Moorish Kings of Europe: King Charles Stuart II – The Black Boy King of England 1630 – 1685 – by – Oguejiofo Annu

Spread the love
  • 782
    Shares

Charles Stuart II the black boy
Merry King Charles Stuart II: The Black King of England – Oguejiofo Annu

The word Stuart comes from the old nordish root Svart which means black. Stuart is the same word as Swarthy, which means black in old English. [Others claim its root origin is Steward]. However that might be, this is not the crux of the story here. Our story is about the suppressed history of the Black and Brown Europeans including several kings that had once called Europe their original home.

There was once a Stuart line of Kings in England. The name of the founding ancestor was Stuart.

In this post, we feature the original painting of one of the Stuart Kings of England and Scotland, King Charles II, also lovingly known as the “black boy” of England by his subjects.

He is commemorated in the celebrated name of the Black Boy Inn, found all over the British Isle.

Like his ancestors before him, King Charles II was a black man. Many of his surviving paintings falsely depict him as a so-called white man in clear contradiction to the famous description of the jolly King.

However, in the picture posted immediately below, one can see one of the contemporary paintings of King Charles Stuart II, Merry Black Boy of England. This picture invites all to decide why King Charles Stuart II, would have been called the black boy.

Charles Stuart II the black boy

King Charles Stuart II 1630 – 1685

The eldest surviving son of Charles I and Henrietta Maria of France, daughter of Henry IV of France, the future Charles II was born on 29th May, 1630, at St. James Palace, London, the second child of the marriage, he replaced an elder brother, Charles James, who had died shortly after birth.

It was said that when Charles was born in 1630 he was nicknamed the Black Boy by his mother, Queen Henrietta Maria, because of his dark and swarthy appearance

In 1646, following political crisis, his father Charles I was overthrown by Oliver Cromwell and beheaded. Charles II had to flee for his life through Scotland and on to France after making a weak and symbolic attempt at regaining the Stuart title. Fate and reality had soon dawned on him. He settled into a life of penury in France.

Upon the death of Oliver Cromwell, Charles was recalled back to England by Cromwell’s legatee and son who had no interest in ruling England. Charles was restored back to the throne and his coronation took place at the traditional venue of Westminster Abbey on 23rd April, 1661.

The Merry Monarch as he was later to become known, is famous for his many mistresses. Although he had numerous children by his mistresses, the Queen, to her great sadness, remained barren.

Charles popularity with the people was solid. Despite the ravages of last great outbreak of the Bubonic Plague struck London in 1665, which claimed thousands of lives; and the great fire of London 1666 which completely destroyed the city, he was highly favoured by the people.

He died without an official heir on 6 February, 1685 after a brief illness and was succeeded by his brother, King James II. He was the most beloved of all the Kings in the line of the Stuarts.

Black King of England

According to the annals of the english monarch:

Charles’ appearance was anything but English, with his sensuous curling mouth, dark complexion, black hair and dark brown eyes, he much resembled his Italian maternal grandmother, Marie de Medici’s side of the family. During his escape after the Battle of Worcester, he was referred to as ‘a tall, black man’ in parliamentary wanted posters.

One of the nick-names he acquired was the black boy His height, at six feet two inches, probably inherited from his Danish paternal grandmother, Anne of Denmark, also set him apart from his contemporaries in a time when the average Englishman was far smaller than today.

English Pubs

All English pubs named the Black boy are named after Charles II due to the swarthy and dark colour of his complexion.

Modern European painters try to hide the racial identity of this jolly King by depicting such fantasy as is posted below:

Whitened King Charles
Whitened King Charles

July 28, 2009
Sources
Black Boy Inn

Stuarts

annal of englishmonarchs

Egmond Codfried


Spread the love
  • 782
    Shares

266 thoughts on “Moorish Kings of Europe: King Charles Stuart II – The Black Boy King of England 1630 – 1685 – by – Oguejiofo Annu”

  1. As a Masters History student studying in England I think this is complete rubbish. Your trying to make something out of nothing due to your own political and racial beliefs. If you all believe he really was black but that it was covered up by later rulers then surely there would be more sources on it from his numerous enemies. You have to remember that Charles II was the ruler during the Civil War and was therefore a focal point for Protestant discontent. If he was actually black then there would be heaps of sources from Protestants commenting on it. Obviously racism as we know it never existed then so there would be no denouncing him for being “black” but I’m sure it wouldn’t take much stretching of the protestant imagination to pick up on the fact that he looked different to the native population!

    You have to detach yourselves from the present and see the world as it was then – not now…

    1. Rob, you may be a History student, but you lack scholarship and a curious attitude most necessary for learning. Hence you look but do not see.

      Was it the author of this article who nicknamed Charles Stuart II as the black boy? Was it not those his contemporaries who saw him and dealt with him on a daily basis?

      Do you not realize that Stuart means Svarti or Swarthy, which means black?

      Was it the author of this article who made the wood carving depicting Charles Stuart II as a black man?

      Can you argue with a picture?

      A picture is worth 10,000 useless uniformed uneducated noisy yapping. Only a foolish dog bark at the flying bird.

      Jahdey

  2. I don’t understand how having a slightly dark complexion from his Italian blood and a nickname of “black boy” is enough to make him African!? Eric the Red wasn’t a Martian it was just a name, same here!

    1. You display complete ignorance again.

      Wherein the article did anyone make Charles Stuart an African? Are you reading the article or the panicky reaction of your own mind?

      Eric the red was not a Martian. He was described as red because he was pink-red like a red neck.

      For your information, the red race (pink people) changed their names to “white people” in 1778 and enacted it into law after the European riots of 1848. Before that you were know as the red men.

      Now you know why Eric the red was called red.

      You also know that Charles Stuart II was indeed a black man, a Moor.

      For your information, Moors were ruling Europe for many centuries before the Red men appeared from the caves. The red men changed the name of the Moors to “Black men” to hide the identity of their masters.

      The first King of Scotland was known as Fergus Mohr. Do you get the flow?

  3. Right lets confine out argument to this one feed.

    I’m not going to argue about Charles II. All you have is a nickname and a picture. This man was at one point the most hated man in England. If he was indeed black and as you assert that this was later seen as something negative then it would have been picked up on by his enemies…

    But Moors in England!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EVIDENCE!

      1. He is just sooo wrong! I’m not even going to try and rectify all his errors because there just isn’t the time. Lets take Mc for example. It means son! not Moor.. He asserts but does not provide evidence and the evidence he does provide is so weak and sparse that it would crack under any sort of prolongued questioning. He also tries to assert that Africans basically created the modern world – thus completely underminining the various influences from Europeans and Asians.

        In fact his biggest weapon to try and seem like he is speaking the truth is by accusing white people of racism to justify his own racism.

        At the end of the day, in the modern world it would not take much for an argument such as his to come to dominate if it were true. However, if I say that to you you will claim that it is true but that all white people are too racist to admit it to pretend the evidence isn’t there – therefore insinuating all white people are racist.

        He does add little bits of truth into his work to give it an air of authenticity in much the same way a holocaust denier would. For example, it is true that the Moors did raid Ireland at times but this does not give any weight to his argument as a whole.

        I want to make clear that by refuting this imposters ideas I am not being racist. Black people and black culture has had important cultural, political and social implications for us all – but I don’t feel the need to celebrate this fact by denouncing the contributions of other cultures.

        If his arguments were indeed as real as he claims that it would not take much for him to become a leading academic in a top university such as Oxford. The fact remains that under scrutiny his arguments don’t work. Lies mixed with some truths that play on Africans who feel victimised by white people.

        He isn’t too disimilar to the white extremists he denounces.

        1. Bob, European albanoids lie too much. Just like you threw a fit when you were hit with the true image of Charles Stuart II the Black boy.

          Now you throw a fit because Dr. Pimienta-Bey PH.D has destroyed your world. I thought you had wanted me to give you a PH.D work.

          Next you want me to give you a star of the Oxford University academic circle. What would that do for you? Even if Pope Paul your European father were to get up from the grave and tell you that they had been lying to you all that time, you would also call him a liar.

          You live in a world of fantasy and made-up history that is instantly destroyed once subjected to real analysis.

          Welcome to Rasta Livewire, where we tell you the other half that the Albanoids have tried to hide!

          1. The image that you showed was done on dark wood – that is why it is black! If you go on that then there are LOADS of English rulers who were black. I just chose to ignore that part of your argument.

            I asked for verifiable sources. Your Dr does not provide anything tangible to look up he just asserts.

            and by saying Europeans lie all the time you are the racist.

            I would have absolutely no problem if some of the English Kings were black. As far as I know my great great Grandfather could have been black. Its not a matter of white or black it is the truth.

            Lets look at the facts your fail to answer about Charles II.
            -When do people try to cover up his “true identity”
            -Why do his enemies not bring it up in their VAST amounts of writing on both the civil war and the glorious revolution.
            -If he was loved by his people at the time why was there not further mention of the fact that he was partially Moorish?

          2. I don’t have time for this any more. You are no better than white supremacists in my opinion. I now have 150 pages of articles related to Bernard Bailyn’s interpretation of the American War of Independence to sift through before you try telling me that King George, George Washington and John Adams were all black too….

  4. Thanks for the gene map. Now study the father of the Y-DNA “E” Haplogroup. He is known as “YAP”+. He was an African.

    Y-DNA “E” Haplogroup is also a black African DNA.

    E-M81 is also found among the Black Berbers of the Sahara desert, the Senegalese, the Gambians, the Malians and the Mauritanians, as well as Somalians, Sudanese, Ethiopians and Egyptians.

    Since Europe was civilized by Africans, I hope you are beginning to see the significance of Hap E-M81.

    1. I think the problem with our argument is that you pick on just one of many of my points and ignore the rest. Lets get back to basics.

      If King Charles II was indeed of Moorish ancestry then why did his protestant openness during the civil war and the glorious revolution not make a point of it?

  5. Greetings Bredren and Sistren..
    Why must you slander INI with all this negative misguided misinformation?
    Jah sees man by his actions and soul, not by his skin tone.
    The fact is, all of mankind is rooted from Africa. period.
    Iman can claim no ancestry except that is of the roots. Africa.
    If you follow your inner I, that is the Almighty I, Jah creator HIMself, You will be granted the wisdom that skin color segregation is a product of wicked Babylon tactics. Furthermore, people of all races are exactly the same. The only thing that can be considered different between people is if they are wicked (faith in one’s self or earthly things) or Righteous (faith in Jah love, and respect). So don’t fall victim to Babylon misguidence, and learn to see others as yourself. That is all. Much Love

    1. See I admire Bo for denouncing the racism preached by others on this site. He is right, it doesn’t matter what colour you are!

      Although I do find the whole calling Babylon wicked a little unfair considering Babylon, forgive me if I am misinformed, basically means all of Western society.

      It is possible to preach a message without denouncing that of others – a lesson Christians and Muslims should learn!

      1. Your reading comprehension leaves me confused. Where in the article brings racism to your mind? You little red men are so guilt-stricken that anytime the Muur begins to self-realize himself, you turn up with your angst, anger, distractions and delusions. But note, that half the history has not been told, and we intend to tell it right here on Rasta Livewire. If you have problems with the truth, then you have problems with yourself. The truth is for everyone Muurish and Albanoid.

        Jahdey

        1. INI know that false history has been passed down through generations. It is good to teach the truth, and I comprehend the article fine. However, I point is that it does not matter if he was black or white, “Albino or Moorish.” Truly what difference does it make? Did his skin color decide how he ruled? Of course not!!

          I people, we cannot move forward to unification unless we put skin color behind us. History is history. It is to be learned only so that we may not make the mistakes of our ancestors. So that we may look forward and purify the future.

          Comprehend this:
          Overstanding>Understanding
          Bo

          1. we can not move forward on lies, we are all apart of the human family, but truth is truth, we must no the truth in order to move on and not make the same mistakes. and rob if you’re true then you wouldn’t really have a open mind and do some research without having your mind already made up. i was raised up in christianity but due the fact of me having a open mind and reasearching i found the lies that was be told, and how the bible are egiptian and sumarian stories changed to make it seem as though it was another race of people this book was talking about when in fact they were black. when i look at documentries on the history channel of egipt, the reinactment usally have white or light actors, but when i look on the wall the picture show them my complexion or darker, and expecially when it’s pre-dyanastic period.

      2. Babylon refers to wicked culture. Materialistic, Capitalistic, Cannibalistic trends. All of which began to multiply and spread like disease through Western Civilization. This by no means refers to every individual in the west, just those who live corrupted lives.

        There is a direct correlation between Roman Babylon and Western society today.

        Capitalistic trends,
        Cannibalistic friends,
        will surely bring Babylon
        unto a fiery end.

        1. See I agree with you Bo. The race does not matter. However, by asserting that a very distant relative was half Moorish I do not believe that that is enough to make him black. As I said before – by that logic a lot of Europeans are also Mongols descended from Ghengis Khan.As most of the English Kings were not English anyway I would have no problem if they had been black, chinese or Russian – but you can’t make assertions like that based on such little evidence and an assumption that pre-18th Century Englishmen were so inherantly racist that they would immediately seek to cover up Charles’s true identity.

          I agree with you that Western society is riddled with many negative aspects. The West has grown at the expense of others, capitalism has led to increasing inequality and societies are plagued by obescity, laziness, promiscuity, crime ect… However, Western society has also created a standard of living and quality of life superior to anything that has existed before. It has given people individual choice and the ability to alter their circumstances.

          if i were to take the native Americans as an example I can demonstrate the inhumanity that Western civilisation can unleash. However, it is not unique to Europe. The Mongols, African tribes, Aborigines, the Chinese, the Japanese, the native AMericans. All are guilty of equally as inhumane acts. The Chinese fought some of the largest battles seen, the Japanese had one of the most unfair cast systems around, the natives AMericans tortured and killed thousands for their Gods.

          The point is that all that is eveil in the world is inherant in humanity. While certain aspects, such as capitalism, can be denounced as Western ideologies, capitalism has also benefitted society in many ways. The real evils of murder, crime, rape, lies ect…. These are the immoral persuits of individuals of every single race, nation and culture. I think your focus should be re-directed against the faults of humanity rather than using “Babylon” as a scapegoat.

          However, at the same time I respect your views and the manner in which you deliver them.

          1. Respect at last. Yes I
            INI agree with you Rob. Good things can come and have come from all systems in which Righteous people stand. See the illusion goes, however, that wickedness outweighs positive culture in modern society. Though the standard of living may improve, does this mean the people are better off spiritually? And what is to come of these destructive wrecknoligical regressions or the exploitation of Mother Earth’s blood? INI can not say but can only act upon the positive laws of Rastafari, Haile Selassie I, the only KING that deserves to be praised for HIM teachings.
            As always
            Respect

          2. Although I personally am not religious I agree 100% with your message. While we may disagree on history and religion I cannot disagree with you on what you have just said.

            Your ultimate message is flawless.

          3. LOL! Welcome to Rasta Livewire. Tout le monde sont ici .. the whole world is here. Now put aside your racialist anxieties and learn!

            Jahdey

  6. You have commented over and over again about how “red men” came from caves and lie all the time. You also say that Africa “civilised” Europe, insinuating the “red men” were incapable of it without Africa.

    That is racism and no different from a 19th Century Englishman telling you of how white people civilised Africans, aborigines, native Americans and Asians. YOu are using the same racist argument but just turning it the other way round.

    Why can you not acknowledge the greatness and weakness of all civilisations. Why is it that your little mind can’t comprehend Africa not being the centre of the universe. The Chinese, native Americans, Aboriginals and Europeans came up with ingenious civilised societies.

    Next you will tell me that the Chinese did not invent gunpowder, that the English did not invent industry, that the natives did not have the most urbanised centres of the world (pre-colonial times) and that it was actually Africans who took Kangaroos to Australia!!!!

    Tell me this. If Africa really is the centre of all civilisation and influenced all of European History. What went wrong? How did Europeans manage to overpower your medieval and ancient leaders to become the most powerful nation in the world. Why is it that the Chinese are on their way to becoming the new world super power while Africa can’t get out of civil war and poverty. Why is it that not a single respected historian agrees with you on any of your points.

    The answers to all these answers are far too complex to even start telling you on here. But I can tell you now that none of them hinge on some sort of conspiracy in which the “red men” over threw their black superiors and managed to somehow overpower the most civised continent in the world (Africa) to dominate on a global scale.

    All cultures, all races, all genders all civilisations are equal. Your arguments only lead to hate and violence.

    1. Bob

      Your questions are welcomed. They have all been raised before and answered on Rasta Livewire, and I invite to research the website and elevate your mind.

      Truth does not need your “respected historians” to authenticate it.

      You have been shown historical, genetic and cultural evidence of our claims. Your incredulity does not dilute them, it only increases their potency. Because when you search further some of the truths we have revealed to you on this site, you will be amazed at how ignorant the system has actually rendered you regarding the true state of reality. And then you will become truly learned.

      On Rasta Livewire, you will learn that Africa is actually the only continent divided equally by the equator, the imaginary line which lies at the center of the globe. Africa is indeed literally at the center of the world.

      Feel free to search the Rasta Livewire database and comment as your knowledge grows.

      Welcome to Rasta Livewire, we shock and we burn up ignorance!

      1. Charles II was called black boy because of his dark hair, it was a nickname. His image is dark because it was done on dark wood – like many English Kings, Princes and Lords (if you go to the Tower of London you can see some of them). The name Stewart derives from the political position of office similar to a governor, known as a steward – it does not mean black. And finally, Alessandro de’ Medici was not black. However, even if he was it would prove to be a drop in the ocean of European blood – by such an argument I could claim all of Europe is descended from almost any nation. Many Europeans can trace their genes back to Ghengis Khan – this does not make them Mongol.

        All your arguments have been refuted with reason. Their are hundreds of primary sources on Charles II due to the Civil war and glorious revolution (not to mention the fact he was a King) – none of these sources claim Moorish ancestry or claim his complection was that of a black man.

        I also believe that if he really did have black ancestry the British government would be on it like a car bonnet. Claiming past royals have African ancestry would work wonders for the “multiculturalism” that the government has been persuing ever since the 1950s.

        Case Closed.

        1. Haha… there were many English kings who were black. Many European Moorish kings that you would fall off your fantasy world and made-up “Oxford University” history tall tales.

          So “Charles II was called black boy because of his black hair”.. lol! Ok and Edward the black prince, was called black supposedly because of his black armour, according to your Oxford historian liars? Do you know Fergus the Mohr, the first king of Scotland? Do you know Queen Charlotte wife of Goerge III? How about the first black Queen of England Queen Phillipa? Do you know the Medici family of Italy? Do you hear about the Stewarts, the Halliburtons, the MacDougals, of Scotland? They all have black ancestors.

          Do you know that Dublin Ireland means Black city? Do you know that Lashbuna (Lisbon) in Portugal used to be a black city in the 14th century? Even the name comes from Moorish people. Do you understand that “Melanie” means little black girl, whereas “Fiona” means little white girl?

          Do you realize that you reds came into Europe only in the 4th century AD, with the conquest of Rome by Alaric the Visigoth? Before then, you were central Asians. Before then, the old tribes of Europeans now nebulously called the Celts were Muurish, and dark brown peoples from Africa, Anatolia and Arabia. sometimes your historians call those old Europeans, “Indo-Europeans”. Indeed, the word Indo, from Indus, India, Indra, means black…you ever heard of the Indian ink, or the Indian marker?

          Those Muurish Europeans ended up as the European elites for a very long time. They were your royalties and learned ones. The rest of you were serfs and slaves. In the feudal times 5% of Europe was armed royalty while 95% were serfs and slaves. The ratio has not changed even in the so-called modern times. You are really part of the mass of serfs and slaves.

          So Bob, those like you, who have nothing in life, no history, no future, because the elites stole them away from you, now hold onto the only other thing you think you have, “Black phobia”… irrational fear and hatred of Muurish descendants. It has been called fear of “genetic extinction”, “racism”. It is virulent, but sometimes benign …yet racism nevertheless.

          There you have some of the origins of your insecurity which seem to prevent you from accepting the true story. Either that or brainwashing in “Oxford University’s Masters’ Program in History”, or just sheer ignorance and hubris.

          Welcome again to Rasta Livewire. Take your time to elevate your mind.

          1. Firstly, your account of history is incorrect and on a par with nazi ideology.

            Secondly it is you who is scared of the role of “red men”. You seek to deny “red people” any role in history or civilisation.

            You are the extremist and the racist. You should open your mind and acknowledge the role of other cultures and other civilisations.

            Welcome to the Truth.

        2. Just a thought….

          In order to grasp the truth, you must use your free will and freedom of thought. Do not let your mind get trapped within the so-called HIS Story. This is nothing more than a form of control that were created by the ruling elite long before you were born. In fact, you were born on three lies: science, religion, and history. Since you have been lied to about reality your entire life, any truthful revelations contracting your false worldview will indeed appear to be far-fetched. To make things even worse, human beings are stubborn creatures who let their egos override everything else. Instead of researching and learning about new information that does not fit within your current worldview, you would rather exercise your ego to override everything else. Have you heard of using the spirit of inquiry or even tapping the guru inside of you – – the search for greater truth beyond your false history, false religion and false science. This is the real seriousness of profound thinking.

          Attempting to hold onto your existing worldview would not be a wise decision. So, either accept the truth now or continue to suffocate in ignorance and mental slavery.

  7. Jahdey,
    is white,arabs,asians and African born with the same father and mother,or ?and who is supirior than others,and firstborn?

    1. Jahson

      I do not know that anyone is superior to the other. I know we are human beings living on earth for millions of years, interbreeding and interliving. There musta been a time we all had one mother and father since we all are the same specie, human being.

      Seen?

      Jahdey

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *