Originally posted by Big Crunch
Whilst the presence of Scotland in the union was a help, (especially considering their prior hindrance as an enemy) I do not agree with the rest of that statement.
Without the Scots England would still have lead to global conquest. Look at the populations of the two countries and it is like saying that without New York the USA would not be a global power.
For every major Scotsman in British history you could easily name 7 or 8 Englishmen.
Whilst the presence of Scotland in the union was a help, (especially considering their prior hindrance as an enemy) I do not agree with the rest of that statement.
Without the Scots England would still have lead to global conquest. Look at the populations of the two countries and it is like saying that without New York the USA would not be a global power.
For every major Scotsman in British history you could easily name 7 or 8 Englishmen.
I've said it before and I will say it again. I'd rather have a British civ but since we don't Scotland's accomplishments along with its economic, and scientific vitality put it well ahead of countries such as Poland, Hungary, or the short lived Malian or Khmer kingdoms.
Comment