The African Athena Controversy - Essay Example

The African Athena Controversy Introduction Martin Bernal’s book: Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots ical Civilization is a controversial book with varied claims on ancient Greece in conjunction with their African and Asian neighbors. Bernal believes that the ancient Egyptians and Phoenicians had a significant influence on ancient Greece and the perceptions in this influence were changed when Western perceptions eventually influenced ancient Greece. This paper shall review Bernal’s arguments and how his competitive plausibility informs his critique of the Aryan Model. A position on this controversy shall be taken, considering the following issues: Were the Greeks strongly influenced by the Egyptians and Phoenicians as claimed by the Revised Ancient Model? Or are the claims of the Aryan Model of the Greeks not having any contact with Egyptians and Phoenicians a more accurate assertion? This paper is being carried out in order to establish a thorough analysis of the issue, reviewing its essential elements and assessing which arguments make a stronger thesis. Body There are possibilities in Bernal’s claims which have to be validly considered. These possibilities have to be reviewed especially when the reality of the origins of Greek civilization have to be assessed, and that it is not possible for them to have suddenly burst out of nowhere in perpetuation of the Greek miracle. There is better plausibility however in the notion that, to some extent, the Greeks, have been influenced by other civilizations, including the Egyptians and the Phoenicians. Bernal’s argument has created much controversy especially with the rejection of the notion that Black Africans had an impact on the Greek culture. Scholars believe that this debate stems from the Eurocentrism versus Afrocentrism labels; this debate is also founded on racial discrimination and the rejection of the notion that Africa had a civilization worth impacting on other civilizations (Conner, n.d). Nevertheless, both sides of the debaters present strong and logical arguments which are worthy of consideration. The thrust of Afrocentrists is a rejection of the notion that the Greeks were the creators of civilization, including science, politics, art, and other intellectually valuable contributions to society (Bernal, 2001). They rejected the idea that they owed anything to the Greeks. Bernal’s ideas perpetuate the notion that the Greeks and Romans had to credit their achievements and their ‘civilization’ to Egyptians (Bernal, 2001). Scholars like Lefkowitz (1996) rejected this notion, arguing in her book, “Ancient History, Modern Myths: Black Athena Revisited” that Bernal’s notions were only motivated by politics and ideology, and that in his protection of these motives, the truth became clouded in Bernal’s mind. However, even with efforts to discredit Bernal’s arguments, it is crucial to note that Bernal’s claims simply submit the notion that Greek civilization did not emerge out of nowhere and that it has displayed Egyptian and Phoenician influences (Bernal, 2001). There are few defenders and supporters of Bernal’s notion and most of them seem to be blacks, which further puts muscle to the racially charged rejection of Bernal’s claims. In reviewing his claims however, there are important elements and notions which cannot be wholly labeled as false. One argument is based on the fact that the Afrocentrists did not exactly imagine the notion of Egyptians impacting on the Greeks; in actuality, up to the nineteenth century, Egyptian influence was accepted as truth, until a small group of German scholars started perpetuating the idea of the Greek miracle (Bernal, 2001). It is not even the Afrocentrists who actually forwarded their notions based on irrational ideas, but it was the Germans who came up with questionable and unsupported notions (Bernal, 2001). The support made by the Greeks on the idea of the Greek miracle is also founded on their perception of scientific history where they believed that only the white race, which were descendants of the Aryans, had the inherent qualities to establish advanced civilizations (Bernal, 2001). This belief was supported by the notion that the black race was at the very end of the civilization and racial hierarchy and cannot be credited for any contributions to modern civilization. Any proof that the black Africans played a role in modern civilization was therefore immediately discounted and disproven (Conner, n.d). German scholars declared the Aryans to be a pure race and claimed their roots and ancestry with them. These so-called racially scientific notions started in the nineteenth century where Europeans were strong in their imperialistic conquests and activities (Berlinerblau, 1999). These racial science notions became their support for their natural right as Europeans to conquer and dominate other non-white races. Purity of races was also crucial to this ideology and the ancient Greeks stuck to the notion that they were progressive, creative, and dynamic due to their pure Aryan blood (Berlinerblau, 1999). The Egyptians on the other hand were viewed as mongrels because of their mixture of black African blood. Based on these perceptions, the conclusion of Egyptians not having contributed anything to the Greek civilization was born and further spread. The rejection of the notion of Black Athena was also founded on the rampant anti-semitism ideals which dominated the time period. The Phoenicians, who were closely linked to the Jews, were a Semitic race (Berlinerblau, 1999). The dominant belief at this at this point was also based on Greek’s claim of racial purity. It was however difficult to dismiss the fact that the Greeks trace their alphabet to the Phoenician alphabet (Bernal, 2001). The ideas of racial motivations in the rejection of Black Athena were seen as early as the nineteenth century, in the Parisian Academy of Sciences where Georges Cuvier declared that the Black Africans were the most degraded race in the world (Conner, n.d). He believed that the blacks were a degenerate race and that their intelligence could easily be discounted. He also likened the facial features of the blacks to the monkeys, thereby associating such features to barbarism (Conner, n.d). Despite the racially charged rejection of the concept of a Black Athena, there are various elements in Bernal’s writing and in contributions from other scholars which help support this idea. In fact, some of these notions have even been forwarded and acknowledged by the Greeks themselves. The ancient Greek authors did not actually discount the impact that the Egyptians have had on their civilization, most of them have even actually written about it. Herodotos, Hippocrates, Plato, Aristotle, and other Greek scholars have acknowledged the Egyptian impact on their civilization (Bernal, 2001). It was not actually even considered a matter of debate among these Greeks and Romans, and for the most part, they have even taken it for granted. As the nineteenth century rolled in however, the classicists and the so-called racial scientists made positive demands on proof tying their civilization with the Egyptians (Bernal, 2001). These scholars soon declared the concept of Egyptian influence as fallacies. Yet, one of the earliest known Greek scholars wrote that most of the names of the gods were from Egyptian sources, and that most of the names from Greek during his time were borrowed from Egypt (Bernal, 2001). The idea therefore that Athena was originally a black goddess to the Egyptians and the Africans were not a far off notion. In relation to the origins of philosophy, the Greek philosophers like Thales, was immersed significantly in Egypt, assessing the original teachings of Egyptian scholars (Bernal, 2001). Pythagoras, a Greek Mathematician, was also said to have travelled to Egypt and as he returned to Greece, he carried with him various philosophies and ideas. Aristotle has also declared that Egypt is the cradle of mathematics and that the Egyptians invented geometry and arithmetic (Bernal, 2001). Plato also acknowledged that many of his ideas came from Egyptian knowledge on arithmetic and geometry, including writing, language, and the various sciences. Political thoughts as embodied in Plato’s “The Republic” were said to have been sourced from Egyptian political ideals, and that these were not his original thoughts (Bernal, 2001). The above statements from the well-known Greek philosophers and scholars do not definitively prove that the Greeks learned many of their ideas from the Egyptians, but it indicates that the Greeks seem to perceive it that way. The Afrocentrists are not therefore alone in their notion of their impact on Greek civilization. There also seems to be a possibility that during the Bronze Age, the Egyptians and Phoenicians conquered and occupied some parts of Greece and therefore transferred many of their philosophies and culture with the Greeks, and from such influence, the Greek civilization may have perpetuated its own roots (Bernal, 2001). Many scholars reject this notion. However, Afrocentrists and ancient Greeks themselves were able to support this notion. There have been various myths about Egyptians and Phoenicians being founders and conquerors of some Greek cities, including Kadmos (Thebes); Danaos (Argos); and Kekros, (Athens) (Conner, n.d). Although these stories are indeed myths, most myths often have a strong basis in actual history. Until proof can be found to discount the possibility, these myths cannot be completely wholly dismissed as complete falsehoods. The Afrocentric notion is more significant in its ideas, as compared to the notion of the Greek miracle. There are archaeological and language evidence which supports their views as explained by Bernal. Other scholars are not convinced by his ideas. Despite these technical arguments however, Bernal (2001) was able to point out various elemental aspects of the debate, and some of these aspects refer to the fact that this debate cannot be separated from the concept of racism. Moreover, those who reject the ideas of Afrocentrism cannot validly claim that their arguments are not based on non-ideological and non-political truths. Black Africans have also been noted for their contribution in the early earth civilizations, and Egyptian civilization is founded on the dynamic culture of Upper Egypt and Nubia which is largely influenced by Africa (Bernal, 2001). This idea proves that the ideas of racial science are unfounded and claiming that the blacks did not contribute anything to civilization is highly disputable. Their impact on ancient Greece cannot therefore be wholly discounted nor can it be rejected based on the biased ideals of racial science. Conclusion Based on the above discussion, Bernal has established a supportable and logical argument. The basic ideas proposed by Afrocentrists are very much possible, and are actually even more logically supported than the idea of the Greek miracle. Current and future archaeological and linguistic findings support these claims and would prompt other philosophers and academicians to review their current positions on the discussion. Ancient Greek philosophers, who are the most reliable sources of information immediately preceding their time, have supported the notion of Egyptian influence on their civilization. There is certainly greater credence in these statements as compared to the biased notions perpetuated by 19th century scholars and purists. Considering Bernal’s notions therefore as better possibilities are more logical and have a better chance of being chance of being proven in the future. References Berlinerblau, J. (1999). The Aryan models. Heresy in the university: the Black Athena controversy and the responsibilities of American intellectuals. New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London: Rutgers University Press. Bernal, M. (2001). Introduction: Black Athena writes back. Durham & London: Duke University Press. Conner, C. (n.d). Afrocentrism vs. Eurocentrism in ancient history. Socialist Action. Retrieved 12 May 2012 from http://www.socialistaction.org/afrocentrism.htm Lefkowitz, M. R. (1996). Ancient history, modern myths. Black Athena revisited. Eds. Mary R. Lefkowitz and Guy MacLean Rogers. Chapel Hill & London: The University of North Carolina Press. Read More