Question about the last scene in Braveheart...

Oh, I'm sorry, were you being serious?

 

Not sure even Johnnie Cochran in his prime could have saved Sir William...

If the regular widescreen release is confused as to what was actually done to Wallace, the pan-and-scan that was shown on HBO(or one of the pay channels)was even more ridiculous, although anyone familiar with those 'implements' being shown pretty much knew what was coming. It's also interesting that Gibson held back here, whereas he went full throttle in THE PASSION...but of course, in a few Mel movies, there are certain inferences one could make about Gibson's attitude about himself, or his characters...in several films he is tortured in some fashion, though he always seemed to live long enough to kill all his enemies....

If you think BRAVEHEART's a little nasty, imagine a burning at the stake....could not have been pretty, nor smelled especially nice if you within reasonable proximity of the event, either...truth is, a firing squad is a pretty easy death compared to some of the ancient methods, all of which are chronicled in the notorious THE HISTORY OF TORTURE...

 

...sure he could! Johnny could have saved the Devil!

 

True. Partly. (Edward III later [15 years?] had the Queens lover, Roger de Mortimer, beheaded.)

From a few web sources (the encyclopedias only state that he met with a brutal death):

-He was imprisoned in Berkeley Castle and almost certainly murdered there.

-After various wanderings he was imprisoned at Berkeley Castle in Gloucestershire. Every indignity was inflicted upon him, and he was systematically ill-treated in the hope that he would die of disease. When his strong constitution seemed likely to prevail over the ill-treatment of his enemies he was cruelly put to death on the 21st of September. It was announced that he had died a natural death, and he was buried in St Peters Abbey at Gloucester, now the cathedral, where his son afterwards erected a magnificent tomb. -

A review for Paul Doherty's "Isabella and the Strange Death of Edward II" -

Queen Isabella is best known to history as the She-Wolf of France, while her husband, Edward II, is infamous for his homosexual leanings and the manner of his death - allegedly by a hot poker up the backside.

He didn't necessarily get the poker because on his leanings (symbolic?), but homosexuals were treated in similar fashion.

 

Such brutality...yikes!

 

Back to Braveheart

Here is a little excerpt from a web site about Sir William Wallace http://www.electricscotland.com/history/wallace.htm

William Wallace is one of Scotland's greatest national heroes, undisputed leader of the Scottish resistance forces during the first years of the long and ultimately successful struggle to free Scotland from English rule at the end of the 13th Century.


Having made peace with the French, Edward renewed his conquest of Scotland in earnest. He captured Stirling in 1304, and although most of the Scottish nobles pledged allegiance to the English crown, he continued to pursue the outlaw Wallace relentlessly. Edward's refusal to acknowledge Wallace as a worthy enemy from a separate country meant that the English could officially regard Wallace as a traitor to the English nation.

On Aug 5 1305, Wallace was betrayed by a Scottish knight in service to the English king, and arrested near Glasgow. He was taken to London and denied the status of a captured soldier. He was tried for the wartime murder of civilians (he allegedly spared "neither age nor sex, monk nor nun"). He was condemned as a traitor to the king even though, as he correctly maintained, he had never sworn allegiance to Edward.

On 23rd August 1305, he was executed. At that time (and for the next 550 years), the punishment for the crime of treason was that the convicted traitor was dragged to the place of execution, hanged by the neck (but not until he was dead), and disembowelled (or drawn) while still alive. His entrails were burned before his eyes, he was decapitated and his body was divided into four parts (or quartered). Accordingly, this was Wallace's fate. His head was impaled on a spike and displayed at London Bridge, his right arm on the bridge at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, his left arm at Berwick, his right leg at Perth, and the left leg at Aberdeen. Edward may have believed that with Wallace's capture and execution, he had at last broken the spirit of the Scots. He was wrong. By executing Wallace so barbarically, Edward had martyred a popular Scots military leader and fired the Scottish people's determination to be free.

 

SIMPLY??

I can't imagine that "simply" and "disembowelment" were ever used together in a sentence before!!

What fun we have here...

 

Two very important sayings come to mind after reading this thread....

1. History is written by the VICTORS. (There are many instances of an enemy considered to a "criminal" to the victors, while a "hero" to the losers.)

2. This is paraphrased from the Book/Movie SHOGUN:

Toranaga to Blackthorne: "Anyone who commits rebellion or treason is a criminal."

Blackthorne: "But there are mitigating circumstances..."

Toranaga: "There are no mitigating conditions to rebellion against a soveriegn lord."

Blackthorne: Unless you WIN.

Just a little food for thought.....

 

Scotland fought and defeated England, and Wallace is a Scottish national hero. Who was the victor who wrote the history books on this one?
Seriously, does anyone know how he is viewed by the British today (its been 700 years)?

 

I think they look up his kilt, wince, and shake their heads in dismay.

 

Well, that's what the English get for taxing your tea.

 

Ouch. I didn't think we took it that far.

 

I noticed you were from Boston - I couldn't resist

How often do we get to talk about history on a music/VA forum. This is an interesting thread!