Charles Stuart II, House of Stuart, The Black Boy, Inn, Pubs

Charles II, House of Stuart, (29 May 1630 – 6 February 1685)

After the death of Cromwell in 1658, Charles's chances of regaining the Crown at first seemed slim as Cromwell was succeeded as Lord Protector by his son, Richard.

Charles I, House of Stuart, father of Charles II

However, the new Lord Protector, with no power base in either Parliament or the New Model Army, was forced to abdicate in 1659 and the Protectorate was abolished. During the civil and military unrest which followed, George Monck, the Governor of Scotland, was concerned that the nation would descend into anarchy.

Monck and his army marched into the City of London and forced the Rump Parliament to re-admit members of the Long Parliament excluded in December 1648 during Pride's Purge.

The Long Parliament dissolved itself and for the first time in almost 20 years, there was a general election. The outgoing Parliament designed the electoral qualifications so as to ensure, as they thought, the return of a Presbyterian majority. The restrictions against royalist candidates and voters were widely ignored, and the elections resulted in a House of Commons which was fairly evenly divided on political grounds between Royalists and Parliamentarians and on religious grounds between Anglicans and Presbyterians.

The new so-called Convention Parliament assembled on 25 April 1660, and soon afterward received news of the Declaration of Breda, in which Charles agreed, amongst other things, to pardon many of his father's enemies. The English Parliament resolved to proclaim Charles king and invite him to return, a message that reached Charles at Breda on 8 May 1660.

A Caucasian type portrait of Charles II

In Ireland, a convention had been called earlier in the year, and on 14 May it declared for Charles II as King. Charles II, who dated his accession from the death of his father, did not take up the reins of government until the restoration of the monarchy in 1660. After 1660, all legal documents were dated as if Charles had succeeded his father as king in 1649.

In that same year, Charles I was canonised as Saint Charles Stuart and King Charles the Martyr by the Church of England and is venerated throughout the Anglican Communion. Charles's English parliament enacted laws known as the Clarendon Code, designed to shore up the position of the re-established Church of England. Charles acquiesced to the Clarendon Code even though he himself favoured a policy of religious tolerance.

The major foreign policy issue of Charles's early reign was the Second Anglo-Dutch War. In 1670, Charles entered into the secret treaty of Dover, an alliance with his first cousin King Louis XIV of France. Louis agreed to aid Charles in the Third Anglo-Dutch War and pay Charles a pension, and Charles secretly promised to convert to Roman Catholicism at an unspecified future date. Charles attempted to introduce religious freedom for Catholics and Protestant dissenters with his 1672 Royal Declaration of Indulgence, but the English Parliament forced him to withdraw it.

In 1679, Titus Oates's revelations of a supposed "Popish Plot" sparked the Exclusion Crisis when it was revealed that Charles's brother and heir (James, Duke of York) was a Roman Catholic. The crisis saw the birth of the pro-exclusion Whig and anti-exclusion Tory parties. Charles sided with the Tories, and, following the discovery of the Rye House Plot to murder Charles and James in 1683, some Whig leaders were killed or forced into exile.

Charles II, House of Stuart, The Black Boy

Charles dissolved the English Parliament in 1681 and ruled alone until his death on 6 February 1685.

He was received into the Roman Catholic Church on his deathbed. Charles was popularly known as the Merrie Monarch, in reference to both the liveliness and hedonism of his court and the general relief at the return to normality after over a decade of rule by Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans.

Charles's wife, Catherine of Braganza, bore no children, but Charles acknowledged at least 12 illegitimate children by various mistresses.

As illegitimate children were excluded from the succession, he was succeeded by his brother James. Note; in reading these excerpts from the book, please ignore the obvious Albino nonsense, and the obviously bogus Whitened portrait, and stay with the facts. Quote:

First of all, he had abnormal darkness of complexion, a truly saturnine tint. This darkness was the subject of comment from first. His mother wrote jokingly to her sister-in-law that she had given birth to a black baby and to a friend in France that 'he was so dark that she was ashamed of him'. She would send his portrait 'as soon as he is a little fairer'. But Charles never did become fairer. Later the sobriquet 'the Black Boy' would be used, still commemorated in English Inn/Pubs signs.

There was even a 'fanatic' fantasy at the time of the Popish Plot in the 1670s, that Charles had been fathered on Henrietta Maria (see her image below), by a 'black Scotsman' - a neat combination of the two prejudices of the time, against the Catholics and the Scots. So it became convenient to refer to the then King as that 'black Bastard'.

Henrietta Maria/Marie, mother of Charles II

Most Truths are "half-false" and most Falsehoods are "half-truth". These statements are ambiguous, unspecific and neither here nor there, at first without dissembling them any further. It is the fourth Natural law relating to Polarity. However, we will prove beyond any reasonable doubt that these statements can be concise, precise, specific, unambiguous and accurate in certain suppositions.

For example, the argument between a Pub (Public House, an Inn) and general members of the public pertaining to The Black Boy Symbol displayed in front of their Pubs, Inns, Hotels or Bread and Breakfast facilities. "Are they Racist Symbols, or Genuine Tradition in celebrating English history?" However, this is a good example scenario to demonstrate the law of Polarity in action. Both Questions are "half-false" and "half-true".

These pubs (Public House, an Inn), Hotels and Guesthouses and general members of the public are both spectacularly wrong in relation as to the truth behind Black Boy Charles Stuart II and The Black Boy Symbol. Those that knew about  Charles Stuart II historicity assumed that he was a Caucasian monarch and blissfully unaware of the Black king narratives because they had been taught in Schools, Colleges and Universities, including the mainstream media otherwise, incorporating Black and White people alike.

Those that wanted the sign to remain stating Historical importance of such symbols and those that wanted it to be taking down sighting Racism, both based their reasons on Misinformed historicity of Black history in Europe. There are two different instances of these real-life scenarios that will display the blissful ignorance of the general public and the mainstream media, graphically and contextually.

The Black Boy, King Charles II, right King wrong Colour

First Scenario: Telegraph Reporters 21 JANUARY 2017 4:00PM
A pub firm has backed down on its mission to rename a pub called The Black Boy after locals complained. Barons Pub Company took over the 500-year-old inn at Shinfield, near Reading, this week and suggested changing its name to the more politically correct Shinfield Arms.

They said there had been “negative comments” over the Black Boy name. But following the announcement, 250 people went on social media to protest about the change.

The firm said they suggested the idea of changing the pub’s name because ‘The Black Boy’ was “causing concern”. A spokesman said: “We are always respectful of the history of pubs and understand that changing the name of a pub is not a decision to be taken lightly.

“However in our short association with the pub, we have been surprised by how many negative reactions we have had to the name The Black Boy. We are proposing to change the name to The Shinfield Arms and would like to hear the views of anyone who lives in the area or anyone who has an opinion on this subject.”

After hundreds of comments from customers urging the pub to keep its historical name, the pub said today it wouldn’t change it. The company said: “What a fantastic response from everyone. Thanks so much for all your comments, your passion, and enthusiasm - you’ve made the decision really easy.”

The Black Boy, a Drummer Boy in the Army

One social media user said: “It's not offensive. It's a historic name that refers back to the English civil war.” The pub’s website says there are “many interesting theories” as to how the Inn acquired its “unusual” name. It says: “As the pub was around during the reign of Charles II, it is supposed that it and other Black Boy pubs around the country were named after the king, who was renowned partly for his swarthy complexion. “Alternatively, many believe that the name comes from a famous dark figurine smoking a pipe that once adorned the doorway."

The Black Boy, now a Chimney Sweeper

In a bite-size and piece by piece, we will expose this lack of knowledge via their argument, which is useful to them in their assertions but totally misrepresented in ours. By presenting our evidence in a legal format.

1.  An eye witness account as evidence is first among equals and second to none in comparison to Hearsay, Rumour, Gossips, Assertions, Assumptions, Presumptions, Speculations, and Suppositions. 2.  An eye witness account that is supported by images albeit contrasting, is even more powerful in the court of law.

Starting by the definition of the word "Swarthy", as to ascertain its meaning. "The word Stuart comes from the old Nordish root Svart which means black. Stuart is the same word as Swarthy, which means black in old English."

Svart, Stuart, Stewart, Swart or Swarthy. According to Alison Weir in her book: Pertaining to Elizabeth I - She has a swarthy, "Olive" complexion like that of mother, although she made a habit of Whitening it with a lotion made up of egg-whites, powdered eggshell, poppy seeds, borax, and alum, which made her face appear White and luminous. From her father, she had her red naturally curly hair.  Let us examine the statement about Whitening her face, including having a complexion like that of her father.

 If Elizabeth I was a pale skin Caucasian as they claimed, she has no need to go to such an extraordinary length to Whitened her face. This also applies to Elizabeth I father (Henry VIII) because they have similar skin complexion, therefore both father and daughter must be at least a Mulatto (Mixed Race). Well, the fact is that Olives are Green or Black, no Humans have Green Skin.

The Black Boy, as a Sailor

According to Henrietta Marie mother of Charles II in her own word in a letter to her sister-in-law: First of all, he had abnormal darkness of complexion, a truly saturnine tint. This darkness was the subject of comment from first.

His mother wrote jokingly to her sister-in-law that she had given birth to a black baby and to a friend in France that 'he was so dark that she was ashamed of him'. She would send his portrait 'as soon as he is a little fairer'. This is an eye witness account supported by the images of the true king Charles II and a Falsified one.

It is quite frightening how little all these Authors, Bloggers, Graduates, Teachers, Professors, Politicians, and the General Public knew about Black Boy Charles Stuart II. Even more so, the Caucasian type narrative has created fake portraits and statues of their Black Kings, depicting them falsely as Caucasians. But sometimes, innocuous-seeming remnants survived and were overlooked.

Finally due, these general campaigns and promotion of the falsified history of Black people in Europe as Slaves, Servants, Beggars, being-Kidnapped or the Prince even the king of Congo. As a direct result of all these misinformation: King Charles II, the Black Boy has been depicted as different things by different Inn-keepers.

The Black Boy depicted as a Black Horse

They first depicted him correctly as King Charles II, but Caucasian type. The second one depicted him as a Drummer in the Army, the third one depicted him as a Chimney-sweeper, the fourth depicted him as a Sailor, the fifth depicted him as a Black Horse and the last one in Oxford, England, has no Symbol at all due to political correctness that has gone mad or Protests.

The same Oxford City that has no Black community Centre while every other major city in the UK has them. What a joke, but it is not funny at all. It is only Birmingham University, in Birmingham England, UK, that facilitates Black history as a course, in its own right, in the whole of Europe.

The Black Boy, Oxford City, England, UK, No Symbol at all

And the facilitation of this course only commences at Birmingham University a couple of years ago.

The irony is that there are plenty of American Universities, specifically the USA, that has been and still facilitating Black history as a course, in its own right and still remain the most racist country on the planet.

In addition, due to falsified history being taught to us in Schools, Colleges, Universities, including Books, Social-Media or regurgitated via the Main-Stream-Media, we unconsciously set in motion the powerful force of Cause and Effect, no 6 out of 8 Natural Laws, called The Principle of Cause and Effect. And subconsciously set in motion The Principle of CARE, the encapsulating principle of the other principles, to Cause an Effect that Erases another evidence of Black history from European type narratives.

Anne Boleyn, mother of Elizabeth I

This is tantamount to a comedy of ironies based of false narratives in which we subconsciously unleashed the oculist forces of the 6th and 8th natural law, via wrong assumptions and presumptions as a causation to change the effect we perceived to feel, in our perception of history, Black and White alike, into a positive effect that which we considered negative. For example:

Those that wanted the signs taken down due to the perceived racist symbol it represent and those that wanted it to stay up believing he was a Caucasian king are both wrongs in their assertions.

Be careful what you CARE about because` unwittingly scenario 1 incorporates the 4th, 6th, and 8th Natural law, being subconsciously invoked, by the general public, Black and White alike, to cause and effect a favourable effect.

By considering and picking one side of the argument (Conceiving), by caring enough about the subject matter, and going into planning mode with others on social media or physically (Conceiving Care), and by actually executing a social media or physical campaign (CARE Action). Finally the innkeeper's decision as to Nay or Ye, a positive or negative manifestation of Action via CARE. This is the same occult principles that the elite has always utilised to rule and control us for thousands of years but consciously.

Therefore, let all these debunking tunes your mind away from the frequency of falsehood. The end of part 3 of 7. I rest my case in relation to Black Boy Charles Stuart II, First Scenario. Next blog 01/01/19. Debunking the Barbados Penny and James Edward Stuart III, including presenting the Second Scenario.