More Than Spuds

I completely disagree with the name Idaho for the state. Yes, I realize it's been called such for over a hundred years. But, why? Talk about poor marketing. It doesn't even sound appealing!

Okay, so this is all in my humble opinion, and you're more than welcome to disagree. But, the parts of Idaho that I have traversed were beautiful areas. Undeserving of such a name. Really, do you want to visit a place called Idaho? Or live there? ... That's what I thought.

In all fairness, it's true that the word Idaho is thought to be an Indian word meaning "gem of the mountains." That is an apt name, and a good PR move. But, there's two problems with it. First, how many people really know that? And second... well, it doesn't actually mean that. It's not even Indian! A guy named George M. Willing (who was trying to make Idaho a state, but got involved in some messy fraudulent things, as I understand) made up the meaning for it (gem of the mountains).

According to my research (I read a grand total of one article, so if they lied to me, I'm going to have to rewrite a lot of this--see the pdf for yourself), Idaho was the name for the Pike's Peak mining area, before Congress established it as Colorado. Now, wouldn't that have been interesting if the name stuck there? We'd be going to the Idaho Rockies, skiing in Idaho, visiting the mile-high city of Idaho.

Somebody with foresight was on Colorado's side. So, a pretty little funny-shaped territory to the northwest of it got stuck with the name Idaho, instead.

Now, I really have no reason for venting about all of this. It would be a little weird to start changing state names and all that. I just wanted to say that Idaho is beautiful, despite it's name (no, I don't live there, and I gain absolutely nothing by encouraging your visiting). And, oddly enough, the name has grown on me as I've thought about it and researched it.

So, hey. Idaho. Why not?