Quote Originally Posted by Dreadbelly
I am fairly sure warriors all over the globe had their own code. Some were better than others, some held to more honourable causes, and some had no honour at all. Scotland was no different. Infact, even though I only know a little on this subject, I would dare venture a guess that the Scots were far more honourable in their warrior code than the English, who time and time again broke treaty after treaty and was constantly backstabbing anybody and everybody they could.

Being violent and dangerous and dare I say, "barbaric" does not make you any less of a human being. Quite the opposite. Some of the greatist people on this earth have been barbarians. Ghengis Khan. Atilla the Hun. William Wallace. (Yes, he was considered a barbarian by the victors, those who write history)
Acutally, Dread, the Scots could be just as "backstabbing" and cruel as you charge the English wi' being; just ask the Comyns, who opposed the Bruce's claim to the Scottish Throne, and found themselves vilified as the "traitors". Wallace was an exception to the Anglo-Norman gentry in Scotland, such as the Bruces, Comyns, etc. that many times put personal interests above patriotism, and even Wallace supported the claim of John Balliol (a relative of the Comyns) to the throne.

There are many examples of Scots betraying fellow Scots in history, not only in the Highlands, but especially on the Borders among the Border Reivers, as well as English betraying English. I could go on and on with examples.

English-bashing is easy, but not always accurate and based in fact. History is not so black and white. Before we start to verbally attack the folks "south of the [Anglo-Scottish] border", we should also remember that many of our members here are from England, lest we say something that might hurt or offend them. Good natured kidding is one thing, but charging the English wi' "constantly backstabbing" is dabbling in generalization.

T.