How was The Kingdom of Great Britain Formed?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 มี.ค. 2024
  • How was The Kingdom of Great Britain Formed?
    Going all the way back to the 16th century, England and Scotland had been two entirely different governments under different monarchs, and in the case of Scotland, uniquely controlled in part by the Highland clan system. Furthermore, for centuries now the neighboring states had been at odds and on and off warfare, with the Scottish Wars of Independence being well remembered by both sides. But, when the Queen of England died heirless in 1603, a past of diplomatic marriages and childbearing set England and Scotland on an entirely new trajectory…
    ♦Consider supporting the Channel :
    / knowledgia
    ♦Please consider to SUBSCRIBE: goo.gl/YJNqek
    ♦Music by Epidemic Sound
    ♦Script & Research :
    Skylar Gordon
    #History #Documentary

ความคิดเห็น • 1.4K

  • @glitchyikes
    @glitchyikes ปีที่แล้ว +471

    The union of 1707 only merge the crowns of Scotland and England to form Kingdom of GB. The -Lordship- Kingdom of Ireland remains separate until the Acts of Union in 1801 when the UK is formed.

    • @agentfundacji1
      @agentfundacji1 ปีที่แล้ว +20

      Exactly, i felt something was wrong

    • @ChunkaMonka
      @ChunkaMonka ปีที่แล้ว +44

      The video is titled "How was The Kingdom of Great Britain Formed" - not UK... also clearly states 'Great Britain' on the 1707 map - there are no inaccuracies.

    • @glitchyikes
      @glitchyikes ปีที่แล้ว +12

      @@ChunkaMonka map transition at 10:00 and accompanying commentary

    • @IrishMedievalHistory
      @IrishMedievalHistory ปีที่แล้ว +12

      @@ChunkaMonka map is wrong.

    • @JamesHussey404
      @JamesHussey404 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      @@ChunkaMonka Then why is Ireland part of the 1707 map for Great Britain? The Lordship of Ireland was seperate from Great Britain up until the act of union of 1801 when the UK was formed. So there are inaccuracies.

  • @tod1way
    @tod1way ปีที่แล้ว +174

    Elizabeth died, her Scottish cousin, who already ruled Scotland, also inherited the English crown. Really not as complicated as people want to make it seem. More like an inevitability, really.

    • @williethomas5116
      @williethomas5116 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      There were two minor things that were ignored. It was an orderly transfer of Power due to the work of Robert Cecil.
      One was Mary's conviction of treason could have if Elizabeth decided resulted in attainment or forfeiture of all claims to English lands and titles and Henry VIII's will have precedence to the heirs of his younger sister Mary (the Brandons and later the Grey's) over that of his older sister Margaret (the Stuarts). But in the end you are right it was a nothing burger.

    • @davidlegrice4207
      @davidlegrice4207 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      That only meant they shared the same monarchy. They were legally separate and had seperate parliaments until 1707.

    • @williethomas5116
      @williethomas5116 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@davidlegrice4207 kinda like the Personal Union of the monarchies of Great Britain and Hanover. It end when Victoria inherited the British crown and her uncle Ernest Augustus inherited the Hanoverian throne.

    • @tod1way
      @tod1way ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@davidlegrice4207 where in my explanation did I refute that? I simply noted how the eventual outcome came about. It makes obvious sense that, at some point, the governments were merged for the sake of uniformity in governance.
      I would venture a guess that, had occurred earlier, maybe Scotland would have been from where the laws came, being that James was Scottish.
      Or, maybe not. It could have been a matter of the closer proximity to the mainland that London ended up being chosen. But, all I said was the death of Elizabeth gave James both kingdoms.

    • @chrisbillig4277
      @chrisbillig4277 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Plus you got the new world who you think helped kick the english out if America..
      We left them
      Wexwere to never ve freinds. You dont claim war say your kand our land..
      Then start holding hands again that is definition of listening to the devil..
      No taxation without representation

  • @amityboy14mo
    @amityboy14mo ปีที่แล้ว +22

    I'm so glad you also mentioned Queen Mary II of England! She's not very well known but I love her so much!!

    • @SALeppard
      @SALeppard ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Mary was also Queen Mary II of Scotland

  • @nicbahtin4774
    @nicbahtin4774 ปีที่แล้ว +59

    They reached 10th administration tech level and owned the required cores.

  • @PakBallandSami
    @PakBallandSami ปีที่แล้ว +148

    “This royal throne of kings, this sceptered isle,
    This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
    This other Eden, demi-paradise,
    This fortress built by Nature for herself
    Against infection and the hand of war,
    This happy breed of men, this little world,
    This precious stone set in the silver sea.”
    ― William Shakespeare

    • @Bluesfan1780
      @Bluesfan1780 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      @Black Lesbian Poet When Britain first, at heaven's command
      Arose from out the azure main
      Arose arose from out the azure main
      This was the charter, the charter of the land
      And guardian angels sang this strain
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      Still more majestic shalt thou rise
      More dreadful from each foreign stroke
      More dreadful, dreadful from each foreign stroke
      As the loud blast, the blast that tears the skies
      Serves but to root thy native oak
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      Still more majestic shalt thou rise
      More dreadful from each foreign stroke
      More dreadful, dreadful from each foreign stroke
      As the loud blast, the blast that tears the skies
      Serves but to root thy native oak
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      The Muses, still with freedom found
      Shall to thy happy coasts repair
      Shall to thy happy, happy coasts repair
      Blest isle regardless, with countless beauty places
      And manly hearts to guard the fair
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves
      Britons never, never, shall be slaves
      🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

    • @nadji6944
      @nadji6944 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Bluesfan1780 من مع

    • @malcolmjcullen
      @malcolmjcullen ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Was prone to writing a load of shite, that lad Shakespeare.

    • @jackwhitehead5233
      @jackwhitehead5233 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@malcolmjcullen said the random internet nobody 🤣

    • @basedtortellini
      @basedtortellini ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@malcolmjcullen heresy

  • @molecatcher3383
    @molecatcher3383 ปีที่แล้ว +75

    Many of today's supporters of Scottish independence think that the Jacobite Rebellions were, at least in part, about regaining indepenence. The reality was that the Stuart monarchs, after James VI, had been very strong supporters of the Union and had no intention of ever giving back Scotland it's independence.

    • @stupidben999
      @stupidben999 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Because ideologues don't talk about facts or logic.

    • @SALeppard
      @SALeppard ปีที่แล้ว +3

      That is actually incorrect stating that the Stuarts were firm supporter's of the Union Charles I, Charles II, James VII/II did no support or
      Advocate any such union. In fact James VII told his son Prince James known to history as the Old Pretender James VIII /III to his supporters to keep Scotland and England separate. The only Stuarts that were in favour if a union were James VI/I William II /III and Queen Anne

    • @molecatcher3383
      @molecatcher3383 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@SALeppard According to your opinion at least half of the Stuart monarchs supported the Parliamentry Union. Also the Stuart monarchs had a very bad record for keeping promises made to the Scottish people so any pledges by Bonnie Prince Charlie to end the Union should be treated with mistrust. His determination to march on London showed where his priorities lay. Also, by 1745 most of Scotland was pro-Hanoverian and pro-Union, with good cause. Scotland was at the beginning of an age of prosperity. Trade with the Americas and India, the beginnings of the future industrial revolution and the intellectual freedom of the Enlightenment were all on the horizon.

    • @SALeppard
      @SALeppard ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@molecatcher3383 incorrect the only two who activity did wad James VI and Queen Anne who was the last monarch of the House of Stuart and if both Scotland and England. William II/III did not actively support it although he thought it was a good idea. 5 of the 7 Stuart duel monarchs did not advocate or support it.

    • @maxtraill4982
      @maxtraill4982 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Whataboutery doesn’t change the fact that it was a conflict largely fought over dissolving the union. Your belief of what the Stuart’s would have done after a success is founded on what ifs not fact. The urge to go for London has nothing to do with the constitutional intentions of the Stuart’s but the only way of winning the uprising

  • @seifsaaed8144
    @seifsaaed8144 ปีที่แล้ว +98

    Great Britain was established when England and Scotland united under one kingdom between 1706 and 1707 under the Acts of Union 1707. The Kingdom of Great Britain lasted until 1801, when it merged with the Kingdom of Ireland to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland between 1800 and 1801 under the Acts of Union 1800.
    Also, Ireland is a separate island from Great Britain. You cannot consider it to be part of Great Britain, and it was also not part of the Kingdom of England. It was once under the control of the Anglo-Normans, a lordship known as the Lordship of Ireland, and then when it was a unified kingdom, it was once an English client state until 1707. And Northern Ireland is not part of Great Britain, it is part of the island of Ireland. The full name of the United Kingdom is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

    • @steveng6788
      @steveng6788 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      No such a thing as a kingdom of Great Britain

    • @adamjd7645
      @adamjd7645 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@steveng6788 There was. During the period 1 May 1707 until 31 December 1800. Which is what the commenter was saying.

    • @steveng6788
      @steveng6788 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@adamjd7645 never has been never will be its an impossibility. For a start no one is king or queen of scotland they are king or queen of the scots. I.e they rule over the people not the country

    • @adamjd7645
      @adamjd7645 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@steveng6788 Dude, seriously, read a history book. That's what it was called between 1707 & 1800. Take it up with the official record. 🤦‍♂️

    • @steveng6788
      @steveng6788 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@adamjd7645 i know my history. If you want to believe a YT video and take that as fact thats upto you.

  • @oliversherman2414
    @oliversherman2414 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I love your channel keep up the great stuff

  • @vikas0505
    @vikas0505 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    The opportunities which the East India company opened up.. by their conquests of the East India and SEA, also drew a lot of the Scots. Many of the early conquestars of the late 17- Early 18th century were Scots.. the opportunity opening up only because Scotland was UK

    • @Yajna007
      @Yajna007 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes.
      I got to know this after reading Śhaśhi Thaṛoor's book _An Era of Darkness_.

    • @Yajna007
      @Yajna007 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      _An Era of Darkness_

    • @Valhalla88888
      @Valhalla88888 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      U mean Great Britain 🇬🇧

  • @llcolj69
    @llcolj69 ปีที่แล้ว +197

    Great Britain is the island comprising of England, Scotland and Wales, it doesn't include Ireland.

    • @edelweiss7928
      @edelweiss7928 ปีที่แล้ว +35

      Geographically yes, politically in 1707-1800 no

    • @grumpy_cat
      @grumpy_cat ปีที่แล้ว +15

      @@edelweiss7928 politically in 1707-1800 yes, that is why the flag was not the same as it is after the Irish act of union

    • @scintillamdei5649
      @scintillamdei5649 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Imagine Honshu saying " We are Great Japan!"

    • @hoonshiming99
      @hoonshiming99 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Depends on what you're referring to. If you're referring to the landmass then yes, it only consists of England, Scotland and Wales. If you're referring to a country then no. The kingdom of Great Britain's territories includes Ireland along with the previously mentioned states.

    • @llcolj69
      @llcolj69 ปีที่แล้ว +18

      @@hoonshiming99 Ireland always remained a separate client kingdom up until the Act of Union, it was never part of the kingdom of Great Britain.

  • @TheBlaqOrder
    @TheBlaqOrder ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Fun Fact:
    Game of Throne's Red Wedding got it's inspiration from The Glencoe Massacre, amongst other famous deadly meals in history.

  • @alparslankorkmaz2964
    @alparslankorkmaz2964 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Nicely explained.

  • @Stand663
    @Stand663 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    The Campbell clan was utterly ruthless. They once in a battle with a rival clan slaughtered 16 thousand of them in a battle. They hanged their bodies on spikes and their blood drained into vast pools on the ground.
    This why when the British empire needed muscle to fight wars, the Scots were always called upon. In Canada for instance, Scots loyalist regiments single handedly defeated the French and their American allies.

  • @candy_moon_3634
    @candy_moon_3634 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    When you showed the clans of Scotland I spent a few seconds looking for my ancestors clan The Ogilvy Clan

  • @dlee645
    @dlee645 ปีที่แล้ว +24

    ARTHUR: How do you do, good lady. I am Arthur, King of the Britons.
    Who's castle is that?
    WOMAN: King of the who?
    ARTHUR: The Britons.
    WOMAN: Who are the Britons?
    ARTHUR: Well, we all are. we're all Britons and I am your king.
    WOMAN: I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous
    collective.
    DENNIS: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship.
    A self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--

    • @CliffCardi
      @CliffCardi ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Oh there you go, bringing class into it again

  • @brokenbridge6316
    @brokenbridge6316 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    The way to host pronounced "Acts of Union" sounded a lot like "Axe of Union." How funny. Nice video.

    • @drewbewho
      @drewbewho ปีที่แล้ว

      And "high.....land". Cringe.

    • @D-A-A-
      @D-A-A- ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Seen this comment just as he said that lol lol lol lol

    • @D-A-A-
      @D-A-A- ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@drewbewho cringe at that

  • @karlwba1372
    @karlwba1372 ปีที่แล้ว +59

    The UK is amazing because of its unique history and its eventual togetherness with its ensuing unshakable ties. Love the Scots, and their lands, culture, history, influence (massive) , we need them at our side is so many ways including culturally , however if they eventually choose to leave then so be it, its their chosen destiny they would have to be accepted with grace, but I want them to stay, i think we need each other more then even now, we need their canny intelligence, their traits of which there are so many.

    • @johngibson3770
      @johngibson3770 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Na.. you lot drag us back.
      Cya.

    • @James-st9uu
      @James-st9uu ปีที่แล้ว

      @@johngibson3770 rebuild the wall and make the scots pay for it.

    • @chickenperson7568
      @chickenperson7568 ปีที่แล้ว +16

      @@johngibson3770 have fun being in debt without us, adios!

    • @SallySturman
      @SallySturman ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@johngibson3770 Pity you didn't say that before joining the Union.

    • @h-Qalziel
      @h-Qalziel ปีที่แล้ว +10

      I personally support independence, but I still appreciate the very kind comments!

  • @Dunsapie
    @Dunsapie ปีที่แล้ว +25

    The Darien Scheme may have bankrupted some of the aristocracy who invested in it, but it did not bankrupt the country. At the union, Scotland, which had no national debt, helped to pay off England's national debt in exchange for access to English trade routes, something it could not have done had it been bankrupt. Also, James VI was not the first British King. Only monarchs after 1707 can be called British so Anne was the first British monarch and George I was the first British King.

    • @MrMabenson1
      @MrMabenson1 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Agreed, it didn't leave Scotland bankrupt but almost a 1/4 of all Scottish liquidity disappeared overnight. There were widespread riots and it had a huge impact on the economy of Scotland. The Scottish govt got some.compensation from the treaty of union (£388000) specifically for the scheme but the average Scot got nothing, The fact compensation was part of the treaty suggests it was a contributing factor in the decision

    • @Dunsapie
      @Dunsapie ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@MrMabenson1 The "compensation" was only given to the Lords who had lost money in the Darien Scheme, and they only got it on condition that they voted in favour of union. "Bought and sold for English gold, such a parcel of rogues in a nation" as the Bard put it. The riots were against the union and because of the roits outside Parliament House the treaty had to be signed in the cellar of the Tolbooth Jail.

    • @MrMabenson1
      @MrMabenson1 ปีที่แล้ว

      So the compensation did help the signing of the union treaty then 🤔?

    • @Dunsapie
      @Dunsapie ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MrMabenson1 Well it did for those who took their forty pieces of silver.

  • @JonnyD1gmail
    @JonnyD1gmail ปีที่แล้ว +24

    The kingdom of Ireland with its own parliament existed from the 16th century until the act of union in 1801 creating the UK. Ireland geographically cannot be apart of Great Britain

    • @dand7763
      @dand7763 ปีที่แล้ว

      Game of Thrones !

    • @KeithMcormack895
      @KeithMcormack895 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Ye but only protestants were allowed to vote and be MPs so Britain basically had all the power

    • @QuietManUK
      @QuietManUK ปีที่แล้ว

      That's why it's was called the United Kingdom... duh!

    • @Dunsapie
      @Dunsapie ปีที่แล้ว

      @@QuietManUK Even today it's united in name only.

    • @imastaycool
      @imastaycool ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Dunsapie Disunited Kingdom of Pedo princes and racist queens

  • @madzangels
    @madzangels ปีที่แล้ว +26

    I remember being in Texas and having to explain that we're not arrogant by calling ourselves 'Great' when it was put to me, it's that 'Great' refers to the largest major land mass of the islands (Comprising Wales, England, Scotland) it's not 'Great' in the sense of 'were amazing' lol

    • @Dunsapie
      @Dunsapie ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Its is called Great Britain to distinguish it from Little Britain, AKA Brittany, in France.

    • @spencerferrier3857
      @spencerferrier3857 ปีที่แล้ว

      You had to explain what "great" means in Texas. Why am I not surprised?🤦

    • @theonetrueking2685
      @theonetrueking2685 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@spencerferrier3857 yes it's as if there would be no practical reason for a Texan to know such a fact to get along in every day life. What brutes these Texans are.

    • @AGrace-tw6ku
      @AGrace-tw6ku ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Great! Pls also keep in mind the fact that 'Slavery, Colonialism & Colonization' are all evil things done by evildoers.
      Around fifty 50 nations fell under British Colonialism; while around twenty five 25 nations under French Colonialism.
      - In the Colonial era all Anglo Western Colonizers did in their Colonies worldwide was build infrastructure, such as roads and ports so that they could ship abundant natural mineral resources, raw materials back to Europe to make fine goods, since there hardly has any mineral resources in Europe. That is what Colonialism is all about; "Pillage and Plunder" at will.
      For instance, it is agreed upon the fact that Africa in general has progressed a lot more in the past 20-30 years than 200 years of Western Colonialism there.
      Besides, World organization such as United Nations, UN was helped founded, with cleverly drawn charters, by the West; only after they have had enough of practicing centuries-long global Slavery, Colonization and Colonialism; in such a way so as to;
      - keep their accumulated wealth to themselves,
      - their accumulated crimes not to get prosecuted by their former victims. 😔
      "Anglo caused most of the world's problems." - David Cameron, former British Prime Minister
      “British society has never been cleansed of the filth of imperialism.” - Salman Rushdie
      The fact that they need to repent & repay their sins & crimes. After all, it's "a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do" thing.
      Like I said, repay and repent your long overdue crimes and sins... Remember the saying, "a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do".
      "History is written by the victors and liars." ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
      Speaking of 'the rule of Law', may I ask where is the rule of law when the Anglo West is practicing centuries-long global Slavery, Colonialism & Colonization?
      May I ask when will the West face justice for their notorious centuries-long global crimes of Slavery, Colonialism and Colonization from North/South America to Australia/New Zealand?
      Speaking of 'crime'.., remember, it’s only a crime if you lose.
      The Anglo Western bloc had been on the winning side for about three centuries.
      Obviously, they couldn't care less about the "crimes" any more. 😔

    • @undeadalex4579
      @undeadalex4579 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@AGrace-tw6ku you mean colonization is basicaly getting rewards after your strong military defeated weaker nation? wont feel bad for defeated nation

  • @lerneanlion
    @lerneanlion ปีที่แล้ว +31

    I read about this like a few years before but what I remembered is simply that the House of Hanover does not wanted Scotland to secede from the union. I'm glad to hear more about this. But still, the fact that they do not wanted Scotland to secede should be mention as well.

    • @QuietManUK
      @QuietManUK ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Um bollocks, nothing to do with that, the Scots went broke over the failed colonisation of Darien and begged the English to bail them out.

    • @lesliehaigh6765
      @lesliehaigh6765 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@QuietManUK agreed they went broke in 1500s I think due to failed attempt off moving to a other country

    • @Tony_milne
      @Tony_milne ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@QuietManUK more to do with the alien act and the act of perdition

    • @NuclearHaggis
      @NuclearHaggis ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@QuietManUK
      Not only was Scotland not broke it had zero debt. The treaty of union actually states that Scotland had zero debt but will take on a share of Englands massive debt, but would receive sixty thousand pounds further down the line to offset any losses incurred. Scotland received sixty percent of this.

    • @QuietManUK
      @QuietManUK ปีที่แล้ว

      @@NuclearHaggis They had no debt because the English paid it off, study some history.

  • @MariNate1016
    @MariNate1016 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Ah this takes me back to Scottish history class at uni lol

  • @johnherlihy4739
    @johnherlihy4739 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great video! 👍

  • @welshxfusionz
    @welshxfusionz ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Please do one about Wales and England

  • @sabfarhan7976
    @sabfarhan7976 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    0:34, it's the 17th century, not the 16th
    The centuries are one ahead of the years

  • @franganr.e.searthra-macleo9214
    @franganr.e.searthra-macleo9214 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    For sure, the Darien Scheme was an economic disaster for Scotland. The fact is portrayed as the last hope for Scotland to stay afloat by joining England. Yet, there's a historical fact that every historian neglects the one that since the Union of the Crowns in 1603 the English navy blocked any ship coming to or from Scotland, which diminished considerably imports and exports for Scotland. This was a long-term plan of starvation by the English, to force the Scots into a union.
    In the 17th century, England generated 5 to 7 million £ revenues, while Scotland's was barely around 160.000£. I guess the revenues could have been higher if the English navy wouldn't have limited trade with Scotland.
    Then how did the Scottish parliament end up signing the act of union? Well, some members had precious lands in northern England, that threatened to be reclaimed by the English nobility should the boost for the union wasn't effective, and other members were offered gold in exchange for support for the union. That's how our legendary Scottish writer exposes it "bought and sold for English gold".
    On May 1st, 1707, 106 out of the 175 MSPs voted in favor of the union. Without asking the population!
    A month followed after the signing, then Glasgow was full of riots and anti-union protests. Of course, democracy wasn't such a thing back in those days...
    I've read the history of Scotland, my dad offered me the book for my 17th birthday, then I read that not only Scots didn't want a union with England cause they didn't want English settlers, but the English didn't want it either cause they didn't want Scottish immigrants! Indeed, this British union has always been based on the elite of the British Isles binding together for the greedy control over the land, nothing else. Even today, Scotland is the country with the most privately owned land on earth: half our land mass is shared and owned between some 432 billionaires.
    Finally, there has been the massacre of Culloden. The last battle fought on Britain's soil. Gosh how confusing would it have been, to pick a side: should I fight for a German monarch, or a Franco-Italian one?
    Anyway, that's it all

    • @garymcatear822
      @garymcatear822 ปีที่แล้ว

      I don't thinks it is as much as 432 billionaires, the numbers are kept low because of a Scottish law that forbids the fragmentation of Scottish land in order to keep it in prestine condition. It is better to moniter 30 billianaires and their land than 432. You can't just buy a bit of land, you have to buy the entire estate and not sell bits of it off to smaller land owners.

    • @docsnoddy2924
      @docsnoddy2924 ปีที่แล้ว

      Bull Shit

    • @Dunsapie
      @Dunsapie ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The Darien Scheme, which was a private enterprise and had nothing to do with the Scottish Government, may have bankrupted the aristocracy who invested in it, but it did not bankrupt the country. At the union, Scotland, which had no national debt, helped to pay off England's national debt in exchange for access to English trade routes, something it could not have done had it been bankrupt.

    • @maxtraill4982
      @maxtraill4982 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Dunsapie £400,000 was invested into the company of Scotland at a time when there was believed to only be £800,000 in the full country. Scots from all walks of life invested in the company and were financially ruined when the company went Bankrupt. Also important to note that the man who wrote the ‘equivalent’ of what England would pay to Scotland for the acts of Union was William Patterson, founder of the company of Scotland.

    • @waynegoodman3345
      @waynegoodman3345 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Why would England support what was a rival power af the time anymore than it would France or Belgium or Spain etc?

  • @kevinsworldK.w69
    @kevinsworldK.w69 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Something tells me that Knowledgia forgot they have a series on Skanderbeg lol

    • @thealbozz4059
      @thealbozz4059 ปีที่แล้ว

      Maybe they are working hard for it, I hope it will be an amazing episode

  • @justbraks
    @justbraks ปีที่แล้ว

    Please can you be write the exact names of the epidemic soundtracks you used?

  • @outerheaven8797
    @outerheaven8797 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    The Kingdom is the United Kingdom of Great Britain (the island where England, Scotland and Wales is located) and Northern Ireland. UK= 4 countries, GB= 3 countries.

    • @imastaycool
      @imastaycool ปีที่แล้ว

      Northern Ireland is not a country though.... it's a manufactured failed statelet.

    • @MichaelSidneyTimpson
      @MichaelSidneyTimpson ปีที่แล้ว +1

      not at that time...the UK came in the second acts of union, a century later. Wales and Ireland (and let's not forget Cornwall) were still under the limbo of being considered a wider part of the Kingdm of England--albeit being even more nuanced, that is just a quick and dirty summarized explanation.

    • @msmissy6888
      @msmissy6888 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MichaelSidneyTimpson England used to be several kingdoms including my native county of Sussex

    • @MichaelSidneyTimpson
      @MichaelSidneyTimpson ปีที่แล้ว

      @@msmissy6888 Um, yeah, that is pretty common knowledge. I know the Anglo-Saxon history, and before, pretty well; surely in equal manner to you. I am confused why you thought that was something someone doesn't know.

  • @andrewg.carvill4596
    @andrewg.carvill4596 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    An Irish perspective: So the King of Scotland took over as King of England also in 1603. England then heroically resisted Scottish domination for over a century, but in 1707 England finally gave in due to Scottish persistence. Now, in the 21st Century there is a movement in Scotland to give the English back their independence, but most English people are no longer interested. Don't let's get started on Northern Ireland!

    • @steveng6788
      @steveng6788 ปีที่แล้ว

      Haha

    • @johng810
      @johng810 ปีที่แล้ว

      That's the most interesting and probably factual perspective I've heard. Well put andrew

    • @generaladvance5812
      @generaladvance5812 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      You know how someone is Irish? They have to tell you about it.

    • @Suuusan28
      @Suuusan28 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      😂And Scots have the Tridents so it´s up to them what happens next. :-)

  • @amityboy14mo
    @amityboy14mo ปีที่แล้ว +2

    OMG I LOVE THIS!!!

  • @justbraks
    @justbraks ปีที่แล้ว

    Please what's the song playing? 3:35

  • @sojakia
    @sojakia 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +171

    Amazing video, A friend of mine referred me to a financial adviser sometime ago and we got talking about investment and money. I started investing with $120k and in the first 2 months , my portfolio was reading $274,800. Crazy right!, I decided to reinvest my profit and gets more interesting. For over a year we have been working together making consistent profit just bought my second home 2 weeks ago and care for my family.

    • @rachealhubert74
      @rachealhubert74 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Hi. I’ve been forced to find additional sources of income as I got retrenched. I barely have time to continue trading and watch my investments since I had my second daughter. Do you think I should take a break for a while from the market and focus on other things or return whenever I have free time or is it a continuous process? Thanks.

    • @sojakia
      @sojakia 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@rachealhubert74 Quitting may not be the best approach if you ask me. This is where an AI comes into the picture. I barely have time to trade myself as my job swallows up most of my time. Alice Marie Coraggio, a licensed fiduciary whom has made me over 5 figures in profit in less than seven months, handles my investments. I could leave you a lead if you need help.

    • @rachealhubert74
      @rachealhubert74 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@sojakia Oh please I’d love that. Thanks!

    • @sojakia
      @sojakia 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@rachealhubert74 Alice Marie Coraggio

    • @sojakia
      @sojakia 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Lookup with her name on the webpage

  • @jakobbrown3291
    @jakobbrown3291 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    I’ve never heard the English civil war be called the war of the three kingdoms before, ngl.

    • @xWHITExEAGLEx
      @xWHITExEAGLEx ปีที่แล้ว +2

      The English civil war was only one of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms obviously.

    • @TheBlaqOrder
      @TheBlaqOrder ปีที่แล้ว

      Yeah they changed the name a while back to more accurately reflect the state of affairs at the time

    • @waynegoodman3345
      @waynegoodman3345 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Scotland was a failed colonial power they realised they could only become a successful power by joining England...the union transformed a largely rural backwater on the edge of europe into a modern industrial world power. Anyone who says otherwise is just trying to re write history.

  • @mansour3967
    @mansour3967 ปีที่แล้ว

    Could you please preview the english subtitles down Screen?.. Thanks for your response

  • @ads2365
    @ads2365 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    I love how you put Glasgow as the capital 😁😁🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

    • @yomrwhite607
      @yomrwhite607 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      capital is edinburgh

    • @azhang5438
      @azhang5438 ปีที่แล้ว

      If Scottish English and Scottish Gaelic were different areas, then Scottish English would be Edinburgh while Scottish Gaelic would be Glasgow.

    • @SpaceHCowboy
      @SpaceHCowboy ปีที่แล้ว

      @@azhang5438 Yeah, no. That's wrong
      Sorry.

    • @azhang5438
      @azhang5438 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@SpaceHCowboy that's what I observe. Mostly Glaswegians speak Scottish Gaelic while Edinburghers speak Scots. But this is just my prediction if the two languages are equivalent to separate regions.

    • @mollyoirsghois
      @mollyoirsghois ปีที่แล้ว

      @@azhang5438 are you scottish? cause most scots speak english now

  • @JonathanReynolds1
    @JonathanReynolds1 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Great Britain is the name of the island that England, Scotland and Wales are on. The name of the State is “The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”.

  • @casper_z1259
    @casper_z1259 ปีที่แล้ว +56

    I was surprised when you said people still debate if the union benefited them and was a good idea. The answer is absolutely yes. Exponentially. No war on either border, secured by the Royal Navy, and Scotland having unrestricted access to the largest empire the world would ever see. I'd say Scotland benefited far more than England, who itself had benefited greatly for security reasons.

    • @user-pv8lp6ht3z
      @user-pv8lp6ht3z ปีที่แล้ว +7

      It obviously benefited them but it’s up for debate if it still benefits them. If they never united and Scotland kept its independence, it is undeniable that Scotland would be a much better country today.
      At the time of union the empire was very small, it only grew after Scotland joined. So they didn’t have access to the largest empire, they essentially were a major player in creating it.

    • @barbarossa5700
      @barbarossa5700 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      What a lot of tripe, firstly what empire, England never had an empire and the UK(GB) foundation was created via the three crowns, a Scottish King. Also the American declaration of independence is no more than a modification of the Scottish declaration of Arbroath. Likewise Canadas founding father was also a Scot. The Scot spawned hegemonies, we aren't recipients of them or as you said mere beneficiaries.
      The Union of the Crowns (Scottish Gaelic: Aonadh nan Crùintean; Scots: Union o the Crouns) was the accession of James VI of Scotland to the thrones of England and Ireland, and the consequential unification for some purposes (such as overseas diplomacy) of the three realms under a single monarch on 24 March 1603. The Union of Crowns followed the death of Elizabeth I of England, the last monarch of the Tudor dynasty, who was James's unmarried and childless first cousin twice removed. The Union was a personal or dynastic union, with the Crown of Scotland remaining both distinct and separate-despite James's best efforts to create a new "imperial" throne of "Great Britain". England and Scotland continued as autonomous states sharing a monarch with Ireland (with an interregnum in the 1650s during the republican unitary state of the Commonwealth and the Protectorate), until the Acts of Union of 1707 during the reign of the last Stuart monarch, Anne.
      US Senate Resolution 155 of 10 November 1997 states that the Declaration of Arbroath, the Scottish Declaration of Independence, was signed on April 6, 1320 and the American Declaration of Independence was modeled on that inspirational document. "Whereas April 6 has a special significance for all Americans, and especially those Americans of Scottish descent, because the Declaration of Arbroath, the Scottish Declaration of Independence, was signed on April 6, 1320 and the American Declaration of Independence was modeled on that inspirational document; Whereas this resolution honors the major role that Scottish Americans played in the founding of this Nation, such as the fact that almost half of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were of Scottish descent, the Governors in 9 of the original 13 States were of Scottish ancestry, Scottish Americans successfully helped shape this country in its formative years and guide this Nation through its most troubled times." www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/senate-resolution/155/all-info
      Declaration of Arbroath (Popular sovereignty) - That the independence of Scotland was the prerogative of the Scottish people, rather than the King of Scots. That government is contractual and that kings can be chosen by the community rather than by God alone. Popular sovereignty or the sovereignty of the people's rule; is the principle that the authority of a state and its government is created and sustained by the consent of its people.
      Sir John Alexander Macdonald (11 January 1815 - 6 June 1891) was the first Prime Minister of Canada (1867-1873, 1878-1891). The dominant figure of Canadian Confederation, he had a political career which spanned almost half a century. Macdonald was born in Scotland; when he was a boy his family immigrated to Kingston in the Province of Upper Canada (today in eastern Ontario). As a lawyer he was involved in several high-profile cases and quickly became prominent in Kingston, which elected him in 1844 to the legislature of the Province of Canada. By 1857, he had become premier under the colony's unstable political system. In 1864, when no party proved capable of governing for long, Macdonald agreed to a proposal from his political rival, George Brown, that the parties unite in a Great Coalition to seek federation and political reform. Macdonald was the leading figure in the subsequent discussions and conferences, which resulted in the British North America Act and the birth of Canada as a nation on 1 July 1867. Macdonald was the first Prime Minister of the new nation, and served 19 years; only William Lyon Mackenzie King served longer.

    • @casper_z1259
      @casper_z1259 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@barbarossa5700 The acts of Union took place a century after the first ENGLISH colony was established and part of the whole thing was that Scotland wanted to get into the colonial game. The two nations shared a monarch in between this time but that doesn't make them a united kingdom and until then the colonies would be English ventures.

    • @johnyare8576
      @johnyare8576 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@user-pv8lp6ht3z That's true but the SNP are trying to distance itself from the not small part played by Scotland in not only creating the Empire but running it.

    • @user-pv8lp6ht3z
      @user-pv8lp6ht3z ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@johnyare8576 where have you seen this? I believe the SNP are the only ones who are trying to show that side of history in schools?

  • @RobertHosein
    @RobertHosein 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Good video

  • @ZYXPQI
    @ZYXPQI ปีที่แล้ว +55

    Ahhhhhhh I'm conflicted about leaving the Union, I feel like Scotland and England would both just be diminished. There has been good parts and bad parts to the Union and many Pro's and many Cons to leaving.
    I hate Westminster but I've not met many English who like it either. I’ve got so many English friends and I like the idea of unity and being something bigger. But I fucking hate Westminster and I hate the ridiculous tendencies of some who vote SNP.
    Great video though guys.

    • @nerd3839
      @nerd3839 ปีที่แล้ว +29

      Solidarity forever, the union between our nations must continue and we must fix the country together leaving will be a horrible play for you Scots many are leaving due to Brexit but does nobody see the Irony in leaving the Union beacuse of us leaving another one?, I see you Scots as fellow country men and brothers we have bled in the trenches together we should not break the Union at any cost!

    • @Bluesfan1780
      @Bluesfan1780 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      Pretty much the rest of England doesn't like the Tories but we vote for them. Image if we had a Labour Government lol

    • @Bluesfan1780
      @Bluesfan1780 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @The Philosoraptor Unlikely, but we will see.

    • @edelweiss7928
      @edelweiss7928 ปีที่แล้ว +15

      @@Bluesfan1780 both parties suck and don’t differ importantly in policy lmao

    • @Bluesfan1780
      @Bluesfan1780 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@edelweiss7928 Believe me I hate them both.

  • @KevOSMusic
    @KevOSMusic ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Yeah, I think the labelling on the map regarding the island of Ireland is confusing.
    The colouring makes sense since it gives clear indication that Ireland was subject to the English/British monarchy.
    However, the placement of the text 'England' is confusing considering England has never claimed that Ireland was England.
    That is the same when it comes to the text 'Great Britain'. Even the current Union is called 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland'.
    I understand simplification but it's not that difficult a concept to grasp & mislabelling can cause confusion.
    Also, someday, people will just be considerate & not use the term 'British Isles'. It's unnecessary.

    • @imastaycool
      @imastaycool ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The term British Isles is part and parcel of antiquated notions of the British empire which are long gone.
      The Brits use this term for Ireland to cause conflict as it's a political term.
      Even UK law uses the term British Islands to refer to the UK, Channel Islands, and Isle of Man as a single collective entity, but does not include Ireland.
      The manufactured term was introduced as the British Isles in the 16th/17th centuries by English and Welsh writers for both propaganda and political reasons.
      The term itself was always controversial to the Irish, but became more so after the breakup of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1922.
      The term is rejected by the Irish government, the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Irish people.
      The term was formally disavowed in September 2005 by the Irish Government when Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern famously stated:
      "The British Isles is not an officially recognised term in any legal or inter-governmental sense. It is without any official status. The Government, including the Department of Foreign Affairs, does not use this term."
      We reject it. It's just another manufactured British term to establish some sort of false dominance over another nation of people on a different island…

    • @user-qi5jw2hg1c
      @user-qi5jw2hg1c 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@imastaycoolThe commenter is referring to the fact that constitutionally at the time the Kingdom of Ireland existed. It was a separate country from England and the two were simply in personal Union. Although the English, and later, the British Government had powers over the Irish Parliament up to the latter 1700s, Ireland was constitutionally a separate state. It therefore is misleading to show Scotland as separate from England pre-1707 and yet show Ireland the same as England

  • @shazanali692
    @shazanali692 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Fun fact the ku Klux Klan was founded by Scottish folks, also the McDonald's live on as the most famous Klan

  • @paulrodgers7228
    @paulrodgers7228 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    James I had one of the best claims to the English Throne once Lizzie I died. Saved you same time.

  • @_ginock_
    @_ginock_ 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    As a resident of England and growing up 1 hour from the Scottish border in the Lake Distract my school taught me nothing of this. Quite shameful really.

  • @DdbxXy
    @DdbxXy ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Because Scotland's King had the best claim to the English throne.

  • @EduardQualls
    @EduardQualls ปีที่แล้ว +7

    *It's **_James the Sixth_** of Scotland, NOT **_James the Sickth._*

    • @andrewg.carvill4596
      @andrewg.carvill4596 ปีที่แล้ว

      There was a Pope Sixtus the Fifth, but strangely enough never a Pope Fifthus the Sixth.

  • @bornablazekovic1092
    @bornablazekovic1092 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Can you do a video about formativnim of the personal union of Croatia and Hungary

  • @piruff
    @piruff ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for all ur efforts. how to watch ur hidden videos tho

  • @stuart8343
    @stuart8343 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    This is what happens when you get an American to research Scottish history - you get a cleansed, anglified version which cites the Darian scheme as the primary reason for the union of nations, yet completely ignores the Alien Act of 1705.

    • @joshygoldiem_j2799
      @joshygoldiem_j2799 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Tbf that would probably call for going into detail about the political blackmailing between the two parliaments, and they wanted to keep this a ten minute video so I can't say I blame them. They didn't go into much detail about other aspects of the story either. Also, I can't really see how this is anglified; they mentioned that the crown pushed to collapse the clan system and may have sabotaged the Darian scheme to favour England as well. It presents the Darian scheme as a sort of killing blow but by no means the primary reason. Could you explain a bit further, please?

    • @stuart8343
      @stuart8343 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@joshygoldiem_j2799 I agree there was a lot of tit for tat Parliamentary acts passed, so why concentrate on one to the exclusion of the others? The 1704 Act of Security, the resulting Alien Act 1705, followed by the Act of Union 1707 were all as a result of the 1701 Act of Settlement, which said the English heir would continue to rule Scotland in the event of the monarch’s death, and was passed without Scotland’s permission. Scotland was never a voluntary partner, and it’s time we stopped perpetuating that lie.

    • @gazibizi9504
      @gazibizi9504 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@stuart8343 Scotland's permission? Scotland including England ceased to exist with the union. Westminster was the sole authority until devolution. Scots, English were all British citizens and enjoyed privileges that came with it.

    • @stuart8343
      @stuart8343 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@gazibizi9504​​⁠​​⁠ - precisely. Scotland lost her national identity because the English King threatened to seize Scottish noble lands if they didn’t capitulate. Scottish commoners were overwhelmingly against the formation of the union, but the nobles didn’t want to risk forfeiture of their land, and so pledged their allegiance to a foreign king. England has been an imperialist bully for its entire existence.
      “As long as a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be subjected to the lordship of the English. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.” - Declaration of Arbroath, 1320.
      I am one of those hundred, and I *will* see an independent Scotland in my lifetime ✊🏽🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

  • @charlesstuart7290
    @charlesstuart7290 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    I believe that Great Britain does not include Northern Ireland.

    • @zacha4812
      @zacha4812 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      And you are correct.

    • @connorharris2119
      @connorharris2119 ปีที่แล้ว

      Great Britain because it’s the largest island in the British isles. That includes England Scotland wales.

  • @greendro6410
    @greendro6410 ปีที่แล้ว

    This was interesting.

  • @sofasofa1479
    @sofasofa1479 ปีที่แล้ว

    bro i just learned everything in 1 video then 10 lessons at school

  • @Scorpion51123314512
    @Scorpion51123314512 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I do believe eventually Scotland will get it's independence from England, Wales and Norther Ireland to become the Scottish republic.

  • @PakBallandSami
    @PakBallandSami ปีที่แล้ว +7

    this is very interesting even the great britian's history like scotland use to be the great rival of the english and then they just became part of the same country like that is very much pakistan becomming part of india we will not like it but then england’s need for political safeguards against French attacks and a possible Jacobite restoration, for which Scotland might serve as a conveniently open back door.

  • @d.c.8828
    @d.c.8828 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Way to completely brush over the Cromwell era

  • @rickintexas1584
    @rickintexas1584 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    European history is amazingly complex.

    • @Ch-xk5tv
      @Ch-xk5tv ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I think American history is way less complex. The US has never been a monarchy, never had a revolution or coup d'etat and it has never been a dictatorship, neither a fascist nor a communist.
      American history starts with the first English colonies on the East coast, because we know so little about what the Indians did before the Europeans arrived

    • @madzangels
      @madzangels ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Ch-xk5tv Even then, I'd declare 'American' history an extension of British history. Even the American War of Independence was one group of Brits, fighting another group of Brits to create their own system of governance in a far away land. Only the British knew how to beat the British.

    • @dashcamclimbs6575
      @dashcamclimbs6575 ปีที่แล้ว

      It's bound to be it's thousands of years old. One major event, can have an affect many years later.

    • @joetheblu3
      @joetheblu3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Ch-xk5tv cause its 300 years, english history is over 1000 years

  • @opticnerve8927
    @opticnerve8927 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Just to clarify the country of Scotland did not go bankrupt it was the investors that went bankrupt

  • @vincenthair9124
    @vincenthair9124 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    Let's be honest, support for the union now boils down to what football team you support.

  • @aurasenpai8139
    @aurasenpai8139 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This makes me want to play EU4 if it didn't lag so much on my Ryzen 9....

  • @donquijote7463
    @donquijote7463 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    IRELAND : HOLD MY BEER.

  • @MichaelSidneyTimpson
    @MichaelSidneyTimpson ปีที่แล้ว +17

    As someone who is 50% Scottish and 50% English, it makes me sad to even think about Scotland leaving. But I felt sad about Brexit too. Hopefully a reformation of the House of Lords, being parallel to something like a Senate of more equiable representation of the unique identities (maybe England's own devolution even too) can remedy this from happening.

    • @ebanydwayne1357
      @ebanydwayne1357 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hell NO! The people of Scotland shall be free once again! You are not truly Scottish even if your DNA says otherwise if you support Westminster controlling over the Scottish. Scotland shall be free once again.

    • @MichaelSidneyTimpson
      @MichaelSidneyTimpson ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ebanydwayne1357 I don't support the current system, I think is should be revised to be more equal and fair.

    • @ebanydwayne1357
      @ebanydwayne1357 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MichaelSidneyTimpson agreed Michael.

    • @xzlemin9569
      @xzlemin9569 ปีที่แล้ว

      In my mind the only question I have is what would Scotland offer the world to be worth supporting? I genuinely don't know what Scotland could offer the EU or NATO to keep itself safe. I could see NI joining Ireland but even that's not completely set in stone.

    • @davequin7051
      @davequin7051 ปีที่แล้ว

      So your a celtic anglo Saxon ?

  • @scottayers8143
    @scottayers8143 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    I think not a lot of people realize it but technically Scotland made the U.K.

    • @msmissy6888
      @msmissy6888 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I do 🙂

    • @scottayers8143
      @scottayers8143 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@msmissy6888 good job!

    • @Suuusan28
      @Suuusan28 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      And the French and German rule it. :-)

    • @scottayers8143
      @scottayers8143 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@Suuusan28 Well at certain points in history France had the region but not today and unless you mean Germanic tribes, what are you talking about?

    • @Suuusan28
      @Suuusan28 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@scottayers8143 Plantagenets and Hanoverians for starters

  • @truthbeforeopinions941
    @truthbeforeopinions941 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Question - How does the annexation of Wales in 1536 mean Wales magically doesn’t exist? When Germany took over France it didn’t all of a sudden become Germany. Wales is tied to England via the Tudor annexation, and not English Conquest! Owain Glyndwr Installed autonomy to Wales from 1400 to 1536.

    • @crazyguy463
      @crazyguy463 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Germany didn’t annex France. England annex wales and incorporated it into the english legal system. Before it was the Principality of wales was an english client kingdom/junior partner

    • @chesterdonnelly1212
      @chesterdonnelly1212 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It came about through Henry Tudor. He was a Welshman. He became king of England with the support of the Welsh. Wales was united with England and it was called the Kingdom of England.

  • @arnoldr2813
    @arnoldr2813 ปีที่แล้ว

    Top!

  • @cymro6537
    @cymro6537 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    And the real irony of this is that the original Britons,Wales and the Welsh aren't represented on the Union banner

    • @QuietManUK
      @QuietManUK ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Well, losers never are.

    • @cymro6537
      @cymro6537 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@QuietManUK Like Wales,Ireland,'lost' to English dominance -yet _it_ has a presence on the Union banner, so your comment isn't strictly true.

    • @QuietManUK
      @QuietManUK ปีที่แล้ว

      @@cymro6537 Clue, Northern Ireland isn't Ireland, they are separate countries.

    • @cymro6537
      @cymro6537 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@QuietManUK Clue :When the(current) flag was set up in 1801 - there _was_ no Northern Ireland - that wouldn't be created until 1922

    • @QuietManUK
      @QuietManUK ปีที่แล้ว

      @@cymro6537 yet there is still part of Ireland in the Union, so your point is moot.

  • @TheGrowler55
    @TheGrowler55 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Rule Britannia from Glasgow 😎 🇬🇧😊

  • @Austin_Schulz
    @Austin_Schulz ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Several conquest attempts with varying degrees of success followed by a successful and much easier strategy of just marrying people off

  • @garymacdonald7165
    @garymacdonald7165 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    South East USA (Virginia/Carolina etc) is the bit of Scotland that moved over to USA in the Ice age! They are both identical!

  • @definitelynotatroll246
    @definitelynotatroll246 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Would love to know why wales is showing just as England in this. I know the reason but would be informative to point out for people who don’t

    • @Knappa22
      @Knappa22 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      The person making these videos has form on this. Any Welsh history is omitted from the narrative. Look at their video titled ‘How England was Formed’. The animation shades the map of the British Isles different with colours and labels to show the development of England and its relations with Scotland, Ireland etc. But Wales is not even mentioned. It remains as if nothing at all was happening there while England was developing. Astonishing considering the biggest earthwork border in Europe was erected by Offa to delineate England’s western border with Wales, not to mention the constant conflict, warfare, alliances etc over the centuries.
      At best they are a lazy and negligent historian, at worst they are a bigoted revisionist.

    • @MonTheWell1886
      @MonTheWell1886 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@Knappa22 Wales was part of the Kingdom of England that's why
      Still see remains of that today with Wales n England having the same legal/court system while both scotlands and northern Ireland is slightly different

    • @cymro6537
      @cymro6537 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Knappa22 So true, very well said 👍🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

    • @Ccccc-mi3tr
      @Ccccc-mi3tr ปีที่แล้ว

      It’s time for Welsh independence. The Union is dead and needs to die

    • @pedanticradiator1491
      @pedanticradiator1491 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MonTheWell1886 Scotland's legal system is very different to that of England and Wales, Northern Ireland's is basically the same though

  • @IrishMedievalHistory
    @IrishMedievalHistory ปีที่แล้ว +3

    The Irish perliement is not apart of England in 1600, that doesn't happen till 1801.

    • @jacthetripper5171
      @jacthetripper5171 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Wales never was a part of England.. this vids a joke

  • @northwing3416
    @northwing3416 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Half the time the map showed unionized. Confusing as H E double hockey sticks

  • @heidiengellenner9651
    @heidiengellenner9651 ปีที่แล้ว

    Isadore- we have some water obstacles.. I wont leave Sully- so if its not water access- then I complete 3 hour point checks.. I could, but I dont want too- Sully is my prioty- If you commit to an exclsuive commitment- then thats the commintment that you make.

  • @dyent
    @dyent ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Literally found an error in the first 20 seconds
    Northern Ireland is not, never has been, and never will be part of Great Britain. Great Britain is the island. Northern Ireland is part of the *United Kingdom* but not Great Britain. Hence "The United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland"
    Saying that Northern Ireland is part of Great Britain is like saying Greece is part of Asia.

  • @lillymasokku
    @lillymasokku ปีที่แล้ว +60

    Your channel has truly changed my life. i've been
    studying and researching about crypto for a
    while now, do to the economy crisis and i got stuck at some point on the
    learning curve. now i can say I'm truly improving
    my understanding of this whole new world and
    making great profit weekly, all thanks to you

    • @Michael-xe7xo
      @Michael-xe7xo ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Yes that's true

    • @Michael-xe7xo
      @Michael-xe7xo ปีที่แล้ว +3

      But i recommended Mrs Sophia she's really my bitcion trading manager

    • @--_juggleku
      @--_juggleku ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@Michael-xe7xoMy first investment with her gave me profit of over $24,000 Us dollars and ever since then she has never failed to deliver and I can even say she's the most sincere broker I have known

    • @greatffgyv
      @greatffgyv ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@--_juggleku I invested £5000 pounds I I received £54,000 thousand pounds within 7 days working

    • @Mavistyio
      @Mavistyio ปีที่แล้ว +3

      My first experience with her gave me the assurance that has made me to invest without fear of loosing

  • @EAlyahya
    @EAlyahya ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Can someone tell me, Dublin was previously known as The English Pale, directly ruled by England. So the Irish Unionist and Loyalist for the UK was there. Why it wasn’t incorporated in Northern Ireland when they opted to stay within the union during Irish Republic establishment?

    • @tsmith415
      @tsmith415 ปีที่แล้ว

      my understanding was the 1922 vote was up or down, county by county. only the 6 counties surrounding belfast voted to stay with england

    • @pedanticradiator1491
      @pedanticradiator1491 ปีที่แล้ว

      The English Pale existed during the middle ages by 1920 Dublin was mostly Catholic and believed in Irish independence. In the early 17th century many people were moved to Ulster from the English/Scottish borderlands that is why that area ended up with a protestant majority and decided to remain in the UK

    • @pedanticradiator1491
      @pedanticradiator1491 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@tsmith415 UK not England

    • @imastaycool
      @imastaycool ปีที่แล้ว

      Ireland = Irish people = Irish culture = Irish language (now that is enough clues for you!)
      Now having read the above... that is why we have always fought, resisted and never bent knee to British rule.
      Do you think we fought British rule for centuries for the laugh of it or something? When people fight, they fight for a good reason and when a nation fights it's because something was taken away from them!
      After the Norman/English Invasion of Ireland in the 1100s, we then had Planters arrive as per The Plantations in 16th- and 17th-century which involved the confiscation of Irish-owned land by the English Crown and the colonisation of land with settlers from Britain.
      We fought back:
      The two Desmond Rebellions took place in 1569-1573 and 1579-1583 to *fight against the threat of the extension of the English government* over the province.
      The successful Battle of Clontibret was *fought against the British* in County Monaghan in 1595.
      The successful Battle of the Yellow Ford was *fought against the British* in County Armagh in 1598.
      The Nine Years' War, sometimes called Tyrone's Rebellion took place in Ireland from 1593 to 1603. It was fought between an Irish alliance to *fight against English rule in Ireland.*
      The Rebellion of 1641 took place when Irish Catholics were being threatened by expansion of the anti-Catholic English Parliament and Scottish Planters and they *rebelled against English and Protestant domination.*
      The Irish Rebellion of 1798 was a major uprising *against British rule in Ireland.* (The Society of United Irishmen was led primarily by liberal Protestants).
      The Irish wanted an end to anti-Catholic discrimination, greater Irish self-governance, and to roll back the Plantations of Ireland.
      The Irish rebellion of 1803 was launched by Irish republicans *against British rule in Ireland*
      The Easter Rising of 1916 was piloted by Irish republicans *against British rule in Ireland* with the aim of establishing an independent Irish Republic.
      The civil rights movement in the early 1960s challenged the inequality and discrimination against ethnic Irish Catholics that was perpetrated by the Ulster Protestant community.
      Derry activists' marched on the 5 October 1968 in Derry, but were attacked by the RUC and loyalists.
      THAT IS A SNAPSHOT OF HOW WE HAVE FOUGHT AND RESISTED BOTH BRITISH RULE AND DISCRIMINATION BY THE UNIONIST COMMUNITY!

    • @imastaycool
      @imastaycool ปีที่แล้ว

      Read up on the British invasion in the 1100s and the Plantations of Ireland in the 1600s.

  • @KangaKucha
    @KangaKucha ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I know why Btw thanks to a CPGrey Video years ago. (got his name wrong but it's close)
    Amazing England pretty much conquer Ireland but doesn't make them a Kingdom until 1801 (hence the current jack flag).

    • @aliteralrodenthampter1861
      @aliteralrodenthampter1861 ปีที่แล้ว

      Child Pron grey???

    • @jackwhitehead5233
      @jackwhitehead5233 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The Pope declared Ireland a Lordship at the request of the English King (Henry II I think...), which the English king then had Papal authority to rule.

    • @KangaKucha
      @KangaKucha ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@jackwhitehead5233 so that roughy killed Ireland off, at least it's monarchy ish.
      The UK of Great Britain and Ireland (assuming it didn't leave) should be 3 Kingdoms that should be like states/provinces. After that it can be other self governments like Wales, Scotland Islands, etc but be in a better balance like the USSR etc was.

    • @jackwhitehead5233
      @jackwhitehead5233 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@KangaKucha I think that was the plan with the Imperial Federation, but WW1 put paid to that.
      What could have been eh!?

    • @KangaKucha
      @KangaKucha ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@jackwhitehead5233 Agreed but I prefer a British/Federation, not a British Empire one (Australia/NZ, Canada, etc should be independent feds themselves because of the distance etc, but that is what the Commonwealth is for :))

  • @SonGoku-io7sh
    @SonGoku-io7sh ปีที่แล้ว +3

    It wasn't really a union of Scotland and England as it was a merging of the Ancients and Moderns of Freemasonry.

  • @christophersanders5007
    @christophersanders5007 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    I think what caused the union of England and Scotland was the financial collapse of New Caledonia Colony. When the colony collapsed Scotland owed France and Spain a lot of money that Scotland borrowed from them to finance the colony. Both France and Spain blockaded the ports of Scotland when Scotland defaulted on their loans, thus barring Scotland from engaging in international trade. Scotland came crying on their knees to England to help them secure their loans to France and Spain. England offered to secure Scotland's loans if they signed the Acts of Union, thus the birth of Great Britain.

  • @MG_Ketchum09
    @MG_Ketchum09 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Do they teach this in the uk?

  • @DiscoDashco
    @DiscoDashco ปีที่แล้ว

    I think I’ve watched a video or two in this channel before when they were showcased as suggestions. I had a difficult time following the details, or lack there of when it comes to context, as well as the awkward over pronunciation and too much run-on between sentences; it causes listeners to tune out instead of changing onto words. Also, pick one accent and just stick with that.

  • @giorgijioshvili9713
    @giorgijioshvili9713 ปีที่แล้ว +18

    Scotland: Try's to establish a colony
    Also Scotland: Goes bankrupt

    • @MrLYPH
      @MrLYPH ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Due to many unforseen circumstances such as exotic diseases and of course the disgusting betrayal of greed by King William... Among other things.

    • @bazmc1153
      @bazmc1153 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@MrLYPH Is there a video? I knew there was a dispute with Spain and England refusing to trade with the Scottish settlers but that's it.

    • @ScotsmanGamer
      @ScotsmanGamer ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Actually Scotland nearly went bankrupt when we had to buy back an island from the Vikings also didn't say we went bankrupt fool say we nearly went bankrupt

    • @jackwhitehead5233
      @jackwhitehead5233 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MrLYPH betrayal 🤣
      Unfamiliar with independence are you?

    • @BillyBobDingo1971
      @BillyBobDingo1971 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@MrLYPH And the Spanish.

  • @elyisusking3603
    @elyisusking3603 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    are you telling me that the union of England and Scotland started because Henry the VIII couldn't get a healthy male heir and their daughters refused to get laid ?

    • @QuietManUK
      @QuietManUK ปีที่แล้ว +1

      No, it's because the loser Scots went broke over the failed colonisation of Darien.

    • @DS9TREK
      @DS9TREK ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Mary was desperate to have an heir and suffered from a false pregnancy. Over a year after her pregnancy was announced but no baby appeared, she was mocked by rumours she'd given birth to a lap dog.
      Elizabeth I didn't marry cos marrying would've meant losing the throne in favour of her husband. The same thing happened to her sister Mary. Upon her marriage to Phillip II, he became King of England, outranked his wife, signed Bills into law and sat on the throne in Parliament. Had Mary given birth to a child, the marriage agreement required England to become part of Spain so Philip could rule Spain and England as one country.
      It wasn't until Queen Anne, over 100 years later, that a woman could become Queen without her husband taking the throne from her.

  • @teejay6063
    @teejay6063 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    🤣
    I love the sound effects when a king is killed.

  • @itszackponce2731
    @itszackponce2731 ปีที่แล้ว

    Gotta love this but the mac donald city still laughs my ass off to this day

  • @Ccccc-mi3tr
    @Ccccc-mi3tr ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Sooner the Union dies the better

    • @joetheblu3
      @joetheblu3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      get mad

    • @havana80
      @havana80 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@joetheblu3 Is that what you want them to do? I don't think it worked lol 🤣🤣

  • @solodragoon
    @solodragoon ปีที่แล้ว +168

    because scotland was broke, saved your data, you're welcome

    • @Dunsapie
      @Dunsapie ปีที่แล้ว +24

      Scotland was not broke. The Darien Scheme, which was a private venture and had nothing to do with the Scottish Government, may have bankrupted some of the aristocracy who invested in it, but it did not bankrupt the country. At the union, Scotland, which had no national debt, helped to pay off England's national debt in exchange for access to English trade routes, something it could not have done had it been bankrupt.

    • @AzderielBane
      @AzderielBane ปีที่แล้ว

      Oh look it's another post from the English troll army. As bad as the Russians for trying to change history to your own liking.

    • @thetryhard.mc.1805
      @thetryhard.mc.1805 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Lol

    • @Challis1989
      @Challis1989 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      Scotlands national debt was 150k. England's debt at the time was over 2 million. Not to mention both population sizes were similar.
      The union happened because Scotland passed an act allowing the Scottish Parliament to pick their next king even if Catholic and Queen Anne didn't like that.

    • @solodragoon
      @solodragoon 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@Challis1989 England and wales had a population of 5.1 mil and Scotland was 1.2 mil ......so no i would say the population sizes weren't similar, would say it was nearly 5x different.
      also scotland was broke due to a much smaller economy, and broke its economy on its colony in central america. Debt doesnt matter as much if your economy can handle it, dunno where you got the 150k I read it was 110k which was more than scotlands normal revenue.

  • @Arksimon2k
    @Arksimon2k ปีที่แล้ว

    Robert "King James sends his regards" Campbell

  • @RENATVS_IV
    @RENATVS_IV ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I agree... Nothing is predictable xD

  • @vivaswanmadkiii1608
    @vivaswanmadkiii1608 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    0:34 17th century, not 16th

  • @Flexpdx
    @Flexpdx ปีที่แล้ว

    It's so weird there's a McDonald's on a street called Glencoe in my neighborhood

  • @buluketek5030
    @buluketek5030 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    this reminds me of the witcher novels

  • @mrdubya
    @mrdubya ปีที่แล้ว

    Normans: "Um, helloo!"

  • @papazataklaattiranimam
    @papazataklaattiranimam ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Happy Germanic noises
    Crying Celtic noises

    • @ZYXPQI
      @ZYXPQI ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @The Philosoraptor they’re a huge donator in the gene pool

    • @papazataklaattiranimam
      @papazataklaattiranimam ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @The Philosoraptor 99% of Celts don’t know Celtic now

    • @Bluesfan1780
      @Bluesfan1780 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @The Philosoraptor Yeah damn the Romans but they did some ok things but the British slavery not cool, wait where's my reparations!
      Sorry being sarcastic.

    • @calumbo9742
      @calumbo9742 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @The Philosoraptor cornwall is pretty much the last celtic part of england and due to revival attempts there is concurrently 300-400 fluent speakers who use cornish regularly, which is pretty impressive considering the language became extinct (ish) at the end of 18th century

    • @zacha4812
      @zacha4812 ปีที่แล้ว

      @The Philosoraptor there is in Cornwall.

  • @alangarland8571
    @alangarland8571 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    Great Britain is not a kingdom, the UK is a kingdom.
    Great Britain is the name of the largest island within the British Isles.
    The British Isles consists of around 100 or so islands off the Northwest coast of Europe, most of them small.

    • @ScotsmanGamer
      @ScotsmanGamer ปีที่แล้ว

      Bud see having to explain this to people it's brutal

    • @JJaqn05
      @JJaqn05 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Great Britain was the kingdom. It was only called the United Kingdom after 1801

    • @ScotsmanGamer
      @ScotsmanGamer ปีที่แล้ว

      @@JJaqn05 You totally dense.... There has never been one country called Great Britain p.s this absolute sausage jockey actually said "Scotland isn't a country" kid.... Why you replying to people when clearly you are brain dead give up!

    • @nonconformalism
      @nonconformalism ปีที่แล้ว +1

      King James styled himself as the King of Great Britain.

    • @Ch-xk5tv
      @Ch-xk5tv ปีที่แล้ว +2

      But we can't call you United Kingdomese, United Kingdomers or UKers. It would also sound ridiculous to call you United Kingdomians. You're British, no matter if your Island is British or Irish. It is not very common to say "Britons and Northern Irish" either.
      Additionally: Why are people from the Falkland Islands or Gibraltar called "British", even though they don't live on the British Isles.

  • @rb.5940
    @rb.5940 ปีที่แล้ว

    I'm an African and have an explanation.
    James 5th of Scoth wanted to keep the old link between Great Britain isle (Scotland+Wales) and Brittany in actual France.

  • @dannyarcher6370
    @dannyarcher6370 ปีที่แล้ว

    3:18 - Thank god sanity prevailed.

  • @jamiewilson2088
    @jamiewilson2088 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Independence rolling in very soon, happy days!

    • @zacha4812
      @zacha4812 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Independence for who? England?

    • @jamiewilson2088
      @jamiewilson2088 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@zacha4812 oh yes, England is awash with independence marches!
      Behave lol

    • @zacha4812
      @zacha4812 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@jamiewilson2088 it’s not, but people in England don’t like complaining and whining all the time like the Scots do.

    • @jamiewilson2088
      @jamiewilson2088 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@zacha4812 we’ll be gone soon pal, you happy people won’t need to concern yourselves with our negativity for much longer!

    • @zacha4812
      @zacha4812 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@jamiewilson2088 honestly Scotland leaving is for the best. I’m sick all of the consonant whining from Scots. Just keep the queen as head of state and I’m fine.
      That’s good, no more whining finally. But when something bad happens in Scotland don’t blame England, blame the SNP.

  • @taqiyasir8086
    @taqiyasir8086 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    a great nation indeed that has given so much to the world. God bless Great Britain

    • @deshaun9473
      @deshaun9473 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Like slavery, genocide, colonialism?

    • @zacha4812
      @zacha4812 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      @@deshaun9473 nope, nope and nope, please pick up a history book and study.

    • @deshaun9473
      @deshaun9473 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      @@zacha4812 a history based on Patriachy, genocide, slavery, colonialism. You need to research more.

    • @zacha4812
      @zacha4812 ปีที่แล้ว +16

      @@deshaun9473 the way you said in it your original comment seemed like you think the Britain invented all those things, well it did not, all those things existed since the Roman era.
      Britain is constitutional monarchy, the monarch did not have that much power, parliament did, females were allowed to become monarch though.
      Every European country committed g*nocide, but English people were also g*nocided against during the Viking era.
      Britain literally abolished the sl@ve trade, oh and sl@very was never legal in Britain because parliament never bothered to make it legal.
      So? Every major European country in the 1700s colonised, Britain wasn’t even the first country to begin colonisation Portugal was.
      By your same logic every European country’s history sucks right?
      No you need too.

    • @jamescallaghan7478
      @jamescallaghan7478 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@zacha4812 He’s probably one of those Indians who are brainwashed by the education system but yet has no problem with other colonial empires especially France who owned a city there.

  • @bigdooze3292
    @bigdooze3292 ปีที่แล้ว

    The dude was called MacIain (Mac Iain) not MacLain. Iain/Ian means John.

  • @kiereann
    @kiereann ปีที่แล้ว

    Too big a gap when introducing the Darian Project. There were reasons.