Medieval Scots yeoman

[IanN]

Any reason these do not get Shove characteristic - even as an option. All the accounts of Bannockburn I've read describe the Scots as 'shoving' the English back ......

[marshalney2000]

I concur with this.

[nikgaukroger]

Any reason these do not get Shove characteristic - even as an option. All the accounts of Bannockburn I've read describe the Scots as 'shoving' the English back ......

I have no opinion either way on the Scots in question, however, if we used every mention of a body of troops pushing back another then I think about 50% of the troops in the lists would have Shove 

But as I say I have no view and would defer to John.

[marshalney2000]

My support really boils down to the change of tactics initiated in the Bruce playbook. He changed the schiltron from a static defence formation to an attacking one which was designed to push back and press the enemy. During the first day at Bannockburn, the schiltron manoeuvred out of the Tor Wood and successfully blocked the English knights attempting to go round the Scottish army and break the siege of Stirling Castle. On the second day there is no doubt that they took the offensive and pushed back the English knights disordering their formation. It should be recalled that this was probably the best trained Scottish army as it had been training at Stirling for almost a year polishing the art of mobility and offensive tactics. The troops who arrived late were not included in the main battle line but were held in reserve bursting forth in the later stages of the battle and being wrongly identified as camp followers (small folk).
Following Bannockburn, the tactics were enshrined in the Bruce doctrine which carried through until the change to pike just before Flodden.