from EuroAfrica-Magazine Website
Dr. Wiercinski (1972) 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
there were Africans among the Olmecs.
Constance Irwin, in Fair Gods and Stone Faces, says that anthropologist see,
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).
Many African skeletons have been found in Mexico. Carlo Marquez (1956, pp.179-180) claimed that these skeletons indicated marked pronathousness and prominent cheek bones.
Wiercinski found African skeletons at the Olmec sites of Monte Alban, Cerro de las Mesas and Tlatilco. Morley, Brainerd and Sharer (1989) said that Monte Alban was a colonial Olmec center (p.12). Diehl and Coe (1996) admitted that the inspiration of Olmec Horizon A, common to San Lorenzo's initial phase has been found at Tlatilco.
Moreover, the pottery from this site is
engraved with Olmec signs.
To determine the racial heritage of the
ancient Olmecs, Dr. Wiercinski (1972b) used classic diagnostic
traits determined by craniometric and cranioscopic methods. These
measurements were then compared to a series of three crania sets
from Poland, Mongolia and Uganda to represent the three racial
categories of mankind.
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.
This would mean that the racial
composition of 26.9 percent of the crania found at Tlatilco and 9.1
percent of crania from Cerro de las Mesas were of African origin.
The races recorded 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.
It is interesting to note that the
empirical frequencies of the Dongolan type at Tlatilco is .231, this
was more than twice as high as Wiercinski's theoretical figure of
.101, for the presence of Dongolans at Tlatilco.
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.
To support this view he,
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 populations 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.
This re-analysis of the Olmec skeletal
material from Tlatilco and Cerro, which correctly identifies
Armenoid, Dongolan and Loponoid as euphemisms 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
This skeletal evidence explains the
discovery of many African tribes in Mexico and Central America when
Columbus discovered the Americas (de Quatrefages, 1836).
The Maya during the Pre-Classic period
built pyramids over the Olmec pyramids to disguise the Olmec origin
of these pyramids.