MICHAEL D. COE 131 has been, I am afraid, a loss of public interest in pre- Columbian cultures. Children are paraded through museums on school trips, given lectures about science and “our” heritage, but they do not return when they are older. We are at risk of returning to where we started so many years ago: of pre-Columbian objects being appreciated, studied, admired, and collected by only a small group of aficionados. The high-handed efforts of archaeologists to protect cultural patrimony, with only themselves as the rightful custodians, have unwittingly led to a withering of interest in past civilizations. FC: What are the frontiers of research in Mesoamerican studies? What’s next? MC: It will depend, overwhelmingly, on what is discovered. And, as I have said before, such discoveries depend in large part just on luck. I do believe, though, we are likely someday to discover a dry cave in the Yucatan Peninsula with at least a few Maya codices. Caves were sacred for the Olmec and the Maya, and Yucatan is riddled with them. I also expect there will be important discoveries along the coastal areas of Colombia and elsewhere, including discoveries that might shed light on the movement of peoples, goods, and ideas throughout the Americas. I hope too that we learn more about how early civilizations such as the Olmec influenced later civilizations, all the way to the Aztecs. FC: How has your recent interest in Angkor and Southeast Asia in general shaped your view of the Americas FIG.7: “One of Fifty-Three Towers in the Structure Known as the Bayon.” Plate From Gilbert Hovey Grosvenor, ed., Scenes from every land: picturing the people, natural phenomena and animal ..., National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, 1912. FIG. 8 (below): Hugo Brehme (1882–1954), Pyramid of the Sun, Teotihuacán, Mexico. C. 1920. Gelatin silver print. 20.3 x 25.4 cm. Courtesy of Throckmorton Fine Art, New York. and of your own work on the early civilizations of Mesoamerica? MC: Basically, I see the Americas as an extension of Asia. The peoples who settled here were all Asiatic. I am convinced that there is more of a tie between the civilizations than is commonly supposed—especially given that most still believe there was no relationship between the development of civilizations in Asia and those in the Americas. Everyone keeps citing the lack of material evidence. The prevailing view is people came, naked and empty-handed, walking across the former land bridge in the Bering Strait. I suspect most came by boat. How long have humans had and used boats? Australia was never connected to Asia, but it was settled 50,000 years ago, I am sure by people arriving in boats. In northern Chile a settlement site was found, dating to 1100 AD where chicken bones were found. DNA tests showed the chickens came from Polynesia. The real evidence of an important cultural link between Asia and the Americas, though, is not material: It is in the realm of ideas, of beliefs, and of concepts. Similarly, no Indian artifacts have been found in Cambodia, yet it is clear that the early Khmer knew everything about India. Looking at such subjects as calendars, conceptions of the four cardinal directions, shamanism, and even the shared appreciation for blue and green stones lead to the conclusion that there was an important, if incomplete, cultural link between Asia and pre- Columbian America. It is a mistake in archaeology—and probably in everything else—to say everything is known that can be known. There are always surprises.
I-IVCoverT68 E_CoverF Vuvi
To see the actual publication please follow the link above