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