Original Writing: Dr. Subrat Kumar Prusty
Edited and Rewritten: Brajabandhu Mahanta, MCA, MA
When discussing the origin and evolution of Odia language, it is often identified as an Aryan language. This classification applies not only to Odia but to most Indian languages, except for the four southern Indian languages—Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, and Malayalam—and the tribal languages of the country. These four southern languages, known as Dravidian languages, belong to the non-Aryan category.
Apart from the four Dravidian languages, many ancient literary works exist in the colloquial languages of northern India. These works include treatises on grammar and other significant texts. Notably, these ancient texts do not mention any Aryan languages; instead, they reference “Bibhasa” or “Prakrit.” For example, Bharata Muni’s Natya Shastra, written between 200 BCE and 200 CE, during a time when Sanskrit had become the official court language. In this work, Bharata Muni explicitly mentions several Bibhasas. Similarly, Prakrit is frequently referenced in texts from earlier and medieval periods.
This leads us to an intriguing question: if ancient writings do not explicitly classify languages as Aryan or non-Aryan, where, when, and why did this concept of linguistic division emerge?
We can illustrate this with an example. After the British subjugated our land, they implemented a “Divide and Rule” policy to conceal their foreign identity. By making English the official and academic language, they divided the population into two categories: English-literate and English-illiterate. The British used the English-literate minority as the ruling class to control the rest of the people. The influence of English, introduced in 1835, became so entrenched that even over 200 years later, it feels almost impossible for us to function without it.
Similarly, foreign historians who wrote India’s history divided the population into Dravidians and Aryans. This led to the division of Indian languages into two categories: Dravidian languages and Indo-Aryan languages. Unfortunately, this division has cost us dearly, as it has perpetuated a pseudo-theory that presents the Odia language—and its script—as a mixture of these two categories. As a result, our ethnic identity has been fragmented, and we find ourselves struggling within this divided framework. However, I am confident that Odia is a distinct and genuine language. The Odia-speaking people, along with the Adivasis (tribal people), have lived in a shared region, influencing each other in language, culture, traditions, and worship. The linguistic and cultural overlap between Odia and the tribal languages is significant.
This connection is further emphasized by the similarities between the writing systems of Odia and the tribal languages. The pictographs discovered in places like the Gudahandi caves in Kalahandi, the Jogimath caves in Nuapada, and the Bikram Khol caves in Jharsuguda show remarkable parallels with the Odia script. For instance, the Gudahandi cave pictographs, dating back to 20,000 BCE, depict human thoughts and interactions with animals. These pictographs, featuring quadrangles in two lines, suggest the presence of an indigenous civilization. Unfortunately, these discoveries have not garnered the attention they deserve from either scholars or the authorities, leaving the world—and even people from Kalahandi—unaware of them.
The Jogimath cave, dating back to around 10,000 BCE, contains a unique pictograph of a human alongside animals. Scholars have linked this inscription to the Ashokan Brahmi script and interpreted it as “Gaitha,” which corresponds to the modern Odia word “Gotha,” meaning a herd of animals. This inscription represents an early form of the Odia script. Additionally, there are numerous paintings with primitive writing in the Bikram Khol caves that have yet to be deciphered. Eminent historian K.P. Jayswal has noted the similarity between the Harappan script and the Bikram Khol script, dating it to around 1500 BCE.
The script is essential for the development of a language. Odisha is home to many ancient paintings, pictographs, and rock inscriptions, but despite the abundance of discoveries, insufficient research has been conducted to trace the origins of the Odia script and language. As a result, misunderstandings about the true nature of Odia persist among scholars. From the time of Ashoka to the present day, the Odia language has undergone various stages of development, with changes in both script and usage. This evolution can be clearly seen in ancient records like palm leaf manuscripts and other historical documents from Odisha.
According to G.A. Grierson, the term “Mâne,” which literally means “men,” serves as the noun for a multitude of living rational beings. In other cases, the noun typically means “all.” Regarding the verb, as in Bengali, the singular forms of the first and second persons are used only by the uneducated or when respect is not intended. He further explains that each letter in every word is distinctly pronounced, describing the language as “comprehensive and poetic, with a pleasant, musical intonation that is by no means difficult to learn and master.”
Odia is notably free from significant dialectical variations. The common saying in northern India that the language changes every ten kos (approximately 30 kilometers) does not apply in Odisha. In the region known as the Mughalbundi, which includes Cuttack, Puri, and the southern half of Balasore, the language remains consistent throughout. [Linguistic Survey of India, Vol-V, P-368-369] (Annexure -XVI).
L.S.S. O’Malley, who was well-versed in not only Odia but also classical and Vedic Sanskrit, offers additional insight. He writes, “The Oriya verbal system is both simple and complete. It has a broad range of tenses, but it is so logically structured and built on such a regular model that its principles are easily memorized. Particularly noteworthy is its comprehensive set of verbal nouns—present, past, and future. When an Odia speaker wishes to convey what in Latin would be the initiative, they simply take the appropriate verbal noun and decline it in the necessary case. Since every infinitive must be an oblique case of a verbal noun, Odia grammar does not include the so-called infinitive mode at all. In this respect, Odia represents an older stage of grammatical development than even classical Sanskrit and, among Indo-Aryan languages, can only be compared to the ancient Sanskrit of the Vedic period.” [L.S.S. O’Malley, Bihar and Orissa District Gazetteers (Cuttack), Second Edition by E.R.J.R. Cousins, (I.C.S.), 1933, pp. 47-50].
The Odia language is a rare example of how a language can struggle to survive and retain its original identity. After the time of King Kharabela, the Kalinga Empire gradually began to disintegrate. The influence of Sanskrit began to permeate the ancient Odia language during the golden age of the Gupta period. Over time, this dominant influence of Sanskrit continued to grow even stronger.
This continued until the Ganga dynasty, when the Odia language received royal and administrative patronage, which helped it gain popularity. The Ganga kings made Odia the official language, and this tradition was carried on by the Gajapati rulers, who further supported Odia language and literature. As a result, Odia spread throughout the entire Kalinga Empire and continued to influence neighboring regions, including the Southeast Asian peninsula, islands, Central Asia, and other parts of the world, as it had in earlier times. Odia was firmly established in a prominent position within India.
Even during the period of Muslim and Maratha rule in Odisha, when Persian and Marathi were used for official purposes, the Odia language remained unaffected. Under both Muslim and Maratha rule, official work was conducted in Odia alongside other languages. However, with the British occupation of Odisha, the use of Odia in official settings was gradually restricted. British rule severely hindered the rise, spread, and popularity of the Odia language.
The British effectively divided the educated Odia community and restricted their access to property, wealth, markets, and, importantly, their own language. Odisha and its people endured multiple hardships, including the devastating Na-anka Durbhikhas (famines). The British, seeking revenge for their long-standing conflict with the people of Odisha, exploited these difficult circumstances, taking advantage of the resistance shown by the Odia people over decades.
During those difficult times, the Odia people did everything in their power to preserve their identity and conscience. The British government, in a few schools in Odisha, sought to create divisions between teachers and students by insisting on the introduction of English. The English-educated Odias saw this as a benefit for themselves. The British also sought to create a rift between the two age-old neighbors, the Odias and the Bengalis. This deliberate instigation of disputes led to a bitter relationship that still lingers today. In this context, it is important to recognize that the struggle of the Odia language began long before the British era, tracing back to the days of the Gupta dynasty.
July 23, 2013, is a landmark day for the Odia people. On this day, the Government of India officially recognized Odia as a Classical Language, acknowledging its originality and rich cultural heritage. Unlike the 1st of April, 1936, when Odisha became a separate province, July 23, 2013, revitalized the Odia identity, making every Odia person proud of their mother tongue.
For context, in 1937, opposition arose in the Madras Presidency against the imposition of Hindi, which had assimilated 42 languages. This opposition strengthened the colonial use of English and simultaneously helped the Tamil language attain Classical Status, paving the way for the development of regional languages. Since 1947, the central government has heavily invested in the development of Sanskrit and Hindi. However, the granting of Classical Status to various languages has now opened opportunities for others to receive similar support. With Odia now classified as a Classical Language, it is eligible for central funding for its development and research.
Along with the four Dravidian classical languages, Odia’s recognition as a Classical Language underscores the need for similar recognition of other mainstream languages such as Bengali, Assamese, and Marathi. Extensive research into all major languages is necessary to dispel misconceptions about their origins and coexistence. The declaration of Odia as a Classical Language offers better prospects for such research initiatives. The continued use of Odia by its people will undoubtedly protect it from extinction, and its development will lead to its prosperity. Sanskrit from the Gupta period and Odia from the Sarala Age are prime examples of languages that brought glory and prosperity to the nation.
The support and cooperation of neighboring communities will further boost the prospects for comprehensive development. In this era of linguistic globalization, I urge those who may be neglecting their mother tongues, whether consciously or unconsciously, to reflect on a verse from a poem by Byasakabi Fakir Mohan:
“Bhasa hi Jeevanishakti Jatimanankar
Jeun Jati Bhasahina Se Jati Barbar.”
First Published in Odisha Review (April-2016)