Talk:Acts of Union 1707

message: Due to all past discussions being inactive since last November, the previous talk page has been archived. Adam אָדָם (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archived 

message: The devolved parliament is not directly related to the acts of union. Count Truthstein (talk) 14:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. There should be some mention of the new parliament, even if it is just a see also link instead of a dedicated section. Road Wizard (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A new Scottish Parliament" section should be removed 

message: I don't know what this phrase is supposed to mean, so I can't correct it. Perhaps someone else can. "pensions and so forth not outwith the usual run of government." Poihths (talk) 01:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems like plain ordinary English to me. Hogweard (talk) 13:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo

message: Clearly a judgement call over how far back an 'historical background' should go. But a long term overview might suggest that the Union between Scotland and England was merely the closing chapter in a story of uniting British kingdoms which had been going on ever since the Romans had left more than a thousand years earlier. Both the Scotland and England of 1707 were themselves created by the progressive amalgamation or union of a multitude of earlier smaller British kingdoms, and the Union of 1707 could be described as simply the final event in a long-term historical process. Cassandra  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.229.231 (talk) 11:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Background - How far back? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Acts of Union 1707. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081210200006/http://www.parliament.uk:80/actofunion/tk_01_dream.html to http://www.parliament.uk/actofunion/tk_01_dream.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081012160340/http://www.parliament.uk:80/actofunion/tk_02_cromwell.html to http://www.parliament.uk/actofunion/tk_02_cromwell.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080925233310/http://www.parliament.uk:80/actofunion/09_bribery.html to http://www.parliament.uk/actofunion/09_bribery.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Being merely Canadian, I can't quite make out the following passage: 
Although described as a Union of Crowns, until 1707 there were in fact two separate Crowns resting on the same head (as opposed to the implied creation of a single Crown and a single Kingdom, exemplified by the later Kingdom of Great Britain).
The implication of "until 1707" seems to be that after 1707 there was no longer "two separate Crowns resting on the same head".  If not X="Union" what "X of Crowns" reduced their number, separateness, or resting pate?  
In my own crib, I began to rewrite this as "Although described as a Union of Crowns, it was actually a merger of two parliaments whose separate crowns already resided upon the same head" ... but then I lost the semantic thread at the problematic aftermath of "until". — MaxEnt 18:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unions of Crowns 

message: The article says:
:By the two Acts, the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland—which at the time were separate states with separate legislatures, but with the same monarch—were, in the words of the Treaty, "United into One Kingdom by the Name of Great Britain".
Where is Wales in that equation? Was Wales not included in Great Britain at the time or was it included in England (or some other possibility)? --MarSch (talk) 06:52, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: See Kingdom of England. Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Geographically the term "Great Britain" refers to the island which constitutes the mainland of England, Scotland and Wales. Wales was (and still is) considered a separate principality within the United Kingdom. However like Scotland and Ireland at the time it did not have a separate legislature, being governed directly by the British parliament in London. Mediatech492 (talk) 21:19, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure it's in good faith but that's a rather confused and ambiguous reply (e.g., if you are talking about post union, England also did not have a separate legislation; if pre-union both Scotland and England did). No need to confuse matters: the simple answer to the question posed is that, pre-union, Wales had been incorporated into and was part of the Kingdom of England. Poetic reference to Wales as a principality is fairly commonplace but has had no constitutional basis since long before the 1707 union. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:52, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wales and Great Britain 

message: This seems to be a somewhat earth-shattering element to have been omitted from this article until now, if correct. Is it? Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the change.  Wikiain (talk) 23:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeal? 

message: Some suggested edits or expansion; the bulk of this article is great but I think it would benefit from simplifying the language and some points should be expanded. I'm happy to either put up suggestions or help out.
Lead section; can we tighten the language - a couple of people have mentioned that the wording is confusing, particularly the second paragraph. The reference to three attempts; 1667 is wrong but also debatable (see below). 
Previous attempts; I don't think the section on James really explains why he wanted a Union and it matters since his attempt to unify the churches was a major spark in the Civil Wars.
Interegnum; this omits the Second and Third Civil Wars which were the direct result of the Kirk Party attempting to impose Union by restoring Charles I, then Charles II. Again, understanding why they wanted it is important (economics being one element).
Later attempts Impetus for this incorporating union came almost entirely from King William, who feared leaving Scotland open to a French invasion. 
I don't think this is correct; William was sympathetic for various reasons but the impetus came from Scottish Episcopalians. Again, this distinction matters because it relates to divisions in 1707 plus the fact that the unlike previous attempts, the churches were kept separate. The balance between religion, politics and economics is what adds complexity to this event.
English perspective; I think this omits some very important elements.
Any thoughts? I can do suggested rewrites and then discuss; I can see there's been a lot of work put in but I always find a different perspective helps me and it could be made even better. 
Robinvp11 (talk) 19:23, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested clarifications 

message: A new article which presented some additional material to here has enabled partial editing of this article.
Hope the adjustments help clarifying historian/current view of positions of the key parties in 1706/7.
Kaybeesquared (talk) 22:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added some material and citations

message: The position of Scotland was certainly difficult as a result of the Darien scheme. Since G.N. Clark was English and in his assessment I only see a benefit for Scotland to accept the Hanoverians to avoid unwanted conflicts and difficult relations with England, it's hard for me to agree that what was earned was of "inestimable value". Scotland did not have many choices and it sounds like the choice to join in 1707 was of unparalleled value. Based on the facts, it appears to me Scotland just resigned itself to the idea of having to follow England into a union because things could not go worse in the early decades of the 1700s.
ICE77 (talk) 06:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  G.N. Clark's assessment 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion