On 16 October 2010 04:05, dilip dacruz <[email protected]> wrote:
> One has to be careful with articles such as these. I cannot, for instance > believe that 'When Afonso de Albuquerque conquered Goa (1510) he respected > the religious norms, which were administered through effective laws. He > allowed the customs and traditions to continue, and did not increase the > taxes already existent.' Dear Dilip, History is stranger than fiction, and it might not always fit into our patterns and biases. Reading of almost any history text on Goa confirms the following fact: (i) The Portuguese -- who went on to stay in parts of Goa for 451 years -- were invited by local collaborators who saw them as the best bet to get rid of the Islamic rulers who then held sway in Goa. (ii) In the initial stages of colonialism -- for at least a few decades after 1510 -- the Portuguese were rather tolerant of local traiditions and religions. This was obviously needed to build acceptance here, if you wish. Their initial ire was targeted against the Muslims -- recall the contemporary of 6000 Muslims being killed in the old city and rivers of blood flowing, etc (iii) Portuguese religious intolerance came up much later, in the latter part of the 16th century (iv) Throughout colonial rule, the bias and bigotry and intolerance was not uniform. It was a Portuguese secretary-general, Cunha-Rivara, who promoted an interest in the Konkani language (while his countrymen of another generation sought to implement Portuguese instead of Konkani). The Portuguese Republican Revolution of 1910, whose century is now being observed, benefitted the Hindu population vastly, and Hindus are also believed to have controlled a significant section of the economy during colonial times. While the latter 20th century Salazar rule was overtly and covertly theocratic, others like the Marquis de Pombal were staunchly anti-Jesuit, and anti the religious orders. In a word, the reality of colonialism does not fit into any neat pattern. To me, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with what Fr Nascimento is writing here. You are referring to another period. Please see the Foral of the early 16th century, and the reasons why the gaunkaria (comunidades) of Goa were preserved, while those in the rest of British India simply withered away. FN Frederick Noronha :: +91-9822122436 :: +91-832-2409490 -- This message comes via the Google Groups "Saligao-Net" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/saligao-net?hl=en Please post regularly to keep the e-village active!
