Unlike most other countries, us Brits are very pedantic about what we call a ‘city’. Elsewhere, a city is a large town. But here, a city has to have a cathederal, or a royal charter from the Queen making it a city. This means you get some very large towns which can’t become cities, and some cities which are no bigger than large villages, like Ely in Cambridgeshire.
I therefore propose a new system, based on something I heard some time ago on Home Truths on Radio 4:
- If it’s just a group of houses, it’s a settlement.
- If there is also a church, it is a hamlet.
- If there is also a pub, it is a village.
- If there is a branch of Woolworths, it is a town.
- And finally, if there is a branch of Marks & Spencer, it is a city.
What do you think – good system or bad?
Related Posts:
This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
January 14, 2005 at 12:13
I’ve never considered religion when calling a place a city or a town. I just do it by eye. Bradford is big-ish (bigger than a village at least) therefore it’s a town and Leeds is huge therefore it is a city.
January 14, 2005 at 12:13
Well it’s not an entirely perfect system. I’d question whether Ilkley is really a town – it has a Woolworths. And Ashton certainly isn’t a city – it has an M&S.
Why can’t we just have the (ex) 01×1 area codes made cities, and anything with more than a certain number of (non-tourist) shops a town.
Of course it’s another non-perfect system, Leeds would be very unhappy. Really though, why should we all care whether we’re called a town or a city?
January 14, 2005 at 12:53
If you are a city, you can charge more rent, higher prices for houses, higher council tax etc. I stay in a city (which was appointed for the Queens Jubilee a couple of years ago) and that is about all that has happened here….
As for Neil’s proposal, I think it seems fair as it won’t affect most of the places I know, although I’d perhaps revise the last point to be “And finally, if there is at least 30 roundabouts and 30 sets of traffic lights within the boundary, then it is a city.”
January 14, 2005 at 13:16
With the way M&S are going, they might not be around much longer and that would get rid of a lot of cities. The same principles would also demote a lot of cities or towns if woolies ever changed their name.
January 14, 2005 at 13:51
Does The Big W count as Woolworths?
Here’s my system
If it’s just a group of houses, it’s a settlement.
If there is also a church, it is a hamlet.
If there is also a pub, chippy, bookie, indian/chinese takaway, blockbuster video store and newsagent in a row, it is a village.
If there is a 24 hour petrol station, it is a town.
If there is an abundance of roundabouts instead of regular junctions, it is a “new town” (eg Milton Keynes or East Kilbride).
And finally, if there is 15,000 Pret-A-Manger, Starbucks, (insert wanky coffee house name here), it is a city.
Still flawed though
January 14, 2005 at 14:36
Greg: I’d say yes, Big W does count – otherwise, Bradford would be some kind of anomoly because it has plenty of pubs and a M&S, but no Woolworths, only a Big W.
It would, however, make Bracknell a city. Which isn’t necessarily a good thing…
January 14, 2005 at 14:58
This is very local. So I will just nod my head, and act sage like.
January 14, 2005 at 15:30
I grew up in a hamlet with no church. It has 3 farms and 18 houses, one of those being a great hall – big black & white building with high walls around the grounds.
The nearest village with a church has 1 farm, 1 school, 1 parish hall and about 12 houses. If that.
The nearest town has a few churches, and a Woolworths, but does not have a pub, chippy, bookie, indian/chinese takaway, blockbuster video store and newsagent in a row. Neither does it have any 24-hour petrol stations. In fact, it doesn’t have a Blockbuster at all. And I believe it to be one of the few remaining places in the country which doesn’t have a Macdonalds or any other large chain fast food outlet (yet the Chav population seem to be growing. Strange!)
January 14, 2005 at 15:54
This is weird. I was explaining the difference to my German housemate who I was talking around a few really English towns around me. Generally it’s Settlement
January 14, 2005 at 16:06
I’d say its only a city if it has a branch of John Lewis, that way Leeds would become a town and i’d be able to stick my tongue out at my brother. Ha.
January 14, 2005 at 16:24
Well, over here in germany there’s only two basic different kinds:
Gemeinde (10.000 ppl)
You can differentiate a little further though (> 50.000 is normally called “Großstadt” – big city)…apart from that nothing much to worry about.
As we have a seperation of church and state there’s no religious stuff involved (e.g. you gotta have a cathedral to be called city)…and as I’m used to it I really like it.
Your new system seems a little bit too much for me…as in: define pub, define group of houses (5? 10? 20? does it matter how many ppl live in those houses? etc)…
January 14, 2005 at 18:40
we did hamlets in geography – can’t remember what the definition was (i didn’t get an A*+ or whatever the youngun’s get nowadays).
Incidentally happy 3rd birthday Neil.
January 14, 2005 at 18:58
Ok, we’ve got “Leicester City” with the M+S store, a Woolworths and houses/shops.
Now we’ve got “Braunstone Town” with the Fosse Park shopping complex in it which has an even larger M+S, but no Wollies or Big W. So is that actually a town or a city or?
And the boundaries of “Leicester City” are slowly creaping into Braunstone so that’ll get confused even further….
It needs to be population or density based IMHO.
January 14, 2005 at 20:41
I propose a whole new system:
Name them according to football clubs…
Bradford = city,
Leicester = city,
Coventry = city,
Northampton = town,
Manchester = both city and united (hmm), and finally:
Aston (in Birmingham) = villa.
Okay, maybe not then.
January 15, 2005 at 06:08
Interesting. I wouldn’t be calling some places we have here in Australia town just because they have a pub though. Some places are just a pub with two permanent residents running the pub.
Here it’s basically,
Population 30 000 = city.
Easy.
January 16, 2005 at 16:01
Good Grief. I’m back, with Tesco still too !!!
The system has broken down I’m afraid. It would mean that Stockton-On-Tees is a City, when really it is a slum.
January 27, 2005 at 11:51
Theres a cattle shed in truro City centre