One bit of interest -- if constructed back in the 1300s, it would have probably taken 4 years or so. Funding is the biggest difference, historically it would have been built from a rich patron's pockets with no desire to wait 25 years for the protection and image it would provide.
The Pacific Locomotive Association has had 10-year restorations. Here's how it was done in 12 days in the heyday of British steam.[1] Of course, the repair works had 6,000 people.
Who were also experts working full time, with plenty of practice with that specific model, and loads of specialized equipment.
vs. a handful of hobbyists.
Sometimes when you look at old things, it can be shocking how “sloppy” the workmanship is, but you have to realize that they were not trying to get perfect paint jobs or smooth castings. They were trying to make money.
However an even higher level of quality is the pros that are called in to do one off custom projects for wealthy customers that pay by the hour and don’t care what it costs.
Ultimately, the perfection of the work is basically a tradeoff between time and quality- and the pros produce a lot more quality per unit time. But it is amazing how a really careful amateur can still do impressive looking work if they just go really really slow.
essentially you owed the local lord a fixed number of days of work, and/or a tax; days could be traded for tax and vice-versa. usually things like clearing, roads, and bridge building, etc.
From visiting the site a couple of years ago, the team is about 30 people, so they are looking at a 25-30 years timeframe to build it. In 13 century, the builder would hire about 70 people (typical small lord could not afford to pay for more) and it would take 10-15 years.
This is a common misconception. Life expectancy at birth being low reflects high mortality for infants and children. If you can make it into adulthood, most people lived for a relatively long time.
https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-n....
OK... 25+25 = 50 rather than 40. But that is for the wealthy, the top percentage who owned land. Everyone else would have been less. That is still about half of what we can expect today.
The average adult lived to what we’d still consider old age - the average life expectancy of all humans was ‘just’ low because child mortality was high, and even most child deaths occurred at very early ages.
Building a wood castle in 4 years seems perfectly reasonable for the crew in question and would have been affordable for the small lord attempting it. The small lord who attempted a stone castle probably did need a lot longer 4 years. That lord probably bankrupted himself from the cost (though a nice castle remains). Or the Lord build the wood castle and then slowly the family upgraded it to stone over the next 400 years or so - each using their own vision of how they want their house to be (and also often adjusting to the latest military technology/defense)