...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Deshret » Xiu are not Mande or taught Maya to write (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Xiu are not Mande or taught Maya to write
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Clyde Winters claims that the Mande, Tutul Xiu, taught the Maya how to write. In order to deal adequately with this claim we need to put it in context both in time and culture. Winters is in the habit of shuffling different time periods as if they were contemporaneous.
The accepted chronology for Mesoamerica follows with some key cities and cultures

Formative 2000 BC- 0 AD

El Manati 1700
Barra – 1600
Ocos- 1500
San Lorenzo 1200

Early Classic 0-300 A.D

Teotihuacan 100 B.C- 650 A.D.
El Mirador
Kaminaljuyu
Izapa
Tres Zapotes
Mojarra
Cerro Las Mesas


Classic 300-900 A.D

Tikal
Palenque
Copan
Uaxactun
Yaxchilan
Chichen Itza
Uxmal

Post-Classic 900-1500 A.D.

Toltec 900-1100 A.D.
Aztec 1325- 1520 A.D.
Chichen Itza 900-1520 A.D.
Uxmal 1000 -1200 A.D. moved to Mani
Mayapan 1100- 1441 A.D.
Mani 1200-1520 A.D.

Both Chichen Itza were occupied in the late Classic, but the period we are interested in is the Post-Classic. Thompson (p. 117) writes:

quote:
There is incontrovertible evidence that Mexican architecture is later at Chichen Itza than the Maya style, and therefore its introduction dates sometime after A.D. 889 or perhaps 909, the latest dates associated with Maya architecture. From various sources we learn that the Itza who were foreigners and spoke broken Maya, settled at Chichen Itza..
The Post-Classic Period all over Mesoamerica involved a much more militaristic atmosphere than in previous periods. First, the Toltec at Tula, Central Mexico created an “empire” based on long distance trade and control of resources such as obsidian and flint. Their reach can be seen by the Mesoamerican distribution of their characteristic Plumbate ware (found in Uxmal and many other sites). They had a number of characteristics in architecture, religion, and behavior, that were transferred to the Post-Classic Maya. Tula the capital of the Toltec Empire, differed from other Mesoamerican sites because it had flatter pyramids with the roof of the top room supported by stone pillars carved to represent serpents. Also present were chac mools, reclining figures with flat plates to receive sacrificial hearts. The egalitarian nature of the religion can be seen by what are called “mercados” large, rooms with many pillars and low flat roofs where many warriors could congregate for ceremonies. This architecture differed from that of Teotihuacan (large pyramids with plazas below for worshippers) or Classic Maya (very steep pyramids with very small rooms at the top—thus a small number of participants) in neither do we see chac mools or serpent pillars. All these architectural features are found in both Tula (Central Mexico) and Chichen Itza (Yucatan) at approximately the same time.

Another clear difference with the Classic Period is the extent and form or human sacrifice. There had always been human sacrifice in Mesoamerica, but the advent of the Toltecs followed by the Aztecs represented a huge quantitative as well as qualitative increase. This can be seen by the “tzompantli” a wall or structure with carved human skulls (representing a real rack with many human skulls; by multiple images of hearts being ripped out of the chests of victims; and by the “chac mool” heart recipients. All of these are found in Tula (Central Mexico) and Chichen Itza (Yucatan) at approximately the same time.

Both the religion and social organization changed in the Post-Classic to become more participatory. Rituals were held in large flat-roofed buildings so that warriors could participate contrary to the reclusive Maya religion of the Classic Period. This wider participation an be seen in the existence of elite warrior orders (the Jaguar and Eagle order. Again these are present both at Tula and Chichen Itza.
Toltec warriors were characterized by the use of spear throwers, butterfly shaped pectorals, and characteristic helmets- which can be seen in monumental warriors at Tula.

Lopez Austin and Lopez Lujan (2001) Describe the influx into Yucatan in the Post-Classic:

quote:
p.268-269 Nevertheless, Maya histories, in the Post-Classic, are variations of the same drama, actions of parallel characters in different scenarios, a struggle for control matching two different conceptions of power. On one side, were peoples who wanted to preserve authority based on ethnicity. They were opposed by innovators who, influenced by foreign ideologies, tried to put in place a broader authority, which would include different ethnic groups.
We know who the first group was but, who was the second group? For a long time they were called “Mexicans” which is not only an inadequate and confusing term, but anachronistic. Other names such as Toltec, Putun Maya, and Mexica are not convenient either. We cannot use an ethnic name to define a event in which a great number of groups, including the Maya, participated. For the same reason, any linguistic term would also be inappropriate. We could choose neutral terms like “westerners” based on the origin of some of them, but this would be confusing both in World and Mesoamerican historical contexts. They cannot even be called “invaders,” because many of them had lived for centuries in Maya territory. Thus, we find ourselves in the uncomfortable and risky need to coin a new term. According to the written sources, these peoples claimed that their remote ancestors came from the same far away place, Zuyuá or Siwán which, as we will see, was mythical. Since this belief was one of their ideological pillars, however, we propose to cal these people the Zuyuans or Siwans.
For several centuries after the end of the Classic, many waves of people migrated from the Gulf Coast to the areas of Chiapas and the Petén. Some of the clearest indications of these migrations are the early sculptures, made by a culture that has been called hybrid (mestiza), at sites on the Pasión River. J. Eric S. Thompson identified their place of origin as the border area between Tabasco and Campeche, and identified the invaders as Putun-Chontal, permeated with Central Mexican ideology. The invading waves followed several routes: toward the jungle, north to the Yucatán Peninsula, or across the course of the Chixoy River toward the high valleys of Guatemala.

Thus the people coming to Yucatan, what Lopez Austin calls “zuyuan” were a variety of people and included not only the Xius but also the Itzas, the Cocoms and others. Landa’s work deals with Yucatan in the Post-Classic— PERIOD! The earliest evidence of full writing in the Maya area is in San Bartolo (300-200 B.C)- 1000 years before the events described by Landa.

Hammond 92006) writes:

quote:
The evidence from Cuello suggests that Mesoamerican symbolic systems and media in which they could be expressed and exhibited have their origins in the early Middle Preclassic, from 900 BC onwards; although the actual, rather than putative, manufacture of bark paper for use as a writing medium, and the presence of symbols carrying a linguistic or numerical charge remains speculative, the evidence nevertheless suggests that the Maya, as much s the Olmec, participated in these important cultural developments, and provides time depth to the undoubted later emergence of fully Maya scribal systems such as that now reported from 300-200 B.C. at San Bartolo in northern Peten, Guatemala (Saturno et al. 2006).
First- let’s copy the relevant passages in Landa:

quote:
Some of the old people of Yucatan say that they have heard from their ancestors that this land was occupied by a race of people, who came from the East. and whom God had delivered by opening twelve paths through the sea. (Landa 1973: 11; Tozzer 1941: 16-17.

It is believed among the Indians that with Itzas who occupied Chichen Itza, there reigned a great lord, named Kukulkan, and that the principal building, which is called Kukulkan, shows this to be true. They say he arrived from the west; but they differ among themselves as to whether he arrived before or after the Itzas or with them (Landa 1973: 12-13; Tozzer 1941: 20-23).

. . .and they had a high priest whom they called Ah Kin Mai and by another name Ahau Can Mai, which means the Priest Mai, or the High Priest Mai. In him was the key of their learning and it was to these matters that they dedicated themselves mostly; and they gave advice to the lords and replies to their questions. . . They provided priests for the towns when they were needed, examining them in the sciences and ceremonies, and committed them to the duties of their office, and the good example to people and provided them with books and sent them forth. . . And they employed themselves in the duties of the temples and in teaching their sciences as well as writing books about them. .. The sciences which they taught were the computation of the years, months, and days, the festivals and ceremonies, the administration of the sacraments, the fateful days and seasons, their methods of divination and their prophecies, events and cures for diseases, and their antiquities and how to read and write with the letters and characters, with which they wrote, and drawings which illustrate the meaning of the writings (Landa 1973: 14-15; Tozzer 1941: 27-28).

(from Landa’s unpublished 3rd ed Tozzer Note 154) They had letters and each letter was a syllable and they understood each other by means of them. . . And they say (of Tutul Xiu) that he was very learned, for he taught the natives the letters and the reckoning of the months and years which the lords of Mani were using when we conquerors entered the land. (Relaciones de Yucatan 1:156; Tozzer 1941:28, N. 154).

The Indians say that numerous tribes with their chiefs came to Yucatan from the south, and it appears that they came from Chiapas, although the Indians have no more knowledge about it. But this author [Landa} conjectures it because many terms and word constructions are identical in Chiapas and in Yucatan, and because there are in Chiapas many remains of places which have been abandoned. And they say that these tribes wandered around in the uninhabited parts of Yucatan for forty years. . . reached the mountains which lie almost opposite the city of Mayapan and ten leagues from it. And there they began to settle. . .and the people of Mayapan became very good friends with them. . .and in this way those of Tutul Xiu subjected themselves to the laws of Mayapan and thus they intermarried, and as the lord Xiu of the Tutul Xius was such he came to be very much esteemed by everybody (Landa 1973:15-16; Tozzer 1941: 29-31)


Herrera 1601 These tribes from the south were the Tutul Xius. (Herrera 4,10,II, Appendix A) tells us that “great companies of people entered from the South from the slopes of the sierras of Lacandon who, they were sure came from Chiapas”, and later, he calls them Tutul Xius. In the Chilam Balam of Mani (Brinton 1882, 100) we read,” This is the arrangement of the katuns since the departure was made from the land, from the house Nonoual, where were the four Tutulxiu, from Zuiva at the west; they came from the land Tulapan, having formed a league.” Nonoual or Nonoualco [BOM located near Xicalanco— where the Chontal Maya come from is a boundary of the languages Maya-Nahuatl] (Herrera 1601; Tozzer 1941; Appendix A pp. 213-220).

Among the various documents in the Xiu Ms. is the Xiu genealogical tree which has been publishes in several places. Morley and Roys give a bibliography together with a complete discussion of the genealogy. They write that the tree “was compiled about 1560, perhaps even in 1557. … and there considerable likelihood that it may have been the work of Gaspar Antonio Chi, who was a Xiu on his mother’s side and probably the best educated Maya in Yucatan during the last half of the Sixteenth Century. This tree gives the name of the progenitor of the family as Hun Uitzil Chac Tutul Xiu and that of his wife as Yx.. . .of Ticul.. . at the base of the trees the founder of the family, in association , probably with a Katun 2 Ahau again in the bottom legend referring to the woman at the bottom right, who is said to be the wife of Hun Uitzil Chac. . . .
By careful investigation Morley and Scholes have reconstructed the Xiu pedigree from about the year 1000, the time of Hun Uitzil Chac Tutul Xiu, down to the present time with this single lacuna of seventeen generations following the time of founder, 1000, to about 1407.. .
The name Tutul Xiu is a Mexican word, xiuhtototl “Turquoise bird” in Nahuatl (BOM from totol”bird” and xiuitl “turqoise”), according to Spinden.. . . Morley and Roys also point out other evidence of the Mexican origin of the Xiu in the Mexican name of Ah Cuat Xiu, son of Ah Uitz, in the genealogical tree in the Xiu manuscript.. Cuat is a variant of the Nahuatl coatl, and also the crown worn by the founder of the family which strongly suggests the xiuhtzontli or turquoise mosaic crown of the Aztecs which could only be worn by their supreme ruler, the Tlacatecuhtli (Tozzer 1941: 29-30).

(Itzamna) The latter, the god of heaven and of the sun, was the most important deity of the Mayas.. .He was the first priest, invented writing and books (Tozzer 1941 p145-146 note 707).

During the month of Uo. . . invoking with prayers and devotions an idol named Kinich Ahau Itzamna, who they say was the first priest.. Meanwhile they dissolved in a vessel a little of their verdigris with virgin water, which they said had been brought from the woods where a woman had never penetrated. With this they anointed the boards of their books so as to purify them. This having been done, the most learned of the priests opened a book and looked at the prognostics of that year, and he manifested to those who were present. (Landa 1973: 92; Tozzer 1941: 153-154)
[Tozzer points out Note 765 that] It will be remembered (N. 707) that Itzamna was considered to been the inventor of the hieroglyphic writing and here Kinich Ahau Itzamna is the god invoked in connection with divination by means of the sacred book (Tozzer 1941: 153-154)

Winters consistently uses the logical fallacy of the “excluded middle” as a method of argumentation. It’s always the “Mande or Nothing” but in this case we have overwhelming candidates for the founders of Chichen Itza and Mani. We find that, in the same time frame, Chichen Itza in Yucatan and Tula in Central Mexico have a number of identical architectural features, skull racks, chac mools, human sacrifice by excising hearts, plumed serpents, participation by warriors in religious rituals, elite Jaguar and Eagle warrior societies, and many Nahuatl loan words.

Winters claims

1) The Tutul Xiu taught the Maya how to write.

Reading Tozzer’s footnote clear reference is made to Tutul Xiu as a single person he not as a tribe. Also disregards the fact that the Maya had been writing for a thousand years before the events described by Landa.

2) That the Xiu had universities.

Nowhere does Landa mention universities. Tozzer pp 27-28 refers to training priest in divination (Hardly a University science)

3) That Tutul Xiu means “Very good subjects of the Order" in Mande. Xiu, "The Shi (/the race)".
"The Shis (who) are very good Subjects of the cult-Order

Purely invented by Winters- no remotely possible etymology is given.
On the other hand, Tutul Xiu “turquoise bird” from Nahuatl (a Central Mexico language) is clearly shown as totol “bird” and xiuitl “turquoise”

4) p. 86 “The proto-Manding often referred to themselves as Si. In the Manding languages the term Si, means “black, race, descendant and family.” The plural in Manding was usually formed with the suffix /-u/. the term si-u would mean the “Blacks”. The Yucatec Maya, called the people who introduced them to writing the Xiu people. The /x/in Spanish is pronounced as /sh/ in ‘she.’
The Mayan term xiu agrees with the ancient name for the Manding people: Si. The fact that the Olmec people introduced writing to the Maya suggest [sic] that the Olmec peopled [sic] called themselves Xiu (shi-u) ‘the Blacks (Winters 2005: 86).

A minor point /x/ in Spanish is NOT pronounced /sh/. Spanish is /j/. Maya is /sh/.

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. English-Bambara, English-Bambara Student Lexicon. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.

Brauner, Siegmund. 1974. Lehrbuch des Bambara. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopaedie.

Delafosse, Maurice. 1929. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula) Vol 1. Intro. Grammaire, Lexique Francais-Mandingue). Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.


Delafosse, Maurice. 1955. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula). Vol 2. Dictionnaire Mandingue-Francaise. Paris: Librarie Paul Geuthner

Norman Hammond. 2006. “Early symbolic Expression in the Maya Lowlands,” Mexicon 28 (#2): 25-28

Herrera, A. 1601 Historia General de los Hechos de los Castellanos en las Islas y Tierra Firme del Mar Oceano Decada IV, Libro X, Caps. I-IV (Appendix A Tozzer pp. 213-220)

Landa, D. 1973 Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan Garibay A. M. Mexico:Porrua

Lopez Austin, A. and Lopez Lujan, L. 2001 Mexico’s Indigenous Past Ortiz de Montellano, B.R. (trans.) Norman: University of Oklahoma Press

Thompson, J. E. S. 1966 The Rise and Fall of Maya Civilization Norman: University Press.

Winters, C. 2005 Atlantis in Mexico 1st ed. Lulu Press

Tozzer, A. M. ed. 1941. Landa’s Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan.p. 27. Cambridge: Peabody Museum of American Archaeology Harvard.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The comment of Lopez Austin and Lopez Lujan (2001) is irrelevant to this discussion because they make it clear that they decided to “coin a new term” Zuyua for the people who migrated into Yucatan.
quote:

Thus, we find ourselves in the uncomfortable and risky need to coin a new term. According to the written sources, these peoples claimed that their remote ancestors came from the same far away place, Zuyuá or Siwán which, as we will see, was mythical. Since this belief was one of their ideological pillars, however, we propose to cal[l] these people the Zuyuans or Siwans.


Also, Austen and Lujan do not show any evidence that any of these people claimed that they came from Zuyua. In addition, none of these people according to your quote were related to the Xiu. Moreover, the Nahuatl do not enter Mexico until hundreds of years after the end of Classical Mayan civilization.

You claim that Tutul Xiu is a Mexican word, xiuhtototl “Turquoise bird” in Nahuatl. This is your opinion Tutul Xiu and xiuhtototl are not related.

None of these people Toltec, Putun Maya, Itzas and Mexica introduced writing to the Maya. In fact the traditions of these people place their migration into Yucatan long after the Maya had writing.

In addition, you talk about the Tutul Xiu family. This family has nothing to do with the introduction of writing to the Maya. The Tutul Xiu, you are talking about was born about 1380. This was around a 1000 years after the fall of Mayan civilization. as a result, the Tutul Xiu, who introduced writing has to be different from the Tutul Xiu family.


The Olmecs probably founded writing in the Mexico. Dr. Coe, in "Olmec Jaguar and Olmec Kings" (1968), suggested that the beliefs of the Maya were of Olmec origin and that the pre Maya were Olmecs (1968,p.103). This agreed with Brainerd and Sharer's, The ancient Maya (1983,p.65) concept of colonial Olmec at Maya sites. Moreover, this view is supported by the appearance of jaguar stucco mask pyramids (probably built by the Olmecs) under Mayan pyramids e.g., Cerros Structure 5-C-2nd, Uxaxacatun pyramid and structure 5D-22 at Tikal. This would conform to Schele and Freidel's belief that the monumental structures of the Maya were derived from Olmec prototypes.

Terrence Kaufman has proposed that the Olmec spoke a Mexe Zoquean speech. My research as discussed in the articles mentioned above indicate that the Olmec people spoke a variation of the Malinke Bambara language and not a Zoquean language.

An Olmec origin for many pre-Classic Maya, would explain the cover-up of the jaguar stucco mask pyramids with classic Maya pyramids at these sites. It would also explain Schele and Freidel's (1990,p.56) claim that the first king of Palenque was the Olmec leader U-Kix-chan; and that the ancient Maya adopted many Olmec social institutions and olmec symbolic imagery.

There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa
Landa in makes it clear that the Yucatec Maya claimed that they got writing from a group of foreigners called Tutul Xiu (Tozzer,1941). The term Tutul Xiu, can be translated in Manding as Tutu l ,"Very good Subjects of the Order", Xi u, "The Shi" , or The Shis (who) are very good supporters of the cult order". In this passage the l, is a suffix of augmentation and the u, is the plural element. The Shi, is probably related to the Manding term "Si", which was also an ethnonym.

The fact that the Yucatec term for writing is "c'i:b'" and the Olmec/ Malinke Bambara term for writing "se'be'", are analogous in sound support a Manding origin for the Mayan term for writing. Moreover this confirms the earlier findings by Wiener of a Malinke Bambara substratum in the culture and religious terms of the Maya and Aztec people.

In addition to the Mande speaking Olmec or Xi people influcing the Mayan languages they also influenced the Otomi language of Mexico.

In conclusion the affinity between Olmec and African skeletons, artifactual evidence from Olmec sites, of Olmec/Manding and Mayan signs support the view that the Mande speaking Olmecs gave the Maya writing. These Olmecs as discussed in earlier postings came from Saharan/ North Africa before 1000 B.C. This would explain the agreement beween Mayan *c'ihb' and Olmec/Manding *se'be'. This along with the obvious total affinity of the Olmec symbols and the symbols used by the Manding people at Oued Mertoutek in 3000 B.C., and later around the Nigerbend which Wiener used to compare with the Tuxtla symbols, all support the fact that the Olmec were Manding speaking Meso Americans.

The fact that the Olmecs were predominately African in no way demeans the abilities of native Americans. In fact, the Olmecs left behind a rich culture/ civilizations that has made the later civilizations of the Zapotecs and Maya some of the greatest civilizations in World History.

Sources

C.H. Brown, Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland, , 32 (4), (1991) pp.489-495.

K. Hau, "Pre Islamic writing in West Africa", K. Hau, "African Writing in the New World", ,t.40 ser.B no.1, (1978) pp.28 48.

R. A. Diehl and M.D. Coe, "Olmec Archaeology". In , (Ed.) Jill Guthrie (pp.11-25), The Art Museum, Princeton University Press, 1996.

T. Kaufman and W.M. Norman, "An outline of Cholan phonology, morphology, and vocabulary. In , (Ed.) by J.S. Justeson and L. Campbell (pp.77-166). Albany : Institute of Mesoamerican Studies.

C. Marquez, Estudios arqueologicas y ethnograficas>. Mexico, 1956.

S.G. Morley, G.W. Brainerd and R.J. Sharer. . Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

C.A. Winters, "The influence of the Mande scripts on American ancient writing systems", , t.39, Ser.B no.2, (1977) pp.405 431.

C. A. Winters, "Manding writing in the New World Part 1", Journal of African Civilization , 1 (1), (1979) pp.81 97.

C.A. Winters, "Appendix B: The Jade Celts from La Venta". In , by A. von Wuthenau (pp.235 237). 2nd Edition, Mexico, 1980.

C.A. Winters, "The Ancient manding Script". In , (ed) by Ivan Van Sertima (pp.208 214), New Brunswick, Transaction Books, 1983.

C.A. Winters, "The African influence on Indian Agriculture", Journal of African Civilization 3(1), (1981) pp.100-110.

C. A. Winters, "The Indus Valley Writing and related scripts of the 3rd millennium BC", 2(1), (1985) pp.13 20.

M. Delafosse, "Vai leur langue et leur systeme d'ecriture", 10, (1899).

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bi-Lingual Olmec Mayan Text

 -


.


.
Support for my decipherment of the Olmec writing comes from a bilingual Mayan-Olmec/Mande inscribed brick from Comalcalco. Comalcalco is a Mayan archaeological site found in Tobasco. Here archaeologist Neil Steede found over 4000 inscribed bricks at the Comalcalco site.

 -


The Comalcalco site encompasses around 360 pyramids. Here almost all of the structures were built of fired bricks (tabiques) . Between 1977-1978, 9 of these pyramids were excavated.

Comalcalco is located in the State of Tabasco. It was built by the Chontal. It is the only city in Mexico built entirely of brick.

 -


Comalcalco means "in the house of earthenware" in Nahuatl

This Mayan site has interesting architecture. For example, "The Great Acropolis" probably used for civil and religious purposes.


In addition to building fine temples, walls and altars, there are fine "stucco" used to face their constructions, which resemble images on the sub-pyramids of many Mayan sites, that have analogy to Olmec iconography.

 -

Neil Steede became interested in the bricks in 1979. He obtained permission to photograph the bricks from the National Institute of Anthropology and History (NIAH).



Many of the inscribed bricks from the Comalcalco ruins were published by Neil Steede in a bilingual book entitled Preliminary Catalogue of the Comalcalco Bricks.


Brick T1-452 R16 is a very special brick. This brick has a bilingual Mayan-Olmec inscription. In this inscription we see a Mayan inscription , and beside it on the right hand side an Olmec/Malinke inscription .


The Olmec writing used on this brick is the plain Olmec style of writing. The plain Olmec style of writing was usually used to inscribe celts and other Olmec artifacts.

On the far right hand side we see two additional characters. These characters also are written in the plain Olmec style of writing (The Decipherment of Olmec Writing).

 -

Steede was advised by Dr. Alexander von Wuthenau, to send me copies of the bricks to determine if I could identify the writing on some of the bricks that appeared to Steede as similar to scripts used in the Old World in advance of his publication of the Comalcalco Catalogue. After an examination of the photographs I spotted the bilingual Olmec-Maya inscription.



I immediately recognized that the T1-452 R16 brick appeared to be include both Mayan and Olmec inscriptions. To test this hypothesis, I suggested to Steede that he decipher the Mayan inscription , and I would decipher the Olmec passage which had been partially defaced.

Steede agreed to this test. He then divided the inscription into three segments (we were both to decipher) and we began our decipherments. Below is the division of the T1-452 R16 text:

 -

I sent a copy of my decipherment of T1-452 R16 to Steede. On this decipherment I include a translation of the Malinke inscription on the right-hand side of the T1-452 R16, and also the Olmec/Mande signs found inside of the Mayan glyphs. Please note in my decipherment that I had placed on this chart a breakdown of the Olmec/Mande signs and the plain Olmec signs found inside of the Mayan glyphs (as well). Below is a copy of the decipherment I sent to Steede in 1984.



 -



Translation/Transliteration Olmec Plain Signs
  • A be ki

    a-ni gyo fe

    Ti lu


Thou exist incomplete.

He is the manifestation of life, a talisman in this proximity.

Give birth to this [funerary] habitation.

[img] http://olmec98.net/biling3.gif[/img]

Translation/Transliteration Olmec Signs inside Mayan Glyphs
  • Ku Fe

    The Jaguar god (of the underworld)

    Te ba

    Be Tu


The person of considerable dignity is void of breath.

[He goes to me the] Jaguar God.

[He] is no longer alive/ or Powerful Righteousness!

[His] Place of rest exist here.



Steede wrote me back (28-3-84) that his interpretation of the Mayan signs was almost identical to my translation of the Mayan and Olmec/Mande signs. He wrote the following:

" 1A shows a face with slashed eyes (blind or non=seeing), nostriless nose (non-breathing) and "clamped shut" mouth ( non-speaking). This would indicate death alright, but below the cartouche is added onto by two breath scrolls on each side of an intricate sacraficial blade. These breath (or speak) scrolls indicate that the person in question has expressed that he feels as though he is "dead" spiritually and wishes t make a self-sacrifice.

1B underlines the fact that he is dead, but note the "S" in the ear of the jaguar. This indicates pentiteuce, or repentence. Therefore, though the person is "dead" spiritually he has heard and accepted repentence.

Therefore 1A and 1B together would read extremely similar to your hieroglyphic translation, but almost exactly as your Manding translation. The person in question is considered to be incomplete until he accepts the priesthood.

2 is identical to your Manding translation and similar to your hieroglyphic interpretation. The part to the right is a dorsal fish fin.

I don't have any notes infront of me but I believe it is Stela 1 of Izapa which shows that Quetzalcoatl "fishes" for all types of fish (men). This stela also implicates that the dorsal fish fin is associated with priesthood.

Here we can see the fish fin "hatching" from an "egg?" or from "inner self?" The person in question is being born again as a priest.

3. I can't understand, but your rendering would seem to be correct. He is now at rest because he is (complete)."

This translation of the Mayan side of this bilingual brick from Comalcalco , and other inscribed bricks from this site indicate that it was probably a Mayan College where scribes learned Mayan writing and possibily pyramid construction. The bilingual text on T1-452 R16, indicates that the Mayan scribes had to learn how to write Olmec inscriptions and translate them into Mayan. The fact that the Olmec inscriptions were defaced indicate that the Mayan scribes while they studied Mayan writing first wrote a piece in Olmec and then wrote the same inscription in the Mayan language(s)

Below we see T1-452 R16. If you look carefully at the brick we see two Olmec signs written vertically.

Reading from top to bottom we find the following signs Mayan. The interpretation of Mayan in Olmec is the following: "It's done well--full of life". These signs appear to indicate a grade or comment on the brick made by the instructor. This supports the view that Comalcalco was a College, where Mayan initiates into the priesthood and scribal classes learned how to write Mayan hieroglyphics.
.


We know the name of the Olmec from the Maya. Landa noted that the Yucatec Maya claimed that they got writing from a group of foreigners called Tutul Xiu from Nonoulco (Tozzer, 1941). The Olmec originated writing in Mexico., so we can assume that the term Tutul Xiu refer to the Olmec.
The Tutul Xi were probably Olmecs. The term Tutul Xiu, can be translated into Olmec which is a member of the Manding Superfamily of languages as follows:
Tutul, "Very good subjects of the Order".
Xiu, "The Shi (/the race)".

"The Shis (who) are very good Subjects of the cult-Order".

The term Shi, is probably related to the Manding term Si, which was also used as an ethnonym. Since Si/Xi was used as an ethnonym, the Tutul Xi-u were the Olmec people. Thusly I call the Olmec by their own name: Xi.

Reference
Landa, D. de. (1978). Yucatan before and after the Conquest. (Trans. by) William Gates. New York: Dover Publications.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -
You mention the San Bartolo inscriptions, you are right they are related to the earliest forms of Mayan writing. They were written by the Black Mayans who lived in Guatemala.

The San Bartolo, Guatemala murals are very beautiful they were discovered by William Saturno of the University of New Hampshire.
 -

Stone head From San Bartolo
 -
These murals were found in an unexcavated pyramid. Entering a looter’s trench Dr. Saturno dug into the pyramid and discovered the murals. Much of the mural was destroyed when the Maya built another pyramid over the original structure.


King Kali
 -


The San Bartolo pyramid has two murals. One of the murals is of a procession of people on a boat . The other mural is of King Tali, sitting on his pyramid.


On the boat there are a number of figures. Moving from right to left we see four standing figures nearest the end of the boat. These figures are carrying bundles raised above their heads.

 -


In front of these figures we see several symbols. These symbols provide context to the procession.

There are a number of female figures on the boat. The woman near the Corn God has writing symbols on their faces. The kneeling figure holding the vase on the far left side toward the end has the words gyo ti “righteous cult specialist” on her cheek.

The standing female figure in front of the last three symbols placed in front of the person carrying gifts has the words ti i “she is righteous

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You know nothing about Mayan history. If you did you would recognize that there were many Black Mayas.

 -


The Popol Vuh, gives us insight into Mayan history.

 -

In the Popol Vuh it is made clear that the ancestors of the Quiche Maya came from across the sea. We will use quotes from Tedlocks translation of the Popol Vuh

We shall write about this now amid the preaching of God,in Christendom now. We shall bring it out because there is no longer a place to see it, a Council Book, a place to see “The Light That Came from Beside the Sea”, the account of “Our Place in the Shadows”, a place to see “The Dawn of Life”……(p.63).

The ancestors of the Maya came from east. “…[b]the first people came from beside the sea, from the east. They came here in ancient times. When they died they were very old”
(p.175).

Claiming that the nacestors came from the East is very important. East of the Maya, would be the Gulf Region where the Mande/Olmec people settled and founded the Olmec civilization.

You guys, in your racism assume that their were no Blacks among the Maya. This is a false view. The Popol Vuh notes that: They didn’t know where they were going. They did this for a long time, when they were there in the grasslands:the black people, the white people, people of many faces, people of many languages, uncertain there at the edge of the sky (pp.149-150).

The Blacks introduced civilization among the Maya. In the Popol Vuh, it is noted that And then the boys made fire with drill and rosted, the bird over the fire. And they coated one of the birds with plaster, they put gypsum on it (p.86).


 -

 -

It is interesting to note that the boys drilling are depicted as Blacks in the Dresden and Tro-Cotesianus Codexes.

As a result, the color Black and Black individuals were recognized as important in Mayan culture. The major Black gods were God C, Xaman and Ekchuah. God C is personification of the concept of sacreness. It has the phonetic value of ku or ch’in deity or sacreness. The Mayan term for deity/god is of Mande Olmec origin:

  • Maya ……..English………Mande

    Kin………….day…………..kene

    K’u,ku……..sacre,god………Ku

This is another indication of the Olmec origin of Mayan civilization.

The jaguar played an important role in Mayan society as it did in Africa. The jaguar pelt or cushion was the symbol of the ‘enthroned lord’. This is why we see the jaguar pelt around the neck of the Black royal represented in the Chama vase.

Blacks also introduced writing and trade among the Maya. The usual Mayan term for black is ’Ek’. Thus the merchant god signified by the back pack staff and etc was called Ekchuah. Thus we see these Blacks, gods etc. represented in many Mayan Codexes.
.

 -
God C

.
The fact is that there were Black Maya, and that these Blacks played an important role in Mayan society.

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To read the Mayan inscriptions I break down the Olmec syllabic signs which make up the Mayan hierogyphs. Once these signs are given a phonetic value I read them in Yucatec Maya.


 -


 -


 -


 -


As you can see when you look at the syllabic nature of many Mayan hieroglyphs the Codexs tell us much more than dates.

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Many pyramids are of Olmec origin. This is evident in the dragon motifs.

 -

This Olmec motif is found on pyramids that were covered over by later Mayan pyramids. These subpyramids were probably built by the Olmec.

.

 -

A good example of the Architectural skill and innovations of the First Nation Blacks is the pyramidal complex at Xultun. These Blacks left evidence of their identity in the architectural workroom.

 -  -

The Xultun pyramidal complex shows a variety of architectural styles and buildings

 -

The First Nation Blacks in Mexico had a right to create their own architectural style just like other Blacks in Africa who developed different pyramidial styles:


Egypt

 -


Fezzan/Garamante

 -


Kushite

 -

--------------------
C. A. Winters

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -


 -

These are pictures of the Lamanai Temple. There is also a jaguar temple at Lamanai.

 -

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The comment of Lopez Austin and Lopez Lujan (2001) is irrelevant to this discussion because they make it clear that they decided to “coin a new term” Zuyua for the people who migrated into Yucatan.
quote:

Thus, we find ourselves in the uncomfortable and risky need to coin a new term. According to the written sources, these peoples claimed that their remote ancestors came from the same far away place, Zuyuá or Siwán which, as we will see, was mythical. Since this belief was one of their ideological pillars, however, we propose to cal[l] these people the Zuyuans or Siwans.


Also, Austen and Lujan do not show any evidence that any of these people claimed that they came from Zuyua. In addition, none of these people according to your quote were related to the Xiu. Moreover, the Nahuatl do not enter Mexico until hundreds of years after the end of Classical Mayan civilization.


As usual , there is lot of ink and spam to distract from the key issue. Call it what you will (except Mande) the waves of people moving into Yucatan around a 1000 A.D. included the Itzas, the Cocoms AND THE XIU (you lie when you claim I excluded the Xiu from these groups-- read my post more carefully. In any event your Mande supposedly arrived 1200 B.C. 2000 years before the events in Yucatan we are referring to.

quote:
You claim that Tutul Xiu is a Mexican word, xiuhtototl “Turquoise bird” in Nahuatl. This is your opinion Tutul Xiu and xiuhtototl are not related.


It's interesting-- when you say something its a fact, but when others say something it is their opinion. However there is opinion
and informed opinion i.e. knowledge. I have forgotten more Nahuatl than you will ever knowl but as I quoted above outstanding Mesoamerican scholars (Tozzer, Spinden, Roys, and Morley) agree.

quote:
The name Tutul Xiu is a Mexican word, xiuhtototl “Turquoise bird” in Nahuatl (BOM from totol”bird” and xiuitl “turqoise”), according to Spinden.. . . Morley and Roys also point out other evidence of the Mexican origin of the Xiu in the Mexican name of Ah Cuat Xiu, son of Ah Uitz, in the genealogical tree in the Xiu manuscript.. Cuat is a variant of the Nahuatl coatl, and also the crown worn by the founder of the family which strongly suggests the xiuhtzontli or turquoise mosaic crown of the Aztecs which could only be worn by their supreme ruler, the Tlacatecuhtli (Tozzer 1941: 29-30).
Please provide a documented etymology in Mande for Tutul Xiu

All that follows is irrelevant spam

What you have never deal with is that si in Mande is pronounced /si, but in Maya xi is pronounced as /shi/or proved that your etymology is correct:

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The comment of Lopez Austin and Lopez Lujan (2001) is irrelevant to this discussion because they make it clear that they decided to “coin a new term” Zuyua for the people who migrated into Yucatan.
quote:

Thus, we find ourselves in the uncomfortable and risky need to coin a new term. According to the written sources, these peoples claimed that their remote ancestors came from the same far away place, Zuyuá or Siwán which, as we will see, was mythical. Since this belief was one of their ideological pillars, however, we propose to cal[l] these people the Zuyuans or Siwans.


Also, Austen and Lujan do not show any evidence that any of these people claimed that they came from Zuyua. In addition, none of these people according to your quote were related to the Xiu. Moreover, the Nahuatl do not enter Mexico until hundreds of years after the end of Classical Mayan civilization.

You claim that Tutul Xiu is a Mexican word, xiuhtototl “Turquoise bird” in Nahuatl. This is your opinion Tutul Xiu and xiuhtototl are not related.

None of these people Toltec, Putun Maya, Itzas and Mexica introduced writing to the Maya. In fact the traditions of these people place their migration into Yucatan long after the Maya had writing.

In addition, you talk about the Tutul Xiu family. This family has nothing to do with the introduction of writing to the Maya. The Tutul Xiu, you are talking about was born about 1380. This was around a 1000 years after the fall of Mayan civilization. as a result, the Tutul Xiu, who introduced writing has to be different from the Tutul Xiu family.


The Olmecs probably founded writing in the Mexico. Dr. Coe, in "Olmec Jaguar and Olmec Kings" (1968), suggested that the beliefs of the Maya were of Olmec origin and that the pre Maya were Olmecs (1968,p.103). This agreed with Brainerd and Sharer's, The ancient Maya (1983,p.65) concept of colonial Olmec at Maya sites. Moreover, this view is supported by the appearance of jaguar stucco mask pyramids (probably built by the Olmecs) under Mayan pyramids e.g., Cerros Structure 5-C-2nd, Uxaxacatun pyramid and structure 5D-22 at Tikal. This would conform to Schele and Freidel's belief that the monumental structures of the Maya were derived from Olmec prototypes.

Terrence Kaufman has proposed that the Olmec spoke a Mexe Zoquean speech. My research as discussed in the articles mentioned above indicate that the Olmec people spoke a variation of the Malinke Bambara language and not a Zoquean language.

An Olmec origin for many pre-Classic Maya, would explain the cover-up of the jaguar stucco mask pyramids with classic Maya pyramids at these sites. It would also explain Schele and Freidel's (1990,p.56) claim that the first king of Palenque was the Olmec leader U-Kix-chan; and that the ancient Maya adopted many Olmec social institutions and olmec symbolic imagery.

There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa
Landa in makes it clear that the Yucatec Maya claimed that they got writing from a group of foreigners called Tutul Xiu (Tozzer,1941). The term Tutul Xiu, can be translated in Manding as Tutu l ,"Very good Subjects of the Order", Xi u, "The Shi" , or The Shis (who) are very good supporters of the cult order". In this passage the l, is a suffix of augmentation and the u, is the plural element. The Shi, is probably related to the Manding term "Si", which was also an ethnonym.

The fact that the Yucatec term for writing is "c'i:b'" and the Olmec/ Malinke Bambara term for writing "se'be'", are analogous in sound support a Manding origin for the Mayan term for writing. Moreover this confirms the earlier findings by Wiener of a Malinke Bambara substratum in the culture and religious terms of the Maya and Aztec people.

In addition to the Mande speaking Olmec or Xi people influcing the Mayan languages they also influenced the Otomi language of Mexico.

In conclusion the affinity between Olmec and African skeletons, artifactual evidence from Olmec sites, of Olmec/Manding and Mayan signs support the view that the Mande speaking Olmecs gave the Maya writing. These Olmecs as discussed in earlier postings came from Saharan/ North Africa before 1000 B.C. This would explain the agreement beween Mayan *c'ihb' and Olmec/Manding *se'be'. This along with the obvious total affinity of the Olmec symbols and the symbols used by the Manding people at Oued Mertoutek in 3000 B.C., and later around the Nigerbend which Wiener used to compare with the Tuxtla symbols, all support the fact that the Olmec were Manding speaking Meso Americans.

The fact that the Olmecs were predominately African in no way demeans the abilities of native Americans. In fact, the Olmecs left behind a rich culture/ civilizations that has made the later civilizations of the Zapotecs and Maya some of the greatest civilizations in World History.

Sources

C.H. Brown, Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland, , 32 (4), (1991) pp.489-495.

K. Hau, "Pre Islamic writing in West Africa", K. Hau, "African Writing in the New World", ,t.40 ser.B no.1, (1978) pp.28 48.

R. A. Diehl and M.D. Coe, "Olmec Archaeology". In , (Ed.) Jill Guthrie (pp.11-25), The Art Museum, Princeton University Press, 1996.

T. Kaufman and W.M. Norman, "An outline of Cholan phonology, morphology, and vocabulary. In , (Ed.) by J.S. Justeson and L. Campbell (pp.77-166). Albany : Institute of Mesoamerican Studies.

C. Marquez, Estudios arqueologicas y ethnograficas>. Mexico, 1956.

S.G. Morley, G.W. Brainerd and R.J. Sharer. . Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

C.A. Winters, "The influence of the Mande scripts on American ancient writing systems", , t.39, Ser.B no.2, (1977) pp.405 431.

C. A. Winters, "Manding writing in the New World Part 1", Journal of African Civilization , 1 (1), (1979) pp.81 97.

C.A. Winters, "Appendix B: The Jade Celts from La Venta". In , by A. von Wuthenau (pp.235 237). 2nd Edition, Mexico, 1980.

C.A. Winters, "The Ancient manding Script". In , (ed) by Ivan Van Sertima (pp.208 214), New Brunswick, Transaction Books, 1983.

C.A. Winters, "The African influence on Indian Agriculture", Journal of African Civilization 3(1), (1981) pp.100-110.

C. A. Winters, "The Indus Valley Writing and related scripts of the 3rd millennium BC", 2(1), (1985) pp.13 20.

M. Delafosse, "Vai leur langue et leur systeme d'ecriture", 10, (1899).

Irrelevant spam. To distract from:

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
 -
You mention the San Bartolo inscriptions, you are right they are related to the earliest forms of Mayan writing. They were written by the Black Mayans who lived in Guatemala.

The San Bartolo, Guatemala murals are very beautiful they were discovered by William Saturno of the University of New Hampshire.
 -

Stone head From San Bartolo
 -
These murals were found in an unexcavated pyramid. Entering a looter’s trench Dr. Saturno dug into the pyramid and discovered the murals. Much of the mural was destroyed when the Maya built another pyramid over the original structure.


King Kali
 -


The San Bartolo pyramid has two murals. One of the murals is of a procession of people on a boat . The other mural is of King Tali, sitting on his pyramid.


On the boat there are a number of figures. Moving from right to left we see four standing figures nearest the end of the boat. These figures are carrying bundles raised above their heads.

 -


In front of these figures we see several symbols. These symbols provide context to the procession.

There are a number of female figures on the boat. The woman near the Corn God has writing symbols on their faces. The kneeling figure holding the vase on the far left side toward the end has the words gyo ti “righteous cult specialist” on her cheek.

The standing female figure in front of the last three symbols placed in front of the person carrying gifts has the words ti i “she is righteous

Irrelevant spam to distract from you faulty Mande etymology:

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Many pyramids are of Olmec origin. This is evident in the dragon motifs.

 -

This Olmec motif is found on pyramids that were covered over by later Mayan pyramids. These subpyramids were probably built by the Olmec.

.

 -

A good example of the Architectural skill and innovations of the First Nation Blacks is the pyramidal complex at Xultun. These Blacks left evidence of their identity in the architectural workroom.

 -  -

The Xultun pyramidal complex shows a variety of architectural styles and buildings

 -

The First Nation Blacks in Mexico had a right to create their own architectural style just like other Blacks in Africa who developed different pyramidial styles:


Egypt

 -


Fezzan/Garamante

 -


Kushite

 -

irrelevant spam to distract from:

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The comment of Lopez Austin and Lopez Lujan (2001) is irrelevant to this discussion because they make it clear that they decided to “coin a new term” Zuyua for the people who migrated into Yucatan.
quote:

Thus, we find ourselves in the uncomfortable and risky need to coin a new term. According to the written sources, these peoples claimed that their remote ancestors came from the same far away place, Zuyuá or Siwán which, as we will see, was mythical. Since this belief was one of their ideological pillars, however, we propose to cal[l] these people the Zuyuans or Siwans.


Also, Austen and Lujan do not show any evidence that any of these people claimed that they came from Zuyua. In addition, none of these people according to your quote were related to the Xiu. Moreover, the Nahuatl do not enter Mexico until hundreds of years after the end of Classical Mayan civilization.

You claim that Tutul Xiu is a Mexican word, xiuhtototl “Turquoise bird” in Nahuatl. This is your opinion Tutul Xiu and xiuhtototl are not related.

None of these people Toltec, Putun Maya, Itzas and Mexica introduced writing to the Maya. In fact the traditions of these people place their migration into Yucatan long after the Maya had writing.

In addition, you talk about the Tutul Xiu family. This family has nothing to do with the introduction of writing to the Maya. The Tutul Xiu, you are talking about was born about 1380. This was around a 1000 years after the fall of Mayan civilization. as a result, the Tutul Xiu, who introduced writing has to be different from the Tutul Xiu family.


The Olmecs probably founded writing in the Mexico. Dr. Coe, in "Olmec Jaguar and Olmec Kings" (1968), suggested that the beliefs of the Maya were of Olmec origin and that the pre Maya were Olmecs (1968,p.103). This agreed with Brainerd and Sharer's, The ancient Maya (1983,p.65) concept of colonial Olmec at Maya sites. Moreover, this view is supported by the appearance of jaguar stucco mask pyramids (probably built by the Olmecs) under Mayan pyramids e.g., Cerros Structure 5-C-2nd, Uxaxacatun pyramid and structure 5D-22 at Tikal. This would conform to Schele and Freidel's belief that the monumental structures of the Maya were derived from Olmec prototypes.

Terrence Kaufman has proposed that the Olmec spoke a Mexe Zoquean speech. My research as discussed in the articles mentioned above indicate that the Olmec people spoke a variation of the Malinke Bambara language and not a Zoquean language.

An Olmec origin for many pre-Classic Maya, would explain the cover-up of the jaguar stucco mask pyramids with classic Maya pyramids at these sites. It would also explain Schele and Freidel's (1990,p.56) claim that the first king of Palenque was the Olmec leader U-Kix-chan; and that the ancient Maya adopted many Olmec social institutions and olmec symbolic imagery.

There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa
Landa in makes it clear that the Yucatec Maya claimed that they got writing from a group of foreigners called Tutul Xiu (Tozzer,1941). The term Tutul Xiu, can be translated in Manding as Tutu l ,"Very good Subjects of the Order", Xi u, "The Shi" , or The Shis (who) are very good supporters of the cult order". In this passage the l, is a suffix of augmentation and the u, is the plural element. The Shi, is probably related to the Manding term "Si", which was also an ethnonym.

The fact that the Yucatec term for writing is "c'i:b'" and the Olmec/ Malinke Bambara term for writing "se'be'", are analogous in sound support a Manding origin for the Mayan term for writing. Moreover this confirms the earlier findings by Wiener of a Malinke Bambara substratum in the culture and religious terms of the Maya and Aztec people.

In addition to the Mande speaking Olmec or Xi people influcing the Mayan languages they also influenced the Otomi language of Mexico.

In conclusion the affinity between Olmec and African skeletons, artifactual evidence from Olmec sites, of Olmec/Manding and Mayan signs support the view that the Mande speaking Olmecs gave the Maya writing. These Olmecs as discussed in earlier postings came from Saharan/ North Africa before 1000 B.C. This would explain the agreement beween Mayan *c'ihb' and Olmec/Manding *se'be'. This along with the obvious total affinity of the Olmec symbols and the symbols used by the Manding people at Oued Mertoutek in 3000 B.C., and later around the Nigerbend which Wiener used to compare with the Tuxtla symbols, all support the fact that the Olmec were Manding speaking Meso Americans.

The fact that the Olmecs were predominately African in no way demeans the abilities of native Americans. In fact, the Olmecs left behind a rich culture/ civilizations that has made the later civilizations of the Zapotecs and Maya some of the greatest civilizations in World History.

Sources

C.H. Brown, Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland, , 32 (4), (1991) pp.489-495.

K. Hau, "Pre Islamic writing in West Africa", K. Hau, "African Writing in the New World", ,t.40 ser.B no.1, (1978) pp.28 48.

R. A. Diehl and M.D. Coe, "Olmec Archaeology". In , (Ed.) Jill Guthrie (pp.11-25), The Art Museum, Princeton University Press, 1996.

T. Kaufman and W.M. Norman, "An outline of Cholan phonology, morphology, and vocabulary. In , (Ed.) by J.S. Justeson and L. Campbell (pp.77-166). Albany : Institute of Mesoamerican Studies.

C. Marquez, Estudios arqueologicas y ethnograficas>. Mexico, 1956.

S.G. Morley, G.W. Brainerd and R.J. Sharer. . Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

C.A. Winters, "The influence of the Mande scripts on American ancient writing systems", , t.39, Ser.B no.2, (1977) pp.405 431.

C. A. Winters, "Manding writing in the New World Part 1", Journal of African Civilization , 1 (1), (1979) pp.81 97.

C.A. Winters, "Appendix B: The Jade Celts from La Venta". In , by A. von Wuthenau (pp.235 237). 2nd Edition, Mexico, 1980.

C.A. Winters, "The Ancient manding Script". In , (ed) by Ivan Van Sertima (pp.208 214), New Brunswick, Transaction Books, 1983.

C.A. Winters, "The African influence on Indian Agriculture", Journal of African Civilization 3(1), (1981) pp.100-110.

C. A. Winters, "The Indus Valley Writing and related scripts of the 3rd millennium BC", 2(1), (1985) pp.13 20.

M. Delafosse, "Vai leur langue et leur systeme d'ecriture", 10, (1899).

Irrelevant spam. To distract from:

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.

This post is silly. Your own translations of Malinke-Bambara 'si', means 'black, race etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).


Bernardo, you are such a liar.

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
 -


 -

These are pictures of the Lamanai Temple. There is also a jaguar temple at Lamanai.

 -

Irrelevant spam to avoid dealing with:

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We are talking about the Mande origin of writing. You have proven by your own post that Malinke-Bambara Si means race, etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).


I have also shown how the Mayan terms for writing are of Mande origin.


There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa

As usual you don't know what you're talking about. You are trying to use the Bandwagon propaganda technique to support your lies. Just because people agree on a particular phenomena does not make them right. For example, Europeans for hundreds of years believed the earth was flat , when it is round.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
 -


 -

These are pictures of the Lamanai Temple. There is also a jaguar temple at Lamanai.

 -

Irrelevant spam to avoid dealing with:

(Delafosse 1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

The following from Delafosse 1929 are the words for “black”

p. 546 negro (fara-fi;moro-fi

548 black (adj,) fi-ni
548 black (color) fi; fi-ma

467 family si(high); si(high)-ya

Delafosse 1935 lists meanings of si they are NOT “black, “family” “race” or “descendant”
]
p. 648 si (v intran)— passer la nuit
(v trans)- make passer la nuit

p. 650 si(high)-- (B&D) Sye(high)

p. 653 Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”
(fi-nsi(high)—“tout a fait noir”)

si (low) and si —breast, udder

p. 654 si (low) and se (low) (noun “straight line”; v. intran—“go straight; v trans- guide straight)

Meanings of si in Brauner (1974) follow

Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)
Si (2)-- to grind (v)
Si (3)-- to sleep, to spend the night


Bird, Charles and Kante Mamadou. 1977. list the following:

p. 29 Si (n) hair
Si (low) (v)--- age, life
Si (low) (v)-- to pass. Spend the night

p. 41 black---- fi(low)n (adj)

p. 51 family--- denbaya (n)

Bottom line On the one hand we have the consensus view of Mesoamerican scholars and contemporaneous archaeological, historical, anthropological, architectural and linguistical evidence. On the other, claims the 1000 years separating Maya writing and Post-Classic Yucatan can be ignored. Claims based on misleading readings of sources and false Mande linguistics.

This post is stupid. Your own translations of Malinke-Bambara 'si', means 'black, race etc.

 -

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).

This proves my claim is based on the Malinke-Bambara language.

Bernardo, you are such a liar.

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:


This post is silly. Your own translations of Malinke-Bambara 'si', means 'black, race etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).


Bernardo, you are such a liar.
.

Right away to ad hominem.

LOL I found (and unlike you quoted completely) the Brauner listing. However, there a lot more problems with your claims.

1) You have never provided a documented detailed etymology in Mande for Tutul Xiu.

2) x in Maya is pronounced /sh/ but s in Mande is pronounced as in “saw” /s/. In linguistics you compare identical sounds.

3) Further Delafosse (1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

Bottom line you can’t according to Mande rules say si-u for your collective meanings (family, race, descendants etc.)

4) The foremost meaning of si Delafosse, Brauner, and Bird and Mamadou is “to pass the night”. The word “black” “negro” in Delafosse is fara-fi; moro-fi; fi; fi-ma. Bird and Mamadou agree on “fi”. As usual you are cherry picking but you have to provide linguistic evidence for your choice

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:


This post is silly. Your own translations of Malinke-Bambara 'si', means 'black, race etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).


Bernardo, you are such a liar.
.

Right away to ad hominem.

LOL I found (and unlike you quoted completely) the Brauner listing. However, there a lot more problems with your claims.

1) You have never provided a documented detailed etymology in Mande for Tutul Xiu.

2) x in Maya is pronounced /sh/ but s in Mande is pronounced as in “saw” /s/. In linguistics you compare identical sounds.

3) Further Delafosse (1929: 175) says that to pluralize add /u/ to a noun ending in a nasal vowel and to certain pronouns. [si] is not a nasal vowel. Further on page 176-177 “Generally it is not necessary to use the plural suffix, unless it is needed to clarify the phrase. And one never uses it when it deals with a name or word that explicitly indicate that it concerns several people or things. One omits the suffix when it follows words that convey a collective meaning .—example of not use “the Europeans do not eat dog meat”. Si as a people is a collective meaning.

Bottom line you can’t according to Mande rules say si-u for your collective meanings (family, race, descendants etc.)

4) The foremost meaning of si Delafosse, Brauner, and Bird and Mamadou is “to pass the night”. The word “black” “negro” in Delafosse is fara-fi; moro-fi; fi; fi-ma. Bird and Mamadou agree on “fi”. As usual you are cherry picking but you have to provide linguistic evidence for your choice

Below Delafosse Malinke-Bambara 'si' = collective meanings family, race, descendants etc .

 -

You are such a liar.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:

2) x in Maya is pronounced /sh/ but s in Mande is pronounced as in “saw” /s/. In linguistics you compare identical sounds.

The Mande /s/ agrees with the Mayan /x/. There are other examples of this analogy besides Xi and Si. It is also interesting to note that many Quiche words beginning with /x/ which is pronounced 'sh', correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru


This is regular sound correspondence.

.
.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:

2) x in Maya is pronounced /sh/ but s in Mande is pronounced as in “saw” /s/. In linguistics you compare identical sounds.

The Mande /s/ agrees with the Mayan /x/. There are other examples of this analogy besides Xi and Si. It is also interesting to note that many Quiche words beginning with /x/ which is pronounced 'sh', correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru


This is regular sound correspondence.

.
.

Only in your imagination. You get there by complete disregard of the rules of Maya and Mande. Glottal stops are essential in Maya as Many of us have told you innumerable times. Also nasal vowels in Mande cannot be ignored because they change meaning of the words. After a truly Herculean effort at Cherry picking cannot save you as any one can see by comparing the true words in K'i7che7 which I reference and you don't.

http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf

K’ICHE’ - ENGLISH DICTIONARY
and
GUIDE TO PRONUNCIATION OF THE K’ICHE’-MAYA ALPHABET
Allen J. Christenson
Brigham Young University


b' Similar to the English b, but pronounced with the throat closed
while air is forcefully expelled to produce a glottal stop

k' Pronounced with the tongue in the same position as for the k, but
the throat is closed and air forcefully expelled to produce a
glottalized k.

q' Pronounced with the tongue in the same position as for the q, but
the throat is closed and air forcefully expelled to produce a
glottalized q.

http://www.taterenner.com/engkiche.pdf

quote:
ENGLISH-K'ICHE' DICTIONARY A reversal of the K'iche'-English Dictionary by Allen J. Christenson Bringham Young Univeristy available at: {URL]http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL]

p.155 Christenson's dictionary contains a pronunciation guide. As the K'iche' language has 32 letters, it uses a number of sounds that are unfamiliar to Engish speakers. In particular, novices should be aware that letters followed by a tz'ut (written as an apostrophe) are different than letters without one. So ch and ch' are different letters of the alphabet. Words with "tz'ut" letters may have no relation to the same word written without the tz'ut. For example, corn, soaked corn kernels (n) tzi and nixtamal (n) tzi are unrelated to: dog (n) tz’i’ The writer is unaware if either is related to: disobedient (child) (adj) tz’i’ In any event, vegetarians may want to be especially careful about their pronunciation before ordering tzi.

Similarly in Mande a, e.i.o.u and ã.ë.ï.õ.ü. (I don’t have lines for all the vowels) are different vowels and words will have different meanings. I’ll note these by vowel-ng;To remind for the millionth time that glottal stops are consonants and must not ignored I’l use the common linguistic symbol (7)

K’iche’- English (Cristianson)
rain jaab
root k7amal
seed baq7


Mande- English

Delafosse 1953

sa (603 death, end
sa (605) serpent
sa (605) weeding scratching

but not valid because it’s a nasal vowel (cherry picking)

sang (607 ) sky, upper atmosphere, rain, clouds

si (648) old, passing the night,

but not valid because it is a nasal vowel (cherry picking)


sing (651) seed, race, lineage, species, family

sulu (699) hen house
sulu (70) root
How do choose (cherry Picking)

Delafosse 1929 French to Mande

grain (489) sing =a particle, grain (not valid it is a nasal vowel)
graine (480) foli;;sing;;lang;dang;;kise

pluie (577) sang not valid it is a nasal vowel—as above sa has different meanings (cherry picking)

racine (595) lili, dili, sulu, gyu, dyu as above sulu has different meanings (cherry picking)


[URLhttp://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL]

K’ICHE’ - ENGLISH DICTIONARY
and
GUIDE TO PRONUNCIATION OF THE K’ICHE’-MAYA ALPHABET
Allen J. Christenson
Brigham Young University

Delafosse, Maurice. 1929. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula) Vol 1. Intro. Grammaire, Lexique Francais-Mandingue). Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

Delafosse, Maurice. 1955. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula). Vol 2. Dictionnaire Mandingue-Francaise. Paris: Librarie Paul Geuthner

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:

2) x in Maya is pronounced /sh/ but s in Mande is pronounced as in “saw” /s/. In linguistics you compare identical sounds.

The Mande /s/ agrees with the Mayan /x/. There are other examples of this analogy besides Xi and Si. It is also interesting to note that many Quiche words beginning with /x/ which is pronounced 'sh', correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru


This is regular sound correspondence.

.
.

Only in your imagination. You get there by complete disregard of the rules of Maya and Mande. Glottal stops are essential in Maya as Many of us have told you innumerable times. Also nasal vowels in Mande cannot be ignored because they change meaning of the words. After a truly Herculean effort at Cherry picking cannot save you as any one can see by comparing the true words in K'i7che7 which I reference and you don't.

http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf

K’ICHE’ - ENGLISH DICTIONARY
and
GUIDE TO PRONUNCIATION OF THE K’ICHE’-MAYA ALPHABET
Allen J. Christenson
Brigham Young University


b' Similar to the English b, but pronounced with the throat closed
while air is forcefully expelled to produce a glottal stop

k' Pronounced with the tongue in the same position as for the k, but
the throat is closed and air forcefully expelled to produce a
glottalized k.

q' Pronounced with the tongue in the same position as for the q, but
the throat is closed and air forcefully expelled to produce a
glottalized q.

http://www.taterenner.com/engkiche.pdf

quote:
ENGLISH-K'ICHE' DICTIONARY A reversal of the K'iche'-English Dictionary by Allen J. Christenson Bringham Young Univeristy available at: {URL]http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL]

p.155 Christenson's dictionary contains a pronunciation guide. As the K'iche' language has 32 letters, it uses a number of sounds that are unfamiliar to Engish speakers. In particular, novices should be aware that letters followed by a tz'ut (written as an apostrophe) are different than letters without one. So ch and ch' are different letters of the alphabet. Words with "tz'ut" letters may have no relation to the same word written without the tz'ut. For example, corn, soaked corn kernels (n) tzi and nixtamal (n) tzi are unrelated to: dog (n) tz’i’ The writer is unaware if either is related to: disobedient (child) (adj) tz’i’ In any event, vegetarians may want to be especially careful about their pronunciation before ordering tzi.

Similarly in Mande a, e.i.o.u and ã.ë.ï.õ.ü. (I don’t have lines for all the vowels) are different vowels and words will have different meanings. I’ll note these by vowel-ng;To remind for the millionth time that glottal stops are consonants and must not ignored I’l use the common linguistic symbol (7)

K’iche’- English (Cristianson)
rain jaab
root k7amal
seed baq7


Mande- English

Delafosse 1953

sa (603 death, end
sa (605) serpent
sa (605) weeding scratching

but not valid because it’s a nasal vowel (cherry picking)

sang (607 ) sky, upper atmosphere, rain, clouds

si (648) old, passing the night,

but not valid because it is a nasal vowel (cherry picking)


sing (651) seed, race, lineage, species, family

sulu (699) hen house
sulu (70) root
How do choose (cherry Picking)

Delafosse 1929 French to Mande

grain (489) sing =a particle, grain (not valid it is a nasal vowel)
graine (480) foli;;sing;;lang;dang;;kise

pluie (577) sang not valid it is a nasal vowel—as above sa has different meanings (cherry picking)

racine (595) lili, dili, sulu, gyu, dyu as above sulu has different meanings (cherry picking)


[URLhttp://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL]

K’ICHE’ - ENGLISH DICTIONARY
and
GUIDE TO PRONUNCIATION OF THE K’ICHE’-MAYA ALPHABET
Allen J. Christenson
Brigham Young University

Delafosse, Maurice. 1929. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula) Vol 1. Intro. Grammaire, Lexique Francais-Mandingue). Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

Delafosse, Maurice. 1955. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula). Vol 2. Dictionnaire Mandingue-Francaise. Paris: Librarie Paul Geuthner

What you wrote does not change the fact that regular correspondence exist between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

The Quichean terms compared below come from Campbell,Lyle (1977), Quichean linguistic prehistory ,Berkeley : University of California Press.University of California publications in linguistics. v. 81




As noted earlier the Quiche/K’ICHE’ words beginning with /x/ correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.


Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k

.
.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[

What you wrote does not change the fact that regular correspondence exist between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

You can dance, you can spin but /sh/ is NOT /s/. Look below

quote:
The Quichean terms compared below come from Campbell,Lyle (1977), Quichean linguistic prehistory ,Berkeley : University of California Press.University of California publications in linguistics. v. 81


As noted earlier the Quiche/K’ICHE’ words beginning with /x/ correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k
.

There is no correspondence in your "proof" In the following table the sequence is :English, Christianson Ki7che7, Winters Ki7che7, Winters Mande, Delafosse Mande. 7 represents the CRUCIAL CONSONANT in Maya languages. I finally found out where Winters claims to get his Ki7che7 words. I have ordered the book and will be able to check them. Given his track record with Delafosse it will be interesting.


English K7iche7 Winters Winters Delafosse
rain jaab xab7 sa sang
root k7amal sulu sulu lili,dili,sulu
seed baq7 ixa? si foli,sing,kise

Even using Winters’s methodology of excluding vowels there is little to no correspondence. X in Maya is /sh/

shb….. . . . . s no match
sl . . . .. sl
sh . . . . . s no match ”s” in Mande like saw /s/

Using Winter’s methodology with the real Ki7che7 is worse not even close

jb . . . . . . s no match, where are /s/,/j/ or /b/ ?
kml . . . . . sl no match, where are /k/,/m/, /l/ ?
bq. . . . . . s no match, where are /b/, /q/ ?

by not ignoring the consonant glottal stop the correspondence? is a farce and by using Delafosse’s dictionary definition using the word “correspondence is ridiculous.

jb. . . . . . sg
k7ml . . . . ll,dl,sl
bq7 .. . . fl,sg,ks

Thus this little game Winters has been playing “discovering patterns” is just a way of trying to say his cherry picking has general applicability without ever showing a number of examples of this “pattern. “ Further , he is violating his rules by showing “patters of vowel shift, his method depends on completely ignoring vowels in words—even when as in here in Maya long vowels have different meaning and in Mande nasal vowels are different meanings from regular vowels.

More to come in your other ki7che7 examples.

Christianson’s Ki7che7 dictionary
[url] http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL]

Delafosse, Maurice. 1929. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula) Vol 1. Intro. Grammaire, Lexique Francais-Mandingue). Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.


Delafosse, Maurice. 1955. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula). Vol 2. Dictionnaire Mandingue-Francaise. Paris: Librarie Paul Geuthner

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[

What you wrote does not change the fact that regular correspondence exist between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

You can dance, you can spin but /sh/ is NOT /s/. Look below

quote:
The Quichean terms compared below come from Campbell,Lyle (1977), Quichean linguistic prehistory ,Berkeley : University of California Press.University of California publications in linguistics. v. 81


As noted earlier the Quiche/K’ICHE’ words beginning with /x/ correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k
.

There is no correspondence in your "proof" In the following table the sequence is :English, Christianson Ki7che7, Winters Ki7che7, Winters Mande, Delafosse Mande. 7 represents the CRUCIAL CONSONANT in Maya languages. I finally found out where Winters claims to get his Ki7che7 words. I have ordered the book and will be able to check them. Given his track record with Delafosse it will be interesting.


English K7iche7 Winters Winters Delafosse
rain jaab xab7 sa sang
root k7amal sulu sulu lili,dili,sulu
seed baq7 ixa? si foli,sing,kise

Even using Winters’s methodology of excluding vowels there is little to no correspondence. X in Maya is /sh/

shb….. . . . . s no match
sl . . . .. sl
sh . . . . . s no match ”s” in Mande like saw /s/

Using Winter’s methodology with the real Ki7che7 is worse not even close

jb . . . . . . s no match, where are /s/,/j/ or /b/ ?
kml . . . . . sl no match, where are /k/,/m/, /l/ ?
bq. . . . . . s no match, where are /b/, /q/ ?

by not ignoring the consonant glottal stop the correspondence? is a farce and by using Delafosse’s dictionary definition using the word “correspondence is ridiculous.

jb. . . . . . sg
k7ml . . . . ll,dl,sl
bq7 .. . . fl,sg,ks

Thus this little game Winters has been playing “discovering patterns” is just a way of trying to say his cherry picking has general applicability without ever showing a number of examples of this “pattern. “ Further , he is violating his rules by showing “patters of vowel shift, his method depends on completely ignoring vowels in words—even when as in here in Maya long vowels have different meaning and in Mande nasal vowels are different meanings from regular vowels.

More to come in your other ki7che7 examples.

Christianson’s Ki7che7 dictionary
[url] http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL]

Delafosse, Maurice. 1929. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula) Vol 1. Intro. Grammaire, Lexique Francais-Mandingue). Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.


Delafosse, Maurice. 1955. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula). Vol 2. Dictionnaire Mandingue-Francaise. Paris: Librarie Paul Geuthner

 -


LOL. Finding regular phonemic correspondence between and within consonants, and shared terms is comparative linguistics.We look at consonants because they are often more stable than vowels.


.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We are talking about the Mande origin of writing. You have proven by your own post that Malinke-Bambara Si means race, etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).

Below Delafosse Malinke-Bambara 'si' = collective meanings family, race, descendants etc .

 -


I have also shown how the Mayan terms for writing are of Mande origin.


There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa

As usual you don't know what you're talking about. You are trying to use the Bandwagon propaganda technique to support your lies. Just because you contend that certain people agree on a particular phenomena does not make them right. For example, Europeans for hundreds of years believed the earth was flat , when it is round.

Your opinions are groundless. You are indeed a LIAR.
.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[

What you wrote does not change the fact that regular correspondence exist between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

You can dance, you can spin but /sh/ is NOT /s/. Look below

quote:
The Quichean terms compared below come from Campbell,Lyle (1977), Quichean linguistic prehistory ,Berkeley : University of California Press.University of California publications in linguistics. v. 81


As noted earlier the Quiche/K’ICHE’ words beginning with /x/ correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k
.

There is no correspondence in your "proof" In the following table the sequence is :English, Christianson Ki7che7, Winters Ki7che7, Winters Mande, Delafosse Mande. 7 represents the CRUCIAL CONSONANT in Maya languages. I finally found out where Winters claims to get his Ki7che7 words. I have ordered the book and will be able to check them. Given his track record with Delafosse it will be interesting.


English K7iche7 Winters Winters Delafosse
rain jaab xab7 sa sang
root k7amal sulu sulu lili,dili,sulu
seed baq7 ixa? si foli,sing,kise

Even using Winters’s methodology of excluding vowels there is little to no correspondence. X in Maya is /sh/

shb….. . . . . s no match
sl . . . .. sl
sh . . . . . s no match ”s” in Mande like saw /s/

Using Winter’s methodology with the real Ki7che7 is worse not even close

jb . . . . . . s no match, where are /s/,/j/ or /b/ ?
kml . . . . . sl no match, where are /k/,/m/, /l/ ?
bq. . . . . . s no match, where are /b/, /q/ ?

by not ignoring the consonant glottal stop the correspondence? is a farce and by using Delafosse’s dictionary definition using the word “correspondence is ridiculous.

jb. . . . . . sg
k7ml . . . . ll,dl,sl
bq7 .. . . fl,sg,ks

Thus this little game Winters has been playing “discovering patterns” is just a way of trying to say his cherry picking has general applicability without ever showing a number of examples of this “pattern. “ Further , he is violating his rules by showing “patters of vowel shift, his method depends on completely ignoring vowels in words—even when as in here in Maya long vowels have different meaning and in Mande nasal vowels are different meanings from regular vowels.

More to come in your other ki7che7 examples.

Christianson’s Ki7che7 dictionary
[url] http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL]

Delafosse, Maurice. 1929. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula) Vol 1. Intro. Grammaire, Lexique Francais-Mandingue). Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.


Delafosse, Maurice. 1955. La Langue Mandingue et ses Dialectes (Malinke, Bambara, Dioula). Vol 2. Dictionnaire Mandingue-Francaise. Paris: Librarie Paul Geuthner

 -


LOL. Finding regular phonemic correspondence between and within consonants, and shared terms is comparative linguistics.We look at consonants because they are often more stable than vowels.


.

irrelevant spam evading the main point -- that even using your method and ignoring vowels there is no correspondence between your consonants, i.e.
shb….. . . . . s no match
sl . . . .. sl
sh . . . . . s no match ”s” in Mande like saw /s/
its even worse if we use accurate Mande and ki7che7 words

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
We are talking about the Mande origin of writing. You have proven by your own post that Malinke-Bambara Si means race, etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).

Below Delafosse Malinke-Bambara 'si' = collective meanings family, race, descendants etc .

 -


I have also shown how the Mayan terms for writing are of Mande origin.


There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa

As usual you don't know what you're talking about. You are trying to use the Bandwagon propaganda technique to support your lies. Just because you contend that certain people agree on a particular phenomena does not make them right. For example, Europeans for hundreds of years believed the earth was flat , when it is round.

Your opinions are groundless. You are indeed a LIAR.
.

irrelevant spam. Trying to distract from the fact that your ki7che7 and Mande words don't match even using your own method.

BTW you are contradicting yourself " This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound." a hard Spanish "c" sounds like /k/. IN Maya "c" is NOT /s/

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Quetzalcoatl, consider this

1) nobody is reading this thread

2) you will never convince Clyde of anything


Just write an article called
"Debunking Van Sertima and Clyde Winters on the Olmecs and other matters"
and move on

then stop wasting energy on this and move on, it's looking pathetic, the repetition on this year after year going nowhere

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Looking at ancient DNA to determine ancient population origins can be misleading. Let’s look at dna of Ust-ishim and Clovis-Anzick man as it compares to modern populations.


 -
Although it is clear that Ust-ishim was T2b3, the popular press claims he belonged to the haplogroup U clade. Look at the cousins of Ust-ishim it is these modern people who belong to the U clade that are his cousins. See: http://www.fi.id.au/2014/11/ust-ishim-ancient-dna-has-matches-with.html


Look at the Clovis-Anzick DNA matches to modern people.

 -

If you look closely you can see how they match many Non-Native Americans. See http://www.fi.id.au/2014/09/clovis-anzick-1-dna-match-living-people.html


What does this mean? It means that researchers may be reporting results that have been contaminated and that they may only be giving us results that match their expectations of how the data should look.

IN relation to Anzick man Felix Immanuel noted that:

quote:


Just a quick recap, I processed the raw data for Clovis-Anzick-1 and uploaded into GEDMatch and to my surprise, there are matches as near as 3rd to 4th cousins. Now, that's a real problem because, the matches are to a DNA sample older than 12500 years. This is practically impossible and very mysterious.[/img] I will investigate step-by-step and see what are all the possibilities and failure points, which could solve the problem. But before that, we need to be absolutely sure that these matches are indeed valid. From the matches, I requested for phased kit and I indeed got one - Thanks to Mario Diaz and Veronica.


See: http://www.fi.id.au/search/label/Anzick



He added that
quote:


Clearly, an IBD segment of 5 cM above 500 SNPs with total IBD segments around 10+ cM cannot be 12500 years old. This is a fact and can be verified using known relationships in families and DNA companies are using these benchmarks all along for showing genetic matches. This fact is more than enough to conclude that the Clovis-Anzick-1 sample is not actually ancient. My best guess is, the infant boy's sample is just from the last century and it was wrongly labeled as 12500 years old or the sample got contaminated.


See: http://www.fi.id.au/search/label/Anzick

As you can see the DNA is not always a clear marker of actual ancient events.

Really, when we look at ancient American dna for example, the dna is of African origin. See: https://www.academia.edu/12231300/AFRICAN_ORIGINS_PALEOAMERICAN_DNA



Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Quetzalcoatl, consider this

1) nobody is reading this thread

2) you will never convince Clyde of anything


Just write an article called
"Debunking Van Sertima and Clyde Winters on the Olmecs and other matters"
and move on

then stop wasting energy on this and move on, it's looking pathetic, the repetition on this year after year going nowhere

He can't, he doesn't know linguistics.

You are right about one thing we have been debating this issue since 1996, and he still has failed to study a comparative linguistics book. Bernardo is hoping the bandwagon effect can help him to convince people the Olmec were not Mande speakers, instead of reliable and valid research.

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
We are talking about the Mande origin of writing. You have proven by your own post that Malinke-Bambara Si means race, etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).

Below Delafosse Malinke-Bambara 'si' = collective meanings family, race, descendants etc .

 -


I have also shown how the Mayan terms for writing are of Mande origin.


There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa

As usual you don't know what you're talking about. You are trying to use the Bandwagon propaganda technique to support your lies. Just because you contend that certain people agree on a particular phenomena does not make them right. For example, Europeans for hundreds of years believed the earth was flat , when it is round.

Your opinions are groundless. You are indeed a LIAR.
.

irrelevant spam. Trying to distract from the fact that your ki7che7 and Mande words don't match even using your own method.

BTW you are contradicting yourself " This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound." a hard Spanish "c" sounds like /k/. IN Maya "c" is NOT /s/

You are dead wrong. If you knew anything about comparative linguistics you would stop making a fool of yourself.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Quetzalcoatl, consider this

1) nobody is reading this thread

2) you will never convince Clyde of anything


Just write an article called
"Debunking Van Sertima and Clyde Winters on the Olmecs and other matters"
and move on

then stop wasting energy on this and move on, it's looking pathetic, the repetition on this year after year going nowhere

Done Van Sertima:
https://www.academia.edu/199927/Robbing_Native_American_Cultures_Van_Sertimas_Afrocentricity_and_the_Olmecs

The problem with Winters is finding a journal to publish in-- I don't do the kind of unreviewed journals Winters does. Van Sertima had achieved some influence in schools and thus serious journals considered it worthwhile to publish an article critiquing his work. I would have trouble convincing peer reviewed journals that Clyde's work is worth some of their limited space.

I do this for fun and because every year or so a new crop of innocent newbys fall for the never changing Winters's fantasy.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Quetzalcoatl, consider this

1) nobody is reading this thread

2) you will never convince Clyde of anything


Just write an article called
"Debunking Van Sertima and Clyde Winters on the Olmecs and other matters"
and move on

then stop wasting energy on this and move on, it's looking pathetic, the repetition on this year after year going nowhere

Done Van Sertima:
https://www.academia.edu/199927/Robbing_Native_American_Cultures_Van_Sertimas_Afrocentricity_and_the_Olmecs

The problem with Winters is finding a journal to publish in-- I don't do the kind of unreviewed journals Winters does. Van Sertima had achieved some influence in schools and thus serious journals considered it worthwhile to publish an article critiquing his work. I would have trouble convincing peer reviewed journals that Clyde's work is worth some of their limited space.

I do this for fun and because every year or so a new crop of innocent newbys fall for the never changing Winters's fantasy.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's a was of mental energy. Just post an article in a blog or Amazon self published book "Debunking Clyde Winters on The Olmecs and Other Matters"


 -

 -
Skull found in Mexico’s Yucatán. There, in 2007, divers found the nearly intact skeleton of a 15- to 16-year-old girl they called Naia (for the Greek water nymph). This year, scientists announced what Naia’s remains revealed.
Multiple methods used to date her teeth and bones suggests that she lived between 12,000 and 13,000 years ago
“She has the physical characteristics we expect to see in Paleoamericans, and the genetics say she and modern Native Americans share ancestry,” says James Chatters, an archaeologist who has studied both Naia and Kennewick Man.


 -
Reconstruction of Luzia Woman , the name for an Upper Paleolithic period skeleton of a Paleo-Indian woman who was found in a cave in Brazil. Some archaeologists believe the young woman may have been part of the first wave of immigrants to South America. Nicknamed Luzia (her name pays homage to the famous African fossil "Lucy", who lived 3.2 million years ago), the 11,500-year-old skeleton was found in Lapa Vermelha, Brazil, in 1975 by archaeologist Annette Laming-Emperaire.

 -  - [/QB][/QUOTE]

^^^ This shows broad featured Native Americans thousands of years before the (possibly mythologica)l 14th century AD Abubakari II of Mali

Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[
[*]Quiche Malinke-Bambara
xab' rain…………… sa
ixa? seed …………..si
uxe root…………….. sulu, suru
[/list]

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k
.
Clyde is shifting tactics, originally claims were that Mande and Maya were genetically related – but this caused problems because the initial tool for comparing these languages is the Swadesh word list, which lists basic words that have a low probability of being loans—not the randomly selected words that Winters likes to use. Now he call his correspondences as loans into Ki7che7 to give himself a better cherry picking opportunity. There is no need to even do his “correspondences.” Loan words are usually items, or things that are foreign or new to the recipient language and there would be no reason for regular shifts, Unless, the sound does not exist in the recipient language, for example words lent form Nahuatl to Spanish- here we have hundreds of examples. Nahuatl has a /tl/ which in Spanish become /te/-coyotl-coyote, popotl-popote, chocolatl-chocolate,petlatl-petate,zacatl-zacate,zapotl-zapote.- this is what a real correspondence looks like—notice the vowels are the same.

More important here is that Winters has a time problem— Several of his examples actually have proto-Maya roots, i.e. they existed a thousand years before there was a Ki7che7 language. Why would the Maya borrow a name for “jaguar” which is a native species from African Mande, which doesn’t have jaguars? Perhaps what really happened is that – say 500 B.C. proto Maya loaned these words to Mande.

The list below is English, proto-Maya, Ki7che7, Winters’ Ki7che7, and Winters Mande. The “7” is the consonant glottal stop that can’t be ignored.

These can’t be loans from Mande because they existed in Maya before there was a Ki7che7 language and before Clyde’s presumed contact.
  • English ProtoMaya ki7che7 winters winters
    dog *tz7i7 tz7i7
    canoe *tyem , *johm jucub xuku? kulu
    earth *kab ulew ka7 ka
    squash *k7uhm k7um k7:um kula, kura
    lord *7ahjaw ajaw ba ba
    mother *naa nan naal na
    jaguar *b7ahlam baläm balam balan
    sun, day *q7iihng q7ij saq7e sa

Brown, C. H. and Wichmann, S. 2004 “Proto-Mayan Syllable Nuclei,” International Journal of American Linguistics 70(2): 128-186.

Christianson’s Ki7che7 dictionary
[url] http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL

Kaufman, T. and Justeson, J. 2003 A Preliminary Mayan Etymological Dictionary
http://www.famsi.org/reports/01051/pmed.pdf


Still a try to shift the focus from the fact that Maya “x” /ch/ is NOT mande “s”/s/.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
It's a was of mental energy. Just post an article in a blog or Amazon self published book "Debunking Clyde Winters on The Olmecs and Other Matters"


 -

 -
Skull found in Mexico’s Yucatán. There, in 2007, divers found the nearly intact skeleton of a 15- to 16-year-old girl they called Naia (for the Greek water nymph). This year, scientists announced what Naia’s remains revealed.
Multiple methods used to date her teeth and bones suggests that she lived between 12,000 and 13,000 years ago
“She has the physical characteristics we expect to see in Paleoamericans, and the genetics say she and modern Native Americans share ancestry,” says James Chatters, an archaeologist who has studied both Naia and Kennewick Man.


 -
Reconstruction of Luzia Woman , the name for an Upper Paleolithic period skeleton of a Paleo-Indian woman who was found in a cave in Brazil. Some archaeologists believe the young woman may have been part of the first wave of immigrants to South America. Nicknamed Luzia (her name pays homage to the famous African fossil "Lucy", who lived 3.2 million years ago), the 11,500-year-old skeleton was found in Lapa Vermelha, Brazil, in 1975 by archaeologist Annette Laming-Emperaire.

 -  -

^^^ This shows broad featured Native Americans thousands of years before the (possibly mythologica)l 14th century AD Abubakari II of Mali [/QB][/QUOTE]

irrelevant span -- still not dealing with the fact that Maya x" is /ch/ and Mande "s" is /s/ no correspondence.

Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
the lioness,
Member
Member # 17353

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for the lioness,     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Clyde I thought you said the Maya were the fake Mongoloid Indians and the big head Olmecs were the real ones
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[
[*]Quiche Malinke-Bambara
xab' rain…………… sa
ixa? seed …………..si
uxe root…………….. sulu, suru
[/list]

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k
.
Clyde is shifting tactics, originally claims were that Mande and Maya were genetically related – but this caused problems because the initial tool for comparing these languages is the Swadesh word list, which lists basic words that have a low probability of being loans—not the randomly selected words that Winters likes to use. Now he call his correspondences as loans into Ki7che7 to give himself a better cherry picking opportunity. There is no need to even do his “correspondences.” Loan words are usually items, or things that are foreign or new to the recipient language and there would be no reason for regular shifts, Unless, the sound does not exist in the recipient language, for example words lent form Nahuatl to Spanish- here we have hundreds of examples. Nahuatl has a /tl/ which in Spanish become /te/-coyotl-coyote, popotl-popote, chocolatl-chocolate,petlatl-petate,zacatl-zacate,zapotl-zapote.- this is what a real correspondence looks like—notice the vowels are the same.

More important here is that Winters has a time problem— Several of his examples actually have proto-Maya roots, i.e. they existed a thousand years before there was a Ki7che7 language. Why would the Maya borrow a name for “jaguar” which is a native species from African Mande, which doesn’t have jaguars? Perhaps what really happened is that – say 500 B.C. proto Maya loaned these words to Mande.

The list below is English, proto-Maya, Ki7che7, Winters’ Ki7che7, and Winters Mande. The “7” is the consonant glottal stop that can’t be ignored.

These can’t be loans from Mande because they existed in Maya before there was a Ki7che7 language and before Clyde’s presumed contact.
  • English ProtoMaya ki7che7 winters winters
    dog *tz7i7 tz7i7
    canoe *tyem , *johm jucub xuku? kulu
    earth *kab ulew ka7 ka
    squash *k7uhm k7um k7:um kula, kura
    lord *7ahjaw ajaw ba ba
    mother *naa nan naal na
    jaguar *b7ahlam baläm balam balan
    sun, day *q7iihng q7ij saq7e sa

Brown, C. H. and Wichmann, S. 2004 “Proto-Mayan Syllable Nuclei,” International Journal of American Linguistics 70(2): 128-186.

Christianson’s Ki7che7 dictionary
[url] http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL

Kaufman, T. and Justeson, J. 2003 A Preliminary Mayan Etymological Dictionary
http://www.famsi.org/reports/01051/pmed.pdf


Still a try to shift the focus from the fact that Maya “x” /ch/ is NOT mande “s”/s/.

The Olmec are the Mother Culture of Mexico. The Olmec spoke a Mande lanbguage. As a result, the Olmec influence on Mayan languages preceeds the founding of the Mayan Classical Civilizations which are founded on Olmec prototypes.

Many pyramids are of Olmec origin. This is evident in the dragon motifs.

 -

This Olmec motif is found on pyramids that were covered over by later Mayan pyramids. These subpyramids were probably built by the Olmec.

.

 -

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Clyde I thought you said the Maya were the fake Mongoloid Indians and the big head Olmecs were the real ones

I never said the mongoloids were fake Mayans. I have said that there were Black and mongoloid Mayan people.

The Olmec were not Maya. The ancestors of the Maya, were the Ocos. The Ocos were Black Mexicans.

 -

Ocos female of the Mokaya tradition.

The Ocos were taught the art of building pyramids by the Olmecs. As a result, umder the earlist Mayan pyramids we find Olmec structures.

 -

These ancient black nations are discussed here:

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=002117

The Maya learned pyramid building, writing and agriculture from the ancient Blacks of Guatemala. These Blacks were the first kings of the Maya. See:


Afro-Mayan kings

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU2OslyBhck&feature=relmfu

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[
[*]Quiche Malinke-Bambara
xab' rain…………… sa
ixa? seed …………..si
uxe root…………….. sulu, suru
[/list]

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k
.
Clyde is shifting tactics, originally claims were that Mande and Maya were genetically related – but this caused problems because the initial tool for comparing these languages is the Swadesh word list, which lists basic words that have a low probability of being loans—not the randomly selected words that Winters likes to use. Now he call his correspondences as loans into Ki7che7 to give himself a better cherry picking opportunity. There is no need to even do his “correspondences.” Loan words are usually items, or things that are foreign or new to the recipient language and there would be no reason for regular shifts, Unless, the sound does not exist in the recipient language, for example words lent form Nahuatl to Spanish- here we have hundreds of examples. Nahuatl has a /tl/ which in Spanish become /te/-coyotl-coyote, popotl-popote, chocolatl-chocolate,petlatl-petate,zacatl-zacate,zapotl-zapote.- this is what a real correspondence looks like—notice the vowels are the same.

More important here is that Winters has a time problem— Several of his examples actually have proto-Maya roots, i.e. they existed a thousand years before there was a Ki7che7 language. Why would the Maya borrow a name for “jaguar” which is a native species from African Mande, which doesn’t have jaguars? Perhaps what really happened is that – say 500 B.C. proto Maya loaned these words to Mande.

The list below is English, proto-Maya, Ki7che7, Winters’ Ki7che7, and Winters Mande. The “7” is the consonant glottal stop that can’t be ignored.

These can’t be loans from Mande because they existed in Maya before there was a Ki7che7 language and before Clyde’s presumed contact.
  • English ProtoMaya ki7che7 winters winters
    dog *tz7i7 tz7i7
    canoe *tyem , *johm jucub xuku? kulu
    earth *kab ulew ka7 ka
    squash *k7uhm k7um k7:um kula, kura
    lord *7ahjaw ajaw ba ba
    mother *naa nan naal na
    jaguar *b7ahlam baläm balam balan
    sun, day *q7iihng q7ij saq7e sa

Brown, C. H. and Wichmann, S. 2004 “Proto-Mayan Syllable Nuclei,” International Journal of American Linguistics 70(2): 128-186.

Christianson’s Ki7che7 dictionary
[url] http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL

Kaufman, T. and Justeson, J. 2003 A Preliminary Mayan Etymological Dictionary
http://www.famsi.org/reports/01051/pmed.pdf


Still a try to shift the focus from the fact that Maya “x” /ch/ is NOT mande “s”/s/.

The Olmec are the Mother Culture of Mexico. The Olmec spoke a Mande lanbguage. As a result, the Olmec influence on Mayan languages preceeds the founding of the Mayan Classical Civilizations which are founded on Olmec prototypes.

Many pyramids are of Olmec origin. This is evident in the dragon motifs.

 -

This Olmec motif is found on pyramids that were covered over by later Mayan pyramids. These subpyramids were probably built by the Olmec.

.

 -

irrelevant spam. Still a try to shift the focus from the fact that Maya “x” /ch/ is NOT mande “s”/s/.
Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[
[*]Quiche Malinke-Bambara
xab' rain…………… sa
ixa? seed …………..si
uxe root…………….. sulu, suru
[/list]

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

Other loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara include:
  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    saq'e daytime,sunlight ……………sa 'heaven, sky'
    k'i many………………………………….. kika
    ja lineage, family……………………. ga, gba
    ja water…………………………………….. ji
    q'aq fire ……………………………………ga-ndi
    palo lake, sea………………………….. ba, b'la
    k'oto to carve, cut………………… ka
    k':um squash …………………………kula, kura
    Ba father………………………………. fa
    Ba lord ………………………………….Ba 'great' (Person)
    ka 'land,earth'………………………… ka 'suffix joined to names of lands,etc.
    naal parent,……………………………….. mother na
    cah earth,…………………………………….. land ka (see above)
    balam jaguar/tiger…………………………. balan 'leopard worship'

    xuku? Boat…………………………………………, canoe kulu
    k'o:x mask……………………………………………. ku

    The loan words in Quiche from Malinke-Bambara show the following patterns
    a------->a c------->s
    o------->u c------->k
    u------->a z------->s
    x ---------s k------->k
    x--------- k p------->f
    q------->k ch------>k
.
Clyde is shifting tactics, originally claims were that Mande and Maya were genetically related – but this caused problems because the initial tool for comparing these languages is the Swadesh word list, which lists basic words that have a low probability of being loans—not the randomly selected words that Winters likes to use. Now he call his correspondences as loans into Ki7che7 to give himself a better cherry picking opportunity. There is no need to even do his “correspondences.” Loan words are usually items, or things that are foreign or new to the recipient language and there would be no reason for regular shifts, Unless, the sound does not exist in the recipient language, for example words lent form Nahuatl to Spanish- here we have hundreds of examples. Nahuatl has a /tl/ which in Spanish become /te/-coyotl-coyote, popotl-popote, chocolatl-chocolate,petlatl-petate,zacatl-zacate,zapotl-zapote.- this is what a real correspondence looks like—notice the vowels are the same.

More important here is that Winters has a time problem— Several of his examples actually have proto-Maya roots, i.e. they existed a thousand years before there was a Ki7che7 language. Why would the Maya borrow a name for “jaguar” which is a native species from African Mande, which doesn’t have jaguars? Perhaps what really happened is that – say 500 B.C. proto Maya loaned these words to Mande.

The list below is English, proto-Maya, Ki7che7, Winters’ Ki7che7, and Winters Mande. The “7” is the consonant glottal stop that can’t be ignored.

These can’t be loans from Mande because they existed in Maya before there was a Ki7che7 language and before Clyde’s presumed contact.
  • English ProtoMaya ki7che7 winters winters
    dog *tz7i7 tz7i7
    canoe *tyem , *johm jucub xuku? kulu
    earth *kab ulew ka7 ka
    squash *k7uhm k7um k7:um kula, kura
    lord *7ahjaw ajaw ba ba
    mother *naa nan naal na
    jaguar *b7ahlam baläm balam balan
    sun, day *q7iihng q7ij saq7e sa

Brown, C. H. and Wichmann, S. 2004 “Proto-Mayan Syllable Nuclei,” International Journal of American Linguistics 70(2): 128-186.

Christianson’s Ki7che7 dictionary
[url] http://www.famsi.org/mayawriting/dictionary/christenson/quidic_complete.pdf[/URL

Kaufman, T. and Justeson, J. 2003 A Preliminary Mayan Etymological Dictionary
http://www.famsi.org/reports/01051/pmed.pdf


Still a try to shift the focus from the fact that Maya “x” /ch/ is NOT mande “s”/s/.

The Olmec are the Mother Culture of Mexico. The Olmec spoke a Mande lanbguage. As a result, the Olmec influence on Mayan languages preceeds the founding of the Mayan Classical Civilizations which are founded on Olmec prototypes.

Many pyramids are of Olmec origin. This is evident in the dragon motifs.

 -

This Olmec motif is found on pyramids that were covered over by later Mayan pyramids. These subpyramids were probably built by the Olmec.

.

 -

irrelevant spam. Still a try to shift the focus from the fact that Maya “x” /ch/ is NOT mande “s”/s/.
The Mayan /x/ is pronounced /sh/ , not /ch/.

What you wrote does not change the fact that regular correspondence exist between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.

The Quichean terms compared below come from Campbell,Lyle (1977), Quichean linguistic prehistory ,Berkeley : University of California Press.University of California publications in linguistics. v. 81


As noted earlier the Quiche words beginning with /x/ correspond to words borrowed from Malinke-Bambara by Mayan speakers, with an initial /s/ e.g.,

  • Quiche Malinke-Bambara
    xab' rain…………… sa
    ixa? seed …………..si
    uxe root…………….. sulu, suru

This confirms the connection between Mayan /x/ and Mande /s/.


We are talking about the Mande origin of writing. You have proven by your own post that Malinke-Bambara Si means race, etc.

Brauner (1974) Si (1)—- kind, type, race (n)

Delafosse, Si (high) – adverbe superlatif de “noir”(superlative for black).

Below Delafosse Malinke-Bambara 'si' = collective meanings family, race, descendants etc .

 -


I have also shown how the Mayan terms for writing are of Mande origin.


There is a clear prevalence of an African substratum for the origin of writing among the Maya. All the experts agree that the Olmec people probably gave writing to the Maya. Mayanist agree that the the Proto Maya term for "write" is <*c'ihb'> and probably *c'ib'.
  • Yucatec c'i:b' Chorti c'ihb'a Mam c'i:b'at

    Lacandon c'ib' Chol c'hb'an Teco c'i:b'a

    Itza c'ib' Chontal c'ib' Ixil c'ib'

    Mopan c'ib' Tzeltalan c'b'
Thus we have Proto Mayan *c'ihb' and *c'ib'. This /c/ in Mayan is often pronounced like the hard Spainish /c/ and has a /s/ sound.

C.H. Brown in "Hieroglyphic literacy in ancient Mayaland: inferences from linguistics data", , 32 (4), (1991, pp.489 495) argues that *c'ihb may be the ancient Mayan term for writing but, it can not be Proto mayan because writing did not appear among the Maya until 600 B.C. This was 1500 years after the break up of the Proto Maya . This view is supported by Mayan traditions recorded by Landa and discussed by B. Stross in "Maya Hierogyphic writing and Mixe Zoquean", 24(1), (1982 , pp.73 134) all point to the extra Maya origin of writing.

This word for 'write' is probably of Olmec/Manding origin. The Proto Manding term for writing is: *se'be', *safa^.
  • Malinke se'be' Serere safe

    Bambara se'be' Susu se'be

    Dioula se'we' Samo se'be

    Sarakole safa W. Malinke safa

As usual you don't know what you're talking about.

You are trying to use the Bandwagon propaganda technique to support your lies. Just because you contend that certain people agree on a particular phenomena does not make them right. For example, Europeans for hundreds of years believed the earth was flat , when it is round.

Your opinions are groundless. You are indeed a LIAR.
.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
zarahan aka Enrique Cardova
Member
Member # 15718

Icon 1 posted      Profile for zarahan aka Enrique Cardova     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
Clyde Winters claims that the Mande, Tutul Xiu, taught the Maya how to write.

So the Mande had a script with which they tutored the native Maya?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
Clyde Winters claims that the Mande, Tutul Xiu, taught the Maya how to write.

So the Mande had a script with which they tutored the native Maya?
There are many inscriptions written by the Mande spreading from the Fezzan to the ancient Mande cities of Tichitt .The Tichitt dwellings were built by Mande speaking people and date back to 2000-800 BC. Researchers claim that the inscriptions are along the chariot routes and other sites in Dar Tichitt.. This suggest that some of the inscriptions may date back to 1500-2000BC, this is the date for the appearance of the horse in the Sahara.

See: Nicole Lambert, Medinet Sbat et la Protohistoire de Mauritanie Occidentale, Antiquites Africaines, 4(1970),pp.15-62;

Nicole Lambert, L'apparition du cuivre dans les civilisations prehistoriques. In C.H. Perrot et al Le Sol, la Parole et 'Ecrit (Paris: Societe Francaise d'Histoire d'Outre Mer) pp.213-226;

R. Mauny, Tableau Geographique de l'Ouest Afrique Noire. Histoire et Archeologie (Fayard);

R.A. Kea, Expansion and Contractions: World-Historical Change and the Western Sudan World-System (1200/1000BC-1200/1250A.D.) Journal of World-Systems Reserach, 3(2004), pp.723-816 ).

The writing found among the Vai and along the Chariots routes leading to Tichitt is related to the Mande, Saharan and Libyco-Berber writing. Many of these inscriptions like the inscription at Oued Mertoutek date back to Olmec times.


The first researcher to recognize that the Olmec writing was Mande was Leo Wiener, in Africa and the discovery of America. He recognized that the writing on the Tuxtla statuette was written in Mande characters.

Here we have three examples of Mande writing the first picture is writing from a modern site.

Picture 2 is writing on the Tuxtla statuette from Mexico.

Picture 3 writing during the chariot age.

Note the symbol made up of squares with dots inside.

.


 -


 -

 -
Mojarra Stela
.

.
 -

.

.

 -

Tuxtla Statuette

.


Check out these videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pawacnH347o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFaTLi9hqaM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Inscriptions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9reWNcVQVEw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAHP_wMy-_E


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHH6nv6SWLk


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11HL6S0C8U0


Enjoy


.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
Clyde Winters claims that the Mande, Tutul Xiu, taught the Maya how to write.

So the Mande had a script with which they tutored the native Maya?
Bi-Lingual Olmec Mayan Text

 -


.


.
Support for my decipherment of the Olmec writing comes from a bilingual Mayan-Olmec/Mande inscribed brick from Comalcalco. Comalcalco is a Mayan archaeological site found in Tobasco. Here archaeologist Neil Steede found over 4000 inscribed bricks at the Comalcalco site.

 -


The Comalcalco site encompasses around 360 pyramids. Here almost all of the structures were built of fired bricks (tabiques) . Between 1977-1978, 9 of these pyramids were excavated.

Comalcalco is located in the State of Tabasco. It was built by the Chontal. It is the only city in Mexico built entirely of brick.

 -


Comalcalco means "in the house of earthenware" in Nahuatl

This Mayan site has interesting architecture. For example, "The Great Acropolis" probably used for civil and religious purposes.


In addition to building fine temples, walls and altars, there are fine "stucco" used to face their constructions, which resemble images on the sub-pyramids of many Mayan sites, that have analogy to Olmec iconography.

 -

Neil Steede became interested in the bricks in 1979. He obtained permission to photograph the bricks from the National Institute of Anthropology and History (NIAH).



Many of the inscribed bricks from the Comalcalco ruins were published by Neil Steede in a bilingual book entitled Preliminary Catalogue of the Comalcalco Bricks.


Brick T1-452 R16 is a very special brick. This brick has a bilingual Mayan-Olmec inscription. In this inscription we see a Mayan inscription , and beside it on the right hand side an Olmec/Malinke inscription .


The Olmec writing used on this brick is the plain Olmec style of writing. The plain Olmec style of writing was usually used to inscribe celts and other Olmec artifacts.

On the far right hand side we see two additional characters. These characters also are written in the plain Olmec style of writing (The Decipherment of Olmec Writing).

 -

Steede was advised by Dr. Alexander von Wuthenau, to send me copies of the bricks to determine if I could identify the writing on some of the bricks that appeared to Steede as similar to scripts used in the Old World in advance of his publication of the Comalcalco Catalogue. After an examination of the photographs I spotted the bilingual Olmec-Maya inscription.



I immediately recognized that the T1-452 R16 brick appeared to be include both Mayan and Olmec inscriptions. To test this hypothesis, I suggested to Steede that he decipher the Mayan inscription , and I would decipher the Olmec passage which had been partially defaced.

Steede agreed to this test. He then divided the inscription into three segments (we were both to decipher) and we began our decipherments. Below is the division of the T1-452 R16 text:

 -

I sent a copy of my decipherment of T1-452 R16 to Steede. On this decipherment I include a translation of the Malinke inscription on the right-hand side of the T1-452 R16, and also the Olmec/Mande signs found inside of the Mayan glyphs. Please note in my decipherment that I had placed on this chart a breakdown of the Olmec/Mande signs and the plain Olmec signs found inside of the Mayan glyphs (as well). Below is a copy of the decipherment I sent to Steede in 1984.



 -



Translation/Transliteration Olmec Plain Signs
  • A be ki

    a-ni gyo fe

    Ti lu


Thou exist incomplete.

He is the manifestation of life, a talisman in this proximity.

Give birth to this [funerary] habitation.

[img] http://olmec98.net/biling3.gif[/img]

Translation/Transliteration Olmec Signs inside Mayan Glyphs
  • Ku Fe

    The Jaguar god (of the underworld)

    Te ba

    Be Tu


The person of considerable dignity is void of breath.

[He goes to me the] Jaguar God.

[He] is no longer alive/ or Powerful Righteousness!

[His] Place of rest exist here.



Steede wrote me back (28-3-84) that his interpretation of the Mayan signs was almost identical to my translation of the Mayan and Olmec/Mande signs. He wrote the following:

" 1A shows a face with slashed eyes (blind or non=seeing), nostriless nose (non-breathing) and "clamped shut" mouth ( non-speaking). This would indicate death alright, but below the cartouche is added onto by two breath scrolls on each side of an intricate sacraficial blade. These breath (or speak) scrolls indicate that the person in question has expressed that he feels as though he is "dead" spiritually and wishes t make a self-sacrifice.

1B underlines the fact that he is dead, but note the "S" in the ear of the jaguar. This indicates pentiteuce, or repentence. Therefore, though the person is "dead" spiritually he has heard and accepted repentence.

Therefore 1A and 1B together would read extremely similar to your hieroglyphic translation, but almost exactly as your Manding translation. The person in question is considered to be incomplete until he accepts the priesthood.

2 is identical to your Manding translation and similar to your hieroglyphic interpretation. The part to the right is a dorsal fish fin.

I don't have any notes infront of me but I believe it is Stela 1 of Izapa which shows that Quetzalcoatl "fishes" for all types of fish (men). This stela also implicates that the dorsal fish fin is associated with priesthood.

Here we can see the fish fin "hatching" from an "egg?" or from "inner self?" The person in question is being born again as a priest.

3. I can't understand, but your rendering would seem to be correct. He is now at rest because he is (complete)."

This translation of the Mayan side of this bilingual brick from Comalcalco , and other inscribed bricks from this site indicate that it was probably a Mayan College where scribes learned Mayan writing and possibily pyramid construction. The bilingual text on T1-452 R16, indicates that the Mayan scribes had to learn how to write Olmec inscriptions and translate them into Mayan. The fact that the Olmec inscriptions were defaced indicate that the Mayan scribes while they studied Mayan writing first wrote a piece in Olmec and then wrote the same inscription in the Mayan language(s)

Below we see T1-452 R16. If you look carefully at the brick we see two Olmec signs written vertically.

Reading from top to bottom we find the following signs Mayan. The interpretation of Mayan in Olmec is the following: "It's done well--full of life". These signs appear to indicate a grade or comment on the brick made by the instructor. This supports the view that Comalcalco was a College, where Mayan initiates into the priesthood and scribal classes learned how to write Mayan hieroglyphics.
.


We know the name of the Olmec from the Maya. Landa noted that the Yucatec Maya claimed that they got writing from a group of foreigners called Tutul Xiu from Nonoulco (Tozzer, 1941). The Olmec originated writing in Mexico., so we can assume that the term Tutul Xiu refer to the Olmec.
The Tutul Xi were probably Olmecs. The term Tutul Xiu, can be translated into Olmec which is a member of the Manding Superfamily of languages as follows:
Tutul, "Very good subjects of the Order".
Xiu, "The Shi (/the race)".

"The Shis (who) are very good Subjects of the cult-Order".

The term Shi, is probably related to the Manding term Si, which was also used as an ethnonym. Since Si/Xi was used as an ethnonym, the Tutul Xi-u were the Olmec people. Thusly I call the Olmec by their own name: Xi.

Reference
Landa, D. de. (1978). Yucatan before and after the Conquest. (Trans. by) William Gates. New York: Dover Publications.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
africurious
Member
Member # 19611

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for africurious     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Quetzalcoatl, consider this

1) nobody is reading this thread

2) you will never convince Clyde of anything


Just write an article called
"Debunking Van Sertima and Clyde Winters on the Olmecs and other matters"
and move on

then stop wasting energy on this and move on, it's looking pathetic, the repetition on this year after year going nowhere

Done Van Sertima:
https://www.academia.edu/199927/Robbing_Native_American_Cultures_Van_Sertimas_Afrocentricity_and_the_Olmecs

The problem with Winters is finding a journal to publish in-- I don't do the kind of unreviewed journals Winters does. Van Sertima had achieved some influence in schools and thus serious journals considered it worthwhile to publish an article critiquing his work. I would have trouble convincing peer reviewed journals that Clyde's work is worth some of their limited space.

I do this for fun and because every year or so a new crop of innocent newbys fall for the never changing Winters's fantasy.

Winters is a charlatan and has no professional credentials in history, archaeology or linguistics. The article you posted has some good points critiquing claims of african influence on early mesoamericans. But, the article also has polemics and misleading information about "afrocentrics". It is another in a long list of writings using the "afrocentric" boogieman and strawman argumentative fallacy to buttress its position. The article apparently blames "afrocentrics" as the originators and sole believers in african influence on early mesoamerica when the article itself notes that such argument was put forth a hundred years ago by a white scholar who was assuredly no afrocentrist. Article also tries to cast "afrocentrists" as people who claim almost every early civilization to be "black" and even implies that ancient egypt is not linked to "sub-saharan" africans by dna nor linguistics. You won't convince the people you are aiming to convince with such nonsense about ancient egypt which is refuted by mainstream scholarship nor by ignoring the fact that since the 18th century european and american scholarship has denied/downplayed the role of people who would be characterized as nothing but black. Saying the olmecs were black based on the heads isn't the sole province of those who the article claims are being black nationalists. Even many mexicans will say the heads represent black people as I've seen on videos and in person witnessed a mexican museum guide say while I was in mexico. Said mexican guide then went on to show our group a sculpture of a man with a beard, said beards cannot be grown on native mexicans and noted how said man looked asian and that it seems many people from all over the world came to mexico. So this habit of assigning racial origin to mesoamerican portrayals of people is independent and predates what the article purports is "afrocentrism". Such racial assignments based on artefacts is wrong but one can point this out without laying false blame on "afrocentrics", strawman arguments against afrocentric boogiemen, and misleading info about the african nature of ancient egypt.
Posts: 214 | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by africurious:
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Quetzalcoatl, consider this

1) nobody is reading this thread

2) you will never convince Clyde of anything


Just write an article called
"Debunking Van Sertima and Clyde Winters on the Olmecs and other matters"
and move on

then stop wasting energy on this and move on, it's looking pathetic, the repetition on this year after year going nowhere

Done Van Sertima:
https://www.academia.edu/199927/Robbing_Native_American_Cultures_Van_Sertimas_Afrocentricity_and_the_Olmecs

The problem with Winters is finding a journal to publish in-- I don't do the kind of unreviewed journals Winters does. Van Sertima had achieved some influence in schools and thus serious journals considered it worthwhile to publish an article critiquing his work. I would have trouble convincing peer reviewed journals that Clyde's work is worth some of their limited space.

I do this for fun and because every year or so a new crop of innocent newbys fall for the never changing Winters's fantasy.

Winters is a charlatan and has no professional credentials in history, archaeology or linguistics. The article you posted has some good points critiquing claims of african influence on early mesoamericans. But, the article also has polemics and misleading information about "afrocentrics". It is another in a long list of writings using the "afrocentric" boogieman and strawman argumentative fallacy to buttress its position. The article apparently blames "afrocentrics" as the originators and sole believers in african influence on early mesoamerica when the article itself notes that such argument was put forth a hundred years ago by a white scholar who was assuredly no afrocentrist. Article also tries to cast "afrocentrists" as people who claim almost every early civilization to be "black" and even implies that ancient egypt is not linked to "sub-saharan" africans by dna nor linguistics. You won't convince the people you are aiming to convince with such nonsense about ancient egypt which is refuted by mainstream scholarship nor by ignoring the fact that since the 18th century european and american scholarship has denied/downplayed the role of people who would be characterized as nothing but black. Saying the olmecs were black based on the heads isn't the sole province of those who the article claims are being black nationalists. Even many mexicans will say the heads represent black people as I've seen on videos and in person witnessed a mexican museum guide say while I was in mexico. Said mexican guide then went on to show our group a sculpture of a man with a beard, said beards cannot be grown on native mexicans and noted how said man looked asian and that it seems many people from all over the world came to mexico. So this habit of assigning racial origin to mesoamerican portrayals of people is independent and predates what the article purports is "afrocentrism". Such racial assignments based on artefacts is wrong but one can point this out without laying false blame on "afrocentrics", strawman arguments against afrocentric boogiemen, and misleading info about the african nature of ancient egypt.
You wish I was a charlatan and had no professional credentials. If this was true I would not have taught Linguistics at Saint Xavier University-Chicago or made numerous presentations at Professional Conferences.


I made many presentations on the Olmecs at Anthrpological Conferences in which members of tha Academe attended. I made these presentations because back in the 1990's some laymen and other detractors attacking my work accussed me of not presenting my work before the academic community.


I have made presentation at international and national anthropological meetings, before my "peers" including AAA. For example Linda Schele attended my 1997 Olmec presentation.


 -
 -

Friday, April 16th
... in Highland Chiapas. 9:30. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Olmec Symbolism in the Mayan Writing. 9:50. Nestor Quiroa (U Illinois ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/pfri.html - 47k - Cached - Similar pages

Saturday, April 17th
... 11:15. Samuel Cooper (Bar Ilan U) The Classification of Biblical Sacrifice. 11:35. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Harappan Origins of Yogi. 11:55. ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/psat.html - 50k - Cached - Similar pages

preliminary program csas98
... Mexican Villages. 4:10 Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio I) Jaguar Kings: Olmec Royalty and Religious Leaders in the First Person. 4:30 ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg98/Prelimp5.htm - 39k - Cached - Similar pages

Thursday April, 3 - Early Afternoon
... Russia [1413]. 2:30 pm - Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio Institute) - The Decipherment of Olmec Writing [1414]. 2:50 pm - James ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg97/final.htm - 36k - Cached - Similar pages


You can see my 1997 Lecture on the Decipherment of the Olmec script on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6TuODS64AY&feature=em-upload_owner


 -

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
Quetzalcoatl, consider this

1) nobody is reading this thread

2) you will never convince Clyde of anything


Just write an article called
"Debunking Van Sertima and Clyde Winters on the Olmecs and other matters"
and move on

then stop wasting energy on this and move on, it's looking pathetic, the repetition on this year after year going nowhere

Done Van Sertima:
https://www.academia.edu/199927/Robbing_Native_American_Cultures_Van_Sertimas_Afrocentricity_and_the_Olmecs

The problem with Winters is finding a journal to publish in-- I don't do the kind of unreviewed journals Winters does. Van Sertima had achieved some influence in schools and thus serious journals considered it worthwhile to publish an article critiquing his work. I would have trouble convincing peer reviewed journals that Clyde's work is worth some of their limited space.


This is just a cop out.Online Journals have unlimited space because they are published on-line.

My on-line articles were peer reviewed and you know it. You are upset because I can write and publish research articles for linguistic and scientific journals. You are a good writer of narrative style descriptive anthropological articles and books, but you are not a scientific research writer.


You just have to follow the methodology for research articles required by the journal, to get your paper published. Your problem is that you don't know how to write scientific and linguistics research papers.

If you had scientific evidence to support your propositions you could get your article published.In addition to not knowing how to write research articles, You just don't want to pay $2-3000 to have your paper published in the "Open Access" journals, e.g., PLoS, you support.

We have been debating these issues since 1996. During this period I have published and written three books on the ancient Olmecs and a major article. I have confirmed the research of Leo Wiener, on the Mande influence on the Mayan Calendar, Olmec writing and the reality that the Mayan language have many Mande loanwords.

 -


.
 -

I have also published books supporting my research:

 -

 -

 -

After our on-line debates in 1996, I starting making presentations at Conferences.

I made many presentations on the Olmecs at Anthrpological Conferences in which members of the Academe attended. I made these presentations because back in the 1990's, you, laymen and other detractors attacked my work and acussed me of not presenting my work before the academic community.


I have made presentation at international and national anthropological meetings, before my "peers" including AAA. For example Linda Schele attended my 1997 Olmec presentation.


 -
 -

Friday, April 16th
... in Highland Chiapas. 9:30. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Olmec Symbolism in the Mayan Writing. 9:50. Nestor Quiroa (U Illinois ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/pfri.html - 47k - Cached - Similar pages

Saturday, April 17th
... 11:15. Samuel Cooper (Bar Ilan U) The Classification of Biblical Sacrifice. 11:35. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Harappan Origins of Yogi. 11:55. ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/psat.html - 50k - Cached - Similar pages

preliminary program csas98
... Mexican Villages. 4:10 Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio I) Jaguar Kings: Olmec Royalty and Religious Leaders in the First Person. 4:30 ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg98/Prelimp5.htm - 39k - Cached - Similar pages

Thursday April, 3 - Early Afternoon
... Russia [1413]. 2:30 pm - Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio Institute) - The Decipherment of Olmec Writing [1414]. 2:50 pm - James ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg97/final.htm - 36k - Cached - Similar pages


You can see my 1997 Lecture on the Decipherment of the Olmec script, Linda Schele attended on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6TuODS64AY&feature=em-upload_owner


At that time I believe you were still teaching. I met many members of the establishment at these Conferences and I presented papers on panels along with other experts.

You have not published anything in response to my presentations at Conferences, articles and books.You confront my research at ES, in the hope that you can use the bandwagon effect (hate of the word :Afrocentrism) to garner support, but you fail because whereas you have no support for your propositions I bring forth evidence destroying all your false claims.

You have not published anything because you are a fool, but you are not foolish. Once you publish such an article I get the opportunity to respond and I will continue to show how you don't know what you're talking about. In a research journal I will show your peers what a liar you are.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
africurious
Member
Member # 19611

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for africurious     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by africurious:

Winters is a charlatan and has no professional credentials in history, archaeology or linguistics.
You wish I was a charlatan and had no professional credentials. If this was true I would not have taught Linguistics at Saint Xavier University-Chicago or made numerous presentations at Professional Conferences.


I made many presentations on the Olmecs at Anthrpological Conferences in which members of tha Academe attended. I made these presentations because back in the 1990's some laymen and other detractors attacking my work accussed me of not presenting my work before the academic community.


I have made presentation at international and national anthropological meetings, before my "peers" including AAA. For example Linda Schele attended my 1997 Olmec presentation.


 -
 -

Friday, April 16th
... in Highland Chiapas. 9:30. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Olmec Symbolism in the Mayan Writing. 9:50. Nestor Quiroa (U Illinois ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/pfri.html - 47k - Cached - Similar pages

Saturday, April 17th
... 11:15. Samuel Cooper (Bar Ilan U) The Classification of Biblical Sacrifice. 11:35. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Harappan Origins of Yogi. 11:55. ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/psat.html - 50k - Cached - Similar pages

preliminary program csas98
... Mexican Villages. 4:10 Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio I) Jaguar Kings: Olmec Royalty and Religious Leaders in the First Person. 4:30 ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg98/Prelimp5.htm - 39k - Cached - Similar pages

Thursday April, 3 - Early Afternoon
... Russia [1413]. 2:30 pm - Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio Institute) - The Decipherment of Olmec Writing [1414]. 2:50 pm - James ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg97/final.htm - 36k - Cached - Similar pages


You can see my 1997 Lecture on the Decipherment of the Olmec script on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6TuODS64AY&feature=em-upload_owner


 -

. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Hahaha, you show your weasely ways as usual. 1st example of your dishonesty is to leave out info that changes the meaning of what the writer (me) said. I specified the subjects in which you had no professional credentials. I didn't say not professional credentials at all. In the subjects we discuss here on ES one needs at least a masters in the relevant subjects to even begin to be considered a professional. You apparently have a masters in "social science" so you fail to be a professional in linguistics, history, anthropology or archaeology. Your phd is in educational psychology so again you fail. Supposedly you taught linguistics at Saint Xavier U but any college that allows someone to teach a subject in which they don't even have masters at least isn't worth jack. I can't even say anything bad about the college because I don't know to what extent you lied about teaching there. They don't even have a linguistics dept listed on their website, lol.

2nd example of your dishonesty is distorting the meaning of clear terms and phrases. You mention talks you gave at the AAA where peers attended, hahaaaa. Idk how they let a quack like you talk but that's still irrelevant because it's obvious that doesn't count as peer reviewed publication. Professors don't get tenure by giving talks and failing to publish in peer reviewed journals that aren't suspect. Those in the know are already aware that there are many dubious journals out there that are for-profits which causes them to accept shoddy papers because they make $ by publishing as many papers as possible. You're a joke.

Posts: 214 | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Olmecs came from Africa. There is no evidence that the Olmec existed in Mexico before 1200-1100 BC.

The archaeological evidence suggest that the Olmec "miraculously appear on American soil".

Some researchers claim that I am wrongly ruling out an “indigenous revolution” for the origin of the Olmec civilization. This is their opinion—the archaeological evidence, not I, suggest that the founders of the Olmec civilization were not “indigenous” people.


In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement”Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects”.

M. Coe, writing in Regional Perspective on the Olmecs (1989), (ed.) by Sharer and Grove, observed that “ on the contrary, the evidence although negative, is that the Olmec style of art, and Olmec engineering ability suddenly appeared full fledged from about 1200 BC”.

Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J.E. Cark and M.E. Pye,makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of the Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become Olmecs, or to become like the Olmecs” (p.234). Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries” (pp.245-46).

Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs:America’s first civilization (2005), wrote “ The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue” (p.25).

Pool (17-18), in Olmec Archaeology and early MesoAmerica (2007), argues that continuity exist between the Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico “[even]though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin for Olmec culture (Diehl & Coe 1995:150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32; Coe and Diehl 1980a:150)”.

Pool admits (p.95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo, who reported dramatic change in ceramic type and argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p.150).”


The evidence presented by these authors make it clear that the Olmec introduced a unique culture to Mesoamerica that was adopted by the Mesoamericans. As these statements make it clear that was no continuity between pre-Olmec cultures and the Olmec culture.

The Olmec came from Saharan Africa.
They spoke a Mande language. Evidence of this connection comes from the fact:

1) both groups used jade (Amazonite) to make their tools. Amazonite was used in Saharan Africa
 -

It was found at many sites in the ancient Sahara by archaeologists from the University of Chicago led by Soreno See:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2515196/pdf/pone.0002995.pdf

They made adzes and pendants to name a few items in amazonite.


2) both groups made large stone heads. Here is an African head dating back to the same period.

 -

3) The Mande came to Mexico in boats from the Sahara down the ancient Niger River that formerly emptied in the Sahara or they could have made their way to the Atlantic Ocean down the Senegal River.

 -

4) The Olmec writing points back to a Mande origin in Africa.

 -

.
 -

5) Olmec skeletons that are African.

6) Similar white, and red-and-black pottery.

 -

7) Introduction of the 13 month 20 day calendar.

8) Mayan adoption of the Mande term for writing.

9)Mande religious and culture terms adopted by Mayan people.

. Check out my video on the name for the Olmecs: Xi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EbtykVTwPg

.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by africurious:
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by africurious:

Winters is a charlatan and has no professional credentials in history, archaeology or linguistics.
You wish I was a charlatan and had no professional credentials. If this was true I would not have taught Linguistics at Saint Xavier University-Chicago or made numerous presentations at Professional Conferences.


I made many presentations on the Olmecs at Anthrpological Conferences in which members of tha Academe attended. I made these presentations because back in the 1990's some laymen and other detractors attacking my work accussed me of not presenting my work before the academic community.


I have made presentation at international and national anthropological meetings, before my "peers" including AAA. For example Linda Schele attended my 1997 Olmec presentation.


 -
 -

Friday, April 16th
... in Highland Chiapas. 9:30. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Olmec Symbolism in the Mayan Writing. 9:50. Nestor Quiroa (U Illinois ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/pfri.html - 47k - Cached - Similar pages

Saturday, April 17th
... 11:15. Samuel Cooper (Bar Ilan U) The Classification of Biblical Sacrifice. 11:35. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Harappan Origins of Yogi. 11:55. ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/psat.html - 50k - Cached - Similar pages

preliminary program csas98
... Mexican Villages. 4:10 Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio I) Jaguar Kings: Olmec Royalty and Religious Leaders in the First Person. 4:30 ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg98/Prelimp5.htm - 39k - Cached - Similar pages

Thursday April, 3 - Early Afternoon
... Russia [1413]. 2:30 pm - Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio Institute) - The Decipherment of Olmec Writing [1414]. 2:50 pm - James ...
www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg97/final.htm - 36k - Cached - Similar pages


You can see my 1997 Lecture on the Decipherment of the Olmec script on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6TuODS64AY&feature=em-upload_owner


 -

.

Hahaha, you show your weasely ways as usual. 1st example of your dishonesty is to leave out info that changes the meaning of what the writer (me) said. I specified the subjects in which you had no professional credentials. I didn't say not professional credentials at all. In the subjects we discuss here on ES one needs at least a masters in the relevant subjects to even begin to be considered a professional. You apparently have a masters in "social science" so you fail to be a professional in linguistics, history, anthropology or archaeology. Your phd is in educational psychology so again you fail. Supposedly you taught linguistics at Saint Xavier U but any college that allows someone to teach a subject in which they don't even have masters at least isn't worth jack. I can't even say anything bad about the college because I don't know to what extent you lied about teaching there. They don't even have a linguistics dept listed on their website, lol.

2nd example of your dishonesty is distorting the meaning of clear terms and phrases. You mention talks you gave at the AAA where peers attended, hahaaaa. Idk how they let a quack like you talk but that's still irrelevant because it's obvious that doesn't count as peer reviewed publication. Professors don't get tenure by giving talks and failing to publish in peer reviewed journals that aren't suspect. Those in the know are already aware that there are many dubious journals out there that are for-profits which causes them to accept shoddy papers because they make $ by publishing as many papers as possible. You're a joke.

You're stupid. Anthropology, history, linguistics and Archaeology are all social sciences.

LOL. Moron, all journals make money by publishing articles.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Quetzalcoatl
Member
Member # 12742

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Quetzalcoatl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Olmecs came from Africa. There is no evidence that the Olmec existed in Mexico before 1200-1100 BC.

The archaeological evidence suggest that the Olmec "miraculously appear on American soil".

Some researchers claim that I am wrongly ruling out an “indigenous revolution” for the origin of the Olmec civilization. This is their opinion—the archaeological evidence, not I, suggest that the founders of the Olmec civilization were not “indigenous” people.


In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement”Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects”.

M. Coe, writing in Regional Perspective on the Olmecs (1989), (ed.) by Sharer and Grove, observed that “ on the contrary, the evidence although negative, is that the Olmec style of art, and Olmec engineering ability suddenly appeared full fledged from about 1200 BC”.

Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J.E. Cark and M.E. Pye,makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of the Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become Olmecs, or to become like the Olmecs” (p.234). Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries” (pp.245-46).

Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs:America’s first civilization (2005), wrote “ The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue” (p.25).

Pool (17-18), in Olmec Archaeology and early MesoAmerica (2007), argues that continuity exist between the Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico “[even]though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin for Olmec culture (Diehl & Coe 1995:150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32; Coe and Diehl 1980a:150)”.

Pool admits (p.95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo, who reported dramatic change in ceramic type and argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p.150).”


The evidence presented by these authors make it clear that the Olmec introduced a unique culture to Mesoamerica that was adopted by the Mesoamericans. As these statements make it clear that was no continuity between pre-Olmec cultures and the Olmec culture.

T
.



Boring spam.

In the future I will show many more examples of Winters’s techniques of misquoting, partial quoting, and paraphrasing instead of accurate quoting to misrepresent the facts and make it seem as if he has established scholars agreeing with his version of events.

The Olmecs DID NOT arise suddenly in 1200 BC.

See the following:

Tate, C. E. 1995 “Art in Olmec Culture,” pp. 47-67 In [u] The Olmec world [/u]Princeton: the Art Museum, Princeton University

quote:
p. 47 “ For the purpose of this discussion, Formative period objects embodying the themes, formats, subjects and formal qualities associated with the dominant form of shamanic kingship, not only from the Gulf Coast but also from other areas of Mesoamerica, will be called “Olmec.” Most of the object in this exposition probably date to the Middle Formative and are part of a widespread ceremonial complex, as discussed by F. Kent Reilly, III, in this volume.”
. . .
p. 65 Far more than merely a style, however, Olmec art objects codified and communicated a shamanic reality whose fundamental truths were shared by disparate peoples across Mesoamerica... Taken together, the subjects of Olmec art must present a nearly complete view of the ideological concerns of America’s first civilization.. .
Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have had no antecedents, no material models remain for its monumental constructions an sculpture and the ritual acts captured in small objects.

Winters continues to cite the underlined Tate statement in support of his “sudden origin” omitting the paragraph on p. 46 or the prior qualification on p. 67. When we asked Dr. Tate about these lines, she pointed out that she was speaking about all of Mesoamerica not just the Gulf Olmec.

quote:
From: "Tate, Carolyn" <CAROLYN.TATE@ttu.edu>
To: >
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: Hello Professor Tate, is this still your interpretation?

It depends on how we define "Olmec." in that statement I used the term at its broadest, to refer to any culture of the Initial Formative Period in Mesoamerica. I did not mean to refer to the GULF COAST Olmec exclusively.
antecedents to Gulf Coast Olmec art and ritual include

Nixtamalization--Oaxaca
earliest Mounds-- pacific coast
earliest ball court -- Geo Shih or Paso de la Amada
earliest evidence of social stratification -- Paso de la Amada
Earliest use of jade axes in a ritual deposit -- El Manati

hope this helps. why do you ask?

C Tate

On Jan 18, 2010, at 10:21 PM,

In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement "Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects".
http://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2009/10/did-olmecs-miraculously-appear-on.html<blockedhttp://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2009/10/did-olmecs-miraculously-appear-on.html>

Or have more finding popped up since then.

Sincerely,

The following is a series of Winters’ statements that are incorrect or misleading by selective quotations.


quote:
Winters Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J. E. Clark and M.E. Pye, makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become like the Olmecs” (p. 234).
BOM (as usual Winters can’t cite accurately) The full cite is

Clark, J.E. and M.E. Pye 2000 “The Pacific Coast and the Olmec,” in J.E. Clark and M.E. Pye, eds., [u]Olmec Art and Archaeology in Mesoamerica[/u] pp. 217-251 Washington: National Academy of Art

completely misrepresents what Clark and Pye say— Mokaya and the Olmec area (Olman) interacted for a thousand years. The cite Winters uses refers to the LAST phase interaction.

quote:
p. 243-244. At the beginning of the Early Formative [BOM Barra Phase 1700-1500 BC]-, the Mokaya at the Soconusco were clearly independent of other peoples of Mesoamerica, Early forms of rank society, or simple chiefdoms, evolved in the Pacific Coast region, and these institutions were quickly adopted by neighboring peoples including those living in Olman [what is usually called the Olmec heartland] (see Clark 1994a; Clark and Blake 1994). There is clear archaeological evidence of early contact between the peoples of the Pacific Coast and those of Olman in pre-Olmec times, most apparent in ceramic assemblages and the types of obsidian imported into each region. The Mokaya’s impact on the first villagers of Olman remains to be determined, but we think it was significant [see Clark 1990; Clark and Blake 1989). Some contact was maintained between the two groups throughout the Formative period, but after the initial close contact at the beginning of the Early Formative the peoples in the Soconusco and Olman developed along separate paths. The people of Olman created the cultural patterns and representational systems that we now call “Olmec”, and the Mokaya of the Soconusco continued much as before. About 1200 B.C. the Olmecs of Olman and the Mokaya of the Mazatan regions once again begin to interact with greater frequency.
[
quote:
Winters:
Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us, this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific Coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries.

[BOM] Pye does NOT say that “it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose..” AND Winters omits the rest of the paragraph that contradicts his claims

quote:
PP. 245-246
Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us, this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific Coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries. (This much quoted by Winters)

BUT WINTERS DOES NOT CITE THE REST OF THE PARAGRAPH

Creation of this first stratified society involved the forging and crystallization of social, political, and religious institutions that became the hallmarks of Mesoamerica itself. As with all historical entities and cultural configurations, this was not creation ex nihilo but from preexistent matter. The Olmecs clearly were influenced by their predecessors and neighbors, such as the Mokaya, in significant ways. . .

.
Pye, M. E. and Clark, J.E. 2000 “Introducing Olmec Archaeology,” in J.E. Clark and M.E. Pye, eds., [U]Olmec Art and Archaeology in Mesoamerica [/U]pp. 9-17 Washington: National Academy of Art

Another quote from Pye and Clark:

quote:
p. 9-10 This definition begs the question, of course, of just what is meant by “Mesoamerican practices”; these include traits such as the cultivation of chocolate, manufacture of paper, the rubber-ball game, human sacrifice, complex ritual calendar, beliefs in corn deities and others [see Kirchhoff 1943].. . Textbooks perpetuate the fallacy of Mesoamerica as a fixed geographical territory. The original distinction remains valuable, however, because there was time, about 1500 B.C., when these cultural practices had not yet been established or disseminated. Along with the “where” of Mesoamerica, we need to consider the “when.” How was the Mesoamerican way of life established? How did it evolve? And how did it spread over time?
. . . .
p. 12 We suggest, instead, that the term [Olmec] be used to describe peoples who followed a particular suite of cultural practices that included certain forms of visual representations (see Clark and Pye this volume).. . . We also believe that the archaeological record already demonstrates convincingly that there were several contemporaneous Olmec polities or entities for most time periods, so we have opted for the plural to convey the idea of plurality rather than a single monolithic entity.

BOM here are more quotes on the topic by other Olmec Scholars

David C. Grove. 1993. “Olmec” Horizons in Formative Period Mesoamerica: Diffusion or Social Evolution?” In Don S. Rice, ed. [u]Latin American Horizons[/u]. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks.

quote:
p.85 The “origins” of Olmec culture have been speculative at times. Because the early La Venta explorations were confined to a mound-plaza complex (Complex A) now known to be relatively late in Olmec prehistory, no antecedents to the artifacts recovered there were readily apparent, and thus a notion began that perhaps Olmec culture was intrusive and that it had not originated on the Gulf Coast (see below also). However, the stratigraphic data later retrieved by Michael Coe and Richard Diehl from San Lorenzo clearly demonstrate that Olmec culture is indeed indigenous to the Gulf Coast (Coe 1970; Coe and Diehl 1980; Grove 1981a: 376-378).
********
The argument for the origin of Olmec style coming from coastal Guatemala is made by John Graham, “Olmec Diffusion: A Cultural View from Pacific Guatemala,” pp. 227-246. This book has chapter by practically all the key archaeologists involved in Olmec research. Now, having published a number of books, I can tell you that these chapters were written up to 2 years before publication. Furthermore, ideas are published as papers in professional journals before they get into books. These ideas are at least 10 years old.

As I pointed out previously, the Olmec *did not* arise suddenly. In the Gulf Area, there is evidence of continual and gradually increasing in complexity occupation of the San Lorenzo site dating to 1500 B.C. (Coe and Diehl 1980) and in the La Venta site occupation of the Rio Bari as far back as 1800 B.C. (Rust and Leyden 1994). A recent summary of the origin of the Olmecs is the quote from Clark (1991):

“The Mesoamerican tradition was first clearly in place by Olmec times. Here (in Guatemala BOM) its beginnings are traced back five centuries before the Olmecs to the Mokaya of the Pacific Coast of Chiapas, Mexico. It is argued here that the first complex cities in Middle America arose in this littoral shore and had profound and widespread civilizing influence on the area that would soon become the nucleus of Mesoamerica. Recent research in the Mazatan region of Coastal Chiapas suggests that simple chiefdom societies were in place by at least 1650 B.C.”

Clark, J. F. 1991. “The Beginnings of Mesoamerica: Apologia for the Soconusco Early Formative.” in [u]The Formation of Complex Society in Southeastern Mesoamerica[/u]. edited by Wm. R. Fowler. 13-26. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Coe, M. D. Coe and R. A. Diehl. 1980. [u]In the Land of the Olmecs: Archeology of San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan[/u]. 2 vols. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Rust, W.F. and B. W. Leyden. 1994. “Evidence of Maize use at Early and Middle Preclassic La Venta Olmec Sites,” in S. Johannessen and C. H. Hostoy, eds. [u]Corn and Culture in the Prehistoric World[/u] pp. 181-201.Boulder: Westview Press.
%%%%%%%


Properly cited Diehl, R. A. 2004 [u] The Olmecs: America’s First Civilization[/u] NY: Thames & Hudson

quote:
Winters says:

Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs: America’s first civilization (2005)
wrote “The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue.” (p. 25)

BOM a couple of points 1) Diehl poses ONLY 2 possibilities- Mokaya or indigenous development nothing else—so this DOES NOT allow the possibility of an African intervention. Also see that San Lorenzo has been pushed back to 1600 BC and that the pottery from that period is identical to pottery from Mokaya, El Manati, and Chiapas supporting Clark and Pye that there were several contacts between San Lorenzo and Mokaya. The first one— Mokaya was more advanced and influenced San Lorenzo and LATER comes the contact used by Winters where San Lorenzo came back and influenced Mokaya. It would be useful to show that pottery of the Ojochi period was very different from African Mande pottery (they may have still been pastoralists and not making pottery- also compare Chicharras pottery)

Also, as usual Winters’ quotes selectively Immediately before what Winters quotes —the paragraph says:

quote:
Until recently archaeologists believed that Olmec culture did not emerge as an identifiable entity until 1200 BC, but today they can trace its origins probably to at least 1600-1500 BC. BOM denies Winters’ claim that the Mande arrived 1200 BC During that century true Olmec remains were ritually deposited at El Manati, a sacred shrine near San Lorenzo in the lower Coatzacoalcos basin. There is good reason to believe that the worshippers came from San Lorenzo, the first large Olmec center and possibly the original hearth of Olmec culture and art.


p. 27 “ Excavations at San Lorenzo have revealed three phases of occupation prior to its emergence as a full-blown city at 1200 BC: Ojochi (1550-1350 BC), Bajio (1350-1250 BC) and Chicharras (1250-1150 BC). Remains of these occupations lie deeply buried under later debris but even so, recent excavations suggest that San Lorenzo covered at least 20 ha (49 acres) by 1250 BC. Surveys in the 400-sq. km (155-sq. mile) region around San Lorenzo identified more than 1000 Bajio and Chicharras-phase sites that formed a complex three-tiered settlement hierarchy with the village of San Lorenzo at its apex. The subsidiary communities included nine small villages and scores of small hamlets and farmsteads. Most settlements were located on high ground that did not flood, but yet provided access to fresh water and fluvial transport. San Lorenzo was the largest village in the region and seems to have dominated the entire zone even at this early time, perhaps receiving food and other tribute from its subordinates.
Ojochi-phase [BOM 1600-1500 BC] pottery includes utilitarian wares used in daily life as well as finely made vessels suitable for ceremonial feasting. Vessel forms included bowls, thin-walled tecomates (restricted mouth-jars that resemble gourds), and jars with out-flaring necks. Red slips and a variety of surface modifications such as gadrooning, grooving , punctuation, and contrasting polished and roughened areas all added to the attractiveness of the vessels. Ojochi-phase pottery is virtually identical to Manati-A-phase ceramics, as well as more distant Pellicer-phase materials in Tabasco, and Barra-phase pottery found in coastal Chiapas across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec

Winters says:

quote:
“Pool (17-18) in Olmec Archaeology and Early Mesoamerica (2007), argues that continuity exist [sic] between Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico”[even] though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin of Olmec culture (Diehl& Coe 1995: 150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo [u]rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32: Coe and Diehl 1980a: 150.”


And
“Pool admits (p. 95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo who reported dramatic change in ceramic types and argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p. 150).”

[BOM] Again a thin reed. Notice that even his own cite contradicts his 1200 BC scenario by 250 years
Just because Winters’ never changes his positions even when they have been proved to be wrong for years does not mean that REAL scholars do not change their views when new or contrary evidence comes to light. Coe’s and Diehl’s opinion of 30-40 year ago is no longer valid because there have been a lot of excavation in the intervening period.

First, the latest opinion of Coe and Diehl. (Pool has a typo in his Diehl and Coe 1995 cite)

Diehl, R. A. and M. D. Coe 1995 “ Olmec Archaeology,” in [u]The Olmec world Ritual and Rulership[/u] Princeton, NJ: Art Museum, Princeton University.

quote:
p. 11-12 “Biologically, the Olmec were Native Americans whose Ice Age ancestors entered the New World from northern Asia via the Bering Strait land bridge. This may come as a surprise to readers familiar with recent sensationalist claims that the Olmecs were Egyptians, Phoenicians, West Africans, Chinese, or even refugees from sunken continents. Scholars rightly dismiss such ideas as outlandish fairy tales and will continue to do so until archaeologists uncover at least one Old world artifact or human skeleton in an Olmec archaeological site. A verified archaeological find of this sort would be truly revolutionary, but none has appeared and it is unlikely any will.”
. . .
The earliest evidence of human occupation in the Olmec heartland is found on the natural levees of the Rio Bari, an old, silted-in stream near la Venta, Tabasco, where farmers settled as early as 2200 B.C. similar villages occurred along all the river valleys of the Olmec heartland in the following centuries. Although they appear to lack the monumental art and architecture, social hierarchies, and complex institutions that characterize Olmec culture, these villages clearly provided the local population base for the later Olmec expansion. By the end of the pre-Olmec period, San Lorenzo and La Venta were growing faster than other communities and fragments of basalt monuments in some of the deepest levels at San Lorenzo suggest that the Olmec sculptural tradition existed prior to 1200 B.C.”[QUOTE]

Now Diehl
Diehl, R. A. 2004 [u]The Olmecs America’s first Civilization[/u] NY: Thames & Hudson

[QUOTE]pp. 13-14 “The origins of Olmec culture have intrigued scholars and lay people alike since Tres Zapotes Colossal head 1, a gigantic stone human head with vaguely Negroid features was discovered in Veracruz 140 years ago. Since that time, Olmec culture and art have been attributed to seafaring Africans, Egyptians, Nubians, Phoenicians, Atlanteans, Japanese, Chinese, and other ancient wanderers. As often happens, the truth is infinitely more logical, if less romantic: the Olmecs were Native Americans who created a unique culture in southeastern Mexico’s Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Archaeologists now trace Olmec origins back to pre-Olmec cultures in the region and there is no credible evidence for major intrusions from the outside. Furthermore, not a single bona fide artifact of Old world origin has ever appeared in an Olmec archaeological site, or for that matter anywhere else in Mesoamerica.

p. 28 “The Chicharras phase (1250-1150 BC) was a critical juncture in San Lorenzo’s history that presaged the full emergence of Olmec culture. The population continued to grow dramatically while the pottery assemblage underwent dramatic changes. Michael D. Coe and I originally attributed these changes to immigrants from elsewhere in the Olmec region [BOM not another continent]], but I am less convinced of this hypothesis today than I was in 1980. Differentially fired black-and-white pottery increased in popularity while many old pottery types disappeared.

%%%%


Finally another expert on Olmec art

Karl A. Taube. 2004. [u]Olmec Art at Dumbarton Oaks /Washington DC: Dumbarton Oaks[/u]

quote:
p.1 To this day, the Olmec continue to be traced to such distant regions as Africa and China (Van Sertima 1976; Thomson 1989; Gonzalez Calderon 1991; Xu 1996). [NOTE 1. Quite frequently, arguments for Old world contacts are based on superficial visual resemblances. A particularly egregious example appeared in U.S. News & World Report (Fenyvesi 1996). According to Shang scholar, Han Ping Chen. One of the miniature jade stelae from La Venta Offering 4 contains a readable Chinese text (ibid.) it has been known for some time, however, that these miniature stelae derive from halves of incised celts cut along the central long axis. Two of the incised Offering 4 “stelae” are parts of the same incised celt, which portrayed a flying figure holding a knuckle-duster and maize ear fetish (see Cervantes 1969; fig. 11). As for the purported incised Shang text, it constitutes half of a frontally facing depiction of the Olmec Maize god. For a reconstruction of the entire figure, see Reilly n.d.; fig 4.51]. The archaeological evidence argues for an entirely indigenous development, however, and many Olmec traits are traceable to earlier cultures of Early Formative Mesoamerica. There is simply no material evidence of any pre-Hispanic contact between the Old world and Mesoamerica before the arrival of the Spanish in the sixteenth century.

p. 5-7. Although the Olmec were extremely early, they by no means appeared ex nihilo, like some wondrous mushroom, out of the swampy Gulf coast lowlands. Many of the more fundamental Olmec traits, such as social hierarchy, ceramics, food production, monumental architecture, craft specialization, ball game, dedicatory offerings, and the restricted use of jade and other rare, exotic goods already were present among earlier Formative peoples. Although similar and contemporaneous developments were surely occurring in the Olmec heartland, the incipient Formative period is best documented for the nearby coastal piedmont region of southern Chiapas and neighboring Guatemala, often referred to as the Soconusco (Blake 1991; Blake et al. 1995; Ceja Tenorio 1985; Clark 1991, 1994; John Clark and Michael Blake 1989, 1994; Coe 1961; Green and Lowe 1967; Love 1975). Clark and Blake (1989) aptly term the Early Formative people of this region Mokaya, a Mixe-Zoque word for “the people of the corn.”

%%%%%%%%%%
Posts: 833 | From: Austin, TX | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3