Scholarly Responses to Some Alleged Eurocentric Framings in European and Christian Historical Narrative

Scholarly Responses to Some Alleged Eurocentric Framings in European and Christian Historical Narrative

Some skeptics, particularly from Africa have a deep skepticism toward European historical narratives and their portrayal of global history, particularly concerning African contributions and the legacies of non-European civilizations. This article will address each accusation systematically, aiming to fact-check and evaluate them with scholarly rigor, objectivity, and evidence, while defending the integrity of scholarship and Christianity where relevant. The approach of this article will prioritize primary sources, archaeological evidence, and historical consensus, while critically examining claims and acknowledging biases where they exist. Each accusation will be highlighted, followed by an analysis grounded in evidence.

Accusation 1: European truths are "half-baked and stereotypical," particularly in rendering Septimius Severus as white despite him being "obviously a Black man."

Fact-check and analysis

Septimius Severus (145–211 CE) was a Roman emperor born in Leptis Magna, modern-day Libya. His heritage is well-documented: his father, Publius Septimius Geta, was of Libyan-Punic descent, and his mother, Fulvia Pia, came from a Roman-Italian family. Cassius Dio, a contemporary Roman historian, described Severus as "Libyan by race", indicating his North African origin. The Severan Tondo, a painting from around 200 CE, depicts Severus with a darker complexion compared to his family, which some interpret as evidence of African ancestry. However, Roman conceptions of race were not equivalent to modern racial categories. The Romans prioritized social class and citizenship over skin color, and there is no definitive evidence that Severus was of sub-Saharan African descent, as the term "Black" might imply today (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus) (https://historyhogs.com/was-septimius-severus-a-black-roman-emperor/)

The claim that Severus is consistently rendered as white in modern depictions is not entirely accurate. Many classical busts and coins portray him in the standard Roman artistic style, which was not focused on realistic racial depiction but on idealized imperial imagery. However, some modern depictions, especially in popular media, may lighten his complexion, reflecting potential Eurocentric biases in art. This does not negate the historical evidence of his North African origin, which is widely acknowledged in scholarship. The accusation overstates the extent of deliberate whitewashing but highlights a valid concern about how modern representations can obscure historical diversity. (https://historyhogs.com/was-septimius-severus-a-black-roman-emperor/)

Defense of scholarship

Historians like Anthony Birley and the archaeological record (e.g., Severan-era artifacts from Leptis Magna) affirm Severus’s North African roots without imposing modern racial categories. Scholarship strives to reconstruct his identity based on primary sources, not stereotypes, though public portrayals may sometimes lag behind academic nuance.

Accusation 2: European dictionaries cite Greek or Latin etymology instead of Kemet/Nubia/Kush/Ethiopia or other African regions.

Fact-check and analysis

The etymology in European dictionaries often traces words to Greek and Latin because these languages were foundational to the development of Western European languages, particularly through the Roman Empire’s influence and the subsequent spread of Latin in medieval Europe. For example, English, French, and Spanish derive much of their vocabulary from Latin, with Greek contributing significantly to scientific and philosophical terms. This focus reflects the linguistic history of Europe, not necessarily a deliberate erasure of African contributions.

Kemet (ancient Egypt), Nubia, Kush, and Ethiopia had sophisticated cultures with their own languages, such as Egyptian (Coptic’s ancestor) and Meroitic. However, these languages had limited direct influence on European vocabularies due to geographical and historical barriers, like the Sahara, which restricted cultural exchange (). Egyptian hieroglyphs and Meroitic scripts were not widely adopted in Europe, unlike Greek and Latin, which became lingua francas in the Mediterranean. Some Egyptian terms did influence Greek (e.g., "pharaoh" from pr-ꜥꜣ), but these are exceptions. (https://historyhogs.com/was-septimius-severus-a-black-roman-emperor/)

The accusation implies a deliberate omission of African linguistic contributions. While Eurocentric biases in early European scholarship may have underemphasized African influence, modern linguistics acknowledges cross-cultural exchanges, such as the impact of Egyptian on Greek astronomical terms. However, claiming that European dictionaries should primarily cite Kemet or Nubia ignores the historical development of European languages. 

Defense of scholarship

Linguistic scholarship relies on traceable evidence of word origins. The Oxford English Dictionary and similar works use rigorous methodologies to document etymologies, prioritizing historical attestation over ideological agendas. Efforts to include African linguistic contributions are growing, but the dominance of Greek and Latin reflects historical reality, not a conspiracy.

Accusation 3: Pythagoras’s principles were used 5,000 years before his birth, implying European theft of African knowledge.

Fact-check and analysis

Pythagoras (c. 570–495 BCE) is credited with the Pythagorean theorem (a² + b² = c²) in Western tradition, but mathematical knowledge of right triangles predates him. The accusation likely refers to ancient Egyptian mathematics, as seen in documents like the Rhind Papyrus (c. 1650 BCE), which demonstrates knowledge of geometric principles, including calculations involving right triangles. Egyptian surveyors used ropes to create 3-4-5 triangles for land measurement, suggesting practical knowledge of the theorem’s principles (David M. Burton, The History of Mathematics).

However, there is no direct evidence that Pythagoras or his school copied Egyptian texts. Greek mathematicians, including Pythagoras, likely learned from Egyptian and Babylonian traditions during travels, as Greek sources like Herodotus note cultural exchanges with Egypt. The theorem’s formal proof, as attributed to Pythagoras, is a Greek contribution, emphasizing deductive reasoning, which was less formalized in Egyptian mathematics.

The claim that these principles were used 5,000 years before Pythagoras (c. 5570 BCE) is inaccurate, as this predates known Egyptian mathematical records by millennia. The accusation reflects a broader concern about Greek appropriation of African knowledge, which has some basis but is overstated without evidence of direct plagiarism.

Defense of Scholarship

Historians of mathematics, like those studying the Rhind Papyrus, acknowledge Egyptian contributions while recognizing Greek advancements in formalizing geometry. Scholarship does not deny cross-cultural influences but requires evidence to assert direct theft, which is lacking here.

Accusation 4: Europeans whitewashed patents owned by Black individuals.

Fact-check and analysis

The accusation of systemic whitewashing of Black inventors’ patents is a serious charge that requires specific examples. In the United States, Black inventors like George Washington Carver and Lewis Latimer faced significant barriers due to racism, including limited access to education and patent processes. Latimer, for instance, contributed to the development of the incandescent light bulb but is often overshadowed by Thomas Edison in popular narratives. Similarly, Granville T. Woods’s patents for railway technology were sometimes challenged or appropriated by white competitors.

However, the claim that “every patent owned by Black men was whitewashed” is an overgeneralization. Patent records are publicly accessible, and many Black inventors are documented as patent holders. Systemic racism likely suppressed recognition of some contributions, but no evidence supports a universal conspiracy to reassign all Black-owned patents. Modern scholarship and institutions like the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture actively work to highlight Black inventors’ contributions.

Defense of scholarship

Patent scholarship relies on legal records, which are verifiable. Historians and archivists are increasingly correcting Eurocentric biases by documenting Black contributions, countering past omissions without endorsing unsubstantiated claims of universal whitewashing.

Accusation 5: Europeans promote Hippocrates as the father of medicine despite Imhotep’s superior prowess.

Fact-check and analysis

Imhotep (c. 2700 BCE) was a polymath in ancient Egypt, revered as an architect, physician, and advisor to Pharaoh Djoser. He is associated with early medical practices, and his deification in later Egyptian culture reflects his significance. Hippocrates (c. 460–370 BCE), known as the “father of medicine” in Western tradition, is credited with systematizing medical ethics and clinical observation, as seen in the Hippocratic Corpus.

The accusation implies that Imhotep’s contributions were deliberately overshadowed. While Egyptian medicine influenced Greek practices (e.g., through trade and travel), there is no direct evidence that Hippocrates copied Imhotep’s work. Egyptian medical texts, like the Edwin Smith Papyrus (c. 1600 BCE), show advanced surgical knowledge, but Greek medicine developed a distinct tradition emphasizing empirical observation and ethical codes.

The title “father of medicine” for Hippocrates reflects the Western focus on Greek contributions, which can marginalize earlier cultures like Egypt. However, this is more a product of historical transmission than deliberate erasure, as Greek texts were more accessible to medieval Europe than Egyptian ones.

Defense of scholarship

Medical historians, such as those studying the Edwin Smith Papyrus, acknowledge Egyptian contributions, while recognizing Hippocrates’s role in shaping Western medical ethics. The narrative is evolving to include non-European pioneers like Imhotep, countering Eurocentric biases.

Accusation 6: Europeans destroyed universities in Kemet, Cordoba, Sankore, and Nalanda to establish Yale and Oxford.

Fact-check and analysis

This accusation refers to several historical institutions:

University of Kemet (Ancient Egypt)

No single “university” existed in ancient Egypt, but institutions like the Per Ankh (House of Life) served as centers of learning. These declined with the fall of Egyptian civilization, particularly after Roman conquest (30 BCE), not due to deliberate European destruction.

Moorish University of Cordoba

Cordoba was a major intellectual center under Muslim rule (8th–13th centuries), but its decline followed the Christian Reconquista, particularly after 1236. Destruction was tied to political conquest, not a direct intent to replace it with European universities.

University of Sankore (Timbuktu)

Sankore was a leading center of Islamic scholarship in the Middle Ages. Its decline in the 16th–17th centuries was due to regional instability, including the Moroccan invasion of 1591, not European intervention. European colonial powers later exploited African resources, but direct destruction of Sankore is not documented.

University of Nalanda (India)

Nalanda was destroyed around 1200 CE, likely by Turkic Muslim invaders led by Bakhtiyar Khilji, not Europeans. Its decline predates Yale (1701) and Oxford (1096).

The establishment of Yale and Oxford was driven by European intellectual and religious needs, not a deliberate replacement of non-European centers. However, colonial powers did benefit from the decline of these institutions, and Eurocentric narratives often downplayed their significance.

Defense of scholarship

Historians like Diarmaid MacCulloch (Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years) document the global exchange of knowledge, including contributions from Islamic and African centers. Modern scholarship seeks to restore the legacy of these institutions, challenging earlier Eurocentric biases.

Accusation 7: Aristotle’s writings were copied from ancient papyri, with Herodotus complicit in crediting him falsely.

Fact-check and analysis

Aristotle (384–322 BCE) was a prolific philosopher whose works cover diverse fields. The accusation that he copied from ancient Egyptian papyri likely stems from claims that Greek philosophers, including Aristotle, studied in Egypt. Herodotus (5th century BCE) noted Greek cultural exchanges with Egypt, but there is no evidence he conspired to credit Aristotle with stolen knowledge, as he predated Aristotle.

Some of Aristotle’s ideas, such as those in metaphysics or biology, may reflect broader Mediterranean influences, including Egyptian and Babylonian knowledge. However, his method of systematic inquiry and logical deduction was distinctly Greek. No surviving Egyptian papyri match Aristotle’s corpus, and claims of direct plagiarism lack primary evidence.

Defense of scholarship

Aristotelian scholarship relies on his extant texts and their historical context. While cross-cultural influences are acknowledged, the absence of specific Egyptian sources linking to Aristotle’s works makes the accusation speculative. Scholars like Martin Bernal (*Black Athena*) argue for African influences on Greece, but these claims are debated for lack of direct evidence.

Accusation 8: Europeans lied about Columbus discovering America to discredit indigenous ancestors.

Fact-check and analysis

Christopher Columbus (1451–1506) is historically credited with initiating European colonization of the Americas in 1492. However, the idea that he “discovered” America is misleading, as indigenous peoples had inhabited the continent for millennia, and Norse explorers like Leif Erikson reached North America around 1000 CE. The accusation reflects a valid critique of Eurocentric narratives that marginalize pre-Columbian civilizations.

Columbus’s voyages were documented to secure Spanish patronage, not to deliberately discredit indigenous peoples. However, the subsequent colonial narrative often ignored indigenous contributions, prioritizing European perspectives. Modern scholarship corrects this by emphasizing indigenous histories and pre-Columbian transatlantic contacts, though evidence of African voyages to the Americas (e.g., Mansa Musa’s alleged fleet) remains speculative.

Defense of scholarship

Historians like Howard Zinn (A People’s History of the United States) and archaeological evidence from sites like Cahokia highlight indigenous achievements. Scholarship now critiques the “discovery” myth, aligning with the accusation’s intent but not its conspiratorial framing.

Accusation 9: Europeans created eugenics to eradicate melanated people, using diseases like the Spanish Flu and COVID-19.

Fact-check and analysis

Eugenics, a 19th–20th-century movement, aimed to improve human populations through selective breeding, often rooted in racist ideologies. Figures like Francis Galton and policies in the U.S. and Nazi Germany targeted marginalized groups, including Black populations, through forced sterilizations and discriminatory laws. However, the claim that eugenics was specifically designed to eradicate melanated people oversimplifies a complex history, as eugenics also targeted other groups (e.g., disabled individuals, Eastern Europeans).

The Spanish Flu (1918–1919) and COVID-19 are pandemics with documented virological origins. The Spanish Flu likely originated in birds, and COVID-19 is traced to a coronavirus in bats. No credible evidence supports the claim that these were engineered to target specific racial groups. Disparities in health outcomes (e.g., higher mortality among Black communities during COVID-19) are better explained by systemic inequities in healthcare and socio-economic factors, not deliberate bioweapons.

Defense of Scholarship

Epidemiologists and historians (e.g., John M. Barry, The Great Influenza) rely on virological and historical data to explain pandemics. While acknowledging eugenics’ racist history, the accusation of engineered diseases lacks evidence and contradicts scientific consensus.

Accusation 10: Europeans teach a global Earth despite knowing it is flat and surrounded by Antarctica.

Fact-check and analysis

The Earth’s shape has been known to be an oblate spheroid since antiquity, with Greek scholars like Eratosthenes (3rd century BCE) calculating its circumference. Modern evidence, satellite imagery, GPS, and space exploration, confirms this. The flat Earth theory, revived in modern times, contradicts observable data, such as Earth’s shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse. The claim that Antarctica surrounds a flat Earth lacks any supporting evidence and is not taken seriously in scientific or scholarly circles.

Defense of scholarship

Astronomy and geography rely on empirical evidence, from ancient observations to modern technology. The flat Earth claim is a fringe view unsupported by peer-reviewed science, and its inclusion here undermines the broader critique of historical narratives.

Accusation 11: Europeans hold Biafrans ransom in Nigeria, knowing they don’t belong together.

Fact-check and analysis

The amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914 by British colonial authorities under Lord Lugard combined diverse ethnic groups, including the Igbo (associated with Biafra), Hausa, and Yoruba, into a single colony. This was driven by administrative convenience and economic interests, not ethnic compatibility. The Biafran War (1967–1970) arose from Igbo secessionist demands, fueled by ethnic tensions and political marginalization. The accusation reflects ongoing debates about Nigeria’s colonial legacy and ethnic divisions.

While British policies created artificial boundaries, the claim that Europeans actively “hold Biafrans ransom” today oversimplifies contemporary Nigerian politics, which involve local and global actors. The issue is complex, involving post-colonial governance and resource conflicts.

Defense of scholarship

Historians like Chinua Achebe (There Was a Country) document the colonial roots of Nigeria’s ethnic tensions, supporting the accusation’s historical basis but not its conspiratorial framing. Scholarship advocates for understanding these complexities through primary sources and oral histories.

Accusation 12: Europeans falsified carbon-dating of Lejja, Nsukka, and Igboukwu artifacts to make African civilizations appear younger.

Fact-check and analysis

The Igbo-Ukwu artifacts (9th–11th centuries CE) and Lejja iron-smelting sites (potentially 2000 BCE) are significant evidence of advanced African metallurgy. Carbon-dating, conducted by institutions like the University of Oxford, places Igbo-Ukwu bronzes around 850–1000 CE, consistent with regional trade networks. Lejja’s dates are less certain but suggest early ironworking. Claims of deliberate falsification lack evidence, as carbon-dating is a standardized scientific method subject to peer review.

Eurocentric biases in early archaeology may have underestimated African civilizations’ antiquity, but modern studies, such as those by Peter Schmidt, affirm their sophistication. The accusation reflects a valid concern about historical marginalization but lacks specific proof of tampering.

Defense of scholarship

Archaeological dating relies on rigorous methodologies, and errors are corrected through peer review. Africanist archaeologists actively counter Eurocentric narratives by highlighting sites like Igbo-Ukwu, aligning with the accusation’s intent but not its conspiratorial tone.

Accusation 13: Europeans fabricated Jesus’s existence with concocted make-beliefs.

Fact-check and analysis

The historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth is supported by multiple sources, including non-Christian ones. Roman historian Tacitus (Annals, 15.44) mentions Jesus’s execution under Pontius Pilate, and Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews, 18.3.3) references him, though the latter’s text is debated for possible Christian interpolations. The Gospels, written within decades of Jesus’s death (c. 30 CE), provide early accounts, though their theological nature requires critical analysis.

The accusation that Jesus’s existence was fabricated by Europeans ignores these sources, which predate European dominance. Christianity’s spread in Europe was a later development, and its African roots (e.g., Coptic Christianity in Egypt) challenge the Eurocentric framing. The claim reflects skepticism about religious narratives but lacks evidence for a deliberate scam.

Defense of Christianity and Scholarship

Non-Christian biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman use historical-critical methods to study Jesus’s life, although suspecting theological embellishments, but affirmed His existence. Early Christianity’s diversity, including African churches, counters the idea of a solely European fabrication.

Accusation 14: Europeans claimed civilizations in ancient Tartaria, repainting murals to insert their faces.

Fact-check and analysis

The concept of “Tartaria” as a lost global civilization is a modern conspiracy theory, not supported by historical evidence. Tartary was a historical term for Central Asian regions, not a unified empire. Claims of Europeans repainting murals to claim Tartarian civilizations lack archaeological or textual support. The accusation may stem from valid concerns about colonial looting of artifacts (e.g., the Benin Bronzes), but the Tartaria narrative is speculative.

Defense of scholarship

Historians and archaeologists rely on primary sources and material evidence, which do not support the Tartaria theory. Scholarship acknowledges colonial theft while rejecting unfounded claims about lost civilizations.

Accusation 15: Europeans stole artifacts, claiming curatorship while treating their owners as intruders.

Fact-check and analysis

Colonial powers, particularly in the 19th century, looted artifacts from Africa, Asia, and elsewhere, often housing them in European museums (e.g., the British Museum’s Benin Bronzes). This reflects imperialist exploitation, and the repatriation debate remains active. The accusation is largely accurate, as colonial powers justified theft as “curatorship” while marginalizing original owners. Modern efforts, like France’s 2018 commitment to return African artifacts, address this legacy.

Defense of scholarship

Art historians and archaeologists, such as those at UNESCO, advocate for repatriation and ethical curation, acknowledging colonial wrongs. Scholarship supports restitution, aligning with the accusation’s critique.

Conclusion

The accusations highlight legitimate concerns about Eurocentric biases in historical narratives, particularly the marginalization of African contributions. However, many claims are overstated, lack evidence, or rely on speculative narratives (e.g., Tartaria, flat Earth). Scholarship, when grounded in primary sources and rigorous methods, strives to correct biases and acknowledge global contributions, including those of Kemet, Nubia, and other African civilizations. 

Christianity’s historical roots are supported by diverse sources, and its African legacy challenges Eurocentric framing. While colonial injustices, such as artifact theft, are undeniable, modern scholarship and ethical movements work to address these wrongs, fostering a more inclusive historical narrative.

Sources

https://www.historytools.org/stories/septimius-severus-romes-african-emperor-and-the-conquest-of-caledonia

https://historyhogs.com/was-septimius-severus-a-black-roman-emperor/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septimius_Severus