I'm seeing a degree of confusion all round concerning the mergeing of the crown and the act of Union.

When the protestant Queen of England died without an heir (virgin/not virgin who knows for sure.lol) the solution decided was to offer succession öf the English throne to King James IV of Scotland thereafter unite both crowns under one mornarch.

Apparently in America some belieuje Scotland lost their King but King James IV.

Maybe Dishonoured,are you"re refering to James II then??

As a Highlander I should be showing my Jacobite devotion for the James and the Bonnie Prince but I look at my history and know it's nowhere near as cut and dried as it's made out or you seem to think Dishonoured.

Scotland has been divided with initself for aslong as there's been a Scotland.The Highlands has always been a more disperate,less unified area where as Central n Southern Scotland were more cohesive.James I%IV made it mandatory for the sons of Scots lords and nobles be educated in London.

His intention to align the thinking of Scotlands powerful familys with their English counterparts.He felt that he could unite the countries as well as the crown this way.With some success..

His Scottish born son the infamous Charles I who dispised Scotland and barely acknowleged it except to try and force his very unpopular bible on Scots protestants as the official version enforced by law.The Covenanters were the supporters who made a covenant with the English Parliament not to declare for Charles during the English Civil War.

Charles by his own arrogance and stupidity was behead therefore Scotlands king was executed by parliament in 1649.

Scotland recognised his son Charles Ii as his successor leading to Scotland invaded to put Charles son on the trone in England too but Cromwell beat them in England and decimated the Scots at Dunbar.

After Cromwell died parliament restored Charles as Charles II.When he later died without an heir his brother who'd converted to Catholicism became James II.

When he had a son and heir parliament couldnt except the idea of a Catholic dynasity ruling as Spain and France were Catholic monarchys so approched James protestant daughter married to William of Orange to take the throne a 'bloodless revolution'.James fled and William became king.So Scotland lost another Stuart King.

James raised rebellion in Scotland to regain the throne but that failed bloodily too.


The Darien Project was an attempt to set up a Scots colony in Panama to profit by moving trade between Atlantic and Pacific.A panama canal at the dawn of the 18th Century but England sabotaged attempts for countries to help or trade with them and they died of disiese.

Scotlands entire wealth was lost in the venture and England offered to reimbvrse Scotland for every penny if they accepted full political union which if your wondering Eng got,they got or wanted it belheving it'd put an end to uprises and rebelliön.

Union 1707 a full century after the merging of the crowns.

It can be said we lost our stuart kings but we lost a dynasty that valued their divine right far over their subjects which ended with Highlanders charging canons when the bonnie prince decided to fight a lost battle at Culloden 1746.The redcoats bayonetted wounded highlanders any caught were executed while he fled to France and drank himself to death,good riddance to our löst stuart kings !!!

Mister bit , thanks for the details there , however now im left wondering where the hell do my taxes goto if everyone in England is paying for me !

Aye so I think we need to figure that one out first eh !

im with freeborn on this one !

This should be good for England as long as we no longer have to continue subsidising Scotland. If they want independence that's what they should get. We need to keep English taxes in England.

Everyone ,Wesh, Scottish, and English should get a referendum, regarding United Kingdom allegiance , the people
should decide, not just the Scottish. Then we can move forward.

Plus if the oil is in Scottish waters it's theirs, with no retrospective repercussions.

I don't think too many people in Englan, Wales and N.I. really care if Scotland stays or goes. I suspect that what is best for Scotland is probably staying in the Union but at the same time, knowing how bitter some Scottish people can be toward the South I wouldn't at all be suprised if they voted themselves out. Either way, who cares?

where are these subsidies going , I still pay taxes like everyone else and have bills coming out my eyeballs and havent had a pay rise tied in with inflation in three years due to a pay cut from the public sector as I work for the man !

What exactly are England subsidising ?
lets just remember we all subsidised the banks that put us in this position of financial recession, because of the government thats currently in power in both of our countries
do you not think thats more important and requires more immediate attention than whether or not we should have our own independence ?

Westminster / London , the UK parliament , doesnt give a flying monkeys testicles about anyone other than themselves and possibly the banking industry , they dont care about the londoners or the northener's they are their own little power elite enclave , so why I dont know are so many of those from London still happy with them saying they are keeping us afloat , they arent , they are butt raping us all ! You guys maybe just got the common courtesy of a reach around to keep you happy !

Of course matters like free education and prescriptions are important but I suspect they are more a result and a reflection of the nature of the society that provides them.

If I was voting on independance I would be asking myself what offers the best chance for real reform.
Will independance help bring about a government system that offers the people a real say in government or will it simply be replacing one set of corrupt and amoral elite politicians for another set with essentially little change for the vast majority?

Originally posted by michael1983l
I don't think too many people in Englan, Wales and N.I. really care if Scotland stays or goes. I suspect that what is best for Scotland is probably staying in the Union but at the same time, knowing how bitter some Scottish people can be toward the South I wouldn't at all be suprised if they voted themselves out. Either way, who cares?

I'm not being funny, this is just my observation and I'm sure the view many neutrals are also getting is that the vast majority of bitterness or childish insults in these threads around the net seems to be coming from English people, including I have to say, yourself.

First, this is a referendum on whether Scotland *wants* independence. It doesn't necessarily mean it's going to happen, and the referendum is 2 years away anyway.

However...If Scotland wants to leave, then go ahead. I personally think it would be a mistake, and given the current state of the UK, it's budget and it's dancing monkeys -oops, I meant government- it would be far too messy. Maybe the time and money that will go into organising this referendum would be better spent getting the UK as a whole back on track, then everyone can go on their merry little ways.

Although...the majority of countries have civil wars within a couple hundred years of gaining independence. A Scottish civil war would be infinitely cool