What do you think?
Scotland and the Crusades, 1095 - 1560
This text puts the Scottish crusader back on record, taking the tradition of Scots going abroad to fight back to the 11th century.
168 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1985
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
September 10, 2026
I was intrigued by the title of this book since I had always been under the impression that Scotland had negligible involvement in the Crusades. The only thing I had known was something we had been told in school about the death of Robert The Bruce in 1329. He had asked his close friend Sir James Douglas to place his heart in a casket and take it on crusade. Douglas and his retinue fought with Alfonso XI of Castile at the Battle of Teba in August 1330. The battle was a Castilian victory and led to the capture of the stronghold of Teba de Ardeles, but Douglas was killed.
The book confirms the above, but also confirmed my impression that, in general, the Scottish contribution to the Crusades was pretty minimal. There were some contemporary references to Scots as a group. On the First Crusade, a Picard, Guibert de Nogent, noted that:
You might have seen groups of Scots, ferocious among themselves but elsewhere unwarlike, with bare legs, shaggy cloaks, a purse hanging from their shoulders, rolling down from their marshy borders…
There is a question mark here over the use of the Latin term “Scoti” which could be applied to either Scots or Irish, though the author argues for the former here. The reference to their “unwarlike” nature suggests (to me) that they may have been peasants. Such was the enthusiasm for the First Crusade that contemporaries reported how entire families would simply walk away from their fields to “take the cross.” People like this fought on foot, were unarmoured, and had poor quality weapons. A Frankish knight would have seen them very much as “making up the numbers.”
There was a similar reference to Scots during the Second Crusade.
The Third Crusade actually contained two named individuals from Scotland, “men of note,” who would have had their own retinues and who joined with the army of Richard the Lionheart. At this time in history Scotland and England were mostly at peace – for much of the time Scotland might be regarded as a client kingdom of England. It was Edward I’s invasion of 1296 that brought on 3 centuries of intermittent warfare.
The presence of a hostile England to the south was thereafter a geographical barrier to Scots going on Crusade. Anyone travelling to the continent by sea risked being intercepted by English ships. It seems that a substantial Scottish contingent did join the Crusade of 1270-72 led by Louis IX of France. It was the last of the great Crusades to the Middle East. Beyond that, the author describes a “steady stream” of Scottish knights travelling to Prussia in the mid-14th century, to join with the Northern Crusades.
The book also discusses how the Crusades affected Scotland in other ways, such as with issues of finance and culture.
The author does his best with some thin material. He has a, perhaps understandable, tendency to give credence to reports that may not be reliable. He hasn’t really changed my view that Scotland’s contribution to the Crusades was minimal. I’ll give him credit though, for covering a subject that, as far as I know, no-one else has.
The book confirms the above, but also confirmed my impression that, in general, the Scottish contribution to the Crusades was pretty minimal. There were some contemporary references to Scots as a group. On the First Crusade, a Picard, Guibert de Nogent, noted that:
You might have seen groups of Scots, ferocious among themselves but elsewhere unwarlike, with bare legs, shaggy cloaks, a purse hanging from their shoulders, rolling down from their marshy borders…
There is a question mark here over the use of the Latin term “Scoti” which could be applied to either Scots or Irish, though the author argues for the former here. The reference to their “unwarlike” nature suggests (to me) that they may have been peasants. Such was the enthusiasm for the First Crusade that contemporaries reported how entire families would simply walk away from their fields to “take the cross.” People like this fought on foot, were unarmoured, and had poor quality weapons. A Frankish knight would have seen them very much as “making up the numbers.”
There was a similar reference to Scots during the Second Crusade.
The Third Crusade actually contained two named individuals from Scotland, “men of note,” who would have had their own retinues and who joined with the army of Richard the Lionheart. At this time in history Scotland and England were mostly at peace – for much of the time Scotland might be regarded as a client kingdom of England. It was Edward I’s invasion of 1296 that brought on 3 centuries of intermittent warfare.
The presence of a hostile England to the south was thereafter a geographical barrier to Scots going on Crusade. Anyone travelling to the continent by sea risked being intercepted by English ships. It seems that a substantial Scottish contingent did join the Crusade of 1270-72 led by Louis IX of France. It was the last of the great Crusades to the Middle East. Beyond that, the author describes a “steady stream” of Scottish knights travelling to Prussia in the mid-14th century, to join with the Northern Crusades.
The book also discusses how the Crusades affected Scotland in other ways, such as with issues of finance and culture.
The author does his best with some thin material. He has a, perhaps understandable, tendency to give credence to reports that may not be reliable. He hasn’t really changed my view that Scotland’s contribution to the Crusades was minimal. I’ll give him credit though, for covering a subject that, as far as I know, no-one else has.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review