Silladar Cavalry

[Steven Broomfield]

This piece was posted originally on the Front Forum, but I thought I'd re-post it here for members who aren't habitues of the other place. There's no special reason for this, but it struck me that there may be members who've come across the term, "Silladar" and wondered what it meant. So, here's an attempt to explain. Feel free to comment, criticise, add or subtract from the general knowledge base.

In simple terms, a silladar was a man who placed himself, his horse, his arms and his equipment at the disposal of a ruler, chief or warlord; in return he received pay or loot. In his book, Whitworth describes the commander of such a force as like a patriarch to his tribe. When the horse was killed, died or lamed, the silladar replaced it. It was quick, simple and (above all) cheap to the government.

The Honourable East India Company preferred the European system of regular cavalry units; the silladar came into British service in the regiments of Irregular Horse raised in the early years of the 19th century. Many of these came over from Indian masters (such as Skinner’s in 1803 when they transferred from Scindia to the British).

Skinner’s and Gardner’s Horses (later the 1st and 2nd Bengal Lancers), together with Lucan’s (lost in the Maratha Wars) were the first silladar regiments in the British service. An assami fund was set – the amount each man had to maintain in order to remain efficient (cost of horse, half a pony and uniform). Effectively, a recruit deposited Rs300, which was refunded on discharge.

Insurance was also provided – chanda fund – which acted as insurance on the loss of horse killed or dying in service of the government.

The HEIC saw the benefit: expense was kept to a minimum, and at the same time, the men were almost a stock company with a vested interest in the good of the unit. Additionally, irregular units had a far lower proportion of British officers: this appealed to Indian members, for whom responsibility and promotion were more readily available.

By 1857 and the outbreak of the Mutiny, the Bengal Army had ten regular cavalry regiments, and eighteen silladar. These recruited from identical areas: all ten of the regular, and ten of the irregular regiments mutinied. Those which remained loyal were, in 1861, renumbered as the 1st to 8th Bengal Cavalry.

By 1914, all but three cavalry regiments were on the silladar system. These three were the old Madras Presidency regiments (26th King George’s Own Light Cavalry, 27th Light Cavalry and 28th Light Cavalry); the system had never taken off in Madras.

By the outbreak of the GW, the system had altered a lot. The man no longer brought his horse with him, but received it, plus all his arms and accoutrements, from the regiment at a price (his assami). In the 2nd Lancers (Gardner’s Horse), this was between Rs350 and 400; Whitworth says that others charged much more.

However, this was quite a lot, so many regiments allowed a deposit (Rs 150; less for poorer classes), with deductions from pay until the balance was met. This resulted in men being very hard up in the early years of their service. The chanda fund was around Rs3/month.

On discharge, the man received all his money back, so had a nice lump sum to start retirement.

Whitworth sees the benefits: the recruits were mainly from the landed classes, and Indian officers were “men of birth and standing”. Often a troop commander held the assamis of all his men, most of whom were dependants or neighbours, so the troop commander’s word was law.

As the men held a large stake in the well-being of the regiment, crime was unheard of, and discipline was reinforced by the commander’s personal influence. The weekly Regimental Durbar was likened to the meeting of shareholders. In the late 19th century, grain for the horses was bought from traders attached to the unit – bunnias. Each troop (there were 8) had its own bunnia, and these appeared at the Durbar to “state their weekly lie, namely that they had been paid in full.” The regiment was constantly in debt to the bunnias, and in 1903, Gardner’s did away with them and purchased grain direct from the government.

At the outbreak of war, the silladar regiment provided the government a force of 600 men, well-trained, supremely disciplined, mobile, and equipped with all their needs – at a much lower cost than a ‘regular’ unit.

The system could never survive in France: in 1914, the government started to supply grain (as the sowars were paid to purchase grain, they did well, being provided with free grain, and the money to buy it!).

So much for the good. Now the bad;

Firstly, the pressure on the Commandant of the regiment was immense – he was commanding officer of a fighting regiment, but also head of business with 600 shareholders. It was a lending business: almost every man owed money. It was a firm of accountants. It was a farming company – the regimental farm raised horses and grew fodder. It was a horse-trading company. The CO oversaw all this – the bureaucracy was huge.

Each regiment which landed in France was different: some were well-off and had good horses, excellent equipment and a sound infrastructure. Others, less so.

Reinforcement was probably even more difficult to the silladar regiment than for any other Indian unit (and, God knows, that was hard enough) – the 36th Jacob’s Horse received officer reinforcements from the 17th Cavalry, 19th (Fane’s) Horse, 23rd Cavalry, 32nd Lancers and 35th Scinde Horse, and men from more regiments.

Because financial pressures were great, useless horses and outdated equipment were kept beyond their time, and (according to Maunsell) men were loathe to risk horses being used by others, and in many cases his chief idea was to make money from them.

Maunsell’s view is that the silladar system provided moderate units, moderately mounted, at a cheap cost – for Internal Security only. Rather different from Whitworth (who is generally a far more fair-minded and non-contentious writer).

Nath comments that many regiments were ill-equipped, arriving in France in the winter of 1914 in cotton uniforms, armed with tulwars (an Indian cavalry sword) and lances: maintenance of these units had to be overtaken by the government.

The system finally died in the post-War period: by the amalgamations of 1922, the Esher Committee had overseen the conversion of all regiments to a non-silladar footing. The silladar was the backbone of the British Indian cavalry for only 60 years, but the romance and glamour of those irregular regiments lives on – the descendents of Skinner, Gardner, Hodson, Probyn and their like still maintain the traditions and history of their forebears.

It is true that the silladar system broke down in the chaos of an industrial war, but for the late Victorian and Edwardian era, Indian Cavalry and the Siladar system are all-but synonymous.

Sources:

History of the 2nd Lancers (Gardner's Horse) Capt D E Whitworth, MC

Prince of Wales's Own, The Scinde Horse Col E B Maunsell

IZZAT Capt A Nath

A Matter of Honour Philip Mason

India's Army Maj Donovan Jackson

[SiegeGunner]

Fascinating stuff, Steve. Thanks for investing your children's inheritance in the rare and expensive sources you have drawn on for this piece.

I wonder how many of the men who served in these regiments have descendants now living in the UK ? Perhaps more posts like this would attract their attention via Google searches, although I have heard that family history research beyond living memory can be more difficult for people of Indian descent due to their naming conventions and the difficulty of locating records.

[centurion]

Some of the recruiting areas were in what is now Pakistan so that,given the significant migration from that country to Britain, its very likely that there are descendants over here.