Latest / The Hidden History of Bengal: Kingdoms, Empires, and Revolution — Fexingo History / The Charnock Controversy: Calcutta's Founder or Colonial Myth
Transcript
- Lucas: So, we've talked a lot about Bengal under the Mughals and the early Company days, but there's one story that's always bugged me — the founding of Calcutta itself. Luna: Oh, the whole Job Charnock thing? I've heard he just plopped down on the riverbank and boom, city. Lucas: Right, that's the legend. But when you dig into it, the reality is a lot murkier and honestly more interesting. So on August 24, 1690, an English merchant named Job Charnock supposedly stepped ashore at a muddy patch on the Hooghly River and decided that's where the Company would set up shop. Lucas: That date has been celebrated as the birthday of Calcutta. But historians have been picking at that story for decades, and it turns out Charnock didn't found anything that day — he was actually returning to a spot the English had already been using for years. Lucas: There were already thriving villages on that site — Sutanati, Gobindapur, and Kalikata — names you can still find traces of in modern Kolkata. And the East India Company had a factory there as early as the 1650s, trading in saltpetre, silk, and cotton. Luna: So why does Charnock get all the credit? Lucas: Partly because he was the one who managed to get the Mughal permission to set up permanently after a series of conflicts. But also because later British writers — especially in the nineteenth century — needed a heroic founder to validate their imperial project. So they created this myth of Charnock as the lone pioneer who braved the jungle and the tigers. Lucas: The reality is that the site was already a bustling frontier settlement. There were Portuguese pirates operating nearby, Indian merchants, and even an old Mughal customs house. Charnock didn't start from scratch; he just got the official green light. Lucas: And he had a fascinating personal story too. When he first came to Bengal in the 1660s, he married a Hindu widow — apparently against all the customs of the time. Some accounts say he rescued her from being forced into sati on her husband's funeral pyre. Luna: Whoa, really? That's a wild detail. Lucas: Yeah, it's one of those stories you hear, but contemporary records are silent. It might be a later embellishment. But it's telling that his mixed marriage and his tolerance for local customs made him somewhat controversial among the other English merchants. Lucas: He was also a bit of a hothead. There are records of him firing on a Mughal convoy in 1686, which escalated into a full-blown conflict that got the English booted from Hooghly for a few years. So when he returned in 1690, he was on thin ice, trying to rebuild trust. Lucas: He didn't even live to see the city grow. He died in 1693, just three years after that famous landing, and left behind a small settlement that was already struggling with disease and threats from local powers. Luna: So the real story is less 'divine mission' and more 'messy colonial negotiation'. Lucas: Exactly. And the myth kept growing. They even built a mausoleum for him in Calcutta that became a kind of pilgrimage site for the British. It wasn't until the 1970s that historians really started debunking the 'founder' narrative. Lucas: But here's the thing — even the counter-narrative has its own agenda. Some Indian historians have argued that Charnock was just one of many agents in a longer story of European expansion, and that giving him sole credit erases the contributions of the local communities who actually built the city. Lucas: And there's also the question of why the British chose that spot at all. It wasn't just random. The Hooghly River was navigable for large ships, it was defensible, and it was close to the riverine trade routes that connected to the Mughal hinterland. Luna: It's almost like they were scouting for the perfect port. Lucas: They absolutely were. The Company had been experimenting with different sites for years. They'd been kicked out of Chittagong, they had a factory at Balasore, but they wanted something closer to the heart of the Mughal province. So when they got the permission from the Mughal governor, they didn't just pick a random patch of mud — they picked a strategic spot. Lucas: Now, I should also mention that the name 'Calcutta' itself is a corruption. The original village was called Kalikata, named after the goddess Kali, and there's still a temple there — Kalighat — which was a major pilgrimage site. So the British were building their city on top of an existing religious and commercial center, not in a wilderness. Luna: That puts a whole different spin on it. They were squatting on a sacred site. Lucas: In a way, yes. And the British were well aware of it. They even had to negotiate with the local landlords, the Sabarna Roychoudhury family, who owned the villages. The Company got a lease, but they didn't buy the land outright — they had to pay rent to the Indian zamindars for years. Lucas: And that's a crucial point that gets lost in the myth: the British were not walking into an empty land. They were inserting themselves into a complex web of local power, and they had to navigate that for decades. Lucas: By the time Fort William was built in 1702, the settlement had become a proper fortified town. But even then, it was a joint enterprise — Indian masons, laborers, and merchants were essential to its construction and survival. Luna: So all those statues of Charnock that used to be around — what happened to them? Lucas: Ah, that's a great question. There was a famous statue of him in London, and another in Kolkata. But in recent years, there's been a reevaluation. In 2022, the Kolkata Municipal Corporation actually renamed a square that was named after him, and there were calls to remove his statue from the city's heritage sites. Lucas: So the same process of myth-making is now being actively dismantled. It's a reminder that history is always being rewritten — and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Lucas: But you know, as we get deeper into these stories, I keep thinking about how much of what we 'know' about history is shaped by the people who wrote it down. And the Charnock story is a perfect example of that. Luna: It's like the saying, history is written by the victors. Lucas: Exactly. And I think that's one of the reasons we make this show — to dig into those layers and find the voices that got left out. Lucas: And speaking of digging deep — this is the kind of episode that only exists because of the support of our listeners. If you've been following along with us, especially through the Bengal series, and you feel like today's conversation was worth the price of a coffee, you can help keep this show ad-free and independent. The link is buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Luna: Yeah, every little bit goes into the research — books, archives, sometimes even a trip to a site. Lucas: And honestly, it's what lets us spend weeks on a single episode like this one, chasing down obscure references and double-checking facts. So if you're able, that's the best way to say thanks. Lucas: Now, back to Charnock. I think the most fascinating part of this whole story is how the myth of the 'founder' obscures the reality of how cities actually come to be. They're not created by a single person on a single day. They grow out of thousands of small decisions, conflicts, and collaborations. Lucas: Calcutta was no exception. It was a place where East met West, where Mughal officials, Portuguese pirates, and English merchants all jostled for influence. And the city that emerged was as much a product of that chaos as it was of any grand plan. Luna: So what happened to the original villages? Do they still exist? Lucas: Sutanati is now a neighborhood called Sutanuti, and Gobindapur was largely absorbed into the Fort William area. Kalikata's name lives on in Kolkata itself. So in a way, the old villages are still there, just buried under two centuries of urban growth. Lucas: And when you walk through modern Kolkata, you can still feel that history — the narrow lanes of old Sutanuti, the ghats on the Hooghly, the temple at Kalighat. It's a palimpsest, layers upon layers. Lucas: So next time someone tells you a city was 'founded' by a colonial officer, maybe ask who was already living there. That's the kind of question that can unravel an entire national myth. Luna: I'll never look at a city the same way again. Lucas: And that, I think, is the true value of history — not just learning dates and names, but learning to question the stories we've been told. And on that note, I think we'll leave it there for today. Thanks for listening, and we'll see you next time.