Muslim & Sikh Cavalry in British Indian Army - 1879 (Afghanistan)

[AlexM]

Hello all!

I'm wondering, and haven't been able to really discern the truth here - were Sikhs and Muslims mixed in regiments in the British Indian Army during the 2nd Anglo-Afghan War, or would they have been separated?

Curious as I'm picking packs from Perry to do an army, and there seem to be options, and I don't want to get it wrong!

Thanks in advance!

Alex

[jambo1]

I have been poring over the very same figures!! Good question look forward to someone more knowledgeable than myself to come up with the answer.

[odd duck]

My reading indicates that the were in the same regiments but separate squadrons. I'm sure someone else on the forum can give you more details

[italwars]

i suppose they were mixed in certain units and above all in cavalry units...certainly not in regiments labelled "sikh" as the "Ludiana Sikhs"..but, for example, from picts of  the Queen Corps of Guides, both the mounted branch and the foot ones they were mixed and also inside the same squadron..from their headress appearing in picys, if we speak about cavalry,  the muslim guys were more than the sikh ones..

[Cubs]

Funny enough, I was reading a book on the Indian Army today. After the 1904 reforms, the book said that there were some battalions that were all Sikh or Muslim and some battalions that were mixed, with Sikh or Muslim companies (or presumably squadrons for the cavalry). I'll have a root around on my shelf tomorrow and see if I can find something for 2nd Afghan War.

[Mad Guru]

I believe that during the Second Afghan War of 1878-1880, odd duck is correct.  Various ethnic and religious backgrounds mixed in same regiments, but concentrated in discrete sub-units, such as Cavalry Troops and Infantry Companies.  However, as always seems to be the case with the Anglo-Indian Army, there were some exceptions to the rule, where a particular regiment was entirely or nearly entirely made up of Indian officers and men from a single ethnic and/or religious background (obviously the British officers were not).

[italwars]

i really cannot dare to contradict the top master of NWF wargame Mad Guru  ...but i still think that, despite official regulations, the presence of both Sikh and Muslim soldiers in the same subunit could have been possible..i'm almost sure about  that if we take into account  some  Frontier Force units like the Guides Inf. or Cavalry..(if you look at the last scanned page you can read "1 company mixed")....from those picts you can detect different styles of turbans..the ones with kullahs without any doubts belongs to muslim subjects..the biggest , rotund and compact ones forming a sort of triangle over the forehead belong to sikh soldiers..i  think that the following picts (11 th Lancers and Guides Infantry)  could have been taken among the same sub-subunit (squadron or company)..on the other hand i 've just found, from an old scrapbook that i made 30 years ago and that i recently digitalised, some pages probably from a US magazine including  the theorical composition, even the ethnical one, of some Indian Army units according to which, as you can see, various ethnicities were included in same unit but with sub units composed of only one distinct ethinicity.

[jambo1]

Super pictures and great info italwars, very interesting, thanks for posting.

[Mad Guru]

No worries, italwars.  I don't think your claim is really contradictory, as there always seem to be exceptions to every "rule" when it comes to the Anglo-Indian army, at almost every stage of its more than two century long existence!  There certainly may have been some "mixed" sub-units simultaneously while most Indian regiments consisted of discrete class companies.

Reading your comment and seeing the scanned reference page spurred me to pull out the excellent book THE INDIAN ARMY, The Garrison of British Imperial India 1822-1922 by T.A. Heathcote, from which I remember long ago learning something about Anglo-Indian regimental "class composition."  Happily my generally failing memory succeeded this time and I found some more info.  Unfortunately I have a lot of "real world" work to do tonight, plus my printer's scanner no longer works with my computer, or else I would take and post photos of the pages in question, which contain tables showing the "Class composition of Bengal Cavalry, 1864, showing proportion of class troops" and "Class composition of Bengal Infantry, showing proportion of class companies", and similar tables for 1884.  Note: the use of the word "troops" in the title of the cavalry tables is a reference to cavalry sub-units, not troopers in general.

A few regiments, such as 1st Bengal Cavalry (entirely Hundustani Muslims), 14th Bengal Cavalry (Jats only), 23rd Bengal Native Infanry (entirely Mazbi Sikhs) are listed as containing only members of one single class, but in both 1864 and 1884 the vast majority of both cavalry and infantry regiments were made up of a collection of sub-units (troops and companies) that each contained a discrete class.  I could use the less diplomatic word "segregated" instead of discrete, but I don't know enough about the social history of late 19th Century India to have anything beyond the thinnest idea of how Indian soldiers from various different backgrounds felt about serving at the troop or company level almost exclusively with those from the same background.

The Troop Classes listed in the 1864 Bengal Cavalry table include:

Multanis
Hindustani Muslims
Trans-Indus and Border tribes
Punjabi Muslims
Hindustani Hindus
Sikhs
Dogras and Hillmen
Bundelas
Jats

The Company Classes listed in the 1864 Bengal Native Infantry table include:

Brahmins and Rajputs
Hindustani Muslims
Jats
Gurkhas and Hillmen
Bundelas
Ahirs
Pasis
Lodhs
Dhanuks
Kurmis
Gujars
Chumars
Mehtars
Hindus of inferior castes
Punjabi Muslims
Trans-Indus and Border Tribes
Dogras and Hillmen
Trans-Sutlej Sikhs
Cis-Sutlej Sikhs
All races and castes*

*NOTE: Inclusion of this "class" category proves your point, italwars, since it means certain units did in fact contain companies made up of a mix of multiple classes.  The regiments listed as containing such "mixed companies" are:

8th Bengal Native Inf.
33rd, 34th, & 36th Bengal Native Inf. (all also categorized as "Low caste Levies")
38th, 39th, & 40th Bengal Native Inf.

Also note that the 1884 Bengal Infantry table does not contain the "All races and castes" category.

@AlexM, the OP: Hope this minutiae hasn't put you off!  For better or worse I think the answer to your excellent question is that it's entirely up to you.  If you use sub-units in your colonial games and like the idea of mixing figures with different styles of turbans in the same regiment or wing or squadron, you can use both Sikh and Muslim figures for the same regiment; or if you prefer a more uniform appearance, you can use all the same type.  For better or worse we Second Afghan War gamers don't have easy access to more than 2 or 3 different styles of turban for our Indian troops, so there's a limit to how accurate and how varied the headgear for those units can be, unless you're up for doing turban conversion work.  I've done such turban conversions only once on a unit-wide basis, for something like 24 figures, though I've done it a few more times for special individual figures.  If you're good with Green Stuff or similar model clay (which I'm not!) it shouldn't be too difficult, but for full units it is very time-consuming.  If you play at the skirmish level, and don't regularly field larger units, and want to be historically accurate, you may want to stick to a single turban style per cavalry troop, or infantry company.

[AlexM]

Thank you so much for all the effort! It's certainly clear as mud now! This has been great reading!

I have gone with a single style of Sikh Turban for now, since it is a single unit in skirmish gaming for The Men Who Would be Kings.

-Alex