ABSTRACT
The agents belonging to the sub-field of general production of scholarship on India, who did not possess the academically certified competences ideally required to access the scholarly pole, were almost totally excluded from institutional positions within this field. They were thus compelled to draw upon principles exterior to the scholarly world, that were of a literary, religious or ideological nature, in order to legitimize their discourses. They could then compete with scholars whose productions were also partly oriented towards the demands of the general public, which everyone tried to fulfil. This competition, however, did not only apply to the conquest of an editorial market and a readership. What was also at stake was the monopoly of legitimate discourse on India, and moreover, the monopoly of the scientific veracity of discourses on India. Thus, we have to consider the relationship that heteronomous individuals, according to their assets and trajectories, maintained with scholars whose verdicts of legitimacy—rejection, recognition or alliance—could produce, at least for those who believed in these issues, field effects; in other words, the positions occupied within the field were (or could be) refracted onto viewpoints taken by agents on the issues at stake.
