Some interesting toponymic tidbits · 1:38pm Sep 14th, 2013
When I am doing my research for the next LC, I come across the following text that explores the history of the -villes, -to(w)ns and -dales in the U.S.:
Usage of -ville in the United States
According to toponymist George R. Stewart, the use of the suffix -ville for settlements in the United States did not begin until after the American Revolution. Previously, town-names did not usually use suffixes unless named after European towns in which case the name was borrowed wholly. When a suffix was needed, -town (or the word Town) was typically added (as in Charleston, South Carolina, originally Charles Town). In the middle of the 18th century the suffixes -borough (-boro) and -burgh (-burg) came into style. The use of -town (-ton) also increased, in part due to the increasing use of personal names for new settlements. Thus the settlement founded by William Trent became known as Trenton. These three suffixes, -town/-ton, -borough/-boro, and -burgh/-burg became popular before the Revolution, while -ville was almost completely unused until afterward. Its post-revolutionary popularity, along with the decline in the use of -town, was due in part to the pro-French sentiments which spread through the country after the war. The founding of Louisville, Kentucky, in 1780, for example, used not only the French suffix but the name of the French king. The popularity of -ville was most popular in the southern and western (Appalachian) regions of the new country, and less popular in New England.
A few -ville names pre-date the revolution, but most of them are named after European settlements or dukedoms. For example, Granville, Massachusetts was named for the Earl of Granville (he was named himself after Granville, Manche (Normandy)). After the revolution and the decline in the use of -borough and -town, the two suffixes -ville and -burgh/-burg became by far the most popular for many decades. A difference between the usage of the two is that -burgh/-burg was almost always appended to a personal name while -ville was appended to any word. Some personal names became associated with one suffix or another. For example, Williamstown and Williamsburg are both more common than Williamsville; Georgetown is far more common than Georgeville.
By the middle of the 19th century the -ville suffix began to lose its popularity, with newly popular suffixes with -wood, -hurst, -mere, -dale, and others taking over.
So it would be Lunaborough, not Lunaville?
1349295 Consider how
oldlong-lived she is, it would probably be Lunabury or Lunaburgh, two yet earlier forms of borough.Come to think about it, the two royals somehow have Latinate names among a sea of English names, maybe a toponymic prefix/suffix that has roots from Sub-Roman Britain (think Canterlot/Camelot) would also do. Something like Lun(a)chester/Lun(a)coln?
1349365 Wasn't London Londonium once? Which would mean that somewhere there's a lost city of Lunadonium? (possibly inhabited by batponies?) Lunchester would be a smaller settlement.
Again, my headcanon is that Ancient Unicorn = Latin; thus explaining the Latinate names.
1349432 It should be Londinium, my friend.
A fine name as it is, it might not befit a strictly uniform etymological setting, since Londinium likely had a Celtic origin which was *Londinion, "Place of Londinos". Londinos was a Celtic personal name which in turn means "wild". On the other hand, Luncoln and Lunchester would be of pure Latin extract since they come from Luna + Colonia (Latin for colony) and Luna + Castra (Latin for fort) respectively.
Gah! Londinium!
And thus it becomes Lunchester: Mountain Home of the Batponies.