"being free, we did not need to assert the importance of liberty and because we would have been embarrassed to proclaim our love of what we knew to be our birthright."

You miss many points. Others feel the need to assert the importance of liberty because it was taken away from them by the English - ask the Irish, Welsh, Scots, native Americans, Aborigines, Maoris, Africans, Indians. - it was their birthright too, but was denied them. So they assert the right against the imposed sense of superiority. English "reserve" was never very much in evidence abroad.

The English are not a pure race. They are an amalgam of Celts, Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Norse and Norman French. The resulting language was first mentioned only in the 14th century Statute of Pleadings and only became general in the 16th. There is nothing quintessentially English, unless, indeed, it is warm ale.

But, it was the English who put the 'Great' into Britain, for which reason, the Union has been a very bad deal for them.

Bill, Suzhou, China

Living in Wales I am able to remind myself of the virtues of being English and hear allegations of our shortcomings almost daily.

Jim, Corwen,

Absolutely one hundred percent spot on.

Alex, London, England, UK

Roy Hattersley said "No ethnic group should be a majority in a society"

This fully explains Labour's immigration policy.

Dave, Ghlin,

I am an Englishman and I am a Brit and I am a Londoner. I have Scottish, Irish and Welsh ancestry. If there was one thing I would rely on as a yardstick for being British in the 21st Century it is that we souldn't really need one. We should insist, as other countries do, upon liberty and the rule of law yet beyond that we should put our faith in pluralism and tolerance. That someone whose roots lie halfway across the world can be just as British as me is what makes being British so much fun. We should remember that even Churchill, the greatest Briton, was half American.

I can agree with most of what Roy says even though I am rather fond of just a sprinkling of pomp and circumstance every now and again. Wider still and wider...

James, London,

The true glory of the English: many of those things which, by rights, should define us have gone on to become universal in their appeal and application; the three piece suit, the idea of the quintessential gentleman, rule of law, Parliamentary democracy, the Protestant Work Ethic, iron-hulled ships, railways and the steam engine, etc. Even the Founding Fathers of America rebelled against British rule in the name of the liberty of the English Constitution.

Much like 'Greekness' or 'Roman-ness' in the later Ancient world the very diffuseness of our identity is testament to our success. No intelligent man fights a system that makes sense...

Chris, Newcastle,

No need to boast indeed, about being English - English would have never achieved anything without the British.

Quentin, London, UK

There is no English race. There may well be an enthnic England but via DNA there is no way to tell us from the Welsh or Scots.

And the Act of Union was the best thing to happen to both England/Wales and Scotland. The last country to invade England was Scotland and the country before that was also Sctoland, and vice versa. But since Great Britain, we have worked together and deserved the adjective. Complete independance will mean that we compete again. How long before the first border dispute? How long before we waste time, effort and money fighting over resources? How long before the Scots end up fighting amongst themselves at another Culloden?

Union was great for England, Wales and especially Scotland which flowered after the Act. I hope I can still boast about being British in years to come.

Derek Smith, Brighton, UK

The English lacked a need to define themselves - there had been no big, defining moment to endlessly rehash, and having had an Empire on which the sun etc etc, and, as initiators of the Industrial Revolution, the English and their way of thinking and doing were, and they took it for granted, globally almost omnipresent - once.

In WW2 3 million Empire troops had volunteered to fight to defend Britain This bond underlay the formation of the Commonwealth. Britain opened its doors to those who had so demonstrated good will - many came, happy at the opportunity. It was an implicit pact made in amity by peoples who then knew each other well. Other empires ended only in recrimination and estrangement.

But these 3m volunteers are airbrushed from all the national histories and a revisionist history of bitterness spread leading to internal - and external - estrangement.

Both sides need to honour that heroic earlier generation - and revisit that defining - voluntary - pact.

Bob T, London, UK

Unlike Hattersley, I am an Englishman who does boast about being English. It is a reaction against the Act of Union forced upon the English people by a dead queen centuries ago.

The issue of Britishness (whatever that is) will not be resolved until Scotland and England become independent countries again.

Independence will not destroy the unique relationship between the Scots and the English, rather it will improve it. It is the natural aspiration of everyone to take pride in their nationality and both Scots and English have every right to that privilege.

When I arrive at Heathrow a sign says "welcome to Britain". When I arrive at Aberdeen airport it says "welcome to Scotland". The Scots have got it right. I applaud them.

Ian fitzsimmons, London , England

That reserve, no-fuss, stiff-upper-lip quiet confidence was all perfectly true when Great Britain housed only the English, Scottish and Welsh, unique but united. Now, with millions+ of immigrants that no-one asked for or wanted, and being forced to consider them all as 'British' as everyone else from day one, not to mention the utter disaster of forced multi-culturalism this place doesn't accept its identity with the ease with which we bore it for many hundreds of years. We're a fragmented, divided island. Because of the traitorous metropolitan elites, the Scots are Scottish, the Welsh are Welsh, the English are English and the "British" are foreigners. Now I do feel like swearing a bloody oath.

Steve Jacks, London,

But isn't this statement:

"we lose something that is essentially English if we start to copy the behaviour of less secure nationalities";

actually an example of :

"boasting about being English"?

If it isn't that then it is at the very least patronising. And you wonder why so many people don't especially like the English.

By the way doesn't anybody think that Shakespeare is just a tad overrated (a bit like the Beatles)?

Tom, Sapporo,