SCOTLAND, the northern part of the island of Great Britain. The length of the mainland, from the Mull of Galloway, in latitude 54° 39´ north, to Dunnet Head, in Caithness-shire, in latitude 58° 40´ north, is 278 miles; the breadth, from Buchanness, in Aberdeenshire, in longitude 1° 41´ west, to the most westerly point in Ross-shire, in longitude 5° 52´ west, is 150 miles, while between the firths of Forth and Clyde, the breadth is only thirty miles. The area, including the islands, 186 in number, is 29,819.09 square miles, or about half the size of the state of Michigan. Its population in 1881 was 3,735,573; in 1811 it was but 1,805,864.
—Although small in size, thinly populated and poor, Scotland, for many centuries, has occupied an important place in the annals of western Europe. Respectable historians have prefaced the history of Scotland with an imaginary line of kings descended from a fabulous daughter of Pharaoh, called Scota, who, fleeing from the plagues sent to punish her father's obstinacy, peopled Scotland.
—The first reliable knowledge we have of Scotland is derived from Julius Cæsar, who invaded the island in the year 55 B. C. Julius Agricola first explored its northern coasts with his fleet, and informed the Romans that Britain was an island. In the 80th year of the Christian era, Agricola led the legions of Rome across the line which in later days marked the boundary between England and Scotland, and his son-in-law, Tacitus, in recording his achievements, first made Caledonia familiar to the Roman world, and brought a new country within the scope of authentic history.
—Although the Romans effected no permanent conquest beyond the neck of land between the firths of Forth and Clyde, yet they more than once pushed their armies far northward. There are more known Roman ramparts, forts, camps and roads in Scotland than in all the rest of the world—vestiges of a close, continued and doubtful warfare. The Caledonians, who so long and so effectually kept the conquerors of the world at bay, are described as barbarous and warlike, with red hair and large limbs, and rugged as the land they inhabited. They painted their bodies, and could stand great hardships. Their arms were bows and arrows, small shields, short spears, and pointless swords; they fought also with chariots drawn swiftly by small horses. They were polygamous and idolaters, their religion being druidical. The name Caledonia, although used by the Romans, had no place among the natives, whose name for Scotland was Albin. The Roman civilization had no influence on Scotland except as it reached that country in after times from the continent.
—When the Romans withdrew, the inhabitants of Scotland consisted of the Romanized Britons of Strathclyde on the south, the Dalriads, or the Scots of Ireland, on the west, and, largest of all, the kingdom of the Picts, embracing the whole of Scotland northward and eastward from the firth of Forth. The archæological hosts have long fought over the Picts. Were they Celts, or Teutons? Were they the same as the Caledonians of Tacitus, or the Scots of Ireland? What language did they speak? These are questions which will probably never be settled.
—The most important event in the history of the Picts was their conversion to Christianity, in the sixth century, by St. Columba and other missionaries from Ireland, who settled in the isle of Iona.
—When the writers of the early Christian centuries speak of Scotia, they refer to Ireland. The Mull of Cantyre, in Argyleshire, is only twelve miles from the county of Antrim, and the Scots spread in great numbers into Argyle and the western isles, so that there came to be two Scotias, and, prior to the twelfth century, a Scot might have meant a native of Ireland or of Scotland. The colony of Irish Scots in Albania, or present Scotland, continued to enlarge till it became a powerful and compact state, and the term Scotia gradually became dissociated from its original country, and attached entirely to the country which now bears the name.
—How it came about, history does not state; but near the middle of the ninth century the Pictish kingdom disappears from history, and Kenneth MacAlpin, king of the Scots, is found reigning over its people. It is not unlikely that the barbarous Picts succumbed to the superior aggressive civilization of the Scots. At this time the Celts were known as a lettered people, and it is not improbable the Picts felt honored in accepting the Dalriadic sovereign as their own.
—Scotland was long subject to incursions from the great Viking fleets of Scandinavia, and from the fourth to the tenth century large numbers of the Northmen settled on the coasts, and mingled with the existing population or gradually crowded them westward. The population of Scotland is probably of the most composite origin of any nation in Europe, a fact which has, no doubt, greatly influenced their national characteristics. Picts, Francs, Angles, Scoto-Galwegians, Saxons, Celts and Norsemen, all contributed to make the Scotsmen of to-day.
—After Kenneth, the first king of the united Scots and Picts, followed a number of royal successors, such as Gregory the Great, Duncan, and Macbeda or Macbeth, around whom has gathered a most interesting history; but unfortunately it is largely mythical.
—The first monarch of whose coronation we hear, was Malcolm III., son of Duncan, known as Malcolm Canmore, who was crowned at Scone, in 1057. His wife, the good Queen Margaret, or St. Margaret, had a greater influence on the destinies of Scotland than even her husband. Through her influence the "Lord's Day" was first sanctified from labor, and she did much to introduce a higher civilization.
—In the tenth year of Malcolm Canmore's reign occurred the Norman conquest of England. The subjection of the southern kingdom by the restless and ambitious Norman opened a serious future for the Scots, and for centuries they had a ceaseless struggle to prevent their absorption by their aggrandizing and powerful neighbors.
—The system of the Celts, even to their latest times, was patriarchal, and not feudal. The Highlander fought for his chief as the head of his family or clan, and not because he was his landed superior. For the same reason the early Scots fought for their king, who, indeed, was oftener called king of Scots than king of Scotland.
—The Normans gradually introduced the feudal usages of the continent. Under them the king was theoretically the owner of all the land. Those cultivating the lands held them from some lord or superior, who in turn held them from the king or some other superior who did so. Each subordinate had to do homage to his superior for the lands he held, for he held them solely through the special favor of his lord, who, in return, had a right to call for military and other service. The king of Scots had estates in England, and for these, under the feudal system, had to do homage to the king of England as his superior. The English soon claimed that he did homage as king of Scotland to the king of England as his superior, and that the crown of Scotland was vassal to the crown of England. Notwithstanding that folios on folios were written by the English to prove their king lord paramount of Scotland, the Scots contested the claim for generations in many a costly war.
—After Malcolm Canmore came Donald Bane, Duncan II., Edgar, Alexander I., and David I. The last named was the third son of St. Margaret, and succeeded his brother Alexander in 1124. As a true son of his good mother, he had a great influence on the condition of Scotland. In his reign the old traditionary usages were first superseded by written laws. He established the bishoprics of Dunkeld, Moray, Aberdeen, Ross, Caithness, Brechin, Dunblane and Galloway, and built the abbeys of Holyrood, Melrose, Jedburgh, Kelso, Dryburgh, Newbattle and Kinloss. He so lavished the lands of the crown on the Catholic church that King James I. said that "he was ane sair sanct for the crown." David reigned twenty-nine years. He was all to Scotland that Alfred was to England. After him came his grandson, Malcolm IV., who was not twelve years old when he began to reign. He was king twelve years, but leaves no special mark on history.
—He was succeeded, in 1165, by William I., surnamed the "Lion," who was taken captive at the siege of Alnwick. King Henry granted him his release only after he had signed an obligation of absolute homage to the English king for Scotland, and placed the Scots under feudal subjection to England, as if a proud and warlike people could be handed over by a slip of parchment signed under duress. Richard the Lionhearted, of England, for 10,000 marks, released the Scots from all the conditions extorted by his father from William.
—William the Lion was succeeded by his son, Alexander II., a monarch of great wisdom and ability, who was in turn succeeded by his son, Alexander II., whose accidental death left the crown to an infant granddaughter, Margaret, the daughter of the king of Norway, who died in one of the Orkneys, while returning to Scotland. The death of Alexander III. closed a period of prosperity, which the kingdom did not again enjoy for five hundred years. No fewer than ten competitors for the crown appeared, the chief being John Baliol and Robert Bruce, grandfather of the great Bruce. The matter was referred to Edward I. of England, who decided in favor of Baliol, stipulating that he should do homage to him as his feudal superior. The case was under discussion and consideration for eighteen months, and the decision in favor of Baliol was no doubt a correct one according to the law of hereditary descent as now established.
—As Edward claimed to be lord paramount of Scotland, so the king of France made a like claim on England, and summoned Edward as his vassal to appear and do homage before him. King Philip even fixed the day when Edward should appear in Paris. Edward prepared for war, and summoned his vassal Baliol to his aid. In the war between England and France Scotland saw her opportunity, and not only refused to aid England, but formed a league offensive and defensive with France. This was the first of that ancient league which for three centuries bound the kingdoms of France and Scotland in the closest intimacy against their common enemy, England, and had a great influence, not only on the politics of Scotland, but even on its language and manners.
—The Scots invaded England, which so exasperated Edward that he decided to concentrate his force on Scotland, and marched northward as far as Elgin with a great army, taking Berwick, Edinburgh, Stirling, Aberdeen, and all the other strongholds of importance. From the abbey of Scone he carried to Westminster the stone of destiny, the palladium of Scotland It was enshrined in the chair on which the kings of Scotland were crowned. The Scots reverently believed it to be the very stone which Jacob used as a pillow at Bethel, and that it was brought to Scone by Pharaoh's daughter Scota, from whom the Scottish kings were descended. Wherever that stone might go, it was believed the Scots would be supreme, a belief which was confirmed when, afterward, James VI. of Scotland was crowned in Westminster king of England. Edward I., as he marched back, garrisoned the strongholds with English soldiers, and many of the old castles in Scotland must be assigned to this period, 1296, and their style of architecture is properly called Edwardian. The Scots found the English planted in large numbers in strongholds in their very midst, and harassing them in many most ex asperating ways. While the nobility, the natural leaders of the nation, had sworn allegiance to Edward, the smaller gentry and the common people sullenly awaited an opportunity for revenge.
—At this juncture appeared the renowned Sir William Wallace of Ellerslie, not only a brave soldier, but a man of great political and military genius. Gathering around him a band of heroic spirits, he harassed the English till his successes enabled him to collect an army of some 40,000 men, with which he totally defeated a larger English army under Surrey at Stirling bridge. This battle of Stirling bridge gave great encouragement to the Scots, as it showed that their haughty neighbors were not invincible, and being the first pitched battle of importance between the two nations did much to inspire and render permanent that international animosity which has disappeared only in recent years. After defending his country with heroism for several years, Wallace was betrayed into the hands of Edward, who caused him to be executed in London in 1305. His head was placed on London bridge, and a quarter of his body exposed at New Castle, Berwick, Stirling and Perth, respectively. These bloody trophies, far from frightening the Scots into submission, aroused their wrath and strengthened their courage. They only wanted a leader to attempt summary revenge. In the meantime, Edward, believing he had conquered Scotland, took steps to incorporate it with England. The crown was to be represented in Scotland by a governor or lieutenant, to be assisted by a council. Scotland was also to be represented in the English parliament by ten representatives; three were to be selected by the prelates, two by the abbots, two by the earls, two by the barons, and two by the community or commonalty. When parliament met, an ordinance was passed for the government of Scotland, complete in all its details. Edward showed a broad statesmanship in all this, and a desire to propitiate the Scots. Being seventy years of age, he hoped for a peaceful close of his stormy life. But it was too late. The Scots had seen the effect of Norman power in England; and Stirling bridge, Falkirk and the quartering of Wallace, were not to be so easily forgotten.
—In February, 1306, Robert Bruce, lord of Annandale, was missed from Edward's court, and it was found that he had left for Scotland. He was now thirty-two years old, and had been carefully trained in the English court. On his way north he met Comyn, his only rival for the crown of Scotland, in the church of the Grey Friars, Dumfries, and during a heated controversy stabbed him with his dagger. He and his followers then attacked the English judges at that time sitting in Dumfries, and drove them across the border. The die was cast, the Rubicon was crossed, and there was no retreat for Bruce. The tidings spread rapidly all over Scotland, that Bruce was in the field against the English, and the people rose like one man. In March of the same year he was crowned king in the chapel royal of Scone. King Edward promptly determined on such an invasion of Scotland as would forever suppress all opposition. The flower of England's chivalry, with all the fighting power of England, was enlisted in the cause; and the king, broken down as he was, exacted a promise that his body should be carried with the army till Scotland was subdued. Some of the nobles of Scotland and Bruce's nearest relatives were executed as traitors, and their bodies quartered; but the Scots were not a servile people, to be cowed by such cruelties, which only served to arouse them to greater deeds of daring. King Edward died within sight of Scotland, on July 7, 1307.
—The first undertakings of Bruce were unfortunate; but the death of King Edward proved a favorable turning point in the destiny of Scotland, for his son, Edward II., was no such leader as a contest like that demanded.
—June 24, 1314, is the most momentous day in Scottish history, the day on which the battle of Bannockburn was fought. The Scots had between 30,000 and 40,000 men, while the English had 100,000. They had, according to agreement, to relieve the English garrison in Stirling castle before St. John's day, or it was to capitulate; and it therefore behooved them to attack the Scots in a field which the latter had selected in front of Stirling. The generalship of Bruce and the bravery of his men inflicted on England, that day, a defeat and a humiliation greater than ever befell her in all her history before or since, with the exception of the battle of Hastings. Her mighty host became a very chaos. The confusion of their flight was irremediable. The booty obtained was very rich, and articles taken at Bannockburn were treasured as heirlooms for centuries. An immense sum was also acquired by the Scots as ransoms for their noble captives.
—The battle of Bannockburn marks an important epoch in Scottish history. The patriotic feelings excited and the glory acquired on that day consolidated the nation as it had never been before. It engraved on the Scottish heart a pride of their independence as a nation, which for centuries prevented a union with England; and to this day, like Thermopylæ and Marathon, it fires many a heart with an enthusiasm for liberty. The war continued for fourteen years longer, during which time England was twelve times invaded, and ravaged with fire and sword; and Edward III. was compelled to ratify a treaty in 1328, in which the claims of Bruce and the independence of the kingdom were acknowledged.
—David II. was only eight years old at his father's death, in 1329, and Randolph, earl of Murray, was appointed regent. Edward Baliol, son of John Baliol, being assisted by Edward III. of England, claimed the throne, and was crowned at Scone in 1332. David, being a mere boy, was sent to France, and Baliol, being defeated soon afterward by the supporters of the Bruce dynasty, fled into England. An active warfare continued along the borders, the Scots making a diversion in favor of their ally, France, on whose soil the English king about this time gained the famous battles of Crecy and Poitiers. David returned from France in 1341, and though but eighteen years of age, he at once put himself at the head of his forces, and while invading England was taken prisoner, and remained one for eleven years. He reigned thirty-nine years, and was succeeded by Robert II. (1371-90), grandson of Bruce of Bannockburn, being the son of his daughter Marjory, and Walter, lord high steward of Scotland, whence came the name of the Stuart dynasty, of which he was the first. Probably no regal line ever encountered so many misfortunes as did the royal house of Stuart, of more than one of whom it has truly been said that they never learned and never forgot. He was succeeded by his son, Robert III. (1390-1406), who being weak-minded, the government devolved upon the duke of Albany. He killed the king's oldest son, David, and his second son, James, fleeing to France, was captured by the English, and detained as a prisoner for nineteen years, during the greater part of which time Albany ruled as regent. It was now over one hundred years after Bannockburn when James I., being ransomed, began his reign, in 1424 He was an accomplished prince, poet and legislator, and made many necessary reforms in the administration of the country, establishing the court of session and other tribunals. He with a firm hand checked the powerful and turbulent nobility, and did much to introduce law and order. He was cruelly assassinated (1437) in the midst of his beneficent work, leaving his son, James II., then a boy of but six years of age, to succeed him. He was a brave and vigorous ruler, and was killed by the bursting of a cannon at the siege of Roxburgh, in 1460.
—James III., his son, was crowned when seven years old. He was unpopular with the nobility, who rebelled against him, and persuading his son, a youth of sixteen, to join them, the king was defeated and slain in the battle of Sanchieburn in 1488—His rebellious son succeeded, as James IV., in the sixteenth year of his age. In 1489 he married Margaret, eldest daughter of Henry VII. of England, and from this marriage eventually came the union of the crowns of England and Scotland. This Margaret, daughter of Henry VII., being great-grandmother of James VI. of Scotland, on the issue of Henry VIII. becoming extinct by the death of Elizabeth, James was next heir. James IV., desirous of assisting his ally, France, declared war against Henry VIII. of England, and was slain on Flodden Field, in 1513, where Scotland suffered the greatest defeat in her national annals. Twelve earls, thirteen lords, five eldest sons of noblemen, and an immense number of barons, fell with their king, and the land became one house of mourning.
—At the death of James IV. his son James V. was but five months old, and the office of regent was conferred on his cousin John, duke of Albany. James first married Magdalen, daughter of Francis I., king of France, who dying without issue, he married Mary of Lorraine, daughter of the duke of Guise. By her he had two sons, who died young, and in 1542 the queen was delivered of a daughter, the famous but unfortunate Mary Queen of Scots. When she was seven days old her father died of a broken heart, caused by the mutinous conduct of his nobles, and the defeat of his army at Solway Moss. When told of the birth of his daughter, the dying man is said to have murmured, "It came with a lass, and it will go with a lass," in allusion to the throne coming to the Stuarts by the daughter of Bruce. Little did he think that the son of that lass, now but seven days old, would sit on the English throne. James V. was affectionately remembered by his people as the "King of the Commons," and he long held a place in literary renown as the "People's Poet."
—It will help us somewhat to realize the troublous character of the times and the unhappy condition of Scotland, to state that, from 1390, when Robert III. began to reign, to 1567, when James VI., thirteen months old, succeeded his mother Queen Mary, a period of 177 years, every king of Scotland was succeeded by a minor. During all those years the nation was shaken by the continued quarrels of the nobles. They were a haughty, fierce and turbulent class, those Hamiltons, Huntleys, Douglasses, Albanys, Atholes, Arrans and Argyles. Combining the most indomitable courage with an utter want of principle, they seldom hesitated to endanger the interests of their sovereign, and even the interests of their country, to avenge fancied insults to their family, or to carry on personal feuds. Still, the country was advancing in wealth, and gradually taking an influential place among the powers of Europe, notwithstanding the clouds of misfortune which had encircled the personal history of her Jameses. "Battle, murder and death had swept away four of them, the fifth died of a spirit broken down by the weight of calamities."
—During the latter part of the reign of James V. Protestantism began to make considerable headway in Scotland. Although she had for centuries been a faithful daughter of the Roman Catholic church, she was so far removed from Rome that she received but little of that attention bestowed so assiduously on the powerful countries of continental Europe. On this account her clergy had received but little supervision, and had become very ignorant and very corrupt. For this reason the hold of the Catholic church upon the moral sense of the people was very weak, and it was not a difficult task to alienate them from the papal see. Under Henry VIII. England had become a base of operations whence those who favored the Protestant faith could influence Scotland. Attempts made by Cardinal Beaton, the Catholic primate, to crush out the spirit of inquiry by persecution, not only failed in their object, but had a contrary effect.
—With the rise of Protestantism, there came a party in Scotland which preferred an alliance with England to the ancient league with France; and by and by two well-defined parties existed, the Protestant or English party, and the Catholic or French party. The Protestant party hoped to unite the crowns of England and Scotland by the marriage of the Princess Mary, the young Queen of Scots, to Edward, son of Henry VIII., and they might have succeeded had it not been for the imperious conduct of Henry, who so roused the Scottish pride that the Catholic party gained the consent of the nation to her marriage with the dauphin of France, an event which brought upon her and upon Scotland many trying calamities. Mary, through the influence of her mother and the French party, was sent to France to be educated, when only six years old. In 1558 she married Francis, then dauphin, afterward king, of France; but, he dying without issue, she returned to Scotland, and in July, 1565, married Henry Stuart, known as Lord Darnley. It was a fearful mistake, for there was scarcely the vestige of a good quality to be found in his character. He was vicious, vainglorious, presumptuous—a fool. On June 19, 1566, a son was born, who was afterward James VI. of Scotland and James I. of England. Darnley was murdered in February, 1567, and in May of the same year Mary married the earl of Both well, who was generally believed to have directed the murder. The nobles soon after drove Both well out of the kingdom, and, having confined Mary in Lochleven castle, compelled her to abdicate in favor of her infant son, with her half-brother, the earl of Murray, as regent. She escaped from Lochleven, and rallied a powerful force around her, which was defeated at Langside by the regent Murray. Mary then fled to England, claiming the protection of her cousin, Queen Elizabeth, but this princess ungenerously confined her in different prisons for eighteen years, and then the accomplished and beautiful, but most indiscreet and unfortunate, Mary Queen of Scots, being accused of conspiring against the life of Elizabeth, died with heroic bravery on the scaffold at Fotheringay castle, on Feb 8, 1587. There is probably no instance in history where one so able, lovely and accomplished became to such a marked degree the victim of untoward circumstances. Her life proved a burden to herself and a misfortune to her people.
—From the time of her father's death to that of her own, the religious aspect of Scotland had undergone a most wonderful change. While she was in France, and her mother, Mary of Lorraine, was regent, the conflict between the Catholic and the Protestant faith was intense. During those eventful years, when individual convictions were struggling with the traditions of centuries, and the religious thoughts and emotions of the people were stirred to their depths, there appeared upon the scene a man of no ordinary power, the fearless, stern, eloquent reformer, John Knox. His life and work have made a more marked impression on Scotland than those of any other man, and no grander figure can be found in the history of Protestantism in Great Britain. It can hardly be doubted that Knox saved Protestantism in Scotland, and in saving it in Scotland he saved it in England; for, if Scotland had been Catholic, it would have furnished the great Catholic powers of the continent a base of operations against England, and in all probability, under such circumstances, a revolution would soon have driven Elizabeth from the throne, and England would have been reclaimed to the Catholic church. But Knox breathed into the commons of his country a spirit which lives to-day, a spirit of individuality and independence which taught them that the humblest peasant, as an immortal soul, is equal in the sight of God to the proudest peer. They may have been hard, narrow and fanatical, but, "heated red-hot in the furnace of a new faith," they could never again be trodden under the foot of tyranny. Protestantism in England proceeded from the king downward, but in Scotland it originated and developed in the bosom of the people themselves. Many of the nobility joined the Protestant ranks from mercenary motives, but the common people did so from their convictions of right. Knox tried to have the lands and revenues of the church set apart for educational purposes, but the greed of the nobility was too much even for him. The year before Mary returned from France, 1560, a meeting of the estates abolished forever in Scotland the power and jurisdiction of the papal see, and made the confession of faith drawn up by Knox and his associates the standard of faith in Scotland.
—Mary on her return failed to understand the true state of affairs. She had been educated in a wrong school to meet in a conciliatory spirit the public feeling of Scotland as it now was. If she had but realized that Scotland could not be brought back to the Catholic church, and conformed herself to the necessities of her condition, she might have reigned a happy queen over a happy people; but that was not to be.
—Mary's son, James VI., had been crowned king in 1567, when but thirteen months old. His uncle, earl of Murray, who was appointed regent, being assassinated in 1570, the office was held in succession by the earls of Lennox, Mar and Morton, when the king took the reins into his own hands. During the government of the regents the kingdom was distracted by civil wars, which continued largely to partake of a religious character. Protestantism retained its supremacy, and Presbyterianism became the established religion of the country. At three o'clock, Thursday morning, March 24, 1603, Queen Elizabeth died; and, a feat unmatched in that age, Sir Robert Cary galloped into Holyrood Court on Saturday night and wakened King James to announce to him that he was monarch of England, Scotland, France and Ireland. The two nations, which for centuries had been bitter enemies, and had crossed swords on a hundred bloody fields, were now united under one head. On the 5th of April James set out for London, and as he journeyed leisurely through England he was received with enthusiasm everywhere. He arrived in London on the 22d of May, to take possession of the government of his new state, and at this point ends the history of Scotland as a distinct kingdom.
—The domestic condition of Scotland was but slowly influenced by the union of the crowns, but its external relations underwent a radical change. The ancient league with France, though never formally abrogated, was now and forever after a dead letter, while it was a matter of pride to the Scots that their king now ruled over their "auld enemy," England. The national institutions of Scotland remained untouched, so that from this source there was nothing to arouse their national jealousy. The parliament still remained in Edinburgh, and there was no occasion for the nobility and landed gentry to go to London, as was the case in 1707, when the union of parliaments took place. However, as the way was now open, a large number of Scots flocked southward to better their condition, and they generally succeeded. Political economy was not understood then, and then, and the prosperity of the Scots was supposed to be at the cost of the English, and in consequence they were much disliked and much maligned.
—Immediately after the accession of James, steps were taken for an incorporating union of the kingdoms, which signally failed. It was proposed that the new state should be called "Great Britain," a name which the king himself claimed to have suggested. A decision by the courts, that all persons born in Scotland after the union of the crowns in 1603 were entitled to all the privileges of Englishmen, did more than anything else to unite the two peoples. An attempt was made to force the church of Scotland to adopt the episcopal form of government; but it failed, and James gave it up as a hopeless task "to make that stubborn kirk stoop more to the English pattern."
—For centuries Scotsmen found their native land too small for their energies, and both before and after this period, under Gustavus, Frederick and Peter the Great, as well as in the Low Countries, France and even in Turkey, they in large numbers attained distinction; and, now that the era of colonization and commerce had dawned, they were not slow to avail themselves of its opportunities. This was first manifested in the settlement of New Scotland, or Nova Scotia.
—Charles I., on his accession, learning nothing from the past, commanded the use of Laud's liturgy in the churches in Scotland, as "the only form which we think fit to be used in God's public worship in this our kingdom." An outbreak was of course unavoidable, and tumults arose in various parts of the kingdom. Under the lead of Archibald Johnston of Warriston, the solemn league and covenant was renewed. In 1638 it was signed in Greyfriar's churchyard amid the wildest enthusiasm, some drawing their own blood, which they used for ink. It has been estimated that a large proportion of the adult male community of Scotland subscribed their adherence to it, as copies were placed in all the churches and other public places. The cause of their national religion had come to be considered as one with that of their national independence.
—The close of the thirty years war released thousands of Scottish soldiers experienced in the wars of Europe, who now returned home and contributed not a little to the important part which Scotland took in the great civil wars of the seventeenth century.
—After the restoration of Charles II. to the throne, in 1660, unmindful of the failures of his father and grandfather in a similar attempt, he tried to force episcopacy on the Scottish church, but he met with most ignominious failure.
—The estates of Scotland were not slow to indorse the revolution of 1689, and to tender the crown of Scotland to William and Mary, declaring that King James VII. had "forefaulted" all right to the crown. The attempt to compel the Highlanders to conform to the new state of affairs resulted in one of the most cruel and treacherous transactions which has ever blackened history. It is known as the massacre of Glencoe, and occurred in 1692, leaving a stain upon the name of William of Orange, which his admirers have found it hard to wipe out.
—Now that the activity and enterprise of the Scots could no longer find a field in the wars of their country against England, or in the greater contests of continental Europe, they began to make themselves felt in the field of commerce. Wm. Paterson founded the bank of England in 1695, while, some years later, John Law drove France wild with his Mississippi company and other financial bubbles. The Darien and African companies were products of the same period, all showing the active though misguided enterprise of the Scottish mind at that time.
—On the accession of Queen Anne, in 1702, the first business of importance which came up was to incorporate the union of the two kingdoms. The succession to the throne and the union of the two parliaments were readily agreed upon, but the English commissioners would not agree to allow the Scots to participate equally with them in the foreign and colonial trade, and the negotiations were a failure. In April, 1706, a new set of commissioners, representing both kingdoms, met at Whitehall; in two short months their labors were finished; and so much and so important business has probably never been concluded in so short a time. The union was bitterly opposed in Scotland; but, after nine months' discussion, on Oct. 16, 1707, an act ratifying its terms was passed in the estates by a vote of 110 to 69. At this time the population of England was about 6,000,000, while that of Scotland was probably not over 1,000,000. Nothing so much reconciled the Scots to the union as the prospect of equality in trading privileges and reciprocity of citizenship.
—George I., the first of the Hanoverian line, was proclaimed king on Aug. 5, 1714, at the market cross of Edinburgh, amid apparent quietness through the whole country. Next year, however, the chiefs of the Highlands, under the carl of Mar, commenced a Jacobite insurrection in the north, which, although encouraged by the appearance in Scotland of the pretender, the son of James VII., was speedily suppressed. This added greatly to the stability of the new government, which now attempted to disarm the Highlands, and in the interests of peace constructed a system of excellent roads through that heretofore almost impassable region. The Highlanders were irritated by and restless under the industrial civilization of the Saxon, and when Prince Charles Edward, "Bonnie Prince Charlie," the oldest son of the pretender, under promise of help from France, raised his standard at Glenfinnan, in August, 1745, many a chieftain with his clan rallied around him. The Jacobite army, marching southward, after defeating Gen. Cope at Preston Pans, entered Edinburgh in triumph. With an army of but 6,000 men, remarkable to say, the prince pushed as far as Derby, only two days' march from London, when the approach of the duke of Cumberland with a larger force compelled him to retreat. On April 16, 1746, his halfstarved, exhausted army was routed on the field of Culloden, and with it forever fell the house of Stuart.
—The British government, unwilling to lose the benefit of the fighting qualities of the Highlanders, organized Highland regiments, with Highland officers and Highland uniforms, nine of which are still in the British army. These regiments have become famous for their never-failing bravery, shown on many a well-fought field in every quarter of the globe. The Gælic-speaking population of Scotland in 1881 numbered only 231,594, or 6.20 of the whole.
—For years the union was very unpopular in Scotland, and it was some time before its beneficent effects began to be felt. In recent times the prosperity of Scotland has been such as could never have been possible without the union. Although occasionally at the present time complaints are made that Scotland receives neither her share of parliamentary attention, nor her proportion of disbursements from the imperial treasury, yet no voice is ever heard expressing a doubt as to the beneficial results of the union.
—While Scotland is an integral part of the United Kingdom, she still retains her own courts and practices of law, and her own church government. At the head of the judiciary is the court of session, which consists of thirteen judges, and is supreme in civil cases. Five of its judges comprise the court of justiciary, which is supreme in criminal cases. The full court sits in Edin burgh, but circuit courts are held in the principal cities of the country. Criminals are indicted by the lord advocate or his deputies, and are tried at the expense of the state. In case of the lord advocate failing to prosecute, any private person may do so on his own responsibility. Criminal cases are tried by a jury of fifteen persons, a majority only being necessary for a verdict; and when the case is not clear, a verdict of "not proven" may be brought in. Appeals from the Scottish courts go to the house of lords. The subordinate courts in the counties are held by justices of the peace, and the sheriffs, the functions of the latter being judicial in Scotland, and not ministerial, as in England.
—In the cities the chief magistrate is not called the mayor, but the "lord provost," and the aldermen are called "baillies." In many particulars the law as well as the titles and duties of public functionaries differ wholly from those of England and the United States, and show distinct traces of the ancient league with France.
—The Scottish peers elect sixteen of their number to represent them in the house of lords; but, in addition, many Scottish peers, being also British peers, sit in the house of lords in their own right. and without an election. Scotland is represented in the house of commons by sixty members, of whom thirty-two represent the counties, twenty-six the burghs, and two the universities. Fifty out of the sixty members belong to the liberal party. The strength of the bodies dissenting from the established church has probably much to do with Scotland being so overwhelmingly liberal in politics. The number of electors on the registers in 1881 were: in the counties, 98,328; in the burghs, 216,851.
—The established church of Scotland is Presbyterian in form of church government. It embraces but a minority of the people, two non-established Presbyterian churches, the Free and United Presbyterian, having together more adherents than the state church. Some sanguine minds think the day is not far distant when the church of Scotland will be disestablished, and all the Presbyterian bodies of the country be united in one grand Presbyterian church, the church of almost all the people of Scotland. The Free church left the established church in 1843 under the lead of the celebrated Dr. Thomas Chalmers, and the result was another church and manse in almost every parish in Scotland.
—For centuries Scotland had a system of national education superior to that of any country in Europe. As early as 1262, Master Thomas Bennum writes himself as "Rector Scholarum de Aberdeen," and in 1478 the master of the "Grammar Schules of Aberdene" had a salary of £5 annually. John Knox and his associates, 300 years ago, ordained that there should be a school in every parish, and there is no doubt but that to her parish school system is to be attributed the high place her sons have commanded in the fields of religion, literature and science. It was truthfully said of Scotland that every Scot had a mouthful of learning, but not a mouthful of meal. The imperial parliament has, in a recent educational act, wholly changed the system in Scotland by providing for local school boards and compulsory education. The number receiving education in 1881 was 720,099, being 19.28 of the whole population. Of those between the ages of five and fifteen no fewer than 79 per cent. were receiving education, which will compare favorably with the school statistics of any state in the American Union. There are four universities in Scotland, viz., St. Andrew's, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Edinburgh, founded, respectively, in 1411, 1450, 1494 and 1582. They are more popular in their privileges than those of England, and were framed after the pattern of the continental universities of the fifteenth century. During the session of 1880-81 there were 6.619 students of all classes in attendance. The graduates elect two members of parliament; those of Aberdeen and Glasgow electing one, and those of Edinburgh and St. Andrew's the other.
—Out of 20,000,000 acres of land in Scotland only 5,000,000 can be cultivated, yet her agriculture is not surpassed by any country in the world. Her deposits of iron and coal are very rich, and her shipbuilding and manufacturing interests are very large. The tonnage built on the Clyde is larger than that on any other river on the globe, and Glasgow is the second city of importance in the British empire.
—There has been a great reduction in pauperism and crime during the last ten years. In 1872 there were 117,611 paupers, while in 1881 there were only 97,787; in like manner the number of convicted criminals fell from 2,259 in 1872 to 1,832 in 1881, showing a remarkable diminution of crime as well as pauperism accompanying an increase of population.
—Notwithstanding the barren soil, the inhospitable skies and the scant population of Scotland, few nations, since the days of ancient Greece, have produced so many names illustrious as historians, philosophers, scholars, essayists, novelists, scientists, theologians and poets.
—BIBLIOGRAPHY. The historical works of Buchanan; Hume, Lond., 1657; Guthrie, 10 vols., Lond., 1767; Dalrymple, 2 vols., Edinb., 1776-9; Robertson, 2 vols., Lond., 1758; Pinkerton, 2 vols., Lond., 1797; Heron, 6 vols., Pesth, 1794-9; Laing, 4 vols., Lond., 1804, new ed., 1819; Chalmers, 2 vols., Edinb., 1807-10; Mackintosh, 2 editions, Lond., 1822. Further, Tytler, History of Scotland, 8 vols., Edinb., 1826-34, 3d ed., 1845; Lindau, Geschichte Schottlands, 4 vols., Dresd., 1827; Scott, History of Scotland, 2 vols., Lond., 1830; Chambers, Domestic Annals of Scotland, from the Reformation to the Revolution, 3 vols., Edinb., 1859- 61; Burton, History of Scotland, 7 vols., Lond., 1867-70, 2d ed., 8 vols., Lond. and Edinb., 1873-4; Mackenzie, History of Scotland, Edinb., 1867; Burns, Scottish War of Independents: Its Antecedents and Effects, 2 vols., Glasgow, 1874. The earliest history of Scotland is treated of by Leslie, 2 vols., Edinb., 1866, and Skene, Celtic Scotland: History of Ancient Alban, 2 vols., Edinb., 1876-7.