This is a specific subject page, dealing exclusively with, or primarily with, the subject in the title. Because of need, there are many such pages at RHWW: usually, but not always, linked to primary pages. For those in a hurry, they enable a quick summary of many important subjects. The menu for these pages is here: Click>>>



Who was Ignatius Sancho (1729-1780) - Really?


Or, Black British Nobility



Oil painting by Thomas Gainsborough, 1768, National Gallery of Canada


Hand-in-waistcoat (Pose)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The hand-in-waistcoat (also referred to as hand-inside-vest, hand-in-jacket, hand-held-in, or hidden hand) is a gesture commonly found in portraiture during the 18th and 19th centuries. The pose appeared by the 1750s to indicate leadership in a calm and firm manner. The pose is most often associated with Napoleon I of France due to its use in several portraits.

The pose traces back to classical times — Aeschines, founder of a rhetoric school, suggested that speaking with an arm outside one's toga was bad manners. Arline Meyer, in her essay "Re-Dressing Classical Statuary: The Eighteenth-Century 'Hand-in-Waistcoat' Portrait," notes the pose being used in eighteenth century British portraiture as a sign of the sitter's breeding. Francois Nivelon's A Book Of Genteel Behavior of 1738 noted the hand-inside-vest pose denoted "manly boldness tempered with modesty." Perhaps the most famous English portraitist, Thomas Gainsborough (1727-1788), had his “hand-in-pocket” for his Self-Portrait (1759). In fact, one fashionable portraitist, Thomas Hudson (1701-1779), used the gesture so frequently that people questioned whether or not he was even capable of painting hands.

Hmmm, Thomas Gainsborough painted a former Slave in the manner of the Aristocracy: bad enough that he painted himself in that presumptuous pose, but now a former Slave too. The British “Upper Classes” would have been scandalized. Gainsborough, a commoner, would have little expectation of ever obtaining another commission to do a portrait for the Nobility. So there must be more to the story..




As a reminder: Key points of human history as told by Albinos:

1) White people are native to Europe, and the original human beings, and the creators of civilizations.
2) Their White color is quite natural as they "Evolved" in Europe that way to take advantage of the "Lower" Sunshine in Europe.
3) Blacks are found naturally only in Africa: those in Europe and the Americas were taken there as slaves by White people. All Blacks are Negroid and prognathic.
4) And when Albinos come across a picture or portrait of a European Black person, they immediately concoct a bogus story telling how the European Black person came to Europe as a Slave. (
Btw: this is exactly the same cruel lying ruse the Albinos and their Mulattoes of North Africa, the Middle-East, and Turkey, use on their Black inhabitants).





Click this link for a full page of Black Europeans declared to be African Slaves or Servants.


5) "Dark" White people like South Europeans, North Africans, Middle-Easterners (Mediterranean) and "Light" Arabs, are Native people who "Evolved" like that in those places.

Talk about "Self-Aggrandizing" bullshit, devoid of common sense or logic, and disproved by every scientific test applied. But worst yet, is the number of Blacks who actually believe this Albino nonsense. Having queried others on that fact, we have been informed that certain Blacks believe it because they are so beaten-down that they will believe anything. Survival is their goal, not enlightenment. Which makes sense, now if we could only figure out what Kanye was thinking, after all, in that case, survival is luxurious and money is no object. A choice - Really??

Let us now establish a background of facts to enable readers to spot Albino lies.

Firstly - except for Spain and Portugal, all of Europe had only 456 African Slaves for the period 1500 to 1875, with England accounting for only 15 in that entire time. The reasons were quite simple: Having just gone through the period of usurping Black Rule, the Albino British knew the dangers of keeping them around - even if they were only African Slaves.





The Slave Voyages Consortium at Emory University has been updated for 2021.

The latest version is Slave Voyages v2.2.13. A facsimile of the Table of number of

Slaves landed, and where they were disembarked, and the associated Map, is located here: Click>>>




Secondly, the primary reason for Black Slaves is to have people capable of FARMING and doing labor in the SUN! Since the UV strength of the Sun is moderate in Europe and Northern North America, there was no need for Black Slavery in those areas. {The Sun ravages un-pigmented skin below 40 degrees North, and above 40 degrees South. This is the most deadly (but not the only) Skin Cancer zone for Whites}.








The Albino Enslavers


European Albinos who chose to settle in areas of the Earth between 40 degrees North and 40 degrees South; knew fully well that they would NOT be able to do the FARMWORK necessary to support themselves with FOOD in those areas due to the Damaging/Killing strength of the Sun’s UV radiation at those latitudes. So they resolved to use the Slave Labor of pigmented people as a means to supply themselves with enough Food to live in those Latitudes.

At that point they were merely Parasites: - Par·a·site

An organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense. A person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.

Wikipedia - In evolutionary biology, parasitism is a relationship between species, where one organism, the parasite, lives on or in another organism, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.

After Slavery was outlawed, they had to PAY pigmented workers to do that same work: so were they still Parasites? Actually yes, because by that time they had used the wealth and position created by slavery to structure societies to where the pigmented workers of Food production were the lowest class and the lowest paid, and thus eternally trapped in the Parasitic relationship. Even the advent of Mechanized agriculture has not done away with the need for Pigmented Workers in those areas, because many Crops cannot be harvested by machines.





It is well understood that the Albinos so low as to use the Slavery of others as a means to support themselves were the most degenerate and Murderous of all Albinos. But seeing the actual manifestation of this degeneracy is still shocking.

The Island of Tasmania sits South-east of Australia just outside of the Albino "Death Zone" for the Suns Ultra Violet Rays. In this place it was "SAFE" for Albinos to "Work Their Own Fields". So having no need to Enslave the Native Black people for their labors, what did they do with them?









As is typical with Albinos as the worlds historians, when the truth hurts Albinos image, they change the story. After many years of accepting William Lanne or Laney, who died in 1869 as the last Tasmanian. The Albinos, having seen the Worlds attitude toward them change, they can no longer revel in their power to kill by whim. So not surprisingly, we now see the Albino boys at Wiki, hard at work producing articles which confuse Tasmanian’s with mainland Australian Aborigines, and then declare that MORE Tasmanians (proportionally) are still alive than Aborigines.


Sick people that they are, their best lie is that they have killed more Blacks on the Mainland (proportionally), than they have in Tasmania. The simple concept that Civilized Humans think it wrong to murder, or to settle lands where you cannot survive naturally, never occurs to them.



For hundreds of years now, beginning just after the usurpation of Black rule in Europe during the 1600s. Albinos have made it their business to scour the world for every last bit of historical artifact and information they can find. They do this not because of a love of history, but rather to “CONTROL HISTORY” so as to shape it’s telling to support their self-serving lies.

As an example of how Albinos “Manage” and “Censor” History to suit their needs: the following was a part of the Wikipedia historical article on the Tasmanians until sometime in 2017, when it was decided by person or persons unknown, that it should be changed – no doubt because it showed Albinos in too “True” a light.

"OLD"-Wiki: Quote: The last of the Tasmanians, William Lanne or Laney, died in 1869. Dr. Lodewyk Crowther removed his head in the name of science at the Colonial Hospital, and made a tobacco pouch out of his scrotum.

Now the only place where that little detail can still be found is in a Wiki article titled “Human Trophy Collecting”. No doubt that will soon be “Sanitized” too.




A great part of the Ignatius Sancho story centers on him being a Slave Servant:

But the reality of those times makes that IMPOSSIBLE!




Slavery Abolition Act 1833
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In May 1772, Lord Mansfield's judgment in the Somersett's Case emancipated a slave in England, which helped launch the movement to abolish slavery. The case ruled that slavery was unsupported by law in England and no authority could be exercised on slaves entering English or Scottish soil. In 1785, English poet William Cowper wrote:

We have no slaves at home – Then why abroad?
Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs
Receive our air, that moment they are free.
They touch our country, and their shackles fall.
That's noble, and bespeaks a nation proud.
And jealous of the blessing. Spread it then,
And let it circulate through every vein.

By 1783, an anti-slavery movement to abolish the slave trade throughout the Empire had begun among the British public. In 1793 Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada John Graves Simcoe signed the Act Against Slavery. Passed by the local Legislative Assembly, it was the first legislation to outlaw the slave trade in a part of the British Empire.

In 1807, Parliament passed the Slave Trade Act of 1807, which outlawed the slave trade, but not slavery itself. Abolitionist Henry Brougham realized that trading would continue and as an new MP successfully introduced the Slave Trade Felony Act 1811 which at last made slave trading criminal throughout the empire. The Royal Navy established the West Africa Squadron to suppress the Atlantic slave trade by patrolling the coast of West Africa. It did suppress the slave trade, but did not stop it entirely. Between 1808 and 1860, the West Africa Squadron captured 1,600 slave ships and freed 150,000 Africans. They resettled many in Jamaica and the Bahamas. Britain also used its influence to coerce other countries to agree treaties to end their slave trade and allow the Royal Navy to seize their slave ships.


This Quote is to show how some of the Albino boys at Wiki LIE!


Slavery in Britain
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Slavery in Great Britain existed and was recognized from before the Roman occupation until the 12th century, when chattel slavery disappeared after the Norman Conquest. Former slaves merged into the larger body of serfs in Britain and no longer were recognized separately in law or custom. From the 17th century until well into the 19th century, transportation to the colonies as a criminal or an indentured servant served as punishment for both major and petty crimes in England and Ireland. During the same period, workhouses employed people whose poverty left them no other alternative than to work under forced labor conditions.

British merchants were among the largest participants in the Atlantic slave trade. Ship owners transported enslaved West Africans to the New World to be sold into slave labor. The ships brought commodities back to Britain then exported goods to Africa. After a long campaign for abolition led by William Wilberforce, Parliament prohibited the practice by passing the Slave Trade Act 1807 which was enforced by the Royal Navy's West Africa Squadron. Britain used its influence to persuade other countries around the world to abolish the slave trade and sign treaties to allow the Royal Navy to interdict their ships.

Somersett's case in 1772 held that no slave could be forcibly removed from Britain. This case was generally taken at the time to have decided that the condition of slavery did not exist under English law, and emancipated the remaining ten to fourteen thousand slaves or possible slaves in England and Wales, who were mostly domestic servants. However slavery elsewhere in the British Empire was not affected. Joseph Knight's case in 1778 established a similar position in Scots law. Slavery was abolished throughout the British Empire by the Slavery Abolition Act 1833, with exceptions provided for the East India Company, Ceylon, and Saint Helena. These exceptions were eliminated in 1843.

Clearly the Albino Boys at Wiki are making it up as they go: Britain accepted 15 African Slaves over a period of 375 years, yet there were 10,000 to 14,000 Black Slaves in Britain in 1772 - REALLY?



So who was Ignatius Sancho (1729-1780) - Really?

All of the asinine Albino revisionists of the world seem to have gravitated to Wikipedia encyclopedia as it allows anyone to publish articles without great regard to their character or knowledge. Of course like everyone else, we sometimes use Wikipedia for a quick lookup. And truth be told, sometimes it does adequately serve the useful purpose of introducing a subject or person to those seeking information. But the rest of the time, the Albino race liars are out in force, producing on Wikipedia, some of the stupidest most inane nonsense, the human mind is capable of. An abject example is Wikipedia's story of Ignatius Sancho:

Ignatius Sancho
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ignatius Sancho (c. 1729 – 14 December 1780) was a British composer, actor, and writer. He is the first known Briton of African heritage to vote in a British election. He gained fame in his time as "the extraordinary Negro", and to eighteenth-century British abolitionists he became a symbol of the humanity of Africans and immorality of the slave trade. The Letters of the Late Ignatius Sancho, an African, edited and published two years after his death, is one of the earliest accounts of African slavery written in English by a former slave of Spanish and English families. Don't you just know that convoluted statement is intended to hide something - like knowledge?



Ignatius Sancho was born on a slave ship in 1729; his precise birthplace is thus unknown. After his mother died in the Spanish colony of New Granada and his father killed himself rather than to live as a slave, Sancho was taken to England.

Actually New Granada was not a colony; it was an administrative district corresponding to modern Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, and Venezuela. The territory corresponding to Panama was incorporated later in 1739, and the provinces of Venezuela were separated from the Viceroyalty and assigned to the Captaincy General of Venezuela in 1777. In addition to these core areas, the territory of the Viceroyalty of New Granada included Guyana, southwestern Suriname, parts of northwestern Brazil, and northern Peru.

From 1731 to 1749, he worked for three maiden sisters in Greenwich. John Montagu, 2nd Duke of Montagu (of the first creation) (1690–1749), impressed by Sancho's intellect, frankness, and his amiability, not only encouraged him to read, but also lent him books from his personal library at Blackheath. Sancho's informal education made his lack of freedom in Greenwich unbearable, and he ran away to the Montagus in 1749. For two years until her death in 1751, Sancho worked as the butler for Mary Montagu (née Churchill), Duchess of Montagu, at Montagu House, where he flourished by immersing himself in music, poetry, reading, and writing. At her death in 1751 he received an annuity of £30 and a year's salary, which he quickly squandered.

During the 1760s Sancho married a West Indian woman, Ann Osborne. He became a devoted husband and father. They had seven children, around the time of the birth of their third child, Sancho became a valet to the George Montagu, 1st Duke of Montagu (of the second creation), son-in-law of his earlier patron. He remained there until 1773.
In 1768 Thomas Gainsborough painted a portrait of Sancho at the same time as the Duchess of Montagu sat for her portrait by the artist. By the late 1760s Sancho had already become accomplished and was considered by many to be a man of refinement.

In 1766, at the height of the debate about slavery, Sancho wrote to Laurence Sterne encouraging the famous writer to use his pen to lobby for the abolition of the slave trade. (Saying: That subject, handled in your striking manner, would ease the yoke (perhaps) of many – but if only one – Gracious God! – what a feast to a benevolent heart!

In July 1766 Sancho's letter was received by Reverend Laurence Sterne shortly after he had just finished writing a conversation between his fictional characters, Corporal Trim and his brother Tom in Tristram Shandy, wherein Tom described the oppression of a African servant in a sausage shop in Lisbon that he had visited. Laurence Sterne's widely publicised 27 July 1766 response to Sancho's letter became an integral part of 18th-century abolitionist literature.

There is a strange coincidence, Sancho, in the little events (as well as in the great ones) of this world: for I had been writing a tender tale of the sorrows of a friendless poor negro-girl, and my eyes had scarce done smarting with it, when your letter of recommendation in behalf of so many of her brethren and sisters, came to me—but why her brethren?—or your’s, Sancho! any more than mine? It is by the finest tints, and most insensible gradations, that nature descends from the fairest face about St. James’s, to the sootiest complexion in Africa: at which tint of these, is it, that the ties of blood are to cease? and how many shades must we descend lower still in the scale, ’ere mercy is to vanish with them?—but ’tis no uncommon thing, my good Sancho, for one half of the world to use the other half of it like brutes, & then endeavor to make ’em so."


Does anyone really believe that a non-racist Albino would call Black complexion "Sooty"?

Of course not, that is just some pathetic pasty-assed Albino taking shots.


Likewise, Blacks did not refer to themselves as "Moors".


Analyzing the text in the above: "Our West Indies" suggests that Sancho is a "Native Britain of property". "My Brother Moors" indicates that he couldn't possibly be an African, because Africans identify by Tribe and family, NOT by Race, and certainly not by a term unknown to them. Then again, is any of this what it is purported to be?


The rest of that nonsense article may be read at the Wikipedia site.


Crazily - even Albinos supposedly interested in uncovering the truth about Ignatius Sancho - LIE!

Brycchan Carey
Dr. Brycchan Carey of London's Kingston University has published "The extraordinary Negro": Ignatius Sancho, Joseph Jekyll, and the Problem of Biography', British Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies, 26, 2 (Spring 2003), 1-13. His website on Sancho is It reproduces the complete text of Joseph Jekyll's Life of Sancho. Dr. Carey writes, in part:

The major problem with Jekyll's Life of Ignatius Sancho is that much of it is unverifiable, and, worse still, much of it directly contradicts what Sancho himself says to people in his letters. For example, although Jekyll tells us that Sancho was born on a slave ship, Sancho himself seems convinced that he was born in Africa. For a more detailed reading of Jekyll's Life of Ignatius Sancho, see my article...that shows that Sancho was almost certainly not born on a slave ship.

Sounds like this Albino is really looking for the truth; doesn't it? Nah, not really, note the highlighted text in the next paragraph.

Black Domestics
Chapter 3 of the Sancho biography is by James Walvin and is entitled Ignatius Sancho: The man and his times. Walvin writes:
This was the period when fashion decreed the use of black domestics, both enslaved and free. In the homes of wealthy Londoners, fashionable spas and stately homes, black pages or servants were commonplace, a fact amply confirmed in any number of 18th Century portraits.

Actually, half of that statement is fact, and half is an Albino Race lie. As established below, servants in Noble Households were the sons of lesser Nobility - certainly NOT SLAVES! So since Blacks were the original Nobility of Europe, Blacks would indeed be in high demand as Servants in Noble households.







Here is probably where the Albino Boys

at Wikipedia got their information:


The Dictionary of National Biography (DNB) by Stephen Leslie 1832-1904: A standard work of reference with articles on more than 29,000 notable figures from British history. It was originally published in 63 volumes between 1885 and 1900.


Normally this source (Stephen Leslie) is dependable, but as indicated by the footnotes, he himself depended on earlier sources. And since this silly story can't possibly be true, Mr. Leslie seems to have depended on corrupt sources.

SANCHO, IGNATIUS (1729-1780), negro writer, was born in 1729 on board a ship engaged in the slave trade while on the journey from Guinea to the Spanish West Indies. At Carthegena, in South America, (Cartagena in Colombia) a Portuguese bishop baptised him in the name of Ignatius. His mother soon died owing to the climate, and his father committed suicide.

At two years old he was brought to England, and was made over to three maiden ladies, who lived at Greenwich. They deemed it imprudent to give him any education, and subjected him to a rigorous discipline. A fancied resemblance to Don Quixote's Squire led them to give him the surname of Sancho. He is conjectured to have sat to Hogarth in 1742 for the negro boy in f Taste in High Life ' (HoGAKTH, Works, ed. Nichols and Steevens, ii. 158, iii. 333).





Emory University Voyages database:

FACT: Homeward passage The voyage leg returning a vessel to its home port. A typical homeward passage for a North Atlantic slaving vessel tracked northeast with the Gulf Stream, and then across the Atlantic to England and northwest Europe. The homeward passage north required 4-8 weeks' sailing time.

Can some Albino of great imagination please explain why some Englishman related to British Royalty, would take the trouble to RESCUE some hitherto unknown Black Baby Boy of two years old from Spanish South America and transport him (With Wet-nurse), because a Bachelor could NOT possibly take care of a Baby for 4-8 weeks at SEA!

Further explain what USE three Albino maiden ladies would have for a two year old Black Baby: and the utter stupidity of mentioning EDUCATION and RIGOROUS DISCIPLINE when talking about a TWO YEAR OLD CHILD: all of this merely speaks to the lying nonsense nature of Albinos.


Continuing: He rebelled against his servitude. John Montagu, second duke of Montagu, who lived at Blackheath and visited the ladies whom Sancho served, took notice of him, and deemed his capacity above his station. The duke lent him books, and he read them with avidity. His mistresses grew more exacting, and after 1749, when his ducal benefactor died, he fled for protection to the duke's widow. She took him into her service as butler, and the post proved so profitable that at her death in 1751 he boasted of possessing 70/. and an annuity of 30/.

A passion for gambling, which he managed to suppress, temporarily embarrassed him, and he made some effort to appear on the stage as Othello or Oronooko,but failed to obtain an engagement owing to his defective articulation. He soon resumed service with the Montagu family, and George, the fourth duke [q. v.], his first benefactor's son-in-law, treated him with every consideration. He now enjoyed abundant opportunities of satisfying his literary predilections. He read, on their first publication, the sermons and ' Tristram Shandy' of Laurence Sterne; and, impressed by Sterne's sympathetic references to the evils of slavery, he entreated him in a letter dated in 1766 to ease the yoke by ' handling ' the subject in his 'striking manner.' Sterne replied in a sentimental vein (27 July 1766), and struck up an acquaintance with his correspondent. In the spring of 1767 Sancho procured promises of subscriptions for the ninth volume of ' Tristram Shandy ' from the Duke and Duchess of Montagu and their son, Viscount Mandeville. Sterne, while thanking him for his efforts, pressed him to exact the money with out delay. One of Sterne's latest letters from Cox wold 30 June 1767 was addressed to ' his good friend Sancho ' (STERNE, Letters, ed. Saintsbury, i. 129-31, ii. 18, 25). The connection extended Sancho's reputation, and on 29 Nov. 1768 Gainsborough, while at Bath, painted his portrait at one rapid sitting.

About 1773 Sancho's health failed, and he withdrew from domestic service, setting up as a chandler or grocer in a shop in Charles Street, Westminster. His literary ambition was unquenched, and he spent his latest years in penning epistles in Sterne's manner. Men of letters and artists befriended him. Nollekens took John Thomas Smith to visit him on 17 June 1780 (Nollekens and his Times, ii. 27). He died at his shop on 14 Dec. 1780, and was buried in Westminster Broadway.

He married ' a deservinar young' woman of West India origin,' and she, with at least two children, Elizabeth and William, survived him. For the benefit of the family, one of his correspondents, Miss Crewe, collected his ' Letters,' and published them in 1782 in two volumes, with an anonymous memoir by Joseph Jekyll [q. v.~j The subscription list is said to have been of a length unknown since the first issue of the * Spectator.' Gainsborough's portrait, engraved by Bartolozzi, was prefixed. The work was popular; a fifth edition was published in 1803, with a facsimile of Sterne's letter of 27 July 1766, and Jekyll's name on the title-page as author of the prefatorv memoir ; the publisher was Sancho's son William, who was then pursuing the career of a bookseller in his father's old shop in Charles Street.

The portrait by Gainsborough was presented by Sancho's daughter Elizabeth to Sancho's friend, William Stevenson of Norwich, and it was sold at Norwich by auction in March 1889. with the property of Stevenson's son, Henry Stevenson, F.S.A. [Chalmers's Biogr. Diet. ; Fitzgerald's Life of
Sterne, ii. 370 et seq. ; Sancho's Letters with Jekyll's Memoir ; Notes and Queries, 7th ser. vii. 325, 427, 457, viii. 32, 296, 336.] S. L.

The National Gallery of Canada comments: The portrait of Ignatius Sancho was painted at Bath on 29 November 1768 by Thomas Gainsborough (1727-1788). Gainsborough, perhaps the greatest British painter of the eighteenth century, resided at Bath from 1760-1774. As a scene of fashionable life, Bath attracted many of the wealthy and well-connected, who also brought their household servants with them. Gainsborough painted Sancho's employers, the Duke and Duchess of Montagu, at the same time. There is no evidence that Sancho and Gainsborough were personal friends, although clearly they met when the portrait was painted. The acquaintance was a brief one: the portrait took Gainsborough only one hour and forty minutes to paint. The portrait was engraved by Francesco Bartolozzi for the frontispiece of The Letters of the Late Ignatius Sancho, an African, which appeared in 1782.



Note: a survey of artists indicates that the painting time is a lie: All agree that a detailed color painting such as the one in question could have been done in one hour and forty minutes. This is significant as it helps debunk the ridiculous notion that an important artist would spend the time and effort to paint someone's Butler! Clearly Sanchos portrait was painted at his own request and at his own cost.

Additionally the proposition that a person of "Low" station such as a Slave or former slave could be employed as a Butler in a ROYAL Household is absurd! A BUTLER was a position held by members of the "LOWER" Nobility!


A duke or duchess can either be a monarch ruling over a duchy or a member of the nobility, historically of highest rank below the monarch. In other words: Noble Ranking is King/Queen, Duke/Duchess.


Medieval household
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Noble households
Main article: Noble court

Eventually the central positions of the royal household became little else than honorary titles bestowed upon the greatest families, and not necessarily even dependent on attendance at court. In Flanders, by the thirteenth century, the offices of constable, butler, steward and chamberlain had become the hereditary right of certain high noble families, and held no political significance.





The Montague's


One thing is clear about the convoluted story of Ignatius Sancho, that is it revolves around the Noble Lords and House of Montague. Here then is some of what we know of the Montague's.

Here for the text, we depend on: The Dictionary of National Biography (DNB) by Stephen Leslie 1832-1904: A standard work of reference with articles on more than 29,000 notable figures from British history. It was originally published in 63 volumes between 1885 and 1900.

Click here for a link to Dictionary of National Biography

The Scottish nation or the surnames

Click here for a link to the Scottish Nation's Nobility



For the "White" pages, we depend on: Mr. John Macky's Memoirs of the Secret Serves.

It should be mentioned that Mr. Leslie often quotes Mr. Macky in his volumes.

Click here for a link to Mr. Macky's Volumes




The following is from: The Dictionary of national biography

MONTACUTE or MONTAGU, JOHN, DE, third EARL OF SALISBURY (1350 P-1400), son of Sir John de Montacute, younger brother of William de Montacute, second earl [q. v.], a distinguished warrior, who was summoned to parliament as John de Montacute (1357-1389), and died in 1390, by Margaret, granddaughter and heiress of Ralph, baron de Monthermer, by his son Thomas, was born about 1350. While serving in France in 1369 he received knighthood from the Earl of Cambridge before Bourdeille, and highly distinguished himself at the taking of that town (FROISSART, i. 582). Having on his father's death received livery of his lands, he obtained license in 1391 to go on a crusade- into Prussia with ten horses and ten servants, apparently on the same expedition as that joined by the Earl of Derby [see under HENRY IV], and in November was summoned to parliament as Baron de Montagu.

He held a command in Ireland during the visit of Richard II to that country in 1394 and 1395. For some years he had been known as one of the most prominent supporters of the lollards; he and others of his party attended their meetings armed, he kept a lollard priest as his chaplain, it was reported, though as it seems falsely, that he had dishonoured the host, and he had caused all the images in the chapel of his manor of Shenley, Hertfordshire, which had come to him by his wife, to be pulled down, only allowing the image of St. Catherine to be set up in his mill, on account of the popular reverence for it ( WALSINGHAM, Historia, ii. 159 ; Ypodigma Neustrice, pp. 368, 390; CAPGRAVE, Chronicle, p. 245). Before Richard's return from Ireland he and other lords presented a bill in parliament containing a lollard attack on the church, and affixed the same to the doors of St. Paul's, London, and of Westminster Abbey. When the king came back he summoned John and the rest before him, and rated and threatened them (WALSINGHAM, Historia, ii. 217; Fox ap. English Chronicle, p. 112).

By the death of his mother he inherited the barony and estates of Monthermer, and received livery of her lands in this year, when he appears as a member of the king's council (Proceedings of the Privy Council, i. 59). He advocated a peace with France and the king's marriage with Isabella of France [q. v.], daughter of Charles VI, and was in France in 1396; when the king went over to marry that princess, and possibly earlier. While there he met with Christine de Pisan, gave her much encouragement, and took back with him to England a collection of her poems.

The next year Christine sent her son to be educated in his household (BoiviN). On the death of his uncle, Earl William, in 1397, he succeeded to his lands and dignity as Earl of Salisbury. The part that he took with reference to the peace and the king's marriage secured him Richard's confidence, and' he was a favourite with him and a prominent member of the court party.

MONTAGU, SIB EDWARD (died. 1557), judge, second son of Thomas Montagu, lord of the manors of Hanging Houghton and Hemington, Northamptonshire, by Agnes. Montagu married thrice : (1) Cicily or Elizabeth, daughter of William Lane of Orlingbury, Northamptonshire ; (2) Agnes, daughter of George Kirkham of Warmington in the same county; (3) Ellen, daughter of John Roper [q. v.], attorney-general to Henry VIII, relict of John Moreton, and after Montagu's death wife of Sir John Digby.

Montagu left male issue by his third wife alone viz. five sons and six daughters. Edward, the eldest son, was father of Edward Montagu, first baron Montagu [q. v.], of James Montagu, bishop of Winchester [q. v.], and of Sir Henry Montagu, first earl of Manchester [q. v.] His widow died in May 1563. Two portraits of the lord chief justice are preserved at Boughton. [Wise's Montagus of Boughton and their Northamptonshire Homes, 1888; Fuller's Worthies (Northamptonshire) ; Bridges's Northamptonshire.

MONTAGU, EDWARD, first BARON MONTAGU of Boughton (1562-1644), born in 1562, was the second son of Sir Edward Montagu, knt. (1532-1602), of Boughton Castle, Northamptonshire, high sheriff for the county in 1567, by his wife Elizabeth (d, 1618), daughter of Sir James Harington of Exton, Rutland. His grandfather was Sir Edward Montagu (d. 1557) [q.v.], chief justice of the king's bench.

James Montagu, [q. v.], bishop of Winchester, Sir Henry Montagu, first earl of Manchester [q. v.], and Sir Sidney Montagu, master of requests, who was the ancestor of the Earls of Sandwich, were his brothers.


Sir Sidney Montagu (died 25 February 1644) was an English politician who sat in the House of Commons at various times between 1593 and 1642. He supported the Royalist cause in the English Civil War. Montagu was one of the younger of the eight sons of the judge Sir Edward Montagu, of Boughton, Northamptonshire and Elizabeth Harrington. He was the grandson of another judge Sir Edward Montagu and his third wife Helen or Elenor Roper. He matriculated at Christ's College, Cambridge in December 1588 and was admitted at Middle Temple on 11 May 1593. In 1593, Montagu was elected Member of Parliament for Brackley. He was elected MP for Malmesbury in 1601 and for Wells in 1614. He became Master of Requests to King Charles I and was Knighted on 28 July 1616.

In November 1640, Montagu was elected MP for Huntingdonshire in the Long Parliament. Since he was reputed to be a man of great wealth, the Commons at the outset of the Civil War were infuriated by his refusal of their request to contribute £2000 to their cause. He was expelled from the Commons and committed to the Tower of London in 1642 as a known Royalist. He was released two weeks later after promising to contribute £1000 to the Parliamentary cause, although it seems that he only paid £200. He spent his remaining years in retirement.

Montagu was of Hinchingbrooke House, Huntingdonshire, England. He married firstly in 1619 Paulina Pepys, daughter of John Pepys, of Cottenham, Cambridgeshire, England and sister of Richard Pepys and Thomas Pepys, grandfather of Samuel Pepys. It is often suggested that it was a love match, as Paulina had no fortune and was not her husband's social equal. Their only surviving son Edward was created Earl of Sandwich in 1660. Paulina died in 1638. In 1642 Sidney remarried Anne Isham, daughter of Gregory Isham of Northamptonshire, and widow of John Pay of Westminster. The marriage was very happy: in his will he praised her as a "religious, virtuous woman, as loving and contenting to me as my heart can desire", and left her generously provided for. She died in 1676. His brothers included Edward Montagu, 1st Baron Montagu of Boughton, Sir Walter Montagu, Henry Montagu, 1st Earl of Manchester, Sir Charles Montagu and James Montagu, Bishop of Winchester.


Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of Sandwich, KG, FRS (27 July 1625 – 28 May 1672) was an English landowner and Infantry officer who later became a naval officer and a politician who sat in the House of Commons at various times between 1645 and 1660. He served Oliver Cromwell loyally in the 1650s, but went on to play a considerable part in the Restoration of Charles II, and was rewarded with several Court offices. He served as the English Ambassador to Portugal 1661-1662, and Ambassador to Spain 1666-1668. He became an Admiral, serving in the two Anglo-Dutch Wars in the reign of Charles II, and was killed at the Battle of Solebay. Wiki quote: Our best picture of him is contained in the diary of Samuel Pepys, who was his cousin and protégé.




The Albino Boys at Wiki say that this is a portrait of Edward Montague, Earl of Sandwich.

Ha,ha: strange, but he does NOT look Tall, Thin, and Black!



MONTAGU, EDWARD, second EARL OF MANCHESTER (1602-1671), born in 1602, was the eldest son of Sir Henry Montagu, first earl of Manchester [q. v.], by Catherine, second daughter of Sir William Spencer of Yarnton in Oxfordshire, who was the third son of Sir John Spencer of Althorp, Lincolnshire.

MONTAGU, RALPH, DUKE OF MONTAGU (1638P-1709), born about 1638, was the second son of Edward Montagu, second lord Montagu of Boughton [see under MONTAGU, EDWARD, first BARON MONTAGU of Boughton], married Anne, daughter of Sir Ralph Winwood, night (DOYLE, Official Baronage, ii. 521). Montagu began his career as master of the horse to the Duchess of York, and on the death of his elder brother Edward succeeded him as master of the horse to Queen Catherine (28 Dec, 1665 ; Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1665-6, p. 120 ; Hist. MSS. Comm. 8th Rep. p. 279). In the court of Charles II he speedily distinguished himself by his successes in gallantry, and Grammont describes him as the favoured lover of the beautiful Mrs. Myddelton [q. v.] As a rival, says Grammont, he was ' peu dangereux pour sa figure, mais fort a craindre par son assiduite, par 1'addresse de son esprit, et par d'autres talens ' (Mcmoires de la Vie du Comte de Grammont, ed. 1716, p. 98). Dartmouth, in one of his notes on Burnet, attributes Montagu's rapid rise to female influence (Own Time, ed. 1833, i. 616). On 1 Jan. 1669 Montagu was appointed ambassador extraordinary to Louis XIV (for his instructions see Hist. MSS. Comm. 5th Rep. p. 316, and BEBINGTON, Arlington's Letters to Temple, p. 393).

It is evident, however, that Montagu was not yet initiated in the secrets of his master's foreign policy, and he first learnt from the mouth of the Duchess of Orleans that Charles II intended to make a secret alliance with Louis XIV against the Dutch (MIGNET, Negotiations relatives a la succession d'Espagne, iii. 88, 91 ; BEBINGTON, p. 440). He was present in June 1670 at the deathbed of the duchess, received her last messages to her brother, and diligently inquired into the rumour that she was poisoned (ib. pp. 438-47; LAFAYETTE, Henrietta d'Angleterre, ed. Anatole France, 1882, p. 142). Charles II was so satisfied with his conduct that at his return Montagu was admitted to the privy council (2 Jan. 1672), and backed by the king in a quarrel with the Duke of Buckingham (DALKYMPLE, Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland, ed. 1790,i. 127). On 12 Aug. 1671 Montagu purchased from his cousin, the Earl of Sandwich, for 14,000/., the mastership of the great wardrobe (DOYLE, ii. 522 ; BOYER, Annals, viii. 369).

On 2 March 1705 Montagu's son John, who succeeded him in the dukedom, was married to Lady Mary Churchill, the youngest daughter of the Duke of Marlborough (BoYEE, Annals of the Reign of Anne, viii. 373 ; LTJTTEELL, Diary, v. 537). The marriage was a political alliance, dictated by Marlborough's desire of making his political position secure against a possible combination of whigs and tories (THOMPSON, Memoirs of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, ii. 9-16). As a consequence Montagu at length attained the goal of his ambition, and was raised to the dignity of Marquis of Monthermer and Duke of Montagu (12 April 1705). He survived his promotion four years only, dying at the age of seventy-one on 9 March 1708-9 (DOYLE, p. 522).

Montagu left, besides his son John, a daughter, Anne, who married Alexander Popham of Littlecote, Wiltshire. An elder son, Ralph Winwood, died in May 1702 (COLLINS, Peerage, iii. 469 ; LUTTEELL, v. 170). Two engraved portraits of Montagu are among the Sutherland collection in the Bodleian Library (Catalogue, i. 648). Macky describes him as of a middle stature, inclining to fat, of a coarse, dark complexion.' Swift adds the very just comment, ' as arrant a knave as any in his time' (MACKY, Secret Services, &c., 1733, p. 44 ; SWIFT, Works, ed. 1824, xii. 237). If Montagu was perfectly unscrupulous in obtaining money, he at least knew how to spend his wealth with dignity. His public entry into Paris as ambassador in 1669 was so magnificent that it has scarce ever been since equalled' (BoTER, viii. 366). He built two great houses, ' which remain still as the best patterns of building we have in England, and show the genius of the great contriver' (ib. p. 371). One of these was Boughton House in Northamptonshire, ' contrived after the model of Versailles.' The other was Montagu House in Bloomsbury, without comparison the finest building in the whole city of London or county of Middlesex, Hampton Court alone excepted' (ib.) Evelyn, who describes it at length in his Diary,' under 10 Oct. 1683, terms it < a fine palace, built after the French pavilion way, by Mr. Hooke' [see HOOKE, ROBERT]. It was burnt down on the night of 19 Jan. 1686, owing to the negligence of a servant; but Montagu, after an unsuccessful lawsuit with his tenant, the Earl of Devonshire, rebuilt the house with very little alteration. The second Montagu House was purchased by the government in 1753 to establish the British Museum, and was demolished between 1840 and 1849, and replaced by the present museum building.


John Montagu, 2nd Duke of Montagu, KG GMB PC (1690 – 5 July 1749), styled Viscount Monthermer until 1705 and Marquess of Monthermer between 1705 and 1709, was a British peer. He was a son of Ralph Montagu, 1st Duke of Montagu, by his first wife Elizabeth Wriothesley. His maternal grandparents were Thomas Wriothesley, 4th Earl of Southampton and Lady Elizabeth Leigh. He went on the grand tour with Pierre Sylvestre. On 17 March 1705, John was married to Lady Mary Churchill, daughter of John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough, and Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough. On 23 October 1717, he was admitted a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians.[1] He was made a Knight of the Garter in 1719, and was made Order of the Bath, a fellow of the Royal Society in 1725, and a Grand Master of the Premier Grand Lodge of England.

On 22 June 1722, George I appointed him governor of the islands of Saint Lucia and Saint Vincent in the West Indies. He in turn appointed Nathaniel Uring, a merchant sea captain and adventurer, as deputy-governor. Uring went to the islands with a group of seven ships, and established settlement at Petit Carenage. Unable to get enough support from British warships, he and the new colonists were quickly run off by the French.



"A Coarse (sic) Dark Complexion"

Ha,ha: he's positively PINK!



MONTAGU, CHARLES, EARL OF HALIFAX (1661-1715). In December 1691 Montagu was elected chairman of the committee of the House of Commons appointed to confer with a committee of the House of Lords on the amendments to the bill for regulating trials in the cases of high treason. In consequence of the great ability which he displayed as a debater on this occasion, Montagu was appointed a lord of the treasury on 21 March 1692. As a reward for his brilliant services Montagu was promoted to the office of chancellor of the exchequer on 30 April 1694, and was sworn a member of the privy council on 10 May following. On 20 Feb. 1695 he was appointed a commissioner of Greenwich Hospital. At the general election in October 1695 Montagu was returned to parliament for the city of Westminster. Having lost his position as leader of the house, he resigned the office of chancellor of the exchequer in May, and that of first lord of the treasury in November 1699. He took his seat as auditor of the exchequer on 18 Nov. 1699 (LuiTRELL, iv. 583), and was created Baron Halifax of Halifax in the county of York on 13 Dec. 1700 with remainder on failure of male issue to his nephew George, the son and heir of his elder brother, Edward Montagu. Halifax took his seat in the House of Lords on 11 Feb. 1701.

Abingdon, fourth Earl of (1740-1799). See Bertie, Willoughby.

DUDLEY, AMBROSE, EARL OF WARWICK (1528 P-1590), born about 1528, was fourth son of John Dudley [q. v.], created Earl of Warwick early in 1514, and Duke of Northumberland in 1551. Like all his brothers, he was carefully educated, and Roger Ascham speaks of him as manifesting high intellectual attainments. He served with his father in repressing the Norfolk rebellion of 1549, and was knighted 17 Nov. During the reign of Edward VI he was prominent in court festivities and tournaments, and was intimate with the king and Princess Elizabeth (cf. 'Edward VI's Journal,' in NICOLAS, Literary Remains, pp. 384, 388, 389). He joined his father and brothers in the attempt to place his sister-in-law, Lady Jane Grey (wife of his brother Guildford), on the throne in 1553; was committed to the Tower (25 July) ; was convicted of treason, with Lady Jane, and his brothers, Henry and Guildford, on 13 Nov., but was released and pardoned 18 Oct. 1554. In 1555 his mother's death made him lord of Hale-Owen. Two years later he and his brothers, Henry and Robert, joined the English troops sent to support the Spaniards at the siege of St. Quentin. All fought with conspicuous bravery at the great battle there, and Henry was killed. In consideration of this service Queen Mary (7 March 1557-8) excepted the two survivors, Ambrose and Robert, and their three sisters from the act of attainder which had involved all the family in 1553 (cf. 4 and 5 Phil. & Mary, cap. 15). The accession of Elizabeth, who had been friendly with Ambrose in earlier years, secured his political advancement. He was granted (12 March 1558-9) the manor of Kib worth Beauchamp, Leicestershire, together with the office of chief pantler at coronations an office which had been hereditary in his father's family. He became master of the ordnance 12 April 1560, Baron de LTsle 25 Dec. 1561, and Earl of Warwick on the day following.


Willoughby Bertie, 4th Earl of Abingdon (16 January 1740 – 26 September 1799), styled Lord Norreys from 1745 to 1760, was an English peer and music patron. Bertie was born in Gainsborough, Lincolnshire, the second eldest son of Willoughby Bertie, 3rd Earl of Abingdon and Anna Maria Collins. On 29 January 1759, he matriculated at Magdalen College, Oxford and received his MA on 29 May 1761. Bertie was a music patron and composer, as well as a political writer. His brother-in-law Giovanni Gallini brought him into contact with J.C. Bach and Carl Friedrich Abel, and he was subsequently very involved in their careers. During his time in England (1791–1792, 1794–1795), Abingdon was a patron of Haydn's, who may have encouraged him to compose. Abingdon is credited with the composition of one hundred and twenty musical works. He and his family lived at Rycote in Oxfordshire and in 1769 he funded the construction of the Swinford Toll Bridge across the River Thames near Eynsham.




Ha,ha: He sure don't look Black to me!



Earl of Lindsey is a title in the Peerage of England. It was created in 1626 for the 14th Baron Willoughby de Eresby (see Baron Willoughby de Eresby for earlier history of the family). He was First Lord of the Admiralty from 1635 to 1636 and also established his claim in right of his mother to the hereditary office of Lord Great Chamberlain of England. Lord Lindsey fought on the Royalist side in the Civil War and was killed at the Battle of Edgehill on 23 October 1642. He was succeeded by his son, the second Earl. He also fought at Edgehill and surrendered to the Parliamentarians in order to attend his mortally wounded father. Lord Lindsey later fought at the First Battle of Newbury, Second Battle of Newbury, and at Naseby. His son from his second marriage, James, was created Earl of Abingdon in 1682. He was succeeded by his son from his first marriage to Martha Cockayne, the third Earl. He represented Boston in the House of Commons and served as Lord Lieutenant of Lincolnshire.

His son, the fourth Earl, was summoned to the House of Lords in 1690 through a writ of acceleration in his father's junior title of Baron Willoughby de Eresby. He later served as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and as Lord Lieutenant of Lincolnshire and was one of the Lords Justices before the arrival of King George I. In 1706 he was created Marquess of Lindsey and in 1715 he was further honoured when he was made Duke of Ancaster and Kesteven. Both titles were in the Peerage of Great Britain. His son, the second Duke, was called to the House of Lords in 1715 through a writ of acceleration as Baron Willoughby de Eresby. He later served as Lord Lieutenant of Lincolnshire. He was succeeded by his son, the third Duke. He was a General in the Army and served as Master of the Horse from 1766 to 1778. He was also Lord Lieutenant of Lincolnshire. His son, the fourth Duke, was briefly Lord Lieutenant of Lincolnshire but died unmarried in 1779 at an early age. On his death the barony of Willoughby de Eresby fell into abeyance between his sisters Lady Priscilla and Georgiana, Marchioness of Cholmondeley, who also jointly inherited the office of Lord Great Chamberlain (the abeyance was terminated in 1780 in favour of Priscilla; see the Baron Willoughby de Eresby for later history of this title).

The late Duke was succeeded in the earldom, marquessate and dukedom by his uncle, the fifth Duke. He represented Lincoln in Parliament and served as Lord Lieutenant of Lincolnshire. He had no sons and on his death in 1809 the marquessate and dukedom became extinct. He was succeeded in the earldom of Lindsey by his third cousin, the ninth Earl.


John Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne , KG, PC (9 January 1662 – 15 July 1711). He was born in Edwinstowe, Nottinghamshire, the son of the 3rd Earl of Clare and his wife Grace Pierrepont. Grace was daughter of The Hon. William Pierrepont and granddaughter of the 1st Earl of Kingston-upon-Hull. Holles was elected MP for Nottinghamshire as Lord Houghton on 14 January 1689, but was called to the House of Lords two days later when his father died and he became the 4th Earl of Clare. He was created the 1st Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, of the 2nd creation, in 1694. The Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne is a title which was created three times in British history. The first creation had become extinct when Henry Cavendish, 2nd Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne died with out a male heir. On 1 March 1690, he married Lady Margaret Cavendish, a daughter of Henry Cavendish. They had one child, Lady Henrietta Cavendish Holles (1694–1755), who married the 2nd Earl of Oxford and Mortimer and was mother to Margaret Bentinck, Duchess of Portland. In 1710 he purchased Wimpole Park in Cambridgeshire and the Manor of Marylebone. The Marylebone lands passed to his son-in-law Harley who named Holles Street in his memory. A rivalry was formed between John and his sister, Elizabeth, when she married Christopher Vane, 1st Baron Barnard.




The Albino Boys at Wiki say that this is a portrait of John Holles, Duke of Newcastle.

Ha,ha: strange, but he does NOT look Black, ruddy, and SIXTY YEARS OLD!






More Macky's


Here are more White pages from Macky's, which incontrovertibly show that Britain's,

(and the rest of Europe's), original Monarchs and Nobility were Black people.

So what happened? Murder, Mayhem, Slavery and Indenture.

The number killed to take over the Americas is stated (by them) as 130 million.

Since they still cling to the nonsense of them being native to Europe,

they have produced no estimates as to how many Blacks they killed to take over Europe;

though numbers for the main instrument (the Thirty Years War), are available.

In the United States, those murderous, Civil War Starting types, still hold great power, as evidenced by Donald Trump.

And they still love the lie, to cover their hateful nature. They originally claimed that they once voted for Obama,

but turned to Trump because of economic unease, (and there were some stupid enough to believe them)!

It is only in April 2018, that they finally admit that they voted for Trump because of RACE unease.

See the New York Times story titled: Trump Voters Driven by Fear of Losing Status, Not Economic Anxiety, Study Finds.

Make note that many more Noble Black Families are mentioned in the Dictionary of National Biography (DNB)




































From a careful reading of the story of Ignatius Sancho, one thing is clear. It was written by a person ignorant of the conventions of British Nobility, and also ignorant of British law and the issue of Slavery. Almost certainly it was written by an American, as the conventions cited were American not British: (no clue as to why the British accepted the story. With those facts in mind...


Could this story from 1860, possibly be the

inspiration for the Ignatius Sancho story?


The importation of slaves had been prohibited in the United States since [1808], and yet, the trade continued illegally on a smaller scale for many years -- even up to the outbreak of the Civil War. Published in the June 2, 1860 issue of Harper's Weekly, The Slave Deck of the Bark "Wildfire" illustrated how Africans traveled on the upper deck of the ship. On board the ship were 510 captives, recently acquired from an area of Africa near the Congo River. The author of the article reported seeing, upon boarding the ship, "about four hundred and fifty native Africans, in a state of entire nudity, in a sitting or squatting posture, the most of them having their knees elevated so as to form a resting place for their heads and arms."
By slave ship standards, not many had died en route -- about 90 of the original 600. But the ship was not filled to capacity -- it could hold 1,000 slaves -- and the Africans were well-fed.


The ship was captured by an American steamer and brought to port at Key West.






[FROM our - 7, THE SLAVE DECK KEY WEST, FLORIDA, May 20, 1860.



Historical note: less than a year later, the American Civil War will start (Apr 12, 1861 – May 13, 1865) as Albino Rabble attacked the United States Fort Sumter, 744 miles away in South Carolina: shortly after U.S. President Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated.


ON the morning of the 30th of April last, the United States steamer Mohawk, Lieutenant Craven commanding, came to anchor in the harbor of this place, having in tow a bark of the burden of about three hundred and thirty tons, supposed to be the bark Wildfire, lately owned in the city of New York. The bark had on board five hundred and ten native Africans, taken on board in the River Congo, on the west side of the continent of Africa. She had been captured a few days previously by Lieutenant Craven within sight of the northern coast of Cuba, as an American vessel employed in violating our laws against the slave-trade. She had left the Congo River thirty-six days before her capture. Soon after the bark was anchored we repaired on board, and on passing over the side saw, on the deck of the vessel, about four hundred and fifty native Africans, in a state of entire nudity, in a sitting or squatting posture, the most of them having their knees elevated so as to form a resting place for their heads and arms.

They sat very close together, mostly on either side of the vessel, forward and aft, leaving a narrow open space along the line of the centre for the crew of the vessel to pass to and fro. About fifty of them were full-grown young men, and about four hundred were boys aged from ten to sixteen years. It is said by persons acquainted with the slave-trade and who saw them, that they were generally in a very good condition of health and flesh, as compared with other similar cargoes, owing to the fact that they had not been so much crowded together on board as is common in slave voyages, and had been better fed than usual. It is said that the bark is capable of carrying, and was prepared to carry, one thousand, but not being able without inconvenient delay to procure so many, she sailed with six hundred. Ninety and upward had died on the voyage. But this is considered as comparatively a small loss, showing that they had been better cared for than usual. Ten more have died since their arrival, and there are about forty more sick in the hospital. We saw on board about six or seven boys and men greatly emaciated, and diseased past recovery, and about a hundred that showed decided evidences of suffering from imanition, exhaustion, and disease. Dysentery was the principal disease.

But notwithstanding their sufferings, we could not be otherwise than interested and amused at their strange looks, motions, and actions. The well ones looked happy and contented, and were ready at any moment to join in a song or a dance whenever they were directed to do so by “Jack"— a little fellow as black as ebony, about twelve years old, having a handsome and expressive face, an intelligent look, and a sparkling eye. The sailors on the voyage had dressed “Jack” in sailor costume, and had made him a great pet. When we were on board “Jack” carried about in his hand a short cord, not only as the emblem but also as the instrument of his brief delegated authority. He would make the men and boys stand up, sit down, sing, or dance just as he directed. When they sang “Jack” moved around slapping his hands together, and if any refused to sing, or sang out of time, Jack's cord descended on their backs. Their singing was monotonous. The words we did not understand.

We have rarely seen a more happy and merry-looking fellow than “Jack.” From the deck we descended into the cabin, where we saw sixty or seventy women and young girls, in Nature's dress, some sitting on the floor and others on the lockers, and some sick ones lying in the berths. Four or five of them were a good deal tattooed on the back and arms, and we noticed that three had an arm branded with the figure “7,” which, we suppose, is the merchant's mark. On the day of their arrival the sickest, about forty in all, were landed and carried to a building on the public grounds belonging to Fort Taylor, and Doctors Whitehurst and Skrine employed as medical attendants. We visited them in the afternoon. The United States Marshal had procured for all of them shirts, and pants for the men, and among them as light as a cat, and beat the time by some benevolent ladies of the city had sent the girls and women gowns. Six or eight were very sick; the others did not appear to be in any immediate danger of dying.

We were very much amused by a young lad about fifteen years old, not much sick, who had got on, probably for the first time in his life, a whole shirt, and who seemed to be delighted with every body and everything he saw. He evidently thought the speech of the white man was very funny. When a few words were spoken to him he immediately repeated them with great glee. Pointing to Dr. Skrine, we said “Doctor.” He said “Doctor.” And then pointing to Dr. Whitehurst, we said “Doctor too.” He said “Doctor too.” The doctors had selected from the bark a woman about twenty-four years of age to assist the nurse in taking care of the sick. She had been dressed in a clean calico frock, and looked very respectably. About sundown they all lay down for the night upon a camp-bed, and were covered over with blankets. And now a scene took place which interested us very much, but which we did not understand and can not explain.

The woman standing up slapped her hands together once or twice, and as soon as all were silent she commenced a sort of recitation, song, or prayer, in tone and manner much like a chanting of the Litany in Catholic churches, and every few moments the voices of ten or fifteen others were heard in the same tone, as if responding. This exercise continued about a minute. Now what could this be? It looked and sounded to us very much like Christians chanting together an evening prayer on retiring to rest. And yet we feel quite assured that none of these persons had ever heard of Christ, or had learned Christian practices, or possessed much, if any, knowledge of God as a Creator or Preserver of the world. We suspect that it was not understood by them as a religious exercise at all, but as something which they had been trained to go through at the barracoons in Africa or on board the ship. In two days after the arrival of the bark the Marshal had completed a large, airy building at Whitehead's Point, a little out of the town, for the reception and accommodation of these people; and after getting them clad as well as he could in so short a time, they were all landed on the fort wharf, and carried in carts to their quarters.

On arriving there they all arranged themselves along the sides of the building, as they had been accustomed to do on the decks of the vessel, and squatted down in the same manner. It took the Marshal and his assistants some little time, and no small efforts, to give the Africans to understand that they were free to move about, to go out and come in at will. They learned this in the course of a few hours, however, and general merriment and hilarity prevailed.

We visited them in the afternoon, and have done so several times since; and we confess that we have been struck, as many others have been, with the expression of intelligence displayed in their faces, the beauty of their physical conformation, and the beauty of their teeth. We have been accustomed to think that the civilized negroes of our own country were superior, in point of intelligence and physical development, to the native Africans; but judging only by the eye, we think it would be difficult to find, any where in our own country, four hundred finer and handsomer looking boys and girls than these are. To be sure you often saw the elongated occiput, the protruded jaws, and the receding forehead; but you also often saw a head as round, with features as regular as any European's, except the universal flat noses.

The statement above from an Albino of the Antebellum South, clearly says that Black Americans were DIFFERENT from Africans: therefore were NOT Africans!

Which is exactly what Realhistoryww has been saying for years; i.e. Black Americans are >90% Expelled Europeans and Native Americans, and <10% African Slave. (As a reminder, only 308,005 African Slaves were imported into North America: i.e. Mexico, the United States and Canada).




Little “Jack” has a head as round as an apple. A number of these negroes—perhaps twelve or fifteen in all—have been more or less at and about Loando, a Portuguese town on the coast (Southwest Africa), and have learned to speak a little Portuguese. Through an interpreter we learned from them that some four or five—perhaps more, but probably not many—had been baptized at the Roman Catholic missionary station at Loando. Francisco, a young man, says he was baptized by a Franciscan friar in Loando; that he was a slave in Africa, and does not wish to return there. He says he had rather be a slave to the white man in this country. Salvador, a bright- looking, smart lad, has been baptized. Constantia says she was baptized in Loando. She does not remember her father; she was stolen away when she was young, and was sold by her brother.

Antonia and Amelia are both fine-looking young women, aged about twenty, and were both baptized at Loando. Madia, a pagan, unbaptized, aged about twenty, has obtained among the white people here who have visited the quarters the name of “The Princess,” on account of her fine personal appearance and the deference that seemed to be paid to her by some of her companions. The persons we have here mentioned, including some eight or ten others, evidently do not belong to the same tribe that the rest do. Indeed the whole number is evidently taken from different tribes living in the interior of Africa, but the greater number are “Congos.” The women we have named have cut or shaved the hair off the back part of their head, from a point on the crown to the back part of either ear. It is the fashion of their tribe. None of the other women are thus shorn. Many of the men, women, boys, and girls have filed their front teeth—some by sharpening them to a point, and others by cutting down the two upper front teeth. The persons above named have their teeth in a natural state. Perhaps fifty in all are tattooed more or less. Travelers describe the natives of Congo as being small of stature, cheerful, good-humored, unreflecting, and possessed of little energy either of mind or body. Negro indolence is carried with them to the utmost excess. The little cultivation that exists, entirely carried on by the females, is nearly limited to the manioc root, which they are not very skillful in preparing. Their houses are put together of mats made from the fibre of the palm tree, and their clothes and bedding consist merely of matted grass. The President, on receiving news of the capture of the Wildfire, sent a special message to Congress on the subject, from which we give an extract below.

The subsequent capture of another slave ship with more Africans will probably lead to some enactment on the subject. The President says: “The expenditure for the Africans captured on board the Wildfire will not be less than one hundred thousand dollars, and may considerably exceed that sum. But it will not be sufficient for Congress to limit the amount appropriated to the case of the Wildfire. It is probable, judging from the increased activity of the slave trade and the vigilance of our cruisers, that several similar captures may be made before the end of the year. An appropriation ought, therefore, to be granted large enough to cover such contingencies. The period has arrived when it is indispensable to provide some specific legislation for the guidance of the Executive on this subject. With this view, I would suggest that Congress might authorize the President to enter into a general agreement with the Colonization Society, binding them to receive, on the coast of Africa from our agent there, all the captured Africans which may be delivered to him, and to maintain them for a limited period, upon such terms and conditions as may combine humanity toward these unfortunates with a just economy.

This would obviate the necessity of making a new bargain with every new capture, and would prevent delay and avoid expense in the disposition of the captured. The law might then provide that, in all cases where this may be practicable, the captor should carry the negroes directIy to Africa, and deliver them to the American agent there, afterward bringing the captured vessel to the United States for adjudication. “The capturing officer, in case he should bring his prize directly to the United States, ought to be required to land the negroes in some one or more ports to be designated by Congress, where the prevailing health throughout the year is good. At these ports cheap but permament accommodations might be provided for the negroes until they could be sent away, without incurring the expense of erecting such accommodations at every port where the capturing officer may think proper to enter.

On the present occasion these negroes have been brought to Key West; and, according to the estimate presented by the Marshal of the Southern District of Florida to the Secretary of the Interior, the cost of providing temporary quarters for them will be $2500, and the aggregate expenses for the single month of May will amount to $12,000. But this is far from being the worst evil. Within a few weeks the yellow fever will most probably prevail at Key West; and hence the Marshal urges their removal from their present quarters at an early day, which must be done in any event as soon as practicable. For these reasons I earnestly commend this subject to the immediate attention of Congress.”






So what is the truth?


In this world of Albinos using history as a confidence crutch and masturbation aid, there is no way to tell. Certainly logic would be on the side of those saying that the Albinos found a portrait of one of the Montague's, and rather than destroying it, they decided to cover up it's identity with a made-up story. That happens all the time, so it's certainly a reasonable guess.

But then we know that John Montagu, 2nd Duke of Montagu was appointed governor of the islands of Saint Lucia and Saint Vincent in the West Indies. So maybe someone could have brought back a "Native American Child" (they were Black too you know), as Europeans loved to bring back exotics for display - Who knows?