John D. Smith
British Indologist
John Dargavel Smith (born August 26, 1946) is a former professor of Sanskrit at Cambridge.
Smith's studies have primarily focused on topics in the language/literature/culture of Rajasthan. Much of this time was devoted to a major project on the hero-deity Pabuji: this was published in 1991 as The epic of Pabuji (Cambridge University Press).
Smith earned a BA degree in Oriental Studies (Sanskrit and Hindi) 1968 and a PhD in 1974. He was appointed Lecturer in Sanskrit at the School of Oriental and African Studies 1975; University Lecturer in Sanskrit at Cambridge 1984, and became promoted Reader in Sanskrit, October 2001. He retired in September 2007.
Smith is interested in Hindu mythology and epic narrative. In 2009, he published an abridged translation of the Mahabharata with Penguin Classics. Professor Smith is also interested in the application of computers to textual study.
Selected publications
The Vīsaḷadevarāsa: a restoration of the text.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “John D. Smith” is british Indologist. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through John, Smith and British, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “british Indologist” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 25, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6228326. VIAF identifies the subject as 53145971485732332147. The Library of Congress control number is n90633958. 3 of 4 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1946, 1991, 1968 and 1974.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “John D. Smith”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow John D. Smith primary sources, John D. Smith archive and John research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “John D. Smith”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “John D. Smith” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.