Historic Alleys

And his role in the Anglo Scottish Union 1705-07

Many a year ago, in 1705 to be precise, Scotland joined the British union, after an acrimonious period of four or five years, to create Great Britain. What if I told you that the incident which hastened it and that one of the persons who was key to the incident was a person of Malabar origin? Well, it is so and you can now read that story, a story that has been under wraps for ages. In fact the whole story went out of circulation after the turn of the 18th century. Why such an important event never got more attention is queer, though a few books have covered the subject in passing and one somewhat rare to find book covers much of the details. But the event and the write-ups focused on the Englishmen involved and the Scotsmen who precipitated the issue, but not really on the person who was the scapegoat. I will cover his story not because he was innocent, but because I felt the poor man was set up and coerced into doing what he did. Then again, it could be so that he was not wrong after all. So we will get deeper into this story, but first a few paragraphs detailing the background and the times.

For that, we will hover around Scotland and then zoom down to Panama. Later we will move quickly to the Malabar Coast line and then head back to Scotland. We will learn about the Darien scheme, learn a little bit more about some piratical adventures, the financial misfortunes of the Scots, the opportunistic maneuvering of the EIC and debacle at Firth of Forth and Leith sands. In passing we will also learn a little of the part played by the small port town of Kayamkulam or Caliquilon and the EIC factory at Calicut in this misadventure. So let us quickly head to those port towns and the waters. Wear your oilskins, lest you get drenched, listen carefully, but don’t get too close to the action, and stay well away from the danger.

If you recall my previous article, Capn Kidd was around in Calicut during 1698. By May 1701 he had been tried and hanged and pirates (as defined by the EIC) had a bad name in press and with the public. This story is set close to that period and around 1703 again around the same Malabar coastline. But before we set the heading to Malabar, we will go to Scotland.

Around 1690, Scotland, still a kingdom, desired to enter the realm of profitable trade like their powerful British neighbors. Though under the British crown, Scotland had it own parliament and treasury. But the coffers were empty; the harvest had proved a disaster. What else to do than focus on trade? The wise or the not so wise, decided that colonization was perhaps a quicker scheme. Soon a colony was planned in New Caledonia or the Isthmus of Panama. The money required for this venture , as high as a quarter of the Scottish monetary worth was advanced by a number of wealthy nobles (originally a number of anti British countries and private citizens subscribed to the capital, but due to British pressure they dropped out leaving only Scottish capitalists). The company that oversaw all this was called the Darien Company. By 1698 the first ships moved to Panama for the colony set up, but it soon turned out to be a disaster and in 8 months the colony was abandoned. Of the 1200 that left Scotland, only 300 returned with heads hanging low. Pride as you will see runs high in Scotland and the situation as you saw was not very nice. A second expedition also failed and the settlers further lost the war to the Spaniards. Much more intrigues took place, but we are not talking about the misfortunes of the Darien Company here. One of the men who took leadership position in this colonization effort was a Thomas Drummond and his activities were later defined as far from satisfactory. The money was gone, the lords were unhappy, Scotland was in the doldrums and something had to be done quickly to recoup the lost capital. The publicly funded company lost more than £232,000, crippling and demoralizing Scotland. English propaganda depicted the fiasco as proof that the Scots were useless and unfit for sovereignty and the Darien plan soon picked up a new name, the Darien fiasco. The still wise racked their brains and decided, what else, but head out to Malabar and plunder or profit in the name of conventional trade?

Two ships, the Speedy Return and the Continent were sent out to Malabar. The Speedy return was captained by Robert Drummond and the aforementioned Thomas Drummond accompanied him as Super Cargo (manager for trade) & advisor. The Continent was lost off the Malabar Coast in a fire. Instead of selling the Scottish goods for gold, the Speedy Return exchanged it for slaves who were traded in Madagascar for a profit. Here they met a pirate named James Bowen who appropriated the Speedy Return. Nothing more was heard from the Drummond brothers for a long time after this event. A British ship Annabelle was then commissioned by the Scots, but it was soon confiscated by the EIC on the grounds that all English sailors should only work for the EIC (apparently the Captain Ap Rice quarreled with his Scottish owners and led the British to the seizure). Naturally the Scottish ire at these failures was directed against the EIC. The spearhead of all this anti British rhetoric was a Darien company bloke and company secretary named Roderick Mackenzie. It was during this inopportune time, around mid 1704 that a ship named Worcester captained by Thomas Green laden with goods, and coming from the Malabar Coast, sailed into the Leith harbor, blown off course into Scotland.

So as we read, the Scottish leased Annabelle had been impounded, and Mackenzie on behalf of the Darien Company, decided that the British flagged (though not EIC owned) Worcester should be seized in Scotland as compensation, which he did. The officers of the defunct Darien Company (not the Scottish government) seized the ship on 12th Aug 1704. The reason attributed was the attempted clandestine sale of EIC goods in Scotland and the claim that the Worcester carried a counterfeit copy of the Scottish Darien company seal. Captain Green of the Worcester always hoped that the situation would be sorted out, but nothing happened for three months. Before he knew what was happening, he and his crew were put behind bars for piracy and murder. Later it turned out that it was due to Green’s (and other crew’s) drunken boast of piracy, plunder, other nefarious activities and burning of a ship. Rumors started flying that the attacked ship was the yet to return Speedy return with the Drummond brothers. Despite a total lack of real evidence, Green and two of his crew, John Madden and James Simpson, were sent for trial. Many a thing turned up at the trial, many a thing did not. Due to the fact that some amount of hushing up was done after the trail, some aspects are not traceable anymore. It was not that the Judges were unaware of the discrepancies, but the public mood and the level of Scottish resentment of the British were running so high that it was the best decision to allow the massacre of a couple of Englishmen.

Let us see how it went. As I retell the story, I will slip back and forth between Malabar and Leith or Edinburgh in Scotland. I will not get into too many details of the sordid affair, for it was that, but will cover it as an overview and focus on the Malabar aspects mainly.

As Kelly explains - The conviction of Green and the others was secured solely on the evidence of the Worcester's Christian Malabari cook, one Antonio Ferdinando. After joining the ship on the Malabar coast, Ferdinando said he witnessed an engagement between the Worcester and another ship crewed by English-speaking white men which lasted three days. He claimed that, when the stricken vessel was boarded, those in the sloop (a smaller sailing ship attached to the main ship), who then came aboard, did take up those of the crew of the said ship from under deck, killed them with hatchets, and threw them over board . . . Captain Green, Captain Madder, and James Simpson the gunner were three of these who went aboard and killed the men. Ferdinando said he believed about ten men were killed, and that after the struggle was over a few goods were transferred into the Worcester. The prize vessel was according to him, disposed of afterwards in Caliquilon. Ferdinando claimed he received a wound to his arm during the action and that the coat he was wearing in court was taken out of the prize.

Antonio’s testimony was the basis of subsequent convictions of Green and two others. Of course, it was supposed that the prize vessel was the Scottish owned Speedy return and that the murdered included the Drummonds, but as the trial progressed, it turned out that it was not. Nevertheless, the trial moved on in its strange and singular course towards culmination into a guilty verdict for the Worcester’s captain and crew. The British crown tried hard to find supporting evidence for the Worcester crew and though a trifle late produced it for study by the Scottish courts. But the situation was clouded due to the boasts by Green and his crew of the illegal activities they themselves (perhaps) committed in Malabar. Whether it was dealing with pillaged goods or piracy of another ship is not clear from the papers, but they were not involved with the Speedy return. The case finally veered off to general piracy, not a specific act and the crew was convicted.

So now we hear a name – Antonio Ferdinando. Who was he? How did he turn up at the courts in Scotland as a witness? What language was he speaking? Before we get to the answers, let us trace the path of Worcester, after it left Britain. The formal journals themselves, were confiscated and lost in Scotland after the Worcester's seizure, and are not available for analysis, but some details are available from British records.

As I held the book ‘Tragedy of the Worcester’, in its first printing from 1930, in my hands, a rare and difficult to find book, now part of my library, I could feel the anguish of the author Richard Carnac Temple. It provided me some information on Ferdinando, the cook’s mate from Malabar, who according to the Temple, possibly used tales current at the Malabar coast to concoct the allegations against Thomas Green. And there was another person of Indian origin in the ship (perhaps from Bengal), one Antonio Francisco who backed Ferdinando’s story. Three other white sailors Linstead, Haines and Bruckley also confessed, supporting Ferdinando’s version, though Haines retracted his some years later.

The Worcester left England in March 1702 with around 35 people on board. Some two years later, when the Scots seized it as it returned to the isles, 14 of the original crew were dead. All of those14 died at the Malabar coast, which itself is peculiar, due to the high mortality percentage. There were plenty of British representation on the coast by then and the Worcester as you will see called on all of them periodically. There was no real medical calamity on board reasoning their deaths, so did they die fighting? We will have to assume so. Interestingly one of the sailors died after a dog bit him near Calliquilon. The ship also brought back two Malabar slave boys, one of whom was purchased by the Duke of Queensborough, whereas the other was purchased by the Earl of Rothe.

The Worcester reached the Malabar Coast on Nov 14th 1702. Between this time and 1704, they were involved in trading activities around Madagascar and Malabar, selling Candy for pepper, asafetida and so on… but related actions were later to cast a slant on their characters.

Ferdinando joined the ship around Nov 1702 when the ship reached Malabar. He sailed with the Worcester since, passing Quilon, Cochin, Calicut, Tellicherry & of course Calliquilon. It was somewhere between Calicut and Tellicherry that Ferdinando, during a couple of clear days in Jan/Feb 1703, claimed he saw Green’s sloop boarded another British flagged ship, manned by English wearing British colors. All of this was deposed through an official interpreter George Yeaman a merchant in Dundee a sworn interpreter.

Kelly explains - The prize vessel was disposed of afterwards in Caliquilon to one Kwaja Kammudi, a Moplah trader. Ferdinando claimed he received a wound to his arm during the action and that the coat he was wearing in court was taken out of the prize. The prosecution used the evidence of Charles May, the Worcester's surgeon, to corroborate Ferdinando's story.

Any story like this will have complications. A document from the shore stated that Ferdinando had boarded the ship only in May 1703. Antonio who was injured in the boarding of the said ship fractured his hand (hit by a shell) and was treated at Cochin, but initially stated that the covered up (plaistered) injury was due to a snake bite (he was threatened by the crew and not allowed to tell the truth – so what were they hiding?). According to him the attack of the ship took over two and a half days and the testimony also states that he was born to Christian parents and joined the ship at Calliquilon though he is not too sure about the date.

The witnesses Francisco and Ferdinando when produced before the court were termed Negros or blacks, not considered real Christians and their names as stated were not considered real. They were for these reasons not considered equivalent to ten pound Scots. Nevertheless, their depositions were the basis for later judgment, Ferdinando’s being the clinching eyewitness testimony augmented by supporting evidence by the others. It appears that he provided his testimony either in Malayalam. Imagine the irony, the destiny of Scotland was decided by a few words in Malayalam!! The translations in court were provided by George Yeaman.

I checked out Yeaman next. What kind of an interpreter was he? As one can see, he was key to the correctness of the testimony. It appears that he had spent 16 years on the coast of Malabar prior to the trial. That means that he came to Malabar in 1684 or so. He returned to Dundee and started a shop ‘Yeamans shore’ in 1700. Yeaman tried a hand at getting into politics subsequently, was successful and continued with various matters until 1715 in many important positions till he died in 1733. His bio is provided by the Scot parliament site below. Perhaps he did know a smattering of Malayalam.

A representative of a long line of merchants and shipowners in Dundee, Yeaman made his fortune in exotic climes. The Jacobite agent Scot referred to him in 1706 as ‘Captain Yeaman, a wealthy merchant, lately come from the West Indies’, while at the trial of Captain Green in Edinburgh the year before, one ‘Captain Eman of Dundee’ had acted as ‘interpreter for the blacks’ on board Green’s ship. It was said that he had ‘spent 16 years on the coast of Malabar, and spoke to them in lingua franca’. Yeaman had re-established himself in Dundee by 1700 and was soon a leading participant in trade, a shipowner and the proprietor of ‘Yeaman’s shore’ along the waterside. He acquired a country seat at Murie, formerly in the possession of the Ramsays.

Later reports provide a little more information on Ferdinando, that he was a devout Christian, with perhaps a father of obscure Portuguese origin, that he said his prayers regularly as a roman catholic, and trained (and provide Christian instructions) the two slave boys on board. One of the key moments of the trial was the display of the coat that Ferdinando wore (Francisco complained that while Ferdinando had one, he had to shiver without one in that lousy Scottish jail where only bread and water was given to these two prisoners). It appears that this coat was taken from a sailor of the ship that Green boarded and was convicted of. The prosecution tried to say that it was nothing more than pieces of an old Scottish rug.

Seventeen of the eighteen defendants were convicted. The verdicts were secured on the evidence of Ferdinando and the other confessors. Green, Madder, Simpson, and two others were sentenced to hang.

Ferdinando as we saw provided the required testimony that went against the Green crew and was subsequently taken back to his cell. Soon after, some say the same day, some say four hours later, some say the next, some say 10 days after, Antonio Ferdinando the sole eyewitness, was dead of poisoning. The person suspected of this murder was none other than the person who precipitated the whole matter, Rod Mackenzie. As a British sympathizer claimed, Ferdinando was seized by guilt and told Mackenzie who visited him that he was sorry to see Green being sentenced to death and that he was forced to say what he said by Dr May, the ships surgeon. Mackenzie soon came back according to Francisco, with a bottle of wine, a glass of which was provided to Ferdinando who drank it with gusto. Soon after he was seized with belly spasms and died shortly as evidenced by Antonio Francisco. Thus came to naught the desire of Ferdinando to lead a better life, wear better clothes and enjoy a future in Scotland. The local press tried to write it off as though Ferdinando came ashore with a hectic fever and died 10 days following the trial, from his pre-existing illness. Thus ended the short life of the Malabari whose actions were was to later change the course of Scotland.

Many a person questioned the testimony of the Malabari cook’s mate. Some opined that he was having flights of fancy, retelling stories he had heard of other pirates, some reconstructed the story as the tale of the Worcester meeting the EIC ship Aurang-Zeb (and just firing gun salutes which was construed as fighting by the delirious Ferdinando) , which was in the neighborhood. Some others like the esteemed Alexander Hamilton, who met Green and his crew in Calicut, did write that he had heard rumors of Greens pirate activities off the coast of Malabar and the tale of Green’s sinking a ship while he himself was in Calliquilon. So it is difficult to take in completely all of what Temple writes in his book, where he concludes that the entire trial was purely a witch-hunt ending up in wrongful conviction of Capt Green and two others, the others having been let free. Circumstantial evidence pointed to a lot of mischief on the side of the Worcester, like evidence of the contraband goods on board, Ferdinando’s coat, the conflicting comments by the crew, Haines blabbering to his new girl friend Anne, Green’s own comments after a few pints. But the question as to which vessel (if one was sunk) sank in Malabar waters during that event is unanswered till now.

Queen Anne intervened personally to secure a stay of execution to allow her ministers time to consider matters. But, on 11 April, the final day of the postponement, events in Edinburgh got out of hand when people started to feel that the Queen might interfere and acquit the convicted persons.

Daniel Defoe – author of Robinson Crusoe, a pamphleteer, wrote -The Streets filld with incredible numbers of men, women and children, calling for Justice upon those ENGLISH Murtherers. The Lord Chancellor Seafield's Coach happening to passby, they stop'di t, broke the Sashes, haul'd him out, and oblig'd him to promise Execution should speedily be done before he could get from 'em... According to the Chancellors promise, soon after, on the same day, being Wednesday, Captain G reen, Madder, and Sympson were brought out, and convey'd to Execution, which was at Leith Road upon the Sands, and all the way was Huzza'd in Triumph as it were, and insulted with the sharpest and most bitter Invectives…

But, as the rope went taut around Green's neck, the mob (80,000 armed men as a witness put it) underwent an apparent change of heart. 'No sooner was the Sacrifice made, and the Men dead', reported Defoe, 'but even the same Rabble, so sickly is the Multitude, exclaim'd at their own Madness, and openly regrated [sic] what they had done, and were ready to tear one another to pieces for the Excess. Although the mob was appeased, Green's execution now became a focal point for anti- Unionist propaganda. In Scotland, opponents of the Union celebrated the outcome as a symbol of national autonomy.

The next batch of the convicted were due to be executed the following Friday, but the anger having been satiated by the three executions, the latter was postponed and eventually the rest of the Worcester’s crew was released. The ship however was given to the Scottish Darien Company and all the goods, including the possessions of the crew, were sold. As Kelly puts it - In England, Green and his men were hailed as martyrs. An unaccountable delay in producing the official trial report in Edinburgh sparked off a vicious pamphlet war. English pens sought to discredit the Scottish judiciary, while the Scots tried any means to deflect criticism until the report could be published. The whole affair hastened the Union of 1707, for it was a choice of Union or war between the two nations.

So whatever happened to the Speedy return? It was earlier pirated off the Malabar Coast by another pirate John Owen and the Drummonds due to their involvement went undercover in Madagascar, living there for many years. But some questioned it. Was the story of the piracy by John Owen a work of fiction by Daniel Defoe to help the English? Was Drury’s book on Owen and the Drummonds death in Madagascar ghost written by Defoe as some felt? That is another matter.

Hamilton writes - The unfortunate Captain Green, who was afterwards hanged in Scotland, came on board my ship at sunset, very much overtaken in drink and several of his men in the like condition (at Calicut, February 1703). He wanted to sell Hamilton some arms and ammunition, and told me that they were what was left of a large quantity that he had brought from England, but had been at Madagascar and had disposed of the rest to good advantage among the pirates. I told him that in prudence he ought to keep these as secrets lest he might be brought in trouble about them. He made but little account of my advice, and so departed. About ten in the night his chief mate Mr. Mather came on board of my ship and seemed to be very melancholy.... He burst out in tears and told me he was afraid that he was undone, that they had acted such things in their voyage that would certainly bring them to shame and punishment, if they should come to light; and he was assured that such a company of drunkards as their crew was composed of could keep no secret. I told him that I had heard at Coiloan (Quilon) that they had not acted prudently nor honestly in relation to some Moors' ships they had visited and plundered and in sinking a sloop with ten or twelve Europeans in her off Coiloan.

We do not know what happened to Antonio Francisco. Maybe he survived in Scotland and his lineage flourishes. Daniel Defoe went on to write Robinson Crusoe’s tale. Roderick Mackenzie had a miserable end. In August 1707 the family of John Madder was awarded £460 compensation for his death.

But the Worcester had yet another interesting story to tell. On Feb 6th 1703, the Worcester entertained the factor at EIC’s offices in Calicut. On Feb 8th the records indicate this interesting incident – Being Munday, riding at anchor at Callicute, a moor merd belonging to Shackmaker passing by, he saluted us with 5 guns, we returned in like manner and he gave us three for thanks. Moor merd means a Persia-man or Moplah vessel. Shackmaker is Sheikh Maraikkar. Now did that mean that were others who continued to hold the Marakkar title after the 1600 Kunhali?

References

The tragedy of the Worcester – Richard Carnac Temple
The Worcester Affair – James Kelly
Celebrated criminal trails in Scotland – Arnot Hugo
The Tryal of Capt Thomas green and his crew

British Scottish relations – A very brief note

England and Scotland were separate states for several centuries before eventual union, and English attempts to take over Scotland by military force in the late 13th and early 14th centuries were ultimately unsuccessful. England and Scotland were ruled by the same king for the first time in 1603 when James VI of Scotland also became the king of England. However they remained two separate states until 1 May 1707.

Quoting from the BBC site - The largest component of customs dues was levied on the colonial trade. But this trade faced significant disruption from Scottish commercial networks which circumvented the Navigation Acts contrived to protect English domestic and overseas trade. English feelings that Scotland was acting as a rogue nation contributed greatly to William’s willingness to sabotage the Darien Venture through which Scotland attempted to establish an entrepôt for the East and West Indies on the Panama Isthmus in the late 1690s. English desires to control the Scots became more acute after the accession of Queen Anne, particularly as the Scots seemed reluctant to accept an eventual Hanoverian succession. Morover, England had insufficient manpower to fight wars, sustain manufacturing and expand its empire. The Scots were a ready reservoir.

Some Scots nobility petitioned Westminster to wipe out the Scottish national debt and stabilise the currency, which was eventually done. United Kingdom thus came into being...

In many of my previous articles, I mentioned in passing the so called Cartaz or pass system instated by the Portuguese who controlled Malabar and Indian west coast trade. Perhaps it is time now to get into some details of what exactly it was and how the Cartaz policy and system was introduced and enforced.

Its name could have been derived from the Arabic "qirtas" and may have had a previous use in both the Indian Ocean and the eastern Mediterranean seas, many centuries ago. Perhaps it even had Indian antecedants, for Ibn batuta mentioned it as present in Barkur or Faknur.

Quoting Ibn Batuta – The Hindu ruler of Barkur (“Fakanur”) “possesses about thirty warships, commanded by a Muslim called Lula , an evildoer who robs at sea and plunders merchants on the sea.” The passage continues: It is a custom of theirs that every ship that passes by a town must anchor at it and give a present to the ruler. This they call the right of the harbor [haqq al-bandar]. If anyone omits to do this, they sail out in pursuit of him, bring him to the port by force, double the tax on him, and prevent him from proceeding on his journey for as long as they wish.

As Prange explains - This system of enforced tribute can be seen as an indigenous precedent of the Portuguese Cartaz system. The similarities are striking: both systems forced ships to call at specific ports in order to tax them; both claimed a legal underpinning; and both were ultimately founded in the threat of maritime violence. Earlier studies have pointed out that the Portuguese Cartaz had indigenous precedents in safe-conduct passes issued sporadically by coastal rulers in the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean,in fact, Cartaz is likely a loanword from the Arabic qirtas, meaning “paper” or “document.

The Portuguese Cartaz system seems to have started with Vasco Da gama’s second voyage in 1502. The first two Portuguese voyages of Gama and Cabral were mainly related to reconnaissance and small trade as well as making a nuisance of themselves with the local rulers with intent to impress them with their naval might. During the second voyage, Gama defeated the king of Bhatkal and declared that the Portuguese were lords of the ocean and that anybody who used the ports controlled by the Portuguese should pay them tribute. Some other conditions were that the ports or ships should not trade in pepper, should not admit ships of Turks or ships from Calicut. The Bhatkal king agreed to pay 1500 bags of rice per annum and that was when the first Cartaz was issued to the king of Bhatkal. A series of papal bulls mainly the Romanus Pontifex of Nicholas 5 in 1454 gave Portuguese the power to impose the system.

The Cartaz was typically a permit valid for one year and obtained after paying a fee for its issue. The fee varied depending on the ships destination, and was obviously higher for overseas trade. Overseas Cartazes were issued only in Goa (after the ship reached there with a coastal Cartaz) and Cartazes for coastal trade could be obtained from any Portuguese fort or factory or possession. The Portuguese armada controlling these seas had absolute control and every king, lord or emperor followed the rules, except of course the moors of Calicut and Ponnani who never agreed with the policy (Cochin, Quilon and Cannanore agreed). The Portuguese used the system effectively on all Indian rulers, until the other western powers like the Dutch and English made their appearances in the 17th century. The Portuguese argument was that the rules were only for infidels and not for followers of Christ and thus the british and the Dutch were not required to take Cartazes ( this was actually because the Portuguese did not want to have any clashes with the other naval powers).

The Cartaz was a detailed document detailing the ship, name, masts, its owners, the tonnage, sailors and officers, guns etc. The Cartaz also detailed the rules the sailing ship had to follow such as – not to carry royal monopoly articles such as pepper and horses, Christian slaves, should not be destined to an enemy port of the Portuguese, and could not change destination. Copper and iron as well as naval stores were sometimes prohibited. In any case, an application for a Cartaz by kings were not always successful, it was quite difficult to obtain one and there are instances where Adil Shah was refused Cartazes until heavy bribing was resorted to. Sometimes the Cartaz was granted only for political expediency and as a favor for somebody whose support was desired by the Portuguese. This was common after Angre and Shivaji appeared on the scene and the Portuguese needed support from Adil Shah. Ships plying the Arabian Sea without a Cartaz were captured and frequently burnt. This set of ships that checked the others plying the sea for trade were classed as the high sea armada and the red sea armada. The Gulf armada, the Malacca armada, and a few others protecting the northern and southern ports of India were the others who patrolled the seas. So as you saw, when an escort was provided, it was in the form of a convoy or cafila while travelling to the Goan or Malabar coasts and beyond.

However, Correa states that the first Cartazes were actually issued in 1502 to ships from Quilon, Cochin, Cannaore etc, i.e. those ports friendly to Portuguese. Later, the Cartaz or permit system actually routed ships to Portuguese ports so that it became a revenue generation system (Sanjay Subramaniam – Portuguese empire in Asia) by way of customs duties. And as we saw it became a diplomatic instrument and later, even as a perquisite by officers to raise irregular incomes for themselves.

The amount charged for a Cartaz varied from nominal to exorbitant as we saw while talking about the Rahimi and other Moghul ships. The customs duty charged at Goa varied from about 6% ad valoreum until 1569 to 7.5% later. It was higher in Chaul and lower in Diu. In Malacca, a 7% amount was charged for any ship passing through the straits. The main payers of Cartaz to the Guajarati’s who without support of their rulers, decided that the amount charged was not worthy of argument. However it turned out from ledger records that this was actually the only profitable part of the Portuguese trade administration, otherwise the trade vessel was a very leaky one with corrupt officers, parallel trading and rampant dishonesty..all traits they taught the people who worked with them and we see all too often in India.

What if a ship did not have a Cartaz? It was confiscated; the crew put to death or sent o the galleys, or set afire. If indeed a ship disobeyed the conditions of its Cartaz, it was again raided and retained at the Portuguese port till penalties were paid. This was also a very lucrative trade because the captain and the crew of the ship seizing such an errant vessel were entitles to fair shares of the booty. In one case a Gujarati ship was raided because it had 6 Turks on board.

The free Cartaz was the diplomatic Cartaz that was granted to a local ruler. Some had as many as four or six, such as the king of Bijapur, whereas Akbar the emperor had just one. It is not exactly clear if a ship carrying pilgrims really needed a Cartaz, for one was needed only for merchant ships. The armada varied between about 50 ships in the early 16th century to about 120 and finally averaging to some 90 ships in the late 16th century. The cafilas or convoys were herding or escorting many hundred small ships during the 17th century.

It is apparent that while the cost of Cartazes was a few rupees in most cases, the Moguls had to pay much more. In fact in their case, even pilgrimage ships were taxed, presumably due to the fact that they carried traders who brought back returns from trade or carried even a small amount of expensive goods like gems and jewels for sale to the high and mighty in Arabia. The rate was as high as 3000-8000 mamudis. In 1573, Akbar finally got one free Cartaz after agreeing not to shelter or encourage Malabar ‘pirates’. And that was how the Portuguese patrolled over 15000 square miles of coast lines to safeguard their trade returns, mainly due to disinterest from the coastal rulers who did not quite take to the sea, perhaps due to the age old rule of staying away from the ocean waters. The losers were the Guajarati and other konkan traders as well the Arab traders of Malabar and the supporting moplah entourage and the marakkar sea captains.

The captain majors of the ships reported directly to the viceroy, and the east coast was also monitored by the armadas or harmads as they were called in the east coast. It is also sad that to administer rteh rule of the Cartaz, the Portuguese were incredibly cruel, killing, maiming the sailors in any captured ship. In one case an island names Bet off Diu was captured by the Portuguese and every person butchered. It was since then, called the island of the dead.

JR Mohammed opines - The Mohamaden ships were special objects of Portuguese fury. Even with Cartazes, their ships were not safe. The Portuguese sea-men demanded heavy bribes; if it is not given the ships were confiscated". To quote an example a ship captured at the port of Kayalpattanarn in 1526 by Manuel de Gama, then the captain of Coromandel, was confiscated and the Muslim Nagudha and his family sold to slavery.

Not that the Armada ships were fully manned by Portuguese. They had Gujarati pilots, local lascars who sometimes sailed with their family. As we saw they even had a number of Malabarese soldiers in their ranks as time progressed.

The Portuguese stronghold could have been broken with ottoman intervention, but the situation was too complex for that. While the Malabar kings such as the Zamorin petitioned their support through Arab traders, the Mughal emperor Akbar was anti ottoman. The ottoman sultans therefore were half hearted in their support for the Zamorin rebellions against the Portuguese. Akbar, as you may recall, disgusted by the disagreement between various Muslims, brought in what was known as the infallibility decree whereby the Sultan or caliph was not recognized as the absolute power. The person who had the deciding authority in Islamic matters was the emperor and not the ulma. Interestingly the ottomans sued for peace and sent a diplomatic delegation asking for his support in their fight against the Hapsburgs. However it was at a juncture where Akbar had just signed the agreement with masceranhas about the free Cartaz and not supporting Malabar. Akbar imprisoned the entire ottoman delegation and banished them to a jail in Lahore, bound in chains. However the ottoman call met with some support in Surat and some other locations and that was when the first plan to build a Suez canal came up in the ottoman council. But then that is another story.

So how did the Cartaz system survive legal requirements valid in the western world? To get to that one has to understand the Grotius 1609 Mare Clausum (the Right and Dominion of the Sea). While the world acted in general according to the Grotius theory – which argued that the sea was openly navigable by all countries for trade, British John Selden as well as the Portuguese countered that the sea was as subject to a country’s private dominion as land. Ultimately, the inexorable growth of global trade favored the cause of Grotius. Well, anyway the Portuguese by virtue of quasi possession of the maritime are of the Estadio Da India, declared the area to be mare clausum. Newitt in his accounting also mentions that before getting a Cartaz, traders had to leave a security for payment of duties on the return before the onset of the main voyage.

It is not that the Cartaz was a big problem for traders, for they were in those trading with commodity that had a ready market and thus a price increase on the account of Portuguese taxes by about 5% (or was it 20% or a fifth – I am still not sure, it sounds too excessive) did not really upset the applecart. The buyer paid up easily. The problem was only for independent ships operated by Arab owners and those in Malabar who were considered Portuguese enemies. Gujarati ships quietly agreed and purchased the Cartaz, but once outside the Portuguese armadas control operated in a way they chose. Anyway the situation was somewhat complex and with the methods of hawala, hundi and so on for effecting payments and recording values, it was not very easy at the end. Maybe that is when undervaluation became a norm.

One could summarize that the system resulted in institutionalized plunder under the legal pretext of the Cartaz system as time went by and the Portuguese at Goa became very corrupt, but on the whole, the Portuguese looked on Cartazes as giving them a right of intervention for violations (Now you can decide who was the pirate and who was pirated), a right to regulation, acknowledgement of their Sovereignty and so on over the sea. Vineeta Shankar concludes - As a result by 1530 or so a new alternative system of trading routes connecting those points not controlled by the Portuguese emerged. Hence while Portuguese ships called at Malacca, others specially the Muslim traders went to Johor or Aceh.

In 1612, however, the Mughal emperor Jahangir (1569-1627) allowed the English to establish a trading post in Surat, and in 1620 a similar concession was made to the Dutch. Then we saw that Mughals in 1632 conquered Ahmednagar, and this was to bring the Portuguese forts at Chaul, Bassein, and Daman under their protection. Later, in 1637 the English and the Dutch strengthened their presence by setting up factories in neighboring Bijapur. However, the most serious blow to the Portuguese Estadio, both in terms of finances and prestige, was the conquest in 1622 of Hormuz by Shah Abbas of Persia, who thereafter allowed English and Dutch companies to establish trading posts in Bandar Abbas, the port of Isfahan (in present-day Iran).

Interestingly, corsairs or pirates as defined then, such as Kanhoji Angre also issued Cartaz’s to ships and when he prowled the seas, it was prudent to have one of them…But Kanhoji’s story is best recounted in more detail another day.

References

Commercial Policy (Essays on Indian history – HVS Moorthy)- BS Sastry
Essays In Goan History edited by Teotónio R. de Souza
Studies in Indian History: Historical Records at Goa - By Surendranath Sen
Portuguese Empire in Asia, 1500-1700: A Political and Economic History - By Sanjay Subrahmanyam
Foundations of the Portuguese Empire, 1415-1580 - By Bailey W. Diffie, George D. Winius
Merchants and Rulers in Gujarat: By Michael Naylor Pearson
History of the Portuguese Navigation in India, 1497-1600 - By K. M. Mathew
The Ottoman Age of Exploration - By Giancarlo Casale
The First Portuguese Colonial Empire - By M. D. D. Newitt
A Trade of No Dishonor : Piracy, Commerce, and Community in the Western Indian Ocean, Twelfth to Sixteenth Century – Sebastian Prange

Text of a Cartaz (from Studies in Indian History referred above Page 64) – An example

A Scottish American privateer at Calicut and Kayamkulam

These days we have an interesting story with a couple of Italian pirate hunters killing two Kerala fishermen off the Malabar coast and spending time in prison, eating pizza and creating a lot of fodder for the TV and newspaper men. The Italians agreed to compensate the families of the dead and the case seems destined for quick closure, the cost per dead being a measly $189,000. But imagine the situation in Calicut in 1697 when news reached the sleepy town that a pirate Capn Kidd and his ship were docked close to port at Kallai..

Well, other readers must be wondering what Kayamkulam has to do with Kidd. Read on and you will also figure out the link. Many of you may not know who Captain Kidd was; he was considered a notorious pirate of the late 17th century. William Kidd was born in Scotland in about 1645 and migrated to New York very young. A man desiring high adventure, he was soon enlisted by the British authorities and American backers, to hunt down pirates and left for London in 1696. A number of unfortunate events ended up with his earning a reputation as a ruthless pirate. He returned later to New York, was imprisoned and consigned to London, deserted by his sponsors, interrogated by the British Parliament before being convicted for piracy and murder. He was hanged in 1701, coated with tar and hung out for years to be eaten away by hungry birds. Kidd was a founder of Trinity Church, which still stands near Ground Zero, in New York. Some days ago Calicut heritage forum covered him in a couple of blogs and as it was a topic that I had been researching, thought it a good idea to cover Kidd’s Malabar sojourn in a little more detail.

Some people have the most beastly luck. If you read the ‘real’ story of Captain Kidd, a New York Sea Captain, you will agree, and reaffirm that he was caught in the cross hairs of political salvos between the Mughal Empire, the British crown and the EIC. He ended up sadly a victim of vicious rumor mongering slander and political wrangling. But I will not venture into the whole story, and would recommend that anybody interested read the book by Zacks instead of the many lopsided articles out on the net. I will however provide some detail of the period when Kidd’s ship first limped into Calicut and the time they spent at the Malabar Coast between Tellichery and Cape Comorin.

But to get to the beginnings of the story, I have to remind you of my previous article about the Rahimi and the pirate activity in the seas lapping Western India. Even though history books talk less about these western pirates, they try to explain off the activity as Malabar pirate/corsair activity, implicating instead the Moors of Calicut (headed by the marakkars). In fact pirate ships flying French, Danish, British or Portuguese flags were, in those Mughal days, actually the ones preying on ‘the fat Jeddah ships’ as they were called.

Why were they called fat ships (aka Moghul ships) in Pirate parlance? These big (across the bows) and slow ships ferried as many as hundreds to a thousand pilgrims from Surat to Jeddah for the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca and carried trade during other times. I must add of course that by the time Aurangzeb got to the throne, few of the ships were smaller, in better shape and were three masted outriggers. Some of these travelers aboard were traders who loaded their wares into those ships and sold them to other pilgrims and buyers at Mecca at a great profit. The return voyage thus had traders bringing back a good amount (perhaps they were also bringing back the payments from previous shipments) of gold and silver that was eagerly sought by the pirates. The slow ships were no match for the fast pirate ships with some 150-200 men and 20-40 guns. If raided, these pilgrim ships were destined for misery. The holds were plundered, many pilgrims were butchered and the women were molested gleefully by the lusty pirates. On shore the story was a bit different. These ships were owned by wealthy nakhudas who were well connected and in some cases, had ownership vested in the royal family as we saw in the case of Rahimi. Also a good amount of trade goods and returns sometimes belonged to nobles of the Agra court or the Mughal royal family. Thirdly it was also the emperor’s responsibility to safeguard a successful Hajj pilgrimage. So an attack on these pilgrim ships created huge uproar and the western diplomats currying for business and trade partnerships in Agra were in hot waters facing large compensation claims and threats of immediate expulsion by the Mughal emperor who believed that these pirate ships were being state sponsored.

As it turned out in the case of the Rahimi and later, ships flying the British flag or with a British master were also involved in piracy and the EIC were faced with a tough decision of keeping it in check. The British EIC and crown had two options, one to employ privateers to hound the pirates off or to launch their own anti piracy ships. It was into this situation that the enterprising Scottish American sea captain William Kidd sailed into, as a privateer with the intent to tackle pirates. As it turned out, he lost his life and fortunes in the process, for the British eventually made him the scapegoat.

Captain Kidd’s story is certainly interesting, in fact it covers all the ingredients, adventure, thrills, love, backbiting, theft, piracy, lust….. Anyway as we read, it was 1695, piracy by ships flying western flags was becoming rampant, the emperor at Agra was livid and privateers were needed to chase and capture them. Kidd formed a joint venture with American Livingston and Lord Belmont. Soon after signing the Agreement, Kidd received two special commissions. As the writer in the USS Kidd memorial site explains, one was a letter of marquee empowering him to capture any ships or goods belonging to France. The other was a commission from the King to seize pirates, but also included a warning that ". . . you do not, in any manner, offend or molest any of our Friends or Allies, their Ships or Subjects."

One of the problems that were to plague him was his choice of American crew, who were unfortunately not the honest type and who had previous connections with piracy (he had to entice them with large salaries that he could ill afford). His ship Adventure galley and the venture had bad luck all the way through and faced problems with the British government from the outset. First was the instance when they got into trouble for not saluting a navy yacht in 1696, then he had problems securing supplies and new sail at Cape Town during the run towards the Red Sea. Then he lost a number of crew to illness and not a single penny had been earned so far, not a single piracy act checked. The crew was getting mutinous, for they had dreamed of quick riches. A number of events and non events were to happen next, but we will get into none of that. It was 1697 already, over a year after they set out, with no returns. The ship hung on, only due to the sheer force of Kidd’s personality as a strict captain. But the strings holding him to his 150 or so crew were becoming tight, after the arduous sea voyage and disappointments and had to burst sooner or later. They finally decided to leave the Red Sea ports and head to Damman off the Indian coast near Goa.

At the end of August 1697 off the Malabar Coast, Kidd encountered a small Moorish twin masted ship Mary of two hundred tones headed to Bombay from Aden. The ship was commanded by an English captain – named Parker, with five Portuguese monks on board, a Portuguese navigator, and manned by Malabar crew. While Kidd and Parker were having a long desired drink, Kidd’s quarter master Walker and some of his former pirate crew ransacked the Mary and tortured the Malabar crew trying to find out if any gold was on the ship. Soon Kidd came out and put a stop to it and had everything returned. But the events were to create no end of trouble later for the Portuguese monks filed a report that Kidd was a pirate and the instigator of the crime but that the stolen goods were returned ( the latter part of the admission was not used during Kidd’s trail). Parker accompanied Kidd after the event. Soon the A Galley docked at Karwar for Kidd needed supplies and water desperately. The EIC agents at Karwar, Pattle and Harvey reported to Bombay that the pirate Kidd had berthed. Deserters from the ship meanwhile, complained about Kidd. Then again, Kidd’s men wanted to sample the famous dancing girls of Karwar but Kidd did not let anyone ashore and that made them angrier. Some of the deserters soon landed up in Goa and informed the Portuguese that Kidd’s ship was in Karwar. The Portuguese sent out two men of war to hound the Adventure Galley. Using some excellent captaincy, Kidd escaped as the Portuguese ships neared, later destroying one of his pursuers. His next port of call was the Laccadive Islands.

They had some problems there with the locals, and ended up having to flee again, this time headed for Calicut. He needed water and supplies and hoped that the agent at Calicut would supply him the required stuff. He worte his first letter of the voyage to the station chief at Calicut, one Mr Thomas Penning, requesting for food and water, in the name of the Crown, while anchored at Calicut’s post (the place was then called Calicut road). Penning having already heard rumors of piracy down the grapevine believed that Kidd was perhaps an imposter of a privateer and more a pirate, refused to supply him the supplies.

Kidd was desperate, his crew getting even more mutinous. It was during this tense period that a Dutch ship passed by. The crew wanted to attack & pillage the ship but Kidd refused permission. Kidd then had a major disagreement with the quartermaster and ringleader of the mutinous crew, the same William Moore and ended up swiping him with a bucket. The bucket hit Moore on the head and he was soon dead. He was then buried at sea in Calicut. Penning would still not provide the supplies and so Kidd finally left Calicut after a few days and sailed his ship to Tellicherry road. A cabin boy deserted and fed tales that Kidd had murdered his quartermaster and that he was forcing his crew to become pirates plus the tale that the unhappy crew wanted to create a mutiny. Kidd thus did not get any supplies from the EIC Tellicherry factory as well. His crew was parched and supplies had hit rock bottom. It was November 1697 and Kidd was now flying a French flag. Around this time they encountered a Dutch ship and captured it with the passes and permission he had, renaming it the Maiden. It had little by way of booty, and Kidd had to find a place to sell whatever he got to buy some supplies.

And that is how he set foot at Kayamkulam or Kalliquilon, popularly known as the smugglers den or Smugglers port. The goods were sold for £150 and Kidd finally managed to get some rice and supplies they desperately needed. He then spent two months based at Kayamkulam sailing back & forth on the Malabar waters, looking for pirates, but saw none. Many a merchant ship plied the routes from Bengal to Malabar ports and Surat. One such ship was the Quedgah Merchant. This time as it moved past the Kayamkulam waters, it was heavily loaded, with cloth, brown sugar, opium, silk, iron, saltpeter and a large amount of jewels. The date was January 30th, 1698. The ship owned by Armenian or Parsi merchant Corgi Baba Sulthanam with an English master John Wright (but using a French alias Pilot Rette)

Kidd was not sure what to do with the 400 tonne, 18 cannon ship flying an Armeinan flag. He followed it and caught up with it at Cochin. As he boarded the ship, it hoisted a French flag. Kidd using his British pass said that he had a right to capture a French ship and the Frenchman who was on board negotiating did not argue with Kidd who mastered a ship with 36 guns. But Kidd did not see Wright, nor did he know it was being captained by an Englishman. The ships good were valued at Rs 4 lakhs or £50,000. Kidd found in the captain’s cabin a chest full of diamonds, rubies, gold nuggets. He did not tell anybody about this find, perhaps his selfishness took over here. As the privateers were making merry, Kidd found out that the ship was actually British brokered and captained by Wright. He was thus in a quandary and in the borders of legitimacy even with the permits to privateer. So he offered to sell the captured ship back to the Armenian owners who offered Rs 20,000. Kidd’s crew did not agree. Kidd thought he could get his way through on this one as he had the French paper of the Quedgah Merchant, but what he did not know was that much of the goods actually belonged to a noble or for that matter the Mughal emperor himself. The ships were taken back to Kayamkulam.

Kidd had to pay his crew and buy his supplies, so he had no choice but to sell the booty at Kayamkulam. He sold the silk and opium at to a renegade EIC factor for £10,000, but this was just a small portion of the ships goods and to sell the rest of the goods would take him more days. But business was going well.

That was not to be, for soon Kidd espied two large EIC and two Dutch merchantmen headed towards his ships. Kidd decided to flee and thus left Kayamkulam taking with him the Quedgah merchant, never to return again to the Malabar shores. The three leaky ships fled to St Mary’s in Madagascar, water pumped out by the seven Moplah’s who were on board as the ship was being unloaded. At St Mary’s, Kidd encountered a regular pirate named Culliford. Most of Kidd’s crew abandoned him and joined Culliford for more piratical adventures. Only 13 people remained true to Kidd.

The worm eaten leaky Adventure Galley was soon scuttled and Kidd sailed to the Caribbean on the Adventure Prize and with the Quedgah merchant in tow. At about this same time, letters from the East India Company reached Britain, talking about the acts of piracy by Kidd. A squadron of vessels from the Royal Navy was dispatched to the Indian Ocean to capture him. Confident in the French passes as evidence that he did not betray his commission, he sailed for New York to contact Lord Bellomont. Prior to his meeting with Bellomont, he dispersed the remaining treasure amongst several widely scattered caches, the largest of which was buried in the orchard of Gardiner's Island at the eastern tip of Long Island. Finally by May 1699, four years after he started, he reached back in New York. But it was not the end. The Moghul king was angry; he threatened to get rid of the Englishmen from Indian trade and demanded the ship, its contents and the head of pirate captain Kidd who had pirated the Quedhgah merchant.

After interviewing the captain, Bellomont had him arrested and jailed at Stone Prison. His treasure was tracked down, recovered, and shipped back to London. He was put on trail and taken to the gallows and hanged on 23 May 1701,But bad luck followed him to the bitter end. Following tradition the crowds passed him rum and Kidd was blind drunk when he swung from the gallows" When the trap doors sprang open, Kidd fell, only to have the rope snap under his weight, and send him crashing to the ground. He was brought up the ladder once more and hanged a second time.

Whatever happened to the treasure aboard the Quedgah merchant?

Ginger Roigers from Long Island states

The Quedgah Merchant carried a vast amount of fabrics, spices, jewels, and gold rumored to be worth 400,000 British Pounds Sterling, according to Cordingly. Kidd had sold most of the goods by the time he arrived in Long Island, but many believe Kidd buried a large share of his profits while sailing around Eastern Long Island. It is known that Kidd buried some of his treasure on Gardiner’s Island, which to this day remains a privately owned island. A portion was returned to Bellomont after Kidd’s death, but many believe the majority is still hidden around Long Island. In addition to Gardiner’s Island, some of the local legends have focused on locations in Long Island such as Plum Island, Money Pond, Fisher’s Island, and along the Long Island Sound, including an undisclosed rocky place on the North Shore called Kidd’s Ledge. Some of these places embrace the legend, such a neighborhood in the town of Mattituck bearing the name "Captain Kidd Estates."

Sarah Kidd, his wife had to fight hard to retain their Manhattan house. Three weeks after his arrest, Bellomont’s men recovered the treasure Kidd buried on Gardiner’s Island. Totally, he shipped 1111 ounces of gold, 2353 ounces of silver, less than a pound of gems, 57 bags of sugar, and 41 bales of cloth to the English Treasury. The British valued it around £5000 !!

As for the ship named after a port in Malaysia, the Quedgah Merchant, which had vanished, was finally discovered in 2007 by archaeologists from the University of Indiana. Remarkably, it has turned up in 10ft of crystal clear waters just a short paddle from the shore of Catalina Island in the Dominican Republic. The winners were the English. They got some of the wealth of the ship doing little other than arresting Kidd, placed the fault on Kidd and continued on with EIC activity. We do not know if they compensated Aurangezeb or the owners. Cogi Baba got £585 as compensation, the rest of the proceeds were taken by the British admiralty as perks. But a good amount is perhaps at large, where is it? Some of what it originally carried was sold in Kayamkulam, some of it auctioned in New York and some still perhaps buried around the east coast of US. I have a niggling doubt. The only place where Kidd spent time on shore was Kayamkulam. What happened to the gem and gold chest? Did he perhaps bury this treasure chest in Kayamkulam? Maybe.. who knows…perhaps his ghost frequents the shores of Kayamkulam still watching over it…..

Why was the ruler of Kayamkulam trading pepper with Kidd as Dutch Zwaderkroon reported? Well, The Dutch tried to put up a monopoly on all pepper purchase at certain rates and that irritated some rulers and traders. It was perhaps into this situation that Kidd arrived and he found a way of making money. But I am not too sure of what actually happened. Kidd may have acquired some pepper. But we know that he had no money and possessed just the passes. So how did he buy pepper, on credit? According to Dutch documents, this went on for some time. But he was virtually on the run each day as we saw except for the two months before the Quedgah came by. If he did buy pepper, whom did he sell it to? Or did he just load the stuff into his ships for future sale in New York? This would mean that the Kayamkulam ruler must have got his returns when Kidd came back with the Quedgah merchant’s treasure. Is there a phase of Kidd’s stay in Kayamkulam that we do not know about? Perhaps…

Back to Delhi..Why was Kidd taken to task and why did the British legal system bend the rules to convict him? It appears that three ships Genj-i-sawai, Fatehi Mohammed and now the Quedgah merchant had been plundered by English pirates, so the Mughals were hopping mad..

Let us check the interview provided by leading historian Dr. Sebouh Aslanian. The first ship appears to have belonged to Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb (who ruled in 1658–1707) and was returning with pilgrims from Mecca when it was plundered by Captain Avery. The Fatehi Mohammed, also plundered by pirates on its return voyage from the Red Sea with a cargo of pilgrims and silver, was owned by the "merchant prince" Mulla Abdul Ghafur, the most influential Muslim merchant of Surat. The plunder of these ships sent shock waves in Surat's mercantile community and even provoked the ire of the Mughal court. The British factory in Surat came under intense pressure from the Muslim Governor of the city to compensate for losses and provide secure convoys for Surati shipping. Of these, however, the capture of the Quedah seems to have been the event that finally tipped the scale against the East India Company. The Quedah was no ordinary vessel. Mukhlis Khan, an eminent Mughal nobleman and a leading member of Emperor Aurangzeb's court, appears to have been heavily invested in the ship's cargo. When news of the Quedah's capture reached Surat, an Armenian merchant who had a stake in the Quedah's cargo had immediately gone to Delhi to complain to the emperor. He had informed Mukhlis Khan of the events and the fact that he had seen the English pirate's letter of marque from the English Crown. This revelation further reinforced the Mughal Court's convictions that all pirates were Englishmen (so-called "hatmen") and that, moreover, they were operating with the blessing of the English government and the East India Company. The news soon spread through the streets of Surat. The city's Muslim governor took strong measures to isolate the English factory. The mobs outside the compound began to whip up anti-European sentiment (already on the rise after rumors that pirates had violated Indian Muslim women aboard the Fatih Mohammed, returning from their hajj to Mecca). Faced with mounting opposition and violence to its presence in India, Company officials in Surat appealed to the Court of Directors in London to increase pressure on Parliament to pass strict legislation outlawing piracy.It was in this context that the High Court of Admiralty in London issued an arrest warrant for Kidd. Though the Court had offered a general pardon for pirates that same year, Kidd was exempted from this amnesty since he had become notoriously implicated in the fate of the company's trade in India.

And so Kidd met his death at the gallows, wondering how unkind fate could be. Kidd’s body was left on the scaffold for the River Thames to wash over it three times, as was the custom. Then his corpse was dipped in pitch tar and hung in an iron cage along the Thames at Tilbury point. Here it stayed for over two years, until it was totally rotted and picked clean by the birds: "As a great Terrour to all Persons from Committing ye like Crimes".

People of Kayamkulam in Aleppey may not remember Captain Kidd or the hectic activities on their shores during the end of the 17th century. However, slightly over a century later, on those very shores, another brigand was to create a legend – Kochunni aka Kayamkulam Kochunni.. Kochunni was a famed highwayman. He is said to have stolen from the rich and given to the poor (like Robin Hood). Kochunni died in a British jail in 1859. But that is another story..

References

The Pirate Hunter – Richard Zaqcks
CHF blog
Yandunts – Emil Sanamyan on the Quedgah Merchant

When the fortunes of the Portuguese nosedived

Many years back, Sheik Zainuddin, writing about the problems (created by the Portuguese) faced at Malabar wrote - The Muslim sultans and emirs did not take any interest in the Muslims of Malabar …..Generous help has been provided only by the Zamorin, from the very beginning…Why would Zainuddin say this? What could have irritated him so much? The linkage came to me only lately, when I put my head deep into the musty pages of the early 17th century documents. It actually surfaced when I researched the sorry story of the royal ship Rahimi.

Some time back we read the story of the Meri and how the Vasco Da Gama and the Portuguese pirated and plundered that ship near Calicut in 1502 and eventually set fire to it. This Portuguese arrogance was to continue even though they were only tangentially involved with Calicut after that, while focusing their efforts at Cochin. The Meri event was soon to set a trend of organized piracy in the Arabian seas by the Portuguese and later by the English and the Dutch. Mind you, I am now talking about a time before the Dutch and the English laid legal control over the terrains of India. Soon afterwards, the Portuguese introduced the system of issuing Cartaz’s or permits for safe passage, through the seas they controlled, for this helped establish their monopoly over the region and certain aspects of trade and religion. The Portuguese by virtue of this control, continued to prosper or decline, whichever way one wants to put it, centered at Goa. As the story goes, another incident took place about a century later which was to create a huge diplomatic furor, and this was during the autumn of 1613.

The North of India as we know was being ruled by the Mughals and Jahangir was on the throne. Down south the various principalities and kingdoms continued their usual ways, warring at times, or maintaining a somewhat low profile. The coastal port towns North of Malabar (except Cochin down south where the Portuguese had a presence) were controlled by the Portuguese, who had an iron grip on the shipping lanes. They controlled it, as I mentioned, with their infamous Cartaz system and their naval might.

First let us see how the Mughal relations stacked up with respect to the Portuguese. Akbar had annexed Surat in 1572 and finally got their access to the western seas. He had no intention of fighting the Portuguese and the Portuguese did not want to either. So after some negotiations (actually Akbar tried to fight the Portuguese indirectly a few times, but failed), the Portuguese accepted Mughal compromises and sent an ambassador to the Agra courts. Akbar tried to buy superior arms to counter the pressure, but could not and finally acceded to their demands for not paying customs at Cambay, and even ordered the Gujarat chieftains not to use Malabar corsairs against the Portuguese (Now you see why Zainuddin & the people of Malabar initially got irritated). In return Akbar was told that his family could go freely to Mecca every year to perform hajj and send one ship to the red sea ports without paying customs at Diu. Even so, the Portuguse hijacked a royal ship in 1577 but returned it quickly. So an uneasy treaty was in place, but by 1605 Akbar was gone and Jahangir had taken his place.

The Portuguese on the other hand were slowly and surely losing their grip and monopoly of the Indian Ocean trade. It resulted from their eagerness to claim even more territories such as Ceylon and Mozambique, but at the same time not possessing the immense military resources or the wealth to invest in the operations. So by 1600 the situation was looking more opportunistic for the British and the Dutch and the Portuguese had to contend additionally with continuing revolts from the chieftains at Malabar as well as the others up north, such as the Marathas, the Mughals and so on. By 1602 the Dutch EIC was created and their voyages to the Indies started. By 1619 the Portuguese shipping was virtually in ruins, so much so that even the rulers up North routinely used Kunhali’s Malabar flotillas ( hence their trips to Malabar hills – I was not aware of this while writing the previous article) effectively to disrupt the Portuguese shipping and policing. The Estado Da India was listing and badly at that. The heavily armed Dutch ships which came later created further havoc on the remaining Portuguese ships with their heavy 24 and 9 pounder guns. In the 17 years between 1602 and 1619, only 79 small Lisbon ships reached India and many of them did not even have trained gunners. The Portuguese were however still holding strong at their land bases and the HQ at Goa was in their firm control. By 1612 the British were also fighting sea battles with the Portuguese, intent on getting a foothold at Surat.

Jahangir continued the same policy that his father adopted. In fact one of his chief advisors was a Portuguese Friar. There were many other political issues and problems that caused Jahangir to fret, not only relating to the Portuguese but also concerning the Persian Shahs, Shia influence in Deccan, the Sultans of Istanbul, his own family etc, but we will not get into all that presently. Even the powerful Mughals had to put up with the Cartaz system as we saw and Jahangir like his father Akbar believed in keeping a balance in the name of peace and harmony, but was biding his time. The British on the other hand were looking for an opportunity to get a foothold at the Western ports. They had their eye at Calicut and Surat. About Calicut we had read about the trip by Keeling to Calicut, but as far as Surat was concerned, all their hopes rested on getting support from Jahangir. It was at about the end of the first decade that the English finally found a foothold in the region thanks to an enterprising young fella named William Hawkins who had burst upon the scene.

Captain William Hawkins led the first voyage of the English East India Company to India and sailed into the Gujarat port of Surat on 24 August 1608. He had with him 25,000 pieces of gold and a personal letter to the Mughal Emperor Jahangir from King James I seeking trade concessions. He had a perfectly miserable time at first and was quickly robbed by the franks or the Gujarat governor. Hawkins later travelled to Jahangir’s palace, impressed the emperor no end, speaking Turkish and all that and was offered an Armenian Christian wife (I will recount this story another day) in return by the pleased Badshah. Hawkins hung around in the Mughal courts for many months but failed to get a trading license for the British and finally left back for England in 1611 after getting fired by Jahangir for various reasons. But during these two years he enjoyed great rapport with Jahangir and that made the Portuguese very nervous. The Portuguese were getting worried as Hawkins was close to the emperor and there was every chance that the British would be granted trading rights, rather than temporary firmans(decrees). The Portuguese had to act to change the mind of the king.

Meanwhile, Indian merchant ships and pilgrim ships who did not comply with the cartaz requirements were routinely plundered on the high seas. But then again, a Cartaz did not always guarantee safety; often the Portuguese attacked even these ships, especially pilgrim ships, on some reason or another. As Ellisson Findly puts it, the situation had become so serious that a leading alim of Akbar's court issued a fatwa (later investigations reveal that this was only discussed but not issued) that the hajj was no longer obligatory for Indian Muslims, owing to the persecution suffered at the hands of the Persians by pilgrims going by land, and at the hands of the Portuguese by those going by sea. Perhaps that would have irritated Zainuddin even more though it is not clear if this fatwa discussion occurred after Zainuddin’s demise.

The tenth voyage (1612–1614) on behalf of the English East India Company was led by Captain Thomas Best. After reaching Surat in September 1612 Captain Best had planned to send an emissary to the Emperor asking for permission to trade and establish a factory at Surat. If refused he planned to quit the country. This may have been possibly because King James I had extended the EIC’s charter in 1609 on the basis that it would be cancelled if no profitable ventures were concluded within three years.

The attack by the nervous Portuguese went the wrong way for them for they encountered the determined Capt Best. This signaled the start of the English-Portuguese skirmishes. The first naval Battle of Swally which took place in November 1612 off the coast of Suvali (anglicized to Swally) a 7 mile beach port stretch near Surat resulted in a victory for the four English East India Company galleons over four Portuguese naus and 26 barks (rowing vessels with no armament). This relatively small naval battle turned out to be historically important as it marked the beginning of the end of Portugal's commercial monopoly over India, and the beginning of the ascent of the English East India Company's presence in India. This event sufficiently impressed the Sardar (Governor) of Gujarat, who reported it to Jahangir. Thereafter it appears that the Badshah was more favorable towards the English than the Portuguese.

On 6 January 1613, Captain Best received a letter from Jahangir ratifying the trading treaty, which was presented by the Gujarat Governor. Captain Best then ordered one of his men, Anthony Starkey, to leave for England, via land through Sind and Persia, carrying letters of their success. He and his companion, however, died shortly after, near Aleppo in Syria, their deaths being ascribed (probably without any foundation) to being poisoned by two Portuguese friars. The letters they were carrying fell into the hands of Luiz Perrera Cotta, a Portuguese (courier) and were later delivered to Spain. The Spanish king forwarded copies to Goa asking what the $%^& was going on and pressed for rigorous measures to be taken against the English and the Moguls. Multiple copies of papers had however been sent back to England by Capt Best and one set finally reached the EIC in London by Dec 1613.

But other troubling events were unfolding meanwhile, in Surat.

The Portuguese had to act. The viceroy in place was none other than Jeronimo de Azevedo de Ataíde Malafaia and he had just been moved from Ceylon to Goa. The not so wise man wanted to make his mark and foolishly decided to take on the emperor Jahangir himself. And so, one fine day, the Portuguese decided to carryout an audaciously stupid act, an act of high piracy, to blackmail the emperor. They hijacked a ship named Rahimi belonging to the Jahangir family, which naturally had a hand in the lucrative business of red sea trade & ferrying persons to Mecca.

The turning point

With this background, let us get to the story of the ship named Rahimi. Rahimi, was certainly large and conspicuous, and known as the biggest pilgrim ship (a monsoon ship as they were termed, perhaps built for the purpose of ferrying pilgrims and manned by Dutch and other sailors) of the times. It could carry 1500 passengers and displace some 1700 tons, was 52 meters long and 15 meters broad. Incidentally the tax that the ship had to typically pay each time was some 15,000 riyals. Piracy was rampant during the period and It was common practice for western pirates to attack red sea ships during their return run as they had disgorged all the goods and were laden with Gold and silver.


The owner of the ship was none other than the prodigious lady trader Maryam Uz Zamani, the mother of Jehangir. Maryam was the Hindu princess from Amber who had married Mughal emperor Akbar (1556-1605) in 1562 as part of a political alliance between her father Raja BiharI Mall Kachhwaha and the emperor. Many people are/were under the impression that she was a "Jodh Bai," a lady from Jodhpur, as suggested by some historians, but this is not apparently correct (Jahangir himself, however, married a Jodh Bai. She was mother to the future Shah Jahan and died in 1619.The capture of her ship was as you can imagine an insult to the reigning emperor’s family.

Findly explains - Maryam was a member of the court and the only woman to have the rank of 12,000 Calvary (suwdr), and was known to receive a jewel from every nobleman "according to his estate" each year on the occasion of the New Year’s festival. Like only a few other women at court, Maryam-uz-Zaman was granted the right to issue official documents (farmans), usually the exclusive privilege of the emperor. So you can see that she was very powerful and had the emperor’s ear at all times.

But her ship had given her no end of trouble. In February of 1609, Maryam’s ship was being readied to carry goods to Mocha, an Arabian port south of Mecca at the entrance of the Red Sea. The Portuguese threatened to confiscate the ship and take it to Diu unless she paid an enormous sum for a cartaz or pass; eventually, to forestall violence, the two sides were able to compromise on a much smaller payment. As the records put it - About this time there was a great stir about the queen mother's ship, which was to be laden for Mocha. The Portuguese fleet of twenty-two frigates then rode off the bar of Surat, and demanded 100,000 mamudies for her pass, and at last agreed to take somewhat more than 1000, together with sundry presents, which the Moguls were forced to give them.

There was trouble again in late 1610/early 1611 when Maryam-uz-Zamanl's ship was being loaded for an-other trip to Mocha. She had sent one of her agents to buy indigo in Bayana to be put aboard the ship for sale in Mocha. Just as the deal was being completed, however, the English trader William Finch arrived and did what no Indian would dare to do-he offered "a small matter more than she should have given," got the indigo, and made off with it. Then there was the English hijacking of Rahimi - Some moths before Best arrived, in 1612; six English ships hijacked about 10 ships coming from red sea ports. One of them was the Rahimi and the British promptly plundered all of them after taking them to a nearby anchorage. The Rahimi was ransomed for Pounds 4,000.

Maryam-uz-Zaman was furious about the English acts and complained to her son the emperor who made the English representative at Jahangir’s court, William Hawkins; suffer for some long time after that.

Why did the Portuguese choose Rahimi? One they knew that the English were planning to ally with the Mughals and secondly they wanted to make an example of stopping the pilgrimages to teach the Muslim Moguls a lesson. It was not for the booty, for the Rahimi’s pilgrims were not let go. As Findly explains, the outrage was compounded by the fact that the ship's owner was a woman and no one less than the revered mother of the current emperor. As a patron of such stature, the court would argue, she should have had a special immunity against such acts of piracy, rather than a special vulnerability.

The outcry at the Mughal court was unusually severe and, when it became clear that the Portuguese had no intention of returning the ship, Jahangir ordered the halt of all traffic through Surat, the major Indian port for sea-going trade, the seizure of the Portuguese town of Daman, the closing of the Jesuit church in Agra, and the suspension of all allowances to Portuguese priests in Mughal India.

So well, as you can imagine, the Portuguese played right into the English hands. When the English themselves had hijacked Rahimi earlier, they had wisely ransomed it off for a measly 4,000 Pounds. After the Portuguese seized it, they wanted the English to be thrown out and Daman returned to them. Jahangir did not agree and the matter was disputed for a long time. The fortunes of the Rahimi did not go well either, and it was never returned to the emperor’s mother. In 1614, the Portuguese frigates burnt about 120 ships in Goa and among them were 10 great ships. It appears that one of them was the queen mother’s Rahimi. A compensation of about 3 lakhs was eventually paid by the Portuguese to Jahangir, to settle the case. But the damage was done. The Portuguese were upstaged by the English in the Mughal court and the Franks ceased to be a major player. And thus the tide turned in favor of the British.

Whatever happened to the Viceroy who carried out all these audacious plans? He tried to find fresh pastures…In 1615 he backed an audacious expedition to Pegu to loot the Moon imperial treasures in Mrauk-U, an enterprise that ultimately did not succeed. Also in 1615 Azevedo led a huge fleet that tried to take on EIC ships under the command of Downton off Surat, but after a series of engagements he ultimately failed - an incident which demonstrated that Portuguese Goa had lost the capacity to protect its monopoly of trade on the west coast of India. On his return to Lisbon in 1617, Dom Jerónimo de Azevedo was held in custody and put on trial on several accusations, including that of not fighting the Dutch. He died in March 1625.

As for Surat, it became the British EIC headquarters till it was sacked by Shivaji in 1664. The British moved to Bombay after Catherine got it as a gift in 1874. After many misfortunes and turns of the tide, life stabilized in Surat and it is now a prosperous manufacturing city of India.

As for the East India Company, the threshold was finally crossed, profits were made after the extension for charter and the receipt of a trading treaty from Jahangir put a nice legal stamp on their activities. The EIC and the crown clung on for another 300 years to signify the ascendancy of the British Raj.

References

The capture of Maryam-uz-zamani's ship - Ellison B. Findly
Moguls, Ottomans, and Pilgrims: Protecting the Routes to Mecca in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries - Naim R. Farooqi
Britain and the Islamic World, 1558–1713 - By Gerald Maclean, Nabil Matar
The Military Revolution: Military Innovation and the Rise of the West, 1500-1800 - By Geoffrey Parker
A history of modern India, 1480-1950 - By Claude Markovits
Medieval India: from Sultanat to the Mughals, Volume 2 - By Satish Chandra
NurJahan, Empress of Mughal India - By Ellison Banks Findly
The Feast of Roses: A Novel - By Indu Sundaresan
Early travels in India, 1583-1619 - edited by Sir William Foster
The voyage of Thomas Best to the East Indies, 1612-1614 - By Thomas Best, William Foster
Royal Mughal ladies and their contributions- By Soma Mukherjee

Post script

I cannot marvel at how one story leads to another. As I researched this event, I stumbled upon another fascinating story, the story of the first Indian who visited England. That is some story, my friends and I will get to that one, shortly.

Exploring their origins

This was a particularly difficult topic for me and the only information I had to look at was a number of legends narrated by historians and reinterpreted by many more people along the way. I will not venture to titrate any amount of fact from it, for I realized early on that it is quite impossible. Confounding the issue was the fact that two castes Tiyya and Ezhava merged during the early part of this century or sometime in the last, under one classification called Ezahava. The Tiyyas of Malabar don’t seem to like it one bit and have been somewhat vociferous about that aspect. Further analysis and discussions resulted in theories of migrations from far flung origins like Polynesia, Kyrgyzstan and Crete as against the more established nearer locale Ceylon (today’s Sri Lanka). Some others countered by saying, well is not everybody from somewhere if you go all the way back? Medieval historians were somewhat unanimous about Lanka, but the Tiyyas themselves do not agree, as yet.

Looking at it from afar, our ancestors were perhaps originating from Africa, later possibly from up North, but yes, everybody came from somewhere, sometime. Sudden furor over reports made by somebody that they share DNA tracers with Central Asian people does not have to create any amount of surprise. Similar theories exist over Nairs originating from various parts of India, Middle Eastern, Scythian or other Northerly parts, we have Cochin Jews originating from today’s Jerusalem or thereabouts, The Nestorian Christians from Persian Syria and so on..And so, man is forever in search of his roots, some like A Haley even writing voluminous and eminently readable works of fiction about it. The discussions will go on and research will intensify as to why somebody left their zone of comfort and moved many miles to create yet another, while others will wonder why some other unfortunate types of displaced people like the Kurdish or the Romany’s never manage to settle down and find a home. I guess that is life, but let us get back to the topic at hand and try to first of all consolidate what I read.

It is important to establish first the earliest mentions of differences between Tiyyas and Ezhavas and Anthropologist LAK Iyer states the following about their classification and origins. In North Malabar as far as Calicut, they are known as Tiyyas; in South Malabar, Izhava or Thandans in Cochin and Travancore- Chovas and Izhavas. They are closely allied to the Tamil speaking Shanars of the Tinnalvelly District, to the Billavas of South Canara and to the Halepaiks of North Canara. Owing to their change in occupation, they are in some places called Velans and Urali s.

So now we establish the geographical distribution and get a general understanding of the categories. But how did they arrive in Southern India? Iyer goes on to explain that Tiyyan came from the word Dwipan which signifies ‘from an island’. In the same vein he explains that Izahvan means from Izham, an old name for Ceylon. Also stated is that both Thiyyas and Ezhavas perhaps originated from the Shanars (which he says is refuted by both communities) and made coconut cultivation their occupation. Further explained is the fact that Covan perhaps meant Sevakan and that there were many Ezhava soldiers in the Travancore Raja’s army and that they were called Chova soldiers.

Now how did they get to these regions? More legends abound. The first is attributed to some old Tamil Puranic texts where a Buddhist King Illa or Izha of Ceylon went to Chidambaram with his priests for a religious discussions presided by the Saivite priest Manikavachakar. Convinced, Izha was converted to the Saivite faith. His descendants were the Izhavas.

Yet another legend states that Alli a Pandyan princes married Narasimha from Vijayanagr and ran away to Ceylon to become the Izha perumal. Their descendants came to South India and formed the Ezhava communities.

The Cherman Perumal story is an interesting one where a washerwoman claims the carpenter’s caste due to a pollution accident (has to do with a wash cloth and a girl – no time to narrate all that now), after which she is killed by the carpenter. The washer men complain to the perumal who castigates the carpenters. They get angry and leave enmasse to Ceylon. The perumal is stumped and pleads with the king of Ceylon for the return of some of the carpenters. The carpenters offer to go back if they are provided armed protection. Accordingly four chovans of soldiers are deputed with them. These four created the community after arrival in the southern Malabar regions.

Mackenzie manuscripts mention the fanciful story of the seven gandharva women who were desired by Shiva – their sons were Ezhavas.

Barbosa, Pyrard etc mentioned about this community or caste. Barbosa described the Tiyyas as people engaging in such various trades as tending the palm-groves, quarry men, agricultural labourers, and men-at-arms; in short those who, ‘earn their living by work of all kinds. Pyrard of Laval mentioned that Such people as the Tuias (Tiyyan), Manen (Mannan), Canaquas (Kaniyan), Ageres (Asari) and the like were regarded as the higher classes among these outcastes. Francis Buchanan refers to the Tiyyas as an industrious people engaging in various trades. He also mentions that they did not pretend to be of the Sudra caste, but were content with their lowly position as panchamas.

When did the Tiyyas come to Kerala, if they were indeed from an island? The clue is in the possible arrival of the coconut tree to Kerala as recounted by LAK Iyer writing about Mysore castes. The Periplus 1AD does not mention coconuts or its derivatives as an exportable item of Malabar. But coconut produce is mentioned in the Cosmas indicopleustes in 520-550 AD. It is also stated that in the copper plate grants that he Tiyyars were an organized guild of coconut plantation professional farmers.

And then there is the study by Sadasivan, where he is sure that the original aborigines of Kerala were the Ezhavas and Thiyyas who practiced Buddhism. That the Nambuthiris and Nairs came from somewhere and destroyed the balance and kicked the Buddhist aborigines to levels below them as the conquered usually are. He also mentions that it could be so that the aborginies who agreed to the Brahmin wishes became Nairs and the others were classified as a lower caste. Perhaps he has a point about the Buddhist origins and more research has to be done around it, though he does himself much disservice in the book by straying away from the topic and voicing his personal dissatisfaction about the upper classes and decrying the other two upper castes for pages at a stretch in his book on the social history of India.

So now we note that Shanars, Chovas and Izhavas perhaps had direct Lankan origins. How about the Thiyyas? Interestingly the Arabic ‘nu tiyya’ is sailor – nu or nau is boat. Were they sailors or islanders?

Krishna Iyer in his History of Kerala states that the Thiyyas reached N Malabar via the Laccadives which had much trade with the Chirakkal rajas. He states that the Shanars came to the Travancore regions from Lanka, whereas the lot that went to Laccadives from Ceylon, drifted to N Malabar to form the Tiyya community. Perhaps the Thandan of the caste was allowed to settle on certain conditions and continue with the trade and other occupations like agriculture, palm tree cultivation (eventually toddy tapping) etc.

According to LAK Iyer, the Thiyyas of Malabar are the offspring of the Chirakkal Mannanar Raja, who was the son of an excommunicated Nambuthiri lady or a lady from the Chirakkal royal family (question I had was, whom did she marry? A Chovan from Ezham? Is that how the linkage with islands came about?)

Let us take a second look at the Mannanars. I had written about them earlier, Mannan is the old Malayalam usage for king. A Chief of Tiyya caste that was given the title of Mannanar, took care of destitute Namboothiri women who were outcastes, by either making them wives or treating them as sisters. The Raja of Chirakkal even donated land to him for this purpose. But if the Tiyyas were offspring of local women and matrilineal then they would not have been called Dweep’ars, right?

K Krishanan Ret Sub Judge Tellicherry explained to LAK Iyer that the Thiyyas belonged to eight Illams and thirty two kiriyams and are also known as ettu illakkar. The eight illams are nellika, Pullani, vangeri, kozhikalan, patayanguti, managuti, thenanguti, velakanguti. The titles they carried are Chekavar (Soldiers) Kurups (priests), Panikkars (trainers – kalari), vauydyan, Jolsyan, Asan (teachers) and finally Thandan the headman. The Thandan position was purchasable, they were the headmen and wore a gold knife on their waist bands and had somewhat the same social level as Nairs. His deputy was called a Ponamben. They ruled by council having 31 or 61 elders deciding things. They were matriarchal and women did not marry south of Korapuzha (men could – signifying together with matriliny, a shortage of women in their fold). They considered the ezhavas of the south to have mixed blood and did not intermarry.

So we get to the husband of the outcaste Kolathiri (or Namboothiri) lady. Was he a Buddhist at nearby Dharmadom? Was he perhaps from Lanka or did he come from the Lakshdweep? He obviously became the first Mannanar or Tiyya Raja if we follow Iyer’s logic. Let me take up this line using inputs provided by my good friend Premnath. Around 6th or 7th century Buddhists had established a flourishing monastery in a secure Island, which later on came to be known as Dharmadom, the place of dharma, near the present-day Thallasserry. In This area and in North Malabar the beggars are still addressed as ‘Bhishakar” & “Dharamakar”, probably the Buddhist Monks daily routine of going around for alms must have let this imprint. The present day “Andalur Kavu” was supposed to be a Buddhist Monastery. Vestiges of this culture can still be seen when they conduct the Annual festivals!! The legend goes on to say that a Sinhalese king was overthrown by his brother and he with his retinue sailed to this Island and took sanctuary. When the news of the Sinhalese king’s arrival reached the ruler of the land [Chirakal Raja?] he sent his emissaries and made all arrangements for his comfortable stay across the river. There was a head village surrounded by smaller hamlets-“Thala” head and “Cheri” village later on became “Thalasseri”. The King later on in the story narrates got back his kingdom and returned to his country. Some in his retinue preferred to stay back. The Thiyyas are supposed to be the descendants of these people from “Tivu” [Island] – “TIVU ARS”=Thiyyar.

But let us dwell on the Mannanar for a little bit more time. A confusion creeps up when we find a mention that he came from the Varakat Illam which is not listed as a mannanar illam of Chirakkal. That does not allow us to tie up the loose ends. The Thiyyas of Varakat illam now established at Chirakkal, far from having any disability arising from untouchability, were permitted to enjoy all privileges of the higher castes and moved about in palanquins, carrying their swords and shields and could even ask the local Kurumattur Namboothiri for a girl from his family. That this Varakat illam is not from Chirakkal creates an issue with the Mannanar origin theory, because the main Namboothiri Illams were in S Malabar and the Varakat Tiyyas were also from South Malabar. Were the mannanars of Chirakkal just there to serve the purpose of providing the banished women (banished beyond valluvanad borders) asylum? If that were the case why did the Tiyyas of N Malabar refuse marriages from the South malabar beyond Korapuzha? Food for thought!

Interestingly in the earlier days, it is said that Tiyyas and cekons did not have untouchability with Nairs or Sudras, but Ezhavas had. Ezhava women address their Nair counterparts as ‘Thamburatti’ wheras the Tiyya or Cekon woman address Nair women as ' ammalakkan ' which denotes an amount of equality. This shows that they had different social standing from the ezhavas, perhaps explained by the mannanar story above.

But then came the next theory which brings them from Pacific Polynesia or Indonesia. In fact one of the early propounders of this theory was PK Goplakrishnan. According to him and many others like Sardar KM Panikkar, the Thiyyas (Thirayors) , Uzhavars, Chantors and Vollor were older than the Ezhavas. Thiyaas were originally thiraiyars according to some historians. The Thirayars were sea people originally settled in the Tirupati, Kanchi locales. The early colonizers of Indonesia, the ancient Pandiyan mariners and warriors, were called Thirayars (People of waves) (Thiyyars of Kerala, a variant) Dweeparu, Deevaru, Dheevara, Devaru etc meaning Island people. (Theevu or Dheevu = Island). Ilanthirayan, who came from waves, became a Chola king. Thirayars founded many countries including Indonesia and many South Asian countries. Thiraiyars returned when Indonesia was invaded by Chinese, to populate various communities of the Southern four states. Some of them drifted to Malabar for reasons unknown.

Very confusing is it not? Well it certainly is, and the same came be said about virtually everybody other than Africans. Everybody else looks different and came from?????. People perhaps want to be seen as adventurers who are here braving a long and risky trek, so farther the locale, the ‘cooler’ it is. But somebody will come up with a differing theory now and then. So while this article was an airing of many of those theories, it came up with no conclusion, though it covered distant regions of the globe.

While Thiyas were placed at a disadvantaged position in the social ladder of the medieval Kerala, they worked diligently as soldiers, farmers and by tending to the palms of Malabar. In the fold were also many astrologers, writers, physicians and Sanskrit scholars. With the arrival of the British, their fortunes changed and when education was offered to all, many of the early scholars from the colleges in North Malabar and Madras were Thiyas. Dr Gundert's dictionary rightly defines the Tiyya as a "community which rose into prominence by serving the British in India". Many became rich as food contractors, bakers and liquor suppliers to the British and in certain regions this close relationship between the Tiyya with French and the British resulted in a group called White Thiyyas, somewhat like the Anglo Indians.

The Thiyyas continued to prosper and do well, some of the greatest writers like SK Pottekkat, OV Vijayan etc are testimony to the creative geniuses of the community. Eventually, we have a large and dynamic community in our midst that contributed and continues to do so, to our collective well being, through many fields. That is all that matters.

And so in conclusion, as Premnath words it, this is all stuff of romantic tales and these legends I am sure will keep surfacing at cocktail circuits and around bonfires for generations to come…

References

Castes & Tribes of Southern India – Thurston
Social history of India – SN Sadasivan
The ethnographical survey of the Cochin state, Volume 10 - L Anantha Krishna Iyer
History of Kerala - KV Krishna Iyer
Chekavars blog
Haris blog
Malabar manual - Logan
Mannanars of Chirakkal