Olmec Exhibit !

[nebsen]

Yesterday on the evening news it was announced that a new exhibit at the main museum ( Northern California ) called Olmec : Colossal Master Work Of Ancient Mexico, which showed a couple of the colossal heads that so many on ESR are familiar with. They talked about this mysterious culture & civilization being the forerunner of both Mayan & Aztec civilizations with a very high culture that was in someways as sophisticated if not more, than both Mayan & Aztec esp. in stone arts.

But, what got me, for the first time, I heard it said that the Olmec civilization seems to come from African roots as well as Asian influences . Now this is the first time that I have heard mainstream news outlet narrated by a latino news man, say African roots as well as Asian. They usually say mysterious peoples, or they will high light the Asian aspect only.

Is this something new for mainstream museums & talks about the Olmec culture ? Any way, I live in a city with a huge latino, Mexican population , so the exhibit is being geared towards this community & it's link to Mexico !

[anansi]

Feb 19, 2011 21:43:14 GMT -5 nebsen said:

Yesterday on the evening news it was announced that a new exhibit at the main museum ( Northern California ) called Olmec : Colossal Master Work Of Ancient Mexico, which showed a couple of the colossal heads that so many on ESR are familiar with. They talked about this mysterious culture & civilization being the forerunner of both Mayan & Aztec civilizations with a very high culture that was in someways as sophisticated if not more, than both Mayan & Aztec esp. in stone arts.

But, what got me, for the first time, I heard it said that the Olmec civilization seems to come from African roots as well as Asian influences . Now this is the first time that I have heard mainstream news outlet narrated by a latino news man, say African roots as well as Asian. They usually say mysterious peoples, or they will high light the Asian aspect only.

Is this something new for mainstream museums & talks about the Olmec culture ? Any way, I live in a city with a huge latino, Mexican population , so the exhibit is being geared towards this community & it's link to Mexico !

What ch. and for what city?

[Tukuler al~Takruri]

No. Some Hispanic scholars have said as much since the first
"Giant Head" displaying wide nose and thick lips was unearthed.

Keep in mind that most but not all Giant Heads have those features.

Giant Olmec Heads

Olmec Colossal Heads

Feb 19, 2011 21:43:14 GMT -5 nebsen said:

Is this something new for mainstream museums & talks about the Olmec culture ? Any way, I live in a city with a huge latino, Mexican population , so the exhibit is being geared towards this community & it's link to Mexico !

[nebsen]

deyoung.famsf.org/

Here is the link for those that want to check it out. City San Francisco Ca.. there is a large vibrant latino population here in the Bay Area. Yes, I'm aware that all the stone heads do not look African, some more Indian to Asian looking esp. the the masks.

I remember seeing Ivan Van Sertima in the 80's doing a lecture "They Came Before Columbus", at the time his history of the Americas was very controversial to say the least.

Than in July 1996 Time magazine did a piece (archeology) which I still have titled "Mystery Of The Olmec" by Michael D. Lemonick . This is some of what was wrote in the article at the time. "Asian hunter gathers who crossed into the Americas at least 12, 000 years ago".

"But archaeologist don't know what transformed a society of farmers into a class-based social structure of the Olmec."

" Olmec style human figures typically have squarish facial features with full lips, a flat nose,pronounced jowls & slating eyes reminiscent at least to early travelers in the region of African or Chinese peoples."

" There were probably a number of different populations forming groups that rose & fell over time & shifted alliances. "There is still hope that archaeologist can solve this mystery, as well as a dozens of other unanswered questions about the Olmec"

So, I will have to go to this exhibit to see what new information concerning the Olmec , to see how far they have come, at least they do mention Africa as a possible root influences. Will the mystery ever be solved , or does the establishment want it to remain a mystery ?

[clydewin98]

There is no secret about the Olmecs. Eurocentrists know that the Olmec do not appear in Mexico until after 1200BC.


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.

Prior to the Olmec the Pre-Classic cultures were founded by Blacks.

[nebsen]

Clyde Winters ,

Thanks for your feedback concerning the Olmec culture. I know you have been one of the leading voice's pointing to a African root for the Olmec civilization. But my question is, if you say in your opening sentence "There is no secret about the Olmecs. Eurocentrist know that the Olmec do not appear in Mexico until after 1200 BC."

So why all the subterfuge around the Olmec culture & civilization ? Can you tie all the lose ends together for more of a wholistic view of this ancient mesoamerican civilization, or point to books & authors that do ?

[clydewin98]

Eurocentrists deny an African influence and origin in relation to the Olmec to support their contention that Africans do not have a history.

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.

[clydewin98]

You can not compare contemporary Native Americans to the Olmecs because they have mixed with African slaves and therefore look similar to the African Olmecs.

The only way you can get a picture of the original native Americans is to look at the mayan art. the classical Mayan people when compared to the Olmec do not have African features.

Olmec





Mayan People






The Maya do not look like the Olmec.

[clydewin98]

When the Olmecs arrived in Mexico they would not have been seen as a strange ethnic group.This is because there were already Mexican Blacks, when the Mande speaking Olmecs landed in Mexico between 1400-1200 BC.

The Olmecs were not the first Africans to create a civilization in Mexico. These Africans came from the ancient Sahara and West Africa.



Africans founded many of the earliest civilizations in the New World. We do not know when these Blacks arrived in the Americas. Scientists theorize that over 5000 years ago a group of African settlers sailing along the West African coast, in their papyrus trading vessels were caught in a storm and drifted aimlessly out to sea. In the Atlantic ocean they were captured by the South Equatorial current and carried across the Atlantic towards the Americas.

We can assume that due to the ability of these explorers to navigate by the stars they were probably able to make a return trip to West Africa. Much of West Africa 5000 years ago was unoccupied. This means that the populations that later moved into West Africa were living in Middle Africa,and the Sahara. These people due to a different climate in the Sahara at this time traveled from community to community by sea. It seems logical to assume that one of these Paleo-African groups travelled down the long extinct rivers of Middle Africa and sailed out into the Atlantic Ocean and was carried to the Americas by the powerful currents found in the Atlantic Ocean.

Mexico and Central America were centers of African civilization 5000 years ago. In Belize , around 2500 B.C., we see evidence of agriculture. The iconography of this period depicts Africoids. And at Izapa in 1358 B.C., astronomer-priests invented the first American calendar. In addition numerous sculptures of blacks dating to the 2nd millennium B.C, have been found at La Venta, Chiapas, Teotihuacan and Tlatilco.


Chiapas Blacks

The African voyagers to the New World came here in papyrus boats. A stone stela from Izapa, Chiapas in southern Mexico show the boats these Africans came in when they sailed to the Americas. These boats were carried across the Atlantic ocean to Mexico and Brazil, by the North Equatorial current which meets the Canaries Current off the Senegambian coast. It is interesting to note that papyrus boats are still being built in West Africa today.

The earliest culture founded by Blacks in Mexico was the Mokaya tradition. The Mokaya tradition was situated on the Pacific coast of Mexico in the Soconusco region. Sedentary village life began as early as 2000BC. By 1700-1500 BC we see many African communities in the Mazatan region. This is called the Barra phase or Ocos complex.

During the Barra phase these Blacks built villages amd made beautiful ceramic vessels often with three legs. They also made a large number of effigy vessels.

The figurines of the Ocos are the most significant evidence for Blacks living in the area during this period. The female figurine from Aquiles Serdan is clearly that of an African woman.

Ocos Female

The Blacks of the Mokaya traditions were not Olmec. The civilization of the Mokaya traditions began 700 years before the Olmec arrived in Mexico.

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 (1989), 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).


Cherla
There continues to be no evidence that Olmec civilization originated in Mexico. R.A. Diehl, in The Olmecs (Thames & Hudson, 2004) wrote that “The identity of these first Olmecs remain 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 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 B.C. to resolve the issue” (p.25).

[nebsen]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeOb9qyu73Q&feature=feedf

Here is a video I found on You-Tube that I felt did a good job in giving information about the Olmec & the Pan African perspective. Now I know it is just a video, but again I felt it addressed in a wholistic fashion some elements that have been missing from this topic. Although there is no DNA evidence here, only a logical flow that makes good sense to me. Also their is an important message in this video, some might disagree with it, but it is worth considering.

[nebsen]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWcjyZGB1Ws

Here is another You- Tube video that I liked , I think the brother brings up very important ponits about the Olmec stone heads, enjoy !

[clydewin98]

I have made these videos on the Olmec that I believe you may find interesting

[near]

Feb 22, 2011 22:46:47 GMT -5 clydewin98 said:

I have made these videos on the Olmec that I believe you may find interesting

Hey. Your videos are very nice, what do you use to make/edit them?

[nebsen]

" Africans have many phenotypic variation & genetic variation too. Some populations may resemble each other in terms of phenotype,but not in genetics , is another issue".

Shomarka Keita

[quetzalcoatl]

For years, scholars, who have actually done research and excavations in the Olmec area and other Mesoamerican scholars, have agreed that the Gulf Olmecs were a local development that began hundreds of years before 1200 B.C. Below I quote some of the key researchers in this area. I quote enough to get a context and evaluate partial quotations elsewhere. I also provide full bibliographic citations.


Grove, D.C. 1993. “Olmec” Horizons in Formative Period Mesoamerica: Diffusion or Social Evolution?” In Rice, D. S. ed. Latin American
Horizons. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks.

p.85 The “origins” of Olmec culture have been speculative at times.
Because the early La Venta explorations were confined to a mound-plaza
complex (Complex A) now known to be relatively late in Olmec prehistory, no antecedents to the artifacts recovered there were readily apparent, and thus a notion began that perhaps Olmec culture was intrusive and that it had not originated on the Gulf Coast (see below also). However, the stratigraphic data later retrieved by Michael Coe and Richard Diehl from San Lorenzo clearly demonstrate that Olmec culture is indeed indigenous to the Gulf Coast (Coe 1970; Coe and Diehl 1980; Grove 1981a: 376-378).
. . . . .
The argument for the origin of Olmec style coming from coastal Guatemala is made by John Graham, “Olmec Diffusion: A Cultural View from Pacific Guatemala,” pp. 227-246. This book has chapter by practically all the key archaeologists involved in Olmec research. Now, having published a number of books, I can tell you that these chapters were written up to 2 years before publication. Furthermore, ideas are published as papers in professional journals before they get into books. These ideas are at least 10 years old.
. . . .
As I pointed out previously, the Olmec did not arise suddenly. In the Gulf Area, there is evidence of continual and gradually increasing in complexity occupation of the San Lorenzo site dating to 1500 B.C. (Coe and Diehl 1980) and in the La Venta site occupation of the Rio Bari as far back as 1800 B.C. (Rust and Leyden 1994). A recent summary of the origin of the Olmecs is the quote from Clark (1991):

“The Mesoamerican tradition was first clearly in place by Olmec times.
Here [in Guatemala BOM] its beginnings are traced back five centuries
before the Olmecs to the Mokaya of the Pacific Coast of Chiapas, Mexico. It is argued here that the first complex cities in Middle America arose in this littoral shore and had profound and widespread civilizing influence on the area that would soon become the nucleus of Mesoamerica. Recent research in the Mazatan region of Coastal Chiapas suggests that simple chiefdom societies were in place by at least 1650 B.C.”

Pye, J.E. and Pye, M.E. 2000 “The Pacific Coast and the Olmec,” in Clark, J.B. and. Pye, M.E, eds., Olmec Art and Archaeology in Mesoamerica pp. 217-251 Washington: National Academy of Art

p. 243-244. At the beginning of the Early Formative [BOM Barra Phase 1700-1500 BC]-, the Mokaya at the Soconusco were clearly independent of other peoples of Mesoamerica, Early forms of rank society, or simple chiefdoms, evolved in the Pacific Coast region, and these institutions were quickly adopted by neighboring peoples including those living in Olman [what is usually called the Olmec heartland] (see Clark 1994a; Clark and Blake 1994). There is clear archaeological evidence of early contact between the peoples of the Pacific Coast and those of Olman in pre-Olmec times, most apparent in ceramic assemblages and the types of obsidian imported into each region. The Mokaya’s impact on the first villagers of Olman remains to be determined, but we think it was significant [see Clark 1990; Clark and Blake 1989). Some contact was maintained between the two groups throughout the Formative period, but after the initial close contact at the beginning of the Early Formative the peoples in the Soconusco and Olman developed along separate paths. The people of Olman created the cultural patterns and representational systems that we now call “Olmec”, and the Mokaya of the Soconusco continued much as before. About 1200 B.C. the Olmecs of Olman and the Mokaya of the Mazatan regions once again begin to interact with greater frequency.
. . . .
pp. 245-246 Creation of this first stratified society involved the forging and crystallization of social, political, and religious institutions that became the hallmarks of Mesoamerica itself. As with all historical entities and cultural configurations, this was not creation ex nihilo but from preexistent matter. The Olmecs clearly were influenced by their predecessors and neighbors, such as the Mokaya, in significant ways, but they also created essentially new institutions on their own, and for this reason they hold the founding position in Mesoamerican history.

Diehl, R. A. and M. D. Coe 1995 “ Olmec Archaeology,” in The Olmec world Ritual and Rulership Princeton, NJ: Art Museum, Princeton University.

p. 11-12 “Biologically, the Olmec were Native Americans whose Ice Age ancestors entered the New World from northern Asia via the Bering Strait land bridge. This may come as a surprise to readers familiar with recent sensationalist claims that the Olmecs were Egyptians, Phoenicians, West Africans, Chinese, or even refugees from sunken continents. Scholars rightly dismiss such ideas as outlandish fairy tales and will continue to do so until archaeologists uncover at least one Old world artifact or human skeleton in an Olmec archaeological site. A verified archaeological find of this sort would be truly revolutionary, but none has appeared and it is unlikely any will.”
. . .
The earliest evidence of human occupation in the Olmec heartland is found on the natural levees of the Rio Bari, an old, silted-in stream near la Venta, Tabasco, where farmers settled as early as 2200 B.C. similar villages occurred along all the river valleys of the Olmec heartland in the following centuries. Although they appear to lack the monumental art and architecture, social hierarchies, and complex institutions that characterize Olmec culture, these villages clearly provided the local population base for the later Olmec expansion. By the end of the pre-Olmec period, San Lorenzo and La Venta were growing faster than other communities and fragments of basalt monuments in some of the deepest levels at San Lorenzo suggest that the Olmec sculptural tradition existed prior to 1200 B.C.”

Benson, E. P. 1996. “History of Olmec Investigations.” In Olmec
Art of Ancient Mexico edited by Benson, E. P. and de la
Fuente, pp. 17-27. Washington: National Gallery of Art.

p. 27. “The Gulf Coast people did not spring out of nowhere, and they were not the only people with an advanced society. Carefully laid-out ceremonial sites started early in many places. People were farming, making pottery, and trading for some time before the Olmec phenomenon. Yet many of the accomplishments of “the Olmec Horizon” are unique. The Gulf Coast region undoubtedly led many of these advances, but the Olmec phenomenon could not have evolved only in one region, for it was fed by many ideas, energies, and materials.”
. . . . .
The Olmecs are not <<exotic>>. The evidence is overwhelming that they
developed just like many other civilizations from precursors who were
hunter gatherers. Eventually maize, beans, and squash were domesticated and formed the backbone of the diet of all Mesoamerican peoples. This led eventually to many small sedentary hamlets by around 2500 B.C. We have C14 dated corn growing settlements around 1800 B.C. in the Rio Bari area of La Venta. There is also evidence of influence and contact between the future Olmec Gulf area and the Mokaya region of Chiapas with similar ceramics etc.

Pye, J.E. and Pye, M.E. 2000 “Introducing Olmec Archaeology,” in Clark, J.B. and Pye, M.E. eds., Olmec Art and Archaeology in Mesoamerica pp. 9-17 Washington: National Academy of Art

p. 9-10 This definition begs the question, of course, of just what is meant by “Mesoamerican practices”; these include traits such as the cultivation of chocolate, manufacture of paper, the rubber-ball game, human sacrifice, complex ritual calendar, beliefs in corn deities and others [see Kirchhoff 1943].. . Textbooks perpetuate the fallacy of Mesoamerica as a fixed geographical territory. The original distinction remains valuable, however, because there was time, about 1500 B.C., when these cultural practices had not yet been established or disseminated. Along with the “where” of Mesoamerica, we need to consider the “when.” How was the Mesoamerican way of life established? How did it evolve? And how did it spread over time?
. . . .
p. 12 We suggest, instead, that the term [Olmec] be used to describe peoples who followed a particular suite of cultural practices that included certain forms of visual representations (see Clark and Pye this volume).. . . We also believe that the archaeological record already demonstrates convincingly that there were several contemporaneous Olmec polities or entities for most time periods, so we have opted for the plural to convey the idea of plurality rather than a single monolithic entity.

Coe, M. D. 2002. Mexico. From the Olmecs to the Aztecs, 5th ed. NY: Thames & Hudson

p.64 A long series of radiocarbon dates from the important Olmec site of La Venta spans the centuries from 1200-400 BC, placing the major development of this center entirely within the Middle Preclasssic. Another set of dates that shows that the site of San Lorenzo is even older, falling within the Early Preclassic (1800-2000 BC), making it contemporary with Tlatilco and other highland sites in which influence from San Lorenzo can be detected.


Diehl, R. A. 2004. The Olmecs. America’s First Civilization New York: Thames& Hudson

pp. 13-14 “The origins of Olmec culture have intrigued scholars and lay people alike since Tres Zapotes Colossal head 1, a gigantic stone human head with vaguely Negroid features was discovered in Veracruz 140 years ago. Since that time, Olmec culture and art have been attributed to seafaring Africans, Egyptians, Nubians, Phoenicians, Atlanteans, Japanese, Chinese, and other ancient wanderers. As often happens, the truth is infinitely more logical, if less romantic: the Olmecs were Native Americans who created a unique culture in southeastern Mexico’s Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Archaeologists now trace Olmec origins back to pre-Olmec cultures in the region and there is no credible evidence for major intrusions from the outside. Furthermore, not a single bona fide artifact of Old world origin has ever appeared in an Olmec archaeological site, or for that matter anywhere else in Mesoamerica.

p. 23 “Until recently archaeologists believed that the Olmec culture did not emerge as an identifiable entity until 1200 BC, but today we can trace its origins probably to at least 1600-1500 BC. During that century true Olmec remains were ritually deposited at El Manati, a sacred shrine near San Lorenzo in the lower Coatzacoalcos basin. There is good reason to believe that the worshippers came from San Lorenzo, the first large Olmec center and possibly the original hearth of Olmec culture and art. 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 indigenous local 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. 27 “ Excavations at San Lorenzo have revealed three phases of occupation prior to its emergence as a full-blown city at 1200 BC: Ojochi (1550-1350 BC), Bajio (1350-1250 BC) and Chicharras (1250-1150 BC). Remains of these occupations lie deeply buried under later debris but even so, recent excavations suggest that San Lorenzo covered at least 20 ha (49 acres) by 1250 B. . . …. Ojochi-phase pottery is virtually identical to Manati-A-phase ceramics, as well as more distant Pellicer-phase materials in Tabasco, and Barra-phase pottery found in coastal Chiapas across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec.

p. 28 “The Chicharras phase (1250-1150 BC) was a critical juncture in San Lorenzo’s history that presaged the full emergence of Olmec culture. The population continued to grow dramatically while the pottery assemblage underwent dramatic changes. Michael D. Coe and I originally attributed these changes to immigrants from elsewhere in the Olmec region [BOM not another continent]], but I am less convinced of this hypothesis today than I was in 1980. Differentially fired black-and-white pottery increased in popularity while many old pottery types disappeared.

Taube, K. A. 2004. Olmec Art at Dumbarton Oaks Washington DC: Dumbarton Oaks

p.1 To this day, the Olmec continue to be traced to such distant regions as Africa and China (Van Sertima 1976; Thomson 1989; Gonzalez Calderon 1991; Xu 1996). [NOTE 1. Quite frequently, arguments for Old world contacts are based on superficial visual resemblances. A particularly egregious example appeared in U.S. News & World Report (Fenyvesi 1996). According to Shang scholar, Han Ping Chen. One of the miniature jade stelae from La Venta Offering 4 contains a readable Chinese text (ibid.) it has been known for some time, however, that these miniature stelae derive from halves of incised celts cut along the central long axis. Two of the incised Offering 4 “stelae” are parts of the same incised celt, which portrayed a flying figure holding a knuckle-duster and maize ear fetish (see Cervantes 1969; fig. 11). As for the purported incised Shang text, it constitutes half of a frontally facing depiction of the Olmec Maize god. For a reconstruction of the entire figure, see Reilly n.d.; fig 4.51]. The archaeological evidence argues for an entirely indigenous development, however, and many Olmec traits are traceable to earlier cultures of Early Formative Mesoamerica. There is simply no material evidence of any pre-Hispanic contact between the Old world and Mesoamerica before the arrival of the Spanish in the sixteenth century.

p. 5-7. Although the Olmec were extremely early, they by no means appeared ex nihilo, like some wondrous mushroom, out of the swampy Gulf coast lowlands. Many of the more fundamental Olmec traits, such as social hierarchy, ceramics, food production, monumental architecture, craft specialization, ball game, dedicatory offerings, and the restricted use of jade and other rare, exotic goods already were present among earlier Formative peoples. Although similar and contemporaneous developments were surely occurring in the Olmec heartland, the incipient Formative period is best documented for the nearby coastal piedmont region of southern Chiapas and neighboring Guatemala, often referred to as the Soconusco (Blake 1991; Blake et al. 1995; Ceja Tenorio 1985; Clark 1991, 1994; John Clark and Michael Blake 1989, 1994; Coe 1961; Green and Lowe 1967; Love 1975). Clark and Blake (1989) aptly term the Early Formative people of this region Mokaya, a Mixe-Zoque word for “the people of the corn.”[/quote



Pool, C.A. 2007 Olmec Archaeology and Early Mesoamerica New York: Thames& Hudson

p.3 “Between 2000 and 1500 B.C., however, in the central portion of Middle America, there began to emerge a distinctive cultural pattern that would define the culture area of Mesoamerica. Early elements of this pattern included permanent settlements, manufacture of pottery , and subsistence based on cultivation of domesticated maize, beans, and squash (cf. Clark and Cheetam 2002). Over the next 2000 years social hierarchies, centralized government, and specific religious concepts and practices emerged in various societies, including the Olmecs, and were adopted by their neighbors.

p. 18 Recent archaeological field work in Olman has uncovered evidence for a continuous sequence of social and ceremonial development stretching as far back as 1700 B.C. (Ortiz et al. 1997; Rodriguez ands Ortiz 1997; Rust and Sharer 1988). Therefore there remains little doubt that the emergence of Olmec culture was primarily a local phenomenon.

p. 35 Melgar also holds the dubious distinction of being the first to claim an African source for the physiognomy of Olmec sculptures, writing, “that which most impressed me was the Ethiopic type which it represents; I reflected that indubitably there had been negroes in this land. . . (1869:292 translation by the author). . .
Melgars’s speculations were very much the product of his times. The origins of Native American societies had fascinated European and American intellectuals and armchair enthusiasts for centuries, with Atlanteans, the Lost Tribes of Israel, Scandinavians, Scythians, and Hindus all mentioned as possible founders of New World populations (Wiley and Sabloff 1993:16). In the 1860s, archaeology was not yet a professional discipline in the Americas, and the recoding of archeological data was still in its infancy. Faced with a unique monument, and immersed in the racialist intellectual climate of his time, Melgar can be excused his earnest fancies. Today, however, more than a century of archaeological fieldwork on the Gulf Cost of Mesoamerica has failed to uncover any convincing evidence of ancient transoceanic contacts.

p. 62 Reconnaissance in the site’s [ La Venta] hinterland has identified several Early to Middle Formative sites on levees along an ancient channel called the Rio Bari or Rio Palma (Rust 1991; Rust and Sharer 1988). Test excavations and deep sediment cores at the hinterland site of San Andres have documented the cultivation of domestic maize as early as 5000 B.C. (Pope et al. 2001; Rust and Leyden 1994)

p. 132 It now appears that people entered the southern Gulf lowlands of Mesoamerica before 5100 B.C.. . . there does appear to have been a gradual evolution of ecological adaptations, with humans increasing their reliance on domesticated maize and other crops as supplement to the natural abundance of wild foods in the lowlands (Pope et al. 2001). .. The emergence of Olmec culture , however, is more significantly one of formation of a coherent identity, reinforce through actions and materialized in artifacts and their attendant iconography. Neither is cultural identity a static entity, but one which is actively reproduced and renegotiated. That is , we should not expect that the expression of Olmec culture should remain monolithically homogeneous through time, any more than the expression of American, English, or Mexican identity has remained static over time. Rather archaeologists must look for continuity between changing forms and their proportional representation in the archaeological record. From this perspective, the beginnings of a distinctive Olmec tradition are evident by 1700 B.C. in the ritual offerings of El Manati, and their links to florescent Early Formative Olmec culture is documented in the gradually changing ceramic and ritual traditions there and in the “pre-Olmec” levels of San Lorenzo, San Andres, and other sites. In other words, there is no longer a basis for seeing Olmec culture as an intrusion from elsewhere in Mesoamerica.