Book Reviews And Journal Notes: Fill & Download for Free

This is yet another racial attack disguised as an innocent Quora question.What happened to Africa over the past 500 years ?It is all in history books : European exploration, followed by the slave trade (Atlantic and Trans-Atlantic) and its infamous gun for slave tactic, European colonization, Cold World proxy wars, European neo-colonization through the Zone Franc, military bases, imposition of commodity prices etc., Apartheid, backing of African dictators, military coups supported by the CIA, assassinations of democratically elected leaders at the orders of the CIA or the French secret services, destabilization of African economies through injection of fake banknotes (Guinea-Conakry), multi-national corporations instilling or increasing conflicts for oil or minerals, etc.Do you know how many cities were destroyed during colonial wars in Africa ?Some say between 50 and 100.The British destroyed Benin City. It had street lighting and very elaborated city walls. It was looted and burned to the ground. The Portuguese destroyed Kilwa, which was described at one time as one of the most beautiful cities in the world.Stanley, the famous British explorer, admitted in his journal that he destroyed 28 major towns in Congo. The Force Publique, the private army of King Leopold II of Belgium destroyed the double.Do you know how many African scholars were killed by European colonialists and neocolonialists ?We may never know.Our Kongo ancestors learned to read, write and count in initiation schools where traditional medecine and technologies were also taught. There were 4 of them : Ndembo, Kimpasi, Lemba and Kimba. During colonial times, they were suppressed and went underground. They were demonized by the Catholic Church as secret societies serving the Devil.The Kongo had a complex writing system described as hieroglyphic by Father Giovanni Antonio Cavazzi, an Italian missionary who lived in court of Queen Nzinga in the 17th. Kongo Graphic Writing system and Narratives of the Sign by Bárbaro Martínez Ruiz is a book that describes key features of the system.Do you know that 90% of Africa’s cultural heritage sit in colonial museums in Europe and the Americas ?I still wonder when our ivory tablets and wooden storyboards that our Kongo ancestors used to illustrate and record our history will be returned to us. They were stolen by the Portuguese and later Belgian colonialists and now sit in colonial museums in Belgium and other colonial museums in Europe.Our royal palaces and sacred shrines were looted. Thousands of our works of art and cultural artifacts are located in private collections and colonial museums.Last but not least, this is another ahistorical question.Some people have a very naive and short view of history.World history is at least 7 000 years old and cannot be reduced to the second rise of Europe in the late 15th (1492-).African Moors contributed to the Renaissance of Europe propelling her out of the Dark Ages.The Moorish Islamic Empire was the Guiding Light of the Middle Ages. The vast majority of the Moorish conquerors, settlers and scholars were of Berber origin. Berbers are indigenous Africans west of the Nile Valley. The Conqueror of Spain, General Tarik, was a Berber from Morocco. Gibraltar is named after him.Ancient Egypt predates ancient Greece by at least 2 thousand years.Ancient Greeks flocked to Egypt to learn and study. The oldest civilizations in Europe : Crete, Rome and Greece are located not far from Africa. Actually, Africa is considered the birthplace of European civilization since it largely influenced the earliest civilizations on European soil.Africa had some of the most prosperous kingdoms of the Middle Ages.The Empire of Mali was richer than medieval Britain. Timbuktu in West Africa Mali is older than Oxford University. The Garamantes in southern Libya were living in cities when northern Europeans were living in villages. The richest man in world history is a Malian King, Mansa Musa aka the Golden King. Monomotapa in southern Africa had trade links with China.Delusional Eurocentrists have created a vision of Africa with a focus on “jungle static primitives” and peripheral populations living in the bush on the edge of powerful empires, sophisticated kingdoms, advanced city states and flourishing communities.If Africa was left so far behind the rest of the world, why on earth Africa is the nearest and yet, the last continent to be explored and conquered by European powers in the late 19th?Conquest is hard when your enemies can match your weaponry and navy and also be very well organized.European colonization in Africa really started only when Europeans outgunned the Africans with automatic weapons.Until the mid 19th, Africa had military power and wealth that could rival and surpass the great empires of Europe.Medieval Africa and the centuries that followed was ruled by several hundred kings, chiefs, sultans and emperors.European powers had no other choice than trading more or less peacefully with them for hundreds of years.Conquest was not really an option for Europe before the late 19th.EDIT # 1Here are two links on Africa’s military systems that can explain why Europe could only conquer Africa in the late 19th and early 20th and not before.African military systems to 1800 - WikipediaAfrican military systems (1800–1900) - WikipediaMilitary systems on the continent during the 19th century illustrate the complexity of previous eras, to which was added the growing pace and weight of European colonialism. These systems defy the easy categorization and depictions of popular media and imagination- often stereotyped in terms of wildly charging hordes on foot, while ignoring the continent's long established archery and cavalry traditions. As noted by one Western historian for example, the notion of countless attacking spearmen is a myth.Indigenous military organization also encompasses Africa's substantial cavalry or mounted tradition, from the armored chevaliers of Western Africa, to the desert horsemen of North Africa, to the mounted fighters of the Basotho in their southern redoubts. On the waters of the continent, naval activities must be accounted for, not simply canoe transport, but fighting vessels, ports, and troop landings covered by poisoned arrows, bullets and cannonballs.Different styles of warfare and modes of organization are also demonstrated by indigenous systems, from the patient tactical defensive of the Basotho, the elaborate armies of Ashanti, the sweeping offensive horns of the Zulu impi, and the protracted guerrilla styles and archery of forest peoples like the Lobi, or the San (Bushmen) further south. As regards styles of organization, different approaches over different eras can be seen.EDIT # 2Some people say that colonialism in Africa has had no lasting impact on Africa. Africans are solely responsible for the current conditions of Africa.Hard to believe.Colonialism caused a profoundly negative impact on African societies, and this impact is evident all across Africa. Many books have been written about the negative impact of colonialism in Africa. The best of all, in my opinion, is How Europe Underdeveloped Africa a book written by Walter Rodney,Here is an excellent review and summary of the book.review and summary of How Europe Underdeveloped Africa is a book written by Walter Rodney,It has been 60 years since most African countries gained their independence. Europeans left and Africans took charge.What has happened ? Africa is in a deplorable state.Some people have an idea of Africa; it overshadows the facts.I live in Africa. I can confirm this : The Real Africa is a Hundred Times Better than The Africa they portray"Africa is on the move and according to McKinsey 7 Company’s report, ‘Lions on the Move: The Progress and Potential of African Economies’, Africa’s combined Gross Domestic Product will be $2.6 trillion by 2020.The report further says that “Africa’s consumer spending by 128 million households with discretionary income is expected to be around $1.4 trillion.”Hiding the Real AfricaPoverty rates throughout the continent have been falling steadily and much faster than previously thought, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. The death rate of children under five years of age is dropping, with “clear evidence of accelerating rates of decline,” according to The Lancet. Perhaps most encouragingly, Africa is “among the world’s most rapidly growing economic regions,” according to the McKinsey Quarterly.Why Your Image of Africa Is Wrong, and How to Change ItEDIT # 3Just like there are many sides to America, there are many sides to Africa.Can you imagine if Africans stereotyped us just like we stereotype them?If you're like most people, you probably have two basic images of Africa. Either you think of something like this:That represents "the good" Africa: safaris, colorful tribes, and Egypt's pyramids. It's the stuff we see on National Geographic.Or perhaps you thought of images like this:That's "the bad" Africa: war, famine, poverty, pestilence, and peril. It's the stuff we see on CNN (and The Huffington Post). It's the fabled "Dark Continent."In short, Africa is either Eden or Hell.Although it's a shame that we almost never see long interviews with such troubled Africans to hear their complex thoughts, at least their voices are somewhat captured by the media, since they pass the microphone long enough for the Africans to say, "I'm hungry! Send me aid!"So they're not completely unheard.What is unheard is the vast majority of Africans who go about their day without any crisis and who don't live in a mud hut. (See the family on the right, that I stayed with in Senegal.)When was the last time a TV camera went into a middle-class African home, which has electricity and running water, and asked folks how their lives are? When was the last time a TV show has captured well-dressed Africans (yup, most are meticulously well dressed) and learned about how the dating life is there?It doesn't happen, because it doesn't sell. It's "uninteresting," TV executives think.Our extreme images of Africa are not the only thing that is wrong with our view of Earth's hottest continent. We also have a tendency to always focus on the same countries, even though there are 54 African countries.Revealing The Unseen AfricaClearly, our image of Africa is wrong. Yes, of course, there are trouble spots. Africans have their Detroit and Hurricane Katrina too. And yes, there are some fantastic safaris and pyramids tourists can enjoy, just like our Grand Canyon and Statue of Liberty are worth seeing too. However, just like we don't like it when foreigners have a simplistic view of America, we ought to update our view of Africa.

Sure. The finer details of history are filled with people writing in their journals or court records things that weren’t true that later get picked up within those reports as being true. Some people lie when they write a book on a subject. Some people are married to an end-goal and filter details to support that goal, that fact almost always comes out when the book is reviewed by other professional historians.Want an example? “Warriors of God” by James Reston. The book was shredded by actual historians who later reviewed what he synthesized in the book. It turns out, he crafted entire conversations between Richard and Philip (King of France) intimating that they were lovers which isn’t supported by the record. He was wrong, historians corrected his flawed narrative. The system worked.If you mean “the broad strokes of history”, then no. There is certainly misunderstanding. That happens where the details are scarce or missing. People make mistakes. The system self-corrects because real historians always get their works reviewed and picked-apart by professional and amateur historians alike.It’s important to note that in history, all things are subject to review and adjustment. There isn’t dogma. One cannot even assert with 100% certainty that Caesar Augustus existed. All we can say is that it’s in the 99.99-percentile that he did. There’s a sliding scale of certainty between 0% and 100% but we never arrive at 100%.History isn’t unlike science in this. Amateurs deal in dogma then project that dealing onto others to legitimize their own silly behavior. “Well, this is just my opinion. Since ‘the experts’ are just expressing their opinions, mine is as good as theirs.” It’s a self-actualization behavior that seeks to elevate the ignorant amateur to the level of expert. This has always happened — our psychology revolts against the idea that we must defer to experts and that we really are ignorant. On the steppes of Africa as wandering tribes people with less than 150 associates and a flat hierarchy, that worked fine. In civilization where some fields truly are abstruse, it doesn’t work, but that still doesn’t stop ignorant conspiracy theorists from overly trusting their own opinions when certain subjects require truly deep dedication to comprehend the minutia of the same.Point is, history isn’t “written by the victors”. People —sadly— love memes. Not those pictures on Facebook (though they love those too). They love overly-simplified ideas that —like genes— get passed on through people repeating them. Repeat the meme enough and it becomes alive. Worse still, since it gets repeated over and over again, our brains incorporate that bit of information. Then to argue against that meme undermines their sense of self and history, resulting in vicious arguments back at us.History is written by professional historians who spend their lives researching the subject. It’s not just one historian, but literally hundreds of thousands, layer upon layer over the years. Historians do refer to past historians but the really good ones access the original sources (carvings on walls, old court documents, preserved letters, journals/diaries of individuals, saved scientific notes, inter-office memos, etc.) and piece together history that way. They may spend time reviewing passed research (which is smart) to ensure that it reconciles with the surviving idea of what is history, but the constant revision and analysis of history means that it would take a hive-like collective consciousness to make the sweeping truths of history “a lie”.As an amateur lover of history, I’ve read dozens of books on Ancient Rome, the US Civil War, World War I and World War II. These books are written by professionally trained historians who spent literally years and years of their lives scouring those ancient records. They sometimes nodded to a historian on a given subject (Gibbon on Rome, Toland on Hitler, Shirer on World War II), but in their books (subjected to peer review like a scientific test) are based on original research and original source documents (or at least, aspire to be and when they get it wrong, they get destroyed for it).History isn’t written by the victors. Some history fades with the passage of time. It’s harder for us to access the history of Carthage because Rome really did raze that city and destroyed its leaders. A lot was lost. Rome did write a lot of the history after that, but the problem is that we know they had their biases and we’re aware that the record is sketchy. We also have access to the full records of the losers.The American North didn’t write the history of the Confederacy. Historians did. We have all their journals, government records, testimonies and leaders’ post-war memoirs. Just the same, we have access to Nazi Germany’s records, I have Guderian’s memoirs. I have Albert Speer’s (albeit self-serving) book on my shelf: “Inside the Third Reich”. There’s no lack of information on what happened and what the losers’ side of the story is.We know this, because professional historians, despite their flaws, usually analyze history and then have to put their reputation at stake when penning their given work. It gets picked apart and either elevated or belittled. That’s a lot of angst and the record, due to competing historians constantly analyzing the record, slowly, but surely, gets corrected over time as new information arises.

You should review back issues of several journals in your field to identify those that publish book reviews. Once you’ve done so, you should then contact the editor of the journals that publish book reviews, identify yourself as a doctoral student, and express your interest in doing a book review for the journal.In that note you should identify your primary areas of professional interest, and perhaps include your vita. Should the journal be interested, they will send you a copy of a book to review.Doing a book review is an excellent way of beginning a scholarly career, as you can learn a bit about how journals work in a (relatively) low risk way.