Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

How Historically Accurate is the Outlaw King

98 bytes added, 05:30, 23 November 2018
no edit summary
[[File:Outlaw.jpeg|thumb|The movie Outlaw King tells the tale of Robert the Bruce and his rise to the Scottish throne. ]]
Many of us know the story of <i>Braveheart</i>, where William Wallace leads a major rebellion against Edward I in the late 13th century. That movie did not only show the English as repressing the Scots but it also showed another prominent Scottish figure, Robert the Bruce, as being supplicant to the English and enabling their actions until finally he successfully revolts against the English during the reign of Edward II. Many historians had criticized this aspect, where Robert the Bruce was shown in a negative light. In fact, Robert the Bruce, along with many Scots, did for a time accept Edward I as the king, but Robert the Bruce may have actually simply weighted and calculated for an opportune time rather than risk a rebellion that was likely to fail. The Netflix movie <i>Outlaw King</i> tells his story and the making of Scotland that was free of English rule.
====The Main Story====
The story begins with Robert the Bruce, along with other prominent Scottish nobles, meeting with Edward I to accept him as their king in the early 1300s. They had already led a rebellion that was unsuccessful, where Edward I, Hammer of the Scots, had earned his nickname by winning against the Scots. Robert still wants to be king, as his family has ancient lineage to the thrown of Scotland, but other claimants exist for the Scottish throne and none of them are in position to attack the English due to their strength and English possession of many key areas of Scotland. John Comyn was another Scottish noble who also had perhaps just an equal or maybe even stronger claim to the Scottish throne.<ref>For more on the period before and the beginning of the Scottish rebellions against Edward I, see: Traquair, P. (1998). <i>Freedom’s sword: Scottland’s wars of Independence</i>. London: HarperCollins. </ref>
While the movie ends there, it is clear that this was a turning point. Soon after this battle, Edward II took over England from his father after he had died and he was far less able to fight the Scots effectively. After more successful operations by the Bruce and the major defeat of the English at the Battle of Bannockburn, where once again Robert the Bruce had to use creative tactics to makeup for his inferior numbers, the Scots were effectively broken free from the Englsh. After that time, it was Robert the Bruce who launched invasions on the English and was later recognized as the Scottish king by Edward II's successor, Edward III.<ref>For more on Edward II, see: Warner, K. (2015). <i>Edward II: the unconventional king</i>. Stroud, Gloucestershire: Amberley.</ref>
====Historical Accuracy====[[File:OutlawSide.jpegjpg|thumb|The movie Outlaw King tells the tale of Figure 2. Kildrummy castle was supposed to be Robert 's key home and eventually became the Bruce and place where Elizabeth, his rise to wife, was captured by the Scottish throneEnglish. ]] ==Historical Accuracy==
While <i>Braveheart</i> has been much criticized for its lack of historical accuracy, and not to mention how it diminishes the role Robert the Bruce played in the war against the English, <i>Outlaw King</i> does a generally better job in showing key events until the Battle of Loudoun Hill. There is still a lot of leeway in the way in which key events are shown and not much agreement as to how they happened. For instance, King Robert is initially shown as reluctant in the movie in accepting that he and the other Scottish nobles are vassals of the English king. There could be some truth to this, but it is also likely that this stage of his career was part of a larger plan that had been at work for some time. He and the other nobles were soundly defeated and were unable to mount a serious resistance. He had already, for instance, made a pact with William Lamberton to always support each other, possibly to lay the groundwork for future rebellion well in advance of the rebellion. William Wallace was killed in 1305, but it took Robert the Bruce an entire year before he launched his rebellion. In fact, Edward I had likely begun suspecting the rebellion, as he asked Robert the Bruce to keep his castle at Kildrummy (Figure 2).<ref>For more on Edward I's and Robert's relationships and conflicts, see: Whyte, J., & Whyte, J. (2016). <i>The Guardian: a tale of Andrew Murray</i>. First U.S. edition. New York: Forge.</ref>
Other issues include the marriage he had with Elizabeth, his second wife. He married her well before (in 1302) he launched his rebellion, rather than around the time of the rebellion. The depiction that they only gradually got to know and trust each other may not be that accurate as the marriage was more likely to be similar to Medieval political marriages. The depiction of the Bruce's defeat at the Battle of Methven shows treachery by de Valence. However, it was not so much treachery as a clearly bad mistake by the Bruce. He would or should have known de Valence would likely be loyal to the English king, as de Valence was English. The other major flaw was the presence of Edward II in the Battle of Loudoun Hill in the film. He would very likely not have been there and certainly Edward II would not have challenged Robert to any fight. Even if he did, the Scots would not have let him escape as he did in the film, as he would have been an extremely valuable prize.<ref>For more on Elizabeth and her marriage to the Bruce, see: Underhill, F. A. (1999). <i>For her good estate: the life of Elizabeth de Burgh</i>. 1st ed. New York: St. Martin’s Press. </ref>
[[File:Side.jpg|thumb|Figure 2. Kildrummy castle was supposed to be Robert's key home and eventually became the place where Elizabeth, his wife, was captured by the English.]] ====Key Characters====
Robert the Bruce was shown as a brave, heroic, but also opportunistic character. In many ways, he was such a person who won important battles. He also learned from his mistakes, particularly after major defeats to the English. Effectively he learned that chivalrous battles with the English would never work since they always had the numbers and resources. Once the Bruce switched to battles he can win on his terms and guerrilla tactics, then he began to win.<ref>For more on Robert the Bruce, see: Penman, M. A. (2014). <i>Robert the Bruce: King of Scots</i>. New Haven: Yale University Press. </ref>
Edward I and II are both shown as greedy rulers of England who would stop at nothing in subjugating the Scottish kingdom. While perhaps there is some truth to that, they were also usually cautious. Edward I did try to rule Scotland by playing off the Scottish nobles against each other, while his son was likely to be a more indecisive and poor strategic thinker relative to his father.
====Summary====
The <i>Outlaw King</i> does a much better job than <i>Braveheart</i> in depicting events that led to the Scottish rebellions that ultimately led to Scottish independence. The significance of Robert the Bruce is not only did he lead Scotland to independence but through his line they eventually merge with the English kings to become the ancestors of the current British monarch. Robert the Bruce, both his ambition and bravery, were critical to the ultimate success against the English. The key events between the 1290s and 1307, the first major victory against the English, are sometimes glossed over or not displayed to full accuracy. However, the rise of Robert the Bruce in the film does show the difficult political landscape that Robert had to navigate and ultimately obtain the Scottish crown for himself and family.
====References====<references/> [[Category: Historically Accuarate][[Category: English History]]

Navigation menu