Hi, Mr. History!
My history teacher asked us this question today in class and it has been on my mind since. “What is the only English colony that DID NOT settle near any water?” It confuses me because I don’t understand why they would settle where there is no water. I hope you can help! Thanks!
Sachin Motiram
???
Dear Mr. Motiram,
Your history teacher must be asking some sort of trick question, since water is an essential ingredient to the survival, let alone success, of any human settlement. All 13 of the colonies that later became the United States had some access to the sea, and north of there Upper Canada, while not abutting the ocean, was nevertheless accessible via the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River. One could apply that rule of habitability to any other place that got “British colony” status, inland Australia included.
Sincerely,
Jon Guttman
Research Director
World History
www.historynet.com
More Questions at Ask Mr. History
Don’t miss the next Ask Mr. History question! To receive notification whenever any new item is published on HistoryNet, just scroll down the column on the right and sign up for our RSS feed.
