Related to post 72 onwards:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Goa under the Portuguese</b>
While no informed scholar goes so far as to portray it in such an extreme way, it is easy to get the impression from much of the extant literature that the arrival of the Portuguese in India was a colossal cultural juggernaut which stamped out a native cultural system and supplanted it with an Asian enclave of Western civilization. Accounts by some Catholics about the Christianization of Goa, apologists for Portuguese rule, Hindu opponents of Portuguese rule, monographs on Goan culture and society, and modern day impressions of casual visitors to Goa and many educated Indians often portray Goa as a Christianized, Lusified corner of India. Indeed, on reading the goals of those connected with the Padroado and correspondence by many church and state luminaries in the <i>Estado da India</i> during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the impression is received that the Portuguese were achieving great success in transforming Goa into a satellite of metropolitan Portugal. Document upon document chronicles mass conversions, the destruction of all the temples in Goa, and the swift success in Christianizing virtually every village in Goa.
The book has yet to be written assessing the varying reports on the levels of brutality and the willingness of Goans to convert to Christianity. It is highly unlikely that an entirely accurate account can ever be created because of the varied evidence. D'Costa, in a book which is largely an apology for the conversion policies, notes the same kinds of contradictions in the archival record that we find. Local traditions, he reports, tell of violence, resistance and the flight of Hindus from Goa, while the Jesuit annual accounts and a number of other official documents report warm receptions and mass conversions. Most documents and accounts concur that temples were destroyed and churches were erected in their place, though the levels of violence and brutality that accompanied them are difficult to determine and varied from village to village. There are also consistent reports of large numbers of Hindus fleeing the conversion, though the accounts vary on the proportion of the population who left. The matter is complicated by the periodic return of some Hindus and half-hearted conversions of others.
Contemporary Goa can also provide a misleading view of the nature and success of the conversion policies. Visually, Goa stands in stark contrast to neighboring Hindu India. Every village in the old conquests is dominated by a huge church, many of which date to the period of active Christianization in the mid-sixteenth century and are centrally located on the sites of the village temple.
In the mid-nineteenth century, the date of the earliest published census, Catholics were the clear majority of the population in the old conquests, comprising 77 per cent in Ilhas, 95 per cent in Salsette and 83 per cent in Bardez.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->However, other documents in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century tell a story of frustration and recidivism on the conversion front. Portuguese administrative, military, and religious officials spoke often of the difficulties they faced in carrying out their policies, and numerous references to the intransigence of Hindus can be found from the mid-sixteenth century through the end of the seventeenth century. In the midst of great claims of success in converting entire villages and destroying virtually all of the Hindu temples in Ilhas, Salsette, and Bardez, is a persistent commentary on their inability to carry out those policies within the area of Portuguese control. More consistently, comments reveal their inability to control the Hindu activities in the areas outside of Portuguese jurisdiction, in which Goan Hindus and Catholics participated. There is ample archival evidence of the frustration of the Portuguese officials in carrying out their conversion policies.
<b>For example,</b> the Portuguese pledged to destroy Hindu temples and, in doing so, limit or stop the practice of Hinduism. Their lack of success shows in the following documents:
+ In the mid-sixteenth century, the viceroy Dom Joao de Castro receives a letter from the king stating that the king has received news that there are still public and private temples on the Island of Goa. He orders the viceroy to prohibit all public and secret temples as soon as the king's letter is received.
+ King Dom Sebastiao signs a letter on 25 March 1559 informing the viceroy that it has come to his attention that:
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->on Goa and annexed lands there are many offenses committed by the infidels and Gentiles there who adore and publicly celebrate idols and temples and use diabolical rituals and, worst, in the presence of Christians besides.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->He thus passes a law that 'henceforward there be no more temples nor idols in any house nor anywhere in my realm.'74
+ A few years later, on 29 March 1566 the king writes that no new temples can be built and that those existing ones cannot be repaired without the king's special licence under penalty of being rased.75
In spite of the destruction of many Hindu temples, royal correspondence (the so-called 'Monsoon letters') to the viceroys and governors of the <i>Estado da India</i> throughout the sixteenth century deal with the topic of Hindu temples in Christian lands:
+ The king writes on 28 March 1580 that there are to be 'no temples, no idols, no festivals allowed:' this was supposed to be done in 1568, but he knows that 'many Hindus keep reverting to their rituals particularly in Salsette and Bardez which is detrimental to the conversion process.'76<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Goa under the Portuguese</b>
While no informed scholar goes so far as to portray it in such an extreme way, it is easy to get the impression from much of the extant literature that the arrival of the Portuguese in India was a colossal cultural juggernaut which stamped out a native cultural system and supplanted it with an Asian enclave of Western civilization. Accounts by some Catholics about the Christianization of Goa, apologists for Portuguese rule, Hindu opponents of Portuguese rule, monographs on Goan culture and society, and modern day impressions of casual visitors to Goa and many educated Indians often portray Goa as a Christianized, Lusified corner of India. Indeed, on reading the goals of those connected with the Padroado and correspondence by many church and state luminaries in the <i>Estado da India</i> during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the impression is received that the Portuguese were achieving great success in transforming Goa into a satellite of metropolitan Portugal. Document upon document chronicles mass conversions, the destruction of all the temples in Goa, and the swift success in Christianizing virtually every village in Goa.
The book has yet to be written assessing the varying reports on the levels of brutality and the willingness of Goans to convert to Christianity. It is highly unlikely that an entirely accurate account can ever be created because of the varied evidence. D'Costa, in a book which is largely an apology for the conversion policies, notes the same kinds of contradictions in the archival record that we find. Local traditions, he reports, tell of violence, resistance and the flight of Hindus from Goa, while the Jesuit annual accounts and a number of other official documents report warm receptions and mass conversions. Most documents and accounts concur that temples were destroyed and churches were erected in their place, though the levels of violence and brutality that accompanied them are difficult to determine and varied from village to village. There are also consistent reports of large numbers of Hindus fleeing the conversion, though the accounts vary on the proportion of the population who left. The matter is complicated by the periodic return of some Hindus and half-hearted conversions of others.
Contemporary Goa can also provide a misleading view of the nature and success of the conversion policies. Visually, Goa stands in stark contrast to neighboring Hindu India. Every village in the old conquests is dominated by a huge church, many of which date to the period of active Christianization in the mid-sixteenth century and are centrally located on the sites of the village temple.
In the mid-nineteenth century, the date of the earliest published census, Catholics were the clear majority of the population in the old conquests, comprising 77 per cent in Ilhas, 95 per cent in Salsette and 83 per cent in Bardez.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->However, other documents in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century tell a story of frustration and recidivism on the conversion front. Portuguese administrative, military, and religious officials spoke often of the difficulties they faced in carrying out their policies, and numerous references to the intransigence of Hindus can be found from the mid-sixteenth century through the end of the seventeenth century. In the midst of great claims of success in converting entire villages and destroying virtually all of the Hindu temples in Ilhas, Salsette, and Bardez, is a persistent commentary on their inability to carry out those policies within the area of Portuguese control. More consistently, comments reveal their inability to control the Hindu activities in the areas outside of Portuguese jurisdiction, in which Goan Hindus and Catholics participated. There is ample archival evidence of the frustration of the Portuguese officials in carrying out their conversion policies.
<b>For example,</b> the Portuguese pledged to destroy Hindu temples and, in doing so, limit or stop the practice of Hinduism. Their lack of success shows in the following documents:
+ In the mid-sixteenth century, the viceroy Dom Joao de Castro receives a letter from the king stating that the king has received news that there are still public and private temples on the Island of Goa. He orders the viceroy to prohibit all public and secret temples as soon as the king's letter is received.
+ King Dom Sebastiao signs a letter on 25 March 1559 informing the viceroy that it has come to his attention that:
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->on Goa and annexed lands there are many offenses committed by the infidels and Gentiles there who adore and publicly celebrate idols and temples and use diabolical rituals and, worst, in the presence of Christians besides.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->He thus passes a law that 'henceforward there be no more temples nor idols in any house nor anywhere in my realm.'74
+ A few years later, on 29 March 1566 the king writes that no new temples can be built and that those existing ones cannot be repaired without the king's special licence under penalty of being rased.75
In spite of the destruction of many Hindu temples, royal correspondence (the so-called 'Monsoon letters') to the viceroys and governors of the <i>Estado da India</i> throughout the sixteenth century deal with the topic of Hindu temples in Christian lands:
+ The king writes on 28 March 1580 that there are to be 'no temples, no idols, no festivals allowed:' this was supposed to be done in 1568, but he knows that 'many Hindus keep reverting to their rituals particularly in Salsette and Bardez which is detrimental to the conversion process.'76<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->