What's new

State of West Bengal approves name change to ‘Bangla’

Gabbar Singh

Test Debutant
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Runs
15,550
I know we have quite a few residents of West Bengal on this forum - what do you guys, and others, make of this?



The West Bengal assembly on Thursday unanimously passed a resolution, recommending that the state be renamed Bangla, following up on a two-year-old effort to move the state up the alphabetical order of India’s states. The state government will now forward the proposal to the Centre, which notifies new names of places including states.

Chief minister Mamata Banerjee told the assembly that the Centre had recently informed the state that it can accept only one name. The Centre’s response came after the state government wrote to it in August 2016 suggesting three names: Bangla (in Bengali), Bengal (English) and Bangal (Hindi). The assembly chose Bangla.

“Although we sent the proposal a long ago, the Union government decided to sit on it. They recently sent a communication, advising us to choose one name instead of three. We do not want any controversy on this issue. We have decided to choose Bangla. Let the resolution be passed unanimously,” Banerjee told the assembly.

The state government first proposed the renaming in 2016. West Bengal parliamentary affairs minister Partha Chatterjee had then argued for the change saying bureaucrats and politicians from the state often complain that they are asked to speak at the end of every national-level meeting in Delhi. This was because the speakers’ lists at such meeting are prepared according to alphabetical order of the states they represent.

“If West Bengal gets the new name, it will leapfrog from bottom of the list to the top of the pecking order,” he had said in August 2016 when the Assembly cleared the three names.

The renaming will help the state appear at the fourth spot after Arunachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Assam in the alphabetic order of the states.

Orissa became Odisha in 2011, but that was just a de-anglicisation of the state’s name. Madras was renamed Tamil Nadu in 1969 and Mysore, Karnataka in 1973, but those also involved re-organisation of territories. This is perhaps the first time a state is changing its name to get ahead in the pecking order.

Historian Rajat Kanta Ray cautioned against the problems that the renaming was likely to cause. “The change will also create problems in all spheres of academics and literature including poetry, prose, sociology philosophy, political science and history. It would have been better if the proposal had not been passed,” said Ray, a former Visva-Bharati University vice-chancellor.

Pabitra Sarkar, a former Bengali professor at the Chicago University, said the name Bangla will create avoidable confusion with Bangladesh. “Abroad, many refer to Bangladesh simply as Bangla,” said Sarkar.

Ray and Sarkar said Paschimbanga, the state’s present name in Bengali, was a better choice.

Theatre director Debesh Chatterjee said he likes the new name. “It takes us closer to Bangladesh.”

West Bengal’s most popular writer Mani Shankar Mukherjee welcomed the new name. “The other side of the border is now Bangladesh. Where is the problem if this side is simply called Bangla? I have no problem since it was a unanimous decision,” said Mukherjee.

The name of the state’s capital, which served as British India’s seat of power until 1911, was changed from Calcutta to Kolkata in January 2001.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...e-to-bangla/story-fm4IMwPHFDvzU6cLNdffEK.html
 
What did the state used to be called before partition? Wasn't the whole area simply called Bengal?

I also don't understand the term West Bengal. Where is the east Bengal then? is that referring to Bangladesh? That makes the name Bangla even more confusing, sounds like a subset of Bangladesh.

Very interesting subject, I look forward to some education on this subject.
 
What did the state used to be called before partition? Wasn't the whole area simply called Bengal?

I also don't understand the term West Bengal. Where is the east Bengal then? is that referring to Bangladesh? That makes the name Bangla even more confusing, sounds like a subset of Bangladesh.

Very interesting subject, I look forward to some education on this subject.

We need the input of [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] on this. He is a Bengali(Sorry Bangla) I think.
 
We need the input of [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] on this. He is a Bengali(Sorry Bangla) I think.

The ancient name of the area was Anga.Later it was Banga. During medieval times it came to be called as Bangal. The British divide Bengal into West and East. West Bengal remained with India post partition and the name was never changed.

Mamata has tried all sorts of new names since coming to power.This is the third one i think. Bangla is a language.Dont know why she chose this name. She should have simply reverted to Bangaal or Banga.This name makes no sense.
 
What did the state used to be called before partition? Wasn't the whole area simply called Bengal?

I also don't understand the term West Bengal. Where is the east Bengal then? is that referring to Bangladesh? That makes the name Bangla even more confusing, sounds like a subset of Bangladesh.

Very interesting subject, I look forward to some education on this subject.

Historically the region has been known as Bengal.

The first partition occurred in 1905 between the West (predominantly Hindus) and East (predominantly Muslim). Calcutta/Kolkata became the administrative capital of West and Dhaka (previously called Murshidabad) was the de facto capital of East.

Then it was reunified in 1911.

Then the eventual partition in 1947. West Bengal went to India (and the name still remains to this day) and East Bengal became East Pakistan until 1971.

After 1971, East Pakistan of course became Bangladesh.

On OP, I don't like the name "Bangla" either for West Bengal. Bengal is the region, Bangla is the language, Bengali is the ethnicity. They could have clearly came up with a better name. Just Bengal would have been nice.

Bangla is too similar with Bangladesh and will create unnecessary confusion.
 
This is the same as renaming Maharashtra as 'Marathi' or Tamil Nadu as 'Tamil'. Bangla is a language. This is one of the dumbest things I've heard of.
 
The ancient name of the area was Anga.Later it was Banga. During medieval times it came to be called as Bangal. The British divide Bengal into West and East. West Bengal remained with India post partition and the name was never changed.

Mamata has tried all sorts of new names since coming to power.This is the third one i think. Bangla is a language.Dont know why she chose this name. She should have simply reverted to Bangaal or Banga.This name makes no sense.

Bhai Anga region comprised only a part of modern West Bengal along with Bhagalpur and Monghyr districts of Bihar.
Till Mahajanapada period, India's(I mean Subcontinent here) eastern boundaries weren't as extensive as they are today and after Tamrilipti(a famous port) it was all non Aryan land and the area eastwards(modern BD) was known as Pundranagara after Pundra people, indigenous inhabitants of the land..

Guptas were the first ones to full expand in the east and their empire comprised of the today's whole Bangladesh which was designated as Pundravardhana Bhukti(Bhukti being a province).

Later on the northern part of Bengal came to be called as Gauda(remember the infamous king Shashanka who tried to destroy the Bodhi tree) while southern portion went by the name of Radha .

A collective Bengali identity started to emerge during the period of Pala and Sena rulers and was further emphasised during Sultanate era(Bengal mostly remained independet in this period with it's Sultans occasionally paying nominal allegiance to Delhi).

When Mughals came a distinctive Bengali identity had emerged with it's own culture, cuisine, art and architecture.
Rest you all know what happened under the British.
 
Only Bangla looks empty. Should have something like the following :

Banglasthan
Banglabad
Banglagarh

Bangla Prodesh is still the best. :inti [MENTION=141520]troodon[/MENTION]
 
What's with just Bangla?

At least repeat it twice. It'll come off as a war cry of sorts: "Bangla Bangla!"
 
The Gurkha's of Hilly region part of West Bengal Darjeeling will be more miffed with this name change.
 
What did the state used to be called before partition? Wasn't the whole area simply called Bengal?

I also don't understand the term West Bengal. Where is the east Bengal then? is that referring to Bangladesh? That makes the name Bangla even more confusing, sounds like a subset of Bangladesh.

Very interesting subject, I look forward to some education on this subject.

In 1927 British separated bengal into West and East Bengal . It was done by Lord Curzon. After that as we know east Bengal was declared as Pakistan province . In 1971 it became Bangladesh.
 
In 1927 British separated bengal into West and East Bengal . It was done by Lord Curzon. After that as we know east Bengal was declared as Pakistan province . In 1971 it became Bangladesh.

Really? What was the purpose of dividing Bengal into two parts in 1927? I assumed the partition happened in 1947.
 
Really? What was the purpose of dividing Bengal into two parts in 1927? I assumed the partition happened in 1947.

The partition happened in 1905 and not in 1927.
There were various reason behind this controversial decision. The ostensible reason given was that Bengal by virtue of it's size and population had become too large to administer which was somewhat true as well since it's population exceeded the other two presidencies by a distance.
The real reason infact was to weaken the stout resistance in Bengal which by then had become a strong centre for anti British sentiments.
Curzon was determined to set things straight in India and Bengal which used to be the most important British province in India was naturally first on his list.
A plan was hatched to divide the region into two parts :East and West. The former being Muslim majority while the latter had Hindu dominance. This was done in order to prop up the communalists and thus successfully wedge a line between the adherents of two religion.
The announcement was of course met with strong protests from the people but they carried it out nonetheless.
After that the region became so restless and a hotbed of revolutionary activities that they had to annul it in 1911.
Also in 1911 they shifted the imperial capital from Calcutta to Delhi.
 
In all honesty though, Bhadralok would have been a better name [MENTION=136588]CricketCartoons[/MENTION] :))
 
The partition happened in 1905 and not in 1927.
There were various reason behind this controversial decision. The ostensible reason given was that Bengal by virtue of it's size and population had become too large to administer which was somewhat true as well since it's population exceeded the other two presidencies by a distance.
The real reason infact was to weaken the stout resistance in Bengal which by then had become a strong centre for anti British sentiments.
Curzon was determined to set things straight in India and Bengal which used to be the most important British province in India was naturally first on his list.
A plan was hatched to divide the region into two parts :East and West. The former being Muslim majority while the latter had Hindu dominance. This was done in order to prop up the communalists and thus successfully wedge a line between the adherents of two religion.
The announcement was of course met with strong protests from the people but they carried it out nonetheless.
After that the region became so restless and a hotbed of revolutionary activities that they had to annul it in 1911.
Also in 1911 they shifted the imperial capital from Calcutta to Delhi.

Very interesting, but of course the divide that the British quite cleverly initiated has been absorbed and is now championed by Indians (and Bangladeshis I assume) themselves. So one could say the British were in fact ahead of the time.
 
Very interesting, but of course the divide that the British quite cleverly initiated has been absorbed and is now championed by Indians (and Bangladeshis I assume) themselves. So one could say the British were in fact ahead of the time.

British were definitely ahead of their time.
After 1857 revolt they had started to eye Muslims suspiciously who formed the majority of the rebels (esp the ones from UP and Bihar) and sidelined them from every sphere giving rise to further discontent.

It was only after when Bengal had emerged as a rallying point for all anti British leaders that they seriously started to consider and bring back their old but effective 'divide and rule' policy.

Thus as a part of this policy influential Muslims such as Waqar ul Mulk, Agha Khan and Nawab Salimullah of Decca were encouraged and an effort was made to isolate Muslims from the rest of the movement. This didn't meet with success at first but the damage was done and we were to see it's consequences in 1940s when communalism swept the whole Subcontinent.
 
Then the eventual partition in 1947. West Bengal went to India (and the name still remains to this day) and East Bengal became East Pakistan until 1971.

To be sure, East Bengal was renamed East Pakistan in 1955 following the imposition of One Unit. Also, under One Unit, the provinces in the western wing were consolidated into a single province of West Pakistan. One Unit was finally dissolved in 1970.
 
India should give West Bengal to Bangladesh along with giving Kashmir to Pakistan, Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh to China, and Tamil Nadu to Sri Lanka.

:inti
 
Back
Top