A Sassenach writes....

[Wapping]

In a completely unrelated thread in the Beackchat section, all about Mrs Thatcher, Shugie wrote, 'no longer giving a shit for entire countries, eg Scotland'.

I am definitely not meaning to be a troll but am genuinely interested to know how and when Scotland became to be viewed as a distinct Country (with a capital C) from England, Wales and parts of Ireland.

At the risk of asking too many questions at once: If it's true (and it may well be, I really do not know) that Scotland wants to become fully independent of the rest of our very small island, doesn't it send a very poor message to those that want to see a united Europe, with no borders? How can we,UK PLC,lecture the rest of the world on the need for integration and acceptance when parts of us want to divide ourselves along lines drawn on map. Are we really like the former Yugoslavia?

I am not in it to stir it up. As I never meet any true Scots (other than those born and raised in Surrey and my uncle, who lives in Northamptonshire but was born in Dollar and educated at Dollar Academy) I have no idea whether it is a real desire to be truly separate or some huge joke played on us gullible folk living south of Carlisle.

Richard

 

[Marjorie Proops]

And I thought I was being controversial opening the thread about Maggie.

Duck Sucker!

Wacky

 

[Schtum]

It only goes to prove that we do live in parallel Universes. Yes, a significant percentage of the population of Scotland wants complete separatism. Scotland has been a country in its own right for as long as there have been "countries". Sadly we're a country which hasn't profited too much from the Union of the Crowns and the subsequent integration into the United Kingdom, largely because the centres of power and the economy gravitated to the South East of England.

You might wish to consider the fact that you've never met any "true Scots" as a bit of an indictment of you. Also, do you really want to live in a unified Europe? Do you think that there have been significant improvements in the quality of your life because of the interference and bureaucracy that emanates from Brussels and is only scheduled to become more and more intrusive into our daily lives?

 

[Wapping]

Hi Schtum,

Thanks for that.

I realised after posting my query (intended to edit) that the questions were wrong and / or might lead the reader to assume that I was overly pro-Euopean or a fierce advocate of a one size fits all national identity.

I was worried that simply asking, Do you (and why) regard yourselves as being a separate Country as being too aggressive an would spark a heap of barbed responses.

I appologise for meeting to too few 'Real Scotsmen', albeit the comment about Surrey Scots was meant as a bit of light hearted banter. I do not meet that many Cornishmen, Irishmen or Welshmen either but plenty of French, Germans, Australians and Swedes, to name but four. I have been to Scotland once and Wales twice but have been half way around the globe. There again I have only been to Manchester twice and have never been to York or Bognor. Maybe that is where I am going wrong?

 

[Dickieboy]

Wap' the same question can be asked regarding England, who is it that says England was formed as a Country before Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
.
Going back to primary school history I was taught that the Romans invaded Britain in 55BC and then again in 54BC. At that time 'England didn't exist as a country the land was ruled by different tribes in different areas, the Iceni with Boudicca being one of them.
East Anglia was ruled by the Angles (the name England was also formed from 'Angland' or Angle Land), the Saxon tribes ruled Middlesex, Essex Sussex, the Jutes in Jutland, off the top of my head I think Cumberland and Northumberland was territory ruled over by a Chieftain or King 'Umber'
During their occupation the Romans conquered all of what is known as 'England', and the eastern part of Wales (the Marches) Most of Wales was Celtic and loosley related to the Picts and Scots. The Scots ( they were actually Irish) used to raid West Wales and actually kidnapped the man who was to become the Patron Saint Patrick.
North of where Hadrian's Wall is situated was occupied by the 'Picts' who together with the 'Scots' (the tribe originally from Ireland) were such a pain in the @rse to the Romans that the Emperor had the wall built to keep them out and thus defined the southern most border of Scotland. The border between what is now England and Wales was not defined at that time, and there was a King Mercia in the region known as West Mercia (he wasn't King of England). So I would suggest that Scotland as a distinct Country actually existed before England IMHO. And Scotland is was named after the Irish tribe, had it been named after the original inhabitants it would be called 'Pictland' or something very similar. .
All of the above from memory anyone please feel free to correct any innaccurracies (I don't think there too many )

 

[Wapping]

Wap' the same question can be asked regarding England, who is it that says England was formed as a Country before Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
.
Going back to primary school history I was taught that the Romans invaded Britain in 55BC and then again in 54BC. At that time 'England didn't exist as a country the land was ruled by different tribes in different areas, the Iceni with Boudicca being one of them.
East Anglia was ruled by the Angles (the name England was also formed from 'Angland' or Angle Land), the Saxon tribes ruled Middlesex, Essex Sussex, the Jutes in Jutland, off the top of my head I think Cumberland and Northumberland was territory ruled over by a Chieftain or King 'Umber'
During their occupation the Romans conquered all of what is known as 'England', and the eastern part of Wales (the Marches) Most of Wales was Celtic and loosley related to the Picts and Scots. The Scots ( they were actually Irish) used to raid West Wales and actually kidnapped the man who was to become the Patron Saint Patrick.
North of where Hadrian's Wall is situated was occupied by the 'Picts' who together with the 'Scots' (the tribe originally from Ireland) were such a pain in the @rse to the Romans that the Emperor had the wall built to keep them out and thus defined the southern most border of Scotland. The border between what is now England and Wales was not defined at that time, and there was a King Mercia in the region known as West Mercia (he wasn't King of England). So I would suggest that Scotland as a distinct Country actually existed before England IMHO. And Scotland is was named after the Irish tribe, had it been named after the original inhabitants it would be called 'Pictland' or something very similar. .
All of the above from memory anyone please feel free to correct any innaccurracies (I don't think there too many )

Dickie,

I do not think I suggested that England was a Country.

Leaving aside what the Legions of Rome found when they marched up the A1, I do not question what you say for one second. '1066 and all that' summed it all up by saying 'The Scots became Welsh, the Welsh became Irish and the Irish, Welsh' or something like that .

My question really was an innocent one. Do the Scots regard themselves as a completely separate Country and truly want to be independent? I have no axe to grind one way or another. Just interested for an hour or two what makes us all tick.

 

[Schtum]

My question really was an innocent one. Do the Scots regard themselves as a completely separate Country

Absolutely. We have a different culture, a different sense of humour, different politics, different money, different food, a separate identity, a very different landscape and a different climate.

and truly want to be independent? I have no axe to grind one way or another. Just interested for an hour or two what makes us all tick.

That one's a bit more complicated. I'd want to be convinced that Scotland could be economically viable. It would, of course, be nice to be a successful Socialist country but it would be difficult to achieve that when our nearest trading neighbours are such voracious Capitalists.

 

[Wapping]

Absolutely. We have a different culture, a different sense of humour, different politics, different money, different food, a separate identity, a very different landscape and a different climate.

That one's a bit more complicated. I'd want to be convinced that Scotland could be economically viable. It would, of course, be nice to be a successful Socialist country but it would be difficult to achieve that when our nearest trading neighbours are such voracious Capitalists.

Schtum,

Thanks for your reply.

I have, ever since reading a book about the Highland clearances, always felt that we (the English) treated the place rather badly and can maybe understand why you might want to be rid of us.

I would be sad to see a totally separate Scotland, preferring to assume that we should be able to achieve more together rather than bickering. I have never liked the regional assemblies, believing that they cause too much confusion in what is really quite a small island. I have never been a Socialist but can see some good thinking behind Scottish differences on healthcare and education.

 

[MikeP]

If those Scots who want independence, get their way, how long will it be before there's a schism between Lowland and Highland?

The truth is that there's as much unity in Scotland as there is in any country of the UK. The only unity that exists is the dislike in some quarters for the English.

How long before those in the extremes of Scotland start to bemoan the magnetic qualities of the Scottish capitol?

In recent years, some Scots muttered about a Tory government in Westminster being unrepresentative of them because they returned so few Tory MP's. Lo and behold a Labour government came to power, a government overly represented by Scots but they are still not taking enough notice of the Scots so now there's a swing to the SNP.

It looks to me as though some Scots will never be happy until they return to Clan politics and they can go back to the halcyon days when they butchered each other with gay abandon.

In truth, some Scots don't hate the English as much as they hate themselves for apparently being the perennial 'number two.'

Another truth is that the English don't see themselves as 'number one,' it's just that some Scots have a highly defined inferiority complex.

 

[wilbjr21]

It's sometimes worth remembering that Scotland was the one that wanted union - some find it convenient to forget this. I work in Scotland and it's great; some good changes on the social front since Devolution.

If it wasn't for Jimmy Hill most Scots would want England to win a football game.

 

[Deleted account rno]

If it wasn't for Jimmy Hill most Scots would want England to win a football game.

I'll have some of whatever it is you're on

 

[arcboutant]

wilbjr21 writes

'It's sometimes worth remembering that Scotland was the one that wanted union - some find it convenient to forget this'.
Those who wanted it were greedy, propaganda driven, no -country ,em,individuals.
The Scottish Royal blood line and regalia is THE or at least one of THE oldest in WORLD!
That is the reason the people to the south of OUR border NEEDED to merge nations - to feel they are of an old and continuing race and not as is, one of a mixed band of Angles,Jutes and Saxons!
We have given many good lads under the orders of Southerners as we have lost in our own defence.

'for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule'

says it all!

we can and will be very good friends BUT give us what you have returned to many other countries!

 

[Schtum]

The Scottish Royal blood line and regalia is THE or at least one of THE oldest in WORLD!

Descended from Jesus Christ himself and the Magdalene, if you subcribe to the Rex Deus view of the world.

 

[arcboutant]

Schtum mate, you were very eloquent till that last

 

[wilbjr21]

OK I was joking about the football game.

My father, being Scottish was a sight to behold when Scotland had a win over England when the two nations played football. I work with a chap who has a piece of Wembly turf in his garden from that last game - he loves it.

As has already been said: Scotland does the ruling in Government and the Trades Unions - just look at the TV interviews. This doesn't seem to bother the English and why should it?

It's just nice getting on with the neighbours.

 

[Posh Pete]

I am definitely not meaning to be a troll but am genuinely interested to know how and when Scotland became to be viewed as a distinct Country (with a capital C) from England, Wales and parts of Ireland.
Richard

Ok. Genuine question so genuine answer: since 1018 AD when Scotland (with pretty much its present boundaries) became unified under one monarch.

Scotland remained an independent nation until the Act of Union of 1707. The two countries had become ruled by one monarch (a Scot - James Stuart, James 6th of Scotland, James 1st of England ) after 1603.

Scotland has its own legal system. Its own education system. Its own established church (if that matters to you) All these were guaranteed by the Act of Union.

There's a lot of mythology about Scottish History. For example ...

I have, ever since reading a book about the Highland clearances, always felt that we (the English) treated the place rather badly and can maybe understand why you might want to be rid of us.

No. The worst treatment of Highlanders during the Clearances was often by fellow Scots not English. Just as it is often forgotten that the army which defetaed the Highland army of Bonnie Prince Charlie in 1746 contained more (lowland) Scots than there were Scots in BPC's army.

And

It's sometimes worth remembering that Scotland was the one that wanted union - some find it convenient to forget this. I work in Scotland and it's great; some good changes on the social front since Devolution.

No. There were riots and a great deal of popular opposition to the Treaty of Union. It was agreed partly because of huge bribes from the English government to members of the Scottish Estates (Parliament) and a thinly veiled threat of military intervention if it was not passed.

Do the Scots regard themselves as a completely separate Country and truly want to be independent?


Well ... we'll see. There's a Scottish Parliamentary election next year. If enough people vote SNP ...

As to issues of national identity being incompatible with a united Europe?

NO. I have no problem with being a member of a European Union and a citizen of the UK and a Scot AND also proud of my Geordie background. (My family moved up here when I was 5 having lived in the North East before that.) National identity only becomes an issue when people try to impose THEIR idea of national identity on others.

 

[Schtum]

Schtum mate, you were very eloquent till that last

I'm not following you, Mr Buttress. There's a fair body of evidence to suggest that most of the royal families of Europe consider themselves to be of the Rex Deus line and it's known that the Bruce considered himself to be of that descent. "Dieu et mon droit" take on a greater significance if you subscribe to this.

 

[arcboutant]

I cede that point sir.