Reply to D Parusaram Maharaj
1999
By Corey Gilkes
Mr. D. Parasuram Maraj sometimes I don't know whether to pity or to treat you with contempt. Once again you, and the stalwarts of the Sanatan Dharma Maha Sabha, labour me with your childlike diatribes over the issue of African presences in ancient Asia in general and India in particular.
I really do not know where you got the notion that when Africentric scholars speak about Africans in India, they are trying to deny the Indians their history. They are not. However, you are right about one thing; they[we, if I might be so bold] are certainly bent on revising history. For a long time it has been know that most of what passes for history is a set of lies mutually agreed upon. Eurpeans and Euro-Americans, realising the immense psychological and political power of history, persistantly falsify and distort it for their own benefit. So, revision is clearly in order.
However, I do do understand your committment to jealously guarding your peoples' history - something that most Africans here are yet to do. However, when you are listing your enemies, Africentric researchers are not to be included [Afro-Saxons are fair game, though]. I would also like to implore you to thoroughly check your facts before making those irresponsible statements [and ask Ms. Marion O'Callaghan to do likewise]. Africentric research is not about engaging in self-indulging hubris but about systematic analysis of facts drawn diverse historical and scientific fields, including sometimes sources that are unquestionably racist.
So, unless you believe in the polygenetic theory of human and social evolution, come to terms with the fact that since the human species began in Africa and stayed there for thousands of years, then it stands to reason that so did civilisation. Now, that is not to take anything away from Indians at all, but no ancient or contemporary culture developed homogeneously. All civilisations enjoyed intercourse with their neighbours. That doesn't necessarily mean that those neighbouring cultures asserted cultural or physical control over them. Look at the British Isles, for example, there were African settlements in England, Scotland [which, according to Scottish historian David MacRitchie, means 'black'-land], and Ireland long before the Anglos and Saxons settled there. Their influence can be seen in the English language, folk tales, traditional dances and even architecture.That does not mean Britain was a black civilisation; we are merelylooking at an example of cultural diffusion [ironically, many English "scholars" try to paint Ancient Egypt as a white civilisation because of the presence of a few Eurasians very late in Egypt's long history].
But, since you are convinced that India developed her high-culture, explain this: how is it that many Indian - not just Hindu - deities seem to have African prototypes? How is it that many words in Sanskrit are similar to Ancient Egyptian words bearing in mind that Egypt's civilisation, including its writing system, originated in Nubia and even deeper south into Uganda.
Previous Page / Gilkes Homepage
^^ Back to top
