History exists in some spacetime bubble in the fourth dimension. There’s no way for us to rip through time and verify it. For fact-checking, we can only depend on written or oral information passed on over generations or evidence-based texts written by historians and scholars.
But, what if a page of history is torn and rewritten without backing it with facts or evidence? In the world of physics, it would be seen as a historical distortion or a historical diplopia (double vision) in the time-bubble.
This phenomenon – of historical distortion or historical diplopia – could likely have occurred on February 19 when Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant, during the celebration of Shiv Jayanti, claimed there was a misbelief that “entire” Goa was under the Portuguese rule for over 450 years.
Elaborating on his statement, he said Portuguese ruled over only three talukas of Goa while the rest of the State was under the Maratha ruler Chhatrapati Shivaji.
Konkani activist writer Uday Bhembre, who put out a YouTube video, contesting point-by-point Sawant’s claims, profusely quoting from the book Portuguese-Marathe Sambandh (Portuguese-Maratha Relations) written by Pandurang Pissurlenkar.
In what can be seen as channeling people’s religious or Maratha pride, Sawant went on to give credit to Shivaji for saving people, supposedly settled in non-Portuguese region, from being converted to Christianity.
The speech left many historians, authors and academics rankled. One of them was the former Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) and Konkani activist writer Uday Bhembre, who put out a YouTube video, contesting point-by-point Sawant’s claims, profusely quoting from the book Portuguese-Marathe Sambandh (Portuguese-Maratha Relations) written by Pandurang Pissurlenkar.
He agreed with the CM only on the point that the whole of Goa was not a Portuguese colony for 450 years. Different talukas came under Portuguese at different in times. Only Tiswadi remained with them for the entire period they were in Goa.
It was the first taluka conquered by the Portuguese in 1510 while Bardez and Salcete were later ceded by Adil Shah. In 1763, Portuguese captured Ponda, and between 1781 and 1788, they took control of six more talukas.
Bhembre agreed with the CM only on the point that the whole of Goa was not a Portuguese colony for 450 years. Different talukas came under Portuguese at different in times.
Bhembre pushed back hard on Sawant’s historical narratives that Shivaji ruled parts of Goa while Portuguese were trying to colonise it and that the Maratha emperor saved people from being converted to Christianity by the Portuguese.
He refuted these claims of Sawant by backing his arguments with facts fleshed out from Pissurlenkar’s book. He emphasised the Maratha warrior king and the Portuguese shared good relations due to a common enemy and cooperated with each other on the military front.
He busted the CM’s narrative on Shivaji warding off conversion threats from Portuguese in non-Portuguese-occupied Goa. The Konkani language activist argued conversions in Goa began in 1540 – almost a century before the Maratha ruler was born in 1630.
He believes it wouldn’t have taken the Portuguese long to convert the small population of the Goa they ruled. Probably, majority of them would have been converted long before Shivaji arrived on the scene. Therefore, he concludes Shivaji would not have meddled in the conversions by the Portuguese.
The Konkani language activist argued conversions in Goa began in 1540 – almost a century before the Maratha ruler was born in 1630.
As soon as Bhembre’s video was out, Hindu right-wing organisations like Bajrang Dal and Swaraj Gomantak Sanghatana agitated against him by burning his effigy, trespassing his residence and filing police complaints to intimidate him.
They are demanding an apology from him for hurting the sentiments of Chhatrapati Shivaji admirers. The Sahitya Akademi award winner and opinion poll hero has refused to buckle down. A stage has been set for an epic showdown between brawn and intellect. Both sides are equally unrelenting.
The questions here are: Who is the keeper of history? Can a flood of emotion wash off documented history to replace it with what suits the popular narrative? Can true history be protected despite the massive tide against it?
Then, one can always adopt American industrialist Henry Ford’s attitude to history. He had famously said; “I don’t know much about history, and I wouldn’t give a nickel for all the history in the world. It means nothing to me. History is more or less bunk. It’s (a) tradition. We don’t want tradition. We want to live in the present and the only history worth a tinker’s damn is the history we make today”.
The questions here are: Who is the keeper of history? Can a flood of emotion wash off documented history to replace it with what suits the popular narrative?
But blacking out history can leave us less wise and “condemned to repeat it” (as was said by the 19th century author and philosopher George Santayana). Today, Goa – a place that always had been a thriving port and centre of trade and commerce – is faced with a moral dilemma of whether to ignore the historical crinkle (caused by distortion of history) in the time-bubble or smoothen it at any cost.
What the tiny State, which has seen many historically tumultuous times, decides today will chart its future course.
