(Even more OT)
Now, now...
Let's not forget that most of what today is considered "general knowledge" about the so-called "Middle Ages" is a simplified construct by a series of writers from the Renaissance, re-constructed by writers of the 19th century - and all of them had their own "agendas".
Truths are seldom simple - and doubly so when we're talking about a continent's history during a period of almost 1000 years that has been relatively recently "homogenised" - artificially (and not a little tendentiously) - into a concoction called the "Middle Ages". And let's not forget what preceded it (because it's essential): widespread destruction of the existing social structures (including material sources of knowledge) and ethnic dispersion following the onslaught of nomadic hordes in Europe - which was already weakened by the protracted agony of the late Roman empire.
But already in the 8th-11th century there was a huge movement towards "reviving" the cultural traditions of the ancient world (not that they were all necessarily that great).
And the lengthy period we're talking here - 12th/14th century - saw a momentous soar in culture.
This is precisely the period when universities were springing all over Europe - and the student population was far more international than it is today (they often followed teachers - and teachers travelled).
It is also the period when the great cathedrals were made and fitted - using architectural innovations brought from the East by the crusaders.
Openness to other cultures' achievements - also evidenced by the intense activity of European translators (think Gerard of Cremona) of scientific and philosophical literature - can hardly be qualified as ignorance. It shows intensely dynamic thought and desire for improvement.
As they say: it takes one to know one.
An ignorant doesn't care for anything beyond his picket fence - and in the period we're talking about here, Europe was as internationalist as it goes.
Still, I suppose one should define "ignorance". If you mean the educational level of the "ordinary" people, what little direct evidence there is it seems to suggest they were - considered in the proper historical perspective - no more ignorant than the "average" teenager today. (Except they did not have the internet at their disposal.)
So most people didn't know how to read or write (as they didn't in the Antiquity), and the same was true for the Islamic/Arabic culture, even in its heyday. (Let's not even mention Byzantium.) As a rule, only leisurely gentlemen had the time to ponder and write down their lofty thoughts...
Most people would not have had the time - or the inclination - to read anyway, because of their daily work obligations. The social and economic structure was totally different than it is today - but that has nothing to do with "ignorance" in itself.
[edit on 4-8-2009 by Vanitas]
), meaning "little Moors", to some beings
that were sometimes seen in the woods, running and jumping. The description is more close to the grey's than to the dwarfs in this case.
), but certainly until the 9th-10th century. (If anyone reading this cares to look at the great
exhibition catalogue "El Andalus", I think they will find their time and money well spent.) 
- and the next day we could either return or explore the wider surroundings. 
