Tribe and state in Waziristan, 1849-1883

• Main Author: Beattie, Hugh
• Published: SOAS, University of London 1997
• Subjects: 900; History
• Online Access: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.263222

The thesis begins by describing the socio-political and economic organisation of the tribes of Waziristan in the mid-nineteenth century, as well as aspects of their culture, attention being drawn to their egalitarian ethos and the importance of tarburwali, rivalry between patrilateral parallel cousins. It goes on to examine relations between the tribes and the British authorities in the first thirty years after the annexation of the Punjab. Along the south Waziristan border, Mahsud raiding was increasingly regarded as a problem, and the ways in which the British tried to deal with this are explored; in the 1870s indirect subsidies, and the imposition of 'tribal responsibility' are seen to have improved the position, but divisions within the tribe and the tensions created by the Second Anglo-Afghan War led to a tribal army burning Tank in 1879. The contrast is drawn with the relatively good relations which were established with many of the Darwesh Khel Wazirs, some of whom had begun to graze flocks and cultivate land in the Bannu district on the north Waziristan border. However, clumsy handling of the latter led to a serious crisis in 1870, and the resulting efforts to improve tribal management are described. In conclusion, the nature of British frontier policy in Waziristan in this period is analysed, and the strategic, political, economic and cultural influences upon it examined; in particular ideas about how the tribes were organised and could be handled are investigated. Actual techniques of tribal management are described and their effectiveness assessed. Tribal reactions are briefly explored; the difficulties experienced with them are seen to have been due to factionalism and a general clash of cultures, as much as to their poverty. The relationship between the tribes and the government in Kabul in this period is also discussed. The implications for the general question of relations between 'tribe' and 'state' are briefly assessed, and the dialectical quality of the relationship emphasised.