quote:Originally posted by CelticWarrioress: Fencer give it up. White people hating, Black racist, Black supremacist, history stealing moron. You were never royalty or nobility in Europe nor are you native to Europe. Go find your own history IN AFRICA and stop trying to steal ours.
A hit dog will holler of course.
How come, a white southern like Doxie becomes frantic in the head with crazy outbursts, making blacks and other non-whites into "racist" whenever they speak about European history. I find that odd. Whites have questioned things all over the globe, yet none else is allowed to do this when it comes to Europe? I find that odd.
So you expect white people to sit there quietly while black people say that Europe was run by blacks in the 17th century ?
Best dialog is proof in the pudding. Not this idiotic rant by Doxie. You at least put time and effort in defending your heritage and ancestry.
Thou, sometimes you look it, on the classic black populations of Europe, by ignoring their influence and perhaps offspring. Which translates into ancestry for the people being discussed here and other threads. Blacks during classic times had important roles in all levels of society, we know now. These are facts. And you've been fighting them for the longest.
Years ago, I remember a conversation on another site, between Siegfried and some other person on Royal blue blood of Europe. Back then Siegfried said, that he had access to several private libraries etc and had discovered that these people were actually people of color, not white.
Was he possibly right? It could very well be, considering that blacks lived in Europe already hundreds of years prior to the 17th century. If we take Mendels Law, it takes 9 generations for people to become fully white, during this faze all kinds of color complexions arise as a transition, but also facial structure. The poster Habsburg gave nice examples on this.
So you expect white people to sit there quietly while black people say that Europe was run by blacks in the 17th century ?
Where do you have those quotes and citations of swarthy skin complexion, on European monarchs.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CelticWarrioress: Troll Patrol,
Sorry but once Black or other non-White blood enters the offspring & their descendants will NEVER be White ever again. The White bloodline ends with the race mixer parent.
LOL, Again I'm only speaking the truth.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
Interesting, to say the least.
quote:Your Celtic phenotypes - Brits with pale skin, freckles, red hair - will burn and never tan," says Mark Birch-Machin, reader in molecular dermatology at the University of Newcastle and a researcher for Cancer Research UK.
posted
Thanks, Lioness. We know that Africans have been in England and other parts of Europe, as early as 2 thousand years ago. Some of these Africans were part of the aristocrat society.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Thanks, Lioness. We know that Africans have been in England and other parts of Europe, as early as 2 thousand years ago. Some of these Africans were part of the aristocrat society.
Grimaldi Man - Wiki:
Grimaldi man was a name given in the early 20th century to an Italian find of two paleolithic skeletons.......These traits, combined with what de Villeneuve interpreted as prognathism led the discoverers to the conclusion that the Grimaldi man had been of a "negroid" type. The Aurignacian is 47 000 to 41 000 years old using the most recent calibration of the radiocarbon timescale. With the Grimaldi skeletons situated at the lowest Aurignacian layer, the true age is likely in the earlier range.
The first European: Created from fragments of fossil, the face of our forbears 35,000 years ago
The clay sculpture, however, portrays the face of the earliest known modern European - a man or woman who hunted deer and gathered fruit and herbs in ancient forests more than 35,000 years ago.
quote:Europeans carry a motley mix of genes from at least three ancient sources: indigenous hunter-gatherers within Europe, people from the Middle East, and northwest Asians from near the Great Steppe of eastern Europe and central Asia. One high-profile recent study suggested that each genetic component entered Europe by way of a separate migration and that they only came together in most Europeans in the past 5000 years. Now ancient DNA from the fossilized skeleton of a short, dark-skinned, dark-eyed man who lived at least 36,000 years ago along the Middle Don River in Russia presents a different view: This young man had DNA from all three of those migratory groups and so was already “pure European,” says evolutionary biologist Eske Willerslev of the Natural History Museum of Denmark at the University of Copenhagen, who led the analysis.
quote:The population of AMH spreading in the eastern direction included “softened” Mongoloid elements. The “dialectal continuum” consisting of Proto-Uralic, Proto-Altaic and Palaeo-Siberian- related languages formed the principal communication media of Early Modern Humans in northern Eurasia.
--Pavel M. DOLUKHANOV
Japan Review, 2003, 15:175-186 Archaeology and Languages in Prehistoric Northern Eurasia
School of Historical Studies, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
quote:The Oase 2 Cranium. As one of the oldest modern human crania known from Europe, Oase 2 presents an unusual mosaic of features relative to the relevant potentially ancestral samples of Middle Paleolithic east African and southwest Asian modern humans and Eurasian Neanderthals , and with reference to the more recent EUP and MUP European modern humans. It has a sufficient number of derived modern human traits to warrant that designation, but there is a suite of characteristics that distinguish it from one or more of those Late Pleistocene modern human samples.
Pes ̧tera cu Oase 2 and the cranial morphology of early modern Europeans
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Europeans carry a motley mix of genes from at least three ancient sources: indigenous hunter-gatherers within Europe, people from the Middle East, and northwest Asians from near the Great Steppe of eastern Europe and central Asia. One high-profile recent study suggested that each genetic component entered Europe by way of a separate migration and that they only came together in most Europeans in the past 5000 years. Now ancient DNA from the fossilized skeleton of a short, dark-skinned, dark-eyed man who lived at least 36,000 years ago along the Middle Don River in Russia presents a different view: This young man had DNA from all three of those migratory groups and so was already “pure European,” says evolutionary biologist Eske Willerslev of the Natural History Museum of Denmark at the University of Copenhagen, who led the analysis.
Stop the nonsense Ish Gebor: even you must know that physical proof - like Skeletons - trumps theory and guesses. Whatever your game, you have been exposed as non-authentic. Please join lioness in the corner.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: [QB] LOL @ THE ABOVE^! What does Grimaldi Man has to do with the aristocrat societies of the medieval and middle-ages?
Thanks for the sanity
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Europeans carry a motley mix of genes from at least three ancient sources: indigenous hunter-gatherers within Europe, people from the Middle East, and northwest Asians from near the Great Steppe of eastern Europe and central Asia. One high-profile recent study suggested that each genetic component entered Europe by way of a separate migration and that they only came together in most Europeans in the past 5000 years. Now ancient DNA from the fossilized skeleton of a short, dark-skinned, dark-eyed man who lived at least 36,000 years ago along the Middle Don River in Russia presents a different view: This young man had DNA from all three of those migratory groups and so was already “pure European,” says evolutionary biologist Eske Willerslev of the Natural History Museum of Denmark at the University of Copenhagen, who led the analysis.
Stop the nonsense Ish Gebor: even you must know that physical proof - like Skeletons - trumps theory and guesses. Whatever your game, you have been exposed as non-authentic. Please join lioness in the corner.
.
Yes the skeletons trump Mike's theory. If you look skulls in medieval graves or even more recent prehistoric skulls, of say 20,000 year ago they don't resemble Oase 2.
Oase 2 had more Neanderthal admixture than any modern human
.
^^look at the weird way there is a protrusion at the sides of the jaw that forms a triangular shape with the nasal cavity. They also found it had larger molars than modern humans, closer to Neanderthal. These are the kinds of details Mike willfully ignores
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Europeans carry a motley mix of genes from at least three ancient sources: indigenous hunter-gatherers within Europe, people from the Middle East, and northwest Asians from near the Great Steppe of eastern Europe and central Asia. One high-profile recent study suggested that each genetic component entered Europe by way of a separate migration and that they only came together in most Europeans in the past 5000 years. Now ancient DNA from the fossilized skeleton of a short, dark-skinned, dark-eyed man who lived at least 36,000 years ago along the Middle Don River in Russia presents a different view: This young man had DNA from all three of those migratory groups and so was already “pure European,” says evolutionary biologist Eske Willerslev of the Natural History Museum of Denmark at the University of Copenhagen, who led the analysis.
Stop the nonsense Ish Gebor: even you must know that physical proof - like Skeletons - trumps theory and guesses. Whatever your game, you have been exposed as non-authentic. Please join lioness in the corner.
LOL What I showed wasn't evidence? Okay.
You should have clicked the links.
posted 22 May, 2016 23:56
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by CelticWarrioress: Troll Patrol first you see the nose bridge on the skull was broken off,they didn't bother to fix it before doing the reconstruction hmmm wonder why. They made the nose broader than the nasal opening is hmm wonder why.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: [QB] LOL @ THE ABOVE^! What does Grimaldi Man has to do with the aristocrat societies of the medieval and middle-ages?
Thanks for the sanity
It has to do with rationality and objectiveness. I am not jumping on people's bandwagon. That never really was my thing.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is a good chance to actually break down the posters deception with texts and stay in line with the theme of the topic they are trying to divert.
It's clear lioness is being deceptive with the posts, first they posts Mackey and choose paintings from an age where many fakes were co-produced (does not mention that during this time paintings and legitmate relics were destroyed which Macky mentions in his own writings in other books).
The poster proceeds in a follow up to post a non-primary source book with a man saying, with even worse - anecdotal evidence, that there are many meanings to black, he describes for example, that black also had to do with being malicious (which is true), but if you actually read Macky, some of the men mentioned as black were of good status among men. So obviously the context in that sense does not match up with Macky who was describing people by their physical appearance. For example, when describing a person on page 26 he explains that they are black like a Spaniard or Jew.
If the reader is still a bit too slow to see through the poster's deception you can get an accurate description of a full blood Jew in Spain by reading an encounter from George Henry Borrow in his journal The Bible in Spain.
"It was the figure of a man, the tallest and bulkiest that I had hitherto seen in Spain, dressed in a manner strange and singular for the country. On his head was a hat with a low crown and broad brim, very much resembling that of an English waggoner; about his body was a long loose tunic or slop, seemingly of coarse ticken, open in front, so as to allow the interior garments to be occasionally seen. These appeared to consist of a jerkin and short velveteen pantaloons. I have said that the brim of the hat was broad, but broad as it was, it was insufficient to cover an immense bush of coal-black hair, which, thick and curly, projected on either side."
"I had now a full view of his face and figure, and those huge features and Herculean form still ocassionally revisit me in my dreams."
The writer reveals the man to be a "Jew" in spain, the black complexion by Mackey, black coal bushy hair, and herculean facial features is pretty much all the description you need. This isn't rocket science at all, simple logic. You can get various other sources too, but this is one of many.
Those interested in learning more feel free to search for the entire text but the man describes that orginally the Church structure was filled with them in the highest position further comfirming what happened.
"There are many such as I amongst the priesthood, and not amongst the inferior priesthood either; some of the most learned and famed of them in Spain have been of us, or of our blood at least, and many of them at this day think as I do."
One must conclude that the poster is either completely dumb, or deceptive, but I have already shown that they are skilled in the act of deception.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: Mackey and choose paintings from an age where many fakes were co-produced (does not mention that during this time paintings and legitmate relics were destroyed which Macky mentions in his own writings in other books). but I have already shown that they are skilled in the act of deception.
I know of this, so yes I agree.
There is a particular word t discribe the falsifying of paintings during that time. I, however forgot the specific definition/ word. Maybe you know about it.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: Mackey and choose paintings from an age where many fakes were co-produced (does not mention that during this time paintings and legitmate relics were destroyed which Macky mentions in his own writings in other books). but I have already shown that they are skilled in the act of deception.
I know of this, so yes I agree.
There is a particular word t discribe the falsifying of paintings during that time. I, however forgot the specific definition/ word. Maybe you know about it.
The immediate one that comes to my mind is iconoclasm. I'll have to see if its mentioned as that in my source though.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Try to save all these sources on your computer or an external hard drive or an online uploading site if you can.......
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: Mackey and choose paintings from an age where many fakes were co-produced (does not mention that during this time paintings and legitmate relics were destroyed which Macky mentions in his own writings in other books). but I have already shown that they are skilled in the act of deception.
I know of this, so yes I agree.
There is a particular word t discribe the falsifying of paintings during that time. I, however forgot the specific definition/ word. Maybe you know about it.
The immediate one that comes to my mind is iconoclasm. I'll have to see if its mentioned as that in my source though.
I think that's the right path.
Iconoclastic Fury
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: Mackey and choose paintings from an age where many fakes were co-produced (does not mention that during this time paintings and legitmate relics were destroyed which Macky mentions in his own writings in other books). but I have already shown that they are skilled in the act of deception.
I know of this, so yes I agree.
There is a particular word t discribe the falsifying of paintings during that time. I, however forgot the specific definition/ word. Maybe you know about it.
So you have researched the topic and "black" in the 18th century England meant exclusively "somebody who looks African"
And you have researched this text by John Macky and have determined that it is authentic
and that because Charles Lennox 1st Duke of Richmond and Daniel Finch, Earl of Nottingham and several others described by Macky as "black" do not resemble Africans in these paintings that therefore these are fake paintings.
Your research has shown that modern Europeans could not destroy or hide or alter this John Macky text. They have to live with it for some reason and make it available in their internet archives
even though it suggests that they are liars about who these nobles were.
So they made these fake paintings to pretend that these people Daniel Finch, Charles Lennox, several others and King Charles himself were not black people.
Ish I didn't realize you were so smart
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I am not speaking in particular cases. I am speaking in general terms. The case of Iconoclastic Fury / Reformation is real. There is interesting info out there.
People back then were mostly illiterate, so art was a way to express imagery and speak to the masses. That's probably one of the reasons why it became so advanced and prevalent.
One the other hand, Europe was waging in wars during those days.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: This is a good chance to actually break down the posters deception with texts and stay in line with the theme of the topic they are trying to divert.
It's clear lioness is being deceptive with the posts, first they posts Mackey and choose paintings from an age where many fakes were co-produced (does not mention that during this time paintings and legitmate relics were destroyed which Macky mentions in his own writings in other books).
The poster proceeds in a follow up to post a non-primary source book with a man saying, with even worse - anecdotal evidence, that there are many meanings to black, he describes for example, that black also had to do with being malicious (which is true), but if you actually read Macky, some of the men mentioned as black were of good status among men. So obviously the context in that sense does not match up with Macky who was describing people by their physical appearance. For example, when describing a person on page 26 he explains that they are black like a Spaniard or Jew.
If the reader is still a bit too slow to see through the poster's deception you can get an accurate description of a full blood Jew in Spain by reading an encounter from George Henry Borrow in his journal The Bible in Spain.
"It was the figure of a man, the tallest and bulkiest that I had hitherto seen in Spain, dressed in a manner strange and singular for the country. On his head was a hat with a low crown and broad brim, very much resembling that of an English waggoner; about his body was a long loose tunic or slop, seemingly of coarse ticken, open in front, so as to allow the interior garments to be occasionally seen. These appeared to consist of a jerkin and short velveteen pantaloons. I have said that the brim of the hat was broad, but broad as it was, it was insufficient to cover an immense bush of coal-black hair, which, thick and curly, projected on either side."
"I had now a full view of his face and figure, and those huge features and Herculean form still ocassionally revisit me in my dreams."
The writer reveals the man to be a "Jew" in spain, the black complexion by Mackey, black coal bushy hair, and herculean facial features is pretty much all the description you need. This isn't rocket science at all, simple logic. You can get various other sources too, but this is one of many.
Those interested in learning more feel free to search for the entire text but the man describes that orginally the Church structure was filled with them in the highest position further comfirming what happened.
"There are many such as I amongst the priesthood, and not amongst the inferior priesthood either; some of the most learned and famed of them in Spain have been of us, or of our blood at least, and many of them at this day think as I do."
One must conclude that the poster is either completely dumb, or deceptive, but I have already shown that they are skilled in the act of deception.
At the time the word "black" could mean anything from any European who was not starkly pale skinned to an African.
Both men could be described as black skinned in 18th century England. The word did not have the racial or African connotation that it does today
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
In England in the 18th century and earlier the time the word "black" could mean anything from any European who was not starkly pale skinned to an African -even though learning that may might spoil the high and illicit emotional states
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Note how this books, compiled from records of the period, describes people being "black" and "Negro" separately
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
there was a massive population influx of Albino Eurasians INTO EUROPE FROM EURASIA!
Yes this is the point at which Blacks lost rulership of Europe, many hundreds of years before any of these paintings we like to look at
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
In England in the 18th century and earlier the time the word "black" could mean anything from any European who was not starkly pale skinned to an African -even though learning that may might spoil the high and illicit emotional states
Remember readers that was not a primary source, that was a book about someone using anecdotal evidence saying it could mean anything. Again the poster is either playing stupid or being dishonest which I have proven in another threas. They carry the same behavior as shown in a previous thread. They are not being honest, I gave a logical reason and a demonstration as to why they are being deceptive and then they begin their illeterate dance.
Of course they ignore information that exposes themselves and all of a sudden they can't read and you avoid direct conflicts with their conclusions. Just repeating nonsense. They are doing exactly what I revealed they would.
Of course they are also toss out logic, if it does not suit their goal:
-There is no such thing as a perfect crime. -Most people will not care enough to research any of this. -There are a lot of documents that they post online that are embarssing for them.
Also keep in mind that negro is primarily a phenotype description. You can look up the origin of how the word was used in that time/recorded in dictionaries to confirm that.
I really do find it interesting that when primary source evidence starts to slip in the poster starts going blind.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will be posting the details from the main topic of this thread tomorrow hopefully. There is a lot here.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
Note how this books, compiled from records of the period, describes people being "black" and "Negro" separately
You know, I think this poster is just legitimately stupid more than deceptive. This is absolutely terrible.
I'm pretty sure at this point the poster is not really sure what they are REALLY posting. Not sure if this is worth responding to, beyond mockery.
Does the poster know what a Black Loyalist is? Lol what the hell, I can't, I just can't believe this nonsense.
Its like they are searching for the words and not even bothering with looking at the context of the book itself. This is a total joke!
I have to directly respond to the poster now, seriously kindly get out of the thread, your prsentation is a total disgrace.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, if anyone is interested, with West Virginia, for those who try to ancestrial research they did not clearly divide people of color accurately. This location seemed to be very confusing for anyone black or indian.
Genologytoday.com has great records for those researching. And the foolishness posted above recalled me to this article I had saved which mentions things concerning this.
"Of course the earliest records just divided people into white, free persons of color, and slave. So bear in mind in your research that a reference to a "Free person of Color" in the 1700s or early 1800s, many were Native American; but, there were also many free blacks."
In any case, this poster needs to get the hell out of my thread, this is a waste of my time.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
Above we have Colonial records of which the word "black" is used and "Negro"
now Fencer comes in and tries to pretend that that means the person was a Black Loyalist
that is a fraud, a clever scam Fencer is trying to perpetrate based on zero evidence, he just made it up Black Loyalists did exist but that is not what is indicated here. As I have shown they list "Negro" when the person was Negro
^ The word "black" here is short for hair color (as fully indicated in other records in the book.
Note the first entry on the page:
James Carmichael, Scotland, 20, 5'8, Prince George, fair, joiner, black, speaks Scotch
^ that means he's from Prince George, Scotland, fair skinned, is a wood joiner, has black hair and speaks "Scotch"
Next:
Samule Cowin, England, 22, 5 61/2, Cambridge , dark, barber , brown, well made man
^^ He's from Cambridge, he's dark ( for a white guy) and his hair is brown
___________________________
If you actually study word usage at this time they didn't use "black" in a racial way
James Carmichael (1771-1831) was born in Glasgow, Scotland and was brought to Fredericksburg, Virginia at an early age by his uncle, Dr. George French. French, a prominent doctor and mayor of Fredericksburg for several terms, raised Carmichael. When Carmichael was of age, French sent him to Edinburgh to study medicine. Upon completion of his medical education at the age of 20, Carmichael returned to America and began his own medical practice in the growing and relatively prosperous town of Fredericksburg. After relocating his business to several different offices in town, Carmichael eventually settled on opening a small brick office adjacent to his home. He soon became a busy and well-regarded physician in Fredericksburg and the surrounding countryside.
Carmichael quickly assimilated himself into Southern culture, becoming a slave owner and eventually owning twelve slaves by 1820. In June 1794 Carmichael married Elizabeth Hackley and together they had six children. Two of the boys joined their father in his medical practice. In advertisements placed in the local newspapers, Edward was announced as joining his father’s practice in May 1817 and George joined eleven years later in May 1828. Thus began four generations of Carmichaels who practiced medicine in Fredericksburg.
Story Pharmacy—Marvel at the primitive recipes and formulas. Tools of the Trade—Examine the devices and practices of the era. Health Care of Slaves—Discover what constituted a significant part of the Doctors’ practice. The letters writtten by patients to James Carmichael indicate that his medical expertise and skills were trusted, but they reveal little about his personality. However, by examining a few of the second–hand sources about him, James Carmichael indeed appears to have been a colorful character. In one recollection, he played a practical joke in the Methodist church located across the street from his house. He and a fellow conspirator sprinkled snuff over the heads of the congregation causing the members to break out in fits of sneezing. For this, Carmichael and his friend spent the night in jail. [Source] His eccentricities are further elaborated upon in a 1937 WPA survey report about the Carmichael house. The interviewer related that Carmichael generally abstained from alcohol, and yet at “long intervals, often more than six months apart, he got into what was called a ‘spree’.” During this drinking bout, which could last anywhere from several days to a week, Carmichael engaged in peculiar—even criminal—behavior such as breaking and entering into his patients’ homes. While he was in this inebriated state, other doctors in town carefully attended to his patients. [Source]
Despite his occasional unconventional behavior, Carmichael remained a beloved physician in the community. When he died at the age of 60 in 1831, his published obituaries were very favorable. The obituary in the Virginia Herald stated, “Few men of the Faculty have had a wider range or been more successful as a practitioner of the healing art—He was justly regarded as very skllful[sic] and had the highest confidence of the community in which he lived and died.”[Source] The Political Arena’s obituary was more glowing:
________________________
^^ This is not a Black Loyalist
A Black Loyalist was an inhabitant of British America of African descent who joined British colonial forces during the American Revolutionary War.
We can start going into the individual genealogies of these people, they were not blacks
______________________
If anybody is interested in REAL Black Loyalists their names are recorded here:
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: By the way, if anyone is interested, with West Virginia, for those who try to ancestrial research they did not clearly divide people of color accurately. This location seemed to be very confusing for anyone black or indian.
Genologytoday.com has great records for those researching. And the foolishness posted above recalled me to this article I had saved which mentions things concerning this.
"Of course the earliest records just divided people into white, free persons of color, and slave. So bear in mind in your research that a reference to a "Free person of Color" in the 1700s or early 1800s, many were Native American; but, there were also many free blacks."
In any case, this poster needs to get the hell out of my thread, this is a waste of my time.
why should I get out of the thread when I have been producing sources and you have not? Even here it's just commentary. And it debunks your claim that what I listed were Black Loyalists
____________________________
who were
Free people of color ?
-mixed people whose black ancestry came form Africa
The term free people of color (French: gens de couleur libres), in the context of the history of slavery in the Americas, at first specifically referred to persons of mixed African and European descent who were not enslaved. The term was especially used in the French colonies, including La Louisiane and settlements on Caribbean islands, such as Saint-Domingue, Guadeloupe, and Martinique. Freed African slaves were included in the term affranchis, but historically they were considered as distinct from the free people of color. In these territories and major cities, particularly New Orleans, and those cities held by the Spanish, a substantial third class of primarily mixed-race, free people developed. These colonial societies classified mixed-race people in a variety of ways, generally related to visible features and to the proportion of African ancestry.[citation needed] Racial classifications were numerous in Latin America.
In the Thirteen Colonies settled by the British, and later in the United States, the term free negro was often used to cover the same class of people – those who were legally free and visibly of ethnic African descent. It included persons of mixed race as well as freed African slaves.
Free people of color played an important role in the history of New Orleans and the southern area of La Louisiane, both when the area was controlled by the French and Spanish, and after acquisition by the United States as part of the Louisiana Purchase. They were also important in forming an educated class of people of color in French colonies of the Caribbean islands.
When French settlers and traders first arrived in these colonies, the men frequently took Native American women as their concubines or common-law wives. When African slaves were imported to the colony, the colonists took African women as concubines or wives. In the period of French and Spanish rule, men tended to marry later after becoming financially established. As the German Coast colony grew and more white women arrived from France and Germany, some French men or ethnic French Creoles still took mixed-race women as mistresses, known as placées, before they officially married. The free people of color developed formal arrangements for placées, which the young women's mothers negotiated. Under the system of plaçage, often the mothers negotiated a kind of dowry or property transfer to their daughters, including freedom for them and their children, and education for the children. The French Creole men often paid for education of their "natural" (illegitimate) mixed-race children from these relationships, especially if they were sons, generally sending them to France to be educated.
Notable free people of color[edit] Chevalier de Saint-Georges, composer and swordsman in late 18th-century France Julien Raimond, leader from Saint-Domingue of the campaign in France and the colony to extend full citizenship to free men of color following the French Revolution Frederick Douglass, American slave who escaped to the North, achieved education, and led abolition movement in the US John Sweat Rock, born free in New Jersey, 19th-century teacher, doctor, lawyer, abolitionist, first black admitted to the US Supreme Court Bar James Forten, born free in Philadelphia, became a wealthy businessman (sailmaker) and strong abolitionist Charlotte Forten Grimke, writer, abolitionist, educator Charles Henry Langston, abolitionist and activist in Ohio and Kansas John Mercer Langston, abolitionist, politician and activist in Ohio, Washington, DC; and Virginia, first dean of Howard University Law Department, first president of Virginia State Univ., first black elected to US Congress from Virginia (1888) Robert Purvis, born free in Charleston, became active abolitionist in Philadelphia, supported the Underground Railroad and used inherited wealth to create services for African Americans Marie Laveau, early 19th century Voodoo practitioner Edmond Dédé, composer Rose Nicaud, born a slave, was the first coffee vendor in New Orleans; earned enough from her portable coffee stand to buy her freedom. Thomas-Alexandre Dumas, father of the author of The Three Musketeers, born free from a noble French general in Saint Domingue and a slave woman. Brought to France at age 14 John Chavis, born free c. 1762 in North Carolina, a teacher and preacher among both white and free persons of color until the mid-19th century, when laws restricted free people of color Thomas Day, born free c. 1801 in Virginia. Famous furniture maker/craftsman in Caswell County, North Carolina William Ellison, born a slave c. 1790, wealthy businessman Charles W. Chesnutt, born free in Cleveland, author, essayist, political activist, business owner and lawyer Solomon Northup, born c. 1808 in New York, kidnapped and enslaved in 1841. After his escape he wrote a memoir, Twelve Years a Slave (1853), and worked for abolition. Norbert Rillieux, engineer and inventor Amanda America Dickson, 19th century heiress, socialite and estate owner in Georgia
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pardon the time it takes me, but I have many PDFs that I have to go through. It’s like a tool box, you need a different tool to deal with the specific nut job.
I don't think I'll do any more than post this bit to put an end to this mess, wash my hands and be done with this moron and continue my thread in peace. Of course they will just ignore this and go into illiterate mode, but this is good info for people to save in their documents.
Same time period (late 1700s), same exact context (Revolutionary War soilder, list, different town though):
I suggest others search out and save this incase this joker comes back with this mess again. I really feel they have no value on this board. The stupidity is very frustrating. It’s like watching a dog jump up on the dining room table and vomit on everything.
I’ll post some favorites… There are more of them in this but I’m not wasting my time with all of them, two is enough.
EDIT: Added three, third times a charm as they say, I also like the simplicity of the added one!
Book: Massachusetts soldiers and sailors of the Revolutionary War: A compilation from the archives. Vol 10.
page 274
“Marten, Isaac, Berwick. Private, Capt. William Mills's co., Lieut. Col. John Brooks's (7th) regt. ; muster rolls for July and August, 1781 ; enlisted April 2, 1781; enlistment, 3 years; also, muster rolls for Dec., 1781-Feb., 1782, dated York Hutts; also, descriptive list dated Feb. 20, 1782; Capt. William Mills's co., Lieut. Col. J. Brooks's (7th) regt. ; age, 16 (also given 17) yrs. ; stature, 5 ft. 4i (also given 5 ft. 5) in.; complexion, black; hair, black (also given wool); occupation, laborer (also given farmer) ; birthplace, Berwick ; residence, Berwick ; enlisted for town of Berwick; enlisted March 2 (also given April 2), 1781; enlistment, 3 years ; reported a negro; also, Capt. Mills's co., Lieut. Col. Brooks's regt. ; list of men who died or were discharged subsequent to Jan. 1, 1781; said Marten died Dec. 24, 1782, at Windsor, of fever.”
page 564
“ McNral, Prince. Descriptive list of men raised in Middlesex Co., agreeable to resolve of Dec. 2, 1780, as returned by Joseph Hosmer, Superintendent for said county ; age, 22 yrs.; stature, 5 ft 74 in.; complexion, black; hair, black; eyes, black; occupation, laborer ; engaged for town of Framingham ; engaged March 13, 1782 ; term, 3 years ; reported a negro.”
page 669
“ Meerill, Caesar, Amesbury. Receipt dated Amesbury, July 2, 1781, for bounty paid said Merrill by Enoch Rogers, on behalf of Class No. 10 of the town of Amesbury, to serve in the Continental Army for the term of 3 years, agreeable to resolve of Dec. 2, 1780; also, descriptive list of men in Continental service; Capt. King's co., Lieut. Col. J. Brooks's (7th) regt. ; age, 22 yrs.; stature, 5 ft. 2 in. ; hair, black; occupation, farmer; residence, Amesbury; engaged for town of Amesbury; engaged July 2, 1781 ; term, 3 years; reported a negro.”
It’s obvious that the soldiers had to be REPORTED as negro, if the weren’t then they just had to go by whatever description they are given.
The take home message is that the poster is a master deceiver and an idiot, a DANGEROUS combination. Sorry for the interruption. I will continue with my main topic tomorrow.
Edit: It is clear that the poster is a liar, I suggest their posts be ignored and skipped over to avoid any further derailment.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
“ Meerill, Caesar, Amesbury. Receipt dated Amesbury, July 2, 1781, for bounty paid said Merrill by Enoch Rogers, on behalf of Class No. 10 of the town of Amesbury, to serve in the Continental Army for the term of 3 years, agreeable to resolve of Dec. 2, 1780; also, descriptive list of men in Continental service; Capt. King's co., Lieut. Col. J. Brooks's (7th) regt. ; age, 22 yrs.; stature, 5 ft. 2 in. ; hair, black; occupation, farmer; residence, Amesbury; engaged for town of Amesbury; engaged July 2, 1781 ; term, 3 years; reported a negro.”
It’s obvious that the soldiers had to be REPORTED as negro, if the weren’t then they just had to go by whatever description they are given.
^ Fencer here, continuing to scam. When you see "it's obvious" you know he is bullshyting.
I deal with facts not what somebody thinks is obvious.
Now he's trying to say that "reported a negro" which means he identified himself as Negro actually means "he was rumored to be a Negro but we're not sure"
And he is further trying to flip this with more of his "it's obvious" suggestions, that everybody knew the person was black but only some were verified for being Negro Therefore anytime you see the word "black" it can't mean hair color or it can't mean a white European who was not starkly pale but had the slightest George Bushian tint. They had to have been a Negro but while their blackness was noted nobody actually noticed if they were Negro at the same time.
what a load of horsesh!t
It's the desperation bourne out of Stockholm syndrome
The desire of some black folk to be fruity aristocrats with big wigs who enslaved Blacks in the Caribbean
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it interesting that the poster projects when they are caught. And start to throw taintrums like a child. We have two direct lies here that I have to point out. And I've seen this time and time again, which is why I typically don't take these things seriously, the posters become predictable.
If something is obvious, that means you can observe enough of the information to come to a sensible conclusion. In almost every case the notification is “reported as negro” if not they actually put complexion as negro the people getting reported was based on information given, sometimes not enough details where provided. I guess if one is too dumb to make an observation (or dishonest, as the poster truly is) something could not appear as obvious. That is different from making a statement and presenting it as fact directly. Which the poster has done.
Note the following:
"I deal with facts"
But wait, they said -
"If you actually study word usage at this time they didn't use "black" in a racial way"
Oops!
Slave Petition for Freedom to the Massachusetts Legislature
“January 13, 1777. To The Honorable Counsel & House of [Representa]tives for the State of Massachusitte [Massachusetts] Bay in General Court assembled, Jan. 13, 1777.
The petition of A Great Number of Blackes detained in a State of slavery in the Bowels of a free & Christian Country Humbly shuwith that your Petitioners apprehend that thay have in Common with all other men a Natural and Unaliable Right to that freedom which…”
I won't post the rest of the petition, we have the date, the use of the word black to describe race.
Let's see if anyone else who looked into this found the same thing or formed a similar conclusion.
Oops!
“Disowning Slavery: Gradual Emancipation and "Race" in New England, 1780–1860”
By Joanne Pope Melish
page 248
“For the first two centuries, people of African descent in New England called themselves variously “blacks,” “Negroes,” and Africans.”
“Early petitions use ’black,’ ‘Negro,’ and ‘African’ indiscriminately, sometimes in the same petition.”
Oh dear…. Two lies detected already without even trying. This should be enough evidence.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
See this guy he's not fair skinned. He's tinted. In the 18th century and earlier they would call this person "black skinned"
They also applied the term "black" to much darker skinned Africans. They would also sometimes describe such people as "wooly haired" and in England often as "Blackamoor"
The proof is this painting and several others which shows that these English nobles described by John Macky were swarthy whites not African looking people.
Now if you don't like it you can't just call the paintings fake with no evidence whatsoever just peoples some fakes do exist. That is no more credible then saying John Macky's text is fake ( and since it was published post-humously that actually is more possible than these official court paintings being fake)
Attempt to say something is fake because sometimes people make fakes is a logical fallacy. Any artifact or writing can be deemed faked at any time if you don't happen to like it. Yet with no proof it's just wishful thinking with no basis whatsoever.
And it's not even a matter of of a painting being fake or not.
If a painting is fake that does not mean that the appearance of the person is then whatever you wish it to be. People also make real paintings as well, many more in fact.
If 2 plus 2 is not 5 that does not mean you can then insert whatever you want. It has to be 4.
Show us a text that describes a European noble as a Negro or Blackamoor. Then I'll listen.
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: This is a good chance to actually break down the posters deception with texts and stay in line with the theme of the topic they are trying to divert.
It's clear lioness is being deceptive with the posts, first they posts Mackey and choose paintings from an age where many fakes were co-produced (does not mention that during this time paintings and legitmate relics were destroyed which Macky mentions in his own writings in other books).
The poster proceeds in a follow up to post a non-primary source book with a man saying, with even worse - anecdotal evidence, that there are many meanings to black, he describes for example, that black also had to do with being malicious (which is true), but if you actually read Macky, some of the men mentioned as black were of good status among men. So obviously the context in that sense does not match up with Macky who was describing people by their physical appearance. For example, when describing a person on page 26 he explains that they are black like a Spaniard or Jew.
If the reader is still a bit too slow to see through the poster's deception you can get an accurate description of a full blood Jew in Spain by reading an encounter from George Henry Borrow in his journal The Bible in Spain.
"It was the figure of a man, the tallest and bulkiest that I had hitherto seen in Spain, dressed in a manner strange and singular for the country. On his head was a hat with a low crown and broad brim, very much resembling that of an English waggoner; about his body was a long loose tunic or slop, seemingly of coarse ticken, open in front, so as to allow the interior garments to be occasionally seen. These appeared to consist of a jerkin and short velveteen pantaloons. I have said that the brim of the hat was broad, but broad as it was, it was insufficient to cover an immense bush of coal-black hair, which, thick and curly, projected on either side."
"I had now a full view of his face and figure, and those huge features and Herculean form still ocassionally revisit me in my dreams."
The writer reveals the man to be a "Jew" in spain, the black complexion by Mackey, black coal bushy hair, and herculean facial features is pretty much all the description you need. This isn't rocket science at all, simple logic. You can get various other sources too, but this is one of many.
Those interested in learning more feel free to search for the entire text but the man describes that orginally the Church structure was filled with them in the highest position further comfirming what happened.
"There are many such as I amongst the priesthood, and not amongst the inferior priesthood either; some of the most learned and famed of them in Spain have been of us, or of our blood at least, and many of them at this day think as I do."
One must conclude that the poster is either completely dumb, or deceptive, but I have already shown that they are skilled in the act of deception.
At the time the word "black" could mean anything from any European who was not starkly pale skinned to an African.
Both men could be described as black skinned in 18th century England. The word did not have the racial or African connotation that it does today
YOU LACK THE FACT AFRICAN PRESENCE WAS PREVELANT IN ENGLAND DURING THOSE DAYS. HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO GET OVER THIS? WHY THE HELL ARE YOU SHOWING BUSH, AGAIN AND AGIAN. IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN, WHEN YOU CLAIM TO BE A BLACK WOMAN? LOL
Crazy retarded claims!
quote:Blanke, John (fl. 1507–1512), royal trumpeter, was employed as a musician at the courts of Henry VII and Henry VIII, making his first recorded appearance there in 1507. He is thought to have been of African descent, but his age, place of birth, and parentage are unknown. His surname may have originated as a nickname, derived from the word blanc in French or blanco in Spanish, both meaning ‘white’. Blanke was part of a wider trend for European rulers to employ African musicians, dating from at least 1194, when turbaned black trumpeters heralded the entry of the Holy Roman emperor Henry VI into Palermo in Sicily. It has been suggested that Blanke arrived in England with Katherine of Aragon when she came to marry Arthur, prince of Wales, in 1501. While there is no record of Blanke's arrival, there is evidence of other Africans in Katherine's retinue, including Catalina de Cardones, who was born in Motril, Granada. However, the Tudor court employed musicians from across continental Europe, and Blanke may have come from Spain, Portugal, or Italy, all of which had growing African populations at this time.
Between 1507 and 1512 Blanke was one of eight royal trumpeters under the leadership of Peter de Casa Nova. The first payment to ‘John Blanke, the blacke Trumpet’ was made in early December 1507, when he was paid 20s. (8d. a day) for his services in the previous month (TNA: PRO, E 36/214, fol. 109). Monthly payments for the same amount continued throughout the following year. Blanke played at the funeral of Henry VII on 11 May 1509, when he wore black mourning livery, and then at the coronation of Henry VIII on 24 June, when he was dressed in bright scarlet. Following the death of the Italian trumpeter Domynck Justinian (last recorded as performing at Henry VIII's coronation), Blanke successfully petitioned the king to grant him Justinian's position and wage of 16d. a day. He complained that his current wage was ‘not sufficient to mayntaigne and kepe hym to doo your grace lyke service as other your trompeters doo’ and asked that his ‘true & faithfull service’ be considered, adding that he intended to continue to serve the king ‘during his lyf’ (TNA: PRO, E101/417/2, no. 150). On 12 and 13 February 1511 Blanke played at the Westminster tournament, a flamboyant Burgundian-style joust held to celebrate the birth of the short-lived Prince Henry on new year's day. The event would have required many fanfares, and the royal trumpeters were paid more than ten times their daily wage.
John Blanke is depicted twice on the 60 foot long Westminster tournament roll of 1511, which was produced in the workshop of Thomas Wriothesley, Garter king of arms. He is shown first riding a grey horse with a black harness. All the trumpeters wear yellow and grey livery, while their double-curve instruments are decorated with the royal quarterings. The trumpeters appear again at the end of the day's jousting. Here, in the more frequently reproduced portrait, Blanke's horse is shown as black with a crimson harness. His dark face contrasts strikingly with those of his companions, but his one visible hand, holding the trumpet, is incongruously shown as white. In both depictions Blanke wears a turban, which is brown and yellow in the first image, and green with a linear design in gold in the second, while his companions are bareheaded.
John Blanke married in January 1512, though the identity of his wife is unknown. Henry VIII sent the great wardrobe a warrant, dated 14 January, to deliver to ‘John Blak, our trompeter’, a gown of violet cloth, and also a bonnet and a hat, ‘to be taken of our gift against his marriage’ (PRO: TNA, E 101/417/6, no. 50). After this no further reference to Blanke has been found in the royal records and he is not mentioned in the full list of trumpeters on 31 January 1514. That he achieved a prominent position in the royal household, was paid wages, negotiated an increase in his pay, and was able to marry, suggest that Blanke was not enslaved.
John Blanke is the only identifiable black person portrayed in sixteenth-century British art. Alongside his relatively high-status occupation and connection to Henry VIII, this has made Blanke the most widely recognized and cited example of an African in Tudor England. In the first decade of the twenty-first century Blanke featured in teaching resources including BBC programmes for seven- to eleven-year-olds, and in the National Archives' guide to black history; his image was the most requested for reproduction of those held by the College of Arms. From 2003 he featured in the National Trust's annual ‘Black History Month’ exhibition at Sutton House, Hackney.
quote: Africans have been present in Europe from classical times. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Roman soldiers of African origin served in Britain, and some stayed after their military service ended. According to the historians Fryer, Edwards and Walvin, in the 9th century Viking fleets raided North Africa and Spain, captured Black people, and took them to Britain and Ireland. From the end of the 15th century we begin to see more evidence for the presence of Glossary - opens new windowBlack Moors in the accounts of the reign of King James IV of Scotland, and later in Elizabethan England.
quote: "The King Provides Clothes for the Party A variety of fabrics were used to make clothing for the Moors - velvet ('wellus'), woollen kersey ('carsay') and fine Holland linen - which was decorated or fastened with buttons, rings or other ornaments ('mailyeis'). These were paid for by the treasury of King James IV. It seems that these Moors were not servants; it is more likely that they were invited guests staying at the palace. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 101 (1505)"
quote:So who were the Numerus Maurorum Aurelianorum and why are they so important to the Black British community? Our key evidence for this unit is a 4th century inscription, found in 1934 at the village of Beaumont two miles east of Burgh-by-Sands on the banks of the River Eden, and known as the Beaumont inscription. Translated from the Latin it reads:
To Jupiter Best and Greatest and the Majesty of our two Emperors, to the Genius [guardian spirit] of the numerus of Aurelian Moors, Valerianus’ and Gallienus’ own, Caelius Vibianus, cohort-tribune in charge of the above-mentioned numerus, [set up this altar] through the agency of Julius Rufinus, senior centurion.
See this guy he's not fair skinned. He's tinted. In the 18th century and earlier they would call this person "black skinned"
They also applied the term "black" to much darker skinned Africans. They would also sometimes describe such people as "wooly haired" and in England often as "Blackamoor"
The proof is this painting and several others which shows that these English nobles described by John Macky were swarthy whites not African looking people.
Now if you don't like it you can't just call the paintings fake with no evidence whatsoever just peoples some fakes do exist. That is no more credible then saying John Macky's text is fake ( and since it was published post-humously that actually is more possible than these official court paintings being fake)
Attempt to say something is fake because sometimes people make fakes is a logical fallacy. Any artifact or writing can be deemed faked at any time if you don't happen to like it. Yet with no proof it's just wishful thinking with no basis whatsoever.
And it's not even a matter of of a painting being fake or not.
If a painting is fake that does not mean that the appearance of the person is then whatever you wish it to be. People also make real paintings as well, many more in fact.
If 2 plus 2 is not 5 that does not mean you can then insert whatever you want. It has to be 4.
Show us a text that describes a European noble as a Negro or Blackamoor. Then I'll listen.
Dumb dumb, there was an inquisition and expell of the Blackamoor. Of course during those days they weren't in aristocrats positions. This however doesn't mean that "watered down" offspring weren't in such positions. What part of the Mendal Law didn't you grasp? Or is it getting too complex for you now?
You could wonder, why the individuals you've shown have light completion, and dark curry hair.
Fun factor is, you'll see plenty of people like that in the Latin world (Americas) And yes, also North America. But "a moor" relevant question is, howcome the Royal house doesn't show these "typical and peculiar traits" nowadays?
You keep ignoring the facts that "black Africans" held high positions, long before the 18th century. You ignore the fact that they copulated and that they had offspring.
All you have to do is Google,...or use another search engine of course.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The English and Scottish surname Black is derived from the Middle English term blak(e) meaning “black’”(Old English blćc, blaca), a nickname given from the earliest times to a swarthy or dark-haired man. The second possible origin is as a shortened form of Black-Smith, a worker in cold metals, as distinct from a White (Smith), one who worked in hot metals.
The surname was popular in Scotland from the 15th Century. Adam Black of Edinburgh (1784 - 1874), a publisher, acquired the rights to the Encyclopedia Britannica in 1827. The first recorded spelling of the family name is shown to be that of Wulfhun des Blaca which was dated circa 901, in the "Old English Bynames Register."
quote: The research, funded by the Wellcome Trust, identified a rare West African Y chromosome in a group of men from Yorkshire who share a surname that dates back at least as far as the mid-14th century and have a typical European appearance.
[...]
The hgA1 Y chromosome could perhaps have entered the gene pool in northern England 1800 years ago when Africans fought there as Roman soldiers, Jobling says. It also might have been introduced in the 9th century, when Vikings brought captured North Africans to Britain, according to some historians.
[...]
Because many slaves from this area came to Britain beginning in the mid-16th century, it is likely that the white men with the hgA1 variant have a black ancestor that arrived this way, researchers say.
[...]
Vincent Brown of Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, agrees and points to the example of Olaudah Equiano, a black man who bought his freedom in Britain in the mid 18th century and achieved fame for his writing. Equiano claimed to be a slave from west Africa, though some argue that he had arrived from colonial America. He lived in London and eventually married a white woman, notes Brown.
“ Meerill, Caesar, Amesbury. Receipt dated Amesbury, July 2, 1781, for bounty paid said Merrill by Enoch Rogers, on behalf of Class No. 10 of the town of Amesbury, to serve in the Continental Army for the term of 3 years, agreeable to resolve of Dec. 2, 1780; also, descriptive list of men in Continental service; Capt. King's co., Lieut. Col. J. Brooks's (7th) regt. ; age, 22 yrs.; stature, 5 ft. 2 in. ; hair, black; occupation, farmer; residence, Amesbury; engaged for town of Amesbury; engaged July 2, 1781 ; term, 3 years; reported a negro.”
It’s obvious that the soldiers had to be REPORTED as negro, if the weren’t then they just had to go by whatever description they are given.
^ Fencer here, continuing to scam. When you see "it's obvious" you know he is bullshyting.
I deal with facts not what somebody thinks is obvious.
Now he's trying to say that "reported a negro" which means he identified himself as Negro actually means "he was rumored to be a Negro but we're not sure"
And he is further trying to flip this with more of his "it's obvious" suggestions, that everybody knew the person was black but only some were verified for being Negro Therefore anytime you see the word "black" it can't mean hair color or it can't mean a white European who was not starkly pale but had the slightest George Bushian tint. They had to have been a Negro but while their blackness was noted nobody actually noticed if they were Negro at the same time.
what a load of horsesh!t
It's the desperation bourne out of Stockholm syndrome
The desire of some black folk to be fruity aristocrats with big wigs who enslaved Blacks in the Caribbean
^You should not involve yourself in things that go beyond your comprehension.
quote: Negro (n.) Look up Negro at Dictionary.com "member of a black-skinned race of Africa," 1550s, from Spanish or Portuguese negro "black," from Latin nigrum (nominative niger) "black, dark, sable, dusky," figuratively "gloomy, unlucky, bad, wicked," of unknown origin (perhaps from PIE *nekw-t- "night;" see Watkins). As an adjective from 1590s. Use with a capital N- became general early 20c. (e.g. 1930 in "New York Times" stylebook) in reference to U.S. citizens of African descent, but because of its perceived association with white-imposed attitudes and roles the word was ousted late 1960s in this sense by Black (q.v.).
Professor Booker T. Washington, being politely interrogated ... as to whether negroes ought to be called 'negroes' or 'members of the colored race' has replied that it has long been his own practice to write and speak of members of his race as negroes, and when using the term 'negro' as a race designation to employ the capital 'N' ["Harper's Weekly," June 2, 1906] Meaning "English language as spoken by U.S. blacks" is from 1704. French nčgre is a 16c. borrowing from Spanish negro.
Like any historical film "Based on a True Story", Belle takes liberties with the historical record. In this talk I will sift the fact from the fiction and discuss the life of Dido Elizabeth Belle in the context of other Africans living in Britain at this time, including Olaudah Equiano, who has a walk-on part in the film. I will also explain the legal history and significance not only of the Zong case featured in the film, but of Lord Mansfield's other famous cases, such as Somersett (1772).
quote: Thursday, 16 May 2013, 7.30 pm Camden History Society, Local Studies Centre, 2nd floor Holborn Library, 32-28 Theobalds Road, London WC1X 8PA .
This talk by Miranda Kaufmann and Kate Donington will explore the presence of Africans in London during the Tudor and Stuart periods. It will also consider the ways in which London slave-owners profited from the exploitation of Africans during the slavery era.
Dr Kaufmann is an expert on Africans in Elizabethan and early Stuart Britain (http://www.mirandakaufmann.com/history.html) and Kate Donington is a researcher for the Legacies of British Slave-Ownership project at UCL (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/lbs).
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: By the way, if anyone is interested, with West Virginia, for those who try to ancestrial research they did not clearly divide people of color accurately. This location seemed to be very confusing for anyone black or indian.
Genologytoday.com has great records for those researching. And the foolishness posted above recalled me to this article I had saved which mentions things concerning this.
"Of course the earliest records just divided people into white, free persons of color, and slave. So bear in mind in your research that a reference to a "Free person of Color" in the 1700s or early 1800s, many were Native American; but, there were also many free blacks."
In any case, this poster needs to get the hell out of my thread, this is a waste of my time.
According to lioness, this is a "black family", a POC family.
For enthusiasts, click the link and use the virtual magnifying glass, for better view on this black family.
quote: It is not too surprising that the last 3 participants in this group have similar results since they were previously known to be related; all 3 are descended in well documented lines from Samuel Bush (1647-1733) who resided in Westfield, MA for much of his life.
[...]
Summary
The results obtained to date have already provided answers to some questions about the relationships among various individuals with the Bush surname. Some notable conclusions that can be derived from the current data include: (1) the results obtained for the Group A participants strongly imply that Samuel (1647-1733) and Jonathan (1650-1739) Bush are grandsons of Reynold Bush who immigrated to the Massachusetts colony about 1640; (2) the results obtained for the Group B participants indicate, among other things, that at least two original immigrants to the southern US, including William Bush (born 1655) who emigrated to Maryland and Richard Bush (born 1655) who emigrated to Virginia, were from related families in England, and that their families were not closely related to that of Reynold Bush, the progenitor of the Group A participants, or to Abraham Bush (born 1622), the presumed immigrant ancestor of Group E, or to Thomas William Bush (immigrated about 1620), the presumed immigrant ancestor of Group D; (3) the results obtained for all the current participants, including those in Group X, indicate that there are several Bush lines, of which more about 40 have been identified by the current results.
posted
I forgot I had one more thing saved just in case there is a want to say that only black people called themselves black.
"Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion. 24. Which leads me to add one Remark: That the Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth. I could wish their Numbers were increased. And while we are, as I may call it, Scouring our Planet, by clearing America of Woods, and so making this Side of our Globe reflect a brighter Light to the Eyes of Inhabitants in Mars or Venus; why should we in the Sight of Superior Beings, darken its People? why increase the Sons of Africa, by Planting them in America, where we have so fair an Opportunity, by excluding all Blacks and Tawneys, of increasing the lovely White and Red? But perhaps I am partial to the Complexion of my Country, for such Kind of Partiality is natural to Mankind."
Here is an example from Ben Franklin that has been posted before. From this text we see that color and complexion defined race, he called all of Africa, black or tawny, I'm not finding negro in the text though to define them. Interesting, I thought everyone called them negros back then? Thats what the poster was telling us. But the poster could not have been lying... They deal with facts!
But more importantly what is truly interesting is that to him a white or tanned red person is still a white person.
If we try to compare it or merge it with the nonsense conclusion our deceptive friend had posted earlier, suddenly a white person with black hair, or who is typically burnt a dark red becomes one of the Sons of Africa! Amazing!
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: I forgot I had one more thing saved just in case there is a want to say that only black people called themselves black.
Swarthy Complexion best can be translated as somewhat dark, brown complected. It has a Germanic root word "swarths". Dutch zwart.
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: "And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth. I could wish their Numbers were increased."
This in a matter of interpretation and semantics. Spaniards, Italians are considerable, depending on the region, as we all know. The French are somewhat considerable, since some look like Spaniards or Italians. (look into past migrations and wars)
Russians (Caucasus region has brown complected people) and Swedes lesser considerable (Saami people, likely). But it could be that back than the demography was different.
During last years Euro song festival, Samra Rahimli from Azerbaijan (Caucasus region) popped out most for me, because of her facial traits and complexion, even hair texture.
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
So if someone were to do his portrait when he's a bit tanned it could look like this>
^^ and we see how his complexion is described as "black" by this writer because they used the term in a much looser and broader way back then. They might use the term to describe and African or they might use it to describe a southern European or somebody who tans easily and might often appear tanned
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Of course during those days they weren't in aristocrats positions.
That's all I'm saying.
But the typical pattern in this forum is as follows
I have several threads talking about books which document Black people in Europe such as John Blanke,Olaudah Equiano, Belle etc. I have the oldest thread mentioning Miranda Kaufman's research not Ish Gebor
But people in the Mike/Egmond Codfied camp are not talking about those people. They are talking about a massive conspiracy where the Kings and nobility of Europe were Black and then whites suddenly came in and made all this fake art, keeping the names of the people they conquered but changing their appearance to be white
^^ This is the type of thing that goes on all the time at Egyptsearch. there are many portraits of Charles V but this is not one of them.
And when people try to make up this mass conspiracy that the nobility of Europe was black so called "negro" type like this man in the portrait Ish Gebor sits back and says nothing while actual Black history in Europe is tainted by this complete foolishness. And Mike has a whole website promoting all sorts of that nonsense.
Then I come in and say wait a minute that's not Charles V. I come in and say these quotes from John Macky where he uses the word "black" are not of African looking people because if we look at the paintings we can see that but the conspiracy theorists think the paintings were fake they were actually Black people.
^ They think that the European nobility looked like this prior to 1648.
If I say it's not true Ish Gebor then pops up. But his ear hears something else. His ear hears me saying "there were no Black people in old Europe" This is very frustrating. It keeps happening over and over again, Ish Gebor has comprehension issues, even Mike has noticed it. I never said that.
It very stupid. He put himself into the camp with these lunatics who make up all these ridiculous conspiracy theories such as a Black nobility harvested white people for shoe leather or that the Thirty Years war was a race war. -and they point to any painting they feel like and say it's fake.
But he expects me to sit there and not say anything while actual Black history gets corrupted.
I was the first to mention legitimate research like Onyeka Nubia's work.
And the lunatics and weirdos don't even look at books like these which document people like John Blanke and Olaudah Equiano,
and they don't even like Olaudah Equiano because he has an African name
In fact Ish Gebor is so stupid not to realize that that these same people who he defends, who make up these conspiracy theories deny the African presence in Europe. They say that these people were native Black Europeans, descendants of Oase 2 who only had remote African ancestry but have been out of Africa for 35,000 years already.
This is the camp that Ish Gebor places himself in
Yes Ish Gebor, you are in that band wagon, the band wagon of the stupid
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dumb **** is now using pictures with lighting effects. lol SMH
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Bush looks pale there but he tans easily? SO?
Lioness, you are a racist first class. LOL SMH
quote: That's all I'm saying.
But the typical pattern in this forum is as follows
I have several threads talking about books which document Black people in Europe such as John Blanke,Olaudah Equiano, Belle etc. I have the oldest thread mentioning Miranda Kaufman's research not Ish Gebor
Retarded one, MENDEL'S LAW. LAW OF SEGREGATION!
AFRICANS WERE IN THOSE PLACES A LONG TIME BEFORE. THESE PEOPLE HAD OFFSPRING YOU DUMB RACIST PIECE OF ****! I all ready posted this, why do you have a hard time grasping this?
I didn't get to know Miranda Kaufman from you, retard. lol smh
I also posted other sources, beating the **** to of you.
Two black males, George Bush and Dick Cheney
Well this one is confusing, ...
Posts: 22245 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
In fact Ish Gebor is so stupid not to realize that that these same people who he defends, who make up these conspiracy theories deny the African presence in Europe.
LOL OH GOSH! THIS IS INCREDIBLE! LOL
quote:Blanke, John (fl. 1507–1512), royal trumpeter, was employed as a musician at the courts of Henry VII and Henry VIII, making his first recorded appearance there in 1507. He is thought to have been of African descent, but his age, place of birth, and parentage are unknown. His surname may have originated as a nickname, derived from the word blanc in French or blanco in Spanish, both meaning ‘white’. Blanke was part of a wider trend for European rulers to employ African musicians, dating from at least 1194, when turbaned black trumpeters heralded the entry of the Holy Roman emperor Henry VI into Palermo in Sicily. It has been suggested that Blanke arrived in England with Katherine of Aragon when she came to marry Arthur, prince of Wales, in 1501. While there is no record of Blanke's arrival, there is evidence of other Africans in Katherine's retinue, including Catalina de Cardones, who was born in Motril, Granada. However, the Tudor court employed musicians from across continental Europe, and Blanke may have come from Spain, Portugal, or Italy, all of which had growing African populations at this time.
Between 1507 and 1512 Blanke was one of eight royal trumpeters under the leadership of Peter de Casa Nova. The first payment to ‘John Blanke, the blacke Trumpet’ was made in early December 1507, when he was paid 20s. (8d. a day) for his services in the previous month (TNA: PRO, E 36/214, fol. 109). Monthly payments for the same amount continued throughout the following year. Blanke played at the funeral of Henry VII on 11 May 1509, when he wore black mourning livery, and then at the coronation of Henry VIII on 24 June, when he was dressed in bright scarlet. Following the death of the Italian trumpeter Domynck Justinian (last recorded as performing at Henry VIII's coronation), Blanke successfully petitioned the king to grant him Justinian's position and wage of 16d. a day. He complained that his current wage was ‘not sufficient to mayntaigne and kepe hym to doo your grace lyke service as other your trompeters doo’ and asked that his ‘true & faithfull service’ be considered, adding that he intended to continue to serve the king ‘during his lyf’ (TNA: PRO, E101/417/2, no. 150). On 12 and 13 February 1511 Blanke played at the Westminster tournament, a flamboyant Burgundian-style joust held to celebrate the birth of the short-lived Prince Henry on new year's day. The event would have required many fanfares, and the royal trumpeters were paid more than ten times their daily wage.
John Blanke is depicted twice on the 60 foot long Westminster tournament roll of 1511, which was produced in the workshop of Thomas Wriothesley, Garter king of arms. He is shown first riding a grey horse with a black harness. All the trumpeters wear yellow and grey livery, while their double-curve instruments are decorated with the royal quarterings. The trumpeters appear again at the end of the day's jousting. Here, in the more frequently reproduced portrait, Blanke's horse is shown as black with a crimson harness. His dark face contrasts strikingly with those of his companions, but his one visible hand, holding the trumpet, is incongruously shown as white. In both depictions Blanke wears a turban, which is brown and yellow in the first image, and green with a linear design in gold in the second, while his companions are bareheaded.
John Blanke married in January 1512, though the identity of his wife is unknown. Henry VIII sent the great wardrobe a warrant, dated 14 January, to deliver to ‘John Blak, our trompeter’, a gown of violet cloth, and also a bonnet and a hat, ‘to be taken of our gift against his marriage’ (PRO: TNA, E 101/417/6, no. 50). After this no further reference to Blanke has been found in the royal records and he is not mentioned in the full list of trumpeters on 31 January 1514. That he achieved a prominent position in the royal household, was paid wages, negotiated an increase in his pay, and was able to marry, suggest that Blanke was not enslaved.
John Blanke is the only identifiable black person portrayed in sixteenth-century British art. Alongside his relatively high-status occupation and connection to Henry VIII, this has made Blanke the most widely recognized and cited example of an African in Tudor England. In the first decade of the twenty-first century Blanke featured in teaching resources including BBC programmes for seven- to eleven-year-olds, and in the National Archives' guide to black history; his image was the most requested for reproduction of those held by the College of Arms. From 2003 he featured in the National Trust's annual ‘Black History Month’ exhibition at Sutton House, Hackney.
quote: Africans have been present in Europe from classical times. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Roman soldiers of African origin served in Britain, and some stayed after their military service ended. According to the historians Fryer, Edwards and Walvin, in the 9th century Viking fleets raided North Africa and Spain, captured Black people, and took them to Britain and Ireland. From the end of the 15th century we begin to see more evidence for the presence of Glossary - opens new windowBlack Moors in the accounts of the reign of King James IV of Scotland, and later in Elizabethan England.
quote: "The King Provides Clothes for the Party A variety of fabrics were used to make clothing for the Moors - velvet ('wellus'), woollen kersey ('carsay') and fine Holland linen - which was decorated or fastened with buttons, rings or other ornaments ('mailyeis'). These were paid for by the treasury of King James IV. It seems that these Moors were not servants; it is more likely that they were invited guests staying at the palace. Accounts of the Lord High Treasurer of Scotland, vol. 3, p. 101 (1505)"
quote:So who were the Numerus Maurorum Aurelianorum and why are they so important to the Black British community? Our key evidence for this unit is a 4th century inscription, found in 1934 at the village of Beaumont two miles east of Burgh-by-Sands on the banks of the River Eden, and known as the Beaumont inscription. Translated from the Latin it reads:
To Jupiter Best and Greatest and the Majesty of our two Emperors, to the Genius [guardian spirit] of the numerus of Aurelian Moors, Valerianus’ and Gallienus’ own, Caelius Vibianus, cohort-tribune in charge of the above-mentioned numerus, [set up this altar] through the agency of Julius Rufinus, senior centurion.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: They might use the term to describe and African or they might use it to describe a southern European or somebody who tans easily and might often appear tanned Yes Ish Gebor, you are in that band wagon, the band wagon of the stupid
LOL OH GOSH! INCREDIBLE!
However,
quote: The research, funded by the Wellcome Trust, identified a rare West African Y chromosome in a group of men from Yorkshire who share a surname that dates back at least as far as the mid-14th century and have a typical European appearance.
[...]
The hgA1 Y chromosome could perhaps have entered the gene pool in northern England 1800 years ago when Africans fought there as Roman soldiers, Jobling says. It also might have been introduced in the 9th century, when Vikings brought captured North Africans to Britain, according to some historians.
[...]
Because many slaves from this area came to Britain beginning in the mid-16th century, it is likely that the white men with the hgA1 variant have a black ancestor that arrived this way, researchers say.
[...]
Vincent Brown of Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, agrees and points to the example of Olaudah Equiano, a black man who bought his freedom in Britain in the mid 18th century and achieved fame for his writing. Equiano claimed to be a slave from west Africa, though some argue that he had arrived from colonial America. He lived in London and eventually married a white woman, notes Brown.
^^ nobody in this forum reads stuff like this they just make up bullsh!t like this:
But Ish Gebor won't say anything about it. He thinks black people don't need any standards for Black history. Just throw truth and made up nonsense and mix it together into a big pot and eat the whole thing
Posts: 43002 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic