Apparently Mayans believe their script is the same as some glyphs found in Egypt. This European scholar however says the glyphs were not related to ancient dynastic Egyptian.
More importantly though is the theory that it may be a predynastic form of African script.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The first researcher to recognize that the Olmec writing was Mande was Leo Wiener, in Africa and the discovery of America. He recognized that the writing on the Tuxtla statuette was written in Mande characters.
Here we have three examples of Mande writing the first picture is writing from a modern site.
Picture 2 is writing on the Tuxtla statuette from Mexico.
Picture 3 writing during the chariot age.
Note the symbol made up of squares with dots inside.
.
Mojarra Stela .
.
.
.
Tuxtla Statuette
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The archaeological evidence suggest that the Olmec "miraculously appear on American soil".
Some researchers claim that I am wrongly ruling out an “indigenous revolution” for the origin of the Olmec civilization. This is their opinion—the archaeological evidence, not I, suggest that the founders of the Olmec civilization were not “indigenous” people.
In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement”Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects”.
M. Coe, writing in Regional Perspective on the Olmecs (1989), (ed.) by Sharer and Grove, observed that “ on the contrary, the evidence although negative, is that the Olmec style of art, and Olmec engineering ability suddenly appeared full fledged from about 1200 BC”.
Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J.E. Cark and M.E. Pye,makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of the Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become Olmecs, or to become like the Olmecs” (p.234). Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries” (pp.245-46).
Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs:America’s first civilization (2005), wrote “ The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue” (p.25).
Pool (17-18), in Olmec Archaeology and early MesoAmerica (2007), argues that continuity exist between the Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico “[even]though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin for Olmec culture (Diehl & Coe 1995:150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32; Coe and Diehl 1980a:150)”.
Pool admits (p.95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo, who reported dramatic change in ceramic type and [b] argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p.150).”
The Olmec came from Saharan Africa. They spoke a Mande language. Evidence of this connection comes from the fact:
1) both groups used jade to make their tools.
2) both groups made large stone heads. Here is an African head dating back to the same period.
3) The Mande came to Mexico in boats from the Sahara down the ancient Niger River that formerly emptied in the Sahara or they could have made their way to the Atlantic Ocean down the Senegal River.
4) The Olmec writing points back to a Mande origin in Africa.
.
5) Olmec skeletons that are African.
6) Similar white, and red-and-black pottery.
7) Introduction of the 13 month 20 day calendar.
8) Mayan adoption of the Mande term for writing.
9)Mande religious and culture terms adopted by Mayan people.
. Check out my video on the name for the Olmecs: Xi
The evidence presented by these authors make it clear that the Olmec introduced a unique culture to Mesoamerica that was adopted by the Mesoamericans. As these statements make it clear that was no continuity between pre-Olmec cultures and the Olmec culture.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
After Neil Steede and I deciphered the ‘Salazer Brick’ from Comalcalco made it clear that you can read the Mayan script based on Olmec—while reading the inscriptions in the Mayan language. To test this theory I deciphered some the Ek-Chuah Black Trader god from the Tro-Crotensiana Codex.
It is interesting to note that the boys drilling are depicted as Blacks in the Dresden and Tro-Cotesianus Codexes.
To read the Mayan inscriptions I break down the Olmec syllabic signs which make up the Mayan hierogyphs. Once these signs are given a phonetic value I read them in Yucatec Maya.
Below we will discuss some of these inscriptions.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
To read the Mayan inscriptions I break down the Olmec syllabic signs which make up the Mayan hierogyphs. Once these signs are given a phonetic value I read them in Yucatec Maya.
As you can see when you look at the syllabic nature of many Mayan hieroglyphs the Codexs tell us much more than dates.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde do you have location, date and source link for this?
Also what is the height and/or weight of this and location, link?
also you said:
The Olmec came from Saharan Africa. They spoke a Mande language. Evidence of this connection comes from the fact:
1) both groups used jade to make their tools.
jade tools in Africa? Do you have documentaion of this? Are you talking about Amazonite? I thought in Africa that is found in the South
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:See about from 51:30. Apparently Mayans believe their script is the same as some glyphs found in Egypt. This European scholar however says the glyphs were not related to ancient dynastic Egyptian.
Try as I might I couldn't see the glyph the vid quality was very bad nor could I find it on the net no matter the combination of key words but interesting vid from the POV of a hyper-diffusionist..he is in the same direction of Dr Winters.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: how about the sources of the two photos?
Better yet, how about more valid evidence. No offense to Dana, but I am more than skeptical to claims of Egyptian or other African influence on Native American civilizations of Meso-America. This is not to say there was no contact between Africans and Americans pre-Columbus times as this possibility is still open.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe it is quite possible that Africans could have reached the Americas. I mean we have documented evidence of a Malian emperor saying he wanted to explore the Atlantic. And not only that but Muslim Africans already knew the world was a sphere. Its unfair to just dismiss the possibilities of Africans discovering the new world before Columbus as 'Afrocentric'. I mean the Vikings were able to reach the New world.
BUT! It is idiotic to say that the Olmecs were African or that Africans influenced ore Columbian American civilization.
If Africans and Native Americans had contact...What would that contact be like?
Posts: 1135 | From: Top secret | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: I believe it is quite possible that Africans could have reached the Americas. I mean we have documented evidence of a Malian emperor saying he wanted to explore the Atlantic. And not only that but Muslim Africans already knew the world was a sphere. Its unfair to just dismiss the possibilities of Africans discovering the new world before Columbus as 'Afrocentric'. I mean the Vikings were able to reach the New world.
BUT! It is idiotic to say that the Olmecs were African or that Africans influenced ore Columbian American civilization.
If Africans and Native Americans had contact...What would that contact be like?
LOL. Why is it idiotic? There is no evidence that the Olmec existed in Mexico before 1200-1100 BC.
The archaeological evidence suggest that the Olmec "miraculously appear on American soil".
Some researchers claim that I am wrongly ruling out an “indigenous revolution” for the origin of the Olmec civilization. This is their opinion—the archaeological evidence, not I, suggest that the founders of the Olmec civilization were not “indigenous” people.
In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement”Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects”.
M. Coe, writing in Regional Perspective on the Olmecs (1989), (ed.) by Sharer and Grove, observed that “ on the contrary, the evidence although negative, is that the Olmec style of art, and Olmec engineering ability suddenly appeared full fledged from about 1200 BC”.
Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J.E. Cark and M.E. Pye,makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of the Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become Olmecs, or to become like the Olmecs” (p.234). Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries” (pp.245-46).
Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs:America’s first civilization (2005), wrote “ The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue” (p.25).
Pool (17-18), in Olmec Archaeology and early MesoAmerica (2007), argues that continuity exist between the Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico “[even]though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin for Olmec culture (Diehl & Coe 1995:150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32; Coe and Diehl 1980a:150)”.
Pool admits (p.95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo, who reported dramatic change in ceramic type and [b] argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p.150).”
The Olmec came from Saharan Africa. They spoke a Mande language. Evidence of this connection comes from the fact:
1) both groups used jade to make their tools.
2) both groups made large stone heads. Here is an African head dating back to the same period.
3) The Mande came to Mexico in boats from the Sahara down the ancient Niger River that formerly emptied in the Sahara or they could have made their way to the Atlantic Ocean down the Senegal River.
4) The Olmec writing points back to a Mande origin in Africa.
.
5) Olmec skeletons that are African.
6) Similar white, and red-and-black pottery.
7) Introduction of the 13 month 20 day calendar.
8) Mayan adoption of the Mande term for writing.
9)Mande religious and culture terms adopted by Mayan people.
. Check out my video on the name for the Olmecs: Xi
The evidence presented by these authors make it clear that the Olmec introduced a unique culture to Mesoamerica that was adopted by the Mesoamericans. As these statements make it clear that was no continuity between pre-Olmec cultures and the Olmec culture.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
I am already knowledgeable about your beliefs on the connection of Mayan and African scripts, Dr. Winters.
I was wondering about the proof that the script found in Egypt and shown in this video was Mayan.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: how about the sources of the two photos?
Better yet, how about more valid evidence. No offense to Dana, but I am more than skeptical to claims of Egyptian or other African influence on Native American civilizations of Meso-America. This is not to say there was no contact between Africans and Americans pre-Columbus times as this possibility is still open.
Djehuti - I am not meaning to be offensive either, but how did the internal dimensions of certain monumental structures down there in Central America come out to be to identical to those in Egyptian pyramids and how are identical similar ceremonial rituals acquired. I think you need to read Dr. Van Sertima's book on the subject carefully. I agree there was contact but I also feel that the chances of such things occurring are a million to one. I don't know if it was necessarily Egyptians that impacted the biology and culture of people down there but some Nilotic population apparently did. And there were definitely a percentage of Negroid and some have said both "hamitic" and negroid found among the remains of the earliest Olmecs near the pyramid complexes.
The only other answer would be some UFO connection which I'm not up to accepting at this point.lol! There is nothing wrong with or its not a matter of seeing such people as are found in Central America - some of whom are in fact still the color of Africans - or Polynesians as derived from both Asian and African people. They BOTH contributed to those populations and there was probably some early impact on those civilizations by an African or Nilotic-affiliated group. That doesn't mean there were not also indigenous Asian blacks already in parts of Central or South America, or that such people were not settled in Polynesia already.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: I believe it is quite possible that Africans could have reached the Americas. I mean we have documented evidence of a Malian emperor saying he wanted to explore the Atlantic. And not only that but Muslim Africans already knew the world was a sphere. Its unfair to just dismiss the possibilities of Africans discovering the new world before Columbus as 'Afrocentric'. I mean the Vikings were able to reach the New world.
BUT! It is idiotic to say that the Olmecs were African or that Africans influenced ore Columbian American civilization.
If Africans and Native Americans had contact...What would that contact be like?
Yes people should definitely not being saying the Olmecs were Africans because it is clear the majority of the skeletons there are not African. But unfortunately some people feel one can disregard forensic and physical anthropological evidence nowadays.
Now, were they "influenced" by the negroid peoples whose crania and skeletal evidence does IN FACT and UNQUESTIONABLY show up amidst some of the sites of the earliest Central American pyramids connected with this culture - that or the extent of that influence is still open for consideration and most certainly plausible.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^I don't believe you know what you are writing about. The Olmec were the people living along the Gulf coast at LaVenta, Tres Zapotes and San Lorenzo.
The people called olmecs found at other sites are called colonial Olmecs, since their civilization was influenced by the African Olmecs.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Son of Ra: I believe it is quite possible that Africans could have reached the Americas. I mean we have documented evidence of a Malian emperor saying he wanted to explore the Atlantic. And not only that but Muslim Africans already knew the world was a sphere. Its unfair to just dismiss the possibilities of Africans discovering the new world before Columbus as 'Afrocentric'. I mean the Vikings were able to reach the New world.
BUT! It is idiotic to say that the Olmecs were African or that Africans influenced ore Columbian American civilization.
If Africans and Native Americans had contact...What would that contact be like?
Yes people should definitely not being saying the Olmecs were Africans because it is clear the majority of the skeletons there are not African. But unfortunately some people feel one can disregard forensic and physical anthropological evidence nowadays.
Now, were they "influenced" by the negroid peoples whose crania and skeletal evidence does IN FACT and UNQUESTIONABLY show up amidst some of the sites of the earliest Central American pyramids connected with this culture - that or the extent of that influence is still open for consideration and most certainly plausible.
There is no question the Olmecs, the people who founded civilization at Tres Zapotes, San Lorenzo and LaVenta were Africans as seen from the art, writing and religion.
Little has been done to analyze Olmec skeletons from these sites. But there is craniometric evidence supporting an African/negro for the vast majority of Olmec skeletons. Dr. Wiercinski (1972) claims that the 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. Wiercinski discovered that 13.5 percent of the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4.5 percent of the skeletons from Cerro de las Mesas were Africoid (Rensberger,1988; Wiercinski, 1972; Wiercinski & Jairazbhoy 1975).
Diehl and Coe (1995, 12) of Harvard University have made it clear that until a skeleton of an African is found on an Olmec site he will not accept the art evidence that the were Africans among the Olmecs. This is rather surprising because 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 (Pailles, 1980), 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. Fronto-occipital deformation among the Olmec is not surprising because cranial deformations was common among the Mande speaking people until fairly recently (Desplanges, 1906).
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. In Table 1, we have the racial composition of the Olmec skulls. 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.
In Table 2, we record the racial composition of the Olmec according to the Wiercinski (1972b) study. The races recorded in this table 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 emperical 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) 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 see: Kwang-chih Chang The Archaeology of ancient China (1976,1977, p.76,1987, pp.64,68). 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. This has left many components of these Old World people within and among Mexican Amerindians.
The iconography of the classic Olmec and Mayan civilization show no correspondence in facial features. But many contemporary Maya and other Amerind groups show African characteristics and DNA. Underhill, et al (1996) found that the Mayan people have an African Y chromosome. This would explain the "puffy" faces of contemporary Amerinds, which are incongruent with the Mayan type associated with classic Mayan sculptures and stelas.
Wiercinski on the otherhand, compared his SRC to an unmixed European and African sample. This comparison avoided the use of 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), and Wiercinski (1972b) highlight the numerous art pieces depicting the African or Black variety which made up the Olmec people. This re-anlysis of the Olmec skeletal meterial from Tlatilco and Cerro, 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.
In conclusion, the Olmec people were called Xi. They did not speak a Mixe-Zoque language they spoke a Mande language, which is the substratum language for many Mexican languages.
The Olmec came from Saharan Africa 3200 years ago.They came in boats which are depicted in the Izapa Stela no.5, in twelve migratory waves. These Proto-Olmecs belonged to seven clans which served as the base for the Olmec people.
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. This skeletal evidence explains the discovery of many African tribes in Mexico and Central America when Columbus discovered the Americas (de Quatrefages, 1836).
The skeletal material from Tlatilco and Cerro de las Mesas and evidence that the Olmecs used an African writing to inscribe their monuments and artifacts, make it clear that Africans were a predominant part of the Olmec population. These Olmecs constructed complex pyramids and large sculptured monuments weighing tons. The Maya during the Pre-Classic period built pyramids over the Olmec pyramids to disguise the Olmec origin of these pyramids.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: ^^^I don't believe you know what you are writing about. The Olmec were the people living along the Gulf coast at LaVenta, Tres Zapotes and San Lorenzo.
The people called olmecs found at other sites are called colonial Olmecs, since their civilization was influenced by the African Olmecs.
.
Before i say something that might set you off Dr. Winters please answer the following question. Believe I am not trying to be argumentative here. "Little has been done to analyze Olmec skeletons from these sites. But there is craniometric evidence supporting an African/negro for the vast majority of Olmec skeletons. Dr. Wiercinski (1972) claims that the 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. Wiercinski discovered that 13.5 percent of the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4.5 percent of the skeletons from Cerro de las Mesas were Africoid (Rensberger,1988; Wiercinski, 1972; Wiercinski & Jairazbhoy 1975)."
I'm not trying to be smart or funny but i'm having again some problem following your ideas. Is this - the above - what you are using to support your claim that the vast majority of Olmecs were of African origin?
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
"As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks."
Lol! I am the one who doesn't know what I am talking about when you keep lumping Armenoids who according to all physical anthropologists in any book European large nosed brachycephalic WHITE SKINNED people with equatorial groups then again I have nothing more to say to you. They DO NOT use the term "Armenoid" for black Africans. Anyone can check right now and see that.
Please don't respond with such SILLY nonsense again cause you take away any integrity that you would have had from learning about the black physical types in Asia found BY EUROPEANS.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Physical anthropologist use many terms to refer to the African type represented by Olmec skeletal remains including Armenoid, Dongolan, Loponoid and Equatorial. The photo of the last Aztec couple and evidence of African skeletons found at many Olmec sites described as Armenoid by Wiercinski and Chan, and their trading partners from the Old World found by Dr. Andrzej Wiercinski prove the cosmopolitan nature of Olmec society. This skeletal evidence explains the discovery of many African tribes in Mexico and Central America when Columbus discovered the Americas (de Quatrefages, 1836).
Armenoid refers to negro or African people. The skeletal material from Tlatilco which has been described as Armenoid make it clear that Africans were a predominant part of the Olmec population. These Olmecs constructed complex pyramids and large sculptured monuments weighing tons. The Maya during the Pre-Classic period built pyramids over the Olmec pyramids to disguise the Olmec origin of these pyramids.
.
Tlatilco Dancer
.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: "As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks."
Lol! I am the one who doesn't know what I am talking about when you keep lumping Armenoids who according to all physical anthropologists in any book European large nosed brachycephalic WHITE SKINNED people with equatorial groups then again I have nothing more to say to you. They DO NOT use the term "Armenoid" for black Africans. Anyone can check right now and see that.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: "As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks."
Lol! I am the one who doesn't know what I am talking about when you keep lumping Armenoids who according to all physical anthropologists in any book European large nosed brachycephalic WHITE SKINNED people with equatorial groups then again I have nothing more to say to you. They DO NOT use the term "Armenoid" for black Africans. Anyone can check right now and see that.
Please don't respond with such SILLY nonsense again cause you take away any integrity that you would have had from learning about the black physical types in Asia found BY EUROPEANS.
Indeed Dana. SO called "Armenoids" have long been viewed as "Caucasian" - quote:
”... distinguished three “short-headed (brachycephalic) southern Europeoids”: the Adriatic (or Dinaric) race, the Armenoid race, and the Pamiro-Ferganian race. These categories, which went back to Deniker and Ripleu at the turn of the twentieth century, place Caucasian peoples in the "Armenoid race." --Bruce David Baum The rise and fall of the Caucasian race 2006 Page 228
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
^^^ and because of dominant genes the Bushman half dominates the Armenian and makes him all African in type
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Physical anthropologist use many terms to refer to the African type represented by Olmec skeletal remains including Armenoid, Dongolan, Loponoid and Equatoria
quote:Armenoid refers to negro or African people.
Agh. Clyde.
Yes, he's so dumb he can't even read typological craniometric data.
Clyde writes:
"Dr. Wiercinski (1972) claims that the 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."
Truth: NONE of the racial types Wiercinski identified are analogous to the "West African type black". Go check Wierckinsi's study for yourself.
Clyde writes:
"Wiercinski discovered that 13.5 percent of the skeletons from Tlatilco and 4.5 percent of the skeletons from Cerro de las Mesas were Africoid (Wiercinski & Jairazbhoy 1975)"
Truth: The 13.5% and 4.5% figure is a reference to the racial component, not racial type. For example of the 13.5%, 0%, yes zilch, manifested metrically as an actual "Black" racial type. Yes, you read that right. Wiercinski did not find a single "Black" skull among the Olmecs. Clyde cannot read Wiercinski's data properly, he's a clown.
Clyde writes:
"Wiercinski (1972b) was able to determine the ethnic origins of the Olmecs"
Truth: Wierciski's typology is diametrically opposed to ethnic origins. Quote: "the concept of individual races (individual typology) which utilises the notion of the racial type to denote a group of human individuals irrespective their populational descent" (Wiercinski, 1975). Get that? "irrespective their populational descent"...
I could go on, but it would be a waste of my own time. Clyde is an academic fraud, a liar, and as shown here, cannot read scientific data.
-- If you are an "Afrocentric" yourself, you should be worried. Clyde is clearly some plant in your movement.
Btw, Wiercinski HIMSELF in the study Clyde quotes describes the Armenoid as "White [variety]".
posted
Let me point out: I own all of Wiercinski's papers and have been translating/posting them online since 2010 [including his anthropometric studies on Egypt]. Clyde has read none of them properly, doesn't understand them, and also distorts them.
Clyde's other errors/gaffes:
(a) "because everyone knows that many Negro/African /Oceanic skeletons (referred to as Loponoid by the Polish school)"
Erm no. It falls under "Yellow" [Mongoloid], nothing to do with "Blacks". Further he can't even spell it right, its Lapponoid not "Loponoid".
(b) "The only European type recorded in this table is the Alpine group which represents only 1.9 percent of the crania from Tlatilco."
What an epic fail. lol. The only racial type Clyde attributes to leukoderms, under Wiercinski is in fact a White-Yellow transitional, not white. Most 20th century Polish typologists did not consider Alpines to be "White", but a mixed Caucasoid-Mongoloid [hence explaining the wider nasal index etc].
Can Clyde get anything right?
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Physical anthropologist use many terms to refer to the African type represented by Olmec skeletal remains including Armenoid, Dongolan, Loponoid and Equatorial. The photo of the last Aztec couple and evidence of African skeletons found at many Olmec sites described as Armenoid by Wiercinski and Chan, and their trading partners from the Old World found by Dr. Andrzej Wiercinski prove the cosmopolitan nature of Olmec society. This skeletal evidence explains the discovery of many African tribes in Mexico and Central America when Columbus discovered the Americas (de Quatrefages, 1836).
Armenoid refers to negro or African people. The skeletal material from Tlatilco which has been described as Armenoid make it clear that Africans were a predominant part of the Olmec population. These Olmecs constructed complex pyramids and large sculptured monuments weighing tons. The Maya during the Pre-Classic period built pyramids over the Olmec pyramids to disguise the Olmec origin of these pyramids.
.
Tlatilco Dancer
.
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: "As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks."
Lol! I am the one who doesn't know what I am talking about when you keep lumping Armenoids who according to all physical anthropologists in any book European large nosed brachycephalic WHITE SKINNED people with equatorial groups then again I have nothing more to say to you. They DO NOT use the term "Armenoid" for black Africans. Anyone can check right now and see that.
Last Aztec
Note the big nose.
Tlatilco Armenoid
Need I say more.
.
4 Icon 1 posted 06-06-2013 04:50 AM Profile for Clyde Winters Author's Homepage Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote Physical anthropologist use many terms to refer to the African type represented by Olmec skeletal remains including Armenoid, Dongolan, Loponoid and Equatorial. The photo of the last Aztec couple and evidence of African skeletons found at many Olmec sites described as Armenoid by Wiercinski and Chan, and their trading partners from the Old World found by Dr. Andrzej Wiercinski prove the cosmopolitan nature of Olmec society. This skeletal evidence explains the discovery of many African tribes in Mexico and Central America when Columbus discovered the Americas (de Quatrefages, 1836).
"Armenoid refers to negro or African people."
I give up! OK you win! "Armenoid" people named by anthropologists for inhabitants of Armenia refers to negro or African people. Western Turkey is part of Mesopotamia and Tres Zapotes is not in Central Americ, Mande were pygmy kushites! What's more is the Berbers spoke a Germanic language. Whatever you say! After all you are doctor!
I'm just sure as h_ _ _ not going to be driven crazy by arguing over it. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Let me point out: I own all of Wiercinski's papers and have been translating/posting them online since 2010 [including his anthropometric studies on Egypt]. Clyde has read none of them properly, doesn't understand them, and also distorts them.
Clyde's other errors/gaffes:
(a) "because everyone knows that many Negro/African /Oceanic skeletons (referred to as Loponoid by the Polish school)"
Erm no. It falls under "Yellow" [Mongoloid], nothing to do with "Blacks". Further he can't even spell it right, its Lapponoid not "Loponoid".
(b) "The only European type recorded in this table is the Alpine group which represents only 1.9 percent of the crania from Tlatilco."
What an epic fail. lol. The only racial type Clyde attributes to leukoderms, under Wiercinski is in fact a White-Yellow transitional, not white. Most 20th century Polish typologists did not consider Alpines to be "White", but a mixed Caucasoid-Mongoloid [hence explaining the wider nasal index etc].
Can Clyde get anything right?
Only half of what you say is right and if you think these people found in Tlatilco that looked like this were not whta are normally called "black" and "negroids" than you are as crazy as the doctor you are cricizing. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Let me point out: I own all of Wiercinski's papers and have been translating/posting them online since 2010 [including his anthropometric studies on Egypt]. Clyde has read none of them properly, doesn't understand them, and also distorts them.
Clyde's other errors/gaffes:
(a) "because everyone knows that many Negro/African /Oceanic skeletons (referred to as Loponoid by the Polish school)"
Erm no. It falls under "Yellow" [Mongoloid], nothing to do with "Blacks". Further he can't even spell it right, its Lapponoid not "Loponoid".
(b) "The only European type recorded in this table is the Alpine group which represents only 1.9 percent of the crania from Tlatilco."
What an epic fail. lol. The only racial type Clyde attributes to leukoderms, under Wiercinski is in fact a White-Yellow transitional, not white. Most 20th century Polish typologists did not consider Alpines to be "White", but a mixed Caucasoid-Mongoloid [hence explaining the wider nasal index etc].
Can Clyde get anything right?
Only half of what you say is right and if you think Wiercinski didn't find some of the crania of these people found in Tlatilco or what are normally called "black" and "negroids" than you are as crazy as the doctor you are criticizing.
BTW - the reason a few physical anthropologists sometimes confused "Laponoids", Armenoids Bushmen etc was because they were aware of the distinct mixture of cranial types found in ancient America and in the Scandinavian area. PERIOD! Many of the anthropologists believed these Neolithic peoples were "BUSHMEN", PERIOD! Which is why Diop called them out on this. Small gracile African "NEGROIDS" DID contribute to early neolithic European populations whether you like it or not many indistinguishable from neolithic Saharans and east Africans, which Brace reaffirmed in his findings. And most importantly because of the differences between the cranial evidence of ancient Mesopotamia which showed this type (the "Bushman" the dolichocephalic Mediterranean type" as opposed to the "monumental" remains or statuary/statuettes uncovered by archaelogists rperesenting the Diyala Plains "Armenoid" brachycephals there in Mesopotamia. These statuettes may in fact date to later times as suggested by Winters, and certainly don't represent the predominant dolichocephalic types of ancient Mesopotamia during Akkadian Sumerian or Subarian periods. THEY WERE LATE COMERS TO THE FERTILE CRESCENT.
The term "Armenoids" - i.e. Diyala Plains "Iranic" people - for the vast majority of anthropologists originally referred to those whom geneticist now refer to as J1 haplotype people - NOT NEGROES!
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dana marniche: [qb] "As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks."
The AZTEC couple you posted if anything is a good example of the MIXTURE that went on in the Americas both in ancient times that's all - if they both have Armenoid and Negroid i.e Bushmanoid traits that DOES NOT mean Armenoids and Bushman ARE THE SAME PEOPLE!!!
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: "As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks."
Lol! I am the one who doesn't know what I am talking about when you keep lumping Armenoids who according to all physical anthropologists in any book European large nosed brachycephalic WHITE SKINNED people with equatorial groups then again I have nothing more to say to you. They DO NOT use the term "Armenoid" for black Africans. Anyone can check right now and see that.
Please don't respond with such SILLY nonsense again cause you take away any integrity that you would have had from learning about the black physical types in Asia found BY EUROPEANS.
Indeed Dana. SO called "Armenoids" have long been viewed as "Caucasian" - quote:
”... distinguished three “short-headed (brachycephalic) southern Europeoids”: the Adriatic (or Dinaric) race, the Armenoid race, and the Pamiro-Ferganian race. These categories, which went back to Deniker and Ripleu at the turn of the twentieth century, place Caucasian peoples in the "Armenoid race." --Bruce David Baum The rise and fall of the Caucasian race 2006 Page 228
Yes, Zarahan - the vast majority of anthropologists simply thought of them as the early large nosed people stretching from Armenia to Iran. And it's ridiculous for anyone to suggest otherwise.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
_______________________________________________________ "It appeared that some of the skulls from Tlatilco, Cerro de las Mesas and Monte Alban (all pre-Classic sites in Mexico) show, to a different degree, a clear prevalence of the total Negroid pattern that has been evidenced by the use of two methods: a) multivariate distance analysis of average characteristics of individual fractions distinguished cranioscopically: b) analysis of frequency distributions of Mean Index of the position between combinations of racial varieties."
"The present author (A. Wiecinski 1972-1972b) has assessed positively the presence of Negroid pattern of traits on the basis of detailed multivariate analysis of a larger set of diagnostic, cranioscopic traits which differentiate between between Black, Yellow and White racial varieties."
- Dr. Andrzej Wiecinski address to the XLI International Congress of Americanist in Mexico (September 1974) ___________________________________________
Wiecinski- "it is no-where written by the present author that the Colossal Heads represent classic Negroid type but only it's strong influence in combination with components of the White or Yellow varieties"
"Transatlantic Hypothesis on the Peopling of Americas: Caucasoid and Negroids, Journal of Human Evolution 2, 1973 pp 75-92 Comas/ Wiecinski ______________________________________________
There is a small community of Armenians in Ethiopia, primarily in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa. Armenians had traded with Ethiopia from the first century AD.
The Armenian presence in Ethiopia is historic. On a religious basis, the Ethiopian Church and the Armenian Apostolic Church are both members of the Oriental Orthodox communion of churches alongside Coptic Orthodox, Syriac Orthodox, Eritrean Orthodox and Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (India) churches.
Armenians had traded with Ethiopia from as early as the first century AD.
Besides the obvious religious affiliation, there is also the story of the Arba Lijoch children coming to Ethiopia after the Armenian Genocide. "Arba Lijoch" were a group of 40 Armenian orphans who had escaped from the atrocities in Turkey, and were afterwards adopted by Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia, then Crown Prince Ras Tafari. He had met them while visiting the Armenian monastery in Jerusalem. They impressed him so much that he obtained permission from the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem to adopt and bring them to Ethiopia, where he then arranged for them to receive musical instruction.
The Arba Lijoch arrived in Addis Ababa in 1924, and along with their bandleader Kevork Nalbandian became the first official orchestra of the nation. Nalbandian also composed the music for Marsh Teferi (words by Yoftehé Negusé), which was the Imperial National Anthem from 1930 to 1974.
Armenians have a much older presence in Ethiopia. Indeed one of the first recorded diplomatic missions to Europe from Ethiopia was led by Matthew the Armenian who traveled to Portugal and Rome at the request of the Dowager Empress Eleni of Ethiopia to appeal for aid against Islamic incursions into Ethiopia in the 16th Century.
The Armenian community was formed in the 7th century when many Armenians escaped the Arabian persecutions from Syria, Palestine and Egypt, immigrated to Ethiopia and settled in modern-day Desie city and built the St. Stepanos Monastery. Throughout time, many Armenians centralized and even formed their own weapons. In the Habesh chronicles, it is known as “Armenian Island”, which saw a downfall in the 16th century and the Armenians were forced to leave for other residential areas in Habeshstan to avoid forceful change of religion.
Armenians have played a huge role in the preservation of the Ethiopian Church’s cultural traditions, literature and economic development. In the 16th century, Armenian clergymen established schools and monasteries in the country, as well as translated the life of Saint Gregory the Illuminator, orations and other works. In 1539, by the order of King Libna Dingel, Ethiopia made the transition to the Armenian calendar. Armenian traders imported metals, lead, silk, cotton, glass, paints, cars to Ethiopia and exported wax, ivory, skin, coffee and more. Since the 19th century, the Armenians have supplied the army with artillery and other arms. An Armenian businessman is currently the owner of a large and most well-known rug store.
Armenians have received high awards by the Ethiopian government, including religious diplomat Mateos (the first Ethiopian ambassador to leave for Europe), Murad of Aleppo (the Ethiopian king’s ambassador and trade representative in India), diplomats Murad Junior and Yeghia Yenovk, the emperor’s advisers Kapro Vorgen and Miratch Vorgen.
In 1923, there was a 400-member Armenian community in Addis Ababa and the St. Mary Church. In 1928, Armenians had 12-14 homes in Dire Dava and the St. Minas Church.
In 1956, there were nearly 940 Armenians living in Ethiopia and most of them had a considerable impact on the country’s commerce and industry. However, after the 1973 revolution, Ethiopia entered a process of nationalization and many Armenians left the country.
There are spiritual pastors of the Armenian Holy Apostolic Church in Ethiopia and they are a part of Egypt’s diocese (the center is St. Gevorg Church in Addis Ababa).
The Gevorgov Armenian Seminary operates there and has a kindergarten.
According to recent data, there are nearly 80 Armenians living in Addis Ababa.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is something odd about this couple , it is as they have some sort of medical condition. Especially the body build of the man gives me the impression that he suffers from a mild form of Microcephaly. If it were so, I would presume that the Photographer was pursueing some sort of racist joke or hoax.
quote:Originally posted by sero: There is something odd about this couple , it is as they have some sort of medical condition. Especially the body build of the man gives me the impression that he suffers from a mild form of Microcephaly. If it were so, I would presume that the Photographer was pursueing some sort of racist joke or hoax.
They look exactly like many depictions of the ancient Mayans to me, - including or especially the heads and profiles - except Mayans were a bit darker obviously.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The first researcher to recognize that the Olmec writing was Mande was Leo Wiener, in Africa and the discovery of America. He recognized that the writing on the Tuxtla statuette was written in Mande characters.
Here we have three examples of Mande writing the first picture is writing from a modern site.
Picture 2 is writing on the Tuxtla statuette from Mexico.
Picture 3 writing during the chariot age.
Note the symbol made up of squares with dots inside.
.
.
Tuxtla Statuette
.
You call the Tuareg script in this art "Mande" while the Tuareg call their script "Tifinagh. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Are these the stones they are saying are no more than three feet high. In any case that thread is very interesting. I probably need to start going to that site instead of this one.
I'm wondernig what happened to the great stone heads found in West Africa that were posted in Van Sertima's journal were they proven to be fake or something? I haven't heard about them.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have not read enough literature to understand how Black groups have been characterized.
Europeans have tried to make all the builders of great civilizations "white". These is why many groups who live in areas today formerly occupied by Blacks are designated as representation of the original Africoid groups they replaced. Any way, as originally noted Armenoid related to African and Black people, eventhough it is used today to relate to Turkomen and other groups living in modern Armenia, etc..
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: "As mentioned earlier the Dongolan , Armenoid, and Equatorial groups refer to African people with varying facial features which are all Blacks."
Lol! I am the one who doesn't know what I am talking about when you keep lumping Armenoids who according to all physical anthropologists in any book European large nosed brachycephalic WHITE SKINNED people with equatorial groups then again I have nothing more to say to you. They DO NOT use the term "Armenoid" for black Africans. Anyone can check right now and see that.
Please don't respond with such SILLY nonsense again cause you take away any integrity that you would have had from learning about the black physical types in Asia found BY EUROPEANS.
Indeed Dana. SO called "Armenoids" have long been viewed as "Caucasian" - quote:
”... distinguished three “short-headed (brachycephalic) southern Europeoids”: the Adriatic (or Dinaric) race, the Armenoid race, and the Pamiro-Ferganian race. These categories, which went back to Deniker and Ripleu at the turn of the twentieth century, place Caucasian peoples in the "Armenoid race." --Bruce David Baum The rise and fall of the Caucasian race 2006 Page 228
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: You have not read enough literature to understand how Black groups have been characterized.
Europeans have tried to make all the builders of great civilizations "white"....
Indeed Dana. SO called "Armenoids" have long been viewed as "Caucasian" - quote:
”... distinguished three “short-headed (brachycephalic) southern Europeoids”: the Adriatic (or Dinaric) race, the Armenoid race, and the Pamiro-Ferganian race. These categories, which went back to Deniker and Ripleu at the turn of the twentieth century, place Caucasian peoples in the "Armenoid race." --Bruce David Baum The rise and fall of the Caucasian race 2006 Page 228 [/qb][/QUOTE][/qb][/QUOTE]"Europeans have tried to make all the builders of great civilizations 'white'."?
On the contrary I'm the one that academically specialized in researching the history of their theoretical nonsense and wrote about it. The fact that you quote so much from Wiercinski about the "Armenoid" type shows you are not interested in admitting the facts about what the majority of anthropologists thought about "Armenoids". It is you who are NOT familiar with the literature in anthropology. Wiercinski is not the one that labeled or created the "Armenoid" type and that Armenoid-Bushmen category is something he chose to make up. So why not instead of saving face and projecting your lack of familiarity with the issue onto me have the integrity to admit that you base a lot of your argument about who populated the ancient world on this idea that Armenoids were Armenoid-Bushmen and the latter were short black people were the same thing for anthropologists - thereby confusing the ancestors of modern Europeans with those of sub-Saharan AFRICANS.
Otherwise what you are perpetuating is A HOAX and it is no wonder people do not think much of what you write has any value. In fact I have seen a lot of discoveries and interesting points you have made that scholars could follow up on but probably wouldn't because of the illogical conceptual frameworks you create to form conclusions.
As far I am concerned you are a main reason why most people think the word "Afrocentrist" means "Afronut". Any other credentialed black or even non-black scholar interested in such subject matter is now at risk of being thought of as an Afronut even more so than previously due to your fraudulent and dishonest approach to interpreting source material.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION!
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Much of Clyde's argument remains intact even if you disregard "Armenian"
Wiercinski lists Dongolan (N. Sudan) as a higher percentage
Clyde there's a category "Subainuid" What is that?
____________________________________
OTHOMI AND OLMECS: INFLUENCE OF MANDE LANGUAGE GROUP ON ANCIENT MEXICAN CULTURE 1. 1. Journal of African Civilizations, Volume 1 Ivan Van Sertima Douglass College, Rutgers University, 1979 -
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Clyde do you have location, date and source link for this?
Also what is the height and/or weight of this and location, link?
also you said:
The Olmec came from Saharan Africa. They spoke a Mande language. Evidence of this connection comes from the fact:
1) both groups used jade to make their tools.
jade tools in Africa? Do you have documentaion of this? Are you talking about Amazonite? I thought in Africa that is found in the South
Unfortunately people mistake i.e. MISIDENTIFY Jade for Amazonite, and Olmecs it appears didn't make much use of the latter. Just as Africans don't appear to have mined much Jade. So-called "African Jade" is really garnet.
I'm sure everyone can agree "some people just can't be trusted." Basing one's proofs on patently false information is not the way to prove Olmecs came to America. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
THEY WERE LATE COMERS TO THE FERTILE CRESCENT. 
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic