No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Dispensaries in colonial South Asia have received scant attention in the historiography on colonial medicine in India. Those who have touched upon them have remarked on the pluralism and hybridity of the medicine practised in them. Yet these studies remain trapped within binarisms such as coloniser/colonised, science/tradition or Occident/Orient and fail to ask further questions about the structure of this medical pluralism. Why did colonial officials collaborate with some strains of indigenous healing while they rejected others outright? Asking this question also forces us to disaggregate categories such as 'indigenous medicine,' 'colonial medical establishment,' 'indigenous practitioners of western medicine' etc. I try to investigate here how categories such as locality, ethnicity and class structured the pluralism of the colonial dispensary practice.
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.