In the early 18th century, the Carnatic region was a hotbed of tension between Mughal-appointed rulers and European settlers vying for influence. Raja Swarup Singh Bundela, the commander of Gingee Fort, found himself at the center of a dramatic confrontation with the English East India Company at Fort St. David in 1710. The capture of two English officers, Lieutenant James Hugonin and Ensign Ray, sparked a prolonged conflict that revealed Swarup Singh’s assertive stance and the fragile balance of power in the region. Drawing from English records and Fort St. David correspondence, this blog post delves into the incident, the harsh treatment of the captives, and the futile efforts to secure their release, shedding light on a pivotal moment in Mughal-English relations.
The Incident: Capture at Valudavur
On June 11, 1710, Lieutenant James Hugonin and Ensign Ray, two military officers from the Fort St. David garrison, ventured beyond the settlement’s bounds for a hunting expedition. Unbeknownst to them, they were trespassing into the territory of Valudavur, part of Swarup Singh’s Gingee jagir. A party of Swarup Singh’s men forcibly seized the officers and took them to Valudavur Fort, approximately 20 miles from Cuddalore. By the time the English authorities at Fort St. David were alerted, the captives had been transferred to Gingee Fort, as noted in a Fort St. George letter dated June 28, 1710: “Matters are far from mending, that they are grown from evil to worse, relating to the captives whom you say are sent from Waldore (Valudavur) to Gingee.”
The incident stemmed from ongoing disputes between Swarup Singh and the English, particularly over unpaid rents by local tenants under English protection. A Fort St. George despatch (1701–1711, p. 140) recounts that Mr. Haughton, a Company servant, escaped to Cuddalore to report the capture, prompting Deputy Governor Montague to send a party led by Captain Vivers to rescue the officers. The effort was futile, as the captives were already in Gingee, escalating tensions into open conflict.
Harsh Treatment of the Captives
The treatment of Hugonin and Ray in Gingee Fort was described as brutal, fueling outrage among the English. A June 1711 letter detailed their plight: “They were detained at Gingee and loaded with heavy irons which continued so long that their feet began to swell extremely.” The letter condemned Swarup Singh’s “stupid inhuman creature” demeanor, accusing him of an “obdurate temper” that could only be softened by money. Another letter to Captain Roach, leading English forces in the Valudavur region, reported that the captives were “in misery and in irons,” forced to stand in the sun until nearly fainting, and denied water. This “barbarous usage” under the supervision of the Chaubauck (likely a fort official) intensified the English resolve to retaliate.
The harsh treatment was seen as a calculated move by Swarup Singh to pressure the English into addressing his grievances, particularly the escape of renters who owed him significant arrears. The Fort St. David Council viewed his actions as driven by an “avaricious humour,” setting a dangerous precedent if concessions were made.
Context of the Conflict
The capture was rooted in a broader dispute over Swarup Singh’s jagir, which included territories like Valudavur and Cuddalore, where the English operated Fort St. David. The English had acquired the fort in 1690 from Maratha ruler Rama Raja, a grant later confirmed by Mughal commander Zulfikar Khan. However, Swarup Singh, appointed Gingee’s commander in 1700, clashed with the English over their protection of renters who evaded payments. Governor Gabriel Roberts’ failure to hold these renters accountable, possibly abetting their escape, prompted Swarup Singh’s drastic action.
A Fort St. George letter from Governor Harrison highlighted the broader implications: “We are but a handful of people and our business is trade and therefore all quarrels with the Gingee government are extremely prejudicial to us and destroy the end for which we have settled in those parts.” The conflict, described as “tedious and expensive,” strained the English Company’s mercantile interests, underscoring the delicate balance between trade and territorial disputes.
Futile Efforts to Secure Release
The Fort St. David Council made several attempts to free Hugonin and Ray, but Swarup Singh’s intransigence proved formidable. In August 1710, a Fort St. David consultation (Diary of Minutes and Consultations, p. 110) noted that Swarup Singh demanded a ransom of 200 pagodas for the captives’ release. By November 1710, the Council sent a present to Gingee to “accommodate all differences,” but it was rejected because it lacked a letter from the Governor (Diary of Minutes and Consultations, p. 114). The Madras Council also proposed sending a 150-pagoda gift to the Nawab’s diwan, possibly Sadatullah Khan, via a vakil or agent, alongside a letter to Swarup Singh (Fort St. David Council, December 9, 1710).
In August 1710, Fort St. George authorized the Deputy Governor to “use all ways and means to give Sarup Singh’s people all vexations” if the captives were not released. By February 1711, an agent was dispatched to Gingee to negotiate, but a despatch to England (1701–1711) noted that Swarup Singh’s officers, seeking personal gain, obstructed the process. A Fort St. George letter from February 1711 lamented: “Though all fair means had been tried by sending a present and also an agent to discourse with him about his demands and having waited two months for an answer there was no prospect of release.” The English concluded that Swarup Singh’s demands for money were unjust, urging stronger measures to force compliance.
Role of Valudavur and Regional Dynamics
The killa of Valudavur, under Mahabat Khan, played a key role in the capture, aligning with Swarup Singh’s efforts to assert control over his jagir. Mahabat Khan later supported Swarup Singh’s son, Raja Desing, in his 1714 rebellion against Nawab Sadatullah Khan, indicating the continuity of regional power struggles. The conflict with the English was part of a broader pattern of Swarup Singh’s defiance, including his refusal to pay tributes to Sadatullah Khan, which amounted to 70 lakhs of rupees by 1714.
Resolution
The capture of Hugonin and Ray marked a low point in Swarup Singh’s relations with the English, escalating into a war that lasted until 1712, when French Governor M. Hebert of Pondicherry mediated their release after two years of captivity. Swarup Singh’s actions, driven by financial disputes and territorial assertions, highlighted the challenges of Mughal governance in the Carnatic amidst European expansion. His death in 1714 left these tensions unresolved, setting the stage for his son’s fateful rebellion.
The episode underscores the fragile coexistence of Mughal rulers and European traders in early 18th-century South India, where trade disputes could ignite costly conflicts. Swarup Singh’s legacy, preserved in English records, reflects the complexities of power in a region caught between empires.
Related Posts
- The Bijapur Commanders Who Ruled Gingee: Power and Betrayal
- The Bijapur Sultanate Rule over Gingee: Conquest, Governors, and Legacy
- History of Gingee Fort After Hyder Ali’s Capture in 1780
- The Last Stand: Haidar Ali’s Capture of Gingee Fort (1780)
- French Occupation of Gingee (1750–1761): A Tale of Fortresses and Failure
- The Assassination of Nasir Jang: Unraveling a Treacherous Act in 18th Century India
- Assassination of Nasir Jang and the Mystery of Dupleix Fathabad: Unraveling the Site of a Historic Betrayal
- The Assassination of Nasir Jang: A Tale of Treachery in the Carnatic Gingee, December 1750