000			02019nam a22002417a 4500
003			ZW-GwMSU
005			20231002182214.0
008			231002b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aMSU _cMSU _erda
100			_aGELDERS, Raf
245			_aGenealogy of Colonial Discourse _bHindu Traditions and the Limits of European Representation
264			_aCambridge _bCambridge University Press _c2009
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
440			_aComparative Studies in Society and History _vVolume , number ,
520			_aIn the aftermath of Edward Said's Orientalism (1978), European representations of Eastern cultures have returned to preoccupy the Western academy. Much of this work reiterates the point that nineteenth-century Orientalist scholarship was a corpus of knowledge that was implicated in and reinforced colonial state formation in India. The pivotal role of native informants in the production of colonial discourse and its subsequent use in servicing the material adjuncts of the colonial state notwithstanding, there has been some recognition in South Asian scholarship of the moot point that the colonial constructs themselves built upon an existing, precolonial European discourse on India and its indigenous culture. However, there is as yet little scholarly consensus or indeed literature on the core issues of how and when these edifices came to be formed, or the intellectual and cultural axes they drew from. This genealogy of colonial discourse is the subject of this essay. Its principal concerns are the formalization of a conceptual unit in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, called “Hinduism” today, and the larger reality of European culture and religion that shaped the contours of representation.
650			_agenealogy
650			_acolonial discourse
650			_ahindu traditions _veuropean representattion
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417509000231
942			_2lcc _cJA
999			_c163400 _d163400