BRUCE AND THE SCOTTISH WARS OF INDEPENDENCE

2001Did the turnaround in the military fortunes of Robert I between 1306-1314 owe more to his opponents’ failings than to his own abilities?

2003What does a study of Robert I’s campaigns between Methven (1306) and Bannockburn (1314) tell us about the development of his abilities as a military leader?

2004Do you agree that a settlement was made possible in 1328 because by that time both sides had become desperate for peace?

2005How far do agree that the career of Robert Bruce, between 1297 and 1328, was motivated more by self-interest that patriotism?

To what extent did King Robert owe his military successes to good fortune?

2006Why did it take so long for England and Scotland to make peace after the Battle of Bannockburn?

2007What factors best explain King Robert I’s defeat of his Scottish enemies by 1309?

2008How far do the actions of Robert Bruce before 1306 undermine his reputation as a great patriot?

To what extent were King Robert’s skills in diplomacy and propaganda as important as his military achievements in winning independence for Scotland?

2009“Caution in strategy, boldness in tactics.” How far is this an accurate assessment of King Robert’s military campaigns against the English between 1309 and 1314?

TIMELINEKing Robert Bruce; murder, rebellion and civil war 1306-1313

Key dates/documents

Feb 1302- Robert Bruce submits to Edward I to protect his Carrick lands and the elusive ‘right’.

11 June 1304-The Cumbuskenneth Bond of Robert Bruce and Bishop Lamberton of St. Andrews.

1305-Bruce in Parliament to decide Ordinance of Scotland but excluded thereafter.

10 Feb 1306-kills John Comyn of Badenoch in church of Blackfriars Dumfries.

25/27 March 1306-coronation at Scone.

19 June 1306- Defeat, Methven, Dalry and then disappears into western Isles and the Irish Sea world.

Feb 1307-Lands in Carrick with Irish/Isleman support.

April 1307-Glen Trool and in May Loudon Hill victories.

7 July 1307-Edward I dies at Burgh on Sands.

1307-08-Defeat of Ross, Comyn’s, Macdougalls, Macdowalls in turn, capture of Aberdeen.

March 1309-Parliament at St.Andrews in response to French King’s letter and General Council of Church refusal to recognize Bruce as King. Declaration of Clergy and Nobility.

1308-14-Attacks on the English in southern Scotland.

1311-First raids into northern England.

29 October 1312-Inverness Treaty with Norwegians renewing 1266 Treaty.(Western Isles)

Nov 1313-One year deadline declared by King Robert for his Scottish opponents to enter into his peace.

HISTORIOGRAPHY – BRUCES MILITARY TACTICSEvidence which supports the view that King Robert’s campaign showed ‘caution in strategy’between 1309 and 1314• King Robert never engaged the English in pitched battle before Bannockburn.• Robert aimed to consolidate his position north of the Forth before attacking positions of greater English strength.• Robert’s strategy was not to achieve decisive military victory but to erode the will of the English to continue their occupation of Scotland.

Evidence which does not support the view that Bruce’s campaign showed ‘caution in strategy’between 1309 and 1314• King Robert’s strategy was to take the war into England as soon as possible; dramatic raids weremade on the north of England after 1311.• King Robert appears to have changed his strategy in 1314 in order to force the issue by pitchedBattle at Bannockburn.• The strategic decision not to challenge English dominance on the vital South East in this periodcan be regarded as courageous.

Evidence which supports the view that King Robert’s campaign showed ‘boldness in tactics’between 1309 and 1314• Daring tactics used to take and then destroy castles.• Use of unconventional guerrilla tactic (‘secret’ war) can be seen as bold for one of King Robert’ssocial background.• Increasingly daring raids into England.

Evidence which does not support the view that King Robert’s campaign showed ‘boldness intactics’ between 1309 and 1314• King Robert’s decision to give battle at Bannockburn, especially on the second day when atactical withdrawal would not have risked his strategic position.• His use of guerrilla tactics can be seen as cautious, and as being born of necessity rather than apreconceived tactical plan.• The tactics of destroying castles may not reflect boldness so much as a recognition of the underlying weakness of his military position; he could not garrison captured castles.

Geoffrey Barrow• emphasises how unusual King Robert’s strategy and tactics were for someone from such aconservative feudal background.Colm MacNamee• has made a detailed study of King Robert’s strategy and tactics. He reveals the effectiveness of Bruce’s raids on England.Michael Penman• regards luck as being one of the major characteristics of Bruce’s campaigns.Aryeh Nusbacher• argues that Robert only made the decision to fight at Bannockburn at the last possible moment.Caroline Bingham• praises Robert’s military strategy and tactics

HISTORIOGRAPHY – REPUTATION AS A PATRIOT (PROBLEMS WITH HIS ACTIONS BEFORE 1306)Evidence which supports the view that Bruce’s actions before 1306 undermine his reputation as a great patriot • Bruce’s family had a long tradition of supporting King Edward I of England. • The Bruce family never supported or fought for King John. • Bruce’s defection to the Scottish side in 1297 may simply have been to pursue his

family’s dynastic ambitions rather than to preserve Scottish independence. • Bruce’s support for the Scottish side was never very vigorous – he was present at the

surrender at Irvine in 1297. • Bruce’s joint guardianship with John Comyn (and later Lamberton) was short-lived and

dominated by factional infighting. • Bruce’s resignation from the Guardianship. • Bruce’s defection to the English in 1302; his concern at the prospect of a Balliol

restoration. • Bruce’s willingness to serve under Edward I according to the terms of the Ordinance for

Scotland 1305.

Evidence which contradicts the view that Bruce’s actions before 1306 undermine his reputation as a great patriot • Bruce’s support for the Scottish cause from 1297. • He may have been present on the Scottish side at the Battle of Falkirk. • Bruce joined the guardianship in 1298, putting aside differences with Comyn.

• Bruce’s defection to the English in 1302 may not have been genuine; concerned at the threat to his own lands in Carrick.

• The ‘Secret Band’.

Geoffrey Barrow • argues that Bruce’s actions demonstrate an underlying consistency in his support of the

national cause; his defection in 1302 to the English was not genuine.

Alan Young • stresses the element of personal or dynastic ambition which drove Bruce and that his

support of the ‘national’ cause was only when it suited his own interests.

Ranald Nicholson • argues that “Bruce’s cause was Bruce”.

HISTORIOGRAPHY – DIPLOMACY AND PROPAGANDAGeoffrey Barrow • has emphasised the importance of Bruce’s diplomatic activity • suggests that Bruce knew that victory was unlikely to come through military victory

alone • praises Robert I for his willingness to pay a high price for peace in 1328.

Michael Penman • has argued that the Wars of Independence can be viewed largely as a Scottish civil war,

and that this was an important factor in the peace settlement. Diplomacy was therefore vital in winning foreign recognition of his kingship.

HISTORIOGRAPHY – DEFEAT OF HIS ENEMIES WITHIN SCOTLANDGeoffrey Barrow: emphasises Bruce’s military skill in winning the campaign. He argues

that his early victories laid the foundation for the development of a Bruce ‘myth’. He praises Bruce’s strategy of clemency and leniency towards his former enemies, and argues that earlier military failures and death of the Red Comyn fatally compromised Comyn political leadership. Barrow’s view is widely shared amongst historians, however, recently:

• Michael Penman: has argued that Bruce was fortunate that the death of Edward I removed an implacable foe.

• Colm MacNamee: argues that the English were weakened by ‘economic catastrophe’ and factional disputes of ‘peculiar bitterness’ which allowed Bruce to move against his Scottish enemies.

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEWWhen John Balliol was chosen by Edward I to be King of Scotland his rival, Robert Bruce did not give up his claim to the throne, instead he passed his claim down to his son who was also named Robert. When the Scots rebelled in 1295, the Bruce family remained loyal to Edward and expected to be rewarded with the Scottish crown. However, when the rebellion was crushed Edward refused to grant Bruce’s request. After the defeat of Wallace at Falkirk Robert Bruce and John Comyn were elected as the Guardians of Scotland in 1298. The two men were bitter enemies and in May 1300 Bruce resigned. In 1302 Bruce once again switched sides and became a supporter of King Edward. By 1304 Edward was once again in control of Scotland and in the same year Robert Bruce died leaving his claim to the Scottish throne to his son Robert, Earl of Carrick. Like his father and grandfather he was convinced of his right to the throne of Scotland and began to plan a rebellion against King Edward I who was now old and unlikely to live much longer. In February 1306 Bruce met with John Comyn at Greyfriars Church in Dumfries. Bruce accused Comyn of treachery and struck him with his sword. Bruce’s followers then stabbed Comyn to death. The Church condemned Comyn’s murder and Bruce was

excommunicated. Edward I ordered that Bruce was to be captured and executed and the powerful relatives and supporters of Comyn were determined to get revenge. Bruce realised that the only hope for him and his family was to seize the throne and drive the English out of Scotland.

In March 1306 the Countess of Buchan crowned Bruce king. He had the support of the Scottish Bishops who pardoned him for the murder of Comyn. He also had the backing of the Earls of Atholl, Lennox and Menteith and some lesser nobleman such as Sir James Douglas.

Bruce’s campaign did not begin well. In June 1306 he was defeated by the English at Methven and by Comyn’s relatives, the MacDougalls at Dalry. His wife and children were taken prisoner and three of his brothers were beheaded for treason. In the winter of 1306 Bruce went into hiding in an unknown location in the highlands and islands.

In February 1307 Bruce landed at Carrick in Ayrshire where he was attacked by a large English force. His brothers Thomas and Nigel were captured and executed. Bruce decided to avoid open battle with the English. Instead he fought a guerrilla war using ambush, surprise attacks and forced the English to fight on ground that was unsuitable for heavy cavalry.

At Glen Trool in April 1307, Bruce ambushed and defeated a large company of English soldiers. At Loudon Hill in May 1307 Bruce forced the English to fight in a narrow area where their cavalry could not move. In July 1307 Edward I died and his son Edward II took over the campaign. He was not a good general or a strong leader and had too many problems in England to pay much attention to Scotland.

The English were driven out of Perth, Linlithgow, Edinburgh and Roxburgh Castles – using night attacks and surprise. Bruce destroyed castles because he did not have enough men to occupy them and did not want them to fall back into the hands of the English.

In 1308 Bruce attacked Comyn Lands - the Herschip of Galloway and the Herschip of Buchan. The Comyns were finally defeated at Inverurie and their lands and property destroyed. Most Scottish nobles now accepted Bruce as king. In 1310 the Scottish parliament met and declared Robert Bruce to be the lawful king of Scotland.

PACT BETWEEN ROBERT THE BRUCE AND LAMBERTON (the Bishop of St Andrews)Agreement between Bruce and Bishop Lamberton (1304):Memorandum that in 1304, on St Barnabas day (11 June), the reverend father in Christ the lord William de Lamberton, by God’s grace bishop of St Andrews, and the nobleman the lord Robert de Brus, earl of Carrick and lord of Annandale, meeting at Cambuskenneth, conferring on future mutual dangers and wishing to avoid them as far as possible and to resist prudently the strivings of rivals, entered a treaty of friendship in the following form: namely, that they will faithfully consult mutually in whatsoever their business and dealings at whatever times and against whatever persons and will bring aid or help by themselves and their mend with all their strength for ever and without dissembling; that neither of them will try any difficult business without consulting the other and that each of them will forewarn, or cause to be forewarned, the other of imminent dangers as soon as he can consider them and will cause them to be impeded with all his strength. And faithfully to hold, fulfil and observe all these things fully and without any dissembling they have bound themselves with mutual faith and an oath taken in their persons, upon pain of £10,000 to be applied to the Holy Land…

Bruce was clearly plotting his future with Lamberton who had a reputation for being a patriotic bishop. This pact became crucial after the events of 1306 with the murder of John Comyn and Lamberton carrying out the coronation of Bruce.

MURDER OF COMYN

One of the best contemporary sources of information about the murder in John Comyn by Bruce on 10 February 1306 is from the English Chronicle of Guisborough. John Comyn was accompanied by his uncle Sir Robert Comyn. Robert Bruce was accompanied by Christopher Seaton (his brother-in-law) and possible Seaton’s two brothers. Guisborough states that they greeted one another with a “kiss of peace.” It is probable that Bruce would have asked Comyn to support Bruces claim to throne. Comyn would never support such as proposal. The following quote is the Chronicle of Guisborough.

“They were speaking together with words which seemed peaceful; suddenly, in a reversal, and with different words, (Bruce) began to accuse him of betrayal, in that he had accused him to the king of England, and worsened his position to his harm. When (Comyn) spoke peaceably and excused himself, (Bruce) did not wish to hear his speech, but as he had conspired, he struck with foot and sword and went away out. But (Bruces) men followed Comyn and cast him down on the paving before the alter, leaving him for dead…Robert Comyn his uncle ran to bring him help, but Christopher Seaton, who had married Robert’s sister met him, struck his head with a sword and he died…Comyn still lived for the friars had carried him down to the alter vestry to treat him and for him to confess his sins. When he confessed he was repentant, by the tyrant’s (that is Bruce’s) order he was dragged out of the vestry and killed on the steps of the high alter.”

John Comyn had not died outright when Bruce left the church. Bruce ordered him to be finished off. Perhaps Bruce had already declared to Comyn that he intended to seize the throne. Nevertheless, after the murder had taken place, Bruce perhaps felt that he had no other option but to seize the throne. The Historian Colm McNamee states that “it is impossible to believe that murder was intended in a sacrosanct church of all places; Bruce would not have handed such a weapon to his enemies.” It is therefore possible that Bruce murdered Comyn in a moment of rage.

This action was a defining episode in Scottish history. Robert Bruce had been one the of the first to come into the peace of Edward I before the Ordinance of Scotland in 1305. After the events in February 1306, Bruce’s actions showed that he was determined to become King of Scotland and that he was firmly against Edward I’s control of the Kingdom.

Possible motivating factors to stake his claim for the throne in 1306 Little chance of Balliol restoration – the French had been defeated by a

Flemish Army and the English had made peace with the French King. This meant that Bruce’s claim to the Scottish throne was the only plausible option for the return of a monarchy in Scotland.

Bruce’s father died on 21 April 1304. This meant that Bruce acquired an increase in prestige as he became Lord of Annandale, head of the family and without doubt the most senior Bruce making him the strongest claimant to become King of Scots.

Bruce was also aware that Edward was 68 in 1306 which made him very old by medieval standards. Perhaps Bruce was waiting for the death of Edward before acting on his ambition to become the King of Scots. However, his actions in February 1306 meant that this process had to be accelerated.

The relationship with Bishop Lamberton clearly encouraged Bruce to act. The pact of 1304 showed the support that Bruce had from such an important Church leader. Bishop Lamberton was appointed as one of four Guardians in October 1305 to hold office until the Englishman, John of Brittany could take up his role as lord lieutenant.

Professor Barrow (the leading authority on Bruce) takes the view that Bruce had everything to lose. He was married to the most powerful magnate in Ireland, he held Ayr and Kildrummy castles, and with three royal forests “Bruce had never been richer or more favoured.” Barrow implies that patriotism motivated him to act contrary to his own interests. Barrow uses the phrase “it was a moment of action”. Bruce had been preparing his castles if the need arose to use them.

Prestwich argues that that Bruce “with more careful handling by Edward, it is likely that Bruce would have remained a valuable ally of English.” He argues that Bruce still harboured fond expectations of being asked by Edward to take on the role of vassal-king of Scotland, and was disappointed at Edward’s continued refusal to use him in this role.

It is possible to argue that Bruce was motivated by the power that Edward had exercised over Scotland. He may have been angry about the foreign occupation, the looting of precious relics and perhaps even by the execution of Wallace who was humiliated, tortured and killed by Edward I.

Bruce suffered a downturn in fortunes. In March 1305, he played a prominent role at the Westminster Parliament and he was consulted about the Ordinance of Scotland. Yet Bruce was relegated to a minor role in the government of Scotland and lands in Carrick were given to Umfraville. In addition, Edward attempted to collect debts from Bruce which were allegedly owed to English king by Bruce’s father. By February 1306, Bruce had suffered a great loss in power at the hands of Edward I and was therefore prompted to take drastic actions in 1306.

Bruce may have been plotting to seize the throne of Scotland and Comyn was trying to stop him. Bruce had the support of Bishop Lamberton and possible Bishop Wishart of Glasgow. Barbour’s Bruce (partriotic poem supporting Bruce) claims that Comyn had made Edward I clear of Bruce’s intentions.

AFTER THE MURDER OF COMYN Bruce rode back to Lochmaben to raise the tenantry of Annandale. He was

in open rebellion against Edward I. He seized castles along the Carrick and Solway shoreline. He appeared to be with his brothers Edward and Neil.

Bruce then appeared to speak to the Bishop of Glasgow (Robert Wishart). The Bishop absolved Bruce for his sins and administered an oath that as King of Scotland he would abide by the direction of clergy of Scotland. The clergy clearly supported Bruce.

Bruce then progressed to cross the Forth and head to Scone. The ceremony of Bruce becoming King occurred on 25th March 1306 in front

of Bishop Wishart of Glasgow, the Bishop of Moray and Bishop Lamberton arrived days later to celebrate mass.

This demonstrates how quickly Bruce acted after the murder of Comyn. 4 Bishops and 4 Earls were present at the ceremony. However, crucially, the

Earl of Fife was absent and a substitute had to found. Traditionally his job was to lead the King to the throne. The heir to the Earl of Fife was in England and instead, the young heir’s Auntie, Isabella of Fife who was the Countess of Buchan was asked to carry out the ceremony. Isabella carried out this role despite being married to the Earl of Buchan who was a Comyn. Isabella is reported in English chronicles as being a mistress of Robert Bruce.

All essential ceremonies were observed. Bruce was acclaimed king by the clergy, nobles and people in the abbey church. Robert administered the oath and a robe was placed on his shoulders. Although the Stone of Destiny was in England, Isabella of Fife led Robert Bruce to sit on a throne or

ornamental chair. A coronet was place on Bruce’s head. Robert’s wife, Elisabeth de Burgh supposedly berated her husband for “playing Kings and Queen.” Nevertheless, Robert Bruce was now King Robert I of Scotland.

While Bruce’s wife may have doubted how legitimate the ceremony was, Bruce had acted quickly and managed to have a significant number of supporters at the ceremony. Bruce was now recognised by many as King of Scots.

Although King Robert had an impressive amount of support, he perhaps only had a quarter of Scotland who firmly supported him. (estimate given by Colm McNamee)

The Bishop of Moray, David Murray, was raising an army to the King’s aid in the North.

After becoming King, Bruce tried to strengthen his powerbase by capturing castles and making “friends and friendship purchasing” as Barbour puts it.

THE REACTION IN ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND IN 1306 – MILITARY FAILURE OF BRUCE

Following the knighting of Edward of Carnaerfon, the Prince of Wales and other knights in May 1306, each of the new knights pledged an oath to avenge the death of John Comyn. They labelled King Robert as “King Hobbe”. (Hobbe meaning nobody)

Scots against Bruce (Anglo-Scots) wasted months waiting for the English to arrive in strength.

Within 12 days of the murder of Comyn, Tibbers castle had been recaptured and on 3rd March 1306, Dumfries had fallen to those hostile to Bruce. However it was not until the summer that the English had entered Scotland.

On 5th April 1306, Edward appointed Aymer de Valence, the brother-in-law of the murdered Comyn as his lieutenant in Scotland.

In June 1306, Aymer de Valence advanced from Berwick towards Perth and Dundee with 300 cavalry and a large force of infantry. Barbour states that he was accompanied by Phillip Moubray and Ingram de Umphraville.

At Cuper in Fife, they arrested the elderly Bishop Wishart of Glasgow. Bishop Lamberton surrendered near Kinross.

Valence then went on to capture Perth.

BATTLES OF METHVEN, STRATHTAY & DALRY – By this time Bruce was already engaged in a full-scale civil war with the family and friends of John Comyn. The coronation in March had given him some legitimacy; but overall his position was very uncertain. Valence had made his base at Perth, where he was joined by many of the supporters of John Comyn. King Robert came from the west, ready to meet his foe in battle. Bruce was with the Earls of Lennox and Athol, his brother Edward Bruce, Thomas Randolf, Hugh Hay, Sir David Barclay and Sir Simon Fraser who was once again in revolt. McNamee points out Bruce’s army was not fighting from a position of confidence as many of King Robert’s knights wore white shirts over their surcoats to avoid being identified if they were defeated. He was prepared to observe on this occasion the gentlemanly conventions of feudal warfare, while the English adopted less orthodox tactics. Valence was invited to leave the walls of Perth and join Bruce in battle, but he declined. The king, perhaps believing that Valence's refusal to accept his challenge was a sign of weakness, retired only a few miles to nearby Methven, where he made camp for the night. Before dawn on 19 June his little army was taken by surprise and almost destroyed, because Bruce had accepted Valence at his word and failed to take the sensible precaution of placing pickets around the camp. His entire army was

routed. Bruce was nearly captured after this battle but he managed to escape. Sixteen prisoners were tried and executed at Newcastle in August and eleven others were taken to York. Simon Fraser, who was hated by Edward, was taken to London and brutally executed like Wallace. This demonstrates that when King Robert tried to fight according to laws of feudal engagement he lost. Nevertheless, it is clear that Bruce later learned from mistakes made at Methven. Despite of this, Bruce did not help his cause as defeat did not instill confidence into his supporters who as shown were not completed confidence of victory as they wore white covers over their surcoats.

Robert and his remaining cavalry fled westwards over the mountains into Strathtay. The Bruce party suffered a further defeat at Strathtay in 1306. Bruce once again managed to escape defeated. Later in the summer of 1306 the MacDougalls of Argyll, allies of Comyn’s attacked Bruce’s small force at Dalry in Argyll. The exact date cannot be established, but it took place sometime between late July and early August. The MacDougalls were related to the Balliol and Comyn families and were firm opponents of Robert I. This meant that their rivals, the Macdonalds, formerly pro-English, now supported Robert. Alexander Macdougall and his son, John of Argyll or of Lorn were uncle and cousin to John Comyn. By 1306 the late summer of 1306, Bruce had been comprehensively defeated.

Summary of King Roberts first few monthsKing Robert’s first few months on the throne ended in complete disaster. By the winter of 1306 his small fledgling army had already been defeated at the Methven Woods near Perth (19 June). The English response to his seizure of the throne had been swift and decisive. The Earl of Pembroke, Aymer de Valance, had assembled a fast-moving body of horsemen and ambushed King Robert’s army as it was setting up camp for the night.As King Robert fled, his murder of Comyn came back to haunt him. One of Comyn’s relations, MacDougall of Argyll, ambushed what remained of his army at Dalry at the head of Strathfillan. Once again the new king of Scots was forced to flee. Perhaps an even more bitter blow was the news that his family had failed to make it to safety and had been forced to seek refuge at Kildrummy Castle. However, Edward’s siege of the fortress had been swift and thanks to treachery from one of the defenders, futile. Robert’s wife and daughter were now in the hands of his enemy, and his younger brother Neil and many of his leading supporters were publicly executed. Even Bishop Wishart was captured and taken south to imprisonment in the tower of London.On the run, with most of his family, allies and friends fallen or captured, the new king of Scots felt anything but a king. It is here that he picks up his nickname, King Hob (King Nobody). King Hob all but falls out of the history pages for a few months. Some suggest that he headed for Ireland, others that he spent a few months in the Western Isles and Orkney. According to legend it is during this time the king is said to have hidden in a cave on Rathlin Island and pondered his own defeats but to have been inspired by the tireless work of a lowly spider. Of course, there is no real historical evidence for this tale, and it was probably invented in the 19th century by the Scottish novelist and poet Sir Walter Scott. It is probable that Bruce was constantly on the move during the winter of 1306/7.

Bruce was a defeated man in 1306. He had gambled and lost significantly. Colm McNamee states that “Recovery from this desperate position was by no means inevitable, however; it was rather miraculous.”

Personal losses in 1306The English army besieged Kildrummy Castle and Neil Bruce was captured. Queen Elisabeth and her daughter Marjorie were captured by the Earl of Ross. The Earl of Atholl who supported King Robert was taken to London and hanged, cut down, beheaded and burned on the orders of Edward I. Christopher Seaton (Bruces brother-in-law) was hanged in Dumfries. Christopher two brothers were also executed. Neil Bruce was tried before Edward of Caernarfon, drawn by horses through the streets of Berwick and then hanged along with several others. Isabel of Fife was put in a cage for the public to look hanging from Berwick castle. Mary Bruce was put in a cage at Roxburgh castle. Each cage had a privy. The Countess of Fife remained in the cage until 1310!! It is not clear how long Mary Bruce had to endure the degrading punishment. Robert’s 12 year old daughter Marjorie was to be similarly punished but Edward relented and she was left in the custody of Henry Percy. King Robert’s wife was held in a Royal Manor in Lincolnshire with two elderly companions who were to be “not at all gay”.

GAINING CONTROL OVER SCOTLAND 1307-1311

In early February 1307 King Robert returned to Scotland and raised a small army that had a few early successes. Bruce came back to the south-west of Scotland with soldiers recruited, for the most part, from the Western Isles. It was an understandable move; for he came ashore in his own earldom of Carrick, where he could expect to command a large degree of local support. Perhaps even more important the countryside itself was well known to Bruce, and there were plenty of remote and difficult areas to allow cover and protection for his band of guerillas. For Bruce to come back to mainland to fight his enemies show his determination to establish himself as King of Scots. The fact that he managed to defeat so many of his enemies shows the success of the guerrilla tactics that he used which was not the tactics that would be expected from someone with such a conservative feudal background.

However, it was a move bold by Bruce as the English border was not far and many of the local castles were strongly held by Edward's forces; and, perhaps most important of all, the Lordship of Galloway, the old Balliol stronghold, was adjacent to Carrick, and many of the local families were hostile to Bruce and his cause. When his brothers Thomas and Alexander attempted a landing on the shores of Loch Ryan, they met with disaster at the hands of Dungal MacDowall, the leading Balliol supporter in the area. His brothers were sent to England to be executed.

Battle of Glen Trool – March 1307 – Aymer Valence tried a surpsise attack on Bruce at the head of Glen Trool. This was a difficult position to approach, for the Loch takes up much of the glen, and only a narrow track led directly to Bruce's camp. It was arguably best not to attempt anything too dramatic, but Valence sent a small raiding party ahead, perhaps hoping to catch the enemy offguard, in much the same fashion as Methven. However, Bruce had learned from previous mistakes this time; making effective use of the terrain, and the knights lack of mobility. Bruce drove them back with seemingly no loss-apart from some horses. Bruce refused to be caught out on land where heavy cavalry would be successful again emphasising his skills as a military leader. Bruce not only survived but went on the following month to win his first important engagement at the Battle of Loudon Hill.

BATTLE OF LOUDOUN HILL - MAY 1307 – After escaping from Glen Trool, Bruce moved to north Ayrshire in early May where his army was strengthened by fresh

recruits. Here he again encountered Aymer de Valence who was commanding the main English force in the area. In preparing to meet him he took up a position on 10 May at Loudoun Hill, some 10 miles east of Kilmarnock. Bruce prepared the ground for his attack on the English force. According to Barbour’s Bruce, Valence's only approach was over the highway through the bog, where the parallel ditches Bruce's men dug outwards from the marsh restricted his room for deployment still further, effectively neutralising his advantage in numbers. He was forced at attack along a narrowly constricted front upwards towards the waiting enemy spears. This effectively reduced the chance of a full scale attack from the cavalry. As Bruce's spearmen pressed downhill on the English knights, the rear ranks began to flee in panic. A hundred or more were killed in the battle. Amyer de Valence managed to escape the carnage and fled to the safety of Bothwell Castle. Once again, Bruce had chosen the ground and prepared the battlefield successfully.

DEATH OF EDWARD I - However, it is the news of the death of Edward I on the 7 July 1307, Edward I died in Burgh-on-Sands aged 69 on his way to wage war against Robert I. This encouraged men to flock to Bruce’s banner. The Lanercost chronicle stated that “the number of those willing to strengthen him in his Kingship increased daily.” The new King Edward II reached Cumnock in Ayrshire on the 25th August 1307, only to go to England never to show face in Scotland for a further 3 years. The scene was now set for a civil war in Scotland between the Bruce faction and the Comyn family and their supporters. John of Brittany was again made the Lieutenant of Scotland and there appeared to be no immediate threat from England. Bruce was perhaps fortunate with the death of Edward I who was regarded as a warrior king. Michael Penman certainly highlights his belief that Bruce was lucky. Nevertheless, Bruce may have been expecting the death of Edward I for a number of years and when it did occur, Bruce effectively acted on it to gain control of Scotland.

CIVIL WAR 1306-1309 - In September 1307 Bruce defeated the Gallovidian leaders, Dungal Macdowall and Donald MacCan. The peasantry suffered so much in Galloway that they were forced to take refuge with their cattle in Cumberland forest. This demonstrated the ruthlessness of Bruce. After the Galloway campaign, Robert marched against the castle of Inverlochy, which belonged to the Comyns of Badenoch. At the same time galleys moved along Loch Linnhe. As a result, John of Lorn agreed to a truce. Inverlochy Castle was captured in October. The subsequent march up the Great Glen, the capture of the castles of Urquhart and Inverness, and the burning of Nairn forced the earl of Ross to make a truce to last until 2 June 1308. Just before Christmas 1307, Robert moved his troops to Slioch near Huntly. On Christmas day there was an exchange of arrow fire with the men of the earls of Buchan and Atholl. The earls returned on 31 December, but believed Robert’s army too strong to be attacked. In the early months of 1308, Robert attacked Balvenie Castle and destroyed the castles of Duffus and Tarndale; one of his supporters captured Skelbo Castle. Later, at a date which is uncertain (perhaps 23 May), Robert completely defeated the earl of Buchan somewhere between Inverurie and Old Meldrum, the main fight perhaps at the latter.

The harrying of Buchan followed: men loyal to the earl were killed, and the countryside laid waste (June 1308). The earl, who died later that year and his surviving associates fled to England. The earl of Ross, now isolated, submitted on

31 October at Auldearn. He was won over by concessions which allowed him to keep his lands with additions, including the burgh Dingwall.

In an undated letter (perhaps March 1308) to Edward II, John or Lorn reported that Robert had approached his territory in Argyll, and that two truces had been agreed between them. It seems probable that the second had expired by August 1308 when Robert advanced into Argyll. He defeated John of Lorn’s men in a battle traditionally said to have taken place in the Pass of Brander. In the notes to his edition of Barbour, A A M Duncan argued that this action took place on the northern slope of Ben Cruachan, but has since modified the views expressed there: he now places the action on the northern side of the north western arm of Loch Awe, but still prefers the name Ben Cruachan for this engagement. King Robert then besieged Dunstaffnage Castle (though A A M Duncan argues that the siege may have taken place in 1309 with John’s father, Alexander Macdougall, having come to terms with the king and kept the castle in 1308). John fled by galley to one of his castles, perhaps Inchchonnell, and subsequently to England. Alexander attended parliament in St. Andrews in 1309, but he later took service with Edward II.

During the summer of 1308 Edward Bruce, now King Robert’s only surviving brother, and one of an inner core of trusted commanders which included Randolph and Douglas, attacked Galloway for a second time. Donald MacCan was captured. Dungal Macdowall and his relatives fled; his island stronghold, probably Threave, was burned. By the end of 1308 Bruce had successfully attacked lands held by the Comyns (The Lordship of Galloway and the Lordship of Buchan). The Comyns had been finally defeated at Inverurie and their lands and property destroyed. Bruce had clearly taken advantage of the preoccupation of the new English King in establishing authority in England. Bruce picked off his enemies in Scotland to establish his authority as King of Scots.

BRUCE AND EDWARD IIEdward II continued the English campaign after his father’s death in 1307. In August Edward II attacked the South West only to withdraw by September to deal with establishing his authority in England. Edward’s failure to send support did allow Bruce crucial breathing space. GWS Barrow argues that “We must not exaggerate the success which Bruce had achieved by 1309, even while admitting that this success was extraordinary when we consider the almost ludicrous weakness of his position only 2 years before” Barrow goes on to state that in 1309, Bruce had still not won over the whole of Scotland. If Scotsman still wanted to fight against Bruce then they could do so as part of the English forces.

Edward II still had supporters in Scotland. He held castles at Stirling, Perth, Dundee and Bothwell. In addition the Earl of Dunbar and William Soules of Liddesdale were active supporters of the English King meaning that the Bruce did not have control over the Lothians. To counter this support for the English King, King Robert’s attacks took the form of mobile plundering across enemy territories, driving off livestock and extracting payments of grain and cash in return for truces. The aim of Bruce was impoverish local communities and supply Bruce’s own forces while making life exceptionally difficult for English garrison to be maintained. Attacks continued despite of a truce with Edward II between July 1309 and March 1310 and complaints to Edward II of such attacks by Bruce which led Edward to raise an army to attack Bruce’s forces. However, Edward II struggled to gain the support of many English nobles because they did not wish to serve beside Piers Gaveston.

In the autumn of 1310, Bruce allowed an English Army under Edward II to penetrate deep into Scotland to little purpose since they found no Scots troops to defeat in open battle and not enough food to sustain themselves or their horses. Bruce clearly did not want to engage the English army in an open battle. When the English Army retreated, Bruce attacked English strongholds and raided across the border until the summer of 1311. Bruce once again showed his skill as a military leader by refusing to fight a major battle and lose. Instead, Bruce stuck to guerrilla tactics along with scorched earth tactics to deny English strongholds food. In January 1313, Bruce stormed Perth Castle which had been blockaded since 1311. He completed the subjugation of Galloway and captured Dumfries in February 1313. In May 1313, Robert captured the Isle of Man. In September 1313, Bruce captured Linlithgow. Bruce’s daring raids on castles followed by destroying them again emphasises his success as a military leader.

In September 1313, King Robert issued an ultimatum to those Scots in Edward’s allegiance which gave them a year to submit or they would face the permanent loss of their lands. Scots loyal to Edward II appealed for help who had established control within his own kingdom. Edward announced that he would lead an army north in 1314.

BANNOCKBURNRobert’s policy of destroying all castles that he captured meant that they couldn’t be used against him in the future. Eventually, by 1313 only Berwick and Stirling remained in English hands, despite Edward II’s attempts to lead costly expeditions north. Stirling, the prized gateway to the north, was willing to surrender if it were not relieved by an English army by midsummer’s day 1314. This was a challenge to his authority that Edward II could not ignore. If Edward ignored this, then his reputation amongst the barons would have been severely damaged. His army marched north to Bannockburn.There has been a lot written about this battle over the years. Bannockburn is often cited as a crushing victory for Scotland over the English. While this is essentially true, it did not turn into a decisive victory. Bannockburn represented a victory of discipline and tactics over superior armour and the reckless charge of armoured knights.The battle was actually fought over two days in 1314, 23 and 24 June. It was by no means a given that King Robert would actually face Edward II in battle. In previous invasions by Edward, Robert had refused to give battle and instead melted into the highlands and awaited the inevitable English withdrawal. Unlike his father, Edward II could not afford a lengthy campaign season in Scotland, nor the expense of garrisoning castles in the face of bitter Scottish attacks. Thus he needed a quick crushing victory against Robert, but did not expect to get the opportunity, therefore he was overjoyed when the Scot presented themselves for battle.Edward’s army was significantly larger than that of King Robert. Although not as large as has been proposed by some historians, it was still a significant force and when compared to the Scots, on paper at least, victory appeared certain for the English king.  English forces Scots forces

Cavalry 2000 knights 500 light horsemen

Infantry 10,000 men from the northern counties

2000 Welsh spearmen

Unknown number of Irish spearmen

4500 pikemen in three schiltrons

Archers (including crossbowmen)

200 crossbowmen from Bristol

1000 Welsh longbowmen

Uncertain number of other longbowmen from the north

Several hundred men armed with both longbows and short bows, mostly from Selkirk forest

The numbers above are a conservative estimate, but are significantly less than reported in some accounts. Edward II’s finances probably couldn’t have sustained much more than this and when combined with the unrest among the barons in England this seems a realistic size for the English army. The numbers of Scots taking part in the battle, by comparison, do not seem to have altered since the earliest accounts. At some point, however, probably thanks to the chronicler Barbour, the role of Sir James Douglas at the battle was significantly enhanced. Indeed it was enhanced to the point where a fourth schiltron was invented and he was given command. However, we now believe that he took part in the battle as part of Sir Robert Keith’s cavalry force although he may well have dismounted and taken part in the melée.First day of the battle

The first day of the battle opened as the English army approached Stirling Castle along the old Roman road. Representatives from the castle met with the king and warned him that many Scots were hiding in the woods of the King’s Park on Coxet Hill. Edward sent two scouting parties forward, both numbering about 300 horsemen. One was under the command of Sir Robert Clifford. This was to scout the flat land to the east of the road, known locally as the Carse. The other, under the command of the Earl of Hereford, rode up the old Roman road towards the Scots position. There Hereford’s men came face to face with King Robert himself, inspecting his men at the edge of the woods.

On seeing the king, a young knight called Henry de Bohun immediately challenged the king to a duel. He spurred his horse onwards straight to the Scottish king. Henry de Bohun was considered a great knight, but the king of Scots simply waited until he was almost upon him then sidestepped his horse and killed the English knight by smashing in the back of his head with a war axe. The Scots pikemen then drove off Hereford’s men with ease. Apparently King Robert’s only comment on the event was to complain about his broken battle axe.Sir Robert Clifford’s advance fared no better. His foray into the Carse had discovered that there were many holes or pots, dug into the ground near the Roman road, but that the Carse itself was flat, if somewhat boggy underfoot. However, before he could procede any further, the Earl of Moray, Thomas Randolph, led his pikemen out of the trees and challenged Clifford’s knights to attack. The result was the same as for Hereford’s men. The knights were unable to penetrate the thick wall of pikes.After hearing about the two disastrous scouting missions, Edward and his advisers decided to move the entire army during the night. They decided to take up position across the Carse facing the Scots. They hoped this would catch the Scots unprepared and prevent them escaping.This meant that the English troops spent a restless night, crossing the burn and standing guard in case of a Scots attack. The English morale had been affected badly by the two defeats the previous day. Worse still was the political infighting among Edward’s advisors. Many of the more experienced and respected nobles had been replaced by Edward, while he took little part in the actual planning. Finally, a Scottish knight defected from Edward’s side and travelled to King Robert. He explained the disorganised position of the English army and advised that the time to fight was now.Second day of the battle

The Scots began the day by marching from the forest and taking up their positions. King Edward was so amazed that the Scots had not run away he exclaimed, ‘My God will they fight?’ When the Scots kneeled in prayer, he even believed they were asking him his forgiveness. The English position had become terribly confused during the night. Now the knights and heavy cavalry formed the entire front rank of the Edward’s army. The majority of his foot soldiers had not even crossed the burn. To make matters worse the archers were not in a position to fire on the Scots, for fear of hitting their own men.When the three Scots schiltron advanced towards the English, the knights did what was expected of them and charged. For hundreds of years, a charge of heavy knights had usually won battles, but here the conditions were far from ideal. The ground was soft underfoot, making it slippery for the horses. The Scots had drilled

constantly for this kind of fight. Their closely packed formations of long pikes meant it was impossible for the knights to get near them. The Scots kept advancing towards the English, slowly pushing them back towards the burn. The knights had no room to manoeuvre or retreat, and were cut down.When the English archers did manage to position themselves so that they could fire on the Scots without hitting their own men, Sir Robert Keith and James Douglas attacked with their light horses. The English archers were unable to defend themselves and scattered.Finally, the Scots reserves, made up of the willing but untrained highlanders and camp followers, rushed down from the top of Coxet Hill waving homemade banners. To the beleaguered English, this appeared to be a fresh Scottish army joining in the battle. Enough was enough and the English broke and ran. Chasing them, the Scots caught up as many tried to cross the burn. The carnage was great, and many English knights and commoners met their death while trying to cross.King Edward, despite popular myth, fought bravely in the battle. He was forced to defend himself from Scottish soldiers as they tugged at his harness and his clothes. Eventually he was led away and managed to escape.Overall it was a most impressive victory, but with Edward’s escape the war would continue.

Why did the Scots succeed at Bannockburn?

The simple answer is that the Scots were better in battle. However, the simple answer is rarely enough to satisfy historians. Most agree that the answer lies in two main areas: English failings and Scottish successes.

SCOTTISH SUCCESSLeadership - The Scots were led by a dedicated and well-motivated group of friends and allies. King Robert’s captains were veterans of the wars and had the loyalty and love of their men. Robert was unquestionably an able general. His use of terrain, personal courage and choice of tactics were flawless. Others, like Randolph, fought on foot next to the men of their schiltron, they led by example. All of the commanders knew their roles. They knew the aims of the day: to continually push forward and hem in the superior English army in the confines of the Carse. In essence the Scots were better led than the disorganised English.Discipline - The Scots troops were highly disciplined. They had trained for this day since the deal had been struck with Edward Bruce many months earlier. Each man knew their place in the schiltron and, unlike Wallace at Falkirk they had trained at moving and staying in formation. Even during the thunderous charges of the English knights, the Scots pikemen stayed shoulder to shoulder with their comrades in arms.

Morale - The events of the previous day had done much to boost the morale of the Scots army. News of the defeat of the English squadrons under the command of Clifford and Hereford had inspired the men. However, more inspiring had been the tale of the duel between their king and Henry de Bohun. When the Scots prepared for battle in the morning, they were well rested; they had eaten a good breakfast and were confident that their king could win.

Planning - It is often said that Robert had not intended to fight at Bannockburn. His tactics of melting back into the highlands had worked well for him, but he did not discount the possibility that he may have to fight and planned accordingly. The use of the holes or pottes in the ground on the old Roman road is often cited as an anti-cavalry measure. However, in reality they were too obvious and easily spotted by the English forces. But if we consider that King Robert was playing a much more subtle game, then it is possible to believe that the Scots king had hoped to encourage the English to fight on the Carse. King Robert did everything he could to push his opposite number to fight on the ground of his choosing, including digging these easily spotted defences. This shows a clear mind and a devious plan: King Robert may not have decided on the eve of the battle to actually give fight, but he certainly had planned for that possibility and discovered a way to neutralise the English advantage of superior numbers.ENGLISH WEAKNESSESLeadership - In stark contrast to the Scots camp, the English leadership was at odds with itself. The king, Edward II, took almost no interest in the planning of the battle, and left that to his lieutenants. It is also true that there was considerable discord among the leading English nobles. Many of the greater magnates and usual leaders of the army had been overlooked by Edward during this campaign. Instead he interfered in the chain of command and promoted lesser men, some suggest his lovers, to positions of command, thereby alienating a good many of the more able leaders. Thus the leadership of the English host was anything but cohesive, and rarely acted together for the common good.Discipline - The knights, who made such a potentially important element of the army, were notoriously difficult to keep in check. They were always looking to the glory of the charge, and failing to recognise the importance of the other elements of the army. Consequently, the English at Bannockburn lacked sufficient discipline to engage King Robert’s formations. As the battle began, the archers were in the centre of the force, and had no way of attacking the Scots, as they had successfully done at Falkirk. Despite their failure to penetrate the schiltrons on the previous day the knights charged headlong into the Scots with disastrous results. The English king fought bravely in the battle, but was unable to lead his men or exert any discipline on his knights.

Morale - For many in the English forces, the night before the battle was particularly stressful. The entire army had moved during the night to take up new positions on the Carse. Thus, few had any sleep; many had to forage far and wide to find enough food and shelter for all the men. Local farmhouses had to be stripped of their doors so that temporary bridges could be built to get the horses across the burn. When the army had finally got into position they were forced to stand guard during what was left of the night, in case the Scots tried a night attack on the camp, or slipped away into darkness. Worse were the stories of the previous day’s defeats, being retold around the campfires. The news was very bleak, and many considered the Scots king invincible. Unlike the Scots, these men were not fighting for their homes or a cause they could believe in. Many were Irish and Welsh and had little love for their king. When the morning came they had only a quick cold meal before the battle had begun. It is little wonder that for the majority of the infantry their heart wasn’t in the fight.

Planning -There had been little thought as to the deployment of the troops prior to the battle. None of the English commanders had believed that the Scots would actually deploy for the battle. They believed that King Robert would follow his usual pattern of withdrawal rather than risk everything in a pitched battle. Thus they were unprepared for the fight. During the night manoeuvre, the vanguard of the army had been forced to merge into a long ragged line of all the cavalry divisions. There was no thought about how the rest of the army would be deployed or used. Indeed, the archers were in a position that they could not be effectively used because they would end up shooting the knights in the back. The majority of the army couldn’t even fit on the battlefield and remained on the far bank of the burn.

Essentially the English underestimated the Scots at Bannockburn and paid the price for their initial disdain of King Robert’s pikemen.

The continuation of the warWhile it is true that Bannockburn was a considerable victory for King Robert, it was not a victory that he could use to bring about an end to the war. For another 14 years Robert struggled against Edward II for official recognition as king of Scots.Only a year after Bannockburn, Robert decided to take the battle to Edward II. He began by opening up a second front in Ireland. His only remaining brother, Edward Bruce, invaded with a sizeable army of Scots. Their intention was to drive the English out of Ireland and crown Edward Bruce king of Ireland. The plan was to then invade Wales, thus setting up a pan-Celtic alliance to surround England. As ambitious as this plan was, Edward Bruce wasn’t quite the leader his brother was, and he eventually failed in his quest to unite the Irish clan chiefs or destroy the English forces. He eventually died in 1318 at Dundalk, having failed to secure the island.King Robert also took the battle to England, invading the northern counties every year between 1315 and 1318. By the end of 1318, Berwick had been recaptured and the north of England devastated.Edward II tried several times to bring King Robert to battle, but the wily Scots commander made good use of guerrilla tactics. When the English king launched cripplingly expensive invasions of Scotland, Robert launched some very profitable counter invasions of England. It all combined to add to the king of Scot’s reputation as a great warrior, and Edward’s reputation as an inept battle king.

Why was Edward II unable to defend northern England from the Scots?The later years of the war are portrayed as the ineffectiveness of the English to contain King Robert. With ease his forces were able to come south and cross the border. The northern counties were ravaged, crops burned, farmers killed, livestock and other goods stolen and the English king seemed unable to prevent it.The reasons for this are twofold. Firstly, the wars had effectively bankrupted the Exchequer. It became increasingly hard for the monarchy to fund expensive expeditions to the north. There was little chance of real success; it had now become readily apparent that the subduing of Scotland was an unobtainable goal. Added to this was the lack of booty to entice the nobility to join in. The lack of money meant that any armies in the north would have to be provisioned and funded by the north and several years of famine up to 1318 meant that at least two expeditions to Scotland had to be cancelled. This all meant that the northern counties were essentially on their own for the most part.Secondly, King Robert was an exceptional strategist. The few times that Edward managed to raise a suitable force to confront the Scots, he found himself unable to bring King Robert to battle. Twice, Edward led a sizeable army north towards Berwick and twice he failed to entice Robert to battle. Instead the Scottish king marched his forces south into the northern counties and laid waste to all he could find. Both times, Edward was forced to abandon his campaign to return south and protect England from the Scots armies. After the humiliating failure of the 1322 campaign, Edward could no longer rely upon his southern barons to raise such an army again.

EDWARD BRUCE AND IRELANDEdward's main mission in invading Ireland was to create a second front in the ongoing war against England, draining her of much needed men, materials and finance by creating havoc in Ireland. This became critical when the Isle of Man was recaptured by English-backed Scots from King Robert's control in January 1315, thereby threatening the south and south-west of Scotland and also reopening up a potential source of aid to the English from the Anglo-Irish and native Irish.

On 26 May 1315 Edward and his fleet (estimated in excess of 6,000 men) landed on the Irish coast at points at and between Olderfleet Castle at Larne, and Glendrum. Edward meanwhile was swiftly faced by an army led by vassals of the Earl of Ulster such as the de Mandevilles, Savages, Logans and Bissets of the Glens, and their Irish allies, led by Sir Thomas de Mandeville. However they were defeated in battle by the Scots under Thomas Randolph. Subsequently, the Scots managed to take the town, though not the castle, of Carrickfergus.

In early June, Ó Néill and some twelve fellow northern Kings and lords met Edward de Brus at Carrickfergus and swore fealty to him as High King of Ireland. The Irish annals state that de Brus "took the hostages and lordship of the whole province of Ulster without opposition and they consented to him being proclaimed King of Ireland and all the Gaels of Ireland agreed to grant him lordship and they called him King of Ireland." In fact, de Brus was never to receive anything more than purely nominal recognition from any of the more powerful Irish Kings, and over the next three years was ignored by many leaders in Ireland.

With support from King Robert, Edward seemed unstoppable as they won battle after battle, in less than a year they had most of Ireland in their control. However by the beginning of 1317 famine had stricken most of the country making it difficult for Edward to provide food to most of his men. King Robert returned to Scotland and to the management of his own kingdom, but promised more aid and more volunteers to help his brother. For almost a year the Anglo-Norman barons did little to retake any land since the famine made it difficult for either side to provide food to soldiers in the field.However, Edward Bruce’s diplomacy to the pope failed and the Papacy did not recognise Edward's claim that he ruled over parts or all of Ireland. In addition, in the late summer of 1318, Sir John de Bermingham with his army began a march against Edward de Brus. On 14 October 1318, the Scots-Irish army was badly defeated at the Battle of Faughart by de Bermingham's forces. Edward was killed and his body was quartered and sent to various towns in Ireland. His head was delivered to King Edward II.

BRUCE PROPAGANDA AND DIPLOMACY

DECLARATION OF THE CLERGY 1309This was a proclamation by a general council of the clergy in support of Robert’s Kingship. It states that Balliol had wrongly been chosen as King during the Great Cause. Bruce hoped that this declaration would strengthen his argument that he had been divinely appointed King of Scots. Scottish church leaders perhaps believed that Bruce as King represented their best chance to resist English rule and most significantly meant that they would not have to answer to the Archbishop of York.

The Declaration of ArbroathWhile King Edward had little success in defeating King Robert in battle, he did have much more success in isolating Scotland from papal help. The pope, John XXII, had been successfully lobbied to excommunicate Robert as punishment for the murder of Comyn.In response, Robert ordered three letters to be dispatched to the Papal council with all haste: one from himself, one from the Scottish clergy and one from the nobles of Scotland to plead for the Scottish cause. Only one of these documents survives, today known as the Declaration of Arbroath.The letter is a sophisticated argument detailing the reasons for Scottish independence and justifying King Robert’s usurpation of the throne in 1306. The letter, often quoted by historians, shows that to the Scottish people, their desire for freedom is only matched by determination to keep that freedom. It even goes so far as to suggest that if Robert is not successful in maintaining the freedom of the kingdom then he may be replaced with someone who is capable. This was something almost unheard of in the middle ages.

What was the purpose of the Declaration of Arbroath?Traditionalist historians suggest that the Declaration was a patriotic expression of popular support for the wars of independence and King Robert by the combined freemen of the kingdom of Scotland. Some have even gone as far to suggest that the passages on replacing Robert if he failed to live up to his duties represent

some of the earliest written ideas of a constitutional monarchy. Many have compared the Scots Declaration of Arbroath to the American Declaration of Independence, some going as far as to suggest that the earlier inspired the latter.Yet how true is this? Certainly the Declaration is an impressive document. It is a rousing and inspiring denunciation of English foreign politics and has often been quoted. But was this the simple purpose of the letter at the time, or is that what it has come to mean to us, many centuries later?The first thing to bear in mind is that the Declaration of Arbroath was but one of a series of letters to the pope ordered by the king. The first two, one from Robert, and another from the Scottish clergy have not survived, but all three were a direct response to the English lobbying for papal support against Scotland. There was also the very real threat of King Robert’s excommunication hanging over his head since the murder of Comyn in 1306. Thus the Declaration should be seen in this context.The second thing to remember is that not all the signatories to the Declaration would have been aware of the contents of the letter; indeed, most would not have been present at the writing of the document. In fact, many would have been requested to send their seals to the king’s chancellor so that they could be added to the letter in order to highlight its significance. If this is true, why would King Robert feel it so important to have such a show of unity from his nobility? Was it for the benefit of the pope, to demonstrate that his usurpation of the throne was seen as legitimate in Scotland? Perhaps, but there is also another possibility. In 1320 the political situation in Scotland was far from as stable as traditionalists would have us believe.This was demonstrated by the ‘Soules Conspiracy’ led by William Soules, a member of the Comyn faction by birth. He was a possible heir to the Scottish throne, and had attempted to assassinate the king only a few months after the Declaration. The actual goal of the assassins is unclear, but demonstrates that Robert had worries about the support he had within his realm. It is possible that the Declaration was also a test of loyalty from his barons.

PROPAGANDA WRITTEN AFTER THE DEATH OF KING ROBERTJohn Barbour – 1320 – 1395

John Barbour was a Scottish poet whose most famous piece was a detailed poem about Robert I. He was writing during the reign of Robert II (Robert I’s grandson). The Brus is a long narrative poem in which Barbour gives a historic and chivalric account of the actions of Robert the Bruce and the Black Douglas in the Scottish Wars of Independence during a period from the circumstances leading up the English invasion of 1296 through to Scotland's restored position in the years between the Truce of 1328 and the death of Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray in 1332. The poem's literal centre-piece is an extensive account of the Battle of Bannockburn of 1314. Barbour's poetic account of these events is a keystone in Scotland's national story.

The king is a hero of the chivalric type common in contemporary romance. This poem clearly promotes King Robert I and is therefore it is a piece of propaganda written after the death of perhaps Scotland’s most famous King.

John of Fordun and Walter Bower – These Scottish narrative sources are also clear Bruce propaganda. Both were written during periods of intermittent wars with England. John of Fordun’s annals date from the mid 14th Century and Walter

Bower’s Scotichronican of the mid 15th Century draws on much of the work of Fordun. John of Fordun even goes as far as comparing Bruce with Christ when he states that “The English nation lorded it in all parts of the kingdom of Scotland harrying the Scots in sundry and manifold ways … But God in His mercy, as in the want of his fatherly goodness, had compassion…; so He raised up a saviour and champion unto them – one of their own fellows to wit named Robert Bruce. The man putting forth his hand unto force, underwent the countless and unbearable toils of the heat of the day…for the sake of freeing his brethren.” This is an example of history being written by the winners. Bower was equally biased in praise of their hero king.