Friday 1 October 2010

Blog changes history

Cornwall Council's website has a "timeline" of Cornish history which used to quote the Kilbrandon Report as "recommending" that official sources should cite Cornwall as a Duchy and not a county. Last month I went to the original document and quoted, verbatim and in context, what Kilbrandon had actually said.

I notice that the Cornish Studies Library, which maintains the timeline for the Council, has now bravely dipped a toe into these controversial waters and changed the course of history. The entry now reads "suggests/recommends" and, crucially, has restored Kilbrandon's own word "appropriate" (Kilbandon actually said "on all appropriate occasions") - which makes all the difference, because the context links the word "Duchy" to the Royal family.

If anyone can find where Kilbrandon specifically says Cornwall should be called a Duchy, please let me know. And nowhere can I find where Kilbrandon says he "recommends" the use of the word Duchy. He simply makes a statement of fact about what "would serve to recognise both this special relationship and the territorial integrity of Cornwall, on which our witnesses laid great stress." His language is permissive, rather than an instruction or exhortation.

Perhaps the Cornish Studies Library, having taken another deep breath, would in the interests of accuracy and objectivity like to go a step further and also remove the word "recommends."

Kilbrandon was an expensively-educated Scottish lawyer whose command of language was probably sufficient for him to express himself with a reasonable degree of clarity and precision. If he had wanted the government to legislate for use of the word Duchy, he would have made his sentiments quite clear. But he didn't. Maybe he didn't think it was worth the effort. So anyone can call Cornwall a Duchy, or a county, as they see fit, where appropriate. And if you think I'm making this up, go and read the Kilbrandon Report yourself.

No comments:

Post a Comment