A Look at the Real Battlefield: Scottish Warfare in the 13th Century

God made the first sword. He gave it to an angel to wield on the borders of the Garden of Eden. For many centuries, edged weapons in the hands of warriors defined the ultimate settlement on the field of battle. In the Bible, the word for sword (chereb) – is used 424 times; the word for spears 46 times; and bows or archers more than 30 times in relation to warfare and even more times as a metaphor for war. Throughout history weapons were hand-held, thrown, or hurled by a machine. Most weapons today still fit the paradigm.

In 12th and 13th century Scotland, the forces led by William Wallace or Robert the Bruce depended – for the most part – on swords, pikes, and arrows, as did their enemies, although crossbow bolts were also included in the English arsenal. As personal defense against those weapons, soldiers often carried a shield or, as a last attempt to thwart a blow, wore some type of armor, whether padded cloth or suits of mail and a helmet. It had been that way since Bible times and would remain such until the age of gunpowder weapons. Advantage over an enemy could best be gained through superior numbers, more skillful tactics, better armor, or just plain valor.

In the English army, the king and his nobles could call out their mounted knights for feudal service when war approached. The king or his commanders sometimes also hired professional cavalry to join their ranks; men officered by a baron or a banneret, entitled to display a square banner above their squadrons and compensated by the king. The mounted knights typically carried a pointed lance in the charge and drew an axe or sword at his belt.

Awaken Your Child’s Love of Learning, History And Adventure With The REAL Story of William Wallace!

Is There Really Safety in Numbers?
At the battle of Stirling in 1297, the Earl of Surry, leading the royal forces, seems to have had only four bannerets, compared to 115 under King Edward himself at Falkirk ten months later. The Scots under William Wallace probably faced an impressive 2,200 mounted knights (many of them veterans) at Falkirk. As was the case in many English invasions of Caledonia, Scottish knights would side with England, hoping to keep their lands and titles.

One source claims the Scots had only 180 cavalry at Stirling, and no nobles to actually lead them. Untitled Scottish horsemen used their ponies and nags primarily for raiding. The great expense of owning a war horse ridden by a properly armored knight, plus the commitment to go against overwhelming numbers of the royal cavalry (led by the king who likely gave an earl his title and lands to begin with) left rebels like Wallace and Moray with mostly infantry upon whom they could rely in battle. The Scottish infantry would consist of the “commonality” and “horseless classes” who were called out by the earls to defend Scotland, while the earls themselves would remain at home by their warm hearths.

The Scottish infantry carried 12 to 14-foot long spears or pikes and created formations called “schiltrouns.” They may have carried shields, since schiltroun means “shield wall.” They packed themselves in tight formations up to six ranks deep. It is likely their defensive arrangements were sometimes circular to fight off cavalry, chopping and hewing and coming at them from all points of the compass.

Bows, Archers, and Other Tactics
The Wallace family seal includes a bow and we know that he recruited Scottish longbow men from the forests of Ettrick. The English already had an international reputation for their expertise at the longbow – a powerful weapon, some with a range up to 400 yards. Of course weightier arrows reduced the killing distance. The estimated pull on some medieval longbows exceeded 160 pounds and the length of the bow itself sometimes extended more than 6 feet in length. Some men carried personal hand-to-hand weapons such as axes, knives, staves, or hammers.

At Stirling, Wallace and Moray sent their 6,000 infantry forward after 2,000 or so English troops had crossed Stirling Bridge. The Schiltroun infantry with their iron-shod pikes closed the 1000-yard gap at a steady pace, likely with the most heavily armored men in the front ranks. They crashed into their outnumbered enemy, divided from the bulk of their force by the river and the bridge. The vanguard of the English troops were pinned with their backs to the bend in the river and were chopped and sliced without avenue of escape. Archers likely never got away much of a volley before being caught up in a melee’ where they stood no chance to survive as they were both unarmored and without adequate weaponry. Knights who could not charge or maneuver were pulled from their horses and stabbed on the ground. In the end, the invaders streamed back to England, and Scottish independence got a breather.

However, when King Edward returned the following year, Wallace’s forces suffered a very different outcome. Poor battlefield position for the Scots, overwhelming superiority of numbers for the English, and the decisive arrow shower that descended on the schiltroun brought about great slaughter and the elimination of William Wallace as a significant factor in the future defense of Scotland. As the archers and crossbow men darkened the sun with their clouds of arrows and bolts, and as the casualties in the Scottish ranks mounted without their being able to reply, the ranks began to separate and the mounted English knights were suddenly like foxes among the chickens, with swords flailing and horses trampling the infantry.

The Famous Battle of Bannockburn
Nothing substantial in warfare, weapons, or tactics had changed when the Scottish army of Robert the Bruce and King Edward II’s knights met 16 years later at the decisive battle of Bannockburn. An incident the day before the main battle would illustrate the nature of knight-versus-knight combat. The vanguard of the English army led by Henry de Bohun bumped into a small contingent of Scots late in the day.

De Bohun recognized Robert the Bruce from across the field and “sensing his moment of glory had come, wheeled his charger and spurred toward the king.” Bruce turned toward his opponent who came on “full tilt.” At the last second, Bruce slewed his more nimble horse to the side, evaded the lance, rose up in the stirrups, and struck his opponent with an axe, which split de Bohun’s head to the collar. He was dead before he hit the ground.

Taken as an omen of God’s favor by the Scot’s army, they confidently prepared for battle the next day. And so it happened. The English knights got crammed in a small space, mixed up with their infantry, and were minced by the Scottish pikes and arrows. Losses among English knights exceeded by far the normal casualties in such battles. The captured knights were ransomed for large sums. Some of the dead ones were shipped home in barrels of pickle juice. The losses among the infantry and yeoman are unknown – but are likely in the thousands.

While Scottish wars for independence would continue, Bannockburn settled matters for a short while and is viewed today as one of the most important victories of Scotland’s history. Although leaders came and went, and victors changed with the dictates of providence, the weapons and tactics adjusted very little until the iron ball fired from a musket began punching holes in horses, armor, and heroes.

For Further Study
I recommend two Osprey books from the Campaign series:

• Stirling Bridge & Falkirk, 1297-98: William Wallace’s Rebellion and Bannockburn

• 1314: Robert Bruce’s Great Victory

Both are authored by Pete Armstrong and illustrated by Angus McBride and Graham Turner, respectively.