Rare CollectionThe Beds Of Empire: Power And Profit
At The Pearl Fisheries
Of South India And Sri Lanka,
C. 1770-1840
by:Samuel Miles Ostroff
University of Pennsylvania
Download Link
Rare CollectionThe Beds Of Empire: Power And Profit
At The Pearl Fisheries
Of South India And Sri Lanka,
C. 1770-1840
by:Samuel Miles Ostroff
University of Pennsylvania
Download Link
வேம்பார் விருத்தம்
வேம்பார் பற்றி இந்த பாடல் கூறுவது கடற்கரை சேர்ப்பன் ஊராக இருந்தாலும் பொறையாறு போன்று விவசாயம் செழிப்புடன் இருந்தது என்றும்
பெரியன் என்பவனைப்போல் வள்ளல் சேர்ப்பன் எனவும், சிறந்த கள்ளு கிடைத்ததாகவும் அங்கே இருந்த தாழை மரங்கள் வேளா கொம்பை நினைவு படுத்தியதாகவும் கூறுகிறது.
நற்றிணை 131
ஆடிய தொழிலும், அல்கிய பொழிலும்,
உள்ளல் ஆகா உயவு நெஞ்சமொடு
ஊடலும் உடையமோ-உயர் மணற் சேர்ப்ப!
திரை முதிர் அரைய தடந் தாள் தாழைச்
5
சுறவு மருப்பு அன்ன முட் தோடு ஒசிய,
இறவு ஆர் இனக் குருகு இறைகொள இருக்கும்,
நறவு மகிழ் இருக்கை நல் தேர்ப் பெரியன்,
கள் கமழ், பொறையாறு அன்ன என்
நல் தோள் நெகிழ மறத்தல், நுமக்கே?
உரை
உயர் மணல் சேர்ப்ப - உயர்ந்த மணற் பரப்பினையுடைய நெய்தனிலத் தலைவனே!; திரை முதிர் அரைய தடந் தாள் தாழை சுறவு மருப்பு அன்ன முள் தோடு ஒசிய - திரைத்தல் முதிர்ந்த அரயையுடையவாய வளைந்த அடி மரத்தையுடைய தாழையினது சுறாமீன் கொம்பு போன்ற இருபுறமும் முள்ளையுடைய இலை முறிந்து சாயும்படி; இறவு ஆர் குருகு இனம் இறைகொள இருக்கும் - இறாமீனை இரையாகத் தின்ற நாரையின் கூட்டம் தங்குதல் கொள்ள வீற்றிருக்கும்; நறவு மகிழ் இருக்கை நல் தேர்ப் பெரியன் - கள்ளுணவையுண்டலான் மகிழ்ந்திருத்தலையுடைய நல்ல தேரையுடைய பெரிய னென்பானது; கள் கமழ் பொறையாறு அன்ன என் நல்தோள் - கள்ளின் மணங் கமழும் 'பொறையாறு' என்னும் ஊர் போன்ற என்னுடைய நல்ல தோள்கள்; நெகிழ மறத்தல் நுமக்கு - நெகிழும்படி நீயிர் எம்மை மறப்பதற்கு யாம் நும்மையின்றி; ஆடிய தொழிலும் அல்கிய பொழிலும் உள்ளல் ஆகா உயவு நெஞ்சமொடு ஊடலும் உடையமோ - வேறு விளையாட்டு அயர்தற்குத் தொழிலையும் நும்மையின்றி வேறு பிரிந்து சென்று தங்கி இருப்பதற்குச் சோலையையும் நும்மை நினைக்கலாகாத வருந்துகின்ற நெஞ்சினையும் நும்பால் ஊடுதலையுமுடையமோ?; அங்ஙனமாயின் நீயிர் மறந்திருப்பீர், இல்லையே; ஆதலின் நீயிர் மறவாமையால் நுமது உள்ளத்தே உள்ளேமன்றோ? அதனால் இவள் தோள் நெகிழ்ந்து வேறுபட்டில; அவ் வேறுபடாமையை யான் ஆற்றினேன் என்பது மிகையன்றோ
பொறையாறு பற்றிய குறிப்பு
பொறையாறு சங்ககால ஊர்களில் ஒன்று. இக்காலத்தில் தரங்கம்பாடியை அடுத்து உள்ள பொறையாறு என்னும் ஊர்தான் அது. சங்ககாலத்தில் பெரியன் என்னும் பெயர் கொண்ட மன்னன் இங்கு இருந்துகொண்டு ஆண்டுவந்தான். இவன் சிறந்த கொடைவள்ளல்.
இவ்வூரில் குருகு இனக் கொக்குகள் மிகுதி.
பரதவ சிறுவர்கள் பற்றிய கட்டியம்
நற்றினை 111 நற்றாய் கூற்று
அத்த இருப்பைப் பூவின் அன்ன
வரி வலைப் பரதவர் கரு வினைச் சிறாஅர்
மரல் மேற்கொண்டு மான் கணம் தகைமார்
வெந் திறல் இளையவர் வேட்டு எழுந்தாங்கு
திமில் மேற்கொண்டு திரைச் சுரம் நீந்தி
வாள் வாய்ச் சுறவொடு வய மீன் கெண்டி
நிணம் பெய் தோணியர் இகு மணல் இழிதரும்
பெருங் கழிப் பாக்கம் கல்லென
வருமே தோழி கொண்கன் தேரே
அதேபோல் இந்த பாடல் பெருங்கழிப்பாக்கம் வாழ்ந்த பரதவர் சதுப்பு நிலத்தில் கிடைக்கும் இறால் மீனை பிடிக்க வரிவலை என்ற வலையை பயன் படுத்தியதையும் கூறுகிறது ஆக இரண்டாயிரம் ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பே பரதவர்களிடம் வெவ்வேறு மீனுக்கு வேறு வேறு வலை உபயோகிக்கும் முறை இருந்தது என்பதை நிறுபிக்கிறது. பரதகுல வர்க்கம் கொங்கணர் அந்த ஊரின் தலைவனக இருந்ததையும் அவர் தேரில் வருவதையும் கூறுகிறது.
எட்டுதொகையில் பரதவர் பற்றிய சான்றுகள்
நற்றிணை
நெய்தல் 207
கண்டல் வேலிக் கழி சூழ் படப்பை
முண்டகம் வேய்ந்த குறியிறைக் குரம்பைக்
கொழு மீன் கொள்பவர் பாக்கம் கல்லென
நெடுந் தேர் பண்ணி வரல் ஆனாதே
குன்றத்து அன்ன குவவு மணல் நீந்தி
வந்தனர் பெயர்வர்கொல் தாமே அல்கல்
இளையரும் முதியரும் கிளையுடன் குழீஇ
கோட் சுறா எறிந்தென சுருங்கிய நரம்பின்
முடி முதிர் #பரதவர் மட மொழிக் குறுமகள்
வலையும் தூண்டிலும் பற்றி பெருங் கால்
திரை எழு பௌவம் முன்னிய
கொலை வெஞ் சிறாஅர் பாற்பட்டனளே
நொதுமலர் வரைவுழி தோழி செவிலிக்கு அறத்தொடு நின்றது.
நற்றிணை
நெய்தல். தாயங்கண்னனார்
நெய்தல் 219
கண்ணும் தோளும் தண் நறுங் கதுப்பும்
பழ நலம் இழந்து பசலை பாய
இன் உயிர் பெரும்பிறிது ஆயினும் என்னதூஉம்
புலவேன் வாழி தோழி சிறு கால்
அலவனொடு பெயரும் புலவுத் திரை நளி கடல்
பெரு மீன் கொள்ளும் சிறுகுடிப் #பரதவர்
கங்குல் மாட்டிய கனை கதிர் ஒண் சுடர்
முதிரா ஞாயிற்று எதிர் ஒளி கடுக்கும்
கானல்அம் பெருந் துறைச் சேர்ப்பன்
தானே யானே புணர்ந்தமாறே
வரைவிடை வைத்துப் பிரிய ஆற்றாளாய
தலைமகள் தோழிக்குச் சொல்லியது.
நற்றிணை
நெய்தல். குன்றியனார்
நெய்தல் 207
ஞான்ற ஞாயிறு குடமலை மறைய
மான்ற மாலை மகிழ்ந்த #பரதவர்
இனிது பெறு பெரு மீன் எளிதினின் மாறி
அலவன் ஆடிய புலவு மணல் முன்றில்
காமர் சிறுகுடிச் செல்நெறி வழியின்
ஆய் மணி பொதி அவிழ்ந்தாங்கு நெய்தல்
புல் இதழ் பொதிந்த பூத் தப மிதிக்கும்
மல்லல் இருங் கழி மலி நீர்ச் சேர்ப்பற்கு
அமைந்து தொழில் கேட்டன்றோ இலமே முன்கை
வார் கோல் எல் வளை உடைய வாங்கி
முயங்கு எனக் கலுழ்ந்த இவ் ஊர்
எற்று ஆவதுகொல் யாம் மற்றொன்று செயினே
தோழி தலைமகன் சிறைப்புறமாகச் சொல்லியது.
நற்றிணை
நெய்தல். மதுரை ஆருலவிய நாட்டு ஆலம்பேரி சாத்தனார்
நெய்தல் 303
ஒலி அவிந்து அடங்கி யாமம்
நள்ளென
கலி கெழு பாக்கம் துயில் மடிந்தன்றே
தொன்று உறை கடவுள் சேர்ந்த பராரை
மன்றப் பெண்ணை வாங்கு மடற் குடம்பைத்
துணை புணர் அன்றில் உயவுக் குரல் கேட்டொறும்
துஞ்சாக் கண்ணள் துயர் அடச் சாஅய்
நம்வயின் வருந்தும் நன்னுதல் என்பது
உண்டுகொல் வாழி தோழி தெண் கடல்
வன் கைப் #பரதவர் இட்ட செங் கோல்
கொடு முடி அவ் வலை பரியப் போக்கி
கடு முரண் எறி சுறா வழங்கும்
நெடுநீர்ச் சேர்ப்பன்தன் நெஞ்சத்தானே
வேட்கை தாங்ககில்லாளாய்த் தோழிக்குத் தலைமகள்
சொல்லியது சிறைப்புறத்தான் என்பது மலிந்ததூஉம் ஆம்
நற்றிணை
நெய்தல். மிளை கிழான் நல் வேட்டனார்
நெய்தல் 349
கடுந் தேர் ஏறியும் காலின் சென்றும்
கொடுங் கழி மருங்கின் அடும்பு மலர் கொய்தும்
கைதை தூக்கியும் நெய்தல் குற்றும்
வைகலும் இனையம் ஆகவும் செய் தார்ப்
பசும் பூண் வேந்தர் அழிந்த பாசறை
ஒளிறு வேல் அழுவத்துக் களிறு படப் பொருத
பெரும் புண்ணுறுநர்க்குப் பேஎய் போல
பின்னிலை முனியா நம்வயின்
என் என நினையும்கொல் #பரதவர் மகளே
தலைமகன் தோழி கேட்பத் தன்னுள்ளே சொல்லியது.
நற்றிணை
நெய்தல். உலோச்சனார்
நெய்தல் - 372
அழிதக்கன்றே தோழி கழி சேர்பு
கானற் பெண்ணைத் தேனுடை அழி பழம்
வள் இதழ் நெய்தல் வருந்த மூக்கு இறுபு
அள்ளல் இருஞ் சேற்று ஆழப் பட்டென
கிளைக் குருகு இரியும் துறைவன் வளைக் கோட்டு
அன்ன வெண் மணற்று அகவயின் வேட்ட
அண்ணல் உள்ளமொடு அமர்ந்து இனிது நோக்கி
அன்னை தந்த அலங்கல் வான் கோடு
உலைந்தாங்கு நோதல் அஞ்சி அடைந்ததற்கு
இனையல் என்னும் என்ப மனை இருந்து
இருங் கழி துழவும் பனித் தலைப் #பரதவர்
திண் திமில் விளக்கம் எண்ணும்
கண்டல் வேலிக் கழி நல் ஊரே
மேல் இற்செறிப்பான் அறிந்து ஆற்றாளாகி நின்ற
தலைமகள் ஆற்ற வேண்டி உலகியல் மேல் வைத்துச்
சிறைப்புறமாகச் செறியார் எனச் சொல்லியது.
நற்றிணை
நெய்தல். மதுரை மருதங்கிழார் மகனார் பெருங்கண்ணனார்
நெய்தல் 388
அம்ம வாழி தோழி நன்னுதற்கு
யாங்கு ஆகின்றுகொல் பசப்பே நோன் புரிக்
கயிறு கடை யாத்த கடு நடை எறி உளித்
திண் திமில் #பரதவர் ஒண் சுடர்க் கொளீஇ
நடு நாள் வேட்டம் போகி வைகறைக்
கடல் மீன் தந்து கானற் குவைஇ
ஓங்கு இரும் புன்னை வரி நிழல் இருந்து
தேம் கமழ் தேறல் கிளையடு மாந்தி
பெரிய மகிழும் துறைவன் எம்
சிறிய நெஞ்சத்து அகல்வு அறியானே
வரைவு நீட ஆற்றாளாகிய தோழிக்குத் தலைமகன்
சிறைப்புறமாகச் சொல்லியது மனையுள் வேறுபடாது
ஆற்றினாய் என்றாற்குத் தலைமகள் சொல்லியதூஉம் ஆம்
The Tamil Seaports of the West Coast of Sri Lanka
King Bhuvanaka Bahu VII ruled the kingdom of Kotte. There were nine ports of call for the import and export trade. These ports were all situated on the western sea board of his kingdom. The nine ports of his kingdom were Kalpitiya, Chilaw, Kammala, Negombo, Colombo, Beruwela, Galle, Weligama and Matara. During his reign there was smuggling in boys and girls, among other goods, to the Malabar coast. On a complaint made by the king, the King of Portugal Joao III, in a directive dated 13th March 1543 AD made the following decree.
To all who will see this document of mine, I make known that I have been informed that many ships and `champanas'(small boats), which leave Ceilao, carry many boys and girls kidnapped in the country from their parents, and many slaves snatched from their owners, and much cinnamon, and other goods smuggled out. Desirous to remedy this as demanded by the service of God and mine own, I order that in future all the ships and `champanas', which are ready to set out from those ports, shall first notify the King of Ceilao so that he may arrange to have them searched to see if they are taking any of the things stated above; and they shall obtain a certificate from the king or official appointed by him, stating that the search has taken place. If they do not obtain such certificate, they shall forfeit all the cargo in favour of the 'Misericordia' of Cochin'.(CC,p29,Vol:l). This proves that Sinhalese boys and girls have been kidnapped and smuggled across to Cochin, a sea port in the Tamil kingdom of Sera.
At the time the Portuguese first visited Ceylon, the north of Ceylon contained the kingdom of Jaffnapattinam ruled by Sangili alias Segarajasegaram, illegitimate son of King Pararajasekeran,and a usurper to the throne. He ruled the kingdom from 1519 to 1561 AD. According to the Yalpana Vipava Malai, a Tamil chronicle, the massacre of the Christians in the village of Pattim, Mannar took place in the month of Adi (July-August) of the cyclic year Khara which falls in 1513-1532 AD. This appears to be incorrect. King Manoel was king of Portugal till about 1539 AD. There after King Joao III, was king. If the massacre took place during their reign, it would have been conveyed to them.
According to Father V.Perniola, who had access to original documents from the archives and libraries of Rome, Lisbon and Goa, states in his book at the foot note at page 51, Vol: i of his book The Catholic Church in Sri Lanka-The Portuguese Period'is as follows:
' King Chekarasa Sekaran or Sangili had put to death the Christians of Mannar. The inhabitants of Mannar seem to have been baptised in October 1544 and put to death in November of the same year. Xavier alludes to this killing in such a matter of fact way as to imply that by the beginning of December 1544 every one knew about it'.
St.Francis Xavier, who was responsible for the conversions of the Kadeas in the village of Pattim, Mannar, by his letter dated Cochin 18th December 1544 states that he was proceeding to meet Governor Martin Afonso de Soyza of Goa to urge him to punish King Sangili of Jaffnapattinam, for the massacre of the Christians.(CC,p51,Vol: l).
The rightful heir to the throne, Paranirupasingham fled to the opposite coast of Kayalpattinam of South India with his retinue for fear of his half brother Sangili who had murdered two other princes to wrest the throne from his father.(CC,p 54,Vol: i). In the meantime Sangili had murdered the first converts to the Catholic religion in Mannar which was part of his kingdom in the year 1544 AD. Father Francis Xavier SJ returned to Mannar and thence to Neduntivu (Delft) and proceeded to Nagapatinam to take an expedition against King Sangili. In the meantime a Portuguese vessel coming from Pegu (Burma) laden with rich cargo ran aground off the coast of Jaffnapattinam. Sangili seized all the cargo on board.
In a letter written from Sao Thome (Madras) dated 28th March 1546 AD by Miguel Ferreira to Loao de Castro Governor of India informing him that he met heir apparent to the throne of Jaffnapattinam in Kayalpattinam (South India), and that the prince together with his children, grandchildren and his kith and kin would be baptised as Catholics if he was made king.(CC,p 150,vol: i). The prince also stated that Joao Fernandez Corea, Captain of the fishery-coast (see map) had invited him to go on board a vessel but had done nothing even after receiving from him a diamond as a gift. The prince also informed him that Martin Alfonso de Souza had also invited him to go on board a ship and had taken him up to Neduntievu and from there he sent him back, after taking from him some pearls and that now he had nothing else to offer. He also alleged that Souza had taken a tribute of 5000 silver coins from Sangili and this prevented him from putting him on the throne.(CC,p 147 Vol: i).
Dispersion of Tamils to the West Coast of Sri Lanka
The Parava community of the fishery-coast in and around Punnaikayal, of Tamil Nadu (see map), were baptised by St. Francis Xavier and subsequently they were shipped to Colombo and dispersed among the Catholic community of the coastal regions from Puttalam to Galle. The king of Madampe, Vidiya Bandara ordered the Parava community living in his kingdom to ' shave their beards and apply ashes on their foreheads and become pagans again. They courageously replied that they were ready to have their heads cut off but that they would never consent to do what they were asked. Then the king agreed not to kill them, but imposed on them a fine of about three hundred `pardaos' as a penalty for their not complying with his orders'.(CC,p 346,vol: i). The Paravas (Tamil) community of the fishery-coast of South India and situated in and around the Punney Kayal , were fishermen by caste.
They were adept in fishing for pearl oysters and chanks off the fishery-coast and during the season converged in and around the village of Murungan, in the Mannar district of Sri Lanka for the pearl fisheries. The Careas or Karavas also of the fishing caste community in South India, subsequently found their way to the coastal regions of the island of Ceylon and came under the religious spell of the Catholic priests of the Franciscans, Jesuits etc. In the year 1556 AD no less than 70,000 of these Karavas living in the sea ports of the island embraced the Catholic faith. These Tamil Karavas or fishermen were living in Kalpitiya,Chilaw, Kammala, Negombo, Colombo, Beruwela, Galle, Welligama, and Matara.(CC,p 18 vol: i). ' The first to receive baptism was their Captain, whom they call Patangati, which means that he is, as it were their king .(CC,p 347,vol: i). It is interesting to read the translation of the original Portuguese document concerning the PARAVAS (TAMILS) in Moratuwa in 1613 AD.
Thanks: www.tamilwritersguild.com
Jesuit missionary Fr Henrique Henriques (1520 - 1600) worked among the pearl fisheries people of South Indian coast between 1546 and 1600 -a little over half a century. He learned the local Tamil language as spoken by the Parathava community to make his conversion work easier. He had little knowledge of classical Tamil and its grammar. His goal was to instruct his missionary colleagues about the language spoken in the coastal area by the community and help in his mission. He wrote a book of grammar in Portuguese around 1549 CE and thus “ Arte da Lingua Malabar“ stands as the first linguistic connection between India and the West.
Jeanne Hein, an American scholar, had been studying the life of Henriques and the period of the Portuguese in India, with a view to understand the work of missionaries from 1964. She was stuck as she could not get much help in decoding Tamil. V S Rajam Ramamurthi had come to the US in 1975 to do her PhD in Pennsylvania and met Jeanne Hein in '78-'79. It was then that they collaborated on the project of translating the Tamil grammar book written in Portuguese into English. The translation was published in 2013. Jeanne, who died in 2013, did not know Tamil and Rajam, Portuguese. That the two managed to get the book to this shape is remarkable.
Arte da Lingua Malabar was first discovered by Fr Thaninayagam in his search for Tamil works of Europeans in South India. Jeanne acquired a microfiche of the same from Lisbon.
In Tuticorin, Henrique Henriques mastered the local language and worked hard to bring out a book of grammar for the language, as he believed that books of religious doctrines should be in local language. Henriques, apart from being the first to produce a dictionary (Tamil Portuguese), set up a Tamil press and printed books in Tamil script. The first book printed in Tamil script was “Thambiran Vanakkam“ (1578), a 16-page translation of the Portuguese “Doctrina Christam“. It was followed by “Kirisithiyaani Vanakkam“ (1579).
Rendering the Arte da meaningfully in English was not easy . For, Henrique took Tamil as he heard it spoken in the Parava villages and stretched it over the grammatical structure of Latin. In addition, when he Romanised Tamil, he did it in his language phonetics of 16th century .The document, at once, therefore becomes a product of Portuguese discovery relating to South India. As Caldwell records in his book “ A History of Tinnevelly“, the South Indian chieftains were interested in getting Arab steeds due to which Muslim traders were ruling the day in the coast. In fact the pearl fishermen were under their mercy as Muslims controlled the trade. The fishermen looked up to the newly arrived Portuguese who were stronger especially after they won the 14-years war at Vedalai in Kerala coast.
Joao de Cruz, a convert, persuaded the Paravas to become Christians so that the Portuguese would assist them. Eighty-five leading Paravas went to Cochin to seek Portuguese assistance and all of them were baptized and on return they were instrumental in converting a vast number into Christian fold. It was in this background that Henriques arrived in the coast to find that though converted the Paravas were following the traditions of their earlier faith.
To impart the knowledge of Christianity, language had to be learned and books written in local language.
Henriques worked for eighteen years on writing the grammar of Tamil as spoken in the coast so that Tamil material could be supplied in spreading the faith. He had no idea about Tamil grammar nor did he attempt to learn it.On the other hand, for the first time he devised a grammar for a language as spoken by the people he was dealing with and shaped a linguistic structure in India for Christianity .
Rajam has taken pains to show how he wrote the letters of the alphabet and their pronunciation. Since he himself spoke 16th century Portuguese, to understand his phonetics today , a specialist of the language of that day was necessary .To add to the confusion the Tamil dealt with was that of a community of 16th century of which even Tamils have very little knowledge. “We are examining a document which describes Tamil the way a foreigner heard it. I have not corrected errors except for minor changes,“ says Rajam.
Thanks : www.timesofindia.indiatimes.com
In 1534, the Malabarian João da Cruz trading in Arabian horses, was in Cape Comorin waiting for payment for the horses he had sold. The distraught Paravar leaders who knew about his connections with the Portuguese met him and told their woes.
João da Cruz felt sorry for the Paravars who were then fearing atrocities from the Muslims. He told the Paravars that as the past events showed they could not expect help from the Viceroy of Madura. So, to find a permanent solution to their problem he advised them to approach the Portuguese Captain of Cochin who would be willing to help them.
So in 1535, fifteen of the most influential Pattangattis (Parava leaders) led by Vikirama Aditha Pandya, accompanied João da Cruz to Cochin.
Here there seems to be a discrepancy in the name of the place that João da Cruz took the Paravars to. Some writers say that João da Cruz accompanied Vikirama Aditha Pandya and the other Pattangattis to Goa and it had been duplicated by others, but from what I have read I would like to differ.
In Cochin, Captain Pero Vaz de Amaral received them cordially since the Portuguese were waiting for such an opportunity to gain a strategic foothold and control of the pearl fisheries in the Coromandel Coast. He said that the protection would be granted on the condition that the leaders who had come were baptised immediately as Catholics and that they would encourage their people also to convert to Catholicism. To this, they gladly consented.
As part of the arrangement for protection from the Muslims, Vikirama Aditha Pandya offered to manage the pearl diving on behalf of the Portuguese.
Fortunately for the Paravars, Fr. Miguel Vaz, Vicar General of India, was in Cochin at that time and he instructed them in the Christian faith. Some days later they were baptized.
Fortunately for them, Fr. Miguel Vaz, Vicar General of India, was in Cochin at that time and he instructed them in the Christian faith. Some days later they were baptized.
In Volume 6, page 123 of his work “Castes And Southern India“, Edgar Thurston quotes what Philippus Baldaeus, a minister of the Dutch Reformed Church said concerning the Paravas:
The Paruas being sorely oppress’d by the Mahometan, one John de Crus, a Native of Malabar, but who had been in Portugal, and honourably treated by John, the then king of Portugal, advised them to seek for Aid at Cochin against the Moors, and to receive Baptism. According‘ly some of the chief Men among them (call’d Patangatays in their Language) were sent upon that Errand to Cochin, where being kindly receiv’d, they (in honour of him who had given His Advice) took upon them the Sirname of Crus, a name still retain’d by most persons of Note among the Paruas.
So, as described by Philippus Baldaeus, the name João da Cruz was appended to the name of all the Pattangattis including Vikirama Aditha Pandya to honour the Malabarian who guided them and brought them to Cochin to be baptized and seek the help of the Portuguese.
When the baptized leaders returned to the Fishery Coast the other Paravars at first did not believe the report they brought back with them; so a larger delegation of eighty-five Paravars was sent to Cochin.
On getting wind of these negotiations between the Paravars and the Portuguese, the Middle Eastern Arab Merchants who were then trading in the Pearl Fishery Coast dispatched two envoys to Cochin to bribe the Portuguese Captain Pero Vaz de Amaral, to not allow conversion of the Paravars to Catholicism, but Pero Vaz Amaral refused to do so.
Captain Pero Vaz immediately arranged for the baptism of 85 Paravar leaders in Cochin by the Vicar General, Miguel Vaz, probably in December 1535. The Paravar leaders were given Portuguese names as surnames such as Fernando, Pereira, Vaz, Almeida, Peres, da Cruz and so forth.
In 1536, Peter Goncalves the vicar of Cochin and three other priests came to the Coromandel Coast along with a naval force conveying troops. They found the men of the Hindu Paravar community assembled for the pearl-fishery and then and there baptized them en masse to Catholicism. It is said that 20,000 Paravars were baptized. The women and children who had been left behind in the villages during the fishery were added to the flock later.
By the end of the year 1537, most of the Hindu Paravars of the seven Paravar villages – Manapadu, Alanthalai, Virapandiapattanam, Punnaikaval, Thoothukudi, Vembar and Vaipar – were baptized and were accepted as subjects of the King of Portugal. Some, however, did not receive baptism till the arrival of Saint Xavier at the end of 1542.
On June 27, 1538, the Portuguese proceeded to destroy the Arab fleet when they met fortuitously at Vedalai in the present Ramanathapuram district.
The Portuguese then firmly settled the rights and privileges of the Paravas and the Rajas no longer dared to interfere with the Paravas or attempt to impede or abridge their prerogative on the Pearl Fishery Coast. The Rajas were then compelled to allow separate laws for the Paravas from those which bound their own subjects.
The Portuguese kept for themselves the command at sea and exercised their sovereignty over the Paravas, their villages, harbours and the pearl fisheries.
Thus the Paravas dwindled into subordination to the Catholic priests and the Portuguese and had to forego having their own chiefs and their own laws. Though the Catholic Paravar community as a whole enjoyed renewed prosperity from that point in history, they became a client community of the Portuguese.
In reality, the declaration of acceptance of the Catholic faith by the Paravars did not prevent them from continuing to worship their old deities of the Hindu pantheon in the manner they had done before being baptized. There were no translators to spread the Catholic message from Latin and Portuguese to Tamil. Also, the conversion was seen by the Paravar people as being merely a convenient arrangement to obtain protection from the atrocities of the Muslims. In fact, the Paravas became a “Christian caste in Hindu society“, whose distinctive Catholic rites and doctrines came to reinforce their place in the Hindu caste structure.
The Portuguese first settled in Tuticorin in 1543, and the port began to expand until it eventually became the hub of the pearl fishery.
In 1543, the Portuguese rewarded Vikirama Aditha Pandya alias João da Cruz for his bartering with the elders of the Paravar caste to convert the community to Christianity since 1535. They offered him the management of the pearl fisheries on their behalf. He became known as Senhor dos Senhores Dom João da Cruz (“first among notables Dom João da Cruz”). The Portuguese recognised him as jathi thalaivan (head of the caste) and also as their official intermediary from 1543 to 1553.
The Portuguese also recognised the caste elders in the various villages perhaps because they were the first to be converted. In the eyes of the Paravars and non-Paravars alike, this led to a formal system of hierarchical control, based on religious authority and economic standing that extended from the jathi thalaivan to the elders and then to the villagers.
To be continued…
By T. V. Antony Raj Fernando
Thanks: www.tvaraj.com
எட்டுதொகையில் இருந்து பரதவர் பற்றிய வரலாற்று சான்றுகள்
எழுத்தாளர்: ஆரிய வரசன் யாழ்ப்பிரமதத்தன்
நெய்தல் 185
அறிகரி பொய்த்தல் ஆன்றோர்க் கில்லை
குறுக லோம்புமின் சிறுகுடிச் செலவே
இதற்கிது மாண்ட தென்னா ததற்பட்
டாண்டொழிந் தன்றே மாண்டகை நெஞ்சம்
மயிற்கண் அன்ன மாண்முடிப் பாவை
நுண்வலைப் #பரதவர் மடமகள்
கண்வலைப் படுஉம் கான லானே.
குறுத்தொகை
எழுத்தாளர். கணக்காயர் தத்தனார்
நெய்தல் 305
கொல்வினைப் பொலிந்த கூர்வா யெறியுளி
முகம்பட மடுத்த முளிவெதிர் நோன்காழ்
தாங்கரு நீர்ச்சுரத் தெறிந்து வாங்குவிசைக்
கொடுந்திமிற் #பரதவர் கோட்டுமீ னெறிய
நெடுங்கரை யிருந்த குறுங்கா லன்னத்து
வெண்டோ டிரியும் வீததை கானற்
கைதையந் தண்புனற் சேர்ப்பனொடு
செய்தனெ மன்றவோர் பகைதரு நட்பே.
குறுத்தொகை
எழுத்தாளர். தும்பிசேர் கீரனார்
நெய்தல் 321
பெருங்கடற் #பரதவர் கொண்மீன் உணங்கல்
அருங்கழிக் கொண்ட இறவின் வாடலொடு
நிலவுநிற வெண்மணல் புலவப் பலவுடன்
எக்கர்தொறும் பரக்குந் துறைவனொ டொருநாள்
நக்கதோர் பழியு மிலமே போதவிழ்
பொன்னிணர் மரீஇய புள்ளிமிழ் பொங்கர்ப்
புன்னையஞ் சேரி யிவ்வூர்
கொன்னலர் தூற்றந்தன் கொடுமை யானே.
பாடியவர்: அம்மூவனார்
வளை பத்து 5
வளைபடு முத்தம் #பரதவர் பகரும்
கடல்கெழு கொண்கன் காதல் மடமகள்
கெடலரும் துயரம் நல்கிப்
படலின் பாயல் நல்கி யோளெ.
Rare Collection
GOVERNMlENT OF CEYLON
LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS
LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS
Pearl Fisheries Ordinance
1950 Revision
Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: The Christian Paravas:
A ‘Client Community’ in Seventeenth-Century Southeast India
[T] he Paravas [are] a maritime people, seated on this Pearle Coast, whose greatest livelihood is Natures bounty, which she in that kind annually bestowes and which art qualifies them in like manner to receive… This nation about one hundred and thirty yeares agoe was a limb of heathenisme, out of which roughquarry it was hewen by papall industry and so became a Jewell of the Triple Crown. The Jesuites, who at first converted them, for a long time after govern'd them in a way both ecclestiasticall andcivill. This latter yoake weares of and delivers up civill concernments into the hands of the civill power, the corruption of one kindof government being the generation of the other. In this state matters rested when, about five yeares agoe (the Portugall greatnesse being then far declin'd from its zenith) the Dutch possesse[d] themselves of this coast, which ever since, they have govern'd by way of judicature and awed by their power. This gave occasion for the persons above mentioned [certaine persons of quality, natives of Tutticorrim and heads of their nation] to recede [into the interior]… This [loss of Cochin in early 1663] involves them in fresh cares, and those send them in great quest of other props to stay themselves upon… Their desires therefore are that themselves, together with their adherents, may be taken into the protection of the English; that they with their padre (who is the hinge whereon they turne) may have their dwellings at Cale Velha [Palaiyakkayal], the seate of our factorie, free from violence; and their boates, by virtue of our passeports, to navigate the seas void of all disturbances.
Notes
1 Foster W. ed., The English factories in India, 1655–1667 II (Oxford 1921–1925) 254–255.Google Scholar
2 Some of the recent works on the Paravas are: Vink M.P.M., ‘The Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of the Fishery Coast: The Portuguese-Dutch Struggle over the Parava Community of Southeast India, c. 1640–1700’, Portuguese Studies Review 9/1–2 (2001) 372–397;Google ScholarIdem , ‘Church and State in Seventeenth-century Colonial Asia: Dutch-Parava Relations in Southeast India in a Comparative Perspective’, Journal of Early Modern History 4/1 (04 2000) 1–42;Google ScholarZupanov I., Disputed Mission: Jesuit Experimentsand Brahmanical Knowledge in Seventeenth-century India (Oxford and New York 1999)Google Scholar; McPherson K., ‘Paravas and Portuguese: A Study of Portuguese Strategy and its Impact on an Indian Seafaring Community’, Mare Liberum (n.s.) 13 (06 1997) 69–82;Google ScholarVink M.P.M., ‘Images and Ideologies of Dutch-South Asian Contact: Cross-cultural Ecounters between the Nayaka State of Madurai and the Dutch East India Company in the Seventeenth Century’, Itinerario 21/2 (1997) 82–123;CrossRef | Google ScholarZupanov I., ‘Aristocratic Analogies and Demotic Descriptions in the Seventeenth-century Madurai Mission’, Representations 41 (winter 1993) 123–148;CrossRef | Google ScholarBayly S., Saints, Goddesses, and Kings. Muslims and Christians in South Indian society, 1700–1900 (New York 1989) 321–369;Google ScholarRoche , Fishermen of the Coromandel Coast: A Study of the Paravas of the Coromandel (Delhi 1984)Google Scholar; Kaufmann S.B., ‘A Christian Caste in Hindu Society: Religious Leadership and Social Conflict among the Paravas of Southern Tamilnadu’, Modern Asian Studies 15/2 (1981) 203–234CrossRef | Google Scholar.
3 A term borrowed from: Parker G. and Smith L.M. eds, The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century (2nd ed.;London/New York 1997)Google Scholar.
4 A 'portfolio capitalist' has been defined as a large-scale entrepreneur who farmed revenue, engaged in local agricultural trade, commanded military resources (war animals, arms, and human labor), and often participated in long-distance trade. See: Subrahmanyam S. and Bayly C.A., ‘Portfolio Capitalists and the Economy of Early Modern India’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 25/4 (1988) 401–424CrossRef | Google Scholar.
5 Between 1659 and 1665, the English East India Company maintained a trading settlement at the Madurai Coast. In 1665, the Dutch arrested John Harington, Travers' successor, ‘the troublemaker and quarreler among nations’, and closed down the local factory upon the outbreak of the Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665–1667).
6 Richard White and others have defined the term 'middle ground’, emphasising accommo- dation and common meaning in the Great Lakes {pays d'en haut). In the two centuries before the intrusion of the Americans, they argue, the pays d'en haut was a joint Indian- white creation, a common, mutually comprehensible world. French and British could neither dictate to nor ignore Indians. They needed Indians as allies, as partners in the exchange, as sexual partners, as friendly neighbours. The middle ground is the place in between: in between cultures, peoples, and in between empires and the non-state world of villages. It is a place where many of the North American subjects and allies of French and British empires lived. It is the area between the historical foreground of European invasion and occupation and the background of Indian defeat and retreat. The real crisis and the final dissolution of this world came when Indians ceased to have the power to force whites onto the middle ground. As a consequence, the middle ground eroded. The American Republic succeeded in doing what the French and English could not do and started to dictate the terms of accommodation. See: White R., The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650–1815 (Cambridge1991).CrossRef | Google Scholar See also: Kling B.B. and Pearson M.N., Europeans in Asia before Dominion(Honolulu 1979).Google Scholar The ‘culture and authority’ school of the University of Chicago, including Bernard Cohn and his students Arjan Appadurai, Nicholas Dirks, and others, are proponents of ‘hegemonic discourse’, whereas the ‘Cambridge school’ of Indian colonial historians, such as Chris Bayly and David Washbrook, espouse the notion of ‘dialogue’.
7 Marshal PJ. ed., Oxford History of the British Empire II (Oxford 1998) 506.Google Scholar
8 These findings corroborate Jerry Bentley's conclusions on conversion. Bentley argues that cultural traditions did notreally cross boundary lines. According to him, adoption of foreign values and cultural standards rarely took place except with the encouragement of powerful political, social, or economic influences. Even successful cases of cross-cultural conversion, he asserts, did not involve a process of exact cultural replication, but rather a merger of traditions by a process of syncretism. See: Bentley J., Old World Encounters: Cross-cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Pre-modern Times (New York 1993) 15–17Google Scholar.
9 For an example of a Weberian, ‘ideal type’ approach to cross-cultural encounters: Vink , ‘Images and Ideologies of Dutch-South Asian Contact’, 82–83.Google Scholar The civilisational approach in the U.S. was popularised after World War I by James Harvey Robinson (1863–1936). See: Segal D.A.,' ‘“Western Civ”and the Staging of History in American Higher Education’,The American Historical Review 105/3 (06 2000) 770–805.CrossRef | Google Scholar The term ‘clash of civilisations’ is of course taken from Samuel Huntington.
10 Wong R. Bin, ‘The Search for European Differences and Domination in the Early Modern World: A View from Asia’,The American Historican Review 107/2 (04 2002) 454–456;Google ScholarIdem , China Transformed: Historical Change and the Limits of European Experience (Ithaca, NY 1997) 127–151.Google Scholar The term ‘great divergence’ is of course based on: Pomeranz K., The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy (Princeton, NJ, 2000).Google Scholar Pomeranz' sophisticated hypothesis can be simplistically subsumed under the heading ‘coal and colonies’'. For recent evaluations of these seminal works from a South Asian perspective: Ludden D., ‘Modern Inequality and Early Modernity: A Comment for the AHR on Articles by R. Bin Wong and Kenneth Pomeranz’, American Historical Review 107/2 (04 2002) 470–480;CrossRef | Google ScholarBayly C.A., ‘South Asia and the “Great Divergence”’,Itinerario 24/3–4 (2000) 89–103CrossRef | Google Scholar.
11 Landes D.S., The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor (New York 1998)Google Scholar; Sowell T., Conquests and Cultures: An International History (New York 1998)Google Scholar; GellnerE., Plough, Sword, and Book: The Structure of Human History (London 1988)Google Scholar; Jones E.L., The European Miracle: Environments, Economies and Geopolitics in the History of Europe and Asia (2nd ed.; Cambridge 1987)Google Scholar; Mann M., The Sources of Social Power I: A History of Power from the Beginning to 1760 A.D.(Cambridge 1986)CrossRef | Google Scholar; Hall J.A., Powers and Liberties: The Causes and Consequences of the Rise of the West (Oxford 1985).Google Scholar For examples of the ‘California school’ (apart from Pomeranz and Bin Wong): GlahnR. von, Fountain of Fortune: Money and Monetary Policy in China, 1000–1700 (Berkeley, CA 1996)Google Scholar; FlynnD.O. and Giraldez A., ‘Born with a “Silver Spoon”: The Origin of World Trade in 1571”, Journal of World History 6 (1995)201–221;Google ScholarWills J.E., Jr, ‘Maritime Asia, 1500–1800: The Interactive Emergence of European Domination’, American Historical Review 98/1 (02 1993) 83–105;CrossRef | Google ScholarGoldstone J., Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modem World (Berkeley, CA 1991).Google Scholar For a recent critical examination of the social-Darwinist, (neo) classical paradigm of the positive effects of interstate competition Vries J. de, ‘Governing Growth: A Comparative Analysis of the Role of the State in the Rise of the West’, Journal of World History 13/1 (Spring 2002) 67–138CrossRef | Google Scholar.
12 Dirks N.B., Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India (Princeton and Oxford 2001) 13–14.Google Scholar See also: Idem , The Hollow Crown: Ethnohistory of an Indian Kingdom (2nd ed.; Ann Arbor 1993) xxiii-xxviii, 3–10Google Scholar, and passim; Idem ed., Colonialism and Culture (Ann Arbor 1992) 1–25.Google Scholar
13 Giddens A., The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (Berkeley, CA 1984) 1–40;Google ScholarIdem , Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis (Berkeley1979) 49–95;Google ScholarIdem , New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies(New York 1976) 118–126.Google Scholar For a general introduction to Giddens' work: Bryant C.G.A. and Jary D., ‘Introduction: Coming to Terms with Anthony Giddens’ in: Idem eds, Giddens' Theory of Structuration: A Critical Appreciation (London 1991) 1–31Google Scholar.
14 Sewell W.H., Jr, ‘A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation’, American Journal of Sociology 98 (071992) 19.CrossRef | Google Scholar
15 Idem , 20.Google Scholar
16 Vink M., ‘Encounters on the Opposite Coast: The Dutch East India Company and the Nayaka State of Madurai in the Seventeenth Century’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Minnesota 1998) 133–146.Google Scholar
17 The existing literature is vast, but for recent general introductions: s'Jacob H.K., The Rajas of Cochin, 1663–1720: Kings, Chiefs, and the Dutch East India Company (New Delhi 2000) 3–31;Google ScholarLannoy M. de, The Kulasekhara Perumals ofTravancore: History and State Formation of Travancore from 1671 to 1758 (Leiden 1997) 1–10;Google ScholarWinius G.D. and Vink M.P.M., The Merchant-warrior Pacified: The VOC (Dutch East India Company) and its Changing Political Economy in India (Delhi 1991) 28–44, and 67–76;Google Scholars'Jacob H.K., De Nederlanders in Kerala, 1663–1701: De memories en instructies betreffende het commandement Malabar van de Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie (The Hague 1976) xxii–xxxv.Google Scholar For information on specific groups and individuals: s'Jacob H.K, ‘Babba Prabhu: The Dutch and a Konkani Merchant in Kerala’ in: All of One Company: The VOC in Biographical Perspective (Utrecht 1986) 135–150;Google ScholarBrown L.W., The Indian Christians of St Thomas (London 1956)Google Scholar; Kurup K.K.N., The Ali Rajas of Cannanore (Trivandrum 1975)Google Scholar; Miller R.E., Mappila Muslims of Kerala: A Study in Islamic Trends (2nd ed.; Cambridge/New York 1982)Google Scholar; Dale S.F., Islamic Society on the South Asian Frontier: The Mappilas of Malabar, 1498–1922 (Oxford 1980)Google Scholar; Nambiar O.K.,The Kunjalis: Admirals of Calicut (Bombay 1963)Google Scholar.
18 The main actors were the English and the Dutch and the sultanates of Jambi and Palembang along the eastcoast of Sumatra, the English and the Dutch and the sultanate of Aceh and its ‘dependencies’ along the westcoast of Sumatra, the English and the Dutch and the interior sultanate of Mataram and the coastal pasisir states on the island of Java, the Portuguese and the Dutch and Makassarese Gowa and Buginese Bone in southwestern Sulawesi, and the Portuguese, Spaniards, English, and Dutch and the sul- tanates of Ternate and Tidore in Maluku. For Sumatra: Harfield A.G., Bencoolen: A History of the Honourable East India Company's Garrison on the Westcoast of Sumatra (1685–1825) (Barton-on-Sea 1995)Google Scholar; Andaya B. Watson, To Live as Brothers: Southeast Sumatra in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Honolulu 1993) 38–144;Google ScholarStuers H.J.J.L. and Veth PJ., De vestiging en uitbreiding der Nederlanders terwestkust van Sumatra(Amsterdam 1849-1850).Google Scholar For Java: Nagtegaal L., Riding the Dutch Tiger: The Dutch East Indies Company and the Northcoast of Java, 1680–1743 (Leiden 1996)Google Scholar; Ricklefs M.C., War, Culture and Economy in Java 1677–1726: Asian and European Imperialism in the Early Kartasura Period (Sydney 1993).Google Scholar For southwestern Sulawesi:Andaya L.Y., The Heritage of Arung Palakka: A History of South Sulawesi (Celebes) in the Seventeenth Century (The Hague 1981)Google Scholar; Boxer C.R., Francisco Vieira de Figeiredo: A Portuguese Merchant-adventurer in South East Asia, 1624–1667 (The Hague 1967)CrossRef | Google Scholar; Stapel F.W., Het Bongaais verdrag (The Hague 1922).Google Scholar For Maluku: Andaya L.Y., The World of Maluku: Eastern Indonesia in the Early Modern Period (Honolulu 1993) 151–175;Google ScholarKnaap GJ., Kruidnagelen en Christenen: De Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie en de bevolking van Ambon, 1656–1696 (Dordrecht/Providence 1987)Google Scholar; Graaf HJ. de, De geschiede-nis van Ambon en de Zuid Molukken (Franeker 1977).Google Scholar Apart from these main indigenous political actors, there were numerous minor political, commercial, and religious groups and individuals.
19 For Dutch estimates on the Parava population in the 1660s: VOC 1243, OBP 1664, fl. 1243, Attestatie van Philip de Hase te Colombo, 6.11.1663; VOC 1251, OBP 1666, fls. 784–785, Rapport, kaptn. Hendrick van Rheede aan gouvr. Van Goens van Ceijlon, 7.10.1665; VOC 1242, OBP 1664, fls. 999r-999v, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 10.11.1663; Dagh-register 1663, 326–328, 569, and 577–578; Nieuhof J., Gedenkwaerdige zee- en lantreize door de voomaemste landschappen van Oostindiën(Amsterdam 1682) 182;Google ScholarValentyn F., Oud en nieuw Oost-IndienV (Dordrecht-Amsterdam 1726) 164.Google Scholar In 1675, Van Goens claimed that the Parava population of the seven large and small ports was no less than 70,000, of which 28,000–30,000 resided at Tuticorin. See: Valentyn , Oud en Nieuw Oostindiën V, 237.Google Scholar Jesuit estimates of the sixteenth century vary widely, though the original number of Paravas to have converted to Christianity is consistently put at 20,000. In 1644, Antonio Lopez, a Jesuit residing at the Fishery Coast, put the number of Paravas at 28,000. See: Schurhammer G., ‘Die Bekehrung der Paraver (1535–1537), Orientalia (Rome/Lisbon 1963) 236–240.Google Scholar For statistical information on the pearl fisheries of 1668 and 1669: VOC 1268, OBP 1669, 92 MARKUS P.M. VINK fi. 1158v, Monture der thonijs, stenen en personen in de parelvisserij van Tuticurin, 27.6.1668; Idem, fl. 1197r, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 13.7.1668; VOC 1270, OBP 1670, fl. 942v, Monture der thonijs, stenen en personen in de parelvisserij van Tuticurin, 16.7.1669; VOC 1266, OBP 1669, fl. 867v, Rapp. commr. Van Goens dejonge over Ceijlon, Malabar, en Madure aan de bewindhebbers, 15.8.1669.
20 bArunachalam S., The History of the Pearl Fisheries of the Tamil Coast (Ananmalai 1952) 87–93;Google ScholarRaoV.N., Shulman D., and Subrahmanyam S., Symbols of Substance. Court and State in Nayaka Period Tamilnadu (New York1992) 265ff;Google ScholarBayly , Saints, 79ffGoogle Scholar; Roche , Fishermen, 36–40.Google Scholar
21 The Portuguese in India were anything but a monolithic community. The main internal divisions were amongst the ofificial Estado da India (headed by the viceroy and council at Goa), the Indo-Portuguese settlers (casados), the ‘rebels’ (alevantados) of the informal ‘shadow empire’ in the Bay of Bengal, and the regular and secular clergy (Jesuits, Francis- cans, Augustinians, Dominicans, and other religious orders). Each of these groups was further divided along political, socioeconomic, religious, and other fault lines.
22 Flores J.M., Os Portugueses e o mar de Ceilao: Trato, diplomacia e guerra (1498–1543) (Lisbon 1998) 157–183;Google ScholarMcPherson , ‘Paravas and Portuguese’, 69–82.Google Scholar See also: Bouchon G., Regent of the Sea: Cannanore's Response to Portuguese Expansion, 1507–1528 (Delhi/New York 1988)Google Scholar; Dale S.F.,Islamic Society on the South Asian Frontier: The Mappilas of Malabar, 1498–1922 (Oxford 1980)Google Scholar; Nambiar O.K., The Kunjalis, Admirals of Calicut (New York 1963).;Google Scholar
23 Schurhammer G., ‘Die Bekehrung der Paravar (1535–1637)’, GesdmmelteStudienll: Orienta lia (Rome 1963)Google Scholar; Idem , ‘Letters of D. Joao da Cruz in the National Archives of Lisbon’, Gesammelte Studien IV: Varia(Rome 1965)Google Scholar; Silva C.R. de, ‘The Portuguese and Pearl- fishing off South India and Sri Lanka’, South Asia (n.s.) 1/1 (1978) 14–28.CrossRef | Google Scholar
24 S.C.Motha provides a ‘genealogical table’ of sixteenth and seventeenth century jati talaivans. Under the Portuguese government: D. Joao da Cruz (1543–1553), his son D. Miguel Joao da Cruz (1553–1562), his daughter Dona Maria Marguerita da Cruz (1562–1565), her husband D. Luis Estovao da Cruz Pires (1565–1590), his son D. Jeronimus Luis da Cruz Pires (1590–1615), his son D. Miguel Jeronimus da Cruz Pires (1615–1641), his son D. Xavier Miguel da Cruz Pires (1641–1646), his son-in-law D. Xavier Henrique da Cruz Correa (1646–1671), his son D.Jose Henrique da Cruz Correa (1671–1680); under Dutch rule: his nephew and son-in-law D. Estova da Cruz ‘Poobalarayen’ (1680–1686), his son-in-law D. Gabriel da Cruz Gomes (1686–1700). See: Motha S.C., A Short History of the fathithalaimai or the Chieftainship of the Bharathars, 14–15Google Scholar.
25 Correia-Afonso J., Thejesuits in India, 1542–1773 (Anand, Gujarat 1997) 9–14;Google ScholarSchurhammer G.,Francis Xavier: His Life, His Times II (Rome 1977) 308–309, 385–389, 471–472;Google ScholarThekkedath J., History of Christianity inlndiaW (Bangalore 1982) 162–163, 257Google Scholar; Schurhammer G. and Voretzsch E.A. eds, Ceylon zur Zeit des Konigs Bhuveneka Bahu und Franz Xavers 1539–1552 I (Leipzig 1928) 135–136, and passim.Google Scholar
26 Kaufmann , ‘A Christian Caste in Hindu Society’, 204Google Scholar; Roche , Fishermen, 38, 42–43, and 54–59;Google ScholarBayly , Saints, 325Google Scholar.
27 Following the conquest of the Portuguese setdements on the Madurai Coast in January 1658, for instance, the recendy deposed jati talaivan Joao da Cruz (not mentioned in Motha's list) readily allied himself with the Dutch. His brother Henrique was forced to leave the field along with his Portuguese patrons to become the head of a powerful antiCompany faction. In August 1692, the Parava merchant Tome de Melo, inhabitant of Manappad, who had served as a V.O.C. broker since 1680, refused to pool resources with other local merchants in a so-called ‘compagnie’, arguing ‘that he had two sons and three son-in-laws with whom he could manage everything’. De Melo continued that ‘they were all willing to assist their father, but certainly not a stranger’. At the same time, the request of the jati talaivan D. Gabriel Pires and other Parava office-holders of Tudcorin to be admitted to trade with the V.O.C. along with the local Parava brokers was flatly turned down by the latter.
28 For details: Schurhammer, Francis Xavier.
29 For the published correspondence of Superiors Antonio Criminalis, Henrique Henriques, and others: Wicki J. ed., Documenla Indica I (1540–1549) (Rome 1948) esp. 158–164, 223–227, 231–250, 279–300, 482–484, 486–488, 491–493, and 577–588;Google Scholar Idem II, esp. 155–168, 300–309, 388–401, and 558–572; Idem III, esp. 236–242, 415–427, and 595–601, and so forth. The Jesuit presence seemed to have declined significandy in the seventeenth century. Membership of the Malabar Province (created in 1602) fell from 190 men in 1626 to only 67 in 1717 due to causes such as the decline of Portugal as a colonial power, the secularisation of European society, the conflict between the Padroado and the Propaganda Fide, the Rites Controversy, the loss of men at sea, and so forth. See: Correia-Affonso J., The Jesuits in India, 1542–1773: A Short History (Anand 1997) 215.Google Scholar In 1663 the seventeen Parava villages between Kanniyakumari and Mukkaiyur were served by eight European priests. For a succinct overview of events: Subrahmanyam S., The Portuguese Empire in Asia 1500–1700: A Political and Economic History (London/New York 1993) 263–267.Google Scholar
30 Wicki J. ed., Documenta Indica I, 158–164, and 165–170.Google Scholar See also: Schurhammer and Voretsch ,Ceylon, 330–332.Google Scholar
31 Henrique Henriques (1520–1600) served on the Fishery Coast from 1546 until his death in 1600, mostly as Superior. He was the first European to master the Tamil language, and translated and published a number of works in Tamil.
32 One captain in particular, because of his evil character traits and actions, bore the brunt of Henriques' wrath, who thought him ‘not to be a human, but rather a beast’ (parece nao ser homem, senao besta). See: Documenta Indica III, 417. Not all local captains received a bad press. Henriques, for instance, was quite pleased with Manuel Rodrigues Coutinho, serving intermittently between 1550 and 1561 at Tuticorin.
33 For an example of existing suspicions among officials of the Estado da India, see the comments of the financial superintendent (vedor da fazenda) Simao Botelho in the mid-1550s. Felner RJ. de Lima ed., Subsidios para a historia da India Portugueza(Lisbon 1868) ii, 245.Google Scholar For figures of Portuguese revenues from the pearl fishery: Subrahmanyam S., ‘Noble Harvest from the Sea: Managing the Pearl Fishery of Mannar, 1500–1925’ in:Stein B. and Subrahmanyam S. eds,Institutions and Economic Change in South Asia (Oxford 1996) 143.Google Scholar
34 Historical Archives, Panaji, Goa, Livros de Moncoes 17, fl. 95. Quoted in: Subrahmanyam , The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 265Google Scholar.
35 Pissurlencar P.S.S. ed., Assentos do Conselho do Estado. Documentos coordenados e anotados I-V (Bastora-Goa 1953-1957) I, 258–259, and 364–365; II, 16–18, and 84–90;Google ScholarBocarro A., ‘Livro das plantas de todas as cidades, fortalezas, e povoacoes do Estado da India Oriental’ in: Pereira A.B. de Branganca ed., Arquivo Portuguh Oriental (n.s.) IV, part III, section 1 (Goa 1938) 368–369Google Scholar.
36 VOC 1158, OBP 1646, fis. 218r-218v, Verbaal van Coromandel, September 1645; VOC 1161, OBP 1647, fl. 952v, Journaal van het kasteel Geldria, 23.4.1646; Idem, fl. 825v, Miss, gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel aan Batavia, 3.5.1646; Idem, Us. 798r-798v, Miss, gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel aan Batavia, 9.6.1646; VOC 1164, OBP 1648, fls. 756r-756v, Miss, gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel aan Batavia, 27.6.1647; der J.A. van Chijs ed., Dagh-register gehouden int Casteel Batavia vant passerende daer ter plaetse ah over geheel Nederlandts-India 1645 (Batavia 1887-1928) 351–352Google Scholar.
37 VOC 1164, OBP 1648, fl. 715v, Miss. Van Barth van Kayelpatnam aan Van der Meijden en Crackouw te Karaikal, 15.1.1647; VOC 1268, OBP 1669, fl. 1170r, Rapport Captn. Van Rheede aan Rijckloff van Goens, 2.7.1668; VOC 1270, OBP 1670, fls. 155v-156r, Redenen en oorsaecken over het begin en vervolgh des Maduresen oorloghs, 19.12.1669. Goonewardena argues: 'The Viceroy [Manuel Mascarenhas Homem] himself caused much harm to the Dutch by successfully inciting the Nayaka of Madura to expel them from Kayalpatnam.' Goonewardena K.W., The Foundation of Dutch Power in Ceylon, 1638–1658 (Amsterdam 1958) 132Google Scholar.
38 VOC872, BUB 1648, fl. 302, Miss. GGen Raan gouvr. Maetsuijckervan Ceijlon, 16.9.1648. See also: Dagh-register 1648, 17.9.1648; Rijks Geschiedkundige Publicatiön, Grote Serie 112, Coolhaas W.Ph. ed., Generate missiven van gouverneurs-generaal en raden aan Heren XVII der Verenigde Oostindische Compagniell (The Hague 1964) 345, dd. 18.1.1649Google Scholar; RoelofszM.A.P., De vestiging der Nederlanders ter Kuste Malabar (The Hague 1943) 125–136CrossRef | Google Scholar.
39 The best accounts of the expedition are provided by two of its participants, the soldier Johann von der Behr and the junior merchant and secretary Johan de Vogel, and the Portuguese protest: VOC 1187, OBP 1652, fls. 509r-531r, Extract dagregister De Vogel gedurende de expeditie van Tuticorin, 31.1-1.3.1649; VOC 1185, OBP 1652, fl. 532r-540r, Verhael van de incomste der Hollanders binnen Tuticorin, gegouverneert bij de gouvr. van Gale, Joan Maetsijcker, 7-20.2.1649; l'Honore-Naber S.P. ed.,Reisebeschreibungen von deutschen Beambten und Kriegsleuten im Dienst der Niederldndischen West- und Ost-Indischen Kompagnien, 1602–1797 IV (The Hague 1930-1933) esp. 109–116.Google Scholar Also: VOC 1173, OBP 1650, fls. 446r-449v, Resolution gedurende hetexploictop de Madurese kust, 10–28.2.1649.
40 VOC 1173, OBP 1650, fls. 450r-450v, Translaat contract uit het Latijn nopende die van Tuticorin, 18.2.1649; VOC 1187, OBP 1652, fls. 522r-522v, Extract dagregister De Vogel, 31.1-1.3.1649; Heeres J.E. ed., Corpus diplomaticum Neerlando-Indicum II (The Hague1907-1938) 512–513,Google Scholar dd. 18.2.1649. Although failing to consult Von der Behr, Nilakanta Sastri correctly characterised these two contracts as ‘paper agreements’: Sastri K.A. Nilakanti, ‘Tirumula Naik, the Portuguese and the Dutch’, Indian Historical Records Commission, Proceedings of Meetings 16 (1940) 37Google Scholar.
41 Letter Viceroy Filipe de Mascarenhas from Goa to the King, 30.11.1649. In: Pissurlencar , Assentos III, 515–516.Google Scholar There are two references in the meetings of the Council of State at Goa to the Dutch punitive expedition. In April 1649, there is a short reference to the ‘excesses’ (exorbitancias) they committed at Tuticorin’. In January 1650, it was noted ‘how last year the Dutch sacked and ravaged (saqueara e assolara) the settlement of Tuticorin under the truce agreed upon’. Idem, Assentos do Conselho doEstadolll, 126 and 135.
42 Resolutiēn van de Staten van Hollandt ende West-Vrieslandt, 159, dd. 25.3.1651. See also: Prestage E. et al., Correspondência diplomática de Francisco de Sousa Coutinho durante a sua embaixada em Holanda (Coimbra/Lisbon 1920-1955)Google Scholar; Prestage E., The Diplomatic Relations of Portugal loith France, England, and Holland from 1640–1668(Watford 1925)Google Scholar.
43 VOC 1195, OBP 1653, fls. 576r-576v, Miss, gouvr. Van Kiitensteijn en raad van Gale aan Batavia, 28.2.1652.
44 VOC 1185, OBP 1652, fls. 532r-540r, Corte verantwoordinge vanwege de VOC die gedaan werd opt relaes bij de Portuguese ambassadeur aan haar Ho. Mo. afgegeven over het gepasseerde in Tuticorin ao. 1649. See also: Generale missiven II, 503–505,Google Scholar dd. 19.12.1651.
45 VOC 1177, OBP 1651, fls. 420r-420v, Transl. brief van de patangatins ofte overheden der stadt Tuticurin aen de gouvernr. van Gale, 9.1.1650; Idem, fls. 422r-424r, Dagregister koopman Goes gedurende de Toutecourijnse voijagie, 13–24.1.1650. See also: Idem, fl. 349r, Miss, gouvr. Van Kittensteijn van Gale aan gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel, 1.5.1650; VOC 1179, OBP 1651, fl. 47r, Generale missive, 10.12.1650.
46 An apologetic letter written afterwards by Cabral from Palaiyamkottai provides some interesting details surrounding the expulsion of the Portuguese and the ambiguous position of the aranmanai. Cabral claimed that he had been initially determined to face the enemy head on, inciting the local Parava and Hindu population to fight. According to Cabral, however, he was tricked with ‘deceptive talk’ (discurzo enganozo) by the Madurai Governor Vadamalaiyappa Pillai into retreating to Palaiyamkottai. The Portuguese commander claimed that the ‘chief regent’ of Madurai had assured him that he would personally see to it that the Portuguese forces from Ceylon would beat the Dutch from the coast (ha vista de nossa forca maritima botar o enemigo da costa). Letter from Jorge Cabral at Palaiyamkottai (‘Palião’) to the governors of India, 12.2.1658. In: Pissurlencar , Assentos III, 625 n. 1Google Scholar.
47 In 1658 a planned mission under the Company Senior Merchant Eduard Ooms to Palaiyamkottai and Madurai was cancelled since the Company was unable to come up with elephants from Ceylon. According to intelligence reports, the Nayaka of Madurai could not be visited without presenting one of these high-esteemed animals. The Dutch later suspected that the initial reports were unfounded and had been spread by their inveterate enemy Henrique da Cruz and other Tuticorin pattangattins in order to prevent the Company from achieving its objectives. A 1659 high-profile mission under Governor Adriaen van der Meijden, scheduled to visit the Nayaka court, was held back in view of troubled conditions in Madurai. Instead, Van der Meijden dispatched the Company Merchant Cornelis Valckenburgh to Barmiliappa Pillai, governor of the Madurai lowlands at Neliappatirnegari.
48 VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fls. 424r-426r, Transl. articulen door den Neijck van Madura aen de hr. gouvr. Van der Meijde verleent, [11].3.1659; Idem, fls. 430r-431r, Transl. ola Barmiliappa Pulle aan de deurwaarders van Van der Meijden, 18.3.1659; Heeres , CorpusII, 142–149.Google Scholar See also: VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fl. 410v, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en koopman Ooms van Tuticorin aan superintendent Van Goens, 15.3.1659.
49 VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fl. 124v, Miss, koopm. Valckenburgh van Tuticorin aan Batavia, 6.11.1659.
50 Letter from Pierre Martin, Missionary of the Company of Jesus, to Father Charles le Gobien, 1.6.1700. Cited in: Ch. Gobien Le ed.,Lettres edifiantes et curieuses ecrites des missions etrangeres par quelques missionaries de la Compagnie de Jesus V (Paris1708) 100Google Scholar.
51 VOC 1239, OBP 1663, fl. 1654v, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 16.8.1662. In November 1659, Admiral Rijckloff van Goens informed Batavia of ‘a prominent and sensible pattangattim’, who had himself instructed by Almeida and eagerly frequented the Protestant church and catechisation at Tuticorin. VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fl. 133r, Miss, admiraal Van Goens aan Batavia, 12.11.1659.
52 Motha's genealogical table merely mentions D. Xavier Henrique de Cruz Correia (1646–1671). See: Motha , A Short History, 14Google Scholar.
53 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fls. 419r-420r, Miss, topas moor Andre de Morais te Punecaijle aan adml. Van Goens, 30.12.1658.
54 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fls. 417r-417v, Brief door de principaalste Paravas aan adml. Van Goens, 23.1.1659; VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fls. 133r-133v and 165r, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 12.11.1659.
55 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fls. 272r-272v, Miss, koopm. Ooms van Tuticorin aan adml. Van Goens, 1.11.1658; Idem, fls. 403r-403v, Miss, koopm. Ooms van Tuticorin aan comms. Van Goens, 12.1.1659; Idem, fls. 433r-434r, Miss, koopm. Valckenburgh van Tuticorin aan superint. Van Goens, 3.4.1659; VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fls. 124r-124v, Miss, koopm. Valckenburgh van Tuticorin aan Batavia, 6.11.1659; VOC 1243, OBP 1664, fl. 1249, Rapport De Haze aan Van Goens, 20.6.1663.
56 Foster W. ed., The English Factories in India, 1661–1664 (Oxford 1923) 254–255.Google Scholar
57 VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fl. 132v, Miss. adml. Van Goens en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 12.11.1659; VOC 888, BUB 1664, fl. 417, Memorie GG en R voor Van Goens gaande als gouvr. naar Ceijlon, 5.9.1664. English investments at Old Kayal amounted to a mere 2,000–3,000 ounds in cotton goods. The factory was therefore considered ‘a deare bought experiment at the Companies cost’. Fostered., The English Factories in India I, 343Google Scholar; Idem, The English Factories in India II, 73Google Scholar; Dagh-register 1663, 577, dd. 27.11.1663.
58 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fl. 410v, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en koopm. Ooms van Tuticorin aan superint. Van Goens, 15.3.1659.
59 VOC 1233, OBP 1661, fl. 150v, Miss. adml. Van Goens van Jaffnapatnam aan Batavia, 15.3.1660. The mere fact that references to Henrique da Cruz become also less and less frequent during the 1660s is indicative of this development. See also: VOC 1270, OBP 1670, fl. 175v, Redenen Madurese oorlog, 19.12.1669. As usual Van Goens overstated his case. Fifteen years later, commenting on the ‘extreme hesitations’ of the aranmanai against farming out the revenues of Tuticorin and Kayalpatnam to the Company in 1675, Van Goens the Younger wryly observed: ‘The large family of die old Henrique da Cruz, the papists and odier Portuguese supporters are undoubtedly the most harmful in this respect…’ VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 560r, Nadere consideration commt. Huijsman aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 23.12.1675. According to Motha's ‘genealogical table’, Xavier Henrique da Cruz Correia (1646–1671) passed the office of jati talaivan on to his son D.Jose Henrique da Cruz Correia (1671–1680). See: Motha , A Short History, 14.Google Scholar
60 Dagh-register 1664, 409, dd. 14.10.1664. The Company also attempted, in vain, to exclude the Jesuit priests (‘het schadelijc volck’) from the lands of Travancore via treaties with its ruler, Rama Varma (r. 1662–1671), in April 1665 and August 1666. See: Memorie commr. Isbrand Godske voor commr. Lucas van der Dussen, Cochin, 5.1.1668. In: Rijks Geschiedkundige Publication, Kleine serie 43, s'Jacob H.K., De Nederlanders in Kerala, 1663–1701. De memories en instructies betreffende het commandement Malabar van de Verenigde Oost- indische Compagnie (The Hague 1976) 58Google Scholar; Heeres , Corpus II, 323 and 344Google Scholar.
61 VOC 888, BUB 1664, fls. 417–418, Miss. GG en R voor Van Goens gaande als gouvr. naar Ceijlon, 5.9.1664.
62 Ibidem; Brown L.W., The Indian Christians of St. Thomas: An Account of the Ancient Syrian Church of Malabar(Cambridge 1956) 11–37, and 92–108;Google Scholars'Jacob , De Nederlanders in Kerala, esp. xxxvii–xxxviii;Google ScholarHeeres , Corpus II, 242,Google Scholar dd. 20.3.1663.
63 Vink , ‘The Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of the Fishery Coast’, 378–387.Google Scholar
64 The three standard, albeit outdated, accounts are: Aiyar S. Sathyanatha, History of the Nayaks ofMadurai (Madras 1924)Google Scholar; Rangachari V., ‘History of the Naik Kingdom of Madurai’, Indian Antiquary 43–46 (1914-1917) passimGoogle Scholar; Nelson J.H., The Madura Country: A Manual (Madras 1868),Google Scholar along with the various district gazetteers. The term imperial ’overstretch’ (in relation to productive resources) is derived from: Kennedy , The Bise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000 (New York 1989)Google Scholar.
65 Desikar P.S.S., ‘Viceroys of die Nayaka of Madurai’, Journal of Indian History 17 (1938) 175–180.Google ScholarDesikar erroneously claims that Vadamalaiyappa died in 1663, but Company sources make clear that he passed away in early 1675. See: VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 146r, Missive opperkoopm. Huijsman van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 20.10.1675. For a description of Vadamalaiyappa: VOC 1274, OBP 1671, fl. 189r, Extract Ceijlons dagregister behelzende de samenspraeck tusschen gouvr. Van Goens en Barmiliappe Pulle tot Tuticorin gehouden, 1.3.1670.
66 VOC 1468, OBP 1691, fl. 317r, Rapport asst. Welter aan opperk. en opperh. Van Vliet en raad van Tuticorin, 9.9.1689.
67 Subrahmanyam S., The Political Economy of Commerce: Southern India, 1500–1650 (Cambridge 1990) 327–336;CrossRef | Google ScholarIdem, Symbols of Substance, 96–104.
68 Rijckloff van Goens Sr, among others, governor of Ceylon (1662–1663; 1665–1675), director general of the Indies (1675–1678), and governor general of the Indies (1678–1681). Rijckloff van Goens Jr, governor of Ceylon (1675–1679).
69 Vink, ‘The Temporal’.
70 VOC 1333, OBP 1679, fl. 135r, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon aan Heren XVII, 2.1.1679. One Dutch observer even suggested incorporating the Muslim Maraikkayars of Kayalpatnam into the Company patronage network, exploiting the existing Parava-Maraikkyar rivalry to bring the recalcitrant Catholic fishermen to order. VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fls. 560r-560v, Nadere consideratien commt. Huijsman, 23.12.1675.
71 VOC 1292, OBP 1674, fls. 154v-155r, Resolutie gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon, 20.12.1673; VOC 1304, OBP 1675, fl. 325r, Rapport Huijsman wegens den jegenwoordigen stant der saecken op de custe van Madure, 29.3.1674.
72 VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 560r, Nadere consideratien commt. Huijsman raeckende het gedane rapport wegens den toestant van Madure, 23.12.1675.
73 VOC 1315, OBP 1677, fls. 345r-345v, Transl. ola landregent Commare Swami Modeljaar aan commt. Huijsman, 7.6.1676; VOC 1315, OBP 1677, fls. 346r-346v, Transl. contract of of obligatie van de landregent Commare Suami Modeljaar, 2.7.1676; Heeres , Corpus III,31–34Google Scholar.
74 Although accepting the offer would have highly indebted these officials and would increase the Company's reputation, it was feared that Chokkanatha Nayaka or a new governor of the lowlands might not acknowledge the agreement. Moreover, if news of the secret deal leaked out, it could create suspicion concerning the Company's real intentions and endanger the reimbursement of the loan on the seaports. In view of these caveats, Governor Van Goens ordered to play for time until further instructions from Batavia were known.
75 VOC 1316, OBP 1677, fl. 336v, Missive Verwer en raad van Nagapatnam aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 16.12.1676.
76 Illustrative of imperialist discourse was that the robbery was described as ‘a villainous and treacherous deed’ on the part of the Company's supposed loyal client community. VOC 1333, OBP 1679, fls. 195r-198v, Miss, commt. Huijsman en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 8.11.1678; Idem, fls. 200r-200v and 203r-204r, Miss, koopm. Fauconnier van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 17.11.1678; Idem, fls. 241r-242v and 244r, Transl. ola Moeckapa Neijck aan commr. Huijsman te Tuticorin, 19.11.1678; Idem, fls. 158v-159r, Resolutie gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon, 21.11.1678.
77 In October 1678, the Dutch had sent an embassy under the head peon Mukkapa Nayaka to the Madurai court. VOC 1333, OBP 1679, fls. 241r-242v, Transl. ola Moeckapa Neijck aan commr. Huijsman te Tuticorin, 19.11.1678; Idem, fls. 212r-213r, Missive Fauconnier en Van Vliet van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 27.11.1678; Idem, fls. 134r-135r, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon aan H. XVII, 2.1.1679.
78 VOC 1469, OBP 1691, fl. 60r, Miss, gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon aan comms. Van Rheede te Tuticorin, 30.3.1690; VOC 1505, OBP 1693, fls. 424r-424v, Rekest van de pattangattins en verdere Paravase gemeente aan gouvr. Van Rhee van Ceijlon, 3.5.1692; VOC 1506, OBP 1693, fl. 859r, Dagregister gouvr. Van Rhee op de voijagie naar Tuticorin, 12.8-8.9.1692.
79 Markus Vink, ‘Communalism or Coexistence? Muslim-Christian Relations on the Madurai Coast in the 17th Century’, Midwest Conference on Asian Affairs, 46th Annual Meeting, DeKalb, 26–28 September 1997 (unpublished paper).
80 In the seventeenth-century pearl fisheries, consisting of 400–500 vessels and 12,000–16,000 men, the Paravas accounted for fifty-five to sixty-five per cent of the diving stones, while the Muslim divers made up thirty to forty per cent of the stones. Markus Vink, ‘Encounters on the Opposite Coast’, table 6.2, page 397.
81 Rao, Shulman, and Subrahmanyam, Symbols of Substance, 264ff; Shulman O. and Subrahmanyam S., ‘Prince of Poets and Ports: Citakatti, the Maraikkayars and Ramnad, ca. 1690–1710’ in: Dallapiccola A.L. and Lallemant S. Zingel-Ave eds,Islam and Indian Regions I (Stuttgart 1993) 497–535;Google ScholarBayly , Saints, esp. 71–86;Google ScholarArasaratnam S., ‘A Note on Periathamby Marikkar: A 17th Century Commercial Magnate’, Tamil Culture 11/1(January–March 1964) 51–57. Rao, Shulman, and Subrahmanyam identify three individuals belonging to the Kilakkarai-based family of Shaykh Abd al-Qadir or ‘Cittakatti’, but Dutch sources clearly show that there were fourGoogle Scholar.
82 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 179r-179v, Transl. ola Perie Tambij aan gouvr. Pijl, 15.3.1684; Idem, fls. 179v-181r, Transl. ola Perie Tambij aan de bramine Timmersa, 15.3.1684; Idem, fl. 378v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 18.10.1684.
83 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 412v-413r, Resolutie commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin, 21.3.1684; Idem, fls. 169v-170v, 171v and 174r-174v, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684; Idem, fl. 312r, Extract missive commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 30.5.1684; Idem, fl. 339v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 16.6.1684; Idem, fls. 13v-14r, Miss, gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 3.7.1684; Idem, fls. 419r-420r, and 422r-423v, Rolle der wederwaardigheden aan d'E. Comps. dienaren en koopl. &a. door sTeuverheers palligares, manigares, als Moorse regenten aangedaan, 28.10.1684.
84 In March 1684, for instance, the rice and nelli purchased by some Parava peddlers at Valinokkam, Mariyur, and other places in the lands of the Tevar were placed under arrest along with the vessel dispatched from Tuticorin to collect it. The ship and the commodities were only after six months to the great detriment of the traders, who claimed to have lost twenty-five per cent in the process.
85 In a subsequent olai of April 1684, the Periya Tambi dismissed this whole episode categorically as ‘false and fabricated rumors’. VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fl. 332v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 14.2.1684; Idem, fl. 181r, 98 MARKUS P.M. VINK Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 9.4.1684.
86 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 331v-333v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Ceijlon aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 14.2.1684; Idem, fls. 181v-183r, Transl. ola Perie Tambij aan den Bramine Timmersa, 15.3.1684; Idem, fls. 168v-169r, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684; Idem, fls. 378v-379r and 380v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684.
87 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fl. 414v, Resolutie commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin, 21.3.1684; Idem, fls. 171r-171v, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684.
88 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 172v-174r, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684; Idem, fl. 427r, Translaat antwoord den Marca Perietambij op de overgegeven rol van klachten, 15.11.1684.
89 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 309v-310r, Missive commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 13.4.1684; VOC 1395, OBP 1685, fls. 1839r-1839v, Transl. ola Teuverheer Tiroemalij Chedoepadde Katte Teuver aan de Bramine Timmersa, 26.4.1684; VOC 1396, OBP 1683, fls. 310r-31 lr, Extract missive Van Rhee en Fauconnier van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 28.4.1684; Idem, fls. 335r-335v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl, 19.5.1684.
90 VOC 1410, OBP 1686, fls. 247r-248r, Artikelen van de vrede met de Teuver, 15.3.1685; Generale missiven IV, 822, dd. 11.12.1685; Heeres , Corpus III, 377–380Google Scholar.
91 Bayly , Saints, esp. 341–347;Google ScholarZupanov , Disputed Mission, 28–30, 40–41, 122–125, 183–184, and 220–226;Google ScholarKaufman , ‘A Christian Caste in Hindu Society’, 210–213;Google ScholarClooney F.X., ‘Robert de Nobili, Adaptation, and the Reasonable Interpretation of Religion’, Missiotogy 18 (1990) 25–36;Google ScholarVOC 1479, OBP 1691, fl. 599r, Dgl. aantekening van de parelvisserij op de kust van Madure door opp.k. Alebos en kaptn. De Theil, 20.6.1690. For a discussion of the syncretic Hindu-Christian beliefs of Tamil Christians in the interior, such as the Alampuram Nadars (Shanars), low-ranking palmyra cultivators and petty traders in Ramanathapuram, see: Mosse D., ‘Catholic Saints and the Hindu Village Pantheon in Rural Tamil Nadu’, Man (n.s.) 29 (1994) 301–332;CrossRef | Google ScholarIdem, ‘Roman Catholicism and Hindu Village Society in Tamil Nadu, India’ in: Stewart C. and Shaw R. eds, Syncrelism/Anti-syncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis (London/New York 1994) 85–107CrossRef | Google Scholar.
92 Nieuhof , Gedenkwaerdige zeeen lantreize, 182.Google Scholar For similar comments: Baldaeus Ph., Naauwkeurige beschryvinge van Malabar en Chormandel (Amsterdam 1672) 150.Google Scholar Frustration to convert the Paravas to the Calvinist ‘True Faith’ partially account for these condescending remarks.
93 Zupanov , Disputed Mission, 226.Google Scholar
94 Vink , ‘Encounters’, 49–50.Google Scholar
95 VOC 1506, OBP 1693, fls. 859v-860v and 868v-869r, Dagregister gouvr. Van Rhee, 12.8-8.9.1692; Anthonisz S. ed., Memoir of Thomas van Rhee, Governor and Director of Ceylon, for his Successor, Gerrit de Heere, 1697 (Columbo 1915) 36Google Scholar.
96 Between the fiscal years 1678–1679 and 1690–1691, for instance, Dutch investments increased 246 percent from 159,000 to 550,000 guilders. Starting in 1680, ‘associations of indigenous merchants’ were created along the Madurai Coast, holding a monopoly of local trade with the V.O.C. These joint-stock companies were dominated by the Parava mejaikarar. The gradual removal of restrictions on the Indo-Ceylon trade in 1696 furthered boosted the fortunes of the Parava leadership. See: Vink , ‘Encounters’, 137–138, and443–445Google Scholar.
97 VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 560v, Nader consideratiën commandant Huijsman wegens den toestant van Madure, 23.12.1675.
Thanks: www.cambridge.org
