The Turanian people, but especially the already mentioned Turko-Tartaric tribes, have made themselves renowned in antiquity by their warlike disposition, and the wild untractable rudeness of their habits; but the Iranians, in strong contrast with these, have always been known for the delicacy of their habits and a brilliant state of civilisation. The former have ever appeared among their neighbours as spoilers, destroyers, and plunderers; the latter, on the contrary, as civilisers, propagators of the arts, and milder social relations.

For it is not only the whole Mohamedan region which embraced Persian civilisation, but even we Europeans have borrowed much from these wonderful people, which, partly through the channel of the ancient Greek and Byzantine culture, partly by a later contact of the Western with the Eastern countries, as, for example, in the Crusades, has naturally always reached us second hand. Iran from time immemorial was the seat of civilisation, and in the entire record of the civilisation of mankind we could in vain seek for a nation which, notwithstanding grand political revolutions, notwithstanding the copious foreign influx of the ancient spirit of its civilisation, could preserve so long and faithfully the character of its national existence as the Persian. There is a great difference between the doctrine of Zoroaster and that of the Arabian Prophet, and yet in the modern Persian almost all the features of the former character may be discovered, which the Greek historians trace out in the ancient Persian. In a hasty superficial glance this will not strike the eye so easily, for, according to outward appearance, it would be most difficult, amidst the agglomeration of tribes in the Persia of to-day, to find out the genuine Iranian. Yet a deeper insight would soon convince us of the truth of what has been said, and we should see that the Iranian has not only borrowed nothing in his customs and manner of thinking from the Semitic and Turanian elements, which for more than a thousand years have endangered his nationality, but has rather exerted over the latter a powerful influence. The cradle of the Iranian nation, as asserted by a modern ethnographer, namely, the learned Russian traveller, M. de Khanikoff, in his Memoirs, "Sur l'Ethnographie de la Perse," is the Eastern portion of modern Persia, and especially Southern Sigistan or Sistan, and Khorassan, which stretches out to the north-east. It is not only ethnography, but also history, which accords with this assertion. As Sigistan, the native place of Rustem, and other celebrated Iranian heroes of the classical age, is used as the scene of action by the narrators of fiction at this day, whenever they wish to describe something highly potent and ancient, so the old Belkh in Khorassan is declared to be the original source of religion and polite education, and Merv is pointed out as the spot where Adam received from the angel the first lesson in agriculture. In a word, whatever refers to the early ages is to be met with in the East, but never in the west.

The Iranian race, on its dispersion, as has been already remarked in a foregoing paragraph, took a direction from East to West; the Turanian scattered from South to North, and in two directions, one towards the North-East the other towards the North-West. The emigration occurred in those very ancient ages, of which we can have hardly the faintest conception; yet even here there are features of a common type which guide us like glittering stars through a night of uncertainty, and though the Iranian race has suffered much in modern times from the Turko-Tartar tribes, so superior to themselves in number, one can nevertheless detect in the groups lying scattered around, the separate rings of the former chain; precisely also as one recognises in the Western remnants, though in continual contact with Turanian and Semitic elements, the avowed Mede, so in the Eastern remnants one may recognise the primitive genuine Iranian.

This preceding opinion formed from personal conviction, and every one who carefully observes the Persian of modern Iran and Central Asia must perceive the same, receives a further confirmation in the learned investigations of our arrow-headed writings;[47] and it is chiefly the Iranian catalogue of people in the arrow-headed writings at Persepolis which enumerates all the nations of Iran, starting from the centre of the empire, Persepolis, and continuing in a west and eastern direction. Of course nothing positive will be perceived in these with reference to higher or lower antiquity concerning the physiognomical distinctions of one or another branch of the families, but that a substantial difference existed already in the early ages is hardly to be doubted. "The Semitic influences in the west," says Fr. Spiegel, "began very early during the existence of the Assyrian and Babylonian kingdom, and lasted through the whole Achoemenian period. After the overthrow of the Achoemenian kingdom occurred the amalgamation with Greeks as well as Semitics, and so forth,"[48] As is rightly observed, for in the Southern provinces of Farsistan, Laristan, and Luristan, where the contact of the Iranian and Semitic elements from the earliest ages has remained undisturbed, we find in the person of the modern Persian the same physical characteristics that were described to us in these people by Herodotus, and later Greek authors. The spare form, which is more natural to the Western than to the Eastern, strongly reminds one of the principal feature of the Arabian, who is represented by Unsemitic tribes as nahif, haggard, and thin, whilst the Turk is kesif, blunt, and stout, the genuine Persian zarif, noble, and elegant.

The Semitic elements have commenced in south and east Persia, from Benderbushir until near to Kirmansah, and have especially left behind with the inhabitants of the towns perceptible traces, which strike the eye all the more when we compare the physiognomy and stature of a Sigistanian with those of an Isfahanian. This is best perceptible in the Ghebrs (fire worshippers), who sojourn among the West Iranians, and are very different from them. As one misses among them the predominating numbers of thin, slender forms, so also one seldom meets with the narrow chin or the thin, small nose. The Ghebr, in company with the Khafi, will certainly strike us less than in the midst of a group of Isfahanians; and since the Ghebrs, who are only sparingly scattered in the west of Persia, are to be considered as the remnants of the primitive Iranian people, having remained most pure from the mixture of foreign elements, one can assert with certainty that the distinction of physiognomy between East and West Iranian must always have existed. The Greek historians of the Alexandrian campaign, who came in contact with the Eastern as well as the Western nations of the then great Iranian kingdom, have disregarded in their descriptions the ethnographical side of the question, which is of the highest importance in our studies. In the same way we gather but little information from the sculptures which descend from the Sassanides. The figures on the bas reliefs of Nakshi Rustem, Nakshi Redgeb, and, near at hand, of Kazerun, may furnish faithful representations of the former Persian, but of the nationality of the same there is no accurate account; and however wide the opinion may extend with regard to stature and features, these appear rather to belong to the West Iranian than to the East Iranian, for the striking resemblance to the modern inhabitants of West Iran must be apparent to the eye of every one. Recent European travellers only cause us to observe the existing difference.

So we find that Gareia Silva Figeroa,[49] who in 1627 visited Persia on a diplomatic mission, already calls our attention to the difference between the East and West Iranian, though without entering into any details of the physical characteristics. Chardin, who travelled through this country in 1664-1677, is more explicit, for he says that the Ghebrs, in whom he perceives the remnant of the ancient Persian, are of a disagreeable exterior, clumsy figure, coarse skin, and dark complexion, and form a strong contrast to the present inhabitants of West Iran, who have a mixture of the Chirkassian and Georgian blood in their veins. This opinion is also positively expressed by Peter Angelus (Labrosse), a contemporary of the former, in his "Gazophylacium linguÆ Persarum," published in 1684, under the article, "Georgians."[50]

Since, therefore, no doubt can remain about the distinction between the East and West Iranians, we will bring the divergence to a common point of view, and then represent the separate branches or members of the two powerful races in such a way as we observed the same on our journeys, not leaving unnoticed the observations of our predecessors with reference to this subject.

In consequence of this diversity of the physical externals, there is also a distinction not to be mistaken in the moral properties of these two races. The East Iranian, although far superior to the Turks in vigour of mind and body, is far inferior to the Persian of modern Iran; and it appears as if the stamp of the mental superiority of the latter was imprinted in the symmetrical formation of their limbs and elegance of their features.

East Iranians.

We can form the following subdivisions or branches according to the geographical position of their north-easterly extension? 1. Sigistani or Khafi. 2. Tchihar Aymak. 3. Tadjik and Sart; each of which counts many subdivisions or degrees. As in our progress towards the west we lose, in the Turanian race, the Mongolian character in physiognomy more and more, and find in the single branches a continually increasing mixture of races; in the same way we discover, also, that the East Iranians become less Iranian, and more Turanian, the farther they remove from the mother land. The relation that exists between the Burut and the pure-blooded Anatolian, the same is to be found between the Sigistani and the Tadjik of Kashgar. The latter may, indeed, be called the old inhabitant of that region, yet no one will dispute that the Turanian elements, surrounding him in such numbers, have strongly influenced him.

1. Sigistani or Khafi;

Or that Shiite population of East Iran which inhabit the eastern part of Iran, from the southern borders of modern Khorassan to beyond Bihrdjan. They are as frequently called Khafi as Sigistani, as the principal mass occupy Khaf and its neighbourhood, Ruy, Tebbes, and Bhirdjan; whilst the ancient, classical Sigistan, more traversed in modern times by Afghans and hordes of Beloochees, offers to the peaceable Persian but a very insecure retreat. Judging by historical accounts of Merv, which, in the Vendidad, is enumerated as the thirteenth locality under the name Mun, as the third spot marked, one might easily conclude that the inhabitants of modern Khorassan, especially of the northern part, might be reckoned with the East Iranians. This was naturally more or less the case before the Arabian occupation; but at this day the people of Khorassan are so powerfully intermingled with Turco-Tartar elements, that the genuine East Iranian type only begins on the other side of the southern rocky chain, behind Shehri No. Without being furnished with an especial ethnographical representation, the traveller will easily perceive that the Khafi (we preserve the appellation which is usual in the country), although brown in complexion, is to be distinguished from the Isfahani; for example: in that his complexion is more olive-brown, whilst that of the latter, tanned by the sun, appears more of a dark brown. In the second place, the afore-named difference in stature and features, but especially the less fiery eye, will strike him. And in the third place, he will miss, in intercourse, that sprightliness and activity which he meets everywhere among the lively West Iranians under the same situation of climate. It can hardly be doubted, that many will be surprised that this relative difference should exist between such tribes as those in question,—of common origin, language and religion, for hundreds of years, nay, for thousands of years, of one and the same political connection. This circumstance would be with difficulty explained through an analagous case in other lands. We shall, however, recognise the cause directly, when we take into nearer view the following points:—

1st. The whole portion named of East Iran has been spared from all times the influence of the Semitic as well as Turanian nations, since the first extended themselves only toward the western side of the desert; the last, on their march westward, only at intervals passed from the high road, Merv, Nishabur, and Rei to the southern slope of the Djagatay Hills. 2nd. East Iran herself, in an earlier period, remained separated through the great desert, when the Shiite sect, the chain of solid union, embraced the Persian population of Iran; and, despite all the wildest sect-hatred, the traffic now is as great with the Sunnite Afghans and Heratis as with their western brethren. It is true that, despite all the fatigue of travel in the desert, despite all fear of the Beloochees, caravans go annually from Shiraz, Isfahan, over Yezd, Tebbes up to holy Meshed. Yet Khaf and Bihrdjan, situated south-east, are never touched upon; and then, as now, it was always the case. In the mutual intercourse of nations, language assumes foreign elements easiest and preserves them the longest. The Persian dialect of modern Iran is overloaded with Arabian-Turkish words. Fars in the south, as well as Mazandran in the north, is in this only a little distinctive. In East Iran, nevertheless, the borrowed richness of language is certainly less; and we find in much that Persian in which Firdusi, with a premeditated rejection of Arabic, wrote his great epic. In what concerns the use of old forms and words, the Persian of Bokhara is of that character, and especially we may name the Tadjiks in the first place; yet these last have too much lexicographical and grammatical material borrowed from the Turks; and this circumstance it is that has produced the conviction in our minds, that in East Iran the purest and oldest Persian is spoken.

As for the language, I should be inclined to cite the Khafi or the Sigistani as the primitive tongue of all the Iranians, yet, in regard to their ethnographical position in relation to the whole Iranian race, I would not venture to attribute that position to them in which the Buruts stand to the whole Turko-Tartar race. What branch of the East Iranian families may be the primitive is one of those questions to which no one could deny a high degree of importance, yet is the reply much more difficult as to the Turko-Tartar race. For the appearance of the latter on the stage of historical events is comparatively fresh, whilst the former stepped forward in a period of which we can hardly form a conception. We must, therefore, again repeat that the Sigistani or Khafi are named as the first among the East Iranians, only in consequence of their geographical position, and not from induction on the more primitive character of their branch.

Tchihar Aymak.[51]

These are the four people or races which, from the time of the conquest of Herat, have been thus named by the Mongols. They consist of the Timuri, Teimeni, Firuzkuhi, and Djemshidi. The whole are of Iranian origin and Persian speech, and enough so to distinguish them from the Hezareh,[52] who, though they speak Persian, yet show their pure Mongolian type, their Turanian origin without a doubt. On the spot itself there is but a confused understanding as to its name Tchihar Aymak, because many appropriate to themselves the same, and are again opposed by others. Our travellers have most contradictory statements concerning these races, and especially this erroneous idea, that the Hezareh are to be reckoned among the Tchihar Aymak, who appeared at the Southern part of Central Asia, at a time when the latter were already indicated by the name in question.

During my abode of six weeks in the town and neighbourhood of Herat, I devoted considerable attention to this question. My knowledge is grounded, not so much on hearsay touching the race, as on their physiognomical characteristics, which are incontestably the best proof. The Timuri, or the Sunnite Persians of East Iran, dwell now partly on the western boundary of Herat, as Gurian, Kuh'sun, &c., and partly also in the villages and towns situated to the east of Iran, from Turbet Sheikh Djam as far as Khaf. In the first-named region they constitute exclusively an united population, in the latter they are only to be found sporadic, for although two hundred years ago the greater number were Sunnites, yet the sect-hatred of the Shiites converted them partly by force, partly drove them into the neighbouring Sunnite city of Herat. In consequence of the frequent confusion of boundary, for Herat has endured in ancient and modern times more than forty sieges, one can easily imagine what an amalgamation has been produced by these continued movements among the solitary branches which approach so nearly to East Iran, and it is truly a wonder that the Timuri are still to be distinguished from the Shiites of East Iran.

The remarkable characteristics are first, that among them more people are to be found short and thick-set than among the Sigistanis; also as regards colour, the latter are, on an average, of an olive brown, and with dark black hair, whilst among the former a whiter complexion, with chestnut brown hair, is not uncommon. As I have said, the united number of the Timuri on the East Iran boundary amounts now in its fullest extent to one thousand families, because the great majority dwell in Herat.

The Teimeni are hardly in any respect to be distinguished from the latter dwelling in the Northern and Southern parts of the so-named DjÖlghei Herat, from Kerrukh to Sebzewar: only a small part has extended as far as Ferrah, and is named by the Afghans Parsivan (Farszeban, speaking Persian). Since the Afghan rule has taken place in the Western valleys of the Parapamisian mountains, many attempts have been made to establish in the midst of the Persian population Afghan colonies, yet until this day all have failed, for the discord and strife which have wasted this neighbourhood for centuries still continue; each member of the Tchihar Aymak knowing no greater enemy than the Afghan. In consequence of this circumstance the Teimeni, although an agricultural people, are of wild, warlike nature, and there is no longer any trace of that spirit of wisdom, which in the time of the descendants of Taimur, viz., Sultan Husein Mirza, animated them.

The Sunnite Persians of former times contended in poetry, learning, and music, with the Shiite confederates in the west; at the present time they are raw barbarians in comparison with the latter.

Firuzkuhi is the name of the little people that dwell on the steep hill, north-east of Kale No, and from their inaccessible situation afflict the whole neighbourhood with robbery and plunder. To the traveller are narrated the most gloomy stories of Kale No on the summit of the mountain, and the fortified places of Derzi Kutch and Tchekseran are considered the same as the robber nests of the Bakhtiari and Luri in the environs of Isfahan. As all dwellers in mountains remain distinct from their nearest kindred in the valleys, so is this the case also between the Firuzkuhi and the remaining Aymaks, and one could almost name them the Gileki and Mazemderanis of East Persia. On the first glance they appear to have much resemblance with the Hezareh. It is even asserted that they came forth from them, yet neither has their formation of the forehead and of the chin, nor the complexion and figure of the body,—a decided Turanian character; and although it might present a strong mixture, yet does the Iranian element prevail, for, besides that they all speak Persian, the names of their dwelling-places and khans are pure Persian words.

They inhabited those hills from immemorial time, and though Taimur settled them by force in Mazenderan, they soon returned back to their old hilly home, and have lived since that time in constant warfare with their neighbours, partly supporting themselves from their scanty breed of cattle and tillage; partly also from robbery and plunder, which they perpetrate on the caravans upon the road to Maymene, or upon the scattered tents of the Djemshidi. Their total number hardly amounts to eight thousand families.

The Djemshidi, the only tribe of the East Iranians living exclusively in a nomadic state, inhabited from time immemorial the shores of Murgab, whither they, according to their own statement, settled out of Sigistan in the time of Djemshid, from whom they derive their descent. This national myth cannot be considered quite true, yet is it incontestable, that among all Iranians who now inhabit Central Asia the Djemshidi have the most striking resemblance with the Sigistani, which is so much the more to be wondered at, because these for so long a time have led a settled life, whilst those have led a nomadic; and the vast influence which the difference of the two ways of life has on the development of the body needs hardly be mentioned. Khanikoff thinks they approach rather the Tadjiks; but I cannot coincide in this view, because, in the first place, the Djemshidi is thinner; secondly, has a longer face and a far more pointed chin than the Tadjik; and in the third place, their language, as well in form as in copiousness, agrees much more with the Persian dialect of East Iran than with that of Central Asia. As to what concerns their method of life, they are the only Iranians who, in every respect, have taken much from the Turanians; that is to say, from the Salor and Sarik Turkomans living in their neighbourhood; whilst the other half-nomadic Aymak used a long Afghan tent, which here is named the Tent of Abraham, one sees among the Djemshidi that round, conical tent of the Tartars surrounded with felt and a reed matting; their clothing also and food is Turkomanish; indeed, even in their occupation, they copy these last. For when a flourishing position, that is, abundance of horses and arms befalls them, they are just such fearful robbers of mankind as the children of the desert. They enjoy also the reputation of the best riders and warriors amongst all Aymak, and abide, partly in service at Herat or Maymene, partly in league with one or other of the Turkoman tribes, when the immediate question among them is a large tchapao (razzia). In consequence of this aforesaid connection they were transported to the banks of the Oxus by force by Allah Kuli Khan, from Khiva, after he had conquered them with the allied Sariks. They remained more than twelve years there; a fruitful place, which was assigned to them as their new home, and rendered them well to do. Yet the longing for the poorer, but old home-like hills, was soon felt by them, and availing themselves of the confusion which a war of the Khivians with the Turkomans called forth, they packed up everything quickly and fled, without fearing the danger of pursuit, across Hezaresp, Tchardjuy, Maymene, back towards the town of Murgab. In their march one thousand Persian slaves joined them, who, in consequence of their escape, obtained their freedom; but, having reached Moorgab, were again taken in a treacherous manner and sold in Bokhara. Although the Djemshidi among all the Iranian races of the East, as well as of the West, have most truly retained the warlike spirit of old Persia, yet they are in proportion less rough in their customs and intercourse with strangers than the neighbouring Turkomans, with whom they have had relations for a long time; and, notwithstanding his wild exterior, the Djemshidi, even in the lowest class, is polite in word and manner:—the light and shade of the Iranian character are not recognisable in him, and we must not be surprised if in the customs of this nomadic people we meet with the most lively marks of the pre-Islamite time. Islam with them has taken still less root than among the other Turanian nomads, and the greater part of them use it as a veil, under which lurk concealed many features of the religion of Zoroaster; thus, for instance, fire among them is in higher estimation than among the Tadjiks; the door of the tent is always facing the East, and the idea of the good and evil spirit is so universal that the lowest class of the people, especially the women, when a sheep or goat is slaughtered, never neglect to throw certain parts of the animal which are considered by other nomads as delicacies, to the bad spirit as kende, "unclean;" and they are only eaten by the dogs. It is worthy of remark, that among the ruins of Martchah the same stories are in circulation, as among the Yomuts of the old remnants of the ruins at Meshdi Misrian. Martchah was in olden times the Kaaba of the whole region until the wicked Turkomans appeared there, and destroyed the whole.

This is all that I can say in respect to the Tchihar Aymaks. I can, notwithstanding all inquiries, learn nothing of their name before their last appellation. According to all probability they were reckoned among the Tadjiks, yet now they are distinct from these latter, and form the second gradation of the Iranian race in its extension to the North-East.

Tadjiks.

As the remnants of the Persian population of Central Asia are called, whom we meet in their largest numbers in the Khanat of Bokhara and in Bedakhshan. But there are, besides, many settled in the cities of Khokand, Khiva, Chinese Tartary, and Afghanistan; although here and there little deviation in their physiognomical outward developments are observable, in consequence of the different climacteric and social relations under which the Tadjiks live. And thus, for example, the Tadjiks of Bokhara and the Afghanistan towns have much more resemblance one with another than the former with the Bedakhshanis, or the confederate races of Chinese Tartary; notwithstanding, the leading features of one common type are generally observable among them. They are usually of a good middle height, broad, powerful frame of bones, and especially wide shoulder bones. Their countenance, the Iranian type of which immediately strikes the eye at first sight, is more oblong than that of the Turks; but by the wide forehead, thick cheeks, thick nose, and large mouth, we soon perceive that this most eastern branch of the Iranian family has much that is heterogeneous, that is to say, Turanian, in its stamp of countenance as well as in the formation of body, and is in nowise to be regarded as the primitive type of the Iranian race, as M. de Khanikoff imagines.

According to the statements of the Vendidad and Greek historians, it is no longer matter of doubt that the native country of the modern Tadjik was in those celebrated regions of ancient times, Bactria and Sogdiana,—the most ancient seat of Iranian civilisation, the cradle of the religion of Zoroaster, and the source of the heroic legends of Persia. We must own, that even in the most ancient times they were inhabitants of this region, for the ancient Khorassan, which stretched far into Chinese Tartary, was, as is proved by topographical nomenclature, founded and occupied by Iranian colonies. And who is there that does not perceive the continuous stream of Scythian-Turkish elements which has overflowed Central Asia, from the valleys of the Altaic Mountains, that officina gentium, from 700 B.C. to 400 A.D.?

No country which was situated along the chief route of these migrations could remain unaffected by the intermingling of foreign blood; and as the northern half of Persia, the modern district of Maymene, Andchoi, and the western declivities of the Parapamisian Mountains could preserve, but in a slight degree, the primitive unity of race; so also was it equally impossible to the Iranians of Transoxiana. The inhabitants only of the mountains of Bedakhshan, namely, the Vakhani (in which name the learned writer of the article, "Central Asia," in the Quarterly Review, July—September, 1866, believes that he has detected the origin of the Greek, ????[53]), can have a greater claim, from their less accessible homes, to unity of race; for all the Feizabadis[54] whom I have seen have more indelible marks of the Iranian type than the Tadjiks: even their very language is freer of Turanian words. And since one can imagine that a people, though in strictest retirement, can preserve for centuries its primitive type, the Vakhani alone, and not the Tadjiks in general, must be considered the truest remnants of the ancient East Iranian.

As regards the appellation Tadjik, I have always found that those concerning whom we are speaking never use it themselves willingly; for, if this does not sound exactly in their ears as a term of reproach, people are yet accustomed to understand by it that expression of contempt with which the Œzbeg conquerors regard the subdued aborigines. By the word Tadjik, the Tartar population of Turkestan understand a man without warlike disposition, of a covetous, avaricious nature;[55] with crafty and vaunting ideas; in a word, everything that stands in opposition to Œzbeg frankness, simplicity, and uprightness. These relations are, moreover, to be found everywhere between Turanian conquerors and the subjugated Iranians; for as the latter, in Persia, are far inferior to the Turks in mental endowments, so is this also the case in Central Asia. And Bokhara has only become the head quarters of Central Asiatic civilisation, because here, from the earliest ages, existed the overwhelming numbers of the Tadjik population; who, continuing their previous exertions in mental culture from the pre-Islamite times, notwithstanding the oppression of foreign power, have civilised their conquerors. As in the earliest ages, after the reception of the Islam faith, all the celebrities in the field of religious knowledge and belles lettres were mostly Tadjiks; so, to-day, one still meets in Bokhara, Khokand, and Kashgar, the most conspicuous Mollahs and most celebrated Ishans. At the court of Bokhara, notwithstanding the Œzbeg origin of the prince, the chief ministers are always Tadjiks; nay, even in the rude Œzbeg government of Khiva, the Mehter (Secretary of State), as an officer whose qualifications must be of the highest order, is chosen invariably from the Persian population of the place. It is truly wonderful how the Tadjiks, notwithstanding more than a century of co-existence with the Œzbegs, are to be distinguished from the latter, not only in their individual nature but in their habits. A proverb says, "Look at the Œzbeg on horseback,—the Tadjik in his house;" for, the same care that the one bestows on his steed, arms, saddle and horse, the other spends on his house and attire. However poor the Tadjik, he will yet pass for a man of more substance than he is, and will always appear rich and great in public, although sparing and abstemious in his family circle. Nor is his conversation less choice: the courteous expressions, the compliments of which he makes use, sound somewhat Tartarian, to ears accustomed to Persian refinement; yet, in contrast with the Œzbeg, he is to be considered an accomplished gentleman. Attuned by nature to peaceful occupations, the Tadjiks are devoted everywhere considerably to tillage, commerce, and industrial pursuits, as they hate war; and if they are compelled to handle weapons, they are rarely valiant, but frequently cruel. They are also defective in that national feeling that strikes one so forcibly among the Œzbegs. This has best shown itself in recent occurrences in Tashkend. In a letter from General Kryjanovsky from the town above-named, (Ausland, December 4th, 1866, H. 1159), we see that, among the diversified population of that place, the Sarts were the first who drew near, in a friendly fashion, to their conquerors, and certainly rendered very readily considerable help in hard labours of pacification; and that probably to the dislike of all the Œzbegs, who certainly took no part in the pretended petition to the Russian Government.

The Tadjiks hold well together, but this is more from the mutual support of one with another in an oppressed race than a special effort for Tadjik public interest; and if they wish to distinguish themselves, which is only the case in Bokhara, then they are in the habit of showing with pride their Arabian descent. The emptiness of this last vaunt Khanikoff has shown sufficiently. He derives the word Tadjik from Tadj (crown), a head-dress, which the old fire worshippers had, and the Ghebrs wear even now;—the name Tadjik arose from it, by which the adherents of the teaching of Zoroaster were called at that time—before Mohamedanism, or else it was a term of their own adoption; for the word Tadji in Huzvari, and Tazi in Persian, which signifies Arab, has with the first no connection. It is remarkable that the word Tadjik is even found in Western Asia. There are Armenians who call Turks as well as Arabs, i.e., Mohamedans, Tadjik, but only among themselves privately. And it seems to me to be constantly a nickname affixed by the oppression of their tyrannic rulers. Since I have found this universal among the Armenians of Asia Minor, it appears to me that they did not wish to express by it only Mohamedans, but also the adherents of a strange religion, and that this, according to all appearance, old word, has been transmitted later to the Arabians by the old inhabitants of Persia, with whom the Armenians, under the Sassanides, were in contact. That the name Tadjik has been missing among both Arabic and Persian authors of the first century, after the entrance of Islam, but existed early in Central Asia, the UÏgur MS. (Kudatku Bilig the lucky knowledge) best shows. This bears the date of 462 Heg., and we find there the word Tadjik often quoted in opposition to Turk. The above-named work, which Jaubert has mentioned in the Asiatic Journal, 1825, is an UÏgur version, or rather rifacimento of the Chinese original. The Turks themselves have always called the Transoxanian aborigines Sart, a word of which I know not the origin. M. de Khanikoff mistakes when he supposes that this is only the case in Khiva, for he must know that in the Russian Army the Persian population of conquered Tashkend at a later period was enrolled under the name of Sart, and they were so called in all Khokand. Also the above-named General Krijanovsky speaks of Tadjik and Sart as of two different races. As to this word Sart, the derivation of which is wholly unknown to me, it is a term of which the famous Mir Ali Shir, in the time of Sultan Husein Mirza BaÏkera, makes use in a treaty on the Persian and Turkish language. The latter, he always calls the Sart tili (Sart language), and not the Tadjik tili. Sart is hence legally used for the Turkish appellation of Tadjik. Here and there Œzbegs busy themselves in making a distinction between Sart and Tadjik; but I cannot agree with this view, although I will not conceal the fact, that the Sarts seen in mass differ greatly in some physiognomical peculiarities from the Tadjiks. They are, for instance, more slender-built, have a longer face, and, moreover, a higher forehead than the Tadjiks; but it must also be mentioned as a qualification of the above, that they formed frequent alliances with the free Persian slaves of Central Asia, which the Tadjiks never or very seldom did.