Calcutta in The 17th Century

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

Calcutta is all set to celebrate its tricentenary on August 24, 1690. Such an important event in the annals of Calcutta should not be missed to narrate the circumstances leading to its foundation in a befitting manner. This is what we have done in this A Tercentenary History of Calcutta, Volume 1: CALCUTTA IN THE 17TH CENTURY. We have traced its pre-history and have offered some new explanations about the meaning of the name Calcutta in the First Part of this volume. The circumstances leading to the foundation of Calcutta are fully narrated in the Second Part of this volume with the help of East India Company's records.

Calcutta is the only metropolitan City founded by the English in India unlike Bombay and Madras. And the honour of laying the foundation of Calcutta on the marshes of Sutanati, Govindpur and Kalkatah, as a prelude to a 'well-grounded dominion in India', goes to Job Charnock.

The birth of Calcutta was the result of Job Charnock's delibe- rate breach with Mogul Emperor Aurangzeb. That the East India Company entertained military designs in the 80's of the Seventeenth Century is a fact stranger than fiction. Charnock knew the strength and weakness of the Great Mogul. His 35 years' residence in Bengal gave him a keen insight into the Mogul court and camp. Sir John Child and other senior merchants of the Company in India in the 17th century were no match to Charnock's firm grasp of the political situation in Mogul India. Otherwise, how could he burn Hugli and Balasore with impunity? Sir John Child was ordered to be expelled from India by Emperor Aurangzeb for his war-mongering, but Charnock was granted permission to lay the foundation of a British Empire in India on the soil of Sutanati!

The foundation of Calcutta cannot be seen in isolation and the War with the Great Mogul cannot be treated as the childish prank of Sir John in India and his patron, Sir Josia Child, in England. The skirmish at Hugli, occupation of Hijili, burning of Balasore etc. are to be viewed as part of that grand design for establishing a dominion in India behind the back of Aurangzeb.

WAS JOB CHARNOCK THE FOUNDER OF CALCUTTA?

Who founded Calcutta? How was Calcutta founded? Why was Calcutta founded? These are the three questions that every student of history frequently asks. There was no dispute about who founded Calcutta till 1895 when an Armenian historian produced an epitaph bearing the date July 1630 from one of the churchyards of the city. This apparently cast doubts about the claim of Job Charnock being the founder of Calcutta as the Armenian burial is 60 years before the advent of Charnock on the scene. Was it a genuine tombstone or a fake? There are more myths about Calcutta and its founder. We shall have to examine them carefully.

Was the birth of Calcutta a fortuitous outcome of the East India Company's war with the great Mogul Emperor Aurangzeb? Was there any war or simply a naval blockade? Did the few English merchants entertain the idea of foundation of 'a large well-grounded sure English dominion in India as far back as 1685? Was the war with the Mogul undertaken with the sanction of the King of England? What were the grievances of the English merchants against the provincial governors of Aurangzeb? Was the war with the Mogul actually the brainchild of Job Charnock? We shall examine these questions in Chapter 3.

Was Charnock, who advocated a breach with Emperor Aurangzeb, a war-monger like Sir John Child, the Company's chief executive in India in 1685-1690? Was Sir John Child a brother of Sir Josia Child, the East India Company's Chairman from 1680 to 1686? Were the Childs simply children compared to Job Charnock in the breadth of his grasp of the political situation in Mogul India? Did Sir John live up to the expectations entertained of him by Sir Josia? Was not Aurangzeb incensed at the piratical and violent acts of Sir John Child? Did the occupation of the Island of Bombay by the Sidi, the Mogul Admiral, bring Child's mortification? Did Sir John eat h's own humble pie? Was he really a coward as alleged by Capt.