Could tide have led to historic victory?
DIGGING INTO THE PAST with Dr Murray Cook
Last Saturday was the anniversary of The Battle of Stirling Bridge - 11/09/1297.
The battle is of international significance as it’s the first time an infantry army defeated an army of knights.
It was and is an astonishing victory for the Scots against much greater odds. Contemporary and later writers always struggled to understand how the Scots won.
So unexpected was the victory, coming as it did between major losses at Dunbar 1296 and Falkirk 1298 that stories and myths appeared: the bridge was sabotaged by a local joiner (the pin wright who was supposedly given land at Cambusbarron); the bridge was very narrow and only two people could cross at a time; the English Commander, got up and then went back to bed, the troops crossed and were then pulled back.
But it seems strange that the bridge was so narrow while the much more expensive causeway was larger; I also doubt that the
English commander was that incompetent. As to the bridge being sabotaged, well the battle was already turning while it was still up. The English Keeper of Stirling Castle, Sir Marmaduke de Thweng fled the field travelling across the bridge on horseback, cutting through his own men. Personally, I think the English didn’t understand the tide and assembled in an area that led to soldiers at the rear standing in rising water which would lead them to push forward. If this happened when the Scots attacked the English this would create a crush for the troops in the middle leading to a panicky crowd rather than a disciplined army. But why not go and have a look and make up your own mind?
Remember Wallace’s bridge is gone but at low tide you can see one of its piers just upstream of the current Auld Brig!