It is quite amazing that those who pioneered the writing of Urdu dictionaries and Urdu grammar were not natives of pre-1947 India but Europeans. One may ascribe this phenomenon to their not-so-good intentions and can easily blame their colonial mindset that saw it necessary to learn the local languages in order that their imperialistic designs are succeeded. However, for local languages and especially for Urdu it was a blessing in disguise, for had it not been for these 'colonial masters' the writing of early books on Urdu grammar and some invaluable bilingual Urdu dictionaries would have been delayed perhaps by a century and nobody can say for sure what would have been the result. They also played a vital role in popularising Urdu and introducing it to Europe.

There are a number of reasons why the Europeans were so keen about the books on the grammar of the vernaculars especially Urdu. Firstly, the study of languages and comparative grammar was already in vogue in Europe and was greatly valued by European scholars. Then there were missionaries who were very keen to learn the vernaculars so that the preaching and spreading of their creed across the vast Indian territories was made possible. Another factor that encouraged the learning of the local languages, especially a lingua franca like Urdu, was the ever-increasing prospect of colonising India. The then European powers like Portugal, France, the Netherlands and Great Britain were eyeing India with growing interest, as it lacked a strong central government after the death of Aurangzeb Alamgir in 1707.

In the 16th century some European scholars had studied Sanskrit. P. Sassette, an Italian, spent five years in India and learnt Sanskrit. His letters, published from Florence after his death, speak of his command over Sanskrit and he was perhaps the first to point out the similarities between Italian and Sanskrit. Robertus de Nobilius, a missionary, had mastered Sanskrit so well that he is said to have written a fake Veda whose French translation he published under the title 'Ezoru Veda'. There were many Europeans who made a profound study of Sanskrit and other Indian languages. A German missionary Hanxleden is said to be the first to have written Sanskrit grammar outside India.

As for Urdu, John Joshua Keterlaer, the then Dutch ambassador to India, wrote Urdu's first grammar circa 1715. Written in Latin, it was named 'Grammatica Indostanica', as Indostan, Indostani, and Hindustani are among the different names Urdu has had through centuries. But it could not be published till 1743. In 1741, Benjamin Schultz, a German missionary, wrote 'Grammatica Indostanica' in Latin. In 1778 from Lisbon was published a book in Portuguese titled 'Portuguese Grammatica Indostan'. The first-ever grammar of Urdu in English was written by a Mr Gliston about whom very little is known. His sudden death prevented his work from being published. Later, someone sent the manuscript to John Gilchrist who by then had himself written a grammar of Urdu. It was a British military officer named Hadley who is credited with writing and publishing the first-ever grammar of Urdu in English. What prompted him to write it was that fact that he was asked to command a company but he felt that unless he knew the language of the local soldiers he would not be able to do it properly. So he compiled the basic rules of Urdu in 1765. Somehow a copy reached a London publisher who published it in 1770. It proved very popular and its revised and corrected edition was published in 1772. Despite some of its faults, which were later corrected and revised by Mirza Fitrat Lukhnavi, it remained in great demand and till 1809 its eight editions were published.

But the fellow truly regarded as a great benefactor of Urdu is John Borthwick Gilchrist. Born in 1759, he came to India in 1782. Brought up in Edinburgh and a medical doctor by profession, he soon realised that until he learnt the language known as Moors, yet another name for Urdu, his coming to India would remain fruitless. Having joined the Bengal Army as a surgeon, he passed through many towns and villages and noted that that language was being spoken in the length and breadth of the country. He decided that it was of utmost importance to compile a dictionary and a grammar of the language. In 1786, he published from Calcutta the first part of his dictionary titled 'A dictionary of English and Hindoostanee'. He also published 'A grammar of the Hindoostanee language' in 1796.

Mir Bahadur Ali Hussaini translated in abridged form Gilchrist's book on Urdu grammar and named it 'Qavaed-e-Zaban-e-Urdu'. Experts are divided on its year of publication — some believing it was 1816 and others favouring 1820. Anyway, the translation was hugely popular and was published many times over. Majlis-e-Taraqqi-e-Adab, Lahore, published the abridged translation of Hussaini in 1962 with a very scholarly introduction by Khalil-ur-Rahman Dawoodi who had edited the book. Now Majlis has reprinted it, as it has been out of print for long despite being much in demand.

John Gilchrist played a very vital role in the development of Urdu. He not only established, with a nod from Wellesley, the then governor-general, the Seminary Oriental to teach Persian and oriental languages to British officers but he was also instrumental in getting written and published many books that today we hold in great awe, including 'Bagh-o-Bahar'. He was made the head of the Hindustani department at Fort William College where he gathered renowned writers, poets and scholars of Urdu and asked them to write books. In fact Gilchrist was the pioneer of a new trend of Urdu prose that replaced the old ornamental prose laden with metaphor. He also established a printing press for his publication programme and published a large number of books.

Mohammad Ateeq Siddiqui has rightly pointed out in his book 'Gilchrist aur us ka ahad' that the great services rendered by Gilchrist are somewhat eclipsed by the dispute that drags him between Urdu and Hindi. Scholars of Urdu accuse Gilchrist of introducing Naagri script and dividing one language into two Urdu and Hindi. However, scholars of Hindi feel that Gilchrist favoured Urdu and preferred it to Hindi. But scholars of both Urdu and Hindi acknowledge his contribution towards the development of both the languages and their literatures.

In 1804, Gilchrist resigned and went back to Europe, citing his illness as the reason for quitting. But many experts believe that he had developed some differences with the management of the College. He continued to teach Urdu till 1841 when he died in Paris on January 9.

Majlis has really done a nice job in the recent past and has published a number of new books and reprints. The reprinting of Gilchrist's Urdu grammar 'Qavaed-e-Zaban-e-Urdu' was surely much needed.

drraufparekh@yahoo.com