I've never been to the northeast. I want to see some of the colonial and Revolutionary War history of the USA. Which of these two cities has more of that preserved history? Consider both landmarks and neighborhoods that have survived since colonial times.

Ive never been to Boston, but I don't like Philadelphia. The city is overrun with homeless junkies. The art museum is great. The pizza and cheesesteaks are great. You can see anything worth doing in a day. And then you should leave.

>>2805547 (OP)
I'm from Philly. The touristy areas of the cities are nice, but outside of that it's a ghetto shithole. There's a lot of cool historical sites, both in the city and outside, but I think Boston would be slightly better overall.
If you like colonial history, I'd actually suggest Virginia. Williamsburg is very much stuck in colonial times

I live in (greater) Boston at the moment, most of my best friends live in Philadelphia, so I've spent much time in both. If it's history you're after, Boston wears its Revolutionary history on its sleeve. You'll find it in abundance here. Philadelphia obviously also has plenty but, from my experience, it isn't as outwardly displayed as Boston.
As >>2805554 mentioned a lot of Philadelphia needs cleaning up. If you visit stay in Center City or South Philly (they, while dirty, are the "least bad," I guess). In Boston you can turn any random corner downtown and find a historical site, just avoid the area called Downtown Crossing ("DTX") as it's just a shopping mall with a lot of sketchy characters.

Boston is easily the victor. A good idea would be just to avoid Philadelphia altogether