SORRY CHARLES..ITS A BUMMER!

Sara Salyers May 2023

In the December, 1984 issue of the ‘Scots Magazine’, an article appeared entitled ‘Where is the Real Stone’. It electrified nationalists across Scotland. The author was Archie, ‘A C’, McKerracher, FSA whose 2001 obituary in the Herald described him as a, “Scot – author, historian, writer, storyteller, and legend investigator, known to an enormous audience at home and overseas.”(https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12227284.archie-mckerracher/)

His detailed and meticulous research traced the likely origins of the Stone of Destiny, dispelling countless myths on the way, through its certain salvation from Edward I by the monks of Scone, to its eventual destination and probable resting place. This is a summary of his article:

What Was the Coronation Stone?

The Stone may or may not have been the Biblical ‘Jacob’s pillow’, as early authors have claimed, but it was almost certainly the portable altar used by St Columba. And it quite probably “came from the Holy Land”, a place from which several of the early Christian missionaries obtained their altars. (It was not the stone the Irish Lia Fail which is known to have remained at Tara until 1798.) A Palestinian origin and the resemblance of the biblical description of a stone set up as a pillar and used by Jacob as a pillow, to contemporary descriptions of Columba’s stone pillow, set up as a pillar at his grave, (Cummine, Adamnan), would certainly have been enough to suggest to imaginative chroniclers that these were one and the same. 

Evidence that the coronation Stone of Scotland was, if not Jacob’s pillow then at least the altar of Columba, is provided by its arrival in Scone, ultimately, with relics from Iona and by the privy Seal of Alexander III. The king is shown seated on the Stone with the motto, ‘Esto Prudens ut Serpens et Simplex Sicut Columba’, let me be as wise and humble as the Dove (Columba)’. 

Whatever it was and wherever it came from, what it unquestionably was not and is not is the lump of rock that sat in the hallowed halls of Westminster Abbey or seven centuries and will be used for the coronation of Charles III. 

A number of royal seals show the monarch seated on a cushion on top of a plain, altar like block: Alexander I (1107 -1124); David I (1124 – 1153); Malcolm IV (1153 – 1165) and William the Lion (1165 – 1214). (In the latter seal, metal hooks at the corners of the stone seem held in place by a perforated metal band.) The Great Seal of Alexander, III shows the “now encased stone, placed beneath a freestanding throne, supported by pillars”. John Balliol’s seal show a more ornate throne, now entirely encasing the Stone. 

Great Seal of Alexander III

In 1954, after its famous removal from Westminster Abbey by Iain Hamilton and pals, a Dr James Richardson, (HM Inspector of Ancient Monuments in Scotland, retired), followed up on his own, longstanding doubts about the authenticity of the article Edward I had stolen. He enlarged the seat of the kings shown in the various seals and “rendered them to the same scale”. This established that all depicted a Stone of the same size and one that, at somewhere between 18 and 20 inches tall, was considerably higher than the 10 and three quarter inch block in Westminster. 

It was Professor Skene (1809 – 1892) who proved conclusively that the stone in Westminster Abbey was of red, Perth sandstone and could only have come from that area. (He then went on to try to show that its geological origins notwithstanding, it was somehow the real coronation Stone of Scotland so as to be able to argue that Victoria had been lawfully crowned Queen of Scots!) But numerous early, writers have described the Stone. All agree that it was marble like, some describe it as black while others say that it was ornately carved. Balliol’s coronation gives the detail that the stone he was crowned on was hollowed out “in the manner of a chair”.

Smooth, marble like, black, ornately carved, with a deep central hollow, or bowl – not one of these details matches the roughhewn, Perth sandstone block that has graced the coronation ceremonies of English monarchs for the 726 years since Edward took it from Scone. 

What Happened to the Real Stone?

What follows testifies to an act of heroic patriotism, one that has been erased by Longshanks’ successful propaganda campaign to obscure his humiliation by the monks of Scone Abbey and maintain the fiction that he had taken possession of Scotland’s true coronation Stone. 

In 1296, a large, marching army gave unmistakable advance notice of its progress. The monks had some six to eight weeks to prepare for Edward’s arrival. At that time, the exact appearance of the stone itself, now encased within the throne, wasn’t widely known, making it easy to substitute something of roughly the same size without fear of immediate detection. Doing so and being discovered, however, would place themonks in certain danger of Edward’s torturers and the swords of his army. This appears to have been a risk they were willing to take.

Edward seized all the relics of Scone and marched off in triumph to London. He immediately ordered a bronze throne, from a Master Adam, goldsmith, to encase his prize. The throne was only half completed when Edward cancelled it and sent a raiding party of knights back to Scone. They arrived on August 17th, 1298 and, according to the ‘Charturly of Scone’, ripped the Abbey apart in a desperate search for something … but returned to London empty handed. Edward, says McKerracher, was furious. He cancelled the bronze chair and ordered one of wood to house the stone instead. More importantly he declared that this wooden chair with the supposed coronation stone it encased, was not to be used by the reigning monarch but only by the priest celebrant. 

That instruction has been ignored by every English monarch since.  (Presumably because he never explained why he issued this order. Explaining would have meant admitting he had been duped.) 

It appears that those in Scotland who needed to know the truth, did so, however. The negotiations for the Treaty of Northampton in 1328, confirming Scotland’s legal autonomy, included the English offer to return the Stone to Scotland. Oddly, given that no one could be legitimately crowned in Scotland without the Stone, the Scots did not bother to include this item in the final agreement. It was offered again in 1328 and 1329 and for a final time in 1363 and each time the offer was with apparently met without even the courtesy of a reply from the Scots. (Possibly theirs were wiser than heads than our own today!)

Over time, however, the secret hiding place of the real Stone appears to have been lost, possibly with the Scottish reformation when the monk custodians of the secret were evicted from their Abbey. A legend persisted, however, that it lay concealed within Dunsinane Hill and around 1800, something closely resembling everything we know about the authentic Stone was, indeed, discovered there.  McKerracherwrites:

“… two farm boys were playing around the site of MacBeth’s Castle when they noticed a fissure cause by a landslip after heavy rain. Crawling inside, they found themselves in a small room with a staircase blocked be debris. In the centre of the room, resting on four short legs, was a large black stone inscribed with hieroglyphics. The boys told no one of their discovery until years later when they apparently informed Mr Nairne of Dunsinane House. He carried out an excavation in 1818 and the details (above) were sent to a London newspaper. A report in this tells how the labourers were carrying away stones from the digging when the ground gave way and they fell into the underground chamber the boys had found 18 years before.

This was cleared out to reveal a regularly built vault, about six feet by four feet. Sitting in the centre of the floor was a very large stone, estimated to weight almost 500 lbs – or about a third heavier than the Westminster stone – and composed of meteoric or semi-metallic rock. This is extremely interesting for remnants of  meteors were regarded as being both holy and sacred by the ancient people. Beside the stone were found “two round tablets, of a composite resembling bronze … the plates exhibit the figures of targets for arms.” …(a) close examination of the Great Seals of Malcolm I, Alexander I and David I, where the Stone is shown exposed … (shows) it is flanked on either side by two round plaques, or targes, which bear armorial signia.

… The article goes on, “the curious stone has been shipped for London for the inspection of the scientific amateur in order to discover its real qualities.” And from that point it has disappeared. Possibly it still lies somewhere in London beneath some foundation or in a churchyard or perhaps it never left Scotland after all.” 

It is hard to say whether Archie McKerracher would have been pleased or not by the subsequent tracing of that “curious stone” to its present hiding place. The clue lay in a Reader’s Digest article, noticed by an alert Scot, one Bob Smith, who then contacted McKerracher about it but received no reply. The title of the article was ‘Mysteries of the British Museum’; it described a black, meteorite like stone with designed, metal plates attached to it, which lay, apparently, uncategorised in the museum basement.

While we wait and hope to see, somehow, the restoration to Scotland of that mere curiosity unearthed from Dunsinane Hill in 1818, can we now follow the lead of our 14th century ancestors? Can’t we, now, enjoy the sight of the royal posterior, enthroned in pomp and ceremony on what is certainly a lump of Perth sandstone and worse, if legend and amateur geology is to be relied on, a match for the masonry in the cistern of Scone Abbey. In other words, a cludgie stane? A gimcrack coronation Stone seems an exquisitely fitting symbol for this sham of a United Kingdom.

MY COMMENTS

Like so much of what we “know” about our history with England most of it is false propaganda. A block of local Perthshire sandstone held up by England as Edward the Conquerer’s great prize from his raiding in Scotland. Some prize?

What does it say about the English that they need this stolen, worthless lump of stone to somehow legitimise their colonial oppression of our country? It is appropriate that it is stolen goods, as they, in their ignorance, hope it secures Charles 111 the throne of Scotland.

To do that legally he requires to take the Scottish Coronation oath acknowledging that it is the people of Scotland that are sovereign in our land. But that day is coming, or will it be a Republic, either way let us hope an Independent Scotland can host ceremonies more based on fact than Saturday’s elaborate and expensive farce.

I am, as always

YOURS FOR SCOTLAND

BEAT THE CENSORS

Sadly some websites seek to censor what their readers have access to read. This is particularly true of sites whose existence is primarily to support the views of one particular party and they seek to block articles which do not slavishly support that particular doctrine. My readers have worked out that the best way to defeat that attack on the freedom of speech and thought is to share my articles widely, thus defeating any attempt at censorship. My thanks for this.

SALVO.Scot AND LIBERATION.Scot

Are playing a crucial role in taking Independence forward. This site limits donations to Yours for Scotland to a maximum of £3. We do not need more as all we seek to do is to cover the costs incurred in running the blog , therefore once this is secured each year all further donations are forwarded to Salvo and Liberation. My thanks for all who choose to support us in this way. It is appreciated.

53 thoughts on “SORRY CHARLES..ITS A BUMMER!

  1. Regardless of whether it’s the real stone or not, and it appears likely it’s not, it acts as a symbol of Scottish sovereignty. I’m very much of the opinion that if Charlie boy wants to be crowned (King of Scots) upon it, he needed to get his arse up to Edinburgh to do so. And take the Scottish oath!

    Liked by 13 people

  2. I am dreading the coverage of the farce , the sycophancy and elevation of the anointed one. The eye watering cost , the pledging of allegiance and the threat of imprisonment if you should protest – at least according to one indulged , self important , entitled youngish woman.

    happily , there is another more important venue at Glasgow Green!

    Liked by 11 people

    1. Do you know if anyone will be doing a live stream from Glasgow? I can’t afford the £5oo travel cost plus overnight stay to be there, yes £500 to travel within Scotland.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. I can well understand you can’t afford such an exorbitant cost of travel + accommodation.
        Is no one else from your area interested in going?
        Are there no Yes/AUOB community buses organized? No car-sharing lifts to and fro, splitting the costs or free because the car-owner was going anyway?
        No Yes-movement/AUOB arrangements for staying free or for a very low cost bed and breakfast offered by Glasgow suporters with a spare bed ?

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Cars and busses no good I’m afraid, the only way I can get to Glasgow is with loganair (hence the cost) Even if I was able afford it all fridays flights are booked up (I did look) fridays always are, workers going home for the weekend.

        Liked by 3 people

  3. I often read how the national patrimony is a neglected area of study in Scotland and that when it is studied the work is rarely carried out by Scots, in a nationalist context not a healthy state of affairs.
    Nevertheless, it would be delicious to speculate that the sandstone building block under the Westminster chair was once a drain or latrine cover and was proffered by the holy monks of Scone abbey to the witless invaders as the real thing.
    Considering the exceeding great damage the invaders wrought through their systematic pillaging to the national patrimony a sharp but painful kick to the posterior of imperialist prestige.

    Liked by 10 people

  4. Thanks for that informative article.

    Regarding the forthcoming goings on this coming Saturday at Westminster Abbey, that most of us are busy preparing to avoid, this symbolises, and is met to, England’s overlordship of Scotland irrespective of the origins of The Stone.

    The real thing, the one involving Scotland’s sovereign people, is being held by AUOB in Glasgow around the same time.

    Liked by 11 people

  5. Why a head of state? Presidents of self styled republics are merely substitutes for monarchs. They still live in palaces with bodyguards etc.
    As an ad hoc post the members of a democratic and sovereign parliament might choose one to suit the occasion of state visits etc.
    No fuss, no mummery, no eye watering expense.
    Putting the demos back into democracy.

    Liked by 9 people

  6. Good article Iain full of info, fake stone or not, I tend to think its a fake, Yousaf capitulated as we knew he would and handed it over immediately, Alex Salmond would not have handed it over.

    “ALEX Salmond has said he would have ordered a ring of policemen to surround the Stone of Destiny and had a “standoff on the esplanade” of Edinburgh Castle to stop it from leaving Scotland. ”

    https://archive.is/8tUsJ#selection-1641.3-1641.192

    Look how straight and obedient “our” FM is, standing to attention like good wee puppet its utterly embarrassing.

    Vote Alba, Join Alba.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fu9oOMnWAAAJahI?format=jpg&name=900×900

    Liked by 7 people

  7. Sorry Iain, I am going to unsubscribe. Having watched how Salyers operated in the Alba Fife LACU, she is not someone I can ever follow.

    I will see your stuff on twitter. Really enjoy all your own stuff about Estonia.

    Thank you, Lynn.

    Get Outlook for Androidhttps://aka.ms/AAb9ysg ________________________________

    Like

    1. Chucking teddy out of the pram and flouncing off in a strop is very childish, don’t you think. Those of us who are REALLY on the independence bus don’t mind who the drivers are as long as we get there.
      Off you pop back to the unionists or the SNP – there’s no difference.
      Watch the door doesn’t hit you too hard on your way out.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. I was surprised why you would unsubscribe from YFS because you have a gripe with a guest poster seems counterproductive especially when you concede you enjoy other articles on this site.?

        Liked by 7 people

  8. Saturday’s events, above all, will be a display of continuity, a highly choreographed and deeply considered attempt to reassure subjects throughout the realm that nothing is about to change and that ye olde establishment remains firmly in control of all wishful ambition and desire in this ancient sceptered-isle! I’ll be on the AUOB march!

    Liked by 9 people

  9. I am familiar with this story apart from the last bit about the Reader’s Digest. Anyone got any more information on this?

    Also, I read something recently that suggested that the current stone, for want of a better name, is actually likely an unfinished horse trough.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. From some of the descriptions I have seen it feels like the actual stone may be of biotite gneiss, hailing from Blairgowrie.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Hmm, that is certainly a possibility, and you may be on to something. It does look like a rather black marble (though gneiss and marble are chemically entirely different). I always liked the idea that it might be meteoritic, as these rocks were commonly ascribed with magical properties, but a local rock is in reality more likely.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. Certainly would polish up well I think – Fae See points below to a link that may suggest lewisian gneiss – impressive rock and from the isle where the kings are buried?

        Liked by 3 people

      3. ooooh the description here matches the one given in this excellent article:
        ‘Mysteries of the British Museum’; it described a black, meteorite like stone with designed, metal plates attached to it, which lay, apparently, uncategorised in the museum basement.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. I really don’t believe that it matters a jot whether it is the real Stone of Destiny or not, or when it was first used in the coronation of the Scottish monarchs. All that matters is the symbolism, and the symbolism is that England conquered Scotland sat on her, basically, because Edward never conceived of a ‘Union’, always a conquest.

    It seems to me to be less about the Union and more about Edward I’s, and the contemporary English, attitude to Scotland and its continuing existence as a sovereign state and nation. As a republican, I couldn’t care less where Charles parks his behind, and, as a republican, I don’t care for the thought of a separate Scottish monarchy either, but that lump of stone does have very particular significance for us all as Scots because it is part of our heritage, and that appears to be that we are still under English hegemony and should know our place.

    Had Charles broken with tradition and stated his intention to take the Scottish oath, on the stone, many of us would have mellowed – not to the point of eschewing independence – but, perhaps, in being rather less uninterested in royal ceremonies. He did not, of course. England always came first and last, even when the monarchs were Scots, of the Stuart dynasty. No change there, then.

    It would have been better had those who removed it from Westminster Abbey had smashed it to smithereens, dumped the pieces in a suitably historical site (Bannockburn vicinity?) and invited the press to view the remains.

    Liked by 4 people

  11. Michael Collins, whilst working for the GPO in London as a young man, went to Westminster Abbey one afternoon to reccy the joint with a view of removing the Stone. Nothing came of it of course and it took Scotland’s own hero Ian Hamilton and his helpers to succeed where the great Collins hesitated.

    If such a removal were to happen again today there can be no doubt that the current SNP hierarchy would be the first group to condemn such an action.

    Liked by 8 people

  12. That guy Hallet is claiming to have the real coronation stone, you know the one who claims to be the real king of the UK.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Yeah, I saw everyone making posts about this guy and a friend and I followed links and ended up on a white rabbit radio channel, not personally but by following links and it looked like it was one of those supremacist stations and I was like nah.

        Liked by 2 people

  13. Here’s a wee video I posted before in regards to some Irish patriots and their feelings in regards to the stone at Tara.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Polling work done on the Monarchy and released by YouGov today (field work late April).
    Monarchy v’s elected head of State (excluding don’t knows)
    In UK, Monarchy wins by a 41% margin of victory.
    In Scotland, Monarchy wins by a 7% margin of victory.

    Applying the theory proposed by Prof. of Geography Danny Dorling (Cambridge) the Monarchist margin of victory amongst autochthonous Scots would be 1.25%.
    No margin of victory at all really, and that’s after subjecting us to saturation Monarchist propaganda.
    If the masses were ever to learn what Keeper of the Royal Galleries, Anthony Blunt was up to in bombed out Germany in the summer of 1945, the Royals would be consigned to history.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. The Paisley bard was exalted. The awakening was upon us, the year 1950. Upon this stone Jacob had rested his head and our ancient, revered, anointed leaders were sure to come home to steep sided Scotland..Oran na Cloiche!

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Lovely, I love music from all around the world and it’s well researched about helping people with healing. It’s in our history under myths about having capabilities which Jacob’s stone enhanced. Today people scoff at things fae our past culture and wonder why we are almost in a plastic, chemical endured trance with our country being carved up and sold to the highest bidder that wants to stick theme parks upon nature reserves under the promise of giving a few jobs.

        Liked by 2 people

    1. It’s true though. They bring in foreign companies who in exchange for taking our land, wealth and nature do it on the jobs creation method. If it were me I would be training people here and saying we might have jobs for those from elsewhere. The goldmine is an example, the government should have hired people to mine it using technology that’s environmental friendly, the gold put to use for the country and not a group of shareholders that allowed Scottish jewellers the privilege to use and sell it. It’s not the buyers fault, in my opinion it’s shoddy decisions. I saw some videos about some folk moving up here excited about it all, and I thought aye I bet ye are. Someone, somewhere has got to start thinking about our country and people and stop those who are making lots for a few jobs in return.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. I mean that guy Gupta that Craig Murray wrote about is another example and I think I read somewhere he bought Ben Nevis. It’s a disgrace and we have to be grateful for five folk or whatever getting jobs in our own country whilst some folk are gaining plenty.

        Liked by 3 people

  15. As a stonemason, perhaps surprisingly, I feel no attachment to the Stone of Destiny. It is an artefact, (now) and very much so, but it’s the “Fool’s Gold” of artefact which duped the throne and court of a colonial usurper for over 700 years, and saw them revering something base as something spiritual.

    We can all have a giggle that the King of England is crowned while sitting a stone which is more of a “throne” than he thinks it is. This whole story might all be a simply typo. Ooooh! Sorry. You wanted the stone that was SAT on by Kings… Oh dear.

    It cannot be what it is presumed to be. The petrographic analysis properly destroys the myth.

    That said, you might very well say the same about any number of religious “relics” purporting to be something etherial and holy. Just look at the Turin shroud, or Hitler’s desire to secure the Holy Lance for his Third Reich, or the Holy Grail of them all, The Holy Grail. For goodness sake, people don’t even know what the Holy Grail actually is. It is revered for what it might be.

    These “artefacts” become vessels for faith, and faith by definition means believing a thing without questioning the thing. Go ahead, prove there isn’t a God.

    Again, as a stonemason, I can look at stonework with a critical eye, and very often an appreciative eye, whether it’s a work of art masterpiece in marble, (take a look at Francesco Queirolo’s Il Disinganno, yes, the net is marble and it is insane), or a modest and mundane rubble wall built either well or poorly.

    But in all sincerity, wherever I’ve been and for all I’ve seen, you know which stones make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up? Scotland’s Pictish Stones. Still on duty after all this time, and not one of them sharing their secrets.

    How very Scottish of us. Why are we a sanctifying a dud relic we suspect (know), is probably fake, when we have a Nation peppered with genuine and profoundly powerful and genuine artefacts we know precious little about? What actually is the meaning of your Z-Rod? Now that intrigues me.. (I have my theories too).

    What is the Stone of Destiny? It is nothing. Scotland isn’t disgraced by it’s removal to London. Scotland was disgraced. Not by a lump of stone, but by a supine and graceless First Mininster givng the whole theatrical farce a guard of honour. Idiot.

    Not in my name.

    See ya Saturday, all you rebels out there.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. The Stone of destiny is not the be all and end all but it is not imaginary. It has a long history. We are either weasels who bow down or people who do not. I say it is ours.

      Liked by 2 people

  16. Joanna Cherry in The Times has said that the current SNP is intellectually dead. She refers to the origins of modern Scottish nationalism and the intellectual «heavyweights» associated with the creation of the SNP.
    They were motivated by belief and conviction. They held to the idea of a broad based national renaissance and renewal. That appears to have dissipated to be replaced by a lesser «something» which has fallen easy prey to short sighted factionalism and possibly to external mischief making.
    When direction is lost or forgotten the mischief makers circle for the kill.

    Liked by 5 people

  17. Acceptance of the «colonial condition» is the the «point de repère» of national regeneration. The steady drift of the SNP leadership away from any historic sense of their country’s troubled relationship with the neighbour suggests the concept of liberation, which has a specific significance in national struggle, was nutrition too rich for too many presiding at the table. The pioneers of the movement would have grasped the intellectual, psychological, existential character of that nutrition and considered it essential.
    On such a diet Scottish nationalism requires no justification, no argumentation, no «case for» any more than a lion requires a case for being a lion.

    Liked by 3 people

Comments are closed.