What's new

War Heroes In Medieval South Asia

What about dates? Who was regnant in Portugal at the time (between 1567 and 1581)? Was Portugal under Spain? Who was the common ruler of Portugal and Spain? This was within 7 years of the date of the defeat of the Armada by the English, but were the Portuguese ships like the ships of the Spanish Armada or much smaller, better suited for unknown waters and dangerous coastal waters? Also, how could cotton-clad soldiers handle themselves in battle against cuirasse-clad Portuguese men-at-arms and knights?

For the first bolded part, please read my explanation in the next post.


For the second bolded part is that I dont think they were as terrifying on land as when compared to sea. Probably, as the numerical superiority of the locals would come into play here. I dont think they had a huge army stationed in Goa. Ofcourse, this is my guess! And I'm not sure why they could occupy Goa but fail to capture coastal Karnataka or Kerala with their navy.
 
Last edited:
Historical Ambiguity

The Portuguese records are the primary source of our information, which certainly could be biased in an attempt to glorify the battles fought by their own commanders.

The dates of the above battles have become a matter of speculation. In the true Indian tradition, history was not written down contemporaneously or if written it has been lost. When history is passed down as oral tradition, much is lost. Even the dates of the battles are uncertain. The rani was said to have ruled for fifty-four years, according to one account, which makes her the ruler of Ullal from 1544 to 1598. This certainly puts the last battle with the Portuguese not in 1581 but much later.

Ganapati Rao Aigal in his account of the local history (Dakshina Kannada Jilleya Prachina Itihasa, published in 1928) was able to reconstruct in some detail the genealogy of Chauta rulers. Thirumala Raya III ruled from 1510 to 1544 and Abbakka Devi II from 1544 to 1582. She was followed by a Thirumala Devi from 1582 to 1606. There was also one queen Abbakka Devi preceding the Rani and one followed her later. The genealogy of the Banga kings of Mangalore shows that Lakshmappa Banga-raja II was ruled from 1545 to 1556. His nephew, Kamaraya III, was in power from 1556 to 1612.

Similarity in some of the names of the rulers and the fact that they followed a matrilineal system might have contributed to the confusion. It is not clear from the historical accounts whether Rani Abbakka Devi died in 1582 or in 1598. It is possible that two rulers of similar names followed each other and this has led to the historical quandary.

The Intrepid Queen by Neria Harish Hebbar, MD
 
wow... lot of questions! :-)

Unfortunately, I do not know the answers to them all... though I can try getting them at a later point of time.

From what I have heard, the Portuguese had their huge ships with cannons mounted on them. Not much of an army, but mainly a very strong and tested navy. They would anchor their ships at some distance from the harbour and then bombard the ports as well as the city, forcing the city into submission. The port city of Mangalore is supposed to have been razed down by them using this tactic.

My reference is to the fact that the Portuguese in particular had three different kinds - and sizes - of ships: in order of size, the Caravel, the Carrack and the Galleon. The Caravel was about 50 to 100 tons, about the size of an ocean-going dhow, and carried maybe 20 people, and guns if required (only if built to carry a broadside of guns); the Carrack was an intermediate size but could go up to a maximum of 1,000 tons; the Galleon was longer in build than the Carrack, and therefore speedier through the water, and between 500 to 2,000 tons! Carracks were unarmed ships occasionally armed, Galleons were built to carry guns normally.

Probably these were Carracks sailing out of Goa, unable to come inshore, with a deep draught and not good for inshore work. They may have been rigged fore-and-aft or with a lateen sail; this is important, as it would determine their handling. They carried different types of guns. It is worth looking up culverin, demi-culverin, and saker, and then cannon and carronade (the last two are later than the period that we are talking about, more in the 17th and 18th centuries).

To counter this technologically superior navy, Abbakka Rani used the Snake boats.... a recent import which is most definitely an idea borrowed from the Zamorins. These boats were very small and narrow which made them very manoeuvrable against the heavy ships deployed by the Portuguese. The cannons were pretty much useless against these small, fast boats.

Where are you getting these priceless details from?

That would make perfect sense; the large Portuguese vessels would be fearful to come close inshore, where the slope of the beach would not necessarily be measured or known; if they came close in, they would be fearful of being becalmed, being dependent totally on wind for propulsion, and be completely at the mercy of quick, paddled boats which could attack them on a quarter not covered by their fixed-position artillery. The classic problem of sailing boat facing galley. There is a famous Hornblower story about this which is a must-read.

Also, her navy was supposed to have used the 'Agni baana'. I am not very sure what it really was. But even in wars earlier than this, armies in this region had used explosive laden hollow metal balls which were lighted and then 'manually' thrown. So maybe, 'Agni baana' was an arrow with some explosives laden at the tip!

Using these fast moving boats and flame arrows, few archers mounted on them would follow a shoot-and-scoot approach. A bunch of these boats following a kind of 'guerilla warfare' technique would harass and damage the Portuguese ships. These tactics were rigorously practiced and people specifically trained as boatmen and archers for the task. Also, they had informers patrolling the seas and the same was done even by the neighbouring kingdoms who would forewarn of any incoming enemy ships.

This strategy would make approaching the ports an expensive affair to the Portuguese and prevented them from coming anywhere near to shooting-distance of the ports!

While you have described grenades quite accurately - it was from these that troops got the name grenadiers; only bigger, heftier men were selected to be grenadiers, as they needed to be stronger than ordinary to hurl the steel and iron cased grenades long distances - an 'Agni-baan' need be nothing more than a fire-arrow, a deadly weapon against a sailing ship dried in the tropical sun, the gaps between its deck and hull planking plugged (caulked) with pitch, its rigging of highly inflammable manila rope and canvas sails. In the Anglo-Dutch Wars, and Napoleonic Wars, fire ships were used with deadly effect; the earliest use I can think of was contemporary to your account, in the battles between Elizabethan England and the Spain of Habsburg Philip II.

An extraordinary account. Have you more information?
 
Have you more information?

A local weekly magazine was bringing out the life story of Abbakka Rani. Must be about 10 years back! It must have been 30-40 episodes long. All in hard copy, I dont think you will find it online.
 
@K. S. Raj

It would be so nice to receive other such notices as well.

I was reading up on the Gardners, who rapidly became Anglo-Indian, although retaining their peerage as Barons of Uttoxeter till today. Their ancestor set up Gardners' Horse. Or Claude Martin, from France, who became the principal military commander at the court of the King (not Nawab, mind you) of Oudh. Or Allard, or Venturi, of the Lahore Court.

This is an Anglo-Indian, or an Indo-European selection. There must be dozens of similar personalities from Persia or Afghanistan, who served the Mughals, for instance, or, in later years, the Nizam of Hyderabad. Surely somebody has the material to write on them? And on the methods of warfare that were practised then?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom