Cities with Multiple Names: Mumbai/Bombay, Beijing/Peking and More

Many of the world's greatest cities are known by two or more completely different names, depending on who is speaking and when. These dual names are not simply different translations of the same word but fundamentally different designations rooted in different languages, cultures, and historical periods. The tension between competing city names often reflects deeper political and cultural conflicts.

Introduction

The phenomenon of cities with multiple names, known as exonyms and endonyms, is one of the most politically sensitive areas of geography. Choosing which name to use can signal political allegiance, cultural identity, or historical awareness. Calling a city by its colonial name versus its indigenous name is never a neutral act.

Overview

• Exonym: A name used by outsiders (e.g., Bombay, Peking)
• Endonym: A name used by locals (e.g., Mumbai, Beijing)
• Reasons: Colonialism, romanization changes, political renaming

Cities accumulate multiple names through several processes. Colonial powers often impose new names or distort local names. Romanization systems change, producing different English spellings (Peking vs. Beijing). Political revolutions prompt deliberate renaming. And different language communities simply develop their own names independently over centuries.

The United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names recommends using endonyms (local names) in international contexts, but practice varies widely. Media organizations, map publishers, and governments each make their own decisions, and usage often lags decades behind official name changes.

Notable Examples

• Mumbai/Bombay: Renamed 1995 (India)
• Beijing/Peking: Romanization change (not renaming)
• Istanbul/Constantinople: Changed 1930 (Turkey)
• Kolkata/Calcutta: Renamed 2001 (India)
• Ho Chi Minh City/Saigon: Renamed 1976 (Vietnam)

Mumbai replaced Bombay as the official English name in 1995, driven by the Shiv Sena political party which argued that Bombay was a colonial corruption. The name Mumbai derives from Mumba, a local goddess. However, the city's financial institutions, including the Bombay Stock Exchange, retained their original names, and many residents still use Bombay in casual speech.

Beijing and Peking are not different names but different romanization systems for the same Chinese characters (北京). Peking uses the older Wade-Giles system based on southern Chinese pronunciation, while Beijing uses the modern Pinyin system based on standard Mandarin. The change reflects a shift in romanization standards, not a political renaming.

Historical Context

• Colonial Era: European powers imposed or distorted local names
• Post-Colonial: Many cities reverted to pre-colonial names
• Romanization: Chinese, Japanese, Korean name spellings changed with new systems

The colonial era produced the largest wave of name distortions. British administrators anglicized Indian city names (Cawnpore to Kanpur, Benares to Varanasi), Portuguese traders created their own versions (Bombom to Bombay), and French colonizers renamed Vietnamese cities. Post-colonial governments have systematically reversed many of these changes.

The shift from Wade-Giles to Pinyin romanization in the late 1970s changed the English spelling of virtually every Chinese place name simultaneously. Peking became Beijing, Canton became Guangzhou, and Nanking became Nanjing. Unlike political renamings, these were not changes in the Chinese names themselves, only in how they were written in the Latin alphabet.

Cultural Impact

• Identity: Name choice signals cultural and political alignment
• Generational: Older generations often use older names
• Media: News organizations must make editorial decisions on name usage

Which name you use for a city can reveal your age, politics, and cultural orientation. Using Bombay versus Mumbai, Saigon versus Ho Chi Minh City, or Burma versus Myanmar signals different relationships to colonialism, nationalism, and generational identity. These naming choices are never truly neutral.

Media organizations face difficult editorial decisions. Most have adopted official endonyms (Mumbai, Beijing, Istanbul) but make exceptions for very well-known historical references. No major English-language publication calls the Byzantine Empire the Istanbul-based empire, but all now use Istanbul for the modern city.

Modern Changes

• Chennai/Madras: Renamed 2001
• Thiruvananthapuram/Trivandrum: Renamed 1991
• Yangon/Rangoon: Renamed 1989
• Nuuk/Godthab: Renamed 1979

City renaming continues into the present. India has been particularly active, with multiple cities reverting to pre-colonial names: Madras to Chennai, Calcutta to Kolkata, Bangalore to Bengaluru, and Pondicherry to Puducherry. Each change reasserts indigenous linguistic heritage over colonial English.

Some name changes remain contested. Turkey's renaming of Kurdish, Armenian, and Greek place names has been criticized as cultural erasure. Conversely, Greenland's shift from Danish names (Godthab) to Kalaallisut names (Nuuk) is widely seen as a positive step toward indigenous self-determination.

Key Facts

• Cities acquire multiple names through colonialism, romanization changes, and political renaming.
• Mumbai replaced Bombay in 1995; Beijing replaced Peking as the standard romanization in the late 1970s.
• The UN recommends using endonyms (local names) in international contexts.
• Name choice can signal political allegiance, cultural identity, and generational differences.
• India has been particularly active in reverting city names to pre-colonial forms.

Fun Facts

• The Bombay Stock Exchange kept its name even after the city was officially renamed Mumbai.
• Peking duck and Peking University retain the older romanization in English.
• Istanbul's post office returned mail addressed to Constantinople after the 1930 name change.
• Ho Chi Minh City residents commonly use Saigon in everyday speech, especially for the city center.

Final Thoughts

Cities with multiple names are linguistic battlegrounds where history, politics, and identity collide. Every alternate name represents a different perspective on the same place: colonial versus indigenous, traditional versus modern, outsider versus local. As the world slowly shifts toward endonyms, the older names do not disappear; they persist in institutions, in older generations' speech, and in the historical record, ensuring that cities remain multilayered palimpsests of naming.