I found the comments on the article most illuminating and was amazed how many were trying to turn it into a Nationalist v Unionist debate.

Obviously History is open to interpretation but if you don't even know it in the first place how can you begin to interpret it?

The article refers to the desire of Michael Forsyth (Tory) to reintroduce Scottish history into the curriculum when he was Secretary of State for Scotland and when we were students together at St Andrews he was pro Devolution and I was anti!

Now our positions would seem to be reversed but we would still agree on this point!