the share of culpability for this dissension, we are
on this occasion bound to admit that the chief blame attaches to Yakoob
Beg. More than any other Asiatic ruler had he assumed to himself the
title of general protector of his religion and his order, against the
conquering strides of Russia; more than any other had he fostered, by
his bold and defiant attitude towards that state, the belief that there
still remained some hope of coping with the danger by a united league of
Central Asian states; more than any other had he seemed to justify this
aspiration; and more than any other must he be held culpable when he
permitted the moment that seemed most auspicious to slip by unutilized.
Moreover, when this insurrection broke out in Khokand, he had made every
preparation to defend himself against a Russian invasion. He saw the
Russians compelled, by the very necessities of their position, to call
off their forces to other quarters, and yet he abstained from striking a
blow in defence of those interests which he had ever declared were most
sacred to him. It is impossible to explain such apathy on so important
an occasion as this was; and his refusal to strike in on the side of
Aftobatcha must remain the greatest blot on an otherwise brilliant
reputation. With the collapse of that effort, and the subsequent
occupation of Ferghana, Russian attention seemed to become more occupied
with the state of affairs on the Oxus and in Cabul, than with the
fortunes or misfortunes of Kashgar. During the few months that
intervened between the annexation of Khokand and the appearance of the
Chinese north of the Tian Shan, Yakoob Beg adopted a more conciliatory
policy towards Russia, and might in a short time have sunk into the
position of a somewhat more important Khudayar or Mozaffur Eddin. Other
events intervened, however, and gave a complete change to the question,
as will be considered in a later chapter. We take our leave of this
narrative of his dealings with Russia with an admiration that would be
perfect but for the weakness he exhibited in 1875. Even that vacillation
will scarcely destroy all the claim that his bold defiance and
consistent opposition to all Russian pretensions to supremacy over
Eastern Turkestan gives him to our respectful and admiring
consideration.

CHAPTER XI.

YAKOOB BEG'S RELATIONS WITH ENGLAND.

In describing the relations that subsisted between England and Kashgar,
while under the rule of Yakoob Beg