Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:44:20.117Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE ALTERNATIVE TO PERPETUAL PEACE: BRITAIN, IRELAND AND THE CASE FOR UNION IN FRIEDRICH GENTZ'S HISTORISCHES JOURNAL, 1799–1800*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2015

JAMES STAFFORD
JAMES STAFFORD*
Affiliation:
Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The British–Irish Union of 1801 remains a significant and controversial moment in the histories of both countries, but understandings of its genesis are restricted inscope. This article seeks to place the Union in a new historical context: the crisis of the European states system that accompanied the French Revolution. It considers the position held by the Union in the critique of Kant's famous essay on “Perpetual Peace” (1795) advanced by one of his most influential students, the publicist and state official Friedrich Gentz (1764–1832). Gentz argued that the consolidation of the British state offered a model for the regeneration of European society. Only unitary forms of sovereign authority could exercise the responsible political agency required for the restoration of peace in the wake of the Revolution. The decline of small states and composite polities supported the durable civil liberty and commercial development necessary to mankind's moral development in history.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Intellectual History , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , April 2016 , pp. 63 - 91
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was made possible by grants from the Arts and Humanities Research Council, the Kurt Hahn Trust, Emmanuel College and the Cambridge History Faculty Doctoral Language Fund. I owe particular thanks to the Maier and Stegmaier families for accommodating me in Munich. While there I benefited greatly from discussions with Eckhart Hellmuth and Annette Meyer. In Cambridge, John Robertson and Isaac Nakhimovsky were invaluable. Thanks are also due to Duncan Kelly and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

References

1 Claims regarding the parliament's antiquity stretched back at least to the seventeenth century: Kelly, Patrick, “Recasting a Tradition: William Molyneux and the Sources of The Case of Ireland . . . Stated (1698),” in Ohlmeyer, Jane, ed., Political Thought in Seventeenth-Century Ireland: Kingdom or Colony? (Cambridge, 2000), 83–107Google Scholar.

2 The most comprehensive recent study of the Union's passage is Patrick Geoghegan, M., The Irish Act of Union: A Study in High Politics, 1798–1801 (Dublin, 1999)Google Scholar.

3 For an incisive treatment of the long-run political trajectory of the Union see Boyce, D. George, Ireland 1828–1923: From Ascendancy to Democracy (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar. On the Northern Irish troubles as a conflict of allegiance see Bourke, Richard, “Languages of Conflict and the Northern Ireland Troubles,” Journal of Modern History, 83/3 (2011), 544–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Kelly, James, Prelude to Union: Anglo-Irish Politics in the 1780s (Cork, 1992)Google Scholar.

5 Jackson, Alvin, “Ireland's Long Nineteenth Century of Union,” Journal of Modern History, 86/1 (2014), 124–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 These developments are extensively discussed in Schroeder, Paul W., The Transformation of European Politics, 1763–1848 (Oxford, 1994)Google Scholar. Charles Tilly observes of this period that “new states came increasingly to form as consequences of wars among established members of the state system and of the negotiations which ended those wars.” Tilly, Charles, “Reflections on the History of European State-Making,” in Tilly, ed., The Formation of National States in Western Europe (Princeton, 1975), 3–83Google Scholar, at 46. For a brief attempt to place the Irish Acts of Union in this broader context see Livesey, James, “Acts of Union and Disunion: The Union in Atlantic and European Context,” in Whelan, Kevin and Keogh, Daire, eds., Acts of Union: The Causes, Contexts and Consequences of the Act of Union (Dublin, 2001), 95–105Google Scholar.

7 Pitts, Jennifer, “Political Theory and Empire,” Annual Review of Political Science, 13 (2010), 211–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 Woolf, Stuart, “The Construction of a European World-View in the Revolutionary–Napoleonic Years,” Past and Present, 137 (1992), 72–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the impact of the French Revolution on international law and geopolitics, Belissa, Marc, Repenser l’ordre européen 1795–1802: De la société des rois aux droits des nations (Paris, 2006)Google Scholar.

9 On “imperial liberalism” in Britain and France see Pitts, Jennifer, A Turn to Empire: the Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France (Princeton, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On “modern” republicanism see inter alia Fontana, Biancamaria, ed., The Invention of the Modern Republic (Cambridge, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hont, Istvan, Jealousy of Trade: International Competition and the Nation-State in Historical Perspective (Cambridge, MA, 2005), 447–52Google Scholar; Sonenscher, Michael, “The Nation's Debt and the Birth of the Modern Republic: The French Fiscal Deficit and the Politics of the Revolution of 1789 (Part 1),” History of Political Thought, 18/1 (1997), 64–103Google Scholar.

10 Kant, Immanuel, “Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch” (1795), in Kant, Political Writings, ed. H. S. Reiss, trans. Nesbitt, H. B. (Cambridge, 1991), 93–131Google Scholar. For a characterization of Kant as an “anti-imperialist” see Muthu, Sankar, Enlightenment against Empire (Princeton, 2003), 122–210Google Scholar.

11 Nakhimovsky, Isaac, The Closed Commercial State: Perpetual Peace and Commercial Society from Rousseau to Fichte (Princeton, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Gentz's essays are mentioned in O’Neill, Patrick, Ireland and Germany: A Study in Literary Relations (New York, 1985), 84Google Scholar; and briefly summarized in Bond, M. A., “A German View of Anglo-Irish Relations in 1800,” Eíre–Ireland, 8/1 (1973), 13–21Google Scholar.

13 Kronenbitter, Günther, Wort und Macht: Friedrich Gentz als politischer Schriftsteller (Berlin, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zimmermann, Harro, Friedrich Gentz: Die Erfindung der Realpolitik (Paderborn, 2012)Google Scholar.

14 On Zeitgeschichte see now D’Aprile, Iwan-Michelangelo, Die Erfindung der Zeitgeschichte: Geschichtsschreibung und Journalismus zwischen Aufklärung und Vormärz (Berlin, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 On the Prussian obsession with sovereign decision-making see Simms, Brendan, The Impact of Napoleon: Prussian High Politics, Foreign Policy and the Crisis of the Executive, 1797–1806 (Cambridge, 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 von Gentz, Friedrich, Von dem politischen Zustande von Europa vor und nach der französischen Revoluzion (Berlin, 1801)Google Scholar. On the “Gentz–Hauterive” debate see Forsyth, Murray, “The Old European States-System: Gentz versus Hauterive,” Historical Journal, 23/3 (1980), 521–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rothschild, Emma, “Language and Empire, c.1800,” Historical Research, 78/200 (2005), 208–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nakhimovsky, Isaac, “The ‘Ignominious Fall of the European Commonwealth’: Gentz, Hauterive, and the Armed Neutrality of 1800,” in Stapelbroek, K., ed., Trade and War: The Neutrality of Commerce in the Interstate System (Helsinki, 2011), 177–90Google Scholar.

17 Gentz's allies in this endeavour included the Genevan exile Francis d’Ivernois. For the francophone intellectual context to the debate see Whatmore, Richard, Against War and Empire: Geneva, Britain and France in the Eighteenth Century (Princeton., 2012), 228–70Google Scholar.

18 On Kant's “modern” republicanism see Nakhimovsky, The Closed Commercial State, 22–35.

19 Kant, “On the Common Saying: ‘This May Be True in Theory, but It Does Not Apply in Practice’” (1793), in Kant, Political Writings, 61–93, at 91.

20 Yvonne Podbielski, “Republics, Morals and Peace: Kant's Perpetual Peace in Its Historical Context” (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge, 1996), 226.

21 Kant, “Perpetual Peace,” 104.

22 On the background to Prussian neutrality see Dwyer, Philip, “The Politics of Prussian Neutrality 1795–1805,” German History, 12/3 (1994), 351–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 D’Aprile, Die Erfindung der Zeitgeschichte, 84.

24 Kant, “Perpetual Peace,” 101.

25 Théremin, Charles, Des intérêts des puissances continentales relativement à l’Angleterre (Paris, 1795)Google Scholar. The book's propaganda value is illustrated by its subsequent appearances in German (1795) and Dutch (1796). It seems unlikely that Théremin was familiar with Kant's “Perpetual Peace” essay when he wrote his book, but the text uses arguments outlined in Kant's earlier essays on “Theory and Practice” (1793), in Kant, Political Writings, 87–93, at 90–91; and “Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose” (1784), in ibid., 41–53, at 47–51. On Théremin see Jainchill, Andrew, Reimagining Politics after the Terror: The Republican Origins of French Liberalism (Ithaca, 2008), 115–22Google Scholar.

26 Théremin, Des intérêts des puissances continentales, 4–8.

27 Ibid., 20–21, original emphasis. All translations from French and German are my own, unless otherwise indicated.

28 Ibid., 8.

29 Ibid., 103–9.

30 Ibid., 117–19.

31 Gentz, Friedrich, “Mémoire,” in Historical Manuscripts Commission, Report on the Manuscripts of J. B. Fortescue, Preserved at Dropmore, vol. 6 (London, 1892), 374–6, at 375Google Scholar, original emphasis.

32 Wittichen, Paul, “Das preussische Kabinett und Friedrich von Gentz: Eine Denkschrift aus dem Jahre 1800,” Historische Zeitschrift, 89/1 (1902), 239–73, at 246Google Scholar.

33 Burke, Edmund and Gentz, Friedrich, Betrachtungen über die französische Revolution, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1794), 84–8Google Scholar. Gentz's position is rather curiously summarized in a diagram at 86. See also Green, Jonathan Allen, “Friedrich Gentz's Translation of Burke's Reflections,” Historical Journal, 57/3 (2014), 639–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34 Gentz to Garve, 5 December 1790, in Wittichen, Friedrich Karl, ed., Briefe von und an Friedrich von Gentz, vol. 1 (Munich, 1909), 180–85Google Scholar, at 181–2. Gentz's political economy has recently been discussed in connection with that of his friend Adam Müller and rival Friedrich Buchholz, in D’Aprile, Die Erfindung der Zeitgeschichte, 180–88.

35 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber das Handels-Monopol der Engländer, die wahren Ursachen der Enstehung und die Folgen einer gewaltsamen Vernichtung derselben,” Historisches Journal, 1 (1799), 395–439, at 429–31Google Scholar.

36 Ibid., 403.

37 Ibid., 435.

38 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber den jetzigen Zustand der Finanz-Administration und des Nazional-Reichthums von Großbrittannien,” Historisches Journal, 3 (1799), 1–107, at 14–30Google Scholar.

39 The “sinking fund” had in fact been established as early as 1717, and was merely revived by Pitt. See Brewer, John, The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State (London, 1989), 99–104Google Scholar.

40 Gentz, Friedrich, “Finanz-Administration (Beschluss),” Historisches Journal, 3 (1799), 143–244, at 182–90Google Scholar. While Gentz's prediction that Britain could avoid bankruptcy was borne out by subsequent events, Pitt's sinking fund has generally been regarded by economic historians as a quixotic failure: Hilton, Boyd, A Mad, Bad, and Dangerous People? England 1783–1846 (Oxford, 2006), 115–16Google Scholar. On Hume's fears about Britain's debt see Hont, Jealousy of Trade, 325–54.

41 Gentz, “Finanz-Administration (Beschluss),” 182.

42 Gentz, Friedrich, “Darstellung und Vergleichung einiger politischen Constitutions-Systeme die von dem Grundsatze der Theilung der Macht ausgehen,” Neue Deutsche Monatsschrift, 3 (1795), 81–157, at 82Google Scholar.

43 Ibid., 87–8, 118.

44 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber die Natur and und den Werth der gemischten Staatsverfassungen,” Historisches Journal, 1 (1799), 487–98, at 494Google Scholar.

45 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber die neue Französische Constituzion (Beschluss),” Historisches Journal, 1 (1800), 317–71, at 336Google Scholar.

46 Ibid., 356.

47 Gentz, Friedrich, Ueber den Ursprung und Charakter des Krieges gegen die Französische Revoluzion (Berlin, 1801), 186–7Google Scholar.

48 Gentz, “Theilung der Macht,” 151–7.

49 Whatmore, Richard, “Etienne Dumont, the British Constitution, and the French revolution,” Historical Journal, 50/1 (2007), 23–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tillet, Edouard, La constitution anglaise: Un modèle politique et institutionnel dans la Frances des Lumières (Aix-en-Provence, 2007)Google Scholar; McDaniel, Iain, “Jean-Louis Delolme and the Political Science of the English Empire,” Historical Journal, 55/1 (2012), 21–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

50 Gentz, “Ueber die Natur and und den Werth der gemischten Staatsverfassungen,” 497–8.

51 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” Historisches Journal, 3 (1800), 711–90, at 788 nGoogle Scholar.

52 Bevilacqua, Alexander, “Conceiving the Republic of Mankind: The Political Thought of Anacharsis Cloots,” History of European Ideas, 38/4 (2012), 550–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 Kant, “Perpetual Peace,” 105.

54 On St Pierre see Podbielski, “Republics, Morals and Peace,” 23–8. On the German debate see Burgdorf, Wolfgang, “Imperial Reform and Visions of a European Constitution in Germany around 1800,” History of European Ideas, 19/1–3 (1994), 401–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Gentz was later to revise this view on his entry into Habsburg service. For his condemnation of Napoleon's dissolution of the empire see Gentz, Friedrich, Fragments upon the Balance of Power in Europe (London, 1806)Google Scholar.

56 For Gentz's views on a “federal” constitution for Europe see Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 765–7. It is notable that, in spite of his endorsement of the “origins and principles” of the American Revolution, Gentz extended his pessimism about federal constitutions to that of the United States.

57 Ibid., 775. On Samuel von Pufendorf's conception of “negative” community as a non-contractual form of coexistence under the law of nature see Hont, Jealousy of Trade, 178.

58 Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 775–7.

59 Nakhimovsky, The Closed Commercial State.

60 Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 747.

61 Ibid., 762–3.

62 Ibid., 785–6.

63 Ibid., 763.

64 Gentz, Friedrich, “Rezension: Ueber den neuren politischen Zustand und die Verhältnisse der europäsichen Staaten usw. Aus den hinterlassenen Papieren des engl. Parlaments-Redners Burke,” Minerva, 1 (1798), 5–10, at 7Google Scholar.

65 Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 737 n.

66 Dominique Dufour de Pradt, La Prusse et sa neutralité (1800), vi–viii, 149–67. On the “Grand Design” see Sonenscher, Michael, Before the Deluge: Public Debt, Inequality, and the Intellectual Origins of the French Revolution (Princeton, 2007), 108–21Google Scholar.

67 Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 739.

68 Ibid., 732–4.

69 Ibid., 735.

70 Ibid., 789.

71 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung zwischen Großbrittannien und Irrland (Beschluss),” Historisches Journal, 3 (1800), 615–710, at 701Google Scholar.

72 Théremin, Des intérêts des puissances continentales, 70–71; Riem, Andreas, Reise durch England, in verschiedener, besonders politischer Hinsicht, vol. 1 (Leipzig, 1798), 476–7Google Scholar.

73 O’Neill, Ireland and Germany, 78–83.

74 Krünitz, Johann Georg, “Irrland,” in Oeconomische Encyclopädie, oder allgemeines System der Staats- Stadt- Haus- und Landwirthschaft, in alphabetischer Ordnung, vol. 30 (Berlin, 1784), 742–63, at 758–9Google Scholar.

75 Gentz, Friedrich, “Plan zu einer engern Vereinigung zwischen Großbrittannien und Irrland,” Historisches Journal, 1 (1799), 439–86, at 439Google Scholar.

76 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung zwischen Großbrittannien und Irrland,” Historisches Journal, 4 (1800), 500–614, at 604–14Google Scholar.

77 Ibid., 564–5.

78 Gawlick, Günthar and Kreimendahl, Lothar, Hume in der deutschen Aufklärung: Umrisse einer Rezeptionsgeschichte (Stuttgart–Bad Cannstatt, 1987)Google Scholar; Ludwig, Roland, Die Rezeption der Englischen Revolution im deutschen politischen Denken und in der deutschen Historiographie im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 2003)Google Scholar.

79 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 604.

80 Leland, Thomas, The History of Ireland, from the Invasion of Henry II, with a Preliminary Discourse, on the Ancient State of that Kingdom, vol. 1 (Cork, 1775), 329–33Google Scholar; Jean-Delolme, Louis, The British Empire in Europe, Part the First (Dublin, 1787), 40–44Google Scholar; Burke, Edmund, “Letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe” (1792), in The Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, ed. Langford, P., vol. 9 (Oxford, 1991), 594–640, at 615–16Google Scholar.

81 Friedrich Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 540–41.

82 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 544.

83 Ibid., 560. Compare Duigenan, Patrick, A Fair Representation of the Present Political State of Ireland (Dublin, 1800), 124–5Google Scholar.

84 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 560.

85 Ibid., 563.

86 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss),” 688–9.

87 Duigenan, Patrick, An Answer to the Address of Henry Grattan (Dublin, 1798)Google Scholar; Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss)”, 675–88.

88 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss),” 681–5.

89 For a more nuanced view of the political aspirations of the United Irishmen see most recently Gillen, Ultan, “Constructing Democratic Thought in Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1775–1800,” in Innes, Joanna and Philp, Mark, eds., Re-imagining Democracy in the Age of Revolutions: America, France, Britain and Ireland, 1750–1850 (Oxford, 2013), 149–62Google Scholar.

90 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss),” 696–7.

91 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber den Einfluß der Entdeckung von Amerika auf den Wohlstand und die Cultur des menschlichen Geschlechts,” Neue Deutsche Monatsschrift, 2 (1795), 269–319Google Scholar.

92 Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 734–5.

93 Ibid., 731.

94 Tschirch, Otto, Geschichte der offentlichen Meinung in Preussen: Vom Baseler Frieden bis zum Zusammenbruch des Staates, vol. 1 (Weimar, 1933), 155–81Google Scholar.

95 Zimmermann, Friedrich Gentz, 70, 157.

96 Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 731.

97 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss),” 638.

98 Tucker, Josiah and Clarke, Thomas Brooke, Union or Separation (London, 1799)Google Scholar; Pitt, William, Speech of the Right Honourable William Pitt, in the House of Commons, Thursday January 31st 1799 (London, 1799), 46–52Google Scholar.

99 Hont, Istvan, “The ‘Rich Country–Poor Country’ Debate Revisited: The Irish Origins and French Reception of the Hume Paradox,” in Wennerlind, C. and Schabas, M., eds., David Hume's Political Economy (London, 2008), 243–323, at 298–304Google Scholar.

100 Douglas, Sylvester, Speech of the Right Honourable Sylvester Douglas, Relative to a Union with Ireland (London, 1799), 32Google Scholar. Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” discusses Douglas's speech at 606.

101 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss),” 643–4.

102 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 537–8.

103 Geoghegan, The Irish Act of Union, 26–41; Bew, John, Castlereagh: Enlightenment, War and Tyranny (London, 2011), 127–9Google Scholar.

104 Gentz, “Staatswissenschaft,” 308, Gentz, Friedrich, “Beitrage zur Berichtigung einiger Ideen der allgemeinen Staatswissenschaft,” Historisches Journal, 3 (1799), 277–313Google Scholar, at 308.

105 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 597.

106 Duigenan, A Fair Representation, 194–6.

107 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 596–7.

108 Gentz, Friedrich, “Ueber die politische Gleichheit,” Historisches Journal, 1 (1800), 1–51, at 7–12Google Scholar.

109 Ibid., 49–51.

110 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 587.

111 Ibid., 581.

112 Wittichen, “Das preussische Kabinett und Friedrich von Gentz,” 249.

113 Gentz, “Theilung der Macht,” 125–7.

114 Wittichen, “Das preussische Kabinett und Friedrich von Gentz,” 269.

115 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss),” 615–23.

116 Hoppen, K. Theodore, “An Incorporating Union? British Politicians and Ireland 1800–1830,” English Historical Review, 123/501 (2008), 328–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

117 Cooke, Edward, Arguments for and against an union, between Great Britain and Ireland, Considered (London, 1798), 12Google Scholar; Pitt, Speech, 19–20.

118 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 516–17.

119 Ibid., 520–21.

120 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung (Beschluss),” 699.

121 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 525.

122 Zimmermann, Friedrich Gentz, 113–18.

123 Gentz, Friedrich, Seiner Königliche Majestät Friedrich Wilhelm dem III (Berlin, 1797), 30Google Scholar. Gentz's tolerance did not extend to writings that suggested active disobedience to state authority: Wittichen, “Das preussische Kabinett und Friedrich von Gentz,” 263.

124 Gentz, “Ueber die Final-Vereinigung,” 504.

125 Ibid., 503.

126 Gentz, “Staatswissenschaft,” 279–80.

127 Kant, “Theory and Practice,” 79.

128 Ibid., 84–5.

129 On Kantian public opinion as a form of continuous representation see Maliks, Reidar, “Acting through Others: Kant and the Exercise View of Representation,” Public Reason, 1/1 (2009), 9–26Google Scholar.

130 Gentz, “Ueber die Natur and und den Werth der gemischten Staatsverfassungen,” 490.

131 Nakhimovsky, The Closed Commercial State, 63–98.

132 Gentz, “Ueber den ewigen Frieden,” 787.

133 Whatmore, Against War and Empire.

134 Gentz, Friedrich, On the State of Europe before and after the French Revolution (London, 1802), 82–3Google Scholar; Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, “Considerations on the Government of Poland” (1772), in Rousseau, The Social Contract and other Later Political Writings, ed. Gourevitch, Victor (Cambridge, 1997), 177–261Google Scholar.

135 Gentz, “Plan zu einer engern Vereinigung,” 482.

136 Kidd, Colin, Union and Unionisms: Political Thought in Scotland, 1500–2000 (Cambridge, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Robertson, John, ed., A Union for Empire: Political Thought and the British Union of 1707 (Cambridge, 1995)Google Scholar.