What's new

Punjab and the British Indian Army

@Nafoumi
@xeuss

If I had anything to do with it, I would have reduced the 'old' regiments to 2 battalions each, retained for their history, and recruited everybody into four regiments with 40 or more battalions - Mechanised Infantry, Mountain Infantry, Marine Infantry, and Parachute Regiment.

The same with the 'old' cavalry regiments; two squadrons horse-mounted, two battalions in all, and all the new recruitment into the Tank Regiment with multiple battalions or numbered line 'regiments'.
 
Ranghars werent part of any specific/distinct units neither were other regiments based on castes..
And you need local Panjabi muslims to re establish units that already existed and were transferred to Pak Army.

If you are interested in reading actual recruitment patterns, read David Omissis works.


Actually there are Sikh Rajputs too.. banda bahadur Singh was a Sikh Rajout.


Embarrassed at forgetting this. That's old age for you.

Gakhars and Khokhars are entirely muslim.

But there are Kamboh Sikhs/Muslims and Hindus??

Yes, you're right! They are among the very oldest ethnic groups, and date back to the Indo-Aryan entry into South Asia.
 
We have tribes like Awan tiwana bajwa bhatti sial khokhar etc.

Bajwa is Jat, Bhatti is Rajput (Jaisalmer, Barmer and Bikaner were all Bhatti kingdoms), and Khokhar were converted to Islam very, very early, but were Rajput originally, I think. Not sure about their origin.

Shaikhs are converted Hindu businessesmen. They are also called khoja
 
As many may have heard, there were many theories on why India and Pakistan came into being.

One theory that I have heard, and this is independently from both Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Sikhs, is that Nehru and the British did not want a Punjabi dominated army in a unified India. They felt that the Punjabi dominated army would sooner, rather than later, rule from Delhi and would present an existential threat to the "establishment".

@Joe Shearer @masterchief_mirza your thoughts?
Disagree with that speculation. Sikhs have always been a blunt militaristic tool exploited by both Britain and Hindustan over the centuries. I have mentioned elsewhere that my hypothesised "prime directives" for British agencies during their organised withdrawal from the subcontinent were (1) inhibiting the development of a strong independent Muslim majority nation at all costs east of messopotamia and (2) if possible, inhibiting the development of a strong independent Hindu majority state as a secondary bonus objective (irrespective of self-appointed so-called "secular" status). In 1947, the British knew a strong Pakistan would rival their own ambitions locally. India and militant Hindu nationalism were an unknown quantity. No sensible, foresighted, ex-colonial master would willingly take a chance with such an unknown unknown. China were likewise an uncertainty following the opium wars, hence Hong Kong was very much intended as a long-term seed of potential mischief planted by the Brits.
 
I have seen many Shaikhs in Maharashtra.
Shaikh is used by myriad of castes, originally it was used by educated Indian Muslims employed by Mughals but then their clansmen and many other castes copied it. So it varies by regionwise.

Khatris being educated were employed too and were called Qanungoh Shaikh (Law knowing Shaikh).

Muslim kashmiri pandits also use shaikh word like Shaikh Rasheed.
Are you sure he's a Pandit? Not all Kashmiris are Pandits.
https://aleemudasir.wordpress.com/2017/02/18/casteism-in-kashmir-my-observations-and-experiences/
 
Shaikh is used by myriad of castes, originally it was used by educated Indian Muslims employed by Mughals but then their clansmen and many other castes copied it. So it varies by regionwise.

Khatris being educated were employed too and were called Qanungoh Shaikh (Law knowing Shaikh).

Amusing.

Qanungo was also one of the subsidiary caste titles of my caste (not caste name; title as in land-owning Chaudhuri, or Ray Chaudhuri, and Mazumdar).

Shaikh is used by myriad of castes, originally it was used by educated Indian Muslims employed by Mughals but then their clansmen and many other castes copied it. So it varies by regionwise.

Khatris being educated were employed too and were called Qanungoh Shaikh (Law knowing Shaikh).


Are you sure he's a Pandit? Not all Kashmiris are Pandits.
https://aleemudasir.wordpress.com/2017/02/18/casteism-in-kashmir-my-observations-and-experiences/


The names in the Valley are very stratified and occupation bound. Dars and Butts were originally Dhar and Bhat, but for the rest, there was a very definite assignment of names to occupations. I would rather consult one of my KP or KM friends on this.

Just read the article by Lone. It was very, very good.
 
Last edited:
Amusing.

Qanungo was also one of the subsidiary caste titles of my caste (not caste name; title as in land-owning Chaudhuri, or Ray Chaudhuri, and Mazumdar).
Yup, both Qanungoh and Shaikh are rather titles not caste, but Shaikh have devolved into a caste in some regions losing the different origins.
 
Shaikh is used by myriad of castes, originally it was used by educated Indian Muslims employed by Mughals but then their clansmen and many other castes copied it. So it varies by regionwise.

Khatris being educated were employed too and were called Qanungoh Shaikh (Law knowing Shaikh).


Are you sure he's a Pandit? Not all Kashmiris are Pandits.
https://aleemudasir.wordpress.com/2017/02/18/casteism-in-kashmir-my-observations-and-experiences/

Good Heavens! That was a strikingly good article!
 

Back
Top Bottom