Great Britain -- History; Great Britain -- History, Naval
The English passed the night in bivouac on the field. All around the
Borderers of both armies were plundering indiscriminately, stripping
the dead, and committing, doubtless, nameless atrocities. They
impartially made prize of Surrey’s tents and baggage and the Scottish
artillery oxen, for want of which nearly the whole train had to be
abandoned. When morning came it was seen that the Scots’ centre had
disappeared. Home had got some of his troops in hand again, and was
in line towards the west, perhaps covering the retreat of the centre.
His demoralized and half-hearted men were scattered by artillery fire,
and drifted away across Tweed; and then Surrey could take stock of his
victory. On the slope of Branxton Hill the victors found dead the King
of Scots, his natural son Alexander, Archbishop of St. Andrews, two
bishops, two mitred abbots, twelve earls, fourteen lords, and hundreds
of scions of every noble house in Scotland. The whole Scottish loss can
hardly have been less than 10,000; the unmailed Highlanders had been
mown down in thousands. The English superiority in troops armed with
missile weapons must have had terrible results; and it should be
remembered that as a rule quarter was neither asked for nor given. The
English put their own losses as low as 1,500. Except in Edmund Howard’s
division, they must have been far lower in proportion than those of
the Scots; perhaps 4,000 in all is a fair estimate. Prisoners in such
a conflict could not have been numerous; the only definite record
is that of about sixty taken by the Scottish left wing. Surrey took
possession of nearly all the Scottish artillery: five ‘great drakes’
(? 24-pounders), seven ‘great culverins’ (18-pounders), four ‘sakers’
(5-pounders), and six ‘serpentines’ (? 4-pounders)--all beautiful brass
pieces wrought by Borthwick’s skilled hand--besides light guns.[J]
[J] Hall gives the total of large pieces at seventeen,
including two culverins; but Holinshed says that the ‘Seven
Sisters’ were all taken, and it is most unlikely that the
Scots could have saved any of these heavy guns.
So ended the Battle of Flodden. On the Scots’ side it was a magnificent
display of fruitless courage, very little aided by military skill. On
the part of England, all the commanders on the field worked together
as one man to gain the victory; and though some of the hasty county
levies showed unsteadiness, on the whole they admirably seconded their
leaders. The boldness of Surrey’s strategy is remarkable in such an
aged man. Napoleon was emphatically of opinion that military leaders
lose their boldness with advancing age. Tried by this standard, the
only modern leader who can challenge comparison with Surrey is
Suvórov, whose greatest triumphs were gained when he was almost seventy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account