Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Groups, Theory of" to "Gwyniad"

Chapter XVII: Act 1856: , is mainly declaratory of the English common law, as embodied (10)

Text size

Guizot was received with marked distinction by the queen and by the society of London. His literary works were highly esteemed, his character was respected, and France was never more worthily represented abroad than by one of her greatest orators. He was known to be well versed in the history and the literature of England, and sincerely attached to the alliance of the two nations and the cause of peace. But, as he himself remarked, he was a stranger to England and a novice in diplomacy; and unhappily the embroiled state of the Syrian question, on which the French government had separated itself from the joint policy of Europe, and possibly the absence of entire confidence between the ambassador and the minister of foreign affairs, placed him in an embarrassing and even false position. The warnings he transmitted to Thiers were not believed. The warlike policy of Thiers was opposed to his own convictions. The treaty of the 15th of July was signed without his knowledge and executed in the teeth of his remonstrances. For some weeks Europe seemed to be on the brink of war, until the king put an end to the crisis by refusing his assent to the military preparations of Thiers, and by summoning Guizot from London to form a ministry and to aid his Majesty in what he termed "ma lutte tenace contre l'anarchie." Thus began, under dark and adverse circumstances, on the 29th of October 1840, the important administration in which Guizot remained the master-spirit for nearly eight years. He himself took the office of minister for foreign affairs, to which he added some years later, on the retirement of Marshal Soult, the ostensible rank of prime minister. His first care was the maintenance of peace and the restoration of amicable relations with the other powers of Europe. If he succeeded, as he did succeed, in calming the troubled elements and healing the wounded pride of France, the result was due mainly to the indomitable courage and splendid eloquence with which he faced a raging opposition, gave unity and strength to the conservative party, who now felt that they had a great leader at their head, and appealed to the thrift and prudence of the nation rather than to their vanity and their ambition. In his pacific task he was fortunately seconded by the formation of Sir Robert Peel's administration in England, in the autumn of 1841. Between Lord Palmerston and Guizot there existed an incompatibility of character exceedingly dangerous in the foreign ministers of two great and in some respects rival countries. With Lord Palmerston in office, Guizot felt that he had a bitter and active antagonist in every British agent throughout the world; the combative element was strong in his own disposition; and the result was a system of perpetual conflict and counter-intrigues. Lord Palmerston held (as it appears from his own letters) that war between England and France was, sooner or later, inevitable. Guizot held that such a war would be the greatest of all calamities, and certainly never contemplated it. In Lord Aberdeen, the foreign secretary of Sir Robert Peel, Guizot found a friend and an ally perfectly congenial to himself. Their acquaintance in London had been slight, but it soon ripened into mutual regard and confidence. They were both men of high principles and honour; the Scotch Presbyterianism which had moulded the faith of Lord Aberdeen was reflected in the Huguenot minister of France; both were men of extreme simplicity of taste, joined to the refinement of scholarship and culture; both had an intense aversion to war and felt themselves ill-qualified to carry on those adventurous operations which inflamed the imagination of their respective opponents. In the eyes of Lord Palmerston and Thiers their policy was mean and pitiful; but it was a policy which secured peace to the world, and united the two great and free nations of the West in what was termed the _entente cordiale_. Neither of them would have stooped to snatch an advantage at the expense of the other; they held the common interest of peace and friendship to be paramount; and when differences arose, as they did arise, in remote parts of the world,--in Tahiti, in Morocco, on the Gold Coast,--they were reduced by this principle to their proper insignificance. The opposition in France denounced Guizot's foreign policy as basely subservient to England. He replied in terms of unmeasured contempt,--"You may raise the pile of calumny as high as you will; vous n'arriverez jamais a la hauteur de mon dedain!" The opposition in England attacked Lord Aberdeen with the same reproaches, but in vain. King Louis Philippe visited Windsor. The queen of England (in 1843) stayed at the Chateau d'Eu. In 1845 British and French troops fought side by side for the first time in an expedition to the River Plate.

The fall of Sir Robert Peel's government in 1846 changed these intimate relations; and the return of Lord Palmerston to the foreign office led Guizot to believe that he was again exposed to the passionate rivalry of the British cabinet. A friendly understanding had been established at Eu between the two courts with reference to the future marriage of the young queen of Spain. The language of Lord Palmerston and the conduct of Sir Henry Bulwer (afterwards Lord Dalling) at Madrid led Guizot to believe that this understanding was broken, and that it was intended to place a Coburg on the throne of Spain. Determined to resist any such intrigue, Guizot and the king plunged headlong into a counter-intrigue, wholly inconsistent with their previous engagements to England, and fatal to the happiness of the queen of Spain. By their influence she was urged into a marriage with a despicable offset of the house of Bourbon, and her sister was at the same time married to the youngest son of the French king, in direct violation of Louis Philippe's promises. This transaction, although it was hailed at the time as a triumph of the policy of France, was in truth as fatal to the monarch as it was discreditable to the minister. It was accomplished by a mixture of secrecy and violence. It was defended by subterfuges. By the dispassionate judgment of history it has been universally condemned. Its immediate effect was to destroy the Anglo-French alliance, and to throw Guizot into closer relations with the reactionary policy of Metternich and the Northern courts.

The history of Guizot's administration, the longest and the last which existed under the constitutional monarchy of France, bears the stamp of the great qualities and the great defects of his political character, for he was throughout the master-spirit of that government. His first object was to unite and discipline the conservative party, which had been broken up by previous dissensions and ministerial changes. In this he entirely succeeded by his courage and eloquence as a parliamentary leader, and by the use of all those means of influence which France too liberally supplies to a dominant minister. No one ever doubted the purity and disinterestedness of Guizot's own conduct. He despised money; he lived and died poor; and though he encouraged the fever of money-getting in the French nation, his own habits retained their primitive simplicity. But he did not disdain to use in others the baser passions from which he was himself free. Some of his instruments were mean; he employed them to deal with meanness after its kind. Gross abuses and breaches of trust came to light even in the ranks of the government, and under an incorruptible minister the administration was denounced as corrupt. _Licet uti alieno vitio_ is a proposition as false in politics as it is in divinity.

Of his parliamentary eloquence it is impossible to speak too highly. It was terse, austere, demonstrative and commanding,--not persuasive, not humorous, seldom adorned, but condensed with the force of a supreme authority in the fewest words. He was essentially a ministerial speaker, far more powerful in defence than in opposition. Like Pitt he was the type of authority and resistance, unmoved by the brilliant charges, the wit, the gaiety, the irony and the discursive power of his great rival. Nor was he less a master of parliamentary tactics and of those sudden changes and movements in debate which, as in a battle, sometimes change the fortune of the day. His confidence in himself, and in the majority of the chamber which he had moulded to his will, was unbounded; and long success and the habit of authority led him to forget that in a country like France there was a people outside the chamber elected by a small constituency, to which the minister and the king himself were held responsible.

A government based on the principle of resistance and repression and marked by dread and distrust of popular power, a system of diplomacy which sought to revive the traditions of the old French monarchy, a sovereign who largely exceeded the bounds of constitutional power and whose obstinacy augmented with years, a minister who, though far removed from the servility of the courtier, was too obsequious to the personal influence of the king, were all singularly at variance with the promises of the Revolution of July, and they narrowed the policy of the administration. Guizot's view of politics was essentially historical and philosophical. His tastes and his acquirements gave him little insight into the practical business of administrative government. Of finance he knew nothing; trade and commerce were strange to him; military and naval affairs were unfamiliar to him; all these subjects he dealt with by second hand through his friends, P. S. Dumon (1797-1870), Charles Marie Tanneguy, Comte Duchatel (1803-1867), or Marshal Bugeaud. The consequence was that few measures of practical improvement were carried by his administration. Still less did the government lend an ear to the cry for parliamentary reform. On this subject the king's prejudices were insurmountable, and his ministers had the weakness to give way to them. It was impossible to defend a system which confined the suffrage to 200,000 citizens, and returned a chamber of whom half were placemen. Nothing would have been easier than to strengthen the conservative party by attaching the suffrage to the possession of land in France, but blank resistance was the sole answer of the government to the just and moderate demands of the opposition. Warning after warning was addressed to them in vain by friends and by foes alike; and they remained profoundly unconscious of their danger till the moment when it overwhelmed them. Strange to say, Guizot never acknowledged either at the time or to his dying day the nature of this error; and he speaks of himself in his memoirs as the much-enduring champion of liberal government and constitutional law. He utterly fails to perceive that a more enlarged view of the liberal destinies of France and a less intense confidence in his own specific theory might have preserved the constitutional monarchy and averted a vast series of calamities, which were in the end fatal to every principle he most cherished. But with the stubborn conviction of absolute truth he dauntlessly adhered to his own doctrines to the end.

The last scene of his political life was singularly characteristic of his inflexible adherence to a lost cause. In the afternoon oi the 23rd of February 1848 the king summoned his minister from the chamber, which was then sitting, and informed him that the aspect of Paris and the country during the banquet agitation for reform, and the alarm and division of opinion in the royal family, led him to doubt whether he could retain his ministry. That doubt, replied Guizot, is decisive of the question, and instantly resigned, returning to the chamber only to announce that the administration was at an end and that Mole had been sent for by the king. Mole failed in the attempt to form a government, and between midnight and one in the morning Guizot, who had according to his custom retired early to rest, was again sent for to the Tuileries. The king asked his advice. "We are no longer the ministers of your Majesty," replied Guizot; "it rests with others to decide on the course to be pursued. But one thing appears to be evident: this street riot must be put down; these barricades must be taken; and for this purpose my opinion is that Marshal Bugeaud should be invested with full power, and ordered to take the necessary military measures, and as your Majesty has at this moment no minister, I am ready to draw up and countersign such an order." The marshal, who was present, undertook the task, saying, "I have never been beaten yet, and I shall not begin to-morrow. The barricades shall be carried before dawn." After this display of energy the king hesitated, and soon added: "I ought to tell you that M. Thiers and his friends are in the next room forming a government!" Upon this Guizot rejoined, "Then it rests with them to do what they think fit," and left the palace. Thiers and Barrot decided to withdraw the troops. The king and Guizot next met at Claremont. This was the most perilous conjuncture of Guizot's life, but fortunately he found a safe refuge in Paris for some days in the lodging of a humble miniature painter whom he had befriended, and shortly afterwards effected his escape across the Belgian frontier and thence to London, where he arrived on the 3rd of March. His mother and daughters had preceded him, and he was speedily installed in a modest habitation in Pelham Crescent, Brompton.

The society of England, though many persons disapproved of much of his recent policy, received the fallen statesman with as much distinction and respect as they had shown eight years before to the king's ambassador. Sums of money were placed at his disposal, which he declined. A professorship at Oxford was spoken of, which he was unable to accept. He stayed in England about a year, devoting himself again to history. He published two more volumes on the English revolution, and in 1854 his _Histoire de la republique d'Angleterre et de Cromwell_ (2 vols., 1854), then his _Histoire du protectorat de Cromwell et du retablissement des Stuarts_ (2 vols., 1856). He also published an essay on Peel, and amid many essays on religion, during the ten years 1858-1868, appeared the extensive _Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de mon temps_, in nine volumes. His speeches were included in 1863 in his _Histoire parlementaire de la France_ (5 vols. of parliamentary speeches, 1863).

Guizot survived the fall of the monarchy and the government he had served twenty-six years. He passed abruptly from the condition of one of the most powerful and active statesmen in Europe to the condition of a philosophical and patriotic spectator of human affairs. He was aware that the link between himself and public life was broken for ever; and he never made the slightest attempt to renew it. He was of no party, a member of no political body; no murmur of disappointed ambition, no language of asperity, ever passed his lips; it seemed as if the fever of oratorical debate and ministerial power had passed from him and left him a greater man than he had been before, in the pursuit of letters, in the conversation of his friends, and as head of the patriarchal circle of those he loved. The greater part of the year he spent at his residence at Val Richer, an Augustine monastery near Lisieux in Normandy, which had been sold at the time of the first Revolution. His two daughters, who married two descendants of the illustrious Dutch family of De Witt, so congenial in faith and manners to the Huguenots of France, kept his house. One of his sons-in-law farmed the estate. And here Guizot devoted his later years with undiminished energy to literary labour, which was in fact his chief means of subsistence. Proud, independent, simple and contented he remained to the last; and these years of retirement were perhaps the happiest and most serene portion of his life.

Two institutions may be said even under the second empire to have retained their freedom--the Institute of France and the Protestant Consistory. In both of these Guizot continued to the last to take an active part. He was a member of three of the five academies into which the Institute of France is divided. The Academy of Moral and Political Science owed its restoration to him, and he became in 1832 one of its first associates. The Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres elected him in 1833 as the successor to M. Dacier; and in 1836 he was chosen a member of the French Academy, the highest literary distinction of the country. In these learned bodies Guizot continued for nearly forty years to take a lively interest and to exercise a powerful influence. He was the jealous champion of their independence. His voice had the greatest weight in the choice of new candidates; the younger generation of French writers never looked in vain to him for encouragement; and his constant aim was to maintain the dignity and purity of the profession of letters.

In the consistory of the Protestant church in Paris Guizot exercised a similar influence. His early education and his experience of life conspired to strengthen the convictions of a religious temperament. He remained through life a firm believer in the truths of revelation, and a volume of _Meditations on the Christian Religion_ was one of his latest works. But though he adhered inflexibly to the church of his fathers and combated the rationalist tendencies of the age, which seemed to threaten it with destruction, he retained not a tinge of the intolerance or asperity of the Calvinistic creed. He respected in the Church of Rome the faith of the majority of his countrymen; and the writings of the great Catholic prelates, Bossuet and Bourdaloue, were as familiar and as dear to him as those of his own persuasion, and were commonly used by him in the daily exercises of family worship.

In these literary pursuits and in the retirement of Val Richer years passed smoothly and rapidly away; and as his grandchildren grew up around him, he began to direct their attention to the history of their country. From these lessons sprang his last and not his least work, the _Histoire de France racontee a mes petits enfants_, for although this publication assumed a popular form, it is not less complete and profound than it is simple and attractive. The history came down to 1789, and was continued to 1870 by his daughter Madame Guizot de Witt from her father's notes.

Down to the summer of 1874 Guizot's mental vigour and activity were unimpaired. His frame, temperate in all things, was blessed with a singular immunity from infirmity and disease; but the vital power ebbed away, and he passed gently away on the 12th of September 1874, reciting now and then a verse of Corneille or a text of Scripture.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--See his own _Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de mon
temps_ (8 vols., 1858-1861); _Lettres de M. Guizot a sa famille et a
ses amis_ (1884); C. A. Sainte-Beuve, _Causeries du lundi_ (vol. i.,
1857) and _Nouveaux Lundis_ (vols. i. and ix., 1863-1872); E. Scherer,
_Etudes critiques sur la litterature contemporaine_ (vol. iv., 1873);
Mme de Witt, _Guizot dans sa famille_ (1880); Jules Simon, _Thiers,
Guizot et Remusat_ (1885); E. Faguet, _Politiques et moralistes au
XIX^e siecle_ (1891); G. Bardoux, _Guizot_ (1894) in the series of
"Les Grands Ecrivains francais"; Maurice Guizot, _Les Annees de
retraite de M. Guizot_ (1901); and for a long list of books and
articles on Guizot in periodicals see H. P. Thieme, _Guide
bibliographique de la litterature francaise de 1800 a 1906_ (_s.v._
Guizot, Paris, 1907). For a notice of his first wife see C. A.
Sainte-Beuve, _Portraits de femmes_ (1884), and Ch. de Remusat,
_Critiques et etudes litteraires_ (vol. ii., 1847).
(H. R.; J. T. S.*)

GUJARAT or GUZERAT, a region of India, in the Bombay Presidency. In the widest sense of the name it includes the whole of the country where the Gujarati language is spoken, i.e. the northern districts and states of the Presidency from Palanpur to Damaun, with Kathiawar and Cutch. But it is more properly confined to the country north of the Nerbudda and east of the Rann of Cutch and Kathiawar. In this sense it has an area of 29,071 sq. m., with a population in 1901 of 4,798,504. It includes the states distributed among the agencies of Palanpur, Mahi Kantha, Rewa Kantha and Cambay, with most of Baroda and the British districts of Ahmedabad, Kaira, Panch Mahals and Broach. Less than one-fourth is British territory. The region takes its name from the Gujars, a tribe who passed into India from the north-west, established a kingdom in Rajputana, and spread south in A.D. 400-600. The ancient Hindu capital was Anhilvada; the Mahommedan dynasty, which ruled from 1396 to 1572, founded Ahmedabad, which is still the largest city; but Gujarat owed much of its historical importance to the seaports of Broach, Cambay and Surat. Its fertile plain, with a regular rainfall and numerous rivers, has caused it to be styled the "garden of India." It suffered, however, severely from the famine of 1899-1901. For an account of the history, geography, &c., of Gujarat see the articles on the various states and districts. Gujarat gives its name to the vernacular of northern Bombay, viz. Gujarati, one of the three great languages of that Presidency, spoken by more than 9 millions. It has an ancient literature and a peculiar character. As the language of the Parsis it is prominent in the Bombay press; and it is also the commercial language of Bombay city, which lies outside the territorial area of Gujarat.

See J. Campbell, _History of Gujarat_ (Bombay, 1896); Sir E. C.
Bayley, _The Muhammedan Kingdom of Gujarat_ (1886); A. K. Forbes, _Ras
Mala_ (1856).

GUJARATI and RAJASTHANI, the names of two members of the western sub-group of the Intermediate Group of Indo-Aryan languages (q.v.). The remaining member of this sub-group is Panjabi or Punjabi (see HINDOSTANI). In 1901 the speakers of those now dealt with numbered: Gujarati, 9,439,925, and Rajasthani, 10,917,712. The two languages are closely connected and might almost be termed co-dialects of the same form of speech. Together they occupy an almost square block of country, some 400 m. broad, reaching from near Agra and Delhi on the river Jumna to the Arabian Sea. Gujarati (properly _Gujarati_) is spoken in Gujarat, the northern maritime province of the Bombay Presidency, and also in Baroda and the native states adjoining. Rajasthani (properly _Rajasthani_, from "_Rajasthan_," the native name for Rajputana) is spoken in Rajputana and the adjoining parts of Central India.

In the articles INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGES and PRAKRIT the history of the earlier stages of the Indo-Aryan vernaculars is given at some length. It is there shown that, from the most ancient times, there were two main groups of these forms of speech--one, the language of the Midland, spoken in the country near the Gangetic Doab, and the other, the so-called "Outer Band," containing the Midland on three sides, west, north and south. The country to the west and south-west of the Midland, in which this outer group of languages was spoken, included the modern Punjab, Rajputana and Gujarat. In process of time the population of the Midland expanded and carried its language to its new homes. It occupied the eastern and central Punjab, and the mixed (or "intermediate") language which there grew up became the modern Panjabi. To the west it spread into Rajputana, till its progress was stopped by the Indian desert, and in Rajputana another intermediate language took rise and became Rajasthani. As elsewhere explained, the language-wave of the Midland exercised less and less influence as it travelled farther from its home, so that, while in eastern Rajputana the local dialect is now almost a pure midland speech, in the west there are many evident traces of the old outer language still surviving. To the south-west of Rajputana there was no desert to stop the wave of Midland expansion, which therefore rolled on unobstructed into Gujarat, where it reached the sea. Here the survivals of the old outer language are stronger still. The old outer Prakrit of north Gujarat was known as "Saurastri," while the Prakrit of the Midland invaders was called "Sauraseni," and we may therefore describe Gujarati as being an intermediate language derived (as explained in the articles PRAKRIT) from a mixture of the Apabhramsa forms of Saurastri and Sauraseni, in which the latter predominated.

It will be observed that, at the present day, Gujarati breaks the continuity of the outer band of Indo-Aryan languages. To its north it has Sindhi and to its south Marathi, both outer languages with which it has only a slight connexion. On the other hand, on the east and north-east it has Rajasthani, into which it merges so gradually and imperceptibly that at the conventional border-line, in the state of Palanpur, the inhabitants of Rajputana say that the local dialect is a form of Gujarati, while the inhabitants of Gujarat say that it is Rajasthani.

Language.

Gujarati has no important local dialects, but there is considerable variation in the speeches of different classes of the community. Parsees and Mussulmans (when the latter use the language--as a rule the Gujarat Mussulmans speak Hindostani) have some striking peculiarities of pronunciation, the most noticeable of which is the disregard by the latter of the distinction between cerebral and dental letters. The uneducated Hindus do not pronounce the language in the same way as their betters, and this difference is accentuated in northern Gujarat, where the lower classes substitute _e_ for _i_, _c_ for _k_, _ch_ for _kh_, _s_ for _c_ and _ch_, _h_ for _s_, and drop _h_ as readily as any cockney. There is also (as in the case of the Mussulmans) a tendency to confuse cerebral and dental consonants, to substitute _r_ for _d_ and _l_, to double medial consonants, and to pronounce the letter _a_ as _a_, something like the _a_ in "all." The Bhils of the hills east of Gujarat also speak a rude Gujarati, with special dialectic peculiarities of their own, probably due to the fact that the tribes are of Dravidian origin. These Bhil peculiarities are further mixed with corruptions of Marathi idioms in Nimar and Khandesh, where we have almost a new language.

Rajasthani has numerous dialects, each state claiming one or more of its own. Thus, in the state of Jaipur there have been catalogued no less than ten dialects among about 1,688,000 people. All Rajasthani dialects can, however, be easily classed in four well-defined groups, a north-eastern, a southern, a western and an east-central. The north-eastern (Mewati) is that form of Rajasthani which is merging into the Western Hindi of the Midland. It is a mixed form of speech, and need not detain us further. Similarly, the southern (Malvi) is much mixed with the neighbouring Bundeli form of Western Hindi. The western (Marwari) spoken in Marwar and its neighbourhood, and the east-central (Jaipuri) spoken in Jaipur and its neighbourhood, may be taken as the typical Rajasthani dialects. In the following paragraphs we shall therefore confine ourselves to Gujarati, Marwari and Jaipuri.

We know more about the ancient history of Gujarati than we do about that of any other Indo-Aryan language. The one native grammar of Apabhramsa Prakrit which we possess in a printed edition, was written by Hemacandra (12th century A.D.), who lived in what is now north Gujarat, and who naturally described most fully the particular vernacular with which he was personally familiar. It was known as the Nagara Apabhramsa, closely connected (as above explained) with Sauraseni, and was so named after the Nagara Brahmans of the locality. These men carried on the tradition of learning inherited from Hemacandra, and we see Gujarati almost in the act of taking birth in a work called the _Mugdhavabodhamauktika_, written by one of them only two hundred years after his death. Formal Gujarati literature is said to commence with the poet Narsingh Meta in the 15th century. Rajasthani literature has received but small attention from European or native scholars, and we are as yet unable to say how far back the language goes.

Both Gujarati and Rajasthani are usually written in current scripts related to the well-known Nagari alphabet (see SANSKRIT). The form employed in Rajputana is known all over northern India as the "Mahajani" alphabet, being used by bankers or _Mahajans_, most of whom are Marwaris. It is noteworthy as possessing two distinct characters for _d_ and _r_. The Gujarati character closely resembles the Kaithi character of northern India (see BIHARI). The Nagari character is also freely used in Rajputana, and to a less extent in Gujarat, where it is employed by the Nagara Brahmans, who claim that their tribe has given the alphabet its name.

In the following description of the main features of our two languages, the reader is presumed to be familiar with the leading facts stated in the articles INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGES and PRAKRIT. The article HINDOSTANI may also be perused with advantage.

(Abbreviations. Skr. = Sanskrit. Pr. = Prakrit. Ap. = Apabhramsa. G. =
Gujarati. R. = Rajasthani. H. = Hindostaani.)

_Vocabulary._--The vocabulary of both Gujarat and Rajasthani is very
free from _tatsama_ words. The great mass of both vocabularies is
_tadbhava_ (see INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGES). Rajputana was from an early
period brought into close contact with the Mogul court at Agra and
Delhi, and even in the 13th century A.D. official documents of the
Rajput princes contained many borrowed Persian and Arabic words.
Gujarati, under the influence of the learned Nagara Brahmans, has
perhaps more _tatsama_ words than Rajasthani, but their employment is
not excessive. On the other hand, Parsees and Mussulmans employ
Persian and Arabic words with great freedom; while, owing to its
maritime connexions, the language has also borrowed occasional words
from other parts of Asia and from Europe. This is specially marked in
the strange dialect of the Kathiawar boatmen who travel all over the
world as lascars on the great steamships. Their language is a mixture
of Hindostani and Gujarati with a heterogeneous vocabulary.

_Phonetics._--With a few exceptions to be mentioned below, the
sound-system of the two languages is the same as that of Sanskrit, and
is represented in the same manner in the Roman character (see
SANSKRIT). The simplest method for considering the subject in regard
to Gujarati is to compare it with the phonetical system of Hindostani
(q.v.). As a rule, Rajasthani closely follows Gujarati and need not be
referred to except in special cases. G. invariably simplifies a medial
Pr. double consonant, lengthening the preceding vowel in compensation.
Thus Skr. _mraksanam_, Ap. _makkhanu_, H. _makkhan_, but G. _makhan_,
butter. In H. this rule is generally observed, but in G. it is
universal, while, on the other hand, in Panjabi the double consonant
is never simplified, but is retained as in Ap. In G. (and sometimes in
R.) when _a_ is followed by _h_ it is changed to _e_, as in H.
_shahr_, G. _seher_, a city. As in other outer languages H. _ai_ and
_au_ are usually represented by a short _e_ and by _a_ (sounded like
the _a_ in "all") respectively. Thus H. _baitha_. G. _betho_, seated;
H. _cautha_, G. _catho_ (written _cotho_), fourth. In R. this _e_ is
often further weakened to the sound of _a_ in "man," a change which
is also common in Bengali. Many words which have _i_ in H. have _a_ in
G. and R., thus, H. _likhe_, G. _lakhe_, he writes; H. din, G. and R.
_dan_, a day. Similarly we have _a_ for _u_, as in H. _tum_, G., R.
_tame_, you. In colloquial G. _a_ often becomes _a_, and _i_ becomes
_e_; thus, _pani_ for _pani_, water; _mares_ for _maris_, I shall
strike. As in most Indo-Aryan vernaculars an _a_ after an accented
syllable is very lightly pronounced, and is here represented by a
small ^a above the line.

The Vedic cerebral _l_ and the cerebral _n_ are very common as medial
letters in both G. and R. (both being unknown to literary H.). The
rule is, as elsewhere in western and southern intermediate and outer
languages, that when n and l represent a double _nn_ (or _nn_) or a
double _ll_ in Pr. they are dental, but when they represent single
medial letters they are cerebralized. Thus Ap. _sonnau_, G. _sonu_,
gold; Ap. _ghanau_, G. _ghanu_, dense; Ap. _callai_, G. _cale_, he
goes; Ap. _calai_, G. _cale_, he moves. In northern G. and in some
caste dialects dental and cerebral letters are absolutely
interchangeable, as in _dah^ado_ or _dahado_, a day; _tu_ or _tu_,
thou; _didho_ or _didho_, given. In G. and R. medial _d_ is pronounced
as a rough cerebral _r_, and is then so transcribed. We have seen that
in the Marwari alphabet there are actually distinct letters for these
two sounds. In colloquial G. _c_ and _ch_ are pronounced _s_,
especially in the north, as in _pas_ for _pac_, five; _pusyo_ for
_puchyo_, he asked. Similarly, in the north, _j_ and _jh_ become _z_,
as in _zad_ for _jhad_, a tree. In some localities (as in Marathi) we
have _ts_ and _dz_ for these sounds, as in _Tsarotar_ (name of a tract
of country) for _Carotar_. On the other hand, _k_, _kh_ and _g_,
especially when preceded or followed by _i_, _e_ or _y_, become in the
north _c_, _ch_ and _j_ respectively; thus, _dic^aro_ for _dik^aro_, a
son; _chetar_ for _khetar_, a field; _lajyo_ for _lagyo_, begun. A
similar change is found in dialectic Marathi, and is, of course, one
of the commonplaces of the philology of the Romance languages. The
sibilants _s_ and _s_ are colloquially pronounced _h_ (as in several
outer languages), especially in the north. Thus _deh_ for _des_, a
country; _hu_ for _su_, what; _ham^ajavyo_ for _sam^ajavyo_, he
explained. An original aspirate is, however, often dropped, as in _'u_
for _hu_, I; _'ate_ for _hathe_, on the hand. Standard G. is at the
same time fond of pronouncing an _h_ where it is not written, as in
_ame_, we, pronounced _ahme_. In other respects both G. and R. closely
agree in their phonetical systems with the Apabhramsa form of
Sauraseni Prakrit from which the Midland language is derived.

_Declension._--Gujarati agrees with Marathi (an outer language) as
against Hindostani in retaining the neuter gender of Sanskrit and
Prakrit. Moreover, the neuter gender is often employed to indicate
living beings of which the sex is uncertain, as in the case of
_dik^aru_, a child, compared with _dik^aro_, a son, and _dik^ari_, a
daughter. In R. there are only sporadic instances of the neuter, which
grow more and more rare as we approach the Midland. Nouns in both G.
and R. may be weak or strong as is fully explained in the article
HINDOSTANI. We have there seen that the strong form of masculine nouns
in Western Hindi generally ends in _au_, the _a_ of words like the
Hindostani _ghora_, a horse, being an accident due to the fact that
the Hindostani dialect of Western Hindi borrows this termination from
Panjabi. G. and R. follow Western Hindi, for their masculine strong
forms end in _o_. Feminine strong forms end in _i_ as elsewhere.
Neuter strong forms in G. end in _u_, derived as follows: Skr,
_svarnakam_, Ap. _sonnau_, G. _sonu_, gold. As an example of the three
genders of the same word we may take G. _chok^aro_ (masc.), a boy;
_chok^ari_ (fem.), a girl; _chok^aru_ (neut.), a child. Long forms
corresponding to the Eastern Hindi _ghor^awa_, a horse, are not much
used, but we not infrequently meet another long form made by suffixing
the pleonastic termination _do_ or _ro_ (fem. _di_ or _ri_; G. neut.
_du_ or _ru_) which is directly descended from the Ap. pleonastic
termination _dau_, _dai_, _dau_. We come across this most often in R.,
where it is used contemptuously, as in _Turuk-ro_, a Turk.

In the article HINDOSTANI it is shown that all the oblique cases of
each number in Sanskrit and Prakrit became melted down in the modern
languages into one general oblique case, which, in the Midland, is
derived in the singular from the Ap. termination _-hi_ or _-hi_, and
that even this has survived only in the case of strong masculine
nouns; thus, _ghora_, obl. _ghore_. In G. and R. this same termination
has also survived, but for all nouns as the case sign of the agent and
locative cases. The general oblique case is the same as the
nominative, except in the case of strong masculine and neuter nouns in
_o_ and _u_ respectively, where it ends in _a_, not _e_. This
_a_-termination is characteristic of the outer band of languages, and
is one of the survivals already referred to. It is derived from the
Apabhramsa genitive form in -_aha_, corresponding to the Magadhi Pr.
(an outer Prakrit) termination -_aha_. Thus, G. _chok^aro_, a son;
_chok^aru_, a child; obl. sing. _chok^ara_.

In G. the nominative and oblique plural for all nouns are formed by
adding _o_ to the oblique form singular, but in the neuter strong
forms the oblique singular is nasalized. The real plural is the same
in form as the oblique singular in the case of masculines, and as a
nasalized oblique singular in the case of neuter strong forms, as in
other modern Indo-Aryan vernaculars, and the added _o_ is a further
plural termination (making a double plural, exactly as it does in the
Ardhamagadhi Prakrit _putta-o_, sons) which is often dropped. The
nasalization of the strong neuter plurals is inherited from Ap., in
which the neuter nom. plural of such nouns ended in -_aai_ In R. the
nominative plural of masculine nouns is the same in form as the
oblique case singular, and the oblique plural ends in _a_. The
feminine has _a_ both in the nominative and in the oblique plural.
These are all explained in the article HINDOSTANI. We thus get the
following paradigms of the declension of nouns.

The general oblique case can be employed for any case except the
nominative, but, in order to define the meaning, it is customary to
add postpositions as in Hindostani. These are:

+------------+----------+---------------+----------+----------+
| | Genitive.| Dative. | Ablative.| Locative.|
+------------+----------+---------------+----------+----------+
| Gujarati | no | ne | thi | ma |
| Rajasthani | ro, ko | nai, rai, kai | su | mai |
+------------+----------+---------------+----------+----------+

The suffix _no_ of the genitive is believed to be a contraction of
_tano_, which is found in old Gujarati poetry, and which, under the
form _tanas_ in Sanskrit and _tanau_ in Apabhramsa, mean "belonging
to." It is an adjective, and agrees in gender, number and case with
the thing possessed. Thus, _raja-no dik^aro_, the king's son; _raja-ni
dik^ari_, the king's daughter; _raja-nu ghar_, the king's house;
_raja-na dik^ara-ne_, to the king's son (_na_ is in the oblique case
masculine to agree with _dik^ara_); _raja-ne ghare_, in the king's
house. The _ro_ and _ko_ of R. are similarly treated, but, of course,
have no neuter. The dative postpositions are simply locatives of the
genitive ones, as in all modern Indo-Aryan languages (see HINDOSTANI).
_Thi_, the postposition of the G. ablative, is connected with _thawu_,
to be, one of the verbs substantive in that language. The ablative
suffix is made in this way in many modern Indo-Aryan languages (e.g.
Bengali, q.v.). It means literally "having been" and is to be
ultimately referred to the Sanskrit root, _stha_, stand. The
derivation of the other postpositions is discussed in the article
HINDOSTANI.

Strong adjectives agree with the nouns they qualify in gender, number
and case, as in the examples of the genitive above. Weak adjectives
are immutable.

Pronouns closely agree with those found in Hindostani. In the table on
following page we give the first two personal pronouns, and the
demonstrative pronoun "this."

Similarly are formed the remaining pronouns, viz. G. _a_, R. _u_,
he, that; G. _te_, R. _so_ (obl. sing. _ti_), that; G. _je_, R. _jo_,
who; G. _kan_ (obl. _kan_, _ko_, or _ke_), R. _kun_ (obl. _kun_),
who?; G. _su_, R. _kai_, what?; G., R. _koi_, anyone, someone, _kai_
anything, something. G. has two other demonstratives, _pelo_ and
_olyo_, both meaning "that." The derivation of these and of _su_ has
been discussed without any decisive result. The rest are explained in
the article HINDOSTANI. The reflexive pronoun is G. _ap^ane_, R.
_apa_. It is generally employed as a plural of the first personal
pronoun including the person addressed; thus G. _ap^ane_, we
(including you), but _ame_, we (excluding you). In G. _pote_, obl.
_pota_, is used to mean "self."

+------------------+-------------------+----------+----------------+
| | Apabhramsa. | Gujarati.| Rajasthani. |
+------------------+-------------------+----------+----------------+
| I Nom. | hau | hu | hu, mhu, mai |
| Obl. | mai, mahu, majjhu | ma, maj | ma, mha, mu |
| MY | maharau | maro | maro, mharo |
| WE Nom. | amhe | ame | mhe |
| Obl. | amhaha | am-o | mha |
| OUR | amharau | amaro | mha-ro, mha-ko |
| THOU Nom. | tuhu | tu | tu |
| Obl. | tai, tuha, tujjhu | ta, tuj | ta, tha, tu |
| THY | tuharau | taro | tharo |
| YOU Nom. | tumhe | tame | the, tame |
| Obl. | tumhaha | tam-o | tha, tama |
| YOUR | tumharau | tamaro | tha-ro, tha-ko |
| THIS, HE Nom. | eho | e | yo |
| Obl. | (?) ehaha, imaha | e | i |
| THESE, THEY Nom. | ei | e-o | e, ye |
| Obl. | eammi, ehana | em | ina, ya. |
+------------------+-------------------+----------+----------------+

_Conjugation._--The old present has survived as in Hindostani and
other Indian languages. Taking the base _call_ or _cal_, go, as our
model, we have:

The derivation of the G. 1 plural is unknown. That of the other G. and
R. forms is manifest. The imperative closely follows this, but as
usual has no termination in the second person singular.

In R. the future may be formed by adding _go_ (cf. Hindostani _ga_),
_lo_, or _la_ to the old present. Thus, _calu-go_, _calu-lo_ or
_calu-la_ I shall go. The _go_ and _lo_ agree in gender and number
with the subject, but _la_ is immutable. The termination with _l_ is
also found in Bhojpuri (see BIHARI), in Marathi and in Nepali. For
_go_ see HINDOSTANI. Another form of the future has _s_ or _h_ for its
characteristic letter, and is the only one employed in G. Thus, Ap.
_callisau_ or _callihau_, G. _calis_, R. (Jaipuri) _cal^asyu_,
(Marwari) _cal^ahu_. The other personal terminations differ
considerably from those of the old present, and closely follow Ap.
Thus, Ap. 3 sing. _callisai_ or _callihi_, G. _cal^ase_, Marwari
_cal^ahi_.

The participles and infinitive are as follows:

In G. the infinitive is simply the neuter of the future passive
participle. The participles are employed to form finite tenses; thus
G. _hu cal^ato_], I used to go; _hu calyo_, I went. If the verb is
transitive (see HINDOSTANI) the passive meaning of the past participle
comes into force. The subject is put into the case of the agent, and
the participle inflects to agree with the object, or, if there is no
object, is employed impersonally in the neuter (in G.) or in the
masculine (in R.). In Hindostani, if the object is expressed in the
dative, the participle is also employed impersonally, in the
masculine; thus _raja-ne sherni-ko mara_ (masc.), not _mari_, (fem.),
by-the-king, with reference-to-the-tigress,
it-(impersonal)-was-killed, i.e. the king killed the tigress. But in
G. and R., even if the object is in the dative, the past participle
agrees with it; thus, G. _rajae waghan-ne mari_, by-the-king,
with-reference-to-the-tigress, she-was-killed. Other examples from G.
of this passive construction are _me kahyu_, by me it was said, I
said; _tene citthi lakhi_, by him a letter was written, he wrote a
letter; _e baie vag^ada-ma, dahada kadya_, by this lady, in the
wilderness, days were passed, i.e. she passed her days in the
wilderness; _rajae vicaryu_, the king considered. The idiom of R. is
exactly the same in these cases, except that the masculine must be
used where G. has the neuter; thus, _rajaai vicaryo_. The future
passive participle is construed in much the same way, but (as in
Latin) the subject may be put into the dative. Thus, _mare a cap^adi
vac^avi, mihi ille liber (est) legendus_, I must read that book, but
also _tene_ (agent case) _e kam kar^avu_, by him this business is to
be done.

G. also forms a past participle in _elo_ (_calelo_), which is one of
the many survivals of the outer language. This -_l_- participle is
typical of most of the languages of the outer band, including Marathi,
Oriya, Bengali, Bihari and Assamese. It is formed by the addition of
the Prakrit pleonastic suffix _-illa-_, which was not used by the
Prakrit of the Midland, but was common elsewhere. Compare, for
instance, the Ardhamagadhi past participle passive _an-illia-_,
brought.

The usual verbs substantive are as follows: G. _chu_, R. _hu_ or
_chu_, I am, which are conjugated regularly as old presents, and G.
_hato_, R. _ho_ or _cho_, was, which is a past participle, like the
Hindostani (q.v.) _tha_. _Hu_, _hato_ and _ho_ are explained in the
article on that language. _Chu_ is for Skr. _[r deg.]cchami_, Ap.
_acchau_. The use of this base is one of the outer band survivals.
Even in Prakrit, it is not found (so far as the present writer is
aware) in the Sauraseni of the Midland. Using these as auxiliaries the
finite verb makes a whole series of periphrastic tenses. A present
definite is formed by conjugating the old present tense (not the
present participle) with the present tense of the verb substantive.
Thus, G. _calu chu_, I am going. A similar idiom is found in some
Western Hindi dialects, but Hindostani employs the present participle;
thus, _calta hu_. In G. and R., however, the imperfect is formed with
the present participle as in H. Thus, G. _hu cal^ato hato_, I was
going. So, as in H., we have a perfect _hu calyo_ (or _calelo_) _chu_,
I have gone, and a pluperfect _hu calyo_ (or _calelo_) _hato_, I had
gone. The R. periphrastic tenses are made on the same principles. With
the genitive of the G. future passive participle, _cal^ava-no_, we
have a kind of gerundive, as in _hu cal^avano chu_, I am to be gone,
i.e. I am about to go; _hu cal^avano hato_, I was about to go.

The same series of derivative verbs occurs in G. and R. as in H. Thus,
we have a potential passive (a simple passive in G.) formed by adding
_a_ to the base, as in G. _lakh^avu_, to write, _lakhavu_, to be
written; and a causal by adding _av_ or _ad_, as in _lakhav^avu_, to
cause to write; _bes^avu_, to sit, _besad^avu_, to seat. A new passive
may be formed in G. from the causal, as in _tap^avu_, to be hot;
_tapav^avu_, to cause to be hot; to heat; _tapavavu_, to be heated.

Several verbs have irregular past participles. These must be learnt
from the grammars. So also the numerous compound verbs, such as (G.)
_cali sak^avu_, to be able to go; _cali cuk^avu_, to have completed
going; _calya kar^avu_, to be in the habit of going, and so on.

Literature.

Very little is known about the literature of Rajputana, except that it is of large extent. It includes a number of bardic chronicles of which only one has been partially edited, but the contents of which have been described by Tod in his admired _Rajasthan_. It also includes a considerable religious literature, but the whole mass of this is still in MS. From those specimens which the present writer has examined, it would appear that most of the authors wrote in Braj Bhasha, the Hindu literary dialect of Hindostani (q.v.) In Marwar it is an acknowledged fact that the literature falls into two branches, one called _Pingal_ and couched in Braj Bhasha, and the other called _[D.]ingal_ and couched in Rajasthani. The most admired work in [D.]ingal is the _Raghunath Rupak_ written by Mansa Ram in the beginning of the 19th century. It is nominally a treatise on prosody, but, like many other works of the same kind, it contrives to pay a double debt, for the examples of the metres are so arranged as to form a complete epic poem celebrating the deeds of the hero Rama.

The earliest writer of importance in Gujarati, and its most admired poet, was Narsingh Meta, who lived in the 15th century A.D. Before him there were writers on Sanskrit grammar, rhetoric and the like, who employed an old form of Gujarati for their explanations. Narsingh does not appear to have written any considerable work, his reputation depending on his short songs, many of which exhibit much felicity of diction. He had several successors, all admittedly his inferiors. Perhaps the most noteworthy of these was Rewa Sankar, the translator of the _Mahabharata_ (see SANSKRIT: _Literature_). A more important side of Gujarati literature is its bardic chronicles, the contents of which have been utilized by Forbes in his _Ras Mala_. Modern Gujarati literature mostly consists of translations or imitations of English works.

AUTHORITIES.--Volume ix. of the _Linguistic Survey of India_ contains
a full and complete account of Gujarati and Rajasthani, including
their various dialectic forms.

For Rajasthani, see S. H. Kellogg, _Grammar of the Hindi Language_
(2nd ed., London, 1893). In this are described several dialects of
Rajasthani. See also Ram Karn Sarma, _Marwari Vyakarana_ (Jodhpur,
1901) (a Marwari grammar written in that language), and G. Macalister,
_Specimens of the Dialects spoken in the State of Jaipur_ (contains
specimens, vocabularies and grammars) (Allahabad, 1898).

For Gujarati, there are numerous grammars, amongst which we may note
W. St C. Tisdall, _Simplified Grammar of the Gujarati Language_
(London, 1892) and (the most complete) G. P. Taylor, _The Student's
Gujarati Grammar_ (2nd ed., Bombay, 1908). As for dictionaries, the
most authoritative is the _Narma-kos_ of Narmada Sankar (Bhaunagar
and Surat, 1873), in Gujarati throughout. For English readers we may
mention Shahpurji Edalji's (2nd ed., Bombay, 1868), the introduction
to which contains an account of Gujarati literature by J. Glasgow,
Belsare's (Ahmedabad, 1895), and Karbhari's (Ahmedabad, 1899).
(G. A. Gr.)

GUJRANWALA, a town and district of British India, in the Lahore division of the Punjab. The town is situated 40 m. N. of Lahore by rail. It is of modern growth, and owes its importance to the father and grandfather of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, whose capital it formed during the early period of the Sikh power. Pop. (1901) 29,224. There are manufactures of brass-ware, jewellery, and silk and cotton scarves.

Previous Next

Comments

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Groups, Theory of" to "Gwyniad"Chapter XVII: Act 1856: , is mainly declaratory of the English common law, as embodied (10)

0%36 min left in chapter