4 ms·
It wasn't the English empire it was the British Empire. It's quite important not to confuse that given the history of prominent Scottish trading firms such as
by Lio 8y ago
It wasn't the English empire it was the British Empire.
It's quite important not to confuse that given the history of prominent Scottish trading firms such as Jardine Matheson.
- krageon 8y agoWhile I recognise it's an important local issue, globally I don't think Scotland is seen as materially different from Britain.
- Lio 8y agoI think you've missed the point. Scotland is a sub-set of Britain so that would be actually fine but... The grand parent didn't conflate Scotland and Britain. They conflated an English Empire with the British Empire. England is a different sub-set of the British Isles. Much of the commodities trade in South East Asia during the period referred to was controlled by powerful Scottish firms. To talk about an "English Empire" like that is not a "local issue" it's just factually incorrect.
- Jaruzel 8y agoThere was never an English Empire. However, it seems an ongoing trait of non British people (mainly Americans) to call our nice little set of islands and territories 'England'. Most notably is constant use of the title 'The Queen of England' - There hasn't been a Monarch of just England since before 1603. To counter, maybe us Brits should start pretending that New York in't part of the USA, or that there are only 9 federal regions (take your pick which one should no longer belong!). Summary: Stop calling Britain 'England'.
- RugnirViking 8y agoOf course, it's not actually wrong to call her the queen of england any more than its not wrong to call her the queen of canada or australia - it's part of her title, just not her entire job. It would be just as incorrect to call her queen of the UK or queen of great britain. Yeah I know its a bit nitpicky and less of an issue but there you go :-)
- dragonwriter 8y ago> Of course, it's not actually wrong to call her the queen of england Yes, it is. > any more than its not wrong to call her the queen of canada or australia - it's part of her title, Queen of Canada is one of her titles. Queen of Australia is one of her titles. Queen of England is not (Queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is.)
- RugnirViking 8y agoI'm not making much of a 'technical' argument for the rules as written but more one of convenience - I think what im getting at here is that while the act of union means that its a single kingdom, its relatively useless to suggest that she is not the queen of england because the title that gives her that power also gives her more power over other areas, when she also has more power than that title alone gives her - that line of thinking almost seems to lead to the idea that it would be wrong to suggest any specific title without listing every single one? Something along the lines of the following: If somebody asks me "who is the queen of scotland" I would answer the question - I assume that the asker is not asking about a specific title that was removed in 1707 but instead they want to inquire about the current monarch that holds control over that territory I mean of course my thought process here is a bit rambly but I think you get where im going.
- tomjakubowski 8y agoI suppose that asking, "Who is the queen of Scotland?" is a bit like asking, "Who is the president of Texas?".
- alistairSH 8y agoAnd all Americans are okay with being called Texans? England and Scotland are subsets of Great Britain, both physically (on the island named Great Britain) and politically (both countries within the UK).
- hrktb 8y agoI stand corrected