in
Geography & Places
—
London's Great Misnomer: The Surprising Truth About Kentish Town
Kentish Town in London isn't from Kent. Its name likely comes from 'Ken-ditch' (the Fleet River's bed) or a landowner named Le Kent, not the county. This North London area's name is a historical puzzle, fooling residents and visitors alike into thinking it has a 'Kentish' past.
Look at a London Underground map, and your eyes might drift north on the Northern Line to a station called 'Kentish Town'. The assumption is immediate and logical: this area must have historical ties to the county of Kent, the famed 'Garden of England'. Perhaps it was an exclave, a settlement for Kentish traders, or simply named in its honor. The truth, however, is far more surprising and rooted in a linguistic puzzle that has fooled Londoners for generations. Kentish Town is not in Kent, has never been part of Kent, and has nothing to do with it whatsoever.
Not in Kent, Not a 'Town'
First, let's clear up the geography. Kentish Town is a vibrant district firmly within the London Borough of Camden, miles away from the county of Kent. It was once a small rural settlement in the parish of St Pancras but was swallowed by London's relentless expansion in the 19th century. Today, it's a quintessential London neighborhood, not an independent town. The 'town' in its name is a historical remnant from a time when it was a distinct village on the road out of the city.
The Mystery of the Name: A River or a Man?
So, if not Kent, where does the 'Kentish' part come from? Etymologists have debated two primary theories, both of which peel back layers of London's history. The most popular theory suggests the name is a corruption of 'Ken-ditch'. This refers to the 'bed of the River Ken'—the original name for the waterway we now know as the River Fleet. This now-subterranean river flows through the area, and its grassy banks, or 'ditch', likely gave the early settlement its name. The Domesday Book of 1086 records a manor in the area held by the Canons of St Paul's Cathedral, which supports the idea of an established pre-Norman settlement.
An alternative theory points not to a place, but to a person. In the 13th century, the area was held by a man named John of Kent (or 'de Kent'). It's plausible that the name simply derived from this prominent landowner, and any connection to the county is purely coincidental, stemming from the family's surname. Either way, the link is to a lost river or a medieval family, not the county of hops and oast houses.
A Common London Blind Spot
This historical quirk is a well-known piece of trivia for some, but a genuine shock for many others, including lifelong Londoners. The name is so convincing that people rarely question its origin, leading to a collective 'mind-blown' moment when they finally learn the truth.
"I've lived in or around London my entire life, passed through Kentish Town hundreds of times on the tube, and always just... assumed. It feels like finding out Shepherd's Bush has nothing to do with shepherds. It's one of those facts you can't believe you never thought to question."
This sentiment is common. It highlights how easily place names can create a powerful, yet entirely false, sense of history. The story of Kentish Town serves as a perfect reminder that London's map is a tapestry of forgotten rivers, ancient manors, and linguistic shifts, where things are not always as they seem.
Next time you see Kentish Town on the map, you can smile knowing its secret. It's not a piece of Kent lost in the capital, but a testament to London's own unique and often hidden history.