Were Scottish villages more badly affected than English ones? She was obviously not referring to the entire male population of villages. My basic point remains - the paucity of names on English war memorials is not in keeping with the scale of slaughter image that we were brought up on so to say 'villages were wiped out' is perpetuating a myth. The small relative number of names in country villages would have had little impact on the 'social and economic viability' of a village - whatever that means.
Three examples from my personal knowledge...
Langford Budville, Somerset - 6 names from an 1891 total population of 340
Milverton, Somerset - 30 names from 1562 in 1891
Henley in Arden, Warwickshire - 20 names from 1043
Piorun, on 27 May 2011 - 12:35 AM, said:
Alan: Forgive an old colonial but I still don't understand. Until May last year, I had lived in Canada for 44 years (of my . . . . . . considerably more!). Since returning, I believe that I've heard of this programme but I'm not sure that it's shown in Scotland. Do I glean from your post immediately following my query that the lady was referring to the male population of English villages being wiped out by the misfortune of the War? If so, assuming that some males were babes in arms and some were in their second childhood, the comment would be literally inaccurate. However, in the context of the socio-economic viability of the village at the time, it probably wasn't too far off the mark, especially in some parts of Scotland, and should hardly be a target for even us pedants. Your further clarification would be appreciated. Yours, Antony