AUTHORITARIANISM AND MAKING OF COUNTERDISCOURSE IN COLONIAL GOA

By using the concepts such as power, discourse, and «reverse» (counter) discourse, this paper contextualises colonial discourse and nationalist counterdiscourse through a critique of the concepts – Goa Dourada and Goa Indica. A comparison of the Goan colonial scenario with Africa demonstrates similarities between the two regions. Further, the Goan scene is juxtaposed with other parts of India. It enables us to rationalize the affinity of the nationalist of Goa with Indian nationalism. The complex processes, individuals, groups involved in the making of the counterdiscourse are delineated. The final part of the article analyses the emergence of discourse that countered the counterdiscourse, thus showing that a discourse is bound to be challenged by a counterdiscourse.


Introduction
Michael Foucault has been a premier figure who provided the scholars with concepts such as power, discourse and counterdiscourse. He identifies the transitional nature of power and discourse. Power is a relative concept that has no identity without the existence of a few constituents. Power involves the relationship between the dominant and subordinate groups. The colonial authority is the dominant group while the colonial subjects are the subordinate groups. Discourse is the mode of power's representation. It is not necessarily a conscious and deliberate act, even though one finds a set pattern when subjected to evaluation at a later period. The dominant ideology always evokes a response from the subordinate class (Taylor 2014: 3). In other words, power and discourse lead to counterdiscourse. Colonial ideology, which represents power and discourse, is not necessarily a permanent phenomenon. Counterdiscourse is also transient as it is likely to evoke a reaction in the form of its critique. This is a situation found in not only Goa but also other parts of India. However, as Foucault says that one need not attach negativity to discourse. It has indirectly assisted the emergence of counterdiscourse. This is because in the absence of discourse, there is no counterdiscourse (Taylor 2014:3). Consequently, nationalism is considered as a reaction to colonialism. In the absence of the former, the latter would not emerge. The transition from discourse to counterdiscourse is a natural and gradual phenomenon. However, it is important to document this transition from one form of power to the other. The emergence of a new discourse further leads to its critique in the form of counterdiscourse (Feder 2014: 64). In other words, colonialism has resulted in nationalism. The latter has resulted in its critique represented by postcolonial history that questions a few aspects of nationalist ideology. However, the present paper is concerned with the manifestation of power in the form of discourse and counterdiscourse in the colonial period.
The present paper is concerned with the response of dominant Goan intellectuals to the policies of the Salazar era. In response to the Portuguese strategy of assimilation, the Goan intellectuals attempted to create an Indian identity in Goa. Without responding to the dominant colonial discourse, the subordinate groups could not have graduated to the new discourse of writing and rewriting history. At the same time, historians did not write a history of the subalterns. One also needs to note that this was the trend found in not only Goa but also other parts of India. In India, during the postcolonial period, there has been considerable interest in the history of subalterns. Indeed the subaltern school of thought emerged in the postcolonial period. The transition from one discourse to the other is not a new development found only in Goa. It is a phenomenon found in other parts of India and Africa.

Making of colonial power and discourse
This paper is related to the creation of a discourse in the Salazar era when the colonial authoritarianism assumed diverse forms, conspicuously due to a few internal and external developments. For example, during the world war era, the Salazar dictatorship reached a new height due to its association with the Nazi and Fascist regimes. The reversal in the war compelled the colonial authority to soften its stance towards the subjects. The colonial state advertised its humanitarian face, by agreeing in principle to share power and authority with the subjects. The Portuguese rule was presented as assimilative and civilizing, as found in the concept of Lusotropicalism (Fine 2007: 7).
The Portuguese authorities used the concept of Lusotropicalism to create a cultural device to control the subject population. Thereby, the Portuguese had created a distinct composite culture not found in other parts of India. It justifies the claim of the Portuguese over Goa as its domain. The assertion of the cordial relationship between the ruler and the ruled has the function of justification of the colonial rule. Thus, for Salazar, the Portuguese rule has been beneficial to the subjects, who should not consider themselves as unequal with other Portuguese citizens. The Portuguese, in this way, are the advocates of equality, liberty, and democracy.
Salazar justified the colonial rule, which played an important role in the making of modern Goa (Salazar 1956). The Portuguese played a role in the civilizing mission through Christianization and westernization particularly of what is termed the Old Conquest Region, the Goan territory conquered mostly in the 16 th century, which is differentiated from the New Conquest Region that was inducted into the Portuguese empire in India in the 18 th century. The Old Conquest Region has a majority Christian population while the opposite is the case with the New Conquest Region. By the early decades of the 20 th century, Portuguese ruled a Hindu majority state, yet claiming to rule through Lusotropicalism. As argued by Perez an important function of Lusotropicalism was the creation of a mythical image of a region where there was no antagonism between the colonizer and the colonized (Perez 2011: 98).
Salazar attempted to justify and legitimize his rule by claiming that he allowed representation to the Goans in Portuguese democratic institutions. Goa, according to him, became a part of the Lusophone world. Lusitanisation of Goa led to the creation of an ideal state for the Goans. He claimed that in return for the meager income of around 700,000 escudos that the Portuguese obtained from Goa, the Portuguese central government spent 70 million escudos (E.B. 1954: 389). He also used history to good effect to make the argument that Goa was part of Portugal when he made the statement: In a maze of feudal-type sovereignties among which Hindustan was divided, rivalry and strife among the small kingdoms and family disputes for the succession were constant. In fact, in Goa, the Portuguese were the allies of the Hindus against the Mohammedans whose dominion and acts of oppression weighed heavily on local populations eager for liberation from their yoke. .. No restrictions were imposed on local life and local institutions: these were such as existed, and they were left to their natural evolution, influenced, of course, by the presence of the Christian and socially more advanced West (Salazar 1956: 419).
One can note a few assumptions implicit in this statement. First, disorder and chaos were rampant in Goa and India. Hindus needed Portuguese interference to obtain liberation from the Muslims. Second, he considered the East as inferior and the West as superior. The statement also emphasized the superiority of Christianity. Salazar, through his writings, attempted to legitimize the Portuguese control over Goa.
The Portuguese, who ruled Goa, for more than 400 years, have been responsible for its transformation from an uncivilized region that was fraught with feudalism and anarchy by order and modernity. Consequently, Salazar is reluctant to leave Goa even after the British and the French had vacated their Indian provinces. This reluctance is demonstrated in the creation of the colonial discourse, which would evoke a response in the form of nationalist discourse.
The manifestation of colonial power and discourse is theorized through the concept of Goa Dourada or Golden Goa. Originally conceptualized by Iffeka (1985), it was later analyzed by Rosa Maria Perez and others. As argued by Perez Goa Dourada was idealised as a harmonious society without remarkable fractures or ruptures between individuals and groups, a society that had been converted to the egalitarian values of Christianity, which were, in theory, incompatible with the social stigmas of the Indian caste system. However, the Goan society was always structured along the caste… (Perez 2011:31).
Thus, the Portuguese attempted to argue that an important component of Goa Dourada was Christianization with no emphasis on the caste system, which was seen in both Old Conquest and New Conquest regions. However, as convincingly argued by Perez, caste has been an important factor that determined the relationship between individuals in Goa (Perez 2011: 31). According to her, Goa Dourada also comprised the deliberate creation of a visual image of the colonial rule in the form of grand urban constructions such as houses, palaces, and churches. Notably, such visual imagery is found mostly in the Old Conquest region while the Hindu dominated New Conquest region is bereft of this manifestation of Goa Dourada. Alves (2000) argues that «That racial harmony predominated in Goa according to sixteenth century official Portuguese narratives demonstrates the underlying attempt of the Crown and its writers to convey their nation's superiority to their subjects…». (Alves 2000: 152). One may note that racial harmony was an important part of the Goa Dourada concept.
For Alexander Henn, the concept Goa Dourada represented a glorification of a cosmopolitan and prosperous city, Cidade de Goa. In addition, according to him, «The adoption of Portuguese language, Portuguese dress and food habits, and Portuguese styles of architecture, music, arts, and sports by the upper-caste converts gave Goa distinctly European features» (Henn 2014: 1-2). However, he differentiated between the «Christian» Old Conquest Region and «Hindu» New Conquest territory of Goa.
There has been a considerable discussion regarding the concept of Goa Dourada. It has been suggested variously as a myth, a concept that was developed to project a positive picture of Goa under the colonial rule despite its inability to compete with other colonial powers such as the British in Asia (Newman 2001: 91). However, the 19 th century and more specifically 20 th century were the periods of decline of the Portuguese colonial authority. It needed justification and legitimation of its power over the colony (Pinto 2007: 49). Marcelo Assunção argues that the concept of Goa Dourada was created with the specific purpose of defending the colonial regime against the Goan elites who attacked the colonial state for its failures. Such a myth was also deemed necessary due to the attack on Portuguese colonialism by the African and Asian nations that pressured the Portuguese to grant independence to its colonies (Assunção 2020: 77).
The colonial discourse exemplified in the form of creating visual imagery of churches and buildings, which gave eternal European or Portuguese character to Goa despite the fact that the nations are not made by buildings but by humans who reside there. Conscious or not so conscious ignorance regarding the caste-based social institutions is another feature of the colonial discourse. This ideology is also exhibited in the form of historical writing. Generally, the Portuguese ignored the construction of the history of Goa, which was left to the Goan nationalist intellectuals, who, in the process of creating a counterdiscourse, attempted to create a history of Goa and related the same with the history of India. However, one may note that discourse and counterdiscourse lived together, even though not harmoniously, and they competed with each other, which explains the contrasting nature of their argumentation and articulation of their respective ideology.
The Goan intellectuals encountered the dichotomy of dealing with Iberian and Indian intellectual traditions. Even though they were educated and trained in the Iberian method of knowledge production, they could not ignore the intellectual tradition of British India. This dilemma has been presented by Rochelle Pinto as «Between Empires» (Pinto 2007). Portuguese and the British are termed as direct and indirect colonizers. It shows the indirect influence of British colonialism on the Goan mind. In the nineteenth century, attempts were made to revive the past glory of Portuguese colonialism, which had failed the Goan elites when compared with the British. In the twentieth century, British India was the only hope for Goan intellectuals (Pinto 2007: 23). By leaning towards British India, the Goan intellectuals created a counterdiscourse and thus resisted the colonial discourse.
We may note that the Portuguese colonial empire, particularly in Africa, faced challenges from the British in the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries, leading to a revolution in Portugal and it contributed to political, social, and economic changes in Portugal (Almeida and E Sousa, 2006: 10). It was expected that the Portuguese would adopt a liberal attitude towards its subjects in the colonies. However, the rise of nationalism in Portugal inspired the Portuguese leaders to enhance their grip over the colonies. In 1910, there was the emergence of the republican constitution, which created considerable hope for the Hindus as the colonial masters promised them the religious freedom denied to them for several centuries. However, a major development was the emergence of Salazar rule in 1926 and the passing of the Colonial Act, which also represented the colonial discourse. The Act continued to harp on civilizing mission and protection of the life of the indigenous population (da Cruz and Furtado 2017: 117). The Colonial Act of the 1930s clearly defined Goa as a colony, thereby clarifying the stand of the Portuguese towards Goa. In the 1950s, however, the Portuguese changed their stance towards Goa, presumably due to the international pressure to give freedom to Goa. Now, Goa was considered an overseas province. This new legislation provided legal justification to the Portuguese for continued rule over Goa and rejection of the demand of India to liberate Goa and merge it with the Indian Union (da Cruz and Furtado 2017: 117).
This article will place its argument in the background of the historical and historiographical developments found in Goa and other parts of India. The colonial documents had a particular purpose to perform. Based on this argument, one needs to evaluate these documents, as they cannot be considered as representing reality.

Goa and Africa: experiments in discourse and counterdiscourse
Goa, other parts of India, and Africa experienced colonialism and responded to the colonial discourse. Africa, like Goa, experienced the emergence of colonial discourse and counterdiscourse. However, the latter was also found wanting in the postcolonial period, due to its limitations, particularly because it was suited to the colonial period and not to the post-liberation era. Such a trend is also noticeable in Goa. In Africa, the Portuguese utilized various strategies to 'assimilate' and 'civilize' the colonial subjects. Unlike, British and the French, the Portuguese attempted to give space to the colonial subjects, at least, theoretically in the decisionmaking process, as the subjects were regarded as part the colonial 'cultural polity' (Madeira 2005: 31). At the same time, Kamalu (2019) noticed a few differences between British and Portuguese colonialism. The British followed a policy of indirect rule by gradually allowing self-rule in Africa. On the other hand, the Portuguese followed a policy of «assimilation» and «paternalism» and ruled Africans directly. The Portuguese could not compete with other colonial powers such as the British. To hide its failures, the Portuguese claimed to assimilate and civilize the masses and thus justified its rule in Africa (Kamalu 2019: 46). One may note similar strategy employed by the Portuguese in Goa. Such a strategy was expected as the Portuguese had colonies in Asia and Africa.
Eurocentrism has been a dominant theme found in the construction of the African history and culture by non-Africans including the westerners and Arabs. Such a construction led to the creation of the African, who was backward and uncivilized (Barbosa, 2008). Evidence of Eurocentrism is found in the case of Goa. This is seen particularly in the process of construction of the history of the region by the Portuguese. The colonial authorities attempted to create a version of their history to legitimize their rule in Goa and other colonies. History writing, in this sense, becomes part of the colonial project (Alves 2000: 152). The Goan intellectuals who opposed the Portuguese colonial rule countered it later with the writing of counter-history that presented a critique of Portuguese colonialism.
The western powers that established an authoritarian and despotic rule argued that the colonized were uncivilized as they were backward and lacked historical sense. As these regions were backward, the colonial power justified its domination of the subject population (Chimee 2018). The Africans, during the initial years of colonization could not counter the European construct of their culture and civilization. However, a few elite Africans obtained an opportunity to study world history in European universities (Xavier and Santos 2007: 17). This experience enabled them to obtain the skills of historical research. They applied the same in the case of African history. They demonstrated that Africa possessed a rich historical legacy before the Europeans conquered them. In the process of reconstructing their past, African historians studied its remote past and studied its relationship with Greeks and Romans (Chimee 2018;Vansina 1993).
A few dominant trends found in Indian and African colonial historiography can be summarised through the following quotation: The nationalism focused on a vigorous defense of Africa's past as well as a commitment to the concept of nation-state constructed along European lines, but with borrowing from indigenous institutions. African thinkers and scholars turned to the past to define African identity in a colonized and postcolonial world. They resented the slave trade, European domination and imperialism, and they believed that the glories of the African past would disprove the negative images. Histories, tales, ceremonies, and religion, sometimes presented in idealistic ways, constitute the knowledge of counterdiscourse (Falola 2002: 210).
Marcelo Assunção finds similarities between Goa and Africa in terms of constructing discourse and counterdiscourse and a divergent trend of presenting the history of the subalterns in the postcolonial historiography (Assunção 2020: 86). In Goa, during the initial years of its colonial rule, no comprehensive history of Goa and India was composed. Most of the Portuguese scholars concentrated on the history of the Portuguese conquest of Asia while mostly ignoring the history of the vanquished region. A major change in this trend could be seen in the nineteenth century when Filippe Nery Xavier began to study the history of Goa (Xavier 1903). In the twentieth century, there was the emergence of Goan intellectuals who obtained education in western historical knowledge. They began to search for the history of India including Goa. Consequently, there was a process of Indianisation of Goa as there was Africanisation of African history, as they fought against the Eurocentric approach to their history. Menezes Braganza, for example, demanded the inclusion of the history of ancient India including Vedas in the school curriculum (De Lima 2010: 73-4).
Like the Africans, the Goan and Indian historians attempted to create a counterdiscourse. The fact that there were westernization and Lusitanisation did not help the cause of the colonial masters as the colonized people identified themselves with the ethnic Goans and Indians rather than their conquerors. The colonial authoritarianism resulted in the creation of historical literature concerning the pre-modern institutions. In the case of Goan scholars, it took the form of writing about Hinduism in ancient India and the village communities of Goa, which continued to exist to the present.
The past, thus retrieved in Africa, nevertheless, was neither perfect nor did it appeal to the imagination of the masses. In the postcolonial phase, a new form of history was written. Barbosa (2012) analyzed the UNESCO project, which aimed to reconstruct the general history of Africa by dealing with the themes that were ignored in the colonial period. It shows the limitations in the colonialist and nationalist historiography that attempted to picture the history of dominant elites as the history of Africa. The project also aimed to preserve the primary documents in the form of oral records that could provide a new perspective concerning the history of people in this region (Barbosa 2012: 196). Thus, an attempt was made to reconstruct the history of Africa with an analysis regarding the inter-African relationship by using the oral sources, and thus present the information regarding the ideas that represented the African civilization (Barbosa 2012: 203). The attempt of this work was to present the history of Africa from the indigenous African perspective instead of western orientation, a feature that was noted in the colonial history of Africa. It is also clear that even the nationalist phase of African history could not do justice to people's history, as there was the presentation of the history of dominant elites rather than history from the below. In the postcolonial period, we can note a similar trend developing in Goa, as scholars have used oral history to study the history of this region, and thus moving away from the archival sources for constructing the Goan identity (Frenz 2014;Mendes 2020).

Making of counterdiscourse in Goa
Counterdiscourse should be placed in relation to the discourse created by the Portuguese earlier. Goa Dourada was part of the colonial discourse. A few Goan historians responded by working in the nationalist framework named Goa Indica. As Goa Dourada has been critiqued, Goa Indica is also subjected to considerable criticism, as it is not possible to consider Goa Indica as the only mode of expression of Goan identity. It is not possible to consider the two discourses as subsisting in different eras. Indeed, both were contemporary to each other, responding to the other discourse. In this sense, discourse and counterdiscourse are related to each other. One also cannot discard one concept for the other. However, in the 20 th century, Goa Indica became more visible in the discourse presented by Goan nationalist leaders. Interestingly, Goa Indica was not an exclusive space of the Hindus or the Catholics were excluded from it. Filipe Nery Xavier, Gerson da Cunha, and many others in the 19 th century, AB Braganza Pereira, Menezes Braganza, and Tristao Braganza Cunha, and many others in the 20 th century have shown interest in the study of the Hindu past of Goa and India, along with the Hindu scholars such as Panduranga Pissurlencar -these scholars can be placed within the perspective of Goa Indica.
For one thing, there are various reasons for the Goan Catholics showing interest in Hindu history. It has been suggested that one reason for this development was the close relationship that emerged between Portuguese and British Indian empires (Pinto 2007: 49). It is true that they could not be compared. However, the Goan elites experienced a sense of deprivation when they noted that the British Indian elites could enhance their social and economic privileges through the success of British colonialism. However, by the 19 th and 20 th centuries, it was clear that, despite the claims of the Portuguese to the contrary, the Portuguese state had failed when compared with British colonialism. Consequently, Goans had the dilemma of dealing with two empires. Indeed, after signing a treaty with the British, there was Anglicisation of Goa. It led to the migration of large numbers of Goans to the British provinces such as Mumbai, Dharwar and Mangalore. The Portuguese also differentiated between the Catholics and Hindus. While the Catholics were allowed to obtain education and administrative positions, the Hindus could not obtain administrative positions (Couto 2005: 211). However, the Hindus were allowed to dominate the commercial field as most of the Gauda Saraswat Brahmanas acted as traders. The Catholic elites, on the other hand, possessed property and many other privileges. This differentiation between Hindus and Catholics could be seen particularly in the Old Conquest region and until 1910. In the 19 th century, the Catholic elites assumed the responsibility of constructing a counterdiscourse, as they attempted to establish a state free from Portuguese interference.
Caste played an important part in the making of counterdiscourse in Goa and it displayed a few features unique to Goa. The Catholics in Goa continued to remember their caste affiliation after the conversion. Thus, the elites were segregated into Brahmans and Chardos. The first category belonged to the priestly class while the latter claimed to belong to a warlike group such as the Kshatriyas. It is also possible that Chardos were affiliated with the Marathas who settled in Goa as warriors. Nevertheless, in the 19 th century, there was a conflict between Brahmanas and Chardos in supporting and countering government policies and strategies. It is exemplified in the conflict between Partido Indiano comprising Chardos that opposed Partido Ultramarino, a Brahmanical faction that supported the government. The conflict culminated in a revolt against the colonial rule, which was compelled to concede a few demands of the revolting faction (de Cruz and Furtado 2011: 74). Maria Aurora Couto shows that the founders of the newspapers O Ultromar and A India Portuguesa fought a caste-based war, opposing other's political views and working to dominate the Goan political space (Couto 2005: 340). The leaders did exhibit anti-colonial ideology but aimed to compete with the other Goan elite. Rochelle Pinto also noted the conflict between the Brahmana and Chardo leaders that culminated in the creation of counterdiscourse in colonial Goa (Pinto 2007: 46). That the Chardos expressed their aspiration to fight against Brahmanical domination in church and other public spaces is revealed by the conflict between the editors of A India Portuguesa and O Ultramaro. Jose Inacio de Loyola, the editor of A India Portuguesa complained that the editor of O Ultramaro criticized the Portuguese policies despite obtaining some concessions from the Portuguese regime. It was an attempt to compete with the other elite. In the process, different factions either supported or rejected the Portuguese rule (Pinto 2007: 46). Finally, Menezes Braganza and Tristao Braganza Cunha firmly established the domination of the Chardos, as against the Brahmanas, in Goan politics when they emerged as the premier critiques of the colonial rule particularly in the Salazar era. The relationship between the Portuguese, Goan Catholic Brahmanas, and Chardos led to the formation of a complex and multilayered counterdiscourse, which evolved over a long period of the Portuguese rule of Goa. The Chardos, who opposed the Brahmanical version of Goan history in the 19 th century, legitimized the same by working within the concept of Goa Indica. However, the Salazar regime, with progressive restrictions imposed on the nationalists of Goa, also contributed to this development as the Goan leaders were alienated from the leaders who propagated Goa Dourada.
Alexander Henn (2005) used the concept of syncretism to explain the reasons for Catholics adopting Hindu history and accommodating Hindu cultural practices. Religious places were the meeting ground for the Hindus and Catholics in Goa. Generally, it is found Catholics visiting Hindu cult centers and Hindus visiting Catholic institutions. Henn (2005: 84) also identifies a gradual increase in the Hindu population in Goa. Today, Hindus constitute a majority population, participating in large numbers of rituals associated with the dominant and subaltern cults of Hinduism. The increased Hindu population is also due to the reverse migration of the Goans who had migrated to other parts of India due to the restrictive policies of the Portuguese. At the same time, one may note that the population of Catholics, as a part of the Goan population, had declined due to their migration to Mumbai and other parts of India. The elites -Hindu and Catholics -used the Hindu or traditional idioms to appeal to the dominant Hindu population (Henn 2005: 84).
The Republican rule in the early 20 th century created hope to the Goan Hindus who resided in other parts of India and they returned to Goa in large numbers (Henn 2005: 83). Goa Indica, a study of the history of pre-Portuguese history of Goa, the ancient history of India, and a history of British India, also influenced the Catholic elites. Newman has articulated the fact that Goans, irrespective of their religions, had a common history as they experienced the transformation of the Goan society from 1510 (Newman 1999: 37). Moreover, it would be difficult to place the Goan traditional institutions such as gaonkari or communidades and Goan folk culture within the concept of Goa Dourada.
At the same time, the elites who participated in the process of making counterdiscourse, that challenged the Portuguese colonial discourse, did not belong to a homogeneous group and they did not necessarily have a single purpose. A few of them were more interested in some concessions to their community rather than complete independence from the Portuguese rule (Pinto 2007: 81).
Over a period, there was a transformation in the relationship between the colonial and nationalist elites, leading to the emergence of different discourses as outlined above. As suggested by Henn recently that along with cooperation between Hindu and Catholic elites, there was an emergence of competition between them, both in religious and nonreligious domains. He qualifies this argument by referring to the image wars, as the Hindus and Catholics installed the Hindu and Catholic images in the villages and side of the roads to attract the attention of the Goan population. At the same time, there was no violent rupture between the two groups. They were competing to dominate the Goan social space (Henn 2014: 57). This analysis is useful to understand the making of counterdiscourse and the use of history by the elites. By discussing the pre-colonial history of Goa and India, the author/s of counterdiscourse could challenge the image of Goa Dourada and Lusotropicalism.
According to Marcelo Assunção in the postcolonial period, there was the replacement of Lusocentric history by Indocentric history. The latter had the function of analyzing the colonial rule and compared it with the pre-colonial period and documented the anti-colonial resistance (Assunção 2020: 78). By writing a history different from the Portuguese version, the nationalist scholars attempted to create a new image of Goa.
Axelrod and Fuerch argue that the syncretism between Hindus and Catholics of Goa represents a form of resistance by the subaltern groups against colonial domination. Resistance, for them, took different forms. Syncretism, for them, also exhibits the failure of the colonial policy. The Hindu and Catholic participation in rituals, for Axelrod and Fuerch, represents the endeavour of the Goans to maintain Goan identity as against the Portuguese attempt to create an image of the Goan distinct from Indians from other parts of India (Axelrod and Fuerch 1996: 393). However, they consider the Hindu and Catholic elites as subalterns and ignore the role of actual subalterns in the struggle against colonial rule (Parobo 2020: 1).
History writing, one can suggest, is a form of resistance. One should place historical and quasi-historical writings in the context of the debate between Goa Dourada and Goa Indica. The earlier group projected a version of history that defended the Portuguese colonial rule. The scholars representing Goa Indica contradicted such an attempt. There were a few factors that contributed to the interest exhibited by Hindus and some Catholics of Goa in the primordial past. One reason was the beginning of western education in Goa, like in other colonies, that provided an opportunity to the Hindu and Catholic elites to obtain knowledge about various fields including the history of Goa, India, and the world (Coutinho 1975). It contributed the development of the scholars such as Adeotado Baretto who wrote about the contribution of premodern Indians to world civilization. He worked from the perspective of Goa Indica. Baretto and others also benefited from the introduction and expansion of printing technology in Goa (Lobo 2009: 234). In the 19 th and 20 th centuries, it led to the rise of the periodical press. According to Sandra Lobo, Baretto contributed to the creation of a counterdisourse and thus challenged the Portuguese authoritarian rule (Lobo 2009: 234).
In the process, they created a distinct version of Goa's past, which discussed the pre-Portuguese origins of Goan history. Both Brahmana and Chardo historians participated in this movement. In the 20 th century, the Chardo leaders such as Menezes Braganza and Tristao Braganza Cunha played a leading role in the creation of nationalist discourse. Among them, Braganza Cunha propounded the thesis of denationalisation of Goans, which exhibited the liking of this scholar for the Goa Indica School (Desai 2000: 470). It also signaled the transition of Goan intellectual leadership from Brahmanas to Chardos in the 20th century. Like African and Indian nationalist historians, the Goan counterparts also discussed the history of India and Goa. It also showed their acceptance of the fact that they belonged to two empires. The Goan historians exploited their relationship with British India to challenge the colonial authority. While there were historians who did not exhibit political leanings directly particularly in the Salazar era, there were politicians like Menezes Braganza and Braganza Cunha who directly challenged the Portuguese colonial rule. Their discussion of the historical themes reflected an aversion to the history created by the Portuguese. Panduranga Pissurlecar did not have the pretension to the freedom struggle, but discussed the issues related to Goan and Indian history. As argued by Newman, Hindus did not have any problem in identifying themselves with India (Newman 1999: 25). Naturally, Pissurlencar, the Hindu elite, contributed to the study of India and Goa. Even though Pissurlencar was the servant of the colonial state, he critically analyzed the Portuguese policies in the 17 th and 18 th centuries. Pissurlencar generally wrote in official journals such as O Oriente Portuguez and Bulletin of the Institute Vasco da Gama (1) . In the process, consciously or not so consciously, he established a relationship between Goa and India. Such an attempt was essential to counter the Goa Dourada and Lusotropicalism concepts propounded by the colonial propaganda machinery. At the same time, the history that the Goan intellectuals attempted to create was not bereft of deficiencies, most important being its ignorance of the role of the subalterns in the making of Goan state and society.

Postcolonial developments
In the postcolonial period, there was a transformation in the counterdiscourse, as it was perceived as nationalist discourse, which was countered with reverse discourse. This transformation is found in the concept of Goa Dourada. Raghuraman argued that Goa Dourada, which represented a particular community among the Catholics in the colonial period, represented the entire Catholic community in the postcolonial period (Trichur 2007: 227). This is despite the fact that Catholic scholars such as Maria Aurora Couto continued to work within the context of nationalist discourse. It also shows that nationalist and postcolonial discourse operated simultaneously and questioned the assumption of the other. Raghuraman critiqued the concepts -Goa Dourada and Goa Indica. He understands that these concepts had particular functions to perform and they exhibit an attempt to obtain power from the other group. Based on this analysis, he suggests that Goa today does not need Goa Indica and it deserves to be replaced with Goa-centric history. He also suggests the need to evolve a new methodology to study Goan history and takes inspiration from the critical perspective provided by Kosambi (Trichur 2000: 644). In a way, he suggested the need to replicate the writing of regional and local history, a trend found in other parts of India such as Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu. At the same time, it would be problematic to dissociate Goan history from the history of India in the process of opposing Goa Indica. G.M. Moraes has shown that there was a relationship between Goa Kadambas and the Karnataka branch of the Kadambas (Moraes 1931).
In the postcolonial period, Parag Parobo raised another significant issue. It was related to the history of the lower castes. He accepted the argument that Goans had to work between two empires and that one cannot question the role of British India in making of the elite Goan mind. He also stressed that the link with British India liberated the lower castes, ignored by the Goan elites who worked in the context of colonial and nationalist discourses. However, he has rightly pointed out the lack of subaltern history in the case of Goa (Parobo 2020: 1). It also shows the emergence of the idea of subalternity, which was missed by earlier scholars. The nationalist scholars were engrossed in countering the colonial discourse and in the process ignored the role of the subalterns in making of Goan polity and society. Parobo also represents the postcolonial trend of questioning both colonial and nationalist discourses. While in the colonial period, the history of colonial elites, including the Portuguese, Goan Catholic, and Hindu elites, in the postcolonial period, there is an emphasis on the history of the indigenous groups that were ignored in the earlier discourses. Along with the study of lower caste groups, scholars also emphasize the study of women, who were ignored in the previous discourses. To fill this gap, Rosa Maria Perez analyzed the role of women freedom fighters who contributed to the building of modern Goa (Perez 2018). With the exception of Maria Aurora Couto, most of the scholars who worked in the postcolonial period have the experience of only the post-1961 period and not colonialism. Couto, in this sense, studied colonial and postcolonial developments.
Marcelo Assunção argues that in the postcolonial period, scholars have attempted to analyze Goa Dourada and Goa Indica concepts. They understand the need to locate multiple identities in colonial and postcolonial Goa (Assunção 2020: 87). Most scholars would agree that one should tolerate pluralism in the writing of the history of Goa. A challenge for the modern Goan historian would be to maintain a distinct identity and retain distance from Goa Dourada and Goa Indica paradigms. However, there is a need to evolve a methodology to achieve this goal. As suggested by Sumit Sarkar there is a need for studies in the postmodernist perspective to present a new history of the region (Sarkar 1997: 103).

Conclusion
The concepts such as «discourse» and «counterdiscourse» are effective modes of analyzing the relationship between the colonizer and the colonized. The latter encompassed a heterogeneous population comprising the Goan Hindu and Catholic elites. Counterdiscourse has been projected as a response to discourse and both continued to live simultaneously. It explains the debate between the scholars who supported either Goa Dourada or Goa Indica. The creation of counterdiscourse by the nationalists of Goa led to the emergence of alternative power zones. However, counterdiscourse is not irrefutable as we find in the case of postcolonial Goa when scholars suggested the need to study the subaltern, the voiceless in Goan historiography, who needed proper representation. At the same time, this new discourse is not likely to remain dominant for a longer period as every discourse would be challenged by a counterdiscourse. This is a natural process. Indeed, this development is not exclusive to Goa. Africa and other parts of India have experienced this development. It is important to study not only the role of subalterns in the postcolonial period but also in colonial times. This is a significant challenge for the historians of Goa.