How Afrocentrism Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History (New Republic Book)

Hotep!
I read this book about three years ago, I was sixteen at the time and was just starting to enter a Afrikan - centered process. ONe in which allowed me to understand my people and know my history). I was Christian. I went to some of the best Catholic schools New York had to offer, so I knew European history. Though when it came to Afrikan history, I didn't even know who Frederick Douglass was. So I went along in my process, but I was still in denial that my people had such a great history. When I came acroos Lekowitz' book, I thought that she would probably show me that what I was learning was a big lie. BUt, as a read the first few chapters of her book, I realized that it wasn't making sense. Ms. Lefkowitz has to be a racist, and if not, then she's really close minded. Well, whatever it may be, Lefkowitz was not able to recapture me into the European mode of life; the materialistic, selfish, rat-race that Europeans call civilization. The format of the books is confusing, she sounds as if she is whining. The book does not give any concrete facts, and she dwells on the surface issues of people saying that other historical figures (Socrates etc.) are Afrikan. The depth in which she should have reached would be to make people understand why the person was NOT Afrikan and why they did not fit into the "pail of Afrikan history". Well, maybe in her next fiction she'll attempt this. Good try though! Maybe she never took anthropology in college, but EVERYTHING came out of AFRIKA. And these "historical figures" I spoke about turned to Kemit/Egypt and Nubia for guidance. They imitated Afrikan people. In Greek art, you see people of dark and light complexion interacting.. and don't tell me it's because of the traditional black and red figure painting style. It's because they DID interact with all types of people. IT's right there on the pottery.
Anyway, You will one day meet me Ms. Lefkowitz in a great debate of historians and scholars and the debate that I have with you, will crush you and everything you have ever written. :O)
Afrikan scholar in the making, Kembahli Sankofa
(For Bernal, James, ben-Jochanan, Ani, Afua, Clarke, X, Rodney, Jackson, Browder, Iweriebor, Asante, Turner, etc. etc. etc.....)

Your ability not to face the facts. Everybody know s that cleopatra VII was of greek desent desendent of alexander the so called great. the other six cleopatra's were of the nubian race also Ramses II to name a few. let's talk about the great universities of Tinbutu in central africa who practiced successful brain surgery while the europeans still lived in caves. and also the blond haired blue eyed yushora bar joseph (jesus christ) so before you books showing your racism know what you're talking about.philadelphia

Is there a dutch version of both these books. (Also "Black Athena revised")
I only read the reviews of both of them and again have to conclude how "diverse" (read: racist) american society must be.
You can tell by the review what the skin colour of the reviewer is. Fantastic!
Every white person suddenly is an expert on African history; Becouse they know nothing it just isn't there. Most of the time they quote the author, who on her turn, quotes the so called afrocentrics. But on the contrary every black person "has to" display their "keen knowledge" of greek and roman history.
Please, a dutch version. ASAP

Essentially Mary Lefkowitz is out to discredit all Ancient Greek writers in order to minimize their reverence for Ancient Egypt. So first person accounts of Ancient Egypt by Herodotus, Diodorus, Plato, Pythagorus etc are basically dellusional, but Mary Leftkowitz writing in the 20th century has the accurate story!

If anything Mary Lefkowitz strengthens the Out of Africa position. Ancient Greeks were in awe of Egypt.

I applaud Mary! What a great book!This book exposes the lies and danger of Afrocentrism.Anyoe who believes in evolution will no doubt think blacks are inferiour to other races. So Afrocentrism supports racism!

The debate here over whether the ancient Egyptions were "black" is confounded by white supremacist myth both in the book and in the reviews. "Race" is an ideological category emanating from white supremacist rationalizations for European colonialism and violence. There are no black or white "races," only various ways of imagining people to be "white" or "black."

People here are saying that ancient Egyptions were not "black" or "negroid" because they depicted themselves as medium brown in contrast to dark brown neighbors to the South. But white supremacist ideology has defined "black" according to the "one-drop rule." Still today in the US if you have any visible African ancestry you are "black" no matter how light or otherwise European you may be. Isn't it interesting that, when it comes to debate over ancient Africans of Egypt, suddenly we have the one-drop rule in reverse; and if you are not of the darkest brown hue or the most stereotypic "black" features, then you are not "black" or "negroid." Conversely, millions of people in Northern Africa who are not defined through this racist double-standard as being part of so-called "black Africa" would be, and are, considered "black" if and when they come to the US, as are millions of so-called "middle-eastern" people. How convenient! This double standard is not a product of logic or Nature but of White supremacist ideology. I am sorry but You cannot have your cake and eat it too! The more important question not addressed by the book is why some people have such a desperate need to separate Egypt from Africa and darker skinned Africans. If lighter-skinned Europeans and their descendents get to claim and glory in their imagined connection to ancient Greece, why on earth shouldn't darker skinned Africans and their descendents get to claim and glory in their continental connection to Ancient Egypt. Eurocentric myth is far more dangerous and has been far more deadly than Afrocentic myth will ever be. That is what we need to talk about.

Having already read The Solen Legacy (which greatly influenced me), several works by Y.B. Jochannon, Cheihk Anta Diop, Drusila Dungee and Chancellor Williams I thought I was pretty well prepared to debate/defend Ancient Black History. Your book taught me otherwise.

As I read the authors latest work I found myself mentally reaching for answers but finding none sufficient for the points you raised. This moved me to dig further. Thankfully after reading again, Civilization or Barbarism and The Stolen Legacy I came across an author who had responded to this book on the internet. His name is Charles S. Finch, III. I was so amazed by the soundness of his responses that I looked for his works which led me to "The Star of Deep Beginnings" and "Echoes of the Old Darkland"

Even more he led me to the works of Gerald Massey, "A Book of Beginnings" and Natural Genesis" which after some time I actually completed. Also I studied the works of Godfrey Higgins, CF Volney, John Jackson and most importantly to me Maulana Karenga who completed "The Husia" which can also be found here on the store.com

Returning to your book, I now not only had what I thought was sufficient information but I was shocked at how unscholarly you work now seemed.

The author says that Greek Philosophy is not Stolen and certainly Not Out of Africa. Well it would seem that she would have:

1. Clearly defined what "Greek Philosophy" is.

2. Clearly defined what "Egyptian Philosophy" is.

3. Compared the two point by point stating the origin dates for each and by whom they were created. Also giving evidence of authenticity in as many disciplines as possible.

There are no boundary lines in her work for defining Greek Philosophy which to me presents a major problem for her work. She should have chosen to defend an aspect of Greek philosophy such as the view of the nature of existence. Instead in her ferver to defend Aristotle and Pythagorus she has taken on the task of proving that the Greeks took nothing in the areas of science and mathematics as well.

Does she believe that mathematics, biology, cartography, astronomy architecture, mining and land/sea navigation which were in use thousands of years before the existence of the Greeks actually originated wih the Greeks? Though the Pelagasians, Cretans and Myceans who had advanced civilizations, active trade and commerce with Egypt and whose populace was a mixture of African/Mediteranian people lived for centuries in what came to be known as Greece. Part of the the Greek script was originally Mycean. There truthfully could have been no avoiding Egyptian influence in every aspect of civilization but especially in science and mathematics!

Its unthinkable that the author would only use her interpretation of what Herotodus and the rest of the ancient Historians wrote as evidence against Egyptian influence. She does not mention all the evidence presented by C.A. Diop or G.M. James. She only mentions what she believes she is prepared to deal with.

And I understand, her book was written out of frustration which is why she spends so much time on smearing the character of Diop, James, and Ben Jochannon.

To attack Afrocentricity as teaching history based on myth would be valid IF so much of factual history was not based on myth! In fact "myth" or "symbolic storytelling" is used throughout the Bible and Greek culture. The Dogon people use myths as a way to simplify complex concepts. Ofcourse the author surely knows this. Just as I know that when she says "myth" she is referring to "something not based in reality"

My point:

1) Egypt hands down was an advannced Civilization that had spread globally before the advent of the Greecian era. A reading of the Works of Ivan Van Sertima will prove that.

2) Ancient Egypt was an African/Black Civilization. Massey, Higgins, Volney, Dungee, Williams as well as the ancient historians (whom the author really does a disservice to in the book) all bear witness and factual evidence to this.

Lastly, because a person gets a date wrong in a book does not mean that their entire basis for that work is wrong. Read The Stolen Legacy as well as the following to get a comprehesive view of what was and is. Then when someone attacks a mispelled word or one aspect of a book you'll still have a firm understanding of what that Afrocentric author intended.

The Destruction of Black Civlization

African Origin of Civilization

Wonderful Ethiopians of the Ancient Cushtic Empire

Echoes of the Old Darkland

The Star of Deep Beginnings

A Natural Genesis

Ruins of Empires

Anacalypsis

Book of Beginnings

The Iceman Inheritance

Black Man of the Nille and His Family

The Husia

God, Man and Civilization

Introduction to African History

Civilization and Barbarism

The Stolen Legacy

Oh and for those of you that just love to review and challenge books that speak critically of the generally accepted view of history. Look up and please review seriously "The Making of the Whiteman" by Paul Laurence Guthrie its here on the store.com

Peace

Eagerly anticipating a set of well-crafted arguments that would determine the relationship between Greek Civilization and Ancient Egypt, I was left sorely disappointed. Instead of explaining the long history of exchange between these two great civilizations, the author seemed obsessed with debunking a handful of ridiculous "straw-man" assertions put forth by some Afrocentric scholars. It seemed hardly worth the effort. In fact, the author's tenor (also somewhat evidenced by the title) seemed to reveal one as emotionally invested in "proving" that not only did Greeks "owe" (and this can take many forms) very little to Ancient Egypt but also that Ancient Egyptians were not Black as claim by the "scholars" she targetted to debunk.

In the end, I was left with many of the same questions that were begged by the author's overall treatise, and some with fairly solid obvious answers. Early Ancient Egyptian civilization progressed from the southern portion of the Nile towards the north, reversing itself following invasions from what is now the Saudi peninsula and abroad. And, that the peoples and cultures along the line of Predynastic and Early Dynastic progression were indeed, Black.

Note to the ignorant;

The Kemitians spoke of themselves as descendents of Kush Ta Netjeru (Ethiopia), they did not see themselves as black, no-one in Africa said hey I'm black; Africans were branded as such by Europeans.
The Kemitians did see themselves as different to the Nubians in the same way that Japanese people see themselves as racially and culturally different to Koreans, or in the same way that Nordic Europeans are different to olive toned Spaniards.

In fact modern day Somalians, Ethiopians and Sudanese often do not refer to themselves as being black, I know this because I am from this region myself. Yet I have brown skin, curly black hair and Europeans would definitely describe me as "negroid". What's wrong with Eritrean's for example saying "hay I'm culturally and racially different to Nigerians" It was the Europeans who lumped us all in the same basket because we had brown skin and curly hair. Black people look different depending on the region, just as Europeans have their blondes, red heads and brunettes with some olive skinned and others pale like snow - but this is common sense isn't it?

The fact is that many of the so called discoveries attributed to Europe like mathematics, medicine, religion etc were commonplace many hundreds of years earlier in Africa. Budge himself described the Sumerians as being Negroid (another great ancient civilization), and there aren't too many Europeans with thick lips, curly hair and broad noses. Look at any depiction of Kemitian art and its clear to see that they are of black origin with features resembling the Somalian, Ethiopian, and Sudanese people more notably. Yes Kemit was invaded by foreigners (the Greeks) but to call the Kemtitians Greek is to call the English Roman, or Native Americans European.

The Kemitian names alone should tell you something; Amun, Akhsunamun, Tehuti, Mintu, Auset, Ra. Do these names sound Greek or Vaguely European to you? Do they even sound Arabic? Not to mention their customs e.g. Circumcision (widely practiced in Africa since the dawn of time), reverence for nature, reliance on spirit as opposed to so called "scientific logic" for the finding of answers. All of the Kemitian names had meanings also (common practice in Africa), unlike European names which are usually taken from ones profession or place of birth.

It really is a shame that the European people feel the need to claim absolutely everything, can't credit be given where credits due? Moreover, to suggest that this argument is based on myth is also ridiculous; it's well documented by Nubian and European scholars alike.

I give this book no stars, this isn't a scholarly piece of work, its just the same old facile racist nonsense we're all bored with already. But i would recommend this book to KKK and BNP members, its the kind of propoganda they love.

Mary Lefkowitz' book has sought to re-assert the idea that Greece did not receive substantial contributions from Kemet, the original name of Egypt, which is the Greek name for the ancient land. Professor Lefkowitz has offered the public a *pablum history which ignores or distorts the substantial evidence of African influence on Greece* in the ancient writings of Aetius, Strabo, Plato, Homer, Herodotus, Diogenes, Plutarch, and Diodorus Siculus. A reader of Lefkowitz' book must decide if she or he is going to believe those who wrote during the period or someone who writes today. History teaches us that a person is more likely to distort an event the farther away from it she happens to be. If you have a choice, go with the people who saw
the ancient Egyptians and wrote about what they saw.
Ancient Greek civilization did not spring from an "immaculate conception." Antiquarians have long been influenced by the "Aryan model" and have IGNORED contributions of the civilizations of the Nile, which were fully developed by 4000 BC.
Sadly, praise for Lefkowitz' strawman arguments comes from white fear that Afri(Afro)centricity is an attempt to "to replace "white" history with "black" history, or "white" mathematics with "black" mathematics..." In fact, it is merely the "to promote a more plausible view of the arts, humanities, social sciences, and physical sciences as products not of white culture only, *but of human culture*, more broadly considered and valued than white elitist intellectuals would traditionally allow."
Read this tripe if you're a fearful individual.

This has to be the most ridiculous book that ever came out! I have read scientific evidence that proves that the ancient Egyptians had Black features. The Greeks themselves describe the ancient Egytians as dark skinned peoples with coarse hair. The description of Jesus was even "short, dark with an underdeveloped beard." That sure don't sound like Caucasian! I think Whites need to accept the FACT that Black Africans contributed a lot to the ancient world just like Blacks in America has contributed a lot. Whites love to discredit Black accomplishments. I even saw a plan where they said how to discredit Blacks at all costs. Is it just a coincidence that the nose of the Sphinx has been damaged? Any fool can see that it was a Black African woman! About what the author says about the Egyptians didn't want to associate themselves with Blacks, well if that's true, who do you think is responsible for that? Like Whites use of "divide and conquer" couldn't have been used back then!! Whites have been using that trick for the longest! That's why there's much division amongst Blacks in America! We're not fools! This book is nothing but racist garbage!!

Tomb paintings in ancient Egypt reveal 4 distinct colors for human beings: White/Fair, Red/Tan, Brown and Black. There are statues of pharaohs and scribes who appear with both Black and Fair skin tones and facial features. Finally, if you look closely at many of the ancient Egyptian statues it can be seen that there is a definite Asian appearance as well, with straight fine black hair and slanted eyes!

I think if we accept the fact that Egypt was truly the center of the pre-Roman/Greek world, we can then begin to allow for a multi-racial nation that has now mixed itself into the Middle Eastern appearance.

This has to be the most ridiculous book that ever came out! I have read scientific evidence that proves that the ancient Egyptians had Black features. The Greeks themselves describe the ancient Egytians as dark skinned peoples with coarse hair. The description of Jesus was even "short, dark with an underdeveloped beard." That sure don't sound like Caucasian! I think Whites need to accept the FACT that Black Africans contributed a lot to the ancient world just like Blacks in America has contributed a lot. Whites love to discredit Black accomplishments. I even saw a plan where they said how to discredit Blacks at all costs. Is it just a coincidence that the nose of the Sphinx has been damaged? Any fool can see that it was a Black African woman! About what the author says about the Egyptians didn't want to associate themselves with Blacks, well if that's true, who do you think is responsible for that? Like Whites use of "divide and conquer" couldn't have been used back then!! Whites have been using that trick for the longest! That's why there's much division amongst Blacks in America! We're not fools! This book is nothing but racist garbage!!

This literary drivel appears to have its roots in a battle between the author and Tony Martin, the former professor of African Studies at Wellesley College where they both taught at one time. Prof. Martin wrote a book which, to be fair, is every bit as vapid, unscholarly, and silly as this one. But it did raise some uncomfortable truths about Jewish involvement in the slave trade which Prof. Lefkowitz found offensive, her supposed dedication to the "truth" not withstanding. This book was her counterattack and like her nemesis Prof Martin, she uses cherry picked facts and a boatload of speculation posing as fact to defend her point of view. Her other motive appears to be her perception that Jewish students were not getting the attention they were entitled to due to the influx of other minorities and people of different religions, particularly Islam. Martin for his part, filed a ludicrus lawsuit as part of their "battle.

Fortunately for our species, neither of these two "academics" appear to be taken seriously, although a right wing hate site, the ironically named "American Thinker", uses Lefkowitz work to bash African Americans, so she does have a few "fans". (FYI. The site is NOT satire ala "The Onion"; The comments and articles are real)

Anyone who has spent time actually studying human history knows that trying to lay the birth of civilization at the feet of any one group is pure idiocy. Yet, the notion that human civilization had a single birthplace is accepted as part of the mythos of our species. Scholars invested in these "isms" talk a good game and can appear very convincing, but it you look at the work of acheologists, anthropologists and other "hard" science" disciplines...you know people who have actually BEEN to and studied the places people like Lefkowitz and Martin only write about, you come away with a very different perspective who we are and how we got here. The simple fact is, all of humanity built human civilization. The Greeks didn't come up with their ideas in a vacuum anymore than the Egyptians or the cultures before them. Each one added a brick to the wall, contributed a story to the history of mankind. So, who built civilization? We all did,

The only two conclusions I could come to after reading this stuff and reasearching the full story is that neither Lefkowitz nor Martin should be allowed anywhere near a classroom. And that there are no fools like old fools, especially the ones that live in ivory towers.

Mary Lefkowitz's book was written to massage White fears about the "dreaded Negro."

She has made many mistakes in her book. She tells us that Hannibal was not Black but a "Semite," when the term "Semitic," is more of a lingustic and cultural rather than a racial term.

Hannibal was Black as his coins indicate. Mary Lefkowitz does not mention these coins. Some say the coins represents mahouts (elephant drivers). However, this is wrong as the Carthaginians mostly depicted aristocrats and gods and goddesses in statues etc.

Her book beats about the bush and does not really thrust into the depths of 'Afrocentrism."

She does not tells us that the Sphinx of Egypt depicts the face of a "Negro," and she does not tell us why the face is Black.

There is a statue of Socrates indicating he was a "Negro."

Before the Library of Alexandria was built, the ancient Black Egyptians had Libraries and Unversities even before the city was renamed "Alexandria."

I recommend "Retake Your Fame," by Aylmer von Fleischer as well as the works of J.A. Rogers and Ivan Van Sertima instead of this hysterical work.

Our Common African Genesis traces the origins of modern humans and early civilization through genetics, linguistics, archeology, history, and the Books of Moses. Despite the predominance of the ancient Africans, they are persistently slandered in the Old Testament and, in turn, dismissed from modern history.
In the finger pointing the Hebrews contrived to rationalize the Exodus and Conquest, the sins of the world were dumped on Egyptians and Canaanites making them the most maligned race in history. Desecration of Our Common African Genesis continued unbelievably into the 20th century, historians deluding Egyptians were Caucasians, ranting that Africans developed no civilization, till 1996, the dementia complete, babbling their history obscure, their Aegean influence NOT Out of Africa. This literary genocide swept an entire race of people from history, the pen a continuation of Joshua's swift sword, psychopathic denial of the Hamitic gene flow in Genesis 10.
This Pious Fraud, aggressively marketed by Christianity and Academia, brainwashed us with sick beliefs about race, religion, and history, indeed, of ourselves and each other. The fictional Mediterranean Caucasians, really Ethiopians, the genetic sons of Ham and Cush, developed civilization long before Caucasians and Semites. Tales of the glorious Mediterranean Caucasians ironically are the most Afrocentric history in existence, quite opposite the authors' intent. The people that the Hebrews, Greeks, and others called Ethiopians are the same Dark Whites Toynbee said spawned ten civilizations.
The verdict may not be unanimous but the evidence is overwhelming that Africans begat the human race and Ethiopians begat Western Civilization, the Hebrews (Semites) and Greeks (Caucasians) very late `pretenders to the throne'. Indeed, it took four tries to get Western Civilization off the ground, with three intervening Dark Ages, all four grafted onto Ethiopian rootstock including the long taproot of the hybrid Judaic, Christian, Islam, and Hindu mythologies, yes, even schooling the Levites, Brahmans, Alexander, young Jesus, and Paul in the Ethiops celestial mythos and ritual.
Only by ignoring and/or suppressing the evidence, deriding the ancient Ethiopians, even denying their birthplace, can Lefkowitz and her predecessors and her reviewers make a case. Then our `White Throne' atop the `Great Chain of Being' was secured, nothing less than God's favorites, Evolution's crowning mutation, far superior to that other "ethnic group whose history has largely remained obscure". Case closed.
This is not mistaken or defective research. Fraud doesn't even adequately describe this crime. This is `literary genocide', eradicating an entire race of people from our history books, a deception of immense proportions, that began in the Old Testament, then took a new turn around 1800 under the pseudoscience of `phrenology', the bogus study of skull shapes, and its accomplice, the decrepit `ethnology', the study of `race'. Even though these pseudosciences were discredited by anthropologists and neurologists by the turn of the 20th century, their corruption spread into history books. It is this hoax that replaced `Ethiopian' with `Mediterranean Caucasian' that was so appealing to Western historians that it became canon.
Dr. Lefkowitz, I charge you with `abandonment of scholarship', `literary genocide', and `fraud'. Add your predecessors' and reviewers' documented testimony and we also have `conspiracy'. You didn't act alone. This is not simply a question of historical right or wrong or the shades of gray in between. The issue is `intent', the difference between `defective research' and `fraud'. Our Common African Genesis, 2nd Ed.

If you want to read an overly detailed diatribe of factoids that are basically just as one-sided as the afrocentric writings the author wishes to refute, then this is the book for you. This book will definitely lead to utter boredom and sleepiness.. It cured my insomnia. I say myths come in all shades...just because the author regurgitates a bunch of "alleged facts" doesn't make her factoids truth no more than the other authors she wishes to defame in her book. Basically, it is all a matter of opinion...and it is difficult to trust the facts of a profoundy dishonest ethnic group who has sought to mitigate or reduce to no value at all every other ethnic group that God created, as absolute truth seekers or speakers, especially when they have never been forthcoming and non-biased with regards to historical facts. However, I will give the lady credit for being a good factoid collector. I'm grateful I borrowed this book rather than having purchased it myself.

Applying the Socratic Method we all should be asking ourselves a series of questions as to why Dr. Lefkowitz focused on Dr. Yosef A. A. ben-Jochannan.

Why didn't she focus on Cheikh Anta Diop or Theophile Obenga the scholars who are pillars of Afrocentrism?
(They are liguist, philosophers, historians and Egyptologist with multiple degrees and extremely documented works).

The reason may be because Dr. Yosef A. A. ben-Jochannan made a scholarly mistake as to when the Alexandrian Library was built and Aristotle's time of study, which is easily debatable and that can and was disproved by Lefkowitz. Lefkowitz received her Ph.d from Harvard in Classical Studies, where in which she would have been required to study the Greek language. That being the case why didn't she refer to the works of Greeks themselves? Why doesn't she know, or acknowledge that the following Greek thikers studied in Egypt: Thales of Miletus, Solon of Athens, Pythagoras of Samos, Xenophanes of Colophon, Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, Pherecydes of Syros, Empedocles of Acragas, Democritus of Abdera, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle?

Dr. Lefkowitz should have been aware of the numerous writings by Greeks written on themselves or by their disciples. It is imperative that we as seekers of truth shout out truth and shed light on lies.

Sources:
Aristotle talks about his time in Egypt (Meteorology 352 b 20), Aristotle talks about Egyptians being the most ancient of people (Meteorology, I 14 352 b)

Phythagoras (Just read the Pythagoras Library)

Socrates (Plato, Phaedrus, 274 c-d)

Plato talks about Egypt in 42% of his work (Gorgias, Meno, Euthyphro, Phaedo, Republic, Phaedrus, Timaeus, Critias, Laws, and Philebus)

We have to search for truth ourselves we can't leave it in the hands of people like Dr. Lefkowitz because not all people are qualified even though they have Ph.d's. If we look at her previous books we see her passion and course of study truly are (which may not be well researched also): The Victory Ode : An Introduction (1976), Heroines and Hysterics (1981), The Lives of the Greek Poets (1981), Women's Life in Greece and Rome (1982) editor, with Maureen Fant, Women in Greek Myth (1986), First-person Fictions : Pindar's Poetic "I" (1991).

Martin v. Lefkowitz Libel Case

1. Lefkowitz won Round One on a motion to dismiss.

2. Martin won Round Two. Mass Court of Appeal overturned lower court -- reinstated case.

3. Lefkowitz won Round Three on a motion for summary judgment.

"Lefkowitz admitted that the offending words she wrote about Martin were untrue" but contended, successfully, that because Martin is a "public figure", as that term is understood in America's libel laws, he has to prove not merely negligence on her part in not writing the truth, but also that she was motivated by malice.

She claimed that Martin did not prove malice.

4. Martin has appealed.

I am completely astonished that the author took it upon herself to write such a book with such statements and allegations of contradiction, without traveling to the place in which she wrote about. I was going to buy this book until I watched Mary Lefkowitz on a 2013 debate of scholars and authors and found that not only has she never visited Africa but she has never even researched African Studies, yet she writes a book called not out of Africa and has no in-depth knowledge of Africa. Yet the country that she is intrigued by, seen by her extensive literary publications are written on Greece and she has visited Greece. In order for me to even grasp or take a book like this seriously, especially with the contradictions she wrote about, the least she could do is the necessary legwork and visit the country or confer with someone with a background in African studies.

I read this book in 2002 because my professor had a problem with my statement that the Greeks stole their philosophy from Kemet (Egypt). This is some pure garbage under the guise of scholarly pursuits. She never discredits anything. She never discusses Gerald Massey or any other European Scholars who wrote about the influence of Kemet on modern civilization. She mentioned that one could say that Kemet is source of all the religious systems...duah...my point is if you are going to set out to crush an argument crush the some of the earliest writing about the topic. She also makes claims about Socrates being black...nobody says that...what we say is the his term "Know Thy Self" was around thousands of years before he existed. It is the white superiority complex that makes this claim so unbelievable which is sad. But as global cleansing is occurring this argument will soon be moot.

It is official, Ramses III's haplogroup is E1b1a, according to the anti-Afrocentric Zahi Hawass and the British Medical Journal.

" Genetic kinship analyses revealed identical haplotypes in both mummies (table 1); using the Whit Athey's haplogroup predictor, we determined the Y chromosomal haplogroup E1b1a. "

Source: Revisiting the harem conspiracy and death of Ramesses III: anthropological, forensic, radiological, and genetic study
BMJ 2012; 345
doi:[...]
(Published 17 December 2012)
Cite this as: BMJ 2012;345:e8268

Haplogroup E1b1a is associated with the Bantu Migrations, E1b1b is associated with the spread of Afro-Asiatic. Both arose between 20k-30k year ago in the Ethiopia region.

I had always suspected that the pharaos would be E1b1b, but E1b1a was certainly unexpected.

Anyone who states that Afrocentrists are delusional but agree with the Eurocentric lies propagated for centuries should rethink their position. The fact is that the "real scientists" have created falsehoods for centuries in order to justify the Eurocentric agenda. Specifically, I am referring to the German scientists during the 19th century who wished to promote the idea of Aryan superiority. Their ideologies circulated as scientific truth for hundreds of years. You can't accuse the Afrocentrists of creating lies and not acknowledge the role played by the "academia" mentioned previously. That is pure hypocrisy.

She makes assertions and criticisms, but, for instance, her claim that the concept of Greek Mystery schools were not derived from Egyptian teachings 1)Ignores the well known statements of Greeks such as Herotidus (and others) adn 2) establishes no scholarly evidence for her claim. She criticizes the author of James "Stolen Legacy" for giving only book titles without citing specific pages, yet James work is riddled with page references throughout. This is not scholarship.

STILL OUT OF AFRICA
Dr. Charles S. Finch, III, M.D.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Every year about this time one comes out of the wood work, a self-appointed "defender of the faith" of European cultural values, and both the popular and academic media dutifully supply maximum exposure. Last year we endured Charles Murray and The Bell Curve; this year it is Mary Lefkowitz of Wellesley College with her Not Out Of Africa. It seems that the surest way for an academic, seeking to break out of ivory tower obscurity, to get a manuscript accepted by a major publishing house is to write a book belittling the intelligence or integrity of some segment of the Black community. The phenomenon is so reliable that even non- white writers, covering the spectrum from Dinesh D'Souza to Henry Louis Gates, have adopted the ploy to obtain media exposure, enhance academic status and augment bank balances. Afrophobic books of every description represent an industry-within-an- industry and there always seems to be a ready market.

The anti-Afrocentric premises of Mary Lefkowitz are patently absurd. One does not even have to be a classicist to find abundant evidence that the influence of northeast Africa, i.e., Egypt and Ethiopia, on Greece was as formative as that of Greece on Europe. The number of Greeks who lived and learned in Egypt reads like a "Who's Who" of Greek Philosophy. Solon, Thales, Pythagoras, Eudoxus, Anaximander, Anaxagoras, Democritus, Plato, Archimedes, Hipparchus, Ptolemy, Herophilus, Galen and others too numerous to mention pursued their higher studies in the Nile Valley. As a classicist, Lefkowitz has to know these historical facts because the Greeks themselves recorded them! If she doesn't know, then her bona fides as a classicist is spurious. However, it is more reasonable to assume that she does, so her deep aversion to any kind of an African influence on early Greek culture has to spring from a fundamental Afrophobia that informs her whole thought.

It is possible to discredit Ms. Lefkowitz's reasoning on numerous counts. Concerning Aristotle, to insist that Aristotle never visited Egypt nor was under any significant Egyptian intellectual influence suggests strongly that she heeds to refamiliarize herself with the literature in her own field. Theophile Obenga shows in an article entitled "Aristotle and Ancient Egypt" (ANKH, vol. 2, 1993) that Aristotle, in his Meteorology, describes the topology of the Nile in a manner that leaves little doubt that he had seen in person what he was describing. Moreover, in his Metaphysics, Aristotle states in a completely unambiguous manner that "Egypt was the cradle of the art of mathematics." In his On The Heavens, Aristotle states furthermore that the Egyptians and Babylonians were the founders of the science of astronomy. In particular, Aristotle was admiring of the Egyptian's exceptional knowledge of the planetary conjunctions and the nature of comets. Here we find the words of Aristotle himself baldly refuting the contention of Ms. Lefkowitz that Aristotle had never visited Egypt nor had been influenced by Egypt's learning.

After about 600 B.C., when selected students such as Thales and Pythagoras began to trickle into Egypt thirsting for knowledge, the temple learning of the Nile Valley began to flow toward the northern Mediterranean in increasing volume. As Cheikh Anta Diop said, there is no Greek mathematics, philosophy, or science until after the prolonged contact with Egypt. Even the term "philosopher," meaning "lover of wisdom," was coined by Pythagoras as a consequence of the 22 years he spent studying in the Temple of Amon at Waset (Thebes). According to Theophile Obenga (Ancient Egypt and Black Africa, 1992), the term sophos, meaning "learning" or "wisdom" has no root in the Indoeuropean language family from which Greek sprang. But Pythagoras would have studied under learned men in Egypt called sbau, from the Egyptian sba meaning "to teach" or "to instruct." The word sba became in Greek sophos, from which the term "philosophy" derives.

Of the 28 dialogues of Plato, 12 deal extensively with Egypt and Egyptian thought. Laws, Republic, and Timaecus, to name but three, all betray an incalculable debt to Egypt, an outgrowth of the 13 years Plato spent there. Plato's "philosopher king" in Republic, for example, clearly derives from the Nilotic pharaonocracy, i.e., the sacred ruler who was, by definition, priest, king, and philosopher. Also, the concept of the logos or "creative word," a central pillar of Platonic philosophy and one that would immeasurably influence Christianity, is taken bodily from Egyptian thought. The world came into being, according to the pre-Platonic priests of Egypt, by virtue of the "divine word" (Thoth) activating the forces of creation. It should be pointed out also that Plato's original teacher, Socrates, also credited Egypt with inventing the mathematical and astronomical sciences (dialogue of Phaedrus).

Another facet of the profound Egyptian impact on the Greek world can be seen in the career of Alexander. Before embarking on his campaign of world conquest, Alexander first wrested Egypt away from the Persians. Having accomplished that, he then took an unprecedented step: he embarked on a perilous 10-day journey across the Libyan desert to the Oasis of Siwa, sacred to Amon, where he was invested with the crown and authority of pharaoh. Following that, he proceeded to build his imperial capital Alexandria not in Macedonia or Greece, but in Egypt. In effect, when Alexander launched his campaign of empire-building in the East, he did so as an Egyptian pharaoh.

The Greeks regularly and forthrightly acknowledged their debt both to Egypt and to Ethiopia. An Apocryphal story by Pseudo- Callisthenes has Alexander sailing up the Nile to do homage to Candace, Queen of Ethiopia (Meroe). The veracity of this story is not nearly so important as the manner in which it shows the profound Hellenic respect for Ethiopia. It only added to Alexander's legend -- whether true or not -- that he had won an audience with the Candace of Ethiopia. Homer, in the Iliad, begins the epic by having the Olympian gods, led by Zeus, descend from their heavenly abode to feast among mortals, but not with Greek mortals, as would be expected, but "the blameless Ethiopians." As we've already noted, in the realm of empirical knowledge, the major Greek thinkers, virtually to a man, deferred to Egypt (some to Ethiopia) as the original home of philosophy, geometry, medicine, astronomy and religion.

A careful investigation of Greek mythology and religion reveals a pronounced African presence. The goddesses Melainis, Libya, Artemis, Hera, Aphrodite, and Eos were unquestionably of African provenance. Mythic human figures such as Cepheus, Cassiopeia, Andromeda, Circe, Aeetes, Medea, Belos, Aegyptos, Phaeton, Delphos, and at least one of many Herculeses were also from Africa. The two most important oracle centers, Dodona, and Delphi, were founded by African priestesses and an African demi- god (Delphos) respectively. Zeus was considered to be a form of the Nilotic Amon, Dionysus a form of Osiris, Hermes a form of Djehuti (Thoth), ad Asclepios a form of Imhotep. No wonder Herodotus concluded that the Greeks received their gods from northeast Africa.

Greek traditions also speak consistently of early African emigrants to the Hellenic mainland. Perseus, considered a founding Greek ancestor, married the Ethiopian princess Andromeda, making her a Greek ancestress. Moreover, the myth of the 50 daughters of Danaus and the 50 sons of Aegyptus who emigrated to Greece from the Nile Valley clearly reveals an important African ethnocultural element in early Hellenic history.

There is simply no valid argument that can be brought forward to disclaim the influence of African civilization on ancient Greece. The transmigration controversy involving a statement of Herodotus is not credible because Greeks such as he, and later Plutarch, who visited and wrote about Egypt had access to information that did not necessarily survive in the documentary record of the Nile Valley. Much was communicated to certain Greeks that had not been written down and was not supposed to be discussed publicly. Time and again, in his chapter on Egypt, Herodotus refuses to continue his discourse on certain topics because it is about to touch on sacred things that demanded secrecy. Because the available Egyptian records do not specifically mention transmigration, i.e., the doctrine of reincarnation, doesn't mean that the Egyptians didn't believe in it. Indeed, everything points to the existence of this belief among them.

Lefkowitz employs an entirely specious mode of argument because she pins her critique on peripheral issues far away from the heart of the matter. The trivial controversy over the race of Cleopatra, for example, is a case in point. It is irrelevant whether Cleopatra was, wholly or in part, of Macedonian ancestry. The African civilization of Egypt that decisively impacted the growth and development of Greek culture long antedated her. Thus her "true" ethnicity has no relevance at all to the question of Egyptian influence on Greece.

In this short survey, sufficient evidence has been brought forward to show that the overarching thesis of Not Out Of Africa -- that there was no significant Egyptian/African influence on the formation of Greek civilization -- is simply groundless. What is striking is that there is so much evidence to the contrary that her thesis calls into question Ms. Lefkowitz's qualifications as a classicist. Either she doesn't know her job or she is engaging in deliberate falsification. Either way, it is the unseemly haste with which national publications and pundits have embraced her book that truly testifies to the polarized state of contemporary American race relations in a way the much vilified Million Man March never could. Not Out Of Africa, and the smug commentary it has inspired, is high-level race-baiting at its most insidious. From where African-Americans sit, there doesn't seem to be any end to it in sight.

Dr, Charles F. Finch III, M.D.
Morehouse School of Medicine
Atlanta, GA
February 17, 1996

Copyright Dr. Charles S. Finch III, M.D., 1996. All rights reserved by the author.

The debate between Dr. John Henrik Clarke and Mary Lefkowitz, entitled 'NOT OUT OF AFRICA DEBATE - Dr John Henrik Clarke vs Mary Lefkowitz', left Mary Lefkowitz's book exactly where it belongs, in the trash can:

[...]

As Dr. John Henrik Clarke stated in his opening comments to Mary Lefkowitz, 'I only debate with my equals. All others I teach.'

For all you eurocentrists, the Greeks went into Africa and built Pyramids, the same Pyramids they never, ever, built in Greece!?.Really!! Even a modicum of common sense will indicate how idiotic this notion is. All that Piltdown man 'science is over, Finished.

It all came out of Africa, including Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

The author systematically wages war on Afrocentrism all the while promoting Eurocentrism using the very same techniques she accuses her opponents of. Listening to hypocrisy is hard, sitting and reading through it is worse.

What Colour was Hannibal?Not Out of Africa Revisited: How Eurocentrism Became an Excuse to Teach History as Myth

These books prove beyond any doubt that what Mary Lefkowitz tells us must be seriously scrutinized. Her facts are simply not true.

Much of what Mary Lefkowitz has written is wrong. For instance a city called Rhacotis existed before Alexandria was built. This city had its own temple/chapel with its own library, which was absorbed by The Library of Alexandria. Ancient writers have mentioned this city.

Also, there are existing coins that proves that Hannibal was Black. Socrates was also Black. Aesop and Terence were all Blacks.

Read the Book 'Not Out of Africa Revisited.'