In George’s recent Report on the origin of the term “Indians” for indigenous Americans, he comments:
Now, I don’t know where Ohians are from, but most of the folks who root for Cleveland teams, however styled, are Ohioans. Just for the record.
[Insert Wahoo smiley here]
Who said anything about Ohioans? Ohians are of course native to the Republic of Ohia. These gentle people worship Chief Wahoo as a god, and believe he will one day visit their island home and lead them to earthly paradise.
[sup][sub](Sheesh, Chronos, now you tell me? Anyway, Little Ed missed it too.)
(Psst. Hey Dex, can you fix that?)[/sub][/sup]
Fix under way, thanks, Chronos.
Not to nit pick (too much, anyway) but shouldn’t it be NEITHER “Ohians” NOR “Ohioans” but rather “Buckeyes”? 
So far as I know, the term “Buckeye”, used in reference to a person, is reserved for a person attending or otherwise affiliated with Ohio State University. It is the “Buckeye State” (official nickname), but that’s the state, not the residents.
Well , Lighter first cites “buckeye” from 1833. “The indigenous backwoodsman is sometimes called buck-eye, in distinction from the numerous emigrants who are introducing themselves from the eastern states.”
Not according to Merriam-Webster’s:
**
Although I was (conceived and) born but a (P. Bunyon-sized) stone-throw from the Buckeye State (and have been stopped at the traffic-traps manned by the Buckeye State Coppers [aka “fascisti”] so many times that I always take the looong route throught the State of the Happy Hoosiers), I confess, samclem, that I never knew the origin of the interesting (yet enigmatic) term “Buckeye”.
Do you have any deeper information as to the original source of the term, samclem?
It’s derived from the American horsechestnut, whose shiny brown seeds have a large pale spot on the side, making them look (supposedly) like the eyes of deer (bucks).
I write a highly erudite report on Columbus and the Indians, drawing no fewer than seven languages, and we get enmeshed in a discussion on why residents of Ohio (aka the Do-nut State) are called Buckeyes?! Pah! Next we’ll be discussing where to find the best do-nut shop in in Columbus, or who was the original Cleveland Indian (Lou Sockalexis, BTW).
Ah. Thanks, Colibri. I didn’t know that about the chestnut. Was really thinking about the origin of the term “Buckeye” as a name for the denizens of the Buckeye State. Sort of suspected that it had something to do with a (White-tail?) Buck’s eye: At least the vision of their highway coppers is at least as good as a (White-tail?) buck’s vision or even an eagle’s vision. 
'Twas a very nice report, BTW. I know this thread is about the report and I neglected to say how good it was. Very interesting. Dispelled some of my personal myths about C. Colombus. (My birthday is Oct. 12, “Columbus Day”. )
I suspect that Ohio was called the “Buckeye State” because the tree was common there, and that just got extended later to the residents.
[sub](And thanks for the compliment on the report. I swear I’m going to start deliberately putting in misspellings in these things just to get some feedback.)[/sub]
I was very sincere in my comment. In fact, I understated things by quite a bit: I had been trying to read your report for several days (about the word “Indian” rather than about C. Colombus–although it is true that my birthday is Colombus Day) but my finger hit the Message Board thingie too quickly and I’ve never figured out how to get back. Very, very interesting. Thanks.
Colibri, a very well-written staff report.
Please elucidate this for me, however. Columbus said “A la primera que yo hallé puse nombre San Salvador . . . los Indios la llaman Guanahaní.” I thought he landed in the Bahamas, but there’s nothing in the Bahamas called San Salvador (I just checked a map to be sure.) Did some other explorer rename the island?
Well, I won’t dispute that Webster’s gives that definition, but as an Ohioan born and bred, I can tell you that I’ve never heard any person not affiliated with OSU called a buckeye. Maybe that’s just what all those Hoosiers and 'Ganders call us when our backs are turned.
There has been much dispute about which island in the Bahamas group Columbus first landed on, largely due to the fact that his original log of the voyage has been lost. (A couple of early partial transcripts and digests exist, but these include many errors and lapses.) Various investigators have championed the former Watling’s Island, Samana Cay, Cat Island, Grand Turk, and others. The present consensus has been pretty strongly for Watling’s Island, so much so that the name was changed to San Salvador in 1926. (Most modern maps I have seen label the island “San Salvador,” with “Watling’s Island” in parenthesis.) However, the controversy is not entirely dead, as an article in National Geographic in the 1980s was still pushing for Samana Cay. (Samana Cay is just south of the “d” in Long Island on the map I linked to.)
(Note to Arnold: As the name was changed 75 years ago, it might be worth checking to see if your atlas also includes the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Persia, and Siam. If so, it might be time to invest in a new one. 
)
The island that was originally known as San Salvador was renamed Watling Island sometime after the Brits took possession of the Bahamas. Watling Island is still there.
Of course, that doesn’t come close to ending the controversy, since a number of scholars believe that Columbus actually made landfall at what became known as Semana Cay or at Cat Island or somewhere else. (Columbus did not leave a titanium marker fixed in reinforced concrete at the site, and, with longitude being unavailable for several hundred more years, the dead-reckoning course he plotted leaves us unsure just where he actually landed. The islands were only given their more-or-less fixed names after the whole archipelago had been charted, and Columbus didn’t stick around to tell the chart-makers, “Yeah, that is where I first landed”)
I’ve got to learn to type faster and preview intervening responses.
(In defense of AW, I will say that I have seen maps printed within the last 25 years that used Watling Island and put San Salvador in parentheses. I don’t remember who published them.)
I was just funnin’ with him. Anyway, since Arnold tragically (if heroically) met his demise in 1386 at the Battle of Sempach, he can’t really be expected to be up on these things.
But that’s just an itty bitty piece of land! I only looked it up in my cheapo desk atlas, which would explain why the island wasn’t shown.
But this time I hauled off my lazy self to the living room to fetch my National Geographic atlas, and indeed it has San Salvador (Watling), with an airport, Cockburn Town, and a Columbus Monument.
If found a picture of the Columbus Monument here:
or to navigate there through the site, go to
Columbus Monuments Pages, click on “Alphabetical list (country - town)”, and on the next page, in the third column, click on “Columbus Landing”. Since that’s the island that took the trouble to put up some monuments to Columbus (there are more than one), I think they deserve the honour.
Information on the debate and the alternatives proposed can be found here:
http://www1.minn.net/~keithp/cclandfl.htm
The Bahamian Islands found by Chris C. in Voyage I were not followed up in too much depth by the Spanish. Columbus himself never went back to the Bahamas. The Spanish Crown concentrated its Caribbean attention on the more resource- and land-rich islands of the Greater Antilles.
Hitting the Bahamas w/o a major accident was itself something of a navigational fluke/feat. In any case, like ** tomndebb** said, with only Columbus’ notes for reference, there was no navigationally reliable way of re-finding San Salvador w/o one of the original crew on hand. Eventually the charting was done by the Brits, who provided the names under which they went onto standard maps.