--- Mario Goveia wrote: > > The Indians from the east of India are "east" > Indians, not "East Indians", which was nomenclature > that was concocted by the East India Company to > distinguish the Maharashtrian Catholics from the > Goan and Mangalorean Catholics, hundreds of years > ago. > --- Bosco D'Mello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Mario, now you are talking history. Would you > possibly have any evidence to validate your above > assertion ? Is this possibly your opinion or > a historical fact ?? > Mario responds: > Bosco, As a matter of fact, I do. My evidence comes from being very close to the East Indian community as well as the the following URL: > http://www.eastindians.blogspot.com/ > If these are not good enough for you, I'm afraid you will have to ask one of the many East Indians in Toronto or check with East Indian Fr. Benny Aguiar who used to be the editor of the Catholic Examiner for several years the next time you are in Mumbai. > Bosco writes: > > Here are some facts: Thanks to Mr. Kureekat (bless > his soul), History Grade 8: East India Companies > were formed by the Dutch and the Danes too (other > than the British) to trade with the East Indies. The > British E-I Co. arrived first, somewhere in > Gujarat. They laid the groundwork for Hastings to > connive with some zamindars, who forfeited their own > rights to the foreigners. Similar to what is going > on in Goa now. > Mario responds: > With all due respect to Mr. Kureekat, I have no doubt that the Dutch and Danes formed "east Indian companies" but there was only one registered British East India Company, which was the original trading company associated with the colonization of India and which is the one we are talking about in this thread. > Bosco writes: > > Mario admonishing Selma in the same message: > > The oblique use you are referring to is your > opinion, not a fact. > Mario observes: > Would I "admonish" Selma and risk being harangued in return by her or one of her admirers?:-))) See how you are haranguing me on her behalf:-))) She took umbrage when I innocently called he a Gulf Goan, which I thought was complimentary. > Actually, I was responding to Selma's allegations that East Indians "obliquely" identified with the west - actually no more than any Goan Catholic does - and some bi-racial background - most East Indians have no bi-racial background. > Previously, I felt she had mixed-up East Indians with Anglo-Indians with her comments that they pronounced "dahl" as "dol" and called "sambhar" as "pepper-water", and claimed that they had somehow assumed their community name for some perceived self-serving benefit. > Actually, East Indians are just like Catholic Goans and Mangaloreans, their sorpotel and vindaloo and roast pork rivals our own and their distinctive almond or cashew flavored marzipans are to die for. Also, the name East Indians was imposed on them by others and it has stuck because no one had the incentive to change it. > Perhaps you will understand this better if I remind you that this is similar to the names D'Mello or Goveia or Carvalho, which were imposed on our families centuries ago by some Portuguese priest or administrator, which no one has changed because there was no real reason to. > > Previously Mario had repeated: > > The name was given to this community by the East > India Company hundreds of years ago and is part of > India's colorful multi-ethnic history, whether you > like it or not. > To which Bosco was moved to comment: > > How many times do you need to repeat the same (Your > opinion & Your fact) content within the same > message? > Mario answers: > Thanks for repeating this once again:-)) Perhaps twice should be enough:-))) > Actually, I think I used it a second time in the context of a comment I was responding to, and since some people are having a hard time with the true facts on East Indians [these are not my opinions]. >
> _______________________________________________ Goanet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org
