Customer Reviews

They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America

5 star:		(49)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(18)

 

 

Sertima has presented a thoery that is not "wild afrocentric babble." Its very plausible for the following reasons:

Most everyone is familiar with the time period of the Dark Ages, which lasted from the fall of the Roman Empire until about the 1200 or 1300's. It was a time when people were intellectually non-progressive, when the average peasent/serf never traveled 20 miles from the place of his birth. What people do forget is that the Dark Age was only a Western European phenomenon. The rest of Asia and Africa were steadily advancing.

One reviewer said that Africans had no ocean trade routes with other peoples. In fact, the East African coast was dotted with powerful city states that traded all over the Indian Ocean, including China. And on the West Coast, Africans did not need trade routes per se, because half of Europe was already under their complete domination through the Islamic Empire (black Moors).

Is it a coincidence that Spain and Italy were the first two European countries to climb out of the Dark Ages? No. Italy's trade routes with Africa long brought it into contact with Moslem and Chinese advances. And Spain; Spain was part of Islam! On the streets of Cardoba, Spain you would have seen Africans, Moslems, and a bunch of other races. By the way, the Moslems invented the magnetic compass and the astrolabe. This same Moslem learning flourished at the world first university; in Timbaktu. Timbaktu was in Mali, West Africa. In this climate how could West Africans not have known about sailing and trade routes?

Incidently, where was Columbus originaly from? Italy. Which country did he go to and got financing for his trip? Spain. Strangly, the same countries we just mentioned as having had close contact with Africa for centuries.

With this background, now you can look at Sertima's book with an open mind. Anyone who thinks that this book is "Afrocentric babble" is either unfamiliar with history or afraid of the truth.

The first time I heard Dr. Ivan Van Sertima speak was at Lincoln University a small historically black college in Pennslyvania. Dr. Van Sertima gave a powerful lecture about the African Presence in America before Columbus, a topic I never heard of before and honestly doubted it's validity.I thought I would leave the lecture only convienced that Van Sertima was a crank and his thesis was a fraud, but in fact the opposite happened. His speech was so articulate and his lecture so well researched and amazingly documented I decided I had to read his book and research the topic on my own. if skeptics think this book is solely for Afrocentrist they are wrong this book is very scholarly it gives botanical,cartographical,linguistic,artistic, and historical evidience in order to make a strong case for the African presence in America. Van Sertima shows us african cotton found in America.He shows the written accounts of the conquistadors themselves, Columbus and Balboa record the presence of Africans already arriving in America, in fact Balboa eyewitnessed Africans in Central America fighting among the "Indian" population..He highlights the mysterious Piri Reis map that shows Antartica mapped before it was covered with ice,when was the only time this could happen? 4,000 B.C.,the point is ancient man had the nautical skill to travel the world at a very early date. He touches on the journeys of Thor Heyerdahl and his ship the Ra successfully crossing the Atlantic, proving that ancient man could travel the high seas. I personally researched on my own the parallels between the Egyptian god(Osiris)and American god(Queztatcoatl)both are virgin born both are ressurection gods, it is amazing.Another enigma would be the cocaine found in the stomach of RamesesII and in many other Egyptian mummies how is it that a New World crop is found in Africa if contact was not made...scholars answer this evidience with silence.One of course can not leave out the colossal Olmec heads with clearly African features with braided hair, and of course the parallel of pyramids found in both cultures Africa and the Americas.Some say that the Olmec heads could be Pacific Islanders or people from South East Asia, but that does not explain all the other pieces of evidience Van Sertima shows, like for instance the identical reed boats used on the Nile by Nubians and on the Amazon or the hieroglyphs and the sun worship.The parallels are almost to the point of exhausting.This book is hard to explain away, and I advise all serious researches and historians to read it....challenge yourself.

Any reader who has given this work a negative review, is do to the fact they do not know history and anthropology, and their foundation has been based off of some of the pioneers and scholars who have been culturally biased against Black people and Ancient Black civilizations. Also for the American Indian criticizers, I am one of you, if you would only check the records of the older tribes such as the Washitaw, Jamassi/Yamasse, Mawshahk, Lenape, and even the records of the Creek, Shoshoni, and Seminole and Iriqous and many others. The records have the history on the Black Mound Builders(Eagle Mounds etc.), and how the ancestors were Black, including the Mayan and Zu-Aztec coming from the Toltecs or Olmecs. In fact in 1996 the year of the indigenous people the Washitaw nation was recognized as the oldest indigenous people in America and they are Black people with wooly hair who link themselves back to the Olmecs only supporting what Sertima has said. Their United Nations number has the prefix 215, go and check it out. People do not want to admit that Blacks were the original people on the planet and has been the root for many of these civilizations regardless of how many artifacts and facts anthropologist and archeologist uncover. Well, guess what? Now science supports everything they have been saying. Biochemist have proven that Black people were here first with the Mitochondria DNA/RNA, go look it up, it is in a case study called Mitochondria Eve. Also read National Geographic while you are at it. Only about 10%-15% of the slaves came from Africa, where do you think the rest came from? They came from the tribes already here. Due to misinformation and racism most people don't know this, all they have to do is check the records of the tribes that were here first instead of creating false theories or relying on miseducated natives and euro-americans. We as American Indians were also victims of "tying the vine" and white washing just like many other minorities in this country. Back to the book, anyone who wants to email me on the previous feel free at faruki@hotmail.com, the book is excellent. It is accompanied with pictures of the monolithic Olmec statues found in Lower America. A picture is a thousand words. Then his accounts telling of the sea routes Africans or Malian Moors were able to use to sail over here prior to Columbus is supported by the engravings found in the Cockaponset forest by John Gallager (Archeologist & Professor from Fordham University)and correlates with the inscription found on the Haj Mimoun Rock in East Morocco and deciphered by Barry Fell, which records Moors (Blacks) being here a thousand years before Columbus. Also in the book "Ancient And Modern Britons" it says that "In 1676 the native races of New England were spoken of indifferently as "Indians" and "Moors";, and our British "Indians" [aboriginals] are also remembered as "Moors"". That is from European sources recognizing that there were Black people over here that were considered Indians. I could go on and on, but Sertima's book speaks for itself, not only is he an Archeologist, he is also a linguist; he knows what he is talking about. He doesn't have a PHD in these studies for nothing. He hasn't spoken at the most prestigious universities simply because he is making up things. Nuff said, this book is a five star resource, anyone that has an interest in history and ancient cultures, specifically Black peoples of Meso-America should pick it up.

There's been a lot of nonsense written about the "truth" or "falsehood" of this book, and whether those who praise it are "Afrocentric" while those who criticize it are "racist." The fact is that there is very little evidence to prove ANY of the common assertions made about ancient history. Yes, Van Sertima's arguments may be inconclusive, but on the other hand, how much do we really know about ancient Egypt, most of our evidence coming from the tombs and temples of the great and well-to-do? Or ancient Sumer, for that matter? The fact is that much of what archaeologists have to rely on is guesswork. They don't have the mass of evidence to know ancient civilizations like we do early modern or our our own present-day global civilization. As for what color or physical type people were, WHAT DOES IT MATTER? Even if his book leaves a great deal to individual interpretation, Van Sertima tells a fascinating story of human beings daring an unknown ocean and interacting with other cultures (and if it's true, then with considerably more benign effect than King Abubakari's European successors). Even if we don't have enough evidence to conclusively prove Van Sertima's theory (hasn't ANYBODY heard of Thor Heyerdahl?), it's certainly plausible and should provide a starting point for some really interesting and original archeological research. And for those who say this book is racist towards Native Americans, I think that they miss the point. Van Sertima is not trying to prove that all Native American culture came over with the Africans. After all, native Americans were here for thousands of years before that. Besides, there's certainly no dishonor in civilizations starting through cultural diffusion. Egypt, Sumer, and the Harappans of the Indus Valley all had regular contact with each other. Anyhow, the Peruvian civilization of Chan Chan was already in existence around 2000-1000 BC. As for the means, Thor Heyerdahl already proved the feasibility of transatlantic crossings with ancient Egyptian maritime technology in 1970 with Ra II. In a similar vein, Richard Poe's BLACK SPARK, WHITE FIRE, provides some interesting theories about cultural diffusion in the Old World as opposed to the new. Put the anger aside, people, and give this book a chance.

Ivan Van Sertima's "They Came Before Columbus" focuses on the idea that ancient Africans sailed to the Americas before 1492. It is a fascinating introduction to the idea of African-American diffusionism. Van Sertima casts a very wide net, cataloging the possibility of voyages to the Americas by Phoenicians and Egyptians in ancient times, and West Africans in the centuries before Columbus.

The evidence (similarity of American and Egyptian pyramids, European encounters with dark-skinned people in the Americas before trans-Atlantic slavery, Native American and West African folktales and oral history, New World crops in the Old World and vice-versa prior to 1492, linguistic similarities between West Africans and Native Americans, ancient American statues with Negroid features, Columbus's contact with African sailors, etc.) presented in this book is continually interesting, and is enough to convince someone who wants to believe it, but it is never quite conclusive enough to convince a skeptic.

At some points, the book is not as well organized as one would wish, and it sometimes jumps from topic to topic without adequate transition and introduction. Also, I did not care for the way some of the information was presented in historical novel form. But overall, there is much food for thought here. Thor Heyerdahl has proved that ancient peoples had the technology to cross vast oceans; there is absolutely no reason why Africans couldn't have sailed to the Americas (especially since the Gulf Stream makes it possible to get between Africa and America almost without trying). Whether they did so by accident or design, and when and how often, are questions historians and archeologists still have to answer. Much more work is needed in this area. Given that this book was first published in 1976, one can hope that another substantial work in this area may come soon.

Ivan Van Sertima's argument cannot be reduced to the apparent negroid features of the Olmec heads, and to even suggest it is to deny the thoroughness of the work, the overwhelming presence of references and notes, and is clearly based on an instinctive contempt for any attempt to show that africans have contributed to world history outside of slavery and colonization.
If anything, Van Sertima's argument revolves around the existence of the Siro Kuwo, a strong current in the proximity of the Canary Islands, going accross the atlantic and ending in the Gulf of Mexico, where Monte Alban's step pyramids and most of the Olmecs heads were found.
Thor Heyerdahl's travels have proven that such travels were possible with primitive boats made out of papyrus; Van Sertima considered that possibility, and backed with evidences, argues that it did happened.
I find it disturbing that everytime africans are not depicted as slaves or savages, every time a scholar tries to bring any part of African history to light, it is never their arguments that is attacked, but their intentions and motives.
The evidence is there, there's enough footnotes in this book to dispel any attempt to undermine Van Sertima's meticulousness.
This work is not an afrocentric discursive attempt at ennobling Africans by robing Native Americans of their own contributions to world civilization, this is the work of a scholar, done with great accuracy and methodology, dealing with the multiple non-violent encounters between Africans and Native Americans, way before Columbus tried to have his cake and eat it too.

I commend the Author for challenging Eurocentric history. It is probable that though the pyramids and hieroglyphs of the Olmecs are not the same as ancient Egypt's, that the concept was derived from Egypt. It is a fact that Egyptians reportedly ventured into the Atlantic, though it is unknown how successful they were. I hope that the claim doesnt upset those who are ancestors of these people (though most Mexicans identify more with their Spaniard roots anyway). I think it's a possibility, but not enough to make a solid claim.

Another theory, more probable to me, is that the original Olmecs were not like the natives of the north who migrated from the Bering Strait but Oceanic peoples who, as they ventured island to island, colonized that part of Mexico, as they did on Easter Island, also building statues,etc. Oceanic people are biologically closely related to Aborigines like Australia and Papua New Guinea. Many Melaynesian islands still have this population. Their features are very similar to the Olmec sculptures and statues. I find this concept to be very logical. The remaining Aborigine like Olmecs intergrated with the immigrating northerners (of Asiatic origin). The only reason this makes sense is to explain the choice of such African/Pacific features in Mexico. However, as one reviewer reminded me, we cannot try to attribute the civilizations of an area to foreignors so far away. It is cultural projection (like when European scholars claim everything monumental in Africa began with an Arab). As far as I'm concerned, the Olmec sculptures are stylistic and representative of Olmec concepts more than Olmec features.

I remember it as if it was yesterday; my eighth grade history teacher began to talk about Christopher Columbus when I raised my hand and asked how he could have discovered something when people were watching him from the shore. My question was shot down then, but I found the answers years later in They Came Before Columbus.

Ivan Van Sertima is a Guyanese historian, linguist and anthropologist whose impeccable research clearly demonstrates that great African mariners visited the Americas and had major influences - with reciprococity - in Native American cultures through trade and religious practices.

Through a strong current named Siro Kuwo, even small boats could cross the Atlantic Ocean from the Equator and travel to the Americas. Columbus learned about the route to the Americas during his years as a trader in Equatorial Guinea.

Van Sertima cites linguistic similarities of West African and Native Americans, "Old World" plants in the Americas - bananas, yams, beans and gourds - that predate Columbus (and vice versa) and the similarities between Aztec/Egyptian calendars & pyramid structures and the "Olmec heartland" in the Americas, where 11 giant heads - one which appears on the cover of the book - were constructed in honor of the African explorers.

Native Americans gave Columbus (as if he didn't know already) evidence of the past trading, explaining how the top of the mariners' spears were made of a metal "gua-nin." The word's origin is from the Mande language of West Africa. The Bambara werewolf cult - whose head was known as amantigi (heads of faith) - appeared in a Mexican ritual as amanteca.

The history built upon the racist myths and lies are destroyed by the facts that Van Sertima meticulously presents. And it is a celebration of mariners who traveled not as imperialists looking to subjugate people, destroy their history and steal their lands, but explorers who learned from, traded with and were respected by those they met on the shores of the Americas.

This is a wonderful new take on history. The author, Van Sertima, can always expect negative remarks from the same people who created most of the historical lies. To the author I say, "Forge ahead!" Ignore the racist Darwinists, "Christians," etc. and write what you please. As for the "reviewer" below, you need to proofread your own review before you critique the publication of Van Sertima or anyone else. You have a PhD in Political Science, you say? Re-read your review -- you can't even spell, dude!

This is a foundational book for those seeking the truth about African history. In no other venue have I seen such blatant lies and obfuscations than those by so-called 'Eurocentric' authors about the ancient past.

This book practically stands alone in providing a rational explantion for the existance of the huge African Olmec heads in Central America. While the aforementioned 'scholars' employ negative 'spin' and deceit, Van Sertima tells the truth. It may not be a popular notion that Africans arrived on the American shores, as rulers, roughly 3,000 years before Columbus but its the truth. It's veracity can be viewed by simply looking at one of the huge stone heads that were quarried many miles away from where they were ultimately found.

Van Sertima doesn't focus on just the stone heads but corroborates his thesis with example after example of how intimate contact over a long period of time must have occurred between African and the American continents. His examples include religious ceremonies common to both and plants that were indigenous to one locale and found in the other.

After completing the book, one cannot help but feel that Van Sertima raises many questions (and answers them) that 'traditional' historians have run away from for hundreds of years. The numbers of ridiculous theories that I have read regarding only the stone heads boggles my mind. I laughed out loud when someone postulated that the heads depicted Asians, not Africans. Even better, an 'esteemed' historian stated that the reason the heads looked African is because the carvers lacked instruments that would have allowed them to draw angular (caucasian) features. This is the depths to which this discouse have fallen.

Read this book and become enlightened.