Historical truths

It is always a pleasure to engage with Bill McLean in matters relating to cabbages and kings. However, he is expressing my views (Letters, 12 April) rather too flexibly to correlate with the facts as I stated them.

Mr McLean refers to “the bribery of Scottish notables” in the Union of 1707, which is a common theme of political activists of a certain hue.

However, Professor TC Smout, (Emeritus Professor of Scottish History at St Andrews University) says, of this point of bribery, “it never has been” proved.

I suggest that his academic viewpoint carries rather more weight than that of the popular history previously quoted by Mr McLean.

I did not refer to the American Revolution as a stunt, but to two events leading up to it which were skilfully managed as anti-British propaganda; namely the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party.

Both were stage-managed by special interest groups, but are popularly (and probably mistakenly) viewed as having been expressions of general American dislike of British rule. This misinterpretation led, in part, to the revolution.

My point was that it is invalid to judge historical events out of context.

However, that does not mean that current historians cannot establish that events in the past have not been misrepresented, rather as the two I cite have often been – and continue to be – in the public mind.

The old joke about a request from the front in the First World War being sent back by word of mouth, “Send reinforcements! We’re going to advance” reaching HQ as, “Send three and fourpence. We’re going to a dance” illustrates my point.

The message that arrived bears no resemblance to the one that was initially sent.

That is why historical research is so important, as a means of establishing whatever truth(s) can be uncovered – “to unmask falsehood, and bring truth to light”. It does not invalidate quotations from the past, however.

Andrew HN Gray

Craiglea Drive

Edinburgh