Why do some historians go through great lengths suppress African culture & achievements?

WHAT?

New member
I was reading "A Short History of The World" last night and the writer simply states that Africa's contribution to the world has been smaller than that of any other continent, and that the "one" African civilization to have influence outside of the continent (Ancient Egyptians aka Kemites) mattered less than Sumer or the Aegean. He says that Africa has had little to offer the world expect in natural resources...

I know this isn't true, but why do some historians go through great lengths to urge eurocentrism? Am I to believe that the African race was anonymous? And to forget countless achievements like establishing some of the first universities?--mathematicians, scientists, philosophers, etc… Greek scholars would have never dreamed of such possibilities had they not first studied for decades at schools like Waset & Karnak. Should ignore that 70,000 year old carvings of geometry have been found in the Sub-Sahara? I even read about the Great Wall of Zimbabwe and how Europeans speculated that it was built by the Portuguese, Arabs, or Chinese because "primitive" locals could not have built it... This thought later found out to be false and that the wall was built by the indigenous people of the region...

I have never thought any race to be superior than another... but I honestly believe that 400 years ago many writers and historians wanted to diminish the culture and achievements of African race to justify slavery. I mean after all it was big business... Or maybe they just want to claim such accomplishments as their own? Although the truth slowly reveals itself why do you think Africa's contribution to the world is overlooked? I'm Caucasian btw.
 
Back
Top