RE: your culture article on the Clan Battle which took place on the North Insh of Perth in 1396 (The National, March 1). I am writing to tell you that there is no way that the Camerons could be present at that battle. One can only determine who the contestants were by understanding the Gaelic names of the clans: particularly the way in which these names were pronounced. Your writer was correct in saying that the Camerons were at Invernahaven and correct in saying that the earlier battle was the precursor of the combat at Perth, but utterly wrong in his conclusion. First we must understand that it had long been a cat-and-dog warfare.

The Camerons were the “Chlanna nan con” or “Sons of the Hound” and there is no way that that name could be confused with the MacKays. In ancient times, before they used tartan as their heraldry in colour, the primitive tribes would have a dog or a cat on their shields. The Camerons who included MacGillonies, MacMartins and Sorleys of Glen Nevis had all originally come from Ireland and claimed descent from Con of the Hundred Battles. The Cattanachs or Clan Chatton came from Europe: they were known to the Romans as the Catti. About 200 AD, the Catti landed on the very north-most part of the Scottish mainland and named it the province of Cat: it is now Caithness. They were later driven southwards by Norse invasions,and finally found refuge in Badenoch but by then the Clan Chattan Bond had acquired a few Gall-Gael clans who were not original Cattanachs, like MacGillvrays and MacBeans who came in on the tail of the Mackintoshes.

What happened was that the male line of the Chattan Chiefs died out with Dougal Dal, and Farquhard Mackintosh of Mackintosh married his heiress, so that their off-spring, Liam Mackintosh of that Ilk became Captain of Clan Chattan. In Gaelic ‘Mac-an-Toisich means Son of the Thane, and the first of the name was a son of MacDuff, Thane of Fife, who in turn claimed descent from Constantin IV, King of Scots. Also the Mackintoshes were quite prolific: one son of the chief Shaw Mackintosh, founded the cadet line of Clan Shaw, and Farquhar Shaw of Rothiemurchas was the progenitor of Clan Farquharson. Only the Macphersons and Davidsons, therefore, were original Cattanachs, and this had a bearing on the outcome of Invernahaven. Meantime the first Cameron chief in MacBeth’s time, had married Marion, the sister of Banquo, Thane of Lochaber and thus they came into a territory adjacent to Badenoch.

The Mackintosh Chief believed that Lochaber was his property but failed to get any tribute from the Camerons who held their land only by the sword. So one dark night the Mackintoshes stole a herd of cattle from the MacMartins of Letterfinlay and instead of returning the beasts to their original owners (as was the peaceful habit of the time) they decided to keep the cattle in lieu of rent. This led to Invernahaven, when Tearlach MacGillonie led the Camerons to recover the beasts.The Cameron Chief at the time (a grandson of the John Cameron who signed the Declaration of Arbroath) was the first of the name “Ewen” and he had no part in what followed.

Both the Macphersons and the Davidsons, being original Cattanachs claimed, nay demanded, the right hand or right flank of the battle line, and this led to a bitter dispute between them. The Mackintosh Captain of Clan Chattan decided in favour of the Davidsons, upon which the Macphersons, in the huff, retired to a nearby hillside to be spectators of the coming conflict.

It was the Davidsons who fought the Macphersons on the North Insh of Perth. The Camerons never reached the North Insh until 9.30pm on September 3, 1745 when, as the advance guard of Bonnie Prince Charlie’s army, they entered Perth through the Skinnergate.

Andrew Cameron
Blairgowrie


WE are constantly told in the media that EU membership is all about “solidarity, social protection and mutual support”. I am sure the EU investment bankers would agree with that. After all they received bountiful protection, solidarity and support in the form of the EU Commission-authorised bailouts which led directly to the application of “austerity” policies across Europe.

Those who fear that progressive elements in the EU would be undermined by Britain’s withdrawal should note that such rulings are ignored anyhow – witness the 48-hour working week ruling – with not a murmur from the EU. In Italy, hard-won job protection laws have been rescinded, while privatisation continues, social entitlements have been destroyed, as have civil rights, and yet more benefit cuts, all accompanied by a deafening silence from the EU.

The European Court of Justice has ruled against trade union or government action in support of imported workers, while the EU-led campaign to raise state pension age continues, backed by Britain and the other EU member states. No wonder the European Court of Human Justice has blocked – yes, blocked – attempts to make EU institutions and treaties accountable to the European Convention on Human Rights.

The secret negotiations of a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Pact (TTIP) with the US continues, which will open up more of our public services to privatisation and make more elected governments subject to legal action by global corporations to protect their profits. Don’t be surprised if you haven’t heard of this deal, because we are not really meant to know about it, as the EU Commission slapped a 30-year secrecy ban on any information being made available to the public in relation to it.

By voting No on June 23, we can kick against the monopoly power of the big corporations that seek to dominate the European economy, and take back at least some democracy and accountability to national level. 

Charlie McCue
Dunoon


THE Leave campaign in Britain’s June 23 referendum on continued membership in the European Union (EU) is led by a virulent nationalist block of right-wing political forces and big business figures.

It consists of three main groups: Vote Leave, Leave.EU and Grassroots Out. Their policies and agenda are framed from the standpoint of the most parasitic sections of the City of London, with its position as a global financial centre held out as offering the prospect of revisiting the halcyon days of empire.

Vote Leave includes Business for Britain representing over 1,000 business heads, Conservatives for Britain and Labour Leave, representing those within the Labour Party who support the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

Its CEO, Matthew Elliott, is the founder of the right-wing TaxPayers’ Alliance. Conservatives for Britain is stuffed with arch-Thatcherites, including its president, Lord Nigel Lawson, a former chancellor, Lord Norman Lamont, another 

ex-chancellor,  and lifelong Eurosceptics John Redwood and Lord Norman Tebbit.

The Vote Leave campaign from the outset was explicit in representing the most parasitic sections of finance capital. It is backed by the billionaire London-based hedge-fund manager Crispin Odey, a founding partner of Odey Asset Management, and other financial institutions. John Caudwell, the billionaire founder of Phones4U, Joe Foster, the founder of sportswear manufacturer Reebok, and other CEOs, are listed as supporters.

The Labour Leave campaign is funded by John Mills, a former councillor who made his fortune as a household goods retailer. Previously Labour’s largest private donor, Mills stopped financing the party when Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader. 

Leave.EU was set up by insurance millionaire Arron Banks, a financial backer of UKIP, and Richard Tice, a former CEO of FTSE 250 multinational group, CLS Holdings PLC and the current CEO of Quidnet Capital Partners.

Banks, a former Tory donor, gave Ukip £1 million before the General Election. On founding Leave.EU, Banks said, “We are in talks with lots of high-profile business people.” £7 million was immediately pledged from six millionaires.

Alan Hinnrichs
Dundee