On 21 May 2010 04:36, Eugene Correia <[email protected]> wrote: > On the subject of Godfrey's piece, the issue went from East Indians to > Anglo-Indians. i happen to come across a piece by a Toronto-based scholar > Megan Mills who got her Ph.D with her these on the Anglo-Indian community in > Bengal in my collection. It is in a journal edited by an old friend under > the title, The Anglo-Indian -- an Ongoing Community of Bengal. > She writes, "Misunderstanding abounds on question of the Anglo-Indians' > origins. Other Indians and westerns can share most assuming notions of > Anglo-Indian descent from illicit relationships between Indian women of > humble origins and unsavoury Europeans. Certainly, these were not more > prevalent than convention alliances in the 17th and 18th centuries > witnessing the rise of the greater part of Bengal's Anglo-Indian population. > Moreover, it is seldom realized that the term Anglo-Indian in use since 1911 > is rather a stunnng misnomer, for the community's European ancestry is > simply not very Anglo (word in italics). ............... >
> Eugene Correia > > COMMENT: Well that was as good a rebuttal was I have ever seen; assumptions were made, probably by those who were jealous of the Anglo-Indians higher than the Indians status.... -- DEV BOREM KORUM Gabe Menezes.
