towards a list for professional sanskritists and archeologists & anthropologists of south asia

[David Salmon]

Dr. Houben,

If serious work is being impeded through the presence and occasional
participation of the unwashed in this continuing seminar, I would step
quietly aside and let you define your exclusivity to your heart's content.

But, if not, or even if it is, a little, then perhaps you would do well to
re-read Prof. Raman's concerns about the future of Indology.  He also raises
serious concerns that warranted a more considerate answer.  When Prof. Raman
does not feel welcome in this group because of the message he brings, one
must question the criteria for membership.  There is such a thing as
becoming more royal than the king.

I quite agree with this list's rule that public conversation should be
restricted to persons with academic credentials in the required fields.   It
is useful to be able to overhear, as it is no doubt to conduct, professional
conversations free of background chatter.

But since this forum is intended to be a place where all experts in Indology
can participate, it must not exclude, either by attitude or by rule,
representative expert points of view.  Obviously, the system is not working
well when Prof. Raman does not feel welcome.  (I do not impute that attitude
to you, of course.)

The Rajaram episode brought the glare of Indian public attention to bear on
this profession, leading to the increase in your email.  It is an event,
which will pass.  What might not pass so easily is any divide between Indian
Indologists and Western Indologists, or Indian public mistrust of Western
science, that could result from failure of Western Indologists to respect
and to accommodate the legitimate concerns of Indian Indologists.

David Salmon