Setanta wrote:As i understood it, the Kelts were responsible for the trait of red hair, and in particular, i have read that many ethnologists believe it was particular to the Picts. Tacitus comments on the red hair and large limbs of the inhabitants of Caledonia (Scotland). The Romanized Greek historian, Dio Cassius, speaks of the Iceni "Queen" Boudica as having "a great mass of red hair." Whatever the origin, it has been shown to have been prominent in central Asia and eastern Europe in ancient times, which suggests that either the "proto-Kelts" had red hair, or that they intermarried with people in the central Asian highlands who had red hair. In the last ice age, a relatively large population lived not far from the edge of the glaciers in Eurasia (roughly, the central Asian highlands and eastern Europe), and red heads have an advantage in cold climates with low sunlight levels because of their very pale skin--they retain body heat more effectively, although the advantage over other "whites" is not great, but they also produce Vitamin D in significantly larger quantities, which would help prevent childhood rickets, a disease which weakens the bones, and can cause childhood skeletal deformity.
Whatever is true about the origin of red hair, it is today most prevelant in the western fringes of Europe, again pointing to a Keltic origin. In places outside western Europe in which it is common, there is usually a tradition of Keltic settlement--so the red-haired Turks are found in Galatia, a region settled more than two thousand years ago by Kelts (Gauls, to the Romans).
I don't think that red hair was that common among the Norse. Eric Raudi, Eric the Red, was so named because he had red hair, and it seems to have been sufficiently uncommon that people not only took note of it, but named him for it. His "real" name was Erik Thorvaldsson--but we only know that because of the Landnamabok of Iceland ("The book of settlement) is obsessed with geneological detail. He is otherwise universally referred to as Erik the Red. As i say, i suspect that this is because red hair was so uncommon among the Norse.
Blond hair, too, is relatively uncommon, and is also associated with especially pale skin, and as with red heads, that confers survival advantages in cold, northern climates. Red hair, however, is a recessive trait, and even may well not appear in all generations of families noted for red hair.
Somewhere I read that red hair is just a mixing of genes for dark hair and blonde hair? The reason I think that might be correct is because the original Celts were supposed to be brown haired and brown eyed. After the Viking invasions the red hair might have sprung up?
Also, I thought in Dickens, Oliver Twist, Fagin, the Jewish character was supposed to have red hair, which was thought of as a "Jewish trait." I have seen more than one carrot colored head amongst Orthodox Jewish children.
And I read in a book about NYC that during the Yukon gold rush, a call went out to NYC pimps, that red headed "Jewesses" were supposed to be really lustful. So, a goodly number of the women of that profession dyed their hair red, and presented themselves as Jewesses when they got to the Yukon. Likely upping their price for such an "exotic" woman (so thought the clients supposedly).
Red hair is interesting. But some people have an aversion to it for some reason?
But, back to blondes. There is straw blonde hair that fades to brown by late adolesence. There is blonde hair that just stays blonde, until it goes gray. Regardless, the texture of the hair is of import too. The silky blonde straight hair, that blows gently with the breeze usually turns heads.
I just think blonde is an aesthetic quality to women that has its own admirers. The part about dumb is silly, since I've know so many blondes that, with their steely blue eyes, were anything but dumb.
