A Global Institute for Sanskrit and Indic Civilisation
A substantial programme in Sanskrit and Indic studies needs an institutional home capable of sustaining work across departments and over many years. Individual scholars can initiate important projects, but teaching resources, archives and international collaborations require continuity. I propose a Global Institute for Sanskrit and Indic Civilisation to provide that support.
The institute would connect existing academic strengths while preserving the identity of participating departments. Sanskrit, philosophy, history, music and the performing arts could contribute alongside other disciplines as particular projects require. Its responsibilities would include coordinating research, supporting teaching and helping scholars develop work that benefits from cooperation beyond their own specialism.
An initial programme should grow from a careful assessment of faculty expertise and collections. This would identify projects that can begin with available resources and those requiring additional appointments, partnerships or funding. The institute’s charter should explain its relationship with departments and how research priorities would be selected. Clear arrangements at this stage would allow academic work to proceed with confidence.
I envisage research chairs, visiting fellowships and collaborative projects around defined fields of inquiry. Critical editions, translations and studies of musical and oral traditions could provide early opportunities for substantial output. A publication programme would help this work reach students and scholars in appropriate languages and formats, with review standards suited to each kind of contribution.
International engagement should be built around work that participants undertake together. Visiting scholars could teach advanced seminars and contribute to ongoing editions or research groups. Summer schools could bring students into contact with specialists. Joint programmes would require careful academic design and the relevant institutional arrangements before students are admitted.
The institute could also support the preservation and language-technology programmes described in this series. Their relationship should be practical: collections provide sources for research, scholarship improves descriptions and interpretation, and digital resources help others study the results. Each activity would need its own expertise and appropriate oversight.
Public reporting should explain what the institute has achieved and what remains in progress. Completed editions, useful research resources, sustained partnerships and the quality of student learning would give substance to its international ambition. I would like such an institute to become a place to which scholars return because serious work is underway and because they can contribute to it. Its reputation should develop from the scholarship and educational opportunities it makes possible.