 |
H O
W A R D U N I
V E R S I T Y
Faces
& Voices IV
AN ANTHOLOGY OF VERSE AND
PROSE
Pre-Columbian
Critics
Jason Johnson
They came before Columbus, right? Well, according to Ivan Van Sertima, the Olmec civilization in the pre-Columbian era in the Americas was held under the influence of Egypto-Nubians, whose presence left a deep impact on Mexican life and culture. There have been many paralleling and contrasting opinions on this subject expressed by various critics, authors, and scholars. Glyn Daniel and F.N. Boney are two critics whose opinions contradict each other’s, and lie on opposite sides of this theory.
Glyn Daniel is convinced that most books published based on archaeological findings within the past twenty years, contain misinformation that is the result of the random theories and opinions of archaeologists that cannot be supported by concrete evidence. In the article, “America B.C.”, he asserts that the popular topics of these “tragic comic and misinformed writers”1 are Stonehenge and pre-Columbian America. He believes that many of the writings of these individuals on the two topics are plagued with bogus information. In reference to one book written on pre-Columbian America, Daniel comments, “I thought that I had reached the nadir in all this speculative nonsense when I read books such as Cyrus H. Gordon’s ‘Before Columbus’; but no so, there was worse to come.”2 When criticizing the assertions made by Ivan Van Sertima that Africans entered the Americas prior to the arrival of Columbus, it becomes very apparent that Daniel’s argument may derive from a more personal deep-seated position against even the possibility of pre-Columbian, non-indigenous occupants. He asked the question, “On what does he base his assertions? A Negroid skeleton found in the Virgin Islands, which dates back to 1250 A.D.; a botanist’s discovery of African cotton in the Americas; step pyramids, bronze casting techniques, looms, the prevalence of the plumed serpent motif and, of course,
mumification”3
(As if this list is not long enough). He goes on to comment that Van Sertima was confused when he suggested that the American pyramids derived from the pyramids of Egypt. His reason for not believing this assertion is because “the American pyramids are temple platforms; the Egyptian pyramids are tombs.”4
However, he still does not give an explanation for why the pyramids could not have derived from Egypt. He also fails to comment on the numerous pieces of evidence that Van Sertima uses to make his claims, such as the Olmec’s use of the double crown, the royal flail, and the use of purple, just to name a few. Daniel concluded his article with the statement, “If one is trying to build a new ancient history of pre-Columbian America, it must be based on well-argued theories backed by indispensable facts-Professors Fell and Van Sertima give us badly argued theories based on fantasies.”5
But how can Daniel make this claim when he only speaks against two pieces of evidence that Van Sertima presents. Daniel is not successful in combating Van Sertima’s statement that, “While it is possible to find a cultural trait or a technique in one place which is similar to that in another, without any contact having taken place, there is a method by which we can examine a parallel or a series of parallels to determine with relative certainty when something is purely coincidental or whether it is strongly suggestive of contact with, and influence from outsiders.”6
A different perspective is expressed in the article “Roll, Presses, Roll: Recent Works on Black History”, by F.N. Boney. Boney refers to Van Sertima’s book, stating that it “eloquently presents the case for a powerful black influence on emerging American Indian cultures.”7
Boney acknowledged the claims that other authors have made, such a Cyrus Gordon and Barry Fell, both suggesting the presence of foreign inhabitants in America prior to the arrival of Columbus. Unlike Glyn Daniel, Boney defends Van Sertima’s claims, and acknowledges the credibility of his assertions, stating that “Van Sertima builds his case by evidence from a number of scholarly diciplines like archaeology, anthropology, serology, botany, linguistics, and history.”8
Also unlike Daniel, Boney creates an extensive list of evidence from Van Sertima’s book, in an effort to defend his position. One of these concrete examples includes the mention of the huge Negroid heads made out of basalt rock that are still in existence today.
It is evident that both of the critics were very subjective in their criticism, however, the method that Glyn Daniel used to express his views was much less convincing than Boney’s method. Granted it was easier for Boney to merely be a witness to Van Sertima’s claims, since he was already in agreement with them, Daniel did not have enough supporting evidence against Van Sertima’s claims to convincingly oppose them; he merely had a bitter argument. Van Sertima’s response to Daniel’s unsupported claims would be, “When such traits appear as an interconnected cluster, performing a single function duplicated nowhere else in the world, except where the Egyptians traveled or left their influence, then only a dogmatic conservative or a bigot can deny the possibility of both a physical contact and a cultural influence.”9
________________
1.America B.C., p.8
2. Ibid., p.12
3 America B.C. p.13
4 Ibid., p.13
5. Ibid., p.13
6 Ibid., p.13
7. Roll, Presses, Roll. p.903
8. Ibid., p.904
9. Revelations, p.29 | 