Archive for October, 2011

The Edge of Union….Scotland ?

Been living under a rock the last few days, you would have noticed a certain document produced by the Scottish National Party, calling for Scottish Independence or even a system called Devo max which is basically all powers except defence and foreign affairs.  Returning to two separate states of Scotland and England, but still containing the Monarchy as head of state and the pound as the currency of choice. This would Return the Main Island of the British Isles into a system of dynastic Monarchy, not seen since the time of King James I or VI if you are from Scotland. Times of have course changed, and the power resides with each nations said parliament.



Above is the original concept of the Royal Badge of Union. The reason why the idea of Union failed under James was because most people thought that there would be no equal partnership between the two nations. Due mainly to England becoming a major player on the world stage with the establishment of James town and also various trading colonies in the Caribbean. You can understand Scotland fearing English interests would take priority. The Attempt to set up their own colonies failed dramatically under what became know as the Darien Scheme. ( There is some evidence that Scots believed that it was an English Plot).  After many political dealing which could fill up a few pages on the blog; and the promise of money and free access to trading markets, Scotland began to flourish under the Union over time economically that is. What really provided the tipping point is the Jacobite Rebellion, which in the end caused the defeat of the Highland system.( It is a dark period of British history.) It opened Scotland away from its backward system and began to evolve on itself into a powerhouse sector of the British state.



What is the point of this you are wondering. Well I am all for national sovereignty, and self-determination but the break up would be very messy. Who would get what. How would the debt be spilt up as the British government holds a lot of the debt. How about the mission in Afghanistan would it be a cut and run job. The UN security council seat as well do we lose it.  Not a lot of people realise England has a lot to lose as well, quite a bit of National income comes from Scotland, taxes and so on may have to go up to cover the costs. If Scotland leave the United Kingdom does not exist, as it really is these two nations. Sorry Wales.  If any one would like to tell me how the below works please tell me.


Her Majesty The
Queen would remain as Head of State and the social union with the remainder of the UK
would be maintained, with the nations continuing to co-operate on a range of matters.

Below is a link to the proposed referendum bill


Maybe we could move to a more federal system, but then the issue of each nation being equal comes to mind again. Oh well in the next few years we will see a political landscape change which would take us back to pre Civil war. See you on the Battlefield. ( not advocating there would be a civil war, just being odd).






After a very interesting seminar i pose this to you all. Was King Charles I a good King or Bad. The decision is for you to decide. Below are some basic concepts that will help you decide.

The Good

Managed to keep a Personal Rule going with out much of a political and economic reasons. ( before the call of the Long Parliament)

Managed to make peace with France and Spain, engaged in the Thirty Years war.

Provided a clear Chain of command.

A King Crucial to English Society

Good Court Leader

The Bad

Not Understanding the DIfferences in England, Scotland and Ireland. (Wales you were classed as part of England then).

War against other nations

Ship money Tax

Not understanding that the use of Catholic Irish troops on English Soil.

Attempt to place the English Prayer book on the Scottish people.

The History Guys view will be placed below in a few days.

The Two Winstons

“… It’s our cultural bloodstream, the secret of who we are, and it tells us to let go of the past, even as we honour it. To lament what ought to be lamented and to celebrate what should be celebrated. And if in the end, that history turns out to reveal itself as a patriot, well then I think that neither Churchill nor Orwell would have minded that very much, and as a matter of fact, neither do I.”

— Simon Schama

“Would it end via Fascist coup d’état (from above) or via Socialist revolution (from below)?” ( George Orwell)


This is very much a comparative look at two at the above comment from Simon Schama.  What we have here  are two people who witnessed  the great changes of the period. You may think that they are two different people, Winston Smith ( George Orwell’s character in 1984) and Winston Churchill are in a way much one in the same, when you actually sit down and read deep into the texts of both people’s lives. This of course will all make sense in due time.



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              When 1984 is written you have to understand there was a certain fear in Orwell’s  eyes much due to the ascension of Communism and Socialism in most European states, it is not surprising that Big Brother is oddly based on Stalin. The acronym INCOG is the Orwellian term for English Socialism.  Due mainly to his time in the Spanish Civil war. This caused Orwell to believe that it would be ether Fascism from above, or Socialism from below. In some respect this could be true, most states turned to an extreme  form of government in the 20th century.  (Ironically Poland could be classed as a military dictatorship, with the exception of maybe Holland, Belgium, Ireland, Swiss,United Kingdom, slightly France, could be considered and extreme right or left governance.)

“You and me are the same We don’t know or care who’s to blame But we know that whoever holds the reins Nothing will change, our cause has gone insane ” Muse-United States of Eurasia

Now the comparison to Churchill, how is this even possible well it is ironically the main thing that drives this comparison is the fear of an over-riding rising from ether the right or the left.  Both had this fear in the 1945 election which of course proved unfounded in the long-term effects of history. He even coined the term of some form of Gestapo would be used by the Labour Government to keep control. This of course did not happen but if you bring it down to a base level both men had the same principles in respect to freedom and choice of the common man.

I hope you enjoyed the above do comment. Next up we go back to the English Civil war to look at was King Charles a good king.


The Wars of the French Revolution and the Rise of Napoleonic Europe Part one

We all know of the what has become known during the Medieval period of English and European history. As the Hundred Years war. (which was more like 113 years off the top of my head). There was another period of history which can be seen as not  nearly 100 years. What we mean is that it is the second longest period the British Isles had been in conflict with the French since that time. The Dates in question are from 1792 to 1815 with a small year break in the middle. 

It is understood that the dates concerned,contain the Napoleonic wars, but in respect to it though it still is a war with France with just a different face. The later part will be covered in the later post but first we shall try to guide you through a simple guide to the French Revolutionary Wars.  The Period is divided between two points of action up till 1802, with the treaty of Amines. You have the war of the

First coalition :

French Royalist                                                    French Republic

Spain /Portugal                                                     Italian states

Prussia/Holy Roman Empire                         Polish Legions

Italian State(Naples and Sicily)

Dutch Republic


The War of the second coalition made some changes to the conflicting nations much due to French acquisition of the Netherlands which turns into the Batavian Republic. These early periods of fighting mainly involved the conscription on mass or leve la mass as it was known at the time, which forced people into said nations armed force. What it showed was even with a conscripted force the French actually still had much of their strong military power on land after the revolution. What you need to grasp is during the period after the revolution, most historians including myself still believe that France was a super power on its own nearly on level with Great Britain. It wasnt untill the defeat of the combined French and Spanish Navies at Trafalgar did you see that dominance at sea, and maybe on land after 1812.

The important facts you need to learn about is that Napoleon, in this period began to gain fame especially in his expeditions to Egypt. ( you can thank the man for half the stuff in the British Museum) Is he gained power in the Military and would eventually become First Consul of France in the 1800’s. France’s power was growing in these two early periods, and wearing the older governments in Europe down.


Continued in the coming weeks……