Quote Originally Posted by Aedilred View Post
This is the standard definition but I have become increasingly sceptical about the use of the term "country" to define the internal divisions, not least because it doesn't seem consistent with general usage elsewhere (we don't refer to Sicily or Aragon or Brittany as "countries", for instance).

Spoiler: Waffle
Show
Really I think the most appropriate term might be "region", in practical terms. As countries or states the Kingdoms of England and Scotland were each abolished in 1707 and the Kingdom of Ireland in 1801. Wales had been a part of the Kingdom of England for centuries previously. Northern Ireland is, I believe, legally a "province". If Wales is to be included on the basis of the largely titular Principality then I feel there is a strong argument that Cornwall should be too.

Nor are any of the four really "nations". There is no ethno-linguistic homogeneity in any of them, even excluding 20th-century immigration from consideration: each has at least two "native" languages ("native" in this instance taken as having been spoken in the region since the creation of the UK). Culturally the Lowlands probably have more in common with the English south than they do with the outer Isles or the Shetlands; Monmouthshire more in common with Gloucestershire than with Powys, and most of rural England more in common with rural Wales or Scotland than with London. (Ironically the most culturally consistent part of the UK might be NI, but then again, lol.)

But then I fear this might be one of the curses of this country, to endlessly debate its own nature rather than doing anything useful.
I believe the correct term is "administrative division". This use of "country" is analogous to how the USA has similarly misused the word "state" to mean "administrative division"