The past is a foreign country...

...and they do things differently there.

This phrase has been taken from L. P. Hartley's 1953 novel "The Go-Between" and has almost become proverbial, further entrenched in our cultural memory by the 1970 film by the same name.

I haven't read the book, and I don't know if I want to, because that phrase always held a certain meaning for me, and I don't want that changed if my interpretation is considerably different from that of the author. By now I've remarked a few times on how people in the past were the same as us, only with a considerable, but sometimes also only slight, disadvantage in knowledge. Humans have externalised their intelligence (think books and other records), allowing us build upon what those before us have learnt instead of starting over every generation. We have done this through speech, and later we learnt to conserve the spoken word in many ways, a process that is still going on today. If (actually when) we die, as we tend to do seeing that we're rather squishy all thing considered, our knowledge is not lost. At least not entirely, as theoretical knowledge is still only one side of the coin that is complete education. The other one is practise. To get around that, we have institutionalised a systems of learning and passing on knowledge, namely schools, universities, apprenticeships and many more.

Not pictured: Useful externalised knowledge

This makes it easy to forget that in our hearts, or rather in our core of cores, our cells, we share the same genetic makeup with all those people from the past.

Yes indeed

I guess no one will deny that where you were born has a huge impact on who you become. If you're born in Alaska you'll learn to deal with the cold, if you're born in Africa you'll learn to deal with the heat, and if you're born in Australia you'll learn to deal with the whole continent down to the very ground itself outright trying to just fucking kill you. If you move you'll acquire a new set of skills, and also adapt some old ones. But just because your ancestors were dicks, you don't need to be one yourself. Also works the other way around. It's an age old debate, nature versus nurture, but what I just said applies to both, and the fact remains that one way or another we are a product of our environment. Bearing that in mind you'll see how externalised knowledge plays a big role in shaping us. As we grow older we learn to discern and to decide which outside influences we want to accept and which ones to reject. But at this point we had a whole lifetime, especially important because it includes our formative years, when we were shaped by others. And though they might have been meaning well, you still might end totally messed up, you guys. That makes it hard to be who you want to be. Hell, that's actually the easy part. It's harder to decide who you want to be.

But if we are that susceptible to outside influences when shaping our personality (and I absolutely maintain that we are) it's unfair to look down on others who didn't have the same room to grow as we arguably have today (at least in some parts of the world). And everything I said in the paragraph above also holds up when exchanging the word "where" for "when". Go ahead, try it. Which means that for the purpose of this article, when and where are synonymous, and that brings us full circle. It doesn't matter where or when, just how that place (or time) shapes you...which is why a foreign country might just as well be the past...and sometimes is.

Cheap shot

Now, indulge me a bit: There are stereotypes concerning practically every country of the world, and it runs even deeper than that. Try asking your grandparents  to tell some stories about the weirdos from the next village over. The Americans are stupid and fat (all of them? Really?), the Japanese like to purchase used panties from vending machines (they don't), the Germans are punctual, have stupid words and are into some weird porn (two out of three is not too bad), the British have weird teeth and make up for it in politeness (they actually have some of the best foodgnashers in the world) and the french are cowards and smell bad.

As you can see some of those are downright insulting and mean, and while I can't disprove all of them, I will shed some light on why the french might be accused of smelling. Spoiler alert: I've been there a few times, and I don't think they do. Unfotunately, I can't do anything about the cowardice-thing...Sorry, France.

A Frenchman, in a rare moment of not surrendering.

Now, from here on out, you are in serious danger of being grossed out, so don't say I didn't warn you!

Seriously, you guys.


Now then, my personal theory is the following: When talking about the smelly french we are actually talking about their nobles in the middle ages (and especially King Louis XIV.) or later. If you were a hard working farmer during that time you would have had every excuse for a little body funk, and you would have been hard pressed to smell worse than your counterparts in England or Germany, seeing as you were probably living a rather similar life.

When Louis XIV. (Loo-ee Cut-(h)orse) was King medicine was in it's infancy. Or rather, it was in puberty, going through a phase of experimentation and giving few to no fucks for common sense and decency. And so it came to be that the King's first physician, one Dr. Darquin, advised him to have his teeth removed . All of them. At once. Without narcotics of any kind. Because back then people believed that the teeth are the chief source of inflammation in the human body, and so it might do for some lowly peasant or British guy to have two full rows of teeth, but it's absolutely impossible for the King of France. Oh dear. While he might have been right about the inflammation thing and even that it is related to teeth (impacted molars can work that way), I can absolutely find no way to make what he did next sound sane, try as I might. The King obviously opposed him, remarking how he liked eating (a lot) and not liked being in constant pain all the time (not so much, surprisingly). The physician knew the King's weakness though, and that was his pride in being a good King, the best King actually, and convinced him that inflammation would weaken him, and therefore his "kingly Glory". That made Louis bite...for the last time in his life.

The name rings a bell, though...

So Darquin (does anyone else get a mad scientist vibe from him?) proceeded to rip out his teeth. Since he was not very good at it (who would have let him practise???) he broke the King's lower jaw in several places. He also ripped out half of his palate along with the upper teeth. This however, was according to plan. Again, Louis was conscious through that ordeal. The good doctor later noted in his journal how he afterwards burnt out the King's wound a whopping 14 times with a red hot iron rod, to prevent infection. While the jaw healed the palate was obviously gone.

From now on when the King ate his food would work it's way up to his nose, but become stuck their for a considerable time, several weeks according to some accounts. It was often not seen again before it came out of his nose, at which point it was thoroughly rotted. That accounts for part of the smell. Bear with me. Also, when the King drank the whine would come out of his nose, too. So much for Glory.

The King still ate considerable amounts of food, although it had been cooked to death so that he would able to swallow it. While his contemporaries took that as a sign of good health the King actually suffered from a cestoda, and therefore was perpetually hungry. Also, since he largely ate unchewed food he had digestive problems, and threw up a lot, most of it still undigested. At this point it's not even funny anymore.

His physician didn't worry, though, as the doctrine of the time dictated that the stomach really wasn't that important, and everything was "bon" as long as the gastrointestinal tract worked fine. Now, you guys, I understand not having access to modern technology and therefore making mistakes, I absolutely don't understand the notion that anything in the human body is superfluous and can be safely ignored if not working. The King also suffered violent bouts of flatulence and blood in his stool.

To ensure the continued performance of the King's digestive system he was given ample doses of laxatives every day, since only an empty tract was considered healthy. Because this is the King we are talking about only the best medicine's cutting edge (bleeding edge, har har) could offer was good enough. The King daily drank a brew of snake powder, frankincense (always a favourite 'cause it's expensive) and...horse manure. Now, bear in mind that is what the french did when they wanted someone to be healthy, I wouldn't want to see what happens when they actually screwed up.

At this point I deem it feasible that actual wizards exist and that Louis XIV. was part of an experiment to determine muggle resistance to potions for when the wizards absolutely positively just had to off a dude in secret to quell the hidden muggle uprising expected in the days to come.

Darquin's secret nickname

This concoction "worked" and the King suffered from diarrhoea (get outta town!) 14 to 18 times a day . So the King had the runs. But a King doesn't run, that is undignified, and so he walked everywhere. Quite often, he was late. That explains another component of his personal odour.

Is it any surprise that the King's favourite mistress asked him to eschew the worldly pleasures of the flesh in favour of the heavenly benefits of a, get this, chaste life? I think not.

In 1686 finally something gave, and it was the King's rectum. Suffering from years of abuse (the joke writes itself, but it's just not funny anymore) he developed an ulcer near his sphincter. I can say with absolute sympathy that the pain must have been horrible and all the pleasures available to a King of France can't make up for that kind of life.

Up and down France people with a similar condition were sought and brought to Paris. They were intended as specimen to be practised on before it was the King's turn. All of them died. They got off easy, I say. Meanwhile, the King was in such pain that he ordered the operation to commence  the following day, come hell or high water. Since this was a private matter only a select few were allowed to witness the event. What the heck you guys?! Only a few?! Boy, you showed some real restraint with the formalities there, I'm impressed! No, really! Jeesh.

So, by now we know why the King smelled, but how got that notion extended to all the Frenchmen? Consider this: The day after the surgery no fewer than 30 people asked the surgeon to have the same incision performed on them. The King was in intense pain, and they wanted that, too, at the risk of their own lives. Do you indeed think it's beyond any of them to crap their pants because the King does it too? Poor old Lou still had to go about the daily routine, and that included copious amounts of sitting on the throne. On his recently cut butt. Ouch.

Anyway, he obviously survived and lived to die at the respectable age of 79. Imagine, he could have live to one hundred if only he never went to the doctor. There is some lesson there, maybe something about Obamacare? Or even Canada? I don't know. He must have been one giant of a man.

Also, he considered himself to be a spaniard, not one of those whimpy frenchmen. Make of that what you will.

I smell, therefore I am.

Also, l'etat c'est moi. Draw your own conclusion, I'm depressed.

Keep on rocking in the afterlife, Big guy

They certainly did things different then, but they meant weel. They acted according to the best medicine had to offer. And since the King continued to be healthy, according to their skewed standards at least, they were justified. 79 is no age to sneeze at, and that goes doubly so for the 17th century. As stupid as that account sounds, they simply had no concept of germs, bacteria, viri and whathaveyou, and they absolutely could not have. Even the King's horrible serves to further our knowledge base...in not how to do it, but still. There are treatments now, that involve putting someone else's stool in your gastrointestinal tract because it will make it work better. That might sound stupid at first glance, but it works. In a way, everything has to be put to the test at least once.

If you wonder how we know all these things, the King's physician kept detailed notes about his condition, down to noting how often he went to the...throne and what it looked liked. All of it.

In conclusion, I'd like to say that although some french might even stink to this day they are fine people just like the rest of us. No two ways about it. Generally is generally wrong. But I think that episode is as good an explanation for the stereotype than any other. This one has the benefit of being 100% true. I did not exaggerate, nor leave anything out. If you think such things are funny, read the article again. There are few examples of worse benevolent stupidity*, and we have the Internet now. Just use your head and think, don't allow yourself for just one second to judge someone you don't know. And beware of extending that judgement to others seemingly like them. Actually, just don't judge at all.

Well, thanks for reading anyways. This is a long one, but I think it's one of my best yet. It's funny, it's interesting, it has all the goods: Intrigue, conspiracies, some speckles of love and lots of blood. No sex though. Maybe next time. i sincerely apologise for the crude language and coarse content, but I thought they went along very well.

PS: The article at first mentioned malevolent stupidity, but that would have made me trip over my own high expectations, contradicted everything I wrote and would have been plain wrong.