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.