I needed no persuading to write this book for, whatever Bannockburn’s qualities as a battle – and it scores highly in this regard – it also marks the greatest victory ever gained by the Scots over the English. William Wallace’s success at Stirling Bridge seventeen years earlier was also fought against superior forces who, with their heavy cavalry and famed bowmen, enjoyed technological superiority. At Stirling Bridge however, Wallace merely prevailed over an army led by Edward I’s representative, John Warenne, Earl of Surrey, whereas at Bannockburn Robert the Bruce utterly defeated the English Army led by its monarch, Edward II. Following Wallace’s victory it was predictable that the redoubtable Edward I (the so-called Hammer of the Scots) would respond by leading another army into Scotland to hunt Wallace down and complete his process of subjugation. Bruce’s success, however, released him from having to appeal for peace from Edward II. He had done so in 1310,1 attempting to gain the moral high ground along with more time to gather his military strength. His victory at Bannockburn gave him new opportunities to continue with his own diplomatic and military initiatives to free his country from English domination. In 1320, the Declaration of Arbroath justified Scotland’s independence and fourteen years later, with the Treaty of Northampton, the English parliament recognised Scotland as a sovereign state and Robert Bruce as its legitimate king. Without Bannockburn he could never have succeeded, thus enabling Scotland’s representatives to voluntarily enter into a process of union with England almost 400 years later.
In light of the battle’s pivotal importance it is surprising that relatively few accounts had been written about it until recently. It is also curious that despite the presence of a singular contemporary source – on the Scottish side at least – there should be such divergence about where the battle occurred – a debate that continues to the present day.
When this book first appeared in 2000 it was believed to be the first dedicated analysis of the battle for some seventy-five years. Since then interest in Scottish history and the country’s most successful battle has grown, and with Bannockburn’s 700th Anniversary approaching more books on the subject have emerged. Despite predictable differences in interpretation, without major new archaeological discoveries or the emergence of any hitherto unknown sources about the battle, all writers – like their predecessors – depend largely on the four contemporary narratives used in this book. These sources recount a largely similar sequence of events. Foremost is the graphic verse account The Bruce by Archdeacon John Barbour of Aberdeen, written some sixty years after the battle. It is in the style of other fourteenth-century romances rather than a blow–by-blow account of events, but Barbour did have access to contemporary chronicles and talked with the descendants of men who fought in the battle. While an undoubted work of art, the general accuracy of The Bruce has also been acknowledged by several subsequent writers.
Although far shorter, there are contrasting commentaries representing the English side. There is the Scalacronica – the so-called ‘ladder chronicle’ due to its author’s desire to survey events from a detached position – written by Sir Thomas Grey, the younger, whose father was taken prisoner at Bannockburn.2 His soldier’s account was completed in 1355–1356 and drew freely on his father’s experiences. The second, Vita Edwardi Secundi (Life of Edward II) is not strictly a chronicle but a journal about the King’s reign, probably written in 1326 by the well-connected John Walwayn, agent to the Earl of Hereford. A fragment of the Chronicle of Lanercost constitutes the third account and was written by an Augustinian monk – or a succession of monks – from the Priory at Lanercost. The Priory was the target of repeated Scottish raids and unsurprisingly the account shows strong English prejudices.
Invaluable as such sources are for studying the battle, their failure to give a clear indication about where the main engagement occurred has led to remarkable consequences. Initially it was thought to be in the locality of Bruce’s Borestone (in which he placed his standard) where the Rotunda Memorial, Pilkington Jackson’s equestrian statue of Robert the Bruce, and the Bannockburn Heritage Centre stand today. However, in 1913 a book by William MacKay MacKenzie conclusively disproved this site as the location of the battle, although MacKenzie’s suggested alternative to the east, close to the River Forth, has also been conclusively rejected. Contemporary writers have further limited the site but still differ over whether the battle occurred on Carse Land near Balquhiderock or within corn land nearby, with some still unwilling to commit themselves either way. Both sites however, lie over one-and-a-quarter miles from the Heritage Centre.
While researching this book and walking the battlefield to help me determine the location of the main clash of arms, I resolved to examine the conflict by assessing the opposing leaders’ military experience and capabilities (together with those of their subordinate commanders). I also considered the characteristics of both armies including their weaponry, favoured tactics and their reported use of the ground. As a result, I concluded that the most likely location is on Carse land enclosed by the two water courses, the Bannockburn and the Pelstream Burn adjoining the dry field of Balquhiderock. However on 24 June 2014 when the Battle’s 700th anniversary celebrations take place they are to be held on the Borestone site which has been newly landscaped. The Rotunda Memorial and equestrian statue of Robert the Bruce have been refurbished and a new visitor centre created. Here visitors will be able to experience a virtual recreation of the two-day battle.
While this undoubtedly represents a massive advance over previous facilities, fundamental questions remain about the actual site of the battle. To date no archaeological survey has been commissioned for the most favoured area (and therefore no mass graves have been discovered) and more serious still no preservation methods have been put in place to protect this site. Unlike the Heritage Centre which enjoys the protection of the National Trust, the most likely true site of the battle remains vulnerable to further urban development, if not eventual obliteration. To help avoid such a tragedy I believe that a ban should be placed on further building and that steps be undertaken to purchase all available ground for the Scottish nation.
In the meantime a battlefield trail should be designed for those visitors wishing to explore the most likely site of the conflict. Without such initiatives, and in spite of all the admirable work recently carried out in the vicinity of the Borestone site, the commemoration of Scotland’s greatest victory remains wanting. With such expectations in mind, this book’s essential purpose is to give an accurate, balanced and graphic account of the epic military confrontation that occurred on the Carse during the 23rd and 24th June in the lea of Stirling’s great castle. At present the opportunity for visitors to appreciate it fully is incomplete. For those with limited time or physical abilities the virtual experiences at the visitor centre, and a written account such as this might suffice, but the majority should also have the opportunity of retracing the actual movements of both armies across the field of battle. Such additional facilities will give all visitors a genuine opportunity to appreciate the remarkable events that took place there. At Bannockburn, a lesser army under its outstanding warrior king – who had previously served the formidable English monarch Edward I, and was considered a usurper by many of his own countrymen – maintained a unity of purpose to overcome a disunited English force and enabled Scotland to regain its national voice.
Whatever people’s knowledge of the battle, its 700th anniversary gives them the chance to make judgements about it. Contemporary observers involved in the current debate on Scottish independence, for instance, are likely to reach conclusions that favour their cause, with those championing independence believing that the Scottish victory at Bannockburn, owing much to patriotic fervour and loyalty, can provide fresh inspiration today. Those favouring continued union might well point to the subsequent series of defeats suffered by equally patriotic Scottish armies and look to the continuing pattern of Scottish achievements within the wider canvas of the United Kingdom.
Whatever such reactions, this book sets out to portray, faithfully, a singular and notable engagement which, like so many others, experienced a ‘grinding phase’ when things could have gone either way. At Bannockburn there were moments when luck played a significant part, but there were other moments – as there were in many other battles between determined men – when insight, belief and the spark of inspired leadership counted most.
Peter Reese
Ash Vale
November