Washington refuses to allow DC or states to have his name?

Zioneer

Banned
So what if George Washington (who from what I understand, didn't like the whole "name things after him" trend) refused to allow DC or future territories/states to be named after him, and advocated for some kind of legislation preventing states/territories/cities/DC from being named "Washington"?
 
Oddly enough, both Washingtons will most likely be known as Columbia.

This, most likely. Though it'd be interesting to see D.C. get a different name--perhaps something classical-inspired, with an allusion to Washington's role... Cincinnati? :D
 
This, most likely. Though it'd be interesting to see D.C. get a different name--perhaps something classical-inspired, with an allusion to Washington's role... Cincinnati? :D

Cincinnati does sound good. Regarding classical-inspired names, perhaps Americus or Freedonia.
 
This, most likely. Though it'd be interesting to see D.C. get a different name--perhaps something classical-inspired, with an allusion to Washington's role... Cincinnati? :D
Cincinnati does sound good. Regarding classical-inspired names, perhaps Americus or Freedonia.
i'd say Liberty City would be a more fitting name, or perhaps something in latin that means "center of the country/world"
 

Zioneer

Banned
What if a city was named after some other Washington? There were other members of his family.

I would assume that they'd defer to him if he made it clear that he didn't want to be venerated or have his family become psuedo-nobility (more than it already was, being rich slaveowners and all).
 
A senator urged Washington Territory to be renamed 'Tahoma' to keep confusion from happening between the city and state.

WashingtonStateasTahoma.png
 
Top