Talk:Dominion of New England
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dominion of New England article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
C-class
editCould this article be reviewed for C-class? I think it could make it... DCI2026 22:56, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Questions
editI have two questions regarding the governance of the dominion after Andros's overthrow.
- Was Francis Nicholson effectively governor of the dominion during the brief period between the Boston revolt and Leisler's uprising?
- Or would dominion secretary Edward Randolph, safe for a time on Castle Island, have become something of a de facto governor?
DCItalk 17:36, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- I think the correct way to look at this is that Andros continued to be de jure governor (he certainly tried to communicate with Nicholson), but that the dominion had de facto ceased to exist after the Boston revolt. Magic♪piano 16:54, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. DCItalk 21:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Incorrect Flag
editI do not believe that the flag shown on this page was actually used by the Dominion of New England. If I'm not mistaken, that is an alternate version of the Bunker Hill flag (the other version has a blue field instead of red) raised during the American Revolution a century after the Dominion of New England ceased to exist. Given that the wiki article on the Dominion of New England doesn't say anything about this (or any other) flag being used, I think this image should be removed from the page until someone can verify that it was in fact used by the Dominion of New England. Nsfreeman (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- agreed. I removed it. Rjensen (talk) 15:51, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
grammar
edit"formally without a charter" ? That shouldn't be "informally"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadsaque (talk • contribs) 05:23, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Inclusion of Vermont?
editI don't see how Vermont could possibly have been a formal part of the Dominion of New England (1686–1689), since it was a French colony until 1763. There were some New York and New Hampshire settlers in the area, but were these considered by England to be part of the Dominion? JustinTime55 (talk) 16:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
- I'm unaware of any English settlers in what is now Vermont prior to the establishment of Fort Dummer (1724). According to History of Vermont, there were French settlements along Lake Champlain as early as 1666; however, most of Vermont was then an Iroquois and/or Abenaki hunting ground, with seasonal occupation by Native populations.
- Also, Vermont was never "a French colony", but it was subject to competing colonial claims during the Dominion period. Its territory may have been part of the expansive claims of New France, but all or part was probably also included in expansive claims of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the Province of New Hampshire, and the Province of New York, none of which (including New France beyond whatever holdings it had settled on northern Lake Champlain) exercised significant actual control at the time. French colonial claims were indeed extinguished in 1763, but competing British claims were not; see New Hampshire Grants.
- The map at the top of this article is IMHO misleading, since it does not reflect either (1) colonial claims of the period, or (2) areas over which actual colonial authority was extended. (New York, for example, then effectively consisted of Long Island and the Hudson River valley up to Albany, with the rest of modern New York mostly Iroquois territory.) A useful map would depict English areas of actual control (2). Magic♪piano 18:19, 15 June 2016 (UTC)