Edward I England takes over Scotland?

Question. Could it have been possible for Edward I of England to take control of Scotland completely, in the same sense that they did in Wales? And if so, what would be the long term consequence of this?
 
He might not have been able to secure control of Scotland for himself, but if Margaret of Norway then the Plantagenets may have been able to unite Britain, either under the then Edward II, or under his successor.

This has extremely interesting possibilities for later Anglo-French wars, as without the 'auld alliance' France is considerably weaker. The Plantagenets probably stand in a better place in the wars in France (which will probably still happen, given the French King's possession of lands they think are rightfully theirs) with a solid homefront and the additional manpower Scotland provides. This might not be enough for them to fully conquer France and establish a lasting Angevin Empire, but it would certainly help them keep a decent foothold on the continent (more than just Calais).

This also may inhibit the growth of Britain's colonial ambitions, as it would posses more European commitments.
 
He might not have been able to secure control of Scotland for himself, but if Margaret of Norway then the Plantagenets may have been able to unite Britain, either under the then Edward II, or under his successor.

This has extremely interesting possibilities for later Anglo-French wars, as without the 'auld alliance' France is considerably weaker. The Plantagenets probably stand in a better place in the wars in France (which will probably still happen, given the French King's possession of lands they think are rightfully theirs) with a solid homefront and the additional manpower Scotland provides. This might not be enough for them to fully conquer France and establish a lasting Angevin Empire, but it would certainly help them keep a decent foothold on the continent (more than just Calais).

This also may inhibit the growth of Britain's colonial ambitions, as it would posses more European commitments.

TBH I doubt that England + Scotland would do much better in the HYW: France's wealth and population comfortably outstripped them both, and they'd have the logistical advantage of not having to ship armies overseas.

On another note, does anybody know whether the Lowlanders were still considered English at this time? If so, would coming under the rule of the English Crown prevent them coming to be considered a separate nation? Perhaps the nations of the UK would be seen as "Scotland" (OTL Highlands) and "England" (England + the Lowlands).
 
AFAIK the Scottish* Lowlands were by this point seen as a part of Scotland. Borders based on ethnicity is a more modern concept.

(*= to avoid any confusion)
 
He might not have been able to secure control of Scotland for himself, but if Margaret of Norway then the Plantagenets may have been able to unite Britain, either under the then Edward II, or under his successor.

This has extremely interesting possibilities for later Anglo-French wars, as without the 'auld alliance' France is considerably weaker. The Plantagenets probably stand in a better place in the wars in France (which will probably still happen, given the French King's possession of lands they think are rightfully theirs) with a solid homefront and the additional manpower Scotland provides. This might not be enough for them to fully conquer France and establish a lasting Angevin Empire, but it would certainly help them keep a decent foothold on the continent (more than just Calais).

This also may inhibit the growth of Britain's colonial ambitions, as it would posses more European commitments.
While I agree that England and France will still come to blows over England's continental territories, note that the English won't have a claim on the French crown in this scenario (since that was through Edward II's OTL wife). Which is a two-edged sword: on the one hand, rebellious French lords won't be able to justify siding with the English under the figleaf of "supporting the rightful king", on the other hand, the later parts of the HYW might see less extravagant English wargoals.

The lack of the Auld Alliance would help the English somewhat (the Scottish provided significant help both by launching invasions while the English were busy in France and by directly supplying troops to the French army), but on the other hand expect occasional Scottish rebellions to still distract the English.

The biggest problem the English had wasn't manpower, it was money. Dispatching expeditionary forces across the channel was expensive, as was garrisoning fortresses in France. One of the sources of the unpopularity of John of Gaunt and Richard II was the constant need to raise taxes to fund a war that wasn't making any progress.
 
AFAIK the Scottish* Lowlands were by this point seen as a part of Scotland. Borders based on ethnicity is a more modern concept.

(*= to avoid any confusion)

They were undoubtedly under the rule of the King of Scots, if that's what you mean. But like you say, borders based on ethnicity is a modern idea, and I was wondering whether ethnically speaking the Lowlanders would be considered England. Certainly during the reign of William the Lion (1165-1214) the royal burghs were considered to be mostly ethnically English, but I'm not sure whether this was still the case when the 1290s rolled around.
 
The lack of the Auld Alliance would help the English somewhat (the Scottish provided significant help both by launching invasions while the English were busy in France and by directly supplying troops to the French army), but on the other hand expect occasional Scottish rebellions to still distract the English.

On the other hand, the British nationbuilding project in France will be a wonderful imperial project to unite the peoples of Britannia.
 
One issue that whether via the survival of the Maid of Norway or Edward I simply living longer and doing a better job of squashing the Scots during the Wars of Independence the geography of Scotland isn't going to change because Britain is under one crown.

Scotland is essentially split into three parts going from South to North, the Southern Uplands which is hilly rough terrain, the rich, arable central Belt and East Coast and then the Highlands. In OTL the Scottish Kings based themselves in the Central Belt and then faced endless problems controlling the both the Highlands and the Southern Uplands. The united British Crown is going to face exactly the same problems, the geographic and cultural distance between London and Inverness is even worse than between Inverness and Edinburgh so the Crown is going to have to concede a large amount of authority to local magnates in order to control the area. England had enough problems in OTL with rebellious magnates based in Northern England and North Wales, add more troublesome magnates in the Southern Uplands and the Highlands and the area strongly under the control of London (South of the Bristol/Hull line) has got no bigger but the problem areas are more numerous.
 
One issue that whether via the survival of the Maid of Norway or Edward I simply living longer and doing a better job of squashing the Scots during the Wars of Independence the geography of Scotland isn't going to change because Britain is under one crown.

Scotland is essentially split into three parts going from South to North, the Southern Uplands which is hilly rough terrain, the rich, arable central Belt and East Coast and then the Highlands. In OTL the Scottish Kings based themselves in the Central Belt and then faced endless problems controlling the both the Highlands and the Southern Uplands. The united British Crown is going to face exactly the same problems, the geographic and cultural distance between London and Inverness is even worse than between Inverness and Edinburgh so the Crown is going to have to concede a large amount of authority to local magnates in order to control the area. England had enough problems in OTL with rebellious magnates based in Northern England and North Wales, add more troublesome magnates in the Southern Uplands and the Highlands and the area strongly under the control of London (South of the Bristol/Hull line) has got no bigger but the problem areas are more numerous.
To be clear, I am thinking the latter in regards to military conquest compared to a dynastic conquest. Basically as with Wales, English law and custom applied in a unitary kingdom.

To push back a little, England was pretty centralised for the time and I would argue the unity of the island may aid the linking of the whole region. Rather than the fuzzy boarder region of OTL it would be one continuous area. And bearly anyone lives in the highlands so one would imagine a grand castle complex could do the trick of permanent pacification.
 
To be clear, I am thinking the latter in regards to military conquest compared to a dynastic conquest. Basically as with Wales, English law and custom applied in a unitary kingdom.

To push back a little, England was pretty centralised for the time and I would argue the unity of the island may aid the linking of the whole region. Rather than the fuzzy boarder region of OTL it would be one continuous area. And bearly anyone lives in the highlands so one would imagine a grand castle complex could do the trick of permanent pacification.

English centralisation in this era was pretty patchy. While we normally attribute the power and independence of the Welsh Marcher Lords and Neville's and Percy families in the North of England to the particular legal structure's there it was also a product of geography. Rough mountainous areas are always difficult to control by a central government some distance away. Banditry and general lawlessness are much easier when you have mountains and moors to hide out in and that in turn forces devolution of power and authority to local figures. By annexing Scotland into England on a similar basis to Wales you have doubled the trouble spots the central government has to deal with. Which isn't a problem in the short term, however the Highlands and Southern Uplands are divided up the first generation of local magnates are going to be loyal to Edward. But in the medium term you are going to have areas which are full of "tough mountain folk", strong local magnates and distant from central authority and sooner or later you are going to have some alt Hotspur marching on London.
 
Top