Why the name "India" was a good choice for the former British colony

[Maira La]

"India" is actually a clever choice for the continent sized country that the British left behind. The Indus is equally foreign to all regions of India. It doesn't run through Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, UP etc. etc.

Any other name would not work. Ganges Republic would not make sense for the Southern states. Dravida Nadu does not make sense for the Northern states. Bharat would be atrocious, no empire in India's history called themselves Bharat (an early Indo-Aryan tribe who looked nothing like modern Indians). The only logical choice would be Republic of Former British Empire in South Asia (RFBESA), but that would hurt the brown man's ego. 'India' (land of Indus) saved the day because it's not associated with any region in this new 'India' so no one can object to regional domination.

In a way it's similar to how English language was chosen as the official language of India. It's equally foreign to all regions, so one region's language does not dominate the rest and no one objects.

And that's how it's the only country in the (old) world having a name that is not of native origin.

 

[SIPRA]

@peagle
@Mangus Ortus Novem

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

"India" is actually a clever choice for the continent sized country that the British left behind. The Indus is equally foreign to all regions of India. It doesn't run through Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, UP etc. etc.

Any other name would not work. Ganges Republic would not make sense for the Southern states. Dravida Nadu does not make sense for the Northern states. Bharat would be atrocious, no empire in India's history called themselves Bharat (an early Indo-Aryan tribe who looked nothing like modern Indians). The only logical choice would be Republic of Former British Empire in South Asia (RFBESA), but that would hurt the brown man's ego. 'India' (land of Indus) saved the day because it's not associated with any region in this new 'India' so no one can object to regional domination.

In a way it's similar to how English language was chosen as the official language of India. It's equally foreign to all regions, so one region's language does not dominate the rest and no one objects.

And that's how it's the only country in the (old) world having a name that is not of native origin.

Are you Bangladeshi or Pakistani?

 

[Maula Jatt]

Are you Bangladeshi or Pakistani?

Neither
Thuada peyo
Your dad, hug and say hi

 

[pc_alt]

"India" is actually a clever choice for the continent sized country that the British left behind. The Indus is equally foreign to all regions of India. It doesn't run through Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, UP etc. etc.

Any other name would not work. Ganges Republic would not make sense for the Southern states. Dravida Nadu does not make sense for the Northern states. Bharat would be atrocious, no empire in India's history called themselves Bharat (an early Indo-Aryan tribe who looked nothing like modern Indians). The only logical choice would be Republic of Former British Empire in South Asia (RFBESA), but that would hurt the brown man's ego. 'India' (land of Indus) saved the day because it's not associated with any region in this new 'India' so no one can object to regional domination.

In a way it's similar to how English language was chosen as the official language of India. It's equally foreign to all regions, so one region's language does not dominate the rest and no one objects.

And that's how it's the only country in the (old) world having a name that is not of native origin.

India was the name of the country at the time of British rule. On independence, the people who wanted to separate got a new name for the new country. India remained India.
This is similar to how Pakistan did not change its name when East Pakistan separated and got a new name 'Bangladesh'.

 

[TigerOfMysore]

India was the name of the country at the time of British rule. On independence, the people who wanted to separate got a new name for the new country. India remained India.
This is similar to how Pakistan did not change its name when East Pakistan separated and got a new name 'Bangladesh'.

Actually India's official name is Bharat. What is amazing is how there is no principle to the name of this country.
Constitutionally I think it is called Bharat. It however also requested exclusively naming rights of India within the UN. And then internally off late it often calls itself Hindustan.
Basically "jis ka deen or iman naheen, wo yehee karain gay". Depending on situation NAME changes like the direction of the wind.

 

[AgnosticIndian]

lel. you should read some history. the whole peninsula from Punjab to Bengal (and beyond) was India since at least Alexander's time, used by Herodotus to pretty clearly mean all of India. maybe you should stop coping about all of the subcontinent having been one nation. Arabia is pretty far away you know. look home.

Ἰνδία - Wiktionary, the free dictionary

en.m.wiktionary.org

 

[pc_alt]

Actually India's official name is Bharat. What is amazing is how there is no principle to the name of this country.
Constitutionally I think it is called Bharat. It however also requested exclusively naming rights of India within the UN. And then internally off late it often calls itself Hindustan.
Basically "jis ka deen or iman naheen, wo yehee karain gay". Depending on situation NAME changes like the direction of the wind.

There are 2 official names - "Republic of India" and "Bharat Ganrajya". Obviously, we only use the former outside the nation as that was the name by which it was popularly known worldwide during British rule.
'Hindustan' is an informal name.
And we are proud of all 3 names.

 

[Maira La]

lel. you should read some history. the whole peninsula from Punjab to Bengal (and beyond) was India

You're fucking nuts. Forget Alexander, neither Mughals nor a single kingdom in Bengal called itself India/Hindustan.
Don't refer to European sources, they called the half of the world India at different points in history - Dutch India (Indonesia), British India, French India (Cambodia,Vietnam,Laos), the Americas were originally called India (some parts are still called West India/Indies).
As I said in the OP, the natives of none of these places called themselves India/Indians.

 

[pc_alt]

You're fucking nuts. Forget Alexander, neither Mughals nor a single kingdom in Bengal called itself India/Hindustan.
Don't refer to European sources, they called the half of the world India at different points in history - Dutch India (Indonesia), British India, French India (Cambodia,Vietnam,Laos), the Americas were originally called India (some parts are still called West India/Indies).
As I said in the OP, the natives of none of these places called themselves India/Indians.

I am curious to know from you. What did the Mughals call this land they rule? I believe they called it 'Hindustan', but correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Arulmozhi Varman]

I am curious to know from you. What did the Mughals call this land they rule? I believe they called it 'Hindustan', but correct me if I am wrong.

Mughals called it Hinduston. Of course some have more time in their life and in their boredom they start useless threads like these.

This land mass was called "Bharatha". Supposedly after a king who ruled the whole of India. Remember I am using the word "land mass" and not country. From ancient Tamil inscription this region was called Bharat. Period.

While we natives never called ourselves as Indians which is true, all foreigners called the landmass as India. And we decided to stick to that name as part of modern era. But both Bharat and India are official names.

 

[AgnosticIndian]

As I said in the OP, the natives of none of these places called themselves India/Indians.

next thing you'll know no one is Germany ever called themselves German. yeah idiot, they called the country Deutschland.
anyway, talking of the Idea of India as a Nation, it is also very old. Refer "India: A Sacred Geography" and various works of Irfan Habib.

https://frontline.thehindu.com/other/article30204590.ece

 

[Jackdaws]

"India" is actually a clever choice for the continent sized country that the British left behind. The Indus is equally foreign to all regions of India. It doesn't run through Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, UP etc. etc.

Any other name would not work. Ganges Republic would not make sense for the Southern states. Dravida Nadu does not make sense for the Northern states. Bharat would be atrocious, no empire in India's history called themselves Bharat (an early Indo-Aryan tribe who looked nothing like modern Indians). The only logical choice would be Republic of Former British Empire in South Asia (RFBESA), but that would hurt the brown man's ego. 'India' (land of Indus) saved the day because it's not associated with any region in this new 'India' so no one can object to regional domination.

In a way it's similar to how English language was chosen as the official language of India. It's equally foreign to all regions, so one region's language does not dominate the rest and no one objects.

And that's how it's the only country in the (old) world having a name that is not of native origin.

Extremely clever. And when the same India created a dumpy swamp as a nation - for marketing purposes it once again showed how clever it was by naming it Bangladesh. Ideal name would have been Kangladesh but everyone from Indira Gandhi to Manekshaw were in a charitable mood.

 

[pc_alt]

Extremely clever. And when the same India created a dumpy swamp as a nation - for marketing purposes it once again showed how clever it was by naming it Bangladesh. Ideal name would have been Kangladesh but everyone from Indira Gandhi to Manekshaw were in a charitable mood.

Lets not insult a nation (and friendly one at that) due to a misinformed poster from that nation.

 

[Species]

It's kind of weird that India still proudly go by their colonial name as others find it quite humiliating.

Most of the former colonies changed their names after decolonization, except for India, some sub-saharan African countries and small island states.