Maybe "lesser United States" or "East America", from a EU/European perspectiveBella Fortuna wrote:Let's just call it all "over there."

Maybe "lesser United States" or "East America", from a EU/European perspectiveBella Fortuna wrote:Let's just call it all "over there."
Geography cannot be divorced from politics.Red Celt wrote:OK, to answer your question...
When referring to England and Wales , "Great Britain" would be factually untrue. It would be like referring to the U.S.A. as North America, ignoring Canada. "Britain" is a shorthand for United Kingdom of Great Britain. So, again, it would be untrue.klr wrote:If/when Scotland gets its independence, would you object to someone who uses the term "Great Britain"? Or even "Britain" ...
The island of Ireland is the second-largest of the British Isles. This is true. It has been true for (at least) 2000 years, when the names first originated. If Ireland somehow stopped being one of the British Isles, when did this happen? If it did happen (it didn't), it would be for political reasons (separation from the U.K.) rather than geographical reasons... which is what I've said from the start.
This isn't about opinions. Sorry and all that, but it really isn't.
Officially, the position is that this island is not part of that group referred to as the British Isles, (although it isn't easy to dig that out from official documents).Animavore wrote:I don't think I've heard anyone in Ireland use the term. It's not even on our maps as that. I think the first place I've heard it used was on the BBC weather forecast.
Isn't "Prydein" a Pictish name?klr wrote:Hmmm ... as someone who protests (rightly) about the UK being confused with England, this is an odd perspective to hold.Red Celt wrote: ...
These group of islands, off the Western coast of Europe are called the British Isles. Not because they're all owned, controlled or been the possession of London, but because that's what they're called. The subsequent history of these isles have given Irish people a very understandable reason to reject that label, but facts aren't altered by wishes or opinions. Ireland is one of several British Isles and that would be true even if it hadn't been under the control of invaders from the largest British Isle.
If/when Scotland gets its independence, would you object to someone who uses the term "Great Britain"? Or even "Britain" ...
Just because the term "British Isles" dates all the way back to the Greek and Romans, doesn't mean it's valid usage anymore. There are plenty of geographical names that are no longer common currency for some reason or other.
That wasn't what Ptolemy was doing. He was labeling some islands. He had no interest in ownership. Your use of "British Isles" may well be what you're suggesting. History, however, predates you be a very long way. To (further) challenge what you said, it isn't "the place of origin of British people". These islands have seen a succession of invasions and settlement by people who wouldn't have claimed Britain as their origin. Indeed, the Bretagnes of Western France could make better claims as far as "Britishness" is concerned.Cormac wrote:Geography cannot be divorced from politics.
When did the people in England, Wales, and Scotland begin to refer to themselves as British?
The name "The British Isles" is intended to mean that these islands are inhabited and owned by British people, and indeed, that it is the place of origin of British people. It is a declaration of or recognition of ownership.
Officially?Cormac wrote:Officially, the position is that this island is not part of that group referred to as the British Isles, (although it isn't easy to dig that out from official documents).Animavore wrote:I don't think I've heard anyone in Ireland use the term. It's not even on our maps as that. I think the first place I've heard it used was on the BBC weather forecast.
Hah. That page answered the question:-Red Celt wrote:Officially?uhm... nah. Based on which (non-political) officials? Please provide a source.
Not the source for anyone's certainty, but here's Wikipedia's entry on The British Isles, just to show that I'm not inventing my own facts.
"Atlantic Arcipelago"Red Celt wrote:Hah. That page answered the question:-Red Celt wrote:Officially?uhm... nah. Based on which (non-political) officials? Please provide a source.
Not the source for anyone's certainty, but here's Wikipedia's entry on The British Isles, just to show that I'm not inventing my own facts.
"The term British Isles is controversial in Ireland,[8][13] where there are objections to its usage due to the association of the word British with Ireland.[14] The Government of Ireland does not use the term[15] and its embassy in London discourages its use.[16] As a result, Britain and Ireland is becoming a preferred description,[14][17][18] and Atlantic Archipelago is increasingly favoured in academia,[19][20][21][22] although British Isles is still commonly employed.[17]"
Politics, politics and more politics... dissociating itself from a truth purely because the phrase appears to show ownership, when it does no such thing.
Poor Ptolemy, taking flack because he didn't know that 2000 years later, a group of people would politically refuse the label of "British Isles" purely because it might make some inhabitants look as if they were the possession of other inhabitants. Silly old Greek-Egyptian, and him not being able to see into the future. Tsk!Svartalf wrote:and he did it from Egypt in complete ignorance of the people actually living there...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests