A POINT which may be added to Michael Fry’s article on the significance of the monarchy in our national history is its contribution to our literary achievement (Why I believe the majority of Scots would vote to keep the monarchy, June 8). A key factor in the brilliant culture of the Stewart period is the importance of the royal court as a centre of literary patronage. Every reign from those of Robert II to James VI has at least one major poet associated with it, and as Allan Ramsay remarked, “Our Kings were poets too themsel, Bauld and jocose”.

He was thinking of James I and James V, but James VI too was a poet, and Mary is the only Scottish monarch (and one of the few Scots of any degree) to make a contribution to French literature with her highly accomplished sonnets.

READ MORE: Michael Fry: Why the majority of Scots would, despite its flaws, vote to keep the monarchy

When lecturing on the period, I found that a useful mnemonic for helping the students to remember which James was which was to associate each one with a literary figure: to note that James III was criticised by Henryson, James IV both praised and satirised by Dunbar, James V instructed by Lyndsay, and so on. And it is no coincidence that the departure of James VI was followed by a marked decline, in both quality and quantity, in the poetry written in Scotland.

When we recover our independence, no doubt the retention or abolition of the monarchy will become a topic of active discussion, but I am with Michael Fry in hoping that an institution of such historical importance will not be abandoned lightly.

Derrick McClure
Aberdeen

THE retention of the monarch as head of state of an independent Scotland has never failed to rile me.

Part of it is obvious. There is no justification for the progeny of historic warmongers to sit at the head of any country. The tourist value comes by way of a freak show where citizens of more enlightened nations stop by to see what constitutional ridiculousness looks like.

The second is practical. By maintaining an all-but-powerless head of state we lose options for our own constitution.

READ MORE: Gerry Hassan: Even Unionists see asking royals for help is desperation from UK

One of the biggest problems with Westminster is the doubling up of executive and legislative power in a majority government.

Holyrood is better, but only by dint of a slightly more representative electoral system. It is a question that must arise early in the life of an independent Scotland. We know presidents can be a disaster. But at least they are the voter’s folly.

Kevin Dyson
Largs

REGARDING the Michael Fry piece, am I alone in thinking the whole concept of someone having a GROSSLY privileged position as the result of an accident of birth is an anachronism? We scrapped bare-knuckle boxing, bear baiting, public hangings and chucking your faeces in the street from an upstairs window (Regardez l’eau ... gardyloo!!)

The concept of a hereditary monarchy, which originally stems from control by physical violence, also belongs to the distant past. Brainwashing of the populace from a very young age, which fortunately is reducing, is the reason for their “popularity”. There are other countries with “monarchies” but as far as I know they have no more rights or exemptions than anyone else. I regard the obsequious bowing and scraping to these relatively useless members of our society a bad (and expensive) joke. To anyone who believes the “They’re only a figurehead” story, I say, “How gullible can you be?”

Barry Stewart
Blantyre

MICHAEL Fry states: “I would say the majority of Scots support the monarchy. If not, where is the evidence?”

The most recent polling of Scots on the monarchy that I’m aware of is a March 2021 Opinium poll. That poll asked Scots that “if Scotland did become an independent country, should it continue as a monarchy or become a republic?” The result was 39% in favour of a monarchy and 39% in favour of a republic (with 22% “don’t know”).

Hamish Scott
Tranent

THE exclusive from excellent journalist Kathleen Nutt (Calls mount for Scots post-indy referendum on monarchy, June 8) resonates strongly with me as that’s precisely the choice that our model constitution offers in Article 3, which deals with how the head of state will be appointed, their remit and remuneration. Our interactive website is straightforward to use, so please get involved at www.constitutionforscotland.scot and offer your own comment and suggestions to shape the future of our country.

John C Hutchison
Secretary, Constitution for Scotland

I KNOW that filmmaker Roderick MacKenzie and former forklift driver Pat Gallagher are far from alone in calling for a comprehensive public enquiry into the Willie McRae case, and Scotia Future would certainly support a new enquiry by the SNP government due to the new revelations by Mr Gallagher.

It is worth reflecting on the fact that no Fatal Accident Inquiry was held, at the request of the MacRae family. It was well known in Stirlingshire SNP circles that Fergus McRae and the rest of the family did not share Willie McRae’s fervour for independence. This may have been a contributory factor in this decision.

Winnie Ewing MEP was tasked by the SNP NEC to investigate the case and my recollection was that she concluded that she was not satisfied with the official verdict. The SNP owes it to the memory of Willie McRae to re-open its NEC minutes from 1985/86 to see if any new light can be shed on the tragic death of a great nationalist campaigner.

Cllr Andy Doig
Nominating Officer, Scotia Future