Posted at 10.11.2018
The works of two historians will be explored in this piece of work, and their individual thoughts and examination of the Robin Hood tale. The foremost is the work by Holt in his book Robin Hood followed by Hilton's article The Roots of Robin Hood. The purpose and argument of each good article will be evaluated and the technique. theoretical approach of every author will also be analysed by examining the two works closely. The two pieces will be compared and analysed to see what information both historians shared and where they fluctuate.
In his book Robin Hood Holt is looking at the tale his purpose is to unravel the countless twists the legend has endured within the centuries to establish the origin of the legend and dismiss many of the myths mounted on the legend. Holts argument is easy too many historians have taken the tale of Robin Hood and twisted it or simply not examined the evidence to squeeze in with these quarrels or theoretical strategies. Holt is looking at the data available and also considering the main quarrels historians make to see when there is any evidence to support their many says.
Holt begins his book by outlining what he intends o show and establish in the publication and really starts by looking at the story and analyzing the five making it through stories of Robin Hood and schedules the work at 1450 and also looks for sources to Robin Hood. Holt is looking at what many people believe that about Robin Hood the myths attached that lots of people neglect for example Maid Marian. Holt is merely dissembling the original stories the Gest looking for information to date the stories or how much the tales have transformed. Holt argues that there surely is no proof Robin Hood being a public rebel or supplying to the poor Holt comes to the conclusion that the evidence is very hard to come quickly to any clear realization. Holt then goes onto the question who was simply Robin Hood his methods are simple he talks about other historians tries to identify Robin Hood and then dismisses them as their simply isn't enough research. Holt then progresses to surnames and once more concludes their simply isn't enough information to produce a logical assumption and that the only real dating facts is the reference to Edwards northern progress. Holt once more concludes that there is not enough evidence available. Holt then makes an attempt to identify the original Robin Hood and talks about how the stories have been combined with a variety of fictional and real tales of outlaws Holt is looking at the themes or templates and the way the experiences are written to try and place the tales and concludes that the stories of Robin participate in the first 15th hundred years. Holt then goes to the psychical setting considering the areas Robin Hoods stories are arranged and after looking at the tales once again and argues that many place names have no real historical value and was much more likely and marketing strategy by later years to improve local interest somewhat than places that can be tracked to the Gest. Holt also argues that place labels would have changed with the performer or creator to make the tales more appealing. Holt then tries to find the audience that the tales were meant and looks for for analysis the task yeoman and employs' a rational approach exploring the use and record of the term and also looks at the way stories were sent orally and then looking at the way in which Robin Hood associates himself with other individuals and for example his use of any sword a tool peasants didn't use and of his camaraderie with nights in this manner he dismisses some historians claims that Robin was a social bandit fighting resistant to the landlords of the day. Holt is merely trying to determine Robin Hood's communal position and with this the audience is primarily targeted at but essentially Holt argues that Robin Hood became everything to all men. Holt finally looks at the later tradition of the tales and talks about how Robin Hood has transformed throughout history and has followed social change. Holt looks at the advancement of the tales how things were added or blended the robbing the abundant to provide to the poor or the myth that Robin Hood was a dropped noble man and the links to Richard the Lion heart and soul and Holt simply says that Robin Hood evolved with the audience the entire world Robin Hood was created into created a brutal violent man and now he is the quintessential gentleman. Holt then concludes his book and argues that a lot more work could be carried out on the Gest to find out more accurately when it was written and how the story of Robin Hood continues to morph and develop and adjust to meet new social changes.
Holts methodologies is very rational in its strategy he simply talks about the evidence in its purest form and extrapolates the relevant information and then looks
At what historians have written r argued and cross references the info he previously provided against how many other historians claim and in this manner leaves the audience with an overpowering sense of the inaccuracy of several historians work and failings in their own research methods which traditional strategy by Holt also shows the lengths that some historians go to twist most important resources to fit their own hypotheses. Holt method of looking at the principal source is very boring to the reader but does business lead to an obvious understanding of the period in which the tales originated and Holt doesn't shirk the difficult points but simply presses on where other historians when looking at this topic have a tendency to ignore areas that issues with their main debate Holt is simply laying all the facts out and let us the reader come to his own bottom line this book has been very helpful in this component in understanding the Robin Hoods star and opened a great many other ways of interpreting primary material especially analysing the use of words or etymology.
The other good article being looked at is Hiltons the Origins of Robin Hood shared in History and Present. Hilton's reason for the part is to look at the facts to see if Robin Hood was a genuine person or a myth. Hilton's discussion is from the tale of Robin Hood and whether Robin Hood was at fancy an early socialist leader objective on setting up a utopian society where each is equal and preventing the dreaded landholders. Hilton is looking at the story to see what facts there exists off this sociable warfare between your classes, Hilton's article made some very interesting arguments regarding the 14th Hundred years Hiltons argument is simply that the legend and stories of Robin Hood were simply an extension of the peasant populace and there desire to be clear of the tyranny of the feudal order and oppressive landlords.
Hilton starts this article by looking at the question was Robin Hood a genuine person or just fiction Hilton argues that Robin Hood was most likely not a real person and Hilton then looks at the worthiness a communal historian may bring to the tale and eventually extends to the final outcome that Robin Hood was a literary creation as there is simply not enough research to support that he was a genuine figure. Hilton then will try to find the earliest mention of Robin Hood and mentions William Langland and his work as the first mention of Robin Hood. Hilton then issues the foundation of the tales to the north of Scotland and argues about the ballads via Scotland. Hilton then looked at links to the May game titles. Hilton then talks about the main arguments of ideas of historians from 16th hundred years to newer historians Hilton looks at each idea and concludes that there is not sufficient proof to look Hilton is wanting to trace the roots of Robin Hood and is essentially examining earlier historians works and although many of the endeavors are interesting there isn't enough information to aid lots of the quarrels especially of Robin Hood being a real person employed in real combat through the 13th century such as a member of Thomas earl of Lancaster's army. Hilton also viewed the name Hood and concludes that it was a very common name and so evidence can be found to link any real hood to the tales immediately. Hilton also makes many public connections during the early area of the article exhibiting Hiltons beliefs and ideology and striving to reinforce the thought of a cultural outlaw. Hilton also searches for the physical locale and concludes that Yorkshire is the main area. Hilton then looks at the social record the audience of the experiences in doing this trying to identify who paid attention to the original experiences and who these were targeted at. Hilton writes about class division within culture the struggle between your peasantry and the nobles. Hilton also looks at the ballad people and talks about how the experiences showed the individuals and their romantic relationships. Hilton argues that the sooner ballads show a very violent Robin Hood and his group that is certainly evidence of sociable conflict with world and that time. Hilton then makes an attempt to Robin Hood and his men into the sociable hierarchy using the ballads and looks at the term yeoman and argues that a yeoman was a rich peasant rather than an associate of the center class. Hilton argues that Robin being a free peasant but still a peasant but of appealed to the peasant category and to the free peasants which was the audience designed for the ballads. Hilton then talks about the social relationships to understand the attitudes and looks and analyses the ballads and explores regulations and the utilization of outlaw in detail to give more credence to his argument of a sociable outlaw created by the population where Robin lived an oppressed contemporary society and the sooner stories are indicative of public struggle. Hilton will try to provide a time to the stories and things to the 14th hundred years and the fantastic upheaval that occurred leading up to the peasants revolt and the have difficulties of the peasantry to go from indentured service to paid service. Hilton argues that the public unrest during this time period is more likely to have induced the tales than the civil or political unrest at that time. Hilton then will try to reinterpret the stories as his argument of sociable unrest resistant to the land lords is a significant part of his argument and argues that although landlords or their providers are not pointed out Hilton tips to the clergy at gratifying that role. Hilton also talks about the role the King played and the individuals still held him in high respect and he's their champ Hilton argues that this love of the King is explained as a disregard for local expert the clergy and sheriff being two and that the people got social aspirations rather than political essentially they need more protection under the law but possessed no politics ambitions to overthrow the king. Hilton finally argues that the ballads and stories are simply just an extension of the peasant's social aspirations and the enemies of this public aspiration are thwarted by Robin Hood and his merry men in the ballads and this reflects the emotions and views of the peasant class during the period of the 14th hundred years.
Hilton's article is an extremely interesting good article and well investigated and shows the reasonable way that the Robin Hood story can be analysed. Hilton says that there is a lack of evidence encompassing the Robin Hood myth and that there is not enough information to formulate for several many items but that the tales themselves show the cultural have difficulties and environment of the 14th century. Hilton social beliefs do show through in this article and almost seem to be thrust after the reader and he doesn't appear to follow many strategies which move too far from his own ideology this however could be simply of the term limit of said article. Hilton work has been an interesting insight into the mind of public historians and how many different quarrels that originates from the same materials and indeed how much information in regards to social interactions can be discovered from the Robin Hood tales.
When looking at the two bits of work both are convincing in proving their individual quarrels and their methods to the materials available Hilton and Holt both try to establish the foundation of the legends and come to the same conclusion that the ballads or tales are infused with a variety of fiction and the stories of real outlaws all combined to generate the Robin Hood theme. Hilton and Holt also both claim that the legend is the most important aspects and tracing the true Robin Hood when there is indeed such a person isn't that important as it's the myth the legend of Robin Hood that important to historians and that is almost impossible to recognize a real person who performed indeed form the basis of the o original tales and there is simply not enough information open to do anything nut make an informed estimate. Both historians also come to same conclusion as to the physical location the Yorkshire Barns dale area in which the tales are based. The main difference between your two historian is the communal group in which robin Hood belongs holt maintains that Robin was from a middle income a freeman who held vitality whereas Hilton argues that robin was a peasant a free peasant but still a peasant this difference is argued by both with diligence and a solid discussion using various options to lower back their individual claims. This communal question is most likely the key area in which the tales can be in interpreted in a different way as both historians recognize the difficulties in proving their arguments. Hilton and Holt both place the foundation of the experiences in the same century but for different reasons. Both historians follow a reasonable procedure and come to numerous of the same conclusions in reference to the Robin Hood star and both Holt's e book and Hilton's article are interesting and well explored.
In bottom line both historians make a very valid debate about the legend of Robin Hood. Holt's way seems to be a far more traditional approach considering the evidence and facts and attempting to provide the reader everything to make his own common sense but Holt himself doesn't seem to like the activities of public historians and just how they make the sources fit their particular views this itself could mean that Holt simply ignores many boasts and does not explore to explore these to the same duration he explored other areas. Holt's e book is very useful however and is difficult to place down and does indeed show the way tales are morphed, fictional tales and real people reports are blended to make what most people imagine is a fact. Holt's ability to show how the tales have transformed also shows how easy it is made for medieval tales to be misinterpreted and misunderstood but he will show how reviews are used again by each era to encompass their own beliefs and reinvent Robin Hood above the generations. Hilton is a cultural historian and was an associate of the communist party and these values show however he makes a good debate and even the 14th hundred years as indeed a period of change but his debate that the Robin Hood tales were a sign of interpersonal unrest although convincing does have holes in it. The differ from indentured service for peasants to income services seems to happened after the agrarian problems or the famine of the first 14th century, which communal migration to find better paid work and social change was beginning to occur earlier than Hilton suggests this could be however deposit to new evidence which wasn't available to Hilton when he published his work. The 14th hundred years was an interval of great change the famine, dark loss of life and wars in Europe all played a part in cultural change but Hiltons debate that the Stories of Robin Hood were just a extension of interpersonal unrest leaves some questions if the tales of Robin Hood were written for this function why didn't the stories discuss landlords or the plight of the peasants there doesn't seem to be enough information from the tales to support this promise. Hilton and Holt show that primary sources can be looked at in entirely different ways and as a student it's important to go through the material first hands and not simply believe was it compiled by esteemed historians. Holt's booklet has been replaced by a second edition which handles the shortcomings of the initial book and explores other areas. Hilton's article could be appeared upon as an indicator of the changing times Hilton was writing in where Marxist views were all over the place and the necessity to explain the cultural struggle with society intended looking for samples throughout history. A simple fact also explains the difficulties in evaluating two different works from different historians everyone experienced their own view and biases have to be taken into account and new information is found that changes how we perceive history.