Elements of Black Athena that Its Critics Agree on

Source: Black Athena Revisited (University of North Carolina Press) 2014 A.D.

d
Note: Page 105 of the source.

d
Note: Page 106 of the source.

d
Note: Page 122 of the source.

d
Note: Page 123 of the source.

u
Note: Page 124 of the source.

h
Note: Page 124 of the source.

n
Note: Page 124 of the source.

h
Note: Page 125 of the source.

d
Note: Page 125 of the source.

d
Note: Page 125 of the source.

h
Note: Page 126 of the source.

d
Note: Page 127 of the source.

d
Note: Page 148 of the source.

This source confirms the black presence of the ancient Mediterranean Basin. This source is important because this commentary is coming from “Eurocentric” scholars. Eurocentric scholars agreeing to the fact that blacks did exist throughout the ancient Mediterranean and that blacks were not always slaves is extremely powerful. I believe this one of the fundamental elements Dr. Martin Bernal, despite some glaring errors in his work and he did have disagreements with heavy weights like Dr. Frank M. Snowden, achieved through his “Black Athena” series: he has gotten “Eurocentric” scholars to deal with the fact that the black presence of the ancient Mediterranean world was real. In my opinion, his work simply furthered the already incredible achievements that the likes of Dr. Frank M. Snowden conducted in their studies.

Dr. Martin Bernal primarily based his theories off of what the ancient historians stated. Some of his theories didn’t have much weight but others did. What this man attempted to do in his series was phenomenal and I believe he did a great job of bringing to the fore front the African influence on ancient Grecian culture that the ancient Greco-Roman scholars attested to themselves. I think a lot of criticism regarding Dr. Bernal’s work revolves around the idea that people like to form “bubbles” around things that they believe are “theirs”. The only problem with this is, that at some point or another, one group of people and their culture will influence another group of people and their culture which “pops” the “bubble”. I say that Africa, the ancient near east, and southern Europe form the “Triangle of Influence”. All of these areas are in extremely close proximity of each other so it is not unreasonable that they have had contact with each other for extended periods of time and various forms of evidence on this website attest to this theory.

I believe the problem that some “Eurocentric” scholars have is that they don’t like the idea that their “prized” civilizations were influenced by other civilizations. I also don’t think some “Eurocentric” scholars like the idea that their “prized” civilizations have received ancient ethnic admixture from other peoples because what this does is it opens up a “can of worms” because not everyone in their “prized” civilizations were “white”. I believe the problem that some “Afrocentric” scholars have is that they lack balance and they become over zealous in trying to reassert the ancient and medieval black presence in ways that are completely over the tope. In terms of Greco-Roman culture, I believe Africa and the ancient near east did influence its development in some significant and minor ways. I do believe there was ethnic mixing (more than “Eurocentric” scholars may like to admit) between Africa, ancient near east, and southern Europe which DNA studies placed in proper historical context support. It is also clear that ancient Greeks and Romans at times through various ways showed admiration for “blacks”. However, ancient Greco-Roman culture was just that: ancient Greco-Roman culture. Some of their peoples and cultural elements at one point originated in Africa and the ancient near east which is clearly attested by the likes of Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus, but through the echoes of time they evolved into what we know generically as “Greco-Roman” culture. Very few things in the world are “original” to any individual or group of people. Some how, some way ideas are transferred from one group and region to another group and region. Don’t fight the fluidity of life.

Here are some different reasons as to how ancient Africa impacted ancient Greece: interactions with the Danaids/Denyen (Herodotus noted this; Herodotus did not say the Danaids were black but he did say the Egyptians were black by stating the Colchians were a race of Egyptians due to them being black and having woolly hair which is significant because the Danaids were of Egyptian origins), the Libyan Amazon conquest across the Mediterranean (Diodorus noted this), ancient Sparta’s ancestral connection to Africa (Herodotus noted this), Egyptian pharaohs ruling in Greece (Diodorus noted this), Egyptians made themselves kings in Peloponnese (Herodotus noted this), the Athenians said they are colonists from Sais (Diodorus noted this), according to Egyptians Macedon (the ancient ancestor of the Macedonians) was the son of Osiris (Diodorus noted this), etc. In my opinion, there are different possibilities, the question is if you are willing to believe any of them. Are we willing to get out of our bubbles (I’m talking about “black” people too) and acknowledge that other peoples and cultures have influenced us in some way even if it is minute? Are we willing to acknowledge that many of us are not “culturally” and “ethnically/racially” pure?

By One For All

Leave a Reply

Have You Seen These?

%d bloggers like this: