The Pirates of Malabar, and An Englishwoman in India Two Hundred Years Ago byJohn Biddulph chapter III

THE RISE OF CONAJEE ANGRIA

Europeans were not the only offenders. The Delhi Emperor, who claimed
universal dominion on land, made no pretension to authority at sea. So
long as the Mocha fleet did not suffer, merchants were left to take careof themselves. There was no policing of the sea, and every trader had torely on his own efforts for protection. The people of the Malabar coastwere left to pursue their hereditary vocation of piracy unmolested. TheGreek author of the "Periplus of the Erythraean Sea," who wrote in thefirst century of our era, mentions the pirates infesting the coast betweenBombay and Goa. Two hundred years before Vasco da Gama had shown the wayto India by sea, Marco Polo had told Europe of the Malabar pirates.

"And you must know that from this Kingdom of Melibar, and from,
another near it called Gozurat, there go forth every year morethan ahundred corsair vessels on cruize. These pirates take with them their
wives and children, and stay out the whole summer. Their method join in fleets of 20 or 30 of these pirate vessels together, and then
they form what they call a sea cordon, that is, they drop off tilthere is an interval of 5 or 6 miles between ship and ship, so that
they cover something like a hundred miles of sea, and no merchant ship
can escape them. For when any one corsair sights a vessel a signal is
made by fire or smoke, and then the whole of them make for this, andseize the merchants and plunder them. After they have plundered theylet them go, saying, 'Go along with you and get more gain, and thatmayhap will fall to us also!' But now the merchants are aware of this,and go so well manned and armed, and with such great ships, that theydon't fear the corsairs. Still mishaps do befal them at times."[1]

From the Persian Gulf to Cape Comorin the whole coast was beset by
native pirates, and, with the rise of the Mahratta power, the evil
increased. Petty chiefs sometimes levied blackmail by giving passportsto those who would pay for them, claiming the right to plunder allships that did not carry their passes; but often the formality wasdispensed with. Owing to the paucity of records of the early days, andthe more serious hostility of the Portuguese and Dutch, we hear littleof the losses sustained from native pirates, except when some shipwith a more valuable cargo than usual was captured. Fryer tells us how,in his day, a rock off Mangalore was known as Sacrifice Island, "inremembrance of a bloody butchery on some English by the pirateMalabars." He further tells us how, in 1674, between Goa and Vingorla,he took part in an attack on a pirate ship that they came on as it wasplundering a prize it had just taken, while the Dutch watched theengagement from the shore.

"We soon made him yield his prize to engage with us, which they did
briskly for two hours, striving to board us, casting stink-pots amonus, which broke without any execution, but so frightened our rowers,that we were forced to be severe to restrain them. They plied theirchambers and small shot, and slung stones, flourishing their targetsand darting long lances. They were well manned in a boat ten times asbig as our barge, and at least sixty fighting men besides rowers. Wehad none to manage our small gun," the gunner having deserted at Goa.

However, the pirates were beaten off, and Fryer and his companions were
mightily praised by the Dutch. These pirates hailed probably from Vingorla,where the Sawunt Waree chief, known in those days as the 'Kempsant,'[2]carried on a brisk piratical trade. The name was a corruption of KhemSawunt, a common name of the Vingorla chiefs; the Portuguese changed itinto Quemar Santo, 'the saint burner,' on account of his sacrilegioustreatment of their churches.

There were no more determined pirates than the Arabs of Muscat and the
Sanganians of Beyt and Dwarka, who, between them, intercepted the trade ofthe Persian Gulf, while the Coolee rovers of Guzarat took their toll ofthe plunder. In 1683 the Company's ship _President_ was attacked by theMuscat Arabs with two ships and four grabs, and fought a gallant action.The grabs[3] were generally two-masted ships, from one hundred and fiftyto three hundred tons burden, built to draw very little water, andexcellent sailers, especially in the light winds prevalent on theWesterncoast. They had no bowsprit, but the main-deck was continued into a longoverhanging prow. The favourite mode of using them was for two or three ofthem to run aboard their victim at the same time, and attack, sword inhand, along the prow. Being built for fighting, and not for trade, theycould sail round the clumsy merchantmen that hailed from the Thames, and,
if pressed, could find safety in the shallow bays and mouths of riversalong the coast. Three grabs grappled the President at once, but theboarders were beaten back, and all three were blown up and sunk, on whichthe rest of the squadron made off. The President was set on fire insixteen places, and lost eleven men killed and thirty-three wounded.

In the following year the Josiah ketch was attacked by the Sanganians
while at anchor, and in the heat of the engagement blew up. A few of thecrew saved themselves in a skiff, but the greater number perished, amongthem the commander, Lieutenant Pitts, whose father was known in Bombay as'the drunken lieutenant.'

In September, 1685, the Phoenix, a British man-of-war that had been sentfor a two-years' cruise in Indian waters, was attacked by a Sanganianvessel that mistook her for a merchantman. It was almost a calm, andCaptain Tyrrell hoisted out his boats to capture the Sanganian ship, butthey were beaten off, so he sunk her with a couple of broadsides.Forty-one of the pirates were picked up, but many of them refused quarter,and one hundred and seven were killed or drowned. The Phoenix had threemen killed, one wounded, and two drowned. According to Hamilton, Sir George
Byng, the first lieutenant, was dangerously wounded; but the log of the
Phoenix is silent on that point, though it gives the names of the
casualties.

Three years later, the Thomas, Captain Lavender, was less fortunate.
Attacked by four Beyt ships, after a brave resistance, the Thomas took
fire, and all on board perished.

Their depredations were not confined to the sea. In 1697 some Beyt pirates
landed and plundered a village within sight of Broach.

But the losses occasioned by native pirates were at first nearly lost
sight of in the more serious losses occasioned by European corsairs.

"As for those Sanganians and those Mallabars and professed pirates,"
wrote the Directors in 1699, "we see no cause why you should not wage
an offensive as well as a defensive war against them when they fall in
your way: but it is hardly worth the while to keep small vessels to
look after them, for they are poor rogues and nothing to be got of
them to answer any charge."

In 1707, the year of Aurungzeeb's death, the pirates of the Persian Gulfmade a great haul of plunder. A squadron of them made their way to the RedSea, waylaid the Mocha fleet, and returned home laden with booty. In thefollowing year, a squadron of fourteen Arab ships from the Gulf, carryingfrom thirty to fifty guns, and with seven thousand men on board, appearedon the Malabar coast and surprised Honore, Mangalore, and Balasore(?); butthe people, having lately been plundered by the Seedee, were ready with
their arms, and beat them off with the loss of four or five hundred men.

"The Arab insolencies are often in the thoughts of the Court," wrote
the London directors, "but the Court fears they shall not be able to
do anything effectually to check their growing strength during the
present war, which finds employment for all our naval force. Further,
the Court sympathizes with Madras on their severe losses by the
pirates, which puts a damp on the Company's trade, and affects their
revenues."

Annoying as were the losses that were suffered from the chronic
depredations of the Arabs and Sanganians, they sank into insignificance
when compared with the troubles experienced on the rise to power of
Conajee (Kanhojee) Angria. The growth of the Mahratta power under Sivajeehad been accompanied by the formation of a formidable fleet which harriedthe coast of the Concan, and against which the Seedee chief, the Emperor'srepresentative afloat, could hardly maintain himself. In 1698 ConajeeAngria succeeded to the command of the Mahratta navy, with the title ofDarya-Saranga. In the name of the Satara chief he was master of the wholecoast from Bombay to Vingorla, with the exception of the Seedee'sterritory. Defenceless towns as far south as Travancore were attacked andplundered, while, at sea, vessels of native merchants were preyed upon.
For a time he seems not to have meddled with the Company's vessels; as thesize of his ships increased, he grew bolder, and, in 1702, his doingsbegan to excite apprehension. In that year he was addressed to release asmall trading vessel from Calicut with six Englishmen on board that hadbeen seized and carried into one of his harbours. What had roused hisanger against the English does not appear, but a month later we find himsending word to Bombay that he would give the English cause to rememberthe name of Conajee Angria, a threat that he carried out only too well.Two years later we find him described as a 'Rebel Independent of the RajahSivajee,' and Mr. Reynolds was deputed to find him and tell him that hecould not be permitted searching, molesting, or seizing vessels in Bombaywaters: to which he returned a defiant answer, that he had done manybenefits to the English, who had broken faith with him, and henceforth he
would seize their vessels wherever he could find them. In 1707 his shipsattacked the Bombay frigate, which was blown up after a brief engagement,and for the next half-century Angrian piracy was a scourge to the European
trade of the West coast. In 1710 Conajee Angria seized and fortified
Kennery, and his ships fought the Godolphin for two days, within sight
of Bombay, but were finally beaten off. He had now grown so powerful that,
in 1711, the Directors were told he could take any ship except the largest
Europe ones; "along the coast from Surat to Dabul he takes all private
merchant vessels he meets."

Owing to the minority and imprisonment of Sivajee's grandson, Sahoojee,[4]
the Mahrattas were torn by internal divisions, in which Conajee Angria
played his part. On the death of Aurungzeeb, Sahoojee regained his liberty,
and was seated on the guddee of Satara. Owing to his want of hardihood,
and weakness of character, the dissensions continued, and Sivajee's
kingdom seemed to be on the point of breaking up into a number of
independent chiefships. Among those aiming at independence was Conajee
Angria. In 1713, an army sent against him under the Peishwa, Bhyroo Punt,
was defeated, and Bhyroo Punt taken prisoner. It was reported that Conajee
was preparing to march on Satara. Ballajee Rao, who afterwards became
Peishwa, was placed at the head of such troops as could hastily be
collected together, and opened negotiations with Conajee. An accommodation
was arrived at, by which Conajee agreed to acknowledge allegiance to
Satara, in return for which he was confirmed in command of the fleet, with
the title of Surkheil, and granted twenty-six forts and fortified places
with their dependent villages.[5] The first result of this treaty was a
war with the Seedee, who had enjoyed some of the places in question for a
number of years. Conajee was supported by the Satara arms, and the Seedee
was forced to submit to the loss. To all intents and purposes, Conajee was
now an independent chief. He was the recognized master of a strip of
territory between the sea and the western ghauts, extending from Bombay
harbour to Vingorla, excluding the Seedee's territories, a tract, roughly
speaking, about two hundred and forty miles in length by forty miles in
breadth. With his harbours strongly fortified, while the western ghauts
made his territories difficult of access by land, he was in a position to
bid defiance to all enemies. Moreover, he was the recognized chief of the
hardy coast population of hereditary seamen, who to this day furnish the
best lascars to our Indian marine.

Angria's exploits on land had not interfered with his interests at sea. In
November, 1712, he captured the Governor of Bombay's armed yacht, together
with the Anne ketch from Carwar.[6] In the engagement, Mr. Chown, chief
of the Carwar factory, was killed, and his young wife, a widow for the
second time at the age of eighteen, became Angria's prisoner. A month
later, the Somers and Grantham, East Indiamen, on their voyage from
England to Bombay, were attacked by a grab and a gallivat belonging to
Angria, off the coast north of Goa. Owing to there being a calm at the
time, the East Indiamen were unable to bring their guns to bear: "for
which reason and by y'e earnest intercession of y'e whole ship's company
to y'e captain" the boats of the Somers and Grantham were hoisted out,
and an attempt was made to board the pirates. The attack was beaten off
with the loss of four men killed and seventeen wounded; but the pirates
found the entertainment so little to their liking that they made off.

On hearing of the capture of the Governor's yacht, the Portuguese wrote to
propose a joint attack on Angria. A few months before, he had captured the
greater part of a Portuguese 'armado,' and disabled a thirty-gun man-of-war
that was convoying it. Governor Aislabie declined the Portuguese offer,
but it had the effect of bringing Angria to terms. Thinking it politic to
make peace with the English, while his affairs with the Rajah of Satara
were still unsettled, he sent a messenger to Bombay, offering to deliver
up all vessels, goods, and captives taken from the Company, if an
Englishman of credit was sent to him to settle on terms of peace for the
future. Aislabie demanded that in future English ships should be free from
molestation; that no ships of any nation coming into Bombay should be
interfered with between Mahim and Kennery; that English merchants should
have liberty of trade in Angria's ports, on payment of the usual dues; and
that Angria should be responsible for any damage done in future by the
ships belonging to his Mahratta superiors. In return, the Governor engaged
to give passes only to ships belonging to merchants recognized by the
Company, and to allow Angria's people full trading facilities in Bombay,
on the usual dues being paid. To these terms Angria agreed, but failed to
get the Governor's consent to additional terms of an egregious nature;
that he should be supplied by the Company with powder and shot on payment;
that a place should be assigned to him to make powder in; that if pressed
by his enemies, he should be assisted by the Company; that merchant ships
should not be convoyed in or out of Bombay harbour.

There remained the duty of sending him 'an Englishman of credit' to
'deliver him the articles.' The Council, 'knowing him to be a man of ill
principles,' thought it improper to order any man on such a risky service,
but Lieutenant Mackintosh, in consideration of a gratuity of one thousand
rupees, undertook to go, and departed for Colaba, with Rs.30,000 as
ransom for the European prisoners, the convention sealed with the Council's
seal, and ships to bring back the restored goods.

And so for a time there was security from Angria's attacks, but, with his
hands free on the Satara side, and in a more secure position than ever, it
was not likely that the peace would be of long continuance. With a fleet
of armed vessels carrying thirty and forty guns apiece, with Kennery
island in his possession within sight of Bombay harbour, Angria and his
successors continued to be a menace to the existence of Bombay, while the
Angrian territory became the Alsatia of the Indian seas, where desperadoes
of all nationalities were made welcome.

The next few years saw an enormous increase of piracy in the Indian seas.
Angria was practically secure in his fastnesses along the coast, and
plundered every ship not strong enough to defend itself. His finest
vessels were commanded by Europeans, generally Dutch. The signing of the
Peace of Utrecht brought a fresh swarm of European adventurers to reap the
harvest of the seas. The privateersmen, disregarding the peace, under
pretence of making war on France and Spain, plundered ships of all nations.
Conden,[7] White, England, Taylor, and many others, made Madagascar their
headquarters, and emulated the feats of Every and Kidd. The Beyt pirates
were as mischievous as ever, while the Muscat Arabs could muster, in 1715,
a ship of seventy-four guns, two of sixty, one of fifty, eighteen carrying
thirty-two to twelve guns each, and a host of smaller vessels carrying
never less than four guns. The Company was forced to rely on its own
exertions, as there was not a single King's ship in Indian waters. The few
armed vessels belonging to Bombay convoyed the more valuable vessels along
the coast. The larger ships, that made the ocean voyage between India and
Europe, sailed in company for mutual protection.

[1] Yule's "Marco Polo."

[2] The 'Kempason' and 'King Kemshew' of Downing.

[3] From the Arabic ghorab, 'a raven.'
[4] Known in the English annals of the time as the Sow Rajah, and the
South Rajah.

[5] The principal forts were Kennery, Colaba, Severndroog, Viziadroog or
Gheriah, Jyeghur, Deoghur, Manikdroog, Futtehghur, Oochitghur; and
Yeswuntdroog.

[6] See page 264.

[7] The name of this pirate is also given as Congdon and Condent.