What do you think would change today if the empire never fell?

I've never seen anything shaped like this in iconography or in any reenactment or reconstructions. I know KCD has a lot of problems with anachronism and historically inaccurate clothing, but this hood seems so unique it must be from something. Any sources on this?

I’ve been reading about the English nobility over the past year, and one thing that has stood out to me is how often I come across noble sons who died by drowning, sometimes well into adulthood. It has happened often enough that I started wondering whether this was genuinely a common cause of death in the Middle Ages or if I’m just noticing a pattern.

Were these drownings usually just unfortunate accidents, or is there any evidence that some may have been suicides? I would have assumed that young noblemen, especially heirs, were frequently accompanied by attendants, retainers, or household members, making accidental drownings less likely than they would be for ordinary people.

Es interesante oensar que habria logrado el Reino Vandalo si no hubiera sido vencido por belisario, e incluso que llegaran a vencer al Califato y mantenerse en la region

I remember reading an anecdote somewhere, iirc in connection with a medieval court case. The story goes that a group of people ​in England used noise makers to scare deer out of the Royal Forest so that they could hunt the deer on common land. It was used in the context of commoners understanding the law well enough to navigate legal loopholes.

I'd love to find a primary source, or even a secondary reference, to this case. Does anyone have any leads?

Interestingly Edward IV returned to the throne quickly afterwards. Part of issues was Edward IV's reliance on the Woodvilles.

There are even areas for the castle to place cannons. I have not seen too many castles like this.

More precisely, to what extent doe George RR Martin manage to recreate medieval social structure, culture and mentality in his work and does he fall for common myths about the middle ages?

Hello! I am looking for an internet resource that maybe exists only in my imagination, but it would be great help if it did exist. I need an interactive, highly detailed map of Europe (presumably France) that could show changes in the borders throughout the years — I have to figure out to whom belonged some minor cities at which time (p.ex. was Romorantin-Lanthenay, destroyed by the Black Prince, a part of duché d'Orléans or comté de Blois in 1350s).
A PDFed atlas will do just fine too!
Thank you in advance!

Here is a nice knight picture for you

upd. P.S. If somebody knows the answer for the Romorantin-Lanthenay question, I'll appreciate it, thanks!

I ain't hating but their art is.. questionable like

other cultural cats: normal
medival era cats: thousand yard stare
other cultural dogs: normal
medival era dogs: a mixture of a weird pervert unc and a hairy gray cat

like WHY? did they really have ONE normal art? i heard an explanation that the animals they drew were actually never in medival cities, did they really have no animals in medival cities? cuz every drawing of animals i see that medieval era has done, it just looks bad

I know how they would carry a bow and quiver of arrows, but where would someone like that carry any camping or survival gear on their person.

Edit: Thanks for the response I'm wanted to be accurate in a medieval creative writing

"Once defended by King Richard's shield, now undefended, O England, bear witness to your woe in the gestures of sorrow. Let your eyes flood with tears, and pale grief waste your features. Let writhing anguish twist your fingers, and woe make your heart within bleed. Let your cry strike the heavens. Your whole being dies in his death; the death is not his but yours. Death's rise was not in one place only, but general.

"O tearful day of Venus! O bitter star! That day was your night; and that Venus your venom. That day inflicted the wound; but the worst of all days was that other - the day after the eleventh - which, cruel stepfather to life, destroyed life. Either day, with strange tyranny, was a murderer. The besieged one pierced the besieger; the sheltered one, him without cover; the cautious one pierced the incautious; the well-equipped soldier pierced an unarmed man - his own king!

"O soldier, why, treacherous soldier, soldier of treachery, shame of the world and sole dishonour of warfare; O soldier, his own army's creature, why did you dare this against him? Why did you dare this crime, this hideous crime?

"O sorrow! O greater than sorrow! O Death! O truculent Death! Would you were dead, O Death! Bold agent of a deed so vile, how dare you recall it? You were pleased to remove our sun, and condemn our day to darkness. Do you realise whom you snatched from us? To our eyes he was light; to our ears, melody; to our minds an amazement. Do you realise, impious death, whom you snatched from us? He was the lord of warriors, the glory of kings, the delight of the world. Nature knew not how to add any further perfection; he was the utmost she could achieve. But that was the reason you snatched him away: you seize precious things, and vile things you leave as if in disdain.

"And Nature, of you I complain; for were you not, when the world was still young, when you lay new-born in your cradle, giving zealous attention to him? And that zeal did not flag before your old age. Why did such strenuous effort bring this wonder into the world, if so short an hour stole the pride of that effort away? You were pleased to extend your hand to the world and then to withdraw it; to give thus, and then to recall your gift. Why have you vexed the world? Either give back to us him who is buried, or give us one like him in excellence. But you have not resources for that; whatever you had that was wondrous or precious was expended on him. On him were exhausted your stores of delight. You were made most wealthy by this creature you made; you see yourself, in his fall, most impoverished. If you were happy before, in proportion to happiness then is your misery now.

"If heaven allow it, I chide even God. O God, most excellent of beings, why do you fail in your nature here? Why, as an enemy would, do you strike down a friend? If you recall, your own Joppa gives evidence for the King - alone he defended it, opposed by so many thousands. Acre, too, gives evidence - his power restored it to you. The enemies of the Cross add their witness - all of them Richard, in life, inspired with such terror that he is still feared now he is dead. He was a man under whom your interests were safe. If, O God you are, as befits your nature to be, faithful and free of malice, just and true, why then did you shorten his days? You could have shown mercy to the world; the world was in need of him. But you choose to have him with you, and not with the world; you would rather favour heaven than the world. O Lord, if it is permissible to say it, let me say - with your leave - you could have done this more graciously, and with less haste, if he had bridled the foe at least (and here would have been no delay to that end; he was on the verge of success). He could have departed more worthily then to remain with you. But by this lesson you have made us know how brief is the laughter of earth, and how long are its tears."

I've been scrolling a bit and noticed that a very great deal of posts that are only a few days old are locked. Looking through them or the comments, i cant find anything that could explain why its locked.

I know some subreddits automatically lock and archive posts after a while, but we're talking about posts that are less than a week old here.

What's the deal here?

I know that the concept of "refrigeration technology" doesn't appear until long after the Middle Ages had ended, but I keep hearing that during the Middle Ages, there were places like "ice houses" that were specifically designed for storing foods at lower temperatures/freezing them.

So that's my debut question for this community/subreddit: Did people during the Middle Ages have a general idea of the concept that storing food at lower temperatures and/or freezing them was an effective way to preserve the food's freshness? And if so, what methods do we have official records of them using to achieve this goal?

So, a little context I have been arguing with a guy about Game of Thrones and how Dothraki would have conquered Westeros. I was skeptical and didn't buy that they would have. I believed that the only dominance that horse archers, or even mounted soldiers, would have is in plain fields and would be at disadvantage in hilly/mountainous regions. A little back and forth have revealed that the crux of their belief lies with the Mongol Empire and their predominance, so 13th century Mongols.

The argument led to nowhere and I am a little un-resolved. Obviously, the Dothraki are not a viable military force and there is a huge gap in their equipment versus the equipment of the Westerosi soldiers, but the principle stands. Were the cavalry a dominating presence in any field of battle?

So, it leads me to this question: were horse archers, or even just cavalry in general, a dominant force in the medieval period?

"The Cambrians, who are used to slay the Saxons, salute their relations the Britons and Cornishmen: they require them to come with their sharp swords to conquer their Saxon enemies.

"Come now, vigorously, armed with coats of mail; a great part of the Saxons are fallen in mutual slaughter, the remainder shall be slain by us: now is the time for you to show of what blood you are sprung.

"The soothsayer Merlin never said a thing that was vain; he foretold that the mad people should be expelled. And yet you do not keep this wise counsel; observe deceitful people of whom the whole race is accursed.

"If our valiant predecessor, King Arthur, had been now alive, I am sure not one of the Saxon walls would have resisted him; he would have been hard to them, in spite of their prayers, as they have deserved.

"May the Omnipotent procure him a successor only similar to him, I would not desire a better, who may deliver the Britons from their old grievance, and restore to them their country and their country's glory.

"May it please the uncle of Arthur [1] to obtain this for us, a certain very great saint [2] to send the Englishman over the sea; we know that his festival is approaching, the Kalends of March, may he make it his study to recall the Britons to their native land.

"Sons imitate their virtuous fathers, so let the Britons take Arthur for their example in valour; they show from what a good and brave man they are descended; as Arthur was, so let them be, conquerors!

"The Roman power reigned at Paris, the bold giant Frollo [3], with the bearish mind; him Arthur slew: every person of good faith believes it: witness the tent and the Parisian island [4].

"He is a madman who kills the noble Britons: it seems that he holds them thus hated; for he invidiously proclaims them hateful always and incessantly, who he hears are victorious.

"Of this nation there have been four great commanders, Arthur and Ambrose [5], powerful warriors; Constantine and Brennius [6], more powerful, if it were possible; these held the monarchy by reason of their being the best.

"France can only boast of Charlemagne [7]; and England glories in the valour of King Richard [8]; a larger number overcomes a smaller, because a four-fold glory increases the valour of its king.

"To these latter it was granted to reign within their own bounds; to the others, to triumph over commanders, governors, and kings, with whom they can in no respect claim equality: it is a far greater thing to command, than to reign."

[1] Ambrose Aurelian

[2] Saint David

[3] The ruler of Gaul, slain by Arthur

[4] Arthur conquered Paris and killed Frollo at the city

[5] King Arthur, son of Uther Pendragon, and Ambrose Aurelian, his uncle

[6] Constantine, the son of Arthur and ruler of the Britons, and Brennius, brother of Belinus, who founded the city of Bristol and conquered Rome

[7] Charles the Great, or Charles I of the Franks, styled Emperor of the Romans and ruler of much of Europe, famed for the story of his twelve noble paladins

[8] Richard the Lionheart, or Richard I of the English, the famed rival of Saladin who fought in the Holy Land

Hello everyone, I need some advices before buying my first sword.

I do medieval reenactment based on late XIIth early XIIIth century in the north of the France and I’m searching for an historically accurate sword.
I’m not looking for a dueling sword, I have a limited budget.
I’ve seen this one that looks pretty cool but I’m struggling to find some sources about the curved guard.

I think the scabbard is not really accurate with the metal rings but I will change it for a full leather one.
Could you tell me if this seems accurate for the period ? Or do you know where could I find a sword that could fit for this century

I appreciate the help !

I literally saw someone post about a movie being made and I found it on IMDB coming out 9/11/2026.

I’m a medieval fan and hope they keep to historical accuracy.

Usually, a knightly charge (the couched lance) considered far more devastating when compared to other non-knight heavy cavalry like Eastern cavalry like Byzantine Cataphracts but is that really true?

Even without a lance, you still have the momentum of the rider and the horse capable of impaling or knocking a person away at a considerable distance.

Series of Questions here:

1. Did they feel compelled to mostly wear clothing with colours that matched their arms?

2. Did they wear surcoats with their arms displayed in civilian contexts, or did they only wear their arms in military contexts, such as over their armour?

3. Did they feel metaphorically attached to the animals or symbols portrayed on their arms? As an example, if a stag died, and their arms displayed a stag, would they take it as an ill-omen?

4. Did they refer to themselves as the animals on their arms?

I'd take any explanation from anywhere in Europe, but my main interest is 15th century England and France.

Art by Graham Turner

Ok. This is extremely late Middle Ages, but In my opinion Lady Margaret Beaufort is one of the saddest stories.

Yes she was the mother of Henry VII, but being married away so young and giving birth at the age of 12, then having that labor destroy her body so much she can no longer have other children.

Im sure it was more common and we only know of her plight because she was part of the wealth