Customer Reviews

Black Athena Writes Back: Martin Bernal Responds to His Critics

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

Black Athena

There are a lot of hysterical reviews on this forum, by people who clearly have
not read, let alone understood the book, Black Athena.

This book is not about whether the Ancient Egyptians were Black, or whether
Greek civilization as it exists today and became known to the Romans was a
wholesale copy of Egyptian civilization, as it obviously wasn't.

So, what is Black Athena about?

This book carefully sets out Martin Bernal's hypothesis, that ancient history
can be seen as having been molded into specific narratives, depending on
the age when that narrative was created and found it's uses.
He defines three different Models or narratives, namely the Ancient Model,
The Aryan Model, and his own Revised Ancient Model. He includes some
suggested timelines, but basically, the Ancient Model of Greeks like
Herodotus, suggested that in 15th century BC, Egyptians and
Phoenicians had set up colonies in Greece and the Aegean, creating Greek
civilization. The Aryan Model suggests that civilization started with the
indigenous creation of a civilization in Greece, and that there were
Nordic invasions of Indo-European speakers who mixed in with
the non-Indo-European speaking indigenous population
Bernal's Revised Ancient Model places the Egyptian and Phoenician
invasions in the 21st-19th century, pushes back the introduction of the
alphabet to the 17th century (from the 9th century), but maintains
that there were Nordic invasions and that the indigenous population
spoke a related Indo-Hittite language.

All ten chapters in this book are documented to a different period and
the changing perspectives and emphasis that is put on a particular origin
of history or culture (from the Ancient Model In Antiquity (I), through
this model's transmission during the dark ages and the renaissance (II),
The Triumph of Egypt in the 17th and 18th Centuries (III) and
the beginning Hostilities To Egypt In The 18th Century (IV) (long _before_
Champollion's decypherment of Egyptian in the first quarter of the19th century).
These hostilities had no small part of their origins in the existing race based slavery,
colonialism and the challenges from within Europe to the transatlantic slave trade
as a catalist of the need for a defense of the first two institutions.

Chapters V through IX deal with the Romantic Linguistics (V) the discovery of
Sanskrit as a related, Indo-European language and the rise of the Indian-Aryan model.
Hellenomania (VI) deals with the rise of Greece as a fount of European
civilization and ideals, under the German school of von Humboldt and Wolf.
Hellenomania 2 (VII) deals with the takeup of this school of thought in England
and the growing pre-eminence of the Aryan model in the middle of the 19th century.
The Rise And Fall Of The Phoenicians (VIII) deals with the recognitions of
the Phoenicians and the influence of antisemitism, as does chapter (IX).

The book concludes with The Post-War Situation (X) and discussion
of the influences of Gordon and Astour and their reclaming of the legacy
of the Phoenicians.

In the end we have to ask: is it really so difficult to believe that Ancient Egypt
at the height of it's power, it's age of expansion, created small Egyptian colonies
in the Peleponnese and around the Aegean (20th century BC), that these colonies
helped to transfer some of it's culture and civilization, and that the Greeks had myths
that said so? No linguist today disputes the Phoenician origin of the Greek alphabet.
A small step pyramid has been found in Thebes, Greece. Most ancient Greek
philosophers paid homage to Ancient Egypt and studied there, in the 5th century.

A classic book and a must read for anyone interested in the topic, especially
of Aegean relations and the history of history itself.

People may dislike Bernal's writing style, but that doesn't mean they should ignore his ideas.

By naming his books "Black Athena" Bernal doesn't mean that Athena, the symbol of the Athenians and their culture, which we call Greek culture, was imagined as black. More likely he believes she was a light Mediterranean brown. Even the famous classicist Bernard Knox (a professor who wrote introductory essays to Robert Fagel's translations of The Iliad and Odyssey) concedes this point in his ironic essay collection "The Oldest of the Dead White European Males" when he politely describes Greeks as an olive colored people.

Bernal's use of black in "Black Athena" refers to the historical misconception of her skin color by Romantics, Racists, and Imperialists who were not necessarily the same people. It also refers to the poetically and politically motivated misunderstanding of the historical origins of Greek myth, culture, and language. Not to say that Athena wasn't a Greek Goddess but rather that Greek ideas of Gods and Nature have significant (and uncredited) roots in more ancient civilizations (whether Egyptian, Sumerian, or more broadly Afro-Asiatic).

Bernal is attempting to undermine the false popular idea (especially among people who specialize in the study of the Greco-Roman Classics) that, poetically speaking, Greek culture just sprang out of the ground like Cadmus' dragon teeth. Oh wait, no; actually, that myth tells of how a Phonecian, who we classify as Afroasiatic, brought literacy to the Greeks. Other ancient Greek sources attest to having recieved the basic tools of Greek Culture from their neighbors, why should we disbelieve them? Then there's etymology...

Of course, Afroasiatic roots do not detract from the genius of Greek theater, literature, and philosophy! That would be like saying Newton was an idiot because he didn't invent numbers. That would be like saying Shakespeare was worthless because he didn't create the theater, because he learnt from the literary examples of Geoffrey Chaucer, Christopher Marlow, and Ben Johnson, because the subject matter of his plays were shaped by thousands of years of preceding history, and because his plots were not original.

Clearly parents have a large role in the raising of children, but posterity does not praise parents for their childrens' accomplishments, not with great artists, scientists, or statesmen. Though they lay the foundations of a child's moral, literary, and technological culture, what is built on those foundation is not theirs. Ultimately Shakespeare's father was not Shakespeare, but who would believe that Shakespeare's family had no influence on his intellectual development? Likewise, using and improving the brilliant ideas of neighbors and ancestors does not rob scientific progress or artistic excellence of value. Is it more important that an idea is perfectly original? none are, or that it is good? Cultural innovators keep their worth when credit is given where credit is due, and their supporters have their importance recognized too.

It seems like the subject of intellectual precedence stirs up great anxiety in lovers of Classical literature. It shouldn't. Greek achievements are no less grand because they sprang from foreign soil. If anything, appreciation of Bernal's ideas will hopefully convince linguists and classicists with philosophical inclinations to shape up their fields erroneous notions of cultural origins, especially regarding etymology (read his books for details). It would be wonderful if a love of truth leads to more precise translations and a better understanding of the ancient literature we love.

This is a compilation of Dr. Bernal's well-thought responses to his most prominent critics. Dr. Bernal continues his brilliant analysis of Egyptian-Greek connections during ancient times. Unfortunately, due to the racism and extreme hatred from a select few of European roots who seem to loathe those of African descent, these books are reviewed poorly. No doubt this is primarily due to latent white racism, Eurocentrism, and the inability to deal with evidence which contradicts firmly held beliefs. Much like a religion, Euro-descended persons seem to think that it is their birthright to believe that their ancestors and only their ancestors developed the so-called "wonder of civilization". This is a position much abused throughout history to justify warfare, slavery, subjugation, murder, and even genocide of dark-skinned peoples the world over. Dr. Bernal's works help to rectify some of these historical wrongs by offering a potential alternative that should be considered rather than dismissed ipso facto. In some ways, the second volume may be considered the weakest of the three with the historiographical aspects of Volume I generally being lauded even by some of the historians who spew so much vitriol at Dr. Bernal and Afrocentrists in general. Volume III is a major contribution to the study of ancient contacts which is still not as widely publicized and consequently also not considered as controversial. Hopefully, over time, humans will be able to shed some of their hateful and racist beliefs so that we can get a truly proper historical analysis of the early connections between Egypt and Europe and these books are a significant part of that overall process. 'Writes Back' is interesting to gain an understanding of the scope of some of the milder and less racist attacks on Dr. Bernal and the theory. The major racists are those on the outside of academia who see these works as some kind of affront to their heinous and false belief system.

If Bernal is the nexus of the Afrocentrist movement, as some claim, then its demise should be close at hand. Barnal's attempt to overcome devestating critisms by sheer inertia of his socio-political fantasy is a failed one. He is still controversial, no doubt, but controversy is not a suitable substitute for good scholarship which is sorely lacking in this latest book on the so called 'Black Athena' controversy.

Barnual's 'refutations' of his critics are, in fact, his original claims restated albeit rewritten in post-modern jibberish. His fantastic theory still rests squarely on conjecture, factless speculation and highly questionable etymologies. It was evident in the original _Black Athena_ that Barnal knew very little about Classical Greece. For instance, he ignorantly claimed Aristotle stole ideas from the Alexandria library even though Aristotle died 25 years before its collection was assembled (facts that could be gleaned from a simple encyclopedia). His grasp of historical facts has not improved with this latest offering. In the end, his theories are as credible as the Ice People/Sun People hypothesis. It's a shame Dr. Martin won't actually study history but instead insists on purpetrating acedemic and intellectual fraud.

The only things this book proves is that the myth of the "stolen legacy", like the myth of benevolent Marxism, dies hard and that crude racism blended with psuedo-history is the core of the Afrocentric movement.

Bernal's work comes some time after Mary Lefkowitz' work NOT OUT OF AFRICA. In this, as well as another edited volume, Lefkowitz takes Bernal to task for conflating ideology and scholarship.

To say that Bernal addresses Lefkowitz' criticisms and then some is an understatement. Bernal shows clearly that the criticisms of Lefkowitz (and other scholars) are wrongheaded. He also shows persuasively that at almost every point in the debate, Lefkowitz prevented Bernal's responses from reaching the same audience as her critiques--even going so far as to prevent Bernal from responding to criticisms in her edited volume ABOUT HIS WORK!

Better late than never.

What is all the controversy around Bernal's work about? It only takes a student of history to learn without a doubt that Egypt was indeed the cradle of modern human civilization. Only look at the historical evidence to confirm this if you have any doubts. Bernal's work was not a mind shocker with his conclusion about the fundamental influence of Egypt as teacher to a student to the Greeks, but I do commend Bernal for introducing the historical evidence to Western readers who do not know about it up till this day.

My only surprise in the whole matter is that this simple idea of Past preceding its Inheritors does not want to be acknowledged by so many people in the "west" today, in the year 2002 AD. This in its self is the biggest testimony to the validity of Bernal's simple thesis.

To those who still doubt, just learn Egyptian history and archaeology; it is written in papyrus, inscribed on stone and closer to you, by the ancient Greek students of Egypt who later became known as the fathers of Greek and, to you, "Western Civilization".

I was impressed by Bernal's earlier books, Black Athena I & II. However, in this work he seems to on the defensive. He also repeats the same points endlessly.

He should not have to rebut every critics every point, but instead get on with his own work, which is very useful to students of many disciplines.

I look forward to his forthcoming publications mentioned in this work.

If Bernal is the nexus of the Afrocentrist movement, as some claim, then its demise should be close at hand. Barnal's attempt to overcome devestating critisms by sheer inertia of his socio-political fantasy is a failed one. He is still controversial, no doubt, but controversy is not a suitable substitute for good scholarship which is sorely lacking in this latest book on the so called 'Black Athena' controversy.

Barnual's 'refutations' of his critics are, in fact, his original claims restated albeit rewritten in post-modern jibberish. His fantastic theory still rests squarely on conjecture, factless speculation and highly questionable etymologies. It was evident in the original _Black Athena_ that Barnal knew very little about Classical Greece. For instance, he ignorantly claimed Aristotle stole ideas from the Alexandria library even though Aristotle died 25 years before its collection was assembled (facts that could be gleaned from a simple encyclopedia). His grasp of historical facts has not improved with this latest offering. In the end, his theories are as credible as the Ice People/Sun People hypothesis. It's a shame Dr. Martin won't actually study history but instead insists on purpetrating acedemic and intellectual fraud.

The only things this book proves is that the myth of the "stolen legacy", like the myth of benevolent Marxism, dies hard and that crude racism blended with psuedo-history is the core of the Afrocentric movement.

I came across this whole controversy while in college and have kept up with the "debate" to some extent since. To make a long story short, Bernal's contentions of "history" have been dealt a fatal blow by Lefkowitz, Rogers, et all. Apparently Bernal believes that repeating the same old distortions, and yes unfortunately, out right lies, somehow qualifies as history.

I italicized "debate" because on the one hand there are responsible historians using the tools and evidence of historians, and on the other there are name calling ad hominem attacks that provide little light but much heat on the matter.

Don't waste your time with this rehash if you are already familiar with the controversy. Certainly nothing new, and frankly, one has to be a bit embarassed for Bernal et al.

In Black Athens Bernal argued that Greek history had been written when racism was dominating Europe. The origins of "super", "pure" races had to be super and pure. We're still under the influence of this racist history. In the opening ceremony of 2004 Athens Olympic games, the NBC speaker had said "now the sport is returning to where it originated", as if there was no sport elsewhere in the world. European civilization advanced our world, and its origin Greece started everything from nothing. This is the idea Bernal criticizes.
But Can you name a civilization which didn't take from others? Building a civiliziation is all about trading ideas. But we were given the impression that Greeks created philosophy, art, mathematics and everything else out of nothing.
But didn't Phthogoras study in Egypt? Didn't Phoenicians invent the alphabet and give it to the Greeks? While even Herodotus mentions Egyptians colonizing Greece, how can we not appreciate Bernal's Black Athens and his this reply? Sure few of us have the sophistication to evaluate his and his opponents' evidence. But Bernal has a rock solid thesis which makes perfect sense. 19th and 20th centuries were the ages of positivism where there was a pure science (physics), where there were pure races. White race was drunk of its supremacy over blacks, native Americans, Indians and was justifying its ruthless colonization with the theory of evolution. Of course when the origin of Europe had to be pure, not contaminated by "backward" African Egyptians, and Semitic Phoenicians and Asians. This was the European-Western arrogance and it still exists today (e.g. current US policy in Iraq, EU Christian Democrats' statements against Turkey's EU membership). The truth is, Greece learned from Egyptians and Phoenicians, contributed to it, and gave it to the world.