• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

This article was downloaded by: [Institutional Subscription Access] On: 21 September 2011, At: 00:12 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Victorian Culture Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjvc20 ‘‘Nations Make Their Own Gods and Heroes’’: Robin Hood, King Arthur and the development of racialism in nineteenth-century Britain Stephanie Barczewski a a Clemson University Available online: 19 Jan 2010 To cite this article: Stephanie Barczewski (1997): ‘‘Nations Make Their Own Gods and Heroes’’: Robin Hood, King Arthur and the development of racialism in nineteenth-century Britain, Journal of Victorian Culture, 2:2, 179-207 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13555509709505949 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and- conditions This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan, sub- licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. ‘Nations Make Their Own Gods and Heroes I Robin Hood, King Arthur and the d#e~~p~entof racialism in nineteenth-century Britain Stephanie Barczews ki Nations make their own gods and heroes, and .. they attribute to them the perfection of those good qualities which are more or less conspicu- ous in themselves. Sharpe’s London Journal (1849).’ Nations come into being through narratives that erase contradictions, defuse paradoxes and fill in discursive gaps, as the halting, stumbling steps through which a national identity is formed are transformed into a logical, linear, seemingly inevitable progression.2As a crucial element of this process, every nation requires a ‘national history’ in which the community’s evolution and existence is explained and validated.3This history consists not only of - or not even primarily of - actual historical events. Instead, it is ‘made’ or ‘forged’ from an admixture of various elements, some taken from past or present reality and others purely from the imagination. In other words, history not only creates nations, but nations also create their own versions of hi~tory.~ In the nineteenth century, the first great era of nationalism, many European nationstates combined mythical and historical material to enhance their sense of distinctness, as they sought to celebrate and clarify their national identity. In Germany, patriotic scholars, prompted by the efforts of Johann Gottfried Herder, eagerly searched the past in order to discover models from which to reshape the present and build Downloaded by [Institutional Subscription Access] at 00:12 21 September 2011 the future, while in France the nation’s Gaulish origins were repeatedly invoked during the Revolutionary, Napoleonic and Restoration periods in order to underwrite current political aspirations. Britain, however, has traditionally been viewed as an exception to this trend.5 Neither an emerging nation like Germany nor one struggling to redefine itself like France, Britain was blessed with the early development of a strong cen- tral government, a non-localised economy and relatively high literacy rates - all key factors, according to recent studies, in the transition from 179 Stephanie Barczauski the feudal or dynastic unit to the nation-state, and it thus had no need of such ‘artificial’ supports. Britain, so says the conventional wisdom, stood apart from - and ahead of - the rest of Europe in terms of the growth of its nationhood and nationalism. But perhaps we should not be so quick to accept this argument. To use Benedict Anderson’s oft-invoked phrase, Britain was and is in many ways an ‘imagined community’, albeit in a different way from most of its European neighbours. One potentially useful way of looking at nation- hood might be to examine efforts to reconcile borders with self-per- ceptions. In the case of a nation like Germany, the self-perception came first, followed only after a protracted and arduous struggle by the estab lishment of what were deemed appropriate borders. But for Britain, the borders came first, and the struggle occurred over the self-perception. It is a nation created not from romantic dreams of the fatherland, but from the pragmatic goals of its legislators,who amalgamated first Wales, then Scotland and finally Ireland in a ruthless quest to preserve national security. And because Britain is (and always has been) a multi- national construct, a particularly British form of nationalism had to be built up which was capable of both domestic discipline and external mobilisation.6Britain thus shares certain characteristics with countries such as the former Yugoslavia or the former Soviet Union, countries in which a number of different peoples were forced to live together for purposes of administrative convenience. These nations ultimately failed to overcome the tensions created when several different com- munities are suddenly thrust together. But although Britain has ex- perienced some of the same sorts of problems, for the most part the vision of a ‘United Kingdom’ has held together. How has it managed to succeed? Part of the answer lies in Britain’s success in creating a ‘history’ for itself over the course of the nineteenth century, a period in which the selective mobilisation of the past acted to overcome the tensions created in the present by the often tempestuous relationship among the nation’s constituent communities. This period of material progress was also an age dominated by a fascination with the past, and with the Downloaded by [Institutional Subscription Access] at 00:12 21 September 2011 medieval past in particular. Rapid technological change was as fright- ening as it was exhilarating, and as it threatened to sweep away every- thing familiar, Britons turned to the medieval past, which seemed to possess the comforting security their own world lacked.’ They also turned to it, however, because it provided them with a rich source of patriotic pride and national unity. The Middle Ages could, if manipu- lated carefully, provide a portrait of a single nation with all its inhabi- tants marching forward together towards glory and greatness, rather 180 Nations Make Their Own Gods and Heroes than a precarious amalgam of constituent parts constantly warring against one another. At a time when external conflict and internal ten- sions placed a premium upon national unity, the creation of this new, uniquely ‘British’,national history glossed over the conflicts of the past and supplanted them with tales of a glorious, unified nation.R In this cultural context, a number of medieval heroes became the focus of considerable patriotic attention and celebration. ‘The seeds of our national character are to be sought in the lives of the heroes of early England, from whom we trace the beginnings of our best habits and institutions’, declared Lady Katie Magnus in her First Makers ofEngland (1901).yTwo of the most important of these ‘heroes of early England’ were King Arthur and Robin Hood, who in the nineteenth centurywere a pervasive presence in contemporary culture. Ships and racehorses were named after them.‘(’ Guests attended facnydress balls dressed in costumes of Arthurian armour or Lincoln green. l1 Children played with toy theatres featuring the outlaws of Shenvood or the knights of Camelot.12 Public houses featured them on their ~ignb0ards.l~ Contemporary interior and exterior decorating featured motifs from the two legends in stained glass, tapestries, statuary, paintings and other household objects, many of which were created by the leading artists and designers of the day for some of Britain’s wealthiest and most prominent citizens.14And for the less wealthy, there were prints, engrav- ings and even Staffordshire pottery figurines depicting episodes from the two legends.15 King Arthur and Robin Hood thus appeared in a variety of places and guises in nineteenthcentury Britain. Nowhere, however, were they more prevalent than in contemporary literature. Between 1800 and 1849 there were no less than 86 literary works concerned directly with the Arthurian legend and a further 141 which contained minor allu- sions.I6And Robin Hood saw a literary resurgence on much the same scale, although the amount of printed matter related to his legend is more difficult to assess in quantitative terms, for it made most of its appearances in extremely ephemeral forms such as broadsheets, chap books and pantomimes which were cheaply printed and rarely pre- Downloaded by [Institutional Subscription Access] at 00:12 21 September 2011 served. Nevertheless, it remains undeniable that the nineteenth century saw a reawakening of literary interest in Robin Hood, as authors as notable as Sir Walter Scott, Thomas Love Peacock, Alfred Tennyson,John Keats and Robert Southey featured him in their works. The prevalence of King Arthur and Robin Hood in print is signifi- cant because, before the invention of modern forms of electronic media, printed matter was the most crucial source in the creation of national heroes and nationalism. It laid the basis for national con- 181 Stephanie Barmski sciousness by creating what Anderson terms ‘unified fields of exchange and communication’, in which speakers of the same language but dif- ferent dialects who cannot understand each other in conversation sud- denly became capable of mutual comprehension in print.

Load more

  30

Copy Link