Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Extension_Ad6338 t1_iruxkeo wrote

>but the actual name for it locally is Bharat.

Along with आर्यवर्त (Aryavarta), भारतवर्ष (Bharatvarsha). I'm sick and tired of ignorants claiming there was no such as thing as India before 1947 when there was clearly a national identity/idea of भारत (Bharat) encompassing the entire Indian subcontinent during the Ancient times itself. The rulers of whatever dynasty/empire/kingdom was under power proclaimed themselves as rulers of India.

4

barath_s t1_iryu3is wrote

That's a very Delhi centric view.

Ask the cholas, cheras, pandyas, satvahanas, nagas etc if they claimed to be the rulers of india ?

India was not defined as being the same as your country necessarily. India as a nation defined by boundaries may not have existed necessarily but it did as an identity (one of many), culture, etc.

2