No, they're not. It was mentioned, in passing,
Jim Eaton-Terry. Excuse you. When the BBC uses the phrase with a straight face then the phrase is being used with a straight face. Lump it.
As for the Royal family you might want to consider your advantage before rubbishing an issue of sovereignty (the cedeing of).
Hey, Zoe, why don't you watch your attitude there? There's no call to be rude.
What Dana Said.
As for the Royal family you might want to consider your advantage before rubbishing an issue of sovereignty (the cedeing of).
Could you explain this sentence? I'm not sure what it means.
moonlit ... wow, like so many others here, you're scary. :)
Evil Jimi, No social life to speak of.
Neither of those were me moonlit. I think Penny has the brother in Russia, and I'm not sure who the other was, but I agree with them.
As for the Royal family you might want to consider your advantage before rubbishing an issue of sovereignty (the cedeing of).
Could you explain this sentence? I'm not sure what it means.
Historically sovereignty of a nation is bestowed upon and symbolically dwells within the person of the monarch -constitutional or not. The cedeing of sovereignty is when the central power of a nation or region is passed through the monarch to a different nation. When the British monarchy was replaced by a German one (see protestantism v catholicism + Union of the Nations (re:Scotland and England = UK)) sovereignty of BRITAIN got ceded right along with it (-see also Jacobites, clearances American and Australian colonisation).
Advantage: given the unification of Europe and the influence of the British monarchy England is in a position of advantage within Europe. If he'd get down of his high horse for just one minute and take a look.
If he'd get down of his high horse for just one minute and take a look.
Okay, three posts ago, didn't I mention something about your attitude?
Seriously. Can it.
Heather it was Brenda, thanks for pointing it out, it's fixed now.
The cedeing of sovereignty is when the central power of a nation or region is passed through the monarch to a different nation. When the British monarchy was replaced by a German one (see protestantism v catholicism + Union of the Nations (re:Scotland and England = UK)) sovereignty of BRITAIN got ceded right along with it (-see also Jacobites, clearances American and Australian colonisation).
I think you have misunderstood. When George I got handed the throne, there *was* no Germany. Just lots of itty bitty German-speaking states. Prussia, Hanover, like that. The king of *one* German state, Hanover, became also the king of England, Scotland, &c. And, like James I before him, he was independently King of two different countries: England and Scotland in James's case, England and Hanover in George's case. (Okay, England, Scotland, Hanover. My bad.) When Great Britain was unified, Hanover was *not* included in the unification. And when William was succeeded by his niece, Victoria, the Hanoverian throne became separated from the British throne, because Hanover followed Salic laws and could not have a sovereign Queen.
Germany has never ruled Great Britain. People of German descent have ruled Great Britain. There's a difference. The nation of Germany didn't exist until long after the nation of Great Britain did.
Sovereignty is one of the *magical* concepts we play around with.