Wednesday, February 27, 2019

Royal Family, Episode 6: Uncrowned Marriages (Documentary)

"Royal Family, Episode 6: Uncrowned Marriages (Documentary)" says the title. Intriguing, but not as much as intended.

Reading the title, it's unclear why uncrowned. Morganatic? One expects to hear of Battenberg and other similar royals who made matches outside the strict caste rules. But it's only about the royals without thrones, and more specifically about two siblings of Alexandra and Dagmar, the Danish princesses who were queen of England and the last but one Czarina, respectively.

Most interesting,  though.

Very unexpected, the two famous princesses of Denmark had a sister not known generally, and almost immediately it's obvious why  0:00 - 8:16 - she fell in love with a mere army officer, which was bad enough since her sisters were to be Russian Czarina and british Queen, respectively,  but that wasn't enough, she had a daughter before marriage too, so of course the royal mob hides the whole thing by not mentioning her! But the daughter was to be put up for adoption? That's too much. Was the royal child to be given away to just anyone? Or was a suitable royal couple found to adopt her?

Comment below the original YT video by someone, worth quoting, about the adopted out daughter of Thyra:

finehomemadewine
OK, I was wrong: "Princess Thyra´s daughter named Maria was born on 8 November 1871. Apparently, the child was adopted by a Rasmus and Anne Marie Jørgensen and Maria was renamed Kate. In 1902 Kate married Frode Pløyen-Holstein. They were apparently childless and she died in 1964."


Amazing, Alexandra the granddaughter from Hesse wasn't the only one to refuse to marry a son or grandson of Queen Victoria 8:16-19:00 - so did princess Thyra of Denmark and even the impoverished Marie of Orleans of the royal Bourbon house!

Marie's Danish Prince husband Valdemaar was offered the Bulgarian throne, but turned it down 19:00 - 20:19 - presumably this was a generation before a Battenberg, a brother-in-law of princess Victoria of Hesse, had to leave it for reasons similar but not quite exactly the same?

"In Russia, Valdemaar's sister in law Dagmar ..." 23:11 - 23:16 - arent the two actually siblings, born siblings, without the "in law" bit?

The princes locking up the servant between two panes or pelting a stoker with coal, not funny, but the various different things Marie did, especially the fireman bit 23:16 - 28:43, not just delightful but much more! No wonder Denmark was charmed for ever.

"Marie had acute pneumonia" and died of it 28:45 - 31:50 -  perhaps Valdemaar ought to have taken the Bulgarian throne, after all, which might have given her a chance at a longer life!

"Anne, former queen of Romania" speaks of Marie as her grandmother 31:50 - 32:16, does that mean that Marie, the queen of Romania who was granddaughter of Queen Victoria and also of the Czar, had a son - or grandson - and heir, who married a granddaughter, of Marie the Bourbob princess from France and wife of Prince Valdemaar of Denmark? Or did Romania change royals somewhere along the way? 

Marie's granddaughter married a Bourbon prince 32:16 - 36:15, would that be a second cousin, or are there plenty of descendents so it need not be that close a cousin?

So son of Thyra, nephew of the then Princess of Wales Alexandra, married Queens Victoria's great-granddaughter Princess Victoria of Hohenzollerns 38:45 - 42:35, yet another intermarriage connection. But Thyra herself had married Ernest Augustus who was dethroned out of Hanover by Kaiser Wilhelm the grandson of Queen Victoria, and since Queen Victoria herself was a descendent of house of Hanover, the new couple were of course cousins - third, or not even third? 

This couldn't be the last time all the heads of state from Europe were together 42:35 - 42:50, unless this was after the funeral of Edward VII.  In another book that's written as Princess Victoria of Hesse the protagonist (autobiography, or not quite, don't recall), she mentions Kaiser Wilhelm making it a point to be as rude to the Battenberg relatives as he could without it getting personal, was it this wedding?

So it was Maximillian, the prince of Baden, and son in law of Thyra, who brought about abdication of the Kaiser Wilhelm after he was made chancellor by him in hope of a solution after WWI, by simply announcing it 42:50 - 44:03 - this family was quite instrumental in key events, for all the relative anonymity since!

Being the duke of Cumberland and supporting Austria during WWI, 44:03 - 44:50  how did he expect to continue the contradiction, and why the surprise when the ducky was taken away? That was probably the least the British could do to ma royal relative under the circumstances! After all, if Germany hadn't jumped into the war and more, the royal mob would not be suffering severed connections, and if Germany hadn't deliberately set Lenin to go to Russia, Nicholas and Alexandra might not have been murdered with the children and other close relatives of the British royal family. And the royals of both Britain and Russia were nephew's of Thyra, for that matter. 




Responding to a comment below the original YT video by Susan Rybak:-

"What about Louise, is she not the mother-in-law of European royalty?"


Rachel Garber:-

"Susan Rybak I guess because of patrilineal descent, the father's line is the one that counts so to speak."


Correction - they do call Queen Victoria grandmother of Europe for similar reasons, but not her husband; so it's not gender or patrilineal descent but the actual monarch rather than the spouse, must be the criteria.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h-P54cv5v70 

Thursday, February 14, 2019

Seeing "Berlin Germany 1947 Rare Color film"

Berlin used to be more avant-garde, in fashion and cosmopolitan culture, than other cities of Europe  - thirties changed that, and consequences of the seeking domination over the world are the heartrending devastation of still visibly magnificent city in this video.

View of Goebbel's house brings a sudden sharp nausea, not related to the physical state or the previous look before destruction. Recently there has been a television series on information channels about the supposed suicide of his boss being a hoax, and the escape across southern Atlantic via Canary Islands - was this guy a survivor too, having killed wife and children?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrz2B9Stipw

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Queen Victoria's Nine Children

Interesting video with photographs of all nine children of Queen Victoria .

Quoted from blurb:-

Victoria "Vicky"                1840 - 1901
Albert Edward "Bertie"    1841 - 1910
Alice                                   1843 - 1878
Alfred "Affie"                     1844 - 1900
Helena "Lenchen"             1846 - 1923
Louise                                 1848 - 1939
Arthur                                  1850 - 1942
Leopold                               1853 - 1884
Beatrice "Baby"                  1857 - 1944



All nine of them 0:08.

Vicky the Princess Royal Victoria, looks so very daring to hope here 0:16, before she married and experienced the hostility of Germany due to her being English! Funny, her father had faced the same for being German, and yet he was a first cousin of Victoria and the whole Hanover royal family was German too, which only changed slightly with Alexandra but turned back with Mary the next queen consort after Alexandra. Vicky had an unhappy life, on the whole, her husband died as Kaiser before coronation and never was in charge until too sick, and her son (cousin Willy to his cousins the other grandchildren of Queen Victoria) was much too abrasive to put it mildly.

Bertie the upright Prince of Wales 0:30 changes with years, to Bertie the sprightly young  Prince of Wales 0:32, to Bertie the chafing at bit Prince of Wales 0:35, to Bertie the slightly frustrated for doing nothing while waiting as Prince of Wales 0:38, to Bertie the by now patient and resigned Edward VII finally 0:41.

Alice the delicate one who married into the Hesse and Darmstadt ruling Battenberg relatives and had children who were to go on to have such key positions in the tragic events to come and further, but didn't even survive to see them grow up! Her daughter Vicky, Princess Victoria of Hesse and Darmstadt, married her first cousin Louis Battenberg from the morganatic marriage of her uncle, and was to be the maternal grandmother to Philip via her daughter Alice whose own life was quite sad. Another daughter Ella, Princess Elizabeth of Hesse and Darmstadt married Sergei Romanov, uncle of Tsar to be Nicholas II who married the youngest one Alexandra, and the third daughter Irina married the brother of Kaiser Wilhelm and a cousin - all married their cousins, all married for love. As WWI came, the first casualty was the cutting off of the usual rounds of visits and other constant communications between various siblings and cousins across Europe, especially those living in England - which included the Battenberg clan members - severing connections with relatives in Germany, and then of course the gruesome murders of Ella, Alexandra and her family, and other Romanov cousins and relatives. Mother of Tsar Nicholas II, the dowager Empress Maria Fedorovna who survived, was a sister of Queen Alexandra of England, while grandmother empress Maria Fedorovna was a Battenberg Princess of Hesse and Darmstadt, sister of this Princess Alice's father in law.

Alfred 1:06 who married the Tsar's daughter Marie, a cousin through German relatives, thus making a trio of sibling pairs from royals of England, Russia and Denmark who intermarried each other and were three couples, Edward VII and Alexandra, Princess Dagmar 'Maria Fedorovna' and Tsar Alexander II, and Prince Alfred and Princess Marie of Russia. Alfred was duke of Edinburgh 1:16, later Admiral of the Royal Navy at Malta. His daughter Marie was to be Queen of Romania, after her marriage with another German cousin. In August 1893, he inherited the duchy on the death of his childless uncle, Ernest II, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. His wife the Russian princess Marie had, from 1893 until her death, the distinction of being an Imperial Russian grand duchess (by birth), a British royal Duchess (by marriage), and the consort (and later widow) of a German sovereign Duke.

Helena 1:34 the good-looking one.

Louise 1:41 had the most beautiful tiara especially designed and ordered for her by her husband at the wedding, the Fife tiara, that rivals the Russian and English royal tiaras in beauty and more. Wish the video had included a photograph of her wearing it.

Arthur 1:53 - 2:07.

Leopold 2:11 - 2:24.

Beatrice 2:25 - 2:40 the youngest married another Battenberg who was the younger brother of her niece Victoria's husband (son in law of the then late Princess alice who was her sister), and a first cousin of the Hesse and Darmstadt cousins.

These intermarriage of the various royal clans of Europe, not only amongst cousins but across generations and often with a sister marrying the nephew of a brother in law or an aunt marrying the younger brother of her sister's son in law, not to mention several intermarriage generation to generation so that people are simultaneously first cousins, second cousins, and more, are hard to keep track of without a 3D graph with multicolour threads to define relationships!

All five daughters of Victoria 2:43 - 2:48, and 2:48 - 2:52 all four sons. The sons together are all grown, while the daughters together are various ages, perhaps because once they began to marry and disperse across Europe and get busy with their own families, it was difficult to get them together in such a photograph.

If one didn't know, this could be any relatively well off family of the time 3:10 - 3:18!

This 3:35 is titled Leopold, Louise and Arthur - but obviously they are standing behind, with the group seated in front including their mother, the presumably new sister in law Alexandra, and a few of the grandchildren of Queen Victoria.

Alice and Bertie 3:51 - Alice the great-grandmother of Philip with Bertie the great-grandfather of Elizabeth, the current royal couple descended from Queen Victoria through these two siblings.

Bertie and Alfred 3:55 - the father in law of the younger one was the Tsar, and found it inappropriate that his daughter took second place at various English royal events from everyday dinner to more elaborate events such as weddings, the first place after the Queen being given to the Princess of Wales Alexandra who was Princess from Denmark, tiny compared to his Russia.

Louise and Helena 4:00 - 4:06, quite a transformation here from sullen little girls to pleasant, lovely young women!

Without more information this one at 4:12 - 4:16 titled Vicky and Beatrice is slightly confusing, because Vicky here looking so young couldn't be the first daughter of Queen Victoria, is this Vicky the Princess of Hesse and Darmstadt the daughter of Alice, making this the photograph of two women who were aunt and niece before Beatrice married the niece's brother in law, making them sisters in law? At 4:18 - 4:23 though, Beatrice does look younger, but not by much, so the confusion stays.

Alice and Vicky here 4:37 - 4:51 are presumably daughters of Queen Victoria, both unhappy in their life in different ways, their children and grandchildren going on to play major roles in events to come!

Nice 6:19. Before WWI, of course! Wonder how often they met after the war.



A conversation below the original YT video with information on the topic quoted here:-


Rachel Green
It would interesting to see each child's descendants and who they are today.  We know the Queen is from Edward's line.  But what about the other offspring?

Gerada Nelson
Rachel Green >

Carol Lopez
The German Kaiser Wilhelm was her grandson, for one
Does that help a little bit?

Carol Lopez
Also, Prince Phillip's mother was her granddaughter, I think.

wholeNwon
@Carol Lopez  He is pictured with his mother (Empress) Victoria.

Patricia Bilinkas
Rachel Green Leopold was a hemophiliac and died at about thirty. Alice died young, too. Then Victoria’s grandchildren started to die from diseases such as typhus and diphtheria. That must have been horrendous for her and the parents.

wholeNwon
@Patricia Bilinkas  Leopold lived long enough to father children, including Princess Alice who lived a very long life dying in the 1980s  as I recall.  There used to be a YT video of HRH describing a few aspects of her life.

Patricia Bilinkas
wholeNwon I believe Alice died while the Queen was still alive, but some of her other daughters did live to old age. Vicky died of breast cancer five months after her mother passed. Some of the daughters carried the hemophilia gene, which they passed on. I wonder if it is anywhere today in the RF.

wholeNwon
@Patricia Bilinkas I was referring to Q. Victoria's granddaughter, Alice, daughter of Prince Leopold. Of course, Empress Alexandra carried the gene and passed it on to her only son where it ended. How did Q. Victoria acquire the gene? Was she a spontaneous mutation?

Patricia Bilinkas
wholeNwon That would be interesting to find out. I just finished the book Victoria the Queen (Baird), which was a comprehensive study of her life. The author was given permission by the Queen to visit the round tower at Windsor, where all the sensitive material on Victoria is kept. It took her years to finally get permission. There was definitely info that the RF wanted kept hidden but she got it from the family of Victoria’s doctor, Dr. Reid, who knew how she wanted to be buried, specifically with John Brown’s mom’s wedding ring on her finger but carefully covered so her children didn’t see it. Fascinating read!

wholeNwon
@Patricia Bilinkas  Dr. Reid was her last Scottish physician in ordinary. She insisted on at least one Scott. Her medical staff was headed by Wm. Jenner and, unfortunately for the world, included Morrell MacKenzie. (sp?).  Victoria was a rather bizarre person, even for a monarch.  Q. Elizabeth has also given permission for an exhaustive study of the papers of George III at Windsor. He was far better organized than Victoria and his handwriting very legible. He has become a more sympathetic figure.

Patricia Bilinkas
wholeNwon True, she had some pretty bad physicians, especially those attending Albert on his death bed. It makes me wonder if he would have lived if they had the correct diagnosis for him, though they had no idea how to treat anything correctly in those days, and Victoria became a greater monarch with him gone.

HopeSwe
Rachel Green I don’t know all of them by heart, but I do know that the current Swedish King is a descendant of Queen Victoria through Arthur and Leopold . The Norwegian royal family is descended from Queen Victoria through Bertie and the Spanish royal family through Vicky and Beatrice (if I’m not mistaken). :)

wholeNwon
@Patricia Bilinkas  Am not sure they were especially bad for their time. John Snow administered anesthesia for her last 2 deliveries and he was a great contributor to medical science. I don't know whether her Jenner was descended from Edward Jenner.  As to Albert, while he had ample reason for typhoid, he was chronically sickly and likely suffered from crohn's disease of something similar. Not sure that I would consider Victoria "great" but she was certainly better than her 2 immediate predecessors and superior to Geo. I and II. Thinking about it now, the Brits. have had a surprisingly large number of ineffectual monarchs of low moral character.
Her health was undoubtedly adversely affected by her gluttony. She had a fondness for wine, including Veuve Cliquot. I once knew someone who stood very close to her when she last opened Parliament and remembered signs of her having had a stroke already.

Rachel Green
@HopeSwe ty...I like how this video was done....perhaps you could round up the descendants at a later time!

May 67
There is close to nine hundred descendants, today.

Ing-Marie Alnås
@HopeSwe the Danish queen is also a descendent from the same line as the Swedish king, they are cousins...

Joseph Logue
@Carol Lopez Prince Philip's mother was a great-granddaughter: Queen Victoria-->Pss Alice-->Pss Victoria (Hesse)-->Pss Alice (Battenberg)-->P Philip

HopeSwe
Ing-Marie Alnås you’re absolutely right. The Swedish Crown Princess Margaret’s only daughter, Princess Ingrid, married into the Danish Royal family - and Margaret was Queen V’s granddaughter through Prince Arthur. :)

Snow Angel
I find it interesting to see a lot of similar facial features in the current Royal Family. Not so much Diana's children, they have her looks thank goodness. But some of the recent and not so recent royals. I just think it's fascinating how we pass along things especially looks!

goosey mcgooseface
Princess Alice was the mother of Tzarina Alexandra who was murdered with her family in 1918.


Snow Angel - the marriage of George V with Mary of Teck who was daughter of first cousin of Victoria, strengthened the features that you speak of; Victoria herself had married her first cousin through her mother, so in the current royals Alexandra and Diana were the exceptions. Late queen mum Elizabeth the wife of George VI was related, but not close, and the recently married princess Beatrice looks like her.



Another comment, worth quoting, below the original YT video by HopeSwe:-

"Sally Ann Vicky married Emperor Frederick III “Fritz”

Bertie married Princess Alexandra of Denmark “Alix”

Alice married Grand Duke Louis IV of Hesse and by Rhine

Alfred married Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna of Russia

Helena married Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein

Louise married John Campbell  Marquess of Lorne, later the 9th Duke of Argyll

Arthur married Princess Louise Margaret of Prussia

Leopold married Princess Helena of Waldeck and Pyrmont

Beatrice married Prince Henry of Battenberg"



Responding to a comment below the original YT video by kiliipower:-

"Prince Charles could stand in between and he wouldn't stand out, the resemblance is amazing."

snugbug:-

"Exactly ! If you look at all the current (their royal highness') today you can see a variety of different ancestors in their features."


Victoria, George V and Elizabeth, each married a cousin, all from same clan, so of course the mould got emphasised. Alexandra and Diana were much needed fresh blood infusion.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XaBtB5JmKG8
................................................................................................

About another video titled
"Queen Victoria: 18 facts about one of Britain's longest-reigning monarchs",
a vital correction.

Correction 3:45 - 4:15, India was not a part of British empire when Victoria became queen, although it was a British supposedly commercial company - British East India company - meddling in India's politics; after 1857, Victoria declared her government taking control of British affairs in India directly, but they were not in complete control by their own admission recorded, to the effect that they could never be certain of their footing in India, not until Maratha empire was extinguished in all but name. Pune by this admission was the last bastion, and this control wasn't lost in a battle but in natural death of the person who was far too smart and alert for the British games to succeed. After him, with a swift change in game, Pune became the capital of reform and resurgence. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nPPSKFwaSvs

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

JNU Mob

Where exactly was the justification of titling this video "JNU Professor Makarand Paranjape Slams Kanhaiya Kumar"? It was mostly a hooligan fest with Paranjape being apologetic.

This whole atmosphere merely confirms the general impression about JNU being more of a mob swaying with easy entertainment procured by targeting those that won't break your limbs in response, and throwing muck at those that won't kill in return.

Disgusting fraud, using village lingo to pretend honesty while being obvious fraud 0:00 - 1:06 - especially when he counters accusation of being privileged at taxpayers' expense with a smirk and boast about a thousand vote win as student leader. Those votes too are by the privileged at taxpayers' expense, not by taxpayers themselves, and the privilege is of fine living and much more without a shred of work, for years that often are more than a decade, with no real achievements or work later but merely more prestigious positions for some and awards so on. Few end up from this privileged campus working honestly, and they aren't leftists.

Guess who is applauded for declaring he will kill if he is attacked 14:30 - 15:06?

Again fraudulent statement 20:15 - 20:28 with the usual position, stating they are "fighting to protect democracy" while they are in fact in dock for sloganeering to defend terrorists and swearing to break up the nation, and more along those lines.

Finally 23:00 Paranjape speaks, but he isn't slamming, he is correcting their falsehoods while not unafraid of the mob.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-V6T_jjiVLw 

Monday, February 11, 2019

Lecture addressed by Tarek Fatah at IIT Bombay, circa 2016 - MAIN TALK

Quote:- "Published on Apr 16, 2016

Tarek Fatah came to IIT Bombay on March 22, 2016, to deliver a very interesting and well-attended talk. It was followed by a long question-answer session. This talk was organized by Subash Chandra Bose Study Circle IIT Bombay."


Lovely talk.

He really keeps abreast current events, keeps track of politics in India 10:15 - 10:30!

Only he could, in midst of the absurdity of a noble India admiring the bloodthirsty racist ethos of those that broke India with false premises and massacred three million in their own piece of India, point out 10:30 - 17:06 that a film artist who has never written a book gets invited to paki litfests - it does so happen that her name, before conversion for sake of marriage to a scion of a Nawab created by British rule, was Tagore,  but that's just polish of an excuse for the invitation; the obvious reality is that the said creation of Nawab out of an Afghan tribal male was a reward for his help to the British in fighting against the Maratha empire, which was the last stronghold of India against the British control - as, the British wrote, they could never be certain of ruling India until the last of the Peshawas were out of power.

"You guys have a return ticket, we have it one way" Tarek Fateh speaking of paki obsession about destroying India and the world "...To annihilate the world as a favour to God " 17:15 - 20:52! Just when one thinks he's repeating his favourite things, he comes up with the priceless! Because it's from genuine honest heart, rather than a planned out entertainment program with political correctness to please the powers as in case of, say, Ms Roy and others.

Tarek Fateh speaking about leftist liberal whites pontificating on terrorist attack in Belgium 21:00 - 29:00, delightful!

About Lahore the appropriate capital of khalistan 38:30 - 38:45 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pC2-8Tgqy78

Royals And Names In England

Funny, he himself used his mum's maiden name - Mountbatten, or its original Battenberg, isn't his father's last name, it was the married name of his mother Princess Alice's mother Princess Victoria, mother of Louis Mountbatten, and of her mother Princess Alice, daughter of Queen Victoria; Princess Victoria had married her Battenberg cousin. So he wants his female ancestors' last name to continue, but not as far back as Queen Victoria, only as far back as the three women between him and her! As silly as it gets, this guy!


A comment, worth quoting, below the original YT video by Dan Fox:-

"Agreed

"Yes, Prince Philip did say that he felt like "a bloody amoeba being the only man in Britain not allowed to give his kids his surname".

"BUT, firstly, Mountbatten wasn't his actual surname - it was his mother's family name (or, at least, her Royal Family's "territorial" name - she was Princess Alice of Battenburg - which was Anglicised to Mountbatten - which was part of the House of Hesse).  His father was a member of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg so may have had that as a surname (though it could also have been Oldenburg as that was the original Royal House that Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg was part of).  It is quite likely that Philip's uncle - Earl Mountbatten of Burma (born Prince Louis of Battenburg) - was instrumental in pushing for a name change to House of Mountbatten as he was rather ambitious.  Also, by taking Mountbatten as a surname, Philip would have been denying his father's "right" to have his male-line grandchildren take his surname - making Philip rather hypocritical.

Secondly, Philip renounced ALL of his titles and succession rights to the Danish and Greek thrones (he was born a Prince of Greece and Denmark so was in line to these thrones).  This meant that he was no longer a "dynast" so he could not start a Royal House nor continue an existing one using his name (compare this to Prince Albert - when he married Queen Victoria, their children became part of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and this became the House name of the British Royal Family when Queen Victoria - who was a member of the House of Hanover - died).  Thus, he could not start a "House of Mountbatten" as he was no longer Royal.  As it turned out, he didn't need to renounce his titles - he just believed that he did in order to become a British Citizen, but he already was by virtue of the Sophia Naturalization Act 1705 (which stated that all of Sophia's legitimate descendants were British Citizens).  That act was repealed in 1948 but that was AFTER he married the then Princess Elizabeth.  Also note that he wasn't a Prince again until 1957 and this was well after the births of Charles and Anne, so they got their HRH's etc from their mother not their father.

"The Queen decreed, on 8 February 1960, that those members of her family that had HRH were members of The House of Windsor and would use Windsor as a surname if needed.  All non-HRH family members could use Mountbatten-Windsor as a surname.  Most have actually used their territorial designation as a surname (eg, Prince William used "Wales" whilst on active service and before he received his Dukedom) though Prince Andrew and Princess Anne did use Mountbatten-Windsor when signing the marriage register.  So, Philip is being represented in that respect but none of his descendants have used just Mountbatten for a surname.  It is possible that, if he hadn't renounced his titles and rights, the House of Windsor could have become the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg once Charles became King but the Queen's decree would have overridden that - as the Head of the House of Windsor, she had that right.

"So, both the Queen and Prince Philip would have known the situation BEFORE they got married and it would not have caused any issues between them - or, at least, for no more than a short period of time (and, certainly not to the degree that this video suggests).

"So, this is just another example of "America Today Network" not checking their facts, so creating fake news."


Another interesting comment below the original YT video by Guðbjörg Gísladóttir:-

"His mother was Alice of Battenberg and his father was Andrew of Greece and Denmark... so no, Philips real name was never Battenberg, it was more Danish than Greek. 

"Possible Rosenborg as many Danish princes who marry without consent of the Danish monarch lose their dynastic rights, including royal title... and are then usually accorded the hereditary title "Count of Rosenborg"  (City of Roses or  Rosetown) 

"If those royals were to use their fathers names as "a surname" He would be Phillip (or Fillip) Andrewson (or Andrewsen) and Charles, Andrew and Edward would be Phillipson"

Guðbjörg Gísladóttir - small correction - although yes his father belonged to a royal family who were ruling Denmark and Greece until the last war, the family itself was German, as indeed most of the relatives of Queen Victoria were and descendents were, and they hadn't until then used either Danish or Greek name for the family; as commented above by Dan Fox,

"His father was a member of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg so may have had that as a surname (though it could also have been Oldenburg as that was the original Royal House that Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg was part of)"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_PhiD-E1QHw


And another video, titled

Elton John opens up on Princess Diana | 60 Minutes Australia,

Has thumbnail state "I've never forgiven them".

10:13

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fVfRGPsawcw

Sunday, February 10, 2019

European Royal Families - Old Footage

European Royal Families - Old Footage

Surely it wasn't Edward, Prince of Wales 6:20 - 6:22, him being called Bertie until he was king and 'took' the name Edward as the king? Wasnt his first name Albert, after his father, just as the Princess Royal was Victoria, named after the mother?

Weren't much of the royalty mentioned 12:15 - 12:22 close relatives, generally first cousins and usually with multiple links, of the british royals who were until then mostly a German family, with Alexandra perhaps the different one for being Danish? Bulgaria and Romania, Greece and Prussia and Russia were certainly all very close relatives of British royals, and most were grandchildren of Queen Victoria or married to them.

British royalty not merely lost the German name 14:45 - 14:53 during WWI, but few relatives too, close relatives they had grown up visiting and marrying and so on; Russian royalty were murdered, and others of Germany couldn't keep the ties close any longer. 

The crowds thronging for this 21:30 - 21:44 remind one of the crowds for Diana's wedding and her funeral.

The abdication speech of Edward VIIIth 24:30 perhaps might have been entirely sincere, even though he didn't refuse the position immediately, but only when it was an impasse about his insistence that he would marry Mrs Simpson and have her as his queen, while his government flatly refused to allow this possibility and forced him to make a choice; but it occurs to one that a very similar speech by another political personae about an elected position in another nation seems to have been copied partly from his speech, especially the part about never wanting the position, while that stance of the copy was completely fraudulent in that several hundred MPs had been asked by this political leader to sign individual declarations asking that this person be appointed to the said position, instead of the usual way, each party declaring their choice in one letter.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TqehW28f6OU

Princess Alexandra of Denmark, Princess of Wales and Queen of England

Beautiful 0:43, 1:13, 1:32, 1:42; reminds very much, with that upwards sideways glance 1:50, of the last Princess of Wales, Diana, especially during her early years of fending off paparazzi. 

Three couples 2:31 of seemingly similar age, would these be the three closely related by marriages and sibling relationships pairing off either as three couples or as two English princes, two Danish princesses and a Russian royal pair of brother and sister? 

Wish there were subtitles identifying the individuals 2:34, 3:09. 

Quoted from a comment below the original YT video by rutejack:- 

"The picture at 3:23 is not of Queen Alexandra, but Princess Alice (Queen Victoria's second daughter) with her husband and children."


Responding to a comment below the original YT video by paixx12:-

"Alexandra's life is what Diana rejected for herself:  a life of long-suffering patience in the face of her husband's infidelities.   One might say:  "please, Alexandra lived in a different era."  I say:  "Nothing is new under the sun."   I can't help but imagine what could have been Diana's had she  repeated this beautiful Queen's example:  a literal crown; a longer life; two sons who would still have their mother; the deep admiration of people around the world; confirmation of the inner beauty in her---just as the comments here acclaim Alexandra's beauty outside and her beauty within." 

There is as much written against Alexandra as against Diana, mostly for identical reasons - women are seen as playthings and when a male with power and wealth prefers an ugly one, the beautiful wife is a target; but in this case there is another reason, of caste. Both Alexandra and Diana were "different" from the family they married into. Alexandra is seen as "not quite", not against her husband's other dalliance but against other women in the position,  chiefly her daughter in law who was a close relative of the family. Diana was young and wanted the fairy tale she was rooted into, rather than the dogs and horses and shooting that goes with the caste. 



Responding to an insidiously poisonous comment below the original YT video by someone against Diana:-

This propaganda by royal train against Diana with innuendos a la "his type, pretty but immature and non intellectual.", because he was an Oxford professor with a Nobel promise in physics, of course! How fraudulent can they get! A male of thirty one excused for destroying a young girl of nineteen because "he was pressurised to marry a virgin", so she was bumped of after the heir and spare, and now he can force Britain to lump it when his preferred one is forced down their heads via "Diana wasn't saintly" campaign about the guy who gets to be called intellectual because his affection for what amounts to his family property and tales of his predecessors! She gets to be criticised because he wasn't a Gardner, could he survive Rwanda or even East End, anywhere outside being the position of the expected next king since birth? No. As to her preferred lovers being different, she wasn't exactly allowed the freedom to meet anyone in peace and privacy, and few go around the globe to search for real love at that, most are forced to pick from what's around. Nevertheless if rumours are true her picks included some much higher guys - a brilliant surgeon, an esoteric film maker whose film is highly regarded, and the current rumour includes a sympathetic Prince too. His pick, another wallis, but an English one. 
........................................................................................................................ 



Princess Feodora of Leiningen half sister of Queen Victoria

Not much known to non historians. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p4hCTCwRgkk
........................................................................................................................ 

Thursday, February 7, 2019

Archeological Discoveries Uncomprehended By Mainstream


New Forbidden Discoveries Documentary 2018 
Impossible Ruins, Out of Place Artifacts & Ancient Tech.
...........................................................

"Before any of the known cultures came into being" 0:00 - 1:45 smacks - rather, is evidence - of Western bias supported by colonial subjugation of much of the rest. 

For example the Konark Temple shown at 1:51 not only stands today, however ancient, in southeastern coastal region in India, but the culture that built it still survives despite the over a millennium of colonial regimes that sought to destroy the culture and the temples across the country.   

The narrator is incapable of reading English, apparently, saying "ashkola" instead of Ashok 4:30! What's more, it's blatant insult to India 5:30 when he asks "what happened to that culture", as if the culture of India is dead simply because India was under colonial subjugation!  

Narrator says 7:02 - and the video has subtitle saying - "Raama's bridge / Adam's bridge" (narrator goes "also known as" at '/'); neither takes into account the fact that Adam was nowhere around, ever, and calling it Adam's bridge amounts to denying existence of culture and history of India, i.e.,  colonial boot on the neck of India put back in the same place by a narrator that's supposed to be of U.S.going by accent. 

The narrator claims 7:02 - 7:21 that there is no doubt it's ancient and real, but "confusion is caused by multiplicity of tales surrounding it" which is a lie - prior to invasions that brought conquistadores and their conversionism oriented faiths out to kill all other cultures, and appropriate everything thereof, there were no multiple tales nor confusion. 

"Raamaayana built the bridge" is as callous a colonialist gets as it goes  7:29 - Raama was the epic hero, and Raamaayana the epic. 

Occult or taantrik object 23:00 - 23:15?


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4JarDrRY2LE
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


New Antarctica Anomalies Documentary 2018
...........................................................

Lovely shots of Antarctica. 

Graham Hancock does mention theories referred to in various parts of this video 0:00 - 10:00, extensively, in his Fingerprints Of Gods. 

If they were Raytheon employees 16:00 and not scientists, were they drilling for oil or precious metals? 

"How did this rock cross 52 miles of space" 22:15???? From Mars to Earth, surely it's never been that short a distance? Unless of course, ancient Indian traditional knowledge is correct, and Mars is born of Earth. 

This whole part about a secret and safe place for precious knowledge, and the conversation between the master and the visitor, Richard E. Byrd, 25:00 - 32:05, is far too like Lost Horizon by James Hilton, was the later one about Antarctica copied from the earlier work by the author about Trans Himaalayan secret place of the monastery Shangri La? Or did James Hilton have prescient knowledge? Perhaps the third, possibly the author knew of the incident and wrote his work set in completely different yet mirror image surroundings? 



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PDmv1RUCPO4 
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


Graham Hancock ~ The Pyramids of Giza/ Orion
...........................................................


Looking at a comment below, one has to wonder if the Jones character was not only based on such maverick archaeologists that did nit confirm to safe and established theory boundaries, but moreover was meant to discredit them forever, by having those that do this or those that hear them and consider them with seriousness, as "oh the Jones fans", with the tacit understanding that films are strictly entertainment only - just as novels are tagged fiction or worse if they aren't heavy, dull, and anything but sweet or romantic, but most of all written by old males with serious misogyny, and anything that is written by women or appeals to women is instantly branded "chick" or "soap".

And yet these archaeologists are as important as Galileo while those confined to the accepted boundaries are equally those witnessing inquisition in silence due not so much to fear but more from adherence to a creed - bible then, dogma about civilisation being younger than six thousand years now.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-jf5goxK41A
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


Graham Hancock - The War on Consciousness - Banned TED Talk
...........................................................

The title is "Graham Hancock - The War on Consciousness - Banned TED Talk"; since Graham Hancock is usually into archaeology, geology, prehìstory and astronomy combined that leads to clues about human history unknown or at least unrecognised in mainstream academia led by West, one expects this talk to be generally in those areas, and wonders why TED had to ban it; one assumes it was pressure from mainstream. But hardly a couple of minutes into the talk 2:19, and it's clear why. It's because he opened with altered state of consciousness and substances that lead towards those, and travelling to Amazon tribal areas to search and experiment.

Funny, Graham Hancock mentions 6:05 that Ayahuasca is effective in treatment of addiction to hard stuff like cocaine and heroin, perhaps it's worth attention of official medical and government authorities to help addicts so crime might reduce, but it's the usual foot dragging by those in recognition of unfamiliar - or is it, much worse, pressure from syndicates of dealers that keeps them from this recognition? 

Graham Hancock mentions 13:54 the social and authorities attitude and behaviour towards various banned substances in contrast to those allowed such as alcohol and coffee, and says the latter are allowed because they let the user be alert; this is true of tea, coffee, but certainly not of alcohol.

True 13:54 - 15:03.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X_hShqKn5cg
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................



Six Ancient Maps That Should Not Exist
...........................................................


It's not merely ignorance on part of the conquering invader colonial regimes, but an arrogance that holds themselves superior to all that came before and existed anywhere else, arrogance based on racism and conquest. They forget that wealth and power may free a next generation to pursue culture, but does not automatically imply possession of knowledge - and certainly not vice versa. For if it were so, Einstein and his fellow scientists should have been wealthiest in the world they lived in, and this was far from the case. And the most obvious they forget is that when they seek to destroy the conquered culture, they lose the chance to enter the realm of knowledge of that culture.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RgJ5A-SDL94
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


Graham Hancock - Impact Events And Ancient Civilisations
...........................................................

The assumption about human presence on the continent or on Earth being only a few thousand years old is inexplicable at best, and based on a deep subconscious need in west of so called rational scientists to nevertheless cling to biblical church approved time zones, until they find archaeological evidence to the contrary - and then they go just that far! At worst, it's racism, since history and knowledge from other cultures, especially those subjugated by colonial regimes and invader conquistadores, is either ignored completely or demonized and disdained, when not completely destroyed by the said invading conquistadores and colonial regimes. What's worse, all these factors are simultaneously operative in most!

It's not merely ignorance on part of the conquering invader colonial regimes, but an arrogance that holds themselves superior to all that came before and existed anywhere else, arrogance based on racism and conquest. They forget that wealth and power may free a next generation to pursue culture, but does not automatically imply possession of knowledge - and certainly not vice versa. For if it were so, Einstein and his fellow scientists should have been wealthiest in the world they lived in, and this was far from the case. And the most obvious they forget is that when they seek to destroy the conquered culture, they lose the chance to enter the realm of knowledge of that culture.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K1BkMqtWMns
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


Species With Amnesia - Graham Hancock
...........................................................

Very interesting 1:59.

This 29:16 has been featured on thumbnail of another video (not by Graham Hancock), but there it was only a thumbnail with no mention thereof in the video. Here, the whole ten minutes or so leading up to this, about his diving off coast of Japan and discovering megalithic structures, at a site called Yonaguni, has been mindnumbingly amazing.

"I think we're going to go to India now" 31:39!

"It was the view of the archaeological establishment in India (meaning, the Archaeological Survey Of India?) that there couldnt be any ruins there" 32:30, Graham Hancock speaking about the local Tamil fishermen telling him and his Tamil speaking wife about the ruins underwater they told everybody about. This was before 2009 when this lecture was being delivered. "Eventually,  ten years later in 2002 we managed to ..." - so, of course, congress led government era, which amounted to denying history unless certified by all powers foreign to India!

So essentially it was Graham Hancock with a few archaeological people appointed by government of India who dived off coast of India close to Sri Lanka and found ancient structures 32:30 - 33:51 that were, in his opinion were man made, and the experts accompanying him concurred; "however, there were political problems" since everyone in india and Sri Lanka knew immediately that these were remains of the construction by Raama and his Vaanarasena, which congress and left were hellbent on denying realty of! But the curved wall at 33:51 leaves no doubts even in these slides, and to someone with as much experience as Graham Hancock it was obvious from start of looking at the "wall" that this was no natural structure.

Graham Hancock next shows 33:51 - 35:35 slides of off coast of Gujarat underwater discovery by him of two cities submerged 40 meters deep, which might have connections with Mahaabhaarata era city of Krishna, Dwaarakaa.

Again, it's Vaasukie and Mandaara,  44:00 - 44:49 - not "bazooki and manderaa"!

"We should all be thankful to Jupiter" 50:24 indeed!

Remarkable slide 52:13 for those familiar!

Remarkable, this 52:14 - 57:16 prophetic lament from ancient Egypt!



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oedOKCGnzX8
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................



10 Legenary cities proven real
...........................................................

Amazing indeed, from Xanadu to Columbia!

Re "Krishna who lived 5,000 years ago" 3:30 - 3:40, that is an estimate based on the staunch belief of bible belt brand historians and archaeologists who deny all possibilities of human civilisation being far more ancient than that; even the most conservative dating of the said possible location of Dwaarakaa discovered submerged under the ocean by archaeologists takes the city much further in past than that, and there have been more than one such submerged possible locations of Dwaarakaa in last few decades.

The narrator isn't human, as evidenced by the contradiction when she says "the oldest parts of Dwaarakaa might have been built 32,000 years ago" 4:00 - 4:45; the first thing known about Dwaarakaa, though, is that Krishna built it from scratch, when he migrated to that part of India from his home region of Mathura neighbourhood, generally called Brajabhoomi, to avoid thousands of his people being killed in a futile war. So the narrator has no clue and is just reading mindlessly, sign of a robot.

At 5:06 the photograph shown is of another famed fortress city, Chittorgadh of famous battles including one defending a woman's right to decline demands of an invader to surrender to him. Chittorgadh, unlike Dwaarakaa which was a coastal city in Gujarat, is a hilltop fortress, situated in Rajasthan and close to Vindhya ranges of central India.

About Vikings arriving on the continent across Atlantic 500 years before Columbus, that's not merely in Canada - there is a Vikings' tower near river Charles in Waltham, MA.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PAGWl0fw_4Q
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................

The Lost Caves Of Tibet
...........................................................

Interesting.

Major correction of perception and comprehension of this video's makers 45:00 - 45:40 - Kaala literally means, not (as the narrator says) "the black one", but TIME, a personified Deity; if Kaala is painted in dark hues, it's merely appropriate, since humanity isn't capable on the whole of seeing through Time, and only those possessing a higher perception can do so. In most Indian languages the word "kaalaa" is indeed used in the sense the narrator does here mistakenly, as is "kaalie" as an adjective for feminine in the same sense; the latter gets more complicated since the pronunciation isn't different for the adjective and the name of the Divine form of Kaalie, the Divine Power. One must there depend solely on the context. But, unlike in non Indian cultures, in this case black or dark isn't necessarily associated with negative connotations, either, and in fact often it's the reverse, but not always. For instance dark clouds are very necessary for the heat of tropics to bring relief and the vital rains for life of plant kingdom; white clouds on the other hand are merely providing a bit of shade, but disappointing if rains are needed. And above all, black isn't necessarily significantly of evil or even death, much less horror, in India.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l-MeV3bWVD8&t=334s
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................

Aarya Is A Word From Sanskrt, Does Not Mean A Race
...........................................................


Nice, video exposing Macaulay 1:42, and Maxmueller 3:02. Also, nice 4:00 -:4:30 about Persian hustory recording Aaryans coming to Iran from India. 

The narrator is incorrect in discrediting evolution, in fact it is in accordance with ancient Indian legends and knowledge of human existence - think Dashaavataara, how it's neatly encapsulating evolution, and as for apes, think Vaanarasena and others from Raamaayana and Mahaabhaarata.

Aryan migration from outside India is a fraudulent theory invented by British to displace most Indians as not native, hence not righteous occupants, just as they used false propaganda following Macaulay policy to badmouth everything good about India.

Fact is Aarya was a term of stature of enlightenment inherent in bringing up and persona, not a race and definitely not defined by physical colours. This word was borrowed, and its meaning was then changed, by European morons to suit their own theories and distorted out of all recognition.

Indians discredit their own histories and ancient knowledge due to slavish following of ex colonial regimes by various invading powers, who discredited everything Indian and attempted to destroy cultures they invaded, by calling it mythology.

But here is a fact undeniable. The names India, Hindu, etc are all given by outsiders, because outsiders associated this land with the river Sindhu which was their only possible approach for centuries while seafaring was not easy. So India was defined as the land beginning with and beyond thus river valley, up to Brahmaputra valley, bound by Himaalayan ranges at North and oceans South.

India on the other hand has Sindhu river only as an outer boundary, while soul if India is deeply attached to the Himaalayan ranges and the two major rivers worshipped more amongst the seven worshipped.

Indian knowledge of ancient era includes rising of Himaalayan ranges out of ocean, now discovered by science, and Gangaa being brought down, ocean North of Vindhya finishing (which must have been the land meeting Asia and watching Himaalayan ranges rise out of the said ocean), and so on. That is all deeply ancient. There is no memory, not a single story, about crossing Sindhu river and coming East.

No, Aarya and any other Indians were and are native to the land. Any ancient migration during last two millennia was via sea by Roman, Arab and Africans who all arrived at various southern places - there are archeological finds on Tamil coastline - and settled, integrating into the fabric of India. Hence the obvious racial diversity of tamilians more than other southern populations of India, not separate but like streams of rivers that meet and merge.

As for the stupid and false idea that North is fair and South dark, we have plenty of relatives to the contrary in both, but even the general populations are only marginally fairer in North if at all, and that is a consequence of cold winters vs uniform heat of South. Don't believe it, see thise that migrate to U.S.northeast from India - most are secpveral shades fairer post a couple of winters. 

A month in coastal Tamil regions is quite enough to coat the skin on the other hand with a deep tan. Just make sure you are on the bus stop in the morning.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7tA1m8fTJrA
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................

About 432
...........................................................


The part about mathematics 1:00 - 1:51 is incoherent enough to be incorrect, wrong, nonsensical.

Twelve isn't mystical, it's convenient 1:51 - 2:14 in that it has several convenient factors, as does obviously its double 24. That a solar year is close to twelve lunar months reinforces the convenience. 

No, it's U.S. that sticks to miles 2:28 while most of the rest of the world has changed to metric system. Degrees, yes, it's still convenient to use 360. That in no way promotes miles, pounds or yards, which incidentally were never universal - other cultures had other units and systems.

The bit about "world's first written kanguage" 2:56 is just as likely incorrect as the most prevalent theory about human civilisation either originating in Mesopotamia or being only 6,000 years old, with archaeological evidences around the world ignored so far in favour of this theory being no longer possibke to continue ignoring.

Counting knuckles and multiplying by fingers 3:23 is merely clever for trading and other uses for counting in a primitive state of civilisation or even now when more convenient, it's hardly necessary for Gods to have descended to teach this!

Maybe 432 is more universally pleasant 5:38 than other options?

Whether it's a robotic voiceover 7:59 or someone reading the script but not quite well versed with everything mentioned, something is as out of sync as, say, a robot patting a child to sleep. For example what could possibly make sense about numbers from 180 to 540 being "in the same numerical neighbourhood as 432"? That they are all between 180 and 540? No surprise there! And why is a hexagon, the one easier to draw than a pentagon, not relevant for this guy? Too easy? Different neighbourhood?

Interesting parts come after 7:45 when he mentions Mayan concept of a great year, taking precession of equinoxes into account, which is 25,920 = 12×2160 years, interesting number in that 2160 is sum of all angkes on a cube as he just pointed out. Are there other connections, say, to sums of angkes on other convex shapes?

Huge mistake 14:00 - 14:13 - "in India, large cycles of time are calked kaliyuga" wrong, Kaliyuga is a particular, current Yuga; and a good approximate word for Yuga is epoch, so Kaliyuga is one, specific, current one, of the different "Yuga"s.





https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WJhKXq2GoUY
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................

Ancient Egyptians Are Descendents Of Atlantis
...........................................................

Mostly has been talked about by Graham Hancock.

Eerie 3:49.

"A star fell" 9:45 - 9:57 sounds very like the theories of Graham Hancock re the cataclysmic events. 

"Sound eye" sounds like a huge meteor burning through atmosphere with a huge sound impact after hissing during fall. 


Responding to a comment below the original YT video by REAL TRUTH:-

"Who would want to -- Only savages could live in a desert..."

Obviously seem unfamiliar with long history of deserts elsewhere from Spain and Morocco to Rajasthan,  palaces inhabited there and more, but how about Arizona and Texas, California and Nevada, or are those not defined as deserts due to some papal grant of exception?

Fact is, it's only post industrial revolution, and much more so post central heating and other technologies,  that cold and dark latitudes were more humanly civilised, while earlier civilisations could only develop in warmer latitudes around the equator. Else Siberia, Alaska and Antarctica would have been flourishing far more through all of history than most other parts of the world, what with no shortage of water to begin with.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb0OLCbiF2k
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................

Raama Setu Reaffirmed By Satellite And Scientists
...........................................................

Atrocious pronunciations of Indian names, but what is new about that!

"We are told" that no civilisation existed before 5,000 years 0:00 - 1:04 - because historians and archeologists find it convenidnt to go along with scriptures of colonial regimes and ignore every other culture. Even with evidence hitting them over and over with contradictions that challenge this assumption.

"This bridge predates all civilisations known today" 1:04 - 1:40 works well with Indian records, since Raama is chiefly credited with civilisation of the land and protection if the civilisation. What's more the era was held as very ancient, dawn of humanity, and the dates match - 1.7 million years old 4:44 is close. As to NASA distancing itself from interpretation, wasnt it another YT video where, looking at this via satellite and more, some western scientists committed to the "interpretation", or more factually, came to an independent conclusion, that this was not a natural but was definitely a man made structure? Apart from Graham Hancock that is, who dived circa 2002 and came to precisely that conclusion himself. NASA officially distancing itself is probably the good old aligning with the religious institutions that are aligned with invading conquistadores colonial regimes powers of yore, although the said ex colonial regimes no longer hold the colonies.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UPxKBIXtnsY
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


Mohenjodaro Is Moyanjodado, Literally Mound Of Dead
...........................................................

What they term "Indus civilisation" is what was locally known in local languages as mounds of the dead, which is literally what "Mohenjodaro", the Brit deformation of "moyan-jo-dado", is, and so is Lothal  and so on; but these are all in the Indus valley area, because that is where archaeologists found it convenient to dig up, while rest of India is neither so much desert nor so much unoccupied - for instance Kaashi is at least as old as Jerusalem or older, but is continuously living city, and one can hardly throw out millions of living residents just to play digging to see if there is something! So too Delhi, and other old names of ancient India. And another point is about the desert being due to a whole river going underground, and hence displacing the civilisation surrounding it to East and West.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kwYxHPXIaao
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


Burning The Library Of Alexandria
...........................................................


Worst crime indeed. Agony, watching Agora, especially the priests ordering murder of Hypatia after she realised the elliptic orbits and heliocentric model. Ransacking of the library, complete horror. Shows how far anti knowledge the church was, how insistent on denying it to humanity. Conversionist institutions do this so as to force the conquered populace into subjugation, as evident in much of history - libraries of Persia, and several universities along with their libraries in India, were destroyed completely by the Islamic invaders - and as depicted in Agora, even though the conquering force in Alexandria wasn't at that point in time military but a conversionist new religion. 

The anchor is most likely incorrect about the destruction of the library being due to Julius Caesar, not only because the scenario as depicted in Agora makes far more sense, but because someone western would be unwilling to blame the church as an institution, even post the events depicted in Spotlight having been witnessed since early this millennium by the world, and not over yet - he's unwilling to see that church as an institution is far more likely to go for destruction of minds and spirit, knowledge and freedom, than a mere conqueror who will need the best of subjects to work for him. So the anchor ignores the evidence of history if the church - inquisition,  treatment meted to Galileo and Jean d'Arc, and finds Julius Caesar a convenient target to blame.  

Couple of comments worth quoting in the context:- 

crazy cat lady:- 

"what you said at the end reminds me of bombing of National library in Serbia in 1941. by Nazis. Around 300k books were lost, around 1000 of those were original documents from from middle ages like musical pieces, royal notes, small paintings, other artistic works and letters and when asked why to bomb library first (it was Easter and with that act we entered WWII) some German general said: because their for centuries built national identity lies there"


Goutham B:-

"Did anyone know the oldest University was destroyed by Muslim invaders? Not 300k or 500k but 90 millions books containing much of science, literature, predated history and many more." 



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gYpU1e3m9G0
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................

Xanadu, Mohenjodaro, Gold Spirals, .... 
...........................................................


This penny 0:00 - 2:32 surely couldn't have been the first evidence of Norse presence in US history of the continent, the Vikings tower in Waltham close to Brandeis university must have been known! 

Gold spirals that are 3:00 - 3:24 thin filaments, not too long, - and weigh one and a half pounds? Something not quite measuring up.

Why does the narrator keep pronouncing j as g 7:00 - 7:30 in the name Mohenjodaro, is it extra racism? That he keeps saying it was discovered in pak well over a century ago, despite pak being much younger than that, just so he avoids mentioning it was in fact India, is obviously anti India racism.

The "aryan" invasion theory 8:00 - 8:12 was based on convenience of invading colonial regimes suffered by India for well over a millennium, of which Brits were among the last to leave, but it is based also in ignorance due to racism. Aarya is a Sanskrit word and has nothing to do with race or colours of any physical parts, it has to do with civilisation and enlightenment more than anything else, but of course Brits had to distort everything so far that Germans elected Nazism and holocaust! And no, the indigenous Indians were not invaders, there was no Aryan invasion, and the theory has been disproved and discredited, but it's root the Macaulay policy of discrediting India and her culture, knowledge and history has migrated to U.S.!

Xanadu 9:00 - 9:45 ?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HsQR1lkBzeg
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................


New Graham Hancock -
The Evidence Mainstream Archeology
Does Not Want You To See
...........................................................

The assumption about human presence on the continent or on Earth being only a few thousand years old 0:00 - 10:15 is inexplicable at best, and based on a deep subconscious need in west of so called rational scientists to nevertheless cling to biblical church approved time zones, until they find archaeological evidence to the contrary - and then they go just that far! At worst, it's racism, since history and knowledge from other cultures, especially those subjugated by colonial regimes and invader conquistadores, is either ignored completely or demonized and disdained, when not completely destroyed by the said invading conquistadores and colonial regimes. What's worse, all these factors are simultaneously operative in most!   

A picture flashes at 18:13 in the video, and the screen goes back to the previous one, and this short view is too difficult to read even after retracing and pausing.

Stupendous 21:44! 

The giant flood due to glaciers melt and huge boulders carried by icebergs 25:00 - 25:07 - could that be why one sees astounding rock formations on hilltop across South India, seemingly precariously balanced but quite stable despite appearances?

"NASA tells us such events only occur once in a hundred million years" 28:00 - 30:03, -  "how nice if the universe were so Germanic that we could set our clocks ..."! "They (the scientists who are uncomfortable with NASA's comforting position)  point out that there is no ancient culture which regards the appearance of a comet as good news" 30:57; indeed, very worth notice, this factor!

Exquisite pictures of Shoemaker-Levy, of its fragmenting and glowing as they crashed into Jupiter 30:57 - 33:01, and "every one of the impacts was larger than earth - and this is the moment we take to say, Thank you, Jupiter!"!!

Quite a coincidence, if that's what it is, Plato giving the exact date 56:00 - 58:30, as 11,600 years ago today, as loss of an advanced civilisation, that coincides with the global warming and extinction of major species due to comet or meteor hit, as this theory goes. Also worth note, the Edfu building texts 58:30 - 59:56, that preserve the heritage tale the builders of latest standing version of temple in Egypt received from treasures of the earlier ones.

What Graham Hancock is describing 1:05:00 - 1:05:46 is typical of deliberate destruction of every sign of every other civilisation, by Islamic fundamentalism when in control. Here at Goebekli Tepe, the method isnt destruction with or without building over, but filling the megalithic architecture with sand. Are they repeating that? Google maps look very different from the photographs Graham Hancock shows 1:06:45.

Impressive 1:06:00 - 1:15:00.

Re the precession, Graham Hancock says that 2,000 years ago the sun rose in Pisces at dawn on spring equinox 1:15:00 - 1:16:35, and having gone precessing one degree every 72 years, is now close to rising on spring equinox dawn in Aquarius, in just about a century; does that mean spring equinox day has preceded to a month prior, unlike being on 20th March as it has been, or does it mean that from point of view of Earth Sun will be in Aquarius instead of Pisces on 20th of March? 

"Greeks didn't discover precession, it was known in antiquity to other civilisations" 1:16:35 - 1:17:16 - amongst other things.

Correction 1:18:41, It's Vaasukie nor "bazukee", and Mandaara not "man dera".

Impressive argument 1:19:00 - 1:24:59 re sphinx orientation and indication that it's 12, 800 years old.

Convincing 1:48:21, and even obvious to those who do not assume superiority of European civilisation and thereby base every argument on that assumption. 



Post, worth quoting, below the original YT video, by 
TS88:-

"Think about the 3:4:5 triangle worshipped by the Ancient Egyptians, it involves the first four prime quadruplets 9,15,105,195. Multiply 9x15x105x195 = 2764125 Now when we split it up we see 27, 64, and 125, now total :
27+64+125 = 216 (216 is plato's number)

All the crazy 6996 combos and 969 numbers in events is no accident, Mayan time began in 3114 bc and 3114 squared or "Time Square" is 3114 x 3114 = 9696996

Why is it that War is always fought by people of at least 18 years? Because 18 years is 216 months. 8/4 is the 216th day of the year and also the date Obama was born and the day George Washington became a Master Mason. 216 represents completion on earth as does 84 is the 7th tetrahedral number. The number 6996 acts as a kind of exchange or conductor atomically speaking.The sum of divisors for 6996 is 18,144 and when we look at 8/4 being the 216th day, just keep in mind that 84x216=18,144 matching the exchange for 6996. In English gematria: BARACK = 216 and he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii which is 21.6 degrees North latitude. The U.S. budget of 2012 signed by Obama was a 216 page document. He passed Obamacare legislation with 216 votes and also canceled 216 minority education scholarships.

Obama the 44th president and the 44th tetrahedral number is 15,180 and dividing 15,180 / 44 = 345 :/
345+543 = 888
3x3x3+4x4x4+5x5x5 = 216
Obama born on 8/4 the 216th day

The SIN of 216 is .696 and the tangent is .969. What I'm really trying to say is that the number 216 is not just a number, ITS A MECHANISM!!!!!! We are 216 without a doubt and our 696 SIN is being guided by 216's tangent of .969 which is Saturn, Saturn EL the bull god. Why are we, the world of humanity, the number 216? Because the human entity is composed of 6 protons, 6 neutrons, and 6 electrons and 6x6x6=216 formulating the biological machine we call a ourselves.
696/216 = 3.22

GOD mentioned 3090 times in the Old Testament and 1354 times in the New Testament of the KJV so that's 3090+1354 = 4444 and the book of Revelations has 404 verses and 22 chapters 404x22 = 8888
CHRIST is mentioned 555 times in the NEW TESTAMENT!!! Prime factorization of 555 is 3*5*37 so 3537+3×5×37 = 4092+2904 = 6996
Replacing the prime factors 3*5*37 with their prime values its the 2nd, 3rd, and 12th prime numbers so --> 2312+2132 = 4444
Washington monument 555 feet and Iraq War began 555 days after 9/11.
SIN = sine = TIME so it's no wonder SIN is mentioned 336 times in the O.T. because 336+633 = 969 for the 9.69km/sec orbital speed of father time AKA Saturn and SIN is mentioned 112 times in the New Testament as payment!!!!
336/112=3 NINE INCH NAILS.

Stumbled into a guy claiming to have revealed the 3,6,9 but he didnt get past the mysterious 9 and see the significance of the next number 12, the circle (time/clock), and the 3:4:5 triangle. So he didn't like me too much for showing my view. The sequence is 1,3,6,9,12. Where 12 is then reduced 12 = 1+2 = 3. You can go around a clock and see that 0 hour-3am-6am-9am-12pm (1+2 = 3) - 3pm or 15:00 (1+5 = 6) - 6pm or 18:00 (1+8 = 9) - 9pm or 21:00 (2+1 = 3) and it just goes on and on.
The 3:4:5 is relevant 3+4+5 = 12
12×3 = 36.....12×4 = 48.....12×5 = 60
36+48+60 = 144 The 12th Fibonacci number the 3:4:5 then is connected to the secret 369 thru it's cube:
3×3×3+4×4×4+5×5×5 = 216
Now looking at the secret 12 and 3,6,9 like we did the 3:4:5 we see:
12x3=36....12×6 = 72.....12×9 = 108
36+72+108 = 216
Now I've shown you a little more reason why I am so attached to the number 345 other than the sum of its mirror: 345+543 = 888.
Let me scout my older posts for additional info.

my view is time and the number 12 for the clock, months, zodiac, disciples, tribes of Israel, Imams etc.
12-> 1+2=3+1+2=6+1+2=9...369
12×3=36......12×6=72......12×9=108
36+72+108= 216 (moon 2160mi)
3:4:5 triangle ....3+4+5=12
3×3×3+4×4×4+5×5×5=6×6×6=216
345+543=888+888=1776
12×3=36....12×4=48....12×5=60
36+48+60=144 the 12th!!!!! Fibonacci number"


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OZhSun9_SYs
......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................

Shahjahan Historic

Great love, thirteen kids weren't enough, she had to die in 14th childbirth and her daughter had to suffer consequences of the parents requiring her to be the foster mom! The details given here aren't a secret, they are even in books published by reputed authors, and travellers who were contemporary  eyewitnesses, but still, what's publicised is only his "building" a tomb, while sweeping under the rug all the disgusting horrors! 

Worth quoting post by Chetankumar Sable
"भंगी" शब्द कैसे चलन मे आया, कृपया सभी मित्र अवश्य पढे.. जिससे पूरी जानकारी सभी को मिले। मुस्लिम हमलावरो की केवल पुरुष सेना ही भारत मे आई। भयंकर लूटपाट और मारकाट के बाद हिन्दू महिलाओ को जबरन उठा कर उनको मुसलमानो के हरम मे रखा।

हरम:  इस्लाम मे विवाहित बीवी की बजाय रखैलो के रहने की जगह को कहा गया है जहाँ मुसलमान अपनी कामपिपासा शांत करने के लिये रखैलो का यौन शोषण करते है।
छोटे से छोटे स्तर के मुसलमान सिपाही के हरम मे भी 100-100 हिन्दू औरतो को जबरन रखैलो के रूप मे यौन पिपासा के वशीभूत होकर मुसलमानो ने कैद करके रखा।

महिलाओ मे पर्दा प्रथा भी उसी समय से भारत मे शुरू हुई। इस्लाम मे औरतो के बाहर आने जाने पर पाबन्दी थी। मल मूत्र का त्याग हर जीव की स्वभाविक प्रक्रिया है। जिसके परिणाम स्वरूप उन हिन्दू रखैलो के मल मूत्र से मुसलमानो के हरमो मे गंदगी के ढेर लग गए।
मुगल मुस्लिम शासक प्रताडित कर, काट -मारकर हिन्दुओ को मुसलमान बना रहे थे, परन्तु तब भी बहुत से कट्टर हिन्दू अपना धर्म छोडने को तैयार नही थे.. भारत मे उस समय तक राजा सहित सभी लोग शौच (Toilet)
खुले मे जाते थे, इस तरह मैला ढोने की कोई प्रथा नही थी.. तब मुस्लिम शासको ने कहा या तो इस्लाम अपनाओ या फिर मैला (मल) हमारे घरो से उठाकर जंगल मे फेंक कर आओ.. तब बहुत लोगो ने मैला उठाना तो स्वीकार कर लिया पर हिन्दू धर्म नही छोडा, मैला उठाने से इनका धर्म "भंग" हुआ, इस तरह ये "भंगी" कहलाये..

भंगी बस्तिया कैसे बनी--जहाँ सुअर (pigs) होते है उस स्थान के आस-पास भी मुसलमान नही जाते थे, तो इन्होने अपनी रक्षा के लिए, मुसलमानो को दूर रखने के लिए सुअरो (pigs) को पाला.. सुअर गन्दगी मे रहते है तो वहाँ गन्दगी रहने लगी, जिससे बाकी "हिन्दू समाज" परेशान नही हो इसलिए इन्होने गांवो के बाहर रहना शुरू कर दिया.. इस तरह "भंगी" बस्तियाँ बनी और धीरे धीरे ये अछूत बन गए..

ये वे साहसी लोग थे जिन्होंने मुसलमानो के अत्याचारों का डटकर सामना किया पर हिन्दू धर्म नही छोडा। नमन है ऐसे वीर हिन्दुओ को..
यही तरीका तो उन कट्टर हिन्दूओ ने अपनाया था मुगलो से अपनी बहू बेटीयो को बचाने के लिये, वे आज भंगी कहलाते हैं!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4GboRq5ItAY 

Magnetic Fields, Star Portals, Gothic Cathedrals On Ancient Temple Sites

X points at confluence of magnetic fields as star portals!

"Remember the Sumerian accounts were of these jealous God's that used to fight" 8:30  - 9:05, as he speaks of the star portals in Iraq and the archeological sites with stone carvings depicting possibly aliens. Yes, that makes sense, speaking of the "gods" of that region - and demand sacrifices and exclusive loyalty sworn, denying all others? That would explain the insistence of abrahmic faiths on monotheism, conversion and propaganda to the effect that all others not of their own branch must automatically go to hell, no matter how good they are!

About Bermuda triangle, not all ships and planes disappear forever 12:00 - 12:20, some do arrive after strange experiences that could not possibly be explained awày, such as too short a gap between beginning and end of the journey.

Where is this 21:15 - 21:18?

"Gothic cathedrals are built on top of ancient pagan sites" 24:45 - 25:00 of course, colonising tactics of wiping out older cultures and appropriating all that belongs to them!



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m-Bvw_M1Ob8

Royals Reception India

Sachin and wife 9:06, Shankar Mahadevan 9:50, Arjun and Anil Kapoor 14:06, Madhuri Dixit and Dr Sriram Nene 14:43, kjo w srk next, Jacqueline Fernandes 16:50, Rishi Kapoor and Neetu 17:48,  Aishwarya Rai Bachchan 18:16, William and Kate Middleton 19:54, Sonam Kapoor in lovely head ornament 25:10, ....

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oKKPrDUiLBw 

Northeast Indians

Funny, the narrator speaks of variety of tribes in Northeast India 3:13 while he shows a crowd of as much variety of people across India as possible, including the most obvious, Sikhs, who are chiefly from Punjab albeit spread everywhere. There goes the different races thought! 

Northeast Indians are not "viewed as foreigners" 3:00 - 3:34, any more than southern or northern ones, but looks alone aren't enough to define nationality, and differences of culture are quite extreme in distant corners - a deep southerner is as diverse from a typical Punjabi, especially if neither is urban, and the same is true of northeast vs Punjab or Kerala or even central parts.

We recall a time when we saw a very strikingly beautiful woman with her husband and son in South India, and while the two males looked Indian enough, she had the most brilliantly beautiful green eyes, colour of fresh grass in spring, with very oriental shapes of features, and we thought she could be from Ladakh.  Turned out she was from Kazakhstan, the husband from U.S. and while we didn't question his race it became obvious he was of European ancestry. They were then living, and working, in that region of India. The son went to school there, and they counted all three countries as their own.

Often when differences of behaviour are beyond reconciliable and there are tensions, it's convenient for those attempting to disturb India as general racism or worse, but exactly the same tensions can and just as often do exist within not only people of the same regions, they do in families, between blood relatives too. Strangers taking advantage of this is no different whether it's a family or a nation. 

Narrator mentions Nepal, 3:30 - 3:50 but people of Nepal or Bhutan or Sri Lanka or so on aren't visibly or otherwise so strange or different from the adjoining parts of India, culturally or otherwise. Political boundaries count for legalities, but not for relationships of people. Nepal strictly speaking isn't foreign to heart of India and for that matter the Tibetan refugees considering India a home or not is entirely their own choice, they arent given any tsuris!  Nor were Jews, ever, in any part of India. Or Parsis.

Really this video seems to be made by an agency with an agenda of poking to see if they can make troubke in India. Isn't Alabama police paralyzing old fathers of U.S. residents, or Mississippi police shooting local youth for perfectly normal behaviour such as shopping, enough to concern this narrator? Racism is rampant when young brilliant sons of India are shot dead in U.S. by locals for no reason at all. Stop making trouble for India and see what werewolfish interests that troublemaking serves.

India isn't a race, it's a culture, and as for looking different, there are as many similar people as extremely dissimilar given any two locations, however close or far. There is huge southern chip on shoulder about colour, but anyone with unbiased eyes can find dark northerners and fair, even light eyed and light haired southerners - or westerners or southwesterners - and the northeast merely is adjoining a border, but so is any other border region or coastal region. Stop feeding the separation feeling and let India love diversity of every kind allowed to grow through millennia!

Responding to a comment below the original YT video by Atolimi267 Kiba:-


"I am from north east NAGALAND and i dont think it's just the north east people look different but people from different part of India has different looks and different identy . PROUD TO BE AN INDIAN , PROUD TO BE A NAGA ."

Atolimi267 Kiba - very well said, and what's more, looks are quite often typecast incorrectly too, especially due to Brits trying to break up India after 1857.

Responding to a comment below the original YT video by Serchhip Chelsea:-

"Wow! These people looks like us. I'm from Osaka, Japan."

Yes, Japan to central Asia to southeast Asia there are similarities, not everyone identical but lot. Just as Europe to central Asia to southernmost tip of India there are light eyes and hair and fair skin, too, with more or less occurrence, and similarly other colours throughout India including separated parts. Diversity in India is a rich heritage.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KhMVjEVD6aI 

Tiffany's, Hope, Romanov'Jewels, Most Expensive Diamonds, ..... And British Jewls, From India And Elsewhere

The tale of Tiffany's
................................................................................................

Met has lovely Tiffany stuff, but some collections at Tiffany's 2:17 are worth a visit to look, especially the Tiffany diamond 3:54 - 4:12.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_KO4naCaevM&t=327s
................................................................................................
................................................................................................


15 Things You Didn't Know About TIFFANY & CO.
................................................................................................

Good to know.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S09sYBVo2Es
................................................................................................
................................................................................................


Inside Tiffany's Secret Room for Top Spenders
................................................................................................

Lovely

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RKZCgAJAkU4
................................................................................................
................................................................................................


Hope
................................................................................................

The thumbnail and the view in first few seconds 0:21 - 0:26 is as attractive as it ought to be, the diamond itself is beautiful and more. The picture at 0:48 however is the usual racism cloaked in incorrect portrayals of cultures other than of West, since the legend associated with the Hope diamond is that of this gem having been stolen from India where it was the third eye of God Shiva - and this picture is definitely not of Shiva in the form depicted here; at the very least, it's photoshopping used to confuse the ignorant by mixing up a genuine statue of Shiva with the image of a demon.

And if the gem indeed was stolen from a temple from image of a God, it's not the stone that's cursed, quite the opposite, it's the thieves and those that continue profiting from the theft.

Here 31:40 one gets an idea of the size of the gem, but uncannily enough and quite inadvergently, it's placed on a human forehead close to where it was supposed to be located on the image of the Deity originally. Wonder what happened to this woman. 

Rare sight 43:00 of a star shining green.



Responding to a comment below the original YT video by Fred blah blah:-

"Judy W:  Not 'foolish people', but FOOLISH WOMEN!
Men don't feel the slightest attraction for this sort of rubbish,
it is females (and i suppose gays as well) who are attracted
to objects that shine.
How often are Prince William or Prince Harry seen donning
diamonds or rubies? Probably never.
The only value jewels have is in the potential to exchange them
for hard cash or other assets.
And you, by the way, sound like the prototypical case of sour
grapes. If you were sincere, you would but acknowledge that
you'd do just about anything to lay your hands on a piece such
as the above, if you thought the odds were in your favour.
One can tell because you rant out of pure resentment and envy."

Have you seen the video? Notice the human speaking 43:30 - 43:45, in a suit and tie? Seems like a male to most viewers. And fascinated by the gem and admits it too. Perhaps that makes him gay to you, probably, but being fascinated by beautiful objects is not quite how homosexuality is defined, that's just perverted system in U.S. established in interests of corporate structure so slavery of males bonded to one another and enslaved by corporate employment would be kept whipped in line, unattached to families and relationships, while women are equally forced to subjugate to a lifestyle of bonded labour so males can be fooled thinking they aren't in chains.



Responding to a comment below the original YT video by esrapk:-

"India lost that right when they lost the war and everything else along with respect and dignity."

This post sounds like an excellent defence for every murder, rape, paedophile act and theft, not to mention holocaust, genocides and other barbaric acts - "x person or community lost the right to (possession of their own, to everything from possessions to human dignity) when they lost (the war, the battle, the argument with the rapist or paedophile or murderer or ethnic cleansing slaver)! In one sentence, defence of all possible crimes by simply "victims deserved it" being dressed up in verbose fraud. Nazi much?


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tQEWkK03CQQ
................................................................................................
................................................................................................

Tiffany's
................................................................................................

Met has lovely Tiffany stuff, but some collections at Tiffany's 2:17 are worth a visit to look, especially the Tiffany diamond 3:54 - 4:12.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_KO4naCaevM
................................................................................................
................................................................................................



Burma Rubies
................................................................................................


Nice shots of Mandalay too, at beginning. Finally 24:51, rubies!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=89FxOWxjDvQ
...............................................................................................
................................................................................................


Romanov Jewels
................................................................................................


Magnificent. The jewels, the palaces, the grandeur of the events, throughout, beginning with the first five minutes and more. Beautiful watching, but requires comprehension of central Nordic Europe languages - quote:-

"Pinned by Scandinavian Royalty
Scandinavian Royalty
Hello, everyone, English subtitles CAN'T be provided, otherwise, I would have uploaded the video with them. As you know the programs are from Swedish/Danish/Norwegian TV and they don't come with subtitles. Please understand that. "

Still, there are English comments throughout, and most worth, splendour of spectacular Russian, palaces, jewels and events that had royals wearing them.  One is reminded of The Royal Mob, with various royals across Europe agreeing about how the splendour of Russian palaces and jewels and events made others of European Royals, especially those throughout Germany but even of England, look quite homely.

The people, though, are only there accidentally - by birth or marriage or both - and few capable of rising to match the splendour they are surrounded with. The video is a piece of history one gets to see and hear about, rather than merely seeing fabulous jewels.

Spectacular,  magnificent jewels 5:55 - 6:38, preceded by 0:00 - 5:54, and also followed by 6:39 - 7:09 and later throughout of course, footages of those days of the events featuring Russian royals in their splendour, in Russia and Paris and elsewhere.

Faberge creations 7:10 - 8:51, mindboggling, amazing, and visual treats too!

Wonder who the Indian woman is 16:48.

Pamela Mountbatten's daughter 4:15? No 20:06, it's Princess Olga Andreevna Romanoff.

Princess Olga Andreevna Romanoff speaks of Felix Yusupov and another relative deciding to murder Rasputin - wonder if anyone realises this might have been the last lynchpin protecting them from the events that followed.

Beautiful 26:29.

Wonder if British royals have this too 27:54, looks familiar.

Seeing the actual photographs of the murdered star and family 20:06 - 30:44 - 31:06 makes the tragedy come alive.

Is this one 36:32 from the Vladimir collection, or some other that Felix Yusoupov got out? Lovely, anyway.

So that's how the other relatives were rescued 38:26, just not the family of Nicholas and Alexandra.

The famous tiara 41:45!

Does 45:33 form part of an emerald parure as it then was?

La Peregrina 46:22!

This depicts a magnolia 47:41 that isn't of winter climates, but quite tropical - Kawathie Chaafaa!

Auction of Romanov jewels 48:20  - 50:17 - 50:28 - 50:45 - 54:30, by Soviets. Last few minutes - grand duchess Vladimir tiara!


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IxrTVyt5B8s
................................................................................................ 
................................................................................................  


The Most Expensive Diamonds In The World 
................................................................................................ 

Lovely. 

Responding to a comment below the original YT video by K Pabbaraju:-

"I disagree in one point. Britishers NEVER stole technology. They only stole precious gems and gold and all that expensive and rare stuff. Oh an they were also good at dividing the nation. I mean they divided India and Bangladesh. And India and Pakistan. Oh wait no... the division of Pakistan and India was not because of them... " 

You might try hearing Tarek Fateh expose on the last bit, the partition was definitely because of the UK and U.S. need of the "great game" of controlling India and much more specifically at that time, containing USSR; he mentions Churchill deciding on partition the day Soviet tanks rolled into Berlin, because jinnah was quite amenable about his piece being used as a military base for them against USSR, and generally India wasn't about to accept such terms. 

Responding to a comment below the original YT video by  Gideon 1951:- 

"Hop on your camel and ride off into the sunset moron.  Muslims destroyed the Great Library at Alexandria, invaded all those countries and examining the inventions, discoveries and innovations made by the People of these countries, then the Islamists claimed the as their own . Theives!!!  The British spread sanitation, education, and prosperity.   You lie sonny. Typical Muslim BS."


Gideon 51 - the great library of Alexandria was first ransacked centuries before islam, by the fanatic converts of the abrahmic religion that Rome garbled itself in - and this faith didn't stop the ransacking and massacres until past murder of Jean d'Arc, if then. No, holocaust was a direct fallout of two millennia of church false propaganda about who was responsible for execution of the king of Jews while Israel and Judea were occupied and ruled by Rome, with a derogatory name of "palestine" given to the region, by Rome. China has employed that tactic more recently, after Germany did it in years leading to WWII. Deny indigenous cultures and knowledge even as you borrow and steal while massaging the indigenous has been technique of conquistadores from Europe and of other invaders who then parade in the borrowed and stolen.  

Responding to a comment below the original YT video by Dejavuc Mail:- 

"@K Pabbaraju India was never a unified country like it is today, it was a geography term, in fact, it was the British who unified dozens of small nation states together. Also, India was not divided by the British, it was Indian ruling elites who want the partition, British tried to hard to stop it happened but they failed." 

If you believe that you are duped like the pakis are by their government lying to them, but lie it is, whether you are participating or not. As to partition specifically, you might try hearing Tarek Fateh expose on the last bit, the partition was definitely because of the UK and U.S. need of the "great game" of controlling India and much more specifically at that time, containing USSR; he mentions Churchill deciding on partition the day Soviet tanks rolled into Berlin, because jinnah was quite amenable about his piece being used as a military base for them against USSR, and generally India wasn't about to accept such terms. But generally British loot of india wasn't short of the preceding invaders, nor were the massacres lesser in comparison - try over a million starved to death due to theft of harvest by Brits, and ships from US with grain meant for India sent by FDR not allowed by Churchill to come past Australia, because he said Indians dying is of importance. And this was just in one span of less than couple of years, before the partition they completely intended had over ten millions killed even as the Brits ran away to safety in a hurry. Shameful Flight is the title of the book by someone from U.S..  

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RcZATf3Lmb0 
................................................................................................  
................................................................................................  

The World's Most Famous Gemstones 
................................................................................................  


Nice.

If it's from Baroda where it belonged to the Maharani's necklace 0:39, why is the great emerald called Chalk? Just any excuse to wipe out the name of India from any association to beautiful, great things?

The thumbnail is Timor ruby - perhaps he stole it on his world tour of massacre? Then again, it's possible it's the colour he painted the then kniwn world, most of it. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YgIY4e9muK4
................................................................................................  
................................................................................................  


The Uncrowned Jewels - 1987 BBC Documentary 
................................................................................................   


This buying and restoration of the Paris home of duke and duchess of Windsor  2:00-2:21, is this why Al Fayed has been denied British citizenship, even though he owns Harrods? 

Exquisite jewels, though. But their splendour does not have any harmony with the mostly party life that was led by those wearing them. Wish they had more appropriate, deserving owners. 

Interesting bit at the end 45:00 on, reminding one of the grizzly realities at the time of the auction, not that different from the years immediately surrounding the Windsors fame, only shifted to Asia much more. 




https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BdJaURVZ7uI 
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work | The Crown Jewels | PBS
................................................................................................ 

Wonder if this was part of the overdrive to correct the aftereffects of the shock felt around the world when the Princess of Wales was killed so very untimely.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TxaYtdp4U3Q 
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Jewels Formerly the Property of the Duke & Duchess of Windsor
................................................................................................

Sotheby's take on the auction.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VDvb8AWpJAE
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Buckingham Palace exclusive: the Queens jewellery show
................................................................................................ 

Quote from video title and blurb:-

"Buckingham Palace exclusive: the Queens jewellery show. The Jewellery Editor dropped by Buckingham Palace to take a look at the Cullinan diamonds on display for the Queens jewellery show at Buckingham Palace. Diamonds: A Jubilee Celebration, runs at Buckingham Palace from 30 June - 8 July & 31 July - 7 October 2012"

Millions starved to death in India when harvest was stolen by empire and aid ships filled with grain for India by FDR were not allowed to proceed further from Australia by Churchill! Monitor was taken from the young Prince orphaned after his father was killed by Brits, war loot not "gift" as falsely claimed in some comments below.

Blood Diamond(s), worth a look!


Responding to a comment below the original YT video by Smriti Pandey
"India se Chura li talwar .... and showing off their collection from theft/loot."


Patricia Bilinkas
Smriti Pandey Most were gifts to the Crown.


cokpeotfg4 fcdck
stupid butthurt low iq uneducated curry negro


"Gifts" from "subjects", like cotton "gift" from plantation workers until the end of civil war in U.S., except the plantation owners are not known to have starved a million to death like Brits did when harvest was stolen by empire and aid ships filled with grain for India by FDR were not allowed to proceed further from Australia by Churchill! Gifts? Just read the abusive comment before this one!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xNZ_DRahMSo
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Most Spectacular Queen Elizabeth's Jewels
................................................................................................ 


Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara 0:00 - 1:05, spoils of Russian revolution that had grisly fallouts - murders of cousins of britush royals who refrained themselves from saving the close relatives for fear of losing power themselves, and fleeing of the other targeted ones who were forced to sell what little they had. Tovarisch, anyone?

Fruit basket seems certainly appropriate for the occasion 1:15 - 1:26.

President of India at the time of this photograph 2:06, simplicity in achievement.

Hyderabad and Burma theft 2:31.

Amethyst set 8:33 looks, unexpectedly, much prettier than the previous, Brazilian aquamarine parure, but only when photographed separately - the photographs where it's worn makes it look dull, and not because the person wearing it is brighter.

"Queen Alexandra's Kokoshnik tiara", gift from her cousin the last tsar, Nicholas?




https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p00AHX6LajI
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................ 

Tiaras Owned And Worn By The British Royal Family 🇬🇧🔝
................................................................................................

 
Halo tiara looks best on the latest royal bride, so far 0:31. Lover's knot, on her lovely late mother in law, Diana the last Princess of Wales.

Queen Mary fringe suits QEII 0:49.

It's grand duchess Vladimir 0:56, not grand duchess of Vladimir! Funny this is so celebrated, considering the grand duchess Vladimir hated and looked down on the Czarina Alexandra who was a granddaughter of Queen Victoria and was married to Czar Nicholas II, the nephew of Queen Alexandra who - oh, we get it, queen mary didnt like her mother in law! Still, Alexandra was definitely family, all the more so since Mary was daughter of a first cousin of Queen Victoria! Oh, but Mary was engaged to the older brother, and George whom she eventually married, Queen Victoria had wanted him to marry her granddaughter Alexandra the princess of Hesse, only Alix as they called her preferred Nicholas II! So of course Mary made much of the romanov jewels she could buy cheaoer, but made much more of this Vladimir tiara! But the descendents like the grand duchess Vladimir tiara so very much, even though they are just as much related to Queen Victoria and the two Queens named Alexandra? Skewed loyalty there! 

Queen Alexandra's Kokoshnik tiara 1:06, would that be the Czarina Alexandra or the queen of England? Anyway, would have suited them, but does not QEII.

Who's the beauty on left 1:19 in the lotus flower tiara? It suits her. Same at 1:24, better on the left. And 1:31 as well. Seriously, stop pushing the one on right diwn people's subconscious by hiding her in glitz, like kids' bitter medicine mixed in honey! Shame! This isn't medicine.

Meander tiara too looks better on left 1:38, Anne? Not Sophie's fault, she might be better in an emerald tiara.

Needless to say the Spencer family tiara 1:45 is loveliest on Diana in her wedding attire!

The Poltimore tiara too looks good on left 1:52, presumably Queen Mary in her wedding dress, not so much on her granddaughter.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VVNgi3uIRJk
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................ 


How Royals Recycle Tiara 
As Kate And Camilla Both Wear 
Historic Tiaras To Glittering Palace Dinner 
................................................................................................   


Margaret looked so beautiful in the delicate, feminine halo tiara 3:53, complete surprise! Heart breaking choices she was forced to make, changed that young woman of this photograph into the typical royal later. No one else looks this good in this tiara. 

Most comments below are about no one else looks anywhere near as lovely as Diana, Princess of Wales, in the lovers' knot tiara, and yes, very very true.  

Looks 4:31 like a grandiose topping on a souffle that's subsided, although the word used for the shuffle is different, but didn't intend the doubke entendre. 

Truly regal, Queen Victoria in her tiny crown 5:48 that's just a token for the empire that grew and stabilised under her long rule. She dwarfs the crown, and yet one feels the regal persona overwhelmingly. 

Queen Alexandra 6:01 really was beautiful! One hardly notices her jewellery, her face focuses the attention. 

One of the comparatively nicer photographs of QEII 6:20. Gets better in 6:43 with the sapphire tiara matching the sapphire necklace, presumably part of a complete sapphire parure set.  

The pearl choker is too much for the delicate Princess Diana 7:14, but quite suitable on her elder daughter in law.  


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NrDUYPfaB9E
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Duchess Meghan Wanted This Tiara
For Royal Wedding
But The Queen Said No
................................................................................................


The photograph at 0:42 shows Queen Mary known popularly as Queen May, whik e the narrator speaks of Grand Duchess Marie of Mecklenburg-Schwerin wearing this tiara when she married Grand Duke Vladimir of Russia.

The original tiara 0:49 Is stunning. They keep showing this Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara, though, when they speak of another tiara, the Kokoshnik with emerald centrepiece, worn by Princess Eugenie. The two are quite different. The Kokoshnik tiara with emerald centrepiece is shown at 4:43, obviously as this seems to be one of the official family photographs post wedding of Princess Eugenie.

Beautiful, this bride 8:53, first one so beautiful after her mother in law at her own wedding in in 1981.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZnT_lOD_8M 
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Meghan Markle's Amazing
$1 Million Dollar
Royal Jewelry Collection
................................................................................................ 


Beautiful style, suits this new royal.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rZJ4DvgPNVk
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................  


The Fascinating History Behind 
The Priceless Tiara 
Princess Eugenie Wore On Her Wedding Day
................................................................................................  


States immediate expose about the tiara and goes for better part of three minutes into history of Yorkses, was tiara clickbait? 

Each of the three younger royal bride's was perfectly matched with her respective tiara. Kate the smiling lady, Megan the regal bride of fairy tales, and Eugenie's colour brought out by the emeralds of the tiara. 

Talking of wedding of Diana, Princess of Wales, and showing the wedding photograph of the Yorkses 2:56???!! 

 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-rFaUx5vc-I
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Top ROYAL TIARAS in The World
................................................................................................ 


Devonshire Palmette tiara 1:42, very Indian look.

Unexpectedly beautiful 6:32.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg-JUzll4ZA
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Russian Royal Jewels (Documentary)
................................................................................................ 

Beautiful watching, but requires comprehension of central Nordic Europe languages - quote:-

"Pinned by Scandinavian Royalty
Scandinavian Royalty
Hello, everyone, English subtitles CAN'T be provided, otherwise, I would have uploaded the video with them. As you know the programs are from Swedish/Danish/Norwegian TV and they don't come with subtitles. Please understand that. "

Still, there are English comments throughout, and most worth, splendour of spectacular Russian jewels and events that had royals wearing them.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IxrTVyt5B8s
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Scandinavian Royal Jewels (Documentary)
................................................................................................

Series of magnificent jewels, interesting histories, and a whole royal crowd intertwined by marriages across Europe.

English captions or subtitles for the narration aren't there, though, but the various queens speaking English makes it easier.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1fy980b5ZvM
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................


Harry Winston Luxury Jewelery Collection Summer 
................................................................................................   


Stunning from moment go! Stupendously beautiful. Lovely, exactly the stuff of dreams of young - and who wouldn't want to be young enough again to wear these and blossom from within! 

Funny, this is one video that puts up an "eh, ok" thumbnail, instead of one of the stunning pieces it shows from beginning through to end! Most others have clickbait thumbnails thst have little to do with content. 



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nm-UHgBDu4k
................................................................................................   
................................................................................................   


World Famous Gemstones 
................................................................................................    


Mostly from U.S.  National Museum of Natural History,  Washington D.C.. 

"Origin unknown, Mandalay ruby is one of the finest rubies in the world" 3:23 one would think origin would obviously be Mandalay,  wouldn't it! 

If it's from Baroda where it belonged to the Maharani's necklace 7:54, why is the great emerald called Chalk? Just any excuse to wipe out the name of India from any association to beautiful, great things?  

(Funnily enough, identical content, narration and voice on another yt video 


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=30W20VX9p8g)


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nsiYX8OkUNo
................................................................................................    
................................................................................................    


12 Rare and Most Expensive Gemstones In The World 
................................................................................................     


Well made video. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wzIMAJFHaiQ
................................................................................................    
................................................................................................    


BIGGEST And MOST EXPENSIVE Gemstones Ever Discovered!
................................................................................................     

Nice. 

This part 3:05 - 3:36 has exaggerations and other deviations from facts - while speaking of the engagement ring of Princess Diana, not once is the actual ring shown, one she got for engagement and wore; and one doesn't need "a cart" to carry around a single sapphire even if it is a thousand carats, which is about a hundred grams. 

Nice locale 4:06 for the Rajaratna ruby, 2475 carats, from Vijayanagar! But 4:17 is somewhere else, not the tremendous Vijayanagar that's still spectacular centuries after it was laid to waste by barbarian invaders. 

Also, temples at Hampi ruins of the Vijayanagar empire are not all "devoted to Shiva", there are many more. Monotheism is about power of a cult, nothing correct or right about it. 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yCt6RjmGCXY 
................................................................................................    
................................................................................................    


Top 10 World Record Breaking Gemstones of 2015
................................................................................................    

00:20  10. Allnatt diamond (worth 3 million dollars )
00:33  9. Moussaieff Red diamond (worth $ 7 million )
00:43  8. Heart of Eternity diamond (worth 16 million dollars )
00:55  7. Wittelsbach diamond (worth 16.4 million dollars)
01:07  6. Steinmetz Pink diamond (worth 25 million dollars)
01:19  5. De Beers Centenary Diamond (worth 100 million dollars )
01:31  4. Hope Diamond ( 350 million dollars )
01:42  3. Cullinan Diamond (worth 400 million dollars)
01:54  2. Sancy diamond ( Can not estimate its value , can be invaluable )
02:05  1. The diamond Koh -i - Noor ( Can not estimate the value of it, this is one of the crown jewels in the British royal) 



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2g1vWrxDWhM
................................................................................................    
................................................................................................     


Sotheby's Geneva Leads the Jewellery Market
................................................................................................ 

Lovely stuff, but video is too fast, it's an ad for Sotheby's after all!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FDLI2lHO5M0
................................................................................................    
................................................................................................