The renaming game

Gajanan Khergamker delves deep into history and archives to explain the loyalties and perceptions behind attributing names to places. History, historically, has been named, written and rewritten by the ones in power. And, with every change in power, the first casualty would be history as the ruler would want to set the record right, read to his convenience, he observes.

Victoria Terminus renamed Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus.

If there’s anything controversial about history and heritage, on the face of things, it lies in the attribution. Dig a little deeper and you’ll realise that the issue is the intent of the attributor, the timing and the political will behind it. Yet if you move away from the issue and adopt a larger and wider perspective of things, you realise that naming, shaming and attributions correct, false or maliciously done are all tenable facets of the nature of history itself.

In the resistance to change, as is the way of development, there is a significant amount of defiance to an older regime and in favour of a newer one. Defiance or compliance, however, is not independent of populist trends.

The renaming of Jabalpur from the British-spelt Jubbulpore, respelled in 1947, Jajmau from Jajesmow, respelled in 1948 and Kanpur from Cawnpore, respelled in 1948, was met with least resistance owing to the very timing of the attempt. Also, on the face of things, the original names were spelt by the British to suit their terminology and had a distinct ring of Victorian touch to them. The British were, owing to their linguistic upbringing, simply unable to pronounce traditionally Indian names and would hence create adaptations to suit their sensibilities. Reverting to original names was an inevitable given and happened without much resistance.

Opposition to anti-national trends

Any opposition then, for whatever reasons, would be construed as being ‘anti-national’ and in affront to a much-awaited freedom. Now, cut to sixty years later in 2017 when Victoria Terminus was renamed Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus in a move to shed the Victorian hangover, it was met with resistance from some quarters who felt that the UNESCO World Heritage Site named after the reigning queen should be retained. Needless to say, the opposition was struck down decisively and the new name stuck. Shiv Sena, the Nationalist Party in Maharashtra, was firm in its resolution to dump all that was British and bring back the State’s lost glory.

History, historically, has been named, written and rewritten by the ones in power. And, with every change in power, the first casualty would be history as the ruler would want to set the record right, read to his convenience. Now, whether the record would be right or not, wasn’t of importance. What was is that it was set in the tone that matched his own.

States of India whose names were changed after Independence were Travancore-Cochin which became Kerala on 1 November 1956, Madhya Bharat that became Madhya Pradesh on 1 November 1959, Bombay State became Gujarat and Maharashtra on 1 May 1960, Madras State that became Tamil Nadu on 14 January 1969, Mysore State that became Karnataka on 1 November 1973, Uttaranchal became Uttarakhand on 1 January 2007, Orissa became Odisha on 4 November 2011 and North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA) became Arunachal Pradesh on 20 January 1972.

The formation of Gujarat and Maharashtra, for instance, followed protests of Samyukta Maharashtra Movement in which 107 people were killed by the police and Bombay State was reorganised on linguistic lines. Gujarati-speaking areas of Bombay State were partitioned into the State of Gujarat following Mahagujarat Movement.

Demand on linguistic lines

It may be recalled that the demand for States to be organised on a linguistic basis was developed even before India achieved Independence from British rule. It was in now-Odisha that a first-of-its-kind linguistic movement was initiated in 1895 which gained momentum many years later with the demand for a separate Orissa Province to be formed by bifurcating the existing Bihar and Orissa Province.

Following efforts by the Father of Odia nationalism, Madhusudan Das, in 1936, Orissa Province became the first Indian state in Pre-Independent India to be organised on the basis of common languages.

Following Independence, there was an ascent of political movements for the creation of new states developed on linguistic lines. The concept of a Telugu-speaking state out of the northern portion of Madras State began to find acceptance after Independence, and in 1953, 16 northern Telugu-speaking districts of Madras State became the new State of Andhra.

Also, small changes were made to state boundaries: the small state of Bilaspur was merged with Himachal Pradesh on 1 July 1954; and Chandernagore, a former enclave of French India, was incorporated into West Bengal in 1955.

The purpose of naming or renaming places is sometimes to match the colour of local culture. Like a more Gujarati Vadodara from an anglicised Baroda renamed in 1974; Thiruvananthapuram from Trivandrum in 1991, Mumbai on Mumbadevi the Goddess after which the city was named from Bombay in 1995, Kochi from Cochin in 1996, Chennai from Madras in 1996 and Kolkata from Calcutta respelled in 2001.

Myriad theories on originals

There are myriad theories that surround the origin of a name. Kolkata for instance has four theories to the origin of its name.

An early theory maintains that after the settlement of British in the zone comprising three villages, they were assimilated into one and named ‘Kalikata’ – a marketing strategy used by the British who stamped ‘Kalikata’ on their export goods to compete with the Portuguese trade in Calico from Calicut in Southern India.

According to another, the city might also have been due to its location next to Ganga. The first half of the name ‘kol’ bears reference to a particular feature of indentation in river banks; thus, the place was named ‘Kolikata’.

The third, and the more popular one which begins the name was the result of a miscommunication between an Englishman and a local grass-cutter. When the Englishman asked the Bengali villager for the name of his village, he answered ‘kal-kata’ (‘I cut it yesterday’) thinking the question referred to his bundle of grass; Hence the name.

According to another theory the city was named after the Goddess Kali, known to be the most worshipped deity of the region. The different versions of the city’s name went on to be further anglicised by the British and called Calcutta. In 2001, Buddhadeb Bhattacharya the-then Chief Minister of West Bengal re-named the city and called it ‘Kolkata’.

Theory of miscommunication

The miscommunication theory bears resemblance to the origin of the name Matheran – Asia’s only non-motorable hill station near Neral in Maharashtra. According to legend, when a Britisher approached a villager lady at the base of the Matheran hill and asked her what lay on top, she replied ‘Mathe Raan’ indicating that there was a forest at the top of the hill. Hence the name Matheran that stuck.

As historians have it, the hill station is called Matheran but is said to be ‘discovered’ by Hugh Poyntz Malet, the-then district governor of Thane in May 1850 and the description is engraved on a plaque in the middle of Matheran market right outside the railway station.

Ironically, at a meagre distance of 3.5 km from Matheran Railway Station, lies Shivaji’s Ladder – one of the top places to visit in Matheran situated on the way to One Tree Hill Point. The pathway was used, according to historians, by Chhatrapati Shivaji often used this pathway for hunting in the Matheran hills. This was in regular use sometime between 1630 and 1680 Chhatrapati Shivaji’s tenure, a good two hundred years before Hugh Malet even arrived to Matheran in 1850, forget discovering anything new.

But for all quoting British historians who would prefer to gloss over the Maratha king and his life’s works and instead claim ownership of discoveries across India, Matheran continues to have been ‘discovered’ by Hugh Malet. Perceiving history and heritage is a matter of convenient interpretation and persisting loyalties.