Aye, King Stephen The Irish was the best played character in the movie. Best line: "The Lard tells me he can get me oota this. But you... may be fookt!"
My Favorite as well..."I'm prettier than this man!! Ironically David O'Hara who played Stephen is Scottish(half Irish but born in Scotland)and the main Characters...aside From Angus McFadyen...and James Cosmo (Robert De Brus and Hamish's dad Campbell) the main Characters are Irish Actors. Mel Gibson is mostly Irish with a half Scottish father. In fact Mel is the name of an Irish saint. And Brendon Gleason(Hamish) is Irish through and through! And the guy who played Morrison is Irish, born in Scotland as well. But the Scottish Gaels share the same lineage and culture as us Irish. So that's not surprising. In fact the Scots get their Gaelic (or Gallic if you're Scottish) lineage and culture from Irish clans that settled on the West coast of Scotland( Dal Riada). It's a little more complicated and there's other DNA to consider (Viking,Norse,Pictish,Flemish).In case you didn't know...there you go!!! A little history lesson. 🍀☘️🇮🇪💚🏴🦁
Regardless of fact or fiction, this is a great piece of history and is theater enough to bring about a sense of National Pride. Thank you for an excellent video.
If it's not the sword that Wallace himself welded then it should not be labeled as so. It should only be recognized as a period piece and not represented as authentic without verification.
I would definitely agree in a museum setting - a tribute monument to the guy who lived centuries ago doesn't seem to have the same rule book as accredited institutions. I think the description placard does hedge some on how 'authentic' it is, memory fails me. I think as far as they're concerned, they named it "The Wallace Sword", which isn't directly saying it was HIS sword, it's just named after him.
Thank you for the work you put in on this, Erik and team! It is fascinating to consider these sorts of historic markers and relics, and I do appreciate your comment at the end-- does it matter how much truth there is in the mythology behind them if they serve their intended purposes of rallying national pride and providing a touchpoint to history? I feel it does matter some, but not enough to dismiss items like the Wallace sword as useless hoaxes. After all, maybe there is some special steel hiding in that sword👍
Excellent and well researched vide I dont think any part of it is Wallaces sword but It also doesnt really matter to Scots and the monument serves its purpose as a symbol for Scottish pride patriotism and is a great visitor attraction
Excellent video. I’m Scottish and lived in Scotland all my life and finally visited the monument this month. Like Braveheart the sword isn’t about accuracy but the message it symbolises for people everywhere that believe in freedom
This reminds me of a time in the 1990s when a group I was with opened for the Animals and the Yardbirds. Both having no original members were much like the Ship of Theseus.
The sword of Brian Boru of Ireland has a similar questionable back story. The sword displayed for years is missing and still being sought. Mystery! Erik should do a story about it around St. Patrick’s day!
they did wear kilts in the 13th century and back into the bronze age...kilt means a pleat in fabric, kilted means staggered, like pleats are. The Great Kilt, Phillimore is simply a large rectangle of woollen material pleated up over a belt around the waist. modern sewn up kilts are from 1720's at the earliest. The philibeg is the little kilt, a strip of woollen fabric approximately 28 feet long by 12 inches wide and can also be worn as tight trews, again dating back to the bronze age but that is another story.
I was at the Wallace Monument a few days ago, I'm back in the states now, I'll be honest if I had known of the Wallace Sword I probaly would of paid the money and did the tour of the monument, you can walk up to it for free, but to climb the tower ( 248 steps ) you gotta pay extra to go inside ( gift shop is free ). I would of really been let down to learn its not his sword. Excellent video, I highly enjoyed it. Great presentation.
Thanks for another great and informative episode. Before watching this I had thought the sword was a total hoax, but now I am going to let myself believe that some small fragment of metal was once wielded by the man himself. But, as an adopted MacLeod, please don't do an episode debunking the Fairy Flag of Dunvegan. To quote Angus Macfadyen, "I want to believe".
I have yet to see someone estimate Wallace's height in relation to drawing a sword of this length, even as kid I had my doubts as to how it was possible. Years later I watched a programme that proved it was three separate pieces of metal, in effect exactly as described here.
I’m beginning to question whether Scotland itself in fact exists. Point 1: Nessie Point 2: Sobieski Stuart’s Point 3: Origins of whisky and the Book of Kelly’s disputed Point 4: Many so-called “Scots” came to America from Ulster Point 5: I’m pretty sure there is no wild haggis. Point 5: I’ve never seen a bottle of Irn Bru except in pictures And now this!
Having had an entire six-pack of Irn Bru, I certainly believe that Scotland exists, because only a people who decided that their national flower is the thistle and invented golf could possibly decide that stuff is their national soft drink. To my American palate, it tastes like bubblegum more than anything else. Also, the Scots may have invented whiskey, but it's the Irish who gave it to the world. (Disclaimer: I have English, Irish, and Scottish ancestry, so I can take the piss out of any of them.)
Is it accurate to say that Wallace's sword must still be out there somewhere? It can't have decomposed, it would be unlikely to have been destroyed without a record of this from someone.
I absolutely loathe the movie Braveheart, I have no problem with William Wallace, he at least was a real Scottish member of the lesser nobility who did fight for Scotland against the English. As for the sword, I'm doubtful of any connection between it and Wallace but it's a good story and it brings in tourists.
I have a replica of the "Wallace Sword" from Braveheart. I know it's not literally the one that Mel Gibson wielded as William Wallace, but every time I unsheathe and brandish it, a part of me believes it is. There's an undeniable magical charge to these artifacts, and in some ways, their material authenticity is irrelevant, just like the ship of Theseus.
Wallace, as the second so of a minor baron, was not, born a knight. Following the victory at Stirling Bridge, Wallace (Waelys), claimed it for himself, but no noble would have followed a commoner, so they were forced to knight him, even though, he was landless and without title.
As someone that has carried and used swords in mock battles for decades I believe you are spot on, Erik. No one that I know would have carried or used such an unwieldy weapon in the field, especially on horseback which is my background. That being said you summed it up nicely with the statement that we, whatever nation or culture we are, do need heroes and as such that sword is as good an emblem as any. Here in Texas, my home, we have David Crockett's rifle at the Alamo, but do we?
most of the Scottish armies were on foot anyway. Including Wallace himself, they only had a very small cavalry contingent, that never seemed to truly stick around for battles.
Wallace his statues are humongous. He stood nearly 8 foot by most accounts of the time he was a giant guy with a compatible sword that’s the way it’s told and the statue’s show him to be eight or 9 feet and the sword looks like it fits him at that size. It actually looks like it may be a bit under size for the guy in the statues.
I'm a Wallace. Been to Stirling and seen the sword. William was a really big guy. He could have wielded a sword this big. So i chose to believe it possible.
wallace isn't known to have been a knight . it's thought he was as it's unlikely he would have been able to gather such a following if he wasn't ,but very little is known about him before his rise to power .
he was knighted after the battle of Sterling bridge, and was the 2nd son of minor nobility. (mother was a lady, father was a knight - if i remember right)
i think zwihander or bearing swords are sometimes heavier than that. its not impractical. also not a hoax just because its big date the metal and ask who they say had a sword like that your like wrecking history by taking parts you think don't fit out
I think it's most likely that "the Wallace sword" is a reproduction made for later display as a show of national pride, but I don't think it's impossible that Wallace would've welded a two handed sword. Based on historical accounts, William Wallace was a huge guy, and being a nobleman from the region it's not out of the question that he would've had a sword custom made to his specifications. That being said I could just be that a hand a half sword would've fit easily into one hand for him and that for regular people on the battlefield it's a two handed sword. Alternatively, it's a hand and a half sword made to his specifications which would've granted it the length of a classic longsword which would've picked up on popularity among nobility only 60 or so years later. There's a similar debate about swords found in France during the transitional period between Viking swords and arming. swords.
Well said.. however I feel that the monument should recognize this fact as well and not call an elephant a rhino. I would have so much more respect for the monument if they would recognize it as “possibly containing parts from his original sword”. Until then, I have lost all faith and respect for it. How do I believe anything of what they say as real history.
Great presantion, Iwill continiu to push my motto, Kindness is still free, get on board the Peace train! Say to your self gang ' Kindness is still free.' U have my permissi to use it! I will continue to push th EV folk to get Ally a major corp gig, Highlander out.
+USAKiltsOfficial *Thanks for the debunk.* Sir William Wallace packed an arming sword during waking hours; was trained in equestrian lance, crossbow, glaive and war bill. The petition o' the Producers of _Braveheart_ to build a Medieval-replica wooden bridge across the River Forth, the better to approach the topography for the Battle o' Stirling Bridge, was denied; so the Producers fell back on a glen suitable for re-enacting Bannockburn.
As we used to say s kids "yes its really his sword, its just,,, that the blade has been changed a couple times and is now 2 newer ones welded together,,, and,, the grip being so old had to be changed a couple times and after all that fighting the guards and pomel had to be changed before it went on display as it was knackered but yes its definitely HIS SWORD OK, FACT,
Just like George Washington's hatchet (an apocryphal story). Over the years the metal had deteriorated and was replaced, and over the centuries, the handle rotted away several times and was replaced. Still George Washington's hatchet?
I do not think any part of this sword did belong to William Wallace. And even though the Scots can rightfully be proud of their history, I do not think that this sword should be a symbol of that. Because the sword is a hoax, a lie. The symbol of Scottish pride should be something that is proven to be true. They deserve that. None the less this was an interesting video. Thanks Eric and team for putting it together!
@_Michiel_ *The **_Cleideamh mór_** postdated the Scottish Wars for Independence.* Infantry warfare evolved to a point where a "bastard sword" on a two hand hilt was useful for smashing through ranks of pikes and/or glaives, after _Landsknechte_ in German Central Europe in general, and _Doppelſöldner_ in particular.
Eh what are you talking about, the sword was taken because the English were going to flog it to the Yanks so the original sword was copied and replaced in 1965. I was there That is based upon the drawings of Sir Archibald Hughes who drew the original arms of the heroes of the Scottiish, including the Kings sword, Douglas's meat cleaver of a sword and Randolfs sword. all these were done and passed to the Graham of Monteith who betrayed Wallace and was eventually forgiven by the king. no the sword in the Tower is not, wallaces sword, but a copy, but for a good reason. I held the real sword before it was copied when I was eight, I couldn't lift it, but then I was a paraplegic and my father was in on the plot to save it from bein stolen an sold. the Smith who made the copy was a genius. like the Stone of destiny stolen and a second copy made in 1951 before I was born, not that it ever was the true Stone and Long shanks knew, but was fo red to keep his trap shut, as the wee Bishop of Scone had away with the real one before he got there. all are hidden by the Independence Movement in secret who also stole the great Eagle lectern from the English.
I've seen it, and I'm glad I was informed ahead of time of its real origins. Can you imagine how many people flow through that monument every day, and have deep emotional resonance to this fake trinket? Even further than that, how many people go to the monument solely because of the extremely fictionalized (aware of it or not) film? It brings up a a deep and surprisingly pertinent consideration for our times. Humanity is so susceptible emotionally to the stories we tell ourselves; a strong-willed devotion to lies that make us feel good, the things we desperately want to be true, whether or not they have any basis in reality or fact.
