3Alexander Von Wuthenau best describes these ancient peoples in his book, Unexpected Faces inAncient America (1975). In page 57 of his book Von Wuthenau writes For the time being , let us go backto our pre-Columbian artists who certainly had no idea that they would be called upon, thousands of years later, as witnesses of ethnological happenings in the new world. We have, however, every reasonto put them on the historical witness stand because they are indeed good and reliable witnesses. Inpages 77-78 of Von Wuthenaus book; an important point was made as he wrote Melgars mind, notyet tainted by certain currents of modern (and perhaps not so modern) anthropology, reacted quitenormally to this newly found evidence of Black mans presence in ancient America. He [Melgar] furthermore cites a document of Bishop Francisco Nunez Vega (1691), who describes an ancient calendar foundin Chiapas that mentions seven negritos representing the seven planets, and in detail refers to thestrange Hebrew like naming of their twenty day calendar, in contrast to the version the Toltecs gave thesame twenty days. Over a hundred years ago Melgar in my opinion was exactly on the right tractconcerning the racial back ground of Americas ancient population.In Africa and the Discovery of America pages ix-x, Leo Wiener sites the words of J. Batalha-Reisfrom an article entitled The Supposed Discovery of South America before 1448, and the critical Methodsof the historians of Geographical Discovery from the Geographical Journal [London 1887, p.120], Thegreater probability therefore, in my opinion, in favor of the supposition that the north-east corner of South America had been seen on or before 1448, although this cannot be affirmed with the samehistorical certainty with which we can affirmed that, in 1492, Columbus landed on some of the AntillesAlmost all the historians of geographical discoveries consider it their absolute duty to arrive at a radicalconclusion in the study of problematical questions, answering with a yes what only deserves a perhaps,or, more, frequently, dismissing with a no what ought to be held as probable. Loven Sven writes inOrigins of Tainan Culture [p.662] But even archaeology has its limitations. It can only give us pastcultures to the extent of such elements as have been capable of preservation in the ground. In thisconnection, however, it may also give rise to conclusions that are essentially false.Claude Levi-Strauss who writes in his book Structural Anthropology page 208, On the one handit would seem that in the course of a myth anything is likely to happen. But on the other hand, thisapparent arbitrariness is belied by the astounding similarity between myths collected in widely differentregions. Therefore the problem: If the content of myth is contingent [i.e., arbitrary], how are we toexplain the fact that myths throughout the world are so similar? According to Levi-Strauss, Mythicalthought always progresses from the awareness of the oppositions toward their resolution (StructuralAnthropology page 226). In other words, Ancient world myths consist of 1. Elements that oppose orcontradict each other and 2. Other elements that mediate, or resolve, those oppositions, like Yin andYang.
In the Cave of the Jagua Arroyo writes in page 9 Linguistic studies also provide a meansof evaluating similarities of cultures. Given the premise that peoples who are relatedlinguistically are also related culturally
Even the similarities between two worlds in ancient times cant be over looked, and they are:1.
Double Crown of King tut and that of the Mayans, and a tablet in a private collection in Brazil.