DNA STUDIES AND THE ORIGIN OF THE OLMECS ENRIQUE VILLAMAR BECERRIL
Creators of a culture in which they left an original display of prodigious creativity and talent, the first interpretation regarding the Olmecs addressed their possible ethnic origin, based on their most distinctive stone manifestation: a colossal head, Monument A of Tres Zapotes, according to its subsequent classification. The proposal dates back to 1871 when, ironically, the Olmec was not included in the panorama of archaeological cultures in Mexico. During a tour of Veracruz, José Melgar, interested in antiquities, learned of the fortuitous discovery of an enormous stone sculpture by peasants in a Hueyapan hacienda, today Tres Zapotes. Without precedent for a similar piece in the then corpus of pre-Hispanic sculpture, José Melgar contemplated an unusual, surprising and enigmatic demonstration of the inexhaustible cultural wealth that awaited on Mexican soil. Skilled artisans detailed the racial physiognomy of the face sculpted in the stone, Melgar considered. In this he saw reliable evidence of transoceanic contacts, long before Columbus, which led to the presence of black individuals in America. Over the years, the idea of the African origin of the Olmecs lingers in the minds of many people, as the same facial features that caused Melgar's astonishment ended up being the constant in Olmec monuments. What information was missing could provide the skeletal remains.
In the investigations of the San Lorenzo Tenochtitlán Archaeological Project at the sites of San Lorenzo and Loma del Zapote, several human burials from the Olmec period were found. The bone consistency in two of them allowed the study of their mitochondrial DNA to be carried out successfully, as part of an investigation that proposes the comparative analysis of the genetic information of the Olmecs with that obtained from subjects from other Mesoamerican societies, under the advice of the specialists María de Lourdes Muñoz Moreno and Miguel Moreno Galeana, from Cinvestav.
In the cells of our body there are two types of DNA. The nuclear, represented by chromosomes, and the mitochondrial. Mitochondria are small organelles external to the nucleus, responsible for producing the energy required by cellular metabolism. Mitochondrial DNA (ADNMT), contrary to nuclear, is inherited only by the maternal route from sons and daughters, and they have been the only ones to transmit it throughout the history of humanity. Thus, mitochondrial lineages, called haplogroups given their uniparental (maternal) origin, are so ancient that they transcend geographic, cultural, and temporal boundaries. This property of ADNMT offers anthropology a means to trace the historical evolution of contemporary and past populations. Thanks to this, the repertoire of maternal lineages is known on a global scale, their geographical-temporal distribution, and in addition the lineages originating from each continent.
The pioneering study of ADNMT carried out on Olmec individuals, one from San Lorenzo and the other from Loma del Zapote, resulted, in both cases, in the unequivocal presence of the distinctive mutations of the “A” maternal lineage. That is, the origin of the Olmecs is not in Africa but in America, since they share the most abundant of the five mitochondrial haplogroups characteristic of the indigenous populations of our continent: A, B, C, D and X.
Beyond what happened in other latitudes, immersed in their particular environmental mosaic from which they took advantage, the Mesoamerican peoples resolved in a practical and innovative way multiple challenges of their day to day. This led them to forge such diverse societies, whose achievements in countless areas of human endeavor made Mesoamerica an extraordinary cultural area. of the ancient world. The underlying talent and its bearers were of local descent, and an example of this is Olmec society, the first Mesoamerican civilization.
Enrique Villamar Becerril. Physical anthropologist from ENAH. Candidate for a doctor in Mesoamerican studies (UNAM), with an analysis of ADNMT in bone remains from various sites of the Preclassic period.
Villamar Becerril Enrique, "DNA Studies and the Origin of the Olmecs", Mexican Archeology, no. 150, pp. 40-41.
_____________________________________
Paternal Y DNA Haplogroup A is found in African Khosian people but has no relation to mtDNA Haplogroup A found in this Olmec sample. mtDNA A is found in many places in Asia although it's highest frequency is found in Greenland Eskimos (96%) Apaches and Navajo also have higher percentages 63% and 61% as well as the Nahua (Cuetzalan, Mexico) (61.3%) The Nahuas comprise the largest indigenous group in Mexico and second largest group in El Salvador. No unified Nahua identity existed in the Pre-Columbian period, and people instead identified based on tribe and altepetl. The name Nahua derives from the name of the language. For these reasons, it may be useful to view the Nahua people as a collection of ethnicities speaking similar languages, rather than one monolithic group.
Location of Olmec sites in Mexico
In Asia mtDNA A is carried in China Nu population (Gongshan, Yunnan)30% and Lisu population (Gongshan, Yunnan) 29.7% along with many other groups with a wide spread in Asia
Haplogroup A is believed to have arisen in Asia some 30,000–50,000 years before present.
Its highest frequencies are among Native Americans, its largest overall population is in East Asia, and its greatest variety (which suggests its origin point) is in East Asia. Thus, it might have originated in and spread from the Far East ________________________
Unrooted genetic distance chart The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans Sarah A Tishkoff, supplement S1
Mitochondrial DNA genetic diversity among four ethnic groups in Sierra Leone Bruce A. Jackson Jamie Lee Wilson 15 August 2005 https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20040
Cheek swabs were obtained from 166 unrelatedindividuals from the two major ethnic groups, the Mende (n= 55) and Temne (n= 28), and two minorethnic groups, the Loko (n = 29) and Limba (n = 54),in Sierra Leone. Samples were collected at prear-ranged gatherings organized by the collaborating chiefs of each ethnic group. Primarily male subjects were chosen because both Primarily male subjectswere chosen because both matrilineal (mtDNA) andpatrilineal (Y-DNA) studies can be conducted on DNA from a single individual.
_______________________________
Of the 166 men sampled their mtDNA was all haplogroup L except for four individuals A2, H, U5, U6 respectively
They found one A2 person in this population of 98% L carriers. Of course that is far from being enough evidence of it having originated there, this is a modern sample. It is likely recent admixture due to so much L as are probably the H and U. That later probably from North African groups/Tuareg
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Note 2) last post included entire large opening post, deleted, not needed for comment, unnecessary repetition
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Mitochondrial DNA genetic diversity among four ethnic groups in Sierra Leone Bruce A. Jackson Jamie Lee Wilson 15 August 2005 https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.20040
Cheek swabs were obtained from 166 unrelatedindividuals from the two major ethnic groups, the Mende (n= 55) and Temne (n= 28), and two minorethnic groups, the Loko (n = 29) and Limba (n = 54),in Sierra Leone. Samples were collected at prear-ranged gatherings organized by the collaborating chiefs of each ethnic group. Primarily male subjects were chosen because both Primarily male subjectswere chosen because both matrilineal (mtDNA) andpatrilineal (Y-DNA) studies can be conducted on DNA from a single individual.
_______________________________
Of the 166 men sampled their mtDNA was all haplogroup L except for four individuals A2, H, U5, U6 respectively
They found one A2 person in this population of 98% L carriers. Of course that is far from being enough evidence of it having originated there, this is a modern sample. It is likely recent admixture due to so much L as are probably the H and U. That later probably from North African groups/Tuareg
.
. If there was one African carrying mtDNA A there must be more.Some Afro-Americans also carry mtDNA A.
[ 13. June 2020, 08:11 PM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
If there was one African carrying mtDNA A there must be more.Some Afro-Americans also carry mtDNA
The origin of a haplogroup is suggested by
1) location of greatest diversity 2) frequency 3) location of oldest human remains carrying haplogroup 4) migration history if available
It is estimated considering these factors.
this is a modern world and people can go across the world in a matter of hours. There is DNA spread all over the world. So of you find one person in some location where 98% of the population do not carry this haplogroup you will have to have a lot more evidence, these factors considered to make an estimate of the haplogroup's origin.
(Chart deleted on percentage of Native American admixture of modern African Americans,previous post off topic. The topic is ancient Olmec remains)
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had these sources in the Database. Not sure what to think of them, but I'll share them anyway.
quote: mtDNA haplotypes of representatives of the cosmopolitan peoples of north-central Mexico were studied. Two hundred twenty-three samples from individuals residing in vicinities of two localities in north-central Mexico were analyzed. A combination of strategies was employed to identify the origin of each haplotype, including length variation analysis of the COII and tRNALYS intergenic region, nucleotide sequence analysis of control region hypervariable segment 1, and RFLP analysis of PCR products spanning diagnostic sites. Analysis of these data revealed that the majority of the mtDNA haplotypes were of Native American origin, belonging to one of four primary Native American haplogroups.
Others were of European or African origin, and the frequency of African haplotypes was equivalent to that of haplotypes of European derivation. These results provide diagnostic, discrete character, molecular genetic evidence that, together with results of previous studies of classical genetic systems, is informative with regard to both the magnitude of African admixture and the relative maternal contribution of African, European, and Native American peoples to the genetic heritage of Mexico. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that African sequences formed a basal, paraphyletic group.
mtDNA Affinities of the Peoples of North-Central Mexico Lance D. Green,1,* James N. Derr,2 and Alec Knight1,†
quote: While the wide distribution of haplogroup X in North America strongly suggested that it was an additional founding haplogroup, its presence in European populations left open the possibility that it was introduced through admixture after a.d. 1492. However, the form of haplogroup X in the Americas (X2a) was shown to be quite distinct from those found in Europe and Central Asia (X2e) (for nomenclature in haplogroup X, see Reidla et al. 2003), and the diversity within Native American populations suggested that the haplogroup was quite ancient in North America (Brown et al. 1998). Haplogroup X in the Americas prior to European contact was finally demonstrated by its presence in the 1340 ± 40 14C b.p. (3340 b.p.) human remains discovered near Vantage, Washington (Malhi and Smith 2002).25 Thus, haplogroup X is now viewed as an additional founder lineage along with haplogroups A, B, C, and D, albeit a “minor” one that has an unusual geographic distribution compared to the other four (Brown et al. 1998; Dornelles et al. 2005; Perego et al. 2009; Smith et al. 1999).
[...]
Within six months31 of the publication of the Tamm and colleagues (2007) findings, three independent research teams reported results from the collection and/or analysis of whole mitochondrial genomes that generally supported the BIM and/or a single origin for the first Americans. Kitchen and colleagues (2008) compiled sets of previous published data32 on which they conducted Bayesian skyline plot analyses (Drummond et al. 2005). Based on the coalescent, this analytical tool infers effective population size backward through time from a set of sequence data and has been demonstrated to be an effective means for reconstructing population dynamics. In an updated version of this analysis,33 Mulligan and colleagues (2008) found that the proto–Native American population was isolated from central Asian populations for 7,000–15,000 years, during which it experienced little or no growth wherever it resided, which was suggested by the authors to have been in Beringia (Kitchen et al. 2008). This part of the demographic profile corresponds to the “incubation” phase proposed by Tamm and colleagues (2007), during which lineages would have accumulated novel mutations that would differentiate them from other Asian populations. Following this period, the population underwent a bottleneck upon entering the Americas approximately 17,000–16,000 b.p., after which a major reexpansion occurred (Mulligan et al. 2008), likely as a consequence of entering a large landmass that was filled with megafauna and the like but, importantly, not occupied by other humans. Note that while the degree of this bottleneck was likely exacerbated by the paleoclimatic conditions in Beringia, this founder effect, recognized more than twenty years prior by Wallace and colleagues (1985) represents just one of a series of founder effects that shaped the human gene pool since our species exited Africa (Ramachandran et al. 2005).
[...]
In line with the discussion above (Terminology for mtDNA Variants), Tamm and colleagues (2007) found evidence for five haplogroups present in indigenous American populations (A–D, X) that were introduced by nine founding lineages/ haplotypes, each representing one of nine subhaplogroups or clades of haplo-groups A, B, C, D, and X. As eight of these subhaplogroups are found widespread in the Americas, these data are consistent with a very rapid spread of humans throughout the American continents. Interestingly, the American haplotypes were a few mutational steps away from their sister Asian haplotypes. That the Native American mutations have not been identified in Asian matrilines lends support to the idea that the proto–Native American population was isolated for some time from other Asian populations, during which it accumulated these new variants (i.e., during an “incubation” period). Tamm and colleagues (2007) also estimated an age of approximately 17,000–10,000 b.p. for A2, B2, C1b, C1c, C1d, and D1, given the amount of diversity observed in these subhaplogroups today. Two additional subhaplogroups, D2a and D3, which possibly arose in the same source population (as will be discussed below), were introduced much later into the Americas, and subhaplogroup A2a was carried back into western Siberia, where it is found today among the Evenks, Koryaks, and Sel’kups (Schurr et al. 1999; Tamm et al. 2007). Overall, their study provided compelling evidence that the initial founders of the Americas emerged from a single Beringian source population.
Ancient and Modern Genetic Variation in the Americas
Patricia Lopez February 10, 2020 (translated from Spanish)
quote: Archaeologist Ann Cyphers and her collaborators have carried out modern studies of mitochondrial DNA that prove the identity
A new finding by the working group of archaeologist Ann Cyphers, an academic at the Institute for Anthropological Research (IIA), assures that the origin of the colossal Olmec heads is not African, as has been rumored for 150 years, but Mesoamerican.
Discoverer in 1994 of the most recent of the 17 Olmec heads known to date, found in the archaeological site of San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan, in Veracruz, Cyphers and her collaborators have carried out modern mitochondrial DNA studies that prove the Mesoamerican identity of that civilization, the oldest of these lands.
Ethiopia
Cyphers stated that the thesis of African origin dates back to 1869 and was proposed by José María Melgar y Serrano, who reported the first colossal head (called Hueyapan) in what is now Tres Zapotes, in Veracruz.
“At that time, the existence of the Olmec culture was not known and Melgar proposed that the features of the sculptures corresponded to characters from Ethiopia, people of the black race, more than anything because of the facial features. From there that speculation was born and a controversy was formed that haunts us in Olmec archaeology,” said Cyphers.
For the researcher, the wide and flattened features of the faces of the colossal heads are explained by the fact that the great thrones of the Olmec rulers, which were large prisms, were recycled to make the sculptures.
“For the Olmecs, reusing thrones was important because it was a symbol of the ruler and because they avoided bringing more rock from other populations, but they wanted the head to be as large as possible within the throne. Then they accommodated the portrait of the ruler within that prism (which was the throne) and the face was slightly deformed, so that it would remain within the material they already had, since the transformation of the throne into said portrait, which was this great sculpture, was symbolic. of the head.
“That clarifies to a great extent why the factions are compressed, since they had to take a face out of the original piece of the throne. This is how, for example, the nose and the wide mouth are understood, since no head has protruding elements, everything is compact, glued and is part of the prism”, he detailed.
The expert pointed out that the African origin and transoceanic migrations are deeply rooted in the collective imagination. “It has been very difficult to shake these ideas from us.”
In excavations carried out for years in the Olmec sites and scientifically studying various pieces of that civilization, university archaeologists have not found African artifacts, which is a first line of investigation that rules out the origin on that continent.
The second line comes from DNA tests, which could not be done before because there were no Olmec burials, since those they found turned to dust. "We found Olmec burials in our works in San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan, and Enrique Villamar Becerril, collaborator of my group, did the study of mitochondrial DNA," added the university student.
The physical anthropologist Villamar specified that two burials were sampled: one in Loma del Zapote (from 1,200 BC) and another in San Lorenzo (from 1,000 BC). “A rib bone sample was taken from these two individuals and they underwent a procedure to obtain their mitochondrial DNA, the lineage that the mother gives to an individual, because it is more feasible to recover it from archaeological remains.”
Villamar obtained the classification of that genetic information, which is called the haplogroup. "The genetic diversity of mitochondrial DNA can be classified according to the similarities in the DNA of various individuals and they may share some mutations that make them different from individuals from other regions of the world."
These distinctions allow us to define that an individual belongs to one group or another, and thus the mitochondrial DNA is classified into haplogroups. “We obtained the haplogroup of these two subjects and learned that they belong to haplogroup A, one of the most abundant among the founding and indigenous populations of America.
If they had been Africans, the haplogroup would be L, which is characteristic of the populations of that continent”, he mentioned. If there was African genetic material in the Olmec, it would not only be seen in burials, but also in populations that would genetically impact later populations, and haplogroup L (not found here) would have been preserved. "In 300 Mesoamerican burials from different eras, haplogroup L is missing," said Cyphers.
Finding
Regarding the discovery of colossal head 17, Cyphers acknowledged that “it is something that is not expected. We were looking for Olmec dwellings and suddenly… the surprise of the head, it seemed that I was dreaming. Each new thing contributes to changing one's perception of what that culture was like,” he recounted.
In describing the Olmecs, Cyphers recalls that they were the first civilization in Mesoamerica; powerful rulers and, in a word; a civilization.
A short video with Ann Cyphers and Enrique Villamar (in Spanish)
posted
The above article does not prove the Olmecs were not Africans.The Olmec DNA does not settle the matters as assumed by Ann Cyphers, because Africans and Foundational Black Americans carry A haplogroup.
The Olmec people were Mande speaking people who migrated to Mexico around 1200 BC. This was supported by the fact that they called themselves Xi and the textual evidence found in Izapa Stela #5. Izapa Stela # 5 shows the Olmecs sailing on a boat to Mexico.
This reality was further confirmed by Olmec skeletons , and inscribed Olmec artifacts excavated on Olmec sites. The decipherment of the Olmecs text indicated they spoke a Malinke-Bambara language that belongs to the Mande family of languages.
We now have Olmec DNA. Enrique Villamar Becerril (1), has found that the Olmec carried mtDNA A, which is a subclade of the Macrohaplogroup N. Haplogroup N originated in Africa.
Enrique wrote: "The pioneering study of ADNMT carried out on Olmec individuals, one from San Lorenzo and the other from Loma del Zapote, resulted, in both cases, in the unequivocal presence of the distinctive mutations of the “A” maternal lineage. That is, the origin of the Olmecs is not in Africa but in America, since they share the most abundant of the five mitochondrial haplogroups characteristic of the indigenous populations of our continent: A, B, C, D and X. “ Click on the video below:
The discovery that the Olmec carried haplogroup A does not prevent the Olmec from being African as claimed by Villamar Bercerril , because foundational Blacks in the United States and Africans, including the Mande speakers carry mtDNA A, X and etc.
There are no “pure” Mexindians. Lisker (5) noted that between 5-50% of Indian genes are African genes. The Mixe, Zenu , Wayuu and other Mexican groups with YAP+ associated A-G transition at DYS271. Haplotype DYS271 is of African origin. In addition, The Maya speaking Ch’ol and Chontal at Campeche carry R-M173, E1b1b, K and T. These are DNA haplogroups common to Africans.
Indian y-chromosome haplogroups C and D show African admixture at locus DYS271. The American mtDNA haplogroups A and B are part of the haplogroup N macrohaplogroup.
African people carry mtDNA A common to mongoloid Native Americans and y-chromosome R, so they probably passed on these genes to mongoloid Native Americans
The mtDNA A haplogroup common to Mexicans is also found among the Mande speaking people and some East Africans (2-4). Haplogroup A is found among Mixe and Mixtecs (2).The Mande speakers carry mtDNA haplogroup A, is common among Mexicans (4). In addition to the Mande speaking people of West Africa, Southeast Africa Africans also carry mtDNA haplogroup A (3).
In addition to DNA, the Spanish explorers reported many Africans in Mexico. The Spanish explorers mentioned Black Nations and Black tribes in the Americas, they met, even before African slaves were landed in America. The Spanish said the Aztecs were Negroes.
Paul Gaffarel noted that when Balboa reached America he found "negre veritables" or true Blacks. Balboa noted "...Indian traditions of Mexico and Central America indicate that Negroes were among the first occupants of that territory." This is why so many Mexicans have "African faces".
In conclusion, Olmec have left us many skeletons, and textual evidence indicating that they were Mande speakers. We have also illustrated that The Spanish found many African communities when they came to America. As , a result, it is only natural that the Olmecs carried African genes like mtDNA haplogroup A. Moreover the presence of haplogroup A among the Olmec, result from Mande speakers carrying this haplogroup in Africa.
References:
1. Villamar Becerril Enrique, “Estudios de ADN y el origen de los olmecas”, Arqueología Mexicana, núm. 150, pp. 40-41.
2. Bonilla C, Gutierrez G, Parra E J, Kline C, Shriver M D. (2005). Admixture of a rural population of the State of Guerrero,Mexico, Am J Phys Anthropol. Dec;128(4):861-9.
3. Salas A, Richards M, De la Fe T, Lareu M V, Sobrino B, Sanchez-Diz P, Macaulay V, Carracedo A. (2002). The making of the West African mtDNA Landscape, Am J. Hum. Genet, 71:1082-1111.
4. Jackson B A, Wilson J L, Kirbah S, Sidney S S, Bassie L, Alle J A D, McLean D C Garvey W T.(2005). Am J Phys Anthropol. 128:156-163.
5. Suarez-Diaz,(2014) Indigenous populations in Mexico. Medical anthropology in the Work of Ruben Lisker in the 1960’s. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 47 (p.117)
[ 25. March 2022, 05:34 AM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ish Gebor I have removed three of your very large text copy posts because they are about the Caribbean, not Olmecs. It's off topic, this is about Olmecs or mtDNA A, thanks
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
One can sometimes think it is a pity that not more serious scholars take their time to debunk pseudo historical claims, but it is also understandable, many of them prefer to spend their time on serious research instead of wasting it on all sorts of fringe theories and distortions of facts. It can be quite time consuming to debunk all weird speculations.
Like all the alternative origin speculations about the Olmecs.
Of course the Olmecs were not Mande (or other Africans), they were Native Americans (who descend from Asian immigrants who came to the Americas around 20 000 years ago or more).
Here is a couple of videos about the Olmecs
This one debunks some of the usual Afrocentric myths about the Olmecs:
This video gives a short overview about the ancient Olmecs, and also adresses some of the conspiracy theories promoted by blackcentric extremists and other pseudo historians:
For a general discussion of Afrocentric and black-centric misrepresentations of history and attempts to appropriate Native American history and achievements one can read Gabriel Haslip-Vieras important book "Thieves of civilisation". A second edition of the book is now available
It is a good and important read which debunks many Afrocentric, pseudohistorical claims
quote: This book is a response to the assertions made over the years by Afrocentric extremists who claim that the first Americans were sub-Saharan Africans, that the first American "civilizations" were created by ancient Egypto-Nubian and West African visitors, and that other West Africans came to the Americas in the fourteenth century CE and again in the years before the European discovery of the Americas in 1492. The book is a point-by-point refutation of some of the most important claims made by Afrocentric extremists and a defense of the real contributions and the actual research that has been done on the cultures, civilizations and peoples of pre-Columbian America by scholars in various fields.
One can also read books and articles by the experts who has worked with Olmec archaeology, history and art history for decades and published extensively in the field.
This includes researchers like Ann Cyphers, Richard Diehl and Karl Taube. I recommend all readers of this thread to study their works instead of wasting time on pseudoscholars without any experience in serious studies (including archaeological fieldwork) of the Olmecs and other Mesoamerican cultures.
Here are a couple of quotes from these experts
And once again the short video with Ann Cyphers and Enrique Villamar Becerril. Better listen to them if one wants to learn something about Olmec culture and anthropology.
One shall be aware of that the vast majority of scholars who actually work with the study of ancient Mesomerican cultures and other precolumbian cultures do not support the speculations about an African origin of these cultures. Those theories are usually regarded as fringe theories.
quote: Olmec alternative origin speculations are non-mainstream theories that have been suggested for the formation of Olmec civilization which contradict generally accepted scholarly consensus. These origin theories typically involve contact with Old World societies. Although these speculations have become somewhat well-known within popular culture, particularly the idea of an African connection to the Olmec, they are not regarded as credible by mainstream researchers of Mesoamerica and are considered fringe theories.
posted
I have written extensively on the African origins of the Olmec. He deciphered the Olmec language and since then he has published numerous websites where he discussed the Olmec Kings and their civilization. My most important work is Atlantis in Mexico, in this book Dr. Winters provides a detailed account of the migration of the Mande speaking people from Africa to the Americas. He explains that they called themselves Xi (Shi) or Si people and provides an informative discussion of the Mexican traditions regarding the expansion of the Olmec from the Gulf Coast, to the Pacific coast of Mexico. .
Atlantis in Mexico provides any researchers with a wealth of knowledge to understand the African origin of the Olmec. And the contributions of the Xi to the civilizations of Mexico.
I have expanded knowledge about the other Blacks who established colonies in the Americas before Europeans. In African Empires Ancient America,Dr. Winters discussed the Axumite, Mound Builders and other ancient Black Americans. I made many presentations on the Olmecs at Anthrpological Conferences in which members of tha Academe attended. I made these presentations because back in the 1990's some laymen and other detractors attacking my work accussed me of not presenting my work before the academic community. I have made presentation at international and national anthropological meetings, before my "peers" including AAA. For example Linda Schele attended my 1997 Olmec presentation.
Friday, April 16th ... in Highland Chiapas. 9:30. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Olmec Symbolism in the Mayan Writing. 9:50. Nestor Quiroa (U Illinois ... www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/pfri.html - 47k - Cached - Similar pages
Saturday, April 17th ... 11:15. Samuel Cooper (Bar Ilan U) The Classification of Biblical Sacrifice. 11:35. Clyde Winters (Loyola U - Chicago) Harappan Origins of Yogi. 11:55. ... www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg99/program/psat.html - 50k - Cached - Similar pages
preliminary program csas98 ... Mexican Villages. 4:10 Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio I) Jaguar Kings: Olmec Royalty and Religious Leaders in the First Person. 4:30 ... www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg98/Prelimp5.htm - 39k - Cached - Similar pages
Thursday April, 3 - Early Afternoon ... Russia [1413]. 2:30 pm - Clyde A. Winters (Uthman dan Fodio Institute) - The Decipherment of Olmec Writing [1414]. 2:50 pm - James ... www.aaanet.org/csas/mtg97/final.htm - 36k - Cached - Similar pages These books confirm that the Olmecs were Africans and spoke a Malinke Banbara language
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Learning from Leo Wiener in Africa and the Discovery of America, that the Tuxtla statuette was written in Malinke-Bambara I decided to attempt to decipher the La Venta Offering #4 celts. I published these celts in the Journal of African Civilizations back in 1979. In 1980, I went on a lecture tour around the country with Dr. Alexanjro von Wuthenau talking about the Olmecs and my decipherment of their writing.
You can learn more about my decipherment of the Olmec language by watching the Video below.
The inscribed celts found at La Venta in 1955, named offering No.4, are inscribed jadeite celt. All the translations of Olmec artifacts are based on the Manding dictionary of Delafosse (1921).
The celts of La Venta offering no.4, were discovered by Drucker in 1955. These celts show both the plain and cursive forms of the Olmec script. These inscribed celtswere part of a collection of 16 figurines and jade and serpentine found in offering no.4 (Soustelle, 1984).
In La Venta offering no.4, fifteen figurines were arranged around a central figure. According to the inscriptions on the celts in this collection, the personage buried in this tomb was Pè. The bold head of Pè suggest that he was their cult leader.
A pit had been dug over the incised celts and figurines, a hole leading from the earth's surface down to the burial cache suggest that this was used for pouring libations on the figurines. This view is supported by the fact that the inscriptions written in the plain Olmec syllabic style ( Fig. 1), mentions the fact that Pè tomb was to act as a talisman or protective shrine for the faithful.
The six celts found in La Venta offering no.4, were arranged in a semi-circle. Four of the celts were engraved. The first and last celts in the semi-circle were not engraved. Moving from left to right two engraved jade celts when joined together depict an Olmec priest wearing an elaborate headdress and holding what appears to be a torch or baton in his hand.
This figure probably represented Pè. It is analogous to the figure engraved on a jade Breastplate (no. 13:583), now located in the National Museum of Anthropology at Mexico City ( Wuthenau, 1980).
The first two Laventa celts probably were originally joined together and served as a symbol of authority for the deceased priest while he was alive. The breakage of this celt into two parts probably symbolized the withdrawal of the priest's physical body, from the physical plane to the spiritual plane. The placement in the tomb of Pè's "celt of power" was meant to hold his spiritual power at the grave site.
The third engraved celt at La Venta offering no.4, was engraved in the cursive Olmec script.
In the text of the cursive script we find Pè's obituary. Transliteration of Symbols on Figure 1 Fè fè mi pè po gbè without breath void consumed Pè pure/holy below (in) lu bè ma the family habitation lay low the celebrity (the) Lord (in) yu ka-pè ba ko the big hemisphere tomb Ka-Pè the Great (in) the back of se yu we (to) possess for posterity the big hemisphere tomb Hence ta lu ba i this place the family habitation great/strong thine gba kyè be po fixed in the ground inheritance/estate here pure/holy mbe be lay low the celebrity lay low the celebrity.
Translation
" Without breath. Void. Consumed (lies) the Hole Pè, below the family habitation. Lay low the celebrity, the Lord, in the hemisphere tomb. The Great Ka-Pè, in the back of the big hemisphere tomb, possesses (this place) for posterity. Thine inheritance (is) fixed in this ground. Here the pure celebrity lays low. Lay low the celebrity".
Vocabulary
fè, v. to be void, empty, without breath mi, v. consumed Pè, proper name; v. spacious, pin down po, adj. : superlative of white translated as holy, pure, the good gbè, v. lay low, below; virtue lu, family habitation bè, v: lay low the celebrity ma, it can be translated as "Great one" or "Lord"; it can also be a suffix joined to a substantive or a verb to show intensity. yu, the big hemisphere tomb Ka, a title given to Olmec elites ba, adj.: great ka, adv.: in the back of se, possess (this place) for posterity we, adv.: hence ta, this place, place, here lu, n.: the family habitation ba, adj.: great i, pronominal particle of the second person: thine, thou, you gba, transitive v.: fixed in the ground kyè, inheritance, estate be, here
It is interesting to note that on this celt, after the use of the Olmec term po, a /g/ or /m/ is prefixed to bè, to make this word into a CCV term. Another interesting fact about this inscription is that reduplication is used at the end, and beginning of this inscription to denote emphasis.
The fourth engraved celt from left to right in La Venta offering no.4, is written in the plain Olmec script.
This inscription declares that the tomb of Pè is a talisman of great power.
Transliteration of Figure 1
Kyè gyo dè gbè
A man the leader of the cult indeed virtue
le gyo we mbè to
to be consecration hence here place of rest
he gyo
good talisman.
Translation
"The man (was) the leader of the cult. Indeed (a man of) virtue to be an object of consecration. Hence here a place of rest (a) good talisman (protective shrine for the faithful)".
Vocabulary
kyè, Man gyo, one faithful to the cult/deity, object of consecration, leader of the cult association; talisman, amulet dè, suffix of determination or definite article; indeed gbè, virtue, righteousness, etc. le, verbal postposition: to be we, adv.: therefore, hence mbè, here to, place of rest he, adj.: good
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I learned that the Mande speaking people had created many writing systems. Wangara mentioned that the Mande probably left inscriptions in the Americas--via the Vai syllabary. Once I saw the Vai script and learned about the Vai tradition that it was invented in ancient times I studied the Vai script and found that I could use it to read the inscriptions on the LaVenta celts.
my discovery of the Ancient Maa Confederation and the Vai script has allowed me to decipher: the Indus Valley Writing, Proto-Sumerian, Minoan Linear A and the Olmec Writing. Using information from the Greco-Romans I also deciphered the Meroitic writing system.
Now you can read these literatures for yourself and decipher new inscriptions .
' [b]
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
After my decipherment of the La Venta Celts I was able to fully read the Olmec language. Being able to read Olmec allowed me to finally find the identity of some of the rulers represented by the Giant Olmec Heads.
I discovered that the headdresses of the Olmec Heads contain the title of the Olmec ruler represented by the stone Olmec heads.
The best evidence that the Olmec Heads represent actual Olmecs is the Cascajal tablet. This tablet was found in Mexico.It is the obituary of Bi Popo, San Lorezo Olmec Head 3.
The Olmec writing on the Cascajal tablet is an obituary for a King Bi Po. This writing is written in Hieroglyphic Olmec (Winters,2006). Hieroglyphic Olmec includes multiple linear Olmec signs which are joined together to make pictures of animals, faces and other objects.
Some researchers have recognized insects and other objects in the signs. In reality these signs are made up several different Olmec linear signs (Winters,1998).
To read the Olmec writing I use the Vai script. The Vai script includes a number of syllabic signs that have been used to engrave rocks in the Sahara for the past 4000 years. I read the signs in Malinke-Bambara which was the spoken language of the Olmec.
The Olmec writing is read right to left top to bottom. Each segment of the Olmec sign has to be broken down into its individual syllabic sign. In most cases the Olmec signs includes two or more syllabic characters. The Olmec signs can be interpreted as follows:
1. La fe ta gyo 2. Bi yu 3. Pa po yu 4. Se ta I su 5. Ta kye 6. Beb be 7. Bi Po Yu to 8. Tu fa ku 9. Tu pa pot u 10. Ta gbe pa 11. i-tu 12. Bi Yu yo po 13. Kye gyo 14. Po lu 15. Fe ta yo i 16. Be kye 17. Fe gina 18. Po bi po tu 19. Lu kye gyo to 20. Kye tu a pa 21. Yu gyo i 22. Pa ku pa 23. Po yu 24. Day u kye da 25. Po ta kye tap o 26. Ta gbe 27. Bi Fa yu 28. Bi Yu / Paw
Translation Reading the Cascajal Tablet from right to left we have the following:
(8) Bi Po lays in state in the tomb, (7) desiring to be endowed with mysterious faculties.
(6) This abode is possessed by the Governor . (5)…. (4) Bi Po Po.
(3) Bi (was), (2) an Artisan desires to be consecrated to the divinity. (1) (and He) merits thou offer of libations.
(14). Admiration (for) the cult specialist’s hemisphere tomb. (13) The inheritance of thou vital spirit is consecration to the divinity.
(12) In a place of righteous admiration, (11) Pure Bi (in a) pure abode
(10) A pure mark of admiration (is) this hemispheric tomb.
(9) [Here] lays low (the celebrity) [he] is gone.
(22) The place of righteousness, [is] (21) the pure hemispheric tomb
(20) (19) Thou (art) obedient to the Order. (18) Hold upright the Order (and) the divinity of the sacred cult.
(17) Pure Admiration this place of, (16) Bi the Vital Spirit. (15) [Truly this is ] a place consecrated to the divinity and propriety.
27) Lay low (the celebrity) to go to , (26) love the mystic order—thou vivid image of the race,
(25) The pure Govenor and (24) Devotee [of the Order lies in this] hemispheric tomb ,desires [to be] a talisman effective in providing one with virtue, (23) [He] merits thou offer of Libations.
(34) Command Respect. (33)….this place of admiration. (32) Thou sacred inheritance is propriety. (31) The Govenor commands existence in a unique state, (31) [in] this ruler’s hemispheric tomb. (29) The Royal (28) [was] a vigorous man.
(36) The pure habitation (35) [of a ]Ruler obedient to the Order. (37) This abode is possessed by the governor. (38) Admiration to you [who art] obedient to the Order. (49) Pure admiration [for this] tomb. (48) Thou hold upright the pure law. (47). Pure admiration [for this tomb]. (46) [It] acts [as] a talisman effective in providing one with virtue. (45) Bi Po, (44) a pure man, (43) of wonder, (42) [whose] inheritance is consecration to the Divinity. (41) Bi Po lays in state in the tomb, (40) desiring to be endowed with mysterious faculties. (62) Bi Po lays in state in the tomb. (61) [This] tomb [is a] sacred object, (60) a place of righteous wonder. (59) Bi’s tomb (58) [is in] accord [with] the law (57) Bi exist in a unique (and) pure state the abode of the Govenor is pure.. (56) The inheritance of [this] Ruler is joy. (55) [In] this tomb of King Bi (54) lays low a celebrity, [he] is gone. (53) The tomb of Bi (52) is a dormitory [of] love. A place consacreted to the divinity. (51) Thou the vivid image of the race love(d) the mystic order. (50) [He] merits [your] offer of Libations.
This translation of the Cascajal tablet makes it clear that the tablet was written for a local ruler at San Lorenzo called Bi Po. This tablet indicates that Bi Po’s tomb was recognized as a sacred site. It also indicates that the Olmecians believed that if they offered libations at the tombs of their rulers they would gain blessings.
The Cascajal Tablet according to the road builders at the village was found in a mound. The fact that a mound existed where the tablet was found offers considerable support to the idea that the mound where the tablet was found is the tomb of BiPoPo.
The obituary on the Cascajal Tablet may be written about one of the Royals among Olmec heads found at San Lorenzo. The Cascajal Tablet may relate to the personage depicted in San Lorenzo monument 3. Head 3 San Lorenzo
We have found that the names of these rulers is probably found among the symbols associated with the individual Olmec heads. The headband on monument 3 is made up of four parallel ropes encircling the head. In the parallel ropes there are two serrated figures that cross the ropes diagonally.
There is also a plaited diadem or four braids on the back of the figure covered with serrated element. On the side of the head of monument 3, two serrated elements on four parallel lines hang. This element ends with a three-tiered element hanging.
In the Olmec writing the serrated elements means Bi, while the boxes under the serrated element within the four parallel lines would represent the words PoPo. This suggest that the name for monument 3 was probably BiPoPo.
The hanging element on monument 3 is similar to one of the signs on the Cascajal tablet. Although symbol 57 on the Cascajal monument is hard to recognize it appears to include the Bi sign on the top of the symbol. This finding indicates that the BiPoPo of monument 3, is most likely the BiPo(Po) mentioned in the Cascajal Tablet.
Cascajal Sign 57
Stirling said that monument 3 was found at the bottom of a deep ravine half-a-mile southwest of the principal mound of San Lorenzo, along with ceramic potsherds. This is interesting because the village of Cascajal is situated southwest of San Lorenzo.
According to reports of the discovery of the road builders who found the Cascajal Tablet, the tablet came from a mound at Cascajal which was located about a mile from San Lorenzo. The coincidence of finding San Lorenzo Monument 3 in the proximity of the Cascajal mound where the Cascajal Tablet was found suggest that these artifacts concern the same personage. This leads to the possibility that the Cascajal mound was the tomb of BiPoPo.
In conclusion the Cascajal Tablet is an obituary for San Lorenzo Olmec Head 3, which depicts BiPoPo .
Given the presence of similar signs on the Olmec head called San Lorenzo monument 3, which also read BiPoPo suggest that the Cascajal Tablet was written for the personage depicted in Olmec head 3.
Head 3 San Lorenzo
If the Cascajal Tablet really corresponds to one of the Olmec heads suggest that Cascajal may have been a royal burial site. If this is the case it is conceivable that other tablets relating to Olmec rulers may also be found at this locale, since some of these other mounds may be the “hemispheric” tombs of other Olmec rulers.
References to African Inscriptions:
M. Delafosse, Vai leur langue et leur ysteme d'ecriture,L'Anthropologie, 10 (1910).
Lambert, N. (1970). Medinet Sbat et la Protohistoire de Mauritanie Occidentale, Antiquites Africaines, 4, pp.15-62.
Lambert, N. 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);
Kea,R.A. (2004). Expansion and Contractions: World-Historical Change and the Western Sudan World-System (1200/1000BC-1200/1250A.D.) Journal of World-Systems Research, 3, pp.723-816
Winters, Clyde. (1998). The Decipherment of the Olmec Writing System. Retrieved 09/25/2006 at http://olmec98.net/Rtolmec2.htm
Winters,Clyde.(2006). The Olmec Hieroglyphic Script. Retrieved 09/25/2006 at:
posted
Same irrelevant spam as usual from Clyde Winters. We have seen the same cut and paste posts many times before. But the truth that he refuses to acknowledge, is that his fringe theories are not accepted among serious scholars regarding Mesoamerica.
His homemade translations and his claims that Olmec writing is Mande is not accepted either.
So who shall we believe, Winters with his pseudo historical claims, or researchers like Ann Cyphers, Karl Taube, Richard Diehl and other serious scholars who has worked with Mesoamerican research for decades?
One must remember that Clyde Winters claims expertise in archaeology but has never done any archaeological fieldwork. He also claims expertise in genetics but it seems he has never worked in a genetics laboratory with qualified genetic research. He claims expertise in anthropology but has not done any hands on qualified scientific analyzes of human remains.
Ann Cyphers has worked over 30 years with researching the Olmecs, including archaeological field work, analyze of artifacts and writing about the Olmec culture.
Karl Taube became a doctor in anthropology in 1988, he has worked in archaeological field work for decades studying different aspects of Mesoamerican precolumbian cultures, including the Olmecs.
Richard Diehl has conducted archaeological fieldwork since the 1960s and done extensive studies and authored a lot of articles in peer reviewed journals and written books about different aspects of Mesoamerican cultures.
Enrique Villamar who participated in the DNA study of Olmec remains has worked together with Ann Cyphers and authored books together with her.
Also the late Michael Coe did extensive studies of Olmec culture including finding some of the giant stone heads that once mislead people to think they had a connection to Africa. Coe and his students have also contributed greatly to the decipherment of Maya writing.
These and many others are serious scholars who have researched and are researching the Olmec culture and civilisation. No one of them has ever found any connection between the Olmecs (or any other precolumbian Mesoamerican culture) and Africa. There are no African artifacts found in precolumbian archaeological digs, no African DNA found in any precolumbian American human remains, no securely dated African human remains in any precolumbian archaeological context.
Everyone can invent translations. I can also take some ancient script which is still not deciphered, declare that it is written in this and that language and find some symbols somewhere in the world which have a superficial similarity with the signs. Then I make a "translation" based on those "similarities".
Clyde Winters claims that the Olmecs spoke and wrote in Mande and some other authors have claimed that Olmec symbols were ancient Chinese script. But the truth is that Olmec symbols are not yet fully understod.
Wiki has an introduction about Olmec writing with references for further studies (Clyde Winters is not referenced). Olmec hieroglyphs
Clyde Winters have in another context claimed that he translated symbols on a bowl found in Bolivia. Archaeologist Carl Feagans made an analyze of Clyde Winters transliteration and translation and came to the conclusion that his translation was "nonsensical".
quote: The writing on the bowl is nonsensical. And the translation of Clyde Winters even more so.
So, one have all reason to doubt Clyde Winters so called translation of Olmec symbols.
There are real researchers working in Mesoamerica, doing archaeological field work, analyzing museum collections, analyzing human remains, doing laboratory work, analyzing DNA. If you want to learn about the real Olmecs (and other precolumbian American cultures) read their books and articles, read journals, and if you have a possibility attend conferences. That is much more rewarding than listening to pseudohistorians making things up and misrepresenting facts.
Here is an interesting lecture about the Olmecs by a real expert:
The pseudo historical nonsense that is spread by some Afrocentric authors has not gone unnoticed. People of Native American descent has created pages on social media to defend their ancestors cultures from being distorted. I give you a link to one of them, a page on Facebook with the straight forward, and very true name Olmecs were not African . It discusses several aspects of the Afrocentrics trying to steal and distort Native American heritage
And as always I recommend Gabriel Haslip-Vieras book Thieves of civilisation: Afrocentric Attempts to Appropriate the Cultural Heritage of Native Americans and Latino Indo-Mestizos in America
It refutes many of the Afrocentric pseudo historical claims.
-----
For a popular overview of all kinds of "alternative" Olmec speculations Wikipedia has an entry which can serve as a stepping stone into further study of that particular field.
quote:Originally posted by Adira and Marra: ^ have you worked in a genetics laboratory with qualified genetic researchers? 🤔
I never claimed to be a geneticist, while Clyde Winters obviously claims such expertise, without having done any qualified research in a genetics lab.
He also claims expertise in archaeology, without having done any fieldwork or any advanced work in archaeology. I have actually done archaeological fieldwork (both excavations and surveys). I have also worked with museum collections, written reports and papers and other archaeological work. And of course I have attended many conferences and similar.
Also Clyde Winters theories are not accepted among most researchers on pre-columbian archaeology, linguistics, anthropology or genetics and he is mostly not referenced in standard textbooks or other serious publications in those fields of study.
If you want to learn about the real Olmecs, read Ann Cyphers, Enrique Villamar Becerril, Michaeel Coe, Richard A Diehl, Karl Taube and others who have done serious research about them.
And once again I can recommend Gabriel Haslip-Vieras book Thieves of Civilisation where he refutes many pseudohistorical claims made by some Afrocentricas and Wabos (Wanna bee bboriginals).
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Same irrelevant spam as usual from Clyde Winters. We have seen the same cut and paste posts many times before. But the truth that he refuses to acknowledge, is that his fringe theories are not accepted among serious scholars regarding Mesoamerica.
His homemade translations and his claims that Olmec writing is Mande is not accepted either.
So who shall we believe, Winters with his pseudo historical claims, or researchers like Ann Cyphers, Karl Taube, Richard Diehl and other serious scholars who has worked with Mesoamerican research for decades?
One must remember that Clyde Winters claims expertise in archaeology but has never done any archaeological fieldwork. He also claims expertise in genetics but it seems he has never worked in a genetics laboratory with qualified genetic research. He claims expertise in anthropology but has not done any hands on qualified scientific analyzes of human remains.
Ann Cyphers has worked over 30 years with researching the Olmecs, including archaeological field work, analyze of artifacts and writing about the Olmec culture.
Karl Taube became a doctor in anthropology in 1988, he has worked in archaeological field work for decades studying different aspects of Mesoamerican precolumbian cultures, including the Olmecs.
Richard Diehl has conducted archaeological fieldwork since the 1960s and done extensive studies and authored a lot of articles in peer reviewed journals and written books about different aspects of Mesoamerican cultures.
Enrique Villamar who participated in the DNA study of Olmec remains has worked together with Ann Cyphers and authored books together with her.
Also the late Michael Coe did extensive studies of Olmec culture including finding some of the giant stone heads that once mislead people to think they had a connection to Africa. Coe and his students have also contributed greatly to the decipherment of Maya writing.
These and many others are serious scholars who have researched and are researching the Olmec culture and civilisation. No one of them has ever found any connection between the Olmecs (or any other precolumbian Mesoamerican culture) and Africa. There are no African artifacts found in precolumbian archaeological digs, no African DNA found in any precolumbian American human remains, no securely dated African human remains in any precolumbian archaeological context.
Everyone can invent translations. I can also take some ancient script which is still not deciphered, declare that it is written in this and that language and find some symbols somewhere in the world which have a superficial similarity with the signs. Then I make a "translation" based on those "similarities".
Clyde Winters claims that the Olmecs spoke and wrote in Mande and some other authors have claimed that Olmec symbols were ancient Chinese script. But the truth is that Olmec symbols are not yet fully understod.
Wiki has an introduction about Olmec writing with references for further studies (Clyde Winters is not referenced). Olmec hieroglyphs
Clyde Winters have in another context claimed that he translated symbols on a bowl found in Bolivia. Archaeologist Carl Feagans made an analyze of Clyde Winters transliteration and translation and came to the conclusion that his translation was "nonsensical".
quote: The writing on the bowl is nonsensical. And the translation of Clyde Winters even more so.
So, one have all reason to doubt Clyde Winters so called translation of Olmec symbols.
There are real researchers working in Mesoamerica, doing archaeological field work, analyzing museum collections, analyzing human remains, doing laboratory work, analyzing DNA. If you want to learn about the real Olmecs (and other precolumbian American cultures) read their books and articles, read journals, and if you have a possibility attend conferences. That is much more rewarding than listening to pseudohistorians making things up and misrepresenting facts.
Here is an interesting lecture about the Olmecs by a real expert:
The pseudo historical nonsense that is spread by some Afrocentric authors has not gone unnoticed. People of Native American descent has created pages on social media to defend their ancestors cultures from being distorted. I give you a link to one of them, a page on Facebook with the straight forward, and very true name Olmecs were not African . It discusses several aspects of the Afrocentrics trying to steal and distort Native American heritage
And as always I recommend Gabriel Haslip-Vieras book Thieves of civilisation: Afrocentric Attempts to Appropriate the Cultural Heritage of Native Americans and Latino Indo-Mestizos in America
It refutes many of the Afrocentric pseudo historical claims.
-----
For a popular overview of all kinds of "alternative" Olmec speculations Wikipedia has an entry which can serve as a stepping stone into further study of that particular field.
No one has ever refuted any of my research. The Olmecs came from Africa. There is no evidence that the Olmec existed in Mexico before 1200-1100 BC.
The archaeological evidence suggest that the Olmec "miraculously appear on American soil".
There is no scholar that has presented any evidence of continuity between the Olmec civilization and earlier Mexican civilizations.
Some researchers claim that I am wrongly ruling out an “indigenous revolution” for the origin of the Olmec civilization. This is their opinion—the archaeological evidence, not I, suggest that the founders of the Olmec civilization were not “indigenous” people.
In the Olmec World: Ritual and Rulership (1995), (ed.) by Carolyn Tate, on page 65, we find the following statement”Olmec culture as far as we know seems to have no antecedents; no material models remain for its monumental constructions and sculptures and the ritual acts captured in small objects”.
M. Coe, writing in Regional Perspective on the Olmecs (1989), (ed.) by Sharer and Grove, observed that “ on the contrary, the evidence although negative, is that the Olmec style of art, and Olmec engineering ability suddenly appeared full fledged from about 1200 BC”.
Mary E. Pye, writing in Olmec Archaeology in Mesoamerica (2000), (ed.) by J.E. Cark and M.E. Pye,makes it clear after a discussion of the pre-Olmec civilizations of the Mokaya tradition, that these cultures contributed nothing to the rise of the Olmec culture. Pye wrote “The Mokaya appear to have gradually come under Olmec influence during Cherla times and to have adopted Olmec ways. We use the term olmecization to describe the processes whereby independent groups tried to become Olmecs, or to become like the Olmecs” (p.234). Pye makes it clear that it was around 1200 BC that Olmec civilization rose in Mesoamerica. She continues “Much of the current debate about the Olmecs concerns the traditional mother culture view. For us this is still a primary issue. Our data from the Pacific coast show that the mother culture idea is still viable in terms of cultural practices. The early Olmecs created the first civilization in Mesoamerica; they had no peers, only contemporaries” (pp.245-46).
Richard A. Diehl The Olmecs:America’s first civilization (2005), wrote “ The identity of these first Olmecs remains a mystery. Some scholars believe they were Mokaya migrants from the Pacific coast of Chiapas who brought improved maize strains and incipient social stratification with them. Others propose that Olmec culture evolved among the local indigenous populations without significant external stimulus. I prefer the latter position, but freely admit that we lack sufficient information on the period before 1500 BC to resolve the issue” (p.25).
Pool (17-18), in Olmec Archaeology and early MesoAmerica (2007), argues that continuity exist between the Olmec and pre-Olmec cultures in Mexico “[even]though Coe now appears to favor an autochthonous origin for Olmec culture (Diehl & Coe 1995:150), he long held that the Olmec traits appeared at San Lorenzo rather suddenly during the Chicharras phase (ca 1450-1408 BC) (Coe 1970a:25,32; Coe and Diehl 1980a:150)”.
Pool admits (p.95), that “this conclusion contrasts markedly with that of the excavators of San Lorenzo, who reported dramatic change in ceramic type and argued on this basis for a foreign incursion of Olmecs into Olman (Coe and Diehl 1980a, p.150).”
The evidence presented by these authors make it clear that the Olmec introduced a unique culture to Mesoamerica that was adopted by the Mesoamericans. As these statements make it clear that was no continuity between pre-Olmec cultures and the Olmec culture.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Adira and Marra: ^ have you worked in a genetics laboratory with qualified genetic researchers? 🤔
You don't have to work in a genetics lab to write articles on genetics, you just need a background in archaeology. For example, Colin Refrew, wrote "From molecular genetics to archaeogenetics",April 24, 2001,PNAS | 98 (9) 4830-4832 | https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.091084198
Stop trying to create restrictions relating to writing genetics articles that don't exist.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Adira and Marra: ^ have you worked in a genetics laboratory with qualified genetic researchers? 🤔
I never claimed to be a geneticist, while Clyde Winters obviously claims such expertise, without having done any qualified research in a genetics lab.
He also claims expertise in archaeology, without having done any fieldwork or any advanced work in archaeology. I have actually done archaeological fieldwork (both excavations and surveys). I have also worked with museum collections, written reports and papers and other archaeological work. And of course I have attended many conferences and similar.
Also Clyde Winters theories are not accepted among most researchers on pre-columbian archaeology, linguistics, anthropology or genetics and he is mostly not referenced in standard textbooks or other serious publications in those fields of study.
If you want to learn about the real Olmecs, read Ann Cyphers, Enrique Villamar Becerril, Michaeel Coe, Richard A Diehl, Karl Taube and others who have done serious research about them.
And once again I can recommend Gabriel Haslip-Vieras book Thieves of Civilisation where he refutes many pseudohistorical claims made by some Afrocentricas and Wabos (Wanna bee bboriginals).
As usual you don't know what you're talking about. I write archaeogenetics articles.
You don't have to work in a genetics lab to write articles on genetics, you just need a background in archaeology. For example, Colin Refrew, wrote "From molecular genetics to archaeogenetics",April 24, 2001,PNAS | 98 (9) 4830-4832 | https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.091084198
Stop trying to create restrictions relating to writing population genetics articles that don't exist.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes it sounds as if Clyde Winters actually believes that he is a geneticist, archaeologist or anthropologist (and all other sorts of expert). It is hard to know if he has fallen for his own mythology or if he only cherry picks half misunderstood information in order to prove his preconceived notion that ancient Americans were black Africans.
As I mentioned before, he has no credibility in the real academic world with real archaeologists, anthropologists, geneticists and other serious scholars who work in the field, in museums, in laboratories and in universities.
He has no experience in archaeological fieldwork or advanced archaeological research. He can absolutely not compare himself with Colin Renfrew who was a very experienced archaeologist who also cooperated with researchers from other fields.
Winters has no experience from any advanced genetic laboratory work. He has also no real hands on experience in any other types of advanced analyzes of human remains.
It is telling that most standard reference books (if any) in any of these fields do not mention Clyde Winters. It is also telling when students in archaeology are introduced into the world of archaeology they read books written by among others Colin Renfrew but not by Clyde Winters.
One can think that the question of the origin of Olmec culture is purely an academic issue, but it is also political. Native Americans are already a marginalized group, and it does not get better when pseudo-historians want to distort their heritage or take credit for their achievements. Most of these pseudo-historians seem not be so much out to find the truth but only to cherry pick and distort information to try to make it look like all ancient American cultures, and especially the Olmecs, were Black/African. The purpose many times seems to be more political than about finding the truth. They are often not interested in the cultures of ancient Amerindians, only about trying to paint them black.
They are experts in only one thing: to spam the internet with their odd theories and hyper-diffusionist speculations.
Once again I recommend Gabriel Haslip-Vieras book Thieves of civilisation where some of these Afrocentric and Wabo-centric speculations are refuted.
And for those who want to learn about the real Olmecs (and other Mesoamerican precolumbian cultures) I once again recommend books by Ann Cyphers, Richaed Diehl, Michael Coe, Karl Taube, Enrique Villamar Becerril and others who actually have worked (both hands on, and theoretically) with the remains of these ancient cultures.
Much better learn from the real experts.
--- For the interested there are also many both academic journals and more popular magazines to read. Do not read pseudo articles or books by blackcentric extremists. The real literature is available at a library near you (hopefully).
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Adira and Marra: [qb] ^ have you worked in a genetics laboratory with qualified genetic researchers? 🤔
You don't have to work in a genetics lab to write articles on genetics, you just need a background in archaeology. For example, Colin Refrew, wrote "From molecular genetics to archaeogenetics",April 24, 2001,PNAS | 98 (9) 4830-4832 | https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.091084198
Clyde you have no educational background in archaeology, stop making up stuff
Colin Renfrew is a Senior Fellow of the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research (University of Cambridge) and Emeritus Disney Professor of Archaeology in the University of Cambridge. He has co-authored peer reviewed articles in science journals on Archaeology. In 1965 he completed his PhD thesis Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of the Cyclades and their external relations;
Clyde, no giant self-bibliographies in the thread please (exception peer -reviewed in science journals) but let's stick to Olmecs and mtDNA A
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Adira and Marra: ^ have you worked in a genetics laboratory with qualified genetic researchers? 🤔
I never claimed to be a geneticist, while Clyde Winters obviously claims such expertise, without having done any qualified research in a genetics lab.
He also claims expertise in archaeology, without having done any fieldwork or any advanced work in archaeology. I have actually done archaeological fieldwork (both excavations and surveys). I have also worked with museum collections, written reports and papers and other archaeological work. And of course I have attended many conferences and similar.
Also Clyde Winters theories are not accepted among most researchers on pre-columbian archaeology, linguistics, anthropology or genetics and he is mostly not referenced in standard textbooks or other serious publications in those fields of study.
If you want to learn about the real Olmecs, read Ann Cyphers, Enrique Villamar Becerril, Michaeel Coe, Richard A Diehl, Karl Taube and others who have done serious research about them.
And once again I can recommend Gabriel Haslip-Vieras book Thieves of Civilisation where he refutes many pseudohistorical claims made by some Afrocentricas and Wabos (Wanna bee bboriginals).
You're being defensive I understand this is an argumentative forum. I'm not supporting Clyde Winters I know him to be a charlatan for decades.
I'm actually interested in the whole idea of primary research into genetics. Collecting and analysing samples in my own Lab. Otherwise how can I trust the results?
Posts: 525 | From: Terra | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Adira and Marra: You're being defensive I understand this is an argumentative forum. I'm not supporting Clyde Winters I know him to be a charlatan for decades. I'm actually interested in the whole idea of primary research into genetics. Collecting and analysing samples in my own Lab. Otherwise how can I trust the results?
Sorry if I misunderstood.
Yes, to actually know how to collect and analyse samples, and be able to do it and have the right resources, ought to be a clear advantage, yes even a necessity for anyone who wants to do more advanced studies in archaeogenetics (and other types of genetic studies).
Many archaeogenetic, archaeological and similar projects are nowadays undertaken as collaborative projects between archaeologist with their specialized knowledge, and geneticists with their special skills. It seems the study of ancient Olmec DNA is such a collaborative work, where Ann Cyphers contributes with her archaeological experience after working with the Olmecs for decades and Enrique Villamar Becerril with his specific knowledge in genetics.
Collaborative efforts are common since it is seldom one person sits on all knowledge necessary for such projects.
Some projects include archaeological knowledge, anthropology (for example osteology), chemistry, knowledge about isotopes (like strontium isotopes), zooarchaeology, macrofossil analyse (paleobotany), genetics and other specialized skills. And in the end the participants must be able to communicate with each other and also with other colleagues through reports, articles, papers and lectures.
At the same time as specialisation increases, the demands on collaboration also increases, and sometimes it can be a bit tricky to get it all together.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to set the record straight. Central and South America are tropical regions spanning the Equator just like Africa does. It should not be surprising to anyone that there would be people there with tropical traits similar to those in Africa, Asia and the Pacific.
Note that the first person to call these people Negroid and African migrants was the person who discovered these heads:
quote: To further demonstrate the connection of the mother tongue already with the one from Chiapas, we will continue with what it says the aforementioned bishop; he adds: that the Indians have great fear of black, because the memory of one lasts of their primitive ancestors of Ethiopian color that He was a great and cruel warrior, that those of Ochuc and from other towns of the plains they revered much, which they call Yalahau.
All of this 'controversy' is due to the racialist anthropology of the 18th and 19th century which defined native Americans as having different "racial" characteristics than Africans. Similarly many African scholars are having similar problems with these same racialist concepts. But the root of these ideas did not start with African scholars.
Then you had Thor Heyerdahl who build a reed boat and tried to sail it from Africa to the Americas, showing it was possible in ancient times:
posted
Just to clear up things about any African connection with precolumbian Americas: So far no tangible evidence of any African presence has been found in the Americas, neither genetically, or archaeologically. No African artifacts, no iron objects, no African archaeological sites (compare the "Vikings" who actually left both houses, a smitty and some typical objects in L'Anse aux Meadows in Canada).
There are literally hundreds of researchers (archaeologists, anthropologists, geneticists, art historians, linguists and others) who are researching pre-columbian Americas, and they have not yet found any African artifacts or other traces in the archaeological record. (As a paranthesis I have a good friend who worked nearly 30 years with archaeological research in Mexico, Belize and Guatemala and so far he has not seen any evidence of any African presence. Not his colleagues either. I have another friend [I also had her as a teacher in the University] who worked with precolumbian cultures in the Andes. She has not found any traces of any Africans either.)
The Ra expeditions are of course interesting, but there must be further evidence that such travels did in fact take place. Also remember that there has been claims of Sumerians, Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, Celts, Chinese, Basque fishermen and others also managing to reach the Americas.
Some brits actually traversed the Atlantic with a skin boat in old Celtic style in 1976 to 1977, from Ireland to Canada.
About the Melanesian connection, it seems that it is some old DNA which were brought in to the Americas by people who shared ancestors with Australasian peoples. The percentage is not very high. The subject is still under research. Jennifer Raff adresses it in the interview I linked to in a commentary in the thread about pre-Maya DNA. She has some interesting thoughts.
Regarding different adaptations to different climates in the Americas, that is most plausible. We can see that peoples vary in skin color and some other phenotypical features (like stature). Also some people in the Andes seem more adapted to higher altitudes. All such adaptations are to be expected after being in the Americas maybe 20 000 years or more (latest call is the up to 23 000 years old footprints in White Sands in New Mexico, which are found together with footprints from now extinct megafauna).
Talking about Heyerdahl, he did not only believe that other peoples came to the Americas, he also thought that Native Americans sailed out in the Ocean and reached Polynesia. He also showed that such travel is possible with the Kon-Tiki raft (1947). Later one has actually found a Native American genetic signal on the Marquesas islands in Polynesia. The signal is dated to around the 13th century AD (if I remember correctly). Exactly who visited who and mixed is of course difficult to know. But still interesting.
Another exciting discovery is signs of a Native American presence on the Falkland islands (somewhere between 1275 and 1420). It seems that the Europeans maybe were not the first peoples who landed there.
Amerindian variation: a rather light skinned Native from Guyana. His people lived until relatively recently quite isolated
A member of the Pomo people painted by Grace Hudson in the late 1800s or early 1900s. His skin is rather dark.
A young Maya woman. She reminds a bit about people on the ancient murals in Bonampak
An Awa man from Brazil. His hair has more locks than what is common among many other Native Americans. His people also lived isolated until quire recently
Native American variation is an exciting subject, but this comment is already rather long.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug, your inbox is full you had a URL that was not clickable and was too long for the thread format cause the slide slider I used the below alternate URL (I made)
All of this 'controversy' is due to... __________________________
please check if this is the right URL. If any URL is too long for a thread or is not postable because of that message "Sorry, we do not permit the following html tag,.."
just shorten the URL at this site, super easy to use
that solves both problems and you can go in and edit the post if that is not the right URL thanks
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
All of this 'controversy' is due to the racialist anthropology of the 18th and 19th century which defined native Americans as having different "racial" characteristics than Africans.
posted
Here is the full text from Jose Melgar about the Olmec heads where he has a lengthy discussion about the possibilities of oral legends or histories of blacks in the Americas and the Olmec heads.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
^^^^^^^^^
Where in the hall is the frackin' RAW DATA?
And no, mtDNA is not enough because it's lopsided not showing male ancestry nor the meat&cheese uniparentals between the two unilateral slices of bread.
One slice of bread does not a sandwich make.
Drop some STaRs and whole genome SNiPs to tell the whole story, plastic, in the round.
I've been on an ADMIXTURE trail of Americans. Those we call Indians aren't the only Americans nor do Indians claim shared origins with those others. My interest is Indians ancestries and percentages in various peoples.
For me that helps see American ancestries start/spread throughout both continents and Meso-America. Here, have a sneak peek at my Nakatsuka 2020's SF2 aDNA only redux. Unlike any before, this one is sorted strictly by time. Three major southern continent lineages go back to the early Holocene 12,000 ears ago, and are all over that continent.
Wait, Willerslev Labs S17 does show African ancestry in Americans or I'm colorblind!
. It's at insignificant levels in * Trail Creek * Anc Br Columbia * Kennewick * Lagoa Santa * Pta Sta Ana * Anc Patagonia
Moreno-Mayar (2018) et al's Africans are as listed in their Table S12. Whole genome sequencing dataset. Details about the whole genome sequences used in this study are shown. For each individual, we enumerate the following features:
ID, a generic name used to refer to each individual; Type, the type of calls considered for each individual, called genotypes (0) or random alleles (1); NoMiss, the number of non-missing autosomal calls after implementing the 1000 Genomes Project strict accessibility mask; %Het, the proportion of heterozygous calls out of 'NoMiss'; Population, the population grouping used throughout this study; Category, a term describing broad continental ancestry and sample type, present-day (PD) or ancient (Anc)
Geneticist find no mixing with Africans or Europeans among early Native Americans
quote: More important, all genomic studies rule out the possibility that the First Peoples mixed with Europeans or Africans or any other populations before 1492. This conclusion runs contrary to stories of a trans-Atlantic migration promoted by popular television series, but the totality of genetic and archaeological evidence emphatically invalidates those notions.
Raff, Jennifer, 2021: Genomes Reveal Humanity’s Journey into the Americas Scientific American, May 2021, p 10
Jennifer Raff recently wrote a book which discuss the genetics on Native American peoples and the peopling of the American continents
posted
It is interesting that many have focused on the 17 large stone heads and seem to have forgot that the majority of Olmec art are in the form of smaller objects, smaller statues, figurines e t c. They show all kinds of different faces, faces who look Native American, Asian and sometimes European. So Olmec art could indeed be quite varied in it´s appearance.
Olmec figurine, Museum of world culture, Gothenburg Sweden
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the colossal heads represent a physical type that looks "Negroid" in features that could have been an indigenous type that was old in the region rather than some people who went there in ships
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
In fact there are indigenous persons also today which show similarities with the Olmec heads.
Of course one can not be fully sure how naturalistic or not the portraits are, or if certain traits were exaggerated or not. One must always be a bit careful before interpreting ancient art as fully naturalistic, and ancient portraits as exact representations of actual persons.
But if one shall judge from pure lookership this man fits rather well into the morphology of some stone heads.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Um, isn't this thread for DNA evidence? SMH.
posted
It would be good if more DNA studies would be done on Olmec DNA. Hopefully they will find bones where both mtDNA, Y-Dna and autosomal DNA is preserved.
Enrique Villamar Becerril have been studying DNA from different Mesoamerican human remains as a part of his thesis work. Presumably we may learn some more when his thesis get published.
Earlier he has among other things studied skeletal remains for his licentiate thesis which were published already in 2002.
Villamar Becerril, Enrique, Estudio osteológico y tafonómico de entierros olmecas del periodo preclásico de San Lorenzo, Veracruz, tesis de licenciatura en Antropología Física, enah, México, 2002.
Here is a number of Arqueologia Mexicana from 2007 were he participated. He seems to have been around a while in Olmec research.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Um, isn't this thread for DNA evidence? SMH.
Of course not because that so-called DNA study with its "novel" methods was never peer reviewed or published in any major journals. So it is nothing but heresay at this point, just like many other theories about the Americas that have come from European 'scholars'. No details on the skeletons used or the raw DNA data at all.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe we just have to wait for Enrique Villamar Becerril´s thesis for more details, since it is supposed to include several DNA studies he done in Mesoamerica.
I suppose one can also contact him for more details.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2684 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic