Transcript
Voiceover: “In October 1914, the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) was at breaking point. Fighting in France against a German invasion, the BEF had lost 70 per cent of its original number and had almost no reinforcements to speak of. Worse, a German attack on the town of Ypres threatened to take advantage of their exhaustion and break through the Allied line. The stage was set for a German victory. However, the BEF were not alone. Arriving in the nick of time were the 45,000 men of Indian Expeditionary Force A. In the face of severe German attacks, they fought desperately to hold the line and in doing so, likely kept the Allies in the fight in 1914. That battle was just the start of India’s massive contribution to victory in the First World War.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “Britain could not have won the First World War in the way that it did without India. The raw materials, the money, and most crucially of all, the 1.5 million men of the Indian Army were simply indispensable to British victory. Their contribution ensured that the British Empire survived the war. But it also sharpened the desire in India for independence in the years after.”
Voiceover: “To understand just how important India was in the First World War, we first need to understand India’s role in the British Empire. At the beginning of the 20th century, the British Empire was the largest in the world and India was the so-called jewel in the crown. It had a huge population, a wealth of natural resources and a large professional army.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “This uniform is typical of those in which the Indian soldier went to war in 1914 and was designed for the Indian Army’s traditional role of fighting low-intensity colonial hill warfare on the northwest frontier of India.
Like all armies at the time, the Indian army was composed of infantry, cavalry, engineers, transport units, and an integrated medical service. However, as a legacy of distrust dating from the 1857 Indian mutiny against British rule, all but the lightest artillery was under British control, and in each infantry brigade, one regular British unit served alongside three from the Indian Army. Indian soldiers were commanded by British and Indian officers, but until 1918, the most junior British officer always outranked the most senior Indian officer. This preserved the system of colonial rule, ensuring no Indian could be in a position of command over white British officers or troops.
The Indian Army was a vital tool in the British arsenal. As the Indian general staff put it in 1906, “In no army can be found officers and men who are better prepared to immediately undertake expeditions in any corner of the globe”.”
Voiceover: “India’s war began a few days after Britain’s on the 6th of August 1914 when the War Council in London decided that the Indian Army should fight overseas. The Indian Army was formed into seven Indian expeditionary forces. Forces A and G largely fought for British security in Europe, while forces B to F largely fought to secure Britain’s empire. We’ll cover all of these forces today. The men of these units signed up to fight for a host of different reasons.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “This recruiting medal was awarded for reaching and exceeding recruiting quotas during the First World War. We see Britannia, sword in hand, pointing the way forward to a tiger, obviously representing India, sending India into battle. Indian society was governed by a rigid hierarchy caste system. Men from low-caste communities viewed the chance of military service as a way of gaining some social status. And this mirrors a traditional reason for men joining the pre-war Indian Army known as ‘izzat’. This was a concept of gaining honour and social standing for oneself, one’s family and community.
In addition, many volunteers were maintaining a family tradition of military service, whilst others were mainly interested in the package of pay and benefits available to long-serving soldiers. Another key consideration was politics. Indian leaders and intellectuals like Mahatma Gandhi supported Britain during the war, believing that loyalty and sacrifice during the war might earn India greater autonomy or even eventual independence.”
Voiceover: “There was some debate on the British side as to whether non-white soldiers should be allowed to fight in Europe. However, the professional nature of the Indian Army and knowledge that the BEF would almost certainly need rapid reinforcement won over the doubters. However, for the other non-white soldiers of the empire, the colour bar against fighting in Europe would remain for the rest of the war.
Thanks in part to the intervention of IEF A, the Western Front had now stabilised. By the end of 1914, Indian forces numbered a third of all British forces on the Western Front. At the same time, Indian expeditionary forces were being rapidly deployed around the world. Some fronts were more successful than others. When IEF B and C were sent to German East Africa, entire battalions fled the battlefield at the first German shots during the Battle of Tanga. However, the Indian troops of IEF E and F would yet again play a decisive role in the outcome of the war, as Ottoman troops launched an attack on the Suez Canal.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “The Suez Canal was Britain’s vital imperial transport artery. In January 1915, Indian troops were the most numerous and best-trained forces available for the canal’s defence. When the Turkish attack came on the night of the second and third of February 1915, those Indian units would play a leading role in defending against the assault. The Ottomans attempted to cross the canal using pontoons and rafts, but the defenders were well dug in along the canal bank and brought down heavy fire on the enemy. Those Ottoman troops who did manage to cross were counter-attacked and destroyed by the British and Indian forces. By the end of the fighting two days later, the Ottomans had suffered around 2,000 casualties for just 100 or so on the defender side.
Having secured the safety of the Suez Canal, Britain could leverage the full support of its empire. Troops and war material continued to flow from India, Australia, and New Zealand into Europe and the Middle East for the rest of the war.”
Voiceover: “Elsewhere, IEF G joined the Gallipoli campaign in which Allied forces attempted to capture the Dardanelles Strait and attack Constantinople, hoping to knock the Ottoman Empire out of the war. The Indians gave a good account of themselves alongside British, ANZAC, and French troops, but the campaign was doomed to failure.
Meanwhile, IEF D led the campaign in another vital theatre of war. Because the most modern warships of the Royal Navy were fuelled by oil rather than coal, it was crucial for Britain to secure the oil fields in the Persian Gulf. This could only be achieved through the occupation of Mesopotamia or modern-day Iraq.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “With the British Army committed to the Western Front and later Gallipoli, the campaign in Mesopotamia was from the beginning largely fought by Indian soldiers. The war in Mesopotamia was very much a campaign of two halves. The first, whilst quickly securing the oil fields, was marked by mission creep that led to a reckless advance on Baghdad and a subsequent humiliating surrender of the British garrison at Kut-al-Amara in April 1916. Up to this time, the army suffered from shortages of just about everything needed to fight a successful war.
A drastic reorganisation and reinforcement followed, leading to a dramatic change of fortunes. And on the 11th of March 1917, Indian and British forces captured Baghdad. After this, Indian troops conducted a successful mobile campaign against Turkish forces that led to the occupation of Mosul by the end of the war.”
Voiceover: “Back on the Western Front, Indian infantry were sorely tested in 1915 during the Battle of Neuve Chapelle in March, where they supplied up to half the attacking force, and again at Loos in September. There is controversy over their performance in this theatre of war. Some historians writing in the aftermath of the conflict tended to emphasise a lack of familiarity with the new weapons of war and low morale caused by discomfort with European weather and the high casualty rate among British officers. However, more modern historians argue against this view. They point to the fact that pre-war Indian troops were well-trained from previous wars and that Indian soldiers suffered from trench foot and frostbite half as much as British troops in late 1914.
Nonetheless, beginning in December 1915, Indian infantry were redeployed to Mesopotamia, while Indian cavalry would continue to fight on the Western Front until 1918, when they moved to Palestine. By that point, a major issue on all sides was finding new soldiers to replace the mounting casualties. For this, the British naturally turned to India.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “The British believed certain ethnicities and regional groups within India were inherently more suited to being soldiers. This theory of the so-called martial races informed the recruitment of the Indian Army. By 1914, just over half of all Indian soldiers came from the Punjab, with Sikhs making up 20 per cent of the army’s strength whilst numbering only 2 per cent of the Indian population.
However, the demands of the First World War undermined this idea of martial races. These medals issued to Subadar Khanzan Singh illustrate how recruitment for the army spread across India during the First World War. We have the British War Medal, the British Victory Medal—they’re pretty standard medals for the First World War. And then we have the General Service Medal with a clasp for South Persia. Khanzan Singh served as an officer with the 71st Punjabis. This was a regiment raised in 1917 from amongst India’s Christian community, a community little touched by military service before 1914. However, within two years of victory being secured in 1918, the British disbanded such regiments and largely fell back on traditional recruiting practices.”
Voiceover: “Indian civilians also made an important contribution to the war on the home front. Iron, manganese, grains, cotton, horses and mules, as well as a lump sum of 100 million pounds, were supplied by India to the British war effort. Despite this, the British grew increasingly fearful of the Indian Home Rule movement and decided to employ a carrot and stick approach to keep them at bay. On the one hand, the British introduced emergency powers in 1915, restricting free speech and implementing internment without trial. On the other hand, in 1917, they made a commitment to political change—a promise that would come back to bite them when the war came to an end in 1918. But before it did, there was just time for the Indian Army to play a decisive role in one more campaign.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “In 1918, the British government committed to knock Turkey out of the war. There was also an objective to concentrate as many British troops as possible on the Western Front to defeat Germany, and some 60,000 of those men were then in Palestine. The Indian Army was called upon to backfill General Allenby’s army in Palestine. This process was named Indianisation. By the summer of 1918, the Indian contingent was the largest in Allenby’s multinational imperial army.
In the crushing offensive launched by Allenby on the 19th of September 1918, Indian infantry and cavalry played a central role in the destruction of two Turkish armies within three days. In a masterpiece of modern mobile warfare, Indian soldiers joined those from Australia, Britain, the Caribbean, Egypt, New Zealand, and Arab Irregulars to pursue the disintegrating Turkish forces to Damascus and Aleppo by the war’s end.”
Voiceover: “The manpower provided by the Indian Army allowed Britain to wage a global war on multiple fronts at the same time. But the Indian soldiers weren’t just there to make up the numbers. Their bravery was noted by Field Marshal French, who remarked on the magnificent bearing and indomitable courage displayed by the troops of the Fourth and Indian Corps. In total, 11 men from the Indian subcontinent won Victoria Crosses during the First World War. One of them was Shahamad Khan.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “This kurta, the traditional form of tunic worn by soldiers of the Indian army, was originally the property of Shahamad Khan while serving with the 8th Punjab Regiment as a Jemadar (that’s a junior Indian officer). On the shoulder, we can see the Eighth Punjabis’ regimental shoulder title, the rank badges for a Jemadar. We can also see where Shahamad Khan’s medal ribbons originally were attached. He’s obviously taken these off and probably put them onto another kurta.
On the 12th and 13th of April 1916 at Beit Ayeesa, Shahamad Khan was in charge of a machine gun close to Turkish positions. During the day, he used his machine guns to beat off three Turkish counterattacks, working the gun single-handed after all his men except two ammunition belt fillers had become casualties. For three hours he held his position under very heavy fire, and when his gun was knocked out, he and the two belt fillers continued to hold their ground just with rifles until the order was given to withdraw. With help, he then brought back the machine gun, ammunition, all the equipment, and one severely wounded man. For his actions that day, Shahamad Khan was awarded the Victoria Cross, the British Empire’s highest award for bravery in the face of the enemy.”
Voiceover: “By 1918, one in six soldiers then fighting for Britain were from India. The casualties suffered by the Indian army numbered around 53,000 killed and 64,000 wounded. The Imperial War Museum itself is a testament to those men. Founded in 1917, its name is a tribute to the contribution of India and British dominions to victory in the First World War. Alongside helping to win the conflict, the Indian Army also helped expand British territory, which reached its zenith in 1922. However, while Indian forces had secured Britain’s empire in the short term, in the long run, the war unleashed forces that the empire could not contain.”
Alan Wakefield, IWM curator: “The Indian Army was transformed through its war experience, becoming a modern fighting force. Indian soldiers too were changed by their overseas war service, returning home with feelings of greater equality with the British, having fought the same enemies and being awarded the same medals. Additionally, war service had brought together soldiers from different ethnicities, castes, and religions, challenging many long-held social and religious views.
However, at home in India, hopes for home rule were quickly dashed. Wartime restrictions on freedoms under the Defence of India Act remained in place after the war, undermining promises of political change. Limited Indian representation in government was introduced in December 1919. But this was very much a case of too little, too late. For Indian nationalists, these broken promises, coupled with the massacre at Amritsar on the 13th of April 1919, illustrated the reality of British rule. This sense of betrayal sparked the mass independence movement of the 1920s and set India on the road to independence.”