rv to version by Paul Barlow |
Street Scholar (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
The Pakistan Army was also accused of [[bias]] and [[racism]] by the Bengalis of [[East Pakistan]] who felt humiliated by this dubious theory that was being floated in [[West Pakistan]], that they were not "martially inclined" compared to the Pathans, Balochs and Punjabis.<ref>[http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+bd0139) Library of Congress studies]</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 |
The Pakistan Army was also accused of [[bias]] and [[racism]] by the Bengalis of [[East Pakistan]] who felt humiliated by this dubious theory that was being floated in [[West Pakistan]], that they were not "martially inclined" compared to the Pathans, Balochs and Punjabis.<ref>[http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+bd0139) Library of Congress studies]</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 |
||
Hasan-Askari Rizvi, Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0312231938 (Pg 128)</ref> This was to be one of the factors for the [[Bangladesh Liberation War]], where [[Bengali]]s aided by the [[Indian Military]] defeated the Pakistan Army in just a [[fortnight]] |
Hasan-Askari Rizvi, Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0312231938 (Pg 128)</ref> This was to be one of the factors for the [[Bangladesh Liberation War]], where [[Bengali]]s aided by the [[Indian Military]] defeated the Pakistan Army in just a [[fortnight]] - which was believed to be due to the [[rebellion]] of the Bengali's who had abandoned ranks and sided with the Indian army <ref> [http://www-ec.njit.edu/~axz6893/pakistan.htm#history History of Pakistan]</ref> which subsequently lead to the taking of nearly 1 [[lakh]] Pakistani soldiers as [[Prisoners of War]] - the largest [[Surrender (military)|surrender]] since [[World War II]]. Defense writers in Pakistan have noted that the defeat was partially attributable to the flawed "Martial Races Theory" which merely led to "[[wishful thinking]]" that it was possible to defeat the Indian Army.<ref>[http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/nov/pak-army.htm Pakistan's Defense Journal]</ref> Since then, the "martial race" theory was rarely, if ever, used at all by Pakistan. |
||
In India, some like the [[Sikh]]s, hold the non-martial races with contempt as a lawless, lesser breed. [[Arun Shourie]] a renowned Indian writer, journalist and politician (present 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> These views are also in accordance with the teachings of the [[Sikh]] [[Guru]]s (spiritual leaders) to consider non-martial races as inferior. The tenth Guru [[Guru Gobind Singh]] 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> One of the most prominent Indian journalists recounts a conversation he had with the sikh leader [[Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale]], who is considered a saint by some Sikhs as having 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> |
In India, some like the [[Sikh]]s, hold the non-martial races with contempt as a lawless, lesser breed. [[Arun Shourie]] a renowned Indian writer, journalist and politician (present 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> These views are also in accordance with the teachings of the [[Sikh]] [[Guru]]s (spiritual leaders) to consider non-martial races as inferior. The tenth Guru [[Guru Gobind Singh]] 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> One of the most prominent Indian journalists recounts a conversation he had with the sikh leader [[Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale]], who is considered a saint by some Sikhs as having 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> |
Revision as of 17:12, 25 November 2006
Martial Race or Martial races theory is an ideology based on the assumption that certain ethnic races were more martially inclined as opposed to the general populace or other races. This was a term originally used by the British Empire who observed that the Scottish Highlanders were more fierce in battle than the others on the British Isles, a concept applied to the Indian scenario. The entire Indian ethnic groups were divided into two categories: Martial and Non Martial. The martial race was typically brave and well built for fighting, but was also "unintelligent".[1] The non martial races were those whom the British believed to be unfit for battle because of their sedentary lifestyle, but were regarded as smarter. Of late, this concept has been dismissed as an Imperialistic thought based on racial stereotypes and laced with Gender bias.[2]
Criteria
Martial Race was a designation created by officials of British India. The British officials described these races as naturally warlike and aggressive in battle, and to possess qualities like courage, loyalty, self sufficiency, physical strength, resilience, orderliness, hard working, fighting tenacity and Military tactics. The British recruited heavily from these Martial Races for service in the colonial army. [3] This doctrine 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 genes that would make them warriors.[4] Critics of this theory state that the Indian rebellion of 1857 may have played a role in reinforcing the British belief in Martial races. During this event some Indian troops (known as "Sepoys"), particularly in Bengal, mutinied, but the "loyal" Sikhs, Punjabis, Dogras, Gurkas, Garhwalis and Pakhtuns (Pathans) 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 Hindus who had sided with the rebel army during the war.[5]
The geography and culture of these martial races had common marks, such as hilly and mountainous terrain, a basis as hunting or agricultural societies, and a history of conflict, whether internally or with external groups. A case in point are the Gurkhas, 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 British Army. 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 kilted Scots, kukri-wielding Gurkhas and turbaned Sikhs in numerous paintings.[6] The Martial Race theory has also been described as a clever British effort to divide and rule the people of India for their own political ends."[7]
The British who were the most enthusiastic proponents of this nineteenth century ideology, however had mixed views of these so called martial races. They were regarded as valiant and strong but also equally stupid, lacking initiative or leadership qualities to command large troops.[8] The martial races were also regarded as politically subservient or docile to authority.[9] For these reasons, the martial races theory did not apply in the case of officer recruitment, which was based on social class and loyalty to the British Raj.[10] 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 "nonmartial" races.[11] In fact, Winston Churchill was reportedly concerned that the theory was abandoned during the war that he wrote to the Indian Commander in Chief that he must "rely as much as possible on the martial races".[12] After Indian Independence, the Indian Army abandoned this theory and recruitment took place without discrimination.
Races designated by the British as martial races
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Rajputs.jpg/220px-Rajputs.jpg)
From the collection of the British Library
British declared martial races [13] (listed below):
- Awans
- Balochs
- Cheema
- Garhwalis
- Gujars
- Gurkhas
- Jats
- Kurups
- Marathas
- Nairs
- Nambiars
- Pashtuns
- Rajputs
- Sikhs
- Scottish
- Zulus
Unlike the martial races, the inhabitants of the hot, flat plains of the country were supposedly unwarlike, flabby, dark-skinned and therefore unfit for military services. Still others were excluded due to their "ease of living" or branded as seditious agitators.[14] The Dravidian people were called non-martial with many derogatory remarks about their looks, ethnicity and history. However, the nature of this is debatable, as a large number of Indian martial arts, such as Adithada and Kalaripayat originated from the the southern regions of the Indian subcontinent. Further, one of the greatest Kingdoms in India to rule across the seas and capture kingdoms in Sri Lanka and Indonesia was the Chola dynasty, a dravidian race. The Chola Military, and their naval power specifically, was seldom matched by any of the other Kingdoms ruled by "martial races" until many centuries later. The Tamil Tigers' holding out against the Sri Lankan Army for decades is another situation which disproves the British theory that the Tamils were mostly "non-martial".
The people of East India were also not considered "martial races", despite the fact that the most powerful empire in ancient India, the Maurya Empire, originated in Eastern India from the kingdom of Magadha (in modern Bihar. Even the Marathas were classified as non-martial, ignoring the Maratha Empire or the Maratha Regiment's valiant contribution against the Turks during the First World War when they were recruited by the British Indian Army. This was because both the Marathas and Biharis actively participated in the First Indian Inpendence war. Poorabiya regiment where the Biharis - Rajputs and Brahmins made up bulk of the army was the one which had mutinied against the British.
Apart from India, the British also classified the Jews as a non-martial race in the 1930s, but this was also disproved when Israel won all its wars against other nations since its inception, including the historic Six day war.[15]
Modern usage
Though seldom used in today's context, it was used until the early 1970s, especially by the Pakistan Military which believed that since the Pakistan Army comprised soldiers of the "martial races", they should easily defeat India in a war, especially prior to the Second Kashmir War[16][17][18] 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,[19][20][21] and thus numerical superiority of the foe could be overcome. However, the Indo-Pakistan Wars of 1947 and 1965 proved otherwise as Pakistan Army lost more men than India,[22] in its many attempts to gain the entire Kashmir region.[23]
The Pakistan Army was also accused of bias and racism by the Bengalis of East Pakistan who felt humiliated by this dubious theory that was being floated in West Pakistan, that they were not "martially inclined" compared to the Pathans, Balochs and Punjabis.[24] 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".[25] This was to be one of the factors for the Bangladesh Liberation War, where Bengalis aided by the Indian Military defeated the Pakistan Army in just a fortnight - which was believed to be due to the rebellion of the Bengali's who had abandoned ranks and sided with the Indian army [26] which subsequently lead to the taking of nearly 1 lakh Pakistani soldiers as Prisoners of War - the largest surrender since World War II. Defense writers in Pakistan have noted that the defeat was partially attributable to the flawed "Martial Races Theory" which merely led to "wishful thinking" that it was possible to defeat the Indian Army.[27] Since then, the "martial race" theory was rarely, if ever, used at all by Pakistan.
In India, some like the Sikhs, hold the non-martial races with contempt as a lawless, lesser breed. Arun Shourie a renowned Indian writer, journalist and politician (present Minister of Communications and Information Technology) refers to the Sikhs as 'having retained a false pride in martial temperament and abilities'.[28] These views are also in accordance with the teachings of the Sikh Gurus (spiritual leaders) to consider non-martial races as inferior. The tenth Guru Guru Gobind Singh proclaimed that one Sikh was equal to sava lakh (one hundred twenty five thousand) and a fauj-a one man army.[29] One of the most prominent Indian journalists recounts a conversation he had with the sikh leader Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, who is considered a saint by some Sikhs as having said 'One Sikh could easily reckon with thirty-five Hindus.'[30]
See also
References
- ^ ‘Martial Races’ and ‘Imperial Subjects’: Violence and Governance in Colonial India, 1857–1914 Volume 13, Number 01 / March 2006 Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group
- ^ Martial Races: The military, race and masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857-1914 By Heather Streets
- ^ Glossary of the tribes and castes of the Punjab and NWFP, H A Rose
- ^ 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
- ^ Country Studies: Pakistan - Library of Congress
- ^ Book review of Martial Races: The military, race and masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857-1914 By Heather Streets in The Telegraph
- ^ Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary Combat by Richard H. Shultz, Andrea Dew (Pg 47)
- ^ Prostitution, Race and Politics: Policing Venereal Disease in the British Empire By Philippa Levine, Pg 284
- ^ Ethnic Group Recruitment in the Indian Army: The Contrasting Cases of Sikhs, Muslims, Gurkhas and Others by Omar Khalidi
- ^ Ethnic group recruitment in the Indian army: The contrasting cases of Sikhs, Muslims, Gurkhas and others by Omar Khalidi
- ^ Country Data - Based on the Country Studies Series by Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress
- ^ The Magic of Indian Cricket: Cricket and Society in India By Mihir Bose After, Pg 25
- ^ Glossary of the tribes and castes of the Punjab and NWFP, H A Rose
- ^ Ethnic Group Recruitment in the Indian Army by Dr. Omar Khalidi
- ^ [1]
- ^ 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."
- ^ An Analysis The Sepoy Rebellion of 1857-59 by AH Amin The army officers of that period were convinced that they were a martial race and the Hindus of Indian Army were cowards. This myth was largely 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 Khem Karan
- ^ United States Library of Congress Country Studies 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
- ^ End-game? By Ardeshir Cowasjee - 18 July 1999, Dawn (newspaper)
- ^ 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.”"
- ^ According to sources in Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 Pakistani fatalities range between 30% - 200% higher than Indian fatalities including the Operation Gibraltar.
- ^ Pakistan backed troops were always the first to be sent into Kashmir during 1947, 1965 and in 1999 kargil conflict with aims of capture, instigation and intrusions. For details/sources, see relevant articles.
- ^ Library of Congress studies
- ^ Military, State and Society in Pakistan by Hasan-Askari Rizvi, Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0312231938 (Pg 128)
- ^ History of Pakistan
- ^ Pakistan's Defense Journal
- ^ Arun Shourie, Lessons from the Punjab, in The Punjab Story, edited by Amarjit Kaur et al., Roli Books International, 1984, pages 178-179
- ^ Ranbir S. Sandhu, Sant Janail Singh Bhindranwale - Life, Mission , and Martyrdom, Sikh Education and Religious Foundation, Dublin, Ohio, 1997, page 10.
- ^ Kuldip Nayar and Khushwant Singh, Tragedy of Punjab, Vision Books, New Delhi, 1984, page 27