A HISTORICAL AND ETHNOLOGICAL SKETCH

THE name Baloch is used in two distinct ways by travellers and historians. In

the first place, it is employed as including all the races inhabiting the
geographical area shown on our maps under the name of Balochistan; and in the
second place, as denoting one especial race, known to themselves and their
neighbours as the Baloch. It is in the latter signification that I employ the word. I
take it as applying to the Baloch race proper, not as comprising Brahois, Numris
and other tribes of Indian origin, nor any other races which may be found within
the limits of the Khan of Kilat's territory, or the Province of British Balochistan.
On the other hand, it does comprise the true Baloch tribes outside those limits,
whether found in Persia on the west, or in Sindh and the Panjab on the east. In
the native use of the word, apart from modern political boundaries, Balochistan
includes Persian Balochistan, the Khanat of Kilat, and the British Districts of
Dera Ghazi Khan (with the adjoining mountains), Jacobabad, and part of
Shikarpur as far as the Indus. Applying the test of language, the true Baloches
may be considered as those whose native language is (or was till recently)
Balochi, and not Brahoi, Persian, Sindhl, Jatki, or Pashto. The spelling and
pronunciation of the name have varied considerably, but the Baloches
themselves only use one pronunciation — Baloch, with the short a in the first
syllable and the o in the second. The tendency of Modern Persian to substitute

‘u’

for an older

‘o’ everywhere has had its effect in Western Balochistan, where the

pronunciation Baluchis, I believe, heard. The sound

‘o’ is historically older, and is

recognised in old Persian dictionaries.

1 Other tribal names, such as Koch, Hot,

Dodal, are also frequently given wrongly as Kuch, Hut, Dudai.