Experts Analyzed Centuries-Old English Skeletons And Exposed A Strange Reality About Medieval Life

Historians are constantly trying to piece together what it was like to live thousands of years ago during the early medieval period. Back then, Britain was a very different place. The Anglo-Saxons followed the Romans across the English channel, establishing a rule that would continue for six centuries. But what have we learned about life under these early kings and queens?

Today, our image of medieval England is populated by starving peasants and a gluttonous, lazy elite — a society grossly divided between the rich and the poor. But just how accurate is this modern perception? Thanks to the work of Sam Leggett, a bioarchaeologist at the University of Edinburgh, the truth is slowly being revealed.

In April 2022 a pair of studies appeared in the Cambridge University journal Anglo-Saxon England. And in them, Leggett and her co-worker Tom Lambert challenged a number of popular perspectives on early medieval life. Now, experts are viewing the world once inhabited by kings such as Egbert and Canute in an entirely different light.

The early medieval era, sometimes referred to as the Anglo-Saxon period, began in Britain in the 5th century, when Germanic tribes migrated west from northern Europe. Displacing the indigenous Celtic people, they raised their own villages and towns, eventually splitting the country into seven kingdoms. From Northumbria in the far north to Wessex in the south, these communities thrived for hundreds of years.

Eventually, these early kingdoms were dismantled, paving the way for the unified England that we see today. And when William the Conqueror emerged victorious at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, the Anglo-Saxons finally fell from power. But that wasn’t the end of the medieval era, which would continue for another 400 years.

Later, medieval England would come to be characterized by political intrigue and dramatic, often murderous, struggles for power. From the assassination of Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury turned enemy of the king, to the Wars of the Roses, it was a bloody and brutal time. Hundreds of years later, though, what is about the Middle Ages that really gets underneath our skin?

In countless movies and television shows across the decades, medieval England has been depicted as a place of dramatic extremes. On one end of the social spectrum, we are told, were the high-society nobles and royals, who waged war on their neighbors, hosted elaborate tournaments, and dined at magnificent feasts.

These medieval elites, though, were only able to live such indulgent lifestyles on the backs of the country’s poor. And as they dined on rich meat and plentiful ale, most believe, thousands of peasants were struggling to survive in the slums and villages of rural England. But is this really how people in the Middle Ages lived?

Recently, evidence has emerged that paints an entirely different picture of life in medieval England. And it’s not the only time that popular perceptions have been proven wrong. Take, for example, the common claim that people in the Middle Ages believed the Earth was flat instead of shaped like a globe.

It’s a story that still holds weight with a small faction of conspiracy theorists today. But experts believe that the concept of medieval flat-Earthers is actually a modern fallacy, popularized by 19th-century thinkers keen to prove how much the world of science had evolved.

In reality, historians believe, the Earth was accepted as round as early as the third century B.C. And aside from the opinions of the dwindling section of flat-earthers, this theory has remained dominant ever since. The medieval masses, then, were smarter than they’re often given credit for. So what of the other questionable practices and traditions typically associated with this period in time?

Another common belief is that medieval communities practiced primae noctis — the right of a lord to bed any bride on her wedding night. But again, historians can only find reference to this supposed tradition in later texts. And most of them doubt it was ever a legal obligation in England in the Middle Ages.

Today, historians believe primae noctis is little more than a myth that grew out of the more informal exploitation that existed between peasants and lords. In fact, many of the grimmer elements of medieval society have actually been proven false over the years. So, how much do we really know about the people who lived during this mysterious era?

According to experts, even the gruesome torture devices commonly associated with the Middle Ages weren’t actually invented until much later in history. With its terrifying spikes and claustrophobia-inducing dimensions, the iron maiden is perhaps the archetypal medieval punishment. But the earliest reference to it was not made until the 19th century — and many doubt if it was ever used for its alleged purpose.

Similarly, stories of medieval chastity belts are also thought to be a 19th-century invention, part of a concerted effort to paint the past as brutal and uncivilized. And even the image of an unwashed populace beset by poor hygiene has taken a hammering in recent years. Baths, it turns out, did exist in the Middle Ages, and most people would have at least attempted to stay clean.

With all of these misperceptions, then, our mental image of the medieval era becomes unclear. Do we actually know anything about the everyday lives of historical figures such as King Egbert, Thomas Becket, and Richard III? Well, historians are actively trying to find out, and Doctor Legget's research has uncovered some astounding answers.

While studying at the University of Cambridge, Leggett decided to tackle another aspect of medieval culture that’s spawned many myths — despite a lack of proper research. By analyzing more than 2,000 sets of human remains, she hoped to gain a better understanding of eating habits during the Middle Ages.

Previously, historians believed that medieval nobility gorged themselves on meat and rich foods, while those in the lower echelons of society struggled to survive. In fact, the practice known as feorm was thought to have ensured this, compelling the peasantry to fill their lords’ larders with food in lieu of monetary rent.

It’s a compelling image, and one that has been recreated countless times on the silver screen. As lords, ladies, and knights gather round a table groaning under the weight of meat platters and jugs of wine, serving maids in bare feet look enviously on. But did such feasts really occur in medieval England? Or are they, like so much else, merely a modern invention?

At first glance, historical texts seem to support claims of meat-heavy feasts enjoyed by members of medieval high society. Take, for example, the texts studied by historians such as Lambert, which document the dishes served up to the elite during the Middle Ages. According to these, it seems, the menus were a carnivore’s dream.

But Leggett soon realized that all was not quite as it seemed. As part of her PhD research, she studied the chemical signatures embedded in a collection of human remains dating from between the 5th and 11th centuries. And the results painted a clear picture of the sorts of diets enjoyed during the Middle Ages.

Next, Leggett cross-referenced these results with data relating to the social status of each burial. By considering factors such as the positioning of graves and the presence of funerary goods, she was able to determine which bones belonged to members of the medieval elite. And, in turn, to identify which had likely been peasants in life.

Surprisingly, Leggett found no evidence to support the theory that those of high social status ate diets rich in protein. Instead, all of the individuals appeared to have consumed mostly vegetarian meals. It was an unexpected conclusion, and one that threatened to turn yet another common belief about medieval England on its head. But if these findings are accurate, how do we explain the texts that clearly describe the rich feasts enjoyed during the Middle Ages?

It was a question that intrigued Lambert, so he teamed up with Leggett to seek an explanation. Together, they analyzed a document dating from the early medieval period, detailing the food consumed at a banquet during the reign of King Ine of Wessex. According to reports, it totaled an astonishing 1.24 million calories — much of which came in the form of meat.

Seeing that the list included 300 pieces of bread, Leggett and Lambert made the assumption that a similar number of people attended the event. But even with the food split so many ways, the meal would have been a hearty one. In fact, everyone present would have consumed more than 4,000 calories over the course of the banquet.

According to reports, each diner would have been served over one and a half pounds of meat, including poultry, mutton, and beef, as well as more than half a pound of seafood in the form of eel and salmon. And if that wasn’t enough, they were also able to sate their appetites with plenty of ale, honey, and cheese.

And King Ine’s banquet was far from a one-off among the elite. Looking at similar lists from different locations across southern England, the team spotted the same pattern time and time again. Rather than the humble, largely vegetarian diet suggested by Leggett’s research, these documents detailed a series of indulgent, protein-rich feasts.

In a University of Cambridge statement released in April 2022, the menus are described as, “modest amounts of bread, a huge amount of meat, a decent but not excessive quantity of ale, and no mention of vegetables (although some were probably served.)” So what exactly was going on? Was Leggett’s research wrong — or was there another explanation?

According to Lambert, these banquets, while rich, would have been far from a regular occurrence. In the statement, he explains, “The scale and proportions of these food lists strongly suggest that they were provisions for occasional grand feasts, and not general food supplies sustaining royal households on a daily basis.”

“These were not blueprints for everyday elite diets as historians have assumed,” Lambert continued. And Legget’s research has supported this theory. She added, “I’ve found no evidence of people eating anything like this much animal protein on a regular basis. If they were, we would find isotopic evidence of excess protein and signs of diseases like gout from the bones. But we’re just not finding that.”

Leggett and Lambert’s research, then, has cast doubt on the idea that medieval royalty dined on meat for every meal. In fact, their diet probably comprised a large amount of cereal, supplemented by the occasional protein-heavy banquet. But that’s not the only revelation that chemical signatures within the centuries-old skeletons have revealed.

Leggett explained, “The isotopic evidence suggests that diets in this period were much more similar across social groups than we’ve been led to believe.” In other words, both peasants and kings appear to have dined on much the same meals, a revelation that has destroyed another stereotype about privilege in the Middle Ages.

“We should imagine a wide range of people livening up bread with small quantities of meat and cheese, or eating pottages of leeks and whole grains with a little meat thrown in,” Leggett continued. And there was another twist to come. According to Lambert, the occasional banquets were not just the preserve of the wealthy — the peasants were invited as well.

Lambert explained, “Historians generally assume that medieval feasts were exclusively for elites. But these food lists show that even if you allow for huge appetites, 300 or more people must have attended. That means that a lot of ordinary farmers must have been there, and this has big political implications.”

Could it be, then, that the feorm referred to in medieval documents were actually shared feasts, rather than a primitive form of tax? If this is the case, then the dynamics of medieval England might have been very different indeed. Lambert added, “We’re looking at kings traveling to massive barbecues hosted by free peasants, people who owned their own farms and sometimes slaves to work on them.”

Up until recently, the concept of feorm or food-rent has been integral to scholars’ understanding of the class system in medieval England. And the idea has played a central role in discussions surrounding the historical rights of peasants — and how they came to be subjugated to their kings and lords.

Now, all these theories have been thrown into disarray. After all, if both peasants and lords shared a similar diet during the early Medieval period — and feasts were a communal affair — then when did this dynamic shift? Was it with the introduction of the feudal system after the Norman conquest? Or did this unexpected equality last for a longer stretch of the Middle Ages?

For now, further research is needed before anyone can begin to answer these questions. But the wait might not take long. Recently, isotopic analyses were performed on the remains of a number of high-profile medieval figures, including kings Egbert and Canute. As they await the results, Leggett and Lambert are keen to see how this story will continue to unfold.