THE National Trust for Scotland has defended its portrayal of the Battle of Bannockburn as "two kings jostling for position" as opposed to a battle between Scotland and England.
The controversial claim was made by Michael Hunter, the trust's west regional director, during a meeting held to outline the guidelines for the annual commemorations and re-enactment held over the weekend.
Alison Corley, the trust's property manager at Bannockburn, defended the "historically accurate" comments yesterday to The Scotsman.
She said: "Our view may not be the most popular take on what happened at Bannockburn, but it's a historically accurate one. Our intention is to educate and engage people by presenting a full, holistic point of view of events. Bannockburn can't be described as a battle between Scotland and England. There were people fighting from Ireland, Wales, France, and Germany. It changed the history of the British isles, and was a turning point in history. We're trying to give an honest portrait.
"I am not saying that Scots and English didn't fight, but that it is not just a case of Scotland against England. That's like saying World War Two was only Germany versus Britain."
However, David R Ross, convener of the Society of William Wallace, who attended the meeting, said: "It was incredible. In front of a room full of people, they said that Bannockburn was not a fight between England and Scotland. They said it was simply between two kings. Every jaw hit the floor when it was said.
"It was shocking and offensive. They are trying to rewrite history. This was Scotland's defining moment, when Robert the Bruce led Scotland to independence. The Scots were fighting for their very liberty.
"It is political correctness because they are scared of offending anyone from England who might come to their visitor centre. They were also scared that English people attending the re-enactment might feel isolated."
Stirling historian, Craig Mair, author of Stirling: The Royal Burgh, said: "Bannockburn was a battle between Scotland and England and it is ridiculous to say otherwise, although men from other nations certainly took part in the fighting. But both kings represented their countries. The Scottish nation was clearly emerging as a concept following the earlier efforts of William Wallace, and it was certainly there by the time of Bannockburn.
"Indeed, Bannockburn was a rare occasion on which Highlanders, Lowlanders and Borderers all fought for Scotland."
Last updated: 25-Jun
-- Edited by Rabbie Downunder at 04:18, 2007-07-08
