William Wallace: The Battle At The Battle Of Sterling Bridge

946 Words4 Pages
William Wallace was born in 1270 in Elderslie, Scotland. William was the younger son of a Scottish knight and minor landowner. Their last name Wallace means the Welshman, and he was probably descended from Richard Wallace who had followed the Stewart family to Scotland in the 12th century. When William was 26, Scotland had been conquered by England, and there was an unspoken need for help. Many of the Scottish nobles were imprisoned by the English, Scotland was being harshly taxed and people were expected to serve King Edward I in his military campaigns against France. Because of these things, the ideas of revolt were spreading across Scotland. In May 1297 Wallace killed William Heselrig, the English Sheriff of Lanark. Soon, William’s movement…show more content…
At The Battle of Stirling Bridge, King Edward had decided to face the Scottish armies and hopefully stop the uprising that they had started. Edward ordered the Earl of Surrey (John De Warrene) and the English Treasurer of Scotland (Hugh De Cressingham) to raise an army that could defeat the Scottish. The Scottish warriors were hugely outnumbered by the English, yet they still had the advantage. In order for the English to reach where the Scottish were waiting for them, they had to cross the River Forth at Stirling, and to do that they had to use a narrow wooden bridge. Wallace’s army cut off the English as soon as they got across, and on the 11th of September 1297, Wallace and Murray were victorious at the Battle of Stirling Bridge. The English armies left with 5,000 dead, and one of those people happened to be their treasurer, Hugh Cressingham. The Scottish suffered one significant casualty, Andrew Murray, who was badly wounded and died two months later. Some historians however, disagree that William was totally victorious at The Battle of Stirling Bridge. One source (History.com: Author Unknown) says that at the Battle of Stirling Bridge, ‘The Scots fought under the command of Andrew Murray, rather than the unproven Wallace. Murray's death in the battle left all the credit to Wallace.’ Many of the other sources however believe that William was the man that lead the…show more content…
They willing to follow him and to serve under his command, which they showed during the Battle of Stirling Bridge. The following year after The Battle of Stirling Bridge, there was another battle between the Scottish and the English, despite the lack of Hugh Cressingham and Andrew Murray. In the summer 1298, Edward I himself went and led the English army into The Battle of Falkirk. Wallace’s contemporaries once again proved themselves by fighting bravely in The Battle of Falkirk. The English won the Battle of Falkirk but William managed to escape. Wallace was then later captured and was taken for a show trial at Westminster Abbey where he was charged with being an outlaw and a traitor. At the trial there were no lawyers and no jury, and Wallace didn’t even get a chance to defend himself. When he was accused of being a traitor, he denied it, saying he had never been Edward's subject in the first place. In 1305, Wallace was condemned and murdered in 1305 for being an outlaw and a traitor. He was found guilty and was immediately hung, drawn and quartered. The orders that William was to be killed this way came from Edward himself, in a hope that it would destroy William’s reputation. It may have destroyed William’s reputation, but it enhanced the myths about William and what he did. In my opinion, William Wallace did not deserve to die. William Wallace was a ‘good guy’ because he devoted his life

More about William Wallace: The Battle At The Battle Of Sterling Bridge

Open Document