The Ranes of
Goan Folklore
Teotonio R. de Souza
This brave article
appeared in the magazine Goa Today 1987 after being rejected by a Goa
University publication on Goa's freedom struggle
[TGF
foreword: This article sets out on a difficult route to disprove the
Rajputness of the Ranes of Goa. A much easier route available now is one
of genetics. With modern DNA testing available, it should be quite easy to
determine fact from mere folklore.
Dr.
Teotonio de Souza might find DNA studies contradicting his "Rane Rajput myth" hypothesis.
TGF
however is impressed by the breadth the article offers relative to the
plight of the Goans who lived under the Ranes.
There is
serious merit in studying the Buddhist claim that the Rajputs (descendants
of the invading Huns from the Ghengiz Khan clan) were used by the Hindu
Brahmins to destroy the Buddhist hold on power. (The anti-Brahmin
Buddhists once held sway over the entire Indian subcontinent) Questions
are also being asked relative to possible Brahmin-Muslim
collaboration against the Buddhists. After all, the Buddhists were also in
Afghanistan!. The fact that there was Hindu-Portuguese collaboration
against the Muslims of South India, is well known.
It gives
further meaning to the adage that "Politics and the Struggle for Power,
make strange bed fellows" ]
THIS
ARTICLE formed the crux of a research paper that was to be
originally included in a Goa University publication on Goa's freedom
struggle. The paper was deemed improper and was
unceremoniously rejected at the time when historians
subservient to ruling political interests were only interested in
paying floral tributes to Goa's freedom struggle, or whatever they chose
to understand by that.
Unfortunately, even the institution that is meant to set the tone for our
intellectual life, including historical research, joined the chorus with 'Goa
Wins Freedom': This is the state of intellectual subservience and poverty
twenty-five years after our liberation! And there are all the indications
in our country that this tendency is on the rise.
The
following exercise is what some modern scholars engaged in "subaltern
studies" call historical 'deconstruction'. Our post-liberation
historiography should not uncritically replace one elitist approach by
another if political change in Goa is to serve truly democratic goals. We
have an opportunity to put the "subaltern" or subordinate classes at the
centre stage of our historical inquiry. Deconstruction in this context, is
only a tool of analysis that seeks to attack and break down the existing
elitist paradigms. It is not a nihilistic exercise, but a prolonged
critical exercise to clear off the rubbish and prepare the ground for a
sound alternative construction in the scheme of post-liberation
historiography of Goa. What has been done here is to apply deconstruction
analysis to one historical episode, namely the Rane myth in Goa's freedom
struggle. Similar exercise will need to be extended to wider areas of
Goa's history.
Truth is
said to be stranger than fiction. The role attributed to the Ranes in
Goa's freedom struggle is one illustration of this old dictum.
Folklore and more recent political developments seem to have conspired to
elevate the so-called 'Rajputs' of Satari to unquestioned honours as Goa's
freedom fighters. Folklorising and political myth-making had its reasons
and validity as means to sustain anti-colonial campaign. But twenty-five
years after liberation we should be able to put aside political
emotionalism and let historical criticism have its say.
How good is
the Rane claim for Rajput origin? An anthropological study conducted by
Dr. Germano de Silva Correia took the tradition of Rajput origin for
granted, but the application of field techniques does not seem to have
enabled him to confirm it decisively. He concluded saying that "their
ethnic origin remains an anthropological problem to be solved" (Les
Ranes de Satary, 1928:29). In the absence of further evidence,
it remains to be proved that the Ranes of Satari differ essentially from
the Marathas of the Deccan.
The origin
of the Rajputs is a red herring that has been much dragged about in the
historical writings on early medieval and medieval India. One can observe
an extreme polarity of opinions which extends in range from attempts to
trace the Rajputs to foreign immigrant stocks of the post-Gupta period, to
contrived justifications for viewing the Rajputs as of pure kshatriya
origin. The question of the indigenous origin of the Rajputs assumed
symbolic overtones in the heyday of nationalist historiography and in the
historical and purely literary writings of various genres, the military
and chivalrous qualities of the Rajputs were repeatedly projected. All
such writings tended to suggest that the Rajputs rose to prominence in the
process of resisting foreign invasions and that they shouldered willingly
the kshatriya duty of fighting for the land as well as for its
people and culture.
Even in
detailed studies of Rajasthan, the origin of the Rajputs in the early
medieval period is far from settled and much less examined. There were
widespread claims in the early medieval period to the traditional
kshatriya status. Such claims were attempts to get away from, rather
than reveal, the original ancestry. It was a process in which new social
groups sought various symbols for the legitimization of their newly gained
power. The case of the Ranes of Satari can be taken to illustrate a
similar process of mobility to kshatriya status in this part of
western India.
While
elsewhere in the New Conquests the traditional village community set-up
suffered some destruction under their Dessais, the village communities of
Satari ceased to exist as a result of the recurring feuds among the Ranes
themselves and their attempts to assert their own feudal control and
relative independence. This is a very important historical background to
be taken into consideration while critically assessing the so-called
contribution of the Ranes to Goa's freedom struggle. Freedom, as we now
tend to understand it, seems to have been the last thing the Ranes aspired
to.
In
a taluka that is blessed with abundant natural resources, its own
ganvkars inhabiting its original seventy or so villages were reduced
to misery and beggary. Even the traditional Dessais and Nadkarnis were
marginalised by the Sardesai Ranes who established their mokasas
all over the fertile and cultivable low-lying western region of the taluka
and extended their administrative and fiscal control over the rest
of the taluka. The armed force of the Ranes was assisted in this task
by their Brahmin Dubhashis. The Ranes also patronised hordes of Bhats
who descended from across the ghats into Satari to perform their religious
role of preaching the oppressed local population into submission to their
new overloads, smoothening thereby the mechanism of violence and reducing
the administrative costs. The Bhats were generously rewarded with many
deussuns
and areca groves. The Bhats grew in numbers
and wealth just as the native
ganvkars decreased in numbers and
increased in misery. All that was left for them were places of worship and
beliefs about the nobility of the Ranes.
We do
not have much documentary evidence that could throw light upon the efforts
of the Satari ganvkars
and their traditional leaders to resist the
oppression of the Ranes until the time when the region came under the
Portuguese jurisdiction. As in the case of most subaltern classes they
were hardly in a position to produce records of their protest. But we do
have, for instance, a long representation submitted by a dozen
ganvkars
of various villages of Satari to the
Portuguese Governor of Coa, D. Manuel da Camara in April 1824. The
document listed the grievances of the villagers against the Ranes and
their "tyrannical yoke" which had obliged many to seek refuge in the
Portuguese territory and beyond the ghats. They were pleading with the
Portuguese Government to protect them by taking direct charge of the
villages of Satari and their revenue administration. It is very probable
that this representation was inspired and drafted by the Nadkarnis of
Sanklli. While these Nadkarnis pretended concern for the plight of the
village ganvkars
they were actually interested in
regaining their own lost traditional control. With their proverbial
skill to manipulate accounts and property records, in the 1830s the
Nadkarnis of Sanklli nearly succeeded in settling old scores with the
Ranes. Some details of this case could better help understand the
complexity of interests in conflict and to realize that the Ranes did not
represent the natives of Satari in their so-called freedom struggle.
The
Nadkarnis represented traditional village interests and kept up their own
freedom struggle against the Ranes. Obviously they were no match to
the Ranes in military skill and force, but they relentlessly pursued their
struggle with traditional chicanery and cunning. 'The Nadkarnis and
their agents had infiltrated into the Portuguese administrative ranks.
Soon after the disturbances created by the Ranes which coincided with the
political instability, caused by the liberal-constitutional struggle in
Goa (1822-1835), the Nadkarnis got round the Portuguese administration
to frame a case against the Ranes for defrauding the Portuguese
administration since 1746. In the process of fiscal inquiry entrusted
by the Portuguese government to a certain Atmaram Parab, the Nadkarnis,
Dessais and ganvkars of Satari produced 'documented' information to
prove that the Ranes had been paying revenue dues to the Sawants of Wadi
in lieu of the mokasas. Hence, in keeping with the terms of
submission to the Portuguese the Ranes ought to have paid the same dues to
the Portuguese exchequer. Obviously, the Nadkarnis would get back into the
job of administering the revenue collection and of playing
the power game that goes with it.
Luckily for
the Ranes, their defence counsel managed to checkmate the judicial
aspersions cast by the accusation of tax evasion by proving that Lakshman
Kustam Sinai Nadkarni of Sanklli had cooked up the information supplied to
Atmaram Parab and had also forged documents in Old Marathi using the seals
of the Sawants. Another Nadkarni of Sanklli, Mallapa Sinai, was also
involved. They had also roped in the official state translator (lingua
do Estado) Sakharam Narayan Vaga. His handwriting was identified in
the interpolations made on the 'Book of Peace Treaties' (Livro de Pazes)
in the Secretariat archives.
It is
apparent from the above that the Ranes had enemies from within. The
traditional landed interests were not reconciled to being subjected to the
power and ambitions of the Ranes. Any critical study of the recurring
rebellions and disturbances caused by the Ranes will have to take into
account the machinations and scheming of the Nadkarnis of Satari. What
appears often as a straight Rane-Portuguese conflict will then be seen as
a more complex situation in which the "subaltern" classes of Satari
silently, or rather subtly, participated in the contest and sought to
undermine the dominance of the Ranes.
It
was not in the interest of the Portuguese to deprive the Ranes of their
privileges in Satari because they had served as a useful
contra
force to check the adventurism of the
Marathas. Alarmed by Shivaji's attempts to extend his sway in the
Konkan, the Portuguese continued to support the turbulent Dessais of Kudal,
Pedne, Bicholim and Sanklli in resisting the territorial ambitions of the
Maratha chieftains of the Deccan. Contrary to the myth propagated by most
traditional Maratha historians that all Marathas (if not all Hindus) had
enthusiastically rallied round Shivaji's banner and his Hindavi
Swarajya, an eminent and critical Maratha historian, A R Kulkarni
tells us that "the people of the Konkan never associated themselves with
the Maratha movement launched by Shivaji. Shivaji did succeed in capturing
some parts of the Konkan but the core of Konkan which was under the Desais
and the Portuguese never came under the Maratha control."
Unfortunately, since liberation Goans are being taught their history by
teachers from outside Goa with insufficient grasp of the local ethos and
cultural background. We read in the Goa Gazetteer that "the aim
of these wars (revolts of Ranes) was to regain the lost territory and
freedom. The Ranes were supported by the common people who were eager to
sweep out the intolerant, obnoxious rule of the Portuguese." No critical
historian could state that the native population that was reduced to
serfdom by the Ranes had the option to choose whether to join them (the
Ranes) or not in their resistance to those who attempted to check their
banditry.
The
Ranes backed any neighbouring ruler (including the Portuguese) when it
suited them, and they backed out from repeatedly renewed "oaths of fealty"
to the Portuguese whenever it did not suit their interests. That the
"common people" of Satari should have "supported the Ranes" can best be
understood from the analysis of a modern and critical Maratha historian,
Prof. P. V. Ranade: "Robbing the rich for the benefit of the poor
is an instinct of all primitive rebellions. Shivaji's campaigns of
mulukhgiri into Mughal territories were campaigns of plunder
against rich emporiums and must have thrilled the hearts of the
'naked rascals'. Shivaji was shrewd enough to exploit this primitive
instinct. Thus he and his successors (applicable to Ranes) could enlist
the Maratha bargirs and shiledars in the mulukhgiri
carnpaigns on the basis of an appeal to their predatory instinct and
religious ethos."
There are
several instances of the Ranes serving the Portuguese as mercenaries in
Goa as well as far away from it in Ceylon during the 17th century. In the
18th century we find them serving the Portuguese as feudatories that were
not always reliable. But that was nothing unusual in the feudal set-up.
The doyen of Indian historians, Prof. D. D. Kosarnbi, a Goan by origin,
states in his classic book An Introduction to Indian History that,
with their depredations till the end of the last century, the Ranes were
no better than "robbers claiming feudal titles". The evidence and analysis
he provides tend to confirm such an assessment. The Ranes only sought to
preserve and enlarge their feudal privileges. Under the Portuguese
suzerainty since 1746, the clash between Portuguese colonial interests and
their own feudal interests became inevitable. That is exactly what
happened. The only option open to the Ranes was to shake off Portuguese
fiscal controls, or submit to their encroachment and eroding power at the
expense of their own feudal claims.
Faced with
the above alternatives the Ranes tried solutions of despair. They were
ill-matched to face the superior organizational and military powers of the
Portuguese. This was true despite the apparent inability of the Portuguese
to quell the rebellions without compromises and grants of amnesty. The
Rane Revolts coincided with a very disturbed political period in Goa. A
time arrived when new and powerful economic interests which had entered
Satari finally crushed their ambitions: over 26,000 acres of land were
taken over on long leases by industrial interests for large-scale
plantations. Some of these planters were British and American citizens. In
the wake of the establishment of the railroad by the British in and around
Goa, the timber wealth of Satari attracted exploiters. An increasing
administrative cooperation and coordination between Goa and British India
made it increasingly difficult for the Ranes to carry on their traditional
game of hit-and-run.
The revolts
of the Ranes were woven into a myth of freedom struggle and even provided
themes for Konkani folk songs as a result of the growing political
discontent among the native intelligentsia of the Old Conquests of Goa.
The Pinto Revolt, the Peres da Silva affair, and the liberal-political
struggle provide the background and clues which account for the
transformation of Satari's feudal lords into legendary freedom fighters.
