As Ahmedabad prepares to host the 2030 Commonwealth Games—one of the largest global sporting events ever allotted to an Indian city—a deeper, more fundamental debate has resurfaced in public consciousness: Should Ahmedabad be rechristened as Karnavati, discarding the imprint of an Islamic invader and returning to the civilizational identity that predates centuries of conquest, conflict, and cultural erasure?
This question is neither new nor merely symbolic. It is firmly rooted in India’s broader political, cultural, and historical journey—particularly in a national context where cities like Allahabad, Faizabad, Mughalsarai, Gurgaon, and others have reclaimed names that reflect their indigenous origins. At stake is not only the matter of nomenclature, but also the politics of memory, the reclamation of historical truth, and the assertion of a cultural identity suppressed during the long arc of medieval rule. With 2030 on the horizon and India eager to present an assertive, confident civilizational identity to the world, the question becomes sharper: If not now, then when?
A City Older Than Its Name
Long before Sultan Ahmed Shah established the city’s modern foundations in 1411 and stamped his name upon it, the region was a thriving center of Hindu culture and polity. The area known today as Ahmedabad was historically identified as Ashaval or Ashapalli, ruled by Bhil tribes, and later redeveloped as Karnavati by the Solanki (Chaulukya) rulers, most notably by King Karna, after whom the name originates. It was a flourishing center of Jainism, Shaivism, and Vaishnavism, dotted with exquisitely carved stepwells, temples, forts, and learning centers.
To pretend that history began in 1411 is to deliberately erase centuries of Hindu civilizational presence. Yet this is precisely what naming conventions across India often did—an outcome of conquest, not consensus.
0
The Politics of Place Names
India’s post-colonial rediscovery of its heritage has often traveled through the route of place-name rectification. Whether it was Bombay becoming Mumbai, Calcutta becoming Kolkata, or Madras transitioning into Chennai, each change symbolized a rejection of colonial or imposed identities. In recent years, the conversation has widened to include places renamed by medieval invaders, whose motivations ranged from political dominance to outright religious suppression.
Ahmedabad occupies a unique place in this debate. While the city has grown into a symbol of Gujarat’s entrepreneurial zeal and modern development, its name still reflects the imprint of Sultan Ahmed Shah—whose establishment of the city was not an act of benevolent patronage but one of political consolidation following military conquest.
This is where critics argue the hardest: Why retain a name that came from an invader whose rule was not foundational to the region’s native identity, but rather disruptive of it? Why should a modern Indian city, especially one aspiring to global recognition, continue to carry the legacy of conquest?
A Global Event, A Global Announcement
The hosting of the 2030 Commonwealth Games in Ahmedabad marks a watershed moment. Not only does it elevate Ahmedabad to an international stage, but it also provides India with a rare opportunity to showcase its civilizational continuity and cultural confidence. For many supporters of the name change, this is the perfect moment to make a definitive civilizational statement: a city rooted in a millennia-old Indian heritage deserves a name that reflects that heritage.
Renaming Ahmedabad to Karnavati ahead of the Commonwealth Games, they argue, would signal to the world that India is not shy about reclaiming history—especially when the world’s eyes are set on the nation’s urban transformation and cultural renaissance.
The Pushback: A Question of Timing, Priorities, and Political Will
Predictably, the idea has its critics. Some argue that renaming cities is a diversion from governance issues; others claim that Ahmedabad has built a global brand value under its current name and should not jeopardize it. A section of historians warn against “rewriting history,” while political actors—especially those representing interests aligned with older power structures—accuse the movement of being communal.
However, such opposition often ignores three crucial points:
If India can invest billions in building infrastructure for the Commonwealth Games, it can surely make a principled decision about the cultural identity of the host city.
The Legal and Administrative History of the Demand
The demand to rename Ahmedabad to Karnavati is not an improvised post-2014 political fad. It has deep roots. In 1990, the then BJP-ruled Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation passed a resolution demanding that the city revert to Karnavati. However, the proposal remained stuck for decades due to the absence of political alignment between the state and Centre.
Since 2014, as place-name corrections have gained momentum with the political climate shifting in favor of cultural reclamation, the demand has re-emerged stronger than ever. With both the state government and the Centre now more aligned, the political feasibility of the name change is higher than at any point in the past.
Cultural Erasure and the Need for Restoration
One of the core arguments in favor of renaming the city is the question of cultural erasure. Across India, medieval rulers systematically renamed cities, towns, and temples as part of a broader project of domination. These new names were not neutral—they symbolized conquest, triumph, and religious supremacy.
Thus, retaining such names in independent India—especially 77 years after freedom—raises an uncomfortable contradiction. If colonial imprints deserved removal, why should medieval Islamic invader imprints be treated differently? Why should names representing conquest be preserved at the cost of culture?
Supporters argue that acknowledging cultural erasure is the first step to healing historical wounds. Just as India has revived ancient traditions, state borders, and cultural practices, renaming cities is part of a broader national project of restoring civilizational memory.
Ahmedabad’s Identity Today: Modern, Yet Deeply Civilizational
The irony of Ahmedabad’s current identity is unmistakable. Despite carrying the name of a medieval sultan, the city’s soul is overwhelmingly shaped by its Hindu, Jain, and indigenous history. The architecture that tourists flock to—Adalaj stepwell, Modhera Sun Temple (outside the city but culturally linked), the Jain temples, the Patan stepwells, the Navratri celebrations, the garba traditions—are quintessentially indigenous.
Even modern symbols—the Sabarmati Riverfront, the Gandhi Ashram, the textile mills, and the new-age infrastructure—echo India’s civilizational ethos of innovation, resilience, and truth.
This makes the present name feel even more disconnected from the city’s lived identity.
A Name Is Not Just a Name
Names shape memory. They shape narratives. They influence how a city is perceived, how its history is told, and how its future is imagined. Changing Ahmedabad’s name to Karnavati is not about erasing history; it is about prioritizing the correct history.
It is about acknowledging that Ahmedabad’s identity long predates Ahmed Shah.
It is about giving future generations a city name that reflects pride, not conquest.
It is about aligning the city’s official name with its civilizational character, in the same way Varanasi, Ayodhya, Ujjain, and Kashi echo their ancient lineage.
Should the Renaming Happen Before 2030?
The answer, many argue, is a resounding yes.
Economics and Branding: A Misplaced Fear
Opponents often warn that renaming cities leads to logistical disruption, economic confusion, or loss of brand value. Yet, studies across multiple countries—including India—have shown that such transitions are smooth when executed with administrative precision.
Moreover, branding depends on a city’s economic strength, not its name. Bengaluru remains a tech capital; Mumbai is still India’s financial hub; Chennai’s manufacturing power did not diminish with its name change.
In fact, renaming Ahmedabad to Karnavati ahead of the Commonwealth Games could enhance global interest by sparking discussions on India’s cultural revival.
The Sentiment of the People
Public sentiment in Gujarat has long been inclined toward restoring the old name. From cultural organizations to political parties, from historians to civil society groups, the demand has consistent local support. Unlike some top-down symbolic changes, this one emerges organically from regional identity and cultural pride.
The younger generation, especially those aware of India’s decolonization journey, increasingly sees the name “Ahmedabad” as an artifact of medieval subjugation—out of sync with the aspirations of a resurgent India.
A Moment of Civilizational Confidence
India today stands at the cusp of a cultural resurgence. From reconstructing the Ram Temple in Ayodhya to restoring ancient temples, reasserting national heroes, and revitalizing classical arts, the country is reclaiming narratives lost to time and conquest.
Renaming Ahmedabad to Karnavati is an extension of this resurgence—a symbolic yet powerful assertion that India is not ashamed of its civilizational roots.
Hosting the Commonwealth Games in Karnavati, not Ahmedabad, would send a message to the world that India celebrates its past with pride and welcomes the future with confidence.
The Political Equation
While the renaming proposal is cultural at its core, its political dimensions are undeniable. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has historically supported such reclamation efforts, and with the party governing both Gujarat and the Centre, the window for action is politically ripe.
Opposition parties, most notably the Congress, often resist such proposals, labeling them communal or unnecessary. Yet this line of criticism is increasingly losing resonance, especially as historical facts become better known and citizens embrace the idea of civilizational justice.
By Nilabh Krishna
(The content of this article reflects the views of writer and contributor, not necessarily those of the publisher and editor. All disputes are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of competent courts and forums in Delhi/New Delhi only)
Leave Your Comment