Medieval Diet

[tkdguy]

Here's a link to the Medieval diet. I don't know if it's 100% accurate, but it would work perfectly in a FH campaign.

 

Food and Drink in Medieval England

 

And if you need to know how much space is needed to fill the castle cellar, here's a Wikipedia link on cask sizes.

[Markdoc]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Here's a link to the Medieval diet. I don't know if it's 100% accurate, but it would work perfectly in a FH campaign.

 

Food and Drink in Medieval England

 

And if you need to know how much space is needed to fill the castle cellar, here's a Wikipedia link on cask sizes.

 

Thanks.

 

It's interesting. When I was younger, I was often told that the medieval diet for most people was basically vegetarian, with small quantities of meat and fish as a supplement. The actual data however shows that medieval peoples (in many areas, at least) ate astounding quantities of meat - in Copenhagen, which wasn't a huge city - an estimated 750 tons of the stuff a month. That's meat - fish was on top of that. As a result the city was - quite literally - surrounded by heaps of bones, carted away out of the city limits where the stink would be less offensive, dumped into the moat (which had to be regularly dredged as result) or dumped in the nearby sea. The remains of these bone heaps turn up regularly in excavations. In Africa, I've seen similar piles, which is some cases reach 30+ metres (say 100 feet) in height Not unnaturally they attract hordes of rats, vultures and hyenas - I'm guessing they'd have attracted wolves and maybe even bears in Europe.

 

Try adding that as a bit of local color in your games

 

Add that to the fact that water was rarely drunk (most Copenhageners drank a lot of beer) and I suspect your average townsman was fat and jolly-looking It does explain why even the ordinary citizens who occasionally turn up in paintings from that era look pretty plump.

 

cheers, Mark

[Curufea]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

I believe though that beer was not as common as ale.

[Markdoc]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

I believe though that beer was not as common as ale.

 

Actually I was using beer to mean both Ale and Lager - that's the usual way here. Certainly most (but not all) of the beer brewed was ale, but lager was popular already in medieval germany: it was imported to Copenhagen by German merchants where it sold for 2-3 times the price of local beer - and sometimes more. The right to sell German beer was apparently highly sought after by the 15th century. Interestingly, a bucket of beer (about a liter and a half) was still given to workmen in Denmark as part of their daily pay many places right up until the middle of the 20th century - and in some places until a decade ago.

 

Of course, medieval beer was often watered, and pure sugar was a luxury so it was "fed" with honey. There are a few places here that make beer to extant late medieval recipes and I've tried a variety of medieval beers. Many of them are quite strong and all of them are strongly flavored. I like a good ale, but many of these are too much for me.

 

cheers, Mark

[Sir Ofeelya]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Grains and cereals also featured highly in diets - why a grain blight or bad harvest meant starvation.

[Lucius]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

I would expect that there would be some difference between a rural and an urban diet. And of course, differences due to social class or region. And finally, season. Herds and flocks might be culled in late autumn and early winter, resulting in a glut of meat compared to the rest of the year.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary notes that cultural and religious factors play a major role in diet - for example, the average American regards eating dog or horseflesh as depraved and evil, although they are probably healthier than that of a pig.

[McCoy]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

The palindromedary notes that cultural and religious factors play a major role in diet - for example' date=' the average American regards eating dog or horseflesh as depraved and evil, although they are probably healthier than that of a pig.[/quote']

And dog, horse, and pig all taste better than mutton!

[Curufea]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

I would expect that there would be some difference between a rural and an urban diet.

 

People should also realise that unlike today, nearly everyone was rural. There was a minority of people living "urban".

[shadowcat1313]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

heres an interesting source of information on Medieval cooking and recipes, written by a Duke of the middle kingdom of the SCA, whos won as many or more awards for his research as for his fighting abilities. I have gotten to try

some of these myself.

 

Cariadocs Miscellany:

http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/cariadoc/miscellany.html

[Lucius]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

People should also realise that unlike today' date=' nearly everyone was rural. There was a minority of people living "urban".[/quote']

 

And the ones we would know most about would be the urban, the noble, and the clerical.

 

The vast majority of people unfortunately could not write, were not much written about, and probably did not much figure in representative art either.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

I wonder what people of the future will make of the palindromedary

[Curufea]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Yeah - it mostly comes from archeology. Piecing together from rubbish left behind.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

I wonder what people of the future will make of the palindromedary

 

They probably won't be able to make heads or tails of it.

[Lucius]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

They probably won't be able to make heads or tails of it.

 

Remind me to come back and reputize you for that.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary thinks they'll make heads fine, but sorry, no tail.

[Markdoc]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Grains and cereals also featured highly in diets - why a grain blight or bad harvest meant starvation.

 

Grain was also an important animal feed during winter (still is, actually) as well as an important human food through the same period. If the harvest failed not only were people in trouble, but you would have to slaughter much of your herd, meaning that even if you got a good harvest the next year, your farm might be crippled in terms of production for several years - and if you had to slaughter all your animals, you might be looking at starvation come spring.

 

In East Africa, where I work, you can still see this cycle in action - if the rains fail, not only are farmers short on grains, but their animals die or have to be slaughtered. Ironically, since everyone is faced with the same problem, it means the value of the animals fall (since there's a glut and no way of preserving all that meat), so farmers can't even make any money off their animals. I've seen farmers leave their animals to die in the fields because there's no point in using up energy to walk them to market. I've also seen a farmer trying to barter a cow - normally a prized possession - for a bag of flour.

 

Often even if the rains come again the next year, people starve - because it takes some months to grow enough crops to live on and in the meantime, people have used up what little reserves they had.

 

It's why foods that can be kept a long time - like salted fish, for example or that godawful Lutefisk - are so important culturally and were such a big deal economically. In East Africa, the equivalent is enset - a paste made by boiling the root of the false banana or other plants into a paste and then drying it. It looks and feels like brown plastic and tastes ... well, it tastes like boiled tree root, to be honest. But it lasts for years: people often wrap it in false banana leaves and bury it in dry soil, to be dug up when famine hits, the same way medieval northern Europeans would store a jar or a barrel of dried, salted fish against need.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

And the ones we would know most about would be the urban, the noble, and the clerical.

 

The vast majority of people unfortunately could not write, were not much written about, and probably did not much figure in representative art either.

 

Actually the idea that the vast majority of people could not read or write appears to be another one of those fables, like "ordinary people mostly ate gruel" or "Most people never travelled more than few mies from where they grew up" foisted on us by the Victorians and still recycled by the worse sort of popular historian.

 

Smaller, rural communities left very few records - because the people of the time didn't consider them important - but examining court records from the 13th-15th centuries, we find over and over again references to accounts, to letters and to written messages, even when we are dealing with ordinary townsmen or small holders who might not own more than a cottage and a patch of garden. There are also common references to the salaries for school teachers - along with complaints about the standard of teaching - some things don't change! But there were, clearly all too many teachers and small schools for them to be only for the children of the wealthy and influential. If we look at extant university records from the 1400's, we find among admissions the sons of cheesemongers, fishermen, alewives, bricklayers, carpenters and house servants (admittedly, not very many, but still...). All of these must have been literate to a reasonable standard to be able to take the examination for entry.

 

The picture we have now of that era actually also resembles that in much of Africa today. Only a privileged few were literate in the sense that we are - reading and writing without effort. A minority - generally the most deprived - were fully illiterate. Most people were in between: reading for pleasure was not something most people did (books were expensive and leisure time limited). But many - perhaps most - small business men and craftsmen, freeholders and even some affluent peasants could apparently read and write simple letters, read signs and contracts, do their accounts and file claims at court. That explains why when the bible was translated into local languages, starting in the mid 1300's, there was an almost insatiable demand. When printing became widespread, many printers' factories were set up simply to churn out as many copies as they could make. If the vast majority of the population was illiterate, who were purchasing the tens of thousands of volumes that were churned out?

 

Paper was expensive, so was often reused if possible (and medieval paper was not of high quality anyway: it doesn't keep well - hence the use of parchment for important documents), and merchants used to mark up sales on wood or slate with charcoal or chalk - then scrub it off. Neither lends itself to preservation. I think rather than saying that most people were illiterate in medieval Europe, it's fair to say that almost nothing in the way of daily records have survived, so that aspect has been ignored until recently. Also these kinds of records even where they still exist were ignored by historians because they "weren't sexy". Most people would rather read records associated with important personages or events than a lawsuit over Farmer Giles wandering pigs

 

cheers, Mark

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Actually the idea that the vast majority of people could not read or write appears to be another one of those fables, like "ordinary people mostly ate gruel" or "Most people never travelled more than few mies from where they grew up" foisted on us by the Victorians and still recycled by the worse sort of popular historian.

 

Smaller, rural communities left very few records - because the people of the time didn't consider them important - but examining court records from the 13th-15th centuries, we find over and over again references to accounts, to letters and to written messages, even when we are dealing with ordinary townsmen or small holders who might not own more than a cottage and a patch of garden. There are also common references to the salaries for school teachers - along with complaints about the standard of teaching - some things don't change! But there were, clearly all too many teachers and small schools for them to be only for the children of the wealthy and influential. If we look at extant university records from the 1400's, we find among admissions the sons of cheesemongers, fishermen, alewives, bricklayers, carpenters and house servants (admittedly, not very many, but still...). All of these must have been literate to a reasonable standard to be able to take the examination for entry.

 

The picture we have now of that era actually also resembles that in much of Africa today. Only a privileged few were literate in the sense that we are - reading and writing without effort. A minority - generally the most deprived - were fully illiterate. Most people were in between: reading for pleasure was not something most people did (books were expensive and leisure time limited). But many - perhaps most - small business men and craftsmen, freeholders and even some affluent peasants could apparently read and write simple letters, read signs and contracts, do their accounts and file claims at court. That explains why when the bible was translated into local languages, starting in the mid 1300's, there was an almost insatiable demand. When printing became widespread, many printers' factories were set up simply to churn out as many copies as they could make. If the vast majority of the population was illiterate, who were purchasing the tens of thousands of volumes that were churned out?

 

Paper was expensive, so was often reused if possible (and medieval paper was not of high quality anyway: it doesn't keep well - hence the use of parchment for important documents), and merchants used to mark up sales on wood or slate with charcoal or chalk - then scrub it off. Neither lends itself to preservation. I think rather than saying that most people were illiterate in medieval Europe, it's fair to say that almost nothing in the way of daily records have survived, so that aspect has been ignored until recently. Also these kinds of records even where they still exist were ignored by historians because they "weren't sexy". Most people would rather read records associated with important personages or events than a lawsuit over Farmer Giles wandering pigs

 

cheers, Mark

 

"Twenty miles through the snow to school! Not like the snow you kids have today, either, it was up to our chests! Up hill! Both ways! And we were lucky!"

If everything has been getting better ever since ever (and you just listen to the old folks, young 'uns; it has!) then the old days must have been pretty darn sad indeed.

At the same time, we shouldn't take things too far. It isn't uncommon to find a "cheesemonger" who owns a manor and fights as a knight. That's because there's a cheesmonger's seat on the local city council. Maybe you did sell cheese once. More likely, your granddad did, and you did for a few years in your mid-20s. The thing is, your family's business is having money, and keeping it. That means doing things like occupying that council seat, suing people, and, when necessary, hitting them over the head with heavy, sharp things. Making and selling cheese? You leave that to the professionals you hire.

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Given this new information, I'm going to make Literacy the default in my fantasy campaigns from now on. There's no reason to enforce not being able to read, especially when you have maps and guild instructions all over the place.

 

As for the diet, I'm reminded of that other fantasy campaign staple -- the travelers inn/pub/restaurant. What would they really be like? What would they serve? where would people sleep and how much would it cost? What kind of privacy would you have if any? Would people really be sent to the stables to sleep, and would it be that bad if people were sleeping there all the time?

 

Oh, and Markdoc should be repped by, well, everybody. It's a brilliant post. I'm impressed.

[phookz]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Oh' date=' and Markdoc should be repped by, well, everybody. It's a brilliant post. I'm impressed.[/quote']

 

What he said...

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Given this new information, I'm going to make Literacy the default in my fantasy campaigns from now on. There's no reason to enforce not being able to read, especially when you have maps and guild instructions all over the place.

 

As for the diet, I'm reminded of that other fantasy campaign staple -- the travelers inn/pub/restaurant. What would they really be like? What would they serve? where would people sleep and how much would it cost? What kind of privacy would you have if any? Would people really be sent to the stables to sleep, and would it be that bad if people were sleeping there all the time?

 

Oh, and Markdoc should be repped by, well, everybody. It's a brilliant post. I'm impressed.

 

generically speaking I expect it'd go sumthing along these lines...

the basic fare, or farmers meal, would be coarse bread, whatever soup or stew they had going that day, small (weak) beer and possibly a bit of butter.

for an appropriate upcharge, you'd add luxury "sides" such as fruit, cheese (hard cheaper than soft), whatever meat they're serving at that point, fresh or preserved (fowl, fish, or mutton mostly if fresh unless in cattle country, ham, corned beef and bacon being the common preserves). A few specialty items would be available based on what the cook had to cook and what they were good at. Deserts are big in this category, as are daily specials for those with the inclination to pay.

All this of course depends on region. I'm assuming generic pseudo-European fantasy setting. I know, f'rinstance, that the daily ration of a Scottish mercenary Galloglagh was paid a daily provision of a pound each of barley, beef, and butter. As well as a lot of beer. Around a gallon, IIRC

Tho I have my suspicions they were being typically Irish about language and it'd be better considered "A pound of grain, a pound of meat, and a pound of processed milk products"

 

I'm less familiar with some of your other questions, but from what I've studied of the period having a "byre", or inhouse barn was pretty standard practice in most of the cooler climates. Sharing body heat and not having to dig through snow to feed, water & tend your animals both don't suck, and all the bloody smoke drives out most of the bad smells...

 

A group bedroom often shared space with a partially walled off byre, while the "better" accommodations were in the further parts of the building. Lots of sleeping closets built into the walls (walls were thick), with the "Master Bedroom" being a second floor or loft.

 

I'd expect to see this basic arrangement (essentially a family farm) as an inn, with multiple buildings and the likely addition of a second floor (uncommon in farms as it's usually cheaper to spread out than up)

[Yansuf]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Given this new information, I'm going to make Literacy the default in my fantasy campaigns from now on. There's no reason to enforce not being able to read, especially when you have maps and guild instructions all over the place.

 

Oh, and Markdoc should be repped by, well, everybody. It's a brilliant post. I'm impressed.

 

I'm sorry, I do not find it convincing.

Whenever I hear a theory that contradicts what was previously generally believed, I am very skeptical. It's true I know of cases where what had been believed turned out to be wrong; but I also know of cases where the "new information" didn't pan out. (For example, "Arming America, The Origins of a National Gun Culture" by Bellesiles turned out to be a case of academic fraud.)

Please do not say that I am accusing any of fraud here!

However, based on the Bellesiles case, and others, I require a lot more evidence before I will get on board.

Try running this theory by the folks on the SCA sites, and let's see if they are convinced.

[Curufea]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

This would be the same SCA with Lords, Ladies and Chivalry, right?

[sinanju]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

Given this new information, I'm going to make Literacy the default in my fantasy campaigns from now on. There's no reason to enforce not being able to read, especially when you have maps and guild instructions all over the place.

 

As for the diet, I'm reminded of that other fantasy campaign staple -- the travelers inn/pub/restaurant. What would they really be like? What would they serve? where would people sleep and how much would it cost? What kind of privacy would you have if any? Would people really be sent to the stables to sleep, and would it be that bad if people were sleeping there all the time?

 

One thing I've hardly ever seen in fantasy fiction is the REALLY small village (of which, statistically, there were far more than any other kind). So small, in fact, that they don't HAVE an inn. If the village was on a widely traveled road it might, but otherwise--what's the point? Not enough business to make it profitable.

 

In which case, travelers will camp out or negotiate for room in someone's barn or house. Or sneak into a barn in bad weather, I suppose, but that's just asking for trouble.

 

A local farmer might take coin if you have it, or he might trade shelter and food for labor on his property, or maybe even for the novelty of tales told by the travelers about strange people in exotic, faraway places.

 

Just don't be messing with his beautiful robot daughters....

[Markdoc]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

"Twenty miles through the snow to school! Not like the snow you kids have today, either, it was up to our chests! Up hill! Both ways! And we were lucky!"

If everything has been getting better ever since ever (and you just listen to the old folks, young 'uns; it has!) then the old days must have been pretty darn sad indeed.

At the same time, we shouldn't take things too far. It isn't uncommon to find a "cheesemonger" who owns a manor and fights as a knight. That's because there's a cheesmonger's seat on the local city council. Maybe you did sell cheese once. More likely, your granddad did, and you did for a few years in your mid-20s. The thing is, your family's business is having money, and keeping it. That means doing things like occupying that council seat, suing people, and, when necessary, hitting them over the head with heavy, sharp things. Making and selling cheese? You leave that to the professionals you hire.

 

No, it didn't really work like that over most of western/northern Europe - until relatively recently, your job was your identity. In many cases, it defined your legal rights as well. If you owned a cheesemonger's but lived in a manor and trained to fight - you wouldn't write "Cheesemonger" as your living. You'd write factotum, or gentleman, or alderman or something similar, depending on your position. If you write "cheesemonger", it's because you actually, physically sell cheese for a living. As an aside, I took that reference from the records of entry to the inns of the court in London, because they are online and searchable. And we know that Londoners were extremely class conscious in that era.

 

So cheesemonger, in this context, means exactly what it seems to mean.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

One thing I've hardly ever seen in fantasy fiction is the REALLY small village (of which' date=' statistically, there were far more than any other kind). So small, in fact, that they don't HAVE an inn. If the village was on a widely traveled road it might, but otherwise--what's the point? Not enough business to make it profitable.[/quote']

 

Actually, this happens frequently in my games: hospitality to travelers - for a little return in kind - is a frequent happening. However, it's also worth noting that the equivalent of the D&D traveler's inn did exist in medieval Europe - and apparently in surprising numbers.

 

If you are really interested in this, I cannot recommend Michel de Montaigne's Travel diary highly enough. In the 1500's he travelled from France to Rome and back, via Germany and Switzerland. He kept a detailed diary along the way, recording which inns he stayed at, what food they ate, commented on the waitresses, quality of the beds, size and decoration of the rooms, his bowel movements and the toilet facilities - everything. Admittedly as a noble, he was traveling at the top of the food chain, so he used the best inns where ever possible - but it wasn't always possible. But his diary makes it very plain indeed that on major roads, there were lots of people traveling and most towns of any size offered a variety of inns. They also offered some unexpected features - on the major roads into Rome, for example the inns operated a "rent a horse scheme". You could pick up a horse at one inn, ride it to the next one and leave it there, picking up a fresh one each day, or using them to make side excursions. Also interesting is his description of the inns - which ones laid down fresh linens each day, which ones provided decent curtains, which ones had good menus, which ones smelled, etc etc.

 

Again the "conventional wisdom" about filthy inns, with flea-ridden mattresses and smoke-filled common rooms doesn't actually hold up to his eyewitness account of fresh linens and mattresses, pretty waitresses and good dining served on pretty crockery in painted and whitewashed rooms. I've no doubt the filthy inns of medieval lore actually existed in good quantity but de Montaigne was clearly a fastidious bloke. I doubt I'd have any problems staying at a place that was good enough for him.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Medieval Diet

 

I'm sorry, I do not find it convincing.

Whenever I hear a theory that contradicts what was previously generally believed, I am very skeptical. It's true I know of cases where what had been believed turned out to be wrong; but I also know of cases where the "new information" didn't pan out. (For example, "Arming America, The Origins of a National Gun Culture" by Bellesiles turned out to be a case of academic fraud.)

Please do not say that I am accusing any of fraud here!

However, based on the Bellesiles case, and others, I require a lot more evidence before I will get on board.

Try running this theory by the folks on the SCA sites, and let's see if they are convinced.

 

Heh. The SCA is the place to go for a cool evenings' drinking, craft and fighting. It is not, by and large, the place to go for history (after all they coined the phrase "history nazi" for people who were concerned about getting details right).

 

As for the illiteracy thing, in academic circles, it's been acknowledged for about 2 generations now, that it was overdone: but that hasn't filtered through into popular culture. Look at books like "A World Lit Only By Fire". Big popular success a few years back, and a rollicking read. Then google up what historians have to say about it: "popular lit, wrong in virtually every detail" would be a charitable summary.

 

The victorian viewpoint was that "the dark ages" represented a fall in virtually every category from the glory of Rome and the inevitable climb back up towards the glory of Victorian England. That makes anice story, and had a major influence on the public viewpoint, but even at the time, it was questioned by serious historians.

 

However, if you look at the work published on medieval literacy (just google it) and compare it with historical works on (say) armor, you'll notice an odd thing. There's virtually nothing published on literacy studies prior to about 30-40 years ago - when suddenly the field exploded. Do the same search for armor (or castles, or economics, or politics) you'll find a treasure trove of study going back over the last century and a half. Today, the net is filling up with medieval records from ordinary people - from will, from assizes, from lists of arms, from letters. Those things always existed - but they simply weren't studied much until recently and until very recently they were only accessible to a few historians.

 

A good example is if you look at medieval militaries: a field that has been studied thoroughly over the last century. The popular view in the early 20th century was that it consisted of mostly illiterate, barbarous knights who turned up and charged at each other without much preparation or any tactics. The foot were mostly a rabble who contributed little of importance. Victory went to the side that bashed the most heads. Then historians started actually looking at primary sources and found knights recommending Tacitus to each other in letters. They started asking questions like "If these guys operated without a strong commissariat, who were they able to maintain a siege of Bari for 2 years? or "If these guys were so unsophisticated, why were they able to consistently defeat well organised, numerically superior byzantine armies?" or "How were they able to operate in hostile territory for months at a time, without an apparent economic support?"

 

Over time, we came to understand that, in fact, many medieval armies were quite well organized, that training involved more than just weapon handling and that some of the more effective knightly forces not only drilled together, but also had effective commmissariats - quite capable of procuring supplies in Spain, shipping them to Greece and paying for it with notes of credit arranged thorough Italian international banking chains. We know, because not only do we have the evidence that they did operate in those areas - but we still have some of the letters and accounts describing the whole action. The knight who organised the mighty bank loan simply didn't get as much press from the troubadours as the knight who led the mighty charge.

 

Groups like ARMA that split off from the SCA or sprung up specifically to study these aspects at a more stringent level have contributed to our knowledge.

 

You'll find relatively few people today who still hold the view that knights were armoured buffoons ignorant of military strategy who kept winning wars mostly by luck or the grace of god - but that was the public viewpoint not so long ago.

 

Essentially over the last century, we have gotten a much more accurate view of how the upper class lived in the medieval period. Over the last 30 years, we have started to get a much more accurate picture of how everyone else lived: that's all this is.

 

cheers, Mark