Look, the blunt of it is that I have zero interest in your racial tripe Asclepias, I am a history buff type and just want to know where you think that African's assisted the European (or really any global "community") in recovering from the black plague, and "brought the [whites] back" from regression into the stone age as you stated, because I haven't seen anything even remotely like that in /any/ history so frankly I think this is a line of "blacks are better than whites" bullshit.
In the early 700's the Moors invaded Europe from North Africa, they gained control on the coast of modern Portugal/Spain, and in the mid 800's took the island of Mazara, Italy where they built a trading port. The conflict between Christians (Europeans) and the Muslims (Moors) over those European lands in Spain/Portugal was indeed ongoing over about 800 years, however, they didn't ever rule Europe in any twist of history, in fact, the farthest the Moors ever made it into Europe was briefly controlling a sliver of the southeast coast of France from like 817-824 IIRC. The Moors were kind of ignored after they established their footholds because the rest of Europe was fighting amongst themselves, and to be blunt, the Europeans didn't see them as a threat and they enjoyed the salt, gold, and slaves coming out of Africa - the settlements the Moors had taken over/built brought those goods to them quicker. In 1224, Christian's expelled the Moor's from Sicily to Lucera, on the southern coast of Italy, and that settlement was sacked in 1300 and it's inhabitants enslaved. The particular spanning war covering the Moor's Spanish/Portuguese land during the plague is called the Reconquista 711 through 1492 [* Depending whom you ask. The history of the region teaches that the Reconquista was from 711-1524, the day Granada fell, because they consider that ousting of so-called "crypto-Muslims" (converted Muslims) to be the end of the long-standing [holy] war - despite Granada's surrender in 1492 - specifically because the Moors were allowed to continue their "pagan" religious practices via the "live and let live" social/religious ideology prevalent in that region until the 1500s dictated full conversion to Christanity.]
So as I said, the Moors were [key word] pretty much [/key word] ousted from Europe - specifically in 1309 the Moors were pushed into their last stand in Granada. Between 1482-1492 the newly united Portugal and France launched a series of summer attacks that wore them down, and in 1492 even Granada, their last hold out, surrendered. If one wants to get technical about it, the Moors were not fully off the European continent until later; in 1501 when, displeased with the slow pace of peaceful conversion to Christianity, the King issued an "ultimatum" that every last Muslim (and Jew) would either convert, exile, or be enslaved - the ultimate hit in Granada in force in the mid 1500s.
I already agreed that there was African influence Prior to the plague; that would be everything (except bathing which you are totally wrong about.) However, the fact remains, that wasn't like the Moors had any major influence over Europeans past, and I am being super generous here, say 1309ish, they'd been, as I'd said, [key word] pretty much [/key word] ousted from Europe prior to even /rumors/ of the plague hitting the middle east/far east arriving in Europe in the 1340s. Do you really think that a repeatedly retreating populace of Moors, who were by and large at quasi-war with European's since they had arrived [due to fundamental cultural and religious differences,] had some kind of influence over any significant stretch of Europe from 1350-1360? this is not reflected I any history source I can find, so again I am asking for a link to this connection.
As far as bathing goes, Europeans didn't want to bath pretty much until the late 1800's because they thought it formed a supposed second barrier against getting sick. Yet you would claim that the Moors taught Europeans how to bathe and thus helped them recover from the plague in 1340-1350? I disagree wholeheartedly.