History of Aurangzib, Based on Original Sources v4.c64.s10: § 14. The Maratha navy and wars with the Siddis, 1680—82.
History of Aurangzib, Based on Original Sources v4.c64.s10
- Language
- English
§ 14. The Maratha navy and wars with the Siddis, 1680—82.
v4.c64.s10.1
Shivaji had seized and fortified the island of Khanderi in 1679 and beaten off the attempts of the allied English and Siddi fleets to wrest it from him. Early next year (9th January 1680), the Siddi had landed men on the neighbouring rock of Underi and mounted heavy artillery on it, which neutralized the Maratha occupation of Khanderi. The English then broke off their alliance with the Siddi and made terms with Shivaji by promising neutrality.
v4.c64.s10.2
But there could be no amity between the English and Shambhuji, because the Siddi fleet, as well as occasional Mughal squadrons from Surat, used to pass the stormy monsoon months (May to October)¹ in the safe shelter of Bombay harbour every year, and the Siddis settled in the Mazagaon quarter of the island, from which they frequently ravaged the Kurlas or rich low-lying tracts of Maratha territory on the mainland east of Bombay. The Siddis also used to bring into Bombay harbour their Maratha prize-vessels and the captives seized by them for ransom in these villages, and the Bombay Council were not strong enough to always prevent such outrages on their neutrality.¹ Shambhuji by turns threatened the English and offered them his alliance if they would only exclude the Siddis from their harbour; but the President and Council of Surat, "more afraid of the Mughal's displeasure than Shambhuji's, ordered the admittance of the Siddi fleet." (Orme, 112.) Their policy is clearly stated in the instructions to Bombay on 3rd Jan. 1684: "You must use all contrivances to keep fair with them; as we would by no means quarrel with Shambhuji Rajah, so upon no account can we with prudence fall out with the Siddi at present, it being a very unfit time."
v4.c64.s10.3
As they advised the Bombay factory: "The king (i.e., Aurangzib) being so near us, both you and we must . . . prudently contrive to act the best for our Masters' interests, keeping fair with all. . . .¹ We much desire to keep fair with Shambhuji Rajah, and would not afford him the least seeming face of displeasure,¹ so far as in us lies; but such is our necessities, as we have no reason to think him our friend because of the Siddis' being continually supplied by our island; and yet he continues fair with us, not out of any respect to us, but of kindness to himself, reaping a great benefit from our trading to the *Kurlas*, which brings into him a great deal of money yearly." Therefore Shambhuji did not declare war against the English. [24 April, 1682; also Surat Consultation of 26 April.]
v4.c64.s10.4
The strength of the Maratha fleet off Bombay in Nov. 1680 is given as 60 ships (both *ghurabs* and *gallivats*), carrying 5,000 soldiers on board. But in May 1682 we read of 85 *gallivats* lying in the rivers opposite Bombay, with about 5,000 soldiers on board,—his total naval strength being 120 *gallivats* and 15 *ghurabs*. Shambhuji's admirals were, besides Daulat Khan, (*i*) the son of Mai Nayak (a Bhandari of Rajapur), (*ii*) Siddi Sambole's son, and (*iii*) Siddi Misri, the nephew and son-in-law of Siddi Sambole. The last-named Siddi, a very gallant fighter, joined Shambhuji in May 1682 and died of wounds received in battle on 5th October next.
v4.c64.s10.5
The Maratha vessels being smaller in size and armament* than the Siddi's, lay sheltered up the Nagothna creek and in Khanderi harbour during the monsoons, without venturing on pitched battles. But occasional skirmishes took place between the rival *gallivats* (*jalbas*) in which the Siddis had the advantage, and these seas were often closed to the Maratha trading vessels. An attempt by 200
v4.c64.s10.6
∗ "They could not resist the artillery of the Siddis, but sailed much better and could anchor in much shallower water." (Orme, 98.)
v4.c64.s10.7
Marathas to surprise Underi in the dark night of 1st August 1680 totally failed, the Siddis next day bringing to Bombay 80 severed heads of the defeated assailants. A year afterwards the attempt was repeated on a vaster scale but with no better success. About the middle of August 1681, Shambhuji's flotilla of 22 gallivats tried to land 4,000 men on the island of Underi, but were beaten off by the Siddi fleet after a four hours' fight.
v4.c64.s10.8
"The Siddi's gallivats at Bombay, elated with this success, sailed over to the Kurlas, and brought away some of the principal inhabitants, who had purchased their protection by an annual tribute, equal to what they paid to the Government of Raigarh; and though several of them, as well as the Siddis, were Muhammadans, they were carried to Underi and beaten unmercifully, until they deputed one to fetch a ransom of Rs. 18,000." [Orme, 107.]
v4.c64.s10.9
On 7th December, 1681, the Siddis burnt the town of Apta, on the Patalganga, ten miles south of Panvel. (They had first sacked it in 1673.) "A few days afterwards their whole fleet went down to Chaul and . . . . ravaged a large tract of the adjacent country. On this provocation Shambhuji, accompanied by Sultan Akbar, came down from Raigarh, with 20,000 men and a vast train of cannon, to Danda, [18 Dec.] . . . . and from the hill opposite to Janjira" bombarded that island incessantly for 30 days, until all the fortifications were levelled to the ground. But the garrison under Siddi Carry (? Karim) clung to a rocky citadel in the centre of the island.* The success of the Marathas was illusory, because they did not command the sea and their vessels durst not transport their army across the bare half mile's breadth of the channel to the island in the teeth of Siddi Qasim's fleet stationed there.
v4.c64.s10.10
Shambhuji now set 50,000 men to work to fill up the channel, 800 yards broad and 30 yards deep, with stones (or "with timber and bags of cotton," according to a Bombay letter) and thus form a causeway for his storming parties. But the Mughal invasion of N. Konkan and capture of Kalian (c. 30 Jan.) forced him to hasten back to Raigarh, leaving only 10,000 men to continue the siege, which was done very slackly in his absence. Large Maratha forces had to be posted elsewhere to meet the three main Mughal armies, as we have already seen.
v4.c64.s10.11
∗ Orme, 109, corrected from Bombay to Surat 3 Jan. and 19 Jan. 1682, the last of which adds: "Shambhuji incessantly keeps firing against Danda Rajpuri (i.e., Janjira island), and it is thought by many that Siddi Carry will be forced to quit it, for the number of shot and grenado shells that are sent to the island every day does his people much mischief and there is security in no part, and Shambhuji is resolved not to raise the siege so long as he hath a rag to his back."
v4.c64.s10.12
In July 1682, the Marathas getting some boats together delivered an assault on Janjira, but they could gain no footing on the storm-beaten rocky coast and had to retire with heavy loss. "Shambhuji Rajah . . . ordered Dad Prabhu, with several of his eminent commanders to choose out 4,000 stout resolute soldiers for that purpose and the better to encourage them to go boldly on this design, he gave them all gold and silver shackles (i.e., bangles, *kara*), but they say most part gold weighing half a seer each; but it seems they had ill-success, for not above 500 escaped, the rest being all killed by the Siddi and his men." (F.R. Surat 108, Karwar Occurrences, 30 July 1682.)
v4.c64.s10.13
In August the Siddis again raided the Kurlas, brought away the Maratha havladar of Ganuan (?) captive and cut off the noses of several inhabitants there besides a great many taken at Nagothna.
v4.c64.s10.14
On 4th October, Siddi Misri (in Maratha service) with 30 gallivats gave battle to Siddi Qasim's squadron of 16 vessels, crowded with his best men, off Kalgaon, 8 miles south of Kolaba Point. But he was defeated after a brief fight, other vessels fled away, and he was carried a prisoner mortally wounded, with seven of his vessels to Bombay. The other Maratha squadron of 80 gallivats under Daulat Khan, lay hiding in the Nagothna river, without venturing out to his assistance. [Orme 113 corrected from Bombay letter of 5 Oct.]
v4.c64.s10.15
Then Shambhuji played a dirty trick. He bribed an Arab admiral of Masqat to fall on the E. I. Co.'s ship *President* (Captain Hide), with two ships and four large ghurabs off Sangameshwar (16th January 1683.) But the English defended themselves gallantly and put the Arabs to flight with the loss of 700 men killed, 3 ships sunk and the other three "miserably shattered." The victors lost 11 killed and 35 wounded, chiefly by a fire caused by the explosion of an enemy ghurab close by. Shambhu disavowed all knowledge of the outrage and expressed sympathy for the English. (Surat to Co. 10th April 1683, F.R. Surat 91, &c.)
v4.c64.s10.16
§ 15. Shambhuji's war with the Portuguese, 1683.
v4.c64.s10.17
After his failure at Janjira, Shambhuji's anger had been swelling against the Christian Powers of the western sea-board. As we have seen, he tried alternate promises and threats on the English of Bombay, who used to let the Siddi fleet anchor in their harbour every monsoon, to the great loss of the Maratha coast districts and ocean trade, "which doth highly exasperate the Rajah against us." But the English merchants, under orders from their chief at Surat, followed the delicate and difficult policy of "keeping fair with all,"* though they also honestly tried to restrain the Siddi's excesses and to prevent him from abusing the neutrality of Bombay in an outrageous manner. The Maratha ministers, on their side, long hankered for an alliance with the English as the best counterpoise to the Mughal-Siddi fleet.
v4.c64.s10.18
Shambhu's wrath, therefore, fell on the Portuguese alone. They had given him provocation enough. Early in 1682, he had sent a subahdar with the intention of fortifying Anjidiv, an island just south of Karwar, as a naval base, to counteract the Siddi stronghold of Janjira. But the necessary troops were not sent, the opportunity was lost, and on 17th April four Portuguese ghurabs landed there 200 men who fortified the island under their own flag. To this mortification was added the
v4.c64.s10.19
* Surat to Sir John Child, 8th May, 1682 — "We are very sensible [that] the Siddi's wintering at Bombay will much prejudice the island, not only by a scarcity of provisions but by many other accidents which will unavoidably happen, and if the Rajah become our enemy it will be much worse. But we see not at present how it can be avoided, we having promised the [Mughal] governor here [to let the Siddi winter at Bombay.] Therefore, that the best may be made of it, let the Deputy Governor [of Bombay] send a letter to the Rajah to this effect 'That our consenting to the Siddi's wintering there was merely for the Rajah's sake, that we might save all his land within Underi Khanderi from being destroyed, which is our conditions with the Siddi and that upon his first touching of those places he shall that very hour be turned out and never receive any more benefit of the island'" (F R Surat, 90)
v4.c64.s10.20
Portuguese unfriendliness in December 1682, when they allowed the Mughal ships to pass under the Portuguese fort of Thana up the creek to Kalian, with provisions for the Mughal army under Ranmast Khan, then ravaging that district. In revenge, Shambhuji burnt several villages in the Portuguese territory of ‘the North.’
v4.c64.s10.21
Pissurlencar, after quoting from the Goa records, suggests (ii. 13) that the Viceroy allowed the Mughal army a free passage through the Portuguese province of Daman (“the North”) to the Maratha district of North Konkan and later permitted a Mughal provision-fleet from Surat to victual Ranmast Khan in Kalian by passing unimpeded up the Thana creek, which was commanded by Portuguese forts,—“with a view probably to avert any conflict with the Mughal power.” But, reading between the lines, one is inclined to believe that Aurangzib’s agents heavily bribed the Viceroy. (See the Viceroy’s letter of 12th April 1683, effusively reciting his acts of friendliness to the Mughals in their war with Shambhuji, ii. 21-23.)
v4.c64.s10.22
In provoking a war with Shambhuji by thus openly siding with Aurangzib, the Viceroy was backing the wrong horse, as Manucci pointed out to him: (“This war could not be of any benefit to the Portuguese, seeing that the Mughal would never be content to leave the Portuguese to themselves after he had destroyed Shambhuji," Storia, ii. 261.) The English at Surat were of the same opinion: "The Portuguese . . . . in stirring against the Rajah did it hastily; and such actions end commonly in repentance, shame and loss, or else in worse, despair and vexation." [Surat to Karwar, 22 Aug. 1684, Vol. 91.]
v4.c64.s10.23
On 5th April 1683, freed from all fear of the Mughals, who had entirely evacuated N. Konkan a fortnight earlier, Shambhuji launched his attack on the Portuguese.* With 1,000 horse and 2,000 foot he raided the open town of Tarapur and burnt it and all other towns from Daman to Basein. "The captain of Tarapur, a native of India, by name Manuel Alvares, retired to the so-called fortress, and made a palisade of palm-trees, from which he made various sallies against the enemy and killed many of their men, commonly reported to have been 700," [exaggeration.] A blacksmith and his son with two hatchets cut down every soldier who entered their door, and thus saved their property.
v4.c64.s10.24
At the beginning of May, Dom Francisco da Costa, the captain of Portuguese or Lower Chaul, bombarded and partly demolished Upper Chaul, which was a Maratha possession, in reprisal for the detention of a Portuguese priest in prison there. Shambhuji retaliated on 31st July, when his Peshwa, with 6,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry, laid siege to Chaul. Early in the morning of 8th August the Marathas made an assault on the city. The time was well-chosen; "the night watch had dispersed, and the men, weary from their vigil (the night having been very rainy), were resting and others were withdrawing to their houses. The enemy attacked the walls with many scaling ladders, which they easily set up, there being very few to oppose them. . . . But the alarm being sounded, religious and lay men flew to the walls, slew those who were already upon the walls and threw down the scaling ladders. The enemy suffered great loss, . . . . and in a short time were forced to abandon their attempt."
v4.c64.s10.25
∗ History of this war, in Portuguese Records, Noticias da India, vol. 1 pt. 2. Supplemented by F.R., Akbar's letters, Storia, Jedhe Shakavali (for dates) and Orme's Frag. The fullest account is in Pissurlencar's Portugueses e Maratas, ii., which gives the Portuguese text of the Noticias da India, the English version of which (preserved in the India Office) I have used As Pissurlencar points out (ii. 15) Manucci is often unreliable.
v4.c64.s10.26
On the very same day the Marathas also attempted to take the fortress of Morro [? Korlai], which is upon a mountain at the mouth of the bar of the city [of Chaul.] . . . . The enemy sent six spies from the side facing the land to scale the bastion of the fortress which looks in that direction as silently as possible, kill the sentinels, and having done so, to sound the two trumpets they had with them, and at the signal the rest of their army would come forward and take possession of the fortress. The spies scaled the wall of the bastion but were caught and being put to the torture confessed the purpose of their coming. The captain ordered the guns to be loaded . . . . . . Then he ordered the spies to blow their trumpets and give the signal for the attack, which being done, so great a squadron attacked the wall that the hill was covered with men. The guns were then discharged with such disastrous effect upon the enemy that they withdrew with the loss of more than 500 men."
v4.c64.s10.27
In the plain of Chaul outside the fort is a Capuchin convent and church of the Virgin, with a watch-tower in one corner of the enclosure. It was held by a small force of Portuguese and Indian soldiers for more than five months, though several times attacked by the Marathas, who would have entirely commanded the interior of the fort if they could have gained possession of the tower.
v4.c64.s10.28
On 17th August, Francisco de Tavora, Count of Alvor, the Viceroy of Goa, called out and armed all the monks of the city, as Shambhuji was reported to be approaching against it with a large army. Then, very unwisely, he determined on going out and invading Shambhuji's dominions. At midnight following the 29th, he assembled all the Indians of the island of Goa and ferried them across the river to the mainland of Savant-vadi, with a general licence to plunder and burn the villages of Shambhuji. This attempt to imitate the Maratha policy of mulkgiri was a failure, as "the spoils were not considerable."
v4.c64.s10.29
The Marathas gained some success in the Portuguese territory on the coast north of Bombay. We have recorded their sack of Tarapur in the preceding April. On 2nd September 50 of their men began to destroy the ripe crops at the village of Anzor, near Basein, but fled as soon as they saw the 25 European soldiers whom the captain of Fort Parsica had sent against them. The Portuguese in making a headlong pursuit fell into an ambush, then fled in disorderly panic and were all slain with the exception of six men, who kept together and retreated by presenting an armed front to the enemy.
v4.c64.s10.30
Both sides made active preparations during the closing months of the rainy season. In October the siege of Chaul was pressed very close, "Shambhuji's forces having taken possession of a hill close by the town on which they have raised four bulwarks and are bringing great guns to plant on it." (Bombay to Surat, 8th Oct. 1683, F.R. Surat, 109.) But though for some months longer, "Chaul lay in a desperate condition," the Marathas failed to take it.
v4.c64.s10.31
§ 16. Portuguese attack on Phonda and disastrous retreat.
v4.c64.s10.32
The Viceroy of Goa planned to make a diversion by laying siege to Phonda,* though his forces were utterly inadequate for an offensive campaign, in number, valour, and material resources. On 17th October he set out from the town with 800 white troops and 8,000 Kanarese, and five pieces of heavy artillery, disembarked at Durbata and arrived (on the 22nd) in the vicinity of Phonda without meeting with any opposition. Mounting his artillery upon a hill a short distance from the fort, he opened fire immediately. "Our guns for the first few days were occupied in dismounting the only three guns which the enemy had mounted, (one of which was 40 calibre), and also in breaking a huge beam which supported a large machine like a watch-tower, which after many shots and much trouble was broken . . . After three days' firing the [enemy] artillery was dismounted, and the [Portuguese] guns were then placed at the mouth of a street near the fortress, from whence they began to batter the walls . . . A breach was made in the barbican after long battering. Then the Viceroy sent three companies of Portuguese soldiers with some Kanarese to carry a fascine and raise a palisade at the mouth of the breach, and that this might be accomplished with less loss, the General Dom Rodrigo da Costa attacked the enemy upon the other side of the fortress.'' But the feint failed, and the Portuguese had to retreat with 8 dead and some 27 wounded. ''The Viceroy was sunk in deep depression . . . . . But he ordered the battery to continue and a breach was made in the very strong interior wall.''
v4.c64.s10.33
∗ Phonda, 10 miles s s e. of Goa town and now included in Portuguese territory. It must not be confounded with another Phonda in the extreme south of the Ratnagiri district. The Viceroy took ship at S. Lorenzo, 5½ m. due south of Goa and disembarked at Durbata on the right bank of the Rachol river, 6 m. s e. of S. Lorenzo and 3 m. s w. of Phonda. (Ind. At 41 S.W) Manucci (ii. 263) tells the story that a spy of Shambhuji lured the Viceroy into attacking Phonda by falsely informing him that the fort contained a vast treasure!
v4.c64.s10.34
The 30th of October had been fixed for scaling the breach of the inner wall. But that very day a relieving force under Shambhuji was sighted,—at first 800 cavalry and a large body of infantry. The Portuguese army was completely outflanked and lost heart, ''none could resolve to prevent them'' (i.e., the Marathas.) The Viceroy held a council of war which voted with only one or two dissentients for raising the siege.
v4.c64.s10.35
On the 31st the besiegers began to retreat. The garrison sallied forth in a body and tried to seize the guns, but were beaten off. The retirement was bravely and skilfully conducted by the Viceroy in person; all the field pieces and ammunition were brought away, and the Portuguese had only a small skirmish which cost about 100 men on each side. Next day, the 1st of November, they reached Durbatà, where they were to embark for return to Goa.
v4.c64.s10.36
On the retreat of the besiegers, Shambhuji razed the fortifications of Phonda to the ground, saying that his father had taken several months in capturing it and had not been able to damage it in that long period so much as the Portuguese had done in ten days! By his order another fort was built near the place. (F.R. Surat, 109, Karwar to Surat, 26 Nov.) I suspect that the real reason was the extensive injury done to the walls by the Portuguese fire, which made it hardly worth while to repair the old fort.
v4.c64.s10.37
The retreat from Durbata was disastrous for the Portuguese. A hill dominated the place of embarkation, and the Viceroy sent three companies of white and one company of native infantry to fortify the hill-top with wooden *chevaux de frise* and hold it at all costs in order to ensure a safe retreat. But the Maratha foot posted behind the hill, by a pretended flight, lured the holders of the hill to descend from it and pursue them in the open. The Viceroy, seeing the danger, himself hastened to occupy this supremely important position, but only 16 out of his 60 horsemen followed him, the rest hanging back in fear.
v4.c64.s10.38
"When he reached the summit of the hill the enemy's cavalry was already attacking our infantry, which was in such disorder that all the three companies fired at once. Several of the enemy were killed, but the rest . . . reforming and bending to the necks of their horses and covering themselves with shields, attacked our infantry with great determination. The Kanarese [i.e., the native troops of Goa] . . . threw down their muskets and fled. Finally, nearly all the Portuguese did the same, but in vain, for the blacks rode over them, trampling most of our men under their horses' hoofs; though some who were present in the conflict declare that it was our cavalry that first trampled them."
v4.c64.s10.39
"That afternoon our men were for a long time exposed to the knives, muskets and blunderbusses of the enemy . . . All our men fled in utter disorder, each one trying to save himself. . . . Of the Portuguese infantry nearly a whole company of seamen were killed, the dead and wounded amounting to two hundred. The Viceroy twice escaped death in this skirmish.
v4.c64.s10.40
"Those [Portuguese soldiers] who were on the low ground near the shore ... rushed into the water; one took to swimming and others embarked with the water up to their necks."
v4.c64.s10.41
The Maratha force (800 horse and 2,000 foot) retreated after the skirmish. The Portuguese crossed over with their artillery in the course of that afternoon and the following day, and returned to Goa. Great grief was caused in that city by the fruitless loss of so many lives. The Viceroy shut himself up for four days in the House of the Jesuits and would see no one.