For my first blog post I thought I would mix my two favorite things, movies and history. I'm sure most of us are familar with the Best Picture winner of 1995, Braveheart. Most of us know the, basic, story of the Scottish rebel William Wallace, portrayed by Mel Gibson, who also directed. But, do you know how much of that story, told in Braveheart, is true? Well, let's go over a few of the major aspects that were false in the movie in order to make the film more entertaining.
Let's go in chronological order, first, in the movie William Wallace's father was portrayed as a peasant farmer fighting for Scotland's freedom in earlier wars. However, historians found letters and a seal, which features William's father name on it, possibly Alan, but Malcolm in the film. So, right off the bat there is an error in the film, William Wallace's father was higher than a peasant, but not nobility. He was probably featured in the film this way to give the effect that the hero rose from the bottom.
Next, we visit William's wife Marion, called Murron, in the film. Now, they did get married in secret and she was killed to draw Wallace out, but not before they had at least one son, whom not much is known about. The attack scene in the movie took place during daytime when it actually took place at night. William Wallace also had a beard and was not clean shaven as depicted in the film.
The Battle of Stirling Bridge is next in which it is depicted as an organized battle in the movie, but it really wasn't. Also, if you look closely something is missing, a bridge! In reality the English were crossing a very narrow bridge over a river and were ambushed. They eventually had to retreat over the bridge, which then collapsed drowning thousands. The battle was won in a matter of a couple hours.
The Battle of Falkirk was next in the movie and it shows the Irish fighting for the English, but just before they meet the Scots in the battle they stop and join them. Well that part, again, is false. They did that in the film because the Irish and Scottish extras did not want to fight each other. In reality the Irish fought the Scots, the Scots were defeated and forced to retreat. Also, Wallace was not betrayed directly on the field as shown in the film. Robert the Bruce did it indirectly by siding with Longshanks. After that Robert the Bruce felt so bad about the betrayal that he went and lived in a cave for months before coming out again and fighting for the Scots and becoming King.
Finally, we have the relationship between Wallace and Princess Isabella, the French wife of Longshanks bisexual son, who was not as skinny and lanky in real life like he was in the movie. But, Princess Isebella at the time was only about 13 years old, so it would not be possible for her and William to have a relationship at the time, which they didn't. Isebella and her husband actually had a fairly happy life and had several children. That whole relationship in the film is false.
At the end of the film, when Wallace is being executed, it shows that Longshanks appears to be dying at about the same time. Well King Edward died about five years later, Wallace was captured and executed in 1305. The Battle of Bannockburn at the end of the film takes place in 1314, although it seems to take place right after the execution.
Those are some of the major aspects of the movie Braveheart that did not really happen in real life. The Scots also did not have kilts until the 1400's and they did not paint their faces in battle as worn by Gibson in the film. Even though the film portrays many things about Scotland's independence and William Wallace's life as wrong, does not mean that Braveheart is a bad movie because it certainly is not. It will entertain you beyond your belief, you will laugh, cry, and cheer throughout the movie and that is what makes it great. If you want the true story of William Wallace, Braveheart is not the place to go, you watch it to simply be entertained. If you haven't seen, give it a watch!
No comments:
Post a Comment