‘India, that is Bharat…’: One Country, Two Names

  • Clémentin-Ojha C
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The politics of naming is shaped by broad socio-political conditions and can be studied from several angles. Adopting a cultural history perspective, this paper considers some of the inherited discourses on ‘Bhārata’ both prior to and at the time of its official equation with ‘India’ in the Constitution (1950). It focusses on three successive definitional moments: the Puranic definition of Bhārata; the shift to its colonial definition, when the old toponym became the ‘indigenous’ name for a budding nation exposed to the imported political and geographical conceptions of (British) India; and, lastly, the choice of the Constitutional assembly to register the nation under a dual and bilingual identity: ‘India, that is Bharat’. The paper concludes with a sample of contemporary reactions that show that this double-name formula remains a baffling subject for Indian citizens.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Clémentin-Ojha, C. (2014). ‘India, that is Bharat…’: One Country, Two Names. South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, (10). https://doi.org/10.4000/samaj.3717

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free