A Guide to English Counties and Parishes, etc.

Boundary changes:

At a detailed level there have been numerous changes to county boundaries over the years. In some cases these have been to tidy up historic anomalies, such as tiny detached pieces of one county being entirely surrounded by another. Such changes have taken place piecemeal over many years, with some such detached areas surviving to as recently as 1974 (notably the northern piece of Worcestershire containing the town of Dudley, which was entirely surrounded by Staffordshire). Certain areas, particularly the West Midlands, have undergone numerous changes, some towns having been in as many as three different historic counties at different times.

In addition to the shifting boundaries described above, most of the larger towns and cities were at various times granted what was known as "County borough" status. A county borough functioned as a separate unit, independently of the county in which it was geographically situated. This system was started in 1888, when all towns and cities with populations in excess of 50,000, plus a few others, became the first such units.

To confuse the issue further, in 1974 a total review of county boundaries took place, which led to the elimination of all remaining detached parts, the combining of some counties, total elimination of others, the introduction of new county names in some places, and the end of all county boroughs. Major conurbations became independent "metropolitan" counties, each including a number of towns which had effectively merged by natural growth. An example of such a new metropolitan county was West Midlands, which combined the industrial areas of Birmingham, Coventry, Dudley and several other towns, reducing the size of the neighbouring counties of Staffordshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire in the process.

The 1974 changes, because of their scale, lead to much confusion among genealogists, especially those resident in other countries, when trying to locate the homes of their ancestors and the likely location of records. The whole of north Berkshire, for example, was transferred to Oxfordshire, so old records relating to such towns as Faringdon speak of its being in Berkshire, but modern gazetteers say it is in Oxfordshire. Similarly, Huntingdonshire, the Isle of Ely and the Soke of Peterborough were all absorbed into Cambridgeshire. Middlesex and large pieces of Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent and Surrey were absorbed into London. Similar events took place also in Yorkshire and Lancashire, while further north the maps were almost completely redrawn.

In 1997/8 many, but not all, of the 1974 changes were reversed. Although the name county borough was not revived, the effect was, and this time the independent status was not confined to urban areas. New local authorities called "Unitary Authorities" took over all local government functions in their areas, just like the old county boroughs and in many cases identical to them in area. This happened in a piecemeal fashion however, with no unitary authorities being created in some areas, but in the extreme case of Berkshire the whole of what survived the 1974 shake-up was split into unitary authorities, so Berkshire as an administrative unit no longer exists.

Other administrative areas

Hundred and Wapentake

These are similar sub-divisions of counties, introduced in the 10th century primarily as a unit of taxation but also having administrative, judicial and military functions. The two names relate to the division of the country into the Danelaw in the north, where the term wapentake was used, and the Anglo-Saxon south which used the term hundred. The name hundred relates to the original size of 100 hides of land (roughly 12,000 acres on average, but very variable).

Parish

Most parishes were originally the area served by a local church, and were (still are in many cases) synonymous with the village in which the church was situated, although outlying dwellings and farms away from the main village were normally included. It must be realised, however, that parishes varied enormously in size, some, especially in the wilder, uncultivated areas, extending for many miles. In some areas a single parish covered a great number of separate settlements (up to 35 in one Cheshire example). Urban parishes in older cities tended to be small in area, with quite a number of separate parishes within a single city (over 40 each in Norwich and York, for example), whereas newer cities tended to have a single parish despite their large population, until they were split up in the middle of the 19th century. Parishes also varied greatly in age. Although most mediæval parishes had been formed by 1200, many were already hundreds of years old by that time. Many more were formed during the great growth in population in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

The concept of a civil parish was introduced in Tudor times, when they were given responsibility for upkeep of highways, caring for the poor and for the less serious aspects of law enforcement. Where the ecclesiastical parish was reasonably small in population it normally corresponded with the civil one, but if the ecclesiastical parish was very large it was divided up into a number of civil parishes.

Like the counties, parish boundaries showed abundant anomalies, detached parts being quite common. However, in 1894 a new Local Government Act revised the entire structure, dividing the rural areas of England and Wales into 14,000 parishes with most of the anomalies and detached parts removed, although in most respects the boundaries followed the old civil parish boundaries. From that time, the affairs of the parish were controlled by an elected parish council. This is the one part of local government structure which survived the 1974 and 1997/8 reorganisations without significant change. In urban areas parishes remain as ecclesiastical units only since 1894, although the legislation bringing in the latest changes give residents the option of having civil parishes in their parts of urban areas if they choose to do so.

In the above paragraph I say most of the anomalies and detached parts. It did say all, but my attention was drawn to one anomaly which still exists, and this suggests to me there may be others. The particular case is at Romsey in Hampshire, where there is still one parish entirely surrounded by another! Romsey Extra Parish (which I assume covers a rural area) entirely surrounds Romsey Infra Parish (which more or less coincides with the small town of Romsey). John Parker, a member of Romsey Extra Parish Council, who drew my attention to this, also reminded me that many parishes which were created, by the demotion of small boroughs or otherwise cover relatively small urban areas, by the 1997/8 reorganisation, were given the option (which many, including Romsey Infra, have taken up) of being called "town councils", with the chairman of the council given the title of "Mayor", although their powers remain identical to those of other parish councils.

I should also add that the Church of England still has its ecclesiastical parishes, quite separate from the civil ones, the governing bodies of which are now known as "parochial church councils". Some large ecclesiastical parishes have a second, subordinate, church or chapel to help cope with the numbers of people or the extended area; such a church or chapel normally has responsibility for a defined area within the parish sometimes known as a chapelry. Genealogists need to be aware that it is these ecclesiastical parishes, not the civil parishes, which maintain the registers of baptisms, marriages and burials, although in most cases the surviving older registers have been deposited with the local county record office.

Tything

A tything, occasionally referred to in old records, was a sub-division of an eccelsiastical parish. It was a basis for some taxation prior to the nineteenth century reorganisation of local government. Tythings were sometimes named to suggest who was entitled to receive the relevant tax or tythe, but in other cases took the name of the hamlet (normally only one, sometimes less than one, such as a single farm) which the tything covered.

Naming a Parish in Relation to Its County, etc.

I have been asked to clarify how a parish should be referred to in relation to the town/village/county of which it is a part. I have not been able to improve on the "off the cuff" reply I gave at the time:

• Most parishes are in rural areas, so no town name is relevant.
• Most, but by no means all, rural parishes coincide with a village, so normally nobody would bother to distinguish. It would then be simply parish, county, country, without the word "parish" being used.
• In some cases a parish covers more than one village. There are then two possibilities:
• The parish may be called something like "Thaton cum Thisham" (fictional names!), meaning the parish covers the villages of Thaton and Thisham. Again it would be stated as parish, county, country, without using the word "parish".
• The parish may have the same name as just one village, in which case it would still be parish, county, country, but with the word "parish" after the parish name to make it clear that the whole parish, not just the village, was referred to.
• In a small town, with just one parish covering the entire town, the situation could be the same as 1 above, although sometimes the parish name would be that of the dedication of the church rather than the name of the town; in this case it would usually be given as parish, town, county, country, with the word "parish" coming first, as in "Parish of St. John, Whichton, Whatshire, England" (fictional names again).
• In a larger town, with more than one parish, there are again two possibilities, with the two both occurring in the same town, but for different parishes, in many cases. One of the parishes may have the same name as the town, in which case it could be referred to as parish, county, country, including the word parish as in "Whichton Parish, Whatshire, England". Other parishes in the town would be of the form parish, town, county, country, as in the last example in 4 above.

Poor Law Unions

One of the most important duties placed on parishes by the Tudor reforms was the care of their own paupers. Since there was no social security of any kind, this was the only way the sick, disabled and elderly could survive (although the church, mainly through abbeys and monasteries, had provided some poor relief prior to their dissolution by Henry VIII). While this certainly helped those it was aimed at, it also placed a financial burden on the parish, for which they had to tax their more affluent members. The impact of this naturally varied from place to place, depending both on the ratio of paupers to wealthy citizens and on the general prosperity of the area concerned.

One particularly serious effect was that parishes were naturally very unwilling to accept into their midst anyone from another area who was likely to become a charge on the local finances. In consequence, severe restrictions were placed on the freedom of ordinary people to move around the country. The 1662 Act of Settlement defined more clearly the responsibilties of the parish and provided a means for people to move in search of work while being able to provide written evidence that they would never become a charge on the community to which they moved. This led to large numbers of court cases in local quarter sessions and the production of settlement certificates. These certificates, as well as detailed records of the courts, where they survive, provide invaluable resources for genealogists and family historians.

The entire system was revolutionised in 1834 by the Poor Law Amendment Act. This created a system of Unions, each consisting of a number of neighbouring parishes who jointly were required to finance the relief of poverty in their areas, so spreading the load a little more fairly. Each union was run by an elected board of guardians, many of whose records survive. By 1865 all unions had set up a workhouse within their area in which to house paupers. Many of the buildings erected for this purpose still survive, often as hospitals. The system remained largely unchanged until the introduction of some aspects of social security on a national basis, such as old age pensions, from 1908 onwards. The entire system was transferred from the parish unions to national government in 1919, but some workhouses continued in operation until the introduction of the modern welfare system by the National Assistance Act of 1948.

Top of Page

Mid-19th century boards and districts:

During the middle part of the 19th century more and more functions were put onto local government organisations to relieve the many problems which were emerging with the growth of population, industrialisation, and urbanisation. However, instead of using existing administrative units to carry out these new activities, a new set of boards and districts were created for each one, often with boundaries overlapping those already in existence. Each of these new authorities required elections to choose its members and each raised its own finance by imposing a local tax (often called a rate). Thus separate bodies existed to maintain highways, to provide and run schools, to provide sanitation, to provide burial facilities, etc.; in some places even the provision of hospitals and of the medical staff to operate them were provided by two separate authorities. The system (for want of a better term) was basically that a separate board was created for each function, with separate elections, separate finances, separate officials, separate premises from which to operate, etc. The waste and incompetence was tremendous. From the genealogical and historical research point of view, it is worth remembering that each of these bodies kept records, many of which survive.

Most of this chaos was cleared up in 1888, when most of the local boards were transferred to the county councils, set up by the Local Government Act of that year as elected bodies with reformed boundaries. Poor Law unions (until 1930), School districts (until 1902) and Sanitary districts (until 1894), however, continued their independent existence a little longer.

Boroughs:

Boroughs have from pre-Norman times been towns and cities which have received a charter granting them certain privileges, mainly but not exclusively concerned with the control of various commercial activities within their boundaries. Such charters could be issued (in mediæval times) either by the monarch or by the local lord of the manor in which the town was situated. The latter were normally "seingeurial boroughs", having only a limited degree of independence from the lord of the manor. Those with corporate status had more complete independence from the lord of the manor, but the details of their powers varied enormously, depending on the detailed wording of their charters, which were all different.

Corporate boroughs were administered by a Corporation, which consisted until 1835 of leading townsmen appointed for life, with vacancies filled by appointment by the existing members. From 1835 this system was replaced by elections for three quarters of the members, with the old system of appointment remaining for the other quarter. The appointed members were known as aldermen, an office which remained (but not with life-long tenancy) until 1974. (One quarter of the members of county councils were also appointed aldermen from 1888 to 1974.) The electors in corporate boroughs, and the people actually running the seigneurial boroughs, were known as burgesses. In some places lists of burgesses survive; it is perhaps worth mentioning that although women could not vote in Parliamentary elections in Britain until 1925, nevertheless they could be, and sometimes were, burgesses, at least in the 19th century and perhaps earlier.

The office of mayor has existed almost, if not quite, as long as there have been boroughs. In past times this was a powerful office, the mayor being the most important man in the town, but gradually the powers have been reduced until today the mayor of a town functions as (at least in theory) a politically neutral chairman of council meetings, and as a public figurehead, and is elected by councillors from among their own members. In boroughs officially recognised as cities (i.e. having a charter to say they have that status), the equivalent person is known as the lord mayor, but his functions are virtually identical. In the 21st century the old idea of having an executive mayor (subject to regular direct election) has been revived in a few places, starting with London.

Top of Page