1 BILOCH, PATHAN, AND ALLIED RACES. 83
2 406. The Pathan tribes of Kohat.i— The Pathans of Kohat belong
3 almost entirely to two great tribes, the Khatak of the the Kakai section of
4 the Karlanri, and the Bangash, a Qnreshi tribe of Arab descent. The
5 original home of the Khatak, in common with the other sections of the
6 Karlanri, was the west face of the noi-thern Sulemans, where they held the
7 valley of Shawal now occupied by the Waziri.- Towards the close of the
8 13th century"' they, with the Mangal and Hanni, two tribes of the Kodai
9 section of the Karlanri, moved eastwards, the two last descending into the
10 Bannu district and settling along the Kurram and Gambila, while the Khatak
11 held the hills to the west of oui- border. A century later the Bannuchi drove,
12 as already related in section 403, the Mangal and Hanni out of Bannu ; and
13 not long after this the Khatak, quan-elling with the Bannuehi, moved to the
14 noxih and east and occupied the hilly country, then uninhabited, which
15 stretches across the centre of the Kohat district to the Indus, leaving
16 behind them the Chamkanni, a tribe (perhaps of Persian origin) who had
17 taken refuge with them, and the Imlk of whom now occupy the north-east
18 corner of the Kurram Valley, while another section still lives in a state of
19 barbarism about Kaniguram as the subjects of the Waziri. At this time
20 the Orakzai, another tribe of the Kodai Karlanri, held all the valley of
21 Kohat in the north and north-east of the district from Resi on the Indus
22 to Kohat ; while the Bangash, already alluded to, lived in the country about
23 Gardez in Zurmat. But in tbe latter part of the 14th century the Bangash,
24 increasing in number and Ijeing pressed upon by the Ghilzai, emigi'ated east-
25 wards en masse and settled in KuiTam. Being presently driven out by the
26 Tui-i* and Jaji, tribes of doubtfid origin who claim descent from Khugiani,
27 son of Kakai, but who are perhaps of Awan stock^ though now Pathans for all
28 practical purposes, and who stiU occupy the valley, they joined with the
29 Khatak who had quan-elled with the Orakzai, and drove the latter out of
30 Kohat. The struggle was prolonged for nearly a century ; but by the close
31 of the 15th century the Orakzai had been driven into the lower of the ranges
32 which form the eastern extremity of the Safed Koh and lie along the north-
33 western border of the Kohat District. The Khatak and Bangash then possessed
34 themselves of all the northern and central portions of Kohat and divided the
35 country between them, the former taking all the southern and central portions,
36 while the latter took the northern and north-western tract consisting of the
37 Kohat and Miranzai valleys up to the base of the Orakzai or Samana range ;
38 and the hills between Gada Khel and Lachi were then fixed and still remain as
39 the boundai-y between the two tribes. In the time of Akbar, Malik Akor was
40 the leader of the Khatak, and he was granted an extensive tract of land south
41 of the Kabul river between Khaii'abad and Naushahra on condition of his
42 ' Unfortunately the Settlement Officer of Kohat went on furlough without reporting his
43 settlement. Consequently I have far less full information regarding this than regarding any other
44 frontier district. I have, however, done my hest to supply the defect from other sources.
45 - Dr. BeUew says that the Khatak held all the plain country of the Indus as far south as
46 Derah Ismail Khan till driven out by the Waziri, who heing in their turn driven northwards
47 by the pressure of Biloch tribes moving up the Indus valley, passed onwards into the hills then
48 held by the Bannuchi. He gives no authority for this account, which does not agree with the
49 traditions of the Khatak themselves as related in the Kalid-i- Afghani.
50 3 The Kalid-i- Afghani places the migration in the middle of the 12th century, and the
51 Bannuchi migration at about 1300 A.D.
52 * The Tiiri were originally hamsdi/ahi of the Bangash, but rose in rebellion against their
53 masters.
54 * Mr. Merk, however, tells me that the Khugiani claim Durrani origin; and that the claim is
55 admitted by the Durrani, and supported by their genealogies.
56 02