No, needless to say, he just made that as an unsupported assertion. Although to be fair, lots of Charles II’s biographers say that he was called this, without providing any evidence either.
The claim is usually linked to the idea that pubs called ‘The Black Boy’ are named after him. But the lore of English pub names is notoriously unreliable, on a par with folk etymologies and political meanings in nursery rhymes. In any case, there are plenty of cases of it being used as a tavern or shop sign long before Charles’s birth. That’s because a Moor’s head was a strong, easily recognisable symbol. But later claiming that the name derives from Charles II was much more romantic.
But there is one early reference to Charles being called the ‘Black Boy’. This was the claim, made within Charles’s own lifetime, that our old friend George Monck had secretly toasted him as such in 1659. Except, of course, this means that Monck thought of him as being ‘black’ only in the sense that he thought of the 29 year-old Charles as being a ‘boy’. Hardly evidence for Charles’s skin colour being any darker than the rather Italianate tone that historians have always agreed it was.
Possibly you need to get a different edition, or read beyong the first couple of pages. Though I understand the desire to hurriedly put down any work by Jonson.
The Masque of Blackness is about how some ethiopian river nymphs travel the world looking for a way to become white. They are advised that they will be turned white by the glorious light of the ruling monarch of Brittania (Which they are, in The Masque of Beauty). The early speeches include efforts by the river Niger to talk his daughters out of their desire to be white, assuring them that their blackness is the true beauty. But the play rapidly goes on to reject that argument.
The sketch you keep posting does not depict the Queen at all, it is a costume design. We have quite a lot of information about the costumes and sets and so on, as the presentation of this particular masque quickly overflowed its text. But Queen Anne at the time of the presentation of the Masque was quite visibly pregnant.
The daughters of Oceanus in the play are blue, do you think this supports the theory that mermaids and mermen were the real blue bloods in Europe?
Thank you for checking my sources, and taking care of the FALSIFICATION, arguments to disproof my theory.
If the Grimaldi Man was a hoax, I wonder what motives Verneau, the hoaxter, might have had. Next I read that the Garamante were Berber OR Negroid, whatever that means. I have read that today they are called Tubu, and you should take a look at them in google.
I say that you confirm my findings. Do you understand ‘allegory.’
Pray, what proof you have that Anne van Denmark really is this blindingly blond woman we see in google.
Did you read my sources on blue men, black Europeans, even among the Vikings who we think of as extremely blond.
Try the NPG site for pages and pages of portraits of all the Stuarts, and you might understand what the hell I’m talking about.
All people come from Africa if you go back far enough. On the other hand the Maori of Australia have dark skin and they’re genetically closer to white people than black people.
So about your incorrect interpretations of “tall black man” and “swarthy Stuart…”
I’m not dodging questions, I’m ignoring insults and personal attacks, which you should be protecting me from. I’m not some machine to answer at a moments notice, I’m doing my best. This is a supposed to be a gentle exchange of ideas between civilized people, not some goddam inquisition.
Most of us recognize that “dark” is not identical to “black” and that a great many non-royal Italians are “dark,” (generally described as “olive skinned.”)
The question was, what does black irish mean. To answer this question we will collect ALL theories and see which one holds.
By the way, when something simple like this seems to have to remain a riddle, I know what time it is. In Holland they still wonder after 65 years why 75% of their Jews perished. In Belgium 50% and France 35%.
Because the Dutch helped the German occupier and delivered their own Jews, Dutch citizens who were living for 400 years in Holland, into the nazies murderous hands. After the war they were told by their leaders to claim; ‘we did not know.’ Yeah, right. Jews were humiliated and beaten at the train stations, before being shoved into cattle carriages. And before that there was the propaganda which depicted Jews as rats.
So, I did not change the topic, but I illustrated why some riddles seem to remain riddles because the truth is to much to handle.
Every time you have been attacked personally, the posters have been told to back off. And by the same token you’ve been told to avoid insulting other posters, which you have not always done.
While you are being asked a lot of questions and have answered some, you’ve ignored the comments that have done the most damage to your argument. That’s been called to your attention already, so you’ll have to pardon me for not being very sympathetic to that defense. I’m not going to allow that to continue indefinitely: if you don’t respond to some basic questions this thread may get closed.
As far as I’m concerned, this has been pretty civilized. And much of the hostility is not because of your theories - it’s because people believe you are avoiding questions and telling people to do their own research instead of supporting your views.
Well, one can rule and post a policeman in every household. Or you can appear to be a loving and doting father. All tyrants like to portray themselves as benevolent and good, fondling babies, handing out honorary decorations. These European kings ruled DG, Deo Gratias, which meant that questioning their rule was akin to questioning god’s will. They might have filled a need when they started, but the system unravelled. Just like the US when Bush decided to bomb American citizens with vaporised planes, and you all can’t do a damn thing about it. But I’m digressing. The problems really started when this middle class sprang up in the cities, wealthy and educated, and the system did not provide for such a group. The changes came too slow, and when implementation started, the people realized they really had power, the whole system came crashing down, with nobles fleeing France and the king being beheaded. The middle class took power.
It is really a puzzlement why Jews vanished from Europe about 65 years ago.
What this has to do with Germany is also in question. And calling Germans murders is a bit far stretched as well. NOBODY got killed by Germans in WW2.
If I where to believe this thread, the Nazi’s did not harm any Jews
It’s an Inquisition because…? We dare to question your “theories?” We actually ask for cites? We are capable of making logical conclusions from carefully considered, scientifically-valid data? We aren’t raving nutjobs who think white people are black because of some perceived I-don’t-know-what obsession? A little help here. Straightforwardly answering a few questions would be a start. Otherwise you are going to go into the SDMB books as one of the most nicely-treated-considering whackos of 2010.
