Youtube comments of Lur (@Luritsas).
-
23
-
15
-
13
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
1. Reino de Castilla:
- Con el Reino de Granada: Hubo varios periodos en los que los reyes de Castilla mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con el Reino de Granada. Por ejemplo, en el siglo XIV, Alfonso XI de Castilla estableció alianzas con los granadinos en ciertos momentos para asegurar la paz o enfrentar a otros enemigos comunes.
2. Reino de León:
- Con el Califato de Córdoba: Durante el siglo X, se dieron varias treguas y acuerdos entre los reyes de León y el Califato de Córdoba. Por ejemplo, Ramiro II de León tuvo periodos de paz con Abderramán III, aunque también hubo confrontaciones.
3. Reino de Aragón:
- Con los reinos de taifas: En distintos momentos, los reyes de Aragón establecieron alianzas con diversos reinos de taifas (pequeños estados musulmanes que surgieron tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba). Estas alianzas eran útiles para consolidar poder y territorios.
4. Reino de Navarra:
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza: A finales del siglo XI, Sancho Garcés IV de Navarra formó alianzas con el Emirato de Zaragoza, aprovechando la fragmentación de los poderes musulmanes para fortalecer su posición.
5. Condado de Barcelona (futuro Reino de Aragón):
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza y otras taifas: Durante los siglos XI y XII, los condes de Barcelona mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con varios emires musulmanes, incluyendo el de Zaragoza. Estos pactos incluían alianzas militares y acuerdos comerciales.
Estas alianzas fueron motivadas principalmente por la conveniencia política y militar del momento. La situación en la Península Ibérica era muy dinámica, y las alianzas podían cambiar rápidamente en función de las circunstancias y los intereses de los reinos implicados.
A ver si YouTube deja de eliminar una respuesta simplemente informativa como esta... Ya les vale con tanta censura.
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrfreeman2911 1. The Beothuk Genocide (Newfoundland, Canada) (16th–19th century)
The Beothuk people of Newfoundland were systematically exterminated due to British settler expansion, starvation, and direct violence. The British cut off their access to resources, hunted them, and introduced deadly diseases. By the early 19th century, the Beothuk were completely wiped out.
2. The Pequot Massacre (1637) (Connecticut, USA)
During the Pequot War, British settlers attacked a Pequot village in present-day Mystic, Connecticut. They burned the village and slaughtered Pequot men, women, and children. Many survivors were either enslaved or killed, effectively destroying the Pequot as a people.
3. The Expulsion and Genocide of the Acadians and Mi'kmaq (1755–1764) (Canada & USA)
The British forcibly expelled over 10,000 Acadians (French-speaking settlers) from their lands in present-day Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, many of whom died from disease and starvation.
At the same time, the British waged a campaign against the Mi'kmaq, an Indigenous people allied with the French. British troops carried out massacres, scalp bounties, and village burnings, significantly reducing the Mi'kmaq population.
4. The Smallpox Biowarfare Against Native Americans (1763)
During Pontiac's Rebellion, British officers, including Jeffrey Amherst, deliberately distributed smallpox-infected blankets to Native American tribes to spread the disease. This act of biological warfare led to devastating outbreaks, killing thousands of Indigenous people across the Great Lakes region.
5. The Genocide of the Tasmanian Aboriginals (Australia, 19th century) (Though not in the Americas, it's another example of British colonial genocide.)
The British settlers in Tasmania launched a campaign known as the Black War, where they hunted and massacred Indigenous Tasmanians. By the late 19th century, the full-blooded Tasmanian Aboriginal population had been wiped out.
6. The British Role in the Trail of Tears (1830s) (USA)
While the forced removal of the Cherokee, Creek, and other tribes was carried out by the US government, British traders and economic policies had already destabilized these nations. The Indian Removal Act, which led to the deaths of thousands through starvation, disease, and exposure, was part of a broader pattern of Anglo-American settler colonialism.
7. The Caribbean Indigenous Genocides (17th–18th centuries)
Jamaica, St. Kitts, and other islands: The British wiped out or enslaved the remaining Indigenous Arawak and Carib populations, similar to what the Spanish had done earlier.
The British actively participated in the extermination of Indigenous peoples in the Caribbean, often using mass enslavement, massacres, and forced labor.
1
-
@mrfreeman2911
1. Attitudes Toward Mixing
The Spanish openly mixed with Indigenous peoples, leading to large populations of mestizos (mixed Spanish and Indigenous descent).
Marriage and unions between Spaniards and Indigenous women were common, often encouraged by colonial policies.
The Casta system categorized racial mixtures but still allowed for some social mobility.
The British generally avoided mixing with Indigenous peoples, maintaining a strict racial divide.
British settlers saw Indigenous peoples as obstacles to land expansion, leading to policies of displacement and extermination rather than integration.
Unlike the Spanish, the British did not develop a mestizo class and rarely intermarried with Native Americans.
2. Land and Settlement Policies
The Spanish used the encomienda system, which forced Indigenous labor but kept Native communities intact.
Indigenous people were often Christianized and assimilated into colonial society.
Many Indigenous settlements remained autonomous under Spanish rule.
The British followed a settler-colonial model, focusing on removing Indigenous peoples rather than incorporating them.
British colonists pushed Indigenous groups off their lands through war, treaties, and forced migrations.
This resulted in the near-total destruction of Indigenous societies in many areas.
Many Indigenous cultures survived under Spanish rule, although they were heavily influenced by European practices.
British policies often led to massacres, forced removals, and genocide.
The British saw Indigenous people as obstacles rather than potential subjects to Christianize and incorporate.
Many Indigenous societies in British North America were wiped out or forced onto small reservations.
3. Long-Term Effects
Modern Latin America has large mestizo and Indigenous populations due to centuries of intermarriage.
Indigenous cultures and languages (such as Quechua, Nahuatl, and Aymara) have survived in many areas.
Racial identity in Latin America is more fluid due to the legacy of Spanish mixing.
British Colonies: Near-Total Indigenous Displacement
Indigenous populations in the U.S. and Canada remain small due to genocide and forced removals.
Native American cultures were largely erased, and Indigenous people remain a marginalized minority.
Racial identity in British-settled countries is much more rigid, with clear distinctions between white settlers and Indigenous peoples.
1
-
@mrfreeman2911 1. The Beothuk Genocide (Newfoundland, Canada) (16th–19th century)
The Beothuk people of Newfoundland were systematically exterminated due to British settler expansion, starvation, and direct violence. The British cut off their access to resources, hunted them, and introduced deadly diseases. By the early 19th century, the Beothuk were completely wiped out.
2. The Pequot Massacre (1637) (Connecticut, USA)
During the Pequot War, British settlers and their Native allies attacked a Pequot village in present-day Mystic, Connecticut. They burned the village and slaughtered around 500-700 Pequot men, women, and children in a single night. The survivors were either enslaved or killed, effectively destroying the Pequot as a people.
3. The Expulsion and Genocide of the Acadians and Mi'kmaq (1755–1764) (Canada & USA)
The British forcibly expelled over 10,000 Acadians (French-speaking settlers) from their lands in present-day Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, many of whom died from disease and starvation.
At the same time, the British waged a campaign against the Mi'kmaq, an Indigenous people allied with the French. British troops carried out massacres, scalp bounties, and village burnings, significantly reducing the Mi'kmaq population.
4. The Smallpox Biowarfare Against Native Americans (1763)
During Pontiac's Rebellion, British officers, including Jeffrey Amherst, deliberately distributed smallpox-infected blankets to Native American tribes to spread the disease. This act of biological warfare led to devastating outbreaks, killing thousands of Indigenous people across the Great Lakes region.
5. The Genocide of the Tasmanian Aboriginals (Australia, 19th century) (Though not in the Americas, it's another example of British colonial genocide.)
The British settlers in Tasmania launched a campaign known as the Black War, where they hunted and massacred Indigenous Tasmanians. By the late 19th century, the full-blooded Tasmanian Aboriginal population had been wiped out.
6. The British Role in the Trail of Tears (1830s) (USA)
While the forced removal of the Cherokee, Creek, and other tribes was carried out by the US government, British traders and economic policies had already destabilized these nations. The Indian Removal Act, which led to the deaths of thousands through starvation, disease, and exposure, was part of a broader pattern of Anglo-American settler colonialism.
7. The Caribbean Indigenous Genocides (17th–18th centuries)
Jamaica, St. Kitts, and other islands: The British wiped out or enslaved the remaining Indigenous Arawak and Carib populations, similar to what the Spanish had done earlier.
The British actively participated in the extermination of Indigenous peoples in the Caribbean, often using mass enslavement, massacres, and forced labor.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joseveintegenario-nisu1928
1. Reino de Castilla:
- Con el Reino de Granada: Hubo varios periodos en los que los reyes de Castilla mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con el Reino de Granada. Por ejemplo, en el siglo XIV, Alfonso XI de Castilla estableció alianzas con los granadinos en ciertos momentos para asegurar la paz o enfrentar a otros enemigos comunes.
2. Reino de León:
- Con el Califato de Córdoba: Durante el siglo X, se dieron varias treguas y acuerdos entre los reyes de León y el Califato de Córdoba. Por ejemplo, Ramiro II de León tuvo periodos de paz con Abderramán III, aunque también hubo confrontaciones.
3. Reino de Aragón:
- Con los reinos de taifas: En distintos momentos, los reyes de Aragón establecieron alianzas con diversos reinos de taifas (pequeños estados musulmanes que surgieron tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba). Estas alianzas eran útiles para consolidar poder y territorios.
4. Reino de Navarra:
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza: A finales del siglo XI, Sancho Garcés IV de Navarra formó alianzas con el Emirato de Zaragoza, aprovechando la fragmentación de los poderes musulmanes para fortalecer su posición.
5. Condado de Barcelona (futuro Reino de Aragón):
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza y otras taifas: Durante los siglos XI y XII, los condes de Barcelona mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con varios emires musulmanes, incluyendo el de Zaragoza. Estos pactos incluían alianzas militares y acuerdos comerciales.
Estas alianzas fueron motivadas principalmente por la conveniencia política y militar del momento. La situación en la Península Ibérica era muy dinámica, y las alianzas podían cambiar rápidamente en función de las circunstancias y los intereses de los reinos implicados.
1
-
@joseveintegenario-nisu1928
1. Reino de Castilla:
- Con el Reino de Granada: Hubo varios periodos en los que los reyes de Castilla mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con el Reino de Granada. Por ejemplo, en el siglo XIV, Alfonso XI de Castilla estableció alianzas con los granadinos en ciertos momentos para asegurar la paz o enfrentar a otros enemigos comunes.
2. Reino de León:
- Con el Califato de Córdoba: Durante el siglo X, se dieron varias treguas y acuerdos entre los reyes de León y el Califato de Córdoba. Por ejemplo, Ramiro II de León tuvo periodos de paz con Abderramán III, aunque también hubo confrontaciones.
3. Reino de Aragón:
- Con los reinos de taifas: En distintos momentos, los reyes de Aragón establecieron alianzas con diversos reinos de taifas (pequeños estados musulmanes que surgieron tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba). Estas alianzas eran útiles para consolidar poder y territorios.
4. Reino de Navarra:
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza: A finales del siglo XI, Sancho Garcés IV de Navarra formó alianzas con el Emirato de Zaragoza, aprovechando la fragmentación de los poderes musulmanes para fortalecer su posición.
5. Condado de Barcelona (futuro Reino de Aragón):
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza y otras taifas: Durante los siglos XI y XII, los condes de Barcelona mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con varios emires musulmanes, incluyendo el de Zaragoza. Estos pactos incluían alianzas militares y acuerdos comerciales.
Estas alianzas fueron motivadas principalmente por la conveniencia política y militar del momento. La situación en la Península Ibérica era muy dinámica, y las alianzas podían cambiar rápidamente en función de las circunstancias y los intereses de los reinos implicados.
1
-
@joseveintegenario-nisu1928 @
1. Reino de Castilla:
- Con el Reino de Granada: Hubo varios periodos en los que los reyes de Castilla mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con el Reino de Granada. Por ejemplo, en el siglo XIV, Alfonso XI de Castilla estableció alianzas con los granadinos en ciertos momentos para asegurar la paz o enfrentar a otros enemigos comunes.
2. Reino de León:
- Con el Califato de Córdoba: Durante el siglo X, se dieron varias treguas y acuerdos entre los reyes de León y el Califato de Córdoba. Por ejemplo, Ramiro II de León tuvo periodos de paz con Abderramán III, aunque también hubo confrontaciones.
3. Reino de Aragón:
- Con los reinos de taifas: En distintos momentos, los reyes de Aragón establecieron alianzas con diversos reinos de taifas (pequeños estados musulmanes que surgieron tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba). Estas alianzas eran útiles para consolidar poder y territorios.
4. Reino de Navarra:
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza: A finales del siglo XI, Sancho Garcés IV de Navarra formó alianzas con el Emirato de Zaragoza, aprovechando la fragmentación de los poderes musulmanes para fortalecer su posición.
5. Condado de Barcelona (futuro Reino de Aragón):
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza y otras taifas: Durante los siglos XI y XII, los condes de Barcelona mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con varios emires musulmanes, incluyendo el de Zaragoza. Estos pactos incluían alianzas militares y acuerdos comerciales.
Estas alianzas fueron motivadas principalmente por la conveniencia política y militar del momento. La situación en la Península Ibérica era muy dinámica, y las alianzas podían cambiar rápidamente en función de las circunstancias y los intereses de los reinos implicados.
A ver si YouTube deja de eliminar una respuesta simplemente informativa como esta... Ya les vale con tanta censura.
1
-
@joseveintegenario-nisu1928 1. Reino de Castilla:
- Con el Reino de Granada: Hubo varios periodos en los que los reyes de Castilla mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con el Reino de Granada. Por ejemplo, en el siglo XIV, Alfonso XI de Castilla estableció alianzas con los granadinos en ciertos momentos para asegurar la paz o enfrentar a otros enemigos comunes.
2. Reino de León:
- Con el Califato de Córdoba: Durante el siglo X, se dieron varias treguas y acuerdos entre los reyes de León y el Califato de Córdoba. Por ejemplo, Ramiro II de León tuvo periodos de paz con Abderramán III, aunque también hubo confrontaciones.
3. Reino de Aragón:
- Con los reinos de taifas: En distintos momentos, los reyes de Aragón establecieron alianzas con diversos reinos de taifas (pequeños estados musulmanes que surgieron tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba). Estas alianzas eran útiles para consolidar poder y territorios.
4. Reino de Navarra:
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza: A finales del siglo XI, Sancho Garcés IV de Navarra formó alianzas con el Emirato de Zaragoza, aprovechando la fragmentación de los poderes musulmanes para fortalecer su posición.
5. Condado de Barcelona (futuro Reino de Aragón):
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza y otras taifas: Durante los siglos XI y XII, los condes de Barcelona mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con varios emires musulmanes, incluyendo el de Zaragoza. Estos pactos incluían alianzas militares y acuerdos comerciales.
Estas alianzas fueron motivadas principalmente por la conveniencia política y militar del momento. La situación en la Península Ibérica era muy dinámica, y las alianzas podían cambiar rápidamente en función de las circunstancias y los intereses de los reinos implicados.
A ver si YouTube deja de eliminar una respuesta simplemente informativa como esta... Ya les vale con tanta censura.
1
-
1
-
@joseveintegenario-nisu1928
1. Reino de Castilla:
- Con el Reino de Granada: Hubo varios periodos en los que los reyes de Castilla mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con el Reino de Granada. Por ejemplo, en el siglo XIV, Alfonso XI de Castilla estableció alianzas con los granadinos en ciertos momentos para asegurar la paz o enfrentar a otros enemigos comunes.
2. Reino de León:
- Con el Califato de Córdoba: Durante el siglo X, se dieron varias treguas y acuerdos entre los reyes de León y el Califato de Córdoba. Por ejemplo, Ramiro II de León tuvo periodos de paz con Abderramán III, aunque también hubo confrontaciones.
3. Reino de Aragón:
- Con los reinos de taifas: En distintos momentos, los reyes de Aragón establecieron alianzas con diversos reinos de taifas (pequeños estados musulmanes que surgieron tras la fragmentación del Califato de Córdoba). Estas alianzas eran útiles para consolidar poder y territorios.
4. Reino de Navarra:
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza: A finales del siglo XI, Sancho Garcés IV de Navarra formó alianzas con el Emirato de Zaragoza, aprovechando la fragmentación de los poderes musulmanes para fortalecer su posición.
5. Condado de Barcelona (futuro Reino de Aragón):
- Con el Emirato de Zaragoza y otras taifas: Durante los siglos XI y XII, los condes de Barcelona mantuvieron relaciones diplomáticas y acuerdos con varios emires musulmanes, incluyendo el de Zaragoza. Estos pactos incluían alianzas militares y acuerdos comerciales.
Estas alianzas fueron motivadas principalmente por la conveniencia política y militar del momento. La situación en la Península Ibérica era muy dinámica, y las alianzas podían cambiar rápidamente en función de las circunstancias y los intereses de los reinos implicados.
A ver si YouTube deja de eliminar una respuesta simplemente informativa como esta... Ya les vale con tanta censura.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@NewDimensions2025
The myth that the Spanish Armada's wrecks in Ireland led to a notable swarthy complexion among some Irish people is another example of how historical events can give rise to lasting, yet often inaccurate, beliefs.
The Myth:
-It is often suggested that the survivors of the Spanish Armada, who supposedly integrated and intermarried with the local Irish population, contributed to a darker complexion and Mediterranean appearance among certain Irish families, particularly in the west of Ireland.
The Historical Context:
- In 1588, following the defeat of the Spanish Armada by the English fleet and severe storms, several Spanish ships wrecked along the western coast of Ireland.
- Some Spanish sailors did survive and made it to shore, but many were captured and executed, and only a few managed to integrate into Irish society.
- The number of Spanish survivors who might have settled and married into the local population was very small. Their genetic contribution would be negligible in the broader Irish gene pool.
- Modern genetic studies do not support the idea that there was a significant Spanish genetic impact on the Irish population from this event.
- Historical records indicate that most survivors were either executed or left the country. The few who did integrate would not have had a significant demographic impact.
- The variation in complexion and features among the Irish is more likely due to the complex and diverse genetic history of Ireland itself, which includes influences from earlier migrations and settlements over millennia, such as the Celts, Vikings, and Normans.
- This myth likely persists due to the romantic and dramatic nature of the Spanish Armada story, combined with a tendency to explain visible differences in appearance through notable historical events.
- Similar myths and stories can be found in other cultures where localized physical traits are attributed to historical events or foreign influences.
In summary, while the tale of the Spanish Armada survivors contributing to a swarthier complexion among some Irish people is intriguing, it lacks substantial historical and genetic evidence. The diversity in appearance among Irish people is more accurately attributed to the broader and more complex tapestry of Ireland’s genetic history.
1
-
@NewDimensions2025 The myth that the Spanish Armada's wrecks in Ireland led to a notable swarthy complexion among some Irish people is another example of how historical events can give rise to lasting, yet often inaccurate, beliefs.
The Myth:
-It is often suggested that the survivors of the Spanish Armada, who supposedly integrated and intermarried with the local Irish population, contributed to a darker complexion and Mediterranean appearance among certain Irish families, particularly in the west of Ireland.
The Historical Context:
- In 1588, following the defeat of the Spanish Armada by the English fleet and severe storms, several Spanish ships wrecked along the western coast of Ireland.
- Some Spanish sailors did survive and made it to shore, but many were captured and executed, and only a few managed to integrate into Irish society.
- The number of Spanish survivors who might have settled and married into the local population was very small. Their genetic contribution would be negligible in the broader Irish gene pool.
- Modern genetic studies do not support the idea that there was a significant Spanish genetic impact on the Irish population from this event.
- Historical records indicate that most survivors were either executed or left the country. The few who did integrate would not have had a significant demographic impact.
- The variation in complexion and features among the Irish is more likely due to the complex and diverse genetic history of Ireland itself, which includes influences from earlier migrations and settlements over millennia, such as the Celts, Vikings, and Normans.
- This myth likely persists due to the romantic and dramatic nature of the Spanish Armada story, combined with a tendency to explain visible differences in appearance through notable historical events.
- Similar myths and stories can be found in other cultures where localized physical traits are attributed to historical events or foreign influences.
In summary, while the tale of the Spanish Armada survivors contributing to a swarthier complexion among some Irish people is intriguing, it lacks substantial historical and genetic evidence. The diversity in appearance among Irish people is more accurately attributed to the broader and more complex tapestry of Ireland’s genetic history.
1
-
@NewDimensions2025 The myth that the Spanish Armada's wrecks in Ireland led to a notable swarthy complexion among some Irish people is another example of how historical events can give rise to lasting, yet often inaccurate, beliefs.
The Myth:
-It is often suggested that the survivors of the Spanish Armada, who supposedly integrated and intermarried with the local Irish population, contributed to a darker complexion and Mediterranean appearance among certain Irish families, particularly in the west of Ireland.
The Historical Context:
- In 1588, following the defeat of the Spanish Armada by the English fleet and severe storms, several Spanish ships wrecked along the western coast of Ireland.
- Some Spanish sailors did survive and made it to shore, but many were captured and executed, and only a few managed to integrate into Irish society.
- The number of Spanish survivors who might have settled and married into the local population was very small. Their genetic contribution would be negligible in the broader Irish gene pool.
- Modern genetic studies do not support the idea that there was a significant Spanish genetic impact on the Irish population from this event.
- Historical records indicate that most survivors were either executed or left the country. The few who did integrate would not have had a significant demographic impact.
- The variation in complexion and features among the Irish is more likely due to the complex and diverse genetic history of Ireland itself, which includes influences from earlier migrations and settlements over millennia, such as the Celts, Vikings, and Normans.
- This myth likely persists due to the romantic and dramatic nature of the Spanish Armada story, combined with a tendency to explain visible differences in appearance through notable historical events.
- Similar myths and stories can be found in other cultures where localized physical traits are attributed to historical events or foreign influences.
-In summary, while the tale of the Spanish Armada survivors contributing to a swarthier complexion among some Irish people is intriguing, it lacks substantial historical and genetic evidence. The diversity in appearance among Irish people is more accurately attributed to the broader and more complex tapestry of Ireland’s genetic history.
1
-
@NewDimensions2025 The myth that the Spanish Armada's wrecks in Ireland led to a notable dark complexion among some Irish people is another example of how historical events can give rise to lasting, yet often inaccurate, beliefs.
The Myth:
-It is often suggested that the survivors of the Spanish Armada, who supposedly integrated and intermarried with the local Irish population, contributed to a darker complexion and Mediterranean appearance among certain Irish families, particularly in the west of Ireland.
The Historical Context:
- In 1588, following the defeat of the Spanish Armada by the English fleet and severe storms, several Spanish ships wrecked along the western coast of Ireland.
- Some Spanish sailors did survive and made it to shore, but many were captured and executed, and only a few managed to integrate into Irish society.
- The number of Spanish survivors who might have settled and married into the local population was very small. Their genetic contribution would be negligible in the broader Irish gene pool.
- Modern genetic studies do not support the idea that there was a significant Spanish genetic impact on the Irish population from this event.
- Historical records indicate that most survivors were either executed or left the country. The few who did integrate would not have had a significant demographic impact.
- The variation in complexion and features among the Irish is more likely due to the complex and diverse genetic history of Ireland itself, which includes influences from earlier migrations and settlements over millennia, such as the Celts, Vikings, and Normans.
- This myth likely persists due to the romantic and dramatic nature of the Spanish Armada story, combined with a tendency to explain visible differences in appearance through notable historical events.
- Similar myths and stories can be found in other cultures where localized physical traits are attributed to historical events or foreign influences.
In summary, while the tale of the Spanish Armada survivors contributing to a swarthier complexion among some Irish people is intriguing, it lacks substantial historical and genetic evidence. The diversity in appearance among Irish people is more accurately attributed to the broader and more complex tapestry of Ireland’s genetic history.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1