I posted this on casualuk a while back but think it can bear a fresh outing. Here’s my rationale – any county with an east or west coast was thus defined, and for the poor landlocked counties it was where they would head for beach-wise. Clearly central southern coast is problematic, so I decided narrow Channel is east, wider Channel is west. I’ve used the classic counties, because they are the original and the best.
Derbyshire goes on the other side. It’s literally in the East Midlands.
In the north, the Pennines are the obvious boundary.
Bournemouth, Salisbury, Swindon, Cirencester, then following the line of the Fosse Way to High Cross, Watling Street between Hinckley and Nuneaton, Uttoxeter, Ashbourne, Buxton, then follow the Pennine watershed up to the Yorkshire border, follow that north and resume at the watershed up to the Scottish border, simples. All those towns named (except Hinckley) to be considered gateways to the west.
The Channel width is mainly down to wiggles in the French coast which obviously cannot have a bearing on anything.
I’d say Hants/Berks/Oxon would definitely be in the East (they are definitely South East) and Derby is mostly in the East, except for High Peak – but if we’re doing it at county level then it’s East.
That leaves Warks in the west as a kind of “lump” into the East but Birmingham is enough to pull it into the West I think.
There is something to this and it is refreshing to see. I teach a class on regional identities in England and the north south divide is only part of the story, and an often over exaggerated one at that.
If Derbyshire, Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire and Hampshire were in the east it would be perfect.
Derbyshire is probably the one that breaks your idea. I stayed in Rowarth recently and to say that’s eastern would be indefensible.
It’s interesting.
I’m from East Midlands (notts) and live in West mids (brum) now, the cultural divide is more obvious in the Midlands. I’m not sure how much you can extend that amalgamation to the rest of the country.
Midlands:
Notts, Sheffield and Lincoln are way more similar than a region centric view would have you believe.
West-midlands has an obvious cultural/accent cohesion.
(Leicester, is the Midlands of the Midlands – they don’t fall in either camp.)
The north:
The “north” don’t make a big deal of east vs west because I guess Manchester is very different culturally to Liverpool (West) and York/Leeds/Hull(?) is very different to Newcastle (east)
The South:
South-west are pirates and farmers, South East are farmers and stock brokers?
So an east-coast amalgamation would be a flat, this is england former minging town with a bad football team (but also inexplicably also include the richest part of the country).
The west-cost amalgamation would be hilly, abandoned victorian factories, a good football team (and pirates).
About right
Devon, Cornwall and Somerset is West. Everything else is East.
Simples.
West Yorkshire in the east?
The west would economically collapse.
Nothing West of Ely is cultually “East.”
not to be that guy but that’s an outdated map of England.
I don’t know London’s based but io generally prefer cities on the west of England.
Personally, I think the great divide is between Wales and the South West…
I’m SouthEast so stuck with London no matter what – I can’t even escape to the Midlands in either-
Hello. We don’t want Derbyshire. We’ll have the Peaks though. Thanks.
21 comments
No pic in the previous – apologies.
I posted this on casualuk a while back but think it can bear a fresh outing. Here’s my rationale – any county with an east or west coast was thus defined, and for the poor landlocked counties it was where they would head for beach-wise. Clearly central southern coast is problematic, so I decided narrow Channel is east, wider Channel is west. I’ve used the classic counties, because they are the original and the best.
Derbyshire goes on the other side. It’s literally in the East Midlands.
In the north, the Pennines are the obvious boundary.
Bournemouth, Salisbury, Swindon, Cirencester, then following the line of the Fosse Way to High Cross, Watling Street between Hinckley and Nuneaton, Uttoxeter, Ashbourne, Buxton, then follow the Pennine watershed up to the Yorkshire border, follow that north and resume at the watershed up to the Scottish border, simples. All those towns named (except Hinckley) to be considered gateways to the west.
The Channel width is mainly down to wiggles in the French coast which obviously cannot have a bearing on anything.
I’d say Hants/Berks/Oxon would definitely be in the East (they are definitely South East) and Derby is mostly in the East, except for High Peak – but if we’re doing it at county level then it’s East.
That leaves Warks in the west as a kind of “lump” into the East but Birmingham is enough to pull it into the West I think.
There is something to this and it is refreshing to see. I teach a class on regional identities in England and the north south divide is only part of the story, and an often over exaggerated one at that.
If Derbyshire, Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire and Hampshire were in the east it would be perfect.
Derbyshire is probably the one that breaks your idea. I stayed in Rowarth recently and to say that’s eastern would be indefensible.
It’s interesting.
I’m from East Midlands (notts) and live in West mids (brum) now, the cultural divide is more obvious in the Midlands. I’m not sure how much you can extend that amalgamation to the rest of the country.
Midlands:
Notts, Sheffield and Lincoln are way more similar than a region centric view would have you believe.
West-midlands has an obvious cultural/accent cohesion.
(Leicester, is the Midlands of the Midlands – they don’t fall in either camp.)
The north:
The “north” don’t make a big deal of east vs west because I guess Manchester is very different culturally to Liverpool (West) and York/Leeds/Hull(?) is very different to Newcastle (east)
The South:
South-west are pirates and farmers, South East are farmers and stock brokers?
So an east-coast amalgamation would be a flat, this is england former minging town with a bad football team (but also inexplicably also include the richest part of the country).
The west-cost amalgamation would be hilly, abandoned victorian factories, a good football team (and pirates).
About right
Devon, Cornwall and Somerset is West. Everything else is East.
Simples.
West Yorkshire in the east?
The west would economically collapse.
Nothing West of Ely is cultually “East.”
not to be that guy but that’s an outdated map of England.
I don’t know London’s based but io generally prefer cities on the west of England.
Personally, I think the great divide is between Wales and the South West…
I’m SouthEast so stuck with London no matter what – I can’t even escape to the Midlands in either-
Hello. We don’t want Derbyshire. We’ll have the Peaks though. Thanks.
— The West
You’re either M1 or you’re M6
Yes especially between Yorkshire and Lancashire
Comments are closed.