What were ordinary people called in the Middle Ages. average life expectancy

SEXUAL LIFE OF A HUMAN IN THE MIDDLE AGES
(superficial judgments that do not claim to be fundamental)

It's him!
- Who is he?
- Boy!
- You didn't say anything about the boy!
Because I didn't want to talk about it!
From the americans. thin series "California"

Each of us - you, you, you, you and I -
I have my own personal life, which does not concern anyone -
not you, not you, not you, not you, and me too...
Sergei SOLOVYOV, film director (from a TV interview)

The world of medieval men and women was filled with strong and powerful passions.
In the medieval world, women were adored.
“I love you more than anyone! You alone are my love and my desire!”
But they also evoked hatred and disgust.
“A woman is just a bait of Satan, a poison for male souls,” wrote St. Augustine.
It was a world in which knowledge of medicine, physiology and hygiene of life was still insufficient.
"The mere sight of a menstruating woman can by itself cause disease in a healthy man."
It was a world where bishops get rich from prostitution and virgins "marry" Christ.
“Because I was standing next to the crucifix, I was overwhelmed with such fire that I took off all my clothes and offered all of me to Him.”
A world in which priests accuse their flock of extramarital affairs and other sexual sins.
“There is so much debauchery and adultery on all sides that only a few men are satisfied with their own wives” (1).
It was a time when in the dwellings of the church fathers and even in the palace of the Pope, everyone was indiscriminately engaged in a variety of sex, not disdaining intercourse with boys and young men, which was especially developed in monasteries.
"... the houses of the church fathers turn into a haven for harlots and sodomites."
It was a world in which God, according to the ministers of the church, promises to exterminate all mankind because of sinful aspirations. (As if one of them communicated with him or knows how to read his mind.)
“We must be afraid of human sensuality, whose fire broke out as a result of original sin, which established even greater depths of evil, producing various sins that caused divine wrath and its revenge” (2).

... "Really sexual relations began in 1963." So, at least, wrote the poet Philip Larkey. But this is not true. Sexual activity in the Middle Ages was as vigorous and varied as it is today. How diverse it was can be understood from the questions that medieval priests were obliged to ask their parishioners:
"Did you commit adultery with a nun?";
“Have you committed adultery with your stepmother, daughter-in-law, your son’s fiancée, mother?”;
"Have you made an instrument or device in the form of a penis and then tied it to your sexual organs and committed adultery with other women?"
“Did you not insert a device in the form of a penis into your mouth or into your anus, moving this tool of the devil there and receiving indecent male pleasure at the same time?”;
“Have you used the mouth and buttocks of your son, brother, father, servant boy for Sodomy pleasure?”;
“Have you done what some women do, who lie down in front of an animal and encourage him to copulate in any way possible. Have you copulated in the same way they did?”
Such interest suggests that sexual activity in the Middle Ages was no different from the sexual desires of people today! But the world in which all this happened was completely different! Knowledge about birth and hygiene, about life and death, physiology and human sexual desires was very different from today.
Considering that today people in all countries live up to 75-80 years, in the Middle Ages people barely reached the age of 40. Everyone has faced death own experience. Most people have seen a brother or sister die. Most parents have lost one or more children. In a medieval village of 100 houses, funerals could take place every eight days. This was facilitated by malnutrition, infections, disease, epidemics and wars.
Life in the Middle Ages was dangerous. It's easy to imagine medieval life as nasty, cruel, and short. At least, this was considered until recently: “At the heart of the early deaths of those years is the struggle for survival, the lack of pleasures, passions and the suppression of one’s sexuality.” But was it really so? Far from it! Medieval records suggest the passions that raged in various parts of society, the deep world of intimacy and sensuality, the close attention to love, sex and various pleasures. And some exotic ways to enhance them.
Many couples wanted to have fun, but in such a way that the woman would not "fly". But the easiest way to avoid fertilization was to cool the fire of desire. True, in this case, and pleasure could not be obtained. To put out the fire of his passion, "Guide to the Secrets of Women" recommended drinking the urine of a man. According to the authors of such nonsense, this should certainly work! There were other ways to avoid unwanted pregnancies. The monks, for example, recommended eating sage for this, which was cooked for three days. After that, allegedly, pregnancy does not occur for a whole year! There were more radical advice: if a woman swallows a bee, she will never get pregnant, and a man who will plant her deeply will feel pain and, probably, he will not want to ejaculate in her!
Since the church allowed sex only for procreation, it categorically rejected the use of contraception. The jurist Burchard, Bishop of Worms, even introduced penance (punishment) for a period of ten years for contraception. However, despite all these prohibitions, various contraceptives known since ancient times were used in practice: herbal tinctures, special exercises after intercourse, genital creams, vaginal suppositories and more. Coitus interruptus was also practiced, perhaps the most effective method of contraception at that time. Termination of pregnancy was resorted to in extreme cases and mostly dispensed with surgical intervention: heavy physical exertion, hot baths, tinctures and other drugs that cause miscarriage. A researcher on the history of contraception, John Noonan, noticed a very curious thing: if in the early Middle Ages much attention was paid to sexual positions, conspiracies and magical amulets as a means of contraception, then in the high and late Middle Ages it was already interrupted sexual intercourse and ejaculation of a man on a woman’s stomach or on a bed. .
Obviously, the medieval understanding of sexual relations was primitive. The anatomy was undeveloped and an autopsy was rarely performed. (Which, by the way, the church actively opposed. It was the lack of knowledge in the field of medicine that caused the outbreak of the most dangerous epidemics in crowded places - primarily in cities.) But this did not stop some of the greatest minds from revealing the secrets of sex. In the centers for the study of sciences throughout medieval Europe, scientists pondered topical issues.
What is the difference between men and women?
Why do people most often like sex, and are they ready to break all conceivable biblical prohibitions for the sake of sexual pleasure?
What is the nature of sexual satisfaction?
What is attraction? What is its essence? And is the devil guilty of it or is it still a divine gift?
The consensus reached by these male authors, many of whom were clerics, was that the woman was the problem. According to classical theory about the four fluids, men were conceived hot and dry. Which was good. The women were cold and wet. Which was bad. This made them sexually insatiable.
“A woman is more thirsty for copulation than a man, because the dirty is drawn to the good,” wrote St. Augustine.
The real mystery was how the female anatomy works. At Oxford in the 14th century, Dr. John Garsdon expressed the common belief of the Middle Ages that menstrual blood was in fact female semen. No wonder, it was thought, that women needed sex to get rid of this semen, menstrual blood.
“This blood is so disgusting that upon contact with it, fruits cease to grow, wine becomes sour, trees do not bear fruit, the air darkens and dogs become wild with rabies. The mere sight of a menstruating woman can by itself cause disease in a healthy man."
In a word, all women were poisonous in the literal sense of the word! (And not just some mothers-in-law, as they think now!)
Medieval thinking was as logical as ours, but based on different assumptions. It often came from religious doctrine or the opinion of ancient authorities. And the biblical story of the Garden of Eden dominated the explanation of the nature of female sexuality.
In the story of original sin, the devil chooses to deceive Eve, not Adam! As has been said, attack human nature where it is weakest. Eve's actions were an act of betrayal that few churchmen could forgive.
"Eve was a bait for Satan, a poison for men's souls," wrote Cardinal Peter Damien in the 11th century.
And he: “Evil from a woman! Women are the biggest evil in the world! Don't you women understand that Eve is you! You have desecrated the tree of knowledge! You disobeyed God's law! You convinced a man where the devil could not win by force! God's judgment on your sex still hangs over the world! You are guilty before men, and you must endure all hardships! You are the devil's gate!"
It is not surprising that with such an attitude towards women, medieval courtship was a rather unromantic activity that few dared to do. In general, marriage at that time was different from today's romantic ideal. He had very little to do with love, if at all. This appeared later.
Most often, it was an alliance between families and an agreement that included the transfer of some property. The wife was considered as part of this property. Such property should have been carefully inspected prior to the conclusion of the transaction. In 1319, Edward II sent the Bishop of Exater to inspect Philippa Edaena as a proposed wife for his young son. The bishop's report reads like a description of future property:
“The lady has attractive hair - a cross between blue-black and brown. The eyes are deep dark brown. The nose is quite even and even not upturned. Pretty big mouth. The lips are somewhat full, especially the lower ones. The neck, shoulders, her whole body and lower limbs are moderately well formed. All its members are well fitted and unmutilated. And on the day of Saint John this girl will be nine years old.”
The report was accepted by the customer with satisfaction. An agreement has been reached. Nine years later, Philippa married the son of Edward II, who later became Edward III.
And here is how the curiosity of a 13-year-old groom in relation to his bride is shown in the French feature series "Borgia":

“Have you seen my bride, brother?
- Saw.
- Your silence disturbs, brother! Calm down baby-Jofre!
- Be calm, Jofre, she is not horned!
- She's beautiful?
- Not.
- She's kind?
- Like, no!
Does she have anything good in her?
- She has two legs, a full set of eyes, ten toes!
- So, she is not beautiful and not kind ... She has two eyes, ten fingers ...
- I forgot my toes. Also ten, in my opinion!
- I marry only once, mother!
- Brother Jofre! She's not just beautiful!
- Yes?
- She's beautiful!
- Truth?
- She is an angel who grew up on the land of Naples! And know: if you do not marry, I will marry her myself!
- Truth?
- Yes true! Do you allow me?
- No, Juan! She is my bride!
- Yes, that's right! Who is the lucky one?..”

We add that the bride was five years older than her teenage fiancé. And later, brother Juan (this is a historical truth) could not resist his lust and right during the wedding celebrations, having improved the moment, he took the girl out of the hall and took possession of her in an empty room, standing, pressing against the wall, lowering his pants, pulling up her wedding dresses, lifting her legs.
Here's this scene from the movie:

"Be good to him! Promise?
- Like this?
- He is my little brother!
- But how, "good"?
<Тут у обоих одновременно наступает бурный оргазм. Оба стонут, извиваются, переживают наслаждения, глубоко дышат...>
- That's it! .. That's it! ..
- So I can! .. Yes! .. Yes! .. "

After that, the bride, well inseminated by her older brother, went to "be kind" with her inexperienced young husband...
In all marriages, the woman's property and belongings became the property of her husband. Just like the woman herself.
The law often allowed husbands to treat their wives however they pleased. Therefore, on their wedding night, many young men and women subtly raped their young wives, considering only their desires and feelings, sincerely believing that they want the same and that they would like it. The cries of the young wife deprived of innocence during the wedding night delighted all the guests, the parents of the groom and even the parents of the bride. And in the morning, the young husband could publicly and in detail savor how, in what position and how many times he took possession of his young wife, how pleased he was, how his dearest wife did not want it, in what way, how he forced her to copulate and how it hurt during defloration.
“It is lawful for a man to beat his wife when she harms him, unless he kills or maims her,” said English law.
The female part of humanity, invoked as the cause of original sin, feared for its sexuality and taken in exchange for property, livestock or goods, and sometimes subjected to violence for its pleasure and satiety, was by no means happy.
In the period of the late Middle Ages and the early Renaissance, cruelty against women was a manifestation of the sexuality of young people in Venice as well. Rape was considered a serious crime if it was committed against children, the elderly, or members of the upper class. Sexual violence against women of lower or equal status was not criminalized (as long as the victim remained alive and unharmed), and was sometimes even considered part of a courtship ritual. For example, some Venetian youths proposed to their chosen ones after they had taken possession of them several times, most often with the use of force. With rare exceptions, the rape of a young girl was part of the wedding ritual. When the older generation had already agreed on everything, the parents with their daughter (or son) came to visit the parents of the future groom (bride). A young man and a girl, under some plausible pretext, retired. And while the parents talked to each other about the weather and city news, the guy behind the wall took possession of his young guest, regardless of her desires. The girl's cries were ignored. The children returned to their parents: he was satisfied with the pleasures received and sexual release, she, who had known male power, inseminated by a young lustful baboon, was in tears. The parents of both were satisfied with the past evening, the guy too. And the girl?.. Who asked her about it? After some time there was a return visit, during which the girl no longer resisted her fiancé so much (mother explained everything to her in detail), but the ritual of returning to his parents - satisfied, and her - in tears was obligatory. And then, if the key fit the lock, an offer was made. Or another bride or groom was looking for. It is somewhat unclear how the issue of contraception was resolved in this case. However, there is evidence that many Venetians were not sure that the firstborn in their family was the offspring of the head of the family.
In general, in Venice, as in other European cities, there was an illegal, but very widespread sexual culture - prostitution, street and domestic rape, forced extramarital cohabitation. All this was the result of the fact that young people began to marry in more late age {3}.
From the early Middle Ages, the secular authorities and the church believed that it was impossible to rape your bride if there was an agreement between the parents, or your wife, since she gave her voluntary consent to sex when she got married. It was also not considered a crime to rape a prostitute, because she earns with her body. Gang rape was also common in the late Middle Ages. Any woman walking or walking alone through the streets in the evening risked being raped by a pack of young scoundrels. The attackers announced their approach by shouting “Whore!” In order to legitimize their further actions in this way. Often, the cries of the raped women either went unheeded or attracted to themselves by the fact that the townspeople, even armed and well-wielding a sword, joined the rapists in order to deprive their pleasure on this wonderful evening, especially if the victim was sexually attractive. A case is described when a very young servant girl, after being raped by three 18-year-old young nobles, continued to be taken by force by the guys from the city guard who came running to the cries of the guard. (Now, if it was a robbery, then they would intercede and detain the criminals!) It was an exception if one of the passers-by stood up for unknown woman for noble reasons. (After all, in his youth, this husband did the same thing: he caught victims and raped with his friends! Well, let the youth frolic!) Rather, one flock of guys, threatening another gang of youths with weapons, beat off the girl in order to become her first. Sometimes because of this, real fencing battles began on the streets with injuries and deaths of young people on both sides. During these fights, the girls were somehow forgotten (it was necessary to keep an eye on the enemy so as not to miss a dangerous injection or blow of a sword!) And they managed to slip away. Then it turned out like this: after a tense battle, the rivals retreated, there were wounded or even killed, and the prize with pretty eyes, a protruding ass and other fresh, appetizing forms, for the possession of which a swara began, disappeared! But it was a rare luck for the girls: the victim during the skirmishes was always carefully guarded by the younger members of the gang. I must say that sometimes the fights before the rape of the girls were provoked by older guys on purpose, because getting sexual release after a tough battle with a strong opponent was an exotic way to enhance the pleasure of copulation. For this, they did not even consider the possibility of the death of friends. Therefore, young men from adolescence were constantly trained, and then improved their art of owning a sword. It was not only prestigious, at that time the life of these undergrowths, and the number of girls they could recapture from their rivals, and then en masse to seize those who were considered whores depended on the reaction and ability to fence. Take possession here, right on the street...
They returned home in the morning. The servant helped to undress, put the young master to bed. (It was not customary to wash, to take care of oneself.) And, young man, remembering what happened during the evening (those fights in which he participated, and those girls whom he had), falling asleep, he thought: yes, the day was not in vain! ..
French researcher Jacques Rossiod believes that young people deliberately sought to "spoil" as many girls as possible, thus expressing dissatisfaction with the social order. I suppose this is the primitive thinking of a person who, apparently, has read Marxist literature, after which public protests appear everywhere, even in obvious criminality (in modern times). How does this researcher imagine it? Probably so:
- Hey, guys, let's protest with this girl the existing order in our glorious Venice! Well, bring her here!
- Yes, be quiet, you fool, do not get out! We will only protest and let you go!.. Now, I’m already lowering my pants for protest!.. We, the protesters, are only ten people!..
- Spread your legs! .. You see how the desire to protest is already bursting me! It will get worse!
- Oh, how well my protest went! .. Who is next to protest? ..
- Oh, homies, how great we protested today! Wonderful night! Let Venice know: we are against it!..
No! Young people (most often with servants peers who were responsible for their master to his parents, and sometimes took part in the rape of victims after masters) willingly joined gangs, usually consisting of five or six (maximum 15) people aged from 18 to 20 years for the purpose of having fun and raping a group of girls and pretty women. Apparently, they were attracted not only by the chance to assert themselves, to get sensations unknown in adolescence, to “become an adult”, but also to see the exposure female body, which is not available in everyday life (how, to the horror of crazy hypocrites, how can one not think about the beneficial effects of pornography!), to notice fear in the eyes of his future victim. In addition, some were attracted by the opportunity to gain experience, to look at the sexual intercourse of their half-naked friends from the side (after all, there was no photo and video porn then!), And some were also excited by the fact that they were watching him during sexual intercourse ...
Here is what one of the Venetian rake wrote to his close friend:
“... In the evening you were not with us again! It's a shame your father didn't let you go. You lost a lot yesterday. The two girls we made whores have come to know us. One cried, tried to pay off, offering us<свой>wallet<с деньгами>. We wished (i.e. took by force) only her honor, not only, as usual, but also in a way condemned<церковью>(four). Both blood and tears<было>a lot of.<...>
You said that you admire (in the sense: excites) when you see how guys play (i.e. enjoy) with a girl. It also delights me (in the sense: turns me on). What you! Especially when I know<во время моего сношения>you are watching me. At such moments, I always want you to be with us (that is, near). Feelings of this<когда ты за мной наблюдаешь во время моего полового акта>are Arkhangelsk (5).<...>
Are you coming today? Make your father let you go! Do you want my father to talk to yours (6)? After all, our walks cost us nothing but a sleepless night. And now there is a girl near her husband or in her father's house, whom we will make today a city whore. Cynus!<...>I'm already burning with desire! Rather, the night! .. "(7)
At the head of such gangs was a slightly older leader. The appearance of such packs in the late Middle Ages testified to a significant decrease in the influence of the church, since the members of the gangs themselves often called themselves "monastic brotherhood", and their leader was called "prince", "king" or even "abbot". Young men left such groups on the day of their marriage. But there were also exceptions. In particular, if the young man was in one of the main positions, he could afford to be in a gang until the age of 30, especially if the guy was one of those who liked to watch the sexual intercourse of others from the side, or to have someone watch, how he does it - both are not available in the matrimonial bedroom. It was these men who, having become older, equipped their bedrooms with mirrors (which at that time were incredibly expensive), which could somehow make it possible to “look” at the sexual intercourse from the side or imagine that someone is watching you. For the same purpose, young servants were called into the bedroom, in the presence of which they had sex with spouses, maids or mistresses (whence the expression “hold a candle”, that is, see copulation). One must think that the young servant boys did not experience any particular disgust at the same time - after all, young people have always been interested in sex, and not only in our time, as some illiterate hypocrites believe. In addition, the walls of the premises were equipped with secret eyes, which made it possible to spy on the sex of young servants, and sometimes eminent guests.
In addition to men, the gang sometimes included girls who lured innocent victims into secluded corners, or were “on the hook” during ritual rapes to deflower innocent girls. They had immunity as long as they acted as future wives of gang members.
The groups acted openly, the local authorities were well aware of what was happening in the cities, because often the sons of these same officials and nobles were members of the gangs. The secular authorities and the church not only did not pay any attention to gang rapes, but, on the contrary, were interested in them. Sexual violence on the streets of the city acted as a kind of restraining force for obstinate young ladies and overly active prostitutes, and also gave guys a sexual and emotional outlet. As victims, the rapists chose mainly the wives and daughters of laborers, prostitutes, mistresses of priests, divorced women, or simply servants. Therefore, fathers protected their daughters, and husbands protected their wives. But the girls themselves were very careful: alone, they appeared on the street only during the day, and in the evening - only accompanied by someone, as a rule, armed and able to wield a sword or other melee weapons. If the girl was defiantly dressed and went out into the street without an escort, then in the event of her rape, only she herself was to blame. Therefore, many young women dressed very chastely and led a mostly domestic lifestyle.
Only in very rare cases were rapists punished, most often if a woman was seriously injured or died. Injuries from repeated sexual intercourse with several males in a row were not considered as evidence of damage to the health of a woman. In the late Middle Ages, only 14 percent of cases of sexual abuse were punished by two years in prison or severe flogging. Most of the cases brought to court were punished either by fines or short imprisonment. The most severe punishments were received by offenders who encroached on the honor of the wives and daughters of the upper class and high-ranking officials. But this was also a great rarity, because such ladies did not appear on the streets of cities late at night without armed guards.
And suddenly, in a society that put women so low, there was a revolution that turned everything inside out. It began in southern France in the 12th century. Troubadours, itinerant poets and musicians began to talk about women and about love in a completely different way. They sang about deep, idealized sexual passion. Their poems reached the ears of one of the most influential women of that time, the daughter of King Louis VII of France, Marie de Champagne. Marie's court was a haven for singers, writers and poets. He soon became famous for the exciting ideas of the troubadours.
>> "When I lay down, all night and the next day
I keep thinking: how can I serve your grace.
My body rejoices and is full of joy because I think of you!
My heart belongs to you!”
The poets put the woman on a pedestal. She was worshiped as a distant and inaccessible object. They were her suffering lovers.
>> "I lost my will and stopped being myself
From the moment you let me look into your eyes!”
Thus the idea of ​​falling in love was born.
Of course, people talked about love before that time. But it was more lustful love. The poetry that captured the imagination of the ladies of the court, such as Marie de Champagne, was something special. It was an idealized kind of sexual passion, and sex was, as it were, a reward for passionate desires and worship of the object of one's adoration. Sometimes this love is called courtly or courtly love. Her hot ideas spread from court to court throughout Europe. And new generations of writers and poets began to sing of new views on love.
One of the most famous is Etienne de Trois, the author of a story about passion and adultery. His famous love story between Lancelot and Jenivera, a great knight in the court of King Arthur and the Queen, is punctuated by thrilling events of true love. For his wealthy patron and ladies of the court, this was the standard by which to measure the behavior of men and form an idea of ​​their own sexual worth. For courtly lovers, such feelings were exquisite love.
“If she does not heal me with a kiss, she will kill me and curse herself! Despite all the suffering, I do not refuse sweet love!
Lancelot tries to win the love of the queen, he exposes himself to untold dangers, including crossing a bridge made from a sword blade. Geneviere eventually relents and sets up a midnight date:
“Today, when everyone is asleep, you can come and talk to me at that window!”
It seems to Lancelot that the day drags on like a century. As soon as night falls, the queen appears in a purple cloak and furs. But iron bars separate them. Lancelot grabbed the bars, tensed up and pulled them out. Finally, there are all the possibilities for adultery. Now Lancelot had everything he wanted: he held his beloved in his arms. He held her in his arms. Their touches were so tender, sweet, that through kisses and hugs they experienced such joy and surprise, which they had never known before.
The influence of this bold, new literature was dramatic. Exquisite love, unrequited love, mutual love, tragic love, adultery. For the first time, noble ladies were exposed to passionate love literature with sophisticated love fantasies about a devoted noble lover who needed not so much their naked bodies and the opportunity to copulate with them, but their appearance, their voice, their feelings, and most importantly, their love.
The new poets challenged the old dogmas. Can love exist in marriage? Or should it be free? Does love survive by becoming public? Is it true that a new love puts an old one to flight, or is it possible to love two women?
“He who is tormented by thoughts of love, whether for a man or a woman, sleeps and eats little.” These words belong to Chaplain Andrew, who is only known to have been at the court of the aforementioned Marie de Champagne. His treatise "On Love" was similar to modern tutorials on the seduction of ladies and love relationships. Writers like Chaplain Andrew were themselves pioneers of love, blazing trails in this new, bold, emotional world. Most surprisingly, such writers were able to move away from the far unromantic relationships that existed between medieval men and women.
Why did the cult of exquisite love gain such popularity? Was it a release valve for emotional pressure and sexual energy? Was this all a natural development of religious love, in which the aristocracy honed their sexual manners? Nobody can say for sure! But the main ideas of this love were assimilated by a wide medieval culture. And they have caused scandals, even violence. It was one thing to discuss codes of love in aristocratic circles, and another to live by them!
One of the most remarkable medieval stories is a passionate, dramatic and seemingly true love story between Adelyard and Aloise.
The young scholar Peter Adelyard arrived in Paris in 1100, when exquisite love had already swept Europe. In Paris, he met the young and beautiful Alois. She lived with her uncle, a former canon at Notre Dame Cathedral.
“I burn with the fire of desires for this girl. And I decided: she will be the only one in my bed! ”, - wrote Peter Adelyard.
Peter Adelyard became a home teacher, a mentor to a very young girl, Aloisa.
“If the uncle of my passion had entrusted the lamb to a predatory wolf, I would be less surprised! Our books lay between us, but we had more words of love than reading. We had more kisses than teachings. My hands touched her breasts and her peach under dresses more often than the pages. Our desires have not left a single position and degree of love untested. I taught her to give herself to a man the way we both wanted. And not a single girl's cavity remained without innocence ... "
Soon, from this unbridled passion of a young insatiable teacher, the girl became pregnant. The young mentor's uncle was angry! And Abeler proposed to his beloved. However, she did not agree to marry her seducer for a long time. Aloisa had her own, rather unconventional ideas. According to her, only free-given love had meaning and the right to exist, and not what she called "the chains of marriage." And Peter wrote:
“The name of a wife seems to many more sacred and valuable, but for me the word mistress, or concubine, or harlot will always be sweeter.”
Aloisa used the thoughts of writers and troubadours about exquisite love, which said that true love can only exist outside of marriage. Such attitudes were contrary to the conditions that bound medieval society. In the end, her loved ones insisted and Aloisa agreed to a secret marriage. Peter Adelyard married his beauty. But a little later, the young woman suddenly retired to the nunnery. Her uncle and relatives suspected that Peter had deceived them by avoiding marriage by making her a nun. Their revenge was swift and brutal.
“One night I slept peacefully in the back room of my dwelling. They bribed one of my servants to let them in. And cruelly retaliated against me in such a terrible barbaric way that it shocked the whole world. They cut off a part of my body through which I committed the injustice they complained about."
After that, Adelyard retired to a monastery forever, and Aloisa actually became a nun. Their correspondence gives us an opportunity to look inside the medieval affairs of the heart.
Years later, Alois, having already become abbess, in her letter to Adelard said that she was still experiencing a strong sexual attraction to her castrated husband:
“The pleasure we then shared was too sweet. It is unlikely that he can be expelled from my thoughts, awakening melancholy and fantasies. Even during mass, obscene visions of those pleasures overwhelm my unfortunate soul. And all my thoughts are in debauchery, and not in prayers.
The ideas that began with the troubadours have transformed our culture. The language of romance, sexual longing was born, unrequited love and unbridled desires. The principles established in the Middle Ages persist to this day.
However, nothing could be more offensive to the medieval church than the idea of ​​human sexual pleasure. In the 13th century in England there were about 40,000 clergy, 17,000 monks, 10,000 parish priests, and they had to interfere in the sexual life of believers. Of course, the views of the church on the carnal pleasures of the flock (and not their own) differed significantly from the views of the troubadours.
“The dirty embrace of the flesh gives off fumes and contaminates anyone who sticks to it. And no one escapes unscathed from the sting of pleasure."
The Church Fathers worked tirelessly to turn their flock away from the sensual pleasures they officially denied.
“This is a sinful act, an abominable act, bestial copulation, a shameless union. This is a dirty, stinking, dissolute business!”
An author in the twelfth century had a useful hint on how to control lustful desires for a woman:
“Try to imagine what her body looks like inside. Think about what is under the skin inside the body! What could be more disgusting to look at, more disgusting to touch, more stinking to breathe. And if that wasn't enough, try to imagine her dead body! What could be more terrible than a corpse, and what in the world could be more disgusting for her lover, who until recently was full of wild desire for this fetid flesh.
In the medieval world, people were in the middle between animals and angels. Unfortunately for the priests, the animal always won in sex.
Then the church put forward its own alternative to the immorality of sex.
“Virginity is the highest dignity, magnificent beauty, source of life, incomparable song, crown of faith, support for hope. A mirror of purity, closeness to angels, food and support for the most enduring love."
In the monasteries, virginity was a treasure to be dedicated only to the divine bridegroom. Here the young woman became the "bride of Christ." The virginity of these young ladies was a treasure to be dedicated to Jesus. Medieval texts often say that there is still something sensual in a woman's passionate devotion to Christ. Jacques Demitre in 1220 describes several nuns so weakened by the ecstasy of love for the son of God that they were already forced to rest from reading the Bible. They melted away from the astounding love of the god until they buckled under the burden of desire. For many years they did not get out of bed.
“Oh noble eagles and tender lamb! O burning flame, embrace me! How long can I stay dry? One hour is too hard for me! One day is like a thousand years!
At times the distinction between sensual and spiritual love disappears altogether.
A certain Angela of Folinia took the idea of ​​being "the bride of Christ" quite literally:
“I stood in front of the crucifix and was overwhelmed with such fire that I took off all my clothes and offered all of me to Him. I promised Him, although I was afraid, to always maintain my chastity and not offend him with any of my members. My feeling is more transparent than glass, whiter than snow, brighter than the sun ... "

Cutting your hair is a symbol that you renounce your earthly beauty... And now you dedicate yourself to the Lord Jesus Christ... You will become Christ's bride, a servant of Christ... Christ will be your love, your bread, wine, your water. ..
(From the French artistic series "Borgia")

The cult of virginity dominated the minds of many women, sometimes giving rise to genuine tragedies.
Take the story of the Baptism of Marquiate. She was from a prosperous English family. A guy from her entourage, Veprod, wooed her and received the approval of her parents. But Christina agreed on one condition: she would remain a virgin for life. She had already sworn to that. Her parents laughed at her, did not allow her to go to church often, go to parties with her friends and gave her love potions. Finally, they agreed with Veprod that they would let him into the house at night. But Christina did not allow the guy to talk about love and take her to bed, but began to tell exemplary stories of chaste marriages. In the event of marriage, she promised to live with him in such a way that "so that other townspeople do not mock you that I refused you." But, nevertheless, she must remain a virgin.
These moralizing conversations were, apparently, so boring that the guy lost his desire. Veprod this time was left without sex.
Friends laughed at him and teased him. Therefore, he made another attempt to penetrate the house and take possession of it in order to deprive his love of these absurd ideas once and for all. Burning with lust, not without the help of relatives of the girl, the guy broke into the bedroom to rape his future wife. But she somehow miraculously hid from him in the depths of the house.
Christina's stubbornness and stupidity infuriated her parents. Her father threatened to kick her out of the house, and her mother grabbed the girl by the hair and beat her. Only visions of the Virgin Mary supported her in trials. To avoid the wrath of the family and sexual intercourse with the groom, Christina ran away from home and became a recluse. Two years later, Veprod gave in and freed her from marriage obligations, and soon married another girl who had a less absurd character.
Christina and the cult of virginity emerge victorious from this bitter family conflict. This girl founded a convent, where she received equally absurd fools and died a virgin, devoted in her "marriage" to Christ. (Lord, there are such stuffed fools!)
Most, of course, would rather marry a flesh-and-blood man or woman than a mythical god, even the most beautiful. People wanted marriage, sexual intercourse, the pleasures of it, and children. But the bedroom and sex were the territories that the church stubbornly wanted to subjugate and completely control. However, marriages in the early Middle Ages had little to do with the church. They were entered into very informally.
Here is a description of a peasant wedding given by a witness in a lawsuit in Jötte:
“At three o'clock after nine, John Big Shorney, sitting on a bench, called Margeret to him and said to her: “Will you be my wife?” And she answered: “Yes, I will, if you want!” And taking right hand mentioned Margeret, John said: “- Margeret, I take you as my wife! And in joy, and in sorrow, I will be with you until the end of my days!
Such an ordinary approach horrified the church authorities. In 1218 the charter for the Diocese of Salisbury was amended. It was legalized that marriages should be celebrated with reverence and honor, and not with laughter and jokes in a tavern or at public drinking parties. No one has the right to put a ring on a finger, made of reeds or other material, cheap or precious, on a girl’s hand in order to freely commit adultery with her, because he can later say that he was joking, although in fact he bound himself with marital duties. ” .
"Marriage," the church argued, "is not a contract, but a religious event."
Over time, it was declared a sacrament, like baptism or confession.
As far as sex was concerned, for the church, marriage did not excuse unlimited lovemaking. What Saint Augustine said became a proverb: “Passionate love for one’s own wife is adultery!” Procreation was the only legitimate reason for sexual intercourse. And it was a big responsibility. And no pleasure and thoughts about it!
Only the church, through its religious courts, dealt with what should or should not happen in the marriage bed.
John, a man from York, was accused by his wife of impotence. Various efforts were made to awaken him. This procedure has been documented in court records:
“The witness exposed her bare breasts, and with her hands, warmed by the fire, held and rubbed John's naked member and his testicles, hugging and kissing them often. She excited him before the court to show courage and potency, urging him to prove them to the judges and take her right here on the table in the courtroom. She pointed out to the court that all this time his penis remained barely 7 centimeters long, without any signs of enlargement and hardness ... "(6)
In 1215, in Rome, Pope Innocent III intervened sharply in the sexual affairs of believers. He issued a bull, according to which all Christians were required to confess their sins and sinful thoughts at least once a year. This decision was supposed to help the clergy root out depravity. To help priests take confession, decide what questions to ask, assess the seriousness of the sins they hear about, and understand what to do about them, encyclopedias known as the Confessor's Guide were widely circulated. The biggest chapter in this guide to sin was, of course, sex. The main idea for confessors: sexual relations can only be in marriage and only for the birth of heirs. Any other form of sexual activity, including sex for pleasure and not for conception, sex by rubbing the penis against the chest, buttocks, between the legs of the wife without inserting it inside the woman, and even more so self-satisfaction, ejaculation outside the woman's body, were considered a sin.
But even in marriage, sexual relations were not an easy issue. To avoid sin, the church had a checklist that a husband must first read before having his wife:
"Is your wife menstruating?"
"Is your wife pregnant?"
"Is your wife breastfeeding a child?"
"Now is the great post?"
"Now is the second coming of Christ?"
"Today is Sunday?"
"Is it a week since Trinity?"
"Easter week?"
"Is today Wednesday or Friday?"
“Is today a fast day? Holiday?"
"Are you naked?"
"Are you in church?"
"Did you wake up this morning with a stiff penis?"
If you answered “no” to all these questions, then the church, so be it, on this day allowed married couples to have sex once a week and never again! But only in a missionary position, in the dark, with eyes closed, without groans, even if you want to scream with pleasure and without showing your other half that you were pleased! Otherwise, God's disfavor and hell await you! After all, He is the all-seeing eye, he watches over all of us, and even such a bastard will not turn away when you enjoy with your beloved wife (option: with your beloved husband)! And, God forbid, not in the position that He prescribed to us through His prophets, or did not do it the way and not what He likes in the sexual acts of people! Fuck you! In that world, he will definitely punish!
Thus, the church regulated when, where, with whom, and in what way one could have sex. Those who broke these rules even in thought were to be punished. Punishment or penance included a complex system of hunger strikes and abstinences separately for each sin:
For adultery, even in thoughts - penance for two years!
For treason twice - five years!
For sex with an animal - seven years!
There were also special questions for women:
"Have you used your husband's sperm to ignite your passion?" - five years!
"Have you secretly added your menstrual blood to your husband's food to agitate him?" - ten years!
“Would you like your husband to bite or kiss your breasts?” - five years!
“Have you ever wanted your husband to kiss or lick between your legs?” - seven years!
"Would you like to take your husband's penis in the pharynx?" - six years!
"Did you want to swallow your husband's seed?" - seven years!
“Have you watched your husband ejaculate? - two years!
“Did you give yourself to your husband, throwing your legs over his shoulders?” - one year!
“The same, in the position, sitting on his lap?” - two years!
"The same if you're on top of a man?" - three years!
“Did you allow yourself to be mastered in a doggy position, on all fours?” - four years!
“Have you ever had a desire to give yourself to your husband in the anus?” - nine years.
The process of confessions and penances regulated every aspect of the believers' sexual life and systematized a sliding scale of punishments. And for those who chose to defy the rules, there was a completely different level of investigation and retribution.
Aside from the mystery of confession stood a religious court, one where the sins of the believers were to be exposed and publicly judged. The creation of religious courts greatly expanded the church's control over people's behavior, including in bed. Confession was common. It was completely different! Because of a misunderstood phrase said in a tavern, anyone could be called to court on suspicion of his behavior and the assumption that in bed, even with his wife, he does something that is not approved by the church. The minds of church authorities were occupied with intimate relationships, and even with the sinful thoughts of man. Judges could impose harsh punishments, excommunications, fines, public penances, and executions by stake, hanging, or drowning.
Here are the records from the books with records of court cases that were obeyed by the ecclesiastical judicial authorities in the dioceses of some English cities in the 14th century:
“John Warren was accused of extramarital affairs with Helen Lanson. Both appeared and confessed their sin, and swore not to sin again under penalty of a fine of 40 pence. Both were ordered to be whipped publicly three times near the church.
“Thomas Thornton, clergyman, is believed to have had an extramarital affair with Aless, daughter of Robert Masner. As punishment for seducing a church official, she was sentenced to 12 lashes in the marketplace and 12 lashes outside the church, naked, wearing only one shirt.” (“The seduced” minister of the church, presumably, escaped with a slight fright.)
“Teenager Michael Smith, 13 years old, was convicted of sinful thoughts while singing in the church choir, because during the service his pants bulged when he saw the priest bending over the fallen gospel, turned his back to him. Sentenced to 10 lashes outside a church." (Apparently, the priest who dropped the book unknowingly gave away that pose that the teenager focused his attention on it!)
“Edwin Cairncros, a teenager of 14 years old, was convicted of masturbating with his pants down, lying on his side, while simultaneously sticking a saliva-moistened forefinger into his anus and lowering his sinful seed in front of him on the straw. Sentenced to 14 lashes in the marketplace."
“Alain Solostell, aged 15, the son of a fishmonger, repeatedly allowed his dog to lick his penis, testicles and anus, confessed to receiving sinful pleasure from this several times, while lowering his semen on his stomach or on his dog’s tongue. Sentenced to 18 lashes outside a church. The dog was hanged. Alain Solostell cried, asked to spare the animal, showed that it was his fault, accustoming the dog to sin. He asked the court to increase his punishment to 40 blows, just to save the life of the dog. The court remained adamant."
“Beatrice, daughter of William Ditis, is pregnant by no one knows. Appeared in the meeting room and confessed to sin. She was pardoned. I vowed not to sin again. Sentenced to 6 lashes outside a church on Sunday and holidays before the whole procession" (8).
Religious authorities relied heavily on fear and shame to maintain order among the congregation and keep them within the bounds of their permitted sexual relations. The church apparatus across the country has been enlisted to have access to the sexual activity of believers! For the church, sexual purity was the ideal. But physiologically to any healthy person it was difficult to live up to the ideal, including for priests and members of religious tribunals.
Take, for example, a book transcribed by the monks of St Augustine's Abbey in Canterbury around 1200. The first half of the book is harmless and rather boring. This is the history of the English bishops. But at the end there is a series of pornographic stories written by the monks with great sexual details and, obviously, they enjoyed. One of them concerns the story of a husband and wife who undertook a pilgrimage to the "holy land". One night they took refuge in the depths of a cave. But then nine Saracens enter the cave (9). They light torches, undress and begin to bathe, helping each other. From touch they are excited.
When the woman saw the powerful genitals of young guys, rearing members, she was so excited that she immediately forced her husband to repeatedly make love to her. (One must think that the Saracens do not hear anything and do not notice anything!) On the fourth time, the hubby could no longer and fell asleep. Then the woman offered herself to the Saracens. All nine...
This is followed by a fairly detailed description of group sex with her young lustful males. Nine guys had her in different poses and in all cavities, alternately changing each other, or even simultaneously in two. (It was the husband's turn to pretend that he was sleeping.) But the Saracens were simply exhausted during the night by this lustful female.
In the morning, all of them, sleepy (except for the husband), but satisfied (including the husband), parted, warmly saying goodbye. However, having visited the “holy land” and bowed to the “holy places”, this lady was cleansed of “filth” and sinful thoughts, became a respectable parishioner, did not allow intimacy, even with her husband ... (If this is so, it remains only to sympathize her spouse. Although, however ... I wonder if there is at least one person who believes in such an absurd religious end to this story? One might think that from a pilgrimage to the "holy land" the physiology of a woman in some miraculous way religion) has changed!.. But, most likely, without such an artificially created ending, this plot could not have been included in such a collection.)
Priests were supposed to be single late medieval the church authorities decided that they could no longer marry. However, you can put on a dignity, but what to do with your physiology? Therefore, most of them circumvented these prohibitions, in their youth living with mistresses, wives of other men, or finding joy with boys and young servants, skillfully corrupting them. Even then, the people understood perfectly well that priests are endowed with the same human and sexual desires as everyone else. Therefore, he willingly laughed at the servants of God, who put on a vow of celibacy. The clergy became the targets of satirical pamphlets and poems:
>> “What do priests do without their own wives?
They are forced to look for others.
They have no fear, they have no shame
When married women are taken to bed
Or beautiful boys...
The medieval clergy had other ways to satisfy their sexual desires, using methods even older than the church itself. Records from the Dijon brothel in France indicate that at least 20% of the clientele were churchmen. Elderly monks, itinerant monks, canons, parish priests - they all visited prostitutes in the city baths. Therefore, venereal diseases spread very quickly.
Medieval brothels could provide churchmen, in addition to sexual satisfaction, also with a good income. The Bishop of Ventchester was regularly paid from the brothels in Salsford's red-light district. That is why prostitutes from there were called "Venchester geese."
But what is due to Jupiter is not due to the bull. The behavior of the clergy and their participation in depraved sex did not prevent the clergy from punishing their flock for most types of sexual activity of believers.
However, there was one kind of sex that the church in other people condemned especially severely ... The sin of sodomy! It turns out that medieval churchmen understood male homosexuality quite well! And then there was someone to punish! It was a time when thousands of men lived together in communities and rarely saw women.
“My eyes long to see your face, the most beloved! My arms reach out for your embrace! My lips yearn for your kisses! So that there is no left for me in the world of desires, your company will make my soul full of joy in the future.
Such words sound erotic even to today's heterosexually oriented readers, if one imagines that they are written to a lady. But such language was very common among young men of that time and had a pronounced homosexual coloring. And the above lines are addressed specifically to a young man, as the story tells, a young man of rare physical beauty.
What lustful rabbit wrote them? Perverted aristocrat? An unbridled citizen? A peasant not afraid of God? No. These lines are written by the most zealous campaigner against homosexuality, Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury. According to Anselm, "this deadly vice spread throughout England." The bishop warned that the islanders would face the fate of the lustful inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah if they were subjected to this sin. However, the punishment for the sin of Sodom is waiting for someone else, the bishop himself does not shy away from such relations, apparently believing that closeness to God will protect him from divine punishments.
Fearing divine retribution, medieval society imposed horrendous punishments for any kind of sexual behavior that was considered unnatural. Castration was the punishment in Portugal and Castile, and hanging for a man's penis in Sieny. In 1288, in Polonia, homosexual contacts were punished by death by burning at the stake. But somehow, always, at all times, there was some indestructible group of people who experienced an irresistible sexual attraction to people of the same sex, no matter how terrible the punishment could be. For, as Nicholas Stoller states, "The real delight<…>we experience when we balance between danger and peace.”
According to the church, homosexuals were no better off in the afterlife. Some depictions of late medieval Italy show sodomites burning in eternal hell. One of the images shows a sodomite who is pierced through the anus to the mouth with a skewer and the devil roasts him over a hot fire. The other end of the skewer coming out of the sinner's mouth enters the mouth of another naked guy sitting next to him. There is a clear allusion here, where the punishment for homosexuals is a mirror image of their methods of obtaining sexual release. We see the allusion to anal sex by piercing the anus. And the pierced mouth is an allusion to oral sex.
At the end of the 14th century in Perugia, an Italian drama about the last judgment enumerates God's punishments to which sinners will undergo in hell. At the very climax of the drama, Christ describes the punishments for sodomites:
“You stinking sodomites tormented me day and night! Get out immediately to hell, and stay there in torment! Immediately send them to the fire, as they sinned against nature! You damned sodomites, roast like pigs!”
And then Satan tells one of the devils to turn this homosexual roast well. It's a very clear allusion to the roasting sodomite...
In general, Christian Europe, the entire flock (acre, of course, God's servants who sinned with their lovers in the same way - humanity did not invent anything new in sex) was waiting for such a terrible punishment for such unbridled sexual deviation.
A religious court could consider any ejaculation of a man outside a woman's vagina as a "sodomic sin": between her breasts, thighs, or buttocks, in her arm, on a woman's face, on her back, or on her stomach. Any man could be called a sodomite if he had a Jewess, or a Jew if he slept with a non-Jewish woman. And this in Spain, Portugal or France could end in burning at the stake. So, the draconian Nuremberg Laws were not an invention of German Nazism!
At the same time, many of the most holy popes of Rome did not disdain to deal with the “sin of Sodom”, in spite of outward appearances. negative attitude to him the Roman Catholic Church and "holy" scripture.
Of the popes, they became famous for their homosexuality: Vigilius (among other things, he loved young boys. And once he killed with a rod the unfortunate 12-year-old teenager who dared to resist him. This led to a rebellion. The rebellious people dragged the pope out of the palace and dragged him through the streets on a rope Rome, subjecting him to scourging. However, everything ended there. The publicly flogged pope returned to the palace in the evening and continued to rule the Catholics as if nothing had happened until he was poisoned by his successor.), Martin I and bestiality), Sergius I (even issued a bull, according to which everything is permitted, as long as it was covered), Nicholas I, John VIII (fell in love with a handsome married man, whom he ordered to be kidnapped and with whom he later cohabited, while in revenge was not poisoned by his lover's wife), Adrian III, Benedict IV (during which, as stated in a letter from his contemporary priest, the houses of the church fathers "turn into resorts of harlots and sodomites"), Boniface VII, Boniface IX, Sylvester III, John XII, Gregory VII, Innocent II, John XII (ascended the papal throne at 18), Benedict IX (received papal power at 15), Paul II (known for collecting antiques and ancient art, whose obligatory attribute was a naked beautiful male nature, seduced the beautiful monks who served him), Sixtus IV (who shamelessly raised his lovers to the cardinal dignity), Calist III (who corrupted his own son and cohabited with him without a twinge of conscience), Innocent X (introduced to the board of cardinals of his lover Astalli - a young man with whom he passionately fell in love), Alexander VI Borgia, Alexander VII (whom subordinates called "the child of Sodom" behind their backs), Julius II (cohabited with bastard sons, nephews, cardinals), Leo X ( was the lover of Julius II), Paul III, Julius III, Sixtus V, Innocent X, Adrian VII, Pius VI...
Oh, yes, how many of them were there - Sodom and Gomorrah! ..
Yes, dads! Saint Augustine himself, the founder of Catholic asceticism (to which he apparently came after he became impotent) in his "Confession" repented that in his youth he indulged in this "shameful love."
The founder of the Order of the Jesuits, Ignatius Loyola, who loved young novices, was also a homosexual! Loved very young boys and young guys and the founder of the Franciscan order, Francis of Assia! What do they all care about biblical prohibitions when it comes to their own sexuality, personal physiology and their own pleasures! Prohibitions are for others, for the flock, for these sheep who sincerely believe in everything that is written in the Bible! schools")
... I must say, the "prophets" in general often foreshadowed death. (Otherwise, who will listen to them!?) They soon demanded terrible protection.
In 1348 William of Edandon, Bishop of Winchester, wrote to all the clergy of his diocese:
“It is with regret that we report the news that has reached our ears. A cruel plague began to attack the coastal regions of England. Although the Lord punishes us for our frequent sins, it is not in human power to understand the divine plan. One must be afraid of human sensuality, whose fire flared up as a result of original sin, which established even greater depths of evil, producing various sins that caused divine wrath and its revenge.
The Black Death killed half the population of Europe. The infected were swollen with boils the size of an egg or an apple. They vomited black and green liquid and coughed up blood. This resulted in a quick and painful death. Relations fell apart.
“Brother left brother, uncle left nephew, sister left brother and wife left husband,” lamented Boccaccio.
For Bishop of Rocher Thomas Brinton, the onset of the plague was God's punishment for the sins of his contemporaries:
“There is so much debauchery and adultery on all sides that only a few men are satisfied with their own wives. But every man covets his neighbor's wife, keeps a stinking mistress, or makes nightly pleasures with a boy. This is behavior that deserves a terrible and miserable death,” he wrote.
The Black Death was the apocalypse of the 14th century. But so it was! It was a payment for non-observance of elementary hygiene, about which even doctors then had a vague idea. Non-compliance with hygiene, not God's punishment for "sins"! As soon as people began to wash more often, wash their hands before eating, regularly change bedding and "God's punishments" immediately stopped. Although the physiology and sexual desires of a person remained at the same level!
medieval world was much less reliable than our current one. The complex world of passion and romance, misogyny and eternal love to his beloved, for whom it is not scary to die, infant mortality and adult cruelty, piety and poetry, human stupidity and the search for truth. In that world there were girls who were seduced by men, and boys who attracted mature husbands with their youth, virgins devoted to Christ, and priests who indulged in all the pleasures of the flesh. It was a life that, it must be said, became difficult for some, short for others. But just as sexually intense and not entirely cruel, if a person and his love knew how to keep the secrets of his sexuality from society, his confessors and the state ...

» After:

>> My sexuality is only my sexuality. It belongs to no one: not to my country, not to my religion, not to society, not to my brother, not to my sister, not to my family. No one!
Ashraf ZANATI
__________________________
(1) Author's note: So, maybe this is the norm of human existence and relationships, if the majority seeks to have fun on the side? And those few who are "satisfied with their own wives" are some kind of aberration? After all, adultery (sexual betrayal) is characteristic of the entire animal world. Zoologists have established: only two species remain faithful once and for all to their chosen partner - leeches and shrimps. But this is not because they are so "moral", intelligent and God-fearing, but because this is due to their physiological being. Like this! Everything! The rest seek to diversify their sensations! Therefore, the norm is where the majority is! And the sexual relations of a human being are no exception here ...
(2) Author's note: God has nothing else to do - first give a person sexual pleasure, and then forbid him to use it, prescribing what and how to do, and what and how not! And follow, follow everyone, literally everyone, in order to be sure to punish them later! Not a god, but some kind of sadist!
(3) Guido Ruggiero "The Limits of Eros".
(4) In other words, these young men were from wealthy families, did not need funds, and at night they walked around the city not for robbery, but were looking for adventure for their penis and testicles! It is curious about what “method condemned by the church” - who else could condemn in those centuries? Society, huh? says this young scoundrel? The Church already then condemned any ejaculation of a man outside the female vagina.
(5) And this is closer to bi- or even to homosexuality. In these lines, completely different feelings of the author of the letter to his friend can be clearly traced. This is more than friendship! Yes, and according to Freud, through the intercourse of a group with the same woman, the guys in this way, deep down, have sex with each other. This is especially true if they are excited to watch the sexual acts of their friends, buddies and comrades. Or for someone to see their sexual intercourse.
(6) C. Perugio “Psychoanalysis of youthful eroticism. What letters from the past can tell, Rome, 1959
(7) It turns out that the parents of the guys are aware of the nightly fun of their underage!
(8) Record of the Religious Court, York, 1233.
(9) Saracens (literally from Greek - "eastern people") - a people mentioned by the ancient Roman historian of the 4th century Ammianus Marcellinus and the Greek scientist of the 1st-2nd centuries. AD Ptolemy. Nomadic bandit tribe, Bedouins, who lived along the borders of Syria. From the time of the Crusades, European authors began to refer to all Muslims as Saracens, often using the term "Moors" as a synonym.

Reviews

God, dear Author, you approached the writing of the article so seriously! Could you advise me the authors who write about the history of Europe, starting from the fifteenth century? I am especially concerned about France, Italy, Burgundy and Spain... And I am also interested in a more detailed study of the life of people living in the Renaissance. In addition, it haunts what the legislative system was like ...

Photo 1 - medieval city along the river

Cities in medieval Europe were small by modern standards. In the capitals (London, Paris) lived 40-50 thousand people, in others major cities- 15-20 thousand, and in a typical average town - 5-7 thousand.

Photo 2 - medieval Bruges (Belgium)

Cities were built on the banks of rivers, around castles or along large tracts. In the latter case, a section of the road became the main city street. Also, the main street could lead from the seigneur's castle to the river or stretch along the coast.

Photo 3 - engraving of a medieval city

Almost every medieval city was surrounded by walls. Moreover, the larger and richer the city, the more powerful and tall they were.

Photo 4 - a fragment of the walls around the city

In the worst case, protection from uninvited guests was an earthen mound with a wooden palisade on it, at best, high stone walls with towers and loopholes, where guards were on duty.

Photo 4a - Norman fortress 10-11 centuries (France)

The city gates were locked at sunset and unlocked at sunrise. Responsibilities for the construction of fortifications and maintaining their condition were distributed among all the townspeople. They either did construction work or paid a cash contribution.

Photo 5 - urban construction

The city walls limited the growth of settlements, so the houses stood close to each other, and the streets were no more than two meters wide.

Photo 6 - a narrow street in Stockholm

Photo 7 - the medieval square of old Tallinn

One of the streets in Brussels was called "street of one person", because even two people could not disperse there.

Photo 8 - One Man Street in Brussels

The upper floors of the buildings protruded above the lower ones, which further narrowed the space of medieval streets.

Photo 9 - the street of the Italian city

Residents could not even dream of night lighting, water supply, sewerage and other amenities. For a modern person, life in a medieval city would seem difficult and dangerous. Garbage was thrown directly into the streets, during night walks you had to take a lantern with you.

Photo 10 - engraving of the streets of medieval cities

Most of the houses were wooden with thatched roofs, and during a fire, the fire quickly spread to neighboring houses, which led to the destruction of entire neighborhoods.

Photo 11 - medieval town square

Due to crowding and dirt, infectious diseases often arose and spread, from which many people died. Rich people took refuge from epidemics in country estates. When the danger of infection disappeared, they returned, but before that they let some vagrant or poor person into the house. If he remained healthy, then the owners entered the house without fear.

Photo 12 - plague epidemic

In the houses of the poor townspeople there were small windows, which were plugged up with hay or rags in winter. To keep warm, they made a fire, the smoke from which came out through a hole in the ceiling or an open door, but partly it remained inside the room.

Photo 13 - a fragment of a painting by Brueghel (senior)

All furnishings in the house ordinary people consisted of a rough table, benches along the walls, a bed, and a chest. The chest contained clothes that were expensive, and therefore they were cherished and passed down from generation to generation.

Photo 14 - a medieval city, a painting by E.E. Lancer ( folk artist RSFSR)

The main part of the population of the medieval city were merchants, artisans, apprentices, barbers.

Photo 15 - wealthy townspeople of the Middle Ages

Aristocratic nobility settled in large cities, feudal lords, officials, doctors, lawyers, Houses of the nobility stood out appearance, the decoration in them was richer and reflected their social status.

Photo 16 - work in a rural district

Many townspeople continued to engage in agriculture. They cultivated the fields outside the city walls, grazed herds of sheep and cows. The nearest rural district was considered to belong to the city.

Currently, many cities in Western Europe that have preserved the appearance and spirit of the Middle Ages have been declared World Cultural Heritage by UNESCO.

Photo 17 - embankment of the French city of Nantes

Residents of cities carefully preserve the monuments and architecture of unique ancient places medieval history Europe.

Photo 18 - a medieval street of a Spanish town in our time

Middle Ages. The most controversial and controversial era in the history of mankind. Some perceive it as the times of beautiful ladies and noble knights, minstrels and buffoons, when spears were broken, feasts were noisy, serenades were sung and sermons sounded. For others, the Middle Ages is a time of fanatics and executioners, the fires of the Inquisition, stinking cities, epidemics, cruel customs, unsanitary conditions, general darkness and savagery.

Moreover, fans of the first option are often embarrassed by their admiration for the Middle Ages, they say that they understand that everything was not like that, but they love the outside chivalrous culture. While the supporters of the second option are sincerely sure that the Middle Ages were not called the Dark Ages for nothing, it was the most terrible time in the history of mankind.

The fashion to scold the Middle Ages appeared back in the Renaissance, when there was a sharp denial of everything that had to do with the recent past (as we know it), and then with light hand historians of the 19th century began to consider this the most dirty, cruel and rude Middle Ages ... the times from the fall of ancient states and until the 19th century, declared the triumph of reason, culture and justice. Then myths developed, which now wander from article to article, frightening fans of chivalry, the sun king, pirate novels, and in general all romantics from history.

Myth 1. All knights were stupid, dirty, uneducated dorks.

This is probably the most fashionable myth. Every second article about the horrors of Medieval customs ends with an unobtrusive morality - look, they say, dear women, how lucky you are, no matter what modern men are, they are definitely better than the knights you dream of.

Let's leave the dirt for later, there will be a separate discussion about this myth. As for ignorance and stupidity ... I thought recently how it would be funny if our time was studied according to the culture of "brothers". One can imagine what a typical representative would then be modern men. And you can’t prove that men are all different, there is always a universal answer to this - “this is an exception.”

In the Middle Ages, men, oddly enough, were also all different. Charlemagne collected folk songs, built schools, and knew several languages ​​himself. Richard the Lionheart, considered a typical representative of chivalry, wrote poems in two languages. Karl the Bold, whom literature likes to display as a kind of boor-macho, knew Latin very well and loved to read ancient authors. Francis I patronized Benvenuto Cellini and Leonardo da Vinci.

The polygamist Henry VIII knew four languages, played the lute and loved the theatre. And this list can be continued. But the main thing is that they were all sovereigns, models for their subjects, and even for smaller rulers. They were guided by them, they were imitated, and those who could, like his sovereign, could knock down an enemy from a horse and write an ode to the Beautiful Lady enjoyed respect.

Yeah, they will tell me - we know these Beautiful Ladies, they had nothing to do with their wives. So let's move on to the next myth.

Myth 2. The “noble knights” treated their wives like property, beat them and didn’t set a penny

To begin with, I will repeat what I have already said - the men were different. And in order not to be unfounded, I will remember the noble seigneur from the XII century, Etienne II de Blois. This knight was married to a certain Adele of Norman, daughter of William the Conqueror and his beloved wife Matilda. Etienne, as befits a zealous Christian, went on a crusade, and his wife remained to wait for him at home and manage the estate.

A seemingly banal story. But its peculiarity is that Etienne's letters to Adele have come down to us. Tender, passionate, yearning. Detailed, smart, analytical. These letters are a valuable source on the Crusades, but they are also evidence of how much a medieval knight could love not some mythical Lady, but his own wife.

We can recall Edward I, whom the death of his adored wife knocked down and brought to the grave. His grandson Edward III lived in love and harmony with his wife for over forty years. Louis XII, having married, turned from the first debauchee of France into a faithful husband. Whatever the skeptics say, love is a phenomenon independent of the era. And always, at all times, they tried to marry their beloved women.

Now let's move on to more practical myths that are actively promoted in the cinema and greatly confuse the romantic mood among fans of the Middle Ages.

Myth 3. Cities were sewage dumps.

Oh, what they just do not write about medieval cities. To the point that I came across the assertion that the walls of Paris had to be completed so that the sewage poured outside the city wall would not pour back. Effective, isn't it? And in the same article it was stated that since in London human waste was poured into the Thames, it was also a continuous stream of sewage. My fertile imagination immediately thrashed in hysterics, because I just couldn’t imagine where so much sewage could come from in a medieval city.

This is not a modern multi-million metropolis - 40-50 thousand people lived in medieval London, and not much more in Paris. Let's leave it aside fairy tale with a wall and imagine the Thames. This not the smallest river splashes 260 cubic meters of water per second into the sea. If you measure this in baths, you get more than 370 baths. Per second. I think further comments are unnecessary.

However, no one denies that medieval cities were by no means fragrant with roses. And now one has only to turn off the sparkling avenue and look into the dirty streets and dark gateways, as you understand - the washed and lit city is very different from its dirty and smelly inside.

Myth 4. People haven't washed for many years.

Talking about washing is also very fashionable. Moreover, absolutely real examples are given here - monks who did not wash themselves from excess “holiness” for years, a nobleman, who also did not wash himself from religiosity, almost died and was washed by servants. And they also like to remember Princess Isabella of Castile (many saw her in the recently released film The Golden Age), who vowed not to change her linen until victory was won. And poor Isabella kept her word for three years.

But again, strange conclusions are drawn - the lack of hygiene is declared the norm. The fact that all the examples are about people who vowed not to wash, that is, they saw in this some kind of feat, asceticism, is not taken into account. By the way, Isabella's act caused a great resonance throughout Europe, a new color was even invented in her honor, so everyone was shocked by the vow given by the princess.

And if you read the history of baths, and even better - go to the appropriate museum, you can be amazed at the variety of shapes, sizes, materials from which the baths were made, as well as ways to heat water. At the beginning of the 18th century, which they also like to call the dirty century, one English earl the house even had a marble bathtub with taps for hot and cold water - the envy of all the acquaintances who went to his house as if on a tour.

Queen Elizabeth I took a bath once a week and demanded that all courtiers also bathe more often. Louis XIII generally soaked in the bath every day. And his son Louis XIV, whom they like to cite as an example of a dirty king, because he just didn’t like baths, wiped himself with alcohol lotions and loved to swim in the river (but there will be a separate story about him).

However, to understand the failure of this myth, it is not necessary to read historical works. It is enough to look at pictures of different eras. Even from the sanctimonious Middle Ages, there are many engravings depicting bathing, washing in baths and baths. And in later times, they especially liked to portray half-dressed beauties in baths.

Well, the most important argument. It is worth looking at the statistics of soap production in the Middle Ages to understand that everything that is said about the general unwillingness to wash is a lie. Otherwise, why would it be necessary to produce such a quantity of soap?

Myth 5. Everyone smelled terrible

This myth follows directly from the previous one. And he also has real proof - the Russian ambassadors at the French court complained in letters that the French "stink terribly." From which it was concluded that the French did not wash, stank and tried to drown out the smell with perfume (about perfume is a well-known fact).

This myth flashed even in Tolstoy's novel "Peter I". Explaining to him couldn't be easier. In Russia, it was not customary to wear perfume heavily, while in France they simply poured perfume. And for a Russian person, a Frenchman who smelled abundantly of spirits was "stinking like a wild beast." Those who traveled in public transport next to a heavily perfumed lady will understand them well.

True, there is one more evidence concerning the same long-suffering Louis XIV. His favorite, Madame Montespan, once, in a fit of a quarrel, shouted that the king stinks. The king was offended and soon after that parted with the favorite completely. It seems strange - if the king was offended by the fact that he stinks, then why shouldn't he wash himself? Yes, because the smell was not coming from the body. Ludovic had serious health problems, and with age, he began to smell bad from his mouth. It was impossible to do anything, and naturally the king was very worried about this, so Montespan's words were a blow to a sore spot for him.

By the way, we must not forget that in those days there was no industrial production, the air was clean, and the food may not be very healthy, but at least without chemistry. And therefore, on the one hand, hair and skin did not get greasy for longer (remember our air of megacities, which quickly makes washed hair dirty), so people, in principle, did not need washing for longer. And with human sweat, water, salts were released, but not all those chemicals that are full in the body of a modern person.

Myth 6. Clothes and hairstyles were infested with lice and fleas.

This is a very popular myth. And he has a lot of evidence - flea traps that were really worn noble ladies and gentlemen, references to insects in literature as something taken for granted, fascinating stories about monks almost eaten alive by fleas. All this really testifies - yes, there were fleas and lice in medieval Europe. Only now the conclusions are made more than strange. Let's think logically. What does a flea trap testify to? Or an animal on which these fleas should jump? It doesn’t even take a special imagination to understand - this indicates a long war going on with varying success between people and insects.

Myth 7. No one cared about hygiene

What was it that had to happen to humanity at the beginning of the 19th century, so that before that it liked everything to be dirty and lousy, and then suddenly it suddenly stopped liking it?

If you look through the instructions on the construction of castle toilets, you can find curious notes that the drain should be built so that everything goes into the river, and does not lie on the shore, spoiling the air. Apparently people didn't really like the smell.

Let's go further. There is a famous story about how a noble English woman was reprimanded about her dirty hands. The lady retorted: “You call this dirt? You should have seen my feet." This is also cited as a lack of hygiene. And did anyone think about strict English etiquette, according to which it is not even possible to tell a person that he spilled wine on his clothes - this is impolite. And suddenly the lady is told that her hands are dirty. This is the extent to which other guests must have been outraged to break the rules good manners and make this comment.

And the laws that the authorities of different countries issued every now and then - for example, bans on pouring slop into the street, or regulation of the construction of toilets.

The main problem of the Middle Ages was that it was really difficult to wash then. Summer does not last that long, and in winter not everyone can swim in the hole. Firewood for heating water was very expensive, not every nobleman could afford a weekly bath. And besides, not everyone understood that illnesses come from hypothermia or insufficiently clean water, and under the influence of fanatics they attributed them to washing.

And now we are smoothly approaching the next myth.

Myth 8. Medicine was practically non-existent.

What can you not hear enough about medieval medicine. And there were no means other than bloodletting. And they all gave birth on their own, and without doctors it’s even better. And all medicine was controlled by priests alone, who left everything at the mercy of God's will and only prayed.

Indeed, in the first centuries of Christianity, medicine, as well as other sciences, was mainly practiced in monasteries. There were hospitals and scientific literature. The monks contributed little to medicine, but they made good use of the achievements of ancient physicians. But already in 1215, surgery was recognized as a non-ecclesiastical business and passed into the hands of barbers.

Of course, the whole history of European medicine simply does not fit into the scope of the article, so I will focus on one person, whose name is known to all readers of Dumas. It's about about Ambroise Pare, the personal physician of Henry II, Francis II, Charles IX and Henry III. A simple enumeration of what this surgeon contributed to medicine is enough to understand at what level surgery was in the middle of the 16th century.

Ambroise Pare introduced new way treatment of then new gunshot wounds, invented prosthetic limbs, began to perform operations to correct the "cleft lip", improved medical instruments, wrote medical works, which surgeons throughout Europe later studied. And childbirth is still accepted according to his method. But most importantly, Pare invented a way to amputate limbs so that a person would not die from blood loss. And surgeons still use this method.

But he did not even have an academic education, he was simply a student of another doctor. Not bad for "dark" times?

Conclusion

Needless to say, the real Middle Ages is very different from fairy world chivalric romances. But it is no closer to the dirty stories that are still in fashion. The truth is, as always, somewhere in the middle. People were different, they lived differently. The concepts of hygiene were indeed quite wild for a modern look, but they were, and medieval people they took care of cleanliness and health, as far as their understanding could.

And all these stories ... someone wants to show how modern people“cooler” than the medieval ones, someone simply asserts himself, and someone does not understand the topic at all and repeats other people's words.

And finally - about memoirs. Talking about terrible morals, lovers of the "dirty Middle Ages" especially like to refer to memoirs. Only for some reason not on Commines or La Rochefoucauld, but on memoirists like Brantome, who probably published the largest collection of gossip in history, seasoned with his own rich imagination.

On this occasion, I propose to recall the post-perestroika anecdote about the trip of a Russian farmer to visit an English one. He showed the farmer Ivan a bidet and said that his Mary was washing there. Ivan thought - but where is his Masha washing? Came home and asked. She answers:
- Yes, in the river.
- And in winter?
- How long is that winter?
And now let's get an idea of ​​hygiene in Russia according to this anecdote.

I think if we focus on such sources, then our society will turn out to be no cleaner than the medieval one. Or remember the program about the parties of our bohemia. We supplement this with our impressions, gossip, fantasies and you can write a book about the life of society in modern Russia(we are worse than Brantoma - also contemporaries of events). And the descendants will study the customs in Russia at the beginning of the 21st century, be horrified and say what terrible times were ...

P.S. From the comments to this post: Just yesterday I was re-reading the legend of Thiel Ulenspiegel. There Phillip I says to Philip II: - You again spent time with an indecent girl, when noble ladies are at your service, refreshing with fragrant baths? And you preferred a girl, yet failed to wash off traces of the arms of some soldier? Just the most unbridled Middle Ages.

Average time to read: 17 minutes, 4 seconds

Introduction: Myths about the Middle Ages

About the Middle Ages, there are many historical myths. The reason for this lies partly in the development of humanism at the very beginning of the New Age, as well as the formation of the Renaissance in art and architecture. Interest in the world of classical antiquity developed, and the era that followed was considered barbaric and decadent. Therefore, medieval Gothic architecture, which today is recognized as extraordinarily beautiful and technically revolutionary, was underestimated and left aside in favor of styles that copied Greek and Roman architecture. The term "Gothic" itself was originally applied to Gothic in a derogatory light, serving as a reference to the tribes of the Goths who sacked Rome; the meaning of the word is "barbarian, primitive".

Another reason for many myths associated with the Middle Ages is its connection with the Catholic Church (hereinafter referred to as the "Church" - approx. Newo than). In the English-speaking world, these myths have their origin in disputes between Catholics and Protestants. In other European cultures, such as Germany and France, similar myths were formed within the framework of the anti-clerical position of influential thinkers of the Enlightenment. The following is a summary of some of the myths and misconceptions about the Middle Ages that arose as a result of various prejudices.

1. People believed that the Earth was flat, and the Church presented this idea as a doctrine

In fact, the Church never taught that the earth was flat, not in any period of the Middle Ages. Scientists of that time had a good understanding of the scientific arguments of the Greeks, who proved that the Earth was round, and knew how to use scientific instruments such as the astrolabe to determine the circumference of a circle quite accurately. The fact of the spherical shape of the earth was so well known, generally recognized and unremarkable, that when Thomas Aquinas began work on his treatise "The Sum of Theology" and wanted to choose an objective indisputable truth, he cited this very fact as an example.

And not only literate people were aware of the shape of the Earth - most sources indicate that everyone understood this. The symbol of the earthly power of kings, which was used in coronation ceremonies, was the power: a golden sphere in the left hand of the king, which personified the Earth. This symbolism would not make sense if it were not clear that the Earth is spherical. A 13th-century collection of sermons by German parish priests also mentions in passing that the earth is "round like an apple" in the hope that the peasants listening to the sermon will understand what it is about. Popular in the 14th century English book The Adventures of Sir John Mandeville tells of a man who traveled so far to the east that he returned to his homeland from its western side; and the book does not explain to the reader how it works.

The common misconception that Christopher Columbus discovered the true shape of the Earth and that the Church opposed his journey is nothing but a modern myth created in 1828. Writer Washington Irving was commissioned to write a biography of Columbus with instructions that he present the traveler as a radical thinker who rebelled against the prejudices of the Old World. Unfortunately, Irving discovered that Columbus was in fact deeply mistaken in the size of the Earth and discovered America by pure chance. The heroic story did not work out, and so he invented the idea that the Church in the Middle Ages thought the Earth was flat, and created this tenacious myth, and his book became a bestseller.

Among the collection of popular expressions found on the Internet, one can often see the alleged statement of Ferdinand Magellan: “The Church claims that the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round. Because I have seen the Earth's shadow on the moon, and I trust the Shadow more than the Church." Well, Magellan never said that, in particular because the Church never claimed that the Earth is flat. The first use of this "quote" occurs no earlier than 1873, when it was used in an essay by an American Voltairean (a Voltairian is a free-thinking philosopher - approx. Newo than) and the agnostic Robert Greene Ingersoll. He did not indicate any source and it is very likely that he simply made up this statement himself. Despite this, Magellan's "words" can still be found in various collections, on T-shirts and posters of atheist organizations.

2. The Church suppressed science and progressive thinking, burned scientists at the stake, and thus set us back hundreds of years

The myth that the Church repressed science, burned or suppressed the activities of scientists, is a central part of what historians writing about science call "the clash of ways of thinking." This persistent concept originated in the Enlightenment, but established itself in the minds of the public with the help of two famous works 19th century. John William Draper's A History of the Relations Between Catholicism and Science (1874) and Andrew Dickson White's The Struggle of Religion with Science (1896) were highly popular and authoritative books, spreading the belief that the medieval Church was actively suppressing science. In the 20th century, historiographers of science actively criticized the "White-Draper position" and noted that most of the evidence presented was grossly misinterpreted, and in some cases even invented.

In the era of late Antiquity, early Christianity did not welcome what some clergymen called "pagan knowledge", that is, the scientific works of the Greeks and their Roman successors. Some have preached that the Christian should shun such works, for they contain unbiblical knowledge. In his famous phrase, one of the Fathers of the Church, Tertullian, exclaims sarcastically: "What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem?" But such thoughts were rejected by other eminent theologians. For example, Clement of Alexandria argued that if God had given the Jews a special understanding of spirituality, he could have given the Greeks a special understanding of scientific things. He suggested that if the Jews took and used the gold of the Egyptians for their own purposes, then Christians can and should use the wisdom of the pagan Greeks as a gift from God. Later, Clement's reasoning met with the support of Aurelius Augustine, and later Christian thinkers adopted this ideology, noting that if the cosmos is the creation of a thinking God, then it can and should be comprehended in a rational way.

Thus natural philosophy, which was largely based on the work of such Greek and Roman thinkers as Aristotle, Galen, Ptolemy and Archimedes, became a major part of the medieval university curriculum. In the West, after the collapse of the Roman Empire, many ancient works were lost, but Arab scholars managed to save them. Subsequently, medieval thinkers not only studied the additions made by the Arabs, but also used them to make discoveries. Medieval scientists were fascinated by optical science, and the invention of glasses is only partly the result of their own research using lenses to determine the nature of light and the physiology of vision. In the 14th century, the philosopher Thomas Bradwardine and a group of thinkers who called themselves the Oxford Calculators not only formulated and proved for the first time the theorem on average speed, but also the first to use quantitative concepts in physics, thus laying the foundation for everything that has been achieved by this science since then.

All the scientists of the Middle Ages were not only not persecuted by the Church, but they themselves belonged to it. Jean Buridan, Nicholas Orem, Albrecht III (Albrecht the Bold), Albert the Great, Robert Grosseteste, Theodoric of Freiburg, Roger Bacon, Thierry of Chartres, Sylvester II (Herbert of Aurillac), Guillaume Conchesius, John Philopon, John Packham, John Duns Scotus, Walter Burley, William Hatesberry, Richard Swainshead, John Dumbleton, Nicholas of Cusa - they were not persecuted, held back or burned at the stake, but they were known and revered for their wisdom and learning.

Contrary to myths and popular prejudice, there is not a single example of someone being burned in the Middle Ages for anything related to science, just as there is no evidence of the persecution of any scientific movement by the medieval Church. The trial of Galileo happened much later (the scientist was a contemporary of Descartes) and was much more connected with the politics of the Counter-Reformation and the people involved in it than with the attitude of the Church towards science.

3. In the Middle Ages, the Inquisition burned millions of women, considering them to be witches, and the burning of “witches” itself was a common thing in the Middle Ages

Strictly speaking, the "witch hunt" was not a medieval phenomenon at all. The persecution reached its apogee in the 16th and 17th centuries and was almost completely related to early period New time. As for most of the Middle Ages (i.e. 5th-15th centuries), the Church was not only not interested in hunting so-called "witches", but she also taught that witches do not exist in principle.

In contact with

The Middle Ages originate from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 and end around the 15th - 17th centuries. The Middle Ages are characterized by two opposite stereotypes. Some believe that this is the time of noble knights and romantic stories. Others believe that this is a time of disease, dirt and immorality...

Story

The very term "Middle Ages" was first introduced in 1453 by the Italian humanist Flavio Biondo. Prior to this, the term "dark ages" was used, which at the moment denotes a narrower segment of the time period of the Middle Ages (VI-VIII centuries). This term was introduced into circulation by the professor of the Gallic University Christopher Cellarius (Keller). This person also shared world history for antiquity, the Middle Ages and modern times.
It is worth making a reservation, saying that speech in this article will go about the European Middle Ages.

This period is characterized by a feudal system of land use, when there was a feudal landowner and a peasant who was half dependent on him. Also characteristic:
- a hierarchical system of relations between feudal lords, which consisted in the personal dependence of some feudal lords (vassals) on others (seigneurs);
- the key role of the church, both in religion and in politics (inquisitions, church courts);
- ideals of chivalry;
- the heyday of medieval architecture - Gothic (including in art).

In the period from the X to the XII centuries. the population is increasing European countries which leads to changes in the social, political and other spheres of life. Starting from the XII - XIII centuries. in Europe there has been a sharp rise in the development of technology. More inventions were made in a century than in the previous thousand years. During the Middle Ages, cities develop and grow rich, culture is actively developing.

With the exception of Eastern Europe, which was invaded by the Mongols. Many states of this region were plundered and enslaved.

Life and life

The people of the Middle Ages were highly dependent on weather conditions. So, for example, the great famine (1315 - 1317), which happened due to unusually cold and rainy years that ruined the harvest. As well as plague epidemics. It was the climatic conditions that largely determined the way of life and the type of activity of medieval man.

During the early medieval period, very most of Europe was covered with forests. Therefore, the economy of the peasants, in addition to agriculture, was largely oriented towards forest resources. Herds of cattle were driven into the forest to graze. In oak forests, pigs gained fat by eating acorns, thanks to which the peasant received a guaranteed supply of meat food for the winter. The forest served as a source of firewood for heating and, thanks to it, charcoal was made. He added variety to the food of a medieval person, because. all kinds of berries and mushrooms grew in it, and it was possible to hunt outlandish game in it. The forest was the source of the only sweet of that time - the honey of wild bees. Resins could be collected from trees to make torches. Thanks to hunting, it was possible not only to feed, but also to dress up, the skins of animals were used for sewing clothes and for other household purposes. In the forest, in the clearings, it was possible to collect medicinal plants, the only medicines of that time. The bark of trees was used to mend animal skins, and the ashes of burnt bushes were used to bleach fabrics.

As well as climatic conditions, the landscape determined the main occupation of people: cattle breeding prevailed in the mountainous regions, and agriculture prevailed in the plains.

All the troubles of a medieval person (diseases, bloody wars, famine) led to the fact that the average life expectancy was 22 - 32 years. Few survived until the age of 70.

The way of life of a medieval person depended largely on his habitat, but at the same time, people of that time were quite mobile, and, one might say, were constantly on the move. At first, these were echoes of the great migration of peoples. Subsequently, other reasons pushed people on the road. Peasants moved along the roads of Europe, singly and in groups, looking for better share; "knights" - in search of exploits and beautiful ladies; monks - moving from monastery to monastery; pilgrims and all kinds of beggars and vagabonds.

Only over time, when the peasants acquired certain property, and the feudal lords big lands, then cities began to grow and at that time (approximately the 14th century) Europeans became “homebodies”.

If we talk about housing, about the houses in which medieval people lived, then most of the buildings did not have separate rooms. People slept, ate and cooked in the same room. Only over time, wealthy citizens began to separate the bedroom from the kitchens and dining rooms.

Peasant houses were built of wood, in some places preference was given to stone. Roofs were thatched or reeds. There was very little furniture. Mostly chests for storing clothes and tables. Slept on benches or beds. The bed was a hayloft or a mattress stuffed with straw.

Houses were heated by hearths or fireplaces. Furnaces appeared only at the beginning of the XIV century, when they were borrowed from the northern peoples and Slavs. The dwellings were lit with tallow candles and oil lamps. Expensive wax candles could only be purchased by rich people.

Food

Most Europeans ate very modestly. They usually ate twice a day: in the morning and in the evening. Everyday food was rye bread, cereals, legumes, turnips, cabbage, grain soup with garlic or onions. Little meat was consumed. Moreover, during the year there were 166 days of fasting, when meat dishes were forbidden to be eaten. Fish was much more in the diet. Of the sweets, there was only honey. Sugar came to Europe from the East in the 13th century. and was very expensive.
In medieval Europe they drank a lot: in the south - wine, in the north - beer. Herbs were brewed instead of tea.

The dishes of most Europeans are bowls, mugs, etc. were very simple, made of clay or tin. Products made of silver or gold were used only by the nobility. There were no forks; they ate with spoons at the table. Pieces of meat were cut off with a knife and eaten with the hands. The peasants ate food from one bowl with the whole family. At the feasts of the nobility, they put one bowl and a goblet for wine on two. The bones were thrown under the table, and the hands were wiped with a tablecloth.

clothing

As for clothing, it was largely unified. Unlike antiquity, the church considered the glorification of the beauty of the human body to be sinful and insisted that it be covered with clothes. Only by the XII century. the first signs of fashion began to appear.

The change in clothing style reflected the then social preferences. The opportunity to follow the fashion had mainly representatives of the wealthy strata.
The peasant usually wore a linen shirt and pants to the knees or even to the ankles. The outer garment was a cloak, tied at the shoulders with a clasp (fibula). In winter, they wore either a roughly combed sheepskin coat or a warm cape made of dense fabric or fur. Clothing reflected a person's place in society. The attire of the wealthy was dominated by bright colors, cotton and silk fabrics. The poor were content dark clothes from rough homespun cloth. Shoes for men and women were leather pointed boots without hard soles. Hats originated in the 13th century. and have changed continuously since then. Habitual gloves acquired importance during the Middle Ages. Shaking hands in them was considered an insult, and throwing a glove to someone was a sign of contempt and a challenge to a duel.

The nobility liked to add various decorations to their clothes. Men and women wore rings, bracelets, belts, chains. Very often these things were unique jewelry. For the poor, all this was unattainable. Wealthy women spent considerable money on cosmetics and perfumes, which were brought by merchants from eastern countries.

stereotypes

As a rule, in public consciousness rooted certain ideas about something. And ideas about the Middle Ages are no exception. First of all, it concerns chivalry. Sometimes there is an opinion that the knights were uneducated, stupid dorks. But was it really so? This statement is too categorical. As in any community, representatives of the same class could be completely different people. For example, Charlemagne built schools, knew several languages. Richard the Lionheart, considered a typical representative of chivalry, wrote poems in two languages. Karl the Bold, who is often described in literature as a kind of boor-macho, knew Latin very well and loved to read ancient authors. Francis I patronized Benvenuto Cellini and Leonardo da Vinci. The polygamist Henry VIII knew four languages, played the lute and loved the theatre. Should the list continue? These were all sovereigns, models for their subjects. They were guided by them, they were imitated, and those who could knock the enemy off his horse and write an ode to the Beautiful Lady enjoyed respect.

Regarding the same ladies, or wives. There is an opinion that women were treated as property. And again, it all depends on how the husband was. For example, Senor Etienne II de Blois was married to a certain Adele of Normandy, daughter of William the Conqueror. Étienne, as it was then customary for a Christian, went to Crusades while his wife stayed at home. It would seem that there is nothing special in all this, but Etienne's letters to Adele have survived to our time. Tender, passionate, yearning. This is evidence and an indicator of how a medieval knight could treat his own wife. You can also remember Edward I, who was killed by the death of his beloved wife. Or, for example, Louis XII, who, after the wedding, from the first debauchee of France turned into a faithful husband.

Speaking about the cleanliness and level of pollution of medieval cities, they also often go too far. To the extent that they claim that human waste in London merged into the Thames, as a result of which it was a continuous stream of sewage. Firstly, the Thames is not the smallest river, and secondly, in medieval London, the number of inhabitants was about 50 thousand. So they simply could not pollute the river in this way.

The hygiene of medieval man was not as terrible as it seems to us. They are very fond of citing the example of Princess Isabella of Castile, who made a vow not to change linen until victory is won. And poor Isabella kept her word for three years. But this act of hers caused a great resonance in Europe, a new color was even invented in honor of her. But if you look at the statistics of soap production in the Middle Ages, you can understand that the statement that people did not wash for years is far from the truth. Otherwise, why would such an amount of soap be needed?

In the Middle Ages, there was no such need for frequent washing, as in modern world - environment was not as catastrophically polluted as it is now ... There was no industry, the food was without chemicals. Therefore, water, salts, and not all those chemicals that are full in the body of a modern person, were released with human sweat.

Another stereotype that has become entrenched in the public mind is that everyone stank terribly. Russian ambassadors at the French court complained in letters that the French "stink terribly." From which it was concluded that the French did not wash, stank and tried to drown out the smell with perfume. They really used spirits. But this is explained by the fact that in Russia it was not customary to suffocate strongly, while the French simply doused themselves with perfume. Therefore, for a Russian person, a Frenchman who smelled abundantly of spirits was "stinking like a wild beast."

In conclusion, we can say that the real Middle Ages was very different from the fairy-tale world of chivalric novels. But at the same time, some facts are largely distorted and exaggerated. I think the truth is, as always, somewhere in the middle. As always, people were different and they lived differently. Some things really seem wild compared to today, but all this happened centuries ago, when mores were different and the level of development of that society could not afford more. Someday, for the historians of the future, we will also find ourselves in the role of a “medieval man”.

Recent tips from the History section:

Did this advice help you? You can help the project by donating any amount you want for its development. For example, 20 rubles. Or more:)