Stefan Buecker wrote on 07/06/11 at 17:17:46:
Savielly Tartakower's booklet Indisch (Berlin 1924) has the subtitle "Aus der Werkstätte einer Eröffnung" [from an opening's workshop (laboratory?)]. Instead of giving theory as the established result of masters' practice, Tartakower's approach was different. He presented the "Indian Defences" (in fact a pre-1900 term, but rarely used) as something fresh and still under construction. Tartakower frankly admitted that the codification of the Indian Systems was incomplete and invented new names on the flight. The small book was like an invitation to look an opening theoretician over the shoulder, watching him at work.
According to the last sentence of the work, Indisch was a "Baedeker [a travel-guide] for explorers of India". It will be the main task of this thread to document changes in the nomenclature of the Indian Systems, through decades and languages. There will be months when I post nothing, but when I see an interesting name (like "Ur-Indisch" in Hypermoderne Schachpartie), I'll write an entry here, giving source and author.
Members are invited to contribute early sightings of names of various Indian Defences in chess literature. For example, which was the oldest source where "Grünfeld's Defence" was converted into "Grünfeld Indian"?
Names of Indian openings are the main topic here, but other opening names may be debated, too. Many openings have more than one name (1.Nc3 has ten, at least). If you want to rename the Muzio Gambit in Polerio Gambit, fine. But I can live just as well with a line named after a kibitzer. Whether a name is accepted or not, only time can tell, and I don't see it as my task to decide which is the "right" one.
In my library I have many of the great tournament books from the period between the wars. One of the most interesting is that of Teplitz-Schoenau 1922, published in 1923. It contains a 26-page survey of the openings by Gruenfeld and Becker. All the 1 d4 Nf6 openings are classified merely as Damenbauereroeffnung except for, guess what - Gruenfeld Verteidigung!
Alekhine wrote an opening survey for New York 1924. There he mentions the "Gruenfeld defence" but does not seem to distinguish between the other "Indian defences".
Then next tournament book with any extensive opening survey is that of Kecskemet 1927 by Alekhine, Kmoch, Maroczy and Nimzowitsch. There we find:
damenidische (this includes some Nimzo lines)
koenigsindische
halbindische (this also includes some Nimzo lines)
Vollindishe (double fianchetto)
In the book of Bad Kissingen 1928, Tartakower uses the terms:
Ost-Indisch (2..g6)
West-Indische (1 d4 Nf6 2 Nf3 b6)
Neu-Indisch (2...e6)
Bogoljubowsche Variante (3...Bb4+)
Nimzowitsch Variante (3 Nc3 Bb4)
Confusingly there is also mention of Altindisch (apparently ...g6 set-ups) and Neu-Indisch (...e6 set-ups)!
In the Karlsbad 1929 book the terminology is the familiar confusion.
Yet by the time we reach Bled 1931, compiled by Hans Mueller, the terminology of the openings index has become recognizably "modern":
Nimzo-Indisch
Damenindisch
Koenigsindisch
Perhaps someone can access the whole series of "Modern Chess Openings" in one of the major chess libraries to help pin down the turning point when the terminology began to stabilise into the current usage.
Pages: 
Nomenclature of Openings: Indian Jungle (Read 107518 times)
