# Was Robin Hood's 'real' grave discovered?



## Brian G Turner

An interesting one - folklore and legend mixed in with some very interesting reconstructive archaeological inquiry. And, of course, the punchline is...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/3198950.stm

*Robin Hood's grave 'dug up'*

The bones of legendary outlaw Robin Hood may have been dug up in the mid-18th Century, according to a history buff. 

Author Richard Rutherford-Moore, who has published two books about Robin Hood, bases the claim on research and a series of experiments with a bow and arrow. 

According to most Robin Hood legends, the ailing outlaw determined his own burial site by shooting an arrow from his death bed. 

He is said to have died in the gatehouse of Kirklees Priory, in West Yorkshire. 

A monument in the privately owned grounds claims to mark Robin Hood's grave, but Mr Rutherford-Moore says it is impossible the outlaw's final arrow could have travelled the full 650 metres from the gatehouse. 

Using measurements of the old priory building and his knowledge of archery in the 13th Century, Mr Rutherford-Moore fired 20 "test arrows" to re-enact the event. 

He performed the experiment near his home in Sherwood Forest, Nottinghamshire, because it was unsafe to do so at Kirklees. The tests were based on research and a number of "educated assumptions", such as the position of the former priory building relative to the bed, the type of bow being used and Robin Hood's health at the time. 

Based on his shots, Mr Rutherford-Moore believes he determined the probable arrow landing site to within a five-metre radius. 

Subsequent research has shown bones were removed from an unmarked grave at that spot during estate improvement work in the mid-18th Century, he says. 

The whereabouts of those bones is unknown. 

So if these bones were uncovered, were they the remains of history's most famous outlaw? 

Earlier this year, a Cardiff-based academic announced that Robin Hood never existed, basing his conclusion on 20 years of study. 

The idea of finding Robin Hood's bones sounds fanciful and, by Mr Rutherford-Moore's own admission, some of his research is based on legends dating back hundreds of years. 

*'Big coincidence'* 

But it is also founded on legitimate research and the bones found at Kirklees 250 years ago may have been significant, he says. 

Mr Rutherford-Moore says: "Bones were found when they were laying a lead pipe... and they are at the exact spot where I calculated an arrow would have landed. 

"That is a pretty big coincidence." 

However, like any tale about Robin Hood, the truth will never be known for sure. "You can never totally prove it, but people can make their own conclusions."


----------



## dwndrgn

Sheesh.  A perfect example of research based on conjecture based on legend based on historical facts...what a muddle.

Research or no, I love the Robin Hood story and will continue to believe, he is currently living with Bigfoot in upper Montana.


----------



## Brian G Turner

I love the fact that everything remains mysterious after. Sort of like they proved nothing in the end - just had a great idea. The missing bones from the 18th century are a great romantic twist that I'm sure will do nothing to finish off the legend.


----------



## Gnome

It's sad to think that Robin is no longer buried in his shady spot......besides, I thought that one account had Marion buried with him.


----------



## jerchar

I do agree with you oh most ancient one; why can't they just leave legends in peace, they live on in our hearts anyway, in my opinion trying to prove anything when dealing with myths, legends is just taking away all the traits that make legends so fascinating; why do people want proof of something if they could just believe!


----------



## Gnome

jerchar said:
			
		

> I do agree with you oh most ancient one; why can't they just leave legends in peace, they live on in our hearts anyway, in my opinion trying to prove anything when dealing with myths, legends is just taking away all the traits that make legends so fascinating; why do people want proof of something if they could just believe!


You are so right. Legends are akin to religious belief. Proof is unnecessary.
It's like if someone discovered Arthur's bones in Avalon....I'd have to give up waiting for his return....something I just don't want to do.


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

Testing


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

Robin Hoods Grave is at Kirklees in West Yorkshire, Brighouse, centre of the Yorkshire Robin Hood Society.
[link removed]http://groups.msn.com/TheGatehousethatDrippedBlood

Yorkshire Robin Hood Society


----------



## Esioul

There are about a thousand places all around Britain reputed to be the grave of Arthur, or just places that he walked past or rocks he sat down on to eat his sandwiches.


----------



## The Master™

But Arthur is supposed to be waiting in some sort of magical stasis for the time when Britain needed him most...​ 
So, therefore, there can not be any bones or burial sites...

Unless, his is waiting to be re-incarnated (like his Knights in Camelot 3000 - DC Comic)...

[EDIT] Now if someone stood as a MP (or whatever) and stated he/she was the reincarnation of Arthur Pendragon and wielded a hefty broadsword, I'd vote for them ('cos you never know)...


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

Well King Arthur is nothing to do with the matter, just because they have made a film about him recently. If its as accurate as all the Robin Hood films up to press it will be historically naff. I wonder why no one has ever been allowed to excavate at Kirklees, even Time Team? There is only one Robin Hoods Grave and that is historically documented in several places to be at Kirklees, though the actual place is not certain, the present gravesite being a Victorian Folly.There have also been paranormal sightings in the area.
Yorkshire Robin Hood Society


----------



## The Master™

You gotta love myth and legend to get people psyched about a subject...

Is there DEFINITIVE proof that Robin Hood even existed???

I seem to remember reading many differing, (alleged) historical accounts... Where "the character" lived anywhere from below Nottinghamshire to above County Durham, that he Robert or Robin, that he was landed gentry (from the houses of Huntingdon or Locsley or some other unknown) or a knight during the crusades or a disgruntled peasant with a love of the dramatic, that he was a psychotic criminal or a fair "equaliser" for the people...

I can say with my hand on my heart, that alleged "paranormal sightings" will ALWAYS get me to laugh out loud at the person who mentions it, with a lot of finger pointing... 

Like many things of this ilk, sometimes it is better to stay with the flights of fancy and enjoy the myths and legends... Whether it be Robin Hood: persecuted knight turned champion of the people or King Arthur: wielder of Excalibur, founder of the round-table and fighter or injustice (Once and Future King)...

Sometimes the truth (if it can be found) may destroy some peoples hopes and dreams for something noble for them to believe in, in a world gone mad...

Once again, just my NOT SO HUMBLE opinion...


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

testing


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

sorry I was trying to s end a reply and it would not do it, so I tried a picture--I didn't think it would work, I was only messing around !


----------



## Esioul

Time Team only excavates if they think they're going to find something worthwhile, you know. Same with any other dig.


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

depends on the reliability of their research 
local knowledge is as important as the esteemed professors


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

pleae see http://groups.msn.com/bossybishopsandnaughtynuns
 for some of the history of kirklees


----------



## The Master™

yorkshirerhsociety said:
			
		

> depends on the reliability of their research
> local knowledge is as important as the esteemed professors


With all due respect, "local knowledge" can be just as suspect as research done by professionals in the field...

Unless there is a marker somewhere that states "Here lies Robin Hood AKA ........." that can be carbon dated to between 12th and 13th Centuries, and some sort of written record of his existence to back up the claim, then all you have is speculation mixed up with myth, legend and local folk lore!!!

Out of the legend, we know that King Richard (the Lionheart) existed, so did King John, there was a Sherrif of Nottingham (though no name given), there is a Sherwood Forest, other than that what other CONCRETE evidence exists??? An old oak tree??? There are loads of those - okay not many that are 800+ years old... 

It is like saying that Jesus Christ really existed... Okay, other than the bible (which isn't likely to be reliable) where is the proof of his existance???

[EDIT] Just found a link to something on the BBC: 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/state/monarchs_leaders/robin_01.shtml


----------



## Brian G Turner

It is a sad fact that a lot of archaeological sites are not excavated - but this is simply due to the sparse nature of funding into the issue. After all, what financial worth is broken pottery to financial backers? 

 As for an actual grave - what Robin Hood are we actually talking about? What are the actual historical sources for the legend? By that I mean all Hood legends - is there an originating tale? HAve to admit I know very little about the history of it.

 Oh - and welcome to the chronicles-network, yorkshirerhsociety.


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

testing


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

Failed to post again!!!!I give up!What am I doing wrong?


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

Third time luck? I simply said that big budget films and childrens story don't tell the true story of robin hood and people just come and have a dabble like tony robinson but miss out by not  getting to know those who have been studying the subject  for years


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

see picture


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

Thanks BRIAN--I am having trouble posting so thats why I am keeping it short 
[link removed]
 Proper research has never been allowed round RHG


----------



## Lacedaemonian

There was a thousand Robin Hoods, during the early renaissance period. A combination of peasant revolts and highway robbery during 14th century helped create a few colourful and sometimes fictional characters.  When I was studying this period, albeit mainly the peasant rovolts of 1831 (Wat Tyler and all that), the name Robin Hood was considered to be a generic name for a leader of outlaws and robbers.


----------



## yorkshirerhsociety

maybe so, but thats a superficial diagnosis


----------



## The Master™

Well, if you have some significant evidence to say that you know the whereabouts of the "ONE TRUE" Robin Hood, and can prove that he wasn't just a made up character, then you should write a thesis stating you evidence and submit it to the right forum...

Until that point, all we have are stories, myths, folktales and legend...


----------



## Esioul

Well, I'm convinced that Hereward the Wake is buried in my garden


----------



## Brian G Turner

Okay now - lovely though all the images are, let's focus this descussion on actual historical/archaeological/folkloric arguments - otherwise I may end up editing any future images out of the thread, unless they are entirely relevant to the discussion to a historical/archaeological/folkloric argument.


----------



## The Master™

Who???


----------



## Esioul

What, Hereward? He fought the Normans, or something, somewhere around here.


----------



## The Master™

Nope, means nothing... More information, please...


----------



## Esioul

I don't know much.... just vague stuff not really remembered from primary school trips to Ely Cathedral. I think Charles Kingsley wrote a book about him.


----------

