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.
I think you'd see increased size and influence mostly in Baltimore, but also noticeable differences in Philadelphia, Annapolis, and Alexandria. Richmond's cultural and economic influence may be larger as well since there wouldn't be nearly as much development and growth in NOVA.
I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that if you take the seat of federal government and the millions of people living and working in that city and suburbs out of the picture, Richmond may see even a small shift in development patterns over the centuries, do you? Yes, it's 100 miles, but the DC area is one of the most significant population and employment centers for the people of Virginia. If you completely eliminate that population and employment center, I think Virginia develops differently and more growth is centered around Richmond. Does it become like Atlanta or Charlotte? Probably not. But it would probably be larger and more influential than it is today.
An argument could be made for Norfolk though too - better seaport (well a seaport) compared to Richmond
Question is where would the capital have been then
It was pretty clear it wasn't going to be Philly or NYC - then next choice was actually just NW of Trenton - like 4 miles close to where where 206 and 31 meet 95. it was the first point non -navigable by sea-going ship on the Delaware - Trenton is
What to me is crazy is could you imagine a capital in between NYC and Philadelphia today (14 miles from Philly and like 38 miles from NYC - well their closest city borders today - at the time were at least a days travel by horse, today as short as 25 minutes by rail)
How do you explain how Harrisburg never grew that big?
Did Philadelphia take away most of the population that would have otherwise settled in that area?
Harrisburg is an entirely different animal with a different history and significance. It makes for a poor comparison. In PA, Philadelphia has always held the cards as the center of gravity. Even at times when Pitt could have even been considered the richer city, Philly was still more important to PA. Harrisburg is and always has been just the capital - a nice town no less. Historically, Richmond's role in Virginia has been more central and important to the state, than Harrisburg was to PA. This is in part because Richmond was where all the wealthy landowners did their business, where the lawyers were, bankers, peddlers, and unfortunate financiers of the nasty slave trade all did their thing. In Virginia, Richmond has always been the personifier of the state even if it wasn't the biggest city, and people were drawn there for this reason. And even in Hampton Roads with Norfolk, Richmond is still considered the center of things. For PA, Philly was the place of business in much the same way, but for different reasons. These types of things have inertia and over time certain industries become entrenched and grow. And Philly's weight certainly does impact Harrisburg. When I lived in Ardmore, Pa you better believe that there were literally dozens of super-commuters who worked in PA state gov't that took the (heavily subsidized) Keystone line from Philly on a daily basis, to and from Harrisburg, because they did not want to live there. In fact, I was one of those people for a short time.
Keep in mind that the balance of power in terms of states in the late 1700s was also much different than today. Virginia was big and held a lot of clout, having the biggest population and important public figures. When the Federalist Papers were published, they were published in New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and Richmond. The folks at the constitutional convention had agreed that the new constitution would officially "outlaw" the transatlantic slave trade (but not the selling of slaves domestically) and in turn the new capital would be in the south. Washington picked the Potomac, probably because it was close to where he lived and basically half way between the new states. So, had the capital been placed elsewhere, it may well have been somewhere like Federicksburg, VA or Annapolis, MD.
If capital had stayed in NY, which is where it was at the time of the Philadelphia Convention, I imagine that Baltimore would actually be a wealthier city, but not necessarily any larger or smaller. It's just that more wealth would have gravitated there, the natural port city, than to a federal behemoth neighbor to the south. And if you look at the industries that dot the DC suburbs in Virginia, many of those didn't even exist 20-30 years ago. They were farmlands. Thus, Northern VA as we know it might not even exist at all. It would likely be very similar to North Carolina. In Richmond's case, there is a lot of people flow between Richmond and the DC area, and while I imagine the city would be larger than it is now (given less outflow to NoVA), the city would probably be like a large version of Winston-Salem, quite quintessentially Southern, conservative, and there would be no debate about what kind of state Virginia is. So much of Virginia has to do with proximity and ties to the capital that it also loses those perks like (Langley, Quantico, CIA, Pentagon, Norfolk Naval Base, the list goes on). I honestly do not see Hampton Roads holding on to that naval base. Maryland as whole would probably be like Virginia is today with people claiming that Baltimore is not really Northern/Southern. ...And it would also be swing state.
Maryland would have retained a lot more Southern culture. Without the DC suburbs, Maryland would be a lot like North Carolina or Georgia. Maryland would definitely be a Republican state without the DC area, and Virginia wouldn't be worrying about turning blue either without the NOVA suburbs. If you take away Montgomery County and PG County, Maryland would be a conservative, Republican dominated state. Yes there would still be Democrats in Baltimore City but they can be outvoted, like the Democrats in New Orleans and Atlanta. The rest of Maryland would be better off today without the nanny state laws, unions, smart growth restrictions, taxes, etc etc.
And howard... and baltimore county (not city).... and charles.... basically, where 90% of the population lives. So if you took away 90% of the population and retained the alabama portions, you're right, Maryland would be a red state and not home to the highest median income in the country.
Obviously Maryland is in your radar because you choose to attack me for stating the obvious that Maryland is a Southern state in which it looks like you have a problem with accepting it.
It's not so obvious that Maryland and DC are in the South... just saying. I've lived here my whole life, and I've always thought of it as Northern. I know I'm not alone, because many of the polls in City-Data have most people saying it is in the Northeast:
I accept that you might think that DC/MD is southern: Southern MD has that southern "Twang" to it, and even some places in southern PG county. That's just a matter of opinion, and saying that your opinion is an "obvious" fact is misleading and wrong. There are arguments for and against it.
That said, I do think Maryland would have been quite rural and "Southern" if DC hadn't existed, with one exception: if Georgetown had developed into a large industrial city, it probably would have been more similar to Philadelphia and Baltimore, which (I think, at least) are "Northern."
It's an interesting question, and I was thinking about it last week. As to whether the non-existence of DC would cause growth in Richmond and Baltimore, I'm not sure.
Sure some people think that Maryland and DC as being northern but that does not make it A Fact........
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisvishr0
It's not so obvious that Maryland and DC are in the South... just saying. I've lived here my whole life, and I've always thought of it as Northern. I know I'm not alone, because many of the polls in City-Data have most people saying it is in the Northeast:
I accept that you might think that DC/MD is southern: Southern MD has that southern "Twang" to it, and even some places in southern PG county. That's just a matter of opinion, and saying that your opinion is an "obvious" fact is misleading and wrong. There are arguments for and against it.
That said, I do think Maryland would have been quite rural and "Southern" if DC hadn't existed, with one exception: if Georgetown had developed into a large industrial city, it probably would have been more similar to Philadelphia and Baltimore, which (I think, at least) are "Northern."
It's an interesting question, and I was thinking about it last week. As to whether the non-existence of DC would cause growth in Richmond and Baltimore, I'm not sure.
How do you explain how Harrisburg never grew that big?
Did Philadelphia take away most of the population that would have otherwise settled in that area?
I don't know. I'd guess age may played a role? Philadelphia was around a bit longer than Harrisburg and Philadelphia made more sense as a hub of commerce than Harrisburg due to the seaport. On the other hand, Richmond had more than 1/2 a century to grow before DC was even planned. Beyond that, Richmond was one of a few industrial cities in the South (whereas the North was heavily industrialized so Harrisburg wasn't as essential in that regard) which made it critical for the region in the years leading up to the Civil War. These are just (somewhat) educated guesses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by $mk8795
I was thinking that the Hampton Roads region would be much larger since it is along the water.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
An argument could be made for Norfolk though too - better seaport (well a seaport) compared to Richmond
Question is where would the capital have been then
It was pretty clear it wasn't going to be Philly or NYC - then next choice was actually just NW of Trenton - like 4 miles close to where where 206 and 31 meet 95. it was the first point non -navigable by sea-going ship on the Delaware - Trenton is
What to me is crazy is could you imagine a capital in between NYC and Philadelphia today (14 miles from Philly and like 38 miles from NYC - well their closest city borders today - at the time were at least a days travel by horse, today as short as 25 minutes by rail)
I definitely agree with you. I thought about Norfolk too. I didn't post about Norfolk because there would be so many variables. For instance, it's a huge military complex and part of the reason (not even close to the ONLY reason, though) for that is because of its proximity to the capital (the excellent seaport is obviously a major plus). Norfolk's military presence is one of the major reasons it's as large as it is today. I was wondering if the capital were to be located further North (i.e. Trenton area), does Norfolk see less military investment? More? The same? Does it grow bigger because there's less focus on NOVA or not grow as much because the capital is further north? I don't know. If the capital is near Trenton, does the Cape May area or Baltimore become the military hub of the East Coast? One thing is for sure, Norfolk/Hampton Roads is impacted regardless.
I can't imagine a National Capital between Philadelphia and NYC. My guess is that it wouldn't be nearly the city Washington DC is today. It would likely be much, much smaller. I wonder what the impact on New York and Philadelphia's growth would have been too?
Sure some people think that Maryland and DC as being northern but that does not make it A Fact........
Agreed. That was kind of my point -- just because someone thinks it's southern or northern doesn't mean it's a fact. I quote, from my post:
"That's just a matter of opinion, and saying that your opinion is an "obvious" fact is misleading and wrong. There are arguments for and against it."
I never said that my opinion is more valid than anyone else's. I'm here to learn and discuss.
I still think we're in the Northeast, because that's what people told me when I was growing up, and I feel more comfortable/at home when I travel to Philly, NYC or Boston than when I travel to Asheville or Charlotte. But you might not feel that way, and that's okay! Just don't pass your opinion off as a fact.
Now, more relevant to the topic, how do you think Georgetown might have grown? I can imagine it being something the size of Williamsport PA or Cumberland MD, but not more than that..
Umm hmm, and at the end if the day Maryland is still a southern state which makes DC a Southern city despite opposing opinions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisvishr0
Agreed. That was kind of my point -- just because someone thinks it's southern or northern doesn't mean it's a fact. I quote, from my post:
"That's just a matter of opinion, and saying that your opinion is an "obvious" fact is misleading and wrong. There are arguments for and against it."
I never said that my opinion is more valid than anyone else's. I'm here to learn and discuss.
I still think we're in the Northeast, because that's what people told me when I was growing up, and I feel more comfortable/at home when I travel to Philly, NYC or Boston than when I travel to Asheville or Charlotte. But you might not feel that way, and that's okay! Just don't pass your opinion off as a fact.
Now, more relevant to the topic, how do you think Georgetown might have grown? I can imagine it being something the size of Williamsport PA or Cumberland MD, but not more than that..
Last edited by $mk8795; 04-29-2014 at 04:16 PM..
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.
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.
