What Is Wallace's Failure At Falkirk?
In the aftermath of his failure at Falkirk, Wallace provides more evidence to the misgivings surrounding his true history. Up until this point it is seen that Wallace is of concerning character, manipulating men into joining his forces and ruthlessly hunting down the English. There is also his subordination to be considered. In addition, there is repetition of Wallace’s abandonment of the Scots on a much grander scale as he leaves for France. The question of whether or not he was truly a skilled military leader. Finally, the circumstances around his execution that serve to amplify the efforts to mythologize his story must be considered. Immediately succeeding Falkirk, Wallace is seen to be enjoying the sympathy of fellow Scots though it quickly
…show more content…
It is commented that after the death of Andrew de Moray, “the Scots under Wallace never won a victory in the open against any English force which can fairly be described as an army.” Though Wallace continually displays his ability to train troops and succeed in small skirmishes, his aptitude for grander warfare is lacking. These small skirmishes, though successful, proved to do little in advancing the efforts of the Scots cause. Ultimately, the biggest source of the Wallace myth and subsequent inauthentic documents surrounding him, begin with his execution in 1305. While Wallace was no longer seen as important to the Scottish, the English looked to him with contempt. Upon his execution, “Edward had killed an enemy and created a martyr.” In making a martyr of Wallace his image and efforts in the Wars of Scottish Independence became inflated and forever changed the documentation of his history. Overall, the career of William Wallace following the events of Falkirk provides further evidence of his poor character, subservience, and diminished importance in the eyes of the Scottish. These are all points in great contrast to the Wallace myth that began at his death, coming together to prove this figure much less significant than thought in
It is commented that after the death of Andrew de Moray, “the Scots under Wallace never won a victory in the open against any English force which can fairly be described as an army.” Though Wallace continually displays his ability to train troops and succeed in small skirmishes, his aptitude for grander warfare is lacking. These small skirmishes, though successful, proved to do little in advancing the efforts of the Scots cause. Ultimately, the biggest source of the Wallace myth and subsequent inauthentic documents surrounding him, begin with his execution in 1305. While Wallace was no longer seen as important to the Scottish, the English looked to him with contempt. Upon his execution, “Edward had killed an enemy and created a martyr.” In making a martyr of Wallace his image and efforts in the Wars of Scottish Independence became inflated and forever changed the documentation of his history. Overall, the career of William Wallace following the events of Falkirk provides further evidence of his poor character, subservience, and diminished importance in the eyes of the Scottish. These are all points in great contrast to the Wallace myth that began at his death, coming together to prove this figure much less significant than thought in