Hi Cornel, To be "BUILT ON TOP OF" is what the English language says. And this was precisely the basis for the Babri Masjid controversy which generated much violence, loss of lives and property, and other costs in India a few years ago. The temple-related violence had spread to other states including the train massacre in Gujarat. The mosque was destroyed and then demolished, and evaluated by the India-government / court appointed archeologists. To the best of my knowledge, they found no temple beneath this mosque in Ayodhaya. Please someone correct me if I am wrong.
A building being "on top of" other structures is common where real state is at a premium. This occurs on the top of a "sacred mountain" OR a small "auspicious island" in the middle / confluence of rivers OR in an VERY OLD populated important city. The best example of the last is Jerusalem, Damascus, Rome, New York, London and other major cities. But pray, in Goa in the 16th and 17th century, (and later) there was no land that was a premium. The Portuguese built their own NEW capital at Velha Goa and later Panjim. Other new rulers did the same in Delhi and later New Delhi, Islamabad away from Rawalpindi and Washington DC. (reasons are obvious!) In your post below, you have made many claims which appear to be unconnected to the specific issue being discussed. (Those statements need another post). I am glad in your inquiry about Goa you state, "I regret I do not have the hard evidence which would be appropriate....." I am sure you would agree we should make sure our words mean exactly what they say. And the sources we quote / refer to, are authenticated with some valid objective proof rather than a mere reference to somebody's fictional or non-fictional writings. Regards, GL ---------------- cornel Thanks for your response. I detect a presentational problem over some of this debate. a) "built on top" to me has meant on a particular site where a structure previously existed. The skyscrapers in limited space on Manhattan Island, New York represent this continously. Indeed, this happens almost everywhere as old structures get demolished and new ones are constructed on the same site by way of modernisation. However, my understanding is that in Goa, some Hindu temples were demolished and Catholic churches were built in their place in a spirit of arrogant displacement. Have I got this entirely wrong according to you? Are you saying that it is not acceptable to say that Catholic churches were built following Portuguese destruction of Hindu temples as you have not found firm historical evidence for such a claim? I regret I do not have the hard evidence which would be appropriate as I have been busy doing other things! b) "built on top" in the way you used it, did not quite strike me as a possible interpretation in our discussion i.e using part of an old structure to hold up the new one. We live and learn! Regards Cornel. _____________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. Goanet mailing list (Goanet@goanet.org)
