The Church Calendar That Ran Medieval Life

Medieval England measured its year by two overlapping calendars: the familiar months we use today, and a parallel Church calendar of seasons, fasts, and feasts so deeply woven into everyday life that people often saw little reason to date anything by the other.

The liturgical year fell into two broad halves. The “Christ cycle” ran from Advent through Christmas, Lent, Easter, Pentecost, and Corpus Christi. It was tied to the moveable date of Easter, which could fall anywhere between 22 March and 25 April and pulled most of the other dates along with it. “Ordinary time” covered roughly the period from midsummer round to Advent and was less tightly prescribed. On top of these came the quarterly Ember Weeks (for fasting and the ordination of clergy), the Rogation Days before Ascension, and a huge number of individual saints’ days — more than two hundred by the later Middle Ages in the Sarum calendar used across much of England. These were graded into five levels of importance, from the “principal doubles” (Christmas, Easter, and a church’s own patronal feast) down to minor “simple feasts” that barely registered beyond the clergy’s own devotions.

The extent to which this calendar shaped ordinary life is remarkable. Margaret Paston dated her letters “the Friday next after Ash Wednesday” or “the Friday next after Crouchmas Day” rather than by month and day, fully expecting her correspondents to understand. Somewhere between twenty-seven and thirty-six days a year, on top of the regular Sundays, required compulsory church attendance, and many of them were treated as public holidays. The Church year was not a religious extra bolted onto medieval life, but a genuine working timetable for the whole of society, governing not only prayers but wedding dates, fast days, legal deadlines, and when a farmer could reasonably expect a day off.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Churching: A Mother’s Return to Church After Birth

Forty days after childbirth, a medieval Englishwoman returned to church in a rite the Church called “purification” but which everyone else by the fifteenth century simply called “churching” — a true celebration of safe delivery rather than the penitential ordeal suggested by its Old Testament roots.

The rite drew on Jewish purity laws, but the Church itself took care — in its own official guidance — to avoid any suggestion that a new mother was somehow unclean or unwelcome in the meantime: one Sarum manual rubric states plainly that women “may enter the church whenever they wish… nor is entry to the church to be denied them lest their pain seem to be converted to blame.” The actual ceremony began at the church door, the mother carrying a lit candle (echoing Candlemas itself) flanked by her midwife and two other women, the priest reading two protective psalms before leading her inside by the hand with the words, “Enter the temple of God so that you may have eternal life.” She then attended the mass that followed, going up to the high altar at the offertory to formally hand back her baby’s chrisom cloth — the white garment used at the christening itself — along with a customary small offering of a penny or two.

For anyone with the means, churching was also a genuine fashion moment: George Cely’s mistress Margery wrote to him in 1482 specifically requesting “raiment — as a gown and other things — against her churching, as she had the other time,” treating the event, quite reasonably, as an occasion worth dressing properly for. Female friends and neighbours typically accompanied the new mother, and a feast at home often followed for both women and men, complete with wine, sometimes music, and — for those who could afford it — a specially bought lamb for the occasion. It’s a genuinely warm, communal custom that survived largely untouched by the Reformation’s usual reforming zeal, only really falling out of favour once Puritan objections gathered force well after the medieval period had already ended.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Baptism Within Hours: The Medieval Rush to the Font

In a world where infant mortality was brutally high, medieval parents did not wait around before naming and baptising their newborns. A baby was typically baptised on the day it was born, or the next day at the latest, because its soul was believed to be in danger.

The Church taught that an unbaptised baby remained in a state of original sin, so it was essential to bring a child to church as soon as possible after birth.

If a newborn looked likely to die, the Church allowed ordinary lay people — usually the attending midwife — to baptise the child on the spot, using just water and the words invoking the Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. If the mother died in childbirth, midwives were instructed to cut the umbilical cord and baptise the baby immediately, before doing anything else.

When there was no such emergency, the full church rite followed several stages. It began at the church door, where the priest confirmed the baby’s sex, checked that it had not already been baptised (since emergency baptisms were common), placed a little salt on its tongue as a symbol of wisdom, and performed an exorcism to drive out any evil spirits. Only then did the baptism proper take place at the font, where the child was immersed and named, before the godparents lifted it from the water and wrapped it in a white christening robe.

So if you are writing a medieval birth scene in which all goes well, be prepared to include a trip to the church by the next morning at the latest. The baby would be expected to be presented for baptism almost at once — not weeks or months later, as is common today.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Hunting for Medieval Cooks in Art

Medieval artists rarely knew quite what to do with cooks. When they appear at all, it is in the smallest of roles, so tracking them down means hunting through manuscripts, misericords, and stained glass.

In the most unexpected places — the margins of manuscripts, where illuminators added their own little doodles, or the carved misericords tucked beneath the hinged seats of choir stalls — kitchen equipment sometimes takes a starring role. The margins of one richly decorated English psalter show two knights in earnest combat, one armed with a kitchen knife, the other using a pot lid as a shield and a ladle as a lance. A misericord in Manchester Cathedral turns the world upside down: the hares are doing the cooking, simmering a hound in a stewpot while the hapless huntsman is trussed up on a spit over the flames. Real, recognisably human cooks are rarer still, but they do occasionally appear. A monastery’s book of benefactors from 1380 includes a double portrait of “Master Robert,” the abbot’s cook, and his wife Helena — who paid three shillings and fourpence out of her own purse to have her husband included.

Even the Bayeux Tapestry, for all its focus on great political and military events, devotes real care to cooking. The scenes of William the Conqueror’s men preparing a meal shortly after the Norman landing are depicted with the same meticulous detail as the battle scenes and Harold’s coronation.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Brewing: The Original Female-Owned Small Business

If any trade belonged to medieval women, it was brewing — and not as a domestic pastime, but as a genuine, capital-intensive small business, one of the few areas of enterprise largely run by women rather than by their fathers or husbands.

Brewing ale on any real commercial scale required a substantial up-front investment: large cauldrons and vats able to hold gallons of boiling liquid, and a supply of malted barley that cost real money. As a result, the wealthiest women in a village tended to dominate large-scale production, selling ale to their neighbours from their own homes, which they marked with the simple sign of a staff and garland to show that a fresh brew was available. Poorer women brewed on a smaller scale, for their own household or to sell the occasional modest surplus.

It was also hard, dangerous physical work rather than a genteel cottage craft. Coroners’ records show women dying in brewing accidents — falling into vats of boiling liquid or being scalded by spilt wort — and around 5 per cent of all recorded female accidental deaths were brewing-related, a grim measure of the risks involved.

Ale and its ingredients carried real economic weight beyond the drink itself. Malt appears regularly in wills alongside land and animals; guild entry fees were sometimes paid in “quarters of malt” rather than coin; and a prosperous brewer’s full set of equipment, worth a considerable sum, was carefully listed in inventories next to her land and livestock.

For a story looking for a capable, independent tradeswoman with real economic clout in her village, a brewer is about as good a fit as it gets.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Foreign Bankers in Medieval English Towns

Long before Lombard Street became a byword for London banking, the city’s very first dedicated financial trading house had already opened for business — run not by the Lombards people usually picture, but by merchants from the Tuscan city of Lucca.

The Riccardi of Lucca set up shop in London by the 13th century, adjacent to what’s still called Bucklersbury today. After the expulsion of the Jews in 1290, and the resulting gap in England’s credit market, Lombard bankers from northern Italy stepped in to finance the crown and major players across the English economy — and by the mid-14th century, three great banking houses from Florence — the city that gave its name to the florin — had joined them: the Bardi, the Peruzzi, and the Frescobaldi. Their profit margins were, by modern standards, remarkably modest: Florentine merchants trading English wool typically made around 15 per cent, while English wool merchants exporting their own goods to the continent could expect roughly 20 per cent — plenty of profit left in the domestic economy even after the foreign bankers had taken their cut.

German merchants of the Hanseatic League set up their own trading base at the Steelyard near London Bridge and came to dominate 14th-century London’s export trade, eventually electing City aldermen of their own — one of whom, William Walworth, would later become rather more famous for personally killing Wat Tyler at the climax of the 1381 Peasants’ Revolt. Dutch immigrants, meanwhile, brought skills in leatherworking, goldsmithing, printing, clock-making and brick manufacture, at a time when most English buildings still relied on timber and stone rather than fired brick. London’s population of registered “aliens” doubled between 1440 and 1501, from 1,500 to 3,000 — a genuinely cosmopolitan trading city, whatever the popular image of insular medieval England might suggest.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

The Myth That Peasant Teens Were Shipped Off As Servants

There’s a persistent historical claim — repeated confidently by more than one respected scholar — that medieval English teenagers routinely left home around age ten to twelve to work as servants in someone else’s household until they married in their twenties. The evidence from the medieval period itself doesn’t actually support it nearly as strongly as later centuries do.

The confusion partly comes from later, early-modern evidence being read backward onto the Middle Ages, when economic conditions were genuinely different. In the medieval records, when a teenager’s household is identifiable in an accident report, home — their own parents’ home — turns up as the most common location by a wide margin, with accidents at other people’s houses a distinctly smaller share. Tax records occasionally list a young person explicitly as both “daughter and servant” or “son and servant” within their own father’s household, muddying the picture further: some servants were simply grown children still living and working at home, not sent-away strangers at all.

Where live-in service was common, it seems to have varied enormously by local economy — a craft-heavy market town might have plenty of young unmarried servants boarding with employers, while a purely agricultural village relied more on its own families’ labour. Housing was also cheap enough throughout the period that a labourer earning decent wages, especially after the Black Death, could simply rent his own small cottage rather than needing bed and board from a master.

For fiction, this opens up a more flexible range of teenage character situations than the “sent away at ten” cliché allows: a peasant teenager staying at home, working alongside parents into their late teens, is at least as historically grounded as one sent into service.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Borrowing Money in Medieval England

Debt in medieval England was not something to take lightly — particularly when the person who owed you money might be armed and living in a castle.

According to the records, landholders were perpetually in debt. Medieval society prized generosity and looked down on thrift, so a prosperous landholder felt obliged to host great feasts and hand out gifts rather than put money aside for hard times. When the good harvests stopped, there was often little in reserve and no ready cash for essentials — and a single extravagant heir could squander in a few years what generations of careful predecessors had built up.

For loans, landholders had essentially two options: Lombard bankers, who had found ways around the Church’s ban on Christians charging interest, and Jewish moneylenders, who operated under a different and frequently shifting set of rules — including the Crown’s power to seize their records and demand payment of the debts owed to them. Peasants, meanwhile, mostly borrowed from each other, in a much smaller-scale, informal economy.

Collecting from a well-armed landholder sitting in his own keep was, unsurprisingly, easier said than done. Many debts simply lingered unpaid, while borrowers took out new loans to cover the interest on the old ones — a cycle that would be painfully familiar today, and a ready-made subplot for any landholder character sliding into financial trouble.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Chapter House Meetings

Alongside prayer, study, and work, every monk was expected to attend a daily meeting in the chapter house — so called because a chapter of the Rule of St Benedict was read aloud there each day. These meetings combined practical business with a good dose of humbling self-examination.

The monks sat on the stone floor or on benches around the walls, with the abbot or presiding monk on a raised seat at the east end, at least at Westminster. Business included the running of the abbey and the formal sealing of documents, but the meeting also dealt with the monks’ faults. Monks confessed their failings publicly in front of the community, whose members, in one vivid medieval image, acted as the “razor of God,” shaving away the “unsightly hairs” that spoiled the penitent and making him “more pleasing to God.”

The chapter house could also be a place of real beauty. Both Westminster and Coventry Cathedral Priory had chapter houses decorated with fine inlays and wall paintings, and Coventry’s included scenes from the Book of Revelation. There is a certain irony in the fact that the room the monks probably dreaded most was so often the most beautifully decorated in the entire monastery.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

The Underwear Gap: What Men Wore That Women Didn’t

One of the more surprising gender gaps in medieval clothing is the lack of underwear among women, attested to in an unexpected place — the clothing allowances laid down in monastic rule books.

Men regularly wore some form of linen undershorts (usually referred to as breeches or braies) that covered much the same area as modern briefs. We know this partly because illustrations of men doing heavy outdoor labour (reaping grain, threshing with a flail) show their tunics tucked into their belts, exposing breeches worn below. Women, by contrast, seem to have worn no such garment at all. Illustrations of women working in the fields or stomping grapes always show their long dresses hiked up to expose hose or bare legs beneath, but never anything like a man’s breeches. The strongest confirmation comes from the exceptionally detailed lists of clothing items allocated to religious orders, specifying everything a monk or nun was entitled to wear down to the minutest garment. Lists for monks always include breeches, alongside shirts and stockings, while lists for nuns include chemises and stockings, but never breeches. References to women actually wearing “drawers” do not appear until the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century.

A woman’s only possible layer of underclothing was the chemise — a long, loose linen underdress, effectively a full-length slip, that reached down to about the ankles regardless of how short her outer dress happened to be — so that a woman’s legs were always modestly covered whichever activity she was engaged in.

It’s a minor but nonetheless genuine piece of evidence — and a good example of how even a monastery’s supply list can answer a question that art history alone can’t address.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

The Surprising Property Rights of Anglo-Saxon Women

Ask most people when English women lost a great many of their rights, and 1066 probably isn’t the first date that comes to mind. But the Norman Conquest was a real turning point for women — and not a good one.

Before 1066, Anglo-Saxon women could be wealthy and powerful in their own right. One noblewoman, Eadgifu “the Fair”, is known to have held some 27,000 acres in eastern England in the 1060s. More than a quarter of the Anglo-Saxon wills that survive were made by women. On marriage, a wife received a morgengifu (“morning gift”) from her husband, usually in the form of land, which belonged to her: she could sell it or give it away as she chose, and many did. Grants of land made jointly to husbands and wives show couples holding estates together, rather than wives owning nothing of their own. Women had access to the courts and could seek redress for wrongs done to them, and unmarried noblewomen could use the leadership of an abbey as a power base. A law of 1008 even gave widows the right to remain unmarried for a year, after which they could choose their own husband, with at least part of their property protected from his control.

All this changed sharply for the worse after the Conquest. The Norman feudal system granted land in return for military service, which women could not provide, and did little to encourage female landholding. Changes in Church and marriage law eroded women’s legal position further. Within a century of the Conquest, a married woman could no longer make a will without her husband’s permission, and he controlled most of the land she brought to the marriage — restrictions with no precedent in Anglo-Saxon law.

It’s a useful reminder that the Middle Ages were not one uniform period in which women’s lives grew steadily worse century by century. There were times and places when women fared considerably better than we might assume — and 10th- and 11th-century England was one of them.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

What’s In a Medieval Surname?

Before 1066, English personal names were genuinely varied and distinctively Anglo-Saxon — Ethelred, Wulfstan, Cutha, Hwituc. Within about two centuries, virtually all of them had vanished from common use, wiped out by a handful of imported Norman favourites, and the practical consequences of that collapse are still visible in modern British surnames today.

By the 1220s, a Lincolnshire survey of 624 tenants found only 6 per cent still carried any pre-Conquest name at all, while William, Robert and John alone accounted for 30 per cent of everyone listed. By 1379, tax records for Sheffield show 52 per cent of all men taxed were named either John or William — a staggering lack of variety that left medieval clerks visibly exasperated, wearily noting “another William…” in court roll after court roll. This naming collapse directly drove the rise of the hereditary surname: with so few first names in circulation, distinguishing one William from another required something extra, and by 1400 almost everyone in England had a fixed, inheritable surname.

The resulting surnames fall into recognisable categories still visible today: local surnames from a home village or landscape feature (Bristow from Bristol, Uppehulle from “up hill”); patronymics building toward modern names like Jackson and Richardson; occupational names (Webster, Fletcher, Smith, and less obviously Billeter for a bell-founder or Harbisher for a maker of chain mail); and, most entertainingly, straightforward nicknames — William “Catface,” never inherited, alongside the surviving Vidler (“wolf-face”) and Gulliver (“glutton”). A small but poignant category — around 4.6 per cent of modern British surnames — traces directly back to pre-Conquest Anglo-Saxon personal names that some families simply kept using long enough for them to fossilise into permanent surnames, tiny linguistic survivors from an entirely different naming world.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

How Often Would You Actually Go to War?

Whether a medieval Englishman went to war often depended less on training and more on simple bad timing — plenty of genuinely unprepared people ended up on a battlefield purely because they happened to be in the wrong retinue at the wrong moment.

During the Barons’ War of the 1260s, Simon de Montfort brought London’s so-called “Trained Bands” into his army at the Battle of Lewes in 1264, despite the name being wildly optimistic — the Bands were mostly apprentices and labourers with minimal actual combat training. Facing a cavalry charge from the future Edward I, they promptly fled toward home. Ironically, this accidental rout helped win the battle for Montfort anyway, since Edward and his own inexperienced young knights broke formation to chase the fleeing Londoners, leaving his father, King Henry III, dangerously exposed to Montfort’s remaining forces — Henry lost the battle and, for a time, control of the country. Edward, having clearly learned his lesson about battlefield discipline, went on to defeat and kill Montfort at Evesham the following year.

Warfare wasn’t purely a matter of individual bravery, either — it served a deliberate political function. One later English king, in a fictionalised but historically grounded reflection on the ongoing wars with France, made essentially this argument: a foreign war kept the nobility united and occupied against a common enemy, and the alternative, with a class trained for little beyond fighting and nothing external to fight, was far bloodier civil strife at home. Given that several of the very worst periods of internal English violence — the Barons’ Wars, the unrest of the 1320s, the later Wars of the Roses — did indeed erupt during lulls between major foreign campaigns, it’s a defensible, if cynical, piece of medieval statecraft.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

The Parish Priest’s Daily Grind

Forget the stained-glass image of the wise, saintly village priest for a moment. The actual job was underpaid, under-supervised, and — by the Church’s own repeated admission — often done extremely badly.

Most rural priests were what the sources call “Mass priests”: poorly educated men living on a tithe income of roughly ten shillings a year, a sum so thin that non-residence and pluralism (quietly holding two or three parishes at once and hiring a cut-price substitute to actually turn up) were chronic problems the Church never managed to stamp out, despite repeatedly trying. In fairness, there was no formal training and little real oversight from busy bishops. Even the physical requirements for ordination were looser than you might expect: one Franciscan reportedly cut off his own thumb to avoid being ordained, while another candidate was ordained anyway despite having lost part of a finger to frostbite.

The role itself was a genuine juggling act: teaching parishioners their faith, correcting sins, preventing heresy, performing baptisms, marriages, and burials, and — from the 14th century onward — being expected to expound on the fourteen articles of the faith, the seven sacraments, the seven works of mercy, the seven virtues, the commandments, and the seven deadly sins, essentially from memory, to an illiterate congregation, on a salary that wouldn’t cover a modern parking fine.

Clerical celibacy was mandated in 1074, but it was only sporadically enforced — married priests turn up in the records well into the 13th century, and some parishioners actively preferred a married priest, on the entirely reasonable grounds that a man with his own family might understand theirs a bit better.

If you want a sympathetic, flawed, overworked clergyman for your story, the historical record has already written him for you.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

What Was Actually In a Peasant’s House

When a medieval tenant died or fled the manor, the lord’s officials drew up a detailed list of what was in the house. Certain items, the “principalia,” belonged to the holding and had to pass on to the next tenant — not unlike a landlord’s inventory for a furnished flat today. For those who want to know what a medieval peasant household contained, those lists are a gold mine.

The smallest items at the bottom of the list might be a single brass pot worth sixpence, two chests (one without a lock, the other missing its base), and a trestle table. A slightly better-off half-virgater could expect a stand, a cupboard, a cart-horse with saddle and collar, and the whole set of ploughing tools. The genuinely comfortable virgater’s house had a towel, a silver spoon, a goblet, a blanket and two pairs of sheets, a mattress, and for luxury a kiln or oven of his own.

The silver spoon deserves a mention, because it wasn’t just there to look nice. In a world without banks, small valuables such as a silver spoon or a coin tucked into a locked chest served as a sort of portable savings, the medieval equivalent of a bit of money under the mattress. Houses were easy to break into, so anything precious stayed locked away rather than on display.

Everything else was refreshingly dull: coarse unglazed pottery for cooking, the occasional prized jug that might have come a hundred miles from a good regional pottery, baskets, wooden bowls, a broom that left a visible groove in the swept clay floor. Poverty and only slightly more modest comfort went hand in hand in the same village, sometimes in adjacent houses.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Running a Monastery: The Obedientiaries

Running a major medieval monastery took a genuinely substantial management team, and the sheer number of specialised roles beneath the abbot — collectively called obedientiaries — reveals just how much of monastic life was, underneath the prayer and ritual, straightforward institutional administration.

Below the abbot (assisted by a deputy prior) sat a whole roster of department heads: the cellarer, in charge of supplies; the chamberlain, handling domestic matters; the sacrist, responsible for the church’s upkeep; the precentor, directing services; the infirmarer, caring for the sick; and the almoner, running the charitable side of the house. Senior monks called circatores patrolled the wider complex specifically to catch misbehaviour or neglect of the Rule. The exact number and titles varied enormously by house — Bury St Edmunds had four separate priors, while Durham and Canterbury Cathedral Priories each ran a substantial twenty-five major officials, some with their own subordinate staff beneath them. By the end of the Middle Ages, as many as two-thirds of monks in a typical monastery held some kind of administrative office or served as a deputy to one — a striking proportion for an institution popularly imagined as devoted purely to quiet contemplation.

This machinery required real financial resources to sustain: income flowed in from tithes, rents, donations, and traded goods, and monasteries were famously, fiercely protective of these revenue rights, with disputes against local tenants and townspeople a common occurrence — in 1480, Chester Abbey’s own abbot and a dozen colleagues were formally bound over to keep the peace after repeated clashes with local tradesmen, a reminder that running a medieval abbey’s finances could be every bit as contentious as running any other large medieval estate.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

The Carthusians: Medieval England’s Hermit-Monks

If the Benedictines represented the comfortable, wealthy end of medieval monasticism, the Carthusians stood at the opposite extreme: monks who chose voluntary isolation and an extraordinarily rigorous ascetic life. They were widely admired for it, precisely because so few people could endure it.

The order was founded around 1080 by monks seeking a solitary life of severe self-discipline, modelled on the first Christian hermits of the desert. Each Carthusian lived alone in a small cell and saw his brothers only at certain daily services; contact was so restricted that monks left their cells together only for a special weekly walk known as the spatiamentum. The first house was established in the French Alps at a place called Chartreuse, which gave the order its name — and the English word “Charterhouse.”

Nine Charterhouses were eventually founded in England. The first, at Witham in Somerset, did not impress everyone: one 12th-century visitor described it as “a horrible place, an empty solitude, where only wild beasts and fowls of prey dwell.” Even devout monks found the life hard going. One Rochester monk wrote of the London Charterhouse, “I cannot bear the discipline of the order.”

Carthusian houses stayed small and austere throughout the Middle Ages; even the largest, Sheen Charterhouse in Surrey, housed only thirty monks. They were also the only order that refused meat to its members even when they were sick or weak — for fear that monks might otherwise fake illness just to get a decent meal.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

The Monks’ Secret Sign Language

Talking was banned across huge stretches of monastic daily life — in church, in the dormitory at night, at mealtimes in the refectory — so from at least the ninth century onward, monks developed something genuinely remarkable to get around it: an elaborate, fully catalogued sign language, formally taught to every novice as a routine part of their training.

The system began at Cluny Abbey and was eventually written down and passed between houses; the earliest surviving English version, the Anglo-Saxon Monasteriales Indicia, contains 127 distinct signs, probably compiled in the late tenth century. Later lists grew considerably more elaborate: two fourteenth-century sets from Bury St Edmunds run to 141 and 198 signs respectively, and a list used around 1500 at Ely Cathedral Priory contains 109. The signs themselves were mostly simple, mime-based gestures for everyday nouns and needs: extending and turning the hand like a page turning meant “book”; a circle made with both thumbs and fingers meant “bread”; sticking out the tongue and touching it with the fingers meant “honey”; a finger pressed to closed lips meant, appropriately enough, “silence.”

Not everyone found the whole system dignified. When the Welsh chronicler Gerald of Wales dined at Canterbury Cathedral Priory in 1180, he was unimpressed by the spectacle: “There were the monks… all of them gesticulating with fingers, hands and arms and whistling to one another instead of speaking… so that I seemed to be seated at a stage play or among actors and jesters.” It’s a wonderfully specific bit of medieval culture-clash — one visitor’s solemn religious community was, quite literally in Gerald’s eyes, indistinguishable from a comedy act.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

What You’d Need to Survive Medieval Travel

Before setting out on any journey in medieval England, it was worth knowing what lay ahead — and the honest answer was a great deal of hard going.

The main roads were old Roman routes, worn by a thousand years of use into a mess of potholes, subsidence, and mud. Chaucer’s pilgrims on their way to Canterbury were travelling along the old Roman Watling Street, and the road from London to York via Lincoln followed Ermine Street. There were no signposts and no reliable maps, so anyone straying from the main route had to find a guide or ask directions from locals, who were often suspicious of strangers and not especially helpful. People travelled in groups because bandits were a real danger; the law even required trees and undergrowth to be cleared back a hundred yards on either side of the road, to deny robbers cover for an ambush.

At the end of the day, abbeys and priories were expected to give a traveller bed and board for a night. A donation was expected in return, or a day’s work if the traveller was short of coin. That bed might well be shared with a stranger, along with the usual fleas, bedbugs, and lice, so a small bottle of lavender water to keep the insects at bay was a sensible thing to pack — even though no one at the time realised that fleas spread the plague. Travellers also carried their own seasoning: a small flask containing vinegar, mustard seed, salt, herbs, and garlic. It made dubious inn and abbey food more palatable and, as it happens, had antiseptic properties too.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Execution Cemeteries and the Medieval Outcast Dead

Not every medieval body received a Christian burial in consecrated ground, and the archaeology of where “deviant” burials were placed instead offers a genuinely striking window into how firmly medieval society drew the line between the community of the living and the dead — and who fell outside it.

From roughly 850 onward, ordinary community cemeteries clustered around churches, considered hallowed ground linking the living and the dead in a single Christian community awaiting the Last Judgement together. Executed criminals and other social outcasts, by deliberate contrast, were buried well away from this consecrated space — often at the boundaries of hundreds and shires, in dedicated execution cemeteries (cwealmstowas). A striking example excavated at a Bronze Age barrow in Norfolk contained over a hundred secondary Anglo-Saxon burials, many in shallow graves showing clear signs of violence: eight decapitated, seven buried face-down, others apparently bound — no children among them, mostly young adults, with none showing any sign of ceremonial care in how they’d been laid to rest.

By the eleventh century, this pattern began shifting: certain monastic orders, most notably the Knights Hospitaller, started deliberately claiming the bodies of executed criminals for burial in their own consecrated churchyards instead, in places as varied as Ilchester, Aylesbury and York. It’s a revealing bit of medieval social engineering either way — whether cast out to a lonely boundary grave or reclaimed by a charitable religious order, where a criminal’s body ended up said as much about medieval attitudes to crime, redemption and community as any written law code ever could.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

The Inheritance Loophole Nobody Talks About: Bastardy

Medieval inheritance laws were particularly harsh toward bastards, for whom a claim to their father’s villein land was forbidden by the laws of England. A court of one manor summarily rejected a claimant’s appeal, stating that he was bastard “to whom no villein-land can descend.”

But in practice, communities and courts were much more flexible in their enforcement of illegitimacy — when it came to land disputes, at least. A Yorkshire court ruled that a child conceived during a private marriage vow (but before the church-door agreement) was legitimate by virtue of local custom and could inherit the father’s land without question. Meanwhile, to avoid an unwelcome succession dispute, a number of manors simply allowed for “bastard” heirs to hold their father’s land for life if no other heir was available. Even a child born of adultery was legally the husband’s “by the law of England,” one contemporary judge declared cheerfully — “whoso bulleth my cow, the calf is mine.”

The same impulse underlay similar rules elsewhere: a lord’s interest in steady, paying tenants outweighed any desire to enforce strict moral standards, while the villagers needed the land to continue to be farmed and to change hands smoothly in the next generation. Wherever the rules on illegitimacy threatened the continuity of a working farm, they tended to bend.

For a story involving a secret or disputed parentage, this is reassuring — for the characters, if not necessarily for the plot. The “no inheritance for bastards” rule existed, but so did a long tradition of finding reasons why it shouldn’t apply.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

The Risky Way Some Attackers Got Into Castles

Every castle required a means of disposing of human waste, and the solution — long, vertical shafts running down through the thickness of the wall to a moat, ditch, or river below — proved to have an unexpected, genuine security vulnerability.

Castle toilets, known as garderobes, were often constructed in small rooms set within the outer walls, sometimes in banks on several different floors and deliberately staggered so that one was not directly above another. The waste shafts angled down through the stonework and emptied out of an opening at the base of the wall, ideally located on the downwind side and falling into a moat, river, or ditch. It was a genuinely clever solution to a difficult engineering problem — until it was found that the same shaft could be used to allow a person to climb in.

Records show that it was not simply a theoretical risk: on more than one occasion, besieging forces had successfully penetrated a castle by having men climb up through the drainage shafts of its garderobes. As a result, the outside openings of these shafts were routinely fitted with iron grilles to prevent such an entrance. This was a security measure added to what was, on its face, purely a sanitation measure.

It is a nicely concrete illustration of how siege warfare influenced medieval castle design in ways that go well beyond the obvious — even the plumbing had to be built with an eye to keeping determined, unpleasant intruders out.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

What Actually Made a Settlement a ‘Town’?

What actually made a medieval settlement a “town” rather than an overgrown village? Not size, as it turns out — it was the market.

The defining feature was having one or more permanent, year-round markets, with guild self-regulation as the other big tell. A large village might hold a market once or twice a year, usually on its patron saint’s feast day, but a proper market town of a thousand-plus people held far more frequent regional markets, drawing goods from perhaps fifteen or more farming villages within a day’s travel by laden cart — roughly seven miles. True cities were vanishingly rare: one historian reckoned there were only six or seven Western European towns above 50,000 people in the year 1300, against roughly a hundred towns sitting in the more modest 5,000-to-10,000 bracket.

Towns grew from a genuinely varied set of starting points. Some evolved from old Roman street grids; others clustered around a bishop and his cathedral after Rome’s collapse, since bishops stepped into the resulting power vacuum as urban leaders; still others grew up around a monastery’s gates, which tended to produce a distinctly different, more radial street plan than the Roman grid towns. Then came the 9th and 10th centuries, when Viking raiders along the coasts and rivers, and Muslim raiders around the Mediterranean, hit most population centres at least once — the towns that hadn’t kept their fortifications in good repair paid the heaviest price, and simply contracted down to a smaller, more defensible core.

It’s a useful bit of scaffolding for anyone building a fictional town from scratch: start with the market, work outward, and remember that “town” was always more a legal and economic category than a simple matter of headcount.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Tithes: The Tax That Built the Parish System

Nothing shaped the medieval English parish quite as decisively as the tithe — a mandatory tenth of a household’s income handed over to the Church every year — and tracing how it grew from a voluntary biblical gesture into a genuinely enormous, closely audited revenue stream tells you a great deal about how the whole parish system actually got built.

The idea started as pure exhortation: a 786 Church council simply urged everyone to give a tenth of what they had, since Scripture reserved it for God, with no real mechanism to enforce it. It took until the 920s and 940s for Kings Æthelstan and Edmund to turn this into an actual compulsory levy, first on royal and clerical estates, then on every Christian householder in the kingdom. Enforcement carried real teeth: a defaulter under King Edgar’s law could expect royal and diocesan officials to seize the tenth owed, leave a second tenth for the defaulter’s own use, and confiscate the remaining eight-tenths outright, split between the bishop and the local lord — a structure that, not coincidentally, gave the lord a very direct financial stake in making sure his own tenants paid up.

Over the following three centuries, tithing expanded to cover an almost comically thorough list: not just grain and livestock, but wool, milk, cheese, honey, doves, fish catches, hay, peas, timber, firewood, bracken bedding — even, in specific recorded cases, rabbits and hunted deer. Industrial workers eventually got folded in too, paying a flat five shillings a year once payment in kind for a blacksmith’s or weaver’s actual output became too impractical to collect. The genuine anxiety tithing produced among ordinary, conscientious people is oddly touching: some paid quiet ‘secret tithes’ during Lent specifically to ease their conscience about any past shortfall, and ‘for tithes forgotten’ became a stock clause in wills right up to the Reformation — a small, permanent hedge against having shortchanged God by accident.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Death, Judgement Day, and Memento Mori

Death in medieval England was neither a taboo subject nor something that people generally tried to ignore. The skeleton became a popular motif in tomb effigies and wall paintings under the theme of memento mori – however glorious and powerful you are in this world, this is what awaits you all, so better pray for the soul in the grave now so that they do the same when your turn comes.

The theology around death was complicated, though, involving such concepts as Purgatory – a place where the departed’s sins are burnt away before they can enter Heaven – which all but the most virtuous or sinful had to experience unless they committed an unspeakable crime or were canonized at once. This gave the living an opportunity to shorten their loved ones’ stay in Purgatory by paying masses said for their intercession, sending pilgrimages on their behalf, or donating to charities, mendicants, road construction, or bridge building – or buying an indulgence. This was a document that promised to cut one’s Purgatory time by a certain percentage in exchange for a particular number of prayers, which the purchaser could perform themselves. All the departed, regardless of their status in life, were destined to be resurrected at the Judgement Day. This is when their bodies would have been unearthed and brought to meet their soul (Unless they were unbaptized children, suicides, witches, heretics, or traitors, who had been sentenced to spiritual execution at the time of their death).

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Gilds: The Closest Thing to a Backup Family

If medieval English peasants did not have the extensive and complex social webs of obligation and association usually associated with large families, then what else might serve to satisfy such needs? One answer, which was available to many, was the parish social-religious gild, a voluntary association which used terms and images of kinship to describe its activities and which provided some of the functions of an extended family.

Gild members addressed one another as brothers and sisters and to the gild’s elected officials in the image of a father. But above all, the gild provided protection in death; almost three-quarters of gilds that registered their statutes in a national survey of 1389 listed provision for a decent funeral as an object of their foundation.

This could be a fitting reward for life membership of a gild, for it is recorded that members received a proper funeral cortège, including candles and even the gild banner, plus continued prayers from their fellow gildsmen for the dead’s release from purgatory on the anniversary of their death, long after any close relatives might have been expected to abandon the effort.

Gilds provided another service normally available only to those with great wealth and extensive lands, in acting as a credit union and a sharing agency for such things as animals and equipment. Gild members could borrow freely from the stock of goods, returning a small percentage of the value when repayment was due, and thus add to gild funds. For example, rural gilds that owned breeding cattle, swine, and especially oxen usually hired out animals to their members in need.

These local gilds helped spread out payments for such expensive purchases as agricultural implements among more gild members, thus easing the burden on any one peasant household. A similar system was used when a natural disaster or domestic emergency such as illness made work impossible. Almost a fifth of gilds, according to the 1389 survey, undertook to give their members a small weekly stipend in time of need.

At the same time, it should be noted that while such gilds provided many of the services of an extended family, their members always knew that they were not families and that they belonged to voluntary associations, however satisfying such associations might be.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Ale, Taverns, and the Village Drink Problem

Forget the picture of a purpose-built village inn. Most medieval ale was sold from a front room and that front room was often tended by a woman since brewing was overwhelmingly a female trade both for consumption and for sale.

If you had a batch of ale ready, you announced it with a staff and garland displayed outside your house visible from the street. No licence or other signage was needed save the staff, a marker for the whole village as to what was on offer that week. The ale varied incredibly from a thin, almost bread like liquid to a genuinely potent clear substance and “small ale” which was run a second time through the wort was light enough for everyday consumption.

The coroners that investigated sudden deaths clearly had a view on the results. Their records include drunk men falling off carts on the way back from the tavern, a drunk fisherman who drowned the next morning while fishing, a man tripping over his own feet when attempting to throw a stone at a dog that had bitten him and general late night stumbling into ditches, wells and rivers. Women drank at taverns too and one remaining carol takes pot shots at those wives who spend the day drinking with the meat and fish they bought and then tell their husbands they were at church all along.

A nicely deflating view on those who picture medieval villages as universally pious and sober is given by the fact that the sign of the tavern was a fixture on every street and the coroners clearly knew why.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Funerals Were Expensive, and Purgatory Terrified Everyone

Dying in medieval England was costly to the families who survived them. It is evident from the surviving records that the burden of both money and conscience was a heavy one – but for the right price, families could make sure that even their soul would find its way to heaven when they died.

At the death of the head of a household, two payments were automatically due: the lord had a right to the best animal in the family’s possession (known as ‘heriot’), while the local parish church claimed the second best (‘mortuary’). Added to these payments were the costs of the funeral itself, not least the candles that had been burnt at the wake for mourners, the cost of the procession and so on. But it was the growth in the numbers of masses said in order to hasten the passage of the deceased’s soul through purgatory to heaven that weighed heaviest on the finances of medieval families. One man’s will reveals that he had paid twenty shillings a year for a decade of continual prayer for his father’s soul; it left his own family in such financial difficulties that he asked his brother to be ‘good and special friends’ to his widow and any children who survived him.

But the burdens of paying for masses and prayers were not without their benefits. The belief in purgatory, as articulated in contemporary moral tales, was that souls in need of purification were boiled in cauldrons until they were reduced to the consistency of a newly born child, only to be dragged out with burning hooks and thrust back into the cauldrons to be boiled once more. This was the kind of frightening imagery that made people willing to pay to ensure their passage to heaven – and it helps explain why roughly two-thirds of the surviving wills of peasants contain money set aside for prayers and masses.

But social-religious guilds provided an effective alternative to buying a place in heaven. For the comparatively small sum of an annual subscription, paid throughout the course of a man’s life, members were entitled to a full funeral procession and ongoing prayers from their guild ‘brothers and sisters’ for the comfort of their widow, children or whoever else survived them – a substantial saving on the cost of a family funeral. But it also ensured that, should the family fail to remember them in prayer after their death, someone would remember them in due course.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

A Medieval Elopement Scandal

Every medieval marriage was not necessarily an arrangement based on land and wealth, as there were also cases of genuine love matches, although a particularly well-documented Norfolk gentry example serves as a cautionary tale about the lengths to which families would go to put an end to a “beneath you” romance.

The eldest daughter of a prominent gentry family fell in love with, and secretly married, the family’s household steward – a serious social faux pas for the era, despite the family’s own social climbing tendencies just a few generations prior. A surviving love letter, written by the new husband while the couple were being deliberately kept apart, is genuinely touching even six centuries later: he speaks of it feeling “a thousand years” since they last spoke and begs her to burn the letter once read, and pleads that those keeping them apart “remember full little what they do.”

Her own family, horrified, summoned the couple separately before the Bishop of Norwich to test whether their private vows genuinely counted as a binding marriage. She held firm, insisting she was already bound to him in God’s eyes regardless of the exact words used, and her husband’s account matched hers precisely under separate questioning. The bishop, reluctant to alienate an influential family, initially stalled his decision and sent her home — only for her own mother to declare she’d never be welcome under the family roof again. She returned to Norwich alone to beg the bishop’s protection, and he eventually ruled the marriage valid; her family, after the initial fury cooled, grudgingly arranged a proper formal wedding to make the whole business official — although her mother’s own written verdict on the affair, that her daughter had “lost but a worthless person” by marrying him, gives a fairly unambiguous sense of how long that particular grudge was nursed.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Forest Law and the Four Ways to Get Arrested

The medieval forest law had little to do with the woods in the way we understand them today. By “forest” we must understand a special hunting ground, which was either a royal village or a stretch of land specially reserved for the king’s huntsmen. Such land had its own jurisdiction and imposed a set of strict rules on the villagers living within its borders.

The best example of a forest is, perhaps, the New Forest in Hampshire, created by William the Conqueror in 1079. It was designated to provide “venison and vert,” that is, to supply the royal huntsmen with game and vegetation. The villagers living within the forest borders were not allowed to “take a single rabbit or pigeon without the king’s permission,” while their dogs received a special “paw plug” to prevent them from ambushing the game. Still, the forest wardens could only arrest the offenders they caught “in stable stand,” that is, “in an ambush with bow or crossbow,” “dog draw,” which means “the pursuit of a wounded animal by a dog,” or “back bear,” when the offender was found “carrying the animal killed.” A less personal but equally unpleasant way of finding out about a villager’s trespassing was “bloody hand,” that is, the presence of blood on the offender’s skin.

The punishment for the trespassing varied depending on the forest’s jurisdiction’s level and could be of three types. The next level up, the Swainmote, which had the power to actually convict, heard the offenders thrice a year. The next in line, the Court of Justice Eyre, which could impose exceptionally long terms of imprisonment, only met once every three years, if not more rarely. This is why, during the reign of Richard III, the bail system was introduced so that the offenders could go on bail until the Court of Justice Eyre met again. It is hard to overestimate the severity of these measures and the jurisdiction’s impact on the lives of the villagers living within the forest borders. All in all, the king’s passion for sport hunting made for a surprisingly vicious set of restrictions for those living within the New Forest’s borders.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

How the Reformation Ended Medieval Church Life

The medieval Catholic ritual calendar was not simply gradually abandoned – it was actively dismantled, with a speed and determination that the authorities only managed to display during the initial phase of Edward VI’s reign. This is astonishing because the Catholic traditions had been integral to the country’s culture long before the arrival of the new rulers.

The process of separation began already in 1538, when candles burned before images of saints in churches were officially banned, followed by the dissolution of the associated guilds in 1547. Images themselves, including the stained glass, were ordered to be removed within weeks of Edward’s coronation. The rituals surrounding Easter Sepulchres and the Paschal Candle, Creeping to the Cross, Ashes and Ash Wednesday, and Palm Sunday’s Branches were all discontinued by 1548. Corpus Christi was subsequently removed from the calendar when the 1549 Prayer Book ceased mentioning it, while the festivities around St George’s Day collapsed soon after his guilds were disbanded and his biblical absence officially condemned. Even more interesting is the fact that the number of testators in the Salisbury diocese who left bequests for the maintenance of “lights” was over 50% in the eight years leading to 1539, but not a single person did so in the following twelve months.

It is notable that some of these expedients were pursued out of theological conviction, not merely as a means of enforcing social order. Observers were quick to realize that many of the purges pursued were driven by popular support for a break with Rome and not directly by royal edicts. For example, the Hocktide festivities, which involved kissing and ransom, mumming, and Lord of Misrule were all quietly abandoned due to their association with public disorder and drunkenness rather than any direct link to theology. Nevertheless, by the end of Edward’s short reign, most of these festivals had already disappeared, dismantling an entire ritual framework that had once defined England’s social life for centuries.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Medieval Life Expectancy Wasn’t What You Think

Medieval life expectancy tables have a way of misleading people, because the statistic that actually matters – how old you’d live to be if you’d survived childhood – tells a different story from the average over the whole country.

Infant and childhood mortality was truly brutal, and this dragged the average life expectancy figure right down. But anyone who’d made it to their teens had already seen off the single biggest danger, and from there on the odds changed altogether: living into your seventies or eighties was an entirely feasible outcome, not an occasional freak accident. From early adulthood onwards, the greatest risks diverged, by sex: for men, warfare and dangerous manual trades such as roofing, timber-felling, or horse- or ox-driving, but for women, the very real dangers of pregnancy and childbirth, repeated throughout a couple’s fertile years. It’s partially why the records of the longest-lived people in history so often turn out to be churchmen, who neither fought nor bore children, and nuns, who at least avoided the second risk.

One genuinely surprising case on the secular front is a 15th-century duchess who bore twelve children across her marriage and still lived to eighty, dying just after her birthday in 1495. A surviving contemporary poem lists her children by name, tracking the family’s losses with a matter-of-fact bluntness – several sons died as infants, and one son died as a teenager fighting alongside his father, but only one daughter died in infancy, out of five who survived to adulthood – a roughly fifty-eight per cent survival rate to adulthood across her family, better than many households, rich or poor, could manage. Two of her surviving sons went on to become kings of England, which puts a rather different spin on ‘family history’ than the modern version usually implies.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Confirmation and Baptism After the Reformation

Baptism and confirmation both survived England’s Reformation more or less intact in terms of general shape, but the details the reformers stripped out (and the ones they left in) are an extremely careful, selective edit — a clear sign, perhaps, of actual adherence to medieval practices rather than wholesale abandonment.

The most significant practical change in baptism was the shift in timing from the near-universal same-day christening driven by fear of an unbaptised infant’s damnation to the 1549 Prayer Book’s move of routine baptisms to the following Sunday after matins, though genuine emergency baptism — by any layperson, using the same fixed formula — was still fully legal and unchanged. Ceremonially, 1549 retained a surprisingly large set of the old ritual furniture: the sign of the cross on forehead and breast, the white chrisom cloth, triple dipping in the font, even a version of the priest’s traditional charge to the godparents. The more radical 1552 revision eliminated the church-door opening segment entirely, dropped the chrisom cloth and anointing altogether, and reduced the entire physical ritual down to a single dipping (or pouring) of water plus one solitary sign of the cross on the forehead afterwards — a change controversial enough that even the single remaining cross would become a flashpoint for Puritan objection later in the century.

Confirmation underwent the most radical change of all. Medieval confirmation had never been tied to any fixed age — surviving images show bishops confirming literal infants, and the real, chronic problem for centuries had simply been getting access to a bishop at all, given England never had more than about seventeen of them covering the entire country. The Reformers deliberately reversed this logic, requiring a child to first pass a genuine spoken examination (the catechism) proving they understood the Creed, Commandments, and Lord’s Prayer before a bishop would confirm them at all, turning what had been, for a millennium, essentially an accident of geographic access, into a legitimately new, delayed rite of passage tied to demonstrated learning rather than mere parental initiative.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Bad Behaviour in the Pews

Medieval churchgoers, by the Church’s own repeated complaints, were considerably less consistently well-behaved than the solemn stereotype of medieval piety usually suggests, and the surviving disciplinary records preserve a genuinely entertaining rogues’ gallery of exactly how congregations misbehaved.

Weapons and animals both turn up with startling regularity; the parishioners of Coverham in the Yorkshire dales were bringing swords, bows, arrows, and staves into the church porch, stacking them so densely that people struggled to actually get inside, and dogs wandered in on their own account often enough that several churches, including York Minster, kept a paid “dog-whipper” specifically to eject them, after complaints of animals urinating on the walls and even getting loose in the chancel itself. Gossips, quarrellers, and outright disruptors get named individually and repeatedly across the records; Kirby Bellars in Leicestershire reported five separate chronic gossipers in a single 1518 visitation, and Thomas Nash of St John Walbrook, London, was hauled before a Church court in 1491 for interrupting the service to shout at the assembled congregation, “what be you but whores, harlots, and bawds?”

Genuine violence broke out too, and not infrequently over the era’s touchiest social flashpoint, precedence; four women physically dragged from their seats at Hawkhurst, Kent, in 1502 were apparently dragged by men convinced their own wives deserved the spot instead, and a 1522 Essex dispute over who received the ceremonial “pax” first escalated into a full assault, the aggrieved parishioner allegedly breaking the sacred object over the parish clerk’s head hard enough to draw blood in front of the entire congregation. Even sartorial pride drew real, pointed scorn from contemporary moralists; Robert Mannyng dismissed starched women’s headdresses in church as “the Devil’s sails,” Chaucer’s Wife of Bath was famously mocked for wearing church headscarves heavy enough, at ten pounds, to weigh down a genuinely modest wardrobe budget.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

How Criminal Were the Middle Ages, Really?

Ask how violent medieval England was, and you’ll get an answer that it was much less violent than our present-day equivalents. The murder rate in fourteenth-century East Anglia has been calculated equivalent to present-day New York; indeed, the English homicide rate overall was far higher than that of today’s US cities. In 1202, the city of Lincoln with a population of approximately 5,000 had 114 separate murder trials in one year. Much of this violence was not dramatic, but a neighbor dispute about land or cattle or even minor debts could quickly turn into a deadly confrontation, as a 1312 Norfolk murder trial demonstrates: two brothers argued over a plot of land, and one killed the other with a cart shaft. Historians who study similar pre-modern peasant societies note that this kind of peasant-on-peasant killing was not considered nearly as serious a threat to the social order as violence against people outside the same social circle; indeed, while the killing of another peasant was a crime of sorts, it was not seen as a challenge to how society was structured.

Crime rates were also fluctuating: they often peaked at identifiable times, such as after soldiers returned from campaigns in France (Justices of the Peace were empowered to force soldiers to take up jobs in order to prevent them from turning to crime), or in times of genuine economic distress, when there is a close statistical correlation between poor harvests and women stealing food and clothing. Anything stolen that was worth more than twelve pence would result in a death sentence: which is why juries so often deliberately underrated stolen goods just under twelve pence, a small, humane act of jury discretion built directly into an otherwise brutally unforgiving system.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Were Anglo-Saxons and Vikings Really Divided?

The St Brice’s Day slaughter of 1002, when king Ethelred II ordered the massacre of the Danes, is presented as an illustration of a nation divided along ethnic lines; however, the archaeological and linguistic evidence demonstrates a more nuanced view.

The new place names, personal names, tax assessments, or even words that have been incorporated into the English language from the Vikings are all evidence of a number of separate communities that have been living among themselves in suspicion and isolation. However, a closer examination of the evidence reveals a number of details that tell a different story. Excavations in York, the former Jorvik, of Viking-age buildings, constructed in the same manner as the English, suggest that there was no distinct “ethnic” hallmarks. The Scandinavian language had disappeared from the Isle of Man, the most Norse-intensive region in Britain, within two centuries, and the English adopted it elsewhere even more quickly. The comparison of skeletons of the Vikings who have died in York with the local people of the nearby village of Wharram Percy suggests that the genetic Scandinavian component in the composition of the people of York gradually “diluted and dissolved” during the following generations.

The most important distinction among people for the Vikings and the Anglo-Saxons who survived the St. Brice’s Day slaughter in 1002 has been not their ancestral homeland, Danish or Wessex. However, it was their loyalty to the local lord that determined whether they had been marked for death or not. The majority of England’s Viking immigrants have been gradually assimilated into the English community, becoming English themselves. Although the massacre of the Danes that was ordered by Ethelred II was most probably aimed at the specific individuals who posed a current military threat, and not entire ethnic groups, the slaughter of the foreign community resulted in the rapid transition from suspicion and isolation to the position where the English lord and the Dane could serve together at the same court. A Danish king Cnut ruled over a reunited England and Denmark and employed English and Scandinavian nobles at his court.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Medieval York: A Case Study

York offers an interesting English equivalent to Paris and Venice: smaller, more provincial, but with a parallel rise and fall from Roman garrison town to England’s second city and back down to a firmly-established regional centre.

Founded by the Romans in 71 CE, York was taken by the Vikings in 866 and held by them until 1055; it was then conquered by William I, who built a castle in 1068 and burned much of it down in retaliation for three rebellions by the inhabitants at different times between 1068 and 1070. (This seems to have resulted in a genuine famine in 1070-71.) From here, York developed into a genuine trading powerhouse: in 1379, a full two-thirds of all English wool exports passed through the city, and when it attracted the royal court, it rivaled London as a commercial centre.

Of the local laws, a few are particularly noteworthy: it was forbidden to graze cattle within six miles of the city, so that cattle for butchering in the shambles (butchers’ quarter) were fed on hay for fattening, rather than allowing the cows to browse the fields, a practice that would seem to have been entirely motivated by municipal bylaw rather than any genuine agricultural interest. York’s Minster, meanwhile, had a less auspicious architectural history: destroyed by fire in 741, rebuilt, burned down again in 1069, rebuilt again, and damaged a third time in 1127, it was not until the reconstruction commenced in 1220 that it took on the form familiar today, having become the largest cathedral in England (by far) by 1472.

By 1500, other English towns, notably Bristol and Norwich, had overtaken York in terms of trade, but it maintained its position as a regional centre throughout. A nice alternative to the “great capital city” model suggested for Paris and Venice, and arguably the most realistic fictional equivalent to an English provincial town.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

How Medieval Children Actually Grew Up, Stage by Stage

One of the more poignant findings buried within medieval coroner’s records is the way in which children’s development followed a strikingly similar biologically-based pattern to what we’d today recognise, tracked purely via accident’s cause and place of occurrence.

Infants under a year spent the majority of their time in a cradle by the fire, largely passive and sedentary. Accordingly, their accidents were dominated by events involving the cradle’s fire being accidentally ignited, either by a smoldering ember or chicken-borne spark catching the straw. By two and three, this changes radically: toddlers, newly mobile and inquisitive, saw a huge increase in accidents associated with active exploration. The coroner’s records include falls down wells while chasing their reflections, following ducks into ponds and reaching for floating feathers in streams. Notably, the age group of two to three had 38 percent more recorded fatalities than did infancy, and the pattern tracks our own modern experience prior to parents learning techniques of childproofing a house unfit for a toddler – an approach that would have been an impossible task in the period due to the very nature of the domestic environment.

Accident rates dropped off sharply again between four and six, suggesting some level of behavioral instruction was having an effect, children at this age becoming old enough to be able to do simple tasks and yet still closely monitored by their parents. Partly responsible for this apparent drop was the mobility of the child allowing them to follow their parents from place to place rather than remaining at home. Between six and twelve, children took on chores – fetching, minding animals, gathering food – and by their teenage years their accident patterns were increasingly similar, though not identical, to those of adults.

The fact that this pattern held true across centuries and continents is oddly inspirational, in that however different the environments we live in, the stages of growing up remain stubbornly, reliably human.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Hell’s Kitchen: Cooking as Eternal Punishment

When medieval artists were called upon to depict eternal punishment, the imagery they most often turned to was culinary. Hell was frequently envisioned as an immense, malevolent kitchen in which devil-cooks tormented the damned using the same tools and technique as any household cook would recognize from her own hearth.

One early fourteenth-century picture Bible depicts a dishonest baker and an equally dishonest ale-wife suspended to stew together in a single pot above the flames issuing from the maw of Hell, alongside other condemned who bubble in a nearby cauldron. A particular illustrated moral tract, intended to instruct the illiterate in the nature and significance of the seven deadly sins, chose the punishment of gluttony with a certain precision: Dives, the wealthy man of Gospel of Luke who had refused, despite his riches, to grant even the crumbs to the beggar Lazarus at his gate, is shown eternally stewing in one of the cauldrons that dot Hell’s landscape, condemned to the precise reverse of the riches he had hoarded so selfishly and exclusively in his lifetime.

Not all such scenes of kitchen-torture were portrayed exactly as they might have been. One particularly arresting picture shows St John the Evangelist being boiled in oil on the orders of a Roman emperor — his cooks visibly flinching and protecting their faces from the heat of the flames, the saint himself reclining idly in the bubbling oil as if at home in his own bath, hands raised in a mildly infuriating gesture of prayer.

It is a telling observation that even the equipment of Hell’s kitchens — the cauldrons, spits and blazing fires — bore sufficient resemblance to their earthly counterparts to be instantly recognizable to medieval eyes, no matter whether or not the holy figure being boiled, grilled or seared happened to be in a particularly ecstatic state of spiritual contentment or not.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Medieval Villages Were Planned, Not Accidental

The idyllic image of a medieval English village, with its houses arranged conveniently around a church and plots of arable land stretching out from it like spokes from a wheel, is at least partially a construction of modern archaeologists. Contrary to what we might expect, many such villages were actually laid out in a very orderly grid pattern by ambitious medieval landlords.

At Wharram Percy in Yorkshire, the house plots are arranged in two remarkably regular lines along the frontage, facing the main street, suggesting that they were laid out in a single exercise of orderly, if utilitarian, town planning, probably between the tenth and the twelfth century. Further evidence of planning can be found in a number of villages in the county of Buckinghamshire, on the border with Northamptonshire, where medieval landowners decided to clear away some of the older peasant plots and lay out more up-to-date rectangular plots in the same area. This took place at the same time as landowners were attempting to group their peasants into more intensively farmed holdings as part of a process that began in the eleventh century of the breakup of large multiple estates.

Peasant houses too, it appears, were not the rudimentary constructions of medieval stereotype but were substantial timber-framed buildings designed to last for generations. There were two main regional variations in medieval peasant housing, one the other throughout the country. In the pastoral areas of the north and west, people and their livestock lived in longhouses, while in the mainly arable lands of the south and east, the hall-and-courtyard farmhouses were built. These houses were designed in a planned, if pragmatic, manner, centuries before anyone had heard of modern town and country planning.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

How a Medieval Doctor Diagnosed You Without a Blood Test

Long before blood chemistry panels existed, medieval doctors had their own uniquely central diagnostic ritual in which they used the patient’s urine, examined in a special special clear glass container that became such a symbol of the profession that a physician was almost recognizable by the vessel he carried.

The containers in which the urine was held were called “jordans,” and were made of clear, uncolored glass so that the doctor could clearly see the color of the sample inside. Medical textbooks of the time contained full-color illustrated charts with twenty different recognized colors of urine, ranging from unhealthy colors of blue, black, and dark red, through the healthiest yellows, and down through less desirable pale or clear colors. In addition to color, physicians also examined the sample for visible sediment, smelled and evaluated the texture (was it thin and watery, or thick and greasy?), interpreting these signs in the context of the medical system of humors, determining which bodily humor was imbalanced.

Nestled within the explanations of the bodily humors, however, were some actual observations of symptoms that a modern physician would recognize as indicating specific problems. Some medieval texts specifically mention that a reddish discoloration of the urine is a sign of internal bleeding, and that gritty sediment indicates kidney stones — both valid modern medical observations, though connected to a completely incorrect system of diagnosis based on bodily humors.

A good example of how the medieval understanding of medicine, while largely based on superstition, did not have it all wrong — careful observations made by medieval physicians sometimes led to them recognizing patterns leading to specific symptoms or illnesses, but dressed them up in incorrect explanations based on the theory of bodily humors.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Abraham of Bristol and the Price of Being Jewish in Medieval England

The story of Abraham of Bristol is one of the most harrowing possible glimpses into what life was like for medieval England’s Jewish community, living precariously at the pleasure of the king’s “protection” which might well be extorted at need.

In 1210, King John exacted a huge ransom of 66,000 marks (£44,000) from England’s Jewish community, throwing the wealthy Jews of Bristol into the castle until payment in full. One Bristol merchant, identified by later chroniclers as Abraham of Bristol, refused to pay his share of 10,000 marks. The king’s response to Roger of Wendover was to have one of Abraham’s molar teeth removed each day until he came to terms with the royal demand, a deliberately horrifying ordeal that lasted a full week. On the eighth day, with teeth still hurting, Abraham paid up.

This was not an example of especially vicious behavior on the part of one nasty king. Jewish communities in medieval England paid substantial taxes directly to the crown for the protection of the king, who was their only official authority over their ability to live, trade and prosper. As moneylenders charging interest, one of the few professions genuinely available to them and a source of substantial income, they were a tempting source of funds for any king in need. Richard I had already extracted a huge contribution to fund his own ransom, and John was merely following in his father’s footsteps, though with more violent methods. It’s a genuinely uncomfortable insight into medieval England’s fiscal practices, but one that highlights the usefulness to the crown of a disadvantaged minority group, and its willingness to use coercive measures to extract that usefulness at need.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Serfs vs. Peasants: Medieval Rural Class Explained

“Serf” and “peasant” are terms that appeared to be interchangeable in numerous fictional contexts, which would have greatly surprised the people living in medieval England, as the difference between the two was significant.

First of all, the wealthier serfs could be classified among the better-off peasants, as a prosperous serf family could own as much as thirty acres or more, which was considered a decent amount of plotland for a peasant family. However, serfs were obligated to perform unpaid work for the lord of the manor, which was the key difference between them and the peasants. This work could be determined individually for every serf family, depending on the size of the plot they occupied, and could include additional day labor and various payments of products. They also had to pay several types of taxes that the peasants were obliged to, including the merger for getting married (and the marriage of peasants was supposed to take place in the same manor), and the heriot – a tax paid when a serf died, usually in the form of the best animal that the deceased owned (the second best animal went to the parish priest, as the medieval church did not allow cash, but accepted animal products).

Heriot was also a tax applied by the lord, which could involve a share of the harvest or even a part of livestock. Additionally, a serf was the property of the landowner, although he could not be sold separately from the plot. On the contrary, peasants paid various types of tax, mostly in currency, animals, and products, not labor, and had the right to appeal to higher courts if they felt that a manor lord was unfairly demanding additional taxes or services from them.

Most serfs lived in extended families of four to six people, where the female members shared the heavy workload with men. Finally, the difference between serfs and peasants was significant, despite the fact that today these terms are often used interchangeably and the difference between them is barely noticeable.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Golf and Tennis Were Banned to Save Archery

Several sports that have become international institutions and staples were actually banned numerous times from play in England and Scotland, not due to any moral objection but because the kings needed all men able to practice with longbows.

Longbow archery was an incredibly useful military ability in England from the late 13th century until the 16th, when guns have replaced it, but it requires extensive practice to master, which could not be fulfilled unless all men practiced regularly. The English kings, starting from John and throughout Henry VIII, have mandated that every able man practice at least once a week, usually on Sundays, after attending church, and forbade other games entirely. The sport of cambuca (an early form of golf), according to Edward III, was a distraction from the sport of longbow archery, which was therefore banned in the 14th century. Similarly, he banned the game of quoits for the same reason, and his Scottish counterpart James II in the 15th banned football and golf (the latter being a popular game, apparently, despite earlier restrictions). The 14th-century ban on golf did not mention the sport by name, but was presumably a result of its popularity and the time that it claimed, as its 15th-century counterpart did specifically name golf.

This is an intriguing look at the restrictions of the past, one which demonstrates that behind every seemingly capricious ban by the government (or in this case, the king) there is often a purpose, even if it only existed in the minds of the people who enforced it. The reason for these bans were indeed a response to a very real threat to England – its national security, which was threatened when potential soldiers wasted their time at popular games rather than practicing their longbows.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

How English Lost (and Regained) Its Status

The English language almost completely lost its status as a prestigious and powerful language after the year 1066. The process of returning to the position of a language fit for governance and intellectual exchange took about two centuries and is reflected in the current version of the language in various ways. One of these is the distinction between words of Norman-French and Old English origin that are used in the same context.

After the conquest, Norman-French and Latin were the languages of government and, to some extent, the culture, leaving English to be used by the less educated majority. It took until 1399 for another English king to be crowned and for the language to regain its former prestige. The legacy of the language’s second-class status is still visible in the English vocabulary through the contrast between words designating food items and the animals from which they are produced. French words, such as beef, mutton, and pork, came to English with the Norman-French aristocracy, while the words for the animals themselves, cow, sheep, and pig, are of Old English origin.

The revival of the English language began in the late 14th century and was facilitated by events such as the Hundred Years’ War and prominent writers such as Chaucer, who expressed patriotism and chose English for their works. Still, the creation of official, or biblical English, lagged considerably in the minds of the general public. While it is commonly believed that prior to the late 15th century, biblical texts were not translated into English, this is not entirely accurate. There were several Old English manuscripts dating back to Bede’s time and later translated by Aldhelm and Ælfric. The link between heresy and English biblicism, however, meant that the publication of the first complete late-14th-century English Bible was met with suspicion and was prohibited by law in 1409. The ban was lifted in 1539 when the English Great Bible was ordered to be placed in every parish church.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

How Many People Actually Went to Medieval Church?

How many people actually turned up to a medieval English parish church on an ordinary Sunday? It’s a genuinely hard question to answer with real precision, but the surviving fragments of evidence — confession fees, communion headcounts, offering-day totals — provide a surprisingly vivid, if patchy, sense of the real numbers involved.

The most reliable figures are the Easter communion counts, since that was a genuine legal obligation and someone, somewhere, usually had reason to record roughly how many people showed up. A 1478 Paston family assessment of tiny Oxnead, Norfolk, judged it “but an easy cure to keep, for there are not twenty persons to be yearly houseled,” while by contrast Manchester in 1519 was reportedly home to “seven thousand houseling people and more” — a genuinely enormous range for two English parishes existing in the very same country at the very same moment in time. A 1548 government survey, compiled while assessing chantries for closure, preserves dozens more such figures: sixty-nine communicants at tiny Coberley in Gloucestershire, all the way up to 4,000 at New Malton in Yorkshire’s sprawling northern parishes.

Attendance to an ordinary Sunday mass, rather than the compulsory Easter count, is genuinely harder to pin down, but the pattern that does survive suggests real, meaningful gaps between theory and practice throughout the period. Devout, leisured people — the nobility, gentry and wealthy urban merchants — attended far more reliably and far more often than the labouring majority, for whom a five-mile round trip to church on a rare day off wasn’t always the obvious priority it was meant to be. As Bishop Lacy of Exeter noted with evident frustration in 1523, describing the large minster parish of Crediton, the “major part of the parishioners” turned up to the principal Sunday mass “scarcely four times a year” — presumably just the four compulsory offering days — a genuinely blunt admission, from inside the Church’s own hierarchy, that regular weekly attendance was very often an aspiration rather than a lived reality.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

What They Wore and What They Ate

What people wore and ate is where medieval fiction most often gets it wrong: they all look like they’ve just come off the Renaissance fair’s main street, and everyone eats with a knife, fork, and spoon. Let’s fix both mistakes.

Clothing was, first and foremost, a class marker: male landholders, lesser clergy, and farmers all wore roughly similar simple tunics and leggings, made of wool or linen; women wore roughly similar wool or linen dresses. Silk, imported from Byzantium and later Italy, was reserved for the wealthiest clothing and church vestments—not that a small manor’s landholder could afford enough of the stuff to bother with the sumptuary laws designed to prevent the cities’ nouveau riche from ostentatiously flaunting their wealth. Jewellery, where it existed, was investment and collateral: gems were regarded as an adornment and a portable, saleable asset, which is a far more pragmatic relationship with diamonds than most of us have today.

Diet was the same, mostly, in quantity rather than in kind: a 13th century peasant family of four ate about six quarters (48 bushels) of grain a year, plus two flitches of bacon, garden produce, milk, cheese, and barley ale, with pottage of beans, peas, and oatmeal as the daily staple. Bread, being made with enough grit from the milling process to visibly wear down a peasant’s teeth over a lifetime, was a genuinely unglamorous detail rarely included in modern fantasy banquets, but a landholder might eat two to three pounds of meat or fish a day and get roughly 4,000 to 5,000 calories—a noticeable amount of game since they were the ones with hunting rights, and far more refined than the gritty oatcakes, since their flour wasn’t mixed in with chestnuts or acorns.

Ale and cider were the drinks everyone, rich and poor, drank, made from the farm’s own crops, arguably medieval England’s one genuinely universal foodstuff, class differences aside.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Why Villeinage Declined

Villeinage – the bondage of serfs to the land and their lord – is not easily extinguished. It is convenient to imagine that its passing was instantaneous and terminated abruptly with the ravages of the Black Death. In reality, villeinage was steadily undermined well before 1348 and persisted for another 150 years.

Serfs had questioned the firmness of their bondage before the Black Death, and they were emboldened to challenge the manorial power structure when it was revealed that the local manor was not originally granted to the lord but belonged to the king. The first recorded successful lawsuit dates back to 1280 and the Derbyshire village of Mickleover. The locals took the matter to the king – and, for a moment, it seemed as if their argument had weight: since the manor belonged to the Crown, villeinage there was illegitimate. However, they ultimately failed in their endeavor. Other villages followed Mickleover’s example: in 1278, the residents of Halesowen, in the 1320s – those of Mildenhall, and in 1346 – Ingatestone. None managed to achieve their goal, but the villagers of Ingatestone continued to use their seals for private negotiations with their lord, which was prohibited for bonded peasants. Moreover, it was not uncommon for serfs to leave the manor of their birth, seeking better opportunities elsewhere. For instance, in Worcestershire in 1305, more than 10% of all tenants were outsiders who had moved to the region, and few of them were formally bound to the land.

The Black Death accelerated the erosion of villeinage significantly. The demographic catastrophe that followed the plague epidemic resulted in a severe shortage of labor. Consequently, wages increased and lords became particularly interested in binding workers to their manors under any terms. For example, the bishop’s wages rose by 69% between 1360 and 1380 – compared to only 6% for his wheat harvest. A free peasant plowman became an attractive alternative to a villein, as he was guaranteed to produce a good harvest. A century later, villeinage was formally abandoned as a social category. However, the legacy of the manorial system lives on today in the English language in the form of words such as villain (from the French villein), churlish (from the Old English ceorl) and boorish (from the Old English gebur).

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Bread, Milk and Cheese on a Peasant’s Table

Bread, milk and cheese formed the genuine backbone of a peasant’s diet, and each came with its own set of small, practical problems that a resourceful cook had to solve, day in and day out, with almost no margin for waste.

Grain had to be ground into flour at the village mill, which took a real cut of payment for the service — hand-mills existed as a workaround, but lords fought a genuinely persistent, centuries-long campaign to confiscate them, since unlicensed home-grinding cut directly into the mill’s income. Milk brought its own urgency: it soured quickly, especially in warm weather, so much of it was deliberately curdled early, on purpose, into curds and whey, or churned into butter, or made into a comforting hot drink called a posset — milk heated with a splash of ale, sometimes enriched further with rare spices for anyone wealthy enough to afford them. Curds themselves, pressed in a cloth bag or a weighted rush basket to drain off the last of the liquid, made a simple, everyday cheese, though a proper hard cheese with real keeping qualities needed more time and skill than most households could spare — better bought ready-made from a specialist at market.

Cheese also offered one of the medieval kitchen’s simplest genuine luxuries: melted on bread under a red-hot shovel, it became toasted cheese, a small transformation popular enough to anchor its own joke in circulation by the early sixteenth century, in which a group of troublesome Welshmen who’d somehow slipped into Heaven are finally lured back out again by St Peter shouting the two magic words “Cause bobe” — roasted cheese — proving that even a joke about Heaven’s gatekeeping could be built entirely around one humble household treat.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

The Real Robin Hood(s)

Robin Hood, as most people picture him, is a largely 19th- and 20th-century invention layered onto a much older, considerably stranger medieval legend — and the earliest genuine evidence points not to one heroic outlaw at all, but to dozens of real criminals who simply adopted his name as their own.

The first securely datable reference comes from the York Assizes of 25 June 1225, ordering the seizure of goods belonging to one “Robert Hod, fugitive” — and within about fifty years, the name (or variants like “Robehod”) was showing up again and again as the adopted surname of entirely unrelated criminals across the country: William Robehod (Berkshire, 1262, outlawry and robbery), John Rabunhod (Hampshire, 1272, murder), Robert Robehod (Hampshire, 1294, sheep stealing), and more. The evidence strongly suggests these criminals were deliberately claiming an already-famous outlaw “brand” for themselves, each adding their own exploits to a growing, shared legend rather than there ever having been one single “original” Robin Hood at all.

What’s genuinely striking is how much of the modern legend simply isn’t there in the earliest sources. No Maid Marian, no Richard the Lionheart (only a vague “Edward our comely king”), no dispossessed nobleman backstory, remarkably little emphasis on robbing the rich to give to the poor — the earliest Robin Hood is closer to a rough, ribald spokesman for resentful yeomen, targeting greedy monks, corrupt sheriffs, and the hated Forest Law, but showing real reverence for the crown itself rather than any genuine revolutionary politics. The legend’s enduring popularity says less about medieval sympathy for lawbreaking in general and more about which specific victims people were happy to see robbed — corrupt officials and wealthy churchmen, not ordinary neighbours — a distinction the earliest ballads make with real, consistent care.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Medieval Paris: A Case Study

Paris is the single best worked example of a “subject town” — genuinely split in its governance between the crown, the bishop, and the university, each pulling in a slightly different direction, and it’s worth a dedicated look on its own merits.

The city sat on the Seine roughly 280 miles from the Atlantic, with a current gentle enough to power water mills reliably while still allowing boat traffic all the way to the English Channel, and — via the Loire — deep into central France as well: a genuinely ideal siting for a capital, geographically speaking. The appetite of the resulting population was staggering: one 14th-century estimate has Parisians getting through 3,420 sheep, 514 oxen, 306 calves, and 600 pigs every single week, a scale of consumption that makes the earlier “how do you feed a medieval town” question feel very concrete indeed.

Notre-Dame’s construction began in 1163 under Bishop Maurice de Sully, who deliberately wanted to rival the new cathedrals already rising at St-Denis, Senlis, and Sens — and, in a detail that genuinely delights, some of the stone used to build it was quarried from mining tunnels dug directly beneath the city itself, meaning parts of medieval Paris were, quite literally, hollowed out to build the cathedral standing above it.

Governance-wise, Paris is presented as the clearest possible case study of a “subject town” divided three ways — crown, bishop, and university all held genuine, overlapping authority, with the ordinary merchants and artisans who actually generated the city’s wealth left with a comparatively limited voice in how any of it was run.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Life Inside a Medieval Nunnery

Medieval nunneries ran on broadly the same daily rhythm of communal prayer, reading and work as male monasteries — but they were, in several important and genuinely revealing respects, a fundamentally different institution, shaped as much by their exclusion from the priesthood as by any difference in spiritual ambition.

There were far fewer nunneries than male houses — roughly one-sixth as many — and English nuns numbered only around 2,500 at monasticism’s medieval peak, falling to about 1,500 by the Dissolution, spread across roughly seventy Benedictine houses, thirty loosely Cistercian-affiliated ones, and a single Cluniac convent (the Carthusians never admitted women at all). Because nuns couldn’t be ordained to say Mass or perform other sacraments for the souls of the dead, they held less appeal for wealthy donors seeking exactly that kind of spiritual return on their patronage, leaving most nunneries noticeably smaller and poorer than their male equivalents — though wealthier exceptions did exist: sixteenth-century nuns at Redlingfield Priory had individual bedrooms with feather pillows and a church fitted with alabaster carvings and silver vessels.

Entry itself required a £5 dowry and a year-long novitiate studying the psalms and offices, typically starting between fifteen and seventeen years old, though some older women joined too — often widows, or wives whose husbands had simply abandoned them. Where a monk’s head was tonsured, a nun’s hair was fully shorn, replaced with a habit, wimple and veil rather than a simple cowl — Benedictine nuns wore black, “Cistercian” nuns white — and their governing abbess held authority not just over her own nuns but over any male chaplains and servants attached to the house as well.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Rogation Week: Beating the Bounds With a Dragon on a Pole

Rogation Week, the week before Ascension Day, sent the whole parish physically outside the church walls for three consecutive days of penitential walking — genuinely long processions accompanied, at their grandest, by carved dragon effigies, banners, and relic caskets, deliberately timed to bless the year’s growing crops before summer really took hold.

At Salisbury Cathedral, the procession was led on the first two days by red banners and a straw-stuffed dragon held aloft on a pole, its tail deliberately “erect” and threatening; by Wednesday, the dragon was demoted to walk behind the clergy instead, its tail now emptied and left “drooping and depressed” — a theologically loaded bit of medieval visual symbolism, explained by one surviving sermon as marking the Devil’s defeat by Christ, “the lion of Judah,” whose own banner now led the way in the dragon’s place. Rural parishes walked genuinely long distances between churches or chapels, often stopping at fixed “stations” — sometimes marked by a stone cross — for a protective gospel reading over the fields; Kirkham in Yorkshire is recorded stopping at four separate named points along its route, a gospel read at every single one.

The whole week wasn’t purely solemn, either — food and drink followed each day’s second mass, and the details survive in genuinely mouth-watering specificity: Exeter Cathedral’s kitchen accounts record thousands of eggs and several bushels of flour going into rich egg-and-cheese pastry flans, flavoured with pepper, saffron, and honey, for the assembled clergy afterward. Reformers eventually turned hard against the whole tradition, one 1540 sermon collection dismissing it as “a right foul and detestable abuse” where people came “not from devotion” but merely “to show themselves”; the government finally abolished the processions outright in 1548 — though, tellingly, popular affection for them ran deep enough that they were quietly revived under Mary Tudor and survived, in a considerably toned-down form, well into Elizabeth I’s own reign.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Buying a New Outfit in Medieval England

Getting a new outfit made in medieval England was a genuinely slow, multi-stage process, and it involved rather more separate tradespeople than simply popping to a single shop.

Early in the 14th century, clothes were at their most expensive because England exported almost all its raw wool rather than weaving it domestically — English wool was shipped to Flanders, woven into cloth there, and then imported back at a considerable markup. Even royalty economised: Queen Isabella, wife of Edward II, had frayed gown hems replaced on old dresses rather than buying new ones outright, some simply pinned in place for reuse. It took Queen Philippa of Hainault, wife of Edward III, actively persuading Flemish weavers to relocate to England and teach their skills, before English woollen cloth genuinely started getting cheaper.

The actual buying process ran through two separate specialists. First, a mercer sold the cloth itself — everything from home-grown wool to imported silks and velvets — and would advise (with a healthy self-interest in overselling) how much fabric a given garment required. The cloth then went to a tailor, who knew the latest fashions worn at court, measured the customer using a personal length of knotted cord (there were no standardised tape measures), cut and stitched everything entirely by hand, and might offer a fitting before final assembly. Any leftover off-cuts were traditionally the tailor’s own perk, unless the customer specifically negotiated to keep them for a matching purse — in which case the overall price crept back up again. Trims, braids, and ribbons had to be sourced separately from a haberdasher or commissioned from a silk-woman. Between the fabric-buying, the measuring, the cutting, and the fittings, a single new gown genuinely represented weeks of coordinated work across several different craftspeople.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Death, Burial, and the Business of Dying Well

Death in a medieval English parish followed a genuinely careful, deeply symbolic sequence of ritual — from the moment of burial itself right through to a full year of subsequent memorial services — reflecting a society that treated dying “well,” in the correct religious sense, as almost as important as living well.

Burial typically followed within a day or two, preceded by a requiem mass (named for its opening Latin words, “Eternal rest give them, O Lord”), the priest marking out the grave’s exact outline in the earth with a spade before the actual digging began — medieval graves, revealingly, were often surprisingly shallow, sometimes as little as 0.4 to 0.7 metres deep. John Mirk’s popular sermon collection carefully explains the symbolism behind each burial custom: the dead were wrapped in a plain white sheet to represent absolved confession, laid facing east to greet Christ’s expected return from that direction on Judgement Day, and buried with a small wooden cross beside the head and a wax cross on the breast, “to show that they died burning with charity.” A genuinely poignant detail survives too: the measuring rod used to size the grave was sometimes deliberately broken and placed inside it, “a reminder that we have no defence after death from what we deserve.”

The formal mourning didn’t stop with the funeral itself. A “month’s mind” memorial mass followed roughly four weeks later, letting distant relatives who’d missed the original funeral pay their respects properly; a “year’s mind” anniversary mass followed a full twelve months on, formally closing the mourning period. Wealthier families layered on considerably more: standing guild memberships routinely promised funeral candles and attendance for their brothers and sisters, while the truly rich could and did commission chantry priests to say masses for their souls indefinitely — sometimes for years, sometimes, on paper at least, forever. Even the humblest grave, though, carried real weight in the community’s collective memory: every passer-by was actively encouraged to say a quick prayer for the churchyard’s anonymous dead in general, whether or not they’d ever known a single name among them.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Maud Heath and the Medieval Market Economy

A sixty-foot column on a Wiltshire hilltop, topped with the sculpted figure of a small, determined woman clutching a shopping bag, commemorates a genuinely modest but lasting act of medieval infrastructure — and it began with nothing more than a widow’s weekly walk to sell eggs and butter.

Maud Heath, a fifteenth-century widow, earned pocket money selling whatever surplus eggs and butter she had at the market in Chippenham, four and a half miles from her home, along a low-lying meadow path that flooded regularly whenever the River Avon rose. Having spent years trudging that same waterlogged route, she left money in her will, when she died in 1474, specifically to build a raised causeway so future travellers could cross dry-shod in any weather — a bequest still partly in use today, genuinely centuries after her death.

Her story is a small but perfect illustration of how deeply the medieval household and the public market were intertwined — self-sufficiency was, at best, an ideal people paid lip service to, rarely one they could actually achieve. Even a fairly modest household needed salt (available only from a market unless you happened to live near a working salt-pan or mine), needed firewood delivered ready-cut if the labour of gathering and chopping it could possibly be avoided, and relied on a household’s own surplus stores — a fattened pig, extra eggs, spare butter — as a genuine source of cash income when times were good. It’s this two-way traffic, ordinary people selling what they could spare and buying what they couldn’t produce themselves, that Maud Heath’s causeway quietly commemorates, four and a half centuries on.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Enclosure and ‘Organic Barbed Wire’

The enclosure of common land — hedging fields that had once been shared, open resources into private, exclusive pasture — was one of the most socially disruptive economic trends of the final decades of medieval England, and it earned itself a genuinely striking nickname among contemporaries: “organic barbed wire.”

The underlying economics were straightforward. As population recovered through the early 16th century, land values and rents climbed sharply, and larger landowners found sheep farming far more profitable than arable, since it needed a fraction of the labour to run. Converting cropland to pasture meant enclosing it — and since common land, by definition, belonged to the whole local community rather than any single owner, enclosure directly stripped poorer villagers of grazing rights they’d relied on for generations. Thomas More, writing in 1516, captured the bitterness with characteristic bite, describing sheep as having “developed a raging appetite, and turned into man-eaters. Fields, houses, towns, everything goes down their throats.” The priest John Rous, writing a few years earlier, personally listed sixty villages in his native Warwickshire that he knew to have been abandoned as a direct result of exactly this kind of enclosure.

The social consequences ran deep enough that they gave a name to a much later political movement entirely: the 17th-century radical group known as the Levellers took their name specifically from the practice of “hedge-levelling” — tearing down the newly erected enclosure hedges as an act of popular protest — a direct linguistic thread connecting a specifically late-medieval and early Tudor grievance to a genuinely different, much later political moment. It’s a useful reminder that “the end of the Middle Ages” wasn’t simply a change of religion and government at the top — for a great many ordinary rural families, it meant the physical, hedge-by-hedge loss of land and grazing rights their communities had shared for centuries.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Improvised Medieval Cooking Fires

Fixed kitchen hearths weren’t always practical, and the surviving pictorial record shows medieval households and travellers alike coming up with genuinely inventive portable heating solutions wherever a hot meal or a bit of warmth was needed away from the main fire.

One French manuscript shows a solitary winter diner enjoying his meal while warming his feet on a small charcoal brazier tucked discreetly under the table, its two carrying handles just visible in the miniature. Another composite seasonal image shows Winter personified as an old man warming himself beside a charcoal brazier mounted on its own small wheeled platform — a genuinely practical bit of medieval furniture design, letting the household’s heat source travel wherever it happened to be needed most that day. Most striking of all is a 1465 illustration from Constance showing a fully mobile oven, mounted on wheels and pulled bodily through the town’s streets, loaded with warm pies being delivered fresh to a waiting market-stall vendor for immediate resale — medieval food delivery, quite literally rolling down the road.

Even genuinely improvised field cooking gets a moment in the record. One Spanish manuscript shows shepherds, tending their flocks far from any proper kitchen, lashing three of their own herding staffs together into a makeshift tripod over a small open fire, a stewpot hung from a hook at the apex — a resourceful bit of on-the-spot engineering built entirely from whatever tools the shepherds already happened to be carrying, letting them get a hot meal cooking even out on open pasture, miles from the nearest actual hearth.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Medieval London’s Sewage Problem

Medieval London had a sewage problem so severe it occasionally killed people outright — and the surviving records of exactly how Londoners tried (and often failed) to manage their own waste are simultaneously grim and darkly funny.

In 1355, the Fleet Prison ditch — designed to run ten feet wide — was found so completely choked with the output of eleven latrines and twelve sewers that water had simply stopped flowing through it altogether. Some enterprising residents, faced with a full cesspool, resorted to piping their household waste directly into an unsuspecting neighbour’s cellar (two men were fined for exactly this in 1347). The most memorably grim case involves a Londoner known to history only as Roger the Raker, whose own backyard cesspit eventually filled to capacity, rotted through the floorboards of his privy above it, and drowned him in his own accumulated waste when he stepped onto the rotten boards.

None of this reflects official indifference, either — London’s authorities were genuinely trying to cope. The city built the Great Conduit by 1285 to supply clean water (its stone fountain house has since been excavated beneath modern Cheapside), employed street cleaners and dedicated “night-soil” collectors, and set up the Assize of Nuisances specifically to settle neighbour disputes over sewage and pollution. Even Edward III personally complained to the authorities about the stench rising off the Thames, warning it would bring disaster if left unaddressed. But the underlying problem — dense population, no coordinated sewage removal, drinking water drawn from the very same rivers used to dispose of waste — was simply beyond what medieval technology and administration could solve. It would take the better part of five more centuries, and a great deal more death, before anyone genuinely fixed it.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

War Comes to the City Gates

Towns rarely fought their own wars directly — they mostly funded, supplied, and occasionally suffered them, preferring to pay someone else to do the actual fighting whenever they possibly could.

Merchants, even ones who could easily afford a full knight’s equipment, generally lacked the training to lead an actual military force, and preferred simply hiring mercenaries instead. Italian condottieri (mercenary captains) commanded genuinely eye-watering salaries — one earned 60,000 ducats a year in peacetime and 80,000 in war from Milan in 1467 alone, a sum that covered his soldiers and officers as well. Urban militias, when towns did raise their own forces, leaned toward crossbows and early handguns over longbows, precisely because they required far less training to use effectively — a sensible trade-off for part-time citizen-soldiers defending their own walls rather than professional archers on campaign.

A siege, ultimately, came down to a fairly grim calculation: whose food or health held out first. Even a town that chose to surrender rather than fight to the last could expect a degree of looting, pillaging, and assault regardless — the opposing commander’s promise to restrain his troops was, at best, a best-effort guarantee rather than an actual protection.

It’s worth remembering, when writing a besieged town in fiction, that the real drama very often wasn’t the storming of the walls at all — it was the desperate arithmetic of supplies, disease, and morale happening quietly behind them, long before any battering ram got involved.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Feast Days and Public Spectacle

Medieval town life ran on a genuinely dense calendar of feasts, processions, and public spectacle, and it’s worth remembering that religion and entertainment weren’t remotely separate categories the way they often are today.

Bruges held thirteen processions a year; Venice, sixteen. Corpus Christi, authorised by papal bull in 1264, involved carrying a consecrated host through the streets in a strict procession running from least to most wealthy participant, ending with the clergy and the mayor — York’s accompanying cycle of religious plays became one of the great civic productions of the period, though the celebration could just as easily spark rivalry: guild members rioted during Chester’s 1399 Corpus Christi festivities.

Then there’s the Fête des Fous — the Feast of Fools, held on the eve of Lent — where groups of unmarried men in each neighbourhood elected a mock “king” to lead them through a night of thoroughly sanctioned drunken revelry. Paris took this to its logical extreme: butchers paraded their best fattened ox through the city streets, with a butcher’s own young child, dressed in finery and carrying a sword and sceptre, riding on its back as king or queen of the day, before formally presenting the ox to the mayor on the steps of the city hall to officially kick off Carnival.

The Church tried, repeatedly and mostly unsuccessfully, to rein in the Feast of Fools’ worst excesses — Innocent III attempted a ban in Polish churches in 1207, and the University of Paris had a go in 1400, with limited apparent success either time. It’s a lovely reminder that “medieval piety” and “medieval party” were very often the exact same event, just viewed from different angles.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Canons Regular and England’s Only Homegrown Order

Not every medieval religious community fit neatly into the four great monastic orders — a whole separate category, the Canons Regular, blurred the line between cloistered monk and working parish priest, and England even produced its own entirely homegrown version of the concept.

Canons Regular were priests who lived communally, like monks, while also carrying out genuine pastoral duties in the outside world — following a considerably less prescriptive rulebook, based on short letters by the fifth-century Bishop of Hippo, than the detailed daily instructions of St Benedict’s Regula. The Augustinians, arriving in England around 1106, grew into the largest such group, eventually running over two hundred houses including fifteen nunneries — the present-day cathedrals of Bristol, Oxford, Portsmouth and Southwark all began life as Augustinian foundations. A related, French-founded offshoot, the Arrouaisian Canons, adopted white habits in deliberate imitation of the Cistercians they admired, while the Trinitarian Canons pursued a genuinely distinctive charitable mission: raising ransom money specifically to free Christians kidnapped by pirates.

England’s own unique contribution was the Gilbertine order, founded by St Gilbert at Sempringham in Lincolnshire specifically to house canons and nuns together in “double” monasteries — a model the French Cistercians themselves declined to formally admit into their own order when Gilbert originally offered to hand his houses over to them. After Gilbert’s death in 1189, only two further nunneries were founded under his order’s rule, and the remaining new foundations shifted to canons alone — a genuinely rare case of an entirely English-invented monastic model that never quite achieved the wider international reach of its continental counterparts.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

The Medieval Bath (Such As It Was)

One of the most persistent questions about medieval life is also one of the hardest to answer with any confidence: did people actually bathe? The honest answer from the records is a shrug, but a more interesting shrug than you might expect.

There’s no systematic evidence for how often ordinary villagers washed their whole bodies, but there’s plenty of evidence that they did, at least sometimes, and mostly in the warmer months. A batch of coroners’ inquests records thirty-five people whose bathing ended in drowning — mostly in rivers, ponds, and streams during summer weather, which at least confirms that outdoor bathing was a real and unremarkable activity rather than a rarity worth remarking on for its own sake. One young harvest worker cooled off in a stream after a hot day’s labour, danced about to dry himself, and slipped back in. Shepherd boys stripped off to bathe while minding their flocks. In winter, warmed water in a basin or tub served the same purpose indoors.

What shows up far more consistently in the records is routine hand-washing before and after eating — people washing at a well or trough as an ordinary part of a meal, not a special occasion. Whatever the full-body bathing schedule actually was, keeping one’s hands clean at the table mattered enough to appear again and again in the incidental background of these cases.

The honest conclusion is that medieval peasants were neither the grimy caricatures of popular imagination nor secretly fastidious by modern standards — they washed when it was practical, sensible, and the weather cooperated, which is probably true of most people in most eras before hot running water existed.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Candlemas, Lent, and the Rules of Fasting

Candlemas and Lent together kicked off the most visually dramatic and dietetically demanding stretch of the whole medieval Church year — genuine hardship layered on top of genuine spectacle, and the details of both survive in surprisingly specific detail.

Candlemas, on 2 February, marked the Virgin Mary’s ritual purification forty days after Christ’s birth, and required every parishioner, adults and children alike, to bring a candle to church for blessing — a Beverley guild dedicated to Mary went further still, with members dressing up as Mary, Joseph, Simeon, and angels to walk in torchlit procession through the streets to church. Roughly three weeks later, Ash Wednesday opened the forty days of Lent proper, marked by ashes painted onto every forehead in the shape of a cross while the priest intoned, “Remember, man, that you are ash, and to ash you shall return” — followed, at least in liturgical theory, by a formal ceremony expelling any serious public penitents from the church entirely until their readmission on Maundy Thursday, three days before Easter.

Lent’s dietary rules were genuinely comprehensive: no meat, no “white meats” (eggs, milk, butter, cheese), fish and shellfish the only permitted animal protein for the full forty days, with pregnant women, nursing mothers, children, manual labourers, the sick, the elderly, and travelling pilgrims all specifically excused from the fast entirely. A large hanging curtain, the “Lenten veil,” was strung across the chancel to physically block the high altar from view for most of the season — drawn back only on Saturday evenings so Sunday’s congregation could still see the consecration, then rehung again before Monday’s services resumed. And on the Wednesday before Easter, as the Passion story reached the words “the veil of the Temple was rent in the middle,” the Lenten veil was deliberately allowed to fall from its own hanging rail at exactly that moment — a genuinely well-timed piece of medieval liturgical stagecraft, landing the physical prop and the spoken text together in a single dramatic beat.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

The Castle Word That Became a Prison Word

The word “dungeon” has a much less grim medieval origin than its modern meaning suggests, and the gap between the two tells you something real about how castles actually functioned as prisons — which is to say, mostly, they didn’t.

“Donjon” originally referred to the large, secure, vaulted cellar chambers underneath a castle’s central stone tower, or keep. These weren’t cells — they were storerooms, prized for how naturally secure and defensible their position was, and they typically held the food supplies a castle needed to survive a siege. Only much later did “donjon” narrow down into “dungeon” and pick up its current meaning of an underground prison cell.

That later meaning reflects a genuine historical shift rather than a simple word drift. Convicted criminals in the Middle Ages were mostly punished with fines, corporal punishment, or execution — imprisonment as an ongoing punishment in itself was uncommon, so castles held accused people only briefly while awaiting trial. The prisoners castles actually did house for extended periods were usually captured nobles being held for ransom, and they were treated as honoured, if unwilling, guests, lodged in quarters appropriate to their rank rather than shackled in a cell. The genuinely dark association between castles and torture chambers mostly traces to a few specific institutions used by the Inquisition starting in the thirteenth century, and it wasn’t until after the Middle Ages ended — once gunpowder artillery had made castles militarily obsolete — that European rulers began repurposing their thick stone walls on a large scale to keep people in rather than out.

For a story that wants a castle prison scene, the ransomed-noble-in-a-comfortable-suite version is the more historically accurate one — the grim oubliette comes largely from a later era.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

When Trouble Came to the Cloister

Even the most carefully enclosed monastery couldn’t always keep genuine trouble outside its own walls — and a handful of surviving incidents show real violence occasionally breaking directly into the supposedly sacred space of the cloister itself.

At Chertsey Abbey in the fourteenth century, a thief snuck into the infirmary and was caught in the act by one of the sick monks — who also happened to be an ordained priest. Rather than simply raise the alarm, the priest climbed straight out of his own sickbed, seized a sword, and struck the intruder, who later died of his wounds; a subsequent investigation cleared the priest of any wrongdoing once it was decided the fatal blow had probably actually come from abbey servants who’d also joined the fight rather than from the priest himself. It’s a genuinely startling image — a bedridden monk turning swordsman mid-recovery — and a useful reminder that monastic enclosure was a legal and spiritual boundary, not a genuinely impenetrable physical one.

Natural disaster proved a far more constant threat than any individual criminal, though. Flooding and famine struck monasteries regularly across the medieval period, and from the fourteenth century onward, plague epidemics became a genuinely recurring institutional fear rather than a one-off catastrophe. At Meaux Abbey, the abbot and twenty-two of his monks all died within a few weeks of each other in August 1349, as the Black Death swept northward through England — a stark illustration that no amount of careful enclosure, discipline, or spiritual devotion could actually offer a monastic community any real protection once serious disease reached its gates.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Anatomy of a Medieval Town: Walls to Workshops

From bath houses to bakeries, medieval towns packed a genuinely impressive range of building types into their walls — and several of them come with details odd enough to be worth stealing for fiction wholesale.

Take the bridges. Urban bridges were rarely simple river crossings; many, like London Bridge (built 1176–1209, twenty arches, buildings three to six storeys high) and Florence’s Ponte Vecchio, had shops and homes built directly onto them. London’s Bridge Masters collected rent from the 140 buildings on the bridge itself and eventually came to own considerable land beyond it — one served an astonishing 23 consecutive years in the post. Cathedrals, meanwhile, were a genuine arms race: Laon reached 79 feet in 1194, Notre Dame hit 108 feet by 1163, Chartres beat that at 121 feet the very same year, and Amiens eventually topped out at 426 feet long. Beauvais tried to go even higher and paid for it — part of its vault collapsed in 1284, and the whole project limped on, interrupted by the Hundred Years War, for over three centuries.

Bath houses split firmly by class: proper bath houses were frequented mainly by nobility, higher clergy, and wealthy townspeople, while everyone else made do with “stews” — cheaper wooden tubs that, delicately put, often came with a prostitute’s services included. Many closed in the 14th century amid scandal.

And then there are mills: a town needed roughly one grain-mill wheel for every 600 to 1,200 inhabitants, and the church typically owned between half and three-quarters of a town’s mills outright — which tells you rather a lot about who was quietly making money off everyone else’s daily bread.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

How Many People Lived in Medieval England?

England’s medieval population didn’t climb steadily upward the way a modern reader might assume — it went through a dramatic boom-and-bust cycle so severe that the country didn’t recover its 1300 population level again until 1750, a full 450 years later.

The rough trajectory: about 2.5 million people in 1086 (Domesday Book), climbing to somewhere between 5.5 and 6.5 million by 1300 — genuinely comparable to England’s population in 1750 — before catastrophic harvests, livestock disease and, finally, the Black Death crashed the figure straight back down to roughly 2.5 million by 1377. It kept falling into the 15th century, possibly bottoming out around 2 million by 1450, and didn’t decisively climb past its 1377 level again until after 1520. Life expectancy followed an almost identical rollercoaster: Essex peasants in the 1390s could expect to live to about 54 on average, a genuinely respectable figure for the pre-modern world, but by the 1490s that had fallen back to 48, as repeated waves of infectious disease after 1348 took their steady toll.

The scale of this collapse is genuinely hard to overstate. England’s population growth essentially hit a hard ceiling around the 1300/1750 mark, and only the twin arrival of the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions after 1750 finally broke through it — strong evidence that pre-industrial farming techniques and transport, however sophisticated they’d become by medieval standards, simply couldn’t sustain a larger population than that on a long-term basis. Four and a half centuries is a genuinely sobering amount of time for a society to spend clawing its way back to where it had already once stood.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Women at Work: Blacksmiths and Bell-Founders

Employers in medieval England were generally happy to hire women, for one blunt, unflattering reason: female labour was consistently cheaper than male labour for the same work, across essentially every trade open to them.

Women couldn’t become priests, lawyers, or officially practise as physicians, but they turned out to have a genuine presence in trades that might surprise a modern reader. Two separate London widows are documented taking over and successfully running their late husbands’ bell-foundries in the 15th century, one of them continuing the business for years — bells cast in that foundry’s workshop, bearing its maker’s mark, reportedly still survive in church towers across southern England today. Blacksmithing shows up too: one woman is recorded being paid to keep the royal forge at the Tower of London running and to sharpen the royal stonemasons’ tools while her husband was dead and her son away on campaign with the king. Another woman inherited and continued running her father’s architecture and stonemasonry business after his death from plague, keeping his (more famous) surname for professional reasons even after her own marriage, and was later commissioned to build an extravagant £100 royal tomb.

Because English surnames sometimes derived directly from occupation, and many trades had distinct feminine forms, an entire hidden vocabulary of women’s work survives purely in old tax and court records: throwster (female silk weaver), webster (female textile weaver), brewster (female brewer), baxter (female baker), lister or dyster (female dyer), and dozens more, some — like “fillister” — genuinely defeating modern historians’ attempts to pin down exactly what the job involved. Hucksters and tapsters, interestingly, became common enough occupations for women that the feminine form of the word eventually got applied to men doing the same job too, a rare instance of gendered vocabulary running in the opposite direction from usual.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Monastic Vows of Chastity

A monk’s vow of chastity was reinforced not just by rules and supervision, but by a genuinely rich body of cautionary stories and imagery — some of it surprisingly vivid, all of it designed to hammer home the same basic message to impressionable young novices.

At Worcester Cathedral Priory, cloister glazing depicted a famous episode from the early life of St Wulfstan, the last Anglo-Saxon bishop, who reportedly threw himself into a bramble bush to physically quell his lust when a young woman threatened to make “a shipwreck of his chastity.” A surviving stained-glass panel from a German Cistercian abbey shows St Bernard of Clairvaux, in bed, shouting “Fures, fures!” (“Thieves, thieves!”) after a promiscuous innkeeper’s wife tried to seduce him. Meat was banned from the ordinary refectory partly on the theory that it stirred up physical desire, and homosexuality was treated as a genuinely serious offence, with senior monks specifically deputed to patrol the dormitory and latrines at night to prevent misconduct.

Despite all this institutional anxiety, the actual surviving disciplinary record suggests real transgressions were considerably rarer than the sheer volume of cautionary art and literature might imply: across the entire religious houses of Yorkshire between 1347 and 1540, only fifteen recorded cases of sexual impropriety survive. It’s a genuinely useful corrective to any lurid modern assumption about rampant medieval monastic misbehaviour — the fear and the imagery built up around chastity were clearly disproportionate to how often it was actually, demonstrably broken.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Was 1553 Really the End of the Middle Ages?

Was 1553 really “the end of the Middle Ages” in England? The honest, evidence-based answer is: not entirely, and not all at once — the transition was messier, slower and more contested than the tidy textbook date suggests.

By the mid-16th century, genuine markers of change were unmistakable: population climbing steadily again after two centuries of stagnation, the monastic system entirely dissolved, the Catholic ritual year dismantled in barely six years under Edward VI, and currency debasement so severe that Henry VIII earned the nickname “Old Copper-nose” once the thin silver wash on his coin portraits wore through to reveal the cheap metal beneath. Yet plenty of genuinely medieval structures persisted stubbornly alongside all this change. As late as 1525, roughly 60 per cent of English households were still effectively self-employed — almost exactly the same proportion as in 1300 — and it would take a great deal longer still before anything resembling a modern wage-earning economy became the norm rather than the exception.

Genuinely new departures were emerging too, tentative but real: the first recorded Africans in England since the Roman period (a trumpeter named John Blanc, paid by Henry VII in 1507, became the first black Londoner ever portrayed in art, at the 1511 Westminster Tournament); the first documented Roma communities, arriving from around 1505 and almost immediately targeted by discriminatory laws; and English ships beginning tentative exploratory voyages toward North America, a modest but genuine precursor of the much larger colonial project to come. Rather than a single clean break, what the evidence actually shows is a genuinely gradual, uneven, overlapping transition — deeply medieval structures persisting stubbornly alongside recognisably new ones, for decades on either side of whatever specific year a historian ultimately chooses to draw the line.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Femmes Soles: Women Who Ran Their Own Businesses

Most medieval Englishwomen who worked were legally “covered” by their husbands — meaning any contracts, debts, or legal responsibility from their trade technically belonged to him, not her. But a distinct category of women, the femmes soles, stood entirely outside that arrangement, running their own businesses under their own legal responsibility, sometimes with spectacular results.

One of the best-documented examples is a wealthy London businesswoman who inherited both her father’s mercantile connections and, later, her husband’s trading interests, running an embroidery-supply business that employed out-workers rather than doing the stitching herself. Her commissions reached genuinely royal heights: a single embroidered bishop’s cope, commissioned by the king and gifted by the queen to the Pope in Rome, took a year to make and cost £100 — an eye-watering sum for the period. She also successfully fought a customs dispute after a shipload of her imported pepper and exotic spices was seized at Dover, using a royal writ that had already pardoned her outstanding customs duties against a separate debt the crown owed her, and won.

Official civic appointments for women were vanishingly rare, but not entirely unheard of. When the man responsible for collecting tolls on London Bridge — a genuinely complex job, since charges varied by cargo, owner, and carrier — died in 1433, his widow simply took over the role, apparently intended only as a temporary stopgap. She proved so efficient and trustworthy that she remained in the post for twenty years, collecting the city’s bridge revenues the entire time. It didn’t, unfortunately, open the door for other women to follow her into similar civic roles — but for two decades, London’s bridge finances ran entirely through one woman’s hands, by simple demonstrated competence rather than any change in the rules.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Forests, Poachers, and the King’s Deer

Every good medieval story needs a forest full of secrets, and it turns out the real medieval forest was already doing quite a lot of narrative heavy lifting on its own — mostly involving furious arguments about deer.

England’s royal forests weren’t simply woodland; they included pastures, fields, and even whole villages, all governed by their own dedicated laws and courts, entirely separate from the ordinary manorial system. Hunting or harming “venison” (the umbrella term for the big game animals — fallow deer, red deer, roe deer, and wild boar) without royal permission was strictly forbidden, and so, for good measure, was harming the trees and undergrowth that fed and sheltered them. You could get in trouble for disturbing a deer’s lunch.

The bureaucracy built around protecting these animals was genuinely elaborate: chief justices of the forest, itinerant justices who toured on an “eyre,” local wardens, and foresters-of-fee who tracked down poachers and criminals living rough in the woods. Offences were split between the verderers’ court (which handled minor matters and could fine up to four pence) and the far more serious eyre of the itinerant justices, which handled anything involving venison — and which, until 1217, could sentence poachers to death or maiming. After 1217 the going rate dropped to mere imprisonment or a fine, which is either progress or simply a sign that the crown had run out of patience for executing quite so many peasants over a deer.

If you’re plotting a story with a poacher hero, the stakes were entirely real, and so was the vast, resentful bureaucracy standing between him and dinner.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Tournaments: Sport, Status, and Sudden Death

Tournaments are one of those things everyone assumes they understand from films — knights, lances, “hurrah” — and almost none of that popular picture survives contact with the actual sources.

Early tournaments, which became popular around 1170, were barely distinguishable from actual warfare: sharpened weapons, no “foul” strokes, no forbidden tactics, and groups of knights quite happily ganging up to waylay a single opponent. The only rules that existed were about honouring refuges where a knight could rest and rearm, and capturing an opponent for ransom rather than simply killing him. Fatal accidents happened anyway — in 1095, Count Henri III of Louvain invited his own vassal Jocelyn of Vorst to joust against him, Jocelyn reluctantly agreed, and the resulting blow to the chest killed the Count outright. Awkward for everyone involved.

Over the following centuries, tournaments professionalised. Mêlée combats involving twenty to two hundred and fifty contestants gradually gave way to the individual joust; armour and weapons for the tournament field began to diverge sharply from what was actually useful in real combat, becoming heavier and more specialised; and by the 15th century, tournament armour had become so expensive that some wealthy knights had to have “loaner” armour made up for their guests. The English crown eventually tried hard to regulate the whole business — Edward I limited each competitor to three armed esquires in 1292, after decades of tournaments repeatedly collapsing into actual riots (the Boston fair of 1288 famously turned into one that burned down part of the marketplace).

Financially, it was a genuine gamble: winners could claim an opponent’s horse and armour, or a ransom, while an ageing knight who could no longer win found himself sliding, quite literally, into poverty. One surviving fabliau describes a knight who lived entirely off ransom money and fell into destitution the moment he got too old to keep winning — the medieval equivalent of a sportsman who never planned for retirement.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Trespassing Your Way to a Better Living

Beyond gathering firewood and gleaning grain, medieval villagers had a whole further toolkit of low-level, calculated rule-breaking that court records preserve in wonderful, petty detail — because the fines involved were consistently cheap enough to make the risk worth taking.

Some tricks were almost comically direct: deliberately letting animals through a gap in a hedge to graze on the lord’s crops, or driving livestock onto a field before the gleaning was officially finished. Others were quieter land grabs. One villager fenced off a piece of common meadow with a ditch and railings so his neighbours in two nearby settlements lost their traditional grazing rights there entirely, and was simply ordered to remove it once caught — no lasting punishment for the years of free use he’d already gotten. At one Surrey manor, twenty-one different men were found keeping cattle, pigs, and in some cases up to two hundred sheep on the lord’s own pasture without permission, for fines running to only a couple of pence each.

The pattern holds up remarkably consistently across the records: when a fine amounts to a few pence and the benefit gained is worth considerably more, rational peasants took the gamble, got caught some of the time, paid up cheerfully, and kept doing it. It wasn’t reckless lawbreaking so much as a shrewd cost-benefit calculation repeated across an entire village, year after year — exactly the kind of quietly self-interested, resourceful behaviour that made “grasping peasant” such a persistent stereotype in medieval literature, even as the same literature praised neighbourliness and charity in the next breath.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Staging a Medieval Wedding Feast (or Funeral)

Staging a proper medieval feast — whether a wedding, a funeral, or simply a grand annual dinner — meant coordinating a genuinely enormous supporting cast, and the detailed notes one elderly Parisian husband left for his very young bride give an almost step-by-step blueprint for exactly how it was done.

Known to English readers today simply as “the Goodman of Paris,” he explained that a host with the right money and connections could hire virtually anything needed for a big event — even the venue itself, renting a grander house than his own from some absent nobleman for the occasion. A cook could be engaged complete with his own crew, responsible in turn for hiring the porters, water-carriers, and even security to keep out gate-crashers. A separate, trusted household officer went shopping alongside the cook specifically to prevent the two of them colluding to pad the bills — a genuine, recognised risk the Goodman warns about repeatedly, citing real cases of dishonest servants who inflated prices and pocketed the difference. Decorations, sauces, and sweets could all be ordered ready-made from specialists: candied orange peel and rose sugar from the spicer, garlands from a professional chaplet-maker, even cheese wafers bought in ready-baked rather than made at home.

One small, thrifty detail rounds out the picture nicely: leftover candle stubs from the feast were carefully collected and returned to the wax chandler afterward, who melted them down into fresh candles and knocked a little off the price of the next order in exchange — proof that even the most lavishly staged medieval feast still kept half an eye on the household accounts the morning after.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Reading for Pleasure: Caxton’s Medieval Bestsellers

By the late 15th century, a genuinely new leisure activity was quietly reshaping medieval England: reading for pleasure, made possible by William Caxton’s introduction of the printing press to the country in the 1470s.

Caxton’s own choices as a publisher give a good sense of what a literate 15th-century audience actually wanted to read. In 1481 he published a beast-fable collection about a cunning fox, intended as a moral lesson about avoiding life’s “daily deceptions” but reading, in practice, as pure comic entertainment — a medieval ancestor of the kind of trickster-versus-pursuer cartoon slapstick that would still be making audiences laugh five centuries later. For readers after something more sweeping, Caxton also printed a landmark collection of King Arthur legends, compiled by an English knight and drawing together familiar figures — Arthur, Guinevere, Merlin, Lancelot — alongside less universally remembered ones like Tristram, Isolde, and Sir Bedevere, written in English despite its French title.

For a slightly racier taste, an English translation (by Geoffrey Chaucer himself, no less) of a 13th-century French “handbook for lovers” — an allegorical dream-narrative wrapped around a genuinely bawdy core — had already been circulating in manuscript form for a century by the time printing arrived, and remained popular enough to survive in several lavishly illuminated copies. Taken together, these bestsellers make a rather charming point: for all the religious duty and gruelling manual labour that structured most of medieval daily life, by the century’s end there was a real and recognisable reading public chasing exactly the same things modern readers still chase — trickster comedy, sprawling legendary adventure, and a decent romance.

Visit westerbone.com for more insights into medieval historical fiction.

Why Nobody Loved Their House

We like to imagine medieval peasants living out their days in the same cosy cottage their grandfather built, patched and loved for a hundred years. The archaeology says otherwise, and it’s a genuinely startling correction to make.

Most peasant houses were built to last about one generation — roughly twenty years — before they were simply abandoned and a new one put up. Not on the same spot, either, and not even facing the same direction: excavated village sites show houses rotated by ninety degrees, moved to a different corner of the plot, sometimes flipped entirely, generation after generation. The old structure, rather than being lovingly preserved, usually just became a shed for the animals or the plough.

Part of this was pure practicality. Timber-framed, wattle-and-daub houses with thatched roofs and no foundations simply didn’t last. Once damp got into the mud walls they began to dissolve, and a family inheriting a decayed house often had two years, by manorial custom, to knock it down and start again. But there’s a more interesting explanation lurking underneath the practical one: sons inheriting the tenancy don’t seem to have minded starting fresh. There’s no sign in the records of grief over losing the house one grew up in, no clause in wills protecting the ancestral walls.

What people were fiercely attached to was the land itself — the strips in the open field, the croft, the family name attached to a particular holding for generations. Home, in other words, wasn’t a building. It was wherever the hearth happened to be pitched that decade. A useful thing to remember next time a story leans on a character’s misty-eyed devotion to the house their father built: the house probably wasn’t there anymore, and nobody much cared.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

The Man of the House Who Loved to Cook

It wasn’t remotely beneath a medieval man’s dignity to take a genuine, hands-on interest in what was cooked in his own household — quite the opposite, in fact, since food touched directly on both a family’s public standing and a husband’s own private comfort, and some of our best surviving evidence for medieval cooking comes precisely from men who cared enormously about getting it right.

Francesco Datini, a wealthy Italian merchant, left behind genuinely detailed instructions for exactly the dinner he expected on arriving home: “A good broth with fat cheese of one kind or another to eat therein… eggs, fish… and many good figs and peaches and nuts… and look to it that the table be well laid and the room well cleaned.” He was fussy about ingredients too, once instructing a servant buying veal to specifically ask for “fine veal for that gentleman from Prato” to ensure good service, and there’s even a hint in his letters that he occasionally cooked a little himself. The Goodman of Paris showed an identical hands-on streak in the guide he compiled for his young wife, right down to warning her how to spot watered-down milk: “Say to the woman who shall sell it to you that she give it not to you if she have put water therein… it will turn.”

Men also had a practical reason for this interest that women of the household often lacked: they were the ones most likely to travel, and so the ones expected to bring back genuine treats from further afield. A young wool merchant regularly returning from business trips to Calais brought his mother preserved ginger and saffron on one occasion, and six sugar loaves and a dozen pounds of currants for a colleague on another — proof that even hard-headed businessmen kept half an eye on the family shopping list while away.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Orphans, Stepparents, and Village Guardianship

Given how routinely disease and accident could remove one or both parents, medieval English villages needed a working system for orphaned children — and they had one, even though it looked nothing like formal adoption, which simply didn’t exist as a legal concept.

When a child inherited land but was too young to hold it, the manorial court typically assigned a guardian the use of that land specifically in exchange for housing, feeding, and raising the child until they came of age. These arrangements were often quite deliberately self-interested and forward-planning: a common structure had the guardian using the orphan’s land for a fixed number of years, at the end of which the orphaned heir — frequently now old enough to marry — would wed one of the guardian’s own children, neatly merging the two households’ interests and land. One case shows a man granted guardianship of three orphaned girls’ land for six years, on explicit condition that the eldest marry a specific young man once the term was up.

Stepparents were common too, given how often widowed parents remarried, and the records show the full emotional range you’d expect: some genuinely affectionate wills treat stepchildren identically to a testator’s own children, splitting bequests evenly between them, while other cases turn genuinely violent, including at least one recorded incident where a mother’s own children by her first marriage killed her second husband after he pushed her to sell off property that would otherwise have gone to them.

There was no formal legal category equivalent to modern adoption, but there was clearly no shortage of practical, community-enforced mechanisms for making sure an orphaned child with land didn’t simply fall through the cracks — even if the guardian’s motives weren’t always purely charitable.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

The Wild Man of Orford Castle

In around 1165, fishermen off the coast of Suffolk reportedly caught something genuinely strange in their nets — a wild, hairy, naked man, unable or unwilling to speak, who was held prisoner at Orford Castle for months before eventually escaping back into the sea. The chronicler Ralph of Coggeshall wrote it up roughly forty years later, and the way he tells it says almost as much about medieval attitudes as the “merman” himself.

According to Ralph’s account, the man ate whatever food he was given (squeezing raw meat between his hands to drain out the juice first), retreated to bed at sunset without fail, showed no reaction whatsoever inside a church, and — when guards grew curious about what language he might speak — was tortured, including being hung up by his feet, in an effort to make him talk. He never did. Eventually allowed into the sea under heavy guard with three lines of nets strung around him, he simply dived under them repeatedly before finally escaping for good. Ralph himself couldn’t decide what he’d actually been: “a mortal man, or some fish pretending human shape, or an evil spirit hiding in the body of a drowned man” — and then, almost as an afterthought, notes that “so many wonderful things of this kind are told by many to whom they happened,” as though this was simply one report among many similarly strange stories reaching him.

What’s most striking, reading it now, isn’t really the mystery of who or what the man was — it’s how completely unremarkable Ralph finds the torture itself, recorded without a flicker of moral comment, purely as an interesting detail in an already strange tale. It’s a small but genuinely useful reminder that medieval chroniclers weren’t neutral, dispassionate journalists by modern standards, however much their surviving accounts can read that way at first glance.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Managing Prostitution in Medieval Towns

Medieval English towns handled prostitution with a genuinely uneasy compromise — officially condemned as sin, practically tolerated as an unavoidable fact of urban life, and managed through deliberate physical segregation rather than any serious attempt at outright suppression.

Officially sanctioned “stews” (brothels) operated in specific licensed locations — Sandwich in Kent, Cock Lane near Smithfield in London, and above all Southwark, on the south bank of the Thames, where the trade sat under the direct legal authority of the Bishop of Winchester, who collected rent from the brothel-keepers on his land. This gave rise to the enduring nickname “Winchester geese” for the prostitutes themselves. Local ordinances tried to keep the trade at least nominally orderly: brothel-keepers had to be male, women were required to stay with a client the whole night to avoid being accused of illicit “night-walking,” and unlicensed operators working outside the designated zone faced the pillory. Street names still echoing this history — variants on “Grope Lane” turn up in Bristol, London, Oxford, Southampton and York, invariably clustered near markets and shops.

The tolerance had real limits, though, and those limits tightened sharply through the 15th century. Behaviour that had gone largely unremarked before 1400 came under increasingly harsh official scrutiny: Coventry’s 1492 ordinances targeted barmaids and alewives suspected of doubling as prostitutes, and Gloucester’s 1500 regulations ordered both prostitutes and their clients placed on public display in the marketplace. This wasn’t really about prostitution suddenly becoming more common — it reflected a wider shift in how urban authorities thought about moral regulation, with local secular courts increasingly taking over responsibility for policing sexual behaviour that earlier generations would simply have left to the Church courts entirely.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Medieval Legal Attitudes Toward Women

The formal 1180 legal definition of a married woman — “every married woman is a sort of infant” — tells you almost everything about medieval English law’s baseline attitude toward women, and the practical consequences were genuinely far-reaching.

On marriage, a woman’s property automatically passed to her husband’s control for as long as he lived. Canon law permitted a husband to beat his wife if he judged her “lazy or disobedient” — not, in fairness, an unlimited licence, since manor court records show neighbours did sometimes intervene when violence seemed excessive, but a real and legally sanctioned power all the same. A wife’s infidelity was judged far more harshly than a husband’s (for the straightforward biological reason that pregnancy made a woman’s infidelity visible in a way a man’s rarely was), and words like “womanish” and “effeminate” functioned as genuine insults against men — Edward II’s perceived effeminacy was actually cited as a contributing factor in the plot that eventually overthrew and killed him in 1327.

Women were formally barred from university, from holding responsible government or legal roles, and — under a 1215 legal reform — even from bringing most criminal accusations to court in their own name, except for a narrow set of cases: their husband’s murder (but only if he died in her arms), the loss of an unborn child, and rape. Manor court records also preserve a wonderfully petty running theme of women fined for “scolding and quarrelling” — one 1449 Yorkshire case shows two women repeatedly fined for arguing with the same third woman, who was in turn fined for arguing back with both of them, a small but vivid snapshot of ordinary village friction being formally logged and monetised by the manorial court system.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

City Money: Public Debt and Urban Taxes

Medieval town finances would look, on paper, weirdly familiar to a modern city council — building maintenance, public safety, the eternal headache of the budget — right up until you notice the bit about bonds sold to fund a daughter’s wedding.

Italian city-states formalised citizen lending into a genuine public-debt instrument called the monte, which issued shares in the community’s debt paying a fixed rate of interest — Venice’s monte Vecchio paid a steady 5% in 1270 and, by 1313, owed investors over a million ducats. A close relative, the monte delle doti (dowry fund), let families deposit a lump sum in anticipation of a much larger payout at their daughter’s marriage — Florence created the first one in 1424, with interest rates running as high as 21% over a seven-and-a-half-year term, a startlingly modern-looking savings product wrapped around a thoroughly medieval purpose.

Taxes, meanwhile, fell unevenly and everyone involved seemed to know it. English poll taxes graduated sharply by class — 4 pence per head in 1377, but by 1379 the rate ran from 4 pence at the bottom right up to 6 pounds 13 shillings for bishops — and by 1380–81 had flattened again into a blunt, resented mean of about 1 shilling per person over fifteen. The burden landed hardest on small shopkeepers, artisans, and modest landholders, who owned just enough easily-valued property to be taxed but lacked the wealth or connections to wriggle out of it — a genuinely direct line runs from this specific tax policy to the 1381 Peasants’ Revolt.

Public debt and grievance-driven tax revolt: not, it turns out, purely modern inventions.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

A Merchant Family’s Lavish Medieval Funeral

A medieval funeral was a genuinely fast-moving, torchlit affair, and the surviving accounts of one London merchant family’s mourning rituals show just how much money and social display could ride on getting the send-off right.

With no cold storage, burial followed death within a day or two wherever possible. The body was washed by the household’s women, anointed and blessed by a priest, wrapped in a shroud, and — before roughly 1300 — carried to the graveyard on an open bier rather than in a coffin, in a torchlit, men-only procession after dark. Because news travelled slowly and distant relatives often couldn’t reach the funeral in time, a “month-mind” memorial feast was held four weeks later specifically to let them catch up and pay their respects properly.

A prominent family of London wool merchants left detailed accounts of exactly this kind of staged mourning through the 1480s. For the month-mind feast after the family patriarch’s death, they hired a cook and two spit-boys for a shilling, but splashed out on a professional butler as well, purely to impress the assembled guests. A full year later, at the “year-mind” feast marking the anniversary and formally ending the mourning period, the same cook was rehired at a considerably higher fee — evidently worth it, since the family brought him back again for the next family funeral, this time employing a friend purely to source wild fowl, meats, and spices from named London tradesmen and to hire sixteen full sets of pewter dishes for the occasion.

By London custom, once a husband’s debts and funeral costs were settled, his remaining estate split cleanly into thirds: one to the Church and charity, one to his widow, and one shared among the children — a formula that, in more than one recorded case, left an enterprising widow remarkably well provided for.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Words That Meant Something Else Entirely

Nothing marks you out as an outsider faster than getting the words wrong, and medieval English had a habit of using words to mean the near-opposite of what they mean today.

Calling a woman “nice” was no compliment at all — it meant fussy, and described a wife who nagged and found fault with everything. Calling a child “naughty” was far worse than it sounds now: the word meant “nothing, not even human,” and was reserved for murderers and rapists, not disobedient toddlers. A clever child, confusingly, was “silly” — meaning sweet and innocent. Praising a friend’s cooking or poetry as “amazing” wasn’t flattering either; it meant bewildering and confusing, as if lost in a maze, while “astounding” implied something had literally hit you hard enough on the head to see stars.

Beyond vocabulary, accent and language marked you out just as sharply. Ordinary English sounded almost foreign by modern standards; churchmen, lawyers, and scholars conducted their business in Latin; and royalty and nobility spoke a form of French well into the 14th century, a fading but still-prestigious mark of good breeding. Strangers, foreigners (from a different county), and aliens (from a different country) were automatically the first suspects whenever anything went wrong locally — missing sheep, a dried-up stream, any unexplained misfortune. During the 1381 Revolt of the Commons, Flemish immigrants living in London became a particular target for mob violence, in part because they’d originally been invited over specifically for their weaving skills; it was said that anyone unable to pronounce “bread and cheese” correctly must be Flemish, and was fair game for the crowd on that basis alone.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Sieges, Chevauchée, and Life on Campaign

Sieges in fiction tend to mean one dramatic battering-ram moment. Real medieval sieges were slower, grimmer, and considerably more about logistics than heroics.

A siege typically opened with an offer of surrender terms and assorted threats rather than an immediate assault — if no terms were offered at all, the attacker could simply pillage and slaughter at will, which gave both sides a strong incentive to negotiate first. A defender might promise to surrender if no relieving force arrived within a set period, commonly one to three months, buying time for a rescue while avoiding the worst consequences of a forced storming. If talks broke down, the attacker moved on to filling ditches, battering walls, and building siege engines, while the defenders responded with their own engines, boiling oil and water, and small raiding parties slipping out through side gates.

Disease, rather than combat, was often the real killer on both sides — in one 1415 siege, dysentery reportedly killed more people than the actual fighting, not helped by the fact that neither side generally had enough cooks to stop starving, exhausted troops from eating half-cooked meat and spoiled bread.

Then there’s the chevauchée — the deliberately unglamorous alternative to a siege, a raid of “fire and sword” designed to pacify a region by simply destroying its crops and buildings rather than capturing anything at all. It’s brutally cost-effective: the raiding army essentially supplies itself from whatever it plunders along the way, no expensive siege engines required. A landholder caught in its path had grim options — retreat to a castle and watch the surrounding fields burn, or try to bribe the raiders to go and ruin someone else’s harvest instead, a “truce” that rarely lasted long before the raiders came back for a second payment.

Real medieval warfare, in short, was mostly about mud, patience, and starving people out — not a single glorious charge.

Browse all historical mystery titles by M. J. Westerbone at westerbone.com/books.

Board Games, Football and Medieval Pets

Leisure in medieval England ranged from the genuinely gentle to the outright dangerous, and the surviving records of board games, football and pet-keeping give a real, textured sense of how ordinary people actually spent their time off — when they got any.

Board games were more varied than the usual chess-and-draughts assumption suggests: Nine Men’s Morris boards, using holes rather than lines, survive carved into cathedral cloister seats at Canterbury, Gloucester, Norwich and Salisbury, and even into a church pillar in Chester — quite literally graffiti left by bored medieval clergy. Chess itself reached England from Spain by around the 12th century, evolving gradually into something close to the modern game by about 1475. Football, by contrast, was closer to organised chaos than sport in any modern sense: a Gloucester Cathedral carving from the early 14th century appears to show players using hands as well as feet, injuries (including a visibly broken arm in the same image) were common enough to be unremarkable, and London banned the game outright in 1314 with essentially no effect on actual play — a 1333 County Durham manor court record shows officials struggling for months just to get residents to name the players still defying an earlier ban.

Pet-keeping, meanwhile, was a genuinely widespread and cross-class habit: dogs, cats, red squirrels, rabbits and tame songbirds were common, with genuinely exotic choices for the wealthy — Edward I’s queen, Eleanor, kept a pair of parrots, and a 13th-century Bishop of Durham was noted for personally feeding his two pet monkeys peeled almonds. One 14th-century priest complained that many of his fellow clergy clearly cared more for their pets than for the actual souls in their care — a grumble that, however unfair to any individual priest, does at least confirm that plenty of medieval clergymen were keeping pets in the first place.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

The Cistercians: White Monks Who Wanted to Start Over

The Cistercians, medieval Europe’s great monastic reform movement, began in 1098 as a genuinely deliberate act of protest — a group of French monks who simply walked away from a prosperous Benedictine abbey because they thought it had grown too comfortable, and ended up transforming the entire shape of Western monasticism within a single lifetime.

The breakaway group settled at Cîteaux, near Dijon, and after a charismatic later leader, St Bernard, founded a daughter house at Clairvaux, a formal set of shared guidelines bound every new Cistercian abbey to identical practices — complete with an annual inspection (“visitation”) from the founding abbey and an annual gathering of every Cistercian abbot at Cîteaux itself, the “general chapter.” Unlike the Benedictines’ black habits, Cistercians wore undyed white wool, a deliberate emphasis on poverty that led one contemporary to compare a gathering of them to “a flock of sea-gulls.” Early Cistercian churches were correspondingly austere — coloured glass, carpets and wall paintings were initially banned outright as wasteful indulgence — a stark contrast to the richly decorated Benedictine and Cluniac interiors of the same period.

The order’s growth was genuinely explosive: from its first English house at Waverley in 1128 (with a Welsh foundation at Tintern following in 1131), Cistercian abbeys spread rapidly to Rievaulx and Fountains in Yorkshire and beyond, absorbing an entire smaller reforming order (the Savignacs) along the way in 1147. By the later Middle Ages, though, the original sharp differences with the Benedictines — including disagreements over decorative art — had genuinely softened, with plenty of later Cistercian churches embracing exactly the kind of ornamentation their founders had originally rejected.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Rector, Vicar, or Chaplain? Sorting Out Medieval Clergy Titles

“Rector,” “vicar,” and “chaplain” get used almost interchangeably in a lot of casual medieval fiction, which would have genuinely confused anyone actually living under the system, since the three titles marked real, meaningful differences in income, security, and status.

A rector held the full “benefice” of a parish outright — every scrap of its land, tithes, and revenue, with no one standing between him and the money. A vicar existed specifically because wealthy institutional patrons — bishops, monasteries, cathedrals, later university colleges — were legally permitted to make themselves rector of a parish and simply pocket its most valuable asset (the “great tithes” of grain) while installing a resident deputy, the vicar, to actually do the pastoral work on a fixed, bishop-assessed stipend. Counterintuitively, this didn’t automatically make vicars poorer than rectors — plenty of rectories were themselves thin and unappealing precisely because a benefice needed real income to be worth splitting between an absent patron and a resident deputy in the first place.

Below both sat the chaplain: hired and fired at will, with no security of tenure, no formal confirmation from the bishop, and generally the lowest pay and status in the entire clerical hierarchy. Chaplains covered the gaps the system left behind — running chapels-of-ease, standing in for an absent rector or vicar, or serving the countless privately funded chantries and guilds that wanted a daily mass said for the souls of their founders. A single Dorset deanery survey from 1535 shows exactly how wide the income gap actually ran: two vicars scraping by on the bare minimum £8 a year, most incumbents comfortably on £10 to £20, the wealthiest rector pulling in over £41 — while an ordinary chaplain, in the same period, might be legally capped at barely £4 to £6. Same collar, wildly different bank balance.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Master and Servant in the Medieval Kitchen

The relationship between a medieval master or mistress and their household servants ran on a genuinely familiar mix of hierarchy, hard bargaining, and — more often than popular stereotype allows — real personal warmth, and the surviving correspondence between actual employers and staff captures both sides with disarming honesty.

One book of practical household advice warns bluntly that hired helpers are “commonly tiresome, rough and prone to answer back… and ready to break into insults and reproaches if you do not pay them what they ask when the work is done” — advice on managing awkward staff that would sound entirely unremarkable in any modern management handbook. Genuine domestic flashpoints survive too: Margaret Paston complained in a 1459 letter that the family’s newly hired steward flatly refused to keep the daily household accounts the way the Pastons always had, insisting on his own weekly method instead and seeing no reason to change. Yet warmth ran alongside the friction just as clearly. One Italian merchant, deeply fond of guinea-fowl and convinced of their health benefits, sent six of the birds to a sick servant with the brisk, affectionate instruction: “Look to it that you eat them, for you could eat naught better, or more wholesome, and I will go on purveying them for you.”

The Goodman of Paris captured the expected balance neatly in his advice to his young wife: hire and manage the servants firmly, but “if one of your servants fall ill… take thought for him full lovingly and kindly.” Distance and authority were expected, certainly — but so, evidently, was a genuine sense of mutual obligation running in both directions.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

The Twelve Days of Christmas, Medieval Style

The medieval Twelve Days of Christmas, running from 25 December to 6 January (Epiphany), was a genuinely continuous stretch of celebration rather than the modern song’s countdown of escalating gifts — though the underlying spirit of extravagant, slightly exhausting festivity translates surprisingly well across the centuries.

Christmas Day itself opened with Mass and the reciting of Christ’s genealogy by candlelight, followed by feasting that formally ended the four-week Advent fast — a beginning rather than a climax, since the celebrations properly built from there. Subsequent days carried their own dedicated meanings: St Stephen (26 December), St John the Evangelist (27th), Holy Innocents’ Day (28th, commemorating the children killed by Herod), and New Year’s Day, reframed by the Church as the Feast of Christ’s Circumcision specifically to distance it from older midwinter customs — Archbishop Wulfstan was condemning “heathen rites” associated with the date as early as 1008. Villeins were excused from working the lord’s land throughout the Twelve Days, and lords traditionally provided a feast for their tenants, though on plenty of manors this was more a genuine bring-and-share affair, with villeins expected to contribute food themselves.

Holy Innocents’ Day developed one of the period’s most charming customs: the election of a “Boy Bishop,” a choirboy given the honour (and, at cathedrals like Winchester and York, the actual duty) of leading Mass for the day — first recorded at Salisbury in 1222, with a small ceremonial mitre purchased for the role by 1225. Households and royal courts also chose a “Lord of Misrule” (sometimes a “Bean King,” selected by whoever found a hidden bean baked into a cake) to preside over a day of deliberate role-reversal and licensed chaos — a tradition that lasted at the royal court right up until 1553, when the accession of the more austerely Catholic Mary Tudor quietly ended it, more for its association with the previous regime than for any real theological objection.

Explore the complete Draychester Chronicles reading order and book collection.

Plows, Crop Rotation, and the Medieval Harvest

Farming in medieval England was less a triumphant pastoral idyll and more a decades-long game of “how do we keep everyone alive until next year,” and the numbers explain why.

Fields were worked under either a two-field system (half cultivated, half left fallow each year) or a three-field rotation (a third wheat, a third barley or other crops, a third resting), with the fallow ground doing quiet, invisible work: grasses growing on it pulled nitrogen from the air back into the soil, ready for the next planting. Even the fallow field wasn’t idle, though — it got ploughed twice, once to turn under the previous crop’s residue and weeds, once again to aerate it. Nobody was getting a year off in medieval agriculture, least of all the soil.

The choice of plough mattered more than you’d think. Wheeled ploughs worked nicely in light soil but clogged in heavy clay; foot ploughs did the reverse; hook ploughs were the tool of choice for stiff ground or uneven terrain, since the smaller ploughshare shrugged off roots and stones more easily. Farmers also switched ploughs by season — foot ploughs for damper winter soil, wheeled ploughs once summer dried things out.

And the payoff for all this careful management? Before improvements kicked in, a typical yield was just four to five bushels harvested for every bushel of seed sown — compare that to twenty-times yields in the modern Netherlands, and you start to appreciate exactly how thin the margin between “adequate harvest” and “famine” really was. One bad summer, one flood, one outbreak of livestock disease, and the whole careful system tipped straight into crisis. It’s not melodrama when a medieval novel treats a poor harvest as a genuine catastrophe — it’s just arithmetic.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

Medieval Money 101: Livre, Sou, and Dernier

Nothing kills a bit of medieval fiction faster than a character casually paying “fifty pounds” for a loaf of bread, so let’s sort out how money actually worked — and, importantly, why the answer changes depending on which side of the Channel you’re standing.

England ran on pounds, shillings, and pence — twelve pence to a shilling, twenty shillings to a pound — the same basic structure that survived, remarkably, right up until decimalisation in 1971. Cross into northern France, though, and the same three-tier structure reappears under different names: the livre, the sou, and the denier, with twelve denier to a sou and twenty sou to a livre. The pound itself often wasn’t a physical coin at all, in either country; it was more of an accounting notation, a tidy way of keeping the books rather than something you could actually drop in a well and wish upon. In practice, the actual coins jangling in anyone’s purse varied hugely in value depending on their metal content and how much silver had been quietly shaved off the edges by the last three people who handled them.

Things got messier still during the Hundred Years War, when England and France both experienced a wave of coinage debasement — essentially, governments quietly making coins with less actual silver in them to stretch their money further, a medieval version of printing more banknotes. The English penny had managed to hold its silver content steady (92.5%, weighing about 1/240 of a pound) from 1279 all the way to 1344 — genuinely impressive fiscal discipline for the period — before being reduced in stages: a fifth less by 1351, another sixth by 1412, another fifth by 1464. France’s own coinage went through comparable rounds of debasement over the same period, driven by much the same wartime pressure on the treasury.

The practical upshot for anyone writing medieval fiction: a coin in 1250 was not worth the same as the same coin in 1400, prices genuinely did creep up as currencies were quietly debased, and any character handling money — English or French — would have been half-consciously assessing whether the coin in front of them was full weight or a clipped disappointment. It’s the medieval equivalent of checking your change twice.

Step into 14th-century England—start reading The Draychester Chronicles today.

The Village Church and Its Secrets

The village church gets cast, in most fiction, as a place people visit on Sundays and funerals and otherwise ignore. The reality was considerably livelier — and, frankly, a bit more useful.

Every parish church needed at least one relic before it could even be consecrated, so somewhere in that unassuming stone building was a saint’s bone, a scrap of cloth, or — if the parish was feeling ambitious — a “mysterious statue of the Virgin” that had supposedly washed ashore or been found while ploughing. Inside, a small chest held the good stuff: a gold or silver chalice, a paten, an alms basin, cruets, candlesticks, and altar linens, most of which the priest brought out only when actually needed and otherwise kept locked away, because medieval villages had thieves too.

But the church wasn’t just a treasury with a spire. It was the closest thing a village had to a community centre. It hosted markets, served as an occasional courtroom, held weddings and dower exchanges at its door or porch, and was the venue of choice for dancing, wrestling, banquets, and religious plays. Merchants sometimes set up booths inside it and slept there overnight to guard their goods — which tells you a lot about medieval property crime, and rather less about medieval reverence for sacred space.

There’s a dark footnote too: unwanted newborns were sometimes left on the church porch or in the graveyard, in the hope that someone — anyone — might take them in.

So: less “quiet Sunday obligation,” more “village hall, courthouse, market, and social club, with occasional actual church services.” The multi-use community space, thirteen centuries early.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Castle Design Through the Centuries

Ask someone to draw a “medieval castle” and you’ll almost certainly get the same picture: tall stone towers, crenellations, maybe a drawbridge. What you won’t get is any sense that castle design actually evolved quite dramatically over four centuries, largely in response to who was trying to knock them down.

It starts with the motte-and-bailey, the 11th-century classic: an artificial hill (the motte) built from stone, earth, and rubble, topped with a wooden or stone tower, the whole thing ringed by a wooden fence, hedges, and ditches. They were quick to build — a 30-foot motte could be raised by 50 men in 40 days — which made them the flat-pack furniture of medieval fortification: fast, functional, not especially glamorous.

The shell keep, arriving in the late 11th century, looked like a stone doughnut from above: outer walls with storerooms and living quarters built into them, wrapped around a central courtyard. Some got a second ring of walls, towers, gatehouses, and a portcullis for good measure.

Then came the circular keep in the 12th century, and this is where the Crusades start showing up in the architecture. Crusaders came home with ideas borrowed from fortresses in the Holy Land — large round stone towers with thick walls, supplemented by rectangular halls, kitchens, chapels, and craft buildings, plus a proper two-to-three-storey gatehouse behind a ditch and drawbridge. They also brought back “archer’s loops”: narrow slits, wider on the inside than the outside, designed to let a defender shoot out while giving an attacker almost nothing to aim at.

So the next time a fantasy castle in a book or film has archer’s loops on a motte-and-bailey mound, know that somewhere, a medieval architect is quietly judging the anachronism.

Uncover medieval intrigue—grab your copy of The Draychester Chronicles.

Inside a 13th-Century Manor House

Let’s do a proper walkthrough of a 13th-century manor, using one particularly well-documented example — a bishop’s estate whose account rolls happened to survive in unusual detail.

A manor wasn’t just “a big house.” It was a whole functioning settlement: one or more villages, a fortified dwelling for the landholder, a church or chapel, mills, ovens, fields, forest, and at least one water source (ideally running water, for reasons that will become obvious to anyone who’s read about medieval sanitation). This particular manor’s set-up started as a classic motte-and-bailey, with a stone keep containing a barracks, well, armoury, and stores, all protected by a ditch and a bridge that could be pulled up in a hurry.

By the 13th century it had grown an outer stone wall, three turrets, a square tower, a round tower, and two gates — a proper upgrade from “wooden fort on a hill.” Inside, the main hall measured a genuinely impressive 66 by 43 feet, lit at night by wax candles in iron holders, its walls hung with tapestries for formal dinners (and, rather less glamorously, used to hang hog carcasses from when the bishop wasn’t in residence — waste not, want not).

The bailey, meanwhile, was the working end of the operation: a cluster of wooden buildings including a bakery, brew house, dairy, dovecot, dyer’s house, kennels, mews, stable, and smithy. Two granges held hay and grain — one could store sixty meadows’ worth of hay, conveniently enough for a single royal visit, should the king ever drop by unannounced (he wouldn’t, but you’d want to be ready).

It’s a useful corrective to the “castle equals fairy-tale palace” image: a working manor was closer to a self-sufficient village with excellent security than a stately home.

Discover The Draychester Chronicles medieval mystery series on Amazon.

Getting, Keeping, and Losing a Fief

Inheriting a fief sounds simple enough: wait for your father to die, collect the deeds, done. In practice, medieval landholding was less “here are the keys” and more “here is a small war waiting to happen.”

The overwhelmingly normal way to get a fief was to inherit it or marry into it — widows and children of a landholder were often given rights to support themselves from the estate. Getting land as an outright gift was rare, and when it did happen it tended to come with faintly absurd conditions: a rose, a few pounds of pepper, a sparrow hawk, or an egg, handed over annually as a symbolic “rent.” Somewhere out there, a medieval bailiff spent his career collecting eggs from a minor knight and calling it estate management.

You could also land a fief by being appointed to an office that came with attached land — a castellan or bailiff managing property for the crown or a bishop — or, in the classic underhand method, by backing the winning side in a war. The Norman Conquest of 1066 is essentially this tactic executed at continental scale.

Losing a fief was rather more varied. There were three respectable routes: military defeat, dying without heirs, or forfeiture for disloyalty or heresy. Dying without heirs turned out to be surprisingly hard to achieve, since “heir” stretched to children, siblings, parents, aunts, uncles, and cousins — reversion to the landholder for lack of anyone at all mostly happened during genuine catastrophes like the Black Plague. Fiefs on contested borders also had a habit of simply being captured and occupied by the nearest hostile army, with the original landholder restored if and when someone won it back.

For a novelist, this is gold: every fief is one bad harvest, one lost battle, or one childless marriage away from changing hands entirely.

What Is a Fief, Really?

If you’ve ever pictured medieval England as a tidy pyramid — king at the top, dukes below him, then earls, then knights, then peasants, all standing in a neat org chart — I’m afraid we need to talk. Medieval people never drew that pyramid. We did. Centuries later. With hindsight and a flair for oversimplification.

The word “fief” itself was a bit of a mess. Medieval writers used it to mean almost any kind of property, and nobody was writing cheerful pamphlets about “the feudal system” — that term wasn’t even coined until 1614, safely after the Middle Ages had finished happening. A proper, settled definition of a fief (land held by someone above peasant status, with obligations owed to a bigger landholder up the chain) only really solidified around the 12th century, and even then it varied wildly by region.

Fiefs probably grew out of the Carolingian “benefice” — a grant of land from the crown or the church to someone for life, in exchange for military service rather than rent. When the Carolingian empire fell apart in the late 9th century, a lot of these benefices quietly merged with the office-holder’s own family land, and custom gradually allowed big fiefs to be passed down by inheritance rather than granted afresh by royal favour each time.

Here’s the bit that surprises people: plenty of medieval landholders didn’t think of themselves as sitting on a rung of anyone’s ladder at all. They thought of their land as, well, theirs. Their duties to a liege lord were treated as personal and social obligations — a matter of honour and friendship — not a strict legal quid pro quo for the property. It’s less “corporate hierarchy” and more “extremely serious mutual favour system with swords.”

So next time someone describes the feudal system as a rigid pyramid, feel free to gently point out that the people living in it never got the memo.

You broke the Pre-Order Record!

Just a brief update as I wanted to thank everyone who pre-ordered the latest book. We absolutely smashed it by launch day on the 14th with 290 pre-orders. That was a new record for the Draychester Chronicles series. Also a big thanks to anyone who left an Amazon review. Leaving a review helps enormously with Amazon’s ranking algorithms and means the series gets promoted to even more fans of medieval crime fiction.

Follow the Bishop’s reluctant officials, Will, Bernard and Osbert as they tackle their most dangerous investigation yet. Can they hope to survive Oxhaven’s lawless streets? If you haven’t already, order Death of the Scholar now.