Yeah, a lot of people are letting me know that Cambridge isn't northern. This map is not meant to be how I define the North/South, just what it would be if it was divided purely on the basis of population.
I think it's interesting. A lot of people don't realise how much of the population lives within the M25 honestly.
I'm surprised so many people didn't read what it was a map of honestly.
> A lot of people don't realise how much of the population lives within the M25 honestly
More than the combined population of Scotland and Wales I believe.
Weirdly London is one of the largest cities in Europe and at the same time also one of the smallest.
* London Metropolitan Area - 11.9-18m (it varies depending on the definition you use)
* Greater London - 8.9m (estimate in 2019)
* City of London - 9,401 (estimate in 2016)
No, Istanbul is the two thirds of the urban agglomeration that is on the European side. The Asian side was different towns for most of history, and only recently have been consumed as suburbs of istanbul
I once saw a map that split the UK into regions with the same population as London. Cumbria, North East England, Scotland and Northern Ireland formed one combined London matching region.
I like London, only been in to it a few times but that city always excites me. But for somewhere to live I dare say I'd struggle with somewhere so busy. Newcastle-upon-Tyne stresses me out so London would probably give me a nervous break down.
I always wonder what London would be like with just its centre but no suburbs and instead forests and rolling hills surrounding it. With the people who make the city work living in its centre.
I often think about what England (and the rest of Britain) looked like before it was cleared of ancient woodlands. I'd love to have been able to visit that place, with wolves and bears aplenty.
I actually think it's more the opposite. There's a lot of people in and around London no question, but you can see on this chart the land area of the red and blue halves are pretty similar, certainly not as skewed toward the south being higher density as I suspect most would have guessed.
Devon and Cornwall have very similar population densities, Cornwall only being slightly less densely populated (\~40 fewer people per square mile). In comparison, the least dense county has 384 fewer people per square mile than Cornwall, the most dense has 13,648 more people per square mile.
Out of 92 counties ordered by pop density, Devon and Cornwall are separated by just 3 counties in the list.
Lincolnshire and Shropshire are less densely populated than Cornwall.
Compared to the most dense county, Devon is 3.1% as dense,
Cornwall is 2.8% as dense.
The difference is not significant.
I had to scroll through over half the comments here to understand what i was looking at...i feel very dumb, but yes that title could have had an extra couple of words to clarify.
I was wondering "49.75% OF WHAT??? For all those counties??? Is it the % of people who think they're in the north or south???"
I think what makes it confusing is the coloring follows the county lines and red and blue are used.
this makes it seem like some sort of political divide.
also the extra .25%
>I think what makes it confusing is the coloring follows the county lines and red and blue are used. this makes it seem like some sort of political divide. also the extra .25%
Yeah that is fair. I used the colours basically as a joke alluding to that very point. Counties were used purely for ease instead of counting every single settlement, village and town, which would make this a far more complicated process (and the fact that any population divide like this estimates as I did).
Once Saw a guy who said “I went down south from Edinburgh to Newcastle the other week” and so many people replying “um ackshually Newcastle is in the north!”
English people are just complete morons as soon as north/south comes up
I'm really rather looking at buying a house, can you make sure that Tollington is in the north, it's rather nice and I'd rather buy in the cheap northern prices.
Would be cool if you still have the data up if you're able to divide in 3 to see where the Midlands would start / end based on population?
Edit: it's pretty cool still anyway, I'm just curious
[I've made a very quick version](https://imgur.com/a/Nfv88Pt), using the county populations from wikipedia.
As someone born in Wiltshire, and particularly in the southwest of the county, it pained me to include it as part of the "midlands" but it was the only way I could make the numbers get close to 33% for each region.
EDIT: putting Wiltshire back into the "south" section changes the regions as follows:
- North: 32.98%
- Midlands: 31.59%
- South: 35.43%
This is actually a much better map than the original one which weirdly gets a lot closer to the actual cultural definitions (ignoring the fact that lumping the South East and South West together as "South" is meaningless).
Northern/Midlands border is pretty spot on, South West not far off, South East is probably the most contentious (Essex is definitely not Midlands, Suffolk/Norfolk and possibly Cambridgeshire probably fit better in an "East" category)
Edit; re Wiltshire, Swindon Town were always the Southernmost club that used to feature in the Midlands Today round up if that's any measure (northernmost Crewe Alexandra).
Cheltenham Town also used to feature; only a short train journey from New Street, would say that's a good call for the South West Midlands border.
Is the northernmidland border spot on? I thought Nottinghamshire and derbyshire were east midlands and Lincolnshire god knows what region that is in. But then I live in Sussex so I 'm probably not the best judge
I'd put the boundary part way up Derbyshire (roughly where you go from the flat-ish bit to the Peak District - Glossop and Chapel are definitely Northern, but Derby is definitely midlands), so it's about as close as it could possibly be.
As someone from Nottingham, but has travelled a lot and lived around the UK, I think of the Trent as the proper North/South divide.
Crossing the Trent is when you get the biggest transition of accents between southern-ish and yorkshire-ish. Also house prices jump up South of the river.
Nah the border is based on what was the kingdom of Northumbria with maybe the addition of cheshire. Midlands are just that Midlands. It doesn't matter on the accent but maybe more so on the dialects and how they developed. If they developed from Northumbrian then they are Northern if they developed from Southern English they are southern.
Midlands is more southern influenced than the likes of what is classed as the North
Ohh thats interesting. Not at all how I expected that to look! My mental image of the northern city populations must be way off. Thanks for taking the time to make that :)
> My mental image of the northern city populations must be way off
[It's not.](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347530093/figure/fig3/AS:974650955804673@1609386304110/Heat-demand-in-the-UK-a-population-density-of-the-UK-from-Vieno-et-al-2016-b.png) They're well populated, they're just leaking over into the "midlands" group.
**EDIT**; I linked the wrong map source.
I think this might be slightly challenging to do based just on county borders, especially when counties get a lot longer as you travel north. Essentially, the results using this method would be less pleasing. Perhaps better to do using constituency data, which would be far more time consuming.
Bing bong, one hour hath passed OP
Edit: Checked your account and it seems you delivered! I guess we now have the population centroid of the UK pretty much at North Hampton, eye balling it?
Yes - this [image](https://imgur.com/a/UCFsK9F) has the two maps overlayed. I believe this would have the village of [Cold Higham](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Higham), Northamptonshire as the centre England's population (although the east-west map did include Wales, whereas this one did not, which skews things significantly).
Unless you mean a circular centre as the most central part of England and which extends until reaching 50% of the population, in which case, i’m going to sleep.
I think there are some variations. Easy first three - smallest radius containing 50% of population, largest radius containing 50% of the population, geographically centered radius with 50% pop.
No. Let us simplify the population ratio to 100:100 and call the line on the map 'x'. If we remove 9 from the South, the ratio becomes 91:100 where line 'x' remains in the same place, the line is of course incorrect.
By moving the line by 'nine million people further north', this would be the result. Rather, since 'x' is meant to have half of the population either side, we would want a population ratio of 95.5:95.5. This would make the north-south divide line 4.5 million further north instead.
Honestly last month I flew out from Gatwick and got a good view of London.
If you didn't know otherwise you'd think Croydon was a completely different city.
I was surprised when I learned that London did not take up 25% of the population by itself.
For context I'm Greek, and I moved here 3.5 years ago. Athens, the capital, has a population of 3.1 mil (very conservative estimate, the number is closer to 4 mil). Our total population is 10 mil, so Athens pretty much amounts to about 30-40% of the population.
Out of 234 counties Greece is the 135th most dense country in the world, a bit higher than the average.
For context the UK is 52nd on that list so it's a considerably more dense country. I get why, in comparison, you'd consider Greece not as populated.
Given London is Greater London, the City of London is tiny, I think we should also include Greater Manchester. Metropolitan Leeds is also over a million, but shouldn't be counted because no one in Wakefield will say they live in Leeds.
Most people these days, they're linked by continuous urbanisation. Stockport especially the border with Manchester is very nebulous and runs down the middle of some suburban streets
Yeah you either have to go all or nothing. By the pure, raw figure of "biggest city" Birmingham is ridiculously far ahead, then Leeds, Glasgow, Sheffield and Bradford. Some cities are structured on their own which pumps them up in that lens, then some are like London and Manchester which fold in smaller towns. But you can't really pick and choose between them, it's normally better to include the "what the city regards itself as" figure.
The City of London isn't 'official London' though.
London itself is the 32 boroughs. It's one administrative region and the 9 or so million population quoted. London is a city as well, the City of London is just inside of it.
Put in one way... the South has a bigger GDP than Spain with about 60% of the population.
Put another way, London and the South East have about the same combined GDP and population as Florida (and thus a GDP per head of about $62,000).
At university I read Jerry White's book on London in the 18th Century, and it was easily one of most entertaining books I read in terms of content and style - rooftop chases because of theatre rivalries are fun. He also has books on London in the 19th and 20th Centuries.
Very interesting by population the old joke of anything North of London being the North seems true.
I like being in the North, all are welcome we have cookies and only the occasional frost giant
The northern section takes up 55.58% to the southern's 44.42% (these are relatively approximate though, I could not be bothered to research the areas of each county used, although this could easily be done, just slightly time consuming).
I know this is just a joke but bear in mind that people move around a lot more these days compared to say 100 years ago... I was born just outside Lincolnshire and grew up in Lincolnshire my whole childhood, my dad was born in Lincolnshire and lived there his whole life, so did his parents, so did their parents, so did their parents... all the way back to the Viking era over 1000 years ago. I've even done a DNA test and a fair amount of my genetics comes directly from Scandinavian ancestry. The DNA from my mum's side is basically pure Anglo-Saxon / Celt.
Now I live in Sussex, about half an hour from Brighton. There's not much further south you can go and I'm a relatively short drive from where the Battle of Hastings took place. I don't see myself leaving anytime soon so potentially my kids will have Viking ancestry but be born in a properly Norman area.
Somewhat ironically my fiancée's mum and that whole half of her family is literally from Normandy in France!
Tbf the Normans were basically Vikings that settled in France and assimilated into Gallic society and culture, so either way it'd likely skew Scandinavian. Similarly, there's a good chance anyone with Celtic ancestry will have a marbling of Scandinavian running through them as well.
The national League north is the highest level of football in the uk split up into regions. This is "the north" according to that
https://twitter.com/Simon_Hughes__/status/1658187635771203614?t=bOOnA58hTPVsJX_BuzLH2g&s=19
Doesn't really tally much different
seems their line is c. 50 miles further north. i imagine the process involved in creating such a map has to be similar, except number of football teams replaces population.
it's more where the teams are that are that level for each season. It is in theory possible (but very unlikely) to have all 24 teams in the Northern section be from Suffolk and the the 24 in the South be from Essex
You make a good point... I used this [website](https://www.mapchart.net/uk.html) which seems to have eradicated Lowestoft from existence. This might be a "paper towns" thing.
To be fair, I believe that the part of Great Yarmouth east of the river might still be on this map.
Welcome OP to finding out how many redditors are literate.
Yeah, a lot of people are letting me know that Cambridge isn't northern. This map is not meant to be how I define the North/South, just what it would be if it was divided purely on the basis of population.
I think it's interesting. A lot of people don't realise how much of the population lives within the M25 honestly. I'm surprised so many people didn't read what it was a map of honestly.
> A lot of people don't realise how much of the population lives within the M25 honestly More than the combined population of Scotland and Wales I believe.
I would definitely believe that. The population of London is not much less than Wales and Scotland combined.
If I remember correctly London has the biggest population of all the cities in Europe except for maybe Moscow.
Weirdly London is one of the largest cities in Europe and at the same time also one of the smallest. * London Metropolitan Area - 11.9-18m (it varies depending on the definition you use) * Greater London - 8.9m (estimate in 2019) * City of London - 9,401 (estimate in 2016)
Actually Istanbul is the greatest population in Europe
Half of its in Asia though?
It's Istanbul, not Constantinople...
Been a long time gone, Constantinople Why did Constantinople get the works? That's nobody's business but the Turks
No, Istanbul is the two thirds of the urban agglomeration that is on the European side. The Asian side was different towns for most of history, and only recently have been consumed as suburbs of istanbul
Asian side has been a part of Istanbul for quite a long time. 1/3 of the population lives there. You can’t really call it suburbs of Istanbul.
16 million people Jesus, at least it's warm!
I once saw a map that split the UK into regions with the same population as London. Cumbria, North East England, Scotland and Northern Ireland formed one combined London matching region.
Which is interesting because I'd much rather live in any of those areas than London.
I like London, only been in to it a few times but that city always excites me. But for somewhere to live I dare say I'd struggle with somewhere so busy. Newcastle-upon-Tyne stresses me out so London would probably give me a nervous break down. I always wonder what London would be like with just its centre but no suburbs and instead forests and rolling hills surrounding it. With the people who make the city work living in its centre.
I often think about what England (and the rest of Britain) looked like before it was cleared of ancient woodlands. I'd love to have been able to visit that place, with wolves and bears aplenty.
Use a sat nav. Mine's always telling me about "bear left", though honestly I never spot it.
cos it left
I actually think it's more the opposite. There's a lot of people in and around London no question, but you can see on this chart the land area of the red and blue halves are pretty similar, certainly not as skewed toward the south being higher density as I suspect most would have guessed.
helps that cornwall and devon are huge yet near empty, and the M62 belt is msasive and quite highly densely populated, as well as birmingham
Cornwall yes, but Devon is 12th out of 47 counties by population - 1.1 million.
Devon and Cornwall have very similar population densities, Cornwall only being slightly less densely populated (\~40 fewer people per square mile). In comparison, the least dense county has 384 fewer people per square mile than Cornwall, the most dense has 13,648 more people per square mile. Out of 92 counties ordered by pop density, Devon and Cornwall are separated by just 3 counties in the list. Lincolnshire and Shropshire are less densely populated than Cornwall. Compared to the most dense county, Devon is 3.1% as dense, Cornwall is 2.8% as dense. The difference is not significant.
in terms of density it’s still pretty low though right?
One in six people live in Greater London - more than Scotland
I read that as "only six" for some reason, wondered what I'd missed
> I'm surprised so many people didn't read what it was a map of honestly. Are you though?
I’m not surprised at all!
Too be fair there is a certain type who thinks anything outside the M25 apart from their cottage in Norfolk or Cornwall is the North
I live I. Cornwall so Devon is the North as far as I’m concerned.
In Devon so Cornwall south, everywhere else (especially Bristol and London) are north, but then so is North Devon because it's got north in the name.
Post to r/mapporn buddy, it will be well received.
Maybe my title was not clear enough ...
[удалено]
I had to scroll through over half the comments here to understand what i was looking at...i feel very dumb, but yes that title could have had an extra couple of words to clarify. I was wondering "49.75% OF WHAT??? For all those counties??? Is it the % of people who think they're in the north or south???"
I think what makes it confusing is the coloring follows the county lines and red and blue are used. this makes it seem like some sort of political divide. also the extra .25%
>I think what makes it confusing is the coloring follows the county lines and red and blue are used. this makes it seem like some sort of political divide. also the extra .25% Yeah that is fair. I used the colours basically as a joke alluding to that very point. Counties were used purely for ease instead of counting every single settlement, village and town, which would make this a far more complicated process (and the fact that any population divide like this estimates as I did).
Once Saw a guy who said “I went down south from Edinburgh to Newcastle the other week” and so many people replying “um ackshually Newcastle is in the north!” English people are just complete morons as soon as north/south comes up
What are these squiggly things under the picture?
Going t' universit' of Cambridge What's the exchange rate of reddit karma to GBP these days?
Universi'eh
Gon’ tuh*
I draw the line between Cambridge and Girton
As a townie I draw it at the river cam
Can you move it up a few hundred yards? I want my house to benefit from those sweet sweet southern England property prices.
I'm really rather looking at buying a house, can you make sure that Tollington is in the north, it's rather nice and I'd rather buy in the cheap northern prices.
am only goin 2 sell 8fths pal
Reading comprehension is a wonderful skill.
Why, are they particularly literate there?
r/angryupvote
Made me laugh, very good.
I never comment but this is hysterical
[удалено]
r/reading
Is that north or south Reading.
Yes.
Just before this post I scrolled past another saying UK was 4th in the world for literacy!
Oh we can read great, we just don't understand any of it.
Would be cool if you still have the data up if you're able to divide in 3 to see where the Midlands would start / end based on population? Edit: it's pretty cool still anyway, I'm just curious
[I've made a very quick version](https://imgur.com/a/Nfv88Pt), using the county populations from wikipedia. As someone born in Wiltshire, and particularly in the southwest of the county, it pained me to include it as part of the "midlands" but it was the only way I could make the numbers get close to 33% for each region. EDIT: putting Wiltshire back into the "south" section changes the regions as follows: - North: 32.98% - Midlands: 31.59% - South: 35.43%
This is actually a much better map than the original one which weirdly gets a lot closer to the actual cultural definitions (ignoring the fact that lumping the South East and South West together as "South" is meaningless). Northern/Midlands border is pretty spot on, South West not far off, South East is probably the most contentious (Essex is definitely not Midlands, Suffolk/Norfolk and possibly Cambridgeshire probably fit better in an "East" category) Edit; re Wiltshire, Swindon Town were always the Southernmost club that used to feature in the Midlands Today round up if that's any measure (northernmost Crewe Alexandra). Cheltenham Town also used to feature; only a short train journey from New Street, would say that's a good call for the South West Midlands border.
Is the northernmidland border spot on? I thought Nottinghamshire and derbyshire were east midlands and Lincolnshire god knows what region that is in. But then I live in Sussex so I 'm probably not the best judge
I'd put the boundary part way up Derbyshire (roughly where you go from the flat-ish bit to the Peak District - Glossop and Chapel are definitely Northern, but Derby is definitely midlands), so it's about as close as it could possibly be.
As someone from Nottingham, but has travelled a lot and lived around the UK, I think of the Trent as the proper North/South divide. Crossing the Trent is when you get the biggest transition of accents between southern-ish and yorkshire-ish. Also house prices jump up South of the river.
Nah the border is based on what was the kingdom of Northumbria with maybe the addition of cheshire. Midlands are just that Midlands. It doesn't matter on the accent but maybe more so on the dialects and how they developed. If they developed from Northumbrian then they are Northern if they developed from Southern English they are southern. Midlands is more southern influenced than the likes of what is classed as the North
Lincolnshire is special. its broken into 3 2 of which are north and the big bit is in the midlands
As a Bristolian I agree, in my mind Gloucester/Cheltenham is the last stop before you’re in the midlands
Ohh thats interesting. Not at all how I expected that to look! My mental image of the northern city populations must be way off. Thanks for taking the time to make that :)
> My mental image of the northern city populations must be way off [It's not.](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347530093/figure/fig3/AS:974650955804673@1609386304110/Heat-demand-in-the-UK-a-population-density-of-the-UK-from-Vieno-et-al-2016-b.png) They're well populated, they're just leaking over into the "midlands" group. **EDIT**; I linked the wrong map source.
That version feels more accurate as to what the North looks like
I think this might be slightly challenging to do based just on county borders, especially when counties get a lot longer as you travel north. Essentially, the results using this method would be less pleasing. Perhaps better to do using constituency data, which would be far more time consuming.
Nobody talks about Englands East-West divide
FFS. Give me, like, an hour. Too interesting of a concept to ignore.
Bing bong, one hour hath passed OP Edit: Checked your account and it seems you delivered! I guess we now have the population centroid of the UK pretty much at North Hampton, eye balling it?
Yes - this [image](https://imgur.com/a/UCFsK9F) has the two maps overlayed. I believe this would have the village of [Cold Higham](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Higham), Northamptonshire as the centre England's population (although the east-west map did include Wales, whereas this one did not, which skews things significantly).
[Here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/13jbd10/england_and_wales_eastwest_divide_by_population/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Nobody talks about England's circular center of population...
No. I am going to sleep.
I'm glad you can sleep. It's 0130 here in Nottingham and I'm wide awake with uncertainty as to whether or not I'm inside or out of that circle.
I am confident that a circular centre (assuming we aim for the smallest centre possible) would be around London, and would not extend to Nottingham.
Unless you mean a circular centre as the most central part of England and which extends until reaching 50% of the population, in which case, i’m going to sleep.
The fact you double posted with clarification makes me feel like we'd be friends IRL. Your assurances will have to see me through the night.
I think there are some variations. Easy first three - smallest radius containing 50% of population, largest radius containing 50% of the population, geographically centered radius with 50% pop.
Now do the Vatican City.
Where is the line if you remove London?
about nine million people further north
> about ~~nine~~ 4.5 million people further north Got you bro
Wow. Good point. I am an idiot. And so confidently sarcastic too.
Atleast youre humble and that's a great quality
I’m confused, surely 9m is right if you remove London? Not evenly split it between the two.
No. Let us simplify the population ratio to 100:100 and call the line on the map 'x'. If we remove 9 from the South, the ratio becomes 91:100 where line 'x' remains in the same place, the line is of course incorrect. By moving the line by 'nine million people further north', this would be the result. Rather, since 'x' is meant to have half of the population either side, we would want a population ratio of 95.5:95.5. This would make the north-south divide line 4.5 million further north instead.
That makes sense now, thank you! I’m no longer confused :)
Are they standing in a queue?
They’re Brits, so I expect so.
Now if only our government distributed public spending in accordance with this.
Very based - there was another comment comparing the GDP of these two areas which you might find interesting.
If they did that then you would find that London would be getting a lot more money.
The north would get even less ?
Eh, more room for us up here.
Northerners taking all the land, typical northerners.
It's because they take up extra space per person
Got to grow sausage rolls and Yorkshire puddings somewhere.
Gonna have a wall of rhubarb from Wales to The Wash to keep the southerners out.
That’s surprising with most of the major cities being in the midlands and the north.
Yeah but London is just so huge
Honestly it’s like a city of cities
Honestly last month I flew out from Gatwick and got a good view of London. If you didn't know otherwise you'd think Croydon was a completely different city.
A lot of people think that, but it’s a bad hill to die on, it’s getting ever more integrated
Do you know how many conversations I’ve had with people who insist they Croydon isn’t London??
I was surprised when I learned that London did not take up 25% of the population by itself. For context I'm Greek, and I moved here 3.5 years ago. Athens, the capital, has a population of 3.1 mil (very conservative estimate, the number is closer to 4 mil). Our total population is 10 mil, so Athens pretty much amounts to about 30-40% of the population.
Always surprises me when I see how small Greece’s population is relative to its size
Out of 234 counties Greece is the 135th most dense country in the world, a bit higher than the average. For context the UK is 52nd on that list so it's a considerably more dense country. I get why, in comparison, you'd consider Greece not as populated.
Makes more sense when you try and explore it. Greece is mostly terrain that would be quite hard to build on.
Birmingham is the only other city in the country with over 1 million people, London has nearly 10 million
Given London is Greater London, the City of London is tiny, I think we should also include Greater Manchester. Metropolitan Leeds is also over a million, but shouldn't be counted because no one in Wakefield will say they live in Leeds.
No-one counts London as just the City of bit though. If we're going on built up areas in close proximity you could have all the new City Regions too
When people talk about Manchester they generally refer to Greater Manchester too.
Who is counting Stockport and Bolton as Manchester?
Who counts Croydon and Dagenham as London
Is everything inside the motorway not "London" for most of the country?
Half of Stockport is inside the M60
Gotta say I don't really differentiate between manchester and stockport
Literally everyone
Everyone e counts Croyden as London
Most people these days, they're linked by continuous urbanisation. Stockport especially the border with Manchester is very nebulous and runs down the middle of some suburban streets
Yeah you either have to go all or nothing. By the pure, raw figure of "biggest city" Birmingham is ridiculously far ahead, then Leeds, Glasgow, Sheffield and Bradford. Some cities are structured on their own which pumps them up in that lens, then some are like London and Manchester which fold in smaller towns. But you can't really pick and choose between them, it's normally better to include the "what the city regards itself as" figure.
The City of London isn't 'official London' though. London itself is the 32 boroughs. It's one administrative region and the 9 or so million population quoted. London is a city as well, the City of London is just inside of it.
I'm northern now? From now on I will drink Bovril and have thick slice of buttered bread with EVERY meal!
Get a whippet
Aye, that'll do
I could be wrong, but according to your flair you are from Hertfordshire? Which remains in the South in this map.
Born in Hertfordshire, and moved North to Cambridgeshire last week. So I still have a southern accent.
You'll lose that quickly now you're up north, I'm sure.
Aye, sure I will lad!
Way aye neighbour, it’s basically Newcastle here.
Ey! That’s the spirit mucker!
[Map men, map men, map map map men men](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENeCYwms-Cc)
Mahogany Mahogany.
[Mahogany](https://youtu.be/14D5wKSVlXg)
Bith
Was hoping to see this otherwise I was gonna link it
Same! I do wonder if Map Men look at their YouTube stats, see a peak and think "Ah, another Reddit post I see..."
Taking these boundaries (2020 figures): GDP South: £1.1T, £39,000 per head ($51,000 in 2020) GDP North: £0.75T, £27,000 per head ($35,000 in 2020)
Thank you, that’s really cool. Edit: cool, as in, it is cool that somebody has added to and utilised a resource I created. Not so cool otherwise
Put in one way... the South has a bigger GDP than Spain with about 60% of the population. Put another way, London and the South East have about the same combined GDP and population as Florida (and thus a GDP per head of about $62,000).
Interesting map. I'm guessing with London's relative growth, year on year the line must move down.
It fluctuates, it was only around 2015 London reattained the population it had in 1939.
It's surprising to find out London has this many people in 1939, I think I've got some history to learn!
I think there was a big push to move people out of the London slums in that period, hence all the new towns that sprung up on London's outskirts
At university I read Jerry White's book on London in the 18th Century, and it was easily one of most entertaining books I read in terms of content and style - rooftop chases because of theatre rivalries are fun. He also has books on London in the 19th and 20th Centuries.
Very interesting by population the old joke of anything North of London being the North seems true. I like being in the North, all are welcome we have cookies and only the occasional frost giant
My mate says anyone south of Knutsford is a cockney.
[удалено]
From the perception of a Londoner, anything outside the M25 on any side is t'Norf
You might like this map: http://www.viewsoftheworld.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/UKCartogram.jpg
I do indeed, thank you.
As a Brummie this surprises the hell out of me, sometimes it feels like half a continent is crammed into this city.
London is 8 times as populous as Birmingham.
Similar population density though at 4.7k per sq km for Greater London vs 4.2k for Birmingham
I'm not sure I believe it tbh
This is Midlands erasure
What is the % area split here?
The northern section takes up 55.58% to the southern's 44.42% (these are relatively approximate though, I could not be bothered to research the areas of each county used, although this could easily be done, just slightly time consuming).
Given London is in the south I’m surprised it’s so close.
Those damn Normans. Anglo-Saxons, Celts and Picts unite!
I know this is just a joke but bear in mind that people move around a lot more these days compared to say 100 years ago... I was born just outside Lincolnshire and grew up in Lincolnshire my whole childhood, my dad was born in Lincolnshire and lived there his whole life, so did his parents, so did their parents, so did their parents... all the way back to the Viking era over 1000 years ago. I've even done a DNA test and a fair amount of my genetics comes directly from Scandinavian ancestry. The DNA from my mum's side is basically pure Anglo-Saxon / Celt. Now I live in Sussex, about half an hour from Brighton. There's not much further south you can go and I'm a relatively short drive from where the Battle of Hastings took place. I don't see myself leaving anytime soon so potentially my kids will have Viking ancestry but be born in a properly Norman area. Somewhat ironically my fiancée's mum and that whole half of her family is literally from Normandy in France!
Tbf the Normans were basically Vikings that settled in France and assimilated into Gallic society and culture, so either way it'd likely skew Scandinavian. Similarly, there's a good chance anyone with Celtic ancestry will have a marbling of Scandinavian running through them as well.
Shows that the UK was diverse even before “diversity” aka mass immigration
Don't let certain groups here you say that :P
Being born in Co. Durham I always considered the north-south divide to be from the Humber to the Wirral.
Finally, a map showing I am northern. Can I now start missing out letters of words now?
Yes, immediately stop putting an 'r' in the word bath. Put coal in it instead.
Like the "T" in water?
waa'aa
Watter has 2 t’s
The national League north is the highest level of football in the uk split up into regions. This is "the north" according to that https://twitter.com/Simon_Hughes__/status/1658187635771203614?t=bOOnA58hTPVsJX_BuzLH2g&s=19 Doesn't really tally much different
seems their line is c. 50 miles further north. i imagine the process involved in creating such a map has to be similar, except number of football teams replaces population.
it's more where the teams are that are that level for each season. It is in theory possible (but very unlikely) to have all 24 teams in the Northern section be from Suffolk and the the 24 in the South be from Essex
I think we're saying the same thing? The 48 teams they use would be the 'population' in this context.
Lot of you people have 0 reading comprehension skills but can vote and stuff crazy if u ask me
It’s grim ‘oop Cambridge.
Good luck OP
Don’t tell Cambridge they’re northern. They won’t know how to cope.
So Great Yarmouth doesn’t exist anymore? Nor any of south east Norfolk!
We can dream
What does this comment mean?
Not sure where you got that map of the UK but you’re missing a section of the most eastern part of Norfolk, where Great Yarmouth is located.
You make a good point... I used this [website](https://www.mapchart.net/uk.html) which seems to have eradicated Lowestoft from existence. This might be a "paper towns" thing. To be fair, I believe that the part of Great Yarmouth east of the river might still be on this map.
I’d say you’ve kept Lowie just because it’s the most easterly point… could be wrong though! Both are definitely (shit) towns though.
[удалено]
Give over anything south of York is the south to me.
I refuse to accept this.
Whilst Norwich is further north than Birmingham it isn’t in the North.
As a true Anglo-Saxon, it's my view that the north consists of the unwashed pagan hordes living on the other side of the river.
Cambridge North? Behave.
I never would've considered Cambridge to be northern territory...
Seems legit to me.
Would be interesting to see how this has changed over time.