Stephen Thomas Knight

This is a large anthology of material, chiefly about Robin Hood but including several stories of other outlaws. It overlaps with the other collection Medieval Outlaws in terms of the tales included, but since this one is a TEAMS collection, most of the items are in the original forms (late Middle English and early Modern English), with only a few of the tales which were originally in Latin or Anglo-Norman French (Hereward, Eustace the Monk, Fulk Fitz Warin) in modern English, while in Medieval Outlaws all the tales are in Modern English prose. Besides, the tales, the story includes brief chronicle mentions of Robin Hood. Two of the chronicle references (Walter Bower and John Major) are also translated from Latin.This collection also includes many later ballads and some plays on Robin Hood not in the other collection.… (más)

This book is a wide-ranging anthology including both recent scholarship and notable earlier pieces. It is divide into fur sections, the first one on the literature inspired by Robin Hood, from the early poems down to the 19th century novel Maid Marion. Then there is a section of historical studies which to me are the strongest part, by well-known scholars in medieval English history including Hilton, Holt, Maddicott, Cook, Hanawalt, Hill, and Colin Richmond, among others, covering the long and serious debates about the historical basis (if any) of Robin Hood and the nature of his audience. The third section includes Sir Sidney Lee's original DNB article arguing Robin never existed as well as Lord Raglan's attempt (not very successful to my mind) to fit Robin Hood into his pattern of the hero ad more recent studies bu John Matthew and Joseph Nagy, followed by a final section on Robin Hood in film, ending with Knight's own study of Robin Hood: Men in Tights. All in all, it is a very useful survey of the field, bringing together much important work which was originally in widely scattered sources.… (más)

This is a relatively recently discovered (1993) relatively late (circa 1670s) manuscript of a thorough collection of Robin Hood ballads, probably compiled for intended publication as a rival (in the editor's view a successful one) to the standard printed "Garland" collections of Robin Hood ballads. Although all the ballads included were already known from other sources, several of these are substantially earlier and better versions than those previously known mid-18th century versions. This edition's purpose is to make available an accurate edition of the ballads as they appear in this manuscript , with scholarly notes comparing these versions to the other versions already known.… (más)

Robin Hood was not known as a master of disguise, but you could be forgiven if this book makes you think otherwise.

Disclaimer: I've published my own book about Robin Hood, so I have my own opinions on the topic. And I freely admit that Knight/Ohlgren was one of the primary sources I used. I also made extensive use of another of Thomas Ohlgren's works. There is a great wealth of information here -- newly-edited copies of all the early "ballads" (actually metrical romances), an assortment of more recent materials, texts of early mentions of Robin Hood, and selections from parallels to the Robin Hood tales, such as the stories of Hereward the Wake and Fulk FitzWarren. As a starting point for Robin Hood studies, it is a tremendous "one stop shop."

But it has frustrating aspects, too. This is perhaps most evident in the "Gest of Robyn Hode," the longest Robin Hood romance. We have multiple copies, all early prints, all different editions. There are three complete prints, one other copy containing about half of the whole, and a handful of fragments. Their disagreements are relatively minor but not trivial. To compile a critical edition on this basis is a significant task. (I know full well, because I've done it!) And the Knight/Ohlgren edition, while competent, has some very erratic readings ("beadsman" as an emendation for "leadsman" springs to mind). And while the notes to the early stanzas mostly discuss why they made the decisions they did, the notes are few and far between as we reach the end. Unless one has access to a fuller critical edition, it's hard to know how far to trust the text.

And most of the materials are just thrown at the student, SPLAT! There isn't really enough context. That is, there is no attempt to try to sort out common elements in the materials, or to show where the legends diverge. (E.g. there isn't much discussion of the question of whether Robin was based in Sherwood forest or Barnsdale. The early sources mostly favor the latter, but it isn't quite universal.)

I suppose the summary is that there is a tremendous amount of good material here, but it needs a commentary volume to go with the text, and the commentary isn't there. Get the book, by all means, but if you truly want to be a Robin Hood expert, be prepared to look for more.… (más)