Al Zan
King
who rule Scotland in 1690 to 1760? Was it England or Scotland?
And who was king of Scotland in 1690?
And who was king of Scotland in 1690?
Scotland
- Thread starter Al Zan
- Start date
Loaf Warden
(no party affiliation)
As I understand it, neither England nor Scotland "ruled over" the other during this period. The two nations had been united when the Scottish King James VI, a descendant of the English King Henry VII, ascended to the English throne in 1603 as James I of England. Neither country was overlord to the other. To answer your first question literally, then, the rulers of Scotland from 1690 to 1760 were:
House of Stuart:
William III, 1689-1702
Mary II, 1689-94 (ruled jointly with William III)
Anne, 1702-14
House of Hannover:
George I, 1714-27
George II, 1727-60
These were all also the rulers of England, of course, but because England and Scotland had been united into a single monarchy, rather than because anybody conquered anybody else.
House of Stuart:
William III, 1689-1702
Mary II, 1689-94 (ruled jointly with William III)
Anne, 1702-14
House of Hannover:
George I, 1714-27
George II, 1727-60
These were all also the rulers of England, of course, but because England and Scotland had been united into a single monarchy, rather than because anybody conquered anybody else.
england and scotland were one country after the 1603 union of the crowns under the stuarts. in 1690 william of orange was king of england and scotland after the glorious revolution of 1688. the act of union of 1707 joined the english and scottish parliments. so the kings of scotland between 1690-1760 were who ever was also king of england
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
A little correction pawpaw, England and Scotland were not one country until 1707. The "communities of the realm" by at time had much more power than the king. In 1603, the king of Scotland became king of England, but this kind of thing was happening all the time all over Europe, and it didn't make them the same country, just as Spain and Germany were not the same country under Charles V. James VI/I wanted to united the two kingdoms, but he failed and they remained two separate kingdoms until 1707.
Benderino
Loyal American Democrat
Right, the Scots were still independent to a degree until 1707 (we just learned all this stuff in European History class, so I'm excited). The Parliament wished to unify the whole island to prevent a French (Catholic) invasion which potetnially could've been encouraged by the then kicked out Stuart line (I don't know if James II was still alive, but it was probably him, he was exiled in France, BTW).
Al Zan
King
thank you for the info!
Yago
came undone
But I've always dreamed about an Hungarian-Spanish reunification.
Richard III
Duke of Gloucester
I think another important motive was economic, insofar as the Scot and English peerages were increasingly intertwined and it was deemed useful to merge to watch over their increasingly collective interests.
Also worth noting that James I was so far off of public opinion in 1603 and after that his attempt to mint a common coin with his face on it was rejected by the Sassenach Parliament.
R.III
yaroslav
Emperor
If I recall it correctly, Hungary was not fully added to the Hapburgs Empire until the end of the XVII century, after the battle where the Turks lost Beda. In Charles V's times, the Hapburgs only rule a mere 1/3 of the Hungarian Territory, so I wouldn't speak about Spanish-Hungaryian union...
No that the idea of Austria-Spanish-Hungary reunification is not cool
Benderino
Loyal American Democrat
Agreed Richard III, economic motives played a huge role, especially as England tried to "shore up" her mercantilism.
Similar threads
