In the event that..... - Page 3

Alex McKee · 15-04-2008, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northumbrian

But again, bit daft calling Wales a kingdom if it has a prince.

Don't be silly. The word Kingdom is derived from Dominion, a placed ruled, and King, a ruler. Literally a place ruled by a King. The reason Wales has a Prince now is because it was absorbed into England as a province.

If such a huge constitutional change as Scotland terminating it's part in the Union occurred, I feel quite sure that Wales would be recognised a Kingdom and that the Queen would become the Queen of England and Wales.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northumbrian

Maybe we should have a referendum in this new state to establish it's name. Obviously highly likely it would end up being called England because there's loads of English people... but hey, that's democracy!

You forget that there would probably be a campaign to name it JediLand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northumbrian

In that case, I'll call it 'England' for short.

The Americans already do call us England.

BonnieDundee · 15-04-2008, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northumbrian

But again, bit daft calling Wales a kingdom if it has a prince.

Maybe we should have a referendum in this new state to establish it's name. Obviously highly likely it would end up being called England because there's loads of English people... but hey, that's democracy!

The Prince of Wales is just a title like the Duke of York, I don't believe it entails any rulership of Wales. That lapsed after the real ones were bumped off by Edward I.

Alex McKee · 15-04-2008, 05:44 AM

Yep, correct.

Northumbrian · 15-04-2008, 05:35 PM

But if the name is changed to United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, how can we be 'British'? The Britain part has gone.

I think we should be called 'Ukites'. This of course rhymes with something a little vulgar.

Eurosceptic Atlanticist · 15-04-2008, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northumbrian

But if the name is changed to United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, how can we be 'British'? The Britain part has gone.

How? England and Wales also form part of 'Britain'.

Northumbrian · 16-04-2008, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist

How? England and Wales also form part of 'Britain'.

You're getting confused between the geographical feature and the political entity. Do you think an Englishman prior to 1707 would have called himself British, just because his nation was on that island? Do you think a Scotsman following independence would call himself British, because his nation lies partly on the island?

Do you call yourself European, because geographically you're in Europe?

Alex McKee · 17-04-2008, 08:35 AM

England and Wales together would still occupy far more of Great Britain, this island, than Scotland. It would, therefore, be perfectly acceptable to call ourselves Britons.

Just as the United States of America occupies a large area of North America and call themselves Americans.

Northumbrian · 17-04-2008, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex McKee

England and Wales together would still occupy far more of Great Britain, this island, than Scotland. It would, therefore, be perfectly acceptable to call ourselves Britons.

Just as the United States of America occupies a large area of North America and call themselves Americans.

What a load of nonsense! I'll call myself after the name of the country I live in - not an island, if you don't mind.

And to compound your nonsense, Canada occupies more of North America than the USA, but they don't call themselves American.

Oh for a sensible debate!

C_steam · 17-04-2008, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ranter

Yes a great idea.Maybe we could take this a bit further and "ask" everyone to return to their country of birth.

didn't that happen once before - around 2000 years ago?

And we're still living with the consequences!

Eurosceptic Atlanticist · 17-04-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex McKee

England and Wales together would still occupy far more of Great Britain, this island, than Scotland. It would, therefore, be perfectly acceptable to call ourselves Britons.

Just as the United States of America occupies a large area of North America and call themselves Americans.

Precisely.

15-04-2008, 05:44 AM	#23 (permalink)
Alex McKee Moderator Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Gloucester Posts: 6,223	Yep, correct. __________________ Anything I post on this website is my personal opinion and not necessarily my professional opinion (unless stated as such) nor is an opinion necessarily shared by any committee or group I am affiliated with. Users on Ignore list: None. Please click one of these once a day: http://gloucesterr.myminicity.com/tra

17-04-2008, 08:35 AM	#27 (permalink)
Alex McKee Moderator Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Gloucester Posts: 6,223	England and Wales together would still occupy far more of Great Britain, this island, than Scotland. It would, therefore, be perfectly acceptable to call ourselves Britons. Just as the United States of America occupies a large area of North America and call themselves Americans. __________________ Anything I post on this website is my personal opinion and not necessarily my professional opinion (unless stated as such) nor is an opinion necessarily shared by any committee or group I am affiliated with. Users on Ignore list: None. Please click one of these once a day: http://gloucesterr.myminicity.com/tra

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

15-04-2008, 05:35 PM	#24 (permalink)
Northumbrian Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, England Posts: 489	But if the name is changed to United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, how can we be 'British'? The Britain part has gone. I think we should be called 'Ukites'. This of course rhymes with something a little vulgar.