Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Over a dozen links from all sorts of sources, even colonial sources from the 1600s saying it was named after James Duke of York and Albany and lvmensch is still denying historical fact with zero sources.
lvmensch, you're no different than a science denier.
Over a dozen links from all sorts of sources, even colonial sources from the 1600s saying it was named after James Duke of York and Albany and lvmensch is still denying historical fact with zero sources.
lvmensch, you're no different than a science denier.
B*ll Sh*t. Spent a lifetime doing real science. Practical but real.
And you are confusing real science with the pontification of the various liberal arts like history.
Never confuse that stuff with science. It is educated opinion but no basis in science.
And the connection to James Duke of York is perfectly clear and accepted. But it is still named after York not the Duke but in his honor. How can you remain so dull as to be unable to deal with the reality.
B*ll Sh*t. Spent a lifetime doing real science. Practical but real.
And you are confusing real science with the pontification of the various liberal arts like history.
Never confuse that stuff with science. It is educated opinion but no basis in science.
And the connection to James Duke of York is perfectly clear and accepted. But it is still named after York not the Duke but in his honor. How can you remain so dull as to be unable to deal with the reality.
I have over a dozen sources saying it was named after the person the Duke of York and Albany.
Denying this historical fact is no different than denying science.
It speaks to who you are as a person offering no sources and denying over a dozen sources including contemporary ones.
You are on the same coin of ignorance as science deniers, just the other side.
This is like how they want to change the name of the Red Skins even though most Native Americans aren't offended by the team name. Woke culture is the culture of flaming racists that project their white supremacist beliefs onto the rest of society.
Starting at 27:07 - "Two days after the English take over on August 29th, 1664, New Amsterdam was officially renamed New York in honor of the Duke of York the brother of King Charles to whom the colony had been promised as a birthday present."
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 1 day ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,163 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19459
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentropa
New York was named after the City of York in the UK. Hence the "New."
It was named after the Duke of York, who later became King James II, the last Catholic monarch, this followed the English Civil War (1642–1651), the later execution of King Charles I, Followed by the Restoration.
During the restoration the Monarch was put back on the throne, however the real power now lay with Parliament rather than the Monarch.
King Charles I son, Charles II was made King in 1660 until 1685, followed by brief reign of his younger brother James II (1685–1688), the former Duke of York than New York is named after.
James II was removed from the Throne by Dutchman William of Orange (King William III) in a protestant coup against him in known as the Glorious Revolution. William of Orange is known as King Billy and the reason protestant orange men march in Northern Ireland.
The Duke of York later King James II was the one who annexed New Amsterdam, and had a friendship with William Penn.
During the English Civil War, the Channel Island of Jersey remained loyal to the British Crown and gave sanctuary to the King. It was from the Royal Square in Saint Helier that Charles II of England was proclaimed King in 1649, following the execution of his father, Charles I. The North American lands were divided by Charles II, who gave his brother, the Duke of York (later King James II), the region between New England and Maryland as a proprietary colony (as opposed to a royal colony).
James then granted the land between the Hudson River and the Delaware River (the land that would become New Jersey) to two friends who had remained loyal through the English Civil War: Sir George Carteret and Lord Berkeley of Stratton. The area was named the Province of New Jersey.
There are numerous other states that have British links in their names such as Maryland named after Queen Henrietta Maria, the wife of King Charles I, Virginia and West Virginia (Quuen Elizabeth I the Virgin Queen), Georgia (King George), the province, named Carolina was named in honour of King Charles I of England, was divided into two colonies in 1729, although the actual date is the subject of debate. Whilst Raleigh is named after the British explorer and Naval officer Sir Walter Raleigh. Even the New York borough of of Queens named after Catherine of Braganza, the former Queen of England.
The French were also involved in the slave trade and Louisiana was named after Louis XIV, King of France from 1643 to 1715.
Vancouver is named after Captain and explorer George Vancouver (22 June 1757 – 10 May 1798) who was a British officer of the Royal Navy best known for his 1791–95 expedition, which explored and charted North America's north-western Pacific Coast regions. Mount Rainier in Washington State was named by George Vancouver, in honour of his friend, Royal Navy Rear Admiral Peter Rainier.
New Hampshire was named after the southern English county of Hampshire by Royal Navy Captain John Mason.
It also should be noted that Washington DC and the state are named after George Washington who had slaves and lets not forger that the Dutch were a maritime power and also involved in the slave trade and this included the Dutch West India Company, who purchased the island of Manhattan.
Last edited by Brave New World; 07-26-2020 at 04:10 AM..
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 1 day ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,163 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19459
Then again you could just rededicate the name and name it after York in England, an ancient city, which was at different historical periods a very important Roman and Viking settlement.
Roman Emperor Constantius Chlorus died in York on the 25 July 306 AD, and his son Constantine the Great was then proclaimed Emperor of the Roman Empire in Eboracum (which was the Roman name for York).
There is a statue of Constantine the Great in York.
However the later name York (Old Norse: Jórvík) is derived from the Brittonic name Eburākon , and basically means "place of the yew trees".
The Vikings who settled in York were mainly a peaceful bunch despite what we read about their bloody campaigns. They farmed the land and were great craftsmen, traders, artists, engineers and ship builders. Over the one hundred years that York was under Viking rule the city prospered greatly.
York is also home to one of the worlds greatest Cathedrals with stained glass windows the size of tennis courts, and the city also has some of the oldest medieval streets in the world in the Shambles district, which was used as a location in the Harry Potter films.
I have over a dozen sources saying it was named after the person the Duke of York and Albany.
Denying this historical fact is no different than denying science.
It speaks to who you are as a person offering no sources and denying over a dozen sources including contemporary ones.
You are on the same coin of ignorance as science deniers, just the other side.
Give it up for gawds sake! You're starting to make yourself look foolish, you probably didn't realise it but York is an English city, the Duke of York is NOT a name, it doesn't matter if you didn't realise New York is New York because there is an older York hence the NEW but now it's explained it's probably better to just accept you've learnt something and move on. If the city was named after somebody called York then they wouldn't have needed the 'New' in the name would they.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 1 day ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,163 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19459
Quote:
Originally Posted by easthome
Give it up for gawds sake! You're starting to make yourself look foolish, you probably didn't realise it but York is an English city, the Duke of York is NOT a name, it doesn't matter if you didn't realise New York is New York because there is an older York hence the NEW but now it's explained it's probably better to just accept you've learnt something and move on. If the city was named after somebody called York then they wouldn't have needed the 'New' in the name would they.
LOL - the truth being that the Duke of York, later became King James II, who only served as King briefly before being removed by protestant forces and replaced by Dutch King William III (William of Orange or King Billy). James was the last ever Catholic monarch.
James died in exile in Saint-Germain in France on 16 September 1701 and his grave is in Paris.
The US can call the city whatever they want, however is they don't want the connection with James II then they can simply invite some dignitaries from York in England and rededicate the name, and establishing stronger links with the city with the original name.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
