A PRESTIGIOUS institution has agreed to change its “offensive” panel about James IV of Scotland following a story in the Sunday National.
The Royal College of Surgeons at first dismissed a complaint by Professor Robert Beveridge that the panel was inaccurate because it labelled James IV as the last “British” king to die in battle.
The panel is displayed in the Surgeons’ Hall Museum in Edinburgh and hangs beside a painting of James IV (below), who lost his life along with thousands of his countrymen in the Battle of Flodden in 1513.
Before his untimely death, his great interest in science led him to grant a Royal Charter for the Royal College of Surgeons, one of the oldest medical organisations in the world.
The panel in the museum read: “On 1 July 1505 the town council of Edinburgh granted the Incorporation of Surgeons and Barbers a Seal of Cause. This legal document was issued to craft guilds as a founding charter.
“The Incorporation’s Seal of Cause was ratified on 13th October 1506 by a Royal Charter granted by King James IV of Scotland. He was keenly interested in medical science and evidence suggests that he actually practiced [sic] some surgery and dentistry himself. James IV was killed at the Battle of Flodden in 1513, the last British monarch to die on the battlefield.”
When the Sunday National ran the story last November, the college confirmed a complaint had been received but said that after an internal review and advice from an external expert it was felt that the passage in question was “fair”.
A spokesperson added: “The small section of the panel which refers to King James IV does make it very clear that James IV was a King of Scotland. The section in which we use the term British is a geographical shorthand reference to the fact that he was the last of any of the monarchs to fall in battle from the British Isles.”
However, Professor Beveridge of Edinburgh who made the complaint told the Sunday National he did not accept the explanation, adding that he was offended at the use of the word “British”.
“I believe James himself would have also been offended at being so described,” he said. “I also think their response should have been more respectful of their founder and it would have been easy to change the wording.
“They seem to think that because only one person complains, it can be dismissed. I cannot understand why they are digging their heels in on such a matter. What is their motivation?
“It’s a matter of truth. James was Scottish, not British. Also James was King of Scots not King of Scotland. They get that wrong too! How can we trust them to be accurate?”
He was backed by the National’s history writer Hamish MacPherson.
“Mr Beveridge is quite right – James IV was never British other than the fact that he was born on the island of Great Britain,” said MacPherson.
However, the college has now said the wording has been changed, with James IV now described as being from the British Isles rather than British.
Welcoming the change, Professor Beveridge said: “This gives their founder the respect he is due and is a recognition of the importance of truth and historical accuracy. Better late than never.”
READ MORE: Stirling: New evidence discovered of Jacobite siege of Scottish castle
A college spokesperson said: “Surgeons Hall Museum undertook a review of the panel under the leadership of a new director of heritage.
"To provide clarity for all audiences, the wording on the panel will be changed and we are currently arranging the printing and installation of an updated panel which will read: 'The incorporation’s Seal of Cause was ratified on 13 October 1506 by a Royal Charter granted by King James IV of Scotland. He was keenly interested in medical science and evidence suggests that he actually practised some surgery and dentistry himself. James IV was killed at the Battle of Flodden in 1513, the last Monarch from within the British Isles to die on the battlefield'.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel