They Came Before Columbus

Summary

The video presents Ivan Van Sertima’s argument that Africans—especially people he describes as Egyptian-Nubian—reached the Americas before Columbus and influenced some American civilizations. These claims are presented by Van Sertima and are disputed in the program; this summary describes his case rather than treating it as established fact.

The Olmec Civilization and the Proposed African Presence

• Van Sertima describes the Olmec as a foundational or “mother” civilization whose influence spread across Mesoamerica and, he argues, reached other parts of the Americas.
• He argues that Olmec society combined Indigenous American traditions with influences brought from outside the Americas, particularly from Africa.
• He points to colossal stone heads and other sculptures, along with skeletal remains, as evidence of people with African physical traits. He gives dates ranging from roughly 1200 BCE to 948–680 BCE for different evidence and sites.
• He interprets some of the heads as depictions of African individuals who held priestly or ruling roles. A local guide identifies one large head as a priest; Van Sertima describes the heads as representing a priest-king elite and discusses features such as facial details, headdresses, and a possible speaking-tube or altar function.

Egypt and Nubia as African Civilizations

• Van Sertima argues that ancient Egypt should be understood as an African civilization, emphasizing Nubian and Sudanese roots in Egyptian political, religious, and writing traditions.
• He uses this framing to support the possibility that African people and cultural ideas could have traveled beyond Africa, including to the Americas.
• He argues that Egyptian and Nubian societies were capable of long-distance travel and sophisticated engineering and navigation.

Cultural Parallels He Interprets as Evidence of Contact

Van Sertima points to similarities between African, Egyptian, and American cultural practices and symbols. Examples he discusses include:

• Pyramids, including step-pyramid forms, ceremonial platforms, and monuments.
• Priestly or royal traditions, including crowns, regalia, and the bird-and-serpent motif.
• Sarcophagi, burials, mummification, and the use of cardinal directions and associated colors.
• Calendars, measurement systems, astronomy, hydraulic agriculture, and the movement of large stones.
• Purple pigment and its symbolic association with sacred or royal power.
• Sculptural and iconographic comparisons, including figures and motifs he considers similar in Egypt and Mexico.

He argues that these resemblances indicate the transfer of ideas, not necessarily that Africans built American monuments or controlled American societies. He distinguishes cultural influence from colonization and says that Indigenous people supplied the labor and developed their own traditions.

Proposed Routes and Periods of Contact

• Van Sertima argues that Atlantic currents could carry boats from Africa toward the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.
• He describes African voyages to the Americas in more than one period. In addition to early contacts he associates with Olmec-era sites, he discusses alleged voyages from the medieval Mali Empire in 1310–1311.
• He says his case draws on accounts by European observers, maps, linguistic parallels, oral traditions, and archaeological or biological evidence.
• In the interview segment, he names a range of evidence categories: European reports, mythological, linguistic, botanical, oceanographic, navigational, skeletal, epigraphic, cartographic, oral and documentary, iconographic, and archaeological evidence.
• He also argues that Columbus recorded reports of dark-skinned traders arriving from the south or southeast, and that later accounts described Black people in parts of Central America and the Caribbean.

Archaeological Interpretation and Access to Evidence

• Van Sertima says that Olmec sites were occupied before their major monuments were built, and cautions against confusing a site’s earliest settlement with the high point of its civilization.
• He discusses La Venta, San Lorenzo, Monte Albán, Mitla, and Teotihuacan as sites connected, in his account, by Olmec influence.
• He interprets some Monte Albán figures as evidence of a foreign or African-descended elite and of political upheaval or sacrifice. He rejects interpretations that the figures represent dancers, sick people, or supernatural beings.
• He alleges that important artifacts, excavation results, or photographs have been overlooked, withheld, or insufficiently publicized. He also raises concerns about the preservation of a private collection in Mexico.
• He attributes the abandonment of some ancient centers to possible epidemics, upheaval, or revolt, while acknowledging that the precise causes are uncertain.

Dispute with Critics

• The program reads a letter from Gabriel Hass Vieira, who says Van Sertima’s claims lack adequate environmental, historical, and archaeological support and should be addressed point by point. Vieira declines to appear, saying that a short summary would not do justice to the subject.
• Van Sertima responds that critics dismiss his evidence rather than answering it individually. He objects to what he describes as unequal space and time in earlier published exchanges and debates.
• The interviewer identifies Bernard de Montellano, Warren Barbour, and Gabriel Hass Vieira as critics. Van Sertima discusses disagreements with them and says his response is set out in his book Early America Revisited.
• Van Sertima says that claims of pre-Columbian African contact should be judged across multiple evidence types, not dismissed with a single label such as “Afrocentric.”

Why Van Sertima Says the Subject Matters

• Van Sertima argues that recovering African history has consequences for people’s sense of identity, dignity, and ability to imagine social change.
• He says that histories portraying Africans as having no major civilizations can foster beliefs in inferiority, while historical knowledge can help people recognize their capacity to shape events.
• He connects historical consciousness to anti-colonial movements and political change, using examples such as Indian independence and African and Caribbean movements.
• He also describes his own turn toward researching primary sources after being taught accounts of Africa that he believed were false or demeaning.
• He recommends his book Early America Revisited and also mentions Dr. Finch’s Star of Deep Beginnings as a work on African history.

Speakers and Sources Featured

• Ivan Van Sertima — Main speaker; presents the arguments for African contact with and influence on the Americas.
• The interviewer/host — Leads the interview and reads Vieira’s letter; addressed as “Mr. Noble” in the program, but not otherwise identified in the subtitles.
• An unidentified local Mexican guide — Discusses a large stone head at a museum or site and identifies it as representing a priest.
• Gabriel Hass Vieira — Not present in person; his letter criticizing Van Sertima’s claims is read aloud.
• Named critics — Bernard de Montellano and Warren Barbour, alongside Vieira.

Other named researchers, authors, or sources discussed: Michael Coe, Victor Damas, Bruce Williams, Clarence Weiant, Matthew Stirling, and Dr. Finch. The program also refers to the Smithsonian Institution, the University of California, National Geographic, and the journal Current Anthropology.