WHAT'S IN A NAME?
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet..."
-Romeo and Juliet, Act II, Scene II
When Juliet says it in Shakespeare’s tragedy Romeo & Juliet, she’s saying that changing what something is called doesn’t change what it inherently is
In a poetic world, it is beautiful. In terms of cities, names take on meanings and become part of its people’s identities. When a city changes names, it assumes the identity of the ruler or the politics of its time. It is no wonder then cities like Mumbai and Delhi, that have changed hands multiple times have assumed different names at different points in history.
The first historical reference to the city we call Mumbai today was given by Ptolemy in 150 BCE. He plotted a cluster of seven islands and called it Heptanesia. This cluster assumed a different identity with the Portuguese sailing into its deep natural harbour in 1508 and calling it Bom Bahia or good bay. They even referred to it as a ilha da boa vida or island of good life. Their ambition did not extend beyond the good life and avowed aim, buscar Christaos e especiaria – to seek Christians and spices. The English received it as part of Charles II’s marriage contract with the Portuguese princess, Catherine of Braganza in 1662. It is said that since she was never to bear a child, it was the sole enduring advantage to accrue to Britain from the marriage. Well, as awful that sounds it did work to an “advantage” not directly for Charles but The East India Company. They always had designs on Bombay but when the Portuguese began making unofficial overtures to buy back the islands from Charles II, The East India Company decided to acquire it for themselves. The King, uninterested in his distant land and chronically short of money agreed to hand it over to them in exchange for a loan of 50,000 pounds repayable at 6 percent interest and a yearly rent of 10 Pounds.
The agreement was signed in May 1668 making The East India Company ‘the true and absolute Lords and Proprietors of the Fort and the Island…’. Under the English Bom Bahia got anglicised to Bombay, and continued after the English left.
From ‘the city, which by God’s assistance is intended to be built.’ (Gerald Aungier, 1672) to Urbs Prima in Indis, port city, maximum city, fairy-tale city to a city of dreams, movement, films, sounds, smells, colours, and ethnicities – Bombay acquired meaning. Its muchness palpable on streets, in claustrophobia of structures, packed restaurants, packed dabbas, film sets, outside film-star homes, by the sea, under a tree, at bus stops, in trains, on platforms, hotels, pocket sized parks, swanky apartments, old pakhdis, vague parties, inane meetings and even books. It became an identifying emotion.
Then, came the name, Mumbai. It wasn’t new; it just wasn’t in use. It was the name the kolis, the original inhabitants of the islands, called the islands after their patron goddess Mumba, also referred to as Mumba-aai (aai: mother in Marathi). Legend has it that a cruel giant, Mumbarka plundered the islands for fun, disrupting the life of the kolis. Petrified the city dwellers sought guidance from Brahma and he created a goddess with eight arms who slayed Mumbarka. The goddess was called Mumba.
With Shiv Sena coming to power in 1995, came the ‘need’ to discard associations with the Colonial past and usher in a strong ‘Marathi identity’. Bombay became Mumbai. Federal agencies, businesses, newspapers and people were ordered to adopt the change. And that was that.
Easier to change on paper than on the tongue for when you have hung out with the name for so long, its difficult to let it go. That’s why, perhaps, one still hears ‘Mumbai is a city, Bombay is an emotion.’
To be continued…(Delhi names)
Books Referenced:
Gillian Tindall, City of Gold.
Sharada Dwivedi. Bombay:The Cities Within
Prashant Kidambi, Bombay before Mumbai
Rahul Mehrotra & Sharada Dwivedi, Fort Walks: Around Bombay’s Fort Area
Pauline Rohatgi, Pheroza Godrej, Bombay to Mumbai: Changing Perspectives