Restoring the Kingdom, 1660–88

Abstract

Disillusioned by the experience of co-operation with the Scots in the 1640s, and desiring to dismantle anything associated with the republican adventure, the English wanted to minimize their political ties with Scotland in 1660. Furthermore, the 1650s underlined English superiority, and there was no economic advantage for England in strengthening the relationship. Fuelled by aggressive mercantilist ideas and agricultural depression, the English put up a wall of protectionism in the navigation acts. For their part the Scots associated union with conquest and wanted their liberty. Only the protestors were ambivalent about the implications of a royal restoration and how to respond to the end of the protectorate. Some urban commercial interests saw advantages in free trade with England, but public opinion overwhelmingly was against union. Charles II and later James VII’s preference for keeping English and Scottish affairs separate contributed to the retreat from union. Charles resisted the suggestion from Edward Hyde, first earl of Clarendon that Scottish affairs be subordinated to English ministers through the Whitehall council. Yet Charles was protective of Scottish independence since it gave him more freedom, and he operated chiefly through the secretary of state, John Maitland, second earl of Lauderdale, who was determined to keep Clarendon at a distance.