Rating: 
Summary: Balanced, sane, and well researched.
Review: At the moment I am nearing the end of William Shirer's THE RISE AND FALL OF THE THIRD REICH, and I have been struck by how much the historical claims made by Hitler reminds me of the kinds of claims made by Afrocentrists. In both instances, all historical evidence is thrown out the window in favor of a fanciful creation of a history that never was. The same holds true of those who would deny that the destruction of the Jews in Nazi Germany took place despite mountains of evidence that it did. Lefkowitz expresses all of this when she writes in the Conclusion, " . . . by substituting myth for history [the Afrocentrists] open the way for other groups to invent their own histories. Some of these new mythologies could harm African-Americans far more than Afrocentrist mythology could ever help them" (155-56). Both Hitler and the holocaust-deniers are graphic proof of this. NOT OUT OF AFRICA, however, is not a perfect book. It is hideously repetitive. This could either be because the author was trying to flesh what could otherwise have been a booklet out to book-length form, or it could be that the individual chapters were originally self-standing essays that have been married together to form a book. Whatever the cause, this book, while short, could easily have been fifty pages shorter. I also wish that Lefkowitz could have discussed Martin Bernal at more length. Most of her discussion of Afrocentrism focusses on such intellectual mediocrities as George James. If the best exponent of an Afrocentrist viewpoint is Martin Bernal, then I would have preferred to have seen more of a discussion of his work and less on James and Diop. Still, this is an excellent book, and one that anyone interested in multicultural literacy, Ancient Greece or Egypt, or Black history should investigate. It is also very clearly written and quite easy to read.
Rating: 
Summary: Courageous Stance By A Top Notch Scholar
Review: This book is more than just the debunking of an obvious myth. This brilliant lady had the guts to state what many are afraid to because of the fear of being labeled a "racist". From some of the more unfavorable reviews on this page, I can see that people are more concerned with feeling good than with knowing the truth. A must read for anyone wanting to know the TRUTH.
Rating:
Summary: An excellent and unbiased look at Classical Civilization
Review: As someone of Egyptian ancestry, who is also interested in world history and Egypt's place in it I found this work to be an excellent refutation of political correctness gone awry. Many people don't believe that I'm Egyptian at all or tell me that I'm not a "real" Egyptian because of my non-African appearance. Reality is tough medicine for those who are angry about America's past crimes, but they are just that, America's crimes and not those of Egypt or Greece.
Rating:
Summary: Remarkably well documented
Review: Prof. Lefkowitz has gone to quite a bit of trouble to put forth this excellent argument for the teaching of factual history. This book is well researched and without racial bias. Anyone who is interested in ancient Greece or Egypt should read this book to understand the historical sources who are either incorrect or are used incorrectly on the myth of Greek cultural dependency. I wholeheartedly applaud Professor Lefkowitz for her daring on this controversial topic.
Rating: 
Summary: She is wrong
Review: Maybe you'll read this, maybe you want But I had to write a comment about you mocking Black Afrocentralism. First I want to ask you this. WHO invented Rock and Roll? I mean Who were the founders of the music? Most white people even you will probably say that Elvis, a white man did. Well you're wrong BLACKS invented Rock and Roll, but when it got popular and all the young whites loved it, how do you think their parents felt. Does, " I can't stand that JUNGLE music ring a bell? " Those white parents despised it. Why was Elvis so popular? Answer: He had the Black Sound, but he was white and his parents could tolerate him. Why did Blacks loose out when it came to reaping the rewards of Creating Rock and Roll? Answer: Racism, also we were economically unable to produce and distribute our own money therefore any jo could literally steal a song and market it as if it were theirs. This same credit stealing happened in EGYPT. Egypt was a world power. Everyone wanted it.
Rating:
Summary: Absolutely Fabulous!
Review: This book is a well-written and well-researched look at how certain members of the academic community have twisted misinterpretations and anachronistic threads into a "history" which is now being taught in schools and universities. As an aspiring classicist, I found the book easy to read and engaging. Even if you aren't interested in the ancient world, this book is fascinating for its expose of Afrocentrism
Rating:
Summary: A logical rebuttal of some specific claims of Afrocentrism
Review:
George Orwell once wrote, "He who controlls the past controlls the future,"
and the revision of the past is the chief concern of _Not Out of Africa_.
Professor Lefkowitz is a teacher of classical history at Welleslsy,
and had no idea of new history trends until a former student
approached her. This former student said that when she had taken
Lefkowitz's course, she thought the black ancestry of Socrates was
not mentioned in the course because of racism -- not because the
teacher had never heard that claim. But Lefkowitz did not become
enmeshed in the "Culture Wars" until she wrote a critique of Martin
Bernal's _Black Athena_. The firestorm released by her article has
brought out this formal reply to many Afrocentrist claims.
The bulk of this work is Lefkowitz's rebuttal of some claims of Afrocentrist teaching. Was Socrates black? Was Cleopatra? What about Cadmus or
other Greek heroes? Read and find out for yourself. Then she goes
to the main problem of confusion between Greece and Egypt -- the
Greeks themselves, who tried to connect their civilization to the
far older (and to Greek minds, older always meant vastly superior)
Egyptian civilization. The problem is that the Greeks themselves
got it wrong, and later "researchers" (who relied on Greek texts,
before the revelation of the Rosetta Stone) propagated these
myths. But only in the nineteenth century have we seen the advent
of scholars deliberately demonizing the Greeks for stealing African
achievements and taking all the credit. By this reasoning, all the
advancements of Western civilization are actually stolen from
Africa -- just more incidents in a history of racism.
Her final section is the one I find most fascinating; in it she addresses the current state of affairs of academia. She censures many of the
researchers for misrepresenting their sources to further personal
agendas, and the only way to determine misuse of sources is to
carefully check each source. I hope Dr. Lefkowitz posesses the
integrity she claims others lack, and truthfully represents her
documents. Does Absolute Truth exist, or does it all depend upon
one's point of view? Is revising history to empower a minority
group a justifyable means to a worthwhile end? Does emotional
empowerment have a place in a college education? In this decade
alone we have seen many examples of this, with the most recent
being a Michigan school teaching children that black Egyptians had
wings until the Europeans came along. To an adult, this story is
obviously fiction, but a child can learn this as truth. Many of
you still think, "What does it matter? It's harmless." In reply,
I want to close with a poignant quote from the very end of the
second chapter: "Only a few of the people teaching in universities
today seem to have not forgotten that not long ago symbolic myths
of ethnic supremacy were responsible for the deaths of whole
populations. One advantage (perhaps the only one) of being older
than most of my colleagues is that I do remember."
Rating:
Summary: Lefkowitz book: get a good laugh
Review: Lefkowitz has never set foot on the continent. I should
stop there but i will go on. I agree with the refutations against beliefs that are blatantly incorrect facts. But she too picks and chooses her
arguments, contradicting herself plenty of times in the process. She needs to check herself and start sweeping
her own front porch before she starts cleaning up other
people's houses. She is just not ready to admit that Ancient
Africa has played a bigger role in the creation of "Western
Civilization." That's sad and so is this book. Do not buy it!
Rating: 
Summary: Keeping the superior on top.
Review: If the Egyptians were not black, than what were they? When I look at a map of the world, it plainly has Egypt located on the Northeastern continent of Africa. Granted it is Northeastern, but still Africa, not Germany. Therefore, I would assume that early Egypt would be a combination of Middle Eastern , and indegenous African peoples, until the onset of Rome and Greece, and other conquerors.
I'm not exactly sure what Afro-centrism claims, however; since it is attributed to the black race, then I assume that it is a neagive term. It is rare that the Western world attribute anything freely to the black race, unless it is negative in nature. As far as civilizations are concerned, the earliest ones were of Egypt, the Euphrates in Mesopotamia, the Indus in India, and the Yangtze, and Hwang Ho in China.
Rome and Greece began their own civilizations with their own ideals, governments, and religions, however; like any other culture, they were heavily influenced by the civilizations that had been around for centuries. Namely, the Eastern, and African worlds. To ingnore this, and calmly submit that Africa and its people have not participated in the history of the world is not only wrong, but a typical response. Typical in the form of the Western world, and in particular, the white race in re-establishing the superiority complex that they have developed for themselves throughout most of history. The book claims to not be racially motivated, yet, when you look at the title, how can it be anything else? Not Out Of Africa, says to anyone who picks up the text, that Africa is not home to anything, or anyone. However, in the world of Western academia, the only time something is racially motivated, is when it is written by a African, or Black American writer. In the world of archaeology, Africa is the cradle of humanity. Yet, the book, Not Out Of Africa seems to imply that as human beings, we must even question our evolution from that continent. But if Africa is the cradle of humanity, then is it not also the cradle of the earliest, most primative forms of civilization? Did not early man, evolve, then migrate to form greater, more advanced civilizations? Or are we to believe that Africa is still seen today, as Europe saw it, in the 18th century? A dark continent, with savage, uneducated, uncivilized, and worse yet, un-Christianized negroids? Even the word negroid, sounds alien, unhuman. And what of books such as The Bell Curve? Another best seller, and why would anyone wonder at that? Once again, it claims what the Western world has all ready come to accept. The races of Africa are inferior, and therefore could never have initiated anything, much less a civilization like Egypt. Egyptian civilization is more associated with that of alien races from space, before anyone can accept its indegenous culture, and technology. And I firmly believe that if Egypt could be cut out of Africa, and attached to England, that it would have all ready been done. I realize that this sounds like a wholly racist statment, however, as a realist, I look at history in a very honest sence , and do not attempt to mask it in colors of convienece, as most Classic, and Historical professionals seem to want to do. Besides that, history has been written by the victor, and that has never been anyone except for the male, and more to the point, the white race.
The title of the book itself, speaks volumns, not only of the author, but of the overall opinion of past, and present historians, anthropologists, and other scientists. In other words, little has changed from the time of Chariots of the Gods. If Afro-centrism, is a racist ideal, I would like to know exactly how. I beleive that Diop, and Bernal, and other non-white historians are doing nothing more than challening the established superior culture. The white race in general, is being questioned about their authority, and superiority. And Diop is quite right, the white race did not invent thinking. As hard as this may be for some people to accept, I believe that it is true. If stating this is being Afro-centric, then I suppose every "non-white" member in the human society is Afro-centric. This does not mean that I agree 100% with everything that Diop and Bernal say. However, these men do place the art, architecture, culture, and people of Africa, to an equal level with that of Europe. Which is a statement that probably would have gotten a few of us burned at the stake not too long ago. Instead, words like "Afro-Centrism" suffice for the cross, and flames in todays world. Greece and Rome began their own civilizations. But as a classics major, I cannot study the texts, without running into the constant Egyptian, African themes that so imbused the minds of the Greeks and Romans. That does not mean that Africa BEGAN those civilizations, but it did help to evolve them. How could it not? African civilizations were around for centuries, long before Europe figured out how to make bricks. Egypt eventually fell, and became part of those great empires. This is where most classic, and archaeological professionals concentrate the most. In the after-effects of the influence of the conquered, not of the early influence of the Nation itself, before it was incorporated in another. This is what I believe Bernal is saying in Black Athena. Africa was a country of vast Kingdoms, not just in Egypt, but in other areas of the Savannah, and rain forests. Most ancient African artifacts, art, and archaeological sites, have been convienetly misplaced, destroyed, ignored, or sold on the black market. Should anyone wonder why Diop and Bernal feel that it is necessary to establish some kind of humanity to the African peoples? It is a very different story when you can be proud of an ancestory that is traceable, other than tracing back, fragments, and given misconceptions. But of course, the white race again, when questioned, or challenged, instantly go on the defensive. This is a natural response to anyone, or anything that has been sitting at the top of the mountain since day 1. Lastly, there is a statement in the book which I find particularly idiotic. It states that Diop and Bernal, the so called, "Afro-centric" authors, assume that everyone who was born in Africa was black. I was slightly confused at that, and then asked myself; am I to assume then, that everyone in places such as Norway, England, and Russia, was not born white? Again, the re-establishing of the white race as superior, is of the out-most importance. Books like this, and the Bell Curve are the best representations of this ideal. And even though they claim to be non-racially motivated, I think that those of us who are non-white members in this society, know better by now
Rating:
Summary: Fine debunking of destructive myth. Written for the layman.
Review: Mary Lefkowitz attempts the debunking of the myth that the
Greeks stole their philosophical and cultural achievements
from ancient Egypt. She examines the political motivations
for the myth, and for teaching it as fact in university
curriculums. The book, targeted for the layman, seeks to
make this issue relevant to a wider audience than academia.
Prof. Lefkowitz succeeds in tracing the history of this myth
at a level that a non-classicist can understand, and in the
validates the need for experts to examine these subjects.
In addition, she makes clear the social and intellectual
dangers inherent in suspending academic standards for a political agenda.
Prof. Lefkowitz looks at ancient, modern, and contemporary
versions of this myth, and how it has been propagated despite
an overwhelming lack of real evidence. The ancient Greeks
themselves provide the story, but they had their own motives
for propagating it. Resurrected in the 1600's as fiction,
the myth gained further embellishment and detail. As the
19th Century progressed, our understanding of ancient Egypt
developed, and eventually the myth was rejected by all
serious historians and classicists. However, the myth stayed on in Masonic ritual and tradition. Eventually,
it was picked up and further refined by black educators and
activists in the 20th Century. In fact, the Egypt on which the myth
is based never existed, and is more European in nature than
African.
Some will interpret this as a racially-motivated book, especially given Prof. Lefkowitz's scrapes with the political-
correctness police in the past. However, she teaches at
Wellesley, not known for its reactionary atmosphere. In
addition, her specialty is the role of women in classical
literature and society. It clearly defends not racial superiority, but rigorous academic standards for examining historical evidence.
|
