Monday, November 19, 2018

The Worli Fort


The tongue of land that juts into the sea off Worli is probably best known today for the fine dining establishment it harbours and the old fishing village of the indigenous Kolis – which is a beautiful, inimitable instance of the contradictions that define Bombay. However, delve deeper into this miniscule peninsula and at its tip, you would find the ruins of the once magnificent Worli Fort.

Source: Wikipedia Commons
That may have been a touch dramatic, for the Fort is neither in ruins nor, truthfully, can it lay claims to any magnificence. In fact, the inconsequentiality of the Worli Fort is best demonstrated by the fact that we do not even seem to remember who built it. While most reports suggest that it was constructed by the British around 1675, some sources credit the Portuguese as having built it nearly a century earlier[1]. As rational beings confronted by conflicting accounts on the internet, we have but one choice. Trust Wikipedia.

The British (as per trusty Wikipedia) supposedly built the Fort as a strategic outpost to keep an eye on ‘enemy ships and pirates’. The enemy ships would have likely been the Portuguese, stationed a short distance away at the newly constructed Castella de Aguada. The reference to pirates, however, is intriguing. Did pirates roam the seas around Bombay in the late 17th and early 18th century? Haranguing merchant vessels and pillaging, plundering, pilfering with abandon? Evidently so; the tale of English pirates looting Aurangzeb’s treasure aboard the Ganj – i – Sawai is fascinating, if somewhat gruesome[2]. Yet, while European trade in the region unsurprisingly attracted European pirates, one Maratha “pirate” in particular caused a great deal of consternation to the British and Portuguese alike – Kanhoji Angre[3].

Kanhoji Angre was born in Angarwadi, Pune in 1669. His father had been in Shivaji’s service and Kanhoji followed the martial family tradition. He was initially appointed as a deputy to the Admiral of the Maratha naval forces by Rajaram (Shivaji’s younger son and successor) and later assumed that office himself, reportedly before the end of the 17th century.[4] Throughout this period, Kanhoji repeatedly harassed European vessels as well as the ships of the Siddis (the Mughal vassals in the region) in a bid to establish Maratha sovereignty over these waters. It would appear that Kanhoji was aware of the greater technological prowess of the European ships and astutely limited his assaults to speedy skirmishes, in an aquatic adaptation of Shivaji’s guerrilla warfare tactic, to gain the upper hand in these exchanges[5]. He had also instituted the system of issuing passes (known as dastak) to ships, and would attack and seize those that did not purchase protection. The East India Company, in particular, was largely unsuccessful in dealing with these assaults, and in 1713, entered into a peace accord with Kanhoji to bring an end to these attacks[6].

This was also a time of upheaval within the Maratha confederacy, with Kanhoji being an important actor. Upon Rajaram’s death in 1700, his widow, Tarabai Bhosale, had proclaimed her infant son as the rightful heir to the throne (and had assumed the role of regent herself). However, after Aurangzeb’s death (in 1707), Shahuji, Shivaji’s grandson, who had been imprisoned by the Mughals since 1689, was finally released. His entry into the Maratha political arena obviously complicated matters. As the direct male heir to Shivaji, he wasted no time in declaring for the throne. The dispute over the rightful successor to the title of ‘Chhatrapati’ split the Maratha kingdom down the middle.
Initially, Kanhoji sided with Tarabai and was one of her most important allies. Around 1713, he had defeated an army sent by Shahuji and may have marched directly against Shahuji himself. However, Shahuji’s Peshwa, Balaji Viswanath (father to the famous Bajirao), convinced Kanhoji to ally with Shahuji with promises of titles, land and prestige. Kanhoji was swayed and it turned out to be a wise, fortuitous decision as Shahuji’s claim prevailed. The support of the Chhatrapati proved crucial in the future campaigns launched by Kanhoji, especially in his engagement with the combined forces of the British and the Portuguese in the Battle at Kulaba in 1721.

Kolaba Fort
Source: Wikipedia Commons
Until his death in 1729 or thereabouts (there exist conflicting reports on the exact date[7]), Kanhoji remained undefeated and unconquered, on land and sea. As proof of how perspectives ineluctably infuse historical facts, Kanhoji has been labelled a ‘pirate’ by some, a legendary Maratha warrior by others. The idea of ‘piracy’ itself has been debunked[8], and Kanhoji cannot be compared to a Blackbeard or a Red Rackham. It would be equally misplaced, though, certainly tempting, to fete Kanhoji as a proto-freedom fighter railing against the British. He was neither but that does not, in any way, diminish the allure of his legacy.



[3] I was unable to find any direct source to suggest some link between the Worli Fort and Kanhoji. However, it is entirely plausible that a long forgotten battle did take place when the might of the British army at Worli Fort clashed with the guile of Kanhoji’s naval forces. In any event, this was as good a segue into Kanhoji’s story as I could imagine.
[6] This inability to deal with sea-faring attackers appears to have plagued the Company well into the next century, as demonstrated in the historical treatise Thugs of Hindostan. One wonders if Napoleon was really all that he is made out to be; after all, he lost to the people who couldn’t handle a 300 year old curmudgeonly school principal – turned – warrior – turned pirate.

Tuesday, October 2, 2018

The Dowry of Bombay


It is something of an oxymoron to imagine that a king, a veritable emperor, would be forced to marry for money, and yet, that is precisely the fate that befell Charles II of England. Charles II had not had a very happy life – at least, not by monarchical standards. His father had been deposed and then beheaded, at the end of an English Civil War (in 1649) which had led to Oliver Cromwell[1] declaring England to be a republic. Notwithstanding his love for a good beheading, it is safe to assume that Oliver did not fancy the royalty.

While parliamentary rule prevailed in the England, Charles II had to maintain his head on his shoulders by seeking refuge in various European courts. Upon Oliver Cromwell’s death in 1658, the parliamentary republic crumbled (ironically, on account of his son succeeding him – not the best advert for a republic). In 1660, Charles II returned to the England and monarchy was restored. As a blue- blooded royal, Charles II was unsurprisingly keen to order a few beheadings himself. Determinedly, he did not let the small matter of Oliver Cromwell already having died, stand in the way of his plans. Oliver Cromwell’s corpse was exhumed, hung, beheaded and the severed head placed on a spike above Westminster Hall. It is hard to imagine that this decorative motif enhanced the London skyline, but the monarch’s desire probably trumped the architect’s.

Unfortunately, by the time Charles II reclaimed the throne, he was incredibly broke and not unlike the parents of many Indian men, he decided to earn a fortune through marriage. The Portuguese princess, Catherine of Braganza, was identified as the most suitable combination of bride and bank, and negotiations were initiated to draft a marriage treaty. The Portuguese were at war with the Spanish[2] and conflicting with the Dutch, so alliance with England was an attractive proposition.

The marriage treaty (image below) was sealed in 1661 with the Portuguese offering: 2 million Portuguese Crowns, the right of English merchants to trade in Portugal and the Portuguese empire, and the ports of Tangier and Bombay[3]. In return, the English composed a poem, an extract of which is below[4]:

England and Portugal are one in Fame
There is no difference ‘twixt ‘em but in Name,
Lisbon is London Tagus Thames, and then,
The Portugues are become Englishmen
The English, Portugues, both meet in hearts,
Thus Providence unites remotest parts

It would not be an exaggeration to say that this was not a fair deal. The marriage took place the next year in England.

Source: Royal Museums Greenwich
Unfortunately for the English, the negotiating party that finalized the marriage treaty had skipped Geography 101 and Contract 101 in college. For one thing, they believed that Bombay was ‘within a very little distance’ from Brazil[5]. A cursory glance at a map of the world created by Nicolaes Visscher in 1658 (image below), shows just how deluded it was for anyone to believe that Bombay and Brazil were neighboring lands. It is no wonder that Oliver Cromwell was so exasperated with the royalty and peerage.

Source: Wikipedia Commons
More damagingly though, the English failed to realize that the treaty was not drafted to their advantage. The clause of the treaty that conferred English sovereignty over Bombay was as follows: “…the King of Portugal with the assent and advice of his Council gives, transfers, and by these presents grants and confirms unto the King of Great Britain, his heirs and successors for ever, the Port and Island of Bombay in the East Indies…[6] The use of the singular was critical.  

The Bombay of 1660s was worlds apart from what it is today. For one thing, the construction of the Bandra Worli Sea Link had only just begun. The Bombay of then was quite literally fragments of lands with connecting swamps, that would be swallowed by the sea at high tide. The seven original rocky islands that today comprise South Bombay were: Bombay (the largest central landmass that today includes the Fort area and Girgaum), Colaba, Old Woman’s Island (said to be a British corruption of its earlier name, Al Omani’s Island[7]), Mazgaon, Parel, Mahim, Worli[8]. Separated from these, was the larger landmass of Salsette (with Bandra at its southern tip).

Source: Wikipedia Commons
When the English set sail in 1662 to assume ownership of these lands, they were blithely unaware of any of this. Much to their chagrin and surprise, they discovered that the Portuguese were not really in the mood to co-operate. In Europe, the canniness of the Portuguese had already come to the fore when they substituted the dowry of promised gold with sacks of sugar and spice[9]. The English fleet met similar reception when it reached Bombay and was informed by the Portuguese that the marriage treaty did not include the dependencies of Bombay (the other islands around the central Bombay island) since it referred to the singular ‘Island of Bombay’. This was unacceptable to the British; dominion over the solitary island of Bombay in the middle of (literally) a sea of Portuguese territories was untenable. However, the terms of the treaty were quite clear. To quote Samuel Pepys[10], the English belatedly realized that they had been ‘choused’[11].

As negotiations continued, the English fleet, having been rebuffed at Bombay, sought refuge in Anjediva (an island off Goa). Reportedly, nearly 300 lives were lost to the 'deadly climate' while they waited for the deadlock to be resolved. It seems that the Portuguese Viceroy tried his best to cling on to even the single island of Bombay and wrote the following words to his King: “…India will be lost the same day in which the English nation is settled in Bombay.[12] Prophetic words indeed, but ultimately, to no avail. The Portuguese King decided to honor the treaty and in January, 1665, the English, at last, acquired possession of the Island of Bombay and ineluctably changed the history of our country.



[1] Incidentally, Oliver Cromwell was related (via a few hops, skips and jumps) to the more famous Cromwell, Thomas – who was Prime Minister to Henry VIII and the reason why Ms. Hilary Mantel has won two Booker Awards.
[2] In 1580, Spain had taken advantage of a succession war and subsumed Portugal to form the Iberian Union. However, by 1640, the Portuguese had become restless and yearned to re-establish their rule. Eventually, they succeeded in ousting the Spanish from Portugal when  
[4] Aqua Triumphalis (1662), John Tatham (available at: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A63171.0001.001/1:7.2?rgn=div2;view=fulltext)
[5] Bombay in the Making (1661 – 1726), Phiroze B. M. Malabari
[6] Ibid
[7] The name could be attributed to the fact that the deep – sea Koli fishermen of the island were known as ‘Al Omanis’; ‘Oman’ being the Persian name for the Arabian Sea. (The Rise of Bombay: A Retrospect, Stephen Meredyth Edwardes)
[8] See: City of Gold: The Biography of Bombay, Gillian Tindall
[10] Sameul Pepys’ diary is an authoritative source of events that transpired during this period and is available online. This particular entry (dated May 15, 1663) can be accessed at: https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1663/05/
[11] Meaning to cheat or trick. This has now been inducted into my list of Ten Words I Love (which is topped by hullabaloo).
[12] Bombay in the Making (1661 – 1726), Phiroze B. M. Malabari

Thursday, September 13, 2018

Forts of Bombay: Castella de Aguada - Part II

Bandra ('Bandora' to the Portuguese and 'Vandre' in Marathi) is located on the western tip of Salsette island, a name derivative of 'Shashasti' or the island of sixty - six villages. While Bandra, and in fact, most of Salsette, is now considered an inalienable part of the city of Bombay (except by people residing south of Haji Ali), things were slightly different in the 1660s. Suffice to say that the famed dowry of Bombay promised by the Portuguese to Charles II in 1661, did not turn out to be quite what the English expected. Ultimately, Salsette, and consequently, Bandra Fort, was retained by the Portuguese but that was soon to change.

One cannot live in Bombay and feign unfamiliarity with the name or countenance (specifically, side profile) of Chhatrapati Shivaji. He is ubiquitous. Omnipresent. Deified, even. Shivaji rose to prominence in 1659 when he took control of Bijapur after disposing of Afzal Khan by embracing him with steel claws attached to his fingers.[1] To be fair, that alone is probably reason enough to have the railway station and the airport named after him. However, he did not stop there and was remarkably successful in harrying the Mughals throughout his life. By the time of his death in 1680 he had established the core of the Maratha kingdom on the western coast (image below).
 
Source: Wikipedia Commons
Contrary to what may be popular perception, Shivaji did not represent the zenith of the Maratha empire. It was in the decades following his death that the Marathas capitalised on the disintegration of the Mughal empire and captured large swathes of the country. While most of the Maratha rulers who expanded Shivaji's fledgling empire seem to have lost their way in the annals of history, we must thank Mr. Bhansali for making one name more recognizable than others - Peshwa Baji Rao.

Though the Peshwa was notionally the Prime Minister to Chhatrapati Shahu (Shivaji's grandson), he was, in fact, the de facto ruler and wielded great authority. During the first half of the 18th century, Baji Rao exponentially increased Maratha ruled territory and even had the temerity to march (albeit, unsuccessfully) on the Mughal throne in Delhi.[2] 

It was during his reign that the Marathas attacked the Portuguese territories of Bassein (Vashi) and Salsette. The Maratha onslaught was led by Chimaji Appa (image below), the younger brother of Baji Rao. While the Portuguese (supported to some extent by the British) fended the Marathas off for a while, they soon lost control of Salsette (and with it, Bandra Fort) to the Marathas in 1739.
  
Source: Marathi Box Office
This was a very critical time for our protagonist, the Bandra Fort. There exist a number of reports (of which I have been unable to locate an academic source) which state that the Fort was "partially demolished" by the retreating British - Portuguese forces in early 1739, to scupper any possibility of the Marathas using it as an offensive base in the future. However, one source suggests that the plans to demolish the Fort were stymied by the Portuguese Jesuits of Bandra, and that no damage was in fact, done to the Fort.[3]

Having captured Salsette, it is somewhat surprising that the Marathas did not press their advantage home to acquire the British - controlled Bombay islands. Perhaps the invasion of Delhi by Nadir Shah (the original purloin-er of Kohinoor) in 1739, gave them pause.[4] It could also have been diplomacy and the attraction of trading with the British, that stayed their hand.[5] In any event, an uneasy peace prevailed in the region.

By 1760, the Marathas were the single largest kingdom in the land (image below - Maratha territories in yellow) and could have founded an empire for generations. However, defeat to the Afghans in the third battle of Panipat in 1761, dealt a crushing blow to the Marathas and slowly changed the power dynamics in Bombay as well. The British were now waiting for an opportunity to expand out of the Bombay islands.  
Source: Wikipedia Commons
Finally, the opportunity presented itself in the form of a Peshwa succession dispute which led to the First Anglo - Maratha War (1774 - 1782). The capture of Salsette was the first act of the war, which turned control of the Bandra Fort over to the British. The war went on intermittently for several years and was finally concluded in 1782 (by way of the Treaty of Salbai). While this war is generally considered to have created something of an impasse, it did lead to the British gaining control over Salsette. 

There would be two more Anglo - Maratha wars which would lead to the establishment of the British Raj in India until August 15, 1947, when the Indian flag unfurled on the ramparts of the Fort would signal the advent of the fourth sovereign to claim dominion on Castella de Aguada.[6]





[1] A History of India Vol. II, Percival Spear
[2] Advance Study in the History of Modern India (Volume-1: 1707-1803), G.S.Chhabra
[3] The East India Company and the Portuguese loss of the Província do Norte, Pedro Nobre (Available at: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S1413-77042015000100007&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en#aff2)
[4] Advance Study in the History of Modern India (Volume-1: 1707-1803), G.S.Chhabra
[5] Gazetteers of the Bombay Presidency, Thana District (Volume XIII, Part II) (Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20090704003608/http:/www.maharashtra.gov.in:80/pdf/gazeetter_reprint/Thane-II/histroy_marathas.html#1)
[6] I have no idea whether the Indian flag was, indeed, unfurled over Bandra Fort on August 15, 1947 but to be completely honest, it seemed like the best way I could end this post and I couldn’t care less if it were true.

Sunday, August 26, 2018

Forts of Bombay: Castella de Aguada - Part I

(This is, hopefully, the start of a series of posts exploring the history of some of the colonial era forts which pepper Bombay. Perhaps owing to the lack of obvious grandeur when compared to the fortifications built by the Delhi Sultanate, Mughals, Rajputs, etc. across North India, the functional colonial forts of Bombay have been sadly neglected and are rarely afforded any status as historic sites. Yet, they played an integral part in the history of colonial Bombay and are well worth a visit.

Since I do not expect anyone other than my friends and family to read these posts, that too upon coercion, I do not need to clarify that I am not a historian by training. Factual inaccuracies, if any, may be attributed to poor research skills and faith on the internet.) 

A mention of the name Castella de Aguada is probably evocative of the famous (and incidentally, older) Fort Aguada in Goa, overlooking Sinquerim beach. That is not surprising since, unlike its namesake, Fort Aguada (built in 1612) is a fairly popular tourist attraction and a much larger, well - preserved structure. Castella de Aguada is however, mostly in ruins and known popularly as Bandra Fort. Interestingly, both these forts owe their names to the presence of a freshwater spring close to the sea shore; 'aguada' in Portuguese meaning 'watering place', referring to the availability of potable water.

While Bandra Fort is not in short supply of visitors, owing to the gorgeous views its ramparts provide of the seascape and the Bandra - Worli Sea Link, there is little there, if any, in the way of information explaining the history of the place.

Built in 1640, at a time when the Portuguese were seeking to consolidate their control in the region, the Bandra Fort assumed greater strategic importance following the famous grant by dowry of the seven islands of Bombay by the Portuguese to Charles II, when he married Catherine of Braganza in 1661. However, before delving into the history of the Fort in the mid - 17th century, let us turn our attention to how the Portuguese came to occupy these islands, almost a century earlier.

The discovery of India by Vasco da Gama (and by extension, the western world) in 1498 is part of folklore. (I say 'discovery', for truly, did the existence of a civilization really matter until it was discovered and subsequently 'enlightened', by the Europeans? One could have asked the Aztecs but the enlightenment proffered by the Spanish was quite hard on them.) Within a remarkably short time of Vasco da Gama's landing in Calicut (Kozhikode, in modern day Kerala), the Portuguese steadily crept up the coast to conquer Goa in 1510. Soon they had reached the island fragments and wetlands, that today comprise Bombay.

Since the late 14th century, the islands of Bombay had been the domain of the Gujarat Sultanate, a breakaway of the Tughlaqs. While the arrival of the Portuguese in these parts led to  a number of skirmishes with the Gujarat military, the Portuguese threat was overshadowed by the massive Mughal army, led by Humayun, that had marched on Gujarat in 1532. Over the next few years, almost all of Gujarat had been captured by Humayun, when he was abruptly forced to re-direct his attentions to quell an uprising in the eastern fringes of the Mughal empire. A revolt was being led there by Sher Shah Suri, the slayer of tigers, the layer of arterial highways that endure till today (I refer, of course, to Grand Trunk Road) and the man who would go on to defeat the mighty Mughal army of Humayun and become Emperor.

But let us not get ahead of ourselves. In the early 1530s, the Mughal army was still a force to reckon with and had left Bahadur Shah (the Gujarat Sultan) reeling in its wake. Forced into a corner and possibly to avoid military conflict on two fronts, Bahadur Shah had signed the Treaty of Bassein (Vasai) in 1534 handing control of Bombay (and its surrounding areas) to the Portuguese in a bid for peace and Portuguese support to repel the Mughal onslaught. However, once Humayun turned east, Bahadur Shah regained his lost kingdom in 1536 and started re-considering the liberties he had granted to the Portuguese. What follows is a fascinating testament to the manner in which history is recorded and reliance that can be placed on it.

By all accounts, Bahadur Shah died in 1537. However, there are said to exist eight different versions of this event, describing how he died while meeting the Portuguese viceroy 1. While the Portuguese and the indigenous narratives unsurprisingly tend to apportion blame and glory as per convenience, a consistent thread is the existence of mutual distrust and stratagems that were played out by each, to upend the other. In any event, whether by treachery or through his own undoing, Bahadur Shah found a watery grave and so in earnest, began the Portuguese occupation of Bombay.

     


1 History of Gujarat, James M. Campbell, Appendix 1 (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/54652/54652-h/54652-h.htm)