1. Uttlesford Through Time -Population

1. Uttlesford through time -Population

Population Density (Persons per Hectare)

National here means England and Wales

The population of Britain in 2001 is more than six times the population in 1801, so the country's overall population density is also six times higher. This is obvious in the time series for districts, but it makes comparing maps over time hard. One problem is that the density bands used in the maps have to change over time, and the bottom four bands in 1801 all fit into the bottom 2001 band. Although the mountains of Scotland and Wales still contain few people, rural England has become much more crowded.
Another problem is that, especially during the 19th century, much of the population was crowded into quite small urban areas that hardly show up on the maps. In 1801, the City of London contained over 400 people per hectare, while in 2001 only two local authorities contained over 100 per hectare. In towns where the main way of getting about was walking, extreme crowding was inevitable. London's area expanded with the development of cheap trains for 'working men' in the late 19th century. Both the bicycle and the bus helped towns spread out, but it was of course the car which made it possible for large numbers to live in rural areas, but with urban jobs and lifestyles. Note that our figures for the area of units as measured in hectares have always been calculated by us from our boundary maps, while all areas measured in acres are figures that were listed in census reports.

2. Rate of Population Change (% over previous 10 years)

National here means England and Wales

We only present the rate of population growth where we can be sure that changes do not result simply from boundary changes.
In the early 19th century, the most obvious areas of rapid growth were in the industrial districts of Lancashire, where cotton textiles had grown rapidly during the 18th century, and of South Wales. However, other areas also grew rapidly: during the 1810s and 1820s. The fens of northern East Anglia expanded as drainage schemes turned marshes into fertile farmland, while seaside resorts on the south coast developed well before the coming of railways.
By the mid-19th century, the north-east of England was growing fast. Its expansion was driven by mining and new heavy industries. In the second half of the 19th century, the old shipyards building wooden sailing ships on the Thames and the Medway were almost completely replaced by new yards on the Tyne and the Wear building iron ships with steam engines. The very heart of London was starting to lose population, and this trend was clearer by the 1900s. The mining areas of South Wales and the East Midlands also boomed. In the North East and the East Midlands, better mining techniques helped the coalfields move east, where the coal was deeper.
These patterns changed completely in the 1930s, rapid growth becoming focused almost entirely around London. This continued into the boom years of the 1950s and 1960s, but the area of low growth at the heart of the south-east becomes more and more visible. By the 1970s, the region of high growth extended beyond the south-east into both the south west and all of East Anglia. Central Wales and the ScottishHighlands benefited from in-migration which was as much about life-style choices as economics forces, as economic activity became steadily less tied to natural resources. Life-style choices plus the boom in financial services also explain the new growth in inner London, which began in the 1980s and blossomed, especially along the Thames, in the 1990s. The decline of the old industrial areas continued.

Population Percentage aged under 15

National here means England and Wales

Over the last 150 years, the proportion of children has dropped steadily: in 1851, 38% of the population was under 15, but today only 19% is. For any given date, variations between districts are within a much narrower range. In general, areas whose populations were growing fast would have contained a lot of children, because immigrants are generally young adults who then tend to have children. Today, it could also be argued that couples about to have children will try to move to certain kinds of areas 'good for bringing up kids': having good schools is a powerful magnet.
Local concentrations of young people in 1851 and 2001 were surprisingly similar, focused on the south midlands with most of London lacking children. However, the pattern at the start of the 20th century was rather different. High proportions of children were found in the industrial areas, reflecting their recent rapid growth, and in some parts of outer London. Of course, if we had included 15 to 19 year olds within this category, areas today with universities would also appear as concentrations of the young.

Population Percentage aged 15-64

National here means England and Wales

Of course, the definition of 'working age' has itself changed. Compulsory education to age 10 was established in some areas from 1870, and in all areas from 1880, but enforcement was patchy. The 1918 Education Act established for the first time a national minimum school leaving age of 14, raised to 15 by Butler's 1944 Education Act (1945 in Scotland) and 16 in 1973. The male retirement age was standardised at 65 only by the 1925 Pension Act, but as far back as the 1870s trade unionists entitled to a 'superannuation' benefit based on physical decay rather than any precise age typically claimed the benefit at 64 or 65. As the census reported 5-year age bands, defining working age over our whole period as 15 to 64 seems reasonable.
Despite the large change in overall age structure, the proportion of working age has changed relatively little: it was smallest in 1871 and 1881 (59%), and at its greatest in 1931 (69%). What has changed, of course, is the make-up of the so-called 'dependent population': in 1851, 88% of those not of working age were under 15, while by 2001 the majority were over 64. As you would expect, the main concentrations of the workforce were in areas of rapid population growth, so in 1851 they were in the industrial districts and London. In 2001, the most interesting pattern is in the south-east, with both the periphery of the region and London itself having high rates, but with a ring of lower rates in between, and along the south coast.
What our choice of rates does not show, of course, is the ratio of young and old within the working age population. Comparing, for example, the proportion under and over 45 would show that declining industrial areas generally have older workforces, and in modern Britain many in this age group are unable to find work.

Population Percentage Aged over 65

National here means England and Wales

The proportion of the population aged over 65 was close to 5% in all censuses from 1851 to 1911, but it then tripled during the 20th century. In the nineteenth century, the elderly can be seen as a residual, concentrated into areas of low mortality and high out migration -- in other words, mainly in rural areas. In 1851, this meant mainly the rural periphery: the south west, Norfolk and Suffolk, and most of Wales. The highlands of Scotland, conversely, contained relatively few elderly people due to poor life expectancy while the fenlands were an area of recent in-migration following drainage. Other peripheral areas with low proportions of the elderly, in Cornwall and west Cumberland, were growing because of the mining industry.
By 1911, or even 1931, the pattern in the south was little different, the main change being that the fenlands had aged rapidly once in-migration ceased. In the north, the old industrial cores were still lacking in elderly but their surrounding districts were also now relatively youthful.
By 1951, we begin to see a new pattern as the elderly ceased to be a group left behind as young people moved away. Instead, as people began to expect a lengthy retirement in which some could live where they pleased, the elderly themselves became migrants, moving to rural areas and especially to seaside areas. By the end of the 20th century, the country was almost ringed by a necklace of districts with c. 20% over 65.

3. Uttlesford through time - Social Structure
Employers and "Educated Men" (1831 definition)

National here means England and Wales

The 1831 census was the first to provide some information about individual occupations, but was also the last not to be based on a detailed door-to-door survey: it still relied heavily on the network of parish priests, but they seem to have been diligent in gathering this information. The available data cover males over 20 only. The nine categories they used were as much to do with different industries than with social status. However, here we present the percentage of males over 20 who were described either as "Agriculture: Occupiers employing Labourers" or as "Capitalists, Bankers, Professional and other Educated Men".

"Middling Sorts" (1831 definition)

National here means England and Wales

The 1831 census was the first to provide some information about individual occupations, but was also the last not to be based on a detailed door-to-door survey: it still relied heavily on the network of parish priests, but they seem to have been diligent in gathering this information. The available data cover males over 20 only. The nine categories they used were as much to do with different industries as with social status. However, here we present the percentage of males over 20 who were described as farmers "not employing Labourers", as "Employed in Manufacture, or in making Manufacturing Machinery", and as "Employed in Retail Trade, or in Handicrafts as Masters or Workmen". This is certainly not a modern notion of "the middle class" as it includes many skilled manual workers, but it is very roughly what people at the time would have called "middling sorts".

Labourers and Servants (1831 definition)

National here means England and Wales

Social Status, based on 1831 occupational statistics

1831 Occupations grouped by Status / 1831
Employers and Professionals / 285
Middling Sorts / 548
Labourers and Servants / 2,125
Others / 130

The 1831 census provides information, down to parish-level, on the occupations of males aged over 20 using nine categories. Here we reorganise this information to provide a crude measure of social status, based more on contemporary ideas than on modern definitions of social class: "middling sorts" combines small farmers not employing labourers with both masters and skilled workers in urban manufacturing and handicrafts.

Uttlesford Hundred: Males aged 20 and over, in 9 occupational categories

1831 Occupational Categories / 1831
Farmers employing Labourers / 211
Farmers not employing Labourers / 31
Agricultural Labourers / 1,976
Manufacturing / 1
Retail and Handicrafts / 516
Capitalists, Professionals / 74
Labourers (non-agricultural) / 79
Servants / 70
Other / 130

The only information provided by the first three censuses was a three-way categorisation of families. In 1831, this more detailed categorisation was published, although it was limited to males aged 20 and over (although numbers of male servants under 20, and of female servants, were also listed). These are the most detailed parish-level occupational data ever published by the census. Information on the precise occupations of workers in retail trade and handicrafts was also published at county-level.

Uttlesford Hundred: Males aged 20 and over, in four industrial categories

1831 Occupational Categories (simplified) / 1831
Agriculture / 2,218
Manufacturing / 1
Retail and Handicraft / 516
Other / 353

The 1831 census provided information at parish-level on the number of males aged over 20 in each of nine occupational categories. Here we re-organise those nine categories into four to get some sense of the distribution of agriculture, of the new manufacturing industries and of the urban "trades". "Agriculture" is quite well-defined here, combining large- and small-scale farmers with agricultural labourers. "Manufacturing" is narrowly defined, excluding labourers and "capitalists", and focuses on the new factory-based industries. "Retail and handicrafts" covers the many workers in small businesses who sold products at the front of their shop and made them at the back. The "other" category covers "capitalists" and professionals, labourers outside agriculture, servants and "others".

Year / Class 1 / Class 2 / Class 3 / Class 4 / Class 5
1841 / 160 / 1,672 / 5,503 / 6,503 / 902
1881 / 197 / 1,757 / 2,810 / 7,085 / 758
1931 / 224 / 2,100 / 4,349 / 4,140 / 1,708
1951 / 694 / 2,630 / 6,406 / 4,247 / 1,490
1971 / 1,080 / 4,145 / 6,657 / 3,169 / 899
1981 / 1,290 / 6,260 / 7,030 / 2,270 / 680
1991 / 1,520 / 7,430 / 7,300 / 2,030 / 660
2001 / 2,905 / 4,601 / 5,253 / 1,593 / 2,007
/ Year / Social Class Total
1841 / 14,740
1881 / 12,606
1931 / 12,521
1951 / 15,467
1971 / 15,950
1981 / 17,530
1991 / 18,940
2001 / 16,359
/ Year / Classes
1 & 2 / Class 3 / Classes 4 & 5
1841 / 1,832 / 5,503 / 7,405
1881 / 1,954 / 2,810 / 7,843
1931 / 2,324 / 4,349 / 5,848
1951 / 3,324 / 6,406 / 5,737
1971 / 5,225 / 6,657 / 4,068
1981 / 7,550 / 7,030 / 2,950
1991 / 8,950 / 7,300 / 2,690
2001 / 7,506 / 5,253 / 3,600

The first census in 1801 simply divided people into those employed in agriculture and those in trade or manufacturing, and the 1841 census, the first to gather detailed occupational data, imposed no real order on it at all. However, the first occupational classification, introduced in 1851, was clearly concerned with social status as well as with what people made: it began with the Queen, followed by government officials and then by 'the learned professions'.
In the twentieth century a separate system of social classes was devised. Originally created to help understand mortality, the Registrar General's Social Classification was tabulated by the census from 1951 onwards. To provide a longer perspective we have re-organised earlier occupational information to the same system. Like the published 1951 data, all our figures are limited to men.
This is only possible where we have very detailed occupational statistics at district-level, so these earlier censuses are limited to 1841, where the replies to the occupational question were tabulated almost raw; 1881, where we can use complete data from the enumerator's books; and 1931, which produced the most detailed of all occupational reports. The 2001 data are based on a rather different system, so comparisons over time are tricky.

Percentage of Working-Age Males in Class 1 and 2

National here means England and Wales

Class 1 covers 'Professionals' while class 2 covers, broadly, 'Managers' so this can be seen as a measure of the 'middle class'. Because 'working class' occupations are generally defined as manual work, as more and more people worked in the services sector and in offices the proportion counted as 'middle class' rose steadily, from 14% in 1841 to 47% in 2001.
In 1841 and 1881, the most obvious pattern was that remoter rural areas were strongly middle class, but this was almost entirely because farmers were all placed in class 2; in these areas, there were relatively few farm labourers. The lack of geographical detail in the original 1841 occupational statistics mean we cannot look at detailed patterns within most counties, but Surrey was already identifiable as a high status area. Industrial communities like Stoke on Trent, Oldham both 8%) and Blaenau Gwent (6%) had the lowest proportions of middle class. The highest proportion of all was the City of London, with 24%. Our more geographically detailed figures for 1881 show that, once sparsely-populated farming areas are excluded, the middle class was strikingly concentrated within London: with the exception of Tower Hamlets (15%), all inner London districts contained at least 23% in classes 1 and 2, even Southwark (23%), Islington (26%) and Hackney (27%).
Right up to 1971 remote rural areas visually dominate the map, but a clearer north-south divide was starting to emerge by 1931: the districts with low proportions of the middle class were almost all in the north and South Wales, while most districts in the south east has relatively high proportions. The exceptions were in London, where the middle class had abandoned districts like Southwark (8%) and Islington (9%) for suburban areas like Harrow (24%) and Barnet (28%).
From 1971 onwards, the areas with the highest proportion of middle class workers became more and more concentrated into the south east, so that by 2001 only two other districts made it into the top forty, Rushcliffe in Nottinghamshire and East Renfrewshire in Scotland. Within the south east, inner London had generally low proportions, but from 1951 a steadily larger part of western central London was also in the highest band: initially just Westminster, and Kensington and Chelsea, by 2001 this included all central districts apart from Southwark, Town Hamlets and Hackney.

Percentage of Working-Age Males in Class 3

National here means England and Wales

This class combines clerical workers and skilled manual workers. By some definitions, the first are 'middle class' and the second 'working class', but skilled manual workers generally had higher earnings than clerks. For some years, separate figures are available for the two groups.
In the 19th century this group consisted mainly of skilled manual workers, and as you would expect they were mainly concentrated into the big cities and industrial districts, including the coalfields. In 1881, mining districts like Easington and the Rhondda had over two-thirds of their workers in this category while farming areas had under a third.
Over the twentieth century, the proportion of all workers in the sector remained almost constant up to 1991, and the geographical focus was increasingly on industrial areas away from the south east, numbers in the London area declining and being increasingly focused into districts along the Thames east of London. The figures for 2001 show only that we have so far failed to identify the equivalent group within the latest census data!