In and out of history: how a Goan scholar in Bombay imagined a colonial Indian past and a future independent India (1870-1900)

In and ou o his o y: how a Goan schola in Bombay imagined a colonial Indian pas and a u u e independen India (1870-1900) Filipa Lowndes Vicen e 12. 264 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in in oduc ion In his book on Po uguese men ha achie ed some p ominence ab oad, published in 1879, Be na des B anco con essed ha he had no been su e i Ge son da Cunha was Po uguese o English, and ha he had had o con ac Cunha Ri a a, he Po uguese sec e a y o he Go e no in Goa and a schola , o esol e his doub s: “M . Ge son da Cunha is a Po uguese subjec , bo n in Goa, o indigenous ace and o he B ahman cas e. He is es ablished in Bombay as a doc o ” was Cunha Ri a a’s answe .1 In ac , Ge son da Cunha s udied medicine in Bombay, Edinbu gh and London, be o e e u ning o Bombay in he 1870s and making medicine his p o ession. Howe e , his his o ical, a chaeological and numisma ic in e es s, mainly in hemes ela ed o he Po uguese in India, inc easingly occupied a la ge pa o his ime and esul ed in nume ous a icles and books published in he las h ee decades o he 19 h cen u y. José Ge son da Cunha’s biog aphy and bibliog aphy, his pe sonal i ine a y as well as his schola ly w i en p oduc ion, will enable me o explo e he idea o inclusion, and o exclusion, in h ee di e en ye in e connec ed ways. The i s is h ough his ac ual biog aphical i ine a y. Li ing ac oss di e en bo de s and spaces mean ha o eignness and displacemen we e cen al wo ds in he na a i e o his li e. I shall explo e how da Cunha s o e o be included in ce ain schola ly na ional sphe es, such as he I alian; while appa en ly consciously excluding himsel om Po ugal, whe e his s a us would always be ha o a Po uguese “o he ” and, he e o e, subal e n in ela ion o mains eam schola ly local eli es. He also p o i ed, I shall a gue, om being a o eigne in Bombay, and hus an Indian ha was no a colonised subjec since, being Goa- bo n, he was o Po uguese na ionali y. Cas e and eligion, and he ac ha he his o ian and doc o combined he mos p i ileged aspec s o bo h iden i ies – B ahmanism and Ca holicism – we e also cen al in his sel -de ini ion and equen ly add essed in his w i ings. Secondly, I shall analyse how exclusion and inclusion a e cen al ques ions in his as his o iog aphical wo k. His main aim was o include he Po uguese expe ience in India wi hin he mains eam his o ical na a i e o Indian his o y p oduced in English, in B i ish India and G ea B i ain. B i ish 1 B anco (1879, 448). Ge son da Cunha’s li e and wo ks ha e al eady been add essed in o he ways, in some o my publica ions: Vicen e (2009-2010, 2010, 2012a, 2012b, 2012c, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016). in and ou o his o y 265 his o iog aphy ended o exclude he o he main Eu opean p esence in Asia, ha o he Po uguese (as well as he Du ch and F ench), in he pas and in he p esen . In his a icle, I will ocus on he speci ic ways in which Ge son da Cunha in oduced he Po uguese o Goan pe spec i e in a wide na a i e. In some cases, his was done as pa o a clea s a egy o alue wha was “Po uguese” o “Goan”, as when he a gues o he pionee ing cha ac e o Po uguese O ien alism, a ew cen u ies be o e B i ish O ien alism.2 He also makes a de ence o he eaching o he Po uguese language a he Uni e si y o Bombay, while, in ano he publica ion, he w i es a indica ion o he aluing o Konkani, he Indian language ha had a imes been ep essed by he Po uguese ule in Goa. In o he momen s, howe e , his c i ical app oach u ns o he Po uguese pas colonial policies – mainly in ela ion o hei eligious iolence pe pe a ed agains he Hindus. In his appa en e e sal o culp i s, his goal is o denounce how some his o ical e en s and expe iences we e omi ed om Po uguese mains eam his o ical na a i es p ecisely because hey did no a ou hose who p ac ised hem. His e lec ions on con empo a y B i ish India will also be add essed. W i ing o an I alian pe iodical in F ench, o in a p i a e le e o an I alian Indianis , Ge son da Cunha could be ee in his opinions on delica e poli ical subjec s. Wha was al eady la en in some o his his o ical w i ings became e iden in his jou nalis ic imp essions: India, an independen and uni ed India, was al eady in his imagina ion (Ande son 1991). A e colonial India – Po uguese o B i ish – he e was ano he India, he u u e na ion ha was becoming i ed o he “ o eign in ade s”. And hi dly, I will explo e he ways in which Ge son da Cunha’s wo k was excluded om bo h Po uguese and B i ish his o iog aphy. Only in 1955 was one o his wo ks on numisma ics ansla ed in o Po uguese and published by Luis Pin o Ga cia. In his p e ace, he Po uguese schola no es how da Cunha’s “Con ibu ions [a e] e y well known and always quo ed in he numisma ic cen es in he O ien and in G ea B i ain”, bu emain “unknown o he g ea majo i y o ou numisma is s and collec o s” (Ga cia 1955). Be o e Pin o Ga cia, only he eminen Po uguese e hnologis Lei e de Vasconcelos had made a 2 On “Po uguese Ca holic O ien alism”, see Xa ie and Zupano (2014). On Po uguese O ien alism and Said’s engagemen wi h he Po uguese expe ience, see he wo k o Rosa Ma ia Pe ez (2006, 2014), and E e on V. Machado (2018). 266 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in e e ence o Cunha: in his magna ope a on Po uguese Numisma ics in 1923.3 My a gumen is ha , pa adoxically, he cosmopoli anism and hyb idi y o his li e i ine a y and his o iog aphical wo k kep him ou o sigh o subsequen schola s. As Ge son da Cunha’s li e and wo k s addled bo de s, hey ailed o be g asped by ei he o he wo main geog aphies o knowledge in which he mo ed. B i ish and Indian his o iog aphy ailed o alue an au ho who was a Goan 3 Vasconcelos (1923, 279-280) w o e on Ge son da Cunha in a sec ion on Numisma ic W i ings om 1867 un il his p esen on pages 163-165, and e en included an o p in o his pho og aphic po ai published in he Ri is a i al. di Numisma . (1888): 383. The Po uguese au ho also adds an appendix wi h a biog aphical no e, in English, on Ge son da Cunha, which had been published in he Royal Asia ic Socie y’s Jou nal a e his dea h: “Biog a ia Inglesa do D . Ge son da Cunha”. José Ge son da Cunha (1844-1900). Pho og aphic po ai in ca e-de- isi e o ma pas ed in he endlea es o his pos humously published book. Da e and pho og aphe unknown. (Cunha, 1900). No e: This po ai mus ha e been done in Rome, in 1878, a he pho og aphic s udio Lo enzo Suscipj, as i is e y simila o ano he one Ge son da Cunha did he e. See Vicen e (2012b, 5). Figu e 12.1 in and ou o his o y 267 o Po uguese na ionali y and highligh ed e e y hing ha was Po uguese in India.4 Ge son da Cunha was excluded om he Goan and, pa icula ly, he Po uguese his o ical canon o an a ay o easons I will ou line u he on: one o he majo ones ce ainly being ha he only w o e in English. I onically, he ac o s ha enabled him o combine, compa e, con on and c oss di e en Indias, di e en Eu opes and di e en his o iog aphical adi ions ended up excluding him om hose e y adi ions. he poli ics o language: konkani be ween supp ession and esis ance I will s a by analysing wo o Ge son da Cunha’s publica ions. The i s was published in 1881 and was i led Konkani Language and Li e a u e. I is he only one o his ex s whe e I could ind c i icism o con empo a y Po uguese colonialism a he han he usual discussion o e en s placed in a emo e his o ical pas (Cunha 1881).5 The second ex I will add ess, also on he poli ics o language and how hey a e embedded in na ional p ojec s, was cen ed on he his o y o he Po uguese language in he Eas and was published mo e han a decade la e (Cunha 1893, 168-191). Bo h we e published in English and in Bombay, one o he Bombay Gaze ee and he o he o he Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y. How local languages and hei usages we e a ec ed by he Po uguese p esence in he egion om he 16 h cen u y on was he cen al subjec o his essay on Konkani. Ge son da Cunha condemned he des uc ion pe pe a ed by he i s missiona ies who, in hei “mis aken zeal o p opaga e Ch is iani y,” did no unde s and how he p ese a ion o ancien Indian manusc ip s could ha e been use ul o he con e sion o “na i es”. Tha which he Spanish had done in G anada wi h A abic manusc ip s, he added, he Po uguese did in 4 When Ge son da Cunha’s name appea s in ecen his o ical books, i does so o his wo k on Bombay. Gyan P akash (2011) men ions him once in his Mumbai Fables. A His o y o an Enchan ed Ci y, while a ecen book on Bombay includes him in he bibliog aphy bu no as a subjec (Chop a 2011). 5 We do no know wha kind o ela ionship Ge son da Cunha had wi h Angelo Ma ei, an I alian Jesui missiona y who, p ecisely in 1878, some mon hs a e he in e na ional cong ess o o ien alis s in Flo ence, a elled om Naples o India. Du ing he wen y yea s he li ed in he Ka na aka egion, he dedica ed himsel o missiona y wo k and p oducing s udies on Konkani (Ma ei 1882, 1883). See also all he wo ks o Mons. Sebas ião Rodol o Dalgado. 268 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in Goa wi h Indian ones. They des oyed hem. The ana icism ha “blinded hese missiona ies” (only jus i ied, Ge son da Cunha a gued, by he his o ical momen ) p e en ed he ansmission o Ch is iani y h ough e nacula languages. Acco ding o him, a global ision o his o y helped o unde s and he iolence, bu also he banali y o his kind o beha iou du ing ha pe iod: “The his o y o mankind is al eady ull o examples o how sec a ian di e ences, bigo y, and supe s i ion ha e dep i ed he wo ld o li e a y easu es o conside able wo h” (Cunha 1881, 25). This Po uguese policy o elimina ing he local language did no es ic i sel o he pas because, as Ge son da Cunha no es, by he end o he 18 h cen u y he e we e s ill p ies s ad ising he Po uguese go e nmen o abolish Konkani and o he Indian languages, “as i a language we e a me e cus om o be easily deal wi h by a legisla i e enac men ”. Only wi h he Ma quis o Pombal was his policy modi ied. Pe haps as a way o be e legi imising his c i icism o Po uguese policies ega ding local language, Ge son da Cunha quo ed Cunha Ri a a, a Po uguese esiden in Goa who, apa om his schola ly wo k, was a espec able go e nmen sec e a y (Cunha 1881, 26). Ge son da Cunha also e lec ed on he ans o ma ions o Konkani and he a emp s o esis hem: Such is, indeed, he ans o ma ion a language – in he compa a i ely sho pe iod o wo cen u ies – unde goes e en in au onomous s a es, which s i e, wi h a iew o hei na ional digni y, o p ese e he pu i y o hei language by means o li e a u e, a es ing all changes, and s e eo yping he o ms inhe i ed om a o me age, ha i is no wonde ha Konkani, an idiom o a small coun y, uled by a o eign ace, and wi hou , a p esen a leas , any aspi a ion o na ional independence [my i alics], should wi hin only a couple o cen u ies ha e assumed a o m so en i ely di e en om he old one. (Cunha 1881, 34) Ge son da Cunha inished his his o y o Konkani and analysis o i s uses wi h a pessimis ic e alua ion o he p esen , in which language and li e a u e we e conside ed insepa able om colonial ule, and whe e he e was a e e ence o o eign go e nmen s ha clea ly dis inguishes Goa – p e-exis en – om i s colonise s: “Goa has o cen u ies been swayed by o eign ule s, who ha e insis ed on making hei own language he o icial language, o he language o he cou , wi hd awing a he same ime all encou agemen o he cul i a ion o he na i e ongue” (Cunha 1881, 41). Facing a con empo a y con ex in which he e was a g owing p essu e om o he Indian languages no subjec in and ou o his o y 269 o he same kind o colonial linguis ic policy, Ge son da Cunha p edic ed he disappea ance o Konkani wi hin one o wo cen u ies. Tha was, a e all, he des iny o hose weake languages, as well as hose weake peoples, he added. In o de o s eng hen his a gumen , he also discussed Konkani li e a u e, mainly poe y, indi ec ly c i icising he con empo a y s a e o a ai s in Goa qui e ha shly. The decline o li e a y p oduc ion co esponded o a social and poli ical decline: “ his is in a iably he case whe e a coun y is in i s decadence, o humilia ed, dep essed and deg aded by despo ism, o is swayed by a o eign ule”, which mos p obably will do no hing o “encou age he s udy o na i e poe y” (Cunha 1881, 41). In spi e o he many ma e ial bene i s ha may be b ough abou by he colonial p esence, he con inues, “i is amids he elemen s o na ional eedom and independence, and he pledges and e idence o he o me g ea ness o hei coun y ha poe s g ow up.” As he o en did, in o de o ein o ce his c i icism o a speci ic subjec , cha ac e o ins i u ion, Ge son da Cunha quo ed ano he au ho , an A chbishop w i ing on he li e a u e o Spain who w o e on he di ec e ec s a o eign go e nmen had on he c ea i i y o a people: g ea poe y could no eme ge om a place wi h “li le o no na ional li e o eeling” (Cunha 1881, 42).6 By quo ing o he s wi h whom he ag eed, ins ead o making he same s a emen in his name, he was somewha legi imising his c i ical posi ion, while making i less di ec . And also, by quo ing a book on he Spanish golden age ha had been published in he p e ious yea , Ge son da Cunha is ein o cing his posi ion as a cosmopoli an and e udi e schola comple ely in une wi h he Eu opean schola ly p oduc ion. In his book on Konkani, he e o e, Ge son da Cunha combined his linguis ic in e es s, associa ed wi h a philological and o ien alis discou se concen a ed on he pas , wi h a discussion o he p esen uses o Konkani. He is clea ly es ablishing a co ela ion be ween a de ined space- e i o y and a language. Mainly, howe e , he is “imagining” Goa as a na ion – a “small coun y” – ha has been, and s ill is, go e ned by o eign ule s who ha e s i en o impose hei language. Howe e , and as we shall also ealise when analysing his ex on he Po uguese language in he Eas , i is no possible o hink o Ge son da Cunha’s posi ion on language poli ics as a s aigh dicho omy be ween he language o he colonise s on he one hand, and ha o he colonised on he o he . In his mani es o p omo ing Konkani and Po uguese, he claimed he languages had mo e in common han appea ed a i s sigh . They bo h 6 Ge son da Cunha is quo ing Richa d Chene ix T ench (1880). 270 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in occupied subal e n spaces; bo h we e an inex icable pa o Goan iden i y and bo h needed o be ac i ely de ended and p omo ed, in di e en geog aphical spaces, in o de o h i e. he eaching o po uguese a he uni e si y o bombay: a eu opean language o an indian e nacula ? Ten yea s la e , in A B ie Ske ch o he Po uguese and hei Language in he Eas , published in 1892, Ge son da Cunha ocuses simila ly on he Po uguese language, analysing i s his o y in India and ancho ing his genealogy in he p esen . Wha led him o publicly champion he Po uguese language was a con empo a y deba e on he changes aking place in he language depa men a he Uni e si y o Bombay (Cunha 1893, 190-191). In his his o ical jus i ica ion o he impo ance o Po uguese, Ge son da Cunha clea ly acknowledges he poli ical meaning o languages, hei uses in o ging iden i ies, and hei in e sec ions wi h no ions o na ionalism and colonialism. When consul ing he o ganisa ion o he language cou ses a he Uni e si y o Bombay, Ge son da Cunha no iced how Po uguese was placed alongside Ma a ha, Guja a i and Cana ese, while F ench was g ouped wi h Sansk i , La in, G eek and Heb ew. I he Uni e si y o Bombay did no conside Po uguese he equal o o he Eu opean o classical languages and placed i wi hin he sec ion o “Indian e nacula ”, i would be be e o simply abolish i , he a gued. By elega ing he Po uguese language o second-class s a us, he Uni e si y o Bombay was no only ma ginalising a language bu also he his o y o he Po uguese in India (Cunha 1893, 172). In o de o ein o ce his a gumen on he impo ance o Po uguese, he men ioned he wo k o Hugo Schucha d , published in he 1880s, on he quan i y o Po uguese dialec s ha we e spoken in A ica and Asia – wo k on which he had collabo a ed.7 Po uguese being he o icial language in he egions unde he ule o he Po uguese go e nmen was a ac ha could be compa ed wi h he use o F ench in Pondiche y o ha o English in Bombay. Jus as eligious con e sions did no e lec he e o pu in o he Ch is ianisa ion policies – he ac ual 7 “I ha e had he pleasu e o con ibu ing o his in e es ing s udy, namely o ha pa ela ing o he dialec o Ceylon. The New Tes amen was published in his dialec in 1852 by he Wesleyan Mission, and a G amma o he dialec was p in ed a Colombo in 1811”. He mus be e e ing o he K eolische S udien, published by Hugo Schucha d be ween 1882 and 1889. in and ou o his o y 271 con e ed being e y ew when ha ing in mind he high deg ee o in es men – he s a e o he Po uguese language in Goa a he ime did no e lec he e o pu in o i s imposi ion. E en in he Indo-Po uguese communi ies o Bombay, Po uguese was la gely being su passed by English: “Peasan s” did no unde s and i , and he “bou geoisie” did no speak i equen ly; only he highe classes used i . In his social ca ego isa ion, Ge son da Cunha is also showing his amilia i y wi h he Eu opean con empo a y language o social sciences, which s a i ied classes acco ding o wo k, weal h and genealogy. Language could no be isola ed om many o he ac o s, which we e used o cha ac e ise he Indo-Po uguese communi y. Ge son da Cunha a gued o he lea ning o Po uguese amongs a mino i y eli e h ough a his o ical dig ession on he uses o Po uguese in India since he 16 h cen u y in comme ce, diplomacy and missions, as well as in educa ional es ablishmen s o a eligious na u e. In his incu sion in o he pas , he w o e how B ahmins (“bo n missiona ies”, in his wo ds), when joining Ca holic eligious o de s, had helped dissemina e he Po uguese language in he wo ld; an idea he had explo ed in p e ious publica ions (Cunha 1893, 168-191). In his s udy o Konkani, he had ein o ced how “B ahmans we e no me e copyis s bu au ho s o “se e al wo ks in Konkani on Ch is iani y”, as well as wo ks in Tamil o Sinhalese (Cunha 1881, 36). Mo eo e , in his long essay on “O ien al S udies amongs he Po uguese”, he had made a lis o all publica ions by hese Indian B ahmin men missiona ies and schola s. In con as o he Po uguese, many o whom did no know how o ead o w i e, B ahmins we e li e a e al eady in childhood.8 Ge son da Cunha concluded by saying ha despi e he ac ha only a ew spoke and w o e i co ec ly, Po uguese was simply “beau i ul” (Cunha 1893, 188). Mo e han en yea s a e w i ing on Konkani, in a ex ha cons i u es one o his ha shes c i icisms o he Po uguese colonial go e nmen and i s s a egy o linguis ic annihila ion, Ge son da Cunha also decla es himsel s ongly in a ou o he p ese a ion o Po uguese as one o he languages o India. Wha could seem a con adic ion – how was i possible o de end he language o he colonised and, simul aneously, ha o he colonise s – can also be ead as a alo isa ion o wha was Goan in he gene al con ex o la e 19 h cen u y India; and ha mean aluing Po uguese as much as Konkani. I , mainly, mean aluing Po uguese in India, bu ou side Goa; and aluing Konkani in Goa. 8 Ge son da Cunha (1893, 186) conside ed music he g ea bene i o Po uguese elemen a y educa ion because “Indian ellow subjec s” ha dly lea n any music a all. 278 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in silences in ela ion o hose episodes ha “do no add o he glo y o he na ion (Cunha 1896, 254-255)”. As happened wi h he poe -soldie , Camões, by hen al eady conside ed he g ea es igu e o Po uguese li e a y his o y, he e we e, in he p esen , many who only emembe ed he i ues o he na ion and p e e ed o o ge i s c imes. Exclusions and inclusions in his o y a e hus denounced by he schola as ways o manipula ing he na a i es o he pas , in a kind o c i icism o ellow his o ians ha ine i ably alues a c i ical oice (his own), one capable o con on ing ins ead o excluding, e en hose pa s o his o y ha a e no so la e ing o he na ion’s sel - ep esen a ion. Ge son da Cunha did no hide his g ea admi a ion o he his o ical cha ac e o A onso de Albuque que, who was he “g ea ounde o he Po uguese empi e in he Eas ”, and “like Welling on”13, was e y a en i e o de ails (Cunha 1893, 177).14 Bu in ela ion o ano he much-ci ed e lec ion on he empi e’s decadence – he ma iage policy o A onso de Albuque que – Cunha’s posi ion was clea ly c i ical and was, in ac , e y close o ha oiced by Richa d Bu on, in his Goa and he Blue Moun ains, and by o he w i e s o con empo a y B i ish ex s (Cunha 1876a, 302; Bu on, 1991 [1851]; Kennedy 2005, 49-50). This episode belonging o he pas – Albuque que’s policy o encou age he ma iage o Po uguese men wi h local Indian women – was usually e e ed o as a his o ical lesson pe inen o he deba e ha was aking place in he con ex o 19 h cen u y B i ish India on he ad an ages and pe ils o policies enabling “mix u e” as opposed o “sepa a ion”. Wi hin his deba e, his ma iage policy was gene ally held as an example o wha no o do. The p esen decadence o he Po uguese empi e as he ul ima e consequence o ha and o he policies. Ge son da Cunha econ ex ualised Albuque que’s ges u e in he adi ion o he Roman Empi e, only o classi y i as an “expe imen ha has been ound, now ha i is oo la e o epai he e il, o be he sou ce o g a e e ils o bo h pa ies.” This app oach, which would i in a B i ish his o iog aphical adi ion, wi h which he clea ly iden i ies himsel , con as s wi h la e 13 Ge son da Cunha is e e ing o A hu Wellesley (1s May 1769 – 14 h Sep embe 1852), Duke o Welling on, p ominen 19 h cen u y poli ical and mili a y igu e, who was commande o he B i ish oops in Po ugal and Spain agains he Napoleonic In asions o he Ibe ian Peninsula in he ea ly 19 h cen u y (1808-1813). 14 Albuque que also appea ed as a posi i e his o ical cha ac e amongs B i ish au ho s, being conside ed ai and magnanimous and someone who had in mind na i e in e es s. See Hun e (1882, 268). in and ou o his o y 279 in e p e a ions o he same his o ical e en , as happened wi h Gilbe o F ey e’s “luso- opicalismo”. Luso-T opicalism was he concep ha he B azilian an h opologis de eloped o iden i y he p ac ice and policy o “miscegena ion” be ween whi e Po uguese men and women belonging o hose Asian, Ame ican and A ican geog aphies unde Po uguese ule. Religion was, o cou se, he mos con o e sial issue o Po uguese colonialism in India. The iolence o he con e sion me hods was equen ly condemned by someone who, despi e conside ing himsel a Ca holic, did no e eal he na u e o his eligiosi y o he cen ali y o ai h in his li e. And e en i Ge son da Cunha’s posi ion canno be educed o a single iewpoin , he clea ly ends o be c i ical o he Po uguese me hods o imposing Ch is iani y and elimina ing Hinduism. Unlike he policy o he p esen ule s o Hindus an, which we hope will also be ha o u u e e as, he spi i which guided he ue missiona y, in his noble ask o impa ing o he hea hen he news o peace and good-will, was no o ole ance bu o agg ession. (Cunha 1880, 184) As an example o he Po uguese policy unde which he na i es we e o ced o change hei ai h, Ge son da Cunha men ioned he des uc i e u ge agains Hinduism shown by he Bishop o Goa, F . João Albuque que (Spain, ci ca 1479 – Goa, 1553), by quo ing a documen ha was kep a he Lisbon To e do Tombo (Cunha 1880, 184-185).15 When he Inquisi ion was se up, he Bishop o Goa had o de ed, acco ding o Ge son da Cunha, he des uc ion o Hindu images and manusc ip s, bu did no o bid his subo dina es o use he local languages as a means o con e sion, some hing which enabled he w i ing o a se ies o g amma s and ocabula ies ha we e la e published by he Goan o icial P ess. In his plea o a poli ics o espec and ole ance owa ds o he eligions, Ge son da Cunha compa ed he con as ing a i udes o wo di e en colonise s o India – he Po uguese o he pas , and he B i ish o he p esen , – and clea ly e ealed which side he was on. By doing so he, again, s ood close o B i ish- P o es an his o ical and policy app oaches, in which Po uguese s a egies ega ding local eligions we e equen ly con as ed, nega i ely, wi h hose p ac ised a ew cen u ies la e by he B i ish. C uel y, in ac , especially when 15 We do no know how Ge son da Cunha had access o his documen . 280 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in associa ed wi h eligion, o en appea ed in desc ip ions o Po uguese India w i en by B i ish o by Indians o B i ish India (Hun e 1882, 268). Bhude Mukhopadhyay (1827-1894), o example, conside ed B i ain – as opposed o Spain, F ance o Po ugal – he leas c uel o he Eu opean na ions.16 By w i ing “which we hope will also be ha o u u e e as”, howe e , Cunha also clea ly s a ed his posi ion owa ds he p esen main colonial go e nmen o India, he B i ish. One o he subjec s o his book, No es on he His o y and An iqui ies o Chaul and Bassein was he con as be ween he pas glo y and he p esen decadence o he empi e, a pe sis en opic when ea ing Po uguese India’s his o y ha was insepa able om eligious ac o s.17 The Inquisi ion and he eligious o de s – ha “impe ium in impe io”, which Ge son da Cunha a ibu ed o he Jesui s – we e amongs he main causes o decadence (Cunha 1876c, iii). When, in 1878, he was in i ed by he Va ican o ecei e a deco a ion by he Pope, he con essed his su p ise o his I alian iend, Angelo De Gube na is.18 Yes, he was a Ca holic Indian, a schola and a doc o , bu did hey know wha he had w i en agains he Jesui s? Ge son da Cunha p esen ed his c i icism o he Jesui s, and his subsequen p aise o he Ma quis o Pombal’s policies owa ds hem on a ious occasions (Cunha 1880, 193). Again, in his p aise o he his o ical cha ac e o he Ma quis and his c i icism o he Companhia de Jesus, he is ep oducing a common ision o con empo a y B i ish his o iog aphy, in which he Ma quis ep esen ed mode ni y and he Enligh enmen ; and he Jesui s, he p oo o Ca holic excesses. Pombal, wi h his “g ea genius”, concei ed he “admi able policy” o expelling he Jesui s and closing con en s, “nes s o idle s” mo e in e es ed in sel ish conce ns han in es ablishing peace and good-will. Ge son da Cunha also made ano he ha sh c i icism, bu in an indi ec way: by quo ing a ex o ano he au ho s a ing ha e e y hing ha he Jesui s buil was des ined o uin and des uc ion.19 16 Ci ed by Raychaudhu i (2002, 70). 17 See Cunha (1876c, -ix). I ha e w i en on his pas glo y, p esen decadence dicho omy in a ex whe e I concen a e on his wo k on uined ci ies (Vicen e 2013, 227-278). 18 bnc , Manusc ip s, Co espondance Angelo De Gube na is, Co . José Ge son da Cunha o Angelo De Gube na is, Cass. 33, n.º 10 (Rome, Ho el Mine a, 29 No embe 1878). 19 See Cunha (1880, 187). He quo ed D . Döllinge , in an a icle published in he Dublin Uni e si y Magazine, in 1877: “ he p o e b abou he Tu ks – saying ha no g ass g ew unde hei s eps – in and ou o his o y 281 In ano he a icle in English, also des ined o he eade ship o B i ish India o G ea B i ain, he appealed o a his o ical econ ex ualisa ion o he Inquisi ion ha “made he Po uguese ule odious o he mild inhabi an s o he Konkan”. Howe e , he a gued, one could no ead he eudal cha ac e o ha ime wi h con empo a y ways o hinking codes, no could one con as he despo ic mili a ism and he cle ical sup emacy o ha pe iod wi h he p esen , du ing which “ he spi i o democ acy pe ades e e y poli ical c eed, and he F ench Re olu ion has augh na ions hei igh s, as well as hei du ies” (Cunha 1887, 142; 1887-1889). In he same pe iod, and in he same jou nal, he published an a icle on Dellon, he F ench doc o and a elle who wen o Goa in he 17 h cen u y and w o e abou his pe sonal expe ience as a ic im o he Goa Inquisi ion (Cunha 1887-1889). Ge son da Cunha explains why he conside ed Dellon’s memoi a “ ab ica ion”, a “ o ge y” and a “ aud” bu , a he same ime, he is ca e ul o add ha his own “denial o he au hen ici y o he wo k ce ainly does no imply a de ence o he Inquisi ion, which I ha e elsewhe e condemned, as should e e y libe al-minded man, whe he a Ca holic o P o es an ” (Cunha 1887-1889). how eely could he speak? w i ing on he con empo a y b i ish empi e ou side india In his a icle on he Buddha’s oo h and i s cul in Ceylon – Mémoi e su l’his oi e de la den - elique de Ceylan p écéde d’un essai su la ie e la eligion de Gau ama Buddha –, Ge son da Cunha inished wi h a long quo a ion om Rodie ha had no di ec ela ion o he a icle’s subjec and his o ical con ex , and which e lec ed on he ela ions be ween Eu ope and Asia, be ween Eu opean colonise s and colonised Indians. Les églemen s o gueilleusemen immuables, pou le co ps e pou l’âme, que les héoc a es de l’Inde on eu la émé i é d’impose à la socié é, on ini pa y dé ui e ous les élemen s du p og ès. Le génie hindou, au e ois si b illan , si écond, si i ace, meu é ou é dans could be applied o he Jesui s, whose buildings always became he ic ims o a empes o a lood. By p esen ing his quo a ion, Cunha could c i icise he Jesui s wi hou exposing himsel o c i icism. He was c i icising he Jesui s bu he was doing so indi ec ly, by quo ing someone wi h whom he ag eed. A he same ime, by quo ing om a Dublin schola ly jou nal, he was displaying he cosmopoli an na u e o his e udi ion” (Cunha 1880, 192). 282 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in une camisole de o ce! Le du con ac de no e ci ilisa ion le é eille a peu -ê e! Espé ons que les descendan s des A ias ou e on , ô ou a d, une compensa ion aux douleu s e aux humilia ions qui leu in lige la p épondé ance des Eu opéens. (Cunha 1884b, 431-432) Ge son da Cunha was no he au ho o hese wo ds. Howe e , by ep oducing hem as he epilogue o his ex , wasn’ he c i icising, o some deg ee, he successi e go e nmen s ha had opp essed India and Ceylon? Wasn’ his a kind o s a egy des ined o e eal his opinions, no only abou his o ical e en s bu also abou p esen day India? Could he ac ha Ge son da Cunha was publishing in a F ench jou nal, and no one o he schola ly jou nals o B i ish India whe e he usually published, ha e gi en him mo e eedom o exp ession? Wasn’ his a way o de ending an ances al “Indianness” o he A yans, a acial and cul u al ca ego y being widely discussed a he ime, and which was ep essed h ough he successi e Eu opean p esences? And wasn’ his a s a agem o say wha he could no say, wi h he ad an age o doing so by using he legi imising wo ds o a Eu opean? The same could be said abou his p i a e co espondence wi h his iend, he I alian Indianis Angelo De Gube na is, and his collabo a ion wi h he Re ue In e na ionale, one o many jou nals c ea ed by De Gube na is in I aly. In his p i a e co espondence, Ge son da Cunha could exp ess himsel mo e eely knowing his wo ds would emain in a p i a e sphe e. While, his wo a icles o he Re ue In e na ionale, as he India co esponden , Ge son da Cunha clea ly el ee o oice his opinions on con empo a y India. Published in Flo ence – a Eu opean coun y ha had no colonial ela ions wi h India – bu w i en in F ench, he Re ue In e na ionale, as i s name sugges s, concen a ed on con empo a y e en s and li e a u e om di e en na ions. Howe e , his manusc ip a icles do no exac ly ma ch his published a icles. Ha ing had access o he manusc ip e sions o he a icles he sen o Gube na is, as he jou nal edi o , and being able o compa e hem o he published e sions, I could e i y how some o he mo e c i ical posi ions owa ds he B i ish Go e nmen in India we e e ased om he inal published a icle. Gube na is clea ly used his ole as edi o o exclude wha he conside ed con o e sial o p oblema ic. The e o e, Ge son da Cunha’s Indian oice as he India co esponden on cu en a ai s, a oice ha seemed ee in ha emo e Renaissance ci y o Flo ence, was somewha con ained and supp essed. In he wo a icles he sen o he jou nal, he e is also a clea consciousness o he changing na u e o colonial ela ionships, and o he ai ly e iden in and ou o his o y 283 signs ha announced he end o B i ish India. The pe iod in which Ge son da Cunha con ibu ed o he Re ue In e na ionale, 1884-85, was p ecisely ha in which he Anglo-Russian con lic was simme ing, due o he ecen Russian occupa ion o some o he bo de s o he B i ish Empi e. Lo d Cu zon also conside ed Russia’s expansionis policy a h ea o he B i ish p esence in India (Cu zon 1892). Ge son da Cunha some imes e e ed, albei somewha indi ec ly, o he possibili y o Russia being he nex colonise o India. And he did so in a posi i e way, assuming ha Russian colonisa ion would be a necessa y ansi ional phase be o e Indian independence. Benedic Ande son’s ideas a e pe inen when conside ing Cunha’s ways o imagining he u u e Indian na ion, as well as when hinking o his mul iple iden i ies. Bo h in Imagined Communi ies and in Unde Th ee Flags, Ande son’s wo k was especially pionee ing in g asping he ele ance o 19 h cen u y colonial schola ly eli es in imagining a pos -colonial u u e (Ande son 1991, 2005). In he in imacy o a le e sen o Angelo De Gube na is, in Flo ence, he Goan His o ian w o e wha he mos p obably could no w i e elsewhe e: “The Russian domina ion, which soone o la e [my i alics] will ollow he B i ish, will be an impo an phase o ou poli ical e olu ion o , o use a somewha imp essi e I alian exp ession, in ou Riso gimen o [unde lined in he manusc ip ].”20 By es ablishing his compa ison be ween he Indian case and he ecen p ocess o I alian uni ica ion ha led o he bi h o he I alian na ion, in 1861, uni ed unde he same king, he Goan s a ed his belie in he u u e – “soone o la e ” – independence o India. Colonised yes e day by he Po uguese, and oday by he B i ish, India would be colonised omo ow by he Russians and, he day a e omo ow, which was no oo emo e, he e would be only “India”: a non-colonised India. In his eleological e lec ion, Ge son da Cunha imagined a na ion wi hou he p esence o o eign colonise s and, e en i he gi es no da es, he e is a ce ain sense o imminence, o ine i abili y in he wo ds “soone o la e ” ha he uses in his le e . He e, as well as in o he o his w i ings, we can, as men ioned be o e, ace many o Benedic Ande son’s ideas o how communi ies we e imagined be o e being (Ande son 1991). In ano he le e o his I alian iend based in Flo ence, he sen his complimen s o he Russian p incesses li ing in Flo ence and whom 20 Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 6 (Roma, Ho el Mine a, 20 h Oc obe 1878). This e lec ion on Russia and India was p omp ed by a pho og aph Angelo De Gube na is had sen him o P incess Gali zine, a Russian p incess whom he Goan had me in Flo ence. 284 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in he e e ed o as he “ u u e ule s o my coun y, ule s ha , we hope, will be he las o eign domina ion ha will p ecede ou emancipa ion”.21 In ano he le e , he wished he Russian p incesses a long li e, so ha one day hey could a i e in India and cause “ he B i ish o panic”.22 In he a icle published in he Re ue In e na ionale, des ined o a Eu opean public, Cunha also el ee enough o muse abou he ad an ages o a hypo he ical Russian dominion o India, mainly when compa ed o he B i ish colonialism o he p esen .23 While he B i ish would “lea e India impo e ished and unde de eloped” because hey had conque ed India as ad en u e s and had colonised i like G eeks, by no mixing wi h he local popula ions and by being a a icious; he Russians would colonise India like ancien Romans, mixing wi h he Indians. A he same ime, hey would con ibu e o he uni ica ion o India, esol ing i s eligious di e ences and he con lic s caused by he cas e sys em. The Russian example, Ge son da Cunha goes on, wi h i s hones y, would also inspi e he Indian people wi h a spi i o na ionali y, “which will ine i ably place he elde b o he o he A yan amily on he pedes al he is en i led o and which is sanc ioned by his o y”.24 Despi e being ma ied o a Russian and ha ing a special in e es in Russian cul u e, his I alian iend Gube na is did no seem o ag ee: in his Indian a el dia y, he s a es ha a hypo he ical Russian in asion o India would be 21 And when P ince Gali zine, b o he o he “beau i ul Russian p incesses” wen on a ip o Bombay, Ge son da Cunha o e ed him his hospi ali y. Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 16 (Bombay, 37 Ho nby Road, 17 h Ma ch 1879); Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 22 (Bombay, 39 Ho nby Road, 14 h June 1881); Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 23 (Bombay, 39 Ho nby Road, 26 h July 1881). 22 Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 20 (Bombay, 39, Ho nby Road, 1s Janua y 1880). He also w o e ha his B i ish a e sion owa ds he Russians was “ he same a e sion ha Mahome had owa ds bacon”, a common de oga o y Po uguese exp ession. 23 Ge son da Cunha’s in e es in Russia was also la en in he a icle he published in he English language jou nal Bombay Gaze e in 1879, on he educa ion o women in Russia. Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 17 (Bombay, 37 Ho nby Road, 1s Augus 1879). 24 [“que de e acaba po coloca o i mão mais elho da amília a iana no pedes al que lhe cabe de di ei o, e que a his ó ia sanciona”]. in and ou o his o y 285 o no bene i because Russia was no mo e ci ilised han India. The e o e, Indians wouldn’ bene i a all by changing “landlo ds” (De Gube na is 1887, 321-322). In his ole as he Indian co esponden , Ge son da Cunha sen his “Le e des Indes O ien ales” o he i s issue o he magazine a he end o 1883. In i , he iden i ied he s a e o con empo a y India as one o c isis and ansi ion (Cunha 1883b, 202-204; 1884a, 829-831). He s a ed o e e o he widely epea ed dicho omy be ween o ien al apa hy, on he one hand; and, on he o he , he ac i e na u e o wes e n peoples said o be a ec ing he apa hy in he O ien .25 The con empla i e and e en se ile na u e o he Indians was changing, hanks o Eu opean colonialism, in o a ansi ional p ocess a ou ing a close and iendlie ela ionship be ween he wo wo lds. The “Indian o he 19 h cen u y”, Cunha decla ed, “ hinks, mo es, communes in mind and sympa hy wi h his A yan b o he o he Wes , ecalls he pas g ea ness o his na i e coun y, eels keenly his p esen pa ial bondage and aspi es o a u u e ull o mo e p omises o success and p ospe i y.”26 A ianism, he e, se ing o uni e Eas e and Wes , and somehow sub e ing he inequali ies ins i u ionalized by colonial ule. he eawakening o a na ion: india a e he o eign in ade s In he second manusc ip a icle Ge son da Cunha sen o be published in he Flo en ine jou nal, he highligh ed he ecen passage o powe om Lo d Ripon o Lo d Du e in and he g andeu o he acclama ion ce emonies wi h which Lo d Ripon was bid a ewell. Howe e , he Indians had been e y unhappy: “ en cen u ies o y anny and opp ession by o eign [unde lined in he manusc ip ] in ade s ha e made hem nea ly o ge ha hei s was one o he sea s o an ancien and ad anced ci ilisa ion”. When a Vice oy ga e he Indians he poli ical igh o “municipal sel -go e nmen ” – a igh ha 25 See Cunha (1883b, 202). Ronald Inden (1986; 2000 [1990]) analyses he pe sis ence o hese essen ialis images o India in con as wi h Eu opean alues and ideas. 26 Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 32 (Bombay 23 d No embe 1883). The a icle, w i en in English, is sen along wi h his le e ; Cunha (1883b, 203). 286 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in had been p esen in he Indian illage communi ies om ime immemo ial, – hei g a i ude was eno mous. This happened, acco ding o Ge son da Cunha because in he las en cen u ies “o da kness”, he Indian people had ecei ed mo e “blows han kisses, mo e kicks han pence!”, and had o go en he p i ileges hey once possessed. Now he p ocess was uns oppable. When a people we e augh abou hei igh s, his people s a ed ques ioning i sel abou he e olu ion o hese igh s. I hey encoun e ed esis ance, on he o he hand, his p og essi e e olu ion would ans o m i sel in o e olu ion. Howe e , as Ge son da Cunha poin ed ou , igh s also mean du ies, and hese we e he las hing on which he masses e lec ed. “The inaugu a ion o a spi i o na ionali y among he na i es o his coun y” had been, in his opinion, he g ea es e ela ion o he ansi ion o powe . Ge son da Cunha’s a gumen would be o - epea ed in he u u e bu , in 1884, was s ill la en . India had much o gain by main aining i s ela ionship wi h he mos p og essi e, enligh ened, in elligen and ene ge ic na ion o Eu ope, bu B i ain would ha e o g adually adjus o India’s demands. The colonise had o please he colonised and win i s good-will, mainly when acing he h ea o a po en ial i al such as Russia. Jus as he Po uguese had done when hey became mo e bene olen wi h he na i es a he beginning o he 17 h cen u y, when he B i ish had a i ed in Su a , a gued Ge son da Cunha, so he B i ish had o please he Indians when he Russians a i ed in Kabul. The published a icle did no p in his sen ence o idea, no did i p in he sec ion o he a icle in which he e lec ed on he meaning o he 1857 Mu iny, while compa ing i wi h he excesses displayed by he masses p esen when Lo d Ripon ceded powe .27 Clea ly Gube na is mus ha e hough ha Cunha’s openness was oo bold. In ega d o he public’s appa en loyal y o he B i ish C own, he Indian co esponden no ed ha he e was always an elemen o p eca iousness in any o eign go e nmen . In India, many had ead he mani es a ions o joy owa ds he ex- ice oy – Lo d Ripon – as a sign o he success and pe manence o B i ain’s ela ionship wi h India.28 Ge son da Cunha, howe e , had doub s. And o demons a e hem, he ga e an example o his o ical pa allelism 27 Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 37 (Bombay, Ho nby Road, 25 h Decembe 1883). 28 Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 37 (Bombay, Ho nby Road, 25 h Decembe 1883). in and ou o his o y 287 aken om “Po uguese India’s” pas : hose mani es a ions o joy had been analogous o wha ook place in he “ lou ishing Po uguese Empi e in he Eas ”. When D. João de Cas o e u ned o Goa a e he conques o Diu, he na i es o e ed him golden lowe s and he me chan s o Cambaia sp ead ou hei iches and mos beau i ul co on and silk clo hs, so ha he could walk be ween he galleon and he ca hed al. And wha was he esul o all o hese na i e acclama ions o he “las he o”, and he cong a ula ions o all he Hindu and Muslim p inces o India? Nowadays, a gued Cunha, no e en he mos cul i a ed na i e o India emembe s he name o D. João de Cas o. This o go en name s ood in clea con as o he names o con empo a y na i es, whose memo y was s ill ali e, and was p ese ed in popula ballads: “Such is he des iny o all o eign ule s, mos bene olen hough hey be.” Ge son da Cunha ended his e lec ion wi h p aise o D. João de Cas o’s cha ac e , ollowed by he e e ence o an e en ha again enabled him o es ablish a compa ison be ween he wo colonial empi es: he Po uguese empi e o he pas and he B i ish empi e o he p esen . D. João de Cas o died poo , assis ed by S . F ancis Xa ie , whose Tomb-Relic in Velha Goa Lo d Ripon had isi ed ecen ly. The epilogue o he Po uguese empi e was al eady known, while he epilogue o he B i ish was ye o be w i en. I would, howe e , be simila , Ge son da Cunha sugges ed. Gube na is, howe e , did no seem o hink he e lec ions on con empo a y B i ish India should be included in he published e sion, and omi ed many o he pages Ge son da Cunha had w i en.29 Was he I alian oubled by his iend’s commen s, which seemed o announce he end o he B i ish colonial go e nmen in India? We e hese e lec ions oo p oblema ic o be published in he jou nal edi ed by someone who was conside ed he majo I alian igu e in Indian s udies, and who was abou o depa on a majo jou ney o India whe e he needed he suppo o he B i ish Go e nmen o India? The exclusions Gube na is decided o make e eal ha e en away om India, no e e y hing could be said. Ge son da Cunha’s ee speech – wo ds w i en in Po uguese and sen o an I alian ci y o be ansla ed in o F ench – we e s ill subjec o a censo ship ha we can only explain by asking ques ions a he han by ehea sing any clea answe . 29 Biblio eca Nazionale Cen ale di Fi enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 37 (Bombay, 25 h Decembe 1884); This second a icle as co esponden was published wo mon hs a e , on 25 h Feb ua y 1884: Cunha (1884a, 829-831). 294 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in exclusion o Po uguese om he ange o Eu opean languages augh a he Uni e si y o Bombay in he la e 19 h cen u y. He does no , he e o e, enable us o d aw simple conclusions, and e en less o es ablish linea dicho omies be ween hose who sided wi h he o eign colonise s and hose wi h he colonised Indian. His c i icism o Po uguese colonial p ac ices ocused mainly on he pas and was exp essed in his schola ly publica ions, and was he e o e his o ical in na u e. Wi h B i ish India, howe e , his c i ical eye ended o add ess con empo a y e en s and was mainly con eyed h ough jou nalis ic w i ing and p i a e co espondence. This di ision was also an objec o my e lec ion. Policies and p ac ices o exclusion and inclusion – and he dialogues and con lic s o e wha should be included o “excluded” – we e embedded in all colonial spaces and Ge son da Cunha pa icipa ed in his deba e h ough his his o ical and jou nalis ic w i ings. Howe e , I ied o analyse, his audience – he people who we e going o ead him and he places whe e he was going o be ead – de e mined wha he w o e on India’s p esen o pas . He was conscious o hei speci ici y and adap ed his discou se, poli ics and c i icism acco dingly and his was no by chance. His posi ion and iden i y de e mined wha he could say and o whom he could say i . The ac ha Ge son da Cunha was Goan and could ead Po uguese, along wi h o he Eu opean and Indian languages, was de e minan in he choice o his o ical subjec s he chose o esea ch and w i e abou . I was also impo an o he cosmopoli an communi y wi h which he in e ac ed, socially as well as in his ole as doc o wi h a medical p ac ice. By belonging o di e en wo lds, and cons an ly c ossing, li e ally and his o ically, he bo de s be ween Po uguese and B i ish India, Cunha was able o make compa isons and connec ions be ween di e en his o ies and his o iog aphies. This con as ed wi h he majo i y o w i en schola ly p oduc ion, which ended o emain sepa a e and unawa e o each o he : on one side, he wo k w i en in English, published in B i ish India o in London, and concen a ing on he geog aphies and expe iences o he B i ish p esence in India; and on he o he , he bibliog aphy published in Po uguese, in Goa o in Lisbon, and ocused on he Po uguese p esence in ce ain Indian egions, mainly in Goa, since he 16 h cen u y. This, as we ha e seen, had wo main esul s: i enabled him o es ablish unusual compa isons and c ossings be ween bo h dominan colonising expe iences in India, while also meaning ha he was no inco po a ed in ei he o he his o iog aphies dealing wi h Po uguese and B i ish India. in and ou o his o y 295 Si ua ed be ween hese wo adi ions – he Po uguese and he B i ish – Ge son da Cunha was ne e ully acknowledged by ei he o hem. In a his o ical pe iod – he second hal o he 19 h cen u y – in which di e en Eu opean colonial go e nmen s uled India wi h he ob ious p edominance o he B i ish, he e we e di e en na ional his o iog aphical adi ions depending on he place whe e he w i ing was aking place and on who was w i ing. These ended o concen a e on di e en pe iods and di e en subjec s, and we e w i en in di e en languages, by schola s who wo ked in di e en a chi es and quo ed di e en his o ians. Pa adoxically, as I ha e sugges ed, i was his belonging o many places while no belonging o a single one – he ac ha Ge son da Cunha was always on he bo de s o di e en wo lds – ha con ibu ed o his in isibili y as a his o ian and his exclusion om he canon, as a p oduce o knowledge on he his o y o India. acknowledgemen s I hank my iend Naomi Pa ke , om he Depa men o Po uguese and B azilian S udies a B own Uni e si y, o he ho ough e ision o his ex , and I hank my dea Ge son da Cunha, an Indian s age and ilm ac o , social wo ke , ac i is , jou nalis , au ho and ad e s ising execu i e, descendan o José Ge son da Cunha, who om he beginning o my esea ch on his amily has been a iend and a suppo e . ____________________________________ ilipa lowndes icen e Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa A . P o . Aníbal Be encou 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Po ugal ilipa. icen [email p o ec ed]lisboa.p o cid.o g/0000-0002-3334-3064 ____________________________________ 296 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in e e ences ande son, B. 1991. Imagined Communi ies. London: Ve so. ande son, B. 2005. Unde Th ee Flags: Ana chism and he An i-Colonial Imagina ion. London and New Yo k: Ve so. ballan yne, T. 2002. O ien alism and Race: A yanism in he B i ish Empi e. London: Palg a e-MacMillan. bayly, C. A. 2012. Reco e ing Libe ies: Indian Though in he Age o Libe alism and Empi e. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. bhanda ka , R. G. 1887. “My isi o he Vienna Cong ess”. The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y, xl i, ol. x ii: 72-95. bose, S., K. Manjap a, eds. 2010. Cosmopoli an Though Zones: Sou h Asia and he Global Ci cula ion o Ideas. Houndmills: Palg a e Macmillan. b anco, M. B. 1879. Po ugal e os Es angei os. 2 ols. Lisbon: Li a ia A. M. Pe ei a. bu on, R. F. 1991 [1851]. Goa and he Blue Moun ains: o , Six Mon hs o Sick Lea e. Be keley: Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess. cha e jee, P. 1993. The Na ion and i s F agmen s: Colonial and Pos colonial His o ies. New Delhi: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. chop a, P. 2011. A Join En e p ise: Indian Eli es and he Making o B i ish Bombay. Minneapolis and London: Uni e si y o Minneso a P ess. clue , M. ed. 2004. La Fascina ion de L’ Inde en Allemagne, 1800-1933. Rennes: P esses Uni e si ai es de Rennes. cos a, A. M. da. S. d. Dicioná io de Li e a u a Goesa. ol. ii. Macau: Ins i u o Cul u al de Macau and Fundação O ien e. cunha, J. G. da. 1876a. “An his o ical and a chaeological ske ch o he island o Angedi a”. The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y, xxxii (xi): 302. cunha, J. G. da. 1876b. “No es on he his o y and an iqui ies o Chaul”. The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y, xxxiii (xii): 95. cunha, J. G. da. 1876c. No es on he His o y and An iqui ies o Chaul and Bassein: Illus a ed wi h Se en een Pho og aphs, Nine Li hog aphic Pla es and a Map. Bombay: Thacke , Vining & Co. cunha, J. G. da. 1880. “Ma e ials o he his o y o o ien al s udies amongs he Po uguese”. In A i del i Cong esso In e nazionale degli O ien alis i enu o a Fi enze nel Se emb e 1878. ol. ii. Fi enze: coi ipi dei successo i Le Monnie , 184. cunha, J. G. da. 1881. The Konkani Language and Li e a u e. Bombay: Go e nmen Cen al P ess. cunha, J. G. da. 1883a. “Con ibu ions o he s udy o Indo-Po uguese numisma ics (pa 3 d) ”.The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y, xl (x ): 194. cunha, J. G. da. 1883b. “Le e des Indes O ien ales”. Re ue In e na ionale, 1, 25 Dezemb o: 202-204. cunha, J. G. da. 1884a. “Le e de Bombay”. Re ue In e na ionale, 1, 25-02-1884: 829-831. cunha, J. G. da. 1884b. “Mémoi e su l’his oi e de la den - elique de Ceylan p écéde d’un essai su la ie e la eligion de Gau ama Buddha”. Annales du Musée Guime , 7: 431-432. cunha, J. G. da. 1887. “On he ma iage o In an a D. Ca a ina o Po ugal wi h Cha les ii o G ea B i ain, he medals and po ai s”. The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y, xl i (x ii): 145-146. in and ou o his o y 297 cunha, J. G. da. 1887-1889. “M. Dellon and he Inquisi ion o Goa”. The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y, x ii (ii): 53-62. cunha, J. G. da. 1893. “A B ie ske ch o he Po uguese and hei language in he Eas ”. The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y. 1892, xlix (x iii): 168-191. cunha, J. G. da. 1896. “The Po uguese in Sou h Kana a”. The Jou nal o he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y, lii (xix): 254-255. cunha, J. G. da. 1900. The O igin o Bombay. London: Kegan Paul, T ench T übne & Co. cu zon, G. N. 1892. Pe sia and he Pe sian Ques ion. London and New Yo k: Longmans, G een & Co. de gube na is, A. 1886-1887. Pe eg inazioni Indiane. Vols. i-iii. Fi enze: Tip. Edi ice di L. Niccolai. di cons anzo, T. 2004. “L’ Inde que F ied ich Maximilian Mülle (1823-1900) oud ai nous mon e ”. In La Fascina ion de l’Inde en Allemagne 1800-1933, ed. Ma c Clue . Rennes: P esses Uni e si ai es de Rennes, 91-102. gange , S., S. L. Lewis. 2013. “Fo um: a wo ld o ideas: new pa hways in global in ellec ual his o y c. 1880-1930”. Mode n In ellec ual His o y, 10 (2): 347-351. ga cia, L. P. 1955. “P e ácio do adu o ”. In Con ibuições pa a o Es udo da Numismá ica Indo-Po uguesa, J. Ge son da Cunha. Lisbon: Agência Ge al do Ul ama , 5. gomes, P. V. 2007. “Bombay Po uguese – se ou não se po uguês em Bombaim no século xix”. Re is a Po uguesa de His ó ia das Ideias, 28: 567-608. guha, R. 2000. “On some aspec s o he his o iog aphy o colonial India”. In Mapping Subal e n S udies and he Pos colonial, ed. V. Cha u edi, London and New Yo k: Ve so and New Le Re iew. hun e , W. W. 1882. The Indian Empi e: i s His o y, People, and P oduc s. London: T übne & Co. inden, R. 1986. “O ien alis cons uc ions o India”. Mode n Asian S udies, xx (3): 401-46. inden, R. 2000 [1990]. Imagining India. London: Hu s & Company. isaka, R. 2006. “Guja a i eli es and he cons uc ion o a egional iden i y in he la e Nine een h Cen u y”. In Beyond Rep esen a ion: Colonial and Pos colonial Cons uc ions o Indian Iden i y, ed. C. Ba es. New Delhi: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess, 151-176. jackson, K. D. 2005. De Chaul a Ba icaloa: as Ma cas do Impé io Ma í imo Po uguês na India e no S i Lanka. E icei a: Ma de Le as. kama , P. 1999. Fa a Fa : Local Resis ance o Colonial Hegemony in Goa 1510-1912. Panaji, Goa: Ins i u e Menezes B aganza. kennedy, D. 2005. The Highly Ci ilized Man. Richa d Bu on and he Vic o ian Wo ld. Camb idge, Mass. and London: Ha a d Uni e si y P ess. lobo, S. A. 2013. O Desassossego Goês: Cul u a e Polí ica em Goa do Libe alismo ao Ac o Colonial. Doc o al Thesis. Lisbon: Faculdade de Ciência Sociais e Humanas, Uni e sidade No a de Lisboa. machado, E. V. 2018. “Hype iden i y and o ien alism: he case o he sieges o Diu in Po uguese ex s”. Sou h Asian S udies, 34 (1): 6-16. ma ei, A. F. X. 1882. A Konkani G amma . Mangalo e: Basel Mission Book & T ac Deposi o y. ma ei, A. F. X. 1883. An English-Konkani Dic iona . Mangalo e: Basel Mission P ess. manjap a, K. 2014. Age o En anglemen : Ge man and Indian In ellec uals ac oss Empi e. Camb idge, Mass.: Ha a d Uni e si y P ess. ma chand, S. L. 2010. Ge man O ien alism in he Age o Empi e: Religion, Race, and Schola ship. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. 298 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in mo aes, G. M. 1967. “D . José Ge son da Cunha 1844-1900”. Jou nal o he Asia ic Socie y o Bombay. D . José Ge son da Cunha. Memo ial Volume, ols. 1964-65, 3: 38. moyn, S. and A. Sa o i, eds. 2013. Global In ellec ual His o y. New Yo k: Columbia Uni e si y P ess. mu i, K. P. 2001. India: he Seduc i e and Seduced “O he ” o Ge man O ien alism. Wes po , c : G eenwood P ess. oli ei a, L. P. de L. C. de. 2013. “Emancipa e you colonies! Reacções de Be na do Pe es da Sil a ao an icolonialismo de Ben ham”. In Es udos dedicados ao P o esso Dou o Nuno Espinosa Gomes da Sil a. ol. i. Lisbon: Uni e sidade Ca ólica Edi o a, 497-531. o a, G. da. 1891-1895. Colóquios dos Simples e D ogas da Índia, ed. Conde de Ficalho. ols. i & ii. Lisbon: Imp ensa Nacional. pe ez, R. M., ed. 2006. Os Po ugueses e o O ien e: His ó ia, I ine á ios, Rep esen ações. Lisbon: D. Quixo e. pe ez, R. M. 2014. “O o ien alismo dos o ien ais: ânsi os, consensos, con adições”. In Goa Po uguesa e Pós-Colonial: Li e a u a, Cul u a e Sociedade, o g. E. V. Machado and D. D. B aga. Vila No a de Famalicão: Húmus, 39-59. pin o, R. 2007. Be ween Empi es. P in and Poli ics in Goa. New Delhi: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. p akash, G. 2000. “W i ing pos -o ien alis his o ies o he hi d wo ld: pe spec i es om Indian his o iog aphy”. In Mapping Subal e n S udies and he Pos colonial, ed. V. Cha u edi. London and New Yo k: Ve so and New Le Re iew. p akash, G. 2011. Mumbai Fables: A His o y o an Enchan ed Ci y. P ince on, New Je sey: P ince on Uni e si y P ess. aychaudhu i, T. 2002. Eu ope Reconside ed. Pe cep ions o he Wes in Nine een h-Cen u y Bengal. New Delhi: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. i a a, J. H. da C. 1875. A Conju ação de 1787 em Goa e Va ias Cousas desse Tempo: Memó ia His ó ica. No a Goa: Imp ensa Nacional. said, E. W. 1993. Cul u e and Impe ialism. London: Cha o & Wind. sa ka , S. 2000. “O ien alism e isi ed: Saidian amewo ks in he w i ing o mode n Indian his o y”. In Mapping Subal e n S udies and he Pos colonial, ed. V. Cha u edi. London and New Yo k: Ve so and New Le Re iew, 239-255. sen, A. P. 2008. Bankim Chand a Cha opadhyay: An In ellec ual Biog aphy. New Delhi: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. siquei a, A.. 2006. “Goa: do ociden alismo ao pós-colonialismo”. In Os Po ugueses e o O ien e: His ó ia, I ine á ios, Rep esen ações, ed. Rosa Ma ia Pe ez. Lisbon: D. Quixo e, 157-160. emple, R. 1881. India in 1880. 3 d edi ion. London: John Mu ay. ench, R. C. 1880. The Li e and Genius o Calde on. London: Macmillan. asconcelos, J. L. de. 1923. Da Numismá ica em Po ugal. O p in om he A qui o da Uni e sidade de Lisboa. Lisbon: 279-280. icen e, F. L. 2009-2010. “The Goan his o ian José Ge son da Cunha a he Bombay B anch o he Royal Asia ic Socie y (1870-1900)”. Jou nal o he Asia ic Socie y o Mumbai, 83: 128-136. icen e, F. L. 2010. “O ien alismos pe i é icos? O his o iado goês José Ge son da Cunha (Bombaim, 1878)”. Le His ó ia, 58: 27-46. in and ou o his o y 299 icen e, F. L. 2012a. “A pho og aph o ou o ien alis s (Bombay, 1855): knowledge p oduc ion, eligious iden i ies and he nego ia ion o in isible con lic s”. Jou nal o he Economic and Social His o y o he O ien , 55, 2/3: 603-636. icen e, F. L. 2012b. O he O ien alisms: India be ween Flo ence and Bombay (1860-1900). New Delhi: O ien Blackswan. icen e, F. L. 2012c. “The housand and one nigh s o Pa is: an Indian a elle a he 1867 Uni e sal Exhibi ion”. Quade ns d’His ò ia de l’Enginye ia, 13: 133-151. icen e, F. L. 2013. “As uínas das cidades: his ó ia e cul u a ma e ial do Impé io Po uguês da Índia (1850-1900)”. In Cidade e Impé io: Dinâmicas Coloniais e Recon igu ações Pós- coloniais, o g. N. Domingos and E. Pe al a. Lisbon: Edições 70, 227-278. icen e, F. L. 2014. “A colabo ação de in elec uais goeses na esc i a da ‘His ó ia de Goa’ da b i ânica Isabel Bu on”. In Goa Po uguesa e Pós-Colonial: Li e a u a, Cul u a e Sociedade, o g. E e on V. Machado and Dua e D. B aga. Vila No a de Famalicão: Húmus, 95-107. icen e, F. L. 2015. En e Dois Impé ios: Viajan es B i ânicos em Goa (1800-1940). Lisbon: Tin a-da-China. icen e, F. L. 2016. “José Ge son da Cunha”. In Dicioná io de o ien alis as de língua po uguesa. Cen o de Es udos de Comunicação e Cul u a. Disponí el em h ps://o ien alis asdelin guapo uguesa.wo dp ess.com/jose-ge son-da-cunha/ icen e, F. L. 2017. “Po uguese-speaking Goan women w i e s in la e colonial India (1860- -1940)”. Po uguese S udies Re iew, 25 (2): 323-327. xa ie , A. B., I. Zupano . 2014. Ca holic O ien alism. Po uguese Empi e, Indian Knowledge: 16 h-18 h Cen u ies. New Delhi: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. sou ces biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 6 (Roma, Ho el Mine a, 20 h Oc obe 1878). biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 16 (Bombay, 37 Ho nby Road, 17 h Ma ch 1879). biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 17 (Bombay, 37 Ho nby Road, 1s Augus 1879). biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 20 (Bombay, 39, Ho nby Road, 1s Janua y 1880). biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 22 (Bombay, 39 Ho nby Road, 14 h June 1881). biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 23 (Bombay, 39 Ho nby Road, 26 h July 1881). 300 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in ci e his chap e as: icen e, F. L. 2018. “In and ou o his o y: how a Goan schola in Bombay imagined a colonial Indian pas and a u u e independen India (1870-1900)”. 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, 263-300. h ps://doi.o g/10.31447/ics9789726715030.12 biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 32 (Bombay 23 d No embe 1883). biblio eca nazionale cen ale di i enze – Manosc i i – Ca eggio Angelo De Gube na is – Co esp. José Ge son da Cunha pa a Angelo De Gube na is, n.º 37 (Bombay, Ho nby Road, 25 h Decembe 1883). bnc , Manusc ip s, Co espondance Angelo De Gube na is, Co . José Ge son da Cunha o Angelo De Gube na is, Cass. 33, n.º 10 [Rome, Ho el Mine a, 29 h No embe 1878].