Claims that people in an independent Scotland wouldn't be entitled to call themselves British, have been rebutted by an award winning academic.
Dr Alex Woolf, of St Andrews university, has pointed out that concepts of Britishness date back to as early as 300 years B.C. - two millenia before the act of union - and stated that: "Britishness is not predicated upon political union, it comes with the territory."
When the respected historian, who was born and raised in East Sussex, told a BBC radio 4 programme earlier this month that he supported an independent Scotland, the presenters questioned why an Englishman living and working north of the border would take such a view.
But as the Saltire award-winning academic writes in an exclusive article for Yesscotland.net, history has shown that when neighbouring states and countries share cultural and linguistic ties, as is the case with Scotland and England, political independence from each other actively encourages innovation and healthy competition which benefits all nations involved.
Dr Woolf points to modern connections between Westminster and Dublin and between the Scandinavian countries to predict that strong links would continue between the countries of the British Isles after Scotland became independent.
Making it clear that Westminster polticians do not have the right to decide whether the people of an independent Scotland could choose to call themselves "British" if they wished to, Dr Woolf said there is considerable historic precedence to suggest that many organisations working within the independent nations of the British Isles would also choose to operate under a British banner.
"In the context of the Independence debate one of the big questions is how Britishness will be articulated after any secession... In a post-Independence world Britishness might just become a term related to geography but it is more likely that various institutions would retain a pan-British identity simply for practicality and economy of scale.
"The dominant language in all the home nations will remain English for the foreseeable future and ease of movement in the present and the future along with shared history and family connections will constantly remind us of the link," writes Dr Woolf.
And he adds: "In our own age we can see this happening in Scandinavia, by far the most progressive part of the West. (where countries were historically joined in various political and royal unions, but are now individual equal nations) ... Ideas and people move freely between the countries and they give institutional priority to harmonising policies where possible."
Making it clear that it is not political unity between neighbouring nations which determines their success, Dr Woolf concludes: "One could argue that Scandinavia is a failed state, that it has not fulfilled ethno-linguistic destiny of unification. If that is what failure looks like, bring it on."