PDA

View Full Version : Did R1b L11 Germanic Italo Celts really spread red hair in western Europe



Fire Haired
19-09-13, 02:44
This shows all R1b in Europe. I am talking specifically about Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11. Which would show much more of a connection with distribution of red hair areas with 1% or more.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_R1b.gifhttp://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/red_hair_map_europe.jpg
I have been thinking this for a few months did the R1b1a2a1a Germanic Italo Celts who arrived in west Europe 5,000ybp spread red hair. I described how i think Germanic Italo Celtic spread acroos western Europe and when on my thread Germanic Italo Celts. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93100-Germanic-Italo-Celts) I didn't do it perfectly i did not explain the different cultures and stuff like that. Or go into detail about about the people. But i gave a basic idea of how and when they spread and in what cultures which FTDNA R1b page says the same(click here (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1b/default.aspx?section=results)). Some criticized me for being to romantic or Patriotic about them and saying their connected with red hair i was just trying to make it exciting and i am not being biased about this. I defintley don't think they are the original source of red hair. U can see in my thread Origin of red hair (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91491-Origin-and-ancient-History-of-red-hair). Red hair exists in Samartians who have no traces of European in globe13 test. Also red hair exists in Urlaic Udmurts in volga Russia at 10-15% as high or hogher than anywhere in western Europe. Also red hair was pretty popular in proto Indo iranian speakers in northern Russia (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?90089-Where-did-proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers-ancestry-orignate). Red hair exists throughout Europe but is extremely rare i think it originated in the mid east 60,000-80,000ybp but first went over 1% in Russia 12,000-20,000ybp.

If it is true red hair was brought over 1% in west Europe by Germanic Italo Celts this would mean a huge portion of western Europeans ancestry is from proto Germanic Italo Celtic speakers. Heavily red haired people like in the British isles might mainly descend from Germanic Italo Celts not native western Europeans. The dissertation of red hair maps that show only areas with 1% or more almost perfectly matches the map of R1b in Europe but really comes from subclade R1b1a2a1a L11. It seriously borders the R1b1a2a1a L11 Germanic Italo Celtic world and the rest of Europe. There is 1-3% in areas of Poland which had alot of Gothic and Vandal settlement and Germanic R1b1a2a1a1 S21. also southern Croatia which had alot of Italo Celtic Urnfield settlement and a pretty good amount of Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a2 S116.

I am for sure that red hair was brought up over 1% n Scandinavia by the spread of Germanic speakers who migrated out of central Europe and arrived in southern southern Scandinavia 4,000ybp and started Nordic bronze age culture. Here is how i know the connection with the distribution of pre Celtic pre Germanic I2a2 in Scandinavia which matches the distributions of Germanic R1b1a2a1a1 s21 and red hair at 1% or more.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1b-S21.gifhttp://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/red_hair_map_europe.jpghttp://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

To me it is pretty obvious Germanic speakers spread red hair to Scandinavia or at least raised it to 1% or more. Why couldn't Italo Celts done the same in western Europe. The Gedorsian in K12b test shows total connection with R1b in Europe which is almost all under R1b1a2a L23. The British isles in western Europe has the highest they also have the highest R1b1a2a1a L11 and red hair so maybe most ancestry from proto Germanic Italo Celts i made that argument in this thread(British almost all ancestry from Celtic and Germanic invaders (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92232-British-ancestry-almost-all-from-Celtic-and-Germanic-Conqueres)). Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11 grandfather R1b1a2a L23 would have come out of the north mid east or at least its great great grandfather or whatever at some point 6,000-10,00ybp it arrived in southeast Europe or southern Russia. So the high amount of red hair would be from the maternal side and Europeans in one of those areas they inter married with i wonder if somehow deep mtDNa subclades cane trace it.

Since red hair is so much under the borders of heavily R1b1a2a1a L1 and Germanic Italo Celtic speaking areas it is obvious to me there is no way this is from the Neolithic western Europeans. The borders and everything is just to much evidence for me i cant really think of any other explanations than Germanic Italo Celts. Click he (http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2013/04/hundreds-of-prehistoric-scandinavian.html)re this project excepts to get pigmentation genes from Bronze age Corded ware people in central and northern Europe from about 3,000bc(5,000ybp). I except no red hair all brown and blonde like people in Poland and most in Baltic area today. But if they get Pigmentation from Bell beaker people or another people in central Europe from 5,000ybp like the R1b samples from Bell Beaker. I except at least some red hair it might prove this idea. I except that if they test for it they might find from 100 Y DNA samples a almost only R1b1a2a1a L11 people with over 10 having red hair maybe 20. and the surrounding non R1b1a2a1a L11 people will have all Brown and blonde which would be huge evidence for this i guess theory. The proto Germanic Italo Celtic speakers i think had around 20% red hair.

Tone
19-09-13, 07:51
The simplest explanation is that red hair has been in Europe for a very, very long time. It is found at high frequencies on the Western and Eastern fringes of the continent because it could have been pushed out there by wave after wave of invaders. L11 could have "married" into it when it invaded Western Europe relatively recently, historically speaking. This would explain why the Udmurts, the red relics on the other side of the continent, can have red hair and virtually no substantial R1b. Plus, Western Europe, and particularly the North Atlantic fringe, was the last area to be settled by Neolithic agriculture. In fact the area held out until almost the dawn of the historical era. Until recently the North Atlantic was inhabited by a wild, untamed, hunter-gatherer folk who's roots stretched back beyond the ice age. I wonder what they looked like? Red hair? Maybe.

Your theory could be right, but it requires massaging and maneuvering, for example, middle-eastern R1b folk moving to the steppe, picking up red hair, and then moving into Western Europe, but leaving no trail of red hair. Indigenous red hair is a much simpler theory. Occam's Razor.

Fire Haired
19-09-13, 23:20
No i dont think red hair is at oppiste sides of euroe because the rest was pushed out. have to show real Evdience with genetics and archaeology not just assumptions. How do u explain that red hair matches the borders of areas with heavy amount of R1b L11 it is just to perfectly matches. Look at the evidence there is almost no doubt in my mind Germanic Italo Celts spread it. I know red hair is very old did u click on any of my links like Origin of red hair. Since it exists in Samartians who have no traces of European in globe13 test have some red hair it must go back to early Caucasians in the mid east 60,000-80,000ybp. Red hair exists throughout all of Europe at extremely low amounts the maps i show only count areas with 1% or more those are not the only areas red hair exists.

I don't think all R1b is connected with red hair i made it clear i am only talking about Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11. the Idea red hair was already in western Europe cant explain my evidence. There is no doubt Germans spread it to Scandinavia why couldn't Italo Celts done the same in western Europe and it seems they did. What we need is DNA samples of early early proto Germanic Italo Celts. and we know were they were central Germany 5,000ybp. The 4,600ybp R1b from Bell beaker are early Germanic Italo Celts. So if we can get pigmentation genes they are already doing that with 5,000 year old remains from proto Balto Slavic Corded ware culture. If we can compare them maybe with 100 samples and if the Balto Slavic Corded ware is all brown and blonde haired which is what i except and the R1b L11 Germanic Italo Celts have over 10% red hair that would be huge evidence because they live in the same area.

The proto Germanic Italo Celts most likely had 20% or more red hair which is shocking. also if they can do other types of DNA tests like aust dna from those remains, I gurnetee they will find close relationship with those Germanic Italo Celts and modern western Europeans mainly the most red haired ones like British isles. Then if they do the same with pre Germanic Italo Celtic west Europeans they might find a missing part to make them like modern western Europeans.

Tone
21-09-13, 05:05
I would have to agree with you that Proto-Germanic, and possibly Proto-Celtic peoples spread red hair around Western Europe. And I also agree that the Neolithic inhabitants of Western Europe did not possess red hair... but that doesn't exclude the Paleolithic inhabitants of Europe, who were pushed out to the fringes by Neolithic invaders.

But the thing is this: Germans and Celts are relatively recent creations, historically speaking. I think you would agree that they are the product of invaders mixing with indigenous natives, along with a healthy dose of Neolithic farmer thrown in. This mixing process, taking place in Central Europe, occurred over thousands of years (3,000 bc to aprx. 1,000 bc). All I'm saying is that the most likely source for the red hair is not the invaders, but the stone-age natives, who had a very, very long and isolated history in a cold, low-sunlight clime, the perfect place for red hair to develop and thrive.

The obvious assumption is that the invading Celts/Germanics had red hair. 'Could be. But sometimes things turn out to be unexpected. It wouldn't surprise me if, after genetic samples from the mists of time are finally analyzed, we discover that the R1B invaders were swarthy West Asians who settled in a remote, cold area in Europe 'cause of those lovely red-haired girls (and their precious metals). Their children were red-haired Germans and Celts, who never invaded Europe because they were "born" there, if that makes sense.

And yes, these are all assumptions. There are no facts. Yet.

We'll see how this plays out. :smile:

Fire Haired
21-09-13, 06:05
I would have to agree with you that Proto-Germanic, and possibly Proto-Celtic peoples spread red hair around Western Europe. And I also agree that the Neolithic inhabitants of Western Europe did not possess red hair... but that the doesn't exclude the Paleolithic inhabitants of Europe, who were pushed out to the fringes by Neolithic invaders.

But the thing is this: Germans and Celts are relatively recent creations, historically speaking. I think you would agree that they are the product of invaders mixing with indigenous natives, along with a healthy dose of Neolithic farmer thrown in. This mixing process, taking place in Central Europe, occurred over thousands of years (3,000 bc to aprx. 1,000 bc). All I'm saying is that the most likely source for the red hair is not the invaders, but the stone-age natives, who had a very, very long and isolated history in a cold, low-sunlight clime, the perfect place for red hair to develop and thrive.

The obvious assumption is that the invading Celts/Germanics had red hair. 'Could be. But sometimes things turn out to be unexpected. It wouldn't surprise me if, after genetic samples from the mists of time are finally analyzed, we discover that the R1B invaders were swarthy West Asians who settled in a remote, cold area in Europe 'cause of those lovely red-haired girls (and their precious metals). Their children were red-haired Germans and Celts, who never invaded Europe because they were "born" there, if that makes sense.

And yes, these are all assumptions. There are no facts. Yet.

We'll see how this plays out. :smile:

Ur right it is not for sure but there is alot of evidence they put red hair over 1% in most of west Europe. Originally Germanic Italo Celtic R1b1a2a1a L11 fathers came from the mid east probably around Antolia, Caucus, and Iraq. So almost completely dark haired they are not the source of the red hair. When they migrated to either southeast Europe or southern Russia 6,000-10,000ybp they mixed or conquered a group of people which would be were the red hair is from. So when R1b1a2a1a L11 Germanic italo Celts arrived 5,000ybp in central Germany they would have had mainly ancestry from a group of maybe very red haired eastern Europeans and of course their paternal lineage originally from the north mid east. I dont get what u are saying the Nelioithic people and whatever. U need to explain aust DNa has shows supringly even Neloithic cultures in Swedan and Otzie from north Italy are extremely Mediterranean over 59% in globe13 they stayed i gues very unmixed. check this link out http://dienekes.blogspot.com/. it expains new results which show even more evidence of this. I guess these farmers at least in western Europe the people who spread farming are most related to south Europeans mainly Sardine people who are almost a perfect match in aust dna percentages.

The hunter gathers in aust dna show they are almost only North Euro in globe13 all over 70% even 7,000ybp Neolithic hunter gather from north Spain were it is around 35-40% today. North Euro actulley is the only group that was in Europe before farming started to spread 9,000ybo. Their closes relatives not surpisngly are people at the far far far far northern borders of Europe like Russia, Finland, and far northern Norway and Swedan. Because Farming from what i have learned never really spread there i know evemtlley it had to but not in the Neolithic age. And these people just saying are pretty much not red haired at all except ones in Scandinavia with inter married with Germanic Swedish and Norwegian. But all Europeans before farming probably did not look liek them since Sami and Finnish have very diff hair and eye color percentages Sami fit more with central French and southern Europeans and also red hair is not at 1% in far northern Sami.

western Europe was all farming when Germanic Italo Celts arrived except Gotland and i think isolated parts around the Baltic sea which really isn't western Europe. I still think Germanic Italo celts are the most likely source but i am still thinking about all the possible answers.

Tone
21-09-13, 08:27
When they migrated to either southeast Europe or southern Russia 6,000-10,000ybp they mixed or conquered a group of people which would be were the red hair is from. So when R1b1a2a1a L11 Germanic italo Celts arrived 5,000ybp in central Germany they would have had mainly ancestry from a group of maybe very red haired eastern Europeans and of course their paternal lineage originally from the north mid east.

This is where we differ. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is no evidence that R1B L11 was ever on the Ukrainian Steppe 5,000 ybp, or that there was a population of red-heads for them to marry there either. There could have been. But we can both agree it's an educated assumption based on incomplete evidence. So is my indigenous Western European red-head theory as well. I'm just using Occum's Razor, and in light of the lack of evidence, the simplest solution is the one to go with... and that is that the red-heads were always in Western Europe where R1B found them.



I dont get what u are saying the Nelioithic people and whatever. U need to explain aust DNa has shows supringly even Neloithic cultures in Swedan and Otzie from north Italy are extremely Mediterranean over 59% in globe13 they stayed i gues very unmixed. check this link out http://dienekes.blogspot.com/. it expains new results which show even more evidence of this. I guess these farmers at least in western Europe the people who spread farming are most related to south Europeans mainly Sardine people who are almost a perfect match in aust dna percentages.

I've read that on Dienekes site, and I agree with you that the evidence shows Neolithic farmers did not mix with the locals at first. And, Paleolithic Europeans seem to be an homogenous group, stretching from Spain to the Baltic and into Russia. And this group matches well with modern Balts and this group probably looked like them (blond, etc.) You also bring up good points about eye color and red hair in the Sami as well. But in the end we don't know that much about indigenous Europeans and what they looked like. I believe it's reasonable to assume they were not only blonde but red hair originated with them as well.

Northwest Europe is big place (and once bigger if you include Doggerland). There could very easily have been tribes of red haired folk living on the fringes, isolated for tens of thousands of years. I think the higher frequency red hair on the Western fringe of Europe backs this up. We know that Northwest Atlantic Europe and the Baltic were that last areas to take up farming.

However, the population of Europe is today a blend of Southern and Northern Europe as you know.

Let me put it this way: if you look at one of those maps of blond hair distribution in Europe, and imagine Europe was almost all blond and one point, you can see how the neolithic farmers replaced it in the south and blond hair becomes less and less diluted by dark hair until it peaks in Sweden and Finland. Blond hair didn't radiate out from Sweden/Finland, it was once ubiquitous and now it survives there in greater frequency because it's furthest from the Southern farmers genetic influence. You could look at the red haired map the same way. It was once prevalent (or at least not uncommon) in all of Atlantic/North-Western Europe. It becomes less and less diluted until peaks on the fringes of the British Isles. Just like the blonds in Sweden/Finland, red hair is at high levels because it survives there away from the influence of Central and Southern Europe.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm just saying there is another way to look at things.

Hopefully we will find out for sure someday because I find this stuff fascinating. :)

Fire Haired
21-09-13, 08:53
We cant say for sure what the 100% in globe13 and other tests pre farming Europeans looked like. All we can say is dominte palness in Europeans does come from them(Origin of Euro palness(skin hair and eye color) (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92883-Origin-of-European-Paleness(skin-hair-and-eye-color)). It is true that the heaviest North Euro people are pretty fair haired and eyed withe exception of Sami. But i am not sure how much the mainly Med with minority southwest asian and west asian farmers changed. Look at Sardine people like i sadi almost perfect matches to Neloithic farmer samples. They look no diff from mainland Italians but did u know that on globe13 south Italians range from 20-24% west Asian and 15-18% southwest asian while Sardine are under 10% southwest asian and under 5% west asian. That extra mid eastern i saw had the same west Asian vs southwest Asian percentages as in southeast europe and greece and it is centered in southern Italy and Greece most likely came in Greco Roma age. So very heavy extra brown skinned mid eastern blood came but Italians look no diff from Sardine i do think though that is an explanation of the darker skinned southern Italians compared to northern Italians.

It is debatable like i said how much their appearance was changed. I do think there is evidence Europe would have been more fair haired and eyed but deifntley not more red haired. U can see my opinion on origin of red hair (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91491-Origin-and-ancient-History-of-red-hair) here. It probably originated in the mid east 60,000-80,000ybp since it exists in Samaritans who have 0% north Euro in globe13 and probably almost no European ancestry. Red hair is not higher in the western Fringe just British isles before Germanic Invasion all 10-15%. But i can explain that by they have the highest amount of R1b1a2a1a L11 at about 80% and the highest amount of Gedorsian which shows sings of being spread with all descendants of R1b1a2a L23 meaning they have the most orignal Germanic Italo Celtic blood.


Origin of hair color percentages in Europe are alot more complicated than to say before farming everyone looked like swedes and Swedes stayed the most unmixed or whatever once again Sami go against that idea. I like how ur trying to find other explinations it deifntley is possible it is from pre Neolithic west Europeans or migrating Neolithic ones which is just as possible as saying late Neolithic and Bronze age Germanic Italo Celts. But since the borders of 1% or more red hair matches so perfectley i still think the Germanic Italo Celtic thing is most possible.

MOESAN
21-09-13, 18:12
We cant say for sure what the 100% in globe13 and other tests pre farming Europeans looked like. All we can say is dominte palness in Europeans does come from them(Origin of Euro palness(skin hair and eye color) (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?92883-Origin-of-European-Paleness(skin-hair-and-eye-color)). It is true that the heaviest North Euro people are pretty fair haired and eyed withe exception of Sami. But i am not sure how much the mainly Med with minority southwest asian and west asian farmers changed. Look at Sardine people like i sadi almost perfect matches to Neloithic farmer samples. They look no diff from mainland Italians but did u know that on globe13 south Italians range from 20-24% west Asian and 15-18% southwest asian while Sardine are under 10% southwest asian and under 5% west asian. That extra mid eastern i saw had the same west Asian vs southwest Asian percentages as in southeast europe and greece and it is centered in southern Italy and Greece most likely came in Greco Roma age. So very heavy extra brown skinned mid eastern blood came but Italians look no diff from Sardine i do think though that is an explanation of the darker skinned southern Italians compared to northern Italians.

It is debatable like i said how much their appearance was changed. I do think there is evidence Europe would have been more fair haired and eyed but deifntley not more red haired. U can see my opinion on origin of red hair (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91491-Origin-and-ancient-History-of-red-hair) here. It probably originated in the mid east 60,000-80,000ybp since it exists in Samaritans who have 0% north Euro in globe13 and probably almost no European ancestry. Red hair is not higher in the western Fringe just British isles before Germanic Invasion all 10-15%. But i can explain that by they have the highest amount of R1b1a2a1a L11 at about 80% and the highest amount of Gedorsian which shows sings of being spread with all descendants of R1b1a2a L23 meaning they have the most orignal Germanic Italo Celtic blood.


Origin of hair color percentages in Europe are alot more complicated than to say before farming everyone looked like swedes and Swedes stayed the most unmixed or whatever once again Sami go against that idea. I like how ur trying to find other explinations it deifntley is possible it is from pre Neolithic west Europeans or migrating Neolithic ones which is just as possible as saying late Neolithic and Bronze age Germanic Italo Celts. But since the borders of 1% or more red hair matches so perfectley i still think the Germanic Italo Celtic thing is most possible.

you are doing a lot of hypothesis about pigmentation
red hairs have (for I red) more than a mutation as cause!
surely the same climate could have favorised or permetted everykind of red hair...
your datations of mutation are not too convincing
the light (blue) eyes among Near-Eastern are very uncommon;
do not believe in the persons saying than a trait is COMMON in a population, taking adventage of a previous believing saying this trait was ABSENT (the contradiction way of thinking);
no offense

Fire Haired
21-09-13, 18:15
you are doing a lot of hypothesis about pigmentation
red hairs have (for I red) more than a mutation as cause!
surely the same climate could have favorised or permetted everykind of red hair...
your datations of mutation are not too convincing
the light (blue) eyes among Near-Eastern are very uncommon;
do not believe in the persons saying than a trait is COMMON in a population, taking adventage of a previous believing saying this trait was ABSENT (the contradiction way of thinking);
no offense

Just because it is rare does not mean it could have originated there. Are u saying u have red hair.

redeyednewt
13-02-16, 07:45
My father probably has this as he has red hair, is German/English with some Scottish, and I also have a little bit of red hair but only in my facial hair and it shows up in my scalp hair but it's dark red hair.

redeyednewt
15-02-16, 08:10
I asked my dad today if anyone on his mother's side or my grandmother's family had red hair and he said no that it came from his grandfather on his father's side.

redeyednewt
21-02-16, 00:38
I also saw a documentary on public TV that claimed this:

http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/pbs-chachapoya-of-peru-are-probably-carthaginians-and-celts-who-fled-from-rome-in-146-bce



PBS: Chachapoya of Peru Are Probably Carthaginians and Celts Who Fled from Rome in 146 BCE (http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/pbs-chachapoya-of-peru-are-probably-carthaginians-and-celts-who-fled-from-rome-in-146-bce)4/4/2014
87 Comments (http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/pbs-chachapoya-of-peru-are-probably-carthaginians-and-celts-who-fled-from-rome-in-146-bce#comments)


Holy crap! PBS has become America Unearthed. In an episode of the PBS series Secrets of the Dead running on local PBS stations this week and available online for streaming (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/episodes/carthages-lost-warriors-watch-the-full-episode/1163/), the venerable public broadcasting channel asserts that blonde-haired, blue-eyed Celts and also some incidental Carthaginians discovered the Americas in Antiquity. (The blue eyes don’t make the show but show up on the show’s web page.) “Carthage’s Lost Warriors” was produced by ZDF, a German television production company associated with the long-running series Terra-X, which traffics in all manner of fringe theories, and the large number of dubbed German interviews testifies to the recycling of a German program. Archaeologist K. Krist Hurst called the show “baloney (http://archaeology.about.com/b/2014/04/02/secrets-of-the-dead-carthages-lost-warriors.htm).”


The show opens with a “Celtic-style bronze axed” found “deep in the Amazon” and the narrator, Jay O. Sanders, asks if—heaven help us!—the Chachapoya are truly the blond, Caucasian descendants of prehistoric superhero warriors (martial prowess specified explicitly) who crossed the Atlantic at some unspecified date to penetrate the continent with their manly thrusts until they fertilized Peru with the glory of Old World culture.

The program is based on the work of the show’s chief expert, Hans Giffhorn, a professor emeritus of cultural studies at the Universities of Göttingen and Hildesheim and documentary filmmaker. Griffhorn’s dissertation on aesthetics outlined his belief that science is dogmatic and rigid and excludes evidence and theories that fail to conform to paradigms, and that a lack of cross-disciplinary interaction has led to erroneous findings and conclusions.

Griffhorn wrote a German book, still untranslated, on his belief that the Chachapoya are white Europeans in 2013.He believes that the Carthaginians did not “simply vanish” after the Carthaginians were defeated by the Romans in 146 BCE, and he refuses to believe Roman accounts that the city’s population was enslaved or killed under Scipio Aemilianus. He wants to know where they went. To find the Carthaginians—and here he is looking for just one boatload—he starts at the Balearic Islands, where Carthage found its fiercest soldiers. Giffhorn feels that the Carthaginians were not enslaved in their entirety, so for him it is only logical that they fled to Kuelap, the Chachapoya fortress in Peru. He believes that in the western Mediterranean the Carthaginian exiles teamed up with Celtic people from Iberia to escape the Romans, who were also taking over the Carthaginian territories of what is today Spain.

Celtic prowess combined with Carthaginian sailing skills to cross the Atlantic.

Griffhorn believes the Diodorus Siculus proves that the Carthaginians reached the Americas. Diodorus (Library of History 5.19-20) first describes an island, not a continent, “over against Libya”—meaning off the African coast—and states that it contains stately towns and fruitful plains when the Phoenicians discovered it:


The Phoenicians therefore, upon the account before related, having found out the coasts beyond the pillars, and sailing along by the shore of Africa, were on a sudden driven by a furious storm afar off into the main ocean; and after they had lain under this violent tempest for many days, they at length arrived at this island; and so, coming to the knowledge of the nature and pleasantness of this isle, they caused it to be known to everyone; and therefore the Tyrrhenians, when they were masters at sea, designed to send a colony thither; but the Carthaginians opposed them, both fearing lest most of their own citizens should be allured through the goodness of the island to settle there, and likewise intending to keep it as a place of refuge for themselves, in case of any sudden and unexpected blasts of fortune, which might tend to the utter ruin of their government: for, being then potent at sea, they doubted not but they could easily transport themselves and their families into that island unknown to the conquerors. (trans. G. Booth)
He, of course, leaves out the information Diodorus—and, crucially, pseudo-Aristotle three centuries earlier, unacknowledged here—gave about the location of this mysterious island, which regular readers will of course remember quite well from when these same texts were used by Harry Hubbard (http://www.jasoncolavito.com/1/post/2014/01/diodorus-and-pliny-on-happyland.html) to claim ancient knowledge of North America, and also from America Unearthed (http://www.jasoncolavito.com/1/post/2013/01/review-of-america-unearthed-s01e06-stonehenge-in-america.html), when Mark McMenamin used the same text from Diodorus to claim that the Phoenicians, not the Carthaginians, discovered America.

Pseudo-Aristotle (De mirabilis auscultationibus 84) writes that:


In the sea outside the Pillars of Hercules they say that an island was discovered by the Carthaginians, desolate, having wood of every kind, and navigable rivers, and admirable for its fruits besides, but distant several days’ voyage from them. But, when the Carthaginians often came to this island because of its fertility, and some even dwelt there, the magistrates of the Carthaginians gave notice that they would punish with death those who should sail to it, and destroyed all the inhabitants, lest they should spread a report about it, or a large number might gather together to the island in their time, get possession of the authority, and destroy the prosperity of the Carthaginians. (trans. Launcelot D. Dowdall)
This land was in frequent contact with Carthage before 300 BCE—not a one-time chance encounter in 146 BCE—and was only a few days’ sail from the Pillars. Brazil is about ninety days’ sail from the Pillars, according to the show’s own estimate. It’s a bit of a difference between three months and a few days.

Griffhorn suggests from such texts that the Carthaginians had had secret communication with Brazil but kept it secret. This seems rather odd considering that the Carthaginians put up in the public square a commemoration of the voyage of Hanno to central Africa, where he saw chimpanzees. Surely they would have kept that secret, too, had that been their typical practice, as Griffhorn suggests.

At this point, the Carthaginians virtually vanish from the show because they were needed solely to give the Celts something they lack—ships—for Griffhorn’s real thesis, that the Celts are the ancestors of the Chachapoya and once reigned over South America.

The program tries to make the case that a boat could have crossed to Brazil using the ocean currents. Griffhorn places the discovery of Brazil by the Carthaginians and Celts at “1500 years before Columbus,” which would be about 10 BCE, long after the fall of Carthage. This makes no sense since Diodorus wrote between two and five decades earlier and pseudo-Aristotle three centuries before that—and both claimed the story reported much older events.

Griffhorn believes that the Carthaginian boat pilots traded with local cannibals (with what?) to survive, and Griffhorn believes that four symbols on the ancient petroglyphs on the rock of Ingá in Brazil aren’t just coincidentally close to geometrical shapes used in Celtiberian alphabets but are actual Celtic letters. Apparently the Carthaginian merchants were the merchant class serving the Celtic warrior elite.

Based on no evidence whatsoever, Griffhorn suggests that the Carthaginians and Celts on this voyage of discovery sailed up the Amazon. “No account exists, and we can only imagine” what they did, the narrator says, substituting early Spanish and Portuguese accounts to give an idea of what the Carthaginians “would have” seen and done. So, to recap: Everyone admits that no evidence exists, but they will nevertheless reconstruct an entire adventure based on analogies.

The narrator suggests that brightly-colored vases with geometric patterns made by the Marajoara culture of Brazil are “reminiscent” of Greek vases from the Classical period, decorated with Celtic spirals. This is a subjective judgment, and to my eyes the pots look nothing like the form of actual Greek vases, nor do the decorations bear more than a superficial resemblance to Old World patterns—no more so than any other Native geometric art. Geometric shapes tend to be the same everywhere. The trouble is that the Marajoara culture flourished after 800 CE, far too late to have anything to do with Mediterranean Greek vases from 1,000 years earlier.

We return to the metal axe from the opening that the show calls Celtic. It has no provenance, and was purchased from a merchant who said he found it in the jungle. The metal part of the axe is copper-zinc bronze, meaning that it was from the Old World, but the handle was made of Paraguayan wood. According to tests that the show says were run on the axe, the wood is 1500 years old. The most parsimonious explanation is that a Spanish, Portuguese, or African object was added to a sacred and ancient handle during the Contact period, but instead the show wants us to believe that Celts from 146 BCE dropped it en route to Peru where it was reused in 500 CE.

This brings us to the Chachapoya, and the show demands to know how mere Native people could possibly have learned how to build buildings, particularly round ones, without European help. Prof. Warren Church explains that the Chachapoya were quite able to build their own buildings, of which none date earlier than 500 CE. Griffhorn, however, sees the round buildings as unique in America and therefore of obviously Carthaginian extraction—700 years or more after the fact! He points to a carving of a face on a temple wall and says this is reminiscent of Celtic beheadings, as though no one else on earth ever drew faces or beheaded enemies. He also cites trepanation among the Celts and Chachapoya as another “connection.” Michael Schultz, a paleopathologist, makes an astonishing claim: that “Hippocratic accounts” from 500 BCE describe Chachapoyan trepanation! This is entirely untrue, and I have no idea where he got the idea that the Chachapoya were discussed in Greek literature.

Griffhorn believes that Spanish fortresses that are round must be connected to the Chachapoya’s round houses, even though this is about all they share in common. The show picks out painted images of shamans with antlers in both the Amazon and among the Celts and decides this must be a connection—even though, unacknowledged here, art from Mohenjo-Daro shows the same thing, as, in fact, does shamanic art everywhere, going back to the Stone Age.

This is really going nowhere fast.

Schultz returns again to assert that pre-Contact Chachapoya mummies suffered from tuberculosis, a disease previously thought only to have come with the Spanish. This “new” fact, however, has been known since 2002, and the presence of tuberculosis in the pre-Columbian Americas has been known since 1994—it’s been found beyond just the Chachapoya—but Griffhorn takes this as a revelation that the Carthaginians brought “Classical” tuberculosis (whatever that means—he seems to think the disease was different in Antiquity) with them in 146 BCE, where it lay dormant for a thousand years. Archaeologists suggest (http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/41/4/515.full) that the disease arose from llamas, who are known to carry the bovine form of tuberculosis—or even from the Polynesians who reached South America before Columbus.

Next, various Chachapoyan traits are compared to Spanish, Majorcan, and other cultures from various time periods, as though the Chachapoyans simply adopted one trait from each of the ark of cross-cultural European outcasts from multiple time periods who sailed up the Amazon to meet them.

The show points to the fair-skinned, blonde-haired Chachapoyan descendants as evidence that that some Chachapoyans are “distinctive” from the “dark haired” and “brown-skinned” Natives, and we hear what Cieza de Leon had to say about this, though the paraphrase offered by Warren Church sounds to me like he’s running together bits and pieces from both Cieza de Leon and from Pedro Pizarro, who famously wrote:

The Indian women of the Guancas and Chachapoyas and Cañares were the common women, most of them being beautiful. The rest of the womanhood of this kingdom were thick, neither beautiful nor ugly, but of medium good-looks. The people of this kingdom of Peru were white, swarthy in colour, and among them the Lords and Ladies were whiter than Spaniards. I saw in this land an Indian woman and a child who would not stand out among white blonds. These people [of the upper class] say that they were the children of the idols. (Relation of the Discoveries etc., trans. Philip Ainsworth Means, p. 430 (http://books.google.com/books?ei=fdY4UI7cN8Ls0gH5loCoAw&dq=Pedro+Pizarro&jtp=471&id=pdNxAAAAMAAJ#v=onepage&q=Chachapoyas&f=false))
By contrast, Cieza de Leon (Chronicle of Peru 1.78 (http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA279&dq=Cieza+de+Leon+Chachapoya&ei=6fc9U7uJAcfL2gXm34GQAw&id=9QJbAAAAQAAJ#v=snippet&q=Chachapoyas&f=false)) was rather less expansive on the particulars:


These Indians of Chachapoyas are the most fair and good-looking of any that I have seen in the Indies, and their women are so beautiful that many of them were worthy to be wives of the Yncas, or inmates of the temples of the sun. To this day the Indian women of this race are exceedingly beautiful, for they are fair and well formed. They go dressed in woollen cloths, like their husbands, and on their heads they wear a certain fringe, the sign by which they may be known in all parts. After they were subjugated by the Yncas, they received the laws and customs according to which they lived, from them. They adored the sun and other gods, like the rest of the Indians, and resembled them in other customs, such as the burial of their dead and conversing with the devil. (trans. Clements Markham)