CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh

Dundas plaque

(140 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. SRD
    Moderator

    Dundas plaque application is apparently generating some heat. Without debating the broader issues of statue toppling, or building re-naming, i'd like to think that we could all agree that a wee plaque on this massive bit of statuary is not inappropriate?

    Link to the planning permission application: https://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/idoxpa-web/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=QF7FWLEWIOS00

    Some context:

    Professor Geoff Palmer, Scotland’s first black professor and someone who has been campaigning for Scotland to properly recognise its role in Transatlantic slavery, has been campaigning for several years to have a plaque mounted on the Melville Monument in St Andrew’s Square. This is the most prominent statue in the city and commemorates Henry Dundas.

    Prof Palmer has been highlighting the fact that Dundas played a pivotal role in delaying the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade. After years of wrangling a wording for a new plaque was agreed.

    This text has had input from university of Edinburgh historians and represents the settled academic view that Dundas was working for the interests of plantation owners and wanted abolition delayed indefinitely. There is, to quote Diana Paton, professor of Caribbean history, "no serious scholar of the Transatlantic slave trade who does not think that Dundas played a pivotal role in delaying abolition". Through the link below you can follow a recent workshop held on Dundas:

    https://www.ed.ac.uk/history-classics-archaeology/news-events/events-archive/2020/historians-on-dundas-and-slavery

    In addition here is a blog post by Prof Melanie Newton, who participated in the workshop, that captures her presentation:
    https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/henry-dundas-empire-and-genocide/

    Supporters of the current Viscount Melville have mounted a concerted campaign to inject uncertainty into this debate. Threatening to sue for defamation, complaints to the university, threatening a judicial review, accusing committee members of voting because they are scared of being accused of racism, daily re-editing of wikipedia to represent an entirely false view of the academic consensus (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wikipedia-war-over-henry-dundas-slavery-role-fwbjvhjvz), and invoking academics who are not expert in this matter.

    Edinburgh City Council are seeking planning permission for the plaque and the deadline for submissions for or against is tomorrow. At the moment there is a concerted attempt by a group calling themselves ’Save our Statues’ to encourage people from across the world to raise objections. Over 1200 people have made submissions and ‘for' and ‘against' is finely poised.

    Over to you fine citizens...

    Posted 4 years ago #
  2. chdot
    Admin

    “i'd like to think that we could all agree that a wee plaque on this massive bit of statuary is not inappropriate?“

    So would I.

    I suppose this is inevitable - “concerted attempt by a group calling themselves ’Save our Statues’ ”

    The ‘defence of my family’s name’ pushback is unwise as it draws more attention to the whole thing!

    Posted 4 years ago #
  3. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Have commented:

    This is the absolute minimum that should be done. Dundas was a dreadful person and only removed by impeachment.

    It's vital that his image should only be displayed as a warning of how badly wrong human beings can go.

    The David Hume thing is insane. Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier was the chief proponent of oxygen theory and also his niece's pimp. Some awful people have great ideas and you can't judge historical figures by today's mores.

    What you can do is history. Let us do history.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  4. chdot
    Admin

    “Some awful people have great ideas and you can't judge historical figures by today's mores.“

    Isn’t that what the family is saying?

    Posted 4 years ago #
  5. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    I thought the family wanted a veil drawn over his many sins? I'd want the sins made clear.

    Also I want the column sunk into a deep hole so that we can look the sinner in the eye.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  6. chdot
    Admin

    “What you can do is history“

    Random internet -

    We hear/read this phrase all the time, but is it really true? Doesn't everyone, including the "losers", write history? Has all the history written by the losing sides in the past been completely purged, leaving us with a one-sided retelling retelling of history?

    https://amp.reddit.com/r/history/comments/5grjf1/how_true_is_the_phrase_history_is_written_by_the/

    Posted 4 years ago #
  7. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Is CCE the place for 'random internet'?

    Posted 4 years ago #
  8. wingpig
    Member

    "...you can't judge historical figures by today's mores..."

    A lot of recent stuff has been about stuff which was 'acceptable' or allowed or a mainstream default belief as few as ten years ago but which is now being called out as not right. Highlighting where the past got things socially/societally/civilisationally Wrong is as valid for the recent past as the distant, when the shared aims include getting people to do them better now and in the future.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  9. jonty
    Member

    I was wondering when the "erasing history" brigade would get onto of this one. Particularly bizarre given that the statue is staying put and the new plaque adds historical context.

    It is almost as if they're upset about something else.

    Whatever your views are on the Hume thing I'm don't think they're that comparable - the argument with Hume is that his views were genuinely 'of their time' and it's unreasonable to have expected him to act any differently, whereas by the time Dundas was in Parliament he was actively fighting against abolitionists to keep slavery alive, with regrettably considerable success. (I don't think I'd die on a hill for either.)

    I'm not a historian, so I don't know whether the fact that their lives actually overlap points to social change being just as rapid as it is now, or just a certain fluidity in how some are willing to interpret historical context.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  10. SRD
    Moderator

    correction: last day for comments is today.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  11. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    I used to learn Chemistry in the Lyon Playfair laboratory. He was born in Bengal in the early 1800s. It's a fair bet that he will have absorbed the rampant racism of the British Empire but he also seems to have been a decent enough cove. Also he was a Victorian gent so probably wildly sexually hypocritical.

    None of these things make me want to rename the laboratory. Guy was a product of his times as we all are. We travel in hope of a better future.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  12. SRD
    Moderator

    The objectors have just surged ahead,

    Posted 4 years ago #
  13. chdot
    Admin

    “The objectors have just surged ahead”

    Oh no, someone must be organising a campaign on the internet...

    Is the plinth and statue owned by the owners of StASq?

    Is that still some/all of surrounding building owners?

    Posted 4 years ago #
  14. Stickman
    Member

    It’s a planning application, so numbers shouldn’t matter if objections aren’t made on planning grounds.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  15. steveo
    Member

    Added my support.

    Objections: 753
    Supporting: 722

    Posted 4 years ago #
  16. chdot
    Admin

    Could always start a ‘no plaque, no statue’ movement!

    Posted 4 years ago #
  17. chdot
    Admin

    “It’s a planning application, so numbers shouldn’t matter if they aren’t made on planning grounds.”

    Yes

    Certainly planning decisions are not made on the basis of whether people object or not.

    Technically it’s a legal process divorced from the political feelings of the councillors on the committee.

    It just doesn’t always seem like that...

    Posted 4 years ago #
  18. chdot
    Admin

    People/institutions often have difficulties with history/facts -

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/18/home-office-policies-based-anecdotes-prejudice-damning-report

    Posted 4 years ago #
  19. dessert rat
    Member

    Is CCE the place for 'random internet'?

    a pretty innocuous question with potentially pages of debate. If not here, then where ?

    Posted 4 years ago #
  20. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    a pretty innocuous question

    I can see no reason why the random internet should not be used to store the random internet.

    I am saddened that my 'column in a hole' idea hasn't taken off. I stole it from great cartoonist B Kliban;

    Posted 4 years ago #
  21. gembo
    Member

    Supporting 912 Objecting 864

    Keep supporting the number of racists in edinburgh is way higher than 864

    Posted 4 years ago #
  22. chdot
    Admin

    “Keep supporting“

    Is that like ‘vote early, vote often’?

    Posted 4 years ago #
  23. Rosie
    Member

    I'm anti statue-toppling in general though there's a certainly a case for knocking down Confederate statues which were erected way after the Civil War and really were purely white supremacist. But that's an American affair and it's uninformative, mapping American politics/history on Britain's.

    I have spent my time in Edinburgh being totally unaware of the Dundas statue, and shamefully didn't know who he was though he turns up in the Master and Commander series of novels. I find that plaque informative and useful. Also that in those days monuments were put up by public subscription.

    In a couple of hundred years, when deep sea divers find it, they will see it as an example of the preoccupations of the early 21st century.

    There's some talk about putting up a monument to executed witches. Scotland was enthusiastic about killing witches in its time. Now that I would like to see. I'd rather be putting up new monuments, than knocking down old ones.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/29/calls-for-memorial-to-scotlands-tortured-and-executed-witches

    Posted 4 years ago #
  24. chdot
    Admin

    In the spirit of the random internet, I maintain this is relevant to this thread -

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/18/us-wars-iraq-george-w-bush

    Posted 4 years ago #
  25. Morningsider
    Member

    The application is for listed building consent, as the Melville Monument is a Category A listed building. On a practical level, the decision is whether it is appropriate to screw an A3 sized brass plaque to the monument.

    However, consideration of the wording might feature in any decision - as it could be argued that the text affects the "special interest" that led to the monument being listed. I wouldn't want to call it a foregone conclusion, but Historic Environment Scotland have already altered the listing to say:

    In 2020 Edinburgh Council will install a new plaque for the Melville Monument to explain Henry Dundas, First Viscount Lord Melville s history, his impact on society and to acknowledge his role in the delay of the abolition of the slave trade (2020).

    Posted 4 years ago #
  26. crowriver
    Member

    As a general principle, any change which adds historical context and nuance is A Good Thing and should be welcomed.

    So plaque on the Dundas monument: fine, makes sense, improves the interpretation of history.

    De-naming Hume Tower not a great move as it erases historical context (both of Hume and the more recent decision to name the building after him). How this improves understanding of the university as an institution is difficult to see.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  27. SRD
    Moderator

    this is getting a bit like dot watching

    Comments Received: 1964 Objections: 908 Supporting: 1050

    Posted 4 years ago #
  28. Rosie
    Member

    @crowriver - I thought the Hume thing absurd. OTOH the ghost of Hume (not that he would believe in such a thing) might be pleased not to have that hideous building named after him, especially as buildings that he would have known were knocked down to make the space for it.

    @SRD - I'm astonished that this should be so controversial. I can imagine strong objections to toppling/removing, but a plaque?

    @gembo - you're putting that a bit strongly. It could simply be anti-woke leftism.

    Posted 4 years ago #
  29. jonty
    Member

    I struggle to see the difference between "anti-wokeness" and "racism" in this instance?

    It's like how the press when through their slightly muddled phase a few weeks ago of referring to "anti-anti-racists".

    As far as I've been able to tell, "anti-wokeness" is another word for "anti-political correctness" which itself was another word for "anti-not being racist anymore."

    Posted 4 years ago #
  30. gembo
    Member

    @rosie, you know me, I am not neutral I am anti-racist. Prof Palmer been fighting the apologists for Dundas just for the mild wording change for more than two years. He won on the info board but they are still out there every time the subject is raised.

    David Hume’s Enlightenment did not extend to other races. Not sure about Adam Ferguson who’s holiday home used to be the Johnsburn Hotel Balerno. Adam Smith not sure. James Watt’s family money from slavery.

    Posted 4 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin