Re: English Counties (Revised Post)

Dear Adrian ~

I'm glad to know GENUKI is correct. That was my point.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Here is yet another example of Doug twisting his argument. You inferred
that "Warwicks." was wrong not that GENUKI was correct.

Adrian

In a message dated 17/01/2006 05:27:40 GMT Standard Time,
Third, in one place, you refer to "co. Warwicks." This should either
be "co. Warwick" or "Warwickshire." For a list of the preferred
county designations, e.g., Warwickshire, see the GENUKI list at the
following website:

lgc...

What I understand from this message is that there are two ways to refer to
this geographical area. One is "Warwicks. and the other is "co. Warwick."
(i.e., loose the "s" when you use "co." as county and shire are redundant.)

Chris Phillips...

Yes, I think that is the point that was being made. The idea is that as
"shire" was a kind of synonym for "county", one can refer either to "the
county of Warwick" or to "Warwickshire", but not to "the county of
Warwickshire". This is the usage followed (almost always) by works such as
Complete Peerage and the Victoria County History.

Chris Phillips

Douglas Richardson...

Yep, that's exactly what I meant.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City. Utah

Given, his point would have stated more clearly if, in the second line of
his message above, he had used the abbreviation "Warwicks." rather
"Warwickshire."

<<<