This is a case of the history behind the story being not nearly as captivating and romantic as the story itself. The author puts up some plausible theories and lists some of the original ballads, as well as providing a lot of background information and illustrations. There were some interesting aspects to this book and since this is my first Robin Hood read, it's all new to me; more seasoned campaigners might find far less new material than I did. I will keep this for future reference, but I wouldn't say it's very entertaining. ( )

Having a keen interest in the Robin Hood legend, I very much looked forward to reading Baldwin's work. In this book Baldwin attempts to uncover the 'real' Robin Hood. Unfortunately, he waits until the final chapter to put forward his theory as to who the real Robin Hood was, and then spends no more than 10 pages supporting his theory. As much as I would like to believe the Robin Hood legend is based in history, Baldwin's book has not convinced me that the legend is more than just that - a legend. ( )

It doesn't matter how good your research is if it's dead wrong.

Let's face it: If you've read a "Robin Hood" story written in the last two hundred years, it's wrong, and even if you go to the proper sources (the half dozen or so ballads known to have been in existence before 1600), they still aren't about a real person.

And even if they were about a real person, it wasn't Roger Godberd, who lived at the wrong time!

Give David Baldwin partial credit: He doesn't pay any attention to the modern frippery, but works primarily with the four major ballads: The Gest of Robyn Hode, Robin Hood and the Monk, Robin Hood and the Potter, and Robin Hood and Guy of Gisborne. But the problems start on the very paragraph where he first mentions the "Gest" (which, at 456 stanzas, is the most important Robin Hood source by an order of magnitude). He states without any reservations at all that the "Gest" is a compilation of five other poems.

Most scholars agree that the "Gest" is a composite -- but the number of sources suggested ranges from two to dozens (although, in the latter scenario, most of the sources were mined for only a few lines). It is true that the "Gest" seems to be based on four or five different stories -- but the tale of Robin Hood's Death, for instance, is glossed over so lightly that it appears the "Gest" poet did not know the full tale.

And if the "Gest" does one thing, it establishes clearly that it was set in the date of Edward II. The King is named Edward, Edward II was the only king in the right place at the right time, and numerous small details fit his reign.

Yet Baldwin's conclusion places Robin in the time of Henry III.

And it's all based on four ballads anyway.

It's an interesting book. But the conclusion is simply wrong. There was no single man who inspired the Robin Hood legend, and to look for a "real" Robin Hood is perverse. We would learn far more by looking at the various ballads (which have some rather spectacular disagreements) and see what they tell us about the contexts of their times. ( )