Santosh Helekar writes: 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.
GL responds: Eyewitness accounts too can have biases and an ax to grind. It is for later readers to sift through the facts or see through the account presented on the issues; with the benefit of hindsight. FACT: Dellon was a French physician practicing in Diu having an amorous affair with his patient; who happened to be the mistress of the (Portuguese) governor of Diu. What would be the punishment for that offence be TODAY? Loss of medical license and a charge of rape of the patient. (there is nothing like consensual sex between a physician and the patient). Dr. Dillon (by his own account) was given opportunities to repent and leave Diu and Goa. But the French physician may have thought he was smarter than the Portuguese. What should the authorities have done to the doctor when the complaints were made against him? What would have been done TODAY if a physician had these undeniable complaints lodged against him? Reading Dillon's work, the author maligns himself as a nobel professional with poor judgment and poor character who took advantage of his position; and who just refused to accept his mistakes and misjudgments.Regards, GL
