Talk:Wars of Scottish Independence/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Hmm, why are four of the events in italics? Don't we usually we reserve these for titles of things (books, movies), and sometimes for quotes. I'd just take the italics out, but I'm concerned they mean something to someone (who has forgotten to add the appropriate key). -- Finlay McWalter 13:02, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

• I suspect they're italics because the original web-page where this aricle was cut-and-paste from http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Wars-of-Scottish-Independence had them in italics (perhaps to the distinguish battles from other events). I agree they should be removed. Gmh04 14:01, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
  • Hmm, I think NationMaster copies from wikipedia, not the other way around. Anyway, I'll take the italics out. -- Finlay McWalter 14:06, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

---

"In 1320 the Declaration of Arbroath was issued by the Pope acknowledging Scottish independence from England." I think the Pope, Pope John XXII, in Avignon (not Arbroath) didn't participate in the issuing of the declaration. Further, the Pope was asked by the people of Scotland to accept the right of Scots to self-determination (i.e. we chose our King, rather than God), NOT Scots simply "acknowledging" their independence. Previously, Pope John had regarded Scotland as unchristian, because he hadn't heard Scotland side of the story. If no one objects I'll reword the above statement. Dduck 14:30, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

---

GDR, if you want to say that the Auld Alliance is not the oldest alliance in Europe, that's fine but you have to explain why first. -- Derek Ross 22:57, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well, in the 6th century BC Sparta and Tegea made a defensive alliance, the beginning of the Peloponnesian League. I'm sure there were plenty of recorded and unrecorded alliances long before that, in Europe and elsewhere.

The Auld Alliance is a famous alliance, and very significant in the history of Scotland. There's no need to inflate its significance; just state the facts! I'll make my change again. Gdr 14:00, 2004 May 4 (UTC)

I see. Well that makes sense. I must say that I was thinking of it as the first treaty between modern (or at least mediaeval) nations rather than classical ones. On that basis I'd prefer to qualify the statement rather than remove it though, otherwise it's likely to make a reappearance at some point when someone else thinks "they haven't mentioned that and everyone knows it". -- Derek Ross 15:04, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

It will be hard for you to restrict the terms of reference to make this kind of qualification work. Even if you exclude classical states, there were many earlier treaties and alliances between medieval states, for example the alliance between Charlemagne and the Lombards in 770, or the treaty between Charlemagne and Offa of Mercia in 790, or the alliance between Ethelred II of England and the Normans in 1002.

However, I agree with you on the difficulty of preventing this kind of legend from resurfacing. Gdr 16:56, 2004 May 4 (UTC)

---

wtf does this sentence mean?

The revolt calmed for a period, until Robert the Bruce, the grandson of the competitor of 1292, was crowned King of Scots in 1306. Specifically, grandson of the competitor of 1292. Does this imply that he is the grandson of Wallace? This needs to be clarified. Avriette Mon Feb 21 04:01:22 GMT 2005

The revolt calmed for a period, until Robert the Bruce, the grandson of Robert Bruce, the competitor of 1292, was crowned King of Scots in 1306. Hopefully this clarifies things. Berek 16:02, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

---

I feel this article needs cleanup, for 2 reasons. Firstly, the term First War of Independence is normally used for the Wallace period and Second War of Independence for the Bruce period. I have never seen the term Second War of Independence used for the Balliol wars before. I also suggest creating an article "Disputed Scots Succession of 1290-92" since this is a complex issue, at present information of various accuracy and detail is spread between various articles, this one and biographies of the leading figures. I might do that myself, but before that I ought to check the definitive biography of Bruce. PatGallacher 16:39, 2005 Feb 21 (UTC)

After a bit of library diving, I can find no reference to either the First or Second War of Independence used consistently. Experts vary widely on their use of the terms, some discarding them completely and naming each battle instead; since I can find no concensus, I'm leaving the article as is. Someone has already changed the Scots Succession to Important Figures as per the second note in cleanup so I'm removing the cleanup tag.

The references I used were:

• Croft, Dickinson W. (1977):Scotland from Earliest Times to 1603:Oxford:ISBN 0198224656
• Grant, Alexander (1991):Independence and Nationhood : Scotland 1306 - 1469:Edinburgh University Press:ISBN 0748602739
• Watson, Fiona (1998):Under the Hammer: Edward I and Scotland, 1286-1307:Tuckwell Press:ISBN 1862320209
• McNamee, Colm (1997):The Wars of the Bruces : Scotland, England and Ireland, 1306-1328:Tuckwell Press:ISBN 1898410925
• Prestwich, Michael (1992):The Three Edwards: War and State in England, 1272-1377:Routledge:ISBN 0415051339

.:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 15:40, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Treaty of Berwick

According to this article, the Treaty of Berwick was signed sometime during the year 1357. When I go to the article on the Treaty of Berwick it states that this agreement was actually made on the 6th July 1586. Could someone please clear the discprencies here? (Saurabhb 20:51, 18 February 2006 (UTC)) As so often, particular places are associated with more than one treaty. There was indeed a Treaty of Berwick in 1357. The cross- reference to that of 1586 in this article is wrong and confusing. Rcpaterson 23:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The Red Comyn.

The Red Comyn was not Earl of Buchan. Rcpaterson 23:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Treaty of Berwick

Wrongly cross-referenced in this article to that of 1586. Rcpaterson 00:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Robert the Bruce Vs John "the Red" Comyn at Greyfriar's Church, Dumfries.

During the meeting within the walls of the Church, Robert the Bruce and John Comyn engaged in a fight where both men drew their daggers and slashed away at each other. The Bruce, finally being the one to hit the decisive blow. For this sacrilege that was committed by The Bruce within the religious walls of the Church Pope Clement V excommunicated The Bruce.

Seperate background into "Great Cause" Page?

Just a thought - there's a great deal of information on the competition for the Scottish throne on this page. Should the Great Cause perhaps have it's own page and the information here be reduced to a stub only? This is supposed to be a page on the war itself after all. - MattDP 2nd June 2006

I put up a request for the Great Cause months ago, because it's so important, but not really a topic which would benefit from my expertise in particular. It certainly should have its own page ... no question at all. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 15:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

It already has a page, I was involved in its editing last year or so... Marrtel 16:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

While all the info on the competitors is an excellent start, I think it might benefit from more background and description. I might take some of the material out of this page and put it into the Great Cause page together with anything else I can dig up sometime over the next few days, if no-one has any objections.

On a related note it might just be me being fussy but does it strike anyone else as odd that the first war has it's own page and yet is described in detail on this page while the second war doesn't have it's own page and is described rather sketchily. Shouldn't either both have their own pages or both be described in detail on this page?MattDP 10:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

The competitors article isn't helpful as is. A list gives the false impression that Patrick Galightly and John Balliol, for example, were claimants on the same basis. Only three candidates appointed auditors, 40 each for Bruce and Balliol and 20-odd for the missing, 14th claimant. Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the Second War of Independence needs seperate treatment. The account here is fair enough as far as it goes, which is not, perhaps, very far at all-no mention is made, for instance, of the Battle of Culblean, a small but crucial encounter that virtually nullified the effects of the English invasion of 1335. I plan to write a seperate article and also a full account of the Great Cause, if time allows. Rcpaterson 04:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No sooner had I started work on the Second War of Scottish Independence than a merge request was put on it! I do not intend to expand the piece beyond the existing introduction if there is to be serious disagreement about the advisibility of this project. Rcpaterson 22:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC) This article is now complete. God bless her and all who sail in her! Rcpaterson 03:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I have done as suggested and put up a Great Cause page with considerably more detail on the process. I am not an expert in this area, so peer review is very welcome. If no-one objects, I may go back and insert links to the Great Cause in other relevant articles (i.e. this one, Robert_I_of_Scotland, John_I_of_Scotland etc)

Battles

I have been spending some time either expanding existing accounts of the battles of the Wars of Independence, or in writing original pieces: turning red to blue, so to speak. However, some headings are likely to remain forever red for the simple reason that there is not enough information to construct a proper article-the 'battle' of Happrew is the most obvious example of this, though I also doubt the wisdom of treating the very minor skirmish at Slioch as a battle seperate from the Inverurie campaign. All we can really say about Happrew is that it happened, very little more than that, and it is therefore best included as a passing mention in the life of William Wallace. Seperate, dictionary style, treatment runs the same risk as reading like the pointless Marion Braidfute piece. Rcpaterson 04:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)