@Natasha_Jay Fun, but I have a some comments and criticisms.
1900: I wish the author had leaned less obviously on Clement Clarke Moore and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. They spoke (or wrote) a stylized English consciously, and our traveller would not.
1700: The letter "ſ", the "long s", is typographical, not linguistic. Readers at the time would read "congress" as readily as "congreſs".
1600: Again, this is mostly typographical variation. Spoken, one would understand it easily. The weird "thouing" want seen until some fifty years later.
1500: Spoken, this would present no trouble to a modern listener.
1400: Typographical again, wiþ only minor variations in þe ſpelling used. Nat harde to reade, alþouȝ again the letter ſubstitution can be rouȝ.
1300: I don't see "ſchaltou" that far back, bit I didn't dig hard. I imagine spoken, one would realize it's two words mashed together. A Germanic "en" seems to show up randomly. "Rewþe" made me smile.
1200 and earlier: I feel like the vocabulary is starting to change here to the point where my unfamiliarity with the typographical anachronisms becomes an impediment. Hearing it spoken would help, and I'm interested enough to want to substitute modern characters for the archaic to see if that gets me further.
Thanks for posting this.
