MischievousMonkey
Gor bu dëgër
I honestly think it's one of the best video on YouTube. It's an 22 min extract (cut in two parts) from a 4 hour conference Pr Theophile Obenga gave in 2012 in Kinshasa.
The main reason is because it encompasses so precisely what it is to do history, or any science for that matter, in a world where psychological biases inherited from white supremacy taint the whole practice.
Professor Theophile Obenga is a colossus of African history. Egyptologist, linguist, historian, philosopher, speaking many language amongst which ancient ones, he is the last alive disciple of Cheikh Anta Diop. The definition of an OG, still giving gems to this day to the youth.
In this video (well these videos, I made it a two-parter since youtube is on that bs), he describes the 1974 Cairo Colloquium.
He talks at lengths of the ferocious adversity and racism him and Cheikh Anta Diop for their work. The crusade part of the so-called "objective" scientific world led against them, labeling them as Afrocentrists and rallying against their work. The same reactionary forces that animate the "we wuz kangs" side of the internet where non-black who pretend to be rational go to incredible lows when confronted with facts.
This adversity didn't stop to bad faith arguments and insults since he also describes, in the video, falsification of evidence.
So considered as one of the leading lights of African history, he went through it. Him and Cheikh Anta Diop were hardened by immense opposition from their days as students in french colleges to international conferences, books written against them, etc.
Proof is in the pudding: check how he is described on his wikipedia page. None of the achievements, some of which he cited at the end of part 2, are mentioned. All criticism leveled against his work occupy most of the page. And he's actually labeled "afrocentrist." Lol.
That's the kind of adversity you face when you do African history in a world drugged on white supremacy/anti-blackness.
But he also talks about the posture he adopted against it all: "When it comes to African matters, if possible; we will defend them without any compromises whatsoever." OG talk right there.
Which leads me to something I wanted to discuss, a parenthesis. I see more and more often, on the Coli and elsewhere, black people, West African in particular, rejecting egyptology and Ancient Egypt under the guise of these two arguments:
1) There is much more to African history. West Africa had empires and kingdoms too that are worthy of research and investment.
2) Most black people in the world come from West Africa; the diaspora does, at least, since the Christian European transatlantic slave trade took people from West Africa. Ancient Egypt is not their history.
Both arguments often come attached with the hypothesis that "hoteps being interested in Ancient Egypt is just another way for them to flee their roots."
To address those:
First argument is obviously very true. But it is possible to chew and walk at the same time, and have interest in Ancient Egypt as well as other African civilizations and structures.
Moreover, it is pretty obvious why Ancient Egypt is the subject of so much heated discussion: it is the mother of Greek civilization, which culture still permeates the world to this day. That obviously doesn't take away from the rich history of West Africa; it only adds to it in the scope of global African history.
Leading to the second argument: if you admit Ancient Egyptian history is indeed part of African history, what reason is there for people of African descent to not be interested in it? Do you have to have direct ancestry to any African kingdom so as to have a legitimate interest in it? I NEVER see these arguments raised when people discuss Swahili history.
Moreover, it is established that multiple West African groups have roots in the Nile valley region. Same groups the diaspora come from. But that shouldn't be important.
"When it comes to African matters, if possible; we will defend them without any compromises whatsoever." If it's black/African history, then it's ours to study and cherish. Drawing borders in individual interests when it comes to the continent is nonsensical when we know that people moved around and all over, creating a genetic diversity that is today unequaled in the whole world. We don't have to put aside any part of African history, whether it'd be because weirdos are on the "we wuz kangs" wave or because it is not part of our immediate tribe.
All in all, we have to pay tribute to our OGs for they paved the way for us. As he said at the end, "we're still standing."
Another point worth noting, even if it won't pass for new today, is what he says when talking about training Black American brehs in terms of technique, science and facts. This is the same philosophy Cheikh Anta Diop preached to all African youth: "Armez-vous de science jusqu'aux dents" which translates by "Arm yourselves with science to the teeth".
Again, today it might seem granted, but it might not have been as obvious back then. I'm glad to see this wish has been respected in the most part as can attest this forum subsection.
The main reason is because it encompasses so precisely what it is to do history, or any science for that matter, in a world where psychological biases inherited from white supremacy taint the whole practice.
Professor Theophile Obenga is a colossus of African history. Egyptologist, linguist, historian, philosopher, speaking many language amongst which ancient ones, he is the last alive disciple of Cheikh Anta Diop. The definition of an OG, still giving gems to this day to the youth.
In this video (well these videos, I made it a two-parter since youtube is on that bs), he describes the 1974 Cairo Colloquium.
He talks at lengths of the ferocious adversity and racism him and Cheikh Anta Diop for their work. The crusade part of the so-called "objective" scientific world led against them, labeling them as Afrocentrists and rallying against their work. The same reactionary forces that animate the "we wuz kangs" side of the internet where non-black who pretend to be rational go to incredible lows when confronted with facts.
This adversity didn't stop to bad faith arguments and insults since he also describes, in the video, falsification of evidence.
So considered as one of the leading lights of African history, he went through it. Him and Cheikh Anta Diop were hardened by immense opposition from their days as students in french colleges to international conferences, books written against them, etc.
Proof is in the pudding: check how he is described on his wikipedia page. None of the achievements, some of which he cited at the end of part 2, are mentioned. All criticism leveled against his work occupy most of the page. And he's actually labeled "afrocentrist." Lol.
That's the kind of adversity you face when you do African history in a world drugged on white supremacy/anti-blackness.
But he also talks about the posture he adopted against it all: "When it comes to African matters, if possible; we will defend them without any compromises whatsoever." OG talk right there.
Which leads me to something I wanted to discuss, a parenthesis. I see more and more often, on the Coli and elsewhere, black people, West African in particular, rejecting egyptology and Ancient Egypt under the guise of these two arguments:
1) There is much more to African history. West Africa had empires and kingdoms too that are worthy of research and investment.
2) Most black people in the world come from West Africa; the diaspora does, at least, since the Christian European transatlantic slave trade took people from West Africa. Ancient Egypt is not their history.
Both arguments often come attached with the hypothesis that "hoteps being interested in Ancient Egypt is just another way for them to flee their roots."
To address those:
First argument is obviously very true. But it is possible to chew and walk at the same time, and have interest in Ancient Egypt as well as other African civilizations and structures.
Moreover, it is pretty obvious why Ancient Egypt is the subject of so much heated discussion: it is the mother of Greek civilization, which culture still permeates the world to this day. That obviously doesn't take away from the rich history of West Africa; it only adds to it in the scope of global African history.
Leading to the second argument: if you admit Ancient Egyptian history is indeed part of African history, what reason is there for people of African descent to not be interested in it? Do you have to have direct ancestry to any African kingdom so as to have a legitimate interest in it? I NEVER see these arguments raised when people discuss Swahili history.
Moreover, it is established that multiple West African groups have roots in the Nile valley region. Same groups the diaspora come from. But that shouldn't be important.
"When it comes to African matters, if possible; we will defend them without any compromises whatsoever." If it's black/African history, then it's ours to study and cherish. Drawing borders in individual interests when it comes to the continent is nonsensical when we know that people moved around and all over, creating a genetic diversity that is today unequaled in the whole world. We don't have to put aside any part of African history, whether it'd be because weirdos are on the "we wuz kangs" wave or because it is not part of our immediate tribe.
All in all, we have to pay tribute to our OGs for they paved the way for us. As he said at the end, "we're still standing."
Another point worth noting, even if it won't pass for new today, is what he says when talking about training Black American brehs in terms of technique, science and facts. This is the same philosophy Cheikh Anta Diop preached to all African youth: "Armez-vous de science jusqu'aux dents" which translates by "Arm yourselves with science to the teeth".
Again, today it might seem granted, but it might not have been as obvious back then. I'm glad to see this wish has been respected in the most part as can attest this forum subsection.
Last edited:
