Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Battle of Chaul

![16th-century Portuguese ships from the Livro das Armadas]float-right The Battle of Chaul was a naval engagement in March 1508 in the harbour of on India's coast, pitting a small Portuguese squadron under against a larger combined fleet dispatched by the of and reinforced by forces under the command of Amir Husain al-Kurdi, known as Mirocean Husain. The Portuguese force, comprising around six vessels left by Viceroy to blockade regional trade routes and harass Muslim shipping, was surprised and overwhelmed when the Mamluk-Gujarati armada, numbering over a dozen ships including heavy carracks, launched a coordinated involving boarding actions and fire. was killed in the fighting, and five of the Portuguese ships were either captured or destroyed, representing a tactical victory for the Muslim coalition that temporarily disrupted Portuguese naval dominance in the . Despite this setback, the battle underscored the strategic vulnerabilities of isolated Portuguese detachments and galvanized the Portuguese response, culminating in the decisive victory at the in 1509, where Viceroy Almeida's reinforced fleet annihilated a similar Mamluk-led armada, securing Portuguese control over key lanes for decades. The engagement highlighted the Portuguese innovative use of maneuverable caravels and broadside gunnery against larger but less agile opponents, though itself exposed the risks of overextension in their aggressive campaign to monopolize the lucrative by interdicting traditional Muslim-Indian routes.

Geopolitical and Strategic Context

Portuguese Maritime Expansion Prior to 1508

![16th-century Portuguese ships from the Livro das Armadas][float-right] The Portuguese maritime expansion towards India accelerated in the late 15th century, driven by the pursuit of direct access to Asian spices and precious goods, circumventing the Ottoman-controlled land routes dominated by Venetian intermediaries. In 1497, King Manuel I dispatched Vasco da Gama with a fleet of four ships—São Gabriel, São Rafael, Berrio, and a storeship—from Lisbon on July 8, aiming to establish a sea route around Africa. After navigating uncharted waters, enduring storms, and relying on local pilots from Malindi, the expedition reached Calicut (Kozhikode) on May 20, 1498, marking the first European arrival in India by sea. Initial trade attempts were thwarted by Arab merchant opposition, leading to skirmishes and a modest return cargo of spices upon da Gama's arrival back in Lisbon in 1499, which nonetheless yielded profits sixty times the expedition's cost. Building on this success, subsequent armadas consolidated Portuguese presence. In 1500, commanded a fleet of 13 ships departing on March 9, inadvertently discovering on April 22 before proceeding to , where they anchored at Calicut on September 13. Hostilities erupted, resulting in the loss of several vessels to local forces backed by Arab traders, but Cabral redirected to (Cochin), securing permission from the to establish Portugal's first feitoria (trading factory) there, laden with spices upon return. Da Gama's second voyage in 1502, with 15-20 warships, adopted a more coercive approach: bombarding Calicut, enforcing trade monopolies via passes (cartazes), and reinforcing the Kochi factory while establishing another at Cannanore, signaling a shift from to armed commerce. By 1505, the scale of operations intensified with Francisco de Almeida's appointment as the first viceroy of . Departing on March 25 with a fleet of 22 vessels carrying 1,500 men, Almeida subdued East African ports like Kilwa and to secure supply stops, arriving in to implement a strategy focused on naval dominance rather than territorial conquests. He fortified and Cannanore, imposed the system requiring non-Portuguese ships to purchase safe-conducts or face seizure, and patrolled trade routes, disrupting Arab shipping networks. Annual armadas, numbering up to 20 ships by 1507, transported artillery, soldiers, and colonists, establishing additional factories at Quilon and pressuring local rulers for alliances against common foes. This expansion, though not yet involving major inland conquests, positioned Portuguese carracks and galleons as enforcers of maritime exclusivity in the prior to the 1508 confrontations.

Formation of the Mamluk-Gujarat-Venetian Coalition

The , under Sultan Qansuh al-Ghawri, initiated the coalition's formation in response to naval dominance in the , which bypassed routes and eroded Mamluk customs revenues from transit through and , previously accounting for a significant portion of state income. diplomatic missions to , motivated by the collapse of their Levant-based monopoly—where galleys had transported goods from Mamluk ports to —pressured al-Ghawri to assemble a counter-fleet, offering promises of arms, manpower, and naval expertise including construction techniques and specialists. These efforts reflected Venice's strategic interest in restoring overland trade dominance, as direct access to Indian ports like Calicut undercut intermediaries by factors of up to 50% in costs. By 1505, al-Ghawri had begun fleet construction at , commissioning approximately 12 initial galleys and carracks adapted for ocean voyages, supplemented by -style vessels and crews that included Greek sailors and gunners for heavy . Command was assigned to Amir Husayn al-Kurdi, a with prior naval experience, who oversaw of , Nubian, Ethiopian, and Turkish mercenaries to crew up to 50 vessels by departure. This Mamluk- collaboration formalized through ad hoc agreements rather than a single , prioritizing mutual economic preservation over ideological unity, though direct involvement remained limited to logistical support amid their entanglements in European wars like the League of Cambrai. The coalition expanded upon the fleet's arrival in the in late 1507, when al-Kurdi linked with the under Mahmud Shah (r. 1458–1511), who had independently resisted bombardments and seizures along the Konkan coast since 1507. contributed 20–30 warships and 4,000 troops under admiral Malik Ayyaz (Meliqueaz), a former slave turned naval commander, forging an operational alliance through shared Muslim solidarity and pragmatic defense against factories at and Diu. This partnership, initiated by overtures as early as 1505 to aid against incursions, enabled coordinated strikes but revealed tensions, as prioritized local autonomy and Ayyaz occasionally pursued independent tactics. The resulting force, totaling over 100 vessels by early 1508, aimed to expel squadrons and secure 's ports as staging bases.

Forces and Preparations

Coalition Naval and Ground Forces

The coalition's naval forces were assembled from the and the , with the Mamluk contingent under Amir Husain al-Kurdi comprising 6 to 13 galleons constructed with technical assistance from shipwrights; these vessels were crewed by sailors, Turkic archers, and Black African arquebusiers. This fleet was reinforced by 34 oared gunboats from Gujarat, commanded by Ayyaz, governor of Diu; these shallow-draft sloops-of-war featured bow-mounted cannons and excelled in maneuverability within coastal waters like harbor. Approximately 40 small boats contributed by allies provided supplementary roles, such as rescue operations, but lacked capacity for sustained high-seas combat. Ground forces supporting the naval operation were drawn primarily from the under Sultan , who positioned ashore to blockade positions and facilitate assaults during the engagement at on March 30–31, 1508. These troops complemented the seaborne combatants, estimated in allied accounts at around 1,500 for the core -Gujarati elements, though precise breakdowns remain uncertain due to varying contemporary reports. The coalition's integrated approach leveraged Gujarat's local knowledge and manpower alongside maritime projection, enabled by cross-regional alliances against expansion.

Portuguese Squadron Composition and Deployment

![16th-century Portuguese ships from Livro das Armadas]float-right The Portuguese squadron at was commanded by , son of , as part of the broader Estado da Índia naval operations to secure maritime trade routes in the . The force consisted of ocean-going sailing ships, primarily carracks and caravels, which were designed for long-distance voyages but proved vulnerable in shallow coastal waters and under calm conditions due to their reliance on for maneuverability. Prior to the battle, the squadron had conducted independent cruising along the coast, engaging in commerce protection and raiding activities against Muslim shipping. In early 1508, following initial clashes with elements of the fleet, Lourenço de Almeida's vessels entered harbor— a key port south of modern —for refitting and repairs after sustaining damage. This positioning left them anchored and exposed when the main coalition fleet arrived unexpectedly on 17 February 1508 (), initially mistaken by the Portuguese for reinforcements under . Deployment in the harbor emphasized defensive formations, with the larger ships forming a line to leverage broadside against approaching enemies. However, becalmed conditions neutralized their advantages, preventing evasion or effective repositioning, and allowed the coalition's oared gunboats to exploit close-range tactics. Lourenço's was isolated and grounded during the fighting, leading to his mortal wounding, while surviving vessels attempted boarding actions before withdrawing with heavy losses.

Course of the Battle

Outbreak and Initial Clashes

The Mamluk-Gujarati coalition fleet, led by Amir Husain al-Kurdi and reinforced by vessels from the under Malik Ayyaz, reached the harbor of in January 1508 after uniting at Diu. There, they encountered the squadron commanded by , son of Viceroy , which consisted of approximately six ships anchored following an escort mission for a merchant . The , lacking carracks and numerically inferior, were surprised by the coalition's approach into the confined harbor space, initiating the battle's outbreak through a coordinated on the stationary vessels. Initial clashes unfolded over several days as the coalition's larger force—comprising around 20-30 warships including galleys and dhows—pressed the attack with artillery barrages and boarding actions against the naos. Lourenço de Almeida's became a focal point, enduring heavy fire while Portuguese gunners responded from anchored positions, inflicting initial on the advancing but struggling against the swarm of smaller craft that restricted maneuverability. The harbor's geography favored the attackers, enabling them to isolate individual Portuguese ships and exploit superior numbers in . Despite determined resistance, including successful repulsion of early boarding attempts, the squadron suffered mounting damage and losses, with the coalition's tactical surprise preventing a breakout to open water. This phase highlighted the Portuguese reliance on broadside firepower, which proved less effective in the harbor's tight confines compared to the coalition's agility and volume of assailants. The primary naval clashes of the Battle of Chaul transpired over three days in the enclosed waters of harbor, commencing around 25 March 1508. Lourenço de Almeida's squadron, comprising a small number of vessels anchored for repairs and trade, encountered the arriving Mamluk-Gujarati fleet commanded by Amir Husayn and Ayyaz. The coalition forces, leveraging numerical superiority, initiated combat by maneuvering into the harbor and exchanging initial fire with the ships. Portuguese tactics emphasized shipboard artillery barrages to maintain distance and inflict damage from afar, a doctrine honed in prior campaigns. However, the confined harbor limited maneuverability, allowing coalition vessels—predominantly oar-powered galleys and dhows supplemented by merchant craft—to close rapidly for boarding actions. Coalition boarders, supported by numerous small boats ferrying reinforcements, grappled Portuguese hulls and engaged in , overwhelming gun crews through sheer volume despite sustaining heavy losses. Sustained fighting across the days saw the Portuguese repel early assaults on secondary ships, but attrition mounted as ammunition dwindled and casualties accumulated. By the third day, focused attacks on Almeida's flagship resulted in its capture following intense deck fighting; Almeida himself perished in the melee, reportedly struck down while defending the poop deck. Several Portuguese vessels were either boarded and seized or scuttled to prevent capture, marking a rare reversal for Portuguese naval forces reliant on technological edges in gunnery and hull design. Surviving captains, including those on lighter craft, effected narrow escapes southward, preserving fragments of the squadron.

Ground Assault and Fall of Chaul

Following the naval clashes in Chaul's harbor on or around January 1508, surviving personnel from the defeated squadron under sought refuge on the adjacent shore and near the city's fortifications, transitioning the conflict to ground combat. Coalition forces, comprising marines under Amir Husain al-Kurdi and troops led by Ayyaz, disembarked to pursue and assault these remnants, leveraging their numerical superiority—estimated at several thousand against fewer than 1,000 combatants overall—to overrun disorganized defenses. Portuguese fighters mounted a desperate along the beachfront and against an exposed arm of Chaul's sea-facing city wall, where attackers directed focused assaults with supported by light artillery and , exploiting the chaos from the sunk vessels (six of eight Portuguese ships lost). This ground phase saw intense hand-to-hand fighting, with Portuguese arquebusiers and swordsmen inflicting initial casualties but unable to hold against coordinated advances that breached perimeter positions. himself perished amid the melee, reportedly struck down while attempting to rally his men, marking a pivotal collapse. The fall of Chaul's Portuguese foothold ensued rapidly, as the coalition secured the harbor and town—already aligned with Gujarati interests—eliminating the expedition's operational base without establishing a lasting , given the absence of a fortified Portuguese enclave. Of the original force, fewer than 100 escaped inland or by sea, while hundreds were slain or captured in the shore assaults, underscoring the coalition's tactical of naval dominance with opportunistic pursuit. Chaul's recapture affirmed local control, though temporary, pending Portuguese reprisals.

Casualties, Losses, and Tactical Analysis

Portuguese Defeats and Key Deaths

The fleet under suffered a comprehensive defeat in the harbor of on 12 March 1508, representing their first major reversal in operations after prior successes against local forces. Outnumbered and blockaded by the combined Mamluk-Gujarati armada led by Amir Husayn al-Kurdi and reinforced by Ayyaz of Diu, the squadron was subjected to sustained and boarding actions, leading to the destruction of multiple ships and the rout of their formation. Lourenço de Almeida, son of Viceroy and commander of the expedition, met his death when his flagship was isolated, rammed, and sunk at the harbor entrance amid fierce . Fighting to the last, Almeida succumbed to wounds sustained in the engagement, with his body unrecovered, an event that profoundly motivated his father's subsequent retaliatory campaign. The debacle incurred heavy Portuguese casualties, including the loss of key vessels and hundreds of personnel killed, wounded, or taken prisoner, severely degrading the squadron's combat effectiveness and forcing the remnants to withdraw northward under cover of night. Contemporary Portuguese accounts describe the toll as grievous, underscoring tactical vulnerabilities such as inadequate scouting and overreliance on aggressive harbor tactics against a superior coalition force.

Coalition Gains and Operational Shortcomings

The secured a on 3 March 1508 by isolating and sinking the Portuguese flagship São Cristóvão at the entrance to harbor, resulting in the death of its commander, , and heavy casualties among the Portuguese . This engagement inflicted substantial material losses on the Portuguese, including the destruction of multiple vessels and the capture of numerous members, temporarily affirming coalition dominance in the region and disrupting Portuguese operations along the coast. Operational shortcomings, however, undermined the coalition's ability to translate this success into lasting strategic advantage. The fleet's reliance on galleys, which required large crews of oarsmen and offered limited endurance beyond coastal waters, exposed vulnerabilities to attrition during extended voyages from the , exacerbated by monsoon dependencies and structural degradation from prolonged exposure. The 1507–1508 further strained arsenals, depleting timber, rigging, and manpower reserves critical for fleet sustainment. Coordination challenges among the disparate , , and Venetian-advised elements—stemming from divergent priorities, such as Gujarat's hedging under Ayyaz—prevented aggressive pursuit of the five escaping Portuguese ships, enabling survivors to regroup and summon viceregal reinforcements. These deficiencies allowed the Portuguese to regroup at Cochin and launch a retaliatory strike, culminating in the coalition's defeat at Diu on 3 1509.

Aftermath and Broader Consequences

Immediate Portuguese Response

Upon receiving news of the defeat at in March 1508 and the death of his son , Viceroy withdrew to Cochin and mourned in seclusion for three days. Vowing revenge, he proclaimed that "he who ate the chick must also eat the rooster or pay for it," signaling his intent to target the Mamluk-Egyptian admiral Amir Husayn and his allies. Almeida then assembled a punitive fleet comprising 18 to 19 ships manned by approximately 1,500 to 1,600 soldiers, supplemented by native fighters from Cochin. He delayed action during the monsoon season to prepare adequately, refusing to relinquish command despite the arrival of on December 6, 1508, as his designated successor. On , 1508, Almeida departed Cochin, sailing northward along the , stopping at ports to resupply and engage local adversaries. En route from Bombay, he dispatched a stern letter to Malik Ayyaz, governor of Diu, demanding the release of Portuguese prisoners captured at and warning of imminent destruction if the forces did not prepare for confrontation. This expedition aimed not only at vengeance but also at reasserting naval dominance in the routes.

Reversal at the Battle of Diu (1509)

Following the Portuguese defeat at in March 1508, where Viceroy Francisco de Almeida's son Lourenço was killed, Almeida assembled a retaliatory fleet to avenge the loss and assert dominance in the . Departing from Cochin in late 1508, the armada consisted of approximately 18 to 20 ships, including naus, caravels, and galleys, manned by about 1,500 Portuguese soldiers and 400 local auxiliaries from Cochin. The fleet arrived off Diu on February 2, 1509, where a joint --Calicut armada under Amir Husayn al-Kurdi ( ) and initially Ayyaz ( ) awaited, comprising around 100 vessels of various types, though many were smaller dhows and galleys ill-suited for open-sea combat. Ayyaz, wary of Portuguese artillery superiority, withdrew to shore, leaving Husayn in command. On February 3, 1509, the battle commenced with ships leveraging broadside fire to devastating effect against the clustered enemy fleet anchored in Diu harbor. Almeida's forces systematically dismantled the squadron, sinking or capturing most vessels, including carracks, while repelling boarding attempts through disciplined musketry and tactics. The engagement lasted several hours, ending in a decisive triumph that shattered the coalition's naval capabilities. Portuguese casualties were light, with 32 killed and around 300 wounded, reflecting effective gunnery and ship maneuverability. Coalition losses were catastrophic, with nearly all ships destroyed and hundreds slain, including key commanders, effectively eliminating Mamluk naval projection in the region. This victory directly reversed the setback, securing Portuguese control over key trade routes and deterring further organized resistance for decades.

Long-Term Impact and Historiographical Debate

Effects on Indian Ocean Trade Dominance

The Portuguese defeat at Chaul in March 1508 temporarily undermined their efforts to enforce a monopoly on Indian Ocean trade, as the coalition's victory disrupted naval patrols and the cartaz (licensing) system, enabling Gujarat, Calicut, and Mamluk merchant ships to evade tribute payments and access spice ports like Calicut without interference. This setback, which included the loss of key vessels and the death of Lourenço de Almeida, briefly restored confidence among Arab and Indian traders, allowing resumption of pre-Portuguese patterns of commerce along the Malabar Coast and Arabian Sea routes. Yet the battle's effects proved ephemeral, as the coalition failed to capitalize on the victory through coordinated follow-up operations, exposing operational disunity between , , and Calicut forces. The Portuguese response culminated in the on February 3, 1509, where a fleet of 18 ships under annihilated over 100 enemy vessels, reestablishing unchallenged naval supremacy and reinstating trade controls. This reversal severed traditional links between the , , and ports, redirecting high-value goods like —valued at approximately 4.64 ducats per unit in Calicut but resold for up to 80 ducats in —through Portuguese-held entrepôts. Long-term, Chaul underscored the limitations of non-European fleets reliant on galley warfare against Portuguese carracks equipped for gunpowder broadsides, reinforcing Europe's technological edge in sustaining trade dominance. The episode facilitated subsequent conquests of strategic bases such as in 1510, enabling to extract revenues from passing shipping and suppress rivals until the mid-16th century, when Dutch and English interlopers began eroding this hegemony.

Assessments of European Naval Superiority

![Portuguese ships 16th century from Livro das Armadas][float-right] The Battle of Chaul challenged early assessments of unassailable European naval superiority in the , revealing contextual limitations of technological edges. Lourenço de Almeida's , comprising roughly five to six naus and caravels armed with heavy , was defeated by a fleet leveraging numerical superiority and tactical adaptability in confined harbor conditions. The Mamluk-Gujarati force, including over 30 oared gunboats under Malik Ayyaz, capitalized on windless weather to close distances, board, and sink the flagship São Mateus, resulting in heavy losses including Almeida himself. This outcome underscored that sailing ships, optimized for open-ocean voyages with broadside cannon fire, were vulnerable in calm, shallow waters against maneuverable, rowed vessels reliant on human power for propulsion and boarding assaults. Historiographical analyses post-Chaul emphasize that advantages—such as stable platforms for large-caliber guns enabling standoff engagements—did not guarantee victory against unified local fleets employing galley-style tactics suited to coastal environments. While vessels integrated weaponry more effectively for sea battles, the coalition's combined galleys, gunboats, and supporting craft demonstrated parity in through lighter, swivel-mounted cannons and incendiary projectiles, allowing them to overwhelm isolated detachments. The defeat prompted to reinforce his fleet, leading to the 1509 , where improved tactics and favorable winds allowed a smaller force to inflict severe damage on the enemy, yet even there, Ayyaz's defenses held firm, resulting in a tactical rather than . Longer-term evaluations reveal that Chaul exposed overreliance on wind-dependent ships and aggressive raiding strategies, contributing to debates on whether dominance stemmed from inherent superiority or opportunistic exploitation of fragmented Asian polities. Scholars reassess claims of definitive hegemony, noting that naval innovations under Ayyaz—such as robust construction and sustained resistance—frustrated control of key ports like Diu until 1522, highlighting adaptive local capabilities rather than . from fleet compositions shows ships outnumbered but outgunned in open water, yet Chaul's confined setting inverted this dynamic, affirming that superiority was situational, dependent on , numbers, and coordination. Ultimately, while integration of , , and disciplined crews enabled trade route monopolization, Chaul illustrates the fragility of such advantages against concerted opposition, tempering narratives of inevitable maritime preeminence.

References

  1. [1]
    A Portuguese East Indiaman from the 1502–1503 Fleet of Vasco da ...
    ... Battle of Chaul in March 1508. Undoubtedly the most upsetting fact for Almeida was that this valuable and strategically important collection of ordnance had ...
  2. [2]
    Giving the Devil His Diu: Malik Ayyaz, the Estado da India and ...
    Begun by Portuguese piracy against Muslim shipping and escalated by Malik Ayyaz and his Egyptian ally Emir Hussein's surprise attack on. Lorenço de Almeida at ...
  3. [3]
    Albuquerque: Rulers of India by Morse Stephens - Heritage History
    The Egyptian admiral in 1508 sailed from the Red Sea for the coast of Gujarat, where the Muhammadan King of Ahmadabad and the Muhammadan Nawab of Diu, Malik ...
  4. [4]
    [PDF] Social history - UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)
    It is clear that Diu drew Portugal's attention very early on when the governor of Diu, Malik Ayaz, attacked the Portuguese fleet in Chaul in 1508, during which ...
  5. [5]
    Vasco da Gama - Ages of Exploration
    They sailed for 23 days, and on May 20, 1498 they reached India.7 They headed for Kappad, India near the large city of Calicut. In Calicut, da Gama met with the ...
  6. [6]
    Vasco da Gama reaches India - History.com
    Feb 9, 2010 · Da Gama sailed from Lisbon, Portugal, in July 1497, rounded the Cape of Good Hope, and anchored at Malindi on the east coast of Africa. With the ...Also On This Day In History · Citation Information · Sign Up For This Day In...
  7. [7]
    Pedro Álvares Cabral - Ages of Exploration
    They finally reached Calicut, India (today called Kozhikode) on September 13, 1500. His time in Calicut was filled with challenges. Disputes between the ...
  8. [8]
    Pedro Alvares Cabral | Accomplishments, Route, & Facts - Britannica
    Oct 1, 2025 · Pedro Alvares Cabral, Portuguese navigator who is generally credited as the first European to reach Brazil (April 22, 1500).
  9. [9]
    Francisco de Almeida | Portuguese explorer, Africa, India - Britannica
    Oct 1, 2025 · ... king Manuel I made him viceroy of the newly conquered territories of India in March 1505. Setting forth with a powerful fleet of 21.
  10. [10]
    Portuguese expansion in the Indian Ocean - The map as History
    May 23, 2023 · After Vasco da Gama's voyage, Portuguese expansion included establishing trading posts, taking Goa and Malacca, exploring the Malay Archipelago ...
  11. [11]
    The Coming of the Portuguese - Saudi Aramco World
    The new Mamluk fleet built at Suez set out for India in 1507, first fortifying Jiddah and Suakin against a possible Portuguese attack. It put in at Aden, where ...
  12. [12]
    Age of Discovery: The Portuguese–Mamluk Naval War
    Jun 13, 2022 · The fleet was completed in November and under the leadership of Amir Husain Al-Kurdi, left Suez and travelled to Jidda (Jeddah), where they ...Missing: formation | Show results with:formation
  13. [13]
    How a naval battle off the tiny port of Diu, Gujarat changed ... - OpIndia
    Feb 3, 2025 · As a result, the Venetians and the Mamluks formed an agreement against the Portuguese. During the League of Cambrai War, there were allegations ...
  14. [14]
    The Mamluk Sultanate from a Global Perspective (Chapter 3)
    May 5, 2022 · In 911/1505, al-Ghawri sent an expedition commanded by the amir Husayn Mushrif al-Kurdi to aid Mahmud Shah, ruler of Gujarat, that included ...<|separator|>
  15. [15]
    Giving the Devil His Diu: Malik Ayyaz, the Estado da India and ...
    May 11, 2024 · ... fleet, commanded by Viceroy Francisco de Almeida, obtained a remarkable victory against a Mamluk fleet through judicious use of broadside guns'.<|separator|>
  16. [16]
    The Battle of Diu - How the Portuguese won control of the Indian ...
    Jul 7, 2024 · Against up to 200 ships from the Mamluk-Gujarat-Calicut alliance, the Portuguese fielded 18 ships, ranging from a brigantine to five large naus.
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Indian History-16th Century
    In August–September 1507, the Mamluk fleet of about 50 vessels was stationed at Aden, preparing to go to India. Battle of Chaul (1508). The fleet, again under ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] Rotting Ships and Razed Harbors: The Naval Policy of the Mamluks
    initially victorious in an encounter with the Portuguese at Chaul in January 1508,72 but in a return engagement the Portuguese destroyed a great number of ...
  19. [19]
    The Portuguese in India and Arabia between 1507 and 1517 - jstor
    Longworth Dames* paper. p. 8. The battle of Chaul.?I think this battle undoubtedly took place in January, 1508, ad-Dayba* tells us that Amir. Husayn only ...
  20. [20]
    Portuguese Campaigns against Diu (1509–1547) - War History
    Dec 14, 2024 · ... battle of Chaul. ... Ottoman admiral Mir Hussein Pasha, probably following standard Mediterranean tactics, anchored his fleet in the harbor of the ...
  21. [21]
    A Dissenting Voice: The Clash of Trade and Warfare in Giovanni da ...
    Jul 21, 2021 · ... Gaspar Correia in his Lendas da India. Footnote Giovanni himself was left for dead and had only partly recovered when in December 1511 he ...
  22. [22]
    The Portuguese Conquest of India - World History Encyclopedia
    Jul 1, 2022 · Da Gama set off on 8 July 1497 with a squadron of four well-armed ships, three years of supplies and a store of cheap goods to trade with what ...
  23. [23]
    Chaul | Encyclopaedia of Portuguese Expansion
    Later, however, Nizam-ul-Muluk decided to join the great Muslim coalition against the Hindu kingdom of Bisnaga or Narsinga, a Portuguese ally, adding his troops ...Missing: composition | Show results with:composition<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    Battle of Diu, February 3, 1509 - Military History - WarHistory.org
    Dec 13, 2024 · In March of 1508, a smaller Portuguese fleet had been surprised and defeated by the Ottoman-Mamlûk fleet at the battle of Chaul. The Portuguese ...
  25. [25]
    Battle of Chaul | Historica Wiki - Fandom
    The Battle of Chaul was a naval battle fought between the Portuguese Empire and a Muslim armada of the Egyptian Mamluk Sultanate and the Gujarat Sultanate ...Missing: historical facts primary
  26. [26]
    Maritime Dangers in the Red Sea during the Mamluk Period (ah 648 ...
    Aug 22, 2025 · It seems the ships had sustained structural damage from strong winds in the Indian Ocean, and by the time they neared the port of. Jeddah, they ...
  27. [27]
    (PDF) "The Affairs of the Turks are growing strongly": the Portuguese ...
    Apr 27, 2022 · The Affairs of the Turks are growing strongly: the Portuguese, the Mamluks, the Ottomans and the Indian Ocean Issues (1505-1517)
  28. [28]
    Today in South Asian history: the Battle of Diu (1509)
    ... Portuguese cannon. The Portuguese fleet gradually boarded and seized the Mamluk carracks, and the Portuguese caravels were able to maneuver around the ...
  29. [29]
    The Battle of Diu in 1509, The Battle That Changed the Global Trade ...
    Jun 21, 2015 · When Portugal threatened his field, Sultan Mahmud Begada of Gujarat allied with the Kozhikkodu Samutiri (anglicised to Zamorin of Calicut). He ...
  30. [30]
    Battle of Diu: Onset of Portuguese Dominance in the Indian Ocean
    Jul 15, 2023 · The massive defeat of the Portuguese in the battle at Chaul (1508) ... Added to this, the Portuguese Viceroy was able to bring Malik Ayaz ...Missing: Ayyaz | Show results with:Ayyaz
  31. [31]
    The Portuguese Maritime Empire, Trade, and Society in the Indian ...
    The Portuguese soldiers who were solteiros were encouraged to become casados by marrying local women and various inducements were offered to them to become ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Roger Lee de Jesus - Gunpowder, firepower and the Portuguese in ...
    markets.2 Portuguese ships were superior because of their matchless ... a European superiority, they show that the military activity of the Indian.