Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Arthur Conolly

Arthur Conolly (2 July 1807 – 17 June 1842) was a , explorer, and captain in the 6th of the , renowned for pioneering reconnaissance missions in and for originating the phrase "The " to denote the strategic contest between the and empires for regional dominance. Orphaned at age twelve after his parents' deaths, Conolly attended before joining the Company's military service, where he rapidly advanced and undertook perilous overland journeys, including a notable 1829 expedition from to via the , documented in his travelogue Journey to the North of India, Overland from England. His intelligence efforts focused on mapping routes, assessing advances, and fostering alliances amid the Anglo- rivalry, culminating in a 1841 mission to the to secure the release of fellow officer Charles Stoddart, who had been imprisoned for violating local protocols. Captured upon arrival, Conolly endured months of captivity before being publicly beheaded alongside Stoddart in Bukhara's central square on the orders of Nasrullah , an event that underscored the hazards of adventurism in the region and highlighted diplomatic miscalculations in engaging unpredictable Central Asian potentates.

Early Life and Education

Family Background and Upbringing

Arthur Conolly was born in London in 1807 to Valentine Conolly, a resident of 37 Portland Place, and his wife Matilda Dunkin. He was one of six sons in the family, which traced its ancestry to the Ó Conghalaigh clan of Ireland, reflecting a heritage of Irish gentry with connections to British colonial administration. Conolly was also a cousin to Sir William Macnaghten, later Secretary of the British East India Company, through familial ties that facilitated his entry into imperial service. By the age of twelve, Conolly was orphaned following the deaths of both parents within a single week, an event that abruptly ended his early home life in and shifted responsibility for his care to guardians or relatives. This loss marked a pivotal disruption in his upbringing, compelling a transition to institutional education and amid the era's norms for children of Anglo-Irish military or administrative families. The family's Protestant Anglo-Irish background, common among officers, likely instilled values of duty, exploration, and evangelical Christianity that influenced Conolly's later career choices, though direct evidence of parental influence remains limited due to his young age at their passing.

Formal Education and Early Influences

Conolly received his initial formal education at in after being orphaned at the age of twelve, when his parents died within a week of each other in 1819. On 3 May 1822, he enrolled at the , the Company's training institution for aspiring officers, to prepare for or service. However, he resigned soon after obtaining a coveted cadetship and sailed for in the same year, marking his entry into active military duty at age fifteen. Early influences on Conolly included his family's connections to administration, as the son of Conolly, a residing at 37 in , which facilitated his rapid advancement into service. Additionally, a religious disposition, characterized by evangelical Protestant convictions prevalent in early nineteenth-century , instilled in him a sense of moral purpose and adventurism that complemented his military training. This blend of orientation and personal faith foreshadowed his later involvement in intelligence and exploratory missions.

Military and Intelligence Career

Commission in the East India Company

Arthur Conolly, born on 2 July 1807, secured a cadetship in the Army of the in 1823 at the age of sixteen, following brief attendance at and the . This appointment, typical for young men of British families seeking military careers in , involved nomination through Company directors or patronage networks, with cadets destined for or regiments after arrival and basic training. He departed that year aboard the ship Grenville, sharing the voyage with , whose evangelical influence reportedly shaped Conolly's later religious convictions. Upon reaching Calcutta, Conolly was posted to the 6th Native Light Cavalry, a regiment raised in for and duties in northern . As a newly commissioned —the junior rank equivalent to an infantry ensign—Conolly began active service amid the Company's expanding frontier operations, though specific early postings remain sparsely documented beyond regimental attachments in the . His rapid adaptation to military life positioned him for subsequent promotions, reaching by the late 1820s, reflecting competence in horsemanship and command expected of officers.

Service in India and Initial Operations

Conolly arrived in in 1823 following education at and , enlisting as a in the East India Company's 6th Native . He sailed aboard the Grenville at age sixteen, marking the start of his military career in the . Appointed upon arrival, Conolly advanced to on 13 May 1826. His early duties involved standard cavalry operations, including patrols and escorts in northern , amid the Company's expansion and frontier tensions during the (1824–1826), though specific engagements for his unit remain undocumented in primary records. By 1829, Conolly was on in , during which he sought and received permission for overland travel back to via and , initiating informal reconnaissance that foreshadowed his later intelligence roles. He resumed active service upon return, attaining captaincy on 30 July 1838 while continuing duties with the 6th Light Cavalry.

Entry into Central Asian Intelligence Work

Conolly's transition to Central Asian intelligence work began during his early military service with the . After joining as a in at age sixteen and sailing to , he was commissioned as an in the 6th Native Light Cavalry, where he initially served in standard regimental duties amid the Company's expanding operations in northern . By 1829, while on in due to health issues contracted in service, Conolly requested and received permission from Company authorities to return to via an unconventional overland route through and territories into , rather than the typical sea voyage—a decision that aligned with emerging interests in potential threats from advances southward. Departing on August 10, 1829, Conolly traversed , , , and , navigating tribal territories and documenting routes, local rulers, and geopolitical dynamics en route, before reaching on January 30, 1830. This self-initiated expedition, though not a formal intelligence assignment, effectively served as , yielding maps and observations of passes, water sources, and alliances that informed strategic assessments of overland vulnerabilities. His detailed account, published as Journey to the North of India, overland from , in 1829-30 in 1834, disseminated this intelligence to policymakers, establishing Conolly as one of the first officers to systematically explore and report on Central Asian interior conditions beyond mere . Promoted to lieutenant shortly thereafter, Conolly leveraged this experience for official roles in the Company's political and intelligence apparatus, initiating structured reconnaissance and mapmaking operations in the region during the mid-1830s. These efforts focused on surveying Afghan borders and Turkmen steppes, driven by fears of Russian encroachment toward India, and positioned him among a cadre of officers tasked with countering intelligence gaps in khanates like Bukhara and Khiva. By advising local rulers—such as urging the Khan of Khiva to engage neighboring powers—and coordinating with figures like Henry Rawlinson, Conolly's work formalized British probing of Central Asian power structures, blending military scouting with diplomatic intrigue under East India Company oversight. This phase underscored the causal linkage between individual officer initiatives and broader imperial imperatives, as Conolly's reports highlighted the fragility of tribal alliances and the need for preemptive mapping to secure northwest frontiers.

Involvement in the Great Game

Strategic Context and Reconnaissance Missions

In the early , British strategic concerns in arose from territorial expansions following the (1804–1813 and 1826–1828), which secured dominance in the and positioned forces closer to the Persian and Afghan frontiers. The Company's policymakers, wary of India's exposure via the Hindu Kush and , initiated to evaluate reach, invasion corridors through deserts and passes, and probe alliances with khanates such as , , and as potential buffers against southward thrusts. These missions operated under the guise of scientific or personal travel to evade diplomatic friction, yielding reports on local governance, trade routes, and tribal loyalties that informed defensive fortifications and preemptive diplomacy. Arthur Conolly, commissioned as a in the 6th Native , undertook pivotal during his 1829–1830 overland journey from to , authorized by amid growing intelligence gaps on intentions. Departing by sea to St. Petersburg in summer 1829, Conolly proceeded southward through , crossing into the via Tiflis (modern ) by late 1829, where he noted garrison strengths and logistical strains in the region. Entering northern Persia near Astrabad in early 1830, he shifted eastward across the steppe toward , aiming to gauge diplomatic overtures to the khanate; en route through the , his party faced ambush by tribesmen on March 17, 1830, losing equipment but escaping with observations of nomadic raiding patterns and sparse water sources impeding large-scale armies. From , Conolly traversed via and , arriving in the latter by mid-1830 to assess Emir Yar Mohammad's court and Russian-Persian influences, before navigating the to reach British in October 1830. His dispatches highlighted the impracticability of overland advances due to arid terrains and hostile tribes, while advocating Christian efforts to undermine Islamic as a long-term counter to Russian Orthodox expansionism. Detailed in his 1834 publication Journey to the North of India, Overland from , Through , Persia, and , these accounts included route sketches and population estimates, aiding cartographers in prioritizing frontier defenses. Throughout the 1830s, Conolly extended these efforts with frontier patrols and covert liaisons in and , monitoring Russian envoys to and mapping alternative passes amid the 1835–1837 Persian siege of , which signaled potential encirclement. His operations emphasized empirical assessments over speculative threats, revealing fragmented Central Asian polities vulnerable to divide-and-rule tactics but reliant on subsidies for anti-Russian resistance. These missions, though risking personal peril without formal diplomatic cover, supplied actionable that shaped the 1839–1842 Anglo-Afghan War's preemptive rationale, prioritizing Afghan stabilization to block Russian proxies.

Coining the Term "The Great Game"

Captain Arthur Conolly, a intelligence officer serving with the , first employed the phrase "the " in a letter dated July 1840 to Major Henry Rawlinson, another key figure in Central Asian operations. In the correspondence, Conolly wrote, "You've a , a noble game before you," referring to the imperative for proactive efforts to counter expanding influence in the region and safeguard routes to . This usage encapsulated the era's clandestine rivalry, involving espionage, reconnaissance, and diplomatic maneuvering between the and empires over , particularly and the khanates of , , and . Conolly's phrasing arose amid heightened British alarm over Russian advances, including diplomatic missions and territorial encroachments that threatened the security of British India. As a of multiple forays into the area, Conolly advocated for bolder policies, such as alliances with local rulers and preemptive actions, to establish British dominance before Russian consolidation. The term "Great " thus highlighted not merely territorial competition but a high-stakes contest of wits and strategy, where intelligence gathering—often conducted by officers like Conolly under the guise of travelers or traders—was paramount. Though originating in Conolly's private missive, the expression gained wider currency over time, notably through Rudyard Kipling's 1901 novel , which romanticized the intrigue of agents in the . Historians attribute the coinage squarely to Conolly, distinguishing it from earlier vague references to imperial rivalries, and it has since become the standard descriptor for the 19th-century Anglo-Russian struggle in .

Mission to Bukhara

Objectives and Preparations

Captain Arthur Conolly volunteered for a mission to in 1841 primarily to secure the release of Charles Stoddart, who had been imprisoned there since December 1839 following the breakdown of his diplomatic efforts to ally the emirate against Russian advances in . Conolly, leveraging his prior reconnaissance experience in the region, aimed to negotiate directly with Nasrullah Khan using personal rapport and intelligence on local dynamics, while also seeking to mend fractured Anglo- relations amid British concerns over Russian encirclement of . This objective aligned with broader strategy to stabilize buffer states, though Conolly's evangelical leanings and optimism about converting the emir influenced his approach. Preparations centered on discreet overland travel to avoid detection, given the emir's hostility toward British envoys. Conolly obtained letters of credence from Governor-General Lord Auckland and other officials, intended to affirm British goodwill and request Stoddart's freedom. He adopted the alias "Khan Ali" and disguised himself as a Muslim merchant, assembling a modest caravan with local guides and pack animals for the route through Afghanistan via Kabul and the Hindu Kush passes. Departing from northern India in the autumn of 1841, Conolly relied on his fluency in Persian and knowledge from earlier journeys, such as his 1831-1832 overland expedition, to navigate tribal territories without formal escort. These measures reflected calculated risks, as no large military support was feasible due to ongoing tensions in Afghanistan following the 1841 uprisings.

Journey, Capture, and Execution

Conolly departed from British India in early 1841, undertaking an overland journey northward through the and into as part of his mission to negotiate the release of Charles Stoddart, who had been imprisoned in since December 1839. His route involved traversing unstable territories, including stops in where the local khan advised against proceeding to due to the Nasrullah Khan's hostility toward British agents. Despite warnings, Conolly pressed on, arriving in on November 10, 1841, accompanied by an interpreter and minimal entourage. Upon entry, Conolly was initially permitted to meet , who was temporarily released from confinement, and was granted an audience with Nasrullah; however, the , already distrustful of British motives amid reports of Russian advances and British military difficulties in , soon accused Conolly of and collusion with rival khanates like and . Nasrullah's spies had monitored Conolly's approach, amplifying suspicions that his mission masked intelligence-gathering efforts in the ongoing Anglo-Russian rivalry known as the . By late November 1841, Conolly was arrested, stripped of his possessions, and confined alongside Stoddart in the Zindon prison within Bukhara's citadel, enduring harsh conditions including a vermin-infested pit described by later accounts as a "black hole" or "bug pit." The prisoners' situation deteriorated further after January 1842, when news reached of the army's catastrophic retreat from , including the annihilation of a 4,500-strong force; Nasrullah interpreted this as evidence of vulnerability and imperial overreach, justifying intensified persecution. Efforts by Conolly to appeal for clemency, including letters to authorities and offers of , were ignored or deemed insufficient by the , who viewed the officers as symbols of foreign interference. On June 17, 1842, both men were publicly beheaded in 's main square on Nasrullah's orders, with their remains reportedly left unburied initially before being interred under the execution site; the cited charges of spying and treaty violations, though contemporary reports, including those relayed to missionary , emphasized the arbitrary nature of the ruling amid the emir's consolidation of power.

Writings and Intellectual Contributions

Key Publications

Conolly's primary published work, Journey to the North of India: Overland from , through , , and Affghaunistaun, appeared in two volumes from London publisher in 1834. This account detailed his 1829–1831 expedition, which traversed approximately 5,000 miles from St. Petersburg through territories and principalities to reach British , combining ethnographic observations with assessments of regional vulnerabilities to expansion. Volume 1 focused on infrastructure and court intrigues, including interactions with officials in , while Volume 2 examined tribal dynamics and routes like the , warning of their exploitability for invasion. Appendices in the volumes appended strategic analyses, such as maps of potential overland advances from the toward the , grounded in Conolly's direct surveys and interrogations of local khans. The text emphasized empirical details—like caravan speeds, fortification weaknesses, and water sources—over speculation, reflecting Conolly's intelligence-gathering mandate from the . Though not a bestseller, it circulated among policymakers, informing early formulations of Central Asian defense strategies amid fears of Tsarist encroachment. No other major books by Conolly survive from his lifetime, though unpublished dispatches and letters, including a 1830 epistle coining "the ," contributed to internal records on religious influences in Afghan politics. A second edition appeared in , incorporating minor revisions but retaining the original's focus on verifiable itineraries and geopolitical risks.

Ideas on Geopolitics and Religion

Conolly viewed the contest between and in as a strategic imperative to safeguard British from Russian encroachment, advocating reconnaissance missions, alliances with khanates like and , and proactive diplomacy to disrupt Russian advances. In correspondence dated July 1840 to Major Henry Rawlinson, he coined the phrase "the " to encapsulate this rivalry, emphasizing the need for to play it "in earnest" through operations and forward policy rather than passive defense. His 1834 publication Journey to the North of India, Overland from England, through , , and detailed Russian military capabilities and Persian weaknesses, arguing that unchecked Russian influence would enable overland threats to via and the Hindu Kush passes. Influenced by evangelical from his youth—exposed during his 1823 aboard the Grenville under the of Calcutta—Conolly integrated religious conviction with geopolitical strategy, seeing expansion as a divine mandate to promote , abolish , and counter Islamic in . He proposed forming a "Christian band of heroes" across , , and to foster anti-slavery coalitions, contain , and soften Muslim prejudices against Christians, framing such efforts as moral duties intertwined with imperial security. This evangelical zeal motivated his 1841 mission to , where he aimed not only to negotiate alliances but also to rescue Captain Charles Stoddart and potentially evangelize amid perceived . In Overland to the Caspian (1838 serialization), Conolly critiqued Persian religious bigotry and Russian Orthodox proselytism as barriers to stable alliances, positing that British policy should leverage Protestant ethics to build trust with Muslim rulers while undermining autocratic theocracies. He attributed Central Asian instability to fanaticism and slavery—evils he linked causally to Islamic governance—urging Britain to export liberal reforms as geopolitical leverage, though he cautioned against overt missionary aggression to avoid alienating locals. These ideas reflected a fusion of realpolitik and providentialism, where securing trade routes and borders served the higher purpose of civilizational advancement under Christian auspices.

Legacy and Assessments

Immediate Impact on British Policy

The execution of Arthur Conolly and Charles Stoddart on , 1842, by Emir Nasrullah Khan of elicited condemnation in British parliamentary debates as early as August 1843, where members questioned the government's receipt of official accounts of the "barbarous murder" and its prior inaction toward their captivity. However, the British government mounted no military or diplomatic retaliation against , prioritizing the reoccupation of and stabilization in following the January 1842 retreat, which had already strained resources and exposed vulnerabilities in forward policy. Official disavowal of Conolly's as unauthorized further insulated the from demands for , with authorities asserting he acted independently after failing to secure formal approval, thereby limiting accountability for his and Stoddart's fates. Press coverage and public sentiment, including missionary Joseph Wolff's 1844 inquiries into their deaths, amplified criticism of governmental neglect but yielded no substantive policy redirection toward Central Asian khanates like . This episode reinforced existing hesitations in the Great Game's more aggressive reconnaissance tactics, as Britain's focus remained on consolidating Afghan buffers against influence rather than punitive expeditions into unannexed territories, where logistical challenges and local enmities posed high risks without assured gains. By mid-1843, with recaptured and the Sirdar Valley secured, policy emphasized defensive perimeters over the proactive diplomacy Conolly had championed, though the broader rivalry persisted without interruption.

Long-Term Influence and Recognition

Conolly's coining of the phrase "the " in a 1840 letter to Major Henry Rawlinson endures as his most significant long-term contribution, establishing the standard nomenclature for the Anglo-Russian geopolitical rivalry in within historical scholarship and popular discourse. This terminology, initially describing efforts to counter Russian expansion through intelligence and alliances, has framed analyses of 19th-century imperial competition, influencing subsequent works on strategy and espionage. Its adoption extended to Rudyard Kipling's 1901 novel , which dramatized the intrigue and embedded the concept in British cultural memory. Posthumous recognition emerged through 19th-century biographies and public campaigns following his 1842 execution, which ignited debates on accountability for agents in hostile territories, shaping Victorian discussions on risk and . John William Kaye's 1867 Lives of Indian Officers portrayed Conolly as a model of devout heroism, reinforcing his image among military and evangelical circles despite limited policy alterations from his missions. 20th-century histories, such as Hopkirk's 1990 The Great Game, revived interest by crediting Conolly's reconnaissance and writings for early insights into Central Asian dynamics, though assessing his direct strategic influence as modest compared to the term's lexical legacy. In modern reappraisals, Conolly's role receives attention in studies of imperial intelligence, with his 1834 travelogue Journey to the North of India cited for documenting routes and tribal alliances that informed later British mapping efforts. A 2025 rediscovery of his correspondence has renewed scholarly focus, highlighting unpublished details on his anti-slavery advocacy and geopolitical observations, potentially expanding archival understandings of early Great Game motivations. These developments underscore a niche but persistent recognition among historians of exploration and rivalry, rather than broad commemoration, reflecting the era's opaque intelligence operations.

Modern Reappraisals and Recent Discoveries

In the , historians have increasingly critiqued the traditional depiction of the as a unified, high-stakes imperial contest, portraying it instead as a retrospective construct exaggerated by later accounts. Scholars like Malcolm Yapp have argued that Anglo-Russian interactions in lacked centralized strategic direction from either empire, with Conolly's role emblematic of ad hoc adventurism rather than orchestrated policy, dubbing elements of the "" due to sparse contemporary of systematic . Similarly, B.D. Hopkins has characterized the as a "" forged in hindsight, emphasizing how Conolly's 1840 letter to Henry Rawlinson—where he first used the phrase to urge evangelical and geopolitical maneuvering—reflected personal zeal more than official doctrine, with the term's broader adoption stemming from Rudyard Kipling's fiction and Peter Hopkirk's 1990 popularization rather than 19th-century records. Recent scholarship extends this reappraisal by broadening the rivalry's scope beyond . V.V. Degoev's analysis traces Anglo-Russian tensions to the late 18th-century Ochakov crisis in the Black Sea region, involving multiple powers like and the , and views Conolly's terminology as initially limited to maneuvers around , , and , rather than emblematic of a grand Eurasian struggle. These interpretations highlight Conolly's evangelical motivations—his advocacy for Christian to counter Islamic —as influencing his geopolitical framing, but question whether systematically heeded his warnings about expansion, attributing outcomes more to local contingencies than prescient intelligence. A notable recent discovery occurred in 2025, when correspondence attributed to Conolly surfaced in the State Archive of Literature and Art in , providing fresh primary material on his Central Asian reconnaissance and the phrase's early invocation amid Anglo- maneuvering. This find, potentially including captured British documents from his mission, underscores archival gaps in Western collections and invites further scrutiny of perspectives on Conolly's , though its authenticity and precise contents await peer-reviewed verification. Such revelations reinforce ongoing debates about source biases in imperial histories, where Russian archives may preserve overlooked British initiatives suppressed in dispatches.

References

  1. [1]
    Arthur Conolly - The British Empire
    Conolly was born in London in 1807 but by the age of twelve was orphaned as his parents died within a week of each other. He was sent to school to Rugby and ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  2. [2]
    Catalog Record: Journey to the north of India, overland from...
    Captain Arthur Conolly (1807-42?) was an intelligence officer of the British East India Company. After briefly attending Rugby School and the Addiscombe ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  3. [3]
    Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Conolly, Arthur
    Dec 28, 2020 · Arthur became lieutenant in the regiment 13 May 1826, and captain 30 July 1838. Being in England on sick leave in 1829, he obtained leave to ...Missing: intelligence | Show results with:intelligence
  4. [4]
    Arthur Conolly (1807-1842) | WikiTree FREE Family Tree
    Sep 29, 2024 · He was a British intelligence officer, explorer and writer. He was Captain of the 6th Bengal Light Cavalry in the service of the East India ...
  5. [5]
    Captain Arthur Conolly (1807 - 1842) - Genealogy - Geni
    Sep 30, 2024 · Death: ; June 24, 1842 (34) Ark Fortress, Bukhara, Bukhara District, Bukhara Province, Uzbekistan (executed by the Emir of Bukhara, Nasrullah ...
  6. [6]
    Stoddart and Conolly: Victims of the Great Game - HubPages
    Jan 7, 2025 · He started life as the son of a Bavarian rabbi, attended a Lutheran school, then became a Roman Catholic, and finally ended up in the ...<|separator|>
  7. [7]
    [PDF] 1958 A Person from England and other travellers to Turkestan by ...
    Captain Arthur Conolly of the Bengd Light Cavalry. A young man of a strongly adventurous, but at the same time romantic and religious disposition, Arthur ...
  8. [8]
    The Conolly's in British India - Historic Alleys
    May 26, 2017 · Captain Arthur Conolly was kept captive till his death and murder at Bokhara in 1842. Captain John Conolly was killed (or died in captivity) ...<|separator|>
  9. [9]
  10. [10]
    H-Net Reviews
    "The Great Game," the geopolitical contest between Tsarist Russia and Victorian Britain for the control of Central Asia, is well known to scholars of Asian ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  11. [11]
    [PDF] The Russian advance in Central Asia and the British response 1834
    Oct 14, 1992 · For his part, the Khan adopted the advice of Arthur Conolly'°7 and sent embassies to both Kokand and Bukhara, in an unsuccessful endeavour ...
  12. [12]
    (PDF) Great Game in Central Asia: Causes and Consequences
    Aug 6, 2025 · Throughout the 19th century, Central Asia emerged as an arena for geopolitical rivalry among major powers, including Russia and Great Britain ...
  13. [13]
    Journey to the North of India: Overland from England, Through ...
    Aug 31, 2008 · Journey to the North of India: Overland from England, Through Russia, Persia, and Affghaunistaun. by: Arthur Conolly. Publication date: 1838.Missing: 1829-1830 | Show results with:1829-1830
  14. [14]
    Journey to the north of India: overland from England, through Russia ...
    The author describes his overland travel from England through Russia, Persia and Afghanistan. Comments. The book in in two volumes. This is volume 1.Missing: 1829-1830 | Show results with:1829-1830
  15. [15]
    Great Game | Encyclopedia.com
    The earliest sortie of the Great Game was the expedition of Henry Eldred Pottinger (1789–1856) and Charles Christie (d. 1812) from Bombay through Baluchistan to ...
  16. [16]
    THE GREAT GAME IN CENTRAL ASIA | Facts and Details
    Arthur Conolly and Col. Charles Stoddart, were captured, forced to dig their own graves, then beheaded by the emir of Bukhara, a city in present-day ...Missing: reconnaissance | Show results with:reconnaissance
  17. [17]
    [PDF] The Legend of the Great Game - The British Academy
    In his biographies Kaye forebore to criticise his subjects, who were nearly all supporters of Wellesley and Hastings, and, with one exception, his uses of the ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  18. [18]
    THE 'GREAT GAME': THE HISTORY OF AN EVOCATIVE PHRASE
    The phrase “The Great Game” was first used in the context of Russia and Central Asia by the ill-fated Captain Conolly in 1840.
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Victims of Downing Street - Open Works - The College of Wooster
    Though significant, this account of Stoddart and Conolly's fate in Bukhara represents only a portion of the story's significance, and neglects a large body of ...
  20. [20]
    1842: Charles Stoddart and Arthur Conolly, Great Game diplomats
    Jun 17, 2012 · Instead, he waited on the arrival of countryman Arthur Conolly, who showed up in late 1841 on a mission to secure Stoddart's release. But ...
  21. [21]
    Bukhara - Matthew Clark Smith
    In his Narrative he goes so far as to outline a strategy for an invasion of Bukhara, containing a prodigious number of shaky assumptions.Missing: objectives | Show results with:objectives
  22. [22]
    Tossed in the pit in Bukhara - Ryan Murdock
    Stoddard was the first to die, after denouncing Nasrullah's tyranny. The executioner turned to Conolly and said the Emir offered to spare his life if he ...
  23. [23]
    Along the Silk Road to Bukhara - by Lesley Downer - The History Girls
    Oct 9, 2020 · Then on November 10th 1841 Captain Arthur Conolly arrived to try and negotiate his release. He too ended up in the Black Hole. Finally the two ...Missing: facts | Show results with:facts
  24. [24]
    Emir Nasrullah, Stoddart, and Connelly - Resisting Empire
    Jul 28, 2018 · Stirred by the rumor that Stoddart, at the peril of death, had renounced Christianity, Connolly asked permission to dive into Bukhara and rescue ...
  25. [25]
    The Ruthless History of the Great Game in Central Asia
    Apr 9, 2025 · The term “Great Game” was first coined by British intelligence officer Arthur Conolly in the 19th century, during his travels through the ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  26. [26]
    Zindon Prison Bukhara - Indian Vagabond
    Apr 9, 2025 · Amir Muhammad Nasrullah Bahadur Khan, the emir of Bukhara, had him arrested and put him inside the same dreaded Zindon Prison. He was also put ...
  27. [27]
    The fate of Charles Stoddart as a victim of British arrogance
    Jul 1, 2021 · The colonel was sent to Bukhara by the East India Company to conclude an alliance with the emir against the Russians, whose advance into Central ...
  28. [28]
    Journey to the north of India: overland from England, through Russia ...
    Travel description of author's overland journey from England through Russia, Persia and AfghanistanMissing: 1829-1830 | Show results with:1829-1830
  29. [29]
    Journey to the North of India: Overland from England, through ...
    Volume 2 recounts the time Conolly spent in Afghanistan. Included also are appendices addressing the possible overland invasion of India as well as the history ...
  30. [30]
    Journey to the North of India: Overland from England Through ...
    Arthur Conolly was a great gamer and his journey was a mission of reconnaissance to access the possibilities of an overland invasion of India by the Russians ...
  31. [31]
  32. [32]
    A RECENTLY DISCOVERED LETTER FROM CAPTAIN ARTHUR ...
    Oct 16, 2024 · This article publishes a recently discovered letter apparently written by the 19th-century British intelligence officer Arthur Conolly.Missing: writings | Show results with:writings
  33. [33]
    Middle East Studies: The Great Game - The Ohio State University
    The Great Game was a political and diplomatic confrontation that existed for most of the 19th century between the British Empire and the Russian EmpireMissing: origin | Show results with:origin
  34. [34]
    Arthur Conolly | Military Wiki - Fandom
    Arthur Conolly (2 July 1807, London - 17 June 1842, Bukhara) (sometimes misspelled Connolly) was a British intelligence officer, explorer and writer.
  35. [35]
    Commons Chamber - Hansard - UK Parliament
    Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government whether any official account had been received of the barbarous murder of Colonel Stoddart and Captain Conolly?
  36. [36]
    colonel stodart and captain conolly — dr. woolf's mission.
    Woolf respecting the fate of Colonel Stodart and Captain Conolly; and he also wished to know whether Her Majesty's Government had given their support to Dr.
  37. [37]
    1842 retreat from Kabul - Wikipedia
    In total the British army lost 4,500 troops, along with about 12,000 civilians: the latter comprising both the families of Indian and British soldiers, plus ...
  38. [38]
    Arthur Conolly: Books - Amazon.com
    4.5 17K · 30-day returnsJourney to the North of India, Vol. 1 of 2 (Classic Reprint): Overland From England, Through Russia, Persia, and Affghaunistaun · by Arthur Conolly.Missing: writings | Show results with:writings
  39. [39]
    Rediscovered Correspondence from the Man Behind the “Great ...
    May 23, 2025 · A recently uncovered letter written by Captain Arthur Conolly, the British officer who coined the term “Great Game,” has captivated historians ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography<|separator|>
  40. [40]
    The Myth of the 'Great Game' - SpringerLink
    Arthur Conolly, Journey to the North of India, over the Land from England ... Cite this chapter. Hopkins, B.D. (2008). The Myth of the 'Great Game'. In ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  41. [41]
    More than the Great Game: The Origins of Anglo-Russian Imperial ...
    Oct 1, 2025 · Why did a seemingly simple metaphor, the Great Game—discovered by chance in a letter by Conolly after his death—become synonymous for a huge and ...