Was William Wallace Really Scourged And Executed In England For Treason As Depicted In The Film Braveheart?

The best short answer to this is "Sort of", which may be unsatisfactory. There are only 2 historical sources for Wallace, The Scotichronicon and the bardic songs of one 'Blind Harry'. Both date from the 15th century, so are at least 300 years after the events and should be treated with some caution.

Yes, Wallace was executed in England; in London to be precise, having endured (to modern eyes) a farcical show trial in Westminster Hall. In 1304 he was still free, but was betrayed by his own people and captured by John of Mentieth's men near Glasgow in August of 1305. His captor received land worth £100. He was then taken to London for the required trial and inevitable execution.

The main accusation against him, that he had rebelled against Edward I, his feudal lord, would never stand up in a modern court, as Wallace had never sworn fealty to Edward, as all Scottish noblemen were required to do, in 1296. The law of the middle ages however, did not require such legal niceties to be addressed, and the result of the trial was a foregone conclusion. It is even doubtful if the prisoner was allowed to refute the charge, or that this mattered in any legal sense at the time. All that was required was his presence.

From the point of view of the state Wallace was a traitor, having failed to swear as required ten years earlier, and therefore deserved to die a traitor's death. This involved that most demanding of the executioner's tasks (as it was difficult to keep the condemned alive through most of the proceedure), hanging, drawing and quartering. There is no record of Wallace having been whipped or scourged and in those times the action would have been considered unnecessary, as the sentence was the most shameful that could be given. He would have been hung until unconscious, let down and revived and then disembowled. He would then have been beheaded and his entrails burned in front of the crowd. Once this had been done, the body would have been quartered.

His head was placed on London bridge, and the quarters sent to Newcastle, Berwick, Stirling and Perth. A man called John de Segrave was given 15 shillings for the undoubtedly smelly task of escorting the parts north.

Edward died on 7 July 1307, just under 2 years later, so the end scenes of the film are out by some time. The wife of Edward II was pre-pubescent in 1305 and did not marry him until after Edward I was dead, so any issue through her by Wallace is ridiculous as (even given the young age at which female nobility married at these times) Wallace and her would never have met. There are other inaccuracies with the film, but in the context of your question, not worth going into in detail.

Add Comment

View Comments [1]

Report