| THE Turkmen
Part 10 Turkmen Part 1
- Turkmen Part 2
- Turkmen Part 3
- Turkmen Part 4
- Turkmen Part 5
- Turkmen Part 6
- The Turkmen Part 7
- Turkmen Part 8
- Turkmen Part 9
- Turkmen Part 10
- Turkmen Part 11
- Turkmen Part 12
As so much has been said in this chapter in favor of
the Turkmen,
it would be wrong to pass by in silence the bad point in
their character, and by some it will be considered to
more than out-balance all the other high and valuable
qualities which they possess. The force of circumstance,
the absence of any recognized authority, has made the Turkmen
a robber and a depredator. He is the bandit par
excellence of Turkestan. He is the slave-hunter of the
steppes, the man who drags the wearied captive four
hundred miles at his saddle-bow to the marts of Khiva,
who knows no pity for the sufferings of the Persian, and
who keenly seeks to intercept those captives who may have
redeemed their liberty and who strive to regain their
native village in Khorasan. The tales which have been
told of the cruelty of the Turkmen
rest upon no hearsay evidence. It has been testified to
over and over again by the most circumstantial of
travelers. Burnes, Terrier, Shakespear, Abbott, Vambery,
and numerous others all agree on this point. The
panegyrist cannot, and if he is prudent will not, attempt
to gainsay the fact that the Turkmen
is at present a man-hunter of the most remorseless type.
His cruelties to the Persians have been narrated over and
over again, and they are as horrible as perhaps they well
can be.
The reader may make what allowance he may feel disposed
to grant for this evil propensity, but he must remember
that the Turkmen
are but exhibiting one of those features of human life
which are to be found at some stage or other in the
history of all people. There is no reason for supposing
that the Turkmen
are irreclaimable. Some of them have been reclaimed, such
as the Goklans and the Chodors. Others, such as the
Yomuds and the Ersari, may be considered to be on the
road to reclamation. In each case the improvement is
clearly traceable to the fact that a more settled mode of
livelihood has been placed at their disposal. The Teke
has still to live by plunder, and consequently retains
longer than his neighbors those qualities in which all Turkmen
were much on a par in the last century. But, if we are to
credit the stories told by the latest travelers, the Teke
(Tekke) is sickening of his occupation. Brought face to
face with a great danger, he finds that his mode of
livelihood alienates not only the sympathy of Persia but
also the friendly feeling which some British officers
have very wisely striven to create in this country.
From Persia, the weak and destitute power, what aid can
the Turkmen
expect? Yet such as that aid is, it is the only source of
comfort to the Teke. It will not enable him to cope
boldly with Russia, but it may at the worst afford for
the relics of his nationality a place whither they may
flee. With that object the Teke (Tekke) clan has, as has
been seen, surrendered Sarakhs to Persia, and given
hostages for future good behavior; that is to say, it has
voluntarily sacrificed its old career in Khorasan. By a
supreme effort it has taken a step in the direction of
self-reclamation, when the object to be attained cannot
be said to be of the highest importance.
We may argue from this known fact what the Turkmen
would be prepared to concede as the equivalent for moral
and material support from this country, which possesses
the means and the power either to make Turkmenia a very
valuable dependency of a reinvigorated Persia, or an
autonomous and respectable community. All nations reach a
point in their career when they will abandon the evil
customs and practices that obtain amongst them if they
are only fairly shown the way by some superior race.
The Turkmen
have apparently reached that stage, and upon this country
more than any other devolves the duty and the
responsibility of showing them the broad, straight road,
by following which they must find increased prosperity
and greater security. Nothing points more clearly to this
conclusion than the confidential report of Captain Napier
made in the year 1876. That officer, who has been in
Khorasan on several occasions during the last six years,
collected the most important information and the most
interesting details that we possess concerning the Tekes
(Tekke); and to his efforts it is to a great extent due
that a more hopeful view has obtained in this country of
the possibility of reclaiming the Tekes. The following
passage taken from this report deserves close
consideration, for the facts mentioned in it clearly go
to prove that the Turkmen
is far from being so steeped in barbarism and cruelty as
a reference to his marauding characteristics alone would
imply. “The Turkmen
nomad is not by any means the mere plundering savage that
his Persian neighbor paints him. From what I have seen
and heard, I would describe the average Turkmen
as exceedingly intelligent, shrewd, and alive to his own
interests. Accustomed from childhood to a free, roving
life, anything like restraint would be at first irksome
to him, but he does not appear to be incapable of
discipline. The Turkmen
of Merv is also now fully alive to the advantages he
enjoys in the possession of one of the most fertile
tracts in the world, and a guarantee of its undisturbed
possession would be one of the strongest inducements that
could be held out to him. He is already in some degree
changing his habits, and there is every indication of the
possibility of his settling down in course of time, of
his own impulse, to peaceful occupations. Two large
sections of the race, the Ersari and the Goklan, have
already done so, and the character of the Teke cannot be
radically different."
Turkmen Part 1 - Turkmen Part 2 - Turkmen Part 3 - Turkmen Part 4 - Turkmen Part 5 - Turkmen Part 6 - The Turkmen Part 7 -
Turkmen Part 8 - Turkmen Part 9 - Turkmen Part 10 - Turkmen Part 11 - Turkmen Part 12
|