The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Anglo-Scottish union of 1707: petitions, patronage, revolt

BBK 67.3

V.Yu. Apryshchenko


Devoted to the analysis of a social protest in Scotland during discussion and signing of the Anglo-Scottish parliamentary union of 1707. In it forms and geography of a protest, social composition of participants of performances, consequences of revolts and also assessment of performances existing in the British literature are investigated. The author comes to a conclusion that performances of 1705-1707 were aniuniatsky by the nature that distinguished them from social performances of the 1720th

Union of 1707; protest; revolt; parliament; incorporation; nation; unionizm; anti-;;.


The author analyzes social protest in Scotland during preparing and ratification of Parliamentary Union of1707. Forms and expansion ofprotest, social structure, results of the revolts as well as British historiography of the subject are studies in the article. The author concluded that protest of 1707-1707 was anti-unionist, and that distinguished it from the social revolts of1720 years.

Ynion 1707; protest; revolt; Parliament; incorporation; nation; unionism; anti-unionism; patronage; parliamentary election.

The most part of Scots was deprived of an opportunity to play though a how many or small role in events of the Anglo-Scottish parliamentary association, becoming hostages of decisions of political elite. However citizens and Edinburgh, and Glasgow made many-voiced chorus of the protest which is very nervously perceived by politicians on both sides. This fact is regarded by many historians as the democratic protest which is not heard by the authorities, so, testifying in favor of illegitimacy of the union. However, it is obvious that democratic will is an anachronism for the 18th century, and not only for Scotland, but also for an overwhelming part of Europe and to draw a conclusion about illegality of the union on it.

One of forms of manifestation of an antiuniatsky protest were petitions. On., - shchestvenny opinion in Scotland [1]. The first Scottish petitions as a form of national will, belong to the kovenantsky movement of 1637-1638, and already then emotionally if not practically, contained requirements of maintaining the Scottish identity. Petitions as a will form, had to show public solidarity, a unification of all nation in fight for the idea representing Scotland and its past, they were in unlimited use among opponents of the union and the political levels supporting them. Harak-

unions, and parliament did not receive any petition supporting the union [2].

Vigorous part in formation of this form of a protest was taken by church, and the activity was shown equally by both yakobitsky and Presbyterian priests. On October 29, 1706 Baili Dzhervisvud from Lankarkshire wrote that not only Tories send "the addresses from all places against the union", but also "many Presbyterian priests oppose the union" [3]. And though the motivation of Presbyterians was not so unambiguous, it is important that Calvinists not always supported a position of London. All these messages - and from separate svyashchen-

The idea of the nation is expressed here by means of the idea of independent church which, on the one hand, gets support from the state creating conditions for free development, and with another - is a guarantor of maintaining traditional values of the nation which interests resist to the interests of Britain. One of the historical principles, Presbyterians of Lanark consider the principle of "agreement", understanding it, obviously, in the sense of "covenant" - a precept, the contract. In this regard, the union incorporation breaks it ancient "precept" according to which Scotland has rights to exercise the rights - religious, political, economic. Though the tone of the petition is far from aggressive, but, nevertheless, moralizing and instructive motives in it can be explained with the fact that her authors felt support of more radical representatives of kameronsky opposition and ideology behind the back. This message of lankarkshirsky Presbyterians was supported with actions of parliamentarians from this county, all them was four, one them whom represented directly royal go.

Arrivals of a baroniya of Glasgow also gave the votes in protest objedi-, voting against and under the first article, and under the union in general [4]. Montgomery for the first time got to parliament and had still no experience of political activity though, .

>, - cooking of the union in 1702

The system of patronage and political management existing in Scotland as an element traditional vertical and horizontal social. represented the isolated event, but it was made out within political and parliamentary activity of Scotland, within New Britain.

but not a wide sphere of influence of Montrose who here in practice realized the patronage principles. Perthshire was presented by four parliamentarians in integrated parliament, one of which, Mungo Graham Morphine, prodol-

1707. -

the tel it was carried to to members of the Squadron, where it entered together with even one before -

>. considered Montrose's "agent" in Scotland, and within new already British structures he continued the career, in particular, in 1718-1720, under the boss.

However the antiuniatsky protest took not only the forms of peace petitions. Street disorders and revolts which were influenced by both Edinburgh and Glasgow, and Damfriz and Stirling became one of manifestations of discontent with incorporation. The parliament representing the interests of the Scottish elite carried out actions for suppression of these movements from October to December, 1706

As a result of national performances the government was forced to send troops, it was ordered to them "to ensure the peace in Edinburgh" and to act as "forces of Parliament" [5]. It, however, was ineffective means against attacks on politicians. When parliamentarians voted under the first article (most basic), among opposition there was a plan of a revolt of the armed kameronets and representatives of other haylendersky clans with a total number from seven to eight thousand people. Parliamentarians could not

not to disturb these manifestations of discontent as the Edinburgh disorders of 1648 when the armed crowd besieged Edinburgh within several days were too alive in memory. At the same time among parliamentarians were, -

- los, there were seventeen representatives of the nobility, twenty nine - counties, sixteen people represented the cities [6].

Continued the people to show actively the discontent and when in yan-1707. .

In February the scope of disorders was so high that, being afraid for the life, politicians and court made the decision, to cancel a celebrating the birthday of the queen which usually took place in a big way and turned, as a rule, into a carnival [7].

>, 1707. , -

in Scotland the tranquility which is occasionally broken by insignificant flashes of city discontent was established by scientific research institute of one and a half decades. And only at the beginning of 1720 18th century over the country the wave of protests swept again. Historians, as a rule, put performances of 1705-1706 and nervousness of the beginning of 1720 in one row, however, it appears, that in terms of the relation to the union, the difference between these two periods of performances exists.


performances happened in Scotland, mainly, on the western coast. The movement in the south of Fife and then as fire with high speed became began

>. (26) - not, Elaye and Pittenweem (on February 2 and 3), Anstrusere (on February 5), to Kingsbarnsa and-. to the north, to the district of Dundee, having captured Valeyfield and Kinkardin, and near on February 17 Blekness and Linlithgow. It declined only after it was successfully suppressed in Montrose (on March 14) and Arbroade (on March 19). But even this list of the listed places does not cover all geography of performances as go, just did not manage to enter all data in the registers what some confusion in establishment of the sequence and exact geography of revolts is connected with.

Thousands of people were involved in performances, not the smaller quantity was directed to their suppression. One thousand people took part in Dizart, according to some data, in a mutiny while on others - two thousand, considering that the revolt continued three days, both figures can be right, belonging to different., -

>- , acting [8].

ny their character. While in England the grocery revolts were for the first time recorded in the 16th century (the first treats 1527), in Scotland they appear only in the 17th century and cover only insignificant territories, being not too considerable.

1709, 1710. , -

shy authorities of a close attention. And after the 20th years of the 18th century they still happened, the malt revolt of 1725, and Porthos's revolt in 1736 were the largest of them. But in 1720. .

Modern historians describe national performances of early modern times or in categories of "old" and "new" forms of regulation of the market relations that means the analysis of economic, social and political processes of "long" XVIII century [9], or as it is done by N.Z. Davies, focus attention on their symbolical to the party. In this regard the Scottish economy and the cities which became the traditional object of study of historians [10] have to be put in a context of political processes till 1707.- , , -

>. , 1720 . -

to vatsya as manifestation of modernization crisis and also as a stage of economic development of Scotland which was a part of process of integration.

The similar point of view is supported by representatives so-called "", - there 18th century. As K. Boton writes in her research devoted to the Parisian grocery revolts of 1775, the historian has to "consider various regional and local factors, a political context in which they [rebels] act and are studied" [11]. The same reasons can fully be carried also to.

K. Uotli notes that the prices were one of factors of disorders. Their growth for the first two decades of the 18th century was up to 144% [12]. However and the prices, obviously, were not the main cause. It is interesting that the most part of the cities covered by revolts were port. Those who visited Scotland at the beginning of the 18th century were surprised with scales of export of the grain which is carried out from its east coast [13]. Expansion of grain export began since 1680 when domestic market was already saturated [14], and actively continued during the period.

1700. - -

the ro-European countries, in the middle of the first decade of the 18th century grain was recognized Scotland as "our medicine". The fourth article of the union gave it free access on the English market, and it laid the foundation for sharp increase in export zer-, . 1718

1722 it increased by 106% in comparison with the period of 1712-1717 [15].

This extending export, as a result of which increase

>, 1720 . -

>, , 1719 .

giving of Lord lawyer Dandas connected these performances with influence of enemies -

It is impossible nevertheless, not to notice what exists, though mediated, but oche-

1720- .

>. 1708 . ,

the arisen vacuum of the power was responsible for stability and an order in society,

>. , 1707. -


for timely deliveries of export according to contracts, did not work any more, and the situation was regulated spontaneously, often, to the detriment of suppliers. In response to a revolt the government takes administrative measures: in May sir David Darlimpl was displaced from a post of Lord lawyer which he held since 1709 for the reason that "to Roksburn (To the State secretary for Shotlan-), - stnik of the last yakobitsky revolt" [17]. Robert Dandas who replaced Darlimpl learned all lessons from resignation of the predecessor and had to punish participants of revolts.

At the same time, it is possible to say that risen achieved the objectives. Nobody died of hunger, and city councils were forced to go for restrictions of the prices. But among results of a revolt there were also more long-term. On the schedules provided in K. Uotli's research it is visible that during 1720-1723 the level of export of grain fell practically to a zero mark that was last time observed in 1710 [18] while export of grain continued to grow in England till 1750 and later, than in Scotland was replaced by import.

In the 80th of the 20th century among the British historians the point of view according to which 20-30 of the 18th century became time of relative social tranquility dominated, and the protest if it also happened, carried "sporadic, in considerable,", preparation of Workers' Struggle of the 19th century", and Marxist historians agreed with such point of view even [19]. Beginning from 1990th, character assessment about-1720. ,

in general negative, on the union of 1707 which was shown within several the decades, subsequent to incorporation, [20]. However in this specific case of the bases to directly connect revolts with a yakobitizm or natsionaliz-. 1720 . .

>, - - a niya of the social conflicts. It did necessary and administrative transformations as a result of which the vacuum of the power which was not allowing the government quickly was formed and to react flexibly to arising protivore-.

stokratiya that was expressed in protection any given groups of the population.

At the same time comparison of performances of the period of preparation and signing 1720- . .

1720- . -

torik, whereas roots of the conflicts, certainly, social. The contradictions which caused revolts originate in the mechanism of the union incorporation which, contributing to the development of some branches of economy, affected a pernicious image others. While disorders of 1705-1706 were structured around process of the conclusion of the union and carried more likely emotional, than социального™ even national otrefleksirovanny character. Over time the emotional party in perception of the union passed into the background while the social and economic component appeared more and more distinctly. In this case, - a rakter of the Scottish modernization.


1. Jones J. Country and Court. England 1658 - 1714. L., 1993. - P. 332.
2. Atlas of Scottish History to 1707. Ed. by P.G.B. Neill and H.L. McQueen. Edinb., 1996.

>- P. 391.

3. Young J.R. The Parliamentary Incorporating Union 1707: Political Management, AntiUnionism and Foreign Policy//Eighteenth Century Scotland. New Perspectives. Ed. by T.M. Devine and J.R. Young. East Linton, 1999. - P. 30.
4. Young J.R. The Parliamentary Incorporating Union 1707: Political Management, Anti-

Unionism and Foreign Policy//Eighteenth Century Scotland. New Perspectives. Ed. by T.M. Devine and J.R. Young. East Linton, 1999. - P. 32.

5. Young J.R. The Parliamentary Incorporating Union 1707: Political Management, Anti-

Unionism and Foreign Policy//Eighteenth Century Scotland. New Perspectives. Ed. by T.M. Devine and J.R. Young. East Linton, 1999. - P. 38.

6. Young J.R. The Parliamentary Incorporating Union 1707: Political Management, Anti-

Unionism and Foreign Policy//Eighteenth Century Scotland. New Perspectives. Ed. by T.M. Devine and J.R. Young. East Linton, 1999. - P. 39.

7. Whatley C. The Scots and the Union. Edinb., 2007. - P. 13.
8. Whatley C. The Union 1707, Integration and the Scottish Burghs: The Case of the 1720 Food Riots//SHR. - 1999. - V. 78, No. 206. - P. 193.
9. Markets, Market Culture and Popular Protest in Eighteenth-Century Britain and Ireland. Ed. by Randall A. and Charlesworth A. Liverpool, 1996.
10. White I.D. Scotland before Industrial Revolution: An Economic and Social History. - 1995.

>- P. 1050-1750.

11. Bouton C. The Flour War: Gender, Class and Community in Late Ancient Regime French Society. Pennsylvania, 1993. P. xxii.
12. Whatley C. The Union 1707, Integration and the Scottish Burghs: The Case of the 1720 Food Riots//SHR. - 1999. - V. 78, No. 206. - P. 198.
13. Journal of Henry Kalmeter&s travels to Scotland, 1719-1720//Scottish Industrial History: A Miscellany Ed. by T.C. Smout. Edinb., 1978. - P. 5, 14.
14. White I. Agriculture and Society in Seventeenth-Century Scotland. Edinb., 1979. - P. 233.
15. Whatley C. The Union 1707, Integration and the Scottish Burghs: The Case of the 1720 Food Riots//SHR. - 1999. - V. 78, No. 206. - P. 201.
16. Rogers N. Riot and popular Jacobitism in early Hanoverian England//Ideology and Conspiracy: Aspects of Jacobitism, 1689-1759 Ed. by E. Cruickshanks Edinb., 1982. - P. 72.
17. Omond G.W. T. The Lords Advocates of Scotland, from the close of the fifteenth century to the passing of the Reform Bill. Edinb. - 1883. - V. II. - P. 304-313.
18. Whatley C. The Union 1707, Integration and the Scottish Burghs: The Case of the 1720 Food Riots//SHR. - 1999. - V. 78, No. 206. - P. 214.
19. Logue K.J. Eighteenth-century popular protest: aspects of the people’s past//The People&s Past. Ed. by E.J. Cowan Edinb., 1980. - P. 109.
20. Whatley C.A. Scottish Society 1707-1830. Beyond Jacobitism, towards industrialization. Manchester, 2000.

Victor Yuryevich Apryshchenko

Federal state educational institution of the highest professional

formations Southern Federal University.


344006, Rostov-on-Don, Bolshaya Sadovaya St., 105.

>.: 89034345583.

Apryshchenko Victor Yur’evich

Federal State-Owned Educational Establishment of Higher Vocational Education "Southern

Federal University".


105, Bolshaya Sadovaya, Rostov-on-Don, 344006, Russia.

Phone: & #43;79034345583.

Ellen Morton
Other scientific works: