ii. 5):

“All in a woodman’s jacket he was clad Of Lincolne greene, belay’d with silver lace And on his head an hood with aglets sprad, And by his side his hunter’s horne he hanging had.”

It is likewise noticed by our poet himself, in another place:

“Swains in shepherds gray, and gyrles in Lincolne greene.”[32]

See Polyolbion, song xxv., where the marginal note says, “Lincolne anciently dyed the best green in England.” Thus Coventry had formerly the reputation of dying the best blue. {xxxix} See Ray’s Proverbs, p. 178. Kendal green is equally famous, and appears to have been cloth of a similar quality. This colour was adopted by foresters to prevent their being too readily discovered by the deer. See Sir John Wynne’s History of the Guedir Family (Barrington’s Miscellanies), p. 419. Thus the Scotish Highlanders used to wear brown plaids to prevent their being distinguished among the heath. It is needless to observe that green has ever been the favourite dress of an archer, hunter, &c. See Note 34.[33] We now call it a Saxon or grass green:

“His coat is of a Saxon green, his waistcoat’s of a plaid” (O. song).

Lincoln green was well known in France in or before the 13th century. Thus, in an old fabliau, transprosed by M. Le Grand (Fabliaux ou Contes, iv. 13), “Il mit donc son surcot fourré d’écureuil, et sa belle robe d’Estanfort teinte en verd.” Estanfort is Stamford, in Lincolnshire.[34] This cloth is, likewise, often mentioned by the old Scotish poets under the names of Lincum licht, Lincum twyne, &c., and appears to have been in universal request: and yet, notwithstanding this cloud of evidence, Mr. Pinkerton has had the confidence to assert that “no particular cloth was ever made at Lincoln.” (See Ancient Scotish Poems, ii. 430.) But, indeed, this worthy gentleman, as Johnson said of Goldsmith, only stumbles upon truth by accident. {xl}

(17)

“_From wealthy abbots’ chests_,” _&c._]

“But who,” exclaims Dr. Fuller, having cited this passage, “made him a judge? or gave him a commission to take where it might be best spared, and give where it was most wanted?” That same power, one may answer, which authorises kings to take where it can be worst spared, and give it where it is least wanted. Our hero, in this respect, was a knight-errant; and wanted no other commission than that of Justice, whose cause he militated. His power, compared with that of the king of England, was by no means either equally usurped or equally abused: the one reigned over subjects (or slaves) as a master (or tyrant), the other possessed no authority but what was delegated to him by the free suffrage of his adherents, for their general good: and as for the rest, it would be absurd to blame in Robin what we should praise in Richard.[35] The latter, too, warred in remote parts of the world against nations from which neither he nor his subjects had sustained any injury; the former at home against those to whose wealth, avarice, or ambition he might fairly attribute not only his own misfortunes, but the misery of the oppressed and enslaved society he had quitted. In a word, every man who has the power has also the authority to pursue the ends of justice, to regulate the gifts of fortune, by transferring the superfluities of the rich to the necessities of the poor; by relieving the oppressed, and even, when necessary, destroying the oppressor. These are the objects of the social union, and every individual may, and to the utmost of his power should, endeavour to promote them. Had our Robin Hood been, like M’Donald of Barrisdale, a reader of Virgil, he, as well as that gallant chief, might have inscribed on his baldric— {xli}

“Hæ tibi erunt artes; pacis componere mores, Parcere subjectis, et debellare superbos.”[36]

(18) “_But it is to be remembered_,” _&c._] The passage from Major’s work, which has been already quoted, is here given entire (except as to a single sentence introduced in another place). “Circa hæc tempora [s. Ricardi I.] ut auguror, Robertus Hudus & Parvus Joannes latrones famatissimi, in nemoribus latuerunt, solum opulentum virorum bona diripientes. Nullum nisi eos invadentem vel resistentem pro suarum rerum tuitione occiderunt. Centum sagittarios ad pugnam aptissimos Robertus latrociniis aluit quos 400 viri fortissimi invadere non audebant. Fæminam nullum opprimi permisit, nec pauperum bona surripuit, verum eos ex abbatum bonis ablatis opipare pavit. Viri rapinam improbo sed latronum omnium humanissimus & princeps erat” (Majoris Britanniæ Historia, Edin. 1740, p. 128).

Stowe, in his Annales, 1592, p. 227, gives an almost literal version of the above passage; Richard Robinson versifies it;[37] and Camden slightly refers to it. {xlii}

(19) —“_has had the honour to be compared to the illustrious Wallace_,” _&c._] In the first volume of Peck’s intended supplement to the Monasticon, consisting of collections for the history of Præmonstratensian monasteries, now in the British Museum, is a very curious riming Latin poem with the following title: “Prioris Alnwicensis de bello Scotico apud Dumbarr, tempore rigis Edwardi I. dictamen sive rithmus Latinus, quo de Willielmo Wallace Scotico illo Robin Whood, plura sed invidiose canit;” and in the margin are the following date and reference:—“22. Julii 1304. 32. E. 1. Regist. Prem. fol. 59. a.” This, it maybe observed, is the first known instance of our hero’s name being mentioned by any writer whatever; and affords a strong and respectable proof of his early popularity.

(20) “_The abbot of St. Mary’s in York._”] “In the year 1088, Alan, Earl of Richmond, founded here a stately abbey for black monks to the honour of St. Olave; but it was afterwards dedicated to the Blessed Virgin by the command of king William Rufus. Its yearly revenues at the suppression amounted to £1550, 7_s._ 9_d._ Dugd., £2850, 1_s._ 5_d._ Speed” (Willis’s Mitred Abbeys, i. 214). The abbots in our hero’s time were—

Robert de Harpsham (el. 1184), ob. 1198. Robert de Longo Campo, ob. 1239. William Rondele, ob. 1244. Tho. de Wharterhille, ob. 1258.

(21) —“_the sheriff of Nottinghamshire._”] Ralph Murdach was sheriff of Derby and Nottinghamshires in the first year of King Richard I., and for the seven years preceding, and William Brewerre in his sixth year, between which and the first no name appears on the roll. See Fuller’s Worthies, &c.

In the year 1195, Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, {xliii} justiciary of all England, sent throughout the kingdom this form of oath: that all men of the realm of England would keep the peace of the lord the king to their power; and that they would neither be thieves nor robbers, nor the receivers of such, nor consent to them in anything; and that when they were able to know such-like malefactors, they would take them to the utmost of their power, and deliver them to the sheriff; who in no wise should be delivered unless by the lord the king or his chief justice; and if unable to take them, they should cause the bailiffs of the lord the king to know who they were: and, cry being raised for pursuing outlaws, robbers, thieves, or their receivers, all should fully do that suit to the utmost of their power, &c. Knights were to be assigned for these purposes, and men chosen and faithful were sent to execute them in every county, who by the oath of true men of the vicinages took many and put them in the king’s prisons; but many, being forewarned, and conscious of evil, left their houses and possessions and fled (_R. de Hoveden_, p. 757).

(22) —“_an anecdote preserved by Fordun_,” _&c._] “De quo eciam quædam commendabilia recitantur, sicut patuit in hoc, quod cum ipse quondam in Barnisdale iram [f. ob iram] regis & fremitum principis, missam, ut solitus erat, devotissime audiret, nec aliqua necessitate volebat interrumpere officium, quadam die cum audiret missam, à quodam vicecomite & ministris regis, sæpius per prius ipsum infestantibus, in illo secretissimo loco nemorali, ubi missæ interfuit, exploratus, venientes ad eum qui de suis hoc perceperunt, ut omni annisu fugeret suggesserunt, qui, ob reverentiam sacramenti, quod tunc devotissime venerabatur, omnino facere recusavit. Sed ceteris suis, ob metum mortis trepidantibus, Robertus tantum confisus in eum, quem coluit reveritus, cum paucissimis, qui tunc forte ei affuerunt, inimicos congressus & eos de facili devicit, et de eorum spoliis ac redemptione ditatus, ministros ecclesiæ & missas semper in majori veneratione semper & de post habere præelegit, attendens quod wlgariter dictum est:

Hunc deus exaudit, qui missam sæpius audit.”

J. De Fordun Scotichronicon, à Hearne, Ox. 1722, p. 774. {xliv}

This passage is found in no other copy of Fordun’s Chronicle than one in the Harleian Library. Its suppression in all the rest may be fairly accounted for on the principle which is presumed to have influenced the conduct of the ancient English historians. See Note 1.

(23) —“_a proclamation was published_,” _&c._] “The king att last,” says the Harleian MS., “sett furth a proclamation to have him apprehended,” &c. Grafton, after having told us that he “practised robberyes,” &c., adds, “The which beyng certefyed to the king, and he beyng greatly offended therewith, caused his proclamation to be made that whosoever would bryng him quicke or dead, the king would geve him a great summe of money, as by the recordes in the Exchequer is to be seene: But of this promise no man enjoyed any benefite. For the sayd Robert Hood, being afterwardes troubled with sicknesse,” &c. (p. 85.) See Note 14.

(24) “_At length the infirmities of old age increasing upon him_,” _&c._] Thus Grafton: “The sayd Robert Hood, beyng troubled with sicknesse, came to a certain nonry in Yorkshire called Bircklies [r. Kircklies], where desiryng to be let blood, he was betrayed and bled to death.” The Sloane MS. says that “[Being] dystempered with could and age, he had great payne in his lymmes, his bloud being corrupted, therefore to be eased of his payne by letting bloud, he repayred to the priores of Kyrkesly, which some say was his aunt, a woman very skylful in physique & surgery; who, perceyving him to be Robyn Hood, & waying howe fel an enimy he was to religious persons, toke reveng of him for her owne howse and all others by letting him bleed to death. It is also sayd that one Sir Roger of Doncaster, bearing grudge to Robyn for some injury, incyted the priores, with whome he was very familiar, in such a maner to dispatch him.” See the Lytell Geste of Robyn Hode, ad finem. The Harleian MS., after mentioning the proclamation “sett furth to have him apprehended,” adds, “At which time it happened he fell sick at a nunnery in Yorkshire called Birkleys [r. Kirkleys]; & desiring there to be let blood, hee was betrayed & made bleed to death.”

Kirkleys, Kirklees, or Kirkleghes, formerly Kuthale, in the {xlv} deanery of Pontefract, and archdeaconry of the West Riding of Yorkshire, was a Cistercian, or, as some say, a Benedictine nunnery, founded, in honour of the Virgin Mary and St. James, by Reynerus Flandrensis in the reign of King Henry II. Its revenues at the dissolution were somewhat about £20, and the site was granted (36 Hen. 8.) to John Tasburgh and Henry Savill, from whom it came to one of the ancestors of Sir George Armytage, Bart., the present possessor. The remains of the building (if any) are very inconsiderable, and its register has been searched after in vain. See Tanner’s Notitia, p. 674. Thoresby’s Ducatus Leodiensis, p. 91. Hearne’s “Account of Several Antiquities in and about the University of Oxford,” at the end of Leland’s Itinerary, vol. ii. p. 128.

In 1706 was discovered, among the ruins of the nunnery, the monument of Elisabeth de Staynton, prioress; but it is not certain that this was the lady from whom our hero experienced such kind assistance. See Thoresby and Hearne ubi supra.

“One may wonder,” says Dr. Fuller, “how he escaped the hand of justice, dying in his bed, for ought is found to the contrary; but it was because he was rather a merry than a mischievous thief (complementing passengers out of their purses), never murdering any but deer, and . . . . ‘feasting’ the vicinage with his vension” (Worthies, p. 320). See the following note.

(25) “_He was interred under some trees at a short distance from the house; a stone being placed over his grave with an inscription to his memory._”] “Kirkley monasterium monialium, ubi Ro: Hood nobilis ille exlex sepultus” (Leland’s Collectanea, i. 54). “Kirkleys Nunnery, in the Woods, whereof Robin Hood’s grave is, is between Halifax and Wakefield upon Calder” (Letter from Jo. Savile to W. Camden, Illus. viro epis. 1691).

“――as Caldor comes along, It chanced she in her course on ‘Kirkley’ cast her eye, Where merry Robin Hood, that honest thief, doth lie.”

(Polyolbion, song 28.)

See also Camden’s Britannia, 1695, p. 709. {xlvi}

In the second volume of Dr. Stukeley’s Itinerarium Curiosum is an engraving of “the prospect of Kirkley’s abby, where Robin Hood dyed, from the footway leading to Heartishead church, at a quarter of a mile distance. A. The New Hall. B. The Gatehouse of the Nunnery. C. The trees among which Robin Hood was buryed. D. The way up the Hill were this was drawn. E. Bradley wood. F. Almondbury hill. G. Castle field. Drawn by Dr. Johnston among his Yorkshire Antiquitys, p. 54 of the drawings. E. Kirkall, sculp.” It makes plate 99 of the above work, but is unnoticed in the letterpress.

According to the Sloane MS., the prioress, after “letting him bleed to death, buryed him under a great stone by the hywayes syde;” which is agreeable to the account in Grafton’s Chronicle, where it is said that, after his death, “the prioresse of the same place caused him to be buried by the highway-side, where he had used to rob and spoyle those that passed that way. And vpon his grave the sayde prioresse did lay a very fayre stone, wherein the names of Robert Hood, William of Goldesborough, and others were graven. And the cause why she buryed him there was, for that the common passengers and travailers, knowyng and seeyng him there buryed, might more safely and without feare take their jorneys that way, which they durst not do in the life of the sayd outlawes. And at eyther ende of the sayde tombe was erected a crosse of stone, which is to be seene there at this present.”

“Near unto ‘Kirklees’ the noted Robin Hood lies buried under a grave-stone that yet remains near the park, but the inscription scarce legible” (Thoresby’s Ducatus Leodiensis, fo. 1715, p. 91). In the Appendix, p. 576, is the following note, with a reference to “page 91:”—

“Amongst the papers of the learned Dr. Gale, late dean of Yorke, was found this epitaph of Robin Hood:

Hear undernead dis laitl stean laiz robert earl of Huntingtun nea arcir ver az hie sa geud an pipl kauld im robin heud {xlvii} sick utlawz az hi an iz men vil england nivr si agen.

obiit 24 [r. 14] kal dekembris 1247.”

The genuineness of this epitaph has been questioned. Dr. Percy, in the first edition of his “Reliques of Ancient English Poetry” (1765), says “It must be confessed this epitaph is suspicious, because in the most ancient poems of Robin Hood there is no mention of this imaginary earldom.” This reason, however, is by no means conclusive, the most ancient poem now extant having no pretension to the antiquity claimed by the epitaph: and indeed the Doctor himself should seem to have afterward had less confidence in it, as, in both the subsequent editions, those words are omitted, and the learned critic merely observes that the epitaph appears to him suspicious. It will be admitted that the bare suspicion of this ingenious writer, whose knowledge and judgment of ancient poetry are so conspicuous and eminent, ought to have considerable weight. As for the present editor’s part, though he does not pretend to say that the language of this epitaph is that of Henry the Third’s time, nor indeed to determine of what age it is, he can perceive nothing in it from whence one should be led to pronounce it spurious, _i.e._ that it was never inscribed on the grave-stone of Robin Hood. That there actually was some inscription upon it in Thoresby’s time, though then scarce legible, is evident from his own words: and it should be remembered as well that the last century was not the era of imposition, as that Dr. Gale was both too good and too learned a man either to be capable of it himself or to be liable to it from others.

That industrious chronologist and topographer, as well as respectable artist and citizen, master Thomas Gent, of York, in his “List of religious houses,” annexed to “The ancient and modern state of” that famous city, 1730, 12mo, p. 234, informs us that he had been told “that his [Robin Hood’s] tombstone, having his effigy thereon, was order’d, not many years ago, by a certain knight to be placed as a harth-stone in his great hall. When it was laid overnight, the next morning it was ‘surprizingly’ removed [on or to] one side; and {xlviii} so three times it was laid, and as successively turned aside. The knight, thinking he had done wrong to have brought it thither, order’d it should be drawn back again; which was performed by a pair of oxen and four horses, when twice the number could scarce do it before. But as this,” adds the sagacious writer, “is a story only, it is left to the reader to judge at pleasure.” N.B.—This is the second instance of a miracle wrought in favour of our hero!

In Gough’s Sepulchral Monuments, p. cviii., is “the figure of the stone over the grave of Robin Hood [in Kirklees park, being a plain stone with a sort of cross fleuree thereon], now broken and much defaced, the inscription illegible. That printed in Thoresby, Ducat. Leod. 576, from Dr. Gale’s papers, was never on it.[38] The late Sir Samuel Armitage owner of the premises, caused the ground under it to be dug a yard deep, and found it had never been disturbed; so that it was probably brought from some other place, and by vulgar tradition ascribed to Robin Hood” (refers to “Mr. Watson’s letter in Antiquary Society minutes”). This is probably the tomb-stone of Elizabeth de Staynton, mentioned in the preceding note.

The old epitaph is, by some anonymous hand, in a work entitled “Sepulchrorum inscriptiones; or a curious collection of 900 of the most remarkable epitaphs,” Westminster, 1727 (vol. ii. p. 73), thus not inelegantly paraphrased:

“Here, underneath this little stone, Thro’ Death’s assaults, now lieth one, Known by the name of Robin Hood, Who was a thief, and archer good; Full thirteen years, and something more, He robb’d the rich to feed the poor: {xlix} Therefore, his grave bedew with tears, And offer for his soul your prayers.”[39]

(26) —“_various dramatic exhibitions_.”] The earliest of these performances now extant is “The playe of Robyn Hode, very proper to be played in Maye games,” which is inserted in the Appendix to this work, and may probably be as old as the 15th century. That a different play, however, on the same subject has formerly existed, seems pretty certain from a somewhat curious passage in “The famous chronicle of king Edward the first, sirnamed Edward Longshankes,” &c., by George Peele, printed in 1593.

“Lluellen . . . . . weele get the next daie from Brecknocke the booke of Robin Hood, the frier he shall instruct us in his cause, and weele even here . . . wander like irregulers up and down the wildernesse, ile be maister of misrule, ile be Robin Hood that once, cousin ‘Rice,’ thou shalt be little John, and hers frier David, as fit as a die for frier Tucke. Now, my sweet Nel, if you will make up the messe with a good heart for maide Marian, and doe well with Lluellen under the green-woode trees, with as good a wil as in the good townes, why plena est curia.

[_Exeunt._

_Enter Mortimor, solus._

_Mortimor._ . . . . . Maisters, have after gentle Robin Hood, You are not so well accompanied I hope, But if a potter come to plaie his part, Youle give him stripes or welcome good or worse. [_Exit._

_Enter Lluellen, Meredith, frier, Elinor, and their traine. They are all clad in greene, &c. sing, &c. Blyth and bonny, the song ended, Lluellen speaketh._

_Luellen._ Why so, I see, my mates of olde, All were nor lies that Bedlams [beldams] told; Of Robin Hood and little John, Frier Tucke and maide Marian.”

Mortimer, as a potter, afterwards fights the frier with “flailes.”

2. “The downfall of Robert earle of Huntington, afterward {l} called Robin Hood of merrie Sherwodde: with his love to chaste Matilda, the lord Fitzwater’s daughter, afterwardes his faire maide Marian. Acted by the right honourable, the earle of Notingham, lord high admirall of England, his servants. ¶ Imprinted at London, for William Leake, 1601.” 4to, b. l.

3. “The death of Robert, earle of Huntington, otherwise called Robin Hood of merrie Sherwodde: with the lamentable tragedie of chaste Matilda, his faire maid Marian, poysoned at Dunmowe, by king John. Acted, &c. ¶ Imprinted &c. [as above] 1601.” 4to, b. l.

These two plays, usually called the first and second part of Robin Hood, were always, on the authority of Kirkman, falsely ascribed to Thomas Heywood, till Mr. Malone fortunately retrieved the names of the true authors, Anthony Mundy and Henry Chettle.[40] As they seem partly founded on traditions long since forgotten, and refer occasionally to documents not now to be found; at any rate, as they are much older than most of the common ballads upon the subject, and contain some curious and possibly authentic particulars not elsewhere to be met with, the reader will excuse the particularity of the account and length of the extracts here given.

The first part, or downfall of Robert earle of Huntington, is supposed to be performed at the court and command of Henry VIII., the poet Skelton being the dramatist, and {li} acting the part of chorus. The introductory scene commences thus:

“_Enter Sir John Eltam, and knocke at Skelton’s doore._

_Sir John._ Howe, maister Skelton! what, at studie hard?

[_Opens the doore._

_Skel._ Welcome and wisht for, honest Sir John Eltam,— Twill trouble you after your great affairs,

[i.e. _the surveying of certain maps which his majesty had employed him in_;

To take the paine that I intended to intreate you to, About rehearsall of your promis’d play.

_Elt._ Nay, master Skelton; for the king himselfe, As wee were parting, bid mee take great heede Wee faile not of our day: therefore I pray Sende for the rest, that now we may rehearse.

_Skel._ O they are readie all, and drest to play. What part play you?

_Elt._ Why, I play little John, And came of purpose with this greene sute.

_Skel._ Holla, my masters, little John is come.

[_At every doore all the players runne out: some crying_ where? where? _others_, Welcome, Sir John: _among others the boyes and clowne_.

_Skel._ Faith, little Tracy, you are somewhat forward. What, our maid Marian leaping like a lad! If you remember, Robin is your love, Sir Thomas Mantle yonder, not Sir John.

_Clow._ But, master, Sir John is my fellowe, for I am Much the miller’s sonne. Am I not?

_Skel._ I know yee are, sir:— And, gentlemen, since you are thus prepar’d, Goe in, and bring your dumbe scene on the stage. And I, as prologue, purpose to expresse The ground whereon our historie is laied.

[_Exeunt, manet Skelton._

_Trumpets sounde_, [1] _enter first King Richard with drum and auncient, giving Ely a purse and sceptre, his mother and brother John, Chester, Lester, Lacie, others at the king’s appointment, doing reverence. The king goes in: presently Ely ascends the chaire, Chester, John, and the queene part displeasantly._ [2] Enter ROBERT, EARLE OF HUNTINGTON, _leading Marian; followes him Warman, and after Warman, the prior; Warman ever flattering and making curtsie, taking gifts of the prior behinde and his master before. Prince John enters, offereth to take Marian; Queen Elinor enters, offering to pull Robin from her; but they infolde each other, and sit downe within the curteines._ [3] _Warman with the prior, Sir Hugh Lacy, Lord Sentloe, and Sir Gilbert Broghton folde hands, and drawing the curteins, all_ (_but the prior_) _enter, and are kindely received by_ Robin Hoode.”

{lii}

During the exhibition of the second part of the dumb show, Skelton instructs the audience as follows:

“This youth that leads yon virgin by the hand Is our earle Robert, or your Robin Hoode, That in those daies was earle of Huntington; The ill-fac’t miser, brib’d in either hand, Is Warman, once the steward of his house, Who, Judas like, betraies his liberall lord, Into the hands of that relentlesse prior, Calde Gilbert Hoode, uncle to Huntington. Those two that seeke to part these lovely friends, Are Elenor the queene, and John the prince, She loves earle Robert, he maide Marian, But vainely; for their deare affect is such, As only death can sunder their true loves. Long had they lov’d, and now it is agreed, This day they must be troth-plight, after wed: At Huntington’s faire house a feast is helde, But envie turnes it to a house of teares. For those false guestes, conspiring with the prior; To whom earle Robert greatly is in debt, Meane at the banquet to betray the earle, Unto a heavie writ of outlawry: The manner and escape you all shall see.

* * * * *

Looke to your entrance, get you in, Sir John. My shift is long, for I play Frier Tucke; Wherein, if Skelton hath but any lucke, Heele thanke his hearers oft with many a ducke. For many talk of Robin Hood that never shot in his bowe, But Skelton writes of Robin Hood what he doth truly knowe.”

After some Skeltonical rimes, and a scene betwixt the prior, the sheriff, and justice Warman, concerning the outlawry, which appears to be proclaimed, and the taking of Earl Huntington at dinner, “Enter Robin Hoode, little John following him; Robin having his napkin on his shoulder, as if hee were sodainly raised from dinner.” He is in a violent rage at being outlawed, and Little John endeavours to pacify him. Marian being distressed at his apparent disorder, he dissembles with her. After she is gone, John thus addresses him:

“Now must your honour leave these mourning tunes, And thus by my areede you shall provide; {liii} Your plate and jewels ‘i wil’ straight packe up, And toward Notingham convey them hence. At Rowford, Sowtham, Wortley, Hothersfield, Of all your cattell mony shall be made, And I at Mansfield will attend your comming; Where weele determine which waie’s best to take.

_Rob._ Well, be it so; a God’s name, let it be; And if I can, Marian shall come with mee.

_John._ Else care will kill her; therefore if you please, At th’ utmost corner of the garden wall, Soone in the evening waite for Marian, And as I goe ile tell her of the place. Your horses at the Bell shall readie bee, I meane Belsavage,[41] whence, as citizens That ‘meane’ to ride for pleasure some small way, You shall set foorth.”

The company now enters, and Robin charges them with the conspiracy, and rates their treacherous proceedings. Little John in attempting to remove the goods is set upon by Warman and the sheriff; and during the fray “Enter Prince John, Ely and the prior, and others.” Little John tells the prince he but defends the box containing his own gettings; upon which his royal highness observes,

“You do the fellow wrong; his goods are his: You only must extend upon the earles.

_Prior._ That was, my lord, but nowe is Robert Hood, A simple yeoman as his servants were.”

Ely gives the prior his commission, with directions to make speed, lest “in his country-house all his heards be solde;” and gives Warman a patent “for the high sheriffewick of Nottingham.” After this, “Enter Robin like a citizen; and then the queen and Marian disguised for each other. Robin takes Marian, and leaves the queen to Prince John, who is {liv} so much enraged at the deception that he breaks the head of Ely’s messenger. Sir Hugh, brother to Lord Lacy, and steward to Ely, who had been deeply concerned in Huntington’s ruin, is killed in a brawl by Prince John, whom Ely orders to be arrested; but the prince, producing letters from the king revoking Ely’s appointment, “lifts up his drawne sworde,” and “Exit, cum Lester and Lacy,” in triumph. Then “Enter Robin Hoode, Matilda at one doore, little John and Much the Miller’s sonne at another doore.” After mutual congratulations, Robin asks if it be

“――possible that Warman’s spite Should stretch so farre, that he doth hunt the lives Of bonnie Scarlet, and his brother Scathlock?

_Much._ O, I, sir. Warman came but yesterday to take charge of the jaile at Notingham, and this daie, he saies, he will hang the two outlawes. . . .

_Rob._ Now, by my honour’s hope, . . . He is too blame: say, John, where must they die?

_John._ Yonder’s their mother’s house, and here the tree, Whereon, poore men, they must forgoe their lives; And yonder comes a lazy lozell frier, That is appointed for their confessor, Who, when we brought your monie to their mother’s, Was wishing her to patience for their deaths.”

Here “Enter Frier Tucke;” some conversation passes, and the frier Skeltonizes; after which he departs, saying,

“――let us goe our way, Unto this hanging businesse; would for mee Some rescue or repreeve might set them free.

_Rob._ Heardst thou not, little John, the frier’s speach?

_John._ He seemes like a good fellow, my good lord.

_Rob._ He’s a good fellowe, John, upon my word. Lend me thy horne, and get thee in to Much, And when I blowe this horne, come both and helpe mee.

_John._ Take heed, my lord: the villane Warman knows you, And ten to one he hath a writ against you.

_Rob._ Fear not: below the bridge a poor blind man doth dwell, With him I will change my habit, and disguise, Only be readie when I call for yee, For I will save their lives, if it may bee. . . .

{lv}

_Enter Warman, Scarlet and Scathlock bounde, Frier Tuck as their confessor, officers with halberts._

_War._ Master frier, be briefe, delay no time. Scarlet and Scatlock, never hope for life; Here is the place of execution, And you must answer lawe for what is done.

_Scar._ Well, if there be no remedie, we must: Though it ill seemeth, Warman, thou shouldst bee, So bloodie to pursue our lives thus cruellie.

_Scat._ Our mother sav’d thee from the gallows, Warman, His father did preferre thee to thy lord: One mother had wee both, and both our fathers To thee and to thy father were kinde friends. . . .

_War._ Ye were first outlawes, then ye proved theeves. . . . Both of your fathers were good honest men; Your mother lives their widowe in good fame:[42] But you are scapethrifts, unthrifts, villanes, knaves, And as ye liv’d by shifts, shall die with shame.”

To them enters Ralph, the sheriff’s man, to acquaint him that the carnifex, or executor of the law, had fallen off his “curtall” and was “cripplefied” and rendered incapable of performing his office; so that the sheriff was to become his deputy. The sheriff insists that Ralph shall serve the turn, which he refuses. In the midst of the altercation, “Enter Robin Hoode, like an old man,” who tells the sheriff that the two outlaws had murdered his young son, and undone himself; so that for revenge-sake he desires they may be delivered to him. They denying the charge, “Robin whispers with them,” and with the sheriff’s leave, and his man’s help, unbinds them: then, sounds his horn; and “Enter little John, Much . . . Fight; the frier, making as if he helpt the sheriffe, knockes down his men crying, Keepe the king’s peace. Sheriffe [perceiving that it is “the outlawed earle of Huntington”] runnes away, and his men.” (See the ballad of “Robin Hood rescuing the widow’s sons,”