What's new

The forgotten Empire - Portuguese rule in India

Cpt. Rishwat

Cpt. Rishwat

T20I Captain
Joined
May 8, 2010
Runs
40,574
There was a book published a few years back which brought to light some truly horrific treatment of locals during the Portuguese reign over south India, but we don't see much mention of it as more focus tends to be on Mughal reign, perhaps because it was more comprehensive, and perhaps because of Pakistan connection.

For balance sake, might be a useful addition to our knowledge of Bharat to understand different aspects of foreign rule beyond the Mughal or British Empire. Here is some basic knowledge to kickstart the debate. Indians of the Christian persuasion such as @Hitman might have some better insights, feel free to contribute. :)

https://www.britannica.com/summary/Portuguese-India
 
Goa is a good source of tourism

Westerners go drink be merry and dance with a few women with the surname fernandez and rodriguez.

Why would the Indian govt want to disrupt that?
 
So, you know, back in the early 1500s, Vasco da Gama rolls up in India, right? Starts setting up shop with trading posts and forts along the coast. Then in 1510, this other guy, Afonso de Albuquerque, takes over Goa, and bam, that's when the Portuguese really start calling the shots. They grab more places like Daman, Diu, and even Bombay.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
There was a book published a few years back which brought to light some truly horrific treatment of locals during the Portuguese reign over south India, but we don't see much mention of it as more focus tends to be on Mughal reign, perhaps because it was more comprehensive, and perhaps because of Pakistan connection.

For balance sake, might be a useful addition to our knowledge of Bharat to understand different aspects of foreign rule beyond the Mughal or British Empire. Here is some basic knowledge to kickstart the debate. Indians of the Christian persuasion such as @Hitman might have some better insights, feel free to contribute. :)

https://www.britannica.com/summary/Portuguese-India
Click to expand...

Hitman is from Assam and a first generation convert to Christianity .

You are better off asking someone who is a Goan or Mangalorean Catholic, many of whom are descendants of the Portuguese.

Portuguese committed many horrors but it was only in a small part of the Konkan coast.

So I'm not sure why there is even a comparison.
 
Nikhil_cric said:
Hitman is from Assam and a first generation convert to Christianity .

You are better off asking someone who is a Goan or Mangalorean Catholic, many of whom are descendants of the Portuguese.

Portuguese committed many horrors but it was only in a small part of the Konkan coast.

So I'm not sure why there is even a comparison.
Click to expand...
He should be able to give us an indication. Convert or not he is part of the body. Or Christian Ummah.

'For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many.'
 
Portuguese ruled a very small part of the subcontinent. And the Portuguese inquisition of Goa is mentioned in history books.

What we don't have is Christians in India who consider Portuguese invaders as heroes because of their religion. Just like we don't have Christians who hail British colonizers as heroes.
 
cricketjoshila said:
Portuguese ruled a very small part of the subcontinent. And the Portuguese inquisition of Goa is mentioned in history books.

What we don't have is Christians in India who consider Portuguese invaders as heroes because of their religion. Just like we don't have Christians who hail British colonizers as heroes.
Click to expand...

How would you describe their beliefs then?

They believe passionately in the teachings of Christ that were brought to them by Portugese but hate the people that brought them ?
 
The OP has no India about India yet generalizing about everything.

I mean, in the southern states, no one even knows about Mughals these days nor mentions it. History is associated with the places and accordingly nay have been more relevant and remembered.

Most of the historic movies down south are based on either British other colonists but not Mughals. The equation is simple - they are not relevant much and it doesn't raise much curiosity/connect for the audience too.

It’s not like people have to live in the past.

The key issue here is that some section of people celebrate Mughals while majority hate it. And thats what creates the talking point. In contrast, no one supports the British rule, so not much of an issue to be created. And as time passes, older part of history will start to become irrelevant and thats what happening.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
There was a book published a few years back which brought to light some truly horrific treatment of locals during the Portuguese reign over south India, but we don't see much mention of it as more focus tends to be on Mughal reign, perhaps because it was more comprehensive, and perhaps because of Pakistan connection.

For balance sake, might be a useful addition to our knowledge of Bharat to understand different aspects of foreign rule beyond the Mughal or British Empire. Here is some basic knowledge to kickstart the debate. Indians of the Christian persuasion such as @Hitman might have some better insights, feel free to contribute. :)

https://www.britannica.com/summary/Portuguese-India
Click to expand...
They ruled a small part of india, far away from Assam
 
DeadlyVenom said:
How would you describe their beliefs then?

They believe passionately in the teachings of Christ that were brought to them by Portugese but hate the people that brought them ?
Click to expand...
For the same reason that latin American and African christians hate thier colonisers
 
DeadlyVenom said:
How would you describe their beliefs then?

They believe passionately in the teachings of Christ that were brought to them by Portugese but hate the people that brought them ?
Click to expand...

Believing in Christ has nothing to do with colonizers.Just like Islam has nothing to do with the looting invaders.

Christianity arrived in India long before any colonizer came here. Just like Islam arrived in India before any invading army from central Asia or Arab lands.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
How would you describe their beliefs then?

They believe passionately in the teachings of Christ that were brought to them by Portugese but hate the people that brought them ?
Click to expand...
Christianity arrived in India much before the portuguese.

But credit to christians, they can separate religion from colonisers, the good from the bad.
 
Nikhil_cric said:
Hitman is from Assam and a first generation convert to Christianity .

You are better off asking someone who is a Goan or Mangalorean Catholic, many of whom are descendants of the Portuguese.

Portuguese committed many horrors but it was only in a small part of the Konkan coast.

So I'm not sure why there is even a comparison.
Click to expand...

Hitman has been commenting plenty on Ummah recently so I thought he must have some thoughts about Portuguese rule in India as there have been books written about it, and by those accounts the Portuguese were particularly cruel to the locals on account of their religion - Christianity.

Of course his choice to partake in the discussion, if he wants to continue talking about Pakistan and Ummah, fire away. Others can feel free to contribute instead. :)
 
sweep_shot said:
I see Indians are conveniently ignoring Marathi invasions of Bengal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_invasions_of_Bengal).

It doesn't fit their narrative perhaps.
Click to expand...
Were the invasions based on religion?

I was ignoring it like I do with most posts because they show a fundamental lack of understanding.

Inter religion conflict vs intra religion conflict. Is the outrcry in muslims same if it a non muslim nation has a conflict with a muslim nation vs when two muslim nations have a conflict? If a pakistani is killed by a pakistani and when a pakistani is killed by an indian, which incident do you think will hurt the collective consciousness of pakistanis more?

They are not the same. So stop drawing equivalences between them. One is an attack on a person, the other is an attack on the entire community. One is a flight between brothers, the other is fight between islam and enemies of islam.
 

Cruelty of the Goa Inquisition​


The Goa Inquisition is regarded as the most violent ever executed by the Portuguese Catholic Church. It was basically a holocaust inflicted on the Indian people. The Inquisition consisted of a tribunal, headed by a judge sent from Portugal, along with two assistants or henchmen. The judge was answerable to no one but Lisbon, and handed down judgments in whatever way he saw fit. The Inquisition was conducted in a palace called the “Big House.” This had been the residence of the Portuguese Governors of Goa until 1554. This had been refitted to accommodate 200 cells for prisoners, and instruments of torture to inflict all kinds of pain on the “heathens and pagans,” Hindus, and force “the true and merciful religion” of Christianity on those who resisted it. All interrogations were conducted behind closed doors, but the screams of agony of the men, women, and children could be heard from the streets, even in the middle of the night, as they would be brutally flogged, beaten, burned, or even slowly dismembered in front of their relatives.

www.hindujagruti.org

The Horrific Truth of the Goa Inquisition ! - Hindu Janajagruti Samiti

www.hindujagruti.org www.hindujagruti.org
Click to expand...

Some horrifying accounts on here, that is just a small sample. Even the article writer has described it as "The Forgotten Genocide".
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
Some horrifying accounts on here, that is just a small sample. Even the article writer has described it as "The Forgotten Genocide".
Click to expand...
Hindus have been at the receiving end of many genocides. Hardly surprising. The meek do not inherit the earth, irrespective of what the Bible says.
 
We can see that there were specially designed sharp instruments with spikes for cutting the ears of Hindus, for breaking their legs and shin, for disembowelling them over the rack, for breaking their jaws, for tearing their tongues and finally there was a specially designed Christian equipment (designed with Christian compassion of rigorous mercy!) for tearing apart the female breasts! I acknowledge my debt to Shri Maanoj Rakhit, a great Hindutva scholar from Bombay for helping me with the above rare photographs of the implements and tools of Christian torture in Goa during the days of the Holy Inquisition!

www.hindujagruti.org

Atrocities on Hindus by missionaries in Goa - present and history of Goa - Hindu Janajagruti Samiti

History of Goa explained in detail - How immoral and barbarous were the Holy Inquisitors in Goa (who took hourly instructions from St. Francis Xavier from 1542 to 1551) in the 16th century can be seen by the oration given by Archbishop of Evora at the Cathedral Church of Lisbon in June 1897
www.hindujagruti.org www.hindujagruti.org
Click to expand...

More atrocities left unanswered.
 
CricketCartoons said:
Hindus have been at the receiving end of many genocides. Hardly surprising. The meek do not inherit the earth, irrespective of what the Bible says.
Click to expand...

I agree, although meekness and gentility is a virtue and has it's place. But when we see evil we should not turn away and fail to acknowledge it. I hope one day someone with real strength demands an apology from the Pope if Modi is not the man to do it.
 
CricketCartoons said:
For once he showed spine instead of his non aligned movement.
Click to expand...
Had to after being left alone during 62 war.
Wish he had got the reality check in 1952 and not 1962.
Weak mind of mine always fantasised that idea of India if it had been challenged in 1952 we would had setup better International policies.
 
JaDed said:
Had to after being left alone during 62 war.
Wish he had got the reality check in 1952 and not 1962.
Weak mind of mine always fantasised that idea of India if it had been challenged in 1952 we would had setup better International policies.
Click to expand...
Unlike Modi toadies, I don't blame Nehru much. He had good intentions and those days many people though socialism was the path. He didn't like commies and called them confused. He may be seen as weak, but he was not an evil person. But his secularism was neither here nor there. He wanted secularism for hindus, but wanted to win over muslims (seems he took it personally that they rejected him in elections before 1947) by supporting exceptionalism for them. Nehruvian secularism has been the bane of this country because it was not truly secular.
 
No invader who ruled India or parts of it is an angel. Everyone used force to impose their will on the masses.

I have no problem with any ruler as long as his descendent adopt Indian ways and become part of the melting pot. Even Greek rulers adopted Buddhism and Hinduism after a few generations in India. Similarly, the Scythians, Kambojas and many central asian invaders and migrants adopted Indian culture.

But if you invade the country and even after hundreds of years, you do not integrate, this can become a problem. This is the issue with Mughals. They stuck to their Turkic-Mongol ways and did not want anything to do with the locals. Hence the hatred for Mughals.

Portuguese only ruled a tiny part of India and they did atrocities there. It is not widespread like what Mughals did.
 
Champ_Pal said:
No invader who ruled India or parts of it is an angel. Everyone used force to impose their will on the masses.

I have no problem with any ruler as long as his descendent adopt Indian ways and become part of the melting pot. Even Greek rulers adopted Buddhism and Hinduism after a few generations in India. Similarly, the Scythians, Kambojas and many central asian invaders and migrants adopted Indian culture.

But if you invade the country and even after hundreds of years, you do not integrate, this can become a problem. This is the issue with Mughals. They stuck to their Turkic-Mongol ways and did not want anything to do with the locals. Hence the hatred for Mughals.

Portuguese only ruled a tiny part of India and they did atrocities there. It is not widespread like what Mughals did.
Click to expand...

By Indian ways you mean become Hindu right?
 
Champ_Pal said:
No invader who ruled India or parts of it is an angel. Everyone used force to impose their will on the masses.

I have no problem with any ruler as long as his descendent adopt Indian ways and become part of the melting pot. Even Greek rulers adopted Buddhism and Hinduism after a few generations in India. Similarly, the Scythians, Kambojas and many central asian invaders and migrants adopted Indian culture.

But if you invade the country and even after hundreds of years, you do not integrate, this can become a problem. This is the issue with Mughals. They stuck to their Turkic-Mongol ways and did not want anything to do with the locals. Hence the hatred for Mughals.

Portuguese only ruled a tiny part of India and they did atrocities there. It is not widespread like what Mughals did.
Click to expand...
Rulers descendents? How many will they be. Neither are indian christians descendents of british/french/portuguese, nor are pakistani and indian muslims descendents of mughals or arabs. They are people of this land who converted. They are not descendents.
 
Champ_Pal said:
No invader who ruled India or parts of it is an angel. Everyone used force to impose their will on the masses.

I have no problem with any ruler as long as his descendent adopt Indian ways and become part of the melting pot. Even Greek rulers adopted Buddhism and Hinduism after a few generations in India. Similarly, the Scythians, Kambojas and many central asian invaders and migrants adopted Indian culture.

But if you invade the country and even after hundreds of years, you do not integrate, this can become a problem. This is the issue with Mughals. They stuck to their Turkic-Mongol ways and did not want anything to do with the locals. Hence the hatred for Mughals.

Portuguese only ruled a tiny part of India and they did atrocities there. It is not widespread like what Mughals did.
Click to expand...
But many Dharmics themselves are adopting non-Indian ways, western lifestyle based on European culture. Do you expect every Sikh must wear a turban and a beard rather than sport a trendy hairstyle and clean cut like many Bollywood heroes? Should every woman wear a sari and a tilak on her forehead rather than jeans or a crop top?

When Hindus themselves don't have to represent Indian ways, why is it expected of Christians or Muslims?
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
But many Dharmics themselves are adopting non-Indian ways, western lifestyle based on European culture. Do you expect every Sikh must wear a turban and a beard rather than sport a trendy hairstyle and clean cut like many Bollywood heroes? Should every woman wear a sari and a tilak on her forehead rather than jeans or a crop top?

When Hindus themselves don't have to represent Indian ways, why is it expected of Christians or Muslims?
Click to expand...
I was talking about invaders who came to India from foreign lands. Not locals of modern day who want to wear Western style clothes.
 
Champ_Pal said:
India is not just Hindus. Its Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs.
Click to expand...
If tomorrow 500millio Indians decide to spontaneously convert to Judaism will they cease following Indian culture and stop being Indian?
 
Champ_Pal said:
India is not just Hindus. Its Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs.
Click to expand...

Sikhism started way after Mughals first arrived. It is a relatively newer religion in India.

Try again. you keep on exposing your comical bigotry.
 
sweep_shot said:
Sikhism started way after Mughals first arrived. It is a relatively newer religion in India.

Try again. you keep on exposing your comical bigotry.
Click to expand...
Why do u think nizam in Hyderabad was hated .He never spoke in regional language .He insists people.should convert to Islam and get a good position in courts.Everyone has to speak in Urdu was official doctrine. what about other religions if not Sikhism.
 
Champ_Pal said:
I was talking about invaders who came to India from foreign lands. Not locals of modern day who want to wear Western style clothes.
Click to expand...

Yet you are conversing in English language which was imposed by foreign invaders. Do you have a better and more Dharmic place we could discuss this?
 
Trade and Economy are the first things that come to my mind when we talk about the Portuguese rule. The Portuguese were the first Europeans to establish a direct trade route to India. One of the things that impacted the Indian sub-continent big time.
 
JaDed said:
Had to after being left alone during 62 war.
Wish he had got the reality check in 1952 and not 1962.
Weak mind of mine always fantasised that idea of India if it had been challenged in 1952 we would had setup better International policies.
Click to expand...

There is a reason why Nehru failed to win a single vote in the Congress elections for the candidature of PM.

Sardar Patel had received the most votes.

Everyone knew how incompetent Nehru was.
 
This thread is about Portuguese rule in India if you look at the title. Why Nehru and other Indian politics stuff is being discussed here?
 
BouncerGuy said:
This thread is about Portuguese rule in India if you look at the title. Why Nehru and other Indian politics stuff is being discussed here?
Click to expand...
Because its Portuguese rule in India ?
They continued to rule even after Independence in 1947 and Nehru was then the PM and it was latter annexed in 1961 so its a valid discussion in this context.
 
IndoorCricket said:
Because its Portuguese rule in India ?
They continued to rule even after Independence in 1947 and Nehru was then the PM and it was latter annexed in 1961 so its a valid discussion in this context.
Click to expand...

Nehru was around during Portuguese rule in India? :unsure:
 
RexRex said:
I don't have any statistics unfortunately; just a view that's based on several conversations I've had with boomer Goan uncles who were alive at the time.
Click to expand...
I have talked to some boomer goan uncles. They would praise the administration and lack of corruption, and hated the topiwala congressis from delhi. But those are 2-3 people. Anecdotal evidence is not sufficient.
 
Vikram1989 said:
Why do u think nizam in Hyderabad was hated .He never spoke in regional language .He insists people.should convert to Islam and get a good position in courts.Everyone has to speak in Urdu was official doctrine. what about other religions if not Sikhism.
Click to expand...
Not at all true. Before independence, the Nizams of Hyderabad were among the the most liberal rulers in India. Many Hindus occupied high posts in their administration, and also formed the majority of their zamindars. Despite Urdu being the official language, the Nizams always spoke in Dakhni Urdu, which was and is still spoken widely by Hyderabadis.
In fact, Hyderabad was almost bankrupted the third Nizam's Prime Minister Chandu Lal, a Hindu from UP, who connived with the British Resident to wreak havoc with the state's finances. The Nizam forgave him and even retired him with a generous pension.

Several elderly Hyderabadi Hindus, some even related to me, had high regard for the Nizams and spoke about their rule with a lot of love and nostalgia. Life in Hyderabad was terrific under the Nizams, for people of all religions.

Things went bad just after independence when creeps like Kazim Rizvi tried to start the Razakar movement to trouble the Hindus in Hyderabad. But it hardly lasted a few days. There was zero resistance to the Indian Army from the Razakars, who surrendered without firing a shot.
 
gani999 said:
Not at all true. Before independence, the Nizams of Hyderabad were among the the most liberal rulers in India. Many Hindus occupied high posts in their administration, and also formed the majority of their zamindars. Despite Urdu being the official language, the Nizams always spoke in Dakhni Urdu, which was and is still spoken widely by Hyderabadis.
In fact, Hyderabad was almost bankrupted the third Nizam's Prime Minister Chandu Lal, a Hindu from UP, who connived with the British Resident to wreak havoc with the state's finances. The Nizam forgave him and even retired him with a generous pension.

Several elderly Hyderabadi Hindus, some even related to me, had high regard for the Nizams and spoke about their rule with a lot of love and nostalgia. Life in Hyderabad was terrific under the Nizams, for people of all religions.

Things went bad just after independence when creeps like Kazim Rizvi tried to start the Razakar movement to trouble the Hindus in Hyderabad. But it hardly lasted a few days. There was zero resistance to the Indian Army from the Razakars, who surrendered without firing a shot.
Click to expand...
What is this Razakar Movement in India? I heard about this movement in East Pakistan only.
 
gani999 said:
Not at all true. Before independence, the Nizams of Hyderabad were among the the most liberal rulers in India. Many Hindus occupied high posts in their administration, and also formed the majority of their zamindars. Despite Urdu being the official language, the Nizams always spoke in Dakhni Urdu, which was and is still spoken widely by Hyderabadis.
In fact, Hyderabad was almost bankrupted the third Nizam's Prime Minister Chandu Lal, a Hindu from UP, who connived with the British Resident to wreak havoc with the state's finances. The Nizam forgave him and even retired him with a generous pension.

Several elderly Hyderabadi Hindus, some even related to me, had high regard for the Nizams and spoke about their rule with a lot of love and nostalgia. Life in Hyderabad was terrific under the Nizams, for people of all religions.

Things went bad just after independence when creeps like Kazim Rizvi tried to start the Razakar movement to trouble the Hindus in Hyderabad. But it hardly lasted a few days. There was zero resistance to the Indian Army from the Razakars, who surrendered without firing a shot.
Click to expand...
Razakars were there for 10 years to harass and loot not for days. People irrespective of religion were murdered for suggesting the integration with india after independence. Kaloji, the political activist and great poet called Nizam as generations of dust to comply.all the activists were murdered, or they escaped in to forrest, Mumbai or neighbouring States.Razakars have not peacefully accepted the integration, they lost in the war in 3 days
 
Vikram1989 said:
Razakars were there for 10 years to harass and loot not for days. People irrespective of religion were murdered for suggesting the integration with india after independence. Kaloji, the political activist and great poet called Nizam as generations of dust to comply.all the activists were murdered, or they escaped in to forrest, Mumbai or neighbouring States.Razakars have not peacefully accepted the integration, they lost in the war in 3 days
Click to expand...
Mate, I have first hand information from several people who lived in Hyderabad during those times.
The harassment and looting happened only for a few days. The so-called Razakars were little more than street thugs who were easily silenced by communist activists and even RSS supporting Hindus. They would then take their anger out on unarmed innocents and women.
The Razakars literally shook with fear when they heard that the Indian Army was coming, and they all surrendered without firing a shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sweep_shot
Mughal Empire Appreciation Thread - Positive Contributions of Mughals in Indian Subcontinent
2 3 4
Replies
276
Views
6K
Cpt. Rishwat
Cpt. Rishwat
Cpt. Rishwat
The Jewel in the Crown - deep dive of the British Empire
Replies
38
Views
1K
NishanKonar
N
FearlessRoar
Chanakya: Mastermind of ancient warfare strategies
Replies
16
Views
796
Nikhil_cric
N
MenInG
"Ashoka's Empire": India On Row Over Mural In New Parliament
Replies
9
Views
830
MenInG
MenInG
The Bald Eagle
'Current period Golden for country'...'Greedy people hungry for power want to break India’: PM Modi in Gujarat
Replies
59
Views
780
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
Back
Top