The Life of Yakoob Beg; Athalik Ghazi, and Badaulet; Ameer of Kashgar

During the winter of 1876, when he was busy in collecting arms, ammunition, and stores at Yarkand and Kashgar, he must have discovered many of these discordant elements; yet he pushed his preparations resolutely on. He conceived that under the circumstances the boldest policy would be the most prudent, and that if he could but beat the Chinese in the field by superior tactics he might ride triumphant over all his difficulties and dangers. With these views uppermost in his mind he concentrated all his forces, Tungan included, along the southern slopes of the Tian Shan, with his headquarters at Turfan. The Russian officer, Captain Kuropatkine, who had been sent to Kashgar on a mission, and who had journeyed through the whole extent of Kashgaria to meet the Ameer at Turfan, computed Yakoob Beg's army at the following strength, and supplied the accompanying information concerning its disposition along the frontier.

The fort of Devanchi, guarding the principal defile through the mountain range, was garrisoned by 900 jigits, armed with muskets and two guns – one a breech-loader. At Turfan there were with the Ameer 3,500 jigits and 5,000 sarbazes, with 20 guns, mostly of ancient make. Toksoun, a fortified place, some miles nearer Korla, on the main road, was occupied by 4,000 jigits and 2,000 sarbazes with five guns. Hacc Kuli Beg had command here. At Korla there were also about 1,500 men, who were brought up to the front shortly after Captain Kuropatkine's departure. With these 17,000 men, scattered over a widely extended area, Yakoob Beg had to defend himself against an enemy superior in numbers, and, as the result showed, in generalship as well.

The Russian officer gave, on his return, a very gloomy account of Yakoob Beg's affairs, predicting the speedy disintegration of his state. He also asserted that the Tungani were deserting in great numbers, and that everywhere east of Kucha there was discontent and distrust of the Kashgarian rulers. This disparaging account was confirmed by Colonel Prjevalsky, some months afterwards, upon his return from his adventurous journey to Lob Nor. In a letter, dated from Little Yuldus, May 28, 1877, he said he had been very kindly received, but also suspiciously watched by Yakoob Beg. "All the way from Hoidu Got to Lob Nor he was escorted by a guard of honour, who officiously endeavoured to satisfy his smallest wishes, but would not allow him, or any of his people, to come in contact with the inhabitants. Yakoob Beg somewhat peremptorily asked Colonel Prjevalsky to explain why the Russians had provisioned the Chinese forces arrayed against him; but, in an interview at Korla, he again and again assured the Russian traveller that he was a friend and well-wisher to Russia. Notwithstanding these precautions, Colonel Prjevalsky and the other members of the expedition succeeded in making the natives tell them that they were disgusted with the military despotism of Yakoob Beg, and that they hoped the Russians would soon be coming."

The information contained in this letter refers to the end of April, 1877, or to a time after the first defeat of Yakoob Beg by the Chinese, and his withdrawal to Korla; but it is à propos in this place as confirming Captain Kuropatkine's remarks.

In addition to the 17,000, more or less, disciplined soldiers whom Yakoob Beg had mustered at the frontier, Captain Kuropatkine mentioned 10,000 Doungans – that is, the Tungani inhabitants of this eastern region. Not only were these notoriously untrustworthy, but they were also badly armed, and were, on the whole, a source of weakness rather than of strength. Before the close of the month of February the Athalik Ghazi was at Turfan, constructing forts at Toksoun and towards the Tian Shan, and endeavouring to inspire his followers with his own indomitable spirit.

In the meanwhile the Chinese had not been idle. They had, after their triumph over the Tungani, established their headquarters at Guchen, near Urumtsi, and had so far secured their communications with Kansuh that a regular service of couriers was organized, and a continual supply of arms, military stores, and men flowed across Gobi to the invading army. For instance, a large arsenal for the storage of arms was erected at Lanchefoo, and on one occasion as many as 10,000 rifles of the Berdan pattern were sent in a single convoy. While Tso Tsung Tang, the Viceroy of Kansuh and Commander-in-Chief, was making these preparations north of the Tian Shan, for forcing the range with the melting of the snow, another Chinese general, Chang Yao, was stationed at Hamil for the purpose of seconding the main attack by a diversion south of the range. In estimating the total number of the Chinese army at 60,000 men – that is, 50,000 round Guchen and 10,000 at Hamil – we would express only what is probable. The total number may have been more or less, but in estimating it at 60,000 men we believe we are as close to exactitude as is possible under the circumstances. In the month of March the Chinese generals had made all their preparations for attacking Yakoob Beg. So far as our geographical information goes there is no direct road from Guchen to Turfan, and consequently the chief Chinese attack was made from Urumtsi against Devanchi, where Yakoob Beg had constructed a fort. But, although the larger army was manœuvring north of the Tian Shan, the decisive blow was in reality struck by the smaller force advancing from Hamil. If we are to judge from the disposition of the Kashgarian army, the movements of this brigade had not obtained that attention from the Athalik Ghazi which they merited.

General Chang Yao captured the small towns of Chightam and Pidjam in the middle of April without encountering any serious opposition. And from the latter of these places, some fifty miles east of Turfan, commenced that concerted movement with his superior, Tso Tsung Tang, which was to overcome all Kashgarian resistance. A glance at the map will show that Yakoob Beg at Turfan was caught fairly between two fires by armies advancing from Urumtsi and Pidjam, and if defeated his line of retreat was greatly exposed to an enterprising enemy. Upon the Chinese becoming aware of the success of their preliminary movements a general advance was ordered in all directions. It is evident that the Chinese were met at first with a strenuous resistance at Devanchi, and that the forcing of the Tian Shan defiles had not been accomplished when news reached the garrison that their ruler had been expelled from Turfan by a fresh Chinese army. It was then that confusion spread fast through all ranks of the followers of Yakoob Beg; in that hour of doubt and unreasoning panic the majority of his soldiers either went over to the enemy or fled in headlong flight to Karashar. In this moment of desperation the Athalik Ghazi still bore himself like a good soldier. Outside Turfan he gave battle to the invader, and though driven from the field by overwhelming odds he yet once more made a stand at Toksoun, forty miles west of Turfan, and when a second time defeated withdrew to Karashar to make fresh efforts to withstand the invading army. Yakoob Beg probably lost in these engagements not less than 20,000 men, including Tungani, by desertion and at the hands of the enemy. He consequently conceived that it would be prudent to withdraw still farther into his territory, and accordingly left Karashar, after a few days' residence, for Korla.

Some weeks before the occurrence of these striking events Yakoob Beg had sent an envoy to Tashkent to solicit the aid of the Russians against the advancing Chinese. But the Russians only gave his messenger fair words, and did not interfere with Mr. Kamensky's commercial transactions with the Chinese army. At the moment, too, Russia was so busily occupied in Europe that she had no leisure to devote to the Kashgarian question.

The Chinese had for many years been good friends with Russia, and Yakoob Beg had all his life been a scarcely concealed enemy. Between two such combatants the sympathies of the Russian government must at first have certainly gone with the former; nor had Yakoob Beg's attitude towards Russia of late been as discreet as it might have been. His nephew, the Seyyid Yakoob Khan, was notoriously an agent for some indefinite purpose at Constantinople. His protection of the Bokharan prince, Abdul Melik, or Katti Torah, the most bitter enemy of Russia in Central Asia, was also ill calculated to attract Russian sympathy to his side.

Moreover there was little or nothing to arouse Russian susceptibilities in Chinese victories so far distant as Urumtsi or Turfan. In many respects, too, this Chinese invasion was a relief for Russia. It freed her hands in Central Asia in a manner that perhaps will never be sufficiently appreciated. Buddhist victories in Eastern Turkestan struck a severe blow at Mahomedan vigour throughout the Khanates, and the waning prestige of the Badaulet, or the "fortunate one," acted as a warning of strange significance to all the neighbouring princes.

It is not difficult, therefore, to discover valid reasons why the Russians declined to negotiate between the combatants, and although Yakoob Beg endeavoured to come to terms with the Chinese, on the understanding that his personal safety should be guaranteed, all his diplomatic overtures were met by categorical refusals.

The Chinese after entering Toksoun came to a sudden halt, for which the causes are not evident. But the terror of their name had gone before them, and the country east of Karashar was hurriedly abandoned by its inhabitants. The Chinese delay may have been caused by the necessity for collecting provisions to enable them to advance further, or perhaps it may have arisen from the outbreak of some epidemic, as asserted by one of the Indian journals. On this point the Pekin Gazette is profoundly silent. The number for the 23rd of June contained a narrative of the operations round Turfan, and also a list of the honours and rewards given to the successful generals; but it and its subsequent issues are silent as to the causes for the Chinese inactivity that then for many months ensued. The most striking sentence in this report is that which says that "the Mahomedans who submitted themselves were permitted to revert to their peaceful avocations;" and if this be true, this is one instance, at all events, of the Chinese exercising moderation. Strange as it may seem, with this preliminary success the vigour of the Chinese invasion appeared to die away, and for five months nothing more was heard of the whereabouts of the Chinese army. In that interval the most important events occurred in Kashgaria, but with these, the Chinese, although the originators of them, had nothing to do. In the closing scene of all of the eventful life we have been in these pages considering the invading Khitay had no part. They were probably not aware of what was taking place some 300 miles from their camp until many weeks after it had happened; and then conceived that their best policy would be to give time for the disintegrating causes at work within the state to have their full effect before they advanced westward. When Colonel Prjevalsky saw Yakoob Beg it must have been within a very short period of his death. The shadow of approaching events may have been upon the defeated conqueror, who from recent disaster could only presage worse yet to come.

Of the exact manner of Yakoob Beg's death there are various accounts. The most probable is that he was murdered by a party of conspirators, who were led by Hakim Khan Torah. The date given is the 1st of May. That Yakoob Beg should meet with a violent death, considering that he was surrounded by such doubtful followers as the Tungan chiefs, is not to be marvelled at, and that the first reverse in his career should be the signal for fresh disturbances is only what we should expect from a consideration of his country and its peoples in the light of past history. So far, then, as the assertion goes, that Yakoob Beg was murdered, there is nothing improbable about it. But there are many discrepancies in the accompanying narrative. The first intelligence of the death of the Ameer of Kashgar was contained in a telegram published in the Times of July 16 last year. It stated that his death occurred at Korla, after a short illness, and that he had nominated as his successor Hakim Khan Torah, to the express disregard of his own sons. The telegram went on to say that Hakim Khan had declined to accept the gift, and that the Ameer's eldest son, Beg Kuli Beg, had succeeded to the throne. A few days after this telegram Hakim Khan Torah was identified with the ancient dynasty of Kashgar, which Yakoob Beg had first seated on the throne, and then displaced in the person of Buzurg Khan. All this intelligence came from Tashkent. On the 23rd of July we learnt in this country, from the same source, that Beg Kuli Beg had notified his father's death and his own accession to the throne to General Kaufmann. There no longer remained any doubt that Yakoob Beg was really dead.

For some reason or other Beg Kuli Beg does not appear to have been a favourite with the Russians; but this aversion to him was based on some mistake, for Beg Kuli Beg was certainly unfriendly to England, and was scarcely civil to our envoy, Sir Douglas Forsyth. Moreover, he at once placed himself in communication with the Russian government, asking for advice as to the course he should pursue with regard to the Chinese invasion, and renewing his father's request that Russia should stop the supplies sent to Urumtsi and Turfan from Kuldja. It was reported, but not confirmed, that his latter demand was complied with.

Nothing more was heard of the history of these events until the end of August, when news reached India through Ladakh and Cashmere that Yakoob Beg "had been assassinated by Hakim Khan Torah, the son of Buzurg Khan." This was the first hint that Yakoob Beg had fallen by the hands of discontented partisans. In itself so natural, it threw fresh light on the strange deed he was reported to have done of disinheriting his own family, and it speedily became the accepted version. The question then was, who was Hakim Khan Torah? Two versions were put forward; one was that he was the son of Buzurg Khan, the other that he was a Khoja chief of Kucha. The former was the more plausible, but as his name does not occur in Sir Douglas Forsyth's exhaustive report, it is open to some objection, more particularly when we are told that he bore a principal part in the conquest of Kashgar by Yakoob Beg. The latter suggestion was much more difficult to prove, but was not open to the same objection. Grant that Hakim, or Aali, Khan Torah was a pardoned Kucha chief when that city fell into the hands of the Athalik Ghazi, and there was nothing extraordinary in his having proved a traitor. Assume that he still conceived he had claims upon the governorship of that city, of which the Turkestan Gazette asserts he had been Dadkwah, and there is nothing inconsistent in his having sought to realize his own ambitious schemes the moment fortune frowned upon his conqueror. That Hakim Khan, if son to Buzurg Khan, should seek to revenge his father's deposition and life of exile is not in itself strange we admit; but if he were a subjected ruler, who regarded Yakoob Beg as an adventurer from Khokand with no claims to his fealty, his plot against and murder of the Kashgarian prince at once appears not only possible, but the true story. As a leading Khoja of Kucha he would also have claims to represent one branch of the old reigning family of Kashgar. In the face, too, of a great and pressing danger from the Chinese, his hereditary enemies, a son of Buzurg Khan would scarcely make confusion worse confounded by murdering the de facto sovereign; whereas a Kucha leader might aspire to play in such a crisis the same part that Amursana did in the last century. It was said that Hakim Khan entered into some negotiations with the Chinese, who gave him little encouragement.

The Turkestan Gazette still adhered to its original statement that Yakoob Beg had died of fever on the 1st of May, after an illness of seven days' duration, and that on the 13th of May the body was brought in state from Korla to Kashgar for the purpose of being deposited in the mausoleum of Appak Khoja. Then, according to the Turkestan Gazette, there ensued one of those atrocious deeds which have so often marked the history of Central Asian states. The second son of the dead Ameer, Hacc Kuli Beg, who had been with him during his last moments, escorted the funeral cortége, and was met at a short distance from the city by his elder brother, Kuli Beg. The elder son at once knelt before his father's coffin, and then rising, without a moment's delay fired a pistol at his brother, who dropped down dead. Not content with this fratricide, Kuli Beg had the whole of the escort put to the sword, and returned to Kashgar with his own followers escorting the coffin. We know nothing whatever of the reasons for this atrocious act, but the fact of Kuli Beg being in Kashgar, and not in the east, shows how Hakim Khan was able to establish his authority in Kucha and Korla. It will be more convenient to consider in another chapter the further course of these internal troubles, and also the final triumph of the Chinese.

There are, therefore, two versions of how Yakoob Beg met his death, and in support of each view there is a certain amount of evidence. All the information on the subject has been recorded, and it is conflicting. The Chinese reports in the Pekin Gazette ignore the subject altogether. Their personal hatred was directed more against Bayen Hu, a Tungan leader who had fled from Hamil some years before, than against the Athalik Ghazi. Of the main fact that Yakoob Beg died at Korla in May, 1877, there is no doubt, and that the most eventful career that has marked its track in the history of Central Asia for several generations was then brought to a close.

Whatever opinion may be formed of the man from his varied fortunes, there will be few who will deny that he possessed great mental qualities; some will be found, no doubt, to question his action in deposing Buzurg Khan, and with more justice may his earlier life be blamed for his repeated desertion of his friend and patron Khudayar. Others will call to mind his vacillating conduct in 1875, and deny that he possessed that decision of character which is the salient feature in all truly great men. His unnecessary wars with the Tungani, and the short-sighted policy he pursued of extending his empire up to the vicinity of China, were also calculated to lower his claims to be considered a general or a statesman. In extenuation of these acts, which decidedly undermined the fabric of his rule, it may be mentioned that there is one side of Yakoob Beg's character that has never received sufficient attention. It is what was the secret to his foreign policy. He certainly did not aspire, as many thought, to contest unaided the palm of superiority with Russia in Central Asia. He was far too well informed to dream of that. Nor could he expect to be able to extend his power to the south, where both Afghanistan and Cashmere would resent his presence. The only option left to him as a conqueror was to continue aggrandizing himself at the expense of China. We know not what dreams may have entered the mind of the stanch Mussulman in his palace at Kashgar of uniting in one crusade against China all the followers of the Prophet in Central Asia and of emulating the deeds of some of his predecessors who had carried fire and sword into the border provinces of China, and whom even the Great Wall could not withstand. Over these bright imaginings, arising from tales told of the decadence of China, we know not how much Yakoob Beg may have brooded as he saw his power spread eastward through fifteen degrees of longitude, through Aksu to Kucha, Kucha to Korla, Korla to Karashar, and Karashar to Turfan, until from his far outpost at Chightam he could almost see the rich cities of Hamil and Barkul, cities which are the key to Western China and Northern Tibet, and imagine them to be within his grasp. But the policy of Yakoob Beg will not be clearly appreciated, unless we bear in mind that these ambitious longings were held in check by fear of Russia, and by the hostility of the Tungani, who continued to plot even when subdued. His keen spirit must have chafed greatly under the inability to accomplish that which he conceived to be possible, and despite his numerous triumphs he was at heart a disappointed man.

Moreover, during these later years, when the task he had set before him had been nearly accomplished, and he had leisure to look around, he was no longer young or as energetic as he had been. He was entering, for an Asiatic, upon the evening of life, and had no longer the physical power to essay any protracted and desperate enterprise. For a "forlorn hope" he was as eager and as effective as ever, but for those undertakings which require not only desperate courage but also forethought and patience he was no longer fit. But the Chinese invasion dispelled all these, and many other illusions. In their eyes and before their power, he was only another Sultan of Talifoo. His great qualities, which attracted sympathy and a certain amount of respect, in India and England were vain in the eyes of a people whose "empire has," in their own tongue, "been planted by heaven." Before Chinese viceroys and Mantchoo chivalry Khokandian soldiers and Mussulman pride must be held vain. So thought the Chinese, if they thought upon the subject at all. And so must we think who view past history by the aid of Yakoob Beg's overthrow. Yakoob Beg's rule in Kashgar was for twelve years a visible fact; it was recognized by England and by Russia. The Central Asian Khans gladly acknowledged the admission of another to their fast dwindling ranks. Even Shere Ali, an ostensibly powerful ruler, honoured Yakoob Beg not so much with his friendship as with his jealousy. Yet it was all fleeting fast away.

In comparison with Chinese power his was as nothing; in comparison with Chinese perseverance his was weakness; in comparison with Chinese tactics, his tactics were those of a school-boy; and even in comparison with Chinese courage his courage had to confess an equal. There was not only the dead weight of numbers against him, but there was also the quick weight of superior intellect. There were superior strategy and superior weapons; greater force and greater determination; no hesitation in action, and perfect unanimity in council; all combined to crush one poor forlorn man, fighting with all the desperation of despair for life, if not for liberty. Worthier of a better fate, and meeting destiny with the calm that is natural to brave men, Yakoob Beg's defeat and death may serve to "point a moral and adorn a tale." The tale has been told in these pages with as close a regard for fact as the meagre records will supply, and for the personage whose name is the pivot round which the main facts concentrate, it may be claimed that he deserved attention even from Englishmen. It may well be that some future generation may recur to this career with interest as marking the only real break in the Chinese domination in Eastern Turkestan. When the massacres and other atrocities that marked the Khoja invasions and the Tungan outbreak on both sides shall have been forgotten or condoned, then it will be admitted that, despite the great benefits conferred by China on the people in the way of trade-fostering and good government, there was some merit in the administration which a Khokandian soldier had unaided created in this region. High credit, then, let us, who view the subject from an impartial stand-point, pay this departed warrior, who as a soldier met few equals, as a governor none in his long career. Much as we may marvel at, and perhaps impugn, Chinese strength, let us not judge Yakoob Beg harshly, because Chinamen out-manœuvred him, and overthrew him in fair fight. It is an easy gauge to apply, and one which would dispel all the reputation the Athalik Ghazi had secured, if we deny the Chinese the great qualities those who know them best will accord them without hesitation. But in applying so shallow a test to the case before us, we should be wronging our own understanding quite as much as its victim. However much we may blame Yakoob Beg for going out to encounter an enemy whom he ought to have awaited either at Kucha or Aksu, his valour, and also his mistaken contempt for the Chinese, are made all the more clear. We may fairly claim for him that he was the most remarkable man Central Asia in its fullest extent has produced since Nadir Shah; and that he accomplished with insignificant means a task which ordinary men, though born in the purple and ruling a prosperous and thickly populated state, might have failed to do. What better epitaph could be placed over a courageous and just ruler?

The moral of his career is a short one, but for us full of significance. Those independent rulers who establish themselves for a space on the confines of China are mere ephemeral excrescences; birds of passage who must betake themselves away, if they can, when their little hour has struck. English governments have never understood the vitality of Chinese institutions. They should appreciate it better in the future.