X Close

How the North could save the Union Scots and Northumbrians have always stood together against England's invincible South

Simon Dawson/Bloomberg via Getty Images


April 26, 2021   7 mins

The recent ban on non-essential travel from Scotland to England was perhaps the first time ever that the Anglo-Scottish border has been effectively sealed to traffic. For although the frontier was settled as long ago as 1018 — when, after the Battle of Carham, the Scots forced the Northumbrians from the banks of the Forth down to a new frontier on the Tweed — this was always a highly porous boundary, more like a buffer-zone between warring states than a hard border.

Yet just last week one of the SNP’s more excitable parliamentarians made the startling claim that the recreation of this medieval border could be an engine of job creation — something that hasn’t obtained since Geordie Burn and “Kinmont Willie” Armstrong were stealing cattle and rustling sheep in Tweeddale and Tynedale. Indeed, the very remoteness of these borderlands, beyond the reach of London — or even Edinburgh — created a unique and lawless civilisation, home to feuding bands of Scots and English highland clans who lived a guerrilla life of arson and plunder, and whose nomadic ranching culture and traditions of military service and recreational belligerence would eventually be transplanted wholesale to the dangerous “back country” of the American colonies.

These families were more loyal to their kinsmen than to abstract notions of nationality. Indeed, at the Battle of Pinkie Cleugh outside Edinburgh in 1547, one observer noticed how Scottish and English border levies could be seen chatting cordially with each other — until spotted by their commanders, whereupon they put on a spirited show of combat. On his accession to the English throne in 1603, James VI may have remarked that “hath not God first united these two kingdoms, both in language, religion, and similitude of manners?”, but this was especially so in the Borderlands and adjacent counties of Northern England.

In Linda Colley’s key text Britons: Forging the Nation she records how the poor in the North East consumed oatmeal like the Scots and “to pass from the borders of Scotland into Northumberland”, a Scottish clergyman wrote at the end of the 18th century, “was rather like going into another parish than into another kingdom”. John Buchan would make similar observations as he passed into England from his beloved Tweeddale. By the early 1500s, there were hundreds of Scots living in Newcastle, including John Knox who was appointed a preacher at St Nicholas’s Church in 1550. Many of the coal miners and keelmen on the Tyne in the 17th and 18th centuries had come down to England from Lothian and the Borders, as did Captain James Cook’s father, a farm labourer who arrived on Teesside from Roxburghshire.

By the time of the ’45 so many Scots had made Tyneside their home that the native Northumbrians differentiated what they saw as the savage highlanders from the more civilised lowland Scots, with whom they shared a loyalty to “King Geordie” and the Protestant succession. Similarly, the unusually high levels of literacy in Northumbria owed much to an appreciation for the neighbouring system of parish education in Scotland, and Northumbrians shared many other traits with the Scots including a taste for classical architecture well into the Neo-Gothic period, and for living in flats (which was highly unusual in England), as well as an obsession with football — a macho and martial strain that was useful on imperial battlefields — and a debilitating enthusiasm for alcoholic beverages.

A second wave of Scots migration to Tyneside shipyards and coal mines helped to establish what can be seen as a North British Industrial Zone, linking places such as Newcastle, Glasgow, Liverpool and Belfast as well as outliers like the shipyard town of Barrow-in-Furness. North East England and West Central Scotland were the only places in the world with large-scale engineering, shipbuilding and coal mining all in the same place, a nexus critical to the technological developments essential to capitalism and the wealth of Britain: Scotland gave us the steam engine, the pneumatic tyre and the telephone, while North East England gave us the locomotive, the turbine and the lightbulb.

Some of Tyneside’s greatest industrialists had strong Scottish connections: George Stephenson had worked in Scottish collieries as well as those on his native Tyneside, and Sir William Armstrong’s business partners were the Scotsmen Charles Mitchell and Andrew Noble. Indeed, Scots played a huge part in the North East’s maritime trades: John Barbour’s wax-jacket empire grew from supplying the Tyneside fishing fleet, hundreds of Scots “fisher lassies” who followed the trawlers down the East Coast settled in North Shields, and so many Scotsmen came to work at Andrew’s Leslie’s shipyard that Hebburn became known as “Little Aberdeen”.

Thousands of families, including mine, crisscrossed the Anglo-Scottish border in the late 19th and early 20th century — and figures such as Arthur Henderson, Manny Shinwell and latterly James Herriott and Mark Knopfler spent their early lives swapping Tyne and Wear for the Clyde (and vice versa). You see this in the career of the theatrical impresario Arthur Jefferson who owned theatres across “North Britain” but principally on the Tyne and the Clyde. It is significant that his son, Stan Laurel (who always considered himself a Tynesider), actually made his first professional appearance in his father’s theatre in Glasgow.

Coming from Northumberland, Scottish things have been a constant in my life: nurtured first by grandparents who took the Sunday Post and bought me The Broons and Oor Wullie annuals at Christmas. My father’s best pals were his Glaswegian workmates who’d relocated to Newcastle from IBM’s plant at Greenock, and I can vividly remember the boisterousness of “Glasgow Shipyard Fortnight” when holidaying Scots would migrate en masse for fun and frolics at Whitley Bay.

As kids we drank Barr’s pop and ate Scotch pies, Tunnock’s teacakes and “McCowan’s Highland Toffee”. Many of us followed Celtic, Rangers, Hibs and Hearts as our “second teams”, and took character-building family holidays in the midge-infested highlands, or on the freezing coasts of Fife and Ayrshire — not to mention regular trips to the Edinburgh Tattoo. McEwan’s Best Scotch was the first pint I ever bought (at 3.6 ABV a good “training beer” for thirsty teenagers), and my first flat was around the corner from St Andrew’s Kirk in Newcastle — right by the old Deuchars Brewery on Sandyford Road.

The sense of similarity and affinity between Scotland and North East England has shaped my own unionist outlook, but also my growing sense that England is, in the radical analysis of Alex Niven, “a nebulous half-country”, riven in two for centuries by a geological fault-line that separated a prosperous and dominant South East, centred on London, from the poor and sparsely populated lands north of the Trent. The medieval North was simply a different country, and the Far North was more different still — a quasi-autonomous border country, run as a buffer zone against the Scots by warlord aristocrats and (uniquely for the British Isles) ruling Prince Bishops — the longevity of whose power meant that North East England was only fully integrated into a centralised English, then British, polity not that long before Scotland was.

This sense of Northern difference was cemented still further in the 18th and 19th centuries with the emergence of the distinctive working class culture of the North of England, whose politics built on the anti-Anglican traditions of recusant Catholicism and muscular Methodism, and birthed a municipal Labourism that raised working-class living standards, and underpinned what Ian Jack, in The Country Formerly Known as Great Britain described as an “independent civilisation”.

And yet the history of the North of England is basically a litany of defeats (both militarily and politically) at the hands of the South: starting with the brutal “Harrying of the North” by the Normans, the Wars of the Roses (where the North lost), the Catholic rebellions of the 1500s (ditto), the Civil War (where the King’s heartlands were in the North and West), and then the failure of any subsequent challenge to the power of London and the South East — from the Jacobite risings, to the Chartists, and then the General Strike and Miners’ Strikes.

In her 1921 book, The Kings’ Council of the North (about Elizabeth I’s brutal suppression of the Rising of the Northern Earls’ in 1569), the historian Rachel Reid wrote that North is “the natural refuge of lost causes”, and yet as the late Scottish historian Christopher Harvie once put it, English regionalism is “the dog that never barked”. Something did seem to stir during the pandemic though, when Northern grievance found its champion in Andy Burnham, and not long afterwards a Northern Independence Party was founded committed to “Northumbrian” secession  — and cringey tweets.

But the North has never been able to stand up to London alone. In his book The Shortest History of England James Hawes made the brilliant observation that, after 1885, the South of England became “a virtually impregnable Tory bloc while the North voted otherwise”, the North therefore had to look for “alliances with the Celts [the Scots and Welsh] to outgun them: we call that alliance, which lasted until 2015, when the Scots deserted it, ‘the Labour Party’”. With the SNP now dominant in Scotland, and then Red Wall in the North crumbling, the South East looks more invincible than ever.

For those dismayed by Northern enfeeblement, and the prospect of a border being reimposed between Berwick and Carlisle —  with the potential for a brassic Scotland becoming a client state of a hostile power, as it was under Mary of Guise – what should be the response?

Well, if I were tasked to save the union, I would focus on two things: firstly rekindling those alliances between the North of England and Scotland, and thinking creatively about how to knit them together economically and culturally — not just dualling the A1, but how about a maglev joining Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, Edinburgh and Glasgow, with a tunnel to Belfast too.

I often get the impression that the Scots — and even the Irish to an extent — don’t mind sharing sovereignty with their larger neighbours, as long as it isn’t the English calling the shots. But my hunch is that it’s the caricatural Southern English that the rest of these islands finds so insufferable. Far too many English Tories fit into the sneering stereotype of Tim Roth in Rob Roy or Tobias Menzies in Outlander, whereas in my experience Scoto-Northumbrian relations are almost always extremely cordial.

I think the strong horse theory explains why high-status opinion in Scotland is so wedded to “independence in the EU”. I’m reminded here of the Catalans, who like the Scots in the British Empire were ardent Spanish imperialists, but as Spain’s power and prestige declined after the loss of Imperio Español, they were beguiled by a new imperial power in Brussels. Ambitious Scots, looking South to an increasingly threadbare post-imperial Westminster, had similar feelings.

So, forget constitutional tinkering, and even emotional appeals to former glories and “our NHS”; the Scots are too hard-headed for that. I suspect that the one thing that will change attitudes to Britishness in Scotland is for the UK to just be a wealthier and more successful country. Easier said than done, but 4% on GDP will do more than any Royal Commission to raise the prestige of the Union in Northern Britain. Can Boris Johnson pull this off? For those of us who fear the imposition of border controls at Carter Bar, we’d better hope so.


Dan Jackson is the author of the best-selling book The Northumbrians: The North East of England and its People. A New History, published by Hurst (2019)

 

northumbriana

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

62 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago

It’s ‘odd’ that it’s really only now, this close to the looming May Scottish Parliamentary elections that the SNP is finally having its plans for independence far more rigorously scrutinized by the likes of the BBC.

‘An independent Scotland in the EU’, if that isn’t an oxymoron and that’s assuming its membership gets fast tracked, will be required to erect a hard border with England and fully expected to adopt the EU single currency, adhere to its budgetary rules, such as they are, and follow EU trade and customs rules when it swaps its current biggest single market, the UK, for the EU’s, with all the domestic chaos that would bring.

Exceptions will absolutely not be made for Scotland by the famously ‘rules based’ EU, least of all because it’s effectively a new member and a mighty small one at that, and yet to hear Nicola Sturgeon on Andrew Marr the other day saying that whilst she accepted a hard border would be inevitable, Scotland would try to negotiate, presumably utterly unprecedented, arrangements to, ‘keep trade flowing freely’.

When pushed in reference to the deleterious impact on the Scottish economy this new border would pose she replied, apropos of nothing really, ‘I am not denying what the EU regulations say. I am not denying because of the absurdity of Brexit that all sorts of issues are raised for Scotland completely against our democratic will’.

Nevermind that had the 2014 IndyRef delivered a Yes that, ironically, the SNP would themselves have led the charge to take the Scotland that it purports to speak in its entirety for out of its beloved EU leaving rUK in it.

Frankly, as if we didn’t know already, it’s quite clear that she either hasn’t got a proverbial Scooby Doo or that the SNP has long decided not to talk too often or too openly about this elephant in the room and the effects it will have.

Still, nice to see Andrew Marr finally behaving out of character and not soft balling Sturgeon for a change, albeit apparently reluctantly.

Last edited 3 years ago by G Harris
John Jones
John Jones
3 years ago

“And yet the history of the North of England is basically a litany of defeats (both militarily and politically) at the hands of the South”

What utter pariochal nonsense. In what world was “the North” defeated in the civil war, you know the one where a Yorkshire man (Fairfax) led the so called southerners (who were in fact no such thing, the civil war was a remarkably fluid conflict, any attempt to make it a North Vs South issue is fake history.

The Normans were not southern English, they were resisted all over the country including in the south, how the harrying of the North has any relevance to any divide is beyond me.

Finally, in this telling of fake history, why do you ignore the various defeats of the Southern English. Does Jack Cade’s rebellion not count? What about the Monmouth Rebellion? Both far more serious threats to the authority of the crown than anything in the North, why do you not belive the history of the South is also a litany of defeats?

I suspect it is because it doesn’t suit grievance culture.

Last edited 3 years ago by John Jones
kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  John Jones

I grew up in the north-east and my mother’s family were from Scotland but I always felt we were crossing the border and entering a completely different country from England. If northern England somehow joined with Scotland wouldn’t Edinburgh just be their capital-how would this be an advantage over having London as the capital? Also didn’t Scotland have their ‘auld alliance’ with France, which eventually led to the Jacobin Rebellion as some backed the Catholic Stuarts over the Protestant Stuarts ( the Hanoverian claim to the throne was through James 1’s daughter Elizabeth)?

Jed Hughes
Jed Hughes
3 years ago
Reply to  John Jones

Very well said, Mr. Jones. Your grasp of history seems much better than mine (but also, unfortunately, much better than Dan Jackson’s).

George Bruce
George Bruce
3 years ago

Certainly always thought on my trips over the border from Scotland that it was in the wrong place, way too far north. The northern English and the Scots are much more similar to each other than either are to the southern English. I wonder where readers would place the people of the English midlands? Are even they northerners?
I know they are to the Guardian – I remember some years ago having a comment removed for daring to point out to Madeleine Bunting that Leeds was not hundreds of miles from London as she had claimed in an article. (Apparently it`s 169 miles as the crow flies.)
Bizarrely, I found out later Bunting is from Yorkshire!

George Bruce
George Bruce
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

Sorry I am not implying Leeds is in the Midlands, by the way.

Fiona Cordy
Fiona Cordy
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

If you come from the proper north of England (Newcastle), as I do, you would certainly believe that Leeds is in the Midlands.

Johanna Louw
Johanna Louw
3 years ago
Reply to  Fiona Cordy

Why aye man!

Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

‘Comment if Free, Facts are sacrilege.’

Last edited 3 years ago by Fraser Bailey
G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

Yep, you can say anything you like on CiF just don’t expect it to survive ‘pre-moderation’ and, if it does, don’t expect it to remain there very long once the ravening hordes get their claws into you for daring to stray from their party line.

Johanna Louw
Johanna Louw
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

I’ve found the moderators on the so-called ‘Comment is free’ to be childish, censorious and sometimes downright fascistic.

David J
David J
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

Depends where you live. If you are south of the M4, anything the other side is bandit territory, where they dye themselves with woad. Mind you, I live in the Cotswolds, so my frontier is the M40!

Chris Scott
Chris Scott
3 years ago
Reply to  David J

From where I am, anything north of the South Downs is the north, and London is bandit country.

Last edited 3 years ago by Chris Scott
Niobe Hunter
Niobe Hunter
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Scott

That is true for everyone these days. Murdered for a scooter? Knifed whilst shopping in Sainsbury in Hampton because someone from the city known previously as Constantinople had had an argument with his wife, and was feeling cross with all women? Stabbed in the back outside a phone shop? Knifed in Oxford Street in the afternoon amongst the shoppers….random rememberings. It’s bandit country, alright.

Ferrusian Gambit
Ferrusian Gambit
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

Calling a someone from the Midlands a Northerner is good trolling just to see the reaction.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago

The weather people mean Scotland when they say the north & I wonder if they have a granny who lives in Invernochie ( pop 20 if you don’t count the sheep) for all the time they spend on it.

spencetraducciones
spencetraducciones
3 years ago

‘Scoto-Northumbrian relations are almost always extremely cordial’. Good grief, where have you been for the last 60 years? Born in Northumberland? Northumberland Place in Notting Hill more like. Clown.

George Bruce
George Bruce
3 years ago

Why, in what way do the Scots not have cordial relations with people in Northumbria? As a Scot, I cannot say I have ever noticed ill-feeling, although I have not spent a lot of time there, so would like to know what the perceived problem is.

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

History dear boy, history.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 years ago

First the Long Bow, then the Bill, and finally the magnificent Brown Bess Musket!
Vae Victis!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

Halidon Hill 1333, Homildon Hill 1402, Flodden Field 1513 and on and on to Culloden 1746.

Johanna Louw
Johanna Louw
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

‘Northumberland’, not ‘Northumbria’. The Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria ceased to exist in the tenth century.

Jim
Jim
3 years ago

Given that the population of the North of England is about 15 million (the article included Liverpool so it’s obviously not just talking about the North East) if the five million Scots want to join us that’s fine

Brian Clegg
Brian Clegg
3 years ago

‘riven in two for centuries by a geological fault-line that separated a prosperous and dominant South East, centred on London, from the poor and sparsely populated lands north of the Trent.’ – So, once again, we in the South West don’t exist?

J StJohn
J StJohn
3 years ago
Reply to  Brian Clegg

You do. You are the location for the holiday homes of people from the south east. Also, you’re bloody good at rugby. Union.

Ferrusian Gambit
Ferrusian Gambit
3 years ago
Reply to  Brian Clegg

As long as you keep making cider for the rest of the country no one cares.

Darren Stephens
Darren Stephens
3 years ago
Reply to  Brian Clegg

Not just that, but “the poor and sparsely populated lands north of the Trent” fails to account for the fact that it was the industrial north and midlands that drove most of the wealth and expansion of the Imperial period. Without places like Birmingham, Nottingham, The Black Country, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Liverpool, Teesside, Wearside and Tyneside, there wouldn’t have been that much wealth in the modern sense. Those places mostly built the country we became.
The “wealthy” south was the beneficiary of much of that, and it’s one reason why, when the great Thatcher reset came, the north was rightly angry about being thrown under the bus by economic policies that didn’t really have a plan B for us. That is something we certainly share with the Scots.
The picture being created by the quote is hugely partial, and (let’s be charitable) not entirely accurate.

Steve J
Steve J
3 years ago

Writing as somebody who was born and lives in northern England, I would be perfectly happy with Scottish independence and a hard border between England and Scotland.

Last edited 3 years ago by Steve J
Sean MacSweeney
Sean MacSweeney
3 years ago
Reply to  Steve J

I think a hard border around London would be more preferential, none of them allowed out

Geoffrey Simon Hicking
Geoffrey Simon Hicking
3 years ago

Once empire, now CANZUK. Let’s get people all across Britain interested in that and the wider commonwealth. It’s more multi-cultural than the EU, and so should even appeal to the wokies.

Darren Stephens
Darren Stephens
3 years ago

That assumes they’d be hugely interested. Why would they be, seeing as they’re in far bigger areas of economic advantage?

D Ward
D Ward
3 years ago

They’ll dissolve themselves in paroxysms. Multi-culti good; commonwealth bad; brain doe not compute….

Ferrusian Gambit
Ferrusian Gambit
3 years ago

“I’m reminded here of the Catalans, who like the Scots in the British Empire were ardent Spanish imperialists, but as Spain’s power and prestige declined after the loss of Imperio Español, they were beguiled by a new imperial power in Brussels” – What are you talking about? The Spanish empire was in decline from the 17th century, and Catalan nationalism got its real fillip in 1898 when the loss of Cuba and the Philippines to the USA in the Spanish-American war pushed a lot of the Catalan bourgeois into an anti-centralisation mood after having had something of a renaissance in their culture the previous 50 years driven by colonially fueled industrialisation. They were not arden Spanish imperialists but largely merchants, Indianos, who focused on the textile (calico) trade and rum, who had a bourgeois sensibility, not especially militaristic like the Castilians, that led to a rebirth of a distinctive Catalan language and culture through the standardisation of the language by Pompeu Fabra, the birth (or rebith depending on your perspective) of Catalan literature under Jacint Verdaguer and a recovery of parts (and in distorted form) of the old identity of the Kingdom of Aragon that the Bourbons had suffocated and consciously repressed after their victory in 1714 at the conclusion of the war of Spanish Succession. Their attachment to the Spanish empire – and it should be said mainly the ‘new’ Spanish empire of the Carribean after the independence of the Spanish colonies given the old South American colonies had far more ties to the Basque country and Andalucia – was almost entirely mercantile and NOT based on the unifying ideology of militant Catholicism that was to be so strong in Spain even through Franco’s reign, which meant they were no means commited to imperialism for imperialism sake. Indeed they consciously adopted an identity that saw themselves as more ‘civilised’ and ‘European’ than the rest of Spain – this was taken to extremes by the Catalan ultra-right, yes they do exist. This reached its peak in the period from the early 20th century (the Mancomunitat) to before the civil war. This was then guttered out by Franco’s Castillian hostility to regional nationalisms, though the rich bourgeois Catalans that made a show of obeisance to Franco quickly reversed course after his death and sought a return to the late Monarchical and Republican era autonomy that Catalonia enjoyed. Spain didn’t join the EU until 1986. The upswing in independence support came far more from the aftershocks of the housing boom bubble bursting in Spain (with 25% unemployment); the bizarre jerry-rigged system of distributing tax revenues – that strangely enough excludes the Basque country, another rich industrial region with separatist tendencies, and the brewing culture war between the PP strongholds and their opposition to the changes to the statue of autonomy that were made in 2006 by the Socialists that the conservative PP saw as being deleterious to Spanish unity and successful forced the nullification of various of its clauses. The EU and Brussels is a fairly irrelevant non-issue – some Catalan separatists want to rejoin, others not; it certainly didn’t form the main plank of support for Catalan indepedence that has come from the beginning by the complex interaction of economic distinctiveness (richer and more industrialised than the rest of Spain), a rich historic identity – both of which make people inclined to think the area would be better off outside Spanish control, EU or no EU. Whether or not this is actually true is debatable, but those are the terms of the debate. The author would do well to actually research the topics he writes about before making ahistorical and nonsensical claims.

Last edited 3 years ago by Ferrusian Gambit
D Ward
D Ward
3 years ago

Thank you – that was very interesting.

Darren Stephens
Darren Stephens
3 years ago

The Scottish influence goes further South. As a kid on Teesside, primary school history, apart from the usuals, had tales of things like the Lambton Wyrm, and Robert Bruce (and not told from an “English” standpoint). Bruce was the Lord of Annandale *and Cleveland*), owning land in North Yorkshire around the Tees, and even being repsonsible for the dedication of a church on the site where Middlesbrough came to be centuries later. As a result of that amongst other things, the picture I was given of Scotland was rather more positive than some further south may have been given.
Teesside shared a lot in common with Glasgow: steel, docks and shipyards, as well as chemicals. And there was a proximity to coalfields. There were, as a result, a lot of families with Scots background kicking around the area. And the Broons and Our Wullie annuals were a fixture: you knew Christmas was coming when the displays would go up in WH Smith in the Cleveland Centre. But then I was also exposed to much more Scottish culture: comedy, music, drama, even poetry, so maybe I’m just personally better disposed.
Personally, living in North Yorkshire, I feel way more affinity with Scots than I do with many English now. And though I wouldn’t want them to leave the union (as they’re a bulwark of comparative sanity at the moment), I can’t blame them for wanting out of what is clearly a dysfunctional and abusive relationship as it stands. The Westminster government no longer rules by consent there, and only a major constitutional shift could change that. But with what’s going on in the Westminster cesspool right now, the chances of that change happening in any meaningful fashion are pretty much zero.

Niobe Hunter
Niobe Hunter
3 years ago

the wyrm lived in Northumberland, it wasne Scots.

Darren Stephens
Darren Stephens
3 years ago
Reply to  Niobe Hunter

I know, it’s just up the road from me in County Durham (a stone’s throw from where I work now).

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago

If you look up Kilton Castle , North Yorkshire you will find the person I think is the origin of Robin Hood, Robert de Thweng.

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago

The EU will still be keen to punish the UK for Brexit by annexing as much territory as possible. The rules will be bent for Scotland, and the SNP will be too stupid to notice they are becoming an EU protectorate on much worse terms than they enjoy as an over-subsidised British region.
Scotland will still have to make some effort to balance its budget and I would think a defence budget of nil will be a key plank of that. The SNP will argue that England will spend the same money anyway so that the EU and England will defend Scotland for free.
I’ve long thought the best way to settle the SNP’s hash would be an independence referendum where the locals “voot” (as Sturgeon pronoonces et) on whether their own region should leave the UK. It would be very hard to object to this as it simply takes the self determination principle to the logical next level.
This would quite likely result in the oil, gas and defence-reliant areas staying in the UK, while the SNP would be left with the rest.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

I don’t think the rules will be bent for Scotland, as, by doing this, the EU would put itself into a very tricky situation as regards the countries of the West Balkans who have been waiting to start accession talks for about 15 years. These countries are basically being strung along; I don’t think there is any appetite at all to allow them into the club. The show currently being put on is the “reformed” accession procedure which is just a “never going to happen” dressed up as a more thorough vetting process. These countries are already losing patience and allowing Scotland to jump right back in over their heads might be the last straw for them. That would mean the EU basically handing over geopolitical influence in the region to Russia and China – I cannot imagine they would want to take that risk just to have Scotland in quickly. I also see this as a reason why the EU tried so hard to frustrate Brexit – if the UK had stayed, the EU would have been able to neutralise the Scotland issue.

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

Caithness and Orkney would probably vote to stay. Holyrood is more distrusted than Westminster up here.

Tony Price
Tony Price
3 years ago

On a point of fact, Scotland did not give us the steam engine, Devon did (Newcomen etc) with some help from France (Papin). James Watt made a crucial improvement but that was decades later.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Price

Don’t forget Thomas Savery or the Wheal Vor Mine in Cornwall.

David Brown
David Brown
3 years ago
Reply to  Tony Price

And, equally, Cornwall gave us the locomotive.

Ben
Ben
3 years ago

A most interesting article.
I think the author will find that disaffection for London extends far into England too! London is in effect a city state and should be governed as such and a policy of economic regeneration extended across the whole of the UK coupled with real political devolution.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

The most equitable solution to this conundrum would be move to the English border northwards to the line of the Antonine Wall, established by the Romans in 142AD/895AUC.

Failing that, reinstating the old Northumbrian border would be acceptable.

Either way it would allow for a totally spurious Gaelic state, perhaps called ‘Jockland’ to develop north of the Forth, with its capital in say, Perth. ( to be renamed Jockburgh).

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago

The currency should be called the “poond”.

Jim Jones
Jim Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

You’re a mong

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago

I hate to point out but the War of the Roses was between the houses of York and Lancaster. As a Yorkshireman by birth I know my traditional enemies cannot be called southern.

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
3 years ago

But it was, in the end, won by the Welsh!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 years ago

No, by the professional French mercenaries, commanded by Philbert de Chandee* who was awarded the title Earl of Bath in recognition of the outstanding performance of his men that day.

Incidentally the parsimonious Henry Tudor only ever created three new earldoms, for Stanley, Clifford and de Chandee.*

* impossible to type the correct accent on the penultimate e!

Last edited 3 years ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
David Brown
David Brown
3 years ago

It is not altogether true that Henry Tudor was a man with deep pockets and short arms. His arms could be very long where other people’s pockets were concerned.

steve horsley
steve horsley
3 years ago

strange way of looking at things.i think come referendum time,if it happens,the scots will vote against wee jimmy for the second time but with a bigger majority.hopefully that will signal the end of her.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago

I think that the only things that will stop the hard-headed Scots leaving the union are the equally hard-headed considerations of money (can they really afford independence?), borders (Sturgeon’s waffle about how the England-Scotland border would work if Scotland reenters the single market just wasn’t convincing) and currency (what, actually, are you going to do about that?).
Apropos the relationship between the Northern English and the Scots described here: yes, I can quite agree. I grew up in Yorkshire which is a bit of a law unto itself anyway, but I definitely felt and still feel more connected to the Scots than I do to the southern English, Welsh or Irish.

Last edited 3 years ago by Katharine Eyre
Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

I can agree with what you say. However, I think that a lot of Scots these days look no further than their hatred of the English and their devotion to NS.

As a Yorkshireman living in Scotland I also feel closer to them than southerners, after all its us Yorkies who taught the Scots to be parsimonious. Remember the Yorkshire moto – a flea, a fly and a flitch of bacon!

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago

Hello, my fellow Yorkshireman! Or should I say: “aye up!”

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago

Its ‘if theres aught for naught make sure its for thee sen’-the Scottish politicians have certainly learnt that well

Charles Rae
Charles Rae
3 years ago
Reply to  Katharine Eyre

As a Scot, I would agree with the point about money being a significant factor in the independende deabate. In fact, the SNP have had 7 years to flesh out the fantasy document that was their independence rationale in 2014. And what have they done?Damn all. The case for independence doesnt rest on economic or other facts( Sturgeon said that independence was more important than economics), but on an emotional basis. I can also add that being in northern England feels very different from being in the south, especially the south-east. For a start, no-one looks askant at Scottish banknotes.When the SNP complained about Boris ignoring Scotland I wanted to shout out to them: It’s not about you, it’s about Boris! The north of England and Wales and northern Ireland are practically non-existent to a certain south-eastern mind.

Katharine Eyre
Katharine Eyre
3 years ago
Reply to  Charles Rae

I absolutely take your point about independence being a strongly emotional issue – Brexit was as well. If you really feel like independence is your destiny then you’ll do it whatever the obstacles placed in your way. I wouldn’t begrudge the Scots their freedom at all…but I do think it would be much more sensible to wait 10 years. Let the economy bounce back and some of the scars from the pandemic heal. Get your currency and economic plans together. After all, what’s another 10 years when the union is already 300 years old?
This rush for another referendum is Sturgeon’s ego talking and it will end in tears – and much more so than Brexit. There was never any question of the UK being a viable country after leaving the EU. The same does not apply to Scotland, especially right after the pandemic. The worst thing that could possibly happen is if there was a referendum, Scotland voted to leave, the exit negotiations were rancorous and then Scotland discovers it has bitten off more than it can chew. Then you’re all stuck together on the island, in a broken down union where everyone hates each other.

Last edited 3 years ago by Katharine Eyre
Andrea X
Andrea X
3 years ago

A case of colonisation and cultural appropriation? Oor Wille in England? OBSCENE!!

In any case, roads between England and Scotland are badly needed indeed and it is a mystery to my why they don’t exist. Even going to Newcastle from Edinburgh is a bit of a trek and thinking that the road connecting London and Edinburgh is in places little more than a single lane track does make you think.

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Andrea X

You need a new satnav, or better still a book of maps.

David Purchase
David Purchase
3 years ago
Reply to  Andrea X

“Roads between England and Scotland are badly needed”. Well, at least one does (though it is admittedly very boring). It is known as M6 / A74(M) / M74. (Of course it should have been M6 all the way to Glasgow, just as the A1 goes all the way to Edinburgh, but the Scots could not stomach that.)
And why was that the best route? Because Scotland is west, as well as north, of England. Edinburgh is west of Bristol. What is, however, clearly needed is a motorway from Abington along the route of the A702.