Challenging perceptions

Mrs Noyce kept on being prosecuted, appearing immaculately clad on her many court appearances. But she carried on, keeping her thoughts to herself. She probably echoed the complaint of another madam, Margaret Sempill, in the 19th Century: when she was accused by the Kirk of keeping prostitutes — in particular the very pretty Katherine Lenton, who slept with the French Amabassador — she commented: ‘I get the name, but others the profit.’ She was whipped for her cheek. The French Ambassador was not troubled.

Over recent years, Fry’s series of Scottish histories have built a splendid track record of overturning cherished myths. Edinburgh’s fabled respectability is just one of them. On a larger scale, he argues that the reason this famously beautiful city has kept its looks and its charm over the years has been a combination of English influence, and the lack of a strongly-based class system. He challenges head-on the late Hugh Trevor-Roper — Lord Dacre — who argued that the Scots have invented a completely spurious medieval history for themselves, full of great kings who were said to have brought civilised values to the country; not only were they an invention, claimed Dacre, it was not until the Union that Scotland came into its own.

Nonsense, says Fry, and introduces King David I, the 12th-century monarch, who built the best of Edinburgh Castle as well as the Abbey of Holyrood, thus giving the city its defining spine — the Royal Mile. He brought in monastic orders from Europe, founded a mercantile class, created the royal burgh, and made Edinburgh, for the first time, the centre of political power — a position it has held ever since. David was not, of course, a Scot, but was created the Earl of Huntingdon and learned his royal duties at the English court.