New Orleans Is Going to Be 300 Years Old in 2018 (from 1718)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 02, 2017 5:02 AM GMT
    http://2018nola.com/
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 17864

    Dec 03, 2017 6:08 PM GMT
    It should have never been located on that marshy, low laying piece of land but on the northern shore of Lake Pontchartrain instead. But the dumb drunken French Canadian nobleman who founded New Orleans had this idiotic notion that the Mississippi River was "in crying need of an ocean port" and insisted on building the new settlement on that vulnerable swampland.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 03, 2017 7:50 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    It should have never been located on that marshy, low laying piece of land but on the northern shore of Lake Pontchartrain instead. But the dumb drunken French Canadian nobleman who founded New Orleans had this idiotic notion that the Mississippi River was "in crying need of an ocean port" and insisted on building the new settlement on that vulnerable swampland.

    Prior to New Orleans the French had established a presence with settlements throughout the Mississppi and Missouri River Valleys. Basically the bulk of the center of the continental US. The main French commercial interest was fur traping, primarily beaver, and buffalo hunting.

    These hunters needed an ocean outlet to a European market. The English colonies on the East Coast were not as lucrative a market, plus France and England had a long history of almost continuous war, further complicating trade.

    Therefore New Orleans served that purpose. Fur traders arrived mainly in small craft, flatboats and even canoes, in a simple route that took them directly down the Mississippi. New Orleans was originally only meant to be another trading post and a transfer point for ocean vessels. The drawbacks of placing what would become a future major urban area in marshland would never have occurred to those early commercial settlers in 1718.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 04, 2017 1:58 AM GMT
    art_deco said
    roadbikeRob said
    It should have never been located on that marshy, low laying piece of land but on the northern shore of Lake Pontchartrain instead. But the dumb drunken French Canadian nobleman who founded New Orleans had this idiotic notion that the Mississippi River was "in crying need of an ocean port" and insisted on building the new settlement on that vulnerable swampland.

    Prior to New Orleans the French had established a presence with settlements throughout the Mississppi and Missouri River Valleys. Basically the bulk of the center of the continental US. The main French commercial interest was fur traping, primarily beaver, and buffalo hunting.

    These hunters needed an ocean outlet to a European market. The English colonies on the East Coast were not as lucrative a market, plus France and England had a long history of almost continuous war, further complicating trade.

    Therefore New Orleans served that purpose. Fur traders arrived mainly in small craft, flatboats and even canoes, in a simple route that took them directly down the Mississippi. New Orleans was originally only meant to be another trading post and a transfer point for ocean vessels. The drawbacks of placing what would become a future major urban area in marshland would never have occurred to those early commercial settlers in 1718.



    You might as well be talking to a chimp. RBB automatically hates any liberal city, so you can throw all the facts you want at him and he'll still hate New Orleans simply because it's so liberal.