Come on, I don't think any Europeans were the first settlers in America. All cultures were similar back then especially in the northern hemisphere, it didnt matter what race they were. The first settlers were Asiatic not Celtic or any indo-European people. The only way there could be is if a Caucasian group of people travelled with the mongoloid groups that went first.
There is a plaque on the shore of Mobile Bay , Alabama , it reads
.." In memory of Prince Madoc , a Welsh explorer who landed in 1170 and left behind , with the lndians , the Welsh language"
Madog was a Prince oif Wales , a Celtic nation to the west of Britain . He left from Porthmadog , North Wales with three ships to escape the Welsh wars with the English . There was a report in 1608 of the Monacan lndians speaking a form of Welsh along the James river . So were the Welsh Celts first ?
Yes this evidence proves that, people will believe anything, if it justifys their agenda. What aload of shit. Jesus tomb found in the USA is more believable than this shit.
Celts didn't exist in Western Europe 16,000 years ago there is no evidence for this even if Europeans migrated to the Americas as proposed by the Solutrean Theory which is possible they weren't Celtic people.
ssssssssss Scientist always discover something new so so
New radiocarbon dating of Clovis-culture materials shows that this group inhabited the Americas a little later and for a shorter period of time than previously believed.
Archaeological evidence of human occupation in South America also dates to the same time as the Clovis-culture materials. This suggests that people were living in the Americas before the Clovis people arrived.
i'm not sure how much evidence there is of an irish migration or whether this is mentioned in the irish texts, however i believe scholars who are adament of a great migration from the anicient welsh kingdoms around 575-600 ad, earlier than the norse/viking settlements in north-eastern america, the welsh also used the trade winds rather than northern route and are said to have settled around the mississipi delta, doesn't acount for stone 'european like' settlements circa 400 ad so maybe irish did
What alot of you people seem to forget when arguing over which people or tribes belong to what is that we are all HUMAN and live on this planet, we are all releated to each other in some form or other so fighting and arguing over race and where one comes from etc etc is pointless.
im not taking up any posistion on this but i will say that a saint brendan is beleived to have tried for america in the 9th century ad. a replica of his ship was built and a man called tim severn sailed it to the americas in 1979 i think. he made it safe and sound to new foundland. so it must be said it is possible that gaelic exploerers may have ventured out. if they did the likely landing spots would have been exactly where the vikings went later. i think that is more plausible
See language of Indian Shady and Basque language, Shady is a language crossed with the Basque language and see results DNA There for Algonquins, as well as sites archeological basques, carcasses of boats, whales, ovens with oil and skeletons of basques dating from the siécle eleventh and before, see documment also British man of year 1380 for the purchase of skins of Canadian beavers
basques were the only ones during siécles to have constructed a boat for the open sea and also to see frequently North America.
Proof exist but all rest seems harebrained and counts of fairy.
Purpose of basques were the whale and the cod and nothing else interested them. But it seems to have had exchange of metal and chromosomes there with Indian of the northwest of the continent (black feet and Algonquins)
The Celtic peoples also had kingdoms in modern day Ankara,Turkey and even in Persia. The oldest known artifacts of the Celtic people are believed to be in the Bavarian mountain valleys of Germany. ERIN GO BRAGH!!! DEATH TO JOHN BULL!!
Druids from around the world need your support in preserving our ancient Indo European Heritage and Traditions. Dear born again Pagan Celts you are welcome to help save the Hill of Tara's Royal Grove from the M3 by sending a protest letter to UNESCO at - Europe and North America Unit, World Heritage Centre, UNESCO, 7 place de Fontenoy 75352 Paris 07SP, France. Sincerely we all want to thank you for investing your time regarding this urgent situation.
The Irish are Celts but not all Celts are Irish. My Swiss friend is Celt. The Celts were the dominant race in Europe at one time and left their bloodlines all over. Regions still remain as in French brittany and the Basque region of Spain. I'm sure YTers know of others. Americans have a hard time wrapping their minds around this because Americans tend to think of nations as attached to the land they occupy, ie, - people become American because they reside in the land of (north) America.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The term "Celtic" does not and never has meant "race." It's a linguistic term first and a cultural term second. When you say things like that you will never be taken seriously by any academics or well-read people. Maybe on youtube you can get away with it though.
Celts were and are a race. Are the Boston Celtics, the Bostons linguistics? You are very funny. Living in California, you rely on academics because you've lost contact with the living breathing heritage.
I don't speak from academic knowledge. I'm a living breathing Celt - of a family of Celts.
I am the real thing while you rely on "academics". The MacPDuff stands for
Macpherson MacDuff. What are your credentials my freind?
If you don't want to aline yourself with the "academics," that's fine. But the way in which you use the term "Celt,' alines you with 18th century English antiquarians, who coined the term, as well other romantic notions such as concepts of druids, Irish as the "noble savage," etc. "Celtic" is a cultural term, not a "racial" term. What you have to understand is that what you seem to
think is "the current form" of "Celticity" is not in any way Celtic, though it certainly has Celtic influence.
caemgen51; I'm struggling to understand your point. When I and others I know say "Celt", we're talking blood lines and ancestry - not culture, not a Romantic notions. When I told my Swiss friend that I am a Celt (born and raised in America), she knew exactly what I was saying and told me she is a Celt also. Her culture is Swiss. Her ancestry/bloodlines are Celt. The term Celt is more informative because not all Celts live in Ireland. It defines descendants of ancient tribes - not geography.
Again, everything you stated comes directly from the writings of 19th century English antiquarians who had very little actual understanding of the culture they were writing about. Recent DNA findings completely disprove any genetic relations between insular Celts (pre-Indo-European) and continental Celts (Indo-European). So you'll have to find something else to attach to I'm afraid.
@caemgen51 yep you are right mate... and the influence is fairly minimal too, particularly now we understand that the language of breton came to brittainy post roman invasions or 'occupation' of britain and is not evidence of 'celtic' or gaulish heritage of the ancient british... good luck telling everyone mate lol nobody wants to know - ancient british history is plagued with such distortion, secrecy and denial its unbelievable... glad to see some people are aware... cheers...
@rugbyboy198127 .I suspect the Bretons did speak a celtic language and this is why it attracted the Britons who fled the Saxon incursions. It is now thought the celtic languages arrived in Britain via the west (Iberia) and may have been spoken all the way up the western seaboard in the bronze age (could explain why the Norse have 2 shadowy older gods Njord & Skadi,who are actually the Irish Nuadhu/Scathach!)
@macpduff haha oh dear, any connection of celtic with the british isles was an early 18th century invention, look it up dude, its a myth, one of the biggest cons of all time and totaal denial of british and irish history, be very proud of your ancestors but please stop calling them celts, stop calling me and my people celtic - we are most certainly not celtic, we're welsh/irish/scots/english, you may use ancient british or brythonic(although this term also inaccurate)brythonic/goidelic languages
@rugbyboy198127 What is your problem with the term "Celt"? How can you seriously say that the Celt/ Gaelic connection with Britain is an 18th C invention? Are you mad?
The only reason I can think of for you wanting to down play the racial heritage of Ireland, Scotland and Wales is if you're an immigrant from Asia, the Middle East, or Africa. then you would want to pretend that the political/geographical entity called a country is important. It's the Countries which were 18th/19thc inventions
@macpduff gaelic is fine, celtic is not! it was first used in connection with the british isles early in the 1700's - quite incorrectly, this is well documented, now this word has evolved in academia to broader use, to aply to virtually all the northern, central and western european peoples, ie indo-european and the fact that the ancient languages of britain have become known as the celtic family is a complete joke, the word 'celtic' doesn't exist in these languages, i am what you call 'celtic'!
@rugbyboy198127 The idea that the term Celt was first used erroneously by 18th century academics is a myth. The term comes from Classical sources in which the Celts are said to refer to themselves as Keltoi. The term Celt was never and has never been used to describe all the Indo-European people. It is used only to describe the people who spoke a branch of what was once a homogenous language.
@macpduff you are the one 'down playing' the heritage of all the peoples of the british isles by labelling them as 'celtic'... i am english with irish and scots ancestry, i am in no way biased against the irish/scots/welsh - infact recent research has shown there is less difference between the people of the england and those of the 'celtic' nations than thought previous! it changes nothing, but you need understand the origin and thus inaccuracy of this term 'celtic' in application to brits mate!
@macpduff oh dear i'm not sure what kind of racist/biggoted agenda you have but you are way wide of the mark with your statement assumption regarding my ethnicity, which shouldn't matter a dot, however in the hope of annoying you further i'll let you in on a little secret, i have strawberry blonde hair and green eyes and was born to a mother of red hair - british enough for you? listen mate you fall for the combination of lies and incompetance by the roman then english empires, i speak the truth
@macpduff sorry. "Celtic" historically, was a designation for many groups of peoples based on the languages they spoke, not on their race. They did not necessarily belong to one raceor any identifiable race. Check your history. this is well known. Today, the term "Celtic" identifies people by their languages as well. If one has the blood of these peoples, one may also be considered celtic. However, historically, "Celtic" has been an appellation of tribes based on their language and culture.
@macpduff . We are not a 'race'. We are not even a single ethnicity. The Hallstatt central European celts are not genetically close to the insular celts whose ancestry is more prehistoric and Atlantic coastal--northern France, Iberia. No one in the British Isles or Ireland even called themselves a 'celt' before the 17th c! It is a culture and a set of languages. Names Behan & Tierney...also the 'real thing' but not fluffy about it!
It should NOT be forgotten that there is much more evidence that is not language related. Such as, the serpent mound in Ohio has 2 European predecessors, one in Avebury, and one in Scotland. There are STONE remains aligned to solar points all throughout the New England states, which is parallel to much Celtic type architecture, then add to this that the average "history" book will say NO Native Americans built in stone. Many cultures were interacting across the globe, it is just that simple
Why would u doubt it.Dont think the irish are smart or advanced enough to trade with other countrys rather than murdering the native inhabitants like the british.
Well, now, that is the nub of the issue, isn't it? The academic gatekeepers traditionally have exhibited a knee-jerk rejection often laced with pejorative insults to dismiss these new theories. Yet, institutional archaeologists in America, uneducated in European scripts, refuse to visit, much less excavate, sites that might contradict their dogma. Thus, the impasse. As for my preferred pronunciation of Celtic, I address that in another video. Ogham as Americans say, not Irish, who say aluminium.
True Scholars agree - these type of rock inscriptions cannot be used as evidence for early Irish settlers in North America - although transatlantic travel to N.A. could have been possible as in the legends of Brendan the Navigator and demonstrated by Tim Severin in the reconstructed "brendan voyage".... That said - You kinda lost me with the pronunciation of Ogham s/b (OH-um); and Celt s/b (hard 'K' sound as in Keltic) - both were incorrect.
The foreign Middle Eastern religion Christianity and their doctrine which is anti Indo European, does not represent the nomadic Pagan Celts from around the world. The Hill of Taras Royal Grove is asking all Druids from around the world to unite together against the Middle Eastern Christian extremists who wish to bring harm to the citizens of ancient Gaul, which is the Unification of the EU. Sincerely the Druid's Brehon Laws
Many anthropologists seem to consider it their duty to dismiss ideas contrary to their dogma as pseudoscience or crackpot theories. If comprehensive genetic testing had been done on ALL native american tribes, that might wash. But anomalies such as the extinct Mandans and Pawnee Skidee tribes cannot be genetically tested lacking survivors or survivors in adequate numbers. Superficial denials do nothing to further science, but only serve to weaken those "cultural inappropriateness" drum beaters
So when someone has been dead for a long time their DNA can't be tested? We KNOW that's not true. You really WANT to believe that Celts and Amerindians are one in the same, and no matter what evidence is shown to the contrary you will continue to hold it as a fact and desperately search for any info to support your view. The linguistic interpretation is laughable. What can be supported is that the Celtic culture had an environmental spiritualism like the original Americans, and Australoids etc.
Kindly reference the mitochondrial DNA tests on the Mandan or the Skidee Pawnee! Just because the skeletons of more prominent tribes may have been tested does not contradict George Catlin's observations of the blue eyed Mandans or the missing remains of the Skidee wiped out by the Sioux. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, as any real scientific investigator understands. Yes, Harvard's Calvert Watkins laughed at our linguistics, too, but he erred in the Ogham "D" having 1 stroke.
@kscottm there has been genetic mapping of many the native american population groups, as i understand it all the native peoples carry 4 main genetic threads all of which tie in with groups in asia supporting accepted theories, then in a tribe living in the far north east they detected traces (only traces) of a fifth thread, european in origin (a close hit to iberians), at first thought perhaps post eruopean colonialism, but far older infact between 20,000 and 16,000 years ago - the saluitrians!
@kscottm the only odd thing is why this dna has only survived among a small tribe living in the north-east? one might expect such small trace from colonialism or even the legends of ancient british in the late 6th century - the mounds at cohekia or whatever it is, the dna doesn't match what one would expect of the 10th century viking explorers and we're pretty sure those colonies didn't survive long, so it has to be these salutrians, evidence of whose activity lies all over eastern united states
@kscottm i guess the simple truth could be that these resourceful yet perhaps unsophisticated peoples of 20,000 years ago in ice-age europe who travelled by the ice to america, were not able to compete with their cousins who it seems arrived in america from north-east asia about 16,000 yhears ago, i guess the fact that only traces of their dna remain tells the story of overwhelming by numbers of by force/disease, unless they cover up native dates&finds sticking to 16,000years, then euorpeans 1st
And proven fantastical. Indigenous Americans are proven to be genetically Asianic, similar to Okinawan. The people called Celts today (Irish, Welsh, Scots, Cornish, Bretons, Manx, etc) are related to Basque, and vice-versa. These are genetic FACTS that prove crack pot theories like this one to be what they are. Pseudo-science.
Youtube is an interesting place to find videos that can't be verified for authenticity. That being said, the claims on this video are about as valid as any other video claiming that Atlanteans founded the Incas and the Maya, or that Aliens impregnated ancient Egyptian women.
YouTube is where I put the evidence forth because archaeological peer review journals won't publish this material often citing it as "culturally inappropriate". What an interesting attitude for would=be scientists! Lump me in with Von Daniken, or the Atlanteans, or UFO's if you wish. That's a pretty lame response if you simply wish to exercise a knee-jerk rejection. Why not evaluate each theory on its own merits, instead? -- author
I've yet to read anywhere that discovered evidence is blocked due to what you claim. My response is a valid one as I like to read about both professional and amatuer archaeology. To claim that you have the ultimate truth but can't publish it sounds suspect at best.
In that case, go to my website and under bibliography download the PDF document "correspondence including Dr. Calvert Watkins..." to learn how these theories were swept under the rug when first introduced in the late 1970's. Yes, my collection of 3 minute videos are superficial, but "Snuffing Colorado Ogham in the bud", "professionals reject theories", and "Celts and Indians, more than cousins" demonstrate the systemic, institutional bias. Or, believe only what you prefer to. It's your choice.
Additionally, my DVD "Old News" frames these theories in a more comprehensive light. If you doubt archaeology's tendency to suppress ideas in defiance of its rigid dogma, see some of my websites items posted under the news page, particularly: How Wikipedia's Archaeoastronomy Article was Hijacked", my summary of the 'Lost Tomb of Jesus' reaction by scholars, TIME's article on First Americans, and the unscientific response to the Smithsonian's archaeologist Dennis Stanford's Solutrean Hypothesis.
ks-I do feel that it is wrong not to publish your materials. I may disagree with it, but that does not make it wrong. No seriously researched data should be overlooked. I think everything should be vetted.
hello, I am here to say that, with those evidences, I shall REALIZE and defend a deep change in the American government. After to see this video, it stays very clear that the North American continent most to belongs to Irish people.
They're telling us that the Native Americans could not have come up with a written form of communication on their own? Least of all by scratching lines into rock? Come on! You can't assume that any sign of advanced thinking was handed to people of color by Europeans. What a bunch of garbage. The theory behind this documentary is a real stretch.
Why so defensive? You've missed the point- Native Americans had several alphabets that they thought up all by themselves, usually hieroglyphic (they couldn't figure out the wheel, though). This writing just looks exactly like the Ogham alphabet of the Celts and spells out words that make sense in Irish. Irish ships were sturdy enough (proven by modern day experiments), for the voyage. So it's actually a pretty strong theory. So why don't you go eat some poop.
There is actually quite a bit of evidence. Google it, it's actually kinda cool. But anyway, we can agree that I'm vulgar and you're ignorant, problem solved!
"There is no evidence besides this theory and it's weak. You're vulgar."
The offense you took to the theory was vulgar. Why would the indians be writing in Ogham?
If you take an interest in science and human history feel free to study it. If you on the other hand only have an interest in injecting political correctness into said studies please feel free to study something else. Limit yourself to liberal arts.
gregdancingmachine "Native Americans had several alphabets that they thought up all by themselves, usually hieroglyphic (they couldn't figure out the wheel, though)." There are artifacts in Central Mexico of toy animals with wheels on their legs made around 200 A.D., so to say that they couldn't "think of the wheel" is absurd.
greg-Why do U say Natives could not figure out the wheel?Natives have calendars,Pyramids,mounds and so on. You need to do more research before making such a comment. Afri-Asians were sailing long before a viking or Celt knew what a star was.When do you think this voyage took place?
Very interesting. I never heard about the Ogham found in Colorado - and I lived there for 10 years! LOL Anyway, this is definitely a theory I will enjoy reading up on. Thanks for posting this!
One of the problems with this little "factual" presentation - "Celt" is pronounced properly with a hard c or 'k' sound. It's from the Greek term of the people, "Keltoi." The celts (selts) are a basketball team.
This dispute has been previously addressed. Check dictionaries. Both pronunciations are acceptable and there are specific reasons for my choice to employ a soft S. Also, see the video response. The author.
@kscottm .Yes,considered 'acceptable' but technically not correct, as 'c' always has a hard sound in any of the celtic languages and is never pronounced as 's'.
Boston celtics you mean,boston is known as irish city,irish are celts or kelts,so B.C. is celtic or irish basketball team,very simple. and second,Greeks said "thouse barbarians call them self Kelts,in that point you are right!! Celt is probably Roman or anglosakson(English) pronouncement.
The narrator of the documentary itself states " presummed" ogham in Colorado.
AS much as I would like to conclude it as definite proof I wonder if they have even been radiocarboned or if is not just a mere coincidence. Let' face it! They could be just horizontal and perpendicular lines......
please watch my video response above to the pronunciation issue you and many others have brought to my attention. There's a scholarly question in my mind based on the research I have seen. It does not conform with common usage and I am aware of this.
This comment only shows that a person from Europe did not research well enough. !!!
I do believe that Celts have made it long ago to America . The Stone Circle in Boston that is called American Stonehenge might be a good evidence for it as well.
@awendragoness .What date is that? Stone circles ceased to be build after 1100 BC. The people who built them are not regarded as celts,although they are the ancestors of many of them.
Aluminum or aluminium. Both are right, depends where you live. The Irish pronunciation of Ogham differs from how most linguists in our hemisphere say it with a hard G. Irish authorities coached me to pronounce IMbolg, tho IMbolc is common WITH a B. As far as my pronounciation of Celts with a soft S, this is consistent with the word's acquisition from Middle French - not Latin directly - where C was pronounced "ess" when followed by vowels e/i/y. Thus, we say "ess" in center, circle and cycle.
Its sad really that there is so much poor scholarship these days with the Celtic culture. The hard C, is how it is said. Understood with the Imbolc/g, region to region that changes.
Although the Welsh & Cornish use Ogham, its still in the Goidelic tongue, they were Gael tribes living in the now regions of Wales and Cornwall, NOT the Brythonic ppl or tongue was ever used in Ogham. The ONLY other ogham that exists is some in Scotland in an odd Pictish language that is dead and untranslateable.
Firstly its NOT pronounced (Og-um), its pronounced Oh-um or even oy-um. The people are NOT the Selts or the Seltic ppl. The are the Celts or the Celtic culture, pronounced with a hard C like a K. Celtic Like the Boston Basketball team is NOT how you pronounce the ancient ppl!!! Who do they get to announce these specials idiots?
Come on, I don't think any Europeans were the first settlers in America. All cultures were similar back then especially in the northern hemisphere, it didnt matter what race they were. The first settlers were Asiatic not Celtic or any indo-European people. The only way there could be is if a Caucasian group of people travelled with the mongoloid groups that went first.
rydomart911 3 weeks ago
the basques were the 1st europeans in north america the original irish were basque
MiamiDolphinsClyde10 2 months ago
Comment removed
ManelinhoAraujinho 3 months ago
And here I thought it was the failed potatoe crop that brought them over.....
Taoist111 4 months ago
There is a plaque on the shore of Mobile Bay , Alabama , it reads
.." In memory of Prince Madoc , a Welsh explorer who landed in 1170 and left behind , with the lndians , the Welsh language"
Madog was a Prince oif Wales , a Celtic nation to the west of Britain . He left from Porthmadog , North Wales with three ships to escape the Welsh wars with the English . There was a report in 1608 of the Monacan lndians speaking a form of Welsh along the James river . So were the Welsh Celts first ?
alunhughes147 1 year ago
It's not a THEORY, it's a HYPOTHESIS!
Protherium 1 year ago
the 'celts' are the descendants of the Native Americans.peace
interstellarwonder 1 year ago
N is 5 below the stemline if anything that shit says gru
THETORCMAN 1 year ago
Yes this evidence proves that, people will believe anything, if it justifys their agenda. What aload of shit. Jesus tomb found in the USA is more believable than this shit.
Bristow42 1 year ago
Celts didn't exist in Western Europe 16,000 years ago there is no evidence for this even if Europeans migrated to the Americas as proposed by the Solutrean Theory which is possible they weren't Celtic people.
KingQafex8 1 year ago
ssssssssss Scientist always discover something new so so
New radiocarbon dating of Clovis-culture materials shows that this group inhabited the Americas a little later and for a shorter period of time than previously believed.
Archaeological evidence of human occupation in South America also dates to the same time as the Clovis-culture materials. This suggests that people were living in the Americas before the Clovis people arrived.
b0rnt0shine 1 year ago
don't forget celtic spain!
Stgfre 1 year ago
It's true...every observer affects a photon's movement....like telling stories. Your race and culture has a powerful tweak in thought and writing.
Licmycat 1 year ago
i'm not sure how much evidence there is of an irish migration or whether this is mentioned in the irish texts, however i believe scholars who are adament of a great migration from the anicient welsh kingdoms around 575-600 ad, earlier than the norse/viking settlements in north-eastern america, the welsh also used the trade winds rather than northern route and are said to have settled around the mississipi delta, doesn't acount for stone 'european like' settlements circa 400 ad so maybe irish did
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
Why is this moron calling them "Selts"? Stupid man.
shamraig 1 year ago
What alot of you people seem to forget when arguing over which people or tribes belong to what is that we are all HUMAN and live on this planet, we are all releated to each other in some form or other so fighting and arguing over race and where one comes from etc etc is pointless.
NitroTab1 1 year ago
im not taking up any posistion on this but i will say that a saint brendan is beleived to have tried for america in the 9th century ad. a replica of his ship was built and a man called tim severn sailed it to the americas in 1979 i think. he made it safe and sound to new foundland. so it must be said it is possible that gaelic exploerers may have ventured out. if they did the likely landing spots would have been exactly where the vikings went later. i think that is more plausible
buachailldeas 1 year ago
See language of Indian Shady and Basque language, Shady is a language crossed with the Basque language and see results DNA There for Algonquins, as well as sites archeological basques, carcasses of boats, whales, ovens with oil and skeletons of basques dating from the siécle eleventh and before, see documment also British man of year 1380 for the purchase of skins of Canadian beavers
polarisreseau 2 years ago
basques were the only ones during siécles to have constructed a boat for the open sea and also to see frequently North America.
Proof exist but all rest seems harebrained and counts of fairy.
Purpose of basques were the whale and the cod and nothing else interested them. But it seems to have had exchange of metal and chromosomes there with Indian of the northwest of the continent (black feet and Algonquins)
polarisreseau 2 years ago
The Celtic peoples also had kingdoms in modern day Ankara,Turkey and even in Persia. The oldest known artifacts of the Celtic people are believed to be in the Bavarian mountain valleys of Germany. ERIN GO BRAGH!!! DEATH TO JOHN BULL!!
Hohenzoellern 2 years ago
Comment removed
Hohenzoellern 2 years ago
Why did they show the sun revolving around the earth? LOL
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
Your another example of a brit hates all things irish.
jimmy27paul 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Today at The Hill of Taras Royal Grove,
Druids from around the world need your support in preserving our ancient Indo European Heritage and Traditions. Dear born again Pagan Celts you are welcome to help save the Hill of Tara's Royal Grove from the M3 by sending a protest letter to UNESCO at - Europe and North America Unit, World Heritage Centre, UNESCO, 7 place de Fontenoy 75352 Paris 07SP, France. Sincerely we all want to thank you for investing your time regarding this urgent situation.
MagicTellaVision 2 years ago
Another Example of Americans having an obession of all things Irish! Blimey, anyone would think Ireland and not China has 1 billion or so people!
PhilipK100 2 years ago
The Irish are Celts but not all Celts are Irish. My Swiss friend is Celt. The Celts were the dominant race in Europe at one time and left their bloodlines all over. Regions still remain as in French brittany and the Basque region of Spain. I'm sure YTers know of others. Americans have a hard time wrapping their minds around this because Americans tend to think of nations as attached to the land they occupy, ie, - people become American because they reside in the land of (north) America.
macpduff 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The term "Celtic" does not and never has meant "race." It's a linguistic term first and a cultural term second. When you say things like that you will never be taken seriously by any academics or well-read people. Maybe on youtube you can get away with it though.
caemgen51 2 years ago
I did not say "Celtic".
I said "Celt".
Celts were and are a race. Are the Boston Celtics, the Bostons linguistics? You are very funny. Living in California, you rely on academics because you've lost contact with the living breathing heritage.
I don't speak from academic knowledge. I'm a living breathing Celt - of a family of Celts.
I am the real thing while you rely on "academics". The MacPDuff stands for
Macpherson MacDuff. What are your credentials my freind?
macpduff 2 years ago 4
If you don't want to aline yourself with the "academics," that's fine. But the way in which you use the term "Celt,' alines you with 18th century English antiquarians, who coined the term, as well other romantic notions such as concepts of druids, Irish as the "noble savage," etc. "Celtic" is a cultural term, not a "racial" term. What you have to understand is that what you seem to
think is "the current form" of "Celticity" is not in any way Celtic, though it certainly has Celtic influence.
caemgen51 2 years ago
caemgen51; I'm struggling to understand your point. When I and others I know say "Celt", we're talking blood lines and ancestry - not culture, not a Romantic notions. When I told my Swiss friend that I am a Celt (born and raised in America), she knew exactly what I was saying and told me she is a Celt also. Her culture is Swiss. Her ancestry/bloodlines are Celt. The term Celt is more informative because not all Celts live in Ireland. It defines descendants of ancient tribes - not geography.
macpduff 2 years ago
Again, everything you stated comes directly from the writings of 19th century English antiquarians who had very little actual understanding of the culture they were writing about. Recent DNA findings completely disprove any genetic relations between insular Celts (pre-Indo-European) and continental Celts (Indo-European). So you'll have to find something else to attach to I'm afraid.
caemgen51 2 years ago
@caemgen51 yep you are right mate... and the influence is fairly minimal too, particularly now we understand that the language of breton came to brittainy post roman invasions or 'occupation' of britain and is not evidence of 'celtic' or gaulish heritage of the ancient british... good luck telling everyone mate lol nobody wants to know - ancient british history is plagued with such distortion, secrecy and denial its unbelievable... glad to see some people are aware... cheers...
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
@rugbyboy198127 .I suspect the Bretons did speak a celtic language and this is why it attracted the Britons who fled the Saxon incursions. It is now thought the celtic languages arrived in Britain via the west (Iberia) and may have been spoken all the way up the western seaboard in the bronze age (could explain why the Norse have 2 shadowy older gods Njord & Skadi,who are actually the Irish Nuadhu/Scathach!)
sonofherne 10 months ago
@macpduff haha oh dear, any connection of celtic with the british isles was an early 18th century invention, look it up dude, its a myth, one of the biggest cons of all time and totaal denial of british and irish history, be very proud of your ancestors but please stop calling them celts, stop calling me and my people celtic - we are most certainly not celtic, we're welsh/irish/scots/english, you may use ancient british or brythonic(although this term also inaccurate)brythonic/goidelic languages
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
@rugbyboy198127 What is your problem with the term "Celt"? How can you seriously say that the Celt/ Gaelic connection with Britain is an 18th C invention? Are you mad?
The only reason I can think of for you wanting to down play the racial heritage of Ireland, Scotland and Wales is if you're an immigrant from Asia, the Middle East, or Africa. then you would want to pretend that the political/geographical entity called a country is important. It's the Countries which were 18th/19thc inventions
macpduff 1 year ago
@macpduff gaelic is fine, celtic is not! it was first used in connection with the british isles early in the 1700's - quite incorrectly, this is well documented, now this word has evolved in academia to broader use, to aply to virtually all the northern, central and western european peoples, ie indo-european and the fact that the ancient languages of britain have become known as the celtic family is a complete joke, the word 'celtic' doesn't exist in these languages, i am what you call 'celtic'!
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
@rugbyboy198127 The idea that the term Celt was first used erroneously by 18th century academics is a myth. The term comes from Classical sources in which the Celts are said to refer to themselves as Keltoi. The term Celt was never and has never been used to describe all the Indo-European people. It is used only to describe the people who spoke a branch of what was once a homogenous language.
shakeystevensVIII 1 year ago
@macpduff you are the one 'down playing' the heritage of all the peoples of the british isles by labelling them as 'celtic'... i am english with irish and scots ancestry, i am in no way biased against the irish/scots/welsh - infact recent research has shown there is less difference between the people of the england and those of the 'celtic' nations than thought previous! it changes nothing, but you need understand the origin and thus inaccuracy of this term 'celtic' in application to brits mate!
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
@macpduff oh dear i'm not sure what kind of racist/biggoted agenda you have but you are way wide of the mark with your statement assumption regarding my ethnicity, which shouldn't matter a dot, however in the hope of annoying you further i'll let you in on a little secret, i have strawberry blonde hair and green eyes and was born to a mother of red hair - british enough for you? listen mate you fall for the combination of lies and incompetance by the roman then english empires, i speak the truth
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
@macpduff sorry. "Celtic" historically, was a designation for many groups of peoples based on the languages they spoke, not on their race. They did not necessarily belong to one raceor any identifiable race. Check your history. this is well known. Today, the term "Celtic" identifies people by their languages as well. If one has the blood of these peoples, one may also be considered celtic. However, historically, "Celtic" has been an appellation of tribes based on their language and culture.
allisonforfornsed 11 months ago
@macpduff . We are not a 'race'. We are not even a single ethnicity. The Hallstatt central European celts are not genetically close to the insular celts whose ancestry is more prehistoric and Atlantic coastal--northern France, Iberia. No one in the British Isles or Ireland even called themselves a 'celt' before the 17th c! It is a culture and a set of languages. Names Behan & Tierney...also the 'real thing' but not fluffy about it!
sonofherne 10 months ago
I think it's more a shame that people think the Romans celts etc didn't know or do anything outside the bounds of the land they had selected.
Celts have been been found in the middle east so this doesn't surprise me all that much but what can you do.
zagan1 2 years ago
It should NOT be forgotten that there is much more evidence that is not language related. Such as, the serpent mound in Ohio has 2 European predecessors, one in Avebury, and one in Scotland. There are STONE remains aligned to solar points all throughout the New England states, which is parallel to much Celtic type architecture, then add to this that the average "history" book will say NO Native Americans built in stone. Many cultures were interacting across the globe, it is just that simple
EducatedRebellion101 2 years ago
The Vikings found America way before Columbus!!
turbofritz2 2 years ago 2
and the the indigenous american people made it there long before the afore-named stragglers.
bluwooforme 2 years ago
@turbofritz2 The Basques were in America before the Vikings.
JorgeLorenzoSpain100 1 year ago
@JorgeLorenzoSpain100
You are wrong Ancient Greeks went to America
first and settled there.....
AleksandrosBr 11 months ago
@JorgeLorenzoSpain100 pero que dices xD
1elgalle1 10 months ago
Why would u doubt it.Dont think the irish are smart or advanced enough to trade with other countrys rather than murdering the native inhabitants like the british.
jimmy27paul 2 years ago
Comment removed
Lafo247 2 years ago
well it could be Gallic speaking immigrants from Ireland but I doubt it. it was probaly Celts.
bob44466 2 years ago
Well, now, that is the nub of the issue, isn't it? The academic gatekeepers traditionally have exhibited a knee-jerk rejection often laced with pejorative insults to dismiss these new theories. Yet, institutional archaeologists in America, uneducated in European scripts, refuse to visit, much less excavate, sites that might contradict their dogma. Thus, the impasse. As for my preferred pronunciation of Celtic, I address that in another video. Ogham as Americans say, not Irish, who say aluminium.
kscottm 2 years ago 4
True Scholars agree - these type of rock inscriptions cannot be used as evidence for early Irish settlers in North America - although transatlantic travel to N.A. could have been possible as in the legends of Brendan the Navigator and demonstrated by Tim Severin in the reconstructed "brendan voyage".... That said - You kinda lost me with the pronunciation of Ogham s/b (OH-um); and Celt s/b (hard 'K' sound as in Keltic) - both were incorrect.
Sláinte!
RadCelt 2 years ago
The foreign Middle Eastern religion Christianity and their doctrine which is anti Indo European, does not represent the nomadic Pagan Celts from around the world. The Hill of Taras Royal Grove is asking all Druids from around the world to unite together against the Middle Eastern Christian extremists who wish to bring harm to the citizens of ancient Gaul, which is the Unification of the EU. Sincerely the Druid's Brehon Laws
MagicTellaVision 2 years ago
Many anthropologists seem to consider it their duty to dismiss ideas contrary to their dogma as pseudoscience or crackpot theories. If comprehensive genetic testing had been done on ALL native american tribes, that might wash. But anomalies such as the extinct Mandans and Pawnee Skidee tribes cannot be genetically tested lacking survivors or survivors in adequate numbers. Superficial denials do nothing to further science, but only serve to weaken those "cultural inappropriateness" drum beaters
kscottm 3 years ago 3
So when someone has been dead for a long time their DNA can't be tested? We KNOW that's not true. You really WANT to believe that Celts and Amerindians are one in the same, and no matter what evidence is shown to the contrary you will continue to hold it as a fact and desperately search for any info to support your view. The linguistic interpretation is laughable. What can be supported is that the Celtic culture had an environmental spiritualism like the original Americans, and Australoids etc.
cinnireseisri 3 years ago
Kindly reference the mitochondrial DNA tests on the Mandan or the Skidee Pawnee! Just because the skeletons of more prominent tribes may have been tested does not contradict George Catlin's observations of the blue eyed Mandans or the missing remains of the Skidee wiped out by the Sioux. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, as any real scientific investigator understands. Yes, Harvard's Calvert Watkins laughed at our linguistics, too, but he erred in the Ogham "D" having 1 stroke.
kscottm 3 years ago
@kscottm
Here is the true theory Ancient Greeks travelled
and settled in America first cause Greeks had extensive
navigational knowledge......
AleksandrosBr 11 months ago
@kscottm there has been genetic mapping of many the native american population groups, as i understand it all the native peoples carry 4 main genetic threads all of which tie in with groups in asia supporting accepted theories, then in a tribe living in the far north east they detected traces (only traces) of a fifth thread, european in origin (a close hit to iberians), at first thought perhaps post eruopean colonialism, but far older infact between 20,000 and 16,000 years ago - the saluitrians!
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
@kscottm the only odd thing is why this dna has only survived among a small tribe living in the north-east? one might expect such small trace from colonialism or even the legends of ancient british in the late 6th century - the mounds at cohekia or whatever it is, the dna doesn't match what one would expect of the 10th century viking explorers and we're pretty sure those colonies didn't survive long, so it has to be these salutrians, evidence of whose activity lies all over eastern united states
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
@kscottm i guess the simple truth could be that these resourceful yet perhaps unsophisticated peoples of 20,000 years ago in ice-age europe who travelled by the ice to america, were not able to compete with their cousins who it seems arrived in america from north-east asia about 16,000 yhears ago, i guess the fact that only traces of their dna remain tells the story of overwhelming by numbers of by force/disease, unless they cover up native dates&finds sticking to 16,000years, then euorpeans 1st
rugbyboy198127 1 year ago
And proven fantastical. Indigenous Americans are proven to be genetically Asianic, similar to Okinawan. The people called Celts today (Irish, Welsh, Scots, Cornish, Bretons, Manx, etc) are related to Basque, and vice-versa. These are genetic FACTS that prove crack pot theories like this one to be what they are. Pseudo-science.
cinnireseisri 3 years ago
Its an interesting premise.
Nuiceltico 3 years ago
Youtube is an interesting place to find videos that can't be verified for authenticity. That being said, the claims on this video are about as valid as any other video claiming that Atlanteans founded the Incas and the Maya, or that Aliens impregnated ancient Egyptian women.
Malocosa 3 years ago
YouTube is where I put the evidence forth because archaeological peer review journals won't publish this material often citing it as "culturally inappropriate". What an interesting attitude for would=be scientists! Lump me in with Von Daniken, or the Atlanteans, or UFO's if you wish. That's a pretty lame response if you simply wish to exercise a knee-jerk rejection. Why not evaluate each theory on its own merits, instead? -- author
kscottm 3 years ago
I've yet to read anywhere that discovered evidence is blocked due to what you claim. My response is a valid one as I like to read about both professional and amatuer archaeology. To claim that you have the ultimate truth but can't publish it sounds suspect at best.
Malocosa 3 years ago
In that case, go to my website and under bibliography download the PDF document "correspondence including Dr. Calvert Watkins..." to learn how these theories were swept under the rug when first introduced in the late 1970's. Yes, my collection of 3 minute videos are superficial, but "Snuffing Colorado Ogham in the bud", "professionals reject theories", and "Celts and Indians, more than cousins" demonstrate the systemic, institutional bias. Or, believe only what you prefer to. It's your choice.
kscottm 3 years ago
Additionally, my DVD "Old News" frames these theories in a more comprehensive light. If you doubt archaeology's tendency to suppress ideas in defiance of its rigid dogma, see some of my websites items posted under the news page, particularly: How Wikipedia's Archaeoastronomy Article was Hijacked", my summary of the 'Lost Tomb of Jesus' reaction by scholars, TIME's article on First Americans, and the unscientific response to the Smithsonian's archaeologist Dennis Stanford's Solutrean Hypothesis.
kscottm 3 years ago
ks-I do feel that it is wrong not to publish your materials. I may disagree with it, but that does not make it wrong. No seriously researched data should be overlooked. I think everything should be vetted.
123bigr 2 years ago
The same as pyramids...pretty decent chances I think.
PictaviaProduction 3 years ago
hello, I am here to say that, with those evidences, I shall REALIZE and defend a deep change in the American government. After to see this video, it stays very clear that the North American continent most to belongs to Irish people.
USA BELONGS TO IRELAND!
FORGET THE WHITE HOUSE!
AlmightyBrazil 3 years ago
ummm i dont agree 100%
USA is USA
I think this land belongs to its native ppl.
alexanderssson 3 years ago
CELTS NOT SELTS!!
aronboylloyd123 3 years ago
They're telling us that the Native Americans could not have come up with a written form of communication on their own? Least of all by scratching lines into rock? Come on! You can't assume that any sign of advanced thinking was handed to people of color by Europeans. What a bunch of garbage. The theory behind this documentary is a real stretch.
13TH1RT33N13 3 years ago
Why so defensive? You've missed the point- Native Americans had several alphabets that they thought up all by themselves, usually hieroglyphic (they couldn't figure out the wheel, though). This writing just looks exactly like the Ogham alphabet of the Celts and spells out words that make sense in Irish. Irish ships were sturdy enough (proven by modern day experiments), for the voyage. So it's actually a pretty strong theory. So why don't you go eat some poop.
gregdancingmachine 3 years ago
There is no evidence besides this theory and it's weak. You're vulgar.
13TH1RT33N13 3 years ago
There is actually quite a bit of evidence. Google it, it's actually kinda cool. But anyway, we can agree that I'm vulgar and you're ignorant, problem solved!
gregdancingmachine 3 years ago
"There is no evidence besides this theory and it's weak. You're vulgar."
The offense you took to the theory was vulgar. Why would the indians be writing in Ogham?
If you take an interest in science and human history feel free to study it. If you on the other hand only have an interest in injecting political correctness into said studies please feel free to study something else. Limit yourself to liberal arts.
jackbelias 3 years ago
gregdancingmachine "Native Americans had several alphabets that they thought up all by themselves, usually hieroglyphic (they couldn't figure out the wheel, though)." There are artifacts in Central Mexico of toy animals with wheels on their legs made around 200 A.D., so to say that they couldn't "think of the wheel" is absurd.
Malocosa 3 years ago
greg-Why do U say Natives could not figure out the wheel?Natives have calendars,Pyramids,mounds and so on. You need to do more research before making such a comment. Afri-Asians were sailing long before a viking or Celt knew what a star was.When do you think this voyage took place?
123bigr 2 years ago
fables
Cirifischio88 3 years ago
in case you fools are forgetting The Celts are still around i'm one of them and damn fucking proud to be
Ceilteach bród i gcónaí!
HonestBollocks 3 years ago
Very interesting. I never heard about the Ogham found in Colorado - and I lived there for 10 years! LOL Anyway, this is definitely a theory I will enjoy reading up on. Thanks for posting this!
LibertyRocks 3 years ago
Celt pronounced (Selt) would be more logical as to the meaning of sail past tense would be selt (Celt)unless you like the sound of saileded
M3T4LH34D812 3 years ago
One of the problems with this little "factual" presentation - "Celt" is pronounced properly with a hard c or 'k' sound. It's from the Greek term of the people, "Keltoi." The celts (selts) are a basketball team.
grapplinbeartx 3 years ago
This dispute has been previously addressed. Check dictionaries. Both pronunciations are acceptable and there are specific reasons for my choice to employ a soft S. Also, see the video response. The author.
kscottm 3 years ago
ks-When did this voyage take place?
123bigr 2 years ago
@kscottm .Yes,considered 'acceptable' but technically not correct, as 'c' always has a hard sound in any of the celtic languages and is never pronounced as 's'.
sonofherne 10 months ago
Boston celtics you mean,boston is known as irish city,irish are celts or kelts,so B.C. is celtic or irish basketball team,very simple. and second,Greeks said "thouse barbarians call them self Kelts,in that point you are right!! Celt is probably Roman or anglosakson(English) pronouncement.
SLAVICONE 3 years ago
In ancient greek and in latin the name was proununced Kelts, this is the only truth.
Cirifischio88 3 years ago
intresting
attila692 3 years ago
The narrator of the documentary itself states " presummed" ogham in Colorado.
AS much as I would like to conclude it as definite proof I wonder if they have even been radiocarboned or if is not just a mere coincidence. Let' face it! They could be just horizontal and perpendicular lines......
buíochas, go raibh maith agat.
Biscaine 3 years ago 3
Fascinating.
jratt2 4 years ago
Read the story of St.Brendan an Irish monk who reached Newfoundland Canada 500 years before the Vikings!
irishoforiel 4 years ago
Dhia Dhuit!
Sorry but the story of St.Brendan is purely speculative
Is more like that the Irish settled in Iceland which is were the Norse found them years later.
Interesting story but like the bible I would not take it a face value.
Slainte!
Biscaine 3 years ago
Its pronounced Keltic not Seltic.Comes from the ancient Greek word for the Celts keltoi!
irishoforiel 4 years ago 2
please watch my video response above to the pronunciation issue you and many others have brought to my attention. There's a scholarly question in my mind based on the research I have seen. It does not conform with common usage and I am aware of this.
kscottm 4 years ago
Jeez guys give them a break. I find the GRN=grian a bit far fetched though.
iddn 4 years ago
Nice to see someone took a clip from Old News and put it here.
killerkimmy 4 years ago
This is very cool stuff.
I can ignore stuff like "OG-HAM" but "SELTIK" UGHHH!!!!! do some research.
Braighs 4 years ago 2
St Brendan rocks
poneil69 4 years ago
Reply) (Spam)
Usual idiot-level stuff from thick Americans.
This comment only shows that a person from Europe did not research well enough. !!!
I do believe that Celts have made it long ago to America . The Stone Circle in Boston that is called American Stonehenge might be a good evidence for it as well.
awendragoness 4 years ago
@awendragoness .What date is that? Stone circles ceased to be build after 1100 BC. The people who built them are not regarded as celts,although they are the ancestors of many of them.
sonofherne 10 months ago
Aluminum or aluminium. Both are right, depends where you live. The Irish pronunciation of Ogham differs from how most linguists in our hemisphere say it with a hard G. Irish authorities coached me to pronounce IMbolg, tho IMbolc is common WITH a B. As far as my pronounciation of Celts with a soft S, this is consistent with the word's acquisition from Middle French - not Latin directly - where C was pronounced "ess" when followed by vowels e/i/y. Thus, we say "ess" in center, circle and cycle.
kscottm 4 years ago
Its sad really that there is so much poor scholarship these days with the Celtic culture. The hard C, is how it is said. Understood with the Imbolc/g, region to region that changes.
Dreoilin 4 years ago
Usual idiot-level stuff from thick Americans.
Heraldfilms 4 years ago
Ogham wasnt use just by the Irish, it was used by the Welsh, Cornish, Manx, Scottish; the celtic nations.
Imbloc is pronounced IM-OLK. The b is silent.
I find it really interesting all of this but for some reason it is not as widely known as the dead sea scrolls
TheMagnaOpera 4 years ago
Although the Welsh & Cornish use Ogham, its still in the Goidelic tongue, they were Gael tribes living in the now regions of Wales and Cornwall, NOT the Brythonic ppl or tongue was ever used in Ogham. The ONLY other ogham that exists is some in Scotland in an odd Pictish language that is dead and untranslateable.
Dreoilin 4 years ago
Firstly its NOT pronounced (Og-um), its pronounced Oh-um or even oy-um. The people are NOT the Selts or the Seltic ppl. The are the Celts or the Celtic culture, pronounced with a hard C like a K. Celtic Like the Boston Basketball team is NOT how you pronounce the ancient ppl!!! Who do they get to announce these specials idiots?
Dreoilin 4 years ago
highly interesting!
mussegugge 4 years ago