Archaeologists Discover Tablet Bearing Olmec Text By Thomas H. Maugh II, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer September 14, 2006
Archaeologists working on the Gulf coast of Mexico have uncovered a 3,000-year-old stone tablet that bears the oldest writing in the Western Hemisphere and the first text unambiguously linked to the Olmec empire -- the enigmatic civilization believed to be the progenitor of the Aztecs and Maya.
The 26-pound tablet, about the size of a legal pad, bears 61 symbols arrayed in a manner suggesting that it is recording everyday speech.
We have long thought that the Olmec would have writing," said archaeologist William A. Saturno of the University of New Hampshire, who was not involved in the discovery. "This block is finally the evidence everyone has been waiting for."
Scientists may never be able to translate the text unless they find many more examples of Olmec writing, said archaeologist Stephen D. Houston of Brown University, a co-author of the report published Friday in the journal Science.
But "if we can decode it, it gives us a chance of hearing their voices and finding out what they considered important and worth recording," he said.
The Olmec flourished in south-central Mexico for more than 1,000 years before they mysteriously disappeared, just before the rise of the Maya. They were the first civilization in Mesoamerica, and at their height, built large pyramids and massive stone sculptures. They built the first cities in the region and established a wide-ranging trading system that stretched across Central America.
The tablet dates from about 1000 B.C. to 900 B.C. and is at least 300 years older than any purported writing that archaeologists have discovered in the region. The oldest previous example of what can be considered a "full-blown written language," Saturno added, is the so-called Tuxtlas script from the eastern coast of Mexico, dating from about A.D. 100 to A.D. 200.
Virtually all of the purported writing that has been found previously in the first millennium B.C. are isolated sets of one to a few glyphs, or symbols. Critics have charged that such discoveries represent merely pictures or identifiers rather than true writing.
With the new discovery, Houston said, "suddenly we are aware of the possibility that those far shorter sequences may be part of the same writing system."
Beginning about 1600 B.C., the Olmec began settling a highly fertile region characterized by swampy lowlands punctuated by low hills and ridges.
The Olmec fished in landlocked ponds and grew maize, beans and squash. They built large pyramids surrounded by rectangular huts made from plants and adobe, with stone drainage systems under their communities. They harvested rubber -- in fact, their name means "rubber people" in the Aztec language -- and invented the ball game that became prominent throughout the region.
What the Olmec called themselves is unknown.
They are perhaps best known for the massive stone heads they sculpted to grace their monumental architecture.
They also developed calendars and the concept of zero. "They had so many other things ... that it would seem odd if they didn't have the concept of writing," Saturno said.
In fact, he added, they started making paper about 1500 B.C., beating the bark of trees into thin sheets. "What else were they making the paper for" besides writing? he said.
But because of the climate, no paper has survived from that period.
The tablet almost did not survive as well. It was unearthed in 1999 by road builders digging gravel from an ancient mound at Cascajal, a village on an island about a mile from San Lorenzo.
A local archaeologist called in anthropologists Maria del Carmen Rodriguez Martinez and Ponciano Ortiz Ceballos of the Centro del Instituto Nacional de Anthropologia e Historia, who are lead authors of the Science report. They assembled the team that analyzed the tablet this spring.
Pottery shards excavated along with the tablet dated it to the beginning of the first millennium B.C., as did similarities between the glyphs and symbols found on artwork from that period. There will most likely always be controversy about the date and the tablet's origin, however, because it was not found in its original location.
"We're quite comfortable with the date we've assigned it," Houston said.
The serpentine or greenstone tablet bears 29 distinct glyphs, some of which are repeated as many as four times. It appears to read horizontally from left to right -- unlike most other text from the region, which is read vertically.
Some of the symbols are clearly derived from natural objects, such as insects, corn, awls and thrones.
From the way the symbols are laid out, "it is crushingly obvious that we are in the presence of writing," Houston said.
"This has a large number of symbols, the symbols are repeated, and they are repeated in order," Saturno said. "There are phrases being written, which really strengthens the argument that ... this is a writing system, a way to make spoken language permanent."
The stone itself is convex on all sides except for the face bearing the inscriptions, which is concave. That suggests, Houston said, that the text may have been repeatedly erased and rewritten.
The small size indicates the tablet was for private use, possibly for religious ceremonies, and not a public monument.
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Myra, watch out. If 'you know who' sees this newly discovered tablet, he will no doubt classify the script as West African Mandingo! LOLPosts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Can you provide proof that they are not West African script??? It is obvious that you believe that the ancient Olmec were not of West African orgins...
Please provide proof that they were something other then African... We know that Africans have been making voyages to what they call the new world for thousands of years. If that wree not so then they wouldn't have found cocaine in the Ancient Egyptians who couldn't have gotten any where else except the America's ...
State your facts because as of now I'm leaning toward Clyde Winters and Ivan .... They have laid down an argument that has not been tested to a point which should change my opinion...
Djehuti I love to read your post but your real argumentative at time... so please state facts an not opinion in your attempt to prove his theories wrong...
Thank you....
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, where is this script in West Africa at the same time of the Olmec? Why is an African script in the Americas with a full blown literature but in the West Africa where it supposedly originated there's nothing? Do abroad what wasn't done at home? Not very likely in my book.
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: Please provide proof that they were something other then African... We know that Africans have been making voyages to what they call the new world for thousands of years. If that wree not so then they wouldn't have found cocaine in the Ancient Egyptians who couldn't have gotten any where else except the America's ...
State your facts because as of now I'm leaning toward Clyde Winters and Ivan .... They have laid down an argument that has not been tested to a point which should change my opinion...
Van Sertima and Clyde Winters are usually ignored by the scientific mainstream, because theirs ideas are not taken seriously. However, there are papers where scientists have destroyed those theories of pre-columbian contacts. Perhaps you should read these papers and decide by yourself.
The papers came from a site called "The hall of Maat" that specializes in destroying pseudo-historical myths of any kind, including Eurocentric, Sinocentric and Afrocentric myths.
They have attacked Mormonisn, the flying saucers, and other wild theories. In doubt you could ask them about any pseudo-historical claims, including cocaine mummies.
The titles of the papers say it all.
Robbing Native American Cultures: Van Sertima's Afrocentricity and the Olmecs
quote:Originally posted by kawashkar: The papers came from a site called "The hall of Maat" that specializes in destroying pseudo-historical myths of any kind, including Eurocentric, Sinocentric and Afrocentric myths...
Just curious, but could you give me some examples of Sinocentric myths?
Not that I doubt it exists, but I haven't heard much about Chinese ethnocentrism to the degree we see in Eurocentrism and now the recent Afrocentrism. I have heard plenty of Nipponocentric (Japanese-centric) psedo-histories but not Chinese.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, there exist plenty of Sinocentric myths. Curiosly enough one says that the Olmecs have a Chinese origin. The other say the Chineses arrived to the Americas before Columbus. The Japaneses also claim a contact with the America. And the East Indians, of course do.
All of those myths are put together by scientists under the label "hyperdiffusionism".
Now, the idea of the Chinese origin of the Olmecs is quite revealing. All of those just show disrespect for the intelligence of Native Americans, I believe.
quote: Well, where is this script in West Africa at the same time of the Olmec? Why is an African script in the Americas with a full blown literature but in the West Africa where it supposedly originated there's nothing? Do abroad what wasn't done at home? Not very likely in my book.
There are many examples of the Proto-Olmec writing dating before the introduction of Olmec writing. Many of these inscriptions have been found at sites from the Fezzan in Libya, to Tichitt and the Mandeland. It was the presence of this writing in Mandeland that led Wiener, in Africa and the Discovery of America, to positively identify inscriptions on the Tuxtla statuette cognate to the Mande writing engraved in Mandeland.
One of the earliest examples of the Proto-Olmec writing comes from Oued Mertoutek. web pagePosts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kawashkar: Yes, there exist plenty of Sinocentric myths. Curiosly enough one says that the Olmecs have a Chinese origin. The other say the Chineses arrived to the Americas before Columbus. The Japaneses also claim a contact with the America. And the East Indians, of course do.
All of those myths are put together by scientists under the label "hyperdiffusionism".
Now, the idea of the Chinese origin of the Olmecs is quite revealing. All of those just show disrespect for the intelligence of Native Americans, I believe.
posted
Excuse me for not looking it up myself but is Oued Mertoutek in West Africa and does there exist a full literature written in it comparable to what exists to the development shown among the Olmec?
Can you present linquist bridging the gap between Weiner's time and the present who show correspondance between Olmec and proposed West African scripts from 3000 years ago.
Also do we have a progression of West African writings from 3000 years ago up until Arabic was adopted by the great Mande empires of Soninke Ghana and Malinke Mali. If so why are their writings in their languages in the sahelian libraries written in Arabic rather than with their own script which supposedly being in continuous use would be much more adequite than Arabic characters lacking direct phonetic precision.
Please respond as precisely and explicitly as possible without reams of irrelevant material or urls to pages already submitted to this forum in the past.
Thank you
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Van Sertima and Clyde Winters are usually ignored by the scientific mainstream, because theirs ideas are not taken seriously. However, there are papers where scientists have destroyed those theories of pre-columbian contacts. Perhaps you should read these papers and decide by yourself.
The papers came from a site called "The hall of Maat" that specializes in destroying pseudo-historical myths of any kind, including Eurocentric, Sinocentric and Afrocentric myths.
The information at Maat is bull. If you are interested in learning that facts in support of the African origin of the Olmecs you can check out the following site: web page
The discussion of Afrocentrism at Maat is biased and one sided. Anything they don't agree with they delete from the site and ban the poster.
If you are interested in my response to the ortiz paper that appeared in Current Anthropology you can read it at the following site: web page
Current Anthropology did not publish my response to Ortiz, eventhough my article in the Black Collegian was attacked.
quote: Excuse me for not looking it up myself but is Oued Mertoutek in West Africa and does there exist a full literature written in it comparable to what exists to the development shown among the Olmec?
Can you present linquist bridging the gap between Weiner's time and the present who show correspondance between Olmec and proposed West African scripts from 3000 years ago.
Also do we have a progression of West African writings from 3000 years ago up until Arabic was adopted by the great Mande empires of Soninke Ghana and Malinke Mali. If so why are their writings in their languages in the sahelian libraries written in Arabic rather than with their own script which supposedly being in continuous use would be much more adequite than Arabic characters lacking direct phonetic precision.
First of all I never said thet the Proto-Olmec came from West Africa. I said they came from Middle Africa. The Mande did not move into the Niger Valley until afterr 300 BC.
The major stronghold of the Mande formerly extended from the Fezzan to Tichitt, down into the Niger Valley. Along this path you will find numerous inscriptions written in symbols recorded in the Vai writing system which I use to read Olmec inscriptions. These inscriptions have been identified and recorded by numerous archaeologists and epigraphers. Here are some of the publications on the inscriptions found from Fezzan to Niger Valley:
Nicole Lambert, Medinet Sbat et la Protohistoire de Mauritanie Occidentale, Antiquites Africaines, 4(1970), pp.15-62;
Nicole Lambert, L'apparition du cuivre dans les civilisations prehistoriques. In C.H. Perrot et al Le Sol, la Parole et 'Ecrit (Paris: Societe Francaise d'Histoire d'Outre Mer) pp.213-226;R.
Mauny, Tableau Geographique de l'Ouest Afrique Noire. Histoire et Archeologie (Fayard);
R.A. Kea, Expansion and Contractions: World-Historical Change and the Western Sudan World-System (1200/1000BC-1200/1250A.D.) Journal of World-Systems Research, 3(2004), pp.723-816
The Vai writing is very old. The major expert on Manding language and civilization M. Delafosse recorded a tradition relating tothe ancient origin of the Vai script (see: M. Delafosse, Vai leur langue et leur systeme 'ecriture,L'Anthropologie, 10 (1910)).
The evidence/literature of these African have always existed it is evident in the inscriptions the people engraved on the rocks near their settlements. Here there are numerous writings relating to the Mande way of life.
The ancient writing of the Mande was always maintained in secret socieities. This is one of the reasons why each school Bukere began to teach the Vai writing was burned down. Some researchers claim that it is members of the Poro Society who attempt to maintain the secreacy of traditional African writing.
Arabic is not a secret writing system so it is acceptable to write in this script. I believe that the Arabic style writing used to record many African languages is called Ajami.
You can find many documents written in Ajami in Africa. I also found some Ajami records among the writings of the Male jihadist in Brazil dating back to 1835.
The Vai writing is very old. The major expert on Manding language and civilization M. Delafosse recorded a tradition relating tothe ancient origin of the Vai script (see: M. Delafosse, Vai leur langue et leur systeme 'ecriture,L'Anthropologie, 10 (1910)).
The evidence/literature of these African have always existed it is evident in the inscriptions the people engraved on the rocks near their settlements.
I have for some time now, come across your references of this Vai script and its supposed connections with the Olmec writing system. Specifically, how old is Vai script supposed to be, and how was this conclusion reached?
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I have for some time now, come across your references of this Vai script and its supposed connections with the Olmec writing system. Specifically, how old is Vai script supposed to be, and how was this conclusion reached?
Delafosse never put a date on the creation of the script he just mentioned that the Vai said it was very old. K. Hau in an interesting article on African writing systems: K.Hau, Pre-Islamic writing in West Africa, Bulletin de l'IFAN, t35, ser.B,No.1 (1973)pp1-45, noted that: "we cannot even guess when this occurred [creation of Mande writing], but it is of great importance to note that almost all the poeple...who possess writing systems whether syllabic or "ideographie" employ languages which belong to the great Mande language family of West Africa ."
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: ..The information at Maat is bull. If you are interested in learning that facts in support of the African origin of the Olmecs you can check out the following site: ..
Hi Clyde,
Sorry fellow, but I won't argue with you. I was once banned from the "Ta-Seti" club just for defending strongly what science knows about the Olmecs. That they were Native Americans.
Far from been "one-sided", "The hall of Maat" attack all pseudo-historians. I have seen how they blew up Eurocentric claims, such as the one of the "white Gods", and how they uncovered the myths of Mormons, East Indians, Sinocentrics, New Agers, and a legion of other myth creators, not only Afrocentrists.
I recommend The Hall of Maat" to the people that really want to see a serious site on archaelogy. They have a tons of data on Egypt. By the way, you are also mentioned on some papers in there.
Listen Clyde. I don't believe a single line of what you write. Your Mandinga-Olmec theory stands on thin air. No Mandinga writing exists of the times you pretend they are. The only source is you.
You forget that the greatest traditions of Western Africa where transmited by griots, not writing. For the people interested, the Sundiata (western African classic of Mali) was preservered during seven centuries by oral transmition from generation to generation.
Now for the Olmecs, they were Native Americans of the region. Actually, the Mayas of Southern Mexico and Guatemala, and other Natives of the region are the real Olmecs. They are such a poor people that is a pitty people like you robb them the heritage of theirs ancestors.
For the myth of civilizations in the Americas, I have to say your sources are outdated. The oldest civilization in the Americas is not the Olmec anymore. I won't tell you the name of the civilization because you can be tempted to write a book about it
I hope you wake up one day and start to realize that what really matters is that all people are human beings, and that all have its own history. You don't need to look for glory, or manufacture it. You only need to know the truth to be proud of the past.
As I say, I wont' argue with you, but you know me well.
No bad feelings about it, anyways.
My name is Omar Vega, alias KAWASHKAR
Posts: 413 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The information at Maat is bull. The discussion of Afrocentrism at Maat is biased and one sided. Anything they don't agree with they delete from the site and ban the poster.
ditto!
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: ...I have for some time now, come across your references of this Vai script and its supposed connections with the Olmec writing system. Specifically, how old is Vai script supposed to be, and how was this conclusion reached?
Vai script is not very old at all. It was invented by Dualu Bukele in 1820. Therefore, it did not exist in the year 3000 years B.C. at all.
quote:Vai syllabary Origin In the 1820s Dualu Bukele of Jondu, Liberia, was inspired by a dream to create a writing system from the Vai language. The syllabary proved popular with the Vai and by the end of the 19th century, most of them were using it. In 1962, the Standardization Committee at the University of Liberia standardized the syllabary.
You can learn to write Vai from the following source:
posted
This is the story of Dualu Bukele, the inventor of the Vai writing system. The source is from a religious organization.
quote: DUALA BUKELE AND THE TALL WHITE MAN
The Vai people of Liberia, West Africa, have an interesting story on how they received their writing system. It all began back in the 19th century with a man named Duala Bukele. As a young man, Dualu served as a steward on a Portuguese trading ship. He was amazed when the captain would give him a written message for another officer. Once that officer received and read the message, he knew exactly what the captain wanted to tell him. Dualu could see there was power behind those amazing little marks that appeared on paper. Later Dualu retired from his work as a steward and returned to his hometown in the Vai chiefdom. But he couldn’t forget the idea of having a means of writing. He asked himself, “Why can’t we have something like this for our own Vai people?” One night he had a vision in which he saw a tall white man who said, “Dualu, come. I have a book for you and your Vai people.” The man in the vision then proceeded to show him the shapes of the Vai characters used in the Vai writing system. When Dualu awoke, he began to write down the characters he’d seen in his vision. Sadly, there were so many he could not remember them all, so he called together his friends and fellow elders and shared with them his vision and the characters he had written down. His fellow Vai elders caught his excitement and over time, they added more characters in place of those Dualu could not remember. Some year later, during the 1840’s, a British naval officer observed this unique writing as he traveled along the coast of Liberia where the Vai people lived. He shared his discovery with a missionary in Sierra Leone, a Rev. Koelle. Rev. Koelle traveled to the town where Dualu lived and spent about two months with him. Upon his return to Sierra Leone. Rev. Koelle wrote a book about this remarkable discovery. More than 160 years have passed since the early development of the Vai script. Many Vai men learned the writing system and used it for journal entries, diaries and personal correspondence, but everything was written by hand. Because the script is so important to the Vai people, it was decided that the New Testament should be printed using the script as opposed to our alphabet. LBT missionaries, with the expert assistance of SIL International, developed the Vai font in 1996. For the first time, the characters of the Vai script. As envisioned by Dualu Bukele so long ago, could be keyboarded into the computer and printed on laser printers. Literacy materials soon appeared followed by health booklets and Scripture portions. In 2003, the New Testament was presented to the Vai people. Not only do they have the Word of God in their heart language, but it is printed in the script that is such an important part of their culture and heritage. Click on the New Testament icon for more information about the development and dedication of the Vai New Testament.
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: ...I have for some time now, come across your references of this Vai script and its supposed connections with the Olmec writing system. Specifically, how old is Vai script supposed to be, and how was this conclusion reached?
Vai script is not very old at all. It was invented by Dualu Bukele in 1820. Therefore, it did not exist in the year 3000 years B.C. at all.
Yeap; was aware of that claim too, but wanted to find out what else Clyde knew about the Vai script, considering his claim about the age, that I didn't already know about. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: ..The information at Maat is bull. If you are interested in learning that facts in support of the African origin of the Olmecs you can check out the following site: ..
Hi Clyde,
Sorry fellow, but I won't argue with you. I was once banned from the "Ta-Seti" club just for defending strongly what science knows about the Olmecs. That they were Native Americans.
Far from been "one-sided", "The hall of Maat" attack all pseudo-historians. I have seen how they blew up Eurocentric claims, such as the one of the "white Gods", and how they uncovered the myths of Mormons, East Indians, Sinocentrics, New Agers, and a legion of other myth creators, not only Afrocentrists.
I recommend The Hall of Maat" to the people that really want to see a serious site on archaelogy. They have a tons of data on Egypt. By the way, you are also mentioned on some papers in there.
Listen Clyde. I don't believe a single line of what you write. Your Mandinga-Olmec theory stands on thin air. No Mandinga writing exists of the times you pretend they are. The only source is you.
You forget that the greatest traditions of Western Africa where transmited by griots, not writing. For the people interested, the Sundiata (western African classic of Mali) was preservered during seven centuries by oral transmition from generation to generation.
Now for the Olmecs, they were Native Americans of the region. Actually, the Mayas of Southern Mexico and Guatemala, and other Natives of the region are the real Olmecs. They are such a poor people that is a pitty people like you robb them the heritage of theirs ancestors.
For the myth of civilizations in the Americas, I have to say your sources are outdated. The oldest civilization in the Americas is not the Olmec anymore. I won't tell you the name of the civilization because you can be tempted to write a book about it
I hope you wake up one day and start to realize that what really matters is that all people are human beings, and that all have its own history. You don't need to look for glory, or manufacture it. You only need to know the truth to be proud of the past.
As I say, I wont' argue with you, but you know me well.
No bad feelings about it, anyways.
My name is Omar Vega, alias KAWASHKAR
You're Omar Vega??? I think i've seen your post on that forum for mixed people. I was tempted to respond to some of your rediculous post but didn't have the time or patience.
If you are indeed the same guy it is amazing that you've managed to find your way over to Egyptsearch.
The internet is really a small place. Posts: 67 | From: New York City | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Contraversy surrounds the invention of the Vai script. Delafosse claimed that Vai informants told him the writing system was invented in ancient times. S.W. Koelle in Narrative of an expedition into Vy country West Africa and the Discovery od a system of writing,etc.(London,1849) claimed that the writing system was invented by Bukele in 1829 or 1839. David Diringer in The Alphabet (London,1968,pp.130-133) reported that there was a tradition that the writing was invented by a group of eight Vai. Marcel Cohen La grande invention de l'ecriture at son evolution (Paris,1958, p. 21) beleived that the Vai writing system was not invented before the 18th century, but more probably at the beginning of the 19thth century.
The story about Bukele's dream is just a cover, used by Bukele to keep members of the Gola Poro society from being angered by Bukele's open teaching of the Vai script .
We know that the symbols associated with the Vai script existed prior to Bukele's alledged invention of the Vai writing because it was known to African slaves in Suriname. In 1936, M.J. Herskovits and his wife on a field trip to Suriname recorded a specimen of writing written by a man while he was possessed by the spirit winti. Mrs. Hau, who examined the specimen wrote that "Most of the component parts of are to be found in the syllabaries of West Africa which we havd just discussed" (see: K.Hau, Pre-Islamic writing in West Africa, Bulletin de l'IFAN, t35, ser.B,No.1 (1973)pp.1-45).
The British took over Suriname and ended slavery in 1799. Years before Bukele's alledged invention of the Vai writing. As a result, there is no way a descendant of a Suriname Maroon (runaway slave) could have produced the writig under possession by the spirit winti if the writing was invented by Bukele.
If you read the history of Bukele's alledge invention of the Vai script we discover that although Bukele dreamt of the Vai characters he was able to "reconstruct" the symbols not by deeply medatating on the dream, he:Later Dualu retired from his work as a steward and returned to his hometown in the Vai chiefdom. But he couldn’t forget the idea of having a means of writing. He asked himself, “Why can’t we have something like this for our own Vai people?” One night he had a vision in which he saw a tall white man who said, “Dualu, come. I have a book for you and your Vai people.” The man in the vision then proceeded to show him the shapes of the Vai characters used in the Vai writing system. When Dualu awoke, he began to write down the characters he’d seen in his vision. Sadly, there were so many he could not remember them all, so he called together his friends and fellow elders and shared with them his vision and the characters he had written down. His fellow Vai elders caught his excitement and over time, they added more characters in place of those Dualu could not remember.
This is the main give-away that the writing existed before Bukele's alledged invention. Firstly, how could "his friends and fellow elders" help him recover the Vai signs, if the signs were not already invented--since these men had not had Bukele's dream.
Secondly, before Bukele popularised the Vai script he sought protection from King Fa Toro of Goturu in Tianimani for his school. The King granted protection to the inventors of the Vai script because "The king declared himself exceedly pleased with their discovery, which as he said would soon raise his people upon a level with the Porors and Mandingoes, who hitherto had been the only book-people" (see: S.W. Koelle, Outline grammar of the Vai language--and an account of the discovery and nature of the Vai mode of syllabic writing, London,1854)
Bukele needed a Kings support for the teaching of anyone the Vai writing because the first schools set up to teach the script at Dshondu and Bandakoro were burned down along with the Vai manuscripts found in the schools after 18 months .
If Bukele had invented the Vai script as he claimed, why did he need protection for his schools? The answer is that he didn't invent the writing he just popularized the script.
The Vai script was taught in the Mande secret societies. This is why eventhough the script is well known, it is cloaked in an aura of secrecy.
This view is supported by the fact that when Thomas Edward Beslow, a Vai prince who attended mission schools in Liberia and the Wesleyan Accademy in Massachusetts was iniated into the Poro Society he mentions in his autobiography that many members fo the secret society could write in Vai (see: T.E. Beslow, From Darkness of Africa to the light of America).
What do we learn from this report. First, the Vai script was known to Vai elites. Obviously, members of Poro would not like non members of the society to know about this writing. Yet, Bukele was teaching the Vai writing to any one who desired to learn it , so the Vai would be recognized for their literacy just like Europeans. Secondly it was being taught in the Poro society, which King Fa Toro, did not belong too.
Today eventhough the Vai script is well known the writing is semi-secret. As a result. some commentators believe the Vai no longer write in the script. This led Christopher Fyfe in A History of Sierra Leone, to write that: "Though an English trader who spent some time among the Vai in the 1860's found schools where children were still learning it,it was almost forgoten by the early twentieth century, and today is only studied by linguist".
Fyfe was wrong. Gail Stewart, only five years later in Notes on the present-day usage of the Vai script in Liberia (African Language Review 6,(1967)p.71) found that the script was still very popular among many Vai.
David Dalby wrote about a Gola student of William Siegman, who allowed Siegman him to copy the inscription but he would not translate same. This student attributed the writing to the Poro Society, and said he was taught the writing by his grandfather. Dalby wrote: "After the present paper hd gone to press, Mr. William Siegman of Indiana University gave me information on a fifteenth West African script, used in Liberia for writing Gola. Mr. Siegman had seen a young Gola student at Cuttingham College (Liberia) writng a letter in this script in 1968, but although the student allowed him to take a copy of the letter he declined to provide Mr. Siegman with a Key"(see:D. Dalby, Further indigenous scripts in West Africa and etc.,ALS,10,pp.180-181).
Dalby viewed the assertion of the student that the writing was used by members of the Poro Society with sceptacism. But Dalby should not have been sceptisim because Beslow had made the same claim.
In conclusion, Bukele probably did not invent the Vai writing. This is supported by the fact that 1) the symbols associated with the Vai script were well known to members of the Poro Secret Society; 2) descendants of Maroon Blacks in Suriname were familiar with the script; and 3) the Vai writing, for the most part remains in use but it is maintained in a semi-secret fashion and not usually shared with people who are not members or kin of members of a secret society, this is why the Gola student would not translate his letter for Mr.Siegman.
Finally it must be remembered that the symbols engraved on rocks from the Fezzan to the Niger bend and other areas where the Mande live are identical to symbols associated with the Vai script. This shows the continuity of writing among the Mande speaking people over a period of 3000 plus years.
The evidence from Suriname, symbols on the rocks near Mande habitations, and the existence of the symbols relating to the Vai script in other Mande writing systems and their continued use by members of the Vai and members of secret societies support Delafosse's tradition that the Vai writing existed in ancient times.
Given the fact that the Mande have maintained writing for 3000 years, it was only natural that when the Xi people founded the Olmec civilization they would teach writing to their children/descendants. This is supported by the evidence of an education system among the Olmec where youth learned about their culture and civilization.
La Venta Celt
This is proven by the LaVenta celt, and the present tablet called Cascajal, which was found near near San Lorenzo, one of the earliest centers of Olmec civilization where many stone heads have been found.
quote: DUALA BUKELE AND THE TALL WHITE MAN
The Vai people of Liberia, West Africa, have an interesting story on how they received their writing system. It all began back in the 19th century with a man named Duala Bukele. As a young man, Dualu served as a steward on a Portuguese trading ship. He was amazed when the captain would give him a written message for another officer. Once that officer received and read the message, he knew exactly what the captain wanted to tell him. Dualu could see there was power behind those amazing little marks that appeared on paper. Later Dualu retired from his work as a steward and returned to his hometown in the Vai chiefdom. But he couldn’t forget the idea of having a means of writing. He asked himself, “Why can’t we have something like this for our own Vai people?” One night he had a vision in which he saw a tall white man who said, “Dualu, come. I have a book for you and your Vai people.” The man in the vision then proceeded to show him the shapes of the Vai characters used in the Vai writing system. When Dualu awoke, he began to write down the characters he’d seen in his vision. Sadly, there were so many he could not remember them all, so he called together his friends and fellow elders and shared with them his vision and the characters he had written down. His fellow Vai elders caught his excitement and over time, they added more characters in place of those Dualu could not remember. Some year later, during the 1840’s, a British naval officer observed this unique writing as he traveled along the coast of Liberia where the Vai people lived. He shared his discovery with a missionary in Sierra Leone, a Rev. Koelle. Rev. Koelle traveled to the town where Dualu lived and spent about two months with him. Upon his return to Sierra Leone. Rev. Koelle wrote a book about this remarkable discovery. More than 160 years have passed since the early development of the Vai script. Many Vai men learned the writing system and used it for journal entries, diaries and personal correspondence, but everything was written by hand. Because the script is so important to the Vai people, it was decided that the New Testament should be printed using the script as opposed to our alphabet. LBT missionaries, with the expert assistance of SIL International, developed the Vai font in 1996. For the first time, the characters of the Vai script. As envisioned by Dualu Bukele so long ago, could be keyboarded into the computer and printed on laser printers. Literacy materials soon appeared followed by health booklets and Scripture portions. In 2003, the New Testament was presented to the Vai people. Not only do they have the Word of God in their heart language, but it is printed in the script that is such an important part of their culture and heritage. Click on the New Testament icon for more information about the development and dedication of the Vai New Testament.
quote: For the myth of civilizations in the Americas, I have to say your sources are outdated. The oldest civilization in the Americas is not the Olmec anymore. I won't tell you the name of the civilization because you can be tempted to write a book about it
I hope you wake up one day and start to realize that what really matters is that all people are human beings, and that all have its own history. You don't need to look for glory, or manufacture it. You only need to know the truth to be proud of the past.
As I say, I wont' argue with you, but you know me well.
No bad feelings about it, anyways.
My name is Omar Vega, alias KAWASHKAR
Hi Omar. No bad feelings taken. I did not have anything to do with your banning at Ta Seti.
The issue is not denying people their heritage I have never did such a thing. I have always noted that the Mayan civilization is uniquely Mayan. But the Olmec were not Amerindians they were Africans this is supported by their iconography, writing and skeletal remains.
You can believe what ever you wish to believe, established belief and permenant false mental schemata will not erase the fact the Olmec came from Africa and founded the "mother culture" of the Amerindian civilization, just like the Africans from Egypt introduced civilization to the Greeco-Romans.
You are doing the same thing to the Olmecs that Aryanists, Dienekites, and other Caucasocentrics do to northeast Africans. Just as they point out "K-zoid" traits in northeast Africans and declaring said Africans "K-zoids", you're pointing out "N-groid" traits in Olmec statues and declaring them "N-groids".
Has it not occurred to you that Amerinds could evolve broad noses and full lips analogous to those of coastal west Africans, just as northeast Africans could evolve narrow noses analogous to those of Europeans? After all, broad noses work better in humid environments (like, say, the steamy jungles of Mesoamerica and coastal west Africa), and narrow noses work better in dry climates (like, say, the northeast African desert and the Eurasian tundra). Scientists call it convergent evolution, the same thing responsible for the superficial "similarities" between the wings of pterosaurs and birds.
I firmly believe that the Olmecs, despite having traits superficially like those of west Africans, were predominantly a variation of indigenous Amerinds, just as northeast Africans, despite possessing features that look on the surface like those of Europeans, are predominantly a variation of indigenous Africans.
quote: You are doing the same thing to the Olmecs that Aryanists, Dienekites, and other Caucasocentrics do to northeast Africans. Just as they point out "K-zoid" traits in northeast Africans and declaring said Africans "K-zoids", you're pointing out "N-groid" traits in Olmec statues and declaring them "N-groids".
Has it not occurred to you that Amerinds could evolve broad noses and full lips analogous to those of coastal west Africans, just as northeast Africans could evolve narrow noses analogous to those of Europeans? After all, broad noses work better in humid environments (like, say, the steamy jungles of Mesoamerica and coastal west Africa), and narrow noses work better in dry climates (like, say, the northeast African desert and the Eurasian tundra). Scientists call it convergent evolution, the same thing responsible for the superficial "similarities" between the wings of pterosaurs and birds.
I firmly believe that the Olmecs, despite having traits superficially like those of west Africans, were predominantly a variation of indigenous Amerinds, just as northeast Africans, despite possessing features that look on the surface like those of Europeans, are predominantly a variation of indigenous Africans.
What are you talking about??? Africans live in a tropical environment just like the Maya.
Most Blacks don't live in the desert. If we were to follow your line of reasoning, since both groups live in tropical environment they would share the same features but the iconographic evidence of the Maya and Olmec make it clear that marked difference are evident in their facial features.
Convergent evolution can not explain the iconographic evidence that the Olmec were Africans, who did not look anything like the Classical Maya.
The Classical Maya in the pictures above are only a few hundred years old.
There are several reasons why we must reject this proposition: 1) genetic evidence; 2)the date for the Mayan iconographic evidence make it clear that convergent evolution could not have taken place in a few hundred years that have passed in Mexico since the Maya made their monuments and other artifacts ; and 3)both the Blacks in the Olmec iconography and the Classical Mayans had distinct noses eventhough they both lived in tropical enviroments in Africa and MesoAmerica as noted from Mayan and Olmec iconography.
Contemporary Mexicans look like Africans because of mixing with Africans since Olmec times and especially during the African slave trade.
The genetic evidence for Africans and Mexicans mixing is quite interesting. This evidence supports the skeletal evidence that Africans have lived in Mexico for thousands of years.
The foundational mtDNA lineages for Mexican Indians are lineages A, B, C and D.The frequencies of these lineages vary among population groups. For example, whereas lineages A,B and C were present among Maya at Quintana Roo, Maya at Copan lacked lineages A and B (Gonzalez-Oliver, et al, 2001). This supports Carolina Bonilla et al (2005) view that heterogeneity is a major characteristic of Mexican population.
Underhill, et al (1996) noted that:" One Mayan male, previously [has been] shown to have an African Y chromosome." This is very interesting because the Maya language illustrates a Mande substratum, in addition to African genetic markers. James l. Gutherie (2000) in a study of the HLAs in indigenous American populations, found that the Vantigen of the Rhesus system, considered to be an indication of African ancestry, among Indians in Belize and Mexico centers of Mayan civilization. Dr. Gutherie also noted that A*28 common among Africans has high frequencies among Eastern Maya. It is interesting to note that the Otomi, a Mexican group identified as being of African origin and six Mayan groups show the B Allele of the ABO system that is considered to be of African origin.
Some researchers claim that as many as seventy-five percent of the Mexicans have an African heritage (Green et al, 2000). Although this may be the case Cuevas (2004) says these Africans have been erased from history.
The admixture of Africans and Mexicans make it impossible to compare pictures of contemporary Mexicans and the Olmec. Due to the fact that 75% of the contemporary Mexicans have African genes you find that many of them look similar to the Olmecs whereas the ancient Maya did not.
In a discussion of the Mexican and African admixture in Mexico Lisker et al (1996) noted that the East Coast of Mexico had extensive admixture. The following percentages of African ancestry were found among East coast populations: Paraiso - 21.7%; El Carmen - 28.4% ;Veracruz - 25.6%; Saladero - 30.2%; and Tamiahua - 40.5%. Among Indian groups, Lisker et al (1996) found among the Chontal have 5% and the Cora .8% African admixture. The Chontal speak a Mayan language. According to Crawford et al. (1974), the mestizo population of Saltillo has 15.8% African ancestry, while Tlaxcala has 8% and Cuanalan 18.1%. The Olmecs built their civilization in the region of the current states of Veracruz and Tabasco. Now here again are the percentages of African ancestry according to Lisker et al (1996): Paraiso - 21.7% ; El Carmen - 28.4% ; Veracruz - 25.6% ; Saladero - 30.2% ; Tamiahua - 40.5%. Paraiso is in Tabasco and Veracruz is, of course, in the state of Veracruz. Tamiahua is in northern Veracruz. These areas were the first places in Mexico settled by the Olmecs. I'm not sure about Saladero and El Carmen.
Given the frequency of African admixture with the Mexicans a comparison of Olmec mask, statuettes and other artifacts show many resemblances to contemporary Mexican groups. As illustrated by the photo below.
But a comparison of Olmec figures with ancient Mayan figures , made before the importation of hundreds of thousands of slaves Mexico during the Atlantic Slave Trade show no resemblance at all to the Olmec figures.
This does not mean that the Maya had no contact with the Africans. This results from the fact that we know the Maya obtained much of their culture, arts and writings from the Olmecs. And many of their gods, especially those associated with trade are of Africans. We also find some images of Blacks among Mayan art.
African ancestry has been found among indigenous groups that have had no historical contact with African slaves and thus support an African presence in America, already indicated by African skeletons among the Olmec people. Lisker et al, noted that “The variation of Indian ancestry among the studied Indians shows in general a higher proportion in the more isolated groups, except for the Cora, who are as isolated as the Huichol and have not only a lower frequency but also a certain degree of black admixture. The black admixture is difficult to explain because the Cora reside in a mountainous region away from the west coast”. Green et al (2000) also found Indians with African genes in North Central Mexico, including the L1 and L2 clusters. Green et al (2000) observed that the discovery of a proportion of African haplotypes roughly equivalent to the proportion of European haplotypes [among North Central Mexican Indians] cannot be explained by recent admixture of African Americans for the United States. This is especially the case for the Ojinaga area, which presently is, and historically has been largely isolated from U.S. African Americans. In the Ojinaga sample set, the frequency of African haplotypes was higher that that of European hyplotypes”.
M.H. Crawford et al (1974).Human biology in Mexico II. A comparison of blood group, serum, and red cell enzyme frequencies and genetic distances of the Indian population of Mexico. Am. Phys. Anthropol, 41: 251-268.
Marco P. Hernadez Cuevas.(2004). African Mexicans and the discourse on Modern Mexico.Oxford: University Press.
James L. Guthrie, Human lymphocyte antigens:Apparent Afro-Asiatic, southern Asian and European HLAs in indigenous American populations. Retrieved 3/3/2006 at: http://www.neara.org/Guthrie/lymphocyteantigens02.htm
R. Lisker et al.(1996). Genetic structure of autochthonous populations of Meso-america:Mexico. Am. J. Hum Biol 68:395-404.
Underhill,P.A.,Jin,L., Zemans,R., Oefner,J and Cavalli-Sforza,L.L.(1996, January). A pre-Columbian Y chromosome-specific transition and its implications for human evolutionary history, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA,93, 196-200.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
No Clyde. You are not going to sale me your books.
This is the Olmec of the Statue, from a real olmec jade of the time. The same expression and facial features. No New Age Mandinga theories are needed to explain the origin of the Olmecs.
Put the hard hat to play ball and you got it.
And this Mexican looks like it. Actually, there are hundred of millions of people in the Americas, without African Ancestry, that look like the Olmecs. You should know there are mummies in the Americas too, and that they are older than the Egyptians.
You are just profiting by the humiliation of Native Americans, like all those white racists that preceded you. An theses are the kids you are robbing theirs heritage:
posted
Kawashkar the majority of Mexicans are mestizos.This means that they are a mixture of Spanish, Africans and Indians. You can continue to attempt to change the reality of race mixing in Mexico by saying that this or that person looks like an Olmec, but that person has no African genes. If they look like the Olmecs it is because they have African genes. This person definitely does not look like the Classic Mayan people.
Unmixed Mayan Olmec
Here are the Olmec heads and a statue of Taharqa. Note the Negroness. They definitely don't look like the Maya.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Kawashkar the majority of Mexicans are mestizos.This means that they are a mixture of Spanish, Africans and Indians.
Clyde. What do you really know about Mexicans?
Now, the mixture is between Europeans and Amerindians peoples, with minorities (<1%) of other origins including East Asians, Arabs and Africans. But do you know the people of Chiapas and Guatemala, in the Maya zone, are overwelming Native Americans? I guess not.
quote: You can continue to attempt to change the reality of race mixing in Mexico by saying that this or that person looks like an Olmec, but that person has no African genes.
I stop if you stop continuing in your attempt to change the reality of Mexico. Plain and simple.
quote: If they look like the Olmecs it is because they have African genes.
Sorry Clyde but that's bull and you know it. We have pre-contact mummies that have a certain "African" look with 0% of African DNA, and that even got the so called "ethiopian hair braids". All your evidence is just crap. Sorry but you are wrong.
Your "eyeballing" science could convince kindergarten kids, but people that is accustumed to scientific methodology simply don't accept it.
quote: This person definitely does not look like the Classic Mayan people.
Here are the Olmec heads and a statue of Taharqa. Note the Negroness. They definitely don't look like the Maya.
Look at this picture, my dear researcher. For some charlatans that picture shows that Pacal was an ASTRONAUT. Yes, with BEM (bug eyed monsters) included.
Look at this one, that shows that Ancient India had corn, therefore they pretend they were the OLMECS. East Indians like others, are also hungry of glory.
Look at this one, that shows that the olmecs where CHINESES, according to "Dr. Mike Xu", a "Dr. Clyde Winters" in East Asian version.
(chinese)
(olmecs)
Look at this picture of Eastern Island Mohais, they show Polynesians were WHITE. At least thor heyerdahl believed that. Science proved he was wrong.
All the above is bull, the work of CHARLATANS, like your Olmec heads. That's pseudo-history.
No wonder the scientifics don't even want to speak with pseudo-historians.
You know it as well as I do, but you just want to sale books. Poor people the one that acquire ignorancy with your writings.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Contraversy surrounds the invention of the Vai script.
What could be clearer than that. At those times lots of people around the world were introducing writing to societies that lacked it. It is the case of Sequoya who invented the Cherokee script in 1819, of Dualu Bekele who invented the Mande script in 1820, and of Kisimi Kamara who invented the Mende script in 1921.
quote: Delafosse claimed that Vai informants told him the writing system was invented in ancient times.
That look a lot like the theory of rumor. That's no evidence, Clyde.
quote: S.W. Koelle in Narrative of an expedition into Vy country West Africa and the Discovery od a system of writing,etc.(London,1849) claimed that the writing system was invented by Bukele in 1829 or 1839. David Diringer in The Alphabet (London,1968,pp.130-133) reported that there was a tradition that the writing was invented by a group of eight Vai.
No contradictions. The invention happened in 1820
quote: Marcel Cohen La grande invention de l'ecriture at son evolution (Paris,1958, p. 21) beleived that the Vai writing system was not invented before the 18th century, but more probably at the beginning of the 19thth century.
Well, it was invented in 1820. Which is correct.
quote: The story about Bukele's dream is just a cover, used by Bukele to keep members of the Gola Poro society from being angered by Bukele's open teaching of the Vai script .
So you have to invent a conspiracy theory now.
quote: We know that the symbols associated with the Vai script existed prior to Bukele's alledged invention of the Vai writing because it was known to African slaves in Suriname.
Who is "we"
quote: In 1936, M.J. Herskovits and his wife on a field trip to Suriname recorded a specimen of writing written by a man while he was possessed by the spirit winti. Mrs. Hau, who examined the specimen wrote that "Most of the component parts of are to be found in the syllabaries of West Africa which we havd just discussed" (see: K.Hau, Pre-Islamic writing in West Africa, Bulletin de l'IFAN, t35, ser.B,No.1 (1973)pp.1-45).
Yes. But the writing was invented in 1820, BEFORE THIS CLAIM, who happened a more than a century afterwards.
quote: The British took over Suriname and ended slavery in 1799. Years before Bukele's alledged invention of the Vai writing. As a result, there is no way a descendant of a Suriname Maroon (runaway slave) could have produced the writig under possession by the spirit winti if the writing was invented by Bukele.
Why not?
You are confusing things. All people of the hearth have simbols. Think in the cross, the half moon, etc. Diferent societies manage hundreds of symbols precisely for rituals and things associated to religion.
BUT THAT IS NOT WRITING.
Writing is a system to record events, not just a colection of symbols. Vai writing was invented in 1820. It symbols could have invented before and used for other things. Is WRITING what is new.
quote: If you read the history of Bukele's alledge invention of the Vai script we discover that although Bukele dreamt of the Vai characters he was able to "reconstruct" the symbols not by deeply medatating on the dream, he:[b]Later Dualu retired from his work as a steward and returned to his hometown in the Vai chiefdom. But he couldn’t forget the idea of having a means of writing. He asked himself, “Why can’t we have something like this for our own Vai people?” One night he had a vision in which he saw a tall white man who said, “Dualu, come. I have a book for you and your Vai people.” The man in the vision then proceeded to show him the shapes of the Vai characters used in the Vai writing system. When Dualu awoke, he began to write down the characters he’d seen in his vision. Sadly, there were so many he could not remember them all, so he called together his friends and fellow elders and shared with them his vision and the characters he had written down. His fellow Vai elders caught his excitement and over time, they added more characters in place of those Dualu could not remember.
That's nothing strange to me. Actually, it is the same way Cherokee writing was invented, and probably the writing of Easter Island as well. The idea was fired for the event of seeing foreigners writing. The system and the symbols are local, but the idea of writing came from the external world.
Actually that was the same way how most people of the planet acquired writing, including the Greeks who say Phoenicians writing before inventing theirs alphabet.
quote: This is the main give-away that the writing existed before Bukele's alledged invention.
Absolutely false. You jump to a conclusion. What could have existed before is a colection of symbols. Not a writing technique.
quote: Firstly, how could "his friends and fellow elders" help him recover the Vai signs, if the signs were not already invented--since these men had not had Bukele's dream.
They were thinking how to adapt the ancient symbols and create the new ones needed to translate theirs language in writing. That's pretty easy to guess. Every time someone invents a script for a language which lacks writing the same things happens.
I don't think that is necesary to continue.
Tou have to show evidence for Vai and Mandinga writings before the 19th century, not just conspiracy theories and secret societies.
By the way, religious symbols are keep by secret societies, writing is always public.
posted
You have presented no scientific evidence supporting your claims. Kawashkar I have presented iconographic, skeletal and genetic evidence relating to the African origin of the Olmecs and admixture of Africans and Mexicans that explains why contemporary Mexicans look like Africans and the Olmecs, while the Classical Maya did not look African. Where is your evidence disputing this research. I am waiting.Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The "text" look more like simple hieroglyphics of animals, and foods to me....nothing in complexity compared to other writings such as Geez, Latin, Arabic etc.
Posts: 214 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: You have presented no scientific evidence supporting your claims. Kawashkar I have presented iconographic, skeletal and genetic evidence relating to the African origin of the Olmecs and admixture of Africans and Mexicans that explains why contemporary Mexicans look like Africans and the Olmecs, while the Classical Maya did not look African. Where is your evidence disputing this research. I am waiting.
LOL And exactly what "skeletal" and "genetic" evidence is this, I ask??!
It is either something totally bogus or something true but distorted/misinterpreted. As is the modus operandi of Clyde Winters.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: You have presented no scientific evidence supporting your claims. Kawashkar I have presented iconographic, skeletal and genetic evidence relating to the African origin of the Olmecs and admixture of Africans and Mexicans that explains why contemporary Mexicans look like Africans and the Olmecs, while the Classical Maya did not look African. Where is your evidence disputing this research. I am waiting.
What evidency has you show, Clyde.
(1) The same picture of the Olmec head that you always show. I have show you an Olmec jade that looks exactly like the Olmec head and you did not payed attention to it.
(2) Genetic studies has shown no evidence whatsoever of African presency in the Americas. Do you want me to find them? Go for it, after all you should know that already. All the evidency that exist points to a Siberian-Mongolian origin of Native Americans, period.
(3) The skeletical studies you always mention are the joke of the scientific community. Do you want to find the oppinion of experts?
(4) I said you before, that Native Americans look like that statue, and you have seen in the post a picture of a non-contacted Native American with zero admixture and you could not identify him. Look for it. Is in a previous picture.
(5) Tell me one more thing, Dr. Winters, how the Mandingas reached the Americas?
posted
The Olmec arrived in Mexico by boat. The tradition of their landing is Mexico are supported by Amerind tradiions and ancient stelas.
Kawashakar you have not presented any evidence disputing the skeletal, epigraphic,genetic and iconographic evidence I have presented in my post. Where is the counter evidence disputing my claims? Where are the articles from refereed journals disputing Wiercinski's skeletal evidence for African Olmecs?
Below are articles from refereed journals claiming that Mexicans show admixture with Africans. Are you claiming that the editors of the journals in which these papers were published were Afrocentrists? What gain would these editors obtain from claim that Mexicans show a high degree of admiture with Africans if this was not a scientific reality?
The genetic evidence for Africans and Mexicans mixing is quite interesting. This evidence supports the skeletal evidence that Africans have lived in Mexico for thousands of years.
The foundational mtDNA lineages for Mexican Indians are lineages A, B, C and D.The frequencies of these lineages vary among population groups. For example, whereas lineages A,B and C were present among Maya at Quintana Roo, Maya at Copan lacked lineages A and B (Gonzalez-Oliver, et al, 2001). This supports Carolina Bonilla et al (2005) view that heterogeneity is a major characteristic of Mexican population.
Underhill, et al (1996) noted that:" One Mayan male, previously [has been] shown to have an African Y chromosome." This is very interesting because the Maya language illustrates a Mande substratum, in addition to African genetic markers. James l. Gutherie (2000) in a study of the HLAs in indigenous American populations, found that the Vantigen of the Rhesus system, considered to be an indication of African ancestry, among Indians in Belize and Mexico centers of Mayan civilization. Dr. Gutherie also noted that A*28 common among Africans has high frequencies among Eastern Maya. It is interesting to note that the Otomi, a Mexican group identified as being of African origin and six Mayan groups show the B Allele of the ABO system that is considered to be of African origin.
Some researchers claim that as many as seventy-five percent of the Mexicans have an African heritage (Green et al, 2000). Although this may be the case Cuevas (2004) says these Africans have been erased from history.
The admixture of Africans and Mexicans make it impossible to compare pictures of contemporary Mexicans and the Olmec. Due to the fact that 75% of the contemporary Mexicans have African genes you find that many of them look similar to the Olmecs whereas the ancient Maya did not.
In a discussion of the Mexican and African admixture in Mexico Lisker et al (1996) noted that the East Coast of Mexico had extensive admixture. The following percentages of African ancestry were found among East coast populations: Paraiso - 21.7%; El Carmen - 28.4% ;Veracruz - 25.6%; Saladero - 30.2%; and Tamiahua - 40.5%. Among Indian groups, Lisker et al (1996) found among the Chontal have 5% and the Cora .8% African admixture. The Chontal speak a Mayan language. According to Crawford et al. (1974), the mestizo population of Saltillo has 15.8% African ancestry, while Tlaxcala has 8% and Cuanalan 18.1%. The Olmecs built their civilization in the region of the current states of Veracruz and Tabasco. Now here again are the percentages of African ancestry according to Lisker et al (1996): Paraiso - 21.7% ; El Carmen - 28.4% ; Veracruz - 25.6% ; Saladero - 30.2% ; Tamiahua - 40.5%. Paraiso is in Tabasco and Veracruz is, of course, in the state of Veracruz. Tamiahua is in northern Veracruz. These areas were the first places in Mexico settled by the Olmecs. I'm not sure about Saladero and El Carmen.
Given the frequency of African admixture with the Mexicans a comparison of Olmec mask, statuettes and other artifacts show many resemblances to contemporary Mexican groups. As illustrated by the photo below.
But a comparison of Olmec figures with ancient Mayan figures , made before the importation of hundreds of thousands of slaves Mexico during the Atlantic Slave Trade show no resemblance at all to the Olmec figures.
This does not mean that the Maya had no contact with the Africans. This results from the fact that we know the Maya obtained much of their culture, arts and writings from the Olmecs. And many of their gods, especially those associated with trade are of Africans. We also find some images of Blacks among Mayan art.
African ancestry has been found among indigenous groups that have had no historical contact with African slaves and thus support an African presence in America, already indicated by African skeletons among the Olmec people. Lisker et al, noted that “The variation of Indian ancestry among the studied Indians shows in general a higher proportion in the more isolated groups, except for the Cora, who are as isolated as the Huichol and have not only a lower frequency but also a certain degree of black admixture. The black admixture is difficult to explain because the Cora reside in a mountainous region away from the west coast”. Green et al (2000) also found Indians with African genes in North Central Mexico, including the L1 and L2 clusters. Green et al (2000) observed that the discovery of a proportion of African haplotypes roughly equivalent to the proportion of European haplotypes [among North Central Mexican Indians] cannot be explained by recent admixture of African Americans for the United States. This is especially the case for the Ojinaga area, which presently is, and historically has been largely isolated from U.S. African Americans. In the Ojinaga sample set, the frequency of African haplotypes was higher that that of European hyplotypes”.
M.H. Crawford et al (1974).Human biology in Mexico II. A comparison of blood group, serum, and red cell enzyme frequencies and genetic distances of the Indian population of Mexico. Am. Phys. Anthropol, 41: 251-268.
Marco P. Hernadez Cuevas.(2004). African Mexicans and the discourse on Modern Mexico.Oxford: University Press.
James L. Guthrie, Human lymphocyte antigens:Apparent Afro-Asiatic, southern Asian and European HLAs in indigenous American populations. Retrieved 3/3/2006 at: http://www.neara.org/Guthrie/lymphocyteantigens02.htm
R. Lisker et al.(1996). Genetic structure of autochthonous populations of Meso-america:Mexico. Am. J. Hum Biol 68:395-404.
Underhill,P.A.,Jin,L., Zemans,R., Oefner,J and Cavalli-Sforza,L.L.(1996, January). A pre-Columbian Y chromosome-specific transition and its implications for human evolutionary history, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA,93, 196-200.
Everyone know the Native Americans have canoes, so the picture shows they have them, nothing else.
Now if you believe people could reach from Africa to the Americas rowing in a canoe.... lol. You are really bad, Clyde. Sorry.
With respect to your famous skeletons, don't you remember this discussion? I believe you man are having problems with your memory. lol.
quote:
Olmec skeletons African? No, just poor scholarship -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a collection of back and forth arguments from sci.archaeology.mesoamerican, compiled by Peter van Rossum, which deconstructs the study of Wiercinski who claims to have found African skeletons.
In response to my post Mr. Winters congratulated me on having performed a fine critique but even though he didn't contradict my conclusions he said he still wasn't willing to dismiss Wiercinski's study.
The final part is one of my last posts to Mr. Winters to try to convince him that no matter what his position with regard to Old-New World contacts, Wiercinski's study is not useful - I guess he never got the message.
Feel free to e-mail me with anything in here that seems ambiguous to you, I'll try to make them clearer.
Peter van Rossum PMV100@PSU.EDU ************************************************************* 1. NOTES ON WIERCINSKI'S ARTICLES
Data set The skeletons used by Wiercinski came from INAH collections and from the Maya Museum in Merida. The data used are summarized in the table below:
+-------------------+-------+--------------+ | Site(s) | Number| Time Period | +-------------------+ ------+--------------+ | Zacatenco & | 6 | Early | | El Arborillo | | Preclassic | +-------------------+-------+--------------+ | Tlatilco | 76 | Preclassic | | | | | +-------------------+-------+--------------+ | Cerro de las Mesas| 19 | Late | | | | Classic | +-------------------+-------+--------------+ | Monte Alban & | 41 | Classic & | | Monte Negro | | Postclassic | +-------------------+-------+--------------+ | Teotihuacan | 13 | Classic | | | | | +-------------------+-------+--------------+ | Maya | 38 | Classic & | | various Maya sites| | Postclassic | +-------------------+-------+--------------+
Wiercinski characterizes the Tlatilco and Cerro de las Mesas samples as "Olmecoid" but its clear that he is using them as being genetically linked to Olmec populations at sites such as La Venta.
Methodology Wiercinski measured the skulls for 48 traits, but focuses in on the following 10 traits: 1. Prominence of maxilla - degree of prognathis 2. Height of nasal root 3. Prominence of nose 4. Prominence of nasal spine 5. Position of nasal spine 6. Profile of nasa 7. Frontal shape of nasal bones 8. Shape of orbits 9. Depth of maxillary incisure 10. Depth of canine fossa Wiercinski is most interested in the above 10 traits because he maintains that they are the best for discriminating between what he calls the 3 great races of man (white, black & yellow).
Based on the above 10 traits he also calculates two distance measures which he calls Py-w and Py-b, where each of these characterizes how a skull compares between yellow-white and yellow-black races. For example a score of Py-w=0 means a skull is completely white; whereas Py-w=100 means a skull is completely yellow. Similarly, Py-b=0 is same as black and Py-b=100 is yellow.
Note: Wiercinski was not able to measure all of the traits for each of the skulls. This is due to post-depositional processes which have had a destructive impact on many of the skeletons.
Results The first thing Wiercinski did was to compare the Py-w and Py-b scores of the 6 Mesoamerican cranial series with measures for series from Poland (white), Mongolia (yellow) and Uganda (black). From this he produced two graphs (figs. 2&3) from Wiercinski 1970. I have summarized these frequency graphs in a rough tabular form below. For simplicity I only include what Wiercinski calls the "Olmecoid" series from Tlatilco and Cerro de las Mesas.
In fig. 3 he compares the Mesoamerican series Pb-y scores with series from Uganda (black race) and Mongolia (yellow race) [the results for the Ugandan, "Olmecoid", Mongolian series are reproduced in rough tabular form below]. Similarly, in fig. 2, he compares the Py-w scores of the Mesoamerican series with series from Mongolia (yellow race) and Poland (white race).
In both figs. 2&3 the Mesoamerican series fall in an intermediate position, but overlap at the extremes with the Mongolian, Polish and Ugandan series. It should also be noted that there is also overlap between his Ugandan (black), Mongolian (yellow) and Polish (white) pops.
For Wiercinski this indicates that those Mesoamerican individuals who overlapped with the Ugandan series were black (African), those that overlap with the Mongolian series were yellow (Asian), and those that overlap with the Polish were white (European).
To me, this only serves to point out what other racial studies have found - racial identification of an individual is problematic at best because there is more variability within members of the same race than there is between members of different races [see any introductory anthro. text or book on race for examples].
Finally Wiercinski classifies the skulls into various racial types based on what he calls the procedure of "the Comparative-Morphological Trend of the Polish Anthropological School." Don't ask me what that means, he doesn't describe it in this article but says it is described in an article published in the 38th Congress of Americanists held in Stuttgart in 1968. I couldn't find this article but here's what he reports:
******************************************************************** 2. MY POSTED CRITIQUE OF WIERCINSKI'S STUDY
In article <4rmm25$rk1@artemis.it.luc.edu> cwinter@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A. Winters) writes:
>Cameron Wesson (c-wesson@students.uiuc.edu) wrote: > >: 1. The claim is made that Tlatilco and Monte Alban are Olmec sites. > >: This is untrue. This fact alone would lead me to believe that the person >: [deletions] > > This is highly misleading granted these sites may have been occupied >in preClassic times but there is a clear Olmec period at Tlatilco and >Monte Alban as discussed by Bernal in , and Coe in Jill >Guthrie .
As has been pointed out to you by other posters, there is currently a debate as to what the best definition of Olmec is. Many archaeologists now think there is an "Olmec style" found throughout most of Mesoamerica which is an amalgamation of traits from different regions. These archaeologists reserve the term Olmec to refer to a cultural group living in the Gulf Coast of Mexico during the time period 1500-500 B.C. Bernal's reference is now woefully dated and more recent work in the Valley of Oaxaca shows that certain "Olmec" traits actually appear here earlier than they do in the Olmec Gulf Coast heartland. This is true for other regions of Mesoamerica as well. While Coe might still be sticking to the notion of the diffusion of an Olmec style from a single source, many others have abandoned this notion in favor of one that sees the origin of traits in various areas and its diffusion associated with cultural contacts by multiple societies at a roughly equivalent stage of cultural evolution.
>: 2. Cranial measurements from Tlatilco indicate an African presence. > >: Wrong again. I presented a paper on the burials of Tlatilco at >: the Midwest Mesoamerican meetings in 1993, _Patterns of Association in >: the Burials of San Luis Tlatilco, Mexico_, and I can tell you that many of >: the remains were NOT in the best condition. They were also negatively >: impacted due to the fact that the site was initially discovered by heavy >: excavation by a brick company, rather than through archaeological >: investigation (although subsequent salvage excavations were undertaken). >: Such impacts often destroy fragile human remains, and this was often >: been the case at Tlatilco. Cranial measures are *AT BEST* correct about >: 85% of the time, and that is when ALL of the cranium is available to be >: measured, and the measurements are made by an expert. Remove one or two >: key cranial features and the confidence interval of racial >: classification drops to 70%. Remove three or more cranial features from >: your measurements and you are about as accurate as simply guessing! >: Since the Tlatilco assemblage was not in great shape to begin with, >: there is a *strong* possibility that the initial racial categorization is >: dubious. STRIKE ONE! > >These statements contradict themselves. How can you claim that there are >many Tlatilco skeletal remains that you have not examined that are spread >throughout Mexico, and say that the findings of Wiercinski are incorrect. >You have not examined all the skeletons so you only "know" what YOU found.
Whether Mr. Wasson was able to examine all of the same Tlatilco skulls or not I can't answer, however, Wiercinski himself only worked with a very fragmentary data set. Wiercinski was only able to analyze 76 of the approx. 500 burials from Tlatilco. As Mr. Wasson points out, many of the skulls are not in the best of shape and therefore, Wiercinski was not able to get readings on all his attributes from many of the skulls (Wiercinski 1970).
While you (and Wiercinski) seem to constantly stress the fact that he identified some 13+% of the skulls as being "black" and therefore suggestive of African contacts; you fail to mention some of the other features of his study.
1. Not only did Wiercinski identify "black" skulls he was able to identify the members of no less than 12 different races among the 52 Tlatilco skulls he identified and 15 races among the 36 Monte Alban/Monte Negro skulls he identified (Wiercinski 1970:247)
2. On page 238 Wiercinski mentions that racial types are not necessarily equivalent to populational descent. This means that just because his classification identifies a skull as "black" it doesn't necessarily the person is from Africa. Many studies have demonstrated that there is more variability between members of the same race than there is between members of different races (for example see Lewontin 1972). For example, there are many people who the U.S. gov. classifies as black who nonetheless have many "white" physical characteristics. Similarly, if you look at Wiercinski's fig. 3 you can see that there are some members of his Mongolian (yellow race) sample who have a racial index that is more black than almost half of his Ugandan (black race) sample and vice versa. Racial classification schemes have been shown to be more social than biological constructs (see Shanklin 1994) yet Wiercinski goes on to use it as a good indicator of physical contact.
3. All the "races" he compares the Mesoamerican series to are present day Old World populations. This ignores the possibility that new "racial" types have developed in the New World after colonization. If this is true then its like devising a classification scheme based on 10 breeds of dogs and then taking the skeletons of a new breed and classifying them using the existing scheme. By necessity you will classify them with pre-existing breeds even if they have their own unique set of identifying traits. Interestingly on p. 236-237 Wiercinski does a quick comparison between the Tlatilco series and a native "Hybrid Nahuan type" living in present day Jalapa and Vera Cruz. Surprise, surprise, he says they are "indistinguishable." He claims this is the result of convergent evolution rather than the simpler explanation that they are a genetic continuation.
4. In another article, Wiercinski talked about how his study demonstrated a social & genetic contribution from Shang Chinese and Mediterranean whites as well as blacks (Wiercinski 1969). If this conclusion is correct (and I don't believe it is) why should anyone believe that it was the Africans, not the whites or Chinese, that brought about major cultural shifts. Seems like Wiercinski's study can be used by just about anyone to support any conclusion, except of course the sensible one that new World pops. were able to develop their own culture without outside help.
5. Among the racial groups that Wiercinski identified are a group of "blacks" of the Dongolian race and a group of "whites" of the Armemoid race (Wiercinski 1970:247). Another study of the 78 Tlatilco skulls was able to identify 2 types, one which they classified as typical and the other as different (Vargas G. 1974). When he compared his groups to Wiercinski's he said that Wiercinski's examples of the Dongolan and the Armenoid (remember these are black and white) both belonged to his normal group. Further he says that Wiercinski's finding of 12 races in the Tlatilco series and its implications for the racial makeup of the population is hard to support (Vargas G. 1974:319). So it looks like Wiercinski's findings were not supported by an independent researcher who appears to have worked with the same data set as Wiercinski.
Criticizing Wasson's study as inadequate while praising Wiercinski's own fragmentary data set using questionable assumptions about the nature of human races and typology is ridiculous.
>Moreover you claim that Cyphers excavated the first Olmec skeletons in >1993. This is wrong, Drucker found Olmec skeletons at Veracruz in 1943. >Please refer to M. Pailles "Pampa el Pajon an early Estuarine site >Chiapas Mexico", , >no.44 (1980). Your comments about the lack of skeletons from Olmec sites >prove YOUR significant reading of the literature on the Olmecs
Other posts by myself as well as Mr. Baker demonstrate to you that the Drucker skulls and other skeletons referred to in Pailles are *not* Olmec. You shouldn't be so quick to slight someone else's research when your own is so clearly false on a given topic.
>: 3. Linguistic evidence supports African contacts with the Olmec. > >: Several people have written to the group about the "translation" of Olmec >: celts and their supposed "Mande" connection. Such assertions are similar >: to the translation of Ogum, Pheonecian, and Ruinic writing systems >: throughout the Americas. They are the efforts of an over-productive >: imagination in an attempt to support someone's strongly held ideas (i.e. >: Madjegorie, Book of Mormon). Unfortunately, no one other than the >: original researcher is able to "read" these celts, and the method and >: evidence haven't been shared with other scholars. Science doesn't work >: this way. We don't accept YOUR word that a study indicates "so-and-so", >: when your method and results cannot be replicated without your presence, >: and your evidence is not shared completely with the community of >: scholars. STRIKE ONE! > >I have shared my readings of the Olmec celts to scholars, they have been >ignored. This is to the loss of these scholars who to this day can not >read the entire Mayan script . > >(But I can read every Olmec inscription I >have ever attempted to read. And if you will refer to J. Guthrie's : Cameron Wesson. > >C.A. Winters
Lewontin, R.C. 1972 "The Apportionment of Human Diversity" in Evolutionary Biology vol. 6, T. Dobzhansky et al. eds. New York: Plenum. Pp. 381-398.
Shanklin, Eugenia 1994 Anthropology and Race. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Vargas G., Luis Alberto 1974 "Caracteres Craneanos Discontinuos en la Poblacion de Tlatilco, Mexico" Anales de Antropologia vol. 11, pp. 307-328.
Wiercinski, Andrzcj 1969 "Afinidades Raciales de Algunas Poblaciones Antiguas de Mexico." Anales de INAH, 7a epoca, tomo II, pp. 123-143. 1970 "Inter and Intrapopulational Racial Differentiation of Tlatilco, Cerro de las Mesas, Teotihuacan, Monte Alban and Yucatan Maya." Proceedings of the 39th International Congress of Americanists.
*********************************************************************** 3. MY FINAL ATTEMPT AT REASONING WITH MR. WINTERS
Mr. Winter writes: >Doug Weller (dweller@ramtops.demon.co.uk) wrote: >: But you haven't done that. Perhaps you haven't seen the posts >: rebutting your argument. I certainly haven't seen any replies from >: you to them. > >: Doug Weller Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated > >I have read the post, they have not rebutted my arguments. Both Nancy >McNelly and Peter van Rossum, acknowledge their disagreement with the >findings of Wiercinski, yet they show that he is a well respected scientist >and provide more references to his work. We can all disagree over a matter >and never really change our views.
Mr. Winter,
You seem to have missed the full import of the posts which have been written so I will make one last attempt to explain them to you. You say you're a seeker of the truth, so I bring you these ten truths:
1. I was the only one (yourself included) who actually made an attempt to ascertain the credentials of Wiercinski. I found that he has published other material in peer-reviewed physical anthropological journals. Based on this I concluded that he shouldn't be dismissed out of hand as a crank since at least some of his research has scientific merit. Whether or not he is "well-respected" by his peers I cannot say.
2. At present there is *no* evidence of the use of metal by *any* Preclassic culture in Mesoamerica. This tends to argue against the idea of significant contacts between Mesoamerican Preclassic cultures and any culture which had developed metallurgy by this time.
3. The burials cited by yourself in Pailles' 1980 publication are *not* Olmec burials. Your assertion that Dr. Diehl lied is incorrect.
4. Many Mesoamerican archaeologists today believe the Olmec style and the Olmec people who lived in the Gulf Coast of Mexico 1500-500 B.C. are *not* equivalent. Therefore just because "Olmec style" objects are found at a site, it is not conclusive evidence of direct contact with the people living in the Gulf Coast region. Therefore, it is controversial to conclude that Tlatilco is an Olmec site. Here it becomes a matter of definition as to what the term Olmec means - see Grove's and Diehl's papers in "Regional Perspectives on the Olmec"
5. As stated by Mr. Baker, Monte Alban is *not* an Olmec site. Bernal's book is excellent but now somewhat dated. On this matter, further research showed him to be incorrect. Joyce Marcus and Kent Flannery's 1996 book "Zapotec Civilization" is an excellent summary of current archaeological knowledge on the Prehispanic Valley of Oaxaca.
6. The term race as applied to humans has *no* genetic/biological basis. To better understand this, do yourself a favor and pick up any recent Intro to Anthropology text to read the section on race - its very interesting.
7. Because of point 6, it is *never* possible to use cranial measurements, skeletal measurements, hair samples, blood samples, the "look" of colossal heads, etc., to "prove for certain" that African peoples traveled to the New World. True scientists use many lines of evidence to decide which of competing arguments is best supported by the data - they *never* prove anything for certain.
8. In our posts, Ms. McNelly and I did not "acknowledge" our disagreement with Wiercinski. Based on points 6 & 7, we *demonstrated* that his study is methodologically and theoretically flawed. This directly rebuts your use of it as evidence supporting your position.
9. The flaws in Wiercinski's research are so profound that it *cannot* be used to support the conclusion that there were skeletons of recent African descent in the burials of Tlatilco, Oaxaca or Cerro de las Mesas.
10. Mesoamerican archaeologists are *not* using their position to "maintain the status quo" or "hide the truth". The reason virtually all of them reject the idea of significant Old World-New World contacts is because they don't see any evidence for it.
> All I have tried to due in this matter is present evidence from the >finding of scholars relative to skeletons in ancient America. I believe I >accomplished this goal and in the process we all had a good discussion. I >have learned much from this posting and I hope other readers have had >similar results.
I hope you demonstrate what you've learned by acknowledging the truth of the points listed above (or explain why they are wrong). If you wish to continue studying the Olmec, more power to you. But please keep an open mind to the idea that Native American populations independently produced complex civilizations by their own efforts - just as African peoples produced wonders by theirs.
If you truly are a truth seeker, you will abandon the statement that Wiercinski's research "proves there were Africans in Olmec sites." Please pass this info on to any other Afrocentrists you know.
I would also suggest that in the future when you read a secondary account of an article which claims to "prove" anything, you go back to the original source and read it with a critical eye - even if it supports your position.
>A discussion on the internet is not a war. It is an >exchange of information. We will disagree, get over excited, and look >silly at times. But we must all remember that knowledge can only advance >if we all attempt to be civil in all matters. Take Care.
On this point we are in total agreement. I think that everyone in this group has behaved in a very civil manner. At the very least we've all learned who Wiercinski is and why his study is flawed.
posted
The above post is a lie. It does not reflect the debate I had with this fellow. It is very one-sided and makes it appear that Wiercinski's discovery of African skeletons was false.
This was not the case. Back in 1996 when we discussed this issue Doug Weller, would ban me from his Archaeological discussion group so it would appear that I did not respond to the anti-African Olmec advocates. I was banned from the group so I could not respond to the above. Below I will explain why the study is flawed and fails to dispute any of the findings of Wiercinski.
African skeletons among Olmecs
There is archaeological evidence for African Blacks in Mexico [9] Numerous African skeletons have been discovered at ancient sites in Mexico. Constance Irwin and Dr. Wiercinski (1972) have both reported that skeletal remains of Africans have been found in Mexico. Constance Irwin, in Fair Gods and Stone Faces, says that anthropologist see "distinct signs of Negroid ancestry in many a New World skull...."
Dr. Wiercinski (1972) claims that some of the Olmecs were of African origin. He supports this claim with skeletal evidence from several Olmec sites where he found skeletons that were analogous to the West African type black.
Many Olmec skulls show cranial deformations according to Pailles, yet Wiercinski (1972b) was able to determine the ethnic origins of the Olmecs. Marquez (1956, 179-80) made it clear that a common trait of the African skulls found in Mexico include marked prognathousness ,prominent cheek bones are also mentioned [10]. Fronto-occipital deformation among the Olmec is not surprising because cranial deformations was common among the Mande speaking people until fairly recently (Desplanges, 1906).
Many African skeletons have been found in Mexico. Carlo Marquez (1956, pp.179-180) claimed that these skeletons indicated marked pronathousness and prominent cheek bones. A. Wiercinski , used classic diagnostic traits determined by crniometric and cranioscopic methods using the Polish Comparative-Morphological School skeletal reference collection (SRC), found that 13.5% of the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4,5% of the skeletons from Cerro de las Mesas were of West Africans. Diehl and Coe (1996) admitted that the inspiration of Olmec Horizon A, common to San Lorenzo's iniitial phase has been found at Tlatilco. R.A. Diehl claims that some many skeletons have been recently found at Tlatilco, that some archarologists believe the site was a necropolis [11] Moreover, the pottery from this site is engraved with Olmec signs.
To determine the racial heritage of the ancient Olmecs, Dr. Wiercinski (1972b) used classic diagnostic traits determined by craniometric and cranioscopic methods. These measurements were then compared to a series of three crania sets from Poland, Mongolia and Uganda to represent the three racial categories of mankind.To determine the racial heritage of the ancient Olmecs, Dr. Wiercinski (1972b) used classic diagnostic traits determined by craniometric and cranioscopic methods. These measurements were then compared to a series of three crania sets from Poland, Mongolia and Uganda to represent the three racial categories of mankind.The only European type recorded in this table is the Alpine group which represents only 1.9 percent of the crania from Tlatilco.The other alleged "white" crania from Wiercinski's typology of Olmec crania, represent the Dongolan (19.2 percent), Armenoid (7.7 percent), Armenoid-Bushman (3.9 percent) and Anatolian (3.9 percent). The Dongolan, Anatolian and Armenoid terms are euphemisms for the so-called "Brown Race" "Dynastic Race", "Hamitic Race",and etc., which racist Europeans claimed were the founders of civilization in Africa.Keita (1993,1996)[12], Carlson and Gerven (1979) [13]and MacGaffey (1970) [14]have made it clear that these people were Africans or Negroes with so-called 'caucasian features' resulting from genetic drift and microevolution (Keita, 1996; Poe, 1997). This would mean that the racial composition of 26.9 percent of the crania found at Tlatilco and 9.1 percent of crania from Cerro de las Mesas were of African origin.The races recorded by Wiercinski are based on the Polish Comparative-Morphological School (PCMS). The PCMS terms are misleading. As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks. This is obvious when we look at the iconographic and sculptural evidence used by Wiercinski (1972b) to support his conclusions.Wiercinski (1972b) compared the physiognomy of the Olmecs to corresponding examples of Olmec sculptures and bas-reliefs on the stelas. For example, Wiercinski (1972b, p.160) makes it clear that the clossal Olmec heads represent the Dongolan type. It is interesting to note that the empirical frequencies of the Dongolan type at Tlatilco is .231, this was more than twice as high as Wiercinski's theorectical figure of .101, for the presence of Dongolans at Tlatilco.The other possible African type found at Tlatilco and Cerro were the Laponoid group. The Laponoid group represents the Austroloid-Melanesian type of (Negro) Pacific Islander, not the Mongolian type. If we add together the following percent of the Olmecs represented in Table 2, by the Laponoid (21.2%), Equatorial (13.5), and Armenoid (18.3) groups we can assume that at least 53 percent of the Olmecs at Tlatilco were Africans or Blacks. Using the same figures recorded in Table 2 for Cerro,we observe that 40.8 percent of these Olmecs would have been classified as Black if they lived in contemporary America.
Rossum (1996)[15] has criticied the work of Wiercinski because he found that not only blacks, but whites were also present in ancient America. To support this view he (1) claims that Wiercinski was wrong because he found that Negro/Black people lived in Shang China, and 2) that he compared ancient skeletons to modern Old World people.First, it was not surprising that Wiercinski found affinities between African and ancient Chinese populations, because everyone knows that many Negro/African /Oceanic skeletons (referred to as Loponoid by the Polish school) have been found in ancient China [16]. These Blacks were spread throughout Kwangsi, Kwantung, Szechwan, Yunnan and Pearl River delta.Skeletons from Liu-Chiang and Dawenkou, early Neolithic sites found in China, were also Negro. Moreover, the Dawenkou skeletons show skull deformation and extraction of teeth customs, analogous to customs among Blacks in Polynesia and Africa.
Secondly, Rossum argues that Wiercinski was wrong about Blacks in ancient America because a comparison of modern native American skeletal material and the ancient Olmec skeletal material indicate no admixture. The study of Vargas and Rossum are flawed. They are flawed because the skeletal reference collection they used in their comparison of Olmec skeletal remains and modern Amerindian propulations because the Mexicans have been mixing with African and European populations since the 1500's. The SRC Rossom used included skeletal material that was labled modern Mexican in his study.
Wiercinski on the otherhand, compared his SRC to an unmixed European and African sample. This comparison avoided the use of Amerindian and Mestizo skeletal material that is clearly mixed with Africans and Europeans, in much the same way as the Afro-American people he discussed in his essay who have acquired "white" features since mixing with whites due to the slave trade.A. von Wuthenau (1980) [17], and Wiercinski (1972b) highlight the numerous art pieces depicting the African or Black variety which made up the Olmec people[18].
This re-anlysis of the Olmec skeletal meterial from Tlatilco and Cerro [19] , which correctly identifies Armenoid, Dongolan and Loponoid as euphmisms for "Negro" make it clear that a substantial number of the Olmecs were Blacks support the art evidence and writing which point to an African origin for Olmec civilization.Physical anthropologist use many terms to refer to the African type represented by Olmec skeletal remains including Armenoid, Dongolan, Loponoid and Equatorial. The evidence of African skeletons found at many Olmec sites, and their trading partners from the Old World found by Dr. Andrzej Wiercinski prove the cosmopolitan nature of Olmec society.
1. Wiercinski, A. (1972a) "An anthropological study on the origin of "Olmecs", Swiatowit, 33, p. 143-174.
^ Copy of front page of Wiercinski (1972b) work at Afrocentric website.
Keita (1993,1996)Keita,S.O.Y. (1993). Studies and comments on ancient Egyptian biological relationships, History in Africa, 20, 129-131;
Keita,S.O.Y.& Kittles,R.A. (1997). The persistence of racial thinking and the myth of racial divergence, American Anthropologist, 99 (3), 534-544. Carlson,D. and Van Gerven,D.P. (1979). Diffussion, biological determinism and bioculdtural adaptation in the Nubian corridor,American Anthropologist, 81, 561-580.
MacGaffey,W.(1970). Concepts of race in Northeast Africa. In J.D. Fage and R.A. Oliver, Papers in African Prehistory (pp.99-115), Camridge: Cambridge University Press.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The above post is a lie. It does not reflect the debate I had with this fellow. It is very one-sided and makes it appear that Wiercinski's discovery of African skeletons was false.
Clyde,
Do you know the Wiercinski is considered a very poor scholar by the academics?
quote: Therefore these authors grossly underestimated the antiquity of Mesoamerican civilizations, used a distorted periodization, and by default drew cultural comparisons between ancient Egypt and the Mayas and Aztecs (not the Olmecs). Van Sertima (pp. 87-88, 137) cites the Polish physical anthropologist Andrzej Wiercinski, who used a typology based on 16 essentialist “pure racial types,” to prove the presence of Africans at Tlatilco. As long ago as 1962, Wiercinski’s methodology was described as grossly obsolete, fallacious, and based on circular reasoning by Stanley Garn, Theodosius Dobzhanski, and Jean Hiernaux among others
Is about the book of your idol, Ivan Van Sertima, "Early Americas revisited". Well, they show the book of Ivan is not worth the paper on which is printed.
posted
^You have not posted any information from these articles which dispute Wiercinski's findings. They are speculations not supported by any measurements. Where is your discussion of the articles cited above?
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde, if any of your findings were valid they would be accepted by the mainstream, let alone in peer-review.
The fact of the matter is you are not taken seriously in academia at all and for the reasons made known to you a long time ago.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
It is either something totally bogus or something true but distorted/misinterpreted. As is the modus operandi of Clyde Winters.
Printer-friendly view of this topic