This is good @usefulcharts but you are overlooking that the word Muslim often obfuscates that the people were Moors or Black Africans. Sancha of Leon was almost certainly someone would be considered Black. And if you look at old portraits of her children like Urraca or Alphonso V many of them are of dark complexion. Also there was a heavy presence of Moors in Portugal and many of the Kings of this era have African features in older portraits. These Moors also founded aristocratic families in Iberia, France and Germany btw. So of course Elizabeth has Black ancestry, so do I and you too. As you said if you go back far enough we are all connected.
In the last video about this topic on Queen Elizabeth, you described princess _Zaida_ as a "wife or mistress" and now in this video you describe her again as "wife or lover". In both instances you're substituting _concubine_ with something else. Seems deliberately misleading. At the very least you should be describing her as "wife, lover or concubine" to cover all three bases.
You're either a bear faced (paid) liar, or completely incompetent. Prince Charles, admitted, he was a descendant of Vladd The Impaler (known today as Dracula), and he admitted this on camera. (you can find it easily) Also, Elizabeth's line, was historically recorded as being invited (from Germany) by Zionism leaders, to be the new rulers of Britain. It was started by George the 1st. And they are known, to have changed their name from Hanoverian to Windsor, overnight. They are clearly jews, and your other assertion, that the Europeans are NOT the Lost Tribes of Israel, is as easily ripped apart. The Lost Tribes ARE, unequivocally, the white Europeans. Shame on you.
Hard to really consider a video game as educational. Using historical figures does not convey educational value. By that standard, so is Mel Brooks’ History of the World etc.
@@miguelservetus9534 Wrong by so many counts... I've already typed and edited and deleted so many tries, but realize there's no sense in beginning an internet debate. Let's be poetic: all learning is games. Buuuuut, even if it weren't true (which it is), at least interesting games accurately portraying history (in some sense; any historian will say that its an imperfect art) will SPARK interest in that period of history.
@@miguelservetus9534 Video games can be extremely educational. Sure, they are no substitute for a university education but they can get young people interested in history and are often a springboard for more learning.
My grandfather used to joke "Don't shake your family tree too much, you may not know what will fall out..." This is great. Two things I took to heart. We all have these wonderful stories, just that records have not been kept. I am not much of a religious man, but I do hope there is a heaven because I would like to know my whole story. I also enjoyed the comment during midivil times race seemed to be based more on culture that skin color. That is a lesson we could use here in the United States right now.
The biggest split in race relations came with the crusades. That’s what’s caused the modern day trouble in the Middle East. Funny thing is, the crusades were nit started because of religion, they were started because a certain pope had huge money troubles. To deflect from his problem being made he came up with a ‘great idea’. Let’s all go on a crusade. Save Jerusalem etc etc. all forget his money troubles. He made and caused one heck of a mess. 👵👵👵👵🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺
this was not reality. it is only an opinion that race seemed to be based more on culture that skin color. i think its just a projection of historians' modern sensibilities on the past. since there is nothing to support reaching that conclusion as people back then were much less exposed to different races than they are now. you have to had lived in both times to make this comparison.
Yeah they really didnt mind race that much but they really minded culture. For example there was a muslim writer who traveled to early russia and studied the rus. He made the usual remarks of white skin and blonde hair etc. But he focused his writing on the cusstums of the rus and he was mainly disqusted by how dirty they were because he was muslim. The point is that humans always find ways to separate themselves and the fact that we constantly change how we separate each other means we really arent that different after all
I found your channel as a suggestion next to a CK3 video by One Proud Bavarian. It was a wonderful find, and I'm thrilled that you were able to do a sponsored video with Paradox. Your charts and videos have greatly improved my understanding of the history and my enjoyment of the game, and seeing CK3 assets throughout the video was highly amusing and extremely entertaining.
Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara was wed to Sancha of Castile and León, King Alfonso VI of León and Castile's daughter. Research suggests that Rodrigo directly descends from Mawiyah, Al-Hakam II's daughter, who was Muhammad I of Córdoba's grandson. This lineage extends back to Abraham through his son Ishmael.
The throne of Spain wasn’t united during the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella. They ruled their territories separate. Spain didn’t unite until the reign of their grandson Charles I in 1516.
Btw, the term "moor" was also given to Iberian Muslims, who were the majority of the Muslims in medieval Iberia, so if the only thing known about Madragana is that she was a moor, that doesn't say almost anything.
The moors also descended from White Spanish people and North Africans, and North Africans aren't Black in general but still intermingle with Black Africans across the Sahel so the Moors likely had recent Black ancestors, so they're probably 10-20% Black which is higher than White Spanish people
yeah moor doesn't mean black, the misconception came from Shakespeare descriptions and we don't know if the one Shakespeare describe was really black or just brown north African coz at that time I think seeing black person wasn't common in England.
@@TheRealGhebs All North Africans throughout history have had high levels of sub-Saharan heritage because of their location, and the Sahara is a trade zone
the Queen Charlotte theory is crazy, genetically it doesnt make sense, but also there are over a dozen portraits of her throughout her life and she doesnt look the slightest bit mixed in any of them. For comparison the Dumas and Puschkin families are great reference to see how mixed people were depicted in european art.
"the Queen Charlotte theory is crazy, genetically it doesnt make sense" - what theory? Matt emphasized that given the number of generations between Charlotte and her (likely) Moor ancestors that Charlotte would have inherited little DNA from her Moor ancestress.
Idk about theories but you can absolutely see African features in portraits. Low key she kind of (not in a disrespectful way at all) gives me Albino vibes. Fair skinned for sure but prominent traditionally African features. Quite frankly you look at Archie and though he looks white at first glance due to the 75% European inheritance his small features and hair texture tip you off a little. It’s not obviously noticeable at first glance for Queen C or Archie but as a person of color I can always tell when someone is “passing” or deceptively looks white.
@@TheDanEdwards i've read 5 reliable sources that say Madragana was mozarab (Iberian Christian) and only one reliable source that says she was moor (Muslim inhabitant of the Maghreb).
This is a very interesting video, but I’m a bit skeptical about Mór Afonso. In Portugal, we use “Mouro” as a synonym for Muslim like the expression “Saracen”. Yes, it tends to refer to North Africa (Mauritania) but that’s because it was important to distinguish Arab Muslims from non-Arab Muslims in Al-Andalus. And since most non-Arab Muslims were Amazigh/Berbers their name of Mouros became widely used. But using Berbers to claim subsaharan ascendency seems like a stretch. Also, Mór Afonso could simply be a Mozarab, which were “native” Iberians who lived under Muslim occupation, so were sometimes called “Mouros” like their overlords.
O pai de Madragana era um muladi, segundo os registros que temos hoje, e muladi refere-se a um cristão que apostatou ao islamismo ou um árabe nascido de pai muçulmano e mãe cristã. No entanto, vários cronistas e pessoas da época diziam que essa linhagem dela era de cor mais escura (por isso, a Rainha Charlotte era dita que era mais escura, mas talvez fosse o fato de que os povos germânicos são mais alvos do que os ibéricos? Quem sabe). Foi a partir do reinado de Dom João V que começaram a publicar textos negando que ela sequer era uma Moura. Meu palpite é que nunca saberemos, mas o mais provável é que ela fosse de raça mista (pois o pai dela era um muladi).
i've read 5 reliable sources that say she was mozarab (Iberian Christian) and only one reliable source that says she was moor ( Muslim inhabitant of the Maghreb).
Avante Lusitania : Mor Afonso was an Israelite !!!! Mor is a Hebrew female name !!! Was the grand-daughter of Chief-Rabbi Yahia Ben YAHI III , First Chief-Rabbi of Portugal and Tax-Collector, Entrusted by Dom Afonso Henriques, First King of Portugal. Also called the Templar King.
Regarding Moors, from North Africa, some may be dark skinned while others have light skin. Think of the people from Morocco, as an example, when "Moor" comes to mind. Anyway, the point is that there is a big difference between a Moor and a "Black" African (e.g., Nubians).
Completely incorrect the moors referred to different groups between North Africa and West Africa.They were not a uniformed ethnic group only differentiated by skin tone only.There were many Black African moors who went into spain I could fo way deeper into this matter but time constraints wont allow me.
BM : The Moors came from North Africa. White North African people are descendants of Vikings ... Kabyle region, North of Algeria was invaded by Vikings during the Middle Age. Many Kabyles possess blue or green eyes. I knew some of them. Check google also Also during the end of Antiquity, North Africa was invaded by Romans, an other White ethnicity. Also, North African Israelite women were raped by Roman soldiers as well. In the Antiquity, North Africa was part of the Roman empire, just like all Europe.
Sudanese people can be quite light, to start off with, I even know Black Sudanese people who were lighter than Middle Eastern people. Secondly, Morocco is in North Africa and there are many Black North Africans so most Moroccans have recent (at least great-grandparent) Black ancestors from North-West Africa like Mauritania
Martim Afonso de Sousa, a colonial governor of Brazil and whose descendents make up a wide branch of the Sousa family in Brazil, traces back it's family tree to Martim Chichorro too.
True. My maternal great-grandmother and grandfather have pride to claim their descent traced back to medieval Spanish royalty, I did have blue blood through both parental and long lines from my grandpa's maternal grandma.
@@thallesgimenezmello2733 why are you people so obsessed with DNA? *Literally* almost all of the world population has "royal" descendants. And how are you guys even so certain of who your ancient ancestors were? We common people don't even have enough records to know that. It's fun to imagine, I love to imagine who my ancestors were but being obsessed with having a certain type of ancestry is lowkey creepy. No one is superior because of their blood! :)
@roberto lang Did you call me of that? I never thought of this. I'm respected and beloved person, by my family and friends. My grandfather and great-grandmother told to my mother, who told me. I'm aware of fact my great-great-grandmother is descendant of primarily medieval Spanish royalty through long line of her grandparents. If you call me of that words for kind of a person? I'm sorry for this.
If one goes back 10 generations, there is less than 0.1% of that person's ancestor's dna.. So they don't have that dna after 8-10 generations of that ancestor, unless they keep on marrying within their small ancestral community..
What happens is that we lose some ancestors from our DNA, and keep others. We inherit blocks of chromosomes (for the autosomes - the Y chromosome is inherited mostly intact from one line) from certain ancestors, and nothing from others. That can happen as near to you as a 5th or 6th great grandparent. Of the 1024 possible pedigree ancestors (at your 10th generation), assuming no pedigree collapse, you like inherited DNA from around 700 or 800 of them. Go back another 10 generations, to the 20th level of ancestor, and of the million pedigree entries at that level you inherited DNA from less than 2000 of them, perhaps only 1500 of them.
As you know, the whole thing with Queen Charlotte is not because of her ancestor Madragana, but simply because of her pug nose "frizzy" hair in paintings and what modern people perceive as her "African looks" That's it. That's how this whole thing started.
Mike Ross : Dona Isabel "Zaida" was a White Spanish noble Christian who was abducted from Christian Spain by Amazigh Muslims into the small Muslim emirate of Grenada, She was captured as prostitute for the Emir Boabdil the Poet / anti-war guy ! Later on, she was seduced and decided to convert to Islam by HER choice, to become an Emira (Queen) and took the Muslim name Zaida. They had together one son and one daughter. In 1492, when Emir Boabdil (he is direct descendant of Saeed ibn Ubada inn Dulaym, chief leader of the saeeda tribe and a companon of Prophet Muhammad of Islam) lost the war against Dona Isabel of Castilla and Don Fernando of Aragon, the Catholic Queen and King of Spain, Dona Isabel "Zaida" and her two Muslim mixed kids, begged Dom Fernando to accept them in Spain and not expelling her . Request accepted. Dona Isabel came back to Christianity and her two Muslims mixed kids were baptised Christians. Dona Isabel of Castilla, Queen of Spain is a great-granddaughter of Portuguese Israelite woman daughter of a shoemaker, from North Portugal. (Don Fernando of Aragon, King of Spain is a great-grandson of Chief-Rabbi Gedalia BenZaken, Portuguese Chief-Rabbi of Portugal) Later on, Don Fernando of Aragon, King of Spain Unified, Took Dona Isabel's daughter, mixed girl as his mistress and had a baby with her. A son who became a Don, Knight in the Kingdom and his noble leanage pass on generation to generation...
@@invisibleface6479 Only Talking about Queen Charlotte who was born as a princess of Mecklinburg-Strelitz in Germany hundreds of years after Zaida and Madragana, and how modern people like to claim she' must have been "African" because of how her nose and hair. look in painted portraits. It's ridiculous and I can't believe she was even mentioned seriously in this video.
First of all: nice clip! It once again shows us that most of these noble bloodlines are intertwined to a significant degree. Secondly I would like to add a few other similar ancestral claims, one also has its origins on the Iberian peninsula. In his standard work on Iberian ancestry named "Nobiliário de Famílias de Portugal" the famous Portuguese genealogist Manuel José da Costa Felgueiras Gaio states that the origin of the House of Maia partially lays within the dynasty of the Umayyads. The founding father of the Da Maia-dynasty is Lovesendo Ramirez, according to Felgueiras Gaio he was married to Zaira bint Zaydan, the daughter of Zaydan (or Zedao) ibn Zayd and a woman named Areguna Fromaríquez. This Zaydan is then mentioned as the grandson of Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Umawi, the Emir of Córdoba. Lovesendo Ramirez himself was a supposed bastard son of King Ramiro II of Léon from the old Asturias-Léon dynasty by a woman named Ortega; the latter being either a daughter of a Moorish person named Sa'd abu Sa'dun ibn Ishaq or by an Iberian named Rodrigo Romães (though I don't think Felgueiras Gaio has mentioned those). An even more exotic claim is made about the first House of Bragança (not the later royal house but the one ruling the lordship), the founder of that house is decribed to have been a Britonic knight that married an Armenian pilgrim princess from the house of Arçruni (with roots into the old Turkic world and the Roman Empire); about the forementioned Asturias-Léon dynasty a similar claim is made (through the Armenian Mamikonian family). Mind you: there is an exilarchic ancestral trail that leads through the Caucasus as well, by means of the House of Mihrani and the Mihranid royal dynasty of Khartli in present day Georgia. A third similar claim is made about a branch of the Byzantine Skleros-clan; one of their scions was a magister named Romanos Skleros (latinized to Romanus Sclerus), a son of the Byzantine throne pretender Bardas Skleros; Romanos is thought to have married the daughter of the Hamdanid ruler Fadl Allah Abu Taghlib ibn al-Hassan (an Emir of Mosul), with supposed Abassid rooting.
Really cool to think about how, Royals are just so privileged they could track this stuff back 100s of years. Its cool that we all share common links, and also cool that we developed such wildly different cultures to shape those links.
Hey i think you made a mistake,Sancho the son of emperor Alphonso didn't have any kids so that's wrong,rather it is a daughter sancha who is the one who has children.
@@UsefulCharts In the last video about this topic on Queen Elizabeth, you described princess _Zaida_ as a "wife or mistress" and now in this video you describe her again as "wife or lover". In both instances you're substituting _concubine_ with something else. At the very least you should be describing her as "wife, lover or concubine" to cover all three bases. Anything else would be deliberately misleading or selective.
Matt, thank you for another excellent video! When it comes down to it we all belong to the same family regardless of our creeds, race, religion, or ethnicity. And, yes, as others have commented, using CKIII in your videos is genius.
@ivanooze but we're all majority the same. Admixture is just that, admixture, it's not our genetic base. We are all the same race lol. Any other claim is identity politics bullshit. We're Homo Sapiens, each of us, at the core.
Iain Moncreiffe wrote a book called HRH just about 40 years ago which was published just before Princess Dianna gave birth to Prince William that discussed William's genealogy extensively. Included in the book was a connection between the Windsor's and Vlad Dracula but more to the point of this video, it described a connection to Mohamed. I no longer have a copy and it is hard to find but he seems to have been a genealogist of some note and wrote a number of books on the topic. I do not recall the exact line that he traced or the sources he cited but I think if one were to obtain a copy it would be an interesting book to read on the topic. As a distant cousin of the Windsor's I enjoy seeing videos describing their ancestry.
Little thing I found in 4:07, as a Spanish person García II was probably king of Galicia, not Galacia. Galicia is a very rainy zone in the north that soon merged with Asturias, Castilla and León, so that's probably what it is
Moor has always meant the same in the Iberian Peninsula, people that came from Mauretania aka Northwestern Africa, mostly Morocco. Them or their ancestors. They were, obviously, majority Muslim. But I've met enough Moroccans to testify that they are not black. Not everyone on the continent of Africa is black. Does this means Madragana was black? Probably no, she was probably Berber. Does this also mean she doesn't have black ancestors? No, she probably does, but probably not Madragana.
regardless. i've read 5 reliable sources that say she was mozarab (Iberian Christian) and only one reliable source that says she was moor ( Muslim inhabitant of the Maghreb).
@@cv4809 typical american definition,blck doest mean sub saharan africanz..black comes in many shades ,some with moors ,who told you all sub saharan africans are dark sikinned ,
You failed to take into account the timeline of the birth of Zaida's children. When she met Alfonso VI in Toledo around 1080, she was pregnant with his daughter to her Hashemite Muslim husband who died defending Córdoba from the Almoravids. She gave birth to Isabel. Later, she also gave birth to Sancho, whom Alfonso made the heir to the throne. Sancho died young in the Battle of Uclés. Notice the date of that battle and the date of births of Elvira and Sancha. The Sancha mentioned here is the ancestress of María de Padilla. She and Elvira were daughters of Isabel who was born in 1080. 1103 if I'm not mistaken, was Elvira's date of birth. The battle of Uclés occured sometime in 1107 or 1108, Sancho dying at age 18.
Except Zaida was never married to Hashimite to begin with but to Abbadid prince of Banu Lakhm tribe ...... Abbadids were Arabs and never claimed descent to Hashimites
@@angusyang5917 Unless I am wrong, which is quite possible, the Muslims who conquered Andalusia were Moors not Arabs, and they conquered it from Visigoths not Vandals. So the sound-change from Vandal to Andalus was probably well underway by the time of the Muslim conquest; and the languages involved could have included Gothic and Berber, in addition to Latin and Wendish and Arabic. TL;DR summary: we probably don’t know how it happened.
So, it means that I'm related somehow to Queen Elisabeth as well. Lots of these caracters are present in my Family Tree, according to The Family Search site. Whatever, how knows?
As far as I know there are (or was) some russian nobile families that have proven descendence from Genghis Khan, so probably there we should start search.
En el contexto Hispano "moro" siempre ha hecho más referencia a los musulmanes (marroquíes, principalmente), que a personas negras. Ejemplo de ello es la expulsión de los moros por parte de los reyes católicos al final de la reconquista, así que me parece muy dudosa la segunda opción, aunque no para descartarla.
I believe that there's another way that Elizabeth descends from Peter of Castile and Maria de Padilla: through their daughter Constance, who was the grandmother of John II of Castle. John was the great-grandfather of Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I, and I believe that George III of England was the 6th great-grandson of Ferdinand.
A couple of incorrect sentences here, Jews did not live so peacefully under Muslim rule, they were subjected to a humiliating second class dhimmi and it never stopped any pogroms happening. It was violent. The idea of Jews wearing a yellow identifier came from Muslim rule. And it is estimated that 1 in 10 people in Spain and perhaps Portugal are directly descended from Jews as a result of the ones who stayed and were forcibly converted to Catholicism
I believe that your using the word "black" to describe a distant ancestor of Queen Elizabeth II is misleading. Moors at that time were NOT the same as "black sub-saharan" peoples, which are what are currently called Africans.
There is the strange idea that the only "black" Africans lived in so called "Sub Saharan Africa" and that the Sahara was some kinda impenetrable barrier that stopped these "Sub Saharan Africans" from ever venturing north of the Sahel, when it is clearly known that people traversed and lived in the Sahara for millennia and that many peoples who we would consider as "black" today lived in "North Africa" also for millennia.
You're all kinds of wrong, first of all every human being on Earth is descended from Black Africans ok? And the people of North Africa were too. Only after Arab and European invasions of lighter hues humans did this confusion about who is Black start.
@@curtisthomas2670 Not impenetrable, obviously. That being said, the further north you go (i.e. North Africa), the more light-skinned people get, and the further south you go (i.e. Sub-Saharan Africa), the more dark-skinned people get, with a transition area around the Sahel. There are obviously minority groups on both sides due to migrations, but we're talking about majority groups, here. The Moors living in Iberia mostly originated from North Africa, and thus the majority of them would have more closely resembled today's Maghrebi populations than Sub-Saharan ones. This is evident when you look at contemporary depictions of the Moors: they were generally depicted as fairly light-skinned, at least in comparison to more dark-skinned people originating from further south in Africa, which is what most western people nowadays (and not just Americans) associate with the word "black".
Yes. The Hashemite King of Jordan. Many of the Royal families of Europe are related to him. Yiri Louda and Michael Maclagan. "Lines of Succession, History of the Royal Familes of Europe". It is a great illustrated book with the genealogical trees from the birth of Heraldry.
I know it's quite popular to say that the Andalusia Muslim states were tolerant. Recent historiography has begun to challenge this. For example, there were repeated pogroms against the Jewish population. Beyond this, they were only tolerant in comparison to the massively intolerant Kingdom of Spain.
Jews were allowed to rise to positions of great prominence under the Muslims in comparison to when they were under the Christians, and in general were allowed more privileges and the ability to rise through society on merit. Still, Jews were nowhere near seen as equals to Muslims, would have to pay a tax/fine to live in Muslim lands, a 'dhimmi', and weren't allowed to ride horses, so they couldn't be 'head and shoulders' above their Muslim countrymen etc. Also, there were always these types of riots/pogroms, depending upon the ruler, whether there were socio-economic issues, like widespread disease, starvation or poverty. As you say though, compare it to Jews under Christianity, there generally is no comparison.
Moors could never black, at least in thsi case. We have to think why this term was given to her and in the people of gave it: in Portugal, a Moor is, as well said in the video, a muslim from northwest africa, which isn't naturally a place with people that we today call "black". If she was black like the concept we use nowadays, she would have to be form sub-saharan africa, in a case where old portuguese would probably use the greek term "ethiopian", rather than "moor"
*Nobody* expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise, surprise and fear, fear and surprise. Our *two* weapons are fear and surprise, and ruthless efficiency. Our *three* weapons are fear and surprise and ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical dedication to the pope.
I have traced one branch of my ancestry back to about 1650. They all lived within a few blocks of the same city, had a different/temporary trade in every record and moved a lot from dwelling to dwelling. On one of the records, the adress states "the front of 12VI, which, after visiting the house, I realise meant half of the top section of the attic. And records stop, presumably because prior to that time, the local church was not too concerned with poor souls. Not enough to write their names down in precious log books. It is both a treasure to have these records of historical people, but also a blunt reminder that I am happy to live in the present time.
You're pronouncing "Al-Andalus" as if it were spelled "Al-Andulas," which is somewhat distracting. It's pronounced quite phonetically, roughly "ahl ahn-dah-LOOS." "Chichorro" does not have a 'k' sound in it. chee-CHOH-ro, even if you don't roll the 'r.'
One important correction. To the definitions of Sephardi and Ashkenazi. It's not that the former traces their roots to Spain/Western Europe and the latter to Germany/Eastern European. All genetic/ethnic Jews trace their roots to Israel (proven by multiple genetic studies, and almost all known Jewish groups are more related to eachother than their are to their host populations). The terms Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, etc. refer to various streams of religious traditions, Sephardi referring to the general group of traditions developed in North Africa/Spain/Western Europe, Ashkenazi referring to the traditions developed in Germany/Eastern Europe, both with sub-groups (such as Yeki, Lithuanian, Chasidish, etc.), Mizrahi (closely related to Sephardi, often grouped with it) refers mostly to Jewish families that were lucky to have never left Israel, and sometimes to those who formerly lived in the Arab world (sub-groups include Yemenite and Iraqi/Bagdadi Jews). Things like Ashkenazi not eating legumes (in Hebrew known as Kitnyot) on Passover so they eat potatoes, or Sephardi not eating fish and dairy together (or at least some) while Ashkenazi will. Slight difference is composition or order of prayers and the tunes they are sung too, but each so similar that one would know they are praying with other Jews if an Ashkenazi Jew suddenly found themselves in a Sephardi community or vice versa. Interestingly, the Yemenite (or in Hebrew Temanim) Jews are likely the only group to properly preserve long lost pronunciation of the different sounds of the letter ג (Gimmel/Jimmel instead of just Gimmel) and ת (tav/thav instead of just tav or tav/sav). These are some of the differences, beyond geography and types of admixture (however limited) leading to Ashkenazim looking white, Sephardim and Mizrahim looking middle-eastern. This all goes beyond the fact that despite being an ethno-religion and generally a distinct ethbic/genetic group, there are Jewish groups such as Ethiopian and Igbo (recently recognized, but long claimed) Jews who are 100% Jewish and part of Am Yisrael (nation of Israel, not to be confused with the get-political state) based on religious law.
@@maganhassan2627 True, but it seems like this guy is implying that because her ancestor was Muslim, that makes her partly Muslim. Hell a person can be a member of a religion then not a member. I grew up Mormon, but I'm no longer Mormon. I am not even partly Mormon. Though I think the Church might still have my record, you could argue I still belong to the Church, but I would counterargue that no church owns it's members like that.
Not quite. The farther you go back in time, the more likely it becomes that someone who reproduced and whose line survives to the present is your direct ancestor. Not everyone reproduced, however, and not all lines have survived to the present. But all human beings are indeed kin to one another, and all living human beings have multiple ancestors in common.
Moor in Spanish (Moro) usually almost always meant north African and middle eastern Arabs. In England and Germany on the other hand in medieval times African = black so Moor= black
@@juliar1225 they were synonymous in German till I'd say 20th century maybe already 19th But the entire medieval and early modern period they were seen as the same thing
They also referred to other African Muslim kingdoms as moors so that is where it becomes confusing. You have to remember that the dominant religion in Africa, at the time was Islam.
@@rai2423 are you talking about Spanish or Germans. Because subsaharians even if Muslim were simply called negros aka black. Even the Moroccans didn't treat blacks even if Muslim as brothers in faith. The only non North Africans or Middle Eastern people to have been called moros are the Muslims of the Philippines
@@bnb6868 That is simply not true. The Spaniards and North African Muslims referred to the Muslim in the Horn of Africa as Moors as well, specifically Red Sea Moors. The North Africans referred to modern day Somalia as Beled Al Barbar and considered them to be similar to themselves in culture. You are woefully ignorant in your statements.
In my previous comment I forgot to add something. The ancestral claims that I pointed out in that comment are about connections from the medieval era, but there is one that is relatively recent and quite suprising in my humble opinion. It doesn't directly relate to Queen Elizabeth II of Great-Britain or the 'medieval ancestral nobility complex' but it does in fact has to do with the British royal family, to be precise: the family of late Prince Philip Mounbatten, Duke of Edinburgh & Deity of Tanna Island. A cousin, in the second degree or so, of Prince Philip was Marquess David Mountbatten of Milford Haven (he lived from 1919 to 1970). Marquess David's mother was Countess Nadejda Mihailovna of Torby, descending from the Romanov dynasty; that is quite interesting in itself but that's not what this comment is about: Countess Nadejda was the grandchild of a Russian woman with the name Natalia Alexandrovna Pushkina, indeed the daughter of the famous Russian poet and novelist Alexander Pushkin. In his turn Pushkin was the descendant of a Russian major-general who was named Abram Petrovich Hannibal. 'Russian' as a qualification basically refers to the fact that Hannibal was an officer in the Russian Imperial army but it is a well known fact that he was African, described to have originated from Eritrea but later research has shown that Abram Hannibal was probably from the area around Lake Chad in Central Africa. My guess is that Abram was shipped from Eritrea by the Ottomans prior to his arrival in Russia, it is known that he was more-or-less enslaved by the army of Sultan Ahmed III. The point in the aforementioned is that there is indeed a fully proven and fairly recent ancestral link between the British royal family, be it in a wider sense, and Africa.
@@astroflyinsightsThat must have been the uncle of Marquess David, namely Earl Louis Mountbatten of Burma. I didn't mention him in my initial comment but he was indeed married to Edwina Ashley, she seems to have had a Jewish great-grandmother because 'The Peerage' mentions a certain Amalia Rosenheim as her ancestor ('Rosenheim' probably is an Ashkenazi family name). I don't know to what extent this would have made Edwina Jewish, a matter of definition I suppose; it's not in a direct female line so the strict Jewish definition does not apply but not everyone adheres that viewpoint ofcourse.
To me as a Hispanic it came as a surprise that in the anglosphere people think moore = black, it simply not the case. Moore or "Morisco" as we know it, where basically what one would see as an hindu, a roma or an saudi. They where arabs from multiple cultures that had darker completion. They could have black in their ancestry but it is an already mixed "ethnicity" just as the three examples I gave. So I would not say they are black, as a sub saharan african more like hindu or saudi people.
Moor was a blanket term for anyone with darker skin than a European and also happened to be Muslim/African. So while is doesn't mean Moor's were only Sub-Saharan African, there definitely were Sub-Saharan Moors. You have to remember that there are lot of Dark Skin Africans in Northern Africa, even to this day, Northern Africa was populated by black people far before people from the middle east ventured across the Sahara.
@@rai2423 Exactly, there wasn't this entire race denomination prior to colonization. If you were Muslim and from Africa, you were a Moor. The Mali Empire which was a large and wealthy Muslim empire that spanned most of West Africa and parts of North Africa had major influence in Europe and would have been classified as a Moor's to Europeans. For example, the alleged richest human to ever exist, Mansa Musa, the King of the Mali Empire was considered a Moor to Europeans.
@@razatiger22 Well skin colour was definitely a factor back then BUT religion played a more important role in during Mediaeval Islamic times. People are using modern racial ideology to make sense of an ancient term.
The Queen Mother's family was Bowes-Lyon, connected to the famous Jewish Lyons family of whom the mother of TV chef Nigella Lawson was a member. More recent Royal Jewish connections: Princess Diana's mother was Jewish: her maiden name was Frances Roche. Also Kate Middleton's mother's maiden name was Carole Goldsmith. Kate's grandmother (on her father's side) was also quite possibly Jewish, her maiden name was Valerie Glassborow. Camilla, wife of King Charles III has Jewish family connections, Her maiden name was Camilla Shand.
The Bowes-Lyon family have no connection to the Jewish Lyons family. The Lyon part of the name comes from the Scottish clan Lyon whose roots are in medieval France . Several Scottish families, including the Stewarts and Bruces have French ancestry as they settled in Scotland during the reign of David II who was brought up at the English (Norman) Royal Court. Catherine, the Princess of Wales's mother's maiden name was Goldsmith but this not an exclusively Jewish name and is an old English name as well. There are rumours that the late Jewish financier Sir James Goldsmith was Diana's true father. The Shand and Roche families are not Jewish. You do need to do some research before posting
7:20 "We can say with confidence that Queen Elizabeth has at least one Muslim ancestor" But you have just (5:30) explained that Zaida converted to Christianity when she came to the court of Alfonso VI, which clearly preceded the birth of her son Sancho. So on this basis Queen Elizabeth had an ancestor who had been Muslim, but not one who _was_ Muslim when she bore the child who links her by direct line of descent with Queen Elizabeth. So I'm not sure that counts.
Zaida's ancestors would have been Muslim. Of course this means Queen Elizabeth might not have any "known" Muslim ancestors. But the fact that she does have Muslim ancestry is beyond doubt.
It counts because Zaida was born a Muslim. Put it this way, the Queen’s great-grandmother, Queen Alexandra, was Danish. She married the future King Edward VII and became a British subject. Her children were all born after this, but we have no problem saying the Queen has a Danish ancestor. Religion and citizenship are similar in this way. They are basically about one’s allegiance. Alexandra was Danish and Lutheran; the fact that she became British and Anglican does not change her past. Zaida was Spanish and Muslim; her past does not change because she converted to Christianity. Being a Muslim is part of her permanent identity, regardless of what religion she was when she gave birth. She is both a Christian and a Muslim.
Honestly, that was the fastest impulse purchase I've ever made. I've been fascinated by Al-Andalus for over a year now - a game on the topic sounds like a dream. Incredibly video, once again.
Everyone is related to each other in some way, the average relation is 50th cousin. Of course, people in the same geographic region are more related to each other than others, but everyone in the UK has a Middle Eastern, South Asian and East Asian ancestor, in some way. And of course, everyone on the planet is Black African or has a Black African ancestor, even if it was thousands of years ago.
@@slurpeecloud999 Firstly, there's a lot of Asian people in the UK. Secondly, the UK has had South Asian people in it, very few to start off with, since the 1700s. Thirdly, ethnically English people are descendants of Indo-Europeans so it's likely some people who lived in India thousands of years ago had descendants who moved to Europe
@@slurpeecloud999 they didn't, they lived in Asian steppes(Kazakhstan) near turkic tribes there's a great chance that some of them intermixed with others
Madragana was not a Moor but rather a descendant of Mozarabs, the Christians of Al-Andalus. Her father was the Qadi in Faro at the time it was the last part of the Kingdom of the Algarve to be taken from Muslim hands. Afonso III of Portugal ended the Reconquista in Portugal by taking Faro in 1249. It is not sensible to maintain that the man who completed the Reconquista in Portugal for Iberian Christians then immediately took a Moorish Muslim as his lover! Note that she was christened as a Roman Catholic only once some time had passed after she became the mistress of Afonso III: "She was christened in time, receiving her new name as Maior Afonso, or Mor Afonso, Mor being short for Maior, a common female name in medieval Portuguese." So, when Afonso III took her as his mistress, she was still following the religion she and her father had practiced her whole life before Afonso III took their home city of Faro. This is why scholars understand that her christening when she was the mistress of Afonso III was "most probably because she had been previously christened according to the Mozarabic Rite, the re-christening being done in the Roman Rite." "Aloandro Ben Bekar or Ben Bakr (also known as Aldroando Gil), was the Mozarab (Iberian Christian living under Muslim domination) Governor of Faro, in Portugal. He was the son of Bakr Ben Yahia and grandson of Yahia Ben Bakr, who is believed to be a descendant (possibly a grandson) of high royal official of Jewish aristocratic descent Yahia Ben Yahi III."
Very interesting video. Uhm, the Moors (more anciently known as Mauri, Mauretani etc.) were NOT Black. They are and were Amazighs, i.e. Berbers, a people who have existed in North Africa since antiquity and continue to do so to this very day, although they might have been "Arabized." In the context of Al Andalus however, Moor simply meant Muslim. If you read the lyrics of the song/poem Las Morillas de Jaen (The Three Moorish Girls of Jaen) in the last verse the girls say when replying to a Christian knight who asked who they were, "We are three christian girls who were once Moors.)
Can you do a video on “Black Hebrew Israelites” it’s basically a cult like British-Israelism but for black Americans. I’ve done a little digging on them ( mostly just wiki and a few articles) but their version of history is quite interesting
Let me say how silly it is to assume Madragana was black. It shouldn’t have been done here. Because for one, the name Mor in Mor Afonso was short for Maior and was a common female Portuguese name meaning “bigger” and did not denote being moorish. But putting that aside, all Muslims in Iberia were called moors, no matter if they were Arab, Berber, black or Iberian convert or descended from them. That includes the non-black Muslims in the chart in the video such as Zaida, Abu Nasir and Al-Mu’tamid, not just Madragana. Also, a great many historians believe she was mozárabe (christian of European Iberian descent living in muslim areas of Iberia). But going back to the moorish thing, if we look at illustrations of moors in Iberia from the time of the moorish rule in Iberia such as in Afonso X’s “Book of Games” from the 1200’s, which was created during the time period of Madragana, we can see large crowds of moors in the illustrations and the vast majority of moors are not black with only a tiny minority being black. Just to clear up the moorish thing. I have a video on my channel about the Moors featuring those historic collections. So based on likelyhood, it’s likely that Madragana was not black. Some historians also claim she was part Jewish too so then there is that too. It’s then unlikely that Queen Charlotte and thus Queen Elizabeth and the modern British royal family descend from a black ancestor. There is just no evidence of it to make such a claim. And such claims on her appearance because of a single painting that was misjudged is just completely ridiculous (all other paintings of her look completely European and there was never any mention of a strange appearance as such during her lifetime). And for certain film or television appearances for her to be of a full, half or partial Sub-Saharan African type is just utter madness because Madragana (who was mostly likely not at all black) was 15 generations before Queen Charlotte and at that rate she wouldn’t have any significant ancestry from Madragana (likely she had none at all or less than a tenth of a percent) to create such as an alleged phenotype. People who make these claims often have agendas. So there you go.
@@user-mu1ig3wn5s Yes, I agree. It’s due to American Afrocentrism started by black Americans of West African descent that make claims on so many peoples cultures that don’t belong to them (as a ploy to have a history beyond slavery) and it migrated from the USA to Britain because of the cultural exchange in the two nations. The white Americans and the white British have become too politically correct to whereas half of them have become brainwashed to believe it and the other half have become so frightened to be branded as racists if they disagree (branded by anti-white real racists living in their nations) which can cause the loss of employment and financial ruin and the like, so these false claims are allowed to flourish in the USA and Britain and even other nations related to them like Canada, Australia and New Zealand. That’s only one part of it. There is a historic part of it that included much of Europe as when the moorish invaded Iberia and ruled in Iberia, although most moorish were non-black the small minority of blacks among them caught the imagination of Europeans outside of Iberia and many historic Europeans created a stereotype of black moors (but not exclusively black). This contributed to the historic belief in Europe that when coupled with the political correctness I spoke of earlier, makes for this unpleasant Afrocentric western claim on moorish history.
Love watching these kind of videos. My family isn't that interesting, the furthest I could go was the 1700s, and the people there were illiterate peasants.
Well there were no education systems. Royalty wanted it that way. Now it's conservative politics that want education destroyed. Don't feel bad as your ancestors were probably hard working and oppressed.
As Matt says if you knew more about your ancestors you would almost certainly find royalty. I could only trace one of my ancestors back to England (via the Mayflower), but that one had royal ancestry.
@@yrobtsvt My grandmother was relative of Teddy Roosevelt (fairly closely as well, she actually looked like him) and Roosevelt can trace his lineage all the way back to KIng John of England and John can trace his lineage back to the William the Conqueror via Cecilia, William's daughter. William, as everyone and the cat knows, can trace his lineage back to Rollo the viking. The reason I know this is because my great uncle is a large phanatic when it comes to finding ones roots. We also found that on my dads side I am related to a dutchman who was actually quite important in the founding of New Amsterdam.
Moors (in Berber: ⵉⵎⵓⵔⵉⵢⵏ - Imuriyen)[ref. necessary] refers to the medieval Muslim and Arab-Berber inhabitants of Iberia, Sicily, Malta and the Maghreb and originally during antiquity the Berber populations of North Africa, especially the Maghreb. The Moors were not clearly distinguished from the Numidians until the Romans became aware of the existence of Berber kingdoms in the far west. Maures (en berbère : ⵉⵎⵓⵔⵉⵢⵏ - Imuriyen)[réf. nécessaire] désigne les habitants musulmans et arabo-berbères médiévaux d'Ibérie, de Sicile, de Malte et du Maghreb et à l'origine durant l'Antiquité les populations berbères d'Afrique du Nord, tout particulièrement du Maghreb. Les Maures ne furent clairement distingués des Numides que lorsque les Romains eurent connaissance de l'existence de royaumes berbères à l'extrême-ouest.
Iberia during it's conquest and reconquista period, as a peninsula was diverse, but that's like saying the United States was diverse during it's slavery period, today it implies cultural contribution in the everyday life between everyone including the most common folk. In reality Iberia was a brutal war zone and a constant struggle between Christians and Muslims with isolated populations in a mountainous and rocky terrain, with laws segregating people, and populations being ruled over by someone from a different background (often the muslims ruled over and imposed islamic laws on completely christian populations for example)
You went over one main point quickly. If you find a record before 1400 it is very likely that that person is connected to royalty. Most people without records had nothing to record. Those people who did own something most probably had a connection. My ancestor lines that do not dead-end mostly go back to royalty as probably most other people's charts.
Matt, how many of QE2's ancestors from the last 1000 years do we know about? The number of ancestors you have double for every generation you go back in history. Assuming 3 generations per century, in 1000 years, you have something like 30 generations and over 2 billion ancestors (2^31 - 2). I'm pretty sure we _don't_ know every one of them. What's the size of the subset we're working with?
No, such a common mistake. Actually, most family trees share a same parent multiple times. See "pedigree collapse". This happens not only at the Habsburgs, but also in every small village.
@@Magic-mystery-man Mathematically, you create different models under different assumptions. The 2B number is one extreme, where the assumption is that couples don't have common ancestors. At the other extreme, you have a family ladder, like the ancient Egyptian royalty. Per generation, you just _add_ 2 ancestors instead of doubling. Obviously, in real life-as you've correctly pointed out-people do marry their siblings and cousins. And every time this happens, the tree shrinks in size-the two branches at the common ancestor merge into one. Again, by making assumptions about how frequently this happens in a given population sample, you can estimate the size of the family tree. Nevertheless, calculating the extremes is useful for several reasons: places bounds on the actual values; can be used for sanity checks; plan for the worst-case scenario if you're building a genealogy or ancestry database etc. Now I didn't explain all this in my original comment, so you thought I made a mistake, for which I apologize. It wasn't my main point; I was just providing some context for my question, which is still the same: In the period of interest, how many ancestors did QE2 have, and of those, how many do we have details of? Obviously we know of many more than Matt has shown in his chart. But we don't know all of them. I didn't say it's 2B-but yeah, I should've explained that number better. In this video, for all 3 questions, Matt found ancestors matching the required criteria. However, if he hadn't-if the answer was "no" to any question-then the numbers I asked for would become important in order to estimate the uncertainty / confidence of the "no" answer. For example, suppose you were to ask _"Are there any Indigenous American or Polynesian ancestors in the family tree?"_ Now in Matt's limited database, there aren't any. But how sure can we be that there aren't any at all?
@@nHans Since we know for a fact that queen Elisabeth had no Indigenous American or Polynesian ancestors since the discovery of America in 1492, you would have to go back thousands of years to find the most recend common ancestor. This is more in the realm of DNA testing than geneology.
I know this is only a bit of fun, but it's worth pointing out that a geneological line is very unlikely to be accurate going back 28 generations (the gap between Abu Nasir in the 11 century and Elizabeth II would be around 28 generations, I can't be bothered to work it out precisely). Let's say for the sake of argument that 14 of those generations are via the male line (although if you think about the way royal families work with male primogeniture, it's likely to be much closer to 28). It would be a very big assumption to consider that all 14 of those connections record accurately the DNA FATHER of the child, rather than some random man the mother happened to be having an affair with. Most of the time the real biological father will be recorded accurately, but every few generations there will have been a case of adultery which won't be recorded in official documents (and usually won't even be known by the father himself) and will be lost to history.
The statistical probability that some children would have been born out of wedlock (including adulterous liaisons) haunts every genealogy. Genealogies are just official histories, and do not necessarily or always reflect what actually happened.
Regarding Madragana, wiki says the term moor can Also refer to Morazab, which is a modern term for Christianized Iberian Jews. So she could cover 2 of the 3. OTOH, although not a direct ancestor of Elizabeth, I've read sources that hint that an ancestor of Charles II through Marie de Medici had black blood. It's something you might be able to check out. BC Charles II through one of his mistresses is an ancestor of the late Princess Diana and therefore Princes William and Harry.
Claiming North Africans of the middle ages were black or that ancient Egyptians were what we consider black, as some fringe groups do today, is deeply offensive to modern North Africans. Contemporary art portrays them as largely similar to modern Morrocans with some even said to be blond as a small minority of Moroccans are today. As someone who is usually so thorough with your research I was disappointed to hear you claim that the leaders of Al-Andulas might not be the ancestors of modern Morrocans. Such claims trying to rewrite the ethnic backgrounds of historic peoples is very problematic as you are aware. Big fan of the channel and I hope my comment didn't sound harsh, I just wanted to give my viewpoint on this.
exactly we have evidence that Amazigh/berber and mediterranean people have been in north africa for 12,000 years plus. They have always been brown including upper egypt.
North Africa has always been mixed and the berbers the brown ones came 2000bc, blacks African tribes were already there as well as the the European lybians and the brown race who live there before berbers had there probably before the Africans the Europeans and the berbers who migrated from the middle east as described by the Egyptians around two thousand years ago. The Egyptians said they carried everything with them as passed through and were very peaceful and thought they were running something bad or destructive, probably war. The term black comes from people thinking they are African but they are not. Moors were for any Arab for the most part. Muslims or not. North Africa had a lot of indigenous black Africans so the term for outsiders stuck. A lot people also remember more the Arab conquest that ended in Spain. They enslaved a lot of Africans and hired a lot as well who helped them in Spain so people think the moors were because of that as well but the Arabs led that exploration into Spain.
DNA studies have shown that in the post Roman (i.e., after the fall of the western Roman empire) time there were migrations from farther south into the north of Africa. Indeed, there have _always_ been migrations. When we draw circles around groups of people and attach labels to them we have to remember that everyone comes from somewhere.
@@TheStimie Iberomaurusians from 15,100-13,900 years ago and middle kingdom egyptians from 4,000 years ago have the same y and mitochondrial dna and roughly the same autosomal dna most modern noth africans still have today.
I love CK3! This is one of the best targeted and best exectued sponsored videos I have ever seen on UA-cam. I definitely wouldn't mind if you worked with them again in the future. The maps and the portraits add a lot to the story! Well done!
Isn't 'Ben' equivalant to 'son of'? In that case, it should be Paloma bat Gedaliah. Actually, Paloma is a Christianized name, her Jewish name was Yonati. Also: Gedaliah was not the son of Yosef but of Shlomo Ha-Zaken. Otherwise, the ages don't add up (Hiyya was supposedy born in 1085).
I think I’ve worked out Charles iii to Ferdinand ii, correct me if I’m wrong (this is just from my own research on my tree). Is it through the Beaufort line to John of gaunt and his line to Eleanor of Castile, her father being Ferdinand iii?
But can you really say there is a Muslim ancestor when Zaida had converted to Christianity before having her son, who was himself raised Catholic? Since Islam isn't a race, but a religion, if your parents weren't of a specific religion and they didn't require you to practice that religion, then how can you claim having anything to do with that religion?
Zaida was also Muslim during her lifetime, regardless of what her religion was at the time she gave birth to her children or at her death, so it is perfectly accurate to call her a Muslim. Besides, we don’t know what her personal beliefs were. Just because she officially converted to Christianity doesn’t mean she embraced it. She was born and raised as a Muslim and would have been culturally a Muslim. Put it this way, lots of Jewish and Muslim Iberians converted to Christianity, but they were still considered Jews or Muslims culturally, and this was enough to have them and their descendants expelled from Spain in the sixteenth century. For an American analogy, it is like how many Americans of Mexican descent still practice traditions associated with Catholicism or indigenous spiritual beliefs because they have become part of Mexican and Mexican-American culture, even if the people themselves are secular, atheist, or Protestant, and this marks them as different from the perceived American ideal. Calling Zaida Muslim is as accurate as calling an American born in Mexico a Mexican, which is to say, it is.
@@katherinegilks3880 Even before you posted your point-of-view, UsefulCharts had already clarified that QE2 has undisputable Muslim ancestry due to Zaida's *_parents._* The OP's objection is settled. Zaida's own religion or culture is moot.
Is it not enough that we all came from Noah (a.s) who himself worshipped one God which means muslim to submit your will to one God, just gonna have to read
no one knew really what is her beliefs it well knowing fact the Iberian Muslims was forced to convert to Christianity which most of them kept their real faith in their hearts until the expulsion
It Was Rumored That King Ferdinand II Of Aragon Husband Of Isabella I Of Castile Had Jewish Ancestry,His Grandfather Or Grandmother Was A Jew Who Converted To Christianity. So Ferdinand Did Have Jewish Ancestors,But Further Down His Family Line. Interesting,I Will Look Up Paloma Ben Yahia.
George III’s mother, Princess Augusta of Saxe Gotha, was a great grandaughter of Princess Elisabeth Sophie of Saxe-Altenburg, who was the great great granddaughter of Maria of Austria, Duchess of Jülich-Cleves-Berg, who was a great granddaughter of Ferdinand II. The exact link is: Ferdinand II Joanna the Mad Ferdinand I Maria of Austria, Duchess of Jülich-Cleves-Berg Anna of Cleves Countess Palatine Anna Maria of Neuburg Johann Philipp, Duke of Saxe-Altenburg Princess Elisabeth Sophie of Saxe-Altenburg Frederick I, Duke of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg Frederick II, Duke of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg Princess Augusta of Saxe-Gotha George III
You make a good point, about something people so often miss - just because a famous individual hails from a certain region, doesn't mean those people living in that region are best the representatives of his ethnic or cultural background. There were Germanic Vandals all over North Africa, throughout much of the period just before this, to give one example of many. 11:51 With any/all due respect, I think it's a bit rude to be so dismissive of a theory, when we can't be definitively certain it's false. It may not be my cup of tea, but even I'm willing to admit it's fully possible.
Yes, I very much hope so! However long it does last, I do NOT believe that her record of years of reign over her peoples in peace and comfort will be bettered. I may be an American but, I, like the nation started out English - American back in 1066.
Well, at least this section of the Queen's pedigree looks a bit more interesting (as in "exotic") to me than all those branches from now obscure German states/territories (in many of which my own ancestors were lowly nobodies). Just a question: Around minute 4/5, one of Ferdinand the Great's sons/Alfonso VI's brothers, García II, is titled "Kind of Galacia" 1065-1072. Is "Galacia" maybe a typo for Galicia (with an "I")?
Yes it’s a typo. There’s Galatia in ancient Turkey, and then Galicia in western Spain and another Galicia in Eastern Europe which was a kingdom in the Middle Ages.
I’m loving this video Matt. Was just wondering with the new Lord of the Rings series releasing in September, could you do a video of the Kings of Gondor and the houses of elves located in middle earth similar to the video you made a few years back ago about the Houses in Game of Thrones?
Technically, it is theoretically possible for you to have no Muslim or Jewish ancestors (if your group was genetically isolated from people who are Jews or Muslims since those religions began since you cannot become a Muslim or a Jew before the religion starts): but it is completely impossible to have no Muslim or Jewish relatives. As for blacks, that group isn’t so easily and definitively defined since race is a purely social construct, so you probably have some ancestors who are black, at least according to some definition. Edit: Thus is a highly theoretical argument that relies upon technical definitions. To put it bluntly, your personal chances of not having any Muslim or Jewish or black ancestors are so close to zero that we pretty much claim it is zero because if you are reading this right now, one your ancestors almost certainly was Jewish, Muslim, or black. However, there is always the possibility that you personally escaped from North Sentinel Island or have left some other previously uncontacted group of humans who have been genetically isolated, so I refuse to claim it is a certainty and merely say this is probably true, but I am willing to bet thousands of dollars on the probability that you are, in fact descended from Muslims, Jews and, with the exception all but the absolutely most ridiculously narrow definitions, blacks as well.
@@mustardgas4000 There is a huge difference between a common ancestor (which everyone has) and having a common ancestor who also happened at the time of our common ancestry to be of some particular identifiable group present today. Go back far enough and all of the identifiable groups today simply do not exist. For example, while we all have ancestors who originated in Africa (since everyone came from Africa if you go back far enough) but that does not mean we all have black ancestors since it is entirely possible that our lineages diverged before the group that we now call black was distinctly identifiable. That means we all have cousins who are black (since everyone in the world can be traced to at least one common ancestor) but they does not mean that everyone has a black ancestor. This, of course, does not in any way, shape, or form validate any form of racism or religious intolerance but it is a simple fact that prior to the group in question takes on the characteristics of what is now our formal definition, it simply does not exist at all.
@@RJStockton Sorry but race is purely a social construct. You simply do not understand how race is defined as you appear to be confusing it with ethnicity, which is much easier to crisply define. Once again, I can prove that someone has no ancestor of Ghanaian ethnicity by going back to when the concept or being a Ghanaian began and proving that no one who ever claimed Ghanaian ethnicity is in our direct lineage but I simply cannot prove that some has no “black” ancestor because we cannot define when “black” began. The key problem is that race is subject to different definitions in different countries. While certain African populations have certainly been isolated and we might be able to prove that you have no ancestors from those particular distinct groups since they became genetically isolated, no definition of race has ever claimed that those individuals form a distinct race from other populations that have mixed with other groups. That is the whole point - it is a purely social construct because the definitions in one country will cause a person to be defined as one race while if they are in another country, they will be considered a different race. According to some definitions, I am white, but if we were to go to other definitions I would not be considered white. It literally depends on which country I am in. That is proof that race is purely socially constructed. If race were not a purely social construct, then the definition of my race could not change from country to country. This is the point and the problem. Once your definition is not crisp, absolute, and does not differ from society to society, the definition is always socially constructed. That is why you cannot be certain about whether someone has a black ancestor - as the definition of black, unlike that of a Jew or a Muslim (or even a Ghanaian), differs from region to region, it becomes impossible for us to determine whether you have a “black” ancestor or not. Sure, you can demonstrate that you have no lineage from the genetically isolated groups in Africa but those genetically isolated groups are not the entirely of who we consider to be “black”and it is not at all clear WHEN these distinctions that we use to demarcate between various races started (unlike religions, for example, which have a clear start point or even ethnicities, where we might be able to define a start point). But race? Sorry but if you definition of black is based on “any person who can trace his or her origin go Africa”, well, we all can do that - every human, without exception, originated from Africa, so that is completely useless. On the other hand, if you wanted to instead argue that blacks began in 20,000 BC or 10,000 BC or some other start date AND you define being black as only those who then you could determine either someone had black ancestors or not. Indeed, given that there has always been at least some mixing (not just recent because we have evidence that those at the outskirts of these populations that we call races have always mixed with adjacent populations of other “races”), then this becomes even more problematic and again proves my point - race is a purely social construct. Define it broadly enough and you certainly have black ancestors. Define it narrowly enough and you might only have black cousins.
Check out Crusader Kings III Fate of Iberia (releases May 31st):
play.crusaderkings.com/UsefulCharts
This is good @usefulcharts but you are overlooking that the word Muslim often obfuscates that the people were Moors or Black Africans. Sancha of Leon was almost certainly someone would be considered Black. And if you look at old portraits of her children like Urraca or Alphonso V many of them are of dark complexion. Also there was a heavy presence of Moors in Portugal and many of the Kings of this era have African features in older portraits. These Moors also founded aristocratic families in Iberia, France and Germany btw. So of course Elizabeth has Black ancestry, so do I and you too. As you said if you go back far enough we are all connected.
In the last video about this topic on Queen Elizabeth, you described princess _Zaida_ as a "wife or mistress" and now in this video you describe her again as "wife or lover". In both instances you're substituting _concubine_ with something else. Seems deliberately misleading. At the very least you should be describing her as "wife, lover or concubine" to cover all three bases.
You're either a bear faced (paid) liar, or completely incompetent. Prince Charles, admitted, he was a descendant of Vladd The Impaler (known today as Dracula), and he admitted this on camera. (you can find it easily)
Also, Elizabeth's line, was historically recorded as being invited (from Germany) by Zionism leaders, to be the new rulers of Britain. It was started by George the 1st. And they are known, to have changed their name from Hanoverian to Windsor, overnight. They are clearly jews, and your other assertion, that the Europeans are NOT the Lost Tribes of Israel, is as easily ripped apart. The Lost Tribes ARE, unequivocally, the white Europeans. Shame on you.
Um where can I view the chart
very stupid video.
I loved the “nobody expected the Spanish Inquisition” comment. Thank you for another excellent, interesting video.
Their chief weapon was fear, and surprise. And ruthless efficiency . . . and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope. And the soft cushions.
@@patricktilton5377 and THE COMFY CHAIR
The great thing is, everybody expected the Spanish Inquisition, they always had to give a month’s notice … in writing!
I didn't expect it.
I came here to say this
Love this format. Even without CKIII specifically... the idea of comparing real life to a video game is such a great educational tool.
Although it *does* require assuming knowledge of the relevant game(s), so won’t be quite so useful for people like me who don’t play them. 🤷♂️
Hard to really consider a video game as educational.
Using historical figures does not convey educational value.
By that standard, so is Mel Brooks’ History of the World etc.
@@miguelservetus9534 Wrong by so many counts... I've already typed and edited and deleted so many tries, but realize there's no sense in beginning an internet debate. Let's be poetic: all learning is games.
Buuuuut, even if it weren't true (which it is), at least interesting games accurately portraying history (in some sense; any historian will say that its an imperfect art) will SPARK interest in that period of history.
@@miguelservetus9534 Video games can be extremely educational. Sure, they are no substitute for a university education but they can get young people interested in history and are often a springboard for more learning.
If only their paradox business practices weren't so shit.
My grandfather used to joke "Don't shake your family tree too much, you may not know what will fall out..."
This is great. Two things I took to heart. We all have these wonderful stories, just that records have not been kept. I am not much of a religious man, but I do hope there is a heaven because I would like to know my whole story.
I also enjoyed the comment during midivil times race seemed to be based more on culture that skin color. That is a lesson we could use here in the United States right now.
I would argue race relations were better in some parts of Medieval Europe than they are today anywhere in the world.
I mean, that doesn't mean people were _nicer_ back then. It just means they hated each other based on ethnicity, not race.
The biggest split in race relations came with the crusades. That’s what’s caused the modern day trouble in the Middle East. Funny thing is, the crusades were nit started because of religion, they were started because a certain pope had huge money troubles. To deflect from his problem being made he came up with a ‘great idea’. Let’s all go on a crusade. Save Jerusalem etc etc. all forget his money troubles. He made and caused one heck of a mess. 👵👵👵👵🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺
this was not reality. it is only an opinion that race seemed to be based more on culture that skin color. i think its just a projection of historians' modern sensibilities on the past. since there is nothing to support reaching that conclusion as people back then were much less exposed to different races than they are now. you have to had lived in both times to make this comparison.
Yeah they really didnt mind race that much but they really minded culture. For example there was a muslim writer who traveled to early russia and studied the rus. He made the usual remarks of white skin and blonde hair etc. But he focused his writing on the cusstums of the rus and he was mainly disqusted by how dirty they were because he was muslim. The point is that humans always find ways to separate themselves and the fact that we constantly change how we separate each other means we really arent that different after all
I found your channel as a suggestion next to a CK3 video by One Proud Bavarian. It was a wonderful find, and I'm thrilled that you were able to do a sponsored video with Paradox.
Your charts and videos have greatly improved my understanding of the history and my enjoyment of the game, and seeing CK3 assets throughout the video was highly amusing and extremely entertaining.
One of Queen Elizabeth II’s ancestors Patrick de Chadworth was a descendant of Layla ibm Malik who was born in Mecca Saudi Arabia.
Patrick the Chad Worth, What a name.
@@Oneiroi0 i believe it was actually de chaworth not chadworth
Rodrigo Gonzalez de Lara was wed to Sancha of Castile and León, King Alfonso VI of León and Castile's daughter. Research suggests that Rodrigo directly descends from Mawiyah, Al-Hakam II's daughter, who was Muhammad I of Córdoba's grandson. This lineage extends back to Abraham through his son Ishmael.
Layla is a girls name in Arabic. Does this add up ?
@@wisdom.research1051yes
The throne of Spain wasn’t united during the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella. They ruled their territories separate. Spain didn’t unite until the reign of their grandson Charles I in 1516.
Spain rome divided by Jewish communists
Btw, the term "moor" was also given to Iberian Muslims, who were the majority of the Muslims in medieval Iberia, so if the only thing known about Madragana is that she was a moor, that doesn't say almost anything.
The moors also descended from White Spanish people and North Africans, and North Africans aren't Black in general but still intermingle with Black Africans across the Sahel so the Moors likely had recent Black ancestors, so they're probably 10-20% Black which is higher than White Spanish people
yeah moor doesn't mean black, the misconception came from Shakespeare descriptions and we don't know if the one Shakespeare describe was really black or just brown north African coz at that time I think seeing black person wasn't common in England.
@@jasonhaven7170 The moors could be descendants of both but they could be just Iberians that converted as well.
@@jasonhaven7170 It's not as likely as you think because the modern North Africans have more subsaharan DNA because of the transsaharan slave trade
@@TheRealGhebs All North Africans throughout history have had high levels of sub-Saharan heritage because of their location, and the Sahara is a trade zone
the Queen Charlotte theory is crazy, genetically it doesnt make sense, but also there are over a dozen portraits of her throughout her life and she doesnt look the slightest bit mixed in any of them. For comparison the Dumas and Puschkin families are great reference to see how mixed people were depicted in european art.
"the Queen Charlotte theory is crazy, genetically it doesnt make sense" - what theory?
Matt emphasized that given the number of generations between Charlotte and her (likely) Moor ancestors that Charlotte would have inherited little DNA from her Moor ancestress.
I’d honestly never once heard anything about Queen Charlotte being black or visibly mixed race until Bridgerton came out.
@@kate_cooper really? I first heard about it when Prince Harry married Megan Markel.
Idk about theories but you can absolutely see African features in portraits. Low key she kind of (not in a disrespectful way at all) gives me Albino vibes. Fair skinned for sure but prominent traditionally African features. Quite frankly you look at Archie and though he looks white at first glance due to the 75% European inheritance his small features and hair texture tip you off a little. It’s not obviously noticeable at first glance for Queen C or Archie but as a person of color I can always tell when someone is “passing” or deceptively looks white.
@@TheDanEdwards i've read 5 reliable sources that say Madragana was mozarab (Iberian Christian) and only one reliable source that says she was moor (Muslim inhabitant of the Maghreb).
This is a very interesting video, but I’m a bit skeptical about Mór Afonso. In Portugal, we use “Mouro” as a synonym for Muslim like the expression “Saracen”. Yes, it tends to refer to North Africa (Mauritania) but that’s because it was important to distinguish Arab Muslims from non-Arab Muslims in Al-Andalus. And since most non-Arab Muslims were Amazigh/Berbers their name of Mouros became widely used. But using Berbers to claim subsaharan ascendency seems like a stretch. Also, Mór Afonso could simply be a Mozarab, which were “native” Iberians who lived under Muslim occupation, so were sometimes called “Mouros” like their overlords.
O pai de Madragana era um muladi, segundo os registros que temos hoje, e muladi refere-se a um cristão que apostatou ao islamismo ou um árabe nascido de pai muçulmano e mãe cristã.
No entanto, vários cronistas e pessoas da época diziam que essa linhagem dela era de cor mais escura (por isso, a Rainha Charlotte era dita que era mais escura, mas talvez fosse o fato de que os povos germânicos são mais alvos do que os ibéricos? Quem sabe). Foi a partir do reinado de Dom João V que começaram a publicar textos negando que ela sequer era uma Moura. Meu palpite é que nunca saberemos, mas o mais provável é que ela fosse de raça mista (pois o pai dela era um muladi).
Correct I'm a black Muslim and the blacka moors were enslaved Africans who helped the Arabs.
i've read 5 reliable sources that say she was mozarab (Iberian Christian) and only one reliable source that says she was moor ( Muslim inhabitant of the Maghreb).
Exactly!
Avante Lusitania :
Mor Afonso was an Israelite !!!!
Mor is a Hebrew female name !!!
Was the grand-daughter of Chief-Rabbi Yahia Ben YAHI III ,
First Chief-Rabbi of Portugal
and Tax-Collector,
Entrusted by Dom Afonso Henriques,
First King of Portugal.
Also called the Templar King.
Regarding Moors, from North Africa, some may be dark skinned while others have light skin. Think of the people from Morocco, as an example, when "Moor" comes to mind. Anyway, the point is that there is a big difference between a Moor and a "Black" African (e.g., Nubians).
Completely incorrect the moors referred to different groups between North Africa and West Africa.They were not a uniformed ethnic group only differentiated by skin tone only.There were many Black African moors who went into spain I could fo way deeper into this matter but time constraints wont allow me.
*Moops
BM : The Moors came from North Africa.
White North African people are descendants of Vikings ...
Kabyle region, North of Algeria was invaded by Vikings during the Middle Age. Many Kabyles possess blue or green eyes. I knew some of them. Check google also
Also during the end of Antiquity, North Africa was invaded by Romans, an other White ethnicity.
Also, North African Israelite women were raped by Roman soldiers as well.
In the Antiquity, North Africa was part of the Roman empire, just like all Europe.
There were plenty black africans in Morocco. Timbuktu was conquered at some point
Sudanese people can be quite light, to start off with, I even know Black Sudanese people who were lighter than Middle Eastern people. Secondly, Morocco is in North Africa and there are many Black North Africans so most Moroccans have recent (at least great-grandparent) Black ancestors from North-West Africa like Mauritania
Martim Afonso de Sousa, a colonial governor of Brazil and whose descendents make up a wide branch of the Sousa family in Brazil, traces back it's family tree to Martim Chichorro too.
True. My maternal great-grandmother and grandfather have pride to claim their descent traced back to medieval Spanish royalty, I did have blue blood through both parental and long lines from my grandpa's maternal grandma.
How do you know that
@@thallesgimenezmello2733 why are you people so obsessed with DNA? *Literally* almost all of the world population has "royal" descendants. And how are you guys even so certain of who your ancient ancestors were? We common people don't even have enough records to know that. It's fun to imagine, I love to imagine who my ancestors were but being obsessed with having a certain type of ancestry is lowkey creepy. No one is superior because of their blood! :)
@@adifferent.kindofhuman You can do your family tree on FamilySearch. FamilySearch is easiest way to discover how your ancestry. Good afternoon. 🙂
@roberto lang Did you call me of that? I never thought of this. I'm respected and beloved person, by my family and friends. My grandfather and great-grandmother told to my mother, who told me. I'm aware of fact my great-great-grandmother is descendant of primarily medieval Spanish royalty through long line of her grandparents. If you call me of that words for kind of a person? I'm sorry for this.
If one goes back 10 generations, there is less than 0.1% of that person's ancestor's dna.. So they don't have that dna after 8-10 generations of that ancestor, unless they keep on marrying within their small ancestral community..
What happens is that we lose some ancestors from our DNA, and keep others. We inherit blocks of chromosomes (for the autosomes - the Y chromosome is inherited mostly intact from one line) from certain ancestors, and nothing from others. That can happen as near to you as a 5th or 6th great grandparent. Of the 1024 possible pedigree ancestors (at your 10th generation), assuming no pedigree collapse, you like inherited DNA from around 700 or 800 of them. Go back another 10 generations, to the 20th level of ancestor, and of the million pedigree entries at that level you inherited DNA from less than 2000 of them, perhaps only 1500 of them.
Aka incest.... 🤢🤮
British royals Jewish tribalism. Deception politics ties to Saudi zionists traitors to Muslims and Christians
As you know, the whole thing with Queen Charlotte is not because of her ancestor Madragana, but simply because of her pug nose "frizzy" hair in paintings and what modern people perceive as her "African looks" That's it. That's how this whole thing started.
Mike Ross :
Dona Isabel "Zaida" was a White Spanish noble Christian who was abducted from Christian Spain by Amazigh Muslims into the small
Muslim emirate of Grenada,
She was captured as prostitute for the Emir Boabdil the Poet / anti-war guy ! Later on, she was seduced and decided to convert to Islam by HER choice, to become an Emira (Queen) and took the Muslim name Zaida.
They had together one son and one daughter.
In 1492, when Emir Boabdil
(he is direct descendant of Saeed ibn Ubada inn Dulaym, chief leader of the saeeda tribe and a companon of Prophet Muhammad of Islam)
lost the war against Dona Isabel of Castilla and Don Fernando of Aragon, the Catholic Queen and King of Spain,
Dona Isabel "Zaida" and her two Muslim mixed kids, begged Dom Fernando to accept them in Spain and not expelling her .
Request accepted.
Dona Isabel came back to Christianity and her two Muslims mixed kids were baptised Christians.
Dona Isabel of Castilla, Queen of Spain is a great-granddaughter of Portuguese Israelite woman daughter of a shoemaker, from North Portugal.
(Don Fernando of Aragon, King of Spain is a great-grandson of
Chief-Rabbi Gedalia BenZaken,
Portuguese Chief-Rabbi of Portugal)
Later on, Don Fernando of Aragon, King of Spain Unified,
Took Dona Isabel's daughter, mixed girl as his mistress and had a baby with her. A son who became a Don, Knight in the Kingdom and his noble leanage pass on generation to generation...
@@invisibleface6479 Only Talking about Queen Charlotte who was born as a princess of Mecklinburg-Strelitz in Germany hundreds of years after Zaida and Madragana, and how modern people like to claim she' must have been "African" because of how her nose and hair. look in painted portraits. It's ridiculous and I can't believe she was even mentioned seriously in this video.
@@mikeross641 :
Sorry i got it wrong about hair😅
English is not my Native language...
I got something else !
And you're not nice at all🙄
@@invisibleface6479 Plenty of Europeans with frizzy hair.
@@baneofbanes :
Not in North Europe
First of all: nice clip! It once again shows us that most of these noble bloodlines are intertwined to a significant degree.
Secondly I would like to add a few other similar ancestral claims, one also has its origins on the Iberian peninsula. In his standard work on Iberian ancestry named "Nobiliário de Famílias de Portugal" the famous Portuguese genealogist Manuel José da Costa Felgueiras Gaio states that the origin of the House of Maia partially lays within the dynasty of the Umayyads. The founding father of the Da Maia-dynasty is Lovesendo Ramirez, according to Felgueiras Gaio he was married to Zaira bint Zaydan, the daughter of Zaydan (or Zedao) ibn Zayd and a woman named Areguna Fromaríquez. This Zaydan is then mentioned as the grandson of Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Umawi, the Emir of Córdoba. Lovesendo Ramirez himself was a supposed bastard son of King Ramiro II of Léon from the old Asturias-Léon dynasty by a woman named Ortega; the latter being either a daughter of a Moorish person named Sa'd abu Sa'dun ibn Ishaq or by an Iberian named Rodrigo Romães (though I don't think Felgueiras Gaio has mentioned those).
An even more exotic claim is made about the first House of Bragança (not the later royal house but the one ruling the lordship), the founder of that house is decribed to have been a Britonic knight that married an Armenian pilgrim princess from the house of Arçruni (with roots into the old Turkic world and the Roman Empire); about the forementioned Asturias-Léon dynasty a similar claim is made (through the Armenian Mamikonian family). Mind you: there is an exilarchic ancestral trail that leads through the Caucasus as well, by means of the House of Mihrani and the Mihranid royal dynasty of Khartli in present day Georgia.
A third similar claim is made about a branch of the Byzantine Skleros-clan; one of their scions was a magister named Romanos Skleros (latinized to Romanus Sclerus), a son of the Byzantine throne pretender Bardas Skleros; Romanos is thought to have married the daughter of the Hamdanid ruler Fadl Allah Abu Taghlib ibn al-Hassan (an Emir of Mosul), with supposed Abassid rooting.
Wow. Interesting. And bravo for the knowledge and the share of it :)
Thank you for charting my family line 😉
Really cool to think about how, Royals are just so privileged they could track this stuff back 100s of years. Its cool that we all share common links, and also cool that we developed such wildly different cultures to shape those links.
Today with DNA and hereditary companies even the average person can more easily trace ancestry. I have one branch that goes back to thr 9th century.
@@beareeves4923 i used the most remarkable wikioedia and tracmed back from 1300 ancestror to a 60 ac god
I love Wikipedia
How do they become Royals?🤔
Hey i think you made a mistake,Sancho the son of emperor Alphonso didn't have any kids so that's wrong,rather it is a daughter sancha who is the one who has children.
Good catch. The important thing is that Sancha was also a child of Zaida.
Yeah,if sancho had any descendants,the throne would probably go to them rather than urraca 😂
@@UsefulCharts In the last video about this topic on Queen Elizabeth, you described princess _Zaida_ as a "wife or mistress" and now in this video you describe her again as "wife or lover". In both instances you're substituting _concubine_ with something else. At the very least you should be describing her as "wife, lover or concubine" to cover all three bases. Anything else would be deliberately misleading or selective.
It is uncertain if Sancha’s mother Isabel and Zaida (later named Isabel) were the same person.
Matt, thank you for another excellent video! When it comes down to it we all belong to the same family regardless of our creeds, race, religion, or ethnicity. And, yes, as others have commented, using CKIII in your videos is genius.
no. some of us have admixtures from 1 or more of at least 4 different archaic humans that no longer exist.
@@zombieat ? Lol
@ivanooze oh oke i see. Didn't really knew that.
@ivanooze but we're all majority the same. Admixture is just that, admixture, it's not our genetic base. We are all the same race lol. Any other claim is identity politics bullshit. We're Homo Sapiens, each of us, at the core.
Yeah....ok, lol.
Iain Moncreiffe wrote a book called HRH just about 40 years ago which was published just before Princess Dianna gave birth to Prince William that discussed William's genealogy extensively. Included in the book was a connection between the Windsor's and Vlad Dracula but more to the point of this video, it described a connection to Mohamed. I no longer have a copy and it is hard to find but he seems to have been a genealogist of some note and wrote a number of books on the topic. I do not recall the exact line that he traced or the sources he cited but I think if one were to obtain a copy it would be an interesting book to read on the topic. As a distant cousin of the Windsor's I enjoy seeing videos describing their ancestry.
I am a 6th generation relative from queen Elizabeth, I find it extremely interesting too!
Bruh, that means you have a small, but significant claim to the throne...
@@therealdarklizzy yes! I am also a descendant from aboriginal royalty too;
@@odetteroyalehigh1432 'aboriginal royalty '...i had no idea of this
Little thing I found in 4:07, as a Spanish person García II was probably king of Galicia, not Galacia. Galicia is a very rainy zone in the north that soon merged with Asturias, Castilla and León, so that's probably what it is
Moor has always meant the same in the Iberian Peninsula, people that came from Mauretania aka Northwestern Africa, mostly Morocco. Them or their ancestors. They were, obviously, majority Muslim. But I've met enough Moroccans to testify that they are not black. Not everyone on the continent of Africa is black.
Does this means Madragana was black? Probably no, she was probably Berber.
Does this also mean she doesn't have black ancestors? No, she probably does, but probably not Madragana.
regardless. i've read 5 reliable sources that say she was mozarab (Iberian Christian) and only one reliable source that says she was moor ( Muslim inhabitant of the Maghreb).
t depends what your definition for black is, just because you say you aren't black doesn't mean you aren't, it depends on the definition being used
@@dtmt502 "iT dEpEnDs On ThE dEfInItIoN" No it doesn't, "black" has always referred to sub-saharan Africans. There is no ambiguity to it
@@cv4809 not it hasn't America's social structure has little relevance to the rest of the world
@@cv4809 typical american definition,blck doest mean sub saharan africanz..black comes in many shades ,some with moors ,who told you all sub saharan africans are dark sikinned ,
You failed to take into account the timeline of the birth of Zaida's children. When she met Alfonso VI in Toledo around 1080, she was pregnant with his daughter to her Hashemite Muslim husband who died defending Córdoba from the Almoravids. She gave birth to Isabel. Later, she also gave birth to Sancho, whom Alfonso made the heir to the throne. Sancho died young in the Battle of Uclés. Notice the date of that battle and the date of births of Elvira and Sancha. The Sancha mentioned here is the ancestress of María de Padilla. She and Elvira were daughters of Isabel who was born in 1080. 1103 if I'm not mistaken, was Elvira's date of birth. The battle of Uclés occured sometime in 1107 or 1108, Sancho dying at age 18.
Except Zaida was never married to Hashimite to begin with but to Abbadid prince of Banu Lakhm tribe ......
Abbadids were Arabs and never claimed descent to Hashimites
I just recently read that the name “Andalus” comes from the tribe “Vandal”.
If I remember correctly, was it the Arabic pronunciation of the word Vandal?
Which is interesting, since the Vandals hadn't been around 150 years by the time of the conquest of Iberia.
@@muhammaddaffaarvianda5050 nope Vandals in Arabic are called Wendell (وندال)
Could be "Atlantis"
@@angusyang5917 Unless I am wrong, which is quite possible, the Muslims who conquered Andalusia were Moors not Arabs, and they conquered it from Visigoths not Vandals. So the sound-change from Vandal to Andalus was probably well underway by the time of the Muslim conquest; and the languages involved could have included Gothic and Berber, in addition to Latin and Wendish and Arabic.
TL;DR summary: we probably don’t know how it happened.
here we go again next 100 years if netflix still exist “I don't care what they tell you in school, Queen Elizabeth was Black.”
So, it means that I'm related somehow to Queen Elisabeth as well. Lots of these caracters are present in my Family Tree, according to The Family Search site. Whatever, how knows?
Only just started this video and I’m super excited to see Matt finally check out Crusader Kings!
Interesting idea and great video. Maybe a future video on the recorded Genghisid descent in European royals could also be interesting.
or the Indo Iranian ancestry of Genghis Khan
As far as I know there are (or was) some russian nobile families that have proven descendence from Genghis Khan, so probably there we should start search.
I love that you answer questions that I didn't know I wanted to ask.
En el contexto Hispano "moro" siempre ha hecho más referencia a los musulmanes (marroquíes, principalmente), que a personas negras. Ejemplo de ello es la expulsión de los moros por parte de los reyes católicos al final de la reconquista, así que me parece muy dudosa la segunda opción, aunque no para descartarla.
Es que están usando la definición Americana de "Negro" o "People of Color", técnicamente los moros son un subgrupo de la raza caucásica.
@@joaquinescotoaleman4320Moros caucásicos? Eres muy divertido, faltaría que digas que son predominantemente indo europeos.
I believe that there's another way that Elizabeth descends from Peter of Castile and Maria de Padilla: through their daughter Constance, who was the grandmother of John II of Castle. John was the great-grandfather of Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I, and I believe that George III of England was the 6th great-grandson of Ferdinand.
I think the best future videos will be the dynastic histories of ducal houses (wittelsbach, savoy etc)
I think Jewish history since 1st Century AD is relatively unknown, a video on that would be interesting, I think! Great work!
Look up Sam Aronow on UA-cam, his channel focuses on Jewish history and he did a video with this channel too.
There are literally thousands of Jewish history books from the last 2000 years 🙄
@@Shanablueray yea, he can start with the Talmud and Mishnah. We jews have been very diligent about passing down our stories and history.
There are many jewish genealogists and historians. I own a few books about it. Look up Berel Wein
A couple of incorrect sentences here, Jews did not live so peacefully under Muslim rule, they were subjected to a humiliating second class dhimmi and it never stopped any pogroms happening. It was violent. The idea of Jews wearing a yellow identifier came from Muslim rule. And it is estimated that 1 in 10 people in Spain and perhaps Portugal are directly descended from Jews as a result of the ones who stayed and were forcibly converted to Catholicism
Interesting insights and discussions👍 Forsure there are. People are connecting to each other via extensive family
I believe that your using the word "black" to describe a distant ancestor of Queen Elizabeth II is misleading. Moors at that time were NOT the same as "black sub-saharan" peoples, which are what are currently called Africans.
That is what he said.
You do realise Moors did include Black Africans from West Africa?
There is the strange idea that the only "black" Africans lived in so called "Sub Saharan Africa" and that the Sahara was some kinda impenetrable barrier that stopped these "Sub Saharan Africans" from ever venturing north of the Sahel, when it is clearly known that people traversed and lived in the Sahara for millennia and that many peoples who we would consider as "black" today lived in "North Africa" also for millennia.
You're all kinds of wrong, first of all every human being on Earth is descended from Black Africans ok? And the people of North Africa were too. Only after Arab and European invasions of lighter hues humans did this confusion about who is Black start.
@@curtisthomas2670 Not impenetrable, obviously. That being said, the further north you go (i.e. North Africa), the more light-skinned people get, and the further south you go (i.e. Sub-Saharan Africa), the more dark-skinned people get, with a transition area around the Sahel. There are obviously minority groups on both sides due to migrations, but we're talking about majority groups, here. The Moors living in Iberia mostly originated from North Africa, and thus the majority of them would have more closely resembled today's Maghrebi populations than Sub-Saharan ones. This is evident when you look at contemporary depictions of the Moors: they were generally depicted as fairly light-skinned, at least in comparison to more dark-skinned people originating from further south in Africa, which is what most western people nowadays (and not just Americans) associate with the word "black".
Thanks for another thoughtful presentation. I really enjoy this channel. Keep up the fantastic work. 💞
Yes. The Hashemite King of Jordan. Many of the Royal families of Europe are related to him. Yiri Louda and Michael Maclagan. "Lines of Succession, History of the Royal Familes of Europe". It is a great illustrated book with the genealogical trees from the birth of Heraldry.
Europians are Japhetites.
I know it's quite popular to say that the Andalusia Muslim states were tolerant. Recent historiography has begun to challenge this. For example, there were repeated pogroms against the Jewish population. Beyond this, they were only tolerant in comparison to the massively intolerant Kingdom of Spain.
Jews were allowed to rise to positions of great prominence under the Muslims in comparison to when they were under the Christians, and in general were allowed more privileges and the ability to rise through society on merit. Still, Jews were nowhere near seen as equals to Muslims, would have to pay a tax/fine to live in Muslim lands, a 'dhimmi', and weren't allowed to ride horses, so they couldn't be 'head and shoulders' above their Muslim countrymen etc. Also, there were always these types of riots/pogroms, depending upon the ruler, whether there were socio-economic issues, like widespread disease, starvation or poverty. As you say though, compare it to Jews under Christianity, there generally is no comparison.
still more tolerant than the Christian kingdoms in the region
@@dtmt502 who said they weren't?
They where still treated better in Iberia than pretty much anywhere else in Europe at the time.
@@dtmt502 eh not really there. The Iberian Christians didn’t really go around expelling the religious minorities until the 1500’s.
Moors could never black, at least in thsi case. We have to think why this term was given to her and in the people of gave it: in Portugal, a Moor is, as well said in the video, a muslim from northwest africa, which isn't naturally a place with people that we today call "black". If she was black like the concept we use nowadays, she would have to be form sub-saharan africa, in a case where old portuguese would probably use the greek term "ethiopian", rather than "moor"
I think a moor could refer to both arab berbers and black north africans.
Umm no. It is recorded that “black” Muslims were also referred to as moors. Ethiopians meant something different during that time…
Shalom ! Brother , im watching you for prolonged timing.
Check out Crusader Kings III Fate of Iberia (launches May 31st):
play.crusaderkings.com/UsefulCharts
0:52 it is a mistake, Iberia we still know as Iberia.
"Spain" and "Portugal" are names of states that function on the land called Iberia.
Please do about queen Esther did really existed? Please 🙏🙏🙏
*Nobody* expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise, surprise and fear, fear and surprise. Our *two* weapons are fear and surprise, and ruthless efficiency. Our *three* weapons are fear and surprise and ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical dedication to the pope.
I have traced one branch of my ancestry back to about 1650. They all lived within a few blocks of the same city, had a different/temporary trade in every record and moved a lot from dwelling to dwelling. On one of the records, the adress states "the front of 12VI, which, after visiting the house, I realise meant half of the top section of the attic. And records stop, presumably because prior to that time, the local church was not too concerned with poor souls. Not enough to write their names down in precious log books. It is both a treasure to have these records of historical people, but also a blunt reminder that I am happy to live in the present time.
You're pronouncing "Al-Andalus" as if it were spelled "Al-Andulas," which is somewhat distracting. It's pronounced quite phonetically, roughly "ahl ahn-dah-LOOS."
"Chichorro" does not have a 'k' sound in it. chee-CHOH-ro, even if you don't roll the 'r.'
You should do a family tree on the Fairbanks house succession. And the long recorded history of the Medecalf/Metcalf/Metcalfe family
I'd assume that Laurie Metcalf, the actress, is a descendant of Medecalf/Metcalf/Metcalfe family.
@@francishollingshead2134 Who?
She's the actress who plays Aunt Jackie on Roseanne and now the Conners
@@thebandit0256 Never heard of any of this crap
One important correction. To the definitions of Sephardi and Ashkenazi. It's not that the former traces their roots to Spain/Western Europe and the latter to Germany/Eastern European. All genetic/ethnic Jews trace their roots to Israel (proven by multiple genetic studies, and almost all known Jewish groups are more related to eachother than their are to their host populations). The terms Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi, etc. refer to various streams of religious traditions, Sephardi referring to the general group of traditions developed in North Africa/Spain/Western Europe, Ashkenazi referring to the traditions developed in Germany/Eastern Europe, both with sub-groups (such as Yeki, Lithuanian, Chasidish, etc.), Mizrahi (closely related to Sephardi, often grouped with it) refers mostly to Jewish families that were lucky to have never left Israel, and sometimes to those who formerly lived in the Arab world (sub-groups include Yemenite and Iraqi/Bagdadi Jews). Things like Ashkenazi not eating legumes (in Hebrew known as Kitnyot) on Passover so they eat potatoes, or Sephardi not eating fish and dairy together (or at least some) while Ashkenazi will. Slight difference is composition or order of prayers and the tunes they are sung too, but each so similar that one would know they are praying with other Jews if an Ashkenazi Jew suddenly found themselves in a Sephardi community or vice versa. Interestingly, the Yemenite (or in Hebrew Temanim) Jews are likely the only group to properly preserve long lost pronunciation of the different sounds of the letter ג (Gimmel/Jimmel instead of just Gimmel) and ת (tav/thav instead of just tav or tav/sav). These are some of the differences, beyond geography and types of admixture (however limited) leading to Ashkenazim looking white, Sephardim and Mizrahim looking middle-eastern. This all goes beyond the fact that despite being an ethno-religion and generally a distinct ethbic/genetic group, there are Jewish groups such as Ethiopian and Igbo (recently recognized, but long claimed) Jews who are 100% Jewish and part of Am Yisrael (nation of Israel, not to be confused with the get-political state) based on religious law.
"Muslim" is a religion, not an ethnicity. It would be like asking if you have any Baptist ancestors.
Zaida came from a Muslim family though
@@maganhassan2627 True, but it seems like this guy is implying that because her ancestor was Muslim, that makes her partly Muslim.
Hell a person can be a member of a religion then not a member.
I grew up Mormon, but I'm no longer Mormon. I am not even partly Mormon.
Though I think the Church might still have my record, you could argue I still belong to the Church, but I would counterargue that no church owns it's members like that.
@@erictaylor5462 true, muslim is religion, im muslim but im not arabs.
@@erictaylor5462 Muslim mostly ancestor
@@ulasctak5278 And how does Muslim ancestry effect you? It doesn't, because "Muslim" is a religion, not an ethnicity.
So basically, if you go some time back in time, everyone is ancestor of everybody.
Not quite. The farther you go back in time, the more likely it becomes that someone who reproduced and whose line survives to the present is your direct ancestor. Not everyone reproduced, however, and not all lines have survived to the present. But all human beings are indeed kin to one another, and all living human beings have multiple ancestors in common.
We are not all Jewish a Zionistss nwo colonial agenda to serve Jewish interests. Africans are Africans not Jewish
Moor in Spanish (Moro) usually almost always meant north African and middle eastern Arabs.
In England and Germany on the other hand in medieval times African = black so Moor= black
The english Moor hast two meanings in german: Mauren (Arabs living in al andalus) and Mohren(Black african)
@@juliar1225 they were synonymous in German till I'd say 20th century maybe already 19th
But the entire medieval and early modern period they were seen as the same thing
They also referred to other African Muslim kingdoms as moors so that is where it becomes confusing. You have to remember that the dominant religion in Africa, at the time was Islam.
@@rai2423 are you talking about Spanish or Germans. Because subsaharians even if Muslim were simply called negros aka black. Even the Moroccans didn't treat blacks even if Muslim as brothers in faith. The only non North Africans or Middle Eastern people to have been called moros are the Muslims of the Philippines
@@bnb6868 That is simply not true. The Spaniards and North African Muslims referred to the Muslim in the Horn of Africa as Moors as well, specifically Red Sea Moors. The North Africans referred to modern day Somalia as Beled Al Barbar and considered them to be similar to themselves in culture. You are woefully ignorant in your statements.
In my previous comment I forgot to add something. The ancestral claims that I pointed out in that comment are about connections from the medieval era, but there is one that is relatively recent and quite suprising in my humble opinion. It doesn't directly relate to Queen Elizabeth II of Great-Britain or the 'medieval ancestral nobility complex' but it does in fact has to do with the British royal family, to be precise: the family of late Prince Philip Mounbatten, Duke of Edinburgh & Deity of Tanna Island.
A cousin, in the second degree or so, of Prince Philip was Marquess David Mountbatten of Milford Haven (he lived from 1919 to 1970). Marquess David's mother was Countess Nadejda Mihailovna of Torby, descending from the Romanov dynasty; that is quite interesting in itself but that's not what this comment is about: Countess Nadejda was the grandchild of a Russian woman with the name Natalia Alexandrovna Pushkina, indeed the daughter of the famous Russian poet and novelist Alexander Pushkin. In his turn Pushkin was the descendant of a Russian major-general who was named Abram Petrovich Hannibal. 'Russian' as a qualification basically refers to the fact that Hannibal was an officer in the Russian Imperial army but it is a well known fact that he was African, described to have originated from Eritrea but later research has shown that Abram Hannibal was probably from the area around Lake Chad in Central Africa.
My guess is that Abram was shipped from Eritrea by the Ottomans prior to his arrival in Russia, it is known that he was more-or-less enslaved by the army of Sultan Ahmed III.
The point in the aforementioned is that there is indeed a fully proven and fairly recent ancestral link between the British royal family, be it in a wider sense, and Africa.
Interesting, and his wife Edwina was Jewish.
@@astroflyinsights To whom are you referring?
@@markmetalen37 Mountbatten
@@astroflyinsightsThat must have been the uncle of Marquess David, namely Earl Louis Mountbatten of Burma. I didn't mention him in my initial comment but he was indeed married to Edwina Ashley, she seems to have had a Jewish great-grandmother because 'The Peerage' mentions a certain Amalia Rosenheim as her ancestor ('Rosenheim' probably is an Ashkenazi family name). I don't know to what extent this would have made Edwina Jewish, a matter of definition I suppose; it's not in a direct female line so the strict Jewish definition does not apply but not everyone adheres that viewpoint ofcourse.
@@markmetalen37 oh thank you for clarifying.
To me as a Hispanic it came as a surprise that in the anglosphere people think moore = black, it simply not the case. Moore or "Morisco" as we know it, where basically what one would see as an hindu, a roma or an saudi. They where arabs from multiple cultures that had darker completion. They could have black in their ancestry but it is an already mixed "ethnicity" just as the three examples I gave. So I would not say they are black, as a sub saharan african more like hindu or saudi people.
Moor was a blanket term for anyone with darker skin than a European and also happened to be Muslim/African. So while is doesn't mean Moor's were only Sub-Saharan African, there definitely were Sub-Saharan Moors.
You have to remember that there are lot of Dark Skin Africans in Northern Africa, even to this day, Northern Africa was populated by black people far before people from the middle east ventured across the Sahara.
No moors where simply Muslims. there were plenty of black moors from east and west Africa in Europe during that time as wells.
@@rai2423 Exactly, there wasn't this entire race denomination prior to colonization. If you were Muslim and from Africa, you were a Moor.
The Mali Empire which was a large and wealthy Muslim empire that spanned most of West Africa and parts of North Africa had major influence in Europe and would have been classified as a Moor's to Europeans. For example, the alleged richest human to ever exist, Mansa Musa, the King of the Mali Empire was considered a Moor to Europeans.
@@razatiger22 Well skin colour was definitely a factor back then BUT religion played a more important role in during Mediaeval Islamic times. People are using modern racial ideology to make sense of an ancient term.
The Queen Mother's family was Bowes-Lyon, connected to the famous Jewish Lyons family of whom the mother of TV chef Nigella Lawson was a member. More recent Royal Jewish connections: Princess Diana's mother was Jewish: her maiden name was Frances Roche. Also Kate Middleton's mother's maiden name was Carole Goldsmith. Kate's grandmother (on her father's side) was also quite possibly Jewish, her maiden name was Valerie Glassborow. Camilla, wife of King Charles III has Jewish family connections, Her maiden name was Camilla Shand.
The Bowes-Lyon family have no connection to the Jewish Lyons family. The Lyon part of the name comes from the Scottish clan Lyon whose roots are in medieval France . Several Scottish families, including the Stewarts and Bruces have French ancestry as they settled in Scotland during the reign of David II who was brought up at the English (Norman) Royal Court. Catherine, the Princess of Wales's mother's maiden name was Goldsmith but this not an exclusively Jewish name and is an old English name as well. There are rumours that the late Jewish financier Sir James Goldsmith was Diana's true father. The Shand and Roche families are not Jewish. You do need to do some research before posting
7:20 "We can say with confidence that Queen Elizabeth has at least one Muslim ancestor" But you have just (5:30) explained that Zaida converted to Christianity when she came to the court of Alfonso VI, which clearly preceded the birth of her son Sancho. So on this basis Queen Elizabeth had an ancestor who had been Muslim, but not one who _was_ Muslim when she bore the child who links her by direct line of descent with Queen Elizabeth. So I'm not sure that counts.
Zaida's ancestors would have been Muslim. Of course this means Queen Elizabeth might not have any "known" Muslim ancestors. But the fact that she does have Muslim ancestry is beyond doubt.
That is because they are using the terms Muslim and Arabic interchangeably while a person can be Muslim and not Arabic or vis versa
Zaida converted, her ancestors didn't. So yes, Queen Lizzy has Muslin ancestors, not Zaida, but her parents
@@rodrigohmoraes The question is who were her ancestors
It counts because Zaida was born a Muslim. Put it this way, the Queen’s great-grandmother, Queen Alexandra, was Danish. She married the future King Edward VII and became a British subject. Her children were all born after this, but we have no problem saying the Queen has a Danish ancestor. Religion and citizenship are similar in this way. They are basically about one’s allegiance. Alexandra was Danish and Lutheran; the fact that she became British and Anglican does not change her past. Zaida was Spanish and Muslim; her past does not change because she converted to Christianity. Being a Muslim is part of her permanent identity, regardless of what religion she was when she gave birth. She is both a Christian and a Muslim.
I absolutely adore CK3 (and my main file is actually currently kings of Aragon/Valencia), so I am very excited for the Fate of Iberia!
Honestly, that was the fastest impulse purchase I've ever made. I've been fascinated by Al-Andalus for over a year now - a game on the topic sounds like a dream.
Incredibly video, once again.
Great video - very interesting, and solid pronunciations ;)
Everyone is related to each other in some way, the average relation is 50th cousin. Of course, people in the same geographic region are more related to each other than others, but everyone in the UK has a Middle Eastern, South Asian and East Asian ancestor, in some way. And of course, everyone on the planet is Black African or has a Black African ancestor, even if it was thousands of years ago.
How would someone in the UK have a south or east Asian ancestor?????
@@slurpeecloud999 Firstly, there's a lot of Asian people in the UK.
Secondly, the UK has had South Asian people in it, very few to start off with, since the 1700s.
Thirdly, ethnically English people are descendants of Indo-Europeans so it's likely some people who lived in India thousands of years ago had descendants who moved to Europe
@@jasonhaven7170 Indo Europeans did not originate in India.
@@slurpeecloud999 they didn't, they lived in Asian steppes(Kazakhstan) near turkic tribes there's a great chance that some of them intermixed with others
@@slurpeecloud999 Doesn't matter, fact is, plenty of White Brits have recent non-White ancestors
Madragana was not a Moor but rather a descendant of Mozarabs, the Christians of Al-Andalus. Her father was the Qadi in Faro at the time it was the last part of the Kingdom of the Algarve to be taken from Muslim hands. Afonso III of Portugal ended the Reconquista in Portugal by taking Faro in 1249. It is not sensible to maintain that the man who completed the Reconquista in Portugal for Iberian Christians then immediately took a Moorish Muslim as his lover! Note that she was christened as a Roman Catholic only once some time had passed after she became the mistress of Afonso III: "She was christened in time, receiving her new name as Maior Afonso, or Mor Afonso, Mor being short for Maior, a common female name in medieval Portuguese." So, when Afonso III took her as his mistress, she was still following the religion she and her father had practiced her whole life before Afonso III took their home city of Faro. This is why scholars understand that her christening when she was the mistress of Afonso III was "most probably because she had been previously christened according to the Mozarabic Rite, the re-christening being done in the Roman Rite."
"Aloandro Ben Bekar or Ben Bakr (also known as Aldroando Gil), was the Mozarab (Iberian Christian living under Muslim domination) Governor of Faro, in Portugal. He was the son of Bakr Ben Yahia and grandson of Yahia Ben Bakr, who is believed to be a descendant (possibly a grandson) of high royal official of Jewish aristocratic descent Yahia Ben Yahi III."
Very interesting video. Uhm, the Moors (more anciently known as Mauri, Mauretani etc.) were NOT Black. They are and were Amazighs, i.e. Berbers, a people who have existed in North Africa since antiquity and continue to do so to this very day, although they might have been "Arabized."
In the context of Al Andalus however, Moor simply meant Muslim. If you read the lyrics of the song/poem Las Morillas de Jaen (The Three Moorish Girls of Jaen) in the last verse the girls say when replying to a Christian knight who asked who they were, "We are three christian girls who were once Moors.)
Can you do a video on “Black Hebrew Israelites” it’s basically a cult like British-Israelism but for black Americans. I’ve done a little digging on them ( mostly just wiki and a few articles) but their version of history is quite interesting
WE
WUZ
KANGZZZ
N SHEIT
Don't forget Ethiopian-israeli cult
I love your channel! Brilliant approach. ❤
Let me say how silly it is to assume Madragana was black. It shouldn’t have been done here. Because for one, the name Mor in Mor Afonso was short for Maior and was a common female Portuguese name meaning “bigger” and did not denote being moorish. But putting that aside, all Muslims in Iberia were called moors, no matter if they were Arab, Berber, black or Iberian convert or descended from them. That includes the non-black Muslims in the chart in the video such as Zaida, Abu Nasir and Al-Mu’tamid, not just Madragana. Also, a great many historians believe she was mozárabe (christian of European Iberian descent living in muslim areas of Iberia).
But going back to the moorish thing, if we look at illustrations of moors in Iberia from the time of the moorish rule in Iberia such as in Afonso X’s “Book of Games” from the 1200’s, which was created during the time period of Madragana, we can see large crowds of moors in the illustrations and the vast majority of moors are not black with only a tiny minority being black. Just to clear up the moorish thing. I have a video on my channel about the Moors featuring those historic collections.
So based on likelyhood, it’s likely that Madragana was not black. Some historians also claim she was part Jewish too so then there is that too. It’s then unlikely that Queen Charlotte and thus Queen Elizabeth and the modern British royal family descend from a black ancestor. There is just no evidence of it to make such a claim.
And such claims on her appearance because of a single painting that was misjudged is just completely ridiculous (all other paintings of her look completely European and there was never any mention of a strange appearance as such during her lifetime). And for certain film or television appearances for her to be of a full, half or partial Sub-Saharan African type is just utter madness because Madragana (who was mostly likely not at all black) was 15 generations before Queen Charlotte and at that rate she wouldn’t have any significant ancestry from Madragana (likely she had none at all or less than a tenth of a percent) to create such as an alleged phenotype. People who make these claims often have agendas.
So there you go.
@@user-mu1ig3wn5s Yes, I agree. It’s due to American Afrocentrism started by black Americans of West African descent that make claims on so many peoples cultures that don’t belong to them (as a ploy to have a history beyond slavery) and it migrated from the USA to Britain because of the cultural exchange in the two nations. The white Americans and the white British have become too politically correct to whereas half of them have become brainwashed to believe it and the other half have become so frightened to be branded as racists if they disagree (branded by anti-white real racists living in their nations) which can cause the loss of employment and financial ruin and the like, so these false claims are allowed to flourish in the USA and Britain and even other nations related to them like Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
That’s only one part of it. There is a historic part of it that included much of Europe as when the moorish invaded Iberia and ruled in Iberia, although most moorish were non-black the small minority of blacks among them caught the imagination of Europeans outside of Iberia and many historic Europeans created a stereotype of black moors (but not exclusively black). This contributed to the historic belief in Europe that when coupled with the political correctness I spoke of earlier, makes for this unpleasant Afrocentric western claim on moorish history.
Love watching these kind of videos. My family isn't that interesting, the furthest I could go was the 1700s, and the people there were illiterate peasants.
Your family was interesting. You just aren’t able to learn enough about them. They had their stories like all people.
Well there were no education systems. Royalty wanted it that way. Now it's conservative politics that want education destroyed. Don't feel bad as your ancestors were probably hard working and oppressed.
As Matt says if you knew more about your ancestors you would almost certainly find royalty. I could only trace one of my ancestors back to England (via the Mayflower), but that one had royal ancestry.
@@yrobtsvt My grandmother was relative of Teddy Roosevelt (fairly closely as well, she actually looked like him) and Roosevelt can trace his lineage all the way back to KIng John of England and John can trace his lineage back to the William the Conqueror via Cecilia, William's daughter. William, as everyone and the cat knows, can trace his lineage back to Rollo the viking. The reason I know this is because my great uncle is a large phanatic when it comes to finding ones roots. We also found that on my dads side I am related to a dutchman who was actually quite important in the founding of New Amsterdam.
In the 1700s illiterate meant not knowing Latin. Almost everyone could read and write the language they spoke daily. But no one could spell.
Moors (in Berber: ⵉⵎⵓⵔⵉⵢⵏ - Imuriyen)[ref. necessary] refers to the medieval Muslim and Arab-Berber inhabitants of Iberia, Sicily, Malta and the Maghreb and originally during antiquity the Berber populations of North Africa, especially the Maghreb. The Moors were not clearly distinguished from the Numidians until the Romans became aware of the existence of Berber kingdoms in the far west.
Maures (en berbère : ⵉⵎⵓⵔⵉⵢⵏ - Imuriyen)[réf. nécessaire] désigne les habitants musulmans et arabo-berbères médiévaux d'Ibérie, de Sicile, de Malte et du Maghreb et à l'origine durant l'Antiquité les populations berbères d'Afrique du Nord, tout particulièrement du Maghreb. Les Maures ne furent clairement distingués des Numides que lorsque les Romains eurent connaissance de l'existence de royaumes berbères à l'extrême-ouest.
I loved the demo and loved the thumbnail pics you put on the tree
Iberia during it's conquest and reconquista period, as a peninsula was diverse, but that's like saying the United States was diverse during it's slavery period, today it implies cultural contribution in the everyday life between everyone including the most common folk.
In reality Iberia was a brutal war zone and a constant struggle between Christians and Muslims with isolated populations in a mountainous and rocky terrain, with laws segregating people, and populations being ruled over by someone from a different background (often the muslims ruled over and imposed islamic laws on completely christian populations for example)
The use of CK3 is such a good idea and would love more videos with this concept
Can you please make a video about the kings of Georgia Armenia and Balkan Countries?
You made Andalus sound like scandalous and I can't unhear it.
Love your videos. Just one small thing, The pronunciation of El Andalus could have been polished a bit.
@Fr-h WLH Of you’re talking about the modern Spanish region sure.
Fascinating, Thank you so much. Xxxx
You went over one main point quickly. If you find a record before 1400 it is very likely that that person is connected to royalty. Most people without records had nothing to record. Those people who did own something most probably had a connection. My ancestor lines that do not dead-end mostly go back to royalty as probably most other people's charts.
Matt, how many of QE2's ancestors from the last 1000 years do we know about?
The number of ancestors you have double for every generation you go back in history. Assuming 3 generations per century, in 1000 years, you have something like 30 generations and over 2 billion ancestors (2^31 - 2).
I'm pretty sure we _don't_ know every one of them. What's the size of the subset we're working with?
Good question. There's probably a way to get an estimate using geni.com but I'm not sure how to do it.
No, such a common mistake. Actually, most family trees share a same parent multiple times. See "pedigree collapse". This happens not only at the Habsburgs, but also in every small village.
@@Magic-mystery-man Mathematically, you create different models under different assumptions. The 2B number is one extreme, where the assumption is that couples don't have common ancestors.
At the other extreme, you have a family ladder, like the ancient Egyptian royalty. Per generation, you just _add_ 2 ancestors instead of doubling.
Obviously, in real life-as you've correctly pointed out-people do marry their siblings and cousins. And every time this happens, the tree shrinks in size-the two branches at the common ancestor merge into one. Again, by making assumptions about how frequently this happens in a given population sample, you can estimate the size of the family tree.
Nevertheless, calculating the extremes is useful for several reasons: places bounds on the actual values; can be used for sanity checks; plan for the worst-case scenario if you're building a genealogy or ancestry database etc.
Now I didn't explain all this in my original comment, so you thought I made a mistake, for which I apologize. It wasn't my main point; I was just providing some context for my question, which is still the same:
In the period of interest, how many ancestors did QE2 have, and of those, how many do we have details of? Obviously we know of many more than Matt has shown in his chart. But we don't know all of them. I didn't say it's 2B-but yeah, I should've explained that number better.
In this video, for all 3 questions, Matt found ancestors matching the required criteria. However, if he hadn't-if the answer was "no" to any question-then the numbers I asked for would become important in order to estimate the uncertainty / confidence of the "no" answer.
For example, suppose you were to ask _"Are there any Indigenous American or Polynesian ancestors in the family tree?"_ Now in Matt's limited database, there aren't any. But how sure can we be that there aren't any at all?
@@nHans Since we know for a fact that queen Elisabeth had no Indigenous American or Polynesian ancestors since the discovery of America in 1492, you would have to go back thousands of years to find the most recend common ancestor. This is more in the realm of DNA testing than geneology.
I know this is only a bit of fun, but it's worth pointing out that a geneological line is very unlikely to be accurate going back 28 generations (the gap between Abu Nasir in the 11 century and Elizabeth II would be around 28 generations, I can't be bothered to work it out precisely). Let's say for the sake of argument that 14 of those generations are via the male line (although if you think about the way royal families work with male primogeniture, it's likely to be much closer to 28). It would be a very big assumption to consider that all 14 of those connections record accurately the DNA FATHER of the child, rather than some random man the mother happened to be having an affair with. Most of the time the real biological father will be recorded accurately, but every few generations there will have been a case of adultery which won't be recorded in official documents (and usually won't even be known by the father himself) and will be lost to history.
The statistical probability that some children would have been born out of wedlock (including adulterous liaisons) haunts every genealogy. Genealogies are just official histories, and do not necessarily or always reflect what actually happened.
I literally love to watch your videos as I play CK3 and now this! Perfect!
Regarding Madragana, wiki says the term moor can Also refer to Morazab, which is a modern term for Christianized Iberian Jews. So she could cover 2 of the 3.
OTOH, although not a direct ancestor of Elizabeth, I've read sources that hint that an ancestor of Charles II through Marie de Medici had black blood. It's something you might be able to check out. BC Charles II through one of his mistresses is an ancestor of the late Princess Diana and therefore Princes William and Harry.
Claiming North Africans of the middle ages were black or that ancient Egyptians were what we consider black, as some fringe groups do today, is deeply offensive to modern North Africans. Contemporary art portrays them as largely similar to modern Morrocans with some even said to be blond as a small minority of Moroccans are today. As someone who is usually so thorough with your research I was disappointed to hear you claim that the leaders of Al-Andulas might not be the ancestors of modern Morrocans. Such claims trying to rewrite the ethnic backgrounds of historic peoples is very problematic as you are aware. Big fan of the channel and I hope my comment didn't sound harsh, I just wanted to give my viewpoint on this.
exactly we have evidence that Amazigh/berber and mediterranean people have been in north africa for 12,000 years plus. They have always been brown including upper egypt.
North Africa has always been mixed and the berbers the brown ones came 2000bc, blacks African tribes were already there as well as the the European lybians and the brown race who live there before berbers had there probably before the Africans the Europeans and the berbers who migrated from the middle east as described by the Egyptians around two thousand years ago. The Egyptians said they carried everything with them as passed through and were very peaceful and thought they were running something bad or destructive, probably war. The term black comes from people thinking they are African but they are not. Moors were for any Arab for the most part. Muslims or not. North Africa had a lot of indigenous black Africans so the term for outsiders stuck. A lot people also remember more the Arab conquest that ended in Spain. They enslaved a lot of Africans and hired a lot as well who helped them in Spain so people think the moors were because of that as well but the Arabs led that exploration into Spain.
DNA studies have shown that in the post Roman (i.e., after the fall of the western Roman empire) time there were migrations from farther south into the north of Africa.
Indeed, there have _always_ been migrations. When we draw circles around groups of people and attach labels to them we have to remember that everyone comes from somewhere.
@@TheDanEdwards exactly just depends on which parts you know and understand.
@@TheStimie Iberomaurusians from 15,100-13,900 years ago and middle kingdom egyptians from 4,000 years ago have the same y and mitochondrial dna and roughly the same autosomal dna most modern noth africans still have today.
I love CK3! This is one of the best targeted and best exectued sponsored videos I have ever seen on UA-cam. I definitely wouldn't mind if you worked with them again in the future. The maps and the portraits add a lot to the story! Well done!
Isn't 'Ben' equivalant to 'son of'? In that case, it should be Paloma bat Gedaliah. Actually, Paloma is a Christianized name, her Jewish name was Yonati. Also: Gedaliah was not the son of Yosef but of Shlomo Ha-Zaken. Otherwise, the ages don't add up (Hiyya was supposedy born in 1085).
A lot of information thanks for the breakdown 👍🏻
I think I’ve worked out Charles iii to Ferdinand ii, correct me if I’m wrong (this is just from my own research on my tree). Is it through the Beaufort line to John of gaunt and his line to Eleanor of Castile, her father being Ferdinand iii?
But can you really say there is a Muslim ancestor when Zaida had converted to Christianity before having her son, who was himself raised Catholic? Since Islam isn't a race, but a religion, if your parents weren't of a specific religion and they didn't require you to practice that religion, then how can you claim having anything to do with that religion?
Zaida's parents (who are also the Queen's ancestors) would definitely have been practicing Muslims.
Zaida was also Muslim during her lifetime, regardless of what her religion was at the time she gave birth to her children or at her death, so it is perfectly accurate to call her a Muslim. Besides, we don’t know what her personal beliefs were. Just because she officially converted to Christianity doesn’t mean she embraced it. She was born and raised as a Muslim and would have been culturally a Muslim. Put it this way, lots of Jewish and Muslim Iberians converted to Christianity, but they were still considered Jews or Muslims culturally, and this was enough to have them and their descendants expelled from Spain in the sixteenth century. For an American analogy, it is like how many Americans of Mexican descent still practice traditions associated with Catholicism or indigenous spiritual beliefs because they have become part of Mexican and Mexican-American culture, even if the people themselves are secular, atheist, or Protestant, and this marks them as different from the perceived American ideal. Calling Zaida Muslim is as accurate as calling an American born in Mexico a Mexican, which is to say, it is.
@@katherinegilks3880 Even before you posted your point-of-view, UsefulCharts had already clarified that QE2 has undisputable Muslim ancestry due to Zaida's *_parents._* The OP's objection is settled. Zaida's own religion or culture is moot.
Is it not enough that we all came from Noah (a.s) who himself worshipped one God which means muslim to submit your will to one God, just gonna have to read
no one knew really what is her beliefs it well knowing fact the Iberian Muslims was forced to convert to Christianity which most of them kept their real faith in their hearts until the expulsion
It Was Rumored That King Ferdinand II Of Aragon Husband Of Isabella I Of Castile Had Jewish Ancestry,His Grandfather Or Grandmother Was A Jew Who Converted To Christianity. So Ferdinand Did Have Jewish Ancestors,But Further Down His Family Line. Interesting,I Will Look Up Paloma Ben Yahia.
can someone tell me how George III is a descendant of Ferdinand II, I'm just curious about that
George III’s mother, Princess Augusta of Saxe Gotha, was a great grandaughter of Princess Elisabeth Sophie of Saxe-Altenburg, who was the great great granddaughter of Maria of Austria, Duchess of Jülich-Cleves-Berg, who was a great granddaughter of Ferdinand II.
The exact link is:
Ferdinand II
Joanna the Mad
Ferdinand I
Maria of Austria, Duchess of Jülich-Cleves-Berg
Anna of Cleves
Countess Palatine Anna Maria of Neuburg
Johann Philipp, Duke of Saxe-Altenburg
Princess Elisabeth Sophie of Saxe-Altenburg
Frederick I, Duke of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg
Frederick II, Duke of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg
Princess Augusta of Saxe-Gotha
George III
@@avibar.5179 thank you very much
Great quality questions 👏 I always wondered how they those were made
You make a good point, about something people so often miss - just because a famous individual hails from a certain region, doesn't mean those people living in that region are best the representatives of his ethnic or cultural background. There were Germanic Vandals all over North Africa, throughout much of the period just before this, to give one example of many.
11:51 With any/all due respect, I think it's a bit rude to be so dismissive of a theory, when we can't be definitively certain it's false. It may not be my cup of tea, but even I'm willing to admit it's fully possible.
Do you think the British monarchy will continue long after Elizabeth II?
Yes
Yes, I very much hope so! However long it does last, I do NOT believe that her record of years of reign over her peoples in peace and comfort will be bettered. I may be an American but, I, like the nation started out English - American back in 1066.
@@steveholton4130 "I, like the nation started out English - American back in 1066." - what does that mean?
Not sure, but it will be less relevant as time passes.
@@shadowguard3578 "Dust In The Wind"
Well, at least this section of the Queen's pedigree looks a bit more interesting (as in "exotic") to me than all those branches from now obscure German states/territories (in many of which my own ancestors were lowly nobodies).
Just a question: Around minute 4/5, one of Ferdinand the Great's sons/Alfonso VI's brothers, García II, is titled "Kind of Galacia" 1065-1072.
Is "Galacia" maybe a typo for Galicia (with an "I")?
Yes it’s a typo. There’s Galatia in ancient Turkey, and then Galicia in western Spain and another Galicia in Eastern Europe which was a kingdom in the Middle Ages.
Not sure how Paloma would have been named Paloma Ben Yahia. Ben is son. She would more likely be Paloma Bat (daughter) Yahia.
Ben Yahia is the surname I think.
Excellent use of Crusader Kings III there. Bravo.
I love that you used CK3 in your video!
CK3 + Useful Charts?
Nice combination and a very "adequate" sponsor.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
I certainly didn't expect the Spanje inquisition in this video, nor the funny remark he made. 😂
Yup, and that was something completely different! 🐍
Jewish communists divided Catholics and Protestants historically
Fantastic video keep it up your doing amazing job
Very interesting article, lots of research went into this.
7:25 Muslim is a religion, not an ethnicity. This ancestor was Christian as you have pointed out. Good video.
And then she still has Muslim ancestors. Don’t see why you’re choosing to die on this hill.
I’m loving this video Matt. Was just wondering with the new Lord of the Rings series releasing in September, could you do a video of the Kings of Gondor and the houses of elves located in middle earth similar to the video you made a few years back ago about the Houses in Game of Thrones?
Your videos are amazing and very well made
Technically, it is theoretically possible for you to have no Muslim or Jewish ancestors (if your group was genetically isolated from people who are Jews or Muslims since those religions began since you cannot become a Muslim or a Jew before the religion starts): but it is completely impossible to have no Muslim or Jewish relatives. As for blacks, that group isn’t so easily and definitively defined since race is a purely social construct, so you probably have some ancestors who are black, at least according to some definition.
Edit: Thus is a highly theoretical argument that relies upon technical definitions. To put it bluntly, your personal chances of not having any Muslim or Jewish or black ancestors are so close to zero that we pretty much claim it is zero because if you are reading this right now, one your ancestors almost certainly was
Jewish, Muslim, or black. However, there is always the possibility that you personally escaped from North Sentinel Island or have left some other previously uncontacted group of humans who have been genetically isolated, so I refuse to claim it is a certainty and merely say this is probably true, but I am willing to bet thousands of dollars on the probability that you are, in fact descended from Muslims, Jews and, with the exception all but the absolutely most ridiculously narrow definitions, blacks as well.
go far back enough, and we can find common ancestors with everyone
@@mustardgas4000 There is a huge difference between a common ancestor (which everyone has) and having a common ancestor who also happened at the time of our common ancestry to be of some particular identifiable group present today. Go back far enough and all of the identifiable groups today simply do not exist. For example, while we all have ancestors who originated in Africa (since everyone came from Africa if you go back far enough) but that does not mean we all have black ancestors since it is entirely possible that our lineages diverged before the group that we now call black was distinctly identifiable. That means we all have cousins who are black (since everyone in the world can be traced to at least one common ancestor) but they does not mean that everyone has a black ancestor. This, of course, does not in any way, shape, or form validate any form of racism or religious intolerance but it is a simple fact that prior to the group in question takes on the characteristics of what is now our formal definition, it simply does not exist at all.
@@drmadjdsadjadi you sir are legit
@@RJStockton Race is literally on a sliding scale with arbitrary lines thrown up biologically speaking.
@@RJStockton Sorry but race is purely a social construct. You simply do not understand how race is defined as you appear to be confusing it with ethnicity, which is much easier to crisply define. Once again, I can prove that someone has no ancestor of Ghanaian ethnicity by going back to when the concept or being a Ghanaian began and proving that no one who ever claimed Ghanaian ethnicity is in our direct lineage but I simply cannot prove that some has no “black” ancestor because we cannot define when “black” began.
The key problem is that race is subject to different definitions in different countries. While certain African populations have certainly been isolated and we might be able to prove that you have no ancestors from those particular distinct groups since they became genetically isolated, no definition of race has ever claimed that those individuals form a distinct race from other populations that have mixed with other groups. That is the whole point - it is a purely social construct because the definitions in one country will cause a person to be defined as one race while if they are in another country, they will be considered a different race. According to some definitions, I am white, but if we were to go to other definitions I would not be considered white. It literally depends on which country I am in. That is proof that race is purely socially constructed.
If race were not a purely social construct, then the definition of my race could not change from country to country. This is the point and the problem. Once your definition is not crisp, absolute, and does not differ from society to society, the definition is always socially constructed. That is why you cannot be certain about whether someone has a black ancestor - as the definition of black, unlike that of a Jew or a Muslim (or even a Ghanaian), differs from region to region, it becomes impossible for us to determine whether you have a “black” ancestor or not. Sure, you can demonstrate that you have no lineage from the genetically isolated groups in Africa but those genetically isolated groups are not the entirely of who we consider to be “black”and it is not at all clear WHEN these distinctions that we use to demarcate between various races started (unlike religions, for example, which have a clear start point or even ethnicities, where we might be able to define a start point). But race? Sorry but if you definition of black is based on “any person who can trace his or her origin go Africa”, well, we all can do that - every human, without exception, originated from Africa, so that is completely useless. On the other hand, if you wanted to instead argue that blacks began in 20,000 BC or 10,000 BC or some other start date AND you define being black as only those who then you could determine either someone had black ancestors or not.
Indeed, given that there has always been at least some mixing (not just recent because we have evidence that those at the outskirts of these populations that we call races have always mixed with adjacent populations of other “races”), then this becomes even more problematic and again proves my point - race is a purely social construct. Define it broadly enough and you certainly have black ancestors. Define it narrowly enough and you might only have black cousins.
this was a 17 minute long ad and i watched almost every second of it, great work lol
amazing, I am a big fan of your channel and Crusader king : )