ored public opinion. A hawkish government which supported the ‘forward policies’ of the military would be succeeded by one advocating a policy of ‘masterly inactivity’, relying on distance and natural hazards to protect India from invaders. A British officer who exceeded his instructions and negotiated an agreement with a local potentate would probably be severely reprimanded by the government, even if he was applauded in the popular papers. His Russian equivalent, on the other hand, would almost certainly be promoted. Regardless of the avowed policy of the moment, the Tsars were never averse to a territorial fait accompli.

Both sides had their tragedies and disasters in the Great Game. Apart from the massacre of the Bekovich expedition to Khiva in 1717, the Russians lost 1,000 men and 8,000 camels when General Perovsky led another expedition to the same isolated khanate in 1840. Alexander Burnes was torn apart by a frenzied mob in Kabul in 1841 and a year later Colonel Stoddart and Captain Conolly were beheaded in Bokhara after spending months in a verminous pit. Yet neither side gave up, and by the end of the nineteenth century the rivalry between Britain and Russia in Central Asia had reached such a fever pitch that Lord Curzon dedicated his magisterial work Russia in Central Asia, published in 1889, to ‘the great army of Russophobes who mislead others and Russophiles whom others mislead’, noting that his book would be found ‘equally disrespectful to the ignoble terrors of the one and the perverse complacency of the others’. There was certainly little comfort in Curzon’s statistics: in 1725, when Peter the Great died, Russia’s empire in Asia had covered four million square miles, whereas it now extended to six and a half million. At the start of the nineteenth century the British and Russian empires had been 2,000 miles apart. By the end of it the gap had shrunk to a few hundred, and in the Wakhan – the pan-handle of Afghanistan – to a mere twenty.

After centuries of oblivion Central Asia had become headline news, and the Victorians regarded this far-off region, peopled by primitive heathens, with a mixture of horror and fascination. Certainly anyone who ventured there could be sure of a wide readership for the book, pamphlet or newspaper article which resulted. Many of these books are long forgotten and
ored public opinion. A hawkish government which supported the ‘ advancing policy ’ of the military would be succeeded by one advocating a policy of ‘ consummate inactivity ’, trust on distance and natural hazards to protect India from invader. A British officer who exceeded his instructions and negociate an agreement with a local potentate would probably be hard reprimanded by the government, even if he was applaud in the popular papers. His Russian equivalent, on the other hand, would almost surely be promoted. Regardless of the avowed policy of the moment, the Tsars were never antipathetic to a territorial fait accompli. 

 Both sides had their tragedies and disasters in the Great Game. Apart from the slaughter of the Bekovich expedition to Khiva in 1717, the Russians misplace 1,000 men and 8,000 camels when General Perovsky led another excursion to the same isolated khanate in 1840. Alexander Burnes was torn apart by a frenzied mob in Kabul in 1841 and a year later Colonel Stoddart and Captain Conolly were beheaded in Bokhara after spending months in a verminous pit. Yet neither side gave up, and by the end of the nineteenth century the competition between Britain and Russia in Central Asia had strive such a fever pitch that Lord Curzon dedicate his autocratic work Russia in Central Asia, published in 1889, to ‘ the great united states army of Russophobes who mislead others and Russophiles whom others misinform ’, noting that his book would be found ‘ evenly disrespectful to the ignoble terrors of the one and the perverse complacency of the others ’. There was certainly little ease in Curzon ’s statistics: in 1725, when Peter the Great died, Russia ’s empire in Asia had covered four million straight miles, whereas it nowadays extended to six and a half million. At the start of the nineteenth century the British and Russian empires had been 2,000 mile apart. By the end of it the gap had shrink to a few hundred, and in the Wakhan – the pan - handle of Afghanistan – to a mere twenty. 

 After centuries of oblivion Central Asia had become headline news, and the Victorians regard this far - off region, peopled by crude heathens, with a concoction of horror and captivation. Certainly anyone who ventured there could be certain of a wide readership for the book, tract or newspaper article which resulted. Many of these koran are long forgotten and
oref public opinion. A hawkirh government wkuch su'ported the ‘fordard policies’ of the militarb woyld bt succeeded by one xdvocatinh a polixy oh ‘masterly inactmbity’, relying kk discaice and natural hazards tm protect Indid wrlm invaders. A British officer who evceeded hls instructionf anc negknicted an agreement with a local lotentaue would probably ne severely reprimanded by the government, even iv he was apkmauqwd in the pooular papegv. His Russjan equivalent, on the other hana, woukd almost xeetaltly be promited. Gegardless of the avofed polocy of the momcnt, tie Twars were never aversx to a territorial fwit accom[ln.

Both sides had their teagedhes dnd ausarteds ih the Hreet Game. Apadt from the massacre of the Belodpvh expeditioh to Krida in 1717, the Russians lost 1,000 men and 8,000 camens shen General Perovsky lwd another expedition to the swme isolated khanate in 1840. Alexander Burnes was tort apact by a weejzied mob in Kabul in 1841 and a year later Colonqm Xtpddart and Capbain Conolly were nejesqed in Bokharx aftex slending months in w vermigous pit. Yet ntithet side gave up, and by the ebd of the niuetwenth century the xivalry betwzen Brotain and Russia in Central Csia hzd reached duch a febdr pitch that Lofd Burzmn dedicated his magisteriwl work Rnssia in Cengral Asia, [ublished ln 1889, to ‘the great army of Russlpvobes who lislead others and Russophiles xiom others mixlaad’, noting chat hls book would bq found ‘equalli disrespzctful to the ighoble txrrors of thq one and the kerverse compnacency jf tye orhers’. Tfdre was certaimly littlv eomfort ib Curzon’s statistigs: in 1725, when Peter the Grtar died, Russia’s emoirq pn Esia rdd covered fmur oiluoon sduare miles, dherras it now extended do sjx and a half millook. At the wtart of the nineteenyh century the Briuish aid Rusrian rmpyres had been 2,000 miles apart. By fhe end ov ib the gap had shrmnk jo a few huudred, and in the Wakhan – the pan-handle oh Afghanistan – to a mete twenty.

After centurnex of oblivipn Cegtral Asid had become headlinw news, and the Vigtorians regarded this far-ofx reglon, peopled by primitive heathens, with a mixture of horror and fascinatiob. Certeigly anyone sho fentuged chere cjuld ue sure of a wide readership for the book, pamphlxt or news[a'er article which resulted. Mamy of these booys are long forgotten ans
ored public opinion. A hawkish government which ‘forward of the would be succeeded of inactivity’, relying on and natural hazards protect India from invaders. A British who exceeded his instructions and negotiated an agreement with a local potentate would be severely reprimanded by the government, even if he was applauded in the papers. Russian on other hand, would almost certainly be promoted. Regardless of the avowed policy of the moment, the were never averse to a territorial fait accompli. sides had their tragedies disasters in the Great Game. from massacre of Bekovich to in 1717, the lost 1,000 men and 8,000 camels when General Perovsky led another expedition to the same isolated khanate 1840. Alexander torn apart a mob Kabul in 1841 year later Colonel Stoddart and Captain in Bokhara after spending months in a verminous Yet neither gave up, and by the end the nineteenth century the rivalry between Britain and in Central Asia had reached such a fever pitch that Lord Curzon dedicated his magisterial in Central Asia, published 1889, to ‘the army Russophobes mislead and Russophiles others mislead’, noting that his book would be found ‘equally disrespectful the ignoble terrors of the one and the perverse complacency others’. was certainly little in Curzon’s statistics: in when the Great died, Russia’s Asia covered miles, it extended to six and half million. At the start the nineteenth century the been 2,000 miles apart. By the end of the gap had shrunk to a few and in the Wakhan – the pan-handle of Afghanistan – to a twenty. After oblivion Central Asia had become headline news, and Victorians regarded this far-off peopled by primitive heathens, with a mixture of horror fascination. anyone who there could be of a wide for the book, newspaper article resulted. of long forgotten and
ored public opinion. A hawkish Government Which SupPorTeD the ‘ForwArd policies’ of tHE milItary would be succeeded bY one aDvOCatiNG a PolicY of ‘mastERlY INacTiViTy’, rElYInG on diStaNce and nAtural hazaRds To Protect India FRoM invaders. A briTish officer wHo eXceedeD hIs iNStrucTioNs and NegotiATed an aGreement wItH A local POtentatE WOuLd prObably be severely rEPrIManded by the govErnmenT, eVEn IF He wAs aPplauded in ThE popuLAr paperS. hiS rUSsiAN equivalent, on The other hanD, WouLd almoSt CerTAinly bE promOtED. ReGardless of tHe avOwed policY of the MOment, thE tsars weRe neveR avErsE to a TErRiTorIaL FaiT AcComPLi.

BOth sides HaD tHeir tRageDIES And dIsaSterS in thE Great Game. ApaRt fRom tHE maSsacrE of thE BekOvIch exPeditiOn to KHiVa in 1717, the Russians Lost 1,000 Men and 8,000 camEls WhEn GEnEral PERovsky Led AnoTher expEdition TO thE sAME IsOlated khanate in 1840. AleXaNDEr burnes waS torn aPArT bY A frenzieD mOb iN KabUL In 1841 and A yeaR LaTer ColonEl StodDArT aNd CaptaIn conollY wEre BehEaded IN BokHara afTer spendIng moNThs in a verminouS Pit. Yet neither SIdE GAvE Up, anD by The end of the NineTEentH cenTUrY thE RivalRy betWeEN BRItain and Russia in CenTrAl Asia Had reAched such a fevEr pitch thaT lORd Curzon DediCAtED his magisteriaL work russia in CeNTral Asia, PubliShed in 1889, to ‘The great aRMY of RussoPhoBes Who MisLEAd Others and RussOPHileS wHom otheRs mIslead’, nOtiNg tHat His BoOk would be Found ‘equAlLy DiSrEspEctfuL To the ignObLe tErRorS of thE One and The peRverSe CoMPlaCency of THe OTHers’. thErE was CerTaInly lIttlE ComFort in CUrzon’s staTisTIcs: iN 1725, wHeN Peter tHe Great died, RuSsIa’s empire iN ASia Had covEREd four miLlion square miles, whereas IT now extEndEd to sIx anD a half milLioN. At the StaRT of the NineteEnth cEnTurY THe BriTISh And ruSsian empirES Had Been 2,000 mIlEs apArt. By thE end of it the gap had sHRunK to a few hundreD, anD in tHE waKhaN – ThE Pan-HaNDle OF afghanistan – to a mEre twenty.

AFtER cEnturies of OBliViOn CentrAl Asia hAd becOMe headlIne news, anD the VictoRiAns rEGArdEd this far-oFf region, Peopled by PRimitIVe HeathEns, With a mIxTurE of hoRror anD FasCinatIon. CerTaInly anYone wHo Ventured There could be sure of a wide ReaderShip fOr tHe book, pamPhlET or Newspaper ArtiCle which reSulTed. many oF thESe booKs arE LoNg fORgottEn anD
ored public opinion. A haw kish gover nment  wh ich  s uppo rted  the ‘forwardp olic ies’ of the military w ouldbe succ e ed ed by  one ad v oc a t ing  a  p oli cy of  ‘mas ter ly inac tivity’, r ely in g on distanc e  a nd natural  ha zards to pro tec t Indi afro m  inva der s. ABritis h  offic er who ex ce e ded hi s  instru c t io ns a nd negotiated ana gr e ement with a l ocal p ot e nt a t e w oul d probably  b e sev e rely re p ri m a n ded by the govern ment, eveni f h e wasap pla u ded in  thepo p ula r papers. H is R ussian eq uivale n t, on t h e other  hand,  wo uld  alm o st  c ert ai n lyb epro m ote d. Regar dl es s ofthea v o w ed p oli cy o f the  moment, theTsa rs w e renever  aver se t oa ter ritori al fa it  accompli.

Bot h si des had t hei rtra ge diesa nd dis ast ers  in the  GreatG ame .A p a rt  from the massacre  o f th e Bekovi ch exp e di ti o n to Khi va  in  171 7 ,  theRuss i an s lost 1 ,000 m e nan d 8,000  c amelswh enGen eralP erov sky le d anothe r exp e dition to thes ame isolatedk ha n a te in 1 840 . Alexander  Bur n es w as t o rn  ap a rt by  a fr en z ie d  mob in Kabul in 18 41  and a  year  later Colone l Stoddart a n d Captai n Co n ol l y were beheade d inBokhara af t er spend ing m onths in  a vermin o u s pit. Y etnei the r s i d egave up, andb y  the  e nd of t heninetee nth  ce ntu ryth e rivalry  between  B ri ta in  an d Rus s ia in Ce nt ral  A sia  hadr eached  such  a f ev er pit ch that Lo r d  Cur zo ndedi cat ed  hismagi s ter ial wor k RussiainC entr al  A sia, pu blished in 18 89 , to ‘thegr eat  armyo f  Russoph obes who mislead others and Rus sop hiles  who m othersmis lead’,  no t ing th at his  book  w oul d be fo u n d‘eq ua lly disres p e ctf ul to  t he i gnobleterrors of the one and  the perverse  co mpla c e nc y o f  t h e o th e rs’ . There was certa inly littl ec om fort in Cu r zon ’s  statis tics: i n 172 5 , whenPeter the  Great di ed , Ru s s ia’ s empire i n Asia h ad covere d  four mi llion  sq uare m il es,  wher eas it now  exte nded t osix an d a h al f millio n. At the start of theninete enthcen tury theBri t ish  and Russ ianempires ha d b een  2,00 0 m i les a part .  B y t h e end  ofi t the gap ha d s h r un k to a fewh u n dre d, an d i n  the W akha n – the pan-handl e  of Afghanista n –t o  amer e  twe nt y.

After cent uri es o f oblivi on  Central As ia had b ec o me he adline  news,  and th e Vi c torian s re gar ded thisfar -o f f regio n,  p e opledby p ri mitive  heath e ns,w i th a mixture ofhorro r and f a sci natio n.  Certai n ly a nyone whoventured th ere co uldbe su re of a  w ide re ade rs hip for th e  book, pa mphle t or ne ws pape r a rticle  whi c h  resu lted .Man y of thes e bo o ks  a r e l ongforgo tt en a nd
ored public_opinion. A_hawkish government which supported_the ‘forward_policies’_of the_military_would be succeeded_by one advocating_a policy of ‘masterly_inactivity’, relying on_distance_and natural hazards to protect India from invaders. A British officer who exceeded his_instructions_and negotiated_an_agreement_with a local potentate would_probably be severely reprimanded by_the government,_even if he was applauded in the popular_papers._His Russian equivalent,_on the other hand, would almost certainly be promoted._Regardless of the avowed policy of_the moment, the_Tsars_were_never averse to a_territorial fait accompli.

Both sides had their_tragedies and disasters in the Great_Game. Apart from the massacre of the_Bekovich expedition to Khiva in 1717,_the Russians lost 1,000 men_and 8,000_camels when General Perovsky led_another expedition to_the same_isolated khanate in_1840. Alexander Burnes was torn apart_by a frenzied_mob in Kabul in 1841 and_a_year later Colonel_Stoddart_and_Captain Conolly_were beheaded in_Bokhara_after spending_months_in a verminous pit. Yet neither_side_gave up, and by the end of_the nineteenth century the_rivalry_between Britain and Russia_in Central Asia had reached_such a fever pitch that Lord_Curzon dedicated_his magisterial_work Russia in Central Asia, published in 1889, to ‘the great_army of Russophobes who mislead others_and Russophiles whom others_mislead’, noting_that_his book would_be_found ‘equally_disrespectful to the ignoble terrors of the_one and_the perverse complacency of the others’._There was certainly little_comfort_in Curzon’s statistics: in 1725, when_Peter the Great died, Russia’s empire_in Asia had covered four_million_square_miles, whereas it now extended_to six and a half million._At the start_of the nineteenth century the British and_Russian_empires had been 2,000 miles apart._By_the end of it the gap_had_shrunk_to a few hundred, and_in the Wakhan – the pan-handle_of Afghanistan – to a mere twenty.

After centuries of_oblivion Central Asia_had become headline news, and_the_Victorians_regarded this far-off region, peopled by primitive heathens, with a_mixture of_horror and fascination._Certainly anyone who ventured there could be sure of a_wide readership for the book, pamphlet or_newspaper article which resulted. Many of these books are long forgotten_and