with troops. The
Maharajah made them swear on the Koran, because he said, “your religious
bigotry may induce you to turn on me and induce you to be again friends
with Mulk Aman. Besides, you all belong to one family and I alone shall
be the loser.” Then they all agreed and he made them swear on the Koran,
after getting them to wash themselves first; “that they would never ally
themselves or be subject to any one but the Maharaja and consult nobody’s
interests but his.” The three swore most solemnly and assured H. H. that
he need not be under any anxiety in future regarding his army and their
own movements. They then asked leave in order to avail themselves of the
dissensions of the brothers and prevent their becoming friends again.
Then H. H. sent 6,000 infantry and 4 guns (mule-batteries) with Isa,
Sultan and Asmat—Rs. 200 cash were given to Isa and a dress of honour;
Rs. 100 and a gun to Sultan and Rs. 120 and a horse to Asmat Shah. The
Maharaja recommended them always to keep the garrisons at Astor and
Bunji, which were each 5,000 strong, at half their strength and to take
the rest in order to prevent surprises and the loss of places which were
difficult to acquire and to reduce to taxation. He thus allowed them
to take 11,000 troops with them in all—_viz._ 6,000 men whom he sent
direct and 5,000 from the garrisons of Astor and Bunji. Thus they started
with the General and the Jítan Sahib (Adjutant?) for Astor. There they
remained a month to see whether the roads ahead were safe. They sent
a Kashmiri, called Abdulla, into Yaghistan, _via_ Sai, Minôr, Gilgit,
Yasin, Dareyl, Tangîr, Hunza, Nagyr, etc., to enquire what the tribes
were doing and going to do. He went to Gilgit and instead of fulfilling
his mission himself, he sent Norôz, a Zemindar and a subject of Mulk
Aman, who, of course, went to Yasin and told Mulk Aman all he had heard
from Abdulla and that Isa and his allies were advancing. On his return
he told Abdulla that he had seen the tribes, that they had no idea that
anything was impending and that Isa might advance with safety at once.
Abdulla returned to Astor, whilst Mulk Aman summoned the Darêl and Tangîr
tribes, saying that unless they fought now they would lose their country.
He also sent a messenger to Ghazanfar, Raja of Hunza and one to Shah
Murad, Wazir of Nagyr (?) telling them to forget their enmity with him in
the advance of a common foe to their country and religion (although the
people of Hunza and Nagyr are Shiahs, necessity made Mulk Aman, a Sunni,
call them Mussulmans) and asking them to meet him with their young men
at Gilgit. Ghazanfar promised to come on the ninth day and asked him to
go ahead. Mulk Aman, however, waited nine days and when nobody came, he
advanced with the friendly hill tribes of Darêl and Tangîr to Gilgit.
Isa Bahadur and his allies, altogether 9,500 men, started from Astor,
2,500 soldiers joined them at Bunji and they all advanced to within the
distance of one kôs from the Gilgit Fort, which they surrounded. Wazir
Zoraveru commanded in this war on the part of the Sikhs—there were also
Sirdar Muhammad Khan of Swat, the Sirdar Jitani (Adjutant) and others
whose names I forget. On behalf of the tribes there were: (1) from
DAREYL: Lalá Khan, Jeldár Bura Khan of Gayá—with 1,000 Zemindars;—Izzeti
and Muhammad Khan of Phugotsh with 700 Zemindars—Matshar Khan and Mahman
from Karini (lower) Samegial with 1,000 men—Mirza Khan and Kalashmir
from Upper Samegial and 1,000 men—Kasûti from Karini Manikyal with
1,000 men—Hamza Khan and Arzennu from Upper Manikyal and 900 men—Bitori
of Yatsho and 40 men—Suryó from Jutyal and 60 men—Tubyó and Syad Amir
of Dudishal and 30 men—altogether 5,846 from Dareyl. (2) from TANGIR:
Mardumì (is still alive), Talipu of Lurak and 40 men—Moza Shah and
Maweshi (still alive) of Dîyamar and 400 men—Khairulla and Mansur (still
alive) of Julkôt and 140 Zemindars—Adab Shah and Mansur (still alive),
of Gali and 60 men,—Néyo and Rustam Khan of Kami (still alive) and 400
men—Multan of Korgah (still alive) and 60 men—Akbaru of Sheikho and 40
men—altogether 1,153 men and Chiefs. With Mulk Aman there came from
YASIN: his brother Mir Vali Khan, the Wazirs Rahmat and Nasir—Hayatalla,
Habib—Padisha Mia, Balhi, Syad Khan (of Swat) with 100 Pathans—Muhammad
Hussain, a great Chief of Yasin and 10,000 men, horse and foot, from
Yasin and friendly countries.

At the dictation of Pehliwan, son of the sister of Aman-ul-Mulk, ruler
of Chitral or little Kashghár, a messenger of the name Balli—was sent to
Chitrál, saying that Hunza and Nagyr had broken their promise and that,
now that their father was dead, all his enemies had assembled to destroy
them, 11,000 infidels, described as ‎‏كافر نابكار ڈوگره بي اِعتبار‏‎,
or useless unbelievers and perfidious Dogras, had already surrounded
Gilgit with the help of faithless Isa, the fugitive Asmat and the traitor
Sultan. “When we shall be dead, what is the use of you, a relative,
striking your forehead with a stone (as a sign of grief)”? Balli taking
forced marches reached Aman-ul-Mulk speedily, who, at once sent Lakhtar
Khan, his nephew, son of Adam Khor (whom he had caused to be killed) with
8,000 men of sorts to Gilgit and wrote to promise further help, if Balli
were sent again. Indeed it was said that Aman-ul-Mulk might come himself.
So there advanced to the rescue of Gilgit the united forces of Mulk Aman
and the auxiliaries from Chitrál. Mulk Aman then told the Dareylis and
Tangîris to lay in ambush behind Parmas and Basîn in the valley, as the
Sikh troops were there. He himself at 6 o’clock in the evening went to
attack these places. About 1,000 Sikhs were there, not suspecting any
danger, in their tents. The attack was sudden and 120 were at once
despatched to the lowest regions [of hell]; 100 Sikhs were captured.
Then he called out to his young horsemen that having done so much they
should attack the besiegers and that the infantry would follow them.
He himself rode ahead, thereby inspiring his troops with courage. The
enemy was attacked, but was now ready for them. A fierce struggle began
and the Sikhs were forced on to the fortress with the loss of twenty
youths and a loss of three Dareylis on our side, who had rashly followed
the Sikhs into the fort. Then Mulk Aman halted in front of the fort and
attacked it in the early morning and called out. “If you want to fight,
well and good—if not, I will let you depart for Astor.” Isa Bahadur
replied: “We will certainly not do so till we uproot the foundations of
your houses.” Saying this, he fired his musket and killed Hayatulla (who
had been the cause of his uncle’s death). Then volleys were exchanged.
So the fight lasted for a month, during the day—Mulk Aman retiring to a
short distance at night—the Sikhs, however, picking off stragglers at
night also. On the 27th day after the siege, the Raja of Hunza reached
with 12,000 soldiers, but did not join the fight. 6,000 soldiers, in
addition to the 8,000 already sent, also came from Chitrál who, at once,
assisted in the siege. There was plenty of wheat which had been cut and
heaped up by the Gilgit Zemindars who had fled at the approach of the
Sikhs. The soldiers of Aman-ul-Mulk would take the sheaves, crush them
with stones and boil them in water. Food was taken at night. Three days
later, when the besiegers still held out, the Chitrál forces thought of
returning. On the last day, Makhsat, a servant of Asmat Shah, renowned
all over Yaghistan as an incomparable hero, came out of the fort with
sword and buckler and called out. “Is there any one who will fight [me]
the mountain eating lion?” Then Balli, the servant of Mulk-Aman, replied:
“Come out and fight with me in the open space, for brave men do not
boast.” So he, snatching a sword and shield, met him. After boasts and
insults on both sides, they closed; but Makhsat’s sword could only find
Balli’s shield to strike, whilst Balli, in protecting himself always
found an exposed part of Makhsat to hit. At last Balli struck a blow
which not only cut through Makhsat’s shield, but falling on his right
shoulder caused the sword to pass out on his left side, thus dividing
the body into two pieces. On seeing this, Mulk Aman considered that a
sufficient victory had been gained and passed on to Yasin, accompanied
by the Allies. Of the prisoners he had captured at Barmas, in order to
wreak his revenge, having been disappointed in taking the Gilgit fort,
he selected twenty four of the officers and ordered them to be executed
at Kuffarkôt, four kôs from Gilgit near the Indus. This was accordingly
done by some men in Lakhtar Khan, the Chitrál General’s army. When their
souls had reached the angels of Hell, Mulk Aman ordered the rest also
to be killed, for, he said, these infidels have made martyrs of many
of our friends and countrymen. Lakhtar Khan interposed on the ground
that they were helpless, now that their officers were dead, and made a
claim to carry them off himself, as a satisfaction for the losses of
his army. “I want,” he said, “to bring them to my country and sell them
for red gold to the Tájiks. Thus I shall obtain compensation for the
blood of martyrs that has been shed and they will be punished by being
sold from place by the Tájiks.” Then Mulk Aman conferred the desired
present on Lakhtar Khan, but kept one (the only officer who was spared)
who was called “Commandân Bahádur” and presented him to Jaldár Khan of
Gayá (Dareyl), as many martyrs [so called because they were Muhammadans,
who had been killed in the war with the “infidel” Dogras] had fallen
from that District. When the troops had gone back for another kôs (from
Kuffárkôt) to a place called Serga—a very deep valley—Jaldár Khan told
the “Commandán” to come near him, as he was in his charge. He caught
hold of his hand and led him along. He then noticed a talisman round the
Sikh’s neck and wanted to snatch it away, forgetting that he was exposing
himself to an attack by the movement. The “Commandan” saw a sword hanging
on Jaldár’s shoulder, so he let Jaldár take his talisman and drawing
the sword struck off his head. When the Dareylis saw the death of their
chief, they rushed upon the murderer and secured him. Separating in
groups to consult as to the best means of putting him to death, the
people of Gayá (Jaldár’s village) advised his arms and legs being tied to
four horses and his body being torn to pieces by the horses being set off
at a gallop. This proposal was not favourably received by Khoshál Khan,
the brother of Jaldár. The people of Samegiál suggested that his tongue
should be torn out with red-hot pincers, then to flay him alive, cover
his body afterwards with salt and pepper and finally to burn him and make
him over to the ruler of Jahannam [Hell]. This suggestion being favoured
by Khoshál Khan, it was ordered to be carried out. Thus the “Commandán
Bahádur” died. The Dareylis then rushed on his ashes and half-burnt flesh
and taking a handful, secured it in their clothes as a reminiscence of
the event. I have mentioned this affair at length, because Jaldár was
a very celebrated man for his hospitality, eloquence, good manners and
administrative capacity. Rich and poor obeyed him, for he was wise and
his death was a great advantage to the Sikhs.

Mulk Aman set out for Yasin, as I have said, and dismissed the
Yaghistanis. Lakhtar Khan also asked for his leave through Pahliwan,
Mulk Aman’s brother and offered to let the army remain if he himself was
allowed to go. This was permitted and the army remained with Pahliwan,
his mother’s brother (a sister of Adamkhor of Chitrál was Gauhar-Aman’s
wife and Gauhar Aman’s sister was Adamkhor’s wife). The following is the
list of the chiefs killed before Gilgit: [The Sikhs lost 221 killed,
wounded and prisoners.] Wazirs Nuseir and Hayatulla of Yasin; Jaldár Khan
of Gayá (Dareyl); Talîpu of Tangîr; Béra Khan of Gaya; Mirza Khan of
Hunîni Samagiál; Sirdar of Hunîni Samagiál; and Padshah Mia of Yasin.

_Dareyl_ lost 203 Zemindars; _Tangîr_ 101 men; _Gakutsh_ [or _Galkûtsh_]
50; _Tshér_, 40; _Sherôt_ 52; _Shukoyôt_ 30; _Guluphúr_ 44. Mulk Aman
lost 160 of his retainers; (altogether 376 of his subjects.) The
Chitrális lost 410, altogether 1,090 were killed on our side. [For a
more chronological account of the conquest of Gilgit vide “Chronological
History of Dardistan,” pages 70-75.]

III.—WAR ON YASIN AND THE MASSACRE OF ITS INHABITANTS. [1860]

When Lakhtar Khan informed the ruler of Chitrál of all that had occurred,
Aman-ul-Mulk sent a messenger to the ruler of Yasin with the advice to
fortify Gakutsh, lest that too should be lost by him and he should be
blamed for not advising him in time. He also thought that the Sikhs would
not advance before they had strengthened their hold on Gilgit. Therefore
he asked for his army to be sent back; next year he promised to send a
larger force, as then an attack from the Sikhs might be possible. Mulk
Aman delayed the messenger for ten days, but sent Sirdar Mustaán, son
of General Hayat-ulla of Yasin, with the Chitrál army to Aman-ul-Mulk.
They were 5,880 horse; 7,720 foot and 12 mules with ammunition. Mulk Aman
then remained at Yasin, feeling quite safe and established a Thanna of
five men at Gakutsh, one day’s march from Yasin, in order to scour the
country and enquire from travellers and Zemindars about the movements of
the Sikhs. He advised them to treat informants well and let him know in
time, lest Aman-ul-Mulk’s warning should come true. The outpost kept a
good look-out, entertained travellers and daily sent in news of the state
of affairs. Five months afterwards Wazir Zoraweru of Kashmir sent Wazir
Mukhtár with twenty young men to Gakutsh to surprise the Thanna at night,
and establish themselves as an outpost and intercept all travellers
from or to Yasin. He also sent after them Sabûr, a Kashmiri, with ten
Hindu Sipahis and Attaì, Kashmiri, with ten Muhammadan Sipahis, and
ordered Attaì to establish himself at 100 yards above Gakutsh and Sabur
at the same distance below Gakutsh and intercept the roads. Three days
afterwards, Zoraweru, Isa Bahadur, Ghulam Haydar, Mizra Wazir, Baghdur
Shah, Zohrab Khan, Asmat Shah and Saif Ali, the Commandant, with 9,000
infantry and 3,000 cavalry, advanced on Gakutsh. We must now leave them
on the road and see what the surprise party is doing. They came there
shortly after mid-night, surrounded the Thanna and captured the five men.
Mukhtar then established himself as Thannadar and Attaì and Sabûr took
up their appointed posts and captured all travellers of whatever age and
sex, sending them in to the Thanna; in all, three women, four children,
two foreign youths and one Yasini were captured. When the army came to
Gakutsh, Zoraweru left the Thanna as it was, and advanced the same day
without stopping, so as to prevent all notice of his march reaching
Yasin before he himself arrived, marching all night, and at about 4
o’clock came to Chamûgar, a village, about twenty nine kôs from Yasin.
Accidentally, Muhammad Hussain, a Sayad, had gone out hunting that day.
His horse rearing without any apparent cause he looked round and saw
clouds of dust at Chamûgar. He, at once, suspected what was taking place,
galloped back to Yasin and called out before Mulk Aman’s house: “Why are
you sitting at your ease? the enemy is on you—now do anything if you
can.” Mulk Aman at once got his horses saddled and fled with his family
over the mountains in the direction of Chitrál. When the army came near
Yasin, Isa Bahadur, who knew the country, ordered it to be divided into
three corps, one of which marched straight on Yasin—the second to go to
the right of Yasin by the village of Martal and the third to go to the
left of the place, so that the inhabitants should not be able to escape.
When the Sikhs entered Yasin with Asmat Khan preceding them (who got all
his friends and relatives out of the way) acts of oppression occurred
which I have heard related by the people of Kholi and which have never
been surpassed by any nation of infidels. In traditions much is told,
but all is nothing compared with the following atrocities which surpass
the doings of demons, jins and witches. We, say the Kholi informants,
with our own sinful eyes saw these ferocities practised by Mussulmans on
Mussulmans. That blood thirsty Kafir, Isa Bahadur, ordered the houses to
be entered and all the inhabitants, without regard to sex or age, to be
killed. We swear that Isa Bahadur descended from his horse and distinctly
ordered the soldiers to snatch the babes from their mothers’ arms and
kill them, so that his heart might be set at ease. He then put one knee
on the ground, putting his hands on his knees and waiting for the babes.
As they were brought to him, he put one of their small legs under his
foot and tore the other off with his hand. Even the Sikh soldiery could
not bear looking on this spectacle. However, this accursed infidel,
(infidel, although he was a Sunni) kept on tearing them to pieces. The
slaughter lasted five days and nights. The blood of the victims flowed
in streams through the roads: there is not a word of exaggeration in
all this. After these dreadful five days were over, Zoraweru sent for
Asmat Shah and enquired after his relatives, whom he had put in safety.
They were brought forward and Yasin committed to their charge, but what
was left of Yasin!?[98] Thus 2,000 men, women, and children above ten
years of age and a countless number of infants and babes became martyrs
at the hands of the bloody Sikhs—3,000 persons (chiefly women) a very
few children as also a few old men were kept as prisoners and brought
in three days to Gilgit, Zoraweru being elated with excessive joy which
he manifested in various ways _en route_. When he came to Gilgit, Isa
Bahadur and Asmat Shah, selecting 1,000 of the more beautiful women, took
them to Jammu with 3,000 soldiers. They were so delighted that they took
double marches in order to be early with their good news. At a public
assembly at Jammu, these scoundrels narrated, with much boasting and
eloquence, their own achievements and those of the Sikhs and spoke with
the loud tone in which victories are reported.

When they had finished, the Maharaja asked them whether their hearts were
pleased with all these doings. Isa Bahadur said that all his heart’s
desire had not been accomplished, though he certainly had experienced a
slight satisfaction in the fate of the people of Yasin, who had been his
enemies in the times of Gauhar Aman. “God be praised,” he said, “that
I have lived to revenge myself on them.” The Maharaja enquired what
else there remained to afford him complete satisfaction. “Perhaps,” he
said, “I may be able to meet your views.” Isa Bahadur replied. “Alas,
Mulk Aman with all his family has escaped unhurt to Chitrál! I should
have liked to have treated him as the Commandán Sahib who killed Jaldár
was treated, and to have taken his wife for myself and to have killed
his children, as I did the infants of Yasin and, moreover, to burn
them. Then alone will my heart be at ease. However, in consequence of
Your Highness’s good fortune, much has been done. If your shadow only
continues to protect me, I may, some day, be able to have my heart’s
desire on Mulk Aman.” The Maharaja then bestowed on him a splendid and
complete dress of honor, a horse and Rs. 500. He also gave Rs. 100, a
dress and a horse to Asmat Shah. He finally placed the 3,000 soldiers
whom he had brought under his command and made him Governor of Sher Kila
(where he is still). Isa Bahadur, after the usual deprecatory forms
of politeness used at oriental Courts, suggested that, in the midst
of Yaghistan, he would not be able to hold his own even with 30,000
soldiers, unless the Maharaja placed Pahlivan, the son of the sister of
Aman-ul-Mulk at the head of the Government of Yasin even without troops,
as he had all the prestige of Aman-ul-Mulk on his side. At last, the Lord
of Srinagar said that he agreed to it, if Isa Bahadur could manage to
get Pahlivan appointed to Yasin, a matter which, naturally, was out of
his own control. Isa Bahadur then asked for troops, not against Chitrál,
whose interests would now be conciliated, but against the Dareylis and
the other hill tribes. So the Maharaja gave him the troops, warning him
at the same time to be on his guard against Pahlivan tampering with his
troops and so causing a general revolt against the Maharaja’s authority.

His Highness then ordered Asmat Shah to go to Yasin in order to keep a
watch on the movements of Pahlivan and to inform Wazîr Zoraweru of all
that was going on. Asmat Shah feared that his life would not be safe at
Yasin and wished for some other employment. The Maharaja then said his
salary should be Rs. 40 per mensem[99] and he should go with Isa Bahadur,
as Thanadar of Gakûtsh. Isa Bahadur, however, thought that it could not
be done and that it would be better to send him to Basîn. This was agreed
to and the two got ready to depart. The Maharaja advised him to take the
2,000 prisoners left at Gilgit back with him to Sher Kila, so that the
place might be well populated, a plan that would not only give him more
income from the produce of fields but provide him with assistance against
an enemy. “Leave,” he added, “your first wife at Gilgit, (as a hostage,
no doubt, for Isa’s fidelity to the Maharaja) and take your second wife
and her children with you to Shêr.” So they returned to Gilgît, Asmat
Shah setting up with his family at Basîn, where he is still and receives
his pay. Isa Bahadur also settled at Shêr in the manner suggested by the
Maharaja. He then sent Daulat Shù, a Zemindar of Gulmutti, eight kôs
from Shêr, to Aman-ul-Mulk of Chitrál asking him to appoint Pahlivan as
Governor of Yasin, who would be quite safe there. Daulat Shù was sent
because he knew the roads and had often gone to Chitrál. He reached
the place in seven days. Aman-ul-Mulk replied that he could not send
Pahlivan, unless Isa Bahadur also agreed to MIR VALI and Wazir Rahmat.
He gave Daulat Shù a parting present of a gun, sword and horse. Daulat
Shù told Isa Bahadur of the result of his mission. Isa at once set off
for Gilgit to consult with Zoraweru. He represented to him that unless
Aman-ul-Mulk was allowed to have his way, he himself could not hold his
own at Sher Kila. Zoraweru, upon this, gave him full permission to act
as he liked, taking the responsibility on his own shoulders in the event
of the Maharaja asking any questions, as the only means of securing some
peace. Isa then again despatched Daulat Shù in all haste, who reached
Chitrál in five days, with the message that Aman-ul-Mulk should do him
the favour of sending the three men he had suggested. Aman-ul-Mulk
entertained Daulat Shù for twenty days, during which time he assembled
2,000 young men and sent them to Yasin with Pahlivan, Mir Vali and
Rahmat. He made those three take an oath on the Koran that they would
never intrigue against each other, “for, if you do, you will fall an easy
prey to Isa Bahadur.” When they reached Yasin, they sent on Daulat Shù
to Isa Bahadur. The first thing they did was to get the fugitive Yasinis
back to their country which they ruled as in former days. Isa Bahadur was
glad at this and gave eight tolahs of gold to the messenger.[100]

IV.—WAR WITH NAGYR AND HUNZA. [1864]

It is now nine years since these wars have taken place or two years after
the conclusion of the war with Yasin. The Maharaja wrote to Zoraweru
that after all what he wanted to conquer were the countries of Nagyr and
Hunza, as there was no profit to be gained from Gilgit and Yaghistan,
whence hitherto, he said, “we have only reaped stony districts and
loss of men,” [in reality, Gilgit and Yasin are fertile, whilst Hunza
is “stony”]. Zoraweru at once set out for Nômal, which is twelve kôs
from Gilgit in the direction of Nagyr and sent Mehdîn Khan of Bunair
and Sultan Wazir of the Janheri descendants and Saif Ali, Commandant,
with 8,000 infantry. Zoraweru himself remained at Nômal in order to
facilitate communications and bring up help, if necessary. The army
advanced next day to Chaprôt, Guyétsh and Hini, of which the latter is
in Nagyr and the former in Hunza and encamped between these places on
a plain.[101](?) Guyétsh and Chaprôt are on the frontier of Hunza. Its
inhabitants speak the same language as the people of Hunza. Hini was on
the other side of the army and is on the frontier of Nagyr. The Chief
of Chaprôt is Shah Murad Wazir, whilst Sirdar Mamal Beg is at Hini and
Phagoi, the Lumbardar, at Guyêtsh, whose son is Shukar Beg, a brave young
man. The chief command of the invading troops was given to Sultan, who
had previously sent a man, Uruz Ali, to the Hunza Raja, to announce his
arrival. He told him to lie in ambush at Nilamutsh in order to destroy
the troops under the other Kashmir Officers. “I will draw off,” he said,
“half the army in the direction of the Valley.” Uruz Ali was by origin
a Hunza man who had settled at Gilgit. The Raja of Hunza acted on the
advice thus sent. When Wazîr Sultan came to Nilamutsh, he started with
some youths towards Chaprôth. Now Nilamutsh is a place so surrounded by
inaccessible and high mountains that escape from an enemy who occupies
them is impossible and even a great army is helpless. No one prevented
or questioned the movements of Sultan, who advanced about one kôs out of
Nilamutsh—Mahdin and Saif Ali now entered the place when they were at
once assailed with stones and bullets on every side by invisible enemies
and lost 400 young men killed between forenoon and evening. Two Nagyris
only were wounded, one being shot through the mouth who is still alive
and the other receiving a bullet in his thigh from which he subsequently
died at Nagyr. When the surprised Generals consulted at night on the
events of the day, they inferred from the absence of Sultan and the fact
that he had got safely through Nilamutsh, as well as from the unexpected
presence of the enemy, that treachery had been at work. The reason of
this conduct was that Sultan, although the bravest to fight on behalf
of the Maharaja, had not been rewarded with land as Isa and Azmat had
been, but had remained under the direct orders of Zoraweru, who had put
him forward in the war in order to get him killed and who had poisoned
the Maharaja’s mind against him. “However,” the Generals added, “at
present we must think of getting out of this place; otherwise not a man
will remain alive to tell the news at Nômal.” They then decided, on the
suggestion of Saif Ali, to send two Dareylis, Firôz and Kúweti, into
the Hunza lines, as they might have influence with them, being also
Yaghistanis, in order to secure the safe return of the Army. The task
was reluctantly accepted by the Dareylis whose presence in the Sikh Army
naturally compromised them. However, they went and swore on behalf of the
Sikhs that if they were allowed to depart no future invasion should ever
take place. Naudin, the Wazir of Nagyr and Ghazanfar of Hunza refused,
on which the Dareylis requested that they might be shot and their bodies
thrown in the valley, as a proof that they had done their best and failed
in their mission. “We are Mussulmans and you should forgive us and as a
natural consequence those whom we represent.” The men now prepared for
death, when Naudin interposed and got their request sanctioned, on the
understanding that the Sikhs would at once return to Gilgit or else he
would attack within an hour. The Kashmir Army, which had been re-joined
by Sultan in the meanwhile, were only too glad to get away on these terms
and returned to Nômal. Sultan gave out that he had gone ahead in order
to clear the road in advance. However, Zoraweru was informed of the
treachery, and, at once, put Sultan in chains and sent him to Jammu with
a detailed letter under strict charge of Sirdars Baghdùr Shah and Ghulam
Haidar and ten soldiers.

Zoraweru then took the army back to Gilgit. When the Maharaja read the
letter, from which it appeared that no one except Sultan’s _confidant_,
Urùz Ali, who, the Gilgitis said, was always going backwards and forwards
to Hunza, could have gone to inform the Hunza people of an attack, which
must have been successful, had they not been forewarned, he condemned
Sultan to imprisonment for life. I think that it was a got-up affair,
for Zoraweru had often and in vain tried to take Hunza-Nagyr. As a proof
of this I may mention that Hilli Shah of Hunza had come to Gilgit a few
days before the expedition to buy merchandise. The Wazîr sent for him,
gave him money and took him into his confidence. Seven days after he
asked Hilli Shah to assist him in an attack on Nilamutsh which he was
contemplating a month hence. Hilli said that he and his brother Mirza
Khan, an artilleryman famous for his bravery and influence, would guide
the Sikh Army through Nilamutsh into Hunza. So they swore to abide by
this plan and the Wazir dismissed him with a present of Rs. 40 and a
Lungi. He also promised great rewards in the event of the success of the
expedition. Hilli Shah told Mirza Khan, who was delighted. Uruz reached
Hunza after Hilli Shah and told the Raja of it, who sent for Hilli Shah
and enquired from him whether he had heard anything at Gilgit about
the movements of the Sikhs or of an attack on Hunza. Hilli Shah said
that he had not been to Gilgit and had heard nothing. However, the Raja
noticed the Lungi which Hilli wore and which Uruz said had been given by
Zoraweru. When he set out to surprise the Sikhs he sent for the brothers:
Mirza Khan came at once, but Hilli Shah hid himself at Gakkarkôt, five
kôs above Hunza. When Ghazanfar returned from the war, he sent for Hilli
Shah. The messenger found him returning from a hunting expedition and
brought him to Ghazanfar who asked him, why he had not gone to the war
against the infidels; “has the Lungi on your head bribed you?” and added
“it is improper that you should live.” He was accordingly cut into pieces
(literally) before the eyes of Mirza Khan, his brother (who is still
alive and braver than Hilli Shah and also a better artilleryman); as
for Uruz Ali, he was put in prison for a fortnight by the order of the
Maharaja, as soon as he came to Gilgit, although Zoraweru wanted him to
share the fate of Sultan. At that time Kalashmir of Dareyl visited Gilgit
and was well entertained by Zoraweru for twenty days, when he presented
him with a shawl and Rs. 100 and gave cheap shawls to the Sirdars who
came with Kalashmir. Zoraweru then asked them, as he had conquered the
whole of Yaghistan, to collect tribute for the Maharaja. This was agreed
to, but when Kalashmir returned to his country he did nothing. In the war
that will ensue I was present all through.

V.—WAR WITH DAREYL [YAGHISTAN] 1866.

When Zoraweru saw that the Hill, or Yaghistan tribes kept quiet he
thought it a good opportunity for attacking Dareyl, which, he fancied,
would fall easily. He appointed spies to bring to him any Dareylis that
might happen to visit Gilgit. Aziz, a Lamberdár of Manikial, came with
100 goats to Gilgit and when he had sold them, visited Zoraweru, who
received him kindly and entertained him for two days. When he left, the
Kashmir General asked him to remind Kalashmir that he had not sent the
tribute of Dareyl and Tangir, which had been promised two years ago and
gave him an ultimatum of one month in which to come himself or send the
tribute, otherwise Zoraweru would pay Kalashmir a visit with his army.
Kalashmir replied that the Kashmiris had better come and take the taxes
and that there was no occasion for his fellow-countrymen to take the
least notice of the threat. When twenty days of the month had passed, two
other messengers, one a Kashmiri, Kurban, residing at Kiner in Chilás;
the other, Rahm Nur of Samegial—both traders, happening to be at Gilgit,
were sent to announce Zoraweru’s immediate attack and to ask the Hillmen
to prepare themselves, because, as Zoraweru said, “it is my custom to
give my enemy notice three times.” Kalashmir replied he did not care and
next day requested the tribes to assemble at Samegiál—_viz_: the people
of Tórr, Harbenn, Shatiál, Sazîn, Sômer—and of Tangi, Lurok, Dayamur,
Sheikho, Jalkôt, Galli, Kammi, and Korgah. He even sent to the Kandiá
people for help, who, however, replied that their harvest was just
getting ready and that Dareyl was too far off. He also sent to Jagloth,
Chilás, Hudur, Takk, Buder, and Gor. The Chilásis flatly refused on the
ground of being subjects of Kashmir and being helpless. Jalkôt also
did not send, as the notice had reached them too late and the war was
immediately impending. The rest all assembled at Samegiál on the 10th day
and were 7,000 in number; there were also 7,000 men from Dareyl itself.
The Sikhs also started from Gilgit, on hearing which Kalashmir appointed
four scouts at each of the following six posts: in the Kargá valley—at
Karóri-Jóji—at Ruro-Dader, fifteen kos off—at Gitshár, at the same
distance—at Barîga, sixteen kos distance—and at Naranéiga, fifteen kos.

From Samegial the tribes marched over the Dummu-dummu mountain to the
valley of Bariga where they halted. Next morning at about 9 o’clock,
after only a few had taken food, the heavens seemed to become dark.
Looking round we saw a Dareyli waving his dress at the Karori-Joji post,
which was a sign of the approach of the enemy. We all got ready and an
hour afterwards the enemy came up, who had taken 11,000 men from Gilgit.
A Sirdar of Samegial, Kuwéti, who had fled about four years ago to Gilgit
from his village in consequence of the enmity of another fellow-villager,
Dodár, now showed the way to the Sikhs. When the forces reached Yatshotsh
below Dummu-dummu on the Gilgit side, he asked Zoraweru to confide the
guidance of the troops to him, as he alone knew the paths. Zoraweru
assenting, Kuweti divided the forces into three bodies; one under General
Har Chand in the direction of the valley of Dutial, the second under
Sirdar Shahzada he despatched to the Yatshotsh valley—whilst the third
was forwarded with Zoraweru to the Bariga valley—he himself going with
the first column. We did not know these tricks and thought we had only to
deal with the troops advancing on Barîga and rushed on them at once. The
fight lasted till four in the afternoon. Accidentally, a Dareyli looking
in the direction of Jadári-Jùt, saw from that “grassy plain” such a cloud
of dust arise that the sky was darkened and out of which troops emerged.
The Manikialis, whose village is five kos from that plain, fled at once
to defend their homes, as they thought the enemy threatened Manikial.
This was followed by the flight of the Samegialis by the Dareyl valley—an
hour afterwards the people of Phugotsh, then the people of Gayá, also
fled in the same direction. Now the fight ceased and night broke in.
We remained at Bariga. The fugitives on reaching their villages,
fled onwards with their families, some to Sazin, others to Tangîr,
others again to Shatial. Yet we only lost five in killed and three in
wounded—the losses of the Sikhs it is impossible to estimate. I alone
counted twenty from where I stood. The Sikhs during the night surrounded
us and cut off our retreat. At day-break, the fight was renewed and
lasted till noon, when we discovered a mountain path for flight which
we took and came to Samegial. The second day we lost nine men and the
Sikhs thirty. The Sikhs remained for ten days at Jadári-Jùt and then
advanced on Samegial _via_ the District of Manikial, of which they burnt
two villages, Shinó Kot and Yashkunó Kot, and killed the old women and
children who had not been able to get away; four boys were found ill and
also killed. Reaching Samegial, they found that we had fled on to Gayá.
In that District the Sikhs also burnt two deserted villages, Dudó Kot and
Birió Kot; they found, however, twelve fugitive women and children _en
route_ and killed them. The Sikhs stayed at Samegial, where 200 of us had
remained concealed at about a mile from the place. A fight took place
with a loss of four on our side and twelve on the part of the Sikhs. We
were not followed up to Gayá. The Sikhs returned to Manikial where they
remained ten days and indulged in eating the grapes which had become
over-ripe and are very abundant in that District. Many died from disease
engendered by this over-indulgence, but the Sikh Sirdars spread a report
that the tribes had scattered poison on the grapes. Winter also set in,
and snow fell, so the Sikhs returned to Gilgit. _En route_ snow-storms
set in, which blinded some and froze others. The Sikhs lost in dead
about 120 men. The fugitive villagers now returned to their homes and
rebuilt the burnt down villages. Six months later, Kalashmîr of Dudokôt
(Samegiál) and Duran of Phugôtsh and Surió of Karînokot (Mánikial) and
Burshù Sirdar of Biliokôt, (Manikial) and Sirdar of Gayá and Nur Muhammed
of Shurôt started for Gilgit and offered allegiance to Zoraweru. He
replied; “Oh! Kalashmir, thou hast given me much trouble and inflicted
much injury. Now I want a goat per annum from every two houses throughout
Dareyl.” He then dismissed them with Khilats and now the tribute is
regularly paid from those villages that I have named as being represented
on that occasion by their Sirdars.

It is necessary to say a few words about the treatment of those who had
assisted Kashmir. After Doulat Shù had arranged matters with Chitrál,
Zoraweru appointed him over the yield of the gold washing of Bakrôt,
Sakwár, Jutial, Deyúr, Minôr, Nomal, and Gilgit. The mode of taxation on
gold washings is as follows: the men work two months in spring and two
months in autumn and have to pay Rs. 3, or 2 gold Rupees = about 5 Chilki
Rupees, for each season per head. Taxes are also raised on the produce,
viz., a third of the whole. Doulat Shù received 10 Chilkis per mensem
for that service. He went one autumn for the first time and brought back
the taxes collected, which were sent to the Maharajah through Baghdur
Shah. Six weeks later, some gold washers came to Gilgit to pay their
respects to Zoraweru, who asked them whether they had had a bad season
as the taxes paid had been small. The goldwashers said that it had been
as good as usual: so Zoraweru, on referring to the accounts of the
preceding year, found a difference of 5 tolas (about 60 Rupees). Doulat
Shu was at once thrown into chains and sent to Jammu in charge of Ghulam
Haidar and Mirza. The Maharajah sent him to the same place in which
Sultan is confined and where both are now. In neither case was there an
investigation. When Isa Bahadur heard of the imprisonment of men who
had rendered such services as Sultan and Doulat Shu he came to Gilgit,
where he found Ghulam Haidar and Mirza and took them to Jammu. They
there interceded for the prisoners with the Maharajah and represented
that brave and faithful men should not be punished with perpetual
imprisonment, one of whom had conquered a country for His Highness, which
the other had kept for Kashmir by his admirable arrangement with Chitrál.
The Maharajah told them to go about their own business. When they heard
this, they left, but, in their correspondence during four years, they
constantly urged the release of the prisoners on His Highness. Two years
ago they again presented themselves at Jammu and represented that the
years that Sultan and Doulat Shu had already passed in prison were a
sufficient punishment. They conjured His Highness by his idol, but the
Maharajah threatened to send them to keep company with the prisoners if
they did not at once desist from their importunities.

When Isa Bahadur heard such words, he left the same night and galloped on
without stopping, till he had got to Sher Kila. He still considers that
he has been very discourteously treated by Kashmir and his correspondence
with the Maharajah has ceased. I have heard him lament over the past.
Ghulam Haidar and Mirza kept on for a whole month importuning His
Highness, who resolved on imprisoning them, when they fortunately asked
and obtained leave to go home to Gilgit. The three Chiefs have not
visited Jammu since the affair which I have related.

PRESENT STATE OF MIR VALI.

A year and a half ago Mir Vali (who drugs himself with charas = a
preparation of hemp) got offended with Pahlivan, (probably on account
of a difference of opinion in _re_ Hayward);[102] went to Kandiá (road
described elsewhere) and to Manikiál [not the village so often referred
to in the account of the Wars] on the borders of Swat. Thence he went to
Tall, Ramta, Berahmar and then to Beïkéy, the Akhûn of Swat, who asked
him why he had come. Mir Vali said that Pahlivan had annoyed him and as
the Akhun was a great Saint he had come to him, having no other friends.
The Akhun entertained him for eight months, after which, on a Friday
(when service takes place at noon instead of 2 P. M.) he told him to
go back to Yasin, “for your heart’s desire has been accomplished.” Mir
Vali at once started off on horseback, taking the bank of the Indus. On
the third day he reached Ghorband; thence he went to Damtirey, Bilkái,
Ranulia and Jajiál; there he crossed the river to Kúi; thence to Palus,
Gagréy Khware (or in Gilgiti, Gabréga), Shogobind (a place for pasture)
Jaglôth, Tekkegá, Parbáh (a place for pasture) Latór, Sazin, Dareyl,
_viz_: Gayá, Samegial (where he stayed a week in order to consult Mulk
Aman, who was there) Manekial, the Matrêt valley (pasture place for
Gujers), and finally to Yasin. There he was well received by Pahlivan
who could not understand why he had left and now the brothers love each
other more than before. The rule is in the hands of Mir Vali who keeps up
friendly relations with the Dogras and would strengthen these relations
still further were it not for fear of Aman-ul-mulk, who is a great enemy
of the Maharajah and who has ordered him to have as little to do with
them or Isa Bahadur as possible. [_Vide_ note on next page.]

MULK AMAN.

When Mulk Aman remembered his country, Yasin, he fell home-sick in
Chitrál and begged Aman-ul-mulk to let him go and, if Aman-ul-mulk
would assist him, he would fight the Sikhs or else die as a martyr.
Aman-ul-mulk said that Mulk Aman could only do the latter, as he had
no army left. “I advise you, he added, to go to Dareyl and ask the
Maharajah’s forgiveness, who may give you some appointment. Serve
him, he said, as Isa Bahadur has done and you may be restored to the
throne of your ancestors.” Aman-ul-mulk said this in order to get rid
of the importunities of Mulk-Aman, who left for Samegial. Baghdur Shah
and Kuweti, the Maharajah’s agents, happened to be there and actually
offered to intercede with the Maharajah on his behalf and to get him an
appointment. Mulk Aman was delighted. The agents spoke in his favour to
the Maharajah who cheerfully ordered him to present himself. They came to
Samegial and brought Mulk Aman to Jammu. His Highness bestowed a dress
of honour, a horse and Rs. 200 on him and a monthly salary of Rs. 100
for himself, Rs. 30 for his son and Rs. 50 for the rest of his family
and requested him to live at Gilgit outside the fort. “Remain there
for 7 years; afterwards I will give you Yasin.” This Mulk Aman did and
built a house about 100 yards from the fort. He did not, however, for
two years send for his family from Samegial where he had left them when
he started for Jammu. When they came he continued serving Kashmir for
four years more. Isa Bahadur, however, happened to tell Zoraweru last
year (for Isa was the arch-enemy of Mulk Aman and feared his getting
back to Yasin) that Mulk Aman intended to escape with his family to
Chitrál, after which, as he had plotted with the Gilgitis, there would
be a general revolt which would end in his sharing the Government of
Yasin with Pahlivan. When Zoraweru heard this he consulted with Isa
Bahadur, who advised him to seize Mulk Aman and send him and his family
to Jammu at once, so as not to give him time to rouse the country. This
pleased the Governor and a suitable hour was left to Isa’s discretion
for surrounding the house and bringing Mulk Aman and his family before
Zoraweru. Isa Bahadur at once went and selected 400 young men whom he
ordered to be in readiness at four in the afternoon. Accidentally a
friend of Mulk Aman overheard the conversation between Zoraweru and Isa
Bahadur and at once informed him of what was contemplated and of the
arrangements made by Isa. The friend advised him to flee at once into the
mountains. Mulk Aman, greatly astonished, went to his house and ordered
his family to get ready to start. Just as his women were coming out of
the house, he saw Isa Bahadur with his soldiers all round it. Mulk Aman
drew his sword, ran a-muck among the troops and after killing a few
soldiers managed to escape alone into the mountains in the direction of
Dareyl.[103] However swiftly pursued he could not be found; the Sikhs
returned from the mountain and took the family prisoners. Mulk Aman,
descending on the other side of the mountain, came to Samegial. Isa
Bahadur then presented the women and children as hostages to Zoraweru who
forwarded them to Jammu, where they still remain. Shortly afterwards the
Maharajah heard that Mulk Aman was perfectly innocent of any conspiracy
and had been got out of the way by the calumny of Isa Bahadur, the enemy
of the house of Gauhar Aman from which he had suffered. The Maharajah
was very sorry at what had taken place and ordered Muhammad Khan of Swat
to bring the brave and unfortunate man back from Samegial under liberal
promises of rewards and appointments. The Swati started and told Mulk
Aman that he was responsible that no treachery was intended. All was in
vain; he insulted Muhammad Khan and raved about the loss of honour, etc.,
which he had suffered at the hands of the Maharajah. “If he makes me his
greatest Sirdar he can not wipe out the stain of having taken away my
wife.” Muhammad Khan returned to Jammu from his fruitless expedition and
told the Maharajah, who was very sorry. Twenty eight days after Muhammad
Khan’s visit, Mulk Aman, considering himself unsafe, went to Harbenn,
which is still Yaghistan [independent, wild]. Zoraweru then advised the
Maharajah to send for him, as he had got among the Yaghis and might
incite them to an attack on Gilgit. “Above all, make him satisfied.”
When the Maharajah read Zoraweru’s letter, he again sent the Swati to
Harbenn and told him to swear on the Koran, on his own behalf and that
of His Highness, that it was all Isa’s fault and that he would give Mulk
Amán his revenge for the wrong suffered and allow him double his former
salary. This Muhammad Khan did and saw Mulk Aman at Harbenn to whom he
brought a shawl as a present from himself. He told him, in private, after
“salâming” to him at a public meeting, all that he was charged to say and
took an oath in attestation of the sincerity of his promises. Mulk Aman
replied that he would not fall a victim to treachery and that if he said
another word or came again he would certainly kill him. So Muhammad Khan
left and again had to report his failure. “Only an army can bring him,
he said, back from Harbenn.” The Maharajah is hoping now that he will
get tired of wandering about and come back of his own accord. During the
last eight months he has sent nobody for him. Mulk Aman is very badly off
and is now at Rimon (Dareyl) and I am quite sure that the Yaghistanis
will never assist him. His brothers will not help him. His wife (Mahtar’s
widow) is now at Jammu and reports have spread about her conduct.”

* * * * *

In connexion with the Sazîni’s account, which in all particulars relating
to the tribes is very trustworthy, may be read the following statements
of S... S... of Kûner, on the borders of Kafiristan, now a Christian.
He relates that he was once a Sepoy in the Maharajah’s Army and started
on one of the Gilgit expeditions [1860?] with 300 Affghans and 3,000
Dogras, etc., under the command of Samund Khan, Ata Muhammad, Badam
Singh, Man Singh and Dula Singh. He believes that Wazir Pannu was with
the forces. At any rate, the attack on Gilgit was mere child’s play. The
Kashmîr troops bombarded it for two or three days, but the Dards had
no cannon with which to reply. Wahháb, the Wazir, looked out of one of
the fort loopholes and was shot and so was a Bhishti. Wahháb’s body was
stripped and hung to a tree. S... S... adds, “We were well entertained by
the people who treated us to curds and we found grapes and wallnuts in
abundance at Sher Kila’. The women of the country cooked our food, but
our soldiers repayed the hospitality which they received by plundering
and ill-treating the inhabitants. I remained behind, but when my company
came back they told me that the Sikhs wanted to dig out the body of
Gauhar Aman, but were prevented from doing so by their own Muhammadan
comrades. We found caverns in the mountains which were filled with food
for the use of the enemy. It is the custom of this people to heap up
food in caverns to which the owners only know the way. After entrusting
Sher Kila’ (a fort as big as that of Gilgit and constructed of wooden
beams and stone) to the administration of native partisans, we went to
Gao-Kutsh, where we found plenty of sport. Gauhar Aman used to sell
captured Sepoys for hunting dogs.” (This story is repeated from so many
trustworthy quarters that it seems to deserve credence. I heard it from
many at Gilgit in 1866. The kidnapping propensities of Gauhar Aman were
great and one of my own retainers, a petty Chief, had been dragged off
for sale, when he escaped by sliding down a mountain side. Yet the people
of Gilgit preferred his rule to that of Kashmir and revolted in his
favour, when oppressed by Santu Singh in 1852). “We had two Hindustani
rebels of 1857 with us and there were also several with the petty
Rajahs.” [This important statement can be somewhat confirmed by me. What
I understood to be the fourth Light Kashmir Cavalry was said to be almost
entirely composed of rebels of 1857. I found many of the stations in
charge of Swatis and numbers of soldiers of that race at Gilgit. One of
the Maharajah’s Sepoys, who came to see me, admitted that he was formerly
at Hyderabad and then had joined the rebels.]

* * * * *

I can also confirm the statements of the Sazîni with regard to the
atrocities committed in the War with Dareyl. In order to be able to
report victories, men, said to be innocent of complicity in the war,
were hanged and women were dragged into captivity in order to fill the
Zananas of the Kashmîr Sepoys. I saw the body of a tall, and powerfully
built Dareyli, which had evidently been hacked about a good deal,
suspended on a tree by the way-side. It was said to be the body of a man
who was quietly returning to Sai, which had long been in the undisturbed
occupation of the Maharajah. A little further on near Jaglôth [which is
also in long-occupied territory] there is a bridge on one of the poles
of which I saw the skeleton head of a Lumberdar of the place, said to
be perfectly innocent of all participation in the war with Kashmir.
The roofs of the houses in Gilgit had been blown off, and most of the
inhabitants had fled into the mountains (_vide_ “dance at Gilgit” page
36). On the other hand, dreadful stories were related of the retaliation
of the Dard tribes. Sepoys had been sold by hundreds into Badakhshan,
etc.; others had been used as fireworks and blown to atoms for the
amusement of the Kunjûtis. Personally, I found the Dards pleasant enough
and consider them to be superior in many respects to either Dogras or
Pathans, but it is by no means improbable that they have been guilty
of many of the atrocities which are laid to their charge. At the same
time, it must be remembered that the wanton cruelties of the Massacre of
Yasin (_vide_ page 69) and the fact that their country was invaded by
a stranger and an “infidel”—in defiance of treaty obligations—is some
palliation for their conduct. The Kashmîr troops, and more particularly
the coolies sent with them, were also grossly neglected as regards food,
clothing and shelter by their own authorities. It is said that out of
12,000 Kashmiris, impressed for the purpose of carrying loads, only
600 survived in the expedition of 1866. The roads were strewn with the
skeletons of horses, etc. I saw men in the most emaciated condition and
ready to eat “unlawful” food. Three Mussulmans in a dying condition whom
I met below the “Acho” summit,[104] were ready to take a tin containing
pork and could scarcely be restrained till “lawful” food was brought to
them by my servants. Men were forced to go with the troops. One Hakím
Ali Shah, a teacher at Amritsar, was compelled to serve as a physician,
a post to which he had no other claim, except that his name happened to
be “Hakím.” I rescued him. A virulent fever was destroying the troops
at Gilgit, who, even after the siege of the fort had been raised, were
liable to be shot down by prowlers from the tribes within a few yards of
the fort. I ordered the fort, etc., to be cleaned and, although myself
in danger of life from my Kashmîr friends, if not from the tribes, I
insisted on my order being obeyed, the assumption of an authoritative
tone being often a traveller’s only chance of safety among Asiatics. I
distributed medicine among the troops and was afterwards told in Durbar
by the Maharajah that some medicine which I had sent to Wazir Zoraweru,
who was then on his Dureyl expedition, had saved his life.

* * * * *

Since then, the Dards have made the acquaintance of diseases for
which there was not even a name in 1866. I refer chiefly to cholera
and syphilis, which Kashmiri and Indian troops have introduced.
Simultaneously, the indigenous methods of treatment, which are full of
lessons for the impartial learner, are dying out. Industrial handicrafts,
historical superstitions or reminiscences, national feasts which existed
in 1866 exist no longer, and what exists now will soon vanish before
the monotony of orthodox Muhammadanism and the vulgarity of so-called
European civilization. “_Und der Götter bunt Gewimmel, Hat sogleich das
stille Haus geleert._” The fairies and prophetesses of Dardistan are
silent, the Tham of Hunza no longer brings down rain, the family axes
are broken, the genealogists have been destroyed, and the sacred drum
is heard no longer. The quaint computations of age, of months, seasons,
years and half-years, and the strange observations of shadows thrown
at various times are dying out or are already dead. Worse than all for
enquiry into ancient human history, the languages which contain the words
of “_what once was_,” are being flooded by foreign dialects, and what
may survive will no longer appeal to the national understanding. This
result is most lamentable as regards Hunza, where the oldest human speech
still showed elementary processes of development. I fear that my attempt
to commit, for the first time, to writing, in an adapted _Persian_
character, the Khajuná language, has only been followed in a document
of honour which the venerable Chief of Nagyr sent me some years ago.
Already do some European writers call him and his people “ignorant” when
their own ignorance is alone deserving of censure. I deeply regret that
the friendship of so many Dard Chiefs for me has made them unsuspicious
of Europeans, and may have thus indirectly led to the loss of their
independence, but I rejoice that for over twenty-five years I have
not attracted the European adventurer to Dardistan by saying anything
about Pliny’s “_fertilissimi sunt auri Dardæ_,” except in Khajuná
Ethnographical Dialogues in the “Hunza-Nagyr Handbook,” which exploiters
were not likely to read. Now others have published the fact, but not the
accompanying risks.

As Kandiá is learned, Nagyr pious, Chilás puritanical, and all true Dard
tribes essentially peaceful and virtuously republican, so, no doubt,
Hunza was the country of free love and of raiding, that had ceased
in 1865, which _we_ practically revived (see Appendix I.). I doubt,
however, whether picturesque vice, which, unfortunately, may form part
of indigenous associations, is as reprehensible as the hypocrisy of
those hired knights of the pen, who, not practising the virtues which
they preach, take away the character of nations and of Chiefs, merely
because they are opposed to us, and falsify their history. I do not,
for instance, palliate the old Hunza practice of lending one’s wife to
a guest, or of kidnapping good-looking strangers in order to improve
the race, though the latter course may be preferred by a physiologist
to a careless marriage, but I do find a reproach on European or Indian
morality in the fact that not a single Hunza woman showed herself to
the British or Kashmîri invaders, although the men, once conquered,
freely joined them in sport and drinking bouts. Europeans have a worse
reputation among Orientals than Orientals among Europeans, and, in
either case, ignorance, prejudice, want of sympathy and disinclination
to learn the truth, are probably among the causes of such regrettable
preconceptions. At any rate, it shall not be said that the races which
I, so disastrously for them, discovered and named, shall suffer from
any misrepresentation so far as I can help it, although the political
passions of the moment may deprive my statements of the weight which
has hitherto attached to them as authoritative in this speciality. _Væ
victis et victoribus_—for history now marches rapidly towards the common
disaster. _Finis Dardarum._ “It has been decided that CHILÁS is to be
_permanently_ held, and consequently the present strength of the garrison
in the GILGIT district will be _increased_ by one native regiment, while
the 23rd Pioneers will complete the road through the Kaghan Valley
to Chilás, and will then _remain for duty on the advanced frontier_.
This strengthening of the garrison in the sub-Himalayan country will
effectually _secure British influence_ over CHITRAL where an Agent is to
be _permanently_ stationed; it will also insure the _control of the Indus
Valley tribes_” (_Times_ telegram of the 8th July, 1893—the italics are
mine). Alas that British influence should so destroy both itself and the
freedom of ancient races!

* * * * *

_Quem Deus vult perdere prius dementat._ Considering the promises of
redress of all grievances made by the Great Northern Emancipator of
Oppressed Nationalities,[105] whose lightest finger is heavier than our
entire yoke, it would be a great mistake on our part to still further
reduce the independence of Native States, the troops of which are already
at our disposal. Even as regards Kashmir, against the mismanagement of
which I have protested for so many years, and the Agents of which made
several attempts on my life in order to prevent my exposure of their
frontier encroachments in 1866, I am bound to say that our procedure
has been a great deal too peremptory, if not altogether illegal. The
following Treaty between Kashmir and the British Government shows alike
that Kashmir had no right to encroach on Chilás and Gilgit (see preceding
pages), and still less on Hunza-Nagyr, and that the Government of India
has no right to convert Kashmir into a “_semi_-independent State” as
called by the _Times_ of the 8th July, 1893. Kashmir is an _independent_
State, whose independence has been paid for and must be protected by
our honour against our ambition, as long as it is loyal to the British
Government:

“TREATY between the British Government on the one part and
MAHARAJAH GOLAB SING of JUMMOO on the other, concluded on the
part of the British Government by FREDERICK CURRIE, ESQUIRE,
and Brevet-Major HENRY MONTGOMERY LAWRENCE, acting under the
orders of the Right Honourable SIR HENRY HARDINGE, G.C.B.,
one of Her Britannic Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council,
Governor-General, appointed by the Honourable Company to direct
and control all their affairs in the East Indies, and by
MAHARAJAH GOLAB SING in person.

ARTICLE I.

The British Government transfers and makes over for ever, in INDEPENDENT
POSSESSION, TO MAHARAJAH GOLAB SING AND THE HEIRS MALE OF HIS BODY, all
the hilly or mountainous country, with its DEPENDENCIES, situated to the
EASTWARD of the River Indus and westward of the River Ravee, including
Chumba, and excluding Lahul, being part of the territories ceded to the
British Government by the Lahore State, according to the provisions of
Article IV. of the Treaty of Lahore, dated 9th March, 1846.

ARTICLE II.

The eastern boundary of the tract transferred by the foregoing Article
to Maharajah Golab Sing shall be laid down by Commissioners appointed by
the British Government and Maharajah Golab Sing respectively for that
purpose, and shall be defined in a separate Engagement after survey.

ARTICLE III.

In consideration of the transfer made to him and his heirs by the
provisions of the foregoing Articles, Maharajah Golab Sing will pay
to the British Government the sum of seventy-five lakhs of Rupees
(Nanukshahee), fifty lakhs to be paid on ratification of this Treaty, and
twenty-five lakhs on or before the first October of the current year,
A.D. 1846.

ARTICLE IV.

The limits of the territories of Maharajah Golab Sing shall not be at any
time changed without the concurrence of the British Government.

ARTICLE V.

Maharajah Golab Sing will refer to the arbitration of the British
Government any disputes or questions that may arise between himself and
the Government of Lahore or any other neighbouring State, and will abide
by the decision of the British Government.

ARTICLE VI.

Maharajah Golab Sing engages for himself and heirs to join, with the
whole of his Military Force, the British troops, when employed within the
hills, or in the territories adjoining his possessions.

ARTICLE VII.

Maharajah Golab Sing engages never to take, or retain in his service,
any British subject, nor the subject of any European or American State,
without the consent of the British Government.

ARTICLE VIII.

Maharajah Golab Sing engages to respect in regard to the territory
transferred to him, the provisions of Articles V., VI., and VII., of the
separate Engagement between the British Government and the Lahore Durbar,
dated March 11th, 1846.

ARTICLE IX.

The British Government will give its aid to Maharajah Golab Sing in
protecting his territories from external enemies.

ARTICLE X.

Maharajah Golab Sing acknowledges the supremacy of the British
Government, and will, in token of such supremacy, present annually to
the British Government one horse, twelve perfect shawl goats of approved
breed (six male and six female), and three pairs of Cashmere shawls.

This Treaty, consisting of ten Articles, has been this day settled by
Frederick Currie, Esquire, and Brevet-Major Henry Montgomery Lawrence,
acting under the directions of the Right Honourable Sir Henry Hardinge,
G.C.B., Governor-General, on the part of the British Government, and by
Maharajah Golab Sing in person; and the said Treaty has been this day
ratified by the seal of the Right Honourable Sir Henry Hardinge, G.C.B.,
Governor-General.

_Done at Umritsur, this Sixteenth day of March, in the year of our
Lord One Thousand Eight Hundred and Forty-six, corresponding with the
Seventeenth day of Rubbee-ool-awal 1262 Hijree._

(Signed) H. HARDINGE

+-----+
|SEAL.|
+-----+

(Signed) F. CURRIE.
” H. M. LAWRENCE.

By order of the Right Honorable the Governor-General of India.

(Signed) F. CURRIE,
_Secretary to the Government of India, with the Governor-General_.

* * * * *

_Note on the Genealogy of the divine Rajas of Nagyr_ (given to me
by Raja Habibulia Khan of Nagyr in 1886).—At Doyur, near Gilgit, on
the mountain-top, three fairy-brothers shot at a calf, which only
the youngest (Azru) hit and was induced to eat, thereby losing his
fairy-hood. The two others flew away and settled on another mountain, but
the crowing of a cock betrayed them to the people of Gilgit who made one
of them, Tura Khan, Raja of Gilgit; the other, Chalis Khan, becoming Raja
of Nagyr. [This account is incorrect as _Azru_ became Raja of Gilgit,
because he had become man by eating meat (_incarnation_), but it is
interesting as showing the desire of Nagyris to be connected with the
Historical Legend of the origin of the neighbouring and more civilized
Gilgit. Some say that Chalis Khan had no son, but that the Rajas of Nagyr
are the descendants of the Makpon rulers of Little Tibet (from which the
Makpon-i-Shang-rong—see page 107—takes its name). Others say that Alladad
was a son of Chalis Khan: at all events, the founders of the Hunza-Nagyr
Dynasty, Girkis-Mogholot, two brothers, whether descended from Mogholot
or Chalis, are called Mogholoti, Girkis becoming the Tham of Hunza, and
Mogholot that of Nagyr. As for Alladad, he was succeeded by Kamal, whom
Rahim and Babar (or tiger) followed in turn. Babar’s son was Ferdûs, and
his son Alif Khan was the father of the present reigning Chief, Zafar
Khan, whose progeny is very numerous]. [The above account, although
very deficient and confused, supplements, as regards Hunza-Nagyr, the
important “historical legend of the origin of Gilgit,” which will be
found on pages 9 to 16, and which chronicles the change in the Shîn rule
in Dardistan. The mystery in the Hunza-Nagyr dynasty fitly entitles it to
be called “ayeshó,” or “heavenly.” I can quite understand that the Chief
of Hunza, unable to convince European disbelievers of his divine origin,
should have claimed a descent from Alexander the Great, _faute de mieux_,
since the more terrestrial chiefs of Badakhshan and other neighbouring
countries claim to be descended from that conqueror.] (See note on page
55 and page 69.)

Colonel Biddulph gives the following interesting version of the above
story:

“The ruling family of Hunza is called Ayeshé (heavenly), from the
following circumstance. The two States of Hunza and Nager were formerly
one, ruled by a branch of the Shahreis, the ruling family of Gilgit,
whose seat of government was Nager. Tradition relates that Mayroo Khan,
apparently the first Mahommedan Thum of Nager, some two hundred years
after the introduction of the religion of Islam in to Gilgit, married a
daughter of Trakhan of Gilgit, who bore him twin sons, named Moghlot and
Girkis. From the former the present ruling family of Nager is descended.
The twins are said to have shown hostility to one another from their
birth. Their father, seeing this, and unable to settle the question of
succession, divided his State between them, giving to Girkis the north,
and to Moghlot the south, bank of the river.

Age did not diminish their enmity, and Girkis, while out hunting, was
one day killed by an adherent of Moghlot, a native of Haramosh, named
Mogul Beg, who, under pretence of a quarrel with Moghlot, took service
with Girkis, and persuading him to look up at some game on the cliff
above him, drove an arrow into his throat. Girkis left only a daughter,
who, according to the custom of the country, became Queen or Ganish of
Hunza. Her first care was to avenge her father’s death. The tradition
relates that having sworn to tear the murderer’s liver with her teeth,
she carried out her vow to the letter. Left without a chaperon, she
was not long without getting into a scrape, as young ladies in similar
circumstances are apt to do. The young prince Kamal Khan of Nager, a
younger son of Moghlot, crossed the river by night, serenaded her and
won her heart. Night after night the lovers met, unknown to the rest of
the world, till serious consequences ensued; and one fine day it was
announced in Hunza that, though Providence had not yet provided the
princess with a husband, it had seen fit to bless her with a son. Morals
in Hunza are not of the strictest even now, so that few questions were
asked, and the good people generally contented themselves with beating
their drums, dancing, and the usual festivities proper on the occasion of
the birth of the Prince Chiliss Khan. Kamal Khan seems to have ‘behaved
badly’ all through, as the above story is concealed in Hunza under the
fiction that a prince of Shighnan became the husband of the princess, but
that his name being forgotten he is known only as Ayeshó (Heaven-sent),
from which the present ruling family of Hunza takes the name. The present
Thum of Hunza is Ghazan Khan” (1880).

APPENDICES.

i. _HUNZA-NAGYR AND THE PAMIRS._

ii. _RECENT EVENTS IN CHILAS AND CHITRAL._

iii. _FABLES, SONGS, AND LEGENDS OF CHITRAL._

iv. _RACES AND LANGUAGES OF THE HINDUKUSH._

v. _ANTHROPOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS._

vi. _ROUGH ITINERARIES IN THE HINDUKUSH._

vii. _A SECRET RELIGION IN THE HINDUKUSH._

viii. _THE SCIENCES OF LANGUAGE AND OF ETHNOLOGY AS ILLUSTRATED
BY THE LANGUAGE AND CUSTOMS OF HUNZA (A SEPARATE PAMPHLET)._

[Illustration: SPECIMENS OF THE BURISHKI RACE OF HUNZA (ON A SLOPE OF THE
PAMIR), OF NAGYR, AND OF YASIN.

MATAVALLI, the first Hunza man who came to Europe.

SOME BURISHKIS FROM YASIN separating the Hunza and Nagyri Warriors.

SAYAD ALI, OF NAGYR.]

APPENDIX I.

HUNZA, NAGYR, AND THE PAMIR REGIONS.[106]

I wish to record how from small beginnings, owing to carelessness,
exclusiveness, and official desire for promotion, Northern India may be
lost and British interests in Europe and Asia become subordinate, as they
have often been, to Russian guidance; how statesmanship has laboriously
invited dangers which physical barriers had almost rendered impossible;
and how it may still be practicable to maintain as independent States
the numerous mountain strongholds which Nature has interposed between
encroachment and intrigue from either the Russian or the English sphere
of action in Asia, much to the benefit of these two Powers and of the
peace of mankind.

When, after an enormous expenditure of men and money and during campaigns
which lasted over thirty-six years, Russia had conquered independent
Circassia—a task in which she was largely aided by our preventing
provisions and ammunitions from reaching by sea the so-called rebels,
although we ourselves were fighting against her in 1856, _quorum pars
parva fui_, it was easy to foresee that our conduct, which some called
chivalry, others loyalty, and some duplicity or folly, would give
her the present command of the Black Sea and lead to the subjugation
of Circassia. The same conduct was repeated at Panjdeh, and may be
repeated on the Pamir, much to the personal advantage of the discreet
officers concerned. We have also recently discovered that the holding of
Constantinople by a neutral Power is not essential to British interests,
as we had long ago found out that neither Merv nor Herat were keys to
India. Indeed, as we give up position after position, a crop of honours
falls to those who bring about our losses and, like charity, covers a
multitude of political sins of ignorance or treason.

It seemed, however, that there was one obscure corner which the official
sidelight could not irradiate. Valley after valley, plateau after
plateau, high mountains and difficult passes separate the populations
of India from those of Central Asia. Innumerable languages and warlike
races, each unconquerable in their own strongholds if their autonomy and
traditions are respected, intervene between invaders from either side
who would lead masses of disciplined slaves to slaughter and conquest.
It is not necessary to draw an imaginary line on Lord Salisbury’s
large or small Map of Asia across mountains and rivers, and dividing
arbitrarily tribes and kingdoms whose ancestry is the same, call it “the
neutral zone.” No sign-board need indicate “the way to India,” and amid
much ado about nothing by ambitious subordinates and puzzled superiors
settle to the momentary satisfaction of the British public that Russia
can go so far and no farther. Where the cold, the endless marching
over inhospitable ground, and starvation do not show the frontier, the
sparse population, the unknown tongue, and the bullet of the raider will
indicate it sufficiently, without adding to the number of generals or
knights for demarcating impossible boundaries.

The reassurances given by Lords Lansdowne and Cross to the native Princes
of India indicate the policy that should be adopted with regard to all
the Mountain States beyond India proper. It is by everywhere respecting
the existing indigenous Oriental Governments that we protect them and
ourselves against invasion from without and treachery from within. The
loyalty of our feudatories is most chivalrous and touching, but it should
be based on enlightened self-interest in order to withstand the utmost
strain. The restoration of some powers to the Maharaja of Kashmîr came
not a minute too soon. Wherever elsewhere reasonable claims are withheld,
they should be generously and speedily conceded. The Indian princes
know full well that we are arming them, at their own expense, against
a common foe who is not wanting in promises, and who is already posing
as a saviour to the people of Raushan, Shignan, Wakhan, Hunza, and even
Badakhshan, whose native dynasties or traditions we have either already
put aside or are believed to threaten.

As for the small States offering a fruitful field for intrigue, their
number and internal jealousies (except against a common foreign invader)
are in themselves a greater safeguard than the resistance of a big but
straggling ally, whose frontier, when broken through at one of its many
weak points, finds an unresisting population from which all initiative
has disappeared. The intrigue or treachery of a big ally is also a more
serious matter than that of a little State. What does it matter if
English and Russian agents intrigue or fraternize among the _ovis poli_,
and the Kirghiz shepherds of the Pamir, or advocate their respective
civilizations in Yasin, Chitrál, Wakhan, Nagyr, Hunza, etc. Ambitious
employes of both empires will always trouble waters, in order to fish in
them; but their trouble is comparatively innocuous, and resembles that of
Sisyphus when it has to be repeated or wasted in a dozen States, before
the real defences of either India or of Russia in Asia are reached.
Indeed, so far as India is concerned, the physical difficulties on
our side of the Himalayas or of the Hindukush, except at a few easily
defensible passes, are insuperable to an invader, even after he has
crowned the more approachable heights when coming from the North.

The only policy worthy of the name is to leave the Pamir alone. Whatever
line is drawn, it is sure to be encroached upon by either side. Races
will be found to overlap it, and in the attempt to gather the fold, as
with the Sarik and Salor Turkomans, a second Panjdeh is sure to follow.
Intrigues will be active on both sides of the line; and, as in Kashmîr,
the worried people will hail the foreigner as a saviour, so long as he
has not taken possession, when they find his little finger heavier than
the whole body of the indigenous oppressor. I have suffered so much from
my persistent exposure of the misrule and intrigues of Kashmîr by those
who now hail the _fait accompli_ of its practical annexation, that I may
claim to be heard in favour of at least one feature of its former native
administration. With bodies of troops averaging from 20 to 200, the
late Maharaja, who foresaw what has happened after his death, kept the
Hunza-Nagyr frontier in order. It certainly was by rule of thumb, and had
no dockets, red tape, and reports. Indeed, his frontier guardians were,
as I found them, asleep during a state of siege in 1866, or, when war
was over, were engaged in storing grain _outside_ the forts; but peace
was kept as it will never be again, in spite of 2,000 Imperial troops,
first-rate roads, and suspension bridges over the “Shaitan Naré,” instead
of the rotten rope-way that spanned “Satan’s Gorge,” or of boats dragged
up from Srinagar over the mountains to enable a dozen sepoys to cross
the Indus at a time, or to convey couriers with a couple of bullets,
some dried butter-cakes, and an open letter or two, who ran the siege at
Gilgit and brought such effective reinforcements to its defenders!

[Illustration]

Nor has our diplomacy been more effectual than our arms, as the encounter
at Chalt with Hunza-Nagyr, hereditary foes, but whom our policy has
united against us, has shown. To us Nagyr is decidedly friendly; but
a worm will turn if trodden on by some of our too quickly advanced
subalterns. That, however, the wise and amiable Chief of Nagyr, a
patriarch with a large progeny, and preserving the keenness of youth in
his old age, is really friendly to us in spite of provocation, may be
inferred from the following letter to me, which does credit alike to his
head and heart, and which is far from showing him to be our inveterate
foe, as alleged by the _Pioneer_. His eldest son began to teach me the
remarkable Khajuná language, which I first committed to writing in 1866,
during the siege of Gilgit, and another son continued the lessons in
1886. The latter is a hostage in Kashmîr, to secure the good behaviour
of his tribe, which is really infinitely superior in culture and piety to
those around them. The father, who is over 90, writes in Persian to the
following effect, after the usual compliments:—“The affairs of this place
are by your fortune in a fair way, and I am in good health and constantly
ask the same for you from the Throne which grants requests. Your kind
favour with a drawing of the Mosque has reached me, and has given me much
pleasure and satisfaction. The reason of the delay in its receipt and
acknowledgment is due to the circumstance that, owing to disturbances
(_fesád_) I have not sent agents to Kashmîr this year. After the
restoration of peace, I will send [a letter] with them. In the meanwhile,
I have caught your hem [seek your protection] for my son Habibullah
Khan, a beloved son, about whom I am anxious; the aforesaid son is a
well-wisher to the illustrious English Government.—ZA’FAR KHAN.” [The
letter was apparently written in June last, when _The Times_ reported a
“rising,” because the British Agent was at Chalt with 500 men.]

It seems to me that none but a farseeing man could, in the midst of a
misunderstanding, if not a fight, with us, so write to one in the enemy’s
camp, unless he were a true man alike in war and peace, and a ruler
whose good-will was worth acquiring. As for his son, I know him to be
indeed well-disposed to our Government. He was very popular among our
officers when I saw him in Kashmîr, owing to his modesty, amiability, and
unsurpassed excellence at Polo. In fact, my friendship with several of
the chiefs since 1866 has aided our good relations with them; and it is a
pity if they should be destroyed for want of a little “_savoir_,” as also
“_savoir faire_,” on our part.

Between the States of Nagyr and Hunza there exists a perpetual feud.
They are literally rivals, being separated by a swift-flowing river on
which, at almost regulated distances, one Nagyr fort on one bank frowns
at the Hunza fort on the other. The paths along the river sides are very
steep, involving at times springing from one ledge of a rock to another,
or dropping on to it from a height of six feet, when, if the footing
is lost, the wild torrent sweeps one away. Colonel Biddulph does not
credit the Nagyris with bravery. History, however, does not bear out his
statement; and the defeat inflicted on the Kashmîr troops under Nathu
Shah in 1848 is a lesson even for the arrogance of a civilized invader
armed with the latest rifle. The Nagyris are certainly not without
culture; in music they were proficient before the Muhammadan piety of the
Shiah sect somewhat tabooed the art. At all events, they are different
in character from the Hunzas with whom they share the same language, and
their chiefs the same ancestry. The Hunzas, in whom a remnant of the
Huns may be found, were great kidnappers; but under Kashmîr influence
they stopped raiding since 1869, till the confusion incidental to our
interference revived their gone occupation. Indeed, it is asserted on
good authority, that even our ally of Chitrál, who had somewhat abandoned
the practice of selling his Shiah or Kalásha Kafir subjects into slavery,
and who had so disposed of the miners for not working his ruby mines
to profit, has now returned to the trade in men, “with the aid of our
present of rifles and our moral support.” Nor is Bokhara said to be
behind Chitrál in the revival of the slave-trade from Darwáz, in spite of
Russian influence; so that we have the remarkable instance of two great
Powers both opposed to slavery and the slave-trade, having revived it in
their approach to one another. Nor is a third Power, quite blameless in
the matter; for when we worried Hunza, that robber-nest remembered its
old allegiance to distant Kitái and arranged with the Chinese authorities
at Yarkand to be informed of the departure of a caravan. Then, after
intercepting it on the Kulanuldi road, the Hunzas would take those they
kidnapped from it back for sale to Yarkand!

As a matter of fact, we have now a scramble for the regions surrounding
and extending into the Pamirs by three Powers, acting either directly or
through States of Straw. The claims of Bokhara to Karategin and Darwáz—if
not to Shignán, Raushan, and Wakhan are as little founded as are those
of Afghanistan on the latter three districts. Indeed, even the Afghan
right to Badakhshan is very weak. The Russian claims through Khokand on
the pasturages of the Kirghiz in two-thirds of the Pamirs are also as
fanciful as those of Kashmir or China on Hunza. As in the scramble for
Africa, the natives themselves are not consulted, and their indigenous
dynasties have been either destroyed, or dispossessed, or ignored.

* * * * *

In an Indian paper, received by to-day’s mail (29 Nov., 1891), I find
the following paragraph: “Col. A. G. Durand, British Agent at Gilgit,
has received definite orders to bring the robber tribes of Hunza and
Nagar under control. These tribes are the pirates of Central Asia, whose
chief occupation is plundering caravans on the Yarkand and Kashgar.
Any prisoners they take on these expeditions are sold into slavery.
Colonel Durand has established an outpost at Chalt, about thirty miles
beyond Gilgit, on the Hunza river, and intends making a road to Aliabad,
the capital of the Hunza chief, at once. That he will meet with armed
opposition in doing so is not improbable.”

For some months past the _mot d’ordre_ appears to have been given to the
Anglo-Indian Press, to excite public feeling against Hunza and Nagyr,
two States which have been independent for fourteen centuries. The
cause of offence is not stated, nor, as far as I know, does one exist
of sufficient validity to justify invasion. In the _Pioneer_ and the
_Civil and Military Gazette_ I find vague allusions to the disloyalty
or recalcitrance of the above-mentioned tribes, and to the necessity
of punishing them. As Nagyr is extremely well-disposed towards the
British, and is only driven into making common cause with its hereditary
foe and rival of Hunza by fear of a common danger,—the loss of their
independence,—I venture to point out the impolicy and injustice of
interfering with these principalities.

I have already referred to a letter from the venerable chief of Nagyr, in
which he strongly commends to my care one of his sons, Raja Habibulla, as
a well-wisher of the English Government. Indeed, he has absolutely done
nothing to justify any attack on the integrity of his country; and before
we invade it other means to secure peace should be tried. I have no doubt
that I, for one, could induce him to comply with everything in reason,
if reason, and not an excuse for taking his country, is desired. Nagyr
has never joined Hunza in kidnapping expeditions, as is alleged in the
above-quoted paragraph. Indeed, slavery is an abomination to the pious
and peaceful agriculturist of that interesting country. The Nagyris are
musical and were fond of dances, polo, ibex _battue_-hunting, archery and
shooting from horseback, and other manly exercises; but the growing piety
of the race has latterly proscribed music and dancing. The accompanying
drawing of a Nagyri dance in the neighbouring Gilgit gives a good idea of
similar performances at Nagyr.

The country is full of legendary lore, but less so than Hunza, where
Grimm’s fairy tales appear to be translated into actual life. No war is
undertaken except at the supposed command of an unseen fairy, whose drum
is on such occasions sounded in the mountains. Ecstatic women, inhaling
the smoke of a cedar-branch, announce the future, tell the past, and
describe the state of things in neighbouring valleys. They are thus
alike the prophets, the historians, and the journalists of the tribe.
They probably now tell their indignant hearers how, under the pretext of
shooting or of commerce, Europeans have visited their country, which they
now threaten to destroy with strange and murderous weapons; but Hunza
is “ayeshó,” or “heaven-born,” and the fairies, if not the inaccessible
nature of the country, will continue to protect it.

The folly of invading Hunza and Nagyr is even greater than the physical
obstacles to which I have already referred. Here, between the Russian and
the British spheres of influence in Central Asia, we have not only the
series of Pamirs, or plateaux and high valleys, which I first brought
to notice on linguistic grounds, in the map accompanying my tour in
Dardistan in 1866 (the country between Kashmir and Kabul), and which
have been recently confirmed topographically; but we have also a large
series of mountainous countries, which, if left alone, or only assured
of our help against a foreign invader, would guarantee for ever the
peace alike of the Russian, the British, and the Chinese frontiers.
Unfortunately, we have allowed Afghanistan to annex Badakhshan, Raushan,
Shignan, and Wakhan, at much loss of life to their inhabitants; and
Russia has similarly endorsed the shadowy and recent claims of Bokhara on
neighbouring provinces, like Darwáz and Karategin.

It is untrue that Hunza and Nagyr were ever tributaries of Kashmîr,
except in the sense that they occasionally sent a handful of gold dust
to its Maharaja, and received substantial presents in return. It is to
China or Kitái that Hunza considers itself bound by an ancient, but
vague, allegiance. Hunza and Nagyr, that will only unite against a
foreign common foe, have more than once punished Kashmîr when attempting
invasion; but they are not hostile to Kashmîr, and Nagyr even sends one
of the princes to Srinagar as a guarantee of its peaceful intentions. At
the same time, it is not very many months ago that they gave us trouble
at Chalt, when we sought to establish an outpost, threatening the road to
Hunza and the independence alike of Hunza and Nagyr.

Just as Nagyr is pious, so Hunza is impious. Its religion is a perversion
even of the heterodox Mulái faith, which is Shiah Muhammadan only in
name, but pantheistic in substance. It prevails in Punyál, Zebak, Darwáz,
etc. The Tham, or Raja, of Hunza used to dance in a Mosque and hold
revels in it. Wine is largely drunk in Hunza, and like the Druses of the
Lebanon, the “initiated” Muláis may consider nothing a crime that is not
found out. Indeed, an interesting connection can be established between
the doctrines of the so-called “Assassins” of the Crusaders, which have
been handed down to the Druses, and those of the Muláis in various parts
of the Hindukush. Their spiritual chief gave me a few pages of their
hitherto mysterious Bible, the “Kelám-i-Pir,” in 1886, which I have
translated, and shortly intend to publish. All I can now say is, that,
whatever the theory of their faith, the practice depends, as elsewhere,
on circumstances and the character of the race.

The language of Hunza and Nagyr solves many philological puzzles. It
is a prehistoric remnant, in which a series of simple consonantal or
vowel sounds stands for various groups of ideas, relationships, etc. It
establishes the great fact, that customs and the historical and other
associations of a race are the basis of the so-called rules of grammar.
The cradle, therefore, of human thought as expressed in language, whether
of the Aryan, the Turanian, or the Shemitic groups, is to be found in the
speech of Hunza-Nagyr; and to destroy this by foreign intervention, which
has already brought new diseases into the Hindukush, as also a general
linguistic deterioration, would be a greater act of barbarism than to
permit the continuance of Hunza raiding on the Yarkand road. Besides,
that raiding can be stopped again, by closing the slave-markets of
Badakhshan, Bokhara, and Yarkand, or by paying a subsidy, say of £1,000
per annum, to the Hunza chief.

Indeed, as has already been pointed out, the recrudescence of kidnapping
is largely due to the state of insecurity and confusion caused by our
desire to render the Afghan and the Chinese frontiers conterminous with
our own, in the vain belief that the outposts of three large and distant
kingdoms, acting in concert, will keep Russia more effectively out of
India than a number of small independent republics or principalities.
Afghanistan may now be big, but every so-called subject in her outlying
districts is her inveterate foe. As stated in a letter from Nevsky to
the Calcutta _Englishman_, in connection with Colonel Grambcheffsky’s
recent explorations:

“One and all, these devastated tribes are firm in their conviction that
the raids of their Afghan enemies were prompted and supported by the gold
of Abdur Rahman’s English protectors. They will remember this on the
plateau of Pamir, and among the tribes of Kaffiristan.”

However colourable this statement may be as regards Shignán, Raushan, and
perhaps even Wakhan, I believe that the Kafirs are still our friends.
At the same time it should not be forgotten that, owing to the closing
of the slave-markets in Central Asia, the sale of Shiah subjects had
temporarily stopped in Chitrál. The Kafirs were being less molested by
kidnapping Muhammadan neighbours; the Hunzas went back to agriculture,
which the Nagyris had never abandoned; Kashmîr, India, and the Russian
side of Central Asia afforded no opening for the sale of human beings.
The insensate ambition of officials, British and Russian, the gift of
arms to marauding tribes and the destruction of Kashmîr influence, have
changed all this, and it is only by a return to “masterly inactivity,”
which does not mean the continuance of the Cimmerian darkness that now
exists as to the languages and histories of the most interesting races
of the world, that the peace and pockets of three mighty empires can be
saved.

In the meanwhile, it is to the interest of Russia to force us into
heavy military expenditure by false alarms; to create distrust between
ourselves and China by pretending that Russia and England alone have
civilizing missions in Central Asia, with which Chinese tyranny would
interfere; to hold up before us the Will-o’-the-wisp of an impossible
demarcation of the Pamirs, and finally, to ally itself with China
against India. For let it not be forgotten, that once the Trans-Siberian
railway is completed, China will be like wax in her hand; and that she
will be compelled to place her immense material in men and food at the
disposal of an overawing, but, as far as the _personnel_ is concerned,
not unamiable neighbour. The tribes, emasculated by our overwhelming
civilization, and driven into three large camps, will no longer have the
power of resistance that they now possess separately.

Let us therefore leave intact the two great belts of territories that
Nature has raised for the preservation of peace in Asia—the Pamir with
its adjacent regions to the east and west, and the zone of the Hindukush
with its hives of independent tribes, intervening between Afghanistan on
the one side and Kashmîr on the other, till India proper is reached. This
will never be the case by a foreign invader, unless diplomatists “meddle
and muddle,” and try to put together what Nature has put asunder. What
we require is the cultivation of greater sympathy in our relations with
natives; and, comparing big things with small, it is to this feeling that
I myself owed my safety, when I put off the disguise in which I crossed
the Kashmîr frontier in 1866 into countries then wrongly supposed by our
Government to be inhabited by cannibals. This charge was also made, with
equal error, by one tribe against the other. Then too, as in 1886, the
Indian Press spoke of Russian intrigues; but then, as in 1886, I found
the very name of Russia to be unknown, except where it had been learnt
from a Kashmîr Munshi, who had no business to be there at all, as the
treaty of 1846, by which we sold Kashmîr to Ghulab Singh, assigned the
Indus as his boundary on the west. Now, as to the question as to “What
and where are the Pamirs?” I have already stated my view in a letter to
the Editor of the _Morning Post_, which I trust I may be allowed to quote:

“As some of the statements made at the Royal Geographical Society are
likely to cause a sense of false security, as dangerous to peace as
a false alarm, I write to say that ‘Pamirs’ do not mean ‘deserts,’
or ‘broken valleys,’ and that they are not uninhabitable or useless
for movements of large bodies of men. They may be all this in certain
places, at certain periods of the year, and under certain conditions;
but had our explorers or statesmen paid attention to the languages of
this part of the world, as they should in regard to every other with
which they deal, they would have avoided many idle conjectures and the
complications that may follow therefrom. I do not wish them to refer to
philologists who have never been to the East, and who interpret ‘Pamir’
as meaning the ‘Upa-Meru’ Mountain of Indian mythology, but to the people
who frequent the Pamirs during the summer months, year after year, for
purposes of pasturage, starting from various points, and who in their own
languages (Yarkandi, Turki, and Kirghiz) call the high plain, elevated
valley, table-land, or plateau which they come across ‘Pamir.’ There
are, therefore, in one sense many ‘Pamirs,’ and as a _tout-ensemble_,
one ‘Pamir,’ or geographically, _the_ ‘Pamir.’ The legend of the two
brothers, ‘Alichur and Pamir,’ is merely a personification of two
plateaux. Indeed, the obvious and popular idea which has always attached
to the word ‘Pamir,’ is the correct one, whether it is the geographical
‘roof of the world,’ the ‘Bám-i-dunya’ of the poet, or the ‘Pamir-dunya’
of the modern journalist. We have, therefore, to deal with a series of
plateaux, the topographical limits of which coincide with linguistic,
ethnographical, and political limits. To the North, the Pamirs have the
Trans-Altaic Mountain range marking the Turki element, under Russian
influence; the Panja river, by whatever name, on the West is a Tadjik
or Iranian Frontier [Affghan]. The Sarikol on the East is a Tibetan,
Mongolian, or Chinese Wall, and the South is our natural frontier,
the Hindukush, to go beyond which is physical death to the Hindu, and
political ruin to the holder of India, as it also is certain destruction
to the invader, except by one pass, which I need not name, and which
is accessible from a Pamir. That the Pamirs are not uninhabitable may
be inferred from Colonel Grambcheffsky’s account [which is published
at length elsewhere in this issue of the ASIATIC QUARTERLY REVIEW]. A
few passages from it must now suffice:—‘The Pamir is far from being a
wilderness. It contains a permanent population, residing in it both
summer and winter.’ ‘The population is increasing to a marked extent.’
‘Slavery on the Pamir is flourishing: moreover, the principal contingents
of slaves are obtained from Chatrar, Jasen, and Kanshoot, chanates
under the protectorate of England.’ ‘On descending into Pamir we found
ourselves between the cordons of the Chinese and Affghan armies.’ ‘The
population of Shoognan, numbering 2,000 families, had fled to Pamir,
hoping to find a refuge in the Russian Provinces’ (from ‘the untold
atrocities which the Affghans were committing in the conquered provinces
of Shoognan,’ etc.). ‘I term the whole of the tableland “Pamir,” in view
of the resemblance of the valleys to each other.’

“The climate of the Pamirs is variable, from more than tropical heat
in the sun to arctic cold in the shade, and in consequence, is alike
provocative and destructive of life. Dr. G. Capus, who crossed them from
north to south, exactly as Mr. Littledale has done, but several months
in the year before him, says in his ‘Observations Météorologiques sur le
Pamir,’ which he sent to the last Oriental Congress,—‘The first general
fact is the inconstancy of severe cold. The nights are generally coldest
just before sunrise.’ ‘We found an extreme amplitude of 61 deg. between
the absolute minimum and maximum, and of 41 deg. between the minimum
and the maximum in the shade during the same day.’ ‘The thermometer
rises and falls rapidly with the height of the sun.’ ‘Great cold is less
frequent and persistent than was believed to be the case at the period
of the year dealt with’ (March 13 to April 19), ‘and is compensated by
daily intervals of elevation of temperature, which permit animal life,
represented by a fairly large number of species, and including man, to
keep up throughout the winter under endurable conditions.’ Yet ‘the
water-streak of snow, which has melted in contact with a dark object,
freezes immediately when put into the shadow of the very same object.’
... The solution of political difficulties in Central Asia is not in a
practically impossible, and certainly unmaintainable, demarcation of the
Pamirs, but in the strengthening of the autonomy of the most interesting
races that inhabit the series of Circassias that already guard the
safety alike of British, Chinese, and of Russian dominion or spheres of
influence in Central Asia.”

* * * * *

WOKING, _Nov. 29_.

It is not impossible that the tribes may again combine in 1892 as they
did in 1866 to turn out the Kashmîr troops from Gilgit. The want of
wisdom shown in forcing on the construction of a road from Chalt to
Aliabad, in the centre of Hunza, as announced in to-day’s _Times_,
must bring on, if not a confederation of the tribes against us, at
any rate their awakened distrust. It is doubtful whether it was ever
expedient to establish an outpost at Gilgit, and the carrying it still
farther to the traditional apple of discord, the holding of Chalt, which
commands the Hunza road, is still more impolitic. As in Affghanistan,
so here, whatever power does _not_ interfere is looked upon as the
saviour from present evils. Once we have created big agglomerations
under Affghanistan, or China, or Kashmir, we are liable to the dangers
following either on collapse, want of cohesion, treachery from within,
the ambitions of a few men at the respective courts, or, as with us,
to serious fluctuations in foreign politics due to the tactics of
English parties. The change, therefore, from natural boundaries to the
wirepulling of diplomatists at Kabul, Peking, or Downing Street is not
in the interests of peace, of our empire, or of civilization. Besides,
it should not be forgotten that we have added an element of disturbance,
far more subtle than the Babu, to our frontier difficulties. The timid
Kashmîri is unsurpassed as an intriguer and adventurer among tribes
beyond his frontier. The time seems to have arrived when, in the words
of the well-known Persian proverb,[107] the sparseness of races round
the Pamirs should bid us to be on our guard against the Affghan, the
“bad-raced” Kashmîrî, and the Kambó (supposed to be the tribe on the
banks of the Jhelum beyond Mozaffarabad). Perhaps, however, the Kambó is
the Heathen Chinee; and the proverb would then be entirely applicable
to the present question. After the construction of the Trans-Siberian
Railway, Russia will be able to exert the greatest pressure on China.
The Russian strength at Vladivostok is already enormous, and when the
time comes she can hurl an overwhelming force on what remains of Chinese
Manchuria, before which Chinese resistance will melt like snow. Peking
and the north of China are thus quite at the mercy of Russia. She will
find there the most populous country of those she rules in Asia, and with
ample supplies. China has a splendid raw material, militarily speaking;
and Russia could there form the biggest army that has ever been seen in
Asia, to hold _in terrorem_ over a rival or to hurl at the possessions of
a foe.

It is against such possibilities that the maintenance of “masterly
inactivity,” qualified by the moral and, if need be, pecuniary or other
material support of the Anglo-Indian Government is needed. This is
the object of this paper, before I enter into the more agreeable task
of describing the languages, customs, and country of perhaps the most
interesting races that inhabit the globe.

* * * * *

_The Times_ of the 30th November publishes a map of the Pamirs and an
account of the questions connected with them that, like many other
statements in its articles on “Indian affairs,” are incorrect and
misleading. Having been on a special mission by the Panjab Government, in
1866, when I discovered the races and languages of “Dardistan,” and gave
the country that name, and again having been on special duty with the
Foreign Department of the Government of India in 1886 in connection with
the Boorishki language and race of Hunza, Nagyr, and a part of Yasin,
regarding which I have recently completed Part I. of a large work, I
may claim to speak with some authority as regards these districts, even
if I had no other claim. The point which I wish to specially contradict
at present, is the one relating to the Russians bringing themselves into
almost direct contact with “the Hunza and other tribes subject to Kashmîr
and, as such, entitled to British protection and under British control.”

[Illustration: DR. LEITNER AS A BUKHARA MAULVI, WHEN CROSSING THE
FRONTIER IN 1866 DURING THE KASHMÎR WAR WITH THE DARD TRIBES.]

When I crossed the then Kashmîr frontier in 1866, in the disguise of
a Bokhara Maulvi, armed with a testimonial of Muhammadan theological
learning, I found that the tribes of Hunza, Nagyr, Dareyl, Yasin, and
Chitrál had united under the leadership of the last-named to expel the
Kashmîr invaders from the Gilgit Fort. My mission was a purely linguistic
one; but the sight of dying and dead men along the road, that of heads
stuck up along the march of the Kashmîr troops, and the attempts made on
my life by our feudatory, the late Maharaja of Kashmîr, compelled me to
pay attention to other matters besides the languages, legends, songs, and
fables of the interesting races with whom I now came in contact under
circumstances that might not seem to be favourable to the accomplishment
of my task. I had been warned by the then Lieutenant-Governor of the
Panjab, Sir Donald McLeod, whose like we have not seen again, not to
cross the frontier, as the tribes beyond were supposed to be cannibals;
but as I could not get the information of which I was in search within
our frontier, I had to cross it. My followers were frightened off by all
sorts of wild stories, till our party was reduced from some fifty to
three, including myself. The reason for all this was, that the Maharaja
was afraid that I should find out and report his breach of the Treaty by
which we sold Kashmîr to him in 1846, and in which the Indus is laid down
as his boundary on the west. In 1866, therefore, at any rate, even the
tenure of Gilgit, which is on the other side of the Indus, was contested
and illegal, whilst the still more distant Hunza and Nagyr had more than
once inflicted serious punishment on the Kashmîr troops that sought
to invade districts that have preserved their autonomy during the last
fourteen centuries, as was admitted by _The Times_ of the 2nd November,
1891, before its present change with the times, if an unintentional pun
may be permitted.

Then, as ever, the Anglo-Indian newspapers spoke of Russian intrigues in
those regions. I am perfectly certain that if, instead of the fussiness
of our statesmen and the sensationalism of our journals, the languages,
history, and relations of these little-known races had been studied by
them, we should never have heard of Russia in that part of the East. It
is also not by disingenuousness and short cuts on maps or in diplomacy,
but by _knowledge_, that physical, ethnographical, and political problems
are to be solved; nor will the bold and brilliant robberies of Russia be
checked by our handing over the inhabitants of the supposed “cradle of
the human race” to Affghan, Kashmîr, or Chinese usurpations. Above all,
it is a loss of time to palm off myths as history in order to suit the
policy or conceal the ignorance of the moment.

Just as little as Darwaz and Karategin are ancestral dominions of
Bokhara, and, therefore, under Russian influence, so little did even
Badakhshan, and much less so, Raushan, Shignan, and Wakhan, ever really
belong to Affghanistan. As for the Chinese hold on Turkistan, we
ourselves denied it when we coquetted with Yakub Khush Begi, though Kitái
was ever the acknowledged superior of Eastern Turkistan. If Hunza admits
any allegiance, it is to China, and not to Kashmîr; and the designations
of offices of rule in that country are of Chinese, and not of Aryan
origin, including even “Thàm,” the title of its Raja.

As a matter of fact, however, the vast number of tribes that inhabit
the many countries between the Indus and the Kuner own no master except
their own tribal head or the tribal council. From kidnapping Hunza,
where the right to plunder is monarchical, hereditary, and “ayeshó”
= “heaven-born,” to the peace and learning of republican Kandiá or
Gabriál, all want to be left alone. If a neighbour becomes troublesome,
he is raided on till an interchange of presents restores harmony. It
is impossible to say that either side is tributary to the other. The
wealthier gives the larger present; the bigger is considered the superior
in a general sort of way, and so two horses, two dogs, and a handful of
gold dust are yearly sent by Hunza to Kashmîr or to Yarkand as a cloak
for much more substantial exactions in return. Nagyr sends a basket of
apricots instead of the horses and dogs. In 1871 Chitrál still paid a
tribute to Badakhshan in slaves, but it would be absurd to infer from
this fact that Chitrál ever acknowledged the suzerainty of Jehandar Shah,
or of the Affghan faction that dispossessed him. Nor were the Khaibaris,
or other highway robbers, our rulers, because we paid them blackmail, or
they our subjects because they might bring us “sweetmeats.”

The points in which most Englishmen are as deficient as Russians are
generally proficient, are language and a sympathetic manner with natives.
That, however, linguistic knowledge is not useless may be inferred from
the fact that it enabled me, to use the words of my Chief, Commissary
General H. S. Jones, C.B., during the Russian War in 1855, “to pass
unharmed through regions previously unknown and among tribes hitherto
unvisited by any European.”

Also in topography and geography linguistics are necessary; and the
absurd mistakes now made at certain learned societies and in certain
scientific journals, regarding the Pamirs, would be avoided by a little
study of the Oriental languages concerned. In 1866, the map which
accompanies my philological work on “Dardistan” shows, on linguistic
grounds, and on the basis of native itineraries, the various Pamirs that
have been partially revealed within the last few weeks, or have been
laboriously ascertained by expensive Russian and British expeditions
between 1867 and 1890. The publication of my material, collected at
my own expense and which shall no longer be delayed, would have saved
many complications; but when, _e.g._, I pointed out, in 1866, that
the Indus, after leaving Bunji, ran west instead of south, as on the
then existing maps, I got into trouble with the Topographical Survey,
which “discovered” the fact through its well-known “Mulla” in 1876. The
salvation of India that is not made “departmentally” is crucified; and
whoever does not belong to the regular military or civil services has no
business to know or to suggest. Mr. Curzon, when presiding at a meeting
of the late Oriental Congress, assured us that a new era had risen; but
only the other night, at the Royal Geographical Society, a complaint was
made of the reluctance of official departments in giving the Society
information. As a rule, the mysteriousness of offices only conceals their
ignorance, of which we have an instance in Capt. Younghusband being sent
to shut the passes after the Russians had already stolen a march on, or
through, them.

* * * * *

The neutralization of the Pamirs is the only solution of a difficulty
created by the conjectural treaties of diplomatists and the ambition of
military emissaries. Left as a huge happy hunting-ground for sportsmen,
or as pasturage for nomads from whatever quarter, the Pamirs form the
most perfect “neutral zone” conceivable. That the wanderings of these
nomads should be accompanied by territorial or political claims, whether
by Russia, China, Affghanistan, Kashmir, or ourselves, is the height of
absurdity. As for Hunza-Nagyr, the sooner they are left to themselves the
better for us, who are not bound to help Kashmîr in encroaching on them.
Kashmîr managed them very fairly after 1848; and when it was occasionally
defeated, its prestige did not suffer, for the next summer invariably
found the tribal envoys again suing for peace and presents. The sooner
the Gilgit Agency is withdrawn, the greater will be our reputation for
fair dealing. Besides, we can take hostages from the Chiefs’ families
as guarantees of future tranquillity. Hunza-Nagyr are certainly not
favourable to Russia, whilst Nagyr is decidedly friendly to us. The
sensational account of Colonel Grambcheffsky’s visit to Hunza, which
he places on his map where Nagyr is, seems to be one of the usual traps
to involve us in great military expenditure and to alienate the tribes
from us. It is also not creditable that, for party or personal purposes,
the peaceful and pious Nagyris,—whom our own Gilgit Resident, Colonel
Biddulph, has reported on as distinguished for “timidity and incapacity
for war,” “never having joined the Hunza raids,” “slavery being unknown
in Nagyr,”—should be described as “kidnappers,” “raiders along with
Hunza,” “slave-dealers,” “robbers,” and “scoundrels,”—statements made by
a correspondent from Gilgit in a morning newspaper of to-day, and to all
of which I give an unqualified contradiction.

The establishment of the Gilgit Agency has already drawn attention to
the shortest road for the invasion of India; and it is significant that
its advocate at Gilgit should admit that all the tribes of the Indus
Valley “sympathized with the Hunzas,” from whose depredations they are
erroneously supposed to have suffered, and that they were likely “to
attack the British from behind by a descent on the Gilgit road” to
Kashmîr. Why should “the only other exit from Gilgit by way of the Indus
Valley be through territories held by tribes hostile to the British”?
Have the Gilgit doings already alienated the poor, but puritanical
Chilásis, tributaries of Kashmîr, who adjoin our settled British district
of Kaghan? Are we to dread the Republic of Muhammadan learning, Kandiá,
that has not a single fort; pastoral Dareyl; the Koli-Palus traders;
agricultural Tangir, and other little Republics—one only of eleven
houses? As for the places beyond them, our officials at Attock, Peshawur,
Rawalpindi, and Abbottabad will deal with the Pathan tribes in their own
neighbourhood, which have nothing to do with the adjoining Republics of
quiet, brave, and intelligent Dards, on both sides of the Indus, up to
Gilgit, to which I have referred, and which deserve our respectful study,
sympathy, and unobtrusive support.

G. W. LEITNER.

_16th December, 1891._

* * * * *

The following account, published by Reuter’s Telegram Company, will
supplement the preceding article:—

“WOKING, _Dec. 13_.

“A representative of Reuter’s Agency interviewed Dr. Leitner at his
residence at Woking to-day, with the object of eliciting some information
on the subject of the Hunza and Nagyr tribes, with whom the British
forces are at present in conflict.

“Dr. Leitner, it is needless to say, is the well-known discoverer of
the races and languages of Dardistan (the country between Kabul and
Kashmir), which he so named when sent on a linguistic mission by the
Punjab Government in 1864, at a time when the various independent tribes,
including Hunza and Nagyr, had united in order to turn the troops of the
Maharaja of Kashmir out of Gilgit. At that time it was considered that
the treaty of 1846, by which Great Britain sold Kashmir to the Maharaja,
had confined him to the Indus as his westward boundary, and had therefore
rendered his occupation of Gilgit an encroachment and breach of treaty.

“Dr. Leitner, although the country was in a state of war, which is
not favourable to scientific research, managed to collect a mass of
information, and a fine ethnographical collection, which is at the museum
at Woking. He has also made many friends in the country, and is doubtless
the highest, if not the only, authority regarding these countries.

“Dr. Leitner, who was quite unprepared for to-day’s visit, said that the
relations which he had kept up with the natives of Gilgit, Hunza, Nagyr,
and Yasin forced him to the conclusion that a conflict had been entered
into which might have easily been avoided by a little more sympathy and
knowledge, especially of the Nagyr people. Indeed, it was not a light
matter that could have induced the venerable chief of Nagyr to make
common cause with his hereditary foe of Hunza, unless he feared that the
British threatened their respective independence.

“Not many weeks ago Dr. Leitner received a letter from the chief of
Nagyr, in which he recommended to his kind attention his son, now in
Kashmir, on the ground that he, even more so than any other member of his
numerous family, was a well-wisher to the British Government. At that
time the chief could not have had any feelings of animosity, although
he might have protested, together with his rival of Hunza, against the
British occupation of Chalt. In fact, it was not true that Nagyr and
Hunza were really subject to Kashmir, except in the vague way in which
these States constantly recognised the suzerainty of a neighbouring power
in the hope of getting substantial presents for their offerings of a
few ounces of gold dust, a couple of dogs, or basket of apricots, etc.
Thus Chitrál, the ally of Great Britain, used to pay a tribute of slaves
to the Ameers of Badakshan; but it would be absurd on that ground to
render Chitrál a part of Afghanistan, because Badakshan now, in a manner,
belongs to Abdurrahman. Hunza, again, sends a tribute to China; and, in
a general way, China is the only Power that ever had a shadow of claim
on these countries, but it is a mere shadow. Dr. Leitner said, the only
policy for Great Britain is, in the words of the Secretary of State or
Viceroy, ‘to maintain and strengthen all the indigenous Governments.’
This policy he would extend to the triangle which has Peshawur for its
base, and thereby interpose a series of almost impregnable mountainous
countries, which would be sufficiently defended by the independence of
their inhabitants. If Circassia could oppose Russia for thirty years,
even although Russia had the command of the Black Sea, how much more
effective would be the resistance of the innumerable Circassias which
Providence had placed between ourselves and the Russian frontier in Asia?
We ought to have made these tribes look upon us as a distant but powerful
friend, ready to help them in an emergency; but now, by attacking two
of them, we caused Russia to be looked upon as the coming Saviour;
indeed, the people of Wakhan, on the Pamir side of Hunza, were already
doing so, whilst Shignan and Roshan, which had been almost depopulated
by our friends, the Afghans, had already begun to emigrate into Russian
territory. Here Dr. Leitner added that the Russian claims through Bokhara
were as illusory as those of Kashmir, and historically even less founded
than those of China. Indeed, no one had a right to these countries
except the indigenous peoples and chiefs who inhabited them; and in
this scramble for the regions round the Pamir, great Britain was simply
breaking down her natural defences by stamping out the independence of
native tribes and making military roads; for it was the absence of those
roads on the British side that rendered it impossible to an invader to do
England any real harm or to advance on India proper.

Asked why the trouble had broken out at the present time, Dr. Leitner
said, that he had been kept without information of the immediate cause,
but he felt certain that it was owing to the attempt to construct a
military road to Hunza, whereby England would only facilitate the advent
of a possible invader from that direction, besides making Hunza throw in
its lot with that invader. It was perfectly untrue, as alleged in some of
the Indian papers, that the Nagyris were kidnappers, and that our attack
would be an advantage to the cause of anti-slavery. The fact was just
the other way. Kidnapping had been stopped in 1869 as far as Hunza was
concerned.

The Nagyris never raided at all; Chitrál also gave up selling its Káfir
or Shiah subjects into slavery when the markets of Badakshan were closed;
but now that confusion had caused the English and Russian advance,
Hunza had again taken to raiding, and Chitrál to selling slaves. As for
Nagyr, the case was quite different; they were an excellent people and
very quiet, so much so that Colonel Biddulph, the Resident, described
them as “noted for timidity and incapacity for war,” whereas in his
“Tribes of the Hindu Kush” he also states that the people of Hunza are
not warlike in the sense in which the Afghans are said to be so. No
doubt the Nagyris dislike war, but would fight bravely if driven to do
so. Colonel Biddulph adds: “They are settled agricultural communities,
proud of the independence they have always maintained for fourteen
centuries, hemmed in by lofty mountains, and living under rulers who
boast of long, unbroken descent from princes of native blood.” He also
bears testimony to the fact that “the Nagyr people were never concerned
in these raids, and slavery does not exist among them.” At the same time
Dr. Leitner fully admitted that the Hunza people were not a model race,
since they used to be desperate raiders and kidnappers, and very immoral
and impious. The father of the present king used to dance in a state of
drunkenness in the mosque; but, on the other hand, we were not bound to
be the reformers of Hunza by pulling down one of the bulwarks to our
Indian Empire. Hunza was a picturesque country in every sense; it was
nominally governed by fairies: ecstatic women were the prophetesses of
the tribe, recounted its past glories, and told what was going on in the
neighbouring valleys, so they were its historians and journalists as well
as its prophetesses. No war was undertaken unless the fairies gave their
consent, and the chief fairy, Yudeni, who protects the “Tham” (a Chinese
title), has no doubt already struck the sacred drum in order to call the
men of the country to defend the “Heaven-born,” as their chief is called.
The two “Thams” of Hunza and Nagyr, who have a common ancestry, are also
credited with the power of causing rain, and there would certainly appear
to be some foundation for this remarkable fact.

The two tribes are great polo players; archery on horseback is common
amongst them; and they are very fair ibex hunters.

The people of Nagyr are as pious and gentle as those of Hunza are the
contrary. Their language went back to simple sounds as indicative of
a series of human relations or experiences, and clearly showed that
the customs and associations of a race were at the basis of so-called
rules of grammar. Nothing more wonderful than their language could be
conceived; it went to the root of human thought as expressed in language,
but the language had already suffered by foreign influences between 1866,
when one son of the Rajah of Nagyr taught him, and 1886, when another son
of the Rajah continued his lessons.

As regards religion, the Hunzas are Mulais, a mysterious and heretical
sect, akin to the Druses of the Lebanon, practising curious rites,
and practically infidels. He had obtained a few pages of their secret
Bible, the Kelam-i-pir, which throws much light on the doctrines of
the so-called “assassins” during the Crusades. The Nagyris are pious
Muhammadans of the Shiah denomination.

Dr. Leitner then showed the map accompanying his linguistic work on
Dardistan. After comparing it with the most recent Russian and British
maps, that of Dr. Leitner gives the fullest and clearest information,
not only as regards Hunza-Nagyr, where all the places where fighting
has occurred are marked, but also as regards the various Pamirs, thus
anticipating in 1866 on linguistic grounds and native itineraries the
different Pamirs that have recently been settled geographically. It
shows that the ethnographical frontier of the Pamirs to the north are
the Turki-speaking nomads of the trans-Altaic range (now Russian); to
the west the Persian, or Tajiks (now Afghan); to the south the Aryan
Hindu Kush [British]; and to the east the wall of the Serikol Mountains,
dividing or admitting Chinese, Tibetan, or Mongolian influence. The
indeterminate river courses through the Pamir, or a line stretched across
its plateaux, valleys, and mountains, are obviously an unmaintainable
demarcation, which is liable to be transgressed by shepherds under
whatever rule; but the whole of the Pamirs together, as a huge and
happy hunting-ground, are, no doubt, if neutralized by the three Powers
concerned, the best possible frontier, as “no man’s land,” and a perfect
neutral zone. “What matter,” continued Dr. Leitner, “if the passes are
easy of access on the Russian side, it is on the descent, and on the
ascent on our side that almost insuperable difficulties begin. Where we
are now fighting in Hunza-Nagyr only the low state of the river which
divides Hunza from Nagyr enables us to make a simultaneous advance on
both. Otherwise we should have to let ourselves man by man down from one
ledge of rock to another, and if we miss our footing be whirled away
in the most terrible torrent the imagination can conceive. Why, then,
destroy such a great defence in our favour if Hunza is kept friendly,
as it so easily can be, especially with the pressure exercised on it by
the Nagyris, whose forts frown on those of Hunza all down the river that
separates their countries? I cannot conceive anything more wanton or
suicidal than the present advance even if we should succeed in removing
one of the most important landmarks in the history of the human race by
shooting down the handful of Nagyris and Hunzas that oppose us. They
preserve the pre-historic remnants of legends and customs that explain
much that is still obscure in the life and history of European races.
A few hundred pounds a year judiciously spent and the promise of the
withdrawal of the Gilgit Agency, which was already once before attacked
when under Colonel Biddulph, would be a far better way of securing
peace than shooting down with Gatlings and Martini-Henry rifles people
who defend their independence within their crags with bows, arrows,
battleaxes, and a few muskets; and promise of the withdrawal of the
Gilgit Agency might be contingent upon the increase of the number of
hostages belonging to the chiefs’ families that are now annually sent to
Kashmir as a guarantee of friendly relations.

The Hunzas and Nagyris are not to be despised as foes; they are very
good marksmen. In 1886, when the Kashmir troops thought they had cleared
the plain before the Gilgit Fort entirely of enemies, and not a person
was to be seen outside it, the tribesmen would glide along the ground
unperceived behind a stone pushed in front of them, and resting their
old flint muskets on them shoot off the Maharajah’s Sepoys whenever they
showed themselves outside the fort. Indeed, it was this circumstance
that induced Dr. Leitner to abandon the protection of the fort and make
friends with the tribesmen outside. All the tribes desired was to be
left alone in their mountain fastnesses. They had sometimes internecine
feuds, but would unite against the common foe. It was merely emasculating
their powers of resistance to subject them, either on the one side to
Bokhara, which meant Russia, or to Afghanistan or Kashmir, which meant
Great Britain, or to China, which meant dependence on a Power that might
be utilized any day against Great Britain after the completion of the
trans-Siberian railway. Diplomatists, frontier delimitation commissions,
and officers, both British and Russian, anxious for promotion, had,
continued Dr. Leitner, created the present confusion; and it was now high
time to rely rather on the physical obstacles that guaranteed the safety
alike of the British, Russian, and Chinese frontiers than on the chapter
of political accidents.

Dr. Leitner, who is going to give a lecture at the Westminster Town-hall
to-morrow afternoon on “The Races, Religions, and Politics of the Pamir
Regions,” then showed our representative Col. Grambcheffsky’s map,
which put Hunza where Nagyr ought to be, and ignored the latter place
altogether, just as did the last map of the Geographical Society in
connection with Mr. Littledale’s tour. Grambcheffsky’s map, however, had
since been corrected by evidently an English map, and it was strange that
Russians had easier access to English maps than Englishmen themselves.
In fact, all this secrecy, Dr. Leitner maintained, was injurious to
the acquisition of full knowledge regarding imperfectly known regions.
Attention was then directed to a number of maps, that of Mr. Drew, a
Kashmir official, showing Hunza-Nagyr to be beyond Kashmir influence.
This was practically confirmed by several official maps and the
statements of Colonels Biddulph and Hayward, the latter of whom placed
the Kashmir frontier towards Hunza at Nomal, whilst the British are now
fighting sixteen and a half miles beyond in front of Mayun, where the
first Hunza fort is. The Nagyr frontier Dr. Leitner places at Jaglot,
which is nineteen miles from Nilt, where we are simultaneously fighting
the first Nagyr fort.

Dr. Leitner, in conclusion, expressed his conviction, from his knowledge
of the people concerned, that any one with a sympathetic mind could get
them to do anything in reason; but that encroachments, whether overt or
covert, would be resisted to the utmost. Indeed, England’s restlessness
had brought on the present trouble.

In 1866, he stated, the very name of Russia was unknown in these parts,
and in 1886 was only known to a few. Yet the English Press in both these
years spoke of Russian intrigues among the tribes. He did not fear them
as long as the Indian Empire relied on its natural defences, its inner
strength, and on justice to its chiefs and people, and as long as its
policy with the tribes was guided by knowledge and good feeling.

APPENDIX II.

NOTES ON RECENT EVENTS IN CHILÁS AND CHITRÁL.

In 1866 I was sent by the Punjab Government on a linguistic mission to
Kashmir and Chilás at the instance of the Bengal Asiatic Society and
on the motion of the late Sir George Campbell, who hoped to identify
Kailás or the Indian Olympus with Chilás.[108] Although unable to
support that conjecture, I collected material which was published in
Part I. of my “Dardistan” and which the Government declared “as throwing
very considerable and important light on matters heretofore veiled in
great obscurity.” That some obscurity still exists, is evident from the
_Times_ telegram of to-day (5th December, 1892), in which an item of
news from the Tak [Takk] valley is described as coming from _Chitrál_,
a distant country with which Chilás has nothing to do. The Takk village
is fortified, and through the valley is the shortest and easiest road
to our British district of Kaghán. It is alleged that some headmen of
Takk wished to see Dr. Robertson at Gilgit, who thereupon sent a raft to
bring them, but the raft was fired on and Capt. Wallace, who went to its
assistance, was wounded. [Chilás is on the Kashmir side of the Indus, and
the Gilgit territory is reached by crossing the Indus at Bunji.]

The incident is ascribed either to “_the treachery of the men who
professed willingness to COME IN_” or to the mischievousness of “other
persons.” It is probable from this suggestion of treachery and the
unconscious use of the words “to come in,” which is the Anglo-Indian
equivalent for “surrender,” that the headmen of Takk were _not_ willing
to make over their Fort to the British or to open the road to Gilgit.
The Takk incident, therefore, is not a part of the so-called “_Chitrál
usurpation_,” under which heading it immediately appears, but is a part
of _our_ usurpation on the tribes inhabiting the banks of the Indus. In
1843, these tribes inflicted a severe loss on the Sikh invaders, and
in my “history of the wars with Kashmir” the part taken by the manly
defenders of Takk, now reduced from 131 to some 90 houses, is given in
detail. It seems to me that as the Gilgit force was unable to support
“the Chitrál usurpation” of our protégé, Afzul-ul-Mulk, owing to his
being killed by his uncle Sher Afzul, it is to be employed to coerce the
Indus tribes to open out a road which ought never to have been withdrawn
from their hold. About 50 years ago the Takk men were stirred into
so-called rebellion by Kashmir agents in order to justify annexation. It
is to be hoped that history will not repeat itself, or that, at any rate,
the next 50 years will see the Indus tribes as independent and peaceful
as they have been since 1856, especially in Chilás (before 1892), and as
mysterious as Hunza ought to have remained till our unnecessary attack on
that country caused practically unknown Russia to be looked upon as the
Saviour of Nations “rightly struggling to be free” (see Baron Vrevsky’s
reply to the Hunza deputation). _Quem Deus vult perdere, prius dementat_;
and no greater instance of folly can be conceived, than the construction
of a military road through countries in which the chamois is often
puzzled for its way. Nor was the attention of the Russians drawn to them
before we made our own encroachments.

As for the Pamirs, whatever may be the present interpretation of Prince
Gortchakoff’s Convention, the Russians were unwilling to let political
consequences or limits accompany the erratic wanderings of Kirghiz sheep
in search of pasturage in that region. Prince Gortchakoff’s advocacy of
a Neutral Zone and of the autonomy of certain tribes was justified by
the facts (which he, however, rather guessed than knew) and was worthy
alike of that Diplomatist and of our acceptance in the interests of India
and of peace. The incorporation of certain Districts in the domain, or
under the sphere of influence, of Afghanistan, was distasteful to tribes
attached to their hereditary rulers or to republican institutions and was
not too willingly accepted by the Amir of Afghanistan, who now expects
us to defend the white Elephants that we have given him better than we
did Panjdeh. Some Muláis that had fled from Russian tyranny to Afghan
territory assured me that “the finger of an Afghan was more oppressive
than the whole Russian army.” Indeed, so far as Central Asia is
concerned, Russia, with the exception of certain massacres, has hitherto
behaved, on the whole, as a great civilizing power.[109]

As for Sirdar Nizám-ul-Mulk, this is his _name_ and not his _title_. He
is the “Mihtar” or “Prince” Nizám-ul-Mulk, and neither an Indian “Sirdár”
nor a “Nizám.” He is also the “Badshah” of Turikoh, this being the
district assigned to him in his father’s lifetime as the heir-apparent.
He was snubbed by us for offering to relieve that excellent officer,
Col. Lockhart, when a prisoner in Wakhan! He has written to me from
Turikoh for “English phrases and words with their Persian equivalents
as a pleasure and a requirement.” This does not look like hostility to
the British. He spoke to me in 1886 of his brother Afzul’s bravery with
affection and pride, though he has ever maintained his own acknowledged
right as the successor of his father Amán-ul-Mulk. If he has been
alienated from us or has ever been tempted to throw himself into the arms
of Russia, it has most assuredly been our fault. Besides, just as we have
abandoned the Shiah Hazaras, our true friends during the late Afghan War,
to be destroyed by their religious and political foe, the Sunni Amir
Abdurrahman, so have the Amir Sher Ali and the Tham of Hunza, Safdar Ali
Khan, rued their trust in Russian Agents. I regret, therefore, to find
in the _Times_ telegram of to-day that “the Nizám” “is acting without
the support of the British Agent” “who has not interfered,” when he had
already interfered in favour of the usurper Afzul-ul-Mulk.

As for the connivance of Amir Abdurrahman, my “rough history of Dardistan
from 1800 to 1872” shows that, in one sense, Chitrál is tributary to
Badakhshán and as we have assigned Badakhshán to the Amir, he, no doubt,
takes an interest in Chitrál affairs. I believe, however, that interest
to be somewhat platonic, and he knows that his friend Jehandár Shah
(the late wrongfully deposed hereditary ruler of Badakhshán) never paid
any tribute to Afghanistan. But Chitrál once also paid tribute to Dîr,
with whose able Chief, Rahmat-ullah-Khan, “the Nizám” is connected by
marriage. Chitrál on the other hand has _received_ a subsidy from Kashmir
since 1877, but this was as much a tribute from Kashmir to Aman-ul-Mulk,
as a sign of his subjection to Kashmir, for shortly after he made offers
of allegiance to Kabul. With all alike it is

“The good old rule, the simple plan,
That they should take who have the power
And they should keep who can.”

It is misleading to speak of their relations to neighbouring States as
“tributary.” Are the Khyberis tributary to us or we to them, because we
pay them a tribute to let our merchants travel through their Pass? Have
we never ourselves come, first as suppliants, then as merchants, then as
guests, then as advisers, then as protectors, and, finally, as conquerors?

The procedure of Afghanistan, of Chitrál, of Kashmir, and of our own is
very much alike and so are the several radii of influence of the various
factors in “the question.” We have our fringe of independent frontier
tribes with whom we flirt, or wage war, as suits the convenience of the
moment. Afghanistan has a similar fringe of independent Ishmaelites round
it and even through it, whose hands are against everybody and everybody’s
hands against them. Chitrál is threatened all along its line by the
Kafirs, who even make a part of Badakhshán insecure, but are nevertheless
our very good friends. Kashmir has its fringe on its extreme border,
especially since, in violation of our treaty of 1846, it has attacked
countries _beyond the Indus on the west_, including the Kunjûtis of
Hunza, who resumed their raiding—which had ceased in 1867—during and
after Col. Lockhart’s visit in 1886. Yet there can be little doubt about
“the loyalty” of those concerned. The Amirs of Afghanistan consider
themselves “_shields of India_,” as I have heard two of them say, and
so did our Ally of Kashmir, who ought never to have been reduced to a
subordinate feudatory position. What wonder then that old Amán-ul-Mulk of
Chitrál should also have tried to become a buffer between Afghanistan on
the West, Kashmir on the East, India on the South and, latterly, Russia
in the North, if indeed the whole story of Russian intrigue in Chitrál
be at all truer than a similar mare’s nest which we discovered in Hunza?
It is the policy of Russia to create false alarms and thereby to involve
us in expenditure, whilst standing by and posing as the future saviour
of the tribes. Our tendency to compromises and subservient Commissions
of delimitation and to “scuttling” occasionally, is also well known and
so we are offered in Russian papers “_an Anglo-Russian understanding on
the subject of Chitrál_,” as if Chitrál was not altogether out of the
sphere of Russia’s legitimate influence! It is also amusing to find in
the _Novosti_ that Russia’s sole desire is “to prevent _Afghanistan_ from
falling into British hands.” We are already spending at Gilgit on food
etc. for our troops more in one year than were spent in the 40 years of
the so-called mismanagement of Kashmir, which I myself steadily exposed,
but which kept the frontier far more quiet than it has been since the
revival of the Gilgit Agency. There is every prospect now of heavier and
continued expenditure as the policy of the Foreign Department of the
Government of India develops. On that policy a _veto_ should at once
be put by the British Parliament and public, if our present Liberal
Administration cannot do so without pressure from without. We should
conciliate Nizam-ul-Mulk before it is too late. He is connected with Umra
Khan of Jandôl and with the influential Mullah Shahu of Bajaur through
his maternal uncle, Kokhan Beg. He has also connections in Badakhshan,
Hunza and Dîr, as already stated. Indeed, we ought to have given him our
support from the beginning. I doubt whether it would be desirable to
subdivide Chitrál as stated in to-day’s _Times_, letting Sher Afzul keep
Chitrál proper, giving Yasin to “the Nizám” and letting Umra Khan retain
what he has already seized of Southern Chitrál. As for Sher Afzul, I
believe, that he is also “loyal.”

As for Hunza, I am not at all certain that the fugitive, Safdar Ali Khan,
really murdered his father. At all events when the deed was committed,
I find that it was attributed to Muhammad Khan,[110] probably not the
present Mir Muhammad Nazim who has acknowledged the suzerainty of
England (through Kashmir) and of China. The latter power has always had
something to say to Hunza, and the very title of its Chief “Tham” is
of Chinese origin. The subsidy that China used to pay for keeping open
the commercial road from Badakhshan and Wakhan through the Pamirs along
Kunjût (Hunza) to Yarkand, was about £380 per annum, and this sum was
divided between four States and ensured the immunity of the route from
raids.[111] I doubt whether in future £380 a year on Hunza alone will
enable us to keep it quiet, and I am sure that the lofty superciliousness
with which Chinese officials discuss the Pamir question, as something
that scarcely concerns them, is no evidence of that pertinacious power
abandoning claims to a suzerainty in those regions which are historically
founded, although their exercise has been more by an appeal to
imagination of the glorious and invincible, if distant, “Khitái,” than by
actual interference.

Indeed, it is China alone that has a grievance—against Russia for the
occupation of the Alichur Pamir—against Afghanistan for expelling her
troops from Somatash (of subsequent Yanoff fame)—and against England
for encroaching on her ancient feudatory of Hunza, whose services in
suppressing the Khoja rebellion in 1847 are commemorated in a tablet on
one of the gates of Yarkand.

[Illustration: H. H. Mihtar Nizam-ul-Mulk and his late Yasin Council.]

[Illustration: Chitrali Musicians and the Badakshi Poet, Taighun Shah.]

NOTE.—We add a reproduction of the photographs of the Mihtar and Badshah
Nizam-ul-Mulk, sitting in Council with his uncle, Bahadur Khan, now at
Gilgit, where he represented Afzul-ul-Mulk. On the Nizam’s left is his
foster-uncle, Maimun Shah, whilst behind him stand our Indian Agent,
Wafadár Khan and a Chitráli office-holder, Wazîr Khan, of corresponding
rank. We also give the portrait of the Chitrál Court poet and musician,
the celebrated Taighûn Shah, one of whose songs, with its notation, was
published in our issue of the 1st of January, 1891. He is seated with the
two flute-players who always precede the King of Chitrál when on a tour.

* * * * *

Although the period may be past in which a great English Journal could
ask, “_what_ is Gilgit?” the contradictory telegrams and newspaper
accounts which we receive regarding the countries adjoining Gilgit show
that the Press has still much to learn. Names of places, as far apart
as Edinburgh and London, are put within a day’s march on foot. Names of
men figure on maps as places and the relationships of the Chiefs of the
region in question are invented or confounded as may suit the politics
of the moment, if not the capacity of the printer. The injunctions of
the Decalogue are applied or misapplied, extended or curtailed, to suit
immediate convenience, and a different standard of morality is constantly
being found for our friends of to-day or our foes of to-morrow. The youth
Afzul-ul-Mulk was credited with all human virtues and with even more than
British manliness, as he was supposed to be friendly to us. He had given
his country into our hands in order to receive our support against his
elder brother, the acknowledged heir of the late Aman-ul-Mulk of Chitrál,
but that elder brother, Nizám-ul-Mulk, was no less friendly to English
interests, although he has the advantage of being a man of capacity
and independence. The sudden death of Aman-ul-Mulk coincided with the
presence of our protégé at Chitrál, and the first thing that the virtuous
Afzul-ul-Mulk did, was to invite as many brothers as were within reach to
a banquet when he murdered them. No doubt, as a single-minded potentate,
he did not wish to be diverted from the task of governing his country by
the performance of social duties to the large circle of acquaintances in
brothers and their families which Providence bestows on a native ruler or
claimant in Chitrál and Yasin. A member of the Khush-waqtia dynasty of
Yasin, which is a branch of the Chitrál dynasty, told me when I expressed
my astonishment at the constant murders in his family: “A real relative
in a high family is a person whom God points out to one to kill as an
obstacle in one’s way, whereas a foster-relative (generally of a lower
class) is a true friend who rises and falls with one’s own fortune” (it
being the custom for a scion of a noble house to be given out to a nurse.)

* * * * *

The dynasty of Chitral is said to have been established by Baba Ayub,
an adventurer of Khorassan. He adopted the already existing name of
_Katór_, whence the dynasty is called Katore. The Emperor Baber refers
to the country of Katór in his Memoirs and a still more ancient origin
has been found in identifying Katór with “Kitolo, the King of the Great
Yuechi, who, in the beginning of the 5th century, conquered Balkh and
Gandhara, and whose son established the Kingdom of the Little Yuechi,
at Peshawur.” (See Biddulph’s “Tribes of the Hindoo Koosh,” page 148.)
General Cunningham asserts that the King of Chitrál takes the title of
Shah Kator, which has been held for nearly 2,000 years, and the story of
their descent from Alexander may be traced to the fact that they were the
successors of the Indo-Grecian Kings in the Kabul valley. If Katór is a
corruption of Kaisar, then let it not be said that the remnant of the
Katore exclaimed with the Roman gladiator: “Ave, Kaisar-i-Hind, morituri
te salutant.”

Amán-ul-Mulk, the late ruler of Chitrál, was, indeed, a terrible man,
who to extraordinary courage joined the arts of the diplomatist. He
succeeded his elder brother, surnamed Adam-Khôr or “man-eater.” His
younger brother, Mir Afzul, is said to have been killed by him or to
have committed a convenient suicide; another brother, Sher Afzul, who is
now in possession of Chitrál, was long a fugitive in Badakhshan whence
he has just returned with a few Afghans (such as any pretender can ever
collect) and a hundred of the Chitráli slaves that used to be given in
tribute to the Mir of Badakhshan, which itself never paid a tribute to
Kabul before the late Sher Ali of Afghanistan installed Mahmud Shah, who
expelled his predecessor Jehandar Shah, the friend of Abdur-Rahman, the
present Amir of Afghanistan. Another brother of Aman-ul-Mulk was Kokhan
Beg, whose daughter married the celebrated Mullah Shahu Baba, a man of
considerable influence in Bajaur, who is feared by the Badshah of Kunar
(a feudatory of Kabul and a friend of the British) and is an enemy of
the Kamôji Kafirs, that infest one of the roads to Chitrál. This Kokhan
Beg, who was a maternal uncle of Afzul-ul-Mulk, was killed the other
day by his brother Sher Afzul coming from Badakhshan. I mention all
this, as in the troubles that are preparing, the ramifications of the
interests of the various pretenders are a matter of importance. Other
brothers of Aman-ul-Mulk are: Muhammad Ali (Moriki), Yádgar Beg, Shádman
Beg and Bahádur Khán (all by a mother of lower degree), and another
Bahádur Khán, who was on the Council of Nizám-ul-Mulk. Nizám-ul-Mulk has
therefore to contend with one or more of his uncles, and by to-day’s
telegram[112] is on his way to the Chitrál Fort in order to expel Sher
Afzul with the aid of the very troops that Sher Afzul had sent to turn
out Afzul-ul-Mulk’s Governor from Yasin. I believe that Nizám-ul-Mulk
has or had two elder half-brothers, Gholam of Oyôn and Majid Dastagir of
Drôshp; but, in any case, he was the eldest legitimate son and, according
to Chitrál custom, was invested with the title of Badshah of Turikoh,
the rule of which valley compelled his absence from Chitrál and not “his
wicked and intriguing disposition” as alleged by certain Anglo-Indian
journals. Of other brothers of Nizám-ul-Mulk was Shah Mulk (of lower
birth), who was Governor of Daraung and was killed by Afzul-ul-Mulk. He
used to live at Dros (near Pathan in Shashi). Afzul-ul-Mulk of Drasun,
whom we have already mentioned as a wholesale fratricide, was killed in
his flight to one of the towers of the Chitrál Fort from the invading
force of his uncle, Sher Afzul of Badakhshan. A younger half-brother is
also Behram-ul-Mulk (by a lower mother), called “Viláyeti,” of Moroi in
Andarti. Other brothers are: Amin-ul-Mulk, a brother of good birth of
Oyôn (Shoghôt), who was reared by a woman of the Zondré or highest class;
Wazir-ul-Mulk (of low birth) of Brôz; Abdur-Rahman (low-born) at Owir
(Barpèsh), and Badshah-i-Mulk, also of Owir, who was reared by the wife
of Fath-Ali Shah. There are no doubt other brothers also whose names I do
not know. Murid, who was killed by Sher Afzul, is also an illegitimate
brother.

A few words regarding the places mentioned in recent telegrams may
be interesting: Shogôth is the name of a village, of a fort, and of
a district which is the north-western part of Chitrál, and it also
comprises the Ludkho and tributary valleys. Through the district is
the road leading to the Dara and Nuqsán passes, to the right and left
respectively, at the bottom of which is a lake on which official toadyism
has inflicted the name of Dufferin in supersession of the local name.
Darushp (Drôshp) is another big village in this district and in the
Ludkho valley, and Andarti is a Fort in it within a mile of the Kafir
frontier. The inhabitants of Shogôth are descendants of Munjanis, whose
dialect (Yidgah) I refer to elsewhere, and chiefly profess to be Shiahs,
in consequence of which they have been largely exported as slaves by
their Sunni rulers. Baidam Khan, a natural son of Aman-ul-Mulk, was the
ruler of it. The Ludkho valley is traversed by the Arkari river which
falls into that of Chitrál. At the head of the Arkari valley are three
passes over the Hindukhush, including the evil-omened “Nuqsán,” which
leads to Zeibak, the home of the heretical Maulais (co-religionists
of the Assassins of the Crusades) in Badakhshán. It is shorter, more
direct, and freer from Kafir raids than the longer and easier Dora pass.
_Owir_ is a village of 100 houses on the Arkari river, and is about 36
miles from Zeibak. _Drasan_ is both the name of a large village and of
a fort which commands the Turikoh valley, a subdivision of the Drasan
District, which is the seat of the heir-apparent to the Chitrál throne
(Nizám-ul-Mulk). Yet the _Pioneer_, in its issue of the 5th October last,
considers that Lord Lansdowne had settled the question of succession
in favour of Afzul-ul-Mulk, that Nizám-ul-Mulk would thus be driven to
seek Russian aid, but that any such aid would be an infringement of
the rights of Abdur-Rahman. Now that Abdur-Rahman is suspected, on the
flimsiest possible evidence, to have connived at Sher Afzul’s invasion
of Chitrál, we seek to pick a quarrel with him for what a few weeks
ago was considered an assertion of his rights. Let it be repeated once
for always that if ever Abdur-Rahman or Nizám-ul-Mulk, or the Chief of
Hunza or Kashmir or Upper India fall into the arms of Russia, it will
be _maxima nostra culpa_. I know the Amir Abdur-Rahman, as I knew the
Amir Sher Ali, as I know Nizám-ul-Mulk, and of all I can assert that
no truer friends to England existed in Asia than these Chiefs. Should
Abdur-Rahman be alienated, as Sher Ali was, or Nizám-ul-Mulk might
be, it will be entirely in consequence of our meddlesomeness and our
provocations. Russia has merely to start a will-o’-the-wisp conversation
between Grombcheffsky and the Chief of Hunza, when there is internal
evidence that Grombcheffsky was never in Hunza at all, and certainly
never went there by the Muztagh Pass, that we, ignoring the right of
China and of the treaty with Kashmir in 1846, forgetful of the danger
in our rear and the undesirability of paving for an invader the road in
front, fasten a quarrel on Hunza-Nagyr, and slaughter its inhabitants.
No abuse or misrepresentation was spared in order to inflame the British
public even against friendly and inoffensive Nagyr. What wonder that a
Deputation was sent from Hunza to seek Russian aid and that it returned
contented with presents, and public expressions of sympathy which
explained away the Russian official refusal as softened by private
assurances of friendship? Whatever may be the disaster to civilization in
the ascendancy of Russian rule, the personal behaviour of Russian agents
in Central Asia is, generally, pleasant. As in Hunza, so in Afghanistan,
some strange suspicion of the disloyalty of its Chief, suggested by
Russia, may involve us in a senseless war and inordinate expense, with
the eventual result that Afghanistan must be divided between England and
Russia, and their frontiers in Asia become conterminous. Then will it
be impossible for England ever to oppose Russia in Europe, because fear
of complications in Asia will paralyze her. Then the tenure of India
will depend on concessions, for which that country is not yet ripe, or
on a reign of terror, either course ending in the withdrawal of British
administration from, at any rate, Northern India. Yet it is “_Fas ab
hosti doceri_,” and when Prince Gortschakoff urged the establishment of a
neutral zone with autonomous states, including Badakhshan, he advocated
a policy that would have conducted to centuries of peace and to the
preservation of various ancient forms of indigenous Oriental civilization
by interposing the mysterious blanks of the Pamirs and the inaccessible
countries of the Hindukush between Russian and British aggression.

* * * * *

Instead of this consummation so devoutly to be wished, and possible even
now, though late, if action be taken under good advice and in the fulness
of knowledge, either Power—

“Thus with his stealthy pace
With Tarquin’s ravishing strides, towards his design
Moves like a ghost.”

If ever the pot called the kettle black, it is the story of Anglo-Russian
recriminations. Russian intrigues are ever met by British manœuvres and
Muscovite earth-hunger can only be paralleled by English annexations.
_Here_ a tribe is instigated to revolt, so that its extermination
may “rectify a boundary,” _there_ an illusory scientific frontier is
gradually created by encroachments on the territories of feudatories
accused of disloyalty, if not of attempts to poison our agents. By
setting son against father, brother against brother and, in the general
tumult, destroying intervening republics and monarchies, Anglo-Russian
dominions are becoming conterminous. Above all

“There’s not a one of them but in his house
I keep a servant fee’d.”

And it is this unremitting suspicion which is alike the secret of present
success and the cause of eventual failure in wresting and keeping
Asiatic countries and of the undying hatred which injured natives feel
towards Europeans.

The attempt to obtain the surrender of the Takk fort, and of the Takk
valley, a short and easy road to the British District of Kaghán, has
merely indicated to Russia the nearest way to India, just as we forced
her attention to Hunza and are now drawing it to Chitrál. David Urquhart
used to accuse us of conspiracy with Russia in foreign politics. Lord
Dufferin in his Belfast speech sought the safety of India in his
friendship with M. de Giers and his Secretary popularized Russia in India
by getting his work on “Russia” translated into Urdu. Certainly the
coincidence of Russian as well as British officials being benefited by
their respective encroachments, Commissions, Delimitations, etc., would
show their “mutual interest” to consist in keeping up the farce of “Cox
and Box” in Central Asia, which must end in a tragedy.

As an official since 1855, when I served Her Majesty during the Russian
War, I wish to warn the British public against the will-o’-the-wisp of
our foreign policy, especially in India. I can conceive that a small,
moral and happy people should seek the ascendancy of its principles, even
if accompanied by confusion in the camps of its enemies. I can understand
that the doctrines of Free Trade, of a free Press, a Parliamentary rule,
the Anti-Slavery propaganda and philanthropic enterprises generally,
with which the British name is connected, should have been as good as
an army to us in every country of the world in which they created a
Liberal party, but these doctrines have often weakened foreign Executive
Governments, whilst “Free Trade” ruined their native manufacture. What
I, however, cannot understand is that a swarming, starving and unhappy
population should seek consolation for misery at home in Quixotism
abroad, especially when that Quixotism is played out. If bread costs as
much now as in 1832 although the price of wheat has fallen from 60s. to
27s. a quarter, it is, indeed, high time that we should lavish no more
blood and treasure on the stones of foreign politics, but that we should
first extract the beam from our own eye before we try to take out the
mote from the eye of others.

What these foreign politics are worth may be inferred from the growing
distrust on the Continent of British meddlesomeness or from what we
should ourselves feel if even so kindred a race as the Prussians sought
to monopolize British wealth and positions. It would be worse, if they
did so without possessing a thorough knowledge of the English language
or of British institutions. Yet we are not filled with misgivings when
our Indian Viceroys or Secretaries of State cannot speak Hindustani, the
_lingua franca_ of India or when an Under-Secretary has a difficulty in
finding Calcutta on the Map.

India should be governed in the fulness of knowledge and sympathy, not by
short cuts. It should not be the preserve of a Class, but the _one_ proud
boast of its many and varied peoples. When Her Majesty assumed Her Indian
title, it was by a mere accident, in which _pars magna fui_, at the last
moment, that the Proclamation was translated to those whom it concerned
at the Imperial Assemblage. This superciliousness, wherever we can safely
show it, the cynical abandonment of our friends, the breach of pledges,
the constant experimentalizing on the natives, the mysteriousness that
conceals official ignorance, is the enemy to British rule in India, not
Russia. A powerful Empire can afford to discard the arts of the weak,
and _should_ even “show its hand.” India should be ruled by a permanent
Viceroy, a member of the Royal family, not by one whom the exigencies
of party can appoint and shift. When in 1869 the Chiefs and people of
the Panjab deputed me to submit their petition that H.R.H. the Prince of
Wales be pleased to visit India, it was because they felt that it was
desirable in the interests of loyalty to the Throne. If it be true that
H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught is going out as the next Viceroy, I can only
say that the longer his admirers miss him in England, the better for
India, which requires its best interests to be grouped round a permanent
Chief.

* * * * *

_Dec. 7th._—As for the wanton aggression on Chilás which never gave us
the least trouble, as all our Deputy Commissioners of Abbottabad can
testify, it is a sequel of our interference last year with Hunza-Nagyr.
The Gilgit Residency has disturbed a peace that has existed since 1856
and now continues in its suicidal policy of indicating and paving the
nearest military road to British territory to an invader. In November
1891 I wrote of the possibility of driving even the peaceful, if
puritanical, Chilásis into aggression and now the _Times_ telegraphs the
cock-and-bull story of the raft, enlarged in to-day’s _Times_ telegram
into an attack of the Chilási tribesmen aided by those of Darêl (another
newly-created foe) on our convoy proceeding from Bunji—the extreme
frontier of Kashmir according to the treaty of 1846—to Dr. Robertson’s
Camp at (now) Talpenn (spelt “Thalpin” in the telegram) and (then) Gôr,
with, of course, the inevitable result of the victory of the heroism of
rifles against a few old muskets and iron wrist-bands (which the Chilásis
use in fighting).

There are still other realms to conquer for our heroes. There is the
small Republic of Talitsha of 11 houses; there is Chilás itself which
admits women to the tribal Councils and is thus in advance even of the
India Office and of the Supreme Council of the Government of India; there
is the Republic of Muhammadan learning, Kandiá, that has not a single
fort; there is, of course, pastoral Dareyl; there are the Koli-Palus
tribes, agricultural Tangîr and other little Republics. Soon may we
hear of acts of “treachery,” “disloyalty,” etc. from Hôdur and Sazîn,
till we shoot down the supposed offenders with Gatlings and destroy the
survivors with our civilization. I humbly protest against these tribes
being sacrificed to a mistaken Russophobia. I have some claim to be
heard. I discovered and named Dardistan and am a friend of its peoples.
Although my life was attempted more than once by agents of the Maharaja
of Kashmir, I was the means of saving that of his Commander-in-Chief,
Zoraweru, when on his Dareyl expedition. This is what the Gilgit Doctor
did in 1866 and what the Gilgit Doctor should do in 1892. This is how
friendship for the British name was, and should be, cemented, and not by
shedding innocent blood or by acts worthy of _agents provocateurs_.

* * * * *

As for the “_toujours perdrix_” of the Afghan advance from Asmar
(_Times_, December 8th) it is better than the telegram in the _Standard_
of the 2nd December 1892, in which the Amir makes Sher Afzul Ruler of
Kafiristan, a country that has yet to be conquered, and which says
“Consequently there is now no buffer-state between Afghanistan and
the Pamirs”!! “Goods carried from India to Russian Turkestan, through
Chitral and _Kafiristan_, will pay _duty to the Amir_.” Such journalistic
forecasts and geography are inevitable when full and faithful official
information, such as it is, is, in a free country, not obtainable by
Parliament, the Press, and the Public. Reuter’s Central Asian Telegrams,
though meagre, are more correct than those of certain correspondents of
the _Times_ and _Standard_.

* * * * *

_Dec. 9th._—Dr. Robertson has, at last, entered Chilás, and found
it deserted. _Solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant._ The _Times_
Correspondent now admits that Chilás has no connexion with Chitrál, but
he still gives us “Tangail” for “Tangir,” and omits the name of the
member of the ex-royal family of Yasin, who is supposed to have stirred
up against us the tribes of Darel and “Tangail,” among whom he has
resided for years. This is one of the Khushwaqtias, though not the loyal
chief to whom I have referred, and who has rendered us good service.
So we have now an excuse for entering Tangir also. In the meanwhile,
the Russian _Svet_ points out that the Russians “would only have to
march some 250 miles along a good road to enter Cashmere,” “since it is
impossible to invade India viâ Afghanistan.” Yet are we nibbling at the
Amir Abdurrahman, whose troops merely occupy the _status quo ante_ at
Asmar, confronted by Umra Khan on the other side of the Kuner river.
We are forgetting the lessons of the Afghan campaigns, and especially
that, although Abdurrahman allowed himself to be proclaimed by us, in
his absence, as Amir, he marched in at one side of Kabul, whilst we
marched out at the other. We forget that, with the whole country against
us in a revived Jehád, with the discontent among our native troops and
with a crushing expenditure, we preferred a political fiasco in order
to avoid a still greater military fiasco. The Russians also urge “the
construction of a military road on their side from Marghelan across the
Pamirs” leaving us to finish it for them on our side of the Hindukush.
The pretension to Wakhan, however, is already disposed of in Prince
Gortchakoff’s Convention with Lord Granville in 1872, and no notice
need be taken of the preposterous claim of the _Svet_ to place Chitrál
under a Russian protectorate! Thus have we sown the wind and reaped the
whirlwind. Our real defence of India lies, as Lord Lawrence ever held,
in its good government, and to this I would respectfully add, in justice
to its Chiefs, wherever they have a legitimate grievance. Mere speeches
of Viceroys, unaccompanied by acts, will not convince them of our “good
intentions.” It is also not by emasculating the Dard tribes and breaking
down their powers of resistance to the level of Slaves to the British,
that we can interpose an effectual barrier to the invading Myriads of
Slavs that threaten the world’s freedom. By giving to the loyalty of
India the liberty which it deserves, on the indigenous bases that it
alone really understands and in accordance with the requirements of the
age, we can alone lead our still martial Indian Millions in the defence
of the Roman Citizenship which should be the reward of their chivalrous
allegiance to the Queen.

G. W. LEITNER.

_P.S._—15 Dec. 1892. The just cause of Nizám-ul-Mulk appears to have
triumphed. Sher Afzul is said to have fled. So far Chitrál. As for
Chilás, the people have come to Dr. Robertson’s Camp and express
friendliness.

* * * * *

LETTERS FROM MIHTAR NIZAM-UL-MULK TO DR. LEITNER:

My kind and true friend and dear companion, may you know:

That before this, prompted by excess of friendship and belief
in me, you had written to me a letter of sincerity full of
pleasing precepts and words of faithfulness. These were
received and caused joy to my heart. My true friend, whatever
words of faith and sincere regard there were, these have
been written in my mind. For I am one of your disciples and
well-wishers here, and have no other care but that of serving
and well-wishing my friends. My heart sorrows at separation
from friends, but there is no remedy except resignation. _As
I consider your stay there [in London] as my own stay, I hope
from your friendship that you have expressed words of my
well-being and my sincerity towards the Lord Bahadoor and the
Great Queen and thus performed the office of friendship and
caused joy there._ Another request is that if you have found a
good dog like “Zulu,” when you come to Delhi please send it to
Jummoo. My men are there, and shall bring it to me. Further,
the volume of papers on the customs of Chitrár and the old
folk-tales have been written partly in Persian and partly in
the Chitrári language. We are frontier and village people, and
are deficient in intelligence and eloquence. They have not
been very well done, and I don’t know if they will please you
or not. But we have no better eloquence or practice as we are
hillmen.

Tuesday 11th Shavval 1304 despatched from Turikoh to London.

* * * * *

The standard of affection and friendship, the foundation-stone
of kindness and obligation, my friend, may his kindness
increase!

After expressing the desire of your joy-giving meeting be it
known to your kind self, that the condition of _this_ your
faithful friend is such as to call for thanks to the Almighty.
The safety and good health of _that_ friend [yourself] is
always wished for. As you had sent me several volumes of bound
papers to write on them the customs of the Chitrar people and
their folk-tales, partly in Persian and partly in Chitrari
language, I have in accordance with this request of _that_
true friend got them written partly in Persian and partly in
Chitrari and sent to you. Inshallah, they will reach you, but
I do not know whether they will please you or not; in any case
you know, that whatever may be possible to do by a faithful
friend or by his employés I will do, with the help of God,
if you will forgive any faulty execution of your wishes, and
continue to remember me for any services in my power, and keep
me informed continually of your good health so as to dispel
my anxiety. The condition here is of all news the best, as
no new event has happened; but three persons, wayfarers and
travellers, have come from Wakhan to Mastuch and two of these
persons I have sent on to Chitrar, and one of these wanderers
has remained (behind) at Mastuch. They don’t know anybody.
Sometimes they say we are Russians, and sometimes they say we
are Frenchmen. And I with my own eye have not seen them. If I
had seen them, they might have told me. Another desire is that
you send me something worth reading in English words and write
opposite to them their translation into Persian, so that it may
be a pleasure and useful to me. I have another request to make
which is that you may be pleased to give an early fulfilment
to your kind promise of visiting Chitrar with your lady for
the purpose of sight-seeing and sport and study. I have been
waiting ever since for your arrival. It is really only right
that you should come now when the weather is very delightful,
game is abundant, and I have made every arrangement for our
hunting together. Everything is tranquil and you will be able
to return before the winter, greatly pleased. Let this become
a fact. The writer Sirdar Nizam-ul-Mulk, Tuesday the 11th of
Shevvál, from Turikoh to London. May it be received!

APPENDIX III.

FABLES, LEGENDS, AND SONGS OF CHITRAL[113]

(_called Chitrár by the natives_).

Collected by H. H. SIRDAR NIZÁM-UL-MULK, Raja of Yasin, etc., and by Dr.
G. W. LEITNER, and translated from Persian or Chitráli.

I. FABLES.

1. THE VINDICTIVE FOWL.

A fowl sat near a thistle, and opened a rag, in which corals were tied
up. Suddenly one fell into the thistle; the fowl said, “O thistle, give
me my coral.” The thistle said, “This is not my business.” The fowl
said, “Then I will burn thee.” The thistle agreed. The fowl then begged
the fire to burn the thistle. The fire replied, “Why should I burn this
weak thorn?” The fowl thereupon threatened to extinguish the fire by
appealing to water: “O water, kill this fire for my sake.” The water
asked, “What is thy enmity with the fire, that I should kill it?” The
fowl said, “I will bring a lean cow to drink thee up.” The water said,
“Well”; but the cow refused, as it was too lean and weak to do so. Then
the fowl threatened to bring the wolf to eat the cow. The wolf refused,
as he could feed better on fat sheep. The fowl threatened the wolf with
the huntsman, as he would not eat the lean cow. The huntsman refused to
shoot the wolf, as it was not fit to eat. The fowl then threatened the
huntsman with the mouse. The huntsman replied, “Most welcome.” But the
mouse said that it was feeding on almonds and other nice things, and had
no need to gnaw the leather-skin of the huntsman. The fowl then said, “I
will tell the cat to eat thee.” The mouse said, “The cat is my enemy in
any case, and will try to catch and eat me, wherever it comes across me,
so what is the use of your telling the cat?” The fowl then begged the cat
to eat the mouse. The cat agreed to do so whenever it was hungry: “Now,”
it added, “I do not care to do so.” The fowl then became very angry, and
threatened to bring little boys to worry the cat. The cat said, “Yes.”
The fowl then begged the little boys to snatch the cat one from the
other, so that it might know what it was to be vexed. The boys, however,
just then wanted to play and fight among themselves, and did not care to
interrupt their own game. The fowl then threatened to get an old man to
beat the boys. The boys said, “By all means.” But the old man refused to
beat the boys without any cause, and called the fowl a fool. The fowl
then said to the Pîr (old man), “I will tell the wind to carry away thy
wool.” The old man acquiesced; and the wind, when ordered by the fowl,
with its usual perverseness, obeyed the fowl, and carried off the old
man’s wool. Then the old man beat the boys, and the boys worried the cat,
and the cat ran after the mouse, and the mouse bit the huntsman in the
waist, and the huntsman went after the wolf, and the wolf bit the cow,
and the cow drank the water, and the water came down on the fire, and the
fire burnt the thistle, and the thistle gave the coral to the fowl, and
the fowl took back its coral.

2. THE STORY OF THE GOLDEN MOUSE WHO TELLS THE STORY OF A MOUSE AND A
FROG.

There was a kind of mice that had a golden body. They never went out
of their hole. One day one of them thought: “I will go out and see the
wonders of God’s creation.” So it did; and when thirty or forty yards
from its hole, a cat, prowling for game, saw it come out from the hole.
The cat, that was full of wiles, plotted to get near the hole, awaiting
the return of the mouse, who, after its peregrinations, noticed the mouth
of the hole closed by the wicked cat. The mouse then wished to go another
way, and turned to the left, towards a tree, on which sat concealed a
crow, expecting to devour the mouse when it should run away from the
cat. The crow then pounced on the mouse, who cried out to God, “O God,
why have these misfortunes overtaken such a small being as myself? My
only help is in thee, to save me from these calamities.” The mouse was
confused, and ran hither and thither, in vain seeking a refuge, when it
saw another cat stealthily approaching it; and, in its perplexity, the
mouse nearly ran into the cat’s paws; but that cat had been caught in
a hunter’s net, and could do nothing. The crow, and the cat which was
watching at the hole, saw that the mouse had got near another cat between
the two. They thought that the mouse had fallen a victim to the second
cat, and that it was no use remaining. It was the fortune of the mouse
that they should be so deceived. The trembling mouse saw that the two
enemies had gone. It thanked the Creator for having escaped from the cat
and the crow, and it said, “It would be most unmanly of me not to deliver
the cat in the net, as it has been the instrument of my safety; but then,
if I set it free, it will eat me.” The mouse was immersed in thought,
and came to the conclusion to gnaw the net at a distance from the cat,
and that as soon as the hunter should come in sight, the cat then, being
afraid of the hunter, would seek its own safety, and not trouble itself
about the mouse. “Thus I will free the cat from the hunter and the net,
and deliver my own life from the cat,” was the thought of the mouse.
It then began to gnaw the net at a distance. The cat then said to the
mouse, “If you want to save me, for God’s sake, then gnaw the net round
my throat, and not at a distance; that is no use to me when the hunter
will come. You err if you think that I will eat you as soon as I get out.
For all the faults, hitherto, have been on the side of cats, which you
mice have never injured, so that, if you are magnanimous and release me,
there is no such ungrateful monster in the world as would return evil for
the unmerited good that I implore you to bestow on me.” The golden mouse,
which was very wise, did not attend to this false speech, but continued
to gnaw the net at a distance, so that, when the hunter came, there
only remained the threads round the neck of the cat, which the mouse
bit asunder at the last moment and then ran back into its hole. The cat
bolted up the tree where the crow had sat, the huntsman saw that the cat
had escaped, and that his net was gnawed in several places, so he took
the net to get it repaired in the Bazaar.

Then the cat descended from the tree and said to herself, “The time of
meals is over, it is no use to go home; I had better make friends with
the mouse, entice it out of the hole, and eat it.” This she did, and
going to the hole, called out: “O faithful companion and sympathizing
friend, although there has been enmity between cats and mice for a long
time, thou hast, by God’s order, been the cause of my release, therefore
come out of the hole, and let us lay the foundation of our friendship.”
The mouse replied: “I once tried to come out, and then I fell from one
danger into another. Now it is difficult for me to comply with your
request. I have cut the threads encircling your throat, not out of
friendship for you, but out of gratitude to God. Nor is our friendship of
any use in this world, as you will gather from the story of

3. “THE FROG AND THE MOUSE.”

The mouse then narrated: “There was once a mouse that went out for a
promenade, and going into people’s houses, found food here and there, and
in the dawn of the next morning it was returning to its home. It came to
a place where there was a large tank, round which there were flowers and
trees; and a voice was heard from out of the tank. Coming near, it saw
that it emanated from a being that had no hair on its body, no tail, and
no ear. The mouse said to itself: ‘What is this ill-formed being?’ and
thanked God that it was not the ugliest of creatures. With this thought
the mouse, that was standing still, shook its head to and fro. The frog,
however, thought that the mouse was smitten with astonishment at his
beauty and entranced with pleasure at his voice, and jumping out of the
corner of the tank came near: ‘I know, beloved, that you are standing
charmed with my voice; we ought to lay the firm basis of our friendship,
but you are sharper than I am, therefore go to the house of an old woman
and steal from it a thread, and bring it here.’ The mouse obeyed the
order. The frog then said: ‘Now tie one end to your tail and I will tie
the other end to my leg, because I want to go to your house, where you
have a large family and there are many other mice, so that I may know you
from the others. If again you visit me, the tank is large, my friends
many, and you too ought to distinguish me from the rest. Again, when
I want to see you I will follow the thread to your hole, and when you
want to see me you will follow it to the tank.’ This being settled, they
parted. One day the frog wanted to see the mouse. Coming out of the tank
he was going to its hole, when he saw the mouse-hawk, who pounced upon
the frog as he was limping along, and flew up with him in its claws. This
pulled the end to which the mouse was tied. It thought that its lover
had come to the place and wanted to see it; so it came out, only to be
dragged along in the air under the mouse-hawk. As the unfortunate mouse
passed a Bazaar it called out: ‘O ye Mussulmans, learn from my fate what
happens to whoever befriends beings of a different species.’

“Now,” said the golden mouse to the cat, “this is the story which teaches
me what to do; and that is, to decline your friendship and to try never
again to see your face.”

4. THE QUAIL AND THE FOX.

The Quail said: I teach thee art.
Night and day I work at art;
Whoever lies, the shame is on his neck.

A quail and a fox were friends. The fox said: “Why should you not make
me laugh some day?” The quail replied, “This is easy.” So they went to
a Bazaar, where the quail, looking through the hole in the wall of a
house, saw a man sitting, and his wife turning up and down the “samanak”
sweetmeat with a big wooden ladle (much in the same way as the Turkish
_rakat lokum_, or lumps of delight, are made). The quail then settled on
the head of the man. The woman said to him, “Don’t stir; I will catch
it.” Then the quail sat on the woman’s head, so the man asked the woman
to be quiet, as he would catch the quail, which, however, then flew back
to the head of the man. This annoyed the wife, who struck at the quail
with the wooden ladle, but hit instead the face of her husband, whose eye
and beard were covered with the sweetmeat, and who thereupon beat his
wife. When the fox saw this, he rejoiced and laughed greatly; and both
the fox and quail returned to their home. After a time the fox said to
the quail: “It is true that you have made me laugh, but could you feed
me?” This the quail undertook to do, and with the fox went to a place
where a woman was carrying a plate of loaves of bread to her husband in
the fields. Then the quail repeated her tactics, and sat on the head of
the woman, who tried to catch it with one hand. The quail escaped and
settled on one shoulder, then on another, and so on till the woman became
enraged, put the plate of bread on the ground, and ran after the quail,
who, by little leaps, attracted her further and further away till she was
at a considerable distance from it, when the fox pounced on the bread and
appeased his hunger.

Some time after, the fox wanted to put the cleverness of the quail again
to the test, and said: “You have made me laugh, you have fed me, now make
me weep.” The quail replied, “Why, this is the easiest task of all,” so
she took the fox to the gate of the town and called out: “O ye dogs of
the Bazaar, come ye as many as ye are, for a fox has come to the gate!”
So all the dogs, hearing this good news, assembled to hunt the fox,
which, seeing the multitude of its enemies, fled till he reached a high
place. Turning round, he saw the dogs following, so he jumped down and
broke his back. The fox therefore helplessly sat down and said to the
approaching quail: “O sympathizing companion, see how my mouth has become
filled with mud and blood, and how my back has been broken. This is my
fate in this world; now, could you kindly clean my mouth from mud and
blood, as my end is near?” The intention of the fox was, that he should
take the opportunity of this artifice to swallow the quail in revenge of
her being the cause of its death. The quail, in her unwise friendship,
began to clean the fox’s mouth. The accursed fox caught her in his mouth;
but the quail, which was intelligent and clever, said, “O beloved friend,
your eating me is lawful, because I forgive you my blood, on condition
that you pronounce my name, otherwise you will suffer an injury.” The
base fox, although full of wiles, clouded by approaching death, fell into
the trap, and as soon as he said “O quail,” his teeth separated, and the
quail flew away from him and was safe, whilst the fox died.

II. STORIES AND LEGENDS.

There is a story which seems to illustrate the fact that private hatred
is often the cause of the injury that is ascribed to accident. A man
slaughtered a goat, and kept it over-night in an outhouse. His enemy put
a number of cats through the airhole, and when their noise awoke the
master of the house he only found the bones of his goat. But he took
their bones, and scattered them over the field of his enemy the same
night; and the dogs came, smelling the bones, searched for them, and
destroyed the wheat that was ripe for reaping. One blamed the cats, the
other blamed the dogs; but both had the reward of their own actions.

* * * * *

Sulei was a man well known on the frontier of Chitrál for his eloquence.
One day, as he was travelling, he met a man from Badakhshan, who asked
him whether he knew Persian. Sulei said, “No.” “Then,” replied the
Badakhshi, “you are lost” [nobody, worthless]. Sulei at once rejoined,
“Do you know Khowár?” (the language of Chitrál). “No,” said the
Badakhshi. “Then you too are lost,” wittily concluded Sulei (to show that
personal worth or eloquence does not depend on knowing any particular
language).

* * * * *

It is related that beyond Upper Chitrár there is a country called _Shin_
or Rashan. It is very beautiful, and its plains are gardens, and its
trees bear much fruit, and its chunars (plane trees) and willows make it
a shaded land. Its earth is red, and its water is white and tasty. They
say that in ancient times the river of that district for a time flowed
with milk without the dashing (of the waves) of water.

* * * * *

Besir is a place near Ayin towards Kafiristan. The inhabitants were
formerly savage Kafirs, but are now subjects of the Mehter (Prince) of
Chitrár. They carry loads of wood, and do not neglect the work of the
Mehter. They are numerous and peaceful, and in helplessness like fowls,
but they are still Kafirs; though in consequence of their want of energy
and courage they are called “Kalàsh.” The people of Ayin say that in
ancient times five savages fled into the Shidi Mount and concealed
themselves there.

* * * * *

Shidi is below Ayin opposite Gherát on the east (whence Shidi is on the
west). Between them is a river. It is said that these savages had to get
their food by the chase. One day word came to them from God that “to-day
three troops of deer will pass; don’t interfere with the first, but do
so with the others.” When, however, the troops came, the savages forgot
the injunctions of God, and struck the first deer. Now there was a cavern
in the mountain where they lived, into which they took the two or three
deer that they had killed and were preparing to cook, two being sent out
to fetch water. By God’s order the lips of the cavern were closed, and
the three men imprisoned in it. God converted the three into bees, whilst
the two who had gone to fetch water fled towards Afghanistan. Thus were
created the first honey-bees, who, finding their way out of the cavern,
spread themselves and their sweet gift all over the world. This is a
story told by the Kalàsh, who credit that the bees are there still; but
it is difficult to get there, as the mountains are too steep, but people
go near it and, pushing long rods into the hole of the cavern, bring them
back covered with honey.

* * * * *

Shah Muhterim is the name of a Mehter (prince), the grandfather of the
present Ruler of Chitrár. This Mehter was renowned as a descendant of
fairies, who all were under his command. Whatever he ordered the fairies
did. Thus some time passed. From among them he married a fairy, with
whom he made many excursions. She bore him a daughter. Seven generations
have passed since that time. This daughter is still alive, and her sign
among the fairies is that her hair is white, which does not happen to
ordinary fairies. Whenever a descendant of the Shah Muhterim leaves this
transitory world for the region of permanence, all the fairies, who
reside in the mountains of Chitrár, together with that white-haired lady,
weep and lament, and their voices are clearly heard. This statement is
sure and true, and all the men on the frontiers of Chitrár are aware of
the above fact.

THE PEOPLE OF AUJER (THE BŒOTIA OF CHITRAL).

There is a country “Aujer,” on the frontier of Chitrár (or Chitrāl as
we call it), the inhabitants of which in ancient times were renowned
for their stupidity. One had taken service at Chitrár, and at a certain
public dinner noticed that the King (Padishah) ate nothing. So he
thought that it was because the others had not given anything to the
king. This made him very sorry. He left the assembly, and reached home
towards evening; there he prepared a great amount of bread, and brought
it next day to the council enclosure, beckoning to the king with his
finger to come secretly to him. The king could not make this out, and
sent a servant to inquire what was the matter; but the man would not
say anything except that the king should come himself. On this the king
sent his confidant to find out what all this meant. The man answered the
inquiries of the confidant by declaring that he had no news or claim, but
“as they all ate yesterday and gave nothing to the king, my heart has
become burnt, and I have cooked all this bread for him.” The messenger
returned and told the king, who told the meeting, causing them all to
laugh. The king, too, smiled, and said: “As this poor man has felt for
my need, I feel for his;” and ordered the treasurer to open for him the
door of the treasury, so that he might take from it what he liked. The
treasurer took him to the gate, next to which was the treasurer’s own
house, where he had put a big water-melon, on which fell the eye of that
stupid man from Aujer. He had never seen such a thing, and when he asked,
“What is it?” the treasurer, knowing what a fool he had to deal with,
said, “This is the egg of a donkey.” Then he showed him the gold, silver,
jewels, precious cloths, and clean habiliments of the treasury from
which to select the king’s present. The man was pleased with nothing,
and said, “I do not want this; but, if you please, give me the egg of
the donkey, then I shall indeed be glad.” The treasurer and the king’s
confidant, consulting together, came to the conclusion that this would
amuse the king to hear, and gave him the melon, with the injunction not
to return to the king, but to take the egg to his house, and come after
some nights (days). The fool was charmed with this request, went towards
his home, but climbing a height, the melon fell out of his hand, rolled
down towards a tree and broke in two pieces. Now there was a hare under
that tree, which fled as the melon touched the tree. The fool went to
his house full of grief, said nothing to his wife and children, but
sat mournfully in a corner. The wife said, “O man, why art thou sorry?
and what has happened?” The man replied: “Why do you ask? there is no
necessity.” Finally, on the woman much cajoling him, he said: “From the
treasury of the prince (mehter) I had brought the egg of the donkey; it
fell from me on the road, broke, and the young one fled out from its
midst. I tried my utmost, but could not catch it.” The woman said: “You
silly fellow! had you brought it, we might have put loads on it.” The
man replied, “You flighty thing! how could it do so, when it was still
so young? Why, its back would have been broken.” So he got into a great
rage, took his axe, and cut down his wife, who died on the spot.

* * * * *

Once, a donkey having four feet, in this country of donkeys having two
feet, put his head into a jar of jáo (barley), but could not extricate
it again. So the villagers assembled, but could not hit on a plan to
effect this result. But there was a wise man in that land, and he was
sent for and came. He examined all the circumstances of the case, and
finally decided that they should do him “Bismillah”; that is to say, that
they should cut his throat with the formula, “in the name of God,” which
makes such an act lawful. When they had done this to the poor donkey, the
head remained in the jar, and the wise man ordered them now to break the
jar. This they did, and brought out the head of the donkey. The wise man
then said: “If I had not been here, in what manner could you have been
delivered of this difficulty?” This view was approved by all, even by the
owner of the donkey.

* * * * *

Two brothers in that country of idiots, being tired of buying salt
every day, decided on sowing it over their fields, so that it may bring
forth salt abundantly. The grass grew up, and the grasshoppers came;
and the brothers, fearing that their crop of salt would be destroyed,
armed themselves with bows and arrows to kill the grasshoppers. But the
grasshoppers jumped hither and thither, and were difficult to kill; and
one of the brothers hit the other by mistake with an arrow instead of a
grasshopper, and he got angry, and shot back and killed his brother.

* * * * *

A penknife once fell into the hands of this people, so they held a
council in order to consider what it was. Some thought it was the young
one of a sword, the others that it was the baby of an axe, but that its
teeth had not yet come out. So the argument waxing hot, they fell to
fight one another, and many were wounded and killed.

* * * * *

A number of these people, considering that it was not proper that birds
alone should fly, and that they were able to do so, clad themselves in
posteens (some of which are made from the light down of the Hindukush
eagle), and threw themselves down from a great height, with the result
that they reached the ground killed and mangled.

III. SONGS.

_A Song (of evidently recent date, as the influence on it of Persian
poetry is obvious)._

THE CONFESSION OF THE SOUL.

1. (_He._) If thy body be as lithe as (the letter) Alif (‎‏ا‏‎),
thy eye is as full as (the letter) Nûn (‎‏ن‏‎).
If thou art Laila, this child (or lover) is Majnûn (referring
to the well-known story of these true lovers).

2. (_She._) If thou art the Prince of the Sultan of Rûm (Turkey)
Come and sit by me, free from constraint;
My eye has fallen on thee, and I now live.

3. My friend had scarcely come near me—why, alas, has he left?
My flesh has melted from these broken limbs.

4. How could I guard against the enmity of a friend?
May God now save me from such grief!

5. (_He._) Were I to see 200 Fairies and 100,000 Houris,
I should be a Káfir (infidel), O my beloved!
If my thoughts then even strayed from thee.

6. Yea, not the Houri nightingale, nor my own soul and eyes as
Houris,
Would, on the day of judgment, divert my thought from thee.

7. I envy the moth, for it can fly
Into the fire in which it is burnt (whereas I cannot meet thee).

8. (_She._) My friend, who once came nigh me, suddenly left me—to
weep.
My grief should move the very highest heaven.
A coral bed with its root has been torn out and gone.

9. A ship of pilgrims (Calendárs) has sunk, and yet the world does
not care.
The end of all has been a bad name to me.

10. (_He._) On this black earth how can I do (sing) thy praise?
Imbedded in the blue heaven (of my heart) thou wilt find it;
And yet, O child (himself), how great a failure (and below thy
merits)!

11. Before thy beauty the very moon is nothing,
For sometimes she is full and sometimes half.
May God give thee to me, my perfect universe!

12. (_She._) If an angel were a mortal like myself,
It would be ashamed to see my fate (unmoved).

13. (_He._) O angel! strangely without pity,
Thou hast written her good with my evil (linked our fates).

14. (_Both._) All have friends, but my friend is the Chief (God),
And of my inner grief that friend is cognizant;
His light alone loves our eyes and soul.

15. Break with the world, its vanities, its love;
Leave ignorance, confess, and let thy goal be heaven!

The following is an attempt to render the pretty tune of a more worldly
Laila and Majnûn song, which reminds one of the “Yodeln” of the Tyrolese.
It was sung to me by Taighûn Shah, the poet-minstrel of the Raja, to the
accompaniment of a kind of guitar. The Chitráli language, it will be
perceived, is musical.

[Music: Shin·djùr is-prûo sar ma bul-bul hut bó·wor Tsá·ren-tu ru-pé

dūr thu mor lo - lé gam - - bū - - ro shūnn donn do - sé

Lai - lī - ki ha - rōsh o - ré Majnun o lo - - lé!]

APPENDIX IV.

THE RACES AND LANGUAGES OF THE HINDU-KUSH.

By DR. G. W. LEITNER.

[Illustration: GROUP OF DARDS AND CENTRAL ASIATICS WITH DR. LEITNER.

_Standing_ Nos. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (_see next page_.)

_Sitting_ Nos. 7 8 9 10 11 (_see next page_.)

_Standing_—1. Khundayar, son of a Shiah Akhun (priest) at Nagyr; 2.
Maulvi Najmuddin, a poet from Kolab; 3 and 4. Khudadad and Hatamu,
pilgrims from Nagyr; 5. A Chitrali soldier; 6. Matavalli, of Hunza.

_Sitting_—7. Mir Abdullah, a famous Arabic scholar and jurist from
Gabrial; 8. Hakim Habibullah, a Tajik, a physician from Badakshan; 9.
Ghulam Muhammad, Dr. Leitner’s Gilgit retainer; 10. Ibrahim Khan, a
Shiah, Rono (highest official caste), of Nagyr; 11. Sultan Ali Yashkun,
of Nagyr.]

The accompanying illustration was autotyped some years ago from a
photograph taken in 1881, and is now published for the first time.
Following the numbers on each figure represented we come first to No.
1, the tall Khudayár, the son of an Akhun or Shiah priest of Nagyr, a
country ruled by the old and wise Tham or Raja Zafar Ali Khan, whose
two sons, Alidád Khan in 1866, and Habib ulla Khan in 1886, instructed
me in the Khajuná language, which is spoken alike in gentle but brave
Nagyr and in its hereditary rival country, the impious and savage Hunza
“Hun-land,” represented by figure 6, Matavalli, the ex-kidnapper whom I
took to England, trained to some Muhammadan piety, and sent to Kerbelá a
year ago. No. 2 was an excellent man, an Uzbek visitor from Koláb, one
Najmuddin, a poet and theologian, who gave me an account of his country.
Nos. 3 and 4 are pilgrims from Nagyr to the distant Shiah shrine in Syria
of the martyrdom of Husain at Kerbelá; No. 5 is a Chitráli soldier,
whilst No. 7 is a distinguished Arabic Scholar from Gabriál, from whom
much of my information was derived regarding a peaceful and learned home,
now, alas! threatened by European approach, which my travels in 1866 and
1872, and my sympathetic intercourse with the tribes of the Hindu Kush,
have unfortunately facilitated. The Jalkóti, Dareyli, and others, who are
referred to in the course of the present narrative, will either figure
on other illustrations or must be “taken as read.” No. 8 is the Sunni
Moulvi Habibulla, a Tájik of Bukhara and a Hakîm (physician). No. 9 is my
old retainer, Ghulám Muhammad, a Shiah of Gilgit, a Shîn Dard (highest
caste), who was prevented by me from cutting down his mother, which he
was attempting to do in order “to save her the pain of parting from him.”
10. Ibrahim Khan, a Shiah, Rôno (highest official caste) of _Nagyr_,
pilgrim to Kerbelá. 11. Sultan Ali Yashkun (2nd Shîn caste) Shiah, of
Nagyr, pilgrim to Kerbelá. The word “Yashkun” is, perhaps, connected with
“Yuechi.”

The languages spoken by these men are: Khajuná by the Hunza-Nagyr men;
Arnyiá by the Chitráli; Turki by the Uzbek from Koláb; Shiná by the
Gilgiti; Pakhtu and Shuthun, a dialect of Shiná, by the Gabriáli. The
people of _Hunza_ are dreaded robbers and kidnappers; they, together
with the people of Nagyr, speak a language, Khajuná, which philologists
have not yet been able to classify, but which I believe to be a remnant
of a pre-historic language. They are great wine-drinkers and most
licentious. They are nominally Muláis, a heresy within the Shiah schism
from the orthodox Sunni Muhammadan faith, but they really only worship
their Chief or Raja, commonly called “Thàm.” The present ruler’s name
is Mohammad Khan. They are at constant feud with the people of _Nagyr_,
who have some civilization, and are _now_ devoted Shiahs (whence the
number of pilgrims, four, from one village). They are generally fair, and
taller than the people of Hunza, who are described as dark skeletons.
The Nagyris have fine embroideries, and are said to be accomplished
musicians. Their forts confront those of Hunza on the other side of the
same river. The people of _Badakhshán_ used to deal largely in kidnapped
slaves. A refugee, Shahzada Hasan, from the former royal line (which
claims descent from Alexander the Great), who has been turned out by the
Afghan faction, was then at Gilgit with a number of retainers on fine
Badakhshi horses, awaiting the fortunes of war, or, perhaps, the support
of the British. He was a younger brother of Jehandár Shah, who used to
infest the Koláb road, after being turned out by a relative, Mahmûd Shah,
with the help of the Amir of Kabul. _Koláb_ is about eleven marches from
_Faizabád_, the capital of Badakhshán. The Chitráli is from Shogòt, the
residence of Adam Khor (man-eater), brother of Aman-ul-Mulk, of Chitrál,
who used to sell his Shiah subjects regularly into slavery and to kidnap
Bashgeli Kafirs. The man from _Gabriál_ was attracted to Lahore by the
fame of the Oriental College, Lahore, as were also several others in
this group; and there can be no doubt that this institution may still
serve as a nucleus for sending pioneers of our civilization throughout
Central Asia. Gabriál is a town in Kandiá, or Kiliá, which is a secluded
Dard country, keeping itself aloof from tribal wars. _Gilgit_ and its
representative have been described in my “Dardistan,” to which refer,
published in parts between 1866 and 1877.

I. POLO IN HUNZA-NAGYR.

Although our first practical knowledge of “Polo” was derived from the
Manipuri game as played at Calcutta, it is not Manipur, but Hunza and
Nagyr, that maintain the original rules of the ancient “Chaughán-bazi,”
so famous in Persian history. The account given by J. Moray Brown for the
“Badminton Library” of the introduction of Polo into England (Longmans,
Green & Co., 1891), seems to me to be at variance with the facts within
my knowledge, for it was introduced into England in 1867, not 1869,
by one who had played the Tibetan game as brought to Lahore by me in
1866, after a tour in Middle and Little Tibet. Since then it has become
acclimatized not only in England, but also in Europe. The Tibet game,
however, does not reach the perfection of the Nagyr game, although it
seems to be superior to that of Manipur. Nor is Polo the only game in
Hunza-Nagyr. “Shooting whilst galloping” at a gourd filled with ashes
over a wooden scaffold rivals the wonderful performances of “archery on
horseback,” in which the people of Hunza and Nagyr (not “Nagar,” or the
common Hindi word for “town,” as the telegram has it) are so proficient.
Nor are European accompaniments wanting to these Central Asian games;
for prizes are awarded, people bet freely in Hunza as they do here,
they drink as freely, listen to music, and witness the dancing of lady
charmers, the Dayál, who, in Hunza, are supposed to be sorceresses,
without whom great festivities lose their main attraction. The people
are such keen sportsmen that it is not uncommon for the Tham, or ruler,
to confiscate the house of the unskilful hunter who has allowed a
Markhôr (Ibex) that he might have shot to escape him. Indeed, this even
happens when a number of Markhôrs are shut up in an enclosure, “_tsá_,”
as a preserve for hunting. The following literally translated dialogue
regarding Polo and its rules tells an attentive reader more “between the
lines” than pages of instructions:—

POLÓ = Bolá.—The Raja has ordered many people: To-morrow Polo I
will play. To the musicians give notice they will play.

Hast thou given notice, O (thou)?

Yes, I have given notice, O Nazúr; let me be thy offering
(sacrifice).

Well, we will come out, that otherwise it will become (too) hot.

The Raja has gone out for Polo; go ye, O (ye); the riders will
start.

Now divided will be, O ye! (2) goals nine nine (games) we will
do (play). Tola-half (= 4 Rupees) a big sheep bet we will do.

Now bet we have made. To the Raja the _ball_ give, O ye,
_striking_ (whilst galloping) he will take.

O ye, efforts (search) make, young men, to a man disgrace is
death; you your own _party_ abandon not; The Raja has taken the
_ball to strike_; play up, O ye musicians!

Now descend (from your horses) O ye; Tham has come out
(victorious); now again the day after to-morrow, he (from
fatigue) _recovering Poló_ we will strike (play).

_Rules_:—The musical instruments of Polo; the ground for the
game; the riders; the goals; 9, 9 games let be (nine games
won); the riders nine one side; nine one (the other) side; when
this has become (the case) the drum (Tsagàr) they will strike.

First the Tham takes the ball (out into the Maidan to strike
whilst galloping at full speed).

The Tham’s _side_ upper part will take.

The rest will strike from the lower part (of the ground).

Those above the goal when becoming will take to the lower part.

Those below the goal when becoming to above taking the ball
will send it flying.

Thus being (or becoming) whose goal when becoming, the ball
will be sent flying and the musicians will play.

Whose nine goals when has become, they issue (victorious).

[Illustration: No. 1. Dareyli.

No. 2. Gabriali.

No. 3. Hunza Man.

No. 4. Nagyri.]

II. THE KOHISTÁN OF THE INDUS, INCLUDING GABRIÁL.

ACCOUNT OF MIR ABDULLA.

The real native place of Mir Abdulla is in the territory of Nandiyar; but
his uncle migrated to, and settled in, Gabriál. The Mir narrates:—

“In the country of Kunar there is a place called _Pusht_, where lives a
Mulla who is famous for his learning and sanctity. I lived for a long
time as his pupil, studying Logic, Philosophy, and Muhammadan Law, the
subjects in which the Mulla was particularly proficient. When my absence
from my native place became too long, I received several letters and
messages from my parents, asking me to give up my studies and return
home. At last I acceded to their pressing demands and came to my native
village. There I stayed for a long time with my parents; but as I was
always desirous to pursue my studies, I was meditating on my return to
Pusht, or to go down to India.

In the meantime I met one Abdulquddūs of Kohistan, who was returning
from India. He told me that a Dár-ul-u’lûm (House of Sciences) had been
opened at Lahore, the capital of the Punjab, where every branch of
learning was taught, and that it was superintended by Dr. L., who being
himself a proficient scholar of Arabic and Persian, was a patron of
learning and a warm supporter of students from foreign countries. I was
accompanied by two pupils of mine, named Sher Muhammad and Burhánuddin;
and I started together with them from my native village. We passed
through the territory of _Dir_, which is governed by Nawab Rahmatulla
Khan. The Qazi of that place was an old acquaintance of mine, and he
persuaded me to stop my journey, and promised to introduce me to the
Nawab, and procure for me a lucrative and honourable post. I declined his
offer, and continued my journey. The next territory we entered in was
that of Nawab _Tore Mian Khan_, who reigns over eight or nine hundred
people. After staying there some days we reached _Kanan Gharin_, which
was governed jointly by Nawabs Fazl Ahmad and Bayazid Khan. After two
days’ march we came to _Chakesur_, which was under a petty chief named
Suhe Khan. Here we were told that there are two roads to India from this
place—one, which is the shorter, is infested with robbers; and the other,
the longer one, is safe; but we were too impatient to waste our time, and
decided at once to go by the shorter way, and proceeded on our journey.
We met, as we were told, two robbers on the road, who insisted on our
surrendering to them all our baggage. But we made up our minds to make a
stand, though we were very imperfectly armed, having only one “tamancha”
among three persons. In the conflict which ensued, one of the robbers
fell, and the other escaped; but Burhanuddin, one of our party, was also
severely wounded, and we passed the night on the banks of a neighbouring
stream, and reached next day _Ganagar Sirkol Jatkol_, where we halted
for eight or nine days. In this place the sun is seen only three or four
times a year, when all the dogs of the village, thinking him an intruding
stranger, begin to bark at him. Burhanuddin, having recovered there,
went back to his home, and I, with the other companion, proceeded to the
Punjab, and passing through the territory of a chief, named _Shálkhan_,
entered the British dominions. On arriving at Lahore we were told that
Dr. L. was not there, and my companion, too impatient to wait, went down
to Rampur, and I stayed at Lahore.” He then gave an account of—

THE KOHISTÁN (OR MOUNTAINOUS COUNTRY).

(A DIFFERENT COUNTRY FROM ONE OF THE SAME NAME NEAR KABUL.)

_Boundaries._—It is bounded on the north by _Chitrál_, _Yasin_, and
_Hunza_, on the east by _Chilas_, _Kashmir_, and a part of _Hazara_; on
the south by _Yaghistán_ (or wild country); on the west by _Swat_ and
_Yaghistán_.

It is surrounded by three mountainous ranges running parallel to each
other, dividing the country into two parts (the northern part is called
_Gabriál_). The Indus flows down through the country, and has a very
narrow bed here, which is hemmed in by the mountains.

The northern part, which is called Gabriál, has only two remarkable
villages—_Kandyá_, on the western side of the river, and _Siwa_ on the
eastern; and the southern part contains many towns and villages:—

On the eastern side of the river,—

Name of influential
Town. Malak
(Landowner).
(1) Ladai Machú.
(2) Kolai Shah Said.
(3) Palas (9,000 pop.) Lachur.
(4) Marín Karm Khán.

On the western side of the river,—

Name of influential
Town. Malak

(5) Batera
(6) Patan (8,000 pop.) Qudrat Ali.
(7) Chakarga
(8) Ranotia

That part of _Yaghistán_ which bounds Kohistan on the west is divided
into (1) _Thakot_, which is governed by Shalkhán, and (2) _Dishán_, which
is under Ram Khan; and that part of Yaghistán which bounds it on the
south is divided into three valleys,—

(1) Alahi, governed by Arsalan Khan.
(2) Nandiyar, ” Zafar Khan.
(3) Tikráí, ” Ghaffar Khan (has also two cannons).

Between the southern part of Kohistan and Alahi, in the eastern corner,
there is a plain, of a circular form, surrounded on all sides by
mountains. This plain is always covered with grass, and streams of clear
and fresh water run through it. Both the grass and the water of this vast
meadow are remarkable for their nourishing and digestive qualities. This
plain is called “_Chaur_,” and is debatable ground between the Kohistanis
of Ladai, Kolai, and Palas, and the Afghans of Alahi.

_People._—The people of this country are not allied to the Afghans, as
their language shows, but have the same erect bearing and beautiful
features.

_Language._—Their language is altogether different from that of their
neighbours, the Afghans, as will be shown by the following comparison:—

KOHISTANI. PUSHTO (THE AFGHAN LANGUAGE).

1. To-morrow night to Lahore I 1. To-morrow night to Lahore I
will go. will go.
_Douche rate Lahore bajanwa._ _Saba shapa ba Lahore shazam._

2. Thou silent be. 2. Thou silent be.
_Tohe chut guda._ _Tah chup shai._

3. Prepare, ye young men. 3. Prepared be, O young men.
_Jubti masha._ _Saubhal she zalmú._

There is a song very current in Kohistan which begins,—

_Palas kulal mariga, Patane jirga hotiga, Johle johal madado propár
asáli_ = “In Palas a potter was killed, in Patan the jirga (or tribal
assembly) sat.”

“The corrupted (Jirga of Malaks) took a bribe, and retaliation was
ignored.” The Afghans are called Pathans.

_Religion._—They have been converted to Islám since four or five
generations, and they have forsaken their old religion so completely that
no tinge of it now remains; and when a Kohistani is told that they are
“nau-Muslims,” that is, “new Muhammadans,” he becomes angry.

Muslim learning, and the building of mosques have become common in
Kohistan, and now we find twenty or thirty learned mullas in every
considerable town, besides hundreds of students, studying in mosques.

_Dress._—Their national dress consists of a woollen hat, brimmed like
that of Europeans, and a loose woollen tunic having a long ‎‏ جاكى‏‎
along the right breast, so that one can easily get out the right hand to
wield one’s arms in a fight. Their trousers are also made of wool and are
very tight. In the summer they wear a kind of leathern shoes borrowed
from the Afghans, but in the winter they wear a kind of boots made of
grass (the straw of rice) reaching to the knees. They call it “pájola.”

Till very lately their only arms were a small “khanjar” (dagger), bows
and arrows; but they have borrowed the use of guns and long swords from
the Afghans.

The dress of their women consists of a loose woollen head-dress with
silken fringes, a woollen tunic and blue or black trousers of cotton
cloth, which they call “_shakara_.” Generally their women work with their
husbands in the corn-fields, and do not live confined to their houses.

_Government._—They have no chiefs like the Afghans, but influential
Malaks lead them to battle, who are paid no tribute, salary, etc.

When an enemy enters their country they whistle so sharply that the sound
is heard for miles; then the whole tribe assembles in one place for the
defence of their country, with their respective Malaks at their heads.

_Mode of Living, and other Social Customs._—In winter they live in the
valleys, in houses made of wood and stones; but in summer they leave
their houses in the valleys for those on the peaks of mountains, and the
mass of the population spends the summer in the cooler region; but those
who cultivate the land live the whole day in the valley, and when night
comes go up to their houses on the heights. Their food is the bread of
wheat, and milk furnished by their herds of cattle (gaómesh, cows, goats,
and sheep), which is their sole property. There are no regular Bazárs
even in the large villages; but the arrival of a merchant from India is
generally hailed throughout the country. The woollen cloth which they use
generally is manufactured by them.

_Marriage._—Very lately there was a custom amongst them that the young
man was allowed to court any girl he wished; but now, from their contact
with the Afghans, the system of “betrothal” at a very early age is
introduced, and the boy does not go till his marriage to that part of the
village in which the girl betrothed to him lives. The Kohistanis say that
they have learned three things from the Afghans:—

(1) The use of leathern shoes,

(2) The use of long swords and guns,

(3) The system of betrothal.

III. A ROUGH SKETCH OF KHATLÁN (KOLÁB) AND ADJOINING COUNTRIES.[114]

By MAULVI NAJMUDDIN, a Theologian and Poet from Koláb.

NAMES OF MANZILS (STATIONS) FROM KOLAB TO THE PUNJAB.

‎‏کولاب ‏‎ (1) Kolab.

‎‏صیاد ‏‎ (2) Sayad. Situated on this side of the Amoo, and
belongs to Badakhshan.

‎‏ین قلع‏‎ (3) Yan-Qalá.

‎‏چاھیاب ‏‎ (4) Chahyáb. Governed then (18 years ago) by Sultan
Azdahar, son of Yusuf Ali Khán.

‎‏دشت سبز ‏‎ (5) Dashti-sabz. A halting-place.

‎‏رستاق ‏‎ (6) Rustáq. Governed then by Ismail Khán, son of Yusuf
Ali Khán.

‎‏قزل درہ ‏‎ (7) Kizil Dara.

‎‏ال‌کاشان ‏‎ (8) Elkáshán. The Himalaya begins.

‎‏اتن جلب ‏‎ (9) Átin Jalab. Here the river _Kokcha_[115] is crossed.

‎‏دشت سفید ‏‎ (10) Dasht-e-sufed.

‎‏فیض اباد‏‎ (11) Faízabad. Capital of Badakhshan; governed then by
Jahandár Shah; is situated on the river Kokchá.

‎‏رباط ‏‎ (11) Rubát.

‎‏دشت فراخ‏‎ (12) Dashti Farákh.

‎‏وردوج ‏‎ (13) Wardúj. Contains a mine of sulphur.

(14) } Names are forgotten.
(15) }

‎‏زیباق ‏‎ (16) Zibáq. Peopled by _Shi’as_ (or rather Muláis).

‎‏دہ گول‏‎ (17) Deh Gôl. The frontier village of Badakhshán; only
a kind of inn.

‎‏سنگر ‏‎ (18) Sanghar. A halting-place.

‎‏چترال ‏‎ (19) Chitrál. Governed then by Aman-ul-mulk (as now).

‎‏سرغال ‏‎ (20) Sarghál.

‎‏رباطَك ‏‎ (21) Rubatak.

‎‏دیر ‏‎ (22) Dír. Governed then by Ghazan Khán.

‎‏سوات ‏‎ (23) Swat.

‎‏پشاور ‏‎ (24) Peshawar.

That part of the country lying at the foot of the Hindu Kush mountains,
which is bounded on the north by Kokand and Karatigan, on the east by
Durwaz, on the south by Badakhshan and the Amu, on the west by Sherabad
and Hissar (belonging to Bukhara) is called _Khatlan_ ‎‏ختلان‏‎. KOLÁB,
a considerable town containing a population of about ten thousand, is
situated at the distance of five miles from the northern bank of the
Amu, and is the capital of the province. The other towns of note are
_Muminabad_ ‎‏مؤمن اباد‏‎, Daulatabad ‎‏دولتاباد‏‎, Khawaling ‎‏خوالنگ‏‎,
Baljawan ‎‏بلجوان‏‎, and Sarchashmá ‎‏سرچشمہ‏‎.

The country, being situated at the foot of mountains, and being watered
by numerous streams, is highly fertile. The most important products
are rice, wheat, barley, kharpazá, etc.; and the people generally are
agricultural.

There is a mine of salt in the mountains of ‎‏خواجه مؤمن‏‎ _Khawaja
Mumin_; and the salt produced resembles the Lahori salt, though it is not
so pure and shining, and is very cheap.

Cattle breeding is carried on on a great scale, and the wealth of a
man is estimated by the number of cattle he possesses. There is a kind
of goat in this country which yields a very soft kind of wool (called
Tibit); and the people of Kolah prepare from it hoses and a kind of
turban, called _Shamali_ (from shamal, the northern wind, from which it
gives shelter).

_Religion._—Generally the whole of the population belongs to the Sunni
sect (according to the Hanafi rite).

_Tribes._—The population of the country is divided into _Laqai_,
_Battash_, and _Tajiks_. The Laqais live in movable tents (khargah) like
the Kirghiz, and lead a roving life, and are soldiers and thieves by
profession. The Battashes live in villages, which are generally clusters
of _kappás_ (thatched cottages), and are a peaceful and agricultural
people. The Tajiks live in the towns, and are mostly artisans.

_Language._—Turki is spoken in the villages and a very corrupt form of
Persian in the towns. Most of the words are so twisted and distorted that
a Persian cannot understand the people of the country without effort.

_Government._—The country is really a province of Bukhárá; but a native
of Kolab, descended from the Kapchaqs by the father’s and from the Laqais
by the mother’s side, became independent of Bukhará. After his death,
his four sons, Sayer Khan, Sara Khan, Qamshin Khan, Umra Khan, fought
with one another for the crown; and Sara Khan, having defeated the other
three, came to be the Chief of the province, but was defeated by an army
from Bukhará and escaped to Kabul.

When Najmuddin left his country, it was governed by a servant of the
court of Bukhárá.

The houses are generally built of mud, cut into smooth and symmetrical
walls, and are plastered by a kind of lime called _guch_. Burnt bricks
are very rare, and only the palace of the governor is made partially of
them. The walls are roofed by thatch made of “damish” (reeds), which grow
abundantly on the banks of the Amoo.

The _dress_ consists of long, flowing choghás (stuffed with cotton) and
woollen turbans. The Khatlanis wear a kind of full boot which they call
_chamush_, but lately a kind of shoe is introduced from Russia, and is
called _nughai_.

The country is connected with Yarkand by two roads, one running through
Kokand and the other through the Pamir.

* * * * *

The above and following accounts were in answer to questions by Dr.
Leitner, whose independent researches regarding Kandiá in 1866-72 were
thus corroborated in 1881, and again in 1886, when the photographs which
serve as the basis of our illustrations were taken.

IV. THE LANGUAGE, CUSTOMS, SONGS, AND PROVERBS OF GABRIÁL.

POSITION.—A town in _Kandiá_, a part of Yaghistan (the independent,
or wild, country) situated beyond the river Indus (Hawā-sinn), which
separates it from _Chilás_. The country of _Kandiá_ extends along both
sides of the _Kheri Ghá_, a tributary of the Indus, and is separated from
_Tangir_ by a chain of mountains.

The town of _Gabriál_ is situated three days’ march from _Jalkôt_, in a
north-west direction, and is one day’s march from _Patan_, in a northerly
direction. _Patan_ is the chief city of Southern Kandiá.

INHABITANTS.—The whole tract of Kandiá can send out 20,000 fighting men.
They are divided into the following castes:—

(1) Shîn, the highest, who now pretend to be Quraishes, the Arabs of the
tribe to which the Prophet Muhammad belonged. (Harif Ullá, the Gabriáli,
and Ghulam Mohammad, of Gilgit, _call themselves Quraishes_.)

(2) Yashkun, who now call themselves Mughals, are inferior to the Shîn. A
Yashkun man cannot marry a _Shîn_ woman. Ahmad Shah, the Jalkoti belonged
to this caste.

{ (3) Doeúzgar, carpenters.} In reality these people constitute no
{ (4) Jolá, weavers. } distinct castes, but all belong to a
3 { (5) Akhár, blacksmiths. } third, the Kamìn, caste.
{ (6) Dôm, musicians.
{ (7) Kámìn, lowest class.

The people of _Northern Kandiá_ (Gabriál) are called _Bunzárî_, and of
the southern part (_i.e._, Patan) _Maní_, as the Chilasis are called
_Boté_. A foreigner is called _Raráwi_, and fellow-countryman, _Muqámi_.

RELIGION.—The Gabriális, as well as all the people of _Chilás_, _Patan_,
and _Palas_, are Sunnis, and are very intolerant to the _Shias_, who are
kidnapped and kept in slavery (Ghulam Mohammad, the Gilgiti, has been
for many years a slave in Chilás, as Ahmad Shah reports). The Gabriális
were converted to Muhammadanism by a saint named _Bâbâji_, whose shrine
is in Gabriál, and is one of the most frequented places by pilgrims.
The Gabriális say that this saint lived six or seven generations ago.
Mir Abdulla (who is really of Afghanistan, but now lives in Gabriál,)
says that the Gabriális were converted to Islám about 150 years ago.
Lately, this religion has made great progress among the people of Kandiá
generally. Every little village has a mosque, and in most of the towns
there are numerous mosques with schools attached to them, which are
generally crowded by students from every caste. In Gabriál, the Mullahs
or priests are, for the most part, of the Shîn caste, but men of every
caste are zealous in giving education to their sons. Their education is
limited to Muhammadan law (of the Hanifite school), and Arabian logic
and philosophy. Very little attention is paid to Arabic or Persian
general literature and caligraphy, that great Oriental art; so little,
indeed, that Harifullah and Mir Abdulla, who are scholars of a very high
standard, are wholly ignorant of any of the caligraphic forms, and their
handwriting is scarcely better than that of the lowest primary class boys
in the schools of the Punjab.

The most accomplished scholar in Kandiá is the high priest and chief of
Patan, named Hazrat Ali, who is a Shîn.

The people generally are peaceful, and have a fair complexion and erect
bearing. Their social and moral status has lately been raised very high.
Robbery and adultery are almost unknown, and the usual punishment for
these crimes is death. Divorce is seldom practised; polygamy is not rare
among the rich men (wadán), but is seldom found among the common people.

GOVERNMENT.—Every village or town is governed by a Council of elders,
chosen from among every tribe or “taífa.” The most influential man
among these elders for the time being is considered as the chief of
the Council. These elders are either Shîns or Yashkun. No Kamìn can be
elected an elder, though he may become a Mullá, but a Mulla-kamìn also
cannot be admitted to the Council.

The reigning Council of Gabriál consists of 12 persons, of whom 9 are
Shins and 3 Yashkuns. Patshé Khân is the present chief of the Council.
The post of Chief of the Council is not hereditary, but the wisest and
the most influential of the elders is elected to that post. Justice is
administered by the Mullahs without the interference of the Council,
whose operation is limited to inter-tribal feuds.

CUSTOMS AND MANNERS.—Hockey on horseback, which is called “lughât” in
Gabriál, is played on holidays; and the place where they meet for the
sport is called “lughât-kárin-jha.”

Guns are called “nâli” in Gabriál, and are manufactured in the town by
blacksmiths.

Dancing is not practised generally, as in the other Shin countries. Only
“Doms” dance and sing, as this is their profession; they play on the
“surúi” (pipe), rabáb (harp), and shaṇdo (drum).

The “purdá” system, or “veiling” women, is prevalent among the gentry,
but it is only lately that the system was introduced into this country.

When a son is born, a musket is fired off, and the father of the newborn
son gives an ox as a present to the people, to be slaughtered for a
general festival.

Infanticide is wholly unknown.

MARRIAGE.—The father of the boy does not go himself, as in Gilgit, to
the father of the girl, but sends a man with 5 or 6 rupees, which he
offers as a present. If the present is accepted, the betrothal (lóli) is
arranged. As far as the woman is concerned the “lóli” is inviolable. The
usual sum of dowry paid in cash is 80 rupees.

A bride is called “zhiyán,” and the bridegroom “zhiyán lo.”

LANGUAGE.—On account of the want of intercourse between the tribes the
language of Kohistan is broken into numerous dialects; thus the structure
of the dialects spoken in Kandiá, _i.e._, in Gabriál and Patan, differs
from that of the language spoken in Chilás and Palus, _i.e._, in the
countries situated on this side of the Indus. Harifullah, a Gabriáli, did
not understand any language except his own; but Ahmad Shah, an inhabitant
of Jalkôt (situated in the southern part of Chilás), understood Gabriáli,
as he had been there for a time. Ghulam Mohammad, our Gilgiti man, who
had been captured in an excursion, and had lived as a slave in Chilás,
also thoroughly understood Jalkóti.

The language of Kohistan (as Chilás, Kandiá, etc., are also called) is
divided into two dialects, called _Shéná_ and _Shúthun_ respectively.
In the countries situated on that side of the Indus, that is in Kandiá,
Shúthun is spoken.

The following pages are devoted to _Ballads_, _Proverbs_, _Riddles_, and
_Dialogues_ in the Shúthun dialect.

_Songs_ = Gíla. Meshón gíla = men’s songs; Gharón gíla = female songs.

1. AN ELEGY.

Fifteen years ago a battle was fought between _Arslán Khan_ of _Kali_,
and _Qamar Ali Khan_ of _Pálus_, in which 300 men were killed on both
sides. _Phaju_, on whose death the elegy is written by his sister, was
one of the killed. The inhabitants of Palus are called “Sikhs,” in
reproach.

_Rugé níle, jimátyán-kachh-dúkánt_,
In a green place, next a mosque, in a sitting (resting) place,
_Chá chápár gála mazé, shahzada marégil_
In a surrounded fort within, the prince was killed
_Rugé níle, jimátyán kachh, dúkánt_
In a green place, next a mosque, in a resting place
_Sheú wále, bathrí, sóh viráti walégil_.
Bring the bier, lay it down, (so that) that heirless one may be
brought to his home.

ii.

_Rúge níle, wo Shérkot shar hogaé_,
In the green place, that Sherkot, where the halting-places of guests
_Diri Sikáno qatle karégil_.
Are deserted, the Sikhs (infidels, that is the Pálusis) slaughter
committed (did).
_Rúge níle, Shérkot, barí bigá hojowo_,
In the green place, in Sherkot, a great fight happened to be,
_Kali Khel, Phajú dasgír marégil_.
O Kalikhel (a tribe of Kohistan) Phajú is captured and killed.

TRANSLATION.

1. In a green place, next the mosque, in a place of rest.
Within an enclosure the prince was killed.
In a green place, next a mosque, in a spot of rest,
Bring the bier and lay it down, to bring him home who has no heir.

2. In the green place, that Sherkôt, where the halting-place of guests
Is deserted, the Sikhs committed slaughter.
In the green place, in Sherkot, a great fight took place,
Oh, Kalikhel tribe, Phajú was captured and killed.

2. The following song is a chârbait, or quatrain, composed by Qamrán, a
Gabriali poet. The song treats of the love between Saif-ul-mulk, a prince
of Rúm, and Shahparì (the Fairy-queen).

The first line of a _charbait_ is called _Sarnâmâh_, and the remaining
poem is divided into stanzas or “Khhàṛáo,” consisting each of four lines.
At the end of every stanza the burden of the song is repeated:

SARNAMAH.—_Ma húga musfar, mi safár hugâe Hindustan waín_
I became a stranger, my travel became towards Hindustan.
_Mí duâ’ salám, duâ’ salámi ahl Kohistan waín_
My prayer-compliments, prayer-compliments, to the
inhabitants of Kohistan (may go forth).
_Malá Malúkh thû, O Badrái tou ínê haragilua_
I myself am Malukh (name of the Prince Saif-ul-mulk), O
Badra, thou didst lose me.

BURDEN.—_Hái, Malá Malúkh thû, O Badrái, ché Malúkh tîṇ tâó bar
zíthu_
Woe, I am Malukh, O Badra, now thy Malukh from thy sorrow
has lost his senses.

STANZAS.—1. _Mala Malukh thu, O Badrai, Malúkh tîṇ, tâó thú dazélo_
I myself am Malukh, O Badra, thy Malukh burnt has been from
thy heat.

2. _Hyó níeṇ nidhéto qarâré, Malúkh Badré wátbe thú harzélo_
In the heart there is no ease, which Malukh after Badra
has lost.

3. _Be tí áṇs yârâúâ, mah pai-mukhé á’ṇs soh wéloṇ_
Ours, yours, was friendship, I beardless at that time.

4. _Gini kirí thi, háê háê, mi Azli qalam zikzithu_
Why dost thou ... woe! woe! the pen of Eternity wrote so.

BURDEN.—5. _Hái, Malá Malúkh thu, O Badrai, Ché Malukh tîṇ tâó harzi
thu._
Woe, I am Malukh, O Badra, etc., etc.

ii.

1. _Gini kiri the, hae hae, mi azló mazé lìkh taqdîr thú_
Why dost thou ... woe, woe! in Eternity did Fate write so.

2. _Darwázoṇ mazá galáchhe dhuî Mato tiṇ daráṇ faqîr thu_
On thy gate I lit fire (like Jôgís), I a boy was the beggar of thy
door.

3. _To hikmat biu báz-shâî thi kishéu lûṇgo maza zanzîr thu_
By thy stratagem thou takest the eagle a prisoner in the chain of
thy black locks.

4. _Kisheu lûngá, narai narai, panar mûṇla bé the zetdu_
Black locks, in strings, on thy bright face are twined.

5. _Hae Mala Malukh thu...._
Woe, I am Malukh, etc....

iii.

1. _Kisheu lûngá narai narai, panar mûṇ la âwizâṇ thu_
Black locks in strings on thy bright face are hanging.

2. _Mi laṛmûṇ mazá karáé, tiu makhchúe gi mi armâṇ thu_
In my body is the knife, thine is this deed which was my desire.

3. _A’khir dhar héṇti nímgaré shoṇ fáni na, malá rawâṇ thu_
At length will remain unfinished this waning (world), I now depart.

4. _Hyó mi kir súraí súraí, Jandun giná thu, ma mari thu_
My heart didst thou pierce in holes, where is my life, I am dead.

5. _Hae Hae...._
Woe, I am Malukh, etc.

iv.

1. _Hyó mi kir súraí súraí térubir, teṇ shon niázah ghiu_
My heart didst thou pierce throughout, by this thy spear.

2. _Mála thu muṛé, ti dalbaráṇ, lailo bá mi janázah ghiu_
I am thy dead boy, thy lover, O dearest, go off from my bier.

3. _Khún tiu gḥaṛ hoga, ghi tulá nibháé ansi khévah ghiu_
My blood is on thy neck, alas! thou didst not sit with me, being
engaged in thy toilet.

4. _Khévah kirethi zhare tin soh khiyál mudá chaizbithú_
Thy toilet do now, now that thy remembrance of me is slackened
by Time.

MATAL (Masl = Proverbs).

PROVERBS.—(1) _Zánda chapélo razan bhiyáṇt._
One who is struck by all, fears even a rope.

(2) _Zoṛoṇ waé nhálé k hurá zhiká._
Looking towards (the length of) the sheet, extend your feet.

(3) _Háte ché rachhélú darwáze aṛat kara._
Elephant if you keep, make your door wide.

(4) _Kaṛotál ghutágir, láwáṇ na hol kir._
The Lion attacks, the Jackal makes water.

(5) _Qá mil tillu gûṇ kaáṇt, báz mil tillu máséu khánt._
With crow went, ate dung; with eagle went, ate flesh.
_i.e._ In the company of the crow you will learn to eat dung
and in that of the eagle, you will eat flesh.

(6) _Taṇgá gatam karé rupaé balyúṇ._
A penny, for collecting went, lost rupee.

(7) _Aíṇ tale kaṇwalé déthé, mazé háṛ shárá túṇ._
Big mouth flattery does, inwardly (in mind) breaks bones.

(8) _Dúṇí lawáṇo karú márch._
Two Jackals a lion kill.

(9) _Dhon mazé ek bakrí budi agalu, bûtoṇ bakroṇ ethi._
In a flock, if a contagious disease to one goat come, it comes to
all goats.

(10) _Gúṇ khuch táṇt soṇ, gháṇo cháí hont._
Dung is spread out however much, bad smell so much more becomes.

(11) _Zhá zhui dárú._
Brother’s remedy is brother.

(12) _Tálaiṇ uthi, kozá dishál, tiu dú boṇdi._
A sieve rose, to pot said, “You have two holes.”

(13) _Zar bádshah tamam hotoṇ, hiyá bandgár shilát._
Money of the king is spent, heart of the treasurer pains.

ISHOLÁ (Question).

RIDDLES.—(1) _Shúṇ ghélá chíz thuṇ, che naháláṇt tasi wáiṇ pasháṇt amá?_
Such what thing is, which they see towards it, they see
themselves in it?
_Answer: Mirror._ _Shúṇ áhan thi._ = Such _mirror_ is.

(2) _Shúṇ gheḷá chíz thúṇ che surat záné thi, tilháṇt nai?_
Such what thing is, whose figure serpent-like is, does not move?
_Answer: Rope._ _Shúṇ rás thi._ = Such rope is.

(3) _Shúṇ ghelá chíz thúṇ, aṇgár dheráni gellú, dhúaṇ darya bau nikáṇt?_
Such what thing is, fire is applied to dry grass, the river of
smoke flows from it.
_Answer: Hookâh._

(4) _Shúṇ ghélá chíz thúṇ, che mut surté waré nahále? hasáṇt, khuroṇ
we nahále roṇt?_
Such what thing is, who seeing towards other body laughs, seeing
towards feet, weeps?
_Answer: Peacock._

SHÚTHUN.

WORDS AND DIALOGUES.

_Words._

God, _Khávaṇd_.
fairy, _kháperé_.
demon, _div_.
female demon, _balái_.
paradise, _janat_.
fire, _aṇgár_.
earth, _uzmuk_.
water, _wí_.
heaven, _asmán_.
moon, _yúṇ_.
star, _tará_.
darkness, _tamáí_.
shadow, _chhoṇl_.
day, _des_.
light, _láwar_.
night, _rál_.
midday, _mazardi_.
midnight, _áṛ-rál_.
evening, _nosháṇ_.
to-day, _ázuk des_.
yesterday, _bayaluk des_.
to-morrow, _rályaṇk des_.
heat, _taó_, _tát_.
cold, _hewán_.
flame, _lám_.
smoke, _dhúáṇ_.
thunder, _hagá-dazi-gé_.
lightning, _mili_.
rain, _ájo_.
drop, _ájo-tìpo_.
rainbow, _bijonṛ_.
snow, _hiṇ yúṇ_.
ice, _kambuk_.
hail, _mékh_.
dew, _palús_.
earthquake, _bhúnál_.
dust, _udhún_.
pebbles, _lakh-bato_.
sand, _sighál_.
mud, _chichál_.
plain, _maidán_, _meráh_.
valley, _dará_.
mount, _kháu_.
foot of mountain, _múndh_.
river, _sín_.
wooden bridge, _síú_.
rivulet, _uchhu_.
streamlet, _kháṛ_.
avalanche, _hiṇál_.
lake, _dhám_.
pond, _dhamkalú_.
confluence, _milil_.
banks, _sin-kaí_.
yonder bank, _pír sinkai_.
this bank, _ár sinkai_.
a well, _kohi_.
country, _watau_.
village, _gáụ_.

place, _zhaí_.
army, _kauár_.
leader, _kauár sardár_.
lumberdár, _malak_.
tax-gatherer, _jám kai_.
policeman, _zeitú_.
cannon, _tof_.
gun, _náli_.
sword, _tarwál_.
dagger, _karái_.
lance, _naizá_, _shel_.
powder, _náláṇ daru_.
ball, _goli_.
ditches, _kahe_.
war, _kali_.
thief, _lú_.
sentinel, _ráth_.
guard, _chár_.
guide, _pan-pasháṇtuk_.
coward, _khiá to_.
traitor, _fatandár_.
bribe, _baṛi_.
prisoner, _bandi_.
slave, _dim_.
master, _maulá_.
servant, _naukar_.
drum, _shaudo_.
sheath, _káti_.
grip, _kauzá_.
bottom of sheath, _kundi_.
hatchet, _ckháí_.
file, _soán_.
smoothing iron, _rambi_.
scythe, _liṇzh_.
tongs, _ochhúṇ_.
razor, _chhúr_.
mirror, _áhin_.
plough, _hól_.
oar, _phiyá_.
yoke, _úṇ_.
ladle, _tagú_.
kneading roller, _chhagór_.
kettle, _chati_.
little kettle, _chedin_.
stone kettle, _botá-bháṇ_.
pan, _to_.
coal, _phúthe_.
key, _kunji_.
lion, _khará_.
shawl, _shíyúṇ_.
bedding, _bathár_.
lock, _sáṛ_.
bolt, _hul_.
vineyard, _dháṇgá_.
stable, _ghozai_.
” for cattle, _gáṇ zai_.
” for sheep, _bakroṇ-ghuzál_.
water mill, _yáṇzh_.
iron peg, _kili_.
bullet-bag, _koti_.
powder-flask, _darú kothi_.
iron and flint, _tíz_.
tinder, _khú_.
bow, _sháe_.
arrow, _káṇó_.
quiver, _káṇó bhaṇ_.
ship, _jaház_.
boat, _heṛi_.

century, _shol kála_.
year, _kála_.
half-year, _aṛa-kála_.
three months, _sha-yúṇ_.
week, _sát-dés_.
spring, _basáṇ_.
summer, _barish_.
autumn, _sharal_.

LUNAR MUHAMMADAN MONTHS.

Khudá tálá yúṇ, Rajab.
Shahqadar, Shaaban.
Rozoṇ yúṇ, Ramazan.
Lukut (smaller) eed yúṇ, Shawal.
Kháli yúṇ, Zi Qáad.
Gháíṇ eed yúṇ, Zi Haj.
Hasan Husain yúṇ, Muharram.
Chár bheyáṇ (four sisters), four months of Rabiulawwal: Rabi 2,
Jamadi 1, Jamadi 2.

man, _máṇsho_.
male, _mésh_.
woman, _gharoṇ_.
new-born child, _chinot_.
girl, _mati_.
virgin, _bikra-mati_.
bachelor, _cháur_.
old man, _zárá_.
old woman, _zírí_.
puberty, _zuáni_.
life, _zhigi_.
death, _máreg_.
sickness, _ráṇs_.
sick, _najúr_.
health, _mith ráhat_.
relation, _zhává_.
brotherhood, _sak zhá_.
friend, _yár_.
aunt, _máfi_.
father, _abá_.
paternal uncle, _pichá_.
mother, _yá_.
brother, _zhá_.
sister, _bhiyúṇ_.
son, _púsh_.
daughter, _dhí_.
daughter’s husband, _zamá zhú_.
grandson, _pázho_.
granddaughter, _pozhi_.
nephew, _zhá-lichh_.
husband, _baryú_.
wife’s brother, _shábri_.
wife’s mother, _ichosh_.
wife’s father, _shor_.
pregnancy, _ghaleíṇ_.
nurse, _razáí mahal_.
priest, _moláṇ_.
mosque, _jamáat_.
pupil, _shágar_.
sportsman, _dháuzír_.
goldwasher, _keryáṇ_.
peasant, _déqán_.
horse-stealer, _gálwáṇ_.
robber, _lú_.
brick-baker, _ustá kár_.
butcher, _qasábi_.
shepherd, _payál_.
cowherd, _go-chár_.
groom, _kharbal_.

body, _surté adúmá_.
skin, _chám_.
bones, _hár_.
marrow, _métho_.
flesh, _maséṇ_.
fat, _miyún_.
blood, _rát_.
veins, _rage_.
head, _shish_.
occiput, _shisháṇ-kokar_.
brain, _metho_.
curls, _chaṇdú_.
tresses, _pétú_.
forehead, _tál_.
eyes, _aṇchhi_.
eyebrow, _ruzí_.
eyelids, _papáíṇ_.
pupil, _machhá_.
tears, _áṇchhe_.
ears, _kaná_.
hearing, _shúoṇ_.
cheeks, _hargel_.
chin, _dáí_.
nose, _nathúr_.
nostrils, _shúli_.
odour, _gháṇ_.
sneezing, _zhitá_.
upper lip, _bul-dhút_.
nether lip, _múṇ-dhút_.
mouth, _áiṇ_.
taste, _khoṇd_.
licking, _chara_.
sucking, _chúshoṇ_.
beard, _dáí-bál_.
moustaches, _phuṇge_.
teeth, _daná_.
tongue, _zíb_.
jaw, _tálú_.
throat, _marri_.
neck, _shák_.
shoulder, _phyá_.
back, _dah_.
fore-arm, _mutá_.
palm, _kát-zil_.
nails, _naḳhá_.
thumb, _aṇgú_.
middle finger, _mazwál angúi_.
breast, _heṇ li_.
lungs, _phap_.
liver, _shúr_.
kidneys, _juká_.
breath, _dhéṇs_.
coughing, _kháṇg_.
spleen, _shiyáṇ_.
belly, _vari_.
side, _shígát_.
ribs, _pash_.
thighs, _sethi_.
knee, _kútá_.
feet, _khurá_.
sole, _sháṇdá_.

anger, _rush_.
aversion, _achháq_.
boastful, _amá-tikú_.
cheating, _tḥag_.
courage, _hyo-kura_.
cowardice, _bhiyáto_.

blind, _shéo_.
deaf, _borá_.
dumb, _cháo_.
dwarf, _khátoṇ_.
giant, _zhigo_.
hunch-back, _dakoro_.
stammering, _hup-hup_.
one-eyed, _ek-áchhá_.

bed, _shi-úṇ_.
broom, _láhúli_.
canal, _yáh_.
fort, _kalá_.
house, _báo_.
ladder, _párchaṇgi_.
street, _durro_.
water-jug, _dhomb-lú_.
wall, _kúṛ_.
window, _bá-úṇ_.

guest, _maláshi_.
host, _malásh-khais_.
breakfast, _vépli_.
midday meal, _ashari-goli_.
luncheon, _mazardiṇ-goli_.
evening meal, _bilalú-ki-goli_.
sour dough, _kham birá_.
light, _lawár_.

I, _má_.
thou, _tú_.
he, _úṇ_.
we, _améṇ_.
you, _tus_.
they, _áiṇ_.

great, _ghéroṇ_.
small, _lakho_.
much, _che_.
beautiful, _sugá_.
ugly, _adash_.
clean, _sáf_.
dirty, _mulgán_.
deep, _khatoṇ_.
rich, _poyandá_.
poor, _kám toáṇ_.
miserly, _sakh_.

oath, _súgáu_.

_Dialogues._

What is your name? _tiṇ ná gi thú?_

Where do you come from? _tú guláṇ ethú?_

Where do you go to? _tú guláṇ byáṇ thú?_

When did you come? _tú kal ethú?_

Come quickly, _zino é_.

Go slowly, _suple bhá_.

Beat him now, _as uskéṇ koteh_.

Kill him afterwards, _as hilék pásrih máreh_.

How is the road between this and there? _uṇgáí shálgái har páṇ
goshe the?_

Very bad and dangerous, _chaí kharáb thi, chai gi aụ thi_.

Very easy; a plain, and nothing to fear, _chaí hasán thi; bodi
maiaán kingi bhíl nithi_.

Is there any water on the road? _paú mazé wi thú ya na thú_
(way-in water is or not is)?

Why should there not be any? _giné nithú?_

There is plenty, and good water, _cho thú, sains thú_.

The water is bad and salty, _achhak thú, lúsuláe milál thú_.

There is a big river on the road, which you will not be able to
cross, _pánda mazé, ghái sin thi, pir-khingí_ (on that side)
_ni biháṇt_.

Why? Is there no bridge? _ginah? síú nithú?_

There was a rope bridge, but to-day it broke, _bilálá síú áṇs,
áz sher thi_.

Can it be not repaired? _sáṇdhat nai éṇ?_

There are no men for two days’ march all round. There are
neither twigs nor ropes to be got. How am I to do? _shásh taraf
se másh nithu, doṇ diṇ so mazaló-mazé, gishí sandhyí?_

How can he come; he has gone about some business, _sóh gishé
éshóto, soh kámi béjthú_.

Go! be silent. Bring him at once, or else I shall be very
angry, _bóh! chubbó; má khapá hothiú, zino bádi á_.

What do you want? _tú gi lukhát?_

I do not want anything except to drink and eat, _mà kiṇgeh ni
lukhaṇt, kháṇ púr lukháṇt_.

I have nothing; what can I give you? _minge kíngé nithú, má gi
dáwá?_

First of all bring cold water, _buttó mú tḥo tú mitḥa wi á_.

Afterwards bring milk, ghi, butter, _paitóṇ shír, ghil,
shishaṇ_.

How many days will you stay here? _tú ondháṇ ketúk desi
bhayáṇto?_

I will start to-morrow early, _má ráli béṇto_.

Get coolies (porters), _petwáre á_.

How many coolies do you want? _ketúk petwáre pakár thú?_

The road is full of stones, _páṇdá maze batáh chaí vaṇte_.

Your loads are very heavy, _tíṇ aíṇ_ (-this) _peté chaí abur
thíṇ_.

The coolies will not be able to carry them, _zaṇ petwaré búí
ner haṇthé_.

I beg that you will make your loads a little lighter, and then
you will arrive quicker, _mi arzí thi, as peté hilék achhrá;
amén hálo chhíl_.

Be patient; I will pay for all; I will give the rate to the
coolies. If you act well I will reward you, _sabar karé; móṇh
buto mazdúri dashul; téṇ miṭh kám karlu, má tighé inám dashut_.

Get the horses ready, _ghúí tayár karáh_.

Put the saddle on, _ghúí tal kátḥí sambhál karé_.

Take the saddle and bridle off, _ghúí na maláni alú karé, háṇ
káthé_.

Catch hold of this, _as dháí_.

Do not lose it, _as phat niré_.

Do not forget what I say, _míṇ bál_ (my word) _né ushá_.

Hear! look! take care, _káno hin shúná, anchhí náhlí l fikar
karé_.

Tie the horse to that tree, _gho as gáí mél gáṇdá_.

Keep watch all night, _rál chokidárí karáh_.

Are there many thieves here? _úndá lú ché thé?_

What is this noise? _shún awáz kasiṇ thúṇ?_

Who are you? _tú káṇ thúṇ?_

Get away from here, _uṇd gáí báh_.

Shoot him the moment he comes near, _uṇgáí ígálo, asíṇ tumakáh
deh_.

This man is treacherous, _úṇ másh bepat thú_.

Don’t let him go, _as másh úṇdú phat niyáréh_.

Bind him, imprison him, enchain him; put him into stocks, _as
gaṇdáh; asiṇ háthe zanzír gáláh; as kundi galáh_.

I am going to sleep, _hú íṇ má sútá bijáṇtaé_.

Don’t make a noise, _chozuk niyáreh_.

How many people are there in the village? _as gáṇó maz katú
maṇsh thé?_

I have not counted them, _méṇ ishmár niyárchí_.

Is the soil fertile or sterile? _dol níl thé, gíh shíshi thé?_

Is there much fruit? _mévá chaí thé?_

Is there much grain in the village? _as watné maz án cho thú?_

How many taxes do you pay in the year? _ek kál maz ketúk masúl
diyáṇt tus?_

Are you satisfied? _tú khush-hál thú?_

How is your health? _tú uṇdáṇ arám thú?_

I am in good health, _arám thú_.

Good temper, _tabyát sáf_.

Bad temper, _tabyát asak_.

God bless you, _khudáé tigé barakat dé_.

May God lengthen your life, _khudáe tiṇ umar chai kare_.

My name is Gharib Shah, _míṇ ná Gharíb Sháh thú_.

My age is twenty years, _míṇ umar bísh káláh thú_.

My mother is dead; my father is alive; _míṇ mháṇli marigai, míṇ
mahálo zaná thú_.

How is the road, good or bad? _pán mit thi ghi achak thi?_

In one or two places it is good, in others bad, _ek dú záé mit
thíṇ, ek dú záé achak thíṇ_.

How did you come from Chilas? _tú Chilasúṇ gishéí thú?_

I could not get a horse, I went on foot, _gho nyans, maton,
khuron tal ethú_.

Are the mountains on the road high? _pán maze kháná úchat thé?_

When are you going back? _tú kaiá bashotá?_

I am poor, _má gharíh thú_.

We kill all infidels, _bé bud kafra maráṇ the_.

I have come to learn the language, _má zíb chhitáíṇ éthú_.

What do I care about? _miṇ gi parwá thú?_

I make my prayers five times every day, _má har dés panjwaqtúṇ
nimáz karáṇ thé_.

Where did you come from? _tu guláṇ ethú?_

Come into the house, _bá khuní é_.

Sit at your ease, _mitho bhaí_.

Are you well? _tú mit thú?_

Are your children well? _tíu chinomati júṛ thé?_

Is your sister’s son well? _tíu sazú júṛ thé?_

Are you very ill? _tú cho ácháq_ (sick) _thé?_

May God restore you to health! _khudá tálá tú joṛ kéré._

Light the fire, _angár guyáh_.

Cook the food, _goli pazáh_.

Spread the bed, _bathári karé_.

It is very cold, _chaí lúí thé_.

It is very hot, _chaí tut thé_.

Put on your clothes, _zúr shá_.

Catch hold of the horse, _gho dhaí_.

Look at that man, _píshas másh nahálá_.

Take care, _fikar karé_.

You will fall, _tú ullá shat_.

Take a good aim, _mitḥi nazir karé_.

I will give you help, _ma timál madat karéshat_.

I am hungry, bring food that I may eat, _má húshoshat, goli á,
khéij_.

I am thirsty, bring water that I may drink, _má chúha húga, wi
á, púmá_.

I am sleepy now, I will go to sleep, _migé nízh íge, nizh
karáṇthú_.

What do you call this in your language? _tus shas chizí taí zíb
hín gimá manáth?_

How much is the produce of this land? _as zaímuz ketúk paidá
húnt?_

Can you sing? _tige gila eṇthe?_

V.—ANTHROPOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS ON DARDS AND KAFIRS IN DR. LEITNER’S
SERVICE.

(_Measurements in Centimetres._)

1. ABDUL GHAFÛR, KAFIR OF KAMÔZ, _about 24 or 25 years of age_.

Height, 168·5; hair, black; eyes, hazel; colour of face, ruddy;
colour of body, very light brown; narrow forehead; high instep;
big boned; length round the forehead, biggest circumference of
head, 53·75; protruding and big ears; square face; long nose,
slightly aquiline; good regular teeth; small beard; slight
moustache and eyebrows; distance between eyebrows, ordinary;
good chest; fine hand; well-made nails. Weight, 10 st. 2¾ lbs.

2. KHUDAYÁR, YASHKUN NÁGYRI; _age 24_.[116]

Height, 182; colour of body, light yellow brown; round the
head, 52·5; teeth, good, regular; nose, very slightly aquiline;
little growth on upper lip; none on cheeks; long, straight,
coarse black hair; eyes, hazel; ears, not so protruding;
better-proportioned forehead; small hand; good instep; foot
bigger, in proportion, than hand (not so good as other’s hand);
80 pulse. Weight, 9 st. 10 lbs.

3. IBRAHÍM, RÔNO, NAGYRI; _age 34_.

Height, 162·3; round the head, 56·5; eyes, dark brown; big
hands and feet; instep, good; colour, brown; good muscular
foot; strong arms; hair, black; plentiful growth on upper lip;
nose, aquiline; broad nostrils; full lips. Weight, 10 st. 12
lbs. (No. 10 on Drawing 1 of Appendix IV.)

4. MATAVALLI, YASHKUN OF HUNZA; _age 30_.[116]

Height, 164·0; very hairy, including hands; round the head,
54·0; head, pyramidal pointed; sinister countenance; very big
hands and feet; thin lips; great moustache, coarser hair; more
flat-soled than rest. Weight, 9 st. 8½ lbs. (_Full details in
“Comparative Table.”_)

5. SULTAN ALI, YASHKUN OF NAGYR; _age 35_.

Height, 165·25; round the head 53·75; square head; retroussé,
small nose; small mouth; red beard, plentiful; black hair;
brown eyes; very big hands and feet, also instep. Weight, 9 st.
12 lbs. (No. 11 on Drawing 1 of Appendix IV.)

6. KHUDADAD OF NAGYR; _age 30_.

Height, 163·3; round the head, 54·4; stupid expression; big
chest; ordinary hands and feet; low forehead; rising head; very
muscular; eyes, brown; complexion, brown; thickish nose; very
narrow forehead; underhung jaw; lots of hair. Weight, 9 st. 12
lbs. (No. 3 on Drawing 1 of Appendix IV.)

7. HATÁMU OF NAGYR; _age 16_.

Height, 162·1; round the head, 54·4 (broad head); low Grecian
forehead; small nose; eyes, dark brown; light brown complexion;
small hands and feet; regular, white teeth. Weight, 7 st. 13
lbs. (No. 4 of above Drawing.)

8. GHULAM MUHAMMAD, SHÎN OF GILGIT; _age 38_.[116]

Height, 161·0; round the head, 54; beard, prematurely grey;
lost second incisor; small hands and feet; fair instep; brown
eyes and complexion; nose, straight; ears all right. Weight 8
st. 5 lbs.

[Illustration: ANTHROPOLOGICAL.

Gilgiti (Ghulman Muhammad).

Nagyri (Khudayar).

Hunza Man (Matavalli).

ETHNOLOGICAL. (_See also Drawing 1 of Appendix IV._)

A Gabriali Student and two Messengers (A Chitrali and a Yasini), from a
Brother of the late Mihtar Aman-ul-Mulk, Ruler of Chitral.]

FURTHER MEASUREMENTS OF THE ABOVE MEN BY THE SCHWARZ SYSTEM.

(_See explanations of these numbers further on, page 5._)

+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
|NUMBERS BY SCHWARZ. |
| |1. ABDUL-GHAFÛR, KAMÔZ KÁFIR. |
| | |2. KHUDAYAR YASHKUN, NAGYRI. |
| | | |3. IBRAHÎM, NAGYRI RÓNO. |
| | | | |4.[117] MATAVALLI, HUNZA YASHKUN. |
| | | | | |5. SULTAN ALI, YASHKUN, NAGYRI. |
| | | | | | |6. KHUDADÁD NAGYRI. |
| | | | | | | |7. HATAMU NAGYRI.|
| | | | | | | | |8. GHULAM |
| | | | | | | | | MUHAMAD,|
| | | | | | | | | GILGITI |
| | | | | | | | | SHÎN. |
+----+-------+-------+-------+------+-------+-------+------+----------+
| 28 | 30 |26·7·5 | 29·2 | 31·5 | 25·5 | 28·5 | 24·7 | 29·5 |
| 29 | 15 |24·7·5 | 14 | 13·5 | 14 | 11·75 | 31·1 | 15·5 |
| 30 | 14·5 | 13·5 | 14·5 | 13·6 |13·7·5 | 14·2 | 12·7 | 14 |
| 31 |10·2·5 | 8·7·5 | 9·5 | 9·6 | 8·7·5 | 9·2 | 8·1 | 9·1 |
| 32 | 3·7·5 | 3·5 | 3 |3·7·5 | 3·25 | 3·3 | 3·8 | 3·9 |
| | | | | | | | | |
| 34 | 3·9 | 4 | 4·6 | 4·1 | 3·6 | 3·6 | 3·4 | 3·5 |
| 35 | 5·5 | 4 | 4·7·5 | 5 | 4·1 | 5·5 | 4·5 | 4·8 |
| 36 | 14 | 11·2 |11·7·5 |11·25 | 11·2 | 11·2 | 11·1 | 10·2 |
| 37 |18·7·5 |20·2·5 | 20·6 | 20·8 | 19 | 20·75 | 19·2 | 18·5 |
| | | | | | | | | |
| 39 | 46 |44·7·5 | 48 | 44·5 | 44·5 | 48·6 | 41·5 | 39·6 |
+----+-------+-------+-------+------+-------+-------+------+----------+

DESCRIPTION OF JAMSHÉD, THE SIAH PÔSH KAFIR.

Jamshêd of Katár, the nephew of General Feramorz, the renowned Kafir
General in the service of the late Amir Sher Alí of Kabul, was a
confidential orderly both in the service of the Amir Sher Alí and in
that of Yakúb Khan, whose cause he espoused against that of his father,
in consequence of which, when his master was imprisoned, he fled to
Rawalpindi, where he came to me. He had witnessed some of the most
exciting scenes in modern Kabul history, had risen to the rank of Major,
and had served with Prince Iskandar of Herát, whom he afterwards again
met in London.

In 1872 I published from Jamshêd’s dictation an account of the
“Adventures of Jamshèd, a Siah Pôsh Kafir, and his wanderings with
Amir Sher Alí,” and also “a statement about slavery in Kabul, etc.,”
which contained the names of places and tribes previously unknown to
Geographers and Ethnographers, as well as historical and political
material, the value of which has been proved by subsequent events. I
took him with me to England, not only on account of the interest which
exists in certain scientific quarters as regards the “mysterious race”
of which he was a member, but also in order to draw the attention of the
Anti-slavery Society and of Government to the kidnapping of Kafirs—the
supposed “poor relations” of the European—which is carried on by the
Afghans.

His measurement was taken, according to the systems of both Broca
and Schwarz (of the Novara expedition), by Dr. Beddoe, and the type
appeared to approach nearest to that of the slavonized Macedonians of
the Herzegovina, like one of whose inhabitants he looked, thus creating
far less attention, especially when dressed _à l’européenne_ in Europe,
than he did at Lahore, where Lord Northbrook saw him. The Anti-slavery
Society sent him to the Chiefs of Katár with a communication to the
effect that Englishmen strongly disapproved of slavery, and that they
should represent their case to the Panjab Government. A curious incident
in connection with his presence in England may be mentioned. It was
the 6th May, 1874, the day of the “Two Thousand”; the result of the
Newmarket race was eagerly expected, when the _Globe_ came out with the
following titles placed on the posters: “Result of the ‘Two Thousand.’”
“An Interesting Race” (the latter was an article on the race of the Siah
Pôsh Kafirs). The result may be imagined. Hundreds of Welshers plunged
into an account of the Siah Pôsh Kafirs under the notion that they were
going to have a great treat in a telegraphic description of a Newmarket
race. I was informed that the wrath of the sporting roughs who besieged
the office was awful when they found out their mistake. Poor Jamshêd was
seen across the Panjab border by one of my Munshis, but returned some
months later to Lahore, whence he found his way to Brussa, in Asia Minor.
It is supposed that he took service in the Turkish Army, but he has not
since been heard of. As I intend to publish an account of the Káfirs of
Katár (now, I fear, all Nimchas, or half-Muhammadans), Gambir, etc., I
reserve the interesting statements of Jamshêd to their proper Section in
my “Káfiristán.”

[Illustration: JAMSHÊD, THE SIAH PÔSH KAFIR,

BROUGHT TO ENGLAND BY PROF. LEITNER IN 1872.]

COMPARATIVE TABLE OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS ON SOME OF THE DARDS IN
DR. LEITNER’S SERVICE.

(_The first five and the last are described by the French system;
the sixth by the German system, put into millimetres and centimetres
respectively._)

+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| | A |
| | MATAVALLI.[118] |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Date and place of observation | 2-6-81: Simla |
|Age; sex; profession | 32 yrs.; m.; peasant |
| | and warrior |
|Caste, tribe, and tongue | Yashkun; Khajuná; |
| | Burishki |
|Religion and birthplace | Shiah; (probably Mulái) |
| | Hunza |
|Thin, medium, or stout | medium |
|Weight[121] | 9 st. 8½ lb. |
|Colours[122] { skin, exposed parts | 53 (red brown) |
| { ” covered parts | 21 (light red brown) |
| { hair | 48 (black) |
| { beard | 41 (black) |
| { eyes | 3 (light brown) |
|Hair: straight, wavy, curly, frizzled, | |
| or woolly | straight |
|Beard: thick (abundant), scanty, or none | thick, long and stiff |
|Skin: smooth, a little, or very hairy | very hairy |
|Shape of profile of nose (p. 111) | No. 2 (nearly quite |
| | straight) |
|Lips: thick, medium, or thin | medium (arched) |
| ” straight, or turned outwards | straight |
|Teeth: large, medium, or small | small |
| ” incisors, straight (vertical), | straight (incisors wide |
| slanting, or very slanting | apart) |
|The set of teeth: very good, good, medium, | |
| bad, or very bad | good (but dirty) |
| {Diameters: antero-posterior, maximum | 195 millim. |
| { ” ” inial | 192 ” |
| { ” transverse, maximum | 144 ” |
|Skull{ ” auriculo-vertical (fr. m.) | 116 ” |
| {Curves: inio-frontal | 345 ” |
| { ” horizontal | 540 ” |
| { ” transverse sub-auricular | 330 ” |
| {facial angle (Camner) | 81 ” |
|From point of chin to edge of hair | 185 ” |
| ” ophryon to alveolar point | 95 ” |
|Breadth between zygomata | 139 ” |
|Length of nose | 48 ” |
|Breadth of nose | 31 ” |
|From ophryon to root of nose | 12 ” |
|Width between inner angle of eyes | |
| ” ” cheekbones | 94 ” |
|Height (standing) | 164 centim. |
| ” (sitting) | 126 ” |
|Greatest extension of arms | 162 ” |
| ” ” of span | 20 ” |
|Total length of foot | 25 ” |
|Length of ditto, ante-malleolar | 20 ” |
|Forehead | high; slightly receding |
|Frontal bone (bord sourcillier) | very marked |
|Intra-ocular distance | scarcely any |
|Eyebrows | bushy, crossing, |
| | forming but one line |
|Eyes | straight |
|Cheeks | little salient |
|Zygomatic arch | very salient |
|Chin | oval |
|Ears | medium, little salient |
| | (round, small) |
|Mouth | |
|Neck | strong |
|Torso | strong |
|Extremities | very small |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+

+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| | B |
| | KHUDÁYÁR. |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Date and place of observation | 2-6-81: Simla |
|Age; sex; profession | 21 yrs.; m.; student |
|Caste, tribe, and tongue | Yashkun; Khajuná; |
| | Burishki |
|Religion and birthplace | Shiah; Nagyr |
|Thin, medium, or stout | thin |
|Weight[121] | 9 st. 10 lb. |
|Colours[122] { skin, exposed parts | 54 |
| { ” covered parts | 47 |
| { hair | 42 |
| { beard | 43 |
| { eyes | 3 |
|Hair: straight, wavy, curly, frizzled, | |
| or woolly | curly |
|Beard: thick (abundant), scanty, or none | scanty |
|Skin: smooth, a little, or very hairy | a little hairy |
|Shape of profile of nose (p. 111) | 5 |
|Lips: thick, medium, or thin | medium |
| ” straight, or turned outwards | straight |
|Teeth: large, medium, or small | medium |
| ” incisors, straight (vertical), | |
| slanting, or very slanting | straight |
|The set of teeth: very good, good, medium, | |
| bad, or very bad | very good |
| {Diameters: antero-posterior, maximum | 183 |
| { ” ” inial | 180 |
| { ” transverse, maximum | 144 |
|Skull{ ” auriculo-vertical (fr. m.) | 110 |
| {Curves: inio-frontal | 315 |
| { ” horizontal | 525 |
| { ” transverse sub-auricular | 315 |
| {facial angle (Camner) | |
|From point of chin to edge of hair | |
| ” ophryon to alveolar point | |
|Breadth between zygomata | |
|Length of nose | |
|Breadth of nose | |
|From ophryon to root of nose | |
|Width between inner angle of eyes | |
| ” ” cheekbones | |
|Height (standing) | 182 |
| ” (sitting) | 131 |
|Greatest extension of arms | 180 |
| ” ” of span | 16½ |
|Total length of foot | 26 |
|Length of ditto, ante-malleolar | 21½ |
|Forehead | high; slightly |
| | retreating |
|Frontal bone (bord sourcillier) | well developed |
|Intra-ocular distance | deep |
|Eyebrows | very bushy |
|Eyes | straight |
|Cheeks | little salient |
|Zygomatic arch | salient |
|Chin | oval |
|Ears | |
|Mouth | |
|Neck | proportioned |
|Torso | square |
|Extremities | fine |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+

+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| | C |
| | GHULAM MUHAMMAD. |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Date and place of observation | 2-6-81: Simla |
|Age; sex; profession | 40 yrs.; m.; |
| | agriculturist |
|Caste, tribe, and tongue | Shiná |
|Religion and birthplace | Shiah; Gilgit |
|Thin, medium, or stout | medium |
|Weight[121] | 8 st. 5 lb. |
|Colours[122] { skin, exposed parts | 38 |
| { ” covered parts | 38 |
| { hair | grey |
| { beard | grey |
| { eyes | 2 |
|Hair: straight, wavy, curly, frizzled, | |
| or woolly | curly |
|Beard: thick (abundant), scanty, or none | very thick |
|Skin: smooth, a little, or very hairy | a little hairy |
|Shape of profile of nose (p. 111) | 5 |
|Lips: thick, medium, or thin | medium |
| ” straight, or turned outwards | straight |
|Teeth: large, medium, or small | large |
| ” incisors, straight (vertical), | |
| slanting, or very slanting | straight |
|The set of teeth: very good, good, medium, | |
| bad, or very bad | good |
| {Diameters: antero-posterior, maximum | 186 |
| { ” ” inial | 187 |
| { ” transverse, maximum | 144 |
|Skull{ ” auriculo-vertical (fr. m.) | 123 |
| {Curves: inio-frontal | 325 |
| { ” horizontal | 540 |
| { ” transverse sub-auricular | 320 |
| {facial angle (Camner) | |
|From point of chin to edge of hair | |
| ” ophryon to alveolar point | |
|Breadth between zygomata | |
|Length of nose | |
|Breadth of nose | |
|From ophryon to root of nose | |
|Width between inner angle of eyes | |
| ” ” cheekbones | |
|Height (standing) | 161 |
| ” (sitting) | 124 |
|Greatest extension of arms | 174 |
| ” ” of span | 16 |
|Total length of foot | 25 |
|Length of ditto, ante-malleolar | 19 |
|Forehead | medium; straight |
|Frontal bone (bord sourcillier) | much developed |
|Intra-ocular distance | very deep |
|Eyebrows | arched, bushy, crossed |
|Eyes | straight |
|Cheeks | salient |
|Zygomatic arch | salient |
|Chin | oval |
|Ears | |
|Mouth | medium |
|Neck | proportioned |
|Torso | proportioned |
|Extremities | fine |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+

+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| | D |
| | GHULÁM. |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Date and place of observation | —— Simla |
|Age; sex; profession | 18 yrs.; m. |
|Caste, tribe, and tongue | Shîn (Kashmir subject) |
|Religion and birthplace | Sunni; Gurukôt near |
| | Astor |
|Thin, medium, or stout | |
|Weight[121] | |
|Colours[122] { skin, exposed parts | 52 |
| { ” covered parts | 53 |
| { hair | 48 |
| { beard | 48 |
| { eyes | 1 |
|Hair: straight, wavy, curly, frizzled, | |
| or woolly | curly |
|Beard: thick (abundant), scanty, or none | thick |
|Skin: smooth, a little, or very hairy | very hairy |
|Shape of profile of nose (p. 111) | 5 |
|Lips: thick, medium, or thin | thin |
| ” straight, or turned outwards | straight |
|Teeth: large, medium, or small | small |
| ” incisors, straight (vertical), | |
| slanting, or very slanting | straight |
|The set of teeth: very good, good, medium, | |
| bad, or very bad | very good |
| {Diameters: antero-posterior, maximum | 187 |
| { ” ” inial | 185 |
| { ” transverse, maximum | 144 |
|Skull{ ” auriculo-vertical (fr. m.) | 110 |
| {Curves: inio-frontal | 335 |
| { ” horizontal | 540 |
| { ” transverse sub-auricular | 335 |
| {facial angle (Camner) | |
|From point of chin to edge of hair | |
| ” ophryon to alveolar point | |
|Breadth between zygomata | |
|Length of nose | |
|Breadth of nose | |
|From ophryon to root of nose | |
|Width between inner angle of eyes | |
| ” ” cheekbones | |
|Height (standing) | 159 |
| ” (sitting) | 125 |
|Greatest extension of arms | 167 |
| ” ” of span | 20 |
|Total length of foot | 24½ |
|Length of ditto, ante-malleolar | 20 |
|Forehead | medium; straight |
|Frontal bone (bord sourcillier) | scarcely any |
|Intra-ocular distance | not deep |
|Eyebrows | arched, bushy, crossed |
|Eyes | straight |
|Cheeks | little salient |
|Zygomatic arch | much developed |
|Chin | oval |
|Ears | |
|Mouth | small |
|Neck | well proportioned |
|Torso | well made |
|Extremities | medium |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+

+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| | E |
| | ABDULLAH. |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Date and place of observation | 2-6-81: Simla |
|Age; sex; profession | 40 yrs.; m.; |
| | agriculturist |
|Caste, tribe, and tongue | Shîn; (Kashmir subject) |
|Religion and birthplace | Sunni; Gurukôt near |
| | Astor |
|Thin, medium, or stout | medium |
|Weight[121] | |
|Colours[122] { skin, exposed parts | 37 |
| { ” covered parts | 37 |
| { hair | 48 |
| { beard | 48 |
| { eyes | 1 |
|Hair: straight, wavy, curly, frizzled, | |
| or woolly | curly |
|Beard: thick (abundant), scanty, or none | very thick |
|Skin: smooth, a little, or very hairy | very hairy |
|Shape of profile of nose (p. 111) | 5, very high nostrils |
|Lips: thick, medium, or thin | medium |
| ” straight, or turned outwards | little turned outward |
|Teeth: large, medium, or small | small |
| ” incisors, straight (vertical), | |
| slanting, or very slanting | straight |
|The set of teeth: very good, good, medium, | |
| bad, or very bad | very bad |
| {Diameters: antero-posterior, maximum | 193 |
| { ” ” inial | 183 |
| { ” transverse, maximum | 140 |
|Skull{ ” auriculo-vertical (fr. m.) | 114 |
| {Curves: inio-frontal | 345 |
| { ” horizontal | 520 |
| { ” transverse sub-auricular | 320 |
| {facial angle (Camner) | 81 |
|From point of chin to edge of hair | 177 |
| ” ophryon to alveolar point | 75 |
|Breadth between zygomata | 132 |
|Length of nose | 52 |
|Breadth of nose | 39 |
|From ophryon to root of nose | 20 |
|Width between inner angle of eyes | 38 |
| ” ” cheekbones | 108 |
|Height (standing) | 152 |
| ” (sitting) | 124 |
|Greatest extension of arms | 165 |
| ” ” of span | 19 |
|Total length of foot | 23½ |
|Length of ditto, ante-malleolar | 19½ |
|Forehead | high; straight |
|Frontal bone (bord sourcillier) | scarcely any |
|Intra-ocular distance | not deep |
|Eyebrows | arched, bushy, crossed |
|Eyes | straight |
|Cheeks | little salient |
|Zygomatic arch | much developed |
|Chin | oval |
|Ears | medium flat |
|Mouth | thick |
|Neck | strong |
|Torso | slim (svelte) |
|Extremities | medium |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+

+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| | F |
| | MIR ABDULLAH.[119] |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Date and place of observation | 23-3-86: Lahore |
|Age; sex; profession | 30 yrs.; m.; Jurist |
|Caste, tribe, and tongue | Dard; Gabriál |
|Religion and birthplace | Sunni |
|Thin, medium, or stout | medium |
|Weight[121] | |
|Colours[122] { skin, exposed parts | forehead & cheeks, |
| | reddish-brown |
| { ” covered parts | lips, pink; covered |
| | parts, lighter |
| { hair | black |
| { beard | red-brown |
| { eyes | _iris_: dark brown; |
| | _ball_: white, bluish, |
| | injected |
|Hair: straight, wavy, curly, frizzled, | |
| or woolly | black, short, curly |
|Beard: thick (abundant), scanty, or none | straight; woolly; |
| | brown-reddish |
|Skin: smooth, a little, or very hairy | hairy on breast, little |
| | on arms |
|Shape of profile of nose (p. 111) | convex |
|Lips: thick, medium, or thin | thin, arched |
| ” straight, or turned outwards | thin, straight |
|Teeth: large, medium, or small | small |
| ” incisors, straight (vertical), | |
| slanting, or very slanting | straight |
|The set of teeth: very good, good, medium, | |
| bad, or very bad | transparent, very white |
| {Diameters: antero-posterior, maximum | 191 |
| { ” ” inial | 186 |
| { ” transverse, maximum | 141 |
|Skull{ ” auriculo-vertical (fr. m.) | 119 |
| {Curves: inio-frontal | |
| { ” horizontal | 530 |
| { ” transverse sub-auricular | |
| {facial angle (Camner) | |
|From point of chin to edge of hair | 191 |
| ” ophryon to alveolar point | |
|Breadth between zygomata | 136 |
|Length of nose | 59 |
|Breadth of nose | 35 |
|From ophryon to root of nose | |
|Width between inner angle of eyes | 34 |
| ” ” cheekbones | |
|Height (standing) | 166 |
| ” (sitting) | |
|Greatest extension of arms | 165 |
| ” ” of span | |
|Total length of foot | 25½ |
|Length of ditto, ante-malleolar | |
|Forehead | high; breadth of |
| | forehead 107 |
|Frontal bone (bord sourcillier) | pronounced |
|Intra-ocular distance | deep; distance 3·4 |
|Eyebrows | standing far apart, |
| | thin |
|Eyes | straight |
|Cheeks | very salient |
|Zygomatic arch | salient |
|Chin | oval |
|Ears | long; height of ear 6·3 |
|Mouth | length of mouth 5·3 |
|Neck | proportioned |
|Torso | proportioned |
|Extremities | small |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+

+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| | G[120] |
| | DR. LEITNER. |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+
|Date and place of observation | 2-6-81: Simla |
|Age; sex; profession | 40 yrs. |
|Caste, tribe, and tongue | |
|Religion and birthplace | |
|Thin, medium, or stout | stout |
|Weight[121] | 14 st. 4 lb. |
|Colours[122] { skin, exposed parts | 25 (very fair) |
| { ” covered parts | 24 (very fair) |
| { hair | fair |
| { beard | fair; slightly red |
| { eyes | 14 (blue) |
|Hair: straight, wavy, curly, frizzled, | |
| or woolly | curly |
|Beard: thick (abundant), scanty, or none | abundant |
|Skin: smooth, a little, or very hairy | very hairy |
|Shape of profile of nose (p. 111) | 5 |
|Lips: thick, medium, or thin | medium |
| ” straight, or turned outwards | thin, straight |
|Teeth: large, medium, or small | medium |
| ” incisors, straight (vertical), | |
| slanting, or very slanting | vertical |
|The set of teeth: very good, good, medium, | |
| bad, or very bad | medium |
| {Diameters: antero-posterior, maximum | 201 |
| { ” ” inial | 200 |
| { ” transverse, maximum | 163 |
|Skull{ ” auriculo-vertical (fr. m.) | 126 |
| {Curves: inio-frontal | 340 |
| { ” horizontal | 600 |
| { ” transverse sub-auricular | 330 |
| {facial angle (Camner) | 73 |
|From point of chin to edge of hair | 193 |
| ” ophryon to alveolar point | 94 |
|Breadth between zygomata | 133 |
|Length of nose | 54 |
|Breadth of nose | 33 |
|From ophryon to root of nose | 16 |
|Width between inner angle of eyes | 35 |
| ” ” cheekbones | 103 |
|Height (standing) | 171 |
| ” (sitting) | 126 |
|Greatest extension of arms | 182 |
| ” ” of span | 19 |
|Total length of foot | 27 |
|Length of ditto, ante-malleolar | 22 |
|Forehead | high; slightly receding |
|Frontal bone (bord sourcillier) | very pronounced |
|Intra-ocular distance | very small |
|Eyebrows | arched |
|Eyes | straight |
|Cheeks | salient |
|Zygomatic arch | not salient |
|Chin | square |
|Ears | medium |
|Mouth | medium |
|Neck | strong |
|Torso | vigorous |
|Extremities | medium[123] |
+--------------------------------------------+-------------------------+

JAMSHÊD.—A KATÁR KÁFIR; NEPHEW OF GENERAL FERAMORZ.

MEASUREMENTS OF HEAD (BY DR. JOHN BEDDOE).

ENGLISH INCHES.

MILLIMETRES.

1. Greatest length of head from glabella 6·8 172·7
2. Length from tuber occip. to greatest convexity of
frontal arch 6·7 170·2
3. Length from tuber occip. to glabella 6·8 172·7
4. Greatest length of head from smooth depression above
glabella (ophryon) 6·75 171·4
5. Greatest length of head from depression at root of 6·65 168·9
nose
6. Length from chin to vertex 9·1 231·1
7. Least breadth between frontal crests 3·7 94
8. Greatest breadth between zygomata 5·1 129·5
9. Breadth from tragus to tragus 5· 127
10. Greatest breadth of head, yielding cranial index 86·7 5·9 149·8
11. Breadth between greatest convexities of mastoid 5·3 134·6
processes
12. Greatest circumference of head 20·6 523·2
13. Circumference at glabello-inial line 20·4 518·1
14. Circumference at inion and frontal convexity 20·5 520·6
15. Arc from nasal notch to inion (tuber occip.) 12·8 325·1
16. Arc from one meatus to the other across top of head 14·4 365·7
17. Arc from one meatus to the other over glabella 11·5 292·1
18. Length of face (nasal notch to chin), giving facial
index, 80·4 4·1 104·1
Height from meatus to vertex 5·3 133·5
Bigoniac breadth 4·1 103·5

The head, though strongly brachy-cephalic, is distinctly of Aryan type;
high and round, but not at all acro-cephalic; the inion is placed very
high.

JAMSHÈD—(_continued_).

THE FOLLOWING MEASUREMENTS ARE ACCORDING TO THE SYSTEM OF SCHWARZ, OF THE
NOVARA EXPEDITION.

CENTIMETRES.

28. From the growth of hair to the incisura semilunaris sterni 25·
29. From the inion to the Halswirbel (vertebra prominens) 14·45
30. Direct diameter, from one meatus aud. ext. to the other 11·85
31. Outer angle of the eye to the other 8·75
32. Inner angle of the eye to the other 2·75
33. Distance of the fixed points of the ear 4·05
34. Breadth of the nose 3·2
35. Breadth of the mouth 5·
36. Distance of the two angles of the lower jaw 10·35
37. From incis. semil. sterni to the seventh vertebra 12·95
38. From the axillary line over the mammæ to the other 26·4
39. From sternum to columna vertebralis, straight across 19·3
40. From one spina anterior superior ilii to the other 22·35
41. From one troch. maj. to other 26·05
42. Circumference of the neck 33·5
43. From one tuberculum majus to the other 37·
44. From middle line of axillary line over the chest, above mammæ,
to the other middle line 41·5
45. Circumference of chest on the same level 88·25
46. From nipple to nipple 19·25
47. Between anterior spines of ilia 26·85
48. From trochanter major to the spina anterior ilii of the same
side 13·5
49. From the most prominent part of the sternal articulation of
the clavicular to above 43·4
50. From same point to the navel 39·2
51. From navel to upper edge of the symphysis ossium pubis 14·75
52. From the 5th lumbar vertebra along the edge of the pelvis to
the edge of the symphysis 43·
53. From the 7th vertebra to the end of the os coccygis 60·35
54. From one acromion to the other across the back 43·7
55. From the acromion to the condyl. ext. humeri 32·25
56. From ext. condyl. humeri to processus styloideus radii 25·
57. From processus styloideus radii to metacarpal joint 10·2
58. From the same joint to the top of the middle finger 9·8
59. Circumference of the hand 21·4
60. Greatest circumference of upper arm over the biceps 26·8
61. Greatest circumference of forearm 24·5
62. Smallest circumference of forearm 15·2
63. From trochanter major to condyl. ext. femoris 34·35
64.
65.
66.
67.
68. From condyl. ext. femoris to mal. ext. 38·6
69. Circumference of knee joint 32·4
70. Circumference of calf 36·4
71. Smallest circumference of leg 21·3
72. Length of the foot 23·3
73. Circumference of instep 23·5
74. Circumference of metatarsal joint 23·5
75. From external malleolus to ground 8·1
76. From condyl. intern. to malleolus int. 36·9
77. Greatest circumference of thigh 48·5
78. Smallest circumference of thigh 35·5
79. Round the waist 68·4
80. Height of man (English, 5´ 3¾) 161·9
81. Colour of hair, very dark reddish-brown.
82. Colour of eyes, hazel-grey.
83. Colour of face, yellowish-brown.
84. Colour of skin of body, lighter than above.
85. Weight,
86. Strength,
87. Pulsation, 80 (a little excited).

APPENDIX VI.

A ROUGH ACCOUNT, COLLECTED IN 1886, OF ITINERARIES IN THE “NEUTRAL ZONE”
BETWEEN CENTRAL ASIA AND INDIA. By RAJA KHUSHWAQTIA AND DR. G. W. LEITNER.

ROUTE I.

FROM GILGIT TO KABUL, viâ Dareyl, Tangir, Kandiá, Ujù, Torwál, Swat, Dir,
Maidán, Jandūl, Bajaur, Muravarri, Pashàt, Kunèr, Jelalabad, Kabul.

GILGIT TO SHERKILA, 9 katsha (rough) kôs[124] (1½ miles), ruled by Isa
Bahadur’s son, Raja Akbar Khan, under Kashmīr, a faithful ally, contains
70 zemindars’ (peasants’) houses on the Yasin river.

SHERKILA TO PATÀRI (is uninhabited), over a ridge Pīr (17 katsha kôs)
called Batrèt, which is a plateau on which the Dareylis graze their
flocks in the spring.

PATÀRI TO YATSHŌT (12 katsha kôs), road stony and jungly. Yatshōt is
a village of Dareyl of one hundred houses, occupied by zemindars who
have cattle, sheep, goats, and _buffaloes_ (which are not found in
Badakhshan). The ground produces much white maize (from which bread is
made), wheat, barley, grapes growing to a gigantic size, nuts, etc.
There is excellent water, but it is very cold. The people are Sunnis,
and speak Shiná (the dialect of Chilás). [The Shins appear to have been
a Hindu tribe expelled from Kashmir territory and converted to a sort
of Muhammadanism, both Shiah and Sunni. They are the highest caste in
Dardistan; but, instead of the Brahminical veneration for the cow, they
abhor everything connected with it—its flesh and milk—and only touch its
calf at the end of a prong.] Yatshōt has two mosques, and Mullas who
understand Arabic well. The Dareylis are very religious, and attentive to
their ceremonial practices. The streamlet of Dareyl runs past it.

YATSHŌT TO MANIKÁL, 3 katsha kôs, a plain easy march through a prairie.
Manikál has two forts, one of which has about 500 houses, and is called
Dòrkans; and the other, Manikál proper, which has 300 houses and an old
Mosque. Manikál is surrounded by forests. When the Kashmīr troops reached
Manikál, the Dareylis, after fighting, burned down their old fort rather
than surrender. There are many Mullas and disciples there, some coming
from Peshawar, Swat, etc.

MANIKÁL TO SAMANGÁL, 3 katsha kôs, over an inhabited plain. The fort
contains 800 houses. A great elder (Djashtero) called Kalashmīr resides
there, whom all the Dareylis respect and follow, although there are many
other Djashteros, like Muqaddams (elders, mayors), in Kashmir villages.
He is wise and rich, possessing, perhaps, in addition to cattle, etc.,
5 or 6 thousand tolas of gold; and he has one wife and two or three
children. Persian is read there in addition to Arabic. There is also
another fort containing 500 houses, also called Samangál, a few hundred
yards from the first. In fact, Dareyl, although a small country, is
thickly populated.

SAMANGÁL TO PÙGUTSH, a fort, with 500 houses, 2 katsha kôs—thence 1
katsha kôs to Gayál, a fort with 600 houses—all an easy road.

GAYÁL TO KÀMI, Fort Tangīr, over a high mountain called Kùbbekunn,
very windy, and wooded. Water must be taken with one when starting
from Gayál, as none is found before reaching Rîm, a small village of
20 houses, on the Tangīr side. The road for 8 kôs is difficult, being
an ascent of 4 kôs on each side. From Rîm to Tangīr the road is good,
water abundant, and habitations numerous. Kàmi fort has 1,000 houses
of Gujars (a shepherd and cowherd tribe that is found following its
peaceful occupation, either as settlers or nomads, in the most dangerous
districts), and zemindars, who are tributaries to Yasin, paying taxes in
gold and kind. There is a direct road from Tangīr to Yasin, viâ Satìl—6
kôs, plain, with many Gujars, paying their grazing tax in gold; thence
over a small peak, Mayiréy, to the plateau of Batrêt, 8 katsha kôs. (See
second stage of this route.)

FROM BATRÊT TO RÀUSHAN, over a small mountain. Ràushan is a small fort
of Yasin, whence there are roads to Yasin, Chitrál, Gilgit, etc. Gold is
washed from the Indus, which is 3 katsha kôs from Kàmi. The Tangīris are
braver than the Dareylis and equally religious, having many Mullas; but
the country, although larger, is not so well populated as Dareyl, the
people of which are also rather shepherds than hunters. The _Gabár_ are
the ruling people in Tangīr, about 1,000 families, of which 500 are in
Kàmi. They are the old proprietors of the country, and are all Shins who
_now_ have given up their old aversion to the cow, its flesh and milk.

KÀMI, over the mountain Tràk, called by the Pathans Chaudunno, which has
no snow on the Tangīr side, but a snow-covered plateau 1½ kôs long on the
Kandiá side. Then comes a green plain. To the foot of the mountain Tràk
on the Tangīr side 11 kôs pakka (11 good kôs, or nearly 22 miles), over
a tree-covered plain. Then over the Tràk pass and plateau, the road goes
along a plain which extends for 17 kôs to GABRIÁL. There are a great many
Gujars along the road. [The road to Yasin is through the Gujar-frequented
district of Kuranjá, belonging to Tangīr. Multán is the Muqaddam of the
Gujars, a brave man.]

GABRIÁL has only 40 houses, but the country of Gabriál generally is
studded with habitations. The famous Mullah Habîbulla, a relative of
Raja Khushwaqtia, is a most influential man among Kohistanis. His tribe
is Mullakheyl, and all the Gujars of Kandiá are obedient to him. The
Mullakheyl are Shîns, but Yashkuns also live there. Yashkuns are the
peasantry of Dardistan, including Hunza, and supposed to be aborigines,
though some derive the Yashkuns of Hunza from the white Yuechi, or Huns,
and others give them a Western origin. They have always been Sunnis.
(The Dareylis were formerly Shiahs.) (See detailed account of Gabriál by
one of its Maulvis, Mir Abdullah, and of Kandiá or Kiliá, translated
by Dr. G. W. Leitner.) The people of Kandiá are wealthy in flocks, ghi
(= clarified butter, exported to Peshawur, 18 to 25 pakka seers for the
rupee). It is subject to Yasin. They possess double or Indian rupees and
mahmudshahis, some having 10 or 20 thousand rupees. The poorest have 10
to 12 cows, 100 sheep, etc. The greatest among the Gujars intermarry
with Yasin chiefs. The Kohistanis are independent, but the Gujars pay a
tribute to Yasin. The Samu or Samasi village is 2 kôs from Gabriál. From
Gabriál, ½ kôs distant, is a mountain called by the same name, with an
ascent of five to six pakka kôs, with excellent water; road only open
in summer. A descent of 5 kôs brings one to _Ushu_, a big village of
600 houses inhabited by Bashkaris. (See special account by Dr. Leitner
of Bashkar and its language.) The Swat river touches it. The Bashkaris
pay a small tribute to Yasin, but are practically independent. They are
generally on good terms with the Torwaliks, who were formerly their
rulers. The languages of Torwal and Bashkar are different.

FROM USHÙ TO TORWÁL, 13 kôs, very bad, stony road, after Kalám (2 miles
from Ushù). Torwál has 200 houses. They are not so rich as the people of
Kandiá and Jalkôt.

FROM TORWÁL TO BRANIHÁL, the frontier of Torwál, 12 to 13 kôs, a bad
stony road, 600 houses and a Bazár in which there are 5 or 6 Hindu
merchants. [The Hindu traders are not molested in Yaghistán (“the wild
land” as Dardistán, the country between Kabul and Kashmir is often
called), because no one is afraid of them; whereas if a Sahib (English
man) came, people would be afraid.] There are many wealthy people in
Branihál, which may be considered to be the capital of Torwál.

BRANIHÁL TO SWAT, a plain; at only 1½ kôs is Shagrám, composed of 3
villages, under the children of the Sayad (descendant of the prophet
Muhammad), Pir Bâba. The three villages are inhabited by Sayads and
contain 500 houses. Then to Tiráh (1 mile, a plain), where the Mîna or
Akhunkheyls live (300 houses).

TIRÁH TO LANDÉY, 1 kôs pakka, a Patán village, in which rice grows,
beginning from Branihál; Landéy to Lalkún (a small village away from the
big road to Hoti Murdan) 5 kôs, a plain. Thence Fazil banda, 12 kôs, a
plain; thence to a mountain, Barkànn, 12 kôs, a plain, leaving the Swat
for the Dīr territory. Jarughey (hamlet of Gujars) is the halting-place.
From Jarughey into the Dara of Ushuréy, in Yaghistan proper; it is the
home of the Khan of Dīr, and is inhabited by the Panda Kheyl tribe.
Halt at Jàbar, a village 14 kôs from Jarughey, a fairly inhabited road.
From Jàbar to Maidán (16 kôs) by the mountain Káir Dara, and passing
the fort Bībiól (100 houses) a fort of the Khan of Dīr. The mountain is
high. Maidán fort and Bazar, and Bandey fort (500 houses), Kumbàr 1 kôs
distant, 1,000 houses, of Mīans, and Bazar with many Hindus. Thence to
Bandey Mayár, a great Bazár, and a renowned Ziáret (shrine), and Langar
(almshouse) of Saukanó Mīân, a village of Peshawar, are 2,000 or 3,000
houses, belonging to Jandūl. It is 14 kôs distant from Maidán, over an
inhabited plain. Umr Khan, the ruler, has 240 excellent horsemen, 3,000
infantry, fights with Dīr, who has 500 inferior horses and numerous
footmen, but not so brave as Jandúl. Terkanì is the name of the Jandúl
ruler and tribe up to Jellalabad, and Irubsì that of Dîr, Swat, Buneyr,
Samè, Pakli, etc. At 1½ kôs of Mayar is Miákil, a big town, of 5,000
houses and a Bazar. Miákil to (Bajaur) Badâm, are Kakazis, of the Mamùnd
tribe, for 16 kôs a plain, 400 houses, Yágis (wild); Badàm to _Mureweri_,
are 16 kôs, over a small mountain (Mohmands) in Yaghistan, has 1,000
houses. (At Nawagai is a Khan, Ajdar Khan, with 20 horsemen and 3,000
footmen.) At Khàr was another Khán, Dilawar Khan, who fled to Peshawar,
his place having been conquered by Ajdar Khan; 100 houses. The place is
surrounded by the Tuman-kheyl tribe. On the other side of the river,
Kabul rule begins, and opposite is Chagar Sarai, leading to Katár, once
a stronghold of Kafirs. Gambīr is subject to Kabul, the rest of the Siah
Posh being independent; and another road leads to Petsh, which is Yági,
or independent.

FROM MURAWERI TO PASHÙTT, 5 or 6 kôs pakka. Below Muraweri, 2 kôs, is
Serkanni, where there are 200 Kabul troops. From Pashùtt cross stream on
jhallas (inflated skins) to Jelalabad, 20 or 22 kôs; whence the road to
Kabul is too well known to need even a passing reference.

* * * * *

Uninteresting as rough accounts of itineraries may be to the general
reader, they are not without importance to the specialist. My material
on the subject of routes to, and through, the Hindu-kush territories is
considerable, though necessarily defective. It was mainly collected in
1866-72, when a portion of it was used by that leader of men, General Sir
Charles MacGregor. I published a few “routes” at various intervals in
the hope of stimulating inquiry, and of eliciting corrections or further
information; but Indian official Departments, instead of co-operating,
are uncommunicative of the partial, and therefore often misleading,
knowledge which they possess, and, above all, jealous of non-official
specialists. The First part of my work on Hunza has recently been printed
by the Indian Foreign Office; where and when the Second will appear, is
doubtful. I think the public have a right to know how matters stand in
what was once called “the neutral zone,” the region between the Russian
and the British spheres of influence in Asia. At any rate, the learned
Societies and International Oriental and other Congresses, that, on the
strength of the material already published, have done me the honour at
various times to apply with but very partial success, to Government on
behalf of the elaboration of my material, shall not be deprived of it,
though I can only submit it to them in its rough primitive state. The
reader of _The Asiatic Quarterly Review_ will, I hope, not be deterred
by the dulness of “routes” from glancing at material which, in future
articles, will include accounts, however rough, of the languages, the
history and Governments, the customs, legends, and songs of, perhaps,
the most interesting countries and races in Asia. The information, often
collected under circumstances of danger, is based on personal knowledge,
and on the accounts of natives of position in the countries to be dealt
with.

G. W. L.

[Reprinted from _The Asiatic Quarterly Review_, April, 1891.]

ROUGH ACCOUNTS OF ITINERARIES THROUGH THE HINDUKUSH AND TO CENTRAL ASIA.

BY DR. G. W. LEITNER.

ROUTE II.

In connection with my note in “Routes in Dardistan,” I now propose to
publish a series of accounts which have been supplied to me by native
Indian or Central Asian travellers of position and trustworthiness, and
which cannot fail, whatever their scientific or literary deficiencies,
to be of topographical and ethnographical, if not of political, value.
I commence with the account of a loyal native Chief, who has had
opportunities of comparing Russian with British administration. The
Chief first passes quickly from JELALABAD TO GANDAMAK, thence to Tazîn,
Butkhák, Balahisár (where he left his sword with D... S...); he then
proceeds from KABUL TO CHALIKÁR, (a distance of 17 kôs over a plain);
then stops at the _Salán_ village, at the foot of the Hindukush, 11
kôs, and then goes on to say: “_Salán_: one road goes to the Hindukush
and one to _Bajgá_ (a halt) 14 kôs,[125] over a mountain into Afghan
Turkistan. _Anderáb_, district of _Kundûz_, 17 kôs, plain; Anderáb
to Bazderá; then Baghbán; then Robât (where there is a camp of Kabul
troopers against Uzbak robbers), 14 k. in Haibak district to Haibak
town; stayed at a small place of Tashkurghán, which has 6,000 houses,
and is held by a Risála (troop) of the Amir; stayed at an intermediate
cantonment established by Kabul; then to Mazari Sharif, 13 kôs (all
belonging to Balkh). Daulatabad (300 houses); thence to the river Amu
over a Rēg (sandy and dusty place) _in a buggy of two horses_, paid
three double rupees,[126] took water with us (20 kôs). There are 100 men
over the ferry for protection against raiding Turkomans. Sherdil Khan
Loináb gave me a passport to visit the Ziárat (shrine) of Khaja Bahauddin
Naqshbandi, at Bokhára. Went on ferry with 100 cattle and 50 men all day
long, to the village of Talashkhán (500 h.) in Bokhára territory, where
we rested in the evening. Next day by road to Sherabad, 7 kôs, plain
(2,500 h.); then to Chinarì (600 houses), passing the _Khirga_ Nishin
Khirghiz and Uzbak, “living in huts” (also Zemindars); Cheshma-i-Hafiz,
40 h., and a Serai for travellers. Then again on to the plain; made a
halt among the Khirga-nishīn. Next day went on to the large city of
Ghuzár (250,000 inhabitants, with villages, etc.). (Thence to Karshi to
Bokhára); thence to Karabagh (700 houses); to town of Chiraghtshi in
Shehrsabz (Ch. has 3,000 h.), whence it is four miles distant. Shehrsabz
is a beautiful place of 6,000 houses. (The Bokhára army has a band in
Russian style, and is drilled in a Russian way; it is better fed and
clad than are the Afghans, but it is not so brave.) Thence to Kitáb,
3,000 houses, and Bokhára troops; did not stay there, but went to Takhta
Karatsha, 10 kôs: thence to Kurghantippé Bazár; thence to _Samarcand_,
a paradise (500,000 inhabitants, two rivers); there is a Hákim and
General, the place belongs to the White Czar = the Ak Padishah. There
were 12 regiments of infantry, and 8 of cavalry there. Then to Jám, 4
kôs (a large Russian force), 12 regiments of infantry, 4 of cavalry. I
stayed with A.R. at Samarcand. There is a Russian cantonment between
Jezakh and Samarcand, Kōr, Khoshgurù. _The guns everywhere are directed
towards Yasin, or India._ I was nowhere molested in visiting Russian
cantonments. Jezakh, Tamburabad, little Bokhara; Zamīn, Uratippa, a great
town, and among 40,000 inhabitants there are 6 battalions and 8 regiments
of infantry; Náu in Khojend district. Then Khojend, 800,000 inhabitants,
great army; Mahràm, Besharìh in Khokand, then to the city of Khokand;
Karawultippa, 8 kôs, plain, Murghilán, a big city, 350,000 inhabitants
with villages; Mintippé, 3,000 houses (or inhabitants?), Arabán; Ush, a
large army (Kashghár is eleven days’ march). Induján, big Russian army;
150,000 (inhabitants). Then to the Kokand river, Derya Sîr, crossing to
Namangán, big city and army, thence returned to Induján, then to Asáka,
8 kôs plain, 9,000 inhabitants and army (1 cavalry, 4 infantry), then
to Shahrikhán, 6 kôs, big city, 8,000 inhabitants or houses; then to
Kawa, 5 kôs. Utshkurghán, 10 kôs, big city in Khokand: thence into a
valley to a Langar, 17 kôs, plain, at night, where there are Khirghiz
subjects to Khokand; over a mountain into Alai, 13 kôs, plain of Pamīr,
inhabited by Khirghiz, very cold; then to Chaghalmak, 15 kôs, plain, a
small village, 100 houses of Khirghiz. District of Karateghin, which is
subject to Bokhara (Alai being under the Russians); Chaghalmak to Zankù,
16 kôs, plain (horses are to be found everywhere for hire, according to
distance by Farsang). At Samarcand one mule’s wheat load = two double
rupees; a big sheep costs one rupee, and one and a half long-tailed sheep
at Khokand, also one rupee. The fat of sheep is used instead of Ghi. Gold
and notes abound more than silver. (Abdurrahman received 700 tungas = 350
rupees per day, for self and eighty followers.) Silk Atlas one and a half
yards is sold for one rupee. The Russian ladies are well dressed, and
great respect is shown to them. The officers are very polite. There are
free dispensaries, and schools in which Russian and the Korán are taught.
(Haldi and black pepper from India is dear); there is no tyranny, and
they are exactly like the English; the Russians live in bungalows. The
Kázis and the man who beats the drum at night for Ramazan are paid by the
Russians; sanitation is well attended to; all the troops are Europeans,
except the Noghais, who are Tartars. I was much struck at Khojend by
seeing the cavalry mounted according to the colour of the horses. (Gold
is said to come from Kashgar and Khokand, but I have not seen the mine.)
Camels abound and are eaten. Zankù to Kila-i Lab-i Ab (300 houses), 16
kôs, plain, to a village Shòkh darà (300 houses).

It is a fine country; the people talk Persian, and are Sunnis (belongs to
Bokhára).

KILA-I LAB-I AB, governed by a Bokhára Kardár, called Hákim Muhammad
Nazir Beg, at a Fort Gharm to Shughdaréy, 12 kôs, plain, on horseback
all along to Samarcand (300 h.), Shughdaréy to Fort Gharm, 3 k. (1,500
houses or inhabitants), Gharm to Childará, a village in Derwáz, plain, 17
k. packa (buggies do not go there), 150 h.; thence to Khawaling, Bazar,
1,000 h. (in the District of _Koláb_), 17 kôs, plain; carriages can go;
thence to the city of Koláb 14 kôs, plain (Koláb is under Bokhára) (was
formerly governed by Kartshîn Khan, a raider), whose brother Serakhan
is at Kábul. Koláb, 6,000 houses, is a fine city, and there are six
other cities belonging to it (Khawaling, Kungár, etc.); thence to
Sar-i-Chashma, 10 kôs, plain; carriages can go (200 houses); thence to
Baràk, 40 h. on the Amu 4 kôs, a warm place like Koláb generally; cross
into Samptì (60 h.), in the district of _Rosták_, belonging to Badakhshán
(paid 4 annas for conveyance of five horses costing me 3 tolas in Koláb
= 30 rupees); to Chayáp city, 2,000 houses (Jews are wealthy and not
oppressed, and at Koláb there are Jews and Hindus, the latter with no
families). Jews wear front curls, and have furs; women are handsome,
but are dressed like Mussulman women; men, however, wear caps and
narrow trousers, not turbans, as a rule, or wide trousers. The Jews in
Turkestan are very clean. “_They have a learning like the Shastras of the
Pandits._” They lend money to the Khan of Bokhára. (The utensils are of
china.)

Mare’s milk is much consumed cooked with meat, and has a highly
intoxicant effect. Chayàp to _Rosták_, 8 kôs, plain, 2 Afghan regiments
of cavalry, 4 regiments of infantry (there are also some troops at
Chayàp) 4,000 houses. Bazár well-frequented; springs; is a hot place.
Atunjuláb, 12 kôs, plain, carriages can go (60 houses); Faizabád 16 kôs,
great city and large Afghan force (3,500 houses?). I stayed at Bárak,
10 kôs; a nice place for illustrious strangers (100 houses); plenty of
Zemindars, very easy, plain, full of fruit (apples, apricots, etc.);
Chaugarán 9 kos, plain (200 houses); Tirgarán (60 houses, of MULÁIS, the
strange sect regarding which elsewhere) 11 kôs, plain, with the exception
of a small bad bit, over which horses, how ever, can go, called Rafàq =
Parrì in Punjabi. From Tirgarán to Zerkhan in Zebák, 14 kôs, plain, but
carriages cannot go. Zebák is a fine cool place. Its great Mulai, Sayed
Abdurrahim, has fled to Arkari in Chitrál. Zerkhan has 500 Khassadars of
Kabul (even the infantry there have horses), and 150 houses. Zerkhan to
Shikashìm, small fort, 11 kôs, plain, 300 houses in villages all round;
it is now well garrisoned with Kabulis (2 k. from Shikashìm are the ruby
mines worked in winter near Gharàn on the road to Shignán). (In the time
of Mir Shah rubies as large as candles were said to be got, lighting up
the place.) “Lajvard” (Lapis lazuli) is got from Yumgan, a village in
mountain above Jirm in Badakhshan. “Lajvard” is sold at a rupee of a
Rupee size. (Gold streaks are often found in it.) Shikashìm to Kazi-deh,
10 kôs, plain (carriages could go) in Wakhan, which begins at Putr about
half kôs from Shikashìm (another road from Shikashìm to Shignán in two
days _viâ_ Ghasann 10 kôs, plain, very cold); thence 12 kôs to a fort in
Shignan. Kazi-deh has 40 houses. Kazi-deh to Pigitsh 12 kôs, very plain,
15 houses of very wealthy people, all Mulais; Shoghōr under Chitrál,
500 houses. Fort over the Khatinza, Nuqsan and Dura passes from Zeibák
all under Chitrál; the first-named pass is open all the year round, but
violent storms blow at the top.

PIGITSH TO FORT PANJAH, a plain 12 kôs; Ali Murdan Khan, its former
ruler, is a refugee with Chitrál; 200 Afghan cavalry; there are 5 or 6
houses in the fort, and a number of villages round it (Zròng, a warm
mineral spring, 40 houses; Kishm, 40 houses, Gatskhòn, 30 houses. Above
Pigitsh are other villages. Khindàt, 50 houses; supplies are most
plentiful).

From PANJAH TO ZÀNG (50 houses) 11 kôs, plain (artillery could go); ZÀNG
TO SERHADD 12 katcha kôs, 200 houses, plain, cold, much wheat, cattle,
etc.; _here the Pamir begins_. Thence to Ushàk, 14 k. plain, except a
small elevation, very cold (here there is a road to Yarkand, and another
to Hunza; the Wakhanis graze their cattle and flocks here in winter as
there is abundant grass); USHÀK TO LANGÀR, 12 kôs, plain; the roads
divide, of which the left one goes to Sarikol, and the right one to
Hunza. Cattle are kept there in winter by the Serhadd people; Langàr to
Baikará 8 kôs plain.

BARKARÁ TO BABAGUNDÌ, 12 kôs over the Irshád Pir (somewhat steep and
snow-covered on the Wakhan side, but otherwise easy). Here there is
a road on the other side to Babagundì (small town); place for Ghazan
Khan’s cattle (Dannkut). Babagundì is a famous shrine of Pir Irshád,
where even the Mulai Ghazankhan gives cooking pots for travellers, and
makes offerings; there are 5 or 6 houses of Zemindars, who look after the
shrine. (Half a kôs beyond Babagundì the various roads to the Karumbar,
Badakhshan, and one to Hunza join.)

BABAGUNDI TO RÍSHATT; small fort, 11 kôs; inhabited; 5 villagers’ houses
employed in agriculture. Ríshatt; for 4 kôs there is a plain road; then
a difficult road, Ráship Jeráb, with precipices (6 kôs from Ríshatt),
which can be destroyed, so as to make the approach from that side very
hazardous; the road continues to Yubkatí, with scarcely much improvement,
for 1½ kôs. There is a small town there, as generally on difficult
defiles, or places than can be defended. Yubkatí to Gircha, 1 kôs
katcha (10 houses); Gircha to Murkhon, 10 houses of Zemindars, 1 kôs; 2
katcha-kôs comes the Khaibar village of 4 houses, a defile defended by a
small town, _with a door shutting the road_ (_Der-band_); Khaibar, 4 kôs
to Pàss; road over snow or glacier for 1½ kôs; below the glacier is the
village of Pàss, 25 houses.

_Pàss_ to Hussain, 20 houses; also a shrine 1½ kôs; fair road; also
a deep natural tank (hauz) (where there is a place to keep cattle in
winter) a few hundred yards from village. Beyond there is again one of
the streaks of never-melting icefields, and dividing it from Ghulkin,
a village of 60 houses (the gardens flourishing in the close vicinity
of these icefields). Immediately near Ghulkin is Gulmùtti, 100 houses;
thence for 10 kôs to Alti, a bad road over an elevation, Refáq, closed
by one of the doors to which I have referred. The door is 1 kôs distant
from Gulmùtti. Alti (150 houses), the residence of Salim Khan, father of
Ghazanfar, who built Balti, where his son, the present ruler of Hunza,
Ghazankhan, lives. Balti is ½ kôs from Alti, and above it. Balti has
1,000 houses, Zemindars Muláis; there are 50 Mosques, but no one reads
prayers in them; people build them for the sake of glorification, not
worship. They are used for dancing, drinking, etc. (the Raja used to
dance himself on the Naurōz, and give presents to the Zemindars). Hunza
_may_ turn out 2,000 fighting men. Near it Fort Haiderabad (½ kôs), with
300 houses; close to it is another fort, Chumarsingh, with 100 houses;
near it Dòrkhann Fort, with 200 houses (the inhabitants are more numerous
than the wasted ground can support. People live largely on apricots,
etc.; the land is generally sterile). ½ kôs from Dòrkhann is Gannish
Fort, 600 houses, above the river which divides Hunza from Nagyr, where
the Sumeir Fort confronts Gannish. There is also a small fort near
Gannish, called Karál, with 50 houses. (Near Dòrkhann is also a similar
small fort, the name of which I forget.) Coming back to Dòrkhann, and
going from it straight in the Gilgit direction, is Aliabad Fort, with 600
houses, and close to it Hasanabad Fort, with 100 houses. There is also a
“Derrband” between Hasanabad and Murtezabad, about a mile distant over
a stream. Murtezabad has 2 forts, one with 100, and the other with 50
houses.

FROM MURTEZABAD TO HIRÌ for two kôs; difficult ascent and descent. Hirì,
a large village, with 800 houses of Zemindars _in_ the fort (Shins live
there); 2 kôs of bad road, excepting about 1 mile; to Mayón, 50 houses.
Four katcha kôs bring one without much difficulty, except over one
ascent, over the Budalèss stream, violent in summer, where there is also
a fort (a warm spring in a fort called Barr, 25 houses, occupied by 20
Sepoys of the Maharaja) to Chálta, in Gilgit territory, near Budalèss.
There is a fort there, 150 houses, and 100 Sepoys. Over the Nulla, about
one kôs above, is Chaprôt, 50 Sepoys and 60 houses; is a strong position
(Natu Shah came to grief, with 1,000 men, between Budalèss and Mayôn).
From Chálta, crossing the river and a small mountain, is a plateau to
Nilt Fort, in Nagyr territory, 4 kôs from Chálta, and confronting Mayôn.
From Chálta to Nomal, in Gilgit territory, with two Rifáqs each; near
to these respective places for 11 kôs (kacha), 100 houses. There are 20
Sepoys in the Koti to guard the grain. The Zemindars now live outside the
fort, which is merely used for the storage of grain. From Nomal to Gilgit
12 kôs, plain, which now contains 200 houses.

ROUTE III.

FROM ZEIBÁK TO CHITRÁL, over the Khatinza, a very high Pass, to Shoghor,
or the other passes already mentioned. _Viâ_ the Khatinza, which is
always open, the road from Zeibák to Deh-i-gul, 1 kôs, 25 houses.

There the roads separate, one going over the Nuqsán, which is closed in
winter, and the other one over the Khatinza, both joining at Kurubakh,
a place ensconced by stones, and about 5 kôs either way from Deh-i-gul;
from Kurubakh to Owîr, 20 houses, 3 kôs, easy road; from Owîr to Arkari,
80 houses, 5 kôs, easy road (Sháli, 10 houses, is one kôs from Arkari);
Mōmi, 5 kôs farther on, 50 houses. From Arkari to Shoghor is 10 kôs
katcha. From Shoghor, 3 miles below, is Rondur, 5 or 6 houses; 4 kôs is
another Shali, 20 houses, and thence over a plain by a village (the name
of which I forget) 5 katcha kôs.

Below Shoghor the streams of Arkari and Lodko join, at Andakhti, two
katcha kôs from Shoghor. The Rajah of Chitràl’s son lives there (Bahram);
another son, Murid, lived in Lodko district. There is little snowfall
on the high Khatinza, but there is plenty on the easy Nuqsán. A third
road, over a plain, also leads to Chitrál from Zeibák, namely, to Uskútul
(3 kôs from Zeibák); thence to Singlich, 2½ kôs, maidán; thence to the
great tank, lake, or Hauz, five miles long and 1½ miles broad, full
of big fish. Thence over the Durra, infested by Kafirs, only a katcha
kôs, easy ascent, when the snow melts (otherwise impassable), and an
easy descent of one kôs to Shai Sidèn, at foot of pass (below which is,
2 kôs, Gobôr, where there is some cultivation in summer). (Birzin is
a village of 40 houses, about 8 kôs distant from Gobôr.) Parabêg, 50
houses, 2 kôs; Parabêg to Kui, 70 houses, 1 katcha kôs; below Kui, ½
kôs, is Jítur; below is a ziarat of Pir Shah Nasir Khosrō at Birgunnì,
one kôs, a warm spring, 50 houses; Birgunnì to Drôshp, 2 katcha kôs,
where Raja Imán-ul-Mulk’s son, Murid, resides. Drôshp, 40 houses; one
kôs further is Mogh, 20 houses; thence to Andákhti, 4 or 5 kôs. Over the
Hauz is the Mandàl mountain towards the Siah Posh country. Ahmad Diwanè,
50 houses, is the first village of Kafirs, subject to Chitrál. Over
Gabôr is the Shuitsh Mountain, behind which is the Aptzai Fort of the
Siah Posh Kafirs, 200 houses; these are the two places from which Kafirs
descend to plunder caravans coming from Peshawar, and of whose approach
they may have been warned from Chitrál, keeping clothes and weapons for
themselves, and giving the horses, etc., to Chitrál. The Kafirs of Kamōz
(2,000 houses) are subject to Chitrál; also Ludde (1,000 houses), Aptsai
(200 houses), Shudgol Fort (150 houses).

Istagàz is subject (100 houses) to Chitrál; Mēr (40 houses) subject to
Chitrál; Mundjèsh, 500 houses; Madugàll (500 houses and two forts), on
a difficult road, is between Kamōz (1 kôs above it) and Kamtán (Ludde,
Aptsai, Shudgol, Ahmad Diwané), 4 kôs. These Madugallis are independent,
and plunder caravans from Dīr or Zemindars. Sometimes they are bribed by
the Chitrál Raja to keep quiet.

* * * * *

Dull as the above account may read, it is full of topographical, if not
political, interest to whoever can read “between the lines”; and the
telegrams and articles in _The Times_ of the 23rd and 25th Sept., 1891,
throw light on an unpleasant and hitherto concealed situation. Since 1866
I have, in vain, drawn the attention of the Indian Government to the
Gilgit frontier. In 1886, or twenty years after my exploration, Colonel
Lockhart’s mission, no doubt, did service, as regards Chitrál; but Hunza
and Nagyr have been mismanaged, owing to the incompetent manner in which
my information has been used. I have recently, after three years’ labour,
much expense, and some danger, completed the first quarto volume of my
work on Hunza, Nagyr, and a part of Yasin, the language of which has been
a great puzzle, that has now been unravelled, giving a new departure
to philology; and the Foreign Department of the Indian Government has
presented me with 100 copies of my work, a compliment that is often paid
to the honorary contributor of a paper to the ASIATIC QUARTERLY REVIEW.

APPENDIX VII.

(a) A SECRET RELIGION IN THE HINDUKUSH [THE PAMIR REGION] AND IN THE
LEBANON.

I.—THE MULÁIS OF THE HINDUKUSH.

A number of conjectures as to the origin of the word “Mulái,” all of
which are incorrect, have been made by eminent writers unacquainted with
Arabic or the meaning of its theological history and terms. A few of
these conjectures, however, go very near some fact or view connected with
the “Muláis.” The word may not mean “terrestrial gods,” but there are
no other, for practical purposes, in the creed of the “Muláis.” It is
certainly not a corruption of “Muláhid” or “heretic,” if not “atheist,”
although this term has been specially applied to them by their enemies.
It can have nothing whatever to do etymologically with “Muwáhidin” or
worshippers of “One” [God], though they, no doubt, call themselves so,
_i.e._, “Unitarians.” There is this additional difficulty, moreover,
introduced into the question, that no name can be conclusive as to
the esoteric appellation of a sect that has been obliged to practise
“Conformity” or “Pious fraud” or “concealment” of its religion, in
order to escape persecution or wholesale massacre. The Shiahs,[127]
whose belief, in the hereditary succession, through the descendants of
A’li, of the _spiritual_ “Imámat” or leadership or apostleship of the
prophet Muhammad, rendered them overt or covert enemies of those Sunni
rulers who held the _temporal_ power or “the Khiláfat” (misspelt as “the
Caliphate”), were, and are, allowed to practise “Taqqîa” (which I have
rendered as “Conformity”) outwardly and the more exaggerated or exclusive
a particular A’liite or Shiite sect, the more careful had it to be. The
Sunni and Shiah may both publicly confess “There is no God but God, and
Muhammad is his prophet”; but the Shiah adds under his breath, “A’li
is the Deputy (Governor) of God and the heir of the prophet of God.”
Now this word for “Deputy” is “_vali_,” “to be close to,” whether it
be to God, a king, a priest, a master, or other position of eminence
in Arabian belief, society, history, or intellectual creations.[128]
“Maulá” or “Mulá” comes from the same root and is generally applied
to a spiritual master, but, among the Shiahs, specially to their
“LORD” A’li. Therefore, “Muláis” are the special followers of the
“Lord A’li,” just as the Jesuits claim to be a fraternity of special
followers of “the Lord Jesus.” When, then, the term “Mauláná” or our
“Master or Lord” is specially used in the Druse Covenant of Initiation
[see further on], there is not far to seek for the meaning of the
appellation “Mulái,” though it was left for me to find it out from the
A’liite songs of the Muláis of the Hindukush. Whatever the innermost
coterie of the “initiated” may practise or believe, a connecting link
of the sect with some existing creed is necessary for their safety or
respectability. Thus, the _Ismailians_ might call themselves “_Sadiqis_”
or “the righteous,” in order to spread the belief of their being special
adherents of the 6th Imám, (in the order of descent from A’li), the
Imám Ja’far _Sádiq_ (the righteous), without entering into the vexed
question as to whether his son “_Ismàîl_” was the real “seventh” Imám
or his other son, Mûsa (through whom the bulk of Shiahs look for their
Mahdi or Messiah, the 12th Imám). Nor would any such special fervour in
revering a particular phase or man be necessarily deemed to be heretical,
even among Sunnis. I have often heard a Sunni, especially if he was a
Persian scholar and the strange magic of that language had subdued him,
admit the impeachment of having “a particular love for the house of
A’li,” and the numerous class of Sayads, who claim to be descendants
of the Prophet, is respected, if not venerated, among Sunnis, who, in
theory, oppose the “hereditary” claims of Shiahs.[129] The Máulais,
therefore, of the Hindukush, being, consciously or not, a sub-sect of
Shiahs, can make friends with the main body of Shiahs, and yet pretend to
the Sunnis as being, in many respects, with them. Normally, the Mauláis
would profess to be good Muhammadans of the Shiah persuasion, leaning,
however, to the 7th Imám; if surrounded by, or in danger of, Sunnis, they
would _outwardly_ “conform” (which is all that the Sunnis require), and,
at home, practise their own rites. The Khojas of Bombay, who had been
converted from Hinduism, but whose very name is Ismailian, used to read
the “Das-awtar” or “ten incarnations,” in which “A’li” is made out to be
the “Tenth Incarnation,” thus rendering their step from Wishnu Hinduism
to Shiah Muhammadanism an easy one. “All things to all men” is the dictum
of the Muláis, without, thereby, sacrificing their own convictions.
The more a Mulái knows, the more he acts on Disraeli’s sneer that all
sensible men are of _one_ religion, but do not tell what that religion
is. The less a Mulái knows, the more fanatically is he an A’liite,
centreing however his faith on the living descendant of the 7th Imám.
“Nothing is a crime that is not found out” may, or may not be, the theory
among the Druses, or the practice all over the world; the fact remains
that neither the Druses nor the Muláis, whatever their belief, are worse
than their neighbours. Even the odious signification that attaches to the
term “Assassin” has been a calumny against those misguided Ismailians who
sought to rid the world of tyrants who had ordered the general massacre
of the sect or who sacrificed one man in order to save a whole people.

In 1866 I discovered the languages and races of “Dardistan” and gave
that name to the countries between Kashmir and Kabul, including Hunza in
them. In 1886 I was again on a special mission regarding the language
of Hunza-Nagyr and a part of Yasin. I had already pointed out in 1867
the importance which our good friend, His Highness Agha Khan of Bombay,
the Head of the Khojas in that city, enjoyed in those, then nearly
inaccessible, regions, as also in Wakhan, Zebak, Shignán, Raushan, Koláb
and Derwáz, where the Muláis predominate and are governed by hereditary
Pîrs or ancient sages of their own choice,[130] to whom they yield
implicit obedience, as do also the covenanters with “Al-Hákim” among the
“initiated” of the Druses. Of these Pîrs, Agha Khan is Chief, and any
command by him would be obeyed in some of the most dangerous parts of the
Hindukush. Advantage was only taken in 1886 of this hint, when Colonel
Lockhart’s mission was supplied with letters of recommendation by His
Highness to the Mulais. My identification of their mysterious rites with
those of the Druses connects the Lebanon with the Hindukush through the
Ismailia sect, which under the name of the “Assassins” enjoyed such an
unenviable notoriety during the Crusades and establishes a link among the
nations of Richard Cœur de Lion,[131] of Palestine and of the Pamirs.
The connection of Hunza with the Huns or Hunas and the relations between
the “Old Man of the Mountain” and our own Richard may be the subject
of a future article. At present, I will confine myself to translating
from the Persian original a Pythian utterance out of the “Kelám-i-Pîr”
or “the Word of the ancient Sage,” which takes the place of the Korán
among Mauláis, and of which the following is the first extract ever
given from that hidden book. It was partly dictated to me and partly
written out on the occasion of His Highness, the present Agha Khan,
paying me a visit, by the leader of some Muláis, who had fled, first
from Russian tyranny, and then from the still heavier Afghan oppression
in the border-countries of Central Asia, my own Hunza man also being
present on the occasion.[132] The extract was called the Mulái “Mukti”
or “Salvation” Cry of the Muláis. It may be incidentally mentioned that
Shah Abdurrahim in Zeibak was (and perhaps still is) the greatest Pîr in
Central Asia. He controls Hunza, so far as that God-forsaken country can
be controlled. In Wakhan, Khwaja Ibrahim Husain was the Mulái leader,
and in Sarikul, Shahzada Makin. Sayad Jafar Khan ruled what there is of
the sect in Bokhara, Balkh, Kabul and Kunduz. “_The_ Pîr” or “ancient
sage,” however, was the historical Shah Nasir Khosrô, who is styled “a
missionary of H. H. Aga Khan’s ancestor.” He is said to have had the
complete “Kelám-i-Pîr,” a book of which I have for so many years in
vain tried to get a copy, although assisted by my friend, the Mihtar
Nizám-ul-Mulk of Yasin and Chitrál. The following extract from it, in
one and the same breath, affirms and denies the special doctrine of
metempsychosis and other notions opposed to the professed Muhammadanism
of the Muláis:

* * * * *

The MUKTI or “SALVATION.”

* * * * *

The Mulái “A’QIL” or “intelligent” = “initiated” [the singular of the
Druse “U’qalá” or “initiated”] first asks, in inelegant and enigmatical
Persian:

* * * * *

“ALA! In what I say, can I remain _knowingly_ an Á’qil?” or “initiated”
or “I remain knowingly an Á’qil, although what I say

* * * * *

1. “Come, solve for me a difficult story [or conjecture]

Come, tell me the Light which the spirit from the world-shape [this world
of Phenomena]

When it becomes [gets] beyond [of] this shape, where [is] its abode and
station? [place of descent = “manzil”]

Is its place [of existence] in plants or in the Higher Universe [the
world above?]

Or in the Lower Universe between water, dust and clay” [or stone]? [the
strata between the centre and the surface of the earth]

* * * * *

2. “If, _knowingly_, that secret, come and tell me: ‘Light’

And, if not, away! not _knowing_, without head-wandering, careless [care
not]

Dear ones! The spirit of the _knowing_ when it departs from these chains,

Does it become [wend] towards the skies [heavens]? Is that its Station
obtaining?[133]

Or why in the shape of man [anthropomorphic shape] is the Adamite
created?[134]

Nay (?) the perfect man [ko-burd] cultured perfect,[135] or ‘the ruling
man [if] perfect, develops perfect culture’

But they who are not wanted [the useless] are ignorant doubters”

* * * * *

3. “Let me tell its Commentary; every one, Come! in the ear make it
acceptable.

The present is one stride [or state of a man]

When they put him outside the body

They bind him in chains; he becomes with cow or ass entering

Another time his place [of staying] is the [world of] plants. They hold
him [there]

He will remain inside these chains for three years [many a year] [under]
that vain curse” [this is a vain word]

* * * * *

4. AL LÁY! Helper of Chosroes![136] Such secrets to men why recklessly
impart? [it only makes them impudent] Not will say ever this the _A’qil_
[or “the initiated one.”]

[The wise do not mention their religion; if they do, they only make the
unwise impudent.]

* * * * *

So, after all, we have not been told the process or secret of after-life,
whether ascending into air, descending into earth, renewing human life
or migrating into animal, plant or stone. In fact, we are made to
understand that our inquiry is folly and that its answer, whether true or
not, is also folly. Yet are we allowed to conjecture the belief of “the
initiated” in transmigration.

As for the Muláis “being all things to all men” in matters of
religion—Sunnis with Sunnis and Shiahs with Shiahs—this is, as already
stated, a mere amplification of the Shiah doctrine of _Taqqîah_ or
concealment in times of danger, to which I have specially referred in my
“Dardistan.”

The leaning of the Muláis is, of course, rather to poetical Shiism, with
the chivalrous martyr A’li as its demigod or “next to God” in the A’lewia
sect, than to prosaic and monotonous Sunniism, so that to strangers they
seem to be Shiahs, as will be seen in an extract from a native Indian
Diary[137] written some 20 years ago, and which, it may be incidentally
stated, still throws much light on the present conflicts in Dir, Bajaur
and other petty States bordering on our frontier. No stranger is allowed
to see the Kelám-i-Pir, which takes the place of the Koran with Muláis,
but in the most popular poem that is recited by them, the Imám-ul Zemán
or Sahib-al-Zeman = the Imam or Lord of the Age (H. H. Aga Khan) is
worshipped as the Monarch of this World, the visible incarnation of the
Deity, offerings or a pilgrimage to whom dispenses a Mulái from prayer,
fasting or a visit to the sacred shrines of Mecca or Madina, or rather
the Shiah Kerbelá, the place of the martyrdom of Hasan and Husain, which
Shiahs annually celebrate by what are inappropriately called “miracle
plays,” but which really are “elegies,” and commemorative funeral
recitations and processions. A person who has seen “the Lord of the Age”
or who possesses some of the water in which he has washed his feet is
an honoured guest in Mulái countries. The poem above alluded to is a
parallel to the Druse “Contract” which will be considered further on, and
begins with an invocation for “Help, oh Ali.”

“Nobody will worship God, without worshipping Thee, Lord of the Age!
Jesus will descend from the fourth heaven to follow Thee, Lord of the
Age!
Thy will alone will end the strife with Antichrist, Lord of the Age!
Thy beauty gives light to heaven, the sun and the moon, Lord of the Age!
May I be blessed by being under the dust of Thy feet, Lord of the Age!”

A Maulái is, if sincere, already dead to sin, and can, therefore, not
commit any. He needs, therefore, no resurrection or last Judgment day.
Obedience to the Pîr is his sole article of faith, and he holds his
property, family and life at this Chief’s disposal.

I must now conclude this introduction to a comparison of the creeds of
the Druses and of the Muláis by quoting a few words from a rhapsody of
A’li, repeated by the ordinary Mauláis till the pious frenzy is at white
heat:

“Oh A’li, to God, to God, oh A’li, my sole aim, the only one, our Mula
A’li; My desire, the only our Mula A’li; My passion only the beauty of
A’li; My longing day and night for union with A’li; Higher and Higher
A’li, oh A’li; A’li is the Killer of difficulties, oh A’li; He is the
Commander of the Faithful, namely A’li; _That_ one is the Imám of the
steadfast in faith, namely A’li,” and so on _ad infinitum_ till we come
to the natural connection between normal Shiism, its exaggeration into
A’li worship, its mysterious interpretation of the self-sacrifice of
Husain to save the world, and, finally, to all other aberrations of
which Maulaism is one. The poem then goes into wild Turkish and Arabic
measures, which exhausted my informant, Ghulam Haidar, who adds on behalf
of himself, also in verse: “It is not proper that I should not answer
the question which you ask me, but what am I to say? The answer from me
is easy, but I see a difficulty in _your_ way. Oh Ghulam Haidar” (thrice
repeated). Then in prose. “In the night of Friday, the Mulái men (in
Hunza), instead of worship and prayer, taking Guitars and Drums (Rabábs
and Ḍaffs) in their hands, play the above “Ghazals” on them. Then six old
men, Akhunds (priests), having assembled, read (sing) them in the Mosque,
when the men of the mass of the people gather and give ear to them:

‘“Yá A’li, Yá A’li, Yá Imám-i-Zemán”’—
‘“Oh Ali, Oh Ali, Oh Imám (and Lord) of the Age”’—

is the mention (Chorus) which they take on their tongues. From the
beginning of the evening till the morning they thus show their zeal; the
Raja then as a reward of thanks for that worship bestows (gold dust to
the value of) four tilas on the priests and gives them a quantity of
butter of the weight of four measures and one sheep or big calf and one
maund of wheat in order to hold a feast.”

II.—THE COVENANT OF “THE INITIATED” DRUSES.

The following is a rendering of the Covenant or Contract which the
U’qalá or “the initiated” amongst the Druses are reciting in mysterious
seclusion. It was overheard by my informant, an “uninitiated” Druse.[138]
It formed, as it were, the evening prayer of his uncle and aunt. Although
an educated and highly intelligent person, he was not aware of even
its local interest, much less of its general historical and religious
importance.

_The Covenant = Al Mitháq_:

“O Governor [Valî] of the Age,[139] may Allah’s blessing and peace be
upon him” (this phrase seems intended to delude Muhammadans into the
belief that the Druses have the same Allah or God, but it has an esoteric
sense which will become apparent further on). “I put my confidence into
‘our spiritual head the Lord’ (literally ‘OUR MAULA AL-HÁKIM’) (here
is one of the esoteric formulæ)—‘the One, the Single, the Everlasting
(Lord), the (serenely) Distinct from Duality and Number.’ (This is a
protest not only against the female form of the Deity, but also against
the notion of a distinct good and evil principle, an Ahriman or Ormuz,
whilst its Muhammadan form would seem to outsiders to be merely a protest
against giving any ‘companion to God.’) The initiator and the to be
‘initiated’ then go on repeating together the following, the former using
the 3rd, and the latter the 1st, person. ‘I so and so’ (here comes name
of the initiated), ‘son of such a one, CONFESS firmly the confession to
which he (or I) respond from his [or my] soul, and bears testimony to it
upon his spirit, whilst in a condition of soundness of his spirit and
of his body, and with the (acceptance of the passing of the) lawfulness
of the order, obeying without reluctance and under no violence: THAT he
verily absolves (himself) from all Religions and Dogmas and Faiths and
Convictions, all of them, in the various species of their contradictions,
and that he does not acknowledge anything except the OBEDIENCE TO OUR
MAULA AL-HÁKIM, may his mention be glorious! and this obedience it is the
worship, and that he will not associate in his worship any (other) that
is past or is present, or is to come, and that he has verily entrusted
his spirit and his body, and whatever is to him and the whole of what he
may possess to OUR MAULA AL-HÁKIM, and that he is satisfied to fulfil all
His orders unto himself and against himself without any contradiction,
and not refusing anything and not denying (refusing) anything of His
actions, whether this injures him or rejoices him, and that he, should he
ever revert (apostatize) from the religion of our Maula Al-Hákim which he
has written upon his soul, and to which he has born testimony unto his
spirit, that HE SHALL BE BEREFT (free) of the Creator, who is worshipped
and deprived of the benefits of all the sanctions (rules, laws), and that
he shall be considered as deserving the punishment of God, the High, may
His mention be glorious! And that he, if he acknowledges that there is
not to him in Heaven and not in the Earth an Imám in existence _except
our Maula Al-Hákim_” (this confession distinguishes the Druses of the
Lebanon and the Muláis of the Hindukush from the orthodox Shiahs, who
believe in the coming of the ever-present Mahdi, or the twelfth Imám, a
view that had been fostered by us in the Sudán to our endless confusion
by our inexcusable opposition to the Sultan of Turkey as the Khalifa
of the Sunnis), “then will the mention of him (who only believes in
Al-Hákim) become glorious, and he will be of the _Muwáhidîn_ (who profess
the unity of God), who will (eventually) conquer.” (This appellation is
common to the Druses and to the Muláis, but is not admitted as being
applicable to them by orthodox Shiahs or Sunnis. In retaliation they
call the Sunni a dog, and the Shiah an ass.) “And (the above) has been
written[140] in the month so and so of the year (chronology) of the I’d
(festival) of our Maula Al-Hákim, whose nation be glorious, whose Empire
be strengthened to Him alone.” (The Maulái Chronology is said to begin
with the _special_ revelation of the Imám on the 17th Ramadan in the
559th year of the Hejira, at the castle of Alamût.)

_The Special Recitation._

The following is repeated by Druses at the conclusion of their prayers:
“May God’s blessing be upon him who speaks (confesses) the Lord of
goodness and benefits. May God bless the Ruler of the Guidances (Hidāyā);
to him be profit and sufficiency. May God’s blessing be on our Lord the
Hādi” (the Guide or “Mehdi” means one who is guided aright by God =
the coming Messiah of the Shiah world,) “the Imám, the greatest of the
perfect light” (this is an allusion to the 7th Imám, Ismail, descendant
of _the_ light[141] (Mohammed)), “who is waiting for the refuge
(salvation) of all living beings. On Him may be (our) trust, and from
him (may be) the peace. May God bless him and them whatever passes of
nights and of days and of months and of years, whenever flashes the dawn
of morning or night remains in darkness may abundant peace and trust be
for ever! _O Allah-humma!_” (the mystic Muhammadan remnant of Elohim =
Lords, Gods) “provide us with _Thy_ contentment” (this is a play of words
implying that our best “daily bread” is God’s contentment with us) “and
with _Their_ contentment” (this is either a Trinitarian or Polytheistic
invocation to “Elohim”) “and with _their_ intercession and with _Thy_
mercy and with _their_ mercy in this world and in the next! O our Maula!
and Lord of the Imám” (this is indeed significant as to the pretensions
of Al-Hákim to the godhead, or to some dignity very near it).

* * * * *

Now comes an ancient curse with a modern application and an appeal to
arms (whispered along the line of assembled Druses):

“Pray for the ornament of sons,

In the East the five[142] residing (compare also the Shiah ‘Panjtan’[143]
and the five main Shiah sects)[144]

They say: Father Abraham has appeared,

and they announce the good tidings to the worshippers of _One_ (the
Druses).

They say: With the sword has Father Abraham appeared;

A violence to his enemies

O brethren! Prepare earnestly for the campaign,

Visiting the House of Mecca.

The House of Mecca and the sacred places,

On them has destruction been ordained.

Oh people of the Berbers! Extermination is lawful.

With the sword shall ye be sacrificed.

The French are coming with stealth.

The ‘A’ql’ [or ‘the body of the initiated’] will protect us with its
sword.

Rejoice, people of China, in the hour of Thy arrival.

Welcome to thee, city of Arin (?), oh my Lady!” [Fatima?].

* * * * *

A Druse wedding-song may also be quoted here: (“Allah, billáli,
billáli.”) _The Chorus_: “O God, with the pearls, with the pearls,”
“Sway on to me, oh my Gazelle!” _Song_: “Thou maid who combest her (the
bride’s) tresses, comb them gently, and give her no pain; for she is the
daughter of nobles, accustomed to being a pet” [_delláli_]. _Chorus_:
_Allah, billáli, billáli; wa tanaqqalí, yá Ghazáli!_

* * * * *

_Another Song_: “Sing the praises of the shore, oh daughters; sing
the praises of the daughters of the shore; for we have passed by the
pomegranate-tree bearing full fruit, and we have compared it with the
cheeks of the daughters of the shore.”

(b) THE KELÁM-I-PÎR AND ESOTERIC MUHAMMADANISM.

It is not my wish to satisfy idle curiosity by describing the contents
of a book, concealed for nine hundred years, the greater portion of
which accident has placed in my hands after years of unsuccessful search
in inhospitable regions. The fragmentary information regarding it and
the practices of its followers which I had collected, were contributed
to publications, like this Review, of specialists for specialists
or for genuine Students of Oriental learning. Nothing could be more
distressing to me than the formation of a band of “esoteric Muhammadans,”
unacquainted with Arabic, which is the only key to the knowledge of
Islám. The mastery of the original language of his holy Scripture is,
still more emphatically, the _sine quâ non_ condition of a teacher, be he
Christian, Muhammadan, or other “possessor of a sacred book.” Nor should
anyone discuss another’s faith without knowing its religious texts in the
original as well as its present practice.

The term “esoteric” has been so misused in connection with Buddhism, the
least mystic of religions, by persons unacquainted with Sanscrit, Pali
and modern Buddhism, that it has become unsafe to adopt it as describing
the “inner” meaning of any faith. Were Buddha alive, he would regret
having made the path of salvation so easy by abolishing the various
stages of Brahminical preparation, through a studious, practical and
useful life, for the final retirement, meditation, and Nirvana. Yet
there are mysterious practices in the Tantric worship of “the Wisdom
of the Knowable,” which Buddha alone brought to the masses that were
to be emancipated from the Brahminical yoke. Even transparent Judaism
has its Kabala, and the religion that brought God to Man has mysteries
of grace and godliness, the real meaning of which is only known to the
true Christian of one’s own sect or school. Thus open, easy and simple
Muhammadanism has its two triumphant orthodoxies of Sunnis and Imamîa
Shiahs and 72 militant, or outwardly conforming, heterodoxies. Indeed,
as long as words can be fought over, and even facts do not impress all
alike, so long will the more or less proficient professors of a creed
reach various degrees of “esoteric” knowledge.

It is the unknown merit of the religious system of the so-called
Assassins of the Crusades to have discussed, dismissed and yet absorbed
a number of faiths and philosophies. It adapted itself to various stages
of knowledge among its proselytes from various creeds, whilst the
circumstances of its birth, history and surroundings gave it a Muhammadan
basis. _Non omnia scimus omnes_ may be said by the most “initiated”
Druse, Ismailian or “Mulái,” the latter being the name by which I will,
in future, designate all the ramifications of this remarkable system of
Philosophy, Religion and Practical politics.

This system elaborates the principle that all truths, except ONE, are
relative. It treats each man as it finds him, leading him through stages,
complete in themselves, to the final secret. We, too, in a way admit
that strong meat and drink are not the proper food for babes. We speak
of professional training and of the professional spirit, of _esprit de
corps_, terms which all have an “esoteric” sense, and imply preparation;
indeed, every experience of life is an “initiation” which he, who has not
undergone it, cannot “realize;” we, too, have medical and other works
which the ordinary reader does not buy and which are, so far, “esoteric”
to him, but we have not laid down in practice that he, who does not
know, shall not teach or rule. This has been systematized, with a keen
sense of proportion, by the Founders of the Ismailian sect. Fighting for
its existence against rival Muhammadan bodies and in the conflicts of
Christianity, Judaism, Magianism and various Philosophies, its emissaries
applied the Pauline conduct of being “all things to all men” in order to
gain converts.

After the establishment of mutual confidence, a Christian might be
confronted with puzzling questions regarding the Trinity, the Atonement,
the Holy Communion, etc.—the Jew be called to explain an Universal God,
yet exclusively beneficent to His people, or might be cross-examined
on the miracles of Moses; a Zoroastrian, to whom much sympathy should
be expressed, would be sounded as to his Magian belief; an idolater,
if ignorant, could be easily shown the error of his ways and, if not,
his pantheism might be checked by the evidences of materialistic or
monotheistic doctrine; the orthodox Sunni would be required to explain
the apparent inconsistencies of statements in the Korán, and the various
sects of Shiahs would be confounded by doubts being thrown on this or
that link of the hereditary succession of the apostleship of Muhammad;
sceptics, philosophers, word-splitters, both orthodox and heterodox,
would be followed into their last retrenchments by contradictory
arguments, materialistic, idealistic, exegetical, as the case may be.
With every creed, to use an Indian simile, the peeling of the onion
was repeated, in which, after one leaf after the other of the onion
is taken off in search of the onion, no onion is found and nothing is
left. The enquirer would thus be ready for the reception of such new
doctrine as might be taught him by the “Mulái”[145] preacher, or _Dái_,
who then revealed himself one step beyond the mental and moral capacity
of his intended convert, whilst sharing with the latter a basis of
common belief. Now this required ability of no mean order, as also of
great variety, so as to be adapted to all conditions of men to whom
the _Dái_ might address himself. Sex, age, profession, heredity and
acquired qualities, antecedents and attainments, all were taken into
consideration. At the same time, in an age of violence, the missionaries
of the new faith had to keep their work a profound secret and to insist
on a covenant, identical with, or similar to, the one of the Druses,
which I published in the last number of the _Asiatic Quarterly Review_.
Even when confronted by Hinduism, the new creed could represent that
Áli, the son-in-law of the prophet Muhammad, was the 10th incarnation
of Vishnu, which is expected, as was the Paraclete and as are the
Messiah and the “Mehdi” (many of those who adopted that title being
secret followers of the Ismailian creed).[146] I have pointed out in my
last article how the very name of ’Ali, his chivalrous character, his
eloquence, his sad death and the martyrdom of his sons lent themselves to
his more than apotheosis in minds already prepared by Magian doctrine and
the spirit of opposition to the successful Sunni oppressor. I think that
I can quote extracts, in support of this statement from the “Kelám-i-pîr”
or the “_Logos_ of the Ancient,” showing how the contributor to it
(for I take the “Kelám-i-pîr” to be a collective name like “Homer”),
the eminent mathematician, historian and poet, Shah Násir Khosrû, who
was born in the year 355 A.H. = 969 A.D. was led, after a long life of
purity and piety, of abstemiousness and study, to examine and reject one
religion after the other and, finally, adopt the one with which we are
now concerned and of which His Highness, Agha Sultan Muhammad Shah is the
present hereditary spiritual head. His authority extends from the Lebanon
to the Hindukush and wherever else there may be Ismailians, who either
openly profess obedience to him, as do the Khojahs in Bombay; or who are
his secret followers in various parts of the Muhammadan world in Asia and
Africa.[147] The present young, but enlightened, Chief is, as his father
and grandfather, likely to exert his influence for good.

The following is a short biographical sketch of this lineal descendant
of the prophet Áli. His genealogy is incontestable and will, I hope, be
included in my next paper.[148]

“H. H. Agha Sultan Muhammad Shah was born at Karachi on Nov. 2nd, 1877.
It was soon seen that it would be necessary to give him a good education,
and his father, H. H. the late Agha Ali Shah, early grounded him in the
history of Persia and the writings of its great poets. But this education
was certainly not sufficient in the present day, and Lady Ali Shah, after
the death of her husband, very wisely carried out his wishes by placing
his son under an English tutor, so that, whilst Persian was by no means
neglected, a course of English reading was begun. Four years ago he
stumbled over the spelling of monosyllables. The progress made now is
really surprising; with natural talents he has found it easy to acquire
a thorough English accent and converses freely with Englishmen. The
histories of Persia, India and England, the series of the Rulers of India
and the Queen’s Prime Ministers, McCarthy’s ‘History of our Own Times’
and the lives of eminent men that stock his library, mark a predilection
for History and Biography. The subjects of conversation during a
morning’s ride are often the politics of the day or the turning points
in the lives of illustrious men. But with this reading his other studies
are not neglected. Algebra, Geometry, Arithmetic, elementary Astronomy,
Chemistry and Mechanics, with English authors like Shakespeare, Macaulay,
and Scott, form a part of his scholastic course.

“Unlike his father and grandfather, the Aga Sahib has little love for
hunting, though he is seen regularly on the racecourse and is well known
in India as a patron of the turf. In the peculiarity of his position it
will be difficult for him to travel for some years, but his eyes are
directed to Europe and he looks forward to the pleasure of witnessing at
some future time an important debate in the House of Commons. From the
fact that every mail brings English periodicals to his door, it will be
seen that he closely follows everything that relates to English politics.

“With the work amongst the Khojahs and his other followers devolving
upon him at so early an age his studies are, of course, liable to be
interrupted, and it is hardly possible for him to devote himself to his
books—Oriental and English—as much as he would wish to do. He is not yet
married, nor does he seem inclined to marry early. A few years, however,
must see him the father of a family, and there is little doubt that his
children will be educated with all the advantages of the best ancient and
modern education so as to make them worthy of their illustrious descent.”

How far His Highness will be himself initiated into more than the
practice and rites, public and private, of so much of his form of the
Ismailian Faith as is necessary for the maintenance of his position and
responsibilities towards his followers, depends on his attainments,
mental vigour, and character. With greater theoretical power than
even the Pope, who is not hereditary, his influence is personal and
representative by the _consensus fidelium_. Nearly all of them are
in the first, or second, degree, even their Pirs being generally in
the 3rd or 4th, with a general leaning to a mystic divine A’li, not
merely the historical A’li, whom their followers see incarnated in his
present living descendant. Few, if any, of the leaders are in higher
degrees, for they might be out of touch with the practical exigencies
of their position in different countries and circumstances. Perhaps,
among the Druses, there may be one professor in the highest stage of
the “initiated”—the Ninth—but even then he would take his choice of
Philosophies and find a microcosm of theory and practice in each. The
result on mind and character would be ennobling, and he would die, if,
indeed, an “initiated” can die, carrying away with him the secret of
his faith, which he alone has been found worthy to discover. What that
secret is, no amount of divulging will impart to any one who is not
fit to receive it, though the infinite variety of its manifestations
adapt it to every form of thought or life. That even Masonic passwords
may, for practical purposes and in spite of published books, be kept a
secret, though possibly an open one, experience has shown, but the man
does not yet exist who can, or will, apply the system, of which I have
endeavoured to give a hint, to the Universal Federation of Religious
Autonomies, which, in my humble opinion, the Ismailian doctrine was
intended to found, little as its present followers may know of this use
of the genuine ring of Truth, of which every religion, according to
Lessing’s _Nathan der Weise_, claims to have the exclusive possession. If
this be not enough, I will, at the outset, give the advice that the old
man in Lavengro with his dying breath gave to his disciple as the reward
of a life-long devotion to learn the great secret—“LEARN ARABIC”—as a
variation on his “Learn German.” There is no royal road to learning or to
salvation, and mental culture is impossible without the synthesis which
the study of Classical languages—Oriental or European—still foster in
this age of destructive analysis and of that scepticism which does not
seek to re-construct.

* * * * *

Since writing above another accident has placed in my hands an evidently
ancient manuscript in Persian verse, on the same or kindred subjects of
Ismailian belief. The manuscript is duodecimo, about 200 pages in extent,
and is written in exquisite miniature caligraphy. Its perusal may affect
my decision as to the manner of dealing with the question, so far as the
public is concerned; in the meanwhile, I am still in search of the name
of its author, and of its date.

APPENDIX VIII.
ON THE
SCIENCES OF LANGUAGE AND OF ETHNOGRAPHY

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO
_The Language and Customs of the People of Hunza_

BEING A REPORT ON AN EXTEMPORE ADDRESS

BY G. W. LEITNER, M.A., PH.D., LL.D., D.O.L., ETC.

_Publications of the Oriental Institute, Woking._

LONDON
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO.
PATERNOSTER SQUARE
1890

ON THE SCIENCES OF LANGUAGE AND OF ETHNOGRAPHY:

_With special reference to the Language and Customs of the People of
Hunza._[149]

The time has long passed since grammar and its rules could be treated
in the way to which we were accustomed at school. Vitality has now to
be breathed into the dry bones of conjugations and declensions, and
no language can be taught, even for mere practical purposes, without
connecting custom and history with so-called “rules.” The influences of
climate and of religion have to be considered, as well as the character
of the people, if we wish to obtain a real hold on the language of our
study. Do we desire to make language a speciality, the preparation of
acquiring early in life two dissimilar languages, one analytic and the
other synthetic, is absolutely necessary, because if that is not done, we
shall always be hampered by the difficulty of dissociating the substance
from the word which designates it. The human mind is extremely limited,
and amongst the limits imposed upon it are those of, in early life,
connecting an idea, fact, or process, with certain words; and unless
two languages, at least, are learnt, and those two are as dissimilar
as possible, one is always, more or less, the slave of routine in the
perception and in the application of new facts and of new ideas, and
in the adaptation of any matter of either theoretical or practical
importance. It is a great advantage, for linguistic purposes, which are
far more practically important than may be generally believed, that
the study of the classical languages still holds the foremost place in
this country; because, however necessary scientific “observation” may
be, it cannot take the place of a cultured imagination. The stimulus
of illustration and comparison, which, in the historical sense of the
terms, is an absolutely necessary primary condition to mental advance,
is derived from classical and literary pursuits. The study of two very
similar languages, however, is not the same discipline to a beginner in
linguistics; _e.g._, to learn French and Italian is not of the same value
as French and German, for the more dissimilar the languages the better.

Again, if you desire to elicit a language of which you know nothing, from
a savage who cannot explain it and who does not understand your language,
there are certain processes with which some linguists, no doubt, are
familiar, and others commend themselves in practical experience; for
instance, in pointing to an object which you wish to have, say, a fruit
which you want to eat, you may not only obtain the name for it, but the
gesture to obtain it, if you are surrounded by several savages whose
language you do not know, may also induce one of the men to order another
to get it for you,—I suppose on the principle that it is easy for one
to command and for others to obey; but, be that as it may, this course,
to the attentive observer, first obtains the name for the required
thing and next elicits the imperative; you hear something with a kind
of inflection which, once heard, cannot be mistaken for anything else
than the imperative. Further, the _reply_ to the imperative would either
elicit “yes,” or “no,” or the indicative present. This process of inquiry
does not apply to all languages, but it applies to a great many; and
the attitude which you have to assume towards every language that you
know nothing about, in the midst of strangers who speak it, is that, of
course, of an entirely sympathetic student. You have, indeed, to apply
to language the dictum which Buddhist Lamas apply to religion—never to
think, much less to say, that your own religion (in this case your own
language) is the best; _i.e._, the form of expression in which you are in
the habit of conveying your thoughts, is one so perfectly conventional,
though rational in your case, that the greatest freedom from prejudice
is as essential a consideration as the wish to acquire the language of
others. In other words, in addition to the mere elementary acquisition
of knowledge, you have to cultivate a sympathetic attitude; and here,
again, is one of the proofs of a truth which my experience has taught me,
that, however great knowledge may be, sympathy is greater, for sympathy
enables us to fit the key which is given by knowledge. Gestures also
elicit a response in dealing, for instance, with numerals, where we are
facilitated by the fingers of the hand. Of course, one is occasionally
stopped by a savage who cannot go, or is supposed not to be able to go,
beyond two, or beyond five.

I take it that in the majority of cases of that kind, a good deal of
our misconception with regard to the difficulty of the inquiry lies in
ourselves—that ideas of multitude connected with the peculiar customs
of the race that have yet to be ascertained, are at the bottom of the
inability of that race to follow our numeration. For instance we go up
to ten, and in order to elicit a name for eleven, we say “one, ten;” if
the man laughs, change the order, and say “ten, one;” the chances are
that the savage will instinctively rejoin “ten _and_ one,” and we then
get the conjunction. Putting the fingers of both hands together may mean
“multitude,” “alliance,” or “enmity,” according as the customs of the
race are interpreted by that gesture.

I am reminded of this particular instance in my experience, because
I referred to it in a discussion on an admirable paper on the Kafirs
of the Hindukush by the eminent Dr. Bellew. If you do not take custom
along with a “rule,” and do not try to explain the so-called rule by
either historical events or some custom of the race, you make language
a matter entirely of memory, and as memory is one of the faculties that
suffers most from advancing age, or from modes of living and various
other circumstances, the moment that memory is impaired your linguistic
knowledge must suffer—you, therefore, should make language a matter of
judgment and of associations. If you do not do that, however great your
linguistic knowledge or scholarship, you must eventually fail in doing
justice to the subject or to those with whom you are dealing.

The same principle applies as much to a highly civilised language like
Arabic, one of the most important languages in the way of expressing the
multifarious processes of human thought and action, as to the remnant of
the pre-historic Hunza language, which throws an unexpected light on the
science of language.

Let us first take Arabic and the misconceptions of it by Arabic
scholars. In 1859 I pointed out before the College of Preceptors, how
it was necessary not only to discriminate between the Chapters in the
Koran delivered at Mecca, and those given at Medina, but also to arrange
the verses out of various Chapters in their real sequence. I believe we
are now advancing towards a better understanding of this most remarkable
book. But we still find in its translation such passages, for instance,
as, “when in war women are captured, _take_ those that are not married.”
The meaning is nothing so arbitrary. The expression for “take” that we
have there is _ankohu_—marry, _i.e._, take in marriage or _nikáh_, as no
alliance can be formed with even a willing captive taken in war, except
through the process of _nikáh_, which is the religious marriage contract.
Again, we have the passage, “Kill the infidels wherever you find them.”
There again is shown the want of sympathetic knowledge, which is distinct
from the knowledge of our translators who render “qatilu” by “kill,”
when it merely means “fight” and refers to an impending engagement with
enemies who were then attacking Muhammed’s camp. Apart from accuracy of
translation, a sympathetic attitude is also of practical importance.
_E.g._, had we gone into Oriental questions with more sympathy and, in
consequence, more real knowledge, many of our frontier wars would have
been avoided, and there is not the least doubt that in dealing with
Oriental humanity, whether we had taken a firm or a conciliatory course,
we should have been upon a track more likely to lead to success than
by taking action based on insufficient knowledge or on preconceptions.
For instance, in the _Times_ there was a telegram from Suakim about the
Mahdi, to the effect that El Senousi was opposing him successfully. I
do not know who El Senousi is, but very many years ago I pointed out
the great importance of the Senousi _sect_ in Africa, and, unless the
deceased founder of that name has now arisen, whether it is a man of
that name or the now well-known sect that is mentioned, one cannot say
from the telegram. The sender of the message states that as sure as the
El Senousi rises to importance there will be a danger to Egypt and to
Islam. It is Christian like to think well of Islam, and to try to protect
it. This very few Christians do, and it shows a kind feeling towards a
sister-faith, but I am not sure that the writer accurately knew what
Islam is; though there can be no doubt that the rise of fanatical sects,
like the Senousi, which is largely due to the feeling of resistance
created by the encroachments of so-called European civilisation, is
opposed to orthodox Muhammedanism. Be that as it may, I have also
turned to “the further correspondence on the affairs of Egypt” which a
friend gave me, and, really, I now know rather less about Egypt than I
did before. For instance, I find (and I am specially referring to the
blue-book in my hand) that letters of the greatest importance from the
Mahdi are treated in the following flippant manner: “This is nothing more
or less than an unauthenticated copy of a letter sent by the deceased
Mahdi to General Gordon!” Is this not enough to deserve attentive
inquiry? General Gordon would, probably, not have agreed with the writer
of this contemptuous remark, which is doubly out of place when we are
also told that the Mahdi was sending Gordon certain verses and passages
from the Korán, illustrative of his position, which are eliminated by
the translator as unnecessary, of no importance, and of very little
interest! Now, considering that this gentleman knew Arabic, I think I am
right when I add that with a little more sympathy he would have known
more, and had he known more he would have quoted those passages, for it
is most necessary for us to know on what precise authority of the Korán
or of tradition this so-called Mahdi based his claim, and knowledge of
this kind would give us the opportunity of dealing with the matter.
Again, on the question of Her Majesty’s title of “Kaisar-i-hind,” which,
after great difficulty, I succeeded in carrying into general adoption in
India, the previous translators of “Empress” had suggested some title
which would either have been unintelligible or which would have given Her
Majesty a disrespectful appellation, whilst none would have created that
awe and respect which, I suppose, the translation of the Imperial title
was intended to inspire. Even the subsequent official adopter of this
title, Sir W. Muir, advocated it on grounds which would have rendered
it inapplicable to India. With the National Anthem similarly, we had a
translation by a Persian into Hindustani, which was supported by a number
of Oriental scholars in this country, who either did not study it, or who
dealt with the matter entirely from a theoretical point of view, and what
was the result? The result was—that for “God Save the Queen,” a passage
was put which was either blasphemous, or which, in popular Muhammedan
acceptance, might mean, “God grant that Her Majesty may again marry!”
whereas one of the glories of Her Majesty among her Hindu subjects is
that she is a true “Satti” or Suttee, viz., a righteous widow, who ever
honours the memory of her terrestrial and spiritual husband—neither of
those views being intended by the translator, or by that very large and
responsible body of men who supported him, and that still larger and
emphatically loyal body that intended to give the translation of the
National Anthem as a gift to India at a cost of several thousand pounds,
when for a hundred rupees a dozen accurate and respectful versions were
elicited by me in India itself.

I therefore submit that in speaking of the sciences of language and
ethnography, we have, or ought to have, passed, long ago, the standpoint
of treating them separately; they must be treated together, and, as
I said at the beginning, taking, _e.g._, Arabic, with its thirty-six
broken plurals (quite enough to break anybody’s memory), you will never
be able to learn it unless you thoroughly realise the life of the Arab,
as he gets out of his tent in the morning, milks his female camel, &c.,
and unless you follow him through his daily ride or occupations. Then
you will understand how it is, especially if you have travelled in
Arabia, that camels that appear at a distance on the horizon, affect the
eye differently from camels when they come near, and are seen as they
follow one another in a row, and those again different from the camels
as they gather round the tent or encampment; and therefore it is that
in the different perceptions to the eye, under the influence of natural
phenomena, these multifarious plurals are of the greatest importance in
examining the customs of the people. Then will the discovery of the right
plural be a matter of enjoyment, leading one on to another discovery,
and to work all the better; whereas, with the grammatical routine that
we still pursue, I wonder, when we reach to middle or old age, after
following the literary profession, that we are not more dull or confused
than we are at present. When one abstract idea follows the other, as in
our phraseology, it is not like one scene following another in a new
country which is full of stimulus, but the course which we adopt of
abstract generalisations, without analysing them and bringing them back
to their concrete constituents, is almost a process of stultification.

Coming now to one of the most primitive, and certainly one of the
remnants of pre-historic languages, that of Hunza, which I had the
opportunity of examining twenty-three years ago, while Gilgit was in a
state of warfare, and where I had to learn the language, so to speak,
with a pencil in one hand and a weapon in the other, and surrounded by
people who were waiting for an opportunity to kill me, I found, that on
reverting to it three years ago, the language had already undergone a
process of assimilation to the surrounding dialects, owing to the advance
of so-called civilisation, which in that case, and which in the case of
most of these tribes, means the introduction of drunkenness and disease,
in this instance of cholera, for we know what has been the condition of
those countries which lie in the triangle between Cashmere, Kabul, and
Badakhshan, and to which I first gave the name of Dardistan in 1866.

Now, what does this language show us? There the ordinary methods proved
entirely at fault. If one pointed to an object, quite apart from the
ordinary difficulties of misapprehension, the man appealed to, for
instance, might say “your finger,” if a finger were the thing of which
he thought you wanted the name. If not satisfied with the name given in
response, and you turned to somebody else, another name was obtained; and
if you turned to a third person, you got a third name.

What was the reason for these differences? It was this, that the language
had not emerged from the state in which it is impossible to have such
a word as “head,” as distinguished from “my head,” or “thy head,” or
“his head”; for instance, _ak_ is “my name,” and _ik_ is “his name.”
Take away the pronominal sign, and you are left with _k_, which means
nothing. _Aus_ is “my wife,” and _gus_ “thy wife.” The _s_ alone has no
meaning, and, in some cases, it seemed impossible to arrive at putting
anything down correctly; but so it is in the initial stage of a language.
In the Hunza language under discussion, that stage is important to us as
members of the Aryan group, as the dissociation of the pronoun, verb,
adverb and conjunction from the act or substance only occurs when the
language emerges beyond the stage when the groping, as it were, of the
human child between the _meum_ and _tuum_, the first and second persons,
approaches the clear perception of the outer world, the “_suum_,” the
third person. Now, during the twenty years referred to “his” (house),
“his” (name), and “his” (head) are beginning to take the place of
“house,” “name,” “head,” generally, in not quite a decided manner, but
still they are taking their place. When I subsequently talked to the
Hunzas, and tried to find a reason for that “idiom,” if one may use
the term, it seemed very clear and convincing when they said, “How is
it possible for ‘a wife’ to exist unless she is somebody’s wife?” “You
cannot say, for instance, if you dissociate the one from the other, ‘her
wife,’ or ‘his husband.’ ‘Head,’ by itself, does not exist; it must be
somebody’s head.” When, again, you dissociate the sound which stands for
the action or substance from the pronoun, you come, in a certain group
of words, to another range of thought connected with the primary family
relation, and showing the existence of that particularly ancient form
of endogamy, in which all the elder females are the mothers and all the
elder men are the fathers of the tribe. For instance, take a word like
“mother;” “m” would mean the female principle, “o” would be the self, and
the _ther_ would mean “the tribe;” in other words, “mother” would mean:
“the female that bore me and that belongs to my tribe.” Now, fanciful
as this may appear to us, it is the simple fact as regards the Hunza
language, which, when put the test of analysis, will throw an incredible
light on the history of Aryan words. For instance, taking Sanskrit as
a typical language, you will, I believe, find how the early relations
grew, and you will get beyond the root into the parts of which the root
is made up; each of which has a meaning, not in one or two instances, but
in most. I am not going to read you the volume which I am preparing for
the Indian Government, and which is only the first part of the analysis
with regard to this language, and only a very small portion indeed of
the material that I collected in 1866, 1872, and 1884 regarding that
important part of the world, Dardistan, which is now being drawn within
the range of practical Indian politics—a region situated between the
Hindukush and Kaghan (lat. 37° N. and long. 73° E. to lat. 35° N. and
long. 74·3° E.) and comprising monarchies and republics, including a
small republic of eleven houses—a region which contains the solution
of numerous linguistic and ethnographical problems, the cradle of the
Aryan race, inhabited by the most varied tribes, from which region I
brought the first Hunza and the first Káfir that ever visited England,
and of which region one of its bigger Chiefs, owing to my sympathy with
the people, invested me with a kind of titular governorship. In that
comparatively small area the questions that are to be solved are great,
and it is even now in some parts, perhaps, as hazardous a journey as,
say, through the dark continent. Whether you get to the ancient Robber’s
Seat of Hunza, where the right of plundering is hereditary, or into the
recesses of Kafiristan or the fastnesses of Pakhtu settlers; whether
you proceed to the republics of Darel, Tangir or Chilás, or proceed to
the community where women are sometimes at the head of affairs, and
which is neither worse nor better than others, an amount of information,
especially ethnographic, is within one’s reach which makes Dardistan a
region that would reward a number of explorers. I may say, in my own
instance, if my life is spared for ten years longer, all I could do would
be to bring out the mere material in my possession in a rough form,
leaving the theories thereon to be elaborated by others. My difficulties
were great, but my reward has been in a mass of material, for the
elaboration of which International, Oriental, and other Congresses and
learned societies have petitioned Government since 1866. My official
duties have hitherto prevented my addressing myself to the congenial
task of elaborating the material in conjunction with others. In 1886, I
was, however, put for a few months on special duty in connexion with the
Hunza language, at the very time that Colonel Lockhart was traversing a
portion of Dardistan. But I think you will be more interested if, beyond
personal observations, I tell you something about that little country of
Hunza itself, which in many respects differs from those surrounding it,
not only in regard to its peculiar language, which I have mentioned, but
in other respects also. Unfortunately, it is also unlike the surrounding
districts, in being characterised by customs the absence of some of
which would be desirable. The Hunzas are nominal Muhammedans, and they
use their mosques for drinking and dancing assemblies. Women are as free
as air. There is little restriction in the relation of the sexes, and
the management of the State, in theory, is attributed to fairies. No war
is undertaken unless the fairy (whom, by the way, one is not allowed to
see) gives the command by beating the sacred drum. The witches, who get
into an ecstatic state, are the journalists, historians, and prophetesses
of the tribe. They tell you what goes on in the surrounding valleys.
They represent, as it were, the local _Times_; they tell you the past
glories, such as they are, of raids and murders by their tribe; and when
the _Tham_ or ruler, who is supposed to be heaven-born (there being some
mystery about the origin of his dynasty), does wrong, the only one who
will dare to tell him the truth is the Dayal, or the witch who prophesies
the future, and takes the opportunity of telling the Rajah that, unless
he behaves in a manner worthy of his origin, he will come to grief! This
is not a common form of popular representation to be met with, say, in
India. Grimm’s fairy-tales sometimes seem to be translated into practise
in Hunza-land, which offers material for discussion alike to those who
search for the Huns and to those who search for the very different Honas.

Then with regard to religion, as I said before, though nominally
Muhammedan, they are really deniers of all the important precepts of
true Muhammedanism, which is opposed to drunkenness, introduces a real
brotherhood, and enjoins great cleanliness as absolutely necessary
before the spiritual purification by prayer can take place. The people
are mostly Muláis, but inferior in piety (?) to those of Zébak, Shignán,
Wakhan, and other places. Now, what is that sect? It is represented by
His Highness Prince Aga Khan, of Bombay, a person who is not half aware
of his importance in those regions, where, till very recently, men were
murdered as soon as looked at. One who acknowledges him or has brought
some of the water with which he has washed his feet, would always be able
to pass through those regions perfectly unharmed! I found my disguise
as a Bokhara Mullah in 1866 to be quite useless, as a protection at
Gilgit, whence men were kidnapped to be exchanged for a good hunting
dog, but in Hunza they used to fill prisoners with gunpowder, and blow
them up for general amusement. His Highness, who is much given to
horse-racing, confines his spiritual administration to the collection of
taxes throughout Central Asia from his followers or believers, and the
believers themselves represent what is still left of the doctrine of the
Sheik-ul-Jabl or the Ancient of the Mountain, the head of the so-called
Assassins, a connexion of the Mahdi, if he was the Mahdi, or the supposed
Mahdi in the Soudan. I consider he was not the Mahdi as foretold in
Muhammedan tradition; but, be that as it may, the 7th Imám of the Shiahs
has given rise to the sects both of the Druses in the Lebanon and to the
Hunzas on the Pamir. They are the existing Ismailians, who, centuries
ago, under the influence of _Hashish_, the Indian hemp, committed crimes
throughout Christendom, and were the terror of Knight-Templars, as
“Hashîshîn,” corrupted into “Assassins.”

Now, I have been fortunate enough, owing to my friendship with the head
of their tribe, to obtain some portions of the Kelám-i-pîr volume, which
takes the place, really, of the Korán, and of which I have got a portion
here. I thought it might not be unworthy of your society to bring this to
your knowledge, as a very interesting remnant which throws, _inter alia_,
considerable light not only on their doctrine, but also on the Crusades.
By a similar favour, I have had the opportunity of hearing the Mitháq,
or covenant of the Druses, and that covenant of the Druses is a kind of
prayer they offer up to God, not only in connexion with the Old Man of
the Mountain, the head of the assassins who began about 1022, but also
with those mysterious rites which also take place in what I may call the
fairy-land of Hunza. With regard to the covenants, or one of them, which
the “U’qelá” or the “initiated” or “wise,” as distinguished from the
“Juhelá” or “ignorant” “laity,” among the Druses, offer up every night,
this was used by a so-called educated Druse, one who had been converted
to Protestantism,—a very good thing: but, as often happens, with that
denationalisation which renders his conversion useless as a means for
the promotion of any religion, as there are no indigenous elements for
its growth. Such a convert is often unable to obtain a knowledge of the
practices of his still unconverted countrymen, as nobody can be looked
upon with greater distrust than that native of a country who has unlearnt
to think in his own language, and who cannot acquire a foreign language
with its associations, which are part of the history of that language;
he does not become an Englishman with English associations, but ceases
to be a good native with his own indigenous associations. Therefore,
in my humble opinion, of all the unfortunate specimens of mankind, the
most degraded are those who, under the guise of being Europeanised and,
therefore, reformers, have themselves the greatest necessity for reform.
Their mind has become completely unhinged, thereby showing us that if we
Europeans wish to do good among Orientals we can do so best by living
good lives in the midst of professors of other religions, this being also
in accordance with the 13th edict of Asoka.

This Druse covenant makes the mad Fatimite ruler of Egypt, Hákim, the
“Lord of the Universe.” As I said before, the present “Lord of the
Universe”. for the Hunzas is the lineal descendant of the 7th Imám, a
resident of Bombay, one to whom the Muláis make pilgrimages, instead
of going to Mecca or to Kerbelá. You may imagine that, even as regards
the Druses, there must be something higher than _their_ “Lord of the
Universe;” but, such as he is, it is with him that this covenant is made.
Reverting to his living colleague, the Indian “Lord,” it may be stated
that there are men scattered throughout India of whose influence we have
only the faintest conception. I pointed out in 1866 that if anyone wanted
to follow successfully my footsteps is Dardistan, he would have to get
recommendations from His Highness Aga Khan of Bombay, and I am glad to
say that Col. Lockhart has taken advantage of that recommendation. The
Druse “Lord of the Universe” is regarded as one with whom nothing can be
compared. The Druses are to render him the most implicit obedience, and
to carry out his behests at the loss of everything, good name, wealth,
and life, with the view of obtaining the favour of one who may be taken
to be God; but the sentence is so constructed as to make him, if not God,
only second to God; in other words, only just a discrimination between
God as the distant ruler of the Universe and, perhaps, some lineal
descendant of Hákim, or rather, Hákim himself as an ever-living being, as
the ruler of _this_ world. This and some other prayers, with some songs,
one amongst which breathes the greatest hatred to Muhammedanism, and
speaks of the destruction of Mecca as something to look forward to, seems
to be deserving of study. There are also references in them to rites
connected with Abraham. A full translation of these documents, compared
with invocations in portions of the Korán, would, indeed, reward the
attention of the student.

I will now again revert from the Druses of the Lebanon to the Muláis
in the Himalayas. I obtained the poem in my hand from the head of that
sect, and the wording is such that it denies whilst affirming the
immortality and transmigration of souls. It says, “It is no use telling
the ignorant multitude what your faith is.” That is very much like what
Lord Beaconsfield said—that all thinking men were of one religion, but
they would not tell of what religion!—a wrong sentiment, but one that is
embodied in the above poem. “Tell them,” continues the poem in effect,
“if they want to know, in an answer of wisdom to a question of folly: ‘if
your life has been bad you will descend into the stone the vegetable, or
the animal; if your life has been good you will return as a better man.
The chain of life is undivided. The animal that is sacrificed proceeds to
a higher life.’ You cannot discriminate and yet deny individual life, and
apportion that air, stone, or plant, to the animal and to man, but you
ought to be punished for saying this to others!” And on this principle,
at any rate, the Druses also act or acted, that that is no crime which
is not found out; and a good many people, I am sorry to say, elsewhere,
think much the same; whereas in Hunza they have gone beyond that stage,
and care extremely little about their crimes being found out. The Mitháq
and other religious utterances of the Druses and the Kelám-i-Pîr of the
Hunzas, if published together, with certain new information which we
have regarding the Crusade of Richard Cœur-de-Lion, would, I think, were
time given and the matter elaborated, indeed deserve the attention of
the readers of the “Transactions.” It also seems strange that where such
customs exist there should be a prize for virtue, but there is one in
Hunza for wives who have remained faithful to their husbands, something
like the French prize for _rosières_.

Formerly Suttee was practised, but Suttee had rather the meaning of Sáthi
or companion, as both husband and wife went to the funeral pyre. Prizes
are similarly given to wives who have not quarrelled for, say, a certain
number of years with their husbands. The most curious custom which seems
to permeate these countries is to foster relationship in nursing,
where a nurse and all her relations come not only within the prohibited
degrees, which is against the spirit of Muhammedanism, but also create
the only real bond of true attachment that I have seen in Dardistan,
where other relatives seemed always engaged in murdering one another.

Nearly all the chiefs in Dardistan give their children to persons of
low degree to nurse, and these and the children of the nurse become
attached to them throughout life and are their only friends. But
this foster-relationship is also taken in order to get rid of the
consequences, say, of crime; for instance, in the case of adultery, or
supposed adultery, the suspected person who declares that he enters
into the relationship of a son to the woman with whom he is suspected,
after a certain penalty, is really accepted in that position, and the
trust is in no case betrayed. It is the only kind of forgiveness which
is given in Dardistan generally to that sort of transgression; but,
further than that, drinking milk with some one, or appointing some one
as foster-father, which is done by crossing two vases of milk, creates
the same relationship, except amongst the noble caste of Shins, who were
expelled by the Brahmins from India or Kashmir, and who hold the cow in
abhorence as one of their religious dogmas, whereas, in other ways, they
are really Brahmins, among whom we find Hinduism peeping out through the
thin crust of Muhammedanism.

The subject of caste, by the way, is also one which is generally
misunderstood, and which, if developed on Christian lines, would give
us the perfection of human society, and solve many of the problems with
which we are dealing in Europe in more advanced civilisations. I have
just read with concern some remarks against caste by Sir John Petheram,
who has been in India some three or four years. I think that before
people speak on subjects of such intricacy, they should take the position
of students of the question, learn at least one of the classical and one
of the vernacular languages of India, and then alone assume the role
of teachers whilst continuing to be learners; even in regard to such
subjects of infant-marriage and the prohibition of widow re-marriage,
there is a side of the question which has not yet been put sufficiently
before the British public. Infant-marriage, when properly carried out
in the higher castes, is an adoption of the girl into the family where
she and the husband grow up together and join in prayer in common, which
is necessary for their respective salvation; there is much to learn in
the way of tenderness, charity, and love, from some of the households in
India, where we find a community constituted on the noblest principles
of “the joint family,” with an admirable and economical subdivision of
labour, which enables them to live for a mere trifle, and yet so to
prepare their food that in every dish you can see the tender care of the
woman who prepares it for the good of the husband and of the household.

Then, as to the widow re-marriage, it has not been sufficiently pointed
out to the British public that spiritual marriage renders the re-marriage
of the Hindu widow impossible, because she is necessary for the spiritual
salvation of the husband, and because as the representative of his
property she may be called on to be the head of the family, for many of
them _are_ at the head of the family, and their position, therefore,
renders it simply impossible for them to re-marry. These are matters
that we should treat with respect, especially if we seek to adapt them
to the spirit of the age. There are also differences amongst Muhammedans
as great as there are between a Christian who tries to follow the Sermon
on the Mount and a nominal Christian. Science and religion, according to
a Muhammedan saying, are twins, and if I understand the object of this
Society, it is in order to make this twinship (if I may be allowed to
use the expression) more real that your labours have been initiated, and
that, under Providence, they have been carried to the successful results
that have followed them both here and abroad.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Strabo II. I., XV. I.—Arrian de Exped. Alex. V. 4 Indica c.
5.—Dio-Chrysos. Orat. XXXV.—Philostrat. de vitâ Apollon. Tyan. VI.
I.—Clem. Alex. Paed., II. 12.—Aelian de Nat. An. XV. 14.—Harpokrat, s.
v. χρυσοχοεῖν, Themist. Orat. XXVII.—Heliodor. X. 26.—Tzetz. Chil. XII.
330-340.—Pseudo Kallisth. II. 29.—Schol. ad Sophocl. Antig., v. 1,025.

[2] Propert. Eleg. III. 13.—Pomp. Mel. III. 7.—Plin. H. N. XI. 36,
XXXIII. 21.—Solin, c. 30.

[3] Indeed, there _is_ no other country between Kaspatyros and the
Paktyan country excepting Dardistan.

[4] This is the Bunji of recent Chilás fights (1893).

[5] General A. Cunningham very kindly sent me the quotation last year. It
runs as follows: Κασπάπυρος πόλις Γανόπρικὴ, Σκυθὼν άκτὴ.

[6] Who refers to my “Results of a Tour in Dardistan, Kashmir, Little
Tibet, Ladak, etc., in 1867-70,” and other papers in his pamphlet on the
origin of that legend.

[7] “Dardistan,” or the country of the Daradas of Hindu mythology,
embraces, in the narrowest sense of the term, the Shiná-speaking
countries (Gilgit, &c.); in a wider sense, Hunza, Nagyr, Yasin,
and Chitrál; and in the widest, also parts of Kafiristan. (See my
“Dardistan,” part III.)

[8] “Yatsh” means “bad” in Kashmiri.

[9] The father’s name was Mir Khan. The daughter’s name was Birani. The
bridegroom’s name was Shadu Malik of Nagyr, of Phall Tshatshe race, and
the place of the wedding was Buldar Butshe.

[10] Elsewhere called _tshi_.

[11] Eating meat was the process of _incarnation_.

[12] The story of the famous horse, the love-making between Azru and the
Princess, the manner of their marriage and other incidents connected with
the expulsion of the tyrant deserve attention.

[13] Possibly this legend is one of the causes of the unfounded
reputation of cannibalism which was given by Kashmiris and others to the
Dards before 1866, and of which one Dardu tribe accuses another, with
which, even if it should reside in a neighbouring valley, it may have no
intercourse. I refer elsewhere to the custom of drinking a portion of the
blood of an enemy, to which my two Kafirs confessed.—(“Dardistan,” Part
III.)

[14] Elsewhere called “Shiribadatt” in one name.

[15] Words inviting attention, such as “listen,” “explain,” etc., etc.,
are generally put at the end of riddles.

[16] The abbreviations “G.” and “A.” stand respectively for “in the
Gilgiti dialect” and “in the Astori dialect.”

[17] Not very many years ago the Albanian robbers in attacking shepherds
used to consider themselves victorious if they had robbed more sheep than
they had lost men.

[18] “Tré” = “three” is pronounced like “tshé.”

[19] Ae = (_Gilgiti_) mouth; aru = in the mouth; ázeju = against the
mouth. Aze = (_Astori_) mouth; ázeru = in the mouth; azeju = against the
mouth.

[20] [Her father was a Mirza and she was, therefore, called Mirzéy.]

[21] Khān is pronounced Khann for the sake of the metre.

[22] Term of familiarity used in calling a daughter.

[23] Mutshutshul is a narrow pass leading from Gakutsh to Yassen.

[24] Doloja is a village ahead of Mutshutshul.

[25] [To fear is construed with the Dative.]

[26] More probably “rey” is the pine called the Picea Webbiana.

[27] Part II., page 16, gives the following for “Birch.” “Birch? = Djônjî
(the white bark of which is used for paper) in Kashmîr where it is called
the book-tree “Burus kull” lit: Burus = the book; kúll = plant, tree.”

[28] “Tshikkí” is a black fragrant matter said to be gathered under
the wing-pits of the hawk; “djónji” is, to me, an unknown tree, but I
conjecture it to be the birch tree. “Gas” is a princess and “mal” is
added for euphony.

[29] [“Mulayi” for woman is not very respectful; women are generally
addressed as “kaki” sister, or “dhì” daughter.]

[30] _Na?_ is it? is it not so? _na_ seems generally to be a mere
exclamation.

[31] The people of Astor are mostly Sunnis, and the Gilgitis mostly
Shiahs, the Chilásis are all Sunnis.

[32] A reed which grows in the Gilgit country of white or red colour.

[33] It is rather unusual to find the nightingale representing the
beloved. She is generally “the rose” and the lover “the nightingale.”

[34] Possibly Ali Sher Khan, also called Ali Shah, the father of Ahmed
Shah, the successful and popular Rajah of Skardo in the Sikh days—or else
the great Ali Sher Khan, the founder of the race or caste of the Makpon
Rajahs of Skardo. He built a great stone aqueduct from the Satpur stream
which also banked up a quantity of useful soil against inundations.

[35] Murad was, I believe, the first Skardo Rajah who conquered Gilgit,
Nagyr, Hunza and Chitrál. He built a bridge near the Chitrál fort. Traces
of invasion from Little Tibet exist in Dardistan. A number of historical
events, occurring at different periods, seem to be mixed up in this song.

[36] The veneration for the name is, of course, also partly due to the
fact that it means “the lion of Ali,” Muhammad’s son-in-law, to whose
memory the Shiah Mussulmans are so devotedly attached. The Little
Tibetans are almost all Shiahs.

[37] “Sar” is Astori for Gilgiti “Djor.”

[38] The defile of the Makpon-i-Shang-Rong, where the Indus river makes a
sudden turn southward and below which it receives the Gilgit river.

[39] The Shiah Rajahs of Skardo believed themselves to be under the
special protection of Ali.

[40] The “Harginn,” a fabulous animal mentioned elsewhere.

[41] The beautiful songs of “My little darling ornaments will wear,”
“Corn is being distributed,” “I will give pleasure’s price,” “My metal is
hard,” “Come out, oh daughter of the hawk,” will be found on pages 2, 4,
10, 11, and 37, of this pamphlet respectively and need not therefore be
quoted in this place.

[42] “Powder” is called “Jebati” in Astóri and in Gilgiti “Bilen,” and
is, in both dialects, also the word used for medicinal powder. It is made
of Sulphur, Saltpetre and coal. Sulphur = dantzil. Saltpetre = Shór in
Astori, and Shorá in Ghilgiti. Coal = Kári. The general proportion of the
composition is, as my informant put it, after dividing the whole into six
and a half parts to give 5 of Saltpetre, 1 of coal, and ½ of Sulphur.
Some put less coal in, but it is generally believed that more than the
above proportion of Sulphur would make the powder too explosive.

[43] By the people of Gilgit.

[44] A few remarks made under this head and that of music have been taken
from Part II, pages 32 and 21, of my “Dardistan,” in order to render the
accounts more intelligible.

[45] The drawing and description of this scene were given in the
_Illustrated London News_ of the 12th February, 1870, under the heading
of “A Dance at Gilgit.”

[46] Wine is called in Gilgit by the same name as is “beer” by the
Astoris, _viz._: “Mō.” The wine press is called “Mōe Kùrr.” The reservoir
into which it flows is called “Mōe Sán.”

[47] These are the strange sect of the Muláis about whom more in my
“Handbook of Hunza, Nagyr and a part of Yasín.”

[48] This is said to be no longer the case, except in those Dard
republics, where foreigners have not yet interfered. In monarchical
Yasin, and, above all, in Hunza, sexual laxity has ever been great.
Where Sunni rulers have substituted dancing-boys for the dancing of
men (formerly both men and women danced together), a worse evil has
been introduced. A most sacred relationship is the one created by the
foster-mother. The linguistic portion of “The of Hunza-Nagyr Handbook,”
as also of Parts I. and II. of “Dardistan” solves the questions of
whether and where polygamy, endogamy, etc., existed among the Dards,
who, in appearance and sentiment as regards women, as also in legendary
lore, are very “European,” but whom invasion will convert into strict
Muhammadans and haters of the “Firenghi.”

[49] The “brother in the faith” with whom raw milk has been drunk, _Vide_
page 41.

Betrothal, = balli = pumpkin in Gilgiti, Soél—Astóri
Bridegroom, = hileléo, Gil. hiláleo. Astóri.
Bride, = hilal
Bridegroom’s MEN, = garóni, Gil. hilalée, Astóri.
Marriage ‎‏شادي‏‎ = garr, Gil. Kàsh. Astóri
Dowry, = “dab,” Gil. and Astóri

(the grain, ghee and sheep that may accompany the betrothal-present is
called by the Astóris “sakáro.”)

Husband, = baráo, Gil. baréyo, Astóri.
Wife, = Greyn, Gil. gréyn, Astóri.

Wedding dinner “garéy tíki” in Gilgiti. “Kajjéyn bai kyas,” in Astori (?)
[“tikki” is bread, “bai” is a chippati, kyas = food].

[50] The Turks say “a girl of 15 years of age should be either married or
buried.”

[51] Is celebrated in Autumn when the fruit and corn have become ripe.
For a detailed account of this and other festivals see “Hunza-Nagyr
Handbook,” and Parts II. and III. of the “Languages and Races of
Dardistan.”

[52] I have already related that a foreign Mulla had found his way to
Gilgit, and that the people, desirous that so holy a man should not
leave them and solicitous about the reputation that their country had no
shrine, killed him in order to have some place for pilgrimage. Similar
stories are, however, also told about shrines in Afghanistan. My Sazîni
speaks of shrines in Nagyr, Chilâs and Yasin, and says that in Sunni
Chilâs there are many Mullahs belonging to all the castes—two of the most
eminent being Kramìns of Shatiál, about 8 miles from Sazîn. About Castes,
_vide_ page 62.

[53] I refer to the Khajuná, or Burishki, a language also spoken in Nagyr
and a part of Yasin, whose inhabitants are Dards.

[54] I refer to the practice of “Taqqîah.” In the interior of Kabul
Hazara, on the contrary, I have been told that Pathan Sunni merchants
have to pretend to be Shiahs, in order to escape being murdered.

[55] Since writing the above in 1867, a third Kafir from Katár has
entered my service, and I have derived some detailed information from him
and others regarding the languages and customs of this mysterious race,
which will be embodied in my next volume. [This note was written in 1872.]

[56] I have heard this denied by a man from Sazîn, but state it on the
authority of two Chilâsis who were formerly in my service.

[57] My Sazîni says that only a portion of the Fort was blown up.

[58] _Vide_ “History of Dardistan” for details of the contending
dynasties of that region, pages 67 to 110.

[59] Major Montgomery remarks “the coins have the word Gujanfar on them,
the name, I suppose, of some emblematic animal. I was however unable to
find out its meaning.” The word is ‎‏غضنفر ‏‎, Ghazanfar [which means in
_Arabic_: lion, hero] and is the name of the former ruler of Hunza whose
name is on the coins. In Hunza itself, coined money is unknown. [For
changes since 1866, see “Hunza and Nagyr Handbook, 1893.”]

[60] This was the _name_ of the grandfather of Amán-ul-Mulk, the present
ruler of Chitrál (1877). Cunningham says that the _title_ of “Kathor”
has been held for 2000 years. I may incidentally mention that natives
of India who had visited Chitrál did not know it by any other name than
“Kashkar” the name of the principal town, whilst Chitrál was called “a
Kafir village surrounded by mountains” by Neyk Muhammad, a Lughmáni
Nîmtsha (or half) Mussulman in 1866.

[61] This is the plausible Gilgit story, which will, perhaps, be adopted
in Hunza when it becomes truly Muhammadan. In the meanwhile, my endeavour
in 1866 to find traces of Alexander the Great’s invasion in Dardistan,
has led to the adoption of the myth of descent from that Conqueror by the
Chinese Governor or the ancient hereditary “Thàm” of Hunza, who really
is “_ayeshó_,” or “heaven-born,” owing to the miraculous conception of a
female ancestor. “Mogholot” is the direct ancestor of the kindred Nagyr
line, “Girkis,” his twin-brother and deadly foe, being the ancestor of
the Hunza dynasty. (See Genealogy on pages 69 and 111.)

[62] This designation is really that of the Minister of Finances.

[63] This was written in 1866.

[64] I refer only to the present rule of Kashmir itself and not to the
massacres by Kashmir troops in Dardistan, of which details are given
elsewhere.

[65] _Vide_ my comparison between Dardu buildings, etc., and certain
excavations which I made at Takht-i-Bahi in Yusufzai in 1870.

[66] Seduction and adultery are punished with death in Chilâs and the
neighbouring independent Districts. Morality is, perhaps, not quite so
stern at Gilgit, whilst in Yasin, Hunza, and even in Nagyr before 1886,
great laxity is said to prevail.

[67] Since writing the above I have discovered that the people of
Kandiá—an unsuspected race and country lying between Swat and the
Indus—are Dards and speak a Dialect of Shiná, of which specimens are
given elsewhere in the “Races of the Hindukush.” (See Appendix IV.)
The tribe living on the left bank of the Kandiá river is called by its
neighbours “Dard.”

[68] The word ought to be transliterated “Gilgit” ‎‏گلگت ‏‎ and
pronounced as it would be in German, but this might expose it to being
pronounced as “Jiljit” by some English readers, so I have spelt it here
as “Ghilghit.”

[69] In a restricted sense “Shîn” is the name of the highest _caste_ of
the Shîn _race_. “Róno” is the highest official caste next to the ruling
families.

[70] My Sazîni says that they are really Shîns, Yashkuns, Dôms and
Kramins, but pretend to be Afghans. _Vide_ List of Castes, page 62.
Kholi-Palus are _two_ Districts, Khóli and Palus, whose inhabitants are
generally fighting with each other. Shepherds from these places often
bring their flocks for sale to Gilgit. I met a few.

[71] This name is also and properly given by the Baltis to their Dard
fellow-countrymen. Indeed the Little Tibetans look more like Dards than
Ladákis.

[72] _Place aux dames!_ For six years I believed myself “the discoverer”
of this fact, but I find that, as regards Kartakchun in Little Tibet, I
have been nearly anticipated by Mrs. Harvey, who calls the inhabitants
“Dards,” “Dâruds” (or “Dardoos.”)

[73] My Sazîni calls the people of his own place = Bigé; those of Tórr =
_Manuké_, and those of Harbenn = _Jure_.

[74] The two Kafirs in my service in 1866, one of whom was a Bashgali,
seemed inoffensive young men. They admitted drinking a portion of the
blood of a killed enemy or eating a bit of his heart, but I fancy this
practice proceeds more from bravado than appetite. In “Davies’ Trade
Report” I find the following Note to Appendix XXX., page CCCLXII. “The
ruler of Chitrál is in the habit of enslaving all persons from the
tribes of Kalásh, Dangini and Bashghali, idolaters living in the Chitrál
territory.”

[75] Both my Gilgiti follower, Ghulam Muhammad, and the Astóri retainer,
Mirza Khan, claimed to be pure Shîns. The former returned to my service
some years afterwards and was measured together with other Dards. (See
Appendix V.)

[76] My Sazîni says that the Dôms are below the Kramìns and that there
are only 4 original castes: Shîn, Yáshkunn, Kramìn [or “Kamìnn”] and Dôm,
who, to quote his words, occupy the following relative ranks: “The Shîn
is the right hand, the Yáshkunn the left; the Kramìn the right foot, the
Dôm the left foot.” “The other castes are mere names for occupations.” A
Shîn or Yáshkunn can trade, cultivate land or be a shepherd without loss
of dignity—Kramìns are weavers, carpenters, etc., but not musicians—as
for leather, it is not prepared in the country. Kramìns who cultivate
land consider themselves equal to Shîns. Dôms can follow _any_
employment, but, if a Dôm becomes a Mulla, he is respected. Members of
the several castes who misbehave are called Mîn, Pashgun, Mamin and Môm
respectively. “A man of good caste will espouse sides and fight to the
last even against his own brother.” Revenge is a duty, as among Afghans,
but is not transmitted from generation to generation, if the first
murderer is killed. A man who has killed another, by mistake, in a fight
or otherwise, seeks a frank forgiveness by bringing a rope, shroud and a
buffalo to the relatives of the deceased. The upper castes can, if there
are no Kramìns in their villages, do ironmonger’s and carpenter’s work,
without disgrace; but must wait for Kramìns or Dôms for weaver’s work.
The women spin. The “Dôms” are the “Rôms” of Gipsy lore.

[77] These legends should be compared with the Chitrál Fables published
by Mihtar Nizám-ul-Mulk in the _Asiatic Quarterly Review_ of January,
1891, namely: “the vindictive fowl,” “the golden mouse,” “the mouse and
the frog,” “the quail and the fox.” See Appendix III. as also Legends in
“The Hunza-Nagyr Handbook.”

[78] The scrupulousness of the Gipsies in discharging such obligations,
when contracted with a member of the same race, used to be notorious. The
Dôms or Rôms of the Shins are the “Romany” of Europe and our “Zingari” is
a corruption of “Sinkari” or inhabitants on the borders of the River or
Sin = the (Upper) Indus.

[79] Tromba, to be made eatable, must be ground into flour, then boiled
in water and placed in the “tshamúl” [in Astori] or “popúsh” [Ghilgiti],
a receptacle under the hearth, and has to be kept in this place for one
night, after which it is fit for use after being roasted or put on a
tawa [pan] like a Chupatti [a thin cake of unleavened bread]. “barao” or
tshítti baráo = sour baráo [móro baráo = sweet baráo].

[80] Almost every third man I met had, at some time or other, been
kidnapped and dragged off either to Chilás, Chitrál, Badakhshán or
Bukhárá. The surveillance, however, which is exercised over prisoners,
as they are being moved by goat-paths over mountains, cannot be a very
effective one and, therefore, many of them escape. Some of the Kashmir
Maharajah’s Sepoys, who had invaded Dardistan, had been captured and
had escaped. They narrated many stories of the ferocity of these
mountaineers; _e.g._, that they used their captives as fireworks, etc.,
etc., in order to enliven public gatherings. Even if this be true,
there can be no doubt that the Sepoys retaliated in the fiercest manner
whenever they had an opportunity, and the only acts of barbarism that
came under my observation, during the war with the tribes in 1866, were
committed by the Kashmir invaders.

[81] This is undoubtedly the _canis rutilans_, a species of wild dog,
which hunts in packs after the wild goat, so numerously found in the
high mountains round Gilgit. The snow-ounce also pursues it. Dardistan,
specially Hunza, is the paradise of the ibex, the wild sheep, including
the _ovis poli_, and the red bear.

[82] Only so much has been mentioned of the Genealogies of the rulers
of Nagyr, Hunza, and Dîr, as belongs to this portion of my account of
Dardistan.

[83] Full details of the son and successor of Ghazan Khan, Safdar Ali
Khan, to the present vassal of the Kashmir (Anglo-Indian) Government,
Muhammad Názim Khan, the fugitive Safdar Ali Khan’s half-brother, are
given elsewhere.

[84] Abbas Khan(?) now at Srinagur and Bahadur Khan(?).

[85] I believe that Raja Záhid Za’far’s wife was a sister of Rajas Kerîm
Khan and Sakandar Khan of Gilgit (also of Nagyr descent). _Vide_ page 67
and Heading V. on page 69.

This connexion might account for Za’far helping the Dogras, who had
reinstated Kerîm Khan in Gilgit.

[86] Jewahir Singh went by Shigar with 13,000 Baltis (Little Tibetans),
2,000 light infantry came _viâ_ Jagloth under Sirdar Mahmud Khan. The
general of all the “Khulle” Regiments was Bakhshi Radha Kishn. Colonel
Hoshiára went by the Nomal road to Nagyr, and after destroying 3,000 head
of sheep and many villages returned.

Wazir Zoraweru went to Darêl with Colonel Devi Singh and 10,000 men(?).
Bija Singh was at Gor(?) and Hussani Ali was in command of the Artillery.

[87] Mir Vali and Pahlwan are brothers by different mothers. Mulk Amán
and Nura Guzá (Mîr Ghazi?) are brothers by the same mother—so one of my
men says. Pahlwan is Amán-ul-Mulk’s sister’s son (_vide_ “History of Wars
with Kashmir”).

[88] _Extract_: “_1850._ The raids of the Chilásis, is made the occasion
for invading the country of Chilás, which not being a dependency of
Kashmir, is not included in the Treaty of 1846. The Maharaja gives
out that he is acting under orders of the British Government. Great
consternation among petty chiefs about Muzaffarabad regarding ulterior
plans of the Maharaja. The Sikhs send a large army, which is defeated
before the Fort of Chilás. 1851.—Bakhshi Hari Singh and Dewan Hari Chand
are sent with 10,000 men against Chilás, and succeed in destroying the
fort and scattering the hostile hill tribes which assisted the Chilásis.”

[89] Extract from Drew’s “Northern Barriers of India,” 1877: “Until
about 1850 they used to make occasional expeditions for plunder, coming
round the flanks of the mountain into this Astor Valley. It was these
raids that determined Maharaja Gulâb Singh to send a punitive expedition
against Chilás. This he did in 1851 or 1852. The Dogrâs at last took the
chief stronghold of the Chilásis, a fort two or three miles from the
Indus River, and reduced those people to some degree of obedience: and
_there has been no raid since_.”

[90] “The Astor people used formerly to do the same thing,” and on page
459 of Drew’s “Jummoo and Kashmir Territories,” the author, who was a
high official in the Kashmir service, says: “The Sikhs sent an expedition
to Chilás under one Sujah Singh, but it was repulsed.... This was about
the year 1843.... The good effects (of the expedition in 1850 or 1851)
... have already been spoken of. Since that time the Chilásis ... pay
yearly to the Maharaja a tribute of 100 goats and about two ounces of
gold-dust; _otherwise they are free_.” Since then Major Ommaney in
1868 reports that ever since the advent of British neighbourhood they
have never committed any offences: “The people are inoffensive.” Mr.
Scott calls them “a quiet, peace-loving people,” and all the Panjab
Administration Reports give them the same reputation.

[91] The word “Thousand” may only stand for 400, as explained elsewhere.

[92] For divisions of Dard castes see pages 62, 63.

[93] Of the value of ten annas each, then 1s. 3d.

[94] “Yaghistáni” means inhabitant of the “wild” or “independent” country.

[95] For Divisions of Dard Castes, see pages 62, 63.

[96] Robe of honor.

[97] [The stones are so loosely embedded in sandy soil, that treading
on or catching hold of one, often brings down an avalanche of stones.
When the path is narrow and a river flows beneath, it is, generally,
impossible to escape. Stones are often placed in such a way as to cause
avalanches to come on the invader who steps on them.]

[98] Here my informant, himself a Sunni Mussulman and always calling his
Shiah co-religionists Kafirs, was raving with indignation against the
orthodox Sunnis, Isa and Asmat and the Sunni soldiers of Kashmir, for
murdering the Shiahs of Yasin. He ascribed the atrocities of the Sikhs
entirely to the orders of the ex-fugitives.

[99] I met Lehna Singh, a relative of the Maharaja, in 1866 in command of
the Sai forces, who had only Rs. 20 per mensem, with unlimited liberty,
however, to make as much besides out of the people, as he could. Bad as
this system is, the drain on the rulers and the ruled is not so great,
under Oriental methods, as under a highly-paid European administration,
and the mismanagement of Kashmîr was far less expensive and less
injurious to the Empire than the present “good” management through
British officers.

[100] The Kholi people from whom the Sazini heard the account of the
massacre were 100 merchants who had come to Gilgit, as is their custom,
to sell goats, etc., and had there been arrested and taken along to Yasin
by Isa Bahadur, in order to prevent their spreading the news of the
impending attack. There were also eight men from Djajiál and five from
Patan. The following were the Chiefs with the merchants: Káhar, Kali,
Dessa, Amr, Djá—Shìns of Mahrëin in Koli (four miles from Koli). Sabit
Shah, Aman, Shudum Khan, Serdàn, Guldán (Kamins); Hajetu, Lola, Shughlu
Hákko, Bisat, Puz, Khushir (Yashkunns); Ashmál, Gulu, Subhán Shah, Bilál,
Mahsúmu, Yadúla, Najb-ulla of Kóli; Bolós Khan, and Bula Shài, two Patan
Sirdars—Wáli, Sirdar of Djajiál, a Shin, with seven Zemindars. I, adds
my informant, have also heard it from Mulk Aman who was not present,
but who sorrows deeply for the occurrence. (The atrocities related are
fully confirmed by Mr. Hayward’s account, quoted elsewhere, and by what I
saw and heard myself in 1866. Mr. Hayward fixes 1863 as the date of the
massacre.)

[101] There is a place called Nilamutsh—green mountain ridge—literally
a mountain that has fallen off a still higher one. Chaprôt is three kôs
above and Guyetsh two kôs below this place. Hîni is on the other side
of the river two and a half kos from Nilamutsh. Chaprôt has 150 houses;
Guyêtsh 30 and Hini 80 houses.

[102] I sent the Yarkandi, Niaz Muhammad, (whom I had taken to Europe),
by the little frequented Shigar route to find out the truth about
Hayward’s murder. His report is a strange and suggestive one, and will be
published in my next volume. (See also pages 74, 75 and 105.)

[103] It has also been alleged that in order to get rid of two doubtful
friends of the Maharajah, namely, Mir Vali and Mulk-Aman, and to make
room for the more trusted Pehliwan, Aman-ul-Mulk, the ruler of Chitrál
and supposed instigator of the murder of Hayward through the agency of
Mir Vali of Yasin, wrote to the Maharajah to implicate Mulk Aman in the
business. Immediately on his flight, his wife and son were temporarily
imprisoned in the Fort of Gilgit. Pehliwan and Rahmat interceded for some
of the servants, who were set free and sent on to Chitrál. Mir Vali found
his way to Chitrál, whose ruler had one of Mr. Hayward’s guns, though
the bulk of his property is said to have been recovered. There he was
seen by Major Montgomery’s Havildar, who reported that Mir Vali was lame
from a kick by a horse. This however, does not seem to have prevented
him from resuming the rule of Yasin in conjunction with Pehliwan or, if
recent accounts are to be trusted, from turning his nominal suzerain,
Aman-ul-Mulk, out of Chitrál. Mulk Aman also figured for a short time on
the scene of the war with Aman-ul-Mulk and by the latest report, seems to
have fled to Yarkand.

[104] This peak overlooks Bunji and the whole course of the Indus (with
a sight of the Gilgit Valley) from its sudden southward bend at the
Makpon-i-Shang-Rong, till it again bends westward beyond Chilás.

[105] The last (semi-official) _Moscow Gazette_ says: “Russia will not
neglect to avail herself of the first convenient opportunity to assist
the people of India to throw off the English yoke, with the view of
establishing the country under independent native rule.”

[106] I began to write this paper as an introduction to an academical
treatment of the history, language, and customs of Hunza-Nagyr, when
the apparently, sudden, but, probably, calculated complications on that
frontier compelled me to abandon my task for the present and to discuss
instead the ephemeral news as they were published from day to day in the
press.

[107]

“Agàr qahàt rijál uftad az-sî qaum kam gîrî.
Yakùm Affghan, doyum Kambó, soyùm bad-zât Kashmîrî.”

If there (ever) should be a scarcity of men, frequent little (beware of)
three peoples: one the Affghan, the second the Kambó, and the third the
bad-raced Kashmîrî.

[108] I was again on special duty in 1886, and its result was Part I. of
the “Hunza-Nagyr Handbook,” of which a second and enlarged edition will
appear shortly. My material, some of which has been published, has been
collected between 1865 and 1889 in my private capacity as a student of
languages and customs.

[109] In spite of Russian attempts to conciliate the orthodox Muhammadans
of Turkey and thus to take the place of the British as “the Protector of
Islám,” the news of the revision of the Korán by a Russian Censor and the
_bévue_ of putting up the Czar’s portrait in Central Asian Mosques, have
injured Russia’s propaganda among Muhammadans, whom also the accounts
of the persecution of the Jews have estranged from a Power that began
its rule in Central Asia by repairing and constructing Mosques, helping
Mosque Schools and even subsidizing an employé to call “the faithful” to
fast and _break_-fast during the month of Ramazán.

[110] “By the most recent account, Ghazan Khan, the son of Ghazanfar,
has been killed by his own son, Muhammad Khan. Muhammad Khan’s mother
was the sister of Zafar Khan, the ruler of Nagyr. She was killed by her
father-in-law, Ghazanfar, and thrown over a precipice from her house.
Ghazan Khan treacherously killed his paternal uncle, Abdullah Khan, ruler
of Gojál, who unsuspectingly met him. On ascending the throne, Ghazan
Khan is also said to have poisoned his ailing full brother, Bukhtawar
Shah, and another (by a different Sayad mother) Nanawal Shah. The
fratricidal traditions of Hunza and of the Khush-waqtia family of Yasin
have now been somewhat thrown into the shade by the parricide of Muhammad
Khan. The father of Ghazan Khan, Ghazanfar, is said to have died from
the effects of a suit of clothes, impregnated with small-pox, sent to
him by his daughter, the full sister of Ghazan Khan, who was married to
Mir Shah of Badakhshan, in order to accelerate her brother’s accession
to the throne. The father of Ghazanfar, Sullum, also poisoned his own
father. This state of things is very different from the gentle rules and
traditions of Nagyr, whose aged Chief, Zafar Khan, has nineteen sons, and
who sent his rebellious eldest son. Muhammad Khan (whose mother was a
full sister of Ghazan Khan of Hunza) to Ramsu in Kashmir territory, where
he died. He was married to a daughter of his maternal uncle, and tried
to sell some of his Nagyr subjects into slavery, against the traditions
of that peaceful country, in consequence of which his father, Zafar Khan
expelled him.” (See Part referring to the History and Customs of Hunza
and Nagyr.) Yet it is this patriarchal, loyal and God-fearing Záfar Khan,
whose letter to me I published last year, whom we accused of kidnapping
and aggressiveness, so that we might take his country.

[111] Of the £380, Shignán received £170, Sirikul £100, Wakkan £50, and
Hunza £60 in Yambus (silver blocks of the value of £17).

[112] _Times_, 5th December, 1892.

[113] _Asiatic Quarterly Review_, January, 1891.

[114] Burns, in his travels to Bukhárá, points out the locality of the
province of Koláb in the south of the Amu (Oxus), and calls it by the
name of Gawalan, which I think is a corruption of Khatlan; but Najmuddin
asserts with certainty that it is situated on the northern bank and
is a part of Ma-vara-un-nahr (the country on that side of the river)
(Transoxiana). Najmuddin is No. 2 of the group at the beginning of this
paper.

[115] This river is formed by three tributaries (1) coming from Sarghalan
(has a mine of rubies); (2) from Wardùj (sulphur mines); (3) ‎‏یمغان‏‎
Yamghan (iron mine). It flows through the territory of Badakhshan, and
joins the Amu.

[116] See also “Comparative Table” at the end of this Appendix, and
the “Anthropological Photograph” facing this page. Read also page 1 of
Appendix IV. “The Races of the Hindukush,” opposite to Drawing 1 of that
Appendix, on which look for Nos. 1, 6, and 9.

[117] Matavalli, and a new man, Mîr Abdullah of Gabriál (column F of
subjoined Comparative Table), were also measured at Lahore on the 23rd
March, 1886, with the following results that may be added to the above
measurements or may be compared with those in the “Comparative Table,”
respectively columns A and F, (_Matavalli_ and _Mîr Abdullah_).

I. Head: Greatest breadth, A, 14·3—F, 14·1.
Greatest length from glabella to the back of the head, A,
18·8—F, 18·6.
Greatest length from root of nose to the back of the head,
A, 19·6—F, 19·1.
Height of ear, A, 11·2—F, 11·9. Breadth of forehead, A,
10·6—F, 10·7.
Height of face (_a_), chin to edge of hair, A, 18·4—F, 19·1.
Height of face (_b_), root of nose to chin, A, 12·7—F, 12·1.
Middle face, root of nose to mouth. A, 8·1—F, 7·6.
Breadth of face, zygomatic arch, A, 13·8—F, 13·6.
Distance of the inner angles of eyes, A, 3·4—F, 3·4.
Distance of the outer angles of eyes, A, 9·2—F, 8·8.
Nose: Height, A, 5·1—F, 5·8; Length, A, 5·3—F, 5·9; Breadth,
A, 3·9—F, 3·5.
Mouth: Length, A, 5·4—F, 5·3.
Ear: Height, A, 6·1—F, 6·3; distance from ear-hole to root
of nose, A, 12·1—F, 12·1.
Horizontal circumference of head, A, 55—F, 53.

II. Body: Entire height, A, 165·7 centim.—F, 166.
Greatest extension of arms, A, 166·5—F, 165. !!
Height: chin, A, 142—F, 143. Height to navel, A, 96·5—F, 99.
” shoulder, A, 138—F, 138. ” middle finger, A, 73—F,
71·5.
” elbows, A, 104—F, 105. ” patella, A, 45—F, 44·5.
” wrist, A, 78—F, 80.
Height in sitting, to top of head (over the seat), A, 88—F, 85.
Breadth of shoulder, A, 43—F, 36.
Circumference of chest, A, 87—F, 81.
Hand: length middle finger, A, 8—F, 7·5; breadth, base of four
fingers, A, 10—F, 7·5.
Foot: length, A, 26—F, 25·5; breadth, A, 11—F, 8·25.
Circumference of upper leg, A, 46—F, 42·5.
Circumference of calf, A, 34—F, 32.

[118] For additional measurements, see page 2. He is No. 6 of Drawing 1
of Appendix IV.

[119] Mîr Abdullah is No. 7 of Drawing 1, and No. 2 of Drawing 2, of
Appendix IV. For additional measurements, see page 2.

[120] I was obliged to get myself measured in order to encourage the
Dards and Kafirs to allow themselves to be subjected to a process so
unintelligible to them. At the same time, their comparison with an
European may have some interest. His brachycephalic Cranial Index
81·44 may be compared with those of dolichocephalic Matavalli 73·84,
mesocephalic Khudáyár 78·7, mesocephalic Ghulám Muhammad 77·4,
mesocephalic Ghulám 77, the exquisitely dolichocephalic Abdullah 72·53
and dolichocephalic Mîr Abdullah 73·82, which give an average of 75·55.
The European’s circumference of head, 60 centimetres, may also be
compared with Abdul Ghafûr’s, 53·7½; Khudayâr’s, 52·5; Ibrahîm’s, 56·5;
Matavalli’s, 54; Sultan Ali’s, 53·75; Khudádad’s and Hatamu’s, 54·4; and
Ghulam Mahammad’s, 54; which give the circumference of the heads of the
eight Dards and Kafirs on the first page. This Table supplies further
details regarding three of them, and adds the measurements of three other
Dards (Ghulám, Abdullah, and Mîr Abdullah), so that in all, including
Jamshêd, the measurements of twelve Dards or Kafirs have been preserved.
Those taken by Dr. Neill have been lost. Notice also the fine formation
of the head and the amplitude of the frontal region of the Dareyli
herdsman, on the drawing opposite to page 76 of the text of this Volume.

[121] There were also weighed the Kamôzi Káfir Abdulghafûr, age 23 or 24,
weighing 10 st. 2¾ lb.; and the following Nagyris: Ibrahim Rôno, 34 years
old, 10 st. 12 lb.; Sultàn Ali, 35 years old, 9 st. 12 lb.; and the boy
Hatamu, 16 years old, and weighing 7 st. 13 lb.

[122] The numbers refer to the tables published by Broca, Topinard and
Hamy.

[123] The following extra measurements were given:—Height to auricular
meatus, 158; to acromion, 142; to epicondyle, 106; styloid apophysis of
the radius, 82; to the end of middle finger, 64.

[124] A kôs is a measurement of distance varying from 1 to 2½ miles, and
often depending on the speaker’s impression due to hardships encountered
or to other causes. “Katsha” and “pakka,” for “rough, unfinished,” and
“thorough” respectively, are terms well known to Anglo-Indians. “Katsha”
and “pakka” are generally spelt “kucha” and “pucka.”

[125] Or about 20 miles. The reader should notice that such abbreviations
as “14 kôs, plain” mean that “the distance is 14 kôs over generally a
plain or easy ground”; “h” stands for houses.

[126] Or British-Indian Rupees.

[127] It is superfluous to inform readers of this Review that the
Persians are Shiah, and the Turks Sunni, Muhammadans. Most of the Indian
Muhammadans are Sunnis.

[128] Many words denoting proximity, become honorifics, such as “Sherîf”
(Shereef), “Hazrat,” “Jenáb,” etc. “Khalîfah” is one who succeeds, or
follows, or is a deputy. Strictly speaking, this title refers to the
Sultan of Turkey as the successor of the Prophet Muhammad in the temporal
headship of the Sunnis, but even the successor of the heretical Mahdi in
the Sudán calls himself “Khalifa.”

[129] The “Sherîfs” or “Shereefs,” in a special, princely or official
sense, are lineal descendants of Muhammad through his daughter Fatima
who was married to A’li, and have, perhaps, even a higher claim to the
respect of the Faithful, than ordinary descendants or “Sayads.” The Grand
Shereef of Mecca, the Shereefian dynasty of Morocco, the Shereef of
Wazan, who also bears the title, like the Emperor of Morocco, of “Muláy,”
or “Maulái,” show the great extent of the “House of A’li.”

[130] Among these Pîrs each Mulái chooses his own, of course, _under_ the
supreme headship of Agha Khan.

[131] Who has been accused of instigating the “Old Man of the Mountain”
to send his emissaries to murder Conrad of Montferrat, titular King of
Jerusalem. The Ismailian “Assassins” are also accused of an attempt to
murder Prince Edward of England at Acre.

[132] Whom I took to England and whose name, curiously enough, was
“Matav_ali_,” which is also a derivative of “vali.”

[133] Also, “Does it rise in the direction of heavens, or is its descent
in vegetation?” [taking “Hásil” = obtaining for “Mehásil” = vegetation],
reproduction (?)

[134] Also, “Or in the form of Man how does it again rotate into being
born an Adamite?” or, “Why is man created in the form of a human being?”

[135] Also, “Nay, but the perfect man, the seemly, the all-perfect wins
the prize.”

[136] These words are so badly written that they may also be read as, “O,
thou that waitest not for wisdom.”

[137] “Degol is the first village of Zebák ... which is ruled by Shah
Abdur-Rahim, a Sayad of the Shiah sect, worshipped by all the Shiahs
of Kashkar, (Chitrál), Yarkand, and Khokand. They also worship Shah
Bombáy, Shah Madkasan, who is learned, good-natured, and friendly
to travellers.... The people give a tenth of their income to their
preceptors; if one has ten children, he consecrates one to Shah
Abdur-Rahim.... The inhabitants are strong and hardy; the women do not
cover their faces from strangers. Although Shiahs, they have no mosques
and repeat no prayers. Abdur-Rahim has one in his village, where _he_
prays. Every morning at _Chasht_ (the middle hour between sunrise and
noon) he sits in the assembly and distributes breads of wheat among the
members, followed by the servants handing round tea in porcelain cups
in which each one soaks his bread, and, after eating it, lifts his hand
to bless the giver, a custom also followed by the nobles on entering
the assembly. If Shah Abdur-Rahim addresses any of them, he rises from
his seat and answers as if he were reading a _ruka’t_ at the time of
praying, and then returns to his place, and sits on his knees, for to sit
otherwise is reckoned a sin amongst these men.” In other words, the only
worship of the prayerless Muláis is to their Pîr, to whom they address
the _ruka’t_ given by real Muhammadans in prayers to God [bowing, whilst
standing, with hands resting on the knees].

[138] The Druses are divided into “Juhelá” = “uninitiated,” or the Laity,
and “U’qalá” = the “initiated.”

[139] It should be noticed that this apotheosis of “Al-Hákim,” the
mad Fatimite Khalifa of Cairo (A.D. 996-1020), who was the head and
originator of the special Ismailian sect, which became subsequently
known to the Crusaders under the name of the “Assassins”—a corruption of
“Hashishin,” or drinkers of Hashish (_Canabis Indica_)—commences with
titles of governorship or Age which would seem (to the uninitiated) to be
compatible with his subordination to the Deity, although, for practical
purposes, Al-Hákim is the “ruler of this world,” whether for good or
for evil. He is, therefore, the Prince of this world, if not Apollyon,
and the fact that the words “Valî” = a deputed governor or “Hákim” = a
governor, may cause him to be confounded with either an ordinary ruler,
or be merely ringing the changes on his own name of “Al-Hákim,” it is
clear, at any rate to the initiated, that the only Deity worth caring for
is thereby meant, and that he began with the Khalifa Al-Hákim, who lives
for ever. In the titles “Maula” and “Valî” there is also an allusion to
A’li, who is “next to God,” and from whom Al-Hákim was descended. The
Mauláis or Muláis of the Hindukush use similar titles for their spiritual
head, whether dead, or continuing in his lineal descendant, Agha Khan of
Bombay. The “Kelám-i-Pîr,” or “the Logos or word of the Pîr or ancient
sage,” mainly refers to the sayings attributed to the “Sheikh-ul-Jabl,”
or “Old Man of the Mountain.” In Hunza itself, the Muláis equally address
their practical Deity as “The Ancient of the Age,” or “Pîr-uz-Zamán.”

[140] The contract is thus repeated from a written document.

[141] Many Shiahs call A’li “the light” of God.

[142] There are _five_ books of the _Sheikh-ul-A’ql_, “or old man of
the intelligence,” or of the “initiated,” and also apparently a book of
investigation and of the unity of the Godhead for the “initiated of the
retirement” = “U’qala al Khalwat.” There are _five_ “Maulas” or Mulas of
“the initiated,” which I take to be the names of five books, namely: (1)
the Mula of the A’ql, or Mind, or of the body-corporate of the “U’qalá”
or “the initiated”; (2) the Mula of the Nafs, or Breath; (3) the Mula
of the Zeman, or the Age; (4) the Mula of the Kalima, or the Word; (5)
the Mula of Al-Hákim, or the founder of the sect. Numbers 3 and 4 are
probably the Kelám-i-Pîr and other dicta of the Mulais of the Hindukush,
to which I have already referred.

[143] This holy roll among extreme Shiahs has _five_ names, namely, God,
Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Husain, which positively excludes the prophet
Muhammad, but includes his son-in-law (Ali), his daughter, Fatima, and
the martyred grandsons of Ali, namely Hasan and Husain. As a rule,
however, the ordinary orthodox “Panjtan” among Shiahs (and even in
some Sunni Mosque inscriptions) are: “Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hasan and
Husain.” “Panjtan” means “the five (holy) bodies.”

[144] There are _five_ main sects among the Shiahs, or, rather,
“Adelias,” or advocates of “the rightful” and hereditary succession to
the Apostleship of Muhammad, in opposition to the elective principle by
the _consensus fidelium_ of the Sunnis. The two sects that now concern us
are the African Ismailians, and the Ismailians of the Lebanon and of the
Hindukush. The number of Shiah sects is estimated variously from 3 to 72.

[145] I use the word “Mulái” to include not only the virtuous Druses
with their self-denying “initiated” or “_U’qelá_” leaders, but also the
Ismailians generally, whether religious or not, (as in impious Hunza) and
of whatever degree of conformity or scepticism. As a rule, an ordinary
Mulái will outwardly practise Sunni rites and hold Shiah doctrines.

[146] In discussion, whenever expedient, with a Brahmin, or even
Buddhist, the belief in a modified metempsychosis would form a bond of
sympathy (see last A. Q. R.), whilst the survival “of the most adapted,”
rather than that of “the best,”—without, however, the loss of any
individual or type,—would be connected with the notion of a certain fixed
number of souls in evolution from “the beginning” and ever recurrent in
living form. “The beginning,” however, would be a mere term applying
to this or that revealed condition, for behind what may be called “the
terrestrial gods,” behind Allah in whatever form, Deity or Deities,
there was The BEING that existed without a beginning and whose first
manifestation was the “Word” with its Replica as the type of the apostle
and his fellow that ever succeeded itself throughout the generations of
this world. If the visible Deity, preferring to show itself in human,
rather than any other, form, is incorporated in the lineal descendant
of the 7th Imám, it is, apparently, because humanity requires such
an unbroken link in order to convert into certainty its hope of the
deliverer, the Messiah, the Mahdi, the second [advent of] Jesus, who will
similarly be the Deity in the shape of a man, reconciling the various
expectations of all religions in one manifestation. That few, if any,
Muláis, or even the most “initiated” Druses, should know _every_ variety
of their belief, is natural, not only in consequence of varying degrees
of mental ability and of corresponding “initiation,” but also because of
varied historical or national surroundings, circumstances which underlie
the guiding principle of all Mulái belief and practice. I venture to
indicate, _as purely my personal impression_, that this principle, which
need not be further explained in this place, is the real secret of that
faith. In my humble opinion, the _disjecta membra_, so to speak, of that
faith form, if reconstituted, an embodiment of the religious thought of
the World that seeks to reconcile all differences in one Philosophy and
in one Policy.

[147] In the interior of Arabia, Mr. W. B. Harris has come across a
curious sect that may be connected with a section of the Kerámis or
Keramátis, sects that gave much trouble in Syria in the 10th century,
or, more probably, with an extreme and, probably, disavowed heterodox
sub-sect of the Ismailians. It may be interesting to quote the
correspondence that has taken place between us on the subject:

Tangier, _April 5, 1893_.

“During my journey through the Yemen last year I came across
a sect of people calling themselves _Makarama_, of whom I was
able to learn little, on account of their own reticence and the
apparent want of interest of their Moslem neighbours. However,
one of their number gave me a couple of lines of Arabic poetry,
which translated, run:

“God is unknown—by day or by night.
Why trouble about him, there is no heaven and no hell.”

All that I could find out about them in addition to this is
that they hold an annual nightly feast with closed doors and
lights in the windows, in which they are said to practise
incest; and that they annually practise the form of driving a
scapegoat into the mountains. The latter is clearly Judaic and
the former custom savours of the Karmathians, but this seems
improbable as the people are not Moslems. They are visited, it
is said, by certain Indians who prize the charms written by
these Yemenis. Beyond this I was able to discover nothing.

I have no valuable books of reference as to religions here,
but if I remember aright there were Phœnician rites resembling
this. Could it have anything to do with the Sabeans? I should
be so grateful to you if you could let me know, when you have
time, what you think about it. I can find no reference to them
in any work on the Yemen. The name of the sect is, I suppose,
of Persian origin.

WALTER B. HARRIS.

[REPLY.]

Vichy, _April 14, 1893_.

I, too, am not here within the reach of books of reference. I
will, however, try to suggest what occurs to me on the spur of
the moment in the hope that it may possibly be of some slight
use in your enquiries. It is very important, first of all,
to learn how “Makarama” is spelt by the Yemen people in the
Arabic character, and especially whether the “k” is a “kef” or
a “qaf” ‎‏ق ‏‎. Then the lines you quote should be sent to me
in the original Arabic dialect and character (not the Maghrebi
form, of course) and transliterated in Roman characters[*] _as
you heard them_, for a good deal depends, _inter alia_, on the
Arabic equivalents, used by “the Makarama” of “God,” “heaven,”
and “hell.” ... The sentiment of the translation is the _Mulái_
of Hunza, about whom I have written in the last _Asiatic
Quarterly Review_....

How do you know that the people are _not_ Moslems? That their
orthodox Muhammadan neighbours do not admit them to be such,
is not conclusive, for I have heard rigid Sunnis even exclude
Shiahs from that appellation. If you could remember the _exact_
question which you put on that subject to your Mukarama friends
and their precise reply, it might help to a conclusion.

Driving a scapegoat into the mountains is a common practice
among the Afghans, who call themselves “Beni Israel” (not to be
confounded with the _Jews_ properly so called—their “Musáis” or
“Yahûdis”). The other rites you speak of _were alleged_ against
the Karmathians and the Yazîdis _are_ accused of them. Have you
thought of the Yazîdis? The accusation of incestuous gatherings
is, as you know, constantly brought by “the orthodox” against
sectarians and I would not, in your place, give up the
conjecture of a Karmathian origin of the “Makarama,” before
you have gone further into the matter. Please, therefore, to
remember _all you can_ about your friends and, if I can, I
shall aid your enquiry to the best of my ability. I think you
are right about the Phœnician rites and the Sabean conjecture.

I do not think that “Makarama” is of Persian origin. Is
it possibly “_Mu_karama” or “_Mu_karrima”? If so, this
would be an appropriate title for a specially “blessed” or
enlightened sect. Why do you call them a “_sect_”? Are they
also ethnographically distinct from their neighbours and what
are their occupations? Could you get me a copy of one of
their _charms_? Their being visited by certain Indians would
rather show their Ismailian connexion than that they are not a
heretical Muhammadan sect. Indeed, among the Ismailian sects
mentioned by Makrizi as having spread in Yemen, among other
countries, are “the _Kerámis_, _Karmátis_, Khárijis, etc.,”
“all of whom studied philosophy and chose what suited them.” I
really think these are your “Makaráma.”

G. W. LEITNER.

[*] I think “romanizing” the Oriental characters a great
mistake, except “to make assurance doubly sure.” The _Arabic_
spelling would at once limit conjectures and lead to a solution.

[148] We trust to be able to publish in our next issue the history of his
family since 622 A.D. as also his photograph and those of his father and
grandfather, the latter of whom tendered great services to our Government
in Sind and Kandahar.—ED.

[149] Being a report of an extempore address delivered before the
Victoria Institute.

Transcriber’s Note:

This book is a collection of papers written at different times, and not
edited with any consistency. Spelling and accents vary considerably.
The text has been preserved as printed apart from minor repairs to
punctuation and the following changes to correct near-certain errors.

Introduction, page 1: “acccurate” changed to “accurate” (one of
the most accurate codes)

Main text, page 12: “Arzu” changed to “Azru” (‘Refuse food,’
said Azru)

Main text, page 40: “porbably” changed to “probably” (in Astor
(probably Vigne))

Main text, page 78: “Seapoys” changed to “Sepoys” (in 1866
_six_ Kashmir Sepoys)

Main text, page 89: “aud” changed to “and” (Shahbaz, also
called “Osmin,” and Uzet Shah)

Main text, page 99: redundant word “in” removed (lost 400 young
men [in] killed)

Main text, page 101: “Dumnu-dummu” changed to “Dummu-dummu”
(Yatshotsh below Dummu-dummu on the Gilgit side)

Main text, page 111: “Islamin” changed to “Islam in” (the
introduction of the religion of Islam in to Gilgit)

Appendix I, page 22: “Naygr” changed to “Nagyr” (As for Nagyr,
the case was quite different)

Appendix IV, page 1: “Kerbalá” changed to “Kerbelá” (sent to
Kerbelá a year ago)

Appendix IV, page 14: “wár” changed to “war” (war, _kali_.)

Appendix VI, page 8: “Pigisth” changed to “Pigitsh” (Kazi-deh
to Pigitsh 12 kôs)

Appendix VIII, page 5: “arbitary” changed to “arbitrary” (The
meaning is nothing so arbitrary.)

Illustration 15: “gNayari” changed to “Nagyri” (No. 4. Nagyri)

Footnote 38: “make” changed to “makes” (the Indus river makes a
sudden turn)

Footnote 129: “Marocco” changed to “Morocco” (like the Emperor
of Morocco)

*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Dardistan in 1866, 1886 and 1893" ***

Home