What Does A City's Name Have To do With Its Success? Nothing?

IMBY · #1 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 4:23 AM**

Let's say San Francisco had been named Saint Francis, or they chose Oakland for a name, and Oakland was named San Francisco, vice versa.

Or they chose to name New York City Hoboken instead, or Harlem.

Or, Los Angeles was named Watts or Compton.

No matter what a city is named, in the beginning, do you believe no matter what name was chosen it would have made no difference at all? That a city would grow into its name, no matter what it was named?

"Fasten your seatbelts! We are now approaching Watts Int'l Airport, Hoboken Int'l Airport!"

QuantumX · #2 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 4:27 AM**

Cities with ville at the end seem to remain small cities.

jd3189 · #3 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 4:54 AM**

San Francisco was once named Yerba Buena in its beginnings. That name didn't catch on.

volguus zildrohar · #4 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 5:18 AM**

Lots of prominent cities have had other names during their life. New Amsterdam, New Sweden, St. Boltoph's Stone, Terminus...all major American cities once upon a time and today and the names had little to do with it over time.

urbanactivist · #5 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 5:52 AM**

Some cities "succeed" in spite of themselves.

JDRCRASH · #6 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 7:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuantumX

Cities with ville at the end seem to remain small cities.

ville = village = small city?

bobdreamz · #7 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 7:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by volguus zildrohar

Lots of prominent cities have had other names during their life. New Amsterdam, New Sweden, St. Boltoph's Stone, Terminus...all major American cities once upon a time and today and the names had little to do with it over time.

I know that New Amsterdam is NYC because it was settled by the Dutch and Terminus is Atlanta because of the railroads but what are the other two cities?

Miami used to be Fort Dallas which was an actual Army fort in the mid 1800s and was abandoned after the local indians attacked it. Miami sounds better.
Jacksonville was called Cowtown but don't ask me why!

JDRCRASH · #8 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 7:44 AM**

Does Pueblo de Los Angeles count?

hauntedheadnc · #9 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 9:26 AM**

A few from North Carolina...

Eden Land --> Morristown --> Asheville

Charlottesburgh --> Charlotte

New Liverpool --> Wilmington

Now as to whether or not a name has much to do with a city's success, it seems doubtful. What seems more likely is that some cities have been growing nicely, perhaps even outperforming all expectations, and then the citizenry decides that perhaps a more dignified name might be more befitting their increasingly grand city. As I understand it that is how Duwamps became Seattle, how Pig's Eye became St. Paul, and how Terminus became Marthasville, which became Atlanta.

tayser · #10 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 11:39 AM**

Fawkner -> Batmania -> Melbourne

Fawker and Batman (no shit) where the original two who set sail from Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania) to settle the "Port Phillip District". Melbourne was the name of the Brit PM at the time, although the suburb of Williamstown to the south west, on a small peninsula was named after the King at the time and it was supposed to be the main settlement - changed at the last minute as Melbourne/Batmania/Fawkner were more defensible from the sea.

Jeeper · #11 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 12:34 PM**

I kind of wish Mexico City still went by it's original name, Tenochtitlán. Just has a nice ring to it.

Anyway, here's a list of former city names for those interested. Russia's seen a lot of changes.

KevinFromTexas · #12 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 1:09 PM**

That link says Austin was originally called Waterloo, but Waterloo was actually the name of a tiny town that existed before Austin was officially incorporated in 1839. Once it was decided to move the capital from Houston to the area that would become Austin, the small town of Waterloo was renamed and Austin was incorporated. The city was named after Stephen F. Austin who led a colonization effort in Texas before Texas was part of the US.

Crawford · #13 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 2:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeeper

I kind of wish Mexico City still went by it's original name, Tenochtitlán. Just has a nice ring to it.

Anyway, here's a list of former city names for those interested. Russia's seen a lot of changes.

Technically there is no city called Mexico City.

Mexico City is really named Mexico, just as New York City is really New York.

People just add the "City" to make distinctions with the country or state.

Within Mexico, people all call Mexico City "Mexico", or, less often, "DF". If you say you live in "Mexico", that's understood to mean the capital city.

relnahe · #14 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 4:10 PM**

I always think it would be interesting if Toronto were still called York.

Steely Dan · #15 Posted **Dec 17, 2012, 4:21 PM**

on the topic of city names, i've always been interested in US place names that are derived from native american place names. we've got many states, rivers, towns, lakes, etc. that have names of native american language derivation, but most of our major cities seem to be derived from old world languages and place names. after thinking about it for a moment, here's a list of major US cities (1,000,000+ metros) with native american derived names that i could think of:

Chicago
Miami
Seattle
Tampa
Milwaukee

any others?