GL wrote: > My reading of Newman's writings is: There are too much of "opinions" > and stories (kaneos) and too little analytic and statistical facts on > Goa, its people and its life. Perhaps this is what anthropology is!
Which of Newman's writings are you referring to? Do you think the statement "little analytic and statistical facts" holds true for 'Goa: The Transformation of an Indian Region' (Pacific Affairs, 1983)? The 'early Newman' reads different from the latter, when he focuses more on the sociology of religion, particularly that around Fatorpa and the Hindu-Christian sharing of traditions in that region and around. FN
