[INDOLOGY] Article about the politics surrounding indology at the IHRC

[Geoffrey Samuel]

As I pointed out, Chakrabarti did not say that Bharadwaj's remarks were racist. The Telegraph's headline did perhaps, but Chakrabarti did not, and I imagine given the current situation in India that he was being quite careful what he said, and deserves not to be misquoted.


Geoffrey

________________________________
From: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info> on behalf of Howard Resnick <hr at ivs.edu>
Sent: 08 June 2015 15:49
To: Simon Brodbeck
Cc: Indology List
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Article about the politics surrounding indology at the IHRC

Thank you for this clarification:

Still, neither A1 nor B1 below give explicitly racial definitions.

B1 may logically refer to a multi-racial group speaking the same language. In America, for example, people of many races speak English. Further, ‘racism’ requires a belief in the superiority or inferiority of a particular race, rather than the association of a certain race with a particular body of literature.

I understand the ugly history linked to the term ‘Aryan’, but Bharadwaj deserves a fair day in court.

I’m still not sure why Bharadwaj’s remarks, at least as given in the article, are ‘racist.’ Has he espoused explicitly racist views?

Best,
Howard



On Jun 8, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Simon Brodbeck <BrodbeckSP at cardiff.ac.uk<mailto:BrodbeckSP at cardiff.ac.uk>> wrote:

Dear Howard,

I think that regardless of any etymological link, we need to apply a semantic distinction between the Sanskrit word arya and the English word Aryan. When the former is translated, it tends to come out as “noble” or something like that (e.g. in truths 1 to 4 of that ilk), rather than as “Aryan”. Under the latter, the OED reads as follows (“arya” has no entry):

A. adj.
 1.
a.       Applied by some to the great division or family of languages, which includes Sanskrit, Zend, Persian, Greek, Latin, Celtic, Teutonic, and Slavonic, with their modern representatives; also called Indo-European, Indo-Germanic, and sometimes Japhetic; by others restricted to the Asiatic portion of these. absol., the original Aryan or Arian language.
b.      spec. Of or pertaining to the ancient Aryan people.
2. Under the Nazi régime (1933–45) applied to the inhabitants of Germany of non-Jewish extraction.

B. n.
1. A member of the Aryan family; one belonging to, or descended from, the ancient people who spoke the parent Aryan language.
2. spec. under the Nazi régime (cf. sense A. 2<http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/11296?redirectedFrom=aryan#eid38293561>).

I think Chakrabarti is probably thinking in terms of meanings A1b and B1. But I can’t speak for him.

All the best,
Simon Brodbeck
Cardiff University



From: INDOLOGY [mailto:indology-bounces at list.indology.info] On Behalf Of Howard Resnick
Sent: 08 June 2015 15:10
To: Geoffrey Samuel
Cc: Dominik Wujastyk; Indology List
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Article about the politics surrounding indology at the IHRC

As we know, Arya is a Vedic term. In the Telegraph article, Bharadwaj states that he wants to research the notion of Aryan migration. Bharadwaj does not state that he takes ‘Aryan’ as a racial, rather than a cultural, term. So please help me here. Where is the racism?

Thanks,
Howard


On Jun 8, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Geoffrey Samuel <SamuelG at cardiff.ac.uk<mailto:SamuelG at cardiff.ac.uk>> wrote:

If you read Dilip Chakrabarti's comment as quoted in the Telegraph article, what he was actually saying was that the concept of Aryans was 'racist and historically puerile' and that research on it was therefore a waste of resources in comparison with other possible uses - he specifically referred to training more palaeographers and epigraphists, 'who will soon be an extinct class of scholars in the country'.

That seems a reasonable and defensible position.

Geoffrey
________________________________
From: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info<mailto:indology-bounces at list.indology.info>> on behalf of Howard Resnick <hr at ivs.edu<mailto:hr at ivs.edu>>
Sent: 08 June 2015 09:12
To: Dominik Wujastyk
Cc: Indology List
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Article about the politics surrounding indology at the IHRC

"Dilip K. Chakrabarti, emeritus professor of South Asian archaeology with Cambridge University and a member of the council and its research project committee, said the proposal was "racist and historically puerile”.

How racist?

h.r.


On Jun 8, 2015, at 11:00 AM, Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk at gmail.com<mailto:wujastyk at gmail.com>> wrote:

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1150606/jsp/nation/story_24264.jsp
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
indology-owner at list.indology.info<mailto:indology-owner at list.indology.info> (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info<http://listinfo.indology.info/> (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info<mailto:INDOLOGY at list.indology.info>
indology-owner at list.indology.info<mailto:indology-owner at list.indology.info> (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info<http://listinfo.indology.info/> (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20150608/73eee41b/attachment.htm>