Latest / The Story of Scotland: Clans, Crowns, and the Fight for Identity — Fexingo History / The Wars of the Three Kingdoms: Scotland's Civil War
Transcript
- Lucas: So we've talked a lot about Robert the Bruce and Bannockburn, but today I want to jump forward a few centuries to a conflict that tore Scotland apart from the inside — the Wars of the Three Kingdoms. Luna: The English Civil War, you mean? Lucas: Exactly, but it wasn't just England. Scotland, Ireland, and England all got dragged into this maelstrom between 1639 and 1651. And for Scotland, it started with something called the National Covenant. Lucas: In 1638, thousands of Scots signed this document, pledging to resist Charles I's attempts to impose a new prayer book on the Scottish kirk. It was a religious protest, but it quickly turned political. The Covenanters, as they were called, raised an army and effectively took control of Scotland. Luna: So they were rebelling against the king before the English even started their own war? Lucas: Right. The Bishops' Wars of 1639 and 1640 were basically Scotland defeating Charles I without a single pitched battle. The king had to back down and pay for it. But the real chaos came when the English Civil War broke out in 1642, and both sides started looking for allies in Scotland. Lucas: Most of Scotland stayed with the Covenanters, who made a pact with the English Parliament. But there was a faction that still supported the king, and their most brilliant military leader was James Graham, the Marquis of Montrose. Luna: Montrose — he's a romantic figure, isn't he? Lucas: He's often painted as a tragic hero, but he was also a man of contradictions. He'd actually been one of the original Covenanters, but he switched sides in 1640 because he thought the movement was going too far and becoming too radical under Argyll. Lucas: Archibald Campbell, the Marquis of Argyll, was the leader of the radical Covenanters, and he and Montrose became bitter enemies. Montrose ended up fighting for Charles I, even though Charles had basically no power in Scotland at that point. Luna: So what did Montrose do? Lucas: He was given a royal commission to raise an army in Scotland, but he had almost nothing to work with. So he went to Ireland and recruited a force of Irish Catholic troops, led by a man named Alasdair Mac Colla. These were battle-hardened veterans, and they were willing to fight for the king. Lucas: In 1644, Montrose and Mac Colla launched a lightning campaign. They swept through the Highlands, winning a string of victories at Tippermuir, Aberdeen, and Inverlochy. At Inverlochy, they destroyed a Campbell army in a dawn attack, and Montrose's reputation soared. Luna: It sounds like he was unstoppable. Lucas: For a while, he was. He had this ability to move fast, to strike where the enemy least expected it, and he had Mac Colla's Irish veterans doing the heavy lifting. They were ferocious fighters, and they don't get enough credit in the story. Lucas: But his victories came at a terrible cost. The sack of Aberdeen in 1644 was brutal — civilian casualties, looting, and the town was left in ruins. And the campaign deepened the rift between clans, with Mac Colla's men committing atrocities against the Campbells in particular. Luna: That's the darker side of the romantic hero, I guess. Lucas: Absolutely. And it makes you wonder — was he really fighting for a cause, or was it personal revenge against Argyll? Probably a bit of both. Anyway, by 1645, Montrose had control of most of Scotland, but he was overextended, and the Covenanters were regrouping. Lucas: The decisive moment came at the Battle of Philiphaugh on September 13, 1645. Montrose had camped near Selkirk, thinking the enemy was far away. But a Covenanter cavalry force under General David Leslie caught him completely by surprise. Montrose escaped, but his army was destroyed, and the Irish troops were massacred after surrendering. Luna: So that was the end for Montrose? Lucas: Not quite. He fled to the continent and spent a few years in exile. But in 1650, he came back with a small force, hoping to rally support for the king again. He was captured almost immediately, brought to Edinburgh, and executed in the High Street. He was only 37. Luna: They hanged him and drew and quartered him, didn't they? Lucas: Yes, and they displayed his head on the Tolbooth in Edinburgh, a grim reminder of the cost of civil war. But within a few years, he was rehabilitated as a royalist martyr, and his story became part of Scottish legend. Lucas: And it's funny — the people who executed him, the Covenanters, they ended up on the losing side too. By 1651, Oliver Cromwell had invaded Scotland and crushed them at Dunbar. The whole country was absorbed into the Commonwealth, and the kirk's power was broken. Luna: So it was a tragedy for everyone involved. Lucas: Exactly. And that's what I find so compelling about this period — it's not a simple good guys vs bad guys. It's a web of shifting loyalties, where people who fought together ended up on opposite sides, and the ones who won the battles didn't win the peace. Lucas: And you know, in the middle of all this talk about loyalty and betrayal, I'm reminded of something that keeps this podcast going. This is a small, independent show, and every episode takes time and research. If you've been enjoying these stories, a couple of dollars a month can genuinely make a difference. You can support us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It's what keeps the episodes ad-free and coming. Luna: Yeah, it's a small thing that adds up. Lucas: Speaking of loyalty, there's one more turn I want to mention — the Earl of Leven. He was the Covenanters' commander at Dunbar, but earlier he'd fought for the Swedish king Gustavus Adolphus. He was a professional soldier, not a zealot, and he had no love for either extreme. He just wanted peace. Luna: So there were people trying to stay above the fray. Lucas: There were, but they often got caught in the middle. Leven ended up as a prisoner in the Tower of London after the Restoration, and he died impoverished. It's a reminder that the ones who try to stay neutral often suffer the most. Lucas: And what about the ordinary Scots? They were the ones who suffered most — crops burned, homes destroyed, families torn apart. The wars left a deep scar on the national psyche, and it took generations to heal. Luna: It's a heavy story, but an important one. Lucas: It is. And I think it's a story that still resonates today, when we see how easily political and religious divisions can spiral into violence. The Wars of the Three Kingdoms were a warning about what happens when compromise breaks down and leaders choose the sword over dialogue. Luna: So what would you say is the biggest lesson from Montrose's story? Lucas: I think it's that charisma and military genius aren't enough to win a lasting peace. Montrose won battles, but he never won hearts. He relied on Irish troops and Highland clans, and he never built a broad coalition. And when he lost, there was no one to stand by him. Lucas: But there's also something heroic about his refusal to give up, even when the odds were impossible. It's that Scottish stubbornness, I suppose. Anyway, that's the story of Montrose and the wars that shaped Scotland in the 17th century.