It is interesting the way you are looking at the history of the Maldives. The work that you are carrying out may contribute to the history of our country. Having said that, I cannot agree with your theory regarding the part of our history which concerns with the Portuguese occupation. As there are irrefutable evidence to prove the role that they played in the Maldives during their rule and based on leteratures availabe from outside itself, this argument of yours seems a biased view.( refer to Bell..H.C.P, Excerpta Maldiviana, The Portuguese at the Maldives', Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, (Ceylone) 84 (1931), p.76-123.) This article conclusively prove based on the documents found both in the archives of Portuguese and on the account of historians worked on the East that Portuguese were in the Maldives during the period of their colonisation of the East.

One is also disturbed by your attitude when you mention the National Day is a display of fanaticism bashing the modern Portugal which is member of European community, you tend to argue as if European countries are pure from sins and are incapable of committing crimes and attrocities. Since you are a person inerested in the history, I am convinced that you are well familiar with European countries past imperialism and colonisation which to a certain extent even continue to the modern time. Whether one is member of European, Nato, Asian it does not make them exonerate or excuse them the role their have played in the past. Being a European country does not give passport to freedom,liberty or civilisation either. These values are now in danger even in Europe and America, countries and region that claims to be based on the foundation of these values.

Jameel
London

 

The following reply was sent to the correspondent.

Dear Mohamed Jameel Ahmed,

Thank you for visiting the web site of the Maldives Royal Family and for your comments.

I have addressed the possible reasons for Bell's and Pyrard's apparent assertion that the Maldives was under the sovereignty of the Portuguese Crown, in the page you refer to in our site. I also have a note on that page from a senior Portuguese academic who backs my point of view. The so called Portuguese conquest was a return of Malé to the sovereign control of the legitimate king of the Maldives, Dom Manoel who was previously known as Hassan IX. This was undertaken with the help of a private militia, some of whose members may have included Portuguese subjects. Maldive oral tradition backs this up. Refer Buraara Koi.

Similar incidents in more modern times, both in the Maldives and elsewhere are not regarded as foreign conquests. You may recall that in 1988, a coup attempt in Malé was foiled by Indian troops. That is not regarded (correctly so) as an Indian conquest and the Maldives is not now seen as under Indian rule. The barbaric regime known as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan was installed with the active and moral backing of the mainly-Saudi criminal organisation called al-Qaeda. However Afghanistan was not regarded as being under the rule of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia- and correctly so.

According to the Tarikh, the kateeb of Uteem seized control of Malé from the regent of King Dom Manoel with the help of the Ali Raja of Cannanore. The kateeb signed away sovereignty of the Maldives to the Ali Raja even though later he reneged on that pact and made peace with the his king.

Official Portuguese records acknowledge Portuguese rule over other territories in the region, namely Ceylon, Goa and other Indian enclaves and Timor. If you know of any Portuguese official archive that mentions sovereignty over the Maldives of the King of Spain in his right of the Crown of Portugal, please let me know.

In recent years, there have been documented cases in the Maldives, of what might be termed as fanatical bashing of the modern state of Portugal, a respected member of the European Union. What is at issue is not what European countries may or may not have done during colonial times or for that matter what Portugal may have done in territories under its jurisdiction. At issue is an orchestrated bashing of the modern state of Portugal in the Maldives, in connection with its national day celebrations.

If you feel there is a need for pillorying Portugal, NATO or Asian countries for what you imply were their past atrocities, why not have a hate Portugal, NATO and Asian Day, rather than doing it on the Maldive national day? The question is why do we stop at Portugal, NATO and Asian. Why don't we pillory Japan for the mistakes of the Imperial Japanese Army or Germany and Austria for the Third Reich? Why don't we have a hate the Turks day for the sake of the sins of the Janissaries? Why don't we have a hate the Arabs day too for their trade in slaves? And yes (I know. I know), a hate the Yankees day for buying the slaves off the Arabs and putting them to toil?

Let me submit to you that hate is not a healthy sentiment, so I would rather not have any of these days.

Best regards
Majid
Nelson