"Britishness" does exist in a biological sense, but not a cultural sense. The difference between England/Wales/Scotland is largely social and cultural, as recent genetic studies have found the populations to be virtually indistinguishable, and the English are largely of Celtic and pre-Celtic stock too, despite all the waves of migrants from mainland Europe. Each new wave - Normans, Vikings, Saxons etc largely just added a top tier to society rather than displacing or transforming the entire population. The history of "nations" is more the story of their rulers and the languages and cultures they bring with them, not their people.

@Kukri:

My whole life, I've thought there existed a rivalry between Angle, Scot, Welshman & Irisher, more on the lines of a good-natured sports rivalry.
Nah -- it's more a centuries/millenia long history of warfare, oppression, rape, slavery and pillage. We just seem to have a better ability to sweep things under the carpet every now and then and forget our differences in the face of foreign threats. And as IA points out, rivalries between counties can be pretty fierce - I'm sure he'll fill you in on what a wonderful place Lancashire is Heck, even neighbouring villages can be downright antagonistic. As for accents in England - the town 5 miles west of my village, and the city 5 miles east have quite different accents, both different to the village itself.

There used to be a saying: "(Unacceptable non-PC term for foreigners of slightly tinted hue) begin at Calais", but having said that the English word "Welsh" derives from the Old English for "foreign" ('waelisc'). The Scots call us "sassenachs" which I used to believe meant "southerners" but seems more likely to be derived from "Saxon". You can certainly find true racists in Wales and Scotland - ever been into a pub that goes dead silent as soon as you speak??? By and large most people are friendly and warm, but when there is animosity it's heartfelt and genuine too, and often based on real historical grievances.

On the practicalities of devolution, why shouldn't the Scots be ruled over by a Bavarian Duke? After all, the current royal family is basically Hanoverian

Trying to extricate the economies and tax etc would be an absolute nightmare, and no telling really whether there is a net subsidy northwards. And would two smaller economies be better off or not than one larger one? Given the wider context of the EU, talk of devolution and independence strikes me as a bit redundant. What we really need is a proper application of subsidiarity wherein local decisions are taken locally, and higher levels of government only take charge on issues that can only be dealt with over a wider area, with as few "layers" of government as possible. This is something England and Wales (and NI) could all benefit from. Government should be as close to the people as possible.

For IrishArmenian: if someone describes himself as an Ulsterman he is usually a loyalist. If he lives in Ulster but is not a loyalist, he'll usually call himself Irish, so the "British and Proud" comment seems quite in keeping. The irony is that most of the loyalists are descended from Scots settlers, and the Scots were originally Irish who had invaded Pictland.... just to give another example of the convoluted history of these islands

Ultimately, though we're all humans, and citizens of the planet etc and obsessing about national governments and the like is bit of a distraction. I'd be quite happy to see a dissolution of nation states generally in favour of smaller, more human-scale units under the umbrella of the EU.