I read Howard Pyle’s version of Robin some years ago and fell in love with it right away.  I have read it a couple times since then and have always considered it to be a very well-written book and purposeful book.  I was quite astonished, when, a few weeks ago, I heard that some people were afraid to read this book to their children as they feared it would teach them to murder and steal. I feel as though this is an injustice done to my beloved Robin Hood and, in case I have any readers with the same doubts concerning this outlaw, I have decided to give a little evalution of his character and tell briefly why I believe him to be a hero instead of a villian. (Please remember throughout this discussion that all references to Robin Hood and any other characters refer to Howard Pyle’s version of the book as I have not read many other versions and cannot vouch for them.)

The setting of Robin Hood is during Prince John’s reign over England in the 13th century.  Many of the rulers and barons are very cruel to the people at this time and many of the people have run away from their masters after harsh treatment.  The forest belongs to the king and no one is permitted to kill any of the deer in that wood although the escaped slaves are often compelled to break this law for fear that they should starve to death.  However, once one has eaten of the king’s deer they are outlawed and, if ever caught, executed.  A good many of the the monks and abbots are very rich and gluttonous and there is very little true devotion to God among them.  They do not care about the starving people around them.

It is in this setting that Robin Hood, a young man of nineteen,  kills a man in self-defense.  He is instantly outlawed and must flee into the forest to save his life.  While there, he lives on the forbidden kings’ deer and thus gets into even more trouble with the government. While he is sheltering in the forest, he meets other unfortunate people like himself who have been outlawed for minor offenses or run away from their harsh masters.  Robin Hood forms a band of these outlaws and teaches them how to live in the wild.  As his followers become more numerous, he is no longer able to feed them with the King’s deer and must find a better way to take care of them.  It is then that he begins robbing the abbots and friars who travel through the forest.  These churchmen are (for the most part) lazy and grow rich off of the money of the poor people.  They steal their lands and find every excuse to outlaw them in order to take possession of their property.  Robin and his band seldom kill any of these churchmen but they take their money and use it to survive on and to help poor people.  They have a rule never to hurt any women and this is followed at all costs. Thus, Robin and his “merry men” live together in Sherwood forest and survive as outlaws. 

Assuming that all of this is true, it seems to me that Robin Hood ought to be considered an admirable and courageous hero, rather than a rogue and villian.  It seems to me that there is nothing wrong with being an outlaw if the law which you are “out” of is wrong.  The laws of Robin Hood’s day that gave absolute freedom and wealth to the lazy rich, but made the poor work until they dropped were NOT just laws.  If loving and serving Christ was illegal in our country, would we not stand up and be outlaws?

I don’t nessacarily think that Robin Hood was a perfect hero.  He had his faults, just like all the rest of us and, clearly, we can’t emulate him in everything, but I think he was an admirable man who shouldn’t be classified with thieves and murderers.

 -Frodo