To -shire or not to -shire?

The History and Geography of Auld Scotia

Moderators: Global Moderators, Russell

SarahND
Site Admin
Posts: 5647
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:47 am
Location: France

To -shire or not to -shire?

Post by SarahND » Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:10 pm

David's resurrection of the Scottish/Scotch question got me thinking about another usage that seems to drive certain folks in the U.K. crazy, but that I have never seen clearly addressed. This is the question of when a county gets a "-shire" at the end and when it doesn't...*

I have read posts (not on this forum!) such as one from an irate Englishman who claims there is no such thing as Devonshire and gets very rude about people who use the term. On the other hand, I assume no one would question the fact that the Duke and Duchess of Devonshire do exist, so it is not surprising that foreigners think they have heard the word-- they have.

In Scotland I have read both Lanark, and Lanarkshire, Renfrew and Renfrewshire, Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire. I can understand that for the counties that also contain a city by the same name, it would be convenient to call the city one thing and the rest of the county another-- is that what it is? If so, then how big does the city have to be to cause this change? What about Stirling? No one says Stirlingshire, do they? At the end of my map of the U.K. , there is a map of modern counties. The only ones in Scotland with a -shire are Aberdeenshire, Lanarkshire and Ayrshire-- are you all consistent with this?

In England, having a -shire or not doesn't seem to have anything to do with whether or not there is a city by that name. For instance, Durham is Durham, regardless of the fact that there is a city by that name, and of course there is Shropshire, despite the lack of a city named "Shrop" :shock: :lol:

What do you use in your genealogy programs? Was Rellie X born in Old Machar, Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire or in Old Machar, Aberdeen, Aberdeen? I'm realizing that I haven't been consistent, having seen it both ways.

I would appreciate any clarification you might offer on this. I know that for locals, some things just "sound right" and others don't-- there may not be a consistent rule, as in so much of language. If it doesn't make sense, if that's "just the way it is" that's okay too, as long as folk realize this and don't go off the deep end when someone from another country uses the "wrong" form... :wink: :D

Regards,
Sarah

*( I found one topic on TS back in March that raised a similar, but not exactly the same question) http://talkingscot.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3759

Russell
Posts: 2559
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 5:59 pm
Location: Kilbarchan, Renfrewshire

Post by Russell » Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:35 pm

Hi Sarah

This is one where I don't think there is a definitive answer.

I think it dates back to the Union when there was an attempt to impose a standard description on geographical areas. The areas nearest to Edinburgh and the Borders ended up with names like Haddingtonshire where previously it was Lothian. Then we had Roxburghshire. Renfrew was not the principal town but there was a shire.
Whether this continued was largely down to the locals.
For Argyll and Bute they never really managd to convert the locals.
Fife was always the Kingdom and the locals will fight fiercely to keep that designation.
Ayr shire has stuck because it is such a widespread area that it was a bit daft when it was a whole long series of parishes with the town of Ayr stuck in the middle of it.
The end result has been that since re-organisation of local authority boundaries there is no consistent pattern now but Perthshire, Aberdeenshire, Lanarkshire, Wigtownshire and a few others have retained it and others have quietly dropped it.
No doubt others will have a view on this and a few more facts to chuck into the discussion pot.

Russell
Working on: Oman, Brock, Miller/Millar, in Caithness.
Roan/Rowan, Hastings, Sharp, Lapraik in Ayr & Kirkcudbrightshire.
Johnston, Reside, Lyle all over the place !
McGilvray(spelt 26 different ways)
Watson, Morton, Anderson, Tawse, in Kilrenny

DavidWW
Posts: 5057
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:47 pm

Post by DavidWW » Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:46 am

I'm no expert on the English situation although I too have noticed the vigorous debate that there can be re Devon, Nurthumberland and several other English counties!

As well as http://talkingscot.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3759 see also http://talkingscot.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3436 Had the [rant] emoticon been available at the time there would have been liberal use of it :!: [rant]

The problem with the usage of "Ayr" or "Lanark" or "Aberdeen" is that it is not always clear whether or not it is the county or the parish being referred to.

I guess, to make it clear, one should write the parish of Ayr, Ayrshire.

Since Old Machar is long since a parish in its own right, I see no problem in writing the location as Old Machar, Aberdeenshire, even although, in modern day terms the City of Aberdeen would be seen to include Old Machar.

David

SarahND
Site Admin
Posts: 5647
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 12:47 am
Location: France

Post by SarahND » Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:22 am

Thanks, David. Your summary of the situation in the FAQ post is very helpful (and I thought I had looked at all of those when I joined!). The situation seems so complex that, if one tried to give the location as it was at the time of the date one is entering, it could get quite messy! What do you do with a date in, say, 1600, when (it looks like) Aberdeen would have been in Mar?

24 May 1600 Aberdeen, Mar, Scotland? I note that the IGI doesn't do this (at least in the online version)

It's true that this is an issue that seems to get people all worked up (as do many spelling conventions that make even less sense*). Not quite sure why-- seems like the less predictable the usage, the more people get upset when it is not used "correctly" :!:

I'd be interested to hear how all of you deal with the problem of writing the location in your genealogy programs. Are you consistent throughout the years, or do you enter each one to reflect the usage at the time?

Regards,
Sarah

*Getting excited about spelling, in particular, strikes me as unrealistic since just a few centuries ago no one cared how you spelled things at all! When we were in St Machar's Cathedral a few weeks ago my husband was intrigued by a memorial stone inside the cathedral where the word "years" was spelled three ways in the space of one inscription (18th century, he thinks, but the camera batteries died at that point). Obviously, if it had mattered at the time, the spelling would have been made consistent before being carved in stone!

Russell
Posts: 2559
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 5:59 pm
Location: Kilbarchan, Renfrewshire

Post by Russell » Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:50 am

Hi Sarah

I don't get fussed over exactly where boundaries are, were and may be in the future. Since I use Family Tree Maker which has the convenient facility of anticipating you when entering birth places for 9 children all in the same place I tend to use the current geographic/socio-political boundaries then put the detail into the text for that person. That way when we show our results to others in the family (and anyone else who has not developed a glazed look on their face :? ) they can immediately understand where we are talking about. To try to explain from the outset that the place/parish/county name has changed 7 times over the last hundred or so years merely confuses and their attention is lost before you have even explained the importance of why g-Aunt Jean moved from A to B.

Wherever possible I add a map of the period to the papercopy of the Tree so that really interested rellies can see it for themselves.
(Just realised my really interested rellie is singular :( )

I love the variations in spelling even if they have made database managers life a nightmare. It hasn't changed my own pattern of correcting my spelling/typing mistakes but then I remember being told "Now say after me! - i comes before e except when coming after c"

I hated rules but these ones stuck.

Russell
Working on: Oman, Brock, Miller/Millar, in Caithness.
Roan/Rowan, Hastings, Sharp, Lapraik in Ayr & Kirkcudbrightshire.
Johnston, Reside, Lyle all over the place !
McGilvray(spelt 26 different ways)
Watson, Morton, Anderson, Tawse, in Kilrenny

Tracey
Global Moderator
Posts: 2617
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 10:27 am
Location: England

Post by Tracey » Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:54 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shire

This should help explain the understanding of "Shires"

As for the certificates i usually put what is on the actual entry, at the end of the day its only me that has to understand it :shock: :D
Scotland - Donaldson / Moggach / Shaw / Geddes / Sim / Gray / Mackie / Richards / Joel / Coull / Mckimmie / Panton / McGregor
Ireland and Scotland - Casey / McDade / Phillips / McCandle / Dinely / Comaskey + various spellings

AndrewP
Site Admin
Posts: 6189
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 1:36 am
Location: Edinburgh

Post by AndrewP » Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:05 am

SarahND wrote:The situation seems so complex that, if one tried to give the location as it was at the time of the date one is entering, it could get quite messy! What do you do with a date in, say, 1600, when (it looks like) Aberdeen would have been in Mar?

24 May 1600 Aberdeen, Mar, Scotland? I note that the IGI doesn't do this (at least in the online version)
The IGI (online, microfiche, and presumably the CD/computer version in the LDS centres) uses the counties that GROS has used for indexing the OPRs and the early statutory registration birth, marriage and death certificates (before boundaries were rearranged, mostly in the early 1890s). So "ancient" counties or areas such as Mar, Breadalbane and Strathnaver will not be found on the IGI for extracted records. They may have been correct for the era you are searching, but to bring in these ancient counties would probaly cause more confusion, and would certainly make computer indexing more complex.

See the map at http://www.nls.uk/digitallibrary/map/ea ... cfm?id=158 to see one of the many variations of the ancient counties. You will also see that the spelling is as variable as the counties themselves.

All the best,

AndrewP

DavidWW
Posts: 5057
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:47 pm

Post by DavidWW » Sun Nov 26, 2006 4:19 pm

Tracey wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shire

This should help explain the understanding of "Shires"

As for the certificates i usually put what is on the actual entry, at the end of the day its only me that has to understand it :shock: :D
Severe [rant] warning ............

The above is a Wikipedia entry, which means that the info is someone's opinion, and not established fact.


I'd comment as follows on this Wikipedia entry.

The term "shire" is purely English and distinctly non-Scottish in a historical sense.

Non-county shires were very common in Scotland. Kinross-shire and Clackmannanshire are probably survivals from such districts.

Both Kinross and Clackmannan are ancient names for the districts concerned which are among the relatively few to survive to the present day in terms of use as local government areas at the top levels. Mar and other similarly ancient area names are still in widespread use, sometimes at a lower level of local government organisation, sometimes just in a local geographical sense.

In Scotland the term shire county is unknown, and the use of shire to refer to sheriffdoms or counties was intermittent, dating largely from the 19th century. It may be seen as an anglification or an example of the power of analogy. The traditional names, insofar as this is a reasonable term to employ, omit the suffix -shire.

Largely correct and the key to the whole situation, except that I'd write "the use of shire was extremely rare in Scotland by Scots prior to the 18th century".

Aberdeenshire, Ayrshire, Banffshire, Berwickshire, Clackmannanshire, Cromartyshire, Dumfriesshire, Dunbartonshire, Fifeshire, Inverness-shire, Kincardineshire, Kinross-shire, Kirkcudbrightshire, Lanarkshire, Morayshire, Nairnshire, Peeblesshire, Perthshire, Renfrewshire, Ross-shire, Roxburghshire, Selkirkshire, Stirlingshire, Wigtownshire

This is modern usage only, - but "modern" in the sense of since the late 1700s, and early 1800s, when it became highly fashionable, among the upper level of Scots society, especially in Edinburgh, to anglify many aspects of Scottish life, including replacing guid Scots with English, - elecutionists were imported to Edinburgh from London to teach folk how to speak proper :!: , - seriously !!

In Scotland four counties have alternative names with the "shire" suffix: Angus (Forfarshire), East Lothian (Haddingtonshire), Midlothian (Edinburghshire) and West Lothian (Linlithgowshire).

There were actually five, - Elginshire for Moray. Some would argue that Shetland for Zetland should be a sixth, since the spelling change took place around the same time.

These "new" county names arose from the decision of the civil servants in Edinburgh and London to follow the English pattern (but don't get into arguments with Devonians and folk from many other English counties! - see below) of taking the name of the county town, and adding "shire" as being the "correct" way to refer to the county.

Somehow it seems to have become the modern belief among many that these 5 alternative county names, in use for little more than a century, were the "traditional" county names. They were not and had never been.

Sutherland is occasionally still referred to as Sutherlandshire, despite there being no town called Sutherland. Similarly, Argyllshire, Buteshire and Caithness-shire are sometimes found. Also, Morayshire was previously called Elginshire.

These are legacies from the same era, i.e. take the traditional county name and stick on "shire" at the end.

Buteshire :?: :!: , an absolute anathema, however much, like Argyllshire, Sutherlandshire, Caithness-shire, and some others it came into such widespread general use so that many folk believe that these are the correct terms, instead of the Isle of Bute, Argyl[l], Sutherland and Caithness.

Although a number of these 18th/19th centuries changes have since been perpetuated in terms of what is regarded as accepted modern usage, I wouldn't recommend a visit to the Kingdom of Fife (historically a thanedom, so effectively the area ruled by a minor Pictish/Celtic king) and calling it Fifeshire ..........

Incidentally, if "shire" was a Southern English concept how come there's Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Dorset, Sussex, Surrey, Kent, Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, Middlesex, Rutland, plus the more northern Durham, Northumberland and Cumberland :?: (Have I missed any :?: :wink: )

Just where have I missed the usage Cornwallshire, Devonshire, Somersetshire, Dorsetshire, Sussexshire, Surreyshire, Kentshire, Essexshire, Suffolkshire, Norfolkshire, Middlesexshire, Rutlandshire, plus the more northern Durhamshire, Northumberlandshire and Cumberlandshire :?: :twisted:

Come to that, when I think about it, why is there the expression "The Home Counties" instead of "The Home Shires" :?:. As the saying goes, get out of that one :!:

[rant] over but, Oh Boy :!: ... [soapbox] ... did I enjoy that !!

Coming back to the practicalities of Sarah's question, in terms of her example of an event in Mar around 1600, all that I would comment, is that the event should be referred to as was correct for the era in terms of location, but that, for correct understanding in modern terms, today's equivalent location should be given, along, perhaps with a map such as that referred to by Andrew.

See also http://talkingscot.com/gallery/displayi ... p?pos=-922 , apologies for the faintness. Note the complete absence of Ayrshire, Renfrewshire, Lanarkshire, Aberdeenshire, and a few others :!:

I'd be surprised if the parish name wasn't recognisable, although perhaps only as what is now part of a combined parish, e.g. Tarland instead of the later combined parish of Tarland and Migvie. There are many such amalgamated quoad sacra parishes.

David

PS Just what did the Irish have that the Scots missed out on to end up with the expression Co. Antrim, and so on :?:
dww
Last edited by DavidWW on Sun Nov 26, 2006 6:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Tracey
Global Moderator
Posts: 2617
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 10:27 am
Location: England

Post by Tracey » Sun Nov 26, 2006 4:27 pm

At least by putting the Wikipedia link it has prompted more of an answer / explanation for Sarah :D :wink:
Scotland - Donaldson / Moggach / Shaw / Geddes / Sim / Gray / Mackie / Richards / Joel / Coull / Mckimmie / Panton / McGregor
Ireland and Scotland - Casey / McDade / Phillips / McCandle / Dinely / Comaskey + various spellings

DavidWW
Posts: 5057
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:47 pm

Post by DavidWW » Sun Nov 26, 2006 4:44 pm

Tracey wrote:At least by putting the Wikipedia link it has prompted more of an answer / explanation for Sarah :D :wink:
The required info that Sarah needed was already there in the two TS FAQs referred to.

My post above is only in answer to the quite erroneous and distinctly misleading Wikipedia entry referred to, as it relates to the correct historical situation in Scotland [5 cups]

David