Guest guest Posted June 9, 2001 Report Share Posted June 9, 2001 Is there a study of the connection of Indology to the rise of Nazism in any reputable academic journal? e.g., why did the Nazis reverse the Swastika sign when they adopted it as their party emblem? Were any of the Indologists of the time sympathizers of the Nazi cause? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2001 Report Share Posted June 9, 2001 INDOLOGY, aishwaryannamboodiri wrote: > Is there a study of the connection of Indology to the rise of Nazism > in any reputable academic journal? e.g., why did the Nazis reverse >the Swastika sign when they adopted it as their party emblem? Were >any of the Indologists of the time sympathizers of the Nazi cause? see the book published from a PhD thesis at oxford, Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, The occult roots of Nazism, Secret Aryan cults and their influence on Nazi ideology, The Ariosophists of Austria and Germany, 1890-1935. NYU press, 1985, 1992. Because of the year Y2K just passed, there are many academic books coming out on the Apocalypse, Jesus the Apocalyptic poet, .... If you search in amazon.com, many new books on the last chapter in the Bible and its relationships with Dualism in the Persia, Gnosticism, Manichaeism. The theme of Forces of Light/white/good versus Evil/Black/Darkness spread from Aryan Iran into the world religions like Judaism and Christianity. With Rigveda dates around 900 BCE determined by Vedicists, and their interactions with Iranian Aryan rishis, and both Avestan and Rgveda extol Black versus Light seeping into Judeo-Christianity. However, Tamil sangam texts are missing in this duality. Friedrich Heer (1916-1983), God's first love: Christians and Jews over two thousand years. Note on the author says: "Even as a student he came into conflict with pan-German thinking historians as a staunch opponent of National Socialism. FH was arrested for the first time on 11 March 1938 by the Austrian Nazis...". In 1967 he published this book in German. On p. 24 in English translation, "St John's thinking owes something to Gnosticism ( a fact that is very often denied): all men belong either to the realm of the Devil or the realm of Light. St John was certainly basing himself on Qumran writings. These Jewish sectarians, escaping to the desert, described themselves as 'children of Light'. Their Jewish enemies, triumphant in Jerusalem, were in their eyes 'children of Darkness'. Puritans and Manichaeans have tended at all times to divide mankind up into two sorts. They themselves (as for instance in New England in America) are 'children of Light'; Catholics, heathens and Communists are 'children of the Darkness'." In the old Indology list archived at Liverpool, there were discussions about the dualism in Vedic and Avestan, but not in sangam tamil corpus. For example, the Rgveda talks negatively of kRSNa tvac 'black skin'. I'm told this is just metaphorical. Regards, N. Ganesan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2001 Report Share Posted June 10, 2001 See the quotes attached to this long post from the works of Halbfass and Kennedy. Note also that if we start discarding the writings of old Indologists because of their affiliation with Nazism, white supermacism, colonialism, european ethno-centrism, racism, Christian Missionary bias etc., then you would be left with hardly anything that forms the basis of even present day Indology. That is the hard fact. You will also get some additional references from my webpage at http://www.voi.org/vishal_agarwal/What_is_AMT.html See also the following link depicting the CURRENT use of AIT and its euphemistic versions by white-supermacists (See the section on India) http://www.melvig.org/tyc/tyc-02.html See also the following chapter from the book of David Duke, an American politician who is sidely regarded as a White Supermacist. http://www.duke.org/awakening/chapter29_09.html The purpose of pointing out these links on white-supermacism is that it is genetically linked to Nazism, and both have drawn sustenance from the Aryan theories, which are unfortunately still alive and kicking. QUOTE 1--- Reference: Halbfass, Wilhem; India and Europe, An Essay in Understanding; State University of New York Press; Albany (New York); 1988 Pg. 139-140: The Aryan Myth and speculative ideas about India continued to play a role in the race theories and doctrines of historical decadance which were developed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They were particularly significant for the lunatic fringe of political and ideological movements around 1900, which contributed to the world view of National Socialism. Among these, the "Ariosophic" movement of G. Lanz-Liebenfels (1874-1954) deserves to be mentioned. During his years in Vienna, Hitler was a regular reader of the hournal Istara, in which Lanz developed his ideas about dark "Tschandalas" (chandala) and blond Aryans. In 1908, two issues of the journal dealt exclusively with "the law book of Manu and race cultivation among the ancient Indo-Aryans" ("Das Gesetzbuch des Manu und die Rassenpflege bei den alten Indo-Arien"). Together with his older contemporaries A. Schuler and G. von List, Lanz was also an early propagator of the svastika. Not much later, references to "Jishnu Krishna," the Buddha, etc. which were partly derived from the mystifications of L. Jacolliot, appeared in the works of Mathilde Ludendorff and the ideology of the "Ludendorff Movement." A. Rosenberg's Der Mythus des 20. Jahrunderts ("The Myth of the Twentieth Century"), which was first published in 1930 and became a leading ideological text book of the Third Reich, frequently mentions the case of the Aryans in India as an illustration and as a warning. It also associates developments in Indian thought, such as the equation of atman and brahman and the metaphysics of ultimate unity, with racial developments, and specifically with what it considers to be the loss of Aryan identity and assertiveness. India is invoked in order to articulate and justify ideas and programs of unparalleled arrogance and destructiveness…" END OF QUOTE 1. Extracts from Kenneth Kennedy's recent book Reference: Kennedy, Kenneth A. R.; God-Apes and Fossil Men, Paleoanthropology of South Asia; The University of Michigan Press; Ann Arbor; 2000 Pg. 67: " Aryan people first emerge from the gloom of prehistory on the northern borders of the Fertile Crescent of the Ancient East…So it is clear enough that the dynasts installed on the Upper Euphrates by 1400 B.C. were Aryans, closely akin to those we meet in the Indus Valley and later in Media and Persia….[the first Aryans were racially Nordics and] the Nordics' superiority in physique fitted them to be vehicles of a superior language. V. G. Childe, The Aryans Two myths have prejudiced the course of South Asian paleoanthropology, each earning the imprimatur of scientific credibility among anthropologists and archaeologists and textual authenticity among linguists and chroniclers of ancient history. The first fabrication is the concept of race as an explanation for human biological diversity with its typological classification of Homo Sapiens. Races were thought to be natural entities below the level of species possessing inherent cultural, linguistic, and psychological- behavioral properties concordant with physical features if skin and hair pigmentation, hair form, cranial architecture, stature, and other readily observable features appearing in high frequencies in different geographically separated human populations. In South Asia this traditional concept of race, which emerged by the eighteenth century in Western thought, became superimposed upon the tenets of the Indian social caste organization. The presence of these supposedly immutable and ancient enclaves within traditional Hindu society was explained by the second myth, namely that the origins of the high caste priests and scholars (the Brahmins) were traceable to an ancient ethnic people called the Aryans. Pg. 68: In the opening pages of the traditional Indian medical practices the Maharaja of Gondal (Bhagavat Simhaji 1896:11-12) wrote that the notion that the Aryans arose in the Caucasus mountains, then separated to become Hindus in India and Celts, Teutons, Italians, Greeks, and Persians in lands to the west is "European in its conception and is not accepted by Indians in general, who call themselves autochthonous." For the maharaja and most other learned Pundits of the end of the nineteenth century the Aryans were Hindus of Aryavarta. European ethnogenesis is not an element of the corpus of Vedic literary tradition, which includes records on religious rites, myths, and elucidation of the relationship of Hindus to the gods and the Absolute Universal Law. The Vedas are silent on the matter of the cradle of Aryan origins and begin with their settlement of the Punjab. Pg. 80: It is in Germany that the European versions of the Aryan myth find their beginnings. Within a pedigree that included Nordic gods and human Goths, Lombards, Angles, Saxons, and Burgundians, German scholars ranked as highest their affiliation with the Franks. It was through Frankish genealogy that earlier lineages were traced to Trojans and ultimately to Noah's son Japheth, who some believed had settled in Germany after the Deluge. Hildegard of Bingen even claimed that Adam and Eve spoke German! It was around this pivot of linguistic affinity that many notions of Germanic identity revolved. German humanists argued for German autochthony, ascribing their descent from powerful rulers of earlier times who manifested their might in regions far distant from the Rhine…..An original language (Ursprache) was the hallmark of the original race (Urvolk) in the minds of many nationalistic Germans in the period of Enlightenment and early years of romanticism. They made no distinction between the language and biological race in defining themselves as distinct from non-German populations of different idioms and origins. A few German scholars clung to the venerable notion that Hebrew was the original language of humanity from which German and other languages called Japhetic were derived, but their voices were seldom heard. Pg. 81: A voice that was heeded in the beginning of the nineteenth century was that of Freidrich von Schlegel (1772-1829) (1808), a German statesman and novelist who had acquired some knowledge of Sanskrit and a familiarity with the work of William Jones while living in Paris. Schlegel's work, the title translated as Essay on the Language and Wisdom of the Indians, was published in 1808, contains two themes: the antiquity and splendor of Sanskrit and the thesis that Sanskrit speaking hordes commanded by warriors or priests had left their Himalaya homeland to bring civilization to India, Egypt, and Europe. The impact of this mass migration was felt as far north as Scandinavia, thus the primitive Germanic people were drawn into this Volkerwanderung of prehistory, becoming amalgamated in the process into a colony of the conquerors of this mysteriously driven Indian race. Schlegel made clear an ethnic concept merely implied by earlier writers of linguistic theory, namely that language, race, and culture were correlated and not separate facets of human condition. Converts to Schlegel's view of history added details, and some attempted to combine his ideas with the Hebrew tradition of racial and linguistic origins. In 1819 Schlegel selected the term Aryan to identify the Indian bearers of culture to the west, a word already familiar in designating Medes and Persians and borrowed from Herodotus. He liked this choice for the reason that he associated the root Ari with the German Ehre (honor), but his racial term had to compete with names favored by other writers (von Schlegel 1900). Julius von Klaproth (1783-1835) (1823), Orientalist and traveler to Asia, employed the term Indo-Germans in 1823, by which time the English had accepted Thomas Young's (1783-1829) (1814) Indo-European nomen when it was proposed by this physician and Egyptologist in 1813. It was the latter term that was used by the Sanskritist and comparative philologist Franz Bopp in 1833-35. Recent research indicates that the first use of the term Indo-Germanic family was coined by the Danish- French geographer, Conrad Malte-Brun (1775-1826) as early as 1810 (Shapiro 1981:167; Day 1994:14). The Aryan myth as proposed by Schlegel received its most enthusiastic support from the German philosopher Georg Wilhel Friedrich Hegel (1770 – 1832), who compared Jones' linguistic discovery of Sanskrit affinities to the finding of a new continent. Hegel (1817) pronounced as fact the phenomenon of the westward migration of an Aryan people, asserting that the proof rested in linguistics. His theme was taken up by Christian Lassen (1800-1876), the Norwegian Sanskritist who introduced the study of Indian archaeology into Germany. Lassen's (1847-61) view was that the ancient Aryans and the high caste people of India today have a white complexion, hence are physically distinguishable from non-Aryans. These and other writers of an Aryan race concept based upon language, biology, myth, and the ideologies of the Germanic right of conquest formed the network whereby the esoteric deliberations of philosophers and antiquarians entered the arena of public awareness. But a particular responsibility for this transmission of ideas rests with the German lexicographer Jacob Grimm (1785- 1863), who is equally well known for his compilation of fairy tales (Hausmarchen) with his brother Wilhelm. When not regaling the world with the adventures of Hansel and Gretel, Rumpelstilkin, Snow White, and the Sleeping Beauty, brother Jacob wrote in his History of German Language, which appeared in 1848, that: "All the peoples of Europe, to begin with, those which were originally related and which gained supremacy at the cost of many wanderings and dangers, emigrated from Asia in the remote past. They were propelled from East to West by an irresistible instinct, the real cause of which is unknown to us…The vocation and courage of those people which were originally related and destined to rise to such heights, is shown by the fact that European history was almost entirely made by them (J. Grimm 1848:113-22) August Wilhelm von Schlegel (1767-1845), brother of Fredrick von Schlegel, made significant contributions to Oriental languages and literature with his publication of the journal Indische Bibliotek (1823-30) and Latin translations of the Bhagavad-Gita (1823) and Ramayana (1829). Pg. 82 He held the view that the common home of Europeans, Persians and Hindus was in a country east of the Caspian Sea. From here Hindus migrated into India, crossing the Indus at Attock, and proceeded on to the Punjab, the identical route taken by the forces of Alexander the Great, Selucus, the Bactrian Greeks, and the Mogul invaders (von Schlegel 1832-34). In his paper "De l'Origine des Hindous," which he read to the Royal Society of Literature, London, in 1833, Schlegel argued that the physical characteristics of Hindus had not changed from times immemorial, as demonstrated by their sculptures and paintings, which were copied exactly from ancient models of art. However, he was unable to resolve the question racial purity of Hindu castes, noting that the tribal populations and low caste elements had aboriginal roots in India not derived from other parts of Asia. The Aryan myth gained a hold in countries outside of Germany. Linguistics became the criterion of racial classification of mankind just at the historic moment when racial typology and anthropometry were becoming the practice of early anthropologists. French translations of Asiatick Researches appeared in 1803, Herder's Ideas in 1823, and F. von Schlegel's Essay on the Language and Wisdom of Indians in 1808. New propagandists of the Aryan Myth arose, among whom Joseph Ernest Renan (1823-92) of France and the Ango-German Friedrich Max Mueller (1823- 1900) were the leading figures in the latter half of the nineteenth century. Renan used the terms Semite (or Jewish) race and the Aryan (or Indo-Germanic) race in his controversial book Life of Jesus, which appeared in 1863 and set off a run of imitations all arguing that the origin of the Bible is to be found in India. The anti-Semtism that surrounded these works did not appear with the same intensity among the English audiences Max Mueller addressed at Oxford University and at the Royal Institute of London as it did on the subcontinent. Nor did his lectures on Aryanism incite political disturbances, even at a time when Darwinian evolution was gaining acceptance over strict acceptance of Genesis and the Mosaic chronology. However, the English never fully accepted the notion that their biological and cultural origins lay among the natives they ruled in India, and few Englishmen read F. von Schlegel's works in the subject. Whatever contributions the Aryans may have made to the arts and sciences, the Church of England affirmed that the origins of religion were clearly established within the Judaic tradition. Even the agnostic Thomas Henry Huxley (1891) defended the ethical teachings of the Bible against those foreigners who would replace it with their doctrine of an Aryan migration. But Max Mueller's influence as a philologist and Orientalist lent weight to the assumption that Aryan meant a biological race as well as a linguistic entity and that in ancient times "the first ancestors of the Indians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Slavs, the Celts and the Germans were living together within the same enclosures, nay under the same roof" (Mueller 1862:213). This idea was put forward in Mueller's Lectures on the Science of Language, which were published in 1862, as well as his book History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, which appeared in 1859, the year of the first edition of Charles Darwin's Origin. By 1872 Max Mueller recanted his support for any idea of a link between biological race and language, and in 1888 he was lecturing that any talk of an Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan hair, and Aryan bones and skulls was as ludicrous as talk of a doliocephalic dictionary or brachycephalic grammar (Mueller 1888:116- 21). This repudiation of his earlier work is a mark of his courage and professional integrity, but his warnings cane too late: his disciples perpetuated the Aryan myth that culminated as a political doctrine and racist manifesto on the continent after the Franco- Prussian War of 1870-71. While rejecting a linkage of language with anatomy, Max Mueller (1890, 1891, 1893) himself never abandoned his theory that an Aryan people had once migrated as a great swarm from their homeland towards northwestern Europe as well as into the Indian subcontinent. The exact location of that homeland was debated by many of his contemporaries, some placing it in central Asia, Europe, or even north Africa (Snyder 1962:42-46). Pg. 83 Along with the substitution of Mosaic genealogy for Indian genealogy went a form of anti-Semitism whereby European Jews, released from ghettos between 1789 and 1815, were considered by many, Germans included, to be members of an inferior race with origins distinct from those of Aryans. However, this notion of imported racial elements from India or central Asia did not find acceptance among certain Germans who maintained the nationalistic theme that Germans emerged from unique racial origins. Germans had always been German! Here was a conflict of myths indeed, and among those who rejected the Aryan theme was Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832), the naturalist and poet who had been strongly influenced by Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744- 1803) while studying law at Stasbourg. But unlike Herder (1784-91) he was disdainful of any ethnic association of Germans with the Hindu pantheon, only accepting the reverent teachings of the Parsis and recognizing the majesty of Sanskrit. Although Goethe dedicated to Jones a chapter in his book West-Osticher Divan, which appeared in 1819, he assumed an indifference to Jones' linguistic discovery, a curious reaction in the light of Goethe's great interest in natural history and the problems of early anthropology. By the time of the Franco-Prussian War, the Aryan concept assumed garish nationalistic colors among Germans who read the writings of the French aristocrat Joseph Arthur, conte de Gobineau (1816-82) (1853-55). His four volume Essai sur l'inegalite des races humaines, which appeared between 1853 and 1855, was introduced to the German public by Richard Wagner (1813-83), who was an active writer of political tracts as well as the composer of some of the most glorious music the world has ever heard. Wagner's son in law Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855-1927) was an Englishmen who molded Gobineau's concepts into the doctrine of Nordic-Tuetonic racial supremacy. Chamberlain's Foundations of the Nineteenth Century appeared in 1899, and any earlier statements by other authors concerning Aryan supremacy were continued by Chamberlain, who preferred the Teutons or the Teutonic race. Thus both Gobineau and Chamberlain transformed the Aryan concept, which had its humble origins in the philological research conducted by Jones in Calcutta at the end of the eighteenth century to its absurd limits as a political, racist doctrine in Adolf Hitler's Third Reich. The idea that the Aryans came to India in two waves of migration was formulated by A. F. Rudolf Hoernle (1841-1918) (1880), an English Orientalist of German descent. His thesis was supported by George Grierson (1851-1941) (1907-9), director of the Linguistic Survey of India, the two scholars agreeing that the first Aryan invasion took place in the Punjab via the Kabul valley. Pg. 84: The second invasion was thought to have occurred later, in a drier period and with greater speed, as the new Aryans penetrated to the valley of the Ganges and Jumna. They arrived as a series of hordes and took wives of non-Aryans (Dravidian?) stick as they penetrated the midlands. Brahmanic culture developed there, and Sanskrit became the classical language of Aryan culture. This two-wave theory of Aryan migration was taken up by scholars who were not linguists. Herbert Risley (1908:55) accepted it on the basis of his interpretation of the ethnology of historic India in the Census of India: 1901. Ramaprasad P. Chanda, author of Indo-Aryan Races (1916) argued that the inner band came first and the outer band at a later time. Following Chanda's modification, scholars were soon speculating that the invasion was composed of multiple groups related through genetic ties, a common history, and mutual influences (Chatterji 1926). Until well into the twentieth century, the historical proofs of an Aryan invasion or a Vedic age in India were no better established than the tenets of the Western scenarios of Aryan influence in the composition of European populations. In the absence of archaeological investigations and laboratory analysis of human remains, comparative linguistics was the single means of establishing an affinity between Europe and south Asia. The minimal archaeological research conducted prior to the discovery of the Harappan civilization in 1920 remained unorganized. In a book on India's antiquities and history written in 1913, Lionel David Barnett (1871-1960) was not alone in holding the view that the 1017 hymns of the Rigveda provided the only means of reconstructing the prehistoric past of the land of Brahmavarta and the regions of the south. The twentieth century archaeologist who was most influential on the issue of Aryan origins was V. Gordon Childe (1892-1957), author of The Aryans: A Study of Indo-European Origins (1926). The Aryans reflected Childe's search for European origins through linguistic data. He wanted to establish the homeland of the ancient people whose Indo-European languages formed a philological tie between his own countrymen and the peoples of India. He was influenced by the German historical concept of the `four empires," which lent a mystical quality to the shift of civilization from the Near East to northwestern Europe. The idea of creative and passive races appealed to Childe as well, the peoples of the Orient being characterized as stagnant and degenerate, while Europeans were held to be superior in terms of energy, inventiveness, and independence. National character rather than history was held by Childe to be the cause of these ethnic differences, prehistoric people being assigned the same qualities as their living descendants (Trigger 1980). Childe argued that a common language implied a common outlook and that Indo- European languages conferred a special advantage on those who spoke them. Thus racial identity could be discovered using a philological approach, and these data could be employed by the archaeologists to identify the races of the peoples whose sites he or she excavated. Whole admitting that the early developments of agriculture, metallurgy, and the sciences came from the speakers of the Middle East, Childe held that when these inventions were adopted by the Indo- European populations they were brought to their highest development and into the realm of true civilization. The Indo-European speakers achieved this because of the higher qualities of their language, the hallmark of a more competent mentality. INDOLOGY, aishwaryannamboodiri wrote: > Is there a study of the connection of Indology to the rise of Nazism > in any reputable academic journal? e.g., why did the Nazis reverse the > Swastika sign when they adopted it as their party emblem? Were any of > the Indologists of the time sympathizers of the Nazi cause? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2001 Report Share Posted June 10, 2001 INDOLOGY, "Martin Delhey" <mdelhey> wrote: Thanks. It is sad that the ideological underpinnings of such a traumatic event in human history has recieved so little attention. The Indologists themeselves may be ill-equipped to study their role in the promotion of German fantasies about cultural origins. It really belongs to the area of holocaust studies- what are the intellectual underpinnings of genocide? Who were the scholars taht gave legitimacy to the Nazi philosophy? What role did Sanskrit Scholars play in educating the Nazi intellectuals on symbolism and terminology? In spite of the military defeat of Nazism, is there a continuation of these fantasies in modern Indology? Other disciplines have recieved such scrutiny. For example, the role of Heisenberg in the German atomic programme has been studied. Why have the Indologists not been subjected to study? > I can't add much with regard to the question when and why antisemitic circles and finally the Nazis adopted the swastika. Concerning the Nazi affiliations of German indologists there is one article that should be consulted: > > Pollock, Sheldon. Deep Orientalism?: Notes on Sanskrit and Power Beyond the Raj. In: Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament: Perspectives on South Asia, eds. Carol A. Breckenridge and Peter van der Veer, 77-133. South Asia Seminar Series. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993. > > To the best of my knowledge, after (and before) the publication of this article no study on this topic has been written. > > Best regards, > Martin Delhey > University of Hamburg > - > gm@A... > INDOLOGY > Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:13 PM > Re: [Y-Indology] indology and nazism > > > The so-called swastika is an old symbol found in many > cultures, not just Indo-European ones. In many cases it is > interpreted as a sun symbol, or more abstractly as > an auspicious sign. The direction of the rotation > varies, as do other aspects of the shape. > > Unfortunately, the Nazis hijacked a version of it for > their own ends. > > Indologists who had Nazi affiliations: sad chapter in > our history--not just Indologists but academia at large > underwent a traumatic period, and unfortunately not > just Indology but all other disciplines had their huge > share of Nazism. Nazism was a system that went > to great lengths and great detail in terms of social > control. Their control over the academic system was > extremely tight and policed increasingly rigidly. > A "wrong word" said in private could result in > deportation and death. There were even Nazi student > organisations who "helped" police the professors! > > European gypsies who to this day speak Indic languages > were relentlessly persecuted by the Nazis. > The Nazi machine, while singling out Jews specially, > actually persecuted not just along "Aryan" lines (they > had their own perverted idea of what "Aryan" meant), but > whoever they felt was hampering their perverted > cause. The mass murder they caused in Europe killed > more Indo-Europeans world-wide than all previous wars > in history taken together. No matter what their propaganda > machine was spreading, the effect on Indo-Europeans > and non-Indo-Europeans alike was totally catastrophic. > This was the case not just for all the IE-speaking nations > of Europe on whom the Nazis declared war, but also internally > in Germany itself. The concentration camps were full > of political opponents, members of religious communities, > individuals who refused to cooperate, and so on. > > Let's talk of something less depressing... > > > aishwaryannamboodiri wrote: > > > Is there a study of the connection of Indology to the rise of Nazism > > in any reputable academic journal? e.g., why did the Nazis reverse the > > Swastika sign when they adopted it as their party emblem? Were any of > > the Indologists of the time sympathizers of the Nazi cause? > > > > > > indology- > > > > > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > Sponsor > > > > > indology- > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2001 Report Share Posted June 10, 2001 INDOLOGY, VAgarwalV@c... wrote: Very informative. > See the quotes attached to this long post from the works of Halbfass > and Kennedy. Note also that if we start discarding the writings of > old Indologists because of their affiliation with Nazism, white > supermacism, colonialism, european ethno-centrism, racism, Christian > Missionary bias etc., then you would be left with hardly anything > that forms the basis of even present day Indology. That is the hard > fact. The mere fact that the originators of a theory have a bias does not invalidate it. Whether an Aryan Invasion of happened is to a historical questioned to be settled by scientific methods. For example many early studies of the heavens were motivated by romantic fantasies such as astrology and the oneness of man with the cosmos. We cannot discount Kepler's laws because he was an astrologer any more than we can discount Whitney' grammar because he might have been a racist. You will also get some additional references from my webpage at > > http://www.voi.org/vishal_agarwal/What_is_AMT.html > > See also the following link depicting the CURRENT use of AIT and its > euphemistic versions by white-supermacists (See the section on India) > http://www.melvig.org/tyc/tyc-02.html > > See also the following chapter from the book of David Duke, an > American politician who is sidely regarded as a White Supermacist. > > http://www.duke.org/awakening/chapter29_09.html > > > The purpose of pointing out these links on white-supermacism is that > it is genetically linked to Nazism, and both have drawn sustenance > from the Aryan theories, which are unfortunately still alive and > kicking. > > QUOTE 1--- > > Reference: Halbfass, Wilhem; India and Europe, An Essay in > Understanding; State University of New York Press; Albany (New York); > 1988 > > Pg. 139-140: The Aryan Myth and speculative ideas about India > continued to play a role in the race theories and doctrines of > historical decadance which were developed in the late nineteenth and > early twentieth centuries. They were particularly significant for the > lunatic fringe of political and ideological movements around 1900, > which contributed to the world view of National Socialism. Among > these, the "Ariosophic" movement of G. Lanz-Liebenfels (1874-1954) > deserves to be mentioned. During his years in Vienna, Hitler was a > regular reader of the hournal Istara, in which Lanz developed his > ideas about dark "Tschandalas" (chandala) and blond Aryans. In 1908, > two issues of the journal dealt exclusively with "the law book of > Manu and race cultivation among the ancient Indo-Aryans" ("Das > Gesetzbuch des Manu und die Rassenpflege bei den alten Indo- Arien"). > Together with his older contemporaries A. Schuler and G. von List, > Lanz was also an early propagator of the svastika. > Not much later, references to "Jishnu Krishna," the Buddha, etc. > which were partly derived from the mystifications of L. Jacolliot, > appeared in the works of Mathilde Ludendorff and the ideology of > the "Ludendorff Movement." A. Rosenberg's Der Mythus des 20. > Jahrunderts ("The Myth of the Twentieth Century"), which was first > published in 1930 and became a leading ideological text book of the > Third Reich, frequently mentions the case of the Aryans in India as > an illustration and as a warning. It also associates developments in > Indian thought, such as the equation of atman and brahman and the > metaphysics of ultimate unity, with racial developments, and > specifically with what it considers to be the loss of Aryan identity > and assertiveness. India is invoked in order to articulate and > justify ideas and programs of unparalleled arrogance and > destructiveness…" > The study of advanced philosophical/literary ideas can bestow a sense of individual superiority on individuals, which without the ethical- moral training that should go with it, can lead to disaster. Indology is not unique in this. We must be at least grateful to these scholars for bringing the tradition to the west. That they lacked the ethical- moral tranining that should have gone with it is a warning to all of us. Hopefully modern Indology departments are conducting careful exercises in self-examination and taking responsibility for the role of their field in this sad episode. > END OF QUOTE 1. > > Extracts from Kenneth Kennedy's recent book > > Reference: Kennedy, Kenneth A. R.; God-Apes and Fossil Men, > Paleoanthropology of South Asia; The University of Michigan Press; > Ann Arbor; 2000 > > Pg. 67: > " Aryan people first emerge from the gloom of prehistory on the > northern borders of the Fertile Crescent of the Ancient East…So it is > clear enough that the dynasts installed on the Upper Euphrates by > 1400 B.C. were Aryans, closely akin to those we meet in the Indus > Valley and later in Media and Persia….[the first Aryans were racially > Nordics and] the Nordics' superiority in physique fitted them to be > vehicles of a superior language. V. G. Childe, The Aryans > > Two myths have prejudiced the course of South Asian > paleoanthropology, each earning the imprimatur of scientific > credibility among anthropologists and archaeologists and textual > authenticity among linguists and chroniclers of ancient history. The > first fabrication is the concept of race as an explanation for human > biological diversity with its typological classification of Homo > Sapiens. Races were thought to be natural entities below the level of > species possessing inherent cultural, linguistic, and psychological- > behavioral properties concordant with physical features if skin and > hair pigmentation, hair form, cranial architecture, stature, and > other readily observable features appearing in high frequencies in > different geographically separated human populations. In South Asia > this traditional concept of race, which emerged by the eighteenth > century in Western thought, became superimposed upon the tenets of > the Indian social caste organization. The presence of these > supposedly immutable and ancient enclaves within traditional Hindu > society was explained by the second myth, namely that the origins of > the high caste priests and scholars (the Brahmins) were traceable to > an ancient ethnic people called the Aryans. > > Pg. 68: > In the opening pages of the traditional Indian medical practices the > Maharaja of Gondal (Bhagavat Simhaji 1896:11-12) wrote that the > notion that the Aryans arose in the Caucasus mountains, then > separated to become Hindus in India and Celts, Teutons, Italians, > Greeks, and Persians in lands to the west is "European in its > conception and is not accepted by Indians in general, who call > themselves autochthonous." For the maharaja and most other learned > Pundits of the end of the nineteenth century the Aryans were Hindus > of Aryavarta. European ethnogenesis is not an element of the corpus > of Vedic literary tradition, which includes records on religious > rites, myths, and elucidation of the relationship of Hindus to the > gods and the Absolute Universal Law. The Vedas are silent on the > matter of the cradle of Aryan origins and begin with their settlement > of the Punjab. > The preservers of a tradition do not have the exclusive right to determining its historical origins. However, it does place a higher burden of proof on outsiders to that tradition who have an alternate view. " Extra-ordinary claims need extra-ordinary proof." If there is direct literary evidence in the Vedas for an eastern migration, for example, that would invalidate the established view. > Pg. 80: It is in Germany that the European versions of the Aryan myth > find their beginnings. Within a pedigree that included Nordic gods human Goths, Lombards, Angles, Saxons, and Burgundians, German > scholars ranked as highest their affiliation with the Franks. It was > through Frankish genealogy that earlier lineages were traced to > Trojans and ultimately to Noah's son Japheth, who some believed had > settled in Germany after the Deluge. Hildegard of Bingen even claimed > that Adam and Eve spoke German! It was around this pivot of > linguistic affinity that many notions of Germanic identity revolved. > German humanists argued for German autochthony, ascribing their > descent from powerful rulers of earlier times who manifested their > might in regions far distant from the Rhine…..An original language > (Ursprache) was the hallmark of the original race (Urvolk) in the > minds of many nationalistic Germans in the period of Enlightenment > and early years of romanticism. They made no distinction between the > language and biological race in defining themselves as distinct from > non-German populations of different idioms and origins. A few German > scholars clung to the venerable notion that Hebrew was the original > language of humanity from which German and other languages called > Japhetic were derived, but their voices were seldom heard. > > Pg. 81: > A voice that was heeded in the beginning of the nineteenth century > was that of Freidrich von Schlegel (1772-1829) (1808), a German > statesman and novelist who had acquired some knowledge of Sanskrit > and a familiarity with the work of William Jones while living in > Paris. Schlegel's work, the title translated as Essay on the Language > and Wisdom of the Indians, was published in 1808, contains two > themes: the antiquity and splendor of Sanskrit and the thesis that > Sanskrit speaking hordes commanded by warriors or priests had left > their Himalaya homeland to bring civilization to India, Egypt, and > Europe. The impact of this mass migration was felt as far north as > Scandinavia, thus the primitive Germanic people were drawn into this > Volkerwanderung of prehistory, becoming amalgamated in the process > into a colony of the conquerors of this mysteriously driven Indian > race. Schlegel made clear an ethnic concept merely implied by earlier > writers of linguistic theory, namely that language, race, and culture > were correlated and not separate facets of human condition. Converts > to Schlegel's view of history added details, and some attempted to > combine his ideas with the Hebrew tradition of racial and linguistic > origins. > In 1819 Schlegel selected the term Aryan to identify the Indian > bearers of culture to the west, a word already familiar in > designating Medes and Persians and borrowed from Herodotus. He liked > this choice for the reason that he associated the root Ari with the > German Ehre (honor), but his racial term had to compete with names > favored by other writers (von Schlegel 1900). Julius von Klaproth > (1783-1835) (1823), Orientalist and traveler to Asia, employed the > term Indo-Germans in 1823, by which time the English had accepted > Thomas Young's (1783-1829) (1814) Indo-European nomen when it was > proposed by this physician and Egyptologist in 1813. It was the > latter term that was used by the Sanskritist and comparative > philologist Franz Bopp in 1833-35. Recent research indicates that the > first use of the term Indo-Germanic family was coined by the Danish- > French geographer, Conrad Malte-Brun (1775-1826) as early as 1810 > (Shapiro 1981:167; Day 1994:14). > The Aryan myth as proposed by Schlegel received its most enthusiastic > support from the German philosopher Georg Wilhel Friedrich Hegel > (1770 – 1832), who compared Jones' linguistic discovery of Sanskrit > affinities to the finding of a new continent. Hegel (1817) pronounced > as fact the phenomenon of the westward migration of an Aryan people, > asserting that the proof rested in linguistics. His theme was taken > up by Christian Lassen (1800-1876), the Norwegian Sanskritist who > introduced the study of Indian archaeology into Germany. Lassen's > (1847-61) view was that the ancient Aryans and the high caste people > of India today have a white complexion, hence are physically > distinguishable from non-Aryans. These and other writers of an Aryan > race concept based upon language, biology, myth, and the ideologies > of the Germanic right of conquest formed the network whereby the > esoteric deliberations of philosophers and antiquarians entered the > arena of public awareness. But a particular responsibility for this > transmission of ideas rests with the German lexicographer Jacob Grimm > (1785- 1863), who is equally well known for his compilation of fairy > tales (Hausmarchen) with his brother Wilhelm. When not regaling the > world with the adventures of Hansel and Gretel, Rumpelstilkin, Snow > White, and the Sleeping Beauty, brother Jacob wrote in his History of > German Language, which appeared in 1848, that: "All the peoples of > Europe, to begin with, those which were originally related and which > gained supremacy at the cost of many wanderings and dangers, > emigrated from Asia in the remote past. They were propelled from East > to West by an irresistible instinct, the real cause of which is > unknown to us…The vocation and courage of those people which were > originally related and destined to rise to such heights, is shown by > the fact that European history was almost entirely made by them (J. > Grimm 1848:113-22) > August Wilhelm von Schlegel (1767-1845), brother of Fredrick von > Schlegel, made significant contributions to Oriental languages and > literature with his publication of the journal Indische Bibliotek > (1823-30) and Latin translations of the Bhagavad-Gita (1823) and > Ramayana (1829). > > Pg. 82 > He held the view that the common home of Europeans, Persians and > Hindus was in a country east of the Caspian Sea. From here Hindus > migrated into India, crossing the Indus at Attock, and proceeded on > to the Punjab, the identical route taken by the forces of Alexander > the Great, Selucus, the Bactrian Greeks, and the Mogul invaders (von > Schlegel 1832-34). In his paper "De l'Origine des Hindous," which he > read to the Royal Society of Literature, London, in 1833, Schlegel > argued that the physical characteristics of Hindus had not changed > from times immemorial, as demonstrated by their sculptures and > paintings, which were copied exactly from ancient models of art. > However, he was unable to resolve the question racial purity of Hindu > castes, noting that the tribal populations and low caste elements had > aboriginal roots in India not derived from other parts of Asia. > The Aryan myth gained a hold in countries outside of Germany. > Linguistics became the criterion of racial classification of mankind > just at the historic moment when racial typology and anthropometry > were becoming the practice of early anthropologists. French > translations of Asiatick Researches appeared in 1803, Herder's Ideas > in 1823, and F. von Schlegel's Essay on the Language and Wisdom of > Indians in 1808. New propagandists of the Aryan Myth arose, among > whom Joseph Ernest Renan (1823-92) of France and the Ango-German > Friedrich Max Mueller (1823- 1900) were the leading figures in the > latter half of the nineteenth century. Renan used the terms Semite > (or Jewish) race and the Aryan (or Indo-Germanic) race in his > controversial book Life of Jesus, which appeared in 1863 and set off > a run of imitations all arguing that the origin of the Bible is to be > found in India. The anti-Semtism that surrounded these works did not > appear with the same intensity among the English audiences Max > Mueller addressed at Oxford University and at the Royal Institute of > London as it did on the subcontinent. Nor did his lectures on > Aryanism incite political disturbances, even at a time when Darwinian > evolution was gaining acceptance over strict acceptance of Genesis > and the Mosaic chronology. > However, the English never fully accepted the notion that their > biological and cultural origins lay among the natives they ruled in > India, and few Englishmen read F. von Schlegel's works in the > subject. Whatever contributions the Aryans may have made to the arts > and sciences, the Church of England affirmed that the origins of > religion were clearly established within the Judaic tradition. Even > the agnostic Thomas Henry Huxley (1891) defended the ethical > teachings of the Bible against those foreigners who would replace it > with their doctrine of an Aryan migration. But Max Mueller's > influence as a philologist and Orientalist lent weight to the > assumption that Aryan meant a biological race as well as a linguistic > entity and that in ancient times "the first ancestors of the Indians, > the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Slavs, the Celts and the > Germans were living together within the same enclosures, nay under > the same roof" (Mueller 1862:213). This idea was put forward in > Mueller's Lectures on the Science of Language, which were published > in 1862, as well as his book History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, What is the view of modern Indologists on the racial meaning of the term `Aryan'? Does a modern professor of sanskrit still follow studies on the racial compostion of India? Or is the view that race is irrelevant to the study of linguistics? > which appeared in 1859, the year of the first edition of Charles > Darwin's Origin. By 1872 Max Mueller recanted his support for any > idea of a link between biological race and language, and in 1888 he > was lecturing that any talk of an Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan > hair, and Aryan bones and skulls was as ludicrous as talk of a > doliocephalic dictionary or brachycephalic grammar (Mueller 1888:116- > 21). This repudiation of his earlier work is a mark of his courage > and professional integrity, but his warnings cane too late: his > disciples perpetuated the Aryan myth that culminated as a political > doctrine and racist manifesto on the continent after the Franco- > Prussian War of 1870-71. While rejecting a linkage of language with > anatomy, Max Mueller (1890, 1891, 1893) himself never abandoned his > theory that an Aryan people had once migrated as a great swarm from > their homeland towards northwestern Europe as well as into the Indian > subcontinent. The exact location of that homeland was debated by many > of his contemporaries, some placing it in central Asia, Europe, or > even north Africa (Snyder 1962:42-46). > > Pg. 83 > Along with the substitution of Mosaic genealogy for Indian genealogy > went a form of anti-Semitism whereby European Jews, released from > ghettos between 1789 and 1815, were considered by many, Germans > included, to be members of an inferior race with origins distinct > from those of Aryans. However, this notion of imported racial > elements from India or central Asia did not find acceptance among > certain Germans who maintained the nationalistic theme that Germans > emerged from unique racial origins. Germans had always been German! > Here was a conflict of myths indeed, and among those who rejected the > Aryan theme was Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832), the > naturalist and poet who had been strongly influenced by Johann > Gottfried von Herder (1744- 1803) while studying law at Stasbourg. > But unlike Herder (1784-91) he was disdainful of any ethnic > association of Germans with the Hindu pantheon, only accepting the > reverent teachings of the Parsis and recognizing the majesty of > Sanskrit. Although Goethe dedicated to Jones a chapter in his book > West-Osticher Divan, which appeared in 1819, he assumed an > indifference to Jones' linguistic discovery, a curious reaction in > the light of Goethe's great interest in natural history and the > problems of early anthropology. > By the time of the Franco-Prussian War, the Aryan concept assumed > garish nationalistic colors among Germans who read the writings of > the French aristocrat Joseph Arthur, conte de Gobineau (1816-82) > (1853-55). His four volume Essai sur l'inegalite des races humaines, > which appeared between 1853 and 1855, was introduced to the German > public by Richard Wagner (1813-83), who was an active writer of > political tracts as well as the composer of some of the most glorious > music the world has ever heard. Wagner's son in law Houston Stewart > Chamberlain (1855-1927) was an Englishmen who molded Gobineau's > concepts into the doctrine of Nordic-Tuetonic racial supremacy. > Chamberlain's Foundations of the Nineteenth Century appeared in 1899, > and any earlier statements by other authors concerning Aryan > supremacy were continued by Chamberlain, who preferred the Teutons or > the Teutonic race. Thus both Gobineau and Chamberlain transformed the > Aryan concept, which had its humble origins in the philological > research conducted by Jones in Calcutta at the end of the eighteenth > century to its absurd limits as a political, racist doctrine in Adolf > Hitler's Third Reich. > > The idea that the Aryans came to India in two waves of migration was > formulated by A. F. Rudolf Hoernle (1841-1918) (1880), an English > Orientalist of German descent. His thesis was supported by George > Grierson (1851-1941) (1907-9), director of the Linguistic Survey of > India, the two scholars agreeing that the first Aryan invasion took > place in the Punjab via the Kabul valley. > > Pg. 84: > The second invasion was thought to have occurred later, in a drier > period and with greater speed, as the new Aryans penetrated to the > valley of the Ganges and Jumna. They arrived as a series of hordes > and took wives of non-Aryans (Dravidian?) stick as they penetrated > the midlands. Brahmanic culture developed there, and Sanskrit became > the classical language of Aryan culture. > This two-wave theory of Aryan migration was taken up by scholars who > were not linguists. Herbert Risley (1908:55) accepted it on the basis > of his interpretation of the ethnology of historic India in the > Census of India: 1901. Ramaprasad P. Chanda, author of Indo-Aryan > Races (1916) argued that the inner band came first and the outer band > at a later time. Following Chanda's modification, scholars were soon > speculating that the invasion was composed of multiple groups related > through genetic ties, a common history, and mutual influences > (Chatterji 1926). > Until well into the twentieth century, the historical proofs of an > Aryan invasion or a Vedic age in India were no better established > than the tenets of the Western scenarios of Aryan influence in the > composition of European populations. In the absence of archaeological > investigations and laboratory analysis of human remains, comparative > linguistics was the single means of establishing an affinity between > Europe and south Asia. The minimal archaeological research conducted > prior to the discovery of the Harappan civilization in 1920 remained > unorganized. In a book on India's antiquities and history written in > 1913, Lionel David Barnett (1871-1960) was not alone in holding the > view that the 1017 hymns of the Rigveda provided the only means of > reconstructing the prehistoric past of the land of Brahmavarta and > the regions of the south. > The twentieth century archaeologist who was most influential on the > issue of Aryan origins was V. Gordon Childe (1892-1957), author of > The Aryans: A Study of Indo-European Origins (1926). The Aryans > reflected Childe's search for European origins through linguistic > data. He wanted to establish the homeland of the ancient people whose > Indo-European languages formed a philological tie between his own > countrymen and the peoples of India. He was influenced by the German > historical concept of the `four empires," which lent a mystical > quality to the shift of civilization from the Near East to > northwestern Europe. The idea of creative and passive races appealed > to Childe as well, the peoples of the Orient being characterized as > stagnant and degenerate, while Europeans were held to be superior in > terms of energy, inventiveness, and independence. National character > rather than history was held by Childe to be the cause of these > ethnic differences, prehistoric people being assigned the same > qualities as their living descendants (Trigger 1980). Childe argued > that a common language implied a common outlook and that Indo- > European languages conferred a special advantage on those who spoke > them. Thus racial identity could be discovered using a philological > approach, and these data could be employed by the archaeologists to > identify the races of the peoples whose sites he or she excavated. > Whole admitting that the early developments of agriculture, > metallurgy, and the sciences came from the speakers of the Middle > East, Childe held that when these inventions were adopted by the Indo- > European populations they were brought to their highest development > and into the realm of true civilization. The Indo-European speakers > achieved this because of the higher qualities of their language, the > hallmark of a more competent mentality. > Why did Indology survive as an academic discipline while the other nineteenth century racial fantasies died out? In short, who funds Indology research now? > > INDOLOGY, aishwaryannamboodiri wrote: > > Is there a study of the connection of Indology to the rise of Nazism > > in any reputable academic journal? e.g., why did the Nazis reverse > the > > Swastika sign when they adopted it as their party emblem? Were any > of > > the Indologists of the time sympathizers of the Nazi cause? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2001 Report Share Posted June 10, 2001 You are correct, we all have that responsibility. Yet, Witzel has a special role as did Thieme in an earlier generation: they are solid scholars who rose to the level of being spokesmen for a field. When symbols and words that acquired a academic respectability because of their work are being abused they have a higher responsibility than an ordinary citizen, they have a special responsibility to correct the public record. This is the flip-side of academic freedom. Scholarship without moral education and courage is truly dangerous- as the abuse of Indology in Germany so clearly shows. >From the lack of a reference in your reply I assume that Witzel has been silent on the issue. Is there any one at all in the field who has stood up? INDOLOGY, gm@A... wrote: > I don't think Indologists like Prof. Witzel have a singular moral > responsibility for preventing Neo-Nazis using any symbols. > You do, too. > > aishwaryannamboodiri wrote: > > > It is not sufficient ( as you so graciously did) to acknowledge that > > some Indologists -like other academics- > > collaborated . You have to name names: who were > > they? It is necessary to see how the field was affected by its Nazi > > association and to see if there are remnants of racism still left in > > the field. Instances of resistance are also valuable. ( Another poster > > mentioned a scholar who resisted the use of the Swastika by the > > Nazis. )For example, how did Thieme resist the abuse of Indology? > > What is Witzel doing currently to prevent the ongoing abuse of Aryan > > symbolism by the Neo-Nazis? > > > > Academics have the right to hold unpopular opinions, even those that > > could be used to justify genocide. The credibility of the discipline > > will only be enhanced by acknowledging the mistakes of its past. The > > Kurt Waldheim episode is instructive: it was his inability to > > acknowledge his Military service that brought him such ill-repute. > > > > Perhaps a conference on " The Abuses of the Aryan Myth " would be a > > good idea. > > By the way what do you think of the book > > " The Aryan Myth: A History of Racist and Nationalist Ideas in Europe" > > by Poliakov, ( London, Heineman 1974)? > > > > INDOLOGY, gm@A... wrote: > > > The so-called swastika is an old symbol found in many > > > cultures, not just Indo-European ones. In many cases it is > > > interpreted as a sun symbol, or more abstractly as > > > an auspicious sign. The direction of the rotation > > > varies, as do other aspects of the shape. > > > > > > Unfortunately, the Nazis hijacked a version of it for > > > their own ends. > > > > > > Indologists who had Nazi affiliations: sad chapter in > > > our history--not just Indologists but academia at large > > > underwent a traumatic period, and unfortunately not > > > just Indology but all other disciplines had their huge > > > share of Nazism. Nazism was a system that went > > > to great lengths and great detail in terms of social > > > control. Their control over the academic system was > > > extremely tight and policed increasingly rigidly. > > > A "wrong word" said in private could result in > > > deportation and death. There were even Nazi student > > > organisations who "helped" police the professors! > > > > > > European gypsies who to this day speak Indic languages > > > were relentlessly persecuted by the Nazis. > > > The Nazi machine, while singling out Jews specially, > > > actually persecuted not just along "Aryan" lines (they > > > had their own perverted idea of what "Aryan" meant), but > > > whoever they felt was hampering their perverted > > > cause. The mass murder they caused in Europe killed > > > more Indo-Europeans world-wide than all previous wars > > > in history taken together. No matter what their propaganda > > > machine was spreading, the effect on Indo-Europeans > > > and non-Indo-Europeans alike was totally catastrophic. > > > This was the case not just for all the IE-speaking nations > > > of Europe on whom the Nazis declared war, but also internally > > > in Germany itself. The concentration camps were full > > > of political opponents, members of religious communities, > > > individuals who refused to cooperate, and so on. > > > > > > Let's talk of something less depressing... > > > > > > > > > aishwaryannamboodiri wrote: > > > > > > > Is there a study of the connection of Indology to the rise of Nazism > > > > in any reputable academic journal? e.g., why did the Nazis reverse the > > > > Swastika sign when they adopted it as their party emblem? Were any of > > > > the Indologists of the time sympathizers of the Nazi cause? > > > > > > > > > > > > indology- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > > > > > > indology- > > > > > > > > Your use of is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2001 Report Share Posted June 10, 2001 Thanks for the reference. There seems to be a curious lack of scholarship on this issue. Does it have to do with the sources of funding? INDOLOGY, "Martin Delhey" <mdelhey> wrote: > > I can't add much with regard to the question when and why antisemitic circles and finally the Nazis adopted the swastika. Concerning the Nazi affiliations of German indologists there is one article that should be consulted: > > Pollock, Sheldon. Deep Orientalism?: Notes on Sanskrit and Power Beyond the Raj. In: Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament: Perspectives on South Asia, eds. Carol A. Breckenridge and Peter van der Veer, 77-133. South Asia Seminar Series. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993. > > To the best of my knowledge, after (and before) the publication of this article no study on this topic has been written. > > Best regards, > Martin Delhey > University of Hamburg > - > gm@A... > INDOLOGY > Saturday, June 09, 2001 11:13 PM > Re: [Y-Indology] indology and nazism > > > The so-called swastika is an old symbol found in many > cultures, not just Indo-European ones. In many cases it is > interpreted as a sun symbol, or more abstractly as > an auspicious sign. The direction of the rotation > varies, as do other aspects of the shape. > > Unfortunately, the Nazis hijacked a version of it for > their own ends. > > Indologists who had Nazi affiliations: sad chapter in > our history--not just Indologists but academia at large > underwent a traumatic period, and unfortunately not > just Indology but all other disciplines had their huge > share of Nazism. Nazism was a system that went > to great lengths and great detail in terms of social > control. Their control over the academic system was > extremely tight and policed increasingly rigidly. > A "wrong word" said in private could result in > deportation and death. There were even Nazi student > organisations who "helped" police the professors! > > European gypsies who to this day speak Indic languages > were relentlessly persecuted by the Nazis. > The Nazi machine, while singling out Jews specially, > actually persecuted not just along "Aryan" lines (they > had their own perverted idea of what "Aryan" meant), but > whoever they felt was hampering their perverted > cause. The mass murder they caused in Europe killed > more Indo-Europeans world-wide than all previous wars > in history taken together. No matter what their propaganda > machine was spreading, the effect on Indo-Europeans > and non-Indo-Europeans alike was totally catastrophic. > This was the case not just for all the IE-speaking nations > of Europe on whom the Nazis declared war, but also internally > in Germany itself. The concentration camps were full > of political opponents, members of religious communities, > individuals who refused to cooperate, and so on. > > Let's talk of something less depressing... > > > aishwaryannamboodiri wrote: > > > Is there a study of the connection of Indology to the rise of Nazism > > in any reputable academic journal? e.g., why did the Nazis reverse the > > Swastika sign when they adopted it as their party emblem? Were any of > > the Indologists of the time sympathizers of the Nazi cause? > > > > > > indology- > > > > > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > Sponsor > > > > > indology- > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.