The Historical Truth of Robin Hood - Historical Misconceptions
12,628
Published 2021-04-14
Through retellings, additions, and variations, a body of familiar characters associated with Robin Hood has been created. These include his lover, Maid Marian, his band of outlaws, the Merry Men, and his chief opponent, the Sheriff of Nottingham. The Sheriff is often depicted as assisting Prince John in usurping the rightful but absent King Richard, to whom Robin Hood remains loyal. His partisanship of the common people and his hostility to the Sheriff of Nottingham are early recorded features of the legend, but his interest in the rightfulness of the king is not, and neither is his setting in the reign of Richard I. He became a popular folk figure in the Late Middle Ages, and the earliest known ballads featuring him are from the 15th century (1400s).
There have been numerous variations and adaptations of the story over the subsequent years, and the story continues to be widely represented in literature, film, and television. Robin Hood is considered one of the best known tales of English folklore.
The historicity of Robin Hood is not proven and has been debated for centuries. There are numerous references to historical figures with similar names that have been proposed as possible evidence of his existence, some dating back to the late 13th century. At least eight plausible origins to the story have been mooted by historians and folklorists, including suggestions that "Robin Hood" was a stock alias used by or in reference to bandits.
All Comments (21)
-
This would make an awesome long running series, just take things that people think are true about various historical topics, and set them all straight. I would love to watch that.
-
I always knew that the story that most people tell is wrong. But its pretty common for stuff like this to be co-opted by people to fit their agenda.
-
One person who maybe the actual influence of Robinhood is actually one of my ancestors named David, Earl of Huntingdon. According to legend even though he was Scottish he did serve in the crusades during the exact time itβs stated that Robinhood did, and he also lead the revolt against Nottingham castle like robin did in the original story. Also one thing I found while doing research on him while doing ancestry was that he was also a professional archer. Coincident? I think not! π€
-
Right as I was listening to your video the biggest hawk that I've ever seen flew low over my truck. Anyways I knew the part about him originally going after tax collectors but not the rest. One thing that I randomly remembered while listening was the character from the book Atlas Shrugged Ragnar Daniskul the pirate. He at one point remarks that his real enemy was Robinhood. Ironically the character himself Bears some resemblance to the earlier Robin Hood story
-
Bravo!! That was incredible!! This channel is a gem!!
-
Great video, good visuals and amazing storyline Iβve never heard! I sub
-
Hmm, I am an American so it might explain it, but I never picked up the communist bent, other than his merry men never really mentioned personal property, but, i thought that was because of the oppressive nature of nobility. I always interpreted it as a man who had been pushed too far by tyranny, especially that of over-taxation, and decided to fight back, returning the money to the people to do as they wished, rather than a central government taking it and "using it for the good of the people".
-
Thank you very much for this. I always see people debating this topic online, and there are lots of people who either say robin hood is an anti tax libertarian, and others who go hard left and claim him for communism. Its very interesting to see the historical basis for the tale.
-
Your channel needs more subscribers! How are you not bigger?!
-
Thanks, a lot of concise information
-
Zdravstvujtye Comrade Hood! Excellent summation.
-
I will be back to watch the rest of this
-
First off, good point about the Robin Hood legend being used as propaganda. Almost all stories serve to influence the listeners, and you do a pretty good job of tracing how the story has changed and morphed to reflect the times (though you missed out on the NeoPagan twist that the BBC's 'Robin of Sherwood' series put on it). That said, I have some concerns with this video. Second, there is no "real Robin Hood." He's a legendary and ultimately fictional character. No one is "getting the history wrong" because there is no "historical truth of Robin Hood" as your title alleges. Third, what is up with your dates? At 1:15, you actually cite a source. Good going. But the source you cite is from 1226--which is not as you claim at 1:26 "literally a century after the reign on Richard the Lion-Heart," who reigned from 1189 to 1999. Twenty-seven years is not a century. At 2:05, you say that "we have written accounts scattered across history from the tenth century to the fifteenth century of criminals being referred to as 'Robin Hood.'" (emphasis mine) Again, at 2:20, you're speculating the the original person going by that name lived in the "tenth century or even earlier." Tenth century? That's 901 to 1000. I seriously doubt there are any records of the name 'Robin Hood' from that century or the following century. If there are, it would be really great if you cited them, as the earliest source you cite is thirteenth-century. I've spent a lot of time poring over Anglo-Saxon texts, and I have never heard of any source that early referencing the name. Fourth, you allege at around 3:09 that the first stories of Robin Hood show the hero leading a band of Anglo-Saxons resisting the Normans, but again, you don't cite any sources. In fact, the text that is considered by many to be the earliest account of a Robin Hood story is A Gest of Robyn Hode; based on the writing style and language, scholars date it to the fifteenth century, and it is set in the reign of a King Edward, placing it somewhere between 1272 and 1483--literally two to four centuries after the Norman conquest of 1066. The Gest contains not a single hint that Robin Hood is anti-Norman. Indeed, Robin allies himself with a Norman knight against the clergy, to whom the knight owes money from a loan, not taxes. Though the two are initially rebels against the king as well, the tales ends with both joining the royal court. So where is your evidence that the first Robin Hood stories were about resisting Norman rule? That feels like yet another modern spin on an old story. Fifth, at around 10:00, you make a sweeping generalization about high taxes to pay for wars ranging from the Hundred Years War (14th to 15th centuries) to the Napoleonic Wars (19th century), and you allege that the Catholic Church was made the scapegoat for these high taxes. What? In the early 16th century, Henry VIII broke the power of the Catholic Church in England, declaring himself the head of the church and more importantly dissolving the monasteries and stripping them of their land and economic power. I seriously doubt that three hundred years later during the Napoleonic Wars, taxpayers were getting riled up against the wealth of the Catholic Church. All in all, you provide an interesting analysis of the Robin Hood legend, but your fuzziness regarding dates and your almost complete lack of primary sources makes it really hard to take this video seriously. I would like to recommend casual viewers check out Tony Robinson's video exploration of this topic: https://youtu.be/xPRBQadLNIM?si=LtQ4AruwDGZdzrZf
-
This is amazing story... Now i know why my aunt gave me the name Robin as to sometimes she loves calling me robinhood...
-
we English have great history
-
No mention of sherwood forest and his band of merry men in tights π
-
All versions of this story is accurate including the modern ones because the story is just a myth and anyone can interpret it to whatever they want.
-
Oo-De-Lally.! ππ βπ»π¦πΊππ€π»
-
YEET
-
Any lawbreaker back then was obviously not a serf and had freedom therefore chose to bandit out of hunger or greed as a β οΈ sentence awaited the breaker of some really small crimes so to rob to give away is a thing that would be unbelievable and the poor had owners that would notice anything new given to one of there serfs
