Creating Memories - A Medieval Romance (The Sword of Glastonbury Series Book 6)

by Shea,Lisa

  Flames of delight blossomed in Caradoc’s eyes, and he climbed onto a nearby table. The surface groaned under his weight, but held steady.

  “You men!” he cried out to the roiling masses. “Tomorrow we will go out to hunt down this Erik. But I want to make it clear – he is MINE. He is to be brought to me without one scratch on him. And then we shall have an arena!”

  Cries of delight and anticipation thundered around her, ringing in her ears. She hoped by all that was Holy that she could get to Erik before Caradoc’s clan put into motion their plans for revenge.

  http://www.amazon.com/Sworn-Loyalty-Medieval-Romance-Glastonbury-ebook/dp/B00FBE82O6/

  Medieval Dialogue

  I’ve been fascinated by medieval languages since I was quite young. I grew up studying Spanish, English, and Latin, and loved the sound of reading Beowulf and the Canterbury Tales in their original languages. I adore the richness of medieval languages. How did medieval English people speak?

  There are three aspects to this. The first is the difference between written records and spoken language. The second is the rich, multi-cultural aspect of medieval life. And the third is how to convey this to a modern-language audience.

  Let’s take the first. Sometimes modern people equate the way medieval folk would talk, hanging around a rustic tavern, with the way Chaucer wrote his famous Canterbury Tales. Something along the lines of this (note this is a modern translation, not the original Middle English version):

  “Of weeping and wailing, care and other sorrow

  I know enough, at eventide and morrow,”

  The merchant said, “and so do many more

  Of married folk, I think, who this deplore,

  For well I know that it is so with me.

  I have a wife, the worst one that can be;

  For though the foul Fiend to her wedded were,

  She’d overmatch him, this I dare to swear.”

  Sure, it seems elegant and rich. But did worn-down farmers sitting around a fireplace with mugs of ale really talk like this?

  Do we think the London street-dwellers in the 1600s skulked down the dark alleys emoting like Shakespeare –

  Two households, both alike in dignity

  In fair Verona, where we lay our scene

  From ancient grudge break to new mutiny

  Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.

  And, in the 1920s in Vermont, did farmers really wander down their snowy lanes murmuring to their farming friends, a la Robert Frost:

  Whose woods these are I think I know.

  His house is in the village though;

  He will not see me stopping here

  To watch his woods fill up with snow.

  As someone who lives in New England, I can pretty resolutely say “no” to that last one. And, given my research, I’m equally content saying “no” to the previous two. There is a big difference between poetry written with deliberate effort and the way “normal people” talked, flirted, cajoled, and laughed day in and day out. People simply did not talk in iambic pentameter. I’m a poet and even I don’t talk in iambic pentameter :).

  Modern people sometimes think of the medieval period in terms of the plays we see. We imagine actors on a stage, speaking in formal, stilted language, carefully moving from scene to scene. But medieval life wasn’t like that. It was a rich cacophony of people struggling hard to survive amongst plagues and crusades, with strong pagan influences and the church trying to instill order. People fought off robbers and drove away wolves. They laughed and loved in multi-generational homes. It was a time of great flux.

  England - A Melting Pot

  England wasn’t an isolated, walled-off island. It was continually experiencing influxes of new words and sounds. The Romans came and went. The Vikings came and went. The French invaded. Nearly all of the English men headed off to the Crusades, leaving behind women to gain strength and position. The men returned with even more languages. Pilgrims went to Jerusalem. Merchants arrived from all over. This was a true melting pot.

  So, in part because of this, Middle English was a rich, fascinating language. People in this time period had a wealth of contractions, nicknames, abbreviations, and combinations of words they used. Often people could speak multiple languages - their old English, the incoming Norman language, Latin from church, and random other words from tinkers, merchants, and pilgrims they encountered. Medieval people had all sorts of words for drinking, for fighting, for prostitutes, you name it. They had slang and shortcuts just like any other language does. After all, these are the people who turned “forecastle” (on a ship) to “foc’s’le” and who pronounce the word “Worcester” as “Woostah.”

  But, here’s the trick. With the medieval language being so rich, varied, intricate, and full of fascinating words, how can we bring that to life for a modern audience?

  Centuries of Change

  Let’s start with a basic issue - most modern readers simply cannot understand authentic medieval dialogue. They don’t have the grounding in Middle English, French, and Latin that would be required. Even the fairly straightforward, basic Chaucer works look like this:

  And Saluces this noble contree highte.

  Modern readers generally wouldn’t know that “highte” meant “was called” as in “And Saluces this noble country was called.”

  This happens over and over again. Words change meaning. In the Middle Ages, if you abandoned your wife it means you subjugated her. You got her under your thumb. It didn’t mean you left her - quite the opposite. Awful meant awe-ful - as in stunning and wonderful. It had a positive connotation. Fantastic wasn’t great - it was a fantasy; something that didn’t exist. Nervous didn’t mean worried or agitated - it meant strong and full of energy. Nice meant silly, and so on.

  If a book was written with proper medieval words and meanings, first, even if the words are reasonably close to what we use now, modern readers would have to struggle with the spelling -

  By that the Maunciple hadde his tale al ended,

  The sonne fro the south lyne was descended

  So lowe, that he nas nat to my sighte

  Degrees nyne and twenty as in highte.

  But, again, that is just the tip of the issue with medieval language. The word “bracelet” didn’t exist until the 1400s. Necklace wasn’t a word until 1590. The word “hug” wasn’t around until the mid-1500s. We also didn’t have the words tragedy, crisis, area, explain, fact, illicit, rogue, or even disagree! Shakespeare invented the words “baseless” and “dwindle” in the 1600s. Staircase is from 1620. A story written solely with words that existed in the year 1200 - and that still retain their modern meaning so modern readers could understand them - would be fairly basic.

  (Speaking of which, the word “basic” didn’t exist until the mid 1800s.)

  Conversely, some words we might think of as thoroughly modern, like “puke”, were also used in Shakespeare’s time. “Booze” traces back to the 1500s. And these are just the proofs we have. While “shiner” for a black eye can be traced definitively to the 1700s, it could easily have been used for centuries before then and we just don’t happen to have a letter or newspaper article which mentions it.

  It’s fair to say that people in medieval days did get black eyes and had a wealth of interesting terms for that situation. After all, it could be a rough life back then. Was one of the terms used “shiner”? Maybe, maybe not. Out of the ten fun phrases they used, probably nine of them would make zero sense to a modern reading audience. So authors strive to find phrases that provide meaning to a modern audience without being too l33t and techno-speak. It doesn’t make sense to completely avoid the word “bracelet” simply because it technically didn’t exist in the 1200s. Surely people in the 1200s had several words for “bracelet” and we are simply using the word modern readers understand. Similarly, people in medieval times hugged! They just called that action something else.

  Medieval people loved playing with words. They called their kids “d
illydowns” and “mitings” (little mites). They called sweethearts “my sweeting” and “my honey. They loved snapping out insults, from “dunce” to “idiot” to “pig filth” and “maggot pie.” And, again, these are just the ones that happened to get recorded.

  Medieval people loved contractions. There’s a phrase “ne woot,” meaning knows not. They’d simply say “noot”. They did this with all sorts of words.

  So writing in modern English should have this same sort of loose, fun sense to the writing. It’s important to remember that even the kings, in this era, were rough fighters. They were out with soldiers, crossing multiple countries, and experiencing a range of languages. They weren’t necessarily concerned about speaking in iambic pentameter. They were more concerned about breaking down their enemy’s walls to plunder what lay within and then drinking themselves under the table to celebrate.

  So, certainly, treasure the poetry and prose of the time. As a poet, I appreciate that immensely. But also keep in mind that people did not talk in poetry. They did not speak in fantasy-speak of Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones. They talked and laughed, flirted and cursed, gossiped and cajoled in a rich, multi-lingual, contraction-filled, sobriquet-laden dialogue which mirrors how we talk in modern times.

  About Medieval Life

  When many of us think of medieval times, we bring to mind a drab reality-documentary image. We imagine people scrounging around in the mud, eating dirt. The people were under five feet tall and barely survived to age thirty. These poor, unfortunate souls had rotted teeth and never bathed.

  Then you have the opposite, Hollywood Technicolor extreme. In the romantic version of medieval times, men were always strong and chivalrous. Women were dainty and sat around staring out the window all day, waiting for their knight to come riding in. Everybody wore purple robes or green tights.

  The truth, of course, lies somewhere in the middle.

  Living in Medieval Times

  The years in the early medieval ages held a warm, pleasant climate. Crops grew exceedingly well, and there was plenty of food. As a result, their average height was on par with modern times. It’s amazing how much nutrition influences our health!

  The abundance of food also had an effect on the longevity of people. Chaucer (born 1340) lived to be 60. Petrarch (born 1304) died a day shy of 70. Eleanor of Aquitaine (born 1122) was 82 when she died. People could and did lead long lives. The average age of someone who survived childhood was 65.

  What about their living conditions? The Romans adored baths and set up many in Britain. When they left, the natives could not keep them going, and it is true they then bathed less. However, by the Middle Ages, with the crusades and interaction with the Muslims, there was a renewed interest both in hygiene and medicine. Returning soldiers and those who took pilgrimages brought back with them an interest in regular bathing and cleanliness. This spread across the culture.

  While people during other periods of English history ate poorly, often due to war conditions or climatic changes, the middle ages were a time of relative bounty. Villagers would grow fresh fruit and vegetables behind their homes, and had an array of herbs for seasoning. The local baker would bake bread for the village - most homes did not hold an oven, only an open fire. Villagers had easy access to fish, chicken, geese, and eggs. Pork was enjoyed at special meals like Easter.

  Upper classes of course had a much wider range of foods - all game animals (rabbits, deer, and so on) belonged to them. The wealthy ate peacocks, veal, lamb, and even bear. Meals for all classes could be flavorful and well enjoyed.

  Medieval Relationships

  Some movies present a skewed version of life in the Middle Ages. They make it seem that women were meek, mild, and obediently did whatever their father or husband commanded.

  This was far from the truth!

  Medieval times were times of immense change. Men were off at the Crusades, leaving the women to run things. Christianity was trying to get a foothold, but many areas of Britain were still primarily pagan, with all the Goddess worship and female empowerment which had been tradition for centuries. The vast majority of brewers were female. Most innkeepers were female. Women’s knowledge about herbs, health, and food was respected. Healthy women were treasured as the key to a child-rich partnership.

  Medieval life was heavily focused on fertility. Farm animals had to be fertile in order to create meat to feed the family. Women had to be fertile to create helpers for the farm and household. Celebration after celebration in medieval times focused on fertility. These people weren’t shy about the topic. They watched their horses, cows, and dogs continually engage in these activities. Their festivals focused on the topic with bawdy delight. Their songs lusted about it.

  The church tried, again and again, to squelch this behavior so that all aspects of relationships could be regulated by the church. However, half of all medieval couples were together outside of a church marriage and, for those sanctified by the church, a large proportion were “sealing the deal” for a couple already pregnant.

  This was the way the medieval people looked at it: they needed to know their partner could create children. This was a key consideration for a relationship.

  The Medieval period was far from an era of Victorian prudity. Quite the opposite. People of this era celebrated fertility, felt it was wholly natural, and even felt it was unhealthy for a man or woman to go for too long without sex. The celibacy would block critical flows of the body.

  It was considered natural that a male noble might take on mistresses and that unmarried couples might seek out partners. It was the same as someone needing food if they were hungry. It was a bodily function which had to be tended to for the health of the person.

  So where does marriage fit in with this mindset?

  Medieval Marriage

  In medieval times, marriage was primarily about inheritance. It was almost separate from sexuality. Sexuality was an important part of bodily health, like eating well and getting enough exercise. Marriage, on the other hand, was about ensuring one’s lands and chattel were cared for from generation to generation. Sex, within a marriage, was focused on creating family-line children to then tend to that wealth.

  For this reason, wealthy families would put immense energy into arranging optimal marriages for their children. This was about the transfer of land far more than a love match. Parents wanted to ensure their land went to a family worthy of ownership - one with the resources to defend it from attack. It was not only their own family members they were concerned with. Each block of land had on it both free men and serfs. These people all depended on the nobles – with their skill, connections, and soldiers – to keep them safe from bandits and harm.

  That being said, both the woman and man would be consulted about the match. Their input was a critical aspect of the decision. Choices were often made with intricate selection processes. Keep in mind that the woman and her suitors would have been raised from birth to think of this process as natural. They would participate in that choice-making with an eye as to how it would secure the stability of their future family.

  Yes, villagers sometimes married for love. Even a few nobles would run off and follow their hearts. Even so, they would have first seriously considered the potentially catastrophic risks which could result from their actions.

  Here is a modern example. Imagine you took over the family business which employed a hundred loyal workers. Those workers depend on your careful guidance of the company to ensure the income for their families. You might dream about running off to Bermuda and drinking martinis. But would you just sell your company to any random investor who came along? Would you risk all of those peoples’ lives, people who had served you loyally for decades, to satisfy a whim of pleasure? It is more likely that you would research your options, map out a plan, and made a choice with suited both you and your responsibilities.

  Medieval Women

  In pagan days women held many rights and responsibilities. During the crusades, especia
lly, with many men off at war, women ran the taverns, made the ale, and ran the government. In later years, as men returned home and Christianity rose in power, women were relegated to a more subservient role.

  Still, women in medieval times were not meek and mild. That stereotype came in with the Victorian era, many centuries later. Back in medieval days, women had to be hearty and hard working. There were fields to tend, homes to maintain, and children to raise!

  Women strove to be as healthy as they could because they faced a serious threat - a fifth of all women died during or just after childbirth. The church said that childbirth was the “pain of Eve” and instructed women to bear it without medicine or follow-up care. Of course, midwives did their best to skirt these rules, but childbirth still took an immense toll.

  Childhood was rough in the Middle Ages – only forty percent of children survived the gauntlet of illnesses to adulthood. A woman who reached her marriageable years was a sturdy woman indeed.

  You can see why fertility was so important to medieval people!

  To summarize, in medieval days a woman could live a long, happy life, even into her eighties – as long as she was of the sturdy stock that made it through the challenges of childhood. She would be expected to be fertile and to have multiple children, which again weeded out the weaker ones. This was very much a time of ‘survival of the fittest.’ Medieval life quickly separated out the weak and frail. Those women who ran that gauntlet and survived were respected for that strength and for their wisdom in many areas of life.

  So medieval women were strong - very strong. They had to be. They were respected. Still, would they fight?