GEORGE III & his granddaughter QUEEN VICTORIA “George III was in height about five feet ten inches and a half, and of a robust person. In his youth he was considered handsome. But his face and eyes were too prominent. His lips thick. His mouth large and wide. His face was red and of a deep copper colour” SOURCE;
(John Brown, “Memoirs of George the Third, Late King of Great Britain”; 1820) Copper is a reddish brown color… This portrait is now erroneously titled “Portrait of an African” It was painted by Allan Ramsay in England, in 1757... Allan Ramsay first painted George in 1757, before he became king… Allan Ramsay was the official court painter for King George III... Eurocentricks and negros who don’t actually research portraiture tell us that this man is an African slave named “Olaudah Equiano” (pseudonym)
Wether that is because of stupidity or laziness I do not know... Allan Ramsay—the official court painter for King George III, painted this portrait in England in 1757.... According to the “autobiography of Olaudah Equiano”, (Pseudepigrapha) he was a slave in Africa in 1757... That alone destroys any notion of this being a portrait of “Olaudah Equiano” Logically, the man in this portrait cannot be “Olaudah Equiano” When you research Allan Ramsay’s career you’ll discover that he never met—nor was he ever commissioned by George III or anybody else to paint a portrait of a “famous slave” named “Olaudah Equiano” Furthermore, according to the Emory university trans-Atlantic slave trade database, in 374 years, only 15 Africans were shipped to England, between the years 1776-1800... Again, logically, the man in this portrait cannot be “Olaudah Equiano” as there were NO Africans in England prior to 1776... Only Aristocratic and upper class families could afford commissioned portraits... The subject must be notable if a portrait was commissioned... Historically, portrait paintings have primarily memorialized the rich and powerful, not slaves or servants... A painted portrait was often seen as a luxury, they were painted for special occasions and important people... In a society dominated increasingly by secular leaders in powerful courts, images of opulently attired figures were a means to affirm the authority of important individuals... Now all of the photographs of this woman were taken by Camille-Léon-Louis Silvy, who was a French photographer, primarily active in London... He photographed members of the British royal family... However, the woman in this photograph is erroneously said to be of an African slave named “Sarah Forbes Bonetta” (pseudonym) who we’re told had a daughter named Victoria… It is interesting to note that the so called white woman (usurper / pretender / decoy) who Eurocentricks tell us is Queen Victoria, also had a daughter named Victoria... (not a coincidence, purely scripted.) When portraits and photographs of so called Black nobility are discovered, Eurocentricks concoct outrageously stupid scenarios to explain their existence... They like to engage in one of their favorite methods of falsifying history, that is to declare all European so called Blacks as Africans, African slaves, or the children of African slaves; without the inconvenience of having to prove what they say... Another tactic they use to falsify the true meaning of so called Black portraits and photographs, is to give it false and often derogatory titles, stupid lies intended to explain away the presence of so called Blacks in Europe i.e. they are ALWAYS Africans, slaves or servants... Eurocentricks told us that she was rescued by Captain Frederick E. Forbes who somehow convinced “King Ghezo of Dahomey” to just GIVE her to “Queen Victoria”, Then in 1850, when she was 7, she met the “Queen”, who was “so impressed by the young princess's exceptional intelligence”, and had the girl, raised as her goddaughter in the British middle class, but yet, her guardians sent her to school in Africa in 1851 when she was 8 years old, and she returned to England in 1855, when she was 12... If this is true, why is it that there are no photographs of “Queen Victoria” and “Sarah Forbes Bonetta”??? Not one. We’re told that “Sarah Forbes Bonetta” was BORN in 1843... However, the earliest known photograph of her was taken in 1840 when she was a teenager... Let that sink in…