Pursuit of Humayin

As ealy as A.D. 1519

at Bhera and Khushab; and it may be inferred that these were Dodais, for when
Sher Shah arrived at Khushab in A.D. 1546, in pursuit of Humayin, he was met
by the three Sons of Sohrab Khan—viz., Ismail Khan, Fath Khan and Ghazi
Khan—and he confirmed to them the ‘country of Sindh,’ by which must be
understood Sindh in the local use of the word—that is, the lands lying along the
Indus, the Derajat, where these brothers had formed settlements.

The three

towns of Dora Ismail Khan, Dera Ghazi Khan, and Dera Fatl Khan still bear their

Shah Beg Arghun

It is not very clear how the Baloches came to be in complete possession of the

Multan country. Shah Beg Arghun, after overthrowing the Sammas of Sindh,
turned his arms against the Langahs of Maltan, and was opposed at Uchh by an
army of Baloches and Langahs. He was victorious, and advanced on Multan in
A.H. 931 (A.D. 1524) where Shah Mahmud Langah was reigning. The army
which opposed him is said to have been composed of Baloch, Jat, Bind, Dodai
and other tribes.

 The Shah was poisoned by Sheikh Shuja’, his son-in-law, and

the historian says: ‘The army, which consisted chiefly of Baloches, being thus
deprived of its head, the greatest confusion reigned.’ The son of the deceased
king was placed on the throne, but the place fell into the hands of the Arghuns.

3

The conquest of Dehli by Babar followed almost immediately, and Shah Beg
admitted his supremacy.
It is evident that the Baloches were in great force in the South Panjab at this
period, and they were in complete possession of the country, as has been seen, in
Sher Shah’s time. The Rinds seem to have spread up the valleys of the Chenab,
the Ravi, and the Satlaj, and the Dodais and Hots up the Indus and the Jehlam.
Babar found the Baloches, as he states in his autobiography

Mir Chakur arrived at Multan

It has been shown above how Mir Chakur arrived at Multan, and how the rivalry

arose between the Rinds and the Dodais. The legendary lore deals with this

subject also, and it is stated that Chakur joined Humayun after wards on his

march to Dehli, and at last settled down at Satgarha (in the Montgomery District
of the Panjab). His tomb still exists there, and there is a considerable Rind
settlement in the neighbourhood. In the Tarikh-i-Sher Shah of ‘Abbas Khan, a
valuable authority, we find Chakur Rind established at Satgarha in Sher Shah’s
time,

1 and the Baloches in possession of the whole Multan country, from which

Sher Shah expelled them. It is evident that they would have been on this account
disposed to join Humayun in his expedition to recover his kingdom from the
Afghans, and although there is no historical evidence of the fact, the legend
makes it very probable that they did so.

Rinds and Lasharis

Other poems, forming the bulk of the legendary ballads, deal with the war which

took place between the Rinds and Lasharis and also between both of them and
the Turks, and assert that it was the loss of Sibi and Kachhi which forced Mir
Chakur and his Rinds to migrate to the Panjab. To understand the true meaning
of these legends it is necessary to go back to the invasion of Sindh by the
Arghuns—the Turks of the Baloch story. The Arghuns were a Mughal family
who claimed descent from Changiz Khan. Zu’n-nun Beg Arghun rose to power

as Minister under Sultan Husain Baikara of Herat, one of the descendants of

Taimur. He obtained the Government of Qandahar, where he made himself
practically independent. The first invasion of Kachhi, by way of the Bolan Pass,
took place in .u. 890 (A.D. 1485). Shah-Beg commanded on behalf of his father,
and penetrated as far as the Indus; Jam Nanda, the Summa Chief, opposed him
and defeated and drove him back at Jalugir in A.D. 1486.

1 After Zu’n-nun Beg’s

death in war against the Uzbegs, Shah Beg, who succeeded him, was driven out
of Qandahar by Babar in A.D. 1507, and took refuge in Shal and Mustang at the
head of the Bolan Pass, where he must have come into contact with the Baloches.
Shah Beg ultimately lost Qandahar, and determined to build up a new throne for
himself in India. He invaded Sindh in A.H. 917 (A.D. 1511) and A.H. 927 (A.D.
1520), overthrew the Sammas, and established his power.

2 He enlisted the

services of some of the hill-tribes, probably Baloches, and we also read of a force
of 3,000 Baloches serving under Jam Feroz; so that it is probable that rival Baloch
tribes fought on opposite sides. This is borne out by Baloch legend as to the
rivalry between the Rinds and Lasharis, in which the Turks under Zunu (Zu’nnun
Beg) and the King of Sibi, Jam Ninda, play an important part.

3 The Rinds

were under Mir Chakur and the Lasharis under Gwaharam, who were rivals for
the hand of the fair Gohar, the owner of large herds of camels. Gohar preferred
Mir Chakur, and this led to a quarrel. A horse-race, in which the Rinds are stated
to have won by trickery, precipitated the outbreak. Some Lasharis killed some of
Gohar’s young camels, and Chakur thereupon swore revenge. A desperate war
began, which lasted for thirty years. At first the Rinds were defeated, and they
seem to have called on the Turks for aid, but after various fluctuations Chakur
with most of his Rinds left Sibi, and made for the Panjab. The LasharIs remained
at Gandava, and some Rinds maintained their position at Shoran, both places not
far from Sibi in the plain of Kachhi. These events constitute the Iliad of the
Baloch race, and form the subject of numerous picturesque ballads which have
been handed down verbally to the present day.

Mir Chakar Rind,

Mir Chakar Rind, whose name is

celebrated among all Baloches up to the present day.
Mir Chakur Rind

2 and his son Mirza Shahdad (or, according to some, his two

sons Shahid and Shuhda) came from Sivi (Sibi) seeking service and lands. Malik
Sohrab Dodai, out of jealousy, prevented Shah Mahmud from accepting his
services; whereupon Jam Bayazid took up his cause, and assigned him lands
from his own jagir of Uchh. According to the legends, Mir Chakur had two sons
named Shahzad and Shaihak. Shahzad was of miraculous origin, his mother
having been overshadowed by some mysterious power. A mystical poem in
Balochi on the origin of Multan is attributed to him, as well as one on the sack of
Dehli. It is remarkable that Shahdad is said by Firishta to have been the first to
introduce the Shi’a creed into Multan. The rivalry between the Rinds (Chakur’s
tribe) and the Dodais is also the subject of many poems.

Muhammadanism

The Rajput tribe named Langah,

1 long since converted to Muhammadanism, had

established an independent kingdom at Multan under their chief Rai Sehra (A.H.
847 =A.D. 1443), who took the title of Qutbu’d-din. He was succeeded in A.H.
874 by his son, Shah Husain, who reigned till A.H. 908 (A.D. 1502). It was during
his reign that the first settlement of Baloches in the Panjab was made by Malik
Sohrab Dodai, who came to Multan with his sons Ghazi Khan, Fath Khan, and
Ismail Khan, and a large number of Baloches. Shah Husain encouraged them and

gave them a jagir extending from Kot Karor to Dhankot, evidently on condition

of military service. Other Baloches, hearing of this, came flocking in, and
gradually obtained possession of the whole country between Sitpur and Dhanko
is to say, the present district of Muzafargarh between the Indus and the Chanab.
The chief authorities for these events are Firishta’s history of the Kings of Multan
and the Tabakat-i-Akbari.

1 Firishta calls the newcomers both Dodais and

Baloches, and says that they came from Kech and Makran. Soon after this two
brothers belonging to the Samma tribe, Jam Bayazid and Jam Ibrahim, who had
quarreled with Jam Nanda (or Nzamu’d-din) the Samma ruler of Sindh, came as
refugees to Shah Husain, and also obtained jagirs—viz., Uchh and Shor (i.e.,
Shorkot, now in the Jhang district). Jam Bayazid became a person of great
influence and commander of the Shah’s armies. After Shah Husain’s death and
the accession of Shah Mahmud he went into rebellion. A temporary
reconciliation took place, but there seems to have been a good deal of friction
between Malik Sohrab Dodal and Jam Bayazid.

Baber and his Turks

India from three distinct sources. First, those of Baber and his Turks, so-called

Mughals, which culminated in the establishment of the Mughal Empire; secondly,
those of the Arghuns, headed by Shah Beg, which established a temporary
dynasty in Sindh, sweeping away the Samma Jams; and, thirdly, that of the
Baloches, which, though it did not establish any dynasty, contributed a more
important element to the population of Northern India than either of the others.
Before their final descent into India the Baloches seem to have been in occupation
of the Kilat highlands, now held by the Brahois. It seems at least probable that
their wars with the Brahois had some connection with their onward movement,
but their own tradition tells us nothing of it. It is commonly asserted by writers
on the subject that a Hindu tribe called Sewa was in possession of Kilat, and that
they called in the services of the Brahois to protect them against the Baloches.
Some hold the Brahios to be aborigines of the country, and this idea seems to be
based on the fact of their language containing a strong Dravidian element, but
they themselves claim, like the Baloches, to have come from Halab. It is at least a
theory worthy of some consideration that they are identical with the Koch, the
neighbours of the Baloch in Karman. The Koch, as we have seen, were often
described as very like the Kurds, and were sometimes even called Kurds. There
is still a powerful tribe among the Brahois bearing the name of Kurd, or Kird,
and a clan of Kirds is even found among the Baloch Mazari. The Brahoi language
is still called by the Baloches Kur-gali, or Kir-gali—that is, the language of the
Kurds—although it has no connection with the Kurdish language, which is an
Iranian dialect with some points of resemblance to Balochi. It is, however, at
present impossible to do more than state, as a probability, that the Brahois came
from the west, and that their occupation of the highlands had something to do
with the Baloch descent on the plains. The separation between the Northern
Baloches and those of Mekran dates from this period.

Hundred and fifty years,

Nothing more is heard of the Baloches in Sindh after the fall of the Somras for

nearly a hundred and fifty years, although there may have been occasional raids
which are not recorded. Their next appearance there is in the reign of Jam
Tughlaq (A.D. 1428-1450), when they are recorded as raiding near Bhakhar.
There was at this period a new feeling of restlessness abroad, of which Taimur’s
invasion of India was the instigating cause, as the conquests of the Seljuqs and of
Changiz Khan had been of the earlier movements. The remains of the once
powerful Tughlaq monarchy of Dehli disappeared, and a succession of feeble
rulers allowed the Lodi Afghans to seize the sovereignty, and opened a tempting
prospect to needy adventurers from beyond the border. This led to invasions of

India from three distinct sources. First, those of Baber and his Turks, so-called

Mughals, which culminated in the establishment of the Mughal Empire; secondly,
those of the Arghuns, headed by Shah Beg, which established a temporary
dynasty in Sindh, sweeping away the Samma Jams; and, thirdly, that of the
Baloches, which, though it did not establish any dynasty, contributed a more
important element to the population of Northern India than either of the others.

In addition to the five main tribes

In addition to the five main tribes and the others just mentioned, there are also a

few tribes of lower status which are supposed to represent the four servile

bolaks,

which were associated with the forty Baloch bolaks. These are the Gopangs,
Dashtis, Gadhis, Gholos, and perhaps some others. The Baloch nation, therefore,
as it appeared in the fifteenth century, on the eve of the invasion of India, was
made up of the following elements:
(1) The five main bodies of undoubted Baloch descent— viz., the Rind,
Lashari, Hot, Korai, Jatoi;
(2) The groups afterwards formed in Mekran—viz., the Budedhis,
Ghazanis and ‘Umaranis;
(3) The Dodais; and
(4) The servile tribes.
And since that period the Gichkis in Mekran, and the Jakranis in Sindh, seem to
have been assimilated in comparatively modern times.

conjectured that at the break-up of the Somra power

It may be conjectured that at the break-up of the Somra power a section of the

tribe, headed by their chief Doda, allied itself with the Baloches, who were then
in Mekran and in the mountains adjoining Sindh, and, becoming gradually
assimilated, ultimately took their place as a Baloch tribe. Although they are
Baloches in appearance, and speak the Balochi language, it has always been
recognised that the Gurchanis (now the principal tribe of Dodai origin) are not of
pure blood. The Mirranis, another Dodai tribe long of great importance, whose
chiefs were for two hundred years Nawabs of Dera Ghazi Khan, are now broken
up and decayed.

Baloch legend of the origin of the Dodais

To turn now to the Baloch legend of the origin of the Dodais. Doda Somra was

turned out of Thatha by his brethren, and escaped by swimming his mare across
the Indus. He came half frozen in the morning to the hut of a Rind named Salhe,
who took him down from the mare, and, to revive him, put him under the
blankets with his daughter

Mudho. He afterwards married him to Mudho, and, as

the ballad says, ‘For the woman’s sake the man became a Baloch, who had been a
Jatt, a Jaghdal, a nobody; he dwelt at Harrand under the hills, and fate made him
the chief of all.’ His descendants were the Dodai tribe, which took a leading place

among the Baloches in the South Panjab, and his son Gorish gave his name to the

Gorshani, or Gurchani, tribe.

The Rajput tribe of Somra

Sindh was under the rule of the Rajput tribe of Somra, which had succeeded to

the power of the Arab conquerors. There is a long list of Somra kings in the
Chronicles, no less than five of whom bore the name of Doda. The chronology is
very uncertain, but Doda IV. seems to have reigned about the middle of the
thirteenth century (A.H 650).

 In the time of his father Khafif a body of Baloches

entered Sindh, and allied themselves with two local tribes, the Sodhas and
Jharejas. When Doda IV. succeeded, the Baloches and Jharejas forsook the Sodha
alliance, and supported him. In the time of Umar, the next king, we again find
the Baloches entering into a combination with the Sammas, Sodhas, and Jatts
(Jharejas), but this did not last long. The Sammas made terms for themselves, and
their allies had to submit, which probably means that the Baloches retired into
the mountains. There is no evidence that they made any permanent settlement in
the plains at this time. In the reign of Doda V. the Somra rule was finally
overthrown, and the power passed into the hands of the Sammas, who
established what is known as the Jam dynasty. This event took place probably at
the end of the thirteenth century, while ‘Alau‘d-din Khalji was reigning at Delhi.
A story, evidently derived from popular folklore, is told in the Tarikh-i-M’asumi
(written

circ. A.D. 1600) about Doda’s extraordinary adventures.2 He wins the

favour of Sultan Maudud of Ghazni by his power of seeing through men’s bodies,
which enables him to fish out two snakes which the Sultan had swallowed, and
is finally restored to his dominions. Possibly the legend referred originally to
Doda I., who lived while the Ghaznavi dynasty still existed (his death is placed
in A.H. 485, while Mas’ud III. was reigning).

 This story begins with the escape

of Doda from his enemies and his crossing the river Indus.

Mir Jalal Khan

Mir Jalal Khan, son of Jiand, is said to have been

ruler over all the Baloches. He left four sons, named Rind, Lashar, Hot, and Korai,
and a daughter named Jato, who was married to his nephew Murad. These five
are the eponymous founders of the five great divisions of the race, the Rinds,
Lasharis, Hots, Korais, and Jatois. There are, however, some tribes which cannot
be brought within any of these divisions, and accordingly we find ancestors duly
provided for them in some genealogies. Two more sons are added to the list—Ali
and Bulo. From Bulo are descended the Bule

dhis, and from Ali’s two sons,

Ghazan and Umar, are derived the Ghazani Marris and the Umaranis (now
scattered among several tribes). I may here note that the genealogies given in the
‘Tuhfatu’l-Kiram

1 seem to be apocryphal, and are not in accordance with Baloch

tradition. It is there asserted that Jalálu’d-din was one of fifty brothers, and that
he received one-half of the inheritance, the rest taking half between them, and
that, while the descendants of the other brothers mingled with the people of
Makran, those of Jalalu’d-din came to Sindh and Kachhi, and their descendants
are spread through the country. The actual tradition of the Baloches, however,
represents that the tribal divisions originated in the performance of Jalal Khan’s
funeral ceremonies. Rind had been appointed by his father successor to the

Phagh

or Royal Turban, and proposed to perform the ceremonies and erect an

asrokh, or

memorial canopy. His brother Hot, who was his rival, refused to join him,
whereupon the others also refused; each performed the ceremony separately,
‘and there were five

asrokhs in Kech. Some of the bolaks joined one and some

another, and so the five great tribes were formed. In reality it seems probable
that there were five principal gatherings of clans under well-known leaders, and
that they became known by some nickname or descriptive epithet, such as the
Rinds (‘cheats’), the Hots (‘warriors‘), the Lasharis (‘men of Lashar‘), etc., and
that these names were afterwards transferred to their supposed ancestors. The
Buledhis, or men of Boleda,

2 probably joined the confederacy later, and the same

may be said of the Ghazanis and Umaranis. One very important tribe—the
Dodai—is not included in any of these genealogies, the reason being that this
tribe is undoubtedly of Indian origin, and that its a to the Baloch stock did not

take place until the movement to Sindh had begun. To explain this it is necessary

to return to the historical narrative.

The effect that Badru’d-din demanded

The legend is to the effect that Badru’d-din demanded a bride from each of the

forty-four

bolaks of the Baloches. They pretended to agree, but sent him forty-four

boys dressed as girls, and themselves marched out of the country to avoid his
vengeance when the deception was discovered. He, however, sent the boys back
to their families, but pursued the tribes into Kech-Makran, and was defeated by
them there. In Makran the Baloches fought against a ruler named Harm or Harun,
probably an Arab of the coast, as the place where the fight took place is named
Harin-bandar, or the port of Harun. Another name in the ballads is Jagin, which
is a place on the coast of Makran, not far from Jask. The original tribes of Makran
seem to have been mainly Jatts, and at the time of the Arab conquest they are

frequently alluded to under the name of Zutt; and no doubt some Arab

settlements had been made then, as now, on the coast. That some of these tribes
were destroyed and others absorbed and assimilated by the Baloch invaders is
extremely probable, but we are without any information as to what extent this
took place.

Shamsu’d-din’s death

About thirty years after Shamsu’d-din’s death Sistan became tributary to the

Ghori kings (A.H. 590), who maintained their power until Changiz Khan
devastated the country, but the Maliks of Sijistan continued to rule under them.
There was a Badru’d-din Kidani among the Maliks of Ghiyasu’d-din Ghori, but it
is impossible to say whether he ever had power in Sistan. But it seems most
probable that the convulsions attending Changiz Khan’s invasion forced most of
the Baloch tribes out of Sistan, and also drove east any who may have still
lingered in Karman. The whole legend is by some authorities located in Karman,
and not in Sistan.

 But I have never myself met with this version among the

Baloches. That a great migration among the tribes took place at this period does
not admit of doubt. Within thirty or forty years we read; of Baloches raiding in
Sindh, where they had previously been unknown.

tribes of the Sulaiman

Although historical data are wanting, their place is to some extent supplied by

tradition, which among the Baloches, especially the tribes of the Sulaiman
Mountains, is full and circumstantial, and contained in numerous heroic ballads
of ancient data.2 The traditional narrative, as far as it possesses any value, may be
said to commence with the sojourn in Sistan. Before that the legend simply
asserts that the Baloches were descended from Mir Hamza, the Prophet’s uncle,
and from a Pari, and that they took part in the wars of ‘Ali’s sons against Yazid
and fought at Kerbela. This is merely the introduction, the descent from some
Muhammadan notable or from someone mentioned in the Quran, which is

considered necessary to every respectable Musalman race, just as the Kalhoras of

Sindh and the Daudpotras of Bahawalpur claim descent from Abbas, and the
sons of Hindus converted to Muhammadanism are called Sheikh and blossom
into Qureshis of the purest blood. Between Kerbela and Sistan there is a gap, and
the settlement in the latter is really the starting- point of the legend. The Baloches
are represented in the old ballads, as I have always heard the tale related, as
arriving in Sistan and being hospitably received by a King named Shamsu’d-din.
After a time another King arose named Badru’d-din, who persecuted and drove
them out. Now, there really was a Malik of Sistan, an independent ruler of the
dynasty claiming descent from the Saffaris, named Shamsu’d-din, who died in
A.H. 559. He is described as a cruel tyrant, hated by his people.

1 It is quite

possible that he may have utilized the services of the Baloches, who were

certainly settled to some extent in Sistan at this time, as mercenaries to uphold

his power. Badru’d-din is not so easily identified.

two movements of the Baloch race

It seems probable that there were two movements of the Baloch race in this

period, each of which corresponded with a conquest affecting a great part of the
Asiatic world. The first was the abandonment of Karman and the settlement in
Sistan and Western Makran, corresponding with the Seljuq invasion and the
overthrow of the Dailami and Ghaznawi power in Persia; the second move was
to Ea8tern Mekran and the Sindh border, corresponding with the invasions of
Changiz Khan and the wanderings of Jalalu’ddin Mangbarni in Makran.
This second movement introduced the Baloches first into the Indus Valley, and
prepared the way for the third and last migration, by which a great portion of the
Baloch race was precipitated into the plains of India. The last movement
corresponds in its commencement with the conquests of Taimur, and in its later
developments with the invasions of India by Babar and the Arghuns.

Baloches from Kerman

Certain it is that soon after the above-quoted accounts were written there was a

wholesale migration of the Baloches from Kerman, and there is some reason to
believe that before establishing themselves in Mekran and on the Sindh frontier
they made a temporary settlement in Sistan. Such a movement had already
begun, as the names of the provinces in Sistan given by Istakhri show; and later
on the author of the ‘Tabakat-i-Nasiri’ notes that he halted in Sistan at a place
called Gumbaz-i-Baloch, a slight indication, but sufficient to show their presence
in the country. There is, however, no historical evidence as to what happened to
the Baloches during this period previous to their appearance in Sindh, which is
first mentioned in the middle of the thirteenth century.

Khorasan and sistan

The Baloch, no doubt, possessed horses and raided far afield, as their

descendants have done ever since. They crossed the desert into Khorasan and

Sistan, and the fact that two of the provinces of Sistan were already in Istakhri’s

time known as Baloch country shows that they had begun to establish

themselves there. During the reign of Mahmud Ghaznwi they roused the wrath

of that monarch by robbing his ambassador on the way to Karman, between

Tabbas and Khabis. Mahmud sent his son Mas’ud against them, who finally

defeated them near Khabis, which lies on the edge of the desert, at the foot of the

Karman Mountains.

3 On another occasion these robbers were disposed of by

allowing them to capture several loads of poisoned apples, which they devoured.

The chronicler approves of this as a pleasant and ingenious scheme for getting

rid of them.

Firdausi, who lived at this time at Tus, near Meshhed, in Khorasan, must have

been familiar with the name of these marauders, and this knowledge must have

given point to the descriptions in the ‘Shahnama’ already alluded to.

Yakut speaks of the Baloch under a separate heading

Yakut speaks of the Baloch under a separate heading and gives a more

favourable account of them. He says they resemble the Kurds, live between Fars
and ‘Karman, and are dreaded by the savage Qufs who fear no one else. The
Baloch, he says, are richer and more civilized than their neighbours, live in
goatskin tents, and do not plunder and fight like the Qufs.
In addition to Adadu’d-daula Dailami, his uncle Mu’iz zu’d-daula, who died
A.H. 356, also came into collision with the wild tribes of Karman, called by some
Kurds and by others Koch and Baloch. He lost his left hand and the fingers of the
right in conflict with them, and was thence known as Aqta or maimed.

The desert infested by the Baloch

Istakhri also, in his account of Sijistan, gives a list of the provinces of that country,

among which two (Nos. 19 and 22) are described as ‘country of the Baloch’

2

The desert infested by the Baloch seems in reality to have been not that to the
south of the Karman Mountains, but the great desert now known as the Lut,
which lies north and east of Karman, and separates it from Khorasan and Sistan.
Idrisi, who was a careful writer, says that the Koch Mountains were inhabited by
a savage race—a sort of Kurds—while the Baloch live to the north, and some to
the west of them.

3 He adds that they are prosperous, have much cattle, and are

feared by their neighbours, and also confirms the statement that they do not
infest the roads. Yakut is in substantial agreement with Idrisi.

4 He also compares

the Koch to the Kurds, and quotes an Arabic poem as follows: ‘What wild
regions have we traversed, inhabited by Jatts (Zutt), Kurds, and savage Qufs! He
gives a long account of the Qufs quoted from er-Rohini, in which he traces them
to pre-Islamic Arabs of Yemen, and says they have never had any religion, either
pagan or Muhammadan. He speaks of them as irreclaimable savages, and says it
would be well to exterminate them. He adds that they do show some respect to

Ali, but only out of imitation of their neighbours. This gives rise to a suspicion

that they may have been Shias, and that er-Rohini had some grudge against them.
Yakut also quotes el-Bishari as classifying the mountains of Karman into those of
the Koch, the Baloch, and the Qaran, which corresponds with the description of
Istakhri. He says that the Koch (Qufs) are tall, slender people, who call
themselves Arabs, given to all sorts of wickedness, barbarous and cruel, and
living by plunder. The Bulus were formerly the most terrible of the marauding
tribes, but were destroyed by Adad-u’d-daula,

1 who also slew a great number of

the Quf They call them selves Musalmãns (this apparently refers to the Qufs but
are more bitter against Musalmans than are the Greeks and Turks.

The Bulus live on the tableland

       

‘The Bulus live on the tableland of the Qufs Mountains, and no one else enters
these mountains; they have cattle and tents like the Beduin, and the routes
through their country are not unsafe.’ ‘The Qufs it says, ‘are believed to be of
Arab descent, and live under their own chiefs.’ Further south, again, lives
another race, apparently distinct from both Koch and Baloch. According to the
Persian version they inhabit the mountains near Hurmuz, and are robbers, said
to be Arabs by origin; while in the Arabic version we read: ‘The inhabitants of
the Qaran or Barfen

1 Mountains were Zoroastrians during the rule of the Amawi

Khalifas they would not submit, and were more cunning than the inhabitants of
the Qufs Mountains. They were converted under the rule of the ‘Abbasi
Khalifas.’ This race is evidently the Ahwas or Hawas of Idrisi. The Persian
version adds that Qufs in Arabic is the same as Koch in Persian, and that these
two peoples—one in the mountains and the other in the desert—are commonly
spoken of jointly as Koch and Baloch. Both versions agree in describing the
Baloch as better behaved than their neighbours, and as not infesting the roads;
but it is impossible to accept this statement as fact. It is perhaps due to the
accidental use of a negative by a copyist, and one authority has probably
reproduced it from another without question.

The migration of the Baloches

The cause of the migration of the Baloches to Karman may have been their

conquest by Naushirvan, or more probably the invasion of the Ephthalites or
White Huns, which took place at that period, and who are also alluded to in the
‘Shahnama’ under the name of Hayital. The Arab conquest of Karman took place
in A.H. 23, or only sixty-five years after the death of Naushirvan. The conquest
was carried nut by ‘Abdu’llãh, under the orders of the Khalif Umar; and all the
accounts agree that the Arabs found the mountains of Karman occupied by a
race known as Koch (in Arabic Qufj or Qufs), and some add the Baloch. None of
the authorities are contemporary or nearly so. The earliest writers who deal with
the subject are: Al-Bilazuri, who died in A.H. 279 (A.D. 892); Tabari,

1 who wrote

about A.H. 820 (A.D. 932); Masudi whose work is dated A.H. 332 (A.D. 943); and
Istakhri,

circa A.H. 340 (A.D. 951). The first two of these, in describing the

conquest, only mention the Koch or Qufs; while Masudi and Istakhri whose
works are geographical and deal with their own times, speak both of Koch and
Baloch. Weil (‘Geschichte der Chalifen,’ i. 95), following Tabari, only mentions
the Kufedj or Kufess. Elliott and Dowson (i. 417) state that when ‘Abdullah
conquered the capital of Karman, the aid of the men of Kuj and Buluj (i.e., Koch
and Baloch) was in vain solicited by the Karmanis. The authority for this
statement appears to be the Tarikh-i Guzida, which was not written till A.H. 730
(A.D. 1329), and has not much weight. The best geographical authorities are
Istakhri and Mas’udi, the valuable work of Idrisi (A.H. 543—A.D. 1151), and the
gazetteer of Yakut, who wrote in A.H. 615, but relies on earlier authorities.
It may be considered as established that the Baloches were settled in Karman at
the commencement of the fourth century of the Hijra; and it is possible, but not
proved, that they were already settled there when the Arab conquest took place
three hundred years before. The Baloch occupied a territory adjacent to that of
the Koch, but were quite distinct from them. Masudi

2 only says that he is not able

to give any account of the Qufs the Baloch, and the Jatt (Zutt), who dwell in the
regions of Karman. He is the only writer who mentions Jatts in Karman, all other
accounts showing them as occupying Mekran at that period. Istakhri gives fuller
details.

3 He describes the Koch as living in the mountains, while the Baloch

inhabited the desert. Both races spoke languages of their own distinct from

Persian, which was the ordinary language of Karman. The version translated by

Ouseley puts the desert inhabited by the Baloch to the south of the mountains,
and towards Mekran and the sea; and one passage in the Arabic version bears
this out—viz.: ‘Karman is bordered on the east by Mukaran, and the desert.

Baloch left on the mountains

He learnt from a Dehkan that his predecessor, Ardashir

(presumably Ardashir Babakan), had in vain tried to subdue them. Nauahirvan
however, surrounded their mountains with his troops, and ordered them to
destroy every Baloch,

1 great or small. This was carried out, so that there was not

a Baloch left on the mountains, and their oppressions and tyranny disappeared.
(This is the reading of the oldest MS.;

2 but the text used by Mohl reads

‘the oppression of the Koch,’ instead of
‘oppression and grief.’) Later on, however, we find that the Baloches were by no
means exterminated, but were serving in Naushirvan’s army, and, together with
the men of Gil, were drawn up armed with golden shields to receive the
ambassador of the Khaqan of Chin. On another occasion we find that the King’s
friends and freemen marched towards Adhar-badagan (Adharbaijan) with a
force made up of contingents from Gil Dailaman, the mountains of the Baloch,
the plain of Saroch, and the swordsmen of Koch. Then, in some texts, but not in
the best MS., follows a passage to the effect that up till that time, since the world
was the world, there had never been a single Koch who did not pillage and burn
the towns.

3 The narrative, after relating the conquest of the Baloches by

Naushirvan, continues to give an account of his war against the men of Gil and
Dailarn—that is to say, of Gilan and Adharbaijan. This association of the Baloch
with the races near the Caspian Sea seems to make it probable that they were
then located in a more northerly province than Karman, where they are next
heard of. Firdausi must have drawn this description from the traditions. Had he
been describing the Baloch simply as they were in his own time, he would
certainly have shown them as occupying Karman and the Lut, and plundering
the routes leading towards Sistan and Khurasan; there would not have been any
especial association with the Gilanis.
The fact that the names of Baloch and Koch are frequently coupled by Firdausi is
not necessarily a proof that this was anything more than a method of speaking
prevalent in his day. In the oldest MS. of the poem the name ‘Koch’ occurs very
seldom, and not at all in the passage describing the conquest of the Baloch by
Naushirvan. It is probable that in many passages later copyists introduced the
name, as the phrase ‘Koch and Baloch’ had become customary in their time; and
this association of names was due simply to the fact that the two races had
settled near each other in Karman, although (as the allusion in Yakat shows) they
were by no means on friendly terms.

Naushirvan is more important historically

The allusion under Naushirvan is more important historically. This King is not a

mythical personage, he is the Chosroes of the classical writers who fought
against Justinian, and was only kept within bounds by the genius of Belisarius;
and Firdausi described his exploits as accurately as was possible to him. He
represents Naushirvan as making war against the Alans, who lived near the
Caspian Sea; he then transports him suddenly to the river of Hindustan (no
doubt the Indus), whence he returned after receiving the submission of the
people. On his return he was met by the news that the country was being laid
waste by the Baloches and Gilanis and determined to subdue them. 

HISTORY AND LEGEND

The first mention of the Baloches in history is found in the Arabic Chronicles of

the tenth century, the fourth of the Hijri era; but Firdausi, whose great poem, the
‘Shahnama,’ was finished in A.H. 400, refers to an earlier period than any of
these. The latter part of this poem, relating to the Sassanians, must be regarded
as mainly historical—at least, as much so as the narratives of the prose chronicles,
such as those of Mas’udi and Tabari and the Rauzatu’s-safa, which embody quite
as much legendary matter as the ‘Shahnama.’ The earlier part of the ‘Shahnama’
is, of course, mainly mythical. The Baloches are introduced as forming part of the
armies of Kai Kaus and Kai Khusrau; and this means no more than that their
name occurred among others in the ballads or legends which Firdausi drew
upon. Kai Kaus is shown as employing ‘the warriors of Pars and of the Koch and
Baloch, the troops of Gilan and of the plain of Saroch.’

1 The passage describing

the assembly of the warriors by Kai Khusrau for his expedition against Afrasyab
is also note worthy:
‘After Gustaham came Ashkash . . . . His army was from the wanderers of the
Koch and Baloch, intent on war and with exalted cockscomb crests, whose back
none in the world ever saw. Nor was one of their fingers bareof armour ... His
banner bore the figure of a tiger….. This passage is interesting as showing the
crest borne by the Baloches, alluded to above as possibly explaining the meaning
of their name.

The Balochi language

The Balochi language is rich in terms for the natural features of a mountainous

country— mountains, streams, valleys, spurs, cliffs, passes, etc. The only
apparently Arabic word among these is

Khaur, ‘a torrent bed’ (Ar. Khor), found

also in Pashto in the form

Khwar The common Arabic words wadi and jebel, which

are to be found from the Persian Gulf to the Atlantic Ocean, never occur away
from the coast which is navigated by Arab sailors.

Baloches, as recent immigrants

The names of places afford little information. The Baloches, as recent immigrants

into Mekran and the Sulaimans, have accepted most names as they found them.
The majority seem to be of Indian origin. A few Balochi names are found, such as
Suhraf (‘red water’), Syahaf (‘black water’), Geh (‘good ‘), Nafuskh (‘stepdaughter’),
Chighard (‘acacia’), Dehgwar, Gandakindaf; and names commencing
with the letters ‘

gw’, such as Gwadar, Gwattar, Gwajak, Gwarokh, are probably

of Baloch origin, as ‘gw’ in that language stands for an original ‘v’ or ‘w’, which
in modern Persian becomes ‘b’. The total number of such names is small.

All Muhammadans

Certain indications as to origin may also be deduced from the proper names in

use among Baloches. All Muhammadans have to a great extent abandoned their
original nomenclature, and adopted the system of religious names drawn from
the Quran, the various divine names, the Prophet, the early Khalifas, and other
persons famed in the history of the religion. Nevertheless, original names have
survived in many languages, especially in Persian; and Persian, as well as Arabic
names, are in use throughout India, Afghanistan, and Balochistan. There is
among the Baloches also a very large and important element which cannot be
derived from either of these sources.
I have made a list of 190 proper names, including all the names I have found in
the older poetry and in the genealogies. Of these only fifty-three are Arabic
names, twenty are Persian or compound Persian and Arabic (as Dost
Muhammad, Imam Bakhsh, etc.), four are Turkish, and twenty-three seem to be
of Indian origin, although mostly not identical with modern Hindu names. The
remaining ninety are names peculiar to the Baloohes, of which a good many are
capable of explanation from Balochi or from the older Iranian languages, and I
am of opinion that the Arabic element is less important than among most
Muhammadan races:

Bozdar means goatherds

The Balochi is, as is well known, an Iranian idiom, nearly related to modern

Persian, but at the same time showing many points of resemblance to the Zend,
or Old Bactrian, rather than to the Old Persian.

1 The vocabulary has borrowed a

large number of words from the neighbouring settled races speaking Modern
Persian on one side, or the Indian idioms Sindhi and Jatki on the other. Brahoi
has furnished a few words, and has itself borrowed extensively from Balochi.
The Arabic element is not very extensive, and mainly consists of such religious
and abstract terms as are common to all Muhammadan nations. Most of these
have been introduced through the medium of Modern Persian. Had the Arab
element been an important or ruling one, we should expect to find the words

relating to government, tribal organization, war, weapons, horses, and other

matters in which the ruling caste of a nomad race mainly concerns itself, largely
derived from the Arabic, much as in English the corresponding class of words is
derived from Norman-French. But hardly a single word of this class comes from
Arabic, though Sindhi has been drawn on to some extent. Most words of this
class belong to the original Iranian element; a few are Turkish.

Baloch is a Persian word

Baloch is a Persian word, which, in addition to its use as a proper name, means,

as explained in the Burhan-i-Qati’ and other dictionaries, a cockscomb or crest. It
seems possible that the proper name was originally a nickname derived from the
use of such a crest or badge; many tribal names are uncomplimentary nicknames,
like our Whig and Tory, and others applied to religious sects. A passage in the
‘Shahnama’ affords some support to this theory. In the enumeration of the
warriors of Ka Khusran’s army, the poet comes to the Baloch led by Ashkash

‘Intent on war, with exalted cockscomb crests.

1 This may be considered as

evidence that in the traditions or poems made use of by Firdausi the Baloches
were represented as wearing such crests, and as the words ‘Baloch’ and ‘Khoch’
have the same meaning, it seems that Baloch must be a nickname.            
                           

Bad-roch, or ‘evil day.’

Colonel E. Mockler

mentions another popular derivation of the name, according

to which Baloch is compared to Bad-roch, or ‘evil day.’ This is another of the
punning and abusive nicknames given to the race by others who had suffered
from their depredations. Colonel Mockler, however, thinks that Badroch, or
Badrosh, in Balochi may be taken as ‘equivalent to Gadrosh, or Gadros, of the
more ancient Pehlevi, or Zend, and to Gadros-ii, or Gedrosii, of the Greeks.

The word ‘Baloch’

I may here allude to the derivation of the word ‘Baloch’ from the Sanskrit

‘Mlechha,’ which Mr. Crooks brought forward in the discussion on Sir T.
Holdich’s paper above alluded to. The derivation is not a new one. Von Bohlen
suggested it long ago, and Lassen dismissed it

1 as resting on an unsupported

guess. He added: ‘It is sufficient to remark that Mlechha was never specially
used in Indian writings of the non-Indian races to the west of the Indus, but
applied to all barbarians without distinction. Also the difference between the two
names is so great that no comparison should be made without the strongest
reasons.’
To this it may be added that the word Baloch was in use long before the
movement of the tribes to the Indian frontier, or even into Mekran. It is found in
the Arab chroniclers of the early part of the tenth century and in the ‘Shahnama,’
and its origin should be sought rather in Persia than in India.
No explanation of the name Baloch as yet given appears to be satisfactory.
Natives of India in the present day say that it comes from ‘bad-log,’ or bad
people, regarding which explanation no remarks are necessary! The Baloches
themselves say it is a corruption of ‘bar-luch,’

bar meaning the wilderness, and

luch

nakd, owing to their progenitor, the offspring of Mir Hamza and a penri,

having been found abandoned in the wilderness.
R. B. Hetu Ram, in his ‘Balochi-nama,’ says: ‘In the language of Halab, dwellers
on the skirt of the hills and in the mountains are called Baloch.

Kalmati

Perhaps the Kalmati should be added to this list. Sir T. Holdich supposes them to

derive their name from Kalmat, and this is,

prima facie, probable. They are stated

to be a peculiar tribe with certain religious superstitions attached to them, and it
seems possible that their name may be derived from the Karmati or Karmatian
heretics, who were driven into Mekran by Mahmud of Ghazni and Muhammed
bin Sam.

3 Neither Kahiri nor Kalmati are probably Baloches by origin, though

long associated with them and mentioned in old ballads.

Kahiri from the name of a ‘torrent,’

The name of the Kahiris, who are in the present day a Levitical tribe with certain

peculiar attributes, is probably derived from one of the Kahiri torrents. The
legend given in the Tarikh-i-M’asumi (1600 A.D.)

2 derives the name direct from

the Kahir-tree, asserting that one of the ancestors of the tribe rode on a tree of this
sort, making it move like a horse when he struck it with a whip.

Kulachi, from Kolanch.

Kulachi is probably from the Kolanch Valley in Mekran. This tribe, once

powerful, but now of small importance, has left its name on the map. The town
of Kulachi, in Dera Ismail Khan, though now belonging to the Gandapur
Afghans, bears it, and the great seaport of KarachI has the same name, with the
usual SindhI change of ‘l’ to ‘r’.

Buledhi, from Boleda.

The Buledhi have been alluded to already. The Lashari are one of the main

divisions of the Baloch race, and the Magassi a tribe generally classed as a branch
of the Lashari. It may be noted that Magas is a place situated in a tract of country
called Laehar in Persian Balochistan.

1 Magassi is sometimes used as a term

interchangeable with Lashari; Ferrier (‘Caravan Journeys,’ p. 481) divides the
Baloches of Sistan into Nervuis (Naruis), Rinds, and Mekees (i.e., Magassis).

The Mazari

Mazari means the son of Mazar, the ‘tiger,’ a true Baloch form. Dr. Bellow

identifies the tribe with the Mysari, ‘Indian Desert Tribe.’ I have not been able to
obtain any information as to the Mysari, but the name, if correctly given, looks
like a corruption of Maheswari (like Mysore, from Maheswar) Dr. Bellew also
derives the Pathan tribe of the Sulaimans, known as Zmari, from a Hindu tribe
Maisari, perhaps the same. He does not note that Mzarai or Zmarai in Pashto
means the same as Mazar in Balochi, ‘a tiger.’

The Natka and Nokthani

Another example is the name Nutkani, as to which Dr. Bellow observes: ‘Natka

or Natkani is for Nat Indian tribe of gypsies, conjurers, rope-dancers, etc.’ This is
a most baseless conjecture. The name is not Natka or Natkanl, but Nutkani, as
pronounced by outsiders, and Nodha kani in Balochi.

Ani is the genitive plural

termination used to form patronymics. Nodhak is a common proper name of
Baloches, a diminutive of Nodh, ‘a cloud,’ a word which enters into other proper
names, as Nodho, Nodhbandagh. Nodhakani or Nutkani simply means ‘the
descendants of Nodhak.’

Bolida and Burdi

In the list occur two names, Bolida and Burdi. These refer in reality to the same

tribe, the Buledi or Bule

dhi, a name derived undoubtedly from the Boleda Valley

in Mekran. Burdi is the Sindhi form, due to the fondness of that language for
changing

‘l’ to ‘r’ and throwing the accent back to the antepenultimate; but the

Burdis of Sindh are never spoken of in Balochi by any other name than Buledhi.
Dr. Bellew gives distinct origins for the two names. He says: Bolida (mentioned
by Ptolemy) is the same as the Puladi or Faoladi of the Hazarah, and has given its
name to a district in Mekran. The original name seems to have been Bol, Bola, or

Pola (whence the Bol temple of Multan, Bolan Pass, and Plilaji

1 Shrine not far

from it) for Bala Brahman, and the form Bolida

 is the Sindhi correlative of the

Hindi Bolika, of the Bola, Pola, or BaIa.’ Dr. Bellow explains Burdi as
representing the Bhurta Solanki Rajput. So that the Buledhi tribe in one form of
its name is Bala Brahman, and in the other Bhurta Rajput.

The Marwaris

The Marwaris are the well-known Indian banking caste originating in Marwar. I

do not know how the name found its way into a list of Baloch tribes.
The Mamasani of Sistan are, I believe, Brahois, and not Baloch. This is Dr.
Bellew’s own opinion (see ‘From the Indus to the Tigris,’ 1874, p. 257).
The remaining twenty-five names on his list are Baloch, but a large number of
well-known names is omitted. A few specimens of the method of derivation, on
which the argument as to their Indian origin is founded, will be sufficient.

THE Lori

The Lori are the same as the Doms, the hereditary minstrels of Indian origin,

known in Persia and Balochistan under this name Lori, or Luri—that is, probably,
natives of Lur, or Luristan. The picturesque legend told in the ‘Shahnftma’ of
their introduction from India into Persia by Bahram Gor is well known. They are
attached as bards to Baloch tribes, but are not, and do not pretend to be, of
Baloch blood themselves. Their customs and appearance are those of the Doms
or Mirasis of India.

Mamasani and Med

The Med, or Medh, are the aboriginal, non-Baloch fisher tribe of the Mekran and

Sindh coast, known long before the appearance of the Baloches, who use the
name as a term of contempt; and those near the Indus apply it to the fishermen of
that river, and couple it with the name Machhi. A bard, in hurling a taunt at his
adversary of another tribe, tells him that Medhs and Machhis are not fit
companions for Mir Hamza!

Khetrani Baloch

The Khetrans are also a tribe of undoubtedly Indian origin, occupying a tract in

the Sulaiman Mountains, between the Baloch and Pathan tribes, and still
speaking their original Indian language—a dialect peculiar to themselves and
akin to Sindhi and Jatt with which I have some acquaintance. It is hardly
necessary to observe that their name cannot be derived, as Dr. Bellew supposes,
from Khater, ‘mercantile Rajput,’ but means ‘cultivator,’ and must be referred to
Khetr (Ski. Kshetra), ‘a field.’

Gichki baloch

The Gichki are an assimilated tribe of Mekrãn, now speaking the Balochi

language, and commonly classed as Baloch; but they are known to be of
comparatively recent Indian origin—some accounts say Sikh, and some RAjpüt.
Their settlement in Mekrän was not earlier than the latter part of the seventeenth
century. It is very likely that the tribe comprises some true Baloch elements. Dr.
Bellew makes Gichki equivalent to XajkI, and derives it from the Kachwàha
Bajpnts, which is clearly impossible on phio.. logical grounds. The termination ki,
commonly used in Sindh to form adjectives (such as Balochki, Jatki, Brahuiki,
etc.), shows that the name must be of Sindhi origin.

Dr. Bellow

The Rajput origin advocated by the late Dr. Bellow

1 deserves some consideration,

but his attempt to prove that all Baloches, jointly with a very large section of
Pathans, were of Indian descent was doomed to failure. If he had confined
himself to stating that there are some Rajput and Jatt elements in the present
Baloch nation, and that the Pathan tribes of the Sulaman range are, to a
considerable extent, of Indian origin, he would have obtained general assent; but
he attempted to show, on philological grounds mainly, that every tribe or clan
whose name he could ascertain was descended from some Indian caste or got,
and he displayed a good deal of ingenuity in comparing these names with those
of their supposed Indian pro genitors.
He commences with the name Baloch, which he considers identical with the
Balaecha (Balaicha) clan of the Chauhan Rajputs, and at the same time he finds a
clan of the Afghan Durrani named Bahrech, which he identifies with another
Chauhan clan, the Bharaecha (properly, Bhuraicha). Leaving the Afghan
identification, with which I cannot deal here, that of the words ‘Baloch’ and
‘Balaicha’ rests on no evidence except the similarity of the sounds. Even on
philological grounds it is improbable, for although original o and i are frequently
converted in Balochi into ‘e’ and ‘i‘ the reverse process never takes place. This
objection applies also to the derivation from Mlechha. The Chauhans were at no
time one of the Rajput tribes occupying the Indus Valley, either in Sindh or the
Panjab. The great mass of Chauhans is still found on the site of their ancient
kingdom, in Karnal and Ambala, in the United Provinces and Eastern Rajputana.
The Varaich, who probably represent the Balaicha clan, are at present a strong

Musalman Jatt community in the Gujrat and Sialkot districts of the Panjab.

Arab families among the Baloches probably

Sporadic cases of the settlement of Arab families among the Baloches probably

occurred during their residence in Karman and Mekran, as such cases occurred
throughout Persia, Turkistan, Afghanistan, and Northern India; but in such cases
the ultimate effect on the general population is but small. Isolated instances of
the survival of Arab features may perhaps be pointed out, and it seems to be the
general opinion of travellers in Mekran that the families of the chiefs show such
features rather than the greater number of their tribesmen. But among the tribes
along the Indian Frontier—’the Arabs of the Indian Border,’ as Sir T. Holdich
calls them—with whom I can claim a long and intimate acquaintance, I am
convinced that there is no such distinction. The typical and characteristic Baloch
face is found equally among chiefs and tribesmen, and true Arab features are
very rare.

Sir T. Holdich’s paper

In his remarks on Sir T. Holdich’s paper, ‘The Arabs of our Indian Frontier,’

 Mr.

Kennedy gave it as his opinion that the Baloches might be descended from the
Sakas, who settled in Drangiana, and gave it its later name of Sakastenê (Sijistan,
Sistan). That the Baloches may be descended from the Sakas, or from some other
race of Central Asian invaders, is no doubt possible, but I do not think that we
have at present sufficient evidence on which to base any definite conclusions. M.
de Ujfalvy finds the descendants of the Sakas in the Baltis of Baltistan, and
supposes them to be a remnant of that race left behind during the invasion of
India by the Karakoram passes. The Baltis are, like the Baloches, a race of
horsemen, with abundant curly hair; but, on the other hand, they are extremely
dolichocephalic, having a mean index as low as 72. In spite of this, however, it
might be quite possible for the Baloches to be derived from the branch of the race
settled in Sistan if we could prove that that province was the cradle of the Baloch
race. But although I formerly believed that this was the case, I have been obliged
by historical evidence to come to the conclusion that their connection with Sistan
is of comparatively modern date, and that their origin must be looked for further
north, in the neighbourhood of the Caspian Sea— in ancient Parthia, in fact.
Some connection with the Parthians seems possible, even probable; but more
than this cannot be asserted. In any case, even if the Baloches have originally
sprung from some Scythian or non-Iranian race, they have long since been
absolutely assimilated by the Iranians.

The nasal index for the same

The nasal index for the same 45 Baloches is 68.8 It is clear, therefore, that as far as

the shape of the head is concerned the Baloches must be classed with the
brachycephalic Iranians, and not with the dolichocephalic Arabs or Indians. This
applies to the Baloches west of the Indus, while those who have settled east of
that river show a tendency to approximate to the Indian type.

2

In their organization and customs they certainly show signs of Turkoman
influence, probably without much mixture of blood. The adoption of Turki
names for tribes (

tuman bolak, el, and u1us), for beasts of burden (lagh and olak, T.

ulagh

and certain proper names (Chakar, Sanjar, Ghazan, Zangi), points

towards such a contact, probably in the time of the Seljuk monarchy.

The Arabs have a mean cephalic index

The Arabs have a mean cephalic index of from 74 to 76, and the Afghans about

the same. The natives of India have a still lower index. Twenty-three castes of the
North West Provinces, as given by Mr. Risley, average 72.8 and seven of the

Punjab 73.1.

1 Mr. Risley gives the index for the Baloches as 80, but this is

misleading, as his figures include several Baloches from Lahore and the
neighbourhood, where they have long been assimilated by their Indian
surroundings, and have lost all their national characteristics. Taking only the
Baloches of the Trans-Indus districts as fairly representative of the race, I find the
mean index to be 81.5. This is most remarkable, as no cephalic index approaching
80 is to be found throughout Northern India for two thousand miles, till we reach
the Thibetans of the Darjiling Hills or the aboriginal tribes beyond Chittagong.
The Tajiks of different parts of the Iranian plateau have an index varying from 81
to 84, the Darwazis 81.4 and the Ghalchas 85. The figures given by M. de Ujfalvy
for Bakhtiaris, Kurds, and Gilanis are 88, 86, and 84, although these are based on
too small a number of cases to be altogether trustworthy. The index of the
Bombay Parsis, who have kept distinct amid their Indian neighbours, is 82.3 The
curve for 60 Tajiks given by M. de Ujfalvy is given here for convenience of

comparison with that of 45 Baloches from the districts of Dera Ghazi Khan and

Dera Ismail Khan. The correspondence is certainly striking, the highest index in
each case being the remark able figure 95 or 96.

The Iranian origin, favoured by Sir B. Burton, Lassen, Spiegel,

There remains the theory that the Baloches are Iranians, and this I believe to be

the true one. Burton’s views have already been alluded to, and Lassen, Spiegel,
and Trumpp have come to the same conclusion. I shall here endeavour to show
that it is borne out by anthropological and historical inquiries, and by evidence
derived from the legends and language of the people themselves.
The Eastern Iranians are considered by modern anthropologists to be what is
generally, for want of a better name, called the Aryan race, and to be strongly
affected by that branch of the Caucasian race which has been named

Homo

Alpinus,

which extends through Central Europe and Asia Minor to the highlands

of the Hindu hush. One of the most distinguishing features of this race is its
consistent brachycephaly, and its purest examples are found among the Tajiks of
Turkestan and the Ghalchas of the Hindu Kush.

2 The Baloches seem to be an

offshoot of this race. They certainly, as I shall show further on, came into their
present locations in Mekran and on the Indian border from parts of the Iranian
plateau further to the west and north, where they would naturally have been
associated with other Iranian nomads, such as the Bakhtiaris of the present day.
They have brought with them a language of the Old Persian stock, with many
features derived from the Old Bactrian rather than the Western Persian, and have
intruded into a region which was always in ancient times regarded as part of
India, and not of Persia, and which, both before and after the Mohammedan

conquest, was peopled by Indian tribes—Rajputs, Jatts and Meds. But the

Baloches still retain their brachycephaly, although Afghans to the north, Indians
to the east, and Arabs to the south and on the Persian Gulf are all dolichocephalic.

The Rajput origin, as put forward by the late Dr. Bellew;

The Baloches, when we first hear of them, were mounted

archers, like the Parthians; they wore long red boots; they had striped rugs and
carpets—all characteristics referring rather to Northern Persia than Arabia. When
they came to close quarters they alighted and fought on foot, like the warriors of
the Shahnama, a custom they still maintain. In one point of character they differ
strikingly from the Arabs. They are an open-hearted race, easily pleased, and
fond of jokes and laughter, while in religious matters they are free from
fanaticism, sensible and tolerant, and willing to discuss opinions with an open
mind.

The Arab origin (probably the theory most frequently held by travellers),

The general vague idea that the Baloches have Arab features seems to be based

mainly on the fact that they have long aquiline noses, which are supposed to
look Jewish; and they are, therefore, assumed to be Semitic and Arabs. But this is
not the Arab type. The latter is well described by Von Luschan,

2 who remarks

that the Beduins must be considered as pure descendants of the Old Semitic race:
‘They have long, narrow heads, dark complexion, and a short, small, and straight
nose, which is in every respect the direct opposite of what we are accustomed to
call a typical Jewish nose.’ To this it may be added that the Arab nose is very
commonly depressed at the root, a characteristic hardly ever found among the
Baloches. The great abundance of hair and beard among the Baloches is not an
Arab feature. The hairiness is often extreme, and I have on several occasions seen
Baloches whose backs were covered with hair.
Resemblances in general character and in customs, both to the Arabs and the
Turkomans, have been pointed out. On the whole, the resemblance to the
Turkomans seems the strongest, but that to the true Persian nomads is strongest
of all. In any case, it must be remembered that a nomadic life in a parched-up
country is likely to develop similar customs, even in distinct races. The fondness
for horses characterizes the races of Central Asia and the Persian Plateau as
strongly as the Arabs. The Baloches, when we first hear of them, were mounted
archers, like the Parthians; they wore long red boots; they had striped rugs and
carpets—all characteristics referring rather to Northern Persia than Arabia. When
they came to close quarters they alighted and fought on foot, like the warriors of
the Shahnama, a custom they still maintain. In one point of character they differ
strikingly from the Arabs.

The Turkoman origin, as advocated by Pottinger and Khanikoff;

Opinions as to the appearance of the Baloches have varied as much as those

regarding their origin. Pottinger compared them to the Turkomans,

1 while

Khanikoff detected a strong resemblance to the Kirghiz, probably to one of the
least Mongolian in appearance of the tribes included under this name. Pottinger

denied all resemblance to the Arabs, while, on the other hand, many travellers

speak of their Arab features. Sir T. Holdich, who advocated their Arab origin in a
paper on the’ Arabs of the North-West Frontier,’ read before the Anthropological
Society in 1899, considered the resemblance both in character and appearance
very strong. Sir B. Burton, who knew the Baloches well and had an almost
unrivalled acquaintance with the Arabs, did not favour this view. He says:

1 ‘His

appearance bears little resemblance to that of Ismail’s descendants. The eye is the
full, black, expressive Persian, not the small, restless, fiery Arab organ; the other
features are peculiarly high, regular, and Iranian; and the beard, unerring
indicator of high physical development, is long and lustrous, thick and flowing.’

Baloch wandering and pastoral life

The Baloches are nomads by instinct, and still prefer the wandering and pastoral

life wherever it is possible, but the population tends more and more to become

fixed as cultivation extends. But town life does not suit them, and although the

Tumandar has in every case a fixed residence, it never becomes the nucleus of a
Baloch town. Where the chief has selected an already existing town with a non-
Baloch population of Hindu traders and Indian Mohammedan artizans, this
population continues much as it was before. Few Baloches live in the towns ;
they prefer the open country. Their villages are collections of mud or stone huts,
and in the mountains, where the population is still nomadic, a village or

halk

consists of a number of little enclosures 3 or 4 feet high, built of loose stones. On
these a temporary roof is spread, generally composed of matting (thaghard)
made of the leaves of the phish (

Chamerops Ritchieana); and when the community

moves to another grazing ground, the roof is carried off, and the walls left
standing for another occupation. Often recesses or ledges in cliffs are utilized,
and no walls are necessary. Their wealth consists in camels, cattle, sheep, and
goats, and their life is absolutely primitive and uncivilized. Yet the arts of carpetmaking
and embroidery flourish among them, and lead one to compare them to
the Turkoman tribes, with whom they must at some time in their history have
been in contact. Robbers they were and to some extent still are; to be a successful
leader in raids and cattle-theft was a title to esteem, and

Rahzan or highwayman

was a title of honour.
Such are the Baloches, and they have been described so often and with so much
detail by so many travellers and frontier officers from Pottinger, Perrier, and
Masson to Sir T. Holdich and Major Molesworth Sykes, that it is unnecessary for
me to go into further details. What I wish to consider now is the question of the
origin and history of this remarkable race, what their position is among the races
of mankind, and how they came to occupy the countries where they now dwell.