"England" or "United Kingdom"

[Glasgia]

And still he can't cut be arsed his mullet?

As for England, I propose that England be divided into Northumbria, Mercia, Essex, East Anglia, Kent, Sussex, and Wessex, with borders defined according to the consensus following the defeat of Offa of Mercia.

I think you're missing a few counties there.

They're not counties...

I recommend we leave you Sassenachs with the four earldoms and a few swords. You'll find a new and interesting way to divide yourselves soon enough.

[Edward Richtofen]

Great Britain

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

I think you're missing a few counties there.

They're not counties...

I recommend we leave you Sassenachs with the four earldoms and a few swords. You'll find a new and interesting way to divide yourselves soon enough.

The English are the master of dividing, we divided William Wallace and the Middle East.

[Glasgia]

They're not counties...

I recommend we leave you Sassenachs with the four earldoms and a few swords. You'll find a new and interesting way to divide yourselves soon enough.

The English are the master of dividing, we divided William Wallace and the Middle East.

And the Vikings divided Aella, so you're not the only ones doing the dividing.

[Imperializt Russia]

I think you're missing a few counties there.

They're not counties...

Huh, cool.
Thanks for the impromptu history lesson.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

The English are the master of dividing, we divided William Wallace and the Middle East.

And the Vikings divided Aella, so you're not the only ones doing the dividing.

We perfected the art of dividing, perhaps not as much as the Japanese, though; they are the master of dividing themselves, indeed, they have made it an art.

[Olivaero]

I think you're missing a few counties there.

They're not counties...

I recommend we leave you Sassenachs with the four earldoms and a few swords. You'll find a new and interesting way to divide yourselves soon enough.

I'm pretty sure some of those are counties.

[Alaizia]

Something you took from the Romans none less. And that french Napoleon took from you.

[Glasgia]

And the Vikings divided Aella, so you're not the only ones doing the dividing.

We perfected the art of dividing, perhaps not as much as the Japanese, though; they are the master of dividing themselves, indeed, they have made it an art.

That's pretty well divided.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

They're not counties...

I recommend we leave you Sassenachs with the four earldoms and a few swords. You'll find a new and interesting way to divide yourselves soon enough.

I'm pretty sure some of those are counties.

Some of them are now the names of counties...though who wouldn't want to have Essex out of their hand?

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

We perfected the art of dividing, perhaps not as much as the Japanese, though; they are the master of dividing themselves, indeed, they have made it an art.

That's pretty well divided.

I guess we still have a long way to go.

[Glasgia]

They're not counties...

I recommend we leave you Sassenachs with the four earldoms and a few swords. You'll find a new and interesting way to divide yourselves soon enough.

I'm pretty sure some of those are counties.

And also Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which is what NPR was referring to.

[Olivaero]

I'm pretty sure some of those are counties.

And also Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which is what NPR was referring to.

Oh okay, sorry missed a bit of the context I think.

[Marcurix]

England isn't a sovereign nation, it is a region that denotes an area of a larger entity. It's a pretty simply concept to get.

[Muriburiland]

Fun fact, I believe Wessex = West Saxons, Essex = East Saxons, Sussex = South Saxons, Middlesex = Middle Saxons.

Anyway they should actually reimplement Danelaw. After all we Norsemen are the best in the world.

[Glasgia]

Fun fact, I believe Wessex = West Saxons, Essex = East Saxons, Sussex = South Saxons, Middlesex = Middle Saxons.

Anyway they should actually reimplement Danelaw. After all we Norsemen are the best in the world.

First part = True.
Second part = False.

You only scored a B on this exam, please revise and we can let you re-sit the test later.

[Muriburiland]

Fun fact, I believe Wessex = West Saxons, Essex = East Saxons, Sussex = South Saxons, Middlesex = Middle Saxons.

Anyway they should actually reimplement Danelaw. After all we Norsemen are the best in the world.

First part = True.
Second part = False.

You only scored a B on this exam, please revise and we can let you re-sit the test later.

I have never seen more perfect physical specimens, tall as date palms, blond and ruddy... - Ahmad ibn Fadlan.

[Arglorand]

First part = True.
Second part = False.

You only scored a B on this exam, please revise and we can let you re-sit the test later.

I have never seen more perfect physical specimens, tall as date palms, blond and ruddy... - Ahmad ibn Fadlan.

Didn't he follow that up with a description of their general overall failure at mental capability?

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

So yes, England, where did it come from, why is it here, and where will it go?

[The Archregimancy]

Except it isn't.

"Britain" - or the Welsh form 'Prydain' - long predates the English, true; it's first attested in written form by the Greek writer Pytheas of Massalia in the 4th century BC.

But it's not derived from the name of the islands as a whole, but rather means something roughly along the lines of "land of the Britons/Pritani" (precise etymology disputed). This is why, after various late Classical / early medieval migrations, we have a Great Britain (the island of the same name) and a Little Britain (not a comedy programme, but rather Brittany).

The crucial clue that the name has absolutely nothing to do with the Irish, though, is that the original form begins with a "P". Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Celtic languages of Britain and Ireland will recognise why any relation to Irish (or Scots) Gaelic is impossible, and why the word must have a Common Brittonic origin from what's now Great Britain, with no real connection to Ireland.

Except, of course, that St. Patrick was Welsh.

St. Patrick was more likely Romano-British, Welsh not existing as an identifiable culture until labelled as such by the Saxons years after the loss of independent Cumbric territories.

Anyway, I'd like to point out the "Pryten" was in fact likely the name that the Picts attributed to themselves. Pytheas, in the fourth century BC, is of course one of the earliest travellers to come to Britain. Sailing there, he claimed to have circumnavigated the isles. However, we can attribute his voyage to that of Scotland due to many of his descriptions of the islands. Importantly, he named them as cold and frosty - encountering frozen waters - despite starting his journey in the early spring: Suggesting he did not have a representation of the warmer southern coasts. Pytheas' discovery of the isle of Thule, usually placed as Norway, would allow for his return round the southern edge of the isle to be instead replaced by an exploration of the North German coasts - Referred to as distinct from most people of Britain. Having travelled around the Iberian peninsula; explored Britain up the Irish Sea, through the Hebrides and up to "Orkas"; then across to Norway; we can then assume that Pytheas' descriptions of the British in fact refer to the inhabitants of Scotland - The Picts.

Knowing this, Pytheas' labelling of "Pretania" seems to have no basis or written justification - Unless it were to be the name with which the natives identified themselves. Such a theory would be supported by the Gaelic "Cruithne", as they called the Picts, generally accepted as a Q-Celtic variation of the Brythonnic names for the Picts - Names such as Qritani, which could very ealised be derived from "Pretani" or the "Pryten".

From this, I would conclude that "Pryten" was not the name of the Britons, but rather of their northern brothers and often their enemies. This would be enforced by the earlier naming of the island of Great Britain as "Albion", as by the Roman Avenius who most certainly did vist the southern areas of the isles.

It should be noted that most later Greco-Roman explorers or authors simply used the label applied by Prytheas rather than applying their own - Therefore the island came Britannia not from the Briton's choice but rather as use of the accepted terms.

I would have thought that following the bit about St. Patrick with a would have made it clear that I was joking. I'm fully aware of his origin as a kidnapped slave of Romano-British birth - and more likely from modern Cumbria rather than modern Wales.

As to the rest, it's a well-written post, and I'm genuinely consistently impressed with your posts - especially given how old you are (which I fully mean as praise, not condescension).

But, well, you're in serious danger here of lecturing a British archaeologist and university lecturer on the Classical etymology of the names of Britain and Ireland.

You're making an fair number of unverifiable - though by no means readily dismissible - assumptions about both Prytheas and the Picts; but let's take your argument fully at face value for the sake of discussion. I specifically said that "Prydain" most likely had a Common Brittonic origin. The current plurality consensus that Pictish was most likely a P-Celtic Brythonic language that split from Common Brittonic in the Classical period. Indeed, that split between the Common Brittonic of the Romano-British and Pictish was likely exacerbated by the Roman conquest of Britain; before then, the languages were likely dialectical variants of each other. While Pictish was later replaced by the Q-Celtic Scots Gaelic, the influence of a P-Celtic Pictish substratum can still be seen on the verb structure of Scots Gaelic, which has clear affinities to Welsh.

We know notoriously little about the Pictish language, but it's from place names and personal names that we assume it was a P-Celtic language. Assuming this is correct, then there's nothing really in your post that substantially disagrees with my previous post. Whether "Prydain" or "Pryten", whether we're talking about the residents of the north of the island or the south of the island, the word has a Common Brittonic root - because Pictish likewise most likely had a Common Brittonic root; and, as you point out, was the name that residents of the island used to refer to themselves - but this is because the word was more or less universal to the entirety of the island, most of which was speaking closely related P-Celtic languages/dialects at the time of Prytheas.

But nice try to make it a solely and specifically Pictish usage.

As to "Albion", you're perhaps in danger of ignoring the point that Gaulish (which also used P- rather than Q-) was also a Celtic language, and that the proto-Celtic *Alb-ien most likely became the Gaulish name for the land of white cliffs across the Channel - and therefore the name used by early Classical writers in the Mediterranean who were far more likely to meet a Gaul than a Briton. In that sense, it's no surprise that "Albion" went out of vogue once the Romans conquered Britain, and started referring to the island by the name the locals called it, rather than the name the Gauls called it.

[Estruia]

St. Patrick was more likely Romano-British, Welsh not existing as an identifiable culture until labelled as such by the Saxons years after the loss of independent Cumbric territories.

Anyway, I'd like to point out the "Pryten" was in fact likely the name that the Picts attributed to themselves. Pytheas, in the fourth century BC, is of course one of the earliest travellers to come to Britain. Sailing there, he claimed to have circumnavigated the isles. However, we can attribute his voyage to that of Scotland due to many of his descriptions of the islands. Importantly, he named them as cold and frosty - encountering frozen waters - despite starting his journey in the early spring: Suggesting he did not have a representation of the warmer southern coasts. Pytheas' discovery of the isle of Thule, usually placed as Norway, would allow for his return round the southern edge of the isle to be instead replaced by an exploration of the North German coasts - Referred to as distinct from most people of Britain. Having travelled around the Iberian peninsula; explored Britain up the Irish Sea, through the Hebrides and up to "Orkas"; then across to Norway; we can then assume that Pytheas' descriptions of the British in fact refer to the inhabitants of Scotland - The Picts.

Knowing this, Pytheas' labelling of "Pretania" seems to have no basis or written justification - Unless it were to be the name with which the natives identified themselves. Such a theory would be supported by the Gaelic "Cruithne", as they called the Picts, generally accepted as a Q-Celtic variation of the Brythonnic names for the Picts - Names such as Qritani, which could very ealised be derived from "Pretani" or the "Pryten".

From this, I would conclude that "Pryten" was not the name of the Britons, but rather of their northern brothers and often their enemies. This would be enforced by the earlier naming of the island of Great Britain as "Albion", as by the Roman Avenius who most certainly did vist the southern areas of the isles.

It should be noted that most later Greco-Roman explorers or authors simply used the label applied by Prytheas rather than applying their own - Therefore the island came Britannia not from the Briton's choice but rather as use of the accepted terms.

I would have thought that following the bit about St. Patrick with a would have made it clear that I was joking. I'm fully aware of his origin as a kidnapped slave of Romano-British birth - and more likely from modern Cumbria rather than modern Wales.

As to the rest, it's a well-written post, and I'm genuinely consistently impressed with your posts - especially given how old you are (which I fully mean as praise, not condescension).

But, well, you're in serious danger here of lecturing a British archaeologist and university lecturer on the Classical etymology of the names of Britain and Ireland.

You're making an awful lot of unverifiable assumptions about both Prytheas and the Picts; but let's take your argument at face value for the sake of discussion. I specifically said that "Prydain" most likely had a Common Brittonic origin. The current plurality consensus that Pictish was most likely a P-Celtic Brythonic language that split from Common Brittonic in the Classical period. Indeed, that split between the Common Brittonic of the Romano-British and Pictish was likely exacerbated by the Roman conquest of Britain; before then, the languages were likely dialectical variants of each other. While Pictish was later replaced by the Q-Celtic Scots Gaelic, the influence of a P-Celtic Pictish substratum can still be seen on the verb structure of Scots Gaelic, which has clear affinities to Welsh.

We know notoriously little about the Pictish language, but it's from place names and personal names that we assume it was a P-Celtic language. Assuming this is correct, then there's nothing really in your post that substantially disagrees with my previous post. Whether "Prydain" or "Pryten", whether we're talking about the residents of the north of the island or the south of the island, the word has a Common Brittonic root - because Pictish likewise most likely had a Common Brittonic root; and, as you point out, was the name that residents of the island used to refer to themselves - but this is because the word was more or less universal to the entirety of the island, most of which was speaking closely related P-Celtic languages/dialects at the time of Prytheas.

But nice try to make it a solely and specifically Pictish usage.

As to "Albion", you're perhaps in danger of ignoring the point that Gaulish (which also used P- rather than Q-) was also a Celtic language, and that the proto-Celtic *Alb-ien most likely became the Gaulish name for the land of white cliffs across the Channel - and therefore the name used by early Classical writers in the Mediterranean who were far more likely to meet a Gaul than a Briton. In that sense, it's no surprise that "Albion" went out of vogue once the Romans conquered Britain, and started referring to the island by the name the locals called it, rather than the name the Gauls called it.

Arch, I don't know how you're able to retain so much information.

[Conscentia]

Great Britain

But that leaves out Northern Ireland.

[The Blaatschapen]

I would have thought that following the bit about St. Patrick with a would have made it clear that I was joking. I'm fully aware of his origin as a kidnapped slave of Romano-British birth - and more likely from modern Cumbria rather than modern Wales.

As to the rest, it's a well-written post, and I'm genuinely consistently impressed with your posts - especially given how old you are (which I fully mean as praise, not condescension).

But, well, you're in serious danger here of lecturing a British archaeologist and university lecturer on the Classical etymology of the names of Britain and Ireland.

You're making an awful lot of unverifiable assumptions about both Prytheas and the Picts; but let's take your argument at face value for the sake of discussion. I specifically said that "Prydain" most likely had a Common Brittonic origin. The current plurality consensus that Pictish was most likely a P-Celtic Brythonic language that split from Common Brittonic in the Classical period. Indeed, that split between the Common Brittonic of the Romano-British and Pictish was likely exacerbated by the Roman conquest of Britain; before then, the languages were likely dialectical variants of each other. While Pictish was later replaced by the Q-Celtic Scots Gaelic, the influence of a P-Celtic Pictish substratum can still be seen on the verb structure of Scots Gaelic, which has clear affinities to Welsh.

We know notoriously little about the Pictish language, but it's from place names and personal names that we assume it was a P-Celtic language. Assuming this is correct, then there's nothing really in your post that substantially disagrees with my previous post. Whether "Prydain" or "Pryten", whether we're talking about the residents of the north of the island or the south of the island, the word has a Common Brittonic root - because Pictish likewise most likely had a Common Brittonic root; and, as you point out, was the name that residents of the island used to refer to themselves - but this is because the word was more or less universal to the entirety of the island, most of which was speaking closely related P-Celtic languages/dialects at the time of Prytheas.

But nice try to make it a solely and specifically Pictish usage.

As to "Albion", you're perhaps in danger of ignoring the point that Gaulish (which also used P- rather than Q-) was also a Celtic language, and that the proto-Celtic *Alb-ien most likely became the Gaulish name for the land of white cliffs across the Channel - and therefore the name used by early Classical writers in the Mediterranean who were far more likely to meet a Gaul than a Briton. In that sense, it's no surprise that "Albion" went out of vogue once the Romans conquered Britain, and started referring to the island by the name the locals called it, rather than the name the Gauls called it.

Arch, I don't know how you're able to retain so much information.

He stores it at Google.

[Mike the Progressive]

Arch, I don't know how you're able to retain so much information.

He stores it at Google.

He's an archaeologist, so he doesn't use google. He uses a notebook.

[Risottia]

He's an archaeologist, so he doesn't use google. He uses a notebook.

Clay tablets, actually. He's fond of them since the times when he used to stroll along with Enkidu.