The Indigenous History of El Salvador

Prehistoric Human Migration in the Americas

This post will describe the history of human movement in the Americas from about 13000 BCE – and perhaps 20000 BCE – until the time of European colonization. There were at least five passages to the Americas from Asia: the Monte Verde, Amerind, or Clovis passage of about 13000 BCE, the “Zuni” passage of unknown time, the “Algonquin” passage of about 7600 BCE, the Na-Dene (Athabaska, etc.) passage of 8000-4000 BCE, and the Inuit passage of about 1000 CE.

The Monte Verde / Clovis Migration

The Monte Verde passage went directly to Monte Verde, Chile. Due to the distances involved, the passage must have been by raft. Most likely the rafts hugged the shore, stopping for fresh water and food along the way. But there is no archeological or linguistic evidence of long stops along the way or migrations from the stops. Given that the original passage probably only had sufficient people for one successful settlement, it also would not have been practical to send off migration parties. The passage passed up many desirable locations and continued to the south of Chile, probably due to the inquisitive nature of the group, wishing to see the entire continental coastal expanse.

The Monte Verde passage was most likely from northeast Asia with some female members from Taiwan or southeast China. At least some of the members of the passage party, the Taiwanese women, spoke proto-Ch'orti', the root language of all Amerind languages, although in most cases too much time has passed to make the trace back to proto-Ch'orti'.

After a few generations, the population grew and migrating parties went to northern Venezuela and to central Colombia. Somewhat later other migrations went to northern Chile, the interior of Brazil, the far south of Chile, and northern Peru. [Click to enlarge map.]

 

At least two migrations went from South America –most likely Chile – to North America before 9000 BCE. The Chumash were probably the first going north by sail raft along the coast to settle in the Channel Islands of southern California. The Chumash spoke proto-Ch'orti' when they migrated, with their name in Ch'orti', chu’ max, meaning "breasts in the hollow," an archaic description of the Channel Islands, breast-islands in the hollow of the ocean. The Chumash migrated north sometime between 12200 and 11800 BCE.

The second migration north likely first went south around the tip of Argentina, then counter-clockwise around South America. The party either explored the Amazon or were already familiar with it, based on later place names. They continued to the Caribbean islands, following them, most likely, to the coast of Florida until reaching the mouth of the Mississippi River. They followed the Mississippi to the Missouri, until present-day South Dakota. Dakota is tak k'ot tah in Ch'orti' or "arrive to the dry forest" (Black Hills). This migration was the Clovis people, also known as the Lakota or Siouxian ancestors, as well as a few other Native nations. This migration happened in about 11600 to 11200 BCE.

There may have been other migrations from South America to North America between 11000 and 9000 BCE, resulting in the Salishan (British Colombia and Washington) and the Pomo people (California). Alternately the Pomo may be related to the Chumash.

Likely the only migration from South America to Central America or Mexico took place in about 8680 BCE, when four rafts landed in El Salvador, soon encountering the Xibalba. The Maya culture was developing on Isla Tigre, Honduras, but a crisis led to two splinter groups heading south and east, the Chibcha and Miskito, in about 8300 BCE. By 8200 BCE the Maya moved to live in four locations in El Salvador.

Between 7700 BCE and 7600 BCE several related migrations took place from El Salvador to North America. The first of these was the Ohlone and Miwok to the San Francisco Bay region. The second were the Iroquois and the Missouri to northeast Canada to prepare conditions and protect the Algonquin. The third was the Algonquin, a group of elite Maya that also included an Asian migration group. At some later time two small groups of the Algonquin sailed to California.

The next migration was the Otomi-Zapotec move from coastal El Salvador to the highlands of Puebla, Mexico, in about 7000 BCE. Their homes were being wiped out from the rising ocean.

After stability among the Maya from 7000 - 2400 BCE, major upheaval rocked the Maya world from 2400-1700 BCE, with successive waves of forced migrations from El Salvador due to the pellagra crisis. This resulted in the Huasteca, Totonac, Yucatec, and Ulua migrating up along the Atlantic Coast. And the Quiche, Purepecha, Olmeca, Xinca, Kanjobal, and the Mam migrating up along the Pacific Coast. The Olmeca soon crossed over to the opposite Gulf Coast.

In addition, smaller splinter groups broke off from these migrations, most likely due to recurring pellagra, resulting in groups in southern California, the Rio Grande area, and the Gulf Coast, including the Choctaw and Alabama.

A later migration of Nawat speakers from the central Mexico region to northern Mexico and the US Southwest, likely refugees from either Toltec or Aztec repression, took place between 1000 and 1500 CE. This includes all Uto-Aztec speakers, including the Shoshone and Hopi.

Genetics of the Monte Verde / Clovis Migration Party

The Asia to Monte Verde migration group appears to have had a mix of genes from south China and from northeast Asia. On the male side, all the males appear to have had Q Y-chromosomes. There are three Y-chromosome haplogroups in the Americas: Q, C, and R. The C Y-chromosome is identified with the NaDene migration and the R Y-chromosome is rare in South America, the destination of the Monte Verde migration. Later, I will discuss the 24,000-year-old remains of the Mal’ta MA-1 Siberian boy whose DNA was recently sequenced. This boy had the R Y-chromosome, yet South American indigenous share much of the DNA of the Mal’ta boy. One possible explanation is that the Mal’ta party split into two (or more groups). One group, in which all the males had the Q Y-chromosome, went east to the coastal area of northeast Asia. A second group, in which the males had the R Y-chromosome, and possibly Q too, went west to the Caucasus. Later, I believe, some of their descendants became part of the Algonquin passage, explaining the concentrated presence of the R Y-chromosome in the Great Lakes region. The Q Y-chromosome is common in northeast Asia, including coastal areas, but found very little south of north China. This is a likely indicator that the Monte Verde migrating party, or at least the men, originated from northeast Asia.

On the female side of the Monte Verde migration, the situation is also complicated. There are five mtDNA haplogroups in the Americas. (MtDNA is passed from female to female.) The X-haplogroup definitely belonged to a different migration, as it is barely present in South America. Of the remaining four, the C-haplogroup is least common in South America, indicating that it may belong to a different migration. Haplogroups A, B, and D are found throughout South American indigenous groups and were likely part of the Monte Verde migration. Haplogroups A and D are found in the same area of Asia as the Q Y-chromosome, however the B haplogroup isn’t. Instead B haplogroup is found in South China, Taiwan, Southeast Asia, and Polynesia.

Earlier I had found that the Ch’orti’ language has roots in Taiwan. This leads to the following speculative scenario. Most of the Monte Verde migration formed somewhere on the coast of northeast Asia – either north China, Korea, or eastern Russia. For some reason they wanted more women in the party and traveled to Taiwan to negotiate for Taiwanese aboriginal women to make the passage. These women joined and came to be dominant linguistically and soon proto-Ch’orti’ became the language of the Monte Verde settlement. The Taiwanese women joining the northeast Asia migrating party would be the explanation of how the mtDNA B haplogroup made its way to the Americas.

The Zuni Passage

The Zuni passage could have been very early, by 20000 BCE or even earlier, and may have accounted for the very early Topper, Meadowcraft, and other eastern Northamerican sites. The Maya, in their naming protocol, called four groups "foreigners": the Xibalba hunters at Corinto cave, El Salvador, the Zuni, the Paleo Eskimos, and a group in Surinam that disappeared sometime before 8000 BCE. It is possible that most or all four of these groups were remnants of the Zuni passage. Most likely, ancestors of the Xibalba account for the remains at Tulum, Mexico, and in central Mexico.

The Zuni have a dental structure that most closely resembles the Ainu of Japan, but that is different than all other indigenous in the Americas. It is clear that they are a different passage from Asia. The Zuni language is a language isolate. Due to intermarriage between the Xibalba and the Olmeca, there may be some language similarities between Zuni and Olmeca-related groups, like the Lenca, Xinca, and Purepecha. Zuni women predominantly belong to the B mtDNA haplogroup, which is likely to have a south China origin. However, that may have been due to intermarriage with neighboring groups, such as the Acoma, a member of the Keresan language group. Instead, the Zuni passage may have carried females with the C mtDNA haplogroup, with A mtDNA also possible.

Based on the language of the Maya, the Zuni, Xibalba, and the Paleo Eskimo shared one characteristic - being fierce warriors. The battles of the Maya with the Xibalba are chronicled in the Popol Vuh. The famous Chichimeca warriors of northern Mexico were likely deployed to keep the Zuni at bay. And the Maya sent warriors like the Missouri up to the Hudson Bay area to protect other Maya-related indigenous groups from the Paleo Eskimos.

The Algonquin Passage

The Algonquin passage took place most likely from the Caucasus region directly to the Great Lakes region, where a group of Maya joined the Eurasian group to found the Algonquin. This took place in about 7600 BCE. The Algonquin passage was responsible for bringing the mtDNA X haplogroup (female) and the Y-chromosome R haplogroup (male) to the Americas. I will write more about this passage soon.

The Na-Dene Passage

The Na-Dene passage took place probably from Siberia to Alaska sometime betwen 8000 and 4000 BCE, according to genetics. The main group of the passage settled in Alaska and northwest Canada. Smaller groups moved to present-day northern California. The Na-Dene passage group is responsible for the C Y-Chromosome haplogroup in the Americas and possibly the C mtDNA haplogroup.

Sometime between 1000 and 1500 CE, two NaDene groups migrated from British Colombia to the Arizona / New Mexico area: the Apache and the Navajo. The Maya encouraged the two groups to make the move to protect new refugee populations - the Hopi and Pima - from the Zuni. Apache is ap pach' che' in Ch'orti' or "handle swinging crusher" in English. The Navajo were perhaps more reluctant to make the move. Navajo is nahp ha' ho in Ch'orti' or "forget about desirable rivers."

The Inuit Passage

The Inuit made the passage from the Russian arctic region to the Alaskan and Canadian arctic in about 1000 CE. They wiped out remnants of the Paleo Eskimo in their area, similar to what the Missouri did along the Hudson Bay and the Vikings did in Greenland.

Aligning the Genetics with the Proposed Migrations

The DNA of the remains of a boy at Mal'ta, Siberia, dated to 24,000 years ago, have been sequenced. The Mal'ta DNA are considered to be Eurasian and account for 14 to 38% of the DNA in indigenous in the Americas. According to Eske Willerslev, a leading Danish geneticist who led the efforts to sequence the Mal’ta DNA, all indigenous American groups so far tested have about equal amounts of Mal'ta DNA. Considering that there were five migrations, this gives the impression that the Mal'ta group was perhaps the only group of humans in that part of the Asia at that time.

More recently, the 12,600 year-old remains of a two-year-old boy at the Anzick ranch north of Livingston, Montana, USA, were genetically sequenced. The remains are 2,400 years younger than the first Amerind settlement at Monte Verde, Chile, and at least 1,900 years younger than sites in northern Venezuela and central Colombia. This boy and his counterparts could have descended from the people of the early South American sites, but not vice versa. The DNA of the Montana boy is shared with the DNA of 80 percent of indigenous Americans from South, Central, or North America, according to Eske Willerslev. The boy was buried with Clovis-style tools, indicating that his family was part of the Clovis culture.

There are obvious links between the Anzick ranch burial site and the Monte Verde culture of southern Chile. The Montana boy was buried with red ocher (iron oxide) paint poured over his remains. The only known source of red ocher paint at that time was the Taltal, Chile, mine. Second, the name of the town near Anzick ranch, Wilsall, is translatable and meaningful in proto-Ch'orti', the same language used to name place names in early sites in Chile, Venezuela, and Colombia. Wilsall or wil sal means "flying wall" in proto-Ch'orti', describing the buffalo driven over cliffs in the area by early indigenous. The ranch owners have identified one cliff on the ranch as a place where this was done.

Dozens of other place names in the upper Great Plains are also translatable in proto-Ch'orti'. This indicates it was extremely unlikely that the Clovis ancestors were the result of a hypothetical group of the Monte Verde-Clovis passage that stopped in North America, while the others proceeded on to Monte Verde. If that were the case, the language in the upper Great Plains would likely have diverged from proto-Ch'orti'. Thus, I conclude that the Clovis people are the result of a migration by raft/canoe from Chile directly to the upper Great Plains. Since words that are culturally important to the Lakota are translatable in proto-Ch'orti', such as Dakota, Lakota, Yankton, and Oglala, I further conclude that the Lakota are among the descendants of the Clovis and are the ones living where the Clovis people first arrived to North America.

Unlike the Mal’ta DNA, the Anzick ranch DNA contains a Q Y-chromosome - Q L54*(xM3) to be precise, per Morten Rasmussen, colleague of Willerslev. This fits the Anzick ranch (Clovis) DNA in the mainstream of predominantly Q haplogroups (Y chromosome) in South America and Central America. In North America, C3, Q, and R are all common. The Q M242 Y-haplogroup strain is common in the Americas and the most widespread throughout the world. This shows some evidence that persons with that genetic marker are among the most exploring of all genetic groups.

The genes of the Malta MA-1 Siberian boy match Native genes throughout the Americas (i.e. Monte Verde-related) between 14 and 38 percent. The Malta boy genes are Eurasian – they match modern European genes but not east Asian genes. This means that if the Mal’ta group split in two, the entirety of the group that went east to northeast Asia migrated to the Americas.

Conclusion

This post proposes at least five passages from Asia to the Americas, with the first likely the Zuni passage, as early as 20000 BCE, and the last, the Inuit, only about 1000 years ago. The largest and most important of the passages was the Monte Verde or Clovis passage of about 13000 BCE. This passage went directly to the south of Chile and led to 60% to 75% of all indigenous in the Americas. Early North American groups, like the Chumash and the Clovis people, migrated by boat from southern Chile to North America. The language and genetic markers of the Monte Verde passage show that it was complex, with men (and maybe some women) from northeast Asia and women from Taiwan or southeast China.

The Pipil, Cihuatan, and the Toltec Humanitarian Crisis

This post tells the story of the rise of the Toltec civilization in central Mexico about 50 years after the fall of Teotihuacan, comprised of two of the seven ethnicities that made up Teotihuacan, the Totonac and Cakchiquel. It describes the oppressive practices of the Toltec which caused refugees fleeing north and south, the latter becoming the Nawat-speaking Pipil who went to El Salvador. Some of the Toltec followed the refugees to El Salvador where they ruled for about 130 years until their centers were burned. Seventy years later, in a bitter split of the Toltec, the losers, the Nahuatlized Totonac, also fled to El Salvador.

The Toltec civilization was active from 800 to 1150 CE, based in Tula in the current Mexican state of Hidalgo. Tula is located 60 kilometers northwest of Teotihuacan and 75 kilometers north of Mexico City. Tula is Tollan in Nahuatl and probably comes from Tulan in Ch'orti'. Tulan shares the last syllable with Aztlan and in Ch'orti' would be tul lah ahn or "condition of fatigued current," describing the Gulf of Fonseca where the ancient origin place of Isla Tigre is located.

Tula developed about 50 years after the fall of Teotihuacan. It was likely settled by one or more of the seven ethnicities who made up Teotihuacan - more on the likely Toltec ethnicities later.

The Toltec civilization is known for the god Quetzalcoatl. As I demonstrated earlier, Quetzalcoatl, the feathered serpent, refers to the meditation (coiled up snake) and gymnastics (bird swinging in the air) that the Maya began in the early pre-Classic at Chalchuapa. The Toltec were known for their yoga or kinam. Kinam is kin am in Ch'orti' and means "spider sticks" or "spider limbs".

Tula and Chichen Itza in the Yucatan have some architectural similarities that could indicate a relationship. (Fowler)

Many of sculptures and images at Tula are warriors or relate to human sacrifice. The wikipedia entry for Tula says, "War and sacrifice are prominent themes at the site with images representing warriors such as jaguars and coyotes as well as eagles eating human hearts. There are also images of serpents eating skeletal figures and skulls in various areas." The name Toltec reflects this identity. It was a name given by the Ch'orti' and it is not complementary. In Ch'orti' it is tol tech and means "expansion of the bruisers." Bruisers could also be translated mutilators, torturers, or sacrificers.

The chakmool sculptures are common at Tula. They have a reclining person with a stone tray on their stomach. It is thought that they were used to hold sacrificing gifts like tamales although a later Aztec one contained an object like a human heart. The name chakmool indicates that at Tula they were also for human hearts. Chakmool is chak mol in Ch'orti' and means "red pile," a reference to a bloody heart.

The "expansion of the bruisers" created a humanitarian disaster in central Mexico. The captures, killings, and human sacrificing must have been at a scale never seen before in Mesoamerica. The rise of human sacrifice at Tula may have contributed to the downfall of the Maya at the end of the Classic period. First, it may have created a moral crisis for the Maya that a Mesoamerican people (of Maya background) could engage in such a high level of human sacrificing. Second, many of the Maya likely became involved in plans to evacuate much of the central Mexico population. Coordinating the evacuation would have distracted the Maya leadership. Tikal's last major pyramid and monuments were built in 810 CE, about ten years after the founding of Tula. Copan's last king came to power in 822 CE but the monument he commissioned was never finished.

I believe that much of the dispersion of the Uto-Aztecan language group is due to the evacuation of Nahuatl speakers from the central valley of Mexico during the time of the Toltec. Later, Nahuatl speakers also fled the Aztec, especially the Nicarao who fled to Nicaragua. At the time of the Toltec, Nahuatl-speaking groups who became the Shoshone, Paiute, Hopi, Comanche, Pima, Yaqui, Mayo, and Tarahumara were likely fleeing the Toltec bruisers.

Some have names, likely given by the Ch'orti' coordinating the evacuation, that reflect the difficult time. For example, Yaqui is yah ki' in Ch'orti' and means "painful heart." This likely reflects both the pain suffered by their relatives who were sacrificed, as well as their emotional pain of losing loved ones and leaving their homeland. Mayo is mah yo'b in Ch'orti' and means "bad ones strike" and would seem to indicate the blows from the Toltec warriors that they endured.

Among those who went north were nahuatlized Mixteca, Otomi, Huasteca, Quiche, Olmeka, Mejica, and Purepecha. As they went north they gained new identities as Hopi, Comanche, Shoshone, Pima, and Yaqui, etc. As they got to know their new neighbors, the Zuni, they gained the name Chicano, ch'i' kah noh, which means "small ones and large ones from the beginning." The Zuni were a taller race and were cousins of the Xibalba, whom the Maya ancestors confronted for over a thousand years when they first arrived in Central America. Relations were probably not much better with the Zuni.

It is hard to know if the migration of the refugees to the north or the migration to the south happened first. The oral tradition of the Pipil suggests a 9th century migration and that the Pipil were adopted by the Ch'orti'. Perhaps the Ch'orti' supported the 1200 kilometer overland migration with logistics.

The oral tradition calls the migration, the "Pipiltzin". The last syllable is sin or "series," which suggests that there were several waves of migrations from Central Mexico to eastern Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Pipiltzin could also mean "numbers of Pipil," signifying a large migration.

My reading of Fowler's The Cultural Evolution of Ancient Nahua Civilizations, the Pipil-Nicarao of Central America, is that likely there were four post-Classic migrations from Central Mexico to Central America:

• Those fleeing the Toltec who went to western El Salvador, the first to be called Pipil
• A Toltec group that followed the refugees to El Salvador
• A Nonoalco group that was timed with the winding down of the Toltec, who also went to El Salvador
• The Nicarao group that fled the Aztec probably in the 14th century and went to Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua.

The first migration, and possibly later ones, was called Pipil, a name which confirms the oral tradition that the Ch'orti' accompanied the Pipil. In Ch'orti' it is pi pil or "companions on the journey" - a beautiful name. The Pipil journey and name make the other name for the Pipil - Nahuat - that much more ironic. Nahuat also comes from Ch'orti' - nab wat - and means "forget about returning home." At the end of the Teotihuacan days a new common language developed, Nahuat (Nabwat) or Nahuatl, and people left behind their old languages because they resigned themselves to the idea that they would never return home (to El Salvador).

But the Pipil, the Nahuat, did return home, although likely under duress. Just like the refugees who fled north, the Pipil were likely made up of many different ethnicities. To clarify, at that time Nahuat was a language, not an ethnicity. But on the journey, the Pipil became a new ethnicity. Their ethnicities of origin would have been Mixteca (or Zapotec), Otomi, Huasteca, Quiche, Olmeka, Mejica, and Purepecha. All, without exception, had roots in El Salvador.

The Mixteca, Zapotec, and Otomi people had moved from the San Vicente department of El Salvador to the Puebla state of Mexico in about 7000 BCE. The Huasteca and Totonac were of Chol-Ch'orti' origin and were forced to move from western El Salvador to the northeast Mexico coast between 2400 and 2000 BCE as part of the pellagra crisis. The Quiche moved from Coatepeque to the northwest coast of Mexico due to pellagra in about 2300 BCE. The Olmeka, Mejica, and Purepecha all moved from southeast El Salvador to Mexico due to pellagra, first the Purepecha to the Michoacan coast and later the Olmeka (some of whom later became the Mejica) moved to the Guatemala/Mexico coastal area in about 1800 BCE.

A 9th century arrival of the Pipil to El Salvador is mostly supported by Fowler, who cites two linguistic studies, one showing a Nawat language divergence of 650 to 850 CE and another one of 801 CE. Fowler also cites de Borhegyi who saw evidence for three migrations, the first of which was in about 800 CE.

The place name Santa Isabel Ishuatan, in southeast Sonsonate department, supports the idea of the Pipil as refugees. It is ix wat ahn in Ch'orti' and means "return home in running movement."

Soon after the Pipil arrived in El Salvador, it appears that a group of the Toltec decided to follow them. In part this may have been to expand Toltec culture to historically important El Salvador. But it was more likely to intimidate the newly arrived Pipil who had just fled the Toltec and their human sacrifice ways. Based on the Cihuatan Archeology Project, the site of Cihuatan, near Aguilares, was established in about 900 CE, marking the arrival time of the Toltec. They likely came by boat from Mexico - walking from Tula to a river like the Rio Balsas, down the Pacific Coast, then up the Lempa, and disembarking at Suchitoto. From Suchitoto it is a 20 kilometer walk west to the Cihuatan site, around the north side of Guazapa volcano.

The name Suchitoto tells us who the Toltec were. It is a Ch'orti' name, either given by the Ch'orti' or the Toltec used a Ch'orti' naming protocol. Suchitoto is sutz si t'ot toh and means "numbers of bats and tap sacrificers." The only Mesoamerican people with a bat emblem are the Cakchiquel. The Cakchiquel are also mentioned in the Popol Vuh with a bat emblem. Even more, during the first round of human sacrificing in about 8300 BCE, the Popol Vuh says that the Cakchiquel were the only lineage to be exempt from human sacrifice, presumably because they first cultivated tobacco so they did not have to "draw a straw."

The other half of Suchitoto - "tap sacrificers" - does make a vague reference to the practice of heart sacrifice of the Toltec, but it is the two syllables together "toto," that tell us that the Totonac were the other lineage that were part of the Toltec. The Cakchiquel and the Totonac made up two of the seven groups that founded Teotihuacan and it appears that they were the two strong groups coming out of Teotihuacan ready to form the next culture.

Source of photo. Cihuatan is one of the most important archeological sites in El Salvador. It is located about 45 kilometers north of San Salvador and just a few kilometers northeast of Aguilares. The fertile soils on the west and north sides of Guazapa Volcano were utilized extensively for cacao as well as staples like corn, squash, and beans.

Cihuatan was a large, multi-cultural city, similar to Chichen Itza in the Yucatan. Those who have studied it (Brahn) have found at least seven neighborhoods, including Maya and Lenca neighborhoods, each with its own ceremonial center. Based on who was living in El Salvador at the time, groups present at Cihuatan likely included the Cakchiquel, Totonac, Lenca, Ch'orti', and several ethnicities of Pipil.

The meaning of Cihuatan supports a Mexican migration. Cihuatan has a double meaning. The name crafters were skilled, finding a name with meaning in Nawat and in Ch'orti'. In Nawat, Cihua means "woman" and refers to the feminine reclined shape of the nearby Guazapa volcano.

Ch'orti' was used as a naming language throughout Mesoamerica, including the second meaning of "Cihuatan". It is si wat ahn and means "return home to the series of currents." The use of the phrase "return home" is relevant since the Cakchiquel and Totonac were each banished from El Salvador to Mexico due to pellagra, the Cakchiquel in about 2300 BCE and the Totonac between 2300 and 2000 BCE. The "series of currents" - many rivers - would have been in contrast to the dryness of Mexico's central valley and Veracruz. By using the syllable wat ("return home") in the name of Cihuatan, the Toltec legitimized their move to El Salvador on humanitarian grounds - people returning to their ancient homeland. The name helps to mask their possible motive of intimidation in their move to El Salvador.

The Toltec built many other ceremonial centers in addition to Cihuatan. Some of these other centers include Santa Maria, Mucuyo, Monte Redondo, La Esmerelda, and Zacotonal (San Francisco).

One can see a broader extension of Toltec and, especially, Cakchiquel influence in the place names to the east of Cihuatan: Chalatenango, Pepeishtenango, Papaturo (maybe), Tenango, Tenancingo, and Pepeto. Tobacco growing and processing is still somewhat common in this area - another Cakchiquel influence, as it was the Cakchiquels who first grew tobacco on Isla Tigre, Honduras.

The Toltec at Cihuatan did not arrive to a power vacuum. The Ch'orti' at Chalchuapa and San Andres effectively controlled most of El Salvador west of the Lempa River, as well as Chalatenango. The Ch'orti' were weary of the Toltec. The name Aguilares shows the Ch'orti', watching the arrival of the Toltec: ak' il ahr retz, which means "viewing the occasion of the rising of the flag." In addition, the Cotzumalhuapa had controlled Cara Sucia since about 600 CE. And the Lenca controlled the east.

The Toltec arrived with a military force. Archeological evidence indicates that Chalchuapa and Cara Sucia were taken over by a central Mexican presence in about 900 CE (Fowler). Toltec warrior plaques were present at the Loma China site in San Vicente near the Puente Cuscatlan (Fowler). Controlling the Lempa River would have been very strategic for the Toltec, given the predominance of water travel by the Ch'orti'. The Toltec also took over Lago Guija (Fowler), especially important for the Totonac since their roots were there.

Further evidence that Cihuatan was a Toltec center consists of the figurines and biconical spiked censers there that are like those at Tula (Fowler). Likewise, the wheeled figurines are like those on the Gulf Coast (Totonac). The architectural structures at Cihuatan are central Mexican and similar those at Chichen Itza.

The Toltec ruled over western El Salvador for about 130 years. In about 1030 CE, according to the Cihuatan Archeological Project, Cihuatan fell. Enemies destroyed Cihuatan and all the other ceremonial centers by fire (and possibly gunpowder explosions). It is unclear who these enemies were but at the top of the list of their enemies would have been the Ch'orti' who were displaced by the Toltec and were against the human sacrificing ways of the Toltec. The Ch'orti', and their likely allies, the Putun, also would have been capable, even in the Post-Classic.

The surviving Toltec leaders most likely fled north to the Lempa River to boats that would take them eventually to Mexico. It seems likely that many of the Toltec-related people in the area stayed. They spoke Nawat, like the Pipil. These Toltec descendants, whether Totonac or Cakchiquel, would have been counted as Pipil at the time of the arrival of the Spanish.

A third migration out of central Mexico occurred around 1100 CE, about 70 years after Cihuatan fell. It is called the Nonoalco migration and is associated with the Veracruz Gulf Coast (Totonac). It is known that there was an internal power struggle at Tula in about 1100 CE. It is likely that the Cakchiquel were victorious over the Totonac in this power struggle and that the Totonac Toltec, called the Nonoalco, fled to El Salvador, the second major wave of the Pipil.

According to the archeology, a new wave of central Mexicans founded Antigua Cuscatlan, El Salvador, at about that time (Fowler) - most likely the Nonoalco Pipil. Later, Antigua Cuscatlan became the center of the Pipil kingdom. Place names indicate that the Nonoalco also settled in La Paz department in the area of Zacatecoluca.

Counting the Toltec and Nonoalco waves, I would roughly estimate the ethnicities of the Pipil in El Salvador to be about one-third Totonac, one-fourth Otomi, one-sixth each Cakchiquel and Mejica, and smaller portions of Quiche, Mixtec, and Purepecha. The presence of Quiche Pipil is likely at San Antonio Masahuat and San Pedro Masahuat in La Paz department. Masa is "deer" in Nawat and Ch'orti' and wat means "return home" in Ch'orti', so Masahuat is "return home of the deer". Deer is the totem animal of the Quiche, seen at Mazatlan, for example. Also many "deer" leaders of the Quiche are listed in the Popol Vuh.

The last migration wave from central Mexico was caused by the Aztec (Mejica) oppression and practice of human sacrifice. This is the Nicarao wave that primarily went to Nicaragua. The oral history of the Nicarao states that they had been subjugated by the Olmeca. Earlier I showed that the Mejica (Aztec) and the Olmeca were the same people, linking the migration of the Nicarao to the rise of the Aztec. Some of this last wave likely settled eastern Guatemala as well, with some possibly going to Honduras and El Salvador.

In conclusion, the rise of the Toltec threw central Mexico into chaos. Refugees fled north and south, giving rise to many new Native nations in the north and the Pipil in El Salvador, the "companions on the journey." One group of Toltec followed the refugees to El Salvador where they ruled for about 130 years. Ironically, one of the two Toltec ethnicities, the Totonac, had to flee themselves from Tula, becoming the second wave of the Pipil. A major portion of the Salvadoran indigenous milieu is based in this complex post-Classic history.