The British Indian Army in World War 1
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- In this presentation Dr Corey Reigel takes a look at the strategic role played by the British Indian Army in World War I. In the context of the campaigns in the Middle East and Africa, the manpower of the Indian Army was a critical part of the Allies’ war effort in those theatres - a fact sometimes overlooked.
Recorded at the Western Front Association's East Coast (USA) Branch Fall 2013 WW1 History Symposium.
If you enjoy this video, please subscribe to our TH-cam channel !
The Western Front Association is a UK registered charity.
The Western Front Association:
www.westernfro...
Become a member:
www.westernfro...
Find 100s of Articles on the Great War of 1914-18:
www.westernfro...
Find a local Branch:
www.westernfro...
#greatwar #westernfrontassociation #ww1 #worldwarone #indianarmy
That is why. You should visit the place and understand. Sikhs didnt militaries against Hindus. They were Hindus who started following the Nanak path and militarized under Mughal/Afghan pressure
Chutiye ajj se 2000 sall pehle tera baaapp bcha rha tha india ko foriegn invaders se......hindu ne 2000 years pehle shod diya ye sabb krna specialy budha k ane k badd
Well they did fought Sikh rajput wars...were they lost to rajputs and vice versa
@@ninjagamings4997 lots of people fought each other. It was pure politics
1857 was not a mutiny but it was the first war of indendence.
1857 as a war of "independence" is a revisionist myth by modern politicians. only non-gurkha/sikh regiments of the Bengal army mutinied. the madras army, Bombay army and the majority of native kingdoms did not rise up.
@@vkeshav3519True.
indendence
My Great Grandfather Manullah Khan disappeared in the Indian Army to France. A misaligned panel list of initial Indian Army record of the 1913/1914 lists of a group in Indian Army did not get properly furnished in the pane list of those that died in the 34th Poona Horse Regiment.
My Great Grandfather Jem. Lehena Singh Martyrdom in 1918
An excellent presentation. I'm always amused at how so many Americans (in their questions) can't relate to the British without harking back to their revolution; as if the rest of the world hasn't changed since 1776.
My great-great grandfather died in WW1 as an officer
(my paternal
grandfather’s maternal grandfather).
Another from the same family, Risaldar Abdul-Latif Khan IDSM, was awarded the Khan Bahadur.
the photograph shown when discussing Sikhs at 13:35 is not of Sikhs, but rather of Muslims. You can tell by the triangular kul in their turbans
Great job on this: excellent delivery of fascinating insights of a fascinating phase of history! Amarillo says hello to Dr. Reigel. It's been a while since we had a nice poodle at 4425 Cline.
In 1942 during freedom movement, Gurkha Regiment refused to fire over Indian agitators in North West India. Sir, if possible please research for us the Indian National Army formed by Subhas Chandra Bose during 2nd World War.
Field Marshal Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief of British Indian Army from 1942, asserted that the British "couldn't have come through both wars (World War I and II) if they hadn't had British Indian Army." 💪💪🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
Fact of the matter is that all the powers of the world at that time America, Russia, France and Germany other Europeans etc. were amazed at the contributions of Indian army. They all realized the strategic importance of India in British empire of that time. And all were conclusive that separating India from British crown is a must to ratinalise Britain. It gave a new boost and support to Indian freedom struggle back home in India.
it was not just the modern day india, but also, pakistani, Bangladeshi soldiers who fought in ww1 and ww2 🇧🇩🇮🇳🇵🇰 i hope that we can all live together and politics be fudged.
India was a loyal ally of Britain and the jewel of it's Empire.
Marty Robinson .... with a pinch of salt .... yes 😐
Fact of the matter is that all the powers of the world at that time America, Russia, France and Germany other Europeans etc. were amazed at the contributions of Indian army. They all realized the strategic importance of India in British empire of that time. And all were conclusive that separating India from British crown is a must to rationalise Britain. It gave a new boost and support to Indian freedom struggle back home in India. After Second world war, both Roosvelt (America) and Stalin (Russia) put immense pressure on weakend ally Britain to free India as soon as possible. And that was end of Britain as global power.
I am confused .Is it east or west ?
One real criticism, the Cavalry Brigades being made up of 1 British and 3 Indian Cavalry Regiments.... Batallions, not Regiments. It sounds like a silly little thing, but when considering the British Army the Regimental system is critically important to understand.
Traditionally a Regiment comprised of 3 battalions, but in the British Army the Regiment itself was NOT a combat formation, it was a purely administrative one. As such a Regiment never took the field, but Battalions of a regiment would. Of the three Battalions you would often find that only 2 of the Battalions were Line Battalions, with the third being a Training and Supply Battalion with a reduced overall complement, but responsible for making sure the Line Battalions had sufficient replacements. However, there was no upper or lower limit to the number of Battalions in a Regiment, and this is where the distinction becomes important.
A few Regiments were single Battalion Regiments, however, they were very much a minority. A Regiment had sole use of an area from which it recruited its personel (with a few exceptions, such as RTR, the RE, RA, Signals and other more specialist formations). In extraordinary circumstances the numbers of Battalions in a Regiment could reach significant numbers. Two examples of this are the Royal Tank Regiment (RTR), and the Royal Welch Fusiliers (RWF). During WWII the RTR had 20 Battalions in the field by 1945, with Battalions of the RTR serving in most Armoured Brigades and all Armoured Divisions, still more were Independant Tank Battalions which were attached to Infantry Divisions as required. During WWI the RWF raised 24 LINE Battalions, this does not include the Training and supply Battalions required to keep the Line Battalions at least mostly up to strength. To put these numbers into perspective, in 1918 an Infantry Division was comprised of 9 Battalions, in 1917, it had comprised of 12, in other words the RWF had a full 2 Divisions of troops in the field in 1917....
This is why 'Regiments' never fought in the British Army, Battalions did, the position of Regiment in the British OOB is taken up by the Brigade, a British Brigade was roughly the same size as a German or American Regiment and would serve roughly the same role in the field.
It seems a small thing, but as I said, understanding the British Regimental system is critical, if you were to look at the size of that Brigade mentioned in the Terms of Regiments then you would give the impression that a British Brigade comprised of 12 Battalions (4 regiments of 3 Battalions each), when in reality it comprised of 4 (later 3) Battalions. In numbers, that would equate to roughly 12,000 actual combat troops when the reality was arounf 4,000... I am sure you will agree that that is a significant difference, it would make a British Brigade the same size as most nations Divisions!
interesting and good points
You'e confusing the Infantry with the Cavalry. Cavalry brigades in the British Army were formed from regiments not battalions. No great difference, just a different nomenclature.
Remarkable speech
Wonderful analysis.
Sir, Martial Race Theory was propagated and used strategically after 1857. Prior to that this theory didn't exist. And caste taboos in warfare or military activities is not that true. Thank you. Otherwise a great lecture on India. Kshatriya is not that much a caste as is Rajput. Kshatriya is more of a code of military conduct like Bushido. Rajput is much like a caste, but that too is very fluid as all Rajputs are not in the army or all the soldiers in Indian Army are Rajputs. 🙏🙏🙏🙏
this photo is actually captionned as Muslims
This man is supposed to be an expert yet he has to read this lecture from notes.
Not much of an expert.
Expertise is more than just memorising a speech.
Pretty pedestrian and simplIstic. And the presenter should LEARN TO PROPERLY PRONOUNCE iNDIAN TERMS AND NAMES.
Most of the soldiers were from the Pakistan punjab area
There is also punjab in india
LOL. Ridiculous.
british has used us like a Christmas tree. We have fought the first war and the second war in their slavery
But Britain has been avoiding Germany, if only because it had a country like Subcontinent.
If it had the worrior nation in the subcontinent, it was the Jat nation, which is why they formed the Jat Regiment.
We fought for Britain both front and back
And as time went on, Britain divided us in such a way that we are still unable to get out of it
And the British are so shameless that to this day they have never said that if they have been fighting Germany it is only because of one subcontinent india pakistan.
To date, no one has succeeded in Afghanistan except the United Kingdom
And we fought for them there too
We fought for them in Asia, we fought for them in Europe
And we were rewarded with hypocrisy by Britain.
And for that we are grateful to the UK.
they are mostly stupid jutts mostly
Not brother there were soilders from Nepal, punjab india, kumon india, garwhal india, himachal india, Rajasthan india and yes people were from punjab Pakistan too but not most.
Dont call us (Sikhs) as #indians....
We didnt Sign United india resulation in 1948, at first place . ..anyway ..
Though, Sikhs formed there own Govt (in exile) 'Sarker-E-Khalsa' in 1986 (in exile Since, due to ongoing Struggle to achive Full Freedom and Indepence ... of the Homeland Of Sikhs 'Punjab Desh' From #Indian Occupation) and Passed the resultion of Indepence from india...
So, Dont call us #Indians... It will be taken as Insult of Glorious Sikh Religious Identification. ..
#Take_A_Serious_Note
#God_Speed
Rajinder Singh The Good Monster well he is not calling u an indian...he is calling the larger portion of sikhs who remain loyal to their country india as indians...no sane mind would want to abuse indians by calling pakistan sposnsered khalistanis as indians....nobody likes to be called a dog atleast not indians.
Rajinder Singh The Good Monster good job. You are very confused
Sikh Regiment of Indian Army says HI
Field Marshal Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief of British Indian Army from 1942, asserted that the British "couldn't have come through both wars (World War I and II) if they hadn't had British Indian Army." 💪💪💪🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳