THE SCOTTISH WARS OF INDEPENDENCE

THE SCOTTISH WARS OF INDEPENDENCE

Scotland in 1286

Historians used to argue that Scotland was not a nation in 1286. It was, in fact the Wars of Independence which turned Scotland into a nation. Now historians are more or less agreed that Scotland was a nation by 1286 as a result of developments in the thirteenth century.

The north and west had a different culture and language . There were numerous different peoples in Scotland. But they accepted a common law and common institutions. French, Angles, Flemings and Scots accepted the alliegance to a common king and belonged to a common church. Scots language, derived from northern middle English, was becoming a common language in the lowlands among all classes. Gaelic and French were dying out. If the Scots did not think of themselves as a nation the conditions existed in which a sense of nationhood could grow when the need arose.

Prof Barrow has argued that the idea of a community of the realm while not recorded as yet was present in the minds of the powerful. In 1260 when the Queen returned to Scotland 4 bishops, 5 earls and 4 barons were sent to supervise her return. 5 bishops, 5 earls and 5 barons represented Scotland at the marriage of Alexander III,s son and the dau;ghter of the count of Flanders. In 1249-58 and 1286 - 90 full colloquies or parliaments met and latterly were regarded as defending the integrity of the realm.

The barons could still fight and struggle selfishly. During the Wars of Independence it is interesting to detect signs of barons acting for the good of the country in the absence of the king and not just acting out of feudal loyalty. It is also worth looking for signs of other classes, the middling and small folk, acting for the good of the realm. In 1286 these groups had not yet shown any sense of national feeling.

The Succession Problem

Alexander III died in 1286. The throne went to Margaret, the Maid of Norway who was under 3 years old. Therefore 6 guardians were appointed, 2 bishops, 2 earls and 2 barons. At this time Edward I of England did not want to interfere.

In 1290 they arranged the Treaty of Birgham :- Margaret was to marry Prince Edward, heir to the English throne. The territorial integrity of Scotland was guaranteed. Margaret died

Comment:- The strength of the kingdom was seen since the guardians considered an infant girl as the queen. A national sense of responsibility is seen in the way 6 guardians represented the idea of the community of the realm. The proposed peaceful union of Scotland and England failed. Had it succeeded Scots nation might never have existed.

Claimants to the throne

13 competitors or claimants to the throne emerged. Civil war threatened between Bruce and Balliol factions. Therefore an appeal was made to Edward I for advice because he still at this time had a reputation as a law giver and had been a friend of Alexander III. As a prince he had been on Louis IX’s crusade with Robert Bruce and Balliol’s brother. Edward agreed to settle the dispute in 1291 at Norham on the Tweed.

Edward’s Breach of Faith

1)

What demand did Edward I make in May 1292? (Source 1)

2)

How did the Scots reply to Edward’s demand? (source 2)

3)

What was the claimants reply and can you explain it? (source 3)

In 1292 Edward finally chose Balliol as king. He was the correct choice by feudal law of primogeniture, being descended from the eldest daughter. Bruce had claimed by imperial law of nearness of degree, i.e., one generation nearer to David. Balliol was not chosen because he was a weak character as historians used to say. Balliol swore homage to Edward at Newcastle as any of the other competitors would have had to do.

A. The reign of John I

John’s reign was difficult since he was in an untenable position since Edward insisted on his rights as overlord to the full. Edward betrayed his trust. (1) Law cases were to be taken on appeal from the King of Scots to Edward, e.g., debt to a Gascony wine merchant owed by Alexander III. (2) The Scots were to fight for Edward v France. In 1295, therefore, at a parliament at Stirling in July the Scots ‘deposed’ Balliol. A council of 12 was set up to rule and they appealed to the Pope and to Philip IV of France for support. The allied with France in July 1295.

Comment:- The idea of a ‘Communitas Regni" , a community of the realm, appeared in Scotland. It was represented by the council of 12. It meant that the group of 12 had some idea of representing the bishops, barons and earls of the country rather than just the king. NB. They did not yet represent the common folk. They represented the country when the king did not, i.e., like a nation acting on its own. Edward, it can be argued, forced the idea of a communitas regni into being. He saw that the Scots wanted to work closely with England but he wanted to rule by force. Therefore, he knew he would face war. He underestimated the Scots reaction which is odd since he had appealed to the English nation when Philip IV made a similar claim to overlordship of Guyenne which Edward ruled. The Scots would probably have accepted nominal overlordship.

B. Phase one of the War - the Baron’s feudal War.

Edward summoned his army on 16 December long before the Scots parliament ratified the French Treaty on 23 February 1296. John had also, no doubt at the Guardians’ prompting, refused to appear at Edward’s court on 13 October 1295 in the Macduff Case. The Scots summoned their army to meet near Selkirk by March 1296. To the Scots this was a war between equals. To Edward it was a police action v traitors. He was Balliol’s rightful overlord.

Edward invaded, sacked Berwick, defeated the Scots barons at Dunbar and took prisoner many barons who were subsequently sent to fight in France. Balliol surrendered at Montrose on 8 July and abdicated. He was sent to the Tower of London, was released to papal custody in France in 1299, then released by Pope to Philip of France in 1301and finally died at his family home in Normandy, Bailleul, in 1313. About 1,500 Scots nobles gave homage to Edward, a process completed at Berwick and their names were recorded on the Ragman Roll. [One of the names recorded there is that of Alan Wallace who is now thought to be the father of William Wallace. This is based on the evidence of the seal of the letter which Wallace and Moray sent to Lubeck in 1297. That seal is inscribed with an abbreviated form of the words William son of Alan Wallace. Alan Wallace held lands at Ellerslie near Kilmarnock.] Edward then treated Scotland as a dependent territory like Wales and Ireland. The Stone of Scone, the Holy Rood of St Margaret, and the government records were removed south. The Great Seal was broken. Edward commented , ‘a man does good business when he rids himself of a turd’.

Comment:- The Scots can be divided into 5 groups at this time.

1)

Those who accepted English overlordship, a few great nobles, e.g., the earl of Dunbar and the earl of Angus who was an Umfraville from Tynedale.

2)

Non-aligned nobles from the isle of Man, the Hebrides and the west coast who had only been ruled by the Scots king since 1266. They wanted their own freedom, e.g., Macdougals, Lords of Lorne and the Macsweens of Knapdale.

3)

Most nobles were pro-Scots

a)

greater nobles such as the earls, the Stewarts, the lords of Annandale (Bruces), the lords of Badenoch (Comyns) the lords of Douglas. They were always close to the crown whether Scots or English with lands north and south of the Border.

b)

lesser lairds, gentry and substantial landholders. It is surprising that they did not immediately go over to Edward but became the backbone of the revolution, e.g., Sir Thomas Maule, Sir William Oliphant, William de Vieuxpont and Willliam Wallace.

4)

The Church - The guardians and Wallace appointed pro-Scots bishops and abbots and therefore the church was consistently national and defended the idea of a community of the realm. It also opposed the claims of York. There were some dissident bishops.

5)

The common people - They followed their superiors and fought for or against the representatives of a community of the realm depending on whom their lord was. They disliked the English as strangers and resisted actively armies which raided their lands.

There was also persistent feud between the Comyns and the Balliols on the one side and the Bruces and the Stewarts on the other.

C. Phase Two of the War - The People’s/Feudal war.

There were various risings throughout the country against heavy taxation to support Edward’s war in France.Also the middling folk were concerned by Edward’s demands for overseas military service. Moray rebelled in the north and Bruce and Wallace in the south west. Wallace killed Hazelrigg the sheriff of Lanark because he had murdered Wallace’s wife or mistress. He rebelled for revenge. he was outlawed and so attacked the justiciar, Ormsby, at Scone where presumably he was to be tried. Nationality was not Wallace’s motive for rebelling. The real leaders of the uprising were James Stewart, Robert Bruce, the grandson of the competitor, and Robert Wishart, bishop of Glasgow. When the English attacked they surrendered at Irvine in 1297. Wallace and Moray joined up and were left to lead the community of the realm in the absence of the magnates.

Stirling Bridge - The English vanguard twice crossed the bridge and retreated. The third time it crossed the Scots attacked and won. The English treasurer, Cressingham, was skinned alive. Wallace made a baldric from his skin. Before the battle James Stewart and the earl of Lennox tried to get their men to leave the Scots side and to join the English . They refused. Stewart and Lennox waited to see who was going to win the battle and then joined the Scots.

Moray died of his wounds. Wallace was made guardian and ruled well. The pope accepted their nomination of Lamberton as bishop of St Andrews. They made a treaty with the Hanseatic League for trade with N Germany and the Baltic. They wanted to restore Balliol as king. Wallace raided the north of England. He was defeated at the Battle of Falkirk in 1298 where his schiltrons remained static. This was a mistake. Guerrilla warfare was much more effective against the larger armies of Edward. The Scots cavalry fled the battle in a panic.

Bruce and Comyn now led the government but Bruce argued with Comyn in 1300. Edward really only controlled the south east.

Comment:-

1)

Wallace’s main importance was to keep the idea of the community of the realm going. Without him there would have been no resistance to the English after 1297. In the absence of aristocratic leaders Wallace also showed that the middling folk could lead the community of the realm and that the common folk could also be part of it. For the first time commoners were developing political awareness.

Professor Barrow has shown that the great barons did support Wallace and that his army was not made only of poor peasants as some have argued. There was, however, an element of social discontent in support of Wallace as Prof Duncan has argued. The Scots Chronicler, Barbour who wrote The Brus, a life of Robert Bruce, in 1376, equated freedom from the English with freedom from thralldom, i.e., serfdom.

Wallace’s relationship with the barons was strained. Some argue that he fought in the traditional style of pitched battles in order to impress the feudal magnates and be accepted as one of them. He failed. W Fisher argues, however , that Wallace did believe in guerrilla war and only fought at Falkirk because Edward caught him unexpectedly. After Falkirk social pressures, Fisher argues, forced him to resign as guardian. Fisher believes that the barons were inconstant in their support and only Wallace remained loyal to Balliol. A Grant points out, as Prof Barrow does, that barons were governed by retaining possession of their lands and would change sides accordingly. This was to be expected. They were struggling, as Grant suggests, with the idea of loyalty to a kingdom rather than a king. What is remarkable is that many of them did act for the good of the country in the absence of a king. After Wallace’s defeat the aristocratic community of the realm began to act independently for the good of the realm.

Edward recovered in 1302 . Philip of France was beaten at Courtrai. Pope Boniface withdrew his support from the Scots. Edward made a truce with Philip of France and the Scots. Bishop Lamberton tried to get the Scots included in the final peace in 1303 but failed. The Scots prepared for Edward’s attack and Lamberton wrote to Wallace asking again for his help.

In 1302 Bruce split with Comyn and joined with Edward so that he could still claim the throne. There was a possibility that Balliol might return and Bruce thought he had more chance of winning the throne if he joined Edward. In 1304 a Scots parliament outlawed Wallace. As an outlaw he would be entitled to no defence at his trial . In 1304 Stirling Castle was besieged by Edward. it held out for the Lion. Sir William Oliphant had to surrender but was spared. - imprisoned. Wallace wascaptured in 1305 and executed for treason after a show trial. In 1305 Edward issued his ordinance for the government of Scotland: a governor with a Scots council and a separate administration but not independent from the English parliament and council. Edward was more generous than in 1297 and spared those who readily submitted to him. But the English never solved the main problem of their occupation, whether to conquer or conciliate, whether to destroy the rebels or win them over.

Comment:-
Historians are divided on their opinions of Robert Bruce and the community of the realm.

1)

Barrow - He first developed/recognised the importance of the idea of a community of the realm. Basically he believes that Bruce was acting for the good of the country and that he received a lot of support and that there was growing national feeling at this time. This is why Wallace and then Bruce received so much support.

2)

Duncan - On the other hand Duncan believes that the phrase community of the realm means very little. It was simply used when barons wanted to justify their own self-interested actions. Social discontent was behind Wallace’s support and not any sense of a community of the realm.

This division can be seen in their views of Bruce’s actions at this time. Prof Duncan argues that Bruce was only interested in getting the throne for himself and would do anything to prevent Balliol getting it. This explains his changes of sides. In his submission document to Edward in 1302 Bruce said that he wanted to protect his ‘right’. Duncan interprets this as the right to the throne. Prof Barrow argues that the right referred to is his right to Carrick and Annandale. By securing these lands and submitting to Edward he could prevent their men being called up on the English side. He always had Scotland’s interest at heart, not his own.

D. Phase Three

Bruce, perhaps trying to compromise with Comyn over their rival claims to the throne and how to reconcile them wounded him in Greyfriars church in Dumfries. Others returned to kill him. Bruce was excommunicated. He seized the throne even though Balliol was still alive. Wishart, bishop of Glasgow helped him but practically everyone else stayed away from his coronation at Scone on 25 March since he was not the king and seemed destined to fail. (25 March was New Years day in the medieval period.) Lamberton turned up only when his lands were threatened by Bruce. Bruce was the first Scots king to be crowned rather than enthroned on the stone of Scone.

He was crowned again by the Countess of Buchan on 27 March once she had been dragged there by the earl of Atholl. Bruce was defeated at Methven shortly afterwards by Aymer de Valence. He spent one year in hiding and at this time was a failed rebel.

Comment:- These events can be interpreted in two ways.

1)

Bruce probably murdered Comyn because Comyn had damaged his reputation with Edward and Bruce was depending on Edward. When he had got nowhere with Edward Bruce decided to act. He realised that he had no right to the throne while Balliol lived and so organised a rebellion to seize the throne.

2)

Bruce was trying to come to a deal about the throne with Comyn for the good of the country and to avoid civil war. Bruce had inherited his father’s claim to the throne on his death in 1304. He had done little to help Edward since 1302 and saw that the Scots and the community of the realm still wanted their freedom but had no leader. He did want the throne but his patriotism, the needs of the community of the realm and his own interests all coincided. He, therefore, rebelled in 1306.

1307

In 1307 Bruce returned from the Western Isles, probably Islay. He held out in SW, escaped the English at Glen Trool. He used savage and ruthless guerrilla attacks but failed to beat the earl of Pembroke at Loudon Hill in Ayrshire. The earl was able to continue on his way with his treasure paying his garrisons contrary to Barbour’s description of this battle as a victory. James Douglas, a teenager offered his services to the English but when rejected he joined Bruce. Later he burned an English garrison in Douglas castle in his ruthless pursuit of his family lands. This type of banditry was made permanent by the barons.

Bruce as a magnate took the decision to reject traditional pitched battles against the English since he had far fewer men, especially cavalry and archers. He adopted guerrilla warfare. He raided the north of England for resources, attacked English supply lines in Scotland and took castles by surprise. He knocked down their palisades and battlements to make them useless and then abandoned them.

Civil War

Bruce first had to fight a civil war against the Comyns. He attacked the Comyns in the north east and their allies, the Macdougals, in Argyll. After defeating the Comyns he secured the north. In these campaigns he showed his military skill by rapid marches and brilliant surprise attacks. Edward died in 1307 on his way north to fight his former friend. He was succeeded by Edward II who was not so able as his father. At this time he had to face trouble from his barons who resented the power of the English crown and his friendship with Piers Gaveston. It was the English government which was now more interested in pursuing the Scots War than the king

1309-1313

Bruce began to win more support since he was a ruler with some hereditary right unlike Wallace. The church in 1309 first declared support in writing for Bruce.

Comment:-
Barrow says this declaration reflected the church’s national interests. Duncan says that Bruce got them to declare support so that he could send their declaration to the pope to try to win his support. He also argues that barons did not support Bruce till they saw he was on top. Barrow argues that many barons support Bruce in order to win lands and make their fortunes, e.g., Douglas. Others sided with Bruce because they had more land in Scotland than in England. The middling group, Simon Fraser, the Sommervilles and Lovel were again the most consistent. They had opposed English before 1304 and again after 1308. But even in this group some changed sides. William Oliphant after imprisonment ended up defending Perth for Edward II in 1313 against Bruce! This group had fewer lands in England, fewer lands to lose and so were more regularly for the Scots.

Bruce kept his supporters in order and utilised their military genius. Thomas Randolph was made earl of Moray in 1312. James Douglas was given Ettrick Forest which was in English hands. The earls of Lennox and Atholl also joined. Bruce avoided pitched battles against the able English commanders, Aymer de Valence and Henry de Beaumont, with their cavalry and longbows. Bruce concentrated on taking castles by surprise, obviously with support form the common folk or there could have been no surprise, e.g., Linlithgow, Roxburgh and Edinburgh in 1313. He invaded the north of England repeatedly and collected a levy as protection money. He also raided Lothian which was generally pro Edward. Philip IV of France secretly recognised Bruce. In 1310 a Provincial council of the church supported him. The longer he survived the stronger his position became. By 1313 Stirling Castle was left in English hands. Edward Bruce made a deal in May 1314 that the English garrison would surrender if it was not relieved by Midsummer day 1314. Edward II was already collecting an army to respond to appeal for help from Anglo-Scots in Lothian and because Bruce had given his enemies a year to swear fealty to him or lose their lands.

Edward invaded and Bruce chose the site of the battle with great care so that he could prevent Edward using all his troops against the Scots. At Bannockburn the use of pits and mobile schiltrons (not static as at Falkirk) also illustrated good command by Bruce. Edward II escaped, therefore, although Scots victory was ensured the war was not finished.

E. Diplomatic Struggle

Bruce’s aims were

1)

to be recognised as king of Scotland by Edward, the pope and other monarchs and

2)

to secure peace. But he had no chance of defeating England. Its wealth and resources were too large and too far away. He therefore put pressure on England in as many ways as possible, e.g., by winning support of France and the papacy.

After 1314 Bruce’s Act of Disinheritance in the Cambuskenneth parliament forbad any baron to hold lands in England as well as in Scotland. This caused problems for some Balliol supporters. Ingram de Umfraville had been exiled after 1304. He became an English commander, just like William Oliphant, but after 1314 he accepted Bruce and returned. Bruce continued raiding England but also thought of a Celtic alliance of Scotland, Wales and Ireland v England. He and his brother Edward campaigned in Ireland 1315-1318 - unsuccessfully. Thomas Randolph ruled the Isle of Man.

Edward’s invasion of 1319 failed to take Berwick on Tweed.

The Declaration of Arbroath and a rebellion v Bruce occurred in 1320. The Declaration of Arbroath was a letter sent to the Pope sealed by the barons and written by Bernard, abbot of Arbroath ( previously mistakenly identified as Bernard de Linton of the Ragman Roll, according to A A M Duncan) It gave a history of the Scots, described how Bruce had fought the English and how he was the rightful king. It stressed that he ruled with the approval of the barons and if he submitted to the English the community of the realm would depose him. (Source 4)

Comment
Prof Barrow considers that the Declaration shows a clear statement of the nationalism and patriotism felt in 14th century Scotland by many of the barons. It also shows the constitutional relationship of the king and the community. The king would be replaced if he did not act in accord with the community. Basically it was a letter to the Pope to try to win him over.

Prof Duncan disagrees. All accept that the barons sent in their seals to Arbroath to have them appended to the Declaration. The evidence for this is that the seals are all in the same shades of wax and that some seals have been added to tags of other barons and new slits for tags had been cut in advance but were never used. This would not have happened if the declaration had been taken to the barons at their own castles and they had added their own seals in person. Duncan concludes that the barons, therefore, did not see the document and had only a vague idea of its contents. It was not, therefore , an outpouring of national loyalty to the king. It was designed to meet a particular threat of interdict from the pope and so it only represented the views of Bruce.

The collection of seals, Duncan argues, aroused the rebellion v Bruce by Balliol supporters who were probably in touch with his son, Edward Balliol, and the king of France. (Edward Balliol invaded Scotland with English support in 1332 and held southern Scotland for several years.) It was not a rebellion to put William de Soules, son of the guardian, on the throne. The Balliols, Duncan says, still represented the view of the majority and the rebels, whose names are recorded, all had Balliol connections.

Barrow accepts the view of the chroniclers that the rebellion was to put William de Soules, son of the guardian, on the throne. In that case, Duncan argues why was his life spared by the Scots Parliament called in August 1320 to try the rebels when most of them were hung.

G Simpson, Nicholson, and most historians take Barrow’s line and accept that the Declaration of Arbroath is representative of national feeling in Scotland. Simpson goes farther and says that when the Declaration talks of freedom it also means social freedom, freedom from serfdom. Simpson also accepts that it does show that the community could restrain the king. That, after all, was what had happened in 1295 and was to happen again in the 14th century. Nicholson disagrees that the Declaration shows that community could replace the king since no king would ever have agreed to this.

In 1322 Edward launched his largest invasion. Bruce retreated before it and followed a scorched earth policy and Edward had to retreat. In 1324 Bruce was partially reconciled with the Pope. 1327 Bruce renewed the French alliance. In 1328 the treaty of Edinburgh/Northampton was agreed. English claims to overlordship were ended and Edward III recognised the Scottish kingdom. It was unsatisfactory in that the stone of Scone and the records taken south by Edward I in 1296 were not returned as intended. A London mob stopped one attempt. The Scots were to pay the English £20,000 to enlist their help with the pope. In 1329 final reconciliation with the pope took place and the Scots were given permission by the pope to anoint their kings.

F. Reasons for Success

1)

Emergence of idea of a community of the realm to lead the country in the absence of a king. Wallace kept it going and then Bruce took over its leadership

2)

Edward I’s misestimation of the Scots reaction and his consequent encouragement of opposition - war of 1297

3)

Emergence of Bruce : a) hereditary claim, b) generalship, c) personal qualities of leadership: determination and ability to attract and use followers such as Douglas and Randolph.

4)

Extent of support from all groups of society, church, magnates and commoners and middling folk.

5)

Hindrances to the English efforts; a) Edward I had to deal with France and the barons; b) Edward II had to deal with the barons and was himself weak; c) Edward III after the murder of Edward II by Isabella and Mortimer was struggling to assert his authority in 1328.

6)

Outside support, intermittent, from France and the papacy.

G. Robert I as King 1314 - 1329

After 1314 fighting with England continued. Berwick was taken in 1318 and raids on England continued. To prevent another succession struggle he passed acts regulating the succession in 1315 and 1326. In 1314 he forfeited all those not in the king’s peace and rewarded his supporters. Parliaments were held: in 1319 a parliament passed laws on various topics including service in the army: and in 1326, at Cambuskenneth, the king received a tax of a tenth of the profits from rents and land. To ensure that this would be granted he summoned burghs to be present at the parliament. They were not yet part of the parliament but this was the first time there is any recorded connection of burghs and parliament.

Administration: While it continued to function throughout the war it had to be rebuilt. Bernard of Arbroath, the chancellor, undertook the task. The chancery developed grants of land: instead of a whole variety of charters Bruce granted only two types of grants, grants in free barony or in free regality. The latter usually gave the baron the right to try the four pleas of the crown. As a king in peace time Bruce was popular but not brilliant.

H. Effects of the War

Bad and Good?:

1)

The balance of power of the nobles and the crown swung in the nobles’ favour. Bruce had to reward his supporters. He had no choice. Therefore, he gave vast grants to Randolph in Moray and to Douglas in the south and south-west. consequently numerous royal rights were alienated and the crown weakened. This was all right as long as the grantees were loyal. Despite the necessity of making the grants Bruce did show a certain lack of foresight. Scottish society could be described as disintegrated order rather than chaos. Several times in the 14th and 15th centuries the barons had to act either to bolster weak kings, Robert III, or to limit tyrannical ones, James III.

2)

Economic effects.- Scotland was not so well off as before 1286.The population fell and agriculture therefore was hit. The areas which suffered most from the effects of the war were the developed areas. e.g., Paxton’s rent in Berwickshire fell from £32 16s and 8d to 0d. The productivity of land fell by about a half. People stopped cultivating in the face of annual devastation. But cattle and sheep could be moved to safety. Therefore, there was more emphasis on pastoral farming, export of wool and woolfells and hides. By 1327 5,000 sacks of wool were exported per per year, a figure seldom surpassed in the Middle Ages in Scotland. Many barons now collected money rather than services from their tenants and so serfdom was ending. The financial resources of the crown fell when lands were granted out to barons. The economy was not crippled and throve modestly throughout the 14th century.

Good and Bad?

1)

Scotland was not absorbed like Ireland and Wales but remained independent like the Swiss cantons and Sweden.

2)

A sense of national identity developed among the magnates and barons and was also starting to develop among middling fold and commoners.

3)

Scots fought for freedom and not just independence. The commoners with their spears in schiltrons were the backbone of the army. If a farmer could be expected to be a schiltron spear men he was not content to be unfree. Prolonged warfare upset old habits and customs. Serfs began to acquire freedom as labour services died and were replaced by rents. Many serfs were free before 1350. Barbour (Source 5) makes the connection between freedom from the English and freedom from serfdom clear.

1)	What demand did Edward I make in May 1292? (Source 1)
2)	How did the Scots reply to Edward’s demand? (source 2)
3)	What was the claimants reply and can you explain it? (source 3)

Comment:- The Scots can be divided into 5 groups at this time.
1)	Those who accepted English overlordship, a few great nobles, e.g., the earl of Dunbar and the earl of Angus who was an Umfraville from Tynedale.
2)	Non-aligned nobles from the isle of Man, the Hebrides and the west coast who had only been ruled by the Scots king since 1266. They wanted their own freedom, e.g., Macdougals, Lords of Lorne and the Macsweens of Knapdale.
3)	Most nobles were pro-Scots
	a)	greater nobles such as the earls, the Stewarts, the lords of Annandale (Bruces), the lords of Badenoch (Comyns) the lords of Douglas. They were always close to the crown whether Scots or English with lands north and south of the Border.
	b)	lesser lairds, gentry and substantial landholders. It is surprising that they did not immediately go over to Edward but became the backbone of the revolution, e.g., Sir Thomas Maule, Sir William Oliphant, William de Vieuxpont and Willliam Wallace.
4)	The Church - The guardians and Wallace appointed pro-Scots bishops and abbots and therefore the church was consistently national and defended the idea of a community of the realm. It also opposed the claims of York. There were some dissident bishops.
5)	The common people - They followed their superiors and fought for or against the representatives of a community of the realm depending on whom their lord was. They disliked the English as strangers and resisted actively armies which raided their lands. There was also persistent feud between the Comyns and the Balliols on the one side and the Bruces and the Stewarts on the other.

Comment:- These events can be interpreted in two ways.
1)	Bruce probably murdered Comyn because Comyn had damaged his reputation with Edward and Bruce was depending on Edward. When he had got nowhere with Edward Bruce decided to act. He realised that he had no right to the throne while Balliol lived and so organised a rebellion to seize the throne.
2)	Bruce was trying to come to a deal about the throne with Comyn for the good of the country and to avoid civil war. Bruce had inherited his father’s claim to the throne on his death in 1304. He had done little to help Edward since 1302 and saw that the Scots and the community of the realm still wanted their freedom but had no leader. He did want the throne but his patriotism, the needs of the community of the realm and his own interests all coincided. He, therefore, rebelled in 1306.

1)	Emergence of idea of a community of the realm to lead the country in the absence of a king. Wallace kept it going and then Bruce took over its leadership
2)	Edward I’s misestimation of the Scots reaction and his consequent encouragement of opposition - war of 1297
3)	Emergence of Bruce : a) hereditary claim, b) generalship, c) personal qualities of leadership: determination and ability to attract and use followers such as Douglas and Randolph.
4)	Extent of support from all groups of society, church, magnates and commoners and middling folk.
5)	Hindrances to the English efforts; a) Edward I had to deal with France and the barons; b) Edward II had to deal with the barons and was himself weak; c) Edward III after the murder of Edward II by Isabella and Mortimer was struggling to assert his authority in 1328.
6)	Outside support, intermittent, from France and the papacy.

Bad and Good?:
1)	The balance of power of the nobles and the crown swung in the nobles’ favour. Bruce had to reward his supporters. He had no choice. Therefore, he gave vast grants to Randolph in Moray and to Douglas in the south and south-west. consequently numerous royal rights were alienated and the crown weakened. This was all right as long as the grantees were loyal. Despite the necessity of making the grants Bruce did show a certain lack of foresight. Scottish society could be described as disintegrated order rather than chaos. Several times in the 14th and 15th centuries the barons had to act either to bolster weak kings, Robert III, or to limit tyrannical ones, James III.
2)	Economic effects.- Scotland was not so well off as before 1286.The population fell and agriculture therefore was hit. The areas which suffered most from the effects of the war were the developed areas. e.g., Paxton’s rent in Berwickshire fell from £32 16s and 8d to 0d. The productivity of land fell by about a half. People stopped cultivating in the face of annual devastation. But cattle and sheep could be moved to safety. Therefore, there was more emphasis on pastoral farming, export of wool and woolfells and hides. By 1327 5,000 sacks of wool were exported per per year, a figure seldom surpassed in the Middle Ages in Scotland. Many barons now collected money rather than services from their tenants and so serfdom was ending. The financial resources of the crown fell when lands were granted out to barons. The economy was not crippled and throve modestly throughout the 14th century.

Good and Bad?
1)	Scotland was not absorbed like Ireland and Wales but remained independent like the Swiss cantons and Sweden.
2)	A sense of national identity developed among the magnates and barons and was also starting to develop among middling fold and commoners.
3)	Scots fought for freedom and not just independence. The commoners with their spears in schiltrons were the backbone of the army. If a farmer could be expected to be a schiltron spear men he was not content to be unfree. Prolonged warfare upset old habits and customs. Serfs began to acquire freedom as labour services died and were replaced by rents. Many serfs were free before 1350. Barbour (Source 5) makes the connection between freedom from the English and freedom from serfdom clear.