‘Persia – especially Seistan’ [‎63r] (124/949)

Confidential.
A Note by Major H. L. Showers, C.I.E., on the present state
of affairs in Kalat and a review of the system of Administration
now being pursued.
1. A brief account of the events in the State that have led up to the present
situation is necessary. ^
2. The earlier history of the country is admirably summed up in the follow
ing extract:—
“ A chief of the Kambarani tribe obtained possession of Kalat in the early
part of the 17th century. Kalat proper was then a very small and uninfluential
State. The Khans therefore gradually engaged the assistance of the Chiefs
of their kindred tribes in the neighbourhood by giving them jagirs * of land in
• Note, all revenue free. Kalat itself. They were bound to furnish
. . . . . in re turn troops in certain specified quotas
raised among their own independent tribes and these chiefs so far became
no doubt quoad these jagirs quasi-feudal vassals of the Khans, though at first
who.ly independent in their own territories. By means of troops so raised the
territories of the Khan were gradually extended through conquest, but the force
furnished by the chiefs was the only one at the disposal of the Khan up to the
reign of Nasir Khan II. 1 hus connected together and finding the necessity
for mutual cohesion and co-operation —the independent tribes, the petty
state of Kalat and their joint conquests gradually became more or less voluntarily
amalgamated into one federal state under the authority of the Khan. As will be
t Minute by the Hon’bie Sir e. c. Bayiey seen >however,theconditionsofthearrange-
k.c.s.i , on Kaiat affairs. ' ’ ment apparently still secured to the con-
. , . , . . , . federate chiefs practically entire Self-Gov
ernment within their own previously independent territoryf.”
3. This extract clearly shows how the Kalat State in its present form came
mto existence and the delicate and slender nature of the bond uniting the head
of the Confederacy and his fellow chiefs. And, as is also evident from the minute
rtwa 3 the failure of Khan Khudadad Khan to act up to the ‘'federal pact” bv
which the Slate was constituted, and of the Sind authorities who supported
him, to appreciate the true relation between him and the Chiefs that are mainly
responsible for the incessant rebellion and disorders that marked this Khan’s
reign. I he pact itself however is a most extraordinary one, suited perhaps to
the early days in,_ and the conditions under, wdiich it originated, but absolutely
impossible as a basis on which to found anything in the form of a stable Gov
ernment among wild ignorant and lawless frontier tribes. Among such people
the pnmus inter pares position of the Khan could never be understood or pro-
perly respected. Nothing but a commanding superiority of force at its head
could hold such a community together.
, 4 - most prominent of the Khans were Abdullah Khan and Nasir Khan
I.(A.L>. 1755—1795). Both engaged in much warfare and added territory to the
Khanate. It was this no doubt that made their reigns successful and held the
confederacy together. Even the great Napoleon was only able to secure th^
stabihty of his throne by engaging constantly in war and dazzling his people by
the brilliance of his victories. r r j
cu u 5 ;u Nasir Kh r an !? el , der brother ’ Khan Ma habbut Khan, obtained from Nadir
bhah the grant of Kachi, or the low lying country between Sibi and the Sind
border as blood compensation for Khan Abdullah Khan who was killed fight-
ing with the Kaloras. And it is here that the Khan has his principal niabats
or districts, which pay him revenue and the inhabitants of which are his
immediate subjects.
6. Nasir Khan I. was the great organizer of the Brahuis. He laid down a
complete set of rules for the management of tribal affairs and the “ rawaj ” or
tribal custom thus established is followed to this day. Generally, whatever
approach to a recognised constitution Kalat possesses may he said to date
from his time. 7