Correcting Scotland’s history mistakes

 

So often, so many mistakes and errors of Scotland’s recorded histories are either ignored, or over written by the powers that be. In encyclopaedias the words Britain and England are conflated constantly – as they are often for Americans. Interchangeable terms, who don’t know their geography.

 

In the National,10 Feb 2026, there was an article on a book entitled: 

Queen James, the Life and Loves of Britain’s first King. 

 

Error! Britain did not come into existence until 1707 after the Union of the Parliaments.

James Stewart was King of the kingdom of Scotland and the kingdom of England. 

James worked to encourage a Britain, to secure his position no doubt. 

 

The Scottish Parliament had sat for 200 years before this union – latterly sitting in St Giles.  

When I look back and read of the Scotland before union 1707, the once independent Scotland is a different country. Its a place of a confident trading nation, with the exchange of people and ideas across the continents – to Flanders Japan, the Americas. Historian Tom Devine says that Scotland has for centuries has long been an outward looking country. 

 

The Wars of Independence with Wallace and Bruce 1314, were in fact Wars of Succession, ad civil wars. Because before this Scotland had always been an independent nation! Scotland’s first king was Kenneth I was King of dal Raida (841-850) and King of the Picts (848-858)

From the time of the Scottish Reformation (1560- 1640)  Scotland’s scholars went to Paris university to study and to teach. Education was greatly encouraged for all young boys. Form 1750 to 1790 there was the Scottish enlightenment. Scots were part of the American founding fathers.

 

The Big Questions facing Scotland today are – is this is a union of two kingdoms supposedly, there therefore must be a route out of this failing union. 

Its time we pointed out these important and crucial errors, which happen constantly. Ignorance of the past does not help our views of the present realities or our futures. There is not enough history taught in schools across Britain -  compared to elsewhere. So that both sides of the border, people have more knowledge and understanding of the true histories of both Scotland and England.

Kenneth I

Olde England as Britain?

 

I picked up a Sunday Times magazine recently – and there was an article with the headline In Search of Olde England - under a photo of Olde England Morris dancers, which reviewed the book - Finding Albion Myth, Folklore, and the Quest for a Hidden Britain by Zakia Sewell.

Sewell writes that she is the “least likely person to go searching for Olde England, or to give it its grown up name Albion.” She speaks of the ‘stale history” of Albion, England as Britain – but is she writing of an unreal “Britain”, or the 4 nations of the UK?

I looked up the meaning of ‘Albion’, which is supposed to stand for ‘Britain’. Its no wonder many are confused, the terms England as Britain are interchangeable and the same. On the very same page a respected author spoke of Elizabeth as the Queen of England! 

Most Americans interchange England and Britain, as meaning the same nation. Its hardly surprising as encyclopaedias, radio, tv and media articles and broadcasts do the very same thing! Where does this leave the other three nations of the UK? As mere regions of England/ Britain?  

Where on earth do the ancient nations of Scotland, Ireland and Wales fit into this narrative - with not one mention, as if their contribution, language, culture and music are of no significance. 

 

Sewell is searching for Britain as England’s “stale old island story” 

She feels there is wisdom to be found in tradition. In the Hebrides she visited Imbole, a Celtic festival to mark the winter solstice and spring equinox. She celebrated Samhaim in haunted York, and attended the Notting hill carnival.

Sewell’s love of urban music drew her to a career as a presenter on Radio Six music. Her father is Welsh and her mother from the Caribbean. She wants to counter balance the far rights use of the English flag, to follow Albion as  Britain folk ways in order to resolve her mixed heritage. In the Caribbean Granadines, the locals have long played down folk practices of the ‘other world’ such as ritual dance or drumming, not wanting to appear backward. This is colonization of the mind, were language was used to suppress different cultures. And the portrayal of local cultures as less worthy or “backward.”

 

She claims there are signs of a “weird renaissance” bubbling in Britain as England. Is she searching for historical culture or music? Her grasp of historical context is severely missing, as she skims the mere surface here.

England certainly appears to have lost is sense of itself – it still has its Constitution of 1688, castles, monarchy, Tudors - all from !600s. but with London now being a melting pot, I’m not sure – what is England/ Britain’s, national identity, lost in this empire building, what is its national costume? Or national sense of itself outside of football or the red cross of St George? 

 

Britain is in fact a landmass, not a country. Britain only came into existence after the union of the parliaments in 1707. But what is Britain or UK as a country? It is not a country with any hinterland or sense of itself – apart from the world war one and the Victorian empire. But the British empire is bland and about elitism and barely taught in schools, even as the empire existed for many centuries and shaped how this Britain as England sees itself.

 

I guess she is searching for a lost 'England as Britain'. In urban London much culture is a cosmopolitan world culture – as heard in the Americanization of the Brits award show in Pop culture and elsewhere. 

 

In this narrative there is not one mention of Scotland, Ireland or Wales – as if they don’t even exist or have any relevance or impact. Ignorance of history in this ‘Albion’ is clearly deep rooted.

Britain urgently needs to move from being an archaic state to a modern one – one that no longer controls and exploits an empire. 

“Scotland is a country NOT a county!”! Alex Salmond

 

**BOOKS: For a deeper history of Scots and Celtic cultures I recommend 

Stuart McHardy’ Scotland’s Future History, 

Tom Devine, A Scottish Nation 1707 to present

Alan Raich - Arts of the Nation

Only Britain has Peerage Privilege

 

Britain is the only nation that continues to revere and believe in a hierarchy with the monarch at the top? In Great Britain, nobility and titles are part of the peerage, which is a social class of titled people who have certain privileges: share in the responsibility of government and can avoid taxes. 

Andrews recent fall from grace,- symptomatic of the entitlement and superiority of royalty, creates serious division and a fake hierarchy with the King or Queen at the top, which only encourages undeserving elites, private school education and a 2-teir system in society that holds many many children back. These elites form networks of privilege who help each other out. 

 

All this therefor holds the country back, as Finland discovered and banned private school education  in – Finland has the best education in the world. How’s that for what some may call a small nation with few resources! So hereditary privilege does matter – it hold Britain back. 

The British House of Lords is the second biggest unelected second chamber in the world, after China! Britain’s archaic constitution of 1690. Britain is an outlier in Europe – the only nation that continues to give nobility privileges such as tax avoidance. Britain urgently needs to move to becoming  a modern state. 

**The five ranks of British nobility, in descending order of precedence, are:

 

·       Duke: The highest and most exclusive rank

·       Marquess: The second most senior rank

·       Earl: The third rank

·       Viscount: The fourth rank

·       Baron: The lowest rank 

 

Titles can be hereditary or granted. Until 1999, peers were exempt from jury duty and entitled to sit in the House of Lords. 

 

Other European countries abolished nobility privileges. First was France in 1789, followed by Holland and Denmark in 1857. And then in 1919 Germany and Austria removed nobility privileges.  

 

 

First was *France – There is no nobility, its legal status was abolished 1789, while there are titles still but with no privileges attached.   

There is no such thing as nobility in France today. French courts have held that the concept of nobility is incompatible with the equality of all citizens before the law proclaimed in the Declaration of the Rights of Man, part of the Constitution of 1958. There are titles, which are considered part of the legal name, and entitled to the same protections in French civil and criminal courts, even though they give no privilege or precedence (the way they do in Great Britain). Regulation of titles is carried out by a bureau of the Ministry of Justice. The President has ceased to confer or confirm titles, but the French state still verifies them,  civil courts can protect them, criminal courts can prosecute their abuse.

History - 

1.     the abolition of feudalism and privileges in 1789, which did away with the legal status of nobility,

2.     the restoration of titles in 1808 by Napoleon, and their confirmation by the successive monarchical regimes until 1870

3.     the fact that the successive republican regimes have never passed any laws on the subject of titles.

The French Revolution did away with nobility and titles, titles were restored (not nobility), and the Republic has not done anything about titles. French nobiliary law is mostly based on court cases. At present, titles have not been abolished. The final establishment of a Republic in 1875 left them in a kind of limbo, and it took a succession of court cases to define the jurisprudence, which is now well established. 

(2) * Denmark - The Danish constitution of 1849 stripped the nobility of its privileges, though the titles remained.  History - The Danish nobility was granted social, economic, and political privileges in the 16th century in exchange for their military service to the king. Some of the families still own and reside in castles or country houses. A minority of nobles still belong to the elite and they can be guests at royal events, are objects of media coverage, for example Kanal 4s TV hostess Caroline Fleming née Baroness Luel-Brockdorff. Some of them own and manage companies or have leading positions within business, banking, diplomacy and NGOs.

(3) *Holland – After Constitutional reform 1848 the privileges of the Dutch nobility were abolished and they lost their constitutional roles. The only privileges that were allowed were titles and coats of arms. They became civilians with a noble title. Nobility became a small elite class consisting of families recognized as noble, and with or without a title in the Kingdome of the Netherlands

 

(4) *Germany  - Abolished the legal recognition of nobility in 1919, while titles are still used. The Weimar Constitution of 1919 removed legal privileges and disadvantages of birth or rank. Current status - Titles of nobility are only valid as part of a name and may no longer be conferred.August 1919, at the beginning of Weimer Republic (1918 – 1933) Germany's new constitution abolished royalty and nobility, and the respective legal privileges and immunities appertaining to an individual, a family or any heirs. Today, German nobility is no longer conferred by the Federal Republic of Germany (1949–present), and constitutionally the descendants of German noble families do not enjoy legal privileges. The Nobility of the German Empire was similar to nobility of the Austrian empire developed during the Holy Roman Empire and both ended in 1919 when they were abolished, and legal status and privileges were revoked.

(5) *Austria - In 1919, Austrian nobility was abolished under the First Austrian Republic (1919–1934) and the and legal recognition of hereditary titles and aristocratic particles and use as part of surnames was banned. Today, Austrian nobility is no longer conferred by the Republic of Austria(1945–present), and the official use of noble titles, is a minor offence under Austrian law for Austrian citizens

 

 

Groundbreaking Community Wealth Building fund

 

The Scottish Parliament recently passed the Community Wealth Building fund Bill 2026, which was crucially the first country to make this law. To ensure local communities – own, control and benefit from wealth they generate and NOT distant investors.

 

Cleveland Ohio, was rebooted with $58 investment. With a democracy alliance and evergreen Co-operatives. For laundry, energy and farm co-operatives to supply local hospitals, councils and universities. Preston adopted this model, and became the most improved city 2018. 

 

An important figure in community wealth fund building is Neil McInroy – worked at the centre for local economic studies (CLES) Manchester – for social, ecological and economic justice. And now back in Scotland. To supply local food to schools and hospitals. He has now relocated back to Scotland after his work in America.

 

Big is not always beautiful. The Scottish enterprise move to more local empowerment than inward investment.

Its crucially important to develop local democracy at community level.