Mulla Iskak Asan oglu — Pulad-Khan
The most loyal and consistent leader of the uprising of 1873–1876 was Mulla Iskak Asan oglu — Pulad-Khan (1844–1876). As evidenced by a number of archival documents and literary sources, Pulad-Khan was of common origin. The head of the Zaravshan department, A. Abramov, and military historian M. Terentyev emphasize that Pulad-Khan was a simple Kyrgyz. The ruler of Kashgar, Muhammad Yakubbek, and the Shah of Karategin, Muhammad Rahimbay, referred to Pulad-Khan as a baseless usurper or some sort of Mulla Iskak. The social status of Pulad-Khan was noted by representatives of the indigenous population of Fergana. Thus, the Kokand poet of that time, Kotibi, condemning and denouncing Abdurakhman Aftobachi for his betrayal at the fortress of Makhram, noted that the suffering masses "found some poor Kyrgyz, elected him as khan, and named him Pulad-Khan."
The activities of Pulad-Khan as the leader of the uprising are also reflected in Kyrgyz folk folklore. He is depicted as a fearless, brave, and determined popular leader. Pulad-Khan led the uprising from its very beginning to the end. He had to lead the rebels under difficult socio-political conditions and faced many hardships. Neither the month-long imprisonment he endured, nor the threat of physical annihilation, nor the dangers that put his life on the line, made Pulad-Khan abandon the uprising. Despite suffering a serious injury in one of the battles, he continued to lead the uprising.
Usurpation, i.e., the royal traits of the Russian peasant movement, clearly manifested in the uprising in question and in the actions of its leader for a "good" and "just" tsar. And Pulad-Khan, like all other rebels, did not know and could not know any form of government other than khanate. He made every effort to strengthen the khan's power in the region. After being proclaimed khan (October 1875), Pulad-Khan began to act in accordance with his title. To consolidate his power, he showed some firmness, executing not only representatives of the feudal nobility but also those who aroused his suspicion of treason. As emphasized in archival documents, he executed "primarily older people," i.e., influential feudal lords. Pulad-Khan even ordered the execution of his father, who had been warned three times not to interfere in his political affairs, "for the request to spare the life of an influential person," i.e., a major feudal lord. Through brutal executions, he sought to instill fear in his enemies, the tsarist punishing forces, and indeed in the entire population of the khanate.
Having become the Kokand khan, Mulla Iskak, although he did not detach himself from the masses and continued to rely on them, attracted some representatives of the feudal nobility to power, appointing them as city rulers and to other positions.
Pulad-Khan, leading the struggle of the working people against the Kokand khans and the tsarist colonial authority, did not show hostility towards Russia and the Russian people. There were instances when he tried to establish friendly relations with Russia, sending his representatives there. However, the tsarist authority, seeing in him an irreconcilable enemy, treated him with hostility, arresting members of his delegation and thereby preventing further connections.
Pulad-Khan sought to win over some Russian prisoners of war to his side. Thus, in November 1875, at his insistence, two Russian soldiers led small groups of rebels, while one officer and a private soldier, unwilling to join the uprising, were killed. Pulad-Khan still hoped for improved relations with Russia.
People's attitudes towards Pulad-Khan were conditioned by social sympathies and antipathies. Different social groups regarded him differently. For the working masses, Pulad-Khan was the leader of the oppressed, i.e., a popular leader who was celebrated in songs and about whom poems were composed. Conversely, for the Kokand khans and the surrounding feudal lords, as well as the tsarist colonial authority, Pulad-Khan was a "rebel," "usurper," "villain," "bandit," "bloodsucker," who dared to raise a hand against the exploiters and disrupted their well-being.
Although the uprising in question ended in defeat, it holds great historical significance. It played a certain role in the growth of social consciousness among the working people. This uprising more vividly and deeply revealed the social contradictions between the exploiters and the exploited, allowing the working masses to better understand their class interests and clearly see the true face of local feudal lords, as well as tsarist officials. It dealt a serious blow to the tsarist conquerors and ultimately led to the liquidation of the Kokand Khanate and the forcible annexation of its territory, including the southern part of Kyrgyzstan, to Russia. This uprising freed the southern Kyrgyz from Kokand domination, although the most severe colonial regime of tsarist Russia was established here.
The Anti-Feudal and National Liberation Character of the Uprising of 1873–1876.