Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Winchester in 1775

Expand Messages
  • tpost@patriot.net
    Kate, Winchester Virginia is in Frederick County, which is about 90 miles (guessing) west of modern Washington DC. Apparently, in the 18th century, it was
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 2, 2001
      Kate,

      Winchester Virginia is in Frederick County, which is about 90 miles
      (guessing) west of modern Washington DC. Apparently, in the 18th
      century, it was just a small frontier town (remember that even
      Williamsburg wasn't that large in the 18th c. by modern standards)
      though it did seem to support the Whig side of things. Several rifle
      companies were raised in this area and a company of the 2d Virginia
      Regiment was raised in Frederick County in November 1775.

      Also of note, this is where the Virginia "Line" was mustered out of
      service in 1783.

      Todd Post, tpost@...
      2d Virginia Regiment
      http://www.patriot.net/users/tpost/2va.html
    • Bart Reynolds
      tpost@patriot.net wrote: remember that even Williamsburg wasn t that large in the 18th c. by modern standards. Todd & List, Actually Williamsburg was not large
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 2, 2001
        tpost@... wrote:

        remember that even Williamsburg wasn't that large in the 18th c. by
        modern standards.


        Todd & List,

        Actually Williamsburg was not large by 18th century standards either.
        It was large only by standards of Virginia. Virginia, because of its
        development as a plantation based economy, had few towns and cities by
        the time of the AWI. Though I suppose it becomes somewhat subjective,
        where you draw the line between what is a town and what is a city, I
        would make the case that by 1775 Virginia had only four cities
        (Williamsburg, Richmond, Alexandria and Norfolk) and a handful of
        reasonably sized towns (Portsmouth, Yorktown and Petersburg).

        Compared with Boston, New York, Philadelphia or Charleston the city of
        Williamsburg had a much smaller population. For a city of its physical
        size it had a very low population density. While the population always
        underwent a marked increase during the sessions of the House of
        Burgesses; it was never on a par with the major cities of British North
        America.

        Bart Reynolds
      • Ron Carnegie
        ... physical ... always ... All of what Mr. Reynolds says is true, though I feel it necessary to mention that Williamsburg wasn t even the largest city
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 2, 2001
          At 04:42 PM 2/2/01 -0500, you wrote:

          >Actually Williamsburg was not large by 18th century standards either. <BR>
          >It was large only by standards of Virginia.  Virginia, because of its<BR>
          >development as a plantation based economy, had few towns and cities by<BR>
          >the time of the AWI.  Though I suppose it becomes somewhat subjective,<BR>
          >where you draw the line between what is a town and what is a city, I<BR>
          >would make the case that by 1775 Virginia had only four cities<BR>
          >(Williamsburg, Richmond, Alexandria and Norfolk) and a handful of<BR>
          >reasonably sized towns (Portsmouth, Yorktown and Petersburg). <BR>
          ><BR>
          >Compared with Boston, New York, Philadelphia or Charleston the city of<BR>
          >Williamsburg had a much smaller population.  For a city of its
          physical<BR>
          >size it had a very low population density.  While the population
          always<BR>
          >underwent a marked increase during the sessions of the House of<BR>
          >Burgesses; it was never on a par with the major cities of British North<BR>
          >America.<BR>
          ><BR>
          >Bart Reynolds<BR>

          All of what Mr. Reynolds says is true, though I feel it necessary to
          mention that Williamsburg wasn't even the largest city in Virgina, as that
          honour belongs to Norfolk. It is however also important to remember that
          there were a large number of people in a small area in Williamsburg
          (creating quite a population density). It was an urban area even if far
          smaller than Philadelphia!

          Cheers,
          Ron Carnegie
          r.carnegie@...
          *************************************************
          "The poetry of history lies in the quasi-miraculous fact that
          once on this earth, on this familiar spot of ground walked
          other men and women as actual as we are today, thinking
          their own thoughts, swayed by their own passions but now
          all gone, vanishing after another, gone as utterly as we
          ourselves shall be gone like ghosts at cockcrow."
          G.M. Trevelyan
          *************************************************
        • Ron Carnegie
          ... of<BR>Williamsburg had a much smaller population.&nbsp; For a city of its physical size it had a very low population density. ... Well...those
          Message 4 of 6 , Feb 2, 2001
            >At 04:42 PM 2/2/01 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
            >
            >Compared with Boston, New York, Philadelphia or Charleston the city
            of<BR>Williamsburg had a much smaller population.&nbsp; For a city
            of its physical size it had a very low population density.
            >Bart Reynolds
            >All of what Mr. Reynolds says is true, though I feel it necessary to
            >mention that Williamsburg wasn't even the largest city in Virgina, as that
            >honour belongs to Norfolk. It is however also important to remember that
            >there were a large number of people in a small area in Williamsburg
            >(creating quite a population density).  It was an urban area even if far
            >smaller than Philadelphia!
            >
            >Cheers,
            >Ron Carnegie
            >r.carnegie@...


            Well...those astute readers will notice that while I said I agreed
            with ALL of what Mr. Reynolds stated, I in fact do not. Williamsburg's
            physical size was NOT much larger than the historic area today. There were
            more building present than exist today, but with the exception of the area
            around the modern areas of Merchants Square, The Williamsburg Lodge, most of
            the colonial City is within the bounds of the modern historic area. Now in
            1775 when the only census we have for the city was taken, there were just
            under 2000 living in that small area, sounds dense to me. (There was
            development outside the above areas, but they are outside the city's limits,
            even the College was outside the city).

            Now this was a change from not much earlier (or at least believed to
            be), as the city began a building boom after the decision to rebuild the
            first capital following the fire of 1747.

            Cheers,
            Ron Carnegie
            r.carnegie@...
            *************************************************
            "The poetry of history lies in the quasi-miraculous fact that
            once on this earth, on this familiar spot of ground walked
            other men and women as actual as we are today, thinking
            their own thoughts, swayed by their own passions but now
            all gone, vanishing after another, gone as utterly as we
            ourselves shall be gone like ghosts at cockcrow."
            G.M. Trevelyan
            *************************************************
          • Davis, Robert
            Bart and Liste, I might respectfully argue that Petersburg, in 1781 was a tad larger than Richmond (not forgetting that the smaller locations such as
            Message 5 of 6 , Feb 5, 2001
              Bart and Liste,

              I might respectfully argue that Petersburg, in 1781 was a "tad" larger than
              Richmond (not forgetting that the smaller locations such as Manchester and
              Warwick, south of the James River were not yet part of Richmond.) The town
              of Richmond was no more the area atop Shockoe Hill. Petersburg was, by
              far, the more industrially developed port town. As nearly as I can
              determine, the prime reason for the Capitol being moved to Richmond (from
              Williamsburg) was the strategic location of being "north" of the James
              River, where Petersburg was "south" of the James. The fear at the time was
              not so much any invasion up the James (as seen with Arnold's and Phillips'
              invasions in Jan and April '81), but the threat of Cornwallis invading from
              North Carolina (as proved to be the case in May '81). The James River
              therein served as a type of "Maginot Line" in Virginia (and just as
              effective).

              I would also add Fredericksburg to your small town list.

              YMHOS

              Bob D.

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Bart Reynolds [mailto:bartiii@...]
              Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:42 PM
              To: Revlist@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [Revlist] Winchester in 1775




              tpost@... wrote:

              remember that even Williamsburg wasn't that large in the 18th c. by
              modern standards.


              Todd & List,

              Actually Williamsburg was not large by 18th century standards either.
              It was large only by standards of Virginia. Virginia, because of its
              development as a plantation based economy, had few towns and cities by
              the time of the AWI. Though I suppose it becomes somewhat subjective,
              where you draw the line between what is a town and what is a city, I
              would make the case that by 1775 Virginia had only four cities
              (Williamsburg, Richmond, Alexandria and Norfolk) and a handful of
              reasonably sized towns (Portsmouth, Yorktown and Petersburg).

              Compared with Boston, New York, Philadelphia or Charleston the city of
              Williamsburg had a much smaller population. For a city of its physical
              size it had a very low population density. While the population always
              underwent a marked increase during the sessions of the House of
              Burgesses; it was never on a par with the major cities of British North
              America.

              Bart Reynolds


              Visit the RevList Homepage, which includes a list of sutlers, RevList member
              photos, FAQ, etc., at

              http://www.liming.org/revlist/

              TO UNSUBSCRIBE: please send a message to Revlist-unsubscribe@egroups.com
              with "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
            • Bart Reynolds
              Bob and List, Point well taken, Bob. I knew when I made an admittedly subjective list of Virginia towns and cities there would be challenges and in the case
              Message 6 of 6 , Feb 5, 2001
                Bob and List,

                Point well taken, Bob. I knew when I made an admittedly "subjective"
                list of Virginia towns and cities there would be challenges and in the
                case of Petersburg rightly so. Fredericksburg was purely a sin of
                omission which Mike Cecere was also kind enough to bring to my
                attention.

                Hampton was also overlooked and should have received recognition as a
                well established and sizable town. I can only surmise that we have no
                one on the Revlist who lives in Hampton, as its omission raised no one's
                hackles.

                No replies were heard from the Urbana/Tappahanock nor West Point lobbies
                but I really don't believe that either of those were more than small
                towns in 1776.

                Best Regards,

                Bart Reynolds


                "Davis, Robert" wrote:
                >
                > Bart and Liste,
                >
                > I might respectfully argue that Petersburg, in 1781 was a "tad" larger
                > than
                > Richmond (not forgetting that the smaller locations such as
                > Manchester and
                > Warwick, south of the James River were not yet part of Richmond.) The
                > town
                > of Richmond was no more the area atop Shockoe Hill. Petersburg was,
                > by
                > far, the more industrially developed port town. As nearly as I can
                > determine, the prime reason for the Capitol being moved to Richmond
                > (from
                > Williamsburg) was the strategic location of being "north" of the James
                > River, where Petersburg was "south" of the James. The fear at the
                > time was
                > not so much any invasion up the James (as seen with Arnold's and
                > Phillips'
                > invasions in Jan and April '81), but the threat of Cornwallis invading
                > from
                > North Carolina (as proved to be the case in May '81). The James River
                > therein served as a type of "Maginot Line" in Virginia (and just as
                > effective).
                >
                > I would also add Fredericksburg to your small town list.
                >
                > YMHOS
                >
                > Bob D.
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: Bart Reynolds [mailto:bartiii@...]
                > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 4:42 PM
                > To: Revlist@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: Re: [Revlist] Winchester in 1775
                >
                > tpost@... wrote:
                >
                > remember that even Williamsburg wasn't that large in the 18th c. by
                > modern standards.
                >
                > Todd & List,
                >
                > Actually Williamsburg was not large by 18th century standards either.
                > It was large only by standards of Virginia. Virginia, because of its
                > development as a plantation based economy, had few towns and cities by
                > the time of the AWI. Though I suppose it becomes somewhat subjective,
                > where you draw the line between what is a town and what is a city, I
                > would make the case that by 1775 Virginia had only four cities
                > (Williamsburg, Richmond, Alexandria and Norfolk) and a handful of
                > reasonably sized towns (Portsmouth, Yorktown and Petersburg).
                >
                > Compared with Boston, New York, Philadelphia or Charleston the city of
                > Williamsburg had a much smaller population. For a city of its
                > physical
                > size it had a very low population density. While the population
                > always
                > underwent a marked increase during the sessions of the House of
                > Burgesses; it was never on a par with the major cities of British
                > North
                > America.
                >
                > Bart Reynolds
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.