February 1, 2024 • 55 mins
Brixton's Brilliant Black British History exhibition at Black Cultural Archives, south London, is rewriting our history to suit their agenda. Visitors are informed that “the very first Britons were Black” and that “Britain was black for 7,000 years before” white people arrived. The exhibit was based on a book which claims Stonehemge was built by black people! Also, In 2021 a paper titled Diversity aboard a Tudor warship by Scorrer et al claimed the crew of the 16th century Mary Rose ship included black peoiple. I wil debunk these claims in this podcast and answer questions from the live audience.
Opening theme by Wolcensmen. Outro music Sanguine fire by Elegiac.
Please support this podcast.
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/survivethejive
All Links: https://linktr.ee/SurvivetheJive
Opening theme by Wolcensmen. Outro music Sanguine fire by Elegiac.
Please support this podcast.
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/survivethejive
All Links: https://linktr.ee/SurvivetheJive
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:19):
It's jive talk, and today I'mgoing to be going back to the topic
that I've done in several videos recently, but not only streams of the fake
black history that has been pushed inBritain. The topic is basically being revived
because a book I already mentioned hasnow also been the subject of a exhibit
(00:43):
in Brixton, which probably not verymany people go to, but this is
public fund publicly funded museums, soit's relevant. And I also want to
talk about a paper from a coupleof years ago about the crew of the
Mary Rose allegedly being very diverse andeven including Africans, because when you look
at it with a close eye forthe details, you find that that's not
really likely to be the case,and there's some misleading stuff going on.
(01:07):
Let's get stuck into some of this, shall we. So basically the article
is in the Telegraph from a fewdays ago, I said the very first
Britons were black. An exhibition onthe Diverse History of Britain has claimed the
Brilliant Black British History Exhibition held thatthe Black Cultural Archives in Brixton, South
(01:27):
London makes a range of contentious claimsabout British history. It's that the Black
Cultural Archives in Brixton, South London, and makes a range of contentious claims.
Physicians are informed that the very firstBritons were black and that Britain was
black for seven thousand years before whitepeople came. Now this claim is again
(01:49):
digging up like the misinformation are ofWestern hunder Gaver has been black and people
thinking now of Africans is due toa few techniques in the media to try
and mislead people, and by usingthe term black, which is used ambiguously
in Britain and America in different ways, to try and convince the African diaspora
(02:12):
living within Britain that the Western hundergatherers were the same race as they are,
which is not true and everyone knowsthat it's not true, but they're
just trying to deceive these people tosort of whip them up into a kind
of sense of ethnic entitlement. Theassertions appear to be based on a genetic
study of the twelve thousand year oldremains of Cheddarman, which suggested that ancient
(02:35):
Britain's had dark skin, but thestudy and these claims have since been contested
by academics. The exhibition at theBlack Cultural Archives, which receives funding from
Lambauth Council Arts Council, England,is based on the Balloonmsbury Children's book Brilliant
Black British History by atin U kthe Nigerian born poet and author. It
says it's Nigerian born and that youcan see the picture of her, but
(02:58):
she's also not entirely Nigerian. Actuallyshe's got some white ancestry anyway, she
doesn't identify with that. But thefirst display panel in the exhibition states,
by testing DNA, scientists made anAmazon and Amazon discovery, the first migrants
to Britain around twelve thousand years agohad black skin. Well, it didn't
(03:22):
say they had black skin, itsaid they had dark intermediate skin. Yes,
that's right, the very first Britonswere black. Well, they weren't
related to black people by scanning,and we don't even know the complexion really
by scanning a QR code, visitorscan listen to audio which expands on this,
claiming that the white first Britons migratedfour five hundred BC years ago,
(03:46):
referring to the Beaker folk. Well, that would imply that the Neolithic race
that lived in between the Mesolithic race, and the Beaker folk wasn't white,
but they were. They were white. They were just Southern European sort of
race, like kind of like Sardiniansor Spaniards. Those people are white.
Britain was black for seven thousand yearsbefore that. No, In twenty eighteen
(04:09):
it was announced that the genetic studyof Turaman the old blah blah blah blah
blah. Yeah, so I'm notsure I'm allowed to read out the entire
article, but you get the idea. It runs until January twenty eighth.
It's finished now. And it alsoclaims that the third century Roman emperor Septimus
Severus was a black Roman ruler.He wasn't black, he didn't have any
(04:30):
black ancestry. He was half white, half North African. It's the good
thing the Telegraph has done this.Cambridge historian Professor David Abu Lafia said the
Brixton Expo is new to me,but the tendentious tone seems to be exactly
what I would expect. I amtotally nonplused by the obsession with the skin
color of people in Britain's remote past. They are unlikely to have existed,
and even though they did they didn'tpass on their dark skin to modern Britains.
(04:53):
Most Black Britains are ultimately of Africandescent, thank you, Dr David.
There is a deliberate effort to tryand whip up a kind of bit
of a racial tension among a blackcommunity where they feel like this is their
land and not ours, and thatthe idea of any like native entitlement is
(05:16):
actually like a racist cover up forlike you know, and there are enough
like conspirational minded people in uh,you know, urban communities where that sort
of thing finds fertile ground. Thefact remains that there's no black people in
Mesolithic and what is black anyway,because they're using the term black in different
(05:40):
ways. I'm going to go throughnow what that is. I will,
by the way, read any superchats that come in, and there's no
superchats come in, so nothing tosay, but we Mesolithic Britain was not
was an island. It was notan island yet, and the people there
were the same race as lived allover Europe western hand, the gatherers,
and probably they might have had darkskin, but then again, like the
(06:02):
genes that are associated with their blueeyes, they all have blue eyes are
found in modern populations to encourage depigmentation. So although they didn't have the genes
one of the genes associated with lightof complexions in modern Europeans, they had
genes that do encourage depigmentation of theskin, so it's possible they were actually
(06:23):
light skinned. All then again,they could have been dark skinned. We're
not really sure about it. Butin any case, there were carcasoid.
Racially, they were of the WestEurasian racial type and they weren't related to
black people. I've already done debunkingon CBBC's Horrible Histories thing where they make
the same climb. Afu were Hirsh, the racial activist said in National Geographic
(06:45):
that Cheddarman was a black African andno one rushed to you know, correct
her. AFU were Hirsh given thishuge platform, she specifically said he was
an African and he never No oneever made the claim he was an African,
and none of the scientists in thistwenty eighteen study, so she misinterpreted
black to mean African. But andshe's meant to be, you know,
an expert, and she was evengiven the platform of National Geographic, which
(07:10):
is meant to be a reputable magazine. But it isn't It isn't a mistake
that people, even like relatively intelligentblack people like Afrohirsh who's not very black,
I guess, but she's part black, make that mistake. They conflate
black and African, because that's howblack is generally used, especially in America.
(07:30):
The word black means African sub SaharanAfrican. But they are the media
are exploiting a kind of ambiguity ofthe term in this country. And also
like not just the terminology, butthe RTE Islands National Television and Radio broadcaster
made a program called the Burn theHeart of Stone, and that depicts Western
(07:50):
hunter gatherers in Ireland with as anAfrican with dreadlocks, which they didn't have
like curran you know, African hair, like they didn't look like it,
and that's brown Africans. The Dutchnews channel RTL News also depicted the Western
hud the gatherer man as a blackman with dreadlocks as well, in a
separate, independent thing. And they'veall done the exactly thing they whg.
(08:15):
These Mesolithic people had no African ancestryand they were less African than any white
people are today. So modern whitepeople are more related to Africans, and
they had brown hair which was straightor wavy, and blue eyes, so
you can't imagine a black person withstraight brown hair and blue eyes for a
start. And then also they didn'thave African shaped nose or any of the
(08:37):
things you associate with substaran Africans akablack people. They just wouldn't have looked
like black people to anyone if you'dsee them today, they just would never
be mistaken for a black person.Even if they were black, really dark
skin, which I don't think theyprobably were, they still wouldn't have been
mistaken for Africans. These people werereplaced by Anatolians six thousand BC, and
those people had light skin jeens,so in this book that they were like
(09:03):
she In this book, the authorsays that at a New k the half
Nigerian author says that the Stonehenge wasbuilt by black people. And then you're
not even talking about Western huntre gatherers. You're talking about the Neolithic people who
were the farmers, who had lightskin, even lighter than the previous people.
(09:24):
So neither of them were black people. But she's saying they were both
black people. Though that's completely crazyso did she confused Western hunter gatherers with
early European farmers. Even so,neither or African, neither of them looked
like her. Even though she's onlyhalf African, she's still going to be
darken than them. The misleading useof the term black to describe to the
man confused the public, including theracial activists like Marsha Garrett, who made
(09:48):
the same mistake in material that wasused in British schools for educational materials and
Affie were Hirsh in the National Geographic. So they're given platforms, important platforms
and then openly making the mistake ofconflating this term. The media used a
black meaning to mean African, andthey've convinced other black people the same,
(10:09):
and they're being using public money toconvince more black African people in Britain that
the Western hunder gathers are black.Now, academics use the term black in
this way hide behind a concept calledpolitically black. Politically black is a definition,
and they know full well that mostpeople don't know about that definition and
don't interpret it that way, butthey use it in a sneaky way.
(10:33):
It was basically invented as like away to like basically class all the non
white people in Britain as black inthe like, and it was only invented
recently, and actually a lot ofblack people, actual black people, didn't
like it because they didn't like theidea that we will be calling the Pakistanis
black people and that like, becausethat would like detract from their owning of
(10:56):
the term black, especially because blackpeople in Britain generally like quite a fond
connection to African American culture, whereblack is owned exclusively by people of African
descent that term. And then blackpeople in Britain by which I mean when
I say black, I mean SubtarranAfricans, so they want to have the
same use of the term black asbeing exclusively theirs. They don't view Chinese
(11:20):
people as black, they don't viewBengalis as black. So this term politically
black is really only used in avery very small, marginal like academic far
left community, and no one elseeven really knows about it. But they
can say politically black. Obviously thatcan't and it's based on like the idea
of marginalization, right, Obviously thatcan't apply to chair a man because the
(11:43):
whole idea of like marginalization can't beapplied retroactively to mesolithic populations. However,
like the adoption of this term politically, black relies on the idea of like
all referencing the way that black wasused in the former British Empire, which
was much more wide than it isnow. For example, Afghans were called
(12:07):
black, and pretty much anyone couldbe called black, like who wasn't like
European like it. It was usedin a in that sense, and so
was the N word. So theN word, you know, like Conrad
Novel talking that that there it's referringto Himalayan person and it can be used
(12:28):
to refer to Afghans or the end. So the N word was not like
just for black people, just asthe word black wasn't just for black people.
But that's like more than a hundredyears ago, and since then,
like the cultural influence of America andthe establishment of a sub Saharan African community
on in Britain has changed the wayblack's use. And it's just not true
(12:52):
to talk as if that's how everyoneuses the term black, Like no one
means Chinese people when they say blackanymore, like no one would ever use
whose the word Chinese to refer toa Napali like Napolee's referred to as black
before. They're not. That isdishonest to pretend that's how we use the
word, but they know that theycan then say use it okay by that
definition ted a man was black whatever, even though they know full well that
(13:15):
they're encouraging people like athle were Hirshto identify herself as belonging to the same
race as a Mesolethic population of Europe. They seem to think it's only the
population of Britain because they always justsay the first Britons. They don't say
the first Europeans. The weird thingis like these people didn't live uniquely in
Britain. Britain wasn't even an island. It was just connected to the rest
of the Europe, and all ofWestern Europe had the same race in it.
(13:37):
So if they were going to claimthat their first Britains were black,
why not to say the first Europeanswere black. It's stupid And anyway,
the Western hundon gatherers weren't the firsthuman beings to live on this island.
There were other people before them anyway, so it's just wrong, wrong,
wrong, wrong, wrong, allthe way in many different levels, and
it's dumb. Uh and anyway,I think that it's being done for specific
(13:58):
purpose to encourage like hatred of theindigenous people in this island so that they
can like encourage these new incomers tofeel like everything is theirs and that like
the Natives don't have any rights toyou know, you know, any sort
of claims of indigenouity, any claimsof like native privileges or anything like that.
(14:24):
Here we got Cherry Appleton sent asuper chat. Thank you, Cherry.
It doesn't say anything though, soI guess you don't have anything to
say, but thank you charity.That's really much appreciated, and we have
five pounds from LS. That's notthe only one. That's not the only
thing I wanted to talk about today, because there's also I mean the early
(14:48):
modern period of history, the Tudortimes, and they've done this in that
horrible history thing where they had thetrumpeter and everyone focused on this trumpeter.
Now, I said before, therearen't very so many black people in like
Tudor England, but they're probably whatthey're definitely worth some because of the Moors
having black slaves and therefore included someBlackamoors, like some of the people among
(15:13):
the Moors who were a North AfricanMiddle Eastern people were Substian Africans who had
been freed because you can win yourfreedom of your convert to Islam. And
then some of those blacks made theirway into Mouris, Spain, Andalusia,
and then some from there maybe cameto Britain and were all like you know,
were used as sort of human trophiesby the king. For example is
(15:35):
trumpeter black trumpeter, and there wereothers as well. Now there it was
an article an article by Scora etal. Scotta and colleagues from twenty twenty one
called Diversity aboard a Tudor warship investigatingthe origins of the mary Rose Crew using
multi isotope analysis. The mary Roseis a ship that's sunk in the sixteenth
(15:56):
century and two the times, andit's dougga. It was take on display
in Portsmouth and it's like quite agood sort of historical thing that we celebrate
in this country. It's not aswell preserved as the Vassa ship in Sweden,
which is a similar period, butit's more important because it actually was
(16:17):
used whereas the Vassa ship sunk onits maiden voyage in the harbor. It's
there, aren't. The paper startswith fluff about how there were blacks in
Tudor, England and referencing dubious booksthat aren't really scientific, books like they
provide little to no evidence for theclaims in them, and this paper is
(16:40):
citing these books. They one ofthe such books. They cite this Black
Tudors The Untold Story by Miranda Kaufman, and she relies on very sparse sources,
often legal records, parish registers ofbirths, deaths and marriages and tax
papers and things like that. It'sdon't even record race anyway, and she
makes massive assumptions about the races ofthe people she's talking about, sometimes based
(17:03):
only on their surname, where someone'scalled black as a surname or kneejer or
Blacker Moore or simply more, shejust assumes that they're black. Now,
of course, you know that manywhite British people have the surname more or
black. Those are not like ThomasMoore, for example, so it doesn't
really hold up. But based onthat, she identifies between three hundred and
(17:26):
four hundred black people living in Englandnot as slaves in that Tudor period,
which isn't very many really, Imean I thought it was. There's an
estimation I've seen elsewhere of three hundredand sixty in the period between fifteen hundred
and sixteen forty, So in onehundred and forty years, approximately three hundred
and sixty, which equals roughly twopoint five black people per year. It's
(17:51):
not very many. But anyway,I don't think that that numbers correct anyway,
because that methodology is not very good. Like you can't just assume someone's
black as they're name is black.That's not anyway. There was a population
then of maybe there was one hundredthere at any time, so that would
mean there was a population of aboutfour million in England at the time.
(18:14):
So that's one hundred people out offour million, which is zero point zero
zero two five percent of the population. It's nothing, it's absolutely like nothing.
It's within the margin of error.However, even that number was too
much, because in fifteen ninety six, a merchant named Van Senden authorized a
letter from the Privy Council to portBlackamoor's took back to Spain and the Masters
(18:37):
of the blacks didn't want to losetheir servants, so that was they opposed
it. So there were black peopleenough that Van Senden complained about them and
that the masters of the blacks didn'twant them being sent away. And then
Van Senden appealed to the Queen forthe power to deport the blacks and without
the interruption of any persons, includingtheir masters, but he failed to achieve
(18:57):
that. So there were some blackpeople. But yeah, like she's saying
between three hundred and four hundred inthis book, and that's sort cited by
Scorer's the Scorer and Colleagues article,and that should show you that it's very
duous. And that's a big chunkat the beginning. But then when it
gets to the actual meat of thearticle, the paper which isn't talking about
(19:18):
like the you know, textual evidence, is saying that it's an isotope study
and DNA study, But there isn'tany DNA in this study. It's only
isotope really so and also, justlike Rebecca Redfern, they rely on macromorphoscopics,
which is not reliable. But yeah, let's get to that later.
It's mainly isotope analysis, which looksat the annamel on your teeth and the
minerals that have affected the enamel duringyour childhood. The eight mary Rose individuals
(19:45):
have values compatible with British origins,which evans at all estimates ranging between bah
blah blah blah. Furthermore, theseare recorded that various locations around Europe,
Africa, in the Middle least andare by no means unique to Britain.
So they're saying that they could beall Brew British anyway, they could have
all been raised in Britain, sobut they could have been also raised elsewhere
(20:08):
because it's not that useful. Interpretationis difficult as there is no local baseline
to compare with four distinguishing locals fromnon locals, and therefore the integration of
multiple proxies is key to interpretation.But it does conclude that as many as
three individuals, maybe from warmer climatesthan Britain, one called FCS eighty five
may well have originated from southern Europe. One of these sailors, and FCS
(20:32):
seventy and FCS eighty one have valuesconsistent with the Mediterranean or inland southern Europe.
So maybe three of them, yeah, three of them Southern Europe,
Mediterranean, probably Spain, probably Spain, right because of the interaction to Spain
and Britain at the time. Innumber seventy, they called the Royal Archer
(20:55):
had a leather risk guard bearing asymbol of a pomegranate, and they conclude
that since pomegranates could be associated withMoors, they because they were an exotic
fruit, not from Yeah, well, anyway, it was also a symbol
used for Catherine of Aragen's branch ofthe English world family. Considering the potential
elevation of values due to dietary factors, it's is possible that this individual was
(21:19):
an Iberian. More, it's possiblelyhe was an Iberian. More, it's
possibly he was an Iberian. Whorit's possible he was just British. It's
like he's got a pomegranate on hiswrist strap, so what Anyway, this
is supported by the dietary isotopes ofnumber seventy, which indicates a diet consistent
with Spanish origins. I'm going toguess he's a Spaniard. So then they
(21:41):
absolutely referenced Rebecca Redfern, who I'mnot. If you haven't been a where
I have done two videos sort ofdebunking hers, and he claims about Roman
Britain being black, and her claimsabout like she tries to make everything black
anyway, and she does it withjust like this really sloppy sort of method
called macromorphoscopics which looks at the shapeof skulls, eye sockets and things like
(22:06):
that and guesses race. And evenher colleague admits in her own papers that
it's not a reliable method and theycan't get like consistent results, so it's
not falsifiably like reliable. It's notlike it just isn't a good enough way
to identify the rates of people inthe past, especially when we have a
method that does relia like identify therace DNA alien air analysis. But anyway,
(22:33):
so they reference her, They citeher, and the authors acknowledge the
problematic history of ancestry estimation stemming fromearly pursuits of scientific racism. Although we
recognize the methodological and ethical concerns regardingthese approaches in forensic contexts, we also
agree that not seeking evidence of humandiversity and phenotypic variation in the archaeological record
only obscures it. Further, somethinghistorians a're actively addressing, so they acknowledge
(22:56):
that it was a little bit wascistto look at people's skulls, but it's
okay because we're doing it to tellpeople that everyone was black or something.
I guess, but yeah, theythe method has repeatedly resulted in incorrect estimations
of race, as in the caseof beachy head Woman, and they didn't
mention, but beaty head women,like everyone was saying she was black and
(23:18):
she wasn't. And some of RedFund's work to buy her own colleagues admission
is just not getting positive results.So they say to improve the clarity of
isotope data, and with the possibilityof North African origins for number seventy and
eighty one and potential African ancestry numbernine, further craniometric and more phos copic
analyses were conducted. So the craniometricresult for number nine was closest to what
(23:45):
they call a Hispanic male from theForensic Data Bank sample, so their Hispanic.
The databank sample includes like Latinos inAmerica who are mixed Iberian and Native
American, but it also includes peoplepretty much just Spanish, I guess,
like and he's going to get ahe's obviously he's not Native American, he's
(24:07):
not a Mexican. This guy isa Spanish guy. Hence he's getting a
positive for Hispanic. It was black. So they also say that there's this
thing an interperetial bone, which isalso called an incer bone because it was
associal with the incas, and they'veused the term incabone in the study to
try and reinforce this idea that maybeit was native or something. But that
(24:29):
bone is something that is more commonin Africans and Asians than Europeans, but
it is found in Europeans. Soanyway, the fact that that's in number
seventy is not proof that it isn'tEuropean. But then referring to it and
it adds number seventy was closest towhite males in the data bank they had
to talk about or did have theincerbone thing, but OHI, by the
(24:52):
way, it's closest in the databank to white males, So yeah,
again it looks probably not black.Due to incompleteness number seventy and eighty one.
The only morphoscopic analysis that was possiblewas the decision tree. Both number
seventy and eighty one were classified asblack. Decision Tree is macromorphoscopic method that
(25:15):
they've developed. Number nine was analyzedusing decision tree and USA in OSSA.
I don't know what that is.In both tests, number nine was classified
as black in the other in themacromorphoscopics, so they have it. Number
nine was Hispanic in the craniometric studythat came out as black from decision tree.
(25:41):
The interpretations are made in consideration ofavailable data, but maybe revised in
future studies with the addition of otherforms of evidence used in studies of population
affinities, such as ancient DNA ADNA and post craniometrics and dental morphopology.
Yeah. Yeah, that would bea good idea, wouldn't it. It
would be a really good idea.These intent So again, these these are
(26:03):
made in consideration of invailable data,but they may be revised in future studies.
In other words, we haven't there'sno DNA and these everything we say
is probably not reliable until there isDNA. That is basically what they're saying,
like, until some reliable data isthere, we're going to try and
like twist everything so that you couldsay maybe the black and they're only able
to do it for three individuals,and obviously none of them are black.
(26:26):
But then this whole scope of this, like art, like paper and the
media, was that there are blackpeople on the Merry Roads, but there
isn't any. There aren't any.There's no through of a single black person
on there. So number nine isotopeanalysis shows he was raised in Britain,
but by macromorphoscopics they reckon he wasblack despite him matching Spaniards in craniometric analysis.
So he's probably a Spaniard raised inEngland, or maybe it wasn't even
(26:48):
a Spaniard, don't know. Thedifference in ancestry estimates between the metric and
morphoscopic methods are not incompatible when consideredin the context of a deep medieval history
between North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula. Well, I suppose, yeah,
that's true. There is a fairbit of Moorish DNA and in Spain at
the time, so it could haveMoorish DNA, But the Moors aren't black,
most of them aren't black. Themore as symmetry, there was analysis
(27:11):
of a more asymmetry and there weremore white Moors of Iberian ancestry than there
were mores of Black African ancestry,and there were most black ancestry, and
any of the mores was like fiftypercent max. The Moors themselves were Middle
Eastern, but they also included whitesand blacks who were enslaved and then and
freed again when they convert to Islam. So yeah, he could have been
(27:33):
a more, but it doesn't meanhe was black. Macromorph MACROMORPHU Scobbish is
the least reliable data here, andthey're going with that most of all.
More. I mean that the isotopeanalysis is reliable somewhat, but I mean
it doesn't tell you anything about ethnicity. It just tells you the region that
you grew up in. So morelikely this is a Spaniard and moved to
(27:53):
England when he was young. Theyalso tried to push the other two into
North Africa through some other methods.They're trying desperately to make the other two
samples seventy and eighty one be NorthAfrican. The craniometric ancestry estimate for seventy
should be approached with caution given theoverall low typicality, which suggests number seventy
is dissimilar to all three populations orpotentially of diverse heritage. However, this
(28:18):
may be because fewer measurements were possibledue to poorer preservation than number nine.
This contrast with morphoscopic analysis, inwhich the decision Try classified seventy along the
same branch as number nine, resultingin an estimate of black. Eighty one
was also estimated as black using thedecision Try, but followed a different branch
from seventy and nine. Furthermore,it was only possible to analyze eighty one
(28:45):
using one ancestry estimation from method,so the results are not as strong.
Therefore, based on the more morphoscopicancestry estimate and the isotope evidence origins in
inland North Africa cannot be discounted fornumber seventy, with Iberia also being possible.
Possible, it's just a Spaniard possibleand also likely, in fact almost
(29:08):
certain. The first author on thepaper is a nice looking young girl called
Jessica Scorer. She was an MScgraduate at Cardiff University School of History,
Archaeology and Religion, and she said, our point our findings point to the
important contributions that individuals have diverse backgroundsand origins made to England to England's navy
(29:30):
during this period. No they don't, No, they don't. Couple of
Spaniards. This adds to the evergrowing body of evidence for diversity and geographic
origins, ancestry and lived experiences inTudor, England. No love, Okay,
it's really nice that they let thisyoung girl be the you know,
the first name on the paper.But yeah, she's a background in archaeology
(29:52):
and librarianism and she now works forthe NHS. She doesn't know about DNA.
There were a couple of other archaeologistson the paper two that probably helped
with the archaeology stuff, but therewasn't a great deal of archaeology stuff.
It's mostly isotope and they've got forthe experts on isotope analysis, they got
Dr mart alben Mill, Doctor MortonAnderson, Angela Lamb and Alexandri Neiderbraacht.
(30:18):
So they were a lot focused onthe teeth stuff. But who what about
the other stuff? Well, there'sa guy called Richard Madwick is an archaeological
scientist to use his molecular, microscopicand macroscopic methods, so I guess he
was the guy who did the macromorphoscopics in the in the vein of Rebecca
Redferam. But there is no geneticiston the paper. There's not a single
(30:40):
geneticists on the paper, so theydon't have any genetic evidence or anything for
a black person. There's no it'snot a genetics paper these So the conclusion
is as follows. These interpretations mayrequire future refinement. You don't say future
isotopic ancestry and ad anda analysis ofmore of the human remains of the Mary
Rose will result in a more completenarrative of both Henry the Eighth Navy and
(31:03):
Widitude of World. I agree withI agree with that that conclusion. I
agree with it one hundred percent.Get from DNA and just shut up until
then. For God's sake. Oh, I've got another super chat. Jeff
Simpson Scott sends twenty pounds. Thanksa lot. I appreciate that, Jeff.
He asks word WHC the same asthe first humans to enter Europe?
(31:27):
Tom, if not, can youbriefly summarize the differences found from DNA analysis?
Please? No, they weren't.It's a bit complicated, but there's
like multiple races in Europe in theIce Age the Aurugnation and Gravettian than the
main ones, and I believe thatthe WHG were previously believed not to be
(31:48):
related to either and to therefore beof some refugeia that came out of nowhere.
But now it's believed that they diddescend from one of these races and
that they dominated and replaced the otherone. But they are a bit different
to those two races, and that'sbecause they they had Also, the WHC
also have some admixture from an easternsource in Siberia, related to the ancient
(32:12):
North eur Asians, probably but that'snot certain. But yeah, basically they
are related to the first humans inEurope from the Ice Age, but not
they're different as well. They're alsodistinct. Do we think ls us Do
we think these people are consciously lyingor have they drunk the kool aid?
Well, in the case is likethis Mary Rose paper, I think there's
like, uh, there's multiple thingsgoing on. Like I don't think these
(32:37):
people are necessarily part of a conspiracy, They're just trying to There's one thing
that that there's a very there's apervasive liberal ideology in Britain at the moment,
and it's especially powerful in white collarenvironments like middle class areas, so
academics are especially likely to be seducedby it. And when you get a
(33:01):
bunch of people seduced by the sameideology in the room, all in the
same room, then they're going tocome to like they're going to have like
a certain prejudices and prize that leadthem towards certain conclusions. They'll all be
wanting to find something like that.That's one possibility and unanalyzed priors that they
haven't you know, tried to overcome. The other is that there is a
(33:24):
financial incentive because it's published by theRoyal Society, and maybe you're more likely
to get like published and also morelikely to get media attention if you can
have a sensational title like black peoplein Tunor Britain, Because obviously there's a
lot of people in the media whoreally like that sort of thing, and
(33:45):
even there's people in the media whodon't really like that sort of thing,
but they know that it gets hateplays, so they want to publish that
kind of article as they you know, they get more ad money for it.
So there are many reasons why thereare incentives for people to put to
push things that way. But theway that they've done it is so like
desperate, it's so desperate to findnon white people on the Mary Rose that
(34:09):
it's a little bit suspicious. Imean, it could be there is something
conspiracial going on, but it's hardfor all of them to be. You
know, it's not necessary for themto be a conspiracy to explain it.
You don't need a conspiracy theory toexplain it. It's just the sort of
cultural climate we exist in now.Indo Celticist says on X why can flate
(34:30):
black with African and then never shutup about colorism? I just say something
full disclosure. When we're talking aboutLambeth Council, which funded the exhibition in
Brixton that I talked about before,Lambeth Council illegally resold my family comes from
Brixton. Before we moved to India, we lived in Brixton. The Roussals
(34:51):
lived in Brixton and the house there, and there's many of my family buried
in Brixton or were the Lambeth Councilillegally we sold my family's grave plots and
buried other people on top of myfamily and removed the gravestones and they never
have seen an apology or anything ofthe kind for that. They did it
illegally. They've been in trouble forit that I and I said that,
(35:15):
and people even said some lefty saidthat I made it up. I didn't
make that up. That's what happened. Several of my ancestors' graves were desecrated
by the Lambeth Council and probably Idon't know for sure, but because the
majority of the population of bricks andan Africa Caribbean, it's probably to make
way for putting the bodies of AfricaCaribbeans on top of my ancestors. This
is a very very serious crime andthere's no they're not being held responsible for
(35:38):
it. Landbouth Council is a reallyreally nasty institution I got. I can
see all the comments on x aswell. Now, the odd foreigner at
a port and on ships isn't areflection on the demo demographics of a wider
area. That's correct, and thatby the way, the the books that
(36:01):
talk about black Tudor England admit thatlike it's mostly concentrated on the ports on
the south part of England. They'rejust hanging around the ports, and that's
the same like in Japan the portsthat you can find Russians around the ports.
Russia is just across the sea.But like the Russians don't contribute a
(36:21):
great deal to Japanese culture and aren'ta major part of Russians of Japanese society,
there are just Russians around the portsfor obvious reasons. That's like,
you know, that's where they near, where they work. Spurglar hellospurglar on
x. He says the Spanish shouldbe the first to refute such claims on
(36:43):
national pride alone. Yeah, theyshould, although I think they could be
Spaniards. There are some Spaniard people. Someone says, if I had twenty
three percent sub Saharan admics, wouldyou consider me black even looking the same
as I do? Now? Well, I don't know what you look like,
man, whoever you are. Butthe the in America, I believe
(37:08):
that people with less than twenty eightpercent ancestry black ancestry generally don't identify as
black. So but obviously it variesin different places. I can imagine there
are plenty in Britain that people withtwenty five percent black ancestry might well identify
as black as that's they might considerit prestigious in the current social climate.
(37:30):
But yeah, in America, that'sgenerally not the case that people identify as
black when they're a quart of blackbro has the Norman fade, says Polaris
on X. Yeah, I'm NormanMaxing right now, I'm going to switch
to wine maybe now, I don'twhy I'm not going to switch to wine.
(37:50):
No, it's it's kind of likeweird to claim that this tiny amount
of black people in Tudor England islike significant for our history because there hasn't
been a single one identified who hadany significance historically, and they hadn't existed,
it wouldn't have made any difference toanything in history. But and also
the modern communities of black people inBritain don't descend from the handful of black
(38:14):
people who lived in tun To Britainfive hundred years ago, so like and
yeah, they're not even closely relatedbecause they were I don't know, well
they might be a little bit,but yeah, it depends, but yeah,
(38:35):
they were a tiny minority. Andlike, if we had a tradition
of having black people but in thecountry, whatever you could that's what they're
trying to argue. Because there werethis, you know, few hundred people
in the ports in southern England,then you can also say that we had
a tradition of trying to kick themout, because that's what Van Senden tried
to do and there was hardly anythere. Like what was van Senden's motivation
(39:01):
living in a country of over amillion people and just a few hundred black
people, black servants specifically, isreferring to really upset him? Like what
was it about them that upset him? Like we're told that racism is this
post colonial thing and like it comeup, it came from like out of
that Well, obviously that's not thetrue if Van Sender was a racist,
(39:22):
although I should add that there aremy main lefty enemies, like in the
historical you know, in medievalist historianMary ram Branham and Eric Wade. They
both have a different angle and theyclaim that actually Britain was racist since Anglo
Saxon times, the Anglo Saxons.They don't just say that word Anglo Saxon
(39:44):
is racist, they say the AngloSaxons themselves were racist. I got a
quote from him, Eric Wade saysthat medieval England was a place of intense
anti Semitism, intense Islamophobia, andincredible discourses of anti blackness from the early
medieval period onwards. Right, butthey like why do they? I mean,
(40:08):
I don't know if that's even true, Like, I can't they probably
what that's probably is true that dependingon what your definition of racism is.
But yeah, they probably were quiteracist. Like obviously Van Senden wanted to
kick him out. If kick wantedto kick him out racist then then then
yeah it is. But like maybehe's not racist, just didn't like him,
as Bad says. So, yeah, I'm referencing a meme of bad
(40:35):
A Barry. It's a British memeof a bloke who says, I'm not
racist, I just don't like him. I can't. Actually, I don't
know what precisely Eric word is referringto that made him think the Anglo Saxons
were racist, because but I mean, sure, I don't care if you
think they were. What But how'sthe DNA testing of the Old Norman Dukes
(40:57):
developing? Haven't heard much of what. I didn't know that there was any
Old Norman Duke's being DNA tested.They think the French government's quite averse to
it. I did the video onthe Norman DNA, and everything I can
find there's no decent There's no decentNorman DNA testing anywhere. I don't think
there's going to be. But Ithink we may never know the real story
(41:20):
of when the Normans became French andceased to be Viking, which is what
everyone wants to know, Like theywant to know how Norman were the Vikings
by ten sixties, How Viking werethe Normans by ten sixty six. I
think that's what people want to know, like how did they still have genetic
like profile like a Scandinavian by tensixty six or some of them and some
(41:44):
didn't. And I've seen loads ofpeople argue either side. You know that
there were definitely Vikings, and there'sno there were French, and I don't
see the point of arguing about itbecause you don't really know. And you
can go buy a few genealogical recordsof some of them, but that's like
that's of some of them. Iwould like to see the DNA evidence,
but I suspect that they were stillsomewhat Scandinavian. I mean the same arguments
(42:09):
used to be made about the Lombards, and like I was sort of on
the side of the people are saying, I doubt that they were even very
German that much by the time theygot to Italy, Like they probably already
they mixed a lot with the Italians, strayed away or whatever. But then
when they looked at the Lombard cemetery, like they were just pure Swedish generation
(42:31):
after generation, it was literally likea Swedish genetic profile of elites ruling northern
Italy. That was very surprising.So the way that the Scandinavian people spread
in the migration era was it wasvariable, like they mixed in some places,
like in England, they mixed quitequickly. The Anglo Saxon paper Gretzig
(42:52):
and all shows that they were quitewilling to mix quite quickly with the Britons.
But the loam Bards for a whileretained a Germanic profile in Italy before
they mixed into oblivion and ceased toexist. I imagine Italy was a good
deal more populous than post Roman Britain. That's part of the reason why they
(43:16):
that the Germanic DNA was sort ofless impactful in Lombardy than it was in
England. But there's also the theGoths mixed themselves out very quickly in Eastern
Europe and in Spain. So anyway, Viking, the Viking age is a
(43:38):
bit complicated. I guess there's theViking, the Norse, the Norse Gaels.
In Ireland, they were very quickto mix with the Irish and form
a new ethnic group which was separatefrom Norse Gales. So should we expect
something similar happened to Normandy. I'dthink so. I think they would have
mixed quite quickly with the French peoplearound them. Obviously they took they were
(44:00):
speaking French by ten sixty six,so that tells you something. You don't
switch. I think the switch toanother language is usually accompanied by mixing of
blood with the other language speakers.So but yeah, like it's all speculative
until we get some decent DNA,and for some reason, it just doesn't
seem like that's going to happen.Like Sam Hyde and survived, the jive
(44:27):
colab would be great as trout,that would be I think he's funny,
but I don't see how he couldcollab. But yeah, be cool.
It's strange says, First, theyoften claim black history in Britain is hidden,
when rather it is just inconsequential.I think that's accurate. Then,
on the other hand, they'll talkabout race as a modern construct from the
(44:51):
colonial period and the Middle Ladies andClassical period were a multicultural paradise because people
would be more ethnic and tribal.Is inconsistent. That's what Alistair is saying,
Yeah, it is, it is. It has one consistent These these
different theories, whichever they even whenthey oppose each other, contrasting, they
(45:13):
always have one thing consistent, andthat's that white people are bad, or
the idea of white people is bad. European identities are either protium fluid and
constantly adapting, in other words,except infinity migrants, or they don't exist
at all, They're completely imaginary,one or the other. That's the only
(45:38):
acceptable positions. You can have anyadvice tracing ancestors past sixteen hundreds. I
can't read the old handwriting. Youshould learn learn to read excursive. Some
of my Irish friends have. Ione wouldn't be surprised. A lot of
a lot of vikings, a lotof English with I won There are you
(46:04):
going back on lotus eaters. Iwas hoping you'd get more into the Anglo
Saxon religion, et cetera. Well, they said I could come back,
and I would be happy to.But Swindon's a bit of a slug for
me to go to. But Imight. I might do a stream with
them or something. I don't know. The English about sixty percent Celtic and
forty percent Germanic on average. Sortof Marty, there are sixty percent iron
(46:27):
Age Britain and forty percent Anglo Saxonin Germanic. Yes, on average,
So iron age Britons weren't pure Celtic. They had a percentage of Celtic ancestry
from the continent. But there's theactual breakdown of English people. Isn't a
two way breakdown, as regret Singerand colleagues paper from twenty twenty two shows,
(46:52):
is a three way breakdown of ironAge Britain and Germanic, Anglo Saxon
and French and the French is youknow, when you're using the breakdown of
Germanic versus Celtic, then it startsto make no sense anymore because many of
obviously the Franks were Germanic and theGauls were Celtic, but you're talking about
(47:15):
the same genetic group in many cases. So like if some of the Anglo
Saxons were accompanied by Frankish Germanic speakers, that's is that Germanic DNA or is
it you or is it Celtic DNA? Or because some of the French DNA
came later when they were speaking Frenchwas a Latin language, so then do
you class it as Latin DNA.This is the problem with like making racial
(47:40):
categories based on languages. It's notreally doesn't make sense because otherwise you've got
to start classing Jamaican DNA as Germanic, you know, Like okay, with
the Anglo Saxons, it's a bitmore sense to call Germanic because the Anglo
Saxons were coming from northern Germany andDenmark and maybe southern Sweden, all places
(48:00):
which are pretty much the core ProtoGermanic heartland, and they're not genetically different
from actual Proto Germanics. But theIron Age Britains are very different from Proto
Celts. Indeed, just as theFrench are very different from Latin speakers of
Rome, their language happens to derivefrom it, so yeah, that Celtic
(48:23):
versus Germanic thing is a little bitof a simplification of a more complicated story.
Anyway, I'm going to wrap thingsup now, guys, because it's
been an hour and it's getting lateand there's no more super chats coming in.
So I thank you all for watchingand whether you're listening on x or
(48:47):
on YouTube, and keep surviving thejive and I'll speak to you all soon.
Good night, Take care and headover to Patreon if you want to
access some exclusive videos that only mypatrons can see, such as one on
the genetics of Iberia and another oneon Focus versus Universalist. You should also
(49:13):
make sure to check up my tspring store to get some very indo European
garments. I'll see you next timeabout that now, not as a wow
(51:22):
lassop that say I died out?Donop what God God like not do like
It's jive talk, and today I'mgoing to be going back to the topic
that I've done in several videos recently, but not only streams of the fake
black history that has been pushed inBritain. The topic is basically being revived
because a book I already mentioned hasnow also been the subject of a exhibit
(00:43):
in Brixton, which probably not verymany people go to, but this is
public fund publicly funded museums, soit's relevant. And I also want to
talk about a paper from a coupleof years ago about the crew of the
Mary Rose allegedly being very diverse andeven including Africans, because when you look
at it with a close eye forthe details, you find that that's not
really likely to be the case,and there's some misleading stuff going on.
(01:07):
Let's get stuck into some of this, shall we. So basically the article
is in the Telegraph from a fewdays ago, I said the very first
Britons were black. An exhibition onthe Diverse History of Britain has claimed the
Brilliant Black British History Exhibition held thatthe Black Cultural Archives in Brixton, South
(01:27):
London makes a range of contentious claimsabout British history. It's that the Black
Cultural Archives in Brixton, South London, and makes a range of contentious claims.
Physicians are informed that the very firstBritons were black and that Britain was
black for seven thousand years before whitepeople came. Now this claim is again
(01:49):
digging up like the misinformation are ofWestern hunder Gaver has been black and people
thinking now of Africans is due toa few techniques in the media to try
and mislead people, and by usingthe term black, which is used ambiguously
in Britain and America in different ways, to try and convince the African diaspora
(02:12):
living within Britain that the Western hundergatherers were the same race as they are,
which is not true and everyone knowsthat it's not true, but they're
just trying to deceive these people tosort of whip them up into a kind
of sense of ethnic entitlement. Theassertions appear to be based on a genetic
study of the twelve thousand year oldremains of Cheddarman, which suggested that ancient
(02:35):
Britain's had dark skin, but thestudy and these claims have since been contested
by academics. The exhibition at theBlack Cultural Archives, which receives funding from
Lambauth Council Arts Council, England,is based on the Balloonmsbury Children's book Brilliant
Black British History by atin U kthe Nigerian born poet and author. It
says it's Nigerian born and that youcan see the picture of her, but
(02:58):
she's also not entirely Nigerian. Actuallyshe's got some white ancestry anyway, she
doesn't identify with that. But thefirst display panel in the exhibition states,
by testing DNA, scientists made anAmazon and Amazon discovery, the first migrants
to Britain around twelve thousand years agohad black skin. Well, it didn't
(03:22):
say they had black skin, itsaid they had dark intermediate skin. Yes,
that's right, the very first Britonswere black. Well, they weren't
related to black people by scanning,and we don't even know the complexion really
by scanning a QR code, visitorscan listen to audio which expands on this,
claiming that the white first Britons migratedfour five hundred BC years ago,
(03:46):
referring to the Beaker folk. Well, that would imply that the Neolithic race
that lived in between the Mesolithic race, and the Beaker folk wasn't white,
but they were. They were white. They were just Southern European sort of
race, like kind of like Sardiniansor Spaniards. Those people are white.
Britain was black for seven thousand yearsbefore that. No, In twenty eighteen
(04:09):
it was announced that the genetic studyof Turaman the old blah blah blah blah
blah. Yeah, so I'm notsure I'm allowed to read out the entire
article, but you get the idea. It runs until January twenty eighth.
It's finished now. And it alsoclaims that the third century Roman emperor Septimus
Severus was a black Roman ruler.He wasn't black, he didn't have any
(04:30):
black ancestry. He was half white, half North African. It's the good
thing the Telegraph has done this.Cambridge historian Professor David Abu Lafia said the
Brixton Expo is new to me,but the tendentious tone seems to be exactly
what I would expect. I amtotally nonplused by the obsession with the skin
color of people in Britain's remote past. They are unlikely to have existed,
and even though they did they didn'tpass on their dark skin to modern Britains.
(04:53):
Most Black Britains are ultimately of Africandescent, thank you, Dr David.
There is a deliberate effort to tryand whip up a kind of bit
of a racial tension among a blackcommunity where they feel like this is their
land and not ours, and thatthe idea of any like native entitlement is
(05:16):
actually like a racist cover up forlike you know, and there are enough
like conspirational minded people in uh,you know, urban communities where that sort
of thing finds fertile ground. Thefact remains that there's no black people in
Mesolithic and what is black anyway,because they're using the term black in different
(05:40):
ways. I'm going to go throughnow what that is. I will,
by the way, read any superchats that come in, and there's no
superchats come in, so nothing tosay, but we Mesolithic Britain was not
was an island. It was notan island yet, and the people there
were the same race as lived allover Europe western hand, the gatherers,
and probably they might have had darkskin, but then again, like the
(06:02):
genes that are associated with their blueeyes, they all have blue eyes are
found in modern populations to encourage depigmentation. So although they didn't have the genes
one of the genes associated with lightof complexions in modern Europeans, they had
genes that do encourage depigmentation of theskin, so it's possible they were actually
(06:23):
light skinned. All then again,they could have been dark skinned. We're
not really sure about it. Butin any case, there were carcasoid.
Racially, they were of the WestEurasian racial type and they weren't related to
black people. I've already done debunkingon CBBC's Horrible Histories thing where they make
the same climb. Afu were Hirsh, the racial activist said in National Geographic
(06:45):
that Cheddarman was a black African andno one rushed to you know, correct
her. AFU were Hirsh given thishuge platform, she specifically said he was
an African and he never No oneever made the claim he was an African,
and none of the scientists in thistwenty eighteen study, so she misinterpreted
black to mean African. But andshe's meant to be, you know,
an expert, and she was evengiven the platform of National Geographic, which
(07:10):
is meant to be a reputable magazine. But it isn't It isn't a mistake
that people, even like relatively intelligentblack people like Afrohirsh who's not very black,
I guess, but she's part black, make that mistake. They conflate
black and African, because that's howblack is generally used, especially in America.
(07:30):
The word black means African sub SaharanAfrican. But they are the media
are exploiting a kind of ambiguity ofthe term in this country. And also
like not just the terminology, butthe RTE Islands National Television and Radio broadcaster
made a program called the Burn theHeart of Stone, and that depicts Western
(07:50):
hunter gatherers in Ireland with as anAfrican with dreadlocks, which they didn't have
like curran you know, African hair, like they didn't look like it,
and that's brown Africans. The Dutchnews channel RTL News also depicted the Western
hud the gatherer man as a blackman with dreadlocks as well, in a
separate, independent thing. And they'veall done the exactly thing they whg.
(08:15):
These Mesolithic people had no African ancestryand they were less African than any white
people are today. So modern whitepeople are more related to Africans, and
they had brown hair which was straightor wavy, and blue eyes, so
you can't imagine a black person withstraight brown hair and blue eyes for a
start. And then also they didn'thave African shaped nose or any of the
(08:37):
things you associate with substaran Africans akablack people. They just wouldn't have looked
like black people to anyone if you'dsee them today, they just would never
be mistaken for a black person.Even if they were black, really dark
skin, which I don't think theyprobably were, they still wouldn't have been
mistaken for Africans. These people werereplaced by Anatolians six thousand BC, and
those people had light skin jeens,so in this book that they were like
(09:03):
she In this book, the authorsays that at a New k the half
Nigerian author says that the Stonehenge wasbuilt by black people. And then you're
not even talking about Western huntre gatherers. You're talking about the Neolithic people who
were the farmers, who had lightskin, even lighter than the previous people.
(09:24):
So neither of them were black people. But she's saying they were both
black people. Though that's completely crazyso did she confused Western hunter gatherers with
early European farmers. Even so,neither or African, neither of them looked
like her. Even though she's onlyhalf African, she's still going to be
darken than them. The misleading useof the term black to describe to the
man confused the public, including theracial activists like Marsha Garrett, who made
(09:48):
the same mistake in material that wasused in British schools for educational materials and
Affie were Hirsh in the National Geographic. So they're given platforms, important platforms
and then openly making the mistake ofconflating this term. The media used a
black meaning to mean African, andthey've convinced other black people the same,
(10:09):
and they're being using public money toconvince more black African people in Britain that
the Western hunder gathers are black.Now, academics use the term black in
this way hide behind a concept calledpolitically black. Politically black is a definition,
and they know full well that mostpeople don't know about that definition and
don't interpret it that way, butthey use it in a sneaky way.
(10:33):
It was basically invented as like away to like basically class all the non
white people in Britain as black inthe like, and it was only invented
recently, and actually a lot ofblack people, actual black people, didn't
like it because they didn't like theidea that we will be calling the Pakistanis
black people and that like, becausethat would like detract from their owning of
(10:56):
the term black, especially because blackpeople in Britain generally like quite a fond
connection to African American culture, whereblack is owned exclusively by people of African
descent that term. And then blackpeople in Britain by which I mean when
I say black, I mean SubtarranAfricans, so they want to have the
same use of the term black asbeing exclusively theirs. They don't view Chinese
(11:20):
people as black, they don't viewBengalis as black. So this term politically
black is really only used in avery very small, marginal like academic far
left community, and no one elseeven really knows about it. But they
can say politically black. Obviously thatcan't and it's based on like the idea
of marginalization, right, Obviously thatcan't apply to chair a man because the
(11:43):
whole idea of like marginalization can't beapplied retroactively to mesolithic populations. However,
like the adoption of this term politically, black relies on the idea of like
all referencing the way that black wasused in the former British Empire, which
was much more wide than it isnow. For example, Afghans were called
(12:07):
black, and pretty much anyone couldbe called black, like who wasn't like
European like it. It was usedin a in that sense, and so
was the N word. So theN word, you know, like Conrad
Novel talking that that there it's referringto Himalayan person and it can be used
(12:28):
to refer to Afghans or the end. So the N word was not like
just for black people, just asthe word black wasn't just for black people.
But that's like more than a hundredyears ago, and since then,
like the cultural influence of America andthe establishment of a sub Saharan African community
on in Britain has changed the wayblack's use. And it's just not true
(12:52):
to talk as if that's how everyoneuses the term black, Like no one
means Chinese people when they say blackanymore, like no one would ever use
whose the word Chinese to refer toa Napali like Napolee's referred to as black
before. They're not. That isdishonest to pretend that's how we use the
word, but they know that theycan then say use it okay by that
definition ted a man was black whatever, even though they know full well that
(13:15):
they're encouraging people like athle were Hirshto identify herself as belonging to the same
race as a Mesolethic population of Europe. They seem to think it's only the
population of Britain because they always justsay the first Britons. They don't say
the first Europeans. The weird thingis like these people didn't live uniquely in
Britain. Britain wasn't even an island. It was just connected to the rest
of the Europe, and all ofWestern Europe had the same race in it.
(13:37):
So if they were going to claimthat their first Britains were black,
why not to say the first Europeanswere black. It's stupid And anyway,
the Western hundon gatherers weren't the firsthuman beings to live on this island.
There were other people before them anyway, so it's just wrong, wrong,
wrong, wrong, wrong, allthe way in many different levels, and
it's dumb. Uh and anyway,I think that it's being done for specific
(13:58):
purpose to encourage like hatred of theindigenous people in this island so that they
can like encourage these new incomers tofeel like everything is theirs and that like
the Natives don't have any rights toyou know, you know, any sort
of claims of indigenouity, any claimsof like native privileges or anything like that.
(14:24):
Here we got Cherry Appleton sent asuper chat. Thank you, Cherry.
It doesn't say anything though, soI guess you don't have anything to
say, but thank you charity.That's really much appreciated, and we have
five pounds from LS. That's notthe only one. That's not the only
thing I wanted to talk about today, because there's also I mean the early
(14:48):
modern period of history, the Tudortimes, and they've done this in that
horrible history thing where they had thetrumpeter and everyone focused on this trumpeter.
Now, I said before, therearen't very so many black people in like
Tudor England, but they're probably whatthey're definitely worth some because of the Moors
having black slaves and therefore included someBlackamoors, like some of the people among
(15:13):
the Moors who were a North AfricanMiddle Eastern people were Substian Africans who had
been freed because you can win yourfreedom of your convert to Islam. And
then some of those blacks made theirway into Mouris, Spain, Andalusia,
and then some from there maybe cameto Britain and were all like you know,
were used as sort of human trophiesby the king. For example is
(15:35):
trumpeter black trumpeter, and there wereothers as well. Now there it was
an article an article by Scora etal. Scotta and colleagues from twenty twenty one
called Diversity aboard a Tudor warship investigatingthe origins of the mary Rose Crew using
multi isotope analysis. The mary Roseis a ship that's sunk in the sixteenth
(15:56):
century and two the times, andit's dougga. It was take on display
in Portsmouth and it's like quite agood sort of historical thing that we celebrate
in this country. It's not aswell preserved as the Vassa ship in Sweden,
which is a similar period, butit's more important because it actually was
(16:17):
used whereas the Vassa ship sunk onits maiden voyage in the harbor. It's
there, aren't. The paper startswith fluff about how there were blacks in
Tudor, England and referencing dubious booksthat aren't really scientific, books like they
provide little to no evidence for theclaims in them, and this paper is
(16:40):
citing these books. They one ofthe such books. They cite this Black
Tudors The Untold Story by Miranda Kaufman, and she relies on very sparse sources,
often legal records, parish registers ofbirths, deaths and marriages and tax
papers and things like that. It'sdon't even record race anyway, and she
makes massive assumptions about the races ofthe people she's talking about, sometimes based
(17:03):
only on their surname, where someone'scalled black as a surname or kneejer or
Blacker Moore or simply more, shejust assumes that they're black. Now,
of course, you know that manywhite British people have the surname more or
black. Those are not like ThomasMoore, for example, so it doesn't
really hold up. But based onthat, she identifies between three hundred and
(17:26):
four hundred black people living in Englandnot as slaves in that Tudor period,
which isn't very many really, Imean I thought it was. There's an
estimation I've seen elsewhere of three hundredand sixty in the period between fifteen hundred
and sixteen forty, So in onehundred and forty years, approximately three hundred
and sixty, which equals roughly twopoint five black people per year. It's
(17:51):
not very many. But anyway,I don't think that that numbers correct anyway,
because that methodology is not very good. Like you can't just assume someone's
black as they're name is black.That's not anyway. There was a population
then of maybe there was one hundredthere at any time, so that would
mean there was a population of aboutfour million in England at the time.
(18:14):
So that's one hundred people out offour million, which is zero point zero
zero two five percent of the population. It's nothing, it's absolutely like nothing.
It's within the margin of error.However, even that number was too
much, because in fifteen ninety six, a merchant named Van Senden authorized a
letter from the Privy Council to portBlackamoor's took back to Spain and the Masters
(18:37):
of the blacks didn't want to losetheir servants, so that was they opposed
it. So there were black peopleenough that Van Senden complained about them and
that the masters of the blacks didn'twant them being sent away. And then
Van Senden appealed to the Queen forthe power to deport the blacks and without
the interruption of any persons, includingtheir masters, but he failed to achieve
(18:57):
that. So there were some blackpeople. But yeah, like she's saying
between three hundred and four hundred inthis book, and that's sort cited by
Scorer's the Scorer and Colleagues article,and that should show you that it's very
duous. And that's a big chunkat the beginning. But then when it
gets to the actual meat of thearticle, the paper which isn't talking about
(19:18):
like the you know, textual evidence, is saying that it's an isotope study
and DNA study, But there isn'tany DNA in this study. It's only
isotope really so and also, justlike Rebecca Redfern, they rely on macromorphoscopics,
which is not reliable. But yeah, let's get to that later.
It's mainly isotope analysis, which looksat the annamel on your teeth and the
minerals that have affected the enamel duringyour childhood. The eight mary Rose individuals
(19:45):
have values compatible with British origins,which evans at all estimates ranging between bah
blah blah blah. Furthermore, theseare recorded that various locations around Europe,
Africa, in the Middle least andare by no means unique to Britain.
So they're saying that they could beall Brew British anyway, they could have
all been raised in Britain, sobut they could have been also raised elsewhere
(20:08):
because it's not that useful. Interpretationis difficult as there is no local baseline
to compare with four distinguishing locals fromnon locals, and therefore the integration of
multiple proxies is key to interpretation.But it does conclude that as many as
three individuals, maybe from warmer climatesthan Britain, one called FCS eighty five
may well have originated from southern Europe. One of these sailors, and FCS
(20:32):
seventy and FCS eighty one have valuesconsistent with the Mediterranean or inland southern Europe.
So maybe three of them, yeah, three of them Southern Europe,
Mediterranean, probably Spain, probably Spain, right because of the interaction to Spain
and Britain at the time. Innumber seventy, they called the Royal Archer
(20:55):
had a leather risk guard bearing asymbol of a pomegranate, and they conclude
that since pomegranates could be associated withMoors, they because they were an exotic
fruit, not from Yeah, well, anyway, it was also a symbol
used for Catherine of Aragen's branch ofthe English world family. Considering the potential
elevation of values due to dietary factors, it's is possible that this individual was
(21:19):
an Iberian. More, it's possiblelyhe was an Iberian. More, it's
possibly he was an Iberian. Whorit's possible he was just British. It's
like he's got a pomegranate on hiswrist strap, so what Anyway, this
is supported by the dietary isotopes ofnumber seventy, which indicates a diet consistent
with Spanish origins. I'm going toguess he's a Spaniard. So then they
(21:41):
absolutely referenced Rebecca Redfern, who I'mnot. If you haven't been a where
I have done two videos sort ofdebunking hers, and he claims about Roman
Britain being black, and her claimsabout like she tries to make everything black
anyway, and she does it withjust like this really sloppy sort of method
called macromorphoscopics which looks at the shapeof skulls, eye sockets and things like
(22:06):
that and guesses race. And evenher colleague admits in her own papers that
it's not a reliable method and theycan't get like consistent results, so it's
not falsifiably like reliable. It's notlike it just isn't a good enough way
to identify the rates of people inthe past, especially when we have a
method that does relia like identify therace DNA alien air analysis. But anyway,
(22:33):
so they reference her, They citeher, and the authors acknowledge the
problematic history of ancestry estimation stemming fromearly pursuits of scientific racism. Although we
recognize the methodological and ethical concerns regardingthese approaches in forensic contexts, we also
agree that not seeking evidence of humandiversity and phenotypic variation in the archaeological record
only obscures it. Further, somethinghistorians a're actively addressing, so they acknowledge
(22:56):
that it was a little bit wascistto look at people's skulls, but it's
okay because we're doing it to tellpeople that everyone was black or something.
I guess, but yeah, theythe method has repeatedly resulted in incorrect estimations
of race, as in the caseof beachy head Woman, and they didn't
mention, but beaty head women,like everyone was saying she was black and
(23:18):
she wasn't. And some of RedFund's work to buy her own colleagues admission
is just not getting positive results.So they say to improve the clarity of
isotope data, and with the possibilityof North African origins for number seventy and
eighty one and potential African ancestry numbernine, further craniometric and more phos copic
analyses were conducted. So the craniometricresult for number nine was closest to what
(23:45):
they call a Hispanic male from theForensic Data Bank sample, so their Hispanic.
The databank sample includes like Latinos inAmerica who are mixed Iberian and Native
American, but it also includes peoplepretty much just Spanish, I guess,
like and he's going to get ahe's obviously he's not Native American, he's
(24:07):
not a Mexican. This guy isa Spanish guy. Hence he's getting a
positive for Hispanic. It was black. So they also say that there's this
thing an interperetial bone, which isalso called an incer bone because it was
associal with the incas, and they'veused the term incabone in the study to
try and reinforce this idea that maybeit was native or something. But that
(24:29):
bone is something that is more commonin Africans and Asians than Europeans, but
it is found in Europeans. Soanyway, the fact that that's in number
seventy is not proof that it isn'tEuropean. But then referring to it and
it adds number seventy was closest towhite males in the data bank they had
to talk about or did have theincerbone thing, but OHI, by the
(24:52):
way, it's closest in the databank to white males, So yeah,
again it looks probably not black.Due to incompleteness number seventy and eighty one.
The only morphoscopic analysis that was possiblewas the decision tree. Both number
seventy and eighty one were classified asblack. Decision Tree is macromorphoscopic method that
(25:15):
they've developed. Number nine was analyzedusing decision tree and USA in OSSA.
I don't know what that is.In both tests, number nine was classified
as black in the other in themacromorphoscopics, so they have it. Number
nine was Hispanic in the craniometric studythat came out as black from decision tree.
(25:41):
The interpretations are made in consideration ofavailable data, but maybe revised in
future studies with the addition of otherforms of evidence used in studies of population
affinities, such as ancient DNA ADNA and post craniometrics and dental morphopology.
Yeah. Yeah, that would bea good idea, wouldn't it. It
would be a really good idea.These intent So again, these these are
(26:03):
made in consideration of invailable data,but they may be revised in future studies.
In other words, we haven't there'sno DNA and these everything we say
is probably not reliable until there isDNA. That is basically what they're saying,
like, until some reliable data isthere, we're going to try and
like twist everything so that you couldsay maybe the black and they're only able
to do it for three individuals,and obviously none of them are black.
(26:26):
But then this whole scope of this, like art, like paper and the
media, was that there are blackpeople on the Merry Roads, but there
isn't any. There aren't any.There's no through of a single black person
on there. So number nine isotopeanalysis shows he was raised in Britain,
but by macromorphoscopics they reckon he wasblack despite him matching Spaniards in craniometric analysis.
So he's probably a Spaniard raised inEngland, or maybe it wasn't even
(26:48):
a Spaniard, don't know. Thedifference in ancestry estimates between the metric and
morphoscopic methods are not incompatible when consideredin the context of a deep medieval history
between North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula. Well, I suppose, yeah,
that's true. There is a fairbit of Moorish DNA and in Spain at
the time, so it could haveMoorish DNA, But the Moors aren't black,
most of them aren't black. Themore as symmetry, there was analysis
(27:11):
of a more asymmetry and there weremore white Moors of Iberian ancestry than there
were mores of Black African ancestry,and there were most black ancestry, and
any of the mores was like fiftypercent max. The Moors themselves were Middle
Eastern, but they also included whitesand blacks who were enslaved and then and
freed again when they convert to Islam. So yeah, he could have been
(27:33):
a more, but it doesn't meanhe was black. Macromorph MACROMORPHU Scobbish is
the least reliable data here, andthey're going with that most of all.
More. I mean that the isotopeanalysis is reliable somewhat, but I mean
it doesn't tell you anything about ethnicity. It just tells you the region that
you grew up in. So morelikely this is a Spaniard and moved to
(27:53):
England when he was young. Theyalso tried to push the other two into
North Africa through some other methods.They're trying desperately to make the other two
samples seventy and eighty one be NorthAfrican. The craniometric ancestry estimate for seventy
should be approached with caution given theoverall low typicality, which suggests number seventy
is dissimilar to all three populations orpotentially of diverse heritage. However, this
(28:18):
may be because fewer measurements were possibledue to poorer preservation than number nine.
This contrast with morphoscopic analysis, inwhich the decision Try classified seventy along the
same branch as number nine, resultingin an estimate of black. Eighty one
was also estimated as black using thedecision Try, but followed a different branch
from seventy and nine. Furthermore,it was only possible to analyze eighty one
(28:45):
using one ancestry estimation from method,so the results are not as strong.
Therefore, based on the more morphoscopicancestry estimate and the isotope evidence origins in
inland North Africa cannot be discounted fornumber seventy, with Iberia also being possible.
Possible, it's just a Spaniard possibleand also likely, in fact almost
(29:08):
certain. The first author on thepaper is a nice looking young girl called
Jessica Scorer. She was an MScgraduate at Cardiff University School of History,
Archaeology and Religion, and she said, our point our findings point to the
important contributions that individuals have diverse backgroundsand origins made to England to England's navy
(29:30):
during this period. No they don't, No, they don't. Couple of
Spaniards. This adds to the evergrowing body of evidence for diversity and geographic
origins, ancestry and lived experiences inTudor, England. No love, Okay,
it's really nice that they let thisyoung girl be the you know,
the first name on the paper.But yeah, she's a background in archaeology
(29:52):
and librarianism and she now works forthe NHS. She doesn't know about DNA.
There were a couple of other archaeologistson the paper two that probably helped
with the archaeology stuff, but therewasn't a great deal of archaeology stuff.
It's mostly isotope and they've got forthe experts on isotope analysis, they got
Dr mart alben Mill, Doctor MortonAnderson, Angela Lamb and Alexandri Neiderbraacht.
(30:18):
So they were a lot focused onthe teeth stuff. But who what about
the other stuff? Well, there'sa guy called Richard Madwick is an archaeological
scientist to use his molecular, microscopicand macroscopic methods, so I guess he
was the guy who did the macromorphoscopics in the in the vein of Rebecca
Redferam. But there is no geneticiston the paper. There's not a single
(30:40):
geneticists on the paper, so theydon't have any genetic evidence or anything for
a black person. There's no it'snot a genetics paper these So the conclusion
is as follows. These interpretations mayrequire future refinement. You don't say future
isotopic ancestry and ad anda analysis ofmore of the human remains of the Mary
Rose will result in a more completenarrative of both Henry the Eighth Navy and
(31:03):
Widitude of World. I agree withI agree with that that conclusion. I
agree with it one hundred percent.Get from DNA and just shut up until
then. For God's sake. Oh, I've got another super chat. Jeff
Simpson Scott sends twenty pounds. Thanksa lot. I appreciate that, Jeff.
He asks word WHC the same asthe first humans to enter Europe?
(31:27):
Tom, if not, can youbriefly summarize the differences found from DNA analysis?
Please? No, they weren't.It's a bit complicated, but there's
like multiple races in Europe in theIce Age the Aurugnation and Gravettian than the
main ones, and I believe thatthe WHG were previously believed not to be
(31:48):
related to either and to therefore beof some refugeia that came out of nowhere.
But now it's believed that they diddescend from one of these races and
that they dominated and replaced the otherone. But they are a bit different
to those two races, and that'sbecause they they had Also, the WHC
also have some admixture from an easternsource in Siberia, related to the ancient
(32:12):
North eur Asians, probably but that'snot certain. But yeah, basically they
are related to the first humans inEurope from the Ice Age, but not
they're different as well. They're alsodistinct. Do we think ls us Do
we think these people are consciously lyingor have they drunk the kool aid?
Well, in the case is likethis Mary Rose paper, I think there's
like, uh, there's multiple thingsgoing on. Like I don't think these
(32:37):
people are necessarily part of a conspiracy, They're just trying to There's one thing
that that there's a very there's apervasive liberal ideology in Britain at the moment,
and it's especially powerful in white collarenvironments like middle class areas, so
academics are especially likely to be seducedby it. And when you get a
(33:01):
bunch of people seduced by the sameideology in the room, all in the
same room, then they're going tocome to like they're going to have like
a certain prejudices and prize that leadthem towards certain conclusions. They'll all be
wanting to find something like that.That's one possibility and unanalyzed priors that they
haven't you know, tried to overcome. The other is that there is a
(33:24):
financial incentive because it's published by theRoyal Society, and maybe you're more likely
to get like published and also morelikely to get media attention if you can
have a sensational title like black peoplein Tunor Britain, Because obviously there's a
lot of people in the media whoreally like that sort of thing, and
(33:45):
even there's people in the media whodon't really like that sort of thing,
but they know that it gets hateplays, so they want to publish that
kind of article as they you know, they get more ad money for it.
So there are many reasons why thereare incentives for people to put to
push things that way. But theway that they've done it is so like
desperate, it's so desperate to findnon white people on the Mary Rose that
(34:09):
it's a little bit suspicious. Imean, it could be there is something
conspiracial going on, but it's hardfor all of them to be. You
know, it's not necessary for themto be a conspiracy to explain it.
You don't need a conspiracy theory toexplain it. It's just the sort of
cultural climate we exist in now.Indo Celticist says on X why can flate
(34:30):
black with African and then never shutup about colorism? I just say something
full disclosure. When we're talking aboutLambeth Council, which funded the exhibition in
Brixton that I talked about before,Lambeth Council illegally resold my family comes from
Brixton. Before we moved to India, we lived in Brixton. The Roussals
(34:51):
lived in Brixton and the house there, and there's many of my family buried
in Brixton or were the Lambeth Councilillegally we sold my family's grave plots and
buried other people on top of myfamily and removed the gravestones and they never
have seen an apology or anything ofthe kind for that. They did it
illegally. They've been in trouble forit that I and I said that,
(35:15):
and people even said some lefty saidthat I made it up. I didn't
make that up. That's what happened. Several of my ancestors' graves were desecrated
by the Lambeth Council and probably Idon't know for sure, but because the
majority of the population of bricks andan Africa Caribbean, it's probably to make
way for putting the bodies of AfricaCaribbeans on top of my ancestors. This
is a very very serious crime andthere's no they're not being held responsible for
(35:38):
it. Landbouth Council is a reallyreally nasty institution I got. I can
see all the comments on x aswell. Now, the odd foreigner at
a port and on ships isn't areflection on the demo demographics of a wider
area. That's correct, and thatby the way, the the books that
(36:01):
talk about black Tudor England admit thatlike it's mostly concentrated on the ports on
the south part of England. They'rejust hanging around the ports, and that's
the same like in Japan the portsthat you can find Russians around the ports.
Russia is just across the sea.But like the Russians don't contribute a
(36:21):
great deal to Japanese culture and aren'ta major part of Russians of Japanese society,
there are just Russians around the portsfor obvious reasons. That's like,
you know, that's where they near, where they work. Spurglar hellospurglar on
x. He says the Spanish shouldbe the first to refute such claims on
(36:43):
national pride alone. Yeah, theyshould, although I think they could be
Spaniards. There are some Spaniard people. Someone says, if I had twenty
three percent sub Saharan admics, wouldyou consider me black even looking the same
as I do? Now? Well, I don't know what you look like,
man, whoever you are. Butthe the in America, I believe
(37:08):
that people with less than twenty eightpercent ancestry black ancestry generally don't identify as
black. So but obviously it variesin different places. I can imagine there
are plenty in Britain that people withtwenty five percent black ancestry might well identify
as black as that's they might considerit prestigious in the current social climate.
(37:30):
But yeah, in America, that'sgenerally not the case that people identify as
black when they're a quart of blackbro has the Norman fade, says Polaris
on X. Yeah, I'm NormanMaxing right now, I'm going to switch
to wine maybe now, I don'twhy I'm not going to switch to wine.
(37:50):
No, it's it's kind of likeweird to claim that this tiny amount
of black people in Tudor England islike significant for our history because there hasn't
been a single one identified who hadany significance historically, and they hadn't existed,
it wouldn't have made any difference toanything in history. But and also
the modern communities of black people inBritain don't descend from the handful of black
(38:14):
people who lived in tun To Britainfive hundred years ago, so like and
yeah, they're not even closely relatedbecause they were I don't know, well
they might be a little bit,but yeah, it depends, but yeah,
(38:35):
they were a tiny minority. Andlike, if we had a tradition
of having black people but in thecountry, whatever you could that's what they're
trying to argue. Because there werethis, you know, few hundred people
in the ports in southern England,then you can also say that we had
a tradition of trying to kick themout, because that's what Van Senden tried
to do and there was hardly anythere. Like what was van Senden's motivation
(39:01):
living in a country of over amillion people and just a few hundred black
people, black servants specifically, isreferring to really upset him? Like what
was it about them that upset him? Like we're told that racism is this
post colonial thing and like it comeup, it came from like out of
that Well, obviously that's not thetrue if Van Sender was a racist,
(39:22):
although I should add that there aremy main lefty enemies, like in the
historical you know, in medievalist historianMary ram Branham and Eric Wade. They
both have a different angle and theyclaim that actually Britain was racist since Anglo
Saxon times, the Anglo Saxons.They don't just say that word Anglo Saxon
(39:44):
is racist, they say the AngloSaxons themselves were racist. I got a
quote from him, Eric Wade saysthat medieval England was a place of intense
anti Semitism, intense Islamophobia, andincredible discourses of anti blackness from the early
medieval period onwards. Right, butthey like why do they? I mean,
(40:08):
I don't know if that's even true, Like, I can't they probably
what that's probably is true that dependingon what your definition of racism is.
But yeah, they probably were quiteracist. Like obviously Van Senden wanted to
kick him out. If kick wantedto kick him out racist then then then
yeah it is. But like maybehe's not racist, just didn't like him,
as Bad says. So, yeah, I'm referencing a meme of bad
(40:35):
A Barry. It's a British memeof a bloke who says, I'm not
racist, I just don't like him. I can't. Actually, I don't
know what precisely Eric word is referringto that made him think the Anglo Saxons
were racist, because but I mean, sure, I don't care if you
think they were. What But how'sthe DNA testing of the Old Norman Dukes
(40:57):
developing? Haven't heard much of what. I didn't know that there was any
Old Norman Duke's being DNA tested.They think the French government's quite averse to
it. I did the video onthe Norman DNA, and everything I can
find there's no decent There's no decentNorman DNA testing anywhere. I don't think
there's going to be. But Ithink we may never know the real story
(41:20):
of when the Normans became French andceased to be Viking, which is what
everyone wants to know, Like theywant to know how Norman were the Vikings
by ten sixties, How Viking werethe Normans by ten sixty six. I
think that's what people want to know, like how did they still have genetic
like profile like a Scandinavian by tensixty six or some of them and some
(41:44):
didn't. And I've seen loads ofpeople argue either side. You know that
there were definitely Vikings, and there'sno there were French, and I don't
see the point of arguing about itbecause you don't really know. And you
can go buy a few genealogical recordsof some of them, but that's like
that's of some of them. Iwould like to see the DNA evidence,
but I suspect that they were stillsomewhat Scandinavian. I mean the same arguments
(42:09):
used to be made about the Lombards, and like I was sort of on
the side of the people are saying, I doubt that they were even very
German that much by the time theygot to Italy, Like they probably already
they mixed a lot with the Italians, strayed away or whatever. But then
when they looked at the Lombard cemetery, like they were just pure Swedish generation
(42:31):
after generation, it was literally likea Swedish genetic profile of elites ruling northern
Italy. That was very surprising.So the way that the Scandinavian people spread
in the migration era was it wasvariable, like they mixed in some places,
like in England, they mixed quitequickly. The Anglo Saxon paper Gretzig
(42:52):
and all shows that they were quitewilling to mix quite quickly with the Britons.
But the loam Bards for a whileretained a Germanic profile in Italy before
they mixed into oblivion and ceased toexist. I imagine Italy was a good
deal more populous than post Roman Britain. That's part of the reason why they
(43:16):
that the Germanic DNA was sort ofless impactful in Lombardy than it was in
England. But there's also the theGoths mixed themselves out very quickly in Eastern
Europe and in Spain. So anyway, Viking, the Viking age is a
(43:38):
bit complicated. I guess there's theViking, the Norse, the Norse Gaels.
In Ireland, they were very quickto mix with the Irish and form
a new ethnic group which was separatefrom Norse Gales. So should we expect
something similar happened to Normandy. I'dthink so. I think they would have
mixed quite quickly with the French peoplearound them. Obviously they took they were
(44:00):
speaking French by ten sixty six,so that tells you something. You don't
switch. I think the switch toanother language is usually accompanied by mixing of
blood with the other language speakers.So but yeah, like it's all speculative
until we get some decent DNA,and for some reason, it just doesn't
seem like that's going to happen.Like Sam Hyde and survived, the jive
(44:27):
colab would be great as trout,that would be I think he's funny,
but I don't see how he couldcollab. But yeah, be cool.
It's strange says, First, theyoften claim black history in Britain is hidden,
when rather it is just inconsequential.I think that's accurate. Then,
on the other hand, they'll talkabout race as a modern construct from the
(44:51):
colonial period and the Middle Ladies andClassical period were a multicultural paradise because people
would be more ethnic and tribal.Is inconsistent. That's what Alistair is saying,
Yeah, it is, it is. It has one consistent These these
different theories, whichever they even whenthey oppose each other, contrasting, they
(45:13):
always have one thing consistent, andthat's that white people are bad, or
the idea of white people is bad. European identities are either protium fluid and
constantly adapting, in other words,except infinity migrants, or they don't exist
at all, They're completely imaginary,one or the other. That's the only
(45:38):
acceptable positions. You can have anyadvice tracing ancestors past sixteen hundreds. I
can't read the old handwriting. Youshould learn learn to read excursive. Some
of my Irish friends have. Ione wouldn't be surprised. A lot of
a lot of vikings, a lotof English with I won There are you
(46:04):
going back on lotus eaters. Iwas hoping you'd get more into the Anglo
Saxon religion, et cetera. Well, they said I could come back,
and I would be happy to.But Swindon's a bit of a slug for
me to go to. But Imight. I might do a stream with
them or something. I don't know. The English about sixty percent Celtic and
forty percent Germanic on average. Sortof Marty, there are sixty percent iron
(46:27):
Age Britain and forty percent Anglo Saxonin Germanic. Yes, on average,
So iron age Britons weren't pure Celtic. They had a percentage of Celtic ancestry
from the continent. But there's theactual breakdown of English people. Isn't a
two way breakdown, as regret Singerand colleagues paper from twenty twenty two shows,
(46:52):
is a three way breakdown of ironAge Britain and Germanic, Anglo Saxon
and French and the French is youknow, when you're using the breakdown of
Germanic versus Celtic, then it startsto make no sense anymore because many of
obviously the Franks were Germanic and theGauls were Celtic, but you're talking about
(47:15):
the same genetic group in many cases. So like if some of the Anglo
Saxons were accompanied by Frankish Germanic speakers, that's is that Germanic DNA or is
it you or is it Celtic DNA? Or because some of the French DNA
came later when they were speaking Frenchwas a Latin language, so then do
you class it as Latin DNA.This is the problem with like making racial
(47:40):
categories based on languages. It's notreally doesn't make sense because otherwise you've got
to start classing Jamaican DNA as Germanic, you know, Like okay, with
the Anglo Saxons, it's a bitmore sense to call Germanic because the Anglo
Saxons were coming from northern Germany andDenmark and maybe southern Sweden, all places
(48:00):
which are pretty much the core ProtoGermanic heartland, and they're not genetically different
from actual Proto Germanics. But theIron Age Britains are very different from Proto
Celts. Indeed, just as theFrench are very different from Latin speakers of
Rome, their language happens to derivefrom it, so yeah, that Celtic
(48:23):
versus Germanic thing is a little bitof a simplification of a more complicated story.
Anyway, I'm going to wrap thingsup now, guys, because it's
been an hour and it's getting lateand there's no more super chats coming in.
So I thank you all for watchingand whether you're listening on x or
(48:47):
on YouTube, and keep surviving thejive and I'll speak to you all soon.
Good night, Take care and headover to Patreon if you want to
access some exclusive videos that only mypatrons can see, such as one on
the genetics of Iberia and another oneon Focus versus Universalist. You should also
(49:13):
make sure to check up my tspring store to get some very indo European
garments. I'll see you next timeabout that now, not as a wow
(51:22):
lassop that say I died out?Donop what God God like not do like
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com