I was just being silly and over-simplifying things, to be fair. His mum was a Catholic, while Jimmy was raised to be a Prod. She had been forced to abdicate to James after an uprising, and the monarch of Englerland was the head of the Church of England. Had she not been executed by Lizzy, things would've got problematical.
Yeah but simplifications on the internet become authentic historical documents that 100% portray stuff
As it stood, though, smooth tranisition from Lizzy to James. Popular guy, but union of the crowns didn't mean political union, which was not a popular idea at the time, despite the power monarchs of the day had. He very much did lay the groundwork to get it done, given his strong desire for it. He styled himself King of GB and Ireland, 'cause he was king of the big island and the wee island, but he wasn't allowed to have that on legal documents, 'cept in Scotland, 'cause he forced them to do that. He also termed himself King of France, which obviously wasn't the case, something the monarchs of England did for hundreds of years prior to and following his reign.
Aye, the groundwork but not the actual formation of a single political entity. On the topic of Regal titles, adopting King of France when he didn't rule France doesn't compare to adopting King of Britain, when he did rule the British Isles. Styling himself King of Britain
instead of King of Scotland or King of England if nothing showed his ambition was to unify both, even if both Scotland and England opposed this idea xD
He was a major proponent of the divine right of monarchs, which is probably a significant factor in why he wasn't on particular great terms with the parliament. Monarchs of the time did retain a great degree of political power, so it's not exactly surprising that he wanted the same foreign policy for all three kingdoms he ruled. It wouldn't do to have them all working at cross purposes, would it?
Not surprising for him, definitely surprising for England; levying his own taxes on Englishmen without Parliament's consent in order to pursue his own foreign policy against English wishes. Major faux pas, going back to the Magna Carta. Also agreed, not saying that's political union, only that the personal union brought the two nations together kicking and screaming
Probably the most significant factor in the eventual union was money. Scotland's investment in Darien was something of a massive failure - arguably in no small part due to English interference - allowing the English government to basically buy enough Scottish politicians to push through the Act of Union.
I don't see how it was the fault of English interference
Someone decided going to X and setting up a colony was a good idea. That is invading Russia in winter wearing flip flops tier in bad ideas. Doing it without having surveyed it prior to the colonial expedition, doing it without allies or naval superiority ascends to insulting the Mongols tier in bad ideas. It is a scheme even the French or Ottomans would not undertake
This reminds me of the South Sea Bubble which hit London, wherein some investors spread some dank marketing all around London and England that they were going to raise capital to go raise funds to trade in South America, shit would be so cash, profits would be 9000% and guaranteed. Obviously this plan wasn't going to work because England was at war with Spain (thus the chance of any Spanish colonies trading with them was 0) and so the company goes bust, thousands of suicides, murders, insane asylum cases, gin sale bonanzas and sold babies start popping up, riots and insurance claims all over the place, generally bad times all round. Only difference is these schemes didn't suck up the nation's economy proportionally, as England had a larger population and economy meaning it could stomach the overall drop in population and monies just in time to fall for the next stupid scheme
some Nigerian prince orientalist monarch proposed. That the Darien scheme ends with innocent English sailors getting executed for no reason beyond scapegoating is the final banter ;P