Archive for the 'Regions' category
CASA Working Paper
My Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA) working paper titled “Family Names as Indicators of Britain’s Changing Regional Geography” has been published online. The paper is one of my PhD upgrade documents and contains the results from much of the research I have completed in my first year. I begin by outlining the significance of surnames in Britain before outlining some of the spatial analysis I have employed to discover if there is a regionality in the British populations’ surnames, and whether this has changed between 1881 and 2001. My results contain plenty of maps to demonstrate where I think the regions fall and I accompany these with a discussion of the appropriateness of each of the methodologies I have used. I must stress that this is a working paper and therefore provides a benchmark on the way to completed research- many of my results and the subsequent conclusions have yet to undergo the rigours of peer review. You can download a copy of the paper here. I have pasted the abstract below.
Family Names as indicators of Britain’s Changing Regional Geography
James Cheshire, Pablo Mateos, and Paul A. Longley
In recent years the geography of surnames has become increasingly researched in genetics, epidemiology, linguistics and geography. Surnames provide a useful data source for the analysis of population structure, migrations, genetic relationships and levels of cultural diffusion and interaction between communities. The Worldnames database (www.publicprofiler.org/worldnames) of 300 million people from 26 countries georeferenced in many cases to the equivalent of UK Postcode level provides a rich source of surname data. This work has focused on the UK component of this dataset, that is the 2001 Enhanced Electoral Role, georeferenced to Output Area level.
Exploratory analysis of the distribution of surnames across the UK shows that clear regions exist, such as Cornwall, Central Wales and Scotland, in agreement with anecdotal evidence. This study is concerned with applying a wide range of methods to the UK dataset to test their sensitivity and consistency to surname regions. Methods used thus far are hierarchical and non-hierarchical clustering, barrier algorithms, such as the Monmonier Algorithm, and Multidimensional Scaling. These, to varying degrees, have highlighted the regionality of UK surnames and provide strong foundations to future work and refinement in the UK context. Establishing a firm methodology has enabled comparisons to be made with data from the Great British 1881 census, developing insights into population movements from within and outside Great Britain.
Prescott on the North South Divide
Part of my research is related to defining cultural regions in Britain based on peoples’ surnames. These can be defined in a number of ways, but one of the most popular ways of culturally partitioning England is the North South Divide. My attention was therefore drawn to this video clip (“Prescott meets a ‘southern twit‘”) on the BBC website promoting the program “Prescott: The North South Divide “. I hoped the program would provide an insightful look at the differences between the North and the South of England by utilising John Prescott’s direct approach to questioning for which he is renowned. Instead much of the show was taken up with views (complete with associated commentary from Mrs Prescott) from the couple’s new flat in London and plentiful shots of John Prescott eating fish and chips. The latter were, ironically, interrupted with a feature on the relatively high increase in obesity prevalence amongst people living in the north of England.
Amongst the diversions, however, some important issues were raised that are worth highlighting. For example, the reported conclusions of the Cities Unlimited Report to stop investing in failing northern towns and encourage their populations to move south. Tim Leunig defends his report saying that if people in the north were to move to the south they would have a greater chance of well-paid employment. This may make economic sense but it fails to consider the many cultural and social implications of such migration. To some, such as Leunig, these considerations may be secondary to alleviating poverty, but they are contradicted by the many examples of people choosing to stay in a place they are familiar with in the full knowledge that it is detrimental to their prospects.
The program viewed the North South Divide as a 20th/ 21st Century phenomenon. Divisions have existed long before that, for example around 865 AD Danish raiders began to settle in Britain creating an area known as “Danelaw“. This created a North South divide in Britain as the raiders did not make it further south than the Thames, leaving south and south west England to the West Saxons. See below (source Wikipedia):
From this we could look beyond the rich/ poor basis for the the North South Divide and see it as a more entrenched cultural phenomenon that has persisted for a thousand years or more. This is certainly apparent if we look at place naming conventions and surnames where a clear transition occurs from south to north (northern places tend to have more Viking names containing “Thorpe”, “Borough” and “Wick” for example). You can see this for yourself by visiting the Institute for Name Studies Website and searching for “Thorpe”.
So, whilst Prescott’s program highlights genuine econmic differences and their associated impacts on health and life expectancy between the North and the South, especially amongst the poorest in society, he mixed these effects with underlying social differences (and prejudices see video clip) that probably developed over centuries. I think a focus on the latter would have made for a much more interesting, and insightful, documentary.
Below is the University of Sheffield’s detailed interpration of the North South Divide.
