The Ancients - Ancient Americas: The Olmec Heads

Episode Date: August 21, 2022

One of the the earliest Mesoamerican civilisations discovered so far - Olmec influences are visible throughout history. But who were they? And what do we actually know about them?In the third episode of our 'Ancient Americas' series, Tristan is joined by Professor Jillian Mollenhauer to help shed some light on this mysterious civilisation. Taking a look at their culture, legacy, and their iconic colossal statues - what can we learn from the archaeology, and why were the Olmec so influential?For more Ancients content, subscribe to our Ancients newsletter here. If you'd like to learn even more, we have hundreds of history documentaries, ad free podcasts and audiobooks at History Hit - subscribe today!

Hi, I'm Tristan Hughes, and if you would like the Ancient ad-free, get early access and bonus episodes, sign up to History Hit. With a History Hit subscription, you can also watch hundreds of hours of original documentaries, including my recent documentary all about Petra and the Nabataeans, and enjoy a new release every week. Sign up now by visiting historyhit.com slash subscribe. It's the Ancients on History Hit. I'm Tristan Hughes, your host, and in today's podcast, where we are continuing our Ancient Americas series on the ancients through this August, because it's such an incredible part of antiquity,

looking at these cultures from Mesoamerica, from South America. Today, we're still focusing in on Mesoamerica, and a culture which is known as the Olmec culture. They're renowned for various artefacts for their archaeology, but in particular for their colossal monumental stone heads, the Olmec heads. So what do we know about these heads? How were they created?

Where were the stone for these heads quarried from? What do we know about the people who created them? Well, to explain all, we were delighted to get on the podcast Dr. Jill Mollenauer from Metropolitan State University of Denver. Jill, it was great to have her on the podcast for this topic, and I hope you enjoy. So without further ado, to talk all about the Olmec heads, here's Jill. Jill, it is great to have you on the podcast today. Thank you so much for having me, Tristan.

You're very welcome. Let's delve straight into this topic. Who were the Olmec? I knew you were going to ask me this question and it is fairly difficult to answer because there are so many different and yet correct answers that I could give. So do you want the shortish answer or the longish answer? You know, let's go the longish answer so we can really get a good background over to hit the ground running. When you're talking about the Olmec, it is quite different than when you were talking about the Maya or the Aztec, the Zapotec, any of the historically indigenous cultures of the Americas, because if you're

asking who are the Maya, you're asking about a contemporary culture that spans back thousands of years. And it's more easily identified because it's a unified language group. And so you can say anybody who speaks a Maya language is Maya. But that's not true of the Olmec. We only know of the Olmec through archaeological investigation and through the material remains that are left to us. And because of the time depth that we're talking about when we're speaking of the Olmec, we're somewhat limited because our knowledge is constantly changing. As archaeology delves deeper and deeper into the past of the ancient Americas, we learn more and more. And so we're constantly getting pieces of a puzzle. And we started making assumptions about what

the image on that puzzle looked like very early on. And we're finding that sometimes the additional pieces fit into that picture, and sometimes they radically change what we thought we were seeing. And when we're talking about the term Olmec, the waters are quite muddied because of the history of investigation. When we first started to recognize that there were materials and specifically artworks that did not conform to a known style, but seemed to be aesthetically unified, this first started to come to people's attention in the late 19th and early 20th century. And largely these works were portable objects and they were appearing in private collections,

but there were a couple of stone monuments or stone sculptures that were found in situ in Southern Veracruz, in kind of the Gulf Coast area, Southeastern Mexico. And people thought, well, this must be the place where this art style comes from. And people didn't realize the antiquity. They didn't realize the age involved. So immediately people started calling them Olmec after the 15th and 16th century inhabitants of that region, referred to by the Aztec as the Olmec or the Olmeca, Xicalanca were another group in Puebla at the time. And one work had been found there. And then the Olmec in the Gulf Coast were reported by the Aztec at that time. And people

thought they were contemporaneous, that they were one of these post-classic cultures. It wasn't until decades later that people realized that the material remains, number one, could not be pinpointed to a single location. That in fact, objects in this style were coming from lots of different places throughout Mesoamerica, as far north as Morelos, as far west as Guerrero, as far south as Honduras and El Salvador, and perhaps even as far south as Costa Rica. And so there was not a way to specifically pinpoint this artistic style as the product of one single culture. And the other issue was that by this point, people had started to discover these colossal heads, which were in this style. And there was a mistaken belief that this style was originating in the place where these colossal

heads were found, and where a number of other monumental sculptures in the style were found. And that was the Gulf Coast. So they very quickly named this the Gulf Coast Olmec culture. And so now we have an issue where there's an artistic style that's very widespread that carries a set of symbols and potentially ideas and worldviews with it that is quite widespread throughout the formative period. And then there is the archaeological culture based in the Gulf Coast, which certainly produced a great number of works in this style. And these are the people that we archaeologically call the Olmec. What they called themselves, what language they spoke, whether or not they saw themselves as in any way politically or culturally unified are all questions that we can't answer. So in some ways, the answer to the question, who are the Olmec, is that we don't know.

We're constantly finding out. to say that there were no such people as the Olmec because this is a name and culture that we, to some extent, have created for ourselves in the modern period. And we are constantly trying to fit archaeological evidence about these people into a preconceived notion of a single cultural framework that we have labeled Olmec. But the short answer is that the Olmec, typically that term references an archaeological culture, which is located in southeastern Mexico, in southern Veracruz, and northwestern Tabasco. And the bounds of the territory that we talk about as Olmec are defined by the presence of these colossal heads that I know we're going to talk about. You're absolutely right, we are going to talk about and let's focus in a bit more on this archaeological culture that you've

explained there. I mean you mentioned words like formative period, we're going back quite far back in ancient history. What time period though are we talking about when we're talking about the archaeological Olmec culture? We are talking about roughly 2000 BCE as the first material elements that we recognize as culturally Olmec. Of course, this keeps getting pushed back farther and farther as we dig deeper and deeper and find more and more. But about 2000 BCE to roughly 350 BCE. So quite far back in time. Absolutely. It's great when we go this far back. I mean, and therefore, let's delve a bit more into the geography of this whole area. So what do we know about the landscape of this area of Mesoamerica back in Olmec times? Do we know anything about the Olmec civilization? Do we know of the landscape of this area of Mesoamerica back in Olmec times? Do we know anything about the Olmec civilization?

Do we know of, let's say, were there big centers or were there lots of smaller centers all around? What do we know about the whole layout of the Olmec culture? It's an excellent question. This is a region that is quite ecologically diverse. that is quite ecologically diverse. And there are three primary sites that are talked about as primary centers for the Olmec. The first is San Lorenzo, that is the oldest, that really starts to rise to prominence about 1850 BCE. And its heyday is around 1200 to 900 BCE. And that site is situated in the Coatzacoalcos River drainage. It's an incredibly wet riverine environment with lots of oxbow lakes and creeks. And it's been described by some as sort of the land that tastes of water because it is so heavily inundated. And that makes working in this region for archaeologists

very difficult because you're constantly trying to navigate around these shifting rivers and riverbeds. And it's a very hot region today. San Lorenzo was an important primary site. And then there were a number of secondary and tertiary centers that sort of radiate out from it. There were also a couple of important secondary centers that were probably somewhat politically autonomous, although that's unclear exactly what the relationship was between primary and secondary centers. But Laguna de los Cerros sits at the base of the Tuxla Mountains, where the stone for these monuments and some of the architecture is coming from. And it probably served as sort of the gateway to these sources of stone. There was a workshop found fairly close by that was probably responsible for querying and shaping some of the stone that would then be passed on to San Lorenzo. To the south was La Venta. It really does not get

going as a major center of power until after San Lorenzo wanes. So primary centers for the Olmec are sequential in their apogees, beginning with San Lorenzo in what we call the early formative between 1850 and 900 or 850 BCE. And then for a variety of reasons that aren't entirely clear to us, San Lorenzo wanes and La Venta becomes the primary site, really comes on the scene as a major center of power. And La Venta is located further south in northwestern Tabasco, a short distance from the current city of Villahermosa, and it's surrounded by mangrove swamps. So it is also a heavily riverine environment in some ways. At least three sides of the site seem to have been bordered by water of some kind.

But the environment is still quite different at that point. Once La Venta's power wanes, which is roughly 400 to 350 BCE, then a site that has been in the north that has been a presence, but not such a major regional power, which is the third site with colossal heads, and that's Tres Apotes, becomes prominent regionally. And that site, again, is very ecologically different. It's situated in the Tuxla Mountains, so it has access to all sorts of different resources. It's not quite as wet in its geography. It doesn't have the Oxbow Lakes.

It doesn't have the rivers. It has more immediate access to stone and other resources that are present in the Tushla Mountains. And interestingly, all three of these sites are varied in their overall layouts, in the kinds of building configurations. And so one of the only things that really unites them in their identity to us as Olmec is, in fact, the presence of the colossal heads. share some elements of architectural construction, particularly when we look at the architecture, which is difficult to do, I will say, these days, because mostly they were building in clay and colored sand and mud brick and using stone, but very judiciously, particularly at San Lorenzo and La Venta, where stone is not plentiful in the immediate region. They are having to import quite a lot of stone from distances upwards of sometimes 60 to 120

kilometers away. And so they're using stone only in the most elite areas of the site and very judiciously at that. For example, at San Lorenzo, stone is used as a cap for stairs or for columns to support otherwise ephemeral architecture. And because of the incredible heat and humidity in this region, ephemeral architecture does not preserve well, ephemeral architecture does not preserve well, particularly at this kind of time depth. So what Olmec architecture looked like is still somewhat of a mystery. We have vestiges, remnants, we have floors, occasionally something that looks like a step. Interestingly, both San Lorenzo and La Venta incorporate water features into their site architecture in the form of these drainage lines, as well as things that we often describe as fountains. They're basically like stone basins to hold water. But we get a sense of incredible built environments

that have worn away over time to nearly nothing, unfortunately. Well, Jill, let's now delve into these great heads themselves now, because it almost feels as if these Olmec heads, is it fair to say they're the most iconic form of monumental structure or monumental sculpture that survives from the Olmec from this time period in Mesoamerican history? Yes, they're definitely the most iconic or at least the most well-known, particularly outside of Mexico and outside of the region. When people, if they've ever heard of the Olmec, the only thing they've ever heard about is that there are these big stone heads. I would urge anyone who's interested in the Olmec to look beyond the heads

to a really incredible sculptural tradition that exists at the sites. And the heads are in some ways typical of the style and in other ways, very exceptional. So in what ways are they typical of Olmec art and sculpture? The scale for one, while even greater than is usual, I would say there are not many monuments. There are some, but not many monuments that exist at that scale

for the Olmec in the Gulf Coast and certainly outside of the Gulf Coast at this formative period. Rarely do you encounter this scale of sculpture. The smallest of the heads is 1.47 meters in height, and the largest is 3.4 meters in height. They're massive. And what I love about them is that when you see them, they have almost like a gravitational pull. It's like being in the room with a small planet. They just suck you toward them. And what people love about the heads is that they are, to a large extent, very naturalistic, very sensitively modeled you do get a sense that they each have their own very particular nuance of expression. The lips are in slightly different configurations. Sometimes they're showing their teeth, sometimes they're not. Their noses are slightly different shapes, their eyes are slightly different shapes. The modeling of the cheeks differs from one to the other. And then their

headdresses are all unique and their ear ornaments are to some extent unique. And because of this, when they're all lined up in a room, you're in this space with individuals that have been expanded to this enormous scale. So they're incredibly visually powerful. And it's interesting from what you said there, Jill. So these heads, actually, first of all, quick answer to this one. I mean, how many heads are there in total that we know of? There are technically 17 that we consider to be colossal heads. One of them is somewhat of an outlier and may have been produced quite a bit later. It's actually not located in any of the three major sites. It was found

outside near what was probably a regional trade route. And it's the most roughly carved of them. And there are stylistic elements that are unusual for that one head. So to my mind, there are really 16 proper heads and then one attempt to make something that was meant to reference these heads. Like a later imitation perhaps or something along that. Yeah for what purpose it's hard to say whether it was commissioned by elites in the area whether it was made by a different group of people that were trying to harness this elite tradition that had perhaps largely passed by this point in time. That's all conjecture. But if you ask most people, they will say 17 heads. It's also interesting from what you were saying there, Jill, because it almost sounds therefore

with these heads, I'm guessing there are overall, there are some key generic features that you can potentially see on all or most of these heads. But as you were saying there, the devil is in the detail, this great variation between each of these heads when you look into certain features that are carved into these great slabs of stone. Absolutely. The fact that the emblems on the headdresses are all different is the best indicator that they are specific individuals because in later Mesoamerican cultures, almost invariably, whether it's the Maya or the Zapotec or later Aztec, there are often key emblems that identify an individual and they are often located in headdresses because the head is seen as the place where your spirit and your individuality sort of reside.

So the fact that all of them have these distinct emblems on their headdresses is probably a way to identify them specifically. So therefore, with these different headdresses, I mean, are these headdresses the main piece of art on these monumental monoliths that you can use to distinguish between them? Or are there other features that vary as well? Like do the eyes sometimes differ slightly or other features or is it mainly just the headdress? All of the facial features vary. And if you took away all of the headdresses, you would still be able to distinguish them.

Which I think is one of the things that people connect to and really love about the heads. And it is one of the things about the heads that does connect to this larger tradition of Olmec sculpture, which is the naturalism that we perceive, which is more like the naturalism that we associate with the Western art tradition. Mesoamerican people as a whole have great aesthetic ability to create works of art in whatever style they want. And sometimes they skew more towards a sort of stylization, and sometimes they skew more heavily towards a naturalism. And for the Olmec, they sort of balance naturalism with more abstract elements, but it's easy to see the foundation of their art as something that is based in natural observation and is also based in the human world. And I think that's the other thing that really appeals is

human world. And I think that's the other thing that really appeals is Beatriz de la Fuente, a very famous art historian who was one of the first to work on Olmec art, described the tradition as homocentric, that it really focuses largely on representations of humans. And because those representations are by and large quite naturalistic, it's very easy for people today to really connect with this tradition. And in regards to this tradition there, that fact that it seems to be largely homocentric, although I'm guessing there are examples that aren't homocentric in Olmec art that survive, but in regards to monumental sculpture, do we know of any monumental sculpture that perhaps predates the Olmec heads from this part of the world? Or is this almost the first

of these really big sculptures? There was a discovery decades ago now of a spring called El Manatee that had ritual deposits going back hundreds and thousands of years. And within that spring, several wooden busts were discovered in the Olmec style. Now, prior to this, it had been hypothesized that the Olmec must have begun sculpting in wood first, because when we see stone sculpture come on the scene, there's no awkward fumbling. There's no rough hewn attempts to sculpt that aren't quite as masterful. Instead, right from the get-go, they seem to demonstrate this incredible facility to sculpt in stone. And remember that when they're sculpting this stone, it's volcanic stone, it's basalt, so it's hard stone, and they're not using any metal tools. It's all done with percussion, stone against stone,

or with abrasion, grinding. And so people thought there's no way that they just started sculpting in stone as master carvers, as master sculptors. They must have been working in wood, which is an easier material to sculpt. But we're talking about such a deep time depth. So many years have passed, and this is, again, a very humid environment in which ephemeral materials like wood do not preserve. So we had given up hope that this would be anything more than a hypothesis. And then in the 90s, these wooden busts were discovered in this aquatic environment and they were beautifully preserved. And it did, in fact, tell us that, yes, the Olmec did sculpt in wood. sculpting wood is quite a bit different than sculpting in stone. So it still remains to me one of the most amazing things about the tradition that they are able to, right at the beginning of the monumental tradition in Mesoamerica, bring such aesthetic facility into their work, that

they're able to really capture this beautiful balance between naturalism and abstraction. They play between three and two dimensions. They like to play with materials, sometimes giving you a sense of flesh carved in stone and other times really trying to emphasize that it is stone. And the materiality of Olmec art is, I think, something that really speaks to people because they're working in these volcanic stones, they're working in greenstone and jade and serpentine and variety of other materials that the artists seem to celebrate for the inherent qualities of the material itself. Hi there, I'm Kate Lister, sex historian and author, and I am the host of Betwixt the Sheets,

the history of sex, scandal and society, a new podcast from History Hit. Join me as I root around the topics which have been skipped over in your school history lessons. Everything from the history of swearing to pubic hair, satanic panic, cults, there is nothing off limits. We'll be bed hopping around different time periods from ancient civilizations to the middle ages to renaissance and early modern right up to now listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts well let's keep all the materials a bit longer then from how you finished off that point, which leads me on to something which I've talked about in a couple of podcasts before,

and I'm finding it really, really fascinating now, is that the origins of the stones themselves were these great heads. I mean, do we know from how far away these stones were quarried from and brought to where these stone heads were ultimately placed? What do we know about the whole process of these stones getting from their quarry to where they were finally placed? We do know that these stones were primarily being brought from the Tushla Mountains to the north. And again, depending on which site you're looking at,

they would have traveled between 60 and 100, 120 kilometers. And again, these are massive basalt boulders that they're transporting. So the question is, how are they getting them there? And the standing theory for many years has been that they were taking advantage of the fact that they lived in this incredibly aquatic environment and were transporting the stones via raft, which makes quite a lot of sense when you think about different modes of transportation and how you could move these stones and the nature of the environment. It makes more sense to say that they were floating them down these rivers and these estuaries rather than that they were trying some or all of the stones via the coastline. And I think that idea needs further exploration, but it's within the realm of

possibility, certainly. And although most of the stones seems to have been from a particular area of the Tushla Mountains that we call Cerro Sintipec. It's a type of basalt located in a particular region next to that site of Laguna de los Cerros. They were bringing stone from other places as well. There is a peak in the Tuxla Mountains called Cerro Vigia and we know that stone used for monuments at San Lorenzo and La Venta and later Tres Apotes were all from this and La Venta and later Tres Apotes were all from this peak, which even today is seen by local communities as sacred. La Venta also pulled stone from areas to the south, again, sometimes upwards of 60 or 90 kilometers away. And if you look at the sources for all of the stone and other materials that they're incorporating into their sites, what's interesting is you start to get a picture of the networks of trade and influence

that people at these various sites had. And in fact, a comparison between the range of materials, how far they were going to get the materials that were incorporated into their site at San Lorenzo versus La Venta, you see that La Venta actually has a larger network of inter-regional exchange and influence, which is what we would expect moving from an earlier to a later period in time. So that's great. So we can actually use the transporting of these stones, you know, from their original location to where they were finally placed to learn more about olmec connections how because actually that's another point i'd love to talk about quickly so with these olmec statues you can learn more about them about olmec culture let's say you can look at the

olmec sculptures which are in the san lorenzo and then compare them to those at Tres Apotes and see the differences there, how they're brought to the places, what that can in turn shine a light on, I guess, the state of the Olmec, you know, that several hundred years later during this whole time period. And we do see some interesting continuities and also wide divergences in the sculptural records between the sites. In fact, besides the heads themselves, there is quite a lot of differentiation in the sculptural forms between these various sites. And one of the things that we see is that between the early formative, again, we're talking roughly 1200 to 900 BCE, and the middle formative, the next 500 years, they move from a preference for three-z and in the Maya region, as major public monuments, bold statements to particularly elite individuals and site cores.

And so the tradition of Stile seems to emerge during this middle formative period, not just at La Venta, but also places nearby in what is technically Maya territory and also in Morelos at the site of Chalcatzingo. So we start to see more inter-regional connections in terms of the sculpture when we move forward in time and we see more and more interaction between the various peoples that are emerging in Mesoamerica as civilizations as we would think of them. And I'm guessing that in turn links, oh it's like tangent, but that in turn links to learning more about the interconnected Mesoamerican world at that time period and I guess can also shine more light on how you do get let's say that 17th head, you know perhaps those ideas are

spreading to those other people like and they're trying to imitate them at a later date. Those light on how you do get, let's say, that 17th head, you know, perhaps those ideas are spreading to those other people and they're trying to imitate them at a later date. Those ideas are spreading through these connections that we now know very much are there at that time period. Well, I think something that is important to keep in mind when we're talking about the Olmec is that while we have rediscovered them through archaeology, people in Mesoamerica knew who the Olmec were. Maybe not by that name, but they knew who they were. They knew what this tradition was. They knew that it had roots in their historical past.

Indigenous peoples throughout Mesoamerica had an incredible sense of history. Their own, but also how they connected to other peoples in Mesoamerica had an incredible sense of history, their own, but also how they connected to other peoples in Mesoamerica throughout time. And Olmec objects from this formative period end up in burial caches in later Maya cities, and they end up actually at the Templo Mayor in Mexico City today. So we do see that classic period people are referencing the Olmec either through keeping these heirloom objects or even by creating variations on Olmec stone monuments in Veracruz you see in the classic period. They're moving these monuments around and they're making things that sort of look like an Olmec monument, perhaps as a sort of nod to this ancient past that they are

absolutely aware of. It's so interesting. We'll get a bit more into the legacy as we start to wrap up. But the last big question, which I know people may well be shouting at me for not asking this earlier, but we've got to ask now, going back to the heads, talked about where they are, how many, where the stones came from. But who do we think these heads portray, Jill? Who are these heads? Again, there have been a lot of theories about this, but I think the most accepted theory and the one that makes the most sense is that they have to be rulers of some sort. Now, we're not entirely sure of the political systems in place at San Lorenzo, La Venta. Tres Apotes, by the time you move into the late formative period, starts to configure itself as a government that may have seen multiple rulers instead of just one. People have sort of

projected onto the Olmec a model of dynastic kingship that is like that we see in the classic Maya kingdoms, but that might be premature. There's also been quite a lot of debate about whether or not the Olmec primary sites constitute archaic states or chiefdoms, or whether or not these rulers should be called chiefs or whether they should be called kings. There's quite a lot of debate around terminology when you're looking back at this ancient past. But the assumption is that only people with a great deal of political clout would have had the resources and the influence to commission what look like portraits of themselves. So the assumption is that they are, in fact, rulers of some ilk, whatever we want to call

them, whether it's chief or whether it's king. And there's also been an acknowledgement that a number of them were probably recarved from thrones. And this comes out of an observation made by James Porter many decades ago now that two of these heads actually preserve elements of a niche on one side that is like the niches we find on the remaining thrones. So evidence says that a number of them were recarved from large thrones. And so there were a couple of theories. Were they taking a previous ruler's throne and recarving it into his portrait after his death? Or were you taking your predecessor's throne and carving it into your portrait as some way to state the kinship connections or the legacy, really writing that connection in terms of the power structures in stone, as it were. And I have gone back and forth about who's commissioning these. Are they commissioning portraits of themselves when they're alive, or are they commissioning portraits of ancestors?

And my current thinking, and I reserve the right to change this as more new information comes to light. But most of the examples I could think of of stone portraiture for later Mesoamerican peoples is portraits that are commissioned by the rulers themselves. So I think it likely that they are commissioned while the ruler is alive. But again, I think people, some people would debate me about that. Well, Jill, it's a great topic to discuss. And it's one of those things, you know, because it's so far back in history, well, going back to prehistory,

that you've just got the archaeology and, you know, the theories are there. And it sounds like, you know, that's quite a strong theory. It's been wonderful to talk about how these stones were transported there as well and who these heads portray. And an overview of the

Olmec in general I wish I had more time to ask about like rock art and how that's you know potentially affects the heads too and a bit more on the legacy of the Olmec on later Mesoamerican cultures which we kind of highlighted with the Maya there but I'm sure there's so much more to that story too last question though I feel this is a nice wrapping up question I mean if there was one thing you'd like people to take away from our chat about the Olmec and the Olmec heads today, what would you want them to take away? What would it be? My takeaway would be that in fact, there is so much more to love and learn about the Olmec than just the heads. The heads really are the most iconic element, but they're the tip of

the iceberg when it comes to this incredible cultural and artistic tradition that existed in Mesoamerica's ancient past. They do set a number of important precedents for later cultures, and they are not setting them alone. It's an interaction with very early Maya and the people who will later become the Zapotec and peoples in Guerrero and Morelos. But they're an important part of the foundation for later Mesoamerican peoples. And at the same time, even if you dismiss the legacy element and just focus on what they're doing in their own heyday, the Olmec are incredibly interesting as a case study for emerging civilizations, for people who are developing a form of at least proto-writing, if not true writing, who are probably establishing some of the elements of Mesoamerican calendars that will become foundational to later worldviews and ideologies. And thinking about, again, how we create an artistic tradition and a cultural tradition seemingly out of thin air.

Certainly, elements of this probably went back a long ways, but in terms of their material presence, this is the first time we're seeing all of these elements that will contribute to Mesoamerican cultures appear in the material record and be preserved in the material record. to me about Olmec sculpture is that nothing really precedes it. And as such, it's incredibly experimental, actually. And there are monuments that look like nothing that came before and nothing you'll ever see again anywhere in Mesoamerica, because there's no rules initially. They're making them up. And they're starting to, as we move into the middle formative, become more established. They're creating these traditions over centuries and over millennia, but they didn't start with those traditions. They're forming them as they go. And looking at that cultural process is so interesting that, again, if you look at nothing later in Mesoamerica, there are incredible lessons for human development just

looking at the Olmec. And I would encourage anyone to look beyond the heads at some of the other wonderful contributions that the Olmec made. I mean, absolutely. Look beyond the heads. I've got like the Olmec dragon and so much more. If only we had time to talk about all of that, Jill, that would be another podcast entirely in due course. Jill, this has been absolutely great. Where can people go and learn more about your work? Yeah, people can certainly read articles I've written and really, if anyone wants to chat about the Olmec, they can email me directly and find my information on the Metropolitan State University of Denver website. Well, Jill, it's been an

absolute pleasure and it just goes to me to say thank you so much for taking the time to come on the podcast today. Thank you, Tristan. I appreciate it. Well, there you go. There was Dr. Jill Molyneux explaining all about the Olmec heads as we continue our Ancient Americas series. I'm really happy we're doing this series and i'm really happy to see how well received it's been so far and don't you worry we've got plenty of episodes left and we're lining some more up too there is so much to talk about there is so much incredible ancient history from this part of the world and we're determined to bring those stories to you on the ancients now last things from me going to be a bit different

from normal today because i got something slightly different i have a very exciting special offer for you for ancients listeners on history hits we're building the world's best history channel on demand and we want to share it with you when you sign up for a monthly subscription using code ancients you'll get two weeks free, followed by your first three months with 50% off. Now, we release two exclusive new documentaries every week, and I present some of those to you, just getting that in there. And you'll get access to every episode of our ever-growing podcast network, which of course includes front and center The Ancients, ad-free, ad-free. And that's not just with me on the ancients,

but of course, that's the main one you want. But also across all of our pods, like with Matt and Kat on Gone Medieval, with Susie on Not Just the Tudors, with James on Warfare, with Kate Lister on Betwixt the Sheets, and so on and so forth. So what are you waiting for?

Get over to History Hit. If you use the code ANCIENTS, you get two weeks free, followed by your first three months with 50 off so head over to history hit today just follow the link in the show notes but that's enough from me and i'll see you in the next episode