This is my one hundred and sixty-second monthly teaching letter and continues my fourteenth year of publication. Again, I am going to have to interrupt my series The Greatest Love Story Ever Told, which I started with WTL #137, giving a general overview of the marriage relationship between Yahweh and Israel, which I have been expanding on in more detail in seven stages as follows: (1) the courtship, (2) the marriage, (3) the honeymoon, (4) the estrangement, (5) the divorce, (6) the reconciliation, and (7) the remarriage. From time to time I have had to interrupt this comprehensive presentation in order to address undue conjecture from some less-than-enlightened individuals who attempt to interject material into the story that the Bible or true History absolutely do not support. With this interruption, I will address how various people in 15th and 16th centuries, for political reasons, branded a pureblooded White woman as being black, which simply isn’t true! With this issue of WTL, we will learn how a few men in high position used their influence, wittingly or unwittingly, to promote Satan’s agenda. I am persuaded the damage done by those people, two to five hundred years ago, will not be fully grasped until Christ’s Judgment.
I continue to be amazed at how some people attempt to bring nonwhites into Yahweh’s Kingdom under His promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Yahweh married the twelve tribes of Israel, and no one else. Therefore, Yahweh had a honeymoon with the twelve tribes of Israel, and no one else! Not only that, but Yahweh demands racial purity with each succeeding generation of Israelites, for He hates mule-people with a passion. Esau married Hittite women, and we read at Mal. 1:2-3: “2 I have loved you [Israel], saith Yahweh. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith Yahweh: yet I loved Jacob, 3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.”
LIES, FALSEHOODS AND PREVARICATIONS
Again, I find myself in a position where I am forced to delay the exposition of Yahweh’s marriage to the twelve tribes of Israel to correct some false propaganda that is circulating in Israel Identity which originated with the enemy. So far, I have received complaints from a man (whom I consider a friend) in Michigan and a lady in Kentucky. I also received a strange letter with no return address from Fort Wayne, Indiana, dated “02 Aug 2011”. On opening the envelope, among five other printed pages, I found the letter-size front page of “The Nubian Times”, Volume 5, Issue 3 ... March 2003 with the lead story “Black Women In History”. First mentioned (with a somewhat blurred photograph) was Ida Stover Eisenhower (with a fifteen line description), who being part Canaanite-jew, probably had some negro blood. Second, which I consider to be untrue, is a column with what appears to be two retouched blurry photographs of a painting of Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, accompanied with thirty-three lines of the authors’ commentary stating:
“The king of England during the American Revolution was George III, who married Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz in 1761. She was a Black woman, who gave him fifteen children: nine sons and six daughters, with their elder son, George IV also becoming king of England. Buckingham Palace was built for her. Several cities and counties in the United States are named after Charlotte and her birthplace of Mecklenburg. If you read this in Charlotte North Carolina, be proud, take your shirt off and fly it like a helicopter again.
“Our Sistah [sic] Charlotte has been traced to a Moorish branch of the Portuguese aristocracy. Charlotte’s granddaughter was Victoria, the Queen for whom the Victorian Era was named. Queen Victoria’s great granddaughter is the present Queen Elizabeth of England.
“When you are working on the premise that ‘one drop of Black Blood’ makes you black, a whole lot of Negroes be trying to pass Yo [sic]! March is supposed to be International Month of the Woman. This month we focus on Black women globally.”
First of all, it was Victoria’s husband, Prince Albert, who taught Victoria etiquette (good manners), so it should have been called the “Albertian Era”. But we mustn’t let mud be splashed on the ladies, not even Victoria! It is obvious to me that “The Nubian Times” is an n-word publication, and they are trying to claim things that don’t belong to them! I checked the Internet, and they are still publishing “The Nubian Times”. It is still formatted exactly as the copy that “no-name” sent me. When I think about it, who other than an n-word would have an issue to make a copy from. This shows that some people are not careful from what sources they collect their data. I have good reason to believe that “The Nubian Times” is deliberate disinformation aimed at the negros, and edited by Canaanite-jews, whom Yahshua Christ labeled as “liars”. (see Congressional Record, vol. 103, page 8559.)
It just so happens that I have my own copy of the same photograph of the painted picture of Charlotte in a 9x11 inch book entitled National Portrait Gallery History Of The Kings & Queens Of England (professionally printed on the best paper available) in my library. My lifelong occupation for fifty-three years was barbering, and photography (including re-photography) was one of my major hobbies. So I have the capability of analyzing the photograph of the painting of Charlotte more closely than most, especially when I place her picture from this book under a powerful lighted magnifying lens. I also found this same painting of Charlotte on several websites on the Internet. At one website, her painting took up about 1/8th of the screen. I noticed, when I placed the cursor on the painting, a plus sign appeared, showing that it could be enlarged. When I enlarged it, it filled up about ½ of the screen and another plus sign appeared, so I enlarged it again whereupon Charlotte’s painting filled up 100% of the screen for close inspection. But from these various inspections, the lighted magnifying lens worked best, and what I found should prove once and for all that Charlotte was a pureblooded Caucasian White woman!
I first started barbering in the Navy in 1945 in the Philippines on an Island ship repair base named Manicani, which had a complement of about 4000 men with all manner of special craftsmen and equipment to support the dry-docks there. A few months later, I was transferred to a Navy tanker named the Monongahela, where I became the official barber for the crew of the ship. Among the crew were three or four negros, and I was duty bound to cut their hair. I soon discovered that it was impossible to draw a comb through their hair as one could do with a white man. All one could do was to jab the points of the teeth of the comb into the mass of intertwined tangled hair and lift a bit while cutting off a little hair. It’s similar to trimming the bushes outside of one’s house – it becomes a matter of sculpturing rather than styling! Then in the early 1960s, I owned and managed my own barber shop in Fostoria, Ohio, when suddenly I received a notice from the Ohio State Barber Board, that any licensed barber who refused to cut negros’ hair would be prosecuted. To scare all of the Ohio barbers and beauticians into compliance, a law case was brought against a Lima, Ohio beautician for not giving service to an n-word, whereupon the judge awarded the n-word the beautician’s business lock, stock and barrel. Before this, in 1949, I worked the second chair in a two-chair barbershop in Bowling Green, Ohio, right across the street from the Bowling Green State University. One day, the Bowling Green State University sent one of its officials to the owner-manager Melvin Munn, to request that his shop (which included me) would start cutting the hair of the n-words attending the university. Neither Melvin nor I were very enthusiastic about the idea, but the officer from the university had a tone of threatened law action in his request. Melvin and I talked this situation over, and not wanting to see Melvin sued, I told him I had cut the n-word’s hair in the Navy, and if he could handle it, I could grudgingly go along. After about three months, I found a different job of barbering. Getting back to the warning from the Ohio State Barber Board in the early 1960s, operating my own barbershop, I avoided every negro that I could, but if confronted while witnesses were present that could testify against me, I would reluctantly cut their hair. Fortunately, until February 1998, when I finally retired, I was able to keep the n-word problem to a minimum. The reason for giving the reader some of my background is because I don’t want anyone trying to tell me that I don’t know what in hell I am talking about!
GETTING TO QUEEN CHARLOTTE’S PAINTED PICTURE
Re-photography (taking pictures of pictures or paintings) requires special photographic equipment and supplies. There is a lot more to it than just picking up a snapshot camera and trying to take a precise duplicate of the original picture or painting. I never got beyond 35mm cameras, but I had several excellent models. Most of all, it requires a good portrait lens. A portrait lens is a special lens which keeps all of the surface of the picture or painting in focus. Without a portrait lens, if the center of the flat painting is in focus, the edges will be out of focus, or if the edges are in focus, the center will be out of focus. I now have a large re-photography case (about the size of an extra-large suitcase) full of re-photography equipment (now all obsolete). I never did followup with the newer digital photography, as when my wife died, I lost my main subject to take pictures of. I advise the reader of this, because I want him to know I have a special ability to evaluate the re-photography that others have done.
As I stated before, my best opportunity of analyzing the photograph of the painting of Charlotte was when I placed her picture from the book, National Portrait Gallery History Of The Kings & Queens Of England under a powerfully lighted magnifying lens. First of all, the portrait painter, Allan Ramsay, painted all of Charlotte’s exposed skin areas a lighter shade of skin color than the average pureblooded Caucasian White woman! Judging from Allan Ramsay’s portrait of King George III (Charlotte’s husband), Charlotte’s skin color is even lighter than that of King George III (see pp. 98-99). King William IV was the third son of King George III and Queen Charlotte, and there is a color photographic facsimile on page 104, where there is absolutely nothing about his color or bodily features to indicate he is the least bit negroid! He does, though, have the same wavy hair that his mother had (not kinky like the blacks). He also has a somewhat wide mouth like his mother, Charlotte, which is common among some white people. While William IV did reasonably well in his naval career, he was only mediocre at being a king. But anyone who has the audacity to claim he was part black has to be stark raving mad, for it simply cannot be true! Some condemn Queen Charlotte as being part black because of her extra wide mouth, but if they would take the time to observe some of the White women around them, they would find it’s not that unusual. I purposely observed, over a period of days, several White blond women on TV that had fairly wide mouths which didn’t detract from their beauty, but Allan Ramsay, Charlotte’s portrait painter, had abolitionist reasons for painting her mouth wider than it really was! This was a criminal act on the part of Ramsay, as old as our country! What’s even more criminal, is to pass this false story as true throughout Israel Identity! Who will The Nubian Times claim they are related to next?
We read from the following website:
“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 ....”
This is true, but this is not the end of the story. Wikipedia did a fairly good job of presenting Queen Charlotte’s background history at:
“Claims of African ancestry
“Mario de Valdes y Cocom, an independent afrocentrist (i.e., centered on Africa) researcher, has argued that Allan Ramsay, a noted abolitionist, frequently painted the Queen in works said to emphasize the alleged mulatto appearance of Charlotte, and that Ramsay’s coronation portrait of Charlotte was sent to the colonies and was used by abolitionists as a de facto support for their cause. Valdes y Cocom goes on to state that, along with descriptions of a ‘mulatto face’ (as, supposedely, Baron Stockmar, whom Valdes y Cocom wrongly considers Queen Charlotte’s personal physician, wrote in his autobiography), the Queen’s features had also been described as Vandalic, as exemplified by a poem written for the occasion of her marriage (‘most literary of these allusions’, according to Valdes y Cocom):
“‘Descended from the warlike Vandal race,
She still preserves that title in her face’ ....”
Evidently the painter Allan Ramsay was not aware that the Vandals were White Caucasian people, actually German, and occupied North Africa in the 5th century A.D. They were also lost Israelites (surely of the Royal tribe of Judah)! So we see, that Allan Ramsay painted quite well on most occasions, but when he didn’t approve of his subject, he had a biased paint brush! This is evidence that Allan Ramsay deliberately painted Queen Charlotte to appear negroid! We are admonished in the Bible to beware of the lying pen of the scribe. In this case it is the lying brush of the painter, which is just as evil!
LET’S TALK ABOUT CHARLOTTE’S HAIRSTYLE
In the portrait which Allan Ramsay painted of Queen Charlotte for her coronation, there is absolutely no way she wore a hairstyle that a negroid (or a mulatto for that matter) could manage to fashion into the position that she, or her servant, had cut and styled. There is a world of difference between the hair of a negroid and that of a Caucasian! The shaft of the hair of Caucasians is round, while the hair of negroids is flat (much like that of a cassette tape, especially when the case of the cassette is broken and the flat tape is all tangled up. Most Caucasians’ hair tends to be straight in nature, although some Caucasians have wavy or even quite curly hair. To what degree a Caucasian has straight or curly hair depends upon the strength of the Arrector Pili muscle which is attached to each hair follicle from which each hair is extruded. This process may cause a curly haired Caucasian’s hair shaft to be slightly oval in shape, but not flat like a negroid. As a barber for 53 years, I have firsthand knowledge of this, and there is absolutely no comparison between the two!
Even though Allan Ramsay defrauded with his paint brush, he did quite well in portraying Charlotte’s hairstyle for her coronation, which we shall examine in minute detail. When we inspect Charlotte’s 2½ x 311/16 inch printed facsimile of her painted portrait, the first thing to be noticed are eleven individual ringlets of blond hair hanging like bangs from the right side of her forehead at the hair line. Because the left side of her forehead at the hairline is shaded it is not as clear, but one can clearly see three ringlets of like nature, and one must assume there are eight more to balance out the right side for a total of twenty-two. If these hair ringlets were a little longer, they would form a circle about 1¼ inch in diameter. Inasmuch as negroid hair forms circles less than ¼ inch in diameter, it would be utterly impossible for Charlotte to have a single drop of negroid blood! To get this frontal hairline style, it would have been necessary to section off a portion of hair about an inch wide, parallel to the hair line; then comb the sectioned hair straight down, cutting off anything in excess of about 2½ inches. And one must remember that in the 1700s, they didn’t have all the tools, gadgets and lotions found in a beauty shop today!
In her portrait, Charlotte had her head turned slightly to her left. This left a portion of her hairstyle exposed on her right side just behind her ear. Under the lighted high power magnifying lens, this clearly shows how her hairstyle, for the occasion, would have appeared from the back of her head. It appears that the back of her head was made up of vertical coils, with the hair combed horizontally into 1¼ inch diameter circuits. Judging from what can be seen on her right side, these coils of hair were 3 tiers high and about 6 or 7 rows wide, all the same size. We can be sure of this as a portion of one coil on her left side (near the same level as her chin) reveals a portion of a like-sized coil. Had Charlotte the slightest amount of negroid blood, such a hairstyle, as described here, would have been impossible!
But this still isn’t the end of the story: The book, National Portrait Gallery History Of The Kings & Queens Of England on the same page 98 with Queen Charlotte’s portrait painted by Allan Ramsay, ¶ 3, states in part: “Charlotte was no beauty, possessing small simian features, though she was not without a certain charm ....” Here the word “simian” means: “... adj. 1. of or pertaining to an ape or monkey. 2. characteristic of apes or monkeys: long simian fingers. –n. 3. an ape or monkey [1600-10; <L simi(a) an ape (prob. deriv. of simus flat-nosed <Gk simós) + -AN] -sim-i-an-i-ty ... n. ” (Webster’s 1996). With this definition, the author is intimating that Queen Charlotte appeared like an ape, and surely that was what Allan Ramsay was implying, but he had to twist his paint brush to accomplish that!
After all of this, maybe we should check to see just who published the National Portrait Gallery History Of The Kings & Queens Of England! The first thing that I notice is, it was printed and bound in Korea. On the second inside title page, the publishing company is stated as Konecky & Konecky. I searched “Konecky & Konecky” on the Internet, and it brought up Dr. Elizabeth A. Konecky, National Jewish Outreach. Also Edith Konecky, feminist and novelist, and (JWA) Jewish Woman’s Archive and European Jewish Fund, which in turn supports “Paideia”, (jewish promoters of race-mixing in Europe; see next ¶).
A WORD TO THE WISE: A Racial Plan For the Genocide Of The White Race from jews in Sweden: (From a youtube video): “As you heard, there are people in Sweden who supported this, and at the expense of the injustice of the present situation. It’s these people who give hope to those who still believe things will get better here. One of them is Barbara Lerner Spectre, a former American who made ‘aliyah’ [meaning migration to the spurious Israeli state in Palestine] and then ten years ago, with the hope of the government of Sweden, set up a non-denominational institute of learning with the Greek name ‘Paideia’ [meaning ‘The European Institute for Jewish Studies in Sweden] here in Stockholm. She believes the current wave of anti-semitism in Sweden will pass, and the jews have an important role to play in a country undergoing profound change.” (Then Spectre, agreeing): “I think there is a resistance to anti-semitism because, at this point in time, Europe has not yet learned how to be multicultural [meaning racially-mixed]. And I think we [meaning the jews] are going to be part of the throes of that transformation, which must take place. Europe [meaning all the countries of Europe] is not going to be the monolithic societies [meaning racially pureblooded nations] that they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the front of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode, and Jews will be resented because of our leading role. But without that leading role, and without that transformation, Europe will not survive.” What in hell is Spectre threatening we pureblooded Whites with?
There is one thing more that we need to discuss about Allan Ramsay’s portrait of Queen Charlotte, and that is the extra dark shadow on the left side of her nose. When placing her printed facsimile under a powerfully lighted magnifying lens, and placing a white sheet of paper over her shadowed left side, the right side of her nose appears quite natural and not out of proportion in any way. Since the left side of her nose is obscure because of the extra dark painted shadow, one must assume that both sides of her nose are normal and well proportioned! When analyzed very carefully, it is quite obvious she was not “flat-nosed” like an ape. However, on the other hand, we know other kinds of people who are! It would have been better, had Allan Ramsay kept his political frustrations over the then heated issue of abolition to himself! Rather, Ramsay should have redirected his frustrations toward the Moslems who were raiding southern Europe and taking White slaves back to Africa and selling them to tyrant nonwhite chieftains (especially White women and children) to satisfy their sexual lusts. The arabs are still the enemy of the White people of today! Of course, by Ramsay’s day in the 1700s, Islam was in its nadir (lowest point), partly due to the advent of Charles Martel. Here is a concise account of that Moslem history:
Mohammed, a half-jew, founder of Islam, was born at Mecca Aug. 20, 570 A.D. At age 40, he claimed a revelation from Gabriel and launched a hybrid religion. Gaining adherents and an army, he soon conquered all of Arabia and summoned Persia, Abyssinia and Constantinople to embrace his religion, but died before taking on Asia Minor and the Roman Empire. After his death, his fanatical followers pressed into Egypt, Palestine, Persia and Syria, and 50 years later moved into North Africa and Spain, giving the conquered an ultimatum of conversion or the sword, raping the women as they went. Upon sweeping northward into Spain, at the beckoning of the jews, they broke the rule of the Visigoths in 711, bringing with them Berbers from Africa, making Cordova their seat of government. In Spanish history, the term “Moor” is used generally to include “Arab” and “Saracen”. Later the Moorish forces invaded France, but were defeated at Tours in 732 by Charles Martel, which was a major turning point in history.
The progress of the Mohammedans northward had continued unchecked for a distance greater than a thousand miles from Gibraltar, and had they not been stopped they would have carried the Crescent to the borders of Poland and the Scottish Highlands. The sedate Gibbon conjectured that the Koran would today be used as the principal textbook at the University of Oxford.
Destiny (through Yahweh) had a different plan. The battle-axe, Charles (called the “hammer”) Martel, was not about to allow the (arab) Moors’ advance to continue. The Frankish warrior was already hardened by twenty-four years of service. With this great emergency upon the kingdom, Charles’ policy was to let the Arabian torrent diffuse itself before attempting to stem the tide. Here Europe was arrayed against Asia and Africa; the Cross against the Crescent; Christ against Mohammed. For six days the battle appeared to favor Islam, but on the seventh day the fierce Germans arose with their battle-axes upon the lighter soldiery from the south. As night closed, Europe was victorious, for Abdalrahman their leader was slain. In the confusion of the darkness the Moorish warriors rose against each other till sunrise, when the few remaining alive retreated south.
One would think that Charles Martel would have received the highest honors the Christian world could bestow! But just the opposite occurred after the victory. Martel, in raising and equipping his army, had been obliged to appropriate the treasures of several churches, and the unthankful clergy never forgave him, but consigned him to hellfire. As far as the church was concerned, the hero of Poitiers could roast in purgatory’s flame. [Gleaned partly from the Cyclopædia of Universal History by John Clark Ridpath, volume II, pages 150-152.]
Let’s once and for all time define the meaning and origin of the term “Moor”. The best source I found for doing this is the 1971 The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 13, page 652 which reads:
“MOOR. In ancient history, the Romans called the people of northwestern Africa Mauri and the region they lived in Mauretania. These peoples belonged to a larger group, the Berbers (see Berber). The Berbers became Moslems and adopted Arabic as their language. They joined the Arabs in conquering Spain during the 700’s. The so-called Moorish civilization of the Middle Ages was in large part Arabic. The Moors lost much of their land in Spain by 1276. In 1492, Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain drove out the last Moors. Most of the refugees settled in North Africa. Today, the term Moor may refer to all inhabitants of northwestern Africa who are Moslems and who speak Arabic. Or it can refer to Moslems of Spanish, Jewish, or Turkish descent who live in North Africa.
“The term Moor in its French form Maure designates the nomads of the western Sahara in Africa. The term Moor also applies to the Arab-Sinhalese Moslems of Ceylon. In the form Moro, it refers to Moslems who live in the southern Philippines.
“A common but incorrect belief that Moors are Negroes was spread by William Shakespeare’s play Othello. Moors belong to the Mediterranean group of the Caucasoid (white) race.” Vernon Robert Dorjahn [emphasis mine CAE]
William Shakespeare 1564-1616: “Early in Elizabeth’s reign a baby boy was born in the village of Stratford, in the center of England. The day we do not know, but the parish register gives April 26, 1564, as the day of his christening ....” (First Steps In The History Of England by Arthur May Mowry) The earliest mention of the play Othello is found in the 1604 Revels Office account, which records that on ‘Hallamas day’, 1st day of November ... the Kings Maiesties plaiers’ performed ‘A Play in the Banketinghouse at Whit Hall, The Moor of Venis’ ... Later, the cover of Shakespeare’s book reads: ‘The Tragoedy of Othello, The Moor of Venice ... London ... 1622’ (Wikipedia).
From this explanation by World Book, and other follow-up data, it is clear the term or name “Moor” originally meant “White Caucasoid” people occupying North Africa, and surely the White Israelite Phoenicians of Carthage (880 B.C.) also fit into the account. It would appear that, over a period 2300 years, the term “Moor” took on three different meanings, in the following order: (1) it originally meant a “White Caucasoid” people from approximately 880 B.C. to around 450 A.D., (2) then with the advent of Mohammed and his mixed arab converts in the 6th & 7th centuries A.D., as they advanced into northwestern Africa and southern Europe, they absorbed the name as an arab people, (3) with the decline of Portugal, by entering the slave trade around 1575, and due to large numbers of negros imported to work their fields, while the Portuguese were out exploring for more slaves, the women back home were getting pregnant by the negros causing an influx of mulattos in the population, and the term “Moor” was also wrongly given to them. The problem is, Shakespeare’s misapplication of the name “Moor” to mean “negro” caused many in England (and God only knows who else) to also misapply the name “Moor”.
SOME SOURCES REFUSE TO LIE ABOUT THE MATTER!
From website: people.virginia.edu/~jlc5f/charlotte/credite.html
“Credits for: Queen Charlotte, 1744-1818: A Bilingual Exhibit
“Angelika Schmiegelow Powell, Slavic Librarian at the University of Virginia Library - and herself a native of Mecklenburg, Germany - prepared the graphic materials for this exhibit, which was shown in 1994, in Charlottesville, VA, one of the towns in the New World named after the royal bride; and simultaneously in Mecklenburg-Strelitz, Germany, the Queen’s birthplace. A Library Faculty Research grant from the University of Virginia Library supported the composition of two sets of 30 pictures depicting scenes, monuments and personages of Queen Charlotte’s life and time. The English set is now permanently housed in the Albemarle County Historical Society Archive. The German edition was deposited in the Stadtmuseum Neustrelitz in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany.
“Jean L. Cooper, Systems Librarian at the University of Virginia Library, suggested the creation of a World Wide Web hypertext document of this exhibit for global viewing. A second Library Faculty Research grant sponsored this cooperative pilot project. Cooper formatted, rearranged, and selected most of the added English texts for the World Wide Web edition of the exhibit. She also scanned all the pictures. Angelika Powell translated the English texts into German.
“In May 1994, Werner K. Sensbach read through 440 of Queen Charlotte’s surviving letters, addressed to her favorite brother, Grand Duke Charles II of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, which are kept in the Mecklenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv in Schwerin, Germany. The director of the archive generously agreed to provide photocopies of 460 royal letters for the University of Virginia Library, and granted permission to quote excerpts from them in English and German translations in this hypertext document. Werner Sensbach translated these excerpts from the difficult 18th century French letters into English. Charles Rice, of the University of Virginia Library, prepared the English translation of eight-year old Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s French dedication letter to Queen Charlotte for his Opus 3 ....”
MORE CONJECTURE, (Which I Will Edit), FROM:
“Queen Charlotte, wife of the English King George III (1738-1820), was directly descended from Margarita de Castro y Sousa, a black [sic White Moorish] branch of the Portuguese Royal House. The riddle of Queen Charlotte’s African [White Moorish] ancestry was solved [sic fabricated] as a result of an earlier investigation into the black magi featured in 15th century Flemish paintings. Two art historians had suggested [sic surmised] that the black magi must have been portraits of actual contemporary people (since the artist, without seeing them, would not have been aware of the subtleties in coloring and facial bone structure of quadroons or octoroons which these figures invariably represented) Enough evidence [sic supposition] was accummulated to propose that the models for the black magi were, in all probability, [sic presumed] members of the Portuguese de Sousa family. (Several de Sousas had in fact traveled to the Netherlands when their cousin, the Princess Isabella went there to marry the Grand Duke, Philip the Good of Burgundy in the year 1429.) [hogwash]
AN ERROR IN REASONING FROM:
“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.” [pile it higher and higher]
Nothing could be farther from the truth, for Queen Charlotte was descended from the White Moors. Over a period of 2300 years, the name “Moor” degenerated downward from “White” to “brown” to “black”. In Portugal, they had a myth that one of the magi that visited the Christ child was black, and in their skits to celebrate the Biblical account, they would use chimney soot to blacken the face of one of the participants acting out the skit of the three magi. However, all of the original magi were White men who came to honor the White Christ! The subject of Charlotte will be continued for three more WTLs.