G'day all,

The question of whether bagpipes were banned seems irrelevant in a film about Sir William Wallace – or at least raises the question upon which side they should appear. Presumably – unless Hollywood has altered the calendar – the film ends with Wallace's death in 1305, at which time the Scots had no bagpipes, although they may were known to the English, who developed a number of regional bagpipes from around that period.

The following is a small extract from Percy Scholes' classic The Oxford Companion to Music, Oxford University Press, (First ed. 1938), Tenth Edition, 1970, twenty second impression, 1996 Edited by John Owen Ward.

Bagpipe Family Extract from (4): The Bagpipe in Scotland

... As stated above (3), the bagpipe was popular in England some centuries earlier than in Scotland. It begins to be mentioned and pictured in the latter country only from the early fifteenth century. James I of Scotland (lived 1304-1437) was a performer of reputation, and one may surmise that his example had something to do with the vogue the instrument quickly obtained. There are carvings showing bagpipes at Melrose Abbey and Roslin Chapel: the latter (1446) shows a performer playing from book presumably using the ancient notation just mentioned. Apparently some superiority in English playing was even after this period admitted, for in 1489 and 149 I the accounts of the Lord High Treasurer show payments to 'Inglis' players at the court.

Not having seen the film, I can't comment on any other part of the music but, if the Hollywood use of an anachronistic instrument can be taken as a sample of their attitude, it is much more likely to fit to stereotype and prejudice than fact.

Plus ca change, plus ca meme.

Regards, Bob Bolton