Robin of Loxley (Robin Hood)
Robin Hood’s pardon after his involvement in the Peasants Revolt at York reads: - “Robert Dore of Wadsley otherwise known as Robert Hode (Hood) given the King’s pardon on 22nd May 1382.” (Roll of King’s Pardons 4-5 Richard II 1382) (Discovered by David Pilling and Rob Lynley.)
From this we learn he was born Robert Dore, he became known as Robert Hode (Hood), he took part in the Peasant’s Revolt at York and he came from the manor of Wadsley where Loxley was a sub vill.
After killing his stepfather he fled from Loxley and went to Kirklees Priory where he met with Little John. (Roger Dodsworth) He joined with Adam Hode at York and Robin had among his Merry Men the son of a miller. His father Johannes Hode was a miller. (Freedom Rolls)
York
Robin Hood became a
freeman of York in 1364 and it was the same for Adam Hode the
miller’s son two years later in 1366. This simply means they were
free to trade as merchants, which is what people had been doing for
many years in opposition to the great Livery Companies. They operated
from unlicensed workshops and they touted their wares around the
markets which up until the granting of their charters by Edward III
tradesmen had been doing illegally (outlaws) but now these
clandestine workers who belonged to the new merchant class were
becoming increasingly rich and in terms of wealth they were followed
by (1) by the clergy, (2) the small businessmen, (3) artisans, (4)
men-at-arms, (5) menials and servants and lastly there were (6) the
peasants who worked the nearby fields.
According to the
Gest, Robin dealt in green and red cloth and Will Scarlet’s name
suggests he also dealt in scarlet cloth. In York were the Merchant
Adventurers who traded around England, Holland, Belgium, France,
Spain, Portugal, Germany, Iceland and the Baltic and if Robin was a
Merchant Adventurer then this would account for him being in
different parts of the country. The Merchant Adventurers helped the
poor, sick and orphans, which would undoubtedly enhance Robin’s
reputation with the populace and might even explain his reputation
for taking from the rich and giving to the poor. In support of this,
there is a record of a ship named “Robin Hood.”
The
ballads have Robin supplying the king with green and grey livery for
his men and King Edward III was often in York, he got married there
and set up parliament in York and any
guildsman who could boast of such a notable
client as the king of England would find themselves enjoying the
respect of their contemporaries, perhaps even being made the hero in
the Corpus Christi plays as well as the later pageantry of the
elaborate street performances that were a speciality of Anthony
Munday.
Thomas H. Ohlgren
wrote, “Robin’s “guild” or “fellowship” are derived from
the policies and practices of the urban guilds, including the master
guilds or Great Livery Companies.... The parallels between guild
policies and practices and specific scenes in the Gest are
compelling, offering convincing evidence that the poem (the Gest) was
composed for an audience who would not only recognize the mercantile
allusions but also appreciate the yeoman hero proving himself
superior to a member of the knightly class.” (The merchant's
superiority over the knightly class was due to their disposable
income compared to the nobility whose wealth was tied up in land and
castles. GK)
Peasants Revolt
After many years of
unrest, the people of York, when they heard what was happening in
London, took to the streets in anger only four years after the death
of King Edward. Gisbourne who was the Lord Mayor and chief
Burgomaster had always been a trouble maker. He controlled the local
trade guilds by imposing fines and penalties which he probably
pocketed for himself, he was always surrounded by scandal, he was a
notorious patron of robbers, he tampered with the Royal Mint at York
and issued false money and two of his right hand men Robert de Harom
and Richard de Kendale were accused of murder.
The merchants had
their own issues and the citizens of York had theirs, they were taxed
over and above the norm to pay for such things as the ships that were
used by the Merchant Adventurers without receiving any of the profits
themselves and the unrest must have reached a point where virtually
the whole population of York rose up against Gisbourne. His livery
that consisted of 1,500 red and white hoods plus a badge served two
purposes, it identified the men in his service and according to
company charter it enabled him to prevent others from pursuing the
same trades as himself and as he traded in wool, cloth, wine and lead
and Robin dealt in cloth he would have seen Robin as operating
illegally or as an outlaw.
The giving of
liveries indicates a time “when liveries and personal badges were
in everyday use” (Keen) “thus indicating a time of social change
when the lower classes and criminal gangs were imitating the
aristocracy” (Ohlgren) in the 14th and 15th century and is known as
“Merrie England” (Ronald Hutton).
Nottingham
At the time of the
Peasants Revolt the sheriff of Nottingham, Robert Morton was the
steward of Conisbrough Castle in Barnsdale, right there on Robin’s
home ground. His father Thomas Morton was secretary to King Edward
III of England so it’s no wonder Robin said beware of the Sheriff
of Nottingham.
http://www.hrionline.ac.uk/conisbrough/browse/roll_1380-81_3.html
Just across the road
from each other is Nottingham market and St. Mary’s Church where
Robin went to hear Mass. In the church itself is a chapel set aside
for the guildsmen paid for by themselves. The “Gyld of St Mary in
her own church, Nottingham, on the Feast of St Michael, 1371 (dating
evidence) features the names of 167 members of the Guild, listing
prominent local residents including knights, clerks, carpenters,
drapers and priests.”
The medieval markets
in Yorkshire cover the same area associated with Robin Hood and if
their wives and children stayed home while Robin and his men
travelled the highways and byways for days or weeks at a time, then
that would explain why there were no women in the early ballads. The
Saylis that appears in some of the ballads was a natural overnight
stop and is just up the road from the old Roman Fort and Robin Hood's
well that was frequented by robbers and it is his travels between
York and Nottingham through the Saylis that provides the backdrop for
the ballads. (There is another Saylis near Wentbridge.)
Markets
were at:- Barnsley, Bawtry, Bedale,
Beverley, Boroughbridge, Bradford, Bridlington, Brough, Campsall,
Conisbrough, Cottingham, Doncaster, Elland, Emley, Filey, Gisburn,
Great Driffield, Guisborough, Harthill, Hedon, Hessle, Hornsea,
Ilkley, Kingston On Hull, Knaresborough, Pickering, Pontefract,
Rotherham, Scarborough, Selby, Sheffield, Stamford Bridge, Thirsk,
Tickhill, Wadsley, Wakefield, Wath Upon Dearne, Wetherby, Whitby,
Withernsea, Wortley, York.
Robin the Forest Outlaw
From the ballads we
read that as Robin became older he lived in the king’s court for 15
months by which time he “had spent his money and all his men’s
fee on both knights and squires, to get him great renown. By the time
the year was over, he only had two men — Little John and good
Scarlett all the rest had gone.” (From the Gest translated into
modern English by Robert Landis Frank.)
Robin’s strength
as an archer was failing and feeling he would die of sorrow if he
remained in the king’s court any longer he asked the king’s
permission to return to Barnsdale where he had previously built a
chapel, which is something only a person of high standing could
afford to do.
Once there Robin was
happy to stay in his beloved Barnsdale as a fugitive, not going back
for “fear of the king” who was not the king he had known and
loved, spending his last remaining 22 years in lawless Barnsdale
where Richard II was murdered in Pontefract
Castle. The
Merry Men lived like outlaws as described in the ballads that tell
of Robin's glory
days under Edward III as
a merchant and possibly archer to King Edward
III.
Hathersage
Loxley is in
Yorkshire and just over the county border in Derbyshire is Hathersage
situated on the edge of Royal Forest. It was administered by the
Sheriff of Nottingham, and this caused a problem for the people of
Hathersage who were not allowed to hunt for food in the nearby Royal
Forest of the Peak. Their only option, which was the lesser of two
evils, was to cross the county border onto land belonging to the
people of Loxley.
This resulted in a
dispute between the two villages that rumbled on for many years.
Eventually a commission was set-up and a ditch dug across Hallam
Moors to mark the official boundary between the two villages, that
was also the county boundary and although the argument was about
hunting rights it had the effect of confirming Robin’s status as a
Yorkshireman and explains why the Sloane Manuscript says; “Robin
Hood was born in Locksley, Yorkshire which some say was in
Nottinghamshire.”
According to Roger
Dodsworth, the ballad, the Sloane Manuscript and Elias Ashmole, after
Little John had buried his comrade, Robin Hood at Kirklees Priory he
made his way sadly back to Hathersage where he spent his last
remaining days. He dug his own grave under the old yew tree in the
graveyard, near the old preaching cross and directed that his cap,
bow, and arrows should be hung in the church. In 1625 Ashmole wrote,
“Little John lyes buried in Hathersage Churchyard within three
miles from Castleton, near High Peake, with one stone set up at his
head and another at his feete, but a large distance between them”.
(Ashmole MS 1137:fol.147) The ballad adds:
“His
bow was in the chancel hung
His last good bolt they drave
Down
to the rocks, its measured length,
Westward fro’ the grave.
And
root and bud this shaft put forth,
When spring returned anon,
It
grew a tree, and threw a shade,
Where slept staunch Little John”.
Kirklees
At Kirklees the
prioress between 1350-60 was Margaret Savile the sister of Sir John
Saville who was the sheriff of Yorkshire when Robin was pardoned. She
was living at the right time to have been the prioress when Robin
fled from Loxley.
Fifty plus years
later between 1402 and 1416 the prioress was Alice de Mounteney and
living at nearby Mirfield was a branch of the Neville family who are
noted for their red hair which was a feature of the prioress lover
who was nicknamed Red Roger.
The prioress who
murdered Robin Hood is said to have been related to him, and this may
have been through the Furnival family who were in Sheffield and
related to both the Neville and Mounteney families. Sir Thomas
Neville married Joan de Furnival of Sheffield; Matilda the daughter
of Gerard de Furnival also of Sheffield married Arnold de Mounteney
and Thomas Lord Furnival married Joan Mounteney in 1366.
Working out the
dates we find that if Robin was born c. 1337 and fled Loxley c. 1350
age 13 then the prioress at Kirklees was Margaret Savile; Edward III
died 1377 and the ballad stops here. The Peasant’s Revolt was 1381;
king Richard II was personally involved at York and then we read
Robin was living in the king’s court, effectively under house
arrest and spending his money to curry favour (on both knights and
squires, to get him great renown). Robin left the king’s court
never to return 15 months later c. 1385; he lived 22 years in
Barnsdale and died c. 1407 when Alice de Mounteney was prioress.
Earl of Huntington or not?
The High Sheriff of
Yorkshire at the time of the Peasants Revolt in which Robin Hood was
involved was Sir Ralph Hastings who lived in York Castle. Bootham
Gate, the scene of the rioting leads into the Royal Forest of Galtres
where there is the village of Huntington (not Huntingdon) which is
the same spelling used by Munday and others when writing about Robin
Hood the earl of Huntington.
George Hastings was
a member of the Drapers company the same as Robin had been, and when
George was created the earl of Huntingdon by King Henry VIII, the
family began the tradition of naming their children Robin Hood as in
the, “Honourable Aubrey Craven Theophilus Robin Hood Hastings.”
In summary, Robin was outlawed by a member of the Hastings family,
Robin and George Hastings were both in the lucrative wool and cloth
trade, they were members of the same guild, but at different times
and they might both have hunted in the Royal Forest of Galtres.
John Major led many
people astray by incorrectly placing Robin Hood in the reign of King
John and other mischief makers were Anthony Munday who elevated Robin
Hood to the non-existent earldom of Huntington and William Stukeley
whose writings resulted in the grave-slab at Kirklees being placed
there in the 19th century by the owner of the estate, even though the
final resting places of the nobility are commonly known. Credit must
be given though to the fabricators for calling Robin Hood the
“Pretended” Earl of Huntington throughout their writings for
although Robin may have been an earl in fiction, he was not an earl
in real life.
The Complete Peerage
Volume 6 speaking about Nottingham’s candidate says, “Robin Hood
(for whose existence no contemporary evidence has been found) was
first called Robert fitz Ooth in a fictitious pedigree concocted by
the 18th century antiquary William Stukeley.”
Since this was
written, contemporary evidence has been found that confirms Robin
Hood was both a real person and that he was from Hallamshires Wadsley
where the village of Loxley is situated.
Timeline
For dating evidence
we have Robin and his men wearing Lincoln Green which became the
colour of the kings livery in the reign of Edward II, Nottingham city
walls were not completed until 1337, the two handed longsword we read
about in Robin Hood and the Monk can be dated to 1350-1550, pavage
tax that we read about in Robin Hood and the Potter was introduced in
Wentbridge in 1319 and friars did not enter England until after the
death of king John in 1221.
The king is spoken
of as Edward and it was Edward III who created the guilds, neither
must we forget Gisbourn, the miller’s son, the two prioress or
Ralph Hastings who was the Sheriff of Yorkshire when Robin was
outlawed in the Peasants Revolt and whose descendants became the
earls of Huntingdon which explains Robin’s gentrification by the
playwright Anthony Munday. For the legend to be true all the
participants would need to be living at the same time, as they were,
which is when the popular contemporary hero who William Langland
wrote about in 1377 was alive and well and making a name for himself.
Professor Holt is of
the opinion the origin of the “Gest of Robin Hood” is circa 1450,
which rules out an earlier hero of the ballads, he goes on to say
Major’s conception about a 13th century Robin Hood “was not
reinforced by argument, evidence or proof it was simply recycled
through later versions of the tale and so became an integral part of
the legend.” Neither is this view supported by the earliest ballads
that name the reigning monarch as “Edward.” This accords with
Professor Thomas Ohlgren who writes the Gest was “commissioned by
one of the fifteenth-century guilds — possibly the Dyers Guild in
the light of the numerous references to cloth and liveries — to
commemorate Edward III not only as the protector of the English
Channel but as the founder of seven of the 12 Great Livery
Companies.”
The Ballads
Robin Hood and the Potter
So far we see a
merchant called Robin Hood who is obviously wealthy and ruthless. He
was used to getting his own way, he is afraid of nobody and he has
men to back him up. An example of Robin’s no-nonsense approach can
be seen in Robin Hood and the Potter who refused to pay pavage tax.
First Robin confiscated his pots and then he disguised himself as the
potter and sold them in Nottingham market for less that they were
worth.
The result was that
the potter was effectively fined when his pots were confiscated. The
money Robin got from their sale would pay the pavage tax and
presumably there would be some money left over for Robin in lieu of
wages, well done Robin. It also guaranteed a quick sale and it got
him to meet the sheriff’s wife through whom he was able to meet the
sheriff himself and lure him into the forest where Robin’s men
surrounded him.
It was thanks to the
hospitality of the sheriff’s wife that Robin let the sheriff go
free and in this way Robin punished the bad and honoured the good.
All the time Robin had the upper hand, the potter’s debt was paid
and Robin had the sheriff of Nottingham in his clutches. This is
where Robin differs from the common brigand who would either have
held the sheriff to ransom, killed him, or both. (As pavage tax was
not introduced into Wentbridge until 1319 and Edward III came to the
throne in 1327 then the events in the ballad would in all probability
have taken place in the reign of Edward III.)
Robin Hood and the Monk
In “Robin Hood and
the Monk” Robin is accused of robbery which may be well-founded
because we read in the Gest that Robin took money from two thieving
monks at the Saylis who could easily have been at St. Mary’s in
Nottingham the same time as Robin.
Whether Robin robbed
them or not is dependent on whether it is possible to rob two monks
of money they do not have, which is what they told Robin. He put it
down to the Blessed Virgin thus absolving himself from blame and
putting it down to the will of God.
Then after a
hair-raising adventure Robin was jailed and when Little John released
him from prison they escaped into the forest by climbing over the
city wall that was not completed until 1337 in the reign of Edward
III. (More dating evidence.)
As it turned out the
monks had embezzled £400 from the impoverished knight so they were
right to say ‘they’ had no money because it did not belong to
them. Whichever way you look at it, firstly they were lying when they
said they had no money and secondly the money they had, was stolen
from someone else, so they had no need to complain that they
had been robbed.
Robin Hood and the Impoverished Knight
When Robin Hood was
convinced the impoverished knight was telling the truth and that he
had no money and was genuinely in trouble, then Robin gave the knight
a grey packhorse, a palfrey, a saddle, a pair of boots, some new
clothes and a pair of gilded spurs, which is something only a knight
would have.
“Master,”
then said Little John, His clothing is very thin. You must give the
knight some good clothes, to wrap his body in. “For you have
scarlet and green, master, and many a rich array. There is no
merchant in merry England so rich, I dare well say.”
“Take
him three yards of every colour, and see that you measure it true.”
Little John took no other measure but his long bow of yew. And at
every handful that he met, he counted it a yard. “What devils
draper,” said little Much, Do you think you are?”
Scarlet
stood still and laughed and said, “By God almighty, John may give
him good measure for it costs him but lightly.” (From the Gest)
Robin then lent the
knight £400 of his own money and this is when we learn that Robin
was “the wealthiest merchant in all England with a rich array of
scarlet and green cloth,” and the loan was to be paid back in 12
months time. With that the impoverished knight set off to St. Marys
to pay his debt and have the matter settled legally.
Then through a
combination of circumstances Robin came into possession of £800 from
the two monks at the Saylis and when the knight returned 12 months
later to pay back the £400 he owed Robin he is told about the £800
Robin got from the two monks. They all laugh and after the knight
repaid his debt to Robin, Robin split the £800 and gave the knight
£400 to buy a new horse, keeping £400 for himself so all in all the
knight’s debt is paid and both men were £400 better off. The real
losers are the two monks from St. Marys who were wrongfully
attempting to rob the knight of all his possessions and justice had
been done.
Professor Holt and Nottingham
Although Robin Hood
was in Nottingham it is unlikely Nottingham’s candidate
Robert-de-Kyme was Robin Hood and neither was he known as ‘Robin
Hood.’ Professor Holt has this to say:-“Since Mr. J. Lees (The
Quest for Robin Hood, Nottingham 1987), has tried to revive
Stukeley’s pedigree in a revised form it may be useful to summarize
a few of the salient errors.”
First, the critical
figure for both Stukeley and Mr. Lees is William ‘FitzOoth,’ who
(Stukeley) or whose heir (Lees) was transferred to the custody of
Robert de Vere, earl of Oxford, in 1214. In reality the William son
of Otho, whose heir or heirs were placed in the custody of Aubrey de
Vere, carl of Oxford, in 1205 and transferred to Robert de Vere, earl
of Oxford, in 1214, had nothing to do with the family of Kyme, or
with the earls of Huntingdon, still less with Robin Hood. He is well
known as an official of the Mint, holding his office in charge of the
manufacture of the royal dies as a sergcanty. By 1219 he was
succeeded by his son, Otho son of William, who still held office in
1242-3. It follows therefore that ‘Robert fitz Ooth’ is entirely
fictitious; so is the alleged link between ‘FitzOoth’ and Kyme;
and so are the grounds for seeking an original Robin Hood in the Kyme
family.
Secondly, there is
no evidence that any Robert of Kyme mentioned by Mr. Lees was
outlawed. The instance on which he relies is a royal remission of
wrath and indignation incurred by an appeal of rape against a Robert
of Kyme at Wenlock in 1226; there is no mention of outlawry.
Thirdly, Mr. Lees’s
‘Robert of Kyme’ is compounded of at least two distinct
individuals, none of them an outlaw and none of them a disinherited
elder son; many of the relationships he proposes within the Kyme
family are quite unsupported by any contemporary evidence.
The recent attempt
by Mr. J. Lees (The Quest for Robin Hood, Nottingham 1987) to alter
the accepted geography of the tales by placing Barnsdale in Sherwood
is quite unacceptable. It involves an elementary misreading of the
Gest: the knight was travelling south through Barnsdale, not north,
as he insists, for he was intending to voyage to the Holy Land (56,
57); it is only later, after leaving Robin in Barnsdale, that he
visits St Mary’s, York, to repay his debt (84).
It is also based on
a tendentious and uncritical evaluation of the place-name evidence.
‘Brunnisdale’ in Basford, Notts., cannot be equated with
Barnsdale. ‘Brunnis’ is most probably ‘brun,’ i.e., brown;
‘Barn’ comes from the personal name ‘Beorn’. Moreover, the
evidence linking Wentbridge, Sayles, Barnsdale and Wading Street is
very clear and certain.
The main facts
concerning the use of Watling Street as a name for the Great North
Road in the Barnsdale area, which Mr. Lees questions, are
incontrovertibly presented in The Place Names of the West Riding of
Yorkshire, vii, p. 145. (Professor Holt)