Portuguese Missionary Grammars in Asia, Africa and ...

John Benjamins Publishing Company

This is a contribution from Historiographia Linguistica 39:2/3 © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company This electronic file may not be altered in any way. The author(s) of this article is/are permitted to use this PDF file to generate printed copies to be used by way of offprints, for their personal use only. Permission is granted by the publishers to post this file on a closed server which is accessible to members (students and staff) only of the author’s/s’ institute, it is not permitted to post this PDF on the open internet. For any other use of this material prior written permission should be obtained from the publishers or through the Copyright Clearance Center (for USA: www.copyright.com). Please contact [email protected] or consult our website: www.benjamins.com Tables of Contents, abstracts and guidelines are available at www.benjamins.com

Portuguese Missionary Grammars in Asia, Africa and Brazil, 1550– 1800. By Otto Zwartjes (= Studies in the History of the Language Sciences, 117.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2011, xiv, 359 pp. ISBN 978-90-272-4608-0. EUR 110 / USD 165 (HB). Reviewed by Gonçalo Fernandes (Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro) The present monograph constitutes the first complete study and most extensive research to date of Portuguese missionary linguistics, covering three continents, South America (Brazil), Africa, and Asia, through the entire pre-modern period (16th–18th centuries). It provides an integrated framework, analysis and evaluation of the first grammars (as well as catechisms and vocabularies) written in Portuguese by missionaries. The author is arguably the most renowned scholar in the growing field of missionary linguistics and certainly its main promoter. This book is the result of many years of research. As Zwartjes writes, “this monograph is, in part, an attempt to ‘revitalise’ older linguistic documentation, analysing how and to what extent the meaning of traditional metalinguistic language was […] changing in different contexts” (p. 261). The volume carries an impressive bibliography (303–346) of primary and secondary sources, prepared with considerable care and with few typographical errors, such as the date of the facsimile edition of Álvares’ grammar (1974 instead of 1972). However, in my view, some important Portuguese historical sources by the historians of the religious orders should have been added, such as, for example, the 21 volumes of Monumenta Missionaria Africana (1952–1988) edited by António Brásio, S.J. (1906–1985), the 10 volumes of the Breve História da Companhia de Jesus no Brasil 1549–1760 (1938–1950) by Serafim Leite, S.J. (1890–1969) and the 7 volumes of the História da Companhia de Jesus na Assistência de Portugal (1931– 1950) by Francisco Rodrigues, S.J. (1873–1956), as these sources offer additional insights and further background data to the understanding and development of missionary work. With the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494), Portugal and Spain divided between them the newly discovered lands (outside Europe), giving Portugal the east and Spain the west of the meridian 370 leagues (2,193 km) west of the Cape Verde islands. This division ended the dispute between the two countries regarding the new lands and changed the history of the Discoveries (Rema 1982: 16–19). On the other hand, after the Papal bull Dum Diversas (1452) and, mainly, the Romanus Historiographia Linguistica xxxix:2/3 (2012), 383–392. doi 10.1075/hl.39.2.11fer issn 0302–5160 / e-issn 1569–9781 © John Benjamins Publishing Company

384 Gonçalo Fernandes: Review of Zwartjes (2011)

Pontifex bull (1455), Pope Nicholas V (1397–1455) attributed to the Portuguese King Afonso V (1432–1481) the ius patronatus (“the right of patronage”) and the complete jurisdiction of the Portuguese overseas territories. In effect, the Catholic Church acknowledged Portugal’s right of governance of the discovered (and yet to be discovered) territories, and the right of the Portuguese King, who was committed to providing missionaries for those lands, to name bishops and to administrate local churches (building, preserving and restoring existing structures) (Rego 1940: 7–8). However, on June 22nd, 1622, during the Iberian unification and the loss of Portugal’s independence (1580–1640), Pope Gregory XV (1554–1623), through the bull Inscrutabili Divinae Providentiae, decreed the establishment of the Papal Congregation for Propagating the Faith (Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide) in Rome, with the purpose of overseeing and directing all Catholic missionary activity. Thus, these two organizations had, mutatis mutandis, the same objectives, which caused many problems to Portuguese missionaries and their activities (Rego 1940: 33–59). Portuguese missionaries worked in these above-mentioned parts of the world and described the main languages spoken by the native peoples in order to communicate with them and to teach the Catholic faith (p. 4), particularly after the approval of the Society of Jesus (1540) by Pope Paul III (1468–1549) and the Council of Trent (1545–1563). However, many of these works of this period (16th–18th centuries) remain unpublished, conserved only as manuscripts, or must be presumed lost. Perhaps these are the reasons why “the total number of languages described in grammars in Portuguese America is not as impressive as that we find in the Spanish New World” (p. 144). Nevertheless, as Zwartjes proves, an interesting corpus of documented non-Indo-European languages from the pre-modern period still survives, mostly Asian (Tamil, Konkani, Bengali, Marathi, Hindi, Japanese), Brazilian (Tupi / Tupinambá and Kiriri), African (Kikongo, Kimbundu and Chinyungwe/Chisena) grammars, as well as dictionaries of Japanese, Chinese, Tamil, Konkani and Hindi, among other languages. Given the relative wealth of linguistic materials, one regrets the little acknowledgment amongst Portuguese scholars given to the field of the historiography of linguistics in general and, in particular, to missionary linguistics. Nevertheless, as this monograph clearly demonstrates, “no elaborate innovative meta-language was developed in the period, but it is obvious that missionary-linguists frequently modify meanings of conventional terminology” (p. 261). Moreover (p. 270), one of the most important contributions of these missionaries to historiography is the fact that they were pioneers in several topics which today belong to specific subfields of linguistics, such as pragmatics, sociolinguistics, translation theories and practices, and even beyond linguistics: culture, history, geography, and (linguistic) anthropology.

© 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company All rights reserved

Reviews / Comptes rendus / Besprechungen 385

Thus, Zwartjes’ books is of the utmost importance to all researchers in missionary linguistics, not only Portuguese, but from all over the world. It is, and will remain, a fundamental reference in missionary linguistics for many years to come. Zwartjes divides his monograph into seven chapters, analyzing the state of the discipline of Missionary Linguistics (Chapter 1), studying the earliest grammars from the Indian subcontinent (Chapter 2), Japan (Chapter 3), Brazil (Chapter 4), Africa (Chapter 5), and those concerning Arabic and Hebrew (Chapter 6). In the seventh and last chapter (261–270), the author draws his conclusions. He ends his work with an Appendix devoted to the possibly first lexicographic treatises of these various languages discussed in the main parts of his book (271–302). In effect, in the first chapter the author presents the goal of the study, reflecting on the contribution of missionary linguistics to the study of the typology of languages, the description of exotic languages, and the development of linguistic concepts. Zwartjes structures his analysis along the lines of phonology and orthography, morphosyntax, parts of speech, and information about other aspects of the local culture, which he calls extra-grammatical information. He is “chiefly interested” in “missionary sources […] as contributions to the history and historiography of language sciences” (p. 17) instead of merely leading “to a better understanding of the indigenous languages themselves” (ibid.), or historical linguistics for that matter. Zwartjes offers an interesting note about the descriptions of ‘natural languages’ by missionary-linguists and their (non-)mixed language studies: “Portuguese and Spanish missionaries never compiled grammars or dictionaries of the varieties such as pidgins and creoles that resulted from contact with European languages: they were interested in independent ‘natural languages’ which had not been corrupted by linguistic contact” (p. 13). However, beyond the scope of the present study, which covers the period 1550–1800, there are some authors who have shown an interest in these “corrupted” languages as well, such as, for example, Marcelino Marques de Barros (1844–1929) and Sebastião Rodolpho Dalgado (1855–1922). Of particular relevance are the author’s reflections on the long-standing historiographical neglect of missionary linguistics. Still in the first chapter, Zwartjes analyses the status quo of missionary linguistics and criticizes — a conclusion I completely agree with — modern scholars for neglecting this field of knowledge as a scientific sub-discipline, mainly, he avers, because it is devoted to the descriptions of non-Indo-European or ‘savage’ languages. He finds two main reasons for this neglect: modern linguists “dismiss their methodology as an attempt to superimpose the Greco-Latin grammatical model on the languages being described” (p. 3) and the fact that “for years the description of languages was not considered a worthwhile scientific endeavour in many quarters” (p. 4). However, this relative © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company All rights reserved


lack of research is changing and the importance of missionary linguistics is increasing all over the world, with Otto Zwartjes being one of the leading scholars contributing to this change. In the second chapter, Zwartjes describes the pioneering missionary linguistic works from the Indian subcontinent (23–91). These works were written in Portuguese focusing on five different languages, still spoken today. In fact, Zwartjes presents the first grammars from Tamil by Henrique Henriques (1520–1600), Konkani by Thomaz Estevão (1549–1619), Bengali by Manoel da Assumpção (fl.1743), and Marathi and Hindi, both dating from 1778 by anonymous authors. For Zwartjes, the most innovative contribution of these studies concerning the history of linguistics was “on the syntactic level, the descriptions of agreement symmetries and asymmetries and split-ergative constructions” (p. 90). However, sadly, “in modern studies generally, missionary descriptions of Indian languages are neglected” (p. 89). Despite the arrival of Jesuit typography in Asia, first in Goa (1556), then in Macau (1584–1588) and, finally, in Japan (1590) (Assunção 2011: 95), many missionary linguistic works have never been printed. This fact is particularly significant in this part of the world, where native people were alphabetized, their languages were written and for them specific typescripts had been created. So, even today, we still have difficulties in discovering which were the first missionary linguistic descriptions. In the third chapter, Zwartjes describes João Rodrigues’ (1561–1634) linguistic works in Japan (93–142). The author of the Arte da lingoa de Iapam (1604– 1608) and the Arte Breve da lingoa Iapoa (1620) has an entire chapter dedicated to him, given that “Rodrigues can be classified among the five best Jesuit grammarians from the colonial period” (p. 141), besides Joseph de Anchieta (1534–1597), Ludovico Bertonio (1557–1625), Diego González Holguín (1552–1618), and Horacio Carochi (1579–1662). For Zwartjes, João Rodrigues followed, albeit only in part, the Japanese edition of the Latin grammar of Manuel Álvares (1526–1582), but he has many innovations that are the “product of his own creativity” (p. 141), having benefited from the classical Japanese literature. He actually “composed an entirely new and original work compared with the standards of his own time” (p. 142). For example, “Rodrigues was aware of the importance of the use of honorifics. He introduces an innovative metalanguage, such as ‘particula honorativa’; ‘particula humiliativa’ (161r), ‘verbos honrados’, ‘grao de honra’ (162r)” (p. 136), and “discusses topics such as the different writing styles (such as naiden, gueden), forms of address among women, forms to be used by inferiors to superiors, and how to address ecclesiastical ministers” (p. 136). The fourth chapter is dedicated to missionary linguistics in Brazil (143–203). Zwartjes analyses the first grammars and the catechism of the Tupi by Anchieta of 1595, António de Araújo (1566–1632) of 1618, and Luiz Figueira (1575–1643) © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company All rights reserved


of 1621, the anonymous grammar of the Lingua Geral Amazónica of 1750, and of the Kiriri language by Luiz Vincencio Mamiani (1652–1730) of 1699. Zwartjes first explains the historical conditions that the missionaries found in the Terra de Santa Cruz, stating that “the Portuguese Crown had no great interest at all in the Brazilian colonies in this early period […], and that they “were far more interested in Japan and India” (p. 144). This criticism is based on the fact that printing and the establishment of local presses were forbidden in this early period. All printing in the Portuguese realm had to be done in Portugal under the direct influence both of the Portuguese Crown and the Inquisition. This situation would only change when the Portuguese Queen (Maria I) and the Prince Regent (João VI) arrived in Brazil at the beginning of the 19th century. However, these facts do not entirely explain why there are so few grammars in Portuguese describing the Amerindian languages: “only the descriptions of three different languages had survived, two Amerindian languages (Tupi and Kipeá-Kiriri) and one African (Kimbundu […]), spoken by imported slaves” (p. 144). Nonetheless, many manuscripts circulated between missionaries, and Zwartjes mentions (147–148) some of them (catechisms and grammars), like the Doutrina na lingua do Brasil (c.1574) by Leonardo do Vale (1538–1591), a grammar on the language of the Guarulhos Indians by Manuel Viegas (1533–1608) and Joseph de Anchieta (1534–1597), and the Arte da lingua dos Aroás by Boaventura de Santo António (d.1697). Araújo’s Catechism (1618) is very important for the study of the Brazilian language (Tupinambá), because it has a prologue with ten rules devoted to spelling in the language, which “are not copied from Anchieta” (p. 164), and this means that “Anchieta was not the only source used by Araújo” (p. 164). Particularly interesting is the study of the anonymous manuscript entitled Grammatica da Lingua geral do Brazil (1750), deposited in the Biblioteca Geral da Universidade de Coimbra, because it has not yet been studied well enough and “gives us some information concerning language variety and language change, which is not found in the grammars of Anchieta and Figueira” (p. 168). The fifth chapter is about the first missionary treatises in Africa, both in West Africa and in East Africa, notably Mozambique. Concerning Western Africa, Zwartjes presents the first linguistic works, including the early catechisms by the Franciscan Gaspar da Conceição (fl.1555), the Jesuits Marcos Jorge (1524–1571), Ignacio Martinz (1531–1598), Mattheus Cardoso (1584–1625), Francesco Pacconio (1589–1641), António do Couto (1614–1666), and the Italian Capuchins Giacinto Brugiotti da Vetralla (alias Hyacinthus Brusciottus a Vetralla, 1601–1659) and Antonio Maria de Monte Prandone (1607–1687), as well as the first grammatical description of the Congo language by Brugiotti da Vetralla and of the Kimbundu language by Pedro Dias, S.J. (1622–1700). For Eastern Africa, Zwartjes presents a study on the Arte da lingua de Cafre, an anonymous 42-page manuscript from the © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company All rights reserved


Biblioteca da Ajuda in Lisbon, studied by Paul Schebesta, S.V.D. (1887–1967) in 1920, probably describing a mix of the Sena and Tete languages of Mozambique (Eça 1969: 80). For the study of these early African grammatical descriptions it is important to understand (as Zwartjes does) and to analyze the early catechisms, because some of them offer specific considerations about the language, which is why they are the first linguistic instruments to focus on those languages. It seems important to add some considerations to Zwartjes’ analysis. For example, though it has been lost and nowadays no further information is available, it is unquestionable that Gaspar da Conceição published a catechism in a Bantu language, because there are two drafts of a letter by the Portuguese King João III (1521–1557) to the Bishop of S. Tomé and to the King of the Congo, both dated October 12th, 1556. In these letters, the Portuguese King asked for help in regard to the arrival of Gaspar da Conceição, who had already been there (in the Kingdom of the Congo), and his partner Father Estêvão de Lagos (fl.1556), saying that they carried with them a catechism that he (Conceição) had printed in Portugal, in Portuguese and in the language of the Kingdom of the Congo, to be more communicable and to teach the slaves of the Island (of S. Tomé) and the common people (of the Congo). For the Portuguese King, the Franciscans went to S. Tomé and to the Kingdom of the Congo in order to establish colleges and convents for teaching the children and preparing the departure or arrival of other missionaries (Brásio 1953 II: 391–393). Likewise, the catechism published in Spain, by the Capuchin Order, for the 1659 mission to the Kingdom of Arda, entitled Doctrina Christiana, y explicacion de sus misterios, en nuestro idioma Español, y en lengua Arda (Madrid 1658), whose language Labouret & Rivet (1929) identify Arda as belonging to the Language with Gbe family of languages, as Zwartjes explains (212–214), merits comment. It is indeed a collective work, led by José de Nájera with the collaboration of the emissary of King Tojonu of Arda (Allada), Vans, who was later baptized as Felipe Zapata (Buenaventura de Carrocera 1949: 529, 545–546), which is why they can be considered its authors. Curiously, the order for this mission was given by the King of Spain Felipe IV, but in the quality of his being king of Portugal, while he held the reign of the neighbouring country 19 years earlier, in 1640 (Brásio 1981 XII: 176–177, 240–251). However, the Catholic Church recognized the independence of Portugal only in 1668 (Rego 1940: 63). Equally important is the brief reference to the Catecismo na língua dos Ardas (ca. 1708), by the Jesuit Manuel de Lima (c.1667–1718), though it has been lost. Manuel de Lima was born in Luanda, Angola, and spent his first years studying in the Jesuit college of Angola. He knew Kimbundu and the language of the Ardas, of which he made a catechism, as he reported in a letter to the Jesuit Father General © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company All rights reserved


Tamburini, on July 28th, 1708 (Leite 1949b VIII, p. 318), while he remained in Bahia, Brazil, perhaps to receive and convert slaves to the Catholic Church that had arrived from the Slave Coast. Thus, the interpretation of Zwartjes in which there “may be an error” (p. 214) of Leite is implausible, because it could not “refer to the same source as the Spanish work” (ibid.). Unfortunately, Serafim Leite has not offered any other evidence where the manuscript or the printed book could be found, as we do not have any alternative source. On the other hand, Zwartjes (214–242) offers a thorough and complete analysis of the three first African language grammars, Regulae quaedam pro dificillimi Congensium idiomatis faciliori captu ad grammaticae normam redactae (1659) by Giacinto Brugiotti da Vetralla, Arte da lingva de Angola (1697) by Pedro Dias and the anonymous author of Arte da lingua de Cafre (c.1680). However, regarding the latter, Paul Schebesta, who first studied this manuscript and published a transcribed version in 1920, made a palaeographic transcription error and, therefore, misled Zwartjes. In effect, in the Aduertencia para os nomes, the anonymous author says that “a lingua de Cafre he muita limitada e naõ copioza como as outra linguas” [‘The Cafre language is very limited and not copious as the other languages’] (Anon. c.1680: 201r), and not, as Schebesta says, “não composta como as outra línguas” [‘not formed like the other languages’] (p. 238). Zwartjes’ conclusion about these three grammars is worth quoting: “Their starting point was the Latin paradigm, but they also worked in the opposite direction, and seem to have had the insight that the Bantu form must be considered first” (p. 242). In the sixth chapter, Zwartjes analyses two Arabic grammars composed by the Franciscans Antonio [do Rosário] Baptista [Abrantes] (1737–1813) and João de Sousa (1735–1812) as well as the Hebrew grammar by Francisco da Paz (1731– post 1798). This chapter is a very important one because for the first time we can integrate these grammars in missionary linguistics. This choice might have been controversial, but I agree with Zwartjes when he situates this subject in missionary linguistics, because “the Arabic grammars […] aimed at three different target groups: academics, missionaries and those involved in commercial activities” (p. 244). At the same time, the Hebrew grammar by Francisco da Paz, “although it is not a missionary grammar in its strict sense” (p. 256), it is very important to know, for instance, how it influenced Arabic and Latin grammars. Zwartjes states, in the conclusion of this chapter, that the importance of these grammars is limited and “they are not modelled on the work of Álvares, nor on any other grammar of Latin, nor on Portuguese grammars of Oliveira and Barros” (p. 260), but “these sources enriched the Portuguese meta-language with technical terms derived from Arabic or Hebrew” (p. 260).



In the Appendix dedicated to lexicography (271–302), Zwartjes, while stating that this subject deserves “a separate monograph”, he felt that “in order to get an impression of the extent of lexicographical work done by the Portuguese, it is sometimes useful to give a short description of the most important lexicographical works as well” (19–20). Thus, he presents a “brief account of the most important bilingual Portuguese dictionaries” (p. 270), from the Indian subcontinent (Sanskrit, Tamil, Konkani, Hindi and Bengali), Japan, China, Cochinchina [Vietnam], Malay, Brazil, African languages, Arabic and Hebrew. This account whets the appetite for another study by Zwartjes in which he provides a complete analysis of the vocabularies and dictionaries composed by Portuguese-speaking missionaries during the pre-modern period. The major difficulty in this subject area is the fact that many missionary linguistic works have never been printed and, as a result, are still lost for us. These facts imply that often we can neither identify which were the first studies on a specific language, nor where we can find them. In other cases, we can only reference secondary sources, mostly by the historians of the religious orders. Only a few examples should suffice to demonstrate these difficulties: we believe that the first Sinhalese grammar was written by Manoel da Costa, S.J. (1590–1626) with the title Ars Chingalensis Linguae (c.1620–1626), never having been printed and presumed lost today (Perera 2004 [1941]: 68, 159), followed by the Arte e Grammatica de lingoa Chingala (1645) by French Pierre Berguin, S.J. (1592–1651), that likewise has never been printed (Perera 2004 [1941]: 158). In Mozambique, in Eastern Africa, there were many catechisms and grammars written in the 17th century (Garcia 1972: 251–276). Among those were the Sena Language with a catechism by the Italian Julio Cesare Vertua, S.J. (1575–post 1629) and a grammar by Luís Mariano (Inhazero), S.J. (fl.1633); the Monomotapa language with a grammar and a vocabulary by the Italian Bartolomeo Manassei, S.J. (fl.1635) — see Schebesta (2011 [1966]: 502) and Garcia (1972: 275); and the language of the Cafres with a primer by Sebastião Berne, S.J. (fl.1655–post 1674) and two catechisms and one confessionary by António da Conceição, O.S.A. (d.1700) — surprisingly, “os quais ainda hoje possuimos” [‘which we still possess today’] (Garcia 1972: 344)! Thus, missionary linguistics is indeed very relevant, and one of the most urgent tasks is to conduct research in libraries from all over the world to preserve this heritage, with an international team of researchers, led by Otto Zwartjes. In conclusion, this thorough monograph by Otto Zwartjes offers an exemplary theoretical and historical study of Portuguese missionary linguistics during the 16th–18th centuries. As such, Zwartjes’ work deserves to be read, studied and analysed by everyone interested in this subject and by all experts in missionary linguistics.



REFERENCES Anonymous. [c.1680]. Arte da Lingua de Cafre. [Ms. Biblioteca da Ajuda, Lisboa, collection “Jesuítas na Ásia”, Codex Ms. 49-v-18: ff. 201–220.] Assunção, Carlos. 2010. “Misionación portuguesa y contacto interlingüístico en Oriente”. Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on Missionary Linguistics, Tokyo. Assunção, Carlos. 2011. “Portuguese missionary work and inter-linguistic contact in the East”. Metamorfoses: 25 anos do Departamento de Letras, Artes e Comunicação. Vila Real: Centro de Estudos em Letras: 91–117. Barros, Marcelino Marques de. 1882. “Guiné Portugueza, ou breve noticia sobre alguns dos seus usos, costumes, linguas e origens de seus povos”. Boletim da Sociedade de Geografia de Lisboa 3.707–731. Barros, Marcelino Marques de. 1897–1908. “O Guineense”. Revista Lusitana 5.174–181, 271–300 (1897/99), 6.300–317 (1900/1901), 7.81–96, 166–188, 268–282 (1902), 10.306–310 (1908). Brásio, António. 1952–1988. Monumenta Missionaria Africana. 15 vols. Lisboa: Agência Geral do Ultramar (vols. 1–11); Academia Portuguesa de História (vols. 12–15). Brásio, António. 1958–1979. Monumenta Missionaria Africana. Série 2. 6 Vols. Lisboa: Agência Geral do Ultramar (vols. 1–4); Academia Portuguesa de História (vols. 5–6). Carrocera, Buenaventura de. 1949. “Misión Capuchina al Reino de Arda”. Missionalia Hispanica 6.523–546. Dalgado, Sebastião Rodolpho. 1900a. Dialecto Indo-Português de Ceylão. Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional. Dalgado, Sebastião Rodolpho. 1900b. “Dialecto Indo-Português de Gôa”. Revista Lusitana 6.63– 84. Dalgado, Sebastião Rodolpho. 1902–1903. “Dialecto Indo-Português de Damão”. Ta-ssi-yangkuo 3.359–367, 4.515–523. Dalgado, Sebastião Rodolpho. 1906. “Dialecto Indo-Português do Norte”. Revista Lusitana 9.142–166, 193–228. Dalgado, Sebastião Rodolpho. 1917. “Dialecto Indo-Português de Negapatam”. Revista Lusitana 20.40–53. Eça, Filipe Gastão [de Moura Coutinho] de Almeida de. 1969. Subsídios para uma bibliografia missionária moçambicana (católica). Lisboa: Author. Fernandes, Gonçalo. In preparation. “Continuity and Rupture in the First Grammatical Descriptions of African Languages by Portuguese Missionaries”. Garcia, António. 1972. História de Moçambique Cristão. 2nd ed. Braga: Livraria Cruz. Labouret, Henri & Paul Rivet. 1929. Le Royaume d’Anda et son évangélisation au XVIIe siècle. Paris: Institut d’Ethnologie. Leite, Serafim. 1938–1950. História da Companhia de Jesus no Brasil. 10 vols. Lisboa: Livraria Portugália (vols. 1–2); Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira (vols. 3–10). Leite, Serafim. 1946. “Leonardo do Vale, Mestre da língua Tupi-Guarani (Notícia biobibliográfica)”. Portugal em África Série A: Língua Portuguesa: 181–190. Leite, Serafim. 1947. “Padre Pedro Dias, autor da Arte da Língua de Angola apóstolo dos negros no Brasil (Nota biobibliográfica)”. Portugal em África, Série A: Língua Portuguesa 1946.9– 11. Leite, Serafim. 1993. Breve História da Companhia de Jesus no Brasil 1549–1760. Braga: Livraria Apostolado da Imprensa.


392 Gonçalo Fernandes: Review of Zwartjes (2011) Perera, S[imon] G[regory]. 2004 [1941]. The Jesuits in Ceylon (in the XVI and XVII centuries). New Delhi & Chennai: Asian Educational Services. [Original publication, Madura: De Nobili Press.] Rego, António da Silva. 1940. O Padroado Português do Oriente: Esbôço histórico. Lisboa: Agência Geral das Colónias. Rema, Henrique Pinto. 1982. História das missões católicas da Guiné. Braga: Editorial Franciscana. Rodrigues, Aryon Dall’Igna. 1996. “As línguas gerais sul-americanas”. Papia 4:2.6–18. Rodrigues, Aryon Dall’Igna. 2003. “Obra nova da língua geral de mina: a língua ewe nas Minas Gerais”. Papia 13.92–96 Rodrigues, Francisco. 1931–1950. História da Companhia de Jesus na Assistência de Portugal. 4 tomes in 7 vols. Porto: Livraria Apostolado da Imprensa. Schebesta, Paul. 2011 [1966]. Portugal: A missão da conquista no sudeste de África: História das Missões da Zambézia e do Reino Monomotapa (1560–1920). Lisboa: Missionários do Verbo Divino. Saradesāya, Manohararāya. 2000. A History of Konkani Literature from 1500 to 1992. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi. Vicente, João Dias. 1992. “Subsídios para a biografia do sacerdote guineense Marcelino Marques de Barros (1844–1929)”. Lusitania Sacra, 2nd series, 4.395–470.

Reviewer’s address: Gonçalo Fernandes Departamento de Letras, Artes e Comunicação Centro de Estudos em Letras Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro Quinta de Prados Apartado 1013 5001-801 Vila Real Por tu ga l e-mail: [email protected]
