I think I read this here before, but I can’t be certain.
I am Irish, I live in the Republic of Ireland, we achieved independence from Britain in the early part of the last century.
I resent living in an island group called the “British Isles”.
Is there any other Internationally Recognised standard for the naming of this group of islands, that include Ireland, Britain, Isle of Mann, Scilly Isles, Hebrides, Shetlands etc…
If anyone could be of help, I’d be grateful.
Well, maybe you could use “Group=of-islands-surrounding-the-Irish-Sea” if it would make you feel better.
.
.
.
[sub]a little awkward[/sub]
Howdy GO,
Lets look at it like this. as a guess, I’d say the name originated from Empirical map makers that called the Area the “British Isles” seeing as Ireland was part of the Empire at that time.
They may call it The british Isles, but we do have the Irish Sea. 
Honestly, its rarely referred to as the British Isles anyway.
I think you have to distinguish between political divisions and geographic names. “British Isles” has been the geographical name for a long time, longer than the U.K. of Great Britain has existed. In any event, the problem may solve itself, if Tony Blair continues his devolution policies, and Scotland and Wales break away.
Canadians run into something similar - in popular usage, “America” is largely synnomous with the United States. If I’m abroad and say I’m from North America, people normally assume I’m an American. Rather than get in a snit about it, I just say “Canadian.” (There’s sometimes the next round, where the other person asks “Where’s that?”)
Besides, once the Royal Canadian Armoured Beaver Divisions (currently arming in secret in various locations across Canada) take over the U.S., the question will be irrelevant.
I would suspect that what the Republic of Ireland achieved independence from was the United Kingdom (currently the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, I don’t, offhand, know what the official title was before the RoI became independent). I don’t think the “British Isles” have any legal existence, it’s just a geographical term for Great Britain, Ireland, and surrounding other bits. (Cue irate protest from Isle of Man residents annoyed at being described as a “surrounding other bit”…)
The naming of this group of islands goes back a pretty long way - it was the Romans who started calling us Britannia, after all, and I suspect they conventionally referred to the group in terms of the island that was largest/closest to them/easiest to conquer. I’d be surprised, though, if there weren’t a (possibly archaic) native Irish or Scots Gaelic name for the island group. Unfortunately, I don’t know what it might be, and I suspect it’s not likely to be “internationally recognised”, at least in the sense that people hearing you use the term would realise immediately what you meant by it. Sorry.
Thanks to both of you,
rarely referred to as the british isles, i think not, even the BBC still calls these islands that.
I want a name that could be adopted as an international norm.
I don’t hate the british, i just hate being tarred with the same brush as them.
but i guess most of the people on these boards are americans?..and you all refer to anyone from this side of the atlantic as “Europeans”.
this name also holds no meaning for me, I am IRISH, not british or european, but thats off the point.
So, if anyone knows of a name i can use for the islands, please help.
A lot of us here in the US just call y’all “England.”
I don’t suppose that cheers you up much, though. 
How about Celtopia or The Emerald Isles (turnabout is fair play, no?)? 
Seriously, though, you’re going to have to deal with the fact that the naming convention of the many outweighs the naming convention of the few … or the one.
Well, you’re certainly not British.
To exclude yourself from “European,” however, is going to require a lot of fancy talking and we aren’t going to believe you, anyway.
The Celts were not an Irish invention (rather the other way around) and that ethnic group once dominated a huge swath of land–mostly Europe–from Britanny to the highlands of what is now Turkey. The Norse who provided a bit of blonde to the countryside were also European. Irish is an Indo-European language (and most of you speak English which is also Indo-European). Your current prevalent religions are European in development and basic association. Your form of government is rooted in European history–as is your form of education.
We all like to see ourselves as special, and there is nothing wrong with that. However, claiming that a few miles of saltwater somehow separates you completely from the entire culture and dominance of Europe is not going to work.
It works for us in the UK.
I would agree with tomndebb - and would just comment that “European/Irish” is another example of the difference between geographical and political subdivisions - “European” is a geographical description, “Irish” is a political description. They’re not contradictory, merely overlapping.
BTW, welcome to the Straight Dope. We’re not exclusively Yankee, although they predominate. Lots of others here - Canucks, Kiwis, Aussies, Irish, English, Dutch and Danes (plus the Icelander we dare not name).
Have fun!
see, if it works for the UK i’m sure it works for the Irish.
Most Irish would have no problem with being called European, but call an irishman a brit, and you will have an argument on your hands.
I recall one incident i saw in a holiday resort in spain, where one of those reps from the tourist bars was trying to entice people into his english themed nightspot.
he approached one group of tourists and asked them if they were english, they replied in the negative, and told them they were Irish. he said “same thing”, and was very quickly shot down and asked to retract his remark. the group of irish lads were quite offended.
i dont think americans can identify with the diverse ethnicity of europe, and how the different people have strong feelings for their own, and against another.
The point about the celts was well made but irrelevent, as after the decline of their great “empire” they ended up living only in the western extremes of europe, ie brittany, cornwall, wales, scotland, isle of man and ireland.
My impression was that the large island off the northwest coast of mainland Europe, on which the city of London now sits, was originally called “Great Britain” to distinguish it from the nearby peninsula called “Lesser Britain” (now Brittany).
This was when both lands were inhabited only by Celtic people who were called “British”.
This says nothing about the other large island further west, on which the city of Dublin now sits. I’m not sure whether the Celtic people who lived there were considered “British” or not. However, island-groups are often named for the largest island in them, so it is logical to name the whole group under discussion the “British Isles”.
Only later did invaders from the east bring the name “Angla”. So the name of Britain predates the English and their empire-building. Said empire should have been called the “English Empire”. OTOH, at the time the English ruled both Great Britain and Ireland, so I can understand why they used the name Britain, even though it may not have been accurate. But it confused “resident of the British Isles” with “resident of the English Empire” which later led to the kind of confusion described by glass onion.
I hereby nominate ‘UKer’ as a name for a resident of the UK.
BTW, DO the Irish consider themselves “European”?
I suspect that the English do NOT; when I broached the subject with an English relative in London, she practically had kittens. Something about being part of a larger “federal state” didn’t agree with her, though I suspect the problem lay more with EU institutions perceived as undemocratic than with the mere idea of membership in the Union.
England: culturally disctinct, half in and half out of a larger grouping; the Quebec of Europe.
Also, it’s not a good idea in England to refer to the major European cntinental landmass as “the mainland”.
I (a Canadian) would refer to both English and Irish as European, yes.
Do Icelanders consider themselves “European”? What about Greenlanders?
You might want to do a little research on this topic.
How about “Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Some Other Stuff?” Think it’ll catch on?
I agree with you, Onion. It’s always kinda annoyed me to see Ireland lumped together with Britain. It’s not like the English ever did Ireland any favors…and if anyone doubts that statement I’ll refer them to Seumas MacManus’ excellent “History of the Irish Race”, or any other decently researched history of the region.
Isn’t it about time the Irish and Scots forget about those old religious differences and make common cause against the Sassenach despoilers of their ancient Celtic culture?
Since the name British is originally Celtic (unless it’s derived from an ancient Roman named “Brutus” as was once believed in Shakespeare’s time), 'tis no insult to the Celts to be called British — just for the love of God don’t ever say “English” when you mean “British”! This may not mollify our Glass Onion, though, since the Irish are Goidelic, a different branch of Celts from the British of old, who were Brythonic, and whose descendants now populate Wales and Brittany. Good point you’ve got there, G.O..
I have gotten in trouble with my Scottish friends for reminding them of this, but the fact is that Scot originally was synonymous with Irish. Caledonia wasn’t called Scotland until the Irish (Scots) moved there from Ireland. The name Scot itself (according to Seaumus McManus’s estimable History of the Irish Race) came from Pharaonic Egypt. Apparently the Pharaoh’s daughter Scota married into the ancestral Celtic people and lent her name to them. Trying to find an actual Egyptian etymology for Scota, I came upon the Egyptian goddess Sekhet. In the ancient Egyptian language, you have to look at only the consonants. The consonants of S-Kh-T and Scota match up fairly well. Who knows if there isn’t a wee nugget of truth concealed within these old legends…
Please ignore my idiotic post above. Thank you.
Please ignore my idiotic post above. Thank you.
Would you believe, The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland? (The name was changed in 1927.)
Or more specifically, the archipelago of which Great Britain is the largest island. (Note: the Channel Islands are not part of the British Isles; they form a distinct archipelago.) But yes, strictly a geographic convenience.
Yes to “Britannia”, although I’m not totally sure they would have called the group “Insulae Britannicae”. In fact, they had a distinct name for the island of Ireland—“Hibernia”, which more-or-less means “Winterland”. And as far as the “easiest to conquer” bit goes, they never made it into Scotia and had a hell of a time in Cambria.
I think there is confusion when you ask people if they’re ‘European’, because we have the ‘continent’ (well it’s not a separate landmass…) of Europe.
Britain and Ireland are certainly part of that. (How else could Ireland keep winning the Eurovision Song Contest?!)
However there is also the European Union. At present this is a trade alliance, including both Britain and Ireland, with some political legal ties. But there is always talk of closer agreement at Government level, which is alarming to some people.
But geographically or politically, both Britain and Ireland are part of Europe.
How about calling them the ‘Celtic Isles’ or ‘Gaelic Isles’? Then the Saxon and Norman types can feel oppressed by the name.
Unfortunately, this idea has little chance of catching on. I think the only internationally accepted name is ‘British Isles’. Shame about that, but there it is.