Customer Reviews

Robert the Bruce, King of Scots

5 star:		(21)
4 star:		(14)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In further efforts to create a deeper connection to our Scottish heritage, I came across "Robert the Bruce--King of Scots" by Ronald McNair Scott. Escaping the tendency toward the dryness which befalls many historians--indeed, which seems unavoidable when reciting names and place and dates--Scott weaves an epic yarn about the man who finished the labors begun by William Wallace and led Scotland in securing her independence.

Drawing from various historical and literary sources, including a number of contemporary chronicles on both the English and Scottish sides, Scott takes us from the death of Alexander III to the intervention and interposition of Edward I; from Stirling to Falkirk; from the death of Wallace to that of Longshanks himself. And then in riveting detail, the campaigns of the Bruce.

"Braveheart" would have you believe that Scottish independence was won on the fields of Bannockburn. While that was indeed a turning point for the rag-tag Scottish army, it was not until 14 years later that a truce was signed and England formally recognized Scotland's borders and her right to be secure within them. We also learn of many other discrepancies between history and film.

A pair of Grahams receive honorable (or, dishonorable) mention--Sirs David and Patrick. Unfortunately, the tendency for our Scots forbears to be on the wrong side of history holds true. Sir David is named in the plot to capture Wallace (who is actually taken in the home of Sir John Menteith--a cadet clan of the Grahams). Sir Patrick was connected with a plot to assassinate King Robert--he was later acquitted.

If you are interested in learning the facts behind a great quest for freedom and independence--or simply some of the history behind this great warrior-king, I highly recommend this fine work.

Ronald McNair Scott in this work has given us a fast paced easy to read account of one of the greatest military leaders in history. Robert the Bruce is not always appreciated in America because he lacks the Hollywood image that Mel Gibson has lent to William Wallace. Wallace was no doubt a great hero of Scotland but it was Bruce who not only defeated the English but posed a very real threat to actually annex English territory.

Scott does have a tendency to state as fact that which is only theory or an educated guess but given the state of affairs in 13th and 14th century Scotland any other tact would have led to a huge and hard to read tome that would have added little to the general understanding of Bruce. By deciding to write in this style Scott brings this great hero of Scotland to life for the reader and lets us see the greatness that was Robert The Bruce.

Bruce's early decisions during the Wallace wars are explained by Scottish politics. Bruce's grandfather had laid claim to the Scottish throne but Edward I decided in favor of John Balliol, Lord of Galloway. Wallace always fought in the name of King John making it very hard for any of the Bruce faction to lend their full support to the cause. Once he established himself as King, Bruce faced the same problem from the Balliol faction. This divided state of affairs could very well have doomed Scotland had not Bruce taken action. He began with an action that seems to have haunted him for the rest of his life when he struck down the "Red" Comyn on the alter of Greyfriars church. Slowly the rest of the Balliol faction was subdued until Bruce was the unchallenged King of Scots.

Scott manages to go into some detail of Bruce's battles with the English without getting the reader lost. In fact, I was able to clearly understand what happened and as I was reading these accounts I could almost see what was going on. Scott's ability to describe events with words is his greatest asset. One feels as if he is actually there side by side with The Bruce.

This book is not the deep study of Robert The Bruce that some people may be looking for. It is however a good place for any reader to begin to understand the history of Scotland. After reading this book anyone who wishes to dig deeper will be ready for the challange. For someone who is simply after a quick and easy to understand history of Robert The Bruce I doubt you will find a better source.

This superb volume reads like a novel, is definitely a spell-binding page turner, and 'telleth of much fyte.' Well-researched, written with wit, vigor, and a definite interest in the subject matter, it covers the period like no other account of medieval warfare this reviewer has ever read. Easy to read and understand, the author has proved himself a definite master of his subject, and this is one of the best books the reviewer has ever read.

From the in house fight with the Comyns, through the early fighting against the English by Wallace, the hit and run raids to the brief, deadly assaults with his solid henchman, Bruce rampages through this book like a juggernaut, coming alive after seven hundred years, his faithful lieutenants, among them his brother Edward and 'The Black' Douglas, range the English/Scottish border taking revenge for years of privations and cruel vengeance of the English King, Edward I, 'Longshanks.'

Working his way through legend and myth to find the 'real' Bruce, the author weaves his tale of high adventure, blook-curdling killings and heartbreaking marches. His brother's adventures in Ireland are not neglected, nor is the climactic battle of Bannockburn, that is highlighted by such a killing of English nobility that the Scots won their freedom and the Bruce was recognozed as their king.

Very seldom does a book of this quality show up. If you haven't read it, you're missing a great treat. If you have, you'll want to read it again, as I have.

The recent Mel Gibson film, "Braveheart" inspired many, including myself, with a newfound appreciation for Medieval history in general and Scottish history in particular. While the story of Wallace is certainly captivating, the movie did not do justice to the real hero of the period, Robert the Bruce.

The Bruce's legacy, so vividly illustrated in the book, of tremendous courage, resilience, leadership, and compassion is inspiring to any reader. Particularly moving was the Bruce's repeated displays of grace to his defeated enemies and political opponents. How rare in history to see such compassion from a victor in battle!

I couldn't help but think that the story of Robert the Bruce, with his ultimate triumph of Scottich independence and peace for Scotland (relatively speaking) would have made for a great Hollywood movie - at least a sequel to "Braveheart." This has all the components of a great epic; heros, villains, love and romance, overcoming great odds to win ultimate victory, betrayal, international diplomacy, graphic battlefield scenes and individual combat vividly displayed that puts the reader alongside The Bruce at his "moments of truth".

Scott's use of quotes from the actual people involved makes for a time travel experience worth taking. Putting the story in historical persectives from his contemporaries (and the Bruce himself) makes the reader appreciate the social, political, and religious issues confronting Bruce throughout his life. Many times I found myself anxious for the outcome of Bruce's campaigns, or the latest feat of bravery from the "Black Douglas" and Bruce's loyal companions.

In short, a great book, not just from a historical perspective but from an engaging, vivid journey through the life of Robert the Bruce. I must caution the male reader, however, to use more discretion that I did in quoting some of the more graphic scenes to my wife - who wasn't able to appreciate the detail in the same way I did.

Despite a few flaws, Ronald McNair Scott's "Robert the Bruce" makes for a compelling read. Mel Gibson's Braveheart, with its exciting over dramatized life of William Wallace, another great Scottish hero, does a disservice to this Scottish patriot who succeeded in driving the British out of Scotland and restoring his nation's independence. Far from the rather weak leader in Gibson's film, Robert was a strategic and tactical genius, both in war and in politics. Moreover, one can only be struck how, in the age before mass warfare, his individual prowess at arms turned the tide of battle in several key skirmishes.

Scott offers an excellent view into Robert's life in this short work. His background on Scotland is generally excellent and he does a good job brining several of Robert's cohorts to like -- a particular favorite of mine being Sir James Douglas, otherwise known as Black Douglas, who used clever strategy to kill out every English noble who dared take possession of his ancestral home. Other characters like King Edward and Robert's brother are also well flushed out.

The weakness of this work, likely owing to its small size at 250 pages, is that it does not offer more of these in depth character portraits. The work could also have used more background placing England and Scotland into the European milieu of the period. Particularly vexing was the relative lack of maps, confusing when you are trying to follow Robert's exploits as he moves through every small town in Scotland.

Despite these short comings, I still give this book strong recommendations for anyone looking for a good read on one of history's most brilliant diplomats and military commanders who is too often overlooked. Hopefully this work will correct the deficiency and give Robert the Bruce the appreciation he deserves, maybe even his own movie?

The authors bring breath to the long-dead, and give a wonderful insight into the lives and times of Robert Bruce. It is a very intense, and sometimes raw, account of Robert Bruce's rise to the throne and the fight of a nation to become free. I would highly reccomend it to anyone interested in Scottish history.

I enjoyed the book. As I view it, it was intended to give a readable history of the man. Anyone who read it with the idea of it being exhaustively documented would be disappointed. As an example, was he born at Turberry Castle or somewhere else such as in England at Writtle. He matter-of-factly states it was Turnberry. I would expect someone with his name to assume so. Does it matter? Probably not. My point is that I think the book was written to read much like a novel, and bring out the salient points of a great man's life. His humanity is indeed shown. He made mistakes as all men do, and one can quibble about how he played both sides against the other to achieve his ends. He was a politician. But it clearly comes out that the man had great humanity and ended up being a great leader. Isn't that what counts in this life? How we end our journey. Ronald McNair Scott weaves a good picture of Good King Robert's journey for the general public to see. I came away with good feelings of the man and his accomplishments. History will always be debated, especially the history of Scotland, which is sparsely documented and filled with myth. That's fun play also; but for the emotion of the story, I like Mr. Scott's book.

This book is a really entertaining read, for all the reasons most of the other reviewers have already mentioned. It's clear that McNair Scott is a great "fan" of Robert I, which energizes his writing and helps make it accessible. However, for the same reason, the book borders on being more a work of historical fiction than a work of history. Scott often presents as fact, without comment, a lot of things that are only speculation (i.e. there's no hard documentary evidence to support them), and also presents a number of things I think he'd _like_ to believe (as opposed to things we have evidence for believing). The book also follows John Barbour's 14th century verse historical romance _The Bruce_ very closely. The dependence on Barbour is part of what makes the book exciting as narrative, but it's important to remember that Barbour was not writing "objective" history (objectivity was not a value in medieval historical writing), but rather a fact-based but highly embellished and romanticized version of Bruce's life. Barbour does try to be true to real events, but there is much in that poem that is driven more by the conventions of medieval romance, narrative necessity, and Barbour's own political biases and agenda, so part of what makes Scott's book compelling as narrative is also what makes it suspect as history.

The problem, of course, is that the best book out there on Bruce in terms of documentary history is G.W.S. Barrow's _Robert Bruce and the Community of the Realm of Scotland_, which is an absolutely meticulous work that pulls together just about every scrap of hard evidence about Bruce's life that we have. Unfortunately, it's also dry as toast (unless you're really into documentary history), and a little difficult to get through if you're just reading it for fun and general interest.

So, if you want a really fun read, go ahead and read Scott, but just be aware that not everything he says is accurate or documented, and that Scott himself may have a particular nationalist sort of agenda, and take him with a grain of salt. If you want super accurate and knowledgeable, and really want to know the difference between what we have real evidence for and what we don't, it's worth reading Barrow.

Personally, rather than reading Scott at all, I'd suggest reading Nigel Tranter's trilogy of novels about Bruce, which are clearly fiction, but no less plausible than Scott's account, and even more entertaining, or even reading John Barbour's poem. To read Barbour you have to get used to his peculiar medieval (more or less northern English) dialect, but the edition by A.A.M. Duncan has facing-page modern English prose translations, and once you get used to it Barbour's Scots-inflected English adds a wonderful "Scottish-y" touch to the whole thing--imagine something like Scott, only with a thick Scots accent and an authentically medieval sensibility. It's great stuff.

Scott did a marvelous job on this biography of the Bruce and Scotland's turmoil during the Wars of Independence. After seeing the famed epic Braveheart, I noticed that the Bruce was displayed as a betrayer in one scene. As a movie, Braveheart was great, but it lacked the Bruce's importance in late thirteenth century Scotland. Starting with Bruce's birth in 1274 and ending with the death of his revered comrade, Sir William Douglas (The Black Douglas) in 1331. The most well written part was the explanation of Bannockburn in 1314, giving just the right amount of details. I reccomend this book for every history buff or Scotland enthusiast.

For history buffs of period and place, I recommend reading this book as a comparison to Barron's "Scottish War of Independence", to ascertain the variations told of Bruce's life. It seems Barron's sources or, at least, his publication of same, are a bit more profuse than Scott's and the tale he tells is markedly different in some key areas. Nevertheless, Scott's "Robert the Bruce" is an engaging read that will entertain and inform any avid history reader. One should seek additional sources, however, for a more detailed description of the epic battle of Bannockburn - a nearly miraculous martial achievement of the gifted warrior, Bruce.