Robin Hood: A Historiography

NICOiE CARTER

In Warner Brothers Pictures’ 1938 film TheAdventures ofRobin hood, Robin asks hispeasant followers to swear an oath which encapsulates the values with which Robin I lood isassociated today:

Do you, the free men of Shenvood Forest. swear to despoil the rich only togive to the poor? To shelter the old and the helpless? To protect all women,rich or poor, Norman or Saxon? To fight for a free England. to protect herloyally until the return ofotir king and sovereign, Richard the Lionheart? Andswear to fight to the death against our oppressors?

This rousing speech is met w’ith a rcsotinding ehonis of Aye’s.’ The medieval Robin I lood, however,was far removed from modern moviemaking

The oldest extant literary reference to Robin flood is found in Pie,s Ploti’rnan when theignorant priest Sloth confesses. “I can noughte pcrfitlv my pater-noster as the prest it syngcd , / l3tit Ican rvmes of Robyn I lood and Randolferle of Chestre.”’ Commonly dated to 1377, this referencestiggests that a strong oral tradition concerning Robin I load existed prior to that date, and that sucha tradition was considered idle and foolish—a priest who should be able to recite prayers has insteadspent time learning trivial rhymes.

From 1377 on, references to Robin I lood proliferated. Robin I mod appeared in texts,proverbs,3 topographical references and general comments. By one count, Robin earned a6omentions by i6oo. lie became the subject of annual plays and games held around Vhitstinday inlate May or early June as a mock-king who presided over dances, sports. pageants. and processions?

As a representative of outlaws, Robin I food was associated with criminal court eases.ibe ballads, well known by the early fifteenth century, infitienced the legal language of the time, asdemonstrated by the phrase ‘Robin I lixic en flamesdale srodc’—a popular opening line—quoted ineotirt in I429. In 1439 a petition denouncing the misdeeds of the criminal Piers Vcnables, chargedthat he gathered arotmd him misdocrs ‘beyng of his clothinge, and in manere of insurection w’enteinto the ‘odes in [the] country like it hadde be Robyn I lode and his mcyncc.7 Criminals also oftenassumed names associated w’ith the Robin I load legend: criminal records have turned up a Frerebk’ in 1417, a ‘Robyn I load’ in 1497, and a Grenclcff (an alias used by John) in 1502.8

The ballads that make up the Robin I lood tradition, as a whole, are not especiallyaccomplished literary works. Penned in English rather than the Latin or Norman French of theelite, the ballads’chiefconcem consists of narrating an adventure, offering little character orrelationship development. They do not fit into any clearly defined genre, alternately referred to as

The Adventures of Robin Hood. Dir. Michael Curtiz. Errol Flynn, Olivia de Havilland. WamerBrothers Pictures, 193$.1 Douglas Gray, “The Robin Hood Poems” in Stephen Knight, ed, Anthology, 5.The two most oft-quoted proverbs arc ‘tales of Robin Hood are good for fools’ and ‘many a manspeaks of Robin Hood that never bent [shot] his bow.’Stephen Knight, “Splitting Time’s Arrow,” 124.So popular were these games in 1459 one bishop complained to parliament that when he came intoone town to preach, he found the church empty. A local told him: ‘Syr thya is a busyc daye with us,we can not heare you, it is Robyn Hoodes day. The pariahe are gone abrode to gather for RobynHoode.’ Gray, “Robin Hood Poems,” $Gray, “Robin Hood Poems,” 6

1 Gray, “Robin Hood Poems,” 7Gray, “Robin Hood Poems,” 7

Ex PosT FACTO

190 Nicole Carter

‘rymes,’ ‘tales,’ ‘songs.’ ‘gests.’ or’fablesY I lowevcr, some may be considered drama, scich as Robinhood and the lilonk. while others remain closet to comedy, such as Robin hood and the Potte,:

The earliest extant ballads include—A GesrofRobin Hode(often called simply theGecr, Robin Hood and the Monk. Robin hood and the Potter, Robin hood and GuvoiGisborne,and Robin hood’s Death. These five receive the most historical concern because they come closestto representing the original version of the ballad. They also share several common elements. Robin isalways called a yeoman, rather than a dispossessed nobleman—that version of the talc (the‘gentrification’ of Robin) did not appear until the 159os. In fact, Robin I lood’s reason for being anoutlaw remains unstated. Robin’s companions always include Little John, Much the Miller’s Son,and Will Scarlct.° Maid Marian and Friar Tuckwere later additions. The tales also always takeplace in summer. butwith two locations competing as Robin’s residence: Sherwood Forest inNottinghamshire or Barnsdale in Yorkshire. The sheriff, however, is always the sheriff ofNottingham.

Robin I lood historiography draws tipon analyses ofvarious details and themes withinthese five ballads, making it useful to begin with a brief synopsis ofeach.

A GestofRobin Iloocf:

In print around Ioo, the Gestis a long rambling narrative, likely compiled from several older oraland textual traditions, and contains inconsistencies in style, plot, character, and message.3 A longpoem of456 four-line stanzas, divided into eight cantos or ‘fi,ttcs,’ it is both the longest and the mostfrequently disetissed of the ballads:

Fvne i. In the Barnsdale greenwood with his men, Robin will not dine tintilhe has welcomed an unexpected guest to the feast. Little John. Much, andWill are sent otit to the road to capture such a ‘guest.’ ‘lucy soon encounter abuight who accepts their invitation to dine and enjoys feasting with RobinI lood. After dinner Robin suggests that the knight should pay for the meal.The knight pleads poverty and John verifies his lack ofmoney through asearch of his belongings. The knight explains: in order to pay bail for his son.who ha.s committed homicide. he had to mortgage his estate for 400 potindsto the abbot of St. Mary’s. York. The debt is now due and the knight doesn’thave the money to pay it. Robin decides to lend him the money, with theknight pledging repayment upon the name of the Virgin Mary. W’ith thisadvance and the provision ala suitable horse and attire, the knight is sent onhis way, accompanied by Little John acting as his servant.Fytte 2. In York. the abbot, the sheriff, and the high justice of England (whohas been retained under cloth and fee by the abbot) sit relishing the due dateand greedily anticipating that the knight will not be able to fulfill his debt.The knight appears, poorly dressed, and begs each in mm to accept his service

Robin Hood ‘ballads’ are not ballads in the modem sense in that they were intended to be recitedrather than sung. Peter Coss, “Aspects of Cultural Diffusion in Medieval England: Robin Hood” inStephen Knight, ed., Anthologj’, 333.‘° Also spelled Scarlock or Scathelock.Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire arc bordering counties.

12 This following summary is derived from]. C. Holt Robin Hood, 17-22.‘ Holt, Robin Hood, 22 and Gray “Robin Hood Poems,” 7.

Ex PosT FACTO

Robin Hood: A Historiography

of friendship rather than money. Each refuses. i’hc knight then pays his debtmuch to the disappointment of the abbot.Fyttc 3. Little John takes part in an archery contest and the sheriff, impressedby John’s performance, invites him into his service. John, alias ReynoldGreenlefe, accepts out of a determination to get revenge tipon the sheriff.While the sheriff is out hunting, John quarrels with the cook and when theyget to fighting, the cook proves so hardy of an adversary that John asks him tojoin Robin’s band to which the cook agrees. ‘IThey steal the sheriffs valuablesand lure him to Robin in the forest. The sheriff is capnired and, spending anight in the woods, is released after swearing on Robin’s sword never to harmRobin or do other than aid his men.Fytte.In the forest, John. Much and Will again lay in wait for a ‘dinner

gucst.’Thev capture a monk by force after his escort flees. The monk turnsout to be the high cellarer of Sc Mary’s and Robin decides he has been sent torepay the knight’s debt which was pledged in Mary’s name). The lyingcellarer denies all knowledge of any debt and claims to be carrying only twentymarks. John searches his baggage and finds 8oo pounds which the outlaw’stake, receiving repayment twofold. The monk sent on his way. The knightrealms to repay Robin’s loan but Robin instead gives him the extra oopounds.F7uc 5. The sheriff holds an archery contest with a gold and silver arrow’ as aprize for the victor, Robin and his men take part and Robin wins. 1 ‘he sheriffbetrays his word and raises the hue and cry against them. ‘l’he outlaws flee btitJohn is wounded in the knee, forcing them to take refuge in the castle of SirRichard at the Lee, who is identified as the knight from the previous f,trcs.Fytte 6. The sheriffwages siege on Sir Richard’s castle. Unsuccessful, hegoes off to I.ondon to appeal to the king. Robin and John. now recovered,return to the forest. iThe sheriff returns and takes revenge by capturing theknight. Robin receives word via the knight’s wife, pursues the sheriff toNottingham. and kills him by shooting him with arrow and then beheadinghim. ‘l’he otitlaw’s rescue the knight from the sheriffs they (outlawsand knight) take refuge in the forest until Robin can obtain pardons from theking.Fyttc.The king comes to Nottingham, wanting to capture Robin I lood,

who has depleted his forest of deer. Unstieccssftil at finding Robin, the kingenters the forest with small company disguised as monks and himselfdisguised as abbot. They are promptly waylaid and entertained in Robin’stisual manner, After dinner, Robin holds an archery contest in which anyonewho misses a shot will be struck on the head. When Robin misses his shot,the ‘abbot’ strikes him so forcefully that the otitlaws suddenly recognize him asthe king. They drop to their knees and ask for pardons. The king pardonsthem and then asks them to enter the royal service. The king, impressed withthe loyalty of Robin’s men (to Robin), temporarily adopts Robin’s color ofLincoln green.Fyrte 8. ‘Ihe king and the outlaws return to Nottingham and thence toLondon. The knight is restored to his land, Robin, after a year or more in theking’s service, grows melancholy with longings for his old life. All his menhave left him except John and Will and he has exhausted his wealth in the richworld of the court. Robin obtains pemlission to visit a chapel in Barnsdalc.Released from service, he rctinites with his band and lives in the threst for

Ex POST FACTO

192 Nicole Carter

twenty two years. In the end, he is slain by treachery. lie visits his relative.the prioress of Kirklees. for medical treatment. She and her lover, Sir Rogerof Doncaster. and plot the outlaw’s death. The Gecrends briefly with a prayerfor Robin’s soul.

Robin Hood and theMo,ih’4:Dated around i.o.

Robin I lood wishes to attend chtirch in Nottingham despite his comrades’advice against it. John accompanies him on the road and the two have aninformal shooting match. John wins, but Robin is such a sore loser—hittingJohn over the head—that John departs in anger, telling Robin to find himselfanother companion. Alone. Robin is identified b’ a monk at St. Man’schurch who calls upon the sheriff to arrest him. Robin fights off and killstwelve of the sheriffs men before his sword hreaI and he is captured. In thewoods. Robin’s men hear of his betrayal by the monk. John says he and Muchwill find the monk and save Robin. Pretending to be yitjj of Robin I loud.they meet the monk, kill him and take his letters (from the sheriff announcingthe capture of Robin I lood) on to the king. John receives a warrant from theking to deliver Robin to his (the king’s) custody. On their return toNottingham on this errand, John and Much are welcomed and entertained bythe sheriff, before breaking Robin out of prison at night and returning toSherwood, John point otir that he has done Robin ‘a gode nirne for an cvuyhl’and Robin offers to make John ‘rnaister...Off all my men and me,’ but Johndeclines, preferring a system of fellowship. l3eguiled. the sheriff fearspunishment by the king but the king. equally bcgtuled, is forced toacknowledge that John. a faithful servant. ‘is true to his maister’ and has‘begyled vs alle.’

Robin hood and rue Potter:

A ‘proud potter’ appears. traveling through the greenwood. John refuses toaccost him since he has fought this potter before and lost. Robin bets onhimself against tile newcomer btit the potter wins and is paid. Robinexchanges clothes w’ith him and goes off to Nottingham in the gursc of apOflet. In town. Robin sells his pots quickly and well below market value; liegives the last pots to the sheriffs wife and is invited to dinner, The sheriffsmen hold a shooting match. Robin is given a bow, shoots, wins, and is praisedby the sheriff. The ‘potter’ says lie has a bow in his cart that Robin I loud gavehim, and the sheriff says lie w’ould give a htmdred pounds to meet RobinI hood. The next day they head for the forest, though before leaiing Robingives the sheriffs w’ife a gold ring. In the forest Robin blows his horn. All theoutlaws appear, take the sheriffs gold and horse, and send him home on foot.Robin sends the sheriffs wife a white palfrey (a lady’s horse). ‘rue wife laughswhen she hears the story and tells the sheriff he has paid for the pots Robin

4 The following summaries of Robin Hood and the Monk, Robin Hood and the Poller, Robin Hoodand Guy of Guisborne, and Robin Hood’s Death are derived from Stephen Knight, Complete Study,5 2-60.

Ex POST FACTO

Robin Hood: A Historiography

gave her. Rack in the forest Robin gives the potter ten pounds for his pots *alarge sum) and says he svill always be welcome in the forest.

Robin hood and Guy olGisborne:

In the greenwood, Robin mentions a dream he has had of impending violence[text damaged]. Robin and John sec another man along the road but theyargue about who will accost him. John leaves angrily, goes off to Rarnsdaleand is captured by the sheriff. Meanwhile Robin meets the stranger, whointroduces himsclfas Guy olGisborne, a houncy-huinter seeking Robin I lood.Robin (not identifying himself) stiggests they share the quest. They stridethrough the woods amusing themselves with a shooting competition, whichRobin wins; then Robin reveals himself and they fight have a duel which lastfor two hours before Robin succeeds in killing Guy. Robin cuts oft (,us headand sticks iron his bow’s end noting that Guy has been a traitor all his life.Robin then disfigures Gtiy’s face so that no one can recognize him andexchanges clothes tvith the dead man. Robin blows Guy’s horn and the sheriffcomes to offer’Guy’ a reward for killing Robin. Robin refuses gold but asks tokill John (whom the sheriff has tJrouight with him). Instead of killing John,though, he frees him and hands him Guy’s bow. The sheriff runs towards hishotisc in Nottingham but John shoots him in the back cleaving his heart in

Robin hood’s Death:

Robin says he mtist go to Clmrehlees for bloodletting. \\‘ill Scarlet objects.but Robin agrees to take John with him, and they go oft shooting. On theway, Robin receives a warning to not let blood this day. The prioress bleedsRobin too much; John appears; Robin escapes through a window’ and yet isstabbed by’Red Roger.’ Robin kills Roger. btit is himself fatally wounded.Robin stops John from taking vengeance by htiming the priory, and tells Johnto bury him—apparently not in the greenwood.

The historiography of Robin I tood has primarily concerned itself w’ith three questions:\Vas there a real Robin I loud and, if so, who was he? When did the legend of Rohin I loud firstdevelop? Who was the original intended audience of the ballads? I listorians have answered these

by looking for correspondences between literature and history—by aligning variousinternal elements of the stories w’ith external elements of social or political history.

The first attempt to identifty Robin I mod as a historical character came from JosephI lunter, a Yorkshire archivist, in 1852. Noting that the king in the Gesris called ‘Edward, otir comelyking,’ I lunter set otit to idcnri’ which of the Edwards this phrase refers to, and by extension, toascertain the precise time period in w’hich Robin Flood lived. i’aking as a clue the fact that theEdward in the Gcsrmakes a progress through Lancaster, I Itinter used manuscript itineraries of thefirst three Edwards to deduce that the king in qticstion must he Edward II (r. 1307-1327), who s’as inthe north part of the eoulntry, including Lancashire, in late 1323. Edward II, like the king in the Gesr,tbeused on reforming abuses of the forest law. ihough he dismissed the tinkingly action” of Edwarddressing in disguuse to meet a notorious bandit as a poetic invention,” I lunter did stippose that by

° Trevor Dean, Crime in Medieval Europe, 145-147.

EX POST FACTO

194 Nicole Carter

some less remarkable device. Robin I lood—likely a follower of the rebelliotis and recently executedEarl of Lancaster.6 hence an otitlaw—carne into the king’s power. In the Gest. the king asks RobinI leod to come to cotirt and enter his service. In a notable discovery, I hinter found Exchequerdocuments containing accounts of expenses in the king’s household in which a ‘Robyn I-lode’ isrecorded several times receiving pay as one of the ‘valdets. porteurs de Ia chambre’ of the king. Illsrecorded wages date from April to July 1324, dates which correspond closely to the end of EdwardI l’s Lancashire progress in I)ecernbcr 1323. The wage reports also record that this Robyn I lode didnot attend court to receive pay on several occasions, and by late November had ceased workingaltogether. I ltrntcr likened these absences, and Robyn’s abniptdepamire, to the Gesr-Robin’sdissatisfaction with life at cotirt. “There is in all this,” I lunrer concluded. “perhaps as muchcorrespondency as we can reasonably expect between the record and the ballad.”1

I lunter’s work set a trend in Robin I lood historiographv—tning to match a historicallynamed figure with the literary outlaw. Although 1-lunter’s identification has drawn criticism amongmodern Robin I load scholars for its heavy reliance on circumstantial evidence, a weakness thatI Iuntcr himself acknowledged. this has not deterred others from identifying their own historicalRobin I loads, most ofwhom prove to actually have had a connection to criminality. ‘fliese otherRobin I loads include: a man in York in 1226 called ‘Robert I lood, a fugitive;’ Robert I loud, anabbot’s servant who killed a man in Circencester in 1213; and a Robin I load arrested for a breach of aroyal forest in Rockingharn in l354. The problem with all these attempts at biographical historicismis that neither ‘Robin’ nor’l loud’ were unique names. Robin. a diminutive of Robert. has beenestimated to have been shared by5 to io percent of the male poptilation,9 and I load occurs inmultiple spellings and variations (I lode, I bode, ‘hood. Wood, I lobbe, and I lobe). Given the lackof infomiation available abotit each of the individuals, it renlains impossible to determine which ofthese multiple Robin I load’s was the Robin that first inspired the legend. Most historians havegiven tip this path of enquiry, being contentwith R II. I lilton’s coneltision that Robin I loud’s“historical significance does not depend on whether he s’as a real person or not.” Questions havebeen raised instead about who the early Robin I load myth appealed to—who speeilicallv formed theprirnan atidience for the Robin I load ballads? Implicit in this question is also ofa question oftiming: When did the legend of Robin I toad first appear and begin to spread?

In separate articles published in 1958. 1 lilton and Maurice Keen ptit forth the idea thatthe early Robin I load ballads constitute a by-product of an agrarian social struggle over rents.services and social status. which ultimately culminated in the Peasant’s Revoltof 1381.’ Robin I load.they argued. appealed mostly to the peasantry in late medieval England as a hero “whose mostendearing activities to his public were the robbery and killing of landowners, in particular churchlandowners, and the maintenance of guedlla warfare against established atithority represented by theshedff,” In the Gear, when Little John asks Robin who they should ‘bcte and bynde,’ Robin replies:

Thomas Plantagent, 2nd Earl of Lancaster (borne. 1278), was executed March 22, 1322 for treasonagainst Edward II.Joseph Hunter, “Robin Hood” in Stephen Knight, ed., Anthology, 187-194.

8 Knight, “Splitting Time’s Arrow,” 122-123.° One in four of the male population were called John, William and Thomas had 10-12% each, and5 to 10% were called Robert. Andrew Ayton, “Military Service and the Development of the RobinHood Legend in the Fourteenth Century” in Nottingham Medieval Studies (1992), 127 footnote 5.20 R. H. Hilton, “The Origins of Robin Hood” in Stephen Knight, ed., Audiology, 197.2i Hilton, “The Origins of Robin Hood,” 197-2 10 and Maurice Keen, “Robin Hood: A Peasant Hero”in History Today (1991), 20-24 (a reprint of the 1958 article). Keen later expanded his ideas in hisbook The Outlasvs ofMedieval England (1960).Hilton, “The Origins of Robin Hood,” 197.

Ex POST FACTO

Robin Hood: A Historiography

Joke ye do no husbonde harme / ‘l’hat tylleth with his plotigheNo more ye shall no gode yeman / That walketh by grene wode shawe;Ne no knyght ne no squyer / That vol be a gode felawe.iisese bisshoppes and these arehebisshoppes/Yc shall them bete and byndeThe bye sherifof Notyingham / I lyrn holde ye in your myndc’3

lie thus excludes the peasantry, husbandmen, from his list of victims and foctises solely on attackingthe tipper, landowning classes. The crooked monks of St. Mary’s—robbed in the Gesr, murdered in1Ionk—rcpresent exemplars of unrelenting landlordism.” The sheriff, Robin I lood’s frcqtientenemy, remained an enemy of the peasantry due to his power to compel tenants to pay rent, performservices, or to dispel or arrest rioters. Moreover, Robin, like the peasants involved in the uprising of1381, rallied against local injustice, but placed his utmost faith in the king. ‘I love no man in all theworlde/ So well as I do my kynge,’ declared Robin in the Gcs’— even as he struck out at the localagents of the king’s authority.

This pro-agrarian outlook offered hyl lilton and Keen led to an ensuing debate amongsthistorians. J. C. I bIt has presented the opposite view—that the early Robin I lood ballads wereoriginally the literature, not of a discontented peasantry, but of the gentry.” The chief topics in theGesr, I Jolt argued, namely ecclesiastical usury and issues over ibrest latv and the sheriffs, werepresented in such a way as to appeal more to the gentry than to any other group. The first menaceencountered in the Gesreoneerned the gentry—the knight’s nlortgage debt and its repayment, hissubsequent loan from Robin and its repayment. Like husbandmen, knights and squires also madeRobin’s ‘do not attack’ list. Commenting upon the sheriff theme, I Jolt thund “the attack is directedagainst the highest ranks of the local administration with whom the knights and gentry were inregular contact and frequent conflict, not against those whom we might expect the peasantry tochoose as their chief targets.” The abbot, meanwhile, was derided not for his role as landlord btit forhis unChristian greed; anti-clericalism remained widespread among the gentry as well as thepeasantry. I bIt traced these developments to the late thirteenth century, which he argtied as thecorrect time of Robin I bond’s origination, lie further cited the use of the unusual compoundsurnames Robynhod’ and 1 obynhoud’ in 1296 and 1332 as evidence of the widespread influence ofthe Robin I lood legend by this time.

Although primarily designed for a gentle audience and disseminated from the manorialhall, I Jolt continued, Robin I loud stories extended beyond this audience:

For such a convivial and socially mixed audience as a household the balladsbrought together a number ofattractive and well-worn themes: a roughlyenforced and crudely conceived idea of justice and morality; a code of honesty;a good fight, an adventurous chase; thejoke of trickery by disgtuse; the Kingincognito. These formed a common denominator, independent of class,which made tip the basic Robin I lood.

I’rom this mixed bag of themes, there developed two strands: an ‘aristocratic’ strand which came tobe embodied in the gentrifleadon of the Victorian era plays, and a ‘plebeian’ strand, represented bythe Robin I lood plays and games associated w’ith May Day.’

Specifically refuting the connections made by I lilton and Keen between the Robin I loodballads and the Peasant’s Revolt, I bIt fotind no significant links between the two. The evidence, he

23 j, B. Dobson and John Taylor, Rymes ofRobin Hood, 80.24 Dobson and Taylor, Rymes ofRobin Hood, 107.25 Jc• Holt, “The Origins and Audience of the Ballads of Robin Hood,” in Stephen Knight, ed.,Anthology, 211-232.

Ex POST FAcTO

196 Nicole Carter

argued. simply wasn’t there: the Peasant’s Revolt did not have “any spechdsignificancc in this [RobinI lood] context unless it can be shown that the ballads were mrncukrrlj’enjoycd by the particularpeasants ot types of peasant who rcvoited.”’ Keen, after a debate with I bit, retracted his previousassertions by conceding that I loft’s ideas were “much closer to the truth,” and that his own priorwork would not stand up to scrutiny.’7

Other scholars, however, continued to qtiestion I bit’s findings by challenging his datingof the material and his claim of a gentry audience. J. R. Madicott took issue with I bit’s dating of theGcstto tire late thirteenth cennin’. arguing instead for its genesis during the first half of thefourteenth cenrun. Examining the socio-politicai context of the Gcs Madicort found that theballad “speaks the language of bastard feudalisrrr’ and it is the language of the fourteenth centuryrather than of the thirteenth.” ‘lire use of liveries and fees exhibited in tire Gesr—the abbot retainsthe justice ‘with clothe and fee’ to deprive the knight of his land; the sheriff offers zo marks to retainLittle John—constitute characteristics of the early fourteenth century. Other factors dated to thethirteenth century by I bIt, including the distraint of knighthood, a corrupt sheriff, and the businessof the forest, could belong just as easily to the fourteenth century.

Madicott included other historical and literary evidence as well, The memory of twofamous and successful outlaw gangs, the Folvilles and the Coterels, who operated in the northmidlands between 1334 and 1339. may have played a role in enhancing the reptitation of outlawsduring a time ofunstable political circumstances.’9 ‘tire Gestalso Fits into tire genre ofcontemporaryfourteenth cenwn protest literature. The 1338 ‘Song against the King’s taxes,’ for instance,complains against profiteering by tax collectors. Madicon thus argued for a dating of the Gesrandof Robin’s origin that lay not more than a generation or two before the first recorded reference toRol,in I loud in 1377. which conctirred with I lunter’s proposed time period. I bowever. he did notclaim that I ttinter’s man was tire real Robin I tood.

David Crook iras convincingly strengthened I bit’s dating of Robin I food to tire latetirirteenrlr century with an additional archival discovery from an Exelrcqtier pipe roll. In April rz6zan abbot was pardoned for seizing tire cirattels of a fugitive nanred ‘Willianr Robehod’ witirotit awarrant. Aitirotigir Viiiiairr’s proper nairre irad been given earlier in tire record as ‘\Viiliairr son ofRobert Ic Fevere,’ Iris surnanreirad been altered by an unkirown clerk to Robehod. denronstratirrg analready active awareness of tire Robin I lood legend as earf as tire iztios.3

With tire issue ofdating apparently settled, critiques again focused on tire question ofaudience. R. 13. Dobson and Joirn ‘I’avIor offered a few’ pointed critiqtles concenring tire ballads’original intention for an aristocratic audience, and tire gentry Irouseiroids stanis as tire prinrarvsetting for tireir dissemination. Considering tire diversified profession of nrinstrelsy. and tire fact thatlivened nrinstrels attached to great liouseirolds would only be required to be physically present in tiregreat iralls at tire principal feasts of tire year, it nray be possible to argue tirat “most nrinstreis spentirrucir of tlreir time perfornring before audiences even larger than tirose afforded by tire aristocratic

26 Holt, “Some Comments” in R. H. Hilton, ed., Peasants, Knights, and Heretics, 267-269.Maurice Keen. “Robin Hood—Peasant or Gentleman?” in R. H. Hilton, ed, Peasants, Knights,

and Heretics, 266. Keen’s retraction was in 1976.a Bastard feudalism: Men were bound together by periodic payments of money rather than grants ofland. “It could be a positive mechanism for stability, order, and justice but paradoxically, it could, inthe wrong hands, lead to the perversion ofjustice, criminal feuds, and anarclry.” Thomas Olhgren,“Edwardus Redivivus in A Gest ofRobyn Hode” in Journal ofEnglish and Germanic Philology, 1529 A baronial rebellion against Edward II.° J. R, Madicott, “The Birth and Setting of the Ballads of Robin Hood” in Stephen Knight, ed.,Anthology, 233-256.‘ David Crook, “Some further Evidence Concerning the Dating of the Origins of the Legend ofRobin Hood” in Stephen Kniglrt, cd, Anthology, 257-262.

EX POST FACTO

Robin Hood: A Historiography

household—the audiences provided by fairs and the larger English towns.” Support for this may betound in the two indisputably authentic fifteenth century ballad texts. l?ohin I load and the Monk-and I?obin hood 1Ind the Portei which show’ little or no courtl’ influence and seem best interpretedas ‘talkings’ addressed to the marketplace and to a popular audience especially responsive to thecomic and mock-heroic aspects of the legend.” The fact that in the GesrRubin only serves the king byspecial request and then only for a short period of time ‘presumably makes it unlikely that the RobinI lood stories would have been deliberately promoted by the aristocracy of England.” ‘I’his groupsvery organization depended on hierarchical service to a lord.3’

The role of the marketplace in the early ballads received even greater emphasis byRichard Tardifin an article published intO 1983. Looking hack at the debate over the ballads’intended audience between hilton and Ilolt, Tardif identified one primary weakness they bothsharcd.’l’hey both examined the Robin I hood ballads in a rural, manorial context. l]iere is simplyno reference [in the ballads] to the social economy ol the manor, lardifargued. Fhe action of allthe ballads is played out across a dichotomy of town and forest.” The difference of opinion betweenI tilton. I bIt, and Tardif largely stemmed from differing interpretations of the word ‘yeoman,’ and itsmeaning, though, Robin and his men are identified as yeomen in all the relevant ballads. I liltondefined yeoman as ‘neither a scoing man nor a rich peasant, but simply a pcasantoffree personalstatus.”33 I bIt placed yeomanry in a lower orderof the gentry. Yeoman, according to Tardif, couldmean an tirban journeyman or tradesman, as well as a relatively prosperous peasant. Tardif arguesthat Robins yeomanry placed him within this class of urban workers, “the outlaw band wasperceived in a fully conscious manner as a yeoman bourneyman] fraternity by a medieval atidienec”9’he economic organization of the forest band, when it becomes explicit, is that of a mastercraftsman’s shop. As evicted peasants migrated in search of employment in the developing moneyeconomy and fom’3ed an urban underclass, the theme of the forest in the ballads may haverepresented an ideal life that the audience votild have liked to live.5

Another theme, the role of the military in the Robin I loud ballads, has also served astopic of recent disetission. Discovering a garrison payroll from the Isle of ‘Night in November of 133$which lists a ‘Robin I lood among a company of forty-three archers, Andrew’ Avton becameinterested in the military aspects involved in the creation and spread of the Robin I load legend.Avton related Robin’s band of merry men to the gangs ofveteran soldiers that, returning jubless fromcampaigns in Scutland took to robbery along roads and in forests. Robin I lood tales, he maintained,“were distinctively colored by the prolonged experience ofwar in the later medieval period.” Ayton’sline of reasoning ran as such: civil conflicts in the l2tios and 132os meant that existing outlaw t,ands,augmented by a flood of restless, demobilized men, whose ‘colorful’ activities aflictcd the image ofthe outlaw community as perceived by the population at large, and hence Robin I load and his menbegan to look and behave like war veterans, lie strengthened his case by discussing several ‘lifestyle’similarities between robber-veterans and Robin I looci. Like many veterans, Robin and his men areunmarried and appear to lack close family ties or property. Skilled archers and fighters, Robin’s menact w’ith great military-like proficiency when called upon to fight. Robin’s courteous demeanor aswell as the mechanics of bastard fetidalism, both hallmarks of the nobility, could have been learneddirectly while engaged in campaign service, With no reason given in the ballads fur why Robin is anoutlaw, Ayton’s suggestion is entirely platisiblc.5

32 j, B. Dobson and John Taylor, “Robin Hood of Bamesdale: a fellow thou has long sought,” reviewof Robin Hood by J. C. Holt in Northern Histo,y(1983), 210-220.Hilton, “The Origins of Robin Hood,” 204.‘ Richard Tardif, “The ‘Mistciy’ of Robin Hood: A New Social Context for the Texts” in StephenKnight, ed., Anthology, 345-362.Ayton, “Military Service,” 126-147,

EX POST fAcTo

198 Nicole Carter

More recently, scholars have taken past historiography to task for ignoring themanuscript contexts of the ballads. John Marshall and Thomas Olgren have each analyzed thesignificance of a particular manuscript in relation to its particular owner. Looking at the singlehound manuscript containing Robin 1-lood and the Porterand several other tales, Ohlgren identifiedRichard Call (c. 1431 to after l504), a bailiff and estate manager for an aristocratic Piston family ofNorfolk. as “not only the original owner but the very person who took an active role in the selection oftexts to be copied.” iThe son of a grocer and small landholder, Call was literate and employed as atrusted servant by the Pastons before marrying their youngest daughter, N largcry. in a clandestinemarriage. The text as whole. Ohlgrcn fotind. exhibited mercantile interests and a strong theme ofself-improvement. Parallels exist between the life of the owner and the stories contained in themanuscript. Calls courtship ofMargerv Paston parallels Robins courtship of the sheriff’s wife, awoman of higher social class, in I’orter. The manuscript, Ohlgren concltided, had not been ownedb’ a noble, cleric, or gentleman. but by an aspiring yeoman with strong mercantile credentials andhigh social and economic aspirations. The contents “are precisely the types of litcrar , religious, andeducational texts that you would expect a yoting man hoping to rise in the world to posscss.”4Marshall. similarl. anah2ed a single folio containing an early Robin I lood play. Robin hood andtile Sberiffwith a plotverv similar to Robin hood and GuvoiGisborne. lie identified the play asbelonging to Sir John Paston.37 who in April I473. complained by letter to his brother of thedesertion of a scrvant who had been hired to enact Robin I lood: “1 hatLe kcpd hyrn tha iij [3] yereto pleye Scynt Jorge and Robvnhood and the shrvff offNotvngliam and now when I wolde hatiegood horse he is goon in-to Bemysdalc. and I with-owt a kepcre.’9 In owning the manuscript and instaging Robin I lood plays. Marshall suggested. Paston must have seen parallels between his ownrole in protecting his land from contran’ claimants and Robin’s personification of jtlstice in the face ofa corrupt administration. It is also possible that an aristocrat like Paston, “recognized that, in theplay of Robin I lood. he could assimilate the political and cultural interests of his servants with hisown. iThe quest for justice and the desire for freedom...may have ostensibly united the household at atime when consensus, or at least a common cause, was crucial to stio’ival.”4

All of the historians discussed thus far have taken the criminality of Robin I lood forgranted. thereby eliciting little specific comment from historians at large. I lowever. l3arabaraI lanawalt and Richard Firth Green. concentrating explicitly on an analysis of crime in the earlyballads, have forged a new path within Robin I lood historiographv. I lanawalt provided aninteresting new question: I low does the banditry employed h’ Robin I lood and his men in theballads compare to banditry in the real world of late medieval England? Comparing material fromthe Robin I loud poems to the activities of real bandits as reflected in thejail delivery rolls of Norfolk.Northhamptonshire. and Yorkshire for the years 1300-1400, 1 lanawalt found that, “on the whole, inmembership. rewards, and techniques of banditry, real bandits encountered in cotmrt records closelyresembled the ballad bandits. The divergence betsvccn the coo occurs with the victims of banditryin fact arid fiction.”1 In terms of the technique and membership of criminal hands. I lanawalt foundseveral interesting similarities and few notable differences betsveen fiction and fact:

36 Thomas Ohlgren, “Richard Call, the Pastons, and the Manuscript Context of Robin Hood and thePotter (Cambridge, University Library Ee.4.35. 1)” in Nottingham Medieval Studies (2001), 210-228.The head of the family with whom Richard Call was employed.Not Richard.

a Ohlgren, “Richard Call,” 220.40 John Marshall, “goon in-to Berynsdale’: The Trail of the Paston Robin Hood Play” in LeedsStudies in English (1998), 185.217.‘ Barbara Hanawalt, “Ballads and Bandits: fourteenth-Century Outlaws and the Robin HoodPoems” in Stephen Knight, ed., Anthology, 263-284.

Ex POST FACTO

Robin Hood: A Historiography

• In the poems, Robin I mod, Little John, Much, and Will Scarlet form the core of theband and most of action only involves them (usually, in fact, only Robin and John). Realhighway robbers often formed small, tiexible units. Two member bands predominated(41 percent), followed by bands with three members (22 percent), or tour members (12percent).

• Although the core of the group remains small, Robin can summon up a large number(seven score) ofmen when needed. For particularly large or risky crimes—robbery ofwell-armed person or taking over a market—real bands might use five to twenty or moremembers (25 percent of the gangs).

• Robin’s band in the early ballads does not contain any women, kin sets, or clergy. Realbands contained only a small percentage ofwomen, btit kin sets and clergy were verycommon. Of all gangs stiivcycd, 21 percent had a kin group within them, usually brotheror spouses, less often fathers and sons. Clergy were members of 13% of the bandit gangsand comprised 7% of the bandit’s personnel.4’

• Robin is prestirnably the leader of his band because he is the best archer. Real banditsoften honored the traditional social hierarchy in selection of leaders. The leader wastisually the man of the highest social rank or, in the case of family members, the father oroldest brother.

• Robin appropriated the language and demeanor of the nobility. I Ic is addressed asmaster, delegates responsibilities to his men, and the men wear his trademark color ofLincoln green. Real bandits, like the fictional ones, might tise royal and magnatehouseholds as models.43

The choice ofvictims and goods stolen make up the main differences between fact andfiction. In the Gesi Robin advises his men not to attack peasants, yeomen, knights, and women, btitrather the clergy and state officials. I Ic also only steals items of high value in the ballads. Acttialbandits had more basic needs to provide for. In addition to stealing items of high valcie, robbersoften took blankets, cooking utensils, clothing, food (especially bread), and beer. Acttial bandits also

42 The number of clergy may have been lower. Many criminals claimed benefit of clergy in anattempt to have their case transferred to the bishop’s court where hanging was not a punishment.° In the most sensational example, one northern outlaw sent Richard de Snaweshill, a Yorkshireparson, a letter, written in French in 1336, demanding that the parson remove a priest from his officeand replace him with a rival claimant. The letter was written in true royal style:‘Lionel, king of the rout of raveners salutes, but with little love, his false and dis]oyal Richard deSnaweshill. We command you, on pain to lose all that can stand forfeit against our laws, that youimmediately remove from his office him whom you maintain in the vicarage of Burton Agnes, andthat you suffer the Abbot of St. Mary’s have his rights in this matter and that the election of the manwhom he has chosen, who is more worthy of advancement that you or any of your lineage, beupheld. And if you do not do this, we make our avow, first to God and then to the King of Englandand to our own crown that you shall have such treatment at our hands as the Bishop of Exeter had inCheep [Bishop Stapledon was murdered there in 13261; and we shall hunt you down, even if wehave to come to Coney Street in York to do it. And show this letter to your lord, and bid him ceasefrom false compacts and confederacies, and to suffer right to be done to him whom the Abbot haspresented; else he shall have a thousand pounds worth of damage by us and our men. And if you donot take cognizance of our orders, we have bidden our lieutenant in the North to levy such greatdistraint upon you as is spoken of above. Given at our Castle of the North Wind, in the GreenTower, in the first year of our reign.’Hanawalt, “Ballads and Bandits,” 272-273; also Ohlgren, “Edwardua Redivivus,” 18-19.

Ex POST FACTO

200 Nicole Carter

commonly targeted women.4 Other victims incitided husbandmen. village craftsmen, shepherds,traveling merchants, clergy, nobility, and government officials—basically, real bandits robbedeveryone. Robin’s narrow scope ofvictims allowed him to be loved by his audience while actualroIbers remained objects of fear. The composition of the ballads as a whole and their selection of acriminal as hero. I Janawalt proposed, suggests that the audience “knew a great deal about organizedcdme...and had an ambiguous feeling about it.”

Noting the strong element of ‘cynical brutality’ in the early poems. Green sotight toexplain the outlaw’s violence in Foucaldian terms. In his history of punishment in western society.Foucault distinguished two distinct stages: the specraeulai in which the state parades its politicalpower by inflicting ritualized violence upon the bodies of its stibjects, and the ea,ver,d. throughwhich the state projects a sense ofomnipresent surveillance over its members’ private lives. Greenidentified a different power/penalty system that operated prior to Foucautt’s specracukzrsvstem—theocclusñecconomv of pitnishment. In an occlusive system, traditional communities turn to rejection.expulsion. banishment and outlawry as a way of coping with the worst offenses. Diametricallyopposed to Foucatilt’s concept of the spectacular. the occlusive system does not expose guilt to thepublic gaze, bitt rather conceals it by sending it away. I’hc cynical brntalitv found in the early RobinI loud ballads...should be read as symptomatic of a clash between two penal regimes. the olderocclusive regime that underlies the very institution of outlawry itself, and the newer spectacularregime repre.sented by the Sheriff of Nottingham and his officials.” Robin I food and his men are notcasually violent. The ritualized violence through constant sparring they enactcdcontaincd a set ofclearly recognized niles of community and conviviality. The outlaws only suspended these rulesss’hen dealing with otttsiders, partictilarly those representing the legal atithority of the state. Robinreacts with reciprocal brutality to a system designed to brutalize him, treating with particularsavagen those who set out to betray him to that system.45 Robin ] lood historiography has largelybeen a matter of empirical verification, ofmatching literature to history. Early attempts to identify ahistorical Robin I food have failed. owing both to the nttmbcr of individuals bearing such a name andthe lack of available information about them. The name Robin I food, most historians haveconcluded, is a “nont deguenilla—taken tip by people who are fulfilling the role of anti-authoritarianactivities. whether in game or in criminal eamest.”6 Robin I food’s importance lay not with beingany one actual person. htit svith what he represents to his audience. Considering the number ofgroups svho may have taken an intere.st in the famous outlaw (peasants. gentry, tradesmen, soldiers),Robin flood remains a hero for cvcnbody.

Women made up 37 percent of the homicide victims of criminal bands compared to 18 percent ofvictims in the ordinary homicide pattern. Hanawalt suggests that this is because women werepresent in the houses where bandits committed burglaries with violence.Richard Firth Green, “Violence in the Early Robin Hood Poems” in Mark D. Mcyerson, ed., A

Great Effusion ofBlood? Interpreting Medieval Violence, 268-286.46 Knight, “Splitting Time’s Arrow,” 123.

Ex POST FACTO