Rating: 
Summary: Will we ever have some scientific rigor instead of rhetoric?
Review: "The basic points of ancient metrology were reconstructed in the seventeenth century by two successive holders of the Saville Chair of Astronomy at Oxford, John Greaves (1602-1652) and Eduard Bernard (1638-1697). Their work is connected with the development of the ideas of Newton, who also was interested in ancient metrology..."Following the principles already formulated by Greaves, Bockh stressed two main points. The first, that there was one single system of metrology, which had been developed in Egypt and completed in Assyria by connecting the Egyptian units of length, volume, and weight with units of time and with angular measurements; this system was received as a unified whole by the Greeks... "The two founders of metrology, Greaves and Bernard, had relied mainly on their extensive knowledge of rabbinical literature, and Bockh had stressed the similarity between ancient metrology and the French metric system. This clearly proved to Beloch [an influential German anti-Semitic philosopher of the late 19th/early 20th century] that he was dealing with an idea concocted by his mortal enemies, the French and the Jews... "The history of the vicissitudes of metrological scholarship forces one to ask why there has been such an explosion of irrationality in a field that is so dry and technical. It is not extraordinary that somebody has claimed that [the numismatists and modern scholars of metrology] Bockh, Brandis, Lepsius, (Nobel Prize-winning Roman historian Theodore) Mommsen, Nissen, Hultsch, Dorpfeld, Huberlin, Brugsch, Lehmann-Haupt, Regling, Kubitschek and others spent the whole or a good part of their lives furthering a sort of conspiracy aiming at the befuddlement of the scholarly world, but it is extraordinary that such a paranoiac view was [and still is] widely accepted..."
Dr. Livio Stecchini, MIT
A HISTORY OF MEASURES
From the Introduction, "Why Study Metrology?" Lefkowitz' book NOT OUT OF AFRICA is a fascinating political treatise; nothing more. Despite how lucid it appears, it is not literary, historical, or even properly sociological in nature. As entertainment--if you are the type to be entertained by such things--you will enjoy this book greatly. Nonetheless, this is simply an unscientific repackaging of a destructive myth from the late 19th century German intelligentsia, masquerading as social/academic criticism. A quote of Lefkowitz toward the end of NOT OUT OF AFRICA is telling of both the stated raison d'Etre of the book and my point: "Students of the modern world may think it is a matter of indifference whether or not Aristotle stole his philosophy from Egypt...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 (emphasis mine). Once you start doing that, you can have no SCIENTIFIC or even social-scientific discourse, nor can you have a community, or a university." Has anyone noticed that Lefkowitz' view of the ancient Classical world is one that she, in NOT OUT OF AFRICA, with a circular literary/historical logic, immediately claims to be the only respectable one before the book even begins? So triumphantly so that she comfortably uses the word "scientific" metaphorically in justifying her defense of it, without the slightest fear of an actual *scientific* challenge? Metrology [the scientific study of ancient measurement systems], as studied by scientific historians at MIT, is the archetypal example of this. Despite its four-century history and the sociological implications of its innumerable volumes of findings, the entire study of metrology was ostracized from the modern University system of the late 19th century and became almost completely obliterated during the rise of Nazism in Western Europe and the Jim Crow segregationism of America in the early 20th. Scholars of Classicism who are aware of its existence will not even mention it. This is institutionalized intellectual censorship, plain and simple, and was put in place in the University systems of Europe and America for most of the 20th century. In other words, what Lefkowitz in NOT OUT OF AFRICA says is in danger of happening to truth in our democracy via Afrocentric postmodernism in the university IS A PRODUCT OF ITS VERY ARCHITECTURE. The cancer is within. Lefkowitz in NOT OUT OF AFRICA says she is protecting knowledge from sociology. In reality she is merely protecting the sociology of knowledge as it already exists. And just in case you were wondering: the science--repeat, science--of Metrology not so ironically substantiates the most cherished theories of the "Afrocentric" school, regarding ancient North Africa's influence on the Near East and Mediterranean cultures. Metrology alone irreversibly debilitates the foundational arguments of NOT OUT OF AFRICA. So much so, in fact, that any ONE of the other ancient world perspectives from the modern sciences like sociobiology, evolutionary anthropology, linguistics or comparative religions (she does know the name of the Greek goddess *Athena* comes from the Egyptian *Neith*, doesn't she?), combined with the findings of metrology, yields a world of paradigm-shifting discoveries that make the ancient Greek historian Herodotos' supposed heresies, literary Masonic rituals, and any inconsistencies of Senegalese Egyptologist Chekh Anta Diop's work totally irrelevant.
I suggest anyone who is finished shouting for joy over how Lefkowitz saved civilization with NOT OUT OF AFRICA read the following: 1) Giorgio de Santillana's CRIME OF GALILEO. See exactly how Lefkowitz' seductive illusion of the virginal University system and its mythical pure search for knowledge cannot hide the fact that its "innocence" has been continuously stolen and restolen in the whorehouses of Euro-politics since its inception in Western European civilization. 2) AT THE HANDS OF PERSONS UNKNOWN: THE LYNCHING OF BLACK AMERICA by Philip Dray, and 3) PLAYING THE RACE CARD: MELODRAMAS IN BLACK AND WHITE FROM UNCLE TOM TO O.J. SIMPSON by Linda Williams. Learn what subconscious, irrational social forces are bolstering the ultimately weak argument of Lefkowitz' thesis. The truth is out there. However, NOT OUT OF AFRICA, nor Lefkowitz' political agenda are telling it.
Rating:
Summary: What is truth; what is fact; what is opinion--relevant?
Review: "The link between Virgo and Child, recognized by the early Christians, was continued into esoteric literature and into the emblems used and studied by the Masons, sometimes in suitably obcscured forms. We have looked at the connections between Virgo, Isis and Ceres. Albert Pike tells us that, in Egyptian times, Virgo was Isis, and her child was Horus. He reminds us that the inscription in her temple announced: " I am all that is, that was, and that shallbe; and the fruit which I brought forth is the Sun... "My attempt to find a connection between the triangle and Virgo-Isis may seem far-fetched to those unfamiliar with astro-hermetic literature. However, the truth is that even 1,000 years before the birth of Christ, the ancient Egyptian temple of Isis at Giza called the goddess 'Mistress of the Pyramids.'" David Ovason
THE SECRET ARCHITECTURE OF OUR NATION'S CAPITAL
From the Appendix "There is no doubt that the early images in Greek and Roman times reflected the secret symbolism of the Egyptian Isis, which survives still in one or two ancient Egyptian planispheres..." David Ovason
THE SECRET ARCHITECTURE OF OUR NATION'S CAPITAL
From Chapter Six "Sit down before fact like a child, and be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abyss Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing." -T.H. Huxley
Rating: 
Summary: Listen to Mr. Leach!
Review: Everyone knows Afrocentricity is a sham. Even the "professors" that teach this pap admit it's purpose is to build esteem rather than provide historically accurate information. Actually, the existence of this book, by classical scholar Mary Lefkowitz, shows how far down the path to ruin we've come. To even have to debate the ridiculous idea of Afrocentric ideology exposes the deep corruption of higher education. At least Lefkowitz delivers powerful, punishing blows to the Afrocentric scholars in this book. The central idea of Afrocentric thought is that the Greeks, those wonderful people who contributed so much to Western thought, actually stole much of their ideas and concepts from the Egyptians. Since Egypt is in Africa, that means the Greeks took these ideas from blacks. Lefkowitz shows, in minute detail, how this is just not true. She also refutes the Afrocentric belief that Cleopatra and Socrates were black. One of the funniest parts of the book takes place during her discussion on Cleopatra. Some Afrocentric scholars actually use Shakespeare as a source! As a historian myself, I find this absolutely hysterical. Note to others: you know you're in trouble when you have to use a 16th century English playwright as a reference for historical information on 1st century AD figures. Lefkowitz goes on to show that Afrocentric scholars actually get most of their theories from a French Freemason. The origins of Afrocentric belief comes from a white European! Could it get anymore delicious? It does, actually. Lefkowitz also talks about how early Hebrews actually tried to do the same thing the Afrocentrists are doing now; that is, trying to take credit for Greek ideas and beliefs. The Greeks were so great that people have been trying to take credit for their ideas for two millenia! Jealousy knows no bounds! As for Africans developing these ideas themselves, forget about it. It has been proven that Africans never even developed a written language. It's hard to pass on a belief system without a written language. This isn't to say that Africans didn't have development. Mali and Songhey were powerful and rich kingdoms. But they just don't compare with the Greeks. There is nothing wrong with that. Why can't Afrocentric scholars be pleased with those developments that really occurred in Africa? Apparently, some of them have frail egos. I'm really glad Mary Lefkowitz took the time to write this book. She should be commended for her bravery in standing up to this threat to academe. She'll suffer many slings and arrows for her beliefs. I'm also glad I had some Greek history and language under my belt. She delves pretty deep into Greek names and ideas. Still, this is a quick read on an important topic. Recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Trully good work
Review: I couldn't help feeling embarassed for Bernal while reading this book. How can he honestly face academia with his flimsy "evidence" knowing that a book with real substance completely refutes his entire thesis?
Fact: genetically Greeks are caucasian.
Fact: Initial greek architecture/sculpture was slightly similar to Egyptian. What made Ancient Greece great was the flowering of their civilization during the Golden age of Philosophy/Drama/Politics(democracy)/etc. The peaks of Greek achievement were of their own making. We don't know much about Black Africa (not Egyptian) because they didn't even develop a WRITTEN LANGUAGE! OUCH! Read Lefkowitz if you want real scholarship. If political propoganda is your game, embrace Bernal.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Out Of Africa
Review: A scholastic degree does not give anyone of any race the right to carelessly publish untruths as their way of exercising their prejudice. Regardless of what was written in this book and inspite of this author's efforts to mislead...the truth WILL be known.
Rating:
Summary: Weak attack on a controversial field
Review: I am stunned by the amount of five star reviews for this book, and am left to wonder what type of knowledge about this subject these individuals possess. I should start out by saying that I do feel the Afrocentrist movement has some serious problems, particularly in the case of the "Black Athena" argument. Substituting one brand of historical racial supremacy for another is not a viable intellectual framework (M.K. Asante, whom many regard as the intellectual father of Afrocenticity - not AfrocentricISM, there is a difference - makes this point clear in his work). The specifics of how much influence African cultures may or may not have had on Greece is not important. The general project of the Afrocentrist movement is to re-center Africans as active agents in history, rather than simply as hitoical bystanders or victims who have contributed nothing of value. Given the recent discoveries of relatively advance ancient African cultures, such as Great Zimbabwe, Mali and Songhay, and the Kongo cultures, arguments about African historical and cultural inferiority are more and more difficult to justify, and smack of intellectualized racism. Although she makes a few valid points, Lefkowitz's arguments dissolve in her rabid attack on the notion that Egypt was not an African culture. Most mainstream (not I did not say Afrocentrist) anthropologists and historians today agree with the assertion that the ancient Eyptians were genetically African. More importantly, however, is the increasing archaeological evidence that Egypt had knowledge of and close contacts with African cultures in the interior. Lefkowitz's arguments resonate with the reactionary school of European history that has systematically denied such contacts existed, lest Egypt lose some of its association with the European paradigm. The one thing that seems to be true about any scholarly work is that historical tidbits and facts can be skewed any which way to support your argue. Lefkowitz falls into this trap (although she is certainly not the first - many of her ideolgical opponents certainly have done the same). She comes off like someone who is fighting for academic survival, which in a sense she is, considering how Classical Studies programs are quickly falling off the radar at many institutions. In short, there is a serious intellectual argument to be made against Afrocentricism. This book isn't it by a long shot. It is, rather, a polemic rant that won't convince anyone who hasn't already made up their mind about the subject. And by the way, some of the review comments that have been made regarding the cover phote are right on the money. Racist images such as this have absolutely no place in serious scholarship. Whomever made this atrocious decision, whether the author or her publishers, ought to be ashamed of themselves.
Rating:
Summary: It bears repeating:
Review: 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
Rating:
Summary: She' a white racist
Review: I find her typical of a white racist that cannot separate her racism from even imagining that since Egypt is in Africa, that just perhaps the Egyptians could possibly be African people?? The reviewer from South Africa is a very sick minded, hateful, hostille person who sounds like he hates black people. Why can't whites separate their racist hostility from their discussions?? Just why are white people so nasty, rude and can only see that Europeans and Greeks are history makers??? I'm baffled by the racism that came through her book.
Rating:
Summary: Hard to refute
Review: Here is the logic used against Mary: Facts don't matter because:
1. She is being racist
2. She is not politically correct
3. Blacks developed nothing, but, umm, hey the egyptians were black! Yeah that's it.
4. How dare she write against the teaching of Afrocentrists (mostly false)-she has to be racist
Rating:
Summary: Here is the truth
Review: and boy, the afrocentrists can't stand it! Just read the venom filled one-star reviews below. I will only take seriously trully researched works, not work of politics.
| 
