• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Trivia: Counties served only by electric trains

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
8,341
Of course they are! The only thing in the whole identity mess that people actually think of as a county! 1,000 years of history is now a "historical anomaly". People should base their identity on "Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole", "Cheshire West and Chester", "Tyne and Wear" and so on! :rolleyes:

A lot of people still regard the "post-1974" entities as phony counties, created by Whitehall as bodies of what they regard as some "ideal size", and imposed almost entirely without seeking the opinions of local populations.
"Real" counties are mostly those with first class or second tier cricket teams. And that excludes areas called Greater Manchester, Tyne & Wear, West Midlands, etc. (End of partly OT rant.)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

norbitonflyer

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
5,782
Location
SW London
You can add City Thameslink and part of Blackfriars to the list of stations in the Square Mile. All-electric, of course.
 

oglord

Member
Joined
13 Oct 2010
Messages
377
Location
Newport, Monmouthshire
A lot of people still regard the "post-1974" entities as phony counties, created by Whitehall as bodies of what they regard as some "ideal size", and imposed almost entirely without seeking the opinions of local populations.
"Real" counties are mostly those with first class or second tier cricket teams. And that excludes areas called Greater Manchester, Tyne & Wear, West Midlands, etc. (End of partly OT rant.)
Indeed so, and more people will be coming to that correct conclusion as more and more local government reorganisation continues to rip up the post-1974 administrative map.
 

InOban

On Moderation
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,537
I could go on a rant here, but basically the above is nonsense. But OT.
Suffice to say that my late sister lived in Newmarket, which claims to be in Suffolk, but is in the Cambridge postcode, reflecting the fact that that is the centre of the local economy. And she actually lived in Cambridgeshire, because the boundary runs the through the modern settlement.
Not saying that the new boundaries are much better. Why does Derbyshire reach almost to Manchester?
 

InOban

On Moderation
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,537
Which bit is nonsense?
That the 'cricketing' county boundaries make any sense, certainly since the economic geography of the country was transformed by industrial revolution and the railway.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
That the 'cricketing' county boundaries make any sense, certainly since the economic geography of the country was transformed by industrial revolution and the railway.
Quite. Newmarket is a prime example (as are some other Suffolk, Essex and Herts towns where the primary travel-to-work destination is Cambridge). Chesterfield is economically and culturally part of a cluster centred on Sheffield, which itself has little connection to York. Peterborough is at the triple point of three "traditional counties".
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
7,587
Location
Torbay
It always did - its boundaries were almost unchanged by the 1974 reforms.
Derbyshire is even closer to Sheffield. The boundary gets to only around 3 miles away from the city centre near Dronfield. What Sheffield shares with Manchester is that both cities only grew rapidly from small unimportant settlements after the industrial revolution, so their position within surrounding older traditional counties is fairly random.
 

oglord

Member
Joined
13 Oct 2010
Messages
377
Location
Newport, Monmouthshire
That the 'cricketing' county boundaries make any sense, certainly since the economic geography of the country was transformed by industrial revolution and the railway.
Different boundaries have different uses - cites, boroughs and parliamentary constituencies have always crossed county boundaries, so they posed no problems for 1,000 years until the Victorians decided to base administrative areas on them. Geographically there is there is a lot of sense using rivers and mountains to define areas that last down the centuries, even if they are not suitable for administrative areas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top