2009/01/01 by Graham Seal · 74 citations
Social Sciences · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · #Law in Society and Culture #Historical Economic and Social Studies #Folklore #History #Genealogy #Sociology #Literature #Art
paper · doi:10.2979/jfr.2009.46.1.67
published in Journal of Folklore Research 46(1), 67-89 (Indiana University Press)
openalex publication_date 2009/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/04/05
The debate over the social bandit's existence has raged ever since the original publication of Eric Hobsawm's <i>Social Bandits</i> in 1969. Hobsbawm's argument that a few individuals in the history of crime and politics transcend the status of the criminal to become truly representative of an oppressed group's struggle has been reinforced or attacked by historians, anthropologists, and political scientists. Given folklorists' interest in the origins, roles, and meanings of heroes, it is odd that folklorists have only marginally participated in these debates. This study of outlaws offers a mediation between the conflicting poles of the debate. By investigating both the history and folklore surrounding outlaw heroes, the mythologies that produce and sustain them can be understood as a series of identifiable cultural processes. These processes can be expressed in a general principle—the Robin Hood principle—and modeled as an iterated cycle of cause and effect that is profoundly implicated in folklore. As well as providing a broad understanding of the production and perpetuation of outlaw hero figures, the model also has a predictive dimension.