Our Anglo‐Saxon ancestors got our administrative boundaries right, and all our tinkering with local government over the last 25 years just proves it. In that time regions have come and gone, along with unitary authorities and new districts, but none of it can disguise the fact that the Saxon county structure established towards the end of the previous millennium was best suited to our geography. The trouble is that each change means alterations, too, in names of administrative authorities, and so in books and other documents which record them, not least of them geographical tables for classification.
So, once again the DDC area tables for the UK have to be revised, and the editors have made the best fist of it possible in the circumstances. It is not their fault that bureaucratic nonsense forces them to such extraordinary headings as “‐ 423 9 Unitary authorities created from Avon” or that in some parts there seem to be as many explanatory cross‐references as entries. The recreation of the counties in headings such as “‐ 422 7 Hampshire, Southampton City, Portsmouth City” is, at least, to be welcomed. Parochially, it is nice to see “Renfrewshire” simply reappear (although shorn of those territories ceded to Inverclyde and with another great chunk appearing under the immediately following “East Renfrewshire”). Ayrshire is not so lucky as it is relegated to a note under “414 6 North Ayrshire, South Ayrshire, East Ayrshire”. One could go on, but suffice it to say that the overall national structure and its major subdivisions (always a problematic task) are retained, all the names old and new (or reincarnated like Strathclyde in its brief late twentieth century bureaucratic existence ‐ our ancestors maintained their kingdom of that name for much longer) are included at the appropriate location, and all is indexed to the thorough and accurate standards established for DDC. It is a bonus that at least a few of the more absurd names invented last time round in local government reorganisation have now been rejected.
I am less able to comment in detail on the Republic of South Africa, but one has to note the far more real circumstances behind revision for that country: the creation of new provinces and elimination of homesteads. The events behind that put our own petty bureaucratic fumblings into a proper context. Again, the job is done comprehensively and accurately and so brings DC21 up to date in a critical and sensitive area. All you now have to decide is whether to reclassify your collections (just in time in the UK probably for the next round of tinkering with local government) or to envy those of us working with historical topographical data where DC16, based on the former stronger county structure, remains ideal.
