If the Scots succeed in their bid to secede from the United Kingdom they'll be called Scotland, with the Queen as Head of State. What will the remnant be?
It's still a kingdom because we have the monarchy too, but it's no longer a united kingdom. England is historically a country as is Scotland, but Wales is historically a Principality and Northern Ireland is historically a Province. England is the only country left so we're no longer a United Kingdom.
That means we're the Kingdom of ... something. It's no longer "Great Britain and", because Great Britain is the name of the island that includes Scotland. I don't know any single word that means "England and Wales".
Which reduces the choice to just one: The Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It's admittedly shorter than what we are at the moment which is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but we'll be smaller anyway.
Which means that the two Internet Top Level Domains we have, .uk and .gb, are both inapplicable. We'll no longer be the UK and we won't be GB either. We can't be .kewni because that's more than two letters.
So - any ideas what we'll be called for short?
Renaming the country
Renaming the country
Long Live General Kim Jong-un, the Shining Sun!
Renaming the country
the Not-so-United Kingdom (NUK) ?
Or perhaps, DU, Disunited Kingdom?
Or perhaps, DU, Disunited Kingdom?
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Renaming the country
Counting chickens before hatching is never good.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Renaming the country
Alex Salmond is a great man, Scotland is a great country and I wish them every success in their bid for independence.
And Hawaii, while I'm at it.
And Hawaii, while I'm at it.
Long Live General Kim Jong-un, the Shining Sun!
Renaming the country
The queen would still remain queen of scotland so it's still a united kingdom in that sense.
Surprised you see england and wales as a mere remnant.:sneaky:
There is no single word for England and wales why should there be? Although for years england has been used to mean the whole of the united kingdom or great britain or british so that some think it synonymous. Most people don't actually know what the word british means or where it comes from but get hung up on the label.
Be interesting to see what happens. I'm in the middle of all this and I wouldn't like to predict. The biggest threat to the UK as a whole is ukip and the likelihood of us pulling out of europe.
Surprised you see england and wales as a mere remnant.:sneaky:
There is no single word for England and wales why should there be? Although for years england has been used to mean the whole of the united kingdom or great britain or british so that some think it synonymous. Most people don't actually know what the word british means or where it comes from but get hung up on the label.
Be interesting to see what happens. I'm in the middle of all this and I wouldn't like to predict. The biggest threat to the UK as a whole is ukip and the likelihood of us pulling out of europe.
Renaming the country
gmc;1444041 wrote: The queen would still remain queen of scotland so it's still a united kingdom in that sense.
If it's solely down to the monarch continuing as Head of State then Scotland has as much right to be called the "United Kingdom" as we south of the border have.
The monarch is Head of State and Queen of over twenty other countries as well, but none of those is called the United Kingdom. The UK didn't depend on those twenty countries sharing the same monarch for it to label itself the UK. We are not, you will agree, the United Kingdom of Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Australia, Canada &c, St Kitts and Nevis.
The term "United Kingdom" applied solely and exclusively to the union of two previously independent countries in 1707, it was never used before then despite the two countries having shared the same monarch since James VI/I and his court came south in 1603. I suggest that disabling the Act of 1706/7 revokes the name of the combined nation.
I can easily foresee Scotland remaining in Europe while the Little-Englander UKIP ultra-nationalist xenophobes and their Conservative colleagues, freed from Scottish rationalism, drag the Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland out into the nether darkness of being yet another US Dependency.
If it's solely down to the monarch continuing as Head of State then Scotland has as much right to be called the "United Kingdom" as we south of the border have.
The monarch is Head of State and Queen of over twenty other countries as well, but none of those is called the United Kingdom. The UK didn't depend on those twenty countries sharing the same monarch for it to label itself the UK. We are not, you will agree, the United Kingdom of Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Australia, Canada &c, St Kitts and Nevis.
The term "United Kingdom" applied solely and exclusively to the union of two previously independent countries in 1707, it was never used before then despite the two countries having shared the same monarch since James VI/I and his court came south in 1603. I suggest that disabling the Act of 1706/7 revokes the name of the combined nation.
I can easily foresee Scotland remaining in Europe while the Little-Englander UKIP ultra-nationalist xenophobes and their Conservative colleagues, freed from Scottish rationalism, drag the Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland out into the nether darkness of being yet another US Dependency.
Long Live General Kim Jong-un, the Shining Sun!
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Renaming the country
gmc;1444041 wrote: The queen would still remain queen of scotland so it's still a united kingdom in that sense.
Surprised you see england and wales as a mere remnant.:sneaky:
There is no single word for England and wales why should there be? Although for years england has been used to mean the whole of the united kingdom or great britain or british so that some think it synonymous. Most people don't actually know what the word british means or where it comes from but get hung up on the label.
Be interesting to see what happens. I'm in the middle of all this and I wouldn't like to predict. The biggest threat to the UK as a whole is ukip and the likelihood of us pulling out of europe.
You may be Interested In this forum gmc... looks like the renaming of Scotland has already been widely discussed on the web.
What should the UK be called after Scottish independence? - Politics - Digital Spy Forums
I can't see It happening... latest gov.poll shows 61 % percent want to reminan part of the UK. I was reading somewhere this week that every Scot would be looking at a tax rise to cover the cost.
30pc back Scottish independence as referendum phoney war ends - Telegraph
You may also want to look on this group:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Sal ... 5880093748
Surprised you see england and wales as a mere remnant.:sneaky:
There is no single word for England and wales why should there be? Although for years england has been used to mean the whole of the united kingdom or great britain or british so that some think it synonymous. Most people don't actually know what the word british means or where it comes from but get hung up on the label.
Be interesting to see what happens. I'm in the middle of all this and I wouldn't like to predict. The biggest threat to the UK as a whole is ukip and the likelihood of us pulling out of europe.
You may be Interested In this forum gmc... looks like the renaming of Scotland has already been widely discussed on the web.
What should the UK be called after Scottish independence? - Politics - Digital Spy Forums
I can't see It happening... latest gov.poll shows 61 % percent want to reminan part of the UK. I was reading somewhere this week that every Scot would be looking at a tax rise to cover the cost.
30pc back Scottish independence as referendum phoney war ends - Telegraph
You may also want to look on this group:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Sal ... 5880093748
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Renaming the country
With the global economy of the day, It really doesn't make a lot of sense for Scotland to rid itself of the union. no matter whether UK remains in the EU, or not, the economy of Scotland and the rest of the Isle are linked in so many ways, the only true result of a breakup would be a lot more politicians with their snouts in the till.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Renaming the country
LarsMac;1444056 wrote: With the global economy of the day, It really doesn't make a lot of sense for Scotland to rid itself of the union. no matter whether UK remains in the EU, or not, the economy of Scotland and the rest of the Isle are linked in so many ways, the only true result of a breakup would be a lot more politicians with their snouts in the till.
There are benefits to an Independent Scotland.
Scottish independence: key questions answered on the pros and cons | News | The Week UK
There are benefits to an Independent Scotland.
Scottish independence: key questions answered on the pros and cons | News | The Week UK
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Renaming the country
oscar;1444066 wrote: There are benefits to an Independent Scotland.
[/url]
:-2That clatter was me falling off my chair.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST:
The Union has served both countries well for 300 years. Devolution is a young experiment, and it is too soon to judge it.
Moot point over the last forty or so.
There is a gap between public spending in Scotland (£40bn) and revenue raised there (£27bn). A Scottish government would have to choose between higher taxes and cuts in public services.
Not so. Our contribution to the exchequer os higher than we get back without checking the figures it's something like we pay 11.5% and get back 8.7%
Scotland has more influence in Brussels as part of the UK than it could have as an independent state.
Too bad it looks like england will be leaving the eu.
The integrated British economy is more capable than an independent Scotland would be of meeting the challenges of globalisation. Likewise, having independent defence and security structures would overstrain Scotland's resources.
Scots should recognise that devolution has put England at a disadvantage, and should press for reforms to the way Westminster works. Satisfying English grievances would put the marriage back on an even keel. Divorce is unnecessary and would be painful.
So much for the notion that we are a burden then eh? With independence it would be the last time there will ever be a labour government in Westminster. It is true that england increasingly looks as though it won;t survive without us. It was a business partnership not a marriage if your partner is dragging you down shouldn't you consider a change?
Some of the press is now beginning to exhibit a real fear that there will be a yes vote.
[/url]
:-2That clatter was me falling off my chair.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST:
The Union has served both countries well for 300 years. Devolution is a young experiment, and it is too soon to judge it.
Moot point over the last forty or so.
There is a gap between public spending in Scotland (£40bn) and revenue raised there (£27bn). A Scottish government would have to choose between higher taxes and cuts in public services.
Not so. Our contribution to the exchequer os higher than we get back without checking the figures it's something like we pay 11.5% and get back 8.7%
Scotland has more influence in Brussels as part of the UK than it could have as an independent state.
Too bad it looks like england will be leaving the eu.
The integrated British economy is more capable than an independent Scotland would be of meeting the challenges of globalisation. Likewise, having independent defence and security structures would overstrain Scotland's resources.
Scots should recognise that devolution has put England at a disadvantage, and should press for reforms to the way Westminster works. Satisfying English grievances would put the marriage back on an even keel. Divorce is unnecessary and would be painful.
So much for the notion that we are a burden then eh? With independence it would be the last time there will ever be a labour government in Westminster. It is true that england increasingly looks as though it won;t survive without us. It was a business partnership not a marriage if your partner is dragging you down shouldn't you consider a change?
Some of the press is now beginning to exhibit a real fear that there will be a yes vote.
Renaming the country
You will pardon my commenting on a bit you quoted but... "The Union has served both countries well for 300 years"?
Scotland has been repeatedly and continuously ransacked by the English since the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the Union itself was a deliberate act of aggression against a defenceless neighbour after which the clearances followed in short order. Scots emigration to every corner of the world was a consequence. The outright theft of Scotland's oilfields is comment enough on the continued ransacking within living memory.
I can think of no aspect of life which the Union improved north of the border. The only people who have benefited, time and again, financially and culturally, have been the English. It's time to end the subordination.
Scotland has been repeatedly and continuously ransacked by the English since the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the Union itself was a deliberate act of aggression against a defenceless neighbour after which the clearances followed in short order. Scots emigration to every corner of the world was a consequence. The outright theft of Scotland's oilfields is comment enough on the continued ransacking within living memory.
I can think of no aspect of life which the Union improved north of the border. The only people who have benefited, time and again, financially and culturally, have been the English. It's time to end the subordination.
Long Live General Kim Jong-un, the Shining Sun!
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Renaming the country
gmc;1444071 wrote: :-2That clatter was me falling off my chair.
An Independent Scotland would depend on reclaiming the oil beds.
I think It was Blair who secretly made Scottish sea beds English by moving the boundaries. It took billions out of the Scottish economy. If challenged by Holyrood and successful, reclaiming the crown estates could see a viable Independent Scotland.
An Independent Scotland would depend on reclaiming the oil beds.
I think It was Blair who secretly made Scottish sea beds English by moving the boundaries. It took billions out of the Scottish economy. If challenged by Holyrood and successful, reclaiming the crown estates could see a viable Independent Scotland.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Renaming the country
Týr;1444075 wrote: You will pardon my commenting on a bit you quoted but... "The Union has served both countries well for 300 years"?
Scotland has been repeatedly and continuously ransacked by the English since the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the Union itself was a deliberate act of aggression against a defenceless neighbour after which the clearances followed in short order. Scots emigration to every corner of the world was a consequence. The outright theft of Scotland's oilfields is comment enough on the continued ransacking within living memory.
I can think of no aspect of life which the Union improved north of the border. The only people who have benefited, time and again, financially and culturally, have been the English. It's time to end the subordination.
Actually that's one of the myths that blurs the reality of what really happened. The clearances were the result of mainly Scottish landowners - one time clan chiefs who now claimed the land as their own - who wanted rid of the people who were now an economic burden and replace them with sheep highlanders found themselves forcibly shipped abroad by the very people who they thought were kin. If you want to read some racist rants have a look at what lowlanders had to say about the mainly catholic highlanders and the irish come to that. It's just nonsense to simply blame the english.
It wasn't just highland Scotland either it happened in the lowlands as well and , in England - with the enclosure acts and indeed all throughout europe. When marx coined the phrase property is theft what he was referring to was the practice in germany of powerful landowners claiming what was once common land just as they did in england where it took an act of parliament which could be bought quire easily if you bribed enough MP's. The last slaves in britain were the miners in fife who were not freed until 1799 - guess what nationality the mine owners were. Our sense of bitterness is aimed at the wrong people.
The act of union was not an act of aggression - where on earth did you get that idea from? It was a thoroughly cynical political ploy and passed as the result of bribes paid to the political establishment in scotland since when do you blame solely the one offering the bribe? Scots played a fairly active role in the glorious revolution not wanting a catholic king that believed in the divine right of kings any more than the english did.
Most recently the scottish government intervened to allow donald trump to build a golf course forcing people off the land to do so. It's just been announced they will be allowing housing development on the site of the battle of culloden. It's not just the english politicians that are a bunch of self serving crooks.
Scotland has been repeatedly and continuously ransacked by the English since the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the Union itself was a deliberate act of aggression against a defenceless neighbour after which the clearances followed in short order. Scots emigration to every corner of the world was a consequence. The outright theft of Scotland's oilfields is comment enough on the continued ransacking within living memory.
I can think of no aspect of life which the Union improved north of the border. The only people who have benefited, time and again, financially and culturally, have been the English. It's time to end the subordination.
Actually that's one of the myths that blurs the reality of what really happened. The clearances were the result of mainly Scottish landowners - one time clan chiefs who now claimed the land as their own - who wanted rid of the people who were now an economic burden and replace them with sheep highlanders found themselves forcibly shipped abroad by the very people who they thought were kin. If you want to read some racist rants have a look at what lowlanders had to say about the mainly catholic highlanders and the irish come to that. It's just nonsense to simply blame the english.
It wasn't just highland Scotland either it happened in the lowlands as well and , in England - with the enclosure acts and indeed all throughout europe. When marx coined the phrase property is theft what he was referring to was the practice in germany of powerful landowners claiming what was once common land just as they did in england where it took an act of parliament which could be bought quire easily if you bribed enough MP's. The last slaves in britain were the miners in fife who were not freed until 1799 - guess what nationality the mine owners were. Our sense of bitterness is aimed at the wrong people.
The act of union was not an act of aggression - where on earth did you get that idea from? It was a thoroughly cynical political ploy and passed as the result of bribes paid to the political establishment in scotland since when do you blame solely the one offering the bribe? Scots played a fairly active role in the glorious revolution not wanting a catholic king that believed in the divine right of kings any more than the english did.
Most recently the scottish government intervened to allow donald trump to build a golf course forcing people off the land to do so. It's just been announced they will be allowing housing development on the site of the battle of culloden. It's not just the english politicians that are a bunch of self serving crooks.
Renaming the country
gmc;1444111 wrote: Actually that's one of the myths that blurs the reality of what really happened. The clearances were the result of mainly Scottish landowners - one time clan chiefs who now claimed the land as their own - who wanted rid of the people who were now an economic burden and replace them with sheep highlanders found themselves forcibly shipped abroad by the very people who they thought were kin. If you want to read some racist rants have a look at what lowlanders had to say about the mainly catholic highlanders and the irish come to that. It's just nonsense to simply blame the english.
It wasn't just highland Scotland either it happened in the lowlands as well and , in England - with the enclosure acts and indeed all throughout europe. When marx coined the phrase property is theft what he was referring to was the practice in germany of powerful landowners claiming what was once common land just as they did in england where it took an act of parliament which could be bought quire easily if you bribed enough MP's. The last slaves in britain were the miners in fife who were not freed until 1799 - guess what nationality the mine owners were. Our sense of bitterness is aimed at the wrong people.
The act of union was not an act of aggression - where on earth did you get that idea from? It was a thoroughly cynical political ploy and passed as the result of bribes paid to the political establishment in scotland since when do you blame solely the one offering the bribe? Scots played a fairly active role in the glorious revolution not wanting a catholic king that believed in the divine right of kings any more than the english did.
Most recently the scottish government intervened to allow donald trump to build a golf course forcing people off the land to do so. It's just been announced they will be allowing housing development on the site of the battle of culloden. It's not just the english politicians that are a bunch of self serving crooks.
Why does the phrase "A Parcel of Rogues in a Nation" spring to mind
It wasn't just highland Scotland either it happened in the lowlands as well and , in England - with the enclosure acts and indeed all throughout europe. When marx coined the phrase property is theft what he was referring to was the practice in germany of powerful landowners claiming what was once common land just as they did in england where it took an act of parliament which could be bought quire easily if you bribed enough MP's. The last slaves in britain were the miners in fife who were not freed until 1799 - guess what nationality the mine owners were. Our sense of bitterness is aimed at the wrong people.
The act of union was not an act of aggression - where on earth did you get that idea from? It was a thoroughly cynical political ploy and passed as the result of bribes paid to the political establishment in scotland since when do you blame solely the one offering the bribe? Scots played a fairly active role in the glorious revolution not wanting a catholic king that believed in the divine right of kings any more than the english did.
Most recently the scottish government intervened to allow donald trump to build a golf course forcing people off the land to do so. It's just been announced they will be allowing housing development on the site of the battle of culloden. It's not just the english politicians that are a bunch of self serving crooks.
Why does the phrase "A Parcel of Rogues in a Nation" spring to mind
Renaming the country
gmc;1444111 wrote: Actually that's one of the myths that blurs the reality of what really happened. The clearances were the result of mainly Scottish landowners - one time clan chiefs who now claimed the land as their own - who wanted rid of the people who were now an economic burden and replace them with sheep highlanders found themselves forcibly shipped abroad by the very people who they thought were kin. If you want to read some racist rants have a look at what lowlanders had to say about the mainly catholic highlanders and the irish come to that. It's just nonsense to simply blame the english.
It wasn't just highland Scotland either it happened in the lowlands as well and , in England - with the enclosure acts and indeed all throughout europe. When marx coined the phrase property is theft what he was referring to was the practice in germany of powerful landowners claiming what was once common land just as they did in england where it took an act of parliament which could be bought quire easily if you bribed enough MP's. The last slaves in britain were the miners in fife who were not freed until 1799 - guess what nationality the mine owners were. Our sense of bitterness is aimed at the wrong people.
The act of union was not an act of aggression - where on earth did you get that idea from? It was a thoroughly cynical political ploy and passed as the result of bribes paid to the political establishment in scotland since when do you blame solely the one offering the bribe? Scots played a fairly active role in the glorious revolution not wanting a catholic king that believed in the divine right of kings any more than the english did.
Most recently the scottish government intervened to allow donald trump to build a golf course forcing people off the land to do so. It's just been announced they will be allowing housing development on the site of the battle of culloden. It's not just the english politicians that are a bunch of self serving crooks.
Reading the history of Scotland, it seems that most of the Scottish Lairds were pretty much self-serving crooks who sold out the common Scots. So nothing really has changed much over the centuries, except, perhaps the exchange rate.
It wasn't just highland Scotland either it happened in the lowlands as well and , in England - with the enclosure acts and indeed all throughout europe. When marx coined the phrase property is theft what he was referring to was the practice in germany of powerful landowners claiming what was once common land just as they did in england where it took an act of parliament which could be bought quire easily if you bribed enough MP's. The last slaves in britain were the miners in fife who were not freed until 1799 - guess what nationality the mine owners were. Our sense of bitterness is aimed at the wrong people.
The act of union was not an act of aggression - where on earth did you get that idea from? It was a thoroughly cynical political ploy and passed as the result of bribes paid to the political establishment in scotland since when do you blame solely the one offering the bribe? Scots played a fairly active role in the glorious revolution not wanting a catholic king that believed in the divine right of kings any more than the english did.
Most recently the scottish government intervened to allow donald trump to build a golf course forcing people off the land to do so. It's just been announced they will be allowing housing development on the site of the battle of culloden. It's not just the english politicians that are a bunch of self serving crooks.
Reading the history of Scotland, it seems that most of the Scottish Lairds were pretty much self-serving crooks who sold out the common Scots. So nothing really has changed much over the centuries, except, perhaps the exchange rate.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Renaming the country
oscar;1444106 wrote: An Independent Scotland would depend on reclaiming the oil beds.
I think It was Blair who secretly made Scottish sea beds English by moving the boundaries. It took billions out of the Scottish economy. If challenged by Holyrood and successful, reclaiming the crown estates could see a viable Independent Scotland.
It was blair, fairly blatant move IMO. The issue of the crown estates is one (OK I'm a cynic) that gets talked around - one of the amazing things is that we have allowed land stolen by a bunch of medieval warlords to persuade us that their descendants are entitled to keep what their ancestors took by force. Land title in scotland used to be known as feudal - now they call it simple. Leasehold is relatively rare but think what leawehold actually means - you can buy the land but it's still belongs to the feudal landlord who gets it back whether you want to give it back or not.
posted by larsmac
Reading the history of Scotland, it seems that most of the Scottish Lairds were pretty much self-serving crooks who sold out the common Scots. So nothing really has changed much over the centuries, except, perhaps the exchange rate.
Yep just about sums it up. Scots history is depressing, so much to be proud off and by the way it counts for nothing as our political establishment are more interested in making money.
posted by bryn mawr
Why does the phrase "A Parcel of Rogues in a Nation" spring to mind
Rabbie burns
The Corries - Parcel O'Rogues - YouTube
Mind you welsh history is equally depressing.
I think It was Blair who secretly made Scottish sea beds English by moving the boundaries. It took billions out of the Scottish economy. If challenged by Holyrood and successful, reclaiming the crown estates could see a viable Independent Scotland.
It was blair, fairly blatant move IMO. The issue of the crown estates is one (OK I'm a cynic) that gets talked around - one of the amazing things is that we have allowed land stolen by a bunch of medieval warlords to persuade us that their descendants are entitled to keep what their ancestors took by force. Land title in scotland used to be known as feudal - now they call it simple. Leasehold is relatively rare but think what leawehold actually means - you can buy the land but it's still belongs to the feudal landlord who gets it back whether you want to give it back or not.
posted by larsmac
Reading the history of Scotland, it seems that most of the Scottish Lairds were pretty much self-serving crooks who sold out the common Scots. So nothing really has changed much over the centuries, except, perhaps the exchange rate.
Yep just about sums it up. Scots history is depressing, so much to be proud off and by the way it counts for nothing as our political establishment are more interested in making money.
posted by bryn mawr
Why does the phrase "A Parcel of Rogues in a Nation" spring to mind
Rabbie burns
The Corries - Parcel O'Rogues - YouTube
Mind you welsh history is equally depressing.
Renaming the country
gmc;1444136 wrote:
Rabbie burns
The Corries - Parcel O'Rogues - YouTube
Mind you welsh history is equally depressing.
I've just played that back to back with the version by Steeleye Span that I'm more familiar with and I think you're right - it does work better that way.
As to the Welsh, they only pissed the English off for a hundred years or so - probably why the English only mildly dislike us
Rabbie burns
The Corries - Parcel O'Rogues - YouTube
Mind you welsh history is equally depressing.
I've just played that back to back with the version by Steeleye Span that I'm more familiar with and I think you're right - it does work better that way.
As to the Welsh, they only pissed the English off for a hundred years or so - probably why the English only mildly dislike us
Renaming the country
LarsMac;1444128 wrote: Reading the history of Scotland, it seems that most of the Scottish Lairds were pretty much self-serving crooks who sold out the common Scots. So nothing really has changed much over the centuries, except, perhaps the exchange rate.
Many of them were absentee landlords, many living at least some of the time in England. When considering the category - self-serving landed gentry profiting at the expense of their tenants and workers - the same treatment was meted out by these mainly absentee landlords wherever their property happened to be. Ireland, Scotland or England saw variations on the same theme. The Scots lairds may have called themselves Scottish but they lived off the backs of the poor just as much as their English equivalents.
Many of them were absentee landlords, many living at least some of the time in England. When considering the category - self-serving landed gentry profiting at the expense of their tenants and workers - the same treatment was meted out by these mainly absentee landlords wherever their property happened to be. Ireland, Scotland or England saw variations on the same theme. The Scots lairds may have called themselves Scottish but they lived off the backs of the poor just as much as their English equivalents.
Long Live General Kim Jong-un, the Shining Sun!
Renaming the country
Týr;1444172 wrote: Many of them were absentee landlords, many living at least some of the time in England. When considering the category - self-serving landed gentry profiting at the expense of their tenants and workers - the same treatment was meted out by these mainly absentee landlords wherever their property happened to be. Ireland, Scotland or England saw variations on the same theme. The Scots lairds may have called themselves Scottish but they lived off the backs of the poor just as much as their English equivalents.
They were still scots though and you can't ignore that fact no matter how much you want to make them honorary Englishmen.
posted by bryn mawr
I've just played that back to back with the version by Steeleye Span that I'm more familiar with and I think you're right - it does work better that way.
early protest song by the same poet.
The Corries --- A Man's A Man - YouTube
They were still scots though and you can't ignore that fact no matter how much you want to make them honorary Englishmen.
posted by bryn mawr
I've just played that back to back with the version by Steeleye Span that I'm more familiar with and I think you're right - it does work better that way.
early protest song by the same poet.
The Corries --- A Man's A Man - YouTube