Who made it first? The history of Indian curry no one talks about

Time of India

a day ago

Curry might be the most misunderstood word in Indian food. Globally, it's become shorthand for anything spicy and saucy that comes from the subcontinent. But ask anyone in India what 'curry' really means, and you'll get a mix of shrugs, jokes, and long family stories.
Because here's the secret – we never actually called it that. Scroll down, and you'll see why.
The word that wasn't ours
The term 'curry' didn't come from an Indian kitchen. It was picked up by British traders and colonisers in the 17th century, likely a mash-up of the Tamil word kari, which means sauce, and their attempt to label an entire cuisine that was too vast, too diverse, and too flavour-packed to be boxed into one name. In Curry: A Tale of Cooks and Conquerors, Lizzie Collingham writes, 'The British codified Indian food into one category – curry – that was suited to their limited palates and pantries.
' What started as a vague word for spiced dishes became a global brand, even though no one in an Indian home has ever actually said, 'What's for dinner? Curry.'
No single origin story
India's food culture was never about one uniform recipe. What someone in Kerala calls a curry could be a coconut-laced stew, while in Punjab it might mean a tomato-rich gravy. Go east, and it's mustard oil and potatoes; head west, and it's yogurt-based kadhi. The British tried to simplify it, but Indian food doesn't do simple.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Online & Flexible degrees
BITS Pilani Digital
Apply Now
Undo
Each region has its own story, spice mix, and way of treating the same vegetable.
In The Flavour of Spice, food historian Marryam H. Reshii says, 'There is no such thing as generic Indian curry powder in the Indian kitchen. That idea is a colonial convenience.' And that's the beauty of it, Indian cooking never followed rules. It adapted, evolved, and shifted with whatever was growing nearby.
The colonial curry shortcut
Once the British got a taste for Indian food, they wanted to take it back – minus the effort.
That's when curry powders, pre-made blends, and 'authentic' recipes for Anglo-Indian stews were born. These dishes were milder, sweeter, and designed for British palates. They weren't wrong, just far from what you'd find in an Indian home.
In "Climbing the Mango Trees", Madhur Jaffrey recalls, 'Each spice was used for a purpose and in a particular order. There was nothing random about it.' That balance and intent was often lost in the British version of Indian food, which flattened the complexity into a one-size-fits-all blend.
Why it still works
Despite its odd, borrowed name, the idea of curry still has a place. It's warm, comforting, and adaptable. Whether you're scooping up rajma with rice or dunking rotis into a bubbling pot of chettinad chicken, that messy, fragrant, spicy gravy is what binds our meals.
And if you think about it, there's real wellness in a good Indian 'curry.' You've got anti-inflammatory turmeric, gut-loving cumin, blood-sugar-friendly fenugreek, and digestion-boosting asafoetida, all simmered in oil or ghee that helps your body absorb their benefits.
So who made it first?
The answer is nobody and everybody. India didn't invent curry the way the West thinks it did. We made gravies, stews, sabzis, and masalas. We ground spices by hand, added layers of flavour, and passed recipes down like family secrets. The British just gave it a name, and the world ran with it.
But behind that name lies something far richer – a history of trade, colonisation, invention, and taste that refuses to be simplified. So the next time someone says they love 'curry,' just smile. You know it's more than just a word. It's a story in every bite.