1 / 11

The Act of Union, 1707

The Act of Union, 1707. Gabriel Glickman. Problems of composite monarchies. Danger of one component part being wealthier and more powerful than others – question of how impartially a monarch would rule. Dominance of England in British Isles, Castile in Spanish monarchy.

gent
Download Presentation

The Act of Union, 1707

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Act of Union, 1707 Gabriel Glickman

  2. Problems of composite monarchies • Danger of one component part being wealthier and more powerful than others – question of how impartially a monarch would rule. • Dominance of England in British Isles, Castile in Spanish monarchy. • Concern of James VI – why he sought a more ‘perfect union’ in 1603.

  3. Darien and the Union • Leaves Scotland humiliated and indebted but does not make union inevitable. • All schemes for union had failed in C17th – e.g. plans in 1669 and 1689. • Opposition as much in English as Scottish parliament. • Widening differences over C17th – law, politics, religion.

  4. Union shaped by impact of European succession contests • Uncertainty over the British succession – house of Hanover vs exiled house of Stuart. • Conflict over the Spanish Succession – Bourbon (pro-French) vs Habsburg candidates backed by England, Netherlands, Austria. • 1701 – beginning of War of the Spanish Succession. • Danger of French ‘universal monarchy’ has raised schemes for unions and confederacies between states across Europe.

  5. Scotland after 1689 • Revolution settlement (1689) reflects push for greater independence – foreshadows Darien scheme. • Domination of parliament by radical Presbyterians. • Episcopalians traditionally more pro-English, but alienated by 1688 Revolution – turn towards Jacobitism. • Conflict over the Revolution underpinned by religious antagonism 1689-1692. • Council of Scotland (appointed by William III) weak and prone to factionalism and feuding .

  6. Impact of Darien • Economic crisis. • Exposes limitations on Scottish sovereignty when king is based in England and rules according to English interests. • Country Party (Fletcher, Belhaven) formed in Edinburgh Parliament – call upon Scots to ‘assert our rights as a free people’). • But alternative conclusion voiced by Seton of Pitmedden – Scotland can never stand alone: needs an incorporating union with England.

  7. 1703-5- Bid for greater independence in Edinburgh Parliament • Exploitation of English weaknesses due to dynastic instability and War of the Spanish Succession. • Attempt to establish sovereign commercial and diplomatic policies. • Demand right to settle Scottish royal succession independently. • But not seeking total independence of England – Fletcher proposes confederal union as alternative to incorporating union.

  8. The English ministers and the push for Union 1705-6 • Fear that Scots are undermining war effort and acting under Jacobite influence. • English ministers meet with Scots commissioners but reject all solutions other than incorporating union. • Queensberry and Seafield accept inevitability of union on English terms – aim instead for concessions. • Scots to get compensation for Darien, free trade with England and Empire, retention of separate church and legal system.

  9. 1706-7 – the Union debate • Emotive opposition in Scots Parliament led by Country Party. • Widespread extra-parliamentary opposition. • Ratification of union provokes riots and protests esp. in key urban centres in the Lowlands. • Three-quarters of Scots believed to be opposed to union. • Opposition rises over following five years due to failure of Union to deliver economic gains.

  10. A divided opposition • Conflict among the opponents of Union the key reason why it was able to survive. • Presbyterian opposition reflects radical separatist traditions of C17th Covenanters. • Contrast with Episcopalian opposition – Union opposed because it keeps the Church in Presbyterian form and keeps out the Jacobites. • Anti-Unionism increasingly led by Episcopalian Jacobites. • Less likely therefore that Presbyterians will support separatist cause.

  11. Conclusion • Union able to endure because: • Scotland a divided country – Presbyterians would choose Union over Jacobite Episcopalian form of independence. • Union of concessions (church, law) – less ambitious than goals of James VI in 1603. • Union to fulfil pragmatic ends (serve the war effort, secure the Hanoverian succession) – not to create a new nation.

More Related