JUST off the Royal Mile, close to where the Scottish Parliament stands today, lies a hidden part of Scotland’s history.
A small building, now belonging to the University of Edinburgh, played a vital role in deciding the future of Scotland.
This is where the Act of Union, the treaty bringing Scotland and England under the kingdom of Great Britain, was supposedly signed in 1707.
The National gained exclusive access to the building, which is currently being used as storage.
The history of the Summer House
The Summer House, which is now part of the University of Edinburgh’s Moray House School of Education and Sport, was built sometime in the latter half of the 17th century.
Serving as a literal summer house, in the 19th century it was then converted into a conservatory, possibly in order to grow oranges or vines, and then a sewing room.
READ MORE: Missing piece of Stone of Destiny 'is in cupboard at SNP HQ', activist says
The location of the building appears to have moved over time, with various features being added including new doors and shutters, which are visible today.
In 1707, the Earl of Seafield had a tenancy here - he was Lord Chancellor of Scotland, and alongside the Duke of Queensbury was tasked with taking the Act of Union through the Scottish Parliament.
The Act passed comfortably by 110 votes to 67 - with 100 MPs absent from the vote - although it was highly unpopular with the ordinary Scot.
‘No union. No union.’
Getting the Scottish public to accept the Act would be a difficult task.
Virtually all print discourse in Scotland during the period of 1699-1706 spoke against incorporating the union, and the Scottish Parliament did not receive any petitions in favour of the union.
Sir George Lockhart of Carnwath, the only Scottish negotiator to oppose the union, noted "the whole nation appears against [it]".
Another negotiator, Sir John Clerk of Penicuik, who was an ardent unionist, observed it was "contrary to the inclinations of at least three-fourths of the Kingdom".
The Act was so unpopular that it was impossible to sign on the Royal Mile, as was first intended, because protestors had blocked the way.
This is where Summer House comes into the story - a quaint, glorified garden shed no bigger than seven feet squared. Today, you would have no idea it existed unless you were really looking for it.
More than 300 years on, the house is being used to store other old, forgotten bits and pieces of history - including a rusted sundial, and two stone animals which were removed at the beginning of the 20th century to be preserved.
Writing in 1880, James Grant attested the involvement of the Summer House in the signing of the Act of Union:
“There long remained the old stone summer house … wherein after a flight from the Union Cellar many of the signatures were affixed to the Act of Union, while the cries of the exasperated mob rang in the streets without barred gates. ‘No Union. No Union.’
The Scottish people’s cry against the possibility of a union is almost bittersweet, as the call for independence continues to grow.
Did the Union really come into existence in a shed?
Historians dispute whether or not the signing of the Act actually took place in Summer House - evidence is largely indirect, and other theories have emerged regarding where this took place.
The Union Cellar that James Grant refers to is often attributed to 177 High Street, opposite Hunter’s Square, where the Italian chain Bella Italia’s Royal Mile restaurant now stands.
READ MORE: Pat Kane - Is Outlander just keeping Scotland wrapped in Tartan mist and myth?
Contemporary publisher Robert Chambers wrote in The History of Edinburgh that the Act was signed in the cellar of the Royal Mile then-townhouse to avoid coming into contact with anyone who objected to the union.
Chambers wrote:
“The noblemen whose signatures had not been procured, then met under cloud of night, and put their names to the detested contract, after which they all immediately decamped for London, before the people were stirring in the morning, when they might have been discovered and prevented.”
Yet if Grant’s account is correct, then the signatories fled from Union Cellar to Summer House, where they then signed the Act.
It wasn’t even necessary for the Act to have signatures - all it needed was the Royal Assent, which was given by the Duke of Queensbury who touched the Act with the royal sceptre, signifying the sovereign’s approval of acts of the Scottish Parliament.
It was the very secrecy of the signing of the Act that contributed to the lack of direct evidence - we may never know the truth.
Regardless, historians do not entirely reject the idea that some signatures may have been gathered in the Summer House.
The future of the Union
It is perhaps ironic that the Act of Union may - or may not have - been signed in what appears now to be an abandoned shed.
When we visited the building, those working there were slightly perplexed at our interest in a place that had clearly been forgotten.
Yet no matter where the Act of Union was signed, the circumstances remain; the Scottish people did not want to enter a union with England.
Three centuries later, as we look forward to Scotland’s future, perhaps it is time to start thinking about the most fitting place to sign an Act of Independence.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel