Maithili Language and the Movement, Part–I

This chapter examines the ways through which the Maithili movement became more provocative and assertive from the beginning of the 1920s until the independence of India. It begins with not just a categorical refutation to Hindi’s claim of Maithili being its ‘dialect’, but by invoking the cultural and historical figures like Vidyapati, Govinda Das, which led to controversy between the supporters of Bengali and Maithili, it tried to galvanize and broaden its support among the Maithili speakers who were divided on the basis of caste, class, religion, region, and sects. In this period, there were many Bengali scholars who tried to project Vidyapati and Govinda Das as Bengali poets. However, the controversy was settled by the Bengali scholars themselves through their meticulous research on Vidyapati and eventually they began to support the cause of Maithili as an independent language. All these developments galvanized the support for Maithili among the Maithils who otherwise were suspicious of Maithili’s prospect in terms of either getting good education or employment. Whereas on the other hand, learning Hindi was seen not only as supporting the nationalist cause but a language that can provide better opportunities. However, Maithili elites remained ambivalent to Hindi. They could foresee its prospect but were not willing to forgo the rich literary traditions of Maithili for championing the cause of Hindi. So, while they were not inimical to Hindi, they rallied solidly behind Maithili to assert its status as an independent modern Indian language. The broadening of Maithili journalism attempts to revive its script—Mithilakshar, and formation of the Maithili Sahitya Parishad were other significant developments in this period. Gradually, these developments led to the growth of a new sense of geopolitical identity on the basis of Maithili. And Mithila-Maithil-Maithili became the key slogan of this phase of the Maithili movement.

British Rule and Classifications of Indian Languages

This chapter examines the ways through which Christian missionaries and British officials attempted to classify Indian languages. How these exercises turned out to be the basis for different groups in India to forge various identities? How that led to competing claims and counter claims by various communities and groups? In particular, language turns out to be a powerful marker of group identity. The question of ‘chaste’ versus ‘standard’, written versus oral, and language with or without grammar and literature became politically and emotionally charged issue since the beginning of the nineteenth century. It also led to the politics of linguistic dominations and subordinations as well as resistances to such processes. For the British, it was an arduous task to classify and categorize various languages and knowledge systems of ‘natives’ in India into one single hegemonic narrative. They did not follow a consistent linguistic policy which remains a daunting task for the post Independent governments in India as well. And, we continue to witness various forms of identity movements based on language, religion and caste with varying degree of intensities. In these movements, their numerical strength became one of the most important signifier. Their engagement with modernity and their own ‘pre-modern’ selves are also important conjuncture in such mobilizations. I have argued in this chapter that more serious explorations of these movements will enrich not only the effective history and politics of modern India but also the understanding of unfolding and adaptations to modernity in India.

Conclusion

This chapter argues about language as a marker of identity and also as a conceptual category that can be a powerful tool for exploring the varied experiences of different linguistic communities with modernity or our ‘colonial modernity’. Besides, it also allows us to revisit some of the important concepts like nation, nationalism, tradition and how these terms were used and understood by different linguistic communities in India particularly in the vernacular spheres. The study of a language is not merely the study of a speech form, but it also involves a whole web of interconnected themes, ideas, and activities which together constitute the totality of human existence. Language as a conceptual category provides a valuable link to approach that reality in all such complexities. Further, I have argued that the study of such language movements in the ‘Hindi heartland’ like the Maithili language movement would be incomplete unless it also takes into account the socialpolitical and historical context in which such movements have emerged. And then, I have explained the major shifts in and challenges to the Maithili movement in its over-a-century of struggles and contemporary developments.

Maithili Language and the Movement, Part–II

This chapter examines the unfolding of the Maithili movement in post-independent India. One of the major characteristics of the movement in this period has been its gradual shift from a predominantly literary and cultural movement to a more politicized movement. A number of political parties and leaders joined in and have played critical roles in the expansion of the movement. One can divide the Maithili movement in this era into four phases. In the first phase, separate statehood demand for Mithila became the central mobilizing factor immediately after Independence of India in 1950s. Demands for separate statehood extended further to claim Mithila as a union republic. The second phase of the movement was highlighted by the issues regarding the recognition of Maithili as a Modern Indian language in Sahitya Akademi and correct enumeration of Maithili speakers in the census. It also includes other demands like opening of a Mithila University, a radio station at Darbhanga. The third phase was about the demand for inclusion of Maithili in the eighth schedule of the Indian Constitution. This phase also witnessed many protests and demonstrations due to removal of Maithili from BPSC (Bihar Public Service Commission) and for its re-inclusion; for the inclusion of Maithili in secondary school examinations; for implementation of decision regarding the use of Maithili as a medium of instruction at the primary level; for publication of textbooks in Maithili and recruitment of Maithili teachers; for the recognition of Maithili as an administrative language in the state of Bihar, especially when Urdu was made second official language in the state by a Maithili-speaking chief minister, Jagannath Mishra. The fourth and contemporary phase of the Maithili movement has been witnessing reassertion of separate statehood demands particularly after the creation of Jharkhand, Uttarakhand and Chhatisgarh in 2001 and the recognition of Maithili in the eighth schedule of the Indian Constitution in 2004.

Language, History, Nation, and the Imaginary of Maithili Identity

Using the category of language and history, the present chapter attempts to explore the incongruities, persistent ambivalences and challenges to the formation of nationalist consciousness in the context of India’s ‘Hindi heartland’ in the second half of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century. Within the ‘Hindi heartland’, we do not find any serious challenges to the pan Indian identity formation, at least not in the beginning. But a weak, even suppressed, but obvious and often visible discomforts against such formation was not totally absent. The Maithili speakers accepted Hindi as the national language of India but when attempts were made by the supporter of Hindi to appropriate it as a ‘dialect’ of Hindi, they began to contest not only such claims by asserting the independence and rich literary history of Maithili, but also in the process they began to articulate a ‘new’ imaginary of Maithili identity. I have explored in this chapter how far such articulations were successful and how did Maithili language and history was used as powerful tools for the articulations of modern Maithili identity.

Introduction

This chapter examines the language politics in India specifically that of the ‘Hindi heartland’ as it evolved during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It discusses the processes that led to subordinations and appropriations of other languages in the region. Thus, it seeks to interrogate the ways through which these other languages became merely as ‘dialects’ or ‘varieties’ of Hindi. It also needs to be stressed that language and dialects’ inter-relationship remains a highly problematic and contentious issue in the ‘Hindi heartland’. Many linguistic communities like Maithili and Bhojpuri had to struggle for the recognition of their respective languages as independent and distinct from Hindi. Other literary rich and more cultivated languages like Braj or Awadhi became ‘varieties’ of modern Hindi. Maithili is now recognized as a modern Indian language but many other languages in the region including Bhojpuri are still struggling for such recognition. In this chapter, I have argued that the studies of vernacular politics may lead to deeper understanding of the contentious trajectories of modernity and nationalist imaginations in modern India.