The wars of independence-the facts.

[ANDY-J]

Scots would like to entertain the notion that their ultimate victory over the English in the wars of independence was due to the indomitable spirit and fighting qualities of the Scottish people.This is a myth.For one thing it is doubtful that the population of mediaeval Scotland had any concept of a unified Scottish national identity.Gaels viewed themselves as Gaels and men from Galloway referred to themselves as Galwegians.They did not fight for patriotic pride but rather they set aside their differences and united against a common enemy or they fought to fulfill an obligation to their feudal superior.England was a very much more wealthy and powerful nation than Scotland and the key to the English failure to subdue Scotland lies more in the logistical(supply)difficulties and in the nature of relationships within mediaeval feudal society.Original texts from the period show that the northern counties of England provided the most men and material for the English forays into Scotland-understandable given that these counties had a vested interest in subduing a hostile neighbour.Records also indicate the unwillingness of England's southern counties to contribute to campaigns north of the border and they only did so when they were threatened by the King if they did not fulfill their feudal obligations.The supply difficulties involved in maintaining an army in the field at this time were enormous.All supplies had to arrive by sea.Scottish armies realised this and often employed a scorched earth policy and deliberately avoided battle.Robert Bruce intended to follow this same policy until his brother foolishly or(fortuitously as it turned out)obliged him to face the English in a pitched battle at Bannockburn.The fact is however that if the English people had shared Edward I enthusiasm for conquering Scotland there would never have been a Bannockburn.If the English nobles had fulfilled their feudal obligations and provided men and equipment to occupy Scotland after the victories of Edward's armies then Scotland would have been succesfully conquered.What is not often appreciated is that during the wars of independence more Englishmen died as a result of malnutrition and disease than were killed by the Scots and this was as a direct result of the apathy towards King Edwards ambitions which was felt by the vast majority of his subjects and their unwillingness to provide supplies for his armies.Had Scotland however been a wealthy nation which could have been plundered then doubtless the English would have shown greater enthusiasm and we would not now have a sense of national identity as Scots.

[Edited by ANDY-J on 5th September 2001 at 14:27]

[The_Bruce]

I have to agree that, yes, in so called mediaeval Scotland we probably had no concept of a unified Scottish national identity but then again we never had the English. You have to ask why England was a much richer and more powerful nation than Scotland, because throughout history the English have INVADED and DICTATED to other nations throughout the world.

As you say in your post "the Northern Counties of England provided the most men and material for the English forays into Scotland & the unwillingness of England's southern counties to contribute to campaigns north of the border and they only did so when they were threatened by the King if they did not fulfill their feudal obligations".

Not much change there then! Still today the Southern Counties and the English government have no interest in Scotland or its people.

I can't agree with your excuse of logistics, England INVADED many a country sucessfully many thousands of miles from their own shaws.

As for "IF the English people had shared Edward I enthusiasm for conquering Scotland there would never have been a Bannockburn. IF the English nobles had fulfilled their feudal obligations and provided men and equipment to occupy Scotland after the victories of Edward's armies then Scotland would have been succesfully conquered". Well theres alot of IF's in there, here's a few more. IF the English people had supported Edward then there would have been alot more dead Englishmen. IF the English were not as arrogant and so full of their own self importance and IF they were not driven by greed, then yes, there might not have been a Bannockburn or a Stirling Brig, a Falkirk and even a Culloden. But as for our strength and unity, fighting agains an INVADING army your right we were not as organized or as well trained or funded as the English But we were determined, united and strong and IF one man like Wallace can give his people faith, the no army will ever destroy that. Just remember "Pro Libertate "

You posted an interesting post, you say "we would not now have a sense of national identity as Scots". So I take it your a Scot your self! So you must be a desendant of one of the so called Scottish Nobles who turned there back on Wallace and their own Country.

[The_Bruce]

Robert the Bruce, 2nd Earl of Carrick and grandson of the old Competitor had supported Edward I against Balliol but, when Wallace renounced the guardianship of Scotland Bruce and Balliol's nephew,John "Red" Comyn replaced him as joint guardians. After a quarrel with Comyn he returned to Edward's camp and obtained a pardon. Bruce, seeking a reconciliation with Comyn, impulsively stabbed him at Dumfries in a church. He was again outlawed by Edward and excommunicated. Bruce claimed the Scottish throne as great-great-grandson of David I and was crowned at Scone in 1306. He went into hiding in a cave on an island off Ireland after he killed Red Comyn. This is where we get the legend of Bruce and the spider. We do not know if this is a true story but it makes a good legend. He watched the spider spinning its web and attempting to fix the web to the ceiling. At last the spider succeeded. According to the legend, this inspired Bruce to overcome his many hardships and persevere until he had won back Scotland. He made plans to take back his original home, Turnberry Castle. As they made their way to the castle, the plan was that if all was well, a light would be showing at the castle wall. They did see the light but upon nearing the castle, discovered that it was an enemy fire. Nonetheless, Bruce attacked and by this surprise attack gained food, armour and horses. He learned that three of his brothers and his wife, daughter and two sisters had been imprisoned by the English. Although he was now King, he was not well supported by the nobles and so Scottish lands and castles remained in the hands of the English. He knew that he would have to fight castle by castle in order to regain Scotland and drive the English out. Through his perseverance, by 1324 all castles in Scotland except Stirling were in Scottish hands. By this time Edward II was on the throne of England and was much more ineffectual than his father.

Bruce's much smaller force spectacularly defeated Edward II's 20,000 strong army at Bannockburn. I will say no more here about the Battle as it has been so well written by Skye.

The Declaration of Arbroath, an affirmation of Scottish independence, was sent to the Pope but the Pope did not recognize Bruce for four years as the rightful king of Scotland. After Edward III ascended to the throne, Bruce's army harassed the English so much that Edward III was forced to acknowledge his sovereignty and Scotland's freedom.

Not long after the peace Bruce died. He was buried in Dunfermline Abbey. He had always wanted to go on a crusade. When he died his heart was placed in a silver casket and kept by Sir James Douglas who planned to take it on a crusade to the Holy Lands. Douglas joined the army of the King of Spain and while fighting a battle was killed. But before he died, he threw the casket in the midst of the battle crying, "Now go before, brave heart, as you always did, and I shall follow you or die." The casket was recovered
and returned to Scotland.

At the end of Bruce's life, he had achieved what he had fought for years to accomplish. Scotland was once again an independent kingdom. Scotland remembers him as "Good King Robert" and his triumph at Bannockburn is a rallying cry to Scots everywhere. Scotland would never again be conquered. Bruce's final legacy was to confirm "Scotland as separate and distinct, not just as a kingdom but as a community, a people and ultimately a nation."

[crying-charlie]

Hi to The Bruce!

Andy, you say you like facts, then here's some more for ya!

Between 1290 and 1292 Longshanks played a long and careful hand. This two year period of Interregnum was great credit to the now passed 'House of Dunkeld' since neither family were prepared to take to the sword and agreed that the matter could be handled within legal proceedings at court. Both families, Bruce and Balliol, claimed there decent from the line of David I's daughters. The Balliol claim was form David's eldest daughter, also called Margaret - and the Bruce claim was from the second daughter of David I, Isabel.

However, as price of mediation between these two houses, Longshanks placed himself in the position as 'Overlord of the land of Scotland' according to the highest legal principles. Longshanks, the future 'Hammer of the Scots' insisted that all those who claimed the right to the throne would adhere to certain rules. They must accept the judgment of the court and they must accept him as their feudal superior.

This would give Longshanks the superiority that he thought he always deserved, and lay the foundations for 'his' United Kingdom!

During this time of organisation and dispute Longshanks put in place English constables in Key Scottish royal castles in case there was any trouble from either family. The occupation of Scotland by Longshanks was well under way, and while the houses continued their meetings and arguments over who would be King of Scotland, Longshanks had gained a secure foothold on Scottish lands - or had he?
Of course the two names of Balliol and Bruce were at the forefront of the courts hearing, but what is commonly disregarded is the fact that the total amount of claims to the throne numbered 15. For example the Hastings family, descended from David I's third daughter, Ada, believed that the kingdom should be divided into three. Others based their claims on the throne from the descent of David I's sister, King Donald Ban, or other variations of the royal family's ******* offspring: one each from Alexander II and henry of Huntingdon, five from the libidinous William the Lion and even the 'Maid of Norway's' father, Erik II, threw his hat into the ring in a bizarre gesture of reverse inheritance. The more complicated the story the better it was for Longshanks, he now had 15 potential Kings to choose from, and a lot of time to let his courts make the decision.

After a great show of learning, which involved council with major continental universities, the court made up its mind on 6th November 1292. Just to gain that little extra piece of superiority Longshanks waited for 11 days before allowing the decision to be announced. In the Great Hall of Berwick Castle: his liege man, the 43 year old John Balliol was to be the new monarch of Scotland. Hardly surprising since two years before he had received the letter from the Bishop Fraser recommending exactly that decision.

On St Andrew's Day 1292, King John was enthroned on the Stone of Scone (The Stone of Destiny), the last monarch to receive this privilege in his native land. The following month he did homage to Edward I the Longshanks at Newcastle as part of the English court's Christmas festivities.

It is now that the game begins. King John Balliol of Scotland did not reign in the great peace that he thought was his. What with the ambitions of Longshanks, backed by the disloyalty of the thwarted Competitors, King John never had the peace in which to establish himself. Longshanks exploited the troubled situation to its fullest, he demanded that the complaints of his Scottish subjects be heard in English courts. When John understandably objected he was threatened, by his 'Overlord' Longshanks with whom he had previously paid homage, with contempt of court and the loss of three of his major castles and towns.

Longshanks also stirred Erik II to reclaim the Western Isles as the Scots had not kept up the payment of 100 merks due to the Norwegian king as was agreed in the treaties which Longshanks had forced the Scots to agree on if they wanted him to mediate the decision of their new king. Add to that the less than patriotic behaviour of the other thwarted families, King John was caught in a place which he didn't want - he ruled a country which didn't want him, and he was not supported by Longshanks the way which he thought he would have been by paying him homage. Longshanks had exactly what he wanted: A divided Scotland in which both sides wanted his help. He was indeed 'Overlord of the land of Scotland' and he didn't have to pick up a sword.

The final straw came when Longshanks insisted that John help him with military service against the French King Philip IV, Balliol had had enough. He did the opposite and forged a treaty with King Philip IV in October 1295 and assembled his host near Selkirk the following March. If Longshanks wanted any more from King John, then he was going to have to fight for it. This, of course, was just what Longshanks had been waiting for and wanted. He had imposed his judgment and superior position on Scotland's king, and then bullied him into a corner which Longshanks new he would eventually strike back from: he had been picking a fight with Scotland for years, and now he was going to get it. But as always the cards were stacked in Longshanks' favour. Whilst bullying Balliol, he had been gaining favour with the other families by allowing them to speak out.

The ill-armed and ill-supported army of King John Balliol was no match for Longshanks' battle-hardened professional soldiers. At the end of March Longshanks had sacked Berwick and massacred its inhabitants.

Many of the great castles surrendered to his call and with one month, on 27th April the Earl of Surrey and his Scottish allies routed King John's forces at the battle of Dunbar. Edinburgh Castle fell, and John surrendered on July 11th.

At a humiliating ceremony at Brechin, King John had the insignia of royalty, his scepter, crown, sword and ring stripped from him. Longshanks marched forward as far north as Elgin on a mission of conquest, seizing the opportunity which he had been patiently engineering for some time. The conquest of Scotland was now at hand once and for all. John Balliol was taken south to the Tower of London and was eventually released in 1299 to spend the rest of his life in exile on his French estates where he died blind and forgotten in 1313 - the very same year that the new king, Robert the Bruce, beat the English at Bannockburn.

To future generations John Balliol is known as "Toom Tabard" or 'Tyne Tabard' (meaning empty coat), a cruel nickname which suggests that his personality was as unimpressive as his rule. The judgment is a harsh one, caught between the twin wheels of an ambitious, distinguished soldier and ruthless bully of a King - Longshanks, and the disloyalty of many powerful subjects, his cause was well-high hopeless from the very start.

King Edward I (Longshanks) of England now had Scotland in his grasp. Just a few years previously he had conquered Wales in mush the same way, taking only 6 years to turn Wales into an annex of England completely under English rule. Doing the same to Scotland must now have seemed a formality.

Longshanks himself left Scotland leaving matters to his trusted leaders, the situation with France had deteriorated and he had matters of a more important nature to deal with rather than the being present in Scotland for the final clean up. His contempt for Scots and their "miserable country" comes across clearly in a passing remark made to his soldiers when he is reported to have said "Bon besoigne fait qy de merde se delivrer" - "He who rids himself of **** does a good job".

Scotland had been pacified at a minimum loss to England, with winter now upon them most of the English host returned south and was demobolised, leaving garrisons of hand-picked men in all the castles of Scotland. Longshanks doubtless congratulated himself on a good job well done. His self satisfaction must have been sort lived.

North of the border, back in Scotland, Scotsman William Wallace - Hammer of the English - raised his head holding true to his family motto: "Pro libertate" - "FOR FREEDOM".

Now ya know what the words "Pro libertate" say Andy. Even if you dont know what they MEAN!

[crying-charlie]

Here is some bed time reading for you Andy!


To the most Holy Father and Lord in Christ, the Lord John, by divine providence Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman and Universal Church, his humble and devout sons Duncan, Earl of Fife, Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray, Lord of Man and of Annandale, Patrick Dunbar, Earl of March, Malise, Earl of Strathearn, Malcolm, Earl of Lennox, William, Earl of Ross, Magnus, Earl of Caithness and Orkney, and William, Earl of Sutherland; Walter, Steward of Scotland, William Soules, Butler of Scotland, James, Lord of Douglas, Roger Mowbray, David, Lord of Brechin, David Graham, Ingram Umfraville, John Menteith, guardian of the earldom of Menteith, Alexander Fraser, Gilbert Hay, Constable of Scotland, Robert Keith, Marischal of Scotland, Henry St Clair, John Graham, David Lindsay, William Oliphant, Patrick Graham, John Fenton, William Abernethy, David Wemyss, William Mushet, Fergus of Ardrossan, Eustace Maxwell, William Ramsay, William Mowat, Alan Murray, Donald Campbell, John Cameron, Reginald Cheyne, Alexander Seton, Andrew Leslie, and Alexander Straiton, and the other barons and freeholders and the whole community of the realm of Scotland send all manner of filial reverence, with devout kisses of his blessed feet.

Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner. The high qualities and deserts of these people, were they not otherwise manifest, gain glory enough from this: that the King of kings and Lord of lords, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His Passion and Resurrection, called them, even though settled in the uttermost parts of the earth, almost the first to His most holy faith. Nor would He have them confirmed in that faith by merely anyone but by the first of His Apostles -- by calling, though second or third in rank -- the most gentle Saint Andrew, the Blessed Peter's brother, and desired him to keep them under his protection as their patron forever.


The Most Holy Fathers your predecessors gave careful heed to these things and bestowed many favours and numerous privileges on this same kingdom and people, as being the special charge of the Blessed Peter's brother. Thus our nation under their protection did indeed live in freedom and peace up to the time when that mighty prince the King of the English, Edward, the father of the one who reigns today, when our kingdom had no head and our people harboured no malice or treachery and were then unused to wars or invasions, came in the guise of a friend and ally to harass them as an enemy. The deeds of cruelty, massacre, violence, pillage, arson, imprisoning prelates, burning down monasteries, robbing and killing monks and nuns, and yet other outrages without number which he committed against our people, sparing neither age nor sex, religion nor rank, no one could describe nor fully imagine unless he had seen them with his own eyes.


But from these countless evils we have been set free, by the help of Him Who though He afflicts yet heals and restores, by our most tireless Prince, King and Lord, the Lord Robert. He, that his people and his heritage might be delivered out of the hands of our enemies, met toil and fatigue, hunger and peril, like another Macabaeus or Joshua and bore them cheerfully. Him, too, divine providence, his right of succession according to or laws and customs which we shall maintain to the death, and the due consent and assent of us all have made our Prince and King. To him, as to the man by whom salvation has been wrought unto our people, we are bound both by law and by his merits that our freedom may be still maintained, and by him, come what may, we mean to stand. Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom -- for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.


Therefore it is, Reverend Father and Lord, that we beseech your Holiness with our most earnest prayers and suppliant hearts, inasmuch as you will in your sincerity and goodness consider all this, that, since with Him Whose Vice-Regent on earth you are there is neither weighing nor distinction of Jew and Greek, Scotsman or Englishman, you will look with the eyes of a father on the troubles and privation brought by the English upon us and upon the Church of God. May it please you to admonish and exhort the King of the English, who ought to be satisfied with what belongs to him since England used once to be enough for seven kings or more, to leave us Scots in peace, who live in this poor little Scotland, beyond which there is no dwelling-place at all, and covet nothing but our own. We are sincerely willing to do anything for him, having regard to our condition, that we can, to win peace for ourselves. This truly concerns you, Holy Father, since you see the savagery of the heathen raging against the Christians, as the sins of Christians have indeed deserved, and the frontiers of Christendom being pressed inward every day; and how much it will tarnish your Holiness's memory if (which God forbid) the Church suffers eclipse or scandal in any branch of it during your time, you must perceive. Then rouse the Christian princes who for false reasons pretend that they cannot go to help of the Holy Land because of wars they have on hand with their neighbours. The real reason that prevents them is that in making war on their smaller neighbours they find quicker profit and weaker resistance. But how cheerfully our Lord the King and we too would go there if the King of the English would leave us in peace, He from Whom nothing is hidden well knows; and we profess and declare it to you as the Vicar of Christ and to all Christendom. But if your Holiness puts too much faith in the tales the English tell and will not give sincere belief to all this, nor refrain from favouring them to our prejudice, then the slaughter of bodies, the perdition of souls, and all the other misfortunes that will follow, inflicted by them on us and by us on them, will, we believe, be surely laid by the Most High to your charge.


To conclude, we are and shall ever be, as far as duty calls us, ready to do your will in all things, as obedient sons to you as His Vicar; and to Him as the Supreme King and Judge we commit the maintenance of our cause, casting our cares upon Him and firmly trusting that He will inspire us with courage and bring our enemies to nought. May the Most High preserve you to his Holy Church in holiness and health and grant you length of days.


Given at the monastery of Arbroath in Scotland on the sixth day of the month of April in the year of grace thirteen hundred and twenty and the fifteenth year of the reign of our King aforesaid.


Endorsed: Letter directed to our Lord the Supreme Pontiff by the community of Scotland.

[ANDY-J]

'If John Comyn would be prepared to help Bruce become King of Scotland then he would receive all Bruces estates and if on the other hand Comyn gave Bruce his estates Bruce would undertake to support him for the crown'

Barbour,John,TheBruce- Edinburgh 1907.

The above is a quotation from a Scottish chronicle and gives an insight into not only the attitude of Robert the Bruce but the attitudes of the social elite in mediaeval European society.Clearly if this text is genuine it suggests that Bruce is primarily concerned with his own personal ambitions.I regard Robert the Bruce as a hero king however initially he was no more than a typical aristocrat of the period ruthlessly pursuing his own ends by any available means.I don't swallow some of the fanciful nonsense which I find in certain history books of the period.I have studied not only the wars of independence but also mediaeval feudal society throughout Europe and this has given me a greater understanding of the values and attitudes which prevailed during the period.I have a deep sense of pride in my country-what I don't have however are any fanciful notions that our ancestors were idealistic freedom fighters engaged in a patriotic struggle against English tyranny.

I disagree with Andy on the matter of national identity, and I'd like to offer three pieces of evidence in support of my assertion that the Scots did feel a sense of unified national identity at the time of the Wars of Independence, and well before the wars.

For well over 1000 years, the monarch of Scotland has been properly addressed as King (or Queen) of Scots. Not Scotland but Scots. In order for this title to have any meaning, there must have been people who identified themselves as Scots who acknowledged their sovereign.

Before, during and after the Wars of Independence all official documents are written in the name of the King and The Community of the Realm of Scotland. Again, community would have no meaning unless the ruling elite, at least, felt they had something in common. In this case, the Realm of Scotland was what they had in common. Therefore, the landowners, clergy, etc. felt themselves to have a common identity, i.e. Scots.

During the 13th and 14th Centuries it was widely believed among Scotland's peasants and foot soldiers (the Common People for want of a better word) that the English had tails. This clearly indicates a sense of difference, of "them" and "us", which I contend shows that the Scots felt a sense of national identity.