Skip to main content

You HAVE to stay at this cool hotel...

It's not every day that you have the opportunity to stay at one of the oldest hotels in the United States. If you ever decide to visit Concord, Massachusetts, you'll get just that.

Concord's Colonial Inn's original structure was built in 1716. One of the Inn's original buildings served as a storehouse for arms and provisions in 1775 during the Revolutionary War.

When the British arrived to seize and destroy the supplies, the Minutemen met them head-on at the North Bridge for what became the first battle of the American Revolution. The event is commemorated every April with a parade near the Inn and a ceremony at the North Bridge on Patriots' Day.

In the early 1800s, parts of the Inn's were used as a residence and variety store. From 1835-1837, author and philosopher Henry David Thoreau, who was born and died in Concord, stayed at the Inn while attending Harvard. In the mid-1800s, the building was used as a boarding house and a small hotel called the Thoreau House.

The Inn as we know it today began operating in 1889, surrounded by a slew of landmarks commemorating the nation's literary and revolutionary history.

Eleven years later, the property was given its current name, Concord's Colonial Inn.
The Inn melds three centuries of history with today's modern conveniences, making it an ideal lodging choice for history buffs and travelers seeking charming, comfortable accommodations in Concord.

It also boasts two lovely restaurants, Liberty and Merchants Row; ample meeting space for weddings and other events; and an enviable location near such historic hot spots as the Concord Museum, Ralph Waldo Emerson House, and Sleepy Hollow Cemetery.

If you're ever in Concord, there's no reason not to stay at this quaint inn steeped in charm and history. It's worth checking out even if you plan on booking elsewhere.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Do you have Isolophilia? Find out...

You're probably asking yourself, "What in the world does Isolophilia mean?" It sounds like it would be something negative, doesn't it?  After all, words that end in "philia" (e.g., pedophilia) tend to involve things we want nothing to do with. But Isolophilia isn't something all people deplore. In fact, introverts like me welcome it. Put simply, Isolophilia is defined as having a strong affinity for solitude. It describes a person who relishes being alone. While extroverts can only take so much solitude, we introverts find that it rejuvenates us. In order to recharge our batteries, we need to retreat to a quiet environment where we we're left alone to rest and/or gather our thoughts. Extroverts, on the other hand, become bored and drained when they're alone for a lengthy period of time. Social interaction is the fuel that drives them. So while an extrovert would probably do anything to avoid feelings of Isolophilia in most cases, an...

No response from someone IS a response

Make no mistake about it: When you don't get a response from someone -- whether they fail to answer your texts or return your phone calls -- it is  still a response, and a powerful one at that. When a person fails to respond, it's a direct reflection of their interest -- or lack thereof -- in the relationship. Few things are more aggravating than having to hound a partner, friend, or relative for some sort of reply after we've reached out to them. Yes, we get busy from time to time, but that doesn't give anyone the right to leave the other person hanging. A terse text with something like "Been busy, will reach out soon" doesn't say much, but at least it shows some effort to bring the other person up to speed on why they've fallen off the radar. Failing to provide a response for weeks -- if not months -- communicates that you are just not a priority, and that you'll have to wait your turn to get this individual's attention. This is n...

An important note to women about men and attraction

I was raised by my mom, grandma, and two older sisters.  Growing up, never did I ever take any interest in the girls at school who tended toward exposing more skin. I always treated them as I would my female family members -- with the utmost courtesy and respect.  And anytime I suspected that a male friend or acquaintance of mine adopted a hump-and-dump attitude toward women, I nixed them from my life. I held men who treated women as objects in very low regard, and still do to this day. If women feel empowered to show off their bodies because they love and work hard on their physique, more power to them. In other words, if they're doing it to please THEMSELVES and no one else, good for them.  However, those who do it specifically to curry men's favor are making a big mistake. It sends the wrong signals and actually makes it less likely that a man will want to stick around for a committed relationship (if that's what you want as anyway).  Granted, if you're not lookin...