The Scottish cavalry were intimidated and fled:--Had they remained in the field, they might have preserved their honour, but never could have turned the chance of that day. It was natural, however, for such of their party as survived the engagement, to impute the disaster to the defection of the cavalry:--National pride would ascribe their flight to treachery rather than to pusillanimity. It is not improbable, that Comyn commanded the cavalry; hence a report may have spread, that Comyn betrayed his country: the report has been embellished by each successive relation. When men are seized with a panic, their commander _must_ of necessity, or _will_ from prudence, accompany them in their flight. Earl Warren fled with his army from Stirling to Berwick, yet Edward did not punish him as a traitor or a coward. “The tale of Comyn’s treachery and Wallace’s ill-timed resentment, may have gained credit, because it is a pretty tale, and not improbable in itself; but it always amazes me that the story of the _congress_ of Bruce and Wallace, after the battle of Falkirk, should have gained credit. I lay aside the full evidence which we now possess, ‘that Bruce was not at that time of the English party, nor present at the battle’--for it must be admitted, that our historians knew nothing of those circumstances which demonstrate the impossibility of the _congress_--but the wonder is, that men of sound judgment should not have seen the absurdity of a long conversation between the commander of a flying army, and one of the leaders of a victorious army. When Fordun told the story, he placed ‘a narrow but inaccessible glen’ between the speakers. Later historians have substituted the river Carron, in place of an inaccessible glen; and they make Bruce and Wallace talk across the river like two young declaimers from the pulpits in a school of rhetoric.”