I don't think the Hudson River should be named after Henry Hudson. Apparently he records in his own diary that his first mate Robert Juet opened fire on an Indian canoe that approached his boat. There was no sense of threat: it was murder for the pure enjoyment of killing and recognized as such by Hudson himself, as reported in his own dairy. What did he do to Juet for this act? Nothing. They continued to spread mayhem and death from Manhattan to Albany.
So, why not call the river after the Indian name instead? Why walk around honoring a cold blooded murderer every time we look at a river? We just had the harvest festival at the Martin Van Buren Historic Site near our house. A group of Mohawk Indians formerly of this area who now have a reservation in Wisconsin who come every year.
The Hudson River was called the Muheakantuck in Mohawk. The way the woman pronounced it to me it was "Mani Can He Tuck." I found it easier to remember as "My Man, Connie Tuck."
So from now on, if I talk about My Man Connie Tuck, that's the river formerly known as the Hudson. "I'm going to go for a ride with My Man Connie Tuck." That means I going canoeing on the Hudson.
Even shorter, I can drop the My Man. The West Side Highway runs along the Connie Tuck.
Hudson was a murderer and Stuyvesant was a tyrant. Why honor an anti-democratic oppressive tyrant? Everything that is named after Peter Stuyvesant should be renamed in honor of Robert Hodgson, leader of the Flushing Rebellion.
I live in Stuyvesant Falls in the Town of Stuyvesant on the banks of Hudson River. I don't like it. I would rather live in the town of Glencadia in the Town of Hodgson on the banks of the Mi-man-can-i-tuck.
As far as I'm concerned, that where I live.