African History is World History?

The following taken from John Henrik Clarke (January 1987) “Why Africana History”

Africa and its people are the most written about and the least understood of all of the world's people. This condition started in the 15th and the 16th centuries with the beginning of the slave trade and the colonialism system. The Europeans not only colonialized most of the world, they began to colonialize information about the world and its people. In order to do this, they had to forget, or pretend to forget, all they had previously known about the Africans. They were not meeting them for the first time; there had been another meeting during Greek and Roman times. At that time they complemented each other.

The African, Clitus Niger, King of Bactria, was also a Cavalry Commander for Alexander the Great. Most of the Greeks' thinking was influenced by this contact with the Africans. The people and the cultures of what is known as Africa are older than the word "Africa." According to most records, old and new, Africans are the oldest people on the face of the earth. The people now called Africans not only influenced the Greeks and the Romans, they influenced the early world before there was a place called Europe.

When the early Europeans first met Africans, at the crossroads of history, it was a respectful meeting and the Africans were not slaves. Their nations were old before Europe was born. In this period of history, what was to be later known as "Africa" was an unknown place to the people who would someday be called, "Europeans." Only the people of some of the Mediterranean Islands and a few states of what would become the Greek and Roman states knew of parts of North Africa, and that was a land of mystery. After the rise and decline of Greek civilization and the Roman destruction of the City of Carthage, they made the conquered territories into a province which they called Africa, a word derived from "afri," and the name of a group of people about whom little is known. At first the word applied only to the Roman colonies in North Africa. There was a time when all dark-skinned people were called Ethiopians, for the Greeks referred to Africa as, "The Land of the Burnt-Face People."

If Africa, in general, is a man-made mystery, Egypt, in particular, is a bigger one. There has long been an attempt on the part of some European "scholars" to deny that Egypt was a part of Africa. To do this they had to ignore the great masterpieces on Egyptian history written by European writers such as, Ancient Egypt, Light of the World, Vols. I & II, and a whole school of European thought that placed Egypt in proper focus in relationship to the rest of Africa.

The distorters of African history also had to ignore the fact that the people of the ancient land which would later be called Egypt, never called their country by that name. It was called, TA-MERRY or KAMPT and sometimes KEMET or SAIS. The ancient Hebrews called it MIZRAIN. Later the Moslem Arabs used the same term but later discarded it. Both the Greeks and the Romans referred to the country as the "Pearl of the Nile." The Greeks gave it the simple name AEGYPTCUS. Thus the word we know as Egypt is of Greek origin.

Until recent times most Western scholars have been reluctant to call attention to the fact that the Nile River is 4,000 miles long. It starts in the south, in the heart of Africa, and flows to the north. It was the world's first cultural highway. Thus, Egypt was a composite of many African cultures. In his article, "The Lost Pharaohs of Nubia," Professor Bruce Williams infers that the nations in the South could be older than Egypt. This information is not new. When rebel European scholars were saying this 100 years ago, and proving it, they were not taken seriously.

It is unfortunate that so much of the history of Africa has been written by conquerors, foreigners, missionaries and adventures. The Egyptians left the best record of their history written by local writers. It was not until near the end of the 19th century when a few European scholars learned to decipher their writing that this was understood.

The Greek traveler, Herodotus, was in Africa about 450 B.C. His eyewitness account is still a revelation. He witnessed African civilization in decline and partly in ruins, after many invasions. However, he could still see the indications of the greatness that it had been. In this period in history, the Nile Valley civilization of Africa had already brought forth two "Golden Ages" of achievement and had left its mark for all the world to see.

Slavery and colonialism strained, but did not completely break, the cultural umbilical cord between the Africans in Africa and those who, by forced migration, now live in what is called the Western World. A small group of African American and Caribbean writers, teachers and preachers, collectively developed the basis of what would be an African-consciousness movement over 100 years ago. Their concern was with Africa, in general, Egypt and Ethiopia, and what we now call the Nile Valley.

In approaching this subject, I have given preference to writers of African descent who are generally neglected. I maintain that the African is the final authority on Africa. In this regard I have reconsidered the writings of W.E.B. DuBois, George Washington Williams, Drussila Dungee Houston, Carter G. Woodson, Willis N. Huggins, and his most outstanding living student, John G. Jackson (now deceased; editor). I have also reread the manuscripts of some of the unpublished books of Charles C. Seifert, especially manuscripts of his last completed book, Who Are the Ethiopians? Among Caribbean scholars, like Charles C. Seifert, J.A. Rogers (from
Jamaica) is the best known and the most prolific. Over 50 years of his life was devoted to documenting the role of African personalities in world history. His two-volume work, World's Great Men of Color, is a pioneer work in the field.

Among the present-day scholars writing about African history, culture, and politics, Dr. Yosef ben-Jochannan's books are the most challenging. I have drawn heavily on his research in the preparation of this article. He belongs to the main cultural branch of the African world, having been born in Ethiopia, growing to early manhood in the Caribbean Islands and having lived in the African American community of the United States for over 20 years. His major books on African history are: Black Man of the Nile, 1979, Africa: Mother of Western Civilization, 1976 and The African Origins of Major Western Religions, 1970.

Our own great historian, W.E.B. DuBois tells us, "Always Africa is giving us something new On its black bosom arose one of the earliest, if not the earliest, of self-protecting civilizations, and grew so mightily that it still furnishes superlatives to thinking and speaking men. Out of its darker and more remote forest vastness came, if we may credit many recent scientists, the first welding of iron, and we know that agriculture and trade flourished there when Europe was a wilderness.

Dr. DuBois tells us further that, "Nearly every human empire that has arisen in the world, material and spiritual, has found some of its greatest crises on this continent of Africa. It was through Africa that
Christianity became the religion of the world. It was through Africa that Islam came to play its great role of conqueror and civilizer."

Egypt and the nations of the Nile Valley were, figuratively, the beating heart of Africa and the incubator for its greatness for more than a thousand years. Egypt gave birth to what later would become
known as "Western Civilization," long before the greatness of Greece and Rome.

This is a part of the African story, and in the distance it is a part of the African American story. It is difficult for depressed African Americans to know that they are a part of the larger story of the history of the world. The history of the modern world was made, in the main, by what was taken from African people. Europeans emerged from what they call their "middle-Ages," people poor, land poor and resources poor. They raided and raped the cultures of the world, mostly Africa, and filled their homes and museums with treasures, then they called the people primitive. The Europeans did not understand the cultures of non-Western people then; they do not understand them now.

History, I have often said, is a clock that people use to tell their political time of day. It is also a compass that people use to find themselves on the map of human geography. History tells a people where they are and what they are. Most importantly, history tells a people where they still must go and what they still must be.

There is no way to go directly to the history of African Americans without taking a broader view of African world history. In his book Tom-Tom, the writer, John W. Vandercook makes this meaningful statement: A race is like a man. Until it uses its own talents, takes pride in its own history, and loves its own memories, it can never fulfill itself completely.

This, in essence, is what African American history and what African American History Month is about. The phrase African American or African American History Month, taken at face value and without serious thought, appears to be incongruous. Why is there a need for an African American History Month when there is no similar month for the other minority groups in the United States? The history of the United States, in total, consists of the collective history of minority groups. What we call 'American civilization' is no more than the sum of their contributions. The African Americans are the least integrated and the most neglected of these groups in the historical interpretation of the American experience. This neglect has made African American History Month a necessity.

Most of the large ethnic groups in the United States have had, and still have, their historical associations. Some of these associations predate the founding of the Association for the Study of Negro
Life and History, (1915). Dr. Charles H. Wesley tells us that, "Historical societies were organized in the United States with the special purpose in view of preserving and maintaining the heritage of the American nation."

Within the frame work of these historical societies many ethnic groups, Black as well as white, engaged in those endeavors that would keep alive their beliefs in themselves and their past as a part of their hopes for the future. For African Americans, Carter G. Woodson led the way and used what was then called, Negro History Week, to call attention to his people's contribution to every aspect of world history. Dr. Woodson, then Director of The Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, conceived this special week as a time when public attention should be focused on the achievements of America's citizens of African descent.

The acceptance of the facts of African American history and the African American historian as a legitimate part of the academic community did not come easily. Slavery ended and left its false images of Black people intact. In his article, "What the Historian Owes the Negro," the noted African American historian, Dr. Benjamin Quarles, says: “The Founding Fathers revered by historians for over a century and a half, did not conceive of the Negro as part of the body of politics. Theoretically, these men found it hard to imagine a society where Negroes were of equal status to whites. Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United States, who was far more liberal than the run of his contemporaries, was never the less certain that "the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government."

I have been referring to the African origin of African American literature and history. This preface is essential to every meaningful discussion of the role of the African American in every aspect of American life, past and present. I want to make it clear that the Black race did not come to the United States culturally empty-handed.

The role and importance of ethnic history is in how well it teaches a people to use their own talents, take pride in their own history and love their own memories. In order to fulfill themselves completely, in all of their honorable endeavors it is important that the teacher of history of the Black race find a definition of the subject, and a frame of reference that can be understood by students who have no prior
knowledge of the subject

.The following definition is paraphrased from a speech entitled. "The Negro Writer and His Relation To His Roots," by Saunders Redding, (1960): Heritage, in essence, is how a people have used their talent to create a history that gives them memories that they can respect, and use to command the respect of other people. The ultimate purpose of history and history teaching is to use a people's talent to develop an awareness and a pride in themselves so that they can create better instruments for living together with other people. This sense of identity is the stimulation for all of a people's honest and creative efforts. A people's relationship to their heritage is the same as the relationship of a child to its mother.

I repeat: History is a clock that people use to tell their political time of day. It is a compass that they use to find themselves on the map of human geography. It also tells them where they are, and what they are. Most importantly, an understanding of history tells a people where they still must go, and what they still must be.

Early white American historians did not accord African people anywhere a respectful place in their commentaries on the history of man. In the closing years of the nineteenth century, African American historians began to look at their people's history from their vantage point and their point of view. Dr. Benjamin Quarles observed that "as early as 1883 this desire to bring to public attention the untapped material on the Negro prompted George Washington Williams to publish his two-volume History of the Negro Race in America From 1619 to 1880."

The first formally trained African American historian was W.E.B. DuBois, whose doctoral dissertation, published in 1895, The Suppression Of The African Slave Trade To The United States, 16381870, became the first title to be published in the Harvard Historical Studies.

It was with Carter G. Woodson, another Ph.D., that African world history took a great leap forward and found a defender who could document his claims. Woodson was convinced that unless something was done to rescue the Black man from history's oversight, he would become a "negligible factor in the thought of the world;" Woodson, in 1915, founded the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History

Woodson believed that there was no such thing as, "Negro History." He said what was called "Negro History" was only a missing segment of world history. He devoted the greater portion of his life to restoring this segment.

Africa came into the Mediterranean world mainly through Greece, which had been under African influence; and then Africa was cut off from the melting pot by the turmoil among the Europeans and the religious conquests incident to the rise of Islam. Africa, prior to these events, had developed its history and civilization, indigenous to its people and lands. Africa came back into the general picture of
history through the penetration of North Africa, West Africa and the Sudan by the Arabs. European and American slave traders next ravaged the continent. The imperialist colonizers and missionaries finally entered the scene and prevailed until the recent re-emergence of independent African nations.

Contrary to a misconception which still prevails, the Africans were familiar with literature and art for many years before their contact with the Western World. Before the breaking-up of the social structure of the West African states of Ghana, Mali and Songhay, and the internal strife and chaos that made the slave trade possible, the forefathers of the Africans who eventually became slaves in the United States lived in a society where university life was fairly common and scholars were held in reverence.

To understand fully any aspect of African American life, one must realize that the African American is not without a cultural past, although he was many generations removed from it before his achievements in American literature and art commanded any appreciable attention.

Africana or Black History should be taught every day, not only in the schools, but also in the home. African History Month should be every month. We need to learn about all the African people of the world, including those who live in Asia and the islands of the Pacifi.

In the twenty-first century there will be over one billion African people in the world. We are tomorrow's people. But, of course, we were yesterday's people too. With an understanding of our new importance we can change the world, if first we change ourselves.

“Man Know Thy Own Self”

WHO WERE THE ANCIENT INDIGENOUS AFRICANS OF KIMIT (EGYPT OR SAIS)?
THE ROMITI

Dr. Yosef ben-Jochannan

Africa; The Mother of Western Civilization, 1971

Herodotus, in the year c450 BCE, reminded his fellow Greek citizens. that he was taught by Egyptian and other African priests of the Mysteries System. They had already plotted and calculated the course of the Triangle and its seven (7) Pole Star; and besides this they had also recorded the moment of the sun's activity to the point where they noticed that it had..

"SET WHERE IT NOW RISES, AND RISEN TWICE WHERE IT NOW SETS," etc.

Due to this disclosure by Herodotus, and as other Greek citizens before and after him received similar information in their studies under African priests (professors) in Africa and elsewhere, it became possible for men such as Drayson to figure out the Egyptian Priests' calculations revealing that ...

" ...the sun revolves around a center just as the earth revolves around the sun, at the rate of travel equivalent to 40 miles per second, traveling through space 33,000,000,000,000,000 miles in performing its one year cycle."

This Stellar PHOTOGRAPHY, which the Africans of the Nile Valleys and Great Lakes had already developed before the dawn of the birth of the first Haribu -Abraham, much less before the birth of Jesus Christ of the Christians, provided further fundamentals for European (first the Greeks and then the Romans) and European-

It should be note that Herodotus was a native son of Ionia, which was at the time of his birth a colony of Kimit(Sais or Egypt). Ionia was located in the area where sections of the present states of Jordan, Israel, and Syria now occupy.

American ASTRONOMY to the point where "modern" man can today project himself in "HEAVENLY-BOUND BODIES" which the Africans of the world of antiquity calculated would take place and noted in their works, as shown in the BOOK OF THE DEAD and other major English translations of papyri and temple structures inscriptions.

All of these have added to the knowledge of so-called "MODERN MAN" in his reach for the OUTER WORLD (Nether World), which he could not have accomplish were it not for said Africans whose descendants are today still serving as slaves for Europeans and European-Americans (recipients of the SECRETS OF THE MYSTERIES of the Nile Valleys and Great Lakes indigenous peoples.

The mere fact that European and European-American educators have separated learning into "SECULAR" and "RELIGIOUS," as if one is independent of the other, is no reason to believe such was the case with respect to the Africans' High-Cultures of antiquity (ancient) or contemporary times. For it is this very same attempt at departmentalizing and sectionalizing Nile Valley and Great Lakes African High-Cultures (civilizations) by European and European-American educators that caused Africans of the north and east to be labeled "CAUCASIANS, CAUCASOIDS, HAMITES" and "SEMITES," etc.; whereas those to the south of an imaginary geo-political boundary at the southern reaches of the Sahara (Great Desert) are called "NEGROES, BANTUS, HOTTENTOTS, BUSHMEN," and a host of other names which these Africans have never authorized to be used in regards ~o themselves. Equally, it is because of the sectionalizing and departmentalizing that the Greeks were able to remove certain disciplines, especially the so-called "Greek Philosophy," and claim them as their own creative genius and development; but professor George G.M. James designated "GREEK PHILOSOPHY" as nothing more than a "STOLEN LEGACY" in his book bearing the same name.

A greater in-depth study of other major "religious" and "secular" signs and symbols of the ancient Africans of the Niles and Great Lakes High-Cultures could have been entered into at this juncture. However, this was accomplished in another volume entitled THE ORIGIN OF RELIGION AS A WAY OF LIFE. Never-the-less the student should closely examine AFRICAN ORIGINS OF THE MAJOR "WESTERN RELIGIONS," by your own professor, and other works referred to therein, along with those cited in this volume, in order to grasp the full meaning of the theft of African origins and their eventual plagierization and relabeling by European and European-American educators and others who call themselves "MEMBERS OF THE CLERGY" and/ or "THEOLOGIANS. "

One need not worry about the so-called "SECRETS OF FREE-MASONRY" revealed herein, all of which are in fact detailed in the Hebrew HOLY TORAH and Christian Bible (New Testament) for anyone to read and observe. Yet, without works such as the BOOK OF THE DEAD, by Sir Ernest A. Wallis Budge; STOLEN LEGACY, by G. G.M. James; SIGNS AND SYMBOLS OF PRIMORDIAL MAN, by Dr. Albert C. Churchward; ANACALYPSIS (2 vols.), by Sir Godfrey Higgins; THE GOLDEN BOUGH, by Sir James Frazier; RUINS OF EMPIRES, by C. F. Volney, and a host of others to periodically consult and translate into 20^th century C.E. understanding with respect to the teachings herein there would be more than enough reasons for the masses of people to remain ignorant of them.

The science of NUMEROLOGY, as practiced by the Africans of Kimit before the arrival of the first European in central Africa to learn its rudiments, was fundamentally a religious development- but only in the sense of the usage of the word "RELIGION" in European-American context. Thus: The major factor which one has to overcome in order to truly comprehend the wealth of knowledge that is the African peoples' (everywhere) heritage is RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY, and more specifically the use of the term "HEATHEN" with regards to anything African which does not constitute what Judaeo-Christian or Muslim (Moslem) theologians (all of them conveniently forgetting that their own religious faith would not exist were it not for the fundamentals they stole from the same "Heathen" Africans) dictate to be GODLY or KOSHER and endorsed with their own SEAL OF GOOD RELIGION AND APPROVED THEOLOGY.

RELIGION that was not the Western-type (European and European-American) of organized capitalistic institutions serving as arms of national political entities, as observed by the student at this juncture, was responsible for all learning before the control of Rome over Christendom around 3l C.E. when Emperor Constantine "the great" became ruler of the Roman Empire of the East and West after having denuded himself of his own "DEVINE" significance. It is before this period that the STOLEN SECRETS were looted from the Grand Lodge of Luxor, other subordinate Lodges (universities) and libraries by Aristotle and company, and before them by Ionians and Persians who entered Greece (Pyrrhus) as teachers from their homelands (Egyptian colonies at the time).

If these basically fundamental factors revealed so far are constantly kept in mind, the students of AFRICAN, AFRICAN-AMERICAN and AFRICAN-CARIBBEAN history, or of any other AFRICAN PEOPLE THE WORLD OVER, cannot fail but find in their further researches that MANDKIND AS A WHOLE ORIGINATED FROM A COMMON AFRICAN ANCESTOR and branched out from someplace around the African Great Lakes region of Central East and West Africa. And the High-Cultures of the White and Blue Nile Valleys, as well as the Atbara River Valley, only reached their zenith in Kush, Puanit, Nubia or Merowe, and Kimit to the north; and Zimbabwe, Swazi to the south; and Ghana, Melle (Mali), and Songhai (Songhay), etc., to the west because of the CREATIVE GENIUS AND RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT (both secular-material and spiritual) of people whom the so-called "Western man" or "modern man" (Light and Dark-Skinned Caucasian) of today still insultingly label "PYGMIES" while knowing too well that they are the TWA peoples; or "BUSHMEN" and "HOTTENTOTS," whom they know are KHOISAN peoples; and even "BANTUS" and "NEGROES" which they know are the same as all other African peoples regardless of which group has THIN or THICK LIPS, FRIZZLY or WOOLEN HAIR, POINTED or FLAT NOSE, BLACK or BROWN BURNT SKIN, or a combination of all of these physical traits which so-cailed "modern educators" have labeled "RACES OF MANKIND" in their racism to establish their "LIGHT-SKINNED CAUCASIANS" as the choice selection of God, as a sort of "CHOOSEN PEOPLE OF JEHOVAH"  which the Haribus (Palestinians, Israelites, Jews, etc.) perpetuated in one of the earliest presentation of RACISM and RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY recorded in human history. (See Hebrew HOLY TORAH or Christian OLD TESTAMENT).

The culmination of all that have been revealed in the previous chapters obviously relate directly to the research made in this chapter as to. its origin. This is especially TRUE whether one is intellectualizing from an Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Greek or Judaeo-Christian (European and European-American-style) foundation, as everyone of these nomenclatures had their origin in ALKEBU-LAN (which the Greeks and Romans renamed "Africa" ) by indigenous peoples whom the "FATHER OF EUROPEAN HISTORY -Herodotus described in his HISTORIES, Book II.. in the following manner:

"THE COLCHIANS, EGYPTIANS AND ETHIOPIANS HAVE THICK LIPS, BROAD NOSES, WOOLY HAIR, AND THEY ARE BURNT OF SKIN."...

These ancient indigenous Africans ("Blacks, Negroes, Bantus" or whatever) from the dawn of the art of writing wrote on interior walls of their pyramids and on their papyri the famous words of this chapter's conclusion...

"MAN KNOW THYSELF"

Paraphrased: African people know yourself and your glorious heritage from your "MOTHERLAND -ALKEBU-LAN.

It is utterly impossible to understand why European and European-American "educators" would wonder about the physiognomy of the ancient Ethiopians and Egyptians in view of the abundance of available data within their possession, most of which they illegally inherited from their ancestors who were pirates - called "discoverers" and "explorers, " or slavers- called "entrepreneurs."

This fact is further accentuated when one considers that as early as the fifth (5th)-century before the Christian era (BCE or BC) Herodotus --the Ionian (who became a Greek citizen after receiving his education in Kimit (Egypt)- made the people of Europe aware of the general indigenous population of north and northeast Africans physical characteristics and colour of pigment. If these truths can be properly observed without the general racist obsession that afflicted European and European-American thinking in their Neqrophobia then, and only then, will it be possible to understand why the ancient Europeans (Greeks and Romans) of Herodotus' era called the indigenous Africans they encountered "ETHIOPIANS" --literally "BLACKS."

Professor Gaston Maspero, Albert Churchward M.D., and Sir Ernest A. Wallis Budge 3(called by many --"the most noted anthropologists and -paleontologists of all times" ) in their respective works have, without a shadow of doubt, articulated the above facts I have brought so far to your attention. Specifically Dr. Churchward in his ethnographical map shown on page 72 of this book, which has been supported by paleontologists from all over the world before colour preejudice became the established way-with-all it now is, has graphically demonstrated the unity and oneness of the people the ancient Romans and Greeks (European ancestors of the "modern Caucasians") identified and designated "ETHIOPIANS." It must be noted, however, that the word "ETHIOPIANS" (Blacks) came from the root --"ETHIOPIA" (the nation) or the African "ITHIOP;" and that this was originally used by the ancients of Europe to identify the entire continent now called "AFRICA," which the indigenous peoples had given the name "ALKEBU-LAN." Because of these facts, it is exceedingly strange that the United States of America's most distinguished Egyptologist of all times, Professor James Henry Breasted, Ph.D., equivocated over the same set of facts about the "Negroness" of certain Africans which his forerunners found no reason to be protective of; this being inexcusable even when one takes into account the racist nature of the University of Chicago, Illinois (as most universities and other institutions of higher-learning) department of Oriental Studies he established and developed.

Why is it necessary to specifically cite the late professor Breasted's works, especially his HISTORY OF EGYPT, and, THE DAWN OF CIVILIZATION" Because he, being "the foremost" of the European-American "Egyptologists," was most responsible for perpetuating the "Semitic" and "Caucasian" myth with respect to the indigenous "Ethiopians, Blacks, Negroes, Coloureds," or even "Niggers", of north Africa being of a different "race" than those of "Africans South of the Sahara." Of course professor Breasted astutely covered himself in the use of the quotation marks in most cases where he had occasion to mention the alleged differences between the "race" of the Egyptians, Nubians, Cushites (Ethiopians), Numidians, Carthagenians, Congolese, Puanits (Punts), Gandese, and other Africans. One can readily see the continued effects of the Breasted Negromania in the latest work by Frank M. Snowdon, Jr., Chairman of the Classics Department at Howard University, Washington, D.C., entitled, BLACKS IN ANTIQUITY, with the sub-title - "Ethiopians in the Greco-Roman Experience," published by the Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1970.

In Mr. Snowden's work, which I wholeheartedly endorse with respect to historical information and exposure of certain truth hithertofore suppressed by European-American educators, there are to many references as to the allegedly different racial composition of the Ethiopians of Egypt and those of the other parts of the continent of Africa (Alkebu-lan). He, too, belatedly hedged and twisted in the very manner and fashion in order to avoid presenting a picture of the Egyptians (Ethiopians) being of the same "race" as all other so-called "Negroes" of today. He also failed to notice that he did not equally try to show that the Greeks and Romans were not uniformly "Caucasian" in their appearance either; yet, he had no problem in calling all of them "Caucasians."

Mr. Snowden, even though trying to be impartial (whatever this is) in his great contribution to African, African-American and African-Caribbean Studies. so-called "Black Studies," nevertheless could not escape the taboos that permeated the national racist educational institutions and their teaching.. with respect to Caucasianism and Negroism in these United States of America. from which we, everyone of us, developed our point of reference with regards to the emotional semantics of the verb -- "RACE." He, in my opinion, found it extraordinarily necessary to portray the measurements of nose, lips, and whatever else, to designate types of Ethiopians; when, in fact, the ancients made no such distinctions. The distinction the ancients made, he very adequately cited when he quoted their reference that precisely dealt with the "Ethiopians' color" in terms of they being that "much ;darker than Asians." Thus, he stated on page 109:

Further, if Diodorus' account of Ethiopians who lived near the Nile  is derived from Agatharchides, he may be recording a Ptolemaic description of the "pure" Negro". The majority of Nile-dwelling Ethiopians, according to Diodorus, were black, flat-nosed, and ulotrichous.

But, what is a "pure Negro" or "pure Caucasian"? At what point did either begin? And, where did they originate?

It is impossible to expect that the same professor, who have for generations assisted in the suppression of African peoples' history and culture, especially with regards to the education of the earliest Europeans by Africans, would have changed their color like chameleons do.

Now that many of the Africans (Ethiopians or Black people) have uncovered much of the data in the timely work of Mr. Snowden. The United States of America's institutions of higher-learning, regardless if Black or White controlled, Anglo-Saxon Judaeo-Christian and Greek-centric as they are, equally make it appear impossible for any approved works containing the endorsement of such institutions' trustees not to maintain the status quo of the "superiority" of the European or "Caucasian (White) race" over the African or "Negro (Black) race," and all other "races." It is because of the presentation of the Ethiopians' (Blacks) history in the manner, such as we find in professor Breasted's and Gerald Massey's works, which compel many Africans and African-Americans to maintain that European-Americans cannot teach "Black Studies Courses" to the satisfaction of people of African origin. Certainly anyone can remember dates and events, and then prattle them off before students who may be less aware of their occurrence. But, it is the interpretation of said data which makes the major difference between the African-American and the European-American instructors with respect to "Black Studies" or "White Studies", the latter of which we (Black people) must all submit ourself_from the very first day of our educational experience, whether public or private, religious or secular.

When will it be that the Africans' contributions to the Europeans, and the world in general, would not have to be prefixed by the racist terms --"SEMITIC" and "HAMITIC," or even "CAUCASIAN;" words that were created specifically to minimize, and in most cases deny, the Africans (Ethiopians) role in world history: Is it so damaging to European-Americans ego or psyche that they cannot accept their African cultural heritage ever being directed by people described by Herodous, but can accept an "ape-like ancestor" instead:  At least, they should be able to note that the Egyptian-type they are willing to accept as their ancestors only differs to the so-called "Negroes" and "Bantus" in variations of darkness and lightness; all of which are only shades of black. The other extremes are only with respect to language construction and religion; never-the-less generally having the same Nile Valleys and Great Lakes cultural root-base.

It is unfortunate for the European-Americans that they were not satisfied with NEANDERTHAL MAN. If they were, and would have stopped at that point, then no problem of claiming BOSKOP MAN, ZIMBABWE (Rhodesia) MAN, BROKEN HILL MAN, ZINJANTHROPUS boisie, and other African fossil-man, in the center and southern parts of Alkebu-lan (Africa). But, in trying to establish their superiority, without leaving any trace or doubt of same, they have continuously unearthed truths that show themselves to be relatively recent in time of culture; the end result being their having to claim many of their so-called "Negro, Bantu, Pygmy, Bushman", and "Hottentot" brothers and sisters, and of course many of the "inferiors" of Asia also; especially the so-called "Indo-European Aryans." Even Adolph Hitter of Nazis Germany found it impossible to have his "pure Aryan race" without adopting some of the Asian "inferiors."

These non-Caucasians, both of Africa and Asia, of yellow, brown and black skin, have the historic background into antiquity that surpassed the Homeric and Greco-Roman experience of which Mr. Snowden wrote in his book, BLACKS IN ANTIQUITY...etc. It is incumbent upon African-American scholars of Black Studies programs to do much more research; to write beyond the scope of the so-called "New Left Revolution;" and interpret their own history and experience in terms ot: their own values of "right" and "wrong;" and, of course, criticize all of the works relating to the African peoples and their descendants the world over. This would, definitely, require that such scholars place before their thrust for academic tenure in the various colleges, the quality of the data they desire to disseminate to their younger Black brothers and sisters, also those less fortunate in educational skills; and above all, publish their own works.

So far I have been unable to observe in the so-called "Black Studies Courses" around at most campuses --white or black --material information beyond the rhetoric of instant revolution; no priority being given the historical achievements of the Africans and their descendants. Yet, those who have distracted young African-Americans from this latter course of their heritage have been busy doing extra-time work writing and teaching about the history of the so-called "Negro." However, would there have been any need for "cultural" or "political revolution" today if historical records of the Africans' experience over the world were not kept; records of events passed, but relevant to the African peoples who were brought to the "Western World" by force, and those who came as explorers before the arrival of the European to the shores of either North or South America?

Returning to professor Gaston Maspero's work, THE DAWN OF CIVILIZATION: EGYPY AND CHALDEA, published by the Society For Promoting Christian Knowledge, London, England, 1901 (as translated by M. L. McClure, member of the Committee of the Egypt Exploration Fund), Fourth Edition, page 398; he stated:

"...the House of the Books" was doubtless, in the first place, a depository of official documents..., etc.

In the same paragraph he also stated that:

...it contained also, however, literary works, many of which even at this early date were already old, prayers drawn up during the first dynasties, devout poetry belonging to times  prior to the misty personage called mini-hymns to the gods of light, formulae of black magic, collections of mystical works, such as the Book of the Dead and the "Ritual of the Tomb;"- scientific treaties on medicine, geometry, mathematics, and astronomy; manual of practical morals; and lastly, romance, or those marvelous stories which preceded the romanceamong Oriental Peoples.

To the average student today in BLACK STUDIES, equally to those in WHITE STUDIES, the above "facts" are confusing in many of the following respects:

a) The Egyptians were not known to have had "short stories" or" novels; ..

b) "romance stories.. were "only written by Orientals in ancient times; ..

c) "magic is a heathen development" of the Africans south of the Sahara.

Both Black and White students were, and still are, taught these lies from elementary grades through their encounter with institutions of higher-learning. Never-the-less, even African-American (Black) professors of history, on the whole, do not challenge these age-old "WHITE LIES;" they, being too busy in their involvement with revolutionary rhetoric of the THIRD WORLD before they concentrate on revolutionizing their own mind and culture.

These inconsistencies by "educators" forces one to query if the so-called "THIRD REVOLUTION" introduced to African-American students on campuses is not an attempt by the so-called "NEW LEFT, and their "OLD LEFT" financiers, to deter Blacks from their African heritage and independent political answer to meet their own particularized problems within the United States of America. I find it, also, a willful attempt to distract the Africans from a possible, natural and most desirable political affiliation with their brothers and sisters in the Caribbean and Africa towards an inter-continental brotherhood of African peoples. Strange as it is, equally, that most of the latest of the so-called Black converts to the "New Left" found "cultural nationalism" offensive when young African-Americans show admiration for their own brother and hero --Marcus Moziah Garvey, but ask them to revere Karl Marx Mao Tu Tsung and Che Guevera. However, it must be understood, I am not saying that it is inconsistent for an African-American to be a "New Left" supporter and at the same time giving some devotion towards his African heritage.

What I am saying, is; everyone of their European-American and Asian-American co-leftist revolutionist, whether they were formerly attached to Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, or any other religious persuasion, have received their won indoctrination in their own cultural heritage and religion while they were still children in their home or 'religious institutions; and, of course the European-Americans and Asian-Americans were forced to study European and European-American history and culture --"White Studies" or "White Power" --the first day they entered public or private school, parochial or secular, in everyone of the States of the United States of America.

In examining the map presented to you; what kind of superficial or material barrier can you discover which the ancient peoples of Alkebu-lan (Africa) did not know existed before the arrival of the European and European-American "educators" that discovered them thousands of years later? Does it indicate that there was any kind of racial, religious, or cultural barrier between the various Africans to prevent their amalgamation with each other; or that there were "Semites of Egypt, Negroes of Nubia," or "Hamites of Puanit" (Punt)? See page 133 of BLACK MAN OF THE NILE for map.

Hannibal Barca-Black Military Genius

 

The Carthaginians, fearing Rome's expansion and her new power, invaded Spain anew under the leadership of General Hannibal Barca (who was the son of an equally famous father -the commander of Carthaginian forces during the First Punic Wars -General Hamiclair Barca -in 238 BCE). At this time in his life the younger Hannibal was only a mere twenty-four (24) years of age, having been born of both indigenous African parents in the year 262 BCE not 247 BCE. He was not of African-Asian stock. His father and mother were indigenous African stock

What did Rome’s expansion mean to  the North Africans during these periods, particularly to the Carthaginians? It meant that their eminent invasion from the Roman Empire was but a matter of time. This was obvious because Sicily, which is a natural geographic part of the Roman peninsula, was at the time under the colonial of Carthage. Carthage at this period had become the most feared nation in all of North Africa; just as Rome was equally feared in all of Europe. Of course Pyrrhus(Greece) also remained a natural challenge to young Rome. Yet, Carthage sent their fleet to help Rome against Greece, which had held an enclave on Italy's East Coast on the Adriatic Sea, after the disastrous defeat of Pyrrhus (Greece), took on its victims' cultural, political, and commercial characteristics. The latter development forced Rome to challenge Carthage for mastery of the Mediterranean commercial trade around the Tryrrhenia Sea. The area involved formed a triangular enclosure of the Mediterranean Sea that embraced both Rome and Carthage, the same triangle being the area that dominated Mediterranean trade.

With the fast growing commercial expansion of Carthage on the North African coast, from the frontiers of the Greek City of Cyrene westward to the Ethiopian Ocean. Carthage had become the dominant power of the "known world". As a direct result of said power, Carthage began to expand her empire to satisfy her trade needs. The following chronology deals with the periods and events of Carthage's expansion, contraction, and defeat at the hands of the Romans and Numidians (fellow Africans of North Africa).

Carthage, in 600 BCE had established, after annexing part of southern Spain, trading posts from the silver mines it confiscated from the Spaniards. It also took over British trading interests with Spain and commanded the strait of the pillar of Hercules (Strait of Gibraltar). The strait and the ports of southern Spain were closed by blockade to all shipping, except Carthaginian. All ships not having Carthaginian clearance were rammed by her warships and sunk. Carthage also maintained a panish zone control and "sphere of influence" until 500 BCE, at which time Rome signed a treaty with Carthage, which excluded Rome's trading rights in the Carthaginian area. The treaty regulations finally infuriated the Roman Senate: for Roman merchant ships passing the Straits of Messing to the City of Messina were forced to receive Carthaginian clearance. The Mediterranean Sea had become, in fact, a kind of "CARTHAGINIAN LAKE". And Rome had also feared the Carthaginians' closing of the "Strait".

Rome attacked Carthage in 264 BCE This was the beginning of the Sicilian War: the attack had created an insurrection in Carthaginian controlled Sicily. Sicily was a colony of Carthage at that time. The Carthaginian military garrison from Sicily followed the attack and invaded Rome in the latter part of 264 BCE and occupied Messina (cloose to Rome). These indigenous Africans had, for the first time, invaded southwestern Europe and Polybius, HISTORY, 400 to 370 BC It must be noted that the Carthaginians were not Phoenicians, as contended by many European and European-American historians. It would be implied by the term "Punic Wars" since "Punic" is the Latin word for "Phoenicia".

Between 242 and 241 BCE somewhat of an uneasy peace ensued between Carthage and Rome. This was because the Romans had forced certain restrictions on Carthage after the Africans were defeated. For example: The Romans compelled the Carthaginians to surrender the entire island of Sicily and neighboring islands to Rome, and to pay an almost impossible sum of 3,200 talents (over three and one/half million dollars -$3,500,000) within a period of ten (10) years (by 231 BCE). Thus, after more than twenty-three (23) years of fighting (from 259 BCE to 241 BCE) the first battles of the struggle between Carthage and Rome were concluded. This victory gave Rome its first colony outside the Italian Peninsula. It was the beginning of a series of wars that were later called the "FIRST PUNIC WARS". The Romans invaded and annexed Corsica and Sardinia in 238 BCE, only a scant three (3) years after they had made a peace treaty with Carthage covering Mediterranean area limitations,

[Note: "Punic" is the Latin word for Phoenician, the name the Romans called the mixed African-Asian peoples of Khart Haddas, which they called Carthage. One has to remember that the original group of Asians in the area came from Phoenicia and amalgamated with the hundreds of thousands of indigenous Africans-the so-called "Negroes" and "Bantus", they met there. The Asians numbered less than 200 to 300 men, women, and children- the vast majority were sailors. However, in less than l00 years after their arrival, the Phoenicians and the Khart Haddans had all but developed one common African physical characteristic, as the Africans dominated the Asians. By any sense of United States of America's "RACIAL STANDARDS ", and according to "Western anthropology", the indigenous Carthaginians would have had to be classified as Blacks -African-Americans- who are called nefariously "NEGROES".]

which did not include these two territories (island outposts). But, the Romans had also seized Gaul (France) and the Po Valley. Roman power then extended from the Alps Mountain range at the north and the entire Italian Peninsula down to the Mediterranean Sea at the south.

General Hannibal Barca launched, in 220 or 218 BCE, the first battle of the Second Punic Wars when Roman and Carthaginian forces clashed along the Spanish-Roman borders. The young African general marched with a combined force of only seventy thousand (70,000) men and a few hundred elephants against Rome's more than three hundred thousand (300,000) man army. He had started in a direction that ran along the East Coast of Spain, from where he planned to cross Gaul (France) at the south, and invade Italy from the north. Some "Western historians", in order to make the Romans appear superior to the Carthaginians, raised this figure to more than 300,000 men.

After one year of exhaustive preparations (from 217 to 216BCE) the young general, Hannibal Barca, was ready for the big push into the heart of Rome after having pacified all of the Roman armies thrust against him while he was in the Po valley preparing for the push. Amongst the defeated was the Roman's most honored general, Consul Flaminius. The capture of his fortresses and the Apennines was a blessing that came to Hannibal. Hannibal followed the defeat of Flaminius by systematically cutting the Roman legions to pieces at the shores of Lake Trasimeno. The Roman army suffered its most humiliating defeat in this battle. The Consul was himself killed in the battle. Hannibal was now only a few days from the "gates of the Roman fortresses at Rome". But the general's army was too weak to begin the

siege of Rome. He, therefore, fought a few other battles to create some diversionary moves at inducing major desertions from the Romans to his side and at the same instance giving his men and animals (elephants) the much-needed chance to recuperate while expected supplies from Spain could arrive for the big push ahead.

Rome got its first real dictator in 217 B.C.E.17when the Roman Senate appointed Fabius "MARSHALL OF ALL FORCES" to stop the onslaught of the African invaders in northern Italy under the command of General Hannibal Barca. Fabius engaged Hannibal in a few small-delaying skirmishes (battles). However, in the meantime, Rome was also rebuilding her army and extending her naval fleet. The people of Rome, angry with the tactics of Fabius

who had been defeated battle after battle, began to call him "CUNTATOR" (the laggard).

By the year 216 BCE the Roman Consuls had organized a new and modern army of more than two-hundred thousand (200,000) men from allover their colonies, an army that was more than four (4) times the size of the remnant army of General Hannibal Barca that stood at the "GATES OF ROME". The Romans had taken advantage of the fact that Hannibal could not secure supplies or replacements for his soldiers. On the other hand, the Romans were able to

secure as many men as they were capable of training, and needed this was the sole ace in the hold, but they were also fortunate in having the strategic advantage of being on their own home territory. Added to this was the fact that the African invaders were completely surrounded by hostile captives from the various battles Hannibal was forced to engage his army in on the way into northern Italy during his crossing of the Alps. Thus in 216 BCE. Rome was able to hurl her newly rebuilt and modernized army of the north, of seventy thousand (70,000) men, against the Africans who had by this time only thirty-thousand (30,000) men - many of whom were ill-trained Europeans captured in the Alps and along the Po Valley. This started the "BATTLE FOR CANNAE" at the gates of Rome.

During the Battle for Cannae in 216 BCE General Hannibal Barca's cavalry chased the Roman horsemen into hasty retreat. This caused the main divisions of the Roman army to be caught in the center of the two main columns of the Carthaginians on each side, with their murderous elephant-equipped cavalry at the rear. The general had held two units of the Carthaginian reserves, his crack sharpshooters, in the rear of the entire battle scene.

These two African "FORCES OF DEATH", as they were called by the Romans who reported the battle events, closed in on approximately fifty-five thousand (55,000) Roman soldiers caught in the trap. By nightfall of the same day the Africans closed in and every last Roman soldier in the trap was annihilated. Historians of this era in history have claimed that...

"ROMAN BLOOD FLOWED LIKE A RIVER...

during this battle, as the Africans slaughtered their trapped adversaries.

The Africans' humiliating defeat of the Roman army (considered the best in the world at that time) forced many nations along both sides of the Mediterranean Sea into treaty alliances with the Africans of Carthage. It was just this reaction that forced Macedonia in the same year- 216 BCE -to sign a "TREATYOF ALLIANCE" with Carthage.

General Hannibal Barca (reputedly "the greatest general and military strategist of all times"), at the age of thirty (3O),

[This same strategy was employed in the l8th century CE by the African general, Tchaka, of the Zulu nation of the Monomotapa Empire against the invading colonialist slavers of Europe.]

had made Carthage the greatest single military power allover the Planet Earth -the "KNOWN WORLD". He had defeated "world's greatest military power". Rome, and had taken the honor for the Africans of Carthage. He had destroyed the Roman armies within less than two (2) short years (216-214 BCE). The Africans were "masters of the Mediterranean world", and now also "masters of the northern Italy, all the areas of the Alpine Pass, all of the Iberian Peninsula, and all of the western islands of the Mediterranean Sea."

General Hannibal Barca had established his mastery as a statesman over northern Italy by bringing in centralized authority over the area he controlled, something that area had not known before and in his military genius and command, caused the allies of Rome to desert in panic during 213 BCE.

The first to desert to Hannibal were the military leaders of northern Italy followed by many Greek city-states. Even Syracuse, in Sicily, forsook Rome and joined the general. Only one Roman (Latin) State in southern Italy remained in and truth loyal to Rome. That was Central Italy, which became the core of Roman nationalism and resistance. But the Roman Senators, all of them, stood their ground after the humiliating defeat and the tail turning of their allies of long standing to the African invaders. But this was not the first time the Africans had defeated the Romans and other Europeans in battle. It was, however, the most humiliating of any of their defeats.

By 207 BCE, after ten (10) long years of African rule and amalgamation of the African soldiers with the European women of the Iberian Peninsula and northern Italy, General Barca's hard core of his best African (Carthaginian) soldiers started to dwindle from many causes. The most damaging reason being his inability to secure reinforcements from Africa.20 As such, he was forced to use mainly deserters and other captured European soldiers to supplement his African "crack-shot" elite troops. But the Europeans could not take the rigorous training with the elephants and other military techniques that were totally foreign to them and there were not sufficient African troops to spare for the sole purpose of training the Europeans, nor sufficient time in which to accomplish such a feat.

The failure of the general to obtain sufficiently trained troops among the northern Italians forced him to dispatch his brother, Hasdrubal Barca, to Iberia (Spain) to gather Carthaginian troops holding that colony and Iberians whom they had time to train to relieve his men of the northern Italian frontier. Hasdrubal set forth to return to his brother the same year with the relief column to link up with the battle weary Carthaginians, only to march directly between a Roman army twice the size of his relief column on both sides of a mountain pass in Iberia. The Romans swooped down upon the Spaniards and Africans and annihilated each and every man, including Hasdrubal. This defeat was the turning point of the African's rule over Roman territory in northern Italy. It was also the beginning of the end to African rule in all of Europe until 711 CE, at which time the African-Moors invaded and annexed Spain and parts of southern France under the command of General Tarikh (for whom the "ROCK OF GIBRALTAR" is named).

During the year 203 BCE the Romans finally found a hero in a general, who was born, raised and educated in Carthage. He was also trained as an officer in the Carthaginian military academy General Barca attended. This man was none other than the world-famous Scipio Nasica, the same general who had defeated the Carthaginians twice before, having been sent earlier by the Roman government to Spain to cut off the chief supply of money and men from Carthage passing through the Iberian Peninsula to Hannibal. This was possible only because General Scipio Nasica knew all of the strategic moves General Hannibal Barca had learnt in the military academy in which they were both trained in North Africa -Carthage. He was also very much aware of the fact that General Barca's supply line was disrupted to the point that his rear flank all the way back to Carthage was left unprotected.

Having convinced the Roman Senate in 203 BCE not to attack General Hannibal Barca anymore in Northern Italy but in Carthage, General Scipio Nasica was allowed to invade Carthage, which he was to do with great success. This move forced General Hannibal Barca into hurried retreat as he returned to his native Carthage. Both Generals were of indigenous African heritage.