Tim May wrote: >Joe wrote at 2004-09-16 20:01:13 (+0100) > > Mark J. Reed wrote: > > > > > > > >Still, I feel the name England should be reserved to refer only to > > >the . . . what is it, technically, a state? . . . of England, > > >which is located on the island of Great Britain (why the > > >adjective, btw? Is or was there a Not-so-great Britain?), which > > >is part of the nation called the United Kingdom (of Great Britain > > >and Northern Ireland). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Generally we call the individual parts of the UK 'countries', but > > in legislation, I think they're usually 'parts'. And the > > 'not-so-great-Britain' is Brittany. > >England and Scotland are kingdoms, I think. Certainly they were >kingdoms before the Act of Union... Wales is a principality, and >Northern Ireland is a province. I'm not sure that there _is_ a >general term, unless Joe's right about 'part'. > > Well, England and Scotland aren't Kingdoms. The Act of Union dealt with that. Northern Ireland is all that remains of the ex-Kingdom of Ireland, though that was also stripped of its Kingdomhood in 1801. Wales mgith be a Principality, but Prince Charles has no actual power in Wales. So I'm not sure it can actually be called that.