I doubt it- unless their birth years were way off. Queen Isabella lived from ca. 1295--1358. William Wallace lived from ca. 1272-1305. Queen Isabella was married to Edward II (son of Longshanks) to help ease relations with France. Edward II was said to be very cruel to his queen. Eventually Isabella freed a man named Sir Roger Mortimer from the Tower of London and helped him escape to France to help her brother Charles. She later escaped to France also. With the help of Charles, Isabella and Sir Roger raised and army to overthrow Edward and his advisor Hugh Despenser (said to be his lover). The story is more detailed than that, but that's my understanding.
Chat with our AI personalities
No. Braveheart, whilst being an exciting film, was full of historical inaccuracies. Isabella's firstborn, Edward III was born on 13 November 1312, William Wallace was executed on 23 August 1305. So a physical impossibility!
William Wallace really existed.
he is believed to be loaded because he was the second son of a minor noble but noone really knows.
the story of William Wallace is very much like the film; you just remove every single little detail of story, scenery, dialogue, and a good bit of the characters, voila.
yes. Prince Eward II is William Wallace's child because he had an affair with Princess Isabella the french princess who was married to King Eward I. She had the child a few months after William Wallace's death. The above statement is FALSE. Isabelle of France didn't give birth to Edward II, she was MARRIED TO HIM. Edward I (often referred to as "longshanks") was Father of Edward II, who married the French Princess Isabelle, but not until long after Wallace had been executed and two years after the death of Longshanks. Contrary to "Braveheart", she never met, let alone had a relationship with, either man.