Generally speaking, the notion that children should leave the parent's home is relatively modern concept, precipitated, to large extent, by the Industrial Revolution and rising prevalence of an employment as the main form of work relationship. In 13th century, between the majority of population working in the agricultural sector, so to speak and the production of goods being largely limited to small workshops, free people were usually not employees but rather entrepreneurs, obliged to provide agreed upon fees and services, be it a part of production, money or work, but were otherwise free to operate and gain income.

Such milieu facilitated inheritance of the homestead or workshop, so that the 'family business' would be continued (it also nullified the cost of learning, as children were gaining necessary skill by first observing and then helping their parents). It was important not only for the prospective farmers or artisans, but also for the social organizations and structures they were belonging to, as the local landowner tried to make sure that the land he owned was worked and developed adequately and local craftsmen were available to provide all the necessary goods, as this translated to their own income and capabilities, while the municipal artisan guilds have seen to it that their particular trade could develop steadily.

Of course, this meant that the child would inherit the homestead or the workshop, but this was clear-cut issue only in case of the families having a single child, what, although definitely not too rare, was not that common, as according to Herlihy, the average size of the family living in a single abode in high-to-late Middle Ages was roughly 6 people, meaning that each couple usually could have expected to have 2-3 kids, although, as usual, the actual family size could have varied significantly. This proved a potential problem, as dividing the inheritance, although practiced, could mean that the subsequent kids would end up with too little land to sustain themselves. And the inheritance systems varied throughout the Europe, with the gavelkind (equal distribution of wealth among the heirs) and primogeniture (leaving the bulk or entirety of the inheritance in the hand of the oldest heir) being the two most common opposites. Without delving into the circumstances favouring either solution (strong primogeniture tend to be associated with strong manorialization, strong familial ties with the partibility), it clearly shows that there was a strong trend to keep the bulk of the family holding within family, so at least a single child, usually son, was always expected to stay with the parents and eventually replace them as the head of the household. Other children could have also simply start their own homestead, either by moving to a newly located village, or by applying to the local landowner who could have given grant them land in exchange of service. In general, it was in the landowner's interest to increase the area worked by peasants and the amount of available land usually increased with the exploitation of the forest resources. Sometimes such land grants could have been conditional and often could have included the matter of marriages. For example, one 14th century document from Horsham St. Faith near Norfolk in England states that a certain family was granted 24 acres on the condition that their daughter will marry lord's bondsman within a year.

As we're speaking the 13th century, we should take note that this is precisely the time when the cities start to appear at an accelerated rate in the Western Europe, marking the beginning of relatively rapid urbanization and all developments associated with the fact. This opened another venues available to the people, as more and more children of the local peasants could have been sent to learn the craft in the nearby city, usually at relatively early age, so they could have start as the pupil, then advance to an apprentice and, with some luck, being admitted to the craft and remain in the city, preferably starting the family as the new addition to the medieval equivalent of the middle class, or return to the village (not necessarily his original one, as 13th century is also the time of rapid colonization of the newly developed lands) and start a life as a local rural craftsman.

Many young people, usually mature enough to perform at least some meaningful tasks, i.e. around 10 or 12 (although 12-14 seems to more common age) were also sent to work in the capability of a servant. This could mean working as a farmhand on the local wealthy peasant but also working for the local lord directly in any capacity that was necessary. Such service was an opportunity to earn some money that could have been used to start the life on their own (or increase family assets) but, especially in the case of the service to local nobility, was treated as an opportunity to advance socially, as the industrious people working directly with the lord and their family could have become a part of their household or, in case of men, be inducted to their military retinue and help in various tasks related to the management of the domain. Likewise, young nobles, especially knightly families were also often sent to the courts of local lords, where they could make necessary connections, become acquainted with the people of higher standing and gain recognition for them and their families.

Last but not least, there was a possibility of joining the ranks of the Church. For people of humble origins, this was usually treated as the social advancement or at least the choice of a vocation. For nobles this could have been done for various reasons, e.g. to provide security for their descendants, to grant them education or simply to give them opportunity to make connections with other nobles, as many priors and high-ranking clergymen were nobles themselves. The latter residence was usually considered temporary and usually referred to as an oblation. It seems to be quite popular in the early part of Middle Ages and since 12th century there is a visible trend to curb it, as the presence of people living the monastic life but not expecting to actually become clergymen was seen as disruptive. Nevertheless, it was not uncommon to send 10-12 year old kids as novices or young oblates, with Benedict of Nursia stating that novices as old as 15 years of age can become ordained monks, although many orders, like Franciscans and Dominicans considered 18-20 years to be a more suitable age.

Now, I need to notice that almost everything I wrote above applies solely to the male children (save for ecclesiastical vocation as many women could and did have become nuns), as if any children were expected to leave their parents early, they were usually the daughters who were most often than not moving to their husbands' place of residence. The expected age of such was thus the same as the one for marriage, i.e. relatively early, possibly late teens or early twenties. But again, moving out was not a separate phenomenon, but the result of being married.

So to sum it up, in the 13th century, substantial part children were expected to stay with their parents to help run and eventually inherit the 'family business, while others were commonly sent in their early teens (10-14 years) to work in the capacity of servants, apprentices or associates to the other members of their prospective crafts.

​

Crawford, S., Childhood in Anglo-Saxon England. Alan Sutton, Stroud 1999.

Faith, R.J., Peasant Families and Inheritance Customs in Medieval England, in: The Agricultural History Review, vol. 14, no. 2 (1966), pp. 77-95.

Hanawalt, B., Growing Up in Medieval London. Oxford University Press, 1993.

Herlihy, D., Medieval Households. Harvard University Press, 1985.

Mitchell, L.E., French, K.L., Biggs, D. (Eds.), The Ties that Bind: Essays in Medieval British History in Honor of Barbara Hanawalt. TJ International, Padstow, 2011.

Newman, P.B., Growing Up in the Middle Ages. McFarland, 2007.