Consulting Scotland-William Wallace's historical background and deeds.

When WilliamWallace's name is mentioned, people will immediately think of the eventful autumn of the Scottish national independence movement in late 13 and early 14. Indeed, Wallace is arguably the most legendary hero in British history. For seven centuries, his descendants' interest and admiration for him have been enduring. In 65438+5th century AD, the bard Harry (also known as Blind Harry) relied on 1 1 volume 12000 lines of Celtic.

Wallace's legendary epic song (TheWal? Lace) has been famous for some time, and cultural classes are scrambling to circulate it. Since Fu Zi16th century, this book is second only to the Bible in popularity. The latest "Wallace fever" originated from 1995 Hollywood blockbuster Brave Heart. Mel gibson's successful image of Wallace captured the hearts of fans all over the world, so that after the film was released, the Scottish Tourism Bureau launched the "filmtourism" project to meet the requirements of tourists from all over the world. On the internet, it is worth mentioning that the screenplay is adapted from Randall Wallace's best-selling novel published in 1995, and the novel is based on Wallace's song. From15th century epic to 20th century movies, they are undoubtedly continuing a "William Wallace myth". Then, we can't help asking, how far is the mythical Wallace from the historical Wallace?

1. A confusing life story

The existing records about william wallace are mostly concentrated in 1297,1/in September, 2008, when he led his troops to win the Battle of Stringbridge, until1July 22, 298, when he was defeated by King Edward I of England of England in Falcock. As for his life, it belongs to the coastal city. So is Wallace a savage hero or a knight hero?

Among the Scottish chroniclers in 14 and 15 centuries, only the blind Harry and Walter Bauer endowed Wallace with a prominent knighthood. Others, such as JohnofFordun and AndrewWyntoun of Fortun, do not deny Wallace's relatively humble family background, but they obviously do not want to pay too much attention to this issue, but only describe his magnificent body and talent. As for the film Braveheart, it seems to be inclined to the latter.

In fact, "Wallace" is not a local Scottish surname, but a nickname. The original meaning is "people in the border areas of Wales". According to historical records, in the12nd century, the ancestors of the Wallace family came to Scotland from Shropshire, England, and took theStewarts family in Brittany as their soldiers. Since David I (1124-1153), the Stuart family has inherited the status of royal housekeeper, and has huge territories in Renfrew, Lanak and Ayrshire in the west of Scotland, so it is the dominant big noble. As vassals of Stuart family, Wallace family also got some fiefs in southwest Scotland. According to the blind Harry, elders, located in Renfrew County, is the birthplace of William Wallace, and he received his childhood education in the nearby Paisley Abbey. When Wallace was young, he lived in Riccarden, Ayrshire, which was the territory of his uncle Richard. Wallace's first amazing act as an adult was to kill the English chief in Lanarkshire. From this point of view, there should be no doubt that Wallace rose in southwest Scotland and maintained close ties with the Stuart family.

Another clue comes from the seal of a letter printed by Zhong Zhong in 1297. This letter was written to the mayors of Lubeck and Hamburg after Wallace took office, asking for trade. The seal is engraved with a Latin line similar to "WillelmileWaleysfiliiAlani", which means "william wallace, son of Allen"; In addition, there are bows and arrows painted on it, which may imply that Wallace was originally a professional crossbowman and made a living by hunting and even poaching in his early years. During Edward I of England's first conquest of Scotland in August 1296, more than 1500 Scottish nobles and lords signed their allegiance to the king in a Lagmanro way, and one of them was called "AlanWalays". If this Allen is William Wallace's father, then we may come to the conclusion that Wallace comes from a low-ranking knight family, but he is not a knight himself.

After the victory of Stirling Bridge, with the unanimous consent of the kingdom, in the name of John Balliol, the supreme king of Scotland, Wallace was posthumously named "Knight, Scottish lord protector and Commander-in-Chief of the Army". In a society with strict emphasis on birth and clear hierarchy in the Middle Ages, such a rapid promotion is a miracle.

2. Heroes and beautiful women

When the hero and heroine Mel Gibson and Sophie Marceau appear in the movie Braveheart, the movie goers must be expecting the wonderful "chemical reaction" between the hero and the beauty. There is no doubt that Hollywood screenwriters have created a romantic love story of "beauty cherishes heroes, and heroes love beauty" for the audience regardless of the huge discrepancy with history. Isabella, Queen Edward II, known as the "French female wolf" in history, was so poignant and affectionate by Sophie Marceau, which really made people laugh. Most scholars think that this plot is not worth refuting at all. In fact, three years after Wallace's death, the princess came to England from France, and Edward III was born seven years later.

In the blind Harry's Song of Wallace, there are only two women related to Wallace, one is his mother and the other is MarionBraidfute. The latter was originally the heiress of Lamington Castle in Lanark County, and married Wallace in St. Kenty Church. 1On August 27th, 2996, the Scots were defeated by the British in Dunbar. The following year, Wallace confronted the British army with high morale in Lanark. He was outnumbered and fled to his wife for refuge. Later, Marianne was caught by the British and executed on the order of William Hisler, the sheriff of Lanark County. 1In May 297, Wallace killed Heisenberg, fulfilled his revenge wish, and made his mark.

The legendary wife appeared in the film as a key role in guiding Wallace's spiritual home (but her status was reduced to poverty and their marriage became a private life). If I remember correctly, at the beginning of the film, the background of young Wallace's father's heroic sacrifice to resist the English people was designed, so he followed his uncle to learn martial arts, just to be with his sweetheart for life when he grew up. The killing of his wife shattered Wallace's dream, and made him embark on the road of resistance and left the world without hesitation. Such a plot arrangement inevitably gives people a feeling of "rushing to the crown and being angry as a beauty", but it also shows the writer's determination to shape Wallace into a lover.

It is doubtful whether there really is such a Marian Bradford in history. Because other chroniclers and biographers said nothing about Wallace's personal love life except these sporadic fragments mentioned by blind Harry. Later generations even pointed out that "Marian Bradford" is very similar to the name of one of Harry's neighbors, and it is suspected that the poet borrowed it. In fact, in Wallace's songs, such examples of substituting flowers and "robbing others of beauty" are not uncommon. Harry, a blind man, completed his masterpiece with the support of the descendants of Wallace family (Sir william wallace of craigie). Therefore, it is conceivable that the poet will try his best to describe his deeds in the creative process, whether for spiritual sincere worship or for objective economic reasons, in order to realize the desire of future generations to honor their contributions.

However, whether Marian Bradford exists or not, the idea of "revenge for love" does not seem to hold water. Because as early as1August 296, the words "WilliamleWaleys, thief" appeared in a legal judgment in Lanak County. Tracing back to the source, it should be the beginning of Wallace's infamous refusal to swear allegiance to the king of England in 1296. According to Edward I of England of England, the first conquest of Scotland in the summer of 1296 was a judgment of strength, and there was no suspense at all. After the Battle of Dunbar, Scottish nobles signed the "Laghman Document" to show their loyalty to the king and recognized him as the supreme Lord of Scotland, in exchange for the acquiescence of English Edward I of England to their existing territory and titles. In fact, whether his father surrendered or not, William would never have the right to inherit the family territory and title if he did not lose confidence in Edward I of England, the "New England Dynasty" in England. Edward I of England, the chief police officer of England in Lanark and Clydedale, holds the judicial power in southwest Scotland, and makes great efforts to punish "rebels" who refuse loyalty like Wallace, which inevitably causes the latter's strong dissatisfaction and disgust. In addition, blind Harry and Andrew Winton both mentioned in their works that Wallace's father and brother were killed by rebellion soon. If so, it will definitely strengthen Wallace's belief in taking up arms and fighting to the death with the English.

Three. With Robert bliss

1286 The sudden death of Alexander III, and the subsequent demise of the canmore dynasty, were the fuse of Scottish domestic political turmoil and English invasion. During the period 1290- 129 1, 13, candidates with royal blood filed a lawsuit against Edward I of England, king of England. In fact, the battle for the crown is mainly between JohnBalliol and RobertBruce. Bruce and Stuart formed a huge family network in western Scotland through land enfeoffment and marriage. Although they lost the battle for the throne with Verrier, they never gave up the battle for the throne. During the reign of Baliol (1292- 1296), they were always called "troublemakers". 1296 After the English conquest, Edward I of England was an excellent opportunity for them to make a comeback.

Many people regard william wallace as a rebellious hero, which is actually the biggest blasphemy to his reputation. Although the Wallace family had a close feudal obligation relationship with the Stuart-Bruce family alliance, he was loyal to the Verrier dynasty all his life. During Wallace's brief protection, Verrier, then imprisoned in the Tower of London, was still regarded as the legitimate king of Scotland. Even after 1298 Wallace was forced to leave Scotland because of Falcock's defeat, he did not give up his diplomatic efforts to save the former king.

Since Wallace is loyal to the Verrier dynasty, he must be full of doubts and vigilance about the Bruce family who has always coveted the throne. The reason why the Bruce family chose to stand on Edward's side early was nothing more than to seek the throne again and to attack the Verrier faction with the help of the English people. Therefore, Wallace's loyalty and prestige are also a threat to them, and the two can be described as "no common goal, no common goal." Some historians even suspect that Robert Bruise betrayed Wallace, because JohnofMenteith, who captured Wallace in 1305 and handed him over to the British, later became a favorite of Robert I.

In the 5th century, the pro-British policy pursued by Stuart James III once again caused a strong rebound of Scottish nationalism. In this context, the historical status of william wallace and Robert I has been artificially elevated, thus becoming national heroes admired by the whole people. In the process of creating this heroic myth, john barber's Song of Blues is as important as the blind Harry's Song of Wallace. In order to highlight the spiritual consistency of the two protagonists, they invented such a plot in their works: in Falcock, when defeated Wallace met Bruce who was fighting on the side of the English, he denounced his timidity and cowardice. Wallace's words were like a blow to the head, which aroused Bruce's long-sleeping rebellious will. Since then, Bruce has reformed and returned to the patriotic camp. After Wallace's martyrdom, he continued to lead the struggle against the British invaders, and finally won the war of independence and established the Bruce Dynasty. Having said that, it is not difficult for readers to find that the movie Braveheart completely copied this scene.

In this elaborate story, the most fatal fallacy is that the narrator completely confuses three generations of Roibert Briuis. "Robert" is actually a name that the Bruce family has always used. Robert (12 10- 1295), the 6th Earl of Carrick, was one of the contenders for the throne of 129 13, and Robert I (1274- 1329. In the Battle of Falcock, the seventh generation Robert, that is, Robert I's father, was an "enemy traitor". At this point, Robert I's attitude (call him Robert Jr. for the time being) is not clear, but what is certain is that he also took part in the resistance movement after the war, probably because he and his father had differences on whether to continue to surrender to King Edward I of England of England. However, in 1302, due to Wallace's French diplomatic mediation and the Pope's court mediation, the possibility of Verrier's return to China greatly increased. He once again deviated from the patriotic camp and sought compromise from Edward. Roibert Briuis Jr' s position as a staunch leader of the independence movement was established in 1305 after Wallace's martyrdom. /kloc-0 ascended the throne in a coup in 306, and 13 14 won a decisive military victory over Edward II in Bannockburn. In the Northampton Treaty (1328), Edward II officially recognized him as the king of Scotland, and completely gave up his suzerainty claim to Scotland. Robert I is worthy of the title of "national hero", but at least during the period of 1297- 1305, his occasional rebellion showed his hesitation on how to realize the hegemony of family kingship, which naturally cannot be compared with Wallace's loyalty, selflessness and courage. Objectively speaking, the nobility is an absolute realist, and Wallace's value lies in his persistence and dedication to the ideal of freedom.

In fact, there are still many inconsistencies between william wallace's literary and film works and history. The above are just two or three examples for the reference of interested readers. It is said that SharonLKrossa, an authoritative expert in American medieval history, listed more than 18 historical mistakes in less than two and a half minutes after watching the movie Braveheart. Of course, we ordinary viewers don't need to be as stingy as her, but if we really want to have a comprehensive and fair understanding of Wallace and his affairs, we might as well read three books with "audio-visual" effects. One is GraemeMorton's william wallace: Reality and Fiction (WilliamWallace:ManAndMyth, Sutton, 200 1). The other is "Follow in william wallace's footsteps" (Sutton, 2002) co-authored by historian AlanYoung and photographer MichaelJ.Stead. This book has both diagrams and illustrations. If Sutton's two books in Brigadoon are serious academic works, then ColinMcArthur's "Pongo Fairy Dancing, Brave Heart and Scots-The Distortion of Scotland's Image in Hollywood Movies" (L.B.Tauris, 2003) is more targeted, and its criticism of movies has expanded from the content level to aesthetic taste and taste. There are many deliberately designed ideological symbols in Braveheart, such as thistles, short skirts and highlands unique to Scotland (in fact, there is no evidence that13rd century Scots wear short skirts and Wallace is not a highland. At the beginning of the film, it is impossible for young Marianne to take off a bunch of thistles and give them to Wallace in real life (because her hands are bleeding profusely), and the wind flute sounds repeatedly in the background music. Although the original intention of film creators may not be so, it does cater to the irrational demands of some extreme right groups in western society. In any case, perhaps as Maurice Habouach, a famous French expert in psychological history, said, "The success of an artist depends on his ability to become a symbol gathering point and attract all kinds of emotions that are not directly related to his works." In this sense, "Braveheart" can win back the Oscar statuette and has its own way of success in the world. Perhaps only historians will show complete disdain for it, but through this