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.
Yeah, Baltimore, DC and NoVA are in the South, but in the context of more granular/detailed "regions," Mid-Atlantic would be a better descriptor.
So for the purposes of this thread, I would definitely classify them as Mid-Atlantic, and I do think North Carolina at a state-level would be the dividing line, between the South and the Mid-Atlantic, and then I would consider Pennsylvania the gateway to the North.
I said hundreds of years. Perhaps I should have said for over a hundred years. The semantics sent you all into a Confederate frenzy. Got it lol. Also, not true. Some people, even is this thread, have questioned if NY should be included. I think its a bit disingenuous to view something as ill-defined while simultaneously trying to define it for me...
Unless you are defining NY as being in New England or you are saying it is it’s own region, I don’t see how anyone can get around NYC being mid-Atlantic.
Yeah, Baltimore, DC and NoVA are in the South, but in the context of more granular/detailed "regions," Mid-Atlantic would be a better descriptor.
So for the purposes of this thread, I would definitely classify them as Mid-Atlantic, and I do think North Carolina at a state-level would be the dividing line, between the South and the Mid-Atlantic, and then I would consider Pennsylvania the gateway to the North.
I think I honestly don’t understand the conversation. Baltimore is in the South, but NC several hundred miles away is the edge of the South? Is mid-Atlantic only being viewed as a geographical marker ala the Southeast, or is it being viewed as a cultural region like New England.
Yeah, Baltimore, DC and NoVA are in the South, but in the context of more granular/detailed "regions," Mid-Atlantic would be a better descriptor.
So for the purposes of this thread, I would definitely classify them as Mid-Atlantic, and I do think North Carolina at a state-level would be the dividing line, between the South and the Mid-Atlantic, and then I would consider Pennsylvania the gateway to the North.
Why would Mid-Atlantic be a better descriptor?
It's like saying that New England is a better descriptor for Connecticut than northeast. They both serve their purposes.
The mid Atlantic states were the most populous in the union and made up of half southern and half northern states. It's the region where all the umpth was in the early days. It has less relevance today than the Mason -Dixon.
I think we are too hung up on a few cities to judge an area than the overall area itself.
Remove NYC from NYS and compare what is left to Virginia and it's night and day. Virginia would be more similar to the south than NYS.
Richmond is also closer to southern cities of its period than northern ones. Richmond, Charleston, New Orleans even smaller ones like Mobile, are all closer to Richmond than Richmond is to Syracuse, Hartford, Rochester, Albany or Trenton.
Richmond's look is a factor of its age and how big it was 150 years ago. The Charlotte's, Atlanta's Houston's of today boomed long after, but look at nearby cities that were the biggest in the area back in the day and they will look very similar.
Obviously Richmond has retained much more of its older areas than cities that boomed after (Atlanta, Houston...) but looking at the older spots in Atlanta or Houston you definitely see similarities to Richmond. So looks are not really the best judge.
Here are some of spots in Houston that had its boom a long time ago:
I don’t understand the last post. In what way is Richmond “closer” to Charleston and Mobile? Are you speaking geographically or culturally?
Geographically Richmond is closer to Boston than Atlanta. It’s closer to Philadelphia than Charlotte. It’s closer to Baltimore than Raleigh. New York City is 100 miles closer to Richmond than Charleston SC. If you’re alluding to culture, I do think New York without New York City is more similar to Virginia than Georgia (demographics and architecture). The built form of the rural east coast from NC to MA is pretty indistinguishable state to state. It’s all just Appalachia when you venture west off of 85 and 95. Virginia towns along I 81 could be anywhere in PA or NY. Western Massachusetts looks like West Virginia.
The built form of the rural east coast from NC to MA is pretty indistinguishable state to state. It’s all just Appalachia when you venture west off of 85 and 95. Virginia towns along I 81 could be anywhere in PA or NY. Western Massachusetts looks like West Virginia.
Nah this is just wrong. Very little of Massachusetts resembles North Carolina and vice versa. I'm not even gonna speak to the states in between because I don't know them as well, but I'm sure others would disagree too. How is it "all just Appalachia" west of 85 and 95? Have you heard of the Piedmont?? How does Roxboro or Rockingham or Salisbury or South Boston resemble anywhere in Appalachia, particularly Appalachia proper like West Virginia, much less Boston Boston?
If you can't distinguish the differences, for better or worse, subtle or otherwise, across different states (or even regions within states), that's on you. But claiming they don't exist is asinine and points to a lack of observation and awareness. Willful ignorance tbh.
Now hold up!. Hold the Heck up!!!
I take issue with that association.
The south isn't Hillbilly. It's not country, it's not any of those derogatory old fashion stereotypes.
That's not us.
That's not nowhere close to the majority of us.
We are not that
It's like saying that New England is a better descriptor for Connecticut than northeast. They both serve their purposes.
The mid Atlantic states were the most populous in the union and made up of half southern and half northern states. It's the region where all the umpth was in the early days. It has less relevance today than the Mason -Dixon.
I think we are too hung up on a few cities to judge an area than the overall area itself.
Remove NYC from NYS and compare what is left to Virginia and it's night and day. Virginia would be more similar to the south than NYS.
Richmond is also closer to southern cities of its period than northern ones. Richmond, Charleston, New Orleans even smaller ones like Mobile, are all closer to Richmond than Richmond is to Syracuse, Hartford, Rochester, Albany or Trenton.
Richmond's look is a factor of its age and how big it was 150 years ago. The Charlotte's, Atlanta's Houston's of today boomed long after, but look at nearby cities that were the biggest in the area back in the day and they will look very similar.
Obviously Richmond has retained much more of its older areas than cities that boomed after (Atlanta, Houston...) but looking at the older spots in Atlanta or Houston you definitely see similarities to Richmond. So looks are not really the best judge.
Here are some of spots in Houston that had its boom a long time ago:
The South is filled with areas like those, but they were never as big as Richmond and New Orleans so the scale was much smaller.
That doesn't make Richmond non southern, it just means it was bigger than the others
I mean, there's no right or wrong answer. Everything you said could be used to justify it being in the South.
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.
