ShareThis Page
News

Newsmaker: Daniel P. Barr

| Saturday, Nov. 8, 2014, 7:57 p.m.
Daniel P. Barr, 43, of Grove City published “A Colony Sprung from Hell: Pittsburgh and the Struggle for Authority on the Western Pennsylvania Frontier, 1744-1794.”
Daniel P. Barr, 43, of Grove City published “A Colony Sprung from Hell: Pittsburgh and the Struggle for Authority on the Western Pennsylvania Frontier, 1744-1794.”

Noteworthy: After 10 years of work, Barr finished a book about the Revolution-era power struggle between Virginia and Pennsylvania over the territory that became Western Pennsylvania. “A Colony Sprung from Hell: Pittsburgh and the Struggle for Authority on the Western Pennsylvania Frontier, 1744-1794,” explores the unique circumstances that drew the region into the American Revolution and set the stage for the Whiskey Rebellion. Barr traces some of Western Pennsylvania's modern character to this era of tumultuous isolation.

Age: 43

Family: Married to Nicole; daughter, Delaney; son, Coldan.

Residence: Grove City

Occupation: History professor at Robert Morris University.

Education: Barr earned a bachelor's degree in history in 1994 and a master's in history in 1996 from Slippery Rock University, as well as a doctorate in Early American History from Kent State University in 2001.

Quote: “What this book really is all about is the lack of any clear governing presence in this region for the better part of five decades. I think we still see this in the latent parochialism we still have — the distrust or disinclination to, sometimes, getting in line with national or state authority.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me