Troubles ahead?

Sir: Jenny McCartney’s article ‘Border lines’ (1 October) was a profoundly depressing one. Perhaps there will be a united Ireland within the next 30 years; but will it be a peaceful and happy place? I have my doubts. Might not areas such as overwhelmingly Unionist Antrim, north Down, north Armagh, east Belfast and indeed much of Co. Londonderry become no-go areas for the new Irish governing authorities – rather in the same way as Derry, west Belfast and south Armagh were for the British in the times of the Troubles?

Most of the wiser commentators observe that the Good Friday Agreement was only a truce, not a perpetual cessation of hostilities. Some pro-nationalist observers mocked the loyalist paramilitaries for ‘fighting to remain the same’. Once they become the ‘occupied areas’, might they not have a clearer target to fight against? The Irish police and military will become targets, just as the British authorities were during the Troubles. Further, the loyalists have a significant following in Glasgow and, to a lesser extent, Liverpool. We in Great Britain will not simply be able to cut ourselves off from what is going on across the water.

Andrew Macdonald

London W3

The plot against St Benet’s

Sir: As a non-Catholic member of the final cohort of St Benet’s Hall undergraduates, I am grateful for – if somewhat alarmed by – the analysis from Dan Hitchens about the demise of our former college (‘Marching order’, 1 October). It is crucial that the truth about what happened to the Hall is in the public domain, and I commend you for exposing this opaque and damaging decision to proper scrutiny.

St Benet’s was, in my sadly limited experience, a place of friendly community for those of all faiths and none. In my own group last year, we had a wonderful blend of Roman Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, agnostics and atheists. For a university eager to talk up its commitment to diversity, St Benet’s Hall was unique for all the right reasons. It was also a close-knit community, where you got to know many across other years as well as postgraduate students – an experience which, speaking to students in other colleges, is not always the case.

As well as detracting from the University’s claim to cherish diversity (its website has the strapline ‘A brilliant university is a diverse university’), the rejection of John Barry’s offer seems churlish and, by suggesting that it does not need the money, can only serve to harm the considerable efforts made to attract global donors to this world-class institution.

Albert Hawkins (2nd year PPEist, formerly of St Benet’s Hall)

Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford

Soldiering on

Sir: As Gus Carter observed, I am indeed a fan of Warhammer (‘Notes on… tabletop games’, 1 October). Like a lot of boys, I painted and played Warhammer and other miniature wargames. When I had boys of my own, we started collecting, painting, and playing together. They grew out of it but I never did. Painting miniatures and listening to politics podcasts is my way of relaxing.

James Cleverly, Foreign Secretary

House of Commons, London SW1A

Recollections may vary

Sir: It was long ago and not that important, but what Taki writes (High Life, 1 October) about the American Conservative is not true. As our richest partner, Taki made a three-year commitment to fund the magazine (edited by me, and initially successful with modest funds largely because of Pat Buchanan’s popularity and the uniqueness of our conservative anti-war perspective during the run-up to the Iraq war). Taki fulfilled his commitment but then pulled out, and Pat concurred with my plan to keep the magazine going for a couple of years while seeking a new buyer. Taki went along with that plan, which succeeded. I admire Pat Buchanan and agree with him on most things, and it is completely false that I ‘wanted to distance the magazine’ from him. Taki can be proud that his three-year investment was essential to getting an important magazine off the ground, and I look forward to seeing him at its 20th-anniversary gala.

Scott McConnell

Founding editor, the American Conservative

Washington DC

Yesterday’s pews

Sir: The suggestion that church pews were only introduced in Europe after the Reformation needs qualifying (Letters, 1 October). English parish churches contain numerous examples of medieval pews: those at Dunsfold, Surrey, have been carbon-dated to between 1409 and 1441; those at Braunton, Devon, to some time after 1475. A servant in Dartmouth, Devon, paid to use a seat in 1438, while the churchwardens of Thame, Oxfordshire, held a collection to finance the construction of pews in 1449. Earlier still, the 13th-century Bishop Durandus of Mende, in his liturgical encyclopaedia, explained why people listened to the Gospel standing rather than sitting: this would be odd if people did not sit at other times. What we can say with certainty is that later seating arrangements have usually obliterated all traces of the earliest seating arrangements. Where that is so, we do not know if people sat, or where.

David J. Critchley

Winslow, Buckingham

All the Queen’s horses

Sir: It will come as no surprise to those with a horsey upbringing to learn that the young Elizabeth II had a certain firmness of character (Letters, 1 October). Anyone exposed to small ponies as a child will have had to combat creatures with considerable strength and attitude. In other words, absolutely no respect for rank or status. It is perhaps too much to imagine our late monarch as the protagonist of the Thelwell cartoons involving Penelope and Kipper, but the reality is a possibility even so. As it is for many equestrians, it was probably a relief when she could progress to larger mounts of a more amenable nature.

P.A. Reid

Sparsholt, Oxon