Why isn't New York considered a New England state?

[Anonymous]

But Connecticut is? Most of New York is further north than Connecticut. Doesn't make sense to me.

[Anonymous]

This explains it:

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-New-York-not-considered-to-be-part-of-New-England

But having grown up in New England, I do think most of us would include NY. New York Yankees anyone?

[Anonymous]

Coz it was part of Old England

[Anonymous]

The simplistic reason is that New England was settled by English refugees fleeing religious persecution. New York was discovered by the French (Verrazzano) but abandoned and later settled by the Dutch. New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The simplistic reason is that New England was settled by English refugees fleeing religious persecution. New York was discovered by the French (Verrazzano) but abandoned and later settled by the Dutch. New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Verrazano was Italian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The simplistic reason is that New England was settled by English refugees fleeing religious persecution. New York was discovered by the French (Verrazzano) but abandoned and later settled by the Dutch. New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Verrazano was Italian.

Yes, but he was in the service of the French crown. His ship and voyage were paid for by France, not Italy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Why'd they change it? I can't say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This explains it:

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-New-York-not-considered-to-be-part-of-New-England

But having grown up in New England, I do think most of us would include NY. New York Yankees anyone?

As a southerner, I can tell you that Yankees refers to anyone from the north, not just New England.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Why'd they change it? I can't say.

People just liked it better that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Why'd they change it? I can't say.

People just liked it better that way.

The English changed it - naming it after their own city of York.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Why'd they change it? I can't say.

People just liked it better that way.

Take me back to Constantinople.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This explains it:

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-New-York-not-considered-to-be-part-of-New-England

But having grown up in New England, I do think most of us would include NY. New York Yankees anyone?

As a southerner, I can tell you that Yankees refers to anyone from the north, not just New England.

That is because Southerners are ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Why'd they change it? I can't say.

People just liked it better that way.

The English changed it - naming it after their own city of York.

You ruined it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This explains it:

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-New-York-not-considered-to-be-part-of-New-England

But having grown up in New England, I do think most of us would include NY. New York Yankees anyone?

As a southerner, I can tell you that Yankees refers to anyone from the north, not just New England.

And I'm sure you know just how the f-ck we refer to youse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: New York City was originally New Amsterdam before it became New York.

Why'd they change it? I can't say.

People just liked it better that way.