Merry King Charles Stuart II: The Black King of England – Oguejiofo Annu
The word Stuart comes from the old nordish root Svart which means black. Stuart is the same word as Swarthy, which means black in old English. [Others claim its root origin is Steward]. However that might be, this is not the crux of the story here. Our story is about the suppressed history of the Black and Brown Europeans including several kings that had once called Europe their original home.
There was once a Stuart line of Kings in England. The name of the founding ancestor was Stuart.
In this post, we feature the original painting of one of the Stuart Kings of England and Scotland, King Charles II, also lovingly known as the “black boy” of England by his subjects.
He is commemorated in the celebrated name of the Black Boy Inn, found all over the British Isle.
Like his ancestors before him, King Charles II was a black man. Many of his surviving paintings falsely depict him as a so-called white man in clear contradiction to the famous description of the jolly King.
However, in the picture posted immediately below, one can see one of the contemporary paintings of King Charles Stuart II, Merry Black Boy of England. This picture invites all to decide why King Charles Stuart II, would have been called the black boy.
King Charles Stuart II 1630 – 1685
The eldest surviving son of Charles I and Henrietta Maria of France, daughter of Henry IV of France, the future Charles II was born on 29th May, 1630, at St. James Palace, London, the second child of the marriage, he replaced an elder brother, Charles James, who had died shortly after birth.
It was said that when Charles was born in 1630 he was nicknamed the Black Boy by his mother, Queen Henrietta Maria, because of his dark and swarthy appearance
In 1646, following political crisis, his father Charles I was overthrown by Oliver Cromwell and beheaded. Charles II had to flee for his life through Scotland and on to France after making a weak and symbolic attempt at regaining the Stuart title. Fate and reality had soon dawned on him. He settled into a life of penury in France.
Upon the death of Oliver Cromwell, Charles was recalled back to England by Cromwell’s legatee and son who had no interest in ruling England. Charles was restored back to the throne and his coronation took place at the traditional venue of Westminster Abbey on 23rd April, 1661.
The Merry Monarch as he was later to become known, is famous for his many mistresses. Although he had numerous children by his mistresses, the Queen, to her great sadness, remained barren.
Charles popularity with the people was solid. Despite the ravages of last great outbreak of the Bubonic Plague struck London in 1665, which claimed thousands of lives; and the great fire of London 1666 which completely destroyed the city, he was highly favoured by the people.
He died without an official heir on 6 February, 1685 after a brief illness and was succeeded by his brother, King James II. He was the most beloved of all the Kings in the line of the Stuarts.
Black King of England
According to the annals of the english monarch:
Charles’ appearance was anything but English, with his sensuous curling mouth, dark complexion, black hair and dark brown eyes, he much resembled his Italian maternal grandmother, Marie de Medici’s side of the family. During his escape after the Battle of Worcester, he was referred to as ‘a tall, black man’ in parliamentary wanted posters.
One of the nick-names he acquired was the black boy His height, at six feet two inches, probably inherited from his Danish paternal grandmother, Anne of Denmark, also set him apart from his contemporaries in a time when the average Englishman was far smaller than today.
English Pubs
All English pubs named the Black boy are named after Charles II due to the swarthy and dark colour of his complexion.
Modern European painters try to hide the racial identity of this jolly King by depicting such fantasy as is posted below:
July 28, 2009
Sources
Black Boy Inn
Dear Friends,
Perhaps I should have broadcasted this engraving sooner because I see that only after seeing this people really seem to take notice.
I should point out that my research Blue Blood is Black Blood (1500-1789) shows that intermarriage was the cornerstone of this black and coloured European elite, the highest nobility. So with one identification of a European black noble or king we can identify a whole string as such. Even without a personal description we can recognize the artist’s intent to show dark skin as proof of blue blood.
Charles’ looks came from all his ancestors who were black or coloured, but he perhaps showed the true colour of night, which made people take notice. In this way he resembled The Moor, the image of a Classical African which symbolised blue blood in art. It seems that families would rejoice in the birth of such a child as proof that the bloodline was really blue, which was black. Both his grandmothers like Maria de Medici, Queen of France were of course black and Anne of Denmark’s portrait for The Masque of Blackness shows her true colour as pitch-black. Charles II shared blood ties with Elizabeth I, Louis XIV, King William III and Queen Anne. Not to mention his ennobled bastards as the Countess of Lichfield and Lord Monmouth.
They all belonged to ‘A fixed, mulatto nation with some looking more African, Asian or white but sharing a black identity called blue blood’ and were descendents of Blue Men, the original Europeans, the Africans who inhabited Europe 40000 years earlier. The whites came only 6000 years ago to Europe from Central Asia.
The fake, whitened, revisionist portraits of this black elite form the basis of white supremacy thinking. They were mostly conceived as propagandistic portraits to legitimise the rule over whites, who seem to have become a majority. The Enlightenment was a liberation ideology to free citizens from despotic rule by a cruel nobility. Scientific Racism, the invention of race and the hierarchy in race should therefore be seen and can be deconstructed as a consciously overwrought liberation ideology to free Europe from a cultured, but despotic and cruel class of oppressors. The hatred focused on the symbol of black superiority, The Moor, so all Africans were hated and today, still pay the price.
Blacks who are stuck in the victim-mode should take heart. Blacks are no victims and they should not be identified with slavery. Black Civilisation lasted 10.000 years, Blacks ruled Europe (1500-1789), started black slavery, which has less to do with colour then the love of money, but lost out and the nobility was abolished with the French Revolution (1789-1795). Nineteenth century racism, European nationalism and rampant colonialism are the fall out, as the dream of a united Europe came apart. Yet most of the elite after the revolution in the whole of Europe was still of colour but refrained from claiming superiority because of their phenotype now called ‘bad complexion.’ The term ‘breeding’ should refer to the conscious project of noble families to make white off-spring.
Egmond Codfried
I’m very interested in your work, but I have to point out that the whites of the eyes in this photo are not white.
@ Vicky Are you serious? What does have to do with anything. Why not grow the Fu$$ up and learn something…dumb ass.
Someone hit a nerve.. ? By identifying the completion gives a great sense of what is taking place in the world. As with the role reversal and lack thereof understanding the true definition of what black and white is in regards to status.. Etymology coincides with skin complexity giving us and understanding that the Melanated man is the true white man and the Black men are Caucasians .
Yep look at Queen Victoria’s son, King Edward the 7th, He had a swarthy complexion like Abraham LIncoln who was whitewashed to look way lighter than he actually was. Also QVictoria’s granddaughter, Princess Melita very dark complexion too. It seems like Edward’s son’s mom was picked to be whitest of white to get the Moor’s features out of the so-called Royal family.
No, you have to show better proof than this.
Images made in woodcuts – which mr Codfried refers to – often make people look darker than they really were. They only used two colors printing and tried to add definition to the faces by shading them. Add the poor quality printing in those days and you get darker faces.
Wake up Lisa! Come out of the clouds with your white husband. Wake the HECK UP! Reality is knocking on your door. You think b/c perhaps you’ve escaped from your so-called roots and have a taste at another way of living that things are not as they really are? Step back from what you THINK you know as you’ve been taught they are and realize- things are not what they seem. How deep does the rabbit hole go? It’s time to FREE YOUR MIND Neo.
black people who went thru slavery are the israelite sons and daughters of the israelite ancestors, king james translated the bible to english knowing we were being taken to foreign lands thru the slave experience we were losing our language, the bible perserved by king james is the actual israelite record book, they started to print the bible without the apocrapha in the year 1666 in an attempt to mix up israelite history even further>> the god of israel is black and so is his son immanuel and we fullfiled the 400 propecy of bondage
Futher more a lot of paintings with kings and queens in Europe that were black were commissioned to be whitewashed!
Now that ain’t nothing but a damned lie!!!
A good observation, will DANI below respond in a helpful and intelligent manner ?
To the description of Charles II as a tall black man. As a black woman living in a North European country (and married to a white man) I know that if white Europeans talk about a “black man” they mean someone with white skin and black hair. If they mean a man with black skin they still use the now forbidden words negro or nigger.
[quote]Lise Nangala says No, you have to show better proof than this.
Images made in woodcuts – which Mr. Codfried refers to – often make people look darker than they really were. They only used two colours printing and tried to add definition to the faces by shading them. Add the poor quality printing in those days and you get darker faces.[…] Lise Nangala says To the description of Charles II as a tall black man. As a black woman living in a North European country (and married to a white man) I know that if white Europeans talk about a “black man” they mean someone with white skin and black hair. If they mean a man with black skin they still use the now forbidden words negro or nigger.
[/quote]
They are not woodcuts, but engravings on copperplate. As you will notice as you study thousands of them, like I did; the lace of the collar and the cuffs still appears white. The latest b.s. I have heard was of a fungus which attacks the copperplate and so the face appears black. Yet this evil fungus attacks only the part which depicts human flesh: the hands and the faces, but never the lace or cloth. It’s a very dangerous fungus for knowing what part is a reflection of human flesh, it now about virtual images, and thus must be from outer space, no?.
These people always insist that black means black hair, but never give an example of this, as if they lived during the 17th century. My research also speaks about the many images of Moors in the western art and I have discovered that they are not real persons but symbols of blue blood. Blue blood symbolised by blacks = blue blood is black blood. They knew what blacks looked like and there was no need for any confusion on this head. Charles II Stuart was described as The Black boy, a tall black man and the swarthy Stuart. This leaves no room for any doubt. As they use a classical African to identify themselves, I cannot but conclude that their blackness was from Africa.
@ Lisa Now I can see why you have a white husband. You should be ashamed of yourself! How dare you say what came out of your mouth. Don’t you know those racist ass bastard in Europe know the difference between black and black boy. Do you honestly think a white man or for that matter a white woman wants to be called black? Take a reality pill and bring your dumb ass back down to earth.
Are you serious? Do you really think that that “black man” refers to a hair color? What part of the world do you live in again
Lisa my comments were for you honey. Thanks
My family are barbadian Dukes, I can tell you Charles l was a frequent visitor to Bardados
His son Charles ll was born there of a black woman. He was then given a birth certificate
from the spanish Royals who was very close to Charles l. When he returned to england he returned as a spanish king. England has never been comfortable with the line of kingship and their waywardness towards Kingship. Hence the line had to be controlled if not removed. Fair to say they have incoopreated the lines back together. Like Princes Diana’s who happens to be a decendant of one of Charles l illegitamate Sons. So all is fair in love and war lolxxx So the sephardic lines remains intact and continues to go from strength to strength !!!!!!!!
We are the “ORIGINAL PEOPLE”;DIRECT CREATION.
WE RULE THEM BUT THEY JUST CAN’T FACE UP TO THE TRUTH.
TRUTH HURTS.
EUROPEANS ARE STINKING LIARS.THEY ARE WANNA BE’S AND JEALOUS.
IT IS SO COOL TO BE AN AFRICAN.
A contemporary chapter on Pushkin’s lineage:
The Mountbattens;
Although most of the above history is related in discussions about Pushkin’s African ancestry, no works – at least those translated or written in English – have ever commented on the descendent of the great poet. And this, despite the fact that Joel Rogers in “Sex and Race” (a privately-published work which has turned into a cult classic) traced the line of one of Pushkin’s daughters into the Mountbatten branch of the British Royal family.
(Perhaps the fact that Pushkin’s daughter Natalie married a prince was too much for either the Bolsheviks or the West’s liberal intellectuals who saw in the proletariat sentiments which had on occasion been expressed by the national poet, a spiritual source of the Revolution. Even if it was a well-known fact that Pushkin sold the serfs he had inherited so that he could afford the pampered wife he wished to wed, standard Soviet doctrine was that he had been the first to dip his pen in red ink.)
Because she herself was not royal, Natalie Pushkin’s wedding to Prince Nicholas of Nassau in 1868 was officially designated a morganatic marriage. The term ‘morganatic’ is a hold-over from a stricter hierarchical time. This term of precedence became more familiar as an increasing number of European royalty towards the end of the last century were slowly forced to adjust to the social changes that had begun to affect the rest of the world. The morganatic title created for Natalie was Countess of Merenberg with the right to bear the title of Count or Countess of Merenberg by her children. A good indication of just how strict the old order had been can be seen from the fact that even though her husband was a prince of the House of Nassau, when it came time for her daughter in turn to wed, her marriage to a member of the Imperial Russian family was also declared a morganatic one. Although the wife of Grand Duke Mikhail, Sophia and the children she bore him were officially known as the Counts and the Countesses de Torby. (No matter how tempting to attribute it as an example of racism in high places, the fact that he was the offspring of a morganatic relationship was probably what prevented Sophia’s brother, George, from succeeding his uncle William as Grand Duke of Luxemburg. Faced with a choice between George, Count of Merenberg and the abrogation of the Sallic Law, which excluded females from the succession, the Luxemburg parliament chose the latter allowing Charlotte to claim the throne as Grand Duchess of Luxemburg.)
Interestingly enough, Sophia’s daughter, Nadjeda, on the other hand, married someone of exactly her own social standing. George Battenberg was the grandson of Queen Victoria (the name would not be changed to Mountbatten until the outbreak of World War II). However, he too was descended from a royal morganatic line. Battenberg was the principality bestowed on the Countess Julie Hauke and her children after her husband, the Prince of Hesse, had been reconciled with his father for having eloped with her.
On the day of Nadja’s wedding in the Chapel Royal at Buckingham Palace the majority of the stories covering the event hysterically pointed to Nadjedja’s African ancestry and snidely speculated about the probability of this branch of the Royal Family producing black babies. It should be pointed out, however, that the Times maintained both its integrity and its dignity. As was to be expected from a journal of such literary standards,the fact that the bride was a descendant of the great Russian poet was duely mentioned but what editorializing they did was instead centered on the morganatic backgrounds of both spouses.
With so many published memories and histories of the Mountbattens available today, it is disconcerting to find so few references to Nadja. As the Marchioness of Milford Haven, she was not only Prince Phillip’s aunt, she also was actually his stepmother during a period of his adolescence.. When his parents, the Prince and the Princess Andrew of Greece, were exiled at the beginning of the war, Prince Phillip was sent to the Mountbattens of Milford Haven since the Marquis was his mother’s elder brother. (Incidentally, his mother’s title, ‘The Princess Andrew of Greece,’ is an indication that hers too was a morganatic marriage like the others referred to above.
Just wait for more to come European suckers.
WE ARE AT WAR.
Duke Anthony–
what kind of shit are you smoking!!
Wrong – you just Made That Up….still it’s nice to dream on…
I did not read the whole piece by WDC, but there seems to be an assimilated kind of Afrocentrism, especially where Whites dictate to Blacks who is Black and who White is. Like Blacks just lack this rare ability to judge and decide who is Black. They need the goddam slave master to point this out to them. It also has to do with funding and keeping your frigging job as a Black scientist. People who were lucky to travel to the South of Spain have discovered how close Africa is to Europe. Africans could have easily come to Europe to become the first Europeans, as they did. They did not magically become white, but Europe was flooded by whites from Central Asia. They were descendents from the albino’s who prudently left Africa, looking for a milder sun. Pushkin could not have been so black if his more recent Russian ancestors were not, Black: Black Europeans, Blue bloods, nobles. Don’t the people who constantly talk about Alexander Hannibal get disgusted by the same old, same old and yearn from new insights. Something to work with? That’s were Blue Blood is Black Blood (1500-1789) come in to bust us out of this white supremacy crap. There idea is that you have to produce a African ancestor to level an accusation of Blackness at some poor chaps door. Well if the ancestor came 43.000 years ago, how the hell are we going to prove that, know his name, and produce a portrait? The cornerstone of the nobility was intermarriage to preserve the colour, the mark of superiority to them. And yet it’s not about an individual’s personal shade of colour, but identity, their mentality. You cannot tell how somebody will move by the shade of Blackness. So we have to regard Blue Blood as a Black Identity. The Black Europeans took pride in their Blackness as a group. But they also had military prowess and scientific knowledge. With these two means they became a noble and royal elite. Nobody invited them into the royalty, the whole thing started with them. Many persons are described as brown or black, chimney sweeper etc, but are shown as whites in all of Europe’s lying museums. Those were the elite of a Reversed Apartheid, were only coloureds could benefit from learning and position. All persons of interest belonged to this ‘mixed mulatto race.’ Some members showing Classical African features, some did not, but could never be considered whites. The Moors in European art and heraldry symbolise blue blood. The Spanish, Muslim Moors are never encountered outside Spain. They are not the ancestors of these Christian Blacks. Carrying on about the Muslim Moors of Spain is another Eurocentric trick to get us in another trap, in order to turn Black’s attention away from the Black European kings.
Englands Queen Charlotte was also of African descent. Her son was King Charles Stuart. I placed a link below, which gives more information on her lines. I learned quite a bit about the history of England and Wales, after tracing my maternal lines to Britain. My female ancestors were Welsh, the original inhabitants of Britain. The Anglos and Normans came into Britain and waged war on the Welsh. The Welsh came from North Africa into Spain, and traversed Europe before settling in Britain. Unlike the Normans and Anglos, they were dark complexioned, with black wavy hair, and brown eyes. This is quite an interesting topic, and I will bring it up on my radio show, http:/blogtalkradio/Anita-Wills (Anita Talks Genealogy). Americas’ History is tinged with lies and racism, in order to continue the Manifest Destiny of Europeans. “If you tell a lie long enough it becomes the truth”, is the motto of those who colonized America.