The first name of India was Hindustan.

((Take the name of India)) 

Since its ancient use by Greek (Indica) and Latin (India) writers, it has been applied to a variety of fields, as, for example, Yule and Burnell remind us in their famous Hobson-Jobson.4 Or take the term Hindustan. . , which was already in use in Persia in the 3rd century BC. To refer to the land located beyond the Indus River.5 Its definition has also always been accompanied by some confusion. it was associated with the lands of the Mughals, for example, in The History of Hindostan by Alexander Dow (1792) or in Memoirs of a Map of Hindostan or the Mughal Empire (1793) by Rennell.6 Were it mentioned only when ? North India (the south being called the Deccan) or did it equate to the entire subcontinent, as it did on maps of the British Empire until the 1840s?7 And then the word 'Hindu' itself in the complex of Hindustan poses a difficulty of interpretation. Gave. It had also changed as everything around it had changed. From being a geographical and ethnic term, it became a religious term, as in the late nineteenth century slogan 'Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan' that linked national identity to a language, a religious sect and a region, or As we will see later, in the Hindutva of radical political activist Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, published in 1923, Sanskritized Hindusthan (Persian-sthan and Sanskrit-sthan both mean 'place'), which refers to the land of Hindus, hence the people To, and no more than that. To a river.8

4At the time of independence, the names Bharat, India, Al-Hind and Hindustan existed together to designate the Indian subcontinent. Those who, like Nehru, used them together understood their differences and knew how to explain their contrasting uses, even if, given the complex history of each, they were skeptical about the nature of their differences. Were in confusion. did not agree. They all agreed that their meaning and usage was context- and language-sensitive.

9 The first article reads: '(1) India, that is, India, shall be a Union of States. (2) State and (...)

10 It is written in Hindi translation: 'Bharat i.e. India will be a union of states.' See http://India.gov. ,

511In 1950, four years after the publication of Nehru's Discovery of India, the drafters of the constitutions of the larger of the two successor states of British India decided how the country should be known. In the opening article of the Constitution of India he wrote: 'India, that is, Bharat, shall be a Union of States.'9 Two names: one, India, associated with the foreigners whose rule was coming to an end; Second, India (Sanskrit Bharat, also called Bharatavarsha) is considered the original because it is found in ancient Sanskrit literature. From now on, no other name other than these two will be used legally. In this juridical-political concept, India and Bharat were considered interchangeable terms.10

6What equation should we make between India and India in the Constitution? How did such a formula with a double name come about? This is the main question. My argument is that the decision of the Constituent Assembly should be understood as the outcome of a long historical process with deep cultural roots. I would also like to say briefly that this process did not stop with the coming into force of the Constitution.

Publication of 11 reports of the debates (proceedings) of the Constituent Assembly (9 December 1946 to 24 January 1950) (...)

7 I believe that the pre-existing definitions of India and Hindustan in various textual sources are important in examining how India can be compared to India. I present some of them in the first part of the paper, focusing particularly on the definition of India given by the Puranas. I then consider the shift from mythological India to colonial India, when the old toponym (British) became the 'indigenous' name for an emerging nation coming into contact with imported political and geographical conceptions of India. In the next section of the paper I will analyze the arguments put forward by  members of the Constitutional Assembly when adopting and debating the dual naming of the new nation. For this section I rely on the official recordings (in English) of the debates available on a website operated by the Government of India.11 Finally, I thought it interesting to give a sample of contemporary reactions based on information published in the printed press and others. Internet. This shows that the decision of the Constituent Assembly to give two names to its country remains a shocking matter for Indian citizens till date.The first name of India was Hindustan? you wisit my another websites>>>(famous)