Tom Devine casts doubt over ‘impartiality’ of Edinburgh's Henry Dundas plaque review

Scotland’s leading historian, Professor Sir Tom Devine, said there was a danger the review’s findings could “simply magnify” the city’s “public embarrassment” over a controversial plaque which has sparked a racism row.

His warning is the latest development in the controversy over a plaque at the foot of the towering Henry Dundas monument in the city centre.

It states that it is “dedicated to the memory of the more than half-a-million Africans whose enslavement was a consequence of Henry Dundas’s actions”.

READ MORE: Tom Devine accuses Scottish universities of 'conspiracy of silence'

Since the plaque was installed in 2020, Professor Devine has argued for its removal on the grounds that is fundamentally erroneous and the delay in abolishing the slave trade was not solely due to Dundas’s actions, which some regard as a way of eventually getting the Abolition Bill through Parliament, in the face of widespread opposition.

His arguments have now been backed by research from Angela McCarthy, professor of Scottish and Irish history and director of the Centre for Global Migrations at the University of Otago in Dunedin.

However, Professor Devine’s pleas to Edinburgh City Council to have a rethink about the plaque on the back of her research have produced no results so far.

“In my own professional view as a historian it has completely demolished the basis of the controversial text … but to date, none of its findings have been meaningfully challenged, far less refuted,” said Professor Devine, emeritus professor at the University of Edinburgh.

He said he had contacted the leaders of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties at the council but only the LibDems replied.

Professor Geoff Palmer, above, branded Tom Devine a ‘racist’ over his complaints about the plaque installed underneath the Melville Monument in Edinburgh

“It was clear that even he had no intention of taking the matter further – so much for the concern of Edinburgh politicians for the reputation of their city,” he said.

Professor Devine added that he had not approached the SNP leader, Adam McVey, who is also leader of the council, as he had been at “the fore in championing the notorious plaque”.

“To my knowledge, indeed, McVey has ignored all press requests to explain why he supported an installation which, if not speedily removed, will draw national and international derision and censure to our capital city,” said Professor Devine.

He claimed that as McVey and the review chair, Sir Geoffrey Palmer, were key figures in producing the text on the plaque, their impartiality was now in doubt.

Professor Geoff Palmer, Scotland’s first black professor, has branded Professor Devine a “racist” over his complaints about the plaque and has also accused Jonathan Hearn, professor of political and historical sociology at Edinburgh University, as being part of an “academic racist gang” after he called the slavery project “strangely superficial”.

Professor Devine has demanded an apology, which has so far been met with no response.

“A formal Legal Opinion presented to me indicated I had undeniably been defamed and libelled in law – and as a result, the possibilities of winning compensation in court were very high indeed,” said Professor Devine. “However, the evidence in mainstream and social media, plus the extraordinary number of messages sent to me personally confirms I have won overwhelmingly in the court of public opinion, which is the one which matters to me,” he added.

“Because of that victory this will be the last press interview I give on these matters. I wish to warmly thank all those who have supported me through this difficult time.”

READ MORE: Tom Devine and Geoff Palmer in 'racism' row over Edinburgh's links to slavery

Council leader Adam McVey said: “The vast majority of councillors voted to support this work and we are determined this process will be able to complete its task.

“This process has also pulled in valuable experience, knowledge and viewpoints from organisations like our universities and Edinburgh World Heritage. I’m grateful to the thousands of people who have responded to the consultation to give their views.

“We shouldn’t lose sight of the purpose of this exercise, to more honestly tell our city’s history – the good, the bad and the ugly – and understand the impact of this on modern-day Edinburgh.

“I look forward to the recommendations in the coming months and the discussions that will follow to make sure all our residents continue to be proud to call our capital home,” McVey added.