Questions for our British friends

[Devius]

Originally Posted by seany65

1a) There is NO evidence that the first Britons were Black. That statement could be based on the suggestion that one or two skulls that had been found could, theoretically, have had African ancestry, but in at least one case NO Black DNA was found.

1b) The first people to settle here were Neanderthals over a quarter of a million years ago, with more or less population depending on how much Ice was here during the ice age.

1c) The idea that Black people built Stonehenge is an absolute lie, and just about level in accuracy as much of "Black History" that is written in "Black History" books that were written by Black Celebrities, none of whom are actual Historians or Archaeologists, and these books usually just repeat every other inaccuracy, exaggeration and half-truth in the other "Black History" books that had been previously written.

2a) There were almost certainly a few Black people with the Romans, but some would have been slaves. There may have been a few black Roman Soldiers. This part will be based on the "African Legion" that was based here for a while. Most of them would've been mostly White Roman settlers from other parts of the empire who went to what the Romans called "Africa" - which was in fact the very North African coastline that had been ruled by the Carthaginians until their "empire" (though the Carthaginians didn't actually have what we would call an Empire) was finally defeated at the end of the third Punic War, some would've been Carthaginians who joined the Roman army. Some could've been Tuareg or Berber, perhaps a few could've been sub-Saharan African. The total number of Black people would've been very small, and certainly NOT enough to suggest that the "average Romano-British family was Black", as the Black Broadcasting... sorry, British Broadcasting Corporation actually told kids in an episode of "Horrible Histories". In the same episode they also said Black people were here first.

2b) The idea that there were a lot of Black people in the UK in the middle ages etc. is based mostly on the existence of 1) The Black trumpeter, who it seems came over as part of the entourage of one of Henry the VIII's wives, and 2) The Black Diver who came over with the Venician(?) diving team who were engaged to do something with the Mary Rose. Neither was British and niether stayed very long. Most of the Black people who were here were sailors who lived/stayed mostly in ports. The vast majority of British people would never have seen a Black person in the entire lives.

5) There is some debate on whether in fact the first West Indians who came in the ship "Empire Windrush" were actually invited or not. I've yet to see anyone quote newspaper articles of the time or quote entries in Hansard that suggests the UK was short of workers and that we should invite people from the West Indies to "help us" fill the employment gaps. Almost everything was strictly rationed up until 1950 or so, so would there have been a need for extra production capacity? It seems that later, a couple of the West Indian Islands requested that we invite some of their unemployed to come and work here because there was a severe unemployment problem there and some civil unrest, so WE may have helped THEM.

Regards point (5) while I agree with some points you raised, I strongly disagree with others...

According to the Pathé news footage at the time, many of the Caribbean passengers aboard the Empire Windrush were "ex-servicemen who know England".

They served this country well. In Jamaica they couldn’t find work. Discouraged but full of hope, they sailed for Britain, citizens of the British Empire coming to the Mother Country with good intent.

Pathé News

So this does fit in with your point that these West Indians were seeking employment, and other West Indians did likewise, seeing Britain as the "mother country".

Two days after the Windrush docked, a group of 11 Labour MPs wrote to Prime Minister Clement Attlee calling for a halt to the "influx of coloured people".

Attlee's reply, which is available to view in the National Archives (and posted below), said that "it would be a great mistake to take the emigration of this Jamaican party to the United Kingdom too seriously". You will note Mr Atlee's letter states how foreign labour is being imported "in large numbers".




I believe I stated in an earlier post how the London Transport (LT) museum has a section on how they recruited from the Caribbean....

In the immediate post-war years, LT had attempted to recruit staff in northern England and Scotland. By 1950 the company had also actively recruited from Ireland. But with staff shortages continuing, in 1956 LT looked to the Caribbean.

Source:
https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collectio...an-recruitment

In 1956, Charles Gomm was dispatched to Barbados to recruit men and women as drivers, conductors and canteen staff, at the invitation of the Barbadian government.

Here is Mr Gomm interviewing Barbadian applicants for LT jobs, circa 1956....



Here is Mr Gomm interviewing the first group of Caribbean applicants for work with London Transport, (1956).



Pictures courtesy of London Transport Museum.

From 1956 to 1970 LT recruited about 6,000 employees directly from the Caribbean to the UK. LT’s direct recruitment in Barbados continued until 1970, having also been extended to include Jamaica and Trinidad.

As for the NHS:

As early as 1949 the Ministries of Health and Labour, in conjunction with the Colonial Office, the General Nursing Council and the Royal College of Nursing launched campaigns to recruit hospital staff directly from the Caribbean. Recruitment was aimed at three main categories of worker: hospital auxiliary staff, nurses or trainee nurses, and domestic workers. Senior NHS staff from Britain travelled to the Caribbean to recruit, and vacancies were often published in local papers. In 1949, the Barbados Beacon advertised for nursing auxiliaries to work in hospitals across Britain; applicants were to be aged between 18 and 30, literate, and willing to commit to a three-year contract. By 1955 there were official nursing recruitment programmes across 16 British colonies and former colonies. Over the next two decades, the British colonies and former colonies provided a constant supply of cheap labour to meet staffing shortages in the NHS,
By the end of 1965, there were 3,000-5,000 Jamaican nurses working in British hospitals, many of them concentrated in London and the Midlands. It has been estimated that by 1972, 10,566 students had been recruited from abroad, and that by 1977 overseas recruits represented 12 per cent of the student nurse and midwife population in Britain, of which 66 per cent came from the Caribbean.

Extracted from:
https://www.historyandpolicy.org/pol...o-the-forefron

And the NHS are still recruiting from the Caribbean today - the following is from the St. Vincent Times, dated 13 April, 2023:

As of this month, even the likes of England’s public healthcare system is looking to the Caribbean in the hopes that nurses, radiologists and other healthcare workers would be willing to migrate overseas to join their ranks.

The National Health Service (NHS) is one of the biggest healthcare employers in the United Kingdom. Now it’s partnering with Caribbean Employment Services Inc., a market-leading digital talent acquisition service based in Barbados but operational throughout the Caribbean, to launch a recruitment drive for qualified healthcare professionals.

The NHS has come to the region with open arms, requiring only that applicants have at least one year of hospital experience and no more than 18 months of an employment gap.

They are primarily looking for radiologists and nurses with specialities including Medical, Surgical, ICU, Theatres, Emergency, T&O, Haematology/ Oncology, Ophthalmology and Paediatrics.

Extracted from:
https://www.stvincenttimes.com/a-lea...an-for-talent/

The problem as you state is that Britain's need for a workforce is not recorded in the Press or in Hansard.

[dereknclive]

Originally Posted by seany65

1a) There is NO evidence that the first Britons were Black. That statement could be based on the suggestion that one or two skulls that had been found could, theoretically, have had African ancestry, but in at least one case NO Black DNA was found.

There's certainly no evidence of sub-Saharan African DNA, but there is ancient DNA evidence that the first post-Ice Age inhabitants of Northern Europe were from the Mediterranean; see the excellent book by Harvard palaeogeneticist David Reich:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Who-Are-How...4322112&sr=8-1

These humans would have been the same colour as, say, people in Sardinia or Southern France, i.e. darker than the UK average now, although probably not much darker once they were in colder latitudes.

The early farmers expanded from the Middle East between 11500 and 5500 years ago and these were the builders of Stonehenge roughly 5000 years ago (see Fig. 14a in Reich). Presumably they would have looked fairly similar, i.e. darker and more olive in complexion than modern Northern Europeans, but not particularly so. Roughly 500 years later the IndoEuropean speakers arrived, bringing war (presumably, given the change in Y chromosomes seen in Western Europe) and plague (yersinia pestis being found in their jaw remains).

The above is an oversimplification of Reich's Chapter 5, "The Making of Modern Europe".

[Jake Gittes]

I was wondering if one of our fellow British friends can define what "antiquing" means in the UK.

Heard a lot of definitions, but want to know for sure.

Cheerios!

[Budo]

Originally Posted by Jake Gittes

I was wondering if one of our fellow British friends can define what "antiquing" means in the UK.

Heard a lot of definitions, but want to know for sure.

Cheerios!

Never heard it before. I've just checked and it explains why. It says it's an American expression for someone collecting antiques.

[foxbat1]

Originally Posted by Jake Gittes

I was wondering if one of our fellow British friends can define what "antiquing" means in the UK.

Heard a lot of definitions, but want to know for sure.

Cheerios!

Searching for antiques to acquire, and sometimes selling them on.

[Jake Gittes]

Originally Posted by Budo

Never heard it before. I've just checked and it explains why. It says it's an American expression for someone collecting antiques.

Originally Posted by foxbat1

Searching for antiques to acquire, and sometimes selling them on.

Thanks for the feedback.

What I've heard is that it is British slang for a prank that guys to friends where they throw white powder or something in another guy's face while they're sleeping.

Wanna make sure that's the right meaning before I start using the term.

[Budo]

Originally Posted by Jake Gittes

Thanks for the feedback.

What I've heard is that it is British slang for a prank that guys to friends where they throw white powder or something in another guy's face while they're sleeping.

Wanna make sure that's the right meaning before I start using the term.

I think we just call that being a complete a-hole.

[Dr Pepper]

Originally Posted by Jake Gittes

I was wondering if one of our fellow British friends can define what "antiquing" means in the UK.

Heard a lot of definitions, but want to know for sure.

Cheerios!

There is a slightly dodgy meaning as well: 'antiqueing' in some circumstances means the deliberate artificial ageing of items such as jewellery, furniture, items of clothing, and other household items in order to present them dishonestly as being much older and earlier than their true age and/or era-to command a higher sale price. In other words a degree of fakery -notwithstanding that the items themselves may be genuine.

[MrGrimsdale]

Originally Posted by Dr Pepper

There is a slightly dodgy meaning as well: 'antiqueing' in some circumstances means the deliberate artificial ageing of items such as jewellery, furniture, items of clothing, and other household items in order to present them dishonestly as being much older and earlier than their true age and/or era-to command a higher sale price. In other words a degree of fakery -notwithstanding that the items themselves may be genuine.

^ is correct.
But it's one of those examples of the relatively recent horrible trend for turning any old noun into a verb (e.g. "gifting").