Not Out Of Africa: How "Afrocentrism" Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History (A New Republic Book) [Hardcover]

Mary Lefkowitz (Author)

Book Description

Series: A New Republic Book | Publication Date: January 25, 1996

Not Out of Africa has sparked widespread debate over the teaching of revisionist history in schools and colleges. Was Socrates black? Did Aristotle steal his ideas from the library in Alexandria? Do we owe the underlying tenets of our democratic civilizaiton to the Africans? Mary Lefkowitz explains why politically motivated histories of the ancient world are being written and shows how Afrocentrist claims blatantly contradict the historical evidence. Not Out of Africa is an important book that protects and argues for the necessity of historical truths and standards in cultural education.For this new paperback edition, Mary Lefkowitz has written an epilogue in which she responds to her critics and offers topics for further discussion. She has also added supplementary notes, a bibliography with suggestions for further reading, and a glossary of names.

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

Wellesley classics professor Mary Lefkowitz takes aim at the basic claims of leading proponents of Afro-centrism, in this expansion of her New Republic article exposing flaws in the argument that black Africans were responsible for the great civilizations of Egypt and Greece that brought praise from historians and criticism from Afrocentrists. Lefkowitz argues that the Greeks' African heritage touted by Senegalese scholar Cheikh Anta Diop is based upon a single dubious source and that Egyptians never considered themselves black Africans, in fact, that they consciously disassociated themselves from blacks. She argues that the legacy of these two cultures remains so rich even foes of European civilization want to claim that legacy for themselves.

From Publishers Weekly

"I am defending academic standards," declares Wellesley College classics professor Lefkowitz, expanding on a New Republic article that brought her praise from historians and criticism from Afro-centrists. Her methodical study, moderate in tone, does not survey the full flower of Afro-centrism in American curricula but takes potent aim at some of the basic claims of leading proponents of Afro-centrism. For example, she shows that influential Senegalese scholar Cheikh Anta Diop asserted the Greeks' African heritage based on a single, highly dubious source. Similarly, she explains how claims tracing Greek religion and philosophy to Egyptian origins are based on clearly suspect Greek sources. Moreover, she shows how those Afro-centrists who say the Greeks borrowed an "Egyptian Mystery System" from Africa are actually relying on an 18th-century French novel. This book is a sobering rebuttal of those academics too spineless to challenge teachings based more on identity politics than on solid scholarship.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 240 pages
• Publisher: Basic Books; 1ST edition (January 25, 1996)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0465098371
• ISBN-13: 978-0465098378
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (159 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,505,280 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

252 of 290 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars ouch, December 4, 2001

By 

Orrin C. Judd "brothersjudddotcom" (Hanover, NH USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Not Out Of Africa: How "Afrocentrism" Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History (A New Republic Book) (Hardcover)

In the fall of 1991 I was asked to write a review-article for The New Republic about Martin Bernal's Black Athena and its relation
to the Afrocentrist movement. The assignment literally changed my life. Once I began to work on the article I realized that here was
a subject that needed all the attention, and more, that I could give to it. Although I had been completely unaware of it, there was in
existence a whole literature that denied that the ancient Greeks were the inventors of democracy, philosophy, and science. There were
books in circulation that claimed that Socrates and Cleopatra were of African descent, and that Greek philosophy had actually been
stolen from Egypt. Not only were these books being read and widely distributed; some of these ideas were being taught in schools
and even in universities.

Ordinarily, if someone has a theory which involves a radical departure from what the experts have professed, he is expected to defend
his position by providing evidence in its support. But no one seemed to think it was appropriate to ask for evidence from the
instructors who claimed that the Greeks stole their philosophy from Egypt.
-Mary Lefkowitz, Not Out of Africa

One is torn by two competing emotions in reading Not Out of Africa. On the one hand, there's the visceral thrill of watching idiotic
ideas get an old-fashioned butt-whipping. But, on the other hand, there's something poignant about the need of black scholars to claim
the accomplishments of the Greeks and Egyptians as their own. It is very nearly painful to watch the ease with which Ms Lefkowitz
disposes of the lunatic ideas that make up Afrocentrism, though she deserves great credit for taking them seriously enough to lay them
out systematically, and demonstrating that they actually do have ancient sources, before annihilating them. Still, as you near the end of
the book, the contest has been so uneven that it's natural to wonder if this bloodbath was really necessary.

However, in her conclusion, Ms Lefkowitz makes the case for why it is necessary to utterly destroy Afrocentrism, and here she is
equally persuasive. Her reasons are as follows :

(1) By claiming European civilization as a product of Africans, Afrocentrism has the perverse effect of making blacks responsible
for the culture which justified their enslavement and oppression for centuries.

(2) By focussing solely on the achievements of the Egyptians, Afrocentrism fails to consider genuinely black African cultures, like
that of Nubia.

(3) By teaching black students that white Europeans stole their culture, Afrocentrism fosters racial animosity.

(4) Afrocentrism is not only antihistorical it is also antiscientific--denying genetic, archaeological, linguistic, and other forms of
data.

(5) It wastes precious educational time; the time that students spend learning the lies of Afrocentrism is time that they are not
spending learning the truth.

And she closes with a very strong statement :

Students of the modern world may think it is a matter of indifference whether or not Aristotle stole his philosophy from Egypt. They
may believe that even if the story is not true, it can be used to serve a positive purpose. But the question, and many others like it,
should be a matter of serious concern to everyone, because if you assert that he did steal his philosophy, you are prepared to ignore or
to conceal a substantial body of historical evidence that proves the contrary. Once you start doing that, you can have no scientific or
even social-scientific discourse, nor can you have a community, or a university.

That's pretty bracing stuff, but it cuts to the quick : are we truly prepared to sacrifice our universities and our students on the altar of
political correctness, self esteem, and multicultural hogwash? One would certainly hope not, and we can only thank Ms Lefkowitz for
having the courage to take on the racially charged task of confronting these issues head on. She has done us all a great service.

GRADE : A

72 of 81 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars There Goes The Neighborhood, March 5, 2005

By 

C. Freeman (San Leandro, CA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Not Out Of Africa: How "Afrocentrism" Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History (A New Republic book) (Paperback)

Alright, I'll admit up front, it wasn't easy reading Lefkowitz' book, especially after having read both volumes of J.A. Rogers 'World's Great Men Of Color' as a teenager (I'm 46 now) and finding both those books fascinating. It wasn't easy having one's firmly established beliefs methodically deconstructed after having lived with them for more than 30 years. Being human, part of me WANTED to believe the claims laid down in Rogers books, but I've come to realize that the danger for self-deception is proportionate to the need to believe in what one is defending AT ALL COSTS. Such an attitude only blinds a person to perceiving what is true by burying it under layers of preconceived ideas and opinions, ideas and opinions often fueled by emotions, and must therefore distort what is read. The result is often a gross misunderstanding of what the person is saying, or worse yet, completely ignoring what is being said.

After having read Lefkowitz' book with an open mind I found her arguments too persuasive to ignore, her proof too irrefutable to brush off. Anyone without an axe to grind can see that this woman CLEARLY knows what she's talking about. All of her assertions are backed up by evidence that can't be swept aside. And yes, as uncomfortable as it was this African-American was willing to make the sacrifice of walking away from his 'cherished beliefs'.

BTW, for those who criticize Lefkowitz of 'being racist' all I can say is, man how childish. Just because someone disagrees with or says something you don't like DOESN'T MAKE THEM A RACIST. PERIOD. END OF STORY.

85 of 98 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Not for the Timid, April 24, 2007

By 

Edwin C. Pauzer (New York City) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Not Out Of Africa: How "Afrocentrism" Became An Excuse To Teach Myth As History (A New Republic book) (Paperback)

After having had enough caffeine to float a ship, I finished Mary Lefkowitz's "Not Out of Africa." The arguments of the book are compelling; it was the author writing like an academic that required shots for the attention span. Nevertheless, her scholarship and knowledge of ancient Egypt is obvious.

Her reason for writing the book was simple. She saw history being revised to enhance racial and cultural esteem by the introduction of fantastic and nonsensical theories that she enumerates in detail.

The revisionism taking place today follows an inductive pattern of thought. Egypt is in Africa; therefore it was a Nubian culture. Cleopatra VII, Queen of Egypt was obviously black because one of her parents probably conceived with a slave. "Proof" of her African heritage comes from a nineteenth century painting by a black artist depicting her as being black, and a description of her in William Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" where she is described as being "tawny brown."

Professor Lefkowitz correctly counters that Cleopatra was a Ptolemy, not Egyptian, a descendent from a Macedonian conqueror who ruled Egypt after the death of Alexander the Great. William Shakespeare's description of her had nothing to do with her skin color, and that the Bard had never left England, let alone traveled to Egypt. (How would he have known?) She refutes the theory that Cleopatra was (likely) conceived by a slave.

She presents compelling arguments against the notion that the Greeks stole the alphabet and philosophy from Egypt pointing out the obvious evidence that both cultures had contrasts on every level. It is like the other theory that Plato stole the African philosophy and ideas from the library at Alexandria and then burned it to the ground, quite a feat since the library wasn't started until Plato was long in the tooth, and then took years to complete. Besides, how do you steal ideas and thought? Even if you do, don't more ideas simply return to those who thought of them in the first place?

Some charge Lefkowitz and her supporters with racism. This is an act of desperation that is tantamount to academic extortion. It is the same as saying that if you don't support the president, you are hurting our troops. Both challenges are nonsense. The good professor is not intimidated.

Warning: the book is not an easy read for those looking for lively narrative. This is very scholarly but academic, and may give new meaning to the word dry.