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.