{"id":165749,"date":"2023-09-19T10:35:15","date_gmt":"2023-09-19T05:05:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.altnews.in\/english-clone-2026\/?p=165749"},"modified":"2023-09-19T11:57:55","modified_gmt":"2023-09-19T06:27:55","slug":"india-vs-bharat-bjps-sudden-u-turn-why-the-british-named-us-india-theory-is-a-distortion-of-history","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.altnews.in\/english-clone-2026\/india-vs-bharat-bjps-sudden-u-turn-why-the-british-named-us-india-theory-is-a-distortion-of-history\/","title":{"rendered":"India vs Bharat: BJP’s sudden U-turn & why the ‘British named us India’ theory is a distortion of history"},"content":{"rendered":"

What’s in a name?<\/a> Apparently, a lot, if social media trends and raging political discourses are anything to go by. The India vs. Bharat debate<\/a> has caught the fancy of the entire nation with several prominent social media users (BJP leaders, Right Wing accounts, celebrities) claiming that the name ‘India’ is a colonial relic, or, given by the British.<\/p>\n

The debate has gained currency against the backdrop of the Opposition alliance naming itself I.N.D.I.A.<\/a> The name was announced after 26 parties had met in Bengaluru on July 18. On the same day, BJP leader and Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sharma said in a tweet, “The British named our country as India. We must strive to free ourselves from colonial legacies. Our forefathers fought for Bharat, and we will continue to work for Bharat.”<\/p>\n

\n

Our civilisational conflict is pivoted around India and Bharat.The British named our country as India. We must strive to free ourselves from colonial legacies. Our forefathers fought for Bharat, and we will continue to work for Bharat .<\/p>\n

BJP for BHARAT<\/p>\n

\u2014 Himanta Biswa Sarma (@himantabiswa) July 18, 2023<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He subsequently changed his bio on X (formerly Twitter) from ‘chief minister of Assam, India’ to ‘chief minister of Assam, Bharat.’<\/p>\n

\"\"
The BJP leader’s new-found love for ‘Bharat’ is reflected in his X (Twitter) bio<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

While the government convening a special session of the Parliament<\/a> from September 18 without initially divulging the agenda kept everyone guessing for some time, a G20 invitation mentioning the unusual phrase ‘President of Bharat<\/a>‘ and a document related to PM Modi’s Indonesia visit describing him as the ‘Prime Minister of Bharat<\/a>‘ further fueled speculation. On September 10, the wreath that PM Modi placed at Mahatma Gandhi’s final resting place at Rajghat had ‘the Republic of Bharat<\/a>‘ written on it. At the G20 conference table, the nameplate in front of PM Modi said ‘Bharat’.<\/p>\n

\"\"
‘Bharat’ replaced ‘India’ on the nameplate at the G20 conference table<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

<\/h4>\n

BJP’s U-Turn on ‘Bharat’<\/h4>\n

For the last nine years of his two stints as PM, Narendra Modi has been the ‘Prime Minister of India’<\/a>. Several schemes and campaigns brought in by his government have had ‘India’ in their names — Digital India<\/a>, Make in India<\/a>, Khelo India<\/a>, Startup India<\/a>, so on and so forth.<\/p>\n

It is also worth noting that in 2004, the Mulayam Singh Yadav-led SP government in Uttar Pradesh had passed a resolution to amend Article 1 of the Constitution to say \u2018Bharat, that is India\u2019, and not of \u2018India, that is Bharat\u2019. According to reports, (1<\/a>, 2<\/a>, 3<\/a>) the resolution was accepted unanimously in the state legislative assembly, expect by the BJP lawmakers, who staged a walk out.<\/p>\n

Moreover, in November 2015, the Modi-led NDA government told the Supreme Court that the country did not have to be called \u2018Bharat\u2019 instead of \u2018India\u2019<\/a>.\u00a0Responding to a PIL seeking a declaration that the Republic be called \u2018Bharat\u2019 for official and unofficial purposes by Union and state governments, the Centre claimed \u201cthere is no change in circumstances to consider any change in Article 1 of the Constitution of India.\u201d<\/p>\n

In view of this, it is difficult not to see the sudden volte-face and the new-found love for ‘Bharat’ as a knee-jerk reaction to the Opposition alliance naming itself I.N.D.I.A.<\/p>\n

India or Bharat? A Debate Dating Back to 1949<\/h4>\n

After Independence, the Constituent Assembly took almost three years to complete the historic task of drafting the Constitution of India. During this period, it held eleven sessions covering a total of 165 days. Of these, 114 days were spent on the consideration of the Draft Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Draft of Article 1 of the Indian Constitution, which starts with the sentence “I<\/strong>ndia, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States<\/b>“, was debated in the constituent assembly<\/a> on November 15 & 17, 1948, and later again on September 17 & 18, 1949.<\/p>\n

On November 15, 1948 during a debate in the Constitution Hall<\/a> (later known as the Central Hall of the Parliament), Ananthasayanam Ayyangar, who would later serve as the first deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha, wanted to rename \u2018India\u2018 to \u2018Bharat\u2019. On September 18, 1949, member H V Kamath introduced an amendment to use both \u2018India\u2019 and \u2018Bharat\u2019. The drafting committee chairman, B R Ambedkar, through an amendment, had already suggested that the Draft Article say \u2018India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States\u2019.<\/p>\n

Kamath was not particularly happy with this phraseology. He found the construction, “India, that is Bharat’, ‘somewhat clumsy<\/a>‘. He was not the only one. “India, that is, Bharat’ are not beautiful words for, the name of a country. We should have put the words “Bharat known as India also in foreign countries”, said Seth Govind Das<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The proposed amendments were put to vote and eventually Ambedkar’s suggestion, “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States” was accepted.<\/p>\n

Fact Check: Is ‘India’ a British Coinage?<\/h4>\n

One of the most viral tweets in this context was by former cricketer Virender Sehwag<\/a>, who claimed, “We are Bhartiyas, India is a name given by the British…” Referring to an article by himself, senior journalist Prabhu Chawla<\/a> wrote on X (formerly Twitter), “Let India, a British noun, be buried, and a new Bharat emerge…” BJP MP from Uttar Pradesh Harnath Singh Yadav<\/a> went a step further and told ANI that the word ‘India’ was an abuse given to us by the British… Adish C Aggarwala<\/a>, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, told PTI that the name India was given by the British. The list continues to grow even as this article is being written.<\/p>\n

The World History Encyclopedia has an entry on the ‘Etymology of the Name India<\/a>‘. It gives us in a nutshell what is the general consensus about the etymology of the word ‘India’:<\/p>\n