Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
Joey B - ok, ok : you've mentioned it 4 times now, so I'll do you the favour of tackling this 'Raphoe is a city' nonesense.... :D
City status is something that is granted upon a town through official political channels within that country. I hardly think a letter between a couple of clerics way back in 1600 constitutes concrete proof of Raphoe's supposed city status, let alone conference of city status. Even the official website link you put up there constantly uses the word "town" to describe Raphoe ! If it is indeed a city, why does its own website insist on describing it as a town ?
Back in the days of British rule, the monarch was the person who granted City status within the Republic (as the Queen does currently, e.g. Newry and Lisburn) - not the local vicar and/or the Pope. I don't believe a charter for City status was ever granted to Raphoe in those days, nor in the days since independence under whatever the new process for granting city status is in the Republic (someone from Waterford might know). Therefore, Raphoe is NOT a city - regardless of what a Pope who died 450+ years ago and an English TV quiz might think. It's not their decision.
The key quote on that website is the description of the town as "The Eclesiastical City of Raphoe". Given that it wasn't given official city status, I'm guessing they used the 'Eclesiastical city' bit to highlight it in a different way. Again - the Brian of Britain bit hardly confers City status. It may be linked to the popular misconception in Britain that having a Cathedral and a University are requirements for city status, and that anywhere with a Cathedral is automatically a city.
But nice try.... :D :p