| Author |
Message |
Host
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:01 pm
Post subject: Territories |
|
|
Hi
Just a silly question...
....
Personal Identifying Data
....
Birthplace: Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland, UK
....
How are, each of the above territories, called in English?
Edinburgh = City
Midlothian =
Scotland =
UK =
Thank you |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Einde O'Callaghan
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:18 pm
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
Host wrote:
| Quote: | Hi
Just a silly question...
...
Personal Identifying Data
...
Birthplace: Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland, UK
...
How are, each of the above territories, called in English?
Better "What are each ... called?" |
| Quote: | Edinburgh = City
Midlothian =
county |
| Quote: | Scotland =
Country |
| Quote: | UK =
Also "country" |
The UK is a multi-national state, so Scotland is a country which is part
of the country called the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland).
Regards, Einde O'callaghan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2004 6:43 pm
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:18:57 +0200, Einde O'Callaghan
<einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote:
| Quote: | Host wrote:
Hi
Just a silly question...
...
Personal Identifying Data
...
Birthplace: Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland, UK
...
How are, each of the above territories, called in English?
Better "What are each ... called?"
Edinburgh = City
Midlothian =
county
|
Not a 'county', but a 'local government area' (named as such by the Local
Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994). [1]
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only for land
registration purposes.
--
Peter Duncanson
UK
(posting from u.c.l.e) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Einde O'Callaghan
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:32 pm
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
Peter Duncanson wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:18:57 +0200, Einde O'Callaghan
einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote:
snip
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only for land
registration purposes.
I thought Midlothian was a historic county - I seem to remember it from |
my atlas as a child.
Regards, Einde O'Callaghan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matti Lamprhey
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2004 8:41 pm
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
"Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote...
| Quote: | Peter Duncanson wrote:
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only for
land registration purposes.
I thought Midlothian was a historic county - I seem to remember it
from my atlas as a child.
|
It certainly was and remains so -- I think Peter's comment is much too
sweeping.
Here's _Encyclopaedia Britannica_ on the topic of Midlothian:
-- council area and historic county in southeastern Scotland, south of
the Firth of Forth. The historic county and council area cover somewhat
different territories. The council area encompasses a suburban and rural
area south and southeast of Edinburgh. The northern part of the council
area occupies the low coastal plain bordering the Firth of Forth. The
rest is gently rolling country that gradually slopes upward to the
Moorfoot Hills in the south. The River Esk flows northward through the
area to drain into the Firth of Forth. The council area lies entirely
within the historic county, which also encompasses the southeastern
portion of West Lothian council area, a hilly region south of the
Moorfoot Hills surrounding the upper valley of Gala Water in the
Scottish Borders council area, the town of Musselburgh in East Lothian
council area, and most of the council area of the city of Edinburgh,
including the city's historic core.
Matti |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 12:03 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:41:37 +0100, "Matti Lamprhey"
<matti-nospam@totally-official.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote...
Peter Duncanson wrote:
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only for
land registration purposes.
I thought Midlothian was a historic county - I seem to remember it
from my atlas as a child.
It certainly was and remains so -- I think Peter's comment is much too
sweeping.
|
My comment was based on information (written before the latest
reorganisation in 1995) at
http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/localgovt.html
<extract>
In 1995, local government in Scotland will be reorganised into 29 unitary
authorities, replacing the two tier system which has existed since the last
reorganisation of local goverment in 1974, following the Local Government
(Scotland) Act of 1973. Between 1974 and 1995 there were 9 Regional
Authorities (divided into 53 District Councils) and 3 unitary Island
Councils. The 3 island authorities will be retained after 1995.
Prior to 1974, Scotland was divided into counties and the larger cities were
governed by City Corporations. The old counties are still used as the basis
of Land Registration in Scotland.
</quote>
| Quote: | Here's _Encyclopaedia Britannica_ on the topic of Midlothian:
-- council area and historic county in southeastern Scotland, south of
the Firth of Forth. The historic county and council area cover somewhat
different territories. The council area encompasses a suburban and rural
area south and southeast of Edinburgh. The northern part of the council
area occupies the low coastal plain bordering the Firth of Forth. The
rest is gently rolling country that gradually slopes upward to the
Moorfoot Hills in the south. The River Esk flows northward through the
area to drain into the Firth of Forth. The council area lies entirely
within the historic county, which also encompasses the southeastern
portion of West Lothian council area, a hilly region south of the
Moorfoot Hills surrounding the upper valley of Gala Water in the
Scottish Borders council area, the town of Musselburgh in East Lothian
council area, and most of the council area of the city of Edinburgh,
including the city's historic core.
Matti
|
--
Peter Duncanson
UK
(posting from u.c.l.e) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
john
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 1:48 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
In message <fihdf0dcgvsnf39l6ov6q6cfpomjjoufdg@4ax.com>, Peter Duncanson
<mail@peterduncanson.net> writes
| Quote: | On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:41:37 +0100, "Matti Lamprhey"
matti-nospam@totally-official.com> wrote:
"Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote...
Peter Duncanson wrote:
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only for
land registration purposes.
I thought Midlothian was a historic county - I seem to remember it
from my atlas as a child.
It certainly was and remains so -- I think Peter's comment is much too
sweeping.
My comment was based on information (written before the latest
reorganisation in 1995) at
http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/localgovt.html
extract
In 1995, local government in Scotland will be reorganised into 29 unitary
authorities, replacing the two tier system which has existed since the last
reorganisation of local goverment in 1974, following the Local Government
(Scotland) Act of 1973. Between 1974 and 1995 there were 9 Regional
Authorities (divided into 53 District Councils) and 3 unitary Island
Councils. The 3 island authorities will be retained after 1995.
Prior to 1974, Scotland was divided into counties and the larger cities were
governed by City Corporations. The old counties are still used as the basis
of Land Registration in Scotland.
/quote
Here's _Encyclopaedia Britannica_ on the topic of Midlothian:
-- council area and historic county in southeastern Scotland, south of
the Firth of Forth. The historic county and council area cover somewhat
different territories. The council area encompasses a suburban and rural
area south and southeast of Edinburgh. The northern part of the council
area occupies the low coastal plain bordering the Firth of Forth. The
rest is gently rolling country that gradually slopes upward to the
Moorfoot Hills in the south. The River Esk flows northward through the
area to drain into the Firth of Forth. The council area lies entirely
within the historic county, which also encompasses the southeastern
portion of West Lothian council area, a hilly region south of the
Moorfoot Hills surrounding the upper valley of Gala Water in the
Scottish Borders council area, the town of Musselburgh in East Lothian
council area, and most of the council area of the city of Edinburgh,
including the city's historic core.
Matti
Whilst all of the above is accurate as far as I know there is an |
important difference between British and American usage of the term
"City".
Not every town of any consequence in UK is called a city. Many large
urban areas are designated "Town". Reading is one example, there are
doubtless many others.
When visiting the US I was surprised to see signs denoting the 'City
Limits' of communities that would be regarded as Villages or even
hamlets in this country.
There are some places in UK that have, for historical reasons,
designations that do not seem to correspond to the size of the community
but in the main Cities are bigger than towns, Towns are bigger than
Villages and Villages bigger then Hamlets. Towns or cities may have
Suburbs or Districts. London has its constituent London Boroughs which
have suburbs and districts of their own.
As far as local Government outside London goes things are far from
simple. The lowest level of Local Government is The Civil Parish,
Sometimes called a town council (which is nothing at all to do with a
church parish). These operate under the District Councils and they take
their place under the County Councils. In some places County and
District Councils are combined into Unitary Authorities. (In others the
powers of both are limited by the existence of National Parks). In
Scotland and Wales there are devolved national Governments. There may
soon be Regional Governments in England.
There are no town or city police departments nor for the main part,
fire departments as these are organised on a county or regional basis.
If you think this is all a terrible mess and wonder how we sort it all
out you may have a point!
The Linguistic confusion between a Parish Council and a Parochial Church
Council or a simple district as opposed to a District Council is beyond
many residents let alone visitors.
Towns have Mayors. Cities have Lord Mayors. A Lady Mayoress is not the
female equivalent of a Lord Mayor but the consort of a Mayor if the
mayor is a man. The Lord Mayor of London has no remit outside the
'square mile' of the City of London. The Mayor of London is in fact the
First Minister of the (Greater) London Regional Government.
Confused? I am almost sorry I started this but I will post it because I
hope it makes the point that nothing is simple or straightforward in the
naming of territories in UK.
--
John Graney |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Okapi
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:12 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
"Mike Stevens" <michael.stevens@which.net> wrote
| Quote: |
In 1540 Henry VIII declared Westminster Abbey to be a Cathedral, and so
Westminster became a City. But in 1550 the Abbey became a Collegiate
Church
instead, but Westminster rtaetained a sort of "honorary City" status.
|
And, along with Temple Church, St George's Chapel and others, Westminster
Abbey remains a "royal peculiar" outwith episcopal control.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/beyond/factsheets/makhist2_prog5a.shtml |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matti Lamprhey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 2:22 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
"Peter Duncanson" <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote...
| Quote: | "Matti Lamprhey" <matti-nospam@totally-official.com> wrote:
"Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote...
Peter Duncanson wrote:
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only
for
land registration purposes.
I thought Midlothian was a historic county - I seem to remember it
from my atlas as a child.
It certainly was and remains so -- I think Peter's comment is much
too
sweeping.
My comment was based on information (written before the latest
reorganisation in 1995) at
http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/localgovt.html
|
Yes, I'm not disputing it in a local government context. I think we
need a Campaign for Real Counties.
Matti |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Molly Mockford
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:04 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
At 21:45:20 on Thu, 15 Jul 2004, John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com>
wrote in <QVCJc.201$cb3.86@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net>:
| Quote: | john wrote:
Not every town of any consequence in UK is called a city. Many large
urban areas are designated "Town". Reading is one example, there are
doubtless many others.
Guildford. Kingston-upon Thames. Rochester [*]
When visiting the US I was surprised to see signs denoting the 'City
Limits' of communities that would be regarded as Villages or even
hamlets in this country.
There are some places in UK that have, for historical reasons,
designations that do not seem to correspond to the size of the community
Wells. Chichester.
but in the main Cities are bigger than towns, Towns are bigger than
Villages and Villages bigger then Hamlets. Towns or cities may have
Suburbs or Districts. London has its constituent London Boroughs which
have suburbs and districts of their own.
|
The definition always used to be that if it had a decent old cathedral,
it was a city, and if it hadn't, it wasn't.
As far as I know, the first part of that still holds true - no matter
how small (e.g. Ely), if it's always had a cathedral, it's always been a
city. (I don't think that building a brand-new cathedral automatically
confers city status, so bad luck Liverpool, you can't claim a double. In
fact, I think it has to be a diocesan cathedral, but I may be wrong
here.)
However, more recently there has been what amounts to a lottery held on
irregular occasions, whereby one or two large towns or conurbations can
win the right to be designated a city, despite not having the necessary
cathedral. Not long ago Brighton-and-Hove applied, and got it, but it
doesn't seem to have made much difference.
Not all cities have Lord Mayors, but nothing that isn't a city has a
Lord Mayor. There are, however, different rankings within the term of
"Mayor", whereby a Borough Mayor outranks a Town Mayor, for example.
All the above is in reference to England. Scotland doesn't have Mayors,
it has Provosts and Lord Provosts. And I don't know how the definitions
of cities work in Scotland, despite having spent my first two decades
there. And I've no idea at all what goes on in Wales. Does anyone?
--
Molly Mockford, past Mayoress of Lewes
I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that
lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be!
(My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Molly Mockford
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:40 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
At 22:27:50 on Thu, 15 Jul 2004, John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com>
wrote in <GxDJc.615$HZ5.176@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net>:
| Quote: | Molly Mockford wrote:
The definition always used to be that if it had a decent old cathedral,
it was a city, and if it hadn't, it wasn't.
As far as I know, the first part of that still holds true - no matter
how small (e.g. Ely), if it's always had a cathedral, it's always been a
city.
You've overlooked what happened to Rochester.
|
I know nothing about Rochester. The one in Kent, or the other one?
Presumably it is an exception to my "As far as I know".
--
Molly Mockford
I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that
lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be!
(My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Briggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:45 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
john wrote:
| Quote: | In message <fihdf0dcgvsnf39l6ov6q6cfpomjjoufdg@4ax.com>, Peter Duncanson
mail@peterduncanson.net> writes
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:41:37 +0100, "Matti Lamprhey"
matti-nospam@totally-official.com> wrote:
"Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote...
Peter Duncanson wrote:
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only for
land registration purposes.
I thought Midlothian was a historic county - I seem to remember it
from my atlas as a child.
It certainly was and remains so -- I think Peter's comment is much too
sweeping.
My comment was based on information (written before the latest
reorganisation in 1995) at
http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/localgovt.html
extract
In 1995, local government in Scotland will be reorganised into 29 unitary
authorities, replacing the two tier system which has existed since the
last reorganisation of local goverment in 1974, following the Local
Government (Scotland) Act of 1973. Between 1974 and 1995 there were 9
Regional Authorities (divided into 53 District Councils) and 3 unitary
Island Councils. The 3 island authorities will be retained after 1995.
Prior to 1974, Scotland was divided into counties and the larger cities
were governed by City Corporations. The old counties are still used as
the basis of Land Registration in Scotland.
/quote
Here's _Encyclopaedia Britannica_ on the topic of Midlothian:
-- council area and historic county in southeastern Scotland, south of
the Firth of Forth. The historic county and council area cover somewhat
different territories. The council area encompasses a suburban and rural
area south and southeast of Edinburgh. The northern part of the council
area occupies the low coastal plain bordering the Firth of Forth. The
rest is gently rolling country that gradually slopes upward to the
Moorfoot Hills in the south. The River Esk flows northward through the
area to drain into the Firth of Forth. The council area lies entirely
within the historic county, which also encompasses the southeastern
portion of West Lothian council area, a hilly region south of the
Moorfoot Hills surrounding the upper valley of Gala Water in the
Scottish Borders council area, the town of Musselburgh in East Lothian
council area, and most of the council area of the city of Edinburgh,
including the city's historic core.
Matti
Whilst all of the above is accurate as far as I know there is an
important difference between British and American usage of the term
"City".
|
Who said anything about America?
| Quote: | Not every town of any consequence in UK is called a city. Many large
urban areas are designated "Town". Reading is one example, there are
doubtless many others.
|
Guildford. Kingston-upon Thames. Rochester [*]
| Quote: | When visiting the US I was surprised to see signs denoting the 'City
Limits' of communities that would be regarded as Villages or even
hamlets in this country.
There are some places in UK that have, for historical reasons,
designations that do not seem to correspond to the size of the community
|
Wells. Chichester.
| Quote: | but in the main Cities are bigger than towns, Towns are bigger than
Villages and Villages bigger then Hamlets. Towns or cities may have
Suburbs or Districts. London has its constituent London Boroughs which
have suburbs and districts of their own.
|
You missed out Metropolitan Boroughs.
| Quote: | As far as local Government outside London goes things are far from
simple. The lowest level of Local Government is The Civil Parish,
Sometimes called a town council (which is nothing at all to do with a
church parish).
|
They needn't exist, of course.
| Quote: | These operate under the District Councils and they take
their place under the County Councils. In some places County and
District Councils are combined into Unitary Authorities.
|
Berkshire is an exception.
| Quote: | (In others the
powers of both are limited by the existence of National Parks). In
Scotland and Wales there are devolved national Governments. There may
soon be Regional Governments in England.
|
It depends what you mean by Governments. I think you may be confused by the
Regional Assemblies and the Government Offices.
| Quote: | There are no town or city police departments nor for the main part,
fire departments as these are organised on a county or regional basis.
|
Or something in between, of course.
| Quote: | If you think this is all a terrible mess and wonder how we sort it all
out you may have a point!
|
Who are the "you" of whom you speak?
| Quote: | The Linguistic confusion between a Parish Council and a Parochial Church
Council or a simple district as opposed to a District Council is beyond
many residents let alone visitors.
Towns have Mayors. Cities have Lord Mayors.
|
Not automatically.
| Quote: | A Lady Mayoress is not the
female equivalent of a Lord Mayor but the consort of a Mayor if the
mayor is a man.
|
Strictly speaking, no.
| Quote: | The Lord Mayor of London has no remit outside the
'square mile' of the City of London. The Mayor of London is in fact the
First Minister of the (Greater) London Regional Government.
Confused? I am almost sorry I started this but I will post it because I
hope it makes the point that nothing is simple or straightforward in the
naming of territories in UK.
|
I think you are making heavy weather of it. But here are a couple of
conundrums:
Why is Westminster a City, and how long has this been the case?
[*] Why is Rochester no longer a City?
--
John Briggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Briggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 3:47 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
Matti Lamprhey wrote:
| Quote: | "Peter Duncanson" <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote...
"Matti Lamprhey" <matti-nospam@totally-official.com> wrote:
"Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote...
Peter Duncanson wrote:
The historic counties of Scotland still exist but are used only for
land registration purposes.
I thought Midlothian was a historic county - I seem to remember it
from my atlas as a child.
It certainly was and remains so -- I think Peter's comment is much too
sweeping.
My comment was based on information (written before the latest
reorganisation in 1995) at
http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/localgovt.html
Yes, I'm not disputing it in a local government context. I think we
need a Campaign for Real Counties.
|
Best not to. It already exists, but there is excessive reactionary
nationalism involved, with an unpleasant implication of racism.
--
John Briggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Briggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 4:27 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
Molly Mockford wrote:
| Quote: | At 21:45:20 on Thu, 15 Jul 2004, John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com
wrote in <QVCJc.201$cb3.86@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net>:
john wrote:
Not every town of any consequence in UK is called a city. Many large
urban areas are designated "Town". Reading is one example, there are
doubtless many others.
Guildford. Kingston-upon Thames. Rochester [*]
When visiting the US I was surprised to see signs denoting the 'City
Limits' of communities that would be regarded as Villages or even
hamlets in this country.
There are some places in UK that have, for historical reasons,
designations that do not seem to correspond to the size of the community
Wells. Chichester.
but in the main Cities are bigger than towns, Towns are bigger than
Villages and Villages bigger then Hamlets. Towns or cities may have
Suburbs or Districts. London has its constituent London Boroughs which
have suburbs and districts of their own.
The definition always used to be that if it had a decent old cathedral,
it was a city, and if it hadn't, it wasn't.
As far as I know, the first part of that still holds true - no matter
how small (e.g. Ely), if it's always had a cathedral, it's always been a
city.
|
You've overlooked what happened to Rochester.
--
John Briggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Stevens
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 16, 2004 4:58 am
Post subject: Re: Territories |
|
|
"john" <john@soloriens.co.uk> wrote in message
news:16vWwADO+t9AFwGb@soloriens.co.uk
| Quote: | Whilst all of the above is accurate as far as I know there is an
important difference between British and American usage of the term
"City".
There are some places in UK that have, for historical reasons,
designations that do not seem to correspond to the size of the
community but in the main Cities are bigger than towns, Towns are
bigger than Villages and Villages bigger then Hamlets.
|
The smaller Cities are usually so designated because they have Cathedrals.
| Quote: | London has its constituent London Boroughs ...
|
Two of which (The City of Westminster and the City of London) are also
cities, just to confuse you even more. And at two of them (Kensington &
Chelsea and Kingston on Thames) are officially designated "Royal Borough".
--
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus II
web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk
Me cogitare credo ergo me esse credo.
(Rainy-Day-Carts) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in