Job Charnock - Assessment

Assessment

In the verdict of Sir Henry Yule:

We cannot claim a high character for Charnock. The charge of cruelty is based, we presume, on the tales of Alexander Hamilton; it is impossible to view this as more than gossip. The charges of vacillation and timidity are based, we again presume, on the fault found by the Court with his conduct of the first exodus from the Upper Hugly. We can see that Job mistrusted (though we apprehend justly) the wisdom of the orders given, especially as to the seizure of Chittagong; and his own notion of occupying Hijili as a fortified settlement showed what may doubtless seem strange ignorance of the sanitary condition of such a position. But setting aside this as a serious mistake he showed no lack of spirit in his action since February, 1687, when he saw that the Nabob and his people by their negotiations were only trying to gain time, and certainly none in the defence of the miserable position in Hijili, and no lack of resource in the notable stratagem by which he imposed upon the enemy! . . . My view of him, pieced together from the fragmentary impressions which are alone available, would be that of an imperfectly educated and coarse and wilful but strong man who had spent his life in almost isolated positions among natives and had been deeply tinged with native habits of thought and action, but who maintained a general loyalty to the Company whom he served, though he was by no means as scrupulous as they gave him credit for being.