Robin Hood is not Real. Or is he?

[PavlovtheCat]

DD is 5, and learning about different people from history. They have looked yesterday at Robin Hood, not sure if a child asked or it was planned.

Teacher told the class categorically that he was Not Real. He was made up.

But. Jesus is very definitely Real. And absolutely the Son of God.

It is not a religious school and I am wondering why the school would take a stance that one element of english folklore based in religion is absolutely real over other folklore being not real.

We talked about the fact that it is hard to say for sure if he was real or not because things were not recorded in writing very well at that time, like Jesus but that, like jesus, lots of people do beleive he was very real. She is not convinced, because her Teacher knows Everything.

I don't know if I am making a big deal of this (in my head, not so DD can hear) but I really think the school should think more carefully about the information they impart that our children put so much weight on.

DD does not always tell me everything she learns at school (obviously, being only 5!) so who knows what other Facts they are imparting?!

I am wondering if I should be putting this in AIBU section...but am scared as I probably am being!

lrd that is exactly it yes .

Purely out of interest (and not at all because I wish to incite snotty-parent vs. teacher conflicts for that would be amusing to hear about on MN bad), what if anything are you going to do?

(Not to imply you actually are a snotty parent, btw. But I expect you know what I mean.)

BBC has a v,v interesting Robin Hood article

www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/middle_ages/robin_01.shtml

LRDtheFeministDragon - Perhaps I am not expressing myself very well.

The earliest Robin Hood tales do not contain any incidents that were historical events at all. Indeed, the king who appears in some of the early stories is unidentified so the precise historical setting is unclear, although many of the details refer to the 13th Century.

The commonly known Robin Hood stories are in a clear historical setting, include references to historical incidents and feature some historical characters. However, there is nothing in the stories themselves (as opposed to their setting) that we can point to and say it is an historical event.

The earliest mentions of Robin Hood are names on documents, prh. We know men of that name existed.

Also, the point is not to establish Robin Hood's historical reality. It is the observe that there is very, very little difference between the evidence for his historical reality and for that of Jesus.

I am going to Have a Word.

Robin Hood was a fairly common name so that proves nothing. It also appears to have been a name commonly used by or applied to outlaws.

And there is considerable difference in the evidence. But I'm tired of this discussion so that is the last you will hear from me on this subject.

Erm, no, it proves that it is incorrect to state that Robin Hood is made up.

Crikey, this isn't rocket science.

I think what this whole discussion proves is, that the teacher cannot state, without question, that robin hood does not exist, dbecause it simply cannot be proven he did not exist. And what a great discussi, I have learnt more than I thought and realised I like history, or some aspect more than I thought, when discussed well!

You can't prove a negative - it's basic logic. This particular negative is an especially daft one to try to prove.

I'm glad I didn't annoy you posting so much on your thread ... I hope your DD's teacher cools it with the Jesus factoids!

Not annoyed, enjoyed the debate!

Me too!