Pots: schutterijstuk with Mr. Salomon Colterman in the middle, with a huge afro hairdo. He payed for this private militia.
This image really sums up my blue blood research: a Black man in the middle, the Blacks dominating the whites. Colterman was a beer brewer in the city of Haarlem, North Holland province.
[De Regentessen van het Oudemannenhuis door Frans Hals]
Again a board of regents, all black and coloured in the Dutch city of Haarlem. It just cannot be a coincidence they all are Black, unless Blacks were the elite. Only the servant looks white.
This is a masterpiece, were only a few strokes determine the facial traits, and makes different mulattoe types.
Staalmeesters by Rembrandt: an all Black group of regents from Amsterdam.
THE BLUE BLOOD IS BLACK BLOOD (1500-1789) THEORY
From Franklin Snow’s ‘Black in Antiquity’ (1971) we learn that during the Classical Era (800 BC-300 AD) Blacks were part of the European, Mediterranean civilisations and were described and depicted in a positive fashion. There was no colour line, as colour was rightly understood as an adaptation to environment, which did not speak of a person’s merit. Racism was projected on the Classical Era by 20th century American researchers, from the Jim Crow Era, when white America openly waged a racist war against its Blacks. This ‘adaptation’ of history to suit the need of a period, by giving racism a historical base, is revisionism. Part of this revising of history was denying that some images, pottery or statues depicted Blacks, by describing them as ‘caricatures’ of a white person. Yet by actually viewing them, most viewers recognise Classical African features. Africa has many faces, but the classical African types symbolises the whole of Africans. This type has; brown or black skin, woolly hair, a flat and broad nose, thick protruding lips, long arms and legs, steatopygie, narrow hips and bandy legs with flat feet. The subnasal prognathism seems to be the most distinguishing and controversial element in the controversy regarding the looks of Blacks, and branding them as ‘ugly.’ And was presented as proof of their inferiority and their proximity to apes. From 1760 human races were invented, nations were defined by skin colour, whites were regarded as superior humans and the summit of the evolution, while the Blacks were the lowest step of the human evolutional ladder.
[Filips II Habsburg]
The Declaration of Human Rights should be understood as whites asking their Black masters for equality. But because of restorations white emancipation followed only around 1848. And only after this date European history was whitewashed, Black Europeans were forced into biological assimilation and marry with whites. Museums displayed whitened, fake portraits of the Black kings and queens. Racism is then a liberation ideology to free whites who were indoctrinated to believe that Blacks were superior beings.
BLACK EUROPEANS WERE CALLED BLUE MAN
BLUE MEN (500-1500)[/b]
Were there ever any black Vikings?
There were trade routes between Northern Europe and Africa, India and China, so it is very likely that people from all over the world would have visited Scotland.
It is also likely that some Northern Europeans would have settled in other parts of the world and some people from Africa, India and other areas would have settled in Northern Europe. Direct evidence of this is rather hard to find, however.
There's a complication in translations of medieval records because a description of someone as "a black man" was used to mean someone with black hair, not black skin.
Norse sagas describe Africans as "Blaumenn" (blue men). There are stories of Blaumenn in Dublin and of someone called Kenneth of Niger in Scotland in the 10th Century.
In the middle ages Muslims were considered as bad or even worse than heathens, because they worshipped Muhammad, who was an Antichrist to Christians. There are not many episodes in Heimskringla that concern Muslims, or ‘blámenn’ as they are called in the sagas. King Sigurd Jorsalafar is said to have fought heathens in Spain on his way to Jerusalem. He plundered with his crew on the island of Formentera, where there was a ‘herr mikill heiðinna blámanna’. Sigurd’s men win the battle of course (Msona chs. V-VI). Heimskringla does not mention anything about Muslim beliefs, but obviously there was no need to clarify the evilness of the blámenn to the audience since the word ‘blár’ reveals that these men were very different from the heroic King Sigurd and his men. Even though blár means ‘blue,’ in this case it signifies ‘black.’ These ‘blue men’ lived in Spain or the south Mediterranean. ‘Blámenn’ refers not only to literally black men, but also to Arabs and Moors. The use of the term ‘blámenn’ indicates that the writer wanted to stress that they were of different ethnic origin than the Norse people. We should also remember, too, that in the fornaldarsögur the term ‘blámenn’ refers to earthly creatures of evil (e.g. ‘blámenn ok berserkir’ Lindow, 1995, 13-14). This ethnic implication was probably more important to the intended audience of the saga than any, rightly omitted, information about the religious beliefs of the blámenn.
Frances 488. Tue Oct 21, 2003 10:26 pm
I'm sure I read that black men were called 'blue men' by the Vikings. Also that some African tribes have no separate words for blue and green, as the differentiation is of no importance in their necessary world-view. However, they can readily recognise the difference when it's pointed out to them. The same as we don't have four hundred words for different aspects of camels, as I'm told Arabs do, only in reverse. If you see what I mean.
Adellijk huwelijk met een Moor in de huwelijksprocessie. Habsburg, Renaissance.