Robin Hood

[Yeomanbowman]

WillS
I wasn't going to get involved with one but in the end I can't help myself as I respectfully cannot agree with your conclusions.  Here's why...

1.  The BBC Robin Hood was based on the latest historical research.  Has anyone actually seen it?  It’s about as factual as the Disney version
2.  There is not much English/Welsh yew that will make good warbows.  Well, only if you don't know where to look.  Nicolas Frost obviously did, when Henry V sent him out to England and Wales to gather yew staves for the Agincourt Campaign.  I've made loads from it.
3.  Ash is a better option.  Yes, it's easier to find but back then elm would have been chosen over ash and just as easy to find.
4.  Composite bows were made and shot by the Romans in Britain.  Bone parts in a finished and semi-finished state have been found in a fabrica in Caerleon.  However, they had a massive infrastructure and central heating.  They didn't live in a wood.  Even if Robin wanted a composite bow, which I doubt, it would have come unstuck sooner or later.  Read Hugh Soar's book about how animal glued fishtail spliced yew billet bows came apart quite often due to our climate.

[BowRaven]

I just finished an excellent "Robin Hood" account called Sherwood by Parke Godwin

I like it because they really work at the whole norman saxon thing rather than the return from the crusades aspect.  It is a far more believeable accounting.  I think it speaks to the advice here about the tree species and reinforces the basic english longbow model.

"In his telling of the Robin Hood legend, Godwin offers a fresh, intriguing version set 100 years earlier than usual, in the time of William the Conqueror. After the uprising against William is put down and his father is killed, Robin goes home to inherit his father's land and title. En route, he encounters Marian, who has lost her home and family. Robin finds carrying out the king's edicts intolerable and flees to Sherwood. Robin's men are outlaws, robbing the rich to give to the poor, but possess no special powers except their knowledge of the forest and skill with the bow. Opposing them initially is the Sheriff of Nottingham, here Ralf FitzGerald, a Norman knight depicted sympathetically. Godwin's tapestry interweaves the church, paganism, romance, treachery, violence, and everyday life. The result is believable and enjoyable with well-drawn characterizations."

[Dane]

Guys, consider that the Romans in Britain did use composite bows. There have been archeological finds that prove this, wet climate or not.

Look to some ancient Irish legends of Fin and the Fianna. I believe that these stories may have influenced Arthurian tales and the Robin legends. Finn MacCool or Finn mac Cumbhaill was a great warrior with an equally great band of followers. To become one of the band, you had to stand in a hole up to your waist and with only a shield and a stick, you had to fend off 9 spears thrown at you, and even a scratch would disqualify you. You had to jump over a stick your own height, and you had to duck under one at knee level. You had to remove a thorn from your foot with only a fingernail while running as fast as you could. You had to be able to recite poetry, and you had to take oaths that you could never break. They lived isolated in the forest from society and renounce home and family. It was a strictly male warrior society, so no Maid Marion.

I just read that Robin may have been based on a bandit named William of Kensham, aka Willikin of the Weald. And he may have been based on Norse gods, including one named Ull, Hollin, Holler, Oller, or Vulder, who was a god of archery.

Whoever Robin was, he was pretty good with his weapons. And this legend may go back far, far before William showed up and wacked Harold Godwinsson, if you can believe the William of Kensham who was apparently harassing and raiding the French in the wake of the invasion by the Normans.

PS Sorry Yeomanbowman, didn't see your comments. I agree with what you said about the Romans.

[barecgesh]

Funny enough i like to think i have an idea of what he looked like as i made a holloween costume for it last year
but more as a generic archer that ran in to some trouble,no flashy colours and he is a woods man so basic stuff
wool for most of his gear and animal hide for the rest.Thats the main thing that annoys me about most films he is wearing
top of the range gear and supposed to be living in the woods i just do not get it.
but i do like to stick to the classical robin hood and stories like the black arrow and the white company



The one problem with my gear at the moment is the hunting shirt is brand spanking new and clean as i only finished sewing it last week
from old curtins
sleeves are rolled up.brown linen one side the natural wool on the other
the pants are wool with oils put back in it and leather knees and upper legs to keep them water resistant  and leather gaiters
the hood is oiled leather that was skinned of an old couch and goes half way down the back
the slowest prey is the easiest to catch
the cloak is just linen waxed and would probably be the most expensive thing to own for someone
and a nice little axe and knife and a couple of belt pouches
gear based around 1070-1120s ish
 




 

[Marks]

Funny enough i like to think i have an idea of what he looked like as i made a holloween costume for it last year
but more as a generic archer that ran in to some trouble,no flashy colours and he is a woods man so basic stuff
wool for most of his gear and animal hide for the rest.Thats the main thing that annoys me about most films he is wearing
top of the range gear and supposed to be living in the woods i just do not get it.
but i do like to stick to the classical robin hood and stories like the black arrow and the white company



The one problem with my gear at the moment is the hunting shirt is brand spanking new and clean as i only finished sewing it last week
from old curtins
sleeves are rolled up.brown linen one side the natural wool on the other
the pants are wool with oils put back in it and leather knees and upper legs to keep them water resistant  and leather gaiters
the hood is oiled leather that was skinned of an old couch and goes half way down the back
the slowest prey is the easiest to catch
the cloak is just linen waxed and would probably be the most expensive thing to own for someone
and a nice little axe and knife and a couple of belt pouches
gear based around 1070-1120s ish
 

You forgot to mention a fantastic beard to top it all off.

[WillS]

WillS
I wasn't going to get involved with one but in the end I can't help myself as I respectfully cannot agree with your conclusions.  Here's why...

1.  The BBC Robin Hood was based on the latest historical research.  Has anyone actually seen it?  It’s about as factual as the Disney version
2.  There is not much English/Welsh yew that will make good warbows.  Well, only if you don't know where to look.  Nicolas Frost obviously did, when Henry V sent him out to England and Wales to gather yew staves for the Agincourt Campaign.  I've made loads from it.

I respect all your points! I would never consider myself an expert, they were just my opinions.  However, I would like to mention that I said from the outset that the program was "poorly made" and it was never intended as evidence or fact in this discussion.  I just thought it interesting that they opted for the Asiatic style recurve as it complied with my belief also.  And also, I too have used lots of fantastic quality English yew.  Saying there wasn't any was a joke. I don't want somebody coming over and nicking it all...

I'm gonna be stubborn and pig headed in regards to this and stick with my theory (as that was the point of the thread and we'll never know anyway) that Robin Hood would have used short fast recurves made of English wood such as yew, as compared to big 6ft military issue war weapons.  So humph. 

[JW_Halverson]

I will see your humph and raise you one harumph!

[Shiloh]

HARUMPHAMUPHHACKCOUGH

Why wouldn't a 6' "War Weapon" be out of the question? These were more than military-issued equipment; these archers would have literally grown up shooting this very type of bow, so why switch to a completely different weapons system that they don't know as well?

I'll relate this to an experience I had (albeit not with archery, but bear with me for a moment) a few months ago. I'm active in the shooting community, and many of the guys I shoot with are former military or law enforcement. As such, many are trained not only to be expert shots with a particular weapon, but to manipulate and control it as well. My buddy Stephen can shoot an AR like no one I've ever met; sub-second malfunction clearence, <1" groups at 100 yards, etc. Anyway, we met a guy who was running an M14 and let both of us shoot it. After twenty rounds at 50 yards, Steve was just barely holding a 6" group, and cursing it the whole time.

It's a stretch for a metaphor, yeah, but it addresses a certain point: If our fictional "Robin Hood" existed, IF he was indeed an English archer, and IF he was like other archers of the time period, there was no valid reason for him to switch to a different bow. To him, a 6' longbow would have been just as easy to shoot as any other, if not more.

[WillS]

Agreed. Until you're in dense woodland.  Up a tree.  Trying to be silent.  With a 6ft warbow.

My humph sticks.

[Thesquirrelslinger]

Agreed. Until you're in dense woodland.  Up a tree.  Trying to be silent.  With a 6ft warbow.

If the tree structure permits, just grab a branch with your feet and teeth, and draw the bow 
Actually, it is surprisingly easy to shoot a long bow out of a tree(I have only tried a 65" oak linen back) as long as it has big, widely spaced branches with few twigs or other stuff. As long as you are only gonna be up for a little bit.
Keep in mind I am young, spry, and light, and it was only a 35 pounder with a 26" draw.