Discussions
Back to Discussions

Very subtle question about the idea of "Britain" vs "England"

Ashamed_Fig4922
Hi everyone, I am having a quandary as per a title change I am considering for my PhD thesis, which is an English. So, for a bit of context, it's a thesis in humanities about the life and works of a foreign individual who lived for many years in London, the thesis itself focusing on the chapter of their life spent in London. It's important to notice that this person - despite never leaving London - had contacts all over Britain and Ireland (when Ireland was still under direct British rule). In Italian I chose as title "X in Inghilterra", as it would have been straight and simple. But translating into English more nuances are implied, and decided to chose "Britain" instead of "England", especially considering the broader cultural implications of "Britain". Yet I am aware that the word "Britain" is also not so common when it comes to indicating the idea of physical territory, and is often reserved for more specific use. I.e. you say "Politics in Britain", "Made in Britain", but I don't think I have ever heard sentences like "John went back to Britain after spending 7 years in New Zealand"- So thought about "X and Britain", considering Britain not just a physical place but also a metaphor for cultural exchanges. Would this title be correct or do you think I am actually overthinking and "X in England" would have sufficed? Or perhaps do you have other suggestions? TIA!

18 comments

Tornadoboy156•
I think you were fine either way. If you’re talking about this individual having lived in London, and his work took place exclusively there, I mean London is both in Britain AND England. If you reference his contacts elsewhere and referred to them as being all over Britain (meaning England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland collectively) and Ireland, then you’re fine there too.
Background_Phase2764•
Britain the political concept and Britain the geographic concept are slightly different but both exist.  X in England to me implies the content will be mostly limited to things involving only one of the countries that make up great Britain X in Britain implies a far broader scope in both the political and geographic context
wibbly-water•
> John went back to Britain after spending 7 years in New Zealand You absolutely do. This is 100% natural. England is the country of England. Britain usually is short for; The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireleand. It includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. But not the republic of Ireland. A more specific way to say this is "the UK". Other smaller islands can be a gray area, but all would flal within "The British Isles". Great Britain is just the big island. If you want to get specific, terms like UK, Great Britain and British Isle have slightly different meanings - and Britain can be short for each of them. But it absolutely can be, and regularly is, used as a place name.
Realistic-River-1941•
What dates are we talking about?
feetmeltthesnow•
Use 'in Britain'; 'and Britain' suggests it's about X's engagement with the political concept of Britain, which doesn't seem to be the case cf. studies of, say, 'Yeats and Britain'. 'England' is too limited for the geographical scope of what you describe, especially if X was not English and had nothing to do with English national identity. The 'United Kingdom' is a bit cold and bureaucratic for what you seem to want to convey. (And yes, I would talk about John's return to Britain!)
Mcby•
What time period specifically are you looking at? Given you mention that Ireland was under direct British rule (but not that it was considered part of Britain the political entity at the time) I assume 18th Century? If this is the case I would lean towards Britain rather than England, though "UK" or "the United Kingdom" may be one to consider as well—personally (as someone born in England and who's lived here most of their life) I refer to living in the UK much more than living in England. That being said, I would consider whether using either the UK or Britain may lead to confusion depending on what the status of Ireland was during the time period you're looking at, and be clear if you're using the modern definition of the era's one.
Crayshack•
Great Britain (sometimes shortened to "Britain") is the name of the largest island in the Isles (the archipelago). England is one of the kingdoms that is primarily located on Great Britain. So, in the case of what you're doing, both Britain and England make sense.
pixel_pete•
What time period did this person live in? If they were in Medieval times before the concept of the "United Kingdom" was formed, then using England might be more appropriate to show they were living specifically in the Kingdom of England. If they are more modern I don't think it matters as much. Britain is used informally to refer to the UK and it certainly includes England.
premium_drifter•
Britain is the island that contains England, Wales, Cornwall, and Scotland. England is one country on that island. the United Kingdom is that island plus Northern Ireland, the Isle of Mann and The Isle of Wight. possibly something else I'm forgetting
z_s_k•
You say this book is set when Ireland was still under direct British rule, i.e. before the 1920s. In that time people commonly referred to the whole UK as "England", a lot more than they do today. So "X in England" might well capture the cultural implications you're after in the dated language of that time. But "X in Britain" is also fine and "John went back to Britain after spending 7 years in New Zealand" sounds like a perfectly normal sentence to me.
ChristyMalry•
I would take the classic text 'Asterix in Britain' as your titular model.
EclipseHERO•
Britain itself is the main island that contains England, Scotland and Wales. Saying something like "John went back to Britain", while a correct statement, is too broad to specify specifically where. Was it England? Was it Scotland? Was it Wales? In a manner of speaking if you're generalising it's fine because most people typically use "British" as a Synonym for "English" so they're likely to understand. However it's more likely that you'll draw a native's mild annoyance for it as some people typically have a stick up their butt about it.
Ippus_21•
Great Britain is the island that includes Scotland and Wales. British/Britain would historically refer to the British Empire as a political and cultural entity prior to the formation of the United Kingdom in the 1920s. England refers specifically to the country of England. Residents of Great Britain who are not English (Welsh, Scots, etc) prefer not to be labeled English. London, however, is definitely an English city.
Efficient-Might-1376•
If this person never left London, then "X in London", X's London life and works", "X. Life and works in London" Seems more relevant than England/Britain.
tomalator•
England is a country occupying most of the southern part of the island of Great Britain Great Britain is the island that is made up of the countries of Scotland, Wales, and England The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a country made up of the 3 aforementioned countries on the island of Great Britain, as well as the country of Northern Ireland, located on the island of Ireland next to the Republic of Ireland. The United Kingdom is often shorted to just UK
Comfortable-Study-69•
It doesn’t matter too much, although “Britain” sounds less formal. Were I writing it, I would probably title the thesis “X in the United Kingdom”, “X in Great Britain”, or “X in England”, assuming the person in question was in London after 1707.
JW162000•
In my experience, “Britain” is often quite a general term to talk about the ‘concept’ or Britain, like a political entity. It could also be a short form of “Great Britain”, which is the main big island of the UK (so just England, Wales, and Scotland). Meanwhile the United Kingdom (UK) is Great Britain plus Northern Ireland. And then the British Isles is Great Britain plus all of the island of Ireland. So in other words: British Isles > UK > Great Britain
JohannYellowdog•
I think it depends on the scope of your topic. An even more specific title like "X in London" could work, if their activities and influence, or at least the ones you're writing about, were contained within that area. A broader title like "X in England" or "X in Britain" could imply either that they travelled around -- which doesn't seem to be the case here -- or that their work was strongly connected to other people from those wider areas. If you're going for the wider scope, it's worth noting that Great Britain is the island that includes England, Scotland and Wales, so "Britain" is accurate if that's the extent of your topic. The United Kingdom is the broader political entity that includes Northern Ireland (and, until c.100 years ago, all of Ireland). If your topic covers this wider area, then I would argue that "X in the United Kingdom" would be more accurate.