There seems to be a great deal of misunderstanding with what was said in this video. 1. We repeated that we've been told this movie is inaccurate so that people can stop telling us that, its not a judgement on the film before it even started. We said it just so people will stop telling us. 2. We actually really enjoyed this movie, which we said on camera after the movies done.

Speaking as somebody from Scotland, I think this film is brilliant and highly enjoyable. I don't watch it to learn our history, so the inaccuracies don't bother me at all. It is just a well made movie in my opinion.

I'm Scottish, I loved this movie when it came out, I love it to this day. The film is largely based on a 15th century poem by a wandering minstrel called Blind Harry about the legend of William Wallace, so it's a TELLING of the story but William Wallace was a real person, he did fight for an independent Scotland and at the Battle of Stirling bridge he won a famous victory over the far larger English army and on the back of that victory he made successful raids on the north of England and was appointed, along with the man he fought alongside at Stirling Bridge, Andrew Murray (not the tennis player) as Guardians of the Kingdom of Scotland by King Of The Scots (John Balliol), and was in later years, knighted, becoming Sir William Wallace. As Guardian of the Kingdom of Scotland he was succeeded by Robert the Bruce - another Scottish legend who dedicated much of his life to Scottish Independence and is prominent in this movie.

As a Scot, this movie is a classic. Know about the historical inaccuracies but it's so well made and a good jumping off point for anyone who's interested in researching the real history.

They were chanting "MacAulish," which means "Son of Wallace" in Scottish. It shifted to "Wallace," signifying that he was no longer the son of Wallace, but the new Wallace.

"They may take away our lives, but they'll never take our freedom!" The betrayal scene is the best acting Mel Gibson ever did. Most people would have played it angry. He made it feel like real betrayal does: confusion, disbelief, numbness, the life flowing out of him. Absolutely gutted me the first time I saw it. Also, this film is EVERYTHING even now after all these years, which never gets old.

Regardless of historical inaccuracy, this is a fantastic and epic movie.

I'm Scottish, live where William Wallace's father was born and went to school with the actor who played young Wallace. I don't care about the inaccuracies of this movie. The story, the music and the action make this an incredible movie.

06:22 As a child of the early 80s George falling for Sophie Marceau is *very* relatable. 🥰

“These doors are so loud”. Priceless. A supercut of Simone’s intros would be amazing.

Despite its inaccuracies. It is a brilliant film. The score from the late James Horner is incredible.

If you really pay attention to the actions of the dwarf performers prior to the execution, you will realize that they are pantomiming what is really going to happen to Wallace moments later. Also, I believe that Isabella, Princess of Wales, was actually just a kid when Wallace died and probably never met him.

To answer George's inquiry, generally an invading force needs a ratio of at least 3:1 when going up against a prepared defender behind good fortifications. That will of course increase due to various other factors like morale, terrain, supply, weather, etc.

Native Scot here - I first saw Braveheart in 2005 in high school, literally; Mr Forsyth chose it for the visual media part of our English class. As such, I've seen it, particularly the Battle of Stirling Bridge scene ("the sword against the blue sky reflects the blue of the Scottish flag and that's why the director chooses to focus on it", etc), more times than I can recall. So it's testament to the strength of the movie that *despite* this introduction and exposure, I love it all the same. It's not just a historical mess for the points George raised. The French princess not only wasn't in Britain at the time of Wallace's campaign, but was also just three years old. The face paint was also worn by the Picts, the people who lived in parts of the land before Scots conquered it all (centuries before Braveheart's setting). While that was 1000 years too late, the wearing of tartan and kilts is about 500 years too early, and two-handed blades (also known as claymores, from the Gaelic _claidheamh mòr_ "big sword") were not in use by any Scottish warrior at the time. Speaking of Gaelic, at 18:10 _amadan_ means "idiot" but only for males; the female would be _oinseach_ Most amusing of all: the Scottish hero William Wallace is played by (EDIT: Australian / American) Mel Gibson; The King of England is Patrick McGoohan, an Irishman; and the mad King Stephen of Ireland is portrayed by David O'Hara, who despite the name is Scottish. Congratulations - between this and Trainspotting you've probably covered two of the most fundamental cornerstones of Scottish-based cinema! Might I suggest Shallow Grave and/or The Angels' Share for two more? Thank you for these FREEEEEEEEE reactions 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

I was a history major, and we had a long going discussion on this movie specifically. We concluded, that is Braveheart the movie could make a person interested in history as a subject, then it has still served a positive role to the field. Then it's up to historians to explain the details. That's not the role of this movie, when it boils down to it.

"Braveheart is historically inaccurate" has been spoken about as many times as "Did you know that Viggo Mortensen broke his toe in that scene?"

"Whom shall I send" and "Not my gentle son..." I love that monologue by the king

This was the first movie I remember where they didn’t cut away from the violent battle scenes. Usually, you’d see the hero slash his sword then it cuts to another part, minimizing the effect. Seeing legs hacked off and hands getting smashed gave me a visceral reaction unlike any movie before. Made it seem more real, less Hollywood than other battle scenes from before it.

"got lost in her eyes". Loved that comment. A whole (my) generation of teenagers did, when she starred in "La Boum" 1980. For us it was awesome to see her again.

Braveheart received ten Academy Award nominations, and a month later, won five including Best Picture, Best Director for Gibson, Best Cinematography, Best Sound Effects Editing, and Best Makeup

In real life Isabella, also known as the She-Wolf of France, deposed Edward the 2nd [the son of Longshanks] in 1327 and ruled as Queen for several years before her son Edward the 3rd assumed the throne of England as King.

The thing about this is, despite all the inaccuracies in this movie, they actually toned down WW's torture. And everything the Irish guy said in this movie was pure gold.

Omg! Finally you guys are reacting to this masterpiece! I know there will be people happy to point out the historical inaccuracies but I’m in the camp of just enjoying great movies and don’t take things so seriously and personally 😊

The spiritual successor to this film is The Patriot (2000), also starring Mel Gibson battling the English complete w/ historical inaccuracies. Both movies have fantastic musical scores by James Horner & John Williams.

"Longshanks" was a mocking nickname given to the king because of being tall. He was six-two, which was unusual at the time.

One of the strange oddities of this movie are Wallace's lieutenants. Hamish is played by Brendan Gleeson who is Irish while Stephen, the import from Ireland, is played by David O'Hara who is Scottish.

One of my all time favorite movies. It has everything. Amazing music, scenery, action, love story.

Something not everyone is aware of is that a spinoff/sequel to Braveheart came out in 2019, called Robert the Bruce. It takes place several years after the death of William Wallace and is centered around, well, Robert the Bruce, starring Angus Macfadyen, the same actor who portrayed him in Braveheart. I haven't heard many people talk about it, so I don't know how well known it is, or how it would do on a poll, but just figured I'd put it out there just in case.

Another great would be Excalibur from 1981. It’s the best version of King Arthur, and you’ll see great actor who were up and coming. They’re totally legends now. Such an excellent film!

A lot of the bowmen that fought for the English were actually Welsh who were considered particularly skilled with the bow. All Englishmen were required by law for many years to regularly train with the longbow and to this day a lot of churchyards have Yew trees in them which were planted to ensure a supply of suitable wood for longbows.

One of the funniest things I have ever seen is the comedian Stewart Lee doing a routine about this movie to a Glasgow audience. The man has balls of steel

The film was never meant to be a history lesson, it was made to inspire.

Another good film on Netflix is outlaw king, based on Robert the Bruce. Set around this era and just after. A lot more accurate but still dramatised

"Say what you want about Mel Gibson, but the man knows story structure." -Character on South Park (not Cartman)

I heard the gentleman state that, "she is ridiculously gorgeous." This is a SERIOUS STATEMENT that should be used, only 4 times in life.

My first viewing of Braveheart was in the cinema and not knowing anything about the history I was floored at the end when, unlike most fantasy sorts of historical movies, he wasn't saved from execution. Just a huge cinematic impact for me as a young moviegoer at the time!

So George is right that the "Wallace being the real father of Isabella's son" arc is total fabrication (and yes, impossible, Isabella was a 10 year old girl when Wallace was executed and her son was born several *years* later). But when you know the history there's far more of a calculated insult in this plot line. One, Isabella herself is legendary as the "she-wolf of France" and a major figure in English history in her own right, and second, her son, Edward III, is considered one of England's greatest monarchs, so much so that there's a push by many historians to have him granted the title "Edward Magnus" (i.e. Edward the Great). So suffice to say, this little invention in the plot is basically trying to take away some of the greatest moments in England's history. Oh yeah, and Edward I "Longshanks" is definitely not at all the monster portrayed in the movie. Instead he was actually known as a man of honor, a kind and devoted father, son and husband, and a figure so respected that one of the biggest problems the Scots claimants to the throne (John Balliol, Joh Comyn, Robert the Bruce etc) had was that Scottish nobles simply preferred Edward as King because they felt he was a better man and a better monarch. You also have to bear in mind that a lot of the Scots noble houses were part of the international francophone caste that dominated Western Europe.. they saw themselves as Christian, French-speaking nobles first and Scots second so being ruled by someone who was also part of that class like Edward even though he was based out of England(plus quite a few of them knew him and his brother Edmund personally from crusading with him in Outremer and other shared ventures), was really not a big issue to them (basically nationalism as we know it wasn't really full formed yet, though in their ways the stories of Wallace and Robert the Bruce would become part of creating it in Scotland).

Campbell was Hamish's father. Played by James Cosmo, who also played Lord Commander Mormont in Game of Thrones. He was also one of the coal miners in Chernobyl.

George didn’t read enough. Wallace’s wife was killed by the sheriff and Wallace avenged her death very similarly to what happened in the film. Also, Wallace’s death in the film was pretty accurate to what really happened. In real life they didn’t give him the choice of a quick death and he never yelled “Freedom!”

Longshanks in this movie is one of the all time great cinema villains. He doesn't get the credit. He's smug, self serving, hateful, cruel, and without mercy. Great actor

Every single film based on historical events is inaccurate, but Braveheart seems to get unfairly singled out for it. It's not even the worst offender either. Truth is, it's a feature film, and as such it has absolutely no obligation to be accurate, It's there to entertain, and it does that job extremely well. If anyone wants accuracy, then they should watch a documentary.

Despite the inaccuracies a very patriotic and moving movie. Highly recommend The Outlaw King which follows on from Wallace's death. Another great (but not accurate) historical Scottish movie which is criminally overlooked is Rob Roy starring Liam Neeson and is set in Jacobite times.

There's a story that one of the local extras asked about the bridge, and Mel's reply was that it got in the way. The extra's response? "Aye, that's what the English found too."

I was born in Scotland & have friends & family there, When they went to see it in the theater, at the end of the film the whole audience cheered & stood and applauded. Technically it is historically accurate. But things like the kilt didn’t come into existence till the 16th century & the bagpipes were invented after this. The Scot’s didn’t win their freedom and Robert the Bruce was also hung drawn & quartered. But it’s the spirit of the film that makes it so good.

Kinda sad that the whole focus of their reaction is on the inaccuracies rather than how great this film is directed, how amazing the soundtrack, how good the costumes, the many many extras for the battle scenes, etc. etc.

The hate this film got/gets is bullshit. No one involved in its production ever claimed the film was historically accurate. It's an artistic interpretation, just like many, many other films about actual historical figures/events; films that never received such scrutiny. 🤷‍♂️

I watched Braveheart at the cinema and was blown away. Much later I heard there were historical inaccuracies and was really interested to learn what the actual history was and to find out the anachronisms. Back in the day, the biggest contoversy was whether you preferred the natural beauty of Wallace's wife or the sophisticated beauty of the French princess. I'm with George on this.

They usually hung ( not until dead) wracked him to break his bones then disemboweled him. Took away his stomachs. They usually burned the bowels and stomachs on the fire in front of the victim. The blue dye was called WODE. Hence the colour of the Scottish flag. Blue and white. The man who played the King Longshanks( long legged) was our great English/ Irish actor Patrick McGowan. Rest in peace sir.

It was funny to me looking back at the reaction people had about this film....as though it was supposed to be a documentary and not a Hollywood movie.😂

Don't care if it's inaccurate it's still a fantastic movie

From IMDB: "When asked by a local why the Battle of Stirling Bridge was filmed on an open plain, Gibson answered that "the bridge got in the way." "Aye," the local answered. "That's what the English found."

It might not be "historically accurate" but in my opinion, it is one of the best movies ever made! Has alot of heart, and a very quotable movie! And I would go as far to say, it's one of the greatest love stories of all time!

I implore you to watch the comedian Stewart Lee doing a bit about Braveheart in front of a Glasgow audience. It's solid gold.

0:26 most people who criticize this movie for historical inaccuracy didn't even know who William Wallace is before this movie comeout.

Commenting just to be corrected: this is more or less Robert Bruce's story, with some William Wallace splashed in. Like Temujin's story mixed with Subodai, or Geranimo's story mixed with Sitting Bull. It's still a good damn story. There's a reason these legends fighting impossible empires still exist. We like the guys who told em to fugg off.

Nice one, you two! Braveheart came out the same summer as two other Celtic themed movies. Rob Roy and also The Secret Of Roan Inish, both of which are very good too. It was a summer of Maximum Celticity. Thanks for sharing this one. 🙂

Hollywood isn't history. However, this only ever seems to be brought up in relation to 'Braveheart' People will lap up Saving Private Ryan, Shindlers List, Twelve Years a Slave, etc... as if they're fly on the wall documentaries and only engage their brains for 'Braveheart'

“Let’s not dwell on historical history inaccuracies” Also:”let’s reference Highlander a lot” 😂

"MacAulish" is (Scottish) Gaelic for "Son of Wallace". They started out chanting that version of William's surname, and then switched to "Wallace!"

What you didn't "see" at the end when he was being tortured, was him being castrated, then disemboweled. Even though there was a lot of "inaccuracies" in this movie, it's still an amazing movie in itself, with a great story line. The acting for that time (1995) was amazing and well done too. I very clearly remember when this came out in 1995. I went to the movie theater for 3 straight days and watched it 3 times in a row because I loved it so much. It was my favorite movie for a very long time. Still in my top 5 easily.

A movie is a movie, you should interpret it that way, 99.99% of movies are historically inaccurate, that's what documentaries are for, that being said, this movie was and is a beautiful story

Another curious fact about Braveheart The actor who played "Hamish" is actually Irish in real life and the actor who played "Stephen" is actually Scottish in real life

Scottish person here, the inaccuracy comes from the implication that William Wallace was not 7ft tall, didn't shoot Fireballs from his eyes and didn't shoot bolts of lightning from his arse....these are completely true and it's a disgrace this movie implied otherwise

True history: For a long time Scotland and France coordinated strategies against England. This relationship was called the 'Auld Alliance' in Scottish. As to 'Longshanks', I was very entertained by a passage in a coffee-table book on the English royals: 'Surely one of our greatest monarchs was Edward I...' He is 'great' chiefly for well-planned aggression, among other things for defeating the barons who had created the House of Commons, conquering Wales, driving the Jews out of England, and numerous forays against Scotland. He is generally reviled in those countries. He ordered the building of state-of the-art castles in Wales, though, that are major tourist attractions. Edward thought of himself as a second King Arthur and had actual Round Tables manufactured for festivals with jousting and music and so on. So he did provide some entertainment for his people.

If you watch Game of Thrones, there are two actors from this. Campbell is played by James Cosmo and is Jeor Mormont in GoT. Also, Lord Bottoms, the English Lord who came by the festival to claim Prima Nocta, is played by Rupert Vansittart and is Yohn Royce in GoT.

29:49 I always find it humorously ironic that just after he throws Phillip off the tower, Longshanks started wondering who was sacrificial to send to meet Wallace.

10:30 "Yeah. See? It's not raining at _all."_ Maybe not at the moment, but Scotland is a _very_ rainy country. There's this joke that, in Scotland, a clothesline is a place where you hang clothes up to be _rinsed._

"Outlaw King" is a must after this. It follows the story of Robert the Bruce, after Wallace.

22:55 Simone’s Highlander joke is the funniest thing I’ve heard in a while! 😆

Wow I remember renting this on VHS from Blockbuster on spring break back in the day. 😂 We watched it like 3x before we returned it 😎 historical accuracy be damned...this is a great action flick.

I'm with George...I was a teen when this was in the cinema and I completely fell in love with Sophie Marceau (and English spoken in a French accent) for ever more... Fun fact: Edward I reigned in the Norman period when English monarchs and nobility were mostly speaking Old French as a first language

This movie got 10 nominations, winning 5 oscars, including Mel winning best director and best producer. Its perfect, in every way

Movies are not about historical accuracy. It’s like complaining about the syntax of a poem. It’s meant to communicate emotions and ideas, not provide a history lesson.

I don't care if I understand what Simone is talking about in her openings or not. LOVE THEM! The weirder, the better! Go girl!

Hamish's Dad, as you kept on referring to him is a power-house of a Scottish actor, James Cosmo. He was later in Game of Thrones as the commander of the forces on the wall, and also played Robert the Bruce's Dad in the movie "Outlaw King" a few years ago. He was interviewed some years ago and said that he spoke with the script writers and complimented them as they had written a script that had captured an idea of a Scottish identity that he felt was going to grow. He felt proud that he had been part of a film that would help raise the idea of an independent Scotland. Outlaw King is definitely worth watching, though it has some inaccuracies, it does spend quite a lot of time and effort on period details and shows the relationship between Edward Longshanks and Robert the Bruce's father...

The film was set in the 13th century and the scots didn't wear kilts until the 6th century. Also the blue paint was (as George said) done by the brits to the Romans (it was called Woad).

The quote I always remember about Braveheart when it came out was from a historian on TV being interviewed and asking, "why have they got Wallace living in a Hobbit village?"

“At last, you know what it means to hate. Now you're ready to be a king.” Epic line.

2:13 While there were some filming locations in Scotland, Ireland provided a lot of locations Church of St Nicholas, Dunsany Castle Dunsoghly Castle Coronation Plantation in the Sally Gap, Wicklow Mountains The Curragh Plains Trim Castle Ballymore Eustace Blessington Lakes Bective Abbey

Fun fact Brian Cox, Brendan Gleeson, & James Cosmo all come out in another historical war epic together. Troy.

Stewart Lee did a stand up routine to a Glaswegian crowd that tore strips off the historical accuracy of this film, it's a must watch on how to fearlessly roast your audience.

I love epic films, and I also love history. So I unironically love this movie, while also recognizing its egregious historical inaccuracies. (You covered some of these at the end of the video, which I watched after typing all this up. So apologies for any repeats.) The depiction of Wallace's family (and of Scotland in general) as backwater mud-farmers is pure fantasy. Scotland was a reasonably-developed European power by the end of the 13th Century - not as wealthy, powerful, or influential as England or France, but also not a barbaric mud-hole. And Wallace's father was a knight, landowner, and minor noble. There are a lot of other inaccuracies, but I consider that to be the most narratively-impactful. I won't list all of the others (again, you covered a lot of them at the end of the video), but the other big one is less important to the story, but arguably a bigger "detail" to get wrong: The actual Battle of Stirling (the first major battle depicted in the film, where the Scots use the chiltrons (long spears) for the first time) was actually the Battle of Stirling Bridge. And the Scottish victory had more to do with the fact that the English had to deploy their heavy cavalry over a narrow bridge and onto muddy terrain, than with the innovative use of the chiltrons - although that was a relatively new innovation, deployed by the Scots against the English cavalry at many other battles of the Scottish Wars of Independence - so it's logical to assume they would've been deployed at Stirling as well. Obviously the English as a whole, and Edward I (the "Longshanks") in particular, are played as straight-up cartoon villains. The movie needed really galling bad guys so that the revenge plot would feel especially satisfying. And for a film presented largely from the Scottish side of the conflict, from that perspective, the English *were* villains. "Prima nocta", as an actual institution, may be largely ahistorical. But as happens any time in history when a more powerful nation oppresses a weaker one, the English interactions with the Scottish were very brutal. It's less that the English would never do something like that, and more that we simply don't have evidence that it was an organized, institutional "thing". Despite all of its inaccuracies, I think this movie succeeds majorly on two fronts: 1) As cinema, it's almost perfect. It's emotional and heartbreaking and satisfying. The production still holds up pretty well in 2023, and in 1995 it was absolutely groundbreaking. This movie's success sort of signaled to big studios that epic period pieces could be successful, and we got a lot of big epics in the late 1990s and early 2000s as a result (e.g. 'Gladiator' in 2000). And as goofy as Mel's accent (and his hair extensions) were, he gave a great performance - as did many others in the movie. The cinematography, James Horner's score, etc. - all magnificent. 2) Although a lot of the details are wrong, I do feel like the movie accurately captured the *nature* of the Scottish Wars of Independence, at least in a way that a modern movie-going audience could understand them. The power discrepancy between the Scottish and English armies (what we might call an "asymmetric conflict" today) that required the Scots to use innovative tactics, the duplicitous nature of the aristocracy on both sides (who were often, as the movie version of Edward I says, just as rich in English lands as they were in Scottish lands) and the shifting allegiances, etc. So it's a bad movie if you want accurate historical detail about this period in British history, but it's a great movie if you want an accurate *feeling* about the period (at least insomuch as we understand it today). I'm glad y'all watched this one. Warts and all, it's one of my favorite movies.

Apparently a local crew member asked the same question about the bridge. When Mel Gibson said they had a problem with it the crew member laughed and said "ay, so did the English".

6:40 Sophie Marceau, Famous and beloved french actress, is a stupidly gorgeous and natural beauty. Even now when she's 57, she's amazingly gorgeous. Her career is long (she started at 13yro) and Varied, she did everything from comedy, to romance, to thrillers and adventures. She did Theatres play and other things too She was interntionaly knowed as One of the Bond Girls in The World Isn't Enough in '99 as Elektra King.

It's great that you started by saying that Scotland ia gorgeous, because most of it was shot in Northern Ireland. I'm not sure if this movie was actually the beginning of them building an industry there, but it has become a popular place to shoot. Basically anything in "The North" in Game Of Thrones was shot there, among other things. They did shoot some stuff in Scotland, because some scenic shots just couldn't be faked, and only exist in Scotland, but otherwise... One of my favorite pieces of trivia about this movie is that even though the cast is a mix of Scottish, Irish, English, and whatever else actors, because it was mainly shot in Northern Ireland, it was obviously logistically easier to get Irish actors, like the Great Brendan Gleeson, that played Scottish, but the one character in the movie that's actually supposed to be Irish, was played by a Scotsman. I've always just enjoyed the irony of it.

Movie nerd at the edge of a large storm drain: "Braveheart is not historically accurate!" Tommy Lee Jones: "I DON'T CARE"

It’s funny how many people claim so many things about this movie are historically inaccurate yet have ZERO idea what really happened, but will believe a random website written by a random person 🤣.

I watch this movie once or twice every year, an absolute masterpiece.

According to mel gibson from the braveheart dvd commentary, he knew that stirling was a bridge battle, but he wanted to show what a typical medieval battle looked like and wanted to showcase typical medieval tactics on the field. So I suppose he was historically accurate in showing that rather than the actual historical battlefield.

King Edward I was 6’2”. At 6ft 2in ( 188 cm ) he towered over over most of his contemporaries, hence his epithet Longshanks”, meaning long legs or long shins. The historian Micheal Prestwich states that his long arms gave him an advantage as a swordsman, long thighs one as a horseman. He died in 1307.

Actually, I think in the movie Wallace and his closest companions deliberately reached back a thousand years into history to do that warrior face-paint thing. It was a deliberate throwback to another time when the Scottish fought for their freedom. No one else did it, only Wallace and his little posse or cadre of friends and advisors. It wasn't meant to accurately reflect what Scottish people did at the time, even within the story. He did this to inspire his people as an old-school Celtic warrior.

I've no problem with movie's taking libraries to what actually happened cause at the end of the day your main focus is make the best movie possible and be as accurate as you can that's how I look at it as bravehart is a truly epic and emotional film

Another one you guys should see is Kingdom of Heaven (Director's Cut)

12:23 - That's what she said. Also, this moment when he's on the horse is the modern-day equivalent of a guy pulling up to the curb and reving his engine and honking for his girl to come out.

For the record, the worst form of execution is scaphism: being slathered in honey and eaten alive by ants… 🐜 As inaccurate as this is, it’s definitely a favorite of people around the world. We watched this all the time at my house from when I was twelve onwards.

My absolute favorite movie of all time. Accuracy - meh. Story, pictures, music - all is perfect! And still after seeing it about 30 times, and maybe the same amount of reactions to it, i still cry every time! Some movies just do that perfect. "Gladiator", "Philadelphia", "LotR: TRotK", "Steel Magnolias".........

If I want historical accuracy I'll watch a documentary. If I want a damned good story, I'll watch Braveheart. I saw this in the theater when it first came out. It was amazing on the big screen.

My understanding of the knightly class is that they go back to ancient Rome. It was composed of men who weren't nobles, but had enough wealth to own war horses (destriers). So when they were called up for battle, they would ride these horses, which were specifically bred for their large size and fierce temperament. They were, in effect, weapons of war unto themselves.

Fun definition: the act of chucking someone out of a high window, is called "defenestration".

Most of this movie was totally inaccurate bullshit but the execution method was mostly accurate. Being hanged, drawn and quartered was the classic English method for punishing traitors, and it was every bit as brutal as depicted. And yes, people did take their kids to watch executions. The final battle of Bannockburn was also insane and I'm kind of disappointed we didn't see it. The Scots were outnumbered 4 to 1, and Robert used schiltrons, a unit of tightly packed spearmen, to absolutely annihilate the English. Robert also personally a dueled an English knight who charged directly at him during the first day of the battle and killed the guy with a single blow of his warhammer right to the dome. The Scots ended up killing at least an estimated ten thousand English soldiers plus 500 to a thousand knights, which ended aggressive English ambition is Scotland for centuries and eventually led to Scottish independence.