Biloch: Tribal Statistics

Select Language Afrikaans Albanian Arabic Armenian Azerbaijani Basque Belarusian Bulgarian Bengali Catalan Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Traditional) Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Filipino Finnish French Galician Georgian German Greek Gujarati Haitian Creole Hebrew Hindi Hungarian Icelandic Indonesian Irish Italian Japanese Javanese Kannada Khmer Korean Latvian Lithuanian Macedonian Malay Maltese Marathi Nepali Norwegian Persian Polish Portuguese Punjabi Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swahili Swedish Tamil Telugu Thai Turkish Ukrainian Urdu Vietnamese Welsh Yiddish

This article is an extract from PANJAB CASTES SIR DENZIL CHARLES JELF IBBETSON, K.C. S.I. Being a reprint of the chapter on The Races, Castes and Tribes of the People in the Report on the Census of the Panjab published in 1883 by the late Sir Denzil Ibbetson, KCSI Lahore : Printed by the Superintendent, Government Printing, Punjab, 1916. Indpaedia is an archive. It neither agrees nor disagrees with the contents of this article.

Abstract No. 66 on the next page shows the figures for the main Biloch tribes^ Abstract No. 67t gives those for minor tribes for certain districts only while Abstract No. 68 shows the principal clans.

The percentage of the Biloch population not included in these details is small in the districts where the Biloch element has any importance, being only 9 per cent, in Derah Ghazi Khan, 13 per cent, in Derah Ismail Khan, 15 per cent, in Muzaffargarh, and 19 per cent, in Multan In other districts it is much larger. As has already been explained, sec tions of the same name occur in different tribes; while a clan of one tribe will bear the tribal name of another tribe.

Thus, where the columns for sub-divisions of caste have not been filled up with sufficient care, errors in tabulation are almost unavoidable. For this reason the tribal and clan figures were tabulated in the district offices. Unfortunately, the Deputy Commissioner of Derah Ghazi, from whom I had hoped for great assistance, was so busy that he was unalile to pay any attention to the matter; and one or two of the results which the Derah Ghazi figures give are patently absurd. It is to be regretted that the opportunity which a Census affords only at long intervals of obtaining an accurate detail of the Ghazi tribes, should not have been made the most of. The points in which the figures are untrustworthy are indicated below.