Non-white royal descendants
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
David Webb
Non-white royal descendants
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are white.
What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal? Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal? Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
None.
He's simply trying to provoke a silly-buggers argument.
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251225.3a251b12@posting.google.com...
| I would disagree that all descendants of James VI and I are white,
| just by using common sense.
|
| The Calverts which came to Maryland were descended in certain lines
| from Charles II through his illegitimate daughter Charlottte Fitzroy.
| I'll assume that in the intervening 300 years that some of the Calvert
| descendants are non-white. Maryland was a southern state and allowed
| slavery. Assuming that at some point one of the Calvert descendants
| must have fathered a child by a slave, there must be at least some (if
| not many) non-white descendants of the Calverts. That's but one
| example.
|
| Also, many people consider the Queen Consort of George III to have
| African blood. So by some standards her descendants who are also
| descendants of James VI and I would be non-white at least in part.
|
| What is the point of your question?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
He's simply trying to provoke a silly-buggers argument.
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251225.3a251b12@posting.google.com...
| I would disagree that all descendants of James VI and I are white,
| just by using common sense.
|
| The Calverts which came to Maryland were descended in certain lines
| from Charles II through his illegitimate daughter Charlottte Fitzroy.
| I'll assume that in the intervening 300 years that some of the Calvert
| descendants are non-white. Maryland was a southern state and allowed
| slavery. Assuming that at some point one of the Calvert descendants
| must have fathered a child by a slave, there must be at least some (if
| not many) non-white descendants of the Calverts. That's but one
| example.
|
| Also, many people consider the Queen Consort of George III to have
| African blood. So by some standards her descendants who are also
| descendants of James VI and I would be non-white at least in part.
|
| What is the point of your question?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
Martin E. Hollick
Re: Non-white royal descendants
I would disagree that all descendants of James VI and I are white,
just by using common sense.
The Calverts which came to Maryland were descended in certain lines
from Charles II through his illegitimate daughter Charlottte Fitzroy.
I'll assume that in the intervening 300 years that some of the Calvert
descendants are non-white. Maryland was a southern state and allowed
slavery. Assuming that at some point one of the Calvert descendants
must have fathered a child by a slave, there must be at least some (if
not many) non-white descendants of the Calverts. That's but one
example.
Also, many people consider the Queen Consort of George III to have
African blood. So by some standards her descendants who are also
descendants of James VI and I would be non-white at least in part.
What is the point of your question?
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
just by using common sense.
The Calverts which came to Maryland were descended in certain lines
from Charles II through his illegitimate daughter Charlottte Fitzroy.
I'll assume that in the intervening 300 years that some of the Calvert
descendants are non-white. Maryland was a southern state and allowed
slavery. Assuming that at some point one of the Calvert descendants
must have fathered a child by a slave, there must be at least some (if
not many) non-white descendants of the Calverts. That's but one
example.
Also, many people consider the Queen Consort of George III to have
African blood. So by some standards her descendants who are also
descendants of James VI and I would be non-white at least in part.
What is the point of your question?
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are white.
What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal? Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
David Webb
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
No, I genuinely want to know. I watched Mel Gibson's Mutiny on the Bounty
the other day, and realised that Mel, a descendant of Edward III, passed on
his royal ancestry to many Polynesian descendants. I myself have black 3rd
cousins. Distant cousins of mine have married Iraqis, Cubans, Koreans etc.
Spencer Hines, I assume you are a slave to political correctness.
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7Ck5d.70$Xc6.2371@eagle.america.net...
the other day, and realised that Mel, a descendant of Edward III, passed on
his royal ancestry to many Polynesian descendants. I myself have black 3rd
cousins. Distant cousins of mine have married Iraqis, Cubans, Koreans etc.
Spencer Hines, I assume you are a slave to political correctness.
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7Ck5d.70$Xc6.2371@eagle.america.net...
None.
He's simply trying to provoke a silly-buggers argument.
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251225.3a251b12@posting.google.com...
| I would disagree that all descendants of James VI and I are white,
| just by using common sense.
|
| The Calverts which came to Maryland were descended in certain lines
| from Charles II through his illegitimate daughter Charlottte Fitzroy.
| I'll assume that in the intervening 300 years that some of the Calvert
| descendants are non-white. Maryland was a southern state and allowed
| slavery. Assuming that at some point one of the Calvert descendants
| must have fathered a child by a slave, there must be at least some (if
| not many) non-white descendants of the Calverts. That's but one
| example.
|
| Also, many people consider the Queen Consort of George III to have
| African blood. So by some standards her descendants who are also
| descendants of James VI and I would be non-white at least in part.
|
| What is the point of your question?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
D. Spencer Hines
Re: Non-white royal descendants
Edward I for one.
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251756.71e09780@posting.google.com...
| I believe some genealogist who like to do "famous" people's ancestry
| did Colin Powell's (the U.S. Secretary of State) ancestry. He's of
| Jamaican ancestry partly, and partly Scottish and British. Does he
| have a royal ancestor? If so, who was it?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251756.71e09780@posting.google.com...
| I believe some genealogist who like to do "famous" people's ancestry
| did Colin Powell's (the U.S. Secretary of State) ancestry. He's of
| Jamaican ancestry partly, and partly Scottish and British. Does he
| have a royal ancestor? If so, who was it?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
There is a book (which I have) with descendants of the Bounty participants,
including Captain Bligh. A fair number of these are recorded on my website
http://www.genealogics.org
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 7:24 AM
Subject: Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
including Captain Bligh. A fair number of these are recorded on my website
http://www.genealogics.org
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
Canberra, Australia
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 7:24 AM
Subject: Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
No, I genuinely want to know. I watched Mel Gibson's Mutiny on the Bounty
the other day, and realised that Mel, a descendant of Edward III, passed
on
his royal ancestry to many Polynesian descendants. I myself have black 3rd
cousins. Distant cousins of mine have married Iraqis, Cubans, Koreans etc.
Spencer Hines, I assume you are a slave to political correctness.
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7Ck5d.70$Xc6.2371@eagle.america.net...
None.
He's simply trying to provoke a silly-buggers argument.
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251225.3a251b12@posting.google.com...
| I would disagree that all descendants of James VI and I are white,
| just by using common sense.
|
| The Calverts which came to Maryland were descended in certain lines
| from Charles II through his illegitimate daughter Charlottte Fitzroy.
| I'll assume that in the intervening 300 years that some of the Calvert
| descendants are non-white. Maryland was a southern state and allowed
| slavery. Assuming that at some point one of the Calvert descendants
| must have fathered a child by a slave, there must be at least some (if
| not many) non-white descendants of the Calverts. That's but one
| example.
|
| Also, many people consider the Queen Consort of George III to have
| African blood. So by some standards her descendants who are also
| descendants of James VI and I would be non-white at least in part.
|
| What is the point of your question?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
Martin E. Hollick
Re: Non-white royal descendants
I believe some genealogist who like to do "famous" people's ancestry
did Colin Powell's (the U.S. Secretary of State) ancestry. He's of
Jamaican ancestry partly, and partly Scottish and British. Does he
have a royal ancestor? If so, who was it?
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
did Colin Powell's (the U.S. Secretary of State) ancestry. He's of
Jamaican ancestry partly, and partly Scottish and British. Does he
have a royal ancestor? If so, who was it?
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are white.
What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal? Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
12-stringer
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pml5d.87748$U04.67232@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
Are you giving us a revelation about Mel Gibson's sex life, or are you
actually talking about Fletcher Christian, the character he portrayed in the
movie?
Was Errol Flynn actually a descendant of Christian, or did he only play him
in an Australian movie of the early 1930s?
RT
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.769 / Virus Database: 516 - Release Date: 9/24/04
news:pml5d.87748$U04.67232@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
No, I genuinely want to know. I watched Mel Gibson's Mutiny on the Bounty
the other day, and realised that Mel, a descendant of Edward III, passed
on
his royal ancestry to many Polynesian descendants. I myself have black 3rd
cousins. Distant cousins of mine have married Iraqis, Cubans, Koreans etc.
Spencer Hines, I assume you are a slave to political correctness.
Are you giving us a revelation about Mel Gibson's sex life, or are you
actually talking about Fletcher Christian, the character he portrayed in the
movie?
Was Errol Flynn actually a descendant of Christian, or did he only play him
in an Australian movie of the early 1930s?
RT
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.769 / Virus Database: 516 - Release Date: 9/24/04
-
Bronwen Edwards
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
Is your question confined to colonial American or Australian
descendants, or are you casting a wider net that might include someone
posting on this list? If the latter is the case, I will step forward
as one (out of who-knows-how-many-millions) non-"white" descendant of
James VI and Henry VII. But I have to follow up with another question:
what does "white" mean to you? To me it means a social construct that
had little meaning before the 18th/19th centuries and then only in
certain colonial regions. The term "race" is misused by most people.
The story of "how the Irish became white in America" springs to mind.
When they first arrived in large numbers, following the potato famine,
they were not regarded as "white". Obviously the term had nothing to
do with physical characteristics but rather it referred to relative
power and status. These Irish famine refugees were largely
abolitionists. A campaign was launched to persuade them to be
pro-slavery. The campaign was successful because the pay-off was to
"become white". In short order, many of the slave owners were Irish.
Of course, these are broad generalizations for the sake of brevity and
this should not be taken as meaning all people of Irish descent who
were in that place and time. One of the many lessons of the genome
project (although this was nothing new to anthropologists) is that we
are a single species without subspeciation. We are unique among
earth's lifeforms in having so little differentiation. Traits like
skin color are highly variable within every group and are very minor
variations. They are not a reliable indicator of anything. So the
question you are really asking is: are there any descendants of these
particular kings who are otherwise from gene pools/ethnic groups
significantly different from those of ... who? Bronwen Edwards
-
David Webb
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
Is your question confined to colonial American or Australian
descendants, or are you casting a wider net that might include someone
posting on this list? If the latter is the case, I will step forward
as one (out of who-knows-how-many-millions) non-"white" descendant of
James VI and Henry VII. But I have to follow up with another question:
what does "white" mean to you? To me it means a social construct that
had little meaning before the 18th/19th centuries and then only in
certain colonial regions. The term "race" is misused by most people.
The story of "how the Irish became white in America" springs to mind.
When they first arrived in large numbers, following the potato famine,
they were not regarded as "white". Obviously the term had nothing to
do with physical characteristics but rather it referred to relative
power and status. These Irish famine refugees were largely
abolitionists. A campaign was launched to persuade them to be
pro-slavery. The campaign was successful because the pay-off was to
"become white". In short order, many of the slave owners were Irish.
Of course, these are broad generalizations for the sake of brevity and
this should not be taken as meaning all people of Irish descent who
were in that place and time. One of the many lessons of the genome
project (although this was nothing new to anthropologists) is that we
are a single species without subspeciation. We are unique among
earth's lifeforms in having so little differentiation. Traits like
skin color are highly variable within every group and are very minor
variations. They are not a reliable indicator of anything. So the
question you are really asking is: are there any descendants of these
particular kings who are otherwise from gene pools/ethnic groups
significantly different from those of ... who? Bronwen Edwards
Are you a descendant of James VI? I am trying to type up all the descendants
of George II in Burke's Guide to the Royal Family, and then I will follow
that with Daniel Willis' descendants of George I, but most of these are
title people. I thought Henry VII was the first king a non-titled person
could be descended from? As for the "race is a social construct" idea: this
is just a left-liberal rant. The Irish were white whether they were regarded
as members of elite groups or not. One can draw a parallel with the position
of eg Serb and Albanian refugees in Western Europe: they are regarded as
almost as undesirable as refugees from outside Europe, but are clearly
"white" all the same. The genome project has revealed the diversity of the
human race - read the works of Luigi Cavalli-Svorza on the subject. At the
extremes, there is a clear differentiation, eg geneticists would have no
trouble differentiating Scandinavian from Zulu DNA. At the edges of Europe,
the difference between France/Algeria, Greece/Turkey is much less distinct.
Bronwen, I make no apology for rejecting the concepts of "anti-racism",
"equality", "multi-culturalism" etc as specious nonsense. If you want to
educate yourself, read the works of Thomas Sowell. You could also try Issues
& Views at http://www.issues-views.com
-
David Webb
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
You are right!
"12-stringer" <12-stringer@d-12-20.org> wrote in message
news:Tqr5d.633728$Gx4.96383@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"12-stringer" <12-stringer@d-12-20.org> wrote in message
news:Tqr5d.633728$Gx4.96383@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pml5d.87748$U04.67232@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
No, I genuinely want to know. I watched Mel Gibson's Mutiny on the
Bounty
the other day, and realised that Mel, a descendant of Edward III, passed
on
his royal ancestry to many Polynesian descendants. I myself have black
3rd
cousins. Distant cousins of mine have married Iraqis, Cubans, Koreans
etc.
Spencer Hines, I assume you are a slave to political correctness.
Are you giving us a revelation about Mel Gibson's sex life, or are you
actually talking about Fletcher Christian, the character he portrayed in
the
movie?
Was Errol Flynn actually a descendant of Christian, or did he only play
him
in an Australian movie of the early 1930s?
RT
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.769 / Virus Database: 516 - Release Date: 9/24/04
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants
Is that a fact or a factoid?
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KQp5d.88$Xc6.2752@eagle.america.net...
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KQp5d.88$Xc6.2752@eagle.america.net...
Edward I for one.
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251756.71e09780@posting.google.com...
| I believe some genealogist who like to do "famous" people's ancestry
| did Colin Powell's (the U.S. Secretary of State) ancestry. He's of
| Jamaican ancestry partly, and partly Scottish and British. Does he
| have a royal ancestor? If so, who was it?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
In message of 26 Sep, "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
<smnip>
It interests me to find that the meaning of the word race has changed
over the last 100 years or so. I am finding more and more that
genealogists of late Victorian times, used the word "race" to mean
"extended family". Particularly one can find of a family that has died
out that the last member was called "the last of his race".
When did the change occur?
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
<smnip>
As for the "race is a social construct" idea: this
is just a left-liberal rant. The Irish were white whether they were regarded
as members of elite groups or not. One can draw a parallel with the position
of eg Serb and Albanian refugees in Western Europe: they are regarded as
almost as undesirable as refugees from outside Europe, but are clearly
"white" all the same.
It interests me to find that the meaning of the word race has changed
over the last 100 years or so. I am finding more and more that
genealogists of late Victorian times, used the word "race" to mean
"extended family". Particularly one can find of a family that has died
out that the last member was called "the last of his race".
When did the change occur?
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
David Webb wrote:
Very far from it - Queen Elizabeth II has two non-titled grandchildren.
Peter Stewart
I thought Henry VII was the first king a non-titled person
could be descended from?
Very far from it - Queen Elizabeth II has two non-titled grandchildren.
Peter Stewart
-
Francisco Antonio Doria
Re: Non-white royal descendants
This is so common around here... I am non white and
have lots of royal ancestries, noble ancestries, et
caterva...
fa
--- David Webb <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
escreveu:
_______________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger 6.0 - jogos, emoticons sonoros e muita diversão. Instale agora!
http://br.download.yahoo.com/messenger/
have lots of royal ancestries, noble ancestries, et
caterva...
fa
--- David Webb <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
escreveu:
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James
VI and I are white.
What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of
the blood royal? Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
_______________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger 6.0 - jogos, emoticons sonoros e muita diversão. Instale agora!
http://br.download.yahoo.com/messenger/
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants
You'll find on the Internet there is some doubt about the identity of the
governor of Jamaica with the Eyre Coot Mr Powell is descended from...
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KQp5d.88$Xc6.2752@eagle.america.net...
governor of Jamaica with the Eyre Coot Mr Powell is descended from...
"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KQp5d.88$Xc6.2752@eagle.america.net...
Edward I for one.
DSH
"Martin E. Hollick" <mhollick@mac.com> wrote in message
news:5d20e7f.0409251756.71e09780@posting.google.com...
| I believe some genealogist who like to do "famous" people's ancestry
| did Colin Powell's (the U.S. Secretary of State) ancestry. He's of
| Jamaican ancestry partly, and partly Scottish and British. Does he
| have a royal ancestor? If so, who was it?
|
|
| "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| > Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
| > What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood
royal? Are
| > there any known non-white royal descendants?
-
Ann Sharp
Re: Non-white royal descendants
David:
Ann:
Prince Joachim and Princess Alexandra of Denmark's children, Prince
Nikolai and Prince Felix?
L.P.H.,
Ann
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are white.
What about descendants of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal? Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
Ann:
Prince Joachim and Princess Alexandra of Denmark's children, Prince
Nikolai and Prince Felix?
L.P.H.,
Ann
-
Bronwen Edwards
Re: Non-white royal descendants
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
Please excuse me if this ends up being posted twice; I first posted a
response sometime yesterday but it has not appeared. So in case it
ended up whirling around in anonymous cyberspace, I will repeat
myself:
First, I am a "non-white" (or, obviously, "part-white") descendant of
Henry VII. In my earlier post I failed to note that you were speaking
of James VI and mis-read it as James IV.
Second, speaking as a social scientist, what do you mean by "white"?
This is a social construct, not a biological one, and has been used to
describe (or exclude) all sorts of groups. There is no such thing,
biologically, as racial differentiation among humans. If one were to
look for physical traits that reliably indicated some kind of racial
differentiation, "color" would be among the least reliable. Given
that, being a social construct does not mean that "race" or
"whiteness" are meaningless; on the contrary, these concepts clearly
have a great deal of power as widely accepted symbols of "people like
me" and "people like them". Just study how the Irish "became white" in
American history after they were persuaded (as a group, not every
individual) to abandon their abolitionist leanings and support
slavery. They were persuaded that as "other" as they were in American
society (including being called a separate race from, for example, the
English), there were others who were even more "other", whose
"difference" was more visible. The classification of human races by
skin color was a colonial invention initially. Before the colonial
days for English-speaking populations, people were known by nation,
tribe or region. The term "race" was used but very differently from
today - as in the "race" of women. So I presume that by "white" you
mean northern European-derived folks. Are Sicilians white? Arabs?
Ethiopians? Pakistanis? Etc. Just one more thing: I recall an African
American sociologist's experience in Japan. He was studying a rural
population in Japan that was off the beaten track in the 1960s. He was
probably the first person of African ancestry that the people had
seen. He found that a group of children would sneak up on him, wait
until he turned, then shriek and run away. He assumed, being American,
that it was his skin color that the children found "different". One
little kid finally screwed up his courage and stayed long enough to
pull his eyelid down to make a round eye before running off. In
contrast, "race" in Japan has nothing to do with Asian origin, but
with nationality and family origin. To our non-Japanese eyes, the
"untouchable" caste members look like any other Japanese people; to
the Japanese, these people are so "different" that they are
contaminants in society, like "untouchables" in any caste society.
Best, Bronwen
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are white.
What about descendnats of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal? Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
Please excuse me if this ends up being posted twice; I first posted a
response sometime yesterday but it has not appeared. So in case it
ended up whirling around in anonymous cyberspace, I will repeat
myself:
First, I am a "non-white" (or, obviously, "part-white") descendant of
Henry VII. In my earlier post I failed to note that you were speaking
of James VI and mis-read it as James IV.
Second, speaking as a social scientist, what do you mean by "white"?
This is a social construct, not a biological one, and has been used to
describe (or exclude) all sorts of groups. There is no such thing,
biologically, as racial differentiation among humans. If one were to
look for physical traits that reliably indicated some kind of racial
differentiation, "color" would be among the least reliable. Given
that, being a social construct does not mean that "race" or
"whiteness" are meaningless; on the contrary, these concepts clearly
have a great deal of power as widely accepted symbols of "people like
me" and "people like them". Just study how the Irish "became white" in
American history after they were persuaded (as a group, not every
individual) to abandon their abolitionist leanings and support
slavery. They were persuaded that as "other" as they were in American
society (including being called a separate race from, for example, the
English), there were others who were even more "other", whose
"difference" was more visible. The classification of human races by
skin color was a colonial invention initially. Before the colonial
days for English-speaking populations, people were known by nation,
tribe or region. The term "race" was used but very differently from
today - as in the "race" of women. So I presume that by "white" you
mean northern European-derived folks. Are Sicilians white? Arabs?
Ethiopians? Pakistanis? Etc. Just one more thing: I recall an African
American sociologist's experience in Japan. He was studying a rural
population in Japan that was off the beaten track in the 1960s. He was
probably the first person of African ancestry that the people had
seen. He found that a group of children would sneak up on him, wait
until he turned, then shriek and run away. He assumed, being American,
that it was his skin color that the children found "different". One
little kid finally screwed up his courage and stayed long enough to
pull his eyelid down to make a round eye before running off. In
contrast, "race" in Japan has nothing to do with Asian origin, but
with nationality and family origin. To our non-Japanese eyes, the
"untouchable" caste members look like any other Japanese people; to
the Japanese, these people are so "different" that they are
contaminants in society, like "untouchables" in any caste society.
Best, Bronwen
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants
"Ann Sharp" <axsc@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:6xL5d.20290$QJ3.2193@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
Er, no! Princess Alexandra was born in Hong Kong but is Caucasian, as were
her parents!
news:6xL5d.20290$QJ3.2193@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
David:
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are white.
What about descendants of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal?
Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
Ann:
Prince Joachim and Princess Alexandra of Denmark's children,
Prince
Nikolai and Prince Felix?
L.P.H.,
Ann
Er, no! Princess Alexandra was born in Hong Kong but is Caucasian, as were
her parents!
-
Andy.III
Re: Non-white royal descendants
Er, no! Princess Alexandra was born in Hong Kong but is Caucasian, as were
her parents!
It was my understanding that her paternal grandmother was Chinese- oramI wrong?
Andy.III
--
SHOW YOUR VOTE 2004
IF you support Kerry, please drive during the DAY with your headlights ON.
IF you support Bush, please drive at NIGHT with your headlights OFF.
Thank you for your participation.
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants
you may be right. I noticed both of her parents had European names, and she
looks more or less European. In this case, the princes are 1/8 non-European,
as is Iain Duncan Smith for example, who had a Japanese great-grandparent.
"Andy.III" <agh3rd@aol.com-Host> wrote in message
news:20040927045950.15036.00003998@mb-m02.aol.com...
looks more or less European. In this case, the princes are 1/8 non-European,
as is Iain Duncan Smith for example, who had a Japanese great-grandparent.
"Andy.III" <agh3rd@aol.com-Host> wrote in message
news:20040927045950.15036.00003998@mb-m02.aol.com...
Er, no! Princess Alexandra was born in Hong Kong but is Caucasian, as
were
her parents!
It was my understanding that her paternal grandmother was Chinese- oramI
wrong?
Andy.III
--
SHOW YOUR VOTE 2004
IF you support Kerry, please drive during the DAY with your headlights ON.
IF you support Bush, please drive at NIGHT with your headlights OFF.
Thank you for your participation.
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Non-white royal descendants
As far as I know she has Chinese ancestors.
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: Non-white royal descendants
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: Non-white royal descendants
"Ann Sharp" <axsc@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:6xL5d.20290$QJ3.2193@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
David:
Dear all, as far as I know, all descendants of James VI and I are
white.
What about descendants of Henry VII in Tudor Roll of the blood royal?
Are
there any known non-white royal descendants?
Ann:
Prince Joachim and Princess Alexandra of Denmark's children,
Prince
Nikolai and Prince Felix?
L.P.H.,
Ann
Er, no! Princess Alexandra was born in Hong Kong but is Caucasian, as were
her parents!
-
Bronwen Edwards
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<45v5d.89759$U04.27658@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
Are you a descendant of James VI? I am trying to type up all the
descendants
I initially mis-read your first post and thought you wrote "James IV".
I am not descended from James VI/I so far as I know. I am, however,
descended from Henry VII. As regards your views on race, where did you
get your degree in anthropology? Mine is from the University of
California. I just retired from teaching this stuff for more than 25
years. Re: Thomas Sowell, he is a dark-faced mouthpiece for the
far-toxic-right. You will find that the current state of the science
supports what I posted regardless of anyone's political opinions. The
genome project exposed our similarities not our differences. Bronwen
Are you a descendant of James VI? I am trying to type up all the
descendants
of George II in Burke's Guide to the Royal Family, and then I will follow
that with Daniel Willis' descendants of George I, but most of these are
title people. I thought Henry VII was the first king a non-titled person
could be descended from? As for the "race is a social construct" idea: this
is just a left-liberal rant. The Irish were white whether they were regarded
as members of elite groups or not. One can draw a parallel with the position
of eg Serb and Albanian refugees in Western Europe: they are regarded as
almost as undesirable as refugees from outside Europe, but are clearly
"white" all the same. The genome project has revealed the diversity of the
human race - read the works of Luigi Cavalli-Svorza on the subject. At the
extremes, there is a clear differentiation, eg geneticists would have no
trouble differentiating Scandinavian from Zulu DNA. At the edges of Europe,
the difference between France/Algeria, Greece/Turkey is much less distinct.
Bronwen, I make no apology for rejecting the concepts of "anti-racism",
"equality", "multi-culturalism" etc as specious nonsense. If you want to
educate yourself, read the works of Thomas Sowell. You could also try Issues
& Views at http://www.issues-views.com
I initially mis-read your first post and thought you wrote "James IV".
I am not descended from James VI/I so far as I know. I am, however,
descended from Henry VII. As regards your views on race, where did you
get your degree in anthropology? Mine is from the University of
California. I just retired from teaching this stuff for more than 25
years. Re: Thomas Sowell, he is a dark-faced mouthpiece for the
far-toxic-right. You will find that the current state of the science
supports what I posted regardless of anyone's political opinions. The
genome project exposed our similarities not our differences. Bronwen
-
Bronwen Edwards
Re: Non-White Royal Descendants
Oh I forgot one thing - we may be even more closely related than most.
My grandfather was a London-born Webb. Bronwen
My grandfather was a London-born Webb. Bronwen
-
marshall kirk
Re: Non-white royal descendants
Now that Bronwen and David have defined something close to the
opposite (and obviously irreconcilable) extremes of opinion on this
particular issue, I hope that others will refrain from arguing such an
OT and horribly inflammatory subject any further. (Here, anyway.)
Otherwise ... let the wild rumpus begin!
--mk, who, tho' blond and blue-eyed, is 1/32 black, with just a dash
of Amerindian
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<qGQ5d.94478$U04.62499@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
opposite (and obviously irreconcilable) extremes of opinion on this
particular issue, I hope that others will refrain from arguing such an
OT and horribly inflammatory subject any further. (Here, anyway.)
Otherwise ... let the wild rumpus begin!
--mk, who, tho' blond and blue-eyed, is 1/32 black, with just a dash
of Amerindian
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<qGQ5d.94478$U04.62499@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
Bronwen, your posting was highly ridiculous, as refuted in between your
comments below.
"Bronwen Edwards" <lostcooper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:54ca55f1.0409262256.246f8da9@posting.google.com...
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<u4e5d.108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
First, I am a "non-white" (or, obviously, "part-white") descendant of
Henry VII. In my earlier post I failed to note that you were speaking
of James VI and mis-read it as James IV.
I see, that pins down your descent much more exactly. If you are a
descendant of James IV and Henry VII, but not of James VI, it sounds
like you may be descended from one of James V's illegitimate sons.
Second, speaking as a social scientist, what do you mean by "white"?
Why can't you get a proper job? "Social sciences" are just chippy
left-wing theorising at public expense.
This is a social construct, not a biological one, and has been used to
describe (or exclude) all sorts of groups. There is no such thing,
biologically, as racial differentiation among humans.
I am afraid you are ill acquainted with the facts. You could see
http://www.isteve.com for articles by Steve Sailer, president of the Human
Biodiversity Institute. He has written a lot about racial differences in
intelligence that you may find interesting. DNA testing, as practised by
the genetic expert Luigi Cavalli-Svorza reveals differentiation between
human beings, although the differences may not be absolute. Eg a certain
haplotype may have a frequency of 30% in France and 70% in Algeria.
Obviously testing for the presence of such a DNA sequence cannot tell
you for sure whether the individual is French or Algerian. This is
because at the edges of the Caucasian world, we shade off genetically
into North Africa and the Middle East with no clear break (Steve Sailer
compares this to mountain vs. plain; just because mountains often ease
off gradually, via hill regions, until plain regions are reached,
doesn't mean that mountains don't exist.) At the extremes, eg Iceland
vs. Zululand, no geneticist is going to have any trouble distinguishing
the DNAs. But the difference between Greece and Turkey is very slight,
and should be viewed as more cultural than racial etc.
If one were to
look for physical traits that reliably indicated some kind of racial
differentiation, "color" would be among the least reliable.
You have shot your own fox. You have admitted in the above sentence that
some groups that look similar - I would cite Aborigines in Australia
and, say, black Africans, can be genetically dissimilar. Because
Aborigines were among the first humans to migrate from Africa,
travelling a very long way to Australia, they are among the furthest
genetically from black Africans. But to admit that is to admit that
"race" is not all about looks, or colour; it is about genetic
differences among people who are more or less distantly related to one
another. By saying that colour is among the "least reliable", your
paragraph admits that there is some way of checking this, and that way
is by means of DNA testing, which can show greater or smaller genetic
distances between human beings. Of course we all share 98.4% of our DNA
with chimpanzees. Cavalli Svorza shows that by the same method that
shows we are 1.6% distinct from chimpanzees it can be calculated that
Englishmen are about 0.0005% distinct from Danes (I quote the figure
from memory - I may have added a nought - please see his books), whereas
Englishmen are 0.16% distinct from Nigerians.
Given
that, being a social construct
You assume as axiomatic what you have to prove.
does not mean that "race" or
"whiteness" are meaningless; on the contrary, these concepts clearly
have a great deal of power as widely accepted symbols of "people like
me" and "people like them". Just study how the Irish "became white" in
American history after they were persuaded (as a group, not every
individual) to abandon their abolitionist leanings and support
slavery.
They were white all along. It was probably contact with blacks that
convinced them that slavery and later segregation was based on a real
cultural difference between people of different races and the need to
restrain a group of people who might otherwise wreck the social order
and commit crimes on a grand scale. Most "African American" men are
likely to go to jail at one time or another in their lives: that is a
fact that refutes your civil rights nonsense. Of course society can only
exist on the basis that we accept other members of the nation as "people
like us". Nationhood is shared identity. In terms of appearance, IQ
levels and behaviour, the Irish were always likely to be assimilated
eventually into the American nation. The problem with the blacks, having
brought them over to America, was what to do with them following
abolition as they clearly have a separate shared identity. Abraham
Lincoln laid the facts of the matter on the line when he spoke to some
free blacks saying:
"Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives. Your race are
suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people.
But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being
placed on an equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of
the advantages which the other race enjoy. The aspiration of men is to
enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent, not
a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man of ours. Go
where you are treated the best, and the ban is still upon you.
I do not propose to discuss this, but to present it as a fact with which
we have to deal. I cannot alter it if I would. It is a fact, about which
we all think and feel alike, I and you. We look to our condition, owing
to the existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount
to you the effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of
Slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race. See
our present condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men
cutting one another's throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and
then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us
there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not
care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the
institution of Slavery and the colored race as a basis, the war could
not have an existence."
He went on to ask them to do the decent thing and move to Liberia.
They were persuaded that as "other" as they were in American
society (including being called a separate race from, for example, the
English), there were others who were even more "other", whose
"difference" was more visible. The classification of human races by
skin color was a colonial invention initially. Before the colonial
days for English-speaking populations, people were known by nation,
tribe or region.
We noticed when we conquered the world that all non-white races were
less developed than we were. Writing, mathematics, science etc were all
unknown to virtually the whole of the African continent.
The term "race" was used but very differently from
today - as in the "race" of women. So I presume that by "white" you
mean northern European-derived folks. Are Sicilians white? Arabs?
Ethiopians? Pakistanis?
Sicilians are; the others most definitely are not.
Etc. Just one more thing: I recall an African
American sociologist's experience in Japan. He was studying a rural
population in Japan that was off the beaten track in the 1960s. He was
probably the first person of African ancestry that the people had
seen. He found that a group of children would sneak up on him, wait
until he turned, then shriek and run away. He assumed, being American,
that it was his skin color that the children found "different". One
little kid finally screwed up his courage and stayed long enough to
pull his eyelid down to make a round eye before running off. In
contrast, "race" in Japan has nothing to do with Asian origin, but
with nationality and family origin. To our non-Japanese eyes, the
"untouchable" caste members look like any other Japanese people; to
the Japanese, these people are so "different" that they are
contaminants in society, like "untouchables" in any caste society.
Best, Bronwen
So what? to the whole of the last para. Bronwen, I suggest you read
Thomas Sowell's book The Vision of the Anointed, where he castigates
liberals. Try reading http://www.issues-views.com, an online magazine produced
by black Americans who do not subscribe to your liberal fantasies. DJW.
--
-
Gjest
Re: Non-white royal descendants
In a message dated 9/27/2004 11:46:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
WJhonson@aol.com writes:
In a message dated 9/27/2004 2:04:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk writes:
No this is not a fact.
Will
People, people, people. This discussion has nothing to do with Medieval
genealogy. This thread has disintegrated into a POLITICAL CORRECT/INCORRECT
area, and opinions only are being voiced. Neither of the premises can be proven
to the satisfaction of the other side.. Let's either take it off list or go
to discussion elsewhere.
If it continues I WILL get involved. Does that not frighten you? It should.
Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
WJhonson@aol.com writes:
In a message dated 9/27/2004 2:04:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk writes:
Most "African American" men are likely to go to jail at one time or
another
in their lives: that is a fact that refutes your civil rights nonsense.
No this is not a fact.
Will
People, people, people. This discussion has nothing to do with Medieval
genealogy. This thread has disintegrated into a POLITICAL CORRECT/INCORRECT
area, and opinions only are being voiced. Neither of the premises can be proven
to the satisfaction of the other side.. Let's either take it off list or go
to discussion elsewhere.
If it continues I WILL get involved. Does that not frighten you? It should.
Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants
You are right, the % of African American males who will go to prison some
time in their life is not, as I thought above 50%. It is 28.5% (see
http://www.jointcenter.org/DB/factsheet ... nalsys.htm).
time in their life is not, as I thought above 50%. It is 28.5% (see
http://www.jointcenter.org/DB/factsheet ... nalsys.htm).
No this is not a fact.
Will
People, people, people. This discussion has nothing to do with Medieval
genealogy. This thread has disintegrated into a POLITICAL
CORRECT/INCORRECT
area, and opinions only are being voiced. Neither of the premises can be
proven
to the satisfaction of the other side.. Let's either take it off list or
go
to discussion elsewhere.
If it continues I WILL get involved. Does that not frighten you? It
should.
Gordon Hale
Grand Prairie, Texas
-
Merilyn Pedrick
Re: Non-white royal descendants
David
Please stop writing this drivel - you sound like a Nazi.
Merilyn Pedrick
Mylor, South Australia
-------Original Message-------
From: David Webb
Date: 09/27/04 18:35:12
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Non-white royal descendants
Bronwen, your posting was highly ridiculous, as refuted in between your
comments below.
"Bronwen Edwards" <lostcooper@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:54ca55f1
0409262256.246f8da9@posting.google.com...
I see, that pins down your descent much more exactly. If you are a
descendant of James IV and Henry VII, but not of James VI, it sounds like
you may be descended from one of James V's illegitimate sons.
Why can't you get a proper job? "Social sciences" are just chippy left-wing
theorising at public expense.
I am afraid you are ill acquainted with the facts. You could see http://www.isteve
com for articles by Steve Sailer, president of the Human Biodiversity
Institute. He has written a lot about racial differences in intelligence
that you may find interesting. DNA testing, as practised by the genetic
expert Luigi Cavalli-Svorza reveals differentiation between human beings,
although the differences may not be absolute. Eg a certain haplotype may
have a frequency of 30% in France and 70% in Algeria. Obviously testing for
the presence of such a DNA sequence cannot tell you for sure whether the
individual is French or Algerian. This is because at the edges of the
Caucasian world, we shade off genetically into North Africa and the Middle
East with no clear break (Steve Sailer compares this to mountain vs. plain;
just because mountains often ease off gradually, via hill regions, until
plain regions are reached, doesn't mean that mountains don't exist.) At the
extremes, eg Iceland vs. Zululan!
d, no geneticist is going to have any trouble distinguishing the DNAs. But
the difference between Greece and Turkey is very slight, and should be
viewed as more cultural than racial etc.
If one were to
You have shot your own fox. You have admitted in the above sentence that
some groups that look similar - I would cite Aborigines in Australia and,
say, black Africans, can be genetically dissimilar. Because Aborigines were
among the first humans to migrate from Africa, travelling a very long way to
Australia, they are among the furthest genetically from black Africans. But
to admit that is to admit that "race" is not all about looks, or colour; it
is about genetic differences among people who are more or less distantly
related to one another. By saying that colour is among the "least reliable",
your paragraph admits that there is some way of checking this, and that way
is by means of DNA testing, which can show greater or smaller genetic
distances between human beings. Of course we all share 98.4% of our DNA with
chimpanzees. Cavalli Svorza shows that by the same method that shows we are
1.6% distinct from chimpanzees it can be calculated that Englishmen are
about 0.0005% di!
stinct from Danes (I quote the figure from memory - I may have added a
nought - please see his books), whereas Englishmen are 0.16% distinct from
Nigerians.
Given
You assume as axiomatic what you have to prove.
They were white all along. It was probably contact with blacks that
convinced them that slavery and later segregation was based on a real
cultural difference between people of different races and the need to
restrain a group of people who might otherwise wreck the social order and
commit crimes on a grand scale. Most "African American" men are likely to go
to jail at one time or another in their lives: that is a fact that refutes
your civil rights nonsense. Of course society can only exist on the basis
that we accept other members of the nation as "people like us". Nationhood
is shared identity. In terms of appearance, IQ levels and behaviour, the
Irish were always likely to be assimilated eventually into the American
nation. The problem with the blacks, having brought them over to America,
was what to do with them following abolition as they clearly have a separate
shared identity. Abraham Lincoln laid the facts of the matter on the line
when he spoke to some free blacks sa!
ying:
"Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives. Your race are suffering
in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when
you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an
equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of the advantages
which the other race enjoy. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with
the best when free, but on this broad continent, not a single man of your
race is made the equal of a single man of ours. Go where you are treated the
best, and the ban is still upon you.
I do not propose to discuss this, but to present it as a fact with which we
have to deal. I cannot alter it if I would. It is a fact, about which we all
think and feel alike, I and you. We look to our condition, owing to the
existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the
effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of Slavery. I believe
in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present
condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men cutting one another
s throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we
know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war,
although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the
other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of Slavery and the
colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence."
He went on to ask them to do the decent thing and move to Liberia.
We noticed when we conquered the world that all non-white races were less
developed than we were. Writing, mathematics, science etc were all unknown
to virtually the whole of the African continent.
Sicilians are; the others most definitely are not.
So what? to the whole of the last para. Bronwen, I suggest you read Thomas
Sowell's book The Vision of the Anointed, where he castigates liberals. Try
reading http://www.issues-views.com, an online magazine produced by black Americans
who do not subscribe to your liberal fantasies. DJW.
Please stop writing this drivel - you sound like a Nazi.
Merilyn Pedrick
Mylor, South Australia
-------Original Message-------
From: David Webb
Date: 09/27/04 18:35:12
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Non-white royal descendants
Bronwen, your posting was highly ridiculous, as refuted in between your
comments below.
"Bronwen Edwards" <lostcooper@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:54ca55f1
0409262256.246f8da9@posting.google.com...
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<u4e5d
108429$hZ3.80726@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
First, I am a "non-white" (or, obviously, "part-white") descendant of
Henry VII. In my earlier post I failed to note that you were speaking
of James VI and mis-read it as James IV.
I see, that pins down your descent much more exactly. If you are a
descendant of James IV and Henry VII, but not of James VI, it sounds like
you may be descended from one of James V's illegitimate sons.
Second, speaking as a social scientist, what do you mean by "white"?
Why can't you get a proper job? "Social sciences" are just chippy left-wing
theorising at public expense.
This is a social construct, not a biological one, and has been used to
describe (or exclude) all sorts of groups. There is no such thing,
biologically, as racial differentiation among humans.
I am afraid you are ill acquainted with the facts. You could see http://www.isteve
com for articles by Steve Sailer, president of the Human Biodiversity
Institute. He has written a lot about racial differences in intelligence
that you may find interesting. DNA testing, as practised by the genetic
expert Luigi Cavalli-Svorza reveals differentiation between human beings,
although the differences may not be absolute. Eg a certain haplotype may
have a frequency of 30% in France and 70% in Algeria. Obviously testing for
the presence of such a DNA sequence cannot tell you for sure whether the
individual is French or Algerian. This is because at the edges of the
Caucasian world, we shade off genetically into North Africa and the Middle
East with no clear break (Steve Sailer compares this to mountain vs. plain;
just because mountains often ease off gradually, via hill regions, until
plain regions are reached, doesn't mean that mountains don't exist.) At the
extremes, eg Iceland vs. Zululan!
d, no geneticist is going to have any trouble distinguishing the DNAs. But
the difference between Greece and Turkey is very slight, and should be
viewed as more cultural than racial etc.
If one were to
look for physical traits that reliably indicated some kind of racial
differentiation, "color" would be among the least reliable.
You have shot your own fox. You have admitted in the above sentence that
some groups that look similar - I would cite Aborigines in Australia and,
say, black Africans, can be genetically dissimilar. Because Aborigines were
among the first humans to migrate from Africa, travelling a very long way to
Australia, they are among the furthest genetically from black Africans. But
to admit that is to admit that "race" is not all about looks, or colour; it
is about genetic differences among people who are more or less distantly
related to one another. By saying that colour is among the "least reliable",
your paragraph admits that there is some way of checking this, and that way
is by means of DNA testing, which can show greater or smaller genetic
distances between human beings. Of course we all share 98.4% of our DNA with
chimpanzees. Cavalli Svorza shows that by the same method that shows we are
1.6% distinct from chimpanzees it can be calculated that Englishmen are
about 0.0005% di!
stinct from Danes (I quote the figure from memory - I may have added a
nought - please see his books), whereas Englishmen are 0.16% distinct from
Nigerians.
Given
that, being a social construct
You assume as axiomatic what you have to prove.
does not mean that "race" or
"whiteness" are meaningless; on the contrary, these concepts clearly
have a great deal of power as widely accepted symbols of "people like
me" and "people like them". Just study how the Irish "became white" in
American history after they were persuaded (as a group, not every
individual) to abandon their abolitionist leanings and support
slavery.
They were white all along. It was probably contact with blacks that
convinced them that slavery and later segregation was based on a real
cultural difference between people of different races and the need to
restrain a group of people who might otherwise wreck the social order and
commit crimes on a grand scale. Most "African American" men are likely to go
to jail at one time or another in their lives: that is a fact that refutes
your civil rights nonsense. Of course society can only exist on the basis
that we accept other members of the nation as "people like us". Nationhood
is shared identity. In terms of appearance, IQ levels and behaviour, the
Irish were always likely to be assimilated eventually into the American
nation. The problem with the blacks, having brought them over to America,
was what to do with them following abolition as they clearly have a separate
shared identity. Abraham Lincoln laid the facts of the matter on the line
when he spoke to some free blacks sa!
ying:
"Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives. Your race are suffering
in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when
you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an
equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of the advantages
which the other race enjoy. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with
the best when free, but on this broad continent, not a single man of your
race is made the equal of a single man of ours. Go where you are treated the
best, and the ban is still upon you.
I do not propose to discuss this, but to present it as a fact with which we
have to deal. I cannot alter it if I would. It is a fact, about which we all
think and feel alike, I and you. We look to our condition, owing to the
existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the
effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of Slavery. I believe
in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present
condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men cutting one another
s throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we
know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war,
although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the
other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of Slavery and the
colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence."
He went on to ask them to do the decent thing and move to Liberia.
They were persuaded that as "other" as they were in American
society (including being called a separate race from, for example, the
English), there were others who were even more "other", whose
"difference" was more visible. The classification of human races by
skin color was a colonial invention initially. Before the colonial
days for English-speaking populations, people were known by nation,
tribe or region.
We noticed when we conquered the world that all non-white races were less
developed than we were. Writing, mathematics, science etc were all unknown
to virtually the whole of the African continent.
The term "race" was used but very differently from
today - as in the "race" of women. So I presume that by "white" you
mean northern European-derived folks. Are Sicilians white? Arabs?
Ethiopians? Pakistanis?
Sicilians are; the others most definitely are not.
Etc. Just one more thing: I recall an African
American sociologist's experience in Japan. He was studying a rural
population in Japan that was off the beaten track in the 1960s. He was
probably the first person of African ancestry that the people had
seen. He found that a group of children would sneak up on him, wait
until he turned, then shriek and run away. He assumed, being American,
that it was his skin color that the children found "different". One
little kid finally screwed up his courage and stayed long enough to
pull his eyelid down to make a round eye before running off. In
contrast, "race" in Japan has nothing to do with Asian origin, but
with nationality and family origin. To our non-Japanese eyes, the
"untouchable" caste members look like any other Japanese people; to
the Japanese, these people are so "different" that they are
contaminants in society, like "untouchables" in any caste society.
Best, Bronwen
So what? to the whole of the last para. Bronwen, I suggest you read Thomas
Sowell's book The Vision of the Anointed, where he castigates liberals. Try
reading http://www.issues-views.com, an online magazine produced by black Americans
who do not subscribe to your liberal fantasies. DJW.
-
Bronwen Edwards
Re: Non-white royal descendants
I was going to answer you in such a way as to expose how cartoonish
your assertions are but you have managed to caricature your
politico-type with great precision. No political cartoonist could have
characterized the wild-eyed ranting racist idiot so well as you. With
this I will stop responding to this thread since it is obvious that
you are not interested in facts but only in trying to support your
ridiculous but dangerous views.
your assertions are but you have managed to caricature your
politico-type with great precision. No political cartoonist could have
characterized the wild-eyed ranting racist idiot so well as you. With
this I will stop responding to this thread since it is obvious that
you are not interested in facts but only in trying to support your
ridiculous but dangerous views.
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants
You're a bad loser in debate.
"Bronwen Edwards" <lostcooper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:54ca55f1.0409272127.6e81d332@posting.google.com...
"Bronwen Edwards" <lostcooper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:54ca55f1.0409272127.6e81d332@posting.google.com...
I was going to answer you in such a way as to expose how cartoonish
your assertions are but you have managed to caricature your
politico-type with great precision. No political cartoonist could have
characterized the wild-eyed ranting racist idiot so well as you. With
this I will stop responding to this thread since it is obvious that
you are not interested in facts but only in trying to support your
ridiculous but dangerous views.
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
Dear all,
I have been contacted by so many people off-list with encouraging comments
on my arguments in this thread. For this reason, I have decided to email a
couple of good links:
http://www.vdare.com Virginia Dare was the first American. This is the best
anti-immigration site, regularly carrying articles by Sam Francis (sacked
from the Washington Post for his race realist articles), Steve Sailer
(President of the Human Biodiversity Institute) and Peter Brimelow (British
man with US citizenship, who authored Alien Nation).
http://www.isteve.com Steve Sailer's site
http://www.cofcc.org Council of Conservative Citizens, the true voice of the
American Right
http://www.amconmag.com The American Conservative, a wonderful fortnightly mag
edited by Patrick J Buchanan
http://www.issues-views.com An interesting magazine by conservative blacks in
America, arguing against racial preferences, arguing that US blacks
progressed more quickly under segregation than they did later on, and
arguing that immigration is the suicide of the West. I like the article "A
country should do its own work" at
http://www.issues-views.com/index.php/s ... ticle/2084 It is always
good to point out to liberals that even conservative blacks realise
multiculturalism and anti racism is bunkum.
For me genealogy and an interest in medieval history is a tribute to my
nation and its history. Anti-immigration and genealogy both dovetail for me
for they are both conservative interests. Just think of Charles Martel,
grandfather of Charlemagne, who stopped the Islamic invasion of Europe in
732 - he could have told George W Bush for nothing that the best way to
protect homeland security is not to let the Muslims into your nation in the
first place! It's the immigration, stupid!
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hy76d.150683$hZ3.58418@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
I have been contacted by so many people off-list with encouraging comments
on my arguments in this thread. For this reason, I have decided to email a
couple of good links:
http://www.vdare.com Virginia Dare was the first American. This is the best
anti-immigration site, regularly carrying articles by Sam Francis (sacked
from the Washington Post for his race realist articles), Steve Sailer
(President of the Human Biodiversity Institute) and Peter Brimelow (British
man with US citizenship, who authored Alien Nation).
http://www.isteve.com Steve Sailer's site
http://www.cofcc.org Council of Conservative Citizens, the true voice of the
American Right
http://www.amconmag.com The American Conservative, a wonderful fortnightly mag
edited by Patrick J Buchanan
http://www.issues-views.com An interesting magazine by conservative blacks in
America, arguing against racial preferences, arguing that US blacks
progressed more quickly under segregation than they did later on, and
arguing that immigration is the suicide of the West. I like the article "A
country should do its own work" at
http://www.issues-views.com/index.php/s ... ticle/2084 It is always
good to point out to liberals that even conservative blacks realise
multiculturalism and anti racism is bunkum.
For me genealogy and an interest in medieval history is a tribute to my
nation and its history. Anti-immigration and genealogy both dovetail for me
for they are both conservative interests. Just think of Charles Martel,
grandfather of Charlemagne, who stopped the Islamic invasion of Europe in
732 - he could have told George W Bush for nothing that the best way to
protect homeland security is not to let the Muslims into your nation in the
first place! It's the immigration, stupid!
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hy76d.150683$hZ3.58418@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
You're a bad loser in debate.
"Bronwen Edwards" <lostcooper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:54ca55f1.0409272127.6e81d332@posting.google.com...
I was going to answer you in such a way as to expose how cartoonish
your assertions are but you have managed to caricature your
politico-type with great precision. No political cartoonist could have
characterized the wild-eyed ranting racist idiot so well as you. With
this I will stop responding to this thread since it is obvious that
you are not interested in facts but only in trying to support your
ridiculous but dangerous views.
-
Nathaniel Taylor
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
In article <Lqm6d.155753$hZ3.139949@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I feel a song coming on:
http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk/poetry/in ... urkers.htm
<...>
Wait: you left out the holocaust denial sites.
It is disappointing to see this association (or perhaps more fully, the
associations of genealogy with white supremacism, apartheid, and fear of
miscegenation) in the mind of a poster to this list. These associations
are precisely what gave genealogy a bad name in the United States in the
half century from the founding of the DAR down to World War II.
Proponents of genealogy as a legitimate discipline have attempted for
decades to rescue the field from this mire.
Nat Taylor
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I have been contacted by so many people off-list with encouraging comments
on my arguments in this thread.
I feel a song coming on:
http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk/poetry/in ... urkers.htm
For this reason, I have decided to email a
couple of good links:
<...>
Wait: you left out the holocaust denial sites.
Anti-immigration and genealogy both dovetail for me ...
It is disappointing to see this association (or perhaps more fully, the
associations of genealogy with white supremacism, apartheid, and fear of
miscegenation) in the mind of a poster to this list. These associations
are precisely what gave genealogy a bad name in the United States in the
half century from the founding of the DAR down to World War II.
Proponents of genealogy as a legitimate discipline have attempted for
decades to rescue the field from this mire.
Nat Taylor
-
Paulo Gomes Jardim
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 23:26:35 GMT, David Webb <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
[..]
If I well recall he associated himself with some Muslim chieftains at the
time, while fighting others.
It was all about power and land, not about religion.
--
" Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." --
Horacio
wrote:
[..]
for they are both conservative interests. Just think of Charles Martel,
grandfather of Charlemagne, who stopped the Islamic invasion of Europe in
732 - he could have told George W Bush for nothing that the best way to
If I well recall he associated himself with some Muslim chieftains at the
time, while fighting others.
It was all about power and land, not about religion.
--
" Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." --
Horacio
-
David Webb
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
Classic playing one off against the other. As the Chinese say, using
barbarians to fight barbarians.
"Paulo Gomes Jardim" <darwin+usenet@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:opsf2pkidrurn6af@news.individual.net...
barbarians to fight barbarians.
"Paulo Gomes Jardim" <darwin+usenet@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:opsf2pkidrurn6af@news.individual.net...
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 23:26:35 GMT, David Webb <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
[..]
for they are both conservative interests. Just think of Charles Martel,
grandfather of Charlemagne, who stopped the Islamic invasion of Europe
in
732 - he could have told George W Bush for nothing that the best way to
If I well recall he associated himself with some Muslim chieftains at the
time, while fighting others.
It was all about power and land, not about religion.
--
" Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." --
Horacio
-
Matthew Rockefeller
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
Excuse me for being totally off-topic and pardon me if I offend
anyone.
What gives someone with a British name more right to be in the USA
than someone named Muhammad? You've got to get along.
Race realisism? Now that's the nicest way I've ever seen racism put.
Is this a joke? Please, please, tell me this a joke. It's such
thinking that has the world in the shape it is in today. Black
conservatives? You could probably name them all by name, cause there
isn't many of them. George Bush's loyal followers are filled with
undereducated, uncouthed, would be or are KKK belonging, Bible
thumping people who preach of freedom but have no grasp of the meaning
of the word. Freedom, freedom, freedom! That's all we here, but what
freedom? The freedom to have your bags checked? The freedom to be
constantly on camera and under surveilance like your criminal? The
freedom to have your bank account monitored? The freedom to blindly
follow Der Fuehrer and his brand of faith and reasoning? Your
president has the let terrorists win, because he is chipping away at
the freedom. And then you call our truly elected president (yes, folks
Al Gore had more votes) crazy when he speaks the truth. It's a shame
I'm not going to the polls to vote for Howard Dean, because he would
have got back the respect this country once had among the civilized
world. IT DOES MATTER TO ME THAT AMERICA IS RESPECTED IN THE WORLD!
And it should to you to.
I'd really hate to think my ancestor Charles Martel was as
narrow-minded as some folks today, but the truth is people were less
englightened then than now. But like Paulo said it was about power and
land, not religion.
Speaking of ancestors, our American ancestors fought for religious
freedom from the Church of England. Now why in the world would they
want us to discrimate against Muslims or people of any other faiths? I
don't want George Bush for king or his religion for a state religion,
thank you very much, and George Washington wouldn't have wanted it
either.
Matthew
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<Lqm6d.155753$hZ3.139949@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
anyone.
What gives someone with a British name more right to be in the USA
than someone named Muhammad? You've got to get along.
Race realisism? Now that's the nicest way I've ever seen racism put.
Is this a joke? Please, please, tell me this a joke. It's such
thinking that has the world in the shape it is in today. Black
conservatives? You could probably name them all by name, cause there
isn't many of them. George Bush's loyal followers are filled with
undereducated, uncouthed, would be or are KKK belonging, Bible
thumping people who preach of freedom but have no grasp of the meaning
of the word. Freedom, freedom, freedom! That's all we here, but what
freedom? The freedom to have your bags checked? The freedom to be
constantly on camera and under surveilance like your criminal? The
freedom to have your bank account monitored? The freedom to blindly
follow Der Fuehrer and his brand of faith and reasoning? Your
president has the let terrorists win, because he is chipping away at
the freedom. And then you call our truly elected president (yes, folks
Al Gore had more votes) crazy when he speaks the truth. It's a shame
I'm not going to the polls to vote for Howard Dean, because he would
have got back the respect this country once had among the civilized
world. IT DOES MATTER TO ME THAT AMERICA IS RESPECTED IN THE WORLD!
And it should to you to.
I'd really hate to think my ancestor Charles Martel was as
narrow-minded as some folks today, but the truth is people were less
englightened then than now. But like Paulo said it was about power and
land, not religion.
Speaking of ancestors, our American ancestors fought for religious
freedom from the Church of England. Now why in the world would they
want us to discrimate against Muslims or people of any other faiths? I
don't want George Bush for king or his religion for a state religion,
thank you very much, and George Washington wouldn't have wanted it
either.
Matthew
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<Lqm6d.155753$hZ3.139949@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
Dear all,
I have been contacted by so many people off-list with encouraging comments
on my arguments in this thread. For this reason, I have decided to email a
couple of good links:
http://www.vdare.com Virginia Dare was the first American. This is the best
anti-immigration site, regularly carrying articles by Sam Francis (sacked
from the Washington Post for his race realist articles), Steve Sailer
(President of the Human Biodiversity Institute) and Peter Brimelow (British
man with US citizenship, who authored Alien Nation).
http://www.isteve.com Steve Sailer's site
http://www.cofcc.org Council of Conservative Citizens, the true voice of the
American Right
http://www.amconmag.com The American Conservative, a wonderful fortnightly mag
edited by Patrick J Buchanan
http://www.issues-views.com An interesting magazine by conservative blacks in
America, arguing against racial preferences, arguing that US blacks
progressed more quickly under segregation than they did later on, and
arguing that immigration is the suicide of the West. I like the article "A
country should do its own work" at
http://www.issues-views.com/index.php/s ... ticle/2084 It is always
good to point out to liberals that even conservative blacks realise
multiculturalism and anti racism is bunkum.
For me genealogy and an interest in medieval history is a tribute to my
nation and its history. Anti-immigration and genealogy both dovetail for me
for they are both conservative interests. Just think of Charles Martel,
grandfather of Charlemagne, who stopped the Islamic invasion of Europe in
732 - he could have told George W Bush for nothing that the best way to
protect homeland security is not to let the Muslims into your nation in the
first place! It's the immigration, stupid!
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hy76d.150683$hZ3.58418@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
You're a bad loser in debate.
"Bronwen Edwards" <lostcooper@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:54ca55f1.0409272127.6e81d332@posting.google.com...
I was going to answer you in such a way as to expose how cartoonish
your assertions are but you have managed to caricature your
politico-type with great precision. No political cartoonist could have
characterized the wild-eyed ranting racist idiot so well as you. With
this I will stop responding to this thread since it is obvious that
you are not interested in facts but only in trying to support your
ridiculous but dangerous views.
-
Bronwen Edwards
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<Lqm6d.155753$hZ3.139949@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
Cheap lie in order to preach his political agenda. Rubbish. If the
above statement is true, where are these courageous souls? We know
what's coming, don't we? Eugenics, camps, and continuing historical
revisionism designed to further his campaign of hate. Maybe it was the
toilet training. In regard to Virginia Dare, she is thought to have
been the first *English* person born in the Americas, not the first
"American". There had already been a number of Spanish and others.
And, of course, there's that problematical word "first". As to Charles
Martel and his immediate descendants, we see the formation of client
states, not a system of racial separatism. What medieval conqueror
worth his salt was concerned with "race" as we (unscientifically) use
the term today? I wonder if David is related to the Webbs in my family
who, I am discovering, were probably Sephardic Jews living in England?
My, my. Bronwen
Dear all,
I have been contacted by so many people off-list with encouraging comments
on my arguments in this thread.
Cheap lie in order to preach his political agenda. Rubbish. If the
above statement is true, where are these courageous souls? We know
what's coming, don't we? Eugenics, camps, and continuing historical
revisionism designed to further his campaign of hate. Maybe it was the
toilet training. In regard to Virginia Dare, she is thought to have
been the first *English* person born in the Americas, not the first
"American". There had already been a number of Spanish and others.
And, of course, there's that problematical word "first". As to Charles
Martel and his immediate descendants, we see the formation of client
states, not a system of racial separatism. What medieval conqueror
worth his salt was concerned with "race" as we (unscientifically) use
the term today? I wonder if David is related to the Webbs in my family
who, I am discovering, were probably Sephardic Jews living in England?
My, my. Bronwen
-
Paulo Gomes Jardim
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 22:08:06 GMT, David Webb <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
How do you think the great Emirate, later Caliphate of Cordoba replaced so
easily the Wisigoth Kingdom in Hispania?
--
" Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." --
Horacio
wrote:
Classic playing one off against the other. As the Chinese say, using
barbarians to fight barbarians.
How do you think the great Emirate, later Caliphate of Cordoba replaced so
easily the Wisigoth Kingdom in Hispania?
--
" Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." --
Horacio
-
marshall kirk
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
As I've had occasion to imply before, a smattering of people seem to
be attracted to genealogy for reasons I find deeply distasteful. I
don't doubt that Mr. Webb has received "encouraging comments" --
judging from my browsing, there are a lot of people out there who
espouse much the same views. (Which doesn't give them -- the views,
or for that matter the people who espouse them! -- any sensible
*raison d'etre*.)
Nathaniel Taylor <nathanieltaylor@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<nathanieltaylor-8D635C.21045028092004@news6.east.earthlink.net>...
be attracted to genealogy for reasons I find deeply distasteful. I
don't doubt that Mr. Webb has received "encouraging comments" --
judging from my browsing, there are a lot of people out there who
espouse much the same views. (Which doesn't give them -- the views,
or for that matter the people who espouse them! -- any sensible
*raison d'etre*.)
Nathaniel Taylor <nathanieltaylor@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<nathanieltaylor-8D635C.21045028092004@news6.east.earthlink.net>...
In article <Lqm6d.155753$hZ3.139949@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
"David Webb" <djwebb2002@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I have been contacted by so many people off-list with encouraging comments
on my arguments in this thread.
I feel a song coming on:
http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk/poetry/in ... urkers.htm
For this reason, I have decided to email a
couple of good links:
...
Wait: you left out the holocaust denial sites.
Anti-immigration and genealogy both dovetail for me ...
It is disappointing to see this association (or perhaps more fully, the
associations of genealogy with white supremacism, apartheid, and fear of
miscegenation) in the mind of a poster to this list. These associations
are precisely what gave genealogy a bad name in the United States in the
half century from the founding of the DAR down to World War II.
Proponents of genealogy as a legitimate discipline have attempted for
decades to rescue the field from this mire.
Nat Taylor
-
Dee
Re: Non-white royal descendants - fast becoming OT
My philosophy teacher could not understand why i would not watch the debates
to see who to vote for. i told him my mind was made up at the last election
fiasco. that no matter who ran against bush that is who i was voting for
and nothing would change my mind. he just didn't understand when i told him
i hated lying religiogus fantics who had to have there brother fix the
election for them. and that further more i was deeply ashamed to be his 9th
cousin and that i had put him on my genealogy tree in very very small
letters. and that most of my family felt the same way. Sleepy Jag
to see who to vote for. i told him my mind was made up at the last election
fiasco. that no matter who ran against bush that is who i was voting for
and nothing would change my mind. he just didn't understand when i told him
i hated lying religiogus fantics who had to have there brother fix the
election for them. and that further more i was deeply ashamed to be his 9th
cousin and that i had put him on my genealogy tree in very very small
letters. and that most of my family felt the same way. Sleepy Jag