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].