Is there a historical reason for why Gujarat contributes so poorly to the Indian Army?

Jan 2019
174
Valencia
#1
Gujarat is not viewed as a place that is "martial". This contrasts with their neighbours (Rajasthan, Malwa, Maharashtra). Why is this? Are Gujaratis just innately peaceful and meek people who aren't aggressive? Maybe they just aren't a good fit for the hyper-masculine environment of the Indian Army?
 
Sep 2012
9,090
India
#2
Gujaratis are a mild and peace-loving community. They are more oriented towards money making and commerce. They have no martial traditions but strong business traditions. It is therefore quite natural that they are not much interested in joining the Indian armed forces. It is significant that the British never established an army formation named after Gujarat or the people there.
 
Likes: Dewal

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,572
New Delhi, India
#4
That is a stereotype. Military recruitments at lower ranks are made on basis of population of the state. So, Gujaratis will be represented in the army in that that proportion. At higher ranks it is a national competition.
 
Jan 2019
174
Valencia
#5
Gujaratis are a mild and peace-loving community. They are more oriented towards money making and commerce. They have no martial traditions but strong business traditions. It is therefore quite natural that they are not much interested in joining the Indian armed forces. It is significant that the British never established an army formation named after Gujarat or the people there.
Agreed, mild, peace-loving and meek is how I would describe Gujarat and Gujaratis as well. I'm always surprised to hear how Gujarat, despite being a loyal and non-rebellious state during the British era, was never targeted for recruitment.
 

Similar History Discussions