Feeding One Medieval Child Cost 15% of Income
Parents kept paying into adulthood, through apprenticeships and beyond, expecting little back.
The Works in Progress Newsletter · The myth of medieval childhoodFeeding a single child in medieval England took roughly 15 percent of a typical income, and parents frequently kept helping children well into adulthood.
Older children did small chores around the house. But at 13 or 14, just when a child might finally become a net economic asset, parents typically sent that child away into apprenticeship or service to gain skills and savings. Parents usually paid for the apprenticeship, and children did not usually send wages home.
Nor was it an investment in retirement. Grateful grown children sometimes supported aging parents, but that seems not to have been the norm. In strict economic terms, medieval parenting was mostly giving, with little expected back.
Questions people ask
How many children did medieval families have?
Most had only three or four children, with somewhat more among the rich and fewer among the very poor. With about one quarter dying in the first year and more by age ten, the typical surviving family was smaller than the stereotype of huge broods suggests.
What was an apprenticeship?
It was a multi-year placement, usually starting in the early teens, where a child lived and trained with a master craftsman or in domestic service. Parents often paid a fee upfront, and the child received food, housing, and training, plus a small payment or savings at the end.
How did families afford to feed children on those incomes?
Food, especially bread and ale made from grain, took up a very large share of household budgets for ordinary laborers and peasants. A 15 percent cost per child meant that two or three children could consume nearly half of average earnings, leaving little margin for bad harvests or illness.