|
|
 |
Misconceptions about mumbai and bombay |
| |
Political parties have always cached in on the Marathi Manoos agenda and Mumbai of the Marathis 'wrongly' conceptualized philosophy. In 1995 when Bal Thakeray lead 4 decade old Shiv Sena came into power in the state, the first thing the party did was to rename Bombay as Mumbai and the controversy has never stopped since then. Now, his nephew Raj Thakeray's MNS party is harking back to the '60s trying to outdo the Shiv Sena. Like how the British Raj named every street of the old Bombay after a colonel officer, Shiv Sena and MNS are trying to rename all those streets as after either Chhatrapati Shivaji or vir Savarkar. Imagine 15 different places in the city being named after Chhatrapati Shivaji. However, if the change of names is cultural, so be it. There is nothing wrong in calling 'our' places by 'our' names but what the Sena and Raj Thakre (or Thakeray)'s MNS are violently trying to do here is to call 'their' places by 'their' names and 'their' means only Marathi and meant for Marathi Manoos and hence everybody else living in the city are outsiders. I mean, wow, by foolishly trying to force these on everyone, they are ignoring the history and the facts. Like Vir Sanghvi says, after perhaps a few decades or a generation, nobody even remember that the city was once called Bombay. But, time has to take it's own course. You can not force everybody to call it 'Mumbai' and 'Mumbai' only within a due course of time just because you have got no other broader issue to campaign in the upcoming elections. I am personally not against the renaming of places if they are done for cultural purposes. Being a Gujarati, I also call it 'Mumbai' like Marathis also do. North Indians call it 'Bambai', Parsis, Christians and many others still prefer to call it 'Bombay'; and so on everybody call it by their own way of pronouncing the city. However, the official name of a place should belong to the people living in there and hence if we combine Marathi and Gujarati speaking population in the city, it will be about 70% of entire city's population. However, some 'extremist' parties, as Sonia Gandhi recently pronounced them so, prefer to do this for their violent political motives and for no other 'positive' cause. I have tried to pen down some interesting misconceptions (I call them 'Myths') about the city versus with what is the actual truth. I am not against or with any community or regional beliefs but what I've written here are pure facts and hence they should be treated so as well. Kindly note that these are not what I 'personally' believe or want you to believe as well. If you have any diversified thoughts or you think any of the myth or truth I've pointed out are incorrect, please share the same via comments.
1. MYTH - Mumbai was built by Maharashtrians.
TRUTH - Bombay/Mumbai, the city, was built by the Portuguese and the British. Before them there were Koli fishermen who used to live in a village near the temple of Mumbadevi (Maha Amba) and the village was called Mumbai. 2. MYTH - The original name of the city is Mumbai and not Bombay.
TRUTH - The city as to what we know as today's Mumbai was originally architect by Portuguese and later on renamed as Bombay by the British Raj. Portuguese used to call the town - Bombaim (meaning 'good bay'), still common in Portuguese use. 3. MYTH - Maharashtrians alone have played a key role in the development of what is today's mega city Mumbai.
TRUTH - Bombay's economic growth and development mainly can be credited to Parsis and Gujaratis. 4. MYTH - Mumbai is a part of Maharashtra even since it's birth.
TRUTH - Till 1960, Bombay city was a part of the erstwhile Bombay state and there was no Maharashtra into existence. Bombay state included the Western Gujarat (including Ahmadabad, Surat, Baroda) and Bombay city. Maharashtra state was formed after a violent movement lead by Samyukta Maharashtra Movement in 1960 and the Bombay state was partitioned into two parts - the Gujarati speaking parts were merged into the state of Gujarat and the Bombay city and some surrounding area including Thane were merged into the newly found state of Maharashtra. 5 districts from Hyderabad State (Now Andhra Pradesh) were also merged into the newly found Maharashtra state and one city from Madhyra Pradesh, Nagpur, was also merged into the new state of Maharashtra. Bombay Citizens' Committee, an advocacy group comprising of leading Gujarati industrialists lobbied for Bombay's independent status. On May 1, 1960, after a movement for a separate Marathi state turned violent (105 people were killed by police at Flora Fountain which itself got renamed later on at Hutatma Chowk), the State of Bombay was partitioned into the States of Gujarat and Maharashtra. 5. MYTH - Mumbai is a Maharashtrian name and hence we should call the city Mumbai and not Bombay.
TRUTH - Bombay city was a part of the erstwhile Bombay state which included Western Gujarat and Gujaratis used to call the city Mumbai and not Bombay. 6. MYTH - Mumbai has the highest number of migrants in entire India.
TRUTH - Delhi has the highest number of migrants in India. 4 out of every 10 residents in Delhi are migrants - the highest in the country. 7. MYTH - The majority of migrants coming to Mumbai city are from North India.
TRUTH - The majority of migrants coming to Mumbai city everyday are from Maharashtra's other parts itself. Maharashtra accounts for 37.5% of the city's migrant poopulation whereas Uttar Pradesh acounts for 24.3%. 8. MYTH - Marathis do not live outside of Maharashtra in a vast number.
TRUTH - Surat and Baroda (Vadodara) have approx. 10% Marathi residents. 9. MYTH - Majority of Indians migrate only to Mumbai.
TRUTH - 42 million Indians live in a state different from where they were born. 100 million Indians have left home over the last 15 years. 40% of India's migrants come to West Bengal, Delhi and Mumbai. 10. MYTH - Majority of people living in Mumbai are Marathis.
TRUTH - Approx. 50% of Mumbai residents are non-Marathis including about 20% Gujaratis. 11. MYTH - Marathis are the sons-of-the-soil of Mumbai.
TRUTH - The original residents of this place were Koli fishermen. Then came the Portuguese and the British and along came Parsis, Gujaratis and then Marathis. |
| |
posted on : Sunday October 11th, 2009 Under:The Story of India
Tags :
mumbai,
bombay,
bombay state,
bombay city,
mumbai city,
shiv sena,
MNS,
mumbai myth,
|
|
|
34 Comments |
| |
these are so true...amazing yet de facto points out there about mumbai's wrongly interpreted
conceptions
|
| |
posted by :
saurabh shukla
Saturday October 17th, 2009
|
| |
Dude, get a life! Mumbai is the capital of Maharashtra. And FYI - Gujjus are also outsiders.
|
| |
posted by :
Piyush
Monday October 19th, 2009
|
| |
everybody is an outsider in mumbai including marathis
|
| |
posted by :
Rohan Singh
Wednesday October 21st, 2009
|
| |
ya ,gujjus are outsider that your mentality but we still believe that maharastrain are very
close to our heart---RAKESH from RAJKOT-GUJARaT
|
| |
posted by :
rakesh
Friday December 4th, 2009
|
| |
all indian are equal.
everyone has right to move and live anywhere in india.
|
| |
posted by :
sahil
Saturday December 12th, 2009
|
| |
this article is not about gujjus being outsider in mumbai or south indian or north indian or punjabi
being an outsider in mumbai. It's about the fact that even marathis are outsiders in mumbai and they
dont own mumbai.
|
| |
posted by :
Revathi
Saturday January 2nd, 2010
|
| |
concept of myth's and truth's are quite helpful 4 knowledge.
|
| |
posted by :
Nirzari
Monday January 18th, 2010
|
| |
There is no such myth that Mumbai was built by maharashtrians.
Original name of Mumbai was
Mumbapuri, where Agri and Koli population lived.
Third point is not a Myth too. Nobody believes
this statement. Mumbai was built by Britishers and Parsis. Even Gujratis have used Mumbai only to
earn money. They have no loyalty with Mumbai.
Mumbai WAS part of swarajya, which included more
There is no such myth that Mumbai was built by maharashtrians.
Original name of Mumbai was
Mumbapuri, where Agri and Koli population lived.
Third point is not a Myth too. Nobody believes
this statement. Mumbai was built by Britishers and Parsis. Even Gujratis have used Mumbai only to
earn money. They have no loyalty with Mumbai.
Mumbai WAS part of swarajya, which included
karnataka, maharashtra, gujrat, MP, Orissa, Bihar, UP, Rajasthan and Haryana. Swarajya was ruled by
Maratha Peshwas. Gujratis never owned Mumbai. A futile attempt by MURDERER MORU was done for it
though.
Gujratis called it Mumbai because Mharashtrians called it Mumbai. Original name was
Mumbapuri, which was purely marathi.
Marathis do live outside Maharashtra, but lesser than the
number of outsiders that live in Mumbai alone.
Majority of migrants migrate to Mumbai is cent
percent true. Its not a myth.
Last point is too ridiculus to laugh at - do you say that the
fishermen were Gujrati? or Bihari? or Mallu? NO. They WERE marathi. Marathis ARE sons of Mumbai
soil.
Another typical GUJJU propoganda with lots of lies and manipulations. I have versions
of such Bihari, Mallu and Tamil propogandas too. Marwadis have done major business in Kolkata, but
they never claim ownership of the city. Telugus are major in Bangalore to make it IT capital. They
dont claim ownership of the city. Being against MARATHI in Mumbai DOES NOT MAKE YOU
SECULAR.
Grow up and get some life.
I know you would delete my post. But still yuo will
NEVER be able to merge Mumbai into Gujrat. Murderer Moru's come and go. Mumbai belongs to
son-of-soil Marathis forever.
less
|
| |
posted by :
maddy
Monday February 22nd, 2010
|
| |
India- Flaunts of being linguistic and Secular....United by the above???? i feel poisoned by it!!!
|
| |
posted by :
marie
Wednesday March 17th, 2010
|
| |
maddy boy you're wrong. there was no such 'swarajya' which consisted all of haryana, gujarat,
rajasthan, UP, rajasthan, orissa and maharashtra. There was no such rule. maratha peshwas only ruled
part of maharashtra, goa and some portion of karnataka for that matter.
|
| |
posted by :
Rick_decay
Wednesday March 17th, 2010
|
| |
Maddy, nobody is talking about merging Mumbai into Gujarat. I've written what it was and not what it
will be. Mumbai is the heart of Maharashtra. So perhaps you have misunderstood the article.
|
| |
posted by :
Kunal
Friday March 19th, 2010
|
| |
Hey ...
The FACT is that Maharashtrians and Gujaratis were a part of a big united state
called The Bombay State and in 1960 they were divided solely on language basis....
So its
only been about 50 years since Gujarat and Maharastra came into existence. Both gujaratis and
marathis settled in Mumbai 60 years ago since it was the capital of The Bombay State and have ... more
Hey ...
The FACT is that Maharashtrians and Gujaratis were a part of a big united state
called The Bombay State and in 1960 they were divided solely on language basis....
So its
only been about 50 years since Gujarat and Maharastra came into existence. Both gujaratis and
marathis settled in Mumbai 60 years ago since it was the capital of The Bombay State and have
continued to live in Mumbai......nobody "came" to mumbai .....except maybe the south indians or
north indians who came here for business work etc.
Lets stop fighting over Mumbai.....and
lets all get a life .....
Mumbai belongs to Both Marathis and Gujaratis ....and we should
co-exist mutually just as we did 50 years ago .....
less
|
| |
posted by :
Suchi
Tuesday April 27th, 2010
|
| |
We geeting into this discussion, dont you all think we are making ourselves "bloody indians". Grow
mature man... behave like Indians.
|
| |
posted by :
Amit
Thursday August 19th, 2010
|
| |
4.You liar.Mumbai was never part of gujrat.The so called bombay state included maharashtra also.Get
your facts right
|
| |
posted by :
Ratnesh
Monday September 13th, 2010
|
| |
if 50% r non marathis then 50 % marathis..majority means highest number ..
tyta is more
than guj.more than rajasthani..
it is not more than all collective pop of non marathis
|
| |
posted by :
Ratnesh
Monday September 13th, 2010
|
| |
5.Mumbai is a maharashtrian name,period.
|
| |
posted by :
Ratnesh
Monday September 13th, 2010
|
| |
The koli fihsermen were marathi only..
|
| |
posted by :
Ratnesh
Monday September 13th, 2010
|
| |
2.Marathi koli ppl who were first to live..used to call it mumbai.so it makes the name also as
"mumbai"
|
| |
posted by :
Ratnesh
Monday September 13th, 2010
|
| |
7.migrant from other states are highest.There is no question of counting in house migration as there
is no issue with that
|
| |
posted by :
Ratnesh
Monday September 13th, 2010
|
| |
Dear Ratnesh,
Where have I written that Mumbai was a part of Gujarat? The states of Gujarat
and Maharashtra came into existence in 1960 after the movement for a separate state for Marathi
turned violent. The state of Bombay included Gujarati, Marathi and even some Kannada speaking
districts and regions.
|
| |
posted by :
Kunal Pandya
Tuesday September 21st, 2010
|
| |
Kunal Sir,
Anyway it was a nice article and I think we shouldn't now spend time on
who Built Mumbai. Lets live in harmony. How ever, city is overpopulated. I think it would be wise to
lessen migration wherever it is from MH/UP or other parts.
|
| |
posted by :
Utpal
Tuesday November 16th, 2010
|
| |
You have contradicted yourself on one occassion atleast.
Maharashtra accounts for 37.5% of
the city's migrant poopulation whereas Uttar Pradesh acounts for 24.3%. That is what you say. So
your opinion is that 37.5 % is majority.
Approx. 50% of Mumbai residents are non-Marathis
including about 20% Gujaratis. 50% Residents are Non-Marathis that means 50% are Marathis. ... more
You have contradicted yourself on one occassion atleast.
Maharashtra accounts for 37.5% of
the city's migrant poopulation whereas Uttar Pradesh acounts for 24.3%. That is what you say. So
your opinion is that 37.5 % is majority.
Approx. 50% of Mumbai residents are non-Marathis
including about 20% Gujaratis. 50% Residents are Non-Marathis that means 50% are Marathis. Now you
say they are not the majority.
Kunal sir, if 37.5% is majority why 50% can't be a
majority.
less
|
| |
posted by :
Utpal
Tuesday November 16th, 2010
|
| |
I do agree that SS/MNS some time do excess. They are more violence prone than they should be but it
seems from your article that most of what is 'bad' in the city can be attributed to
Marathis.
How many Policemen stationed in Mumbai who got killed in 26/11 were
Parasis/Gujaratis. Answer would be a big Zero.
If putting up a big Industry which
certainly contributes... more
I do agree that SS/MNS some time do excess. They are more violence prone than they should be but it
seems from your article that most of what is 'bad' in the city can be attributed to
Marathis.
How many Policemen stationed in Mumbai who got killed in 26/11 were
Parasis/Gujaratis. Answer would be a big Zero.
If putting up a big Industry which
certainly contributes to economy and making money in turn is what the greatest contribution to
development then yes the Mumbai certainly would be developed by Gujaratis. But unfortunately that is
not the only thing that drives a city. Businessmen can't be Policemen, Administrators. Teachers etc.
The city was built by everyone Gujaratis, Marathis, Parasis, NI, Not one group.
less
|
| |
posted by :
Utpal
Tuesday November 16th, 2010
|
| |
All marathiness is crap. They only washed utensils in Gujarati and Parsi houses, worked in mills
built by Non Maharashtrians and rubbed tobbacco till the goons took Bombay away from Gujarat.Bomaby
deserved to be with Gujarat. As for no non-marathi getting killed on 26/11, as the adminstration why
others don't apply in the Maharashtra police force.
|
| |
posted by :
Bhavesh
Sunday May 1st, 2011
|
| |
@Utpal - You should better read the figures correctly. 37.5% of all migration is from parts of
Maharashtra itself. It does not mean 37.5.% are marathis in Mumbai. The overall 100% ration taken
here is for all 'migrants' to the city.
And this is not a Marathi vs Gujarati blog, so all
you guys should stop getting into comparisons. This is not a community related article. Also, i... more
@Utpal - You should better read the figures correctly. 37.5% of all migration is from parts of
Maharashtra itself. It does not mean 37.5.% are marathis in Mumbai. The overall 100% ration taken
here is for all 'migrants' to the city.
And this is not a Marathi vs Gujarati blog, so all
you guys should stop getting into comparisons. This is not a community related article. Also, in a
Maharashtra ruled city, how can you expect non-marathis to be in key role positions in government
posts such as politics, police, fire brigade and other government offices? Have you ever seen any
accountable percentage of marathis in police department of any other state of India? State
government jobs are majorly given to locals. So your arguments are simply void.
less
|
| |
posted by :
Kunal Pandya
Sunday June 12th, 2011
|
| |
well the erstwhile bombay state was actually bombay presidency which included gujarat ,maharastra
and goa and even parts of present day karnataka. the regions in maharashtra are now known as western
maharashtra,konkan ,north maharashtra used to fall under bombay presidency.Marathwada and vidarbha
were added in 1960 as they were marathi speaking areas.
|
| |
posted by :
lalit
Wednesday July 13th, 2011
|
| |
With regards to point 11. MYTH - Marathis are the sons-of-the-soil of Mumbai.
It is a
mis-conception that the kolis are the only original residents of Bombay , besides the Kolis the
East-Indian community are also the orignal residents of Bombay . Like fishing are the main
occupation of the Kolis , farming was the occupation of the East Indians , hence request you to
kindl... more
With regards to point 11. MYTH - Marathis are the sons-of-the-soil of Mumbai.
It is a
mis-conception that the kolis are the only original residents of Bombay , besides the Kolis the
East-Indian community are also the orignal residents of Bombay . Like fishing are the main
occupation of the Kolis , farming was the occupation of the East Indians , hence request you to
kindly change the truth .
less
|
| |
posted by :
Kenny Lobo
Thursday August 25th, 2011
|
| |
Dear all writer be respectable with Maharashtrians dont come in Maharashtra for begging please be
settled in your own state and do whatever including begging.Just respect culture finally we
Maharashtrians are the king of our territory and Mr.Blog writer i appreciate your way about Gujarati
community have played significant role.It is true that Gujarati played important role not Bhaiyas... more
Dear all writer be respectable with Maharashtrians dont come in Maharashtra for begging please be
settled in your own state and do whatever including begging.Just respect culture finally we
Maharashtrians are the king of our territory and Mr.Blog writer i appreciate your way about Gujarati
community have played significant role.It is true that Gujarati played important role not Bhaiyas
from UP and BHIHAR
less
|
| |
posted by :
Abhijit
Wednesday November 2nd, 2011
|
| |
I was studying Karnataka where i learnt Kannada,i can speak and read it here the only one thing is
that give respect to the local culture.Just keep in mind the villages near to Mumbai IE where
Navimumbai
they are all basically Marathi it indicates that the first settlement in Mumbai
done by Maharashtrian not Gujaratis.
|
| |
posted by :
Abhijit
Wednesday November 2nd, 2011
|
| |
The original inhabitants of BOMBAY are the East Indians of Bombay, and for your information there
are a fair number of Kolis who are East Indians.
Show a single ORIGINAL village within
bombay that is NOT an East Indian village....!!!
chek out the villages of East Indians of
Bombay
www.east-indians.net
|
| |
posted by :
Prem Moraes
Friday November 25th, 2011
|
| |
@Prem Moraes .... thanks for such information
"These people are of the original Marathi
ethnic group"
|
| |
posted by :
prashant
Monday January 2nd, 2012
|
| |
http://www.east-indians.com/ .... the best
|
| |
posted by :
prashant
Monday January 2nd, 2012
|
| |
all myths are now baseless hahahaha.
for
Rick_decay
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_empire
|
| |
posted by :
prashant
Monday January 2nd, 2012
|
| |
I am born and brought up in Bangalore. I am a complete Bangalorean but both my Parents are from
Rajasthan and my mother tongue is marwari. I have always treated Bangalore as my own city and
respected the kannada culture. Infact I call myself a Kannada Person because of my eating habits.
Unfortunately the Kannada localities have always treated us as outsiders and have always treated and... more
I am born and brought up in Bangalore. I am a complete Bangalorean but both my Parents are from
Rajasthan and my mother tongue is marwari. I have always treated Bangalore as my own city and
respected the kannada culture. Infact I call myself a Kannada Person because of my eating habits.
Unfortunately the Kannada localities have always treated us as outsiders and have always treated and
blamed us for looting the Karnataka's economy. Its very easy for people to brand migrants as
outsiders but you do not know how much difficult it is to survive when you are treated as an
Outsider in your own country. Always tell yourself when you feel jealous of the achievements of
non-mumbaikars that let me also work hard and carve a niche for myself and say to your self all
Indians are my brothers.
less
|
| |
posted by :
Manish
Thursday February 2nd, 2012
|
| |
|
