Cross border posting

[NormanS]

When James VI inherited the English crown he became King of England as well as remaining King of Scots. At that time the monarch was very much at the centre of government, so a de facto single centralised administration was inevitably established in London, but the countries remained legally separate with their own laws and judiciaries, the Scottish parliament continuing to sit as before.

So from 1603 to 1707 it would be fair to regard Britain as a partially united kingdom, but certainly not in any legal sense the United Kingdom or a single country. Thus, when Charles the first was executed at the command of the English parliament, the Scottish parliament resolved to punitively invade England since the English had judicially murdered the King of Scots.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Of course it was a united kingdom. If the one king was king of both countries, then it was a united kingdom. What part don't you understand?

When Scotland becomes an independent country again, then unless it decides to reject the monarchy, and become a republic, which seems unlikely, Scotland and England will still be members of a united kingdom. QED.

 

[Rowana]

What I can't get my head around is the Lord High Bampot Alex Salmond wittering on about an independant Scotland when he wants to remain in the EU ! !

From what I see, those in "Government" in Edinburgh couldn't run a pi$$ up in a brewery! Look no further than the Scottish Parliament building fiasco, The Edinburgh tram project Etc., Etc.

What the UK government should do is get us out of Europe, disband the Scottish Parliament, realise that we are no longer a world power with an empire, but a third-world, third rate country, and act accordingly.

If ever Salmond gets his way, I'll seriously consider emigrating - To England

 

[Appleyard]

From what I see, those in "Government" in Edinburgh couldn't run a pi$$ up in a brewery! Look no further than the Scottish Parliament building fiasco, The Edinburgh tram project Etc., Etc.

[/U][/B]

That is nonsense...those in "government" in Edinburgh had nothing to do with either the new parliament building or the tram fiasco.

 

[Sgeir]

Of course it was a united kingdom. If the one king was king of both countries, then it was a united kingdom. What part don't you understand?

I think you'll find that Dave is correct; the Union of the Crowns (plural) meant that two kingdoms shared the same king. Despite the endeavours of James VI, that was not resolved until 1707 when the one kingdom was created.

 

[DaveS]

Of course it was a united kingdom. If the one king was king of both countries, then it was a united kingdom. What part don't you understand?

HM Queen Elizabeth is currently queen of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and various other places but that does not mean that they are all part of one country, or united kingdom. To use your language, What part don't you understand?

 

[Lakesailor]

Will Scottish football managers be repatriated? Please.

It will cause redundancies in the North West region television subtitles department. But it will be worthwhile.

 

[Rowana]

That is nonsense...those in "government" in Edinburgh had nothing to do with either the new parliament building or the tram fiasco.

Why do you think I put "Government" in quotes? ? ?

I'm refering to whoever is in charge, whether it me MSP's, Edinburgh City council or whover. Shower of useless numpties the whole jing-bang of them!

Look at Aberdeen. The City council are umteen millions in the red, but they are looking to waste even more millions on some useless "civic square." Just because Sir Ian Wood is giving a few of his millions to the project in order to create another eyesore that can be named after him.

Then there's the Aberdeen by-pass. It's dragged on for years with not one foot of new road constructed. The thing is, if the planners had had any sense in the first place, the whole thing would have been totally unecessary.

Don't tell me that the Scots could run their own country. I see feck-all evidence of it

 

[Rowana]

Will Scottish football managers be repatriated? Please.

.

No problem. We'll send you Terry Butcher as soon as you like.

 

[NormanS]

HM Queen Elizabeth is currently queen of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and various other places but that does not mean that they are all part of one country, or united kingdom. To use your language, What part don't you understand?

She is Queen of those countries that you mention because they were Colonies of Great Britain. While at times it may feel like it, technically, Scotland never was, and never will be a Colony.

The Union of the Crowns was a Union of two separate, sovereign countries, hence United Kingdom. It's quite simple really.

 

[maxi77]

She is Queen of those countries that you mention because they were Colonies of Great Britain. While at times it may feel like it, technically, Scotland never was, and never will be a Colony.

The Union of the Crowns was a Union of two separate, sovereign countries, hence United Kingdom. It's quite simple really.

The union of the crowns was not repeat not a union of the two countries, far from it, England was very active in trying to stop the Scots from developing their own empire an banned Scots ships from the American colonies and were intrumental in the demise of the ill fated Darien plan which ultimately led to the Union of the Parliaments and the United Kingdom.

Politics is never simple really.

 

[Sgeir]

The Union of the Crowns was a Union of two separate, sovereign countries, hence United Kingdom. It's quite simple really.

Good try, but not accurate. If your premise was correct, that "the Union of the Crowns was a Union of two separate, sovereign countries", then there would be a record of both sovereign countries making that decision. There isn't. James VI was proclaimed James I of England solely by English proclamation. It could not have been otherwise.

 

[NormanS]

Good try, but not accurate. If your premise was correct, that "the Union of the Crowns was a Union of two separate, sovereign countries", then there would be a record of both sovereign countries making that decision. There isn't. James VI was proclaimed James I of England solely by English proclamation. It could not have been otherwise.

That's rubbish, isn't it. He was already King of Scots, so what decision did Scotland need to make?

He became King of England by heredity, and they proclaimed him King. Big deal.

And I'm going to bed. History lesson over.

 

[DaveS]

The Union of the Crowns was a Union of two separate, sovereign countries, hence United Kingdom. It's quite simple really.

This is getting silly.

Of course James VI was confirmed king of England by the English as Elizabeth of England's successor - he was already King of Scots, and remained so. Scotland and England remained separate countries, but as I posted earlier, with some centralised administration round the king.

In another post (re. Canada etc.) you conceded that simply having the same monarch does not necessarily mean that countries are a united kingdom, i.e. that your simplistic "If the one king was king of both countries, then it was a united kingdom" test does not hold. The circumstances must be examined in each case: I agree with you as to why the present HMQ finds herself head of state of quite a few countries.

So consider the facts of 1603. The Scots parliament continued in existence with no legislation enacted regarding James' succession to the English throne other than administrative detail because the king was to be 400 miles away. Do you really believe that if the plan had been for Scotland and England to merge the Scots parliament would have had nothing to say about it?

I have already given the example of what happened after Charles I's execution: this was warfare waged by sovereign nations, not civil war. You will note that the events which led up to said execution are referred to, correctly, as the English (not British) Civil War. (At various times Scots fought on one side or the other.) Does that look remotely like a united country? Maxi77 gave you the example of the active hostility of English forces towards the Scots attempting to form colonies, Darien in particular.

Lastly, if your hypothesis is correct, what do you think was the significance of 1707? Why pass acts of parliament in Scotland and England merging the parliaments, and create a new national flag combining the flags of Scotland and England? Why agree to call the combined country The United Kingdom of Great Britain, with England and Scotland to be known in future as South Britain and North Britain respectively? Why the prolonged negotiations, threats and bribery if a united kingdom had been in place for a hundred years? The Edinburgh mob was incensed - they knew Scotland was losing its sovereignty and did not like it. There were no such riots in 1603.

 

[Sgeir]

Norman is quite right where he wrote that James "became King of England by heredity", which rather undermines his previous claim that "the Union of the Crowns was a Union of two separate, sovereign countries". Right; it was purely a dynastic affair, but with political and religious overtones.

The proclamation was made by the English Privy Council, with which James had been in league, through Robert Cecil, during Elizabeth's decline. Strangely, from what I recall of the history books, the Carey letter (three days by messenger from London to Edinburgh) inviting James to pick up the English throne was actually written some days before Elizabeth got around to shuffling her mortal coil. That would have been impossible without Cecil having already done the deal with James.

Goodnight!

 

[Appleyard]

Why do you think I put "Government" in quotes? ? ?

I'm refering to whoever is in charge, whether it me MSP's, Edinburgh City council or whover. Shower of useless numpties the whole jing-bang of them!

Look at Aberdeen. The City council are umteen millions in the red, but they are looking to waste even more millions on some useless "civic square." Just because Sir Ian Wood is giving a few of his millions to the project in order to create another eyesore that can be named after him.

Then there's the Aberdeen by-pass. It's dragged on for years with not one foot of new road constructed. The thing is, if the planners had had any sense in the first place, the whole thing would have been totally unecessary.

Don't tell me that the Scots could run their own country. I see feck-all evidence of it

I fully agree with you in respect of your view of "government"..to include local as well as natiional.
What I was referring to is the fact that it was the Westminster shower who,egged on by Saint Donald initiated the holyrood shambles,despite the SNP's wanting to use the old high school.
And as for the trams....again a glory project dreamed up by Labour,supported by tories and libthings,and opposed by Eck....but railroaded through just the same.

Aberdeen seems to be a richt can o worms as well ...the porblem is that it seems to be only the headbangers who stand for election to councils etc.


Anyway....fit like's your doddie o'wid?

 

[Rowana]

Anyway....fit like's your doddie o'wid?

It's a wee bitty breezy richt enough, bit it wiz waur a couple o' weeks ago.

It's aboot 25 kts the noo, wi gusts up tae 40.

Ah'll hae tae hing oan tae ma bunnet

 

[A1Sailor]

It's a wee bitty breezy richt enough, bit it wiz waur a couple o' weeks ago.
It's aboot 25 kts the noo, wi gusts up tae 40.
Ah'll hae tae hing oan tae ma bunnet

For those who didn't study Scots when at school, only English, he means:

"Correct - it is somewhat windy at present, but not as bad as it was two weeks ago.
Currently the wind strength is approximately 25 knots; with gusts of almost 40 knots.
Unless I am careful, I may lose my headgear."

Bring back Ian McCaskill - unless one prefered Michael Fish.

 

[Appleyard]

However the question was "Fit's like your doddie o' wid?"

Which translates as...."how is your piece of wood?"

 

[Orla]

However the question was "Fit's like your doddie o' wid?"

Which translates as...."how is your piece of wood?"

Which means he's been watching to much pornography............

 

[capnsensible]

Scottish. Football.