Before the Advent of the Black Moors of Africa who ruled parts of Spain for 700 years there was Medieval Europe a classic rat hole. Until the Blacks came in from Africa and cleaned it up.
In this installment, we present to our readers an article from Pravda describing all that had been achieved in European history just before the advent of the Black Moors of Africa. The Black Moors of Africa gave the Europeans, African sciences (now falsely termed as western science), African commerce, African architecture, African culture, African governance, African libraries and African hygiene.
Other installment will do a comparison of the state of development attained by the medieval age Black Moors of Africa who built Granada, Cordoba, Toledo, and other cities of Southern Europe.
Don Jaide
………………………………..
The stench of medieval Europe still echoes today
22.01.2008
People normally associate different epochs with different smells. The Middle Ages smell of sewage and decaying bodies. German writer Patrick Suskind, the author of a well-known novel “Perfume: The Story of a Murderer,†wrote in his book that the stench of European cities in the late Middle Ages period was unbearable. His work conveys the terrible smell of human faeces and urine in the streets, decaying wood and rat dung, spoiled coal and animal fat, mouldy dust and chamber pots.
Stench used to be an inseparable part of all human activities, constructive or destructive. The Queen of Spain Isabel of Castle (the end of the 15th century) confessed that she had taken a bath only twice in a lifetime – when born and married. A daughter of one of French kings died of lice. Dysentery and scab caused fatal terminations to Popes Clement V and Clement VII correspondingly. Duke Norfolk neglected bathing for religious reasons. As a result of such disregard numerous abscesses dotted his body.
A billet-doux sent by the inveterate Don Juan Henry of Navarre to his sweetheart Gabrielle d’ Estrées became an anecdote. Its contents conveyed the following meaning: “Do not wash yourself, my sweetheart, I’ll visit you in three weeksâ€. The king himself took a bath only thrice in a lifetime, twice coercively.
Russian ambassadors at Louis XIV court wrote that His Majesty stunk like a wild animal. Europeans considered Russians perverts because it was a tradition for the latter to take steam baths once a month.
European cities were buried in sewage. Town residents splashed the contents of garbage pails and washtubs out into the street on the heads of carefree passers-by. Stagnated slops made stinking pools; and a great number of town pigs crowned the whole picture. People emptied chamber pots right out of their windows making streets look like cesspools. Bathrooms were the rarest luxury. Fleas, lice and bugs swarmed in rich and poor houses of London and Paris.
Unsanitary conditions, diseases and starvation personify medieval Europe as it was. Even the noble class could not afford to eat their fill. Noble families were happy if at best two or three of ten children survived. Delivery was quite an undertaking for women: a third part of them died in labor. Street illumination also was poor – oil lamps, splinters or wax candles at best. Hunger, smallpox, leprosy and syphilis disfigured people’s faces.
There were not any cleaning agents or the notion of personal hygiene in Europe up to the middle of the 19th century. One Italian nobleman said in his memoirs that in the 16th century it was impossible to walk along the streets that resembled a fetid stream of turbid water. He had to hold a scented handkerchief or a small bouquet to his nose not to vomit. But not only faeces poisoned the air. Butchers slaughtered and disembowel cattle right in the streets. They would scatter guts around and pour blood out onto the pavement.
In late Middle Ages people learned to process wastes and faeces. Urine, for example, was used to tan leather and bleach cloth, animals’ bones – to produce flour. In days of old painters placed barrels for urine near the farms, they used it to knead paints. In Ancient Rome they sold even the urine from latrines to wool dyers and leather tanners. What could not be processed was left in the street.
Rain was the only street cleaner in those times. And still, notwithstanding its sanitary function, rain was considered a providential punishment. Rains washed dirt out of all cracks, and raging sewage streams rushed through the streets. Just like this there appeared a small river Merderon in France (from French “merde†– shit).
If there were stinking funds in the country, in cities people defecated in narrow side streets and yards. Only after the ‘hydraulic revolution’ aqueducts and gutters appeared; they provided houses with water and removed the sewage.
People were not cleaner than the streets where they lived. “Water baths warm the body, but weaken the organism and widen pores. That’s why they can be dangerous and cause different diseases, even deathâ€, a medical treaty of the 16th century runs. Medieval doctors thought that infectious air could penetrate through the cleaned pores. Owing to this cause all social bathhouses were abolished. In 15-16th centuries rich citizens had a bath at least twice a year, in the 17-18th centuries they decidedly stopped to wash themselves. The French king Louis XIV had a bath only twice in his life on doctors’ advice. But the procedure shocked the sovereign so, that he made a vow not to do it anymore.
All hygienic arrangements included only hands and mouth rinsing, but not the whole face. “By no means you should wash your face, – wrote medics in the 16th century, – as it can cause catarrh or weaken the eyesight.†As for women, they had a bath only two or three times a year.
The majority of aristocrats used scented rags to rub the body. It was recommended to moisten armpits and groin with rose water. Men wore small bags with fragrant herbs between the shirt and waistcoat. Women used only fragrant powder.
Medieval ‘neat’ persons often changed their clothes. They considered that it absorbs all dirt and cleans the body. But our ancestors were rather selective on this issue. Clean starched shirt for every day was a privilege for rich people only. That is why white crimped collars and cuffs that were the evidence of wealth and cleanliness of their owners became fashionable. Poor men neither washed nor changed their clothing. Most of them had only one shirt. No wonder – clothes were extremely expensive. The cheapest canvas shirt and one milk cow, for example, had the same price.
Source: Pravda.Ru URL:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/103574-stench-0
Translated by Ksenia Sedyakina
Pravda.ru
Jahdey, I will gladly admit the Moors were all ‘black Africans’ if you use a “primary source”:
“A primary source is a document, recording or other source of information that was created at roughly the time being studied, by an authoritative source, usually one with direct personal knowledge of the events being described.”
I have given you a website with primary sources that depict the Moors as they were during the Moorish occupation of Spain – you on the other hand have given me heraldry (not good via Moors) and the beliefs of persons 400+ years after the Moors inhabtied occupation of Spain in relation to Moors.
Note: Most historians will ‘always’ choose primary sources over secondary sources, Jahdey.
Also, the Fulani (or Fula) appear to have origins in Senegal, and speak the “Fula Language” (a Niger-Congo Language) as opposed to a “Berber Language” (an Afro-Asiatic Language).
Now Sceptic, Angelfire website is full of “liberal” racists. It has no authority not to talk of anything primary.
The pictures on that site were drawn by some ignorant monks of Catalan Spain, hundreds of years after the fall of the Moors.Do not be deceived. The same Monks drew the Indians of America as white savages. They were notorious in their inaccuracy and no one in his right mind would rely on them.
Ask the Spaniards who their overlords were. And the Sicilians too. They will tell you.
Caucasiod is a non-scientific term of no fixed meaning. There are even Black caucasiods living in Africa according to the crazy pink men that set up the term like: the Tutsis, the Ethiopians, the Fulanis, even some Igbos like the Aros. You are stuck on anachronistic and discredited concepts.
# Sceptic complains:
Jahdey, I will gladly admit the Moors were all ‘black Africans’ if you use a “primary sourceâ€:
# Another Skeptic replied:
The “Moors†of Andalusian renown are generally considered to be a mixture of arab overlords, with predominantly-Berber and some “black†(i.e. sub-Saharan African) soldiers.
Jahdey replies: Now make up your mind boy. Admixure means what to your litle mind? Admixure of who and who? And those Black soldiers were who? Europeans?
# Another Skeptic asks:
If all “Moors†would be ascribed as “black†(i.e. ’sub-Saharan African), where did the term “black-a-moor†come from?
Jahdey: The term Black-a-moor means Black as a Moor.
The term Moor comes from the Latin word Mauro which means Black.
Skeptic continues: …you on the other hand have given me heraldry (not good via Moors)
Jahdey: Heraldry is one of most legitimate sources of European history. Upper class Europeans rely on helradry to trace blood legacy, and royal prerogatives.
Besides a picture is worth one thousand words. Besides, why would your pink Corsicans, and pink Spaniards define their overlords as Black people in their flags?
Sceptic continues: and the beliefs of persons 400+ years after the Moors inhabtied occupation of Spain in relation to Moors.
Jahdey: Again just like you have demonstrated your ignorance by confusing St Maurice with the figure on the flag and then compounded it with St Julia mistake, Rembrandt lived in an Europe teeming with Moorish immigrants. Rembrandt lived in the 16th century, Moors were defeated in the battle of Cordoba at the turn of the 16th century (1495) to be precise. Yet many Moors stilled lived in Europe from that time until now.
Jahdey: the European Romance of El Cid, which describes some other Berber women. It relates an account about a “Black Moorish woman†named Nugaymath Turquia who is said to have led a contingent of 300 Black Moorish “Amazons.†They were members of the Almoravid Dynasties which occupied Spain in 1086AD.
The Berber clans that were most instrumental in the Moorish conquest of Spain (and parts of Portugal) of 711AD were the Nafza, Masmuda, Luwata, Hawwara, Zanata, Sanhadja and Zugwaha. They consisted primarily of Black Africans nations. A Muslim scholar describes the women of the Berber clan of the Sanhadja confederation in the following terms: “Their color is black, though some pale ones can be found among them.â€
Jahdey I believe any further discussion is pointless – you seem to believe that “you” can define what is, and what isn’t, a “correct” source.
All those pictures were DURING the Moorish occupation of Spain – yes, I prefer the sources of persons DURING that time on what Moors were/were not, over the views of a 16th Century painter.
If I asked the Spaniards/Sicilians who their “overlords” were, I doubt they’d say “black Africans”.
And yes, “Caucasoid” is a ‘valid concept’ – ask any anthropologist, and they will concur that there are indeed “Caucasoid”, “Negroid”, “Mongoloid” etc racial groupings.
I meant “mixture”, as in the army wasn’t entirely arabic, berber or black African.
And are we an etymologist, Jahdey? It’s just, I can’t find any sources corroborating your “history” of the term blackamoor.
“but this adj (Mauros). only appears in late Gk. and may as well be from the people’s name as the reverse”.
“Heraldic charges” can mean ‘anything’ to the families involved – are you saying that a family depicting a lion on their crest are descended from lions, Jahdey? Also, the “Moor” seems to have originated:
The use of the ‘moor’s head’ as a heraldic device dates from the 13th century. The emblem has connections to the Crusades, reflecting associating individual families with victories over the moors.”
“Frederick’s use of black Africans can be explained by his desire to present himself as a ‘world ruler’. Their presence symbolised the extent of his power. Other families may have adopted the moor’s head on their arms to associate themselves with the Hohenstaufan dynasty.”
And Jahdey, you do know what a Moor with a white headband signifies – right? Yes, it implies that the Moor was a PRISONER – why would the Corsicans/Spanish ‘acknowledge the ancient black Moorish kings’ by giving them headbands signifying their capture?
And no Jahdey, you said that the “patron saint of Corsica” was a Moor – I proved that that wasn’t so, as Saint Julia is the Patron Saint of Corsica. Lastly, St Maurice is the main ‘source’ of the Moor’s head on European emblems.
“”In the north of the country of Mali, there are Berber tribes who are white and are under [the Sultan of Mali’s] dominion …. They are: the Yatansir, the Shagharasan, the Maddusa and the Lamtuna.” – al-‘Umari
Sceptic postures:
“Heraldic charges†can mean ‘anything’ to the families involved – are you saying that a family depicting a lion on their crest are descended from lions, Jahdey?
Also, the “Moor†seems to have originated:
The use of the ‘moor’s head’ as a heraldic device dates from the 13th century. The emblem has connections to the Crusades, reflecting associating individual families with victories over the moors.â€
“Frederick’s use of black Africans can be explained by his desire to present himself as a ‘world ruler’. Their presence symbolised the extent of his power. Other families may have adopted the moor’s head on their arms to associate themselves with the Hohenstaufan dynasty.â€
The Moor’s head: http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=moor+flag+corsican&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi
Your own quotation declares that:
a) Not only are Moors Black Africans;
b) but that the Moorish head on the Spanish and Corsican flags is a Black African Moor.
Case close!
It appears that you are not reading your own lines Sceptic. It appears your own source, your own words even contradict you.
Case done!