Help with TL: British Re-Naming of Colonies?

Hey Guys,

Just a question to y'all, but when would the British government rename a colony that they'd just acquired from another nation through capturing it? Would they randomly do that? Or would they name it for Patriotism? Or simply to show of to whoever they caught it from?

Also after you answer the above could you come up with any British names for Louisiana, New Orleans, Russian America (OTL Alaska) and Anchorage. I was thinking for New Orleans something like New Portsmouth (due to Portsmouth being a large harbour at the time and now, and also the flagship of the fleet that captured New Orleans came from Portsmouth - HMS Victory.)
 
Well, Acadia became "New Scotland" because of a fairly obscure Scottish attempt at colonising the place, so any historical links with britain like that would be good starting points. "New Portsmouth" sounds like a good idea to me. I'd recomend following that sort of train of reasoning.
 
Not too likely, I can't think of any examples of anyone doing this off the top of my head. Let alone the British; English is a flexible anarchic language and place names of any origin are fine in it.
Britain kept Quebec, Bombay, Hong Kong, etc....- with French especially bare in mind that French is the closest thing to an official language England has ever had!

The only times I could think of this happening is when theres a lot of bad blood with someone and the place they take remains in dispute and on the border. Even then though nations generally just change the spelling and pronunciation a little to fit their language more (e.g. Strassbourg)

I suppose it could also be done if the place is named after another nation's leaders/heros. e.g. Fort Tsar Peter the Great becomes Ft George.
 

Teleology

Banned
So keep territory names but keep some of the specific location changed names? Like, George Vancouver named part of the Alaskan coast "New Norfolk" and maybe a city is founded there but keep the name Aleyska or Alaska for the whole region itself. I like the idea of renaming New Orleans for the warship that conquered it, but keep the name of Louisiana territory itself. What in our world would be San Francisco becomes New Albion, but California is still California.
 
As a side question, why was Alaska called Alaska? I take it that it was a native name or something.

Anyway back to the point, thanks for the input. So the overall consensus is that large areas keep their own name, while smaller places (such as cities) could be renamed.
 
As a side question, why was Alaska called Alaska? I take it that it was a native name or something.

Alaska, or Alyeska, is derived from an Aleut term meaning 'main land' or 'great land', which it is when one makes landfall at the island of Unalaska, which Vitus Bering did in 1741.
 
Anyway back to the point, thanks for the input. So the overall consensus is that large areas keep their own name, while smaller places (such as cities) could be renamed.

I was thinking about this a second time and would agree with it until the British would be dividing the territory up into smaller regions for the sake of governance. Much like Australia, in that it was a English territory that was divided into states that were then unified into a Dominion.
 
Daniel Coxe in the beginning of the 18th century proposed to settle the mouth of the Mississippi as 'Carolana' and the site of New Orleans and the Isle of Orleans the town is situated on becomes 'Nassaw'.

http://library.wustl.edu/units/spec/exhibits/terra/images/coxe2.gif

Russian Alaska's coast-the main one the Alaska Panhandle and Anchorage are part of-were named 'New Norfolk' by George Vancouver (who named Stickeen area New Cornwall, British Columbia's main coast New Hanover, Washington and Oregon's coasts New Georgia after George III, and re-affirmed the British calling California New Albion).

Anchorage is a neutral English name, descriptive of the place's function, and likely would be kept in any event if settlement somehow forms even roughly to OTL.

http://books.google.com/books?id=6lHbBMF9900C&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=%22New+Norfolk%22+%22New+Cornwall%22+%22New+Georgia%22&source=bl&ots=LArxeaK990&sig=IHMRBzeqwnMw6GA_ETfGuVP8Ipo&hl=en&ei=gVo-S67oLImXtgezlrX-CA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22New%20Norfolk%22%20%22New%20Cornwall%22%20%22New%20Georgia%22&f=false

http://www.leejacksonmaps.com/America.htm#THOM0011

http://books.google.com/books?id=VQ...Norfolk" "New Cornwall" "New Georgia"&f=false

BTW, 'Canada' was considered a French term by the British at 1763, who gave the name 'Quebec' to the entire province as a way of erasing previous French ownership. 'Quebec' itself has been corrupted to 'Cabeck'.

Further, the Gaspe Peninsula was part of the original Nova Scotia project as part of the 'Province of Alexandria', later extended to 'both sides of the River Canada (St. Lawrence), I THINK that Nova Scotia had originally been also a sea-to-sea grant to the propieter. Must do more research on that last part.
 
Last edited:
The only times I could think of this happening is when theres a lot of bad blood with someone and the place they take remains in dispute and on the border. Even then though nations generally just change the spelling and pronunciation a little to fit their language more (e.g. Strassbourg)

Fashoda in Sudan was changed to Kodok after the Entente Cordiale was signed.
 
Anchorage is my hometown, and I assure you it has nothing to do with the Russians. It was founded as a port along the Alaska Railroad in 1914, almost half a century after the United States purchased Alaska. Good luck getting the British to rename Anchorage; they'd have to acquire Alaska from the Americans, either during World War I or at some point thereafter. If the British acquire Alaska from the Russians, there won't be a town here for them to rename; if they decide to build a town at this site, they can call it whatever they like. (Something honoring James Cook would be fairly likely.)
 

terence

Banned
Countries and territories if not named for a geographic feature or native name tend to be reserved for Royalty. Prime Ministers, Foreign and Colonial secretaries and colonial administrators might get a town, especially an administrative one. (Count up how many Richmonds and Wellingtons there are around the world). A 'discoverer' might be lucky to have a name stick if it lasted long enough before the settlers arrived, as in Tasmania and the Falkland Islands.

As for Native names these were in any case mangled (try pronouncing Madraspattinam in a 17th Century Bristol sailor's accent or Hēunggóng in Charles Elliot's german accented Devon English)

Here's some suggestions

"Charlotiana" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotina#cite_note-0"Charlottina" and "Charlotta". Were all names for proposed colonies varying from Kentucky, through the Ohio valley and Missisippiafter Queen Charlotteof Mecklenburg-Strelitz. (who had enough places and things named after her). For reasons of ease of pronounciation, I suggest Charlottia for the Ohio district. Vandalia was also proposed as Charlotte had supposed Vandal ancestry- a suitable name for the annexed area around New Orleans, itself renamed as New Hanover. The native name of Mississippibeing retained for the teritorry up river.
With the uniting of the Colonies and the need for an independent administrative centre, a new city on the Potomac, Amhurst, can be imagined.

August and Augusta were common enough names among the Hanoverians and I think that the colony of Augusta sounds mighty fine and grand enough to belong to a huge swath of the West Coast of North America from the 54th parallel down to the Snake River. One can see the major city of Francistown receiving mail intended for the re-named St. Francis Bay
further down the coast in annexed California.

As British North America consolidates, one can imagine the march of soldier's, civil servant's, patron's names and those of their schools Westward. Wentworth, Bentick, Bathhurst, Brisbane, Prouse, Addington, Butterworth, Popham, Ellingborough, Cradock, Sherbourne, Wellesley, Lancing, Westminster, Rugby, Harrow.

Military victories in other parts of the world would result in 'alien' place names being honoured in new settlements. Aliwal, Agra, Mysore, Vigo, Salamanca, Carniac, Finisterre, Navarino.

The problem is that when one has the whole of Oceania, most of Africa AND the Americas, one is going to run out out of names. It would probably end up like any small town where the council name the first new streets after themselves, the next tranche after their wives, the third tranche after their Mother's-in-law and so on.
 
Terence mentioned Charlottiana, which reminds me that OTL's east-central Kentucky & Tennessee might have become Transylvania. Charlottiana (or a name of a British royal, especially if recently dead at the time of conquest) would work especially well for Louisiana. Perhaps New Orleans could be creatively called something like Deltana.
 
Top