Kingdom of Great Britain

The Kingdom of Great Britain[c] was a sovereign state in

Western Europe from 1707[5] to the end of 1800. The state Kingdom of Great Britain
was created by the 1706 Treaty of Union and ratified by the 1707–1800
Acts of Union 1707, which united the kingdoms of England
(which included Wales) and Scotland to form a single
kingdom encompassing the whole island of Great Britain and
its outlying islands, with the exception of the Isle of Man and
the Channel Islands. The unitary state was governed by a
single parliament at the Palace of Westminster, but distinct Flag Coat of arms
(1714—1801)
legal systems—English law and Scots law—remained in use.
Motto: "Dieu et mon droit" (French)
The formerly separate kingdoms had been in personal union "God and my right"[1]
since the 1603 "Union of the Crowns" when James VI of
Anthem: "God Save the King"[a]
Scotland became King of England and King of Ireland. Since (since 1745)
James's reign, who had been the first to refer to himself as
"king of Great Britain", a political union between the two 0:00 / 0:00
mainland British kingdoms had been repeatedly attempted and
Royal coat of arms in Scotland:
aborted by both the Parliament of England and the Parliament
of Scotland. Queen Anne (r. 1702–1714) did not produce a
clear Protestant heir and endangered the line of succession,
with the laws of succession differing in the two kingdoms and
threatening a return to the throne of Scotland of the Roman
Catholic House of Stuart, exiled in the Glorious Revolution of
1688.

The resulting kingdom was in legislative and personal union

with the Kingdom of Ireland from its inception, but the
Parliament of Great Britain resisted early attempts to
incorporate Ireland in the political union. The early years of
the newly united kingdom were marked by Jacobite risings,
particularly the Jacobite rising of 1715. The relative incapacity
or ineptitude of the Hanoverian kings resulted in a growth in
the powers of Parliament and a new role, that of "prime
minister", emerged in the heyday of Robert Walpole. The
"South Sea Bubble" economic crisis was brought on by the
failure of the South Sea Company, an early joint-stock Great Britain in 1789; Kingdom of
company. The campaigns of Jacobitism ended in defeat for the Ireland and Electorate of Hanover in
light green
Stuarts' cause in 1746.
Capital London
51°30′N 0°7′W
The Hanoverian line of monarchs gave their names to the
Georgian era and the term "Georgian" is typically used in the Official languages English · Law
contexts of social and political history for Georgian French[b]
architecture. The term "Augustan literature" is often used for Recognised Scots
Augustan drama, Augustan poetry and Augustan prose in the regional languages Welsh
period 1700–1740s. The term "Augustan" refers to the Scottish Gaelic
acknowledgement of the influence of classical Latin from the Norn
ancient Roman Empire.[6] Cornish
Religion Protestantism
Victory in the Seven Years' War led to the dominance of the (Church of
British Empire, which was to become the foremost global England,[3]
power for over a century. Great Britain dominated the Indian Church of
subcontinent through the trading and military expansion of the Scotland)

East India Company in colonial India. In wars against France, Demonym(s) British
it gained control of both Upper and Lower Canada, and until
Government Unitary
suffering defeat in the American War of Independence, it also parliamentary
had dominion over the Thirteen Colonies. From 1787, Britain constitutional
began the colonisation of New South Wales with the departure monarchy
of the First Fleet in the process of penal transportation to Monarch
Australia. Britain was a leading belligerent in the French • 1707–1714[a] Anne
Revolutionary Wars. • 1714–1727 George I
• 1727–1760 George II
Great Britain was merged into the United Kingdom of Great • 1760–1800[b] George III
Britain and Ireland on 1 January 1801, with the Acts of Union Prime Minister
1800, enacted by Great Britain and Ireland, under George III, (select)
to merge with it the Kingdom of Ireland. • 1721–1742 Robert Walpole
(first)
• 1783–1800 William Pitt the
Etymology Younger (last of
GB)
The name Britain descends from the Latin name for the island
of Great Britain, Britannia or Brittānia, the land of the Britons Legislature Parliament of
via the Old French Bretaigne (whence also Modern French Great Britain
Bretagne) and Middle English Bretayne, Breteyne. The term • Upper house House of Lords
Great Britain was first used officially in 1474.[7] • Lower house House of
Commons
The use of the word "Great" before "Britain" originates in the Historical era Early modern
French language, which uses Bretagne for both Britain and
• Treaty of Union 22 July 1706
Brittany. French therefore distinguishes between the two by • Acts of Union 1 May 1707
calling Britain la Grande Bretagne, a distinction which was • Union with Ireland 31 December
transferred into English.[8] 1800
Currency Pound sterling
The Treaty of Union and the subsequent Acts of Union state
that England and Scotland were to be "United into One Preceded by Succeeded by
Kingdom by the Name of Great Britain",[9] and as such
Kingdom United
"Great Britain" was the official name of the state, as well as of Kingdom of
being used in titles such as "Parliament of Great Britain".[c][10] England Great
The websites of the Scottish Parliament, the BBC, and others, Kingdom Britain and
of Ireland
including the Historical Association, refer to the state created
Scotland
on 1 May 1707 as the United Kingdom of Great Britain.[11]
Both the Acts and the Treaty describe the country as "One Today part of United Kingdom
England
Kingdom" and a "United Kingdom", leading some Scotland
Wales
publications to treat the state as the "United Kingdom".[12]
The term United Kingdom was sometimes used informally
a. ^ Monarch of England and Scotland
during the 18th century to describe the state.[13] from 1702 to 1707
b. ^ Continued as monarch of the
Political structure United Kingdom until 1820

The kingdoms of England and Scotland, both in existence from the 9th century (with England incorporating
Wales in the 16th century), were separate states until 1707. However, they had come into a personal union
in 1603, when James VI of Scotland became king of England under the name of James I. This Union of the
Crowns under the House of Stuart meant that the whole of the island of Great Britain was now ruled by a
single monarch, who by virtue of holding the English crown also ruled over the Kingdom of Ireland. Each
of the three kingdoms maintained its own parliament and laws. Various smaller islands were in the king's
domain, including the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.

This disposition changed dramatically when the Acts of Union 1707 came into force, with a single unified
Crown of Great Britain and a single unified parliament.[14] Ireland remained formally separate, with its own
parliament, until the Acts of Union 1800 took effect. The Union of 1707 provided for a Protestant-only
succession to the throne in accordance with the English Act of Settlement of 1701; rather than Scotland's
Act of Security of 1704 and the Act anent Peace and War 1703, which ceased to have effect by the Repeal
of Certain Scotch Acts 1707. The Act of Settlement required that the heir to the English throne be a
descendant of the Electress Sophia of Hanover and not a Roman Catholic; this brought about the
Hanoverian succession of George I of Great Britain in 1714.

Legislative power was vested in the Parliament of Great Britain, which replaced both the Parliament of
England and the Parliament of Scotland.[15] In practice, it was a continuation of the English parliament,
sitting at the same location in Westminster, expanded to include representation from Scotland. As with the
former Parliament of England and the modern Parliament of the United Kingdom, the Parliament of Great
Britain was formally constituted of three elements: the House of Commons, the House of Lords, and the
Crown. The right of the English peers to sit in the House of Lords remained unchanged, while the
disproportionately large number of Scottish peers were permitted to send only sixteen representative peers,
elected from amongst their number for the life of each parliament. Similarly, the members of the former
English House of Commons continued as members of the British House of Commons, but as a reflection of
the relative tax bases of the two countries the number of Scottish representatives was fixed at 45. Newly
created peers in the Peerage of Great Britain, and their successors, had the right to sit in the Lords.[16]

Despite the end of a separate parliament for Scotland, it retained its own laws and system of courts, as also
its own established Presbyterian Church and control over its own schools. The social structure was highly
hierarchical, and the same ruling class remained in control after 1707.[17] Scotland continued to have its
own universities, and with its intellectual community, especially in Edinburgh, the Scottish Enlightenment
had a major impact on British, American, and European thinking.[18]

Role of Ireland
As a result of Poynings' Law of 1495, the Parliament of Ireland was subordinate to the Parliament of
England, and after 1707 to the Parliament of Great Britain. The Westminster parliament's Declaratory Act
1719 (also called the Dependency of Ireland on Great Britain Act 1719) noted that the Irish House of Lords
had recently "assumed to themselves a Power and Jurisdiction to examine, correct and amend" judgements
of the Irish courts and declared that as the Kingdom of Ireland was subordinate to and dependent upon the
crown of Great Britain, the King, through the Parliament of Great Britain, had "full power and authority to
make laws and statutes of sufficient validity to bind the Kingdom and people of Ireland".[19] The Act was
repealed by the Repeal of Act for Securing Dependence of Ireland Act 1782.[20] The same year, the Irish
constitution of 1782 produced a period of legislative freedom. However, the Irish Rebellion of 1798, which
sought to end the subordination and dependency of the country on the British crown and to establish a
republic, was one of the factors that led to the formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Ireland in 1801.[21]

History

Merging of Scottish and English Parliaments

The deeper political integration of her kingdoms was a key policy of
Queen Anne, the last Stuart monarch of England and Scotland and the
first monarch of Great Britain. A Treaty of Union was agreed in 1706,
following negotiations between representatives of the parliaments of
England and Scotland, and each parliament then passed separate Acts of
Union to ratify it. The Acts came into effect on 1 May 1707, uniting the
separate Parliaments and uniting the two kingdoms into a kingdom called
Great Britain. Anne became the first monarch to occupy the unified
British throne, and in line with Article 22 of the Treaty of Union Scotland
and England each sent members to the new House of Commons of Great
Britain.[22][17] The Scottish and English ruling classes retained power,
and each country kept its legal and educational systems, as well as its
Queen Anne, who reigned
established Church. United, they formed a larger economy, and the Scots
from 1702 to 1714
began to provide soldiers and colonial officials to the new British forces
and Empire.[23] However, one notable difference at the outset was that the
new Scottish members of parliament and representative peers were elected by the outgoing Parliament of
Scotland, while all existing members of the Houses of Commons and Lords at Westminster remained in
office.

Queen Anne, 1702–1714

During the War of the Spanish Succession (1702–14) England continued its policy of forming and funding
alliances, especially with the Dutch Republic and the Holy Roman Empire against their common enemy,
King Louis XIV of France.[24] Queen Anne, who reigned 1702–1714, was the central decision maker,
working closely with her advisers, especially her remarkably successful senior general, John Churchill, 1st
Duke of Marlborough. The war was a financial drain, for Britain had to finance its allies and hire foreign
soldiers. Stalemate on the battlefield and war weariness on the home front set in toward the end. The anti-
war Tory politicians won control of Parliament in 1710 and forced a peace. The concluding Treaty of
Utrecht was highly favourable for Britain. Spain lost its empire in Europe and faded away as a great power,
while working to better manage its colonies in the Americas. The First British Empire, based upon the
English overseas possessions, was enlarged. From France, Great Britain gained Newfoundland and Acadia,
and from Spain Gibraltar and Menorca. Gibraltar became a major naval base which allowed Great Britain
to control the entrance from the Atlantic to the Mediterranean.[25] The war marks the weakening of French
military, diplomatic and economic dominance, and the arrival on the world scene of Britain as a major
imperial, military and financial power.[26] British historian G. M. Trevelyan argued:

That Treaty [of Utrecht], which ushered in the stable and characteristic period of
Eighteenth-Century civilization, marked the end of danger to Europe from the old French
monarchy, and it marked a change of no less significance to the world at large,—the
maritime, commercial and financial supremacy of Great Britain.[27]

Hanoverian succession: 1714–1760

In the 18th century England, and after 1707 Great Britain, rose to become the world's dominant colonial
power, with France as its main rival.[28] The pre-1707 English overseas possessions became the nucleus of
the First British Empire.

"In 1714 the ruling class was so bitterly divided that many feared a civil war might break out on Queen
Anne's death", wrote historian W. A. Speck.[29] A few hundred of the richest ruling class and landed gentry
families controlled parliament, but were deeply split, with Tories committed to the legitimacy of the Stuart
"Old Pretender", then in exile. The Whigs strongly supported the Hanoverians, in order to ensure a
Protestant succession. The new king, George I was a foreign prince and had a small English standing army
to support him, with military support from his native Hanover and from his allies in the Netherlands. In the
Jacobite rising of 1715, based in Scotland, the Earl of Mar led eighteen Jacobite peers and 10,000 men,
with the aim of overthrowing the new king and restoring the Stuarts. Poorly organised, it was decisively
defeated. Several of the leaders were executed, many others dispossessed of their lands, and some 700
prominent followers deported to forced labour on sugar plantations in the West Indies. A key decision was
the refusal of the Pretender to change his religion from Roman Catholic to Anglican, which would have
mobilised much more of the Tory element. The Whigs came to power, under the leadership of James
Stanhope, Charles Townshend, the Earl of Sunderland, and Robert Walpole. Many Tories were driven out
of national and local government, and new laws were passed to impose greater national control. The right
of habeas corpus was restricted; to reduce electoral instability, the Septennial Act 1715 increased the
maximum life of a parliament from three years to seven.[30]

George I: 1714–1727
During his reign, George I spent only about half as much of his time overseas as had William III, who also
reigned for thirteen years.[31] Jeremy Black has argued that George wanted to spend even more time in
Hanover: "His visits, in 1716, 1719, 1720, 1723 and 1725, were lengthy, and, in total, he spent a
considerable part of his reign abroad. These visits were also occasions both for significant negotiations and
for the exchange of information and opinion....The visits to Hanover also provided critics with the
opportunity...to argue that British interests were being neglected....George could not speak English, and all
relevant documents from his British ministers were translated into French for him....Few British ministers or
diplomats...knew German, or could handle it in precise discussion."[32]

George I supported the expulsion of the Tories from power; they remained in the political wilderness until
his great-grandson George III came to power in 1760 and began to replace Whigs with Tories.[33] George I
has often been caricatured in the history books, but according to his biographer Ragnhild Hatton:
 ...on the whole he did well by Great Britain, guiding the country calmly and responsibly through
the difficult postwar years and repeated invasions or threatened invasions... He liked efficiency
and expertise, and had long experience of running an orderly state... He cared for the quality of
his ministers and his officers, army and naval, and the strength of the navy in fast ships grew
during his reign... He showed political vision and ability in the way in which he used British
power in Europe.[34]

Age of Walpole: 1721–1742

Robert Walpole (1676–1745) was a son of the landed gentry who rose to
power in the House of Commons from 1721 to 1742. He became the first
"prime minister", a term in use by 1727. In 1742, he was created Earl of
Orford and was succeeded as prime minister by two of his followers,
Henry Pelham (1743–1754) and Pelham's brother the Duke of Newcastle
(1754–1762).[35] Clayton Roberts summarizes Walpole's new functions:

He monopolized the counsels of the King, he closely

superintended the administration, he ruthlessly controlled
patronage, and he led the predominant party in Parliament.[36]

Walpole, by Arthur Pond

South Sea Bubble
Corporate stock was a new phenomenon, not well understood, except for the strong gossip among
financiers that fortunes could be made overnight. The South Sea Company, although originally set up to
trade with the Spanish Empire, quickly turned most of its attention to very high risk financing, involving
£30 million, some 60 per cent of the entire British national debt. It set up a scheme that invited stock owners
to turn in their certificates for stock in the Company at a par value of £100—the idea was that they would
profit by the rising price of their stock. Everyone with connections wanted in on the bonanza, and many
other outlandish schemes found gullible takers. South Sea stock peaked at £1,060 on 25 June 1720. Then
the bubble burst, and by the end of September it had fallen to £150. Hundreds of prominent men had
borrowed to buy stock high; their apparent profits had vanished, but they were liable to repay the full
amount of the loans. Many went bankrupt, and many more lost fortunes.[37]

Confidence in the entire national financial and political system collapsed. Parliament investigated and
concluded that there had been widespread fraud by the company directors and corruption in the Cabinet.
Among Cabinet members implicated were the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Postmaster General, and a
Secretary of State, as well as two other leading men, Lord Stanhope and Lord Sunderland. Walpole had
dabbled in the speculation himself but was not a major player. He rose to the challenge, as the new First
Lord of the Treasury, of resolving the financial and political disaster. The economy was basically healthy,
and the panic ended. Working with the financiers he successfully restored confidence in the system.
However, public opinion, as shaped by the many prominent men who had lost so much money so quickly,
demanded revenge. Walpole supervised the process, which removed all 33 company directors and stripped
them of, on average, 82% of their wealth.[38] The money went to the victims. The government bought the
stock of the South Sea Company for £33 and sold it to the Bank of England and the East India Company,
the only other two corporations big enough to handle the challenge. Walpole made sure that King George
and his mistresses were not embarrassed, and by the margin of three votes he saved several key government
officials from impeachment.[37]

Stanhope and Sunderland died of natural causes,

leaving Walpole alone as the dominant figure in British
politics. The public hailed him as the saviour of the
financial system, and historians credit him with
rescuing the Whig government, and indeed the
Hanoverian dynasty, from total disgrace.[38][39]

Patronage and corruption

Walpole was a master of the effective use of patronage,
as were Pelham and Lord Newcastle. They each paid
Walpole's Houghton Hall
close attention to the work of bestowing upon their
political allies high places, lifetime pensions, honours,
lucrative government contracts, and help at election time. In turn the friends enabled them to control
Parliament.[40] Thus in 1742, over 140 members of parliament held powerful positions thanks in part to
Walpole, including 24 men at the royal court, 50 in the government agencies, and the rest with sinecures or
other handsome emoluments, often in the range of £500 – £1000 per year. Usually there was little or no
work involved. Walpole also distributed highly attractive ecclesiastical appointments. When the Court in
1725 instituted a new order of chivalry, the Order of the Bath, Walpole immediately seized the opportunity.
He made sure that most of the 36 men honoured were peers and members of parliament who would provide
him with useful connections.[41] Walpole himself became enormously wealthy, investing heavily in his
estate at Houghton Hall and its large collection of European master paintings.[42]

Walpole's methods won him victory after victory, but aroused furious opposition. Historian John H. Plumb
wrote:

Walpole's policy had bred distrust, his methods hatred. Time and time again his policy was
successful in Parliament only because of the government's absolute control of the Scottish
members in the Commons and the Bishops in the Lords. He gave point to the opposition's cry
that Walpole's policy was against the wishes of the nation, a policy imposed by a corrupt use of
pension and place.[43]

The opposition called for "patriotism" and looked at the Prince of Wales as the future "Patriot King".
Walpole supporters ridiculed the very term "patriot".[44]

The opposition Country Party attacked Walpole relentlessly, primarily targeting his patronage, which they
denounced as corruption. In turn, Walpole imposed censorship on the London theatre and subsidised writers
such as William Arnall and others who rejected the charge of political corruption by arguing that corruption
is the universal human condition. Furthermore, they argued, political divisiveness was also universal and
inevitable because of selfish passions that were integral to human nature. Arnall argued that government
must be strong enough to control conflict, and in that regard Walpole was quite successful. This style of
"court" political rhetoric continued through the 18th century.[45] Lord Cobham, a leading soldier, used his
own connections to build up an opposition after 1733. Young William Pitt and George Grenville joined
Cobham's faction—they were called "Cobham's Cubs". They became leading enemies of Walpole and both
later became prime minister.[46]

By 1741, Walpole was facing mounting criticism on foreign policy—he was accused of entangling Britain
in a useless war with Spain—and mounting allegations of corruption. On 13 February 1741, Samuel
Sandys, a former ally, called for his removal.[47] He said:

Such has been the conduct of Sir Robert Walpole, with regard to foreign affairs: he has deserted
our allies, aggrandized our enemies, betrayed our commerce, and endangered our colonies; and
yet this is the least criminal part of his ministry. For what is the loss of allies to the alienation of
the people from the government, or the diminution of trade to the destruction of our liberties?[48]

Walpole's allies defeated a censure motion by a vote of 209 to 106, but Walpole's coalition lost seats in the
election of 1741, and by a narrow margin he was finally forced out of office in early 1742.[49]

Walpole's foreign policy

Walpole secured widespread support with his policy of avoiding war.[50] He used his influence to prevent
George II from entering the War of the Polish Succession in 1733, because it was a dispute between the
Bourbons and the Habsburgs. He boasted, "There are 50,000 men slain in Europe this year, and not one
Englishman."[51] Walpole himself let others, especially his brother-in-law Lord Townshend, handle foreign
policy until about 1726, then took charge. A major challenge for his administration was the royal role as
simultaneous ruler of Hanover, a small German state that was opposed to Prussian supremacy. George I and
George II saw a French alliance as the best way to neutralise Prussia. They forced a dramatic reversal of
British foreign policy, which for centuries had seen France as England's greatest enemy.[52] However, the
bellicose King Louis XIV died in 1715, and the regents who ran France were preoccupied with internal
affairs. King Louis XV came of age in 1726, and his elderly chief minister Cardinal Fleury collaborated
informally with Walpole to prevent a major war and keep the peace. Both sides wanted peace, which
allowed both countries enormous cost savings, and recovery from expensive wars.[53]

Henry Pelham became prime minister in 1744 and continued Walpole's policies. He worked for an end to
the War of the Austrian Succession.[54] His financial policy was a major success once peace had been
signed in 1748. He demobilised the armed forces, and reduced government spending from £12 million to
£7 million. He refinanced the national debt, dropping the interest rate from 4% p.a. to 3% p.a. Taxes had
risen to pay for the war, but in 1752 he reduced the land tax from four shillings to two shillings in the
pound: that is, from 20% to 10%.[55]

Lower debt and taxes

By avoiding wars, Walpole could lower taxes. He reduced the national debt with a sinking fund, and by
negotiating lower interest rates. He reduced the land tax from four shillings in 1721, to 3s in 1728, 2s in
1731 and finally to only 1s (i.e. 5%) in 1732. His long-term goal was to replace the land tax, which was
paid by the local gentry, with excise and customs taxes, which were paid by merchants and ultimately by
consumers. Walpole joked that the landed gentry resembled hogs, which squealed loudly whenever anyone
laid hands on them. By contrast, he said, merchants were like sheep, and yielded their wool without
complaint.[56] The joke backfired in 1733 when he was defeated in a major battle to impose excise taxes on
wine and tobacco. To reduce the threat of smuggling, the tax was to be collected not at ports but at
warehouses. This new proposal, however, was extremely unpopular with the public, and aroused the
opposition of the merchants because of the supervision it would involve. Walpole was defeated as his
strength in Parliament dropped a notch.[57]

Walpole's reputation
Historians hold Walpole's record in high regard, though there has
been a recent tendency to share credit more widely among his allies.
W. A. Speck wrote that Walpole's uninterrupted run of 20 years as
Prime Minister

is rightly regarded as one of the major feats of British

political history... Explanations are usually offered in
terms of his expert handling of the political system after
1720, [and] his unique blending of the surviving powers
of the crown with the increasing influence of the
Commons.[58]

He was a Whig from the gentry class, who first arrived in

Parliament in 1701, and held many senior positions. He was a
country squire and looked to country gentlemen for his political
base. Historian Frank O'Gorman said his leadership in Parliament
reflected his "reasonable and persuasive oratory, his ability to move
both the emotions as well as the minds of men, and, above all, his 1740 political cartoon depicting a
towering Walpole as the Colossus of
extraordinary self-confidence."[59] Julian Hoppit has said Walpole's
Rhodes
policies sought moderation: he worked for peace, lower taxes,
growing exports, and allowed a little more tolerance for Protestant
Dissenters. He avoided controversy and high-intensity disputes, as his middle way attracted moderates from
both the Whig and Tory camps.[60] H.T. Dickinson summed up his historical role:

Walpole was one of the greatest politicians in British history. He played a significant role in
sustaining the Whig party, safeguarding the Hanoverian succession, and defending the principles
of the Glorious Revolution (1688) ... He established a stable political supremacy for the Whig
party and taught succeeding ministers how best to establish an effective working relationship
between Crown and Parliament.[61]

Age of George III, 1760–1820

Victory in the Seven Years' War, 1756–1763

The Seven Years' War, which began in 1756, was the first war waged on a global scale and saw British
involvement in Europe, India, North America, the Caribbean, the Philippines, and coastal Africa. The
results were highly favourable for Britain, and a major disaster for France. Key decisions were largely in the
hands of William Pitt the Elder. The war started poorly. Britain lost the island of Minorca in 1756, and
suffered a series of defeats in North America. After years of setbacks and mediocre results, British luck
turned in the "miracle year" ("Annus Mirabilis") of 1759. The British had entered the year anxious about a
French invasion, but by the end of the year, they were victorious in all theatres. In the Americas, they
captured Fort Ticonderoga (Carillon), drove the French out of the Ohio Country, captured Quebec City in
Canada as a result of the decisive Battle of the Plains of Abraham, and captured the rich sugar island of
Guadeloupe in the West Indies. In India, the John Company repulsed French forces besieging Madras.

In Europe, British troops partook in a decisive Allied victory at the Battle of Minden. The victory over the
French navy at the Battle of Lagos and the decisive Battle of Quiberon Bay ended threats of a French
invasion, and confirmed Britain's reputation as the world's foremost naval power.[62] The Treaty of Paris of
1763 marked the high point of the First British Empire. France's future in North America ended, as New
France (Quebec) came under British control. In India, the third Carnatic War had left France still in control
of several small enclaves, but with military restrictions and an obligation to support the British client states,
effectively leaving the future of India to Great Britain. The British victory over France in the Seven Years'
War therefore left Great Britain as the world's dominant colonial power, with a bitter France thirsting for
revenge.[63]

Evangelical religion and social reform

The evangelical movement inside and outside the Church of England gained strength in the late 18th and
early 19th century. The movement challenged the traditional religious sensibility that emphasized a code of
honour for the upper class, and suitable behaviour for everyone else, together with faithful observances of
rituals. John Wesley (1703–1791) and his followers preached revivalist religion, trying to convert
individuals to a personal relationship with Christ through Bible reading, regular prayer, and especially the
revival experience. Wesley himself preached 52,000 times, calling on men and women to "redeem the time"
and save their souls. Wesley always operated inside the Church of England, but at his death, it set up
outside institutions that became the Methodist Church.[64] It stood alongside the traditional nonconformist
churches, Presbyterians, Congregationalist, Baptists, Unitarians and Quakers. The nonconformist churches,
however, were less influenced by revivalism.[65]

The Church of England remained dominant, but it had a growing evangelical, revivalist faction in the "Low
Church". Its leaders included William Wilberforce and Hannah More. It reached the upper class through the
Clapham Sect. It did not seek political reform, but rather the opportunity to save souls through political
action by freeing slaves, abolishing the duel, prohibiting cruelty to children and animals, stopping gambling,
and avoiding frivolity on the Sabbath; evangelicals read the Bible every day. All souls were equal in God's
view, but not all bodies, so evangelicals did not challenge the hierarchical structure of English society.[66]

First British Empire

The first British Empire was based largely in mainland North America and the West Indies, with a growing
presence in India. Emigration from Britain went mostly to the Thirteen Colonies and the West Indies, with
some to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. Few permanent settlers went to British India, although many
young men went there in the hope of making money and returning home.[67]

Mercantilist trade policy

Mercantilism was the basic policy imposed by Great Britain on its overseas possessions.[68] Mercantilism
meant that the government and the merchants became partners with the goal of increasing political power
and private wealth, to the exclusion of other empires. The government protected its merchants—and kept
others out—by trade barriers, regulations, and subsidies to domestic industries to maximise exports from
and minimise imports to the realm. The government had to fight smuggling—which became a favourite
American technique in the 18th century to circumvent the restrictions on trading with the French, Spanish
or Dutch. The goal of mercantilism was to run trade surpluses, so that gold and silver would pour into
London. The government took its share through duties and taxes, with the remainder going to merchants in
London and other British ports. The government spent much of its revenue on a superb Royal Navy, which
not only protected the British colonies but threatened the colonies of the other empires, and sometimes
seized them. Thus the Royal Navy captured New Amsterdam (later New York City) in 1664. The colonies
were captive markets for British industry, and the goal was to enrich the mother country.[69]

Loss of the 13 American colonies

During the 1760s and 1770s, relations with the Thirteen Colonies turned from benign neglect to outright
revolt, primarily because of the British Parliament's insistence on taxing colonists without their consent to
recover losses incurred protecting the American Colonists during the French and Indian War (1754–1763).
In 1775, the American Revolutionary War began at the Battles of Lexington and Concord, and the
Americans then trapped the British Army in Boston in the Siege of Boston and suppressed the Loyalists
who supported The Crown.

On 4 July 1776, the Second Continental Congress, representing the Thirteen Colonies, unanimously
adopted and issued the Declaration of Independence. The Second Continental Congress charged the
Committee of Five with authoring the Declaration, but the committee, in turn, largely relied on Thomas
Jefferson, who authored its first draft.

Under the military leadership of Continental Army general George Washington and with some economic
and military assistance from France, the Dutch Republic, and Spain, the United States held off successive
British invasions. The Americans captured two main British armies in 1777 and 1781. After that, King
George III lost control of Parliament and was unable to continue the war, which was brought to an end with
the signing of the Treaty of Paris in 1783, which acknowledged the independence and sovereignty of the
thirteen colonies and recognized the United States.

The American Revolutionary War, which lasted from 1775 to 1783, was expensive but the British financed
it successfully. Approximately 8,500 British troops were killed in action during the war.[70]

Second British Empire

The loss of the Thirteen Colonies marked the transition between the "first" and "second" empires, in which
Britain shifted its attention away from the Americas to Asia, the Pacific and later Africa.[71] Adam Smith's
Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, had argued that colonies were redundant, and that free trade should
replace the old mercantilist policies that had characterised the first period of colonial expansion, dating back
to the protectionism of Spain and Portugal. The growth of trade between the newly independent United
States and Great Britain after 1781[72] confirmed Smith's view that political control was not necessary for
economic success.

Canada
After a series of "French and Indian wars", the British took over most of France's North American
operations in 1763. New France became Quebec. Great Britain's policy was to respect Quebec's Catholic
establishment as well as its semi-feudal legal, economic, and social systems. By the Quebec Act of 1774,
the province of Quebec was enlarged to include the western holdings of the American colonies. In the
American Revolutionary War, Halifax, Nova Scotia became Britain's major base for naval action. They
repulsed an American revolutionary invasion in 1776, but in 1777 a British invasion army was captured in
New York, encouraging France to enter the war.[73]

After the American victory, between 40,000 and 60,000 defeated Loyalists migrated, some bringing their
slaves.[74] Most families were given free land to compensate their losses. Several thousand free blacks also
arrived; most of them later went to Sierra Leone in Africa.[75] The 14,000 Loyalists who went to the Saint
John and Saint Croix river valleys, then part of Nova Scotia, were not welcomed by the locals. Therefore,
in 1784 the British split off New Brunswick as a separate colony. The Constitutional Act of 1791 created
the provinces of Upper Canada (mainly English-speaking) and Lower Canada (mainly French-speaking) to
defuse tensions between the French and English-speaking communities, and implemented governmental
systems similar to those employed in Great Britain, with the intention of asserting imperial authority and not
allowing the sort of popular control of government that was perceived to have led to the American
Revolution.[76]

Australia
In 1770, British explorer James Cook had discovered the eastern coast of Australia whilst on a scientific
voyage to the South Pacific. In 1778, Joseph Banks, Cook's botanist on the voyage, presented evidence to
the government on the suitability of Botany Bay for the establishment of a penal settlement. Australia marks
the beginning of the Second British Empire. It was planned by the government in London and designed as
a replacement for the lost American colonies.[77] The American Loyalist James Matra in 1783 wrote "A
Proposal for Establishing a Settlement in New South Wales" proposing the establishment of a colony
composed of American Loyalists, Chinese and South Sea Islanders (but not convicts).[78] Matra reasoned
that the land was suitable for plantations of sugar, cotton and tobacco; New Zealand timber and hemp or
flax could prove valuable commodities; it could form a base for Pacific trade; and it could be a suitable
compensation for displaced American Loyalists. At the suggestion of Secretary of State Lord Sydney, Matra
amended his proposal to include convicts as settlers, considering that this would benefit both "Economy to
the Publick, & Humanity to the Individual". The government adopted the basics of Matra's plan in 1784,
and funded the settlement of convicts.[79]

In 1787 the First Fleet set sail, carrying the first shipment of convicts to the colony. It arrived in January
1788.

India
India was not directly ruled by the British government, instead
certain parts were seized by the East India Company, a private,
for-profit corporation, with its own army. The "John
Company" (as it was nicknamed) took direct control of half of
India and built friendly relations with the other half, which was
controlled by numerous local princes. Its goal was trade, and
vast profits for the Company officials, not the building of the
British empire. Company interests expanded during the 18th
century to include control of territory as the old Mughal
Empire declined in power and the East India Company battled
for the spoils with the French East India Company Lord Clive of the East India Company
meeting his ally Mir Jafar after their
(Compagnie française des Indes orientales) during the
decisive victory at the Battle of Plassey in
Carnatic Wars of the 1740s and 1750s. Victories at the Battle
1757
of Plassey and Battle of Buxar by Robert Clive gave the
Company control over Bengal and made it the major military
and political power in India. In the following decades it gradually increased the extent of territories under its
control, ruling either directly or in cooperation with local princes. Although Britain itself only had a small
standing army, the company had a large and well trained force, the presidency armies, with British officers
commanding native Indian troops (called sepoys).[80]

Battling the French Revolution and Napoleon

With the regicide of King Louis XVI in 1793, the French
Revolution represented a contest of ideologies between
conservative, royalist Britain and radical Republican
France.[81] The long bitter wars with France 1793–1815, saw
anti-Catholicism emerge as the glue that held the three
kingdoms together. From the upper classes to the lower classes,
Protestants were brought together from England, Scotland and
Ireland into a profound distrust and distaste for all things
French. That enemy nation was depicted as the natural home
of misery and oppression because of its inherent inability to Pitt addressing the Commons in Anton
shed the darkness of Catholic superstition and clerical Hickel's painting The House of Commons,
1793–94
manipulation.[82]

Napoleon
It was not only Britain's position on the world stage that was threatened: Napoleon, who came to power in
1799, threatened invasion of Great Britain itself, and with it, a fate similar to the countries of continental
Europe that his armies had overrun. The Napoleonic Wars were therefore ones in which the British invested
all the moneys and energies it could raise. French ports were blockaded by the Royal Navy.[83]

Ireland
The French Revolution revived religious and political grievances in Ireland. In 1798, Irish nationalists,
under Protestant leadership, plotted the Irish Rebellion of 1798, believing that the French would help them
to overthrow the British.[84] They hoped for significant French support, which never came. The uprising
was very poorly organized, and quickly suppressed by much more powerful British forces. Including many
bloody reprisals, the total death toll was in the range of 10,000 to 30,000.[85]

Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger firmly believed that the only solution to the problem was a union of
Great Britain and Ireland. The union was established by the Act of Union 1800; compensation and
patronage ensured the support of the Irish Parliament. Great Britain and Ireland were formally united on 1
January 1801. The Irish Parliament was closed down.[86]

Parliament of Great Britain

The Parliament of Great Britain consisted of the House of Lords (an unelected upper house of the Lords
Spiritual and Temporal) and the House of Commons, the lower chamber, which was elected periodically. In
England and Wales parliamentary constituencies remained unchanged throughout the existence of the
Parliament.[87]

Monarchs
Anne was from the House of Stuart and the Georges
Monarchs' Coats of arms
were from the House of Hanover. Anne had been
Queen of England, Queen of Scots, and Queen of
Ireland since 1702.

Anne, Queen of Great Britain (1707–1714)

George I of Great Britain (1714–1727)
George II of Great Britain (1727–1760)
George III Great Britain (1760–1800)
George III continued as King of the United Kingdom Coat of arms of the Stuart arms used in
until his death in 1820. House of Stuart Scotland

See also
Early modern Britain
Georgian era
Great Britain in the Seven Years' War
History of the United Kingdom § 18th century
Jacobitism
Coat of arms of the Hanoverian arms used
List of British monarchs
House of Hanover in Scotland
Timeline of British history (1700–1799)

Notes
a. There was no authorised version of the national anthem as the words were a matter of
tradition; only the first verse was usually sung.[2] No statute had been enacted designating
"God Save the King" as the official anthem. In the English tradition, such laws are not
necessary; proclamation and usage are sufficient to make it the national anthem. "God Save
the King" also served as the royal anthem for certain royal colonies. The words King, he,
him, his were replaced by Queen, she, her when the monarch was female.
 b. Law French, based primarily on Old Norman and Anglo-Norman, was an official language in
the courts until 1731.
c. "After the political union of the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland in 1707,
the nation's official name became the 'Kingdom of Great Britain' ".[4]

References
1. "The Royal Coat of Arms" (https://www.royal.uk/coats-arms). The Royal Family. 15 January
2016. Retrieved 19 November 2018.
2. Berry, Ciara (15 January 2016). "National Anthem" (https://www.royal.uk/national-anthem).
The Royal Family. Retrieved 4 June 2016.
3. Carey, Hilary M. (2011). God's Empire: Religion and Colonialism in the British World,
c.1801–1908. Cambridge University Press. p. 41. ISBN 9781139494090. OL 27576009M (htt
ps://openlibrary.org/books/OL27576009M).
4. The American Pageant, Volume 1, Cengage Learning (2012).
5. Parliament of the Kingdom of England, "Union with Scotland Act 1706 Article I" (http://www.le
gislation.gov.uk/aep/Ann/6/11), legislation.gov.uk, "That the two Kingdoms of England and
Scotland shall upon the First day of May which shall be in the year One thousand seven
hundred and seven and forever after be united into one Kingdom by the name of Great
Britain..." "
6. Lund, Roger D. (2013), "Chapter 1", Ridicule, Religion and the Politics of Wit in Augustan
England, Ashgate
7. Hay, Denys (1968). Europe: the emergence of an idea. Edinburgh University Press. p. 138 (h
ttps://books.google.com/books?id=QLpmAAAAMAAJ).
8. Manet, François-Gille-Pierre (1934), Histoire de la petite Bretagne ou Bretagne armorique (in
French), p. 74
9. "The Treaty (act) of the Union of Parliament 1706" (https://web.archive.org/web/2019052707
4630/http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/union.html). Scots History Online. Archived from
the original (http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/union.html) on 27 May 2019. Retrieved
18 July 2011.
"Union with England Act 1707" (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1707/7/contents). The
national Archives. Retrieved 18 July 2011.
"Union with Scotland Act 1706" (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Ann/6/11/contents).
Retrieved 18 July 2011.:
Both Acts and the Treaty state in Article I: That the Two Kingdoms of Scotland and England,
shall upon 1 May next ensuing the date hereof, and forever after, be United into One
Kingdom by the Name of GREAT BRITAIN.
10. Stanford, Harold Melvin (1921). The Standard Reference Work: For the Home, School and
Library. Vol. 3. "From 1707 until 1801 Great Britain was the official designation of the
kingdoms of England and Scotland"; United States Congressional serial set, vol. 10, 1895,
"In 1707, on the union with Scotland, 'Great Britain' became the official name of the British
Kingdom, and so continued until the union with Ireland in 1801."
11. "England – Profile" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/7327029.stm).
BBC. 10 February 2011.; "Scottish referendum: 50 fascinating facts you should know about
Scotland (see fact 27)" (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/
9007300/Scottish-referendum-50-fascinating-facts-you-should-know-about-Scotland.html).
The Daily Telegraph. London. 11 January 2012.; "Uniting the kingdom?" (http://www.national
archives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/rise_parliament/uniting.htm). nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Retrieved 31 December 2010.; "The Union of the Parliaments 1707" (https://web.archive.org/
web/20120102060414/http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/scotlandshistory/unioncrownsparliament
s/unionofparliaments/index.asp). Learning and Teaching Scotland. 2 January 2012. Archived
from the original (http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/scotlandshistory/unioncrownsparliaments/unio
nofparliaments/index.asp) on 2 January 2012.; "The Creation of the United Kingdom of Great
britain in 1707" (https://web.archive.org/web/20110515023116/http://www.history.org.uk/reso
urces/he_resource_730_9.html). Historical Association. 15 May 2011. Archived from the
original (http://www.history.org.uk/resources/he_resource_730_9.html) on 15 May 2011.
12. "Scottish referendum: 50 fascinating facts you should know about Scotland" (https://www.tele
graph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/9007300/Scottish-referendum-50-fascin
ating-facts-you-should-know-about-Scotland.html). The Daily Telegraph. London. 11
January 2012. "Scotland has been part of the United Kingdom for more than three hundred
years"; "BBC – History – British History in depth: Acts of Union: The creation of the United
Kingdom" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/acts_of_union_01.shtml).
BBC.
13. Gascoigne, Bamber. "History of Great Britain (from 1707)" (http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhi
s/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab07). History World. Retrieved 18 July 2011.; Burns,
William E. A Brief History of Great Britain. p. xxi (https://books.google.com/books?id=Fjf4Yyn
nC90C&pg=PT21).; "Report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" (htt
ps://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/UNGEGN/docs/9th-uncsgn-docs/econf/9th_UNCSGN_e-co
nf-98-48-add1.pdf) (PDF). Ninth United Nations Conference on the Standardisation of
Geographical Names (Item 4 of the provisional agenda, Reports by Governments on the
situations in their countries and of the progress made in the standardisation of geographical
names since the eighth conference. New York. 21–30 August 2007.
14. Act of Union 1707, Article 1.
15. Act of Union 1707, Article 3.
16. Williams 1962, pp. 11–43.
17. Williams 1962, pp. 271–287.
18. Broadie, Alexander, ed. (2003), The Cambridge Companion to the Scottish Enlightenment,
Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-1-139-82656-3; Herman, Arthur (2001), How the
Scots Invented the Modern World: The True Story of How Western Europe's Poorest Nation
Created Our World & Everything in It, Crown Business, ISBN 978-0-609-60635-3
19. Costin & Watson 1952, pp. 128–129.
20. Costin & Watson 1952, p. 147.
21. Williams 1962, pp. 287–306.
22. The Treaty or Act of the Union (http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/union.html) Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20190527074630/http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/union.html) 27
May 2019 at the Wayback Machine scotshistoryonline.co.uk, accessed 2 November 2008
23. Allan, David (2001). Scotland in the Eighteenth Century: Union and Enlightenment.
Longman. ISBN 978-0-582-38247-3.
24. Falkner, James (2015). The War of the Spanish Succession 1701–1714. Pen and Sword.
pp. 22–25 (https://books.google.com/books?id=UX0ACwAAQBAJ&pg=PA23). ISBN 978-1-
78159-031-7.
25. Hoppit 2000, chapters 4, 8.
26. Loades, David, ed. (2003), Readers Guide to British History, vol. 2, pp. 1219–1221
27. Trevelyan, G.M. (1942), A shortened history of England, p. 363
28. Pagden, Anthony (2003). Peoples and Empires: A Short History of European Migration,
Exploration, and Conquest, from Greece to the Present. Modern Library. p. 90. ISBN 0-812-
96761-5. OL 3702796M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL3702796M).
29. Speck 1977, pp. 146–149.
30. Marshall 1974, pp. 72–89; Williams 1962, pp. 150–165; Hoppit 2000, pp. 392–398; Speck
1977, pp. 170–187.
31. Gibbs, G. C. (21 May 2009). "George I". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 1
(online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/10538 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2
Fref%3Aodnb%2F10538). (Subscription or UK public library membership (https://www.oxforddnb.
com/help/subscribe#public) required.)
32. Black 2016, pp. 44–45 (https://books.google.com/books?id=XdQGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT44).
33. Williams 1962, pp. 11–44.
34. Hatton, Ragnhild (1983), "New Light on George I", in Baxter, Stephen B. (ed.), England's
Rise to Greatness, University of California Press, pp. 213–255, quoting p. 241, ISBN 978-0-
520-04572-9, OL 3505103M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL3505103M)
35. Williams 1962, pp. 180–212.
36. Taylor 2008.
37. Cowles, Virginia (1960). The Great Swindle: The Story of the South Sea Bubble (https://archi
ve.org/details/greatswindlestor01edunse). New York: Harper.
38. Kleer, Richard (2014). "Riding a wave the Company's role in the South Sea Bubble" (https://
www.ehs.org.uk/dotAsset/380e0bd9-47d1-4878-87a1-6bfb013ad21c.pdf) (PDF). Economic
History Society. University of Regina. p. 2. Retrieved 16 January 2020.
39. Marshall 1974, pp. 127–130.
40. Browning, Reed (1975). Duke of Newcastle (https://archive.org/details/dukeofnewcastle0000
brow). Yale University Press. pp. 254–260 (https://archive.org/details/dukeofnewcastle0000b
row/page/254). ISBN 978-0-300-01746-5. OL 5069181M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL50
69181M).
41. Hanham, Andrew (2016), "The Politics of Chivalry: Sir Robert Walpole, the Duke of Montagu
and the Order of the Bath", Parliamentary History, 35 (3): 262–297, doi:10.1111/1750-
0206.12236 (https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1750-0206.12236)
42. Roberts, Clayton; et al. (1985), A History of England, vol. 2, 1688 to the present (3rd ed.),
pp. 449–450, ISBN 978-0-13-389974-0, OL 2863417M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL2863
417M)
43. Plumb 1950, p. 68.
44. Carretta, Vincent (2007). George III and the Satirists from Hogarth to Byron. University of
Georgia Press. pp. 44 (https://books.google.com/books?id=xQqs0qxcnJMC&pg=PA44)–51.
ISBN 978-0-8203-3124-9. OL 29578545M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL29578545M).
45. Horne, Thomas (October–December 1980), "Politics in a Corrupt Society: William Arnall's
Defense of Robert Walpole", Journal of the History of Ideas, 41 (4): 601–614,
doi:10.2307/2709276 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2709276), JSTOR 2709276 (https://www.js
tor.org/stable/2709276)
46. Leonard, Dick (2010). Eighteenth-Century British Premiers: Walpole to the Younger Pitt.
Springer. p. 94 (https://books.google.com/books?id=JpiIDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA94). ISBN 978-
0-230-30463-5. OL 37125742M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL37125742M).
47. Kellner, Peter (2011). Democracy: 1,000 Years in Pursuit of British Liberty. Random House.
p. 264 (https://books.google.com/books?id=bobcxij5UkIC&pg=PT264). ISBN 978-1-907195-
85-3. OL 36708739M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL36708739M).
48. Wiener, Joel H., ed. (1983), Great Britain: the lion at home: a documentary history of
domestic policy, 1689–1973, vol. 1
49. Langford 1989, pp. 54–57 (https://books.google.com/books?id=9-b81opKYREC&pg=PA56);
Marshall 1974, pp. 183–191.
50. Black, Jeremy (1984), "Foreign Policy in the Age of Walpole", in Black, Jeremy (ed.), Britain
in the Age of Walpole, Macmillan, pp. 144–169, ISBN 978-0-333-36863-3, OL 2348433M (htt
ps://openlibrary.org/books/OL2348433M)
51. Robertson 1911, p. 66 (https://books.google.com/books?id=OawxAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA66).
52. Black 2016.
53. Wilson, Arthur McCandless (1936), French Foreign Policy during the Administration of
Cardinal Fleury, 1726–1743: A Study in Diplomacy and Commercial Development,
Greenwood Press, ISBN 0-837-15333-6, OL 5703043M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL570
3043M)
54. Williams 1962, pp. 259–270.
55. Brumwell & Speck 2001, p. 288; Marshall 1974, pp. 221–227.
56. Ward, A. W.; et al., eds. (1909). The Cambridge Modern History. Vol. VI: the Eighteenth
Century. p. 46 (https://books.google.com/books?id=fMgFAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA46). ISBN 978-0-
521-07814-6. OL 7716876M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL7716876M).
57. Langford 1989, pp. 28–33.
58. Speck 1977, p. 203.
59. O'Gorman 1997, p. 71.
60. Hoppit 2000, p. 410.
61. Dickinson, H. P. (2003), Loades, David (ed.), "Walpole, Sir Robert", Readers Guide to British
History, vol. 2, no. 1338
62. McLynn, Frank (2004). 1759: The Year Britain Became Master of the World. Atlantic Monthly
Press. ISBN 9780871138811. OL 24769108M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL24769108M).
63. Anderson, Fred (2005). The War That Made America: A Short History of the French and
Indian War. Viking. ISBN 0670034541. OL 3426544M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL3426
544M).
64. Armstrong, Anthony (1973). The Church of England: the Methodists and society, 1700–1850.
65. Briggs, Asa (1959). The age of improvement, 1783–1867. Longman. pp. 66–73.
66. Rule, John (1992). "Chapters 2–6". Albion's People: English Society 1714–1815.
67. Simms, Brendan (2008). Three Victories and a Defeat: The Rise and Fall of the First British
Empire (https://archive.org/details/threevictoriesan00simm). Basic Books.
ISBN 9780465013326.
68. Savelle, Max (1948). Seeds of Liberty: The Genesis of the American Mind. University of
Washington Press. pp. 204–211. OL 5951089M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL5951089M).
69. Nester, William R. (2000). The Great Frontier War: Britain, France, and the Imperial Struggle
for North America, 1607–1755. Praeger. p. 54. ISBN 0275967727. OL 40897M (https://openli
brary.org/books/OL40897M).
70. Black, Jeremy (1991), War for America: The Fight for Independence, 1775–1783, Alan
Sutton, ISBN 978-0-862-99725-0
71. Pagden, Anthony (1998). The Origins of Empire, The Oxford History of the British Empire.
Oxford University Press. p. 92.
72. James 1994, p. 119.
73. Reid, John G.; Mancke, Elizabeth (2008). "From Global Processes to Continental Strategies:
The Emergence of British North America to 1783" (https://books.google.com/books?id=KmX
nLGX7FvEC&pg=PA22). In Buckner, Phillip (ed.). Canada and the British Empire. Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-927164-1.
74. Maya Jasanoff, Liberty's Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World (2012)
75. Winks, Robin (1997). The Blacks in Canada: A History. McGill-Queen's Press. ISBN 978-0-
7735-6668-2.
76. Morton, Desmond (2001). A short history of Canada. McClelland & Stewart. ISBN 978-0-
7710-6508-8.
77. Schreuder, Deryck; Ward, Stuart, eds. (2010). "Chapter 1. Australia's Empire". The Oxford
History of the British Empire Companion Series.
78. Carter, Harold B. (1988). "Banks, Cook and the Eighteenth Century Natural History
Tradition". In Delamotte, Tony; Bridge, Carl (eds.). Interpreting Australia: British Perceptions
of Australia since 1788. London: Sir Robert Menzies Centre for Australian Studies. pp. 4–23.
ISBN 978-0-902499-98-0..
79. Atkinson, Alan (1990). "The first plans for governing New South Wales, 1786–87". Australian
Historical Studies. 24 (94): 22–40, 31. doi:10.1080/10314619008595830 (https://doi.org/10.1
080%2F10314619008595830). S2CID 143682560 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusI
D:143682560).
80. Lawson, Philip (2014). The East India Company: A History. Routledge.; Stern, Philip J.
(2009). "History and historiography of the English East India Company: Past, present, and
future!". History Compass. 7 (4): 1146–1180. doi:10.1111/j.1478-0542.2009.00617.x (https://
doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1478-0542.2009.00617.x).
81. Knight, Roger J. B. (2013). Britain against Napoleon: The Organization of Victory, 1793–
1815. Penguin UK. pp. 61–62. ISBN 978-0-141-97702-7. OL 30961773M (https://openlibrary.
org/books/OL30961773M).
82. Drury, Marjule Anne (2001). "Anti-Catholicism in Germany, Britain, and the United States: A
Review and Critique of Recent Scholarship". Church History. 70 (1): 98–131.
doi:10.2307/3654412 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F3654412). JSTOR 3654412 (https://www.js
tor.org/stable/3654412). S2CID 146522059 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:14652
2059).; Colley, Linda (1992). Britons: Forging the Nation 1707–1837. Yale University Press.
pp. 35, 53–54. ISBN 0-300-05737-7. OL 1711290M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL171129
0M).
83. Andress, David (1960). The Savage Storm: Britain on the Brink in the Age of Napoleon.
Little, Brown Book Group. ISBN 978-1-405-51321-0. OL 34606684M (https://openlibrary.org/
books/OL34606684M).; Simms, Brendan (1998). "Britain and Napoleon". The Historical
Journal. 41 (3): 885–894. doi:10.1017/S0018246X98008048 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0
018246X98008048). JSTOR 2639908 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2639908).
S2CID 162840420 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:162840420).
84. "British History – The 1798 Irish Rebellion" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_sea
power/irish_reb_01.shtml). BBC. 5 November 2009. Retrieved 23 April 2010.; Gahan, Daniel
(1998). Rebellion!: Ireland in 1798. O'Brien Press. ISBN 978-0-86278-541-3. OL 403106M (h
ttps://openlibrary.org/books/OL403106M).
85. Rose, John Holland (1911). William Pitt and the Great War (https://archive.org/details/cu319
24028005803). Greenwood Press. pp. 339–364. ISBN 0-837-14533-3. OL 5756027M (http
s://openlibrary.org/books/OL5756027M).
86. Ehrman, John (1996). The Younger Pitt: The Consuming Struggle. Constable. pp. 158–196.
ISBN 0-094-75540-X. OL 21936112M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL21936112M).
87. Cook, Chris; Stevenson, John (1980). British Historical Facts 1760–1830. The Macmillan
Press.
Sources
Black, Jeremy (2016). Politics and Foreign Policy in the Age of George I, 1714–1727.
Routledge. pp. 44–45 (https://books.google.com/books?id=XdQGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT44).
ISBN 978-1-317-07854-8.
Brumwell, Stephen; Speck, W.A. (2001). Cassell's Companion to Eighteenth Century Britain.
Cassell & Company. ISBN 978-0-304-34796-4.
Costin, W. C.; Watson, J. Steven, eds. (1952), The Law & Working of the Constitution:
Documents 1660–1914, vol. I: 1660–1783, A. & C. Black
Hoppit, Julian (2000). A Land of Liberty?: England 1689–1727. ISBN 978-0-19-822842-4.
James, Lawrence (1994). The Rise and Fall of the British Empire. Abacus. ISBN 978-0-349-
10667-0. OL 9642159M (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL9642159M).
Langford, Paul (1989). A Polite and Commercial People: England 1727–1783.
Marshall, Dorothy (1974). Eighteenth-Century England (2nd ed.).
Plumb, John H. (1950). England in the Eighteenth Century.
Robertson, Charles Grant (1911). England under the Hanoverians (https://archive.org/detail
s/cu31924014654044). Methuen & Company. ISBN 978-0-598-56207-4.
Speck, W.A (1977). Stability and Strife: England, 1714–1760. Harvard University Press.
ISBN 978-0-674-83350-0.
Williams, Basil (1962), The Whig Supremacy: 1714 – 1760 (2nd ed.), At the Clarendon
Press, ISBN 978-7-230-01144-0

Further reading
Black, Jeremy (2002). Britain as a Military Power, 1688–1815. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-138-
98791-3.
Brisco, Norris Arthur (1907). The economic policy of Robert Walpole (https://archive.org/detai
ls/economicpolicyof00brisrich). Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-93374-2.
Cannon, John (1984). Aristocratic century: the peerage of eighteenth-century England.
Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-25729-9.
Colley, Linda (2009). Britons: Forging the Nation 1707–1837 (2nd ed.). Yale University
Press. ISBN 978-0-300-15280-7.
Cowie, Leonard W (1967). Hanoverian England, 1714–1837. ISBN 978-0-7135-0235-0.
Daunton, Martin (1995). Progress and Poverty: An Economic and Social History of Britain
1700–1850. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-822281-1.
Hilton, Boyd (2008). A Mad, Bad, and Dangerous People?: England 1783–1846. Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-921891-2.
Hunt, William (2019) [1905]. The History of England from the Accession of George III – to the
close of Pitt's first Administration (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.203898).
Creative Media Partners, LLC. ISBN 978-0-530-51826-8. also Gutenberg edition (http://guten
berg.readingroo.ms/2/5/2/3/25232/25232.txt)
Langford, Paul (1976). The Eighteenth Century, 1688-1815. A. and C. Black. ISBN 978-0-
7136-1652-1.
Leadam, I. S (1912). The History of England From The Accession of Anne to the Death of
George II (https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.459426).
Marshall, Dorothy (1956). English People in the Eighteenth Century.
Newman, Gerald, ed. (1997). Britain in the Hanoverian Age, 1714–1837: An Encyclopedia.
Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-8153-0396-1.
O'Gorman, Frank (1997). The Long Eighteenth Century: British Political and Social History
1688–1832.
Owen, John B (1976). The Eighteenth Century: 1714–1815.
Peters, Marie (2009). "Pitt, William, first earl of Chatham [Pitt the elder] (1708–1778)" (http://w
ww.oxforddnb.com/view/article/22337). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.).
Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/22337 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fref%3Aodn
b%2F22337). Retrieved 22 September 2017. (Subscription or UK public library membership (htt
ps://www.oxforddnb.com/help/subscribe#public) required.)
Porter, A.N.; Stockwell, A.J. (1989) [1986], British Imperial Policy and Decolonization, 1938-
64, vol. 2, 1951–64, ISBN 978-0-333-48284-1
Plumb, J. H (1956). Sir Robert Walpole: The Making of a Statesman.
Porter, Roy (1990). English Society in the Eighteenth Century (2nd ed.). Penguin Publishing.
ISBN 978-0-140-13819-1.
Rule, John (1992). Albion's People: English Society 1714–1815.
Simms, Brendan (2008). Three Victories and a Defeat: The Rise and Fall of the First British
Empire, 1714–1783 (https://archive.org/details/threevictoriesan00simm). Basic Books.
ISBN 978-0-465-01332-6.
Speck, W.A (1998). Literature and Society in Eighteenth-Century England: Ideology, Politics
and Culture, 1680–1820.
Taylor, Stephen (2008). "Walpole, Robert, first earl of Orford (1676–1745)" (http://www.oxford
dnb.com/view/article/28601). Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford
University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/28601 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fref%3Aodnb%2F2
8601). Retrieved 22 September 2017. (Subscription or UK public library membership (https://ww
w.oxforddnb.com/help/subscribe#public) required.)
Ward, A.W.; Gooch, G.P., eds. (1922). The Cambridge History of British Foreign Policy,
1783–1919 (https://archive.org/details/cambridgehistory00ward). Vol. 1, 1783–1815.
Cambridge, The University press.
Watson, J. Steven (1960). The Reign of George III, 1760–1815. Oxford History of England.
Williams, Basil (1939). The Whig Supremacy 1714–1760 (https://archive.org/details/whigsup
remacy171001761mbp).
—— (April 1900). "The Foreign Policy of England under Walpole". The English Historical
Review. 15 (58): 251–276. doi:10.1093/ehr/XV.LVIII.251 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Feh
r%2FXV.LVIII.251). JSTOR 548451 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/548451).
—— (July 1900). "The Foreign Policy of England under Walpole (Continued)". English
Historical Review. 15 (59): 479–494. doi:10.1093/ehr/XV.LIX.479 (https://doi.org/10.109
3%2Fehr%2FXV.LIX.479). JSTOR 549078 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/549078).
—— (October 1900). "The Foreign Policy of England under Walpole (Continued)".
English Historical Review. 59 (60): 665–698. doi:10.1093/ehr/XV.LX.665 (https://doi.org/
10.1093%2Fehr%2FXV.LX.665). JSTOR 548535 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/548535).
—— (January 1901). "The Foreign Policy of England under Walpole". English Historical
Review. 16 (61): 67–83. doi:10.1093/ehr/XVI.LXI.67 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fehr%2F
XVI.LXI.67). JSTOR 549509 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/549509).
—— (April 1901). "The Foreign Policy of England under Walpole (Continued)". English
Historical Review. 16 (62): 308–327. doi:10.1093/ehr/XVI.LXII.308 (https://doi.org/10.109
3%2Fehr%2FXVI.LXII.308). JSTOR 548655 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/548655).
—— (July 1901). "The Foreign Policy of England under Walpole (Continued)". English
Historical Review. 16 (53): 439–451. doi:10.1093/ehr/XVI.LXIII.439 (https://doi.org/10.109
3%2Fehr%2FXVI.LXIII.439). JSTOR 549205 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/549205).
Historiography
Black, Jeremy (1987). "British foreign policy in the eighteenth century: A survey". Journal of
British Studies. 26 (1): 26–53. doi:10.1086/385878 (https://doi.org/10.1086%2F385878).
JSTOR 175553 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/175553). S2CID 145307952 (https://api.semanti
cscholar.org/CorpusID:145307952).
Devereaux, Simon (2009). "The Historiography of the English State during 'the Long
Eighteenth Century': Part I–Decentralized Perspectives". History Compass. 7 (3): 742–764.
doi:10.1111/j.1478-0542.2009.00591.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1478-0542.2009.00591.
x).
—— (2010). "The Historiography of the English State During 'The Long Eighteenth
Century'Part Two–Fiscal-Military and Nationalist Perspectives". History Compass. 8 (8):
843–865. doi:10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00706.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1478-0542.20
10.00706.x).
Johnson, Richard R. (1978). "Politics Redefined: An Assessment of Recent Writings on the
Late Stuart Period of English History, 1660 to 1714". William and Mary Quarterly. 35 (4):
691–732. doi:10.2307/1923211 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F1923211). JSTOR 1923211 (http
s://www.jstor.org/stable/1923211).
O'Gorman, Frank (1986). "The recent historiography of the Hanoverian regime" (http://web.cs
ulb.edu/~ssayeghc/foucault/ogorman.pdf) (PDF). Historical Journal. 29 (4): 1005–1020.
doi:10.1017/S0018246X00019178 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0018246X00019178).
S2CID 159984575 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:159984575).
Schlatter, Richard, ed. (1984). Recent Views on British History: Essays on Historical Writing
Since 1966. pp. 167–254.
Simms, Brendan; Riotte, Torsten, eds. (2007). The Hanoverian Dimension in British History,
1714–1837. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-15462-8.

External links
The Treaty of Union (https://web.archive.org/web/20110721181249/http://www.scottish.parlia
ment.uk/corporate/history/SPTradition/treaty.htm), Scottish Parliament
Text of Union with England Act (http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/legResults.aspx?LegType=All+
Legislation&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=
0&sortAlpha=0&PageNumber=0&NavFrom=0&activeTextDocId=1519711)
Text of Union with Scotland Act (http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/legResults.aspx?LegType=All+
Legislation&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=
0&sortAlpha=0&PageNumber=0&NavFrom=0&activeTextDocId=2078400)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kingdom_of_Great_Britain&oldid=1208796363"