15 Major Historical Inaccuracies That Undermine Famous Movies

Author John O'Farrell once said that Braveheart couldn't have been more historically inaccurate if it featured a plasticine dog and was called William Wallace and Gromit; he wasn't exaggerating.

So, what does it get right? There was a Scottish man named William Wallace who fought the English and... that's it.

Braveheart is excellent, but it's historically nonsensical. For example, Scotland was not under English occupation for years like in the film, while the Battle of Stirling centered around a bridge in real life.

The villain, Edward I (who actually died years after Wallace), wasn't nearly as bad as the film implies and he definitely didn't throw Edward II's gay lover out of a window. The film is also unfair on Robert the Bruce and depicts him as a traitor.

Protagonist William Wallace was a member of the lower nobility, not a peasant. He wears a kilt and paints his face blue, which is very anachronistic since the face paint is several hundred years late and the kilt is several hundred years early.

The most distracting historical inaccuracy is Wallace's affair with Isabella of France. It's fairly safe to say that didn't happen, since not only did they never meet, but she was only three at the time. That makes the film feel very creepy. Even Wallace's death is misrepresented, although that's a relief since his death was far more brutal in real life.

Basically, here's a movie so historically inaccurate it's actually hilarious.