Capitol of Thailand?

This site lists the nine gems of the Asian Zodiac as

Huh? “Mumbai”? When did this start? Why?

From this page::

[QUOTE]

In 1995, the ruling party in the government of the state of Maharashtra (of which Bombay was capital) announced that Bombay’s name would be changed to its Marathi name, Mumbai. The casual observer would assume that the name “Bombay” was a British corruption of the original “Mumbai”. However, this is not actually the case. In actuality, the Portuguese colony on the islands was called “Bom Bahia”, meaning “Good Bay” or “Good Harbor”. This colony, not any ancient settlement, was given to King Charles II of England as his dowry for marrying the Portuguese princess Catherine de Braganza in 1661, at which point the name was anglicized to “Bombay”.

The justification accepted by most people without question seems to be that Mumbai was the original name of some settlement in the area, so the name change was just a restoration of the original Indian name. For instance, http://www.mumbainet.com/renaming.htm claims that the native Kolis had “named the island Mumbai, after their divine protectress”. But all sources seem to be in agreement that there were seven islands until some point in the twentieth century, when the water between them was filled in. The seven islands inhabited by the Kolis were named Colaba, Mazagaon, Old Woman’s Island, Wadala, Mahim, Parel and Matunga-Sion. “Mumbai” was a derivation of the name “Mumbadevi”, a goddess worshipped by the Kolis. According to http://www.soulkurry.com/v2/ssi/print.php3?articleid=736, the Koli settlements were named after their patron deities, and (at least by the early 20th century) one of the settlements in Bombay was named Mumbadevi. This article also suggests that the goddess was sometimes known by the alternate name of Mumabai, but this name does not seem to have been attached to the city as a whole by anyone other than the Marathas.

Thus, the name Mumbai seems to be an attempt to respect the original inhabitants of the islands. But in the intervening centuries, Bombay had also become home to large numbers of Gujaratis, Gujarati Muslims, Goans, British, and Parsis, many of whom referred to it as Bombay. The particular form “Mumbai” seems to suggest that “Bombay” was a corruption of the “original” name. The change was first proposed as far back as 1982 by the municipal government. However, it was not until 1995 that the change was actually made. This was when the Hindu nationalist Shiv Sena party came to power in coalition with the BJP. The Shiv Sena had many policies that discriminated against non-Marathas and Muslims, and this name change seemed to be one more divisive measure. But the national government, though still controlled by the INC, approved the change readily, because of their weak standing for the upcoming elections. (They ended up losing to the BJP-led coalition anyway.)

[/QUOTE}

It is also Kolkata(Calcutta) and Chennai(Madras)

Mmm…The Black Hole of Kolkata, yes I think I can live with that.
A Chennai Beef Curry though… I don’t think so.

V