Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Braveheart' Sword Leaves Scotland for 1st time in 700 years (William Wallace’s sword coming to NYC)
AP via Yahoo! ^ | Wed Mar 30, 8:12 AM ET Europe - AP

Posted on 03/30/2005 1:06:55 PM PST by dead

LONDON - One of Scotland's national treasures, the 5-foot sword wielded by William Wallace, the rebel leader portrayed in the Academy Award-winning film "Braveheart," left its homeland for the first time in more than 700 years Wednesday.

The double-handed weapon that belonged to Wallace will be the centerpiece of an exhibition at New York's Grand Central Station during Tartan Day celebrations, which begin later this week.

Mick Brown a specialist remover prepares to pack William Wallace's sword at the Wallace Monument in Stirling, Scotland Wednesday March 30, 2005. The sword will leave Scotland Wednesday for the first time in more than 700 years, travelling to the United States as part of the country's Tartan Day celebrations being held in April. Members of Stirling Council met earlier this month to decide whether to allow the national treasure make the trip to New York, where it will form the centerpiece of an exhibition. (AP Photo/Andrew Milligan, PA)

This year marks the 700th anniversary of the execution of Wallace, who led the Scots in their battle to free themselves from English rule and whose story was brought to the screen by Mel Gibson in the 1995 film "Braveheart." The film won five Academy Awards.

"This is an historic moment. It is the first time in 700 years that a relic of this importance has left these shores," said Colin O'Brien, a Scottish official accompanying the sword to the United States.

The 6-pound weapon will be returned to its home at the National Wallace Monument in Stirling, Scotland, after the celebrations.

Wallace's sword was kept at Dumbarton Castle for 600 years. King James IV is said to have paid for it to be given a new hilt in 1505.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: New York; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: archaeology; ggg; godsgravesglyphs; history
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-188 next last
To: Sthitch
Well we know that there will not be any field trips to see this sword, it might give the students of NYC schools the idea of lopping off the arms and legs of their fellow students.

"'Tis but a scratch."

41 posted on 03/30/2005 1:46:37 PM PST by dfwgator (It's sad that the news media treats Michael Jackson better than our military.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

http://www.americanscottishfoundation.com/tartandayevents2005.htm
http://www.news24.com/News24/Entertainment/Abroad/0,,2-1225-1243_1682811,00.html
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050330-124516-2581r.htm

Hope that helps!


42 posted on 03/30/2005 1:46:50 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick ("Marsa Stert is a britch and and I sit on the exhange")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Oberon

6 stone maybe ?


43 posted on 03/30/2005 1:50:35 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn

If you go further into that web site, it looks like Gibson copied the Robert the Bruce Sword instead.


44 posted on 03/30/2005 1:52:52 PM PST by Military family member (If pro is the opposite of con and con the opposite of pro, then the opposite of Progress is Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
I have no idea how much this sword weighs but I've seen it and it's huge. My first reaction is that it's probably taller than Mel Gibson. NOt knocken Mel but he aint to tall.

My second thought was William Wallace was alleged to be around 6'5" and even if you factor in some exageration due to legendary status he had to be one big MOFO for his time. If you see the sword you can tell he would have to be very big and strong to wield it.

45 posted on 03/30/2005 1:53:33 PM PST by marlon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Oberon

From an article on The Association for Renaissance Martial Arts ( www.thehaca.com)page:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html

"Identification - Definition of the Two-Handed Great Sword

To understand what we are discussing it is important to first have a working definition. The respected work, Swords and Hilt Weapons, offers this description of the weapon:

"The two-handed sword was a specialized and effective infantry weapon, and was recognized as such in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although large, measuring 60-70 in/150-175 cm overall, it was not as hefty as it looked, weighing something of the order of 5-8 lbs/2.3-3.6 kg. In the hands of the Swiss and German infantrymen it was lethal, and its use was considered as special skill, often meriting extra pay. Fifteenth-century examples usually have an expanded cruciform hilt, sometimes with side rings on one or both sides of the quillon block. This was the form which remained dominant in Italy during the sixteenth century, but in Germany a more flamboyant form developed. Two-handed swords typically have a generous ricasso to allow the blade to be safely gripped below the quillons and thus wielded more effectively at close quarters. Triangular or pointed projections, known as flukes, were added at the base of the ricasso to defend the hand." (Coe et al, p. 48) "


46 posted on 03/30/2005 1:55:37 PM PST by antiantiamericans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Oberon
You got to be joking. Fill a 5 gal bucket with water and add two more gallons (7 gal. of water total or 60 lbs) and try swinging it around your head. Even William Wallace (who had lightning bolts come out his ass: see the movie) could not do that in the heat of battle.
47 posted on 03/30/2005 1:56:25 PM PST by fish hawk (I am only one, but I am not the only one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: marlon

http://www.thearma.org/essays/Misconceptions.htm


48 posted on 03/30/2005 1:57:31 PM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #49 Removed by Moderator

To: marlon

Good article at the link I gave.


50 posted on 03/30/2005 1:58:16 PM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Oberon
60 lbs. Wouldn't that be like swinging Calista Flockhart around? (Alley McBeal)
51 posted on 03/30/2005 2:04:12 PM PST by fish hawk (I am only one, but I am not the only one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Military family member

Yeah, I noticed that. It does have a cleaner, leaner look, IMHO.


52 posted on 03/30/2005 2:09:34 PM PST by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

I got a kilt from Sport Kilt and I'm wearing it to the offce on Tartan Day.

Maybe someday the Scots will be free of the Brits, like us.


53 posted on 03/30/2005 2:13:28 PM PST by voxpop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk

Oberon is flat wrong.

Look at this:

http://albion-swords.com/swords/albion/squire/sword-squire-warsword.htm

47 inches.
3 pounds 10 ounces.


54 posted on 03/30/2005 2:13:30 PM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

I got a kilt from Sport Kilt and I'm wearing it to the offce on Tartan Day.

Maybe someday the Scots will be free of the Brits, like us.


55 posted on 03/30/2005 2:15:03 PM PST by voxpop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: voxpop

Sorry 'bout the double post. It's been awhile.


56 posted on 03/30/2005 2:17:17 PM PST by voxpop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy; msdrby; Darksheare
And only 6 lbs. That's pretty good for a 5 foot sword.

Aye. It is fairly thin, however. Mine is about 3 1/2 feet and weighs in at 7 pounds.

57 posted on 03/30/2005 2:20:45 PM PST by Professional Engineer (Have you angered a muslim today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn

Whoa, 8 pounds? My single hand sword is less than 3.


58 posted on 03/30/2005 2:22:37 PM PST by Sender (Team Infidel USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Professional Engineer

Supposedly it's also balanced quite well.
I'd love to know how they did that.


59 posted on 03/30/2005 2:28:31 PM PST by Darksheare (She sashayed into my heart, her insurance should cover the damages.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: dead

"The 6-pound weapon will be returned to its home..."

Wouldn't a 5ft sword be closer to 26lbs than just 6lbs? At 5ft and only 6lbs I can't imagine it would survive very many two handed swipes.


60 posted on 03/30/2005 2:46:55 PM PST by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-188 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson