Talk:History of Boston

United States: Massachusetts / Boston High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as High-importance).
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Boston (assessed as Top-importance).

History

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ponzi had his office in Boston

Long before infamous fraudster Bernie Madoff, there was "Charles Ponzi, a dapper, five-foot-two-inch rogue who in 1920 raked in an estimated $15 million in eight months by persuading tens of thousands of Bostonians that he had unlocked the secret to easy wealth. Ponzi's meteoric success at swindling was so remarkable that his name became attached to the method he employed," the "Ponzi scheme."^[1] "Charles named his concern the Securities Exchange Company"^[2] on 27 School Street in Boston, Massachusetts.^[3]

Identical to Boston article

From what I can tell, this article is exactly identical to the history section of the Boston, Massachusetts article. Should this be deleted as a pointless copy of another article, or will somebody step in and expand this article so that it offers something that the Boston article cannot? --Sophitus 01:36, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

This was moved from the Boston article, and the history section of the Boston article was greatly condensed. It was too long. I did this per the request of some of the people objecting to the Boston, Massachusetts article becoming a featured article. I should have been more explicit about this, but it was late, I was in a rush, and I wanted to get it done.

Let me know if you have any problems.--AaronS 12:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing this up; and thanks for not getting offended - Cheers--Sophitus 13:53, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

Roxbury dates

The Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts and West Roxbury, Massachusetts articles disagree on when Roxbury was divided. -- Beland 22:25, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

What we really need is a single consolidated color map showing the which parts of the city were landfilled at which times, overlaid on the current streets. This would be much nicer than having a series of ad hoc maps comparing different periods. There was an exhibition at the Boston Public Library a few years ago that had excellent maps; I think one of them may have done just that. -- Beland 19:58, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, such a map does exist at the City Maps archive, and I own a copy. It's very helpful, and the fellow there said that William Manchester was in there every day while working on Back Bay (which focuses on a "buried treasure" with a curse, whose location/context shifts from swamp to church basement over the centuries) to study it and others like it.

I would guess that it might be possible to get permission from the city to use that map; haven't been over in a while but could remember to ask next time I'm there.

In direct answer, it's possible to generalize about the chronology to some degree. The main areas of landfill to be attended to can be classified in three ways:

a) The deliberate infilling of the Mill Pond (Causeway Street in the North End is the literal remnant of the "causy" or causeway that spanned it, and there is now a millstone located along the refurbished area near Haymarket (almost near) where the Mill race ran). The back alley behind the Union Oyster House/Yankee Publications complex is the true millrace, as far as I can tell; I'm sorry that when they started clearing that area, they took down the interpretive marker that explained it. That land is said (in Whitehead, I think) to have come from Beacon Hill, which was lowered by quite a bit to its present height, and a new beacon set up when it was completed.

b) The more casual or ongoing inflling of the docks along the eastern shore of the city. Called "wharving out and filling in" this process made extended shorelines and infilled land areas all along the margins, especially in the North End, around Fort Hill/Batterymarch, and in the Fort Point Channel area. The city map referred to above makes this very clear--the red "added" areas run very close to the edges of the old wharves and some areas--Long Wharf, Union Wharf, Russian Wharf, and Rowe's--retain their names as well.

c) The very deliberate, sustained infilling of the Back Bay (and, in Cambridge, the Ox Swamp, Magazine Beach/swamp, and Ship Swamp) in the mid-to-late 19th c. An interesting result of this campaign is the fact that each block (alphabetical from Arlington to Hereford) was filled in (using land brought by train from the Needham Heights area) about every 10 years. The older, formerly "downtown" Boston churches began moving to the new, more popular (and larger) lots as the land was available, paralleling the population shift westward. The churches built on these lots, from Arlington Street on, thus reflect changing architectural fashions and serve as a useful chronological record of styles from the 1850s, when the project began, to the 1890s.

Further infilling in Roxbury (at the Neck, in particular) and in the Fens, partly in tandem with Olmstead's Emerald Necklace project (of open public parks running the length of the city), were also important, but I believe were of a more stop-and-go character. Some have been nearly obliterated in the overbuilding of roadways (in the Fens) and later housing developments (in Roxbury). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.104.12 (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the whole thing about the relationships bewtween Winthrop and the Johnsons goes on much too long. It was barely significant, as far as I've ever known, in the development of the town overall, so its length here is out of proportion to its value. If a separate entry on Winthrop's legal activities were created (he did have some interesting ones overall) that might be a place for it, but it seems out of place here.

On the other hand, the issues over hogs and the problems they created running free (especially for Keynes, the founder of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery, and hog-reeve under Winthrop at the time) are a telling index of social status and community relationships...and those did concern everyone! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.104.12 (talk) 15:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Earthquake

for those who know how to fix citation errors, here's the link to the Earthquake of 1755. Does not mention what it was on the Richter scale though. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/states/events/1755_11_18.php

I added it. Thank you! - Jeeny ^Talk 03:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brahmins

I wonder if the below quote is acurate: "The Irish were held as an underclass by the Boston Brahmins, because the Brahmins were of English descent and Protestant, and the Irish were from Ireland and Catholic"

Whilst a large proportion of the Brahmins where of English decent, I would have thought the term British would have been accurate. A number of the families (The Forbes) where Scottish and the Cabot family where from Jersey in the British Channel Islands. Also I would imagine the ingrained Protestant versus Catholic distrust would have been a greater influence then the nationality. Since the Brahmins seem to be made up of families from traditional Protestant countries i.e. Scotland, England and Germany.

What is other opinions on this? 75.195.14.0 (talk) 16:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Winthrop/Johnson Relationship Section

I agree with the earlier poster who said, "Also, the whole thing about the relationships bewtween Winthrop and the Johnsons goes on much too long. It was barely significant, as far as I've ever known, in the development of the town overall, so its length here is out of proportion to its value..." In addition, there is a reference to "the earlier 968 conquest of southern England." What could that possibly be referring to? I've never heard of anything like a "conquest" happening in England in 968 - nor can I find any reference to anything like that in any of the sources I've checked. Dtm323 (talk) 17:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with both. I am a genealogist. Genealogy can be fun for the researcher. It is often irrelevant in an encyclopedia once it gets back a generation or two. Do the math: First generation back = 1, 2nd =2 parents, 3=4 gparents, 4=8, 5=16, 6=32, 7=64, etc. Mentioning an ancestor that might have contributed 1 out of 1024 genes seems simply silly. It also presumes no children fathered by someone else and no adoptions which sometimes aren't mentioned in the records. Note that "inconvenient" relatives are usually dropped from the record. The whole business is irrelevant to this article which is supposed to be about Boston not Johnson. Student7 (talk) 13:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Island annexation

Many of the islands in the Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area are now part of Boston; annexation dates should be added to the expansion timeline. -- Beland (talk) 06:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the boonies for awhile

The text is correct, on one hand. And very WP:TOPIC-oriented, which I appreciate. I don't want to change either. On the other hand, the text needs to make clear, IMO, that Cape Cod was a Pilgrim colony and more or less flourishing before this. They rightly considered Boston as being in the boonies/frontier for some years to come! Hard to believe. Admittedly with Puritans pouring in, this view probably did not prevail for very long. Student7 (talk) 21:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added a mention of the nearby Plymouth Colony; "boonies" is a bit subjective. The entirety of British North America was probably considered a backwater in the 1600s. -- Beland (talk) 00:35, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Firsts, and more history

I think this article ought to have, or at least it would be nice to add a new item in the See also references at bottom pointing to a separate page for, a list of Boston firsts.

By extension, this article is not comprehensive, and requires introduction of many more topics in Boston's long history.

In the 19th century, Boston was on the shortest possible list of the most important cities in the United States. Entry 'Boston' in the index for Stephen Puleo's book, A City So Grand, 2010, shows, for example, that on a national level, Boston had the first: arboretum, electric public transport (in a major city), employee credit union, use of ether as an anesthetic, municipal water supply (one of the first), training school for nurses, municipal public library, subway, underwater transportation tunnel, telephone exchange (and invention of telephone), X-ray, etc. And in the world: first electric fire-alarm system, largest and busiest railroad terminal, etc.

But search for any of these items in this article, and they're no-shows. Not even the word municipal appears substantively in the article.

Providing a list of firsts will have another benefit: It will encourage comprehensive coverage herein.

--Jim Luedke Jimlue (talk) 20:11, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

good idea. Why not make a new section on "municipal leadership". Rjensen (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Urban renewal and rearrangement

Comparing this 1852 map with the modern street grid, you can see there have been major street realignments in Park Square, Bay Village, and the western Theatre District, including Tremont Street. The article Bay Village, Boston mentions some raising of streets when the Back Bay and South End were filled in, and some rearrangement at unspecified times. I just learned about the urban renewal (read: bulldozing) in the New York Streets district of the South End in the 1950s. I'm wondering if the changes on the other side of the Pike were due to urban renewal, organic growth, or what. It would be interesting to know when some of the old streets disappeared. I think some of the rebuilding around Park Plaza happened in the 1980s, but I haven't been able to track anything concrete down yet. -- Beland (talk) 00:31, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, here is a 1973 report on urban renewal of Park Plaza, and here is a blog entry with some interesting leads. -- Beland (talk) 01:00, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Urban expansion should have its own article

Due to the scale of Boston's growth and the manner in which it went from being a small hamlet on an isthmus to a major world city, the way this happened should be in it's own article.

The new article is not about the narrative of the city's history (like this one). It should be concerned with the physical efforts in making a city. For instance, which areas developed first, and why? Was there even a development model? What material were used, land fill, infill from quarrying etc? Was it all done by hand or did advent of steam assist the efforts of the city planners/developers? A precedent has already been set for this type of article because there is already one for New York city's expansion.

I just think because this was such a massive undertaking, and a largely unexplored area (like it's almost taken for granted) there is enough material to make a new article. And one that goes way beyond just the simple historical narrative of the city of Boston.86.181.165.174 (talk) 10:44, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently no history in the article Greater Boston. It could go there until it is big enough for it's own article.

Having said that, overlap with other histories should be avoided, where possible. It may well be a summary with pointers to "main" articles of Boston itself and surrounding communities. Student7 (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Boston

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 15:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on History of Boston. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:03, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on History of Boston. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:18, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

20th century - No mention of the great depression???

EDITORS: This should be included: "John C. Hull first Securities Director of Massachusetts (1930-36), on behalf of the Boston Stock Exchange in response to October 1929, the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression. He was helpful in the passing of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with his war on "unlisted securities".^[4] Hull gave testimony to the US Senate (Sen. Duncan Upshaw Fletcher) for work on the Pecora Commission." Thank you. Theonomad (talk) 22:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/in-ponzi-we-trust-64016168
^ https://www.acfe.com/article.aspx?id=4294968365
^ https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-ponzi.shtml
^ hinkttps://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRECB-1933-pt1-v77/pdf/GPO-CRECB-1933-pt1-v77-19.pdf

@Theonomad: I was unable to find any mention of this in the source cited. What page is it on? [[User::::@Magnolia677:|Magnolia677]] (talk) 23:01, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

3,4 .pdf; 1071-72 congressional record Theonomad (talk) 23:13, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Theonomad: The source cited is a letter written by John C. Hull (a primary source); almost none of what he wrote in the letter supports your edit. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677:A) Why not mention the depression on "The history of Boston" page? B) Yes, I know it was a letter. It was entered into the congressional record and the Pecora Commission ultimate findings on unlisted securities and became law under Securities Exchange Act of 1934 C) I prefer someone else to edit this because I think your not operating in Wikipedia's best interests by letting your animosity for me color your judgement. You are wild with a little of power Magnolia677. Theonomad (talk) 00:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Theonomad: Your edit is not supported by the source cited, which makes it unsourced content. Please do not add unsourced content. Moreover, User:Wham2001 made this excellent comment at Talk:Boston#John Carpenter Hull - First Securities Director Massachusetts, where you added the same information. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:56, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677:,User:Wham2001 - Events in history cannot, will not change. I can deconstruct the "20th century" on this page too. Porter Motors was only in business for 1 year, Molasses Flood and Sacco and Vanzetti were thieves. Again, what world wide calamity happened in 1929?Theonomad (talk) 17:22, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/in-ponzi-we-trust-64016168

[2] ttps://www.acfe.com/article.aspx?id=4294968365

[3] ttps://www.sec.gov/spotlight/enf-actions-ponzi.shtml

[4] ttps://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRECB-1933-pt1-v77/pdf/GPO-CRECB-1933-pt1-v77-19.pdf

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]