|
|
Post by sandypine on May 14, 2023 17:14:12 GMT
I said, as you well know, that the benefits of Union appeared within a few decades. What do you wish me to 'prove'. All I am doing is repeating the opinion of some well known historians. You disagree, I am not going to go trawling around for information that you will just dismiss. We disagree, so be it although you do also seem to dismiss Tom Devine's opinion from whom I quoted. The enlightenment was invigorated by Union as the education the Church provided was very much directed to the word of God with its then peculiar Scottish slant of intolerance towards alternative points of view and observance of the Sabbath as Aitkenhead found out very much to his cost at the turn of the century. I repeat, again, it is a complex issue and way transcends Scotland good England bad which seems to be the whole direction of your historical journey. That the Union benefitted England as well is not the issue, that it also benefitted Scotland is and keeping to the parcel of rogues scenario does no credit to Scotland in Britain. The Scottish enlightenment flourished during the Union, you cannot separate that, according to you, stultifying Union from the freedom that the enlightenment encouraged. sandy you are going around and around in circles mate making empty claims without proof.
its self evident.back up the claims you have repeatedly made .If you cant , we can dismiss them .
you are not. So far , you claim ferguson and another guy agrees with your position but cant back it up. All you are doing is repeating your own misinformation.
i have tam devines book on scottish history in front of me , and i still cant find the part you claim regading the scottish economy in the 18th century.
same tactics as you display al lthrough this thread and others. You make empty claims , that claim is challenged , you then backtrack and try and mitigate damage limitation.
without an indy scotlands education policy , there would have been no scottish enlightenment .union or no.
now you are putting words in my mouth. I didint say it didnt flourish within the union. What i said was the union didnt cause the scottish enlightenment.
How can I prove what Tom Devine says other than quote directly from his book which I have done which you keep ignoring. You are free to dismiss anything you like, I am not judging I will leave that to others. If Tom Devine is 'some other guy' then your Scottish history is lacking. I repeat yet again that the circumstance of the Scottish Enlightenment occurred as result of everything in a complex way. I have not said the Union caused the Scottish Enlightenment but there is little doubt it flourished during the early period of the Union and many factors, including the Union, played a part. You cannot remove anything from the context. Its effect of course is interpretation which we leave to professional historians and some think it was important others prefer a bit of polarisation. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 14, 2023 17:16:36 GMT
sandy you are going around and around in circles mate making empty claims without proof.
its self evident.back up the claims you have repeatedly made .If you cant , we can dismiss them .
you are not. So far , you claim ferguson and another guy agrees with your position but cant back it up. All you are doing is repeating your own misinformation.
i have tam devines book on scottish history in front of me , and i still cant find the part you claim regading the scottish economy in the 18th century.
same tactics as you display al lthrough this thread and others. You make empty claims , that claim is challenged , you then backtrack and try and mitigate damage limitation.
without an indy scotlands education policy , there would have been no scottish enlightenment .union or no.
now you are putting words in my mouth. I didint say it didnt flourish within the union. What i said was the union didnt cause the scottish enlightenment.
How can I prove what Tom Devine says other than quote directly from his book which I have done which you keep ignoring im calling you out sandy.
I have tam devines famous book on scottish history , scotland 1700 - 2000 , and not anywhere i have seen does he say what you are claiming.
what page is it on?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2023 17:17:23 GMT
bought and sold for english gold....? I hope one day we get to the bottom of the mystery behind sturgeon and all the conpiracy theories.
Still you are one to talk.
Seems little has changed over the centuries in your country either. how many english politicians are desperate to sell your country down the road to brussells , not to mention the grovelling they do to washington?
Putin had half the tory party in his back pocket .Didnt boris take quite a bit of the old rouble in return for awarding that kgb guy a peerage?
Christ almighty think before writing - the UK Tory Government has spent the last 10 years supporting Ukraine in their conflict against Russia. If Russia had bought and paid for the Tory party they didnt get a very good deal..  He does get a little excited, which could be the six pack of special brew:
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 14, 2023 17:19:56 GMT
How can I prove what Tom Devine says other than quote directly from his book which I have done which you keep ignoring im calling you out sandy.
I have tam devines famous book on scottish history , scotland 1700 - 2000 , and not anywhere i have seen does he say what you are claiming.
what page is it on?
Page 58 halfway down the page start of a paragraph. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 14, 2023 17:21:29 GMT
I repeat yet again that the circumstance of the Scottish Enlightenment occurred as result of everything in a complex way. . prove it then?
Scotland educates the poor . Scotland builds more universities than england , scotland then reaps the rewards , and britian trys to take the credit because the fruits of that labour happened after their shotgun marriage proposal.
The union was not the cause of the enlightenment. there is nothing complex about it.
Why do you think the scots lords wanted to keep the superior scottish education system , rather then get rid of it and have a british education system?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on May 14, 2023 17:23:08 GMT
Christ almighty think before writing - the UK Tory Government has spent the last 10 years supporting Ukraine in their conflict against Russia. If Russia had bought and paid for the Tory party they didnt get a very good deal.. He does get a little excited, which could be the six pack of special brew:
No one in high places is asking how Blair has accumulated a £70Million fortune (that we know of), where did all that money come from? Please don't tell us after dinner speeches, or it will leave us all speechless, maybe pictures paint a thousands words ^^ |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 14, 2023 17:23:09 GMT
Christ almighty think before writing - the UK Tory Government has spent the last 10 years supporting Ukraine in their conflict against Russia. If Russia had bought and paid for the Tory party they didnt get a very good deal.. He does get a little excited, which could be the six pack of special brew:
right but i dont like or support tory blair or new labour. dont divert about dirty russian money in the tory party b4. While its correct about tony blairs lack of vision over putin caused problems further down the line , its also correct to say the tory party will bow and scrape to anyone who will give them a few quid. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 14, 2023 17:24:51 GMT
im calling you out sandy.
I have tam devines famous book on scottish history , scotland 1700 - 2000 , and not anywhere i have seen does he say what you are claiming.
what page is it on?
Page 58 halfway down the page start of a paragraph. cant see it on a quick glance. I will read the chapter and get back to you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2023 17:27:12 GMT
He does get a little excited, which could be the six pack of special brew:
No one in high places is asking how Blair has accumulated a £70Million fortune (that we know of), where did all that money come from? Please don't tell us after dinner speeches, or it will leave us all speechless, maybe pictures paint a thousands words ^^ You would have to ask him, I don't do conspiracy theories, but if you were to push me I'd say it was more likely through the USA (he was special to them, possibly even more so to the Clintons than Bush) and the EU, where the latter have had a terrible time keeping financial records.
Here's Biden doing the finger bang:
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 14, 2023 17:30:52 GMT
I repeat yet again that the circumstance of the Scottish Enlightenment occurred as result of everything in a complex way. . prove it then?
Scotland educates the poor . Scotland builds more universities than england , scotland then reaps the rewards , and britian trys to take the credit because the fruits of that labour happened after their shotgun marriage proposal.
The union was not the cause of the enlightenment. there is nothing complex about it.
Why do you think the scots lords wanted to keep the superior scottish education system , rather then get rid of it and have a british education system?
How do you prove an interpretation of history, you say the Union has nothing to do with it, fine, but that is also interpretation. I believe, and it is the opinion of others, that the Union created, in the end, a political stability within which those free thinkers could exercise their minds and disseminate their views. Having a superior education system was a bonus, it is not the grounding of all that Scotland was however as the Kirk were very quick to hang poor Thomas Aitkenhead for his crime of free speech. It is the rough with the smooth and free thought was not a Scottish Commodity just prior to the Union. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 14, 2023 19:08:25 GMT
prove it then?
Scotland educates the poor . Scotland builds more universities than england , scotland then reaps the rewards , and britian trys to take the credit because the fruits of that labour happened after their shotgun marriage proposal.
The union was not the cause of the enlightenment. there is nothing complex about it.
Why do you think the scots lords wanted to keep the superior scottish education system , rather then get rid of it and have a british education system?
How do you prove an interpretation of history, you say the Union has nothing to do with it, fine, but that is also interpretation. I believe, and it is the opinion of others, that the Union created, in the end, a political stability within which those free thinkers could exercise their minds and disseminate their views. Having a superior education system was a bonus, it is not the grounding of all that Scotland was however as the Kirk were very quick to hang poor Thomas Aitkenhead for his crime of free speech. It is the rough with the smooth and free thought was not a Scottish Commodity just prior to the Union. Regarding your argument here , you arent providing a counter to my argument , merely a narrative running alongside it. im saying the process was set in place that produced the scottish enligtenment long before 1707. You say the union provided a platform for it.cant you see how both statements dont necessarily contradict each other?
Heres what you originally said about the enlightenment..
totally disagree. those great thinkers would have been released with or without the union , because the educational process that produced them was set in motion long before the union of 1707.
what political stability?
The scottish enlightenment ran from the 18th to early 19th century. during that time , we had the union in 1707 , subsequent riots , the severance of scotland from its old trading partners , malt tax riots , 1715 rebellion , war of the spanish succession , 1745 uprising , 1820 uprising and so on.
you final sentence is irrelevant to my original point.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 14, 2023 19:21:26 GMT
im calling you out sandy.
I have tam devines famous book on scottish history , scotland 1700 - 2000 , and not anywhere i have seen does he say what you are claiming.
what page is it on?
Page 58 halfway down the page start of a paragraph. read the whole chapter , and what you imply is incorrect at worst , or part cherry picking small excerpts of scotlands economy while ignoring the whole at worst.
Lynch claims in detail from 1696 to 1706 , scotland economy grew by 2.5 % per annum. Then from 1707 , to 1797 , the next 9 decades , went into freefall.
While devine doesnt give the same exhaustive econmic detail as lynch and others do in his book , much of what he says back s up lynch , and is contrary to what you imply.
In page 52 of devines "the scottish nation 1707 - 2000 he writes...
"the period before the union was not (for scotland) an economic dark before the dawn."
He makes the point punitive taxes were imposed on scotland to pay for englands war of the spainsh succession and subsequent madssive debts.
He goes on at length to tell of the pros and conse of various small and emerging sectors of the economy , but does not mention the overall state of the scottish economy in depth as lynch does against the backdrop of 1696 to 1706. The growth of that ten year pre union period never seems to be reached again until the 19th century.
He makes the point clearly on page 57 where i quote...
"The economic miracle (of union) predicted by some pro union propagandists had manifestly not taken place."
so no once again sandy i disagree.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on May 14, 2023 19:26:18 GMT
India to push for UK to hand over Koh-i-Noor diamond as part of 'colonial reckoning' that 'dwarfs' Elgin Marble demands
The diplomatic effort to reclaim the artefacts centres on the Koh-i-Noor diamond, one of the largest cut diamonds in the world. The Koh-i- has been in the British royal family's crown jewels since 1849.
India's "reckoning with the past" would be the largest repatriation attempt the UK has faced yet, the Telegraph reported - dwarfing claims made by the Greek government for the Elgin Marbles, held in the British Museum.
The push comes from the top of the Indian government and is one of the priorities for Narendra Modi, the country's Prime Minister.
The efforts to get the treasures returned could even affect trade talks between the UK and India.
I bet one or two are thinking there are a few of their treasures we would love to send back. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on May 14, 2023 19:42:30 GMT
How do you prove an interpretation of history, you say the Union has nothing to do with it, fine, but that is also interpretation. I believe, and it is the opinion of others, that the Union created, in the end, a political stability within which those free thinkers could exercise their minds and disseminate their views. Having a superior education system was a bonus, it is not the grounding of all that Scotland was however as the Kirk were very quick to hang poor Thomas Aitkenhead for his crime of free speech. It is the rough with the smooth and free thought was not a Scottish Commodity just prior to the Union. Regarding your argument here , you arent providing a counter to my argument , merely a narrative running alongside it. im saying the process was set in place that produced the scottish enligtenment long before 1707. You say the union provided a platform for it.cant you see how both statements dont necessarily contradict each other?
Heres what you originally said about the enlightenment..
totally disagree. those great thinkers would have been released with or without the union , because the educational process had that produced them was set in motion long before the union of 1707.
what political stability?
The scottish enlightenment ran from the 18th to early 19th century. during that time , we had the union in 1707 , subsequent riots , the severance of scotland from its old trading partners , malt tax riots , 1715 rebellion , war of the spanish succession , 1745 uprising , 1820 uprising and so on.
you final sentence is irrelevant to my original point.
I repeat that is a complex situation. I referenced a point made by another which does not mean I accept his point in total I was providing erudite alternative opinion. You do not know what would have happened without the Union all we know is what happened with it. The Church of Scotland was partially pulled into accepting heresy from others against its will. As regards political stability your dates stop at 1745 and recommence in 1820. I said that the benefits of Union were apparent within a few decades, Devine says c. 1740. From 1745 to 1820 (which was the Nationwide depression post Napoleonic wars) there was a long period of political stability where the economy boomed and the New Town and the Glasgow Western parishes saw massive levels of building. Scotland before and post 1820 at times became the most rapidly growing economy in Europe. This boomtime and the political stability enabled the dissemination of ideas. To make a point in the early 18th century the journey from Glasgow to Edinburgh took 36 hours with an overnight stop. Before the arrival of the railways that journey time was down to less than 5 hours. The dissemination of ideas was not just to the Scottish literate population it was worldwide. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on May 14, 2023 19:47:09 GMT
Regarding your argument here , you arent providing a counter to my argument , merely a narrative running alongside it. im saying the process was set in place that produced the scottish enligtenment long before 1707. You say the union provided a platform for it.cant you see how both statements dont necessarily contradict each other?
Heres what you originally said about the enlightenment..
totally disagree. those great thinkers would have been released with or without the union , because the educational process had that produced them was set in motion long before the union of 1707.
what political stability?
The scottish enlightenment ran from the 18th to early 19th century. during that time , we had the union in 1707 , subsequent riots , the severance of scotland from its old trading partners , malt tax riots , 1715 rebellion , war of the spanish succession , 1745 uprising , 1820 uprising and so on.
you final sentence is irrelevant to my original point.
I repeat that is a complex situation. I referenced a point made by another which does not mean I accept his point in total I was providing erudite alternative opinion. You do not know what would have happened without the Union all we know is what happened with it. The Church of Scotland was partially pulled into accepting heresy from others against its will. As regards political stability your dates stop at 1745 and recommence in 1820. I said that the benefits of Union were apparent within a few decades, Devine says c. 1740. From 1745 to 1820 (which was the Nationwide depression post Napoleonic wars) there was a long period of political stability where the economy boomed and the New Town and the Glasgow Western parishes saw massive levels of building. Scotland before and post 1820 at times became the most rapidly growing economy in Europe. This boomtime and the political stability enabled the dissemination of ideas. To make a point in the early 18th century the journey from Glasgow to Edinburgh took 36 hours with an overnight stop. Before the arrival of the railways that journey time was down to less than 5 hours. The dissemination of ideas was not just to the Scottish literate population it was worldwide. so by the same token you cant say what wouldnt have happened without the union either can you?
All we know is the enlightenment happened within the period of the union.
All of your arguments as to why that might have been have fallen at the first hurdle.
|
|
