Black Quetzalcoatl

Even though Quetzalcoatl has been depicted as a bearded white man who came from Europe to civilize the Mesoamericans, I came across an interesting article that says he was dark skinned.

The article, published online titled Quetzalcoatl Negro (Black Quetzalcoatl) by Rosario Nava Román "Although this Quetzalcoatl was a man, he was revered as a god... The adornments with which he was worshipped were as follows: a miter on his head, with a plume of feathers known as 'quetzalli'... his face was dyed black, as was his entire body."

Two depictions of Quetzalcoatl with black skin. From Quetzalcoatl Negro

Bernardino de Sahagún (c. 1499-1590) was a missionary in what is now Mexico, starting in 1529. He wrote a History of New Spain (Mexico) and the famous Florentine Codex is a manuscript version of this history. The illustrations it includes, done by native artists depict Quetzalcoatl in the traditional way, with dark, black, skin.

Other manuscripts, like the Borgia, Vindobonensis and Nutall codex depict him with a black body.

Nava Román points out that other gods such as Tezcatlipoca, Tláloc, Ixtlilton, etc. are also portrayed with black body paint in those codex. The high priests, sacrifice, penitents and man-gods are all black skinned.

The practice was noted by Jerónimo de Mendieta (1525-1604) who in his Historia Eclesiástica Indiana written in 1595-96, described (see p.108 in Chapter 37) how the Kings were enthroned in Mexico, in Tezcuco and Tlacuba: "The first thing the high priest did was to dye the lord's entire body black with very black ink; he had prepared a swab made of cedar and willow branches and reed leaves, and—with the lord kneeling—he would sprinkle him four times with water from a vessel of holy (or cursed) water, greeting him with brief words; then he would dress him in a mantle painted with the heads and bones of the dead, and upon his head..." The dark skin tone caused by the dye gave them a god-like appearance and strenghtened the link between mortal king and gods.

Nava Román mentions how this practice continued during the colonial period, and cites plate number 15 in the codex known as Tira de Tepechpan which depicts the conqueror of Mexico, Hernán Cortés in black (it can be seen below, with the Spaniard, with black skin, on the left).

The author argues that the white, bearded man from across the Atlantic was an invention of the Spaniards to justify their conquest, erasing the real black-skinned gods of the natives and replacing them with the superior white caucasians.

As I have posted in the past, (see here and here for some examples), I do not believe that there is evidence of African black people in America in pre-Columbian times, so the dark-skinned Mexican gods are not African people or Olmecs.

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall © 

Black "First People" in America - controversy

In yesterday's post I mentioned an exchange I had on X (Twitter) with a person who had posted a reply to someone who criticized a previous port of his, that went as follows:

"[expeletive deleted] we are indigenous to the USA. We built the country from scratch. We were here before this countries inception. Also there were Black Aboriginal tribes here In the Americas that were enslaved & mixed in with the small 3% of African slaves that came to the US. EthnoGenesis."

Rude comments and pseudoscientific nonsense bother me, so my reply was "The Native Americans arrived ~20 kya and are the First People. Black Africans were forcibly transported by the slave trade ~1492-1808. There was no "indigenous" (autochthonous) population and no native "Black Aboriginals" in the Americas. Homo sapiens arrived ~20,000 years ago." Factual and polite.

As an answer, the X post author, uploaded the following image and posted more nonsense: "Before the red skin mongolóid tribes came from Siberia there were BLACK ABORIGINAL tribes in America. It’s been proven over & over there were Black aboriginal tribes in America before the slave trade."

The "proof" added as bibliographic reference in the image, shows a Wikipedia entry on Constantine Samuel Rafinesque which, states that "Among his theories were that ancestors of Native Americans had migrated by the Bering Sea from Asia to North America, and that the Americas were populated by black indigenous peoples at the time of European contact." It also includes an image of a text snippet from Rafinesque's self-published magazine, the Atlantic Journal and Friend of Knowledge, which in its issue of Sept. 1833, on page 85 refers to the Primitive Black Nations of America. I found the article, and below is a transcription of part of its text:

"The Society of Geography having offered a reward for the best Memoir on the Origin of the Asiatic Negroes, I sent them last year two Memoirs; one on those Asiatic Negroes, wherein I demonstrated the affinities of their languages with the African and Polynesian Negroes, as well as with the Hindus and Chinese, and renders it probable that all the Negroes originated in the Southern Slopes of the Imalaya [sic] Mountains, as they did once exist all over India, South China, Japan, Persia, and Arabia. My second Memoir was on the Negroe or Black Nations, found in America before Columbus, wherein I proved their existence and connection by language with the Ngroes of Africa and Polynesia... To many) this fact of old Black Nations iki America will be new, yet it is an important feature of American History, as well as the existence of primitive White Nations there still more numerous. To furnish a kind of insight into this subject I will here merely enumerate the Black tribes of which I have found evident traces and remains, in North and South America:
1. The Ancient Caracols of Hayti represented as a Nation of Beasts by the historical songs, see Roman and Martyr.
2. The Califurnams of the Carib Islands, called Black Caribs or Guanini by others, are a black branch of Caribs. See Rochefort, Herrera, &e.
3. The Arguahos of Cutara mentioned by Garcia in the West Indies, quite black.
4. The black Aroras of Raleigh, or Yaruras of the Spaniards, ugly black or brown Negroes, yet existing near the Oronoco, and language known, called Monkeys by their neighbours.
5. Chaymas of Guyana brown Negroes like Hottentots, see Humboldt.
6. The Mangipas &nd Porcigis of Nienhof, the Motayas of Knivet, &e., all of Brazil, brown Negroes with curly hair. See also Vespucius and Pigafetta.
7. The Nigritas of Martir in Darien, yet existing in Choco under the name of Chuanas or Gaunas or Chinos. See Mollien. Ugly black or red Negroes.
8. Those of Popayan called Manabi blackish with negro features and hair. See Stevenson.
9. The Guabas and Jaras of Taguzgalpa near the Honduras. See Juaros, &c, now called Zambos.
10. The Enslen or Esteros from New California, ugly blackish Negroes. See Vanegas, Langsdorf, &c.
11. The Black Indians met by the Spaniards in Louisiana in 1543. See Soto's invasion.
12. The Moon-eyed Negroes, and Albinos, destroyed by the Cherokis and seen in Panama. Barton, &c.
Among these the Yarura language has 50 per cent of analog with the Gauna 40 per cent with the Ashanty or Fanty of Guinea, and 33 per cent with the Fulah, Borny and Congo languages of Africa. In Asia it has 39 per cent of affinity with the Samang Negroes, and 40 per cent with the Negroes of Andaman as well as those of Australia or New Holland."

Unlike most readers who repost this text without validating it (just try Googling it to see it paste-copied without any further questioning. See this search on Califurnams), I looked up these references cited by Rafinesque and found quite a few of them (refrence number is given in parenthesis) and added some comments:

(7) by Pedro Mártir de Angelería, page 130 mentions the Darien dark-skinned people: "There they found black slaves from a region only two days' journey from Cuarecua, where only black people are raised, and these are ferocious and exceedingly cruel. They believe that long ago black people came from Ethiopia to steal, and that, shipwrecked, they settled in those mountains. The people of Cuarecua harbor a deep hatred for these black people, and they either enslave one another or kill each other." This took place during Balboa's expedition across Panama, when he discovered the Pacific Ocean in 1513. However, I did not find references regaring the Caracols (1) in Angelería

Regarding (2) the Caribs, Rouchefort (see pp. 251-252) writes "the Caribbians are a handsome well-shap'd people... True it is their complexion is naturally of an Olive-colour... All the Caribbians are black-hair'd... The hair of the Caribbians is not curl'd or frizzled, as that of the Moors , but streight and long..." Not African at all! Regarding Walter Raleigh and the Aroras, Raleigh wrote: "my old pilot, a man of great travel, brother to the cacique Toparimaca, told me that... there inhabited four principal nations... The fourth are called Aroras, and are as black as negroes, but have smooth hair." Dark, but not negroes, smooth hair, not African.

Humboldt (5) did not describe the Chaymas as Hottentots: "Their colour is that of the whole American race, from the cold table lands of Quito and New Grenada to the burning plains of the Amazons... If the uniform tint of the skin be more coppery and redder toward the north, it is on the contrary among the Chaymas of a dull brown inclining towards tawny." In fact, he says they look like Asians: "If the Chaymas, and in general all the natives of South America and New Spain, resemble the Mongul race, by the form of the eye, their high cheek bones, their straight and flat hair, and the almost entire want of beard; they essentially differ from them in the form of the nose, which is pretty long, prominent throughout it's whole length, and thick toward the nostrils, the openings of which are directed downward, as with all the nations of the Caucasian race. " (See p. 223-224).

(6) the citation is incorrect, the author's name was Johannes Nieuhof a Dutch explorer does not mention Mangipas or Porcigis, only Brazilian Tupí natives "They are of a dark brown colour, black hair, which hangs all over their fhoulders..." (p. 133). The only people with curly hair are the Brazilian Portuguese! (p. 129)

Gaspard Mollien (7) mentions African Blacks and Indians, and no reference to Black Indians (See Chapter VIII). Miguel Venegas (10) describes the natives of California as "The color is somewhat more tan and darker than that of the other Indians of New Spain" (Mexico). I read the chronicles of De Soto's expedition (11) and found no reference to black people in Louisiana.

So, I confidently replied in Twitter: "Wrong. No Black natives. Whiteness was a Spanish mindset and the color of natives concerned them a lot. But sorry, not one single research paper has shown black natives in America."

The reply, again unfounded was "Just because you say that dont make it true. It’s been proven over & over there were BLACK ABORIGINAL people in America before the slave trade or even before the red skin mongolóid tribes. For example the “Luiza” women who is the oldest skeleton found in the American was Blk."

This person refloated as factual the unfounded story of an African-looking Luzia (the Lagoa Santa woman) who in fact was a Paleoindian with a small percentage of Austronesian alleles, and clearly an Amerindian who carried no African genes in her.

The author then added in a quick follow-up post [sic]: "Also the explorers them selves wrote about the Black Aboriginal people they encountered. Learn history"

I must admit that the "learn history" part irked me, I love history, and have read almost every single book about Patagonia, and history in General. History has always fascinated me, and I enjoy checking historic events by reading eyewitness accounts. The guy then included the following images about Verrazzano.

In fact, Verrazzano who was born in what is now Italy, and served the French Crown, exploring the Atlantic seabord of North America, wrote about Amerindians with tan skin, not black-skinned Africans. As proof, see The Voyage of Verrazano, by Henry Murphy, 1875. So I retorted: "Verrazzano original text p. 23 https://ia801308.us.archive.org/19/items/cu31924028728065/cu31924028728065.pdf: "They exceed us in size, and they are of a very fair complexion (?) ; some of them incline more to a white (bronze ?), and others to a tawny colour ; their faces are sharp, their hair long and black" - no curls or black skin."

That was the end of the exchange, which was pretty worthless, but had two positive outcomes.

The first, was that I identified and read several original sources that supposedly support the presence of dark, African-like Amerindians and in fact prove the opposite.

The second, is a lesson learnt: it isn't worth the effort to try to persuade stubborn or illogical people against their mindset, it is best to avoid conflict and preserve one's inner peace and follow the advice given in Proverbs 26:4.

Have a great week!

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2026 by Austin Whittall © 

Olmecs, not African, but Oriental? or were-jaguars?

Continuing with the Olmecs, I noticed, while researching for my post about the supposed African admixture into the Olmeca people in Pre-Hispanic America, that not all sculptures and statues depicted people with African features.

I was quite surprised to see that many Olmec artifacts depicted people with a very clear East Asian appearance. In this post we will explore their artwork with non-African features, and what some scholars have written about these oriental-looking depictions.

See my two previous posts on the Olmecs: Blacks in Pre-Columbian America and Africans reached America ca. 1310 C.E.?

Jaguar Men: the were-jaguar

Those who have studied the Olmec culture find that their artwork depicts people with feline features, and this has led to the concept of a jaguar-based symbolism used by the ruling class and the religious leaders and shamans. Of course, we cannot decipher their writing, and there are no Olmecs to tell us about their beliefs. These theories are just that, conjectures.

As an example of this notion, I will quote from the following essay: Slater, F., (2010). Were-jaguars and jaguar babies in Olmec religion, Essex Student Journal 3(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.5526/esj114.

"Digs at sites such as La Venta have yielded an abundance of finds, testament to the sophistication and artistic sensitivity of this ancient culture. Of these finds, one particular type has spurred the most debate and speculation. The delicately carved and gracefully composed anthropomorphic hybrid figures, known as Were-Jaguars and Jaguar-Babies respectively, have puzzled scholars for decades....
The Jaguar Motif appears in a variety of different guises. The essential elements of the Were-Jaguar or Jaguar-Baby are, the ‘V’ shaped cleft, clawed or paw like feet or hands and a feline head with, in some cases, a tail. With Jaguar-Babies the iconography is of a greater symbolic content and is based on facial features. These include; The ‘V’ shaped cleft, large almond shaped eyes, a snarling mouth with bifurcated fangs and full down-turned lips and a broad flat nose. Different levels of ‘jaguarness’ are visible in these images, with some being unmistakeably jaguar like. Others have a much more subtle pars pro toto style, which is typical of Olmec iconography...
Whilst we can never know for certain the significance of the jaguar to Olmec religious view we can be certain of their importance. Whilst it is always difficult to assert with any confidence about the mystical practices of cultures long dead, the frequency of this motif is an excellent starting point for investigation, leading no doubt to the wealth of literature dealing with the subject. In my opinion, the Jaguar was an important symbol of the power of the natural world, as the apex predator of the surrounding area it would be natural for the jaguar to be subsumed into the iconography of any burgeoning chiefdom, which might later become the “royal house” (if such a term can be used accurately). However, the jaguar would always first and foremost be the creature that most played on the popular imagination and, before any conflation with the trappings of state, would indubitably have become a major part of the religious complex. As for the possibility of human/jaguar copulation, it is extremely difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions as to the significance of the jaguar motif, especially when it comes to the possibility of sexual intercourse. Those Monuments where copulation can be inferred - transmit just that - an inference."

Were-Jaguar Olmec figurine, 900-300 BC. Source

Down Syndrome

An article by John M. Starbuck, (2011) (On the Antiquity of Trisomy 21: Moving Towards a Quantitative Diagnosis of Down Syndrome in Historic Material Culture. the Journal of Contemporary Anthropology Research, Vol. II-1) put forward the idea that these statues depict people with Down Syndrome who were worshiped because they resembled their idea of a person which blende human and jaguar features:

"Milton and Gonzalo (1974) argue that several Olmec figurines from Meso-America dated from 1500 B.C. – 300 A.D. may depict Down syndrome. Milton and Gonzalo report that these figurines have upslanted palpebral fissures, well-marked epicanthic folds, short noses, broad nasal bridges, brachycephalic head shapes, open mouth postures, and a lower lip that is drawn downward. Kunze and Nippert (1986) have also diagnosed an Olmec figurine with Down syndrome because of the presence of slanted palpebral fissures, ocular hypotelorism, short extremities, and obesity. In addition to asserting that these figurines depict Down syndrome, Milton and Gonzalo (1974) argue that the religious beliefs of the Olmec culture may have ascribed a high status to individuals with trisomy 21 because they were thought to be the offspring of a mating between humans and the jaguar, which was the most powerful Olmec totem."

Below is an image depicting a were-jaguar, it has clear feline features, with jaguar ears, and sharp teeth in a snarling mouth. It does not look oriental, it is a man-jaguar:

Down Syndrome? Olmec figurines. Starbuck J.

Olmec figurines depicting adults

The following artworks have a very strong oriental look to them. They are not babies, but men:

Olmec Jadeite face, 900-400 BC. The Met

Olmec contortionist, Middle pre-Classical period, 900-400 BCE. Acrobat made of steatite. Source

Some believe the "Wrestler" shown below, with his mustache and goatee is a fake, a forgery that was created to resemble Olmec art. Others say it is authentic. It is remarkable as it hints at motion, and has unique features that don't look like an Amerindian at all!

The Wrestler, basalt, Olmec statue. 1,400-400 BC. Source

Lord of Las Limas, Olmec, Veracruz, 1,200-400 BC. Serpentine with pyrite eyes.

Comments

The Olmecs are better known for their gigantic Afro-looking heads, like the one shown below. The delicate and finely crafted figures with oriental features when compared with these massive and coarsely hewen heads look as if they were the creation of different societies and civilizations. This is quite intriguing. One one hand, small detailed objects, on the other 40 ton, 3 meter tall (10 ft.) colossal heads. Were they produced at different times, during different cultural periods?

Notice how the gigantic head, despite its lips, and flat nose bridge has oriental eyes!

This goes to show that a culture can display many different styles of art, even if they use the same media (stone) and that the creative inspiration in humans is vast. We'd never infer that the Olmecs were were-jaguars just because they made these statues, so why do we wonder if they were Africans that sailed to America, if we see statues with African features?

I do believe that people depict their beliefs and also portray themselves. The oriental-looking figures are not gods, or were-jaguars, they are people, people with pronounced Asian-like epicanthic folds, the skin that covers the inner corner of the eye (canthus). Interestingly, they have high nose bridges, which is not so common among East Asians. So it isn't likely that they depicted visitors from China, Japan, or Korea that sailed across the Pacific Ocean 3500 years ago. They could easily represent a Native American, who share both features. And so do the Polynesians!).

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2025 by Austin Whittall © 

The mysterious lack of Olmec DNA papers

The Olmec culture flourished on the Gulf of Mexico coast (Campeche Bay) in the Tehuantepec, Veracruz, Chiapas, Tabasco region of Mexico between 1,500 BC and 100 BC. They are the earliest known major Mesoamerican civilisation, predating the Mayas and the Aztecs. (Short article on the Olmec people or this book with a section dedicated to their culture, both of them in English).

My previous posts (Blacks in Pre-Columbian America and Africans reached America ca. 1310 C.E.?) explored the weird and pseudoscientific theory that assumes as true that Black African people sailed across the Atlantic from Western Africa, reached Mesoamerica, and settled there, creating the Olmec civilization. For some examples of this theory, see: "Olmec and Mayas have distinct genetic origins", "The surprising connection between Olmecs and Africans", "African Origins of Olmec Civilization", etc.

I don't believe in conspiracy theories. Instead, I opt for believing in human ignorance, incompetence, and deliberate manipulation of information to forward certain causes and obscure legitimate ones. Nevertheless, as I sought information on the genetics (mtDNA, Y-chromosome and autosomal DNA) I quickly realized that there is little to be found. This seems to be a blank in the research of Amerindian genetics. Which, is quite surprising! (just google the terms "genetics Olmecs" and you will undertand what I mean).

The paltry papers on Olmec genetics

It is true, papers on Olmec genetics are really scarce! There are very few; I have only found the following, none of which analyzed nuclear DNA or Y-chromosome DNA, they only seem to have looked at the mtDNA, and it is unclear if the specimens analyzed were Olmec or not. Of course, none of these papers hint at an African origin, they state that the Olmecs are Amerindians, like all the other Native Americans. Below are these papers, with a brief comment on their main conclusions):

• Arnaiz-Villena A, et al., (2000). HLA genes in Mexican Mazatecans, the peopling of the Americas and the uniqueness of Amerindians. . Tissue Antigens. 2000 Nov;56(5):405-16. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-0039.2000.560503.x. PMID: 11144288.
  Old paper! "The HLA allele frequency distribution of the Mexican Mazatecan Indians (Olmec culture) has been studied and compared with those of other First American Natives and worldwide populations (a total of 12,100 chromosomes; 6,050 individuals from 59 different populations). The main conclusions are: 1) An indirect evidence of Olmec and Mayan relatedness is suggested, further supporting the notion that Olmecs may have been the precursors of Mayans..."
• Navarro-Romero MT, et al, (2021). Mitochondrial DNA Haplotypes in Pre-Hispanic Human Remains from Puyil Cave, Tabasco, Mexico, in María de Lourdes Muñoz-Moreno, and Michael H. Crawford (eds), Human Migration: Biocultural Perspectives (New York, 2021; online edn, Oxford Academic, 21 Oct. 2021), https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190945961.003.0007.
  It tells that the archaic and pre-classic individuals had The mtDNA of haplogroups A, A2, C1, C1c, and D4, haplogroup B was absent. It does not specifically mention "Olmecs" only Maya and Zoque people. But the team's next paper mentions Olmecs, see it below.
• Navarro-Romero MT, et al, (2024). Bioanthropological analysis of human remains from the archaic and classic period discovered in Puyil cave, Mexico. Am J Biol Anthropol. 2024 Jun;184(2):e24903. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.24903. Epub 2024 Feb 2. PMID: 38308451.
  It investigated "ACD" and conducted mtDNA tests, finding: "artificial cranial deformation (ACD)... These pre-Hispanic remains exhibited five mtDNA lineages: A, A2, C1, C1c and D4. Network analysis revealed a close genetic affinity between pre-Hispanic Puyil Cave inhabitants and contemporary Maya subpopulations from Mexico and Guatemala, as well as individuals from Bolivia, Brazil, the Dominican Republic, and China. Conclusions: Our results elucidate the dispersal of pre-Hispanic Olmec and Maya ancestors and suggest that ACD practices are closely related to Olmec and Maya practices. Additionally, we conclude that ACD has likely been practiced in the region since the Middle-Archaic Period." More or less a re-hash of the 2021 paper, but, it does mention the Olmec culture.
• Enrique Villamar Becerril, (2018) Estudios de ADN y el origen de los olmecas, Arqueología Mexicana, núm. 150, pp. 40-41.
  "The pioneering mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) study conducted 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 maternal lineage “A”. That is to say, the origin of the Olmecs is not in Africa but in the Americas, 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." These individuals had haplogroup A.
• Cyphers, Ann, (2020) El ADNMT y la descendencia olmeca, Arqueología Mexicana, Edición especial, núm. 94, p. 23. Same conclusions. It is not based on new studies, only repetition of Villamar's paper (above), mtDNA is Amerindian and not African.

The Olmecs didn't vanish into thin air, their genes must be present in the current population of this region. According to Pye and Clarke (2005), the area where the Olmec and Mokaya lived, was peopled by the Proto-Mixe-Zoque people, who differed from their neighbors, the Maya and Zapotec. The Maya would have a large impact on them when their civilization bloomed and the Olmecs vanished.

The "Ghost" population

However, a study published in Science (Viridiana Villa-Islas et al., Demographic history and genetic structure in pre-Hispanic Central Mexico. Science 380, eadd6142 (2023). DOI:10.1126/science.add6142), though it does not mention the Olmecs and only goes back to the year 100 BC., does mention the Mixe people! and adds an intriguing fact, a "ghost population" admixed into the Mixe.

"Earlier studies report the contribution of “ghost” genetic ancestry from an unsampled group, designated as UpopA, among the present-day Mixe from Mexico. We tested the presence of this UpopA in the pre-Hispanic individuals using combinations of admixture graph models... we found that Sierra Tarahumara and Mixe share the same ghost genetic ancestry, UPopA ... Finally, we ... confirmed that ... Mixe share the contribution from UpopA1... A contribution from an unsampled population named UpopA was previously identified in present-day Mixe as well as in present-day northern and central Indigenous populations from Mexico. UpopA was estimated to have diverged ~24,700 years ago from Native Americans"

The "earlier studies" mentioned above by Villa-Islas et al. refer to a paper by J. I. Moreno-Mayar et al. (2018), Early human dispersals within the Americas (Science 362, eaav2621 (2018). DOI:10.1126/science.aav2621), which says "Modeling indicates that the Mixe most likely carry gene flow from an unsampled outgroup and form a clade with Lagoa Santa... Hereafter, we refer to that outgroup as unsampled population A (UPopA), which is neither AB, NNA, or SNA and which we infer split off from NAs ~24.7 ka ago, with an age range between 30 and 22 ka ago... Under a model with a pulselike gene flow, we inferred a probability of ~11% gene flow from UPopA into the Mixe ~8.7 ka ago (95% CI, 0.4 to 13.9 ka ago)... We infer that the Lagoa Santa population diverged from the Mixe shortly thereafter, ~13.9 ka ago (95% CI, 12.8 to 14.8 ka ago)"

A "Ghost" population is one that left genetic material (DNA, mtDNA, aDNA) in a current or ancient population, but has not been sampled or, it vanished, becoming extinct leaving no remains; a ghost.

Who were these people?

The fact that they appear among the Mixe (Olmec) and the peculiar Lagoa Santa people of Brazil, who carry rare haplogroups and also seem to be associated with Australasians, is surprising.

This is something that furhter genetic research could help clarify with deeper sampling, including ancient remains, if the ghost signal belongs to allelles found at very low frequencies, a larger sample will provide more data about them and help pinpoint the ghost population's origin.

Closing Comments

It is likely that the lack of publications on the Olmec DNA is due to a shortage of funds (Mexico may not provide funding for this kind of research), not enough academic interest in this culture, or, that the jungle habitat or the poorly preserved remains don't allow collection of adequate genetic material for DNA studies. I guess it is a combination of all factors. The Aztecs and the Mayas seem to be more popular as you can see in the following image which compares web searches for Olmecs (blue), Aztecs (yellow) and Mayas (red) between 2004 and now (Google Trends). Notice the Maya peak in 2012 (when many believed that the world was going to end according to a prophecy in the Maya calendar).

Link to this Google Trends result

---

Patagonian Monsters - Cryptozoology, Myths & legends in Patagonia Copyright 2009-2025 by Austin Whittall ©