Best south asian history program

[Prospect]

Hi,

How would you rate/rank these places for south asian history? Michigan, Harvard, Chicago, Columbia, Princeton. Please let me know in terms of faculty, faculty access, quality of history department, department environment and job prospects.

Have to make a choice (among some of these places), so please do comment.

[TransnationalHistory]

What's your field specifically? Ancient? Colonial? Modern? A particular country or the region in general? Do you already have language skills, or will you need to acquire them at school? Anyway, I have a secondary interest in colonial/post-colonial India/Sri Lanka, in that it relates to my field somewhat, and I know Michigan recently hired someone who specializes in that. Otherwise, I'd just email current students at each school who are in your field, and see what they say.

[TMP]

Transnational- OP was already accepted to all these programs.

OP, Why did you apply to those schools in the first place? Think back to why you picked them over other schools.

Those are all very good programs in general. You should check out each university's (South) Asian Studies program/center and see how much support they give to doctoral students. Talk to the students and faculty. Don't be afraid to tell the faculty where else you have applied. Some may actually suggest that you go to this program or that program over theirs- they will have your best interest in their mind (usually...). Will you need FLAS for more language study in the future? Check out how competitive FLAS funding is at each place.

Discuss, as well, course offerings. How much of your coursework will be based on independent readings because there aren't enough to fill a seminar? You'll want to be able to take a good number of courses with plenty of students in them so you can gain different perspectives.

[superfluousflo]

I have to reply to this, it's my major field too (makes me wonder if we've met). My impression is that all of these programs/schools are great.

Columbia and Michigan are hard to compete with on a Early Modern/Modern South Asia level, especially if working on India. They both have stellar placement records and impressive faculties. Michigan having just hired Mrinalini Sinha and with plans to hire two more South Asianists in the very near future. Columbia, with its team taught Nicholas Dirks/Partha Chatterjee advanced South Asian history course, might offer the most provocative course in the country. Michigan and Columbia also have pretty good guaranteed funding packages and there doesn't seem to be much of a problem getting external funding for further language training and/or archival research. Then it comes down to location. Ann Arbor or NYC? Columbia gets to offer an Ivy League consortium and the Inter-University Consortium (NYU, Columbia, Fordham?, CUNY, Princeton, Rutgers?, ), both provide incredible access to other University's, their faculties, libraries, centers, etc. Michigan, on the other hand, has agreements with Big Ten schools and has a working relationship with UToronto, with a good likelihood of working with UChicago and other regional schools (just not a close-by as those around NYC).

Chicago would be an excellent place for a person especially interested in Bengali history, as they boast Dipesh Chakrabarty and Rochona Majumdar and have done well to produce high level scholars. Funding is precarious for some, excellent for others, but with an offer, you should know about the funding package at each of the respective schools listed.

Harvard, in my humble opinion, isn't great as it only has Sugata Bose to offer in the history department, an imminent historian, no doubt, but it seems limited for Harvard. There is a good relationship between Harvard and Tufts, where Ayesha Jalal has done an impressive job orienting advanced study in history toward South Asia. So a person with interests in revolutionary history, Indian ocean, and South Asian Islam would do well at Harvard/Tufts.

Finally, Princeton is a curious place for South Asian history. Of course they have Gyan Prakash on faculty and his eclectic tastes would probably suit anyone's interests. Along with Prakash you have Bhavani Raman, an historian of early modern scribal cultures in India. So, Princeton offers breadth that Harvard/Tufts and Chicago don't seem to. On the other hand, Princeton, an awesome department, doesn't seem to have a strongly articulated institutional interest in South Asia, unlike all of the other schools mentioned.

I can't give a numbered list; however, I think my preferences are somewhat clear.

[qbtacoma]

Silas, you should cross-post that in the Index thread. That's a lot of great info!

[chicagostudent]

What about University of Wisconsin-Madison? How does this program stack up? I don't think I could get into those top tier schools such as Harvard, Princeton, Columbia...

Thanks.

[Astarabadi]

Hi,

How would you rate/rank these places for south asian history? Michigan, Harvard, Chicago, Columbia, Princeton. Please let me know in terms of faculty, faculty access, quality of history department, department environment and job prospects.

Have to make a choice (among some of these places), so please do comment.

Hi,

I've been doing serious research on South Asian studies programs. Here's what I found (this is as of late July):

1. You will find the best S.Asian studies programs at Title VI schools: that means the state schools. In random order:

U-Washington (Henry Jackson International) People: A. Yang and P. Dhavan

U-W Madison (Andre Wink). Madison is also where the annual South Asian studies conference takes places, followed by the South Asian librarians conference (good to look into both).

U-C Berkeley (M.Faruqui holding down the fort). U-C Davis also to some extent (A. Anooshahr).

U-T Austin (C. Talbot) Good Mid-Eastern studies program as well

U-M Ann Arbor (Cole, F.Mir, etc.)

Rutgers is up and coming with S.Guha and I.Chatterjee on the S.Asian team

As for the private schools, Columbia has gotten weak recently, chaotic program. NYU/Harvard/Yale I am not sure about, but I think the last two are more focused on anthropology and art.

In terms of subject matter, the state schools have good solid historians in the field. This is important, as it forms the matrix for other field such as art, literature, etc.

In terms of religion, I am really not sure. I think there are a few and far between experts on S.Asian religion, but the program is held down by historians. They have a certain personality that tends to sometime "cast a shadow" on the artists and poets.

[sankd]

Really? What about Pandey at Emory? Cole does South Asia?

Edited July 20, 2011 by sankd

[gradwoes]

As for the private schools, Columbia has gotten weak recently, chaotic program.

I have to respectfully disagree with this assessment. Columbia offers quite a few historians for South Asia including Profs. Dirks, Bakhle, and Rao. This fall the department will be hiring an historian who focuses on Islam in pre-modern and modern South Asia. Outside of the history department there's of course the plethora of professors in Anthro, Art History, and MESAAS (Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies). I'm not sure if it's gotten weaker, as they haven't lost any faculty or anything like that. Also, I don't think it's chaotic either: students study South Asia from a multitude of departments, but all the graduate students get to know each other/research/present papers through the South Asia Institute. I'm not trying to be a hack and say that Columbia is for every single potential South Asia history graduate student ever, but it certainly has its merits!

[crater21]

I'm surprised someone hasn't mentioned NYU where Manu Goswami and Andrew Sartori (not to mention David Ludden) are doing some very interesting work.

Also, what about UCLA (Vinay Lal and Sanjay Subrahmanyam)?

Another over-looked place (esp. among American students) is the University of Toronto. They have more South Asianists than some of the bigger departments in the U.S

Then, there are places with one or two big names: Vazira Zamindar at Brown (for Partition history) and Neeti Nair at U of Virginia.

[crater21]

I have to respectfully disagree with this assessment. Columbia offers quite a few historians for South Asia including Profs. Dirks, Bakhle, and Rao. This fall the department will be hiring an historian who focuses on Islam in pre-modern and modern South Asia. Outside of the history department there's of course the plethora of professors in Anthro, Art History, and MESAAS (Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies). I'm not sure if it's gotten weaker, as they haven't lost any faculty or anything like that. Also, I don't think it's chaotic either: students study South Asia from a multitude of departments, but all the graduate students get to know each other/research/present papers through the South Asia Institute. I'm not trying to be a hack and say that Columbia is for every single potential South Asia history graduate student ever, but it certainly has its merits!

Hi gradwoes,

I'll be applying for South Asian history this fall for 2012 admissions, and Columbia is on my list. Do you have any advice/tips about making an application there? I'm interested in doing 18C history, so Prof. Dirks would be the obvious choice. I haven't been in touch with him yet, as I thought I should wait until term starts.

Thank you very much!

[Astarabadi]

Yes, I did leave out two places:

UCLA with now Nile Green and S. Subrahmanyam. NYU I didnt know much about but am finding out.

Emory also has a good mix with Scott Kugle and Joyce Flucekinger.

As for Columbia, I visited the campus and spoke to a professor I know there. Even though I am an "attractive candidate" (his words not mine, and I've known him for years), he asked me to stay away for Columbia. Not making any conclusions here, but it might be different for you.

In any and all cases, it is foolish to apply without first speaking with the professors themselves to see if they are interested, and with graduate students to see how the chemistry with the professors is, and of course if you like the program.

For instance, there are a couple ppl at UT Austin I would like to work with but again the area studies program is based on language and literature, something I am not interested in. So I am going to end up applying for history with a focus on S.Asia/Mid. East.

the struggle continues....

[Area Study]

I am interested in doing my PHD in History on partition . Where should I apply

Edited May 27, 2012 by ufaque

[Area Study]

I am interested in doing my PHD in History on partition . Where should I apply

[SK904]

Then it comes down to location. Ann Arbor or NYC? Columbia gets to offer an Ivy League consortium and the Inter-University Consortium (NYU, Columbia, Fordham?, CUNY, Princeton, Rutgers?, ), both provide incredible access to other University's, their faculties, libraries, centers, etc. Michigan, on the other hand, has agreements with Big Ten schools and has a working relationship with UToronto, with a good likelihood of working with UChicago and other regional schools (just not a close-by as those around NYC).

What is the difference between this and interlibrary loan? Can people not affiliated with the university use it too?

[Shep]

I'm going to be completely honest with you. I am also a South Asianist (in the making) and as I inquired about some of the named programs, I was told that the market for this field is extremely bad. This came from my advisor and other committee members as well as many of the professors at these institutions. There is limited space for South Asianists in PhD programs. In fact, many are simply bypassed in lieu of Americanists, Europeanists, and Africanists. This isn't affecting only the field of history, but languages and literature, linguistics, anthropology, sociology, etc. Be careful and do not get your hopes up, but I do wish you the best. Think "saturation" and also think of a plan B in terms of topics. I'm sure I will get a lot of grief for this response, but this is my second year applying. Last year I received some very sobering information but went ahead with the process. This year, I have inquired again at different institutions with the same responses and warnings. Sure, some POI's are polite, but....

[GLS1604]

Hi,

I can't seem to find any other thread i could post this on, so i too have South Asia pinned down as my primary area of research interest . But my field is more literature centred. i'd appreciate it if someone could list places i could apply with a proposal dealing with urdu literary historiography for instance.

Thanks

[czesc]

Hi,

I can't seem to find any other thread i could post this on, so i too have South Asia pinned down as my primary area of research interest . But my field is more literature centred. i'd appreciate it if someone could list places i could apply with a proposal dealing with urdu literary historiography for instance.

Thanks

 

Why exactly are you looking at history programs rather than South Asian Studies or something like that? This would help us figure out where might be best for you.

 

I know we have a PhD candidate working on Urdu language construction and politics at Cornell right now, but I'm not sure how close that kind of thing is to what you're looking for.

[dr. t]

 it only has Sugata Bose to offer in the history department, an imminent historian, no doubt,

 

So when does he start 

 

EDIT: Oh wow this thread is old.

Edited October 23, 2014 by telkanuru

[GLS1604]

Why exactly are you looking at history programs rather than South Asian Studies or something like that? This would help us figure out where might be best for you.

 

I know we have a PhD candidate working on Urdu language construction and politics at Cornell right now, but I'm not sure how close that kind of thing is to what you're looking for.

 Oh, thats because i couldn't find a thread on South Asian Studies per se. I am sorry! new to gradcafe.

[nerdbird]

Hi! I would love some updated information here if anyone has any ideas. Any ideas on where the best spots are for South Asianist faculty with a focus on postcolonialism and gender? I applied to 15 schools and am hearing back now, and want to make an informed choice.

[MettaSutta]

On 2/12/2018 at 2:32 PM, nerdbird said:

 the best spots are for South Asianist faculty with a focus on postcolonialism and gender? 

Anupama Rao at Columbia.

[Irvine student]

I would like to share here a warning for prospective PhD in South Asia students. I had joined PhD in University of California Irvine in Vinayak Chaturvedi’s supervision. I tried to inquire about his past records but no one was honest with me, which is why I am writing on this platform. He has not graduated a single student in his entire career of 20+ years. He is extremely abusive towards his grad students, and my experience was extremely negative. I and most of his other students had to leave the PhD program after years of torture and ill treatment. In general, the department is extremely toxic and they like to make students apologize to faculty again and again, something I had never experienced in India. The faculty stand together and gang up against powerless graduate student and single them out. Additionally, I would also like to inform grad students that UCI History Department does a year end review of 1st year PhD students, where they weed students out. There is blatant racism and sexism, as confided by a professor of the Department to me. I can vouch for that based on my own experience. I would never recommend UCI History Department to any grad student ever because of the general toxicity and racism rampant there.