Martial Race Theory and Colonial Military Recruitment: Constructing Racial Hierarchies in British India
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The British colonial administration constructed the martial race theory to selectively recruit soldiers based on racial, ethnic and geographical criteria. This paper examines how colonial discourse shaped the classifications of Indian communities into martial and non-martial groups, favouring Sikhs, Gurkhas and Pathans while marginalising high caste Hindu and Dalits. Using recruitment handbooks, administrative policies and military reports, the study highlights the racialised logic behind the British military enlistment practices. The shift in recruitment post-1857, particularly the Peel and Eden Commissions’ role in reinforcing ethnic segregation, demonstrates how these policies were aimed at dividing Indian society and ensuring imperial stability. Furthermore, the paper explores how martial race ideology was codified through colonial ethnographies, handbooks, and regimental structures. This study argues that martial race theory was not merely a military necessity but a colonial tool of governance, reinforcing racial hierarchies that persisted even in post-colonial India.
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Caplan, L. (1995). Martial Gurkhas: The persistence of a British military discourse on race. In P. Robb (Ed.), The Concept of Race in South Asia (p. 261). Oxford University Press.
Metcalf, T. R. (1994). Ideologies of the Raj (p. 84). Cambridge University Press.
Roy, K. (2013). Race and recruitment in the Indian Army: 1880–1918 (p. 1320). Modern Asian Studies, 47(4), 1320.
Dirks, N. B. (2001). Castes of mind: Colonialism and the making of modern India. (p. 70).Princeton University Press.
Rand, G., & Bates, C. (Eds.). (2013). Mutiny at the Margins: New Perspectives on the Indian Uprising of 1857 (p. 26). Cambridge University Press.
Rand, G., & Bates, C. (Eds.). (2013). Mutiny at the Margins: New Perspectives on the Indian Uprising of 1857 (pp. 25-28). Cambridge University Press.
Dirks, N. B. (2001). Castes of mind: Colonialism and the making of modern India. (p. 70).Princeton University Press.
Farooqui, A. (2014). Sectional President’s Address: ‘Divide and Rule’? Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 75, 428.
Yong, T. T. (2005). The Garrison State: Military, Government and Society in Colonial Punjab, 1849-1947 (Vol. 8, p. 19). Sage Publications.
Yong, T. T. (2005). The Garrison State: Military, Government and Society in Colonial Punjab, 1849-1947 (Vol. 8, p. 17). Sage Publications.
Caplan, L. (1991). ‘Bravest of the Brave’: Representations of ‘The Gurkha’ in British military writings. Modern Asian Studies, 25(3), 571–597.
Kolff, D. H. A. (2002). Naukar, Rajput, and Sepoy: The Ethnohistory of the Military Labour Market of Hindustan, 1450-1850 (p. 58). Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, S. P. (1971). The Indian army: Its contribution to the development of a nation (p. 41). Oxford University Press.
Farooqui, A. (2014). Sectional President’s Address: ‘Divide and Rule’? Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 75, 431.
Farooqui, A. (2014). Sectional President’s Address: ‘Divide and Rule’? Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 75, 438.
Dirks, N. B. (2002). Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India. Princeton University Press.