AHC: The Children's Crusade Succeeds

Saphroneth

Banned
But again, the question is tied up : puberty was considered the same way in MA than today, as in when sexual distinction becames clear and with fertility. Albert the Great doesn't say anything else.

If one means that medieval people aged by 12/14 were "puer" in the sense of child by body, it's wrong.
Again, that's not how I read it. I could be wrong, but I think Sycamore was saying that they'd have bodies at the developmental stage we consider "children" today.
 
Again, that's not how I read it. I could be wrong, but I think Sycamore was saying that they'd have bodies at the developmental stage we consider "children" today.

Then it doesn't have anything to do with puberty : today, puberty's age tends to be actually earlier than in medieval times (by two ore more years : Diet and life context have a lot to do with biological development), and 10 years old girls are still considered as childs.

Furthermore, I'll quote him

Actually, in medieval times, puberty only commenced at the age of 17 or over. So they certainly would have been children from a medieval POV.

Not only puberty age was clearly appearing earlier, but Sycamore argued not how they would be considered today, but from a medieval point of view.

Maybe there's a confusion somewhere, but I simply don't see it to be honest.
 
Top