Mexican ‘Chinaman’ Statues

James Churchward described, as part of his materials on William Niven’s Mexican discoveries, a small statue of what he termed, a ‘Chinaman.’

From Lifting the Veil on the Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men page 114:

RELICS FROM NIVEN’S LOWEST CITY 1. Egyptian head. 2. Ancient Grecian vase. 3. A toy. 4. Little Chinaman

From Lifting the Veil on the Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men, pages 215-218

“This image proves with indisputable evidence that the people who lived ages ago in the Valley of Mexico knew and were familiar with the Mongolian type. The ruin in which I found the Chinese image was in the remains of the third or lowest civilization thirty feet down from the surface in the pit which I had dug at San Miguel Amanda, near Haluepantla, nineteen miles from the national palace in Mexico City. The first (upper) civilization, marked by a cement floor, and walls of a concrete building I found at a depth of eight feet. Eleven feet below this was the second (middle) civilization of about the same grade of development as the first, and 30 feet 3 inches from the surface of the ground I came on a bed chamber, or tomb, I do not know which, in the third stratum of ruins, which contain the finest artefacts I have ever seen in Mexico. I am inclined to think the room was thirty feet square, its walls were made of concrete and crushed down to within a foot of their bases. Below was a tomb. In the center, on a raised rectangular platform, also of concrete, lay the skull and some of the bones of a man who could not have been more than five feet in height. His arms were very long, reaching almost to the knees, and his skull was decidedly of a Mongolian type. Around his neck had been a string of green jade beads. Green jade is not a Mexican mineral.
“Lying beside the body was a string of 597 pieces of shell. I say string, but the buckskin thong which had once born them was long since rotted to dust, and the wampum, or money, lay as if it had fallen from a string. With this money lay the greatest find of all – the little Chinaman.
“It is the first of its kind ever found in Mexico, though Mongoloid types persist in sufficient numbers among the Indians of all Mexico to convince anyone that the Indian blood of the country originally came from Asia.
“His oblique eye-slits, padded coat, flowing trousers and slippers make him a present-day Chinaman in all respects, except for the queue which is lacking. The Chinese did not, however, adopt the queue until they had been conquered by the Tartar hordes from the north.
“The little statuette is about 7 inches high, and where the arms are broken off, the clay of which the image is made shows red and friable in the center; outside, however, the clay has metamorphosed into stone, so that it can be chipped with the hammer only with the greatest difficulty. It is about 3 1/2 inches in width across the chest and 1 1/2 inches in thickness through the abdomen. In the ears are huge rings similar to those worn by the Chinese today, on the head is a skull cap with a tiny button in the center, almost exactly like the caps of the mandarins of the Empire, which has now become a republic. The coat, which is loose and of a type still worn by the Chinese, is shown fastened with a frog and a button, while on the breast is a circular plate or ornament, evidently covered with a layer of beaten gold, but worn bare by contact with the earth of unknown ages. Each arm is broken off at the shoulder, and the opening of the entire tomb has failed to disclose the missing hands. This Chinese image was not made by Aztecs. It had been buried in the earth in the Valley of Mexico’ for thousands of years before the Aztecs set foot on the plateau. The Aztecs were newcomers in Mexican history, the blood-thirsty conquerors of the great civilized and organized races of Mexico, who ravaged with fire and sword the cities built by the Toltecs, Ohmecs and Mayas. The Aztecs did not build; they took buildings from the builders by force of arms.
“The little Chinaman furnishes exactly the link for which we have been searching. He says without speaking that the most ancient tribes of Mexico were offshoots of the Mongoloid. “Near the skeleton, but off the platform, lay a flower vase about 15 inches high, undoubtedly filled with Xochitl, the yellow sacred flower of practically all of the ancient races of this country.”

This passage is from Chapter 11 (“Niven’s Buried Cities”) of Lifting the Veil on the Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men. Almost the entirety of the chapter is contained in an article in one of James Churchward’s scrapbooks and is published as a footnote in “Lifting the Veil on the Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men”. This account provides that the grave and statue were from San Miguel Amanda, near Haluepantla. It is unfortunate that the source and date of the article were removed from the article.

As reported in the “The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser” on January 11, 1913 in an article entitled, “Discoverers of America: Chinese First to Land,” Niven must have found another ‘chinaman’ statue. The article describes that Niven, while digging at the base of the great pyramid at ‘Tootihuacan(Teotihuacan)’ under three levels of civilization. It is described almost exactly the same as the ‘chinaman’ statue in the 1926 Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men.

One aid to help decipher the mystery is also included in one of James’ scrapbooks. The following map (source and date also removed) provides the locations of ancient ruins and includes the location of Azcapotzalco, “where traces of a Mongoloid civilization were uncovered by William Niven.”

The map also distinctly shows that Teotihuacan is in another location, so perhaps the placement of the artifacts from Teotihuacan was derived with the intent of bolstering the importance of the discovery, and saving them from having to write/type ‘Azcapotzalco.’

This ‘chinaman’ statue has been referenced in recent literary works also. The artifact was used by Gavin Menzies to show ‘Chinese influence in Central America,’ however that opinion is not unanimous. Mr. Menzies’ statue is the version discovered at Teotihuacan and it is even included on the People’s Daily (official information organ of the People’s Republic of China.) Jason Colavito provides an analysis of the statue on his website and indicates that far from being a ‘chinaman’ or an Asian figure, the artifact shows Mexican influences.

So, when is a ‘chinaman’ statue not Chinese? – when it is Mayan.

Jack Churchward

Comments are closed.