Politics of Goan Historiography Raghuraman S Trichur rtric...@saclink.csus.edu
[Trichur is Professor and Chair of the Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento, and this is an extract from his book *Refiguring Goa*, which will be released in Panjim later today Wednesday, March 26, 2014, at 5 pm, Broadway.] To write about Goa is to write about difference. Goan history has always occupied a marginal position within the field of Indian history. Goa's economy and social practices, though closely bound up with those in the South Asian subcontinent, have evolved a specific character and flavor. The year 1998 marked the quincentenary of Vasco da Gama's arrival in the west coast of South Asia. Perhaps for the first time since its Liberation in 1961, Goa's 451 year long colonial history became the focus of national attention. In the interim, Goa’s colonial past has become a unique selling point for the marketing of Goa as a tourism destination. The quincentenary created a sense of curiosity within the national mediamedia. However, in Goa the issue roughly crystallized into a dialogue between two political visions of Goa's past, Goa Dourada (Boxer, 1961; Collis, 1946:32; Remy, 1957) and Goa Indica (Ifeka 1985; Newman; 1988).. [Much of the research related to Goan studies has been restricted to the discipline of history and a few contributions from sociologists and anthropologists. Hence, the chapter will depend heavily on the works of historians.] Goa Dourada (meaning, Golden Goa) refers to the Portuguese colonial construction of Goa, which sees Goa as a European enclave attached to the Indian subcontinent. Goa Indica refers to the anti-colonial construction of Goa, which emphasizes the Indian contribution to Goan society. Theoretical discussions in the field, such as the modes of production debate (Banaji, 1977; Kahn and Lobera, 1981; Patnaik, 1990), or the subaltern critique (Guha, 1983, 1997; Prakash, 1990) that shaped Indian and world historiography, have not yet had a significant influence on Goan historiography. [D.D. Kosambi a native of Goa, introduced a paradigmatic shift in the study of Indian history with his book An *Introduction to the Study of Indian History* (Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1956). Kosambi (1962) made some insightful observations about social structures of villages in Old Conquest areas of Goa (See also Kosambi's letter dated July 4, 1964 to Pierre Vidal-Naquet, cited in Thapar, 1994: 105-6). For reasons unknown, there is hardly a reference to Kosambi's theoretical insights in recent literature, the only exception being an essay published in French by Camilleri (1986). This isolation from the crucial debates, has contributed to the continued dominance of the earlier mentioned two main interpretations of Goan society and history. Needless to say, the absence of critical assessment has rendered mute the history of the Goan majority.] Existing assessments of history focus on the activities of individuals, groups or institutions and are more a documentation of 'facts'. They are either divorced from contemporary reality or inadvertently rationalize contemporary developments within society. A majority of the accounts, to be discussed later, do not investigate the social relations that contribute to the constitution of historical facts. Most of these accounts of Goan history, irrespective of whether they reinforce ideas of Goa Dourada or Goa Indica have obscured and cast a shadow over the actual processes and struggles that contributed to the making of contemporary Goan society and its history. Goa Dourada and Goa Indica are class-based ideologies, these ideologies are world-views which, despite their partial and possible critical insights, prevent us from understanding the society in which we live and the possibilities of changing it. They are world-views which correspond to standpoints of classclasses and social groups whose interests in the existing social system and incapacity to change it make it impossible for them to see it as a whole... these ideologies are part of bourgeois ideology, not because they express immediate interests of the ruling class, but because they are limited in theory, by the limits of bourgeois society in reality; because their development, including even their criticism of bourgeois society, is governed by the development of bourgeois society and unable to go beyond it (Malcolm Shaw, 1978). This chapter offers a critical assessment of the dialogue between Goa Dourada and Goa Indica and attempts to destabilize these ideologies whose shadow obstructs our attempt to access, retrieve and understand Goan history. Goa Dourada ----------- For Latins the city was a paradise, a lotus-eating island of the blest, where you could sit on your veranda listening to music as the breeze blew in from the sea (Collis, 1946). Goa Dourada or Golden Goa is the image of Goa as conceived by the Portuguese colonizers in their construction of the Portuguese Empire. According to a Portuguese writer Freitas, "...the Goans have created a lifestyle that is sui generis different in many ways from ours in Europe, but totally distanced, by the insoluble problem of mentality, from that followed by the inhabitants of neighboring India" (Freitas, n.d. cited in Newman, Robert S.Newman, 1988). Freitas is obviously considering Goans to be more civilized by virtue of their conversion to Christianity and the discontinuation of Hindu religious practices among the converts, as reasons contributing to the distancing from the rest of India. [In 1567, Portuguese colonial administrators passed a decree, which forbade marriages, cremations, and investiture according to Hindu rites. Marriage had to be officiated by the Church. This caused a migration of higher caste Hindus. However, for the sake of land, one brother would stay behind to be converted along with his family. From then on, there were Catholic Brahmins and Catholics of the lower caste. The caste mechanism was incorporated into a casteless religion, as these classes were essential for maintaining the relations of production.] The "insoluble problem of mentality" clearly refers to the dominance of Hindu practices in the rest of the subcontinent. Golden Goa refers to images of prosperity and leisure made possible by mercantile trade and the appropriation of surplus from a rural labor force under the protection of Portuguese colonizers and their institutions. The image of Golden Goa was reproduced in Goa especially within Catholic communities in the Old Conquest areas. The Old Conquest areas of Goa consist of three talukas -- Ilhas (now Tiswadi), Bardez and Salcete (which earlier included Mormugao). These areas came under Portuguese control in the first half of the 16th century and were subjected to the longest period of colonial rule in the Indian subcontinent and the harshest treatment by the Portuguese, including forced conversions to Catholicism. As enumerated, Golden Goa has been articulated in a traditionalist and modernist way within Goa (Siqueira, 1991). The Traditionalist View of Goa Dourada -------------------------------------- The bulk of Goa's colonial history has been written from the perspective of colonial institutions such as the Portuguese Crown and religious institutions. History written from this perspective was aimed at validating the Portuguese claims of Goa as "a tiny piece of Catholic Portugal transplanted on to tropical soil" (Ifeka, 1985). For most of these colonial historians, or chroniclers to be more accurate, including those who were critical of the Portuguese administrative abuses and military failures, tje Portuguese presence in the East was by divine dispensation (de Couto, 1954 [1790], p. xx). The establishment of the Portuguese colonial rule was rationalized as an initiation of the civilizing process. These colonial images of Goa were reproduced locally by the native landed Catholic elite who controlled people's access to land and took advantage of the access to education and employment in the colonial bureaucracy which were open to members of the colonized population. [Gaunkars or gaoncars were members of the oligarchic families who were often referred to as the dominant settlers. The gaunkars were the only members within the village eligible to bid in the auction for land for cultivation. As members of the dominant class, the Gaunkars enjoyed special privileges within the villages which were ritually or otherwise sanctioned.] The traditionalist view of Goa Dourada was constructed during the initial phase of Portuguese colonial rule in Goa. During the 16th century, the Portuguese were the undisputed lords of the sea, controlling a majority of shipments from Asia to Europe. Since Goa was the capital of the Portuguese Estado da Índia Portuguesa, it played host to a variety of people. The traditionalist view of Goa Dourada is constructed based on the prosperity of the Portuguese in 16th century colonial Goa. The Portuguese administration offered incentives to the colonized who converted to Christianity, such as access to education and employment in the colonial bureaucracy. The people who availed of the opportunities, primarily gaunkars (members of the rural elite) were encouraged to adopt a European lifestyle and ethos which is encapsulated in the idea of a sossegado (meaning relaxed and leisurely) lifestyle. On the one hand, the sossegado lifestyle of the gaunkars was actually made possible by the labor provided by members of the subordinate castes. The exploitation and appropriation of labor by the gaunkars was based on the bhatkar (landlord)-mundkar (tenant) relationship which was ritually sanctioned and ensured by the prevailing landland tenure system which had a pre-colonial origin. (See Kosambi, 1964 cited in Thapar, 1994: 105-6). The bhatkar allowed the mundkar to stay on his landland at his discretion and, in return, the mundkar provided labor demanded by the bhatkar. Failure to comply on the part of the mundkar entailed his eviction. On the other hand, the sossegado lifestyle of the gaunkars demanded the acceptance of and submission to the authority of the Portuguese colonizers. Today, this very idea of sossegado has been appropriated in contemporary discourses of tourism (Siqueira, 1991). The Modernist View of Goa Dourada --------------------------------- The modernist view of Golden Goa is essentially a reaction from the laboring sections, especially the Sudirs, of the Christian population in colonial Goa. Throughout much of the first half of Portuguese rule in Goa, the agricultural laboring classes did not have a choice but to be involved in their traditional activities. In the meantime, the increasing influence and power of Catholic gaunkars vis-a-vis the colonial administration reproduced and deepened the exploitative relationship between the bhatkar and mundkar. By the middle of the 19th century, the Goan economy economy had already touched its nadir with the Portuguese grip on Indian Ocean trade being loosened first by the Dutch and later by the British. This contributed to the constant migration during the colonial period of Catholic Goans to British India, especially Bombay, to seek employment. While some educated Catholic Brahmins did seek clerical employment, most of the migrants were Sudirs -- Sudir is same as the varna or caste category of Shudra -- who sought employment as ayahs, cooks, butlers, musicians, etc. The religious affiliation of the Catholic Sudirs and their apparent familiarity with European etiquette attracted the attention of European trading communities in Bombay and other cities in British India. Soon job opportunities in other British colonies opened up, especially in East Africa. With every successive generation, the families of migrants enhanced their lifestyle in Goa. The Sudir families started competing with the Catholic gaunkars for social prominence. The Sudirs appropriated the gaunkars' social practices and incorporated their cultural rituals into their everyday repertoire; they changed their patterns of consumption and traded their traditional lifestyle for a European lifestyle. The most important impact of this transformation was the reduction of the labor that could be accessed by the gaunkars. Female members of Sudir families, whose members worked abroad, withdrew from the labor force. This, combined with new income from outside Goa, which was also beyond the control of the existing social order, introduced drastic changes in social relations within village communities. The sossegado lifestyle which had been a reality for gaunkars, was now appropriated by the Goan laboring overseas migrants as a nostalgic memory of Goa itself. In the process of looking forward to such a lifestyle in Goa, the Sudirs also rejected the social hierarchy, which had in the first place made such a lifestyle a possibility for the gaunkars. The increasing affluence of the migrant families destabilized the hold of the gaunkar on the village community. The Sudirs' ability to compete with the gaunkars for prominence in village celebrations also contributed to changing the demographic composition of village communities in the Old Conquest. The shortage in labor within village communities was met by attracting laborers from the New Conquest areas, predominantly Hindu Shudras trying to better their conditions of existence. This inflow of population reintroduced the Hindu presence within the Old Conquest communities. The presence of Hindus disrupted the spatial configuration of a colonial conception of Golden Goa for both the Catholic gaunkars and migrant Goans. In the post-Liberation period, the Catholic elite, which included gaunkars who were employed in the erstwhile colonial administration found their political and social domination eroding. The social mobility of the subordinated caste made possible by new opportunities (such as access to education, employment in the government sector), and the Government of Goa, Daman and Diu Tenancy Act of 1964 eroded the power and control exercised by the Catholic elite. While some Catholic Sudirs were the most conscious of their position within the hierarchy of the Goan society -- See J. Montemayor (1970) -- Catholic Sudirs took advantage of political and commercial (legal and illegal) opportunities at their disposal in post-Liberation Goa to cash in on the vacuum created by the crises that the Catholic landed elite found themselves in, others found employment within the government bureaucracy and the private sector. With the development of tourism in Goa and its growing prominence within the Goan economy, the idea of a Golden Goa was given a new lease of life by the tourism industry and more significantly by the Indian State through its public relations efforts to promote tourism in Goa. Though initially tourism activities were restricted to the coastal areas in the Old Conquest areas of Goa, today they have expanded into the New Conquest areas as well. For coastal communities, the incoming tourists meant new opportunities for generating income, which in turn led to enhancing their status within their community. The members of coastal communities now rent their houses as tourist accommodations, operate restaurants and as far as possible have withdrawn from the labor market. However variations were observed. Catholic families are involved in both renting rooms and operating restaurants, Hindu families had more reservations about renting rooms to tourists and are more willing to operate restaurants. See Siqueira, Alito (op.cit.) in his observations about Candolim in 1988. I observed similar patterns during my fieldwork in 1995-96. While on the one hand, the idea of Goa Dourada received a fresh lease of life through the development of tourism, it also set in motion criticism from the traditionalists and the migrant returnees who were upset over the construction and commodification of the authentic experience of Golden Goa for the tourists (Siqueira, 1991). An example of the articulation of this displeasure is evident in the Report of the Sub-Committee of the Diocesan Pastoral Council, entitled, ‘Tourism in Goa: Its Implications,’ (Diocesan Pastoral Council, 1988). This report, in the process of critiquing the commodification of the image of Golden Goa, in turn glorifies the idea of Goa Dourada in various ways. The report laments the loss of traditional occupations, ridicules the new job descriptions such as waiters and bus-boys, and reproduces erstwhile colonial elitist sentiments towards the Goan majority. Goa Indica ---------- There is an abundance of published work on Goa, but a critical look at them leaves us with hardly anything that has any depth of analysis and is not tainted, directly or indirectly, with the myth of 'Golden Goa' and its implied theory of welfare that served to quieten the guilt of the erstwhile rulers and few local beneficiaries (de Souza, 1994: 69). Goa Indica is viewed as a nationalist response to the colonial construction of Goa Dourada. It emphasizes the Indian contribution to the construction of Goan identity and was intended as an ideological answer to the Portuguese colonial mythology. Historians wanted to demonstrate and highlight the Indianess of Goan society and prove that Portuguese rule was viewed as a mere "accident in history" (Priolkar, 1967: 46). To assert the significance of Goan initiative (and its Indianess) in the making of Goan history is one thing; to ascertain the historical and social content of this phenomenon, quite another. Given the circumstances and the manner in which history has unfolded, the meaning of Goan initiative in the making of history remains elusive. Thus violence is done to the facts in order to fit them into some preconceived vision of the past. Responding to a need for a history that erases the Portuguese colonial bias, research has slid away from being an investigation into history towards historicism -- an imposition. The discourse of history and the patterns of communal politics in postcolonial Goa have encouraged and reproduced each other and this is evident during the first couple of decades after Liberation. Most of the anthropologists and sociologists who5B conducted research in Goa in recent years also seem to have uncritically accepted these nationalist renditions of history. They have concentrated on viewing Goan history with the intention of encouraging the process of assimilation within the Indian nation-state, postcolonial nation-building and state formation without subjecting these very processes to critical inquiry. The argument I'm making here is not to undermine their efforts but to point out the unintended ramifications of these good intentions. Caroline Ifeka's (1985) work fits squarely within this search for the formula for the integration of Goan society into the Indian nation-state. Robert S Newman (1988) also concurs with Ifeka's (1985) argument that the colonial construction of Golden Goa has to be displaced and replaced by an image of a Goan society which "emphasizes the Indian contribution to Goan Identity -- Goa Indica" (Ifeka, cited in Newman, 1988). Taking into consideration the immediate need for Goa's integration into the Indian nation-state and the violence inflicted upon Goan society by the contradictory images of Golden Goa, Robert Newman (1988) hints to an overarching need to "develop an identity which can include all 'sons of the soil' and give them the confidence to meet other Indians on an equal footing" (Newman, 1988). But the question remains as to who develops the identity that Newmanrefers to. Is it one emerging from these "sons of the soil" themselves or from discourses of nationalism within India? Considering the need for Goa's integration with India, the responsibility of creating an identity for the Goan people rests on the shoulders of the Indian State and the dominant class within the Goan society. The exploited majority of Goan society and their history has little influence over this process of identity formation. This process of identity formation is not much different from the colonial construction of Goa. Newman is able to recgnize the contradictory antagonisms that hold Goan society together. As Newman states: Circumstances have always been against the emergence of Goa Indica as opposed to Goa Dourada. First, the society is divided by caste and class... there is a long history of colonial oppression... upper class (Brahmin or Kshatriya) landlords and government officials during colonial times and landlords, industrialists and businessmen in recent times have exploited the lower or working class... so that alternative images or views of Goa have been very slow to emerge. The class interests of the opposing groups have been far apart and some of the so-called freedom struggles of the past were really attempts by powerful landed clans to exploit their erstwhile 'subjects' without Portuguese interference (Newman, 1988:17). Newman raises very crucial issues here but does not explore the significance of the above mentioned class conflicts in the process of identity formation. He considers these issues as secondary and less consequential. Newman's main concern is to overcome the threat posed by the idea of Golden Goa. The problem with works such as Newman's is, firstly, the failure to recognize the dangers of conflating the politics of identity with the politics of history, and, secondly, the inability to identify the class alliances forged in the call for Goa Indica. The sustained emphasis on the politics of identity which is devoid of class analysis leads to misunderstanding history and co-option by the dominant class. Undertaking a political economic analysis of identity politics might actually contribute to exposing class-based exploitation and appropriation of populist symbols within Goan society. Rather than viewing the recognition of Konkani as the official state language merely as a triumph of the efforts within Goan society to establish harmony between the Catholic and Hindu communities, it is important to assess the class alliances that were forged for voicing this demand. Thus, Newman's recognition of class/caste antagonisms in Goan society but his inability to undertake class analysis of Goan society, points toward certain fundamental methodological and conceptual problems in the study of Goan society.... There are some researchers located outside Goa who, responding primarily to the theoretical developments in history and the social sciences, have started reevaluating Goan history. Anthony R. Disney started his discussion of 17th century Goa with the following questions: Should Goa be studied mainly within the context of Indian Ocean trade? Or should greater recognition be given to the fact that most Goans lived by subsistence agriculture, and more stress therefore be placed on the life of the villages and the routines of the countryside? On another plane, is it more appropriate to regard Goa as falling firmly within the Portuguese political, economic and cultural orbits... or should she, on the contrary, be presented as (an) indissoluble part of the mainland, overwhelmingly Indian in character and essence, throughout this period? And if Portuguese rule was never more than superficial and Goa derived little of her distinctiveness from Portuguese associations, what, if anything, gives her a particular identity as compared with neighboring parts of India? (1986:85). These questions, when considered within the context of Goan historiography, are refreshing, but Disney's response is problematic. For Disney, the answers to these questions vary "according to the concerns and interests of those through whose eyes Goa is viewed in any particular period," for there are "several perceptions of Goa, each held by an identifiable interest group." (Siqueira) While Disney's answer suggests that the various identifiable interest groups exist in isolation from one another and can have their own perception of Goa and Goan history without interfering with the others, the situation can also be considered an ongoing crisis.... The conflicts among interest groups are not natural; rather they emerge when each group tries to fulfill its role in the course of their everyday interactions within the community.... ###