| 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
|