Readers' letters: No surprise to see ‘mystery’ of Picts solved

It is not a surprise that the Picts have been found to be a long-established people in Scotland (Scotsman, 28 April).

The Picts, or “Picti” (the name given to them by the Romans means “painted people”), or “Wærteras”, as they were also called in Old English, spoke a language which was not easily understood by speakers of the Irish form of Gaelic, which explains why St Columba had to find an interpreter to communicate with them. This would seem to indicate that they had no close linguistic relationship.

However, not much later than Columba's death, around 600AD, the Gododdin, Brythonic warriors of south-east, present-day Scotland feasted at the fortress of Din-Eidyn (Edinburgh) for a year before riding south to do battle with the Angles at Catraeth (possibly Catterick), where almost all the Gododdin perished. During their feasting, they were joined by other warriors from Pictland and we are told this by Aneirin, who wrote Y Gododdin, recounting the story and bequeathing us the earliest work of literature from Great Britain.

It would seem more likely than not to expect that neighbouring tribes would speak languages in which many words were cognates (having a common origin), as is the case with modern English and Dutch, for example. It would be difficult to launch a military operation unless plans and tactics could be discussed in days when there was little or no education in other languages.

One of four stones with Pictish carvings in the village of Aberlemno, near Forfar

Unfortunately, we have only some Ogham script carved into stones to tell us about Pictish and it is enigmatic, at best. Even so, a similarity to Cumbric – and the associated genetic ties between the tribes – would seem to be a strong likelihood.

Andrew HN Gray, Edinburgh

Case closed

Branislav Sudjic (Letters, 28 April) suggests reverting to the proven/not proven verdict as it is “less stressful” for complainers. A not guilty verdict implies that the complainer is lying. That’s a good point.

Two years ago I asked if Scotland wanted to be just a clone of England or did it want to keep its justice system independent and distinct. As some have pointed out, no-one except the accused knows whether or not they are guilty. Sometimes not even the accused.

Consequently, the old Scottish system of proven/not proven was philosophically correct. To get a conviction, the prosecution has to prove its case. Lawyers seem to lean towards returning to it. That at least would show that Scotland is not just a copy of England and can be more rational in its verdicts. The public should get used to what the verdicts actually mean. So keep “not proven”, add “proven” and dump the guilty/not guilty verdicts.

Steuart Campbell, Edinburgh

Poor Humza

You know you are in trouble as a political leader when people from the “other side” start to sympathise with your predicament, but that is how I feel about Humza Yousaf. I feel a bit sorry for him. Having seen various SNP politicians and commentators trying to defend their position over the last week or so, I have come to the conclusion that they don’t seem to have anyone who can speak with either authority or humility, no-one competent to delegate to, no-one who seems to know what they are doing.

There is a reason for this, of course. Too many of them were chosen for their willingness to follow the previous leader, and not to question them under any circumstances. A lot of them had to sign a contract to that effect. That kind of approach favours people who can appear to function well when the wind is blowing in their favour, but creates a problem when the boat hits a rock and the captain decides to jump ship first.

It doesn’t then matter how many of you there are, if no-one knows what is happening, or what the objective now is, or indeed if you will have a role in the party going forwards now at all. They are a single-issue party, without a road map, and now without a purpose. The years of pretence have come to an end.

And for the first time since they came to power, we even have the Scottish political press asking them serious questions. You know you are in trouble when even they decide to put you on the spot, unable to ignore the blindingly obvious any longer. Things must be bad indeed. Poor Humza.

Victor Clements, Aberfeldy, Perth & Kinross

Tactical voting

Your Editorial (28 April) commenting on the potential outcomes of tactical voting makes some good points. However where I must disagree is where you comment on the distortion of “the will of the people”.

When one casts one’s vote in whatever direction, it becomes “the will of the individual”. Should I decide, as an individual, that a tactical vote could result in the removal of this hapless and shameful cabal of incompetents known as the SNP then so be it. I have only myself to blame as to the consequences of where my X goes on the ballot paper and that is democracy.

Richard Allison, Edinburgh

Monarchy rules

While respecting each to their own on their views of the monarch, be careful of what you wish for. Many republican countries have virtual dictatorships with people running for office with little or no experience.

I seem to remember that Ronald Reagan’s wife completely refurbished the White House at the beginning of his term of office. King Charles was advocating the inevitable trouble with the environment in the 70s and is well known for his thrifty way of life. He is also a non-political head of state.

I dread to think for whom the good people of Scotland would vote as their head of state, given the opportunity.

Jane Drysdale, Edinburgh

Royal reset

If Tim Flinn (Letters, 26 April) had read my letter carefully he would have noted that the premise of my argument was that the monarchy needs to reform to stay relevant.

I did not express a view against the coronation nor support an elected head of state but until the monarchy reforms for the better it will wither and die. Better a strong democratically elected head of state than a sham monarchy. I also disagree that it is easier to remove a monarch with over a thousand years of succession than a fixed-term US president.

Neil Anderson, Edinburgh

Magic money pot

I am beginning to wonder how educational standards have slumped when I see how “political education” seems to have left a void in many modern minds.

Politicians are elected by us to carry out a mandate involving the spending of our money according to specific criteria – set out in the party’s mandate. We are a democracy and so we all agree that we will abide by the mandate of the party that wins the most votes (for five years). The money available to spend is our money (there is no magic pot other than contributed through tax levels). We want the ‘anonymous’ government to provide wherever our level of living is threatened – bringing us back from abroad, where we went to earn big money, if suddenly it is not so attractive, or protecting our standard of living standard, if suddenly world events produce “problems”.

Life has its ups and downs and we cannot always get everything we want “magically”: there is a price to pay – resources to be found. In the 1970s there was no anticipated annual pay award; there was no magic hand-out when mortgages rose to 15 per cent-plus. There was, however, a community spirit that saw the “haves” in a community feel an obligation to assist the “have-nots”.

We also had politicians who entered politics to serve and not simply make a career choice and civil servants who saw their job as making things work and not shaping their own agenda. Demonstrations were just that – marches to draw attention to issues, and not campaigns to cause maximum disruption to the general public.

We also had professions held in the highest regard – teachers, lawyers, doctors, who gave of their talents to meet our needs and not hold the country to ransom to further their needs.

James Watson, Dunbar, East Lothian

Devolution

With regard to all the talk of Holyrood’s powers being curtailed, may I just add this. I voted again devolution, in the same way and for the same reasons as Tam Dalyell. I had a good idea it would all end in tears and act merely as a catalyst for the worst elements of nationalism in Scotland to come to the fore. And so it proved. But, like it or not, I accept it was implemented by a majority of the people.

The problem is, devolution is a fine theory. But when nationalists become involved, all bets are off. They are one-issue obsessed and harmful to our country, and they used and are using devolution not to better the country, clearly much the opposite, but simply to pursue their obsession. As nationalists have done wherever in the world they have gained control.

Devolution with no SNP would work just fine.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh

Sewage dumps

Given the SNP/Greens penchant for pursuing green issues to the detriment of almost everything else, it's disturbing to learn that in excess of 400 sewage dumps took place near some of the country's best beaches last year (Scotsman, 28 April).

Why has the Scottish Government allowed this to happen? The First Minister may have pledged to raise the issue with Scottish Water but surely the likes of Scottish Water and SEPA are not doing their jobs properly in failing to protect the environment and the people who use these beautiful beaches? It seems ministers are quite happy to sit in their ivory towers and let quangos have their way without holding them to account.

Bob MacDougall, Kippen, Stirling

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line - be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.

Subscribe

Subscribe at www.scotsman.com/subscriptions