Sounds like Hagar the Horrible. 
And when you ask for the number of the friendliest escort services in town, they know you’re not an undercover from the Vice Squad.
Lumpy you fool! If you give that information away, they will cancel your membership at Boodle’s! And if the Special Forces Club hears of it, you will be pink mist! Some restraint old fellow!
Kind of like AirBnB.
An excellent book!
I also had the chance to listen to a lecture by L. E. Modessit, a fantasy writer with an economist background. Basically he said that most writers (Game of Thones?) did not consider this problem, everyone seemed to travel with an unlimited American Express card. The problem was, unless you had connections in the distant land, (letters of credit and all that) you had to carry a large bag of coin or similar valuables . This made you a prime target for robbery - so you needed to take a company of knights with you… which meant you had to feed all them, too - so you needed an even bigger chest of coins and valuables -and a cart hauling food, clothes, supplies, and the chest of money. Basically, anyone of any importance needed to travel with a large retinue and a large amount of valuables. Travel was rare and difficult.
Once you got to the next foreign capital, if you had connections (your neighbour lord’s daughter had married viscount de Whatever’s son) they put you up. but, the road was dangerous, and despite medieval fantasy to the contrary, very few major voyages were done in a day or three.
Robin Hood made a convenient living off of passing lords, usually by outnumbering their entourage.
Or, like the Canterbury pilgrims, the poorer people travelled in packs. The only question was, could you trust your fellow travellers? And were there enough able young men to fight off the robber gangs? Remember too, that medieval fantasies aside, most inns were communal events. Only the rich got their own room (which again marked you as a target - you have money), usually everyone bunked down in one of the main rooms; better sleep on top of your purse.
I suppose if you were a known person with a title or just upper enough in class you could get by on your name locally.
There’s also a delightful series of travel memoirs by Patrick Leigh Fermor, who traveled from Rotterdam to Istanbul in the 1930s, mostly on foot. He camped out a lot of the time, and spent a few nights in youth hostels and the like, but mostly he got himself invited to stay with people – very often minor nobility, who would invite him into their castle and then send off letters to friends at his next destination. Once he befriended his first central European baron, he was in with all of the others.
It obviously helped that he was a personable, attractive young man, and that he knew how to send off the right social class signals even when he was tramping across the continent with only a single change of clothes.
International banking systems actually stemmed from rich guys trying to solve this very problem. IIRC, the Knights Templar made their mark by developing just such a system. Basically, if you were going to the holy land you’d swing by one of the Knights ‘banks’ and, in exchange for your gold they would give you part of a coded receipt for the amount of gold you were wanting to take with you (less some service fees. Not interest though :p). Then you could basically head out to the holy land, stopping by Knight facilities along the way, where they would deduct some fees for services along the way. When you got to the holy land you could then change what was left on your coded receipt for the remainder of the money and be good to go. When you wanted to go back, same thing.
I know there were other civilizations and times that used similar systems. You COULD take a large guard force and just carry the gold, and that happened a lot, but there were alternatives at various times in history that were similar to my recollection above of roughly how the KT did it.
Also remember that a lot of travel in the middle ages was done by ship - you bypassed the robber class, and were surrounded by several dozen able-bodied seamen with a vested interest in protecting you and them from pirates… your value as a slave or hostage, plus the value of the boat you were travelling on and its cargo, probably exceeded the value of any valuables the vessel carried.
Of course that puts the burden of transferring gold around on the Templars, unless the traffic both ways averaged the same.
Provided you could be reasonably sure the captain and crew of your own boat weren’t pirates/slavers- which for enough money they might be tempted to do it just this once…
[QUOTE=Lumpy]
Of course that puts the burden of transferring gold around on the Templars, unless the traffic both ways averaged the same.
[/QUOTE]
They already had it there, as well as fortresses to protect it. This was a business model that evolved, IIRC, and stemmed from their earlier one where they provided escort and assistance to pilgrims going to the holy land…which stemmed from their own part in earlier crusades to the area. In a lot of cases what the KT would do is take notes on land or property and give receipts for gold, and the traveler would either redeem the notes (and pay whatever was used plus fees) when the pilgrimage or whatever was over and they returned or the KT would take possession of the property. This turned out to be quite lucrative for the KT over time.
(Note, this is my very History Channel centric view of this, so grain of salt)
Related topic:
One of the ways the Tokugawa Shogunate kept the daimyô (大名 lords; lit: great name) in line was to require them to travel to the capital every other year. This not only kept them out of their homelands and strongholds regularly, but required them to spend money and resources traveling and split their forces between the retinue and their home territory. It also kept their wives, heirs, etc. partially hostage since it left lords with the choice of risking everyone in the family on the road, or keeping some in a stronghold in home territory but separate from the lord on his visit. Depending on past history, they might be specifically required to bring hostages to the capital.
Here’s the brilliant part; other lords would have to play host to them along the way. This meant that they had constant ongoing contact with each other. It forced them to trade favors, and put them in mutually vulnerable positions. Plus, they ended up blowing money and resources on proxy warfare like elaborate hosting parties. A visit by a peer would be bad enough, but if someone higher on the ladder visited, it could put one of the lower houses in debt. There were deliberate “revenge visits” where someone’s liege-lord would invite himself and hist retinue over for a season, using the hosting customs and conspicuous consumption traditions to force a troublemaker into indebtedness and keep him from being a pain in the ass for a while.
Of course, this kind of enforced mutual hosting wasn’t exactly perfect for preventing conflict. jidaigeki (時代劇 lit; period drama) are based on all the ways this could go wrong. One of the most famous stories outside Japan, The 47 Rônin was precipitated by a provoked attack that may have been caused by deliberate manipulation; stories vary on motivation and characters of the three principal individuals involved.
The benefit was that the conflicts tended to be more personal, small-scale, and less ambitious than they would be otherwise, and intrigues were mostly directed away from the Shôgun or Emperor. Some happy side effects — though I’m not sure most realized it at the time — were an increase in trade and capital flow from one area of Japan to another, and a really good incentive for maintaining roads and other infrastructure. When you travel the same roads everyone else does every couple of years, you notice the potholes.
The development of shops and other facilities along major routes contributed to the rise of a stronger middle class than was typical under most feudal systems, to the point where specific laws and customs were made to prevent the craftsman/merchant class from completely outstripping many of the poorer samurai (侍).
European fiefdoms didn’t have the benefit of a lack of external conflict, so as far as I know they never developed customs like this to the same level that the Japanese did, but I do know that there were some similar visiting requirements for lords in France and England, and probably in many other places too.
The road to Santiago, specifically the French Road which is what most people think of, was built in order to try and create a controlled highway that, being kept clear of bandits, would be less risky than travel by sea. It’s full of towns, monasteries, bridges and hospitals (in the double sense of hostal and hospital) founded/funded by this or that King or Queen.
And yes, piracy by the hired crews themselves is mentioned in the documents from the time.
A Royal Progress around England could, and did, mire the ‘honoured host’, who might be fomenting mischief, in debt for several generations in providing the hospitality to the Court for an extended period - as it was intended to.
The persecution of the Templars is also the origin of that phrase, so beloved of Special Forces - “Kill them all and let God sort them out.”
The actual quote as I heard it rendered in English is “Kill them all. God will know his own.” Since the Pope said it, it was probably in Latin.:rolleyes:
I may be wrong, but I always heard that attributed to the genocide in Languedoc, ostensibly of Cathars, but in practice purging almost everyone.
And it wasn’t the Pope but a bishop.
One thing too that I recall reading was that the court of the French kings in the late middle ages / early renaissance would circulate among the chateaux of the Loire and back to Paris because there was not enough supplies in one area to continuously feed the entire court entourage, so like a cloud of locusts, they would descend upon an area, strip it clean, and in a month or a few move on.
the Papal legate, the Abbot of Citeaux, Arnaud Amalric, about the siege of Beziers, where over 20,000 were allegedly massacred. The town refused to hand over the Cathar heretics and the Catholics refused to leave town with the attackers’ negotiation team.
The important thing to remember about travel in the middle ages was that it was NOT SAFE. Too small a group risked robbery, if they carried enough for stay at comfortable inns for several nights - which seems to be the typical medieval fantasy scenario. By paying the innkeeper and possibly telling them you final destination you hinted at how much money you must be carrying.
London to Oxford is 50 miles; London to Salisbury is 80 miles. London to Nottingham is 108 miles. Not sure what a “typical” travel day would be, but I suspect 30 miles is pretty good; and England is comparatively small. Paris to Brussels is short, 160 miles. Paris to Munich, Bavaria - 420 miles. A lot of stops in country inns needed.
OOPS. Right on both counts. I conflated the two events, but had always heard that the quote was direct from Pope Clement when his guidance was sought.
That’s what I get for relying on protein memory. :o