What city can be the Philadelphia of the South?

[City-man]

The South's cities are are flourishing, but which one can be similar to the urban city-Philadelphia, of the North?

[ironchapman]

Miami? Houston? Dallas? Atlanta?

[City-man]

Miami? Houston? Dallas? Atlanta?

Sounds like a hard one.

[TBurban]

Miami? Houston? Dallas? Atlanta?

It would have to be a city with a lot of history. Im not sure on those

[ironchapman]

It would have to be a city with a lot of history. Im not sure on those

Atlanta doesn't have a lot of history?

However, I assume you're arguing in favor of New Orleans, a case I could see being made.

[TBurban]

Atlanta doesn't have a lot of history?

However, I assume you're arguing in favor of New Orleans, a case I could see being made.

Oh no, I wasnt saying Atlanta doesnt have a lot of history. It's just that Philadelphia was an important part of this country. With all the landmarks and halls being there. Famous for the Liberty Bell and the signing of documents such as the Constitution. I dont really think any Southern could evenly match that, maybe come somewhat close, but no cigar.

I dont know enough about New Orleans to debate about it

[mrh3]

Who would want to be the Philadelphia of the south?

[krazeeboi]

In terms of its important role in the history of this nation, Charleston is about the closest equivalent. But it's not the "Philadelphia of the South." It's Charleston.

[Jerseyman4]

Washington, DC

its below the mason-dixon line

[dimebag1980]

Washington, DC

its below the mason-dixon line

Very true. I didn't even think of DC, and I'm sure most others didn't either. You're very observant!

[krazeeboi]

No way I would label DC as the "Philadelphia of the South." They are equals.

[TBurban]

Some either have the skyline but not great amount the history, or have the history and dont have the skyline or density. So I agree with DC as Philadelphia's equal.

[NCB]

I don't try to boast about New Orleans often, but if you're looking at it in terms of history, historical and current national importance, culture, density, and famous landmarks, I would have to say New Orleans. New Orleans had a huge impact on the growth of the nation, mostly centered around its importance as the city/port controlling the Mississippi River. Also, I think New Orleans may be the best city in the South to see a very large mix of modern and old buildings and architecture like you do in Philadelphia, as the 18th century buildings of the French Quarter, 19th century shipping and industrial warehouses of the Warehouse District, and classic mansions of the Garden District are all only blocks away from the modern high rises of downtown.

This is a very bad quality and crooked panorama I took in New Orleans a few weeks ago, the quality is pretty bad, but I think it shows you just how close the modern high-rises of downtown are from the French Quarter. You quickly go from a modern American city to a much older European-like city. You also get to see some of the density in downtown NOLA.

http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?image=do...rterpano3sd.jpg

But I could also see Charleston being the "Philadelphia of the South" in terms of the same categories I listed for New Orleans. I thought it was interestesting that in 1840, New Orleans, Philadelphia, and Charleston were all one of the 10 largest cities in the country:

Population of the 10 Largest Urban Places: 1840

1 New York city, NY *................ 312,710

2 Baltimore city, MD................. 102,313

3 New Orleans city, LA *............. 102,193

4 Philadelphia city, PA *............ 93,665

5 Boston city, MA *.................. 93,383

6 Cincinnati city, OH................ 46,338

7 Brooklyn city, NY *................ 36,233

8 Northern Liberties district, PA *.. 34,474

9 Albany city, NY.................... 33,721

10 Charleston city, SC................ 29,261

Source

[Greens!]

nope

[krazeeboi]

I also see New Orleans being important and unique enough to not be classified as the "Philadelphia of the South." The fact is, there is only one Philadelphia, and it's in Pennsylvania, not in the South. And it's a jewel of a town.

[NCB]

I also see New Orleans being important and unique enough to not be classified as the "Philadelphia of the South." The fact is, there is only one Philadelphia, and it's in Pennsylvania, not in the South. And it's a jewel of a town.

I completely agree. New Orleans is New Orleans, Charleston is Charleston, and Philadelphia is Philadelphia. I was just listing some things I thought were comparable between New Orleans and Philadelphia. All three cities are important and unique enough to not "be *inset city name*."

[satalac]

why can't we just be southern? what about who's the nashville of the north? or who is the charlotte of the midwest? or.......etc.

[krazeeboi]

^To be fair, the Northern and Midwestern cities that we tend to compare our Southern cities to are more established, mature, and historically important on a national level. Our cities are definitely on the up and up, but I really don't see any other city in any other area of the country labeling itself the "Atlanta of the Midwest" or the "Tampa of the North." The cities that tend to get the most press in the South are relatively new to the big city game; hence the lack of comparisons to Southern cities from cities in other areas of the country.

[RestedTraveler]

Charleston, SC would be my vote.

[City-man]

^To be fair, the Northern and Midwestern cities that we tend to compare our Southern cities to are more established, mature, and historically important on a national level. Our cities are definitely on the up and up, but I really don't see any other city in any other area of the country labeling itself the "Atlanta of the Midwest" or the "Tampa of the North." The cities that tend to get the most press in the South are relatively new to the big city game; hence the lack of comparisons to Southern cities from cities in other areas of the country.

I heard someone reply before-Houston is the NY of the South,but honestly i get what you are saying.It seems the South's cities are really starting to come up now.

[Lacharm]

i wouldnt consider new orleans as the philly of the south. i would compare it more to the "boston of the south" i would say probably memphis.

[satalac]

^To be fair, the Northern and Midwestern cities that we tend to compare our Southern cities to are more established, mature, and historically important on a national level. Our cities are definitely on the up and up, but I really don't see any other city in any other area of the country labeling itself the "Atlanta of the Midwest" or the "Tampa of the North." The cities that tend to get the most press in the South are relatively new to the big city game; hence the lack of comparisons to Southern cities from cities in other areas of the country.

i understand what you're coming from, but i get frustrated when we try to hold ourselves in the shadow of other cities. instead of trying to be like these great cities all over the country, why can't we make a great name for ourselves by being original?

[wanderer34]

i wouldnt consider new orleans as the philly of the south. i would compare it more to the "boston of the south" i would say probably memphis.

BOSTON!!! I don't even think so!!! Here's my N-S analogies:

Miami=NYC (finance, major port, int'l presence, diverse population)

Atlanta=Chicago and Boston (commerce and education)

Houston=LA (not exactly a N-S analogy, but the best comparison)

NO=sort of like Philly (petroleum industries, river cities, great cuisine, similar accents, fine women, great strip clubs)

Richmond=DC (capitals of their own realm)

Hampton Roads=Boston (w/o a major prestigious school, major port)

[erdogs]

Hampton Roads=Boston (w/o a major prestigious school, major port)

Hampton Roads has a major port and a renowned research campus in Old Dominion University. But I don't see HR as Boston, thats quite a stretch.

[monsoon]

This is another fairly useless thread.