Post by zarahan on Jan 18, 2011 23:31:51 GMT -5
Howe's book has some detailed info in it of
historical interest as to older authros and
writings on the topic, but in other ways it is a
slippery and inconsistent rant, heavy on strawman
building.
He spends a lot of time assailing "Afrocentrists"
while attempting to minimize as much as possible
the data showing the AEs were tropically adapted
Africans. By 1999, when he wrote his book, he had
the substantial cranial, limb proportion,
cultural and even initial DNA data on file. He
minimizes all, then in a veiled way, finally,
grudgingly admits the truth when he has to deal
with Keita's data.
Quote from page 132- after dozens of previous
page rants and sly minimization (he is sure to
mention Libyan and Nubian mercenaries, and Greek
immigration, for example, and Eugene Strouhal's
"5% negroes" claim, but somehow skips the
substantial aforementioned cranial, limb,
cultural and dna data).
Finally he admits it: [QUOTE:]
"No serious contemporary scholar, however,
appears to doubt that the great bulk of the
predynastic and Pharonic population was of
indigenous African origin (see, for example,
Hoffman 1991; Rice 1991)"
--S. Howe (1999) Afrocentrism: mythical pasts and
imagined homes. Verso. pg 132.
In his standard modus operandi of damming with
either faint praise or obfuscation and omission,
Howe's veiled confession above is quickly
covered by noting the work of C. Loring brace
1993. He also tries to water down Keita's data,
claiming that Keita said European Egyptology has
over a long period page accepted the Egyptians as
a mixed but largely African population. In fact,
Keita said no such thing. Indeed, Keita notes
the Aryan/Hamitic model and associated ideology
in several of his works prior to 1999.
On page 133, Howe also claims that Keita and C.L
Brace 93 are in "broad agreement". In fact they
are not. Keita's research challenges several
aspects of Brace's work, even before 1999. One
can see the slipperiness of Howe. And while
appearing to agree with Keita, he is sure to get
in a slight dig at him- putting Keita's term
Saharo-Tropical in ironic quotes.
Research since 1999 only confirms Keita's data.
-------------------------------------------
historical interest as to older authros and
writings on the topic, but in other ways it is a
slippery and inconsistent rant, heavy on strawman
building.
He spends a lot of time assailing "Afrocentrists"
while attempting to minimize as much as possible
the data showing the AEs were tropically adapted
Africans. By 1999, when he wrote his book, he had
the substantial cranial, limb proportion,
cultural and even initial DNA data on file. He
minimizes all, then in a veiled way, finally,
grudgingly admits the truth when he has to deal
with Keita's data.
Quote from page 132- after dozens of previous
page rants and sly minimization (he is sure to
mention Libyan and Nubian mercenaries, and Greek
immigration, for example, and Eugene Strouhal's
"5% negroes" claim, but somehow skips the
substantial aforementioned cranial, limb,
cultural and dna data).
Finally he admits it: [QUOTE:]
"No serious contemporary scholar, however,
appears to doubt that the great bulk of the
predynastic and Pharonic population was of
indigenous African origin (see, for example,
Hoffman 1991; Rice 1991)"
--S. Howe (1999) Afrocentrism: mythical pasts and
imagined homes. Verso. pg 132.
In his standard modus operandi of damming with
either faint praise or obfuscation and omission,
Howe's veiled confession above is quickly
covered by noting the work of C. Loring brace
1993. He also tries to water down Keita's data,
claiming that Keita said European Egyptology has
over a long period page accepted the Egyptians as
a mixed but largely African population. In fact,
Keita said no such thing. Indeed, Keita notes
the Aryan/Hamitic model and associated ideology
in several of his works prior to 1999.
On page 133, Howe also claims that Keita and C.L
Brace 93 are in "broad agreement". In fact they
are not. Keita's research challenges several
aspects of Brace's work, even before 1999. One
can see the slipperiness of Howe. And while
appearing to agree with Keita, he is sure to get
in a slight dig at him- putting Keita's term
Saharo-Tropical in ironic quotes.
Research since 1999 only confirms Keita's data.
-------------------------------------------
