Battle of the Standard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Battle of the Standard

Battlefield monument at grid reference SE360977
Date 22 August 1138
Location Cowton Moor near Northallerton in Yorkshire
Result English victory
Belligerents
Kingdom of England Kingdom of Scotland
Commanders
Archbishop Thurstan of York David I of Scotland
Strength
up to 10,000 up to 16,000
Casualties and losses
unknown unknown; as high as 12,000

The Battle of the Standard, sometimes called the Battle of Northallerton, in which English forces repelled a Scottish army, took place on 22 August 1138 on Cowton Moor near Northallerton in Yorkshire. The English were led by Archbishop Thurstan of York, who had gathered local militia and baronial armies from Yorkshire and the north Midlands. They arrayed themselves round a chariot carrying the consecrated banners of St Peter of York, St John of Beverley, St Wilfrid of Ripon and St Cuthbert of Durham, it was this standard bearing chariot that gave the battle its name. The Scottish army were led by King David I of Scotland.

David had entered England in support of his niece, Matilda, who was viewed as the rightful heiress to the English throne usurped by King Stephen. With Stephen fighting rebel barons in the south, the Scottish armies had already taken Cumberland and Northumberland, the city of Carlisle and the royal castle at Bamburgh. Finding the English in a defensive position on a hill, David elected to force a battle counting on his superior numbers. Repeated attacks by native Scots failed, taking withering casualties from the English archers, and a subsequent attack by mounted knights met initial success but fell back due to lack of infantry support. The battle ended when David's reserve deserted, forcing him to retreat. The English elected not to pursue, and the Scots apparently recovered in sufficient order to besiege and capture Wark castle. David later retired to Carlisle and negotiated peace.

Contents

[edit] Background

Scottish atrocities depicted on the 14th century Luttrell Psalter.
Scottish atrocities depicted on the 14th century Luttrell Psalter.

Henry I had arranged his inheritance to pass to his daughter Matilda, but this was opposed by many of the English and Norman magnates and barons, because of her marriage to Geoffrey V, count of Anjou. Instead Stephen, younger brother of Theobald, count of Blois, seized the throne.[1] David however had been the first lay person to take the oath to uphold the succession of Matilda in 1127, and when Stephen was crowned on December 22, David decided to make war.[2] After two months of campaigning in northern England, a peace treaty was agreed with King Stephen.[3] When the winter of 1136-37 was over, however, David once again invaded England, though and a truce was quickly agreed until November. When November fell, David demanded that Stephen hand over the whole of the old earldom of Northumberland. Stephen's predictable refusal led to David's third invasion, this time in January 1138.[4]

[edit] The leadup and the battle of Clitheroe

David advanced into the English lands taking blackmail payments from settlements and establishments that paid and plundering and burning those that did not. The army which invaded England in the January and February of 1138 shocked the English chroniclers, and the shock was compounded even more by the fact that it was led by "their" David.[5] Richard of Hexham called it "an execrable army, savager than any race of heathen yielding honour to neither God nor man" and that it "harried the whole province and slaughtered everywhere folk of either sex, of every age and condition, destroying, pillaging and burning the vills, churchs and houses". Several doubtful stories of cannibalism entered the chronicle records.[6] as well as routine enslavings and killings of churchmen, women and infants.[7] Henry of Huntingdon wrote that the Scots:

“cleft open pregnant women, and took out the unborn babes; they tossed children upon the spear-points, and beheaded priests on altars: they cut the head of crucifixes, and placed them on the trunks of the slain; and placed the heads of the dead upon the crucifixes. Thus wherever the Scots arrived, all was full of horror and full of savagery”.[8]

By February, King Stephen had mustered an army which marched north to deal with David. The two armies avoided each other, and Stephen was soon on the road back into the south. In the summer, David split his army into two forces, sending William fitz Duncan to march into Lancashire, where he harried Furness and Craven. On June 10, William fitz Duncan was met by force of knights and men-at-arms. A pitched battle took place, the battle of Clitheroe, and the result was that the English army was routed.[9]

[edit] Battle of the Standard

[edit] David and his Normans

By later July the two Scottish armies had reunited on the far side of the river Tyne in "St Cuthbert's land", that is, in the lands controlled by the Bishop of Durham. Another English army had mustered to meet the Scots, led by William, Earl of Aumale. The victory at Clitheroe was probably what inspired David to risk battle. David's force, apparently 26,000 strong and several times larger than the English army, met the English in August 22 on Cowdon Moor near Northallerton, North Yorkshire.[10] Many of David's Norman vassals abandoned him at this point, perhaps shocked by the king's huge "barbarian" army, but more likely compromised by dual loyalty to King Stephen and David. Robert de Brus and Bernard de Balliol, two of these men, approached the king's camp and tried to plead with him. According to Ailred of Rievaulx, Robert de Brus protested to David,

"Against whom today dost thou bear arms today and lead this huge army? Against the English, truly, and the Normans. O King, are not these they with whom, thou hast ever found useful counsel and ready help, and willing obedience besides? Since when, my lord, I ask thee hast thou found such faith in Scots that thou dost with such confidence divest and deprive thyself and thine of the counsel of the English, and the help of the Normans, as if the Scots would suffice alone for thee even against the Scots? New to thee is this confidence in Galwegians, attacking with arms today those by whose aid hitherto thou hast ruled the Scots with affection [and] the Galwegians with terror".[11]

[edit] Dispute between Franks and the Scots and Galwegians

According to the sources a dispute erupted in among David's army about who would fill the front line. The decision by David to put the his small French contigent in the front line was resented by the "Galwegians", perhaps a term used for Gaels from Scotland south of the Forth rather than just from Galloway.[12] Ailred of Rievaulx reports that the protests were led by Máel Ísu, mormaer of Strathearn, reportedly saying to the king "why is it, O King, that thou reliest rather upon the will of Galli, since none of them with their arms today will advance before me, unarmed in the battle?",[13] and the Scots pointed out that already ""we gained at Clitheroe a victory over mail-clad men" in an effort to convince David of their better worthiness.[14] Despite the protests of David's Norman followers, David apparently had to yield, and he gave the Galwegians the honour of filing the front of the four Scottish lines. Behind the Galwegians were the men from David's former principality in southern Scotland, led by Prince Henry and David's Northumbrian ally Eustace fitz John. The third line was taken by the Hebrideans, Argyllmen and men of Lothian, and the forth and biggest line was taken up by the men of Scotland-proper, with David in personal command.[15] The English on the other hand were massed into one dense column around a detached ship's mast topped with religious banners, giving to the battle its most famous name, i.e. "the battle of the Standard".[16]

[edit] The battle

The battle soon got underway. Henry of Huntingdon tells us that "the Scots cried out the warcry of their fathers - and the shout rose even to the skies - Albanaich, Albanaich!" and charged the massed Anglo-Norman line.[17]. The cry, meaning "Men of Scotland", had been used by the Scots at the battle of Corbridge in 908.[18] Ailred described the same charge, saying that the first line

"after their custom gave vent thrice to a yell of horrible sound, and attacked the southerns in such an onslaught that they compelled the first spearmen to forsake their post; but they were driven off again by the strength of the knights, and [the spearmen] recovered their courage and strength against the foe. And when the frailty of the Scottish lances was mocked by the denseness of iron and wood they drew their swords and attempted to contend at close quarters"

As the Scots were engaging in this close combat, Ailred tells us that the English archers began to fire on the Scottish line, causing extreme disarray and loss of life. The suicidal bravery and endurance of the Galwegians, and the lack of Norman-style armour which Máel Ísu and the Scots had allegedly been so boastful of, was mocked by Ailred:

"like a hedgehog with its quill, so would you see a Galwegian bristling all round with arrows, and none theless brandishing his sword, and in blind madness rushing forward now smite a foe, now lash the air with useless stokes".[19]

Despite this attack, the battle continued. Ailred tells us the force of David's son Henry managed to route its opponents.[20] According to Henry of Huntingdon, though, the battle turned when the "chief of the men of Lothian", probably Gospatric II, earl of Lothian, was struck by an arrow.[21] The men of Lothian apparently fled first; and after a while, Ailred tells us the Galwegians followed suit when Domnall and Ulgric, two of their captains, were slain.[22] John of Hexham tells us that the battle lasted three hours.[23]

[edit] Aftermath

Image:CIMG0364.JPG
Carlisle Castle was rebuilt by King David, and became one of his chief residences.

After the battle, David and his surviving notables retired to Carlisle. Although the result was a defeat, it was not by any means a decisive nor even devastating defeat. David retained the bulk of his army and thus the power to go on the offensive again. The siege of Wark, for instance, which had been going on since January, continued to go on until it was captured in November. David continued to occupy Cumberland and much of Northumberland. On September 26 Cardinal Alberic, bishop of Ostia, arrived at Carlisle where David had called together his kingdom's nobles, abbots and bishops. Alberic was there to investigate the controversy over the issue of the bishop of Glasgow's allegiance or non-allegiance to the archbishop of York. However, Alberic also played a role as peace-broker. With Alberic acting as a go-between, David agreed to a six week truce which excluded the siege of Wark. Negotiations between David and Stephen continued over the winter months, but on April 9 David and Stephen's wife Matilda of Boulogne met each other at Durham and agreed a settlement. David's son Henry was given the earldom of Northumberland and was restored to the earldom of Huntingdon and lordship of Doncaster; David himself was allowed to keep Carlisle and Cumberland. However, King Stephen was to retain possession of the strategically vital castles of Bamburgh and Newcastle, and Prince Henry was to perform homage for his English lands, while David himself was to promise to "remain loyal" to Stephen at all times. The last conditions aside, this effectively fulfilled all of David's war aims. Thus, despite the surprising victory of the outnumbered English army in North Yorkshire, the series of invasions that David led into England since the death of his patron Henry at the end of 1135 had resulted in a significantly expanded kingdom. David, moreover, was no longer in practice a sub-king. So if King Henry's life and reign had brought David all his fortune, Henry's death had brought David even more.[24]

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ M.T. Clancy, England and its Rulers, (Malden, MA, 1998), pp. 84-5; Robert Bartlett, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075-1225, (Oxford, 2000), p. 10.
  2. ^ Oram, David: The King Who Made Scotland, pp. 121-3.
  3. ^ Oram, David: The King Who Made Scotland, pp. 122-5.
  4. ^ Oram, David: The King Who Made Scotland, pp. 126-7.
  5. ^ Michael Lynch, in his single-volume Scotland: A New History, explains the initial hatred displayed in the northern English chroniclers not in terms of the brutality shown during David’s invasions of northern England, but in terms of what might be called cultural treason. Michael Lynch, Scotland: A New History, p. 83; R. R. Davies, First English Empire, p. 11, offers a slightly different, but not incompatible, explanation: "The outrage with which the contemporary chronicles responded to what they termed the barbarism of the Scots…is surely to be explained in part by the shock of the Anglo-Normans on realizing that their economic and cultural superiority and civility as well as their military dominance were being challenged for the first time in three generations. Empire-builders are distressed by challenges to their right to build empires".
  6. ^ e.g. accounts of Richard of Hexham and Ailred of Rievaulx in A.O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 180, & n. 4.
  7. ^ e.g. Richard of Hexham, John of Worcester and John of Hexham at A.O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 181.
  8. ^ A.O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 179.
  9. ^ Oram, David: The King Who Made Scotland, pp. 132-3.
  10. ^ Oram, David: The King Who Made Scotland, pp. 136-7; A. O. Anderson, Early Sources, p. 190.
  11. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 193.
  12. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 198, n. 2.
  13. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 199; Galli is Ailred's Latin rendering of the Gaelic word Gall, which means "foreinger", see A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 180, n. 4.
  14. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 199.
  15. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, pp. 199-200
  16. ^ Account by Richard of Hexham - A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, pp. 200-01; Ailred of Rievaulx - A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, pp. 201-2.
  17. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 202.
  18. ^ Michael Lynch, Scotland: A New History, (Edinburgh, 1991), p. 53.
  19. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 203.
  20. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 204
  21. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 203.
  22. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 204.
  23. ^ A. O. Anderson, Scottish Annals, p. 204.
  24. ^ Oram, David: The King Who Made Scotland, pp. 140-4.

[edit] References

[edit] Primary sources

  • Anderson, Alan Orr (ed.), Early Sources of Scottish History: AD 500-1286, 2 Vols, (Edinburgh, 1922)
  • Anderson, Alan Orr (ed.), Scottish Annals from English Chroniclers: AD 500-1286, (London, 1908), republished, Marjorie Anderson (ed.) (Stamford, 1991)

[edit] Secondary sources

  • Bartlett, Robert, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 1075-1225, (Oxford, 2000)
  • Clancy, M. T., England and its Rulers, 2nd Ed., (Malden, MA, 1998)
  • Davies. R. R., The First English Empire: Power and Identities in the British Isles, 1093-1343, (Oxford, 2000)
  • Duncan, A. A. M., The Kingship of the Scots 842-1292: Succession and Independence, (Edinburgh, 2002)
  • Duncan, A. A. M., Scotland: The Making of the Kingdom, (Edinburgh, 1975)
  • Green, Judith A., "Anglo-Scottish Relations, 1066-1174", in Michael Jones and Malcolm Vale (eds.), England and Her Neigh-bours: Essays in Honour of Pierre Chaplais (London, 1989)
  • Green, Judith A., "David I and Henry I", in the Scottish Historical Review. vol. 75 (1996), pp. 1-19
  • Lynch, Michael, Scotland: A New History, (Edinburgh, 1991)
  • Oram, Richard, David: The King Who Made Scotland, (Gloucestershire, 2004)

[edit] External links

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.