conspicuously negroid features

Really, Frontline?  Really!?  Negroid?  Whatever, PBS.  Not sure why that caused me intense irritation, but it did.  Moving on…  This strikes me as something that should be common knowledge.

Was This Britain’s First Black Queen?

by Mario de Valdes y Cocom

“The suggestion that Queen Charlotte was black implies that her granddaughter (Queen Victoria) and her great-great-great-great-granddaughter (Queen Elizabeth II) had African forebears. Perhaps, instead of just being a boring bunch of semi-inbred white stiffs, our royal family becomes much more interesting.” (The Guardian, March 12, 2009)

With features as conspicuously Negroid as they were reputed to be by her contemporaries, it is no wonder that the black community, both in the U.S. and throughout the British Commonwealth, have rallied around pictures of Queen Charlotte for generations. They have pointed out the physiological traits that so obviously identify the ethnic strain of the young woman who, at first glance, looks almost anomalous, portrayed as she usually is, in the sumptuous splendour of her coronation robes.

Queen Charlotte, wife of the English King George III (1738-1820), was directly descended from Margarita de Castro y Sousa, a black branch of the Portuguese Royal House…  Six different lines can be traced from English Queen Charlotte back to Margarita de Castro y Sousa, in a gene pool which because of royal inbreeding was already minuscule, thus explaining the Queen’s unmistakable African appearance.

Queen Charlotte’s Portrait:
The Royal FamilyThe Negroid characteristics of the Queen’s portraits certainly had political significance since artists of that period were expected to play down, soften or even obliterate undesirable features in a subjects’s face. Sir Allan Ramsay was the artist responsible for the majority of the paintings of the Queen and his representations of her were the most decidedly African of all her portraits. Ramsey was an anti-slavery intellectual of his day. He also married the niece of Lord Mansfield, the English judge whose 1772 decision was the first in a series of rulings that finally ended slavery in the British Empire. It should be noted too that by the time Sir Ramsay was commissioned to do his first portrait of the Queen, he was already , by marriage, uncle to Dido Elizabeth Lindsay, the black grand niece of Lord Mansfield.

Thus, from just a cursory look at the social awareness and political activism at that level of English society, it would be surprising if the Queen’s negroid physiogomy was of no significance to the Abolitionist movement.

Ramsay painted this one, with her two children, in 1765

Mulatto Queen: Black Grandmother of Queen Victoria

by Gary Lloyd

History reveals two curious details about Queen Charlotte Consort to George III: First, her official coronation portrait shows a woman with distinct mulatto features. Second, the Royal Physician to her granddaughter, Queen Victoria, wrote about her in his memoir: “She had a true mulatto face.”

But if Queen Charlotte was a mulatto, who was the black man who fathered her? And if Queen Victoria became the “Grandmother of Europe” would not her black African great-grandfather be the great-grandfather of virtually every Royal house in Europe?

Mulatto Queen unravels this mystery. Along the way we meet Voltaire, Samuel Johnson, Czar Peter the Great, Liebniz, and finally, the black African rumored to be Queen Charlotte’s biological father.

No stodgy historical drama, Mulatto Queen is a hypnotic, farcical romp through King George III’s England. Think: The Da Vinci Code meets Roots …

The characters are heroic, cowardly, desperately funny, disturbingly neurotic. What with their wedding-cake high wigs, court gowns, rampant alcoholism, bloodlust for public executions, addiction to snuff, penchant for gluttony, the appearance of a 17-year old mulatto girl and King George’s instant attraction to her caused a scandal and a cover-up that persists to this day.

Buy the book HERE

About these ads

16 thoughts on “conspicuously negroid features

  1. “Not sure why that caused me intense irritation, but it did.” Perhaps you have such a deep aversion for all things negroid that this becomes a natural reaction for you.

  2. Perhaps because the science behind the negroid, caucasoid, and mongoloid labels is dubious? I thought these terms fell out of favor among well-informed people years ago.

  3. Why would anyone have an aversion to the term negroid characteristics? There are Asian characteristics aren’t there. There are Caucasian characteristics. I am half Nigerian and half European and it doesn’t bother me in the slightest when a black person is identified that way. Tiff Jones looks like a black woman but there is obviously something worrisome going on beneath her skin. Sad really.

  4. To Odile and Lois…it seems like you are both projecting your issues onto Tiff.

    Particularly you, Odile. I’ve noticed that in most of your comments there is bitterness toward biracial people.

    She doesn’t have an aversion to anything African. The term “Negroid” is outdated.

    Maybe that’s the problem, wouldn’t you say?

  5. I was upset at “negroed “also ,And they said she was ugly what a very rude rasict insult to her and her King husband .Shes very pretty and if they knew history they should also know Henry was mixed blood also Henry the first was full black .No one looked at race untill the natzi party and the Jim crow era whitewashed our black birth right world .

  6. This is an old article and a ridiculous subject. Debra Willison you obviously need to learn your history. As a historian I can tell that Henry I, for starters, was not a black man. Queen Charlotte was known for not being very pretty and that has nothing to do with her background. Just because someone is royal does not mean they have to be attractive as we have seen throughout history. This has nothing to do with herself or her husband nor is an insult to either. She just wasn’t pretty! As far as the article you have posted, you didn’t even read it. The Queen Mum was the queen consort to King George, the grandson of Queen Victoria who was also not a black man. The article is clearly stating that the Queen Mum was artificially inseminated. This is also a ludicrous article. Queen Charlotte yes displayed larger lips in her portraits. She was also related to the Austrian Hapsburgs and this is a birth defect with them having intermarried so many times. Just like the Spanish Hapsburgs have enormous chins because of intermarrying. So what are you all looking at her nose? Ever stop to think she just had large nostrils? I have full large lips and that doesn’t make me black not to mention I also have larger eyes as well. This started because Queen Charlotte may or may not have been related to a branch of the Portuguese Royal family that may or may not have been black. Not to mention she was something like 5 generations apart and 9 times removed from this person. OMG, I am so sick of the race issue in the country. GET A CLUE PEOPLE!

  7. Two-and-half years ago I self-published Mulatto Queen: England’s Black Queen. The mulatto in question is of course Queen Charlotte, consort to England’s King George III. My story was an attempt to show how a mulatto wound up the wife of the most powerful monarch of the time (1761). When I first heard of this story, my first question was, “How is it her Negroid features weren’t immediately seen and her wedding to the King of England called off?”

    You’ll have to read the book to find that out — but the evidence she was mulatto is so compelling that as I began encountering it, I could not help but wonder why no one had written a book — fiction or non-fiction — about this amazing woman.

    The evidence Charlotte was half-black is all over the internet. At the top of the list is a description of her made by her grandson-in-law’s physician, Baron Stockmar:

    “Small and crooked, with a true Mulatto face.”
    –Baron Christian Stockmar, MD
    http://tinyurl.com/27ryc3b

    Please note two things about this quote: first, the word true; Second, the capital M. Clearly, Stockmar meant to idiot-proof his meaning — that is, to let the world know for all posterity Queen Victoria’ grandmother was half black.

    When the quote was posted in a forum several people replied Stockmar was only trying to say Queen Charlotte was ugly; that is, “mulatto” was a term for ugly during her day. But in my research the usage I found was identical to its meaning today: a person of white and black parentage. The word “mulatto” is of Latin origin and seems to have taken the original meaning as early as 1593. Consider:

    Origin of MULATTO:
    Spanish mulato, from mulo mule, from Latin mulus
    First Known Use: 1593

    A mule, of course, is a hybrid, a cross between a horse and donkey. The Latin word for mule is “mulus” and from that we can see how some enterprising Spanish-speaker used it to mean a cross between the white race and black race — mulatto. Below is a painting made by a South American painter in 1780 graphically showing usage of the word, literally spelling it out:

    In other words, all available evidence shows Stockmar meant exactly what we mean when he used the mulatto in his memoir. Stockmar was born in 1787 and died in 1863. He arrived at the English court in 1816 two years before Queen Charlotte (by then Queen Mother) died. As Physician-in-Ordinary to her granddaughter, Princess Charlotte, and grand-son-law, Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, he was considered part of the royal family. His memoir, in fact, describes taking meals with the huge brood (Queen Charlotte and King George had 13 children who survived).

    Therefore, we can only conclude that when Stockmar described Queen Charlotte as “a true Mulatto” he most surely meant she had Negroid features.

    Stockmar went on to become a respected diplomat and confidant of Queen Victoria, Charlotte’s granddaughter. We have several letters from Queen Victoria discussing political matters with him. Stockmar was not only a physician, but one who while serving as a doctor during the Napoleonic wars, set up a military hospital in which wounded from both sides were treated. The man was no wastrel given to inexact descriptions; in fact, we could hardly expect there existed anyone better qualified than he to describe Charlotte’s features.

    As to context, his description was part of a dozen others describing members of the royal household. In each of these descriptions we see the same sober, frank, and exacting language as in Charlotte’s description:

    The Regent: ‘Very stout, though of a fine figure; distinguished manners; does not talk half as much as his brothers; speaks tolerably good French. He ate and drank a good deal at dinner. His brown scratch wig not particularly becoming.’

    The Duke of York: the eldest of the Regent’s brothers. ‘Tall, with immense embonpoint, and not proportionately strong legs; he holds himself in such a way that one is always afraid he will tumble over backwards; very bald, and not a very intelligent face: one can see that eating, drinking, and sensual pleasure, are everything to him. Spoke a good deal of French, with a bad accent.’

    The Queen Mother (Charlotte, wife of George III.): ‘Small and crooked, with a true Mulatto face.’

    Memoirs of Baron Stockmar VOL. I. E pp. 50

    Another argument offered against Charlotte being a true mulatto is that that no one else said she was, and that all the paintings of her show a decidedly Caucasian-looking woman. Not so! The fact is, there are many references to her mulatto looks in literature and many paintings and mezzotints that support Stockmar’s description. (see below)

    Several of these were made before Stockmar was born. In fact, with a good number of these paintings we have two versions of Charlotte: one in which she appears to be completely Caucasian; the other in which she possesses obvious Negroid features.

    Finally, some mention should be made of the flood of bad reviews this book received during late September/early October of last year. Besides the five one-star reviews, an astounding 118 negative votes were cast; an extraordinarily high number in light of the fact the book had been on Amazon for two years without a single bad review or vote. These votes and reviews are fraudulent — we even know the name of the white racist who orchestrated the attack — R.W. Peace is an avowed racist whose attacks on blacks and Asians is nothing new: http://marchingwithcaesar.blogspot.com/

    In fact, his virulent reaction to the prospect of an English Royal Family of African descent was expected. In the weeks leading up to the publication of the book articles about it brought the racists out of the woodwork in a similar fashion. What wasn’t expected, however, was Amazon’s do-nothing attitude about the attack. Check out the dates of the one-star reviews, you’ll see they all occurred in less than a two week period. Now, by themselves one-star reviews won’t kill a book. But one-star reviews pushed to the top of the page by a flood of supporting votes is another matter. In this case it was 118 votes all made in the same two-week period.

    The book has been on Amazon for 29 months (as of this writing). For 23 months it did not receive one bad review or vote. For it to suddenly receive five one-star reviews and 118 votes in less than two weeks, is evidence of an organized attack — nothing else explains it.

    And then there’s the content of the one-star votes — malicious, angry, hateful. This alone should have prompted Amazon to remove them. A review saying, “This is the worst book ever — complete garbage!” is hardly a review. That’s hate, which is an emotion Amazon’s own guidelines prohibits in reviews.

    And yet when I contacted Amazon with these facts they did nothing. Despite the fact that the book has 10 five-star reviews, the five bogus one-star reviews are what new customers see. That’s because the bogus votes push the bogus reviews to the top of the page. Worse still, it places these bogus reviews under the headline “Most Helpful.” And if that isn’t enough, it pulls quotes from them, quotes such as “This book was awful! ”

    In other words, it wasn’t the hooligans hurting my book – it was Amazon’s insane review presentation system.

    Amazon explains all this as its policy of being scrupulously honest about customer reviews. But embedded in this policy is the premise that all reviews and votes are scrupulously honest — that malicious attacks on books don’t happen.

    Indeed, this was the pro-forma response I received from all my emails — “Our IT staff has checked our campaign vote algorithm and detected no abnormal activity on your book detail page.”

    This pretty much explains the wall of malicious reviews that greeted you when you first came to this page — hate and incompetence.

    And here I’ll stop …

    My saving grace are the sample chapters; they’re free and customers have read them, seen the quality of writing was excellent and ignored the bogus reviews. Sales are now solid and look to stay that way. Because of Amazon’s incompetently managed vote system the bogus reviews will remain at the top of the page no matter how many tens of five-star reviews this book receives, but I’ve given up trying to convince Amazon of how their nutty system is misleading customers.

    References in Literature:

    “She was undoubtedly a plain young girl with a large mouth, with a rather swarthy complexion and, her nostrils spreading wide, with something of the appearance of a mulatto.”
    George III A Personal History
    by Christopher Hibbert 2000
    http://tinyurl.com/2fxrg9q
    ——————————
    J.A. Rogers Writes:
    From Crisis Magazine Feb 1940
    “her portrait by Ramsay in the National Gallery shows her to be decidedly Negroid. I have a copy bought in London which I have been showing to both colored and white persons without saying who she was and they invariably take her for a colored woman…”
    http://tinyurl.com/33erylq
    ———————————————-
    The Princess Royal Geoffrey Wakeford
    page 110 “her mulatto looks”
    http://tinyurl.com/2bhf9re
    ——————————
    “The jewels lit up her (queen Charlotte) fine, broad features, echoes of her mulatto ancestry…”
    The Love Stones, by Tobias Hill
    novel 2003
    http://tinyurl.com/383s6rk
    ———————————-
    In an article in the Sunday Telegraph, 3/10/99, reporting Dr Steve Jones geneticist calculation that ‘one in five British people has a direct black ancestor’, it is stated that the explanation for Queen Charlotte’s ‘mulatto’ appearance is that …
    http://tinyurl.com/2ax4h6o
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/steve-jones/
    ——————————————–
    The last of the cocked hats: James Monroe & the Virginia dynasty:
    “the small, mulatto-faced Queen Charlotte, whose wide-slit mouth was reminiscent of the rigid demarcation line she set between virtue and vice…”
    University of Oklahoma Press, 1945 Arthur Styron
    http://tinyurl.com/3ak9v4z
    ———————————–
    William Haig Miller, James Macaulay, William Stevens – 1873 – Full view:
    The Queen Mother (Charlotte, wife of George III.) “Small and crooked, with a true mulatto face.” (An old playgoer reports that when George m appeared in a theatre without the Queen, the gallery used to call out, ‘ ‘ George, where’s Pug^ …
    http://tinyurl.com/3akke5n
    ——————————–
    Posthumous memoirs of Karoline Bauer: from the German, Volume 2
    By Karoline Bauer 1884
    http://tinyurl.com/2bmoj89
    ———————————————–
    ——————————
    The Princess Royal Geoffrey Wakefordpage 110 “her mulatto looks”http://tinyurl.com/2bhf9re
    ——————————
    Parson Austen’s daughter Collins, 1967 http://tinyurl.com/39gltop
    ——————

    George the Third
    Stanley Edward Ayling – 1972 – 510 pages – Snippet view
    patience when news of the death of the Duchess of Mecklenburg- Strelitz,Charlotte’s mother, arrived only four days … Her colouring was dark, and some discovered a hint of the mulatto in her looks.
    http://tinyurl.com/29j9k9r
    “She was undoubtedly a plain young girl with a large mouth, with a rather swarthy complexion and, her nostrils spreading wide, with something of the appearance of a mulatto.”
    George III A Personal Historyby Christopher Hibbert 2000http://tinyurl.com/2fxrg9q

  8. Hmm…there are certain features that many “black” people have which are classified as “Negroid” features, but that isn’t an insult unless one makes it so.

    Dark skin, kinky hair, wide noses, full lips, certain body types are NOT ugly. And these features might be most commonly found among people of African descent but they aren’t exclusive to people of African descent. Some Southeast Asians are VERY dark-skinned. Some “white” Jewish and Italian people have very coarse, kinky hair. Some Black people (those without any significant admixture) might be dark in complexion but have thin lips and narrow, pointy noses. This is why racial classifications are so confusing and ridiculous.

  9. I am so sick of this topic. First of all, who defines what is and is not black or white. Certainly black people don’ t in fact, some of the darkest people on earth have been classified as not black, now how did that happen? I think it is time for non whites to write their own history and define ourselves and am tired of being defined by the western mind set.

  10. Also notice, the English dictionary (written by “WHITES”) has no definition for overprivileged. Now I wonder why that is and I wonder why history books in America start off with black folks on slave ships. Just saying.

  11. Miscegenation is a crime against all races which by the way, are a known fact. DNA predicts race end of story. You left wing scumbags can argue your “race is a social construct” all you like but the scientific facts are there for all to see. It is simple, we whites do not want to live or associate with blacks or mulattos. Never! We did not ask for mixed societies and the day is fast approaching when we take matters into our own hands. We will prevail – never mind the jew doing his dirty work behind the scenes trying to get rid of us, he too will be finished. Have fun people, because the days of snorting and grunting at the trough are few. You will pay for all the rapes, murders and other crimes that blacks, asians and muslims have committed against white people. Those traitorous whites who have encouraged this to happen will swing from trees along with their pets. Mark my words – it is coming.

  12. I am 59% African, 34% European and 7% Asian (DNA tested through 23andMe) and descendant of the House of Charlemagne. According to DNA and God, we all migrated (our were shipped) from the Motherland Africa (new flash America…), we are all imported, the only people who are Native are the Indians.

  13. When “White People” set sail to the New world, overwhelmingly they encountered very dark skin people in fact in some of Christopher Columbus’s logs he says that the people were as “Black as the Devil”. “White people” love changing history to fit there point of view and I don’ t blame them, with the overwhelming amount of “Booty” they acquired from looting other cultures in every single way possible that continues to this day (Rothschild family is worth about 100 Trillion Dollars and I am sure it did not come from clean living, hard work, and pulling themselves up from their bootstraps). “White Race” is a misnomer, they invented this idea during the transatlantic slave trade and this was well documented by so called “white people”. No wonder their forefathers would kill slaves that were caught reading or educating themselves because they knew that we would be able to read about their folly in the future and what animals do you know of that can read anything? (We were once considered three fifths of a human once by “White People”) The same “White people” who not only enslaved so called Africans (We are named after the white Roman general Africanus) by the millions but also murdered by the Millions by “White People” and any other people of color they encountered on their “Discovery” of the new world and this murder continues to this very day. The same “White people” who even killed their own “White People” by the millions well documented by “White People”. The same “White people” who manufacture weapons of mass destruction, the same “White people” who invented nuclear weapons and cannot even pronounce the word nuclear properly and are the only humans (If you can call them that) that used those weapons on other human beings. The same “White People” who were so filthy dirty nasty that until the 1900′s (Well documented by “White people”) would ground up the corpses of my ancestors (Ancient Egyptian Mummies) to make Mummia or magic mummy powder and turned that into a tincture and even consumed each other. The same “White People” who were so full of disease from not taking baths and would cover up themselves with clothing and perfume to hide the smell of their dirty nasty funky asses until Black moors came and taught “White People” how to bath, how to read and write , and were responsible for their renascence period. The same “White People” that were so nasty, that not only could the Natives of every place “White people” landed with their dirty ass funky sailing ships could smell “White People” from miles away but all “White People” had to do was breath on the Natives and they died by the millions and in some cases became extinct!! Now tell me, why is that not taught in your history books but “White People” teach that everyone else especially Black people are inferior to “White people” and that we were only slaves and everyone else who is not “White” are also subhuman and lesser then “White People”? “White people” have in less then 100 years brought us to the point of no return in terms of destruction and disharmony on this planet. “White people” have discovered in their “White people” Science that Black people from so called Africa have overwhelmingly zero I repeat zero Neanderthal DNA and are considered to be Homosapiens, the taxonomic binomial name of the contemporary human species which should explain why “White People” are so destructive and aggressive. You Knuckle dragging, Neanderthal, cave dwelling troglodytes are only part modern human which makes you and your kind subhuman and yes because your forefathers raped our women and some of us willingly mixed with you we also unfortunately carry some of that DNA but fortunately black is dominant by nature which would describe the genius of MLK because he knew as well as “White People” that black and white or anything else mixed with black meant more black people. LOL. The same “White People” who cannot make up their minds of what “White People” really means. Are “white People” Caucasian, Nordic, Aryan? “White People cannot make up their minds of what “White” is and since their numbers are declining now they want to put Hispanics and some Middle Easterners that were once once considered not “White” under the “White” Umbrella. “White people” hate “White People” too, don’t believe me, look at what is happening in the Ukraine and Europe in general since the EU started and look at some of the comments on You tube that “White People” make about other “White People” Even though I am Alkebulanian (so called African we are named after the “White’ Roman general Africanus) Native American, West Indian, Eastern European, and Scottish, Black being a dominant trait, no one has ever mistaken me from anything but black and even though it has and continues to be a challenge for the past 46 years in this black mans body, right about now, I would not wanna be “White People”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s