And yet, there’s more to it than any of the 9/11 Truth claims. 
So…she’s Greek?
78 trillion… heretic.
And presumably the peasantish Perkin Warbeck several shades lighter than the man or class he was impersonating.
Absolute cracker of a thread!
The OP ticks all the boxes of the standard conspiracy theorist.
Confirmation bias in droves. He starts with the theory and then interprets all of the evidence he chooses to look at (old pictures and woodcuts) in light of the pre-existing theory.
Closure of logic? Sure. “All or substantially all aristocrats are black.” “But here is a vast array of portraits of aristocrats who are obviously white.” “This just proves that the portraits were painted to look white.”
Decontextualisation of evidence? I’m glad you asked. The OP seizes upon a couple of ambiguous descriptions of Charles II and then conveniently overlooks the vast amount of evidence which should be there but isn’t if his theory is true. Why is there utterly no contemporaneous account at the time of the French or American revolutions of the true reason for the revolutions? How could the “facts” he demonstrates have simply disappeared from all human recording? What about the descendants of the unkilled black aristocrats still alive today who are embarrassingly, ahem, white?
Confusion between ascription of motives and evidence? But of course. The proposition that a white underclass might want to overthrow evil overlords is not the slightest proof that said underclass/overlords ever existed.
Massive **superficial erudition **about detail that entirely misses the point? I won’t weary patient readers with the lengthy posts of the OP.
Conspiracy cross-pollenisation? Yep. When 911 Truthing reared its head, it is clear that this guy was a victim of the well-known glitch in reasoningso well described by xkcd.
Finally, the OP simply descends into incoherence. His position is that, simultaneously, there was overwhelming domination by black masters of the universe, yet they all felt some strange compulsion to portray themselves as white. And then included actual pictures of black people to confirm their own blackness.
Feel free to point out if I’ve missed anything.
What about simple errors?
In order to make the OP theory work, one needs to explain how these noble Black people came to Europe. The theory as explained by M. Codfried says:
- they are descendants of a Black European paleolithic species, the Grimaldi Man, and/or
- they descend from Roman mercenaries, the Garamantes.
The first option, the Grimaldi Manis poppycock. The Grimaldi “species” was the result of wishful thinking of the early 1900s and, as it seems, some kind of deceit too. It was widely published in the academic world at that time, but, when it turned out to be a hoax, only a little article appeared in a French archeological journal.
We may research the second option, if we’re in good mood, but I believe these are the Numidian horsemen in the Roman armies. Were they Black? I think not, they were Berber.
Charles definitely had something going on with his right eye, both as a child and as an adult. What’s up with that?
Some have already made the remark that engravings, by the lack of colors, look darker than paintings.
I would like to add that engravings were not made after the real models (the king had court painters, but no engravers). Engravings were copies of paintings (for the “poor”). If you carefully look at a XVII or XVIIIth century engraving (on the flea market!), you will find the name of the painter (pinxit) and the engraver/cutter (escudit) on the print. It is hence not useful to attiribute differences between painting and engraving to the looks of the king. The engraver never saw the king. The differences result from the copy or the printing process.
I picture Egmond Codfried sitting in a public library with a dozen history books open before him and reams of stacked notes scattered around the table. Then the camera swoops up from the floor, catches some lens flare from an open window on the second floor of the library and Ode to Joy starts playing as the camera slowly and dizzyingly circles around him. He starts to cry as he realizes its all been a lie. Its all been a fucking lie. The aristocracy of Europe…
They were secretly black cavemen!
Well, given the character of the exhibits you’ve presented, that’s kind of the impression I’ve been getting, yes.
Well, there are a lot of people referred to as “black” across North Atlantic history who are just a bit darker than their peers. Take, for example, Black Mike Cochrane. Does this guy look like an African to you?
Honestly, I think some of the hyperbole **Egmond **has been promulgating obscures the more obvious conclusion: genes circulate freely worldwide, and “race” is just not a stable category of analysis.
One wonders what the OP makes of “black Irish.”
I like how the aristocracy commissioned religious art to depict Mary and Jesus to look black, because, being black themselves, they had no use for a “white Jesus.” And yet…they themselves were trying to pass as white, so they doctored their own portraits. Da’hell?
Or the Black and Tan.
Something like this.
Apparently John Clifford, 9th Lord Clifford was called “black-faced Clifford.” You can look at that portrait and judge for yourself whether this nickname was warranted.
On the other hand there’s this engraving of General George Monck, which confused me enough that I actually started a thread on it. It turns out that the engraving, as Moulay said, was simply much darker than the original painting it was based on.
And then there’s “Bluidy Dam” Dalyell, the “Muscovite De’il.” Also known as the Quaker Oats Man’s extremely evil twin brother. No connection to this thread really, but I just love that painting.
Hey – I found out where he got his ideas!!!
(Warning – this guy’s fingernails are really freaky!)
Undoubtedly simple errors make him wrong, but merely being wrong as a result of simple errors is something anyone can do. It doesn’t really capture the heroic grandeur of the cast of thought involved here, that giddy sense of having uncovered something no-one else has been clever enough to see, that is typical of the conspiracist. There is mere bad poetry, and then there is William McGonagall. There is mere bad opera, then there is Florence Foster Jenkins.
It must indeed be an intoxicating thought to think that, alone of all the people in the world who have looked at, thought about or researched the aristocracy of Europe, the OP has noticed something devastatingly profound and important. Such as that they were all black. It is this sense of exultation and deadly seriousness that makes this all so delicious.
Holy cow. Sounds as if someone was strangling her while she sang, and if someone wasn’t someone should had. 
Great find, Guinastasia.
This is one of the most entertaining threads in ages. Parts of it are even educational.
We could even try to score the OP Theory with the Orcutt index.