Goa's 'Pelourinho Novo' Renaming Sparks Historical Accuracy Debate Among Experts
The directorate of archaeology's recent notification to designate the historical structure known as 'Pelourinho Novo' (New Pillory) in Old Goa as 'Hath Katro Khamb' has ignited a significant controversy, drawing mixed reactions from historians, architects, and heritage activists. The move, which proposes to list the pillory as a protected monument under the Goa, Daman and Diu Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1978, is being challenged on grounds of historical validity and accuracy.
Formal Objections Filed by Historians and Professionals
A formal objection has been submitted to the archaeology department by a group including historian Dale Luis Menezes, architect Cedric Lobo, and journalists Joseph Marques and Frazer Andrade. They dispute the interpretation linking the pillory to punitive practices, arguing that historical records consistently refer to the structure as 'Pelourinho Novo'. The petitioners maintain that claims of it being a place where the Portuguese severed the hands of non-believers are based on "hearsay and folklore" rather than documented evidence.
Additional objections are in the process of being filed by Dr. Luis Dias and PhD scholars Amita Kanekar, Maria de Lourdes Bravo Da Costa, and Celsa Pinto. According to their submission, several historical references from 19th-century writings and later official records identify the structure exclusively as 'Pelourinho Novo'. They contend that a pillory is a civic marker historically associated with administrative or municipal authority, often indicating a central or symbolic point within a settlement, and there is no evidence linking it to religious persecution or punitive practices.
Debate Over Etymology and Historical Interpretation
The issue has drawn attention from other experts, shedding light on its possible colonial-era origins and evolving interpretations. History enthusiast Sanjeev Sardesai noted that while pillories were introduced by the Portuguese and used for public humiliation in Europe, the term 'Hath Khatro' has been used to refer to the structure since the pre-Liberation era. He suggested that practices may have involved people being tied to the pole with their hands broken, not severed, indicating a structured system of punishment.
In contrast, historian and heritage activist Prajal Sakhardande argued that the term 'Hath Katro' in local parlance translates to 'hands chopped', not 'hands tied or broken'. He emphasized that while there may be no historical record of such acts occurring at the location, the etymology suggests hands were cut, and thus the name should not be contested. Sakhardande proposed a compromise, suggesting it could be called 'Pelourinho Novo: Hath Katro Khamb'.
Official Response and Call for Reconsideration
Director of the archaeology department, Nilesh Fal Dessai, stated that all objections and suggestions will be considered. "We have to look at the sentiments of the people and at the same time, at the accurate history surrounding the subject before deciding. Then, it is up to the government," he said. The petitioners have urged the department to reconsider the nomenclature and adopt a historically accurate name before proceeding with the declaration, warning that failure to do so could result in the creation of an inaccurate historical record.
This debate highlights the delicate balance between preserving local folklore and ensuring historical accuracy in heritage conservation efforts. As the archaeology department reviews the objections, the outcome will likely set a precedent for how such historical interpretations are handled in Goa's rich cultural landscape.
