Go Back   Scotland Discussion Forum > Culture > History


William Wallace

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 7th February 2008, 16:01
Polwarth Polwarth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,721
Try googling The Norman Conquest and 1066.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 7th February 2008, 16:08
Kern Kern is offline
Quarantined Users
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 55


Nice one.

Kind of makes Robert the Bruce 4th or 5th generation Viking. The invading Normans of 1066 being 2nd generation Vikings. Its how his family made the leap to Scots freedom fighter?
Reply With Quote
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 12:11
ScotSites's Avatar
ScotSites ScotSites is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 497
Kern, maybe you should re-read what wiki has to say:

Quote:
Although his paternal ancestors were of Scoto-Norman heritage... his maternal ancestors were Scottish-Gaels.
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 12:24
Kern Kern is offline
Quarantined Users
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 55
Got that.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 22nd October 2009, 16:18
ochilsman ochilsman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wee County
Posts: 17
William Wallace

As a newbie here, I can't believe the criticism being directed at Wallace from certain quarters. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest he was junior to Moray or that Stirling Bridge was due to the latter. Wallace was the first true patriot. He fought for our countrys' independence without thought of reward. He united the common men against a common foe, which was why he was despised by the nobility. And he died a horrible death in the cause of Scottish independence.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 5th January 2010, 12:01
PADDYBOY PADDYBOY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 32
Wallace lost at the battle of Falkirk due to the Welsh longbows. The longbow was a devestating weapon for its time and was used to great effect by the English against the French in the hundred years war. Longshanks realised that the English heavy cavalry were outmatched by the Scottish schiltrons which is why he brought the unchivalrous longbows into play. most people have no idea how highly trained and accurate these guys were and that they could wipe out an enemy army without even seeing the colour of their eyes.
As for the Scottish light horse, charging the Welsh longbowmen ? dosen't that depend on how well protected/guarded they are ? My guess is that they (Scottish light horse) could see no way to break through to the archers and that is why they abandoned the field, as I say, my guess ?
The Bruce was shrewd enough to predict were the archers would be positioned at Bannockburn and set the light horse up to ambush and route them. Without their longbows, the English were outmatched.

It was following the battle of Falkirk that the longbow replaced the heavy horse as the main arm of the English military. Longshanks outlawed all sports except archery so that he could train and have the best archers in Europe and the rest is history, as they say
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:02.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC4 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.