Dunfermerline - city status?
Craig Cockburn
fox1 <edin...@irport.zetnet.co.uk>
>The message <37a3308c...@news.freeserve.net>
> from james...@scotland-2000.freeserve.co.uk (James Kerr)
>contains these words:
>
>
>> Edinburgh isn't a city either.
>
>Neither is Glasgow! The only City that can produce its Royal Charter
>credentials is Dundee.;-)
>
>Both Dunfermerline and Edinburgh have Royal Connections and their Royal
>Charters are probably locked away in some dusty vault somewhere.
>
Does anyone have a definitive list of Scottish cities?
Dunblane also claims to be one
--
Craig Cockburn ("coburn"), soc.culture.scottish FAQ author.
Find it at http://www.scot.demon.co.uk or http://scotland.home-page.org
Port na Banrighinn, Alba. (Queensferry, Scotland) PGP key available.
Sgri\obh thugam 'sa Gha\idhlig ma 'se do thoil e.
Niall Tracey
: Does anyone have a definitive list of Scottish cities?
: Dunblane also claims to be one
Under the definition of 'cathedral cities', so me mammy tells me.
--
NT As long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any
\ \/ /conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for
\ / glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for
/ \ freedom -- for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with
/ /\ \life itself. -- Arbroath, 1320
Craig Cockburn
Tracey <nia...@dai.ed.ac.uk>
>Craig Cockburn (cr...@scot.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
>: Does anyone have a definitive list of Scottish cities?
>: Dunblane also claims to be one
>
>Under the definition of 'cathedral cities', so me mammy tells me.
>
with having a cathedral (or a university, the other oft-cited
definition)
Connor Macleod
City. This is Because Cities were originally
formed at the hearts of the Catholic See's (sp?)
In every Catholic See there had to be a city
marked as a city by the Cathedral.
When hendry the eighth broke away from the catholic
church to the anglican. They kept this manner of
forming cities at the heart of each of the see's
and cathedrals in the same place so dunblane stayed
a city because it had the cathedral whilst Stirling
(The captital of the time) did not, had Royal charter
been involved at that time then stirling would have
most certainly become a city. Eventualy it was decided
that the church should not have rule over this sort of
thing and it passed to government to do so. ormore
specificly Royal Charter.
How ever in most other countries a cathedral is all that is
required to guarantee City status. And this is unlikely to
be changed in this country as no cathedral can be built out
of the heart of the see and all of the sees in britain
already have cathedrals.
regards,
Connor
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
fox1
from nia...@dai.ed.ac.uk (Niall Tracey) contains these words:
> Under the definition of 'cathedral cities', so me mammy tells me.
An English defination?
R.H.W.Moncreiff
http://www.tulbol.demon.co.uk/dunfermline/annals1.htm
contains over 12 refs to Dunfermline City and 39 refs to Charters, of
which 5 refer to the burgh.
--
R.H.W.Moncreiff
Allan-John Marsh
>
> Ann an sgriobhainn, <7o4m7k$kja$1...@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>, sgriobh Niall
> Tracey <nia...@dai.ed.ac.uk>
> >Craig Cockburn (cr...@scot.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> >
> >: Does anyone have a definitive list of Scottish cities?
> >: Dunblane also claims to be one
> >
> >
> with having a cathedral (or a university, the other oft-cited
> definition)
I think you're very much mistaken there sorry.
Craig Cockburn
Macleod <the_ga...@bigfoot.com>
>Any Place with a cathedral is Technically a
>City. This is Because Cities were originally
>formed at the hearts of the Catholic See's (sp?)
>In every Catholic See there had to be a city
>marked as a city by the Cathedral.
>When hendry the eighth broke away from the catholic
>church to the anglican. They kept this manner of
>forming cities at the heart of each of the see's
>and cathedrals in the same place so dunblane stayed
>a city because it had the cathedral whilst Stirling
>(The captital of the time) did not,
Since when was Henry the VIII King of Stirling, Dunblane or Scotland?
Craig Cockburn
Malcolm Ogilvie
<day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>Craig Cockburn wrote:
>>
>> Ann an sgriobhainn, <7o4m7k$kja$1...@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>, sgriobh Niall
>> Tracey <nia...@dai.ed.ac.uk>
>> >Craig Cockburn (cr...@scot.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>> >
>> >: Does anyone have a definitive list of Scottish cities?
>> >: Dunblane also claims to be one
>> >
>> >Under the definition of 'cathedral cities', so me mammy tells me.
>> >
>> A city is a city because it has a Royal Charter and is nothing to do
>> with having a cathedral (or a university, the other oft-cited
>> definition)
>
>I think you're very much mistaken there sorry.
We've had this discussion before, last year sometime. It is a confusing
subject with different definitions applying in different countries.
However, as far as the UK in concerned, a city is a town which has had
the title 'city' conferred on it by the crown. Although this has
traditionally been towns with cathedrals and more especially those that
are the seat of a bishop, that is not a sine qua non, nor is the
existence of a university. There are plenty of towns with cathedrals and
with universities.
So, Craig is right, and you're very much mistaken there, sorry.
--
Malcolm
Malcolm Ogilvie
<the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
>Any Place with a cathedral is Technically a
>City.
Wrong.
>This is Because Cities were originally
>formed at the hearts of the Catholic See's (sp?)
>In every Catholic See there had to be a city
>marked as a city by the Cathedral.
>When hendry the eighth broke away from the catholic
>church to the anglican. They kept this manner of
>forming cities at the heart of each of the see's
>and cathedrals in the same place so dunblane stayed
>a city because it had the cathedral whilst Stirling
>(The captital of the time) did not, had Royal charter
>been involved at that time then stirling would have
>most certainly become a city.
If you would explain what powers Henry 8th had over Scotland I might be
more inclined to believe you.
> Eventualy it was decided
>that the church should not have rule over this sort of
>thing and it passed to government to do so. ormore
>specificly Royal Charter.
>How ever in most other countries a cathedral is all that is
>required to guarantee City status. And this is unlikely to
>be changed in this country as no cathedral can be built out
>of the heart of the see and all of the sees in britain
>already have cathedrals.
>
So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll and the
Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is not a city.
--
Malcolm
Allan-John Marsh
>
> --
> Malcolm
Interesting to see how you've gone and turned a bit nasty in that last
line. Well, I wasn't a part of that discussion last year, and a
cathedral makes a town a city - so raspberries.
Allan-John Marsh
>
> --
> Malcolm
And I wasn't taking the discussion outside of the UK either.
Wellington
<day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>> So, Craig is right, and you're very much mistaken there, sorry.
>>
>> --
>> Malcolm
>
>line. Well, I wasn't a part of that discussion last year, and a
>cathedral makes a town a city - so raspberries.
Blackburn in Lancashire has a cathedral (with a bricked up east end) but
is not a city. Hence the local football team is called 'Rovers' and not
'City'. From this I deduce Blackburn is a rover.
--
Wellington
Malcolm Ogilvie
<day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>> So, Craig is right, and you're very much mistaken there, sorry.
>>
>> --
>> Malcolm
>
>Interesting to see how you've gone and turned a bit nasty in that last
>line. Well, I wasn't a part of that discussion last year, and a
>cathedral makes a town a city - so raspberries.
Far from turning "a bit nasty", I used the *exact* words which you used
in your response to Craig and, because you have snipped them, I quote
them below just to remind you.
*********************************************************
In article <37A67B...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John Marsh
<day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>Craig Cockburn wrote:
>> A city is a city because it has a Royal Charter and is nothing to do
>> with having a cathedral (or a university, the other oft-cited
>> definition)
>
>I think you're very much mistaken there sorry.
*********************************************************
And whether or not you were part of the discussion last year, a
cathedral does NOT make a town a city - so raspberries to you too!
Both Inverness and Oban have cathedrals, yet neither are cities.
I think you're again very much mistaken there, sorry.
--
Malcolm
Allan McVie
village.
Allan McVie
Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire
outside of bragging rights that is causing this debate. Or is this another one
just for the fun of it? :-)
Dillard Gilmore (Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire)
David Thorpe
Surely a city is a town with a cathedral and a football team?
David.
Connor Macleod
>If you would explain what powers Henry 8th had over
>Scotland I might be more inclined to believe you.
none whatsoever, but it was his breaking away from
the catholic church, yet keeping the Seats of the
bishops and thusly the cities in the same place.
that influenced the same to happen in scotland.
>> How ever in most other countries a cathedral is all
>>that is required to guarantee City status. And this is
>>unlikely to be changed in this country as no cathedral can
>>be built out of the heart of the see and all of the sees
>>in britain
>>already have cathedrals.
>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
>not a city.
Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
ones the city status stayed with the original city.
With the specific case of Argyll and the Isles AFIK the
original seat was at Iona however as an abbey and not a
cahtedral and with no town either there never was a city.
regards,
Connor
-- Malcolm
Alan Smaill
> >If you would explain what powers Henry 8th had over
> >Scotland I might be more inclined to believe you.
>
> none whatsoever, but it was his breaking away from
> the catholic church, yet keeping the Seats of the
> bishops and thusly the cities in the same place.
> that influenced the same to happen in scotland.
It was under the Stuarts that Edinburgh first had a cathedral.
So seats of bishops did not stay the same in Scotland.
> >> How ever in most other countries a cathedral is all
> >>that is required to guarantee City status. And this is
> >>unlikely to be changed in this country as no cathedral can
> >>be built out of the heart of the see and all of the sees
> >>in britain
> >>already have cathedrals.
So, let's have a new one -- I presume that's what happened
in Edinburgh.
> >So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
> >and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
> >not a city.
>
> Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
> reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
> Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
> ones the city status stayed with the original city.
"Presbyterian Cathedrals" is something of a misnomer ...
> With the specific case of Argyll and the Isles AFIK the
> original seat was at Iona however as an abbey and not a
> cahtedral and with no town either there never was a city.
>
> regards,
>
> Connor
> -- Malcolm
>
>
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
--
Alan Smaill, email: A.Sm...@ed.ac.uk
Division of Informatics tel: 44-131-650-2710
Edinburgh University.
Alan Smaill
to clarify my post ...
Alan Smaill <sma...@dai.ed.ac.uk> writes:
> It was under the Stuarts that Edinburgh first had a cathedral.
> So seats of bishops did not stay the same in Scotland.
This was in 17th century, post Reformation.
R.H.W.Moncreiff
A history of Dunfermline can be found at
http://www.tulbol.demon.co.uk/dunfermline/annals1.htm
it includes transcripts of all the major Dunfermline charters.
R.H.W.Moncreiff
Charles Ellson
day....@xtra.co.nz "Allan-John Marsh" writes:
> Craig Cockburn wrote:
> >
> > Ann an sgriobhainn, <7o4m7k$kja$1...@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>, sgriobh Niall
> > Tracey <nia...@dai.ed.ac.uk>
> > >Craig Cockburn (cr...@scot.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> > >
> > >: Does anyone have a definitive list of Scottish cities?
> > >: Dunblane also claims to be one
> > >
> > >Under the definition of 'cathedral cities', so me mammy tells me.
> > >
> > A city is a city because it has a Royal Charter and is nothing to do
> > with having a cathedral (or a university, the other oft-cited
> > definition)
>
> I think you're very much mistaken there sorry.
>
The subject has been done to death elsewhere. In the UK a town becomes a
city when it receives a Royal Charter making it one; there are a number of
towns with cathedrals which are not cities.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson:E-mail charlesATellson.demon.co.uk | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | > < |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|
Allan-John Marsh
> >I think you're very much mistaken there sorry.
>
> reference?
A cathedral does make a town a city.
Allan-John Marsh
>
> In article <37A6C1...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John Marsh
> <day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
> >> So, Craig is right, and you're very much mistaken there, sorry.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Malcolm
> >
> >Interesting to see how you've gone and turned a bit nasty in that last
> >line. Well, I wasn't a part of that discussion last year, and a
> >cathedral makes a town a city - so raspberries.
>
> is not a city. Hence the local football team is called 'Rovers' and not
> 'City'. From this I deduce Blackburn is a rover.
>
> --
> Wellington
well well well
Allan-John Marsh
>
> In article <37A6C1...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John Marsh
> <day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
> >> So, Craig is right, and you're very much mistaken there, sorry.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Malcolm
> >
> >Interesting to see how you've gone and turned a bit nasty in that last
> >line. Well, I wasn't a part of that discussion last year, and a
> >cathedral makes a town a city - so raspberries.
>
> in your response to Craig and, because you have snipped them, I quote
> them below just to remind you.
I know what I wrote you tit. However, when I say something in plain
comment that you repeat using "the *exact* words" against me, it's not
clever, but is rude and is nasty. To quote is for proof, but to throw a
reply back in ones face is just something people do to feel big in the
effort of belittling somebody else. I won't bother thus to ask why you
did it as i've just got my answer.
Craig Cockburn
Marsh <day....@xtra.co.nz>
No reference then, you just made it up.
Malcolm Ogilvie
<the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
>
>>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
>>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
>>not a city.
>
>Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
>reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
>Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
>ones the city status stayed with the original city.
I don't think I've ever heard of a "Presbyterian Cathedral". Perhaps
you could point me at one.
>With the specific case of Argyll and the Isles AFIK the
>original seat was at Iona however as an abbey and not a
>cahtedral and with no town either there never was a city.
>
Well that's interesting and plausible.
So what's your excuse for Inverness? :-)
--
Malcolm
Malcolm Ogilvie
<day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>Craig Cockburn wrote:
>
>> >I think you're very much mistaken there sorry.
>>
>> reference?
>
>A cathedral does make a town a city.
Just repeating an error does not make it right.
Please don't lower the tone of the discussion to "Yes it is" "No it
isn't" levels unless this is all you can manage.
--
Malcolm
Malcolm Ogilvie
<day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:
>>
>> In article <37A6C1...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John Marsh
>> <day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>> >> So, Craig is right, and you're very much mistaken there, sorry.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Malcolm
>> >
>> >Interesting to see how you've gone and turned a bit nasty in that last
>> >line. Well, I wasn't a part of that discussion last year, and a
>> >cathedral makes a town a city - so raspberries.
>>
>> Far from turning "a bit nasty", I used the *exact* words which you used
>> in your response to Craig and, because you have snipped them, I quote
>> them below just to remind you.
>
>I know what I wrote you tit. However, when I say something in plain
>comment that you repeat using "the *exact* words" against me, it's not
>clever, but is rude and is nasty. To quote is for proof, but to throw a
>reply back in ones face is just something people do to feel big in the
>effort of belittling somebody else. I won't bother thus to ask why you
>did it as i've just got my answer.
So when you said it for the first time it was polite and pleasant, but
when I said it back to you it was rude and nasty? What strange logic you
employ.
And no, I didn't throw it back in your face in an effort to belittle you
but in order to point out that what you said was wrong. It remains wrong
and I note that you are completely failing here, and elsewhere in the
thread, to come up with a shred of proof for your repeated statement
that a town with a cathedral is a city. Instead, you are resorting to
personal abuse and petty name calling, a sure sign of a lost argument -
you can see and hear the same sort of intellectual certainty in any
playground.
--
Malcolm
Wellington
<day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
>Wellington wrote:
>>
>>
>> Blackburn in Lancashire has a cathedral (with a bricked up east end) but
>> is not a city. Hence the local football team is called 'Rovers' and not
>> 'City'. From this I deduce Blackburn is a rover.
>>
>> --
>> Wellington
>
>well well well
You're thinking of Motherwell, which has neither cathedral nor charter,
so must be something else entirely.
--
Wellington
Lesley Robertson
Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire <djgi...@aol.comical> wrote in message
news:19990803164241...@ngol06.aol.com...
The rights etc used to be considerable back in medieval times (when the
cities were walled) - city guilds, trade contracts, etc. Now, it's just a
matter of civic pride.
Lesley Robertson
Allan-John Marsh
>
> Ann an sgriobhainn, <37A75D...@xtra.co.nz>, sgriobh Allan-John
> Marsh <day....@xtra.co.nz>
> >
> >> >I think you're very much mistaken there sorry.
> >>
> >> reference?
> >
> >A cathedral does make a town a city.
>
If that gets you off. I can't reference where I learnt my name either
but I know it's Allan-John.
Allan-John Marsh
>
> In article <37A75E...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John Marsh
> <day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
> >Malcolm Ogilvie wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <37A6C1...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John Marsh
> >> <day....@xtra.co.nz> writes
Whatever.
Simon Brooke
> In article <9337164...@www.remarq.com>, Connor Macleod
> <the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
> >
> >>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
> >>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
> >>not a city.
> >
> >Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
> >reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
> >Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
> >ones the city status stayed with the original city.
>
> I don't think I've ever heard of a "Presbyterian Cathedral". Perhaps
> you could point me at one.
St Giles, in the High Street in Edinburgh, is often referred to as a
cathedral; and is undoubtedly presbyterian.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GP/CS s++: a+ C+++ ULBVCS*++++$ L+++ P--- E+>++ W+++ N++ K w--(---)
M- !d- PS++ PE-- Y+ PGP !t 5? X+ !R b++ !DI D G- e++ h*(-) r++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Simon Brooke
> Surely a city is a town with a cathedral and a football team?
No, no, a city is a town with *two* football teams, one of them called
.. United :-)
Niall Tracey
: In article <9337164...@www.remarq.com>, Connor Macleod
: <the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
: >
: >>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
: >>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
: >>not a city.
: >
: >Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
: >reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
: >Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
: >ones the city status stayed with the original city.
: I don't think I've ever heard of a "Presbyterian Cathedral". Perhaps
: you could point me at one.
St Giles cathedral, High St, Edinburgh.
Not a cathedral _per_se_, but it was taken by the protestants
during the reformation and they just kept the name "St. Giles'
Cathedral" - probably as one in the eye for the Catholics...
AFAIK it's the only Kirk property called a 'catheral'.
--
NT As long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any
\ \/ /conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for
\ / glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for
/ \ freedom -- for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with
/ /\ \life itself. -- Arbroath, 1320
Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire
Thanks for the info, Lesley. So my guess was right - this debate is just for
the fun of it like football, etc. :-)
Dillard Gilmore (Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire)
Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire
In article <37A817...@xtra.co.nz>, Allan-John wrote:
>> >A cathedral does make a town a city.
>>
>> No reference then, you just made it up.
>
>If that gets you off. I can't reference where I learnt my name either
>but I know it's Allan-John.
>
>
I have a birth certificate that at least tells me someone was born whith what I
believe to be my name on the date I believe I was born. But unless science is
advanced enough to tell if the hand & foot prints on the birth certificate are
mine, guess I'll never know for sure that it's me. For all I know, I died when
I was 6 months old & my parents got someone else & told him all his life he was
me :-)
FWIT,out of curiosity I looked up "city" in my dictionary. The only definition
it gives that pertains specifically to GB is "an incorporated British town usu.
of major size or importance having the status of an episcopal see".
Dillard Gilmore (Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire)
Malcolm Ogilvie
<nia...@dai.ed.ac.uk> writes
>Malcolm Ogilvie (mal...@ogilvie.org) wrote:
>: In article <9337164...@www.remarq.com>, Connor Macleod
>: <the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
>: >
>: >>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
>: >>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
>: >>not a city.
>: >
>: >Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
>: >reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
>: >Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
>: >ones the city status stayed with the original city.
>
>: I don't think I've ever heard of a "Presbyterian Cathedral". Perhaps
>: you could point me at one.
>
>St Giles cathedral, High St, Edinburgh.
>
>Not a cathedral _per_se_, but it was taken by the protestants
>during the reformation and they just kept the name "St. Giles'
>Cathedral" - probably as one in the eye for the Catholics...
>
>AFAIK it's the only Kirk property called a 'catheral'.
>
--
Malcolm
Alan Hardie
wrote:
>"David Thorpe" <m...@mearnscraft.force9.co.uk> writes:
>
>> Surely a city is a town with a cathedral and a football team?
>
>No, no, a city is a town with *two* football teams, one of them called
>.. United :-)
The other called "City".
==========================================
Alan Hardie
<<remove *x* from email address to reply>>
==========================================
Connor Macleod
And it Actually is a cathedral.
Although I believe it may have
originally been R.C and changed
hands at some point.
regards,
Connor
Sharon L. Krossa
> Ann an sgriobhainn, <7o4m7k$kja$1...@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>, sgriobh Niall
> Tracey <nia...@dai.ed.ac.uk>
> >Craig Cockburn (cr...@scot.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> >
> >: Does anyone have a definitive list of Scottish cities?
> >: Dunblane also claims to be one
> >
> >Under the definition of 'cathedral cities', so me mammy tells me.
> >
> A city is a city because it has a Royal Charter and is nothing to do
> with having a cathedral (or a university, the other oft-cited
> definition)
Okay, what exactly do you mean by being "a city because it has a Royal
Charter" -- what kind of royal charter? Is/was there a special charter
that turns/turned places into cities? (I am assuming you do not mean a
charter that made a place a burgh, because such charters don't make
cities, they make burghs, and a royal one makes a Royal burgh, which, as
I am sure you know but I am pretty sure not all our readers know, is not
the same thing as a city at all.) Anyway, if so, when did this custom
start and/or when did it start in Scotland. Is it still practiced? Any
idea as to why it was/is done?
Sharon Krossa, who has long been curious about British and Scottish
definitions of "city"
Sharon L. Krossa
> Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire <djgi...@aol.comical> wrote in message
> news:19990803164241...@ngol06.aol.com...
> > What special privledges are bestowed upon a city, as opposed to being a
> town,
> > outside of bragging rights that is causing this debate. Or is this
> another one
> > just for the fun of it? :-)
> >
> > Dillard Gilmore (Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire)
>
> The rights etc used to be considerable back in medieval times (when the
> cities were walled) - city guilds, trade contracts, etc. Now, it's just a
> matter of civic pride.
It doesn't seem that in medieval times the designation "city" had any
import in Scotland (other than to indicate the place either was a
bishop's seat or -- perhaps, see below -- was big and important). The
distinction that gave actual rights (to self governing, trading
priveledges, etc.) was being created a burgh (and in medieval times
that, definitely, was done by charter, though not always royal charter).
Regarding the whole "cathedral"/"not cathedral" argument, may I suggest
the discussion in the OED is rather useful, and indicates that *both*
sides of the argument have some truth to them, especially in Scotland?
(Note especially the part where it talks about some cities attaining
"sufficient importance to be raised to the rank of burghs" ;-)
----- begin quote, OED s.v. "city"-----
The name civitas was applied by the Romans to each of the independent
states or tribes of Gaul; in later times it adhered to the chief town of
each of these states, which usually became afterwards the seat of civil
government and of episcopal authority. Though there were civitates in
Britain also in Roman times, the word was not adopted by the Angles and
Saxons, who applied the name burh to all towns alike. In later times
civitas may be found as a Latin equivalent of burh, and, in Domesday, it
is frequently applied to the larger and more important byri3, bur3es, or
boroughs, which were the centres of districts, and had in some cases
municipal autonomy, and thus corresponded in character to the cite/s of
France. As an English word, cite/ is found early in the 13th c.,
applied, both to foreign, and particularly ancient cities, where it is
probably due to translation from Latin or French, and also to important
English boroughs, such as London and Lincoln. Under the Norman kings,
the episcopal sees, which were formerly often established in villages,
began to be removed to the chief borough or 'city' of the diocese, as in
France; and as the bishops thus went to the cities, there grew up a
notion of identification between 'city' and 'cathedral town'; which was
confirmed and legally countenanced when, on the establishment of the new
bishoprics by Henry VIII, the boroughs in which they were set up were
created 'cities'. The same title has been conferred on all (or nearly
all) the places to which new bishoprics have been assigned in the 19th
c. Historians and legal antiquaries have, however, always pointed out
that there is no necessary connexion of 'city' with 'cathedral town',
and in recent times the style and rank of 'city' have begun to be
conferred by royal authority on large and important boroughs which are
not episcopal seats, Birmingham being the first so distinguished in
England. (See Freeman in Macmillan's Mag., May 1889.)
In Scotland, the style of civitas appears to have been introduced from
England, after the association of the word with the episcopal seats.
Here, it appears to have had no relation to the size, civil importance,
or municipal standing of the place, but was freely applied in charters
from the time of David I (12th c.) to every bishop's seat, even when a
mere hamlet; it was only at much later dates that some of these
civitates attained sufficient importance to be raised to the rank of
burghs, while others remained villages. In later times, perh. not
before the Reformation, civitas is found applied to Perth and Edinburgh,
which were not episcopal seats, but ancient royal burghs, and seats of
royalty. The vernacular form 'city' is found in the 15th c. applied to
some of the burghs which were civitates, and it gradually came to be
commonly used of certain of the larger of these, notably Edinburgh,
Glasgow, Perth, and Aberdeen. In this sense, the royal burgh of Dundee
was also created a 'city' by Royal Charter in 1889. Some of the other
burghs which were formerly bishop's seats, or can show civitas in their
early charters, have in recent times claimed or assumed the style of
'city', though not generally so regarded.
The history of the word in Ireland is somewhat parallel. Probably all
or most of the places having bishops have been styled on some occasion
civitas; but some of these are mere hamlets, and the term 'city' is
currently applied only to a few of them which are ancient and important
boroughs. Thom's Directory applies it to Dublin, Cork, Londonderry,
Limerick ('City of the violated treaty'), Kilkenny, and Waterford; also
to Armagh and Cashel, but not to Tuam or Galway (though the latter is
often called 'the City of the Tribes'). Belfast was, in 1888, created a
'city' by Royal Letters Patent.
In other lands now or formerly under British rule, 'city' is used
sometimes more loosely, but often with more exact legal definition than
in England. In North America it usually connotes municipal autonomy or
organization of a more complete or higher kind than 'town'. See 2 d, e.
In India it is applied titularly to the three Presidency capitals, and
to all great towns of historic importance or note, as the seats of
dynasties, etc., e.g. Benares, Delhi, Agra, Lucknow, Indore, Peshawur,
etc.
The distinction is unknown to other Teutonic and (now) also to Romanic
languages: Ger. stadt, F. ville, It. citta, Sp. ciudade, etc., translate
both town and city.
-----End Quote-----
Sharon Krossa
Sharon L. Krossa
> Malcolm Ogilvie (mal...@ogilvie.org) wrote:
> : In article <9337164...@www.remarq.com>, Connor Macleod
> : <the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
> : >
> : >>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
> : >>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
> : >>not a city.
> : >
> : >Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
> : >reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
> : >Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
> : >ones the city status stayed with the original city.
>
> : I don't think I've ever heard of a "Presbyterian Cathedral". Perhaps
> : you could point me at one.
>
> St Giles cathedral, High St, Edinburgh.
>
> Not a cathedral _per_se_, but it was taken by the protestants
> during the reformation and they just kept the name "St. Giles'
> Cathedral" - probably as one in the eye for the Catholics...
>
> AFAIK it's the only Kirk property called a 'catheral'.
Saint Machar's in Old Aberdeen is, I believe, called cathedral and it is
also (currently) Church of Scotland. My impression is that once a
cathedral, always a cathedral, so any R.C. cathedral that got taken over
by the Protestants stayed a cathedral (at least in name), even if that
flavour of Protestant didn't go in for bishops and whatnot.
Sharon Krossa
Craig Cockburn
2.stanford.edu>, sgriobh Sharon L. Krossa <skr...@stanford.edu>
>Okay, what exactly do you mean by being "a city because it has a Royal
>Charter" -- what kind of royal charter? Is/was there a special charter
>that turns/turned places into cities? (I am assuming you do not mean a
>charter that made a place a burgh, because such charters don't make
>cities, they make burghs, and a royal one makes a Royal burgh, which, as
>I am sure you know but I am pretty sure not all our readers know, is not
>the same thing as a city at all.)
Yes exactly, the sign which until a few years ago which welcomed people
to Dunblane stated it was a city and burgh (ie not a royal burgh).
I don't have the reference to hand at the moment, but the following may
be of use if anyone wants to chase this up
http://www.techtrac.demon.co.uk/ (Dunblane info)
http://www.ebig.com/
Encyclopedia Britannica
The Encyclopaedia of Scotland
ISBN 0002550822
Lesley Robertson
Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire <djgi...@aol.comical> wrote in message
>
> In article <7o8ssc$sc0$1...@news.tudelft.nl>, "Lesley wrote:
>
> >
> >Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire <djgi...@aol.comical> wrote in message
> >news:19990803164241...@ngol06.aol.com...
> >> What special privledges are bestowed upon a city, as opposed to being
> >a
> >town,
> >> outside of bragging rights that is causing this debate. Or is this
> >another one
> >> just for the fun of it? :-)
> >>
> >> Dillard Gilmore (Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire)
> >
> >The rights etc used to be considerable back in medieval times (when the
> >cities were walled) - city guilds, trade contracts, etc. Now, it's just
> >a
> >matter of civic pride.
> >
> >
> Thanks for the info, Lesley. So my guess was right - this debate is just
for
> the fun of it like football, etc. :-)
This group will/can debate ANYTHING. Mind you, the history of cities and
their rights is very interesting once you get into local history, and past
the tis/tisn't arguments - MUCH more fun than football - and that's better
than cricket!
Test Match Special - Bah Humbug!
Lesley Robertson
Wellington
<a*x*har...@clara.co.uk> writes
>On 04 Aug 1999 11:34:20 +0100, Simon Brooke <si...@jasmine.org.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>"David Thorpe" <m...@mearnscraft.force9.co.uk> writes:
>>
>>> Surely a city is a town with a cathedral and a football team?
>>
>>No, no, a city is a town with *two* football teams, one of them called
>>.. United :-)
>
>The other called "City".
>
--
Wellington
Thomson McFarlane
Craig Cockburn <cr...@scot.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> A city is a city because it has a Royal Charter and is
nothing to do
> with having a cathedral (or a university, the other
oft-cited
> definition)
I was told recently, by a professional geographer, that the
EU definition of a city, has to do with population size and
density.
The two cities she and I live in have quite a rivalry, and
the one I live in was defined as a town, while hers was
defined a city. My city has a larger population, but not the
necessary concentration. (Both have cathedrals.)
This is of course the EU definition, and bears, probably, no
relation on how each country defines its' cities.
Thomson
--
------------------------------------------------------------
----------
"Oh wad some power the giftie gie us
To see oursel's as others see us!
It wad frae monie a blunder free us,
And foolish notion." Rabbie Burns
Thomson McFarlane
thomson....@valmet.com
tm...@sci.fi
All my opinions are my own, wholly my own and nothing but my
own.
------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Simon Brooke
> > St Giles cathedral, High St, Edinburgh.
> >
> > AFAIK it's the only Kirk property called a 'catheral'.
>
> Saint Machar's in Old Aberdeen is, I believe, called cathedral and it is
> also (currently) Church of Scotland. My impression is that once a
> cathedral, always a cathedral, so any R.C. cathedral that got taken over
> by the Protestants stayed a cathedral (at least in name), even if that
> flavour of Protestant didn't go in for bishops and whatnot.
Come to think of it I'm fairly sure St Magnus' in Kirkwall is also
known as a cathedral.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon
Anagram: I'm soon broke.
Alan Smaill
> Malcolm Ogilvie <mal...@ogilvie.org> writes:
>
> > In article <9337164...@www.remarq.com>, Connor Macleod
> > <the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
> > >
> > >>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
> > >>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
> > >>not a city.
> > >
> > >Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
> > >reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
> > >Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
> > >ones the city status stayed with the original city.
> >
> > I don't think I've ever heard of a "Presbyterian Cathedral". Perhaps
> > you could point me at one.
>
> St Giles, in the High Street in Edinburgh, is often referred to as a
> cathedral;
incorrectly ....
> and is undoubtedly presbyterian.
>
> --
> si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon
Alan Smaill, email: A.Sm...@ed.ac.uk
Division of Informatics tel: 44-131-650-2710
Edinburgh University.
Alan Smaill
> Malcolm Ogilvie (mal...@ogilvie.org) wrote:
> : In article <9337164...@www.remarq.com>, Connor Macleod
> : <the_ga...@bigfoot.com> writes
> : >
> : >>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll
> : >>and the Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is
> : >>not a city.
> : >
> : >Ok, I now accept that there are some exceptions. However the
> : >reason is that the seats may have been changed but since the
> : >Royal Charter now extended to Presbyterian Cathedrals not RC
> : >ones the city status stayed with the original city.
>
> : I don't think I've ever heard of a "Presbyterian Cathedral". Perhaps
> : you could point me at one.
>
> St Giles cathedral, High St, Edinburgh.
>
> Not a cathedral _per_se_, but it was taken by the protestants
> during the reformation and they just kept the name "St. Giles'
> Cathedral" - probably as one in the eye for the Catholics...
No, it wasn't a cathedral before the reformation, there being
no bishop in Edinburgh.
> AFAIK it's the only Kirk property called a 'catheral'.
>
Jackie Gribbon
or more commonly just "Glasgow Cathedral". It is presbyterian, but like the
others was originally the seat of a catholic bishop.
Perhaps someone with more knowledge of the workings of the Church of
Scotland can explain the details, but my understanding is that 'a kirk is a
kirk' and there is no hierarchy. A cathedral is just a big kirk. The
management position which a bishop holds in other churches is held by the
presbytery, which is a committee of elders and ministers from all the local
kirks in the area. Whether or not every presbytery has an associated
cathedral, I don't know.
As for St Giles, it's most commonly known as "The High Kirk of Edinburgh".
Perhaps supporting the 'big kirk' idea.
I think in the UK that city status is usually conferred by royal charter,
whatever the historical relevance of having a cathedral may have been. I
know there was a discussion a couple of years ago about Paisley receiving
such a charter, though to my knowledge this hasn't yet happened.
It's obviously very complicated, as in England they even have a couple of
examples where the same conurbation has two cities - i.e. London and
Westminster, Manchester and Salford.
Jackie
David Thorpe
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote in message ...
>So where's the cathedral *city* for the bishopric of Argyll and the
>Isles? The RC cathedral is in Oban, but Oban is not a city.
>
Oban's probably too new - it seems that most of the burghs that claim to be
cathedral cities had established bishoprics well before the reformation.
Oban, on the other hand, was little more than a hamlet at the end of the
18th century and certainly didn't have a cathedral then. Incidentally, it's
now got two as there's also an episcopal cathedral, quite possibly the only
end-of-terrace cathedral in the country.
So far as Scotland is concerned, I don't think cities were created by royal
charter as for centuries the burghs were far and away the most important
element of local government in Scotland. If they attracted royal favour
they were given charters as royal burghs, not cities. The Royal Burghs had
extremely advantageous trading privileges, and formed both the burgess
estate in Parliament and the very influential Convention of Royal Burghs.
No royal burghs were created post 1707, but as a result of the 19th century
Reform Acts a new category of Parliamentary Burgh was created and they were
then admitted into the Convention of Royal Burghs, as were the subsequent
and less important Police Burghs. By 1972 the Convention of Royal Burghs
included 68 Royal Burghs, 14 Parliamentary Burghs, and 119 Police Burghs.
Nine of the royal burghs had populations less than 1000.
In straightforward local government terms, the 1929 Local government Act
created three different categories of burgh - cities (of which there were
four), large burghs (19) and small burghs (178). By 1972, according to the
Municipal Year Book of that date, there were six Scottish cities, Edinburgh,
Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dundee, Perth and Elgin. Perth was never an episcopal
see, though it did lay claim to being one of Scotland's former capitals, but
Elgin was of course the cathedral town of the old diocese of Moray. Neither
Perth nor Elgin had the local authority powers given to the other four by
the 1929 Act. Three other burghs, Dunfermline, Brechin and Kirkwall, were
officially using the term city; like Perth, the former has claims to having
been an ancient capital of Scotland and the latter two were pre-Reformation
episcopal sees. Whether any of the other old cathedral towns - St Andrews,
Dunblane, Dornoch, Fortrose and Whithorn - still make any claim to city
status I don't know.
David.
ian.s...@dial.pipex.com
Gribbon" <jackie....@bt.com> :
>St Mungo's in Glasgow is known as a cathedral, either "St Mungo's Cathedral"
>or more commonly just "Glasgow Cathedral". It is presbyterian, but like the
>others was originally the seat of a catholic bishop.
There is also, in Glasgow, a Roman Catholic Cathedral, Saint Andrews,
on the Clydeside.
(as we have two, what does that make us, more than a city ???)
>
<snip>
>
>I think in the UK that city status is usually conferred by royal charter,
>whatever the historical relevance of having a cathedral may have been. I
>know there was a discussion a couple of years ago about Paisley receiving
>such a charter, though to my knowledge this hasn't yet happened.
Paisley has an "Abbey", not a Cathedral.
(Just to complicate the discussion <g>)
AFAIR. Paisley *applied* to be recognised as a city on the basis that it
was bigger than some of the existing ones in Scotland (Perth ?)
A search on Dejanews should find a long thread on this subject
(about 18 months ago ?)
-- IRS
-- http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/ian_stewart
Malcolm Ogilvie
ian.s...@dial.pipex.com writes
>On Fri, 6 Aug 1999 12:37:27 +0100, I read these words from "Jackie
>Gribbon" <jackie....@bt.com> :
>
>>St Mungo's in Glasgow is known as a cathedral, either "St Mungo's Cathedral"
>>or more commonly just "Glasgow Cathedral". It is presbyterian, but like the
>>others was originally the seat of a catholic bishop.
>
>There is also, in Glasgow, a Roman Catholic Cathedral, Saint Andrews,
>on the Clydeside.
>(as we have two, what does that make us, more than a city ???)
>>
><snip>
>>
>>I think in the UK that city status is usually conferred by royal charter,
>>whatever the historical relevance of having a cathedral may have been. I
>>know there was a discussion a couple of years ago about Paisley receiving
>>such a charter, though to my knowledge this hasn't yet happened.
>Paisley has an "Abbey", not a Cathedral.
>(Just to complicate the discussion <g>)
>
>AFAIR. Paisley *applied* to be recognised as a city on the basis that it
>was bigger than some of the existing ones in Scotland (Perth ?)
>
Millennium. At least 20 British towns have applied including Inverness,
Ipswich and Milton Keynes, but only one will be selected.
ref: Today programme on R4 this morning. The journalist had it exactly
right by saying that it was nothing to do with having a cathedral and
that the new city will be created by receiving a Royal Charter from the
Queen.
--
Malcolm
David Thorpe
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote in message ...
>ref: Today programme on R4 this morning. The journalist had it exactly
>right by saying that it was nothing to do with having a cathedral and
>that the new city will be created by receiving a Royal Charter from the
>Queen.
>
In modern terms he no doubt had it right. It doesn't however explain why
Perth and Elgin were officially considered to be cities - neither had had a
royal charter, although the latter was the seat of an old episcopal see.
Nor did Brechin have a charter, though it did have a bishop and a cathedral.
(Brechin and Elgin also, of course, have "City" football teams) :-)
Connor Macleod
>>>Cathedral". Perhaps you could point me at one.
>>
>>referred to as a cathedral;
>
>incorrectly ....
>>
>> and is undoubtedly presbyterian.
Why Incorrectly?
In the catholic church, a cathedral is such because
it is the seat of a bishop and thus has a bishop in charge.
In the presbyterian church a cathedral, is usually the
largest church in the area and is the one used (In general)
for any state or General Assembly ceremonies.
Just as the catholic church uses a Bishop in charge, AFAIK
the Presbyterian church has a special position for those in
charge of a cathedral, the name of which escapes me at the
moment. Similarly as the bishop has two or three preists to
service the cathderal as has the presbyterian.
The only real difference is that the leader of the cathedral
does not lead the presbytary as is the case in catholisism.
Sharon L. Krossa
> In article <37ab24c0...@news.dial.pipex.com>,
> ian.s...@dial.pipex.com writes
> >On Fri, 6 Aug 1999 12:37:27 +0100, I read these words from "Jackie
> >Gribbon" <jackie....@bt.com> :
> >
> >>St Mungo's in Glasgow is known as a cathedral, either "St Mungo's Cathedral"
> >>or more commonly just "Glasgow Cathedral". It is presbyterian, but like the
> >>others was originally the seat of a catholic bishop.
> >
> >There is also, in Glasgow, a Roman Catholic Cathedral, Saint Andrews,
> >on the Clydeside.
> >(as we have two, what does that make us, more than a city ???)
> >>
> ><snip>
> >>
> >>I think in the UK that city status is usually conferred by royal charter,
> >>whatever the historical relevance of having a cathedral may have been. I
> >>know there was a discussion a couple of years ago about Paisley receiving
> >>such a charter, though to my knowledge this hasn't yet happened.
> >Paisley has an "Abbey", not a Cathedral.
> >(Just to complicate the discussion <g>)
> >
> >AFAIR. Paisley *applied* to be recognised as a city on the basis that it
> >was bigger than some of the existing ones in Scotland (Perth ?)
> >
> Apparently, there's going to be a new city at the start of the new
> Millennium. At least 20 British towns have applied including Inverness,
> Ipswich and Milton Keynes, but only one will be selected.
>
> ref: Today programme on R4 this morning. The journalist had it exactly
> right by saying that it was nothing to do with having a cathedral and
> that the new city will be created by receiving a Royal Charter from the
> Queen.
More accurately, *modernly* becoming a city in Scotland has nothing to
do with having a cathredral. *Historically* having a bishop's seat had
everything to do with being considered a city in Scotland (at least up
until about the time of the Scottish Reformation, give or take, when
size also came into play).
The question is, if already considered a city prior to Union with
England, did these cities lose their city status just because England
had different ideas about what a city was? Can a place be "de-citied"?
If one takes the approach that once a city always a city, then a key
determiner in Scotland of city status is not just having a cathedral,
but having a pre-reformation cathedral (or otherwise being a bishop's
seat). Thus, a modern Roman Catholic or Episcopal cathedral doesn't
count, but a ruined medieval one does.
If one takes the approach that only a royal British (post-union)
city-making charter makes a city, then only those places with such a
charter in Scotland are cities. So far I've only found reference to
Dundee being created a city by charter in 1889. (Source, OED: "In this
sense, the royal burgh of Dundee was also created a 'city' by Royal
Charter in 1889."). So, what are the other Scottish cities by this
interpretation and what are the dates of their city making charters?
(Sources that just claim they are a city won't do -- we need the dates
and statement they were made city by royal charter. And it's got to be a
reasonably reliable source ;-)
If, as I suspect, Dundee was the first Scottish place to be created a
city by this method, does that make Dundee the first Scottish city? (And
if so, don't you agree this rather kills the only by modern royal
charter theory of Scottish city making?)
Sharon Krossa, reminding readers this is not a multiple choice test and
there are undoubtedly other factors to consider (especially in the case
of Edinburgh).
--
Sharon L. Krossa, kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu
Medieval Scotland: http://www.stanford.edu/~skrossa/medievalscotland/
Other names sites: Academy of S. Gabriel - http://www.s-gabriel.org/
Medieval Naming Guides - http://www.panix.com/~mittle/names/
Joseph Finlay
89.stanford.edu>, Sharon L. Krossa <kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu> writes
The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
city by charter and containing a cathedral. That being said, there are
or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
classed as being sited in a city.
The three are as follows :-
Glasgow - Begun in the 12th century and completed in the 15th century,
dedicated to St. Mungo.
Edinburgh - The church of St Giles, was a classed as a cathedral up to
1689
Aberdeen - Built in the 15th century, dedicated to St Mary.
The other eleven are :- Brechin, Dornoch, Dunblane, Elgin, Fortrose,
Iona, Kirkwall, Lismore, St Andrews, Whithorn.
My view is that if it's big enough, then it's a city. By big I mean over
a hundred thousand in population.
--
Joseph Finlay
Charles Ellson
the_ga...@bigfoot.com "Connor Macleod" writes:
<snip>
> Just as the catholic church uses a Bishop in charge, AFAIK
> the Presbyterian church has a special position for those in
> charge of a cathedral, the name of which escapes me at the
> moment.
It's a provost in the Episcopalian Church, but do the CoS and Free
Churches recognise cathedrals as such in anything other than name?
<snip>
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson:E-mail charlesATellson.demon.co.uk | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | > < |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|
Malcolm Ogilvie
<jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <1dw686w.10rcf8a1268k0wN@sunet-s5as05-1-dynamic-
>89.stanford.edu>, Sharon L. Krossa <kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu> writes
Big snip.
>>
>>If, as I suspect, Dundee was the first Scottish place to be created a
>>city by this method, does that make Dundee the first Scottish city? (And
>>if so, don't you agree this rather kills the only by modern royal
>>charter theory of Scottish city making?)
>>
>>Sharon Krossa, reminding readers this is not a multiple choice test and
>>there are undoubtedly other factors to consider (especially in the case
>>of Edinburgh).
>
>The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
>city by charter and containing a cathedral.
Well, your COD might say that, but mine (6th ed.1976) is subtly
different, because its definition is:
"Large town: (strictly) town created city by charter, especially as
containing a cathedral."
You might think I'm nit-picking, but the above quote is *not* the same
as your "and containing a cathedral".
The Shorter Oxford (2nd ed 1936) is vaguer:
"In Great Britain and Ireland: Associated with episcopal seats, and
ancient royal burghs, and in recent times conferred by royal authority
on important boroughs, as Birmingham."
> That being said, there are
>or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
>classed as being sited in a city.
>
>The three are as follows :-
>
>Glasgow - Begun in the 12th century and completed in the 15th century,
>dedicated to St. Mungo.
>
>Edinburgh - The church of St Giles, was a classed as a cathedral up to
>1689
>
>Aberdeen - Built in the 15th century, dedicated to St Mary.
>
>The other eleven are :- Brechin, Dornoch, Dunblane, Elgin, Fortrose,
>Iona, Kirkwall, Lismore, St Andrews, Whithorn.
>
Umm. Did Lismore Island in Loch Linnhe ever have a cathedral or has
Lismore Cathedral, Co.Waterford, Ireland, crept in here somehow?
In view of the Shorter Oxford quote, it is of interest that Johnston's
Gazeteer of Scotland (1958) describes all the above, except Dunblane
and Iona (and Lismore), as royal burghs. There are many more, of course.
>
>My view is that if it's big enough, then it's a city. By big I mean over
>a hundred thousand in population.
>
Well, it might be your view but it has never been officially defined as
such.
--
Malcolm
Craig Cockburn
Finlay <jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk>
>
>The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
>or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
>classed as being sited in a city.
Is this the recently published 10th edition?
Craig Cockburn
89.stanford.edu>, sgriobh Sharon L. Krossa
<kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu>
>
>If one takes the approach that once a city always a city, then a key
>determiner in Scotland of city status is not just having a cathedral,
>but having a pre-reformation cathedral (or otherwise being a bishop's
>seat). Thus, a modern Roman Catholic or Episcopal cathedral doesn't
>count, but a ruined medieval one does.
>
Joseph Finlay
<cr...@scot.demon.co.uk> writes
>Ann an sgriobhainn, <LcFXEDAq...@jfinl.demon.co.uk>, sgriobh Joseph
>Finlay <jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk>
>>
>>The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
>>city by charter and containing a cathedral. That being said, there are
>>or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
>>classed as being sited in a city.
>
>Is this the recently published 10th edition?
No, the 9th edition.
By the way, for clarity, in the above paragraph, the last sentence is
mine and not the COD!!
--
Joseph Finlay
Joseph Finlay
<mal...@ogilvie.org> writes
>In article <LcFXEDAq...@jfinl.demon.co.uk>, Joseph Finlay
><jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In article <1dw686w.10rcf8a1268k0wN@sunet-s5as05-1-dynamic-
>>89.stanford.edu>, Sharon L. Krossa <kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu> writes
>
>Big snip.
>
>>>
>>>If, as I suspect, Dundee was the first Scottish place to be created a
>>>city by this method, does that make Dundee the first Scottish city? (And
>>>if so, don't you agree this rather kills the only by modern royal
>>>charter theory of Scottish city making?)
>>>
>>>Sharon Krossa, reminding readers this is not a multiple choice test and
>>>there are undoubtedly other factors to consider (especially in the case
>>>of Edinburgh).
>>
>>city by charter and containing a cathedral.
>
>different, because its definition is:
>
>"Large town: (strictly) town created city by charter, especially as
>containing a cathedral."
>
>You might think I'm nit-picking, but the above quote is *not* the same
>as your "and containing a cathedral".
>
>The Shorter Oxford (2nd ed 1936) is vaguer:
>
>"In Great Britain and Ireland: Associated with episcopal seats, and
>ancient royal burghs, and in recent times conferred by royal authority
>on important boroughs, as Birmingham."
>
>>or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
>>classed as being sited in a city.
>>
>>
>>Glasgow - Begun in the 12th century and completed in the 15th century,
>>dedicated to St. Mungo.
>>
>>Edinburgh - The church of St Giles, was a classed as a cathedral up to
>>1689
>>
>>Aberdeen - Built in the 15th century, dedicated to St Mary.
>>
>>The other eleven are :- Brechin, Dornoch, Dunblane, Elgin, Fortrose,
>>Iona, Kirkwall, Lismore, St Andrews, Whithorn.
>>
>Umm. Did Lismore Island in Loch Linnhe ever have a cathedral or has
>Lismore Cathedral, Co.Waterford, Ireland, crept in here somehow?
No, Lismore Island it is. The cathedral was founded around 1200 and
dedicated to St Moluaig and was once the centre of the diocese of
Argyll. It measures about 60 feet by 20 feet. Damaged in the
Reformation, it was rebuilt in 1749 and is still in use today as a
parish Kirk.
>
>In view of the Shorter Oxford quote, it is of interest that Johnston's
>Gazeteer of Scotland (1958) describes all the above, except Dunblane
>and Iona (and Lismore), as royal burghs. There are many more, of course.
>>
>>My view is that if it's big enough, then it's a city. By big I mean over
>>a hundred thousand in population.
>>
>Well, it might be your view but it has never been officially defined as
>such.
Well, if there is no official definitive explanation, then mine is as
good as any! :)
--
Joseph Finlay
Simon Brooke
> The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
> or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
> classed as being sited in a city.
>
> The three are as follows :-
>
> Glasgow - Begun in the 12th century and completed in the 15th century,
> dedicated to St. Mungo.
>
> Edinburgh - The church of St Giles, was a classed as a cathedral up to
> 1689
>
> Aberdeen - Built in the 15th century, dedicated to St Mary.
>
>
> The other eleven are :- Brechin, Dornoch, Dunblane, Elgin, Fortrose,
> Iona, Kirkwall, Lismore, St Andrews, Whithorn.
Whithorn was never a Catherdral, it was an Abbey; the same is I
believe true of Iona, and possibly some of the others. To the medieval
mind an Abbey did not make a City, because an Abbey was considered to
be to some extent withdrawn from the world.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon
Just as defying the law of gravity through building aircraft requires
careful design and a lot of effort, so too does defying laws of
economics. It seems to be a deeply ingrained aspect of humanity to
forever strive to improve things, so unquestioning acceptance of a
free market system seems to me to be unnatural. ;; Charles Bryant
Malcolm Ogilvie
<jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <Iem+kfAU...@ogilvie.org>, Malcolm Ogilvie
><mal...@ogilvie.org> writes
>><jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>>The other eleven are :- Brechin, Dornoch, Dunblane, Elgin, Fortrose,
>>>Iona, Kirkwall, Lismore, St Andrews, Whithorn.
>>>
>>Lismore Cathedral, Co.Waterford, Ireland, crept in here somehow?
>
>No, Lismore Island it is. The cathedral was founded around 1200 and
>dedicated to St Moluaig and was once the centre of the diocese of
>Argyll. It measures about 60 feet by 20 feet. Damaged in the
>Reformation, it was rebuilt in 1749 and is still in use today as a
>parish Kirk.
>
>>>
>>>My view is that if it's big enough, then it's a city. By big I mean over
>>>a hundred thousand in population.
>>>
>>Well, it might be your view but it has never been officially defined as
>>such.
>
>Well, if there is no official definitive explanation, then mine is as
>good as any! :)
>
Or as bad :-)
--
Malcolm
Joseph Finlay
<si...@jasmine.org.uk> writes
>Joseph Finlay <jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>> The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
>> city by charter and containing a cathedral. That being said, there are
>> or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
>> classed as being sited in a city.
>>
>> The three are as follows :-
>>
>> Glasgow - Begun in the 12th century and completed in the 15th century,
>> dedicated to St. Mungo.
>>
>> Edinburgh - The church of St Giles, was a classed as a cathedral up to
>> 1689
>>
>> Aberdeen - Built in the 15th century, dedicated to St Mary.
>>
>>
>> Iona, Kirkwall, Lismore, St Andrews, Whithorn.
>
>believe true of Iona, and possibly some of the others. To the medieval
>mind an Abbey did not make a City, because an Abbey was considered to
>be to some extent withdrawn from the world.
>
Whithorn is one of the oldest Christian centres in Britain and a place
of pilgrimage until the Reformation. The Priory was built between the
12th and 15th centuries and the church attached to the Priory became the
cathedral of the Bishops of Galloway in 1605.
The Abbey of Iona was consecrated a cathedral during the reign of Abbot
Mackinnon, the last Abbot of Iona in 1500.
--
Joseph Finlay
David Thorpe
Joseph Finlay wrote in message ...
(snip)
>>Whithorn was never a Catherdral, it was an Abbey; the same is I
>>believe true of Iona, and possibly some of the others. To the medieval
>>mind an Abbey did not make a City, because an Abbey was considered to
>>be to some extent withdrawn from the world.
>>
>
>Whithorn is one of the oldest Christian centres in Britain and a place
>of pilgrimage until the Reformation. The Priory was built between the
>12th and 15th centuries and the church attached to the Priory became the
>cathedral of the Bishops of Galloway in 1605.
>
I think you'll find that the bishopric was either created or restored by
Fergus Lord of Galloway in 1186 and that he founded the priory and then
built a Romanesque cathedral which during the following century was
incorporated in a priory church serving the diocese of Galloway. In 1610
Bishop Gavin Hamilton rebuilt the nave of the cathedral which then served as
the parish church until replaced by the present parish church in 1822.
>The Abbey of Iona was consecrated a cathedral during the reign of Abbot
>Mackinnon, the last Abbot of Iona in 1500.
And served as the cathedral for the for the bishopric of the isles from then
until the Reformation. Thanks for pointing this out - I wasn't previously
aware that Iona had been anything but an Abbey and your posting spurred me
into a little research.
David Thorpe
David Thorpe
Malcolm Ogilvie wrote in message ...(snip)
>>The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
>>city by charter and containing a cathedral.
>
>different, because its definition is:
>
>"Large town: (strictly) town created city by charter, especially as
>containing a cathedral."
>
>You might think I'm nit-picking, but the above quote is *not* the same
>as your "and containing a cathedral".
>
>The Shorter Oxford (2nd ed 1936) is vaguer:
>
>"In Great Britain and Ireland: Associated with episcopal seats, and
>ancient royal burghs, and in recent times conferred by royal authority
>on important boroughs, as Birmingham."
>
This seems a pretty good definition although so far as Scotland is concerned
I think you could narrow the episcopal definition further to pre-Reformation
sees. Brechin, Elgin and Dunblane would thus be covered, while the "ancient
royal burgh" definition would presumably take in Perth and even Edinburgh -
but see below......
>> That being said, there are
>>or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
>>classed as being sited in a city.
>>
>>The three are as follows :-
>>
>>Glasgow - Begun in the 12th century and completed in the 15th century,
>>dedicated to St. Mungo.
>>
>>Edinburgh - The church of St Giles, was a classed as a cathedral up to
>>1689
Not so. St Giles was made a collegiate church by James III in 1466. The
last Mass was sung there in 1560 and subsequently presbyterianism held sway
until 1633 when Charles I declared the kirk to be a cathedral and Edinburgh
a bishopric and city. It is not clear whether its city status was achieved,
therefore, by royal charter (and I don't think that there is any record of
an actual charter) or by the fact that it was given a bishopric and
cathedral. In any event it was an unwise move as when Charles and his
bishops went a little further in 1637 and attempted to introduce the English
prayer book, Jenny Geddes famously flung her folding stool at the Dean with
the cry of "Deil colic the wame o' ye!" A year later the National Covenant
was signed in Greyfriars Kirk and episcopacy abolished so that any cathedral
status that St Giles enjoyed was presumably lost.
David Thorpe
Ian O. Morrison
<mal...@ogilvie.org> writes
<re Lismore>
>I didn't realise it was ever called a cathedral. It certainly isn't now.
Confused? You certainly will be after reading this thread.....
I was in Millport (on the Bicycle Island) last Monday, and it has a
cathedral.
There are numerous cathedrals in Edinburgh. I don't think there are any
official standards for what can be called a cathedral, just as there
aren't for museums (cathedrals for the muses, one might say). So any
Tom, Dick or Harriet can call themselves a saint and erect a cathedral
in their honour.
--------------------------------------------------------
Ian O. Morrison: http://www2.scran.ac.uk/staff/ianm/
....lapsed saint.....
Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire
In article <l82ToDAA...@nmsdoc.demon.co.uk>, "Ian wrote:
>There are numerous cathedrals in Edinburgh. I don't think there are any
>official standards for what can be called a cathedral, just as there
>aren't for museums (cathedrals for the muses, one might say). So any
>Tom, Dick or Harriet can call themselves a saint and erect a cathedral
>in their honour.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>Ian O. Morrison: http://www2.scran.ac.uk/staff/ianm/
>....lapsed saint.....
>
>
and any Ron, Jim, or Yung-Sun can call themselves God & start a cult ... er,
enlightened religion ... :-)
... lapsed prophet (not to mention the tax break)...
Dillard Gilmore (Mhic-Ghille-Mhuire)
Sharon L. Krossa
> Ann an sgriobhainn, <1dw686w.10rcf8a1268k0wN@sunet-s5as05-1-dynamic-
> 89.stanford.edu>, sgriobh Sharon L. Krossa
> <kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu>
> >
> >If one takes the approach that once a city always a city, then a key
> >determiner in Scotland of city status is not just having a cathedral,
> >but having a pre-reformation cathedral (or otherwise being a bishop's
> >seat). Thus, a modern Roman Catholic or Episcopal cathedral doesn't
> >count, but a ruined medieval one does.
> >
> Dunblane's cathedral isn't a ruin!
I wasn't saying it was -- notice the change in subject line? The ruined
(but, according to some, still city status giving) cathedral I
particularly had in mind was Elgin's. (And quite a lovely ruin it is,
too.)
Sharon
Sharon L. Krossa
> Ann an sgriobhainn, <LcFXEDAq...@jfinl.demon.co.uk>, sgriobh Joseph
> Finlay <jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk>
> >
> >The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
> >city by charter and containing a cathedral. That being said, there are
> >or were 14 cathedrals in Scotland, only three of which could/can now be
> >classed as being sited in a city.
>
> Is this the recently published 10th edition?
Note that a concise dictionary is unlikely to appropriately recoginize,
let alone note, a difference in English and Scottish usage. Dictionaries
of English in Britain have a tendency (unsurprisingly) to be rather
Anglo-centric. Besides, I think the OED still outranks any concise
dictionary, including its own concise brethren. (See my earlier post to
this thread for the historical discussion included in the OED entry for
"city".)
Consider also that dictionaries are not always the best source for legal
or official distinctions. What would be truly useful would be some legal
or official proclomation regarding the designation "city" in Scotland.
(For example, while we've pretty much agreed that a place can be made a
city by a royal charter making it one, is there any act of parliament or
other such legal proclomation declaring that *only* places with such a
charter can properly be called cities?)
Sharon, noting that what the English think makes a city may or may not
be relevent to Scotland
Craig Cockburn
22.stanford.edu>, sgriobh Sharon L. Krossa
<kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu>
>
>Note that a concise dictionary is unlikely to appropriately recoginize,
>let alone note, a difference in English and Scottish usage. Dictionaries
>of English in Britain have a tendency (unsurprisingly) to be rather
>Anglo-centric. Besides, I think the OED still outranks any concise
>dictionary, including its own concise brethren. (See my earlier post to
>this thread for the historical discussion included in the OED entry for
>"city".)
>
may be in order. I notice their definition of "High School" is the
English one, but they cite it as UK. This is in the recently published
10th edition which I got for the bargain price of £6.
James Silverton
>
> Ann an sgriobhainn, <1dw737g.1po4z97ymrvswN@sunet-s5as03-1-dynamic-
> 22.stanford.edu>, sgriobh Sharon L. Krossa
> <kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu>
> >
> >Note that a concise dictionary is unlikely to appropriately recoginize,
> >let alone note, a difference in English and Scottish usage. Dictionaries
> >of English in Britain have a tendency (unsurprisingly) to be rather
> >Anglo-centric. Besides, I think the OED still outranks any concise
> >dictionary, including its own concise brethren. (See my earlier post to
> >this thread for the historical discussion included in the OED entry for
> >"city".)
> >
> I think a mail to wo...@oed.com asking them to revise their definitions
> may be in order. I notice their definition of "High School" is the
> English one, but they cite it as UK. This is in the recently published
> 10th edition which I got for the bargain price of £6.
>
Very probably true. After more than 35 years in the US, I still find my
favorite dictionary is Chamber's which is also good on American/British
as well Scottish/English differences. I try to have the latest edition
of Chamber's and I also use a copy of Webster's but not the Concise
Oxford. I would like to have a copy of the OED but the price of even the
CD-ROM is a bit high.
Jim.
Micheil
<mal...@ogilvie.org> wrote:
>In article <LcFXEDAq...@jfinl.demon.co.uk>, Joseph Finlay
><jos...@jfinl.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In article <1dw686w.10rcf8a1268k0wN@sunet-s5as05-1-dynamic-
>>89.stanford.edu>, Sharon L. Krossa <kro...@alumnae.mtholyoke.edu> writes
>
>Big snip.
>
>>>
>>>If, as I suspect, Dundee was the first Scottish place to be created a
>>>city by this method, does that make Dundee the first Scottish city? (And
>>>if so, don't you agree this rather kills the only by modern royal
>>>charter theory of Scottish city making?)
>>>
>>>Sharon Krossa, reminding readers this is not a multiple choice test and
>>>there are undoubtedly other factors to consider (especially in the case
>>>of Edinburgh).
>>
>>The Concise Oxford Dictionary classes a "city" as a large town created a
>>city by charter and containing a cathedral.
>
>Well, your COD might say that, but mine (6th ed.1976) is subtly
>different, because its definition is:
>
>"Large town: (strictly) town created city by charter, especially as
>containing a cathedral."
I'm beginning to wonder if the very term "city" can be said to be a
Scottish concept at all.
It may that be burghs and toons are the only possibilities in a
Scottish context and that Edinburgh for example is simply a large
"toon".
I also don't know what advantage there is to being classed as a city.
Is it simply a way of defining an urban area or does it have some
financial or other advantage?
- měcheil
- innis dhomh sgéile mu 'n Thěr na Ňg......
Sharon L. Krossa
>
> I'm beginning to wonder if the very term "city" can be said to be a
> Scottish concept at all.
>
> It may that be burghs and toons are the only possibilities in a
> Scottish context and that Edinburgh for example is simply a large
> "toon".
>
> I also don't know what advantage there is to being classed as a city.
> Is it simply a way of defining an urban area or does it have some
> financial or other advantage?
Well, since "city" and the Latin "civitas" were used in late medieval
Scotland to describe Scottish places, I think you can say it is a
Scottish concept. The original sense of "civitas" in Scotland was a
place with a cathedral/bishop's seat, later the Scots language term
"city" was used for a few of the larger burghs even if they weren't
bishop's seats as well as for places with cathedrals/bishop's seats.
And all this before the union of the Crowns, let alone the union of
parliaments.
Modernly, according to what someone else posted on this thread, certain
local government re-organization acts have called certain Scottish
places cities, but in only one such act mentioned does there seem to
have been any different status for those called cities and those not.
And, of course, all those local government re-organizations have been
swept away at least a couple times since, and as far as I am aware being
called a "city" in Scotland doesn't get you any special priviledges
other than to call yourself a city. (And only in Britain do people
obsess over where is a city and where isn't when there isn't even any
defining legislation or laws regarding the issue -- or at least no one
has produced any so far -- or any special priviledges for being one.)
Also, modernly, in common with English practice, certain Scottish places
have officially been declared cities by royal charter -- which
apparently gets them nothing except to have a claim to being called a
city.
Further, modernly, some places that were called either "city" or
"civitas" in their old records and charters decided to use "city"
modernly, as well. Some still do, some may not any longer. And again
this doesn't get them anything but a label.
From this, I conclude that in Scotland a "city" is any one of several
things:
1. A place that had a cathedral/bishop's seat before the Reformation
(1560)
2. A one of a couple large and significant ancient burghs that didn't
have such a cathedral/bishop's seat.
3. A place that has a modern royal charter declaring it a city.
4. (A place called a city in one of the modern local government
re-organization acts -- except that all of these seem to come under one
of the above anyway.)
And the significance of being a city is that such a place gets to call
itself a city. (And since there *is* no real advantage to being a city,
nor does there seem be any official act "uncitying" former cities, I
don't think we should begrudge a medieval city/civitas calling itself a
city modernly.)
Sharon, who, being a medievalist, has rather a medieval bias...
Craig Cockburn
Marsh <d...@viewport.f9.co.uk>
>On Sat, 14 Aug 1999 11:44:58 +0100, in scot.general,
> Craig Cockburn <cr...@scot.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>I think a mail to wo...@oed.com asking them to revise their definitions
>>may be in order. I notice their definition of "High School" is the
>>English one, but they cite it as UK. This is in the recently published
>>10th edition which I got for the bargain price of £6.
>>
>
>
>I've always used 'High School' and 'Secondary School' interchangeably.
>Is there a difference?
>
High School (in the UK: chiefly for grammar or independent fee paying
schools).
My experience of High Schools in Dunblane, Queensferry and elsewhere is
that there are also plenty non fee paying High schools and the use of
'chiefly' is incorrect. The use of 'academy' seems to be more usual for
fee paying Scottish schools.
--
David Thorpe
Micheil wrote in message <37b5afaa...@news.direct.ca>...
(snip)
>
>It may that be burghs and toons are the only possibilities in a
>Scottish context and that Edinburgh for example is simply a large
>"toon".
>
Historically you're largely right inasmuch as the burgh was for centuries
the cornerstone of Scottish local government. They were established by
David I in the 12th century and existed quite happily until destroyed in a
fit of pique in 1975 by a Tory government that had, at best, only minority
support in Scotland. If the monarch wanted to give a town special favours
he made it a royal burgh. All four of Scotland's traditional cities were
royal burghs.
However, the concept of city does exist in a Scottish context. In 1633 when
Charles I declared St Giles Kirk in Edinburgh to be a cathedral and
Edinburgh a bishopric and city. And the 1929 Local government Act created
three different categories of burgh, one of which was the city (Edinburgh,
Glasgow, Aberdeen and Dundee). They were given local government powers
considerably greater than those of mere burghs. Some smaller burghs -
Perth, Elgin, Brechin, Dunfermline, Kirkwall, etc - have however for
centuries called themselves cities although this has given them nothing more
than, in their eyes at least, status.
>I also don't know what advantage there is to being classed as a city.
>Is it simply a way of defining an urban area or does it have some
>financial or other advantage?
>
See above.
David.
David Thorpe
Craig Cockburn wrote in message ...
>Ann an sgriobhainn, <slrn7rbe...@viewport.f9.co.uk>, sgriobh David
>Marsh <d...@viewport.f9.co.uk>
>>On Sat, 14 Aug 1999 11:44:58 +0100, in scot.general,
>> Craig Cockburn <cr...@scot.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>I think a mail to wo...@oed.com asking them to revise their definitions
>>>may be in order. I notice their definition of "High School" is the
>>>English one, but they cite it as UK. This is in the recently published
>>>10th edition which I got for the bargain price of £6.
>>>
>>
>>What's their definition of High School?
>>
>>I've always used 'High School' and 'Secondary School' interchangeably.
>>Is there a difference?
>>
>High School (in the UK: chiefly for grammar or independent fee paying
>schools).
>
>My experience of High Schools in Dunblane, Queensferry and elsewhere is
>that there are also plenty non fee paying High schools and the use of
>'chiefly' is incorrect. The use of 'academy' seems to be more usual for
>fee paying Scottish schools.
>
Academy, all state secondary non-fee-paying schools. There doesn't seem to
be any hard and fast rule at all.
David.
Duncan Dewar
<cr...@scot.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>High School (in the UK: chiefly for grammar or independent fee paying
>schools).
>
>My experience of High Schools in Dunblane, Queensferry and elsewhere is
>that there are also plenty non fee paying High schools and the use of
>'chiefly' is incorrect. The use of 'academy' seems to be more usual for
>fee paying Scottish schools.
There are also plenty of local authority run Academies. For instance,
Rothesay Academy and Thomson Institute - usually shortened to Rothesay
Academy nowadays - was originally a fee paying school, prior to
universal secondary education being introduced. Possibly these
"grander" titles for secondary schools indicates their pre-1940s
status?
"Public School" also differs in meaning between Scotland and England.
In England, it is used for fee-paying private schools, which I have
always found highly illogical. Rothesay Primary School, the main
(local authority run) primary school on Bute, was called Rothesay
Public School up to around the 1970s - the name change probably
occurred either when it moved to a new site or at that local
government reorganisation.
--
Duncan Dewar
dunc...@brandane.demon.co.uk
Alan
I suggest "High School" may be an older term than "Academy" but that they
are now almost interchangeable.
In Airdrie the "High School" was I believe Junior Secondary and the
"Academy" Senior Secondary but really it seems there are no hard and fast
rules.
Alan
David Thorpe <m...@mearnscraft.force9.co.uk> wrote in message
news:LqFt3.5126$wC.126374@stones...
>
> Craig Cockburn wrote in message ...
> >Ann an sgriobhainn, <slrn7rbe...@viewport.f9.co.uk>, sgriobh David
> >Marsh <d...@viewport.f9.co.uk>
> >>On Sat, 14 Aug 1999 11:44:58 +0100, in scot.general,
> >> Craig Cockburn <cr...@scot.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>I think a mail to wo...@oed.com asking them to revise their definitions
> >>>may be in order. I notice their definition of "High School" is the
> >>>English one, but they cite it as UK. This is in the recently published
> >>>10th edition which I got for the bargain price of £6.
> >>>
> >>
> >>What's their definition of High School?
> >>
> >>I've always used 'High School' and 'Secondary School' interchangeably.
> >>Is there a difference?
> >>
> >High School (in the UK: chiefly for grammar or independent fee paying
> >schools).
> >
> >My experience of High Schools in Dunblane, Queensferry and elsewhere is
> >that there are also plenty non fee paying High schools and the use of
> >'chiefly' is incorrect. The use of 'academy' seems to be more usual for
> >fee paying Scottish schools.
> >
Alan
a city. The signs as you approach it all say "City of Dunblane". It is a gey
small city but it does have a cathedral.
Alan
David Thorpe <m...@mearnscraft.force9.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TgCt3.4821$wC.120345@stones...
amclb
bright ones went.
The dovey ones went to Queen Anne Secondary........The catholics of course went
to their own versions of this hierarchy but we wont go into that now..8-}
Did you notice how I have managed to combine two threads..? Not bad for one of
the dovey ones
Alan
Stuart Smith
amclb wrote in message <37B73034...@niwa.cri.nz>...
>Well, in the City and Royal Burgh of Dunfermline, the High School was where
the
>bright ones went.
>The dovey ones went to Queen Anne Secondary........The catholics of course
went
>to their own versions of this hierarchy but we wont go into that now..8-}
I resent that, my favourite aunt went to Queen Anne Secondary. Of course my
mum and dad went to Dunfermline High school :) Actually my mum sometimes
makes a joke about her sister going to Queen Anne :)
Charles Ellson
dunc...@brandane.demon.co.uk "Duncan Dewar" writes:
<snip>
> "Public School" also differs in meaning between Scotland and England.
> In England, it is used for fee-paying private schools, which I have
> always found highly illogical.
AUIU most of the older ones were "public" in the sense that a benefactor
founded them with the intention of enabling free or cheap education to
be provided for locals (Harrow school was founded by John Lyon as a free
grammar school); over the centuries the free places have in many of
the schools mostly disappeared but the now incorrect description has
remained.
<snip>
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson:E-mail charlesATellson.demon.co.uk | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | > < |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|
Alan Gauton
>
> Ann an sgriobhainn, <slrn7rbe...@viewport.f9.co.uk>, sgriobh David
> Marsh <d...@viewport.f9.co.uk>
> >
> >
> >I've always used 'High School' and 'Secondary School' interchangeably.
> >Is there a difference?
> >
> High School (in the UK: chiefly for grammar or independent fee paying
> schools).
>
> My experience of High Schools in Dunblane, Queensferry and elsewhere is
> that there are also plenty non fee paying High schools and the use of
> 'chiefly' is incorrect. The use of 'academy' seems to be more usual for
> fee paying Scottish schools.
And there's also Harris Academy and Morgan Academy in Dundee. And in
terms of Grammar schools, there's Hamilton Grammar and Paisley Grammar,
all of which are local authority funded.
--
AG
Remove removes to remove anti-spam measures.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Gauton + Tel +44 141-548-2686
EEE Department, SPD, + Fax +44 141-552-2487
The University of Strathclyde + E-Mail a...@spd.eee.strath.ac.uk
204 George St., Glasgow G1 1XW+ http://www.spd.eee.strath.ac.uk/users/ag
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never for me the lowered banner, never the last endeavour!
(Damon Hill - 16th June 1999)
Stuart Smith
amclb wrote in message <37B86F16...@niwa.cri.nz>...
>> I resent that, my favourite aunt went to Queen Anne Secondary. Of course
my
>> mum and dad went to Dunfermline High school :) Actually my mum sometimes
>> makes a joke about her sister going to Queen Anne :)
>
>Yeh, but which one did you go to...?
St. Ninnians (sp?) Primary
Dunblane High School
>And, probably, your aunt is your favourite because of her schooling 8-}
Nah, not because of that :) She's my favourite 'cause she's really cool, a
lot of fun and very, very, funny :>
>
>Alan, IIIB2, and Helen Gillespie as the form teacher
>
amclb
Stuart Smith wrote:
> amclb wrote in message <37B73034...@niwa.cri.nz>...
> >Well, in the City and Royal Burgh of Dunfermline, the High School was where
> the
> >bright ones went.
> >The dovey ones went to Queen Anne Secondary........The catholics of course
> went
> >to their own versions of this hierarchy but we wont go into that now..8-}
>
> I resent that, my favourite aunt went to Queen Anne Secondary. Of course my
> mum and dad went to Dunfermline High school :) Actually my mum sometimes
> makes a joke about her sister going to Queen Anne :)
Yeh, but which one did you go to...?
And, probably, your aunt is your favourite because of her schooling 8-}
Alan, IIIB2, and Helen Gillespie as the form teacher
Alan Smaill
> Craig Cockburn wrote:
> >
> > My experience of High Schools in Dunblane, Queensferry and elsewhere is
> > that there are also plenty non fee paying High schools and the use of
> > 'chiefly' is incorrect. The use of 'academy' seems to be more usual for
> > fee paying Scottish schools.
>
> And there's also Harris Academy and Morgan Academy in Dundee. And in
> terms of Grammar schools, there's Hamilton Grammar and Paisley Grammar,
> all of which are local authority funded.
Not to mention Alloa Academy.
I don't see any correlation between the terminology and the
educational status these days.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Alan Gauton + Tel +44 141-548-2686
> EEE Department, SPD, + Fax +44 141-552-2487
> The University of Strathclyde + E-Mail a...@spd.eee.strath.ac.uk
> 204 George St., Glasgow G1 1XW+ http://www.spd.eee.strath.ac.uk/users/ag
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Never for me the lowered banner, never the last endeavour!
> (Damon Hill - 16th June 1999)
--
Alan Smaill, email: A.Sm...@ed.ac.uk
Division of Informatics tel: 44-131-650-2710
Edinburgh University.
Aidan Thomson
Charles Ellson wrote:
> In article <37b6f8d5...@brandane.demon.co.uk>
> dunc...@brandane.demon.co.uk "Duncan Dewar" writes:
>
> <snip>
> > "Public School" also differs in meaning between Scotland and England.
> > In England, it is used for fee-paying private schools, which I have
> > always found highly illogical.
> AUIU most of the older ones were "public" in the sense that a benefactor
> founded them with the intention of enabling free or cheap education to
> be provided for locals (Harrow school was founded by John Lyon as a free
> grammar school);
And similarly Eton was founded by Henry VI of England for such purposes.
> over the centuries the free places have in many of
> the schools mostly disappeared but the now incorrect description has
> remained.
Though there is one sense in which the definition does make some sense,
namely that at one time, to be educated privately meant 'by private tutors',
whereas public schools were places where one was educated with other members
of the public (albeit those who could afford it).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aidan Thomson.
Aidan Thomson
Alan wrote:
> In Glasgow both Glasgow Academy and Glasgow High School are fee paying.
Though The High School of Glasgow (that's its correct name, BTW, not Glasgow
High School, though it's often shortened even by its pupils to 'GHS') only
became fee-paying in the mid seventies, having been a senior secondary
beforehand. OTOH, Edinburgh Academy is fee-paying but (Edinburgh) Royal High
School is not.
> I suggest "High School" may be an older term than "Academy" but that they
> are now almost interchangeable.
Don't know about that, but GHS is hundreds of years old whereas GA has only
recently celebrated its 150th anniversary.
In England, incidentally, it's quite common for a town to have a 'School' or
'Grammar School', which is the main boys' independent school (though its origins
were often grammar schools, especially in the north of England) and a 'High
School' or 'Girls High School' which is the main girls' independent school, e.g.
Leeds Grammar School and Leeds Girls High School. These days, however, many of
these schools are co-ed to some degree, so that distinction no longer exists.
> In Airdrie the "High School" was I believe Junior Secondary and the
> "Academy" Senior Secondary but really it seems there are no hard and fast
> rules.
Not just in Airdrie, but in other parts of Lanarkshire too. Hamilton Academy
and Rutherglen Academy were once senior secondaries. Ironically, with
comprehensivization, Hamilton Academy was renamed 'Hamilton Grammar' - not to be
confused with the independent school Hamilton College, of course.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aidan Thomson.