Yaghistan, the land of free and unruly

[Samandri]

By Khan Barmazid





Pashtun highlands in the past have been called Yaghistan which means the land of the free and unruly (Yaghi means uncontrollable and unmanageable). Amir Abdur Rahman Khan referred to the tribal belt between British India and Afghanistan as Yaghistan in his autobiography. Colonel Brazier Creagh of the Indian Army, who visited the area in 1893-4, wrote, "When went to the frontier it was Yaghistan ; it was a forbidden land, and no Englishman had ever been there before.....It was impossible to go [inside] and if you did your bones would be left there.”

Yaghistan, referred to as Roh in medieval times (Roh means mountains) was the land where no man was above another. They were not subjects of any body and they were not the part of any kingdom of a king according to Afsana-i-Shahan. The fiercely independent Pakhtun tribes of Yaghistan remained independent during the Ghaznavid period and Ghaznavid sources reveal that Turkish Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Afghans who used to raid his frontier districts and killed large numbers of them but Afghans remained unruly and his successors had struggle with ever rebellious Afghans. These Afghan tribes of mountains maintained their independence during Ghurid, Mongol, Timurid, Delhi Sultanate, Mughal , Durrani and Sikh periods and could not be forced to pay any taxes. Lavish subsidies were paid by the Mughals as protection money to keep the passes through Yaghistan open. In 19th century (before 1893) the tribes of Yaghistan did not belong either to the British raj or Amir of Kabul.

[toughpashtun]

By Khan Barmazid





Pashtun highlands in the past have been called Yaghistan which means the land of the free and unruly (Yaghi means uncontrollable and unmanageable). Amir Abdur Rahman Khan referred to the tribal belt between British India and Afghanistan as Yaghistan in his autobiography. Colonel Brazier Creagh of the Indian Army, who visited the area in 1893-4, wrote, "When went to the frontier it was Yaghistan ; it was a forbidden land, and no Englishman had ever been there before.....It was impossible to go [inside] and if you did your bones would be left there.”

Yaghistan, referred to as Roh in medieval times (Roh means mountains) was the land where no man was above another. They were not subjects of any body and they were not the part of any kingdom of a king according to Afsana-i-Shahan. The fiercely independent Pakhtun tribes of Yaghistan remained independent during the Ghaznavid period and Ghaznavid sources reveal that Turkish Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Afghans who used to raid his frontier districts and killed large numbers of them but Afghans remained unruly and his successors had struggle with ever rebellious Afghans. These Afghan tribes of mountains maintained their independence during Ghurid, Mongol, Timurid, Delhi Sultanate, Mughal , Durrani and Sikh periods and could not be forced to pay any taxes. Lavish subsidies were paid by the Mughals as protection money to keep the passes through Yaghistan open. In 19th century (before 1893) the tribes of Yaghistan did not belong either to the British raj or Amir of Kabul.

Yaghistan refers to present day FATA?
Would the highlands of Northern Balochistan(Zhob,Sherani,Musakhel etc) also be included?

[ZarakDurrani606]

Yaghistan refers to present day FATA?
Would the highlands of Northern Balochistan(Zhob,Sherani,Musakhel etc) also be included?

Pakhairoona, i think Yaghistan also included swat.... the expanse over malakand. It's a postulate. I'm not sure but the all the Pashtun lands that the brits deemed uncontrollable, unruly or just plain dangerous were collectively called Yaghistan. So yeah that'd be dir, swat, fata, and all the darras that you mentioned.

[Samandri]

Would the highlands of Northern Balochistan(Zhob,Sherani,Musakhel etc) also be included?

Yes....in fact Swat, Dir, Panjkura and Buner were also included in the Yaghistan in 19th century.

The tribes of plain areas recognized the authority of either Safavid or Mughal empires and paid nominal tributes (entire Abdali tribe was offering only 50 sheeps as tribute to the Mughals according to Ain-i-Akbari)......but Zhob and its people (Kakars, Sheranis etc) were not part of Mughal empire as evident from Mughal records, they were not part of any 'Sarkar', and were not paying any tribute nor they were furnishing any troops . While Sibi, Mastung, Pishin, Quetta and other dependencies are shown to be under Mughal and Safavid rule, and we read about appointment of Safavid governor in Pishin in 1630s. In Adab-i-Alamgiri (letters of Aurangzeb) we read that Kakars blocked the passage for Mughal army who were advancing for conquest of Kandahar city from Safavids. Prior to that, Dara Shikoh and his army was harassed by Kakars during march to Kandahar. The same Kakars were also in confrontation with Safavids (During Mirwais Hotak times, Safavid governor of Kandahar sends expeditions against Kakars)

[toughpashtun]

Yes....in fact Swat, Dir, Panjkura and Buner were also included in the Yaghistan in 19th century.

The tribes of plain areas recognized the authority of either Safavid or Mughal empires and paid nominal tributes (entire Abdali tribe was offering only 50 sheeps as tribute to the Mughals according to Ain-i-Akbari)......but Zhob and its people (Kakars, Sheranis etc) were not part of Mughal empire as evident from Mughal records, they were not part of any 'Sarkar', and were not paying any tribute nor they were furnishing any troops . While Sibi, Mastung, Pishin, Quetta and other dependencies are shown to be under Mughal and Safavid rule, and we read about appointment of Safavid governor in Pishin in 1630s. In Adab-i-Alamgiri (letters of Aurangzeb) we read that Kakars blocked the passage for Mughal army who were advancing for conquest of Kandahar city from Safavids. Prior to that, Dara Shikoh and his army was harassed by Kakars during march to Kandahar. The same Kakars were also in confrontation with Safavids (During Mirwais Hotak times, Safavid governor of Kandahar sends expeditions against Kakars)

What i find surprising is that you mentioned how the Kakars were a warlike tribe and resisted both Mughal and Safavid empires but :

1 - The British described Kakar as an in-offensive tribe that did not give trouble.(I read this on your website)

2 - The Kakars did not resist the British to the best of my knowledge.
(The Sheranis and Harifals did though)

[Samandri]

What i find surprising is that you mentioned how the Kakars were a warlike tribe and resisted both Mughal and Safavid empires but :

1 - The British described Kakar as an in-offensive tribe that did not give trouble.(I read this on your website)

2 - The Kakars did not resist the British to the best of my knowledge.
(The Sheranis and Harifals did though)

They did, read about their anti-British activities during second Anglo-Afghan war (British defeated Kakar lashkar in 1879) and about their anti-British leaders of later decades like Dost Muhammad Khan Kakar, Bangal Khan Jogezai, Omar Khan Kakar etc (i have not posted any extract on Kakars from British book on my site, so i dont know what you are talking about). In fact there were some tribes of Yaghistan who offered zero opposition to British advances e.g Turis and Dawars and were friendly and cooperative like tribes of settled areas. You have to understand that entire Yaghistan ceased to exist in early 20th century and i am talking about 19th century and before. Kakars recognized no authority in old times, this can be ascertained from the fact that they were harassing and were willing to plunder the camp of Amir Abdur Rahman who was passing through their territory in 1869. From autobiography of Amir Abdul Rahman its clear that Kabul had little or no sway over Zhob at that time like other areas of Yaghistan.

And no Pashtun tribe was inoffensive in old times. Each and every tribe was offensive to their neighbours. And a very large number of them were offensive to travelers and caravans passing to their areas

[Traveller]

They did, read about their anti-British activities during second Anglo-Afghan war (British defeated Kakar lashkar in 1879) and about their anti-British leaders of later decades like Dost Muhammad Khan Kakar, Bangal Khan Jogezai, Omar Khan Kakar etc (i have not posted any extract on Kakars from British book on my site, so i dont know what you are talking about). In fact there were some tribes of Yaghistan who offered zero opposition to British advances e.g Turis and Dawars and were friendly and cooperative like tribes of settled areas. You have to understand that entire Yaghistan ceased to exist in early 20th century and i am talking about 19th century and before. Kakars recognized no authority in old times, this can be ascertained from the fact that they were harassing and were willing to plunder the camp of Amir Abdur Rahman who was passing through their territory in 1869. From autobiography of Amir Abdul Rahman its clear that Kabul had little or no sway over Zhob at that time like other areas of Yaghistan.

And no Pashtun tribe was inoffensive in old times. Each and every tribe was offensive to their neighbours. And a very large number of them were offensive to travelers and caravans passing to their areas

I thought all Pashtuns were at least a little anti-British.

[toughpashtun]

They did, read about their anti-British activities during second Anglo-Afghan war (British defeated Kakar lashkar in 1879) and about their anti-British leaders of later decades like Dost Muhammad Khan Kakar, Bangal Khan Jogezai, Omar Khan Kakar etc (i have not posted any extract on Kakars from British book on my site, so i dont know what you are talking about). In fact there were some tribes of Yaghistan who offered zero opposition to British advances e.g Turis and Dawars and were friendly and cooperative like tribes of settled areas. You have to understand that entire Yaghistan ceased to exist in early 20th century and i am talking about 19th century and before. Kakars recognized no authority in old times, this can be ascertained from the fact that they were harassing and were willing to plunder the camp of Amir Abdur Rahman who was passing through their territory in 1869. From autobiography of Amir Abdul Rahman its clear that Kabul had little or no sway over Zhob at that time like other areas of Yaghistan.

And no Pashtun tribe was inoffensive in old times. Each and every tribe was offensive to their neighbours. And a very large number of them were offensive to travelers and caravans passing to their areas

Kakar tribe | History of Pashtuns د پښتنو تاريخ

A few lines above the photo of the Kakar man , you can find that the Central Kakars have been described as "peaceable and inoffensive folk".
But I get your point generally.Thanks.

[Samandri]

I thought all Pashtuns were at least a little anti-British.

In thoughts may be , but in action those tribes were overwhelmingly pro-British who had experienced Sikh rule. All the tribes who were under Sikh rule , supported British against Sikhs in Anglo-Sikh wars (1846 and 1848), and this support continued in 1857 mutiny and afterwards. They did oppose foreign invasions and occupations on various occasions before British period and were generally troublesome and unruly in nature but its a fact that they were on good terms with British from 1849 to 1947. These tribes of plains had no shelter of mountains or forts to hide , so historically they were at disadvantage in opposing invaders. Their areas , unlike those of Yaghistan, were easily accessible to invaders so they suffered the most. A read of Baburnama illustrates this fact. Nadir Shah Afshar, the Napoleon of Asia, was feeling threatened in the treacherous Khyber pass but he easily wiped out the Tatur tribe of Daman and easily crushed the Yousafzais/Mandanrs of plains who were supporting the Mughal governor Nasir Khan (whose mother was Yousafzai). Official history of Nadir Shah reveals that after this, he enlisted thousands of Yousafzais for Indian campaign and after return from India, he again recruited large number of Yousafzais for campaigns in Caucasus and central Asia. The hill tribes could not be forced into submission like this.

The Mughals who were stationed in Kabul, Ghazni, Peshawar etc, were much familiar with Pashtun people since Genghis Khan times.....they forayed into Yaghistan and for that they employed best of their generals. They inflicted numerous defeats on hill tribes but they were unable to gain any thing from it and retreated to plain areas. Mughals had a strong fort by name of Langarkot in Mardan but they had no presence in hilly areas like Buner and Swat. Sikhs did not venture into hilly tracts at all.

[Samandri]

Kakar tribe | History of Pashtuns د پښتنو تاريخ

A few lines above the photo of the Kakar man , you can find that the Central Kakars have been described as "peaceable and inoffensive folk".
But I get your point generally.Thanks.

Muhammad Hayat Khan was not an Angraiz and his book Hayat-i-Afghani is not considered a 'British source' by any means, and he wrote his book in 1867 when there was no British presence there. British rule in Kakar area started in 1890s with Robert Sandeman.

Also about the inoffensive part.....by that authors means they were not raiders and robbers.....but it doesn mean they were docile and meek and incapable of resisting invaders,.... they were not inoffensive to armies passing to their areas.....Ghilzai and Lohani powindah tribes were "inoffensive" but they always had fought with any one attempting to loot their caravans.

[toughpashtun]

[MENTION=18842]Samandri[/MENTION]
thanks for explanation