Talk:Border reivers

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Clans of Scotland High‑importance This article is supported by the Clans of Scotland WikiProject, which gives a central approach to Scottish clans and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Border reivers, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Lancashire and Cumbria Mid‑importance North West England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Middle Ages Mid‑importance Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. North East England Mid‑importance North East England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Scotland High‑importance Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: British / European / Medieval / Early Modern C‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  British military history task force European military history task force Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500) Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)

A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

Semantics – Dependance/dependence/dependences/dependencies

The text states:

In 1606 an act (4 Jas. 1. c. 1) to assist the recent Union of the Crowns was enacted; it was long titled An act for the utter abolition of all memory of hostility, and the dependance thereof, between England and Scotland, and for repressing of occasions of disorders, and disorders in time to come.

Someone just changed 'dependence' to 'dependence'. Can someone in the UK with access to original statute law, find an early copy and identify the correct word. Google Docs provides at least three possibilities, but who knows if any of the authors checked the original. This is different to 's's being typed as 'f's. Thanks! Q8682 (talk) 04:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

disputed section - Borderers as soldiers

There is a {{disputed section}} template at the head of this section. However, there has been no discussion on this talk page concerning it, nor can I see anything in the section which can be criticised as biased or partial. If there is no change in the next few days, I propose to remove the template as frivolous. HLGallon (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing edits - Any Questions or Ideas?

Hi all, I’m the one adding a lot of information to this page—hopefully, you’ll agree it’s factual and well-referenced! Apologies for the length, but there’s a lot of history to cover.

Once I finally get to 1603, I’ll start summarising and cutting out irrelevant or tangential details. I’ve already done a little of this, but it’s a case of two steps forward, one step back (I’m looking at the Schavaldour section in particular—no matter how fascinating I find the antecedents of the Border Reivers and desperately overlooked).

I also plan to add much of this information to the Anglo-Scottish Borderlands page, which, in my opinion, is currently full of junk and opinion. Plus, I’d like to include a map to show the gradual southward spread of Scotland and northward movement of the Normans—because it wasn’t just Battle of Carham, bonk, here’s the border!

Once I finish the history section, I’ll trim it down further and focus more on the specific history of the Border Reivers themselves. The challenge is that their story is deeply intertwined with Tudor-Stewart politics, war, local magnate rivalries, and—of course—the Reformation.

Writing this has helped me dig even deeper into the history, and I’m learning more as I go. That should make it easier to separate the wheat from the chaff once I reach 1603. Any questions or suggestions, feel free to drop them below.

And finally, huge thanks to everyone who’s been fixing the referencing - I really appreciate it!

All the best, Lategreatanddead (talk) 06:44, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like this article is 99% of the way there - the vast majority of references have page numbers. There are things I like to add - Geordie Bourn/Burn's list of crimes he confessed to, and I am sure there are things I feel think of or read that I will add in the coming months or even years. But I am happy as is. Lategreatanddead (talk) 09:51, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To add to what I have said above - if you have any questions on the Border reivers article that I mostly rewrote and added references to, then let me know below - I'll try my best to answer. Or any map ideas?

And thanks again for those who are tidying the article in my wake!

All the best, Lategreatanddead (talk) 11:49, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Border reivers

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because...

Hi - I almost completely rewrote this article - not all was bad about it - from 'original research' to well-referenced, generally from academic papers if available (there is surprisingly little that directly talks of Border Reivers) and many now extensive collection of Border Reiver books I can see in the corner of my eye.

Please be kind!

Thanks, Lategreatanddead (talk) 08:42, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]