shgar, it may be useful
to give some description of the Aktaghluc and Karataghluc parties, of
whose rivalry the history of Kashgar in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and
eighteenth centuries is so full. It may be remembered that in 1533,
Reshid, the younger son of Said, who had distinguished himself in his
father's wars, seized the state from his brothers, to whom he was
inferior both in age and in birth on his mother's side. In effecting
this he availed himself of the alliance of the Usbeg rulers west of
Pamir, and during the negotiations that were transacted between them,
the distinguished divine, Maulana Khoja Kasani, of Samarcand, visited
him. He was greeted with the most striking marks of Reshid's affection,
and granted a large estate in Kashgar. He married and left two sons in
that state to represent his interests and share his possessions. The
elder son, whose mother was a Samarcand lady, was averse to the younger,
whose mother was a native of Kashgar. In the course of time they each
rose prominently in the service of the state, but they transmitted their
antipathy to their descendants. Khoja Kalan, the elder, whose influence
was greatest in Yarkand and Karatagh, was the founder of the
Karataghluc, or "Black Mountaineers." Khoja Ishac, the younger, whose
influence was greatest in Kashgar and Actagh, another form of Altai,
was the founder of the Aktaghluc, or "White Mountaineers." The
descendants of either of these Khojas, or priests, the sons of the great
divine of Samarcand, claim the title of Khoja, but that must not be
confounded with the more exclusive signification it possesses as
representing the once ruling family.

CHAPTER V.

THE CHINESE RULE IN KASHGAR.

The Chinese conquest of Jungaria and Eastern Turkestan having become an
accomplished fact, what did the new rulers do to justify their forcible
interference in Central Asia? What measures did they adopt to conciliate
the subject peoples, and what to increase the prosperity of a vast
region, naturally fertile, but impoverished by centuries of improvident
government and of civil anarchy and war? Did they follow the precedent
that had been set them by every past ruler of those countries, and leave
the people to their own devices, to starve or to exist as best they
might, so long as the tribute money was forthcoming? Did the Chinese
Viceroys of Ili, or their lieutenants in Kashgar, Yarkand, Aksu, or
Kucha adopt a policy of inaction, and pursue a line