@incollection{fdi:010067574,
  title = {{M}ax {M}üller and the theosophists or the other half of {V}ictorian orientalism},
  author = {{V}idal, {D}enis},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{I}n this paper, {I} argue that the dominant forms of orientalism prevalent in {I}ndia from the second half of the nineteenth century onwards are not adequately explained by the criticismes of {E}dward {S}aid or {R}onald {I}nden. {I}t must not be forgiven that from the time of {M}acaulay onwards, orientalism, far from epitomising colonial ideology, was in fact marginalised by the {B}ritish administration. {M}oreover, orientalism, in its less orthodox forms, did in fact play an important role in the formation of anti-imperialist discourse in {I}ndia. {T}his means that in order to evaluate the full significance of what oriental ism represented in late colonial {I}ndia, one needs first to consider the relationship between is different composite elements.},
  keywords = {{INDE} ; {FRANCE}},
  booktitle = {{O}rientalism and anthropology : from {M}ax {M}üller to {L}ouis {D}umont},
  numero = {24},
  pages = {17--29},
  address = {{P}ondich{\'e}ry},
  publisher = {{IFP}},
  series = {{P}ondy {P}apers in {S}ocial {S}ciences},
  year = {2001},
  ISSN = {0972-3188},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010067574},
}