Why did Scotland develop pikes?

[Kawee]

I've always wondered about this but never really found a convincing answer. Perhaps it's because I live in Thailand so I have no access to any really good books (library is not a big thing around here )

Whenever I read accounts of battles and wars between England and their continental counterparts, it seems England was very often outnumbered in terms of cavalry. This made me come to a conclusion that England didn't have a lot of horses, so they must have been a pretty infantry based military power.

So if cavalry is not where their strength lies, then why did Scotland, their bitter rival develop pikes and spears as their main weapons? In fact, since the English is famous for their infantry and archers, pike formation would be pretty vulnerable, no?

Somebody educate me

[Lysimachus]

Wasn't it a bit like Greece and Macedonia in antiquity? The former (which would would be the highlands in this case) raised infantry whereas the lowlands (or "Macedonia") was more suitable for raising cavalry.

[different_13]

Because when Scotland was first developing their spear/pike based infantry (late 12th, early 13th century, thereabouts?) English cavalry was significantly better than Scottish cavalry (in both quality AND quantity). Doesn´t matter that most major European armies had better cavalry than the English, the Scots didn´t.

[Spartacus the Irish]

Because when Scotland was first developing their spear/pike based infantry (late 12th, early 13th century, thereabouts?) English cavalry was significantly better than Scottish cavalry (in both quality AND quantity). Doesn´t matter that most major European armies had better cavalry than the English, the Scots didn´t.

Yeah - English cavalry horses were usually pretty good around this time. They were bred to be large (even light cavalry horses were large compared to their continental counterparts), grain-fed, reared in stables, and so were very impressive and delivered a tremedous shock action. The cavalrymen weren't great, but as different_13 says, the scots had less and worse cavalry. The best way for the Scots to try and defend against such was spears, so they made the spears longer and pointyer and thus - pikes were re-introduced into the Scottish army.

[Kawee]

I was thinking along the same lines, but couldn't really find any empirical evidence to prove it to me. Scots couldn't care less what the Germans and French had to offer, all the knew was that the English had cavalery advantage, so they were going to counter that. Like Isengard and Rohan. LOL. Sorry, I've been playing Third Age Total War.

Question:did England have superior missile power as well? If so, wouldn't that make the pike formation extremely vulnerable?

[Lysimachus]

Course they had superior missile power, they had longbowmen remember?

Because of that, it would simply become a case of the pikemen closing in on to the English armies as quick as possible so as to minimise the effect of their archers.

[Lance-Corporal Jones]

Course they had superior missile power, they had longbowmen remember?

Because of that, it would simply become a case of the pikemen closing in on to the English armies as quick as possible so as to minimise the effect of their archers.

The pike used as first wasn't a pike proper -- it was a schiltron spear, as was used in Falkirk, Bannockburn, Dupplin Muir, or Otterburn, to name a few, mainly in the 14th century. Afterwards the preferred weapon was indeed the pike, as in Flodden Field, where the Scots pikemen engaged the English lines unharmed by sustained fire from longbows -- proof of how decisively armour had evolved.

[ivan_the_terrible]

The pike used as first wasn't a pike proper -- it was a schiltron spear, as was used in Falkirk, Bannockburn, Dupplin Muir, or Otterburn, to name a few, mainly in the 14th century. Afterwards the preferred weapon was indeed the pike, as in Flodden Field, where the Scots pikemen engaged the English lines unharmed by sustained fire from longbows -- proof of how decisively armour had evolved.

Could the pikes have played a part in protecting from arrows too, ala Macedonian sarissa formations?

[Lysimachus]

Could the pikes have played a part in protecting from arrows too, ala Macedonian sarissa formations?

Perhaps, but the Scottish pikes don't seem to have been put up gradually to a 90 degrees angle like those of the Macedonian phalanx.

[Lance-Corporal Jones]

Could the pikes have played a part in protecting from arrows too, ala Macedonian sarissa formations?

No, Bishop Ruthven -- an eyewitness -- clearly states that it was their armour which protected them entirely from the arrows. The Scottish formation in Flodden was clearly a Swiss-style pike square, by the way.

[ivan_the_terrible]

No, Bishop Ruthven -- an eyewitness -- clearly states that it was their armour which protected them entirely from the arrows. The Scottish formation in Flodden was clearly a Swiss-style pike square, by the way.

I see.

[emperorpenguin]

Because William Wallace read a book by Alexander the Great! It was in Braveheart so must be true!

[Boyar Son]

Because William Wallace read a book by Alexander the Great! It was in Braveheart so must be true!

Wait a minute i don't remember that in the movie. he read a book by Alexander?

[Poach]

It was the only response Scotland had to the far superior and more numerous English knightly class. Scotland was poor, the pike was cheap and easy to manufacture and required no training to operate, as a result a handful of Scottish peasants became an effective match for English Knights. The English, ofcourse, countered this by deploying more and more archers against the Scots to exploit the fact that pikement are fatally vulnerable to archers.

To answer your question in short: Out of necessity in order to counter the main advantage of the enemy.

[Frédéric Bastiat]

Geography.

[Poach]

Geography.

Geography played a small part but back in those days pitched battles were the order of the day, not multiple armies holding the high ground along a front line. Further to this, Scotland includes the Lowlands, does it not? The Highlands don't begin until well north of both Glasgow and Edinburgh.

So no, Scotland did not develop pikes purely as a result geography, though it is possibly a (rather small) factor.

[Kawee]

Thank you all for answering my question, although Fred-Bas will need to explain to me how geography explain the pikes development.

So let me see if I understand.

Before armour was developed enough to protect them from arrows, they used spear and shield as weapons and used the schiltron formation. Afterwards, they used the actual pike formation. However, since Scotland was poor, surely not all their soldiers had decent armour. So did the poorly equipped ones (probably peasants) continue to use shield and spear or did they too used the pikes, and just risked the deathly arrows?

If so, they must surely be trained to a certain extent since it must have been awfully difficult to march quickly while trying to keep the pike formation in discipline.

[Lysimachus]

@Poach

If they have limited grounds to raise horses (geography) then doesn't that mean they'll use pikes so that they're able to counter any English cavalry since they're not able to field much of it themselves?

[Poach]

Such is why England won the vast majority of battles against the Scots, Kawee. The peasant armies of the Scots just couldn't stand up to the Longbowman/Knight combo as using a pike needed both hands and peasants couldn't afford armour capable of stopping an arrow.

Lys: A good point you make, Scotland didn't indeed have as much land to raise horses on as England. They didn't have as much land full stop, though, Scotland could never hope to match the English knightly class even if the whole country was lowlands. Scotland was far poorer and far less populated than England. As such, geography remains a factor but I still feel it is a small one, as the Scottish crown never considered trying to match English Knights in the first place, let alone decided they couldn't supply the horses for such an effort.

[Lysimachus]

As such, geography remains a factor but I still feel it is a small one, as the Scottish crown never considered trying to match English Knights in the first place, let alone decided they couldn't supply the horses for such an effort.

...and so they resorted to pikes because they were a much cheaper solution, no?