Bheemunipatnam or Bimlipatam: Under the Dutch 1600-1800

(Note: Google Translate has been used for translating sources written in Dutch, French and German.)

Preface: During my trip to Mukhalingam in the Srikakulam district of Andhra Pradesh, I managed to make a short stop at Bheemunipatnam or, as it was earlier called, Bimlipatam. I had heard of an old Dutch cemetery there which I wanted to see. Followed directions on Google Maps but since there are no large boards marking this cemetery it took me some time to locate it. Then, just outside the cemetery, I saw a small brown board which gives information about the cemetery. Inside, I found several gravestones but only a few had engravings which also were only partially visible. Since the inscriptions were in Dutch, I could hardly understand whatever little was visible. I was itching to find out more about the place and the town, but I lacked the time for it. Nevertheless, once back home I put on my researcher’s hat and searched for any information I could lay my hands on to present this article. To my surprise, the first thing I learnt was that there are two cemeteries in Bimlipatam – the second being the Flagstaff Cemetery located opposite the lighthouse, which I missed visiting.

I must add here that the name of the place has been spelt in numerous ways since the time it was noticed by the Europeans. Here are the various spellings (and names too) of the place Bimlipatam, or Bheemunipatnam as we call it today:

Bemelipatnam, Bimilipatnam, Biblipatnam, Bimelipatnam, Bimelipatam, Bimlepatam, Bimilipatan, Bimulipatam Brimilipatnam, Bimlepatan, Bimblepatam, Bimblapatam, Bimbilapatam, Bimlapatam, Bymilipatam, Bimlepatnam, Billiapatam, Bimelepatnam, Bumelpatnam, Bimmelepatnam, Bymelipatnam, Bymelepatnam, Bymelopatam, Bymelepatam, Bymolopatam, Bymolapatam, Bimelapatam, Binnilipatnam, Bibolipatan, Biblipatan, Bimbelpatam, Bemlepatam

Bimlipatam or Bheemunipatnam is located on the east coast of India, a few miles north of Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh. The old part of Bimlipatam is on a small promontory along the coast with river Gosthani flowing into the Bay of Bengal just north of it. Before the arrival of the Dutch, Bimlipatam was a small obscure village. As described later, to reach the village of Bimlipatam from Visakhapatnam, there was a road meandering along the coast on one side and hills on the other, making it a scenic route.[1]

Seventeenth Century

Bimlipatam came into prominence when the Dutch East India Company established a factory (a building which housed the offices of the Company and had storerooms to keep the goods they traded in) in Bimlipatam in 1628. The Dutch East India Company was granted Bimlipatam by a Farman by the Nizam in the same year which was ratified by the Mughal Emperor in Delhi.[2] At another place in the same source it is mentioned that the place was first granted to the Dutch by the Raja of Vizianagram which was confirmed by the Nizam of Hyderabad who was part of the Mughal Empire at the time. 

As per the Gazetteer of Madras Presidency:

“…it [Bimlipatam] was represented to be held under Fermans granted by the Nizam and confirmed by the Mogul or Emperor of Delhi, bearing dates from A.D. 1628 to A.D. 1713, and by a Cowle* granted by Hajee Housson in A.D. 1734 and A.D. 1754 by Jaffar Ally Khan. The two last mentioned persons were Naibs or deputies of the Nizam in the Circars.”[3] (*a contract)

However, it seems the Dutch had established a base in Bimlipatam much earlier. Alexander Rea of the Archaeological Survey of India states in his report of 1897 that there was a tombstone in the Dutch cemetery at Bimlipatam which mentioned the year 1623. Further, there is a letter written by a Dutch merchant based at Bimlipatam dated April 1616 lamenting about his inability to go make purchases in Bengal because of the wars between the Arakans and the Mughals.[4]

Maps of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century were checked to confirm if Bimlipatam was noticed earlier than 1620s by the Dutch or any of the other European trading companies. Interestingly, “India Orientalis” a world map of 1607-8 created by Gerard Mercator, has Bimlipatam marked.[5] Further research resulted in finding another old map dated 1606 which has Bimlipatam along with Vizagapatam marked on the eastern coast.[6] This means that the Dutch would have had a base in Bimlipatam before the publication of this map. The Dutch may not have had a permanent lodge at the time but would have taken up lodgings on rent which was the method European trading companies adopted to gauge trading potential of a place before constructing permanent factories. In fact, in a world map of 1621 by Peiter van den Keere, Bimlipatam is marked but no other Dutch posts find a mention[7] which may imply that Bimlipatam was considered an important place for the Dutch. Further, a book on the history of Dutch trade and navigation published in 1801 mentions that Masulipatnam was the first place where the Dutch began trading on the Coromandel coast. This was followed by Palicol (later called Petapoli, located 18 miles south of Masulipatnam). The author states that there was also a Dutch establishment located 12 miles from Palicol which was one of the first lodges constructed during the first expedition of the Dutch but was in a dilapidated state at the time of writing of the book. For Bimlipatam the author wrote, “Quite early on, our people had also established a residence at Bimilipatam, which, being not far from the beach, was considered very suitable to serve as a larder for our possessions in Ceylon.”[8] An interesting essay written as an introduction to the travels of one Dutch merchant named Peter Floris, supposedly a pseudonym, who was one of the early Dutch travellers to the Coromandel coast, analyses various early letters and manuscripts to conclusively infer that the Dutch had visited the Coromandel coast in the first few years of the 17^th Century.[9]

All evidence given above point to the fact that Bimlipatam had a Dutch lodge as early as 1606 or possibly even before because the first expedition of the Dutch to the Coromandel coast happened in 1603-04.[10]  

Tapan Raychaudhuri states that the Dutch post at Bimlipatam was attacked and plundered by a local Raja in 1638 who took away all the merchandise stored there and despite several attempts to recover the goods the Dutch were unsuccessful.[11] The reason for this raid is not given but it could mean two things. Firstly, the trade under the Dutch was flourishing greatly resulting in jealousies in the local rulers and secondly, the Dutch were being aggressive in their dealings and in trade causing angst in the the powers that be. Later in the same work, Raychaudhuri mentions that in 1651 Gerrit Backer sought a farman to open a trading post at Bimlipatam or Vizagapatam.[12] This could indicate that either the Dutch were trading without permission till then or they had permission for only limited trade which they thought appropriate to work from a leased property and therefore were seeking permission to build a more secure factory rather than operating out of leased properties exposing them to attacks mentioned above. These events confirm that Bimlipatam was very much part of the network of trading posts of the Dutch in the Coromandel Coast during the early years of the seventeenth century.     

As per records of the East India Company, the Dutch settled at Bimlipatam twenty years before the English set up their factory in Visakhapatnam in 1682. Amusingly, the English merchants Ramsden and du Jardin write about the Dutch establishing their post in those parts before the English as being “very great heartburning.”  They further wrote that the Dutch for their quarters had managed to get an old house which stood on a piece of land given to them by the Sarlaskar. They had employed six Rajputs to guard their lodge.[13] The use of the word “settled” indicates that the Dutch had a permanent lodge at the place in about 1662.

Daniel Havart, a Dutch physician, who had lived for some years in the Coromandel Coast (1670s and 1680s) wrote the following about the name of the place:

“Bhimondepatam, or, for short, Bimilipatnam (as we call it), meaning in Dutch, a city founded in honor of the idol Bhimond, or a ‘farm town,’ as the word is pronounced in the Tellinga language. This place is the smallest and most remote location the Eastern Company has in the North; we cannot describe it in detail, as we only happened to see the village once in passing, also because there isn’t much to do here….”[14]

A century later, Jacob Haafner, a German-Dutch traveller, visited Bimlipatam in 1780s and the following is his understanding of the name of Bimlipatam:

“Bhiempatnam is the true name of this village; some believe that it was formerly a large and populous town, whose name comes from Bhiem, one of the heroes of the poem Mahabharath, who resided here. Others, however, derive it from the Tella language, in which the name Bhiem means rice.” ^[15]

The privilege of minting coins was granted to the Dutch in the same Farman of 1628. Though it is believed that the Dutch minted coins in gold, copper and silver in Bimlipatam, evidence suggests that only copper coins were minted and only till 1794. The silver coins issued at Bimlipatam were coined at Jagganautpooram [17] now known as Jagannaickpur in Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh.

It is stated that the Dutch built a fort and a factory in Bimlipatam in the middle of the 17^th century around the same time as the English established themselves at Visakhapatnam.[18] That the Dutch had built a fort in the 1650s could not be confirmed through either Dutch sources and records maintained in the National Archive of the Netherlands or in the collections of the Leiden University library which is the oldest university of Netherlands. Also, Havart, who, as mentioned above, visited Bimlipatam in the 1680s, does not record the existence of a fort. Instead, he gives a detailed description of the factory or a lodge, as the Dutch called it in 1686. If indeed a fort was built in the 1650s then Havart would not have missed mentioning it. As for the Dutch lodgings, he notes that these were situated not far from the beach.

Plan of lodgings

Legend of the layout[19]

1. Gate of the Lodgings
2. A Gallery
3. A Forehouse (or Front house) of the Chief
4. A Large Room
5. A hallway
6. A nursery
7. An office
8. A dispensary
9. A pantry
10. A secretory
11. An open space for keeping livestock
12. A commode
13. A long open space
14. A large area to create a new dwelling for the second person, as the old building threatened to fall every hour, but in 1686 it was still not completed.
15. A place where the gate of the Lodge would previously have stood
16. A room where the clothes are received.
17. A newly built warehouse.
18. A place where the balance is hung.
19. An iron warehouse under the stairs, which one uses to go upstairs.
20. The warehouse beneath the flat, above which a room was to be built.
21. An open gallery.
22. A warehouse beneath the upper house of the Chief, which house also had to be demolished.
23. A room for the Chief.
24. A large open space where the Chief’s kitchen, some slave quarters, and a garden were to be built.
25. The court of the Lodge

In the 1660s the local governor at Srikakulam harassed and impeded the Dutch in their trading business. Since the governor’s post was “farmed out at exorbitant rates” the governors would extract money by any means. One way was controlling the price of procurement of rice. The Dutch had to haggle with the governor for the price and found it difficult to get new governors to abide by the agreed price negotiated with the earlier one. The constant troubles faced by the Dutch at Bimlipatam led the Dutch to temporarily abandon the place sometime in 1664 or 1665. However, the Dutch could not let go of Bimlipatam as it was the best place to procure rice for Ceylon. The Dutch high command at Batavia directed their factors in Coromandel to take charge of Bimlipatam. [20] Upon their return they continued to face problems. The Sarlaskar found petty reasons to impede the smooth functioning of the Dutch factory at Bimlipatam. For instance, in 1666, one Dutch factor was arrested and forced to pay a large sum as penalty because the Sarlaskar suspected the Dutch of colluding with the Portuguese in their attack on the Orissa coast. In 1668, a brawl between the Sarlaskar’s men and the Dutch resulted in the former laying siege and occupying the Dutch factory at Bimlipatam for a short while.[21]

Despite paying an annual rent of 500 guilders to the Golconda king for renting out Bimlipatam to them, the Dutch were made to face such troubles. To remove these obstacles and the high rent, the Dutch sent an embassy to the king of Golconda in 1671 to request the following: [22]

1. Freedom everywhere, as the English enjoyed on the coast.

2. The lease of the village of Palicol [later called Petapoli] in perpetuity, for a maximum of 8,000 guilders per year.

3. Reimbursement of some rice charges and exemption from the toll at Bimlipatam, where these had been taken from the Company’s employees.

4. Permission to transport the goods using one’s own handwriting and passports.

In early 1676, the king of Golconda visited Masulipatam where the Dutch entertained him lavishly and presented him with gifts and presents worth 66,458 florins. In return the king granted several important rights to the Dutch through farmans.[23] Among the several rights one was the abrogation of the annual rent. The agreement signed then is given below.[24] (The translation of the source written in Dutch was done using Google Translate.)

“Order of King Sultan Abu-il-Hassan Kotbsj’ah, concerning the toll of Bimilipatam, belonging to Sikakol. Above it was written: “God is the King and the King.” The seal of His Majesty, with the usual description:

There is a worldly submissive commandment, glittering as the sun, and a command of necessary pursuit, from the blessed Court, full of God’s Vicarage, accompanied by righteousness, so emerged, namely.

That all Land Bailiffs, Governors, Custodians, Recorders present and future in the city of Bimilipatam, belonging to Sikakol [now Srikakulam], know: That the handle of honor and respectability, the best and most select among his own, the Dutch Captain, residing in the blessed maritime trading place of Mazulipatam, has submissively expressed his wish to those who have found the good fortune to stand at the foot of the throne of him who is a Vicar of God.

That the E. Company trades in the aforementioned city of Bimilipatam and conducts its trade, and pays two of the hundred Pagodas, amounting annually to one hundred Pagodas, or five hundred guilders, requesting with one in all humility that the aforementioned moneys be cleared, and that no difficulties be encountered in the work regarding those who conduct the E. Company’s business there, with promises that the said village would become abundant and enriched from the trade there, and small and large goods would flow there in abundance, bringing profits to the King’s treasury. Therefore, out of royal courtesy and a widely spread Cosriose affection, we have imposed a toll of two per bond, or in total the hundred Pagodas per year, paid and donated to the said Dutch Company.

Therefore, they, [Regents], will establish that this is granted once and for all, and will not cause the least difficulty or disturbance to the servants and subjects of the said Dutch Company, so that they may conduct their trade with peace of mind and peace, without any doubt that Bimilipatam will be filled with blessing and abundance, it being unnecessary to issue a new order regarding this matter every year, take a copy of this highly exalted Firman and return the original.

They [Rulers] then behave according to this high commandment, and consider it a matter of very strong insistence. Written in the mane Sikada, Anno Muhammedano 1086, Anno Christi 1676 on the side it said: With permission from the Lord Madūena, with the usual titles. (Google corrected line’ translation- Written in the mane Cicada, Anno Muhammad Ano 1086, Anno Christi 1676 on the side it said: With permission from the Lord Madūna, with the usual titles.)”

However, the Sarlaskar at Srikakulam refused to abide by the orders and instead started levying tolls in total contravention of the agreement signed by his ruler. In response the Dutch blockaded the Gingelly coast [25] resulting in the complete stoppage of trade in rice causing shortage of the produce in Masulipatnam and nearby areas. This crippling of trade in rice coupled with the seizure of one the Sarlaskar ships forced the Sarlaskar to accept the terms of the Dutch East India Company {VOC) and the Dutch returned to Bimlipatam in 1678.[26] However the peace did not last long because soon afterwards two Hindu rajas rebelled resulting in the Dutch moving all their merchandise and goods from Bimlipatam to Masulipatnam and operating from there. Peace returned in early 1680s and the Dutch returned to Bimlipatam in 1682.[27]

Soon after, in 1686, Aurangzeb’s army took control of Golconda fort after a prolonged siege. The downfall of the Qutub Shah rule caused the ruin of trade to such a great extent that a place like Masulitpatam witnessed a complete halt of trade as “merchants deserted the place.”[28] The only Dutch factory that functioned normally during the turmoil in the hinterland was Bimlipatam.[29]

Havart says that Bimlipatam was not a place of great importance. It was only a rationing house for Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) where, in the past, “whole ships of rice used to be sent.” During his visit, trade in Bimlipatam was much reduced with no sale taking place for most part of the year except when “sometimes some merchandise is sent instead of cash” from other Dutch factories. The cause of the fall in trade was the constant trouble faced by merchants from the Sarlaskar. However, Wouter Schouten, a Dutch surgeon presents a contradictory picture. Schouten who visited sometime in the mid 1670s writes about Bimlipatam being a very fertile place and that which brought great profit to the VOC.[30]

The Dutch purchased rice, Guineans,[31] Salempuris,[32] Dongris, Negros,[33] lacquered cloth, and turmeric. Of these the most profitable one was the lacquered cloth for which there was a great demand in Persia where it sold at 600 percent profit. However, the Dutch at Bimlipatam found the supplies of this particular cloth hard to procure because the people of the lands from where the lac was collected were in constant war with the Sarlaskar [34]. Around the same time, the English who had a factory in Visakhapatnam, not far from Bimlipatam, note that the Dutch ships carried calicoes, oil, rice, turmeric and butter from Bimlipatam to coastal towns like Masulipatam.[35]

Havart was witness to a great famine which struck the region in 1678, but he says that Bimlipatam was largely untouched by the scourge. This famine impacted the Dutch commerce on the Coromandel coast quite extensively and since Bimlipatam was not an important place, it was one of the first places to be targeted by the Dutch government at Batavia which ordered the reduction of the establishment at Bimlipatam to three sub-merchants and ten local Indians. However, the reduced numbers proved insufficient to do the work at Bimlipatam which resulted in the Dutch authorities increasing the numbers of the local Indians to twenty-five from the original ten. Besides the reduction in staff at the place, extras such as the annual table expenses of 50 ducats[36] were abolished and two horses assigned to the place were withdrawn along with oil etc.[37]. Francois Valentyn, a Dutch Calvinist minister and author, visited the east coast of India in the first decade of the 18^th century, and lamented the reduction of Dutch staff which happened in 1678, as described by Havart. Valentyn saw this act as being responsible for the diminishing of “prestige of the Dutch Company, and its income and benefits among the Natives.”[38]

Another famine hit south India in late 1687 which resulted in immense suffering and mortalities to both man and beast. The Mughals had ruined the city of Golconda and were in siege of the castle. It is described that “weavers and painters, as well as the merchants, having fled and died, the trade throughout Chormandel, but mostly in the north, with the exception of Bimilipatnam, has suffered such a breakdown that the sale of the goods brought, as well as the quality of the cloth, has been almost entirely destroyed.”[39]

The Sarlaskar allowed the Dutch to trade unmolested only if they offered him expensive gifts and the chief of the lodge had to pay him a visit annually and never emptyhanded. Havart qualifies that the gifts very not as expensive as other lodges because of their diminutive operations at Bimlipatam which yielded rarely “more than twenty thousand guilders in profit a year.” But giving expensive gifts to local governors and chiefs to maintain cordial relations and to protect their business was the norm along the Coromandel coast.[40] 

Philippus Baldeus, a Dutch missionary, who visited the Coromandel coast in the late 1650s, a couple of decades before Havart, mentions that Bimlipatam was an important trading post for the Dutch from where rice and other produce were exported with great profit.[41] The French traveller Jean de Thevenot, who visited the coast around the same time as Baldeus, states that rice, fine linen, iron, wax and lacquer was traded from this post. [42]

Havart mentions that Bimlipatam had a convenient harbour and Dutch ships sent from Malacca to Coromandel coast first anchored here for victualling and other necessities.[43] Tapan Raychaudhuri writes that ships of 50 to 70 tons were being built at Bimlipatam and other places such as Narsapur, Masulipatam and Pulicat in the mid 17^th century. Growing trade along the coast could not be handled by their regular ships as they would be available infrequently and lacked adequate space. At first local vessels were employed to convey cargos between their several factories and posts along the eastern coast however that too could not solve their problems. In 1652, the Dutch headquarters at Batavia authorised the construction of ships of small size in the places mentioned above. However, this was brought to halt in 1661 as the cost of building ships was considered expensive by the authorities at Batavia [44].

The rivalry between various European trading companies in India made it imperative for merchants of the companies to be aware of the locations and operations the other European nations[45]. Havart notes with a sense of relief that “there are no other European traders in this small place, except the Dutch, but twelve miles from here there is a village called Viziagapatam [Visakhapatnam], where the English and the Danes each have a lodge or a house, to conduct their trade, as we used to do there in former times, but it does not amount to much with them, and they can, for that reason, do us little damage”[46]. Interestingly, Havart suggests that the Dutch used to trade from Visakhapatnam before establishing themselves in Bimlipatam. A map of 1621 in the National Archives of Netherlands depicts places where the Dutch had a lodge or a factory by placing their flag. In this map both Visakhapatnam and Bimlipatam have flags against their names, clearly indicating that the Dutch did have a setup in Visakhapatnam in the early decades of the 17^th century.[47]

Eighteenth Century

Valentyn noted that the Bimlipatam lodge had a sub-merchant as chief and under him were two book-keepers and an assistant.[48] He also states that Bimlipatam was being called as Bunnilipatam during his time and that nothing from Netherlands was sold here. Instead, the Dutch used the cash to make purchases of many kinds of cloths which were much better in quality than elsewhere along the Coromandel coast [49]. At his time rice, lacquer and Guinea cloth were exported to Persia and Salampur cloth, Dongris and Negros were exported to Ceylon from Bimlipatam [50].

Valentyn reaffirms Havart’s statement of the corrupt behaviour of the Sarlaskar but instead of seeking gifts the Sarlaskar during Valentyn’s time sought alcohol supply from the Dutch. “The Serlaskeer, or Head of the King’s army, who used to hold court at Sikakol, about fourteen miles from here, almost like a Viceroy had to be constantly plied with alcohol by our men to keep the flow of trade flowing smoothly, but since the total profits of this Comptoir [commercial setup] in an entire year did not exceed 20,000 guilders, the gifts were also somewhat rationed.” [51]

In the early decades of the 18^th century, Bimlipatam was flourishing as a trading town. It is noted in one of the sources that in 1702 the Dutch merchants at Bimlipatam were given full power over Srikakulam,[52] the place where the local governor was based. It is unclear what transpired that resulted in this directive by the Dutch high command at Batavia. However, certain happenings consequent to this may hold answers. In 1706, the Dutch became serious about protecting their buildings and decided to surround them by a stone wall. At the same the decision was taken to build a mud wall at their post in Sadraspatnam.[53] The wall is a clear indicator of the growing importance of Bimlipatam and, also, of its vulnerability to adversarial forces one of which could have been the governor at Srikakulam.  

By 1730s, the Dutch high command at Batavia were giving priority to places which were more profitable, one of which was Bimlipatam and the other being Palliacatta.[54] The English at Vizagapatam bemoaned the fact that Bimlipatam was doing better trade than Vizagapatam despite “more hardships and oppressions” in Bimlipatam.[55] For the English the reason for Vizagapatam not faring as well as Bimlipatam, was that the latter was given on rent annually to the highest bidder by the Raja (not mentioned which king but it was the Raja of Vizianagram at that time) while Vizagapatam was rented to them by the Nawab of Golconda at a fixed rate. The Rajah did not like to see Vizagapatam flourishing at the cost of Bimlipatam and to curtail the growth of Vizagapatam the Raja could at his will stop grain coming from his country to Vizagapatam thereby harming the prospects of the place.[56] 

The English had other problems with the Dutch at Bimlipatam. The cloth purchased at Vizagapatnam by English merchants could not be finished properly as skilled workmen were attached to the Dutch who gave them better rates. In 1745, a merchant named John Andrews from Ganjam wrote to the English Governor of Fort St Geroge that the cloths he purchased were not coming out properly because there were only a few families who performed the task well. He tried to bring washers from Bimlipatam but the Dutch were paying them well and therefore they did not want to leave their employment.[57]

Bimlipatam by the 1740s had become one of the most important ports for the Dutch. The place was equidistant from Nagapattinam in the south and Bengal in the north. Ships of all kinds and belonging to different nations and private people would anchor at Bimlipatam and get victuals and any repair work on their ships. It seems the remnants of the ship building yard of the 1660s were resuscitated to provide the services. The Dutch government at Batavia directed in 1740 that anchors, and other spares required by ships, be kept Bimlipatam so that Dutch ships were not forced to buy from outside.[58] This would mean that either the purchase of anchors and such from outside resulted in incurring high costs or that the Dutch could not rely on the quality of products available in the outside market. This confirms the existence of ship repair and spare parts market being in operation at the place. 

The rivalry between the Dutch at Bimlipatam and the English at Vizagapatnam intensified as the century progressed. Merchants and traders who owed money or committed a crime started taking refuge in the factory of the rival nation. For example, in 1752-53, an Englishman named Thomas Kemmeling took shelter at the Dutch factory at Bimlipatam from the English authorities. The details of the crime he committed are not clear, but it must have been quite grave because the English sent “a corporal and 24 seapoys” to bring him back to Vizagapatnam dead or alive. The Dutch refused to entertain the request of the English by informing them of their own acts of protecting escapees from the Dutch at Bimlipatam.[59] These acts of providing refuge to criminals of the rival factory had become quite frequent. In another instance, in 1764, three Indian merchants who owed money to the Dutch at Bimlipatam escaped to Vizagapatnam and other places belonging to the English. The Dutch failed in getting them back from the English.[60]

In 1750s, the French began to spread their influence in south India. The first act was to get their own man as Nizam of Hyderabad. This was achieved by the French forces under the command of Marquis De Bussy. In return, Bussy managed to get the control over the maritime affairs of the coast of Coromandel from Madras to the border of Orissa.[61] In 1754, Jaffer Ali, the Naib of Srikakulam and Rajamundary and Viziaram Vaz, the king of Vizianagram, who were arch enemies, signed a peace agreement to take on the French forces who were on a spree to acquire territories. However, Bussy realising that the French could not defeat the combined forces of Jaffar Ali and Viziaram Vaz, decided to break their partnership by enticing Viziaram Vaz with the offer of revenue collection at Srikakulam and Rajamundary at a lower rate. Vaz abandoned his partnership with Jaffar Ali resulting in Jaffer Ali turning to the Marathas for assistance. At that time Maratha leader Ragoji’s son was in the vicinity with a large body of soldiers. Jaffar Ali managed to convince him to attack Srikakulam and later plundered the Dutch factory at Bimlipatam.[62] They took away several chests of treasure from Bimlipatam.[63] A Dutch source claims that four tons of gold was taken away.^[64] A letter from English authorities at Fort St George to Stephen Vermont, the Dutch President and Governor at Negapattinam, provides some details of the attack on Bimlipatam. They write that because of the sudden attack of the Marathas on Bimlipatam “both the town and your factory at Bimlipatam had been reduced to ashes. The attack was so sudden and unexpected; that the Gents, your agents had but just time to make their escape in the cloaths they slept in, this happened the 1^st instant…” The English sent a rescue party with palakins for the Dutch who had escaped and met them between Bimlipatam and Waltair at 2am in the morning. The Dutch chief of Bimilipatam wanted to return to Bimlipatam the next day to check if anything could be recovered. For this the English provided him with a sloop to carry him there via the sea. This attack happened on 1^st April 1754.[65]

This loss of property and treasure caused the Dutch to take steps to protect their settlement. First step they took in 1755 was to take 13 surrounding villages at Bimlipatam for a five-year lease.^[66] Second step was to build a fort at Bimlipatam. The directive for building a fort was given in May of 1757.^[67] However, the survey and plans for the fort were ready in 1756.[68] The architect was one P. C. Keller, and the actual construction was carried out by a servant of Asian descent of the Dutch East India Company called “Henk” in the records.[69]   

The map of Bimlipatam, location of fort and plan and the final layout of the fort are given below. These are copies of the original maintained at the library of the Leiden University (https://digitalcollections.universiteitleiden.nl). The English translation of the legend and annotations provided in the map are included.

Map of Bimlipatam 1756

Close-up of the plan of the Fort from the map above

Given below is the legend given for the plan of the Bimlipatam Fort by C.P. Keller. The script on the map at places is indecipherable probably because of my lack of knowledge of the Dutch language and its script. I have used Google Translate to provide the English translation of the same which follows the Dutch original.

EFGH: The regular quadrangle of the projected Fort being each polygone exterior 40 rods a face, off 11 rods 7 vorten, a flancq 4 3/4 rods, a curtain 16 3/4 rods long, and after the common manner of Mr. Vanban assigned

IKLM: The square of the Boniovallige rough wall, as it was built in the first place

IMNO: A rear piece defensive pulled to the lodge, and but with a Kloijmaar to give

P: The residence of the chief, being above and below it some rooms for dispensing all things, but now, due to a lack of packing lines, it is occupied together with E. Company merchants’ goods and the merchants’ parcels, the remaining goods being here and there kept in private hands at home, and stored in that of the said Bloome

Q: A bedroom covered by the ironwork, and most of the time filed beams of mango wood are

R: Below the place of the chief, being there on the comb, slave quarters, and chicken coop

S: A scout hut

T: A secretion

U: A pigeon loft, a room under a cannon, a gunner keeps his ammonition safe and sound

V: Three lower chambers, which in the past served as dispensaries for a chest, but in good times the millers still occupied them

W: A raised place where the guns are placed to fire salutes when ships arrive or depart

X: The guard and room of the European soldiers, is also very good, and is commanded by the cashiers’ residence

Y: The broken and half-standing wall of the burnt-out warehouse and warehouse, which could be used to make a roof, which could still be fortified in good weather

Z: Two small rooms, where the pawns must wait

abcd: Shows the width of the Walgangh

efgh: Show also the inner street, which runs around below the rampart, and the inner square that one can admire, to aim for everything always wider and more spacious than the one passing over it.

All measured and recorded on Tuesday, as well as projected. By/ was drawn:/ C. P. Keller

Bimilipatnam

Dated : 18 October 1756

Layout of the fort

The following are the details in English using Google Translate. Again, because of the writing being unclear or the word/phrase in Dutch being indecipherable, the list has some gaps.

• 1.Room for Servants
• 2.No Idea
• 3.Small Room for Peons
• 4.? No idea
• 5.A B C and D show how the Chief’s residence should be built above the second floor on the wells; this white-faced parallelogram or elongated square, running parallel with the wall above serves as a back space to easily get into the rooms and to go to the combination (Apartments?)
• 6.? No idea
• 7.Room for Flag Galley
• 8.Front Room
• 9.Secretion (Toilet)
• 10.Slave Room
• 11.Middle hall, front of the landing of stairs
• 12.Dispense
• 13.Church (?)
• 14.Front Room
• 15.A Room for Diners
• 16.Rooms for Constables for cannons
• 17.Front Room
• 18.Front Room
• 19.A Room for the Pawns (?)
• 20.Stable
• 21.Platform
• 22.Between Stairs and Landing
• 23.Platform
• 24.Food Hut
• 25.Downstairs Garden for the Chief
• 26.Garden for the Second
• 27.Spice Warehouse
• 28.Buyers Warehouse
• 29.Dining Room can be Converted into a front and back room
• 30.This Square Block is Projected for the Second
• 31.Secretion (Toilet) clear markings confirming that secretion in toilet
• 32.Spice Warehouse
• 33.Mint for copper/warehouse
• 34.Room
• 35.Gallery
• 36.Projected Staircase
• 37.A Room for the Slaves
• 38.Room for the Servant and the Peon
• 39.Stairs to climb onto to the Embankment
• 40.Room
• 41.Room now the Chief’s Office (Second’s Office)
• 42.Church?
• 43.Dispense
• 44.Secretion (Toilet)
• 45.Room
• 46.Room
• 47.Back Space
• 48.Back Space
• 49.Room
• 50.Gallery
• 51.Kitchen
• 52.for house
• 53.Dispense
• 54.Room
• 55.Gallery
• 56.Dispense
• 57.for house
• 58.?
• 59.Dark Hole
• 60.North towards the Sea
• 61.Water Room
• 62.Profile
• 63.No Idea
• 64.If this house remains standing, the back street must be closed to avoid taking away the light from the rooms

The fort was much larger than the factory building that stood before. To accommodate the fort, several blocks of houses of fishermen and Brahmins were demolished. So were some temples and wells. A prominent temple located right on the tip of the promontory was demolished too. The high cost of the fort impacted the accounts of the Dutch East India operations on the Coromandel coast.^[70] But the construction quality turned out to be poor. The location of the fort close to the sea resulted in the walls facing the sea being continuously pounded by sea waves resulting in weakening them. In 1759, Bimlipatam experienced heavy rainfall which caused the already weakened walls of the fort to collapse. Though another secondary source mentions that it collapsed in 1768.^[71] This damage of the fort so soon after its construction by natural occurrences led to a high-level enquiry. The Dutch authorities held Keller accountable, but he blamed Henk for the disastrous failure. A long drawn-out case was fought by Keller but in the end, he was pardoned for his role in the construction of the fort.[72]

The Dutch authorities at Batavia, however, directed that the fort be renovated only when the necessity arose which indicates that the damage was not too grave. In fact, the second-in-command at Bimlipatam spent 1633 pagodas to repair the fort but without authorisation resulting in the authorities claiming a reimbursement of 1233 pagodas from his estate.^[73] On 6 April 1761, the Dutch govt directed that the village of Bimilipatam must be acquired by the ministers for the Company either as property or on a perpetual lease.^[74] Seeing the growing interest of the Dutch authorities in a small place like Bimlipatam, the Dutch chief at Bimilipatam wanted to acquire more land at the place. In 1764, he wrote to the company officers asking if the land next to the river could be acquired as property for the company.^[75]The final settlement between the Vizianagram ruler and the Dutch for Bimlipatam was signed on 10 February 1769 when an agreement was signed for the taking over of Bimilipatam by the Dutch and that all pending matters would be settled with the Prince.^[76]

Before the completion of the fort at Bimlipatam, the English and the French got embroiled in the Seven Years’ War which commenced in 1756. The war spread to the colonies where the French began attacking English possessions. The French East India company directed its officers in India to destroy all English fortifications when captured. The interesting caveat to this instruction was that the English fortification at Visakhapatnam was to be left untouched because the French feared that its destruction would result in the Dutch at Bimilipatam getting enriched.^[77] While the English East India Company, expecting the French to take control of Visakhapatnam soon, directed their ships to anchor at Bimlipatam than at Visakhapatnam.^[78]

With peace returning, the Dutch began to make serious effort at improving Bimlipatam. In 1779, the Dutch government at Batavia decided to place a surgeon at Bimlipatam. However, the peace was very short lived.

The American war of independence and the machinations of European countries, especially the Dutch who the English considered their allies, against the interests of the English and the growing rivalry between East India Company and the Dutch East India Company for territories and commerce in India and in southeast Asia resulted in the English declaring war against the Dutch in December of 1780.[79] In this war Bimilipatam, Pulicat and Jagganaickpuram forts of the Dutch were seized by the English in 1781 and destroyed. The booty and plunder taken from the Bimlipatam fort by the English forces in 1781 amounted to pagodas 56,832^[80] which was distributed amongst the soldiers of the EIC according to “rank and station.”^[81]

The signing of the peace treaty of Amiens of 1802 resulted the return of Bimilipatam to the Dutch but the Dutch took control of the place only in 1819.  The Dutch held Bimlipatam till 1825 when the English and the Dutch decided to exchange territories in the east. The Dutch factories across India were handed over to the English and the English gave up Bencoolen and all their settlements in Sumatra and the Island of Billeton to the Dutch. The English got full control of Singapore in exchange of their renouncing the claim over island of Billeton.^[82]

A late 19^th century source provides some information from older sources about the Dutch settlement:

“The settlement of Bimlipatam is in fact little more than a factory, but it appears to have been a fortified factory. After taking possession of in 1781 it was destroyed under orders received from England. No territorial jurisdiction is attached to this factory, but 3 washing greens belong to it and are the only appendages appertaining to this factory which appears to have been merely a commercial factory or lodge with certain privileges. It is situated in the sea coast 14 or 15 miles North of Vizagapatam within the limits of the Zemindary of Vizianagrum and was granted to the Dutch Nation by the ancestors of the present Zemindar.” At the time of the publication of this source, some remains of the settlements including the fort existed.[83]

Extra Information

Some epitaphs on the gravestones of the cemetery in Bimlipatam collected from various sources:

In Dutch: Hier leydt begraven Hendrick Hiddingh jongste zoonte van W. Hiddingh Zaliger Gebooren alhier op Bimlipatnam den 3on Julius A 1681 en gestorven den 6 October anno 1683^[84]

English Translation: Here lies buried Hendrick Hiddingh, youngest son of W. Hiddingh. Born here at Bimlipatnam on 3 July 1681 and died on 6 October 1683.

Gravestone of W. Hiddingh (Copyright: nuggetsofindianhistory.com)

In Dutch: Maart 1686, Hier Leyt begraven Floris Bolwerk (It is Bolwerck in VOC records archives Netherlands) van Amsterdam. In syn Leven in Dienst der E. Compe OnderCoopman en Opperhooft deses Compt. Bimlipm. Overleden den 3oen Maart A 1686 out synde 38 Jaren 8 maanden en 17 dagen. Legt noch benevens hem syn soon Luydolf Bolwerk geboren ten dezen Comptoire overleden den 16 Feb A 1683 out synde 2 Maanden en 21 Dagen^[85]

English Translation: March 1686, Here lies buried Floris Bolwerk of Amsterdam. In his life in the service of the E. Compe, Under-Cooper and Chief of this Compt. Bimlipm. Died on 30 March 1686, aged 38 years, 8 months and 17 days. His son Luydolf Bolwerk, born at this Comptoire, also lies with him, died on 16 February 1683, aged 2 months and 21 days.

Havart knew Floris Bolwerk personally and writes, “As soon as we heard of the death of Bolwerk (who had been an exceptionally good friend to us during his life), we could not help but perform our usual duties and make the following gravestone and go to India to be carved on the gravestone with the approval of our friends.

Vita Hominis, Lumen sue dio positum (Latin- The Life of Man, the Light of His Divine Presence)

who lies buried here,

was diligent, good, and sincere,

but it was of no avail;

he had to give up his life.

Now his noble soul,

which God held in esteem,

is still busy here trembling,

praising Him eternally.” [86]

List of Dutch chiefs and their second in command at Bimlipatam.

---

[1] Francois Valentyn, Oud en Nieuw Oost-Indiën, vervattende een Naaukeurige en Uitvoerige Verhandelinge van Nederlands Mogentheyd in die Gewesten, benevens eene wydluftige Beschryvinge der Moluccos, Amboina, Banda, Timor, en Solor, Java, en alle de Eylanden onder dezelve Landbestieringen behoorende, het Nederlands Comptoir of Suratte, en de Levens der Groote Mogols, In vyf Deelen, Vol 5, (Amsterdam: 1726), 42-44.

[2] Alexander Rea, Archaeological Survey of India, (New Imperial Series) Volume XXV, Southern India, Volume IX, Monumental Remains of the Dutch East India Company in the Presidency of Madras (Madras: Government Press, 1897), 52.

[3] W. Francis, Madras District Gazetteers: Vizagapatam (Madras: Government Press, 1907), 226.

[4] Stephan Egbert Arie van Galen, Arakan and Bengal: The Rise and Decline of the Mrauk U Kingdom (Burma) from the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Century AD (University of Leiden, 2008 PhD Thesis), 120.

[5] https://www.nationaalarchief.nl/en/research/archive/4.HEK/invnr/MC020/file/NL-HaNA_4.HEK_MC020_R

[6] P. Bertii [Petrus Bertius?], Tabulrum Geographicarum Contractarum: libri quinque: cum luculentis singularum Tabularum explicationibus, Editio Tertia, Apud Cornclium Nicolai, Anno 1606, Amstelodaami, 592.

[7] 4.VELH Inventaris van de verzameling buitenlandse kaarten Leupe, supplement, 1621-1813 (1925)

Inventory number: “Nova totius terrarum orbis geographica ac hydropgraphica tabula a Petro Kaerio.” [Petro Kaerius also Peiter van den Keere], Filename:NL-HaNA_4.VELH_2,

https://www.nationaalarchief.nl/en/research/archive/4.VELH/invnr/2/file/NL-HaNA_4.VELH_2

[8]Jacques Accarias de Serionne (1706-1792), Hollandsch Rijkdom of Tafereel van Neerlandsche koophandel en zeevaart, Behelzende Deszelfs oorsprong, Magt en teeneemande Vermeerdering, de Oorzaaken welke tot derzelver verval strekken; mitsgaders de middelen, welke dezelve wederom zoeden kunnen opbeuren, en tot hunnen voorigen bloei brengen. Uit Het Fransch Vertaalk. Merklijk veranderd, vermeerderd, en van verscheiden misflagen gezniverd, door wijlen Mr Elias Luzac, in leven Advocaat voor den heve van Holland, Zeeland en Westvriesland, Tweede Uitgave, Tweede Deel (Te Leiden Bij M. Cijfveer 1801), 96.

[9] W. H. Moreland, ed., Peter Floris: His Voyage to the East Indies in the Globe, 1611-1615 (London: Hakluyt Society, 1934)

[10] George D. Winius and Marcus P. M. Vink, The Merchant-Warrior Pacified: The VOC (The Dutch East India Company) and its Changing Political Economy in India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994), 12.

[11] Tapan Raychaudhuri, Jan Company in Coromandel, 1608-1690: A Study in the Interrelations of European Commerce and Traditional Economies (S. Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff 1962), 41

[12] Ibid., 51-52

[13]Francis, Madras District Gazetteers, Vizagapatam, 36; Sarlaskar or Sarlashkar or Sar-i-lashkar was the head of the army who resided as a viceroy in Srikakulam which was about 30km north of Bimlipatam.

[14] Daniel Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3 (Amsterdam: 1693), 74-87.

[15] M. J. Haafner, Voyages Dans La Peninsule Occidentale De L’Inde Et Dans L’ile De Ceilan; Par M. J. Haafner Traduits du Hollandois. Tome Second, Voyage fait par terre le long des cotes D’Orixa et de Coromandel, Dans la Peninsule Occidentale de L’inde, Avec cinq Plauches (Paris: Chez Athus-Bertrand, 1811),4-7.

[16] Rea, Monumental Remains of the Dutch East India Company, 65-66.

[17] Ibid.

[18] D. F. Carmichael, comp. & ed., A Manual of the District of Vizagapatam, in the Presidency of Madras (Madras: Asylum Press, 1869), 273-274.

[19] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3, 74-87.

[20] Realia: Register Op De Generale Resolutien Van Het Kasteel Batavia, 1632-1805, Uitgegeven door het Bataviaasch Genootschap Van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, Eerste Deel (Leiden: 1882), 320.

[21] Raychaudhuri, Jan Company, 62.

[22] Hollandsch Rijkdom of Tafereel van Neerlandsche koophandel en zeevaart, Behelzende Deszelfs oorsprong, Magt en teeneemande Vermeerdering, de Oorzaaken welke tot derzelver verval strekken; mitsgaders de middelen, welke dezelve wederom zoeden kunnen opbeuren, en tot hunnen voorigen bloei brengen. Uit Het Fransch Vertaalk. Merklijk veranderd, vermeerderd, en van verscheiden misflagen gezniverd, door wijlen Mr Elias Luzac, in leven Advocaat voor den heve van Holland, Zeeland en Westvriesland, Tweede Uitgave, Tweede Deel (Te Leiden Bij M. Cijfveer 1801), 98.

[23] Raychaudhuri, Jan Company, 67.

[24] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3, 74-87.

[25] This is the coast north of the Coromandel Coast and where sesame seeds, known as Gingelly, where found.

[26] Raychaudhuri, Jan Company, 67-68.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Ibid., 70.

[29] Ibid., 71.

[30] Wouter Schouten, Ost-Indische Reyse: Worin erzehlt wird Viel gedenckwürdiges, und ungemeine seltzame Sachen, bluhtige See- und Feld-schlachten, wieder die Portugisen und Makasser; Belägerungen, Bestürmungen, und Eroberungen vieler fürnehmen Städte und Schlösser. Wie auch Eine eigendliche Beschreibung der fürnehmsten Ost-Indischen Landschaften, Amsterdam 1676, 179.

[31] Blue and white cloth made in India. For more details see https://dutchtextiletrade.org/textiles/guinea-cloth/

[32] A type of blue cotton cloth.

[33] A form of coarse cloth.

[34] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3, 74-87.

[35] Metchlepatam March 1680-1681, Masulipatam: Consultations, 5 Jan to 31 Dec 1680, 3 Jan to 29 Dec 1681, p. 3 & 14, IOR/G/26/3, British Library.

[36] Gold coin

[37] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3

[38] Francois Valentyn, Oud en Nieuw Oost-Indiën, vervattende een Naaukeurige en Uitvoerige Verhandelinge van Nederlands Mogentheyd in die Gewesten, benevens eene wydluftige Beschryvinge der Moluccos, Amboina, Banda, Timor, en Solor, Java, en alle de Eylanden onder dezelve Landbestieringen behoorende, het Nederlands Comptoir of Suratte, en de Levens der Groote Mogols, In vyf Deelen, Vol 5, (Amsterdam: 1726), 42-44.

[39] Rijks Geschiedkundige Publicatien Uitgegeven in Opdracht van De Minister Van Onderwijs En Wetenschappen Onder Toezicht Van De Rijkscommissie Voor Vaderlandse Geschiedenis, Grote Serie, 150 (1686-1697), (‘s-Gravenhage: 1975), 137.

[40] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3, 74-87; Guilder was a Dutch currency, and one guilder was equivalent in value to 10 gm of silver in the 1600s.

[41] Philippus Baldaeus, Wahrhaftige ausführliche Beschreibung der berühmten Ost-Indischen Kusten Malabar und Coromandel, als auch der Insel Zeylon… Durchgehends verzieret mit neuen Landkahrten und Abbildungen … Benebst einer umständlichen und gründlichen Entdeckung der Abgötterey der Ost-Indischen Heyden (Amsterdam: Ben Johannes, 1672), 165.

[42] Voyages de Mr De Thevenot Content La Relation de l’Indostan, des nouveaux Mogols, & des autres Peuples & Pays des Indes (chez La VEUVE BIESTkINS, ruë de la Harpe, à l’Imprimerie des Roziers, 1684), 313.

[43] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3, 74-87.

[44] Raychaudhuri, Jan Company, 149.

[45] The English merchants at Vizagapatam have frequently reported about Dutch ships arriving and leaving Bimlipatam and about their cargos. See India Office Records, Masulipatam Consultations of 1680s.

[46] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3, 74-87.

[47] Inventaris van de verzameling buitenlandse kaarten Leupe, supplement, 1621-1813 (1925)

Inventory number:156.2.6 “De Kust Chormandel” (1:966.200), Filename:NL-HaNA_4.VELH_156.2.6, National Archives of the Netherlands

[48] Valentyn, Oud en Nieuw Oost-Indiën, 7.

[49] Ibid., 42-44.

[50] Ibid.

[51] Ibid.

[52] Realia: Register Op De Generale Resolutien Van Het Kasteel Batavia, 1632-1805, Uitgegeven door het Bataviaasch Genootschap Van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, Eerste Deel (Leiden: 1882), 321.

[53] Ibid., 322.

[54] Ibid., 324.

[55] “Letter No. 50,” Records of Fort St George, Letters to Fort St George, 1732, 1733 & 1735, Vols XXI, XXI-A and XXII (Madras: Government Press, 1932), 40-42.

[56] “Letter No. 50,” Records of Fort St George, Letters to Fort St George, 1732, 1733 & 1735, Vols XXI, XXI-A and XXII (Madras: Government Press, 1932), 40-42.

[57] Records of Fort St. George, Letters to Fort St. Geroge, 1745-46, Volume XXX (Madras: Government Press, 1932), 38-39.

[58] Realia: Register Op De Generale Resolutien Van Het Kasteel Batavia, 1632-1805, 325.

[59] “No. 43,” Records of Fort St. George: Letters to Fort St. George 1752-53 (Volume XXXIII) (Madras: Government Press, 1941), 55-56.

[60] “No. 88,” Records of Fort St. George: Letters to Fort St. George 1763-64 Vol XLIV (Madras: Government Press, 1941), 79-80, & 123-124.

[61] William Wilson Hunter, The Indian Empire: Its People, History, and Products, 3^rd ed. (London: W. H. Allen & Co, 1893), 446.

[62] D. F. Carmichael, comp. & ed., A Manual of the District of Vizagapatam, in the Presidency of Madras (Madras: Asylum Press, 1869), 173-175.

[63] Robert Orme, A History of the Military Transactions of the British Nation in Indostan, from the Year MDCCXLV… Vol 1, Book V, 4^th ed. (Madras: Pharoah and Co., 1861), 374.

[64] N. G. Van Kampen, Geschiedenis Der Nederlanders Buiten Europa, of Verhaal Van de Togeten, Ontdekkingen, Oorlogen, Veroveringen en Inrigtingen Der Nederlanders in Azien, Afrika, Amerika en Australia Van Het Laatste Der Zestiende Eeuw Tot op Dezen Tijn, Derde Deel (Haarlem: 1832), 90.

[65] Fort St George: Letters to Various Places in India 1754, 7 Jan-29 Dec 1754, IOR/G/19/42, 161-162, British Library.

[66] Realia: Register Op De Generale Resolutien Van Het Kasteel Batavia, 1632-1805, 330.

[67] Ibid., 329.

[68] P.C. Keller, Plaan van het dorp Bimelepatnam en ‘SEComps loge, 1756, COLLBN 002-09-034, Leiden University Library.

[69] https://www.leidenspecialcollectionsblog.nl/articles/a-disastrous-fortification

[70] P. Groot, Selections from the Records of the Madras Government: Dutch Records No. 15 (Nos in Press List 471 and 613) Accompaniments to Letters from Negapatam (1748-1750 and 1757-8) (Madras: Government Press, 1911), 182.

[71] George D. Winius and Marcus P. M. Vink, The Merchant-Warrior Pacified: The VOC (The Dutch East India Company) and its Changing Political Economy in India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994), 118.

[72] https://www.leidenspecialcollectionsblog.nl/articles/a-disastrous-fortification

[73]  Realia. Register op de Generale Resolutien van het Kasteel Batavia, 1632-1805, 337.

[74] Ibid., 331.

[75] Ibid., 332

[76] Ibid., 336

[77] “Memoirs of Count Lally, Part I,” The Dublin University Magazine, A Literary and Political Journal, Vol XLIII, January to June, 1854 (Dublin: James McGlashan, 1854), 45-47.

[78] Records of Fort St George, Letters from Fort St. George, 1757, Vol XXXII (Madras: Government Press, 1942), 27.

[79] C. P. Lucas, A Historical Geography of the British Colonies, Vol. IV South and East Africa, Part 1, Historical (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1898), 86-88.

[80] Military Letter dated 1^st August 1788, Abstracts of Letters Received from Madras, 1 Aug 1786-17 Oct 1797, IOR/E/4/292, 109, British Library.

[81] Despatches to Madras (Original Drafts), Volume 13, 22 Dec 1786-7 Sep 1787, IOR/E/4/873, 907-908, British Library.

[82] Carmichael, A Manual of the District of Vizagapatam, 273-274.

[83] Rea, Monumental Remains of the Dutch East India Company, 45-46.

[84] D. G. Van Epen, Grafschriften in Voor-Indie (Heralidisch-Geealogisch Archief, 1897), 10-11, accessed 27 July 2025, https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Grafschriften_in_Voor_Indi%C3%AB/azbp4b8kJJcC?hl=en&gbpv=0

[85] Ibid.

[86] Havart, Op En Ondergang Van Cormandel, Vol 3, 74-87.