UnrepentantSinner
A post by Alan Smithee
There’s one area, besides cryptozoology that I don’t see getting much text time in the Forum, and that’s Revisionist History (well, besides Young Earth Creationism). Since that’s a topic near and dear to my heart, I wanted to toss out a few of the ones that really bother me.
Historical Revisionism differs from other questions and conflicts over historical “facts” in that there is almost always an agenda behind the advocates of the alternate versions. Unusual discoveries, like Kennewick Man; incomplete answers, like the origins of Japan’s Ainu; and even revolutionary theories, like Thor Hierdahl’s migration theories aren’t sufficiently driven by agenda to qualify as Historical Revisionism.
Egyptian Afrocentrism.
Advocates of this theory claim that the Ancient Egyptians were black equatorial Africans and not the brown Hamitic north Africans we see portrayed in wall art. I’ve even heard it claimed (I forget by whom at the time) that Rameses II was black. The biggest problem I have this theory is Ancient Egypt belongs to the Egyptians. As an Islamic state they technically should have destroyed all the idolatry of the Ancients (see the Taliban) but from the death of Cleopatra, though the Coptic Church period, the coming of Islam until the modern state, they have generally preserved their heritage.
It’s not as though black Africa has a dearth of great civilizations they can be proud of like Timbuktu and Great Zimbabwe as well as the Zulu Kingdom build by Shaka and need to co-opt the Pharaohs.
British Israelism:
This intellectual abomination gleans many different revisions into a unifying theory that is generally used by anti-Semites and White Power advocates. The basic claim is that the diaspora of the 10 “lost” tribes of Israel were sent by the Assyrians into Europe where they became the modern mostly northern European states. Some of the supposed evidence for this is Denmark, is named after the tribe of Dan and the Saxons are “Isaac’s Sons.” From this claim advocates try to support the notion that Northern Europeans (and by extension the United States) are the “true” Israel not the imposter Khazar Jews living in the Middle East.
This melange of pathetic attempts at etymology, racism and migration maps drawn with more wishful thinking than facts was most vocally advocated in the U.S. by Herbert W. Armstrong’s World Wide Church of God. Under the leadership of his son Garner Ted Armstrong, this organization has completely renounced British Israelism. The torch, however, has been picked up by ]Gerald Flurry’s Philadelphia Church of God.
I discovered one irony of British Israelism and it’s conflict with reality while watching a documentary on the possibility that some of the Israelites might have wound up in India. I’ll dig around for further information if anyone wants it, but the show gave pretty compelling evidence that that’s where some of the lost tribes went. I’m sure Gerald Flurry will be in a tizzy when he learns that the Promised Land is on the Brahmaputra and not the Potomac.
Holocaust Deniers:
This group is personally offensive to me because I’ve been to Dachau. I’ve seen the death camps. I’ve seen a gravesite the size of an automobile holding the ashes of thousands of victims. The only reason I don’t get more angry about it more often is that thankfully there aren’t that many believers, though doubtlessly as time passes, others will fall for slickly produced video tapes and web pages. In general they tend to be virulently anti-Semetic and are associated with White Power organizations.
Unfortunately one of the most influential organs of this movement comes up as the 2nd hit on a Google search if you use “historical+review.” Here’s the result:
Institute for Historical Review ... The Institute for Historical Review is non-ideological, non-political, and non-sectarian. It is ...
Description: Site of the world's leading Holocaust denial organisation. Many articles from its journal (founded...
Michael Shermer does a great job showing how to (as well as how not to) confront Holocaust Deniers in his “Why People Believe Weird Things.” Steven Spielberg is doing the world a great service with his Shoah project, recording the memories of Holocaust survivors.
Feminists/Neo-Pagans:
Not to lump Feminists and Neo-Pagans together, but the Revisionism that I’m referring to is used by both groups. A gross oversimplification of their theory states that Europe was a feminist, woman-centered, vegetarian Utopia, where women were fat and happy and men knew their place. It seemed the wonder years of the Neolithic might last forever until the coming of the Khurgans who, as meat eaters, had developed large penises and aggressive tendencies. They subjugated the peaceful, nature loving, Goddess worshipping peoples of Europe and gave rise to such brutal societies as the Assyrians, Egyptians and Greeks.
Marija Gimutas is considered to have started this ideological movement and while she has received praise from people like Joseph Campbell I remain unmoved by her claims. One of the more prominent voices advocating this theory is Starhawk who is a paragon for everything I disdain about this form of Revisionism.
Antedeluvian Utopians:
Despite the name, not all Antedeluvian revisionists claim a flood wiped out some pre-historic advanced or Utopian civilization. Some claim that astronomic events or other Earth changes wiped them out. Atlantis remains the most famous of these supposed civilizations. Others include Mu and the pre-flood Bible stores. One of the more famous claims about the Atlanteans comes from “The Sleeping Prophet” Edgar Cayce who claims that there is a Hall of Records beneath the Sphinx in Giza that contains the wisdom, knowledge and “real” history of Atlantis.
The biggest problem faced by Antedeluvians, despite hundreds of years of claims and hundreds of publications on these civilizations is that we have yet to uncover even a pot shard that would indicate they actually existed. With all the archaeological digs that have occurred in places that many of these claims center on, not a single compelling piece of evidence has been found.
These are just a few examples of Historical Revisionism that bother me. If anyone else wants clarification or to discuss any of them (or add your own) please post and we’ll see if this thread has any legs.
Historical Revisionism differs from other questions and conflicts over historical “facts” in that there is almost always an agenda behind the advocates of the alternate versions. Unusual discoveries, like Kennewick Man; incomplete answers, like the origins of Japan’s Ainu; and even revolutionary theories, like Thor Hierdahl’s migration theories aren’t sufficiently driven by agenda to qualify as Historical Revisionism.
Egyptian Afrocentrism.
Advocates of this theory claim that the Ancient Egyptians were black equatorial Africans and not the brown Hamitic north Africans we see portrayed in wall art. I’ve even heard it claimed (I forget by whom at the time) that Rameses II was black. The biggest problem I have this theory is Ancient Egypt belongs to the Egyptians. As an Islamic state they technically should have destroyed all the idolatry of the Ancients (see the Taliban) but from the death of Cleopatra, though the Coptic Church period, the coming of Islam until the modern state, they have generally preserved their heritage.
It’s not as though black Africa has a dearth of great civilizations they can be proud of like Timbuktu and Great Zimbabwe as well as the Zulu Kingdom build by Shaka and need to co-opt the Pharaohs.
British Israelism:
This intellectual abomination gleans many different revisions into a unifying theory that is generally used by anti-Semites and White Power advocates. The basic claim is that the diaspora of the 10 “lost” tribes of Israel were sent by the Assyrians into Europe where they became the modern mostly northern European states. Some of the supposed evidence for this is Denmark, is named after the tribe of Dan and the Saxons are “Isaac’s Sons.” From this claim advocates try to support the notion that Northern Europeans (and by extension the United States) are the “true” Israel not the imposter Khazar Jews living in the Middle East.
This melange of pathetic attempts at etymology, racism and migration maps drawn with more wishful thinking than facts was most vocally advocated in the U.S. by Herbert W. Armstrong’s World Wide Church of God. Under the leadership of his son Garner Ted Armstrong, this organization has completely renounced British Israelism. The torch, however, has been picked up by ]Gerald Flurry’s Philadelphia Church of God.
I discovered one irony of British Israelism and it’s conflict with reality while watching a documentary on the possibility that some of the Israelites might have wound up in India. I’ll dig around for further information if anyone wants it, but the show gave pretty compelling evidence that that’s where some of the lost tribes went. I’m sure Gerald Flurry will be in a tizzy when he learns that the Promised Land is on the Brahmaputra and not the Potomac.
Holocaust Deniers:
This group is personally offensive to me because I’ve been to Dachau. I’ve seen the death camps. I’ve seen a gravesite the size of an automobile holding the ashes of thousands of victims. The only reason I don’t get more angry about it more often is that thankfully there aren’t that many believers, though doubtlessly as time passes, others will fall for slickly produced video tapes and web pages. In general they tend to be virulently anti-Semetic and are associated with White Power organizations.
Unfortunately one of the most influential organs of this movement comes up as the 2nd hit on a Google search if you use “historical+review.” Here’s the result:
Institute for Historical Review ... The Institute for Historical Review is non-ideological, non-political, and non-sectarian. It is ...
Description: Site of the world's leading Holocaust denial organisation. Many articles from its journal (founded...
Michael Shermer does a great job showing how to (as well as how not to) confront Holocaust Deniers in his “Why People Believe Weird Things.” Steven Spielberg is doing the world a great service with his Shoah project, recording the memories of Holocaust survivors.
Feminists/Neo-Pagans:
Not to lump Feminists and Neo-Pagans together, but the Revisionism that I’m referring to is used by both groups. A gross oversimplification of their theory states that Europe was a feminist, woman-centered, vegetarian Utopia, where women were fat and happy and men knew their place. It seemed the wonder years of the Neolithic might last forever until the coming of the Khurgans who, as meat eaters, had developed large penises and aggressive tendencies. They subjugated the peaceful, nature loving, Goddess worshipping peoples of Europe and gave rise to such brutal societies as the Assyrians, Egyptians and Greeks.
Marija Gimutas is considered to have started this ideological movement and while she has received praise from people like Joseph Campbell I remain unmoved by her claims. One of the more prominent voices advocating this theory is Starhawk who is a paragon for everything I disdain about this form of Revisionism.
Antedeluvian Utopians:
Despite the name, not all Antedeluvian revisionists claim a flood wiped out some pre-historic advanced or Utopian civilization. Some claim that astronomic events or other Earth changes wiped them out. Atlantis remains the most famous of these supposed civilizations. Others include Mu and the pre-flood Bible stores. One of the more famous claims about the Atlanteans comes from “The Sleeping Prophet” Edgar Cayce who claims that there is a Hall of Records beneath the Sphinx in Giza that contains the wisdom, knowledge and “real” history of Atlantis.
The biggest problem faced by Antedeluvians, despite hundreds of years of claims and hundreds of publications on these civilizations is that we have yet to uncover even a pot shard that would indicate they actually existed. With all the archaeological digs that have occurred in places that many of these claims center on, not a single compelling piece of evidence has been found.
These are just a few examples of Historical Revisionism that bother me. If anyone else wants clarification or to discuss any of them (or add your own) please post and we’ll see if this thread has any legs.
