Instigator / Pro
7
1922
rating
117
debates
97.44%
won
Topic
#1841

THBT: BRAVEHEART DEFAMES ROBERT the BRUCE

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
0

After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...

oromagi
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
3
1557
rating
35
debates
52.86%
won
Description

THBT: BRAVEHEART DEFAMES ROBERT the BRUCE

DEFINITIONS:
BRAVEHEART is "a 1995 American epic war film directed and co-produced by Mel Gibson, who portrays William Wallace, a late-13th-century Scottish warrior. The film grossed $75.6 million in the US and grossed $210.4 million worldwide. At the 68th Academy Awards, the film was nominated for ten Academy Awards and won five: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Cinematography, Best Makeup, and Best Sound Effects Editing."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braveheart

DEFAMES is [verb] "to harm or diminish the reputation of; to disparage."
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/defame

ROBERT the BRUCE was "King of Scotland from 1306 until his death in 1329. Robert was one of the most famous warriors of his generation, and eventually led Scotland during the First War of Scottish Independence against England. He fought successfully during his reign to regain Scotland's place as an independent country and is today revered in Scotland as a national hero."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce

BURDEN of PROOF is shared
PRO must prove defamation of Bruce
CON must prove no defamation of Bruce

- RULES --
1. Forfeit=auto loss
2. Sources may be merely linked in debate as long as citations are listed in comments
3. No new args in R3
4. For all relevant terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the rational context of this debate

And Gary Mcallister is a Scottish professional footballer. He became famous during euro96 when he was in the Scotland team that went to Wembley to face England.. The match was played at a time when "Braveheart" had just hit the screens. The tartan army descended upon Wembley to the tune of "freedom" raved up in to techno. The Scotland team for a pre-match team talk, watched the film "braveheart". The scotland team that day were captained by defender Colin Hendry, nicknamed "braveheart".
Scotland only needed a draw to qualify for the knock out stages. Scotland went 1-0 down.
But then they began to rally. on the 79th minute they got a penalty.
And Gary Mcallister stepped up to take it. He "missed".
Gary Mcallister was never forgiven for this. He soon had to announce his retirement from international football.
It was unforgivable.
He was supposed to score, so that the Scots could continue with their techno raved up version of braveheart for the rest of the tournament.
The film braveheart became synonymous with Scottish culture.
English of course wished to point out the flaws in the historical accuracy.
But scots at the time were not bothered about that.
It was purely a great time.
Magical. I will never forget the 96 trip to wembley. It is etched in my memory forever.
Robert Bruce could try to claim defamation.
But Robert Bruce was never ever a scottish national hero before braveheart. Not amongst anyone else other than catholic normans anyway.
It was the film braveheart, that made him a national hero.
I can assure you.
However Bruce went down in my estimations. He was actually just part of the Norman conquests really. He was self interested. He fought a civil war in Scotland, yet he was not himself scottish. He donated lands to the man that betrayed wallace.
Bruce does not deserve the recognistion he received from scots after braveheart.

-->
@oromagi

You are correct. I have made the error of talking whilst i research. William was actually Robert Bruce Grandfather.
Willam was grandson of William de Breuse.
Apologies.
As i live 5 miles from Robert Bruce place of death, and regularly visit Rosslyn chapel, i took defeat on this quite badly.
As i never looked upon Robert Bruce as a traitor. Nor does any scotsman i know.
Nobody thought he faught at Falkirk.
Were never taught this at school.
However he did have a reputation as being a bit "Norman" English.
Which there is nothing wrong with.

However, like i said. "Congratulations on your victory".
And i meant that.
Thank you.

-->
@Nevets

No explanation needed cuz it just ain't so

https://www.debateart.com/debates/1945/robert-bruces-son-william-de-brus-is-on-the-falkirk-rolls-fighting-for-the-english-which-probably-means-robert-de-brus-robert-bruce-was-on-side-with-the-english

-->
@oromagi

How do you explain Robert Bruce son, William, being on the Falkirk rolls?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/The_Falkirk_Roll_of_Arms_-_Panel_2_-_La_Batayle_le_Eveske_de_Dureme.jpg

-->
@Melcharaz

Fame is fame, even if its fame for evil.

Fame for evil is properly termed infamy, the opposite of fame. Fame used to imply not only well-known but also well-spoken of. I notice that this definition has changed during the age of internet, which prizes name recognition above a good reputation but in my book, famous for evil, true or false, is the opposite of fame.

Meghan Markle who recently married Prince Harry is a 25th generation direct descendant of Robert the Bruce (in fact, Bruce has many famous descendants because his children married into multiple royal lines). But that fact gets almost no play in America as a direct result of Bruce's ruined reputation in the US, exclusively due to the lies Mel Gibson told about Meghan Markle's Greatx24 Grandfather. Now, if Meghan Markle was a descendant of William Wallace, that fact would likely be well known in America even though the real Wallace was a mostly unsuccessful minor landowner.

Richard the Lionheart vs Bad King John is a classic example. Richard was easily one of the worst kings in history. Richard only went to England twice and both times came as a French invader killing English. He wasted the English treasury on fancy clothes and tournaments that he mysteriously always won. He tried to kill his father multiple times and started a war for seducing the Dauphin of France (Richard was super gay). He went on the crusades, lost a couple of battles and got imprisoned for years. John, on the other hand, lived in England his entire reign, rescued the treasury from bankruptcy, restored law and order, made peace with the barons (after some clashes, to be sure) and granted some Englishmen their first civil rights since Rome.
By any measure, John was a much better English King than Richard, any contemporary document would affirm as much. But mostly because of "Robin Hood" glam wastrel Richard is now better remembered than his objectively better little brother. That's defamation: even into modernity, English Royals won't name their children John- not because of true history but because of false fiction.

So does anyone have any disputes from the link below, where i showed Robert De Brus son fought for the English that day, and is on the Falkirk rolls? How well can we trust historians to narrate for us, when even i, can zoom in on the Falkirk rolls, and find Roberts son on them, fighting for the english, within 10 seconds

Or maybe we are by this period, looking for an actual De Breuse, because here is Roberts son, William, on one of the Falkirk rolls
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/The_Falkirk_Roll_of_Arms_-_Panel_2_-_La_Batayle_le_Eveske_de_Dureme.jpg

We must also remember. I am not even sure if historians are aware. We are not looking for a Robert De Brus. We are looking for a Robert le Fiz

I'm actually studying the Falkirk rolls of arms now. I know just before the battle of Falkirk, Robert Bruce had pledged allegience to Edward. That is not in disupte. However i do not believe even if Robert did fight at Falkirk, he would be stupid enough to have his name put in the Falkirk roll of arms. I dont think the Falkirk roll of arms means that much. But i am studying all the names on the Falkirk roll of arms to find any discrepancies

True. Id rather not be remembered at all if it was made a lie. But the point here is the correlation between defamation and false accusation. Fame is fame, even if its fame for evil. But a history that is wrong has to do more with integrity. Thats how i see it

-->
@Melcharaz

Alot of people would probably never heard of bruce if not for braveheart.

A lot of Americans, maybe. In Scotland he has always been the first free King of Scotland. Their George Washingto. Nothing about those lies made the movie better so why not make a movie with the same great battle scenes only telling the truth about the people who fought them. I know there are people who think famous is so important that its better to be famous for something evil than not to be famous at all. I would sooner be forgotten five hundred years from now than remembered as a traitor or a fink, personally.

This was an intresting debate. Something i think should be considered is the implications of defamation. Alot of people would probably never heard of bruce if not for braveheart. Was his fame truely diminished? Or was it falsely accused? But this is more philosophy related.

-->
@oromagi

Congratulations to oromagi

-->
@Barney

thanks for voting!

Bumping over the spam...

bumpin for Buaidh no Bàs!

-->
@Barney

Mad Max does Macbeth

https://imgflip.com/i/3vy7wy

This debate promised Mad Max...

-->
@Nevets

PRO's R3 sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randall_Wallace
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Falkirk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Falkirk#The_Falkirk_Roll_of_Arms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_of_Guisborough
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/defame#English
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_de_Menteith
http://www.thesocietyofwilliamwallace.com/menteithtraitor.htm
http://www.screenplay.com/downloads/scripts/Braveheart.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce#Burial
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/romanticized

PRO's R2 sources

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism_in_England
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_I_of_Scotland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_of_England
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braveheart
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Balliol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Comyn_III_of_Badenoch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce#Earl_of_Carrick_%281292%E2%80%931306%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capture_of_Berwick_%281296%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunbar_%281296%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Stewart,_5th_High_Steward_of_Scotland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wallace
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Fordun
https://books.google.com/books?id=O1oJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA201&lpg=PA201&dq=if+you+had+the+Earl+of+Carrick,+the+Steward+of+Scotland+and+his+brother...you+would+think+your+business+done&source=bl&ots=rqB-ESS3Or&sig=ACfU3U2nN6AMRYzWIsZWngajrXNbo_8y3Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi3nMLE-9DoAhUaV80KHVzFBfYQ6AEwAHoECAsQKQ#v=onepage&q=if%20you%20had%20the%20Earl%20of%20Carrick%2C%20the%20Steward%20of%20Scotland%20and%20his%20brother...you%20would%20think%20your%20business%20done&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=qqYHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=was+born+12th+July+1274,+whether+at+Turnberry+Castle+or+Lochmaben+Castle+has+not+been+definitely+ascertained&source=bl&ots=5o5DuWmsx_&sig=ACfU3U1weKA7y47VxO6M_gXdFHc13FEOwQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9-d-A_NDoAhUwB50JHaR3BuMQ6AEwAHoECAwQKQ#v=onepage&q=was%20born%2012th%20July%201274%2C%20whether%20at%20Turnberry%20Castle%20or%20Lochmaben%20Castle%20has%20not%20been%20definitely%20ascertained&f=false
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce
http://www.braveheart.co.uk/macbrave/history/wallace/ewart.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wallace_%28poem%29

-->
@Nevets

PRO's R1 sources:

https://www.google.com/search?q=least+historically+accurate+movies&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_of_France
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Balliol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitulation_of_Irvine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_I_of_England
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Falkirk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_invasion_of_Scotland_%281298%29#Invasion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wallace
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wallace#Battle_of_Falkirk
http://www.screenplay.com/downloads/scripts/Braveheart.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborationism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Comyn_III_of_Badenoch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_de_Lamberton
http://www.screenplay.com/downloads/scripts/Braveheart.pdf
https://www.ranker.com/list/life-of-robert-the-bruce/genevieve-carlton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_the_Bruce

-->
@oromagi

If there is a "sticky" on here, then this debate should deserve a "sticky".
What a great topic.
I am extremely interested in this.
But first i must make sure that i feel i have an argument to provide.
I think i definitely do. But need to do some studying first to get my tactics organised.
If someone else comes along in the meantime, so be it.