Day of Empire_ How Hyperpowers Rise to Global Dominance--And Why They Fall - Amy Chua [109]
The Darien fiasco effectively bankrupted Scotland. Paterson and his co-survivors were treated as pariahs. In 1707, a demoralized, famine-stricken Scotland signed the Act of Union with England, creating a new entity called Great Britain. The drive for unification was led by a number of ruined Scottish nobles who, according to many, had been bribed by London with a secret slush fund. In any event, the Scottish parliament dissolved itself, and the Scottish Privy Council relinquished its power over taxes, customs, and military and foreign affairs. In return, England paid off approximately £400,000 in Scottish debts, principally covering the Darien losses. For the many Scots who bitterly opposed unification, the Act of Union was “an entire surrender,” a “devil's bargain,” and the death of their nation.13
From the English point of view, the big question after 1707 was what to do with the Scots. Despite the Darien debacle, the Scots were famous for their ambition and commercial prowess. Many English were fearful of the Scots, whom they saw as shrewd, cunning, and aggressive. Highlander Scots were known for their bravery and belligerence. There were other, sometimes inconsistent stereotypes as well. “The principal part of the Scottish nobility are tyrants and the whole of the common people are slaves,” declared one Scotophobe, while others made just the opposite point, railing against the dangerous radicalism of “Scotch rebel buggers.” Through it all, the English maintained a firm belief in their superiority over their “poor and pushy” northern neighbors. As one grandee put it, Scotland was “the sink of the earth.”
After the Act of Union, the English essentially had to decide whether to raise the Scots up or to keep them down: to try to incorporate, win the loyalty of, and utilize the Scots, or rather, as many in the north feared, to suppress them. The English chose the former path, and profited immeasurably from it.14
As the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries unfolded, British dominions expanded at an astounding rate. Indeed, between 1815 and 1865, the British Empire grew by 100,000 square miles on average every year. An empire of this unprecedented expanse required, first and foremost, manpower: soldiers, settlers, farmers, clerks, tradesmen, doctors, officers, governors. There were not nearly enough Englishmen willing or able to fill these positions. Oceans away, in lands filled with tropical disease and not always friendly natives, Britain's colonies did not necessarily appeal to the English, whose domestic economy was thriving.
The Scots, however, were differently situated. They were much poorer than the English. Many from the noble and gentry classes had been bankrupted by the Darien scheme. Scotland's relatively backward economy offered few prospects. Nor was it so easy for a Scot to advance in England, where the best jobs were likely to go to Englishmen. With everything to gain and little to lose, the Scots proved eager to seize the risks and rewards of empire building.
For the English, it was a match made in heaven. British statesmen made a conscious strategic decision to recruit the Scots into imperial service. After unification, and contrary to doomsayer predictions about “slavery to the English,” the Scots experienced “an unprecedented freedom and mobility.” To the dismay of many English, Prime Minister Henry Pelham declared in 1747 that “[e]very Scotch man who had zeal and abilities to serve the King should have the same admission with the administration as the subject of England had.”
Instead of being the enemy, the “hardy” Scots were suddenly actively recruited for the British army—particularly Highlanders, who were now prized for their valor and obedience. By the mid-eighteenth century, roughly one-quarter of the British army's regimental officers were Scots.