Authors

  • Anvarjon Abduqahorov
    Navoi State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.jasss.113685

Abstract

This article approaches the 1916 popular movement in Turkestan from the perspective of modern historiography, reanalyzing its regional, political, and social significance. The author interprets this movement not merely as a spontaneous revolt, but as a historical expression of public dissatisfaction with colonial policies and an important stage of national awakening. While Soviet historiography viewed the event through the lens of class struggle, post-independence scholarship reconsiders it as a national liberation movement. The article explains the roots of the popular movement in factors such as social injustice, political oppression, and economic exploitation. It also analyzes the consequences of the uprising, including demographic losses, mass killings, deportations, displacement, and famine. Attention is given to some scholars' application of the term “genocide.” The article emphasizes the need to reassess historical events free from political and ideological influence, framing the movement as part of a broader effort to restore historical memory and national identity. Thus, the 1916 uprising is presented as a courageous struggle of the peoples of Turkestan in pursuit of freedom.

 

background image

Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025

Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:

6.995, 2024 7.75

http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass

230

RESISTANCE TO COLONIAL POLICY: THE 1916 TURKESTAN UPRISING BASED

ON NEW RESEARCH

Abduqahorov Anvarjon Alijon ugli

Researcher at Navoi State University

E-mail:

anvarabduqahhorov34@gmail.com

F-ORCID ID: 0009-0004-4836-9867

Abstract:

This article approaches the 1916 popular movement in Turkestan from the perspective

of modern historiography, reanalyzing its regional, political, and social significance. The author

interprets this movement not merely as a spontaneous revolt, but as a historical expression of

public dissatisfaction with colonial policies and an important stage of national awakening. While

Soviet historiography viewed the event through the lens of class struggle, post-independence

scholarship reconsiders it as a national liberation movement. The article explains the roots of the

popular movement in factors such as social injustice, political oppression, and economic

exploitation. It also analyzes the consequences of the uprising, including demographic losses,

mass killings, deportations, displacement, and famine. Attention is given to some scholars'

application of the term “genocide.” The article emphasizes the need to reassess historical events

free from political and ideological influence, framing the movement as part of a broader effort to

restore historical memory and national identity. Thus, the 1916 uprising is presented as a

courageous struggle of the peoples of Turkestan in pursuit of freedom.

Keywords:

1916 uprising, popular movement, colonialism, national liberation struggle,

historical memory, genocide, Soviet historiography, demographic losses, political oppression,

historical interpretation, Central Asia, national awakening.

Introduction.

The 1916 popular movement in Turkestan stands as one of the most significant

historical events in the history of Central Asia, closely associated with complex social, political,

and cultural processes. This movement represented a major outburst of public discontent

accumulated in the social consciousness of the local population, openly expressing opposition to

the colonial policies carried out by the Russian Empire over many years. Although official

historical documents and contemporary sources often described the movement as a “rebellion,” a

“spontaneous uprising,” or “local disorder,” interpreting it merely as such is inadequate. In

reality, the movement was a clear expression of public protest against long-standing social

injustice, economic exploitation, national discrimination, and political oppression. The decree

issued by the Russian Empire in 1916, known as the “mobilization order” — which called for the

conscription of local male populations from Turkestan and other peripheral regions to serve in

labor battalions on the rear fronts of World War I — significantly intensified the already growing

discontent among the people. This decree was seen as a violation of the local communities’

social, cultural, and religious values, and was perceived as forcing them to sacrifice themselves

for the interests of the Russian Empire. Especially for peasants, herders, artisans, and other

working-class people who had lived independently on their lands for centuries, the decree


background image

Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025

Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:

6.995, 2024 7.75

http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass

231

represented not only economic but also moral oppression. In essence, the Turkestan popular

movement was driven not only by social or economic factors but also by deep national-liberation

aspirations. Participants included representatives of various social strata — peasants, artisans,

religious scholars, and even some members of the local intelligentsia. They fought for the honor

and freedom of their homeland, to preserve their identity, and to secure justice and liberty for

future generations. The movement spread across many regions of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan,

Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, demonstrating that it was not a localized uprising limited to one

group or region, but rather a broad expression of collective dissatisfaction throughout the

Turkestan region. Throughout history, the approach to the Turkestan popular movement has

varied. During the Soviet era, it was interpreted within the framework of class struggle,

portrayed as a conflict between local exploiting classes and the Russian Empire. In this view, the

people’s national liberation aspirations were either ignored or deliberately denied. However,

after Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and other Central Asian states gained independence, attitudes

toward this historical event changed drastically. Modern historians now interpret the movement

as a national liberation struggle against colonial policies, striving to uncover its true nature.
Recent scholarly research based on archival documents and the memories of local witnesses has

contributed to a fuller understanding of the movement’s complexity, scope, and the deep

impression it left on the consciousness of the people. In this process, it is essential not only to

restore historical truth but also to acknowledge and honor our people’s courageous struggle for

freedom and justice.

Main Body.

The 1916 Turkestan People's Movement was not merely a local event, but a large-

scale wave of resistance shaped against colonial policies in the region. Its roots lie in past social

injustices, political oppression, and economic exploitation.[1] This movement, by its nature,

scope of interpretation, and historical evaluation, remains a subject of ongoing debate among

scholars and the public.

During the Soviet historiographical period, this movement was

primarily viewed through the lens of class struggle. Its national-liberation essence, however,

remained largely unexpressed until more recent times. Nevertheless, some scholars striving to

reveal historical truth have described this process not only as a struggle against exploitation, but

also as a significant stage in the awakening of national identity. In the post-independence period,

a new approach to the 1916 movement has emerged in the historiography of Central Asian states,

especially in Kazakhstan and Turkestan.[2] In scholarly literature, this event is increasingly seen

as a national liberation war, and at times, as a revolutionary movement. For example,

academician M. Qoziboyev refers to this movement as "a revolution against colonialism in the

East." According to him, the events of 1916 represented the collapse of imperial policy and a

step towards national awakening and political transformation.[3] Other researchers interpret the

movement as a national uprising that contributed to the restoration of traditional state institutions

and the formation of economic and political alternatives. It should be noted that these various

perspectives shape different understandings of the movement's actual dynamics, as historical

sources and figures reveal the complexity of the events.
In addition, the issue of the casualties among Turkestan peoples during the movement has also

become a subject of wide discussion. Some sources note that over 100,000 people lost their lives,


background image

Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025

Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:

6.995, 2024 7.75

http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass

232

while other studies claim the number may have reached between 150,000 and 300,000.[7]

Demographic losses, mass displacement, famine, and disease—all these consequences were

closely linked to the brutal suppression of the movement. In particular, in post-Soviet

historiography, the issue of "genocide"[6] raised by historians makes the topic even more

pressing. It is increasingly argued that the movement may have involved not only political

suppression but also elements of ethnic cleansing.[4]
Another significant issue is the potential influence of external forces in the outbreak of the revolt.

Some researchers have noted that German or Ottoman intelligence and propaganda were active

in Turkestan and that their religious and political appeals intensified public discontent.[5]

However, existing sources are insufficient to draw firm conclusions in this regard. Credible

evidence suggests that the movement primarily emerged as a result of internal social, economic,

and political pressures. Moreover, the events of 1916 are now being re-evaluated not just as a

"revolt," but as a phenomenon that contributed to the formation of national identity, historical

memory, and political maturity in the region.[2]
One of the most important tasks for contemporary historiography is to re-examine the essence of

the 1916 Turkestan People's Movement free from political and ideological biases. The movement

should not be interpreted as a “spontaneous uprising,” but rather as an eruption of historical

discontent deeply rooted in the collective consciousness of the people. It emerged in response to

the intensification of Tsarist Russia’s exploitative policies, particularly issues related to land, tax

burdens, and the mobilization decree.[3]
Today, reassessing historical truth is not only a scholarly obligation but also a cultural and moral

responsibility. The mass massacres, deportations, famine, and disease that occurred during the

1916 movement left a deep and lasting impact on the history of our people.[1] The deaths of

countless individuals, the disintegration of families, and the rupture of cultural memory must be

given special attention in current historical analysis.
Furthermore, viewing the movement not merely as a local expression of dissent, but as an

integral part of a broader regional awakening and political formation, helps to restore its true

historical significance. The 1916 Turkestan People's Movement was a struggle for freedom,

dignity, and life by an entire nation. To assess it solely through the lens of class struggle or

foreign provocation is a one-sided approach to history. This movement is an inseparable part of

national memory and represents the historical courage of our people in their fight against

colonial oppression.
Future historical research must deeply analyze the social, demographic, political, and cultural

consequences of this movement, serving as an important step toward illuminating the difficult

path of the Turkestan peoples in their pursuit of freedom.

Conclusion.

The 1916 Turkestan People's Movement was not merely a temporary protest born

out of the socio-economic and political crises of its time, but rather one of the most vivid and

significant expressions of the people’s centuries-long aspiration for national and human freedom.

In its essence, causes, and consequences, this movement left a profound mark on the history of


background image

Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025

Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:

6.995, 2024 7.75

http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass

233

our people and holds historical value as a form of national resistance against colonial oppression.

The roots of the movement lie in the Russian Empire’s long-standing policies of economic

exploitation, political discrimination, and disregard for the customs, religious beliefs, and social

values of the local population. The wide scale and intensity of the movement demonstrate that it

was not confined to one or two regions but emerged as a nationwide uprising throughout

Turkestan. Among those who took part were peasants, artisans, herders, religious scholars, and

even some local intellectuals, confirming the movement’s broad and diverse social base. Despite

lacking any organized political support or military strength, they fought for their freedom,

dignity, and future. The armed clashes, mass casualties, the deaths of thousands of innocent

people, and the forced displacement of many families—all of these events, though tragic, reflect

our people’s unwavering desire for independence and liberty.
During the Soviet era, these events were interpreted through the lens of official ideology, often

reduced to a class struggle while ignoring their nature as a national liberation movement. This

approach led to a distortion of historical truth in the public consciousness. However, in the post-

independence period—especially with the development of national historiographies in

Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and other regional states—this movement has begun to be

reevaluated from a new and more just perspective. Today, the 1916 Turkestan People's

Movement is being rediscovered as an integral part of national self-awareness, political

awakening, and the broader struggle for freedom. Moreover, the tragedies that occurred during

this movement—including mass killings, refugee crises, and acts of genocide against the

population—now necessitate the restoration of historical truth, the honoring of the memory of

the victims, and the establishment of historical justice. This event should serve not only as a

historical fact illuminating the past but also as a source of inspiration in our people’s ongoing

pursuit of freedom, justice, and national unity.
Thus, the 1916 people's movement holds great importance for us—not only as a lesson from the

past but also as a historical experience that guides our future. It serves as a solid foundation for

preserving historical memory, fostering national pride and identity, and strengthening the

struggle for justice and truth.

REFERENCES

1.

Abduqahorov, A. (2025). Measures for Establishing National Statehood in the Turkestan

Autonomy. Academic International Conference on Multi-Disciplinary Studies and Education, Pittsburgh,
USA.

2.Abduqahorov, A. (2025). THE POST-INDEPENDENCE PERIOD: THE TURKESTAN Uprising in Modern
Russian Historiography. New Uzbekistan, Journal of New Studies, 2(9). https://phoenixpublication.net/

3.Abduqahorov, A. (2025). THE 1916 Uprisings in Turkistan: Causes, Stages and History. Science and
Innovations, 3(17), 4–5.

https://in-academy.uz/index.php/si/article/view/52510

4. Abduqahorov, A. (2025). SOCIAL INJUSTICE AND THE BEGINNING OF NATIONAL LIBERATION


background image

Volume 15 Issue 06, June 2025

Impact factor: 2019: 4.679 2020: 5.015 2021: 5.436, 2022: 5.242, 2023:

6.995, 2024 7.75

http://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass

234

MOVEMENTS IN TURKESTAN (LATE 19TH – EARLY 20TH CENTURY). In Central Asian Journal of Academic
Research (Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 111–113). Zenodo.

5. Abduqahorov, A. A. (2025). Turkestan resistance movements in contemporary Russian historical
research. European Science International Conferences. Researcher at Navoi State University.
6. Булдаков, В., Леонтьева, Т. (2015). Война, породившая революцию: Россия, 1914—1917 гг.
Москва: — 720 с.

7. Pianciola, N. (2009). Stalinism on the Frontier: Agricultural Colonization, Extermination of Nomads,
and State Building in Central Asia (1905–1936). Golden Horde Review, 52, 52

References

Abduqahorov, A. (2025). Measures for Establishing National Statehood in the Turkestan Autonomy. Academic International Conference on Multi-Disciplinary Studies and Education, Pittsburgh, USA.

Abduqahorov, A. (2025). THE POST-INDEPENDENCE PERIOD: THE TURKESTAN Uprising in Modern Russian Historiography. New Uzbekistan, Journal of New Studies, 2(9). https://phoenixpublication.net/

Abduqahorov, A. (2025). THE 1916 Uprisings in Turkistan: Causes, Stages and History. Science and Innovations, 3(17), 4–5. https://in-academy.uz/index.php/si/article/view/52510

Abduqahorov, A. (2025). SOCIAL INJUSTICE AND THE BEGINNING OF NATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENTS IN TURKESTAN (LATE 19TH – EARLY 20TH CENTURY). In Central Asian Journal of Academic Research (Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 111–113). Zenodo.

Abduqahorov, A. A. (2025). Turkestan resistance movements in contemporary Russian historical research. European Science International Conferences. Researcher at Navoi State University. 6. Булдаков, В., Леонтьева, Т. (2015). Война, породившая революцию: Россия, 1914—1917 гг. Москва: — 720 с.

Pianciola, N. (2009). Stalinism on the Frontier: Agricultural Colonization, Extermination of Nomads, and State Building in Central Asia (1905–1936). Golden Horde Review, 52, 52