New Book--the Robin Hood/Highgate Conspiracy

damiana · **Joined:** 30 Nov 2009 4:40 pm **Posts:** 239

Hi--I don't know about the festival I only know about historical research,

tat damiana

Serendipity · **Joined:** 20 May 2008 3:32 pm **Posts:** 2894

The festival IS historical research...and if I'm not mistaken you will find that the festival is OLDER than your grave.

How can you be a Robin Hood expert and NOT know that it was possibly the largest festival in Scotland during the middle ages? The citizens of Edinburg nearly destroyed the city one year because the festival had been cancelled. The story can be found on the website for the Edinburg Mile....

Serendipity · **Joined:** 20 May 2008 3:32 pm **Posts:** 2894

damiana wrote:

Hi--I don't know about the festival I only know about historical research,

tat damiana

We have had this discussion before. Must have slipped your mind...and mine. However, the Robin Hood experts on this forum still have NOT answered the question.

The Festival IS older than your grave. Explain.

http://andrewgough.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2441&start=0

Quote:

I can't remember everything that was in this thread, but I think I remember reading something about Robin Hoods grave being about 300 years old.

The problem with that, is that, (if I'm not mistaken) the Robin Hood Festival - May Day - is much older than 300 years.

There is a great story about the Robin Hood Festivals and such on the Edinburgh Mile website.
http://www.edinburgh-royalmile.com/iframe_files/high-street.html

Quote:
In 1561 the Tolbooth figures in one of those tulzies or rows so common in the Edinburgh of those days ; but in this particular instance we see a distinct foreshadowing of the Porteous mob of the eighteenth century, by the magistrates forbidding a " Robin Hood." This was the darllng May game of Scotland as well as England, and, under the pretence of frolic, gave an unusual degree of licence; but the Scottish Calvinistic clergy, with John Knox at their head, and backed by the authority of the magistrates of Edinburgh, who had of late been chosen exclusively from that party, found it impos-sible to control the rage of the populace when deprived of the privilege of having a Robin Hood, with the Abbot of Unreason and the Queen of the May. Thus it came to pass, that in May, 1561, when a man in Edinburgh was chosen as " Robin Hood and Lord of Inobedience," most probably because he was a frolicsome, witty, and popular fellow, and passed through the city with a great number of followers, noisily, and armed, with a banner displayed, to the Castle Hill, the magistrates caught one of his companions, " a cordiner's servant," named James Gillon, whom they condemned to be hanged on the 21st of July.

Venator · **Joined:** 18 Apr 2010 4:08 pm **Posts:** 48

I thought it was generally accepted by historians that a single individual called "Robin Hood" never existed, and that the name might have evolved over a significant period of time to identify a folk legend. "Robin Hood" might be an amalgam of a number of robber bandits who collectively became known as such as the ballads, songs and legend manifested into the figure we recognise today; not a real person but a mythical character developed by balladeers and authors, notably Anthony Munday (1560–1633) who wrote The Downfall of Robert Earl of Huntington in 1597-8 (published in 1601) and The Death of Robert Earl of Huntington with the collaboration of Henry Chettle in 1597-8 (also published in 1601).

Serendipity · **Joined:** 20 May 2008 3:32 pm **Posts:** 2894

http://www.jstor.org/pss/536152

"The May Games and Robin Hood" however this fella references Sir Edmund Chambers not Anthony Munday.

Serendipity · **Joined:** 20 May 2008 3:32 pm **Posts:** 2894

I suppose I have issue with persons claiming expertise in a certain area while holding knowledge of only a fraction of the available information....Whether the subject matter be Robin Hood or Jesus Christ.

Anthony Hogg · **Joined:** 05 Dec 2009 7:37 pm **Posts:** 315

Holly Dolly,

You shouldn't gotten Barbara started on the movie! :lol:

Although, I do find it funny that she's roasting it...before it's even been released.

Serendipity,

The "historical research" angle's an interesting one. That's why I asked her the following:

Quote:

I'm also wondering about your motivations, concerning the grave. I'd think that a Robin Hood Society would be more interested in folkloric/historical research. Meanwhile, your purpose for trespassing her grounds was help a pagan rite take place (you still haven't answered how you resolve this with your Christianity, by the way). You've previously had a vampire hunter as your patron and now a "psychic investigator".

Her response was:

Quote:

IT WAS ORINALLY HISTORIOCAL AND STILL GOT REFUSED, THE PARANOMAL CAME BY LATER FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES

I did ask her to elaborate on that, but she hasn't just yet. I hope she does.

Now, as to the Kirklees grave itself, there's a couple of interesting items I've read about it. First, this one:

Quote:

The earliest reference to the gravestone is in Philemon Holland's English translation of William Camden's Britannia (1610). In the 18th century, Thomas Gale, Dean of York, claimed to have found a poetic epitaph with the date of death given as 24 December 1247, although the language in which it is written is not the Middle English of the time, suggesting it is merely a forgery.

And there's Richard Rutherford-Moore's "Bury Me Where My Arrow Falls...", which disputes a certain aspect of the legend.

Barbara,

Quote:

Actually Holly Dolly its just another innacurate Hollywood depection of an entirely fictitious Robin Hood, based in the time of Richard 1 with a lot a men dashing around on horseback whacking each other with swords.

If that's the case, why don't you share the "real" story with us, instead.

Venator · **Joined:** 18 Apr 2010 4:08 pm **Posts:** 48

Serendipity wrote:

I suppose I have issue with persons claiming expertise in a certain area while holding knowledge of only a fraction of the available information....Whether the subject matter be Robin Hood or Jesus Christ.

Or the Highgate Vampire?

Serendipity · **Joined:** 20 May 2008 3:32 pm **Posts:** 2894

Venator wrote:

Serendipity wrote:

I suppose I have issue with persons claiming expertise in a certain area while holding knowledge of only a fraction of the available information....Whether the subject matter be Robin Hood or Jesus Christ.

Or the Highgate Vampire?

Not really sure why you gave me that link. You're the last person I would figure would be promoting David. Is there something about me/Serendipity in the radio program? I'm not sure what you're getting at....and I really don't have the time to listen to the entire broadcast. I'm on a quest for the Ninth Gate.

Serendipity · **Joined:** 20 May 2008 3:32 pm **Posts:** 2894

So many experts....I wonder how many people have made money from these subjects? If the thing becomes your income stream then it completely loses its value as a source of knowledge.
You defend the monetary value and the value of the truth is lost.

It is the historical research of Robin Hood that is so fascinating. The actual person is allusive, but the history is rich indeed.

And if you know anything about really ancient knights, like the Order of the Thistle....then the story becomes even more fascinating.

I kept hoping one of the Robin Hood experts would carry the story in that direction. [sigh]
They know nothing of it.

Take a look at the statue of Robin Hood (wikipedia I think) and then look up a picture of a male scythian. Then tell me if you see any similiarities.

Venator · **Joined:** 18 Apr 2010 4:08 pm **Posts:** 48

Serendipity wrote:

Venator wrote:

Serendipity wrote:

I suppose I have issue with persons claiming expertise in a certain area while holding knowledge of only a fraction of the available information....Whether the subject matter be Robin Hood or Jesus Christ.

Or the Highgate Vampire?

Not really sure why you gave me that link. You're the last person I would figure would be promoting David.

Surely not the "last person"? There must be quite a few ahead of me in that particular queue, not least the clergyman he attempts to malign in every interview he gives.

If you're not sure why I gave you that link just look at what you originally wrote: "I suppose I have issue with persons claiming expertise in a certain area while holding knowledge of only a fraction of the available information".

Now listen to the podcast ...

DavidFarrant · **Joined:** 16 Nov 2009 5:32 pm **Posts:** 458

I told you "Venator", everybody knows it is really YOU!

David Farrant

damiana · **Joined:** 30 Nov 2009 4:40 pm **Posts:** 239

Frankly I would have preferred Russell Brand as Robin Hood to Russell Crowe and I have seen bits of the film. It is a made up story about a made up person who became Robin Hood in the wrong reignn--Richard 1 and in the wrong place--Nottomgham and all it is is these big beefy sweaty men whacking each other with swords non stop--really boring.They are all brainwashed on the same old story. The most historically likely is in the reighn on the gay king Edward 11, at a time of climate change--the Little Ice Age--the king was murdered by his wife (or on her orders)and later Robin was murdered also by a mad nun. Robin spent time at the corrupt court at Westminster--haha-very topical!

The best person to have protrayed Robin Hood , in my view anyway-would have been Clint Eastwood--tough looking, handsome,sexy, brill actor. Oh well--I have had a few interviews from radio and newspapaers--even the Times--I wonder if it will get in or will the Powers that Be--continue to put the blight on Yorkshire,and if so why--its gone on for 30 years now!

tata damiana

Anthony Hogg · **Joined:** 05 Dec 2009 7:37 pm **Posts:** 315

Barbara,

Quote:

The most historically likely is in the reighn on the gay king Edward 11, at a time of climate change--the Little Ice Age--the king was murdered by his wife (or on her orders)and later Robin was murdered also by a mad nun. Robin spent time at the corrupt court at Westminster--haha-very topical!

That's quite an interesting story. I had a look for info on Edward II (1284-1327). He reigned from 1307-1327.

However, references to Robin Hood appeared before his reign:

Quote:

The oldest references to Robin Hood are not historical records, or even ballads recounting his exploits, but hints and allusions found in various works. From 1228, onwards the names 'Robinhood', 'Robehod' or 'Hobbehod' occur in the rolls of several English Justices.

Admittedly, more references to Robin (without details) pop up later in the 13th century, but still before Edward's reign:

Quote:

The majority of these references date from the late 13th century. Between 1261 and 1300, there are at least eight references to 'Rabunhod' in various regions across England, from Berkshire in the south to York in the north.

So, I ask you: did these Robin's merely share the same name? Or is this the Robin you're alluding to?

Do you know of any contemporary documentation of Robin's exploits in association with his name, during the reign of Edward II?

I'm also wondering about your contention that Robin's grave rests on the Kirklees estate. Would it have anything to do with the description found there?

Also, do you believe that Robin selected his gravesite by shooting an arrow through a window?

Quote:

The best person to have protrayed Robin Hood , in my view anyway-would have been Clint Eastwood--tough looking, handsome,sexy, brill actor.

He's also 79. Don't think he'd be too deft with a bow and arrow, put it that way. And besides, last I heard, he'd retired from acting after Gran Torino (2008).

damiana · **Joined:** 30 Nov 2009 4:40 pm **Posts:** 239

I am not going to make a discussion with you Hoggsy--(apparently you have referred to me recently as Babsy) and it would be easier for me not to do so, however, in this EXCEPTION I just need to clarify that I know Clint Eastwood is now too old to play RH--i MEANT, OBVIOULSY, when he was in his prime of manhood--Sean Bean would be another brill Robin, thinking about it, he would have also made a good Henry the 8 in the recent BEEB production where they had this skinny young fella instead--however, I am aware of the earlier refs, there may have indeed been more than one Robin Hood all composited into one on which the Litle Geste--earliest ballad--was based on--however, other than the Yorkshire theory based in Wakefield/Kirklees there is nothing in the Notts stuff to tie on a particular person that coincides with the time lines of the stories in the Geste and the historical documents of the times. As for Richard 1 and Crusades,Earl of Huntingdon and Loclksley,all made up.

Please do not expect any further replies from me, this is an exception to clear up important points-You can look on my website www.robinhoodyorkshire.co.uk

So that is that, I will not reply to anyother points you make, I have said what was necessary and I am not going to get involved.

damiana

damiana · **Joined:** 30 Nov 2009 4:40 pm **Posts:** 239

ps that applied to venator also and any other comedians, if someone has something sensible and polite to say, even if I don't agree, I will answer, and dickipogginess will be ignored.

damiana

Anthony Hogg · **Joined:** 05 Dec 2009 7:37 pm **Posts:** 315

G'day Barbara,

Quote:

I am not going to make a discussion with you Hoggsy--(apparently you have referred to me recently as Babsy)

If I have, you would've seen it. So there's no "apparently". As you can see, I prefer to address you by your first name.

Quote:

. . . I am aware of the earlier refs, there may have indeed been more than one Robin Hood all composited into one on which the Litle Geste--earliest ballad--was based on--however, other than the Yorkshire theory based in Wakefield/Kirklees there is nothing in the Notts stuff to tie on a particular person that coincides with the time lines of the stories in the Geste and the historical documents of the times. As for Richard 1 and Crusades,Earl of Huntingdon and Loclksley,all made up.

Are you referring to "A Gest of Robyn Hode" aka "A Lyttell Geste of Robyn Hode"?

According to this source, it was "printed between 1492 and 1534, but shows every sign of having been put together from several already existing tales." That's close to a 200 year gap from the time of Edward II.

Now, as to Nottingham, the ballad "Robin Hood and the Monk" which is "among the oldest existing ballads of Robin Hood" dates in manuscript form from 1450, thus, pre-dating "Gest". It certainly contains references to Nottingham, as you'll see in the article. And a sheriff, too.

The references to Robin as Robert, Earl of Huntington, are interesting, because the Kirklees grave description (considered to be fake) alludes to him.

So, in this light, I ask you, on what grounds do you believe Robin's even buried at Kirklees at all? Also, if he wasn't Robert, then what was his actual name?

Anthony Hogg · **Joined:** 05 Dec 2009 7:37 pm **Posts:** 315

Hi again Barbara,

As you'll see, I've been having a read through your site. Now, concerning this:

Quote:

In 1521 John Major wrote -

About this time (1190) Robert Hude and Little John most famous of outlaws, hid in the woods and only plundered the goods of rich men and never slew any unless they opposed them in defence of their goods. Robert maintained one hundred archers most skilful in battle whom four hundred of the boldest fellows did not dare attack. He never allowed harm to be done to a woman, nor the goods of poor men, but seized the rich oblations of Abbots.

I'll contrast it with what I've found elsewhere:

Quote:

In the 16th century, Robin Hood is given a specific historical setting. Up until this point there was little interest in exactly when Robin's adventures took place. The original ballads refer at various points to "King Edward," without stipulating whether this is Edward I, Edward II, or Edward III. Hood may thus have been active at any point between 1272 and 1377. However, during the 16th century the stories become fixed to the 1190s, the period in which King Richard was absent from his throne, fighting in the crusades. This date is first proposed by John Mair in his Historia Majoris Britanniæ (1521), and gains popular acceptance by the end of the century.

But what actual historical backing is there for this claim?

Also, your claim that Vision of Piers Plowman (1377) contains the "earliest reference" to Robin Hood, is incorrect. It's the earliest literary reference, but, as we've discussed here, the name previously appeared in the 13th century. And if you claim that Robin was active in the time of Edward II, surely, there'd be some kind of documentation on him pre-dating Vision. Are you aware of any?

Now, as to Robin's alleged grave, you iterate the last arrow story:

Quote:

Robin's grave lies some 650 yards from the place where he is said to have shot forth his last arrow, an upper room in Kirklees Priory Gatehouse, which still stands to this day. Modern archers are extremely sceptical about this version of events saying 200 yards would be more acceptable (particularly for a dying man).

On what grounds do you believe this is Robin's grave, if you're skeptical (?) about the last arrow story? Have you read Richard Rutherford-Moore's article?

You also refer, again, to the Kirklees grave being Robin's and quote the Huntington epitaph. Again, this is widely considered to be a forgery. You acknowledge it might be a re-writing of an older epitaph. But I'm still wondering exactly what convinces you that it's Robin's grave, if there's no contemporary references to it?

damiana · **Joined:** 30 Nov 2009 4:40 pm **Posts:** 239

One answer only, do not mention rrm to me.

damiana

damiana · **Joined:** 30 Nov 2009 4:40 pm **Posts:** 239

ps see post 422 on t'other thread re "babsy".

And I do know about Robin Hood and the Monk, its just simpler to refer straight off to the Geste as it was printed atround 1500.

damiana

Venator · **Joined:** 18 Apr 2010 4:08 pm **Posts:** 48

Quote:

I told you "Venator", everybody knows it is really YOU!

Well, I hope they don't think I'm YOU!

Of course I'm ME. Who else am I likely to be?

DavidFarrant · **Joined:** 16 Nov 2009 5:32 pm **Posts:** 458

"Of course I'm ME. Who else am I likely to be?"

No less than the person you keep referring to, "Venator"!

David Farrant

Venator · **Joined:** 18 Apr 2010 4:08 pm **Posts:** 48

Quote:

No less than the person you keep referring to, "Venator"!

I've only referred to myself once and that is to say I am who I am.

DavidFarrant · **Joined:** 16 Nov 2009 5:32 pm **Posts:** 458

"I've only referred to myself once and that is to say I am who I am."

That is saying absolutely nothing "Venator"!

David Farrant

Anthony Hogg · **Joined:** 05 Dec 2009 7:37 pm **Posts:** 315

David,

Have you forgotten what the Mod said about bickering? Can it, please. For your sake, at the very least.

Barbara,

Quote:

One answer only, do not mention rrm to me.

I presume you mean Richard Rutherford-Moore. I wasn't aware of any rift between you two...

What happened?

Quote:

ps see post 422 on t'other thread re "babsy".

The posts aren't numbered on my screen, so I'm not sure which one you're referring to. [Update: check your inbox where I've answered this matter].

Quote:

And I do know about Robin Hood and the Monk, its just simpler to refer straight off to the Geste as it was printed atround 1500.

Ok, but as I pointed out, "Robin Hood and the Monk" (c. 1450) pre-dates "Geste". So wouldn't it be a more, mmm, reliable (for want of a better term) source?

I'm still interested to know on what grounds you believe that the Kirklees tomb is Robin's grave. Love to hear your thoughts on that matter.

Arcadia Discussion Zone

New Book--the Robin Hood/Highgate Conspiracy

Who is online