Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
The hunt is On.
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Wednesday, 3rd December 2008 Change Date

The Scotsman Digital Archive - Special Christmas Offer

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Readers' Ombudsman: One monarch, two numbers – how history can turn cumbersome



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 13 October 2008
By IAN STEWART
THE e-mail is simply signed Judy Steel, Aikwood Tower, but it is of course from Lady Steel, wife of Sir David Steel – Baron Steel of Aikwood. Sir David is the former presiding officer of the Scottish Parliament and former leader of the Liberal Party.
Lord and Lady Steel have restored their peel tower in the Borders, which has many historical connections, so it perhaps no surprise that Lady Steel's complaint also has historical connections. And she doesn't mince her words.

"I am appalled that T...



The full article contains 689 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 12 October 2008 11:18 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Ian Stewart
 
1

Hugo of Garven,

13/10/2008 08:13:02
"We should describe them as James VI and I, and James VII and II."

Just musing. In Scotland should that more properly be James I and VI, and James II and VII?
2

Guga II,

Rockall 13/10/2008 08:16:28
Judy Steel is absolutely correct. The Hootsmon should use the proper designations for the kings of Scotland. You could, of course, put the English designation in brackets beside it, but certainly not as the main or only designation.

The Hootsmon is usually far too Anglocentric, given that it is, allegedly, a Scottish newspaper. There have been numerous examples of this, especially when it comes to things like, for example, a recent report of something the High Court said. The article in question was about the English High Court, though this was not made clear in the article. This is the usual mistake made by the EBC who appear to have little knowledge or concern for what happens in Scotland.

The Hootsmon is also more like a New Labour propaganda sheet than a genuine newspaper. I, like many others, am one of your long term readers who has now stopped buying the print version because of this as I have no desire to be put off my breakfast (actually, lunch in this part of the world) by the blatantly obvious Labour Party barracking by a number of your reporters.

Perhaps if the Hootsmon wants to increase its falling circulation, it should have a rethink about being a politically independent, genuine newspaper again, and remember it is meant to be a Scottish newspaper, not a "British" or English one.


3

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 13/10/2008 12:58:57
#2. I agree. The Scotsman's political desk needs drastic filleting. Furthermore, it is employing far too many people whose knowledge of Scotland is obviously completely inadequate to enable them to do their job. There is an overall lack of editorial vision, of the ability to assess current events within the context of long-term trends and developments. The complete confusion of Ian Stewart's sixth paragraph is a good example, although he many not know what I am talking about.

For the record, the United Kingdom, in its three successive manifestations, dates from 1 May 1707, under the terms of the 1706 Treaty of Union as ratified and implemented by the two 1707 Acts of Union by the Scottish and English parliaments. Before that date there were two separate crowns with separate designations. The correct one to use is dependent on whether the subject matter refers to Scotland, or on the other hand to England/Wales/Ireland. There will normally be no need to use both.

The use of designations like William IV, Edward VII, Edward VIII or Elizabeth II is historically and constitutionally incorrect in a UK context, irrespective of their official approval. The use of these English titles is not only an indication of official attitude to Scotland's status within the Union, but could also be taken to mean that there never was a Union in the first place. At any rate, Judy Steel is right, and The Scotsman is the last publication that should fall into such error.

4

Conway,

13/10/2008 17:20:44
Excuses excuses ,come on Scotsman admit you have got it wrong . Now even the Lib dems are pointing out how London centric you have become its only a matter of time before your arogance destroys a once proud quality newspaper.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 

More Opinion

More Opinion >>

More Ian Stewart

More Ian Stewart >>

Features

Online Supplements
Scotsman Digital Archive

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.