Naming 13,838 and13,820?

Colorado peak questions, condition requests and other info.
Forum rules
  • This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
  • Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
  • Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
  • Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
    For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
User avatar
Trotter
Posts: 1485
Joined: 6/5/2013
14ers: 58  6 
13ers: 276 2 8
Trip Reports (10)
 

Re: Naming 13,838 and13,820?

Post by Trotter »

LifeIsGood wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2026 6:12 pm This message is just to put Ben (Supranihilest) at ease, that none of these threads ever seem to gain any real traction.
So why bother? These naming threads reminds me of political posts on social media... bunch of people argue, nothing constructive happens, and thats it. ](*,)
After climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb. -Nelson Mandela
Whenever I climb I am followed by a dog called Ego. -Nietzsche
User avatar
LifeIsGood
Posts: 107
Joined: 4/30/2020
Trip Reports (1)
 

Re: Naming 13,838 and13,820?

Post by LifeIsGood »

PRESIDENT DUMP RENAMED DENALI BACK TO MOUNT MCKINLEY!!!

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY, COMPLETELY, and UTTERLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!
User avatar
Jan van Tilburg
Posts: 13
Joined: 9/23/2009
14ers: 51 
13ers: 180
Trip Reports (1)
 

Re: Naming 13,838 and13,820?

Post by Jan van Tilburg »

Reading all arguments here I was reminded of what Edward Abbey says about this in his book Desert Solitaire (1987 edition, p.226)
On naming landmarks when in 1956 he entered the Maze, what is now know as Canyon Lands National Park, with his friend Robert Waterman:
"Why call them anything at all," asks Waterman; "why not let them alone?" And Abbey agrees: "Vanity, vanity nothing but vanity: the itch for naming things is almost as bad as the itch for possessing things. Let them and leave them alone -- they'll survive for a few more thousand years, more or less without any glorification from us."
But he is hesitant. If we don't name it, someone else will. Upon which Waterman replies: "let the shame be on their heads"
Again Abbey agrees, but yet, he stipulates; "through naming comes knowing, we grasp an object, mentally by giving it a name."

I see the power of names. That's why I prefer names like the native Americans had. A name with a meaning, preferably a meaning derived from nature, the environment.

Again, reading all arguments here, a concensus seems impossible to reach. I guess the fun is in the journey here.
(although a journey without reaching the summit is not as satisfying)
User avatar
TakeMeToYourSummit
Posts: 378
Joined: 9/9/2012
14ers: 58  2 
13ers: 320 26 3
Trip Reports (8)
 

Re: Naming 13,838 and13,820?

Post by TakeMeToYourSummit »

supranihilest wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2026 4:24 pm"colloquial names"
...are the best! My friend & I hiked up 12,914 (starting from trail 1917)... & now that peak is known as "Mount of the Fancy Savage". Why? Because.
I'm horrible with names...
But will never forget a mountain's face!