It seems simplistic to have South Midlands so far South as it nowhere near the Midlands. Something like Central is bland and boring, so maybe Mercia which ties the area back to it’s past.
Greater London should remain Greater London as an entity by itself since none of the Home Counties around London bear any resemblance to it.
I’m not sure why you’ve split a third off Hertfordshire, it’s nothing like London geographically or culturally and having lived there, they fight hard against any sign of London creep.
I’m aware this map will be very contentious and controversial here’s some of my reasoning.
**SOUTH CENTRAL**
Most of Hampshire etc is basically halfway between the southwest and southeast regions sitting between them. It’s a little too west to be southeast, but too far east to be southwest. Eastern wiltshire with the M4 corridor and swindon included in this region
**SOUTH EAST**
Pretty self explanatory. However, Essex is split into two. The more urban/suburban, London-oriented south is included in the southeast but the more rural north Essex is included in East Anglia
**EAST ANGLIA**
Again, pretty self explanatory, includes the Northern third of Essex and also includes southern Lincolnshire. This is because southern Lincolnshire shares a lot of the culture and geography with the the other parts of Anglia particuarly the area around the Fens.
**SOUTH MIDLANDS**
Basically the southern M1 corridor. Includes towns like Luton, Bedford, Northampton, Aylesbury. A little too north to be in the proper south and has strong connections to the Midlands via the M1 and rail. Towns like Luton also have a lot in common with some Midlands towns like Birmingham.
**EAST MIDLANDS**
Pretty much the same as it is now. However, only includes southwestern Lincolnshire and the southern halves of Derbyshire and Notts
**WEST MIDS**
A lot smaller than the present west mids region. The northern half of Staffordshire is excluded, and places on the welsh border are their own region
**WEST**
The westernmost parts of England. Bordering the west mids but have very little in common with the conurbations around Birmingham, Coventry etc, as they are mostly rural. Includes a tiny bit of Staffordshire in the north, all the way down to Gloucestershire in the south
**SOUTHWEST**
Pretty much the same as it is now, however the eastern portion of Dorset with its conurbations of Poole/Christchurch/Bournemouth are in the South Central region, as this part of the county used to be part of Hampshire, so in the South East for a while.
**NORTH WEST**
Pretty contentious as it includes most of Yorkshire. However this is because IMO there are strong ties between the urban areas of West Yorkshire and that of Greater Manchester, and to a lesser extent some of the towns in southern Lancashire. Does not include Cumbria.
**UPPER NORTH WEST**
Predominantly rural, this also includes the western parts of Northumbria.
**NORTH EAST**
Includes northern Lincolnshire, the east riding of Yorkshire. Not an ideal name as most people think of the north east as the area around Newcastle
**UPPER NORTH EAST**
Durham, North Yorkshire, most of Northumbria
Hey OP, just a heads up you are using old data for your counties boundaries map. That looks like the pre-1974 border between Oxfordshire and Berkshire which was quite substantial. More info [here](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-68515410).
Edit – sorted link out
I’m sure it has its problems to others but I’m just glad to see Herts not inexplicably lumped in with East Anglia for once.
Yes of course, Watford and St Albans, those cities basically attached to London, they definitely belong in the wheat fields.
5 comments
[removed]
It seems simplistic to have South Midlands so far South as it nowhere near the Midlands. Something like Central is bland and boring, so maybe Mercia which ties the area back to it’s past.
Greater London should remain Greater London as an entity by itself since none of the Home Counties around London bear any resemblance to it.
I’m not sure why you’ve split a third off Hertfordshire, it’s nothing like London geographically or culturally and having lived there, they fight hard against any sign of London creep.
I’m aware this map will be very contentious and controversial here’s some of my reasoning.
**SOUTH CENTRAL**
Most of Hampshire etc is basically halfway between the southwest and southeast regions sitting between them. It’s a little too west to be southeast, but too far east to be southwest. Eastern wiltshire with the M4 corridor and swindon included in this region
**SOUTH EAST**
Pretty self explanatory. However, Essex is split into two. The more urban/suburban, London-oriented south is included in the southeast but the more rural north Essex is included in East Anglia
**EAST ANGLIA**
Again, pretty self explanatory, includes the Northern third of Essex and also includes southern Lincolnshire. This is because southern Lincolnshire shares a lot of the culture and geography with the the other parts of Anglia particuarly the area around the Fens.
**SOUTH MIDLANDS**
Basically the southern M1 corridor. Includes towns like Luton, Bedford, Northampton, Aylesbury. A little too north to be in the proper south and has strong connections to the Midlands via the M1 and rail. Towns like Luton also have a lot in common with some Midlands towns like Birmingham.
**EAST MIDLANDS**
Pretty much the same as it is now. However, only includes southwestern Lincolnshire and the southern halves of Derbyshire and Notts
**WEST MIDS**
A lot smaller than the present west mids region. The northern half of Staffordshire is excluded, and places on the welsh border are their own region
**WEST**
The westernmost parts of England. Bordering the west mids but have very little in common with the conurbations around Birmingham, Coventry etc, as they are mostly rural. Includes a tiny bit of Staffordshire in the north, all the way down to Gloucestershire in the south
**SOUTHWEST**
Pretty much the same as it is now, however the eastern portion of Dorset with its conurbations of Poole/Christchurch/Bournemouth are in the South Central region, as this part of the county used to be part of Hampshire, so in the South East for a while.
**NORTH WEST**
Pretty contentious as it includes most of Yorkshire. However this is because IMO there are strong ties between the urban areas of West Yorkshire and that of Greater Manchester, and to a lesser extent some of the towns in southern Lancashire. Does not include Cumbria.
**UPPER NORTH WEST**
Predominantly rural, this also includes the western parts of Northumbria.
**NORTH EAST**
Includes northern Lincolnshire, the east riding of Yorkshire. Not an ideal name as most people think of the north east as the area around Newcastle
**UPPER NORTH EAST**
Durham, North Yorkshire, most of Northumbria
Hey OP, just a heads up you are using old data for your counties boundaries map. That looks like the pre-1974 border between Oxfordshire and Berkshire which was quite substantial. More info [here](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-68515410).
Edit – sorted link out
I’m sure it has its problems to others but I’m just glad to see Herts not inexplicably lumped in with East Anglia for once.
Yes of course, Watford and St Albans, those cities basically attached to London, they definitely belong in the wheat fields.
Comments are closed.