William Wallace

[Sire-Chris]

William Wallace was a murderer who was only happy to raid english borders, much like many scottish "freedom fighters" over the years.

Speaks volumes that people ignore these facts and semi worship him.

[oneofthefew]

I think you'll find that Wallace wasn't actually a "murderer" and as for your comment on Scottish "freedom fighters" I think you'll find those from England were just as bad! Maybe you need to read some history before posting a comment that shows your ignorance and very obvious English bias!

[Sire-Chris]

Originally Posted by oneofthefew

I think you'll find that Wallace wasn't actually a "murderer" and as for your comment on Scottish "freedom fighters" I think you'll find those from England were just as bad! Maybe you need to read some history before posting a comment that shows your ignorance and very obvious English bias!

I'm afraid I'm going to have to burst your bubble here.

Wallace is a murderer. He killed people outside of battle, without provocation. Sir William Heselrig?

And I know england were "just as bad". That's my point. We were both guilty of the same thing so why are scotland never acknowledged as aggressors? Because we were more successful? The act of union was under a scottish king as well, but that's all our fault.

It's just always too one sided.

[oneofthefew]

Originally Posted by Sire-Chris

Wallace is a murderer. He killed people outside of battle, without provocation. Sir William Heselrig?

I'll give you time to check up on your history again, but assuming that Wallace actually did kill Heselrig (and what evidence other than Blind Harry do you have to say he did?), it was hardly without provocation (and again, do you have any evidence to back up your claim?)

As far as I am concerned, the whole Scotland-Issue is NOT one-sided, there is good and bad on both sides of the border. However, I am sure you will find that the Act of Union was completed during the reign of a queen (Anne) not a king - and who exactly is blaming you for it?

Obviously you have a huge chip on your shoulder, but I seriously recommend that you research your claims before making yourself look stupid!

[Lianachan]

Originally Posted by Sire-Chris

I'm afraid I'm going to have to burst your bubble here.

Wallace is a murderer. He killed people outside of battle, without provocation. Sir William Heselrig?

And I know england were "just as bad". That's my point. We were both guilty of the same thing so why are scotland never acknowledged as aggressors? Because we were more successful? The act of union was under a scottish king as well, but that's all our fault.

It's just always too one sided.

While I agree with your basic premise that it's not really as simple as Scotland are the Good Guys and England are the Baddies, you have picked a bad example. It is by no means certain that Wallace killed Heselrig.

Historically, England made far more attempts to conquer Scotland than visa versa, and things like the sacking of Berwick (which is something that definately did happen) do not help the cause expressed in English protestations of innocence.

[ANDY-J3]

During the wars of independence the sole aggressor was the English crown- no Scottish monarch laid claim to the throne of England. That being the case Wallace had a legitimate right to kill any English officials who administered Scotland hence Heselrig was not murdered but executed as a matter of military necessity. The subsequent acknowledgement of Scottish independence by England was an admission that Scottish freedom fighters were involved in a lawful struggle to defend their country.

[Kern]

As an aside I have been looking at Robert the Bruce on Wikipedia and it appears that his ancestry was basically Norman. So I am kind of wondering if anyone knows how that came about? As in how his family got to Scotland and how his history of resistance to the English unfolded from there?