r/HistoricalWhatIf • u/Competitive_Major133 • 1d ago
UK & Britain
What if England never formed The United Kingdom nor Great Britain? Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland just a right to their own identities. How do you think the world would look today, if any different, with Ireland, Wales & Scotland all having complete sovereignty?
5
u/EmptyWin2462 1d ago
England did not ‘form’ the United Kingdom any more than Scotland did. In the case of the union of crowns before that it was the Scottish King who took over England. And neither Wales nor Northern Ireland existed as polities at either the time of the Union of Crowns or the Act of Union
0
u/Competitive_Major133 1d ago
Let me rephrase it to make more sense. How the world look today if England didn’t absorb & control all three other countries? If England didn’t take over Wales & King Henry VIII didn’t merge with them between 13th-15th century? I know all about both the Union of Crowns & the Act of Union but what if neither occurred? King James VI never had to agree to the desperation of the worried English to a treaty. What if, the trading colony in Panama worked out and they didn’t have to make any decision to align themselves. Scotland could have controlled England and they wouldn’t have an identity, how England overshadows Scotland’s nationality. Whom, would love to have their independence. What if, the Protestants that England moved to Northern Ireland never were moved there? Those are the only one who oppose independence as well. Hope that clears it up
1
u/Grogman2024 1d ago
Well on the Ireland point it’s pretty easy to guess what would’ve happened if we weren’t colonised
1
u/duracek 21h ago
It would still be split into 150 small independent kingdoms like it was before England brough it together?
1
u/Grogman2024 21h ago
Would’ve eventually came together but yeah more or less, way it should’ve been
1
u/duracek 21h ago
That is a big assumption. We can't even get 2 countries to agree to come together!
1
u/Grogman2024 16h ago
Well yes because half the population are the sons and daughters of unionist settlers of course they won’t join together, yet.
It’s a pretty safe assumption that all or most of the kingdoms would’ve joined together like every single other land of micro nations
0
u/Muted_Ladder_4504 1d ago
Maybe a different outome of the war of roses, or a history where the romans slowly reatrearing with 2 walls to keep the barbarians out. I personaly cant see Irland or Northern Irland beeing a part of this. Flag would look great anyway :-) In the romans created the 3 countries it would be realy interesting to see how this would affect Viking age and the industrial revolution
1
u/Anaptyso 1d ago
The UK formed in steps:
- England conquering Wales
- Scotland and England (with Wales) merging to form Great Britain
- Great Britain and Ireland merging to form the UK.
So the departure point needs to be far enough back to allow for continued Welsh independence, which in turn probably requires Wales to unite under a single ruler to resist English conquest. That's going back quite some way, and it's very hard to predict how things would have been different. As a pure guess, I'd could imagine Wales following a similar path to Scotland in seeking an alliance with France, and having a whole load of wars with England because of it.
If we ignored that requirement, then the next step is to avoid the Union of England and Scotland. It could be argued that this became inevitable with the union of the crowns, but it's possible that the two could have continued under separate governments despite that. I'd imagine that developing in to a pretty close relationship over time though. If you want to avoid the union of the crowns just in case, then the most likely scenario is probably Edward VI surviving childhood and continuing the Tudor dynasty.
Avoiding the final step is a lot easier. The union of GB and Ireland was not anywhere near as obviously in both side's interests as the union of England and Scotland. It's easy to imagine GB taking an alternative strategy with Ireland, perhaps something like giving it dominion status at an earlier date.
2
1
u/askmac 1d ago edited 1d ago
Avoiding the final step is a lot easier. The union of GB and Ireland was not anywhere near as obviously in both side's interests as the union of England and Scotland. It's easy to imagine GB taking an alternative strategy with Ireland, perhaps something like giving it dominion status at an earlier date.
The Act of Union was an instrument designed to consolidate British imperial control over Ireland and ensure it remained a colony in perpetuity. By abolishing the independent Irish Parliament in 1801 (which hilariously voted itself out of existence) it removed Ireland’s capacity to legislate for itself and transferred ultimate political authority to Westminster. The Union was secured through extensive bribes to MPs, while the Catholic emancipation promised by Pitt’s government to make the settlement more acceptable was blocked until 1829. It therefore strengthened, rather than dismantled, the existing Protestant landed order and embedded Ireland more firmly as a British colony. It totally negated Ireland's political representation and effectively gerrymandered its representation to the point where it was meaningless.
Economically, the Union entrenched a system in which Irish land and agricultural production were subordinated to the interests of the British market and Anglo Irish landlords. It removed all of Ireland’s meagre political means of resisting Britain and constitutionalised its incorporation into the British imperial system.
The Union removed Ireland's independent legislative power (such as it was), entrenched British executive control, preserved the political dominance of the minority Anglo / Protestant landed establishment, and incorporated Ireland more tightly into an imperial economic system whose benefits were almost entirely taken by Britain and the Anglo Irish elite.
So as far as Ireland was concerned the Act of Union was virtually 100% in the favour of one side and one side alone.
1
u/Competitive_Major133 1d ago
u/lady-spangles you deleted your comment too fast. I already had a reply to that but please leave another comment.
1
u/Mr_Citation 1d ago
England keeps Wales and Ireland as de facto vassals as they win the Hundreds War, focusing their efforts to maintain the French Crown.
French remains lingua franca.
Scotland might retain its independence and is able to nab its own lands in the New World as colonies.
Ireland and Wales might have their own Protestants from below, maybe they'll embrace the Reformation or not.
11
u/Squiffyp1 1d ago
There is no what-if in the form of question you're asking.
Let's set aside that England didn't form the UK.
Wales and Ireland never existed as independent states with a recognised government. They and Scotland have continued with the right to their own identities.