Post Number: 2544
|Posted on Wednesday, January 09, 2008 - 9:09 pm: || |
Going once again through my huge collection of family photos, I came across a current photo of a log house that was owned by my paternal family line in the 1700s. It's a historic building in the town of Downingtown, Pennsylvania. But in looking at it, the construction date of 1701 struck me. I imagine these logs were all being fitted together about the time that Cadillac was landing on the north bank of the Detroit River.
Just thought it was a nice coincidence in my family history.
Post Number: 5934
|Posted on Wednesday, January 09, 2008 - 11:51 pm: || |
Good post Ray1936. Did your last name use to be Downing? Amazing connection.
How do you move to Detroit's Westside when your family owned a town?
If jjaba's name were Lincoln, he would stay in the capital of Nebraska. If his name were Johnson, he would stay in Johnson City. If his name was John Denver,.........
jjaba, Proudly Westside.
Post Number: 4438
|Posted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 12:07 am: || |
Is this it?
Post Number: 4798
|Posted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 12:22 am: || |
Somehow, the year you presented isn't accurate. In 1701, all Detroit had of any consequence was a fort and a few settlers. Many of those who came with Cadillac then were the equivalent of taxi drivers, and they most likely went on to the next fare. Cabs seem to do that...
Even forty years later, Detroit was small with some ribbon farms, and most of its farming settlers also lived within the fort, and rarely were more than forty French soldiers garrisoned at the fort at any given time.And the fort was tiny--192 ft by 192 ft (about 1/4 a block in size).
Pere Marquette (1668) and Nicolet (1634) entered Oisconsing (Wisconsin) and Illinois, BTW. In 1673, Marquette first entered Chicago. Marquette had been in Wisconsin for a few years already by that time.
It was only in 1679 that the first French explorer to take note of Detroit--Hennepin--first passed by Detroit. (It's unsure if he ever landed in Detroit instead of merely passing by it on the Detroit River.) So, by that reckoning, Chicago is at least some six years older than Detroit. And both Chicago and Detroit are several years younger than Green Bay, WI. That's probably why the Packers beat the Lions and Bears so handily.
Chicago: Early days
(Message edited by LivernoisYard on January 10, 2008)
Post Number: 4312
|Posted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 1:48 am: || |
I don't think I would use that reckoning. The beginning of a city is when it is first settled. In 1701, Detroit was settled. Somewhere around the revolutionary War, Chicago was settled.
A remark I made earlier about the value of this photo got deleted. Anyway, it should give us an idea of the earliest structures in Detroit, having been settled, as we all know, in 1701.
Post Number: 1591
|Posted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 1:53 am: || |
It's interesting to note (never thought about it) that Chicago considers its age based on its date of charter, but Detroit considers its based on its date of settlement.
Post Number: 191
|Posted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 2:41 am: || |
and at the same time in 1701,Jjaba was living on the western edge of the settlement of Detroit. i envy folks like you Ray who can keep up and trace your family history.
Post Number: 541
|Posted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 2:54 am: || |
Ray - you truly have some wonderful family treasures!