Historical Mayan / African (by phenotype) American monarchs

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:02 pm

(picture 1 of 17)

Who or what is African? Geographically, those who live in Africa whose ancestry there dates back millions of years. Physically, Africans are those (one can argue – exceptions abound) who have some combination of full facial features and/or wooly / wiry hair. This question is of significance as those who are physically African were your earliest known peoples of the world’s earliest societies and also the first historical monarchs of North America predating the Mayflower in cases by over 1500 years. They might even be called the first Afro-Americans.

This post is part of a series identifying by name these Mayan monarchs of African phenotype. Further, analogies between ancient Mayan and African societies exist which would seem to indicate that Mayan roots are found in Africa. In Mexico, these monarchs are from Bonampak, Pelenque, Yaxchilan; in Guatemala from Quirigua and Machaquila; in the Honduras, from Copan.

In this series, 17 named, known, historical monarchs will be presented a new one every few days over the period of perhaps three weeks. The one who is the subject of any given post will have his or her name capitalized in the King’s list below starting with monarch of Bonampak known as King Fish Fin who reigned near 521 AD. Theirs were the first civilizations with great art, agriculture, religion, social complexity, longevity.

Those whose browsers allow will see the imbedded picture below the text. Otherwise, following the link will reveal the picture.

SOUTHEAST MEXICO, CHIAPAS, BONAMPAK
[1] KING FISH FIN, c. 521 AD
[2] Likely King Chaan Muan-I c. 603 AD
SOUTHEAST MEXICO, CHIAPAS, PELENQUE
[3] King B’utz’aj Sak Chiik, 487-501 AD
[4] King K'inich Janaab' Pakal-I, 615-683 AD
[5] King Upakal K'inich 721 736 AD
[6] King K'inich Janaab' Pakal-II, 742-746 AD
SOUTHEAST MEXICO, CHIAPAS, YAXCHILAN
[7] King Itzamnaaj B’alam-II, 681-742 AD
[8] Queen, K’abal Xook, 681-742 AD
[9] Queen Evening Star c. 700-750 AD
[10] King YaxuunBalam-IV, 752-768 AD
[11] King YaxuunBalam-IV, 752-768 AD
[12] Mut Balam Servant Of Queen K’abal Xook, 681-710
GUATEMALA, IZABAL, QUIRIGUA
[13] King Tutuum Yohl K’inich, c. 455.AD
[14] King K’ak’ Tiliw Chan Yoaat, c. 724-785 AD
GUATAMALA, PETEN, MACHAQUILA
[15] King Siyaj K’in Chaak, c. 820 AD
HONDURAS, COPAN
[16] King Waxaklajuun Ub’aah K’awiil, c. 695-738 AD
[17] King Yax Pasaj Chan, 763-810 AD

Identical features of African-Mayan Civilization

1. Divine kingship
2. Sun gods
3. God of writing
4. masonry block for monumental buildings
5. pyramids
6. transformation at death to divine being
7. Sun god combating its enemy, the serpent
8. the becoming of an ancestor after death
9. Patron gods
10. Gods carried in effigy
11. Use of dynastic names (e.g. Balam-1, Balam-II … Balam V)
12. Enthronement ceremony
13. Court lords
14. Iconography of trampling the enemy underfoot (seen in Egypt)
15. Incense burners
16. Head elongation
17. Use of shields in warfare
18. Identical loop-earing ornamentation
19. Three pairs of male/female creation gods under one supreme god
20. Twin brothers in the Cain-Able mode
21. King as central axis of universe
22. A heaven of four quadrants
23. A tripartite creation: underworld, earth, heavens
24. An Osiris-like corn god called the Maize god
25. Perhaps same type of dug-out canoes
(The above 25 are half of the analogies equating ancient African and Mayan
societies and peoples – not all)

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:13 pm

Paul, do you have a link to the whole site?

Sam Salmon · Post by **Sam Salmon** » Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:19 pm

Note that the ancient Olmec head as shown below is not in any way representative of anything African-it's widely thought to be a child's head with exaggerated features (enclosed some some as yet unknown reason in a helmet).

I know this is true because I read it right on this board!

It's not African-NOT!!!

Might look that way but don't be fooled!

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 5:55 am

.
.

Minimalist. The only link I have to "all things ancient North American" is here: http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_ ... index.html

Pages of historical figures such as Fish Fin are 98% finished and uploaded. However, there is that 2% undone meaning I have to make some minor changes.

Over the 3 weeks time, I will upload them all and after that will make either one or perhaps two web pages featuring them all together and provide a link to it / them.

All the best,

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:40 pm

.
.

THE SECOND OF 17 MONARCHS

I'd said that a new picture would be put up every few days. The format is as follows. Directly below is a web page re-stating the thread as introduced on the first entry above. There being 17 monarchs (at least) usually just the new monarch will be presented. From time-to-time, however, the page below will be linked to to refresh the focus and indicate that we're still on target.

After the first page below will be added the second of 17 monarchs.

http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_ ... archs.html

http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_ ... 10-01.html

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:09 am

So, Paul, while we're waiting for you to finish what is your opinion on the "official" Out of Africa theory which claims that modern humans originated in Africa and began spreading out about 70,000 years ago?

Of course, even the competing "Multi-Regional Theory" suggests that HE originated in Africa and began spreading 1.3 mya so, to my way of looking at things, BOTH are based in Africa anyway.

Of course, my way of looking at things has been described as "odd" from time to time.

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Mon Dec 22, 2008 11:00 am

Hi Minimalist. You ask about the Out of Africa theory and Multi-regionalism?

To me, interesting subjects. Out of Africa at 70 tya interesting particularly, in my view, because of the eruption of Mt. Tuba and population bottlenecks and the Garden of Eden model.

Multi-regionalism is interesting to me as it seems unresolved. Was there or wasn't there? One piece of the puzzle I haven't heard much about is

Yuehai Ke and Li Jin, et. al., African Origin of Modern Humans in East Asia: A Tale of 12,000 Y Chromosomes, Science, 292:5519, pp. 1151-1153, Issue of 11 May 2001.

Multi-regionalism is, to me, one of those things that will forever be contentious.

All the best,

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:33 pm

Exactly, Paul. My problem with the Mt Toba eruption scenario is that, for a volcanic blast, it seemed highly specific to humans. Aside from those killed in the immediate blast zone, it requires a "nuclear winter" scenario to explain how people 5,000 miles from SE Asia could be obliterated. Why no corresponding die off of other species?

Curiouser and curiouser, as the saying goes.

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Mon Dec 22, 2008 3:34 pm

.
.

I think your point is well taken.

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Tue Dec 23, 2008 5:57 am

The 3rd of 17 known Monarchs: TODAY’S MONARCH: King B’utz’aj Sak Chiik, 487-501 AD, Palenque, Chiapas, Mexico

After the first page below will be added the third of 17 monarchs. The pictures can be seen below if your browser allows it. Otherwise, they can be seen at the link.

MORE AFRICAN-MAYAN ANALOGIES:Brown-skinned, very full in facial features, this (1) monarch’s head is elongated as was the practice during the time of Tutankamun. (2) A diadem is worn as in Africa and he is adorned with (3) heavy drooping earrings; a style of ornamentation still found in Africa.To show Egypt’s presence and immersion in Africa and its oneness culturally and otherwise, we might refer to it as Afrigypt. They might be referred to as the first Afro-Americans.

INTRODUCTION TO PAGE, KING'S LIST, 25 AFRICAN-MAYAN ANALOGIES: http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_ ... archs.html

KING B’utz’ aj Sak Chiik, 487 AD – 501 AD:

http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_ ... 10-07.html

Note: A comprehensive listing of the monarchs shown appears at this link following their introduction:
http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_ ... index.html
.
.

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Dec 23, 2008 10:12 am

That last one looks more "Indian" to me but of course, there is the whole question of interbreeding which, in any conquest scenario, comes into play.

Consider this photo (too large to post as an image) of modern Maya men. Look at some of the noses and compare.

http://tbn0.google.com/hosted/images/c? ... 5235_large

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:24 pm

I understand your feeling but at the same time I would come to the same conclusion you did.

Post by **Minimalist** » Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:16 pm

Don't get me wrong, I like where you're going with this. I have no problem seeing African features in the Olmec heads. For that matter, anyone who ever looked at a map can see pretty clearly that a voyage from Africa to South America is a hell of a lot shorter than a trip from Europe to South America. The only thing that tells us that such a voyage was not made was the Eurocentric view of history which pervades the field.

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:51 am

I did not think you were being cagey or speaking tongue-in-cheek. I think you hit the nail on the head.

As my approach in picture-selection is to choose pictures in all my work that are unequivocally (by phenotype) African [see footnote] I really did hesitate about using that picture - it's too "mixed" for me.

But, there seemed to be something to salvage in B'utz'aj Sak Chiik even as a transitional physical-type (a watershed between unequivocal African and a nondescript future peoples of the region). The fourth monarch isn't equivocal nor are most the rest in this series. But, they often have a really unique look.

This is unrelated to the thread and comes up from that comment on "really unique look." Both blacks and whites in reliefs and statues from before 2500 BC from all around the world have huge noses twice the size of what they now are!!! Later (down to the birth of Christ) you can see it still in some places. From before and after 2500 this group contains those from Mesopotamia, China, Southeast Asia, Mesoamerica, North Europe. Really interesting.

I interpret it as the holdover of hunter-gatherer peoples who needed a good sense of smell and had just become an agricultural and settled peoples.

FOOTNOTE:

I don't feel I'm prejudiced in this regard as I am trying to balance the scales that 99% in history books is "agnostic" about phenotypic Africans outside the continent - the word proto or indigenous often seems to be used and is shrouded in purposeful ambiguity ; not so much from current users who are by now only following convention, but historically at that point in the early 20th century when anthropologists made the conscious decision to couch all things from Eurocentric terms. Before then historians and anthropologists and archeologists were objective [mostly] with no hidden agenda. I can't well-defend this though I do have some references about this.

.
.

PaulMarcW · Post by **PaulMarcW** » Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:47 am

Minimalist. The following page is one I had disabled recently as the subject was about what I thought was a phenotypic disconnect between the Olmec and Mayan. However, as I explored this topic over the years, I encountered what appears to me to be a phenotypic shift in the Mayan from the Early Classical to Post-Classical period. Here is the page that I just minutes ago uploaded again that I now feel is not a circumspect view:

http://www.beforebc.de/all_america/900_ ... 00-07.html