The Treaty of Paris 1657 was surely between England and France, not between 'Britain' and France.

Good to see another perspective on our history being published.

Bad for the reporter not knowing that "the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was a state that was created on 1 January 1801 by the merger of the Kingdom of Great Britain (itself a merger of the former Kingdoms of Scotland and England in 1707) and the Kingdom of Ireland. It ended upon Irish independence on 6 December 1922 when the Anglo-Irish Treaty created the Irish Free State.
The merger followed the Irish Rebellion of 1798 and the crisis over the mental health of King George III, given that both separate kingdoms could in theory appoint different regents. The union was enacted by means of the Act of Union, passed by both the Irish Parliament and the British Parliament. The British government controversially awarded gifts of titles, land and money to Irish Members of Parliament to encourage their support for the merger, since most of them had previously been against union.[citation needed] Some saw this as offering compensation for the loss of status through loss of seats that this would bring (many of the seats represented rotten boroughs and were seen as the "property" of families and of financial benefit). Most outside the Irish parliament, and most historians subsequently, saw it as blatant bribery to achieve something that could not be achieved by normal means."

I googled and consulted Wikipedia. The Evening Rag should've had all this on their own files!!!

If it was during the "Protectorate" then good ole Ollie would have included Scotland when he signed, though illegally.
What's new?

No 2
I don't see any mention of the "United Kingdom of Gt Britain and Ireland"
I thought we were discussing a period of Scots history.
Or is Irish history more important?

#1 Yes it was a treaty only between England and France.
#2 I didnt see a reference here either of the UK. but the term Britain is correct After Elizabeth's death in 1603 the kingdoms shared one King, James VI of Scotland and I of England. On 20 October 1604 he proclaimed himself "King of Great Brittaine" (thus including Wales and also avoiding the cumbersome title "King of England and Scotland"). This was the time of the union of the crowns
I would like to see the diary (or Diaries) as a whole published, as it is an important document and will be of interest to many. It is probably just as important and would say more significant (it covers more events and geographic area) than the dairies of samuel pepys

This is good news for anyone interested in or studying Europe in the 17th century.

Although, the period is well documented by John Evelyn and Samuel Pepys. They both concentrate mainly on England and London, particularly the end of the Civil War, Cromwell and the reign of Charles II.

It will be of great benefit to historians to have a first hand account of other countries, people and courts in Europe during the period.

Fascinating reading! The Scots are a well-travelled lot, aren't they?

The treaty of Paris would not have needed to include Scotland as France and Scotland already had a treaty
of mutual protection, the Auld Alliance 1295.

Yeh Moira, we had to be, all the foreigners coveted our land so much we had to get out and take our generous, and hospitable good nature to the rest of the world.

#5 No, it was between Britain and France. As the article points out Cromwell had abolished the Scots Parliament which was only restored on the return of Charles II.

Although there was no formal Act of Union both countries were effectively run by Cromwell's lot, as indeed were parts of Ireland.

I hope this diary is published without amendment.

Arthur @ 8 & 9

The Auld Alliance between Scotland and France was rescinded by the Scottish government with the Treaty of Edinburgh in 1560.

This was about 100 years before Fraser went on his travels or wrote his diaries.

In 1603 a Scottish King, James VI and I succeeded to the English throne, so, it could be argued that the Scots had long coveted the English throne and England.

Joanna 11
How does the fact that James the VI succeeded to the English throne (through his Tudor blood) be used to argue that "the Scots had long coveted the English throne and England"?
I am unaware of any previous Scottish king claiming the southern throne.
Now, the other way around.

Wayne @ 12

I was replying to Arthur's remark about everyone else coveting Scotland. The Scots managed to claim the throne of their neighbour where the English failed. King James and his nobles wanted the English throne and they most certainly did 'covet' it.

Many Scots travelled south with King James and caused much resentment among the English nobility, because of the favour that the King (understandably) awarded them.

The succession of James passed peacefully, yet in English law James's claim was uncertain. Since 1351, foreigners were forbidden to inherit English lands, which might block James from inheriting the Crown and its estates. The parliamentary succession statute of 1544 mentioned no heir after Elizabeth and her children (if any), while the 1547 will of Henry VIII debarred his Scottish relatives from the throne.

There was also another claimaint the king had a cousin, Lady Arbella Stuart, another Scottish descendant of Henry VII but English-born. Exempt from the 1351 aliens statute, Arbella was a serious contender.

No English King ever succeeded to peacefully, or took the Scottish throne by force. Therefore, the Scots scored a coup (albeit without force) by claiming the English one.

The history between England and Scotland is long, complex and is not all one-sided.

"I am unaware of any previous Scottish king claiming the southern throne."

Wayne @ 12

James IV (brother in law of Henry VIII) invaded England at the Battle of Flodden in 1513.

Mary, Queen of Scots styled herself Queen of Scotland, France and England and lost her head because of it.

The monarchs of both countries in history were greedy and they did covet one another's country and land. As I said, it was a 2-way street.

Joanna
Yes James coveted the English throne, as his right, because to himself, and a large party of English nobles, he was the legal heir, as could be argued for his mother in the previous generation.
Before marrying into the English royal family no Scots monarch tried to claim the throne of England and would definitely have no southern party behind them if they did.
That is a bit different from Edward the 1st, et al., illegally invading a country and trying to conquer it for no other reason than it was there.

I do mean James the VI there.

The battle of Flodden was not part of a war of conquest, this area, in what is now Cumbria was in a no man's land contested since the Norman Conquest of England.
Scotland had just as much right to this area as England.

For goodness sake Wayne,

What do you think James IV was doing at the Battle of Flodden - just on an away day trip to England?

He was desirous of kicking Henry VIII off his throne and grabbing it for himself. Failing that, he was on a land grab of the Northern counties of England.

But, if you want to view the English as always being the aggressors then on you go........... don't let the facts get in the way will you?

I do not operate on patriotic emotion - I am only interested in historical fact and yours are a little naive.

Also, I am not going to enter into an argument with you of England bad, Scotland good because:

a. Its not true.
b. You're not up to it.

erm.... is Flodden not in Nothumberland Wayne?

Wayne,
"
The battle of Flodden was not part of a war of conquest, this area, in what is now Cumbria was in a no man's land contested since the Norman Conquest of England.
Scotland had just as much right to this area as England."

Flodden is in Northumberland ...... try telling your average person from there that Scotland has a right to their land........ then or now.

What do you think the Border Reivers were? There were English reivers as well - the border was fiercely contested by both countries.

I am keeping copies of personal photos, emails, journals and movies on DVD for posterity. I should imagine that my descendants in say, 2000 years time would be interested in our life today.

People's reactions to this are interesting, reveal a lot about them. Many are amazed that I think the planet will still exist then, others say there won't be DVD players, yet others say noone would be interested.

I find it all fascinating.

There's no point, were all doomed I tell ye, doomed!

Wow... I thought it was just bad teachers that made me think growing up in Scotland that Scottish history is complicated and hard to follow but what it really is, is that it IS complicated and hard to follow!
Living in the U.S. now I want to educate my kids on their heritage but I think I'm going to have a really hard time since I can hardly follow it myself. Anyone out there recommend a good concise history of Scotland?

Angela are ye ready lass seatbelts on let's go
Ireland...St Ninian...Dalradia...celts, picts, scots, vikings...bang...kapow...crash...bang...wallop, and a bit o assasination, rape n pilage....Scotland....Rob the bruce....edward longshanks....wants... it's mine gotta have....naw ye dinnae it's oors yer no gettin it.... here pope geis a haun, here tell him.... aye taht's right... eddie pal get aff it's theirs....Treat o Arbroath....willie wallace aff wi his heid an ither bits....this isnae right...
Bannockburn.... noo will ye tak a tellin its oors awa hame an stay there.....Mary Queen of the South....
Were aw Catholics.....John Knox......naw were no
awa ye go.....awright then had enough o this anyway
Liziie the poxy virgin Queen o even further south.....
aff wi her heid an aww, even if she is ma cousin.....here this isnae right either......ouch that hurt....go an dinnae dae tha....how no.....covenanters.....were aw protestant now.... naw were no.....were no haen ony bishops here.....jenny geddes..... stool..... crump.... that hurt tae.... King James sixth an furst......dae ye think if ah show them ma erse they'll clap ony louder.....Gunpowder plot......nae bang....guy fawkes....aff wi his heid an ither bits.....right wer'e definately aw protestant now.... naw wer no....union o parliaments wi much connivance, corruption an skullduggery.......bonnie prince charlie.....twit n poof......cullodden.....bang crash wallop....treatchery.....buther cumberland....
ouch tha hurt a lot.....highland clearances.....good queen vickie.....lord lyon king at
arms......tartans....british empire...harry lauder.....two world wars....european union.....devolution......

Arthur,

Ye left oot Henry McLeish!!!

You could've added - european union.....devolution..........Henry McLeish.......dirty.......thieving........scumbag.......Jack McConnell......eejit........dense.....

Sorry, stand corrected on Northumberland.
It is literally what it says, the land north of the Humber, it was an independent entity and after the conquest it was a Palatinate ran by the Bishop of Durham.
I accept that in this day and age Northumbrians consider themselves part of England but it was a bit different after the conquest when their only allies against the Normans were the Scots.
The dynastic marriage (c1067) between Malcolm III and the English Princess Margaret (later Saint Margaret) was probably responsible for the Lothians (Northumbrian at that time) passing into Scots control and also giving the Scots king claim to the whole country of Northumberland.
The Northumbrian form of English became the basis of Lowland Scots.
Flodden was part of a two pronged attack on the southern English/Normans with the French expected to invade in the south.
Scotland has never been strong enough to conquer the whole of the island.

Some things just arenae worth mentioning!

Angela, never mind tha boys, they'll be carryin on all day!! :)

what about "Reportage Scotland: Scottish History" by David Stevenson and Louise Yeoman?? never read it , only heard about it

Arthur... brilliant! Now if only my kids could understand you, I'd just let them read that!

Re No. 4 Perhaps he has not read the article properly. It is about a gentleman's travels in the eighteenth century and not a discussion on Scottish history.

AJ/Arthur.....well done on the 'funny', tho I think perhaps the truth of it is no too funny!

"Flodden was part of a two pronged attack on the southern English/Normans with the French expected to invade in the south.
Scotland has never been strong enough to conquer the whole of the island"

So, Wayne,

You admit that the Scots of the day were just as aggressive as the dastardly English. Even though the Scots thought they would get a bit of help from the French who btw: were a bit preoccupied at the time with fighting the English.

They were all as bad as each other in those days and the Auld Alliance benefited the French far more than it ever did the Scots. So, its hardly surprising that the Scots dissolved it in 1560 is it?

Wayne,

Northumbria was a Kingdom in its own right during Anglo Saxon times in the 6th and 7th century.

After the Norman conquest all of the seperate Anglo Saxon kingdoms which had made up the area now known as England were eventually conquered by the Normans.

East Anglia was one of the last to fall - due to our local hero known as Hereward the Wake.... an Anglo Saxon version of William Wallace.

Joanna,

The politics of the 16th century benefited only a relatively few people in both countries - The Monarchs and Aristocracy. It's unfair to suggest all Scots and English were aggressive - it was solely their respective feudal overlords who were the blood thirsty greedy swine.

AJ how true, and how little has changed!!

What, you mean Hereward the wake looked like Mel Gibson too, what a coincidence!

Well said AJ

That was always the case - the monarchy, nobility and power brokers of whatever nationality, have always been a unscrupulous lot.

As for the 'common folk' - well they were mere cannon fodder to help their greedy 'betters' achieve more land, wealth and power.

Either that or the ancestors of today's nobility slept' their way into their titles by going to bed with the monarch of the day. Most of the Dukedoms were awarded in the royal bedchamber to the mistress or in the case of James I and VI - boyfriend of the day.

Arthur,

500 years ago Mr Blair would've had an axe through his head ages ago :)

Yes Joanna, the Royals had a penchant for poofery in the old days. It was a hell of a way to grab a shire or two!!!:(

Arthur,

I think Mel Gibson may well have been going to do Hereward the Wake instead of William Wallace but the Scottish thing was more scenic and less boggy than the Fens. :))

Arthur,

Brilliantly put. Such a wealth of knowledge and from the spelling, I would guess that you are quite young.

Joanna,

How dare you compare a fenland bumpkin with oor own Wullie Wallace, champion of the Scottish people, scourge of the English and husband to a murdered wife!

nah nah aj jist his neck!

Thank you Moira, and from the spelling I would guess
that you are not aquainted with Scottish Dialects.

AJ

Are you confusing Mel Gibson with Russell Crowe? Surely, it was Maximus Gladiatorius who had the line 'husband to a murdered wife'?

Anyway, if this diarist, Fraser had been about - we could have been more sure what exactly was going on at the time.

Possibly, Gibson did Wulle W because he fancied himself in a skirt as well :))

AJ, or was it husband to a murdered mistress??!! Russell might get a bit angry ya stole his line!

Arthur 24 - love it!
Fit wye did the nae pit it lik at fin I wis at school?

Seriously, you should publish an illustrated version - bound to be a hit.
(You could do subtitles for the non-bilingual.)

Somebody's done a series of books called horrible histories of.....
nipped at the post eh!

Angela 23
There's a book called "Scotland Bloody Scotland"
by The Baron of Ravenstone.
It's brief, though not very comprehensive.
It's also funny and would not put your kids off entirely, as most history books probably would.

If there's a Horrible History of Scotland, Angela, that's what you need.

Lanna and Joanna,

You saw through my pontification!

btw your names together sound pretty groovy;)

Arthur #45 good comeback!

#35/38 AJ/Joanna Well said!! :)

AJ, well thank there, Mister.... ;)

#24
Arthur, man but that was braw. Best read in days. Pure dead brilliant!
Can I have a signed copy when you publish?

#23
Angela,
the best and most readable book I have read on Scottish history is The Story of Scotland by Nigel Tranter (ISBN 1-897784-07-4). It is not deep and complex, just readable to get your interest and for bairns wi oot wir ain leid it's in English.

Let hope that they publish Rev Fraser's work in full and unaltered. Looking forward to reading it.
Can the Scotsman tell us when it comes out in print as they fired interest in the first place?

#40 AJ
Did ye nae mean "Squire or two" ?

51 Apparently, according to my daughter who has read it there is a Horrible History of Scotland called Bloody Scotland By terry Deary.

Arthur.... I have just read your reduced Scottish history..... brilliant !! I was going to watch David Starkey tonite, but it will be a bit of an anti-climax after all your Bang, Wham,Whallop.

Signed copy for me too please.

Thanks everyone for your recommendations. I am familiar with the Horrible History series, but have been unable to get my hands on the Scottish one. I like to shop on Amazon but I don't think the British site ships to the U.S. yet. Just have to keep saving my pennies to get home on holiday. Contrary to popular belief not all Americans have loads of money. Uh oh better not open that can 'o wurms!

Angela 23

Horrible Histories Bloody Scotland is a great read. I'm looking at it right now. I bought it at a bookshop in Edinburgh. My son loves it. It basically takes the important events, cracks jokes about them and informs at the same time. You'll laugh and learn.

Arthur! excellent history lesson! I'll take some signed copies over here too....

Yes, thanks for the excellent post and history lesson, Arthur - very well summarised.

Arthur..I hope you're keeping a diary for the Scots of 100 years hence...just in case the Scottish dialect and 'word-usage' becomes homogenized or lost.

Someone in some space-station archive will find it, and say..'This is how our ancestors spoke, it's a 'lost language' who can decipher it?
Don't forget to leave them a dictionary.
Hilarious.

#60
Angela, you can get the Nigel Tranter I suggested on amazon.com for about $14 US and they can also get the Bloody Scotland recommended by others;which my son had as a child: although it is a much simpler book than Nigel's, but maybe that is what you require

And so it was the travellers found a dead planet which had been teeming with life, they found a protected cave with many treasures and artifacts and knew there had been intelligent life. Their best engineers and scientists
spent decade deciuphering the languages and making the artifacts work again and last they came to a large
flat round tin with a long ribon wound round a metal reel, it took the longest time to work out but they did
they saw the intelligent life move again, they heard it speak but last was the most difficult of all. they never understood what it meant. it said

The End

A Walt Disney Production

To paraphrase Arthur C Clarke

Which remindsm

Wahts the difference between Robbie Burns and Walt Disney

That's right

Robbie Burns But Walt Disnae

Arthur 24 fabulous...if there were an Oscar of postings ..you'd qualify! I tried to copy/paste it but couldn't without copying the entire article plus 66 postings and god knows what else. It's likely though that the Scotsman holds everything published as copyright. If you have the time and inclination though, I would appreciate an Email with an attachment of the posting...rgsimpson@shaw.ca
Thanks...keep writing!

I look forward to the final transcript. Will it be published for general reading or be set as reference in university libraries for scholarly use? A costly project to undertake in general appearance.

#24 - Thank you Arthur for an inspired and slightly Pythonesque summary of history.

Excellent!

I hope they publish Fraser's diary intact. It would be great reading.

#20 Joanna: you're so right about the back and forth raids in the Borders. Some of my mother's family came from the Scottish Borders - their history is full of tales of raids and stealing flags from the tower of the Sheriff of Something or Other. How they ever figured out where to actually draw the border line across, I'll never know, as it sure seemed fluid. Enjoyed your history lessons, thanks.

Arthur, you had me just flowing along with you until you hit Harry Lauder. After that I was all tensed up and waiting for you to throw in Andy Stewart and Donald Where's yer Troosers. Guid yin.

Shelley... would you consider parting with it when you're done. I'd pay you obviously and pay for the postage. Are you in Texas too? Not Houston by any chance?

Well afore they close this thread, it has digressed somewhat from the original article, and I have unwittingly played a part in that. I am gratified by the pleasure my wee piece at 24 has given so many people
it was just a wee bit of fun, which I never thought would take wings as it has.
I may take it further and flesh out the bones, if in doing so I can maintain the flow, interest, and humour.
Thank you all for your kind words, let's see what happens next.

Menzies @ 70

I have family living in the Scottish Borders and the Northumbrian Borders. It is a fascinating and beautiful region of the UK and is steeped in history. From the remmants and stories of the Reivers, the Pele Towers, the great castles of Bamburgh and Alnwick, the Abbey's of Dryburgh and Jedburgh and of course even further back the Roman wall itself.
The Borders are well worth a visit and should not just be thought of as a mere crossing point into either country.

Regards.....:))

That was highly entertaining and I could fair hear the screams and clashing o' swords in the backgroon.....almost caught a whif o' blood anaw....excellent....excellent yet another fine example o' the Scots scribe!

By the way ah know its aff the point but could ye mibbe throw a wee bit in aboot Sawney Bean....always gave me the willies that at school...luvved it!

Like the bit about "highwaymen" (ie 17th century muggers) in Newcastle.

No much change there then in over 300 years!

i look forward to a full publication of these journals also.

We need Cromwell back to abolish the Scottish Parliament.

Great article, and the feedback is wonderful! Thanks to you all for sharing your wisdom and wit. With such quality entertainment as this, who needs television?