View original post
That really is hard to get your head around, that difference... though what is even more so is those rare people who lived to truly old age in a time when most others died around 50. Like that French knight, de Joinville, who lived to be 93 - even most of his grandchildren must have been dead by then.
This is reminding me of some passages in Huizinga's Waning of the Middle Ages. What I've often wondered, though, is to what extent such emotional displays were real, and to what extent our literary sources simply exaggerate them.
They both sound very interesting, I might give them a try at some point.
View original postHe shows, for example, how people did their best to keep their homes and persons clean, how they attempted to live in harmony with their neighbors (as reputation was vital to survival), and how many of the more brutal aspects of their society arose naturally. If parents beat their children often and severely (which they did - they would be considered bad parents by their neighbors if they didn't), Mortimer is quick to point out that children as young as seven could be summarily hanged for theft. If their society seems more violent and impulsive generally, Mortimer reminds us that the median age for society was 21, that people often married between 12 and 14, and that 16-year-olds commonly led armies. Life expectancy at birth was only 18 years, though those who survived one year saw their expectancy increase to around 50.
That really is hard to get your head around, that difference... though what is even more so is those rare people who lived to truly old age in a time when most others died around 50. Like that French knight, de Joinville, who lived to be 93 - even most of his grandchildren must have been dead by then.
Though as for 16 year olds leading armies, I dare say if they did it was generally with some older and more experienced advisors doing most of the real work...
View original postMortimer addressed almost all aspects of life - home life, professions, trade and markets, the way towns and cities looked, how waste was disposed of (often, gongfermours), what people did in their spare time, the arts and literature, crime and punishment and the incredible sense of religion that permeated society. The fact that a merchant who wanted to collect on a debt was likely to cry while he attempted to demand payment (sorry that he was forced to threaten the debtor), or that a battle-hardened knight would shed a tear while contemplating the beauty of flowers, is a level of emotional immediacy that the present day certainly lacks.
This is reminding me of some passages in Huizinga's Waning of the Middle Ages. What I've often wondered, though, is to what extent such emotional displays were real, and to what extent our literary sources simply exaggerate them.
View original postI highly recommend the book and will likely move on to its companion volume, The Time Traveler's Guide to Elizabethan England (which, perhaps because it wasn't released by the Folio Society, has a thoroughly American spelling of the title).
They both sound very interesting, I might give them a try at some point.
Illusions fall like the husk of a fruit, one after another, and the fruit is experience. - Narrator, Sylvie
Je suis méchant.
Je suis méchant.
The Time Traveller's Guide to Medieval England by Ian Mortimer
- 06/10/2013 01:28:54 AM
1137 Views
I still don't see the "mix" you talk about... traveler/traveller, yes, but what's the American bit?
- 06/10/2013 11:00:13 AM
683 Views
"Medieval" instead of "mediæval"
- 06/10/2013 11:23:06 AM
864 Views