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?!

Yes b cause they wouldn't be staring at their phone avoiding eye contact with others in the queue!

If I remember correctly the issue with teeth wasn’t to do with sugar but with bread. There was grit in bread from the grinding process that slowly wore down teeth.

I think I’ve read that about 10% of deaths were related to dental issues, although that does seem very high. But an infection after pulling a tooth could easily be fatal.

@kwiksavenofrillsusername in the book Claire is delighted by the opportunity to get rid of her hair, but Jamie is horrified by her bald armpits 😂

@SpottyTablecloths

I can thoroughly recommend the "Time Travellers Guide" books by Ian Mortimer ]] There is one on Medieval, Elizabethan, Restoration and Regency periods - fascinating snippets about everyday life

Thank you for the recommendation. Have downloaded.

Like now it would depend on class.

I think people are over-egging the teeth thing - if we’re talking pre-Tudor, tooth decay wasn’t a massive issue because sugar was so rare. Apparently tooth decay was much rarer than today (around a fifth of current levels) and for those with means, nice smelling breath and white teeth were desirable and tooth brushing/tooth powders etc definitely existed.

But overall I think we’d see a much greater difference in size, visible ageing, scars etc in someone from the peasant class than an aristocrat, for instance.

The man in this colourised photo from 1865 looks very modern (and very good looking.)
www.google.com/amp/s/boingboing.net/2016/08/03/colorized-1865-photo-of-abraha.html/amp

Whenever we go around a National Trust places I airways think how similar the people look in the portraits, large noses, hooded eyes, small rosebud lips and a weak chin.

I've just Googled 15th century portrait and this proves my theory.

Slightly off topic but there are videos of fly-arounds of reconstructed towns at different periods on YouTube which are fascinating. This one is 17th century London (it starts with a few boring stills):

And here’s how people might have sounded down the ages:

@Gertie75

Whenever we go around a National Trust places I airways think how similar the people look in the portraits, large noses, hooded eyes, small rosebud lips and a weak chin.

It's the olde-worlde equivalent of those filters people use on selfies.

@GiantCheeseMonster

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.

Definitely, although I'd have preferred the time just after the Black Death when a shortage of workers gave peasants more bargaining power than they'd had for a long time. I think a lot of the ideas about bad hygiene are seen through the lens of more recent history - the economic change of the Industrial Revolution was, after all, the biggest seen since the agricultural.

I saw a program years back where Alan Titchmarsh Was made up to look like a Neanderthal
He walked down the street and no one gave him a second look

I’m not sure anyone would notice a 15th C person walking about either

In the 15th century, their teeth would have been good. This was before the importing of sugar. Dental studies on teeth of this period found them to be in good condition, but often abraded because of bits of grit that got into bread mixtures etc. Unless wealthy they would have been mostly vegetarian, living on pottage and bread. They would have had good skin, why not?

They walked everywhere and did physical labour, so probably much fitter.

"Flip side. If you ended up in the 15th century how would you ensure you could fit in and not stand out whilst also ensuring you don't die due to not applying modern knowledge. For example, I'd want to practice hygiene and disease control but not be taken for a witch."

There's a series of books called The Chronicles of St Mary's about a group of time travelling historians who travel around history observing major events in real time. In one of them, the main character, Maxwell, is kidnapped and dumped in the 13th century with no way of getting back. Most of the book is about her struggles to survive there, especially as a woman on her own. She does of course, because Maxwell is a badass.

They're great books, fab romps around history, I'd recommend them.

Sorry, cross posted on the teeth and grit in food. It's a myth about black and decaying teeth though.
Good point about women and body hair!
I'm very short sighted and often wonder how I'd have coped without glasses or lenses.

I often see people, particularly young women and think if you changed their clothes they could be a portrait. We have a young family friend and her features are so pale and and Unenhanced that she could easily be a milk maid or something!

They'd have tiny feet.

Even in from the start of the 20th to the 21st century, the average female foot size has increased from a 4 to a six. In the 15th century they'd have been teeny-tiny - what we'd see as a child size - so the sight of an adult wearing children's shoes might be a clue.

BoreOfWhabylon

Gertie75
Whenever we go around a National Trust places I airways think how similar the people look in the portraits, large noses, hooded eyes, small rosebud lips and a weak chin.
It's the olde-worlde equivalent of those filters people use on selfies.“

Or in-breeding.

I think it an assumption about poor hygiene as well. When I first started working in hospitals, the elderly men and women often didn’t have a bath but knew how to strip wash and thoroughly clean themselves. They all smelt fine and used to tell me about how they were taught to wash properly not like nowadays. Also a lot of aprons / overalls were worn. Also, without central heating, many places were cooler so less sweating and body odour.

Placemarking. It’s such an interesting question.

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.

Which has the plot device of a pandemic and lockdown, just for lolz.

@SquirryTheSquirrel

They'd have tiny feet.

Even in from the start of the 20th to the 21st century, the average female foot size has increased from a 4 to a six. In the 15th century they'd have been teeny-tiny - what we'd see as a child size - so the sight of an adult wearing children's shoes might be a clue.

I don't think this is true. Poor diet reduced size after the industrial revolution but before that people were of a similar size to us.

@GreeboIsMySpiritAnimal

"Flip side. If you ended up in the 15th century how would you ensure you could fit in and not stand out whilst also ensuring you don't die due to not applying modern knowledge. For example, I'd want to practice hygiene and disease control but not be taken for a witch."

There's a series of books called The Chronicles of St Mary's about a group of time travelling historians who travel around history observing major events in real time. In one of them, the main character, Maxwell, is kidnapped and dumped in the 13th century with no way of getting back. Most of the book is about her struggles to survive there, especially as a woman on her own. She does of course, because Maxwell is a badass.

They're great books, fab romps around history, I'd recommend them.

Oooh, I will have to check those out! I have read Connie Willis (Domesday was ok though I have forgotten much of plot, and To Say Nothing of the Dog, but got a bit bored by the other 2nd world war ones).

And thank you to the posters who mentioned the bread grinding down teeth. I remember going to a talk about that but had forgotten until you mentioned the bread. It was quite interesting talk - had some who specialised in studying teeth and bones but also reenactors talking about food and whether we can accurately replicate historical recipes. Conclusion was they can't use the correct pots which might alter taste (health and safety for metal content iirc); that it medieval reenactment is pretty good for meeting dietary requirements without having to change recipes; and that the main issue with authenticity is that recipes rarely give quantities. So especially when it comes to sugar, herbs, spices etc they make the food to modern tastes which may be utterly inedible/unrecognisable to someone actually from that time (and vice versa if we time travelled backwards).