Alternate names for real world cities?

Reflection

What are cities that could've had different names, and what are the feasible names for those cities? As a bonus, would just having a different name cause any considerable butterfly effects?

I was thinking New York City could've easily been named Empire City (a known nickname of NYC), as the center of British Colonial America and later the United States. It would also have a good ring to it. On the plus side, it would help better distinguish Upstate New Yorkers from the city so whenever someone says "I'm from New York", they don't have to say it's upstate and NOT the city every single time. I'm sure Upstate New Yorkers love that idea. Sadly, that would also eliminate all the possibilities for jokes about the city being "so nice, they named it twice" (the horror). Oh, and it'd be kind of awkward to be called "Imperials" as your demonym. Though, maybe badass depending on the context (think like in sports or in tough guy culture).

Anyways, what examples do you have?
 
Umbric Man

Umbric Man

Atterdag said:
Rome could of course always have been Reme
Click to expand...
I've seen it consistently made out as Remora in Latin and probably would've anglicized to Remore. https://sententiaeantiquae.com/2016/03/17/roma-could-have-been-remora/

------

A ton of American cities funnily enough had very consistent anglicizations in spelling or pronunciation over the centuries that kept cropping up, though the likelihood of those ever becoming official were slim-to-nil due to American love of French and classical names being as-is and shifting from all English/anglicized toponymy of the colonial period for their major cities to differentiate themselves. For example, for simple starting ones: Louisville and St. Louis were spelled in letters, journals, and even official documents like a map or proclamation from Jefferson as Lewisville and St. Lewis. https://archive.org/stream/georgerogerscla02jamegoog/georgerogerscla02jamegoog_djvu.txt for Lewisville, and https://lewisandclark.org/wpo/pdf/vol35no3.pdf for St. Louis. Philadelphia and Cincinnati dropped their last syllable in MANY letters and journals unintentionally following anglicizations of classical names since ancient times (as end syllables, -ia becomes -y while single vowels like -a and -i are dropped entirely), alongside Cincinnati consistently spelled with just one -n even by various Founding Fathers who should know how to spell it regularly to become Philadelphy and Cincinate. https://books.google.com/books?id=Xjs1JMrx-zwC&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq="philladelfie"&source=bl&ots=iSoVVSEHw5&sig=ACfU3U146tjT50b6DC4DHkNcCaEPvAGuow&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjthK2vlrrpAhWIdN8KHccWCxoQ6AEwCnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q="philladelfie"&f=false and https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5636&context=etd for Philly, and https://books.google.com/books?id=hiRCAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA137&lpg=PA137&dq="sincinate"+"society"&source=bl&ots=28IP1dmzXT&sig=ACfU3U2RHmm_GQWEsh6oATDHtYsmfTGSFw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiph9--_frqAhWGdd8KHZFfCxoQ6AEwAHoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q="sincinate" "society"&f=false, http://www.islandregister.com/uxine1848.html, and http://stlawrence.nygenweb.net/html/cw_town_cl_gouverneur.HTM for Cincy. Same for cities annexed or captured by America over its history: New Orleans could be spelled as New Orlins via phonetic pronunciation and the common surname of Orlins, and Albuquerque was Albakirk(y). https://books.google.com/books?id=4YxkCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq="new+orlins"+"1789"&source=bl&ots=lqpEnjLtOP&sig=ACfU3U0Rhw-HOadCMLrRA0Wb1y9aR0LRdA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjdpo3OjLXqAhXBm-AKHVMpCpkQ6AEwAHoECAsQAQ#v=onepage&q="new orlins" "1789"&f=false and http://files.usgwarchives.net/la/state/bible/lghsbible/bible3-1.txt for New Orleans, and http://www.caminorealcarta.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/chron_vol6_no3Corrected.pdf for Albuquerque.

Many, MANY other cities follow these unofficial anglicization rules in common peoples' spellings or pronunciations through various letters and journals and the occasional official record of some form over the decades or even centuries, and I can provide more sources for the showcased examples and many others. While it's not quite the "alternate name" OP desires, I say this because imagining America anglicizing-americanizing place names the way many other nations have corrupted non-native names into a form that resembles one in their language (just as England did with Duvris becoming Dover, dropping that Latin end syllable again!) would have been an interesting exercise in nationality.
 
Last edited:

Reflection

I remember how Portland, Oregon's name was decided on a coin flip. If it landed on the other end, the city would be called Boston, Oregon.

Now there's something right there. Portland was named after the city in Maine and is now the one people think about when they hear it because the original was already quite obscure overall. However, I don't think it would overshadow Boston in this case as much as it would rival it, as Boston is very much iconic. This would create some kind of cultural rivalry (I can see MA Bostonians resenting OR Bostonians for their stereotypes and relation to them via name). Portland is already a city everyone likes to crap on for their far left stereotypes, hipster subculture and their insane politics, but making the name "Boston" would open a new can of worms.
 
Umbric Man

Umbric Man

Reflection said:
I remember how Portland, Oregon's name was decided on a coin flip. If it landed on the other end, the city would be called Boston, Oregon.

Now there's something right there. Portland was named after the city in Maine and is now the one people think about when they hear it because the original was already quite obscure overall. However, I don't think it would overshadow Boston in this case as much as it would rival it, as Boston is very much iconic. This would create some kind of cultural rivalry (I can see MA Bostonians resenting OR Bostonians for their stereotypes and relation to them via name). Portland is already a city everyone likes to crap on for their far left stereotypes, hipster subculture and their insane politics, but making the name "Boston" would open a new can of worms.
Click to expand...
In a vague sense I'm surprised Portland, ME doesn't return to its original Falmouth name and force the newer-founded Falmouth, ME that took the name once it became Portland to return to New Casco: http://www.falmouthmehistory.org/history due to the confusion, since Portland, ME is just big enough to crop up on many more detailed maps.

I also feel if Portland took on the name Boston it'd eventually change once it got big enough. Small European towns giving a namesake to a much bigger metropolis in the New World is a thing across the Americas and even - obviously - happened in the USA itself from east-to-west-coast (Richmond and Wilmington, CA anyone?), but two MAJOR cities within the same nation sharing the name - distance or not - is like England having two Manchesters. Maybe Portland in that case would become Willamette or the more direct anglicization Wallamet after the river it's on, since many American cities from the Midwest onward name themselves after the body of water they are on (Cincinnati once Losantiville IE a mashup of various languages' root words to say "City Across the Licking River", San Francisco, Kansas City, Chicago, Milwaukee, Miami, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, etc. etc.).
 
Last edited:
An Thuong

An Thuong

The extended urban area called London could have instead been known as Westminster; given that it's one of the two cities that form the nucleus of the urban area, and the City of London is to this day very much it's own entity.
In a timeline where the Indian Subcontinent sees maximal partition upon Independence (i.e. dozens of linguistically aligned states, as opposed to two religiously aligned states) then perhaps some of the 'British' names of cities will survive; Bombay and Madras could potentially even be city states in this scenario.
Sai Gon is still officially used in certain contexts, but the whole conurbation would retain the name in any number of scenarios; from the Republic of Viet Nam not reneging on the promise of a unity referendum through to their unlikely survival. (Sai Gon became shorthand in North Vietnam for the regime of the Republic of Viet Nam and thus garnered an ugly connotation by 1975).
The New World is rife for every settlement carrying a different name with a single butterfly-wing POD before 1492.
 
DUWANG

DUWANG

If Cölln overtook Berlin and the united village never rose above a swamp village then it could have ended up as "Köln an der Spree".
 

wwbgdiaslt

Manchester, UK, was named from the name of the Roman fort Mamucium/Mancunium (meaning breast shaped hill) established in AD 79

So, possible the name could have derived from Mamucium rather than Mancunium.

Mamucium first into Mamucian to denote a resident of the area, and Mamceaster after the Roman exit from Britain to denote the "fort at the breast".
 

Tarabas

Atterdag said:
Rome could of course always have been Reme
Click to expand...
There is some recent research claiming that Rome's "true" (that is, "secret") name is "Maia". I am not sure on how the two names were chosen (out of the myth, of course), but maybe the two can be switched, and we have the "Maian Empire" arise.
 
Beacon

Beacon

Many of the cities in India would have different names without Islamic and Turkic invasions. Most cities would still end in -pur/-nagar instead of -abad.

For example, Aurangabad would be called Fatehpur, Daultabad would be called Deogiri, and so on.
 

CommieScum

Beacon said:
Many of the cities in India would have different names without Islamic and Turkic invasions. Most cities would still end in -pur/-nagar instead of -abad.

For example, Aurangabad would be called Fatehpur, Daultabad would be called Deogiri, and so on.
Click to expand...
They did just change Allahabad back to Prayag.
And Madras/Chennai, Bombay/Mumbai, Calcutta/Kolkata too although those didn't get changed "back" so much as renamed.
 

Minchandre

Originally, the island just east of Hispaniola was named "San Juan" and the town that would eventually become its capital was named "Puerto Rico", which honestly makes much more sense as a name for a town than an island. Apparently the switch took place shortly after foundation of the latter due to confusion in correspondence. It shouldn't be too hard to keep the original names.
 
SunKing105

SunKing105

A whole bunch of Alexandrias could've been named differently if it was instead Philip II leading the campaign into the Achaemenid Empire, if Alexander had either died or lost a civil war, or just happened to be named differently. In fact the Hellenistic era is full of such opportunities, considering that it was a common practice.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top