Talk:Cuncolim Massacre/Archive 1

Archive 1

Background POV

The following paragraphs in the Background Section are biased and unapologetic-ally insulting and generalising with respect to Hindu religion and seem to be written from an extremely biased one sided Catholic perspective and hence don't qualify as suitable language and assertion for a Wikipedia article. The below cited paragraphs fail to take the perspective of the Hinduism and the problem faced by the indigenous people due to the interfering and irritating nature of the missionary activities of the Portuguese priests. -

"The Portuguese in Goa and other parts of India were shocked when they learnt that the crafty minority of educated upper caste persons and Sadhu would often do magic tricks and deceits to fool the uneducated majority into following truth mixed with false myths, beliefs and superstitions(some of which are later classified under Hinduism) in order to serve the upper castes ulterior financial motives and political interests for the past thousands of years.[6] The Portuguese missions came to preach the teachings of Jesus from Asia, and to put an end to the evil motives of the upper castes who obstructed the progress of the local people. Later, as a result 5 innocent missionaries were most brutally killed, along with the 14 other local Indians who were also aware of the errors propagated by the Brahmins. However, force was later used, and in 1567 a campaign was launched in Bardez in North Goa resulting in the destruction of 300 temples. Enacting laws, prohibition was laid from 4 December 1567 on Hindu rituals and which required all persons above 15 years of age to listen to Christian preaching, failing which they were punished. In 1583 Hindu temples at Assolna and Cuncolim were destroyed through army action.[7]"

and also the following text - "The Portuguese chronicler Diogo do Couto described Cuncolim as "The leader of rebellions" and its people as "The worst of all villages of Salcete".[14] Jesuit priest Valignani described Cuncolim as 'rigid and obstinate' in its adherence to idolatory.[10]"

Disagree. The two accounts (Diogo do Couto, Alessandro Valignano) are relevant to this article because they are contemporary accounts about how Cuncolim was perceived by European observers.

Untitled

Can this orphan article be connected to the sequence / list of articles on Goa's history? Kalpak (talk) 09:20, 24 April 2021 (UTC)Kalpak

The Title and POV

I have renamed this article from the extremely POV title of 'Martyrs of Cuncolim' to what the incident is commonly referred to outside of Church circles: 'Cuncolim Revolt'. However, I am concerned that this may also be a POV title as the actual incident involved the massacre of several unarmed clergymen and civilians by armed members of a warrior caste. I am seriously considering renaming this to 'Cuncolim Massacre', but am unable to find any reference to the incident as such. Another more or less non-incendiary title would be something as mild as 'Cuncolim Incident'.

On a completely different, but parallel note I am very concerned that the historical version of a massacre of unarmed civilians was created by the Portuguese to bolster support for the inquisition in Goa. There are claims from modern day desecendants of the Gauncars that the conflict was not entirely one sided. Their stand is that the priests did not venture (as the Church would have us believe) into a hostile village of warriors accompanied by civilians one of whom was armed with a gun, and that the conflict involved a Portuguese armed escort which inflicted casualties on the assailants. If anyone has any sources to support this story, please help us out. Tigerassault (talk) 14:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

the conflict has evidently generated its own opposed historiographies, and the page needs to deal with this by contextualising as much as possible. Thanks for the work you've put into expanding this! At the moment there still seems some structural problem in the way the different perspectives are juxtasposed without comment.Dsp13 (talk) 01:00, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Cuncolim gauncars keep making excuses because they refuse to accept that their ancestors killed unarmed people, including other Goans. Goa Inquisition started in 1560, this massacre was in 1583 (more than 20 years later). The Jesuits didn't have an armed escort because their group leader Rodolfo Acquaviva wasn't expecting an armed mob. He had arrived in Goa from Akbar's court, where religious differences were discussed in a civil manner. (Before visiting Akbar's court, he had been a teacher in St. Paul's College in Old Goa, a peaceful academic environment.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:3A80:CB2:7CB1:6FCC:D469:CC5:D566 (talk) 04:53, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

The numbers involved also don't support the attempts of various parties since the last century to revise the massacre into a "revolt against foreign occupation". Hindus were already a minority in Goa by the 1580s due to native conversions, and 70% of those killed during the Cuncolim massacre were Goan Catholics. (One Hindu man of Cuncolim even murdered his own converted nephew.) All contemporary records also show that the only armed person in the group of Christians was the Portuguese layman (Gonçalo Rodrigues had one revolver that wasn't fired, because Acquaviva told him not to), whereas the Kshatriya opponents were armed with blade weapons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:3A80:C86:4C23:6971:FC3C:B2EC:BB37 (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2021 (UTC)