Other names for Canberra

[Melvin Loh]

Just read in Bill Bryson's book DOWN UNDER for, during the construction of Canberra as our nat'l capital, there were discussions re the name for this new city, ranging to some quite ridiculous suggestions as Kookaburra, Shakespeare and Victoria Defender IIRC. WI Canberra had then been called by some different name ?

[Tetsu]

Well, George V was the king when Canberra was given it's name, so maybe Georgetown?

[Dave Howery]

Funkytown?

[Grettir Asmundarsen]

How about:

Yogiberra

[Cloudy Vortex]

How about:

Yogiberra

I'd say something appropriate, but only the man himself can do proper Berrisms.

Hmm... How 'bout "Australopolis". Pretentious as hell, and it doesn't have any kind of ring to it.

[DMA]

How about call it by what it is - Shithole :D

[Tyr]

Why was Canberra chosen? What on Earth does that mean?

Victoria Defender? Now that is daft...

[DMA]

Why was Canberra chosen? What on Earth does that mean?

Victoria Defender? Now that is daft...


Canberra is supposedly a local Aboriginal word meaning "meeting place".

[Cockroach]

Canberra is supposedly a local Aboriginal word meaning "meeting place".
IIRC there are various other "translataions" relating it too wind.
Quite appropriote given that the damn pollies talk like hell but rarely ever actually do anything :D

[luakel]

Funkytown?
How about call it by what it is - Shithole :D
:D :D :D

[Wendell]

Could they have called it Victoriana? I know that there is an Australian state called Victoria...

[DMA]

IIRC there are various other "translataions" relating it too wind.
Quite appropriote given that the damn pollies talk like hell but rarely ever actually do anything :D


Very true ;)

And I can vouch for the wind part as I lived there for several months during the winter of 1997.

And not one decent pub in the entire dump.

[DMA]

Could they have called it Victoriana? I know that there is an Australian state called Victoria...


Yes there's a state called Victoria so whether they'd call the capital Victoriana is doubtful. But then again the national Australian capital was Melbourne (the state capital for Victoria) for several years until Canberra was built & finally opened in 1927 (if memory serves). So they could have called it Victoriana based upon honouring Melbourne being the first Australian national capital albeit the temporary one. Doing so, though, would have seen my state, New South Wales, secede from the Australian Commonwealth with Canberra, being located where it is, being placed under seige from New South Wales armed forces and eventually captured.

[Wendell]

Yes there's a state called Victoria so whether they'd call the capital Victoriana is doubtful. But then again the national Australian capital was Melbourne (the state capital for Victoria) for several years until Canberra was built & finally opened in 1927 (if memory serves). So they could have called it Victoriana based upon honouring Melbourne being the first Australian national capital albeit the temporary one. Doing so, though, would have seen my state, New South Wales, secede from the Australian Commonwealth with Canberra, being located where it is, being placed under seige from New South Wales armed forces and eventually captured.
That would have been interesting.

[Wendell]

Maybe the name Kingston could have sufficed?

[DMA]

That would have been interesting.


Well it was a near miracle that we all got together in the first place without a war between the colonies. None of the colonies liked the other, all were in competition in regards to markets & so forth, some where expansionists wanting to start their own empire, whilst others were protectionists & paranoid of their neighbours.

Then, for Federation, states argued over were the capital would be. Then, when Melbourne became the temporary capital, Sydney demanded & got the official Residencies of the Prime Minister & Governor-General. Even today, even though the national capital moved to Canberra 80 years ago, Sydney still has the official Residencies of the Prime Minister & Governor-General. Then there were arguements over railway gauges, arguments over taxation, arguments over industrial relations, arguments over defence, etc, etc, etc...

One big happy family :rolleyes:

[Wendell]

Well it was a near miracle that we all got together in the first place without a war between the colonies. None of the colonies liked the other, all were in competition in regards to markets & so forth, some where expansionists wanting to start their own empire, whilst others were protectionists & paranoid of their neighbours.

Then, for Federation, states argued over were the capital would be. Then, when Melbourne became the temporary capital, Sydney demanded & got the official Residencies of the Prime Minister & Governor-General. Even today, even though the national capital moved to Canberra 80 years ago, Sydney still has the official Residencies of the Prime Minister & Governor-General. Then there were arguements over railway gauges, arguments over taxation, arguments over industrial relations, arguments over defence, etc, etc, etc...

One big happy family :rolleyes:
You haven't had a civil war yet.

[DMA]

Maybe the name Kingston could have sufficed?


The name Kingston would have been out as one of the Australian Founding Fathers went by that name.

[Wendell]

The name Kingston would have been out as one of the Australian Founding Fathers went by that name.
I guess that could be seen as problematic.

[DMA]

You haven't had a civil war yet.


I'd doubt that we ever will - these days. But around 1900 it could have been a different story as the premire of New South Wales, in the colony referendum leading up to nationhood, advised the New South Wales citizens to vote no because the rest of the colonies refused his demands to have Canberra established within New South Wales territory (where it is currently located).

As a result, not only did the other states (Victoria, South Australia, & Tasmania) have to change their position, as the first referendum consequently failed in NSW, but a second referendum was required in NSW which needless to say finally succeeded. So we could have had a civil war over where the national capital was to be.

Then there was Queensland who, early on, was a major supporter of Federation, but then in 1899 went very cold on the idea for several reasons - the leading one being over it's territory in New Guinea, which it shouldn't have had in the first place but ignored everyone including the UK - and then immediately had its referendum only after the second one in NSW was successful.

And finally there was Western Australia, who's premier at the time did everything he could to sabotage every move towards Federation & only permitted his colony to join, not due to any popular referendum, but because the British government threated his sacking & arrest if he continued to refuse to join.

As I said - one big happy family... :rolleyes:

[DMA]

I guess that could be seen as problematic.


Well Kingston wasn't the most influencial Founding Father. He also came from South Australia, which was one of the medium size colonies as well - the leading two being NSW & Victoria.

If the capital was to be named after a Founding Father, that'd be Parkes.

[Wendell]

Well Kingston wasn't the most influencial Founding Father. He also came from South Australia, which was one of the medium size colonies as well - the leading two being NSW & Victoria.

If the capital was to be named after a Founding Father, that'd be Parkes.
Then, what else might it have been named?

[DMA]

Then, what else might it have been named?


Well as Melvin originally posted, there was Kookaburra, Shakespeare and Victoria Defender. I'd say New Westminister or New London may have been suggested as well. Maybe Parkes (after the Founding Father Sir Henry Parkes). There's possibly another Aboriginal name they could have used as well such as Yirr-ma (meaning to gather). Or name the place after the original farm property which was there - Yarralumla (which is actually a name of a suburb & the original farm building is actually used as the Governor-General's Residence in Canberra).

But whatever they call it, it'll still be a shithole :D

[Wendell]

Well as Melvin originally posted, there was Kookaburra, Shakespeare and Victoria Defender. I'd say New Westminister or New London may have been suggested as well. Maybe Parkes (after the Founding Father Sir Henry Parkes). There's possibly another Aboriginal name they could have used as well such as Yirr-ma (meaning to gather). Or name the place after the original farm property which was there - Yarralumla (which is actually a name of a suburb & the original farm building is actually used as the Governor-General's Residence in Canberra).

But whatever they call it, it'll still be a shithole :D
You really don't like the place, do you?

[DMA]

You really don't like the place, do you?


Well like I said, I lived there for a while over winter... :eek:

Besides, there's about 20 million other Australians who don't like the place either ;)

[Wendell]

Well like I said, I lived there for a while over winter... :eek:

Besides, there's about 20 million other Australians who don't like the place either ;)
True. Americans aren't always fond of their capital district either. Many refer to it as the Logic-Free Zone :D

[DMA]

True. Americans aren't always fond of their capital district either. Many refer to it as the Logic-Free Zone :D


Sounds familiar ;)

[DMA]

Oh, BTW, Canberra was actually built in the wrong place. It's supposed to have been built on the southern coastline of NSW somewhere.

[Wendell]

Sounds familiar ;)
Great minds think alike.

[Wendell]

Oh, BTW, Canberra was actually built in the wrong place. It's supposed to have been built on the southern coastline of NSW somewhere.
Really? Was was it built where it currently sits, then?

[DMA]

Really? Was was it built where it currently sits, then?


Well it all got lost in the politics of the day, especially when NSW did it's dummy spit & refused to join the Federation if the captial wasn't located in NSW. At first NSW wanted Sydney as the capital, but everyone simply said no chance. So they reached a compromise & even wrote it into the Constitution believe it or not. Basically it says it's supposed to be no more than 100 miles (160km) from Sydney & had to be built in territory donated by the NSW government. Well Canberra is actually about 330 km (about 200 miles) south west of Sydney, which means it's in breach of our Constitution (Section 125 to be exact) & therefore unconstitutional.

Anyway there's more. In the original Act of Parliament, for the building of Canberra, it states that the Federal Capital must be a water port in a manner akin to Washington DC. In other words it should have been on the southern coastline of NSW within 100 miles of Sydney. But where Canberra is actually built is about 120km (75 miles) inland & obviously in breach of the Act of Parliament. They did fix this breach & the constitutional issue, though, by taking the small coastal village of Jervis Bay (located around 100 miles south of Sydney), built a jetty into the bay, established a Naval College there, & then declared it a port and a suburb of Canberra.


Why Canberra was finally built were it was is another long story, but basically it had to do with politics between the states & all that.

[benedict XVII]

Well it all got lost in the politics of the day, especially when NSW did it's dummy spit & refused to join the Federation if the captial wasn't located in NSW. At first NSW wanted Sydney as the capital, but everyone simply said no chance. So they reached a compromise & even wrote it into the Constitution believe it or not. Basically it says it's supposed to be no more than 100 miles (160km) from Sydney & had to be built in territory donated by the NSW government. Well Canberra is actually about 330 km (about 200 miles) south west of Sydney, which means it's in breach of our Constitution (Section 125 to be exact) & therefore unconstitutional.

Anyway there's more. In the original Act of Parliament, for the building of Canberra, it states that the Federal Capital must be a water port in a manner akin to Washington DC. In other words it should have been on the southern coastline of NSW within 100 miles of Sydney. But where Canberra is actually built is about 120km (75 miles) inland & obviously in breach of the Act of Parliament. They did fix this breach & the constitutional issue, though, by taking the small coastal village of Jervis Bay (located around 100 miles south of Sydney), built a jetty into the bay, established a Naval College there, & then declared it a port and a suburb of Canberra.


Why Canberra was finally built were it was is another long story, but basically it had to do with politics between the states & all that.

This looks like a Belgian compromise! How delightful!

[TheLoneAmigo]

You really don't like the place, do you?


Hell, I was born there and I hate the place.

[Wendell]

Well it all got lost in the politics of the day, especially when NSW did it's dummy spit & refused to join the Federation if the captial wasn't located in NSW. At first NSW wanted Sydney as the capital, but everyone simply said no chance. So they reached a compromise & even wrote it into the Constitution believe it or not. Basically it says it's supposed to be no more than 100 miles (160km) from Sydney & had to be built in territory donated by the NSW government. Well Canberra is actually about 330 km (about 200 miles) south west of Sydney, which means it's in breach of our Constitution (Section 125 to be exact) & therefore unconstitutional.

Anyway there's more. In the original Act of Parliament, for the building of Canberra, it states that the Federal Capital must be a water port in a manner akin to Washington DC. In other words it should have been on the southern coastline of NSW within 100 miles of Sydney. But where Canberra is actually built is about 120km (75 miles) inland & obviously in breach of the Act of Parliament. They did fix this breach & the constitutional issue, though, by taking the small coastal village of Jervis Bay (located around 100 miles south of Sydney), built a jetty into the bay, established a Naval College there, & then declared it a port and a suburb of Canberra.


Why Canberra was finally built were it was is another long story, but basically it had to do with politics between the states & all that.
That explains Jervis Bay...

[DMA]

That explains Jervis Bay...


It certainly does. Why all of Canberra wasn't actually built at Jervis Bay in the first place defies all logic.

[Wendell]

It certainly does. Why all of Canberra wasn't actually built at Jervis Bay in the first place defies all logic.
That's government for you.

[DMA]

That's government for you.


Ain't that the truth. ;)

Besides which the NSW government didn't want to hand over a lot of prime real estate.

[PJ Norris]

:D Then there was Queensland who, early on, was a major supporter of Federation, but then in 1899 went very cold on the idea for several reasons - the leading one being over it's territory in New Guinea, which it shouldn't have had in the first place but ignored everyone including the UK - and then immediately had its referendum only after the second one in NSW was successful.

Sometimes I mourn the death of our possible Banana Republic, reaching from Kakadu too New Guinea too Brisbane....sigh. :(

Anyhow despite all the hassles and mistakes over our muddled capitol (and yes DMA I agree it is as cold as hell and full of politicians making it as close to the real thing as possible) I guess we're lucky Brisbane didn't want to have the capitol halfway between Sydney and Melbourne to itself. Where would it have been then - Orange? Dubbo?
Howabout Perth demanding a slice of the capitol cake and demands that as a new state of this federation, the city must be between itself and the rest of the eastern cities. Canberra in the red central, the middle of woopwoop. That would have been fun (dripping with sarcasm) but at least those politicians would be faraway enough. :D

[Wendell]

WI PNG had become a state or two of Australia?

[DMA]

:D

Sometimes I mourn the death of our possible Banana Republic, reaching from Kakadu too New Guinea too Brisbane....sigh. :(

Anyhow despite all the hassles and mistakes over our muddled capitol (and yes DMA I agree it is as cold as hell and full of politicians making it as close to the real thing as possible) I guess we're lucky Brisbane didn't want to have the capitol halfway between Sydney and Melbourne to itself. Where would it have been then - Orange? Dubbo?
Howabout Perth demanding a slice of the capitol cake and demands that as a new state of this federation, the city must be between itself and the rest of the eastern cities. Canberra in the red central, the middle of woopwoop. That would have been fun (dripping with sarcasm) but at least those politicians would be faraway enough. :D


Canberra is in the middle of woopwoop! :D

Actually it's in the middle of what was a sheep farm that was going broke because the land is more or less arid & useless for much of anything - other than for the national capital. ;)

[DMA]

WI PNG had become a state or two of Australia?


There was a referendum held, somewhere in the early 1970s in PNG, where the locals voted for independence than stay as part of Australia.

Change the referendum result and it's possible PNG could become a state sometime in the late 1980s. The only hassle though is the UN. PNG was seen as a "colony" & we were being pushed to give them independence one way or the other. Plus, if it did become a part of the Commonwealth as a state, Australia would have been dragged into it's own Vietnam style war when Bougainville started its insurrection.

[cranos]

There was a referendum held, somewhere in the early 1970s in PNG, where the locals voted for independence than stay as part of Australia.

Change the referendum result and it's possible PNG could become a state sometime in the late 1980s. The only hassle though is the UN. PNG was seen as a "colony" & we were being pushed to give them independence one way or the other. Plus, if it did become a part of the Commonwealth as a state, Australia would have been dragged into it's own Vietnam style war when Bougainville started its insurrection.

Not sure about that. There is a good chance that if PNG had become a full state of australia then Bougainville might not have happened at all. Australia is not going to want to gain a new state that is just going to be a complete drain on the economy, instead it is going to have to modernise as quickly as possible to avoid PNG becoming exactly what it is today, near collapse and a haven for raskals and proto-rebels.

On the other hand we would then be sharing a common land border with Indonesia, this might add an interesting twist to the East Timor fracas.

[Wendell]

There was a referendum held, somewhere in the early 1970s in PNG, where the locals voted for independence than stay as part of Australia.

Change the referendum result and it's possible PNG could become a state sometime in the late 1980s. The only hassle though is the UN. PNG was seen as a "colony" & we were being pushed to give them independence one way or the other. Plus, if it did become a part of the Commonwealth as a state, Australia would have been dragged into it's own Vietnam style war when Bougainville started its insurrection.
That is assuming that the Bougainville crisis still takes place. In such an alternate TL, the Solomon Islands themselves could have even joined Australia. Also, the most recent U.S. states became such more than a decade after the formation of the U.N.

[DMA]

Well in regards to PNG, the referendum held clearly showed that the locals wanted independence. So it then makes it hard for Australia to ignore the wishes of the locals, especially if the UN are on our backs. And the relationship that Australia had with PNG was nothing like the one the USA had with Hawaii or Alaska.

The next thing, and probably far more important, is the fact that PNG would have cost Australia far more than what Australia would have gotten back in return. Although that may be true of all the smaller states, it'll still add up & cost significantly more than subsidising Tasmania, West Australia, and to a lessor degree South Australia & Queensland.

Plus I have little faith in the fact that the locals in PNG would instantly behave themselves just because they're a state of Australia. More than likely that'll even reinforce their efforts at local independence & make any such insurrection even worse than the OTL. And this would take place in the aftermath of Australia's involvement in Vietnam. Furthermore, as cranos pointed out, there's the business with Indonesia/PNG/East Timor. IMHO it would more trouble than it is worth. Better give them their independence & let them stuff it all up, rather than we stuff it all up for them.

[Wendell]

Well in regards to PNG, the referendum held clearly showed that the locals wanted independence. So it then makes it hard for Australia to ignore the wishes of the locals, especially if the UN are on our backs. And the relationship that Australia had with PNG was nothing like the one the USA had with Hawaii or Alaska.

The next thing, and probably far more important, is the fact that PNG would have cost Australia far more than what Australia would have gotten back in return. Although that may be true of all the smaller states, it'll still add up & cost significantly more than subsidising Tasmania, West Australia, and to a lessor degree South Australia & Queensland.

Plus I have little faith in the fact that the locals in PNG would instantly behave themselves just because they're a state of Australia. More than likely that'll even reinforce their efforts at local independence & make any such insurrection even worse than the OTL. And this would take place in the aftermath of Australia's involvement in Vietnam. Furthermore, as cranos pointed out, there's the business with Indonesia/PNG/East Timor. IMHO it would more trouble than it is worth. Better give them their independence & let them stuff it all up, rather than we stuff it all up for them.
That's true about Australia's relationship with New Guinea...

[cranos]

That's true about Australia's relationship with New Guinea...

Two ideas spring to mind:

1. PNG votes to become a fully fledged state within Australia. Massive investment in infrastructure and industry follows to build the state of Papua New Guinea to the same base standards as the rest of the country. Could see potential trouble with clash of cultures but if handled right it could be done.

This however leaves open the Indonesian question. What does Australia do about West Papua? Does the PNG referendum take place before or after the sham referendum forced by the Indonesians, if before could we see clashes between Australian and Indonesian forces over border control as well as an insurrgency run against the Australians supplied by Indonesia?

2. PNG votes to leave but more authoritarean government refuses. Stung over the losses in Vietnam and threatened by a rapidly expanding Indonesia the government decides it needs to have a forward base in case the dominos start to fall. PNG is declared a territory of australia "In Perpituity" and basically becomes a police state ala East Timor under the Indonesians.

[Wendell]

Two ideas spring to mind:

1. PNG votes to become a fully fledged state within Australia. Massive investment in infrastructure and industry follows to build the state of Papua New Guinea to the same base standards as the rest of the country. Could see potential trouble with clash of cultures but if handled right it could be done.

This however leaves open the Indonesian question. What does Australia do about West Papua? Does the PNG referendum take place before or after the sham referendum forced by the Indonesians, if before could we see clashes between Australian and Indonesian forces over border control as well as an insurrgency run against the Australians supplied by Indonesia?

2. PNG votes to leave but more authoritarean government refuses. Stung over the losses in Vietnam and threatened by a rapidly expanding Indonesia the government decides it needs to have a forward base in case the dominos start to fall. PNG is declared a territory of australia "In Perpituity" and basically becomes a police state ala East Timor under the Indonesians.
It would be interesting to have Australia take over East Timor too.

[DMA]

That's true about Australia's relationship with New Guinea...


Well if the Queenslanders kept out of PNG in the first place... ;)

[DMA]

Two ideas spring to mind:

1. PNG votes to become a fully fledged state within Australia. Massive investment in infrastructure and industry follows to build the state of Papua New Guinea to the same base standards as the rest of the country. Could see potential trouble with clash of cultures but if handled right it could be done.

This however leaves open the Indonesian question. What does Australia do about West Papua? Does the PNG referendum take place before or after the sham referendum forced by the Indonesians, if before could we see clashes between Australian and Indonesian forces over border control as well as an insurrgency run against the Australians supplied by Indonesia?

2. PNG votes to leave but more authoritarean government refuses. Stung over the losses in Vietnam and threatened by a rapidly expanding Indonesia the government decides it needs to have a forward base in case the dominos start to fall. PNG is declared a territory of australia "In Perpituity" and basically becomes a police state ala East Timor under the Indonesians.


Well the thing with these two points is a couple of things have to change back in Australia. First of all Australia isn't involved in Vietnam. And secondly you've got to take out the Whitlam ALP government & the Fraser Coalition government. Although the ALP & the Coalition may have hated each other in the 1970s & 1980s, both shared the same policy of letting PNG have its independence. So you've got to have a lot of PODs before PNG comes in as an Australian state.

What's more likely is that, in the aftermath of Indonesia's takeover of East Timor with no challenge at all coming from Australia, a border war starts between a nearly independent PNG & an agressive Indonesia in 1976. It soon intensifies with a full Indonesian invasion not long afterwards. Australia, suffering from Vietnam & still unstable thanks to the Dismissal, would probably be in no position to stop Indonesia successfully taking over PNG save for islands like Bougainville etc.