‘Our friendly rivals’: rethinking the Great Game in Ya'qub Beg's Kashgaria, 1867–77

Abstract

The short-lived Emirate of Kashgaria was of strategic and commercial interest to both the Russian and British Empires. However, a close examination of the publications produced by the Russian and British missions to its ruler, Ya'qub Beg, militates against interpreting these missions as merely another episode of the Great Game, the century-long struggle for influence in Central and High Asia. Rather, Russian and British diplomats and travellers participated in a common culture of exploration, sharing a purpose and a European identity. This self-identification, in turn, was closely connected with the practice of exploration: objective measurement and scientific inquiry were coded as activities differentiating Russian and British travellers from the objects of their study. Although the information so gathered had political and strategic utility, the international networks and common values involved in its production established a network of mutual interests, respect, and cooperation even during moments of heightened geopolitical tension.

Keywords:

• Great Game
• comparative imperialism
• Xinjiang
• Ya'qub Beg
• exploration
• travel writing

Acknowledgements

This article was originally presented at a conference at the University of Liverpool organized by Alexander Morrison, at which comments from David Schimmelpenninck van der Oye and Thomas Welsford were particularly helpful. Professor Morrison then kindly provided a close reading of the revised conference paper, as did Kimberly Ann Powers. Quinn Javers gave useful guidance to the relevant Qing historiography, and three anonymous readers for Central Asian Survey gave detailed feedback. I thank all of these people and institutions for their assistance. I am, of course, responsible for any remaining errors of fact or judgment. Funding for the research presented in this article was provided by the University of Michigan and the University of California, Davis. Rudi Lindner nurtured some of the conceptual framework during a graduate seminar at the University of Michigan.

Notes

1. TsGARKaz f. 345, op. 1, d. 648, l. 4 (letter of Schlagintweit brothers to A.M. Gorchakov, 8 November 1858).

2. Ibid., ll. 1-1ob (G.K. fon-Fridrikhs to K.K. Gutkovskii, 23 December 1858).

3. Ibid., ll. 15-15ob (report of Ibragim Zhaikpaev, senior sultan of Akmolinsk okrug, 28 May 1859).

4. This volume itself could not have been completed without the significant support of the tsarist Ministry of War, which provided Severtsov with a convoy of soldiers and, after his fieldwork was complete, awarded him 3000 rubles towards its publication. See RGVIA f. 400, op. 1, d. 90, ll. 95 and 98ob-99, F.L. Geiden, ‘Dokladnaia zapiska po aziatskim delam: O polzhanovanii Doktoru zoologii Severtsovu 3000 r. za trudy po izsledovaniiu Turkestanskogo kraia i o nagrzhdenii drugikh lits byvshikh v sostave fizicheskoi ekspeditsii’, 24 August 1869.

5. Veniukov (1873, 278) attributes this achievement to an officer attached to Kaul'bars' 1872 mission; however, he shares a sense that British and Russian officers were engaged in a similar project as clearly as Gordon.

6. RGVIA f. 203, op. 1, d. 10, l.4. Thanks to Alexander Morrison for providing this reference.

7. RGVIA f. 400, op. 1, d. 305, ll.35ob.-36 (‘Kopiia s instruktsii dannoi Turekstanskim general-gubernatorom general'nogo shtaba Kapitanu Baronu Kaul'barsu. Tashkent 9 Aprelia 1872 goda’); l. 95 (‘Kopiia s pis'ma podpol'kovnika barona Kaul'barsa k Turkestanskomu general-gubernatoru ot 2-go iiunia 1872 goda. G. Iangisher’). The former instructs Kaul'bars that gathering information has a low priority; the latter is Kaul'bars' report that his ability to collect information has been constrained.

8. RGVIA f. 400, op. 1, d. 420, l.17, D. Miliutin to K.K. von Kaufman, secret, 28 November 1875.

9. Ibid., l.34, Loftus to Burnaby, no date.

10. Ibid., ll.37-38, G.A. Kolpakovskii to F.L. Geiden, ‘Po povodu poezdki Kapitana Angliiskoi sluzhby Byornobi v Sredniuiu Aziiu’, 2 February 1876. Despite not achieving all of his goals on the journey, Burnaby (1877) would later publish his own account of these events.

11. Ibid., l. 17.

12. RGVIA f. 400, op. 1, d. 161, ll. 40-41, F.P. Litke (for the Imperial Russian Geographical Society) to D.A. Miliutin, 21 November 1869.

13. Such claims were routine throughout the Ili crisis and in correspondence pertaining to Ya'qub Beg; their uniformity in internal and external memoranda suggests that they were more than just a bluff. See e.g., on Ili, RGVIA f. 400, op. 1, d. 313, ll. 9ob-10 (‘Kopiia s pis'ma Turkestanskogo general-gubernatora k general-maioru Boguslavskomu ot 29 aprelia 1872’) and 160-160ob (Asiatic Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to D.A. Miliutin, 4 November 1872); on Kashgaria, RGVIA f. 400, op. 1, f. 305, ll. 7ob.-8 (‘Kopiia s pis'ma Turkestanskogo general-gubernatora k praviteliu Dzhity-shara Iakub-beku ot 13-go oktiabria 1871 goda’).