Williamsburg capital of British North America?

1776:
AYpu assuming none American revolution,or a agreement between UK and thirteen colonies,or a British victory in the revolutionary war.
Large part of what that in OTL is USA, in this timeline is a sort of greatest Canada.
In 2014 is Williamsburg the capital of British North America?
If yes,which size could achieve Williamsburg in XX century?
We said the size of OTL Washington or more? (London? New York size?)

I'm gonna go with a solid "no" to the OP's feasibility; I'd find it more believable if New York City ended up the capital as it was A) relatively closer to Britain in terms of distance traveled, B) more reliable in terms of Loyalism relative to much of the 13 Colonies as a whole, especially compared to Williamsburg, and C) much more developed than Williamsburg ever was in terms of infrastructure and serviceability for transportation and commerce purposes. Failing that, likely a purpose-built "new" capital would IMO be established (one hopefully IMO not on the Potomac).

I don't think Williamsburg could ever become a dense, highly populated government center, the terrain doesn't leave a ton of room for growth. Plus the James river peninsula is not exactly easily travers able territory. Maybe capital of a smaller Virginia, but not much else.

So New York is more probable as Capital.

1) I doubt there'd BE a united bna. It would be multiple colonies. The US only formed to fight for independence, if theres no ARW why would they unite. Remember Canada only united in 1867 due (largely) to the percieved threat of a victorious Union.

2) Philadelphia is, imo, as likely as New York. Remember that New York didnt really take off until the Erie Canal, and if the whole StLawrence basin is in British hands, a proto-Seaway makes far more sense than the Erie.

"Plausibility and probability" are just some vague terms know-it-all's dish out to stroke their ego. My advice, you can do whatever the fuck you want as long as you can convince people it can happen.

Hawkeye said:

"Plausibility and probability" are just some vague terms know-it-all's dish out to stroke their ego. My advice, you can do whatever the fuck you want as long as you can convince people it can happen.

Click to expand...

Hey, you ask a direct question and you get a direct answer, especially if it's an opinion on an idea. Of course nobody said lounge60 can't make Williamsburg a BNA capital, and it's his decision on what to do if he makes a TL (if it's well-written, it shouldn't matter where the capital actually is); however, I have actually BEEN there on several occasions and can speak to its small size, lack of inherent attributes that lend itself well to being any kind of large city (let alone a political center outside of the state level), and its historical ranking relative to other cities in terms of commercial and political worth. Plus, on a subjective level I cringe at the notion of the capital being located there after seeing what D.C. has become IOTL, so there is that. Still, there's no need to go around name-calling others for their opinions yourself, considering nobody's insulted or lambasted the OP from what I can tell.

Yes, my was only a simple curiosity born from reading of "The Two Georges" of Harry Turtledove and George Dreyfuss.
In the book the "North American Union",Dominion of British Empire,have a Capital named "Victoria" that is less or more on OTL Washington DC site.
My curiosity was if the construction of a new Capital was required or if existing Cities,as Williamsburg,New York,Philadelphia,Boston, could become Capital of a British North America Dominion.