Good to see that Vivek has provided a pertinent quote from Priolkar in which he appears to be expressing the concern that his account would be dismissed as biased because it was not written by a Portuguese historian. Legitimate specific criticisms of any scholarly work is always a good thing. What is wrong is its outright dismissal without producing contrary facts, but rather, just by using such baseless canards as guilt by association and various ideological devices. As alluded to by Vivek, there is no detailed alternative historical account on Goan inquisition based on primary sources. I understand that this is in large part due to destruction or loss of original records. In this context, I remember that Teotoniobab de Souza once mentioned that some of the remaining records were transferred to the Biblioteca Nacional do Brasil. So all we need is a competent, committed and dispassionate secular historian, and proper funding from a secular source.
Priolkar's book relies naturally on secondary sources. But it was well-received by eminent historians such as C. R. Boxer. Regarding Dellon and Buchanan, I should have said that they are eyewitness accounts rather than well-researched. No independent facts contradict what they have written. They have been maligned based on pure speculations and biases of their detractors, and generalization of such ideological concoctions as the "Black Legend" to the Goan situation. Cheers, Santosh On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 10:26 PM, V M vmin...@gmail.com [seculargoa] <secular...@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > > > > The problem with the state of "Goa Inquisition Studies", such as they > are, is the near-total absence of decent modern and contemporary > historiography of the two-centuries-plus episode. Twenty-first-century > historical understanding cannot be properly achieved by reading > primary documents by witnesses or near-witnesses who (a) wanted to > sell their accounts, (b) gain coniderably grom their accounts, or (c) > were published in order to settle tertiary scores. I'd say Priolkar's > book is a significant step in the right direction, but as he himself > writes, while laying his bare to be considered, " the story of the > Inquisition is a dismal record of callousness and cruelty, tyranny and > injustice, espionage and blackmail, avarice and corruption, repression > of thought and culture and promotion of obscurantism and an Indian > writer who undertakes to tell it can easily be accused of being > inspired by ulterior motives. From this point of view, it would have > been appropriate if the task had been undertaken by a Portuguese > historian..." > > But no such Portuguese historian has emerged, and no serious Indian > historian has tried to develop the necessarily complex understanding > required here either, and so Goans are left foundering, reacting by > instinct and out of a misplaced sense of self-protection. As Priolkar > also writes, rather piercingly, "it is indeed an irony of history that > some of the descendants of the "New Christians" in Goa, who suffered > cruelly at the hands of the Inquisition, should be so anxious to > prevent the truth about the working of the institution from coming to > light." > > In that case, Priolkar was speaking directly about the "contentions of > Dr. Gerson da Cunha and Braz Fernandes" that Dellon's account was > fiction or fictionalized, despite no European scholar having similar > doubts. Elsewhere, he is quite unreasonable and nasty - thus betraying > considerable bias in his own history-making - as when thanking "the > Goud Saraswat Brahman Community of Bomay for the grant given for the > publication of this volume" but refraining to mention the names of > other, presumably Goan Catholic contributors because "it must be > remembered that the Inquisition has been abolished but the spirit > which guided its activities is not entirely extinct." In that passage > and others, Priolkar attempts the trick of transposing 16th and 17th > century European colonialist ideas, attitudes and policies to the Goan > Catholics of the 20th century, which is both morally shabby and > useless as historiography. > > VM ***************************************************************** No offense meant. But let the chips fall where they may. *****************************************************************
