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).
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@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@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@list.indology.info> on behalf of Howard Resnick <hr@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@gmail.com> wrote:
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@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@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)