I think that the New England colonies were more successful because their locations along the coast was easier to access by sea-route than the Chesapeake colonies, was less marshy, and was colonized more by people who were used to getting their own food, unlike the "gentleman" colonists at Chesapeake.

The New England colonies were much more successful when in comparison to the Chesapeake colonies. Not only was there a larger population, but there was also a lower percentage for death rate. Though they both were settled indefinitely, the new England colonies were better because in the end, because of the amount of families that lived there, leading to a larger more efficient settlement.

I believe the Chesapeake Colonies were more successful in comparison to the New England Colonies. At first, disease and lack of workers created a problem for the Chesapeake colonies but eventually time took its toll and created successful colonies. The people of the Chesapeake Colonies made it through some tough times such as the "Great Starvation" and many wars with the Native Americans and with the power to do that, they could do anything.

I think that New England was more successful because New England has a bigger population and the Chesapeake Colony had a bunch of diseases that caused there population to decrease like malaria, dysentery, and typhoid.

In my opinion, New England was more successful than the Chesapeake Bay colonies. For example, the settlers that arrived at New England tended to arrive as families while the colonists of Chesapeake Bay consisted more of men. The women in the New England colonies had more freedom and since there was a higher ratio of men to women, in the Chesapeake Bay colonies, it was more difficult for the men to start families, which resulted in having a higher death rate.

I believe New England colonies were more successful due to the fact they had well educated leader. Their economy had prospered do to fur trading, fishing and shipbuilding becoming important industries. Out of all the New England outposts, Massachusetts Bay Colony was one of the biggest/most influential of them all. They also had a strong belief with god - giving them hope to look positively toward their future.

:)

The more successful colonies in the Americas were the colonies of New England. These colonies were more successful due to the fact that the colonists of Jamestown and the surrounding area of the Chesapeake Bay consisted of mostly w ealthy men who were not used to any form of laborous task. The only reason they went to the Americas in hopes of finding gold and other precious materials. The colonists of Plymouth and other New England colonies were seeking freedom from religious opression. These people were used to working hard, as they were the lower class while living in England. Also, along with the help of the Natives, the New Englanders were able to farm more efficiently and have more agricultural success. Ergo, they had a much lower mortality rate than the colonists of the Chesapeake Bay.

The New England Colonies were more successful in my opinion. The Chesapeake colonies were a more disfunctional group of people, most of which were indentured servants. The New England Colonies were more of an orderly established group and because of such the colonies grew to become tightly knit and proper. The New England colonies were able to grow their colony naturally while the Chesapeake colony had a number of deaths causing it to be harder to reproduce. The New england colonies were more religiously and family centered. Since most Immigrant came as families the New England colonies didn't need to bring more people in because they had the means to reproduce naturally.

The New England colonies, or at least a few of them, formed the New England Confederation. It was one of the first recognizable building blocks of colonial unity. Without the New England colonies' step would the colonies have still united?

The New England Colonies had more success than the Chesapeake Bay Colonies. Although they were both started by Europeans, the New England Colonies were set up with more organization. They created governments and "constitutions" that were created and understood by the people. They even tried to obtain Independence from their mother country and had unity from one colony to another. With trade set up they allowed for much more money to be spread throughout the economy. The stable environment of the New England Colonies allowed for the success that the poorly lead Jamestown could not achieve.

I believe New England colonies have been more successful in settleing down and building their economy. They were definently more sucessful than the chesapeake colony when they started off. New England was beginning to be a very healthy place and one settler claimed "inhaling one breath of fresh New England air was better than all of Old Englands ale".

Children were growing up in a nurturing enviornment where they learned to read and write and were actively going to school. Full families began moving to New England rather than the Chesapeake. Also, laws prohibited men from abusing their wives in New England and abandonment was punishable.

Another point to make why New England colonies were more successful since a shared sense was among the first settlers. Also, since majority of the Englishmen left the colonies to the West Indies or Barbados, yet some of the colonies still remained STRONG and withheld with the short population

New England was more successful. New England had a healthy environment, the settlement was more natural than Chesapeake and their democracy is still being used today.

The Chesapeake Colony had a clear advantage which set them apart as the far more successful colony, attributed to their early origin; they were the first seeded, and were largely organized to begin with. They paved the way for the British demand for the poor man's crop of Tobacco, and created a steady colony-dependent crop that is today a multi-billion dollar industry. Furthermore, they were the seed of the America we know today, forming a crude colonial delegation that ran themselves under British yoke which blossomed into a magnificent government of democratic ideals. Their population was organized and united, surviving terrible early conditions under strict military leadership and essentially establishing themselves within a swamp to a bastion of Old World power in the New World while the New England colony was still struggling against the large Algonquin tribes.

crudeesapeake colony was more successful in my opinion, in that it was a colony based off of its plantations of Tobacco- which got it more money in its economy later on. The House of Burgesses had control over the militia and the finances gotten. But in the New England Colonies, when Plymouth was settled, the mayflower compact was made and basically made from a “crude” government that had no real governmental decisions. Therefore, the Chesapeake colony was more successful in the standpoint of its government from success of trade, than that of its northern colony.

The settlements in New England were generally more successful due to the fact that the settlers usually came with women and children and were able to create a stable society much like the one in England. Also, the towns and villages of New England were much closer together than those of Chesapeake. This allowed the New Englanders more opportunities to exchange services and create a trade system that resembled a somewhat stable economy.

Another reason I think that New England was more successful is they were very prosperous and more modernized than the Chesapeake because their population had a more known language throughout, which was English.

Another reason I think that New England was more successful is they were very prosperous and more modernized than the Chesapeake because their population had a more known language throughout, which was English.

The Chesapeake colonies were more agricultural then the New England colonies. But because they were more agricultural, their staple crop being tobacco, they were more spread out leaving the colonist with little to no communication with the other colonists. The region was also filled with diseases such as malaria and typhoid. The region was unhealthy and because of such it decreased the life expectance of the colonists whereas when the colonist migrated to the New England colonies it actually added ten years to the life expectance. Though gradually the Chesapeake colonies did gain immunity and a foundation, that foundation was still rocky. They had a tough time creating a population and the people were dying like flies. New England had a more stable colony with families, industry, and a solid government. In conclusion the New England Colonies had a more successful colony.

I believe that the New England colonies were more successful than the Chesapeake because there was a lot of war and conflict present in the Chesapeake with the Native Americans. The economy of the New England colonies prospered because of fishing, fur trading, and shipbuilding. In the Chesapeake there were a higher number of death rates than in New England due to disease and there was no way to reproduce, seeing as there were no women. The New England colonies were much more stable and they believed that all men were equal, so in fact they worked more than in the Chesapeake where the men were gentlemen and did not want to work because they expected it to be done for them.

Another thing that should be pointed out is that the New England colonies, being along the coast, had easier access to the ships that came across with European goods than the Chesapeake colonies did.

During the colonial era, Chesapeake colonies were more successful than the New England Colonies. The original purpose of of the New England Colonies was to allow the colonists freedom from religious oppression. However, the New England colonies failed to allow its inhabitants religious freedom. Anne Hutchinson was driven out for challenging Puritan orthodoxy and the peaceful Quakers were persecuted. New England failed to fulfill its purpose- religious freedom- at the most fundamental level.

On the other hand, the Chesapeake colony succeeded in its purpose. The Virginia Company of London sent colonists to America for one reason: to make money. After a rocky start, the discovery of tobacco as the perfect cash crop sent the economy skyrocketing and thus made the Virginia Company successful.

New England was more successful than the Chesapeake Bay colony due to several reasons. First off, New England settlers consisted of mostly Puritans who attempted to create an ideal community enriched with religion and unity which allowed the colonists to focus on God and on their family. In contrast, Chesapeake colonists were “gentlemen” who did not hunt for their own food which resulted in many lives lost. Next, New England developed little cities and towns, helping it become more economical than Chesapeake Bay, which was beneficial for their trading.

The Chesapeake Colonies were also more successful than the New England colonies because they supported broad agriculture through the highly successful plantation system. The Chesapeake colonies also did not have to deal as much with religious discrimination such as the discrimination against Quakers in Boston. The New England Colonies were also places for common religious conflict.

New England colonies were better off in the long run, because they had limited amount of diseases. One of the leading factors for this was the location of the colonies. Being in a colder climate, some diseases couldn’t survive. Unfortunately where it was warmer, the diseases could live, which led to higher death rates for other colonies. Therefore, the New England colonies were much more successful.

I believe that living in the chesepeake would have been a bad life. Disease plagued settlers for long periods of time and political chaos was going on in Jamestown. Settlers spent so much time looking for gold that wasent there that you couldent really call Jamestown a town due to the determination of the settlers to find gold that they pretty much ignored everything else in order to find it.

As a whole, both colonies had success. Eventually they did join forces but in the beginning, I believe the New England colonies were more successful. Rather than being based on agriculture like the Chesapeake, they focused on other factors such as ship building and carpentry. Ship building allowed the New Englanders to explore places more efficiently and travel back to the Old World for trade, etc.. New England was also more successful because they were more religiously tolerant leading to a higher population especially in Quakers, Catholics and Puritans.

Another reason to support that the New England Colonies were better off than the Chesapeake Bay Colonies was the quality of life in the prior. In the Chesapeake Bay Colonies the inhabitants were almost all men who were used to being given everything, which bit them in the behind when the starving times came from no stored food. Disease, mosquitos, lack of women, and judgment clouded by the desire for gold all played a role in an unhealthy environment leading to poor quality life. On the other hand, New England Colonies were much more organized and started under the Puritans. The Puritans had a plan in which they would live simply while serving God. It was also said in New England instead of subtracting 10 or more years off your life, like in Chesapeake, you could add 10 years because of the healthy home. There also were more families in New England than in Chesapeake because of the greater men to women ratio. In conclusion, the New England Colonies were a much better place to live because the people had long and healthy lifestyles.

Chesapeake was not successful because it was random in development, diseases took ten years off of settlers, and the men couldn't really find women and land.

I feel that the New England colonies were more productive, mostly thanks to the colonists of the region who, unlike the Chesapeake colonies, were better prepared and willing to put basics (food, water, shelter) before searching for gold. Also, the New England colonies were easier to access, paving the way for a future in the shipbuilding and timber industries

Does anyone feel that although religion did not play a critical role in how either the Chesapeake or New England colonies were founded, it at least survived as a large enough issue to persuade aspiring colonists to one colony or the other, depending on their religious beliefs and values?

It seems that everyone here is arguing that the Chesapeake colonies' location was less ideal for trade with England than the New England colonies'. That is absolutely not true. Ships docked in a bay which protected them from the stormy Atlantic. That network of rivers and swamps that gave everyone typhoid in the beginning was now both an irrigation system and a network of trading routes. Without this network, the vast tobacco plantations that were key to Chesapeake's success would not have been possible. While Chesapeake was flourishing, New England's rocky soil and lack of river networks kept it from obtaining success on the world economic scene.

Due to the number of women present, the location, and the work ethic of the men the New England colonies were clearly superior. Their location was right along the shore which is convient and the presence of so many women is a sign that their standard of living was superior to that of the Chesapeake colonies. Also, with the Chesapeake colonies being made up of primarily men it was hard to maintain the population. On top of this the men who did live there were "gentlemen" and not accustomed to hard work. The marshy ground of the Chesapeake area did not lend well to them becoming extremely successful.

Although the the Chesapeake colonies made a bigger impact in the economic stand point, in my opinion the New England colonies were more successful over all. The settlement at Plymouth was more stable, in that it was an actual colony, not just a whole bunch of spread out plantations. The New England colonists were like little cities that would last longer and had well formed goverments. Their governing was the basis for the government America still has.

I think that the Chesapeake colonies were most successful. I think this because Virginia was the first colony and opened the door for all the other English colonies. Also many colonists were drawn to the Chesapeake colonies because of its successful tobacco industry, especially Virginia. The Carolinas were also very successful because of their sugar relations with Indians from Barbados. Georgia was also very successful because it had a valuable silk and wine industry. Georgia was also a haven for people in debt and also tried at first to keep slavery out of Georgia. In the Chesapeake colonies there was also religious toleration for Protestants.

I believe that the New England colonies were more successful than the Chesapeake because they were Puritans and were simple. They didn’t need all of the fancy things like in England and they focused on the important things like organizing a community and being productive. The New England colonists also were able to focus more on family and God compared to the Chesapeake colonists who were just looking to make money for themselves.