Talk:List of counties of England by area in 1831

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Areas?[edit]

The areas given here don't seem to be consistent.

  • Northumberland, Durham figures match exactly 1891 census figure
  • Oxfordshire, and Kent doesn't match anything exactly, but are similar to the 1881 figure
  • Berkshire and Surrey matches 1881 census figure exactly, which is different to 1891
  • Lancashire doesn't match any years census well
  • Yorkshire matches the exact figure in the 1871 census, which is bigger than the 1831 census and different to the 1881 and 1891 censuses

For comparison see pages like [1]. Insert county name of your choice.

Where did these numbers come from? Morwen - Talk 15:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


So, what are we going to to about this? Can someone give the year of a census I can pull out of the BL and get the acreage figures for? At least then we will have an internally consistent list, with figures all pulled from the same source. Morwen - Talk 15:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Three choices: 1) Cite a source, 2) Delete as original research, 3) Update with data from an alternative source. MRSC 23:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hectares total[edit]

I'd prefer this to be in acres too but the VoB annoyingly gives E+W in acres but England in hectares. I don't feel comfortable doing calcs on original data, is there somewhere I can get that presented in acres? Unless someone is able to reliably do the conversion? MRSC 21:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eep eep eep - i wasn't remotely expecting it to change the actual ordering. Is the ordering for the ancient counties in the 1881 census the same? Morwen - Talk 22:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neither was I. I had to check it 3 times to make sure! I haven't checked 1881, I guess it will be totally different with all the 1844 changes in place so the rankings could alter. Perhaps a List of historic counties of England by area (1881) could be created? MRSC 22:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is.... I don't see any changes in 1844 in the Essex and Kent boundaries. I wonder was there land reclaimed from / lost to the sea? Durham obviously was much bigger with Bedlingtonshire, Craikshire etcetera pre 1844 so that makes sense. Lozleader 09:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How accurate were they at this point? Could there have been improvement which caused the 'changes'. Or would any changes have been applied to the data retrospectively so we wouldn't see it? MRSC 09:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Although a quick google make land reclaimed from the sea look more likely. MRSC 09:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't trust 19th century surveying to be as accurate as today's, but misplacing thousands of acres seems a bit weird. Mind, they did have to resurvey everything in the 20th century from scratch. Probably inland counties would be a better choice for this comparison. Morwen - Talk 09:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the census uses "ancient counties" in 1831 and "registration counties" in 1881 which explains the differences. MRSC 06:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Which were an entirely different thing. Must do something with the Registration county page, which just lists Scottish counties at the maoment, and says reg counties were the forerunners of admin counties, which i don't agree with ! Incidentally that link just gets me a Sorry! page Lozleader 08:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That link still works for me. To summarise, it shows the county boundaries of Essex with the registration county boundaries overlayed. There are several noticable differences around places such as Enfield and Bishops Stortford. MRSC 20:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me now. must have caught it a bad time! AFAIK the main differences were that Stansted Montfichet (which I have probably spelt wrong) was in Herts reg county, and Waltham Holy Cross (Waltham Abbey to you and me) was in Middlesex reg county. There were acouple of parishes in Suffolk reg county too. Lozleader 22:01, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We can derive a reasonably good list of differences in registration counties from the list of rural districts from 1894 we have - we just need to undo the splits of RSDs by county and then paste them back together. Youngs explains differences in the back, as well. Morwen - Talk 23:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(back up to sensible indent)

yeah. for Essex for example it notes poor law county of Essex had part of Rochford PLU in Suffolk, and also in other registration counties Essex parishes were

one think i spotted that i found quite interesting is that at least three 1974 boundary changes had the effect of uniting former poor law unions and therefore more closely resemble the registration counties than the ancient counties (Startforth Rural District, Bowland Rural District and also the border between North Yorkshire and the East Riding). anyway, this should go at Talk:Registration county Morwen - Talk 23:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming[edit]

I'm thinking maybe this should really be at List of counties of England by area (1831). They date removes any ambiguity. MRSC 21:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe List of counties of England by area in 1831 ? I think it would make sense to do this for Wales and Scotland as well - if the figures are available? Morwen - Talk 23:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Much better. I'll see what I can find. MRSC 06:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo (: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.130.50.126 (talk) 07:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

London?[edit]

Why is London (County)46.7.195.132 (talk) 18:48, 29 July 2019 (UTC) missing?[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_counties_of_England_by_area_in_1831&oldid=1205228601"