U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-31-2012, 08:32 PM
 
29,873 posts, read 27,324,185 times
Reputation: 18427

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
My humble opinion:

What I call the South: Missouri south of the St. Louis metropolitan area, the far southern reaches of Illinois, far southern Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia south of the panhandle, Virginia below the Rapahannock river, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida north of Disneyworld, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, the far eastern part of Texas, the far east part of Oklahoma.

Points where the South ends:
Northern points: Cincinnati,OH;Wheeling,WVA;Virginia's DC suburbs;St. Louis Metropolitan area
Southern points where the south ends(ironically): Disneyworld(Orlando), Tampa-St. Petersburg area(and no point further north), Cape Canaveral.
Western points: Dallas-Ft.Worth metro, Tulsa metro
Very comprehensive...great job!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-01-2013, 08:02 AM
 
10,167 posts, read 17,107,086 times
Reputation: 5741
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
My humble opinion:

What I call the South: Missouri south of the St. Louis metropolitan area, the far southern reaches of Illinois, far southern Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia south of the panhandle, Virginia below the Rapahannock river, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida north of Disneyworld, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, the far eastern part of Texas, the far east part of Oklahoma.

Points where the South ends:
Northern points: Cincinnati,OH;Wheeling,WVA;Virginia's DC suburbs;St. Louis Metropolitan area
Southern points where the south ends(ironically): Disneyworld(Orlando), Tampa-St. Petersburg area(and no point further north), Cape Canaveral.
Western points: Dallas-Ft.Worth metro, Tulsa metro
Why do you think the "South ends" (western wise) around the DFW area? West of that point, what does it become? And why does it become something different than the South? Which, apparently, you consider to be the southeast?

I am really not trying to be a smarta$$ here, but yep, a point of irritation to me is that false notion that the South somehow ends around Ft. Worth. IMHO, this whole thing got started with Hollywood movies and traces back to the Ft. Worth city theme "Where the West Begins". That is ok...properly understood and within the original context. Over time though, it has been taken out of context!.

What it originally meant was where the EAST ends, not the South. Ft. Worth was settled overwhelminly by southeastern pioneers looking to get a new start. The old Cotton Exchange was just a much part of FW as was the Cow Town...although one attracted more tourist trade. The Southern heritage of Ft. Worth was never denied at all. They simply built upon a "frontier west" image, not that they denied their basic Southern roots. Hell, that would have been unimaginable. There is a big difference in the "frontier west" and the interior Southwest and Rocky Mountain West. Kansas is a western state too...but it is nothing like the West of the Rockies. It is a product of the Midwest, just as Texas is a product of the American South.

Here is a good link on the subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontier_Strip

And who settled West Texas? Again, it was migrants from the southeast...which is why, when it comes to the Southern Baptist church being unquestionably domiant, and Southern twangs and drawls and cotton farming...and just about everything else associated with the eastern South, that West Texas is still essentially Southern. Not at all "Southwestern", if by "Southwest" one means a cultural/historical kinship with New Mexico and Arizona. It just isn't so, topography not withstanding.

The former is "western South". The latter is "southern West". There is a huge difference....

Last edited by TexasReb; 01-01-2013 at 08:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 4,225,932 times
Reputation: 998
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
My humble opinion:

What I call the South: Missouri south of the St. Louis metropolitan area, the far southern reaches of Illinois, far southern Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia south of the panhandle, Virginia below the Rapahannock river, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida north of Disneyworld, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, the far eastern part of Texas, the far east part of Oklahoma.

Points where the South ends:
Northern points: Cincinnati,OH;Wheeling,WVA;Virginia's DC suburbs;St. Louis Metropolitan area
Southern points where the south ends(ironically): Disneyworld(Orlando), Tampa-St. Petersburg area(and no point further north), Cape Canaveral.
Western points: Dallas-Ft.Worth metro, Tulsa metro
I strongly disagree about Missouri south of the St. Louis metropolitan area. You are not in the south as soon as you are outside of St. Louis...far from it. You have to go at least 100 miles south of a line from St. Louis to Jefferson City to Kansas City before you can truly say you are in the south. As far as the Tulsa and Dallas metro areas being the western limits of the south, I can tell you for a fact this is false. Amarillo, Texas is still very much a part of the south. The northernmost limits of the south and westernmost ones are way off...the northernmost limits of the south are the northern half of Kentucky, at least 2/3 of Virginia, West Virginia south of Clarksburg, and Missouri starting at Springfield and Cape Girardeau moving south. THe western most limits I'd say are into eastern New Mexico practically.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 05:09 PM
 
10,167 posts, read 17,107,086 times
Reputation: 5741
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlouisan View Post
I strongly disagree about Missouri south of the St. Louis metropolitan area. You are not in the south as soon as you are outside of St. Louis...far from it. You have to go at least 100 miles south of a line from St. Louis to Jefferson City to Kansas City before you can truly say you are in the south. As far as the Tulsa and Dallas metro areas being the western limits of the south, I can tell you for a fact this is false. Amarillo, Texas is still very much a part of the south. The northernmost limits of the south and westernmost ones are way off...the northernmost limits of the south are the northern half of Kentucky, at least 2/3 of Virginia, West Virginia south of Clarksburg, and Missouri starting at Springfield and Cape Girardeau moving south. THe western most limits I'd say are into eastern New Mexico practically.
Well said, my friend. While I might hesitate a bit to call any part of New Mexico "Southern", you definitely have a good point in that far eastern New Mexico has some of the influence, notably the language and Southern Baptist Church influence, largely due to the fact that many Texans moved out that way, early on.

This map is -- IMO -- about the most accurate I have ever seen when it comes to the northern and western limits of "The South". It indicates the aproximate extent of "Southern American English". Other than self-identification with a region, the common "language" is probably the single most important feature of the same, in terms of boundaries...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...EnglishMap.jpg

Off on the proverbial related tangent, one reason I tend to get so irritated (not that anyone cares! LOL) when some people tend to lump western Texas into the same "Southwest" class as New Mexico and Arizona, is that (again, just my worthless opinion!), so little thought seems to be put into it. This is nothing against NM and AZ in the least. There are great people and truly beautiful landscapes in both. It is just that, while they are Southwest, they are not the same Southwest as Texas. The former are southern West, the latter is western South. The are all "Southwestern", but not of the same variety...

While Texas had some influence (as you mention) in eastern parts of New Mexico, the interior Southwestern states played little if any role in the development of Texas. Hell, they did not even become states until the early 20th Century...whereas Texas was already obviously -- both culturally and historically -- a progeny of the American South.

If there is any state I can think of that is analogous, it would be Kansas. Although Texas and Kansas are for sure not in the same region, it is still amazing that no one questions Kansas' status as a Midwestern state, yet Texas -- which in many ways is the macrocosm of the South because of its blend of features of both the Deep and Upper South -- has always been the subject of so much debate. Put another way, both states are "western"...but neither of them are "the West" as in Rocky Mountain and/or desert Southwest, West

Last edited by TexasReb; 01-01-2013 at 06:37 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 06:17 PM
 
1,189 posts, read 1,808,378 times
Reputation: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlouisan View Post
I strongly disagree about Missouri south of the St. Louis metropolitan area. You are not in the south as soon as you are outside of St. Louis...far from it. You have to go at least 100 miles south of a line from St. Louis to Jefferson City to Kansas City before you can truly say you are in the south. As far as the Tulsa and Dallas metro areas being the western limits of the south, I can tell you for a fact this is false. Amarillo, Texas is still very much a part of the south. The northernmost limits of the south and westernmost ones are way off...the northernmost limits of the south are the northern half of Kentucky, at least 2/3 of Virginia, West Virginia south of Clarksburg, and Missouri starting at Springfield and Cape Girardeau moving south. THe western most limits I'd say are into eastern New Mexico practically.
Good description. However i would say the south ends around lubbock and amarillo. El Paso is certainly not related to the south and its much more like the west. E N. Mexico is more like the west as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 06:45 PM
 
10,167 posts, read 17,107,086 times
Reputation: 5741
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amercity View Post
Good description. However i would say the south ends around lubbock and amarillo. El Paso is certainly not related to the south and its much more like the west. E N. Mexico is more like the west as well.
I would grant El Paso and even, perhaps (with qualifications) Amarillo, but not Lubbock. I stand by what I said above as concerns West Texas relationship to the South. That is, it is the South moved into a more western environment. West Texas is pure Southern Baptist country, and no where is the "Mountain South" twang anywhere stronger. And definitely, next to the Mississippi Delta area, the most productive part of the original "Cotton Belt" South.

What about west Texas would you say has more culturally/historically in common with Arizona or Colorado, than with Tennessee or Arkansas...?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2013, 12:37 PM
Status: "I hate living in Georgia!!" (set 7 days ago)
 
47,978 posts, read 45,435,742 times
Reputation: 15309
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb View Post
Why do you think the "South ends" (western wise) around the DFW area? West of that point, what does it become? And why does it become something different than the South? Which, apparently, you consider to be the southeast?

I am really not trying to be a smarta$$ here, but yep, a point of irritation to me is that false notion that the South somehow ends around Ft. Worth. IMHO, this whole thing got started with Hollywood movies and traces back to the Ft. Worth city theme "Where the West Begins". That is ok...properly understood and within the original context. Over time though, it has been taken out of context!.

What it originally meant was where the EAST ends, not the South. Ft. Worth was settled overwhelminly by southeastern pioneers looking to get a new start. The old Cotton Exchange was just a much part of FW as was the Cow Town...although one attracted more tourist trade. The Southern heritage of Ft. Worth was never denied at all. They simply built upon a "frontier west" image, not that they denied their basic Southern roots. Hell, that would have been unimaginable. There is a big difference in the "frontier west" and the interior Southwest and Rocky Mountain West. Kansas is a western state too...but it is nothing like the West of the Rockies. It is a product of the Midwest, just as Texas is a product of the American South.

Here is a good link on the subject:

Frontier Strip - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And who settled West Texas? Again, it was migrants from the southeast...which is why, when it comes to the Southern Baptist church being unquestionably domiant, and Southern twangs and drawls and cotton farming...and just about everything else associated with the eastern South, that West Texas is still essentially Southern. Not at all "Southwestern", if by "Southwest" one means a cultural/historical kinship with New Mexico and Arizona. It just isn't so, topography not withstanding.

The former is "western South". The latter is "southern West". There is a huge difference....
I'm just calling it as I see it. And to me, I see much of Texas as being more western. Eastern Texas, I see it as South, but from Dallas westward, not so much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2013, 05:01 PM
 
10,167 posts, read 17,107,086 times
Reputation: 5741
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
I'm just calling it as I see it. And to me, I see much of Texas as being more western. Eastern Texas, I see it as South, but from Dallas westward, not so much.
And nothing wrong with calling it as you see it. We all do that, and there is no "right answer", anyway. I always enjoy exchanging wth a worthy opponent, even if I disagree with them...

What I am asking though is what about most of West Texas is more historically and culturally akin to the Rocky Mountain and/or Interior Southwest states such as Colorado and Arizona, than with states like Tennesee and Arkansas?

Now, if one is talking in terms of purely physical geography, then I would agree with you. But even then, I would put west Texas more in terms of an "East/West" division (or gradient), than a "South/West" division. That is why I brought up the example of how the Ft. Worth slogan of "Where the West Begins" was never intended to mean -- from the opposite direction -- "Where the South Ends". Not at all. This is backed up quite a bit by the reply from Dallas which said "Where the East Ends". There is a noteable difference here

*considering* And really, most of West Texas geography more resembles the Plains states. Not the true "West" And no one (I don't think) would put Texas and Kansas in the same class in terms of the more important considerations of what defines a true region, such as, again, history and culture...which embraces speech patterns, settlement patterns, church membership, political voting patterns, etc. The only real similarity is a lot of landscape, and that both can fairly be considered "western states", just as both Tennessee and Ohio can be considered "eastern" states. But it doesn't make them part of the same historical/cultural region, as the definition usually goes.

In the case of west Texas, it was a product of overwhelming American South influence, just as Kansas was one of the eastern Midwest. Other than a post-bellum settlement history, neither shared much common history with the states west of the frontier strip, which can be defined by that as West as defined by the Census Bureau.

https://www.census.gov/geo/www/us_regdiv.pdf

Frontier Strip - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think another way to put it, and make the central point, just as the terms "West" and "Midwest" are not mutually exclusive in Kansas? Neither are the terms "West" and "South" mutually exclusive in Texas.

There does exist, of course, a "western South" sub-region (covering most of Texas and large part of Oklahoma, at the least), but it has to be properly placed into "familial" context with its relationship with the larger American South. In this case, how the "eastern South" pioneers after the WBTS were definitely the most responsible for the development of the area.

This is in contrast to the "Southwest" of New Mexico and Arizona, where there is almost nothing "Southern" about them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2013, 09:33 AM
 
2,331 posts, read 3,804,852 times
Reputation: 357
Yeah your humble opinion, however just by judging from your comment it looks like you have Never Traveled to the state of Maryland and is going by the opinion of others to not fully understand that Maryland is also a Southern State.

Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
My humble opinion:

What I call the South: Missouri south of the St. Louis metropolitan area, the far southern reaches of Illinois, far southern Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia south of the panhandle, Virginia below the Rapahannock river, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida north of Disneyworld, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, the far eastern part of Texas, the far east part of Oklahoma.

Points where the South ends:
Northern points: Cincinnati,OH;Wheeling,WVA;Virginia's DC suburbs;St. Louis Metropolitan area
Southern points where the south ends(ironically): Disneyworld(Orlando), Tampa-St. Petersburg area(and no point further north), Cape Canaveral.
Western points: Dallas-Ft.Worth metro, Tulsa metro
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2013, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 1,794,252 times
Reputation: 1053
Quote:
Originally Posted by $mk8795 View Post
Yeah your humble opinion, however just by judging from your comment it looks like you have Never Traveled to the state of Maryland and is going by the opinion of others to not fully understand that Maryland is also a Southern State.

Maryland isn't in the south.

It borders the south.

It has random southern elements.

Let it go.

You will NOT win this argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top