What do you think?
Rate this book
Robert the Bruce - King of Scots
Robert the Bruce is one of the great heroic figures of history. When after years of struggle Scotland was reduced to a vassal state by Edward I of England it was Bruce who, supported by the Scottish Church and a group of devoted followers, had himself crowned as King of Scots and renewed the fight for freedom. Ronald McNair Scott has used the accounts of contemporary chronicles, particularly those of John Barbour, to reconstruct the story of one of the most remarkable of medieval kings. It is a story with episodes quite as romantic as those of King Arthur, but one which belongs to the authentic history of the Scottish nation.
253 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1982
141 people are currently reading
1239 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 70 reviews
November 13, 2018
The Scots were so divided among themselves that sometimes the father was on the Scottish side and the son on the English and vice versa: also one brother might be with the Scots and another with the English; yea, even the same individual be first with one party and then with another. But all those who were with the English were merely feigning, either because it was the stronger party, or in order to save the lands they possessed in England: for their hearts were always with their own people, although their person might not be so.
With the death of Alexander III in 1286 it was the beginning of the unraveling of strong Scottish rule.
Edward I King of England wanting to unite the kingdoms of Scotland and Wales with the lands he
currently controlled in England and France. He was determined, ambitious, intelligent and frankly rather brutal. He supported the ascension of John of Balliol in 1292 after Alexander’s children all died, conveniently, in quick succession. King John, he felt would be weak and easy to undermine and soon a council of Scottish barons, tired of the way the English King was treating them as vassals of his empire, was appointed to help the King. Edward not liking this turn of events invades Scotland in 1296, captures John, and hauls him off to England for an all expense paid vacation to the Tower of London. John abdicates.
Edward I
The Bruces had been sitting on the sidelines through all the ruckus feeling that their claim to the throne was stronger than John of Balliol. They had sworn fealty to Edward on one day, but then continued to fight against him on the next day. This was an era of barons, dukes and earls hedging their bets, blowing with the wind, with the ultimate goal being in the end to land on the side of the victor. If they chose the wrong side for too long or were too vigorous in their support for the loser they lost their head, and their lands were confiscated by the crown.
William Wallace appears on the scene becoming the Guardian of Scotland. He proves to be a real pain in the English Royal Arse. He introduces an effective form of guerilla warfare and develops a new fighting concept involving spears formed in a hedgehog called a schiltron. The better armoured and mounted English soldiers had been decimating the foot soldiers of the Scots in open battles. With the development of this new method the Scots could stand up better to the onslaught effectively taking away the advantage of mounted soldiers. At the Battle of Falkirk this method allowed them at least at chance against the English. The problem of course was that Edward had brought along a deadly weapon.
Again and again the schiltrons were charged by the mounted knights but their ranks remained unbroken. It was then that King Edward ordered up the Welsh longbowmen and the crossbowmen and sligmen of Gascony. A deadly hail of arrows, bolts and stones was poured into the schiltrons until the gaps in their ranks became too wide to be filled and the mail-clad knights broke into the weakened rings. Once the human fortress was breached hundreds upon hundreds of the Scottish foot were slain.
Wallace escaped, but due to the enormity of the loss, and finding his support that was based on victories was dissipating in the wind with a defeat, resigned as Guardian of Scotland. This brings in a joint guardianship of Robert the Bruce and John Comyn both with claims to the Scottish throne. Edward wasn’t done with Wallace. When he was captured in 1305 vengeance was swiftly and brutally perpetrated and certainly sent a message to all those that chose to oppose him.
He was chained flat to a hurdle and for the greater entertainment of the populace was dragged by horses along a circuitous route over four miles of cobblestones from Westminster to Smithfield. There he was hanged but cut down half-strangled and still alive. Then he was castrated and disembowelled. His genitals and entrails were burned before his eyes and, after his unspeakable agony had been ended by the headman’s axe, his heart was ripped out and added to the flames. His body was then hacked into four pieces. His head was mounted on a pike on London Bridge and the four quarters were distributed to Newcastle-on-Tyne, Berwick, Stirling and Perth to be displayed to the public eye as menacing symbols of King Edward’s might.
Robert the Bruce
Robert the Bruce and John Comyn had a signed agreement between themselves. Given a choice Comyn decided to give up his claim to the throne in exchange for the Bruce lands. Robert the Bruce would be crowned king when there was a kingdom to be crowned for again. In one of many moments of double crossing and underhanded dealings in the war for independence John Comyn took the agreement to Edward to curry favor and also to hopefully eliminate a powerful rival. Robert by the nearest of margins escaped from the English court before he could be arrested. He later meets with Comyn to discuss this change of events and with the help of his closest supporters kills Comyn. Bruce is crowned King of Scotland.
His destiny was sealed. His family would be pay a large price in the coming years. His brothers are captured and beheaded. His wife and daughter from a previous marriage along with other female members of his family are captured and hauled back to England where Edward comes up with a particularly horrific punishment.
For them he ordained that wooden cages should be built jutting from the battlements of Berwick and Roxburgh castles respectively, and that within them they should be shut up as animals in a zoo, exposed to the gaze of passers-by with the only concession to their modesty the provision of privies within the walls.
The women would stay there under those conditions for four long years. He’d planned the same for Bruce’s twelve year old daughter, but public opinion changed his mind. Bruce’s wife Elizabeth de Burgh because of her connections to English royalty was not put in a cage, but placed under strict house arrest and would remain a prisoner for eight years.
Robert the Bruce catches a break with the death of Edward I in 1307. His son Edward II is a brave young man, but was much more distracted by pursuits of pleasure. He also had issues with his own barons mainly over the overt showering of affection and treasure on his male favorites a man named Piers Gaveston and another named Hugh Despenser. He fathered five children by two different women, but it is fairly obvious he was bisexual. During the upheaval with his barons his first favorite Gaveston was beheaded and later Hugh Despenser was also gruesomely executed for treason.
Battle of Bannockburn
Robert begins a campaign of guerrilla warfare and stealthy castle attacks that culminates in the battle of Bannockburn and defeats Edward II ensuring independence for Scotland and solidifying his right to be King. Edward’s troubles do not end there. His wife, sister to the king of France, Isabella, raises an army and captures her husband and imprisons him in Kenilworth Castle. There they force him to abdicate and his son Edward III is crowned king of England. He attempts to escape and is recaptured, but after a second attempt his wife decides he is just too much of a problem.
Systematically he was ill-treated and starved in the hope that this would bring about his decease, but when his robust constitution failed to succumb to this treatment, a marrow bone was thrust up his rectum and through it a red hot poker to cauterize his entrails so that his body could be displayed to the public gaze without sign of injury, the victim of natural death.
Isabella, controlled a kingdom at the point of a red hot poker
Robert the Bruce along with William Wallace have become enduring legends of Scottish freedom. They waged war against a superior enemy and found that patience and stealth were the best weapons to eroding the endurance of the English. My disappointment with this book is that Robert the Bruce remained a shadowy figure. His exploits are of mythic proportions. He was a warrior, a gifted fighter, a great strategist, and a man who inspired his people. I’m afraid that the source documentation that Scott had to draw on was from the heralds of the day who obscured the man in hyperbole. The book did fill in some historical blanks for me that will make future reading about the period much easier to comprehend.
With the death of Alexander III in 1286 it was the beginning of the unraveling of strong Scottish rule.
Quhen Alysandyr oure kyng was dede,
That Scotland led in luve and le,
Away was sons of ale and brede,
Of wyne and wax of gamyn and gle.
Oure gold was changed into lede,
Cryst, born into vyrgynyte,
Succoure Scotland and remede,
That stat is in perplexyte.
Edward I King of England wanting to unite the kingdoms of Scotland and Wales with the lands he
currently controlled in England and France. He was determined, ambitious, intelligent and frankly rather brutal. He supported the ascension of John of Balliol in 1292 after Alexander’s children all died, conveniently, in quick succession. King John, he felt would be weak and easy to undermine and soon a council of Scottish barons, tired of the way the English King was treating them as vassals of his empire, was appointed to help the King. Edward not liking this turn of events invades Scotland in 1296, captures John, and hauls him off to England for an all expense paid vacation to the Tower of London. John abdicates.
Edward I
The Bruces had been sitting on the sidelines through all the ruckus feeling that their claim to the throne was stronger than John of Balliol. They had sworn fealty to Edward on one day, but then continued to fight against him on the next day. This was an era of barons, dukes and earls hedging their bets, blowing with the wind, with the ultimate goal being in the end to land on the side of the victor. If they chose the wrong side for too long or were too vigorous in their support for the loser they lost their head, and their lands were confiscated by the crown.
William Wallace appears on the scene becoming the Guardian of Scotland. He proves to be a real pain in the English Royal Arse. He introduces an effective form of guerilla warfare and develops a new fighting concept involving spears formed in a hedgehog called a schiltron. The better armoured and mounted English soldiers had been decimating the foot soldiers of the Scots in open battles. With the development of this new method the Scots could stand up better to the onslaught effectively taking away the advantage of mounted soldiers. At the Battle of Falkirk this method allowed them at least at chance against the English. The problem of course was that Edward had brought along a deadly weapon.
Again and again the schiltrons were charged by the mounted knights but their ranks remained unbroken. It was then that King Edward ordered up the Welsh longbowmen and the crossbowmen and sligmen of Gascony. A deadly hail of arrows, bolts and stones was poured into the schiltrons until the gaps in their ranks became too wide to be filled and the mail-clad knights broke into the weakened rings. Once the human fortress was breached hundreds upon hundreds of the Scottish foot were slain.
Wallace escaped, but due to the enormity of the loss, and finding his support that was based on victories was dissipating in the wind with a defeat, resigned as Guardian of Scotland. This brings in a joint guardianship of Robert the Bruce and John Comyn both with claims to the Scottish throne. Edward wasn’t done with Wallace. When he was captured in 1305 vengeance was swiftly and brutally perpetrated and certainly sent a message to all those that chose to oppose him.
He was chained flat to a hurdle and for the greater entertainment of the populace was dragged by horses along a circuitous route over four miles of cobblestones from Westminster to Smithfield. There he was hanged but cut down half-strangled and still alive. Then he was castrated and disembowelled. His genitals and entrails were burned before his eyes and, after his unspeakable agony had been ended by the headman’s axe, his heart was ripped out and added to the flames. His body was then hacked into four pieces. His head was mounted on a pike on London Bridge and the four quarters were distributed to Newcastle-on-Tyne, Berwick, Stirling and Perth to be displayed to the public eye as menacing symbols of King Edward’s might.
Robert the Bruce
Robert the Bruce and John Comyn had a signed agreement between themselves. Given a choice Comyn decided to give up his claim to the throne in exchange for the Bruce lands. Robert the Bruce would be crowned king when there was a kingdom to be crowned for again. In one of many moments of double crossing and underhanded dealings in the war for independence John Comyn took the agreement to Edward to curry favor and also to hopefully eliminate a powerful rival. Robert by the nearest of margins escaped from the English court before he could be arrested. He later meets with Comyn to discuss this change of events and with the help of his closest supporters kills Comyn. Bruce is crowned King of Scotland.
His destiny was sealed. His family would be pay a large price in the coming years. His brothers are captured and beheaded. His wife and daughter from a previous marriage along with other female members of his family are captured and hauled back to England where Edward comes up with a particularly horrific punishment.
For them he ordained that wooden cages should be built jutting from the battlements of Berwick and Roxburgh castles respectively, and that within them they should be shut up as animals in a zoo, exposed to the gaze of passers-by with the only concession to their modesty the provision of privies within the walls.
The women would stay there under those conditions for four long years. He’d planned the same for Bruce’s twelve year old daughter, but public opinion changed his mind. Bruce’s wife Elizabeth de Burgh because of her connections to English royalty was not put in a cage, but placed under strict house arrest and would remain a prisoner for eight years.
Robert the Bruce catches a break with the death of Edward I in 1307. His son Edward II is a brave young man, but was much more distracted by pursuits of pleasure. He also had issues with his own barons mainly over the overt showering of affection and treasure on his male favorites a man named Piers Gaveston and another named Hugh Despenser. He fathered five children by two different women, but it is fairly obvious he was bisexual. During the upheaval with his barons his first favorite Gaveston was beheaded and later Hugh Despenser was also gruesomely executed for treason.
Battle of Bannockburn
Robert begins a campaign of guerrilla warfare and stealthy castle attacks that culminates in the battle of Bannockburn and defeats Edward II ensuring independence for Scotland and solidifying his right to be King. Edward’s troubles do not end there. His wife, sister to the king of France, Isabella, raises an army and captures her husband and imprisons him in Kenilworth Castle. There they force him to abdicate and his son Edward III is crowned king of England. He attempts to escape and is recaptured, but after a second attempt his wife decides he is just too much of a problem.
Systematically he was ill-treated and starved in the hope that this would bring about his decease, but when his robust constitution failed to succumb to this treatment, a marrow bone was thrust up his rectum and through it a red hot poker to cauterize his entrails so that his body could be displayed to the public gaze without sign of injury, the victim of natural death.
Isabella, controlled a kingdom at the point of a red hot poker
Robert the Bruce along with William Wallace have become enduring legends of Scottish freedom. They waged war against a superior enemy and found that patience and stealth were the best weapons to eroding the endurance of the English. My disappointment with this book is that Robert the Bruce remained a shadowy figure. His exploits are of mythic proportions. He was a warrior, a gifted fighter, a great strategist, and a man who inspired his people. I’m afraid that the source documentation that Scott had to draw on was from the heralds of the day who obscured the man in hyperbole. The book did fill in some historical blanks for me that will make future reading about the period much easier to comprehend.
November 11, 2018
The recent release of the Netflix film “Outlaw King” led me to re-read this biography of The Bruce, which I originally read many years ago. I’m glad to say I found it a worthwhile re-read.
Despite his near-incredible success in the Wars of Independence, Robert Bruce is generally seen in Scotland as a less romantic figure than William Wallace. The latter is seen as an unselfish patriot whereas Bruce is viewed as someone motivated primarily by personal ambition. To some extent this is looking at Bruce through the lens of modern-day morality. Bruce was born into what might be described as the international aristocracy of medieval Europe, for whom family and dynasty were more important than wider notions of nationhood. For all that, it is striking how many of Bruce’s speeches, and those of his supporters, expressed notions of nationalism that some claim did not arise before the 18th century.
It’s been said that a characteristic of successful people is their ability to recover from setbacks, and certainly Bruce was a man of astonishing resilience. At his lowest point his wife, daughter and two of his sisters had been imprisoned by the English and three of his brothers had been barbarously executed, whilst he himself was reduced to a hunted fugitive with a legion of enemies and no more than a handful of followers. How he recovered from this position to defeat not only his domestic enemies but the armies of England is truly a remarkable tale, culminating in his crushing victory over Edward II at Bannockburn in 1314, the most disastrous defeat ever suffered by a medieval English army. The author gives us a detailed and vivid description of the battle, with diagrams.
Bruce was without question a brilliant tactician who, at Bannockburn and in earlier battles, made textbook choices of terrain to negate the advantages held by the numerically superior and better equipped armies of England. He was no less able as a strategist, practising what we now recognise as “asymmetrical” warfare. In conventional terms the English armies were much more formidable than those of the Scots. Bruce used the superior mobility of his forces, and the fact he was fighting in his own country, for the purposes of ambush and raid. It’s a pattern we’ve seen in different conflicts over many centuries. The author quotes a 14th century Scottish verse:
“On foot should be all Scottish war
Let hill and marsh their foes debar
And woods and walls prove such an arm
That enemies do them no harm
In hidden spots keep every store
And burn the plainlands them before
So, when they find the land lie waste
Needs must they pass away in haste
Harried by cunning raids at night
And threatening sounds from every height
Then as they leave, with great array
Smite with the sword and chase away
This is the counsel and intent
Of Good King Robert’s Testament”
The book is divided into 3 parts. I would say it starts slowly but really gets going from Part 2 onwards. Worth reading if you are thinking of watching the film, and a worthy biography of an exceptional historical figure.
Despite his near-incredible success in the Wars of Independence, Robert Bruce is generally seen in Scotland as a less romantic figure than William Wallace. The latter is seen as an unselfish patriot whereas Bruce is viewed as someone motivated primarily by personal ambition. To some extent this is looking at Bruce through the lens of modern-day morality. Bruce was born into what might be described as the international aristocracy of medieval Europe, for whom family and dynasty were more important than wider notions of nationhood. For all that, it is striking how many of Bruce’s speeches, and those of his supporters, expressed notions of nationalism that some claim did not arise before the 18th century.
It’s been said that a characteristic of successful people is their ability to recover from setbacks, and certainly Bruce was a man of astonishing resilience. At his lowest point his wife, daughter and two of his sisters had been imprisoned by the English and three of his brothers had been barbarously executed, whilst he himself was reduced to a hunted fugitive with a legion of enemies and no more than a handful of followers. How he recovered from this position to defeat not only his domestic enemies but the armies of England is truly a remarkable tale, culminating in his crushing victory over Edward II at Bannockburn in 1314, the most disastrous defeat ever suffered by a medieval English army. The author gives us a detailed and vivid description of the battle, with diagrams.
Bruce was without question a brilliant tactician who, at Bannockburn and in earlier battles, made textbook choices of terrain to negate the advantages held by the numerically superior and better equipped armies of England. He was no less able as a strategist, practising what we now recognise as “asymmetrical” warfare. In conventional terms the English armies were much more formidable than those of the Scots. Bruce used the superior mobility of his forces, and the fact he was fighting in his own country, for the purposes of ambush and raid. It’s a pattern we’ve seen in different conflicts over many centuries. The author quotes a 14th century Scottish verse:
“On foot should be all Scottish war
Let hill and marsh their foes debar
And woods and walls prove such an arm
That enemies do them no harm
In hidden spots keep every store
And burn the plainlands them before
So, when they find the land lie waste
Needs must they pass away in haste
Harried by cunning raids at night
And threatening sounds from every height
Then as they leave, with great array
Smite with the sword and chase away
This is the counsel and intent
Of Good King Robert’s Testament”
The book is divided into 3 parts. I would say it starts slowly but really gets going from Part 2 onwards. Worth reading if you are thinking of watching the film, and a worthy biography of an exceptional historical figure.
March 3, 2023
I'd say this is the best biography of The Bruce.
The leading noble Robert Bruce came to the front of Scottish history to succeed after the execution of freedom fighter, William Wallace.
King Robert The Bruce lived in the 13th to 14th centuries and fought the King of England and his enemies inside Scotland and led Scotland to independence.
This book mainly focuses on battles (including not only big battles, but also guerrilla battles and castle attacks)
Scotland, who was an overwhelming military-economic subordinate to England, defeated England in the battle of Bannockburn.
I would recommend this book to those interested in Scottish history and in particular that of Robert the Bruce.
The leading noble Robert Bruce came to the front of Scottish history to succeed after the execution of freedom fighter, William Wallace.
King Robert The Bruce lived in the 13th to 14th centuries and fought the King of England and his enemies inside Scotland and led Scotland to independence.
This book mainly focuses on battles (including not only big battles, but also guerrilla battles and castle attacks)
Scotland, who was an overwhelming military-economic subordinate to England, defeated England in the battle of Bannockburn.
I would recommend this book to those interested in Scottish history and in particular that of Robert the Bruce.
June 18, 2023
Stirring the patriotic heart. Alongside William Wallace, Bruce takes his place as the greatest of Scottish leaders from history. Although this biography is probably biased in his favour there remains little doubt that he was a brilliant tactician, inspirational leader and also, to a degree by the standards of the day, a humane ruler. If only those that followed hadn't squandered what he had fought so hard to win. We could do with a leader of similar stature in the modern world of politics to truly allow Scottish freedom to flourish once more.
April 3, 2023
Robert the Bruce, King of Scotland, had 5,000 men when he faced the 20,000 strong army of English King Edward II at Bannockburn in 1314. The Bruce’s superior strategy together with the skill, commitment and loyalty of his men forced the English army into retreat. In the words of our national anthem, he sent them homewards tae think again. And think again they did. Edwards I, II and III were determined to subjugate the Scots but when Robert Bruce led the nation, their efforts were repulsed time and again. King Robert tried many times to agree a lasting truce but the English kings would not agree as they were determined to bring Scotland under English rule.
The English crown’s influence with the Holy See brought notices of excommunication against Bruce and his men. He was summoned to Avignon but because the Pope refused to address him by his rightful title, King of Scots, Bruce refused. In response, the Pope was sent the document known as the Declaration of Arbroath, 1320, which detailed the cruelties and hardships suffered under English rule, declared the loyalty of the Scottish nation to King Robert and swore to defend their right to liberty:
for so long as there shall be but one hundred of us remain alive we will never give consent to subject ourselves to the dominion of the English. For it is not glory, it is not riches, neither is it honour, but it is freedom alone that we fight and contend for, which no honest man will lose but with his life.
The letter asked the Pope to instruct the King of England to be content with what he had and to leave the Scots in peace. It was stirring stuff and it worked. The Pope sent a missive to King Edward II instructing him to make peace with the Scots but it wasn’t until 1328 that it was eventually achieved. By then, the young King Edward III had also had a go and failed to conquer the Scots. Finally, his 6 year old daughter, Joan, was married to Robert’s 4 year old son, the future David II of Scotland, thus cementing the truce.
I love the spirit in which this book is written. It’s not just a biography, it’s a celebration of a man who was not only a great statesman but also a brilliant military strategist, a clever politician, diplomat and, in stark contrast to his English counterparts, a humanitarian. It reads at times like a Boys’ Own story! The Bruce was surrounded by faithful companions such as James ‘Black’ Douglas who, on his king’s death and at his request, journeyed towards the Holy Land with his heart only to be killed in battle with the Moors near Seville. These times are full of traitors, heroes, naked ambition, power hungry zealots and stomach churning atrocities. It’s part of my country’s history though and I enjoyed learning more about this particular period. Thank goodness Those days are past now and in the past, they must remain!
The English crown’s influence with the Holy See brought notices of excommunication against Bruce and his men. He was summoned to Avignon but because the Pope refused to address him by his rightful title, King of Scots, Bruce refused. In response, the Pope was sent the document known as the Declaration of Arbroath, 1320, which detailed the cruelties and hardships suffered under English rule, declared the loyalty of the Scottish nation to King Robert and swore to defend their right to liberty:
for so long as there shall be but one hundred of us remain alive we will never give consent to subject ourselves to the dominion of the English. For it is not glory, it is not riches, neither is it honour, but it is freedom alone that we fight and contend for, which no honest man will lose but with his life.
The letter asked the Pope to instruct the King of England to be content with what he had and to leave the Scots in peace. It was stirring stuff and it worked. The Pope sent a missive to King Edward II instructing him to make peace with the Scots but it wasn’t until 1328 that it was eventually achieved. By then, the young King Edward III had also had a go and failed to conquer the Scots. Finally, his 6 year old daughter, Joan, was married to Robert’s 4 year old son, the future David II of Scotland, thus cementing the truce.
I love the spirit in which this book is written. It’s not just a biography, it’s a celebration of a man who was not only a great statesman but also a brilliant military strategist, a clever politician, diplomat and, in stark contrast to his English counterparts, a humanitarian. It reads at times like a Boys’ Own story! The Bruce was surrounded by faithful companions such as James ‘Black’ Douglas who, on his king’s death and at his request, journeyed towards the Holy Land with his heart only to be killed in battle with the Moors near Seville. These times are full of traitors, heroes, naked ambition, power hungry zealots and stomach churning atrocities. It’s part of my country’s history though and I enjoyed learning more about this particular period. Thank goodness Those days are past now and in the past, they must remain!
June 6, 2022
Very easy to read and overall and very informative, welcoming and entertaining historical bio.
May 9, 2019
Enjoyed this book which recounts the story of the Bruce exclusively from his family's perspective, unlike the last book on the Bruce which I read (King Robert The Bruce, by Murison). According to McNair Scott: the Bruce never truly betrayed Scotland, which makes sense when one considers that the Bruces were unfairly denied the vacant throne of Scotland through the shenanigans of English king Longshanks (Edward I - yes that grim, aggressive king with the snowy white beard from Mel Gibson's Braveheart) which are amply described in this book.
At the end of the day the Bruce was a Lord who - like all other Lords - chiefly sought to advance the fortunes of his family, yet one has to consider when branding his fighting against his fellow Scots 'traitorous' that he was dealing with a desperate, fratricidal, Scottish zero-sum 'civil war' of sorts between the houses of Comyn and Bruce while also having to fend off the crushing might of the Kingdom of England led by the ruthless and capable Longshanks. Although the author doesn't refrain from calling out Longshanks' betrayal of Scottish trust for what it was, he also provides valid strategic reasons why Longshanks (also preoccupied with suppressing the Welsh and Irish and locked in constant conflict with France) decided to take full advantage of the power vacuum in Scotland which was brought about following the death of the Maid Of Norway.
Mcnair Scott also provides a lot of interesting background about all of the players involved in the Scottish 'game of thrones' which followed the death of the Maid Of Norway. And while I'm on the subject of the 'Game of Thrones' analogy, it is very interesting to note that phrases like 'Robert's Rebellion' and references to 'Ramsay' and 'the small folk' in George R. R. Martin's 'A Song Of Ice And Fire' are directly ripped off the historical period in which the Bruce was forced to wangle his bloody way towards Scottish kingship. Martin's unforgettable, larger-than-life Robert Baratheon is also heavily based on the Bruce, with his legendary conflict with Prince Rhaegar Targaryen at the Trident being highly reminiscent of the Bruce's own clash with De Bohun on the eve of the Battle of Bannockburn. Like Martin's Baratheon, Robert the Bruce was one of the leading knights of his day, a man of great martial prowess who was said to be one of the three leading knights in Christendom.
Of particular interest to me was the further background provided on the patriot William Wallace as well as John Balliol: the puppet king of Scotland selected by Longshanks, who was nicknamed 'Toom Tabard' (King Nothing) by his own subjects despite having the support of the house of Comyn and the English Crown. There were also a few priceless nuggets of lesser known information which I had not previously learned, like the Bruce intending his wife, daughter and other sisters in Scotland to join his other sister, Isabel the Queen Consort of Norway, in Norway before they were apprehended by a Scottish Lord who gave them up to Longshanks.
The book also provides further evidence of the brave yet highly volatile, forceful and irascible John Comyn, nicknamed 'The Red Comyn', who once actually seized the Bruce by the throat during a gathering of Scottish nobility, before also betraying the Bruce's trust with Longshanks so as to get the Bruce killed. Little wonder then, that the Red Comyn met with the fate he did at the Bruce's hands in Dumfries. Less wonder too that the Scottish church (wholly opposed to English dominion) decided early on in the piece to back the Bruce's claim for kingship, even before his seismic clash with the Red Comyn at Dumfries which set in motion a chain of harrowing events leading to the eventual independence of Scotland.
If I have one criticism of the book it's that - unlike Murison's account - it doesn't present a number of various historical narratives about the different parts of the Bruce's life (it’s still hard to pin down exactly what happened and when and where). McNair Scott instead settles on the narratives which he considers most plausible (and seemingly always favourable to the Bruce), and then links them together to present one long uninterrupted narrative. That said, there are copious footnotes at the end of each chapter, and the book does add more detail and background to an often misunderstood and largely heralded figure of legend and a name which - like that of William Wallace - is wholly synonymous with that of the Scottish nation.
Further detail about the Bruce's three lieutenants: his sole surviving brother the highly incendiary Edward the Bruce, Randolph Moray and the Black Douglas and their raids across Scotland, England and eventually Ireland is also provided (the foursome were either on the run for years or else galloping somewhere to pull off an ambush, invasion or a siege). A sound description is also provided about the Battle of Bannockburn, which closely reflects recent explorations of the battlefield conducted in recent years by popular BBC TV presenter on all things Scottish history: Neil Oliver.
At the end of the day the Bruce was a Lord who - like all other Lords - chiefly sought to advance the fortunes of his family, yet one has to consider when branding his fighting against his fellow Scots 'traitorous' that he was dealing with a desperate, fratricidal, Scottish zero-sum 'civil war' of sorts between the houses of Comyn and Bruce while also having to fend off the crushing might of the Kingdom of England led by the ruthless and capable Longshanks. Although the author doesn't refrain from calling out Longshanks' betrayal of Scottish trust for what it was, he also provides valid strategic reasons why Longshanks (also preoccupied with suppressing the Welsh and Irish and locked in constant conflict with France) decided to take full advantage of the power vacuum in Scotland which was brought about following the death of the Maid Of Norway.
Mcnair Scott also provides a lot of interesting background about all of the players involved in the Scottish 'game of thrones' which followed the death of the Maid Of Norway. And while I'm on the subject of the 'Game of Thrones' analogy, it is very interesting to note that phrases like 'Robert's Rebellion' and references to 'Ramsay' and 'the small folk' in George R. R. Martin's 'A Song Of Ice And Fire' are directly ripped off the historical period in which the Bruce was forced to wangle his bloody way towards Scottish kingship. Martin's unforgettable, larger-than-life Robert Baratheon is also heavily based on the Bruce, with his legendary conflict with Prince Rhaegar Targaryen at the Trident being highly reminiscent of the Bruce's own clash with De Bohun on the eve of the Battle of Bannockburn. Like Martin's Baratheon, Robert the Bruce was one of the leading knights of his day, a man of great martial prowess who was said to be one of the three leading knights in Christendom.
Of particular interest to me was the further background provided on the patriot William Wallace as well as John Balliol: the puppet king of Scotland selected by Longshanks, who was nicknamed 'Toom Tabard' (King Nothing) by his own subjects despite having the support of the house of Comyn and the English Crown. There were also a few priceless nuggets of lesser known information which I had not previously learned, like the Bruce intending his wife, daughter and other sisters in Scotland to join his other sister, Isabel the Queen Consort of Norway, in Norway before they were apprehended by a Scottish Lord who gave them up to Longshanks.
The book also provides further evidence of the brave yet highly volatile, forceful and irascible John Comyn, nicknamed 'The Red Comyn', who once actually seized the Bruce by the throat during a gathering of Scottish nobility, before also betraying the Bruce's trust with Longshanks so as to get the Bruce killed. Little wonder then, that the Red Comyn met with the fate he did at the Bruce's hands in Dumfries. Less wonder too that the Scottish church (wholly opposed to English dominion) decided early on in the piece to back the Bruce's claim for kingship, even before his seismic clash with the Red Comyn at Dumfries which set in motion a chain of harrowing events leading to the eventual independence of Scotland.
If I have one criticism of the book it's that - unlike Murison's account - it doesn't present a number of various historical narratives about the different parts of the Bruce's life (it’s still hard to pin down exactly what happened and when and where). McNair Scott instead settles on the narratives which he considers most plausible (and seemingly always favourable to the Bruce), and then links them together to present one long uninterrupted narrative. That said, there are copious footnotes at the end of each chapter, and the book does add more detail and background to an often misunderstood and largely heralded figure of legend and a name which - like that of William Wallace - is wholly synonymous with that of the Scottish nation.
Further detail about the Bruce's three lieutenants: his sole surviving brother the highly incendiary Edward the Bruce, Randolph Moray and the Black Douglas and their raids across Scotland, England and eventually Ireland is also provided (the foursome were either on the run for years or else galloping somewhere to pull off an ambush, invasion or a siege). A sound description is also provided about the Battle of Bannockburn, which closely reflects recent explorations of the battlefield conducted in recent years by popular BBC TV presenter on all things Scottish history: Neil Oliver.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 2, 2023
I greatly enjoyed this biography of the most famous of Scottish warrior kings. It was written in a flowing style and took the time to include anecdotes that shone a personal light on both Bruce and the figures who took part in the Wars of Scottish Independence, both Scottish and English. I particularly appreciated the anecdote of Bruce telling stories to his soldiers in their darkest moments. It is a beautiful image of a king reflecting back that which is intangible to his people.
December 19, 2022
I'm not usually into nonfiction, but this was fascinating! Some of the events discussed sounded like they came right out of a Robin Hood story. The author did a great job at being both informative and engaging. Now I'm even more anxious to return to Scotland. :)
August 17, 2023
Robert the freaking Bruce. What an epic person and story.
"Robert the Bruce: King of Scots" by Ronald McNair Scott is a biography that chronicles the life and achievements of Robert the Bruce, one of Scotland's most celebrated historical figures. The book provides a comprehensive and engaging account of Robert the Bruce's journey from his early years to his rise as a warrior king and his pivotal role in Scotland's fight for independence from England.
I loved James Mackay’s biography of Bruce’s infamous contemporary William Wallace that I read earlier this year, but that story ended with Wallace’s execution and I felt like I didn’t get the rest of the story of the Scottish Wars of Independence from England that happened after his death. This biography of Robert the Bruce tells the second half of that story and finishes by wrapping everything up with a satisfying ending (although I still am interested in moving forward in history in a future book there).
Part 1 of this book retells the history of how this entire situation first happened, tells all the known facts of Wallace’s life and early happenings of the war and again ends with his execution. This felt a little redundant having just recently that part of the story, but it totally makes sense to include it to give all the backstory needed to set up the rise of Robert the Bruce which is where Part 2 takes off.
When he enters the story in full force, the energy, drama, and epic romanticism picks up immediately with some serious badassery from Robert in battle and just in general. I really enjoyed it. There is epic imagery throughout, full of fiery revenge and strength. The whole story is so cinematic, I loved it. I couldn’t stop reading.
The realities and brutality of war back then are on full gruesome display. But the author has an incredible ability to put you right there in the center of the action, despite this happening so many hundreds of years ago. You can feel the sun beating down on the soldiers and the smell of the dust as they fight. This story has many moments of medieval romanticism that feel equivalent to someone like King Arthur, but the story mostly feels totally grounded in genuine history. The book feels very well researched and scholarly.
I found out after finishing this book that there is a statue of Robert the Bruce that is set in the wall of Edinburgh Castle at the entrance, and it stands alongside one of William Wallace. Statues of these two men also flank each side of the main entrance to the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. I feel like this is fitting as, although there were many people who fought for Scottish independence, it seems to me that these two men were the most important in establishing it and a sense of national identity in the country at the time.
The author shares part of a poem entitled “Scots Wha Hae,” that was written by Robert Burns in 1793. In essence, the poem is a call to arms, again invoking the memory of Wallace and Bruce and encourages the Scottish people to continue to fight against oppression. It also feels like the perfect way to end this review:
Scots wha hae with Wallace bled
Scots wham Bruce has aften led
Welcome to your gory bed
Or to victorie
"Robert the Bruce: King of Scots" by Ronald McNair Scott is a biography that chronicles the life and achievements of Robert the Bruce, one of Scotland's most celebrated historical figures. The book provides a comprehensive and engaging account of Robert the Bruce's journey from his early years to his rise as a warrior king and his pivotal role in Scotland's fight for independence from England.
I loved James Mackay’s biography of Bruce’s infamous contemporary William Wallace that I read earlier this year, but that story ended with Wallace’s execution and I felt like I didn’t get the rest of the story of the Scottish Wars of Independence from England that happened after his death. This biography of Robert the Bruce tells the second half of that story and finishes by wrapping everything up with a satisfying ending (although I still am interested in moving forward in history in a future book there).
Part 1 of this book retells the history of how this entire situation first happened, tells all the known facts of Wallace’s life and early happenings of the war and again ends with his execution. This felt a little redundant having just recently that part of the story, but it totally makes sense to include it to give all the backstory needed to set up the rise of Robert the Bruce which is where Part 2 takes off.
When he enters the story in full force, the energy, drama, and epic romanticism picks up immediately with some serious badassery from Robert in battle and just in general. I really enjoyed it. There is epic imagery throughout, full of fiery revenge and strength. The whole story is so cinematic, I loved it. I couldn’t stop reading.
The realities and brutality of war back then are on full gruesome display. But the author has an incredible ability to put you right there in the center of the action, despite this happening so many hundreds of years ago. You can feel the sun beating down on the soldiers and the smell of the dust as they fight. This story has many moments of medieval romanticism that feel equivalent to someone like King Arthur, but the story mostly feels totally grounded in genuine history. The book feels very well researched and scholarly.
I found out after finishing this book that there is a statue of Robert the Bruce that is set in the wall of Edinburgh Castle at the entrance, and it stands alongside one of William Wallace. Statues of these two men also flank each side of the main entrance to the Scottish National Portrait Gallery. I feel like this is fitting as, although there were many people who fought for Scottish independence, it seems to me that these two men were the most important in establishing it and a sense of national identity in the country at the time.
The author shares part of a poem entitled “Scots Wha Hae,” that was written by Robert Burns in 1793. In essence, the poem is a call to arms, again invoking the memory of Wallace and Bruce and encourages the Scottish people to continue to fight against oppression. It also feels like the perfect way to end this review:
Scots wha hae with Wallace bled
Scots wham Bruce has aften led
Welcome to your gory bed
Or to victorie
November 30, 2019
Ronald McNair Scott’s retelling of the efforts to liberate Scotland from English rule makes for a superb work of history. Robert the Bruce: King of Scots briskly fills its readers in on this brutal conflict between seemingly outmatched warriors and their universally feared next door neighbor.
King Edward I and, upon his death, King Edward II, relentlessly fought to crush the relatively small army led by the Scot Robert the Bruce. Guerrilla warfare tactics were continually employed by the Scottish fighters, and the seemingly overwhelming force wielded by the English is slowly neutralized by the successful usage of these tactics. Lacking siege engines and other martial instruments that gave a decided advantage on paper to the English, the Scots nevertheless manage to turn so many small things to their favor that this advantage is wiped out.
The genesis of the war for Scotland’s independence did not begin with Robert the Bruce. Author Ronald McNair Scott does nice work filling readers in on the back story behind why and how Robert found himself in such a momentous leadership role.
Robert the Bruce in fact takes up the fight carried on initially by William Wallace, whose leadership of the Scottish armed forces came to a brutal end with his execution at the hands of Edward I. (In 1298, Wallace had actually been knighted by Robert Bruce in the Selkirk forest during Bruce’s days as Earl of Carrick). But Wallace’s string of successes against the English hid a roadblock with defeat at the Battle of Falkirk, resulting in the dissipation of the aura of near invincibility which had hung about him. Wallace’s lack of proper breeding in the eyes of the Scottish nobility led him to be seen as little more than a useful backwoodsman not fit for national leadership in their eyes.
Bruce did not have a fully united Scotland behind his cause. In fact, he had promised to take a hands-off approach during the early portion of the war for independence from England. Hopeful that he might one day be heir to the Scottish throne (with the English king ultimately having the final say), he did not want to rock the boat too much with King Edward I. The king trusted Bruce’s loyalty so much that in 1305 he asked him, alongside Sir John Mowbray, to put together a report on Scotland’s future settlement once the rebellion was put down.
But the breaking point between England and Robert came as a result of back-stabbing. John Comyn, a member one of Scotland’s most well-known families, was holding out hopes that he would one day be crowned king of Scotland. Comyn, Bruce, and the deposed former king John Balliol all felt they had a legitimate claim to that title. The dealings with Comyn, which at first seemed to adeptly handled by Robert, ended with disastrous consequences.
Comyn initially had to be won over by promises of gifts of land from Robert before he gave up his own lusting to be crowned King of Scotland and allowed Bruce to claim that title for himself. When this deal was completed, King Edward I was sick and there was no guarantee he would recover. But when he ultimately recovered to full health, Comyn turns on Bruce, writing a letter (ultimately intercepted by Bruce) detailing to the king the agreement made with him. This was done in an effort to curry favor with King Edward and, when Comyn is called out on it during a face-to-face with Robert, he is slain by Robert and his men in the ensuing struggle.
During the lead up to the Comyn affair, the king’s own sunny view toward Bruce had been darkening. Documents seized on William Wallace (the exact contents are known) containing communication with Scottish nobles caused the king to begin placing less and less authority in Bruce’s hands. These events led to a final break between the king of England and the aspiring king of the Scots.
In addition to these potential stumbling blocks, Bruce also had to deal with recalcitrant Scots who, though perhaps internally supportive of independence, dared not join up with his efforts due to their reliance on the favor of the English crown. Forfeiting this until Scottish victory seemed absolutely assured was akin to the behavior of Loyalists in America over four centuries later.
And yet there were plenty of allies waiting to take up the cause first championed by William Wallace and taken up by Robert the Bruce. Standing steadfast behind the push for independence throughout was the Church of Scotland.
While Pope Boniface VIII wavered on whether the Scottish or English position was more aligned with providence, the Scottish church at no point harbored such no doubt. Scottish Bishops Lamberton and Wishart each prove to be invaluable allies during Scotland’s struggle. Not even the excommunication of Bruce by Pope Boniface VIII (ultimately rescinded years later by a different pontiff) could dissuade the local clergy from the position that Scotland’s freedom was in line with the Lord’s will.
The English king had internal power struggles of his own to deal with. After taking over the crown, King Edward II was frequently distracted from his fight with the Scots by an uprising of his own country’s nobles. This predicament had to be solved before he would be able to fully marshal his forces for an invasion of Scotland. Not only did this lack of internal unity aid the Scots, but King Philip of France’s willingness to position himself as neutral to slightly in favor of the Scots ensured they would face no resistance from that quarter.
Shortly after the deadly scuffle with Comyn, his chief obstacle removed, Bruce is crowned King Robert I on March 25, 1306.
Many in the Scottish countryside continued to rally to Bruce’s banner. He is tremendously aided in the fight against England by his brother Edward Bruce, by the efforts of Sir James Douglas, and the martial prowess of Thomas Randolph (who switches sides after being freed from English imprisonment).
His tactics against the English are marked by numerous raids, hit-and-runs that are meant to slowly suck the willingness out of the English-busy maintaining vassal states galore of their own-to carry on a prolonged war. But the key point in the War for Scottish Independence occurs at the Battle of Bannock burn; Bruce is at the head of barely one-fourth the manpower marched and ridden into Scotland by King Edward II during this clash in the summer of 1314.
After King Edward II is pulled from the Bannock burn battlefield against his will, Bruce then calls on the servants, camp followers, and late arrivals to run over the crest of the hill toward the fighting. The English troops, seeing their king having left the battle and already wavering as it was, fled in panic and suffered one of their worst battlefields defeats to date. (The English infantry never even had a chance to get involved in the battle).
Following the victory at Bannock burn, McNair Scott notes, “On that midsummer day he (Bruce) had established without question his brilliance as a general and his authority as a leader; but beyond these gifts he now displayed in the aftermath of his success a consideration and courtesy towards the defeated which they did not easily forget. The fame of his humanity spread abroad and the harshest of English chroniclers paid an ungrudging tribute to the magnanimity of his behavior.” He goes on to cite Robert the Bruce’s humane treatment of the corpses of the Earl of Gloucester and Sir Robert Clifford, as well as his honorable burials of various barons and knights, in addition to his respectful treatment of prisoners of war, as proof of this magnanimity.
According to the book, after this battle Robert had “offered peace in return for the recognition of his royal title and the independence of his kingdom.” Evidence of this offer and the spirit it was given in is provided via a letter from Robert to the English king: “Since while kindly peace prevails the minds of the faithful are at rest, the Christian way of life is furthered and all the affairs of holy mother church and of all kingdoms are everywhere carried on more prosperously, we in our humility have judged it right to entreat of your highness that, having before your eyes the righteousness you owe to God and to the people, you desist from persecuting us and disturbing the people of our realm, so that there may be an end of slaughter and shedding of Christian blood. Everything that we ourselves and our people by their bodily service and contributions of wealth can do, we are now and shall be prepared to do sincerely and honourably for the sake of good peace and earn perpetual grace or our souls. If it should be agreeable to your will to hold negotiations with us upon these matters, let your royal will be communicated to us...”
Envoys from England and Scotland would agree to a temporary truce after this letter, but the fighting would not yet be over for good.
Negotiations quickly broke down, and a different pope (this time John XXII) would repeat the excommunication orders against Robert. This would result in a response from the Scottish nation known as the Declaration of Arbroath, in which Robert is compared, in a Biblical allusion, to the Old Testament prophet Joshua.
The Declaration of Arbroath essentially promises that if England would just grant Scotland independence, then the warriors of the latter nation could then stop fighting and simply turn their attention and battlefield skills to service in the Crusades. Interestingly enough, this was the same line of reasoning that England had used on a previous pope to get him riled up toward Scotland: if only those pesky Scots would stop tying up English military resources, they otherwise could be used in the Holy Land. The pope then softens his harsh, hell-condemning rhetoric toward the Scots, pushing for both countries to finally reach a durable conclusion.
This conclusion fails to come, and by New Year’s Day 1322 both sides were back at the fighting again (King Edward II first had to put down the rebellion by Earls of Lancaster and Hereford within his own borders, underscoring the distracted state his kingdom was in during the war against Scotland).
An interesting side story occurs with respect to the Irish. Robert’s brother Edward is dispatched to Ireland and placed in charge of the effort to rid that land of anti-Scot elements in order to ensure that they fully join Scotland as partners in the fight against England. The author shows Edward Bruce to be much less in control of his emotions than his brother, and after both steps forward and backward he is ultimately killed in Ireland during battle.
While Robert leads a raid into the northern portion of England, harassing Cumberland and sending a message to the English residents there, King Edward II was marching with his massive army toward and over the border of Scotland. He and his men get as far as Edinburgh before being forced to turn back thanks to dwindling supplies and an attack of dysentery. This unfortunate circumstance brought to an end a failed invasion which only resulted in the destroying of the abbeys of Holyrood, Dryburgh, and Melrose, actions not calculated to win the fickle favor of the Church.
Previously Robert and his men would make raids on counties across the border into northern England, but while destructive these did not move the needle very much since the heart of the country’s governance was found in its more southerly portion. But during the king’s absence from England on this ill-fated venture northward, Robert decided to take these raids a step further and push deeper into the country, nearly intercepting and capturing the king at Rievaulx Abbey after his return from the failed invasion. While Robert (with help from the Highlanders) broke through the English defenses and nearly got his hands on King Edward II, he manages to flee by horseback with minutes to spare.
By this point, angry at the destructiveness of the Scots’s raids and speaking for many of the English who were ready to treat with Robert and grant his country its independence, Andrew Harclay (Earl of Carlisle and, at that point, outward ally of the king of England), secretly dispatched feelers to Robert on what the terms of peace would be.
While in Scotland, both he and Bruce hammered out a treaty whereby Scotland-with stipulations-would be free to govern their realm. Thinking he was doing his nation a favor and acting as a man seeking a much-desired and honorable peace, the Earl of Carlisle got an idea of how King Edward II perceived these negotiations done without his blessing upon his return to England. After receiving the news, King Edward II showed his thanks by having him drawn, hanged, disembowelled, and then beheaded for good measure.
But the vindictiveness shown toward the Earl could not cover up the fact that many in England were indeed ready to put a stop to the madness, and a thirteen month truce heavily weighted in Scotland’s favor was agreed to a few months later at Bishopthorpe.
This concluded major hostilities and soon after, following a strange falling out between King Edward II and his wife Isabella, the former died and his son Edward III rose to the throne. With England having spent massive sums in treasure and lives to no avail against Scotland, with Ireland unwilling to help fight against Scotland, and with many in England long since ready to sue for peace, Edward III puts the final touches on the agreement to end hostilities. This agreement would be known as the Treaty of Edinburgh and ensured Scotland would be able to run her own affairs from that point forward.
Although conflict would continue on and off between Scotland and England for the better part of four more centuries, the efforts of Robert Bruce made sure the status of Scotland as an independent entity able to govern its own affairs was no longer in question. Following Robert’s death on June 7, 1329 at the age of 54, his heart was removed and carried by Sir James Douglas on a Crusade to Spain. His skills, both on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, are detailed admirably by Robert McNair Scott in this fine piece of historical writing.
Although somewhat slanted in the Scots's favor, given the touchy nature of its subject this book could have been much more biased than it was. It never leans too far in the direction of beating the English over the head with their past mistakes, and the manner in which McNair Scott wrote the book keeps the at times complicated story line moving admirably along. The willingness to lay out the facts of this tough struggle in as evenhanded of a manner as he probably could have is a credit to the author, ensuring this book can be enjoyed by anyone wanting a detailed accounting of the rocky past between England and Scotland.
-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado
King Edward I and, upon his death, King Edward II, relentlessly fought to crush the relatively small army led by the Scot Robert the Bruce. Guerrilla warfare tactics were continually employed by the Scottish fighters, and the seemingly overwhelming force wielded by the English is slowly neutralized by the successful usage of these tactics. Lacking siege engines and other martial instruments that gave a decided advantage on paper to the English, the Scots nevertheless manage to turn so many small things to their favor that this advantage is wiped out.
The genesis of the war for Scotland’s independence did not begin with Robert the Bruce. Author Ronald McNair Scott does nice work filling readers in on the back story behind why and how Robert found himself in such a momentous leadership role.
Robert the Bruce in fact takes up the fight carried on initially by William Wallace, whose leadership of the Scottish armed forces came to a brutal end with his execution at the hands of Edward I. (In 1298, Wallace had actually been knighted by Robert Bruce in the Selkirk forest during Bruce’s days as Earl of Carrick). But Wallace’s string of successes against the English hid a roadblock with defeat at the Battle of Falkirk, resulting in the dissipation of the aura of near invincibility which had hung about him. Wallace’s lack of proper breeding in the eyes of the Scottish nobility led him to be seen as little more than a useful backwoodsman not fit for national leadership in their eyes.
Bruce did not have a fully united Scotland behind his cause. In fact, he had promised to take a hands-off approach during the early portion of the war for independence from England. Hopeful that he might one day be heir to the Scottish throne (with the English king ultimately having the final say), he did not want to rock the boat too much with King Edward I. The king trusted Bruce’s loyalty so much that in 1305 he asked him, alongside Sir John Mowbray, to put together a report on Scotland’s future settlement once the rebellion was put down.
But the breaking point between England and Robert came as a result of back-stabbing. John Comyn, a member one of Scotland’s most well-known families, was holding out hopes that he would one day be crowned king of Scotland. Comyn, Bruce, and the deposed former king John Balliol all felt they had a legitimate claim to that title. The dealings with Comyn, which at first seemed to adeptly handled by Robert, ended with disastrous consequences.
Comyn initially had to be won over by promises of gifts of land from Robert before he gave up his own lusting to be crowned King of Scotland and allowed Bruce to claim that title for himself. When this deal was completed, King Edward I was sick and there was no guarantee he would recover. But when he ultimately recovered to full health, Comyn turns on Bruce, writing a letter (ultimately intercepted by Bruce) detailing to the king the agreement made with him. This was done in an effort to curry favor with King Edward and, when Comyn is called out on it during a face-to-face with Robert, he is slain by Robert and his men in the ensuing struggle.
During the lead up to the Comyn affair, the king’s own sunny view toward Bruce had been darkening. Documents seized on William Wallace (the exact contents are known) containing communication with Scottish nobles caused the king to begin placing less and less authority in Bruce’s hands. These events led to a final break between the king of England and the aspiring king of the Scots.
In addition to these potential stumbling blocks, Bruce also had to deal with recalcitrant Scots who, though perhaps internally supportive of independence, dared not join up with his efforts due to their reliance on the favor of the English crown. Forfeiting this until Scottish victory seemed absolutely assured was akin to the behavior of Loyalists in America over four centuries later.
And yet there were plenty of allies waiting to take up the cause first championed by William Wallace and taken up by Robert the Bruce. Standing steadfast behind the push for independence throughout was the Church of Scotland.
While Pope Boniface VIII wavered on whether the Scottish or English position was more aligned with providence, the Scottish church at no point harbored such no doubt. Scottish Bishops Lamberton and Wishart each prove to be invaluable allies during Scotland’s struggle. Not even the excommunication of Bruce by Pope Boniface VIII (ultimately rescinded years later by a different pontiff) could dissuade the local clergy from the position that Scotland’s freedom was in line with the Lord’s will.
The English king had internal power struggles of his own to deal with. After taking over the crown, King Edward II was frequently distracted from his fight with the Scots by an uprising of his own country’s nobles. This predicament had to be solved before he would be able to fully marshal his forces for an invasion of Scotland. Not only did this lack of internal unity aid the Scots, but King Philip of France’s willingness to position himself as neutral to slightly in favor of the Scots ensured they would face no resistance from that quarter.
Shortly after the deadly scuffle with Comyn, his chief obstacle removed, Bruce is crowned King Robert I on March 25, 1306.
Many in the Scottish countryside continued to rally to Bruce’s banner. He is tremendously aided in the fight against England by his brother Edward Bruce, by the efforts of Sir James Douglas, and the martial prowess of Thomas Randolph (who switches sides after being freed from English imprisonment).
His tactics against the English are marked by numerous raids, hit-and-runs that are meant to slowly suck the willingness out of the English-busy maintaining vassal states galore of their own-to carry on a prolonged war. But the key point in the War for Scottish Independence occurs at the Battle of Bannock burn; Bruce is at the head of barely one-fourth the manpower marched and ridden into Scotland by King Edward II during this clash in the summer of 1314.
After King Edward II is pulled from the Bannock burn battlefield against his will, Bruce then calls on the servants, camp followers, and late arrivals to run over the crest of the hill toward the fighting. The English troops, seeing their king having left the battle and already wavering as it was, fled in panic and suffered one of their worst battlefields defeats to date. (The English infantry never even had a chance to get involved in the battle).
Following the victory at Bannock burn, McNair Scott notes, “On that midsummer day he (Bruce) had established without question his brilliance as a general and his authority as a leader; but beyond these gifts he now displayed in the aftermath of his success a consideration and courtesy towards the defeated which they did not easily forget. The fame of his humanity spread abroad and the harshest of English chroniclers paid an ungrudging tribute to the magnanimity of his behavior.” He goes on to cite Robert the Bruce’s humane treatment of the corpses of the Earl of Gloucester and Sir Robert Clifford, as well as his honorable burials of various barons and knights, in addition to his respectful treatment of prisoners of war, as proof of this magnanimity.
According to the book, after this battle Robert had “offered peace in return for the recognition of his royal title and the independence of his kingdom.” Evidence of this offer and the spirit it was given in is provided via a letter from Robert to the English king: “Since while kindly peace prevails the minds of the faithful are at rest, the Christian way of life is furthered and all the affairs of holy mother church and of all kingdoms are everywhere carried on more prosperously, we in our humility have judged it right to entreat of your highness that, having before your eyes the righteousness you owe to God and to the people, you desist from persecuting us and disturbing the people of our realm, so that there may be an end of slaughter and shedding of Christian blood. Everything that we ourselves and our people by their bodily service and contributions of wealth can do, we are now and shall be prepared to do sincerely and honourably for the sake of good peace and earn perpetual grace or our souls. If it should be agreeable to your will to hold negotiations with us upon these matters, let your royal will be communicated to us...”
Envoys from England and Scotland would agree to a temporary truce after this letter, but the fighting would not yet be over for good.
Negotiations quickly broke down, and a different pope (this time John XXII) would repeat the excommunication orders against Robert. This would result in a response from the Scottish nation known as the Declaration of Arbroath, in which Robert is compared, in a Biblical allusion, to the Old Testament prophet Joshua.
The Declaration of Arbroath essentially promises that if England would just grant Scotland independence, then the warriors of the latter nation could then stop fighting and simply turn their attention and battlefield skills to service in the Crusades. Interestingly enough, this was the same line of reasoning that England had used on a previous pope to get him riled up toward Scotland: if only those pesky Scots would stop tying up English military resources, they otherwise could be used in the Holy Land. The pope then softens his harsh, hell-condemning rhetoric toward the Scots, pushing for both countries to finally reach a durable conclusion.
This conclusion fails to come, and by New Year’s Day 1322 both sides were back at the fighting again (King Edward II first had to put down the rebellion by Earls of Lancaster and Hereford within his own borders, underscoring the distracted state his kingdom was in during the war against Scotland).
An interesting side story occurs with respect to the Irish. Robert’s brother Edward is dispatched to Ireland and placed in charge of the effort to rid that land of anti-Scot elements in order to ensure that they fully join Scotland as partners in the fight against England. The author shows Edward Bruce to be much less in control of his emotions than his brother, and after both steps forward and backward he is ultimately killed in Ireland during battle.
While Robert leads a raid into the northern portion of England, harassing Cumberland and sending a message to the English residents there, King Edward II was marching with his massive army toward and over the border of Scotland. He and his men get as far as Edinburgh before being forced to turn back thanks to dwindling supplies and an attack of dysentery. This unfortunate circumstance brought to an end a failed invasion which only resulted in the destroying of the abbeys of Holyrood, Dryburgh, and Melrose, actions not calculated to win the fickle favor of the Church.
Previously Robert and his men would make raids on counties across the border into northern England, but while destructive these did not move the needle very much since the heart of the country’s governance was found in its more southerly portion. But during the king’s absence from England on this ill-fated venture northward, Robert decided to take these raids a step further and push deeper into the country, nearly intercepting and capturing the king at Rievaulx Abbey after his return from the failed invasion. While Robert (with help from the Highlanders) broke through the English defenses and nearly got his hands on King Edward II, he manages to flee by horseback with minutes to spare.
By this point, angry at the destructiveness of the Scots’s raids and speaking for many of the English who were ready to treat with Robert and grant his country its independence, Andrew Harclay (Earl of Carlisle and, at that point, outward ally of the king of England), secretly dispatched feelers to Robert on what the terms of peace would be.
While in Scotland, both he and Bruce hammered out a treaty whereby Scotland-with stipulations-would be free to govern their realm. Thinking he was doing his nation a favor and acting as a man seeking a much-desired and honorable peace, the Earl of Carlisle got an idea of how King Edward II perceived these negotiations done without his blessing upon his return to England. After receiving the news, King Edward II showed his thanks by having him drawn, hanged, disembowelled, and then beheaded for good measure.
But the vindictiveness shown toward the Earl could not cover up the fact that many in England were indeed ready to put a stop to the madness, and a thirteen month truce heavily weighted in Scotland’s favor was agreed to a few months later at Bishopthorpe.
This concluded major hostilities and soon after, following a strange falling out between King Edward II and his wife Isabella, the former died and his son Edward III rose to the throne. With England having spent massive sums in treasure and lives to no avail against Scotland, with Ireland unwilling to help fight against Scotland, and with many in England long since ready to sue for peace, Edward III puts the final touches on the agreement to end hostilities. This agreement would be known as the Treaty of Edinburgh and ensured Scotland would be able to run her own affairs from that point forward.
Although conflict would continue on and off between Scotland and England for the better part of four more centuries, the efforts of Robert Bruce made sure the status of Scotland as an independent entity able to govern its own affairs was no longer in question. Following Robert’s death on June 7, 1329 at the age of 54, his heart was removed and carried by Sir James Douglas on a Crusade to Spain. His skills, both on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, are detailed admirably by Robert McNair Scott in this fine piece of historical writing.
Although somewhat slanted in the Scots's favor, given the touchy nature of its subject this book could have been much more biased than it was. It never leans too far in the direction of beating the English over the head with their past mistakes, and the manner in which McNair Scott wrote the book keeps the at times complicated story line moving admirably along. The willingness to lay out the facts of this tough struggle in as evenhanded of a manner as he probably could have is a credit to the author, ensuring this book can be enjoyed by anyone wanting a detailed accounting of the rocky past between England and Scotland.
-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado
May 29, 2021
A history book is just another history book…yawn, yawn, yawn! But, this one was actually a little better than most I’ve read, and could have been more meaningful if Robert the Bruce was my ancestor AND had I followed along with the map in the book, or any map for that matter, of his travels and battles. But, he's not. I read this book and took lots and lots of notes ( which was too long to add here on Goodreads) for a friend of mine, who is a direct ancestor of Robert the Bruce. And because I took notes, I learned so much about the history of Scotland and its people and their battles all in the name of “freedom”. I don't regret reading this book for one minute.
Although it did receive very high ratings, and is said to be a great and interesting read, a couple of reviewers on Amazon claim this work to be more historical fiction rather than true history. They say Scott writes as facts many things that are only speculation and have never been proven in history, but they don’t point out any particulars. One reviewer suggested G.W.S. Barrow's "Robert Bruce and the Community Realm of Scotland" as a solid documentary historical read for the serious individual looking for super accuracy and the truth. But, beware, he warns it's extremely dry reading. Also suggested reading for those who can't read "history" books, there are Nigel Tranter's trilogy of historical novels about Robert Bruce that might be a little more enjoyable to read. Also, there is a movie, exclusive on Netflix, called "Outlaw King" (2018), starring Chris Pine as Robert the Bruce.
----------
Although it did receive very high ratings, and is said to be a great and interesting read, a couple of reviewers on Amazon claim this work to be more historical fiction rather than true history. They say Scott writes as facts many things that are only speculation and have never been proven in history, but they don’t point out any particulars. One reviewer suggested G.W.S. Barrow's "Robert Bruce and the Community Realm of Scotland" as a solid documentary historical read for the serious individual looking for super accuracy and the truth. But, beware, he warns it's extremely dry reading. Also suggested reading for those who can't read "history" books, there are Nigel Tranter's trilogy of historical novels about Robert Bruce that might be a little more enjoyable to read. Also, there is a movie, exclusive on Netflix, called "Outlaw King" (2018), starring Chris Pine as Robert the Bruce.
----------
February 4, 2019
Ronald McNair Scott's Robert the Bruce: King of Scots is one of the best books I have read in a long while. The story of the life of Robert the Bruce is already well-known to me; it is the author's ability to weave the various story-lines together and keep me riveted on what was going to happen next that I found outstanding. This is a very well written biography that reads tremendously fast.
If you're not familiar with the life of Robert the Bruce and were to read this book as a piece of fiction, you'd finish thinking that there's no possible way that the events that take place in Bruce's lifetime life actually took place. It becomes obvious why the Scottish highly revere this man.
If you're not familiar with the life of Robert the Bruce and were to read this book as a piece of fiction, you'd finish thinking that there's no possible way that the events that take place in Bruce's lifetime life actually took place. It becomes obvious why the Scottish highly revere this man.
Read
August 5, 2011Forget William Wallace, Robert the Bruce was so much cooler. He was crafty and cunning with an ability to adapt and change his strategy according to shifting circumstances, never restricted by the strategic conventions of warfare like his English peers. On top of that he remained true to chivalric code and was humane and generous even to those opposing him - even the English chroniclers had to admit that.
A fabulous read with wonderful anecdotes and vivid description of the Scottish fight for independence. McNair uses his sources well and gives a detailed account of the life of a truly heroic figure in Scottish history.
A fabulous read with wonderful anecdotes and vivid description of the Scottish fight for independence. McNair uses his sources well and gives a detailed account of the life of a truly heroic figure in Scottish history.
December 1, 2022
I don't know why I give this five stars.....whether I immensely enjoyed reading it or because I am a direct descendant of Robert the Bruce. Probably a combination of both. While Scott's book covers the years 1285-1329, Bruce was crowned the first king of Scotland in 1306 and led the Scots in their continuing battles to remain free from England and Kings Edward I & II. In addition to learning so much about my ancient and storied ancestor, the book is filled with history, politics, people, battles, and customs. So much to learn!
August 28, 2012
A well-written and informative look at the life of Robert Bruce and the wars for Scottish independence. William Wallace also puts in an appearance at the beginning, and then there's the Black Douglas, who is full of awesome, end of story.
May 12, 2016
Sure, its a bit old and done in a rip-roaring romantic style, but its still a thorough and comprehensive history of Robert the Bruce, and in particular his military campaigns. Includes details often overlooked in the post-Bannockburn phase of his career as well.
January 31, 2021
This was an interesting read, Ronald Scott does a wonderful job giving historical detail into of King Robert Bruce's life. There are many good details and quote especially surrounding the life of William Wallace (a well known scottish war hero giving his life for the country) as well. There is a lot of detail about the main royal family line and social connections which is a bonus for learning about a feudal society and a negative for dulling the retelling of his story. I would give this a four star rating mostly due to the lack of hooking the reader into the story. Another reason I would not recommend the book is because most people would not be invested into this read unless they enjoy researching Scottish history or old english in general. Due to the fact that I am part Scottish I thoroughly had fun reading about the historical retold story. Definitely a great read for those who want to learn more about the Scottish kings.
December 22, 2024
History is hard to write and to read.
November 13, 2018
This is a swift moving book that won’t let you put it down!
October 15, 2019
Ronald McNair Scott in this work has given us a fast paced easy to read account of one of the greatest military leaders in history. Robert the Bruce is not always appreciated in America because he lacks the Hollywood image that Mel Gibson has lent to William Wallace. Wallace was no doubt a great hero of Scotland but it was Bruce who not only defeated the English but posed a very real threat to actually annex English territory.
Scott does have a tendency to state as fact that which is only theory or an educated guess but given the state of affairs in 13th and 14th century Scotland any other tact would have led to a huge and hard to read tome that would have added little to the general understanding of Bruce. By deciding to write in this style Scott brings this great hero of Scotland to life for the reader and lets us see the greatness that was Robert The Bruce.
Bruce's early decisions during the Wallace wars are explained by Scottish politics. Bruce's grandfather had laid claim to the Scottish throne but Edward I decided in favor of John Balliol, Lord of Galloway. Wallace always fought in the name of King John making it very hard for any of the Bruce faction to lend their full support to the cause. Once he established himself as King, Bruce faced the same problem from the Balliol faction. This divided state of affairs could very well have doomed Scotland had not Bruce taken action. He began with an action that seems to have haunted him for the rest of his life when he struck down the "Red" Comyn on the alter of Greyfriars church. Slowly the rest of the Balliol faction was subdued until Bruce was the unchallenged King of Scots.
Scott manages to go into some detail of Bruce's battles with the English without getting the reader lost. In fact, I was able to clearly understand what happened and as I was reading these accounts I could almost see what was going on. Scott's ability to describe events with words is his greatest asset. One feels as if he is actually there side by side with The Bruce.
This book is not the deep study of Robert The Bruce that some people may be looking for. It is however a good place for any reader to begin to understand the history of Scotland. After reading this book anyone who wishes to dig deeper will be ready for the challange. For someone who is simply after a quick and easy to understand history of Robert The Bruce I doubt you will find a better source.
Scott does have a tendency to state as fact that which is only theory or an educated guess but given the state of affairs in 13th and 14th century Scotland any other tact would have led to a huge and hard to read tome that would have added little to the general understanding of Bruce. By deciding to write in this style Scott brings this great hero of Scotland to life for the reader and lets us see the greatness that was Robert The Bruce.
Bruce's early decisions during the Wallace wars are explained by Scottish politics. Bruce's grandfather had laid claim to the Scottish throne but Edward I decided in favor of John Balliol, Lord of Galloway. Wallace always fought in the name of King John making it very hard for any of the Bruce faction to lend their full support to the cause. Once he established himself as King, Bruce faced the same problem from the Balliol faction. This divided state of affairs could very well have doomed Scotland had not Bruce taken action. He began with an action that seems to have haunted him for the rest of his life when he struck down the "Red" Comyn on the alter of Greyfriars church. Slowly the rest of the Balliol faction was subdued until Bruce was the unchallenged King of Scots.
Scott manages to go into some detail of Bruce's battles with the English without getting the reader lost. In fact, I was able to clearly understand what happened and as I was reading these accounts I could almost see what was going on. Scott's ability to describe events with words is his greatest asset. One feels as if he is actually there side by side with The Bruce.
This book is not the deep study of Robert The Bruce that some people may be looking for. It is however a good place for any reader to begin to understand the history of Scotland. After reading this book anyone who wishes to dig deeper will be ready for the challange. For someone who is simply after a quick and easy to understand history of Robert The Bruce I doubt you will find a better source.
February 27, 2018
A good easy to read history of Robert the Bruce and of the poor state of relations during that period of time. Scotland and England were a tangled mess of noble titles and lands that caused a major conflict of interest between the various noble houses and their respective kings. Often times where something appeared on the surface as disloyalty and even treason, the conflicts of fealty for lands and titles meant the lords owed their fealty to both kings at the same time. Robert the Bruce, before he claimed the title of King of Scots was in same situation.
This volume brought those points and many more of the typical points of interest to the fore. I recommend this book for anyone looking to understand the politics of the time along with the king (as well as all those brave hearts who fought and died) who helped win Scotland's independence again from the bloody English.
This volume brought those points and many more of the typical points of interest to the fore. I recommend this book for anyone looking to understand the politics of the time along with the king (as well as all those brave hearts who fought and died) who helped win Scotland's independence again from the bloody English.
October 5, 2019
After having just read Richard Oram’s Domination and Lordship: Scotland 1070-1230 and his biography of David I , this felt like stepping down to the tabloids after reading the broadsheets. Verging on the hagiographic , it nevertheless reads well and gives a reasonable cover of the main points of Robert’s life. I felt however that the limited focus it has on The Bruce misses out on the opportunity to expand on the machinations of the church and the reasoning of the Bishops of Glasgow and St Andrews. Also the viewpoints of the previously existing chiefs and landowners are pushed somewhat to the periphery. That being said it is a good starting point in telling a tale of the times.
Currently reading
February 28, 2015This is interesting but dry dry dry. It is a tough slog! I keep picking it up again but you ned to be able to concentrate.
November 3, 2022
I've had thus book since at least 2007... probably longer. In 2001 I got to visit Bannockburn while on a bus tour in Scotland, which is probably what prompted me to pick this up at a book sale.
Have to say, this book was mostly a slog for me and read sort of like the Bible, with tons of people/clan/place names that were hard to keep straight. It didn't help anything that the various Scottish and English lords and knights were frequently changing sides. This was a brutal, violent time full of squabbles, politics and betrayals and I bet it was no picnic to be a commoner or peasant just trying to eke out daily living in this environment. Even knowing some English and European history going in I was still shocked at how heavily the royal families were intertwined - like the Scottish king owing fealty to the English King for English land holdings, and the English king in turn owing fealtytotheFrenchking for holdings in Aquitaine etc. - what a mess!
There are also some plain old shocking events in here, like surgeons delivering a baby alive from Robert the Bruce's daughter after she was killed from falling off a horse, or the Queen of England (along with her lover) rebelling against her king and trying to take over England for France (not to mentioning trying to starve and mistreated husband to death and when that didn't work, cauteriziing his organs from within via a hot poker up the butt so there would be no visible wounds and they could say he died a natural death!).
Robert the Bruce does come off as pretty darn humane by comparison, and he was a great tactician as well.
Have to say, this book was mostly a slog for me and read sort of like the Bible, with tons of people/clan/place names that were hard to keep straight. It didn't help anything that the various Scottish and English lords and knights were frequently changing sides. This was a brutal, violent time full of squabbles, politics and betrayals and I bet it was no picnic to be a commoner or peasant just trying to eke out daily living in this environment. Even knowing some English and European history going in I was still shocked at how heavily the royal families were intertwined - like the Scottish king owing fealty to the English King for English land holdings, and the English king in turn owing fealtytotheFrenchking for holdings in Aquitaine etc. - what a mess!
There are also some plain old shocking events in here, like surgeons delivering a baby alive from Robert the Bruce's daughter after she was killed from falling off a horse, or the Queen of England (along with her lover) rebelling against her king and trying to take over England for France (not to mentioning trying to starve and mistreated husband to death and when that didn't work, cauteriziing his organs from within via a hot poker up the butt so there would be no visible wounds and they could say he died a natural death!).
Robert the Bruce does come off as pretty darn humane by comparison, and he was a great tactician as well.
September 17, 2025
Finished right in time for my trip to Scotland! Upon starting this book, I really had close to zero knowledge of Scottish history. I did find it a little challenging to keep straight names, roles, and alliances. I was however amazed with Robert the Bruce’s political and military tactical genius. He was like a mix of George Washington’s political prowess and a Hannibal Barca level military savant. It’s always impressive how much historical figures are able to pack into their short lives. Robert the Bruce died at the age of 55, yet he had freed Scotland from centuries of English rule for,ed alliances with France, courted the Pope, and expelled the English from Ireland. He was a truly remarkable king and leader.
November 23, 2018
Good overview of the Scottish war for independence. It is always a little hard to pick up a piece of history with no prior background but this book does a good job making sense of it. It is a little disappointing that there is not more about Robert the Bruce as an individual as opposed to his movements and tactics. The one stand out detail is the moment he read a French novel to his troops while they were crossing a river. Now that I have the background, I would be interested in a more narrative history of the people and events.
January 18, 2021
A good tale laboriously told
I'm really puzzled by the praise for the writing of this book. It is well researched and thorough, but there is simply no evidence of a good editor. I understand the need for explanatory phrases and complex sentence structure for the purpose of analysis, but even when relaying straightforward action the author couldn't find the active voice if his life depended on it. When the reader is struggling to keep the myriad of actors and places straight, it's frustrating to have to fight through the writing too.
I'm really puzzled by the praise for the writing of this book. It is well researched and thorough, but there is simply no evidence of a good editor. I understand the need for explanatory phrases and complex sentence structure for the purpose of analysis, but even when relaying straightforward action the author couldn't find the active voice if his life depended on it. When the reader is struggling to keep the myriad of actors and places straight, it's frustrating to have to fight through the writing too.
May 25, 2019
McNair Scott does a great job of keeping the historical context for the life of Robert the Bruce. Modern readers may not equate a national hero with military guerillas as McNair Scott identifies Bruce's supporters, but as they were a band of illegal, nationalistic fighters, it is a fitting label.
Although William Wallace is taking the majority of popularity (thanks to the movie Braveheart), Bruce deserves credit for uniting the peoples of Scotland and creating an independent nation.
Although William Wallace is taking the majority of popularity (thanks to the movie Braveheart), Bruce deserves credit for uniting the peoples of Scotland and creating an independent nation.
March 8, 2021
An enjoyable account of the life of Robert the Bruce, King of the Scots, and his decades long war to get the English Edwards (I, II, and III) to recognize the independence of Scotland. Scott (the author) is not neutral but presents the people and events vividly and, I think, fairly. Did my Scottish heart proud! Now to read a biography of Edward I and revive my English heart. Just a note: I read the paperback version of this hardcover edition.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 70 reviews