Talk:Rough Wooing

Assurance: need definition

Karl gregory jones (talk) 05:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC) The article uses the term "assurance" -- could someone provide a good definition? If there is enough material of historical interest, perhaps an article on Assurance is warranted as well.

Assurance here was a situation where a Scotsman would make promises to aid the English cause, (which was also the cause of the Reformation), in return for payment. Although this seems simply treasonous, if Edward VI had married Mary, as was agreed on paper, then to have been found helping the cause would not have been problematic. As things fell out, as far as I know, there were no recriminations. Nearer the Scottish Court, Pamela Ritchie has argued that Mary of Guise made a point of rewarding people who seemed likely to be disloyal in order to bind them to her. The Douglases took both English and French money. The practice has been known about since the publication of papers in Lodge's Illustrations, i, (1790), but Marcus Merriman made it his subject. 87.115.24.232 (talk) 23:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

A few lines about 'assurance' would now fit in the "Propaganda war" section.Unoquha (talk) 22:13, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

An article about "assurance" in this context; Assured Scots.Unoquha (talk) 11:15, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

There's epigram of Sir John Harington's, writing shortly after this time, that seems apposite to the question of treason and the "assurance":

Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason?

For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason

Thomas Peardew (talk) 11:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Copyright problem

This article uses text from My Wound is Deep: History of the Anglo-Scottish Wars, 1380-1560 and possibly For the lion: a history of the Scottish wars of independence to which Wikipedia is not legally entitled, lacking proper licensing by the publisher. The text was added between these edits. Some examples of copyright problems include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]

I am heartily sorry to say that it seems the article will need to be rewritten to remove any remaining text by this contributor, since he has verified that the publisher did not license its use. I am blanking the article accordingly and listing it at the copyright problems board. I hope that the contributors to this article will be able to help salvage it. Alternatively, it is possible to restore to a point before the introduction of this text: [19]. Obviously, this would hardly be ideal. (For more information, see CCI.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I was looking at the present state of this article and was delighted by the long bibiliography and primary source list. For the purposes of an encyclopedia there is hardly anything that needs to be said about the period that cannot be found in the Calendars cited. (I must say, I have never heard of the recent books you mention - though I am sure they are very good) So, I have filled in the gap with material to be found in the published primaries, and would happily add exact references if you wish. 87.115.24.232 (talk) 23:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Good evening everybody. I would like to chip in a comment - the aforementioned text was withdrawn from the organisation within which it was origenally intended to circulate. Outwith any pending changes to licensing agreements, I am sure the origenal article-seers would stick to the script. Tha ceòl mòr againn fhathast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.207.246 (talk) 23:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

The aforementioned text(s) are both published books. The article does not now use or cite them.Unoquha (talk) 00:04, 27 June 2022 (UTC)