Straying a little off topic, I found this quote included above interesting:
It is not until 2004 that the republican “Declaration of Calton Hill” — a spirited call for “an independent Scottish Republic built on the principles of liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity”
Isn’t there some contradiction between “liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity” ? Doesn’t liberty mean that you’re free not to believe in any of the others ? Can you really have both diversity and solidarity ? But it’s great buzzword bingo stuff.
Definitely “Bingo suff” and also a contradiction in terms.
Peter B
1 year ago
Straying a little off topic, I found this quote included above interesting:
It is not until 2004 that the republican “Declaration of Calton Hill” — a spirited call for “an independent Scottish Republic built on the principles of liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity”
Isn’t there some contradiction between “liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity” ? Doesn’t liberty mean that you’re free not to believe in any of the others ? Can you really have both diversity and solidarity ? But it’s great buzzword bingo stuff.
Margaret Donaldson
1 year ago
A friend of mine whom I would never have thought was a royalist, has nothing but praise for King Charles. He puts his money where his mouth is. Asked to buy a crumbling but locally important house in Lanark, (Probably wrong but south of Glasgow), he not only bought it but turned it into a training college for traditional building skills and crafts. Now its graduates work all over Scotland.
After the disastrous floods on the Dee several years ago, Charles oversaw and funded the opening of a very profitable eating place in Ballater, profits from which went back into the community. The food was good too!
Princess Anne is very highly regarded in agricultural circles and regularly visits shows in the NE where folk have learned not to underestimate the depth of her knowledge.
In short, the Royals in Scotland are highly regarded by groups of people whom nobody ever asks but who know their merits.
As for the garden parties at Holyrood, people love them! And they love seeing the Royals. AND the tea is excellent!
Finally, who would WANT to stay in Holyrood Palace for longer than they had to?
A friend of mine whom I would never have thought was a royalist, has nothing but praise for King Charles. He puts his money where his mouth is. Asked to buy a crumbling but locally important house in Lanark, (Probably wrong but south of Glasgow), he not only bought it but turned it into a training college for traditional building skills and crafts. Now its graduates work all over Scotland.
After the disastrous floods on the Dee several years ago, Charles oversaw and funded the opening of a very profitable eating place in Ballater, profits from which went back into the community. The food was good too!
Princess Anne is very highly regarded in agricultural circles and regularly visits shows in the NE where folk have learned not to underestimate the depth of her knowledge.
In short, the Royals in Scotland are highly regarded by groups of people whom nobody ever asks but who know their merits.
As for the garden parties at Holyrood, people love them! And they love seeing the Royals. AND the tea is excellent!
Finally, who would WANT to stay in Holyrood Palace for longer than they had to?
Vincent R
1 year ago
I’ve always assumed that the Scot Nats reticence about embracing republicanism is simply to do with not wanting to unnecessarily alienate royalists in their midst, and part of their project to make independence seem less daunting.
Similarly, of course, the Irish sectarian division runs deep in Scotland also. The last thing the SNP would want to do would be to be seen as too close to their nationalist counterparts in Sinn Fein, so embracing the monarchy is a handy, and obvious way, of distancing themselves from other, more contentious, brands of Celtic nationalism.
If and when independence actually happens of course, then all bets would be off.
I think you’re probably right.
Republicanism is also, as the author alludes, just about the sole issue the SNP would have available to pursue if independence was secured. In every other respect, independence would signal the end of its raison d’etre.
Yes, a poll of people who live in Scotland is utterly different from a poll of Scots (or ‘scotch’ as Rabbie Burns and charlie stanhope calls them). Your last sentence is spot-on.
When did the taboo about referring to the Scotch start. The term is used without equivocation by both Sir Walter Scott and R.L. Stevenson. Did it start with Kenneth McKellar and Heather Mixture. It must be one of the earliest examples of the ‘banning’ of a non-obscene word – now the dictionary is full of them.
Thank you for this comment–I wondered that also. My American father always used the term “Scotch”, and until recent years I had no idea anyone considered it incorrect. I think he was using the term as he had heard his “Scotch” ancestors use it, so the change must have occurred in the latter half of the 20th century (?)
Thank you for this comment–I wondered that also. My American father always used the term “Scotch”, and until recent years I had no idea anyone considered it incorrect. I think he was using the term as he had heard his “Scotch” ancestors use it, so the change must have occurred in the latter half of the 20th century (?)
When did the taboo about referring to the Scotch start. The term is used without equivocation by both Sir Walter Scott and R.L. Stevenson. Did it start with Kenneth McKellar and Heather Mixture. It must be one of the earliest examples of the ‘banning’ of a non-obscene word – now the dictionary is full of them.
I think you’re probably right.
Republicanism is also, as the author alludes, just about the sole issue the SNP would have available to pursue if independence was secured. In every other respect, independence would signal the end of its raison d’etre.
Yes, a poll of people who live in Scotland is utterly different from a poll of Scots (or ‘scotch’ as Rabbie Burns and charlie stanhope calls them). Your last sentence is spot-on.
Vincent R
1 year ago
I’ve always assumed that the Scot Nats reticence about embracing republicanism is simply to do with not wanting to unnecessarily alienate royalists in their midst, and part of their project to make independence seem less daunting.
Similarly, of course, the Irish sectarian division runs deep in Scotland also. The last thing the SNP would want to do would be to be seen as too close to their nationalist counterparts in Sinn Fein, so embracing the monarchy is a handy, and obvious way, of distancing themselves from other, more contentious, brands of Celtic nationalism.
If and when independence actually happens of course, then all bets would be off.
Phil Rees
1 year ago
Whenever I see Charles in his Scottish fancy dress outfit, complete with a dirk in his sock, I am struck by how ridiculous he looks, as did his father before him. It’s as though they could never dare set foot in Scotland without that Walter Scott invented garb for fear they might insult the Scots. I constantly wonder what Scots make of it.
Ridiculous? I think he looks quite nice in a kilt and jacket.
Honestly, the Royal attachment to Scottish dress is quite a good advertisement for Scotland. As a tourist to Scotland, all the heathered wools and the tartan cloth catch my eye and bring me back to time spent in actual fields of heather and other spectacular areas of nature there.
I have thought often of Scotland since the Queen’s passing, and think of when I can make another visit.
I can imagine that not all Scots want to be represented by the Highlands and could feel sensitive on that issue and on others. Certainly there are those who like to have a grumble.
Whatever. To steal a line I heard on Gutfeld (American late night comedian) tonight, I like the Scots. Especially their tape.
It’s not a “dirk in his sock”, but a skean dhu in his stocking. A dirk is much larger, worn on a waist belt and can contain a small knife and fork as well. Other traditional weapons are the highland broadsword, often wrongly called a claymore, which is carried by officers in Scottish regiments, and the double-handed sword, the claymore (from the Gaelic for big sword) – think Braveheart.
As a scot I don’t like to see english wearing a tartan unless they are decended from a Scottish clan, which probably very few are. Traditionally, those wearing a tartan kilt should be descended from the appropriate clan. Although I have a lot of respect for King Charles, his wearing of a variation on the Royal Stewart tartan or other of his choice is less than genuine. Generic and modern tartans may be fine for tourists but that’s about it. I’m almost ashamed to say I haven’t worn a kilt since I was eight years old and probably never will again, although I do have a pair of plus fours in the MacLean of Duart Hunting tartan for playing hickory golf , where the dress tartan is possibly the most beautiful of them all.
So he’s 1/4th Scot. Is this like “Native Americans”? (I prefer David Reich’s “Original Pioneers”, but nobody would know what I was talking about). Most tribes consider anyone with 1/8th Indian ancestry to be Indian. And if their tribal rolls are getting thinned, they sometimes go to 1/16th. Kind of like a membership drive.
I don’t believe that the Bowes-Lyon or Cavendish-Bentnick families have a clan tartan. She was born in London as was her father. He may have had Scottish titles and been a landowner but I doubt he was through and through Scottish? I’m no nationalist and my father was english, enlisted in the RN during the WW2, whom I’m very proud of, but clans and tartans are basically Highland heritage.
So he’s 1/4th Scot. Is this like “Native Americans”? (I prefer David Reich’s “Original Pioneers”, but nobody would know what I was talking about). Most tribes consider anyone with 1/8th Indian ancestry to be Indian. And if their tribal rolls are getting thinned, they sometimes go to 1/16th. Kind of like a membership drive.
I don’t believe that the Bowes-Lyon or Cavendish-Bentnick families have a clan tartan. She was born in London as was her father. He may have had Scottish titles and been a landowner but I doubt he was through and through Scottish? I’m no nationalist and my father was english, enlisted in the RN during the WW2, whom I’m very proud of, but clans and tartans are basically Highland heritage.
Ridiculous? I think he looks quite nice in a kilt and jacket.
Honestly, the Royal attachment to Scottish dress is quite a good advertisement for Scotland. As a tourist to Scotland, all the heathered wools and the tartan cloth catch my eye and bring me back to time spent in actual fields of heather and other spectacular areas of nature there.
I have thought often of Scotland since the Queen’s passing, and think of when I can make another visit.
I can imagine that not all Scots want to be represented by the Highlands and could feel sensitive on that issue and on others. Certainly there are those who like to have a grumble.
Whatever. To steal a line I heard on Gutfeld (American late night comedian) tonight, I like the Scots. Especially their tape.
It’s not a “dirk in his sock”, but a skean dhu in his stocking. A dirk is much larger, worn on a waist belt and can contain a small knife and fork as well. Other traditional weapons are the highland broadsword, often wrongly called a claymore, which is carried by officers in Scottish regiments, and the double-handed sword, the claymore (from the Gaelic for big sword) – think Braveheart.
As a scot I don’t like to see english wearing a tartan unless they are decended from a Scottish clan, which probably very few are. Traditionally, those wearing a tartan kilt should be descended from the appropriate clan. Although I have a lot of respect for King Charles, his wearing of a variation on the Royal Stewart tartan or other of his choice is less than genuine. Generic and modern tartans may be fine for tourists but that’s about it. I’m almost ashamed to say I haven’t worn a kilt since I was eight years old and probably never will again, although I do have a pair of plus fours in the MacLean of Duart Hunting tartan for playing hickory golf , where the dress tartan is possibly the most beautiful of them all.
Phil Rees
1 year ago
Whenever I see Charles in his Scottish fancy dress outfit, complete with a dirk in his sock, I am struck by how ridiculous he looks, as did his father before him. It’s as though they could never dare set foot in Scotland without that Walter Scott invented garb for fear they might insult the Scots. I constantly wonder what Scots make of it.
Richard 0
1 year ago
Thank you Daniel Kalder. As ever, your writing has insight, humour and a great deal of sense. Please, Unherd, can we have more of DK?
Never would be good, after this odd and poorly researched article
Richard 0
1 year ago
Thank you Daniel Kalder. As ever, your writing has insight, humour and a great deal of sense. Please, Unherd, can we have more of DK?
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Is today’s Censor from Scotland may I ask?
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Is today’s Censor from Scotland may I ask?
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
The SNP needs an external foe with which to distract the electorate from dwelling on its own incompetence. Once Westminster can no longer be blamed for everything (although I suspect the shadow will survive for as least as long as Mrs T’s has), the monarchy will make a good replacement distraction.
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
The SNP needs an external foe with which to distract the electorate from dwelling on its own incompetence. Once Westminster can no longer be blamed for everything (although I suspect the shadow will survive for as least as long as Mrs T’s has), the monarchy will make a good replacement distraction.
Brendan O'Leary
1 year ago
I haven’t detected any hostility to Charles in Scotland. Most folk either don’t care or think he’s doing OK as king, better than expected
Brendan O'Leary
1 year ago
I haven’t detected any hostility to Charles in Scotland. Most folk either don’t care or think he’s doing OK as king, better than expected
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
The caption photograph says it all!
Both Philip and Charles with knives in their socks! They should both have been charged with ‘carrying a deadly weapon’.
No wonder the Scotch young are disillusioned!
All this pseudo Gaelic ‘Braveheart’ tosh is quite ridiculous, and even worse than the equally laughable Kerrygold Republic.
I’m sure someone could come up with a suitable caption for the display of royal mirth.
I’ll start with: “The Royal Family enjoy another fine display of Scotsmen tossing their cabers”.
Royal family enjoy another splendid days sport at the annual ‘Highland Games, Cross-Dressing and Trans Gender Championships, held this year at Balmoral Castle.
Ms Nicola Sturgeon and Mr Humza Yousaf (of that Ilk.) were the eventual winners.
Royal family enjoy another splendid days sport at the annual ‘Highland Games, Cross-Dressing and Trans Gender Championships, held this year at Balmoral Castle.
Ms Nicola Sturgeon and Mr Humza Yousaf (of that Ilk.) were the eventual winners.
I’m sure someone could come up with a suitable caption for the display of royal mirth.
I’ll start with: “The Royal Family enjoy another fine display of Scotsmen tossing their cabers”.
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
The caption photograph says it all!
Both Philip and Charles with knives in their socks! They should both have been charged with ‘carrying a deadly weapon’.
No wonder the Scotch young are disillusioned!
All this pseudo Gaelic ‘Braveheart’ tosh is quite ridiculous, and even worse than the equally laughable Kerrygold Republic.
Chris Twine
1 year ago
The best the Royal Family can hope for is a sort of national apathy towards them.
Exactly. It’s the “meh” factor that will sustain it. As long as there is no majority which is explicitly and wholly against the Royals, then the trend will be towards the status quo. An irrelevant but harmless head of state who is (or at least should be…) apolitical is probably much preferable to the turbulence and division which you’d have if you tried to change anything.
I’m getting the same sort of vibes from Canadians and Australians too here. It’s not quite so much a love for the monarchy that keeps it in place in those lovely countries – it’s a lack of persuasive alternatives or just an antipathy to messing with a status quo that’s basically peaceful.
I can’t comment on the Canadians, but I’d wager the Australians will ditch the Monarchy within the next 20 years. They are much more Americanised , especially the younger generation and the republicanism movement is much more prevalent. I don’t currently see the same attitudes in New Zealand, but that may change if Australia was to become a republic
Wouldn’t the Kiwis then be more likely to keep the monarchy just to be different and annoy the Aussies? The Islanders at least like a monarch after all.
Wouldn’t the Kiwis then be more likely to keep the monarchy just to be different and annoy the Aussies? The Islanders at least like a monarch after all.
I can’t comment on the Canadians, but I’d wager the Australians will ditch the Monarchy within the next 20 years. They are much more Americanised , especially the younger generation and the republicanism movement is much more prevalent. I don’t currently see the same attitudes in New Zealand, but that may change if Australia was to become a republic
Exactly. It’s the “meh” factor that will sustain it. As long as there is no majority which is explicitly and wholly against the Royals, then the trend will be towards the status quo. An irrelevant but harmless head of state who is (or at least should be…) apolitical is probably much preferable to the turbulence and division which you’d have if you tried to change anything.
I’m getting the same sort of vibes from Canadians and Australians too here. It’s not quite so much a love for the monarchy that keeps it in place in those lovely countries – it’s a lack of persuasive alternatives or just an antipathy to messing with a status quo that’s basically peaceful.
Last edited 1 year ago by Katharine Eyre
Chris Twine
1 year ago
The best the Royal Family can hope for is a sort of national apathy towards them.
LCarey Rowland
1 year ago
While visiting St. Andrews in January of 2022, sitting by the seaside having coffee (this American was surprised it was not tea) with four elderly Glasgow visitors, they assured me that Charles would prove be “just fine” among the Scots.
I did begin to wonder, however, while visiting the notable landmarks and the museum there at St. Andrews. One museum display educated me to the impact that John Knox had had on the members of a local church, when he railed on the idolotry of the Catholics who attended the cathedral down the road. Knox’s righteous anger prompted the StAndrewans to rush down to the papist cathedral and trash the place.
So it seems that Scots do have, generally, some criticisms of their fellow countrymen who are inclined to sumptuous displays of magnifecence, wealth, all that glitters and . . . . the monarchy?
But I am a know-nothing American, although I do live in a Blue Ridge mountain area where hundreds/thousands? of Scots are hosted every summer for our yank version of the Highland games.
I am neutral about the House of Windsor, although I did write, five years ago, a novel, Smoke, the beginning of which took place in London on May 12, 1937, the day that Charles’ grandfather was crowned King of Britain and the Empire on which the sun never sets. My interest about you citizens of Albion was stimulated when I came across, and purchased, an ancient, yellowed, tattered original copy of the Times of London, May 20, 1937. The front cover of that tab special edition, consisted of a letterpress reproduction of an oil painting of the Archbishop of Canterbury placing the Crown upon the head of Charles’ grandfather, George VI.
All of which fascinated me enough to write the story of what was happening on the Continent in 1937, which is, by the way, eerily similar to what is happening across the Channel now. Apparently, Putin is positioning himself to be the Hitler of the 21st-century. And I’m wondering what King Charles and all of yonder Brits will do to fulfill Winston Churchill’s bravely noble knighthood.
Whatever happens, the yank says Cheerio and Chin up!
Pity about the Cathedral.
It was both the largest and finest medieval building in Scotland, only rivalled perhaps by Elgin, also trashed, as in fact were most Scotch Cathedrals, to the eternal shame of the nation.
What remains is meagre in the extreme, with the sole exception of the splendid St Mungo’s, in Glasgow.
Pity about the Cathedral.
It was both the largest and finest medieval building in Scotland, only rivalled perhaps by Elgin, also trashed, as in fact were most Scotch Cathedrals, to the eternal shame of the nation.
What remains is meagre in the extreme, with the sole exception of the splendid St Mungo’s, in Glasgow.
LCarey Rowland
1 year ago
While visiting St. Andrews in January of 2022, sitting by the seaside having coffee (this American was surprised it was not tea) with four elderly Glasgow visitors, they assured me that Charles would prove be “just fine” among the Scots.
I did begin to wonder, however, while visiting the notable landmarks and the museum there at St. Andrews. One museum display educated me to the impact that John Knox had had on the members of a local church, when he railed on the idolotry of the Catholics who attended the cathedral down the road. Knox’s righteous anger prompted the StAndrewans to rush down to the papist cathedral and trash the place.
So it seems that Scots do have, generally, some criticisms of their fellow countrymen who are inclined to sumptuous displays of magnifecence, wealth, all that glitters and . . . . the monarchy?
But I am a know-nothing American, although I do live in a Blue Ridge mountain area where hundreds/thousands? of Scots are hosted every summer for our yank version of the Highland games.
I am neutral about the House of Windsor, although I did write, five years ago, a novel, Smoke, the beginning of which took place in London on May 12, 1937, the day that Charles’ grandfather was crowned King of Britain and the Empire on which the sun never sets. My interest about you citizens of Albion was stimulated when I came across, and purchased, an ancient, yellowed, tattered original copy of the Times of London, May 20, 1937. The front cover of that tab special edition, consisted of a letterpress reproduction of an oil painting of the Archbishop of Canterbury placing the Crown upon the head of Charles’ grandfather, George VI.
All of which fascinated me enough to write the story of what was happening on the Continent in 1937, which is, by the way, eerily similar to what is happening across the Channel now. Apparently, Putin is positioning himself to be the Hitler of the 21st-century. And I’m wondering what King Charles and all of yonder Brits will do to fulfill Winston Churchill’s bravely noble knighthood.
Whatever happens, the yank says Cheerio and Chin up!
Graeme Arnott
1 year ago
“After years of drifting apart, the United Kingdom suddenly felt united again. It couldn’t last, of course, and it hasn’t”
An odd thing to say in light of the recent fall in support for secession.
Straying a little off topic, I found this quote included above interesting:
It is not until 2004 that the republican “Declaration of Calton Hill” — a spirited call for “an independent Scottish Republic built on the principles of liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity”
Isn’t there some contradiction between “liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity” ? Doesn’t liberty mean that you’re free not to believe in any of the others ? Can you really have both diversity and solidarity ? But it’s great buzzword bingo stuff.
Definitely “Bingo suff” and also a contradiction in terms.
Definitely “Bingo suff” and also a contradiction in terms.
Straying a little off topic, I found this quote included above interesting:
It is not until 2004 that the republican “Declaration of Calton Hill” — a spirited call for “an independent Scottish Republic built on the principles of liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity”
Isn’t there some contradiction between “liberty, equality, diversity and solidarity” ? Doesn’t liberty mean that you’re free not to believe in any of the others ? Can you really have both diversity and solidarity ? But it’s great buzzword bingo stuff.
A friend of mine whom I would never have thought was a royalist, has nothing but praise for King Charles. He puts his money where his mouth is. Asked to buy a crumbling but locally important house in Lanark, (Probably wrong but south of Glasgow), he not only bought it but turned it into a training college for traditional building skills and crafts. Now its graduates work all over Scotland.
After the disastrous floods on the Dee several years ago, Charles oversaw and funded the opening of a very profitable eating place in Ballater, profits from which went back into the community. The food was good too!
Princess Anne is very highly regarded in agricultural circles and regularly visits shows in the NE where folk have learned not to underestimate the depth of her knowledge.
In short, the Royals in Scotland are highly regarded by groups of people whom nobody ever asks but who know their merits.
As for the garden parties at Holyrood, people love them! And they love seeing the Royals. AND the tea is excellent!
Finally, who would WANT to stay in Holyrood Palace for longer than they had to?
He bought Dumfries House in East Ayrshire
He bought Dumfries House in East Ayrshire
A friend of mine whom I would never have thought was a royalist, has nothing but praise for King Charles. He puts his money where his mouth is. Asked to buy a crumbling but locally important house in Lanark, (Probably wrong but south of Glasgow), he not only bought it but turned it into a training college for traditional building skills and crafts. Now its graduates work all over Scotland.
After the disastrous floods on the Dee several years ago, Charles oversaw and funded the opening of a very profitable eating place in Ballater, profits from which went back into the community. The food was good too!
Princess Anne is very highly regarded in agricultural circles and regularly visits shows in the NE where folk have learned not to underestimate the depth of her knowledge.
In short, the Royals in Scotland are highly regarded by groups of people whom nobody ever asks but who know their merits.
As for the garden parties at Holyrood, people love them! And they love seeing the Royals. AND the tea is excellent!
Finally, who would WANT to stay in Holyrood Palace for longer than they had to?
I’ve always assumed that the Scot Nats reticence about embracing republicanism is simply to do with not wanting to unnecessarily alienate royalists in their midst, and part of their project to make independence seem less daunting.
Similarly, of course, the Irish sectarian division runs deep in Scotland also. The last thing the SNP would want to do would be to be seen as too close to their nationalist counterparts in Sinn Fein, so embracing the monarchy is a handy, and obvious way, of distancing themselves from other, more contentious, brands of Celtic nationalism.
If and when independence actually happens of course, then all bets would be off.
I think you’re probably right.
Republicanism is also, as the author alludes, just about the sole issue the SNP would have available to pursue if independence was secured. In every other respect, independence would signal the end of its raison d’etre.
Yes, a poll of people who live in Scotland is utterly different from a poll of Scots (or ‘scotch’ as Rabbie Burns and charlie stanhope calls them). Your last sentence is spot-on.
When did the taboo about referring to the Scotch start. The term is used without equivocation by both Sir Walter Scott and R.L. Stevenson. Did it start with Kenneth McKellar and Heather Mixture. It must be one of the earliest examples of the ‘banning’ of a non-obscene word – now the dictionary is full of them.
Thank you for this comment–I wondered that also. My American father always used the term “Scotch”, and until recent years I had no idea anyone considered it incorrect. I think he was using the term as he had heard his “Scotch” ancestors use it, so the change must have occurred in the latter half of the 20th century (?)
Thank you for this comment–I wondered that also. My American father always used the term “Scotch”, and until recent years I had no idea anyone considered it incorrect. I think he was using the term as he had heard his “Scotch” ancestors use it, so the change must have occurred in the latter half of the 20th century (?)
When did the taboo about referring to the Scotch start. The term is used without equivocation by both Sir Walter Scott and R.L. Stevenson. Did it start with Kenneth McKellar and Heather Mixture. It must be one of the earliest examples of the ‘banning’ of a non-obscene word – now the dictionary is full of them.
I think you’re probably right.
Republicanism is also, as the author alludes, just about the sole issue the SNP would have available to pursue if independence was secured. In every other respect, independence would signal the end of its raison d’etre.
Yes, a poll of people who live in Scotland is utterly different from a poll of Scots (or ‘scotch’ as Rabbie Burns and charlie stanhope calls them). Your last sentence is spot-on.
I’ve always assumed that the Scot Nats reticence about embracing republicanism is simply to do with not wanting to unnecessarily alienate royalists in their midst, and part of their project to make independence seem less daunting.
Similarly, of course, the Irish sectarian division runs deep in Scotland also. The last thing the SNP would want to do would be to be seen as too close to their nationalist counterparts in Sinn Fein, so embracing the monarchy is a handy, and obvious way, of distancing themselves from other, more contentious, brands of Celtic nationalism.
If and when independence actually happens of course, then all bets would be off.
Whenever I see Charles in his Scottish fancy dress outfit, complete with a dirk in his sock, I am struck by how ridiculous he looks, as did his father before him. It’s as though they could never dare set foot in Scotland without that Walter Scott invented garb for fear they might insult the Scots. I constantly wonder what Scots make of it.
Ridiculous? I think he looks quite nice in a kilt and jacket.
Honestly, the Royal attachment to Scottish dress is quite a good advertisement for Scotland. As a tourist to Scotland, all the heathered wools and the tartan cloth catch my eye and bring me back to time spent in actual fields of heather and other spectacular areas of nature there.
I have thought often of Scotland since the Queen’s passing, and think of when I can make another visit.
I can imagine that not all Scots want to be represented by the Highlands and could feel sensitive on that issue and on others. Certainly there are those who like to have a grumble.
Whatever. To steal a line I heard on Gutfeld (American late night comedian) tonight, I like the Scots. Especially their tape.
Surely that should be SCOTCH TAPE?
Surely that should be SCOTCH TAPE?
BRIGADOON.
What’s the contemporary alternative ? Deep fried Mars Bars and Irn Bru ?
It’s not a “dirk in his sock”, but a skean dhu in his stocking. A dirk is much larger, worn on a waist belt and can contain a small knife and fork as well. Other traditional weapons are the highland broadsword, often wrongly called a claymore, which is carried by officers in Scottish regiments, and the double-handed sword, the claymore (from the Gaelic for big sword) – think Braveheart.
No, think Culloden!
This begs the question then: why did they name a mine after a double-handed Scottish sword?
An American choice, and better than our anti-tank gun named WOMBAT!
An American choice, and better than our anti-tank gun named WOMBAT!
No, think Culloden!
This begs the question then: why did they name a mine after a double-handed Scottish sword?
As a scot I don’t like to see english wearing a tartan unless they are decended from a Scottish clan, which probably very few are. Traditionally, those wearing a tartan kilt should be descended from the appropriate clan. Although I have a lot of respect for King Charles, his wearing of a variation on the Royal Stewart tartan or other of his choice is less than genuine. Generic and modern tartans may be fine for tourists but that’s about it. I’m almost ashamed to say I haven’t worn a kilt since I was eight years old and probably never will again, although I do have a pair of plus fours in the MacLean of Duart Hunting tartan for playing hickory golf , where the dress tartan is possibly the most beautiful of them all.
The King’s grandmother was a Scot.
So he’s 1/4th Scot. Is this like “Native Americans”? (I prefer David Reich’s “Original Pioneers”, but nobody would know what I was talking about). Most tribes consider anyone with 1/8th Indian ancestry to be Indian. And if their tribal rolls are getting thinned, they sometimes go to 1/16th. Kind of like a membership drive.
I don’t believe that the Bowes-Lyon or Cavendish-Bentnick families have a clan tartan. She was born in London as was her father. He may have had Scottish titles and been a landowner but I doubt he was through and through Scottish? I’m no nationalist and my father was english, enlisted in the RN during the WW2, whom I’m very proud of, but clans and tartans are basically Highland heritage.
Really? I thought she was the offspring of an Irish chamber maid.
So he’s 1/4th Scot. Is this like “Native Americans”? (I prefer David Reich’s “Original Pioneers”, but nobody would know what I was talking about). Most tribes consider anyone with 1/8th Indian ancestry to be Indian. And if their tribal rolls are getting thinned, they sometimes go to 1/16th. Kind of like a membership drive.
I don’t believe that the Bowes-Lyon or Cavendish-Bentnick families have a clan tartan. She was born in London as was her father. He may have had Scottish titles and been a landowner but I doubt he was through and through Scottish? I’m no nationalist and my father was english, enlisted in the RN during the WW2, whom I’m very proud of, but clans and tartans are basically Highland heritage.
Really? I thought she was the offspring of an Irish chamber maid.
The King’s grandmother was a Scot.
Ridiculous? I think he looks quite nice in a kilt and jacket.
Honestly, the Royal attachment to Scottish dress is quite a good advertisement for Scotland. As a tourist to Scotland, all the heathered wools and the tartan cloth catch my eye and bring me back to time spent in actual fields of heather and other spectacular areas of nature there.
I have thought often of Scotland since the Queen’s passing, and think of when I can make another visit.
I can imagine that not all Scots want to be represented by the Highlands and could feel sensitive on that issue and on others. Certainly there are those who like to have a grumble.
Whatever. To steal a line I heard on Gutfeld (American late night comedian) tonight, I like the Scots. Especially their tape.
BRIGADOON.
What’s the contemporary alternative ? Deep fried Mars Bars and Irn Bru ?
It’s not a “dirk in his sock”, but a skean dhu in his stocking. A dirk is much larger, worn on a waist belt and can contain a small knife and fork as well. Other traditional weapons are the highland broadsword, often wrongly called a claymore, which is carried by officers in Scottish regiments, and the double-handed sword, the claymore (from the Gaelic for big sword) – think Braveheart.
As a scot I don’t like to see english wearing a tartan unless they are decended from a Scottish clan, which probably very few are. Traditionally, those wearing a tartan kilt should be descended from the appropriate clan. Although I have a lot of respect for King Charles, his wearing of a variation on the Royal Stewart tartan or other of his choice is less than genuine. Generic and modern tartans may be fine for tourists but that’s about it. I’m almost ashamed to say I haven’t worn a kilt since I was eight years old and probably never will again, although I do have a pair of plus fours in the MacLean of Duart Hunting tartan for playing hickory golf , where the dress tartan is possibly the most beautiful of them all.
Whenever I see Charles in his Scottish fancy dress outfit, complete with a dirk in his sock, I am struck by how ridiculous he looks, as did his father before him. It’s as though they could never dare set foot in Scotland without that Walter Scott invented garb for fear they might insult the Scots. I constantly wonder what Scots make of it.
Thank you Daniel Kalder. As ever, your writing has insight, humour and a great deal of sense. Please, Unherd, can we have more of DK?
Never would be good, after this odd and poorly researched article
Never would be good, after this odd and poorly researched article
Thank you Daniel Kalder. As ever, your writing has insight, humour and a great deal of sense. Please, Unherd, can we have more of DK?
Is today’s Censor from Scotland may I ask?
Is today’s Censor from Scotland may I ask?
The SNP needs an external foe with which to distract the electorate from dwelling on its own incompetence. Once Westminster can no longer be blamed for everything (although I suspect the shadow will survive for as least as long as Mrs T’s has), the monarchy will make a good replacement distraction.
The SNP needs an external foe with which to distract the electorate from dwelling on its own incompetence. Once Westminster can no longer be blamed for everything (although I suspect the shadow will survive for as least as long as Mrs T’s has), the monarchy will make a good replacement distraction.
I haven’t detected any hostility to Charles in Scotland. Most folk either don’t care or think he’s doing OK as king, better than expected
I haven’t detected any hostility to Charles in Scotland. Most folk either don’t care or think he’s doing OK as king, better than expected
The caption photograph says it all!
Both Philip and Charles with knives in their socks! They should both have been charged with ‘carrying a deadly weapon’.
No wonder the Scotch young are disillusioned!
All this pseudo Gaelic ‘Braveheart’ tosh is quite ridiculous, and even worse than the equally laughable Kerrygold Republic.
I’m sure someone could come up with a suitable caption for the display of royal mirth.
I’ll start with: “The Royal Family enjoy another fine display of Scotsmen tossing their cabers”.
Royal family enjoy another splendid days sport at the annual ‘Highland Games, Cross-Dressing and Trans Gender Championships, held this year at Balmoral Castle.
Ms Nicola Sturgeon and Mr Humza Yousaf (of that Ilk.) were the eventual winners.
Royal family enjoy another splendid days sport at the annual ‘Highland Games, Cross-Dressing and Trans Gender Championships, held this year at Balmoral Castle.
Ms Nicola Sturgeon and Mr Humza Yousaf (of that Ilk.) were the eventual winners.
I’m sure someone could come up with a suitable caption for the display of royal mirth.
I’ll start with: “The Royal Family enjoy another fine display of Scotsmen tossing their cabers”.
The caption photograph says it all!
Both Philip and Charles with knives in their socks! They should both have been charged with ‘carrying a deadly weapon’.
No wonder the Scotch young are disillusioned!
All this pseudo Gaelic ‘Braveheart’ tosh is quite ridiculous, and even worse than the equally laughable Kerrygold Republic.
The best the Royal Family can hope for is a sort of national apathy towards them.
Exactly. It’s the “meh” factor that will sustain it. As long as there is no majority which is explicitly and wholly against the Royals, then the trend will be towards the status quo. An irrelevant but harmless head of state who is (or at least should be…) apolitical is probably much preferable to the turbulence and division which you’d have if you tried to change anything.
I’m getting the same sort of vibes from Canadians and Australians too here. It’s not quite so much a love for the monarchy that keeps it in place in those lovely countries – it’s a lack of persuasive alternatives or just an antipathy to messing with a status quo that’s basically peaceful.
Quite. It’s not as if elected heads of state have been a great success. Kurt Waldheim, for example, Katherine.
I can’t comment on the Canadians, but I’d wager the Australians will ditch the Monarchy within the next 20 years. They are much more Americanised , especially the younger generation and the republicanism movement is much more prevalent. I don’t currently see the same attitudes in New Zealand, but that may change if Australia was to become a republic
Wouldn’t the Kiwis then be more likely to keep the monarchy just to be different and annoy the Aussies? The Islanders at least like a monarch after all.
Possibly, although the Republican movement might become braver and more outspoken. It simply isn’t an issue here currently to be honest
Possibly, although the Republican movement might become braver and more outspoken. It simply isn’t an issue here currently to be honest
Wouldn’t the Kiwis then be more likely to keep the monarchy just to be different and annoy the Aussies? The Islanders at least like a monarch after all.
Quite. It’s not as if elected heads of state have been a great success. Kurt Waldheim, for example, Katherine.
I can’t comment on the Canadians, but I’d wager the Australians will ditch the Monarchy within the next 20 years. They are much more Americanised , especially the younger generation and the republicanism movement is much more prevalent. I don’t currently see the same attitudes in New Zealand, but that may change if Australia was to become a republic
Exactly. It’s the “meh” factor that will sustain it. As long as there is no majority which is explicitly and wholly against the Royals, then the trend will be towards the status quo. An irrelevant but harmless head of state who is (or at least should be…) apolitical is probably much preferable to the turbulence and division which you’d have if you tried to change anything.
I’m getting the same sort of vibes from Canadians and Australians too here. It’s not quite so much a love for the monarchy that keeps it in place in those lovely countries – it’s a lack of persuasive alternatives or just an antipathy to messing with a status quo that’s basically peaceful.
The best the Royal Family can hope for is a sort of national apathy towards them.
While visiting St. Andrews in January of 2022, sitting by the seaside having coffee (this American was surprised it was not tea) with four elderly Glasgow visitors, they assured me that Charles would prove be “just fine” among the Scots.
I did begin to wonder, however, while visiting the notable landmarks and the museum there at St. Andrews. One museum display educated me to the impact that John Knox had had on the members of a local church, when he railed on the idolotry of the Catholics who attended the cathedral down the road. Knox’s righteous anger prompted the StAndrewans to rush down to the papist cathedral and trash the place.
So it seems that Scots do have, generally, some criticisms of their fellow countrymen who are inclined to sumptuous displays of magnifecence, wealth, all that glitters and . . . . the monarchy?
But I am a know-nothing American, although I do live in a Blue Ridge mountain area where hundreds/thousands? of Scots are hosted every summer for our yank version of the Highland games.
I am neutral about the House of Windsor, although I did write, five years ago, a novel, Smoke, the beginning of which took place in London on May 12, 1937, the day that Charles’ grandfather was crowned King of Britain and the Empire on which the sun never sets. My interest about you citizens of Albion was stimulated when I came across, and purchased, an ancient, yellowed, tattered original copy of the Times of London, May 20, 1937. The front cover of that tab special edition, consisted of a letterpress reproduction of an oil painting of the Archbishop of Canterbury placing the Crown upon the head of Charles’ grandfather, George VI.
All of which fascinated me enough to write the story of what was happening on the Continent in 1937, which is, by the way, eerily similar to what is happening across the Channel now. Apparently, Putin is positioning himself to be the Hitler of the 21st-century. And I’m wondering what King Charles and all of yonder Brits will do to fulfill Winston Churchill’s bravely noble knighthood.
Whatever happens, the yank says Cheerio and Chin up!
Pity about the Cathedral.
It was both the largest and finest medieval building in Scotland, only rivalled perhaps by Elgin, also trashed, as in fact were most Scotch Cathedrals, to the eternal shame of the nation.
What remains is meagre in the extreme, with the sole exception of the splendid St Mungo’s, in Glasgow.
Pity about the Cathedral.
It was both the largest and finest medieval building in Scotland, only rivalled perhaps by Elgin, also trashed, as in fact were most Scotch Cathedrals, to the eternal shame of the nation.
What remains is meagre in the extreme, with the sole exception of the splendid St Mungo’s, in Glasgow.
While visiting St. Andrews in January of 2022, sitting by the seaside having coffee (this American was surprised it was not tea) with four elderly Glasgow visitors, they assured me that Charles would prove be “just fine” among the Scots.
I did begin to wonder, however, while visiting the notable landmarks and the museum there at St. Andrews. One museum display educated me to the impact that John Knox had had on the members of a local church, when he railed on the idolotry of the Catholics who attended the cathedral down the road. Knox’s righteous anger prompted the StAndrewans to rush down to the papist cathedral and trash the place.
So it seems that Scots do have, generally, some criticisms of their fellow countrymen who are inclined to sumptuous displays of magnifecence, wealth, all that glitters and . . . . the monarchy?
But I am a know-nothing American, although I do live in a Blue Ridge mountain area where hundreds/thousands? of Scots are hosted every summer for our yank version of the Highland games.
I am neutral about the House of Windsor, although I did write, five years ago, a novel, Smoke, the beginning of which took place in London on May 12, 1937, the day that Charles’ grandfather was crowned King of Britain and the Empire on which the sun never sets. My interest about you citizens of Albion was stimulated when I came across, and purchased, an ancient, yellowed, tattered original copy of the Times of London, May 20, 1937. The front cover of that tab special edition, consisted of a letterpress reproduction of an oil painting of the Archbishop of Canterbury placing the Crown upon the head of Charles’ grandfather, George VI.
All of which fascinated me enough to write the story of what was happening on the Continent in 1937, which is, by the way, eerily similar to what is happening across the Channel now. Apparently, Putin is positioning himself to be the Hitler of the 21st-century. And I’m wondering what King Charles and all of yonder Brits will do to fulfill Winston Churchill’s bravely noble knighthood.
Whatever happens, the yank says Cheerio and Chin up!
“After years of drifting apart, the United Kingdom suddenly felt united again. It couldn’t last, of course, and it hasn’t”
An odd thing to say in light of the recent fall in support for secession.