Afghan Wars 1839-42 and 1878-80 | Page 3

the Siberian and Orenburg forces commenced,
culminating under General Tchernayeff in the capture of Aulieata and
Chemkent in 1864, and of Tashkent in 1865.
Here, M. Veniukoff says: "The Government intended to halt in its

conquests, and, limiting itself to forming a closed line on the south of
the Kirghiz steppes, left it to the sedentary inhabitants of Tashkent to
form a separate khanate from the Khokand so hostile to us." And this
historian tells us that the Tashkendees declined the honor of becoming
the Czar's policemen in this way, evidently foreseeing the end, and, to
cut the matter short, chose the Russian general, Tchernayeff, as their
Khan. The few Central Asian rulers whose necks had so far escaped the
Muscovite heel, made an ineffectual resistance, and in 1866 Hodjeni
and Jizakh were duly "annexed," thus separating Bokhara and
Khokand.
Here we may glance at the method by which Russia took firmer root on
the shores of the Caspian, and established a commercial link with the
Khivan region. In 1869 a military post and seaport was planted at
Krasnovodsk, on that point of the east shore of the Caspian, which
presents the greatest facilities for shipping, and as a base of operations
against the Turcomans, who were at that time very troublesome.
Several military expeditions set out from this point, and every year
detachments of troops were despatched to keep the roads open toward
Khiva, the Kepet Dagh, or the banks of the Attrek. Within five years
(1870-'75) the nomads living within the routes named had become
"good Turcomans," carried the Czar's mails to Khiva, and furnished the
Krasnovodsk-Khivan caravans with camels and drivers. But the
colonization scheme on the lower Caspian had once more brought the
Russians to the Persian boundary. In 1869 the Shah had been rather
officiously assured that Russia would not think of going below the line
of the Attrek; yet, as Colonel Veniukoff shows, she now regrets having
committed herself, and urges "geographical ignorance" of the locality
when the assurance was given, and the fact that part of her restless
subjects, on the Attrek, pass eight months of the year in Russian
territory and four in "so-called" Persia; it is therefore not difficult to
imagine the probable change on the map of that quarter.
The march continued toward Khiva, and after the usual iron-hand-in-
velvet-glove introduction, General Kaufmann in 1873 pounced upon
that important khanate, and thus added another to the jewels of the
Empire. Nominally, Khiva is independent, but nevertheless collects and
pays to Russia a considerable contribution annually.
In 1868 Russia seized Samarcand, and established over the khanate of

Bokhara a similar supervision to that in Khiva. As the distinguished
Russian already quoted remarks: "The programme of the political
existence of Bokhara as a separate sovereignty was accorded to her by
us in the shape of two treaties, in 1868 and 1873, which defined her
subordinate relation to Russia. But no one looks at these acts as the
treaties of an equal with an equal. They are instructions in a polite form,
or programmes given by the civilized conqueror to the conquered
barbarians, and the execution of which is guaranteed by the immediate
presence of a military force."
The district of Khokand, whose ruler, Khudoyar Khan, submitted
himself to Russia in 1867, was for a number of years nominally
independent, but becoming disturbed by domestic dissensions, was
ultimately annexed under the name of the Fergana Province.
To this point we have followed Colonel Veniukoff's account of the
Russian advance. It will doubtless interest the reader to continue the
narrative from an English view, exceptionally accurate and
dispassionate in its nature.
In a lecture before the Royal United Service Institution in London, May
16, 1884, Lieut.-General Sir Edward Hamley, of the British Army,
discussed the Central Asian question before an audience comprising
such Indian experts as Sir Henry Rawlinson, Lord Napier of Magdala,
and Mr. Charles Marvin, and many distinguished officers, including
Lord Chelmsford, Sir F. Haines, and Colonel Malleson. Among other
things, General Hamley said:
"Probably England has never been quite free, during the present
century, from some degree of anxiety caused by the steady, gradual
approaches of Russia through Central Asia toward India. It was seen
that where her foot was planted it never went back. It was seen that
with forces comparatively small she never failed to effect any conquest
she was bent on, and that the conquest, once effected, was final. This
security in possession was owing in great measure to the fact that the
governments she displaced were bad governments, and that she
substituted one far better in itself and of a simplicity which was well
adapted to the people with whom she was dealing. She aimed mainly at
three things--the establishment of order and of confidence and the
obtaining of