Finding the real Robin Hood
The earliest Robin Hood ballads (which existed in oral form for many decades before being written down in the mid-fifteenth century) are an unappreciated insight into medieval England. Historians prefer to write them off as fiction, often dismissing them by pointing to possible sources of inspiration from other legends or tales of outlawry, like that of Finn MacCool or Eustace the Monk and, in doing so, completely overlook their many unique qualities.
I first approached the ballads from an interest in folklore when, because I became conscious of key misinterpretations, I soon decided to start studying the history as well. I was curious to discover whether certain misconceptions might lead to a reconsideration of his existence.
At first this research was a casual, slow burner carried out for personal interest. Eventually, however, when I began to see a more complete and convincing picture, I realised I had to condense my findings into a publication.
The result of my research is Robin Hood Existed, in which I argue for firmly establishing everyone’s favourite outlaw as a historical figure, rather than one of legend.
I’m now firmly convinced that he existed beyond any reasonable doubt.
My books explores the reasons for which we have so many misconceptions about Robin Hood, which have largely come about because the first historians to try and explain who he was ended up writing a heap of nonsense that has waylaid historians ever since – though a prominent place in popular culture has also, inevitably, had its impact.
These historians, writing in the sixteenth century, would dismiss many of the key elements of the ballads because of class prejudice. They were writing histories for the nobility and did not think very much of the Robin Hood stories, looking down upon his reputation as a hero of the common man. Some tried to re-characterise him as a villain, others to recast him completely as a disinherited noble – just as he remains in most modern film depictions.
The truth was that he was always a yeoman and the yeomanry are notoriously difficult for historians to study. Their deeds are not recorded by scholars, so it is fortunate that we have the ballads at all, which attest to Robin’s popularity and also his heroism.
Indeed, it is these two crucial factors that I found to most require a thorough re-examination in order to understand him better, as Robin’s heroism and popularity have also been re-characterised. Many have found his behaviour and actions in the earliest ballads to be unsatisfying for their notions of heroism, as his actions have been interpreted as silly and playful, but this is a wildly inaccurate reading of what is going on.
For example, Robin is often said to be disappointing in that he challenges many people to fights and loses. But, firstly, this only ever happens once, in the ballad Robin Hood and the Potter (though it became retold as the famous Friar Tuck story). And, secondly, those who have depicted the ballad in this context have completely overlooked who the Potter in question is. Although we are never given a name for him, the Potter is clearly described as a fearsome individual who pays tolls to no one and may have even once bettered Little John in a fight.
In going up against him, Robin is trying to impress his men and almost pays a heavy price for attempt. However, with the exception of the Death ballad in which he is tricked and murdered, this is the only example of Robin being clearly beaten, excepting one occasion where fellow Merry Man, Gilbert with the white hand, comes first in an archery contest. Robin still comes second however, though competing against many skilled bowmen. Elsewhere he kills twelve of the sheriff’s men and wounds many more, when cornered in a church; he leads his men out of an ambush when the sheriff tricks them into attending a tournament; and, perhaps most notably, he slays Guy of Gisborne without the help of anyone else, though Gisborne is also described as a feared and formidable individual. In addition, the strength and physical prowess of his Merry Men are frequently referred to throughout the ballads.
His popularity and heroism are not in question after all, though understanding his place in the hearts of the yeomanry has proven problematic. By providing a more accurate reading of the ballads, therefore, I hope that we can clear up the many aspects of his reputation that are seen as murky. While, in doing so, and by rendering him in a clearer historical context, we can reach a confident conclusion that the ballads were certainly based on the exploits of a remarkable but also a very plausible hero.
I first approached the ballads from an interest in folklore when, because I became conscious of key misinterpretations, I soon decided to start studying the history as well. I was curious to discover whether certain misconceptions might lead to a reconsideration of his existence.
At first this research was a casual, slow burner carried out for personal interest. Eventually, however, when I began to see a more complete and convincing picture, I realised I had to condense my findings into a publication.
The result of my research is Robin Hood Existed, in which I argue for firmly establishing everyone’s favourite outlaw as a historical figure, rather than one of legend.
I’m now firmly convinced that he existed beyond any reasonable doubt.
My books explores the reasons for which we have so many misconceptions about Robin Hood, which have largely come about because the first historians to try and explain who he was ended up writing a heap of nonsense that has waylaid historians ever since – though a prominent place in popular culture has also, inevitably, had its impact.
These historians, writing in the sixteenth century, would dismiss many of the key elements of the ballads because of class prejudice. They were writing histories for the nobility and did not think very much of the Robin Hood stories, looking down upon his reputation as a hero of the common man. Some tried to re-characterise him as a villain, others to recast him completely as a disinherited noble – just as he remains in most modern film depictions.
The truth was that he was always a yeoman and the yeomanry are notoriously difficult for historians to study. Their deeds are not recorded by scholars, so it is fortunate that we have the ballads at all, which attest to Robin’s popularity and also his heroism.
Indeed, it is these two crucial factors that I found to most require a thorough re-examination in order to understand him better, as Robin’s heroism and popularity have also been re-characterised. Many have found his behaviour and actions in the earliest ballads to be unsatisfying for their notions of heroism, as his actions have been interpreted as silly and playful, but this is a wildly inaccurate reading of what is going on.
For example, Robin is often said to be disappointing in that he challenges many people to fights and loses. But, firstly, this only ever happens once, in the ballad Robin Hood and the Potter (though it became retold as the famous Friar Tuck story). And, secondly, those who have depicted the ballad in this context have completely overlooked who the Potter in question is. Although we are never given a name for him, the Potter is clearly described as a fearsome individual who pays tolls to no one and may have even once bettered Little John in a fight.
In going up against him, Robin is trying to impress his men and almost pays a heavy price for attempt. However, with the exception of the Death ballad in which he is tricked and murdered, this is the only example of Robin being clearly beaten, excepting one occasion where fellow Merry Man, Gilbert with the white hand, comes first in an archery contest. Robin still comes second however, though competing against many skilled bowmen. Elsewhere he kills twelve of the sheriff’s men and wounds many more, when cornered in a church; he leads his men out of an ambush when the sheriff tricks them into attending a tournament; and, perhaps most notably, he slays Guy of Gisborne without the help of anyone else, though Gisborne is also described as a feared and formidable individual. In addition, the strength and physical prowess of his Merry Men are frequently referred to throughout the ballads.
His popularity and heroism are not in question after all, though understanding his place in the hearts of the yeomanry has proven problematic. By providing a more accurate reading of the ballads, therefore, I hope that we can clear up the many aspects of his reputation that are seen as murky. While, in doing so, and by rendering him in a clearer historical context, we can reach a confident conclusion that the ballads were certainly based on the exploits of a remarkable but also a very plausible hero.
No comments have been added yet.
