Alvin Jackson
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199593996
- eISBN:
- 9780191731419
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593996.003.0003
- Subject:
- History, British and Irish Modern History, Economic History
Parliamentary union was an established motif in the politics of both 17th-century Ireland and 17th-century Scotland. Moreover, ‘incorporating’ union was not merely an airy ideal (or, equally, a ...
More
Parliamentary union was an established motif in the politics of both 17th-century Ireland and 17th-century Scotland. Moreover, ‘incorporating’ union was not merely an airy ideal (or, equally, a threat): for both the Irish and the Scots it had been a Cromwellian reality, however bloody and transient, and however different the resonances in the two nations. Later, the Scots and the Irish Acts of Union were launched against a shared background of European war, political and religious threat, and economic dislocation. Though each union was sanctioned by parliamentarians who were subsequently damned as corrupt in their respective national demonologies, the ‘parcel’ of Scottish and Irish ‘rogues’ in 1707 and 1801 had each exercised a much greater measure of legislative independence in the eighteen years preceding union than any earlier generation of representative. For the English, Scots, and Irish, union was tied up with history, religion, war, political stability, and economic opportunity. But the relative strength and truculence of the national parliaments before 1707 and 1801, particularly in the context of bloody and threatening European conflicts, meant that union was more desirable, indeed necessary, than hitherto for the English government: this strength also meant that the Scots and (to a lesser extent) the Irish now had forms of bargaining position where once there had only been the unanswerable eloquence of English economic and military dominion. This chapter compares this array of contexts, with a view to assessing their impact upon the forms of union inaugurated in 1707 and 1801.Less
Parliamentary union was an established motif in the politics of both 17th-century Ireland and 17th-century Scotland. Moreover, ‘incorporating’ union was not merely an airy ideal (or, equally, a threat): for both the Irish and the Scots it had been a Cromwellian reality, however bloody and transient, and however different the resonances in the two nations. Later, the Scots and the Irish Acts of Union were launched against a shared background of European war, political and religious threat, and economic dislocation. Though each union was sanctioned by parliamentarians who were subsequently damned as corrupt in their respective national demonologies, the ‘parcel’ of Scottish and Irish ‘rogues’ in 1707 and 1801 had each exercised a much greater measure of legislative independence in the eighteen years preceding union than any earlier generation of representative. For the English, Scots, and Irish, union was tied up with history, religion, war, political stability, and economic opportunity. But the relative strength and truculence of the national parliaments before 1707 and 1801, particularly in the context of bloody and threatening European conflicts, meant that union was more desirable, indeed necessary, than hitherto for the English government: this strength also meant that the Scots and (to a lesser extent) the Irish now had forms of bargaining position where once there had only been the unanswerable eloquence of English economic and military dominion. This chapter compares this array of contexts, with a view to assessing their impact upon the forms of union inaugurated in 1707 and 1801.
Christopher A. Whatley
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748616855
- eISBN:
- 9780748672271
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748616855.003.0003
- Subject:
- History, Political History
This chapter outlines the historiography of the parliamentary or incorporating union of 1707. It explains what the key issues and points of debate there are for historians, and sets out the arguments ...
More
This chapter outlines the historiography of the parliamentary or incorporating union of 1707. It explains what the key issues and points of debate there are for historians, and sets out the arguments that will be developed in The Scots and the Union.Less
This chapter outlines the historiography of the parliamentary or incorporating union of 1707. It explains what the key issues and points of debate there are for historians, and sets out the arguments that will be developed in The Scots and the Union.
T C Smout (ed.)
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780197263303
- eISBN:
- 9780191734137
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- British Academy
- DOI:
- 10.5871/bacad/9780197263303.001.0001
- Subject:
- History, British and Irish Modern History
The Union of the Crowns in 1603 is the cornerstone of the modern British state, but relations between England and Scotland did not always run smoothly in the following centuries. This volume examines ...
More
The Union of the Crowns in 1603 is the cornerstone of the modern British state, but relations between England and Scotland did not always run smoothly in the following centuries. This volume examines how the neighbouring British nations regarded each other from 1603 to 1900. Why did this union last when many others in Europe fell apart? How close did it come to unravelling? What were the strengths and tricks that preserved it? As aggregations of individuals, as economies, or as systems of law and politics, how did England and Scotland mesh? Political, economic, legal, intellectual and literary historians examine the first three centuries of Union, including the reception of James in the south, the Civil Wars, the background to parliamentary union in 1707, the spoils of Empire, and the Victorian climax. Together with its companion Anglo-Scottish Relations, from 1900 to Devolution and Beyond, the volume provides a vivid account of two nations, which have often differed, remained very distinct, yet achieved endurance in European terms.Less
The Union of the Crowns in 1603 is the cornerstone of the modern British state, but relations between England and Scotland did not always run smoothly in the following centuries. This volume examines how the neighbouring British nations regarded each other from 1603 to 1900. Why did this union last when many others in Europe fell apart? How close did it come to unravelling? What were the strengths and tricks that preserved it? As aggregations of individuals, as economies, or as systems of law and politics, how did England and Scotland mesh? Political, economic, legal, intellectual and literary historians examine the first three centuries of Union, including the reception of James in the south, the Civil Wars, the background to parliamentary union in 1707, the spoils of Empire, and the Victorian climax. Together with its companion Anglo-Scottish Relations, from 1900 to Devolution and Beyond, the volume provides a vivid account of two nations, which have often differed, remained very distinct, yet achieved endurance in European terms.
Luis Cabrera
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- March 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780198805373
- eISBN:
- 9780191843440
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198805373.003.0016
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This chapter explores the case for a more formalized United Nations parliamentary assembly, including the potential oversight, accountability, and (ultimately) co-decision roles that such a body ...
More
This chapter explores the case for a more formalized United Nations parliamentary assembly, including the potential oversight, accountability, and (ultimately) co-decision roles that such a body could play alongside the UN General Assembly. Given difficulties in expecting national parliamentarians to perform such functions continuously, a UN assembly is found to hold greater potential for promoting key UN system aims in the areas of security, justice, and democratic accountability, even as the existing Inter-Parliamentary Union continued to play some important complementary roles. Learning from relevant global and regional parliamentary bodies, the chapter outlines concrete steps toward developing a parliamentary assembly over time, including the creation of a more informal UN network of UN-focused national parliamentarians in the near term.Less
This chapter explores the case for a more formalized United Nations parliamentary assembly, including the potential oversight, accountability, and (ultimately) co-decision roles that such a body could play alongside the UN General Assembly. Given difficulties in expecting national parliamentarians to perform such functions continuously, a UN assembly is found to hold greater potential for promoting key UN system aims in the areas of security, justice, and democratic accountability, even as the existing Inter-Parliamentary Union continued to play some important complementary roles. Learning from relevant global and regional parliamentary bodies, the chapter outlines concrete steps toward developing a parliamentary assembly over time, including the creation of a more informal UN network of UN-focused national parliamentarians in the near term.
S J Brown and Christopher Whatley (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748638024
- eISBN:
- 9780748672295
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748638024.001.0001
- Subject:
- History, Political History
This book brings together chapters that in May 2007 were presented at a Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) conference organised to mark the 300th anniversary of the Union of 1707. One of the guiding ...
More
This book brings together chapters that in May 2007 were presented at a Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) conference organised to mark the 300th anniversary of the Union of 1707. One of the guiding objectives of the RSE event was to showcase the work of younger historians, and to present new work that would provide fresh insights on this defining moment in Scotland's (and the United Kingdom's) history. The seven chapters range widely, in content and coverage, from a detailed study of how the Church of Scotland viewed the Union and how concerns about the Kirk influenced the voting behaviour in the Scottish Parliament, through to the often overlooked broader European context in which the British parliamentary union — only one form of new state formation in the early modern period — was forged. The global War of the Spanish Succession, it is argued, influenced both the timing and shape of the British union. Also examined are elite thinking and public opinion on fundamental questions such as Scottish nationhood and the place and powers of monarchs, as well as burning issues of the time such as the Company of Scotland and trade. Other topics include an investigation of the particular intellectual characteristics of the Scots, a product of the pre-Union educational system, which, it is argued, enabled professionals and entrepreneurs in Scotland to meet the challenges posed by the 1707 settlement. As one of the chapters argues, Union offered the Scots only partial openings within the empire.Less
This book brings together chapters that in May 2007 were presented at a Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) conference organised to mark the 300th anniversary of the Union of 1707. One of the guiding objectives of the RSE event was to showcase the work of younger historians, and to present new work that would provide fresh insights on this defining moment in Scotland's (and the United Kingdom's) history. The seven chapters range widely, in content and coverage, from a detailed study of how the Church of Scotland viewed the Union and how concerns about the Kirk influenced the voting behaviour in the Scottish Parliament, through to the often overlooked broader European context in which the British parliamentary union — only one form of new state formation in the early modern period — was forged. The global War of the Spanish Succession, it is argued, influenced both the timing and shape of the British union. Also examined are elite thinking and public opinion on fundamental questions such as Scottish nationhood and the place and powers of monarchs, as well as burning issues of the time such as the Company of Scotland and trade. Other topics include an investigation of the particular intellectual characteristics of the Scots, a product of the pre-Union educational system, which, it is argued, enabled professionals and entrepreneurs in Scotland to meet the challenges posed by the 1707 settlement. As one of the chapters argues, Union offered the Scots only partial openings within the empire.
James K. Libbey
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- September 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780813167138
- eISBN:
- 9780813167831
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University Press of Kentucky
- DOI:
- 10.5810/kentucky/9780813167138.001.0001
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
Born in humble, rural surroundings in the Jackson Purchase, Barkley grew into a sturdy youth who received an education through parental sacrifices. He graduated from Marvin College as an ...
More
Born in humble, rural surroundings in the Jackson Purchase, Barkley grew into a sturdy youth who received an education through parental sacrifices. He graduated from Marvin College as an award-winning speaker and soon moved with his parents to Paducah, where he read law and became an attorney. Barkley entered politics winning elections as county attorney and then county judge: he gained victory through his farmer constituents. In 1913 he moved from courthouse to Congress as a progressive who championed President Wilson’s New Freedom program. During World War I, he favored freedom of the seas to promote agricultural exports and gained national attention by advocating prohibition. In wartime he visited US soldiers on the front lines and in peacetime became a member of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, which enhanced his understanding of international relations. His only electoral loss occurred when he campaigned for governor, but his Kentucky canvass enabled him to win a US Senate seat in 1926. Furious over Republican administrations for their support of high tariffs that hurt agricultural exports and their inability to assist impoverished Americans during the Great Depression, Barkley became a strong supporter and national spokesman for the New Deal. World War II found Senate majority leader Barkley playing a key role in wartime legislation, but he lost favor with President Roosevelt by opposing the president’s expensive revenue bill of 1944. Meanwhile, the senator had maintained close and supportive relations with Truman and joined him as his vice presidential candidate on the 1948 presidential ticket. Barkley became the one and only Veep who turned the vice presidency into an important office. The Paducah politician failed to get his party’s nomination for president in 1952, so he temporarily retired, appearing on his own national television show, and preparing (with help) his autobiography. In 1954 he won election and returned to the US Senate as a junior member.Less
Born in humble, rural surroundings in the Jackson Purchase, Barkley grew into a sturdy youth who received an education through parental sacrifices. He graduated from Marvin College as an award-winning speaker and soon moved with his parents to Paducah, where he read law and became an attorney. Barkley entered politics winning elections as county attorney and then county judge: he gained victory through his farmer constituents. In 1913 he moved from courthouse to Congress as a progressive who championed President Wilson’s New Freedom program. During World War I, he favored freedom of the seas to promote agricultural exports and gained national attention by advocating prohibition. In wartime he visited US soldiers on the front lines and in peacetime became a member of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, which enhanced his understanding of international relations. His only electoral loss occurred when he campaigned for governor, but his Kentucky canvass enabled him to win a US Senate seat in 1926. Furious over Republican administrations for their support of high tariffs that hurt agricultural exports and their inability to assist impoverished Americans during the Great Depression, Barkley became a strong supporter and national spokesman for the New Deal. World War II found Senate majority leader Barkley playing a key role in wartime legislation, but he lost favor with President Roosevelt by opposing the president’s expensive revenue bill of 1944. Meanwhile, the senator had maintained close and supportive relations with Truman and joined him as his vice presidential candidate on the 1948 presidential ticket. Barkley became the one and only Veep who turned the vice presidency into an important office. The Paducah politician failed to get his party’s nomination for president in 1952, so he temporarily retired, appearing on his own national television show, and preparing (with help) his autobiography. In 1954 he won election and returned to the US Senate as a junior member.
Robert Frost
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- August 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780198208693
- eISBN:
- 9780191746345
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198208693.003.0039
- Subject:
- History, European Early Modern History
The concluding chapter analyses the dramatic events that led to closer, parliamentary union between Poland and Lithuania, and Poland and Royal Prussia in 1569. It shows how, following the death of ...
More
The concluding chapter analyses the dramatic events that led to closer, parliamentary union between Poland and Lithuania, and Poland and Royal Prussia in 1569. It shows how, following the death of Radziwiłł Czarny, his cousin Radziwiłł Rudy miscalculated, leading the Lithuanians out of Lublin in protest at Polish intransigence. It recounts how Sigismund August targeted the Lithuanians’ weakest point by incorporating Podlasie, where support for closer union was strong, and the Ruthenian lands, where the Orthodox had been regarded as second-class citizens. Initially reluctant, the Ruthenians accepted incorporation, forcing the Lithuanians to agree what terms they could. It argues that, although Lithuania lost the southern Ruthenian palatinates—half its territory—in one sense they emerged victorious, securing recognition of a union of peoples and of two realms of equal statusLess
The concluding chapter analyses the dramatic events that led to closer, parliamentary union between Poland and Lithuania, and Poland and Royal Prussia in 1569. It shows how, following the death of Radziwiłł Czarny, his cousin Radziwiłł Rudy miscalculated, leading the Lithuanians out of Lublin in protest at Polish intransigence. It recounts how Sigismund August targeted the Lithuanians’ weakest point by incorporating Podlasie, where support for closer union was strong, and the Ruthenian lands, where the Orthodox had been regarded as second-class citizens. Initially reluctant, the Ruthenians accepted incorporation, forcing the Lithuanians to agree what terms they could. It argues that, although Lithuania lost the southern Ruthenian palatinates—half its territory—in one sense they emerged victorious, securing recognition of a union of peoples and of two realms of equal status
James K. Libbey
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- September 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780813167138
- eISBN:
- 9780813167831
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University Press of Kentucky
- DOI:
- 10.5810/kentucky/9780813167138.003.0010
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
In 1930 Barkley attended the Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting in London and then joined colleagues in visiting the Soviet Union. They were intrigued by the Soviet Five-Year Plan of industrialization ...
More
In 1930 Barkley attended the Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting in London and then joined colleagues in visiting the Soviet Union. They were intrigued by the Soviet Five-Year Plan of industrialization in the midst of depression. Barkley returned to the United States furious that President Hoover refused grants to farmers suffering from a terrible drought. He also argued with the administration about the Hawley-Smoot Tariff that pummeled US foreign trade and ended German reparations and hence European payments on war loans. A terrible car accident temporarily removed him from political activity in 1931. He criticized the 1932 Reconstruction Finance Corporation because it funded businesses with no direct help to the thirteen million with no wages. Meanwhile, Hoovervilles--where unemployed lived in shacks--spread across the United States including a large one in Washington, DC. Forceful elimination of the Bonus Army and the capital’s Hooverville reduced Hoover’s chance to gain reelection in 1932. Barkley served as keynote speaker and temporary chairman of the Democratic national convention that selected Franklin D. Roosevelt as the party’s presidential nominee. FDR promised a “new deal for the American people.”Less
In 1930 Barkley attended the Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting in London and then joined colleagues in visiting the Soviet Union. They were intrigued by the Soviet Five-Year Plan of industrialization in the midst of depression. Barkley returned to the United States furious that President Hoover refused grants to farmers suffering from a terrible drought. He also argued with the administration about the Hawley-Smoot Tariff that pummeled US foreign trade and ended German reparations and hence European payments on war loans. A terrible car accident temporarily removed him from political activity in 1931. He criticized the 1932 Reconstruction Finance Corporation because it funded businesses with no direct help to the thirteen million with no wages. Meanwhile, Hoovervilles--where unemployed lived in shacks--spread across the United States including a large one in Washington, DC. Forceful elimination of the Bonus Army and the capital’s Hooverville reduced Hoover’s chance to gain reelection in 1932. Barkley served as keynote speaker and temporary chairman of the Democratic national convention that selected Franklin D. Roosevelt as the party’s presidential nominee. FDR promised a “new deal for the American people.”
James K. Libbey
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- September 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780813167138
- eISBN:
- 9780813167831
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University Press of Kentucky
- DOI:
- 10.5810/kentucky/9780813167138.003.0008
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
Barkley attended the 1920 Democratic national convention and became acquainted with and campaigned for the party’s vice presidential candidate, Franklin D. Roosevelt. Warren G. Harding and the GOP ...
More
Barkley attended the 1920 Democratic national convention and became acquainted with and campaigned for the party’s vice presidential candidate, Franklin D. Roosevelt. Warren G. Harding and the GOP won the White House, and thus began the era of “normalcy.” The Great War helped turn Barkley into a moderate internationalist who belonged to the Inter-Parliamentary Union and supported the Washington Naval Disarmament Conference. Barkley continued to be a progressive politician, but congenial programs were rare except for the Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act. Barkley was a sometime member of the farm bloc but fought the GOP higher tariff, which promised high rates against foreign agricultural imports. He lost his only election when he ran unsuccessfully against J. Campbell Cantrill in the 1923 Democratic primary for the Kentucky governor’s post. In the process, however, he built a statewide organization that enabled him to win the Senate seat from Richard P. Ernst in 1926.Less
Barkley attended the 1920 Democratic national convention and became acquainted with and campaigned for the party’s vice presidential candidate, Franklin D. Roosevelt. Warren G. Harding and the GOP won the White House, and thus began the era of “normalcy.” The Great War helped turn Barkley into a moderate internationalist who belonged to the Inter-Parliamentary Union and supported the Washington Naval Disarmament Conference. Barkley continued to be a progressive politician, but congenial programs were rare except for the Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act. Barkley was a sometime member of the farm bloc but fought the GOP higher tariff, which promised high rates against foreign agricultural imports. He lost his only election when he ran unsuccessfully against J. Campbell Cantrill in the 1923 Democratic primary for the Kentucky governor’s post. In the process, however, he built a statewide organization that enabled him to win the Senate seat from Richard P. Ernst in 1926.
