How can the royal family be of pure blood when their 100th ancestor would have been some local tribal?

Question

Just wondering how people can say they are of royal blood when their 100th or 150th or 70th ancestor or great grand parent can be a commoner or a beggar or what not.....

Why do people claim to be of pure blood when all blood is the same and one cannot claim such nonsense when it is a fact that we are all one single human race with roots dating back to anywhere in the world?

Just curious... state your facts and explain what it means to be of pure blood or royal blood...

Thank you.

Answer 1

as a Native American my view is that WE know who OUR ppl were and the many kewl deeds they did/or baad ones too.

europeans who are here claim indian heritage(cos we're kewll like that)even tho at one time it wasnt.  I totally agree about the science of your thoughts.....who knows IS right!  I am a full blood Hohe/dakotah but for all we know I have THAT one drop of ghangus kahnn however his name's spelled.

Answer 2

thats all BULL****

so whats the difference between human, cat and dog blood ?

its all red !

Have u checked yours ♥CutieFace♥

Cheers

Answer 3

In The UK this is an inexplicable phenomenon.

Even though folk on here from my country will tell you they dislike our Royalty in fact it is deep seated in all of us that we accept it.

We acknowledge that our present House of Windsor is of German descent but all of us to a man would if push came to shove defend our monarchy because that is what makes us all British.

It really is not to do with pure blood.

It is to attempt to understand The British Psyche.

Maybe this has helped- probably not but that is the way we are and always will be.

Answer 4

just as a yak can survive cold and a camel take the desert heat,similarly a nepali can or a person from ladakh would be best suited for mountain war fare compared to a man from the plains.its is seen characteretics of the father or grandfather r possesed by the son, hence the the family and cultures r still seen in high class society

Answer 5

well i agree with you first off, that we are all the same and everybody's blood is the same in essence. but to me i just look at the term pure blood as exactly that a term and nothing more. people like that just use c**p like that to make themselves feel better and more superior to everyone else. they may not act that way, but i think they think that cause they have money and the history it makes them feel better than everyone else even when to be that is a load of bullsh*t. so i guess you could just say they are people on a power trip is all.

Answer 6

There are many people who have royal 'blood' - descendants of a king's/queen's child who did not succeed to the phone.  Also, many royals had mistresses and had children with them.  Their descendants are all over the place.

Also, not all kings were descendants only of nobility.

These questions are of little concern to me, expect for my interest in history.

Answer 7

The royal family doesn't really give a c**p about its tribal beginnings. As a matter of fact, who does?

Answer 8

Pure Blood? We are all Muts!   ONE LOVE ONE PEOPLE

whose blood is pure

Answer 9

Pure blood is just interchangeable with royal.  Silly word, "pure" since there IS no sure thing on this planet.  No one can no (for sure) who anyone but their mother is, after all, and even that can be faked.

Most who use the designation royal are people in ordinary society that want to be known for 'something', anything.  Most royals don't announce it unless they are like Princess Margaret who never missed an opportunity to let people worship her, lol.  I love in "The Queen," when the Queen said to Tony Blair, "I'm not like my sister, I don't measure the depth of each curtsy (because Blairs' wife doesn't curtsy)."  Meaning that Princess Margaret always walked in, stayed standing until everyone else "rose" and then sat down so everyone else "could."  She was a real pain in the bu** according to most people.

Basically, it ALL GOES BACK TO "THE DIVINE RIGHT TO RULE."  Since its God who put their ancestor on the Throne, they must be special, yadda yadda yadda.  Big whoop.

Answer 10

It means you had a successful pirate/murdering thug for an ancestor and have continued to breed with other vicious types since then.

Answer 11

People claiming to be 'pure' or 'royal' blooded are, as you imply, just been pretentious or superious. (I said superious, not superior.) There are variations but, as you suggest, human blood is human blood is human blood.

The expression 'pure' blood is a misnomer too - 'royal' blood is not 'pure', it can in point of fact be said to be completely impure. Carriers or royal blood are often mentally retarded and suffer from haemophilia because these 'royals' have been inbreeding for centuries.

And the word 'royal' is misleading, It implies some kind of mental or physical superiority but as shown above nothing could be further from the truth.

As another poster has effectively pointed out, these 'royals' are just descended from thugs, villains, and warlords, who achieved positions of power by killing or stepping on others.

(postscript - BT, I am an indigenous Brit i.e. not of Anglo-Saxon descent)

Answer 12

The Royal Family is not of pure royal blood, it use to be many years ago when they were only marrying other royals but due to the family ties at that time, they were marrying blood relatives which cause many mental issues.

That is when they started bringing in non royal blood to cleanse the blood line.  Like Princess Dianna and Fergie.

If I recall correctly they bring in a commoner every third generation.

The reason they claim that it is of royal blood only, is they only count one side of the family.  If they count all the blood in the line it is not a true statement.