My, this has stirred up a hornet’s nest, hasn’t it?  If the book is so bad, why doesn’t someone do an impartial review and refute its major theses?  Obviously, the book will be considered important by many, a successor to Said’s work (see the blurb on Amazon from Hiltebeitel’s review). I don’t find any of the negative replies on Indology so far substantive — they are, rather, general impressions or unflattering stories about the authors which, even if true, do not directly concern their book.  Why is it so bad? I certainly agree it is unconscionable to associate anyone with “Nazi ideology” unless they have publicly defended the Nazis or, like Heidegger, actually joined the Nazi party. This is my last post on the subject. GH


On Jun 12, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Walter Slaje <slaje@kabelmail.de> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

as it happens, Michael Hahn has left a published statement on the background of the shameful events at the University of Marburg just referred to by Prof. Franco. He added it as a "supplement" to a paper dealing with the matter by his successor Jürgen Hanneder, which I have attached to this mail for your kind information (pp. 136f). In Michael Hahn's own words:

<image.png>
<image.png>

​Kindly regarding,
Walter Slaje​

-----------------------------
Prof. Dr. Walter Slaje
Hermann-Löns-Str. 1
D-99425 Weimar
Deutschland

Ego ex animi mei sententia spondeo ac polliceor
studia humanitatis impigro labore culturum et provecturum
non sordidi lucri causa nec ad vanam captandam gloriam,
sed quo magis veritas propagetur et lux eius, qua salus
humani generis continetur, clarius effulgeat.
Vindobonae, die XXI. mensis Novembris MCMLXXXIII.
<Hanneder-Pretence-and-Prejudice.pdf>