Talk:Province of New York

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of the New York State WikiProject, an attempt to better organize and improve articles related to the U.S. state of New York. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

shouldn't the Province of New York be called New York Colony or should there just be 2 separate articles? Most of the other locales such as Virginia and Maryland are referred to as colonies. For consistency's sake, this should be renamed New York Colony as Virginia is named Virginia Colony and Maryland is named Maryland Colony. Stevenmitchell 03:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

According to the article on the 13 Colonies, the opposite is true, most of them were named "Province of ...":

Province of New Hampshire, Province of Massachusetts Bay, Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut Colony, Province of New York, Province of New Jersey, Province of Pennsylvania, Delaware Colony, Province of Maryland, Colony and Dominion of Virginia, Province of North Carolina, Province of South Carolina, Province of Georgia. ...Catiec 20:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Map of territorial claims

The following off-site maps show the various claims of the original Thirteen Colonies: [1], [2], [3], and [4]. If this information could be included in a map of this province's claims, it would be great. (This request was originally made by jengod, and I moved it here.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 16:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

• Of course a lot of these claims were made/persisted considerably after independence. Let's count. There's the pre-independence borders encompassing southern Ontario, the giant New York Western claim, the Erie Triangle, the Massachusetts claim on Western New York, the whole Vermont dispute, and apparently some Pennsylvania claim on the Southern Tier as seen on this map, which is actually the most influential in American history. And this isn't even mentioning New Jersey. The question I think is, how many maps do we need?--Pharos 15:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Just one, though admittedly it is a bit busy. Article really needs a history section to explain some of them. Kmusser 17:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you; I hope you won't take it as kibitzing to suggest the Quebec line be dotted; as it is, it looks like NY didn't claim southern Vermont. Septentrionalis 05:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I just adjusted where the Vermont line points, should hopefully make that clearer. Kmusser 13:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I haven't checked this page in awhile. I have to say, that's a beautifully informative map. The southern Ontario thing, which is on several historic maps (particularly one from 1774, said to be based on a 1764 proclamation), is still missing though, though I admit I don't really understand this claim too well. The map shows the ordinary borders extended westward on a line till they hit Lake Huron, taking in southern Ontario, but leaving out Michigan. From a little research, it appears, however, that this was some sort of claim on a portion of the Indian Reserve (1763) (see this map), which was not designated for colonial settlement until the Quebec Act of 1774--Pharos 19:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll add that as soon as I get a chance, looks like New York had a thin theoretical claim to that land between 1763 and 1774, but never tried to enforce it. Kmusser 18:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Another thought occurs to me: How did New York come to acquire that portion of the Indian Reserve which is today western New York? The Line of Property doesn't seem to have given New York much extra land. Could the western areas have been part of the Indian Reserve up until American independence? Would that area then really be considered part of "New York"? Would the Treaty of Fort Niagara have any relevance?

It's understandable that the claim on this portion of the Indian Reserve was more successful than that on the one in the former New France. However, the Mitchell Map from before the French and Indian War somewhat dubiously shows all Iroquois lands in modern western New York and southern Ontario as "British". Perhaps that is part of the thinking behind the claim on the 1774 map I discussed. There is also no clear border for New York on the Mitchell Map (or for Virginia, for that matter).--Pharos 20:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

All of New York's western claims were based on their dealings with the Iroquois, not from any grant from the Crown. The logic went that since the Crown allowed New York to negotiate with the Iroquois on the Crown's behalf, then the Crown had granted New York implied soveriegnty over all Iroquois lands. It was considered pretty dubious logic even back then. Kmusser 22:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Map updated. Kmusser 14:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It's very hard to believe there's another map as comprehensive on this topic anywhere.--Pharos 19:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)