The Borgi Bogeyman: Why renaming Fort William to Vijay Durg might be a misstep in Bengal | India News

“Baire Theke Borgi Aashe,
Niyom Kore Proti Maashe,
AMI or ACHI, Tumi or Tunic,
Bondhu Ebar Khela Hobe “.
(“The Borgis come from outside, every month without fail. But I am here, and you will stay. Friend, now is the time for the game to begin”).
In the political atmosphere full of Bengal, the story is not only remembered, it is exercised as a weapon. During the Western Bengal elections of 2021, the Khela Hobe viral political song, concentrated by the Debangshu Bhattacharya of TMC, framed the BJP as strangers, attracting a direct parallel between the marathha pyllectors (Borgis) and the BJP’s carpenter of the Hindi Belt . The message was clear: Bengala had suffered the wrath of the ‘strangers’ before, and would not allow the story to be repeated.
Now, in 2025, the story has completed the circle. The Indian Army’s decision to change the name of Fort William, the bastion of his eastern command in Kolkata, to Vijay Durg It may seem harmless to non -Bengali, but in Western Bengala, it could cause a nest of hornets.
What was destined to be a symbolic step towards decolonization could reopen centennial wounds. While the government’s intention may have been to honor Indian military heritage on colonial relics, for the average Bengali, this name change is not just about shaking the British domain, it feels like rubbing salt in an old wound inflicted by the Marathhas.
By lowering a strength of British power with the name of a Marathha fortress, the BJP could have involuntarily delivered Mamata Banerjee and the Trinamool Congress (TMC) a powerful electoral weapon, one rooted in the historical presentation and the Bengali identity policy.
Decolonization or historical insensitivity?

Rename the institutions of the colonial era is a politically lucrative movement. It aligns perfectly with the narrative ‘Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav’ of the BJP, erecting the British influences while glorifying the ‘indigenous’ history. From Rajpath’s name change to Kartavya Haper to the review of military regiments, the government has followed a clear agenda: India must claim its past from its colonial lords.
But history is not a monolith, and decolonization is not a unique size. A name that resonates with pride in Maharashtra might not evoke the same feeling in Bengal.
The context matters. And in Bengala, the name Vijay Durg is not a resistance emblem: it is a historical terrestrial mine that expects to exploit.

Borgi’s invasions: a horror chapter
To understand why this name change is obliged to be incendiary, one must review a chapter of history that still pursues Bengala’s cultural memory: Borgi’s invasions (1741-1751).
The Marathhas, led by Raghoji Bhonsle and their generals, launched a horror campaign of a decade in Bengal. The official pretext was to extract Chauth, a form of tribute, but in practice, it was a ruthless looting. The Borgis (Marathha Raiders) swept through the villages as an unstoppable devastation force, burning homes, looting barns, raping women, marrying men and enslaving children.
The ravages they caused was so immense that Alde Khan, Bengal’s Nawab, was forced to restructure the entire defensive strategy of the province. After ten years of tireless war, he finally pushed them back, but Bengala was mistreated, his economy paralyzed and his people traumatized.
Unlike many other historical invasions, Borgi’s raids did not fader simply in the dark. The memory of those terrifying years was interwoven in Bengali folklore. Even today, Bengali mothers invoke Borgi as a Bogey man to scare his children in obedience.
A famous popular song of the time remains recorded in cultural consciousness:
“Khoka Ghumalo, for Juralo, Borgi Elo dishem,
Bulbulita Dhan Kheychhe, Khajna I owe Kise? “
(“The baby sleeps, the people shut up, but the Borgis have arrived. The sparrows have eaten the grains; how will we pay the tax?”)
This is not just history, this is a generational trauma. And the trauma has a long memory.
A political objective?

For a party that has struggled to gain deep advances in Bengal, this name change is nothing less than a strategic error. The TMC will undoubtedly capitalize this moment, using it to strengthen its Bangali Amitidate narrative (Bengali identity).
With the elections of the Bengal Assembly established by 2026, the time of this name change could not have been worse for the BJP. He gives the TMC a new meeting point, allowing Mamata Banerje to frame BJP as strangers once again, a problem that helped her to tithe to the Saffron Party in the state elections of 2021.
Mamata Banerjee will now have the perfect opportunity to ask:

For the BJP, these are difficult questions to answer.

Bengal’s own heroes: the alternative that was ignored
Bengal has never been signed to the idea of ​​a general hero, a god or a ruler. Hinduism itself, in its vast complexity, resists uniformity. Unlike monotheistic traditions, it thrives in diversity: multiple gods, multiple texts, multiple philosophies and multiple paths towards salvation. By extension, HindutvaThe attempt to impose a unique historical narrative, focused on a handful of chosen figures, collides with the deeply rooted pluralism of Bengal.
If the idea was to honor the maritime legacy of India, why not look closer to home?
Bengala had his own naval rulers, figures such as Shashka, the first independent king of Bengal, who ruled in the seventh century and maintained a formidable naval force. The blades also had a strong naval presence that extended to the Southeast Asia. Even in the medieval period, Bengal’s ports, such as Tamralipta and Saptagram, played a crucial role in trade and maritime defense.
If Fort William had to be renowned, why not choose a name linked to Bengal’s own Naval History, instead of glorifying an invasive force?
Instead of erasing a colonial shadow, the new name throws a darker and more divisive one, one that revives painful memories instead of promoting pride. And with the 2026 Bengal elections on the horizon, where each cultural symbol becomes a battlefield, this renowned could have given Mamata Banerje a very loose ball.