Hmmmmmm, Scot-shire?

The historian, David Starkey, whose channel 4 series Monarchy is currently showing on TV has offended some of our Scottish friends:

"Scotland matters for a single reason, which is its involvement with England from the 17th century onwards. Then it becomes important. Could Scotland have had an empire of its own? The Darien scheme suggests not."

He went on: "I love Scotland but it is not an important country. Your own political elite don’t want independence because they love swanning around as Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer.

"Given the choice of being First Minister of Scotland or Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown would always choose the latter."

Not important? Swanning around? Naughty Dr. Starkey!

Neal Ascherson, some leading Scottish historian responded by dismissing Starkeys remarks as "a basket of cheerfully stupid English prejudice". Starkey is apparently annoyed because:

"It is a fact that England failed to reduce it [Scotland] to Scot-shire and maybe that’s a source of annoyance to some people."

This has all the hallmarks of a good old fashioned cross border bust-up. But let's face it, we don't need to give the Scottish another piece of baggage to burden their shoulders with for the rest of human history. I suggest that the two historians take this to the field (perhaps behind an old church at sunrise) and settle the thing before it gets out of hand.

Posted by John at October 20, 2004 12:52 PM | TrackBack