The Act of Union, 1707 Gabriel Glickman. Problems of composite monarchies Danger of one component...
-
Upload
norah-parker -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of The Act of Union, 1707 Gabriel Glickman. Problems of composite monarchies Danger of one component...
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.
• Concern of James VI – why he sought a more ‘perfect union’ in 1603.
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Conclusion
• Union able to endure because:1) Scotland a divided country – Presbyterians would
choose Union over Jacobite Episcopalian form of independence.
2) Union of concessions (church, law) – less ambitious than goals of James VI in 1603.
3) Union to fulfil pragmatic ends (serve the war effort, secure the Hanoverian succession) – not to create a new nation.