Dave, I absolutely agree with you. That is why I put "English Army" in quotes; I meant for this to be ironic. If I were speaking to you might sarcastically say "The English Army, quote, unquote." Maybe our writing and speaking causes even other English speaking people to not "get it." Most Americans who travel to Scotland will say when they get to Dundee, they start having problems understanding the language. I have problems understanding rural East Texans or "Oil Field" English. From this vantage point it seems the "English" claim all accomplishments of Britain. When I read English historians and journalists, they usually refer to a Welsh or Scottish accomplishment as British, which is true. But if it is an English accomplishment, it is refered to as "English." It just chaps me a bit. I read the Economists, created by a Scot, but many of the writers will make subtle untoward remarks about Scotland. The latest edition has a map with Scotland decapitated. Some times professors from Scottish Universities will make statements confusioning the distinctions Mark so well elucidated not long ago. Americans are hopeless, most are just now starting to find the origin of their surname. So many of the songs of the Brittish Army have lyrics alluding to "England," rather than Britain. The British singer who lives in America did the same thing in the lyrics to that song he wrote about MM when he applied it to Diana. When Americans go to "England" they a generally shocked by the obsession with social class, ad nauseum. Only the French are worse than the English. Then they will often add, "but it is not that way in Scotland, at least not as bad." To be fair, some Eastern United States states have "social registers" and are pretty hung up on social status and snobbery. And even in Texas the Daughter's of the Republic of Texas have tried to create their status as a sign of inherited social standing. If it is time for devolution, it is the business of the Scots, not mine, but I certainly understand it. I am certainly opposed to the separation of Texas, even though some make the point that it is the only state both energy and agriculturally independent. One major point I meant to make was that an enlightened policy, as advocated by Edmund Burke, toward the Colonies and there would never have been a violent separation. As it turned out, the former Colonies made good trading partners. The British wanted Southern cotton so Pres. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. It did not free a single slave but it did inhibit Britain from making a formal alliance with the Confederacy, a nation dominated by slavers. Had the Colonies stayed in the British Empire, the "English Army" would have to have stopped slavery by force of arms. At the time of the American Civil War the Southern Planting class were the most wealthy people in America. The vast wealth from the Industrial Revolution did not manifest, in the North, until the 1880's and 90's. ScotHeritage@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 12/11/99 6:17:23 PM Central Standard Time, > wlockhart@brooksdata.net writes: > > << These Ulster Scots were highly motivated to join George Washington, when > the latter and cohorts decided to take on the mightiest army on the globe, > the > "English Army", and sever ties with Hanoverian Britain. The Hanoverians could > have stopped this by allowing gentlemen like, Mr. Washington, into polite > English society. >> > > It was not The English Army, It was the british Army. The Kings Army. Which > included Irish, Welsh Scottish English and Highland, as well as the famed > Immigent Regiments. The reason I act so strongly to this remark is that we > of the United Kingdom but not of English birth, are very quick to agree that > it was the bloody sodding English who dominated India, ripped off the West > Indies, Imerial Bastards everyone of those bloody Limie sodders. > > We have all decicated ourselves here to, if nothing else, being honest with > ourseland a fact we Brits have to face is that we were Proudly Marching along > and building an empire because it was dam good for us too. As for the > American war of independence and Mr. Washington, not knowing what America > would become, it just was not worth removing resources from Flanders to win > back a colony that they could take back later. and I think you will find that > as in Culloden, about as many Colonists wanted to stay with King George as > were forced to rebel. > Dave > Oh and the Alamo, to which I had the privlidge to be invited to celebrate the > First Scottish day to be celebrated in America, (Their Decloration having > been taken from Our Decloration of Abroth April 06 1320) It was John > MacGregor who played the pipes as the Mexicans attacked, and if you check the > names at the Alamo, you will find over 85% were either directly from or > decendents of scots.