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.
Looking at a couple other threads on this, it seems that people agree that both Massachusetts and Virginia are both equally rich in important and fascinating history, but that Southern New England historic sites are a little more compact and feel more "down the street" although Virginias individual historic sites might be on average more stately.
Where do the Misdle Colonies fit here? I always understand that Philadelphia and the middle colonies had a disproportionate influence on the Midwest than the other two. (dialect, ethnic German influence, etc.)
BTW: A few years ago when visiting family in VA, I got a pass that gets you into Jamestown, Williamsburg, and Yorktown. Amazing! Definitely compact but far from where most Virginians live.
When I think of Colonial history in the U.S. I think of the period between 1607 (Jamestown) and 1776 (the Declaration of Independence) when the British were in control of the thirteen colonies. From what I can discover, there are really very few buildings that were constructed in the 1600s that are still standing today (<100) with the majority of those that are standing located along the Boston-NYC axis. Thus when I think of Colonial America I usually think of the 1700s and of places along the eastern seaboard where there is significant early American history along with concentrations of buildings from that period.
With this in mind, I think it is hard to beat Philadelphia. The city was founded in 1682 by William Penn, and although there are very few buildings here built before 1700, there are hundreds constructed between 1700 and 1776. The Society Hill/Old City neighborhoods alone have the largest concentration of original 18th century residential architecture of any place in the country with Elfreth's Alley being the oldest continuously occupied street in the U.S. (32 houses dating from 1728). And the list of famous buildings here is truly impressive--Old Swedes Church (1699); Christ Church (1727); Independence Hall (1732-48); Pennsylvania Hospital (1751); Betsy Ross House (1760); Man Full of Trouble Tavern (1760); Carpenters Hall (1770); and The Todd House (1775). Of course cobblestone streets abound throughout the area.
So if you are looking for a place where Colonial American history is woven into the very fabric of a modern city, look no further than Philadelphia. It's one of the reasons I moved here 14-years ago. When I walk around Society Hill, I feel as though I'm strolling through a beautiful painting!
Looking at a couple other threads on this, it seems that people agree that both Massachusetts and Virginia are both equally rich in important and fascinating history, but that Southern New England historic sites are a little more compact and feel more "down the street" although Virginias individual historic sites might be on average more stately.
Where do the Misdle Colonies fit here? I always understand that Philadelphia and the middle colonies had a disproportionate influence on the Midwest than the other two. (dialect, ethnic German influence, etc.)
BTW: A few years ago when visiting family in VA, I got a pass that gets you into Jamestown, Williamsburg, and Yorktown. Amazing! Definitely compact but far from where most Virginians live.
Hmm...The Historic Triangle (Wmsbg. Jamestown and Yorktown) is within the VA Beach/Norfolk metro with a population of almost 1.8 million. It is also within 40 miles of the Richmond metro with 1.2 million population.
So the Triangle is actually within an area in Virginia with almost 3 million people, by all means not FAR from where most Virginians live.
I have. I haven't however been to a lot of the other places. Virginia has amazing history, but I'm wondering if Mass/Conn/RI might be places where you are more likely to have a 1600s building down the street type of thing.
If you're just looking for 17th century building, eastern New England is probably the best of the two. Even there, the earliest buildings tend not to survive, earliest settlement buildings were always relatively primitive and built fast. Population was also much smaller; not hard to find 18th century buildings at all in Massachusetts. Oldest house in Massachusetts, 1640:
Albany is older than Boston, New York and Philadelphia for **** sake. But no mention.
Albany was a city before Boston, Boston was a town till 1820 or something.
That is simply a change in Government not existence.
Its kind of like saying the United States is an older country than France because the US government has been continuous since 1789 and France since 1958.
No it isn't because Boston TORE DOWN a number of theirs for more contemporary buildings the last 50 years. The rest of the state is mostly wooden houses.
Philadelphia by itself has more colonial housing stock than Boston does by a considerable margin.
Boston tore down 1900s Tenements not old colonial buildings.
I guess wooden Buildings don't count?
Albany was a city before Boston, Boston was a town till 1820 or something.
That is simply a change in Government not existence.
Its kind of like saying the United States is an older country than France because the US government has been continuous since 1789 and France since 1958.
Albany was founded slightly earlier than Boston. Boston founded 1630, Albany 1624. But Albany was little more than a frontier outpost for the first few decades. Boston became the region's largest town quickly and was the colonial capital.
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.