In Their Own Words: Unknown Soldier of the 100th Foot

Forced enlistment

The journal begins in the summer of 1780, when the author - an ordinary working man - set out from Bridlington in the East Riding of Yorkshire to seek employment in London. During this period, he twice fell victim to the ruthless recruitment methods used by Britain’s fighting services at the time.

First, when docking at Great Yarmouth, he was press-ganged into the Royal Navy. However, he was able to escape from this plight with the help of a friend before continuing his journey on foot.

Then, a few months after arriving in London, he was targeted by an unscrupulous Army recruiting agent. Lured into a house with the promise of work, he was held prisoner and compelled to enlist.

Duplicitous recruiting

Tricks such as this formed part of a wider pattern of deceitful recruiting employed by the Army right up until the 19th century. 

More commonly, alcohol and tales of military glory were used to seduce naive young men into joining up. Also widespread was the fraudulent use of recruiting bounties to hoodwink the greedy or the desperate.

Kidnap was the most extreme method and was widely acknowledged to be a violation of legal rights. The agents who practised it were hated and feared, and could find themselves victims of mob violence, if discovered.

The 100th Regiment of Foot

Our soldier was enlisted into the 100th Regiment of Foot. Raised in 1780 by Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Humberston for service in India, this was the second of six distinct regiments that would bear this numerical title.

The first had seen service in the Caribbean during its brief existence from 1760 to 1763. Three other short-lived units would also come and go before the title became more firmly established with the raising of the 100th (Prince of Wales’s Royal Canadian) Regiment of Foot in 1857.

Order of precedence

The temporary lifespans of these units is accounted for by the British Army’s ‘order of precedence’ system, which emerged during the late 17th century and was formalised in 1751. In accordance with this, each infantry regiment was allocated a number relating to its date of formation and lineage. 

Units with lower numbers enjoyed greater prestige and security of tenure, whereas those with higher numbers - such as the 100th Foot - were often raised only in wartime and were the first to be disbanded when peace returned.

Hazardous voyage

By March 1781, our soldier had completed his training and found himself at sea on board the ship 'Pondicherry'. The vessel formed part of a convoy commanded by Commodore George Johnstone, which was bound for India.

En route, the fleet was due to put in at the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of Africa. The Dutch held a strategically important colony here, which the British hoped to capture.

The dangers of this already perilous journey were magnified by Britain being at war with France. This situation had arisen following the outbreak of the American War of Independence (1775-83).

Naval engagement

On 16 April, Johnstone’s fleet became embroiled in a battle with the French at Porto Praya (now Praia) in the Cape Verde islands, off the coast of West Africa. Although the fighting was inconclusive, the British suffered many casualties, including 28 men from the 100th Foot.

The battle also allowed the French to steal a march in the race to the Cape, where they were able to reinforce the Dutch defences. As a result, the British fleet was compelled to continue its journey onwards to India without taking this prize.

Sickness and malnutrition

Long sea voyages during this period were characterised by severe hardship and suffering. Inadequate food, poor hygiene and a lack of medical care allowed diseases to run rife and resulted in a high mortality rate.

The author of our journal provides some grim indications of the frightful conditions aboard his vessel. At one time, he noted that they were throwing the bodies of three or four dead men overboard each day.

On arrival at Bombay (now Mumbai) in January 1782, after a journey of over 10 months, he recorded how ‘most of us were so weak we could scarcely walk the decks’.

Second Mysore War

Our soldier joined the struggle for supremacy being fought in southern India between the British and the Kingdom of Mysore, which was allied to the French.

The main theatre of war was the Carnatic region along India's south-east coast, where Britain and France had important bases at Madras (now Chennai) and Pondicherry (now Puducherry), respectively.

Hyder Ali, the ruler of Mysore, had invaded the Carnatic in July 1780. His defeat of a British force under Colonel Baillie at the Battle of Pollilur in September had placed the British in a critical situation. However, Ali failed to capitalise on this victory, enabling British reinforcements under Lieutenant General Sir Eyre Coote to retrieve the situation a few months later.

A tough and experienced commander, Coote won a series of victories over Ali’s forces but was unable to compel him to withdraw.

A strategic coup

The British found a solution to their problems more by accident than design.

In February 1782, a small force of around 1,500 men commanded by Colonel Humberston - consisting of his own 100th Regiment of Foot and some sepoys of the East India Company - set down at Calicut (now Kozhikode) on the Malabar coast in south-west India. The men had originally been bound for Madras but were diverted due to the French naval threat.

During the spring, this contingent would play a role out of all proportion to its numbers, winning a series of victories against much larger Mysorean forces.

In response, Hyder Ali despatched a force led by his son, Tipu Sultan - the famous ‘Tiger of Mysore’ - to counter this threat, weakening his position in the Carnatic.

Superior fighting methods

Our soldier’s journal provides a useful insight into the nature of the fighting in this period. It reveals how the British were repeatedly able to defeat their numerically superior opponents through a combination of better discipline and advanced tactics, such as rapid-fire musketry and the bayonet charge.

On the defensive

The arrival of Tipu Sultan placed the British firmly on the back foot. Although re-enforced, Humberston was compelled to break off a second offensive launched in the autumn, and instead fight a desperate rearguard campaign back to his base at Panianee (Ponnani).

Here, with further reinforcements - and now under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Norman MacLeod - the British were able to keep their enemy at bay. A notable defensive action took place on 28 November, when the Mysoreans were repulsed with the loss of over 1,000 casualties.

Hostile environment

In addition to the hard fighting during the campaign in Malabar, the hostile climate and terrain also proved very challenging to the British. Much of the country was mountainous and covered with sweltering jungle. 

Our soldier recorded many deaths from the excessive heat of the region and also described a horrific night march undertaken during a torrential storm.

A new offensive

When Hyder Ali died in December 1782, Tipu Sultan departed from Malabar to secure his succession to his father’s throne. 

The British - once more re-enforced and now under the command of Brigadier General Richard Matthews - seized the opportunity to mount another offensive at the start of 1783. Their aim was to capture Bednore (now Nagara), where a store of Mysorean treasure was believed to be held.

Surrender at Bednore

Matthews enjoyed great initial success. In January, Bednore was taken by an intrepid mountain assault. This was followed in March by the capture of the important trading port of Mangalore (now Mangaluru). However, the campaign provoked Tipu Sultan’s return, and the British became besieged in both towns.

Much of the 100th Foot - including our soldier - formed part of the garrison at Bednore that surrendered on 28 April. The British force at Mangalore held out for much of the year, before also being driven to capitulate.

Despite these defeats, the operation had not been in vain. It had forced Tipu to withdraw the bulk of his forces from the Carnatic, achieving Britain’s primary military objective.

Prisoner of war

This news would have been little comfort to our soldier and his comrades, who were taken prisoner at Bednore and forced to endure a terrible ordeal in captivity. For a year, they were kept in irons and marched about the country. The threat of execution, or of death from hunger or disease, was ever present.

At one stage, the men were told they were going to be put to death. They were taken to a grove of trees where many local people had been strung up. But, fortunately for them, the threat was never carried out.

An enthralling experience

Despite the trials and tribulations of his service, our soldier was clearly enthralled by the things he saw. His account is filled with his impressions of the lands in which he travelled. He assiduously recorded the exotic animals, vegetation and landscapes that he encountered, and paid special attention to the appearance and customs of local people.

Although his remarks are simple and unreflective, his journal nonetheless provides a striking example of the impact that foreign service could make upon the mind of a soldier of this era.

Perhaps more importantly, the journal is a rare and precious example of an account of life on campaign in 18th-century India written by an ordinary soldier, which provides a window onto the many perils and hardships endured.

Shipwrecked

In March 1784, the Treaty of Mangalore brought an end to the war. Our soldier was released and allowed to return home. But his troubles were far from over.

Shortly after embarkation, the ship on which he was travelling - the 'Hinchenbrooke' - sank off the coast of Calcutta (now Kolkata) and he was fortunate to be rescued from the wreckage.

When he finally made it back to England in July 1786, he was greatly relieved to be discharged from military service.

The heavy casualties suffered by his unit during its time in India reveal just how remarkable our soldier's survival was. A total of 39 officers and 1,200 men died from enemy action and disease, a number far greater than the original contingent of 900.

An unknown soldier

Although the soldier's name is not known, we do have some tantalising clues as to his identity. The end of the journal bears what appears to be his signature. However, unlike the neat and legible handwriting he uses elsewhere, this inscription is very hard to decipher.

Moreover, while records relating to the 100th Foot in this period are scarce, a list of the soldiers who survived the Siege of Bednore appears in a contemporary publication entitled ‘An authentic narrative of the treatment of the English who were taken prisoners on the reduction of Bednore’ (1785).

Our soldier’s name must be among those listed. However, none of them bear any resemblance to the signature in the journal. And so, frustratingly, his identity remains a mystery.