THE Union of the Crowns between Scotland and England in 1603 might have helped historically to make possible the current Platinum Jubilee celebrations but in its first half century at least it brought neither peace nor prosperity to the Scottish people, according to Scotland’s most eminent historian.
Speaking to the Sunday National, Sir Tom Devine, Emeritus Professor at the University of Edinburgh, said: “There is a direct line of connection between the 1603 Regal Union and the current celebrations for the Platinum Jubilee. The Queen is connected through blood and family heritage both to the English royal house and Scotland’s Bruce dynasty of the medieval period. The Regal Union brought both those historic relationships together.
“Most people might assume therefore that the Union of 1603 brought the Scottish line of kings and queens to an end. But although James declared himself to be the ‘King of Great Britain’ the separate kingdoms of England and Scotland continued to exist. This is confirmed by the fact that both James and his son, Charles, had two coronations, one of which in each case was for the crown of Scotland.
“James VI of Scotland’s claim to the English throne was based on his descent from Margaret Tudor, daughter of Henry VII, who had married James IV, King of Scots, in 1503. However, despite the fact James VI had a blood relationship to the English royal dynasty there were problems.
“The first was that he was foreign. He was a Scot, and England and Scotland at that time were entirely separate countries. He was also the son of Mary, Queen of Scots, who had been executed after being accused of treason against Elizabeth I of England.
“English law on treason was draconian and dictated that any claim to property or title was lost by traitors and, importantly in addition, their descendants. That meant in law James could not succeed Elizabeth.
“Although there were other claims to the English throne, however, he was the senior claimant in terms of blood legitimacy. Crucially, he also already had children so that meant the royal succession after his death was maintained.
“Above all he was a Protestant and therefore would secure the future of the English Reformation at a time when England was in danger from Catholic European states.
“A joint monarch of Scotland, England and Ireland was attractive to English elites because it reduced the risk of France or Spain aligning with Scotland against England. Until the Union of 1707, and even after that with the Jacobite Risings, Scotland was seen by hostile European monarchies as a tempting back door for invasion into England.
“James left Scotland for London in April 1603, promising to return every three years but only came once, leaving the routine government of Scotland to the Privy Council in Edinburgh.
“There was not very much interest among influential English politicians in ruling Scotland by intervention from the south. James, in fact, boasted that he was able to govern Scotland by the pen and so a postal service was established between London and Edinburgh for the king’s correspondence. That became the origin of the Royal Mail.
“James still wanted a fuller union between Scotland and England, however, and put pressure on the English parliament to agree.
"The project failed because England had no wish to share its lucrative trades with impecunious Scots. In speech after speech in the House of Commons, MPs ranted against them in almost racist term. They feared ‘Scots beggars’ descending in their thousands from the north and taking advantage of England’s riches.
“It does show you how far apart the two nations still were at that time. Old enmities died hard and the fact that a Scot now sat on the English throne did little to dispel them. Indeed they may have been increased because of suspicions about the undue influence of James’s Scottish favourites at court.
“James also tried to bring Scottish religious practices closer to English ritual in order to extend spiritual and ideological conformity across the two realms. Yet when his son Charles later took that policy to extremes, it unleashed a bitter rebellion north of the Border which triggered the Wars of the Three Kingdoms. They endured for several years during which Scotland lost much in blood and treasure until the wars ended with the military conquest and occupation of the nation by the forces of Oliver Cromwell from 1652 to 1660.
“When normal relations were restored between the two countries after 1660 with the accession of Charles II, the limitations of the Regal Union were once again manifest.
“Tariff barriers against Scottish exports were once more imposed. Also before James VI left Scotland it had been a long tradition that the making of the nation’s foreign policy was the exclusive responsibility of the monarch. After 1603 this power went south, often with dire effects on the northern kingdom.
‘FOR instance, England’s wars after 1660 with France and Holland were fought against two of Scotland’s best trading partners. Even more crucially, William III’s strident condemnation of the Scots’ Darien adventure in the 1690s and his brazen failure to support the colony in its hour of desperate need was because he feared it would alienate Spain and so weaken his grand alliance against France.
“All this evidence demonstrated unambiguously that by the end of the 17th century the Regal Union was unstable and full of contradictions.
The stage was therefore set for the formation of a new relationship between England and Scotland. That resulted in the Parliamentary Union of 1707.
“The Regal Union of 1603 might have helped historically to make possible the current Platinum Jubilee celebrations. In its first half century at least, it brought neither peace nor prosperity to the Scottish people.”
