[INDOLOGY] The so-called German Indology

[Herman Tull]

My comment was written before I saw Reinhold's comment.  My original remark
was less a matter of supporting ("acclamation") George Hart's remarks
(which I do support), then it was a matter of drawing our attention to the
fact that Americans have struggled with their academic heritage, and in
particular, with the precise sense of "wissenschaftlich."

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Gruenendahl, Reinhold <
gruenen at sub.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:

>  I hope this is not to suggest that the matter should be decided by
> acclamation. I merely asked Professor Hart to specify a point "that should
> be seriously considered by indologists". My interest does not go beyond
> that.
>
>
>
> R.G.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *Von:* INDOLOGY [indology-bounces at list.indology.info]" im Auftrag von
> "Herman Tull [hermantull at gmail.com]
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 12. Juni 2015 16:59
> *An:* Indology
> *Betreff:* Re: [INDOLOGY] The so-called German Indology
>
>    I am reading the Adluri/Bagchee book right now; though not without its
> problems, I have to agree with George Hart's assessment.
>
>  But, I will also say, as a student of religion (my graduate department
> had the rather comprehensive and so, too, largely meaningless name,
> "Department of the History and Literature of Religions"), Americans have
> long struggled with the precise meaning of "wissenschaftlich."  The 19th
> century American world was a direct descendent of the German academy, but
> lacked its sophistication.  (Somewhere early in the JAOS I recall that the
> reason given for the turn to Oriental studies was to "keep up with the
> Joneses"--i.e., the Europeans; not much science there, I am afraid.)
>
>  cheers,
>
>  Herman Tull
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:27 AM, George Hart <glhart at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>> If you search the book at Amazon, you can read significant parts of it
>> (“Look inside this book”). The authors are serious, well-read scholars and
>> have put a colossal amount of work into their effort. The book strikes me
>> as an important contribution whose ideas should be seriously considered by
>> indologists. George Hart
>>
>>   On Jun 12, 2015, at 5:48 AM, Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>    On 12 June 2015 at 14:15, Philipp Maas <philipp.a.maas at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In reading these lines, I get quite puzzled. Are historical-critical
>>> methods in general flawed, or only when practiced by Germans?
>>>
>>>
>>  ​Only when practised by Germans, as any Italian would certainly answer
>> :-)
>>
>>  ​
>> (This refers to a running joke between some of us British, German and
>> Italian philologists here at the Vienna department.)
>>
>> I suppose the Adluri & Bagchee book deserves a more serious response, but
>> I'm not interested personally.  How did this get by the commissioning
>> editor at OUP NY?
>>
>>  Best,
>>  Dominik Wujastyk
>>
>>
>>   _______________________________________________
>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
>> committee)
>> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or
>> unsubscribe)
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> INDOLOGY mailing list
>> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
>> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
>> committee)
>> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or
>> unsubscribe)
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Herman Tull Princeton, NJ *
>



-- 

*Herman TullPrinceton, NJ *


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20150612/2bb3a5d3/attachment.htm>