Counties
Chris Pickford
c.j.pickford.t21 at pqiI7YcILt0UQ4orhnMsEi2ymlDCuhJWqWy8eJGUXAPUZxG10U1bZMP5Ex4mMjkdXsu0a7Qc4tOKZaCc2kEdKPScaCVBVbAfpA.yahoo.invalid
Wed Aug 8 09:10:02 BST 2012
I am rather too imtimately aware of the niceties of boundary and county
changes around Birmingham - having gone into it all pretty thoroughly
for my Birmingham bells survey (long completed but never published) -
and I'm pretty sure that John is entirely correct on Selly Oak.
More generally, I have a preference for sticking (fairly loosely) to the
pre-1974 and/or Lieutenancy counties. It's not that I refuse to accept
change. Nor is it because the earlier groupings are "traditional" or
long-established (they weren't - and there's been lots of tinkering down
the centuries).
My reasons for preferring the older boundaries are these:
1. Many of the post-1974 administrative areas have proved to be too
short-lived to be durable "handles" for description
2. The historic county groupings (however defined) are important in
sourcing reference materials regarding particular places (e.g. the
location of documentation as Anne Willis has observed, or even which
county bell book to refer to)
There is another reason (a bit of a "hobby-horse" of mine) - and that is
that places which have switched county tend to be overlooked or
short-changed in "county" reference books. It's a sort-of "X isn't
really in yyyshire" or "it's in zzzshire now" mentality. As a result,
I've always felt it doubly important to make sure that these places are
properly covered in all my surveys (e.g. my Bedfordshire churches books
which cover every single place that has at any time been in that
county), and to explain and account for the administrative history that
lies behind the omissions in other books. Such places often switch
between dioceses too, and - again - miss out on coverage in those
sources as well.
As to whether the historic county changes matter in a source like Dove,
it's a bit of a moot point. As comments on places like Selly Oak and
Penge have revealed, it's always complicated - and often contentious. It
gets trickier still with detached portions of counties and parishes
(e.g. parts of historic Worcestershire dotted around Warwickshire and
Oxfordshire) and instances where parishes are split across county
boundaries. On the whole, I'd say it's far too complicated for a simple
"Anytown, was Blankshire now Newshire" listing. It is important for
linkage to historical reference materials, but not really for much else.
--
Chris Pickford 4 Walmsley Court, High Street, Kinver, DY7 6HG Tel: 01384
878435 or (mobile) 07811 453525 E-mail: c.j.pickford at kUSawvmBQp62aOSfTlTRquUzWJJFoa5BLix1STteNlhIDBBePyQn68C1k0U7U1xgSEkbR5CKO2sdK_RaWLA.yahoo.invalid or
(interchangeably) c.j.pickford.t21 at _HzIeTb_P7Ls98cjt6A6SrI0qmUuQ4AIxxvxy---bcioCE6UdcEpBw5qsX5HGzQF5Slu6DFpr4u1rZN7QaWy4munnGT7-MnUZQw.yahoo.invalid
More information about the Bell-historians
mailing list