If somebody from the 15th Century was stood in front of you, wearing jeans and a top, do you think you’d be able to tell they were from a different era?!

[Parrotanne]

I’m bored! I know that people are said to have become taller as the centuries pass but I wondered if there would be any other discernible differences. Differences that would be obvious just by looking - the 15th C speech would most likely be a bit of a clue!

So if, for instance, 15th C person was stood in front of you at the bus stop, dressed in Boden/Primark/Next/Any High Street Shop would you realise something was a bit different?!

Depending on class, 25yo woman would probably look a lot older than your average, Western modern 25yo woman.

She will have borne children most likely, had a decade or more of work behind her, probably be illiterate. Possibly a bit coarse. Her mannerisms, gait, manners, body language would all reflect unspoken norms of the era: men first.

Hair would probably be long.

@PineappleWilson

When did the letter J get added to the alphabet? I've got it in mind that it was later than C15th so they probably couldn't read, but if they could, may query the letters we use.

I think the letter j was introduced in the early 1600s, so 17th century.

Personal hygiene was very different
Given the recent thread about ex-es, I'd say not so much

Lots of grey and no straighteners for the women and longer hair and beards/moustaches for the men!

So they'd look like everyone else does after lockdown then!

I think peasants in the 15th century were probably healthier than those in the 18th/19th. Assuming you didn’t get plague/leprosy/smallpox, you probably ate a reasonably healthy (if spartan) diet, and spent time outdoors. In the 19th century you’d spend your days in a factory or a mill (as would your children, so they’d get rickets from the lack of sunlight) and probably die of industrial disease, if the cholera from the slums didn’t finish you off. I’d rather be a serf toiling in the 15th century fields, I think.

They'd be physically stronger than we are now. All work whether housework, agricultural or industrial would have no labour saving element and life would be very physical. Ian Mortimer's Time Travellers guide to Medieval England has pondered this kind of question!

Only allowed to look. I probably wouldn't bat an eyelid at the hair, teeth or skin. I would assume smackhead. Depressingly common around here.
Love this thread OP, I often wonder along the same lines but my timeline is more Tudors in shock

I thought about this when I went to the Sistine Chapel (and no I didn’t scream!). I thought that if practically all the people in the lower paintings were given modern clothes they could easily fit in! I was sure I could see some familiar looking modern Roman faces!

I'd imagine one half of us mnetters would be dead, given the life expectancy was less than 40yr old for us peasants and the other half would be burnt at the stake as witches.

I think they would look ‘rough’ very rough. As if someone who had had a hard life. It would be hard to age them ? Assume they would look more ‘ravaged’ generally than their physique would suggest.

Their hands would be rough - scarred. Skin generally tough from tough life.
Assume they would have different eye contact and personal bearing depending on social/sexual setting of our ‘meet up’.
Great question.

elaine I too have ‘not screamed’ there. 😂 still makes me laugh.

They would be tiny and have bad teeth, bad breath and BO, unplucked eyebrows, split ends in their lank hair.

I think they would look the same. I know a lord and put him in the right clothes he looks the spitting image of his 17thC ancestor. The painting the the NT castle could literally be him.

Yeah I reckon teeth would be awful and hair would be different

I think that they would stand out more if there was a group, they would be shorter than average height and a lot with signs of disease, for example walking with a limp due to badly healed broken limbs. I imagine mannerisms would be different, as well as spoken language.

If you are interested in the reverse question then I recommend doomsday book by Connie Willis which is about a time traveller who goes back to live in the middle ages.

They would be significantly smaller, I remember seeing adult women's shoes from the 18th century at a NT house and my not then teen daughters would have struggled to fit in them!

Another good read: Doomsday Book by Connie Willis is a sci-fi novel about time travel to 14th Century England. It wasn't as the time-traveller expected it to be.

www.amazon.co.uk/Doomsday-Book-MASTERWORKS-Connie-Willis/dp/0575131098?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

X post @55378OO8

No sugar. More vegetables unless you are wealthy and eat meat.

Their teeth mightn’t be that bad.

Excellent taste @BoreOfWhabylon

I’m loving all the book recommendations - thank you.

I wonder if the women would have very noticeable facial hair —like me—

Gah! My strikeouts never work!

Ooh good question.

I was watching Outlander recently and realised that in bodice ripper type shows and movies, the women never have hairy legs or armpits. There’s a scene where an upper class woman in Paris is getting her legs waxed but otherwise, how does the main character look so smooth and hairless in sex scenes? And did women in the olden days just stay hairy, since they were in long skirts anyway?

@BoreOfWhabylon

Another good read: Doomsday Book by Connie Willis is a sci-fi novel about time travel to 14th Century England. It wasn't as the time-traveller expected it to be.

]]

Ooh, that looks good. Hurriedly downloads.

@kwiksavenofrillsusername

I expect that in the olden days, body hair on women was normal.