The traditional iconography of the First World War is dominated by the image of the mud-caked soldier in the trenches of the Western Front. In the Indian context, historical remembrance has long focused on the 1.3 million combatants—the sepoys and cavalrymen—who fought from the Ypres Salient to the deserts of Mesopotamia. However, a massive, silent contingent of over 550,000 men has remained largely absent from the annals of military glory. These were the non-combatants: the porters, janitors, stretcher-bearers, and cooks who formed the logistical spine of the British imperial war machine.
In her seminal work, The Coolie’s Great War: Indian Labour In Global Conflict 1914-1921, Radhika Singha, a Professor of Modern History at Jawaharlal Nehru University, meticulously reconstructs this forgotten history. Based on a decade of exhaustive research into legal, military, and colonial archives, Singha’s narrative shifts the focus from the "martial races" to the "menial ranks," revealing how the British Empire was sustained not just by the rifle, but by the shovel, the stretcher, and the broom.
Main Facts: The Scope and Scale of Non-Combatant Service
The sheer scale of Indian non-combatant involvement in World War I is staggering. While the official narrative celebrates the "contributions" of the Indian Army, Singha points out that nearly one-third of the Indian personnel sent overseas were non-combatants. This "Coolie Corps," a term used to describe the various labor units, was essential for the maintenance of military infrastructure across global theaters of war.
The Diverse Roles of the Follower Ranks
The non-combatants were categorized into various "follower" ranks, performing tasks that the British military deemed necessary but "menial." These roles included:
- Logistics and Construction: Stevedores and porters who unloaded ships and transported supplies; construction workers who built roads, railways, and camps.
- Sanitation and Maintenance: Janitors (often referred to as sweepers) who cleaned latrines and managed waste; washermen (dhobis) and water-carriers (bhistis).
- Medical Support: Stretcher-bearers (kahars) who risked their lives to retrieve the wounded from the front lines.
- Animal Transport: Mule-drivers (drabis) and syces (grooms) who managed the thousands of animals required for transport in roadless terrains.
Singha’s research highlights that without these men, the British supply chains would have collapsed. Yet, because their work was perceived as "non-martial," their stories were buried under the weight of colonial hierarchy and caste-based prejudice.
Chronology: From the Fields of India to the Fronts of the World (1914–1921)
The mobilization of Indian labor was not a static event but an evolving process that reflected the increasing desperation of the British Empire as the war dragged on.
1914–1915: Initial Mobilization and Caste Hierarchies
At the onset of the war, recruitment followed traditional colonial lines. The British relied on "martial races"—primarily from Punjab and the North-West Frontier—for combat, while "menial" tasks were assigned to specific lower-caste groups. The recruitment of "followers" was often haphazard, relying on existing social structures and local intermediaries.
1916: The Mesopotamian Crisis and the Epidemic Letter
A turning point in Singha’s research occurred when she discovered a confidential letter from Mesopotamia dated March 1916. The British forces in the region were facing a catastrophic health crisis. The letter was an urgent requisition for latrine sweepers from India, but it was marked "confidential" because a Cholera epidemic had broken out.
The British authorities were effectively shipping Indian laborers into the heart of a deadly epidemic to ensure the sanitary survival of the combatant forces. This moment illustrates the expendability of non-combatant lives in the eyes of the imperial administration.
1917–1918: The Professionalization of Labor
As the war’s hunger for manpower grew, the British were forced to look beyond traditional recruitment zones. They began shipping Indian tribals and colonial prisoners to far-flung battlefields in France and the Middle East. During 1916–17, there was a shift in the institutional position of "higher followers" like stretcher-bearers and mule-drivers. Recognizing that efficiency required better health, the military began providing improved food, kit, and training to these units to prevent desertion and "invaliding" (discharge due to illness).
1919–1921: The Aftermath and Erasure
Even after the Armistice in 1918, many Indian labor units remained overseas to assist in the cleanup and the administration of occupied territories. By 1921, most had returned to India, but unlike the combatants, they returned to a country that had no monuments for them and a colonial government that was eager to forget the promises of status and "government service" it had made during the recruitment drives.
Supporting Data: Narratives of Sacrifice and Subversion
Singha’s book uses specific case studies to illustrate the tension between the "menial" status assigned to these workers and the "heroic" reality of their service.
The Grave of Sukha Kalloo
One of the most poignant stories in the book is that of Sukha Kalloo, a sweeper whose grave lies in the churchyard of St. Nicholas at Brockenhurst, England. Sukha was likely the inspiration for a fictionalized account by Lieutenant General George F. MacMunn, who wrote about a sweeper named "Bigha" dying for the Empire.
In reality, Sukha’s burial was a point of contention. The local Muslim burial ground refused to take him because of his "untouchable" status (he belonged to the Lalbeghi community, often described as nominal Muslims). It was the local Vicar, Mr. Chambers, who allowed Sukha to be buried in the churchyard, famously stating, "Surely Bigha Khan [Sukha] has died for England, I will bury him in the churchyard."
Today, Sukha’s grave—marked with an Islamic arch—stands beside New Zealand soldiers, a rare physical testament to a non-combatant’s presence in the "theatre of glory."
Propaganda and the Promise of Status
To recruit men for these grueling roles, the British utilized sophisticated propaganda. For the Jat peasantry, military service was framed as the only honorable alternative to farming. Recruitment songs contrasted the indignity of civilian life with the prestige of the uniform:
“Here you get tattered shoes, out there you get full boots… Here you get shoved around, out there you get a salute.”
The promise was clear: by joining the "follower" ranks, a man could gain immunity from the "rough handling" of local police, creditors, and revenue officials. The uniform offered a temporary shield against the systemic oppressions of colonial Indian society.
Official Responses: The "Hyper-Masculine" Code of Combat
The British military establishment struggled with how to categorize these non-combatants. On one hand, medical and transport officers argued for better treatment of their personnel based on "labour efficiency." On the other hand, the high command was wedded to a "hyper-masculine" code that prioritized the "fighting races."
The official rhetoric often suggested that the devotion of the "follower" ranks served to give a "higher gloss to the valour of the fighting races." By framing the labor of sweepers and water-carriers as an act of service to the "warrior," the British managed to maintain caste and racial hierarchies even as they relied on these men for survival.
However, the war occasionally forced the "unimaginable to be imagined." In some accounts, even the lowliest latrine cleaner was cast as a war hero, if only to serve as a propaganda tool against the rising tide of Indian nationalism. General MacMunn, for instance, used the stories of loyal "untouchables" to mock "Gandhi and his blather," suggesting that the British Empire was a better protector of the marginalized than the burgeoning independence movement.
Implications: Rewriting the History of the Great War
The implications of Radhika Singha’s research are profound, challenging both the British and the Indian nationalist versions of history.
1. Challenging the "Martial Race" Theory
By documenting the contributions of 550,000 non-combatants, Singha effectively dismantles the colonial myth of "martial races." The war was won not just by those deemed "racially suited" for combat, but by a diverse cross-section of Indian society—including tribals, Dalits, and prisoners—who performed the essential labor of modern warfare.
2. Social Mobility and Leverage
The "Coolie Corps" were not merely passive victims. Singha explains that these men often used the warring powers’ desperate need for manpower as leverage. They pushed back against wage differentials and traditional service hierarchies, using the "prestige of government service" to claim a higher social standing upon their return.
3. A New Lens on Global Conflict
The Coolie’s Great War forces a shift in how we view global conflicts. It moves the narrative away from the strategic maneuvers of generals and the heroism of soldiers toward a "history from below." It highlights the intersection of labor, law, and military history, showing how the mobilization of menial workers was a prerequisite for the industrial-scale slaughter of the 20th century.
4. Historical Justice for the Unsung
Ultimately, the book serves as a memorial for those who were never given a monument. Men like Sukha Kalloo, the nameless porters of the Mesopotamian desert, and the stretcher-bearers of the Western Front are finally given their place in history. Their "backbreaking work" is recognized not as a footnote, but as the very foundation upon which the history of the First World War was built.
In the words of Radhika Singha, the war’s hunger for manpower allowed for the "unimaginable to be imagined"—a world where the sweeper could be cast as a war hero. A century later, her research ensures that this imagination is backed by the hard, undeniable evidence of their sacrifice.
