Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Apolyton ExtraCivs Pack: English vs Brittish

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    England was not a world power

    Britain was, and should be the name used

    The argument can then quite happily move on to what Britain actually includes:

    ((((England+Wales)+Scotland)+Ireland)+Empire)

    [delete as appropriate]
    "An Outside Context Problem was the sort of thing most civilisations encountered just once, and which they tended to encounter rather in the same way a sentence encountered a full stop" - Excession

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Myrddin
      England was not a world power

      Britain was, and should be the name used
      Have to disagree with you there; England (at least under Cromwell, as the English Republic/Commonwealth) was very much a world power; it defeated the Scots at Dunbar, it defeated the Spanish at the Battle of the Dunes, it wrested Jamaica from Spain, defeated the Dutch and the Barbary Pirates at sea, and subdued Ireland. Not bad going for a country that had been through a civil war....
      Admittedly, it was not the world power that Great Britain/The United Kingdom was to become, but it was a world power.
      Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.

      ...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915

      Comment


      • #63
        And I have to disagree with you there; England did not wrest Jamaica from Spain but from Castile Do you get my point? I think Myrddin's post summed it up quite well. It should be British, not English, just like it should be Spain, not Castile (had the Spanish been included, that is).

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Jay Bee
          And I have to disagree with you there; England did not wrest Jamaica from Spain but from Castile Do you get my point? I think Myrddin's post summed it up quite well. It should be British, not English, just like it should be Spain, not Castile (had the Spanish been included, that is).

          Ummm...no. My point was that from a low point under James I and VI, and his son Charles I, and again under Charles's son Charles II, England under Cromwell, rather than the United Kingdom established by the Act Of Union, was a world power. If Cromwell had not been succeeded by his inadequate son, Richard, and perhaps by someone of more ability, such as Monk, perhaps a rather different historical timeline might have been generated. I think I understand your point about the regions of Spain (the geographic, not political entity) being subsumed within the political entity dominated by the Kingdom of Castile; but I would say that suppression of revolts such as the townships of Castile against the corregidores in 1519, in Aragon in the Germania, and the Catalan revolt in the 17th Century, simply show how much earlier and more centralized the state and the regions were under Charles V and his descendants.
          I believe most people would think that as a world power, it is the British to whom we should refer, as being more representative of the period during which lasting greatness was achieved, but it would be wrong to say that England was not a world power. It is however, inconceivable to me that the British Empire as we know it could have been founded without the assistance of the Scots, Welsh and Irish, as a cursory glance at the history of ex-Dominions would show.
          Vive la liberte. Noor Inayat Khan, Dachau.

          ...patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness towards anyone. Edith Cavell, 1915

          Comment


          • #65
            I think you have simplified the picture a bit. Under the Habsburgs, Castile and Aragon were not 'regions' but kingdoms -independent of each other- with the same king. Those revolts you mentioned occurred after the king failed to respect the local laws. Spain as a really centralized state occurred under the Bourbons.

            But getting back on-topic, I think I had misunderstood you before and apologize for that. I fully agree with the last paragraph of your posting. Nevertheless, I still see this England vs Britain debate as essentially similar to the Castile vs Spain one.

            Comment


            • #66
              I think this is the third or fourth time this topic has come up. Here's the reoccurring problem: Fraxis listed the civ's name as England; England is just a part of Great Britain (or the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland if you want to look at it that way) so the civ should really be called British and not English.

              So far the, nearly, universally agreed upon fix for this problem has been to replace Liz with Victoria and to rename it the British and not English civ. Personally, I am mystified how Fraxis could make such and ignorant and blatantly obvious mistake. I think Sid & company should be forced to read history books and be made to look at world maps until they can figure out country names and other simple things like that.
              Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

              Comment


              • #67
                As a matter of interest, does the 'English' civ use the city names 'Edinburgh' and 'Glasgow'?

                Comment

                Working...
                X