Chapter VIII: Introduction: (juin, 1893.) (3)

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)._

MATAVALLI, the first Hunza man who came to Europe.

SOME BURISHKIS FROM YASIN separating the Hunza and Nagyri Warriors.

SAYAD ALI, OF NAGYR.]