Jump to: navigation, search

Robin Hood (Holborn)

Coordinates 51.516111111111, -0.10694444444444
Adm. div. Middlesex, now Greater London
Vicinity 5 Robin Hood Court; West side of Shoe Lane
Type Public house
Interest Robin Hood name
Status Defunct
First Record 1692
Loading map...
Site of Robin Hood (Holborn).
At Shoe Lane. Robin Hood Court with the Robin Hood pub at No. 5 was somewhere on the west (left) side of the street / Google Earth Street View.

By Henrik Thiil Nielsen, 2018-01-17. Revised by Henrik Thiil Nielsen, 2018-05-08.

A public house named the Robin Hood in Robin Hood Court, on the west side of Shoe Lane, is referred to as early as 1692, when it figures in the summary of a case at the Old Bailey (see Records below). Information on publicans gleaned from trade directories etc. from the period 1839–75 can be found at UK Pub History (see Sources section below).


1692 - Proceedings of the Old Bailey (1)

[15 Jan. 1692:]
Anne Brodnix was tryed for being accessary to James Philips and Abraham Stacy in the Felony and Robbery they lately committed in the House of William Kent a Brewer, in Liquor-Pond-Street, in the Parish of St. Andrews Holbourn, on the 26th of December, which they confest upon their Arraignment. The chief Evidence was Griffith, who is before mentioned in the single Tryal of Stacy, who was with them at the Robbery which was done by himself: Philips, Stacy and Morris Moore, after they had compleated their Work, they went to the Robin Hood in Shoe-lane and then Griffith went and sold the Plate to Mrs. Brodnix the Prisoner for 34 l. 13 s. 9 d. part of which Money was paid him by the Prisoner's Order, and the Remainder was to be paid him when the Plate was melted down, which he afterwards received, and he said further, that he used to sell stolen Plate to the Prisoner, very frequently: The Prisoner denied the Charge against her, and said, she knew nothing of it; and would have called several Witnesses to prove her Reputation, which was not allowed of, because it was unnecessary in respect to the Law; for Philips and Stacy having confest their Indictment, she could not lie under any penalty, neither be found guilty upon that Indictment, so she was acquitted.[1]




Also see