Revision as of 20:47, 4 September 2007 view sourceHornplease (talk | contribs)9,260 edits →Races designated by the British as martial races: of course its bloody debatable.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:32, 9 December 2024 view source CharlesWain (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,515 edits →In British colonial times: supposed to add hereTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|British Indian colonial military recruitment theory}} | |||
'''Martial Race''' or '''Martial races theory''' is an ] based on the ] that certain ] races were more martially inclined as opposed to the general populace or other races. This was a term originally used by the ] who observed that the ] were more fierce in battle than the others on the ], a concept applied to the Indian scenario. The entire Indian ] groups were divided into two categories: Martial and Non Martial. The martial race was typically brave and well built for fighting but were also described as "unintelligent".<ref name=rand>{{cite journal|last=Rand|first=Gavin|title=Martial Races and Imperial Subjects: Violence and Governance in Colonial India 1857–1914|journal= European Review of History|volume=13|issue=1|pages=1-20|publisher=Routledge|date=March 2006|url=|doi=10.1080/13507480600586726}}</ref> The non martial races were those whom the British believed to be unfit for battle because of their sedentary lifestyle. Of late, this ] has been dismissed as an ] thought based on ]s and laced with ].<ref>Martial Races: The military, race and masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857-1914 By Heather Streets</ref> | |||
{{pp-semi-indef|small=yes}} | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2019}} | |||
], 1912.]] | |||
'''Martial race''' was a designation which was created by army officials in ] after the ], in which they classified each ] as belonging to one of two categories, the 'martial' caste and the 'non-martial' caste. The ostensible reason for this system of classification was the belief that a 'martial race' was typically brave and well-built for fighting,<ref name=rand>{{Cite journal|last=Rand|first=Gavin|title=Martial Races and Imperial Subjects: Violence and Governance in Colonial India 1857–1914|journal= European Review of History|volume=13|issue=1|pages=1–20|publisher=Routledge|date=March 2006 |doi=10.1080/13507480600586726 |s2cid=144987021}}</ref> while the 'non-martial races' were those races which the British considered unfit for battle because of their ]s. The British had a policy of recruiting the martial Indians from those who has less access to education as they were easier to control.<ref name="Khalidi2003">{{cite book|author=Omar Khalidi|title=Khaki and the Ethnic Violence in India: Army, Police, and Paramilitary Forces During Communal Riots|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=B-NtAAAAMAAJ|year=2003|publisher=Three Essays Collective|quote= Apart from their physique, the martial races were regarded as politically subservient or docile to authority|page=5|isbn=9788188789092}}</ref> | |||
According to modern historian Jeffrey Greenhut on military history, "The Martial Race theory had an elegant symmetry. Indians who were intelligent and educated were defined as cowards, while those defined as brave were uneducated and backward". According to Amiya Samanta, the martial race was chosen from people of mercenary spirit (a soldier who fights for any group or country that will pay him), as these groups lacked nationalism as a trait.<ref>Greenhut, Jeffrey (1983) The Imperial Reserve: the Indian Corps on the Western Front, 1914–15. In: ''The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History'', October 1983.</ref><ref name="Samanta2000">{{cite book|author=Amiya K. Samanta|title=Gorkhaland Movement: A Study in Ethnic Separatism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=J4GqdfG0EU8C&pg=PA26|year=2000|publisher=APH Publishing|isbn=978-81-7648-166-3|pages=26–|quote=Dr . Jeffrey Greenhut has observed that “ The Martial Race Theory had an elegant symmetry . Indians who were intelligent and educated were defined as cowards, while those defined as brave were uneducated and backward. Besides their mercenary spirit was primarily due to their lack of nationalism.}}</ref> British-trained Indian soldiers were among those who had rebelled in 1857 and thereafter, the ] abandoned or diminished its recruitment of soldiers who came from the ] and enacted a new recruitment policy which favoured castes whose members had remained loyal to the British Empire.<ref name="Street">{{cite book |title=Martial Races: The military, race and masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857–1914 |last=Streets |first=Heather |year=2004 |publisher=Manchester University Press |isbn=978-0-7190-6962-8 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BscnZT_1po8C |access-date=20 October 2010}}</ref>{{Page needed|date=March 2019}} | |||
The concept already had a precedent in Indian culture as one of the four orders (]) in the ] social system of Hinduism is known as the ], literally "warriors".<ref name="gbook1">{{cite book | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=P_SrAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA301 | title=The Indian Postcolonial: A Critical Reader | publisher=Routledge |year=2010 |editor1-first=Elleke |editor1-last=Boehmer |editor2-first=Rosinka |editor2-last=Chaudhuri |first=Santanu |last=Das |chapter=India, empire and First World War writing |page=301 |isbn=978-1-13681-957-5}}</ref> ] were described as 'the oldest martial community',<ref name="Singh2014">{{cite book|author=Gajendra Singh|title=The Testimonies of Indian Soldiers and the Two World Wars: Between Self and Sepoy|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3cVMAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA29|date=16 January 2014|publisher=A&C Black|isbn=978-1-78093-820-2|pages=29–}}</ref> in the past having two of the oldest British Indian regiments, the ] and ]. Now, except a clan known as ] whose habits are simpler, very few are found in the army.<ref name="MacMunn 1979">{{Cite book |last=MacMunn |first=George Fletcher |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uiQKAQAAIAAJ&dq=Gaur+Brahmin+martial+race&pg=PA272 |title=The Martial Races of India |date=1979 |publisher=Mittal Publications |language=en}}</ref> Following the transfer of the British Indian Armed forces to the Indian Armed forces, these communities continued to have a high representation.<ref>{{Cite book |last=YADAV |first=ATUL |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pH9aEAAAQBAJ&dq=pandit+lal+chand&pg=PA22 |title=Valour Unlimited : Haryana and the Indian Armed Forces (1914-2000) |date=2022-01-22 |publisher=K.K. Publications |language=en}}</ref> | |||
Following Indian independence, the Indian government in February 1949 abolished the official application of "martial race" principles with regard to military recruitment, although it has continued to be applied formally and informally in certain circumstances.<ref>{{cite web|title=No More Class Composition in Indian Army|url=http://pibarchive.nic.in/archive/ArchiveSecondPhase/DEFENCE/1949-JAN-DEC-DEFENCE/PDF/DEF-1949-02-01_035.pdf|website=Press Information Bureau of India - Archive|date=1 February 1949|access-date=16 February 2020}}</ref> In Pakistan, such principles, although no longer rigidly enforced, have continued to hold considerable sway and have had major consequences for the nation's political life—the most extreme case being the ], following decades of continued ] exclusion from the armed forces.<ref name="Lakshmi_2016">{{cite news |last1=Lakshmi |first1=V. Vidya |title=Pakistan Army: Martial Race or National Army? |url=https://mantraya.org/pakistan-army-martial-race-or-national-army/ |access-date=25 August 2021 |work=Mantraya |date=1 June 2016}}</ref> | |||
==Criteria== | ==Criteria== | ||
In their attempts to assert control after the ], the British faced fierce resistance in some regions while easily subduing others. British officials sought 'martial races' accustomed to hunting, or from agricultural cultures from hilly or mountainous regions with a history of conflict. Others were excluded due to their 'ease of living' or branded as ] agitators.<ref name="Khalidi2006">{{cite web |url=http://www.defenceindia.com/def_common/ethnic_group_recruitment.html |title=Ethnic Group Recruitment in the Indian Army: The Contrasting Cases of Sikhs, Muslims, Gurkhas and Others|author= Dr. Omar Khalidi| website=www.defenceindia.com |access-date=26 June 2023}}{{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061020114933/http://defenceindia.com/def_common/ethnic_group_recruitment.html |date=20 October 2006 }}</ref> The doctrine of 'martial races' postulated that the qualities that make a useful soldier are inherited in certain races by birth, and that the rest of the Indian races did not have the requisite ] that would make them warriors.<ref>Greenhut, Jeffrey "Sahib and Sepoy: an Inquiry into the Relationship between the British Officers and Native Soldiers of the British Indian Army". (In: ''Military Affairs'', Vol. 48, No. 1 (Jan. 1984), p. 15.</ref> | |||
Martial Race was a designation created by officials of ]. In India, the British faced fierce resistance in some regions while they easily conquered some other regions. This led the British to look closely at some of the South Asian races. The British officials described these races as naturally warlike and ] in ], and to possess qualities like ], ], ], ], ], ], hard working, fighting tenacity and ]. The martial races were supposedly tall, broad-shouldered, light-skinned and capable of enduring hardship. Unlike the martial races, the inhabitants of the hot, flat plains of the country were supposedly unwarlike, flabby, darkskinned and therefore unfit for military service. Still others were excluded due to their "ease of living" or branded as seditious agitators. However, they were regarded as smarter and sometimes more cunning when compared to the martial races. | |||
British general and scholar Lieutenant-General George MacMunn (1869–1952) noted in his writings "It is only necessary for a feeling to arise that it is impious and disgraceful to serve the British, for the whole of our fabric to tumble like a house of cards without a shot being fired or a sword unsheathed".<ref>MacMunn, G. F. (1911). The Armies of India; painted by Major A. C. Lovett. London: Adam & Charles Black.</ref> To this end, it became British policy to recruit only from those tribes whom they classified as members of the 'martial races', and the practice became an integral part of the recruitment manuals for the Army in the British Raj. | |||
Apart from their physique, the martial races were regarded as politically subservient or docile to authority. The British recruited heavily from these ] ]s for service in the ].<ref>''Glossary of the tribes and castes of the Punjab and ], H A Rose''</ref> This ] of martial races postulated that the ability and desire of the soldier was inherited and that most Indians, with the exception of the specified castes, did not have the requisite ]s that would make them warriors.<ref>Sahib and Sepoy: An Inquiry into the Relationship between the British Officers and Native Soldiers of the British Indian Army | |||
Jeffrey Greenhut Military Affairs, Vol. 48, No. 1 (Jan., 1984), Pg 15</ref> Critics of this theory state that the ] may have played a role in reinforcing the British belief in Martial races. During this event some Indian troops (known as "]s"), particularly in Bengal, mutinied, but the "loyal" ]s, ]s, ]s and ] did not join the mutiny and fought on the side of the British Army. From then on, this theory was used to the hilt to accelerate recruitment from among these races, whilst discouraging enlistment of "disloyal" Bengalis and high-caste ] who had sided with the ] during the war.<ref> - ] </ref> | |||
The British regarded the 'martial races' as valiant and strong but also intellectually inferior, lacking the initiative or leadership qualities to command large military formations.<ref name="Levine2003">{{cite book|author=Philippa Levine|title=Prostitution, Race, and Politics: Policing Venereal Disease in the British Empire|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=It1lPzFCG9EC|year=2003|publisher=Psychology Press|isbn=978-0-415-94447-2|quote=The Saturday review had made much the same argument a few years earlier in relation to the armies raised by Indian rulers in princely states. They lacked competent leadership and were uneven in quality. Commander in chief Roberts, one of the most enthusiastic proponents of the martial race theory, though poorly of the native troops as a body. Many regarded such troops as childish and simple. The British, claims, David Omissi, believe martial Indians to be stupid. Certainly, the policy of recruiting among those without access to much education gave the British more semblance of control over their recruits. Garnet Wolseley, one of Britain's most admired late nineteenth-century soldiers, published a damning essay on "The negro as soldier" in 1888, and though his focus was on the African command with which he was most familiar, his dismissive comments are typical of those used against nonwhite soldiers more broadly. While "the Savage" lacked intelligence, was riddled with disease, and enjoyed human suffering, the Anglo-Saxon craved "manly sports" that had developed in him a "bodily strength" unmatched by any other nation.}}</ref> They were also regarded as politically subservient or docile to authority.<ref name="Khalidi2003"/><ref name="Khalidi2006"/> For these reasons, the martial races theory did not lead to officers being recruited from them; recruitment was based on ] and loyalty to the ]. One source calls this a "pseudo-]" construction, which was popularised by ], and created serious deficiencies in troop levels during the ], compelling them to recruit from 'non-martial races'.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170614224923/http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-6146.html |date=14 June 2017 }} – Based on the Country Studies Series by Federal Research Division of the ].</ref> ] was reportedly concerned that the theory was abandoned during the war and wrote to the ] that he must, "rely as much as possible on the martial races".<ref>Bose, Mihir. The Magic of Indian Cricket: Cricket and Society in India; p. 25.</ref> | |||
The British, sensing the inequalities and fierce loyalty to one's tribe and caste of the diverse natives of the subcontinent, found opportunity to use it to their own great advantage. These already wide divides were fertile breeding ground to inculcate pride in one's identity based on race and physical attributes. This served the British in two ways. On the one hand this made sure that there was no repeat of the ] by ensuring there was no unity among the different subjects of the Raj. On the other hand it encouraged a sense of competition among the different 'races'. And the British found willing Indians to aid and abet it in the suppression of the rebellion to begin with{{Fact|date=June 2007}}. A British general and scholar, Lieutenant General Sir ] (1869-1952) noted in his writings ''"It is only necessary for a feeling to arise that it is impious and disgraceful to serve the British, for the whole of our fabric to tumble like a house of cards without a shot being fired or a sword unsheathed"''.<ref>The Armies of India. 1911. London: Adams and Charles Black.</ref> To this end, it became British policy to recruit from only those who they classified as members of the 'Martial Races' and the practice became an integral part of the recruitment manuals for the Army in the British Raj. ''"The Martial Race theory had an elegant symmetry. Indians who were intelligent and educated were defined as cowards, while those defined as brave were uneducated and backward."''<ref>Dr. Jeffery Greenhut "The Imperial Reserve:The Indian Corps on the Western Front, 1914-15. "The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, October 1983.</ref> | |||
Critics of the theory state that the Indian rebellion of 1857 may have played a role in reinforcing the British belief in it. During this event the troops from the Bengal Native Infantry led by ] ] mutinied against the British. Similarly, the ] from ] also caused trouble with British forces. However, the loyal ], ], ], ], ]s, ] and ] did not join the mutiny, and fought on the side of the British Army. From then on, this theory was used to the hilt to accelerate recruitment from among these 'races', whilst discouraging enlistment of 'disloyal' troops and high-caste ] who had sided with the rebel army during the war.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Pakistan - THE BRITISH RAJ |url=http://countrystudies.us/pakistan/8.htm |access-date=2022-04-22 |website=countrystudies.us}}</ref> | |||
The geography and culture of these martial races had common marks, such as hilly and mountainous terrain, a basis as ] or agricultural societies and a history of ], whether internally or with external groups. A case in point are the ]s, who challenged British imperial expansion and gained the respect of their enemies for their fighting prowess and tenacity, thus earning them their reputation and their continued employment in the ]. Some authors like Heather Streets rebuff this Martial Races Ideology stating that the military authorities puffed up the images of the martial soldiers by writing regimental histories, and by extolling the ]ed Scots, ]-wielding Gurkhas and ]ed Sikhs in numerous paintings.<ref> in ]</ref> The Martial Race theory has also been described as a clever British effort to ] the people of India for their own political ends."<ref>Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat by Richard H. Shultz, Andrea Dew (Pg 47)</ref> | |||
Some authors, such as Heather Streets, argue that the military authorities puffed up the images of the martial soldiers by writing regimental histories, and by extolling the ]ed Scots, ]-wielding Gurkhas and ]ed Sikhs in numerous paintings.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304071621/http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050701/asp/opinion/story_4933880.asp |date=4 March 2016 }} in ].</ref> Richard Schultz, an American author, has claimed the martial race concept as a supposedly clever British effort to divide and rule the people of India for their own political ends.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=SHULTZ |first1=RICHARD H. |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/shul12982 |title=Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat |last2=DEW |first2=ANDREA J. |publisher=] |year=2006 |isbn=9780231503426 |pages=47 |jstor=10.7312/shul12982 }}</ref> | |||
The British who were the most enthusiastic proponents of this ] ideology, however had mixed views of these so called martial races. They were regarded as valiant and strong but also equally intellectually challenged, lacking initiative or ] qualities to ] large troops.<ref>Prostitution, Race and Politics: Policing Venereal Disease in the British Empire By Philippa Levine, Pg 284</ref> The martial races were also regarded as politically subservient or docile to authority.<ref></ref> For these reasons, the martial races theory did not apply in the case of ] recruitment, which was based on ] and loyalty to the ].<ref></ref> One source calls this a "]-]" construction, which was popularised by ], and created serious deficiencies in troop levels during the ], compelling them to recruit from "nonmartial" races.<ref> - Based on the Country Studies Series by Federal Research Division of the ]</ref> In fact, ] was reportedly concerned that the theory was abandoned during the war that he wrote to the ] that he must "rely as much as possible on the martial races".<ref>The Magic of Indian Cricket: Cricket and Society in India By Mihir Bose After, Pg 25</ref> After ], the ] abandoned this theory and recruitment took place without ]. | |||
== |
==Tribes and groups designated as martial races== | ||
]'']] | |||
===In British colonial times=== | |||
British declared martial races <ref>Each of the following groups are mentioned in the ''Annual Class Return, 1925, pp 96-99''. </ref> <ref>See Refs also: Restricted Peasants and the Restraint of Imperial Power, Indian Army and the Making of Punjab, 2003, R. K. Majumdar.</ref> <ref> See: Punjab Alienation Land Act XIII of 1900 (Lahore Amrit Electric Press, 1924), Appendix A, Notified Tribes, pp 146-149, Nihal Chand Anand.</ref> <ref> A Handbook of fighting Races of India, 1889, p 81/82, 179/181, P. D. Bonarjee.</ref> <ref> See also: The Martial Races of India, George Fletcher (Sir), MacMunn, 1933. </ref> <ref>Cf also: Wealth and Welfare, p 214, Calvert.</ref>. | |||
Listed below in alphabetical order: | |||
] in France during ]. The post card reads, "Gentlemen of India marching to chasten the German hooligans"]] | |||
* ] | |||
* ]s <ref>Handbook of the Panjáb, Western Rajpútáná, Kashmír, and Upper Sindh, 1883, p 61, John Murray (Firm).(''It is also important to note that in this reference, the Arains are also described as the blood cousins of the Jatts (ibid p 61))''.</ref> <ref>The Punjab Alienation of Land Act XIII of 1900, Appendix A, Notified Tribes, pp 146-149, Nihal Chand Anand.</ref> <ref>Annual Class Return 1925, pp 96-97.</ref> <ref>The Indian Army and the Making of Punjab, Chapter Recruited Peasants and the Restraint of Immperial Power, (Edition) 2003, p 105, R. K. Mazumder.</ref>. | |||
* ]s | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] <ref></ref> | |||
* ]s | |||
* ]s | |||
* ] | |||
* ]/] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ]/] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ]s | |||
* ]s | |||
* ]s | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ]s | |||
] ''(Risaldar Major), c. 1909, by AC Lovett (1862–1919)'']] | |||
Unlike the martial races, the inhabitants of the hot, flat plains of the country were supposedly unwarlike, unfit for military services. Still others were excluded due to their "ease of living" or branded as ] agitators.<ref></ref> The ] were called non-martial with many derogatory remarks about their looks, ethnicity and history. | |||
British-declared martial races in the Indian subcontinent included some groups that were officially designated instead as "agricultural tribes" under the provisions of the ]. These terms were considered to be synonymous when the administration compiled a list in 1925. Among the communities listed as martial were:<ref name = "Mazumdar Rajit">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=O4Wop9vwS9sC&pg=PA105 |title=The Indian Army and the Making of Punjab |first=Rajit K. |last=Mazumder |page=105 |publisher=Orient Longman |year=2003|isbn=9788178240596 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=MacMunn |first=George Fletcher |url=https://books.google.co.in/books?id=uiQKAQAAIAAJ&dq=Gaur+Brahmin+martial+race&pg=PA272&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Brahmin%20martial%20race&f=false |title=The Martial Races of India |date=1979 |publisher=Mittal Publications |pages=271 |language=en}}</ref> | |||
*] | |||
The people of ] were also not considered "martial races", despite the fact that the most powerful empire in ], the ], originated in Eastern India from the kingdom of ] (in modern ]). | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*]s | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*]s | |||
*]s | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*Syed | |||
Communities that were at various times classified as martial races include: | |||
Even the ]s were classified as non-martial, ignoring the ] or the Maratha Regiment's valiant contribution against the ]s during the ], when they were recruited by the ]. | |||
*]<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fWw8AAAAIAAJ |title=History of Jammu and Kashmir State: The making of the State |last=Kapur |first=Manohar Lal |publisher=Kashmir History Publications |year=1980 |isbn= |location=India |pages=51}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Understanding Kashmir and Kashmiris |chapter=Jammu and Jammutis|first=Christopher |last=Snedden |year=2015|publisher= HarperCollins India |isbn= 9781849043427|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=s5KMCwAAQBAJ}}</ref><ref name="Iffat Malik">{{citation |last1=Malik |first1=Iffat |title=Kashmir: Ethnic Conflict International Dispute |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=n9J8QgAACAAJ&q=kashmir+ethnic+conflict+international+dispute |page=62 |year=2002 |chapter=Jammu Province |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-579622-3}}</ref> | |||
*]<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jpXijlqeRpIC&pg=PA98|title = India's Historic Battles: From Alexander the Great to Kargil|isbn = 9788178241098|last1 = Roy|first1 = Kaushik|year = 2004| publisher=Orient Blackswan }}</ref> | |||
*]<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=O4Wop9vwS9sC |title=The Indian Army and the Making of Punjab |first=Rajit K. |last=Mazumder |page=99 |publisher=Orient Longman |year=2003|isbn=9788178240596 }}</ref> | |||
*]<ref>{{cite book |last= |first= |author-link= |year= 1898 |title= Historical Records of the XIII Madras Infantry |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Sxs9AAAAYAAJ&dq=coorgs+gaudas+service&pg=PA191|location= |publisher=W. Thacker |page=191 |quote= …Coorg for the purpose of trying to induce Coorgs and Gaudas to take service, but, after working the whole of Coorg, one recruit only, a Gauda, was obtained . According to the report of the native officer in command of the party, the inhabitants of Coorg, although a warlike race, are much… |isbn=}} | |||
</ref> | |||
*]s<ref name="eup">{{Cite journal|last=Surridge|first=Keith|year=2007|title=Martial Races: the Military, Race and Masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857–1914 (review)|journal=Journal of Victorian Culture|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|location=Edinburgh|volume=12|issue=1|pages=146–150|issn=1355-5502 |url=http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/journal_of_victorian_culture/v012/12.1surridge.html|doi=10.1353/jvc.2007.0017|s2cid=162319158}}</ref> | |||
*]<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5bJlCgAAQBAJ&q=kumaoni+people+as+a+martial+race&pg=PT14|title=mountain echoes a reminiscense of kumaoni women|first=namita|last=gokhale| publisher=Roli pvt ltd.| year=1998|isbn=9788174360403}}</ref> | |||
*]<ref name="i9788178357751">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vRwS6FmS2g0C|isbn = 9788178357751|title = Martial races of undivided India|year = 2009|publisher = Gyan Publishing House}}</ref> | |||
*]<ref> From book: "In the early twentieth century, the Marathas were identified as a "martial race" fit for the imperial army, and recruitment of Marathas increased after World War I."</ref> | |||
*]<ref name="Khushwant">{{cite book |last=Singh |first=Khushwant |author-link=Khushwant Singh |title=The End of India |date=2003 |publisher=Penguin |isbn=978-0143029946 |page=98 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TQjYaXkTqdcC&pg=PA98 |quote=Punjabi Mussalmans and Khalsa Sikhs were declared 'martial races' for recruitment to the army or the police; only one small Hindu caste, the Mohyal Brahmins, qualified as martial.}}</ref> | |||
* Agricultural Brahmins of ]<ref>{{Cite book|last=Singh|first=Gajendra|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3cVMAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA29|title=The Testimonies of Indian Soldiers and the Two World Wars: Between Self and Sepoy|date=2014-01-16|publisher=A&C Black|isbn=978-1-78093-820-2|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=MacMunn |first=George Fletcher |url=https://books.google.co.in/books?id=uiQKAQAAIAAJ&dq=Gaur+Brahmin+martial+race&pg=PA272&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Brahmin%20martial%20race&f=false |title=The Martial Races of India |date=1979 |publisher=Mittal Publications |pages=271 |language=en}}</ref> | |||
*]<ref name="i9788178357751"/> | |||
The ], where the ]i Rajputs and Bhumihar Brahmins made up bulk of the army, faced total annihilation during three Anglo-Afghan Wars and mass desertions during others and caused much loss of face to British Army. Therefore these were replaced with other Kshatriya agricultural castes of Eastern ]. | |||
*]<ref name="i9788178357751"/> | |||
*]s<ref>{{Cite book| title = The Mass Media and Village Life: An Indian Study |first1=Paul |last1=Hartmann |first2=B. R. |last2=Patil |first3=Anita |last3=Dighe | publisher = Sage Publications | year = 1989 | page = 224| isbn = 0-8039-9581-4}}</ref> | |||
*]<ref>{{Cite book |last=Mazumder |first=Rajit K. |title=The Indian Army and the making of Punjab |date=2003 |publisher=Permanent Black ; Distributed by Orient Longman |isbn=978-81-7824-059-6 |series=Permanent Black monographs. The "Opus 1" series |location=Delhi : Bangalore}}</ref> | |||
==Post-colonial period== | |||
The ]s of ] were initially included in the list, however after the Nairs of Travancore rebelled against the British under ], they were recruited in lower numbers. Apart from India, the British also classified the ]s as a non-martial race in the ], but this was also disproved when ] won all ] since its inception, including the historic ].<ref></ref> | |||
===India=== | |||
India was quick to formally disclaim the martial races theory after gaining independence. The largest single source of recruitment for the ] had come from ], with Sikhs and Punjabi Muslims particularly preferred, with the result that at independence over 90% of the new ]' senior officers came from ] despite the fact that it made up just 5% of the new country's population.<ref name="Wilkinson_2015">{{cite book |last1=Wilkinson |first1=Steven I. |title=Army and Nation: The Military and Indian Democracy Since Independence |date=2015 |publisher=] |location=Cambridge, MA |isbn=9780674967007}}</ref> Recognizing the destabilising potential of an unrepresentative armed forces, Prime Minister ] soon urged the ] and ] to undertake "large scale reform to the armed forces”.<ref name="Guruswamy_2016">{{cite news |last1=Guruswamy |first1=Menaka |title=Why the Indian army needs to abandon the colonial concept of 'martial races' |url=https://scroll.in/article/811303/why-the-indian-army-needs-to-abandon-the-colonial-concept-of-martial-races |access-date=25 August 2021 |work=The Scroll |date=16 July 2016}}</ref> | |||
However, while most caste or tribal bars on recruitment were lifted, recruitment in regions populated by the former "martial races" was progressively intensified, with the result that by the beginning of the 1970s, India had more than doubled the number of "martial class" units. The ], which recruits mainly ] and ], had gone from five to 29 battalions since independence, while the ], which is mainly composed of ] and ], increased from six to 21 battalions over the same time period.<ref name="Guruswamy_2016" /> The three states that comprised the former ]—], ], and ]—remain substantially over-represented in the contemporary Indian Armed Forces. In the 1968-1971 period, Haryana, which accounted for 2.2% of India's population, accounted for 7.82% of the armed forces' headcount; the figures for Himachal Pradesh were 0.6% of the population, and 4.68% of the armed forces, and for Punjab, 2.6% of the population and 15.3% of the armed forces.<ref name="Khalidi_2001">{{cite journal |last1=Khalidi |first1=Omar |title=Ethnic Group Recruitment in the Indian Army: The Contrasting Cases of Sikhs, Muslims, Gurkhas and Others |journal=Pacific Affairs |date=2001 |volume=74 |issue=4 |pages=529–552 |doi=10.2307/3557805 |jstor=3557805 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3557805 |access-date=25 August 2021}}</ref> By the 1996-97 period, the proportion of the armed forces coming from each state had fallen from 4.7% to 4.4% to Himachal Pradesh, from 7.8% to 5.1% in Haryana, and from 15.3% to 7.6% in Punjab.<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> | |||
==Modern usage== | |||
Though seldom used in today's context, it was used until the early ], especially by the ] which believed that since the ] comprised soldiers of the "martial races", they should easily defeat ] in a war, especially prior to the ]<ref>Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat Richard H. Shultz, Andrea Dew: "The Martial Races Theory had firm adherents in Pakistan and this factor played a major role in the under-estimation of the Indian Army by Pakistani soldiers as well as civilian decision makers in 1965."</ref><ref> ''The army officers of that period were convinced that they were a martial race and the Hindus of Indian Army were cowards. Some say this was disproved in 1965 when despite having more sophisticated equipment, numerical preponderance in tanks and the element of surprise the Pakistan Armoured Division miserably failed at ]''</ref><ref> ''Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India"''</ref> Based on this belief in the martial supremacy, it was popularly hyped that one Pakistani soldier was equal to four to ten Hindus/Indian soldiers (including a large number of Sikh soldiers and officers),<ref></ref><ref> - 18 July 1999, ]</ref><ref>''India'' by Stanley Wolpert. Published: University of California Press, 1990. "India's army... quickly dispelled the popular Pakistani myth that one Muslim soldier was “worth ten Hindus.”"</ref> and thus numerical superiority of the foe could be overcome. However, the ] of 1947 and 1965 proved otherwise as Pakistan Army lost more men and land than India.<ref>According to sources in ] Pakistani fatalities range between 30% - 200% higher than Indian fatalities including the ].</ref> in its many attempts to gain the entire Kashmir region.<ref>Pakistan backed troops were always the first to be sent into Kashmir during 1947, 1965 and in ] with aims of capture, instigation and intrusions. For details/sources, see relevant articles.</ref> | |||
{{Table alignment}} | |||
The Pakistan Army was also accused of ] and ] by the Bengalis of ] who felt humiliated by this dubious theory that was being floated in ], that they were not "martially inclined" compared to the Pashtuns, Balochs and Punjabis.<ref></ref> Pakistan author Hasan-Askari Rizvi notes that the limited recruitment of Bengali personnel in the Pakistan Army was because, the West Pakistanis "could not overcome the hangover of the martial race theory".<ref>Military, State and Society in Pakistan by | |||
{| class="wikitable collapsible sortable col1left" style="text-align:right" | |||
Hasan-Askari Rizvi, Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0-312-23193-8 (Pg 128)</ref> This was to be one of the factors for the ], where ] aided by the ] defeated the Pakistan Army in just a ], which subsequently lead to the taking of nearly 1 ] (100,000) Pakistani soldiers as ] - the largest ] since ]. | |||
|+ State-wise Composition of the Indian Army<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> | |||
|- | |||
! rowspan="2" |] | |||
! colspan="1" |], ]<ref>{{cite web |title=Population and decadal change by residence : 2011 (PERSONS) |url=http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/PCA/PCA_Highlights/pca_highlights_file/India/Chapter-1.pdf |publisher=Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India |page=2 |access-date=2019-01-15 |archive-date=2016-06-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160624015117/http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/PCA/PCA_Highlights/pca_highlights_file/India/Chapter-1.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> | |||
! colspan="1" |% of Indian Army, 1968-1971 | |||
! colspan="1" |% of Indian Army, 1996-1997 | |||
! colspan="1" |Change in % | |||
|- | |||
!{{Abbr|%|Percentage}} | |||
!{{Abbr|%|Percentage}} | |||
!{{Abbr|%|Percentage}} | |||
!{{Abbr|+%|Percentage Change}} | |||
|- | |||
|] (including ]) | |||
|17.3 | |||
|15.6 | |||
|20.6 | |||
|{{Percentage | 5.0| 15.6 | 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|5.7 | |||
|7.0 | |||
|7.9 | |||
|{{Percentage | 0.9| 7.0| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|2.3 | |||
|15.3 | |||
|7.6 | |||
|{{Percentage | -7.7| 15.3| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|9.3 | |||
|7.6 | |||
|7.3 | |||
|{{Percentage | -0.3| 7.6| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] (including ]) | |||
|11.3 | |||
|5.1 | |||
|7.0 | |||
|{{Percentage | 1.9| 5.1| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|7.5 | |||
|3.6 | |||
|5.7 | |||
|{{Percentage | 2.1| 3.6| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|2.1 | |||
|7.8 | |||
|5.1 | |||
|{{Percentage | -2.7| 7.8| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] (including ]) | |||
|7.0 | |||
|4.1 | |||
|4.9 | |||
|{{Percentage | 0.8| 4.1| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|6.0 | |||
|5.1 | |||
|4.9 | |||
|{{Percentage | -0.2| 5.1| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|0.6 | |||
|4.7 | |||
|4.4 | |||
|{{Percentage | -0.3| 4.7| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] (including ]) | |||
|1.0 | |||
|2.9 | |||
|3.7 | |||
|{{Percentage | 0.8| 2.9| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|5.1 | |||
|2.8 | |||
|3.7 | |||
|{{Percentage | 0.9| 2.8| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|2.8 | |||
|5.4 | |||
|3.1 | |||
|{{Percentage | -2.3| 5.4| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|] (including ]) | |||
|8.1 | |||
|5.1 | |||
|3.0 | |||
|{{Percentage | -2.1| 5.1| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|All other states and union territories combined{{efn|], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ].}} | |||
|13.9 | |||
|7.9 | |||
|11.1 | |||
|{{Percentage | 3.2| 7.9| 2 }} | |||
|- | |||
|} | |||
Explicit ethnic- or caste-based requirements have nevertheless persisted amongst some military formations. The most notable instance is the ], the most senior and arguably the most prestigious unit of the ], which recruits exclusively from Sikhs, Jats and Rajputs in equal proportion. The Indian government has defended what it terms as "class composition" restrictions on the grounds of the "functional requirements" of the ceremonial detachment, namely its "ceremonial duties demand common height, built, appearance and dress for reason of pomp and projection".<ref>{{cite news |last1=Ahsan |first1=Sofi |title=President's bodyguards: Govt defends recruitment process, says it's based on 'functional requirements' |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/india/presidents-bodyguards-govt-defends-recruitment-process-says-its-based-on-functional-requirements-5835027/ |access-date=25 August 2021 |work=] |date=18 July 2019}}</ref> | |||
Defense writers in Pakistan have noted that the defeat was partially attributable to the flawed "Martial Races Theory" which merely led to "]" that it was possible to defeat the Indian Army.<ref></ref> Since then, the "martial race" theory was rarely, if ever, used at all by Pakistan. | |||
Sikhs continue to be strongly over-represented in the armed forces despite the discontinuation of the marital race theory. While religious data of soldiers is not collected, the number of religious preachers for each group in the Army was disclosed by the government to the ] in early 1997, a number believed to proportionate to the number of each religion's adherents in the army, and indicated that over 10% of the Army was Sikh as opposed to under 2% of the general population.<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> Notably, the ] and ] are largely homogenous regiments with around 20 battalions highly used as a strike force,<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> with the Sikh Regiment being the most decorated regiment in the Indian Army.<ref name="Ahsan_2019">{{cite news |title=Sikh Regiment: Legacy of Valour and Bravery in Indian Army|url=https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/sikh-regiment-legacy-of-valour-and-bravery-in-indian-army20230530153308// |access-date=18 October 2024 |work=] |date=30 May 2023}}</ref> Sikhs compose up to 20% of the Indian Army officer corps.<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> Nonetheless, Sikhs have alleged that their proportion in the armed forces has been dropping,<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> and the ] called for "the present ratio of their strength in the Army should be maintained".<ref>{{cite web|last=Singh|first=Khushwant|title=The Anandpur Sahib Resolution and Other Akali Demands|url=http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195673098.001.0001/acprof-9780195673098-chapter-20|work=oxfordscholarship.com/|publisher=Oxford University Press|access-date=5 April 2013}}</ref> Major General Jaswant Singh Bhullar complained that Sikhs were having trouble joining the armed forces due to religious quotas, which may have fueled the ] and ].<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> Lieutenant General ] complained that migration abroad was leading an officer shortage, measured at 13,000, which may lead to lowering of education standards and test scores.<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> | |||
] an Indian writer, journalist and politician (former Minister of Communications and Information Technology) refers to the Sikhs as 'having retained a false pride in martial temperament and abilities'.<ref> Arun Shourie, Lessons from the Punjab, in The Punjab Story, edited by Amarjit Kaur et al., Roli Books International, 1984, pages 178-179</ref> The tenth Sikh Guru ] proclaimed that one Sikh was equal to sava lakh (one hundred twenty five thousand) and a fauj-a one man army.<ref> Ranbir S. Sandhu, Sant Janail Singh Bhindranwale - Life, Mission, and Martyrdom, Sikh Education and Religious Foundation, Dublin, Ohio, 1997, page 10.</ref> The Sikh leader ] was reported to have said 'One Sikh could easily reckon with thirty-five Hindus.'<ref> Kuldip Nayar and Khushwant Singh, Tragedy of Punjab, Vision Books, New Delhi, 1984, page 27</ref> This characterization of Sikhs is particularly strong within the ] movement, which emphasizes ].{{or}} | |||
{{Table alignment}} | |||
{| class="wikitable collapsible sortable col1left" style="text-align:right" | |||
|+ Estimated religion-wise Composition of the Indian Army<ref name="Khalidi_2001"/> | |||
|- | |||
! rowspan="2" |] | |||
! colspan="1" |% of national population, ]<ref name="censusindia.gov.in">{{Cite web |title=C -1 POPULATION BY RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY - 2011 |url=https://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/C-01/DDW00C-01%20MDDS.XLS |access-date=2 October 2023 |website=]}}</ref> | |||
! colspan="1" |estimated % of Indian Army, 1997 | |||
! colspan="1" |Proportion | |||
|- | |||
!{{Abbr|%|Percentage}} | |||
!{{Abbr|%|Percentage}} | |||
!{{Abbr|%|Percentage}} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|{{Percentage|966,257,353|1,210,854,977|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|1568|1,854|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|84.57|79.80|2}} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|{{Percentage|20,833,116|1,210,854,977|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|194|1,854|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|10.46|1.72|2}} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|{{Percentage|172,245,158|1,210,854,977|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|54|1,854|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|2.91|14.23|2}} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|{{Percentage|27,819,588|1,210,854,977|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|27|1,854|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|1.46|2.30|2}} | |||
|- | |||
|] | |||
|{{Percentage|8,442,972|1,210,854,977|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|11|1,854|2}} | |||
|{{Percentage|0.59|0.70|2}} | |||
|- | |||
|} | |||
===Pakistan=== | |||
At independence, the new ] likewise reflected the institutional legacy of the "martial races" theory, although it was no longer formally applied there as well. The British preference of Punjabis, combined with the fact that Bengalis (who were the single largest group in the new nation) had been disfavored ever since the Revolt of 1857, led to an even more ethnically lopsided army corps than in India. At the ]'s establishment in 1947, ], with 25% of the new nation's population, accounted for 72% of the Army's headcount, while ], with 55% of the total population, was virtually unrepresented. In the ], there was not a single Muslim member from Sindh, Balochistan or Bengal, which together comprised 70% of Pakistan's total population.<ref name="Lakshmi_2016" /> | |||
This imbalance created tensions, particularly amongst the ] of ], who felt humiliated by the continued belief in the theory which continued to hold sway in ], that they were not 'martially inclined' compared to the ] and ].<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd%2Fcstdy%3A%40field%28DOCID+bd0139%29 |title=Library of Congress studies. |access-date=7 November 2006 |archive-date=5 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190705131255/http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r%3Ffrd/cstdy:@field(DOCID%2Bbd0139) |url-status=live }}</ref> Pakistani author ] notes that the limited recruitment of Bengali personnel in the Pakistan Army was because the West Pakistanis "could not overcome the hangover of the martial race theory".<ref>{{cite book |title=Military, State and Society in Pakistan |first=Hasan-Askari |last=Rizvi |date=September 2000 |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |isbn=0-312-23193-8 |page=128}}</ref> As a result, in 1955, out of the Pakistan Army's 908-strong officer corps, 894 hailed from West Pakistan and a mere 14 from East Pakistan. Thus, following the ], the exclusion of East Pakistani Bengalis from military leadership translated into their exclusion from the nation's political leadership. This deepened the alienation of East Pakistanis from the Pakistani government, which would eventually lead to the ].<ref name="Guruswamy_2016" /> | |||
Furthermore, it has been alleged that the continued influence of the theory among the command of the ], whose rank and file had largely drawn from the martial races, contributed to an otherwise unjustified confidence that they would easily defeat India in a war, especially prior to the ].<ref>Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat ], Andrea Dew: "The Martial Races Theory had firm adherents in Pakistan and this factor played a major role in the under-estimation of the Indian Army by Pakistani soldiers as well as civilian decision makers in 1965."</ref><ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20120719232027/http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+in0189) |date=19 July 2012 }} "Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by 'Hindu India'."</ref> Based on this belief in martial supremacy<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170509223002/http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1965.htm |date=9 May 2017 }}.</ref><ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101023234619/http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/990718.htm |date=23 October 2010 }} – 18 July 1999, ].</ref><ref>''India'' Stanley Wolpert Published: University of California Press 1990. "India's army... quickly dispelled the popular Pakistani myth that one Muslim soldier was 'worth ten Hindus.'"</ref> numerical superiority of the foe could be overcome.<ref name="Cohen">''The Idea of Pakistan'' ] Published: Brookings Institution Press 2004 {{ISBN|0-8157-1502-1}} pp. 103–104.</ref> Defence writers in Pakistan have noted that the 1971 defeat was partially attributable to the flawed 'martial races' theory which led to ] that it was possible to defeat the ] based on the theory alone.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/nov/pak-army.htm |title=Pakistan's Defence Journal. |access-date=29 February 2008 |archive-date=7 March 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090307232548/http://defencejournal.com/2000/nov/pak-army.htm |url-status=dead }}</ref> Author ] notes that "Elevating the 'martial races' theory to the level of an absolute truth had domestic implications for Pakistani politics and contributed to the neglect of other aspects of security.".<ref name="Cohen"/> | |||
In contemporary Pakistan, army recruitment still reflects the biases of "martial races" theory, with a considerable over-representation of ethnic ] and ], particularly from the ], and under-representation of ] and ].<ref name="Lakshmi_2016" /> In the past few decades there have been some efforts to rectify these imbalances and make the Armed Forces more representative, in part by relaxing recruitment standards in Sindh and Balochistan.<ref name="Lakshmi_2016" /> In 2007 a report published by the ] claimed success bringing the army's composition closer to national demographics; the proportion of Punjabis in the army had fallen from 71% in 2001 to 57% in 2007, and was expected to reach 54% by 2011.{{update inline|date=August 2021}} In turn, the proportion of Sindhis was expected to increase from 15% to 17%, and Balochis from 3.2% in 2007 to 4% in 2011. The report also projected an increase in the soldiers from Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan from 0% to 9% by 2011.<ref name="Lakshmi_2016" /> However, noting that, for instance, a disproportionately large share of new recruits from Sindh are ethnic ] rather than Sindhis, critics have alleged that such figures, in measuring provincial origin rather than ethnicity ''per se'', mask continued biases in recruiting.<ref name="Lakshmi_2016" /> | |||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
*] | |||
* ] | |||
*] | |||
* ] | |||
==Notes== | |||
* ] | |||
{{notelist}} | |||
* ] | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist| |
{{reflist|30em}} | ||
==Further reading== | |||
*{{cite journal |jstor=2943173 |title=The Untouchable Soldier: Caste, Politics, and the Indian Army |first=Stephen P. |last=Cohen |journal=The Journal of Asian Studies |volume=28 |issue=3 |date=May 1969 |pages=453–468 |doi=10.1017/s0021911800092779}} {{subscription required}} | |||
*{{cite book |first=Stephen P. |last=Cohen |title=The Indian Army |location=Berkeley |publisher=University of California Press |year=1971}} | |||
*{{cite journal |title=Militarized Masculinities: Shaped and Reshaped in Colonial South-East Punjab |first=Prem |last=Chowdhry |journal=Modern Asian Studies |volume=47 |issue=3 |date=May 2013 |pages=713–750 |doi=10.1017/S0026749X11000539 |jstor=24494165|s2cid=145147406 }} | |||
{{Historical definitions of race}} | |||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Race, Martial}} | |||
==External links== | |||
* Martial race is the ]n scenario. | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 14:32, 9 December 2024
British Indian colonial military recruitment theory
Martial race was a designation which was created by army officials in British India after the Indian Rebellion of 1857, in which they classified each caste as belonging to one of two categories, the 'martial' caste and the 'non-martial' caste. The ostensible reason for this system of classification was the belief that a 'martial race' was typically brave and well-built for fighting, while the 'non-martial races' were those races which the British considered unfit for battle because of their sedentary lifestyles. The British had a policy of recruiting the martial Indians from those who has less access to education as they were easier to control.
According to modern historian Jeffrey Greenhut on military history, "The Martial Race theory had an elegant symmetry. Indians who were intelligent and educated were defined as cowards, while those defined as brave were uneducated and backward". According to Amiya Samanta, the martial race was chosen from people of mercenary spirit (a soldier who fights for any group or country that will pay him), as these groups lacked nationalism as a trait. British-trained Indian soldiers were among those who had rebelled in 1857 and thereafter, the Bengal Army abandoned or diminished its recruitment of soldiers who came from the catchment area and enacted a new recruitment policy which favoured castes whose members had remained loyal to the British Empire.
The concept already had a precedent in Indian culture as one of the four orders (varnas) in the Vedic social system of Hinduism is known as the Kshatriya, literally "warriors". Brahmins were described as 'the oldest martial community', in the past having two of the oldest British Indian regiments, the 1st Brahmans and 3rd Brahmans. Now, except a clan known as Gaur whose habits are simpler, very few are found in the army. Following the transfer of the British Indian Armed forces to the Indian Armed forces, these communities continued to have a high representation.
Following Indian independence, the Indian government in February 1949 abolished the official application of "martial race" principles with regard to military recruitment, although it has continued to be applied formally and informally in certain circumstances. In Pakistan, such principles, although no longer rigidly enforced, have continued to hold considerable sway and have had major consequences for the nation's political life—the most extreme case being the Bangladesh Liberation War, following decades of continued Bengali exclusion from the armed forces.
Criteria
In their attempts to assert control after the Indian Rebellion of 1857, the British faced fierce resistance in some regions while easily subduing others. British officials sought 'martial races' accustomed to hunting, or from agricultural cultures from hilly or mountainous regions with a history of conflict. Others were excluded due to their 'ease of living' or branded as seditious agitators. The doctrine of 'martial races' postulated that the qualities that make a useful soldier are inherited in certain races by birth, and that the rest of the Indian races did not have the requisite traits that would make them warriors.
British general and scholar Lieutenant-General George MacMunn (1869–1952) noted in his writings "It is only necessary for a feeling to arise that it is impious and disgraceful to serve the British, for the whole of our fabric to tumble like a house of cards without a shot being fired or a sword unsheathed". To this end, it became British policy to recruit only from those tribes whom they classified as members of the 'martial races', and the practice became an integral part of the recruitment manuals for the Army in the British Raj.
The British regarded the 'martial races' as valiant and strong but also intellectually inferior, lacking the initiative or leadership qualities to command large military formations. They were also regarded as politically subservient or docile to authority. For these reasons, the martial races theory did not lead to officers being recruited from them; recruitment was based on social class and loyalty to the British Raj. One source calls this a "pseudo-ethnological" construction, which was popularised by Frederick Sleigh Roberts, and created serious deficiencies in troop levels during the World Wars, compelling them to recruit from 'non-martial races'. Winston Churchill was reportedly concerned that the theory was abandoned during the war and wrote to the Commander-in-Chief, India that he must, "rely as much as possible on the martial races".
Critics of the theory state that the Indian rebellion of 1857 may have played a role in reinforcing the British belief in it. During this event the troops from the Bengal Native Infantry led by sepoy Mangal Pandey mutinied against the British. Similarly, the Revolt of Rajab Ali from Chittagong also caused trouble with British forces. However, the loyal Rajputs, Jats, Pashtuns, Sikhs, Gurkhas, Kumaunis and Garhwalis did not join the mutiny, and fought on the side of the British Army. From then on, this theory was used to the hilt to accelerate recruitment from among these 'races', whilst discouraging enlistment of 'disloyal' troops and high-caste Hindus who had sided with the rebel army during the war.
Some authors, such as Heather Streets, argue that the military authorities puffed up the images of the martial soldiers by writing regimental histories, and by extolling the kilted Scots, kukri-wielding Gurkhas and turbaned Sikhs in numerous paintings. Richard Schultz, an American author, has claimed the martial race concept as a supposedly clever British effort to divide and rule the people of India for their own political ends.
Tribes and groups designated as martial races
In British colonial times
British-declared martial races in the Indian subcontinent included some groups that were officially designated instead as "agricultural tribes" under the provisions of the Punjab Land Alienation Act of 1900. These terms were considered to be synonymous when the administration compiled a list in 1925. Among the communities listed as martial were:
- Ahir
- Arain
- Awan
- Baloch
- Dogra
- Gakhar
- Gurjars
- Janjua
- Jat
- Kamboh
- Khokhar
- Labana
- Mahton
- Mughal
- Saini
- Pathan
- Rajputs
- Rowthers
- Qureshi
- Sial
- Syed
Communities that were at various times classified as martial races include:
- Sudhan Pathan
- Bhumihar Brahmins
- Garhwali
- Gowdas
- Gurkhas
- Kumaoni
- Kurmi
- Marathas
- Mohyal Brahmin
- Agricultural Brahmins of Oudh
Post-colonial period
India
India was quick to formally disclaim the martial races theory after gaining independence. The largest single source of recruitment for the British Indian Army had come from Punjab, with Sikhs and Punjabi Muslims particularly preferred, with the result that at independence over 90% of the new Indian Armed Forces' senior officers came from East Punjab despite the fact that it made up just 5% of the new country's population. Recognizing the destabilising potential of an unrepresentative armed forces, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru soon urged the Commander-in-Chief, India and Defence Secretary to undertake "large scale reform to the armed forces”.
However, while most caste or tribal bars on recruitment were lifted, recruitment in regions populated by the former "martial races" was progressively intensified, with the result that by the beginning of the 1970s, India had more than doubled the number of "martial class" units. The Punjab Regiment, which recruits mainly Sikhs and Dogras, had gone from five to 29 battalions since independence, while the Rajputana Rifles, which is mainly composed of Jats and Rajputs, increased from six to 21 battalions over the same time period. The three states that comprised the former East Punjab—Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Punjab—remain substantially over-represented in the contemporary Indian Armed Forces. In the 1968-1971 period, Haryana, which accounted for 2.2% of India's population, accounted for 7.82% of the armed forces' headcount; the figures for Himachal Pradesh were 0.6% of the population, and 4.68% of the armed forces, and for Punjab, 2.6% of the population and 15.3% of the armed forces. By the 1996-97 period, the proportion of the armed forces coming from each state had fallen from 4.7% to 4.4% to Himachal Pradesh, from 7.8% to 5.1% in Haryana, and from 15.3% to 7.6% in Punjab.
State | % of national population, 2011 | % of Indian Army, 1968-1971 | % of Indian Army, 1996-1997 | Change in % |
---|---|---|---|---|
% | % | % | +% | |
Uttar Pradesh (including Uttarakhand) | 17.3 | 15.6 | 20.6 | 32.05% |
Rajasthan | 5.7 | 7.0 | 7.9 | 12.86% |
Punjab | 2.3 | 15.3 | 7.6 | -50.33% |
Maharashtra | 9.3 | 7.6 | 7.3 | -3.95% |
Bihar (including Jharkhand) | 11.3 | 5.1 | 7.0 | 37.25% |
West Bengal | 7.5 | 3.6 | 5.7 | 58.33% |
Haryana | 2.1 | 7.8 | 5.1 | -34.62% |
Andhra Pradesh (including Telangana) | 7.0 | 4.1 | 4.9 | 19.51% |
Tamil Nadu | 6.0 | 5.1 | 4.9 | -3.92% |
Himachal Pradesh | 0.6 | 4.7 | 4.4 | -6.38% |
Jammu and Kashmir (including Ladakh) | 1.0 | 2.9 | 3.7 | 27.59% |
Karnataka | 5.1 | 2.8 | 3.7 | 32.14% |
Kerala | 2.8 | 5.4 | 3.1 | -42.59% |
Madhya Pradesh (including Chhattisgarh) | 8.1 | 5.1 | 3.0 | -41.18% |
All other states and union territories combined | 13.9 | 7.9 | 11.1 | 40.51% |
Explicit ethnic- or caste-based requirements have nevertheless persisted amongst some military formations. The most notable instance is the President's Bodyguard, the most senior and arguably the most prestigious unit of the Indian Army, which recruits exclusively from Sikhs, Jats and Rajputs in equal proportion. The Indian government has defended what it terms as "class composition" restrictions on the grounds of the "functional requirements" of the ceremonial detachment, namely its "ceremonial duties demand common height, built, appearance and dress for reason of pomp and projection".
Sikhs continue to be strongly over-represented in the armed forces despite the discontinuation of the marital race theory. While religious data of soldiers is not collected, the number of religious preachers for each group in the Army was disclosed by the government to the Lok Sabha in early 1997, a number believed to proportionate to the number of each religion's adherents in the army, and indicated that over 10% of the Army was Sikh as opposed to under 2% of the general population. Notably, the Sikh Regiment and Sikh Light Infantry are largely homogenous regiments with around 20 battalions highly used as a strike force, with the Sikh Regiment being the most decorated regiment in the Indian Army. Sikhs compose up to 20% of the Indian Army officer corps. Nonetheless, Sikhs have alleged that their proportion in the armed forces has been dropping, and the Anandpur Sahib Resolution called for "the present ratio of their strength in the Army should be maintained". Major General Jaswant Singh Bhullar complained that Sikhs were having trouble joining the armed forces due to religious quotas, which may have fueled the Sikh insurgency and Sikh migration abroad. Lieutenant General Joginder Singh Dhillon complained that migration abroad was leading an officer shortage, measured at 13,000, which may lead to lowering of education standards and test scores.
Religion | % of national population, 2011 | estimated % of Indian Army, 1997 | Proportion |
---|---|---|---|
% | % | % | |
Hindu | 79.8% | 84.57% | 105.98% |
Sikh | 1.72% | 10.46% | 608.14% |
Muslim | 14.23% | 2.91% | 20.45% |
Christian | 2.3% | 1.46% | 63.48% |
Buddhist | 0.7% | 0.59% | 84.29% |
Pakistan
At independence, the new Pakistan Armed Forces likewise reflected the institutional legacy of the "martial races" theory, although it was no longer formally applied there as well. The British preference of Punjabis, combined with the fact that Bengalis (who were the single largest group in the new nation) had been disfavored ever since the Revolt of 1857, led to an even more ethnically lopsided army corps than in India. At the Pakistan Army's establishment in 1947, Punjab, with 25% of the new nation's population, accounted for 72% of the Army's headcount, while East Bengal, with 55% of the total population, was virtually unrepresented. In the Armoured Corps, there was not a single Muslim member from Sindh, Balochistan or Bengal, which together comprised 70% of Pakistan's total population.
This imbalance created tensions, particularly amongst the Bengalis of East Pakistan, who felt humiliated by the continued belief in the theory which continued to hold sway in West Pakistan, that they were not 'martially inclined' compared to the Punjabis and Pashtuns. Pakistani author Hasan-Askari Rizvi notes that the limited recruitment of Bengali personnel in the Pakistan Army was because the West Pakistanis "could not overcome the hangover of the martial race theory". As a result, in 1955, out of the Pakistan Army's 908-strong officer corps, 894 hailed from West Pakistan and a mere 14 from East Pakistan. Thus, following the coup d'état of 1958, the exclusion of East Pakistani Bengalis from military leadership translated into their exclusion from the nation's political leadership. This deepened the alienation of East Pakistanis from the Pakistani government, which would eventually lead to the independence of Bangladesh.
Furthermore, it has been alleged that the continued influence of the theory among the command of the Pakistan Armed Forces, whose rank and file had largely drawn from the martial races, contributed to an otherwise unjustified confidence that they would easily defeat India in a war, especially prior to the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965. Based on this belief in martial supremacy numerical superiority of the foe could be overcome. Defence writers in Pakistan have noted that the 1971 defeat was partially attributable to the flawed 'martial races' theory which led to wishful thinking that it was possible to defeat the Bengali Rebel Forces based on the theory alone. Author Stephen P. Cohen notes that "Elevating the 'martial races' theory to the level of an absolute truth had domestic implications for Pakistani politics and contributed to the neglect of other aspects of security.".
In contemporary Pakistan, army recruitment still reflects the biases of "martial races" theory, with a considerable over-representation of ethnic Pashtuns and Punjabis, particularly from the Salt Range, and under-representation of Balochis and Sindhis. In the past few decades there have been some efforts to rectify these imbalances and make the Armed Forces more representative, in part by relaxing recruitment standards in Sindh and Balochistan. In 2007 a report published by the Inter-Services Public Relations claimed success bringing the army's composition closer to national demographics; the proportion of Punjabis in the army had fallen from 71% in 2001 to 57% in 2007, and was expected to reach 54% by 2011. In turn, the proportion of Sindhis was expected to increase from 15% to 17%, and Balochis from 3.2% in 2007 to 4% in 2011. The report also projected an increase in the soldiers from Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan from 0% to 9% by 2011. However, noting that, for instance, a disproportionately large share of new recruits from Sindh are ethnic Pathans (Pashtuns) rather than Sindhis, critics have alleged that such figures, in measuring provincial origin rather than ethnicity per se, mask continued biases in recruiting.
See also
Notes
- Gujarat, Odisha, Assam, Delhi, Tripura, Meghalaya, Manipur, Nagaland, Goa, Arunachal Pradesh, Puducherry, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Sikkim, Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, and Lakshadweep.
References
- Rand, Gavin (March 2006). "Martial Races and Imperial Subjects: Violence and Governance in Colonial India 1857–1914". European Review of History. 13 (1). Routledge: 1–20. doi:10.1080/13507480600586726. S2CID 144987021.
- ^ Omar Khalidi (2003). Khaki and the Ethnic Violence in India: Army, Police, and Paramilitary Forces During Communal Riots. Three Essays Collective. p. 5. ISBN 9788188789092.
Apart from their physique, the martial races were regarded as politically subservient or docile to authority
- Greenhut, Jeffrey (1983) The Imperial Reserve: the Indian Corps on the Western Front, 1914–15. In: The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, October 1983.
- Amiya K. Samanta (2000). Gorkhaland Movement: A Study in Ethnic Separatism. APH Publishing. pp. 26–. ISBN 978-81-7648-166-3.
Dr . Jeffrey Greenhut has observed that " The Martial Race Theory had an elegant symmetry . Indians who were intelligent and educated were defined as cowards, while those defined as brave were uneducated and backward. Besides their mercenary spirit was primarily due to their lack of nationalism.
- Streets, Heather (2004). Martial Races: The military, race and masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857–1914. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-6962-8. Retrieved 20 October 2010.
- Das, Santanu (2010). "India, empire and First World War writing". In Boehmer, Elleke; Chaudhuri, Rosinka (eds.). The Indian Postcolonial: A Critical Reader. Routledge. p. 301. ISBN 978-1-13681-957-5.
- Gajendra Singh (16 January 2014). The Testimonies of Indian Soldiers and the Two World Wars: Between Self and Sepoy. A&C Black. pp. 29–. ISBN 978-1-78093-820-2.
- MacMunn, George Fletcher (1979). The Martial Races of India. Mittal Publications.
- YADAV, ATUL (22 January 2022). Valour Unlimited : Haryana and the Indian Armed Forces (1914-2000). K.K. Publications.
- "No More Class Composition in Indian Army" (PDF). Press Information Bureau of India - Archive. 1 February 1949. Retrieved 16 February 2020.
- ^ Lakshmi, V. Vidya (1 June 2016). "Pakistan Army: Martial Race or National Army?". Mantraya. Retrieved 25 August 2021.
- ^ Dr. Omar Khalidi. "Ethnic Group Recruitment in the Indian Army: The Contrasting Cases of Sikhs, Muslims, Gurkhas and Others". www.defenceindia.com. Retrieved 26 June 2023.Archived 20 October 2006 at the Wayback Machine
- Greenhut, Jeffrey "Sahib and Sepoy: an Inquiry into the Relationship between the British Officers and Native Soldiers of the British Indian Army". (In: Military Affairs, Vol. 48, No. 1 (Jan. 1984), p. 15.
- MacMunn, G. F. (1911). The Armies of India; painted by Major A. C. Lovett. London: Adam & Charles Black.
- Philippa Levine (2003). Prostitution, Race, and Politics: Policing Venereal Disease in the British Empire. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-94447-2.
The Saturday review had made much the same argument a few years earlier in relation to the armies raised by Indian rulers in princely states. They lacked competent leadership and were uneven in quality. Commander in chief Roberts, one of the most enthusiastic proponents of the martial race theory, though poorly of the native troops as a body. Many regarded such troops as childish and simple. The British, claims, David Omissi, believe martial Indians to be stupid. Certainly, the policy of recruiting among those without access to much education gave the British more semblance of control over their recruits. Garnet Wolseley, one of Britain's most admired late nineteenth-century soldiers, published a damning essay on "The negro as soldier" in 1888, and though his focus was on the African command with which he was most familiar, his dismissive comments are typical of those used against nonwhite soldiers more broadly. While "the Savage" lacked intelligence, was riddled with disease, and enjoyed human suffering, the Anglo-Saxon craved "manly sports" that had developed in him a "bodily strength" unmatched by any other nation.
- Country Data Archived 14 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine – Based on the Country Studies Series by Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress.
- Bose, Mihir. The Magic of Indian Cricket: Cricket and Society in India; p. 25.
- "Pakistan - THE BRITISH RAJ". countrystudies.us. Retrieved 22 April 2022.
- Book review of Martial Races: The military, race and masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857–1914 By Heather Streets Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine in The Telegraph.
- SHULTZ, RICHARD H.; DEW, ANDREA J. (2006). Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat. Columbia University Press. p. 47. ISBN 9780231503426. JSTOR 10.7312/shul12982.
- Mazumder, Rajit K. (2003). The Indian Army and the Making of Punjab. Orient Longman. p. 105. ISBN 9788178240596.
- MacMunn, George Fletcher (1979). The Martial Races of India. Mittal Publications. p. 271.
- Kapur, Manohar Lal (1980). History of Jammu and Kashmir State: The making of the State. India: Kashmir History Publications. p. 51.
- Snedden, Christopher (2015). "Jammu and Jammutis". Understanding Kashmir and Kashmiris. HarperCollins India. ISBN 9781849043427.
- Malik, Iffat (2002), "Jammu Province", Kashmir: Ethnic Conflict International Dispute, Oxford University Press, p. 62, ISBN 978-0-19-579622-3
- Roy, Kaushik (2004). India's Historic Battles: From Alexander the Great to Kargil. Orient Blackswan. ISBN 9788178241098.
- Mazumder, Rajit K. (2003). The Indian Army and the Making of Punjab. Orient Longman. p. 99. ISBN 9788178240596.
- Historical Records of the XIII Madras Infantry. W. Thacker. 1898. p. 191.
…Coorg for the purpose of trying to induce Coorgs and Gaudas to take service, but, after working the whole of Coorg, one recruit only, a Gauda, was obtained . According to the report of the native officer in command of the party, the inhabitants of Coorg, although a warlike race, are much…
- Surridge, Keith (2007). "Martial Races: the Military, Race and Masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857–1914 (review)". Journal of Victorian Culture. 12 (1). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press: 146–150. doi:10.1353/jvc.2007.0017. ISSN 1355-5502. S2CID 162319158.
- gokhale, namita (1998). mountain echoes a reminiscense of kumaoni women. Roli pvt ltd. ISBN 9788174360403.
- ^ Martial races of undivided India. Gyan Publishing House. 2009. ISBN 9788178357751.
- Creative Pasts: Historical Memory And Identity in Western India, 1700-1960 From book: "In the early twentieth century, the Marathas were identified as a "martial race" fit for the imperial army, and recruitment of Marathas increased after World War I."
- Singh, Khushwant (2003). The End of India. Penguin. p. 98. ISBN 978-0143029946.
Punjabi Mussalmans and Khalsa Sikhs were declared 'martial races' for recruitment to the army or the police; only one small Hindu caste, the Mohyal Brahmins, qualified as martial.
- Singh, Gajendra (16 January 2014). The Testimonies of Indian Soldiers and the Two World Wars: Between Self and Sepoy. A&C Black. ISBN 978-1-78093-820-2.
- MacMunn, George Fletcher (1979). The Martial Races of India. Mittal Publications. p. 271.
- Hartmann, Paul; Patil, B. R.; Dighe, Anita (1989). The Mass Media and Village Life: An Indian Study. Sage Publications. p. 224. ISBN 0-8039-9581-4.
- Mazumder, Rajit K. (2003). The Indian Army and the making of Punjab. Permanent Black monographs. The "Opus 1" series. Delhi : Bangalore: Permanent Black ; Distributed by Orient Longman. ISBN 978-81-7824-059-6.
- Wilkinson, Steven I. (2015). Army and Nation: The Military and Indian Democracy Since Independence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674967007.
- ^ Guruswamy, Menaka (16 July 2016). "Why the Indian army needs to abandon the colonial concept of 'martial races'". The Scroll. Retrieved 25 August 2021.
- ^ Khalidi, Omar (2001). "Ethnic Group Recruitment in the Indian Army: The Contrasting Cases of Sikhs, Muslims, Gurkhas and Others". Pacific Affairs. 74 (4): 529–552. doi:10.2307/3557805. JSTOR 3557805. Retrieved 25 August 2021.
- "Population and decadal change by residence : 2011 (PERSONS)" (PDF). Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India. p. 2. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 June 2016. Retrieved 15 January 2019.
- Ahsan, Sofi (18 July 2019). "President's bodyguards: Govt defends recruitment process, says it's based on 'functional requirements'". Indian Express. Retrieved 25 August 2021.
- "Sikh Regiment: Legacy of Valour and Bravery in Indian Army". ANI News. 30 May 2023. Retrieved 18 October 2024.
- Singh, Khushwant. "The Anandpur Sahib Resolution and Other Akali Demands". oxfordscholarship.com/. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 5 April 2013.
- "C -1 POPULATION BY RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY - 2011". censusindia.gov.in. Retrieved 2 October 2023.
- "Library of Congress studies". Archived from the original on 5 July 2019. Retrieved 7 November 2006.
- Rizvi, Hasan-Askari (September 2000). Military, State and Society in Pakistan. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 128. ISBN 0-312-23193-8.
- Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat Richard H. Shultz, Andrea Dew: "The Martial Races Theory had firm adherents in Pakistan and this factor played a major role in the under-estimation of the Indian Army by Pakistani soldiers as well as civilian decision makers in 1965."
- United States Library of Congress Country Studies Archived 19 July 2012 at archive.today "Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by 'Hindu India'."
- Indo-Pakistan War of 1965 Archived 9 May 2017 at the Wayback Machine.
- "End-game?" By Ardeshir Cowasjee Archived 23 October 2010 at the Wayback Machine – 18 July 1999, Dawn.
- India Stanley Wolpert Published: University of California Press 1990. "India's army... quickly dispelled the popular Pakistani myth that one Muslim soldier was 'worth ten Hindus.'"
- ^ The Idea of Pakistan Stephen P. Cohen Published: Brookings Institution Press 2004 ISBN 0-8157-1502-1 pp. 103–104.
- "Pakistan's Defence Journal". Archived from the original on 7 March 2009. Retrieved 29 February 2008.
Further reading
- Cohen, Stephen P. (May 1969). "The Untouchable Soldier: Caste, Politics, and the Indian Army". The Journal of Asian Studies. 28 (3): 453–468. doi:10.1017/s0021911800092779. JSTOR 2943173. (subscription required)
- Cohen, Stephen P. (1971). The Indian Army. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Chowdhry, Prem (May 2013). "Militarized Masculinities: Shaped and Reshaped in Colonial South-East Punjab". Modern Asian Studies. 47 (3): 713–750. doi:10.1017/S0026749X11000539. JSTOR 24494165. S2CID 145147406.