It depended, to a great degree, according to the Historian Francis Parkman, on State.
I'm currently (also) reading Montcalm and Wolfe: The French & Indian War.
This is concerning 1740s/1750s Massachusetts and Virginia:
=quotes
Massachusetts:
"Its government, originally theocratic, now tended to democracy, ballasted as yet by the strong traditions of respect for established worth and ability, as well as by the influence of certain families prominent in affairs for generations. Yet there were no distinct class- lines, and popular power, like popular education, was widely diffused.
Virginia:
"The Great Colony of Virigina stood in strong contrast to New England. In both the population was English; but one was Puritan with Roundhead traditions, and the other, so far as concerned its governing class, Anglican with Cavalier traditions. In the one, every man, woman, and child, could read and write; in the other, Sir William Berkeley once thanked God that there were no free schools, and no prospect of any for a century. The hope had found fruition. The lower classes of Virginia were as untaught as the warmest friend of popular ignorance could wish. New England had a native literature more than respectable under the circumstances, while Virginia had none; numerous industries, while Virginia was all agriculture, with but a single crop; a homogenous society and a democratic spirit, while her rival was an aristocracy.
...
"They [Virginian Aristocrats] were few in number; they raced, gambled, drank and swore; they did everything in Puritan eyes was most reprehensible; and in the day of need they gave the United Colonies a body of statesmen and orators which had no equal on the continent."
=end quote
Please recall that two English land grants. Plymouth and Virginia, the North and the South.