TOPIC 5

From Allahabad to Prayagraj, Faizabad to Ayodhya – Decolonization or Erasing Minority Heritage?

What’s in a name? Shakespeare asked. In India under the BJP, the answer is: everything. Since 2014, a quiet but relentless renaming revolution has swept across the country – Allahabad became Prayagraj, Faizabad became Ayodhya, Aurangabad is now Sambhajinagar, and even Mughal-era roads and villages are being stripped of their ‘Muslim-sounding’ identities. The government calls it “decolonization” and “reclaiming indigenous heritage.” Critics call it the saffron erasure of India’s pluralistic past – a systematic effort to replace Muslim and colonial names with Hindu-centric ones, reshaping collective memory one signboard at a time. This article investigates whether renaming is cultural restoration or cultural cleansing.

WHAT – A sustained campaign by BJP-led central and state governments to rename cities, towns, roads, villages, and institutions that bear Muslim, Mughal, or colonial-era names, replacing them with Hindu mythological, historical, or regional names.

WHO – Led by the BJP and its state governments (Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, etc.), supported by RSS affiliates, and endorsed by sections of the judiciary and intelligentsia.

WHEN – Accelerated dramatically after 2014, with major renaming waves in 2018-2019 (Prayagraj, Ayodhya), 2020-2023 (Aurangabad proposal), and 2024-2026 (village-level renaming in MP, UP).

WHERE – Across India, with particular intensity in the Hindi heartland (UP, MP) and Maharashtra, targeting Mughal-era names and Muslim-sounding villages.

WHY – Officially to shed “colonial and Mughal slavery,” restore “authentic Indian names,” and promote national pride. Critics argue the real goal is to erase Muslim heritage, assert Hindu majoritarianism, and consolidate the Hindutva vote bank.

HOW – Through state government resolutions, central government approvals, administrative orders, and – in some cases – unilateral announcements by chief ministers without legislative consultation.

---

THE CONSTITUTIONAL & LEGAL FRAMEWORK – CAN CITIES BE RENAMED?

Renaming cities in India is not unconstitutional, but it follows a specific legal process. The power to rename cities primarily rests with state governments, subject to central government approval for changes that affect national records.

Legal Process for Renaming a City:

Notable Renamings Under BJP Governments:

Source for renaming list:

---

ALLAHABAD TO PRAYAGRAJ – THE FLAGSHIP RENAME (2018)

The renaming of Allahabad to Prayagraj in 2018 was the most high-profile and controversial of the BJP’s renaming exercises.

Historical Background of “Allahabad”:

The Renaming Process (2018):

Justification Given by UP Government:

UP Minister Siddhartha Nath Singh stated: “The renaming of Allahabad as Prayagraj came for approval in the meeting and I am happy to say Allahabad will now be known as Prayagraj. Rig Veda, Mahabharat and Ramayana also mention Prayagraj (for Allahabad).”

Impact of the Rename:

The Anomaly: As AAP MP Ashok Mittal noted in Parliament (March 2025): “The city has been renamed, but its high court and a prestigious university still carry the name ‘Allahabad’. Even the Lok Sabha constituency continues to be named Allahabad instead of Prayagraj.”

Akbar ‘Prayagraji’ Incident:

Perhaps the most absurd consequence of the renaming was documented in 2025: the famous Urdu poet Akbar Allahabadi was officially referred to as “Akbar Prayagraji” in some government records – changing the name of a deceased poet who never consented to the rename.

---

FAIZABAD TO AYODHYA – ERASING A MUSLIM-ERA DISTRICT (2018)

The renaming of Faizabad district to Ayodhya in 2018 was even more politically and religiously charged than Allahabad’s rename.

Historical Background:

What Was Renamed:

The Erasure Concern:

The district of Faizabad was not just a colonial name – it was a Muslim-era administrative and cultural center. Faizabad was the first capital of the Nawabs of Awadh, a center of Urdu poetry, and home to important Shiite monuments and imambaras. By renaming the entire district to Ayodhya – a Hindu religious site – the government effectively submerged Faizabad’s Muslim heritage under a Hindu identity.

Academic Analysis:

A 2024 academic study published in the journal Antipode by Ghazala Jamil (JNU) analyzed the renaming: “The new Ayodhya, which lies at the heart of the Hindu nationalist (Hindutva) project, can arguably stand in as a metaphor for the project of transforming the secular Indian state into a Hindu nation (Hindu Rashtra).” The study documented the “legal-administrative erasure of Faizabad as a template for the effaced cultural history of Muslim urbanisms in India.”

Another academic analysis (Taylor & Francis, 2024) examined how the renaming of Allahabad and Faizabad functions “simultaneously as symbolic valorization, glorifying and legitimizing Hindu cultural supremacy, and as symbolic retribution, denigrating and erasing traces of the nearly thousand-year stretch when Muslim dynasties ruled large parts of the Indian subcontinent.”

---

AURANGABAD TO SAMBHAJINAGAR – THE LONG-PENDING RENAME

The renaming of Aurangabad to Sambhajinagar has a long and politically tangled history.

Historical Background:

The Political Stalemate:

Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut (January 2021): “The Shiv Sena had renamed Aurangabad as Sambhajinagar 30 years ago but the Centre has not yet approved its renaming. If Allahabad can be renamed Prayagraj, Faizabad as Ayodhya, and Delhi’s Aurangzeb Road to Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Road, then why didn’t the BJP government approve the renaming of Aurangabad as Sambhajinagar?”

Congress’s Objection: Congress state chief Balasaheb Thorat stated that the renaming issue “is not part of the Common Minimum Programme of the MVA government” and that the party would oppose it if brought forward.

Status as of 2026: The central government has still not approved the rename, leading to accusations of political hypocrisy – supporting renaming when it suits the BJP (Prayagraj, Ayodhya) but delaying when initiated by rival parties.

---

VILLAGE-LEVEL RENAMING – THE NEW FRONTIER (2024-2026)

In 2024-2026, the renaming drive expanded from cities to villages – targeting ‘Muslim-sounding’ village names, often without legislative process.

Madhya Pradesh (January 2025):

Chief Minister Mohan Yadav unilaterally announced a slew of village name changes over two consecutive Sundays.

Source for MP renaming data:

CM Yadav’s Statement: At a public gathering, the chief minister read out the old and new names amidst enthusiastic applause by BJP leaders. He justified the changes because “naam atakta hai” (we stumble across the names) – essentially finding Muslim names difficult or uncomfortable to pronounce.

Lack of Due Process: Critics pointed out that there was no evidence of gram sabha deliberation or panchayat resolutions. The CM announced the changes unilaterally, apparently based on a list submitted by the local BJP MLA. “How democratic is it for the chief minister to announce the new names without any consultation or due process?” questioned opposition leaders.

The Dalit Angle Ignored: Former chairman of MP Scheduled Castes Commission Pradeep Ahirwar noted the hypocrisy: “While calling someone chamar is deemed a slur and may invite punishment, the government has been insensitive and indifferent to names like Chamariya, Chamrauha and Gadariya, which are on official records and humiliate the Dalit community. Why don’t Dalit-sounding names stick out?”

Uttar Pradesh – Fatehabad to Sindoorapuram (Proposed, 2025):

The Agra Zila Panchayat passed a unanimous resolution to rename Fatehabad town to Sindoorapuram. The BJP-led resolution called the names “remnants of the region’s symbolic slavery tied to historical invasions and foreign rule.” The aim was to “shed colonial-era names and reclaim indigenous heritage.”

---

DELHI – RENAMING ROADS AND MONUMENTS

The renaming drive extended to the national capital, targeting Mughal-era roads and colonial monuments.

AAP MP Ashok Mittal’s Praise (March 2025): “These steps reflect a nationalistic thought process and are crucial in shedding the colonial mindset.” He cited examples: Rajpath to Kartavya Path, Indian Penal Code to Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and Allahabad to Prayagraj.

But Mittal also raised concerns: “Several institutions, roads and landmarks still bear British-era names. The Allahabad High Court still carries the name ‘Allahabad.’ Even the Lok Sabha constituency continues to be named Allahabad instead of Prayagraj.” He called for a parliamentary committee to examine further renaming efforts.

---

THE IDEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK – WHY RENAME?

Government’s Official Rationale:

AAP MP Ashok Mittal (2025): “I expressed concern over what I described as ‘carrying the burden’ of colonial-era names, which symbolize India’s past under British rule.”

Critics’ Counter-Rationale:

Academic Critique (Taylor & Francis, 2024): The renaming strategy is “rooted in the divisive politics of communal polarization and exclusion under the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).” It shows how “this change from Muslim- to Hindu-centric place names functions simultaneously as symbolic valorization, glorifying and legitimizing Hindu cultural supremacy, and as symbolic retribution, denigrating and erasing traces of the nearly thousand-year stretch when Muslim dynasties ruled.”

---

THE SAFFRON STRATEGY – BEYOND NAMES

The renaming campaign is not isolated; it is part of a broader saffron strategy:

The Erasure of Urdu:

The renaming of Allahabad to Prayagraj had a direct impact on Urdu – the city’s famous poet Akbar Allahabadi was being referred to as “Akbar Prayagraji,” erasing the very name he was known by for centuries.

Similarly, villages with ‘Hussain‘, ‘Mohammad‘, ‘Allah‘, ‘Sheikh‘, ‘Haj‘, ‘Khalil‘, and other Islamic markers are being systematically renamed. The message is clear: Muslim identity has no permanent place in the saffron map of India.

---

PUBLIC OPINION – DIVIDED AND REGIONAL

A 2025 survey on renaming:

Regional Breakdown (Support for renaming “Muslim-sounding” villages):

Support is highest in the Hindi heartland (where the renaming is most aggressive) and lowest in the South and Northeast – regions with stronger regional identities and less saffron penetration.

---

ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST RENAMING

For Renaming (Government, RSS, supporters):

Against Renaming (Opposition, academics, activists):

The Constitutional Debate (Times of India legal analysis, March 2026): “To rename a city is not merely to change a word on a map, but to engage with the constitutional expression of identity, memory and democratic will…. Renaming, when undertaken with deliberation and responsibility, is not an act of erasure. It is an act of remembrance, one that aligns history with constitutional values and ensures that the stories we inherit are also the stories we choose to tell.” The article emphasized the need for “historical authenticity grounded in credible evidence, public consultation ensuring inclusivity, administrative feasibility, and sensitivity to India’s plural and diverse fabric.”

---

THE HINDU MARATHI VS SAFFRON NARRATIVE – AURANGABAD AS CASE STUDY

The Aurangabad/Sambhajinagar controversy reveals internal Hindu political tensions.

The Hypocrisy Charge: Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut: “If Allahabad can be renamed Prayagraj, Faizabad as Ayodhya, and Aurangzeb Road to Kalam Road, then why didn’t the BJP government approve the renaming of Aurangabad as Sambhajinagar?”

The Answer: Politics. The BJP supports renaming when it controls the state government (UP, MP) but delays or obstructs when the proposal comes from rival parties (Maharashtra’s MVA). This reveals that renaming is not a principled “decolonization” drive – it is a political tool to consolidate Hindutva votes while denying the same political capital to opponents.

---

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON – RENAMING AROUND THE WORLD

Observation: India’s renaming under the BJP is unique in its selective targeting of Muslim names (not colonial names only) and its association with a religious majoritarian political project – rather than a purely post-colonial or linguistic reclamation.

---

SUMMARY TABLE: MAJOR RENAMINGS UNDER BJP (2014-2026)

---

CONCLUSION – NAMES AS BATTLEGROUNDS

The renaming of cities, villages, and roads under the BJP is not an innocent exercise in cultural restoration. It is a systematic political project with clear characteristics:

1. Selective Targeting: Only Muslim, Mughal, and colonial names are targeted – never Hindu or Brahminical names, even when they are equally ‘imposed’ or historically contentious.

2. Majoritarian Assertion: Hindutva ideology seeks to replace India’s pluralistic, multi-religious identity with a single Hindu-centric narrative – and names are the most visible markers of that identity.

3. Collective Memory Engineering: By erasing Muslim names from maps, textbooks, and official records, the government ensures that future generations grow up without visible reminders of India’s 1,000-year Muslim-ruled past.

4. Political Consolidation: Renaming is used to energize the Hindutva base before elections, to assert dominance over opposition-ruled states, and to deny political rivals the same ‘nationalist’ capital.

The Fundamental Question:

Is India a nation that remembers its entire history – Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Buddhist, Jain, colonial, and post-colonial – or a nation that selectively erases the parts that do not fit the saffron narrative?

The renaming revolution says: erase.

But names have a way of persisting. The older generation will always call Allahabad by its name. The poet Akbar Allahabadi will not become “Akbar Prayagraji” in the hearts of Urdu lovers. And the Muslims of Faizabad will remember that their city was once a center of Shiite culture, even if the map now says only Ayodhya.

The saffron brush is painting over history. But history bleeds through.

---

SUMMARY TABLE: RENAMING – FOR AND AGAINST

---

Continued Topic 6