Examines the union of England and Scotland by weaving the navy into a political narrative of events between the regal union in 1603 and the parliamentary union in 1707.This book examines the union of England and Scotland by weaving the navy into a political narrative of events between the regal union in 1603 and the parliamentary union in 1707. For most of the century the Scottish crown had no separate naval force which made the Stuart monarchs' navy, seen by them as a personal not a state force, unusual in being an institution which had a relationship with both kingdoms. This did not necessarily make the navy a shared organisation, as it continued to be financed from and based in England and was predominantly English. Nevertheless, the navy is an unusually good prism through which the nature of the regal union can be interrogated as English commanded ships interacted with Scottish authorities, and as Scots looked to the navy for protection from foreign invaders, such as the Dutch in the Forth in 1667, and for Scottish merchant ships trading with the Baltic and elsewhere. These interactions were often harmonious, but there were also many instances of tensions, particularly in the 1690s. The book illustrates both the ambiguous relationship between England and Scotland in the seventeenth century and also the navy's under-appreciated role in creating the political union of Britain.r Scottish merchant ships trading with the Baltic and elsewhere. These interactions were often harmonious, but there were also many instances of tensions, particularly in the 1690s. The book illustrates both the ambiguous relationship between England and Scotland in the seventeenth century and also the navy's under-appreciated role in creating the political union of Britain.r Scottish merchant ships trading with the Baltic and elsewhere. These interactions were often harmonious, but there were also many instances of tensions, particularly in the 1690s. The book illustrates both the ambiguous relationship between England and Scotland in the seventeenth century and also the navy's under-appreciated role in creating the political union of Britain.r Scottish merchant ships trading with the Baltic and elsewhere. These interactions were often harmonious, but there were also many instances of tensions, particularly in the 1690s. The book illustrates both the ambiguous relationship between England and Scotland in the seventeenth century and also the navy's under-appreciated role in creating the political union of Britain.

A comprehensive overview of the subject, demonstrating that the maritime aspects of the civil wars were much more important than has hitherto been acknowledged.

A detailed examination of the March system - the special administrative arrangements which applied on both sides of the border - how it was applied and how it evolved as national political circumstances changed. The Anglo-Scottish borderlands of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries provide an excellent window into early modern state formation, diplomacy, and cross-border interactions during a key moment in history. In the early modernperiod, the Anglo-Scottish border was transformed from an established line of demarcation between two independent kingdoms into a political obstacle. The people and administrators of the borderlands faced intense pressure after the Union of the Crowns in 1603, as King James VI/I sought to eliminate the borderline and turn the region into the "Middle Shires" of a united Great Britain. This book shows that, though the official borderline disappeared after union, the unique administrative arrangements, social and economic bonds of kinship, and built landscape served to uphold the notion of continued separation between the kingdoms. It highlights the movement of peoples across the borderline, collaboration attempts between local officials, and the formation of temporary cross-border alliances but also the assertion of national differences through periodic lawlessness, conflict, and outright war. The book thus demonstrates the complexities of the common border zone and the significance of the border in shaping distinct national identities. JENNA M. SCHULTZ teaches in the Department of History at the University of St Thomas in St Paul, Minnesota.

Alvin Jackson examines the two Unions - the Anglo-Scots Union of 1707 and the British-Irish of 1801 - comparing their background, birth, and survival. In sustaining a comparison between the Unions, he illuminates the long history and current state of the United Kingdom.

This book investigates the concept of the heroic, questions what it is that makes the national hero an indispensable appendage to any possible interpretation of national identity, and asks why scholars stop short before coming to terms with this elusive phenomenon. It finds answers by following heroic traditions in Scotland, Norway and Lithuania from the early modern period to the twentieth century. The book argues that heroic traditions - prevailing trends in situating heroes in national history - owe much to the early modern state. Both national heroes and the nation state had been conceived with a similar moral political mindset that looked for new ways to identify sources for commonality. The confluence of political theory and Realpolitik attested to three classical types of polities, i.e. civitas popularis (democracy), regnum (kingship), and optimatium (aristocracy), as found at that time in Scotland, Norway and Lithuania respectively. The author shows the varied impact these patterns had on heroic traditions. The long record of national heroes in Scotland is explained as a vestige of the legacy of civic humanism, the continuing traditions of the heroic king-lines in Norway are seen as a result of long-standing absolutism, while the belated arrival of national heroes in Lithuania is excused by the country's aristocratic if at times oligarchic past.

In 1603, England and Scotland came together and Great Britain was created. But how did this union last when so many others in Europe have failed? This volume provides an account of two nations who have often differed, remained very distinct and yet have achieved endurance in European terms.

The British Isles is a multi-national arena, but its history has traditionally been studied from a distinctively English -- often, indeed, London -- perspective. Now, however, the interweaving of the distinct but mutually-dependent histories of the four nations is at the heart of some of the liveliest historical research today. In this major contribution to that research, eleven leading scholars consider key aspects of the internal relations of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales in the early modern period, and the problems of accommodating different -- and resistant -- cultures to a single centralizing polity. The contributors are: Sarah Barber; Toby Barnard; Ciaran Brady; Keith M. Brown; Jane Dawson; Steven G. Ellis; David Hayton; Philip Jenkins; Alan Macinnes; Michael Mac Craith; and John Morrill.