You Can’t Wear That!

Psalter_of_Mary_de_Bohun_and_Henry_Bolingbroke_1380-85_Abigail

You probably regard what you wear as being entirely up to you. Despite this we all conform to dress codes at various times: school uniform, no jeans in the office, evening dress, smart casual in the pub. There are, however, no laws setting out what we can and can’t wear. The fourteenth century was, of course, completely different.

Status was everything.  What you wore, what you ate and the way you spoke showed with pinpoint accuracy exactly what your position was in society. People in the upper echelons were so obsessed with status that they were buried in clothes and with possessions reflecting their rank, so that everyone would know on the Day of Resurrection what their station was. When Alais’ mother dies in The Traitor’s Daughter having lost all her possessions, Hugh puts an amber bracelet into the grave to show that she was a noblewoman.

Whenever people are taken up with their own status, they’re generally worried about other people passing themselves off as being of the same status, which is just what people started to do in the fourteenth century.

In part this led to two sumptuary laws being passed in the fourteenth century. They had different causes, but the results were the same. In March 1337 a statute banned the export of English wool and the import of foreign cloth. Foreign cloth could not be worn by anyone. Furs could only be worn by those with an income of £100 per annum. Foreign weavers (mainly Flemish) were encouraged to move to England. The intention was to frighten the Flemings and to create a royal wool monopoly. It was a protectionist measure and it failed.  Wool was England’s most valuable product. Much of it went to weavers in Flanders where it was woven into cloth. Edward III used the export of wool to coerce the counts of Flanders into being his allies against France. It was not a particularly successful policy.

In the 1340s there was a big change in the way people dressed. Clothing became more ornate and fitted. Compare the loose-fitting clothes worn in the first half of the century in this picture with the gown from the end of the century at the top of the post.

Codex_Manesse_Johannes_Hadlaub

After the Black Death (1348 – 1351) wages rose, despite the efforts of Edward III and his parliaments to prevent it. This meant that some people of lower status had more disposable income, and they used it to buy clothes or food. People who had not been able to afford them before began to buy richer fabrics and wore more fashionable clothes.

Parliament believed that inflation was caused by people wearing clothes and eating food beyond their station. In reality it had more to do with the shortage of labour leading to higher wages, although this was not the only reason. Bad harvests in the 1350s and 60s were also a factor. In 1363 Edward III passed another sumptuary law regulating what people could wear and eat.

Many people were afraid that the distinctions between gentility and peasants were becoming less marked. The legislation of 1363 allowed people with an income of £100 or more to eat and dress more luxuriously than everyone else. People were genuinely worried about not being able to tell what someone’s status was from their clothes.

Servants and artisans were not allowed to buy cloth costing more than 2 marks a length. A mark was worth 13 shillings and 4 pence which was two-thirds of a pound. No, I don’t know why either.

Ploughmen, agricultural workers and others with less than 40 shillings of goods could only wear blanket and russet wool cloth costing less than 1 shilling a length.

Regulations about what people could and could not wear were, of course, completely unenforceable and parliament asked for free trade to be reinstated in 1364. Attempts to restrict what people wore continued on and off for another hundred years.

 

Sources:

England in the Reign of Edward III – Scott L. Waugh

A Social History of England 1200-1500 – ed. Rosemary Horrox and W. Mark Ormrod

Advertisements

29 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Clothing

Medieval Church Tithes

 

Bradford on Avon Tithe Barn exterior 4

Bradford on Avon Tithe Barn Exterior

On a recent journey to Bath I drove through Bradford-on-Avon, where there is a splendid fourteenth-century tithe barn. Sadly, the weather was dreadful on that day, so the photographs are very dark, but you should be able to get an idea of the size of the barn.

There are about 200 surviving tithe barns in England of varying sizes. English Heritage, who are responsible for it, tells me that this one is 51 metres long or, if you prefer, 55.77 yards.

Bradford on Avon Tithe Barn exterior

Bradford on Avon Tithe Barn Exterior

Tithe barns were built to store a parish’s tithes. The tithe was the tenth of the crop given to the church. The object of the tithe was to provide for the parish priest, to pay for the upkeep of the church building, to provide alms for the poor. A proportion was also sent to the local bishop.

As soon as the crop had been reaped a tenth was taken from the field and stored in the barn.

Bradford on Avon Tithe Barn interor 6

Bradford-on-Avon Tithe Barn Interior

There were three different types of tithes:

  • praedial tithes, based on the income from produce;
  • mixed tithes, based on income from stock and labour;
  • personal tithes, based on income entirely from labour.

Whether you were someone who had your own land and produced your own crops, or earned your living from labour, you paid a tenth of it to the church. Income from woodland was exempt. I haven’t discovered why this should be the case.

Not all parishes had an incumbent rector, i.e. the priest responsible for the parish who lived and worked in it. Somethings this was because the rector was an institution, such as a monastery or a college. This was the case at Bradford-on-Avon, where Shaftesbury Abbey had the living. An absent rector would appoint a deputy, a vicar (from the Latin vicarious, meaning deputy) to look after the parish. The tithe would be shared between the rector and the vicar.

The barn at Bradford-on –Avon belonged to Shaftesbury Abbey, almost 30 miles away, which meant that the parish would have had a vicar.

Bradford on Avon Tithe Barn cruck roof 2

Bradford on Avon Tithe Barn Cruck Roof

The barns were not only used for storage. They were large, roofed buildings and provided shelter against snow, rain and cold. Cows could be milked inside. Ewes could be kept warm and safe during lambing. On wet days a barn provided a space where labourers could carry out tasks that would normally be done outside.

In theory, the contents of the tithe barns could be used to dispense food to people in times of need.

 

Sources:

The Companion to Cathedrals and Abbeys – Stephen Friar

Medieval Lives – Terry Jones

The English Manor c1200 – c1500 – Mark Bailey

9 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Buildings, The Medieval Church

Fortune’s Wheel

carminaburana_wheel.jpg

If she were constant and behaved reasonably, so that she was just and true to everyone, she would not be Fortune. Machaut

In last week’s about gambling I used a picture of Fortune’s Wheel to illustrate the chancy nature of such activities. In one of the comments Fragglerocking said that it wasn’t clear what it was, so I thought I would crop the picture and enlarge it a bit.

Although it was a Christian society, some people held beliefs in the fourteenth century that we would struggle to reconcile to Christianity. Fortune’s Wheel is one of them.

The basic concept is that Fortune raises men up and can cast them down again when they least expect it. It’s almost a protection against pride. All men are on the wheel and the wheel turns all the time.

No one knew better than a fourteenth-century Englishman, or woman, how randomly the wheel was spinning. At either end of the century an anointed king was deposed and, probably, murdered. Men who had been a king’s favourite were executed. The ravages of the Black Death struck as if it were Fortune herself. Both high and low were taken, even the Archbishop of Canterbury and a daughter of the king. No one could predict who might be next.

In the image above you can see a man being raised up, a king, a king losing his crown and a man with nothing. Fortune sits in the middle spinning the wheel. There are many medieval pictures showing variations of this image.

The belief in Fortune’s Wheel dated at least from Roman times and the wheel itself was a popular literary figure in the fourteenth century.  It appears in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde.  Troilus complains that Fortune has treated him unfairly and his friend points out that Fortune can’t be expected to do otherwise. If she stopped turning her wheel which raises up men and casts them down, she would no longer be Fortune.

Boccaccio used similar imagery in The Decameron, a book of tales he put into the mouths of people who had fled from Florence to avoid the Black Death.

31 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Life

Medieval Gambling

CarminaBurana_wheel.jpg

Last week we looked at the games that medieval people played, and where there are games there’s usually gambling.  Most of the games played were games of skill, but dicing and coin tossing were won or lost by pure chance, and these were the games that came in for the most criticism.

It wasn’t just the risk of huge losses involved in gambling that caused it to be frowned on, but also the locations where it took place. Gambling during mass in church must have been fairly widespread, because it was something that had to be managed in several places. There were no pews or chairs in medieval churches and the parishioners stood whilst they were in church. This must have provided good cover for men who didn’t have anywhere else to meet without drawing attention to themselves.

Gambling was rife in inns, as innkeepers acted as bankers and pawnbrokers. They would hold a gambler’s property in exchange for money so that they could continue to gamble. Many men lost everything in this way, including their clothes. This is one of the reasons why dicing was banned in many towns. Men who had very little in the way of possessions could lose them all very quickly.

Great losses weren’t limited to the poor, however. The aristocracy also gambled and they could lose much larger sums of money. Edward III lost almost £4 in one day in 1333. Using our usual guide to the value of money – the 4 pennies that represented a day’s wage for a skilled labourer – the king’s losses represent 240 days of work.

Gambling wasn’t only considered a problem generally, but it was also recognised as a specific problem in armies. Richard I banned gambling in his army when he was in the Holy Land in 1192. If a soldier was discovered gambling, he was stripped naked and whipped for three days.

Problems with gambling weren’t limited to the English. Geoffrey de Charny, the standard-bearer of the Oriflamme (the French war flag), who was killed at the battle of Poitiers in 1356, wrote a book called The Book of Chivalry. It was a subject in which he was well-versed, although some of his actions seem less than chivalrous today. He was completely opposed to gambling, which afflicted the French aristocracy as much as it did the English. He also condemned tennis, because of the wagers made on the games.

Try as I might, I have no idea why this might be, but in 1343 playing with dice while wearing a mask was forbidden by a bye-law in London.

 

Sources:

A Social History of England ed Rosemary Horrox and W. Mark Ormrod

The Time-Traveller’s Guide to Medieval England by Ian Mortimer

By Sword and Fire by Sean McGlynn

Edward III and the Triumph of Britain by Richard Barber

 

27 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Entertainment, Medieval Life

The Games Medieval People Played

1300_1320ManesseCodex_hawking

Last week we were looking at medieval holidays. It was all very well having time off work, but what did people do with it? Fairly obviously, eating and drinking played a part, but there were other activities which varied according to the time of year.

Some of them were of a fairly martial nature. Archery practice was important all year round, and men practised at the butts and at something called shooting at cock, which involved a live cockerel. I assume that this has less to do with cruelty than with the benefit of shooting at a moving target.

Other martial activities included wrestling, javelin-throwing and throwing a knife at a peg. These were fun, but were also developing skills useful in warfare.

There were ball games: handball, football and bowling. Football was a vicious game and injuries, even deaths, were not uncommon. Teams varied in size: a tithing could take on another tithing or a village another village. The distance between the goals varied according to the number of players. Bowling was a bit more sedate and took place out of doors anywhere where there was enough flat ground. A round stone was used as the bowl.

On the side of pointless entertainments were quoits, blind man’s buff and skittles. Again, these were mostly outside activities. In the summer boating and swimming were popular, but led to many fatalities.

More sedentary occupations were dicing and board games, which were played by rich and poor alike. The most popular dice games were raffle, with three dice, and hazard, with two.

One of my favourite medieval board games is merrelles, or nine men’s morris. It’s for two players who each have nine pieces in two colours, e.g. player A has white and player B has black.  The aim is for a player to get three of the pieces in a line horizontally or vertically, removing the opponent’s pieces until they only have two pieces left and can no longer play.

Nine_Men's_Morris_board_with_coordinates.svg

The board is blank at the beginning and the players take it in turn to place their pieces. If one of them succeeds in making a line of three, they can remove one of the other’s pieces. Once all the pieces are on the board, the players take it in turns to move their pieces trying to join three in a row. The piece can only be moved to an adjacent space and cannot leap over any other pieces.

It’s a very ancient game, dating back at least to Roman times. It needs no complicated equipment. The lines can be scratched on the ground and small pebbles used as the pieces.

Dancing was an activity in which everyone could take part. At certain holidays this was done round a bonfire.

The aristocracy hunted, feasted and jousted. Although these were entertaining, they also had serious uses, in that hunting provided food for the household, feasting ensured that the aristocracy were healthy and in good condition for war and jousting meant that they were well-practised when it came time to fight in a battle or skirmish. They could also play tennis. Tennis is mentioned in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde, dating from 1385, which shows that it was already fairly well-known in England. Tennis was the same game as handball, but was played with racquets.

Chess is another game mentioned in Troilus and Criseyde, as Criseyde reflects on how pleasant her life is without a jealous and controlling husband to shout ‘Checkmate!’, or ‘Chek mat!’ as Chaucer has it.

Aristocratic women probably had more leisure time than anyone else. They sewed, chatted to one another, listened to books being read aloud, or read books themselves.

 

Sources:

Life in a Medieval Village – Frances and Joseph Gies

A Social History of England 1200 – 1500 – ed Rosemary Horrox and W. Mark Ormrod

The Time Traveler’s Guide to Medieval England – Ian Mortimer

37 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Entertainment

Medieval Holidays

peasants_breaking_bread

Neither holidays nor weekends as we know them existed in the fourteenth century, although the biography of Edward II that I’m reading at the moment does talk about a holiday he took in the Fens in the autumn of 1315 much to the bemusement of his barons.

Despite this, there was leisure time and quite a lot of it. The longest period was the twelve days of Christmas. This started on Christmas day and ended on the feast of the Epiphany – 6th January. It was very handy that the longest holiday coincided with the shortest days of the year when very little work could be done anyway.  Houses and churches were decorated with holly, ivy, and bay leaves.

Shrove Tuesday, the day before Lent begins, was also a holiday. It was the last time for 46 days people could eat meat, if they had any. During Lent there was fasting from many types of food, so Shrove Tuesday was a day for eating up what was left of any of these ‘forbidden’ foods.

Easter brought another holiday: seven days without work. The second Monday and Tuesday after Easter were known as Hocktide. This holiday was celebrated by contests between men and women. The women always won.

Whitsun (Pentecost) at the end of May was followed by another week of holiday. This was when people went to watch the mystery plays if they were being performed nearby.

All of these long holidays took place during the slack period of the agricultural year, although things were starting to pick up by Whitsun.

The feast day of the patron saint of a church was also a holiday for the parish.

Most people didn’t work on Sundays and some didn’t work on Saturdays or the vigils of feasts.

A local fair was also the occasion for a day off to see the travelling entertainers and to buy things which might not be available locally.  A fair was usually held once a year.

When all these days are added together, there could be up to 115 holy days a year, in theory. On those holy days only essential work would be done, such as making sure animals had enough to eat drink and milking cows. Even during harvest most people wanted to observe holy days and cease work. If you were a servant, however, you would still have to work for many of the holy days.

In practice, many people were denied some of their holidays. It wasn’t unknown for lords of the manor to be taken to court by their villeins for allowing them only two or three days for Christmas and Easter, and correspondingly fewer holidays during the rest of the year.

Next week we’ll have a look at what people did with their leisure time.

 

Sources:

Edward II: The Unconventional King – Kathryn Warner

Life in a Medieval Village – Frances and Joseph Gies

A Social History of England 1200 – 1500 – ed Rosemary Horrox and W. Mark Ormrod

33 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Entertainment

Popular Medieval Saints

IconEcaterina

I’ve just finished reading Christine de Pizan’s The Book of the City of Ladies. Written in the first few years of the fifteenth century, its purpose was to refute various claims about the weaknesses and unreliability of women. De Pizan was the first woman known to make her living from writing and she made her case by telling the stories of remarkable women from the Bible, Greek and Roman myths, and antiquity, as well as from the first centuries of Christianity. The final section of the book concentrates on women martyred for their faith. The notes at the back of the book state that the examples chosen were popular saints in the Middle Ages and I wondered what might make one saint more popular than others.

The most popular saints were men – St Peter, St Paul, the Evangelists and St Stephen. These were men who were either with Jesus or who were important in the early years of Christianity. Since they don’t serve de Pizan’s purpose, she ignores them and chooses women. These women were martyrs, thus she ignores St Mary Magdalene, who was not only with Jesus but was also supposed to have died in France.

Like the majority of the early saints, these women have gruesome stories. De Pizan’s first three are St Catherine of Alexandria, St Margaret of Antioch and St Lucy of Rome,

St Catherine was a fourth-century martyr. According to de Pizan she was the daughter of the king of Alexandria and she inherited everything when her father died. Instead of marrying, she preferred to dedicate herself to God and remain a virgin. She was well-educated and, when Emperor Maxentius arrived to carry out an important sacrifice to pagan gods, she went to tell him the error of his ways. He sent for fifty Egyptian wise men, but they thought that convincing a mere woman that she was wrong was a waste of their time. She converted them, however, and the emperor had them killed. A sexual element enters the story now, but the emperor, despite his desire for her, had Catherine tortured and starved. This didn’t work and he had her ground between two wheels studded with sharp blades, which broke. Seeing this, emperor’s wife converted, so the emperor had her killed, which caused many more people to convert. Somewhat bizarrely, the emperor proposed marriage to Catherine. Since Catherine had dedicated her virginity to God, she refused and he had her beheaded. When she was killed milk flowed from her wounds instead of blood.

I’m not sure how the torture of St Catherine of Alexandria on a wheel led to the creation of the Catherine wheel, a popular firework for Guy Fawkes when I was a child, but it did. If you don’t know what a Catherine wheel looks like, here’s a video.

The cult of St Catherine sprang up suddenly in the 9th century and there was no mention of her in earlier stories of martyrs. This doesn’t necessarily mean that she didn’t exist, just that no early record of her has been found. She was a useful saint to have on your side since she was a bride of Christ, she was clever enough to beat the Egyptian wise men and she was considered to be the protector of the dying. She was the patron saint of young girls, students (including the clergy), nurses and craftsmen. She was popular in England and thirty-six wall paintings of her are still in existence.

St Margaret was another beautiful virgin from a well-off family, this time in Antioch. She caught the eye of Olybrius, the local prefect. She turned down his advances and he imprisoned her. When this didn’t work, he had her tortured and the instruments of torture were miraculously destroyed. This caused those who saw it to convert to Christianity. Olybrius had Margaret beheaded.

St Margaret probably did not exist and a declaration to that effect was made by the church towards the end of the fifth century. She was, however, very popular in England as well as in other parts of Europe. Her popularity arose from her promises that anyone reading her story would receive a crown in heaven; those who called on her name on their death-bed would have divine protection from devils; those who dedicated churches to her would receive anything they pray for that was useful; and pregnant women who asked for her help would be safe when they gave birth.

St Lucy of Rome was also a fourth-century virgin. She was kidnapped by a barbarian king, Aucejas. By preaching to him, she managed to convince him not to rape her. Due to her prayers, he was successful in everything he did for twenty years. God told her to go to Rome where she would be martyred. Aucejas went with her as Lucy’s servant. When she was about to be beheaded, Aucejas declared himself a Christian and died beside her.

St Lucy’s existence is so doubtful that she isn’t even mentioned in my dictionary of saints and all I can find online about her is the same story that de Pizan tells.

Like many of the women mentioned in de Pizan’s book, St Catherine, St Margaret and St Lucy provide examples of steadfastness. Despite torture and the threat of death they never waver from their paths.

 

Sources:

The Book of the City of Ladies – Christine de Pizan

The Oxford Dictionary of Saints – David Hugh Farmer

 

April Munday is the author of several books set in the fourteenth century. Find out more here.

48 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, The Medieval Church

Medieval Mystery Plays

Melford Hys Companie

Melford Hys Companie

After last week’s post about medieval dancing, there were some comments about miracle/mystery plays, so I thought we’d have a look at them.  They were medieval plays based on events from the Bible. They were usually performed at Corpus Christi or at Whitsun, both movable church feasts i.e. feasts which did not take place on the same date every year.

Corpus Christi is the Thursday after Trinity Sunday, which in turn is the first Sunday after Pentecost. Pentecost (Whitsun in England) is the seventh Sunday after Easter. For example, this year Easter is on 1st April, Pentecost is 20th May and Corpus Christi is 31st May. Easter is early this year. This will be important later.

Many towns had their cycles of mystery plays, but only those from Chester, York and Wakefield remain. There’s also a cycle from an unknown town.  A cycle of plays covered everything from Adam and Eve to the Last Judgement, with stops along the way.

The plays were performed in English by members of guilds (mysteries) as a way of showcasing their particular talents. Each guild performed a play relating to their guild. In York the Guild of Goldsmiths was responsible for the Coming of the Three Kings. In Chester it was the vintners who performed their version of the play. In York the Guild of Shipwrights put on the Building of the Ark. In Chester the Guild of Bakers presented the Betrayal of Christ. In York they were responsible for the Last Supplier

The plays were different in each town, although they were all based on Biblical stories. A few were based on the lives of saints.  In my paperback collection each play is about twelve pages long, which would take around half an hour to perform, depending on the complexity of the props and the accompanying music.

The plays were performed from the back of a wagon with two storeys. The bottom storey housed the props and the changing rooms. Curtains hid it from the audience. The top storey was the stage. This meant that the players were visible to their audience only when they performed. The wagon was pulled to various places within the town where the audience gathered to watch.

Although the plays were doubtless entertaining, that was not their main purpose. The audience saw great and meaningful events of the Bible acted out for them and became very involved in what was going on. We have moving and changing visual images thrust on us all the time on television, films and YouTube, but that was not the case in the Middle Ages. Interior walls were painted with pictures, but they remained the same until the building was redecorated. Statues were colourful and meaningful images, but they neither moved nor spoke. There were no theatres. The mystery plays literally brought the story of sin and salvation to life for them.

Some of the plays have very funny moments. The only one that I’m familiar with is Noah’s Flood, one of the Chester plays. It was used by Benjamin Britten to create a work in which schoolchildren can perform music with professionals. In the play Noah’s wife prefers to gossip and drink with her friends rather than help build the ark. They’re still gossiping when the flood arrives and she has to be forced into the ark by her sons.

The York plays are making a bit of a comeback and have been performed in York fairly regularly over the last twenty years.

Mystery plays were not the only form of acting that people could see. Morality plays were performed in Latin by clerks (men in minor orders). They had characters such as Ignorance, Humility and Covetousness. Performed in churches, they were obviously less accessible to ordinary people, but could still be entertaining. These were the precursors of the miracle plays, although they continued alongside them.

For sheer entertainment you would have to look at mummers’ plays, where the actors were disguised by masks. These were usually put on at Christmas or Easter. The plays were about a hero who had to fight evil.

Mummers still perform, usually in pubs at Christmas. I’ve seen a performance of St George and the Dragon. The most popular and the best-known of the plays, these days it’s an odd mix of the medieval, the Victorian and the modern. Father Christmas and a doctor in a top hat usually make an appearance, as well as St George, the dragon, a bishop, the king of Egypt, the king of Egypt’s daughter and a Turkish knight. There are examples on YouTube, but the quality of the audio is usually poor, as they’re either performed in front of a rowdy pub audience or outside in a howling gale.

There were secular plays as well, but only fragments of these have been found, whereas there are many examples of the miracle plays. The secular plays were probably performed by travelling musicians.

The plays used rhyme for the speeches. Since they also included music, it’s not too much of a stretch to imagine some of the lines being sung.

At the beginning of the post I mentioned Corpus Christi. It was recognised as a feast day in 1311. The miracle plays became associated with this feast and with Whitsun. The Latin plays performed in churches could be put on all year round in accordance with the seasons, but the mystery plays were performed outdoors. If the performers were to have an audience they needed to perform when the weather was good, as it often is at the end of May and the beginning of June. Even when Easter is early, as it is this year, the plays were performed on the cusp of summer.

 

Sources:

The Time Traveller’s Guide to Medieval England by Ian Mortimer

Everyman and Medieval Miracle Plays edited by A.C. Cawley

 

April Munday is the author of several books set in the fourteenth century. Find out more here.

20 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Entertainment, Medieval Life

Medieval Dance

Medieval Dancers

As I was getting ready for my tap class this week (yes, I know), I was thinking about dancing in the Middle Ages.

Most villages didn’t have a space large enough for everyone to get together, except the churchyard, so that’s where they danced. There’s not a huge amount of information about these dances, since they were danced by people who, for the most part, couldn’t write. Besides, why would they describe something that everyone knew how to do?

One of the things that is known is that there was a carolling dance where everyone held hands in a circle around one person in the middle. You can see people holding hands to dance in the picture at the top of the post. The person in the middle sang the verses of the song and everyone in the circle sang the choruses while they stepped to the right or the left. Dances weren’t probably much more complicated than that, although there was probably stamping as well. Speed probably made it more exciting and amusing, when dancers bumped into one another.

The carols did not have the kind of lyrics that we’re familiar with these days. They tended to be very bawdy, which was one of the reasons why priests complained about the dances taking place in the churchyard.

Another reason why priests weren’t keen on dancing was because St Jerome said that women dancing were the swords of the devil.  They were thought to tempt men to fornication.

For the upper classes, dancing was something that they watched as well as did themselves. Dancers were professionals who could be retained by a lord for his household’s entertainment. Usually they had their own musicians and sometimes they were also jugglers and singers.

Some entertainers were not attached to a household, preferring to travel and take up casual employment, but this could be rather dangerous. There was always the chance that they could be arrested. Men without a lord were viewed with suspicion. For all the constables of the towns they passed through knew these men could be outlaws.

The upper classes danced a bit and it was one of their favourite occupations during tournaments. Sometimes they would dance in fancy dress, just as they would fight in the tournament dressed as cardinals or aldermen.

A few dance tunes have survived from the fourteenth century. Here are two Italian tunes which were paired together – a slow dance followed by a fast dance. They’re the Lamento di Tristano and La Rotta.

Sources:

The Medieval World Complete – edited by Robert Bartlett

The Time Traveller’s Guide to Medieval England – Ian Mortimer

The Senses in Late Medieval England – C.M. Woolgar

Tournaments: Jousts, Chivalry and Pageants in the Middle Ages – Richard Barber and Juliet Barker

26 Comments

Filed under Fourteenth Century, Medieval Life

The Templars: History and Myth – A Book Review

Templars

It’s been a while since I reviewed a book I’ve read about the Middle Ages, so I thought I’d have a look at a book I’ve just finished.  The Templars: History and Myth by Michael Haag was published in 2010. The Templars were dissolved at the beginning of the fourteenth century, so I didn’t really read the book with a view to learning anything that I could use in a story. Like almost everyone else, I’m fascinated by the story of the Templars and intrigued by the idea that a group of men held in such esteem across Europe for two centuries could fall so decisively and so suddenly.

The book begins with the building of Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem from which the Templars took their name. It covers the early crusades and the creation of the Templars in 1119. After Jerusalem fell to the Crusaders in 1099, Christian pilgrims started travelling to worship there.  There were many thefts, rapes and murders before the Templars were formed to protect the pilgrims. They were created as an order of monks who were permitted to bear arms against the enemies of the church, and they also supported the Christian states in Outremer (as the region was known) in battles with the Muslims.

After the fall of the last Christian stronghold in Outremer in 1291, there seemed to be little reason for the Templars to continue. By then, however, they had become lenders to many of the kings across Europe. Their wealth brought about their downfall when Philippe IV of France thought it should be moved across Paris from their headquarters to his. The ensuing capture, torture and execution of most of the Templars in France mark the low point of his reign.

Haag sets out the history of the Templars very clearly, although it’s a fairly superficial history. This takes up only two-thirds of the book. The rest covers the mythology that rose up after the Templars were disbanded. Many of them seem to originate in the, surprisingly credulous, nineteenth century. There’s also a bit of a travelogue taking the reader to places where the Templars had bases. The final chapters look at books and films about the Templars, including one of my favourites, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. The Holy Grail and the Turin Shroud also receive mentions.

The book is easy to read and there are no footnotes to interrupt the flow of the text. Although I prefer my reference books to have footnotes, I wasn’t particularly bothered that they were missing here.

It’s a very sensible book and not as sensational as I was expecting. I’ve read things about the Templars that have more to do with the authors’ imaginations than with any researched facts. As an introduction to the Templars I think it does rather well.

One of the interesting facts in the book is that some of the French Templars who survived got married so I might write a romance about a Templar after all.

 

19 Comments

Filed under Book Review