HOME | DD
procrastinating2much — Kingdom of Scotland, c. 1405
Published: 2018-10-22 22:20:18 +0000 UTC; Views: 3029; Favourites: 59; Downloads: 49
Redirect to original
Description
The Stewart dynasty rose out of the ashes of the macMalcom dynasty. During this period the Kingdom underwent an economic slump after the loss of Berwick-upon-Tweed. However, it slowly transitioned into a renaissance kingship under the Jameses, gaining the Northern Isles from Norway, finally completing the borders of modern Scotland. The creation of the Lordship of the Isles centralised power in the west and slowly brought the far-reaching Gaelic Scotland under the control of the king.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References:
Grant, A., 2007. Franchises North of the Border: Baronies and Regalities in Medieval Scotland. [Online]
Available at: eprints.lancs.ac.uk/633/
[Accessed 7 October 2018].
Lynch, M., 1992. Scotland: A New History. Pimlico ed. London: Pimlico.
McNeill, P. G. & MacQueen, H. L., 1998. An Atlas of Scottish History to 1707. Revised ed. Edinburgh: The Scottish Medievalists.
Related content
Comments: 16
Noice map, my dude...
Sorry if I can't provide you with some cool insight, I don't really know much about Scotland.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I like this. The Kingdom of Scotland fascinates me for how weird its monarchy is. It's a weird sort of situation where the King/Queen of Scots isn't necessarily the monarch of a country, they're more like the chieftain of a clan called the Scots who are made up of many smaller clans that happens to have a country called "Scotland" as their patrimony.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah pretty much! People in Scotland (especially before the independence wars) wouldn’t have seen themselves as Scottish, but as English, German, Gaelic, Cumbric, Norse or a Scot all loosely swearing fealty to the actual king of Scots, who had relatively little power compared to kings of England. Clan chiefs, bishops, lords, sheriffs and earls had much more control over their region than the king did, and could choose to support them in times of war if they wanted to.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's feudalism for ya. Another thing I like is that Scotland also had a Parliament from the 1300s up until the Acts of Union, one that went through periods of being fairly weak to being a real thorn in the side of the Scottish Monarchy. Actually, from what I've read, most people just held that it was a weak and impotent organ of government for most of modern historiography, which is probably provincialism on behalf of the English since their parliament was a real parliament and not that of the weird kilt-wearers on the other side of the border.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, during the Stewart dynasty, ALL of the kings were kings during their minority (king at a young age and could legally hold no power) so parliament had to take over and appoint regents who ranged from power hungry and violent to pretty incompetent at launching a successful attack on tiny clans in the Highlands. When the king rose to power though, parliament couldn’t really do anything and he could pass whatever he wanted, which is why the Stewart’s were so unpopular as they continuously passed insane tax laws that benefitted nobody because they spent it all on wine
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Mary I comes to mind, given that she spent pretty much her entire youth in France and Scotland had to be attended to by the actual Scottish people.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, funnily enough the regent during her time in France was Mary of Guise, her mother! She was insanely cruel and used French armies to brutally suppress any Protestant/Unhappy Catholic risings in burghs (towns of Scotland with trading rights). The idea of France was to merge Scotland and France into one Catholic kingdom with Scotland becoming a dukedom or viceroyalty of some kind.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I remember that too. It was some thing where if Mary and Francis II died without an heir, then Scotland would become part of France.
Sometimes you have to wonder where Scotland might have ended up if it had been lucky enough to have rulers that gave a damn about running it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, it was secret accords signed by Mary that ceded Scotland to France during her wedding. It never happened in the end as the Reformation was successful and a pro-English regent representing her 5 year old son, James VI (who would later inherit the throne of England and allow for the creation of Great Britain) took power in a coup and Mary was executed by Elizabeth.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yep. Scotland just couldn't catch a break, could it?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Nah, unfortunately it was pretty much a vassal of England or France since the auld alliance immediately after the Wars of Independence.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's why I bring justice for Scotland when I play it in EU4 by first kicking England's ass and then going HAM on France.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I’ll need to try that one day in EU4!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0