Reducing difference in the Portuguese empire? A case study from early-modern Goa

Reducing di e ence in he Po uguese empi e? A case s udy om ea ly-mode n Goa Ângela Ba e o Xa ie 11. 242 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in In 1951, he B azilian sociologis Gilbe o F ey e made a sho isi o Goa. This was pa o a ip du ing which F ey e a elled h ough he Po uguese colonies in A ica and Asia o obse e he esul s o he miscegena ion p ocess ha , in his iew, cha ac e ised Po uguese colonialism (Cas elo 1998; Souza 2008; Bas os 2003; Ca dão and Cas elo 2015; Bas os 2015). Du ing ha isi , F ey e conside ed ha Goan socie y was one o he bes exp essions o Luso- opicalism, o ha benign Po uguese colonialism ha adap ed physically and cul u ally o opical con ex s, c ea ing mixed socie ies (F ey e 1953). I onically, i e yea s la e , he Po uguese geog aphe O lando Ribei o, who, among o he Po uguese in ellec uals, espoused Luso- opicalis heo ies, had a di e en imp ession o he same e i o ies and socie y, wa ning Salaza abou he nea absence o Lusophile eelings, and ha he Po uguese p esence in Goa was in dange (Ribei o 1999). How can hese di e en na a i es be explained? Was F ey e mis aken? O was Ribei o oo apocalyp ic (which he was no , since in 1961, Goa was annexed by he Indian go e nmen )? To unde s and he di e se pe cep ions ha F ey e and Ribei o had, in he same decade, o he same e i o ies and socie y, i is necessa y o go back in his o y. F ey e and Ribei o we e seeing pa s o he end o a p ocess ha had s a ed ou cen u ies be o e. P obably each o hem was s uck by di e en ou comes o ha p ocess, which led o hei con adic o y pe cep ions. In his sho isi , F ey e was appa en ly unawa e o he esis ance o he Po uguese p esence el by many Goans (Ca holic o Hindu, bu usually o Indian descen ) in hose e y same yea s. He was, in ac , “guided” by well-o Goans o Po uguese (pe haps mixed) o igin and by Ca holic eli es o Indian o igin comple ely adap ed o he Po uguese impe ial idiom, and some imes he i s o umpe he i ues o he Po uguese empi e. Ribei o, in con as , had a longe s ay in Goa. In his 1956 epo , eques ed by Salaza , his pe plexi y is clea when aced wi h he in icacies o Goa. He ob iously did no expec o hea he na a i es o he many ep esen a i es o he demog aphic majo i y ha had been excluded, om he 16 h cen u y onwa ds, om he bene i s ha impe ial domina ion b ough o a ew. In ac , hese na a i es we e in deep con adic ion wi h he Luso- opicalis an asies. In e isi ing he i s cen u ies o he Po uguese p esence in Goa and he s a egies ollowed by he Po uguese c own in o de o keep hose e i o ies and people unde Po uguese ule, I shall discuss why F ey e and Ribei o’s pe cep ions we e simul aneously co ec , mis aken, and complimen a y. educing di e ence in he po uguese empi e? 243 The i s wo sec ions will sc u inise he Po uguese physical and cul u al miscegena ion policies in ea ly mode n Goa, and hei long- e m consequences. How success ul we e hese policies? To wha ex en he “Lusi anisa ion” o Indians was comple e? We e hey ull membe s o he impe ial poli ical body, o s igma ised subjec s wi h a liminal s a us? And wha happened o he child en o mixed couples (Van Gennep 1909; Go man 1963; Tu ne 1969)? In he hi d sec ion, I a gue ha he inclusi e and assimila ionis policies o he 16 h cen u y led simul aneously o he educ ion o di e ence and he mul iplica ion o dis inc ions and hie a chies no only be ween “colonise s” and “colonised”, bu also be ween “colonised” and “colonised”, in wha could be called a colonial exp ession o he communi y p oblems o “ he es ablished and he ou side s” (Elias and Sco son 1994). I in he 16 h cen u y Es ado da Índia, he Po uguese colonis s i onically played he ole o “ he es ablished”, in he ollowing cen u ies, his equa ion gained a di e en complexion, calling in o ques ion he expec ed balance o powe , and he necessa y hie a chy be ween “colonise s” and “colonised” ( o compa e wi h o he impe ial expe iences, see S ole , 1995; Belmessous, 2013). Finally, in my ou h sec ion, I shall e isi he ini ial pa adox and d aw some conclusions on he ensions and dilemmas be ween inclusion and exclusion in he ea ly mode n Po uguese empi e. mixed ma iages Con olling he o ms o social ep oduc ion was cen al o he du abili y o colonial socie ies, as poin ed ou by Ann Lau a S ole and o he s (S ole 1995; S ole 1997; Young 2005). Social ep oduc ion in he impe ial e i o ies laid he ounda ions o he poli ical iden i y o hese places, he igh s o belonging o he poli ical communi y, he e ms o his belonging, as well as he loca ion o he a ious ac o s in he social scena io. I was he awa eness o i s signi icance ha led A onso de Albuque que (1453-1515), he 2nd ice oy o India, o p opose a policy o Manuel i (1469-1521) ha , in his iew, would cons i u e he basis o main aining he new Indian Ocean e i o ies and o u he e i o ial ad ances in India. The mili a y and adminis a i e needs o he newly c ea ed Es ado da Índia (1505) demanded mo e and mo e people. Howe e , un il he second decade o he 16 h cen u y, he majo i y o Po uguese impe ial agen s e u ned o Po ugal a he end o hei commission, no mally s aying h ee o a ew mo e 244 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in yea s. In con as wi h he A lan ic islands ( he Azo es and Madei a) and, om he 16 h cen u y onwa ds, wi h B azil, whe e Po uguese se lemen became he ule, he Po uguese p esence in Asia was cha ac e ised by mobili y (Russell- Wood 1992; Russell-Wood 1998). To o e come hese di icul ies – ew colonis s o hold as and dis an e i o ies – Albuque que p oposed o he king o Po ugal ha his soldie s be allowed o ma y Indian women, ans o ming he newly conque ed ci ies o Goa, Kochi, Malacca and Ho muz, in o se le s’ socie ies o a so . The pe cep ion o India as a place o al e i y, as wo h less han he kingdom, legi imised hese ma iages o he Po uguese men wi h (lowe cas e) Indian women. In addi ion, he A is o elian gene a ion heo y s ill p e ailing a his pe iod, which s essed he dominan posi ion o he male semen in he momen o gene a ing a child, suppo ed he belie ha he blood o he child en o hese couples was mainly Po uguese (Needham 1959; Da mon 1977; Hespanha 1993; Felici and Si acusa 2000). The legal e ms o he ag eemen be ween he Po uguese c own and i s subjec s who accep ed hese ma iages we e exac ing, bo h ega ding he mo e en icing pa s o he p oposal – he g an ing o lands and o he ewa ds as compensa ion o he unions – and he quali ies equi ed o he spouses. The b ides should ha e he ai es skin possible and had necessa ily o con e o Ch is iani y (Ba os 1988, i, 198; Boxe 1961). Bi h (na io) and bap ism ( egene a io) we e equi alen iden i ica ion c i e ia in Po uguese law, which mean ha hese women heo e ically became Po uguese a e hei bap ism. The land g an s we e gi en unde a egime o emphy eusis, by which ansmission could only occu h ough inhe i ance. This helped o a ach he couples and hei p ogeny o he Indian land. The enewal o he idea o pa e amilias wi h co esponding economic implica ions, unde pinned he legal ules ha sus ained his policy, whe e he opoi “house”, “land”, “ a m” we e di ec ly associa ed wi h “ma iage”. The immedia e esul s o Albuque que’s s a egy we e no negligible: in he second decade o he 16 h cen u y he e we e hund eds o mixed couples – om ha momen onwa ds known as he casados – and mixed child en who we e subjec s o he Po uguese c own. The majo i y o hem we e om Goa, whe e hese ini ia i es we e mo e success ul (o e 500 mixed couples), besides unsanc i ied unions be ween single men and sla e women o concubines. A le e om Diogo Ma iz, a cle k o he Goa Council, is e y sugges i e. Acco ding o Ma iz, he ci y o Goa had 1,000 child en o Po uguese a he s, educing di e ence in he po uguese empi e? 245 conside ing hem as u u e loyal soldie s o de end he empi e. The o he owns unde Po uguese ule had ewe casados, bu he e we e s ill a numbe o child en concei ed om hese unions bea ing ypically Po uguese names: A onso, Jacome, Ines, Joana, B ísida, F ancisco, Pe o, Ana (g , 10, n.º 23; ian/ , cc, p 2, Mç 3, n.º 154; Mç 17, n.º 27 e 30). Like hei pa en s, hese child en had ull igh s and obliga ions in ma e s o public and p i a e Po uguese law. Since Po uguese law did no p edic in e e ence in he p i a e a ai s o he communi ies ha we e unde Po uguese dominion bu we e no Po uguese (o Ch is ian), his legal aspec was no i ele an (Hespanha 1995; Suá ez 1971, 6, § 18-22). A he ime, in ac , he Po uguese king exe cised di ec ule only o e a mino i y ( he Po uguese people and he ew Indians con e ed o Ch is iani y) o he housands o people li ing in hose e i o ies, which mean ha nea ly all he empi e’s inhabi an s we e no , s ic ly speaking, subjec s o he king o Po ugal (Thomaz 1994a; Hespanha 1995). Besides inc easing, in demog aphic e ms, he c own’s powe in hose e i o ies, physical miscegena ion changed, in he long e m, he ela ion be ween “colonise s” and “colonised”. F om he second decade o he 16 h cen u y onwa ds, he communi y o “colonise s” became mo e he e ogeneous, including a social g oup o Indian descen , which was, o some ex en , he his o ical p oo o wha was a gued by F ey e. Howe e , in con as wi h he posi i e assessmen o F ey e, he malaise owa ds he casados and hei child en was high, e en ually leading o he suspension o Albuque que’s policy o physical miscegena ion (which F ey e was appa en ly unawa e o ). Resis ance o physical miscegena ion s a ed om i s beginnings, in India and in he kingdom. Fi s , he pa en s o he Indian women e used o gi e hei daugh e s o Po uguese men. Only la e , when hey saw hem “honou ed wi h land and ichness ha hey did no ha e be o e”, he poo e ones ag eed o his kind o union. Howe e , he daugh e s o uppe -cas e Indians did no in eg a e his ma iage ma ke , p obably because hei pa en s didn’ need o ha e honou s and ichness, and p e e ed o keep hei own way o li e (Ba os 1998, i, 198). Secondly, om he ou se , he e had also been Po uguese nobles who we e agains such unions, a guing ha simila a angemen s would nei he be welcome no honou ed. Since he e we e concu en heo ies o gene a ion (o igina ed by Hippoc a es and Galen), and some o hem ques ioned he male dominance, he ea o blood con amina ion was also p esen . In addi ion, he e was he ques ion o colou – he colou ba ie –, 246 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in which did no ha e any legal s anding, bu o which mos Po uguese we e ha dly indi e en (Boxe 1961, 1963). João de Ba os, who p aised Albuque que’s decisions, complained agains hese c i ics, a guing ha he Romans had ma ied he Sabine, and nobody e oked hose beginnings o Rome as being impu e; and in he Po uguese colonisa ion o he A lan ic islands he e had been mixed couples, oo. Again, he e we e no complain s agains i (Ba os 1998, i, 178, 470-73, 550). Ano he impo an a iable o ake in o accoun a he momen o analysing he changing pe cep ions owa ds he mixed ma iages happening in India is he eme gence o he ideology o pu i y o blood. This ideology e oked he al e na i e gene a ion heo ies, in which he ole o he emale subs ance in he momen o gene a ion is ac i e, oo. Pu i y o blood became hegemonic du ing he 16 h and 17 h cen u ies Po ugal, a guing ha un il he ou h gene a ion he “impu e” Jewish male o emale blood did no anish. The ou come o his was ha mos people o Jewish descen we e no eligible o he o ices, bene i s, p i ileges and dis inc ions o he Po uguese c own. The signi ican p esence o Jews and New Ch is ians in he impe ial Po uguese e i o ies, as well as he ac ha some o he casados we e ma ied o daugh e s o New Ch is ians, helped he ans e o his ideology o India, and i s impac on he pe cep ion o he casados and hei child en (and la e , o he Indian con e s, oo) (Ta im 2003; Rego 2011; Xa ie 2011). Along wi h his, in Eu ope he e we e deba es on “ he pe ec ma iage”, he p ope beha iou o couples, he ole o he Ch is ian pa e amilias, and he educa ion o child en. These deba es ha la e would ha e a no ma i e exp ession in he T iden ine dec ee en i led De Re o ma ione Ma imonii o 1563, adop ed as law in Po ugal in 1564 ( Fe nandes 1995; Cae ano 1965; Xa ie 2010), uelled ques ions such as: How could ma iages be ween unequal pa ies be conside ed “pe ec unions”? How could an Indian woman ecen ly con e ed o Ch is iani y aise a child as a ue Ch is ian? O , how could an “Indianised” Po uguese man beha e like a pa e amilias (Xa ie 2014)? The pe cep ion ha he casados we e g adually becoming less and less in e es ed in he c own’s mili a y campaigns, and mo e in ol ed in hei own p i a e p ojec s also con ibu ed o hei nega i e image in he kingdom. Al eady in 1524, he cap ain o Goa, D. Hen ique de Meneses, had w i en o João iii s a ing ha he could no us he Po uguese se led in Goa o de end ha ci y, because “ hey had no honou , ins ead, hey we e all ma ied o nigge s” (Sub ahmanyam 1995). educing di e ence in he po uguese empi e? 247 I inc easingly de ached om he Po uguese poli ical body, how could hese people gua an ee he main enance o he Po uguese impe ial p esence in Asia? One o he measu es aken by he Po uguese c own o cope wi h his p oblem was o suspend he policy o physical miscegena ion, while sending Po uguese o phan gi ls o India in ended o ma y he sons o he casados. F equen ly daugh e s o oyal o ice s who had died in mili a y campaigns in A ica and he Indies, hese gi ls b ough wi h hem a dow y o land and he igh o collec en s. The sons o he casados who would ma y hem would ecei e an o ice in he local impe ial adminis a ion (Boxe 1961, 1975; Coa es 2002). The King’s ci cle o ad ise s belie ed ha his would help o econs uc he dependence o he casados and hei amilies on he king and he kingdom, eco e he “Po uguese iden i y” o he Po uguese amilies se led in India, and, simul aneously, o whi en hei o sp ing. S a ed in he decade o 1540, he new ma iage policy con inued o be adop ed du ing he Habsbu g pe iod (1580-1640), when Po ugal was unde Spanish dominion. Poli ically undesi able, he p ac ice o ma ying local women did no s op comple ely. In o de o p e en i , in 1596, Filipe ii o Spain (and I o Po ugal) o bade hose ha ma ied Indian women o ecei e any o ice in he impe ial adminis a ion. La e , ma iages be ween he Po uguese o phans wi h people o “lowe quali y”, namely hose o Jewish and Indian o igins (in gene al, he descendan s o he i s casados) we e also discou aged. In con as , he c own s imula ed he ma iages be ween Po uguese gi ls and bachelo s o “quali y”( he child en o he second casados, conside ed pu e han he i s ) (apo 1992, . 3, 620-628; cclp 1603- 1612, 1854, 105; ian/ , Li o das Monções, n . 2, 314; n . 21, 55 ; d i, 1880, i, 191-203). Unexpec edly, uppe -cas e Ca holic Indians began o eques oyal p o ec ion o hei own ma iages, oo. Ini ially hese ma iages occu ed s ic ly wi hin he Indian communi y, ollowing cas e ules. Bu om he second hal o he 17 h cen u y, a new so o mixed ma iage was aking place, namely be ween poo Po uguese noble men and he daugh e s o well-o Ca holic B ahmans and Cha odos, hose cas es ha had adop ed he impe ial ocabula y and p esen ed hemsel es as pu e blood Indian nobles. The sys ema ic con e sion o he local popula ion o Ch is iani y and i s s uc u al e ec s on he local social o de played a key ole in his new scena io o physical miscegena ion. 248 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in eligious and cul u al con e sion I con olling he o ms o social ep oduc ion was cen al o he du abili y o colonial socie ies, go e ning he o ms o cul u al ep oduc ion became e en mo e impo an in some e i o ies o he Po uguese empi e. Complemen ing he whi ening and wes e nisa ion o he child en o he casados, he Po uguese c own ealised ha he con e sion o Ch is iani y o he demog aphic majo i y ( he Indians) was he mos e icien ool o main aining and expanding he Es ado da Índia e i o ies. Al hough his had heo e ically been a mission o he Po uguese c own om i s ini ial p esence in he Indian ocean (Thomaz 1994b), i was only in he eign o João iii ha he ma e ial condi ions o Ch is ian con e sion we e es ablished, namely he bishop ic o Goa in 1534 (which soon became he bigges A chbishop ic o he Po uguese mona chy). In he hi d decade o he 16 h cen u y, João de Ba os ep oduced he well- known humanis opos “a wo d las s mo e han a s one” o de end he linguis ic colonisa ion o India and o he e i o ies unde Po uguese dominion. Toge he wi h o he humanis s in luenced by E asmus ci cula ing in he king and queen’s ci cle, Ba os also belie ed ha he sp ead o Ch is iani y would b ing uni e sal dominion and e e las ing peace. Romani as and C is iani as in e sec ed, de ining he poli ical ab ic ha nu u ed he go e nmen o João iii, con e ing he exe cise o poli ical powe in o some hing qui e di e en om his a he ’s ule. In ha pe iod, he Roman empe o s Augus us, Ma co Au elius, Cons an ine and Theodosius became ole models o he cons uc ion o he impe ial socie y, which was sha ed by he inne ci cles o he c own and by many impe ial agen s, oo (Buescu 1996, 2005; Deswa e 1992; Mo ei a 1991, Xa ie 2008b). In addi ion o ha , he con lic s and wa s caused by he eligious di isions in Eu ope ein o ced he idea ha a p ince’s subjec should sha e his ai h: he p inciple o cuius egio eius eligio. The ideal poli ical communi y was, he e o e, one whe e all subjec s sha ed he same eligion as hei p ince, he only way o gua an ee hei poli ical loyal y. In Po ugal, as in Spain, I aly, Ge many, o England, his p inciple led o an alliance be ween poli ical and eligious agen s and o he use o Ch is iani y as a way o build a ce ain ype o socie y (P odi 1994; P ospe i 1996; Hsia 1989; Palomo 2004; Pai a 2006, 2011; Xa ie 2008b). This means ha eligious con e sion became an ins umen o poli ically including Indians, wi h he goal o , o e ime, a aining poli ical and cul u al educing di e ence in he po uguese empi e? 249 con o mi y. The a i al o inc easing numbe s o missiona ies in Goa, many bea ing papal dispensa ions ha allowed hem o engage in judicial and secula ac i i ies – i. e. o ac i ely beha e as agen s o he king – played an impo an pa in his s uc u al change in he exe cise o he impe ium (Xa ie 2008b, ch. 2). Fi s unde he o ien a ion o he ica -gene al o he Es ado da Índia, Miguel Vaz, o he F anciscan bishop Juan de Albuque que and he F anciscans, and la e wi h he help o he Jesui s, local Goan Hindu emples and objec s o wo ship we e des oyed du ing he 1540s, he local p ies s expelled and public wo ship o Indian eligions p ohibi ed, in a p ocess o ma e ial and symbolic decapi a ion o he local eligious cul u e (Xa ie 2010; Robinson 1998). Legal iolence was also pu sued sys ema ically, aiming o p omo e he ull Ch is ianisa ion o Goan social o de . P o isions in 1541 channelled he asse s o local emples in o Ch is ian ones. These ac ions we e accompanied by o he s wi h equally p o ound impac , co e ing aspec s such as he amily, inhe i ance, land, esidence, labou , and poli ical igh s. A law signed by Queen Ca a ina o Aus ia in 1559 – ollowing in he oo s eps o p e ious legisla ion – called again o he des uc ion o all emples, namely hose ha we e hidden in p i a e houses, p ohibi ing he celeb a ion o any local i e, in public o a home. These and o he no ma i e ools in ended o “pe suade” Indians (and, in pa icula , Indian eli es) o con e o Ch is iani y by educing hei local powe i hey did no . Signi ican ly, he p eambles o many o hese o de s explici ly s a ed ha “by dep i ing hem o his honou , hey shall be mo e easily con e ed o ou Ca holic ai h”(apo F. 5, p ii, 543-545, 612, 903-903). O he dec ees a ou ed Ca holics in he dis ibu ion o he mos p oduc i e lands wi hin illages wi h Ca holic and non-Ca holic popula ions, and sub e ed he adi ional dis ibu ion o powe , p ohibi ing he access o non-Ca holics o decision-making posi ions. Ecclesias ical laws, like dec ee 27 o he Fi s P o incial Council o Goa (1567) ein o ced his, when s a ing ha “no o ice, digni y, honou , p e-eminence o domain shall be gi en o a non-belie e o e a belie e ”, a dec ee ha e oked he Summa con a Gen iles o Thomas o Aquinas, and ha would ha e a legal exp ession in he law o he c own (apo F. 5, p ii, 543-545). In ac , om he momen o hei bap ism, he Indians o Goa enjoyed, a leas heo e ically, he same legal igh s and obliga ions as he Po uguese (d i ol. ii, 66-67). Fo some i mean social mobili y, o an unexpec ed 256 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in e isi ing ey e and ibei o The descendan s o one o he o he o hese g oups we e ce ainly among hose people ha F ey e and Ribei o me in mid-20 h cen u y Goa, gi ing hem di e en e sions o he pas and o hei p esen condi ion. Tha is why nei he he sociologis no he geog aphe we e comple ely mis aken, o comple ely co ec , bu complemen a y. Thei opinions we e de ini ely shaped by hei his o ical knowledge, con ex s o in e p e a ion, and di ec expe ience o local Goan socie y. Goans om he “Old Conques s” and he “New Conques s”, Goans wi h Po uguese o igins o no , Ca holics and non- Ca holics, om uppe and lowe cas es: he di isions in he local socie y we e immense, bu impene able a i s sigh . Some Goans we e mo e o he Luso- opicalis ype and p oclaimed he Po uguese empi e as a di e en ype o colonialism, whe e “colonise s” and “colonised” co-exis ed peace ully. Since some o he con e s inc eased hei local powe and iches h ough he Po uguese p esence – and who could igh ly be called “collabo a ionis s”–, and ha he Goan eli es had a special s a us among all he “indigenous eli es” o he Po uguese empi e, as many au ho s ha e al eady demons a ed (Sil a 2009; Lobo 2013; Oli ei a 2015), his in e p e a ion can be conside ed accu a e (Thomaz 1994b). O he s, in con as , s essed he idea ha he Po uguese we e acis , and did no wan o mix wi h he locals, especially when hey we e o a da k colou – which was comple ely ue, oo, pa icula ly when we conside he o icial ejec ion o physical miscegena ion om 1540 onwa ds, and he cons an demand o pu i y o blood. And o he s, namely hose coming om he “New Conques s”, had weake ies wi h Po ugal, he Po uguese people, and he Po uguese cul u e and empi e, emaining almos comple ely “Indian”. I hey we e he ul ima e “o he s”, o hem he Po uguese ep esen ed al e i y, oo. Again depending on who hey had me , i is no su p ising ha F ey e and Ribei o’s iews we e so di e en . They only sha ed wi h us di e en s o ies o an i egula puzzle ha s ill asks o be esol ed, a puzzle ha was no so singula – i we conside ecen li e a u e on Du ch, B i ish and F ench expe iences, o example (S ole 1997; Belmessous 2013) –, and which eminds us o some o he ensions and dilemmas o con empo a y socie ies, and he side e ec s o mo e o less inclusi e and assimila ionis policies. educing di e ence in he po uguese empi e? 257 acknowledgemen s This essay is based on he chap e “Dissol e a Di e ença. Con e são e Mes içagem no Impé io Po uguês” (Xa ie 2008a). ____________________________________ ângela ba e o xa ie Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa A . P o . Aníbal Be encou 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Po ugal ang[email p o ec ed] o cid.o g/0000-0002-4367-6647 ____________________________________ e e ences ames, G. 2000. Renascen Empi e? The House o B aganza and he Ques o S abili y in Po uguese Monsoon Asia, ca. 1640-1683. Ams e dam: Ams e dam Uni e si y P ess. ba os, J. de. 1988 [1552-1563]. Ásia, dos Fei os que os Po ugueses Fize am no Descob i- men o e Conquis a dos Ma es e Te as do O ien e. Lisbon: incm. bas os, C. 2003. “Um luso- opicalismo às a essas: colonialismo cien í ico, aclimação e pu eza acial em Ge mano Co eia”. In Fan asmas e Fan asias Impe iais no Imaginá io Po uguês Con empo âneo, o gs. M. C. Ribei o and A. P. Fe ei a. Po o: Campo das Le as, 227-253. bas os, C. 2015. “A en u a e o ina: um li o de meio de pe cu so e isi ado”. In Gilbe o F ey e. No as Lei u as de Ou o Lado do A lân ico, o gs. M. Ca dão, C. Cas elo. São Paulo: Edusp, 35-48. belmessous, S. 2013.Assimila ion and Empi e: Uni o mi y in F ench and B i ish Colonies, 1541-1954. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. bhaba, H. 1997. “O mimic y and man”. In Tensions o Empi e, Colonial Cul u es in a Bou geois Wo ld, ed. F. Coope and A. L. S ole . Be keley, Los Angeles, London: Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess. doi: h ps://dx.doi.o g/10.1525/cali o nia/9780520205406.003.0004. boxe , C. R. 1961, “The colou ques ion in he Po uguese empi e, 1415-1825”. P oceedings o he B i ish Academy, 47: 113-138. boxe , C. R. 1963 [1977]. Race Rela ions in he Po uguese Colonial Empi e, 1415-1825. Ox o d: Cla endon P ess (Relações Raciais no Impé io Po uguês. Po o: A on a- men o). boxe , C. R. 1975. Ma y and Misoginy. Women in Ibe ian Expansion O e seas. 1415-1815. London: Duckwo h. buescu, A. I. 1996. Imagens do P íncipe, Discu so No ma i o e Rep esen ação, 1525-1549, Lisbon: Cosmos. buescu, A. I. 2005. D. João iii. Lisbon: Cí culo de Lei o es. cae ano, M. 1965. “Recepção e execução dos dec e os do concílio de T en o em Po ugal”. Re is a da Faculdade de Di ei o da Uni e sidade de Lisboa, xix. 258 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in ca dão, M., C. Cas elo. 2015. Gilbe o F ey e: No as Lei u as do Ou o Lado do A lân ico. São Paulo: Edusp. cas elo, C. 1998. O Modo Po uguês de Es a no Mundo, O Luso-T opicalismo e a Ideologia Colonial Po uguesa, 1933-1961. Po o: A on amen o. coa es, T. J. 2002 [1998]. Con ic s and O phans. S a e-Sponso ed Coloniza ion in he Po uguese Empi e, 1550-1755. S an o d: S an o d Uni e si y P ess. da mon, P. 1977. Le my he de la p oc éa ion à l’âge ba oque. s. l.: Édi ions J. J. Pau e . deswa e, S. 1992. Ideias e Imagens em Po ugal na Época dos Descob imen os. F ancisco de Holanda e a Teo ia da A e. Lisbon: Di el elias, N., J. L. Sco son. 1994. The Es ablished and he Ou side s. A Sociological Enqui y in o Communi y P oblems. London-Thousand Oaks-New Delhi: Sage Publica ions. ab e, P.-A. 1999. “La con e sion in inie des ‘con e sos’: enquê e su le s a u des nou eaux ch é iens dans la Compagnie de Jésus au x ie siècle”. Annales, 4. a ia, P. S. 2007. “Ma eus de Cas o: um bispo ‘b âmane’ em busca da p omoção social no impé io asiá ico po uguês (século x ii)”. Re is a Ele ónica de His ó ia do B asil, 9 (2): 31-43. elici, M. de, G. Si acusa. 2000. “The ise o emb yology in I aly: om he Renaissance o he ea ly 20 h cen u y”. In e na ional Jou nal o De elopmen al Biology, 44, 515-521. e nandes, M. de L. C. 1995. Espelhos, Ca as e Guias. Casamen o e Espi i ualidade na Península Ibé ica, 1450-1700. Po o: Ins i u o de Cul u a Po uguesa. Faculdade de Le as da Uni e sidade do Po o ey e, G. 1953. Um B asilei o em Te as Po uguesas: In odução a uma Possí el Luso- -T opi cologia Acompanhada de Con e ências e Discu sos P o e idos em Po ugal e em Te as Lusi anas e Ex-lusi anas da Ásia, da Á ica e do A lân ico. Rio de Janei o: Olympio Edi o a. ias, A. J. 1702. Au eola dos Índios, e Nobilia chia B acmana: T a ado His ó ico, Genealógico, Panegy ico, Poli ico, e Mo al (…). Lisbon: O . Miguel Deslandes. ga cia, J. I. de A. 1872. A chi o da Relação de Goa: Con endo Va ios Documen os dos Seculos x ii, x iii e xix a é a O ganisação da No a Relação pelo Dec e o de 7 Dezemb o de 1836. Lisbon: Imp ensa Nacional. go man, E. 1963. S igma. No es on he Managemen o Spoiled Iden i y. Englewood Cli s: Simon & Schus e . gugliemine i, M., ed. 1976. Viaggia o i del 600. To ino: u e . hespanha, A. M. 1993. “A amília”. In O An igo Regime (1620-1807), o gs. A. M. Hespanha e al., ol. i , His ó ia de Po ugal, di . José Ma oso. Lisbon: Cí culo de Lei o es. hespanha, A. M. 1995. Pano ama da His ó ia Ins i ucional e Ju ídica de Macau. Macau: Fundação Macau. hsia, R. P.-C. 1989. Social Discipline in he Re o ma ion: Cen al Eu ope, 1550-1750. London- -New Yo k: Rou ledge. lobo, S. 2013. O Desassossego Goês: Cul u a e Polí ica em Goa do Libe alismo ao Ac o Colonial. phd Thesis. Lisbon: Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, Uni e sidade No a de Lisboa. lopes, M. de J. dos M. 1996. Goa Se ecen is a, T adição e Mode nidade. Lisbon: Uni e sidade Ca ólica Po uguesa, Cen o de Es udos dos Po os e Cul u as de Exp essão Po uguesa. machado, D. de B. 1752. Biblio heca Lusi ana. Vol. 3. Lisbon: An onio Isido o da Fonseca. educing di e ence in he po uguese empi e? 259 mo ei a, R. 1991. A A qui ec u a do Renascimen o no Sul de Po ugal. A Encomenda Régia en e o Mode no e o Romano. phd Thesis. Lisbon: Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas. needham, J. 1959 (1934). A His o y o Emb yology. New Yo k: Abela d-Schuman. no onha, A. J. de 1994. Sys ema Ma cial Asiá ico, Polí ico, His ó ico, Genealógico, Analí ico e Miscelânico. Lisbon: Fundação O ien e. oli al, F. 2004. “Rigo e in e esses: os es a u os de limpeza de sangue em Po ugal”. Cade nos de Es udos Se a di as, 2, 151-182. oli ei a, L. C. de .2015. A Consag ação dos Na u ais: Di ei o(s) e Eli es Na u ais Ca ólicas em Goa (1780-1880). phd hesis. Lisbon: Faculdade de Di ei o da Uni e sidade No a de Lisboa. paes, L. 1713. P omp ua io das Di iniçoens Indicas Deduzidas de Va ios Ch onis as da India: G a es Au ho es & das His o ias Gen ílicas. Lisbon: O . A. Ped ozo Gal am. pai a, J. P. 2011. Balua es da Fé e da Disciplina: O Enlace en e a Inquisição e os Bispos em Po ugal. Coimb a: Imp ensa da Uni e sidade de Coimb a. pai a, J. P. 2006. Os Bispos Po ugueses no Reino e no Impé io. Coimb a: Imp ensa da Uni e sidade de Coimb a. palomo, F. 2004. Faze dos Campos Escolas Excelen es. Os Jesuí as de É o a, a Missão do In e io e o Disciplinamen o Social na Época Con essional (1551-1630). Lisbon: cg. pe ei a, C. R. G. 1964-1965. His ó ia da Adminis ação da Jus iça no Es ado da Jndia: Século x i, ols.1-2. Lisbon: Agência Ge al do Ul ama . p odi, P. P., ed. 1994. Disciplina dell’anima, disciplina del co po e disciplina della socie à a medioe o ed e à mode na. Bologne: Il Mulino. p ospe i, A. 1996. T ibunali della coscienza, inquisi o i, con esso i, missiona i. To ino: Einaudi. pu i icação, M. da. 1640. Relacion de ensi a dos ilhos da Índia O ien al e da p o íncia do após olo S. Thome dos ades meno es da egula obse ância da mesma Índia. Ba celona: O . De Sebas ião e João Ma he a. ego, J. de F. 2011. A Hon a Alheia po um Fio. Os Es a u os de Limpeza de Sangue nos Espaços de Exp essão ibé ica (secs. x i-x iii). Lisbon: cg. ibei o, O. 1999. Goa em 1956. Rela ó io ao Go e no. Lisbon: cncdp. obinson, R. 1998. Con e sion, Con inui y and Change. Li ed Ch is iani y in Sou he n Goa. New Delhi-London: Sage. ussell-wood, A. J. R. 1992. A Wo ld on he Mo e: The Po uguese in A ica, Asia, and Ame ica, 1415-1808. New Yo k: S . Ma in’s. ussell-wood, A. J. R. 1998. “A disseminação das gen es”. In His ó ia da Expansão Po uguesa, ol. 1, o gs. K. Chaudhu i and F. Be hencou . Lisbon: Cí culo de Lei o es. sil a, C. N. da. 2009. Cons i ucionalismo e Impé io. A Cidadania no Ul ama Po uguês. Coimb a: Almedina. so ge, G. 1986. Ma eo de Cas o (1594-1677) p o ilo di una igu a emblema ica del con li o giu isdizionale a Goa e Roma nel secolo 17. Bologna: clueb. souza, T. R. 2008. “Gilbe o F ey e na Índia e o ‘luso- opicalismo ansnacional’ ”, h ps:// cibe du idas.isc e-iul.p /a igos/ ub icas/luso onias/gilbe o- ey e-na-india-e-o-luso- opicalismo- ansnacional/1608, consul ado a 4-01-2018. s ole , A. L. 1995. Race and he Educa ion o Desi e: Foucaul ’s His o y o Sexuali y and he Colonial O de o Things. Du ham-London: Duke Uni e si y P ess. 260 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in s ole , A. L. 1997 “Sexual a on s and acial on ie s. Eu opean iden i ies and he cul u al poli ics o exclusion in colonial Sou heas Asia”. In Tensions o Empi e, Colonial Cul u es in a Bou geois Wo ld, ed. F. Coope and A. L. S ole . Be keley-Los Angeles-London: Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess. suá ez, F. 1971. De legibus: De na u a legis, ol. 1. Mad id: csic. sub ahmanyam, S. 1995. O Impé io Asiá ico Po uguês. 1500-1700. Lisbon: Di el. a im, J. A. R. da S. 2003. Judeus e C is ãos-No os de Cochim, His ó ia e Memó ia (1500-1662). B aga: appacdm Dis i al de B aga. homaz, L. F. 1994a, “Goa: uma sociedade luso-indiana”. In De Ceu a a Timo , ed. L. F. Thomaz. Lisbon: Di el. homaz, L. F., 1994b. “A es u u a polí ica e adminis a i a do Es ado da Índia no século x i”. In De Ceu a a Timo , ed. L. F. Thomaz, Lisbon: Di el. u ne , V. 1969. The Ri ual P ocess. S uc u e and An i-S uc u e. I haca-New Yo k: Co nell Uni e si y P ess. an gennep, A. 1909. Les i es de passage. Pa is: Émile Nou y. xa ie , A. B. 2008a. “Dissol e a di e ença. Con e são e mes içagem no impé io po uguês”. In I ine á ios. 25 anos de in es igação no Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, o gs. M. Villa e de Cab al, K. Wall and F. C. da Sil a. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais. xa ie , A. B. 2008b. A In enção de Goa. Pode Impe ial e Con e sões Cul u ais nos séculos x i e x ii. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais. xa ie , A. B. 2010. “Ma imónio e impé io na Goa quinhen is a”. In Sac amen al Disciplines and P axis in non-Eu opean Con ex s, 16 h-18 h Cen u ies, coo d. Ma ia Te esa Fa o i, special issue o C is ianesimo nella S o ia, 30. xa ie , A. B. 2011. “Con e sos e no amen e con e idos. Law, eligion and iden i y in he Po uguese kingdom and empi e (16 h and 17 h cen u ies)”. Jou nal o Ea ly-Mode n His o y, 15: 255-287. xa ie , A. B. 2012. “Race and cas e. Iden i y na a i es in Goan eli es”. In Race and Blood in Spain and Colonial Hispano-Ame ica, ed. M. E. Ma ínez, M. S. H. To es and D. Ni enbe g. Be lin and London: li Ve lag. xa ie , A. B. 2014. “ ‘Pa ecem indianos na co e na eição’. A ‘Lenda Neg a’ e a indianização dos po ugueses”. E nog á ica, 18 (1): 111-133. xa ie , A. B., I. Župano . 2015. “In e nal o ien alism”. In Ca holic O ien alism. Po uguese Empi e, Indian Knowledge (16 h-18 h cen u ies), eds. A. B. Xa ie and I. Župano . Delhi: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, young, R. J. C. 2005. Colonial Desi e. Hib idi y in Theo y, Cul u e and Race. London-New Yo k: Rou ledge župano , I. G. 2009. “Con e sion his o iog aphy in Sou h Asia – coun e space o al e na i e his o ies in 18 h cen u y Goa”. Medie al His o y Jou nal, Theme Issue Con e sions, ed. Monika Juneja e Kim Siebenhüne , 12 (2): 303-325. abb e ia ions apo – Ri a a, J.H. Cunha. 1992. A chi o Po uguez O ien al. New Delhi-Mad as, Asian Educa ional Se ices. cc – Co po C onológico. educing di e ence in he po uguese empi e? 261 cclp – Sil a, José Jus ino de And ade e. 1854. Collecção ch onologica da legislação po ugueza: 1603-1612. Lisbon : Imp ensa de J. J. A. Sil a/ Imp ensa de F. X. de Souza. dhmppo – Rego, An ónio da Sil a, ed., 1947. Documen ação pa a a his ó ia das missões do pad oado po uguês do O ien e: Índia, ol. 12. Lisbon: Agência Ge al das Colónias. d i – Documen os Reme idos da Índia ou Li o das Monções, publicados de O dem da Classe de Sciencias Mo aes, Poli icas e BellasLe as, ed. An onio de Bulhão Pa o, Lisbon: Academia Real de Sciencias. g – As Ga e as da To e do Tombo. 1960-1977. Lisbon: Cen o de Es udos His ó icos Ul ama inos. hag – His o ical A chi es o Goa. ian/ – Ins i u o dos A qui os Nacionais/To e do Tombo. ci e his chap e as: xa ie , A. B. 2018. “Reducing di e ence in he Po uguese empi e? A case s udy om ea ly-mode n Goa”. In Changing Socie ies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. i. Ambiguous Inclusions: Inside Ou , Inside In, eds. S. Aboim, P. G anjo, A. Ramos. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais, 241-261. h ps://doi.o g/10.31447/ics9789726715030.11