Acts of Union 1707
|Long title||An Act for a Union of the Two Kingdoms of England and Scotland|
|Citation||6 Anne c. 11|
|Territorial extent||Kingdom of England (inc. Wales)|
Status: Current legislation
|Revised text of statute as amended|
|Long title||Act Ratifying and Approving the Treaty of Union of the Two Kingdoms of SCOTLAND and ENGLAND|
|Citation||Anne c. 7|
|Territorial extent||Kingdom of Scotland|
Status: Current legislation
|Revised text of statute as amended|
|Treaty of Windsor||1175|
|Treaty of York||1237|
|Treaty of Perth||1266|
|Treaty of Montgomery||1267|
|Treaty of Aberconwy||1277|
|Statute of Rhuddlan||1284|
|Treaty of Edinburgh–Northampton||1328|
|Treaty of Berwick||1357|
|Laws in Wales Acts||1535–42|
|Crown of Ireland Act||1542|
|Treaty of Edinburgh||1560|
|Union of the Crowns||1603|
|Union of England and Scotland Act||1603|
|Act of Settlement||1701|
|Act of Security||1704|
|Treaty of Union||1706|
|Acts of Union||1707|
|Personal Union of 1714||1714|
|Wales and Berwick Act||1746|
|Acts of Union||1800|
|Government of Ireland Act||1920|
|Royal and Parliamentary Titles Act||1927|
|N. Ireland (Temporary Provisions) Act||1972|
|Northern Ireland Assembly||1973|
|N. Ireland Constitution Act||1973|
|Northern Ireland Act||1998|
|Government of Wales Act||1998|
|Government of Wales Act||2006|
The Acts of Union were two Acts of Parliament: the Union with Scotland Act 1706 passed by the Parliament of England, and the Union with England Act passed in 1707 by the Parliament of Scotland. They put into effect the terms of the Treaty of Union that had been agreed on 22 July 1706, following negotiation between commissioners representing the parliaments of the two countries. The Acts joined the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland (previously separate states with separate legislatures, but with the same monarch) into a single, united kingdom named "Great Britain".
The two countries had shared a monarch since the Union of the Crowns in 1603, when King James VI of Scotland inherited the English throne from his double first cousin twice removed, Queen Elizabeth I. Although described as a Union of Crowns, until 1707 there were in fact two separate Crowns resting on the same head (as opposed to the implied creation of a single Crown and a single Kingdom, exemplified by the later Kingdom of Great Britain). There had been three attempts in 1606, 1667, and 1689 to unite the two countries by Acts of Parliament, but it was not until the early 18th century that both political establishments came to support the idea, albeit for different reasons.
The Acts took effect on 1 May 1707. On this date, the Scottish Parliament and the English Parliament united to form the Parliament of Great Britain, based in the Palace of Westminster in London, the home of the English Parliament. Hence, the Acts are referred to as the Union of the Parliaments. On the Union, the historian Simon Schama said "What began as a hostile merger, would end in a full partnership in the most powerful going concern in the world ... it was one of the most astonishing transformations in European history."
Historical background 1
Previous attempts at union 1.1
- Early Stuart union 1.1.1
- Union during the interregnum 1.1.2
- Later attempts 1.1.3
- Treaty and passage of the Acts of 1707 1.2
- Previous attempts at union 1.1
- Ethnonym 2
Political motivations 3
- English perspective 3.1
- Scottish perspective 3.2
- Irish perspective 3.3
- Provisions of the Acts 4
- Albanians in the Middle Ages 5.1
- Criticisms 6
- 300th anniversary 7
- Scottish voting records 8
- See also 9
- Notes 10
- References 11
- External links 12
Previous attempts at union
England and Scotland were separate states for several centuries before eventual union, and English attempts to take over Scotland by military force in the late 13th and early 14th centuries were ultimately unsuccessful (see the Wars of Scottish Independence). The first attempts at Union surrounded the foreseen unification of the Royal lines of Scotland and England. In pursuing the Scottish throne in the 1560s, Mary, Queen of Scots pledged herself to a peaceful union between the two kingdoms.
England and Scotland were ruled by the same king for the first time in 1603 when James VI of Scotland also became the king of England. However they remained two separate states until 1 May 1707.
Early Stuart union
The first attempt to unite the parliaments of England and Scotland was by Mary's son, King James VI and I. On his accession to the English throne in 1603 King James announced his intention to unite his two realms so that he would not be "guilty of bigamy". James used his Royal prerogative powers to take the style of 'King of Great Britain' and to give an explicitly British character to his court and person. Whilst James assumed the creation of a full union was a foregone conclusion, the Parliament of England was concerned that the formation of a new state would deprive England of its ancient liberties, taking on the more absolutist monarchical structure James had previously enjoyed in Scotland. In the meantime, James declared that Great Britain be viewed 'as presently united, and as one realm and kingdom, and the subjects of both realms as one people'.
The Scottish and English parliaments established a commission to negotiate a union, formulating an instrument of union between the two countries. However, the idea of political union was unpopular, and when James dropped his policy of a speedy union, the topic quietly disappeared from the legislative agenda. When the House of Commons attempted to revive the proposal in 1610, it was met with a more open hostility.
Union during the interregnum
The Solemn League and Covenant 1643 sought a forced union of the Church of England into the Church of Scotland, and although the covenant referred repeatedly to union between the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, a political union was not spelled out.
In the aftermath of the Civil War, in which the Covenanters had fought for the King, Oliver Cromwell occupied Scotland and began a process of creating a 'Godly Britannic' Union between the former Kingdoms. In 1651, the Parliament of England issued the Tender of Union declaration supporting Scotland's incorporation into the Commonwealth and sent Commissioners to Scotland with the express purpose of securing support for Union, which was assented to by the Commissioners (Members of Parliament) in Scotland. On 12 April 1654, Cromwell – styling himself Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland – enacted An Ordinance by the Protector for the Union of England and Scotland, which created 'one Commonwealth and under one Government' to be known as the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland. The ordinance was ratified by the Second Protectorate Parliament, as an Act of Union, on 26 June 1657. One united Parliament sat in Westminster, with 30 representatives from Scotland and 30 from Ireland joining the existing members from England. Whilst free trade was brought about amongst the new Commonwealth, the economic benefits were generally not felt as a result of heavy taxation used to fund Cromwell's New Model Army.
This republican union was dissolved automatically with the restoration of King Charles II to the thrones of England and Scotland. Scottish members expelled from the Commonwealth Parliament petitioned unsuccessfully for a continuance of the union. Cromwell's union had simultaneously raised interest in and suspicion of the concept of union and when Charles II attempted to recreate the union and fulfil the work of his grandfather in 1669, negotiations between Commissioners ground to a halt.
An abortive scheme for union occurred in Scotland in 1670. Following the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the records of the Parliament of Scotland show much discussion of possible union. William and Mary, whilst supportive of the idea, had no interest in allowing it to delay their enthronement. Impetus for this incorporating union came almost entirely from King William, who feared leaving Scotland open to a French invasion. In the 1690s, the economic position of Scotland worsened, and relations between Scotland and England became strained. In the following decade, however, union again became a significant topic of political debate.
Treaty and passage of the Acts of 1707
Deeper political integration had been a key policy of Queen Anne from the time she acceded to the throne in 1702. Under the aegis of the Queen and her ministers in both kingdoms, the parliaments of England and Scotland agreed to participate in fresh negotiations for a union treaty in 1705.
Both countries appointed 31 commissioners to conduct the negotiations. Most of the Scottish commissioners favoured union, and about half were government ministers and other officials. At the head of the list was Queensberry, and the Lord Chancellor of Scotland, the Earl of Seafield. The English commissioners included the Lord High Treasurer, the Earl of Godolphin, the Lord Keeper, Baron Cowper, and a large number of Whigs who supported union. Tories were not in favour of union and only one was represented among the commissioners.
Negotiations between the English and Scottish commissioners took place between 16 April and 22 July 1706 at the Cockpit in London. Each side had its own particular concerns. Within a few days, England gained a guarantee that the Hanoverian dynasty would succeed Queen Anne to the Scottish crown, and Scotland received a guarantee of access to colonial markets, in the hope that they would be placed on an equal footing in terms of trade.
After negotiations ended in July 1706, the acts had to be ratified by both Parliaments. In Scotland, about 100 of the 227 members of the Parliament of Scotland were supportive of the Court Party. For extra votes the pro-court side could rely on about 25 members of the Squadrone Volante, led by the Marquess of Montrose and the Duke of Roxburghe. Opponents of the court were generally known as the Country party, and included various factions and individuals such as the Duke of Hamilton, Lord Belhaven and Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun, who spoke forcefully and passionately against the union. The Court party enjoyed significant funding from England and the Treasury and included many who had accumulated debts following the Darien Disaster.
In Scotland, the Duke of Queensberry was largely responsible for the successful passage of the Union act by the Scottish Parliament. In Scotland, he received much criticism from local residents, but in England he was cheered for his action. He had received around half of the funding awarded by the Westminster treasury for himself. In April 1707, he travelled to London to attend celebrations at the royal court, and was greeted by groups of noblemen and gentry lined along the road. From Barnet, the route was lined with crowds of cheering people, and once he reached London a huge crowd had formed. On 17 April, the Duke was gratefully received by the Queen at Kensington Palace.
The English purpose was to ensure that Scotland would not choose a monarch different from the one on the English throne. The two countries had shared a king for much of the previous century, but the English were concerned that an independent Scotland with a different king, even if he were a Protestant, might make alliances against England. The English succession was provided for by the English Act of Settlement 1701, which ensured that the monarch of England would be a Protestant member of the House of Hanover. Until the Union of Parliaments, the Scottish throne might be inherited by a different successor after Queen Anne: the Scottish Act of Security 1704 granted parliament the right to choose a successor and explicitly required a choice different from the English monarch unless the English were to grant free trade and navigation. Many people in England were unhappy about the prospect, however. English overseas possessions made England very wealthy in comparison to Scotland, a poor country with few roads, very little industry and almost no Navy. This made some view unification as a markedly unequal relationship.
Scottish perspectiveIn Scotland, some claimed that union would enable Scotland to recover from the financial disaster wrought by the Darien scheme through English assistance and the lifting of measures put in place through the Alien Act to force the Scottish Parliament into compliance with the Act of Settlement.
The combined votes of the Court party with a majority of the Squadrone Volante were sufficient to ensure the final passage of the treaty through the House.
Personal financial interests were also allegedly involved. Many Commissioners had invested heavily in the Darien Scheme and they believed that they would receive compensation for their losses; Article 15 granted £398,085 10s sterling to Scotland, a sum known as The Equivalent, to offset future liability towards the English national debt. In essence it was also used as a means of compensation for investors in the Company of Scotland's Darien Scheme, as 58.6% was allocated to its shareholders and creditors.
Even more direct bribery was also said to be a factor. £20,000 (£240,000 Scots) was dispatched to Scotland for distribution by the Earl of Glasgow. James Douglas, 2nd Duke of Queensberry, the Queen's Commissioner in Parliament, received £12,325, more than 60% of the funding. (Some contend that all of this money was properly accounted for as compensation for loss of office, pensions and so forth not outwith the usual run of government. It is perhaps a debate that will never be set to rest. However, modern research has shown that payments were made to supporters of union that appear not to have been overdue salaries. At least four payments were made to people who were not even members of the Scottish Parliament.) Robert Burns referred to this:
We're bought and sold for English Gold,
Such a Parcel of Rogues in a Nation.
Some of the money was used to hire spies, such as Daniel Defoe; his first reports were of vivid descriptions of violent demonstrations against the Union. "A Scots rabble is the worst of its kind," he reported, "for every Scot in favour there is 99 against". Years later Sir John Clerk of Penicuik, originally a leading Unionist, wrote in his memoirs that,
(Defoe) was a spy among us, but not known as such, otherwise the Mob of Edinburgh would pull him to pieces.
Defoe recalls that he was hired by Robert Harley.
The Treaty could be considered unpopular in Scotland: Convention of Royal Burghs also petitioned against the Union as proposed:
That it is our indispensable duty to signify to your grace that, as we are not against an honourable and safe union with England far less can we expect to have the condition of the people of Scotland, with relation to these great concerns, made better and improved without a Scots Parliament.
Not one petition in favour of an incorporating union was received by Parliament. On the day the treaty was signed, the carilloner in St Giles Cathedral, Edinburgh, rang the bells in the tune Why should I be so sad on my wedding day? Threats of widespread civil unrest resulted in Parliament imposing martial law.
Ireland, the third of the "sister kingdoms", was not included in the union. The effective government of Ireland was in the hands of the 'Protestant Ascendancy', a minority elite (about 10% of the population). The Roman Catholic majority were systematically excluded from political and military discourse through a series of post-Cromwellian Penal Laws, limiting their rights to property, education, and the franchise.
In July 1707 each House of the Parliament of Ireland passed a congratulatory address to Queen Anne, praying that "May God put it in your royal heart to add greater strength and lustre to your crown, by a still more comprehensive Union". The British government did not respond to the invitation and an equal union between Great Britain and Ireland was out of consideration until the 1790s.
Ireland's benefits from the Union of 1707 were therefore few. Its preferential status in trade with England now extended to Scotland. However, Ireland was left unequal and unrepresented in the Parliament of Great Britain. The Kingdom of Ireland was to remain separate, and legally subordinate to Great Britain until 1784. The union with Ireland finally came about on 1 January 1801.
Provisions of the ActsTreaty of Union, agreed between representatives of the Parliament of England and the Parliament of Scotland in 1706, consisted of 25 articles, 15 of which were economic in nature. In Scotland, each article was voted on separately and several clauses in articles were delegated to specialised subcommittees. Article 1 of the treaty was based on the political principle of an incorporating union and this was secured by a majority of 116 votes to 83 on 4 November 1706. To minimise the opposition of the Church of Scotland, an Act was also passed to secure the Presbyterian establishment of the Church, after which the Church stopped its open opposition, although hostility remained at lower levels of the clergy. The treaty as a whole was finally ratified on 16 January 1707 by a majority of 110 votes to 69.
The two Acts incorporated provisions for Scotland to send representative peers from the Peerage of Scotland to sit in the House of Lords. It guaranteed that the Church of Scotland would remain the established church in Scotland, that the Court of Session would "remain in all time coming within Scotland", and that Scots law would "remain in the same force as before". Other provisions included the restatement of the Act of Settlement 1701 and the ban on Roman Catholics from taking the throne. It also created a customs union and monetary union.
The Act provided that any "laws and statutes" that were "contrary to or inconsistent with the terms" of the Act would "cease and become void."
Soon after the Union, the Act 6 Anne c.40 (later infelicitously named the Union with Scotland (Amendment) Act 1707) united the English and Scottish Privy Councils and decentralised Scottish administration by appointing justices of the peace in each shire to carry out administration. In effect it took the day-to-day government of Scotland out of the hands of politicians and into those of the College of Justice.
The English and Scottish parliaments had evolved along different lines; especially, the Parliament of Scotland had been unicameral while that of England had been bicameral. Following Union, the parliament at Westminster followed the English model.
Defoe drew upon his Scottish experience to write his Tour thro' the whole Island of Great Britain, published in 1726, where he admitted that the increase of trade and population in Scotland, which he had predicted as a consequence of the Union, was "not the case, but rather the contrary".
However, by the time Samuel Johnson and James Boswell made their tour in 1773, recorded in A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland, Johnson noted that Scotland was "a nation of which the commerce is hourly extending, and the wealth increasing" and in particular that Glasgow had become one of the greatest cities of Britain.
The Scottish Executive held a number of commemorative events through the year including an education project led by the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland, an exhibition of Union-related objects and documents at the National Museums of Scotland and an exhibition of portraits of people associated with the Union at the National Galleries of Scotland.
Scottish voting records
- Andrew Fletcher
- Daniel Defoe
- History of democracy
- List of treaties
- MacCormick v Lord Advocate
- Parliament of the United Kingdom
- Political union
- Real union
- English independence
- Scottish independence
- Scottish Parliament
- Unionism in Scotland
- Welsh independence
- The citation of this Act by this short title was authorised by section 1 of, and Schedule 1 to, the Short Titles Act 1896. Due to the repeal of those provisions, it is now authorised by section 19(2) of the Interpretation Act 1978.
- Article I of the Treaty of Union
- Act of Union 1707, Article 3
- Lockyer, op. cit., pp. 54–59
- Parliament.uk Archived December 10, 2008 at the Wayback Machine
- Lockyer, op. cit., p.59
- Parliament.uk Archived October 12, 2008 at the Wayback Machine
- The 1657 Act's long title was An Act and Declaration touching several Acts and Ordinances made since 20 April 1653, and before 3 September 1654, and other Acts
- C. Whatley, op. cit., p.95
- C. Whatley, op. cit., p.30
- History of the Byzantine Empire, 324–1453 By Alexander A. Vasiliev Edition: 2, illustrated Published by Univ of Wisconsin Press, 1958 ISBN 0-299-80926-9, ISBN 978-0-299-80926-3 (page 613)
- History of the Balkans: Eighteenth and nineteenth centuries By Barbara Jelavich Edition: reprint, illustrated Published by Cambridge University Press, 1983 ISBN 0-521-27458-3, ISBN 978-0-521-27458-6 (page 25)
- The Indo-European languages By Anna Giacalone Ramat, Paolo Ramat Edition: illustrated Published by Taylor & Francis, 1998 ISBN 0-415-06449-X, 9780415064491 (page 481)
- Robert Bideleux, Ian Jeffries,The Balkans: A Post-Communist History, Routledge 2006 p.26.
- The theory linking the ethnoym to the verb 'to speak' was advanced by Hahn who suggested it was perhaps a Latin loan word from excipio. See Robert Elsie, A dictionary of Albanian religion, mythology and folk culture, C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, 2001, ISBN 978-1-85065-570-1, p. 79.
- The wars of the Balkan Peninsula: their medieval origins G – Reference, Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects Series Authors Alexandru Madgearu, Martin Gordon Editor Martin Gordon Translated by Alexandru Madgearu Edition illustrated Publisher Scarecrow Press, 2008 ISBN 0-8108-5846-0, ISBN 978-0-8108-5846-6 It was supposed that those Albanoi from 1042 were Normans from Sicily, called by an archaic name (the Albanoi were an independent tribe from Southern Italy). The following instance is indisputable. It comes from the same Attaliates, who wrote that the Albanians (Arbanitai) were involved in the 1078; rebellion of... p. 25
- Mazaris 1975, pp. 76–79.
- N. Gregoras (ed. Bonn) V, 6; XI, 6.
- Lloshi, Xhevat (1999). “Albanian”. In Hinrichs, Uwe, & Uwe Büttner (eds). Handbuch der Südosteuropa-Linguistik. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag. p. 277. "The Albanians of today call themselves shqiptarë, their country Shqipëri, and their language shqipe. These terms came into use between the end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th centuries. Foreigners call them albanesi (Italian), Albaner (German), Albanians (English), Alvanos (Greek), and Arbanasi (old Serbian), the country Albania, Albanie, Albanien, Alvania, and Albanija, and the language Albanese, Albanisch, Albanian, Alvaniki, and Arbanashki respectively. All these words are derived from the name Albanoi of an Illyrian tribe and their center Albanopolis, noted by the astronomer of Alexandria, Ptolemy, in the 2nd century AD. Alban could he a plural of alb- arb-, denoting the inhabitants of the plains (ÇABEJ 1976). The name passed over the boundaries of the Illyrian tribe in central Albania, and was generalised for all the Albanians. They called themselves arbënesh, arbëresh, the country Arbëni, Arbëri, and the language arbëneshe, arbëreshe. In the foreign languages, the Middle Ages denominations of these names survived, but for the Albanians they were substituted by shqiptarë, Shqipëri and shqipe. The primary root is the adverb shqip, meaning “clearly, intelligibly”. There is a very close semantic parallel to this in the German noun Deutsche, “the Germans” and “the German language” (Lloshi 1984) Shqip spread out from the north to the south, and Shqipni/Shqipëri is probably a collective noun, following the common pattern of Arbëni, Arbëri. The change happened after the Ottoman conquest because of the conflict in the whole line of the political, social, economic, religious, and cultural spheres with a totally alien world of the Oriental type. A new and more generalised ethnic and linguistic consciousness of all these people responded to this.”
- Kamusella, Tomasz (2009). The politics of language and nationalism in modern Central Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 241. "Prior to the emergence of the modern self-ethnonym Shqiptarë in the mid-16th century (for the first time it was recorded in 1555 by the Catholic Gheg, Gjon Buzuku, in his missal), North Albanians (Ghegs) refereed to themselves as Arbën, and South Albanians (Tosks) Arbër. Hence, the self-ethnonym Arbëreshë of the present-day Italo-Albanians (numbering about 100,000) in southern Italy and Sicily, whose ancestors, in the wake of the Ottoman wars, emigrated from their homeland in the 14th century. hese self-ethnonyms perhaps influenced the Byzantine Greek Arvanites for ‘Albanians,’ which was followed by similar ones in Bulgarian and Serbian (Arbanasi), Ottoman (Arnaut), Romanian (Arbănas), and Aromanian (Arbineş)."
- Nitsiakos, Vassilis (2010). On the border: Transborder mobility, ethnic groups and boundaries along the Albanian-Greek frontier. LIT Verlag. p. 143. "Gjergj has married an Albanian Christian Orthodox, Zerina, who works as a nurse in the country surgery of the village. His mother says meaningfully about her daughter-in-law that, even though she is not “one of ours” (nu iasti di anuastrë) she is good (iasti bunë). And of course she never refers to her daughter-in- law by her name. She calls her “nviasta” (the bride) or “aistë” (she). This, too, is part of the moral code of communication revealing the nature of relationships among the members of a Vlach family. I know this well from my own family. But, at this moment, I am thinking more about the categories “one of ours” and “stranger” inside the same family, again in relation to whatever we call “identities”. Zerina is “stranger” to her mother-in- law, in the sense that she is not a Vlach. She is “arbiniasë’ (an Albanian or, better, an Arvanite). This, too, is very familiar to me. My own wife is not “one of ours” for my parents, namely she is not a Vlach but a “Greka”. We shall return to this category, “Grekos”, but here the parallelism is useful for understanding how relative and fluid ethnic classifications and categories are, as they depend on what people define as theirs or other in practice. I corrected the term “Albanian” above and used “Arvanite” instead, because I believe it expresses the perspective of these people more accurately. If the bride were Muslim, her mother in-law would most certainly not say that she is not one of our own, she would simply say she is a Turk (though she would have tried to conceal that). The basic distinction established in the wider area of the Balkans and in the context of Ottoman domination was one between Muslims and Christians."
- "Until the Interwar period Arvanitis (plural Arvanitēs) was the term used by Greek speakers to describe an Albanian speaker regardless of his/hers religious background. In official language of that time the term Alvanos was used instead. The term Arvanitis coined for an Albanian speaker independently of religion and citizenship survives until today in Epirus (see Lambros Baltsiotis and Léonidas Embirikos, “De la formation d’un ethnonyme. Le terme Arvanitis et son evolution dans l’État hellénique”, in G. Grivaud-S. Petmezas (eds.), Byzantina et Moderna, Alexandreia, Athens, 2006, pp. 417-448."
- Liotta, Peter H. (2001). Dismembering the state: The death of Yugoslavia and why it matters. Lexington Books. p.198. "Among Greeks, the term “Alvanitis”—or “Arvanitis”—means a Christian of Albanian ancestry, one who speaks both Greek and Albanian, but possesses Greek “consciousness.” Numerous “Arvanites” live in Greece today, although the ability to speak both languages is shrinking as the differences (due to technology and information access and vastly different economic bases) between Greece and Albania increase. The Greek communities of Elefsis, Marousi, Koropi, Keratea, and Markopoulo (all in the Attikan peninsula) once held significant Arvanite communities. “Arvanitis” is not necessarily a pejorative term; a recent Pan Hellenic socialist foreign minister spoke both Albanian and Greek (but not English). A former Greek foreign minister, Theodoros Pangalos, was an “Arvanite” from Elefsis."
- Watt, Douglas. The Price of Scotland: Darien, Union and the wealth of nations. Luath Press 2007.
- Parliament.uk Archived September 25, 2008 at the Wayback Machine
- The Humble Address of the Commissioners to the General Convention of the Royal Burrows of this Ancient Kingdom Convened the Twenty-Ninth of October 1706, at Edinburgh
- Notes by John Purser to CD Scotland's Music, Facts about Edinburgh.
- Journals of the Irish Commons, vol. iii. p. 421
- Theißen, Ulrich (2007). "Die Namen für das Gänseblümchen Bellis perennis im Bulgarischen und seinen Nachbarsprachen–Etymologische und benennungstheoretische Aspekte." Zeitschrift für Balkanologie. 43.(1): 90. Der ursprüngliche Name Άλβανίτης (abgeleitet von Άλβάνος) wurde im Neugriechischen zu Άρβανίτης… In türkischer Vermittlung erfuhr die Silbe -van- eine Metathese zu -nav-, so dass die türkische Form des Namens für die Albaner arnavut bzw. arnaut Lautet. In dieser Form gelangte das Wort ins Bulgarische (BER I/1971: 15). [The original name Άλβανίτης (derived from Άλβάνος) was established in Modern Greek to Άρβανίτης .... In Turkish the syllable was experienced and mediated as -van- and by metathesis to -nav- so that the Turkish form of the name for the Albanians became respectively Arnavut or Arnaut. In this form, the word came into Bulgarian (BER I / 1971: 15).]"
- Guzina, Dejan (2003). "Kosovo or Kosova – Could it be both? The Case of Interlocking Serbian and Albanian Nationalisms". In Florian Bieber and Židas Daskalovski (eds.). Understanding the war in Kosovo. Psychology Press. p.30. There is similar terminological confusion over the name for the inhabitants of the region. After 1945, in pursuit of a policy of national equality, the Communist Party designated the Albanian community as ‘Šiptari’ (Shqiptare, in Albanian), the term used by Albanians themselves to mark the ethnic identity of any member of the Albanian nation, whether living in Albania or elsewhere.… However, with the increased territorial autonomy of Kosovo in the late 1960s, the Albanian leadership requested that the term ‘Albanians’ be used instead—thus stressing national, rather than ethnic, self-identification of the Kosovar population. The term ‘Albanians’ was accepted and included in the 1974 Yugoslav Constitution. In the process, however, the Serbian version of the Albanian term for ethnic Albanians—‘Šiptari’—had acquired an openly pejorative flavor, implying cultural and racial inferiority. Nowadays, even though in the documents of post- socialist Serbia the term ‘Albanians’ is accepted as official, many state and opposition party leaders use the term ‘Šiptari’ indiscriminately in an effort to relegate the Kosovo Albanians to the status of one among many minority groups in Serbia. Thus the quarrel over the terms used to identify the region and its inhabitants has acquired a powerful emotional and political significance for both communities.
- Neofotistos, Vasiliki P. (2010). "Cultural Intimacy and Subversive Disorder: The Politics of Romance in the Republic of Macedonia". Anthropological Quarterly. 83. (2): 288. “Because of their allegedly rampant aggression and concerted attempts to destroy national integrity, Albanians in Macedonia are stigmatized with the pejorative term Šiptar (singular)/Šiptari (plural) as an ethic Other. Especially important for the purposes of this paper, as I show below, is the ambivalent character of the stereotype Šiptar/i—after all, as Bhabha ( 2004:95) reminds us "the stereotype [is] an ambivalent mode of knowledge and power," a "contradictory mode of representation, as anxious as it is assertive" (2004:100). In particular, the stereotype declares Albanians to be utterly incapable of participating in political and social life as Macedonian nationals who are committed to respecting and upholding state laws, and the territorial integrity and national sovereignty of Macedonia. In this sense, they are allegedly intrinsically "inferior"—"stupid," "dirty," "smelly," "uncultured," "backward," and so on. By the same token, however, and in the context of an ethnic-chauvinist and masculinist ideology (which I discuss in the next section), the stereotype also declares Albanians to be aggressive and capable of violating the territorial integrity of the Macedonian state and the moral integrity of Macedonian women. In this sense then, the stereotype invests Albanians with an excessive, disorderly energy that cannot be regulated and, hence, is dangerous (also see Lambevski 1997; for an analysis of the production and transgression of stereotypes, see Neofotistos 2004).
- Neofotistos, Vasiliki P. (2010). "Postsocialism, Social Value, and Identity Politics among Albanians in Macedonia". Slavic Review. 69. (4): 884-891.
- , July 2000, Volume 8, Number 7, pp. 480-486.European Journal of Human GeneticsMichele Belledi, Estella S. Poloni, Rosa Casalotti, Franco Conterio, Ilia Mikerezi, James Tagliavini and Laurent Excoffier. "Maternal and paternal lineages in Albania and the genetic structure of Indo-European populations". "Mitochondrial DNA HV1 sequences and Y chromosome haplotypes (DYS19 STR and YAP) were characterized in an Albanian sample and compared with those of several other Indo-European populations from the European continent. No significant difference was observed between Albanians and most other Europeans, despite the fact that Albanians are clearly different from all other Indo-Europeans linguistically. We observe a general lack of genetic structure among Indo-European populations for both maternal and paternal polymorphisms, as well as low levels of correlation between linguistics and genetics, even though slightly more significant for the Y chromosome than for mtDNA. Altogether, our results show that the linguistic structure of continental Indo-European populations is not reflected in the variability of the mitochondrial and Y chromosome markers. This discrepancy could be due to very recent differentiation of Indo-European populations in Europe and/or substantial amounts of gene flow among these populations."
- R. Elsie: Early Albania, a Reader of Historical Texts, 11th – 17th Centuries, Wiesbaden 2003, p. 3
- Extract from: Grujic, Radoslav: Legenda iz vremena Cara Samuila o poreklu naroda. in: Glasnik skopskog naucnog drustva, Skopje, 13 (1934), p. 198 200. Translated from the Old Church Slavonic by Robert Elsie. First published in R. Elsie: Early Albania, a Reader of Historical Texts, 11th – 17th Centuries, Wiesbaden 2003, p. 3. Albanian History Archived April 4, 2013 at the Wayback Machine
- House of Lords – Written answers, 6 November 2006, TheyWorkForYou.com
- Announced by the Scottish Culture Minister, Patricia Ferguson, 9 November 2006
- Defoe, Daniel. A tour thro' the Whole Island of Great Britain, 1724–27
- Defoe, Daniel. The Letters of Daniel Defoe, GH Healey editor. Oxford: 1955.
- Fletcher, Andrew (Saltoun). An Account of a Conversation
- Herman, Arthur. How the Scots Invented the Modern World. Three Rivers Press, 2001. ISBN 0-609-80999-7
- Lockhart, George, "The Lockhart Papers", 1702–1728
- Union with England Act and Union with Scotland Act – Full original text
- Treaty of Union and the Darien Experiment, University of Guelph, McLaughlin Library, Library and Archives Canada
- Text of the Union with Scotland Act 1706 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from the UK Statute Law Database
- Text of the Union with England Act 1707 as in force today (including any amendments) within the United Kingdom, from the UK Statute Law Database