Food, Survival, and the Medieval Market: Putting a Meal on the Table

Food, Survival, and the Medieval Market: Putting a Meal on the Table

Today I want to learn more about how people bought food in medieval Britain, and what the simple act of putting a meal on the table might have felt like in a world fully controlled by the seasons, status, and uncertainty.

In the early medieval period, most people were living in small rural villages where money was scarce and survival really only depended on the land. For ordinary families, “buying” food often did not mean handing over coins at all. Instead, people relied on what they could grow, gather, or raise themselves. Small strips of land were cultivated with grains like barley and oats, while vegetables such as beans, onions, and cabbage filled garden plots. Livestock, if a family could afford it, provided milk, eggs, or occasional meat. There was a strong sense of connection to the seasons, but also a constant awareness that a poor harvest could mean hunger. Markets existed, but they were not the centre of everyday life for most villagers.

By the 11th and 12th centuries, as towns had started to grow larger, weekly markets were becoming more common and had started to shape how food was obtained. These markets were often granted by royal or noble charter and they quickly became social places. Farmers and traders would arrive very early in the morning with carts or baskets, in hopes of selling their grain, vegetables, cheese, salted fish, or freshly baked bread. The atmosphere must have been a mixture of excitement and necessity, with the sounds of bargaining filling the air. Coins had become more common, though barter still played a big role. Even in these growing towns, many people worked as day labourers, they took whatever job they could find, from carrying goods to helping on building sites. Their income was unpredictable, and there must have been a constant worry about illness or lack of work. For many people though, market day was not only about buying food but also about socialising, sharing news, and an opportunity to take a brief break from their mundane routine.

In the 13th century, towns expanded even further and trade networks had started to improved. Specialist traders had begun to appear, including butchers, bakers, and even fishmongers, they sold their goods from permanent shops or sometimes stalls. Guilds formed to regulate quality and prices. Food prices could rise during shortages, and there must have been anxiety when their income did not stretch quite far enough.

For the majority of people, bread remained the main food. The type of bread someone could afford was dependant on their place in society, from coarse dark loaves for labourers to fine white bread for wealthier households. Buying bread was often a daily task, and the smell of baking must have been tempting. Ale was also a common purchase, as it was safer to drink than water in many areas. 

The Black Death in the mid-14th century brought dramatic change. With so many lives having been lost, labour became more valuable, and wages started to rise. Markets managed to recover, but the atmosphere must have been very different, one of grief and possibly uncertainty. At the same time, those who lived through it sometimes found they could afford better food than before, including more meat or dairy. 

By the late medieval period, in the 15th century, towns were well established and markets and shops formed a regular part of life for many people. Imported goods such as spices, dried fruits, and wine became more available for wealthy people, which was due to the growing trade links with Europe. For ordinary people, however, the weekly market still remained central to their lives. The seasons continued to dictate what was available, and preserving food by salting, drying, or pickling was essential to survive the winter months. 

The effort and uncertainty that surrounded something as basic as food, must remind us how hard survival was for many.

Do you think the strong connection medieval people had to seasons and local markets made communities feel closer, or did the constant risk of scarcity create more anxiety than comfort?

Image info:

Artist: Workshop of Master of the City of Ladies 

Title: Scène de marché ou de foire

Date: 1400 – 1405

Collection: Bibliothèque nationale de France

The Mordaunt Divorce Scandal: Reputation, Royalty, and Ruin in Victorian Britain

The Mordaunt Divorce Scandal: Reputation, Royalty, and Ruin in Victorian Britain

I have been trying to find out more about the real lives and experiences of people in the past, and I came across a story that feels almost like a Victorian drama brought to life. It is the story of the Mordaunt divorce scandal, it reveals just how fragile reputation could be in a society obsessed with respectability.

Sir Charles Mordaunt was a wealthy baronet  and he married Harriet in 1866. At the time Charles was 30 and Harriet was 18. At first glance their marriage seemed to fit the expectations of their class. Marriage among the aristocracy was often as much about social position as about affection, and outward appearances mattered enormously. But their relationship soon became difficult. Harriet was a lively and sociable woman who was fond of the attention that came with the London society, but Charles was more reserved. The pressures of maintaining a perfect image in a society that scrutinised everything, must have been huge, particularly for a young woman who was  still finding her place in the world.

By 1868, rumours had began to circulate about Harriet’s behaviour. Victorian high society could be extremely unforgiving, and even gossip could cause scandal. The following year, events took a dramatic turn when Harriet confessed to her husband that she had been unfaithful and suggested that their infant daughter might not even be his. This admission would have been devastating, not only emotionally but socially. For Charles, there was the humiliation and obvious anger, but also the knowledge that his family name was now under threat. For Harriet, she may have had some fear, shame, and perhaps  even a sense of isolation in a world that offered women very little room for mistakes.

In 1869, Sir Charles filed for divorce on the grounds of adultery, he named several prominent men as co-respondents these even  included the Prince of Wales, whi became the future King Edward VII. The involvement of such a high-profile figures made the case into a national sensation. Newspapers followed  every detail, and the public watched with fascination. Victorian society found it both shocking and captivating in equal measure. The scandal clearly exposed the double standards of the Victorian age, where male indiscretions were more often that not overlooked but women faced condemnation.

As the case progressed, Harriet’s mental health sadly became a central issue. She was declared mentally unfit. Whether her condition was a result of a genuine illness, the strain of public scrutiny, or a even maybe a combination of both is difficult to know, but it is impossible not to imagine the emotional toll. The court ultimately granted Sir Charles a separation rather than a full divorce at first, leaving the situation unresolved and prolonging the uncertainty.

For years the case just lingered on, this shows  the slow and complicated nature of Victorian divorce law. Finally, in 1875, the marriage was formally dissolved. By then, the scandal had already left a scar. Harriet lived the rest of her life mainly away from society, while Charles got custody of their daughter- which was standard for the time  The public attention did gradually fade, but the consequences lasted her entire lifetime.

When you think about Harriet Mordaunt’s story, do you feel she was treated more as a cautionary tale than as a person?

Image info:

Date: 1865

National Portrait Gallery

Photograph of Harriet Mordaunt

Between History and Legend: Why Robin Hood Still Captures Our Imagination

Between History and Legend: Why Robin Hood Still Captures Our Imagination

Today I want to take a look at a figure who, even today lives somewhere between history and legend. Someone who carries with him a real sense of mystery. That person is Robin Hood. For many centuries he has stood as a symbol of resistance and fairness.

The earliest traces of Robin Hood appear in scattered references from the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries. At the time England was a country controlled by strict hierarchy, heavy taxation, and huge social divides. Forest laws were harsh, and massive areas like Sherwood were reserved for royal hunting. This made survival difficult for those who lived nearby. It was during this time of growing frustration that the name “Robin Hood” begins to surface. It is sometimes used almost as a nickname for outlaws. Whether there was one man or several that inspired the name is unclear. But the idea of a skilled fugitive living out if the reach of the controlling elite clearly captured the imagination. For ordinary people who usually felt powerless, such a figure may well have represented someone who could cause both fear and hope. 

By the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, Robin Hood had become a character in popular ballads. These early stories like, A Gest of Robyn Hode, paint a very different picture from the noble hero that many of us know today. He is often portrayed as a yeoman, not an aristocrat, and his conflicts are usually with local officials rather than the king. They reflected the lives of working people who gathered in taverns or around fires. In these tales, Robin and his companions share meals, argue, laugh, and face danger together. There is a sense of camaraderie and survival, it does suggest that listeners could relate to these stories. They may have felt some comfort by the idea that loyalty and laughter could matter more than wealth or even status.

During the sixteenth century, England was changing again. The Tudor period brought with it stronger central authority and a growing interest in national identity. During this time, the legend began to change again. Robin Hood was increasingly linked to the reign of King Richard I and set against Prince John, giving the story a more moral meaning. He also started to be portrayed as a dispossessed nobleman, clearly emphasising a society that was entirely confined by rank but also fascinated to tales of justice. This change really shows how each generation reshaped him to reflect its own era. The idea of a rightful figure being pushed aside may have given feelings of sympathy towards him and a belief that honour will survive hardship.

The May Day celebrations of the late medieval and early modern period helped to firmly establish Robin Hood’s place in popular culture. Villages put on plays and games where the locals dressed as Robin, Marian, and the Merry Men. These festivities were fun but also had meaning, they allowed communities to briefly flip social rules and celebrate together. Taking part must have brought a sense of freedom and a shared feeling of identity. 

By the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, historians and writers began collecting and publishing the old ballads. Making sure the legend would never be forgotten. The Victorian era in particular embraced Robin Hood as a romantic hero of the greenwood, they emphasised his honour and generosity. This interpretation reflected the Victorian ideals about morality and social responsibility. 

The twentieth century continued the story of Robin Hood. Turning the stories into film, television, and children’s literature. He has become a global figure. Each retelling changing his character slightly, sometimes emphasising rebellion, sometimes kindness, but always returning to the idea of standing up for others. 

The reality of Robin Hood is not one of a single life story but a story evolved from many voices. He represents the frustrations of the poor, the moral questions of changing societies, and the hope that fairness is possible. Whether he began as a real outlaw or simply as a symbol, his legend has survived because it speaks to something human: the desire to believe that even in difficult times, someone will stand up for what is right.

Do you think the appeal of Robin Hood says more about the past he may have lived in, or about our own continuing need to believe in fairness and resistance?

Image info:

Date:1475

Malcolm III and Queen Margaret: A Partnership That Shaped Medieval Scotland

Malcolm III and Queen Margaret: A Partnership That Shaped Medieval Scotland

I have been discovering more about Scottish history, a topic I find fascinating.  Today I want to look at Malcolm III and Queen Margaret, a king and queen whose partnership reshaped Scotland not only politically, but spiritually and culturally.

Malcolm III who is often known as Malcolm Canmore, and was born into a Scotland that was overshadowed by uncertainty. He was the son of King Duncan I, and grew up in the shadow of his father’s downfall in 1040, when Macbeth seized the throne. Malcolm spent many years in exile in England, an experience that must have affected him profoundly. Living away from his home in a country where he was dependent on the protection of others, he must have learned patience and resilience, but he also would have learned the importance of alliances. When he did finally return to Scotland and defeated Macbeth in 1057, he reclaimed the throne but he was not just a man seeking power, but he was someone who understood just how fragile kingship could be.

In the early years of his reign, Malcolm focused mainly on strengthening his authority and securing Scotland’s borders, particularly against England. Although Malcolm had found refuge in England, the political landscape had changed dramatically once he had become king. The England that had sheltered him had changed after 1066 by the Normans. Border tensions and the constant need to demonstrate his power, meant that Malcolm could not rely on his past alliances. While he may have felt some connection to England, his duty was to Scotland, and defending his country was paramount.

His first marriage was to Ingibiorg Finnsdottir, who had Norse heritage. It brought stability, but it was his second marriage that would truly transform his court and his legacy. In around 1070, he married Margaret, who was an English princess who had been forced to flee to the north after the Norman Conquest. Margaret had suffered displacement and a great deal of uncertainty, and she may well have felt both relief and apprehension arriving in Scotland. 

Margaret brought with her a deep religious devotion. She was raised in a cultured environment and she was very well educated.

She carried clear ideas about faith, charity, and reform and that would influence Scotland massively. Malcolm, although he was known his for bravery and his generosity, he was not formally educated and is said to have relied on Margaret in order to help him read books and religious texts. Their marriage appears to have been one of genuine respect, with Malcolm supporting her reforms even when her beliefs were different from his own. You can only imagine their conversations, Margaret speaking passionately about faith and order and Malcolm listening with interest.

As queen, Margaret became determined to reform the Scottish Church, at the time the church followed a mixture of local customs. She worked to encourage alignment with the wider European practices, she promoted regular church attendance, the proper observance of Lent, and even reform among the clergy. These efforts showed her belief that the fact that faith could strengthen both society and the monarchy. She also founded more churches and monasteries, including the abbey at Dunfermline, and turned it into a centre of worship and learning. As we know, change can be difficult, but her sincerity and compassion appear to have helped her win over support.

Margaret’s influence extended way beyond religion. She was known for her charity, she often fed the poor and cared for orphans and pilgrims. Accounts describe her as personally tending to those in need, these actions show a genuine empathy and humility. Having his queen devote herself to others may have even reinforced Malcolm’s own reputation for generosity, and together they created a court well known for its hospitality and kindness.

Their family life was also important to them. They had eight children together, many of whom would go on to make their own influence on Scotland’s future, including sons who became kings. Despite the responsibilities of ruling, their appears to be genuine tenderness that suggest their marriage was more than just duty, but also in affection. The pressures of leadership, the threat of conflict, and the expectations placed on both of them must have been immense, but they seem to have drawn strength from one another rather than push then apart.

In 1093 during renewed conflict with England. Malcolm tragically fell at the Battle of Alnwick on the 13th of November. Margaret, who herself was already unwell, is said to have received the news only shortly before her own passing on the 16th of November. The loss must have been heart-breaking, it was not only the end of a marriage but of a shared vision that had shaped a generation.

Do you think Malcolm would have ruled very differently without Margaret’s influence, or did their partnership simply bring out qualities that were already there?

Image info:

Date: 1562

Artist: Forman Armorial made for Mary, Queen of Scots.

National Library of Scotland

Malcolm III and Margaret of Wessex

Stepping Into Society: Debutantes and the London Season in Victorian Britain

Stepping Into Society: Debutantes and the London Season in Victorian Britain

I have been learning about life during the Victorian period, so today I want to discover more about debutantes and the London Season. This was a tradition that for generations influences the lives of young women stepping into society for the very first time.

The idea of formally presenting young women to society began to take shape in the eighteenth century, but it became more recognisable in the late Georgian and Victorian periods. For aristocratic and wealthy families, society was not just about socialising, it was about maintaining their status, forming alliances, and securing advantageous marriages. A daughter’s “coming out” was the moment she was considered ready to enter the adult world. For the young women themselves, this moment must have felt both exciting and daunting. Their behaviour, appearance, and reputation mattered massively.

By the early nineteenth century, the London Season had become a firmly established tradition. It usually began in the spring and ran all the way through the summer months, it was timed to coincide with Parliament sitting, which ensured the presence of the political and social elite in the capital. Families would move to their London homes and the city would be full of balls, dinners and garden parties, there were visits to the theatre and the opera. For debutantes, the highlight was often the formal presentation at court, where they would be introduced to the monarch. Etiquette was hugely important, from the curtsey to the carefully chosen white gowns. Many young women must have felt such intense pressure to perform perfectly, knowing that one small mistake could become the subject of gossip.

Throughout the Victorian era, the Season grew even more elaborate. Society placed enormous emphasis on respectability and femininity, and debutantes were expected to embody grace, modesty, and charm. Mothers and chaperones closely supervised their daughters, they guided their conversations and ensured they were never alone with a man. While some young women could well have enjoyed the excitement of new friendships and all the events, but others may well have felt constrained by the constant scrutiny and the knowledge that their futures were being assessed by potential suitors and their families.

By the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the Season reached its peak. Balls at townhouses and venues like Almack’s became symbols of social prestige. Newspapers reported on the most fashionable dresses and the most sought-after young women. But beneath the glamour, there was often an undercurrent of anxiety. For many families, the Season was expensive, and the success was often measured by whether a suitable marriage was made. Some debutantes must have felt the expectation, aware that their happiness could be tied to how they were perceived during these few short intense months.

The First World War did bring a turning point. Many families faced loss and financial strain. Although the tradition did continue in a more subdued form, it never fully regained its former glory. By the time Queen Elizabeth II ended royal presentations at court in 1958, the formal ritual had largely faded out.

Do you think the London Season offered young women opportunity and excitement, or did it place too much pressure on them to conform to society’s expectations?

Image info:

Artist: Robert Hope

Date: 1922

Collection: Aberdeen Art Gallery

One agreement. One king. A moment that reshaped power forever. The Magna Carta still shapes the rights and freedoms that many of us take for granted today.

One agreement. One king. A moment that reshaped power forever. The Magna Carta still shapes the rights and freedoms that many of us take for granted today. 

Have you ever wondered about how a document that was created to settle a medieval political crisis came to be seen as a symbol of freedom, not juat in England but across the world? I have been learning more about the Magna Carta, and what fascinates me most is how  something that was created out of conflict, fear, and a mistrust slowly grew into an idea that still influence how we think about rights today, over eight hundred years after it was signed.

In the early thirteenth century, England was ruled by King John, his military failures in France had damaged his reputation, and the cost of trying to retake lost land had led to heavy taxation. Obviously not popular. These demands for more tax did not just affect the lords; they filtered down through society, affecting merchants, townspeople, and even peasants who were already living close to the edge. Many must have been worried about the future, unsure how much more would be taken from them.

Among the barons, frustration was turning into open resistance. They believed the king was ruling through force rather than with any fairness, and they feared that they would lose their lands and even their influence. But this was not simply a power struggle. It was also about trust, or rather the lack of it. The relationship between the king and the ruled had broken down, and the country stood on the edge.

In June 1215, the opposing sides met at Runnymede, a meadow beside the River Thames. It was neutral ground, and was carefully chosen, maybe because both sides were worried about being betrayed. King John agreed to a charter designed to restore peace. The Magna Carta promised limits on royal authority, protection from unlawful imprisonment, and the right to justice that could not simply be bought or denied. For the barons, it was reassurance that their rights would be respected. For the population at large, even if they were not directly included, the idea that the king himself should follow the law must have felt somewhat revolutionary.

Despite the hope the document had given, the agreement quite quickly unravelled. Within only months, mistrust started to resurface and civil war broke out, known as the First Barons’ War. Although King John had sealed the charter, he had had no real intention of accepting the limits of his authority. He had seen the agreement as something imposed on him under duress rather than as a fair settlement. The barons, meanwhile, were doubting his sincerity. The lack of trust meant the peace was extremely fragile right from the start, almost like a pause rather than a real resolution. The charter was declared void by the pope in August of the same year and England once again faced instability.

But the story did not end there though. After King John’s death in October 1216, the government of his young son, Henry III, reissued the charter in an attempt to bring unity back to the country. Over the next few years it was revised and confirmed several times, gradually becoming an integral part of the political fabric.

Although the Magna Carta mainly only protected the interests of the elite at first, which is not a huge surprise.  It did help to establish an important principle, that rulers had responsibilities as well as rights. This idea slowly filtered into the wider culture. Even though peasants still faced harsher conditions and had very little real power, the idea that authority would be limited began to take hold. 

During the later Middle Ages, the Magna Carta was sometimes used in legal disputes. Especially when royal officials were accused of acting in an unfair way. Its clauses about the right to lawful judgment and to a fair process began to go beyond just the noble class. Justice was still extremely uneven, but the expectation that it should follow rules rather than just a persons whim gradually influenced how the law was understood. This slow change helped to shape the foundations of the legal system that would slowly develop over the centuries.

By the seventeenth century, England was, once again facing political upheaval. Conflicts between the monarchy and Parliament led many to look to the Magna Carta as proof that a king should not have unlimited powers. Lawyers and politicians used it to argue for rights and freedoms, and sometimes interpreted it in ways that went way beyond what its original intent was. Even if these interpretations were not entirely accurate, they carried weight. The Magna Carta became a symbol of resistance and a reminder that even authority should be accountable.

These ideas spread way beyond England. In the eighteenth century, the colonists of North America used the charter when arguing for their own rights and freedoms. Its influence can be seen in the language they use, like due process and a fair trial, these appear in the United States Constitution. So in many ways, a medieval peace agreement helped to shape the foundations of modern democracy and law.

In Britain, many of the Magna Carta’s original clauses were eventually repealed or evolved. But a few key principles remain, especially those connected to the rule of law and fair legal process. Even though it mainly has no direct legal force, it still remains powerful. Politicians, judges, and campaigners still refer to it when discussing freedom and justice.

What makes the Magna Carta so remarkable is not just what it said in 1215, but how its meaning has evolved. For the barons who demanded it, it was about protecting their privileges. For later generations, it represented a freedom. For ordinary people today, it represents the belief that everyone deserves fairness under the law, no matter what their status is.

The charter did not create equality overnight, that was not what it intended to do, and it certainly did not improve the lives for the poor immediately. But it introduced a idea: that power should be accountable. Over the centuries, that idea has been reshaped and expanded, influenced by reform, justice, and human rights across the world.

The Magna Carta feels far less like a single moment in history and more like the beginning of an ongoing conversation about authority and freedom- even today we are having similar conversations. It shows how societies build their values gradually, learning from history- the conflicts and the compromises.

When you think about how this medieval agreement still affects modern debates about justice, equality, and the limits of power, do you feel its biggest importance lies in the legal rights it helped inspire, or in the that fact that ordinary people can challenge authority and shape the future?

The Dangerous Jobs That Powered Victorian Britain’s Industrial Rise

The Dangerous Jobs That Powered Victorian Britain’s Industrial Rise

I have been trying to find out more about the real lives and experiences of ordinary people of the past, and in doing that, I found myself drawn to the dangerous jobs that were necessary to keep Victorian Britain running. It is easy to admire the beautiful and impressive buildings, the railways, and to be in awe of the industrial achievements of the nineteenth century, but behind that progress were men, women, and even children whose jobs placed them in danger. The more I learned, the more I started to wonder how it must have felt to wake each morning knowing your job could harm you, but having very little choice but to carry on.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century, Britain was still tied to forms of labour that were more laborious, and agriculture remained one of the most common occupations for working class men. Farm workers were  faced with long hours, and they were out in all weathers, often using sharp tools and working with unpredictable animals. Injuries were extremely common, and there was little to no protection if someone was hurt. For many rural families, the fear of illness or injury must have always been on their minds, because losing the ability to work could and often did mean losing everything. 

As the Industrial Revolution began to speed up, dangers became even more obvious in the fast-growing factory towns. Textile mills, especially in the early part of the century, were filled with loud and dangerous machinery with fibres were flying everywhere and fast-moving parts. Children were also often employed because their small hands could reach into the tight spaces. This made them especially vulnerable to getting hurt. Many must have felt a mixture of exhaustion and anxiety, they worked long hours in noisy and dusty rooms where accidents could happen in a split second. For families, sending children to work was rarely a choice that they made lightly, but their wages were desperately needed in the home.

By the 1820s and 1830s, coal mining had become one of the most hazardous jobs in Britain. Miners worked deep underground in cramped, dark conditions, breathing in coal dust and facing the constant threat of a collapse or even an explosion. The communities that built up around the mines often shared a strong sense of togetherness, because everyone understood the risks. When disasters did occur, grief would be felt through the entire town. One tragedy that shows just how dangerous mining could be happened at the Hartley Colliery on the 16th of January 1862 in Northumberland. A massive beam from the pumping engine snapped and it fell down the single shaft and blocked the only exit. Two hundred and four men and boys were trapped underground with no way to get out. For days, families waited in freezing conditions as rescuers tried desperately to reach them, but tragically none survived. The disaster shocked the entire nation and led to new laws that required mines to have more than one shaft, this showed how loss and tragedy were often the one thing that could force change.

Railway construction was exciting but introduced even more new dangers. The rapid expansion of the rail network required thousands of labourers, that were often called navvies, to dig tunnels, lay tracks, and move heavy materials. They worked with explosives in unstable ground, and used primitive equipment, which made accidents even more common. But the work also offered relatively good pay which obviously drew men from across Britain and Ireland for work. Many may have felt a mixture of pride and fear, knowing they were helping to build something transformative while risking their lives in the process. Maybe they saw the risks as something that was expected if you wanted to be paid. 

Urban growth also created hazardous jobs above the ground. Chimney sweeps who were often young boys in the earlier part of the century, climbed down narrow flues filled with soot, they risked suffocation and long-term illnesses. Their experiences must have been frightening, they were offered very little protection. Over time though, growing public concerns led to reforms, showing the gradual  change in attitudes.

By the late Victorian period, factory work was still dangerous despite the increased regulations. Heavy industry, including ironworks and shipbuilding, exposed the workers to extreme heat, loud noise, and dangerous machinery. While reforms had begun to improve safety slowly, many still lived with the constant awareness that a single mistake could have serious consequences. But there was also a sense of pride in skilled labour, and many workers found identity and community through their trades.

Their work shaped the modern Britain, but it came at a cost that is often easy to overlook today. It makes me wonder about the balance between progress and safety, and how different their lives might have been if stronger protections had existed earlier on.

Do you think the benefits of Victorian industrial progress can ever truly be separated from the human cost paid by those who worked in its most dangerous jobs?

Image info:

Hartley Colliery disaster

Illustrated London news

Date: 1864