Kaithi, Caste & Politics (One language, Two scripts - a book review)

[Guest guest]

Dr. V. J. Roebuck wrote:

>Could it not also be that at some point (with increasing

>communication between different parts of India through railways,

>newspapers etc) it actually became more convenient for people to use

>a more limited number of scripts?

 

Surely, that is one of the reasons. Many Sanskrit texts

were found in the South in Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam Grantha scripts.

The North was missing those, and the Hindus esp. from the North

wanted to have one scrript so that a transfer of these Sanskrit

texts into Nagari script was effecetd. Sanskrit texts, written

in the local scripts, can have one script for All India readership.

In the second half of the 19th century, the Hindu nationalists

founded Nagari Pracarini Sabha and the British adminitration heeded

to their demand of Nagari script. The switch of Modi to Nagari

would also have played a role. Major Hindu movements from

Shivaji to RSS started in Maharsshtra.

 

The standardization of Urdu-Hindi script could have gone either

for the Kaithi script (prevalent already from Bihar to Gujarat),

or towards the Nagari script used primarily for Sanskrit.

A parallel example is possibly Hebrew in Israel.

Prof. Sumathi Ramaswamy mentions the Kaithi script

in her paper, Sanskrit for the Nation (Modern Asian studies).

David Ludden edited the volume, "Making India Hindu" &

is available in the net:

(does it mention the shift of Urdu-Hindi from Perso-Arabic to

Devanagari?)

http://www.history.upenn.edu/hist085/MakingIndiaHindu.htm

 

Srivastava, Sushil "Review Article: Christopher King,

One Language, Two Scripts,"

The Annual of Urdu studies, p. 217-228. In pdf format

http://www.urdustudies.com/pdf/10/28KingLanguage.pdf

p. 225

"However, it is a fact that Kaithi was a popular script

in rural north India up to the nineteenth century. It was

because of this that Sher Shah Suri accompanied all his

Persian declarations with translations in local languages

of the areas written out in the Kaithi script. Kaithi

was apparently used in matters related to the villages.

Literature, however, was composed in the Perso-Arabic

script. Most of the mss. that were put togther by the

Search Committee set up by the Nagari Paracarini Sabha

were found to have been written in the Perso-Arabic script."

 

Dr. Yashwant Malaiya wrote:

<<<

The origin of the Palas of Bengal is unclear, however they were not

derved from a noble dynasty. However Ain-i-Akbari calls

them "Kayeth", and I think that may explain their inclination

towards Buddhism and prominence of kayasthas in Bengal.

>>>

 

and,

 

>I think most of the Devanagari manuscripts were also written

>by Kayasthas.

 

Kaithi for laukika life was used by Kayasths. But the Sanskrit

works in Nagari script - were they also written by Kayasths?

(Or, by BraahmaNas?). So, were Kayasths very proficient

in Sanskrit? In the British colonial period, were there

many famous professors and authors of Sanskrit from Kayasth caste?

Reading books about colonial Bengal, there's mention of

the shudra background of Vivekananda, a Kayasth.

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

naga_ganesan wrote:

 

> The standardization of Urdu-Hindi script could have gone either

> for the Kaithi script (prevalent already from Bihar to Gujarat),

> or towards the Nagari script used primarily for Sanskrit.

 

Kaithi and Nagari are really just one script.

 

Anyone who did not know that the script without the top line is

called "kaithi" , would call it just nagari.

 

> Kaithi for laukika life was used by Kayasths. But the Sanskrit

> works in Nagari script - were they also written by Kayasths?

> (Or, by BraahmaNas?).

 

I believe that majority of the text writing (i.e. reproduction)

in the north was done by kayasthas. If I'm not mistaken, somewhere

there is a Sanskrit Buddhist manuscript from 13th century Bihar

written by a Kayasth. I know several sanskrit inscriptions that were

written by Kayasthas, the inscriptions mention the fact.

 

At Khajuraho, the Markateshvar inscription of Dhanga was originally

written by Yashapala Kayasth. Incidentally the Kedaranath

inscription of Ajayagarh praises and gives the account of a Kayastha

officer. Both are in Sanskrit.

 

>In the British colonial period, were there

> many famous professors and authors of Sanskrit from Kayasth caste?

 

No, I don't think so. There were mostly brahmins.

 

> Reading books about colonial Bengal, there's mention of

> the shudra background of Vivekananda, a Kayasth.

 

True. He was a Kayasth, as was Aurobido.

 

Yashwant