Indian doctors were for some time regarded as appropriate mediums for the dissemination of western medical knowledge in East Africa, despite the fact that their contribution has largely been forgotten by historians. Although Indian practitioners were not appointed to the same rank as European Medical Officers (MOs), they nevertheless were medically qualified individuals, who had undergone training in western medicine in India, usually for a minimum of three to five years depending upon when and where their diploma or certificate was obtained. Despite being awarded the less-prestigious rank of Assistant Surgeon, Sub-Assistant Surgeon or Hospital Assistant within the CMS, and being paid much lower salaries than MOs, these Indians to all intents and purposes fulfilled similar clinical roles and responsibilities to their European counterparts. Indeed, ample evidence exists that, before 1923, Indian practitioners were regarded as an invaluable constituent part of the medical infrastructure. At their peak in 1920, there were almost twice as many Indian medical practitioners as European MOs in the Government Medical Department. After 1922, however, the recruitment of Indians to the CMS halted.

Through original research conducted at the British Library, The Wellcome Library, Syracuse University Library, The British Medical Association Archive, and The Kenya National Archive, this paper will highlight how this Indian cohort of medical personnel have been overlooked by historians for decades and describes some of the dynamics behind the production of colonial knowledge, both at the time and subsequently.

It will be argued that the British progressively excluded Indians from working in the CMS in Kenya because the practice became increasingly antithetical to the new priorities of Empire. As ideas of trusteeship became fashionable from the 1920s, it became ever more appropriate to Africanise the CMS, in terms of training and employing more African dressers. However, at the same time (and with no apparent sense of contradiction) as the Service became more inclusive to Africans, it became less inclusive to Indians. This implies that, despite British rhetoric, something more complicated than progressive racial inclusionism was going on. In key ways, Indians working in roles similar to Europeans in Africa posed a threat to British ideas of colonial hegemony and their role as a practical means of disseminating colonial medical knowledge became no longer acceptable to the priorities of settler dominated Kenya.