Alternate US Regional Names

As it stands, most US regions have kinda boring names; most of them have names based on cardinal directions (the South, the Northeast, the West Coast, the Midwest, etc) The only region with a different name is New England. So I was wondering what could be some potential alternative regional names-and this might be contingent on whether a state takes that name. So if Oregon has a different name, perhaps the West Coast would get called Oregon. Or if Louisiana keeps the Orleans name, maybe the former Louisiana Purchase would get that name. Maybe if Ohio winds up with a different name, perhaps the Lower Midwest would get called Ohio instead? Also, if you have multiple states with a certain name, the whole region gets the name. So if Georgia has a different name, perhaps a variant on the Carolina, all of the Deep South would get stuck with the name the Carolinas. Do you guys have any other possible alternate US region names?
 

CatalanKing

Banned
As it stands, most US regions have kinda boring names; most of them have names based on cardinal directions (the South, the Northeast, the West Coast, the Midwest, etc) The only region with a different name is New England. So I was wondering what could be some potential alternative regional names-and this might be contingent on whether a state takes that name. So if Oregon has a different name, perhaps the West Coast would get called Oregon. Or if Louisiana keeps the Orleans name, maybe the former Louisiana Purchase would get that name. Maybe if Ohio winds up with a different name, perhaps the Lower Midwest would get called Ohio instead? Also, if you have multiple states with a certain name, the whole region gets the name. So if Georgia has a different name, perhaps a variant on the Carolina, all of the Deep South would get stuck with the name the Carolinas. Do you guys have any other possible alternate US region names?


The Tennessee/Georgia region could be called the Tanasie after the people that first lived there.
 
Do you mean the official ones the Census Bureau uses? Because the Great Plains is pretty commonly used as a name for a region.

You could have Missouri (or variant like "Missouria") being the name for the states in the Missouri watershed. Maybe Columbia (or the often seen Cascadia) for Oregon/Washington. Or borrow the French/Spanish term "Illinois Country" (shortened to just Illinois?) for the Upper Midwest.

The Tennessee/Georgia region could be called the Tanasie after the people that first lived there.

Why would the town of Tanasi/Tanasqui (who were not an ethnic group) give its name to both states?
 
mainly because it isn't the natives who names it, but those who take an interest in the native culture. If I'm not mistaken, that's why TN is named what it is, correct?

Yes, it's named for Tanasi/Tanasqui via the name of the town being given to the Tennessee River. Oddly, Tanasi isn't on the Tennessee River proper but instead the Little Tennessee River. Only the Little Tennessee's source is in the Georgia, the Tennessee River isn't at all in Georgia unless you're the state government of Georgia.

Grouping Tennessee and Georgia also wouldn't work since Tennessee was founded by settlers from North Carolina and Virginia who had already long-lived in Appalachia, whereas Georgia had more coastal people from South Carolina and a similar economy. There's definitely more connection between Georgia and South Carolina than Georgia and Tennessee. Plus it looks nicer on a map since they fit together nicely.
 
One major problem with regional names is, officially the state border lines encompass many different regions within the states that may match up with a neighboring region in a different state better, but for official purposes it's easier to just include a whole state in X region. New England was lucky being defined so early and having very clear natural boundaries that its entire cultural region could be squeezed into. For example, Alabama is primarily a Deep Southern state, but its northern third or so is very Appalachian-feel-and-settled and would've been in the proposed state of "Nickajack".

OTL (or at least OTL-ish) names, maybe jiggled a bit here and there to take in a neighboring area culturally identical in daily life:

-The Deep South has Dixie(land), that is, states primarily settled by South Carolinian aristocratic planters, their poor white workers, and black slaves (South Carolina west to Louisiana).
-Virginia, Maryland, and North Carolina can be lumped together as the Chesapeake. This area was primarily settled by noble second sons fleeing the English Civil War, poor white workers, and slaves, but never matched Dixieland in extremity.
-As mentioned, Cascadia is common for Washington, Oregon, and with Idaho lumped in for a natural border at the continental divide. Liberal, environmentally friendly, etc.
-Northwood(s) could take in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the UP of Michigan (IE, the "Upper Midwest"). It was settled by Yankees, followed by a semi-small batch of Catholic Germans and a larger batch of Protestant Scandinavians (who the Yankees liked better). This area is where the "Minnesota/North-Central" accent resides.
-I've always thought Heartland could shift to encompass first and foremost all the Great Plains states (Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Wyoming, perhaps Iowa).
-Aztlan could take in New Mexico, Arizona, and the Trans-Pecos area of Texas, although this is used by the Chicano Reconquistia group and so may be controversial. This is the most Hispanic-settled area of the USA.
-West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee (barring its western third that's Dixie in feel, but it's being lumped in), and the mountainous southwestern/pure-western/northwestern parts of Virginia-to-Alabama can defined as Appalachia, settled by northern English and the Scots-Irish. Notice the mountainous parts of Virginia-to-Alabama may be lost and lumped into Dixieland if you're going by whole states being in a region together, despite being settled by Appalachian-men and not Dixie-men.
-Hilariously, California and Texas on their own are singular states big enough to serve as their OWN cultural areas with sub-cultures/areas within them (notice NorCal and SoCal are technically different but each would probably fit in quite well into a layman's thoughts on California). Local nationalism a la Cascadia, New England, "the South", etc. plays a part in this definition.
 
Last edited:
The Rust Belt (or perhaps Ferriterra if you want something sort of Latinized) for New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. That could extend westward to take in Ohio, the southern half of so of Michigan's Lower Peninsula, northern Indiana and northeastern Illinois so that it takes into account the old heavy industry part of the US.

I'd also suggest Vandalia as another name for the Heartland.
 
If Spain retained control of the Louisiana Territory for longer, you could see more Hispanic-inspired names, such as “Luisiana” or “Arcansa”.

For Texas, under Spanish rule, it was also known as the New Philippines. If that name had stuck, Texans would be calling themselves New Filipinos.
 
I'm really sorry, as much as I tried, I coulnd't find the criticising article that I had in mind: it had to do with how much things had changed since then.
 
Last edited:
Top