posted
Another disingenous and misleading video about alleged African people in precolumbian America. This time it is a childrens cartoon which is spreading a completely false narrative about West Africans travelling to America and founding the Anasazi culture in what is now southwestern USA.
The Native American Anasazi culture was never black or African. It was pure Native American. Africans came to the Americas first within the last 500 years.
posted
I can understand they want to give some sense of self worth to black kids who grow up in the west but this is just feeding them with lies and illusions.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Bollocks like that? It is harmful to authentic African Studies. It cannot withstand 'objective' vetting, hence not taught in any accredited classrooms. But then those interested in learning factual information about anything should have the brains to steer clear of stuff with 'true' or 'real' etc, in the label, title, or subject header.
Unfortunately ES promotes similar cartoonish efforts under the guise of 'alternate history', but bollocks is bollocks no matter who promotes it to enrich their coffers. Note the OP vid only has 4.5k views in a year whereas a vid like this one What Was Going On In Africa During Mayan Civilizationhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAQ2NrNWYW8 has garnered 35k views in 9 months. See also the comments here Are Black People Native To America? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIuFu03WT6c
Anyway black children in "the west" (euro-america) are not gobbling up such ethnocentric bollocks and their sense of worth lies in the phenomenal proliferation and copycatting of Black American culture (ie, speech patterns, music, clothes styles) by all peoples on the planet.
Nobody wants Swede or Beur culture and perhaps why the previous posters are so envious of Black/African Americans who are primarily Descendents America's Slaves. And so the relatively new ethnic label ADOS.
They are a people recognizing they were born and bred in the USA and did not exist in Africa despite their main component being western African from Cabo Verde to Angola with shakes of far south east Africans too.
posted
Don't bother with 3 minute videos with 4K views (practically nothing for youtube) and it's been posted for a year
The templebabies kids products are produced by Robbie Hubner and one of her children Tiyi They are part of the Nuwaubian Nation, a cult that started in the 70s
The creators of this "black history" series, Robbie Hubner (female) are interviewed here also on youtube:
The Ancestral Puebloans, also known as the Anasazi, were an ancient Native American culture that spanned the present-day Four Corners region of the United States, comprising southeastern Utah, northeastern Arizona, northwestern New Mexico, and southwestern Colorado.[1] They are believed to have developed, at least in part, from the Oshara tradition, which developed from the Picosa culture. The people and their archaeological culture are often referred to as Anasazi, meaning "ancient enemies", as they were called by Navajo. Contemporary Puebloans object to the use of this term, with some viewing it as derogatory.[2][3]
The Ancestral Puebloans lived in a range of structures that included small family pit houses, larger structures to house clans, grand pueblos, and cliff-sited dwellings for defense. They had a complex network linking hundreds of communities and population centers across the Colorado Plateau. They held a distinct knowledge of celestial sciences that found form in their architecture. The kiva, a congregational space that was used mostly for ceremonies, was an integral part of the community structure.
Archaeologists continue to debate when this distinct culture emerged. The current agreement, based on terminology defined by the Pecos Classification, suggests their emergence around the 12th century BC, during the archaeologically designated Early Basketmaker II Era. Beginning with the earliest explorations and excavations, researchers identified Ancestral Puebloans as the forerunners of contemporary Pueblo peoples.[1][3] Three UNESCO World Heritage Sites located in the United States are credited to the Pueblos: Mesa Verde National Park, Chaco Culture National Historical Park and Taos Pueblo.
Pueblo,[4] which means "village" and "people" in Spanish, was a term originating with the Spanish explorers who used it to refer to the people's particular style of dwelling. The Navajo people, who now reside in parts of former Pueblo territory, referred to the ancient people as Anaasází, an exonym meaning "ancestors of our enemies", referring to their competition with the Pueblo peoples. The Navajo now use the term in the sense of referring to "ancient people" or "ancient ones".[5]
Hopi people use the term Hisatsinom, meaning "ancient people", to describe the Ancestral Puebloans
History Origins During the period from 700 to 1130 CE (Pueblo I and II Eras), the population grew fast due to consistent and regular rainfall which supported agriculture. Studies of skeletal remains show increased fertility rather than decreased mortality. However, this tenfold population increase over a few generations was probably also due to migrations of people from surrounding areas. Innovations such as pottery, food storage, and agriculture enabled this rapid growth. Over several decades, the Ancestral Puebloan culture spread across the landscape.[citation needed]
Ancestral Puebloan culture has been divided into three main areas or branches, based on geographical location:[citation needed]
Chaco Canyon (northwest New Mexico) Kayenta (northeast Arizona), and Northern San Juan (Mesa Verde and Hovenweep National Monument) (southwest Colorado and southeastern Utah) Modern Pueblo oral traditions hold that the Ancestral Puebloans originated from sipapu, where they emerged from the underworld. For unknown ages, they were led by chiefs and guided by spirits as they completed vast migrations throughout the continent of North America. They settled first in the Ancestral Puebloan areas for a few hundred years before moving to their present locations.
__________________________________
So why is it some African Americans have these various claims to be Moors, Egyptians, Hebrews, American Indians, Europeans nobles, etc ??
It may have a rebellious component but the thing that really enabled it was when they were brought to the Americas as slaves, people from various tribes were mixed up randomly and they were prevented from using their languages and practicing most of their culture. many do not know what tribe they came from. Slave owners did not allow the speaking of African languages because they did not want people planning escapes or disobedience so easily as to discuss the plans right in front of them but where they could not understand what was being said. So as you chastise them for "stealing native Americans culture" you are not native Americans, it's not your fight and European Americans are the very people that forcibly erased African Americans' languages and much of their culture and creating this void which makes this type of thing, these various alternative histories more likely to occur. Nevertheless I don't like the idea of teaching kids this total nonsense about Anasazi being Malians but what you are looking at here is the inside of a cult.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Unfortunately ES promotes similar cartoonish efforts under the guise of 'alternate history', but bollocks is bollocks no matter who promotes it to enrich their coffers.
"Alternate history" narratives are fictional by design and their authors don't claim them to be anything but. They present speculative "what if" scenarios showing how history could have proceeded differently. A story about how African-American lives would be different had they been fairly compensated for their enslavement in the wake of the Civil War would be an example of an alternate history story.
By contrast, what the video in the OP is doing is making claims about how history actually went down, however spurious they may be. Same thing with Clyde Winters's various narratives about Mande Olmecs etc. They want their audience to believe they're telling the truth rather than a fictional narrative. What they promote is more properly called pseudohistory, not alternate history.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I cannot freely and openly respond to you because of your relationship to management but I will say purposely presenting a population as other than they were is bollocks and antithema to the known history culture and physical anthropology of any said population.
Despite benign correction you have defended misrepresentation of Dahya alKahena for one and lately the return of Frank Zappa's Sheikh Yerbouti as the early 1st millenia Hebrew phenotype.
That's all I have to say and I fear even that little may get me 'vacationed'.
EDIT: But understand this your art as art is outtasight as I said a year and a month ago
quote: So as you chastise them for "stealing native Americans culture" you are not native Americans, it's not your fight and European Americans are the very people that forcibly erased African Americans' languages and much of their culture and creating this void which makes this type of thing, these various alternative histories more likely to occur. Nevertheless I don't like the idea of teaching kids this total nonsense about Anasazi being Malians but what you are looking at here is the inside of a cult.
I am close to certain native Americans so I have in some way come to be involved in the fight.
And obviously identity questions are very important and sensitive, they want to defend their cultural heritage both against white people, but also against some black individuals, who they feel are encroaching on it, or who they feel are appropriating it.
One can just check out the controversy about the Juneteenth mural which showed an Olmec head in the context of African American history
A story about how African-American lives would be different had they been fairly compensated for their enslavement in the wake of the Civil War would be an example of an alternate history story.
While Black people wouldn't all have been millionaires,this sounds like a troll post. It's not like the economic reality of Black folks had substantially improved sense the Civil War.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
This video generated about 4 736 comments, both pro and con, but one comment stood out, it illustrates how the Black aboriginal theme can be perceived by some Native Americans. The comment is anonymous, but it is in line with what I heard other Native Americans express, both online and in personal communication. These "Blacks were already here" narratives are seen as an extra burden upon all the bad things that white people already done to them. And now also some Black individuals are enchroaching on Native identity.
Well, read her comment and judge for yourself (it shall be noted that she is from Canada and references the history of that country):
quote: in6
You are right, it Does matter! As Indigenous Canadians, we were targeted for extermination, cultural genocide. I was stolen from my Indigenous mother right from birth. Two of my brothers were stolen too. We Never found one of them! We don't know if our brother is living or dead. Canada would take Native children away and forcibly raise them, themselves. So I ended up in 11 foster homes, while my mother mourned us at home. When you remove the children of an entire race of people, you overwhelm the system, so Canada Sold many of our children to the USA, Europe and Australia. If our brother is one the children Canada sold, we will never find him. I myself, was almost killed in one of the foster homes I was sent to. Remember, these people didn't love or respect us, and they were a whole different race from us. So we were abused and killed at high rates in European Canadian homes. The last year Canada stole our children from their families was in 1991. When I was finally able to find my family, I found out the government had STERILIZED my little sister in the 1990s. My uncle was murdered by a skinhead, also in the 1990s. It was simply a case of the wrong race in the wrong place. He saw a chance to beat up a Native guy, so he did. The RCMP, our national police force, found my uncle unconscious before he died. Because my uncle was Native, they decided that he must need the drunk tank, due to his Race. So my uncle didn't get much-needed medical attention. The RCMP can't have that coming out in the media, so they told the racist to leave town, and they would leave him alone. So the racist will never face justice for the death of my uncle. Canada Must get rid of the Indigenous people, because they are Still negotiating land claims with us.
For 60 years to over 150 years, depending on where in Canada we lived, we were stolen from our parents and put into segregated schools called residential schools. It was the Law, we all had to go there. It was Only for Indigenous Canadians, in order to complete the cultural genocide. Three generations of my family were forcibly sent there. Physical and sexual abuse ran RAMPANT in those places. There was no escape. Gord Downie, of the band Tragically Hip, wrote a song about one of the children who died trying to escape one of those 'schools'. It is called Secret Path.
My mother had a needle stuck through her tongue for speaking her Indigenous language. She accidentally swallowed it in the violence of it all. It stayed in her body from the age of five or six, until the day she died seven years ago. Canada had to Exterminate our languages and our cultures. They could not be allowed to exist or Canada couldn't take our land away.
The USA ended segregated schools in the 1960s, Canada didn't close our last 'school' until 1996! In our segregated schools, we were never allowed to go home at the end of the day. If we were lucky, we got to visit our parents for the summer, before we were stolen away again!
My teenagers are the first generation in my family line to be BORN FREE! They finally have the permission of our government to be raised by their Own Parents! That is because they were born in the 2000s, when we were given our freedom to have families just like every other Canadian. In Canada, No Indigenous/ Native people got land grants. We got NOTHING. Only European settlers got land grants here, and they also got farm equipment to help them survive the winter up here. There are No '$5.00 Indians' here, as you like to call us. We look like our Indigenous brothers in the USA. There is No reason for Canada to do what you claim the US did, pretend that white people are the Indigenous people. They would get Nothing here.
So why are we being sterilized down in Canada, and black people aren't? Why were we segregated and stolen from our families and black Canadians weren't? Why didn't black Canadians have needles poked through their tongues for speaking an Indigenous language, and we were? Because black people are Not Indigenous! Yes, some people mixed with us, but their Indigenous roots come from us, not the black part of their DNA. White people know who the real indigenous/Native people are, so 'you' are not a threat. We Are, and that is why to this day, we continue to sterilized and stolen. There are no land negotiations with black people, because black people are Not Indigenous!
We have to FIGHT for our HUMAN RIGHTS in this country, and it is oppressive, and it is daunting. White people try to steal our history, saying that they are the 'real' Native people here, and now black people are doing the Very Same Thing! Stealing our history is not a 'victimless' crime! We have had EVERYTHING removed from us, even our own children, and our human right to REPRODUCE! They had 26% to 50% of our women between the ages of 30 to 50 years old, Sterilized! Now you do This to us? Horrible, horrible, and as another minority who has suffered as well, I admit I did not expect this! I have nothing. Not even my own Family. I am a first mom. Starting from scratch because we weren't allowed to have families until now. If black Canadians were Indigenous, and we weren't, then my story would have been theirs. But it is not.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thing is, where are any such 'We were already here' pseudo history vids authored by registered Native America Freedmen themselves?
Fringe is not mainstream and you'll never make it so.
Again, for those whose interest is proper non-ethnocentric documented histories Spreading facts to all regardless of age
308k views in 2 yrs Black Indians: An American Story https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlL94sw_C8Q <-- this has nothing to do with spurious notions of African phenotype people as indigenous Americans here before the Triangular TransAtlantic Trade. This video is pt3 of the 2008 series Trail of Tears .
132k views in 9 months A 60 Minutes 2002 SPECIAL REPORT: "BLACK SEMINOLES" [a real eye opener: The word “Seminole” formed from a combination of the words cimarron and simanoli. The Spanish term cimarron means “runaway” or “renegade.” The Muscogee term simanoli means “those that camp at a distance.”] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmlQYp3K_5M .
I present the below with caveats as it contains irrelevant inappropriate Christian Bible verses. Nevertheless it has much of interest to digest for unprejudiced unbigotted vetters who have no stakes involved. Months of work here for ethnologists and historians. I have not watched it in full and will mute the distracting volume when I do as it adds no discourse to the subject. 401K views in 11 yrs Black Indians? Who Are You? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDFLVH65BTU
posted
Two videos where persons with Native American roots adress the problem with some "Afrocentrics" and "(W)abos" claiming Native American history and culture.
In the videos the participants give their views about why these issues are important to adress.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
By definition ADOS do not claim to be original indigenous Americans of hundreds and thousands of years residency, nor do they claim any Native American culture or accomplishments. ADOS are an ethnic group who are at base of African descent but did not exist as any single African ethnicity and became the distinct people they are in America due to the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, rapes by European AMerican males, and sprinkles of a variety of peoples also held in American slavery. Hence
Only prejudiced bigots totally unfamiliar with day to day on the ground Americans and American history and culture with axes to grind say otherwise.
You need to apply yourself to listening to the various Black/African American sub-ethnies in an effort to learn about them per they themselves instead of making stuff up.
An overwhelmingly majority of Black/African Americans, upon introduction to the idea, scoff at off the wall pretensions of Olmec conflation with Black/African America.
quote: I have the profoundest respect for native Americans. I come from a country named by them—Guyana—“land of waters”. I grew up among them. I am one of them, part Macusi Indian and part African. My critics claim that I have trampled upon the self-respect and self-esteem of native Americans and they have come forward to champion their cause. America's original people, my people, would be horrified to have as champions of our cause, De Montellano, Barbour, and Haslip-Viera, who disgrace us with the charge that “native Americans would have sacrificed and eaten Africans if they came.”
As far back as 1976 I made it very clear that I was not suggesting that Africans founded native American civilization. That is so absurd that even an idiot would not give it a second thought. Let me quote from They Came Before Columbus published earlier in that year. “I think it necessary to make it clear—since partisan and ethnocentric scholarship is the order of the day-—that the emergence of the Negroid face, which the archeological and cultural data overwhelmingly confirm, in no way presupposes the lack of a native originality, the absence of other influences or the automatic eclipse of other faces”. Ten years later, in 1986, I state this with even greater force: “I cannot subscribe to the notion that civilization suddenly dropped onto the American earth from the Egyptian heaven.
[. . .]
I am part Macusi Indian. Native Americans dominated my childhood years. My rivers (the Cuyuni, the Mazaruni, the Essequibo), my mountains (the Roraima, the Pakaraima range), even my lost and beloved country (Guyana—land of waters) were named by them, ...
My people (for I am part Macusi and part African) would he horrified to have as champion of our cause, Do Monte llano, Barbour, and Haslip-Viera, who disgrace us with the charge that “native Americans would have sacrificed and eaten the Africans if they came.”
[. . .]
De Montellano also claims that 1 said the Mexicans got their calen¬ dar from the Egyptians, which is an outright falsehood* since I point to the existence of four calendars in America and merely report the claim made by the Abbd Hervas to Clavigero that one of these is in confor¬ mity with an Egyptian calendar* De Montellano argues that America* alone among world civilizations* was a virginal entity and that if any¬ one were to claim that Native Americans were influenced by anyone outside of the post-Columbian European, such a person would be try¬ ing to downgrade the Native American people in order to upgrade his own ethnic community. He is ignorant, of course* as he is in most matters, of the fact that my ethnic identity and community is as much Native American (Macusi Indian) as African.
From my Smithsonian address, 1991
-- Ivan Van Sertima -- Early America Revisited (1998)
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:
I have never claimed that all the stone heads were African. I pointed to some of them which meet all the criteria that a scientific classification of racial types would establish, without the slightest doubt, as such. Dr. Matthew Stirling, head of the first expedition sent out by the Smithsonian, came to the same initial conclusion. "Amazingly Negroid," were his words. Even the first discoverer of a colossal stone head in 1862, Jose Melgar, a native Mexican, was so struck by the African features that he wrote the first essay on the African presence in early America. Beatrice de la Fuente practically broke into lyrical prose when she saw the head I shall discuss shortly—the one with braids. She declared, in a moment of rare innocence, brought on by the kind of visual shock that sometimes shatters prejudices, "it is the most remote in physiognomy from our indigenous ancestors”. In the very next moment she turned on her words in fear, startled by the voice of her own otherness. Frederick Peterson did the same when the furor my book caused led to pressures from his colleagues to retract his statement about "a strong Negroid substratum connected with the Olmec magicians. These two-mouthed commentators should not be attacked, Academic survival is the motive behind their retractions. Dr. Clarence Weiant was the first American archeologist in the field (1938). The head of the Smithsonian expedition, Dr. Matthew Stirling, was delayed for some reason. Dr. Weiant defended me in the New York Times against my British would-be executioner, Glyn Daniel. Daniel, by the way, had never even studied the Olmecs, and the New York Times , I was told by an informer, bad to return his initial attack on my work since the first draft of his critique presented no credible counter-evidence. Dr Weiant's doctoral thesis revealed dozens of Africoid types at Tres Zapotes, terracotta more startlingly realistic in its portrayal of these types than all but one of the stone heads—the head with braids. Before I discuss that particular head, however, I would like to quote Dr Weiant's comments;
"Van Sertima’s work," Dr. Weiant wrote "is a summary of six or seven years of meticulous research based upon * archaeology * Egyptology * African history * oceanography * geology * astronomy * botany * rare Arabic and Chinese manuscripts * the letters and journals of early American explorers and * the observations of physical anthropologists. As one who has been immersed in Mexican archeology for some 40 years and who participated in the excavation of the first of the giant heads, I must confess I am thoroughly convinced of the soundness of Van Sertima’s conclusions ”
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
Maybe you ought to watch the videos instead of trying to guess what I know or not know. In the videos you can hear what at least some persons of Native descent think about the issue of cultural appropriation. They do not say that all African Americans claim that Black/African people created the ancient precolumbian cultures. Only a minority claim such things, which obviously still is an issue to adress.
About Van Sertima and others with similar claims: His ideas have been discussed and also refuted in different articles.
One notable book in this context is Thieves of Civilisation by Gabriel Haslip Viera. It was written in 2014 and a second expanded edition is now available.
quote: This book is a response to the assertions made over the years by Afrocentric extremists who claim that the first Americans were sub-Saharan Africans, that the first American "civilizations" were created by ancient Egypto-Nubian and West African visitors, and that other West Africans came to the Americas in the fourteenth century CE and again in the years before the European discovery of the Americas in 1492. The book is a point-by-point refutation of some of the most important claims made by Afrocentric extremists and a defense of the real contributions and the actual research that has been done on the cultures, civilizations and peoples of pre-Columbian America by scholars in various fields.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
You don't know squat about ADOS as proven by what you attributed to them while calling them (W)abos. What a whopping gaffe! Plus, Van Sertima was no Afrocentric and denounced it as black ethnocentricism.
You ken just as little about Rez Skins. You just use them as a foil to spew melanophobia. If you were their champion, as you fake being, you'd post about their number one problem.
You also know doodly squat about Van Sertima and refuse to read and digest the snippets from him I posted. Plus you deny he's part Macusi.
Did you know Montellano was an ES member for a few years here before he passed away?
Such a phony fake fraud black hater you are. Haslip-Viera is a good example of of the appeal to authority logical fallacy as he is just a professor of social history. And if you were really the 'professional anthropologist' you claim to be you'd see the man on that book cover is not comparable to that Cabeza Colossal unlike the Xingu individual I posted here 16 yrs ago who actually fits the bill.
Stirling, Melgar, Fuentes, Peterson, and Weiant are each and every one a recognized specialist in the field of study. You been whooped again.
Some NAs making a YouTube hardly prove any mass upset on the part of Skins against what you mistake as 'cultural appropriation' as again for the zillionth time Black/Africa America does not claim to be Olmec or any other indigenee Americans north south or central. Not only that, Black/African Americans don't say shiss kabob against NAs claiming Jimi Hendrix who was at best 1/4 Indian. Take that sheet off your face, hater.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
Maybe you ought to watch the videos instead of trying to guess what I know or not know. In the videos you can hear what at least some persons of Native descent think about the issue of cultural appropriation. They do not say that all African Americans claim that Black/African people created the ancient precolumbian cultures. Only a minority claim such things, which obviously still is an issue to adress.
About Van Sertima and others with similar claims: His ideas have been discussed and also refuted in different articles.
One notable book in this context is Thieves of Civilisation by Gabriel Haslip Viera. It was written in 2014 and a second expanded edition is now available.
quote: This book is a response to the assertions made over the years by Afrocentric extremists who claim that the first Americans were sub-Saharan Africans, that the first American "civilizations" were created by ancient Egypto-Nubian and West African visitors, and that other West Africans came to the Americas in the fourteenth century CE and again in the years before the European discovery of the Americas in 1492. The book is a point-by-point refutation of some of the most important claims made by Afrocentric extremists and a defense of the real contributions and the actual research that has been done on the cultures, civilizations and peoples of pre-Columbian America by scholars in various fields.
So Europeans didn't steal native American culture and history but Africans did? Really? Please dude that right there is fringe nonsense in itself. At face value the idea that Africans could have sailed to the Americas is not far fetched and many people, starting with Europeans were the ones to suggest this. And there is a long list of them who have said this about the Olmecs. And there are still some that do. It isn't totally unbelievable as you claim and beyond that, we know for a fact that Native Americans in the region and across the Americas have variation in features.
Here is an actual video in Spanish stating that current scholars do not know where the Olmec culture originated, which implies that it did not originate in America. They state this point blank and they are not "Afrocentrics" and when they mention the theory of African origins nowhere is Ivan Van Sertima mentioned because the theory didn't come from him.
And we all know the crux of the issue with the Olmecs, which is a slap in the face of the skin color caste system put in place by Europeans. And as such their models of history based on skin color as the basis of race and human advancement are the epitome of pseudoscience. And that is regardless of whether any evidence of the Olmecs having African origins or otherwise is ever found.
You are just desperate to try and claim African scholars are the root of all racism and deception in anthropology and history while Europeans who have been outright lying and stealing everything in their path for hundreds of years are let off the hook.
Not to mention the great many hoaxes and frauds promoted to this day by Europeans that are nowhere as believable as the African Olmecs. Yet I don't see you calling these out even though they have much more popularity even if they are far less credible.
So please save us your nonsense posting of the same thing over and over again trying to slander legitimate African scholarship.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Here is an actual video in Spanish stating that current scholars do not know where the Olmec culture originated, which implies that it did not originate in America. They state this point blank and they are not "Afrocentrics" and when they mention the theory of African origins nowhere is Ivan Van Sertima mentioned because the theory didn't come from him.
And we all know the crux of the issue with the Olmecs, which is a slap in the face of the skin color caste system put in place by Europeans. And as such their models of history based on skin color as the basis of race and human advancement are the epitome of pseudoscience. And that is regardless of whether any evidence of the Olmecs having African origins or otherwise is ever found.
quote: Video: La Extrańa Cultura Olmeca: Origen, Características, Economía The Strange Olmec Culture: Origin, Characteristics, Economy Lifeder Education
The Olmec culture was a civilization that appeared during the Mesoamerican Preclassic. Its area of influence covered the southeast of the current state of Veracruz and the west of Tabasco. In addition, archaeological remains have been found that confirm their presence in other areas of Mesoamerica, reaching Guatemala, Belize or El Salvador. This culture began to develop around 1500 BC. C. Its influence on subsequent civilizations has caused many historians to call it the mother culture of Mesoamerica. Among other aspects, the Olmecs were the inventors of the calendar, the ball game or, according to some authors, the number 0. Their main urban centers were La Venta, Tres Zapotes and San Lorenzo. In all of them they established a political and social system in which religion was intimately linked to the exercise of power. It was also a very hierarchical society, divided between the elite and the rest of the people. The economy of the Olmec culture was based on agriculture, although they also developed commercial activities. On the other hand, they also stood out in the artistic field, in which the seventeen colossal heads found throughout their territory stand out. Origin and history There is not much data on the origin of this culture beyond what researchers have discovered from archaeological remains. It is considered one of the oldest cultures in the region, which is why it is considered the mother of civilization in Mesoamerica. Origin Most historians affirm that the Olmecs arrived in Mesoamerica around 1500 BC. C., although there is another current that delays its arrival to 1200 a. C. In both cases, the period would be framed in the Middle Preclassic. Yes, there is coincidence in pointing out that they settled in a very wide area and that the population continued to increase through migrations until 400 BC. C. During those centuries the Olmecs built a series of important and fairly populated cities.
However, it was not a unified civilization, since each settlement had its own government and social system. Therefore, the Olmec is considered as an area of cultural influence and not as a political entity. The origin of the population that formed the Olmec culture is not known. Some remains found seem to indicate that there were previous settlements with similar characteristics in Chiapas and in central Oaxaca, but there is no agreed theory about them. Nor is it known who his descendants were, since historians have not reached an agreement on the subject....
The 17 colossal heads that have been found so far are, without a doubt, the best-known artistic works of this culture. Their weight ranges from 6 to 40 tons and, according to the most accepted theory, they represent rulers and warriors. For its construction , the Olmecs used basalt and other types of volcanic stones, all of which were large.
Each of these heads was made with different features, although they all share a certain Negroid appearance. This gave rise to a theory, later discarded, about a possible contact with peoples on the other side of the ocean. Another theory to explain these features is that the Olmec tried to stylize the features and not faithfully represent them.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
And we all know the crux of the issue with the Olmecs, which is a slap in the face of the skin color caste system put in place by Europeans
there is no Olmec art that shows color
A Mexican soccer team
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
there is no Olmec art that shows color
.
Tlatilco stylee, close enough but not the ceegar.
Even von Wuthenau (1965 & 1975) misses the brass ring.
The most African-like Olmec Cabeza Colosal. Does anyone have a photo of the top of this head? http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/santiago-tuxtla-3.htm Olmec Colossal Head Monument Q, Tres Zapotes Santiago Tuxtla, Veracruz, Mexico
Ethiopia was the only nation in Africa to have never been colonized by a European country. In 1935, Italian troops entered Ethiopia and successfully triumphed over the Ethiopian army and proceeded to occupy the country for the next five years. This was known as the Second Italo-Ethiopian War. At the League of Nations, Mexico was one of only five member-states to condemn the Italian invasion and occupation of Ethiopia. Because of this, Ethiopia kept its seat in the assembly, and it remained a member.[1] A few years after World War II, diplomatic relations between Ethiopia and Mexico were established in 1949. In 1954, Emperor Haile Selassie became the first ever African head of state to pay an official visit to Mexico.[2]
In 1963, both nations opened embassies in each other’s capitals, respectively; however, Mexico closed its embassy in Ethiopia in 1989 due to financial reasons and Ethiopia followed suit in 1990. In 2007, Mexico re-opened its embassy in Addis Ababa.[3]
To commemorate Mexico’s assistance to Ethiopia during its occupation by Italy; Ethiopia named a center square in Addis Ababa “Mexico Square“. In 2010, the Mexican government donated a replica of an Olmec colossal head to Ethiopia where it was placed in Mexico Square.[1] In September 2015, the Ethiopian capital inaugurated its Light Rail system and has a “Mexico Station”. On the 22nd of June, 1954, a traffic circle in Mexico City was named “Plaza Etiopía”, under which in August 1980, a metro station in Mexico City was built and named Metro Etiopía. In 1985, after a major earthquake shook Mexico City, Ethiopia donated $5,000 to help aid the victims of the earthquake.[4]
In July 2010, Prime Minister Meles Zenawi arrived to Cancun to attend the United Nations Climate Change Conference.[5] In June 2012, Prime Minister Zenawi again visited Mexico to participate in the G-20 summit being heald in Los Cabos.[6] In 2014, both nations marked 65 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations.[7] In 2017, Ethiopian Airlines launched cargo services between both nations.[8]
References
1. History of diplomatic relations between Mexico and Ethiopia (in Spanish) 2. "Mexico-Ethiopia relations (in Spanish)". Archived from the original on 2014-12-15. Retrieved 2014-11-14. 3. Visita del Emperador Haile Selassie I a México (in Spanish) 4. Bilateral relations of Mexico and Ethiopia (in Spanish) 5. Ethiopian Red Cross donates aid to Mexican quake victims 6. La diversificación de la política exterior mexicana en África, Medio Oriente y Asia Central (in Spanish) 7. "Meles Zenawi at G-20 summit in Los Cabos, Mexico". Archived from the original on 2014-11-29. Retrieved 2014-11-14. 8. Ethiopian Airlines sería la Primera Aerolínea Africana en Volar a México (in Spanish) 9. Concluye la visita de trabajo a Etiopía del subsecretario Ventura (in Spanish) 10. Mexican Ministry of the Economy: Ethiopia (in Spanish) 11. Embassy of Mexico in Addis Ababa
And before somebody raises the strawman I DO NOT SUPPORT any kind of Olmeca-was-an-African-transplant theory. There was nothing like it in 1400-400 BCE Atlantic West Africa, period.
Nonetheless racial/forensic anthropology phenotype is what it is and the white European inventors of physical racial anthropology call this particular type N E G R O wherever found.
All the children sing: ♫ They found a head in Mexico and NEGRO is its name oh. N E G R O. N E G R O. N E G R O and NEGRO is its name! ♫
Exactly. As soon as you post some of the numerous examples of obviously black populations in the Americas the light skin obsessed people come out and start complaining.
They will never address these kinds of facts:
quote: Amy Kerner, “Indios, Negros, and Criollos: The Racial Anxieties of Argentine Yiddish”
This article analyzes discourses of Latin American race and ethnicity in the context of the ethnic language production of a transnational immigrant group: Yiddish-speaking Jews in Argentina. Argentine Yiddish writings have been analyzed in previous scholarship as an offshoot of a global Yiddish culture that entered a marked decline as immigrants culturally assimilated in the 1930s. By contrast, this article analyzes the presence of nationalist tropes and racial stereotypes in Yiddish-language materials after 1930 to argue that immigrants engaged with the changing ethnic and racial landscape of mid-century Argentina. In a context of heightened race and class anxiety spurred by Creole mass migration to cities, these authors used Yiddish to reproduce and reinforce—and in some cases, to contest—negative stereotypes of Indigenous and Creole Argentines. In doing so, they reflected and appropriated a Spanish-language discourse that racialized poor and dark-skinned people, aligning Jewish Argentines with a white middle class.
The point being that Natives are at the bottom of the Hispanic American social ladder, no matter how some claim the heritage or culture. Meaning light skinned Europeans going all over the world imposing themselves and their skin color preferences on everybody else. This didn't come from "Afrocentrics" or "black skinned" people which is why the people obsessing over black people "stealing" Native American identity and history is so obviously hypocritical.
INDIOS MUERTOS, NEGROS INVISIBLES. LA IDENTIDAD "SANTIAGUEŃA" EN ARGENTINA.
quote: Abstract The construction of the Argentine nation, hegemonized by an elite of large landowners and businessmen from Buenos Aires, consisted in the eradication of the ethnic traits present in Colonial times which were considered as synonymous with and the cause of "backwardness" and "barbarism". Indians, Blacks and their various mixtures, who comprised the majority of the population of the Santiagoan Mesopotamia located in the northern part of the country, were wiped off of the social map and, in accordance with the official mandate to recognize only provincial identities, the entire range of people in the postcolonial era were placed within a single "Santiagoan" identity. This identity represents a broad field of differentiations and social struggles. The majority population, which is closest to and the structural continuity of those ethnic majorities of the past (in terms of their language and their economic, cultural and employments positions), resort to represent the obscure presence of "Indians" and "Blacks" and this provides de text of the logic of their identity. Quichua/Spanish bilingualism, the rituals of death and the representation of "Indians" in the celebrations of the Saints, and the generalized beliefs in the underground birth of music all serve to express the power of the absence of the "Indian" and the "Black" in the common "Santiagoan". In the face of this, the rural and urban elite establish their gestures of differentiation and undertake the political-cultural task of mediating between the model of national citizenship and its provincial version. In spite of this, the commoner "Santiagoan" population pushes the "Argentine" identity to its limits from their position of obscure inconformity, in which death and invisibility place pressures on this identity.
quote:Lo "indio" exluido y framentado por la guerra y la nueva paz social fue invisibilizado, sepultado, bajo el nuevo modelo de cuidadania. Constituyo el suelo movedizo bajo los cimientos, sin lugar en los discursos y las practicas oficiales, negacion fundante, pero muy proximo de los cuerpos y las voces cotidianas de las mayorias. Los ideologos de la "organizacion nacional" pusieron en practica varias tecnologias politicas para transformar la "pastas" de la poblacion (Alberdi 1984): "pasta" india, negra, y de sus mestizos.
Translation: The "Indian" excluded and fragmented by the war and the new social peace was invisible, buried, under the new model of citizenship. I constitute the shifting ground under the foundations, without place in the discourses and practices official, founding negation, but very close to the bodies and voices everyday life of the majority. The ideologues of the "national organization" put into practice various political technologies to transform the "pastas" of the population (Alberdi 1984): "pasta" Indian, black, and their mestizos.
In other words miscegenation or race mixing using these "racial ingredients" to make a new mestizo population like making pasta.
quote:Las "conquistas del desierto" pampeano-patagonico y del "desierto" chaqueno estuvieron asociadas a la colonizacion de esos espacios con contingentes de immigrantes."
Translation: The "conquests of the desert" pampas-patagonico and of the chaco "desert" were associated with the colonization of those spaces with contingents of immigrants.
In other words, European immmigration as a tool for population erasure/replacement.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Seems that it annoys you a lot that some persons of Native background and also some others (Black Latinos, White) call out also the misinformation spread by certain black individuals. Are black persons above all criticism? Shall only desinformation spread by whites be called out?
The word "Wabos" is an abbreviation of "Wannabe aboriginals" and refers to some black persons who claim that Black Americans are the original inhabitants of the the Americas. Some of them also claim that the people that today are called Native Americans are Siberian or "mongoloid" invaders. Those who in this context are referred to as "Afrocentrics" are those who claim that Africans came to the Americas and founded or inspired different Native cultures. You may not have encountered some of the worst of those debaters online, but they indeed exist.
I have read Ivan Van Sertimas "They came before Columbus" and I also read the criticism against it. I read his defense and further criticism. So I know about the debate.
You say to that when I refer to a book which debates Van Sertimas claims and other claims about Africans visiting the Americas in precolumbian times, it is a fallacy because the author is just a scholar of social history. He actually has been writing about this subject since the 90s, among other together with Warren Barbour who was an African American scholar of precolumbian cultures. Ivan van Sertima was not an archaeologist or anthropologist with precolumbian Native American cultures as his specialty either. He did not do any archaeological or anthropological field work in the Americas. Then you go on by referring to scholars of an older time like Stirling, Melgar, Fuentes, Weiant and others who belonged to another time. Since then our knowledge of precolumbian cultures have actually advanced.
But maybe you do not accept researchers like Ann Cyphers (who even discovered an Olmec stone head), Karl Taube, Richard Diehl, Enrique Villamar Becerril and others who work with different aspects of Mesoamerican culture? They have all stated that there is no proof of any African presense in precolumbian America.
Desinformation ought to be met with refutation, whether it is black persons or white persons who spread it.
About Bernardo Ortiz de Montellano, yes I have read his posts on ES and his sometimes rather intense discussions with Clyde Winters.
And about the cover of the book by Gabriel Haslip Viera, I did not put it there. There are actually better pictures that compare Native Americans of today with some of the giant stone heads. There are also pictures which compare Native Americans of today with other Olmec art (which comprise the majority). But lookership between statues and certain people are hardly the first line of evidence when it comes to studying and identifying ancient peoples.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have no links to prove who this guy is outside a name.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Thereal, ever see a freshly neck wrung chicken?
It's body runs around flapping its wings for a while while its severed head still tries to cluck as it eyes continue to blink until finally a minute or two later shock subsides and the fowl ceases all semblance of life.
Never you mind the melanophobic propaganda from a hater who can't even address the number one problem facing Rez Skins and is too myopic to notice my plethora of ES posts disclaiming any kind of African Olmeca. He's just building strawmans and planting seeds of hate.
Meanwhile all the children still sing: ♫ They found a head in Mexico and NEGRO is its name oh. N E G R O. N E G R O. N E G R O and NEGRO is its name! ♫
__ Colossal Head No. 1 San Lorenzo ____ Colossal Head No. 6 San Lorenzo ____ Colossal Head No. 8 San Lorenzo _____ Monument 1 La Venta ____
The children´s book I posted above is misleading even on its cover with among others a painting by Albert Eckhout of an African and an Olmec head besides a black guy.
It would be a bit tragic if parents taught their children a lot of myths and misinformation instead of some real knowledge about the actual history of Native Americans.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Exactly. As soon as you post some of the numerous examples of obviously black populations in the Americas the light skin obsessed people come out and start complaining.
They will never address these kinds of facts:
quote: Amy Kerner, “Indios, Negros, and Criollos: The Racial Anxieties of Argentine Yiddish”
This article analyzes discourses of Latin American race and ethnicity in the context of the ethnic language production of a transnational immigrant group: Yiddish-speaking Jews in Argentina. Argentine Yiddish writings have been analyzed in previous scholarship as an offshoot of a global Yiddish culture that entered a marked decline as immigrants culturally assimilated in the 1930s. By contrast, this article analyzes the presence of nationalist tropes and racial stereotypes in Yiddish-language materials after 1930 to argue that immigrants engaged with the changing ethnic and racial landscape of mid-century Argentina. In a context of heightened race and class anxiety spurred by Creole mass migration to cities, these authors used Yiddish to reproduce and reinforce—and in some cases, to contest—negative stereotypes of Indigenous and Creole Argentines. In doing so, they reflected and appropriated a Spanish-language discourse that racialized poor and dark-skinned people, aligning Jewish Argentines with a white middle class.
The point being that Natives are at the bottom of the Hispanic American social ladder, no matter how some claim the heritage or culture. Meaning light skinned Europeans going all over the world imposing themselves and their skin color preferences on everybody else. This didn't come from "Afrocentrics" or "black skinned" people which is why the people obsessing over black people "stealing" Native American identity and history is so obviously hypocritical.
INDIOS MUERTOS, NEGROS INVISIBLES. LA IDENTIDAD "SANTIAGUEŃA" EN ARGENTINA.
quote: Abstract The construction of the Argentine nation, hegemonized by an elite of large landowners and businessmen from Buenos Aires, consisted in the eradication of the ethnic traits present in Colonial times which were considered as synonymous with and the cause of "backwardness" and "barbarism". Indians, Blacks and their various mixtures, who comprised the majority of the population of the Santiagoan Mesopotamia located in the northern part of the country, were wiped off of the social map and, in accordance with the official mandate to recognize only provincial identities, the entire range of people in the postcolonial era were placed within a single "Santiagoan" identity. This identity represents a broad field of differentiations and social struggles. The majority population, which is closest to and the structural continuity of those ethnic majorities of the past (in terms of their language and their economic, cultural and employments positions), resort to represent the obscure presence of "Indians" and "Blacks" and this provides de text of the logic of their identity. Quichua/Spanish bilingualism, the rituals of death and the representation of "Indians" in the celebrations of the Saints, and the generalized beliefs in the underground birth of music all serve to express the power of the absence of the "Indian" and the "Black" in the common "Santiagoan". In the face of this, the rural and urban elite establish their gestures of differentiation and undertake the political-cultural task of mediating between the model of national citizenship and its provincial version. In spite of this, the commoner "Santiagoan" population pushes the "Argentine" identity to its limits from their position of obscure inconformity, in which death and invisibility place pressures on this identity.
Above Doug attempts to say a pre-Columbian figure of Tlatilco culture, Mexico is "Negro" not Indian.
There is tons of this alternative history on youtube, they are saying stuff like "We were already here, I'm talking about Black people not these Mongoloid people they call Indians" Maybe Doug doesn't watch youtube or is unaware of all of this going in the Black community going viral by social media
West/Central African culture as African American ancestry is becoming completely replaced by endless freestyling black people claiming they are Aboriginal Americans, Egyptians, Hebrews, Moors I have no problem with black people practicing any religion they want but Black history is a big mess right now, thanks to the internet, conspiracies, fantasy revisionism is rampant. It's not religion in some cases but about ancestry, I'm real you're fake types stuff. At the same time it's fun and creative for many, so I don't see it stopping anytime soon and not to say there could be on a case by case basis possible connections But I think a lot of come from not going to college. People don't have to believe what the professors teach but there is a chance there people will run into a diversity of students who can challenge each other's ideas. The internet has enabled the spread of ideas bypassing this so people of all types can go directly to whatever myopic niche theory they are attracted to and not be exposed to challenge or question.
posted
The point here is that modern European scholarship now argues that the Americas were always diverse with a range of features, including those similar to Africans and Australasians.
quote: South America was the last major continent to be colonized by modern humans (1, 2), yet it has unusually high among-population cranial differentiation relative to other global continents (3–9). This seems counterintuitive, given that within-group neutral genetic and craniometric diversity decreases with distance from sub-Saharan Africa, due to serial founder effects as humans dispersed out of Africa (10–13). However, populations can exhibit low within-group variation yet still show high between-group differentiation due to population isolation (reduced gene flow) and pervasive genetic drift, which is likely to be the case in South America (4). High levels of among-population differentiation in the Americas have also been noted for linguistic (14) and neutral genetic data (15). Whereas a concordant larger-than-expected cranial diversity is observable among late Holocene “Amerindian” populations (6, 8, 16), among-group differentiation is further exaggerated by the distinct cranial morphology of early “Paleoamerican” crania compared to the morphology of contemporary Native Americans (17–24), which has generated a long-standing debate about the origin of morphological diversity in the continent (17, 19, 20, 25).
Debates regarding the cause of this high between-group differentiation have centered on two main competing hypotheses. One possibility is that the observed diversity in South America is the result of in situ processes during the Holocene, whereby high within-group variation among early Americans became subdivided among descendent populations due to the rapid colonization of the Americas and/or as a result of genetic drift or natural selection acting in small isolated populations (5, 8, 25–27). Variants of this model emphasize the importance of recurrent gene flow between Asia and the Americas following the initial colonization of the continent (17). However, whereas among-group cranial differentiation in South America is extraordinarily high, within-group variation for early Paleoamerican samples is not excessive and is within the range expressed by contemporary global populations (4). This finding argues against the notion that the earliest migrants into the Americas were the source of all subsequent among-group biological diversity. The other main hypothesis proposed is that the observed cranial diversity is the result of multiple waves of dispersion into the Americas from northeast Asia over the course of several thousand years, with each wave of migrants introducing new sources of biological diversity. This argument is largely based on the empirical observation that the average cranial shape of the earliest South Americans bears stronger affinities with Australasian and Polynesian populations than it does with East Asian or later Native American groups (20, 24, 26). Recently, Hubbe et al. (18) suggested that early Paleoamerican groups retain the generalized ancestral morphology that characterized late Pleistocene Eurasian populations, as represented by fossils such as the Upper Cave specimen from Zhoukoudian (China) and Upper Paleolithic European specimens. If this ancestral morphology is also shared with contemporary Oceanic populations, then this would explain the apparent connection between Australasia and South America, despite their large geographic separation. Under such a scenario, subsequent population differentiation occurred in Asia following the initial settlement of the Americas, with later migrants into the New World resembling the derived “East Asian” morphology more closely.
Of course, one potential reason for refuting the African origin of the Olmec was in DNA testing which was also posted here. But that doesn't change the fact that most scholars agree that the diversity within the Americas was real and evidenced by the Olmec heads, regardless of whether or not they came from Africa or anywhere else.
That said, those DNA studies have not been published in any peer reviewed journal anywhere else outside of Mexico that I know of. And the person who did the study of the DNA, Enrique Villamar Becerril, is not referenced in any other work regarding DNA of any ancient population in the Americas or anywhere else.
quote: In excavations carried out over the years at Olmec sites and scientifically studying various pieces of that civilization, university archaeologists have found no African artifacts; This is a first line of investigation that discards the origin in that continent. The second line contemplates DNA studies, which before could not be done because there were no Olmec burials, “the ones that had been found were in dust. But we found some in San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan, and Enrique Villamar Becerril, a collaborator of my group, did the study of mitochondrial DNA”, he explained. In this regard, Villamar indicated that two burials were sampled: one in Loma del Zapote (dating from 1,200 BC) and another in San Lorenzo (1,000 BC). “From these two individuals, a bone sample was taken from the rib and underwent a procedure to obtain their mitochondrial DNA, the lineage that the mother provides to an individual, because it is more feasible to recover it from archaeological remains.” This is how he managed to classify that genetic information, called haplogroup. “The genetic diversity of mitochondrial DNA can be classified according to the similarities that exist in various individuals, and they may share some mutations that make them different from other individuals in different geographic regions of the world.”
posted
Even today there is a variation in looks and skull form among Native American peoples. They do not all look the same. Even the old race biologists, measuring skulls noticed that. So there was theories about some Native Americans descending from Asia (the ones with short skulls) and others descending from Europe or the Canary islands (the ones with long skulls).
Later studies of so called ´paleoindians´ also show variation. So variation among Native Americans through the times is hardly any news. But the step from talking about a certain variation is rather long to fantasize about ancient African travels, or Africans as founders or inspiration for nearly all Native civilisations (especially if they left spectacular material remains).
About the study of the Olmec DNA. One can of course hope there will be more upcoming studies of Olmec, and other Mesoamerican, DNA. The Olmec DNA study was a part of a larger project studying the Olmecs headed by Ann Cyphers, an historian and archaeologist with over thirty years experience in archaeological research in Mesoamerica. She even discovered one of the stone heads. According to Ann Cyphers out of 300 DNA tested precolumbian human remains in Mesoamerica no one has so far showed any affinity to Africa.
Enrique Willamar Becerill is a anthropologist and part of the project. He seems relatively new in the field: He is presented like this in Arqueologia Mexicana: "Enrique Villamar Becerril. Physical anthropologist from ENAH. Candidate for a doctor in Mesoamerican studies (UNAM), with an analysis of ADNMT in bone remains from various sites of the Preclassic period."
If the Olmec DNA study also is a part of a larger thesis work it perhaps will be published there in full detail.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: A black writer (Dominique Alexander McPhearson) tells us about his relation to Ivan van Sertimas book They came before Columbus. He says believing in that book was like the belief in Santa Claus, it made him feel good. He wanted another history than the usual one about slavery, Jim Crow and civil rights. He (and many other African Americans) longed for something more. Then van Sertima came and fullfilled that wish and he devoured the book without questioning it.
One day though he happened to listen to the podcast Tales from Aztlantis (The Problem with the Black Olmec Myth) with archaeologist Kurly Tlapoyawa and historian Ruben Arellano. In the pod they among other things talk about the the retracted article in the Urban review. That lead to the writer starting to question van Sertimas claims. Further study convinced him that those claims were erronous. In the end it turned out that the truth can be like medicine, it tastes bad, but it is good for you, to paraphrase Kurly Tlapoyawa and Ruben Arrelano in their podcast.
Van Sertima did not come up with the theory The idea was first suggested by José Melgar, who discovered the first colossal head at Hueyapan (now Tres Zapotes) in 1862 and subsequently published two papers that attributed this head to a "Negro race",and made rerence to "Ethiopian" features. The view was espoused in the early 20th century by Leo Wiener and others. Alfonso Medellín Zenil in the 60s and Ivan Van Sertima in the 70s who identified the Olmecs with the Mandé people of West Africa. South African anthropologist MDW Jeffreys in an article entitled "Pre-Columbian Negroes in America." Jeffreys accepts (1953:213) the Negroid appearance of the colossal head found in 1862 in the "Canton of Tuxt1a" as "valuable circumstantial evidence" for his theory that Arab sailors were indulging in a Negro slave trade with the Indians of Mesoamerica prior to Columbus' voyages to the New World.
What it all is is just people looking at these heads and thinking they look like "Negroes"
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, the idea is old, and van Sertima just popularized it.
There has been many wild theories about all sorts of immigrants to the Americas. Many of those theories were confined to books and articles which had a comparably limited distribution. It is first with Internet and social media these and many other speculations have reached a larger audience. Now Youtube videos, Facebook groups, home pages, Tiktok videos and similar are spreading all kinds of alternative theories all over the world.
I removed the earlier post before I saw your answer, since I wanted to put it after my comment to Dougs post. But since you quoted it I perhaps do not have to insert it again
I posted it mostly to show what impact Sertimas book had on the writer of the article.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Even today there is a variation in looks and skull form among Native American peoples. They do not all look the same. Even the old race biologists, measuring skulls noticed that. So there was theories about some Native Americans descending from Asia (the ones with short skulls) and others descending from Europe or the Canary islands (the ones with long skulls).
Later studies of so called ´paleoindians´ also show variation. So variation among Native Americans through the times is hardly any news. But the step from talking about a certain variation is rather long to fantasize about ancient African travels, or Africans as founders or inspiration for nearly all Native civilisations (especially if they left spectacular material remains).
About the study of the Olmec DNA. One can of course hope there will be more upcoming studies of Olmec, and other Mesoamerican, DNA. The Olmec DNA study was a part of a larger project studying the Olmecs headed by Ann Cyphers, an historian and archaeologist with over thirty years experience in archaeological research in Mesoamerica. She even discovered one of the stone heads. According to Ann Cyphers out of 300 DNA tested precolumbian human remains in Mesoamerica no one has so far showed any affinity to Africa.
Enrique Willamar Becerill is a geneticist and part of the project. He seems relatively new in the field: He is presented like this in Arqueologia Mexicana: "Enrique Villamar Becerril. Physical anthropologist from ENAH. Candidate for a doctor in Mesoamerican studies (UNAM), with an analysis of ADNMT in bone remains from various sites of the Preclassic period."
The point is there is fringe science and pseudoscience all over the place but you are trying to make it seem as if Africans especially are the ones promoting such things. Europeans have been promoting pseudoscience as fact for hundreds of years but somehow you don't call it that. Europeans created the concept of race based on phenotype, then used it to segregate and dominate populations they colonized, including putting Africans into a "black race". Yet when these black people see other black skinned people also suppressed by the same racial caste system and identify similarities in features with them you get outraged. Yet no outrage over the system of racial oppression that created the problem in the first place. You have created how many threads on this? For what? This site as been discussing these issues for many years, with various views and debates on the topic. And certainly you creating numerous threads on the topic when almost nobody here today is defending it is the issue I have. Do a search on the forum and you will see this topic has been discussed to death for years and at this point it is just rehashing as opposed to introducing anything new.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know that also other people promote a lot of pseudo science and pseudo history. African Americans are not alone. But obviously the African American speculations online have come to upset some Native Americans who feel their identity trampled on. Some of them feel especially bad about that since Black Americans are also a minority that faced a lot of oppression, just like Native Americans, so they see it as rather selfish of some African Americans to try to intrude on Native American history and take credit for civilisations that their (the Native Americans) ancestors once built. One Native American online even called it lateral violence.
They also feel that it could be an obstacle when it concerns cooperation between he two minorities. They feel they have to defend their heritage both against Whites and some groups within the African American minority.
But of course this problem is not their main problem, there are much worse issues, like land theft, violence, social problems, racism and much more, which many of them adress all the time. And for me personally I have also adressed them and put in work, but not here on ES. I have been, and still am active outside ES. ES is not the end of the world for me. Most of my activity is outside ES, both online and IRL.
So perhaps I do not have to raise these questions so much here on ES anymore.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
STOP SPREADING YOUR LIES! Cease deploying the 'Poisoning the Well' and 'Strawman' logical fallacies.
Again, and I will post this again whenever and as often as necessary until it is understood, Van Sertima never proposed an African origin for either the Olmec people or the Olmec civilization. In fact he calls such a theory "absurd".
quote:As far back as 1976 I made it very clear that I was not suggesting that Africans founded native American civilization. That is so absurd that even an idiot would not give it a second thought. Let me quote from They Came Before Columbus published earlier in that year. “I think it necessary to make it clear—since partisan and ethnocentric scholarship is the order of the day-—that the emergence of the Negroid face, which the archeological and cultural data overwhelmingly confirm, in no way presupposes
* the lack of a native originality, * the absence of other influences or * the automatic eclipse of other faces”.
Ten years later, in 1986, I state this with even greater force: “I cannot subscribe to the notion that civilization suddenly dropped onto the American earth from the Egyptian heaven.
Van Sertima proposed Africans as the models for a limited number of the giant Olmec stone heads.
quote:I have never claimed that all the stone heads were African. I pointed to some of them which meet all the criteria that a scientific classification of racial types would establish, without the slightest doubt, as such.
1). Dr. Matthew Stirling, head of the first expedition sent out by the Smithsonian, came to the same initial conclusion. "Amazingly Negroid," were his words.
3). Beatrice de la Fuente practically broke into lyrical prose when she saw the head I shall discuss shortly—the one with braids. She declared, in a moment of rare innocence, brought on by the kind of visual shock that sometimes shatters prejudices, "it is the most remote in physiognomy from our indigenous ancestors”.
These are not merely "some people". These are pre-eminent professional specialist of the discipline.
Fact is, though they are certainly American natives those heads display classic N E G R O features per Linneas the Swede inventor of racial anthropology on up to today's forensic anthropology which is used in the courtroom.
=-=-=-=
I am uncertain what dangles from Q's head. I don't think they're braids nor cornrows. They could very well be ornamental tassels. Notice there's either a cap or bandana under them. HD photos of Q are needed to help ascertain what they are.
Again, anyone have a view from above looking down on the sculpture?
Ivan Van Sertima was educated at the School of Oriental and African Studies at London University, where he graduated with honors. From 1957 to 1959, he served as a Press and Broadcasting Officer in the Guyana Information Services. During the decade of the 1960s, he broadcasted weekly from Britain to both Africa and the Caribbean. He began his teaching career in Africana Studies at Rutgers in 1972 and retired as Professor of Africana Studies in 2005. Following graduation from college, van Sertima briefly resumed his broadcasting career. However, in 1970, he took time off to visit the United States for the first time. While there, he made two crucial intellectual discoveries. The first was a monumental historical work of the 1920s, Leo Wiener’s Africa and the Discovery of America. The book was an example of the “diffusionist” school of thinking which held that cultural traits in general, and in this case African traits in particular, tended to migrate around the globe rather than springing up separately and spontaneously in different cultures.
Leo Wiener (1862–1939) was an American historian, linguist, author and translator. Wiener was born in Białystok (then in the Russian Empire), of Lithuanian Jewish origin.[1] His father was Zalmen (Solomon) Wiener,[2][3] and his mother was Frejda Rabinowicz. He studied at the University of Warsaw in 1880, and then at the Friedrich Wilhelm University in Berlin. At Harvard he became the first American professor of Slavic literature and translated 24 volumes of Leo Tolstoy's works into English
"While working on a Comparative Grammar of Ameri can Languages, I was confronted with a number of words which seemed to observe perfectly the phonetic laws, indicative of extreme old age, and yet were obviously introductions from Europe after the discovery of America. I intended to deal with this phenomenon in half a dozen pages, when it occurred to me that the cul tural in?uences of Europe upon the Indian languages needed a far more thorough examination than they had been subjected to. When I began my scrutiny, I was firmly convinced, as is the universal belief, that tobacco, manioc, yams, sweet potatoes and peanuts were bless ings bestowed upon the world by the Indians. A cursory study excluded the yams and the manioc. Soon the peanuts followed in their wake. Next came the sweet potatoes, and at last the tobacco. It turned out that American archaeology was to a great extent built on sand. But the most painful discovery was in the line of Indian religion. Here everything turned out to be topsy-turvy.
In this first volume I show that the Negroes have had a far greater influence upon American civilization than has heretofore been suspected. In the second volume I shall chiefy study the African fetishism, which, even with the elaborate books on the subject, is woefully misunderstood, and I shall show by documentary evidence to what extraordinary extent the Indian medicine-man owes his evolution to the African medicine-man, who, in his turn, derives his wisdom from the popular Arabic medical science and religion."
posted
@ Archeopteryx You people are amazing on this site just really amazing! Tassels under a cap? Not braids or locs/locks? Hell some spend inordinate time whitewashing Ancient Khemit or Egypt for those binded by let's not anger white folks by Black-African basis or cultural transfer to whites & others a feel good idea. Robin Walker isn't African American he's African-Black-British who espouses all history doesn't start with the Atlantic & Indian Oceans slave trade.Blacks studying history aren't restricted to the US.
Posts: 115 | From: north america | Registered: Jan 2014
| IP: Logged |
Van Sertimas book is rather well analyzed and refuted by Haslip Viera et al in articles from the 90s and in Haslip Vieras book from 2014, if you ever bother to read it. Melgar, Stirling and the others belonged to older generations with a somewhat other outlook on reality than todays researchers. After their time new knowledge have been attained both about the Olmecs, about Mesoamerican precolumbian cultures in general and about precolumbian Americas as a whole. Methods and theoretical framework have changed, whole new fields of study (like archaeogenetics) have been added. If you want to know about todays trends in Olmec and Mesoamerican studies you have to read new material, and correspond with those researchers that are alive and active today.
Are you a specialist on Olmec or other Mesoamerican cultures? Do you claim that you know more than researchers like Ann Cyphers, Richard Diehl, Karl Taube and others who all have refuted claims of an African presence in precolumbian Mesoamerica?
I have myself a friend who has worked with archaeological research in Mexico, Guatemala and Belize over 25 years now. When I asked him about all the claims about ancient Africans in precolumbian Mesoamerica he just sighed and said that there are just too many pseudo historical ideas out there, especially now in the time of Internet and social media.
For me I rather listen to experts who actually work there today, with modern methods and updated theories.
Van Sertima still was rather balanced compared with some of the more extreme followers he got, whereof some now run amok on social media.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
are the definition of N E G R O facial features per both physical anthropology and forensics
doesn't matter where on earth they are found Africa is but the definitive example and when found outside Africa they're termed negroid
the source of such features is NOT necessarily recent, ie post-LGM, African admixture
there is such a thing as convergent evolution
thus peoples like Andamans Papuans and Melanesians are >12K yr old populations that are negroid
peoples in the Americas like so-called paleo Indians and California Indians and Amazonian Indians etc have their negroid features ultimately and most likely from the same sources the above named 'Asian' peoples have them or else from convergent evolution
END SCIENCE LESSON
=-=-=-= regardless of who proposed it or when they did it is beyond logic that Egypt (who used Canaanites to circumnavigate Africa) or any other 1400BCE-400CE Africans haphazardly much less intentionally sailed ships fitted with the intelligentsia and militarists necessary for diffusion or conquest across either the Atlantic or Pacific oceans as their are no historic examples of them doing such along Africa's shores, the north Mediterranean or Atlantic shores of Europe, the Asian continental Indian Ocean shores
we live in the 21st century and knowledge has advanced far beyond mid-20th century levels and much more so than pre-1970s assessments
posted
That's it! No other elements? Is that how the other groups in the human family defined,with such scant elements?
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Of course there are many other elements both facial/cranial and post cranial
A Swede named Linnaeus invented racial anthropology and you can look him up for his characteristics falsely separating Homo sapiens sapiens into superior and inferior varieties or breeds including mental capacity and disposition.
All other racial anthropologists from his era down to Carleton Coon and disciple John Baker concur on a limited narrow definition of their black or negro race.
Google ES for PMK's primer for the absurdity of white or caucasian super-plasticity vs constricted forms of all other races.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: @Tukuler.
Are you a specialist on Olmec or other Mesoamerican cultures? Do you claim that you know more than researchers like Ann Cyphers, Richard Diehl, Karl Taube and others who all have refuted claims of an African presence in precolumbian Mesoamerica?
.
Sheesh. As if I don't dispute African presence in Olmeca?
Stop acting as if you are an insufferable illiterate asshat whose only goal is debate points. Aren.t you better than that even though you remain by nature a melanophobe with not one good word to say about ADOS or other Black/African Americans who never existed as a people or ethnic group before coalescing after TAST.
I do not, and have never in my science degree holding mature adult life, supposed Olmecs and Olmeca to be other than native to Meso America and I shouldn't have to repeat that over and over again to you or anybody else.
Please locate and quote my ES posts about Olmecs and Olmeca
You'll see my first such post back in 2006 questions why any Olmec Giant Head sculpture cannot simply be a physical type native to the Americas. Though the img of the Amazonian Xingu I used has been rescinded the message is essentially the same imparted in this post from above
although the individual she presents is unidentified so we do not know his parentage or to what extent he may be admixed. With my now lost Xingu example there was no doubt about his identity and antecedents because he was of Xingu ethnicity.
I also posit lack of evidence of anything like Olmec cultural civilization anywhere in Africa between 1400BCE and 400CE especially Olmeca's Rubber Ball aspect and all it entails despite Atlantic West Africa's rubber trees ala 20th century Firestone Tires source of rubber.
Should you continue lying about this and purposely twisting my words planting in readers' minds I support extreme displacement diffusion for Olmecs/Olmeca when quite frankly and clearly I do NOT I will petition management to remove such libelous posts by you.
posted
Who are Europeans to point fingers at Africans in terms of "stealing" history, culture, identity or anything else? Who stole the Americas from the natives? It wasn't Africans. Who stole the history and culture from them? Who stole the gold, land, plants, animals and architecture?
Not to mention the fact that concerning the Olmecs, how come is it that only after Africans started looking into it, all of a sudden they claim to care about the aboriginal history and identity of the Americas. Really? And even more than that, if they have all this knowledge of the diversity in phenotype of the Natives of the Americas then why were the European colonizers claiming the Olmec features are foreign? Why are they all of a sudden now digging up all these examples of indigenous people with similar features and why didn't they do it 100 years ago? Surely those features existed. Why is it only now after all this attention they are admitting to the diversity of the natives of the Americas which goes against any simplistic attempts at racial categorization?
The reason is because their racial theories are pseudeoscience and have always been pseudoscience and as such their past descriptions and assumptions are bound by such pseudoscience. Don't blame this on Africans when Europeans have been touting the superiority of their "science" for all these years. If there were always dark skinned natives with big lips in the Americas, then why did it take so long for them to admit to it? Sounds like they are full of sh*t, because they know full well they never cared about native diversity except in terms of theories of skin color superiority.
Hence:
quote: In truth, up to the present, the question of primitive man in Argentina has always stemmed from the Ameghinian idea, only to develop in two opposite directions and to arrive at antagonistic conclusions. On the one hand, it is admitted that the American aborigine could have been native and that his ancestors, while not so far remote as Ameghino claimed, evolved during the pampas age, totally or partially Quaternary, along with the mammals which were so characteristic of the same geological period. On the other hand, it is argued that the Argentine aborigines, like their kin throughout America, are more or less recent immigrants and that, consequently, the antluopological remains dug from the pampas belong to these immigrants who were accidentally (through removal or burial) in terred with the remains of Typotherium, Toxodon, Mastodon, Mega therium, Megalonix, Glyptodon, etc.
Within this second trend of ideas the opposite extreme was reached by reducing all the American peoples to one race and searching for the origin of their stock among the Egyptians, Sumerians, Chaldeans, Phoenicians, Trojans, Basques, Tartars, Chinese, etc. According to A. Hrdlicka, for example, his "American homotype" was probably derived from Mongoloids who, moving from the extreme east of Asia, reached the far west of America through Bermg Strait and from there no doubt scattered as far as Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego. Elliot Smith, however, held that a "heliolithic civilization" leaving Egypt crossed Asia and the Pacific, and then, moving from island to island, reached America and, in its spread toward the south, was deterred only by the inhospitable barrier of the Antarctic ice sheets.
Along the same trend of thought but on a more logical basis, other authors maintained that the peopling of America could have been accomplished only by successive waves of anthropologically and ethnographically diverse elements, in different periods of time and from many different regions. Among those who upheld this idea we may name Griffith Taylor, R. B. Dixon, Von Eickstedt, E. W. Count, and others. However, in order to keep within hypotheses which have more direct bearing on the problem in Argentina, it is more appropriate to mention P. Eivet and J. Imbelloni.
The theory of P. Rivet (1924 e, 1926 a, 1926 b) derives from an old idea of G. d'Eichthal concerning the predominance of the "Oceanic races" in the peopling of America, and of the ties between "Oceanics" and Americans, which have been verified by well-known ethnographers and corroborated by his own investigations in the fields of anthropol ogy, ethnography (archeology), and linguistics. On this basis he claims that the peopling of America was effected through Pacific water routes, in different eras and by countless waves of ethnically different elements, whose origin must be sought in the extreme southeast of Asia and in the Indo-Malayan Archipelago. Furthermore, he declares that the first arrivals of these elements on the coasts of America occurred in an epoch no earlier than the end of the Quaternary, i. e., when the continent's present contours had already become fixed.
With this theory Rivet denies the authenticity of the discoveries attributed to paleolithic man in America in general and in Argentina in particular; further, he does not accept any route from hypothetical Atlantic and Pacific continents of pre-Quaternary times. Again the complete ignorance throughout all of pre-Columbian America of the use of iron and writing, as well as of no less fundamental elements, such as the wheel, glass, wheat, etc., enable him to deny flatly any theory which , for the populating of America, resorts to ancient inhabitants of the Mediterranean area and to direct influences from civilized peoples of eastern Asia.
According to Rivet, the principal groups which contributed successively to forming the primitive population of America were, in the order of their arrival, the following: An Australian element ; an element of Malayo-Polynesian speech resemblmg in physical characteristics the Melanesian group; an Asiatic element in which can be distinguished a Uralian (Eskimo) admixture; and a Sino-Tibetan (Na-Dene) element. Rivet does not fix the dates of the successive arrivals; but, on the suggestion of A. Mendes-Correa, supposes that the first inhabitants, the Australians, landed in the extreme south of South America and wandered along the borders of the Antarctic during the recession of the ice sheets, at the time of the postglacial optimum approximately 6,000 years ago.
Along similar ideas, Imbelloni's theory also considers the peopling of America as the result of countless migratory waves in different epochs from the Pacific and near-Pacific regions. He disagrees, however, on essential points. Like Rivet, he denies both the "American homotype" of Hrdlicka's pan-Mongoloidism and Ameghino's monogenism; but he explains the great number of American races by new arguments, including serology, and he admits, although vaguely, that America, like the rest of the habitable world, might have sheltered human life from the time of the Pleistocene age. He contemplates a primitive Australoid prototype, but conceives it as evolving from an archaic human creature which dominated the Asia-Pacific world and which spread through America from north to south, to the very limits of Tierra del Fuego. He accepts a Malayo-Polynesian contingent, but separated into numerous elements of very dissimilar type. And he adds another migratory element: the Indonesian, source of the Mayan civilization (and its derivatives).
Imbelloni's theory is that with the passing of time these different groups appeared in succession with the following physical character istics: Short dolicoids, Tasmanian in appearance and culture, from whom evolved the Fueguido and Ldguido; tall dolicoids, Australoids, nomadic hunters from whom the Pldnido and Pdmpido developed; ultra-dolichocephalics of short stature, Melanesoids, hunters and gatherers, together with less pronounced dolicoid elements of the proto-Indonesian type, weavers and agriculturists, from whom originated the Amazonido) brachycephalics of medium height. Mongoloids, bringers of higher forms of agriculture and of patrilineal institutions, represented by the Pueblo- Andino ; ultra-brachycephaUcs and brachycephalics artistically endowed and the creators of states, from whom stemmed the Istmido and their metastases; finally, the last contingents, Columbido and Eskimo.
Showing that these theories about various groups arriving in the Americas from different places over time has always been part of the discussion of the origins of the indigenous Americans. This is not "Afrocentric" at all and the idea that sailors from other regions whether it be the Mediterranean, Oceania or elsewhere has also been included as possibilities. To sit here and claim that all of this is new or somehow came from "Afrocentrics" is just flat out false and nothing more than slander against African scholarship, trying to defend and uphold Europeans as the "sole" authority on history when they have been the biggest promoters of falsehoods, misinformation, pseudoscience and other forms of propaganda ever seen.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Haslip-Viera is a hack and his book's title proves his purpose is purely polemic propaganda not objective examination.
So did you read the book or is your opinion only based on the title? Seems you just dislike that he calls out Van Sertima and other proponents of the Africans in America narrative.
Btw about Beatrice Fuentes that Tukuler mentions (in a quote from Ivan van Sertima):
She indeed said that
quote: If anytime one could imagine that there were Negroes in Mesoamerica, it would be after seeing head 2 of Tres Zapotes, the one that is most removed from the physiognomy of our Indian ancestors
But she at the next page in the same book also said:
quote: Certainly the colossal heads do not represent individuals of the Negro or Ethiopian race as Jose Melgar the first westerner to see one more than 100 years ago supposed. We have to agree that in them are recorded, on a historic scale, the ethnic characteristics of the ancient inhabitants of Mesoamerica, characteristics that are still preserved in some contemporaneous natives
Which can be interesting to know in this context.
Quote originally from: De La Fuente, B 1971: Las Cabezas Colosales Olmecas. Fondo Cultura economica, Mexico.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting to note the similarities between the computer generated picture and Native Americans that still live in Mexico, Central America and parts of South America.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
It is not only "Europeans" that point fingers at African Americans for stealing culture or insert themselves into others culture. It is also Native Americans themselves. They are of course aware that the whites stole their country, genocided them, oppressed their culture and religion, forcibly removed Native children from their parents. But at the same time they see the barrage of "Afrocentric" and/or "Wabocentric" nonsense that are spewed above all in social media as disturbing. They feel that after all they gone through (and still going through) as a result of actions from the white society, this "We were always here" or "Africans were first" rhetoric is an unwelcome addition. That is not a European invention, that is what people of Native background are saying. Most of these online debates are in a context of USA and often pertain USA and Mexico. In most of Latin America this is not an issue.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Xingu people are beautiful and have very interesting cultures. Many of them now live in the so called "Terra Indigena" or "Xingu Indigenous park", a large protected area where about 6000 people live, divided in about 15 different ethnicities. Many of the groups talk different languages divided into four major language groups.
In 1961 when "Terra Indigena" was formed several of the Native groups were at the brink of extinction.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
.
Printer-friendly view of this topic