In a move that has ignited considerable speculation and discussion, Indian President Droupadi Murmu has seemingly initiated a new trend by referring to herself as the “President of Bharat” in the English-language invitations for a dinner event during the G20 summit. This departure from the conventional norm where the name “India” is used in English communications has stirred rumours that the nation might be on the brink of undergoing a name change.
Traditionally, when it comes to official communication drafted in English by Indian constitutional entities, the country is called “India”. Conversely, the term “Bharat” has been employed when the content is in Hindi. This customary practice was disrupted recently when the invites for the G20 dinner labelled Murmu as the “President of Bharat”, which was notably drafted in English.
When approached by Reuters, an official from the president’s office opted to abstain from commenting on this development.
Examining the Country’s Constitutional Name
When delineating the nation’s official name, the English lexicon refers to the South Asian powerhouse as “India”. However, in various Indian languages, it is acknowledged as “Bharat” or “Bharata” and sometimes even as “Hindustan”. The constitution meticulously articulates that “India that is Bharat shall be a Union of States”, marking a clear delineation between the two terms.
A transition towards exclusively using “Bharat” would entail a constitutional amendment, a process demanding approval from a two-thirds majority in both houses of the Indian parliament.
The sudden eruption of this controversy seems reasonable, surfacing shortly after the announcement of an unexpected five-day special parliamentary session slated for later in the month. The official agenda behind this assembly remains undisclosed, fueling uncorroborated reports hinting at potential discussions centred around an official name change.
Though the government hasn’t confirmed this potential change, certain governmental factions and the ruling BJP party have expressed preferences towards elevating the prominence of “Bharat” over “India”. Furthermore, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the ideological forebearer of the BJP, has consistently preferred the name “Bharat”.
Tracing the Historical Roots of the Names
Diving into the historical intricacies of both appellations, it’s evident that these names have co-existed for thousands of years. While proponents of the “Bharat” name argue that “India” was a byproduct of British colonization, historical accounts denote its usage long before the colonial era, even tracing to periods predating Alexander the Great’s Indian expeditions in the 3rd century BCE.
This nomenclature stems from the River Indus, traditionally known as “Sindhu” in Sanskrit. The region southeast of this river was identified as India by travellers hailing from regions as distant as Greece. Contrarily, the term “Bharat” has roots entrenched deeper in history, appearing in ancient Indian scriptures. Experts note that it was traditionally used to denote a socio-cultural identity rather than a geographical designation.
*Additional input was taken from Reuters
