William Wallace

Exploits And Death Of William Wallace, The "Hero Of Scotland"

Author: Scott, Sir Walter

Exploits And Death Of William Wallace, The "Hero Of Scotland"

1297 - 1305

When the granddaughter and sole heiress of King Alexander III of Scotland

was betrothed, in her sixth year, 1288, to the son of Edward I of England, an

early union of the English and Scottish crowns seemed assured. But the death

of the little princess, two years later, left the throne of Scotland vacant,

and was followed by the rise of thirteen claimants, three of whom were

entitled to serious regard - John de Baliol, Lord of Galloway; Robert Bruce,

Lord of Annandale; and John Hastings, Lord of Abergavenny, all descended from

David, brother of William the Lion, King of Scotland, 1165-1214.

Edward I of England at once assumed all the rights of a feudal suzerain

until the disputed claims should be settled. Finally the claim of Baliol was

recognized, he did homage to Edward for his services to the realm of Scotland,

and for a time peace prevailed. But when Edward called upon the Scottish

nobles to serve in his foreign wars, and made other demands implying the

dependence of Scotland, the resentment of Baliol's subjects forced him into an

attitude of war. In 1295 he made an alliance against Edward with Philip the

Fair of France. In 1296 Edward invaded Scotland, took Berwick and slaughtered

eight thousand of its citizens; defeated the Scots at Dunbar; occupied

Edinburgh, Stirling, and Perth; compelled Baliol to surrender, and sent him to

the Tower of London. Edward then made Scotland a dependency of his crown.

This submission was not the act of the people, but of their leaders. "The

Scots assembled in troops and companies, and betaking themselves to the woods,

mountains, and morasses, prepared for a general insurrection against the

English power."

They found their leader in the outlawed knight, William Wallace. Wallace

was born about 1274. Popular tradition, which "delights to dwell upon the

beloved champion of the people," has invested him with many striking

qualities, ascribing to him a gigantic stature and enormous strength, as well

as extraordinary courage. Little, if anything, is really known of his

personality and private life; while all that belongs to history concerning him

is told by his celebrated and admiring fellow-countryman, Sir Walter Scott, in

the following narrative.

Wallace is believed to have been proclaimed an outlaw for the slaughter

of an Englishman in a casual fray. He retreated to the woods, collected

around him a band of men as desperate as himself, and obtained several

successes in skirmishes with the English. Joined by Sir William Douglas, who

had been taken at the siege of Berwick, but had been discharged upon ransom,

the insurgents compelled Edward to send an army against them, under the Earl

of Surrey, the victor of Dunbar. Several of the nobility, moved by Douglas'

example, had joined Wallace's standard, but overawed at the approach of the

English army, and displeased to act under a man, like Wallace, of

comparatively obscure birth, they capitulated with Sir Henry Percy, the nephew

of Surrey, and in one word changed sides.

Wallace kept the field at the head of a considerable army, partly

consisting of his own experienced followers, partly of the smaller barons or

crown tenants, and partly of vassals even of the apostate lords, and

volunteers of every condition. By the exertion of much conduct and

resolution, Wallace had made himself master of the country beyond Forth, and

taken several castles, when he was summoned to Stirling to oppose Surrey, the

English Governor of Scotland. Wallace encamped on the northern side of the

river, leaving Stirling bridge apparently open to the English, but resolving,

as it was long and narrow, to attack them while in the act of crossing. The

Earl of Surrey led fifty thousand infantry and a thousand men-at-arms. Part

of his soldiers, however, were the Scottish barons who had formerly joined

Wallace's standard, and who, notwithstanding their return to that of Surrey,

were scarcely to be trusted.

The English treasurer, Cressingham, murmured at the expense attending the

war, and, to bring it to a crisis, proposed to commence an attack the next

morning by crossing the river. Surrey, an experienced warrior, hesitated to

engage his troops in the defile of a wooden bridge, where scarce two horsemen

could ride abreast; but, urged by the imprudent vehemence of Cressingham, he

advanced, contrary to common-sense as well as to his own judgment. The

vanguard of the English was attacked before they could get into order; the

bridge was broken down, and thousands perished in the river and by the sword.

Cressingham was slain, and Surrey fled to Berwick to recount to Edward that

Scotland was lost at Stirling in as short a time as it had been won at Dunbar.

In a brief period after this victory, almost all the fortresses of the kingdom

surrendered to Wallace.

Increasing his forces, Wallace, that he might gratify them with plunder,

led them across the English border, and sweeping it lengthwise from Newcastle

to the gates of Carlisle, left nothing behind him but blood and ashes. The

nature of Wallace was fierce, but not inaccessible to pity or remorse. As his

unruly soldiers pillaged the church of Hexham, he took the canons under his

immediate protection. "Abide with me," he said, "holy men, for my people are

evil-doers, and I may not correct them." When he returned from this successful

foray, an assembly of the states was held at the Forest Church in

Selkirkshire, where Wallace was chosen guardian of the kingdom of Scotland.

The meeting was attended by Lennox, Sir William Douglas, and some few men of

rank: others were absent from fear of King Edward, or from jealousy of an

inferior person, like Wallace, raised to so high a station.

Conscious of the interest which he had deservedly maintained in the

breast of the universal people of Scotland, Wallace pursued his judicious

plans of enforcing general levies through the kingdom and bringing them under

discipline. It was full time, for Edward was moving against them. The

English monarch was absent in Flanders when these events took place, and, what

was still more inconvenient, before he could gain supplies from his parliament

to suppress the Scottish revolt, Edward found himself obliged to confirm Magna

Charta, the charter of the forest, and other stipulations in favor of the

people; the English being prudent, though somewhat selfishly disposed to

secure their own freedom before they would lend their swords to destroy that

of their neighbors.

Complying with these demands, Edward, on his return from the Low

Countries, found himself at the head of a gallant muster of all the English

chivalry, forming by far the most superb army that had ever entered Scotland.

Wallace acted with great sagacity, and, according to a plan which often before

and after proved successful in Scottish warfare, laid waste the intermediate

country between Stirling and the frontiers, and withdrew toward centre of the

kingdom to receive the English attack, when their army should be exhausted by


Edward pressed on, with characteristic hardihood and resolution. Tower

and town fell before him; but his advance was not without such inconvenience

and danger as a less determined monarch would have esteemed a good apology for

retreat. His army suffered from want of provisions, which were at length

supplied in small quantities by some of his ships. As the English King lay at

Kirkliston, in West Lothian, a tumult broke out between the Welsh and English

in his army, which, after costing some blood, was quelled with difficulty.

While Edward hesitated whether to advance or retreat, he learned, through the

treachery of two apostate Scottish nobles, the earls of Dunbar and Angus, that

Wallace, with the Scottish army, had approached so near as Falkirk.

This advance was doubtless made with the purpose of annoying the expected

retreat of the English. Edward, thus apprised that the Scots were in his

vicinity, determined to compel them to action. He broke up his camp, and,

advancing with caution, slept the next night in the fields along with the

soldiers. But the casualties of the campaign were not yet exhausted. His

war-horse, which was picketed beside him, like that of an ordinary

man-at-arms, struck the King with his foot and hurt him in the side. A tumult

arose in the camp, but Edward, regardless of pain, appeased it by mounting his

horse, riding through the cantonments, and showing the soldiers that he was in


Next morning, July 22, 1298, the armies met. The Scottish infantry were

drawn up on a moor, with a morass in front. They were divided into four

phalanxes or dense masses, with lances lowered obliquely over each other, and

seeming, says an English historian, like a castle walled with steel. These

spearmen were the flower of the army, in whom Wallace chiefly confided. He

commanded them in person, and used the brief exhortation, "I have brought you

to the ring; dance as you best can."

The Scottish archers, under the command of Sir John Stewart, brother of

the Steward of Scotland, were drawn up in the intervals between the masses of

infantry. They were chiefly brought from the wooded district of Selkirk. We

hear of no Highland bowmen among them. The cavalry, which amounted to only

one thousand men-at-arms, held the rear.

The English cavalry began the action. The Marshal of England led half of

the men-at-arms straight upon the Scottish front, but in doing so involved

them in the morass. The Bishop of Durham, who commanded the other division of

the English cavalry, was wheeling round the morass on the east, and,

perceiving this misfortune, became disposed to wait for support. "To mass,

Bishop!" said Ralph Basset of Drayton, and charged with the whole body. The

Scottish men-at-arms went off without couching their lances; but the infantry

stood their ground firmly. In the turmoil that followed, Sir John Stewart

fell from his horse and was slain among the archers of Ettrick, who died in

defending or avenging him.

The close bodies of Scottish spearmen, now exposed without means of

defence or retaliation, were shaken by the constant showers of arrows; and the

English men-at-arms finally charging them desperately while they were in

disorder, broke and dispersed these formidable masses. The Scots were then

completely routed, and it was only the neighboring woods which saved a remnant

from the sword. The body of Stewart was found among those of his faithful

archers, who were distinguished by their stature and fair complexions from all

others with which the field was loaded. Macduff and Sir John the Grahame,

"the hardy wight and wise," still fondly remembered as the bosom friend of Sir

William Wallace, were slain in the same disastrous action.

Popular report states this battle to have been lost by treachery; and the

communication between the earls of Dunbar and Angus and King Edward, as well

as the disgraceful flight of the Scottish cavalry without a single blow,

corroborates the suspicion. But the great superiority of the English in

archery may account for the loss of this as of many another battle on the part

of the Scots. The bowmen of Ettrick Forest were faithful; but they could only

be few. So nearly had Wallace's scheme for the campaign been successful, that

Edward, even after having gained this great battle, returned to England, and

deferred reaping the harvest of his conquest till the following season. If he

had not been able to bring the Scottish army to action, his retreat must have

been made with discredit and loss, and Scotland must have been left in the

power of the patriots.

The slaughter and disgrace of the battle of Falkirk might have been

repaired in other respects, but it cost the Scottish kingdom an irredeemable

loss in the public services of Wallace. He resigned the guardianship of the

kingdom, unable to discharge its duties, amid the calumnies with which faction

and envy aggravated his defeat. The Bishop of St. Andrew's, Bruce, Earl of

Carrick, and Sir John Comyn were chosen guardians of Scotland, which they

administered in the name of Baliol. In the mean time that unfortunate Prince

was, in compassion or scorn, delivered up to the Pope by Edward, and a receipt

was gravely taken for his person from the nuncio then in France. This led to

the entrance of a new competitor for the Scottish kingdom.

The Pontiff of Rome had been long endeavoring to establish a claim, to

whatsoever should be therein found, to which a distinct and specific right of

property could not be ascertained. The Pontiff's claim to the custody of the

dethroned King being readily admitted, Boniface VIII was encouraged to publish

a bull claiming Scotland as a dependency on the see of Rome because the

country had been converted to Christianity by the relics of St. Andrew.

The Pope, in the same document, took the claim of Edward to the Scottish

crown under his own discussion, and authoritatively commanded Edward I to send

proctors to Rome to plead his cause before his holiness. This magisterial

requisition was presented by the Archbishop of Canterbury to the King, in the

presence of the council and court, the prelate at the same time warning the

sovereign to yield unreserved obedience, since Jerusalem would not fail to

protect her citizens, and Mount Zion her worshippers. "Neither for Zion nor

Jerusalem," said Edward, in towering wrath, "will I depart from my just rights

while there is breath in my nostrils."

Accordingly he caused the Pope's bull to be laid before the Parliament of

England, who unanimously resolved "that in temporals the King of England was

independent of Rome, and that they would not permit his sovereignty to be

questioned." Their declaration concludes with these remarkable words: "We

neither do, will, nor can permit our sovereign to do anything to the detriment

of the constitution, which we are both sworn to and are determined to

maintain" - a spirited assertion of national right, had it not been in so bad

a cause as that of Edward's claim of usurpation over Scotland.

Meantime the war languished during this strange discussion, from which

the Pope was soon obliged to retreat. There was an inefficient campaign in

1299 and 1300. In 1301 there was a truce, in which Scotland as well as France

was included. After the expiry of this breathing space, Edward I, in the

spring of 1302, sent an army into Scotland of twenty thousand men, under Sir

John Seward, a renowned general. He marched toward Edinburgh in three

divisions, leaving large intervals between each.

While in this careless order, Seward's vanguard found themselves suddenly

within reach of a small but chosen body of troops, amounting to eight thousand

men, commanded by Sir John Comyn, the guardian, and a gallant Scottish knight,

Sir Simon Fraser. Seward was defeated, but the battle was scarce over when

his second division came up. The Scots, flushed with victory, reestablished

their ranks, and having cruelly put to death their prisoners, attacked and

defeated the second body also. The third division came up in the same manner.

Again it became necessary to kill the captives, and to prepare for a third

encounter. The Scottish leaders did so without hesitation, and their

followers, having thrown themselves furiously on the enemy, discomfited that

division likewise, and gained - as their historians boast - three battles in

one day.

But the period seemed to be approaching in which neither courage nor

exertion could longer avail the unfortunate people of Scotland. A peace with

France, in which Philip the Fair totally omitted all stipulations in favor of

his allies, left the kingdom to its own inadequate means of resistance, while

Edward directed his whole force against it. The castle of Brechin, under the

gallant Sir Thomas Maule, made an obstinate resistance. He was mortally

wounded and died in an exclamation of rage against the soldiers, who asked if

they might not then surrender the castle. Edward wintered at Dunfermline, and

began the next campaign with the siege of Stirling, the only fortress in the

kingdom that still held out. But the courage of the guardians altogether gave

way; they set the example of submission, and such of them as had been most

obstinate in what the English King called rebellion, were punished by various

degrees of fine and banishment.

With respect to Sir William Wallace, it was agreed that he might have the

choice of surrendering himself unconditionally to the King's pleasure,

provided he thought proper to do so; a stipulation which, as it signified

nothing in favor of the person for whom it was apparently conceived, must be

imputed as a pretext on the part of the Scottish nobles to save themselves

from the disgrace of having left Wallace altogether unthought of. Some

attempts were made to ascertain what sort of accommodation Edward was likely

to enter into with the bravest and most constant of his enemies; but the

demands of Wallace were large, and the generosity of Edward very small. The

English King broke off the treaty, and put a price of three hundred marks on

the head of the patriot.

Meantime Stirling castle continued to be defended by a slender garrison,

and, deprived of all hopes of relief, continued to make a desperate defence,

under its brave governor, Sir William Olifaunt, until famine and despair

compelled him to an unconditional surrender, when the King imposed the

harshest terms on this handful of brave men.

But what Edward prized more than the surrender of the last fortress which

resisted his arms in Scotland was the captivity of her last patriot. He had

found in a Scottish nobleman, Sir John Monteith, a person willing to become

his agent in searching for Wallace among the wilds where he was driven to find

refuge. Wallace was finally betrayed to the English by his unworthy and

apostate countryman, who obtained an opportunity of seizing him at Robroyston,

near Glasgow, by the treachery of a servant.

Sir William Wallace was instantly transferred to London, where he was

brought to trial in Westminster Hall, with as much apparatus of infamy as the

ingenuity of his enemies could devise. He was crowned with a garland of oak,

to intimate that he had been king of outlaws. The arraignment charged him

with high treason, in respect that he had stormed and taken towns and castles,

and shed much blood. "Traitor," said Wallace, "was I never." The rest of the

charges he confessed and proceeded to justify them. He was condemned, and

executed by decapitation, 1305. His head was placed on a pinnacle on London

bridge, and his quarters were distributed over the kingdom.

Thus died this courageous patriot, leaving a remembrance which will be

immortal in the hearts of his countrymen. This steady champion of

independence having been removed, and a bloody example held out to all who

should venture to tread in his footsteps, Edward proceeded to form a species

of constitution for the country, which, at the cost of so much labor, policy,

and bloodshed, he had at length, as he conceived, united forever with the

English crown.

Ten commissioners chosen for Scotland and twenty for England composed a

set of regulations for the administration of justice, and enactments were

agreed upon by which the feudal law, which had been long introduced into

Scotland, was strengthened and extended, while the remains of the ancient

municipal customs of the original Celtic tribes, or the consuetudinary laws of

the Scots and Bretts - the Scotto-Irish and British races - were finally

abrogated. This was for the purpose of promoting a uniformity of laws through

the islands. Sheriffs and other officers were appointed for the

administration of justice. There were provisions also made for a general

revision of the ancient laws and statutes of Scotland.

You Might Also Like:

World History related image
Read More

World History

Welcome to our World History section, a vast treasure trove of historical knowledge that takes you on a captivating journey through the annals of human civilization. Our collection spans a wide spectrum of topics, providing an exhaustive resource for history enthusiasts, students, and curious minds ...
Read More

A Complete History Of The European Middle Ages

The Middle Ages Date: 1992 During the decline of the Roman Empire, the migrations of a strong, rude people began to change the life of Europe. They were the German barbarians, or Teutonic tribes, who swept across the Rhine and the Danube into the empire. There they accepted Christianity. The union o...
Read More

A Day In The Life Of A Battle Of Britain Pilot

The following would have been a typical day in the life of a Battle of Britain pilot The sequences are based on the works of different authors with the exception that the names have been changed. This is just to give you an idea as to how a pilot may have spent his day at the height of the battle. ...
Read More

A General Survey Of The Slave Plantation

The American Civil War, Frederick Douglass Edited by: Robert Guisepi 2002 A General Survey of the Slave Plantation by Frederick Douglass It was generally supposed that slavery in the State of Maryland existed in its mildest form, and that it was totally divested of those harsh and terrible peculiari...
Read More

A. P. Hill

The American Civil War, A. P. Hill Edited by: Robert Guisepi 2002 b. Nov. 9, 1825, Culpeper, Va., U.S.d. April 2, 1865, Petersburg, Va. Confederate general during the U.S. Civil War who was particularly active in the fighting around Washington, D.C. His force, called the "Light Division," was cons...
Read More


The American Civil War, Abolition, The Movement Edited by: Robert Guisepi 2002 There can be no doubt that antislavery, or "abolition" as it came to be called, was the nonpareil reform. Abolition was a diverse phenomenon. At one end of its spectrum was William Lloyd Garrison, an "immediatist," who de...
Read More

Abraham Lincoln

The American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln American Civil War history with slideshows, photos, music, major battles like Gettysburg as well as personalities like Lincoln, Grant, Lee and the Black Regiments Edited by: Robert Guisepi 2002 He was an unusual man in many ways. One minute he would wrestle wi...
Read More


European Absolutism And Power Politics Introduction Louis XIV (1643-1715) of France is remembered best as a strong-willed monarch who reportedly once exclaimed to his fawning courtiers, "L'etat, c'est moi" (I am the state). Whether or not he really said these words, Louis has been regarded by histor...
Read More

Absolutism As A System

Absolutism As A System L'Etat, C'Est Moi Date: 1998 Absolutism As A System Unlimited royal authority, as advocated by Bossuet and Hobbes, was the main characteristic of absolutism. It was demonstrated most obviously in political organization but also served to integrate into government most econom...
Read More

Absolutism, Case Against

The Case Against AbsolutismAuthor: Wallbank;Taylor;Bailkey;Jewsbury;Lewis;HackettDate: 1992The Case Against AbsolutismThe Enlightenment's highest achievement was the development of a tightlyorganized philosophy, purportedly based on scientific principles andcontradicting every argument for absolute ...
Read More

Accession Of Solomon

Accession Of Solomon Author: Milman, Henry Hart Accession Of Solomon B.C. 1017 Introduction After many weary years of travail and fighting in the wilderness and the land of Canaan, the Jews had at last founded their kingdom, with Jerusalem as the capital. Saul was proclaimed the first king; afterwa ...
Read More


A History of Ancient Greece The Glory That Was Greece Author: Jewsbury, Lewis Date: 1992 The Acropolis Acropolis (Greek akros,"highest"; polis,"city"), term originally applied to any fortified natural stronghold or citadel in ancient Greece. Primarily a place of refuge, the typical acropolis was con...
Read More

Aegean Civilization

A History of Ancient Greece Author: Robert Guisepi Date: 1998 AEGEAN CIVILIZATION The earliest civilization in Europe appeared on the coasts and islands of the Aegean Sea. This body of water is a branch of the Mediterranean Sea. It is bounded by the Greek mainland on the west, Asia Minor (now Turkey...
Read More

Aemilius Paulus

AEMILIUS PAULUS by Plutarch Almost all historians agree that the Aemilii were one of the ancient and patrician houses in Rome; and those authors who affirm that king Numa was pupil to Pythagoras, tell us that the first who gave the name to his posterity was Mamercus, the son of Pythagoras, who, for ...
Read More

Africa In The Age Of The Slave Trade

Africa And The Africans In The Age Of The Atlantic Slave Trade Various Authors Edited By: R. A. GuisepiAfrican Societies, Slavery, And The Slave TradeEuropeans in the age of the slave trade sometimes justified enslavementof Africans by pointing out that slavery already existed on that continent.Howe...
Read More