HistoryExtra
type: channel
link: https://www.historyextra.com
description: Home of Britain’s bestselling history magazine and award-winning podcast
date: 2023-11-16T13:16:41.000Z
update period: hourly
update frequency: 1
update base: 2000-01-01T12:00+00:00
items: 10 things you (probably) didn’t know about Scottish history
items: The battle of Bannockburn: Robert Bruce's fight for freedom
items: 9 of the most overrated battles in history (and one underrated one)
items: Robert the Bruce: what do we know?
items: The big debate: was Edward II really murdered?
items: Robert the Bruce: champion of Scotland or murderous usurper?
items: 10 medieval dates you need to know

10 things you (probably) didn’t know about Scottish history
type: item
date: 2020-06-30T09:30:42.000Z
subject: General History
subject: Period
description: Who was the first king of Scotland? What language did people in Ancient Scotland speak? And has Scotland really never been conquered? Dr William Knox from the University of St Andrews investigates...
encoded: In his book, Scottish History For Dummies, Knox explores the story of Scotland and its place within the historical narratives of Britain, Europe and the rest of the world. Here, writing for HistoryExtra, he reveals 10 surprising facts about Scottish history... There is no genetically pure or original Scot There is no common ancestral or genetic heritage that links the peoples of Scotland. The country was a patchwork quilt of various peoples grouped together in tribes who certainly never thought of themselves as Scottish. They owed allegiance only to their kith and kin, but in the campaigns against Roman imperialism they built federations that laid the basis of kingdoms. Ancient Scotland was made up of four separate groups: Angles, Britons, Picts and Gaels (or Scoti), who each spoke a different language. Latin became the common language of the whole country only after the Christianisation of Scotland in the 6th century AD. No, the Celts weren't primitive hooligans with terrible table manners... Kenneth McAlpin (810–858) was not, as is popularly claimed, the first king of Scotland What McAlpin did was in 842 take advantage of the Picts who had been severely weakened militarily by punitive Viking raids, and unite the kingdom of the Gaels with that of Pictavia. But while he ruled over the whole of Scotland north of the river Forth, large parts of the country were still in the hands of the Vikings in the north and Islands, and in the south the Anglo-Saxons ruled. But McAlpin was referred to as king of the Picts – a title conferred on him at his coronation on Moot Hill at Scone, Perthshire, in 843 AD. It was not until the reign of Donald II (889–900) that the monarch became known as the ri Alban (king of Alba). McAlpin’s achievement was to create a long-lasting dynasty that gradually extended the territorial borders of Scotland both north and south, but it was not until 1469 that what we know as Scotland today was established. Listen | Professor Tom Devine explores one of…

GettyImages-4639252452-3c91ff9.jpg
width: 5354
height: 3280

The battle of Bannockburn: Robert Bruce's fight for freedom
type: item
date: 2020-06-23T09:50:23.000Z
subject: Medieval
subject: Period
subject: Medieval battles
subject: Medieval kings and queens
description: The battle of Bannockburn (23–24 June 1314) was fought to the south-east of Stirling Castle in central Scotland. It was the climax of a brutal civil war, pitting the Scots under Robert the Bruce against the English under Edward II. Here, Fiona Watson explains the circumstances surrounding the battle and reveals how the conflict was later recast as an epic struggle for liberation...
encoded: There are only about four hours of proper darkness at midsummer in Scotland. For the English army crossing the boggy ground beneath the town of Stirling, that was just enough time to feed and water horses and men, clean equipment and wonder what lay ahead of them once the sun rose. Morale was low. The foot soldiers were exhausted, having been forced to march as quickly as they could from Edinburgh 30 miles away in order to meet the midsummer deadline agreed for the relief of Stirling Castle. And they had failed to best their Scottish enemies earlier the previous day, 23 June 1314, in a series of encounters including the infamous attempt by Sir Henry de Bohun to kill the Scottish king in single combat, only to be felled by one mighty blow of Robert Bruce’s battle-axe. Nevertheless, Edward II was prepared. What he did not expect was the Scots to fight, for it was their habit to disappear into the hills when confronted by an English army. But now, as dawn crept into the sky, Edward could see the Scots advancing in three brigades of spearmen before kneeling before him. The English king was exultant, believing that this was a prelude to surrender – until it was pointed out to him that, though the Scots sought mercy, it was from God rather than the English. If, as appeared to be the case, the Scottish king had decided to fight, it would be the seventh engagement between the two kingdoms in the 18 years since Edward’s father, Edward I, had (temporarily) conquered his northern neighbour in 1296. The prelude to what was a shockingly dramatic change in the relationship between Scotland and England was the death a decade earlier of the Scottish king, Alexander III, without any surviving male heirs. This had prompted Edward I – Alexander’s former brother-in-law – to begin interfering in the northern kingdom’s affairs. Edward insisted on presiding over a court looking into the claims of 14 candidates to be king, though the choice was really between John Balliol, Lord of Galloway…

dreamstime m 49724436-c2f92aa.jpg
width: 2121
height: 1413

9 of the most overrated battles in history (and one underrated one)
type: item
date: 2019-07-11T09:57:20.000Z
creator: Dr Seán Lang
subject: 20th Century
subject: First World War
subject: Georgian
subject: Medieval
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Roman
subject: Second World War
subject: Tudor
subject: Victorian
subject: Medieval battles
subject: Naval battles
subject: Second World War battles
description: From Bosworth and Bannockburn to the Battle of Britain, historian Sean Lang examines nine British battles accorded a decisive importance that, he argues, does not necessarily stand up to close scrutiny…
encoded: To be overrated, a battle must be famous and have been generally regarded as decisive or of great historical significance. Of course, some battles, like those of the Crimean War, never had much reputation to start with; others, such as El Alamein, are genuinely debatable: a sideshow in the grand scheme of things, it helped turn the tide in the Second World War’s north African campaign and was of genuine value in stiffening British morale. Judging a battle to be overrated does not mean it was insignificant; still less does it deny the bravery and sacrifice of those who fought in it. It simply means that it has been accorded a decisive importance that does not necessarily stand up to close scrutiny. For reasons of space, I have restricted this exploration to battles from British history; other peoples can doubtless compile similar lists of their own. Julius Caesar’s invasions of Britain, 55 and 54 BC The cheeky satirical volume 1066 and All That gave 55 BC as one of the two memorable dates in English history (the other, of course, being 1066), but a memorable date does not prove a battle’s significance. What was Julius Caesar actually doing in Britain? What was his landing supposed to achieve? Caesar himself says it was to punish the Britons for the aid they sent the Gallic tribes during his conquest of Gaul in 58–50 BC, which would make it a sort of punitive expedition, like the ones the British would later launch in their own empire. Either way, it cannot be called a conquest, or even, properly speaking, an invasion. One of the problems with Caesar’s raid, as with so much ancient history, is that we are so heavily dependent on tainted written sources – in this case Caesar’s own written account. Corroborative archaeological evidence for the scale of Caesar’s expedition is relatively sparse. We do know that Caesar’s account was a propaganda exercise to promote his own bid for power, and that it would have suited his purposes to ‘big up’ what was either a large raid or…

GettyImages-2668585-f3c6eb8.jpg
width: 3327
height: 2632

Robert the Bruce: what do we know?
type: item
date: 2019-03-25T08:00:35.000Z
subject: Medieval
subject: Period
subject: Family and parenting
subject: TV interest
description: Robert the Bruce (1274–1329) proclaimed his right to the Scottish throne in 1306 and is remembered as a hero of Scotland who waged a highly successful guerrilla war against occupying English forces. He has been portrayed numerous times in film and television, most recently by Chris Pine in Netflix's original film, Outlaw King. But how much do you know about the Scottish king? Here, medieval expert Chris Brown explores the true facts of Robert the Bruce's life, from his supposed birth in England to his landmark victory over the English forces of Edward II at the battle of Bannockburn…
encoded: What most people think they know about Robert the Bruce can be compressed into a single paragraph: He was born in Writtle, Essex (his family were great landowners in England as well as Scotland) and he was a French-speaking Anglo-Norman. He was perfectly willing to serve Edward I (the ‘Hammer of the Scots’) as a client king, if Edward would put him on the throne. He murdered John Comyn, a major rival for the Scottish crown, at Greyfriars church in Dumfries and later embarked on a lengthy guerrilla war, ostensibly because Scottish troops did not have such good horses or armour as their English counterparts. In June 1314, at the battle of Bannockburn, he managed to score his one great victory against the English – with the help of Knights Templar. During the battle, the English attacked Robert the Bruce’s fortified position up a hill and through a bog and, despite being mounted on a mere pony, he dispatched an English knight in single combat. With his war concluded, he promptly died of leprosy. Read more: Robert the Bruce: champion of Scotland or murderous usurper? Bannockburn: Robert Bruce's fight for freedom That’s pretty much it, isn’t it? Yet, with the exception of the murder of John Comyn, the entire paragraph is what historians might call ‘rubbish’; there is not a word of truth in it. Here’s a closer look at some ‘facts’ about the Scottish king… Edward I and the ‘Great Cause’ The Bruce family first came to prominence in 1291–2, after Robert Bruce of Annandale (grandfather of the man who would become king of Scotland in 1306) was rejected as the next king of Scotland, in favour of John Balliol. After King Alexander III died and left no heir, Edward I of England was invited to decide who would be the next king of Scotland, given that there was some doubt over who – out of 13 contenders – had the best claim. The process is often described as the ‘Great Cause’, and it is widely believed that Edward deliberately chose John Balliol because the king was confident that …

OK Unit 08570 R-1a700f5-e1541764378403.jpg
width: 1025
height: 683

The big debate: was Edward II really murdered?
type: item
date: 2019-02-25T12:15:37.000Z
subject: Medieval
subject: Period
subject: Debate
subject: Medieval battles
subject: Medieval kings and queens
subject: Murder
description: In 2005, the bestselling historian Ian Mortimer caused a storm when he argued that Edward II had not been assassinated at Berkeley Castle in 1327 – received opinion for almost 700 years – and was still alive in 1330. His theory has attracted numerous critics, among them the medieval academic Nicholas Vincent. In a debate from 2016, the two put forward their conflicting views on the fate of an English king...
encoded: If there’s one thing most historians agree on, it’s that Edward II was one of medieval England’s least capable rulers. He is chiefly remembered for squandering his father, Edward I’s, military gains in Scotland (notably by losing the battle of Bannockburn), and alienating his wife and barons by promoting personal favourites such as Hugh Despenser the Younger. But how did Edward die? We know that Queen Isabella’s patience with her husband snapped in 1326, and that she invaded England with her lover, Roger Mortimer, who was living in exile in France. Edward was forced to abdicate and was then imprisoned at Berkeley Castle, where he was murdered on 21 September 1327 (with, as legend would have it, the assistance of a red-hot poker). That, at least, has been the accepted view of events for centuries. Yet, in 2005, Ian Mortimer challenged the consensus by arguing – in the journal The English Historical Review – that Edward had cheated death and was still alive in 1330. Mortimer’s theory has sparked a lively debate in the historical community, as the following exchange proves… Ian Mortimer: How can we be sure whether Edward II did or did not die in Berkeley Castle? The answer is not a straightforward: ‘because this document says so’ – after all, any single piece of evidence could be wrong. It is, rather, a matter of showing first that the evidence for the death, which we have hitherto accepted, is fundamentally flawed; and second that there are multiple independent accounts from people who knew him, stating that Edward was alive at a later date. According to the royal accounts, Edward II died in Berkeley Castle on 21 September 1327. Lord Berkeley’s accounts show that the news was taken in his own letters to the royal household, which was then at Lincoln. An extant letter written at Lincoln by Edward III on 24 September states that news of his father’s death had been received during the previous night. It was therefore accepted in the royal household and circulated from 24…

https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/7/2016/01/GettyImages-173281885-194ff8b-b0dac39-e1551104032245.jpg
width: 650
height: 432

Robert the Bruce: champion of Scotland or murderous usurper?
type: item
date: 2018-08-21T10:40:52.000Z
subject: Medieval
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Medieval battles
subject: Medieval kings and queens
subject: Murder
description: On 23 and 24 June 1314, Robert Bruce, king of Scotland, faced King Edward II at Bannockburn in the decisive battle of the Wars of Scottish Independence. Dr Michael Brown takes a closer look at the Scottish king and his often bloody path to the throne
encoded: On 10 February 1306, the most important political murder in Scottish history took place. John Comyn, “the Red”, was slaughtered by Robert the Bruce, Earl of Carrick, and his followers in an outburst of violence in the church of the Franciscans, the Greyfriars, at Dumfries. Comyn and Bruce were leading members of the Scottish nobility. They had been rivals and had recently fought on opposing sides in the wars between Edward I of England and the Scots. In early 1306 with Edward finally recognised as ruler of Scotland, the two lords met together in the Greyfriars church. At first the men seemed friendly and Bruce talked alone with Comyn before the high altar. Read more: Bannockburn: Robert Bruce’s fight for freedom (subscription) The Black Prince: hero or villain? Kings and Queens in profile: Edward II Suddenly the mood changed. Bruce accused his rival of treachery. Making to walk away, Robert Bruce then turned back with sword drawn and struck Comyn. Bruce’s followers then rushed in, raining blows on John Comyn who fell to the floor. Comyn’s uncle, who joined the melee, was cut down. Bruce left the church. Mounted on Comyn’s horse he led his followers the short distance to Dumfries Castle where King Edward’s justices were holding court. Breaking in, Bruce arrested the king’s men but then he heard news that Comyn was still alive. He dispatched two of his men to the friary. They found John Comyn tended by the friars in the vestry, wounded but not dying. Michael Penman will be speaking on 'Robert Bruce of Scotland (1306-29): Myth and Aftermyth' at our Kings and Queens Weekend in March 2019. Find out more here After allowing him to hear confession, Bruce’s men dragged Comyn back into the church and killed him on the altar steps, spattering the altar itself with blood. While Comyn’s corpse was abandoned to the friars, Bruce rode from Dumfries to begin the uprising against Edward I which would climax with his crowning as king of Scots six weeks later. Those seeking to unders…

dreamstimes39671715-0fc521f.jpg
width: 800
height: 530

10 medieval dates you need to know
type: item
date: 2018-07-12T13:00:22.000Z
creator: Ellie Cawthorne
subject: Medieval
subject: Norman
subject: Period
subject: Family and parenting
subject: Historical people
subject: Medieval battles
subject: Medieval kings and queens
subject: Medieval life
description: Don't know the battle of Bosworth from the battle of Bannockburn? Confused between Magna Carta and Domesday Book? We've got you covered. Here we bring you 10 key medieval dates you need to know
encoded: 1066: The battle of Hastings and the Norman conquest The Norman conquest of 1066 marked a dramatic and irreversible turning point in English history. Events began with the battle of Hastings, in which the Anglo-Saxon king Harold II attempted to defend his realm from the Norman invasion forces of William, Duke of Normandy (later known as William the Conqueror). Harold’s English troops numbered around 5,000, compared to a well-equipped Norman force of 15,000 infantry, archers and cavalry. Although the English had some initial success using shield-wall tactics, they proved no match for William, who was a formidable warlord. English defences were eventually broken down and King Harold was killed. His crushing defeat and gory death on the battlefield is famously recorded in the Bayeux tapestry, which was completed in the 1070s. Following William’s success at the battle of Hastings – dubbed by Andrew Gimson the “most durable victory of any monarch in English history”– William the Conqueror set about transforming the face of Anglo-Saxon England. He skillfully secured his hold on the lands he had invaded, replacing the English ruling class with Norman counterparts and building defensive fortresses at strategic points throughout the kingdom. Under William the feudal system [a hierarchical system in which people held lands in return for providing loyalty or services to a lord] was introduced, the church reorganised and England’s links to Europe strengthened. The legacy of 1066’s Norman conquest can still be seen today in Britain’s language, culture and social structure. 1085: The Domesday Book is completed The Domesday Book is England’s earliest surviving public record, unsurpassed in depth and detail until the introduction of censuses in the 19th century. Towards the end of the 11th century England came under threat from Danish invaders. William the Conqueror (who had himself been an invader two decades earlier) realised the need to catalogue the country’s financial resource…

GettyImages-142083925-2-894e5fc-e1671618170796.jpg
width: 620
height: 411