Talk:Battle of Roslin

This article is obscene
The largest army that England sent north during the 1st Scottish War of Independence was around 21,000 for Bannockburn, followed by around 15,000 for Stirling Bridge. The idea that 30,000 men were at Roslin is just nonsense. The size of the Scottish force is also incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AyrshireNeil (talk • contribs) 10:06, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

30,000?
30,000 is the number given in the campaign box, yet the article says only a few hundred took part? I seriouly doubt that there were 30,000 troops sent by the English. The combined forces of Englan could not number 30,000.Tourskin 02:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC) You are absolutely right, very few medieval English armies were anything like as strong as 30,000. The English force seems to have been gathered from the garrison of Berwick and the gentry and aristocracy of N. England and such Scots as were in English allegiance - rather few in 1302-3. The account of a great battle with 30,000 English and 8,000 Scots is a complete fabrication and is totally contrary to all of the contemporary material. Likewise claims that command of the Scots passed to Sir John Comyn (or to Sinclair) because Sir WIlliam Wallace declined the post are unsupportable. John Comyn was the Guardian (regent) of Scotland for King John, a post that Wallace held in 1297-8.

It was not 30,000
Supposedly it was 3 separate armies of 10,000 that converged —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.219.191 (talk) 10:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)  but there is no trace of these armies in the sources of the day. An editor has chosen to write an entry based entirely on Bower's completely fabricated account of the battle, written more than a century after the event. there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to suggest a battle between enormouse armies, nor that William wallace was considered for the role of commander.I have,therefore, replaced that account with a short piece based on what we know from contemporary and near-contemporary evidence. If any material - other than Bower's - can be produced I would be very happy to see it included. Chris Brown. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.110.125 (talk) 11:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC) I have endeavoured to remove a lengthy, but quite spurious account of battle which is derived from Bower's account. Bower essentailly invented a large battle for propaganda purposes. We know from record material that no great English or Scottish army was raised that February and that the forces engaged in a modest, though politcally significant action - the size of a medieval battle is often not a useful guide to its importance. There is no value to be gained from keeping Bower's highly romanticised account on the main page unless someone can provide a compelling reason to the contrary which has a firm basis in early 14th C. evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.182.136 (talk) 15:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Copy and pasting of article
The article for the Battle of Roslin is almost wholly copy and pasted from http://www.roslinbiocentre.com/location/the-battle-of-rosslyn. As such there may be issues of copyright violation, plagiarism and source reliability.77.103.95.102 (talk) 16:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Condense article
In view of the problems which people have identified above, I propose to substantially condense it mainly to whatever can be gleaned from Peter Traquair's account, which I think is a reliable source. PatGallacher (talk)

Wikipedia on the battle in article on Segrave
This is what Wikipedia says of the battle in the article on Segrave. "On the first Sunday in Lent 1303 Segrave, with his followers dispersed, was suddenly attacked when near Edinburgh by some Scots in ambush, severely wounded, and taken prisoner with twenty other knights. He was, however, subsequently recaptured by the other portions of his army who had escaped the earlier surprise." 82.37.141.26 (talk) 15:55, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

We can hardly take a work published in 1695 as a reliable source, when more recent scholarship contradicts this. PatGallacher (talk) 17:16, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring
An IP user is engaging in an edit war on this article, by attempting to change it in a way which does not reflect recent scholarship, which is that this was not a particularly large battle. PatGallacher (talk) 19:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Fraud
This article has recently been the subject of some downright fraudulent editing, attributing e.g. figures for the size of the armies to Traquair pages 110-111. I have checked these pages in this book and there is nothing about this. PatGallacher (talk) 15:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)