Indian Headdress Variety

[Helen Bachaus]

Hi Folks, I'm in a little jam and hope someone please can direct me to where an applicable site shows all the various headdress worn by the numerous Indian caste (if thats the right word) in WW1 or can explain in detail the various headdress worn by the various Indian class.

Thankyou. :-)

Best Wishes

Helen

[findabetterole]

Hello Helen,

Firstly, the Indian Armed Forces of WW.1 did not make distinction between their ranks... all were equal, and modelled on their counterparts in British regiments..

Secondly, 'im sorry, but this is not the site you require to discus such an issue... and i do not know what site you require.

Seph.

[Crunchy]

Are you sure this is not the right site Seph?

I think Helen is asking about the various styles of turbans different Indian Regiments, such as the Sikhs and Baluchi's, wore and her request was about WWI. Maybe they all wore the same style turbans although I have a copy of Chater Paul Chater's book of watercolours on Indian Army uniforms showing different styles of turbans but it refers to uniforms leading up the the Great War.

Helen,

Ss Seph says I they were not distinguished by caste but but regiment/region. PM me and we can meet and I can show you the book.

Cheers

Chris

[findabetterole]

Hmmm...

Correct me if I'm wrong on this Chris, but Indian ranks, although names were different due to the nationality, were the equivalent of their British counterparts. Any 'OR' could rise through the ranks just the same as his British Army opposite number.... therefore.. no distinction.

I think Helen may have worded her enquirey a litttle differently, as to my mind, a 'caste' = class distinction : individuals /ranks. If someone proves me wrong.. so-be-it... thats the learning curve we are all on.

On the other hand, if the enquirey is purely in reference to the various regimental styles of headress... thats totally different!

Seph

[Crunchy]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this Chris, but Indian ranks, although names were different due to the nationality, were the equivalent of their British counterparts. Any 'OR' could rise through the ranks just the same as his British Army opposite number.... therefore.. no distinction.

Seph,

Correct weight Mate. I am assuming Helen actually means different regimental headdress rather than the way she has worded it.

Helen,

Can you confirm what you are actually after, as Seph says and to the best of my knowledge there was no head dress distinction according to class/caste?

Cheers

Chris

[Chris Henschke]

I think Helen may have worded her enquirey[sic] a litttle differently, as to my mind, a 'caste' = class distinction : individuals /ranks. If someone proves me wrong.. so-be-it... thats the learning curve we are all on.

But there were distinctions in caste.

British Officers serving in a recruiting role were issued 'Caste books.'

In the 1890s the policy was changed significantly. Units were no longer raised on a territorial basis but along what was referred to as "class" lines.

Regiments admitted only those having similar ethnic, religious, or caste backgrounds. Between 1892 and 1914, recruitment was confined almost entirely to the martial races. This method of recruitment and organization was formed and shaped by caste and regional factors and became loyal and responsive to British command.

The procedures also perpetuated regional and communal ties and produced an army that was not nationally based.

Some infantry regiments recruited from only one caste, such as the Sikh Regiment.

Other regiments operated on the class-company basis, in which a battalion level would consist of companies of different castes. So, in the Kumaon Regiment, a battalion would have a Kumaoni company, an Ahir Company, a Jat Company, etc. This class company system was initiated by the British primarily to avoid a repetition of the 1857 uprising.

Chris Henschke

[Greg]

I stand to be corrected on this but I have an idea that the different 'caste' companies could in fact have different headress within a given regiment. Sikhs wore a particular type of turban- rounded in outline- whilst some moslem soldiers wrapped theirs around something like a fez and had a starched fan of material on top

Greg

[Helen Bachaus]

Hi Folks,

Thanks everybody sofar who have had replied to my query.

Chris has hit the nail on the head. In a number of Indian units there were caste grouped into companies. If you look at a previous thread with the Kasmirs (under other theatres) they had a number of different class within the unit and these were grouped into companies.

So my question still remains how to identify those caste who wore what turban. Muslims, Hindu etc. We also know that different caste wore beards and others who were clean shaven or with a moustache etc.

Its a topic that I've not seen around and it just assists when trying to ascertain the groupings within an Indian Unit. I just want to get it right at the end of the day. I even have an Indian house-mate who cannot assist me.

My main interest is for Gallipoli, Africa and the Middle-East of the Great War. I also wargame this period and also manage a yahoo group on the Sideshows of the Great War. This information will not only assist designers for figure making, but will assist others who wish to know as well.

Best Wishes

Helen

[Heid the Ba]

Ah, the Great Indian Hat debate.

Gordon Corrigan's book "Sepoys in the Trenches" gives a breakdown of the composition of companies of the various regiments for the Western Front which would be good for when the Indian Corp moves to Mesopotamia. Well worth reading as it contains a lot of background on organisation. It is based heavily on the Official History which is now reprinted.

You have to be careful with your terms with the Indian army, caste refers primarily to rankings in the Hindu faith, but different races could be the same caste and have different turbans. The distinctions can be religious eg Sikh, racial eg. Gurkha, both eg Jat Sikh, regional and religious eg Punjabi Musselman and a variety of combinations thereof.

As has been said, some regiments contained only one type of soldier, and consequently only one type of headgear. Sikhs, Gurkhas, Garwahlis are all class regiments containing only that type of soldier, though Sikhs crop up as companies in other regiments. Brahmin and Rajputs tend to be grouped together for religious and dietary reasons and had identical (for wargames purposes) headgear.

Other regiments have four different troop types with four different turbans, like the Baluchis, Napier's Rifles etc.

Speaking as a wargamer you won't find 15mm figures for most varients, alas.

If there is a particular regiment or brigade PM me and I'll give you what I have.

All this comes with the caveats that I'm working from memory, and this information may be worth exactly what you have paid for it.

[centurion]

I stand to be corrected on this but I have an idea that the different 'caste' companies could in fact have different headress within a given regiment. Sikhs wore a particular type of turban- rounded in outline- whilst some moslem soldiers wrapped theirs around something like a fez and had a starched fan of material on top

Greg

I think that you are getting completely mixed up here - caste is primarily a Hindu matter and does not apply to other religions ie Moslems, Sikhs etc. Only the Sikhs had a religious imperative to wear a turban for others it was a matter of culture, tradition and local practice. Only the higher castes would be in military service in any case although lower castes might serve as porters, gun lascars etc.

Various Indian regiments evolved different styles. At one time (right back pre Mutiny) many regiments wore a metal or light wood frame around which turban cloth was wrapped giving the effect of a European shako from a distance. It needs a lot of space and time to describe but its possible to trace the development from this to some of the styles around in 1914

I think it would be most unlike to find Hindus, Moslems and Sikhs all mixed up in one regiment. Each regiment had its own headgear and you would not find a mixture except that Indian officers might have some difference from the rank and file in the ornamentation, quality etc of theirs

As an aside it is interesting to note that when Skinner Lawrence was forming what grew into the Indian army, (back in the 18th century) he made no distinction between European and Indian officers and it was objections on the grounds of caste and religious pollution on the part of high caste Hindu officers that led to the division as they considered mixing and dining with non Hindu officers would cause them to become 'unclean'.

[Heid the Ba]

I think it would be most unlike to find Hindus, Moslems and Sikhs all mixed up in one regiment. Each regiment had its own headgear and you would not find a mixture except that Indian officers might have some difference from the rank and file in the ornamentation, quality etc of theirs

It is actually quite common to find this; as I mentioned above an Appendix in "Sepoys in the Trenches" lists the composition of companies within regiments and apart from Sikh, Gurkha and Garwahli regiments most contain a mixture of races, castes and religions.

Each class had it's own headgear so a regiment with mixed classes would have companies with different headgear. From memory SitT has two photos of the 129th Baluchis, one of a Sikh company in the big, rounded Sikh turban, with a comments on the scimitar carried by the officer, and the second of a Musselman company whose turbans are much smaller and have a conical pugri, with comments on the added strap attached to the British offficer's turban to help keep it on.

I appreciate I'm quoting a single source here but I'm at work and it is the one I remember best.

ETA: On browsing the hyperweb I have come accross a claim that the second photo I refer to is actually 57th Wilde's Rifles. It is generally identified as 129th Baluchis.

ETA2: This may get tedious, feel free to do something useful instead. This thread has the photo of the Sikh company of the 129th. This thread is also of the view that the other photo is of the 57th. Either way it is a Punjabi Musselman company of a mixed class regiment, the 57th having Dogra, Sikh and Afridi companies as well.

So, the 57th has a Dogra company (hindu*, ethnically related to Sikhs); a Sikh company; an Afridi company (Pathan/Pashtun, muslim, probably from outwith the borders of India) and a Pujabi Musselman company (muslim, geographically and probably ethnically related to Sikhs).

3 religions, 2 languages, (Pashtun and Punjabi, with dialects/regional variations), at least 2 main dietary differences and I would guess 3 different styles of turban as Sikhs and Dogras look similar, certainly within the variations you see with Sikh units.

*some Dogras are muslim

ETA3: Beards - Sikhs and Dogras, ideally big enough to hide a badger in: remembering that many from the subcontinent grow facial hair at a ferocious rate so a week without shaving would leave many with a reasonable fullset.

Clean shaven - Gurkhas, Garwahlis, possibly Brahmin

Moustaches - most others, though the clean shaven/moustache distinction has a lot to do with age and the ability to grow something presentable.

[Helen Bachaus]

Hi Guys,

Thankyou to everyone wiith their comments about this topic.

If you have in your library or can get a copy of the OH for East Africa, Appendix three shows the various units with mixed class contained within each unit.

The variation of race within the 2nd Kashmirs if we look upon them for example: Their strength is approx for GEA - 730 personnel. Under the heading of "Musalmans" we see a sub-heading of "Punjabi" of which there are 255 personnel, under the heading "Dogras" 102 personnel, under the heading "Gurkhas" 358 personnel and under the "Other Various" 15 personnel.

My collection by the way is 28 mm. 15 mm is to small and we tend to do large scale actions. I've over 100 Sikhs for my games, but would love to have other Indian units.

Best Wishes

Helen

[findabetterole]

Well I never!...

I stand corrected, and thank you to all concerned.

There is certainly more to this subject than I personally thought possible. It puts another notch into what is quite a much larger picture than one previously imagined.

In line with the information already shared within this thread, a valid question seems to rear its head. That question is: "How would the various company Junior and Senior Nco's have been selected and employed, and just how far could they have risen within the regiment as a cohesive unit?"

Seph

[centurion]

Hi Guys,

Thank you to everyone wiith their comments about this topic.

If you have in your library or can get a copy of the OH for East Africa, Appendix three shows the various units with mixed class contained within each unit.

The variation of race within the 2nd Kashmirs if we look upon them for example: Their strength is approx for GEA - 730 personnel. Under the heading of "Musalmans" we see a sub-heading of "Punjabi" of which there are 255 personnel, under the heading "Dogras" 102 personnel, under the heading "Gurkhas" 358 personnel and under the "Other Various" 15 personnel.

I still think that you are conflating class, race, clan,(or tribe), religion and caste.

Before the Mutiny Indian Army units tended to be individually homogeneous. ie of the same religion and caste (where the latter was applicable in Hindu units). After the Mutiny as a result of the Peel Commission there was a deliberate policy of mixing them all up. Tables of regimental makeup published in The late 1860s show the degree to which this was achieved. However in 1879 (after the Eden Commission) this policy was reversed as the possibility of the Indian Army having to face a European power (Russia) was recognised and it was considered that having such diversity in a single Regiment mitigated against unit solidarity (which was why the Peel Commission had suggested it!). By the beginning of the 20th Century table for Regiments in the Bengal part of the Army (which was typical of the whole show that regiments tended to consist of a number of companies of the Muslim faith (which could include Punjabis) and either a number of companies of straight forward Hindus or a number of various types of Sikh including Jats and Mazbis from the Punjab or from the NE frontier (including Gurkhas and Hillmen) But Never a mixture - ie valid combinations were Muslims and Sikhs, Muslims and Straight Hindus and Muslims and NE Frontiers men. The Hindu companies in general were recruited from only two castes - the Brahmin (priestly and ruling ) and the Kshatriyas (soldier ) caste) but could come from Hindustani or the Punjab (in which case they would be Dogras) Jats need not be Sikhs and could come from Hindustani and can also be Muslims (so you can have Sikh Jats, Muslim Jats and straight Hindu Jats - and there are probably some Christian Jats etc) Jat is an ethnic distinction (as is Dogra etc) and does not define religion (any more than does being Irish or Scots [but don't say that too loud around Ibrox for example] and therefore has nothing to do with caste either which is a Hindu concept.

There were a number of regiments that were not mixed at all (eg all Sikh). The Peel system had not been applied to the cavalry in general (probably because they remained substantially loyal during the Mutiny) so they were much more homogeneous any way.

This is the simplified version! But the point is by WW1 Indian regiments might contain a range of ethnic types but would in general only have two religious groups and a simplified caste structure. Standing orders defined the uniforms and there appears to be no prescription of types of turban (only colour) issued from the top - this appears to have been left to the individual regiments. A wide variety of turbans existed but regimental standing orders in general defined only one for that particular regiment. However a turban worn by a Sikh might well appear more rounded simply due to the fact that he might have considerably more hair to deal with.

[Helen Bachaus]

Hi Centurion,

Thanks for your thoughts on this. Alas, I should have read the meaning of the word "Caste" first in the dictionary before proceeding with my query.

Agree on the Sikhs - very long hair :-)

So I've noticed in some photographs of the various regiments in the GW in GEA with a number of different headdress attire in the same unit.

Thanks again.

Helen

[Heid the Ba]

There were a number of regiments that were not mixed at all (eg all Sikh). The Peel system had not been applied to the cavalry in general (probably because they remained substantially loyal during the Mutiny) so they were much more homogeneous any way.

Of the 5 cavalry regiments in the Indian Corp in France, 2 were single religion, 1 had two religions and 2 three. The most loyal in the Mutiny were those from the Punjab which were the most mixed. The single class Bengal cavalry were most prone to mutiny.

This is the simplified version! But the point is by WW1 Indian regiments might contain a range of ethnic types but would in general only have two religious groups and a simplified caste structure. Standing orders defined the uniforms and there appears to be no prescription of types of turban (only colour) issued from the top - this appears to have been left to the individual regiments. A wide variety of turbans existed but regimental standing orders in general defined only one for that particular regiment. However a turban worn by a Sikh might well appear more rounded simply due to the fact that he might have considerably more hair to deal with.

I can't agree with this. The 9th Bhopal had 3 religions, 57th Rifles (as stated) 3, 58th 3, 59th 3, 69th Punjabi 3, 89th 3. THE 129th Baluchi was all muslim, but Pathan and Punjabi, my memory let me down.

Of the 23 regiments in the Corp in France, 13 were class regiments, 2 were multi-class single religion, 2 had two religions and 6 had three; as set out by Corrigan.

Can you link to or refer me to any of the regimental standing orders which define turbans?

Bootnecks: Indians could rise through the ranks, in single class regiments this was not a problem, in multi-class they rose within their company with the senior NCO posts being rotated (informally) between classes.(Corrigan p8)

[Crunchy]

I too stand corrected. thank you for this most interesting information,

Cheers

Chris

[Helen Bachaus]

Hi Guys, I came across this information and would appreciate from my learned folk here on thsi forum some thoughts please.

All native ranks wore a 'Lunghi' or 'Pagri' (turban) as headdress, tied according to their 'class', ie whether they were Sikh, Pathan, Punjabi Mussulman, etc. Underneath the 'pagri' was worn a 'kulla' by Mohammedans and a 'pug' by Sikhs, which were white for cavalry, red for infantry.

Best Wishes

Helen

[Michael Johnson]

Helen, that is basically correct. The kulla was also worn by Jats (Hindu). Dogras did not wear the kulla.

If you take a Sikh figure, file down the turban, and add a point for the kulla, you will have a figure that in your scale can be a Punjabi Mussulman, or an Afridi.

Run an image search on "Awan" and you will find a number of illustrations from "Armies of India" by Lovett and McMunn. Postcards of the illustrations are also to be found on eBay.

[Helen Bachaus]

Thanks Michael :-)

[Heid the Ba]

The Great Indian Hat debate; Part 2.

What things are called. I think, but as my Indian language skills are suboptimal I'm happy to be corrected, there are a number of names for the parts of the headgear in part because of different transliterations into english, and partly simply in different languages. I'll call the whole thing a turban for simplicity, though even that is contentious.

This may be a job for your housemate depending on what languages they have.

As Michael says, the kulla is the central part which is conical in some instances and soft and flat in others, but which shows when the main part of the turban is wound round. The other part is the lunghee which varies in length and width to give smaller or larger turbans. One end of the lunghee is at the top and is sometimes starched into a fan, the other end is at the back and sometimes hangs like a tail.

It is infintely simpler to wargame 1916 onwards, but those of us with figures for Neuve Chapel and Loos get both the Great Indian Hat Debate and the Scots Bunnet Check Dilemma. The SBCD being how to paint them in 15mm.

Michael: thanks for the tip, I'll check those out later.