Boston not the capital

Boston has been the capital of Massachusetts since 1630.
Suppose Boston is not the capital.
What city shall be the capital of Massachusetts?
 
Boston has been the capital of Massachusetts since 1630.
Suppose Boston is not the capital.
What city shall be the capital of Massachusetts?

Spitballing a bit here, but why not Worcester? It's almost in the middle of the state and is fairly populous itself(about the size of Little Rock, Ark.).
 
Possibly Salem as it was important to the 1800s on its own, right by Boston, coastal, and can grow a la Boston if it runs the state.
 
What about Quincy?

Quncy is just a suburb. Nothing particularly special about it other than its proximity to Boston. Boston *was* centrally located, until half the state became its own state.

About the only other city I could see becoming the capital is Plymouth. Unless we're suggesting a modern move, whre a centrally located arbitrary capital is chosen. Then, Worcester could work. Maybe Springfield.
 

birdboy2000

Banned
Boston's a big city, founded by the state's founders, and while it's distant from western MA, being a port on the center of the state's coastline with a makes it more accessible from most of the state's population centers, though admittedly nowhere near Springfield. That's hard to overcome.

Maybe if Shays' Rebellion succeeds (or the western Massachusetts discontent that led to it leads to victories at the ballot box instead) the capital could be moved inland. Or maybe if John Winthrop doesn't hear about the site of Boston he'd pick another location which might have staying power. But Boston's a good spot for a capital and barring a political ascendancy of western Massachusetts (which is hard given democracy and settlement patterns) there's not much reason to move.
 
Last edited:
The commerce, the population, the money - most of it is in the east. Boston is by far the most probable location. If it's there, it's probably the capital.

On the other hand, what if it isn't there? Suppose that when Howe withdrew from Boston in 1776, he just flattens the city - completely demolishes it in an act of scorched earth. He wasn't that sort of man, as far as I know, nor would it have been good policy, but suppose. The port's ruined, burned, blockaded - valueless. The capital moves west (pick a spot). Maybe it stays there, or maybe the British come back circa 1812 and do it again, after which the shift is made permanent.
 
To be fair, during the Intolerable Acts Britain moved the capital to Salem. That was also what made me ponder on it, and my other reasonings for it are basically a combo of what mine, Birdboy, and Samarian reason's are for Boston.
 
In the present era, the population of the state is half east of Natick (16 miles from Boston). This was likely more exagerrated back then. I can't see any non-coastal capital happening so long as Maine is part ofvthr Commonwealth.
 
Top