An Old Argument on Christopher Columbus

By

Sampson I.M Onwuka

The Syria-Byzantine-Greek is one of the languages that gave birth to what is in fact possible in many parts of the world. Even in modern times, it was always Syria and the Red sea that Govern as much as Arab legendary history and in very modern times. It is only in the course of time, did a separation exist between Asia and the Americans. In the time of Christopher Columbus, we met his view of the whole of his discovery of a place that is now called America, and the story as it goes suggest that the Columbus was in that part of the world as some point after the 1492. We have not noted what took Columbus to that part of world in the very first place. We have not also asked why all of a sudden these people from different parts of Europe descended into Africa, into deeper parts of Europe, to India, and to other parts of the America. 

The story is told in such a way that we come out believing at times that in Christopher Columbus coming to America, he was sent by the Spanish Royalty of Isabella and Ferdinand in 1492, to discover the new lands of America. If that is considered true by any stretch, we may lean towards asking the question whether or not Christopher Columbus made it to America on first visit. For if we have enough information to indicate that Christopher Columbus landed in America in the first visit or consequent visit before the official adventure in order of Isabella, we may say that Christopher Columbus never made it to America on a discovery level, that the place that he arrived at was none other than the Caribbean, where perhaps he learns of the lands faraway, the so called ‘otro modus’, the other world, a noted world nonetheless. In his letter to Isabella and Ferdinand, he cited that he has discovered a New Land, more than anything Spain has seen for such a long time. And it is through this accord that we find a connecting thread between Spanish travelers a decade later and the first missions to the place we regard as Domingo. 

The story is told many times, the story is part of the same thing, and the story is quite What we now presume is that this land called America was accidentally discovered by Christopher Columbus in 1492 or sometime later. In essence, Christopher Columbus appeared in that part of the world only by accident and only in the same year where a major part of world history took place. This history is nothing we have never seen or heard, but here we are tempted to explore the broad stroke of history from the standpoint of Muslim and Jewish expulsion from Spain. The ships of Columbus has been described by many as a Viking Ship, a fact that we may yet explore, yet still, we can say that Columbus ships carried people no longer at ease in Spain to a new land that was not America, it was in all respect, the Caribbean. 

There is no doubt that Columbus arrived in the Caribbean first and fore mostly, and it was in the Caribbean that he met or at least sojourned all of the other adventurers from Spain, including the likes of Guzman Domingos and Prester John as we have noted early. What is however missing from this point is what these groups of people were doing in that part of the world, and when they reached there. We have to look very closely at the role of Columbus, who was master of 15 ships, where the flag ship as they called, Santa Maria, was captained by a certain Pietro. This history is not new but we may not square that with the incident regarding the people contained or crammed in the 15 ships, most of whom were mainly Muslims and Jews, at least they were not part of the Christian society as the Edith of 1492 of Alhambra suggest. In essence, Columbus carried certain people with them, and these people as we have noted were not The point of history is too clear that those who arrived at the New World were not carrying European Whites at all, or some sprinkling of them, that they were not Christians is beyond dispute.  

 For the practical demarcation between the Catholic Church and those who were not Christians at all existed in Spain, for the war against the Muslims including none Christians for practical religious reasons of enhanced possibility of success, not unlike the Crusades. So who were they and where did they come from? They were none other than Jews and Muslims, Muslims especially who has ruled Europe for such a long time. What we notice in the time past and what we know today is that Muslims were in many parts of Europe even before the advent of Erik the Red, especially the European Islands which was conquered by Vikings, within the same century. It seems rather a co-incidence that Muslims and Jews, departing parts of Europe, could only find solace in no other part of the World but in a place where the Vikings one sailed and explored. The Norsemen are nothing Muslim by history, which is only true in so far as current history also deny that Muslims of Africa were always and entirely Arabs, and every Arab essentially a Muslim. 

This is not the case. Most Arabs after the 9th century appearance of the Ishmaelite in Egypt, came from Syria, at a time when Syria was still very much part of Africa. In many sense therefore, we may say eagerly that Syria was very instrumental in the formation of the ‘Twelfers’ of the twelve tribes of the Ishmael, who determined the fate of Islam, the very head of it all, but deep down are others, the Persians and the Africans of say Fezzan, and these two were neither Arabs or particular Whites. European Muslims and their role of exploration is therefore dimly lit, in so far as we can say that they make our world is littered with unrealized explicating of actual history of the world. We know that the nothing could have better persuaded the Christian coalition in Spain to fight against the world of Muslims, did they not see what was in store for them. The catastrophe of the decision has never departed Spain, who perhaps needed to be free from others.                                                               

 The disaster of 1492 Spain in nothing else than the religious expurgation, where the departing group were scattered through the World, especially Africa, and the New World – assuming it was New at all. The role of Persia in spreading Islam is not also documented and who and what the Khazars (Khazaria) were, and their role in widening the Arabic society is not that documented, we may also say that there is nothing to compel anyone to believe or doubt about the so called group of people, for if we hope educate the minds of the society of how deep the spread of Islam is, we may say.... But it is difficult to prove that point, largely because a place called America was supposed to have gotten its name from a certain Vespucci. The claim is that the name supposedly came down to the current generation through a certain man by America Vespucci. It has been argued by a host of people that such is not the case that Vespucci may have claimed to have discovered the Quattro Pas, the Fourth part of the Atlas, sometime before Columbus. Too much have happened regarding the efficacy of the argument that seeks to largely oppose Vespucci’s claims.

                                                                                                                                                    Yet alternative theories on the discovery of America so to speak, relate the history concerning the people and culture as we noted in the time past. In the context of the writing concerning the claims, it does appear that all explicating was resolved in the favor of Columbus, such that the likes of Sebastian Cabot and other post 1450 century navigators indicated that the story about Vespucci was essentially redoubtable. It is not impossible to claim that the story about Vespucci was only progressively popular, and for one thing, the popularity of the man as the name for the fourth part of the Atlas was never certain until the founding of the United States of America. It does not mean that the name America has not been in use, but the name was general to a point such that the area we call America is based on old maps included a portion of the initial 13 colonies.

Samuel Eliot Morrison is a respected Historian of early history and the discovery of America. In his book the ‘European Discovery of America’, he raised the ultimate question about the travels supposedly made by Vespucci and the incident leading to some of the conclusions on the subject which his letter suggests. There is a reason why is has to be the Viking who re-discovered America, for it seems that we forget so easily, that the presence of other factors concerning the conquest of the people and in the land.

The incident of the people that follow their path and between these people and the rest of Asia are a long chain of the Islands which were conquered by these Vikings in familiar light of Muslims and Islam. We have stated before that these lands supposedly conquered by Vikings or at least visited by Vikings and Saracens were so names after Alla, and that the name alla, is also part of the same rubric ala in many languages including the African Igbo, which is land in English, which appear in all the statements and saying in the forms of the lands of God, and in the instance, England, taken and captured by Vikings and then Normans, Ireland, captured by Vikings, so also is Scotland.

But there are other lands such as Sheltland, Faroe land, Iceland, Greenland, and Baffin land, are what Elliot Samuelson once described as “series of island stepping-stones from Europe to America, parallel to those East Asia to Alaska”. It is therefore not enough to exist to see how and why these lands where simultaneously conquered by the Vikings and the so called Norsemen.

There is nothing to pretend about the possibility of their landing in that part of the world, but if we look into the facts surrounding the founding of these places which surrounds America, then there is so much to doubt about the discovery of even Caribbean in the name of Spain The issue is not the name that became the Americans or the conception of the name, rather the issue is the map, the old map that contains much of the name and information about America, is published from ages past and the map contains evidence of permanence of paper and reference which enabled a rebirth of the name over the years.

Whether the people who translated part of the letter from Wardseemuller, a cosmography and publisher, badly translated or not, we may seem to indicate that both the error and the misinterpretation of the error, would have handed is perhaps responsible for the enduring power of the name America.

The error was probable not Vespucci’s, or even Wardseemuller’s, the error may have occurred from the zeal of latter day scholars who may read their own meaning into the discoveries and travels of Vespucci, which included a date that suggest that he was the first to reach America. It cannot be taken for granted that the printing of the Cosmographies annual edition may have made the case that compelling for a populist crowd, or can it be taken for granted that Vespucci is Amerigos last name not the first, for all these may combine to even perpetuate a greater error that either Vespucci or Columbus discovered America in the decade of 1490-1500, AD.

We shall begin by looking in the sample of the letter Vespucci where allusions of discoveries were supposedly to have been made and avoided to Vespucci. It is claimed that Vespucci made the statement that “These regions we may rightly call Mundus Novus, a New World, because our ancestors had no knowledge of them….I have found a continent more densely peopled and abounding in animals than our Europe or Asia or Africa.” This statement is from a man who is believed to have travelled to several parts of the world before making it to the Americans. And the statement indicate the man was as much aware of the seize of the crowd of human beings in America, for it seems that Amerigos Vespucci, was relaying an incident that was either exaggerated or was based on stories which were popular in his time.

Yet we can see the writing from the point of view of a world that was gradually evolving for the New Europeans, for it seems that the inability of Europeans to investigate some of the claims made by these 15 century explorers substantiated their basic assumptions. What we may also note is the very attempt to woe the Majesty whose only investigation, can proclaim that a certain people or place has been discovered for the interest of the general public, hence the history which is likely to follow the view. In order to win the approval of their Majesties and the people who make the discoveries possible, we may likely seek other examples of the room and need for publicity which are the Press.

We may yet state that the above statement is not that far from Columbus’s statement about the blessing that is entirely America, abounding in wealth which only time proved him right. In the words of Columbus before his passing, mentioned that “By the Divine Will I have placed under the sovereignty of the King and Queen an Other World, whereby Spain, which was reckoned poor, is to become the richest of all countries.” Why there is something to note about these two statements and how they evolved over the centuries, we cannot pretend that enough does not exist to prove the statement from Columbus false to a point, amended through the years, as has become the tradition of some Spanish authors regarding their 15c.

For one thing, Spain at the time of Columbus was the greatest country on earth, there was no country that attempted to rival Spain in the 15c, as such the 18th and 19th century view of Spain as a poor country in Europe is not the same as Spain at the height of its power in the 15c and 16th century, besides the Moors who were themselves masters of Europe, or at least one of the masters of Europe, ruled from Granada Spain. Granada had one of the best Architectural Buildings of Europe in the 15c, and it is said that Alhambra was the Crown Jewel of Granada, built from Red Earth.

As such the supposed statement by Columbus couldn’t have been true, for it seems that the America of the 15c was reduced to a small state in Africa. But this is not the motivation of this article, this article explores some of the claims in the early years of the works and workers concerned, for if we look at the claim about the dense population of the America as also noted in the statement of Vespucci and compare them to the statement in the light of claims of slavery, we may begin to see some of the assumption in even Vespucci’s comments. How anyone will acquire slaves from the Indians and at the same time replace them with slaves from Africa is ridiculous to the point of densely ‘populated people’.

The central fix in this man’s argument may not dwell on this issue clearly enough, unless we make some review about the forces that determined the evolution of the story or stories concerning the people concerned. But the presence and role of Wardseemuller may go the distance to make the point quite clear. First we need to repeat the story for the general good of the reporting and so on, that one, Wardseemuller was at time of the incident an ‘instructor’ at a College of St. Die in Eastern France, and he was involved in the process of publishing the new edition of Ptolemy Atlas, titled ‘Cosmographie Introduction’ (1507) “…et quarta orbis pars (quam quia Americus inveunit (sic) Amerigen /quasi Americi terram / sive Americam nuncupure licet) (…and the fourth part of the Globe, which, since Americus discovered it, may be called Amerige or Land of Americus, or America…).

 And according to many sources, the same publisher by name Wardseemuller supposedly repeats the statement in time to make the room other forms of discusses on the Wardseemuller is believed to have also placed the name AMERICA at the fore front of the book covering the South and North of what is now the continent of America. Several arguments have been made about the name and how it stuck over the years in terms of the America. Some refer to the naturalness of the name in respect to other places of the world, others may refer it to something else, but somehow everyone believes that the name stuck for a combination of other factors which we are likely to examine.

 Beginning with the literary interpretation of the statements, we are seriously concerned with what we can make out the statement in direct connection likely to look at the statements closely and draw significant from a literary perspective, and that involves looking at the relationship between the lines in the first quotes of Vespucci as Wardseemuller represented it, and the second statement as it is believed to be a repeat of Wardseemuller. We are likely to form the opinion about the Wardseemuller and Vespucci on the context of the first statement, since the first statement need no second guessing and such the second version cannot apply as the real statement.

 Even we push the argument that the first torched the second, we are likely to do so on the presumption that Wardseemuller and Vespucci did not corporate with each, and no point exists to cast aspersions on the deduction that is likely the case and may likely take place before these people. As such we left we the statement that one, “…et quarta orbis pars (quam quia Americus inveunit (sic) Amerigen /quasi Americi terram / sive Americam nuncupure licet) (…and the fourth part of the Globe, which, since Americus discovered it, may be called Amerige or Land of Americus, or America…)And this theme allows you to view the disappearing quotations from the earliest evidence of the printing that one, Wardseemuller’s statement was badly mutilated to the degree that we cannot for one make out what he is saying in full. In a sense, those who began this propaganda for Vespucci, adapted their position to Wardseemuller in such a way that the reader in many other circles of the world, would see the whole interpretation for themselves, such that we are likely to view the statement from the point of reduction with little or no relationship to the actual statement by Wardseemuller.

The statement is not true and worthy of great scholastic since it is riddled in ellipsis and in complete sentences, and secondly the quotation “…et quarta orbis pars (…and the Fourth part of the Globe...)” may suffer from bad translation, for the disappearing statement in the way we now observe them, may be reduced to other translations for instance, (…to the Fourth part of the Orbit), which instantly changes the statement, to mean that a ‘Fourth Part of the Globe’ was already known, and was perhaps navigated from time to time, and from all indication, it will seem to unlikely to appear that a second or other parts of the ‘quarta orbis pars’ was discovered, or that explorers at the time of the publication of a ‘cosmography’ edition submitted an addition to the ‘Fourth part of the Globe’ which became by the edition, a Vespucci contribution, by title America.

The remaining part of the first quotation from Wardseemuller, suggested the following that one “…(quam quia Americus inveunit (sic) Amerigen /quasi Americi terram / sive Americam nuncupure licet) (…and the fourth part of the Globe, which, since Americus discovered it, may be called Amerige or Land of Americus, or America…)” “…quarta pars per Americum Vesputium (ut in sequentibus audietur) inventa est / quam non video cur quis iure vetet ab Americo inventore sagacis ingenii viro Amerigen quasi Americi terram / sive Americam dicendam; Asia a mulieribus sua sortita sint nomina. (…Since another fourth part (of the world) has been discovered by Americus Vesputius (as will be seen in what follows), I do not see why anyone should object to its being called after Americus the discoverer, a man of natural wisdom, Land of Americus or America, since both Europe and Asia have derived their names from women.) It is too obvious that in the statement as well, that there is nothing to hide about the words in bracket, which is naturally in conflict with the first line of the statement, suggesting at least on the minimum that a later redactor inserted the claim for Vespucci.

It is not wrong to claim that the words in the form that they essentially appear, made it possible for people to dwell on this fact very closely, for it seems that the earliest extant material on the Vespucci’s saga, made it impossible to dwell on this facts very clearly, where alterations in the form of commentaries became perpetuated as the story and as the fact. We are likely to dwell on the changes that the enduring lines, et al, “Land of Americus, or America…”, once we note that the copyist carefully manipulated these lines to suit his or her argument about the founding of a land, we can see why it endured, since it seems necessary that the words above suggest entitlement to Vespucci.

How the first name of a man by name Albert Vespucci, was also tried and embroidered into the frontal piece as Amerigo from Albert, from which America resulted, may be a lengthy discourse, but in more ordinary levels, there is a greater look at the name Amerigo, which hardly appear in many parts of ancient Latin, which became the central puzzle on a land far away. If a place is to be called after a man, they naturally follow the path of the last name or the surname, and at no point does it seem that the surname Vespucci appear anywhere else, saving for the coordinates, which is based on existing names and family. In reality as we shall also discuss, the word America, simply refers to a Land of a certain people, and the construct of the name/s may widen the mind construction of the later day cryptic who created the error, for while the name Ameri (Am Eri) is not new, and literarily refers to ‘domain of Eri’ or ‘place of Eri’ and very evident in the name Emeri, part of syllable Rudrik, Erik, Henrik, Henri, it is the later incident of the name Ama-eri-ka, that seem to invoke the great difficulty with the final chip in the puzzle about the incidents of 15c.

Yet the solution with the discovery of America is the name, which somehow manages to spoil the highly choreographed falsifications of Columbus and Vespucci, and survives the years of misleading stories about the role of Ferdinand and Isabella is directing Columbus to move South, as if Columbus who was later jailed and chained by Isabella, who in life identified himself as Moro (Moor), was working on a master plan from Spain towards the discovery of America. What we may say that enough exists from the statement from the purported statement of Wardseemuller - whose name suggest Norman and Moorish origin – originally from Germany, that the incidents of Vespucci is probably not true, furthermore, the claim of discovery America by Columbus is also not true. It may seem that these two sea captains were aware of the effects of publishing on the general crowd, a process which Gutenberg perfected but did not originate.

This process of publishing perpetuated the error in the 18th century, and not before. It will also seem that Vespucci who accompanied Hojeda (Ojeda), one of Columbus’s Travel Guide, may have also hinted Vespucci on a secret, which gave Vespucci the impudence to encourage any misunderstanding with the printing, as if to also claim a ‘claim’ for himself as Columbus may have also done. We are looking at the possibility of two claims from two people who have little and no reason to doubt each other’s mental pre-occupation, for it seems that there all people who ruled in the domain of Eri were in serious decline, and the bunch of them were mainly interested in rediscovery of the old navigation route, used maps already enhanced and perfected by a disappearing group.

It is not easily to illustrate the insignificance of Vespucci and Columbus, and we can only hope to make amend on the claims on the context of the statement and history regarding the exploration of the 15c, where it all seems that all hell broke loose for the European explorers and the English, when in no small measure we notice the arrival of these people to a land far away. Or was it? The familiar statements of the American Philosopher by name Ralph Waldo Emerson, in his sloppy and overly done ‘English Traits’ mentioned that “Strange that…broad America must wear the name of a thief. Amerigo Vespucci, the pickle dealer at Seville, who went out, in 1499, a subaltern with Hojeda (Ojeda), and whose highest naval rank was boatswain’s mate in an expedition that never sailed, managed in this lying world to suppress Columbus and baptize half the world with his own dishonest name”

That statement also appeared in the Morison’s book, but in such a way as to suggest that the man was attacking Vespucci. Such commentary is not without the impact of the civil society for nothing in the context of American society may mean that US would have been called Columbus or Christopher Columbus as the case with Amerigos. What we can also miss from this point is that Amerigos in the context of the discussions, evolve through the picture carefully, and the fact that the ‘Land of Americus’ has nothing to do with Amerigos, can only be explained by the acceptance since it was not the land of Amerigos. We must also note that nothing in the history of America in the last 100 years or thereabout remotely mentions the faults with the claims, that neither Spain or England, were maritime champions in the 15c, that in fact the name Armada, which sounds (at least to me as Am-edda) refers to a group of explorers, older than the foundation of Royal Spain in 1494, on whose shoes the Spanish house of Aragon and Castile essentially carried on...

There is also the word ‘marine’ which now refers to life inside the water, a name that is evident in Spanish history, a name that is only African through and through, for this Marine, refers an Old Empire on the Red Sea, on what in Ancient and Modern times, is Africa, Egypt to be sure. Merimde, Merida, Meriden, are terms that are African through and through, terms that are associated with navigation on the continent of Africa, terms that are reserved for explorers, who became much more portent with the rise of Islam and the collapse of Persia into the hands of Arabs. It is not small statement to say that no useful part of the open Sea Navigation belongs to Europe before 1415, and no small part of their interference with masters of navigations, the Africans, the Persians, the Arabs, especially the Africans, seem evident after 800 AD.

We shall delve into this discussion from the point of view of a man who wrote in the time past by name Henry Pirene, especially his book ‘Mohammed and Charlemagne’, and shall discuss in full some of the writings of a certain man by Thompson on his ‘Social and Economic History of the Middle ages’. Before we continue, we may look at the second statement, “…quarta pars per Americum Vesputium (ut in sequentibus audietur) inventa est / quam non video cur quis iure vetet ab Americo inventore sagacis ingenii viro Amerigen quasi Americi terram / sive Americam dicendam ; cum &Asia a mulieribus sua sortita sint nomina. (…Since another fourth part (of the world) has been discovered by Americus Vesputius (as will be seen in what follows), I do not see why anyone should object to its being called after Americus the discoverer, a man of natural wisdom, Land of Americus or America, since both Europe and Asia have derived their names from women.)

This second statement which is believed to have come by of way of Wardseemuller, may be the reason behind the difficulty in settling the issue, for it seems at least to the best of us, that the reiteration of Wardseemuller’s words in one of his publications, whose original is no longer extant, may indicate that the connection of the word to the saying ‘Land of Americus, since both Europe and Asia have derived their names from women’ may have done more in perpetuating the name and in giving some credibility to the statement. If the original copy from where the statements from which the account where were copied does not exist anywhere by stretch of history, there is nothing to come to grasp with the statement that Vespucci who was called a man of “natural wisdom”, regarded as the “discoverer” of America had anything to do with Wardseemuller.

The statement was probable inserted by someone else, and that is where the confusion begins and ends, for here there is no where we can verify the sources and the accounts about the Atlas, nor see the entire pages since the document was ascertained more than once to be longer be extant. Whether we lift the name Albert Vespucci to the sailor to replace Amerigos Vespucci as a derivative, and from there to become Americus Vespucci, to Americus, is entirely up to the reader who has to understand what essentially is going on over years. We are only left with one option and one option only, to look at the evidence of remaining papers and make all the amends in terms of business and business community.

Here only first class scholars can interpret the whole incident very clearly, that as much as Europe was named after a Iopa, a supposed daughter of a Pharaoh, captured by an Ensi (a Chief) which is a general term as the name Zeus, and taken to an island far away, we can remain attentive to choreography of words which indicate that the names of other continents as woman’s name may indirectly but inaccurately survived the much of everyone’s else. Iopa’s brother, Kadmos, was said to sail out to look for Iopa, but was never successful. And as the story goes, Iopa was taken to the West which is what we now call Netherlands, and what is now Europe. Asia on the other hand and as a story is difficult to square in the context of being a woman’s name, for no such history or indication is actually available.

The origin of the name seems difficult to demonstrate saving for more realized view that Asia existed at some point or another as a name of a people, perhaps as a name that was not that whole, perhaps a name that changed from ancient form to its modern corruption. In terms of America, we cannot exactly indicate that the name is exactly and completely what it is, for even we say that the name of the man was Amerigo, we can still indicate that the Amerigo is looked upon as a Latin female version of America. The inference from the Amerigo as a name makes it very clear that the name in of itself could not have been appropriate in terms of the provisions of the insertion, by necessity the female name in context of Amerigo which the poor redactor inserted, defeats the purpose of the claim, since America as a name could not have survived as a male version of Amerigo when the name Amerigo, is supposedly the female genitive of America.

Unless we insert that Amerigo Vespucci is a woman, whom the author and later redactors attempted to appropriate as the soul of the New Continent from a male bias, then surely the statement is not from the Publisher, Wardseemuller. We may further indicate that the lines also suggest the redactor’s pre-occupations, for it seems clear that him or her that inserted the description, cannot be that opposite and complete at the same time, for we know too well that praising a man or woman before completely verifying the facts tells us too much about the other and about the publication. If we pretend that Wardseemuller inserted the statement, then we can say that the man was leading a campaign for the bearer of the name, Vespucci.

It may seem to also say that the praises on the name is all of sudden a matter of necessity where the name is lousily incorporated into the main, irrespective of Vespucci as the main name, for sure, the publishers may have been motivated by other names which was well received, a name that was perhaps existing at some point, a name that must have been forgotten but now fleshed in the names of Amerigo and Vespucci. In some sense, the name Vespucci is as sound as Amerigo, may even on its own even strike a match in public ear as the name Americus, yet the name America was affixed to the paper, suggesting a quality that was not ordinary at the time of its publication, or a name insubordinate to public view. That inability to outlast the public image indicates very clearly that the public did not care about Vespucci, since the original publications probably did not quote Vespucci as the discovery of the land of the Americans.

In very vivid sense, Vespucci may have been celebrated as a local hero who added to the world a new land, and the new land was celebrated in a popular magazine or publication thereof, such that the publication became popular in terms of America which to many small people was a new land, which became confused with the name Amerigo, the star of the new edition of Cosmography, in essence there were subsequent editions, and others much later, yet one involves a man that will be popular in later years. His popular was not so much the publication as it was destined to become the place, the continent. In essence, we attach Vespucci to the name America, when in reality Albert is the first name of Vespucci and not really Amerigo, let alone America.

A name that probably had nothing to do Albert Vespucci, ab initio, became popular because of the publication, ipso facto. We may presume that some form of transfer of the name from public ‘imagination’ and the ‘reality’ of a place, to the very reality of the source of the popularity, no more a hero than he was a local champion who may or may not discovered a place in the fourth part of the compass. We may buy this view on one condition that America is a place in the Atlas that covered the Fourth Part of the Compass or the Atlas, the Northern part of the Atlas to be precise, that the place must have been known and traveled to and well navigated to complete the fourth part of the Compass. The Compass was perfected in the 13th century, and it has been in use for some time, and in respect to Vespucci and Columbus, their landing in America, assuming we accept their view, would have taken place in the 15th century, almost two centuries from the perfection of the Compass and the Atlas.

In any given sense, we may presume that the Fourth part of the Compass was not a new discovery and cannot account for one. We can always compare that other publications may or may have the same name and title as the one for America, is one that is recent and not as old as Columbus and his voyages. We can also spy a possibility that Spanish historians and others from Europe kept the name alive as a form of reminding them that Europe discovered America. It is too early to indicate that such outcome may yet prove that no alternate sources exist to correct the impressions, for it seems (at to me) that Columbus was not as popular as he became in Spain in the course of time, that the incidents of Mexico, made more magic the outcome of the incident.

Therefore we claim that it is only a recent addition to the name, as such historians out of purpose or out of error gave Vespucci the name of a place that he neither claimed to have discovered or discovered in its entirety. Vespucci may have discovered a land within the Americas, but by facts, it was not the Fourth part of the compass, a theme within a theme which self-defeats. For how could one discover a place called place where he stood to discover the place, for if there was no Fourth part of the world or globe already known, the need will not exist to demonstrate that a Fourth Part of the world has been found.

The Quartro Pars was a puzzle only because the solutions were already, the ‘otro mundus’ was a Noun form from a verb because there was a place noted as the Outer World. The New World was to suffer the same fate, from verb to Noun because there was a different world at the time of the people and their culture. Vespucci is that of the bearer who got the anointing for the continent. Second of all, there are names of this Amerigo which is better fitting, for instance his surname which is Vespucci, by far a more commanding male name and more fitting into the gender repressed names. The New World and Quatra Pars, Terra Incognita, which makes for more difficult comprehension and the rest of the whole issue, In another way, there was no discoveries made about the Fourth part of the World, there were perhaps new lands which never existed before, which were included in an Atlas that was published from to time.

As we shall see, the Ptolemy Atlas goes to the 2nd century before Christ, launched as a appendage to sea Navigation and exploration, which was the pre-occupation of a certain people called the Merinde, who wrote in runes, who used Red Sea as platform to reach parts of the world including places that was easily noted. There may probable be a place was not discovered, and that land was not America, rather a New World, that may or may not be Mexico, but a new land by claim. The error may have started something later, The extra-ordinary quality of the name Americus; America, must be something divine, something so powerful that only the earning years can the respect and make it possible to have survived the centuries.

It may also indicate that the nature of instinct is such that one may reach a certain threshold on the context of a subject that has occupied his or her mind. We can also indicate that there is no need to state clearly, whether the name should be that important, for sure, we know that if go through the title of the name Amerigos, and how it even appears on the man’s name, we may suggest that the man’s popularity was not in Spain or Portugal, that enough name/s exist for the name in the context of perception and not reality. We may go the greater detail in changing the name to meet the fact that America is supposed to be a Spanish Version of the Latin name Amerigo, or is the other way round, for if we note the example very clearly, the female nature of the name has nothing to do with the subject in the context of how it descends into America as the cognomen for other names in the story.

There are other more revealing factors in the whole discourses and from the available facts of the given story we may recapture part of the synapses from the era of the story which may directly explain a whole lot, which we may find adequate or inadequate in the course of the discovery of American story. The evidence of these names includes the Atlas, by name Ptolemy Atlas, and the name America, which as we have mentioned is not an uncommon place in the years past, featured prominently in the Introduction or part of the Introduction, as if the edition was about America and nothing more.

The publisher himself Wardseemuller, as I have mentioned earlier, has a name that can be attributed to be Moorish in origin, which I have also mentioned is not far from Normans as will be the case for French, though he is supposed to be German in Origin. It is only in the context of the understanding that ‘Cosmographie’ was not experiencing a first hand of trial and execution, that Cosmographie was a theme that was quite old, much older than 15c and Amerigo and Columbus, can we see the point much clearly that the edition was a form not a first and continues later.

In terms of what lies between the word ‘Cosmographie’ and the culture, we may only see it as a case that is not that different from new editions of world Atlas, for instance new edition of British Encyclopedia, with near dispatches from new scientist and new introduction to new discoveries or even commentary upon the old, may need the publisher’s introduction to the particular subject. In essence, Preludes in a book edition are mere symbolic process of introduction, whose central theme may be the title of the book, and whose idea is still very young. There is a whole lot to offer the tinkering group and culture involved in book making if look at it very seriously, for it seems, that if we collect the evidence about lands far away, about commentary on old Maps which Vespucci and Columbus had a great Library, especially Columbus, we are likely to see this group as apprentice coming into their own when the masters have already left.

We must also add that Columbus identified himself as a Moro or a Moor, ‘son of enlightenment’ as they describe them nowadays, as opposed to ‘sons of light’ or ‘sons of God’ as they appear in early times. We must also indicate that he was following a religious prophecy so to speak about the end of the reign of the ‘great ones’ in Spain, and a star was to come full light in the year 1492 or sometime thereabout which was to lead to the banishment of these sons of light into some unknown land of promise. These were only stories, or claims which people made at some point and another, for as much as we know, there is not enough about that stories that appear in regular history of American, and by the turn of the last century, all the story connected to the Americas and Amerigos has been reduced a form of opposition against the already entrenched view, which made the whole argument and refutation seem a case for Columbus.

But someone is not always his best defense. We may however indicate that the Columbus is not the man who reached or discovered America first, that America does not need to be discovered in particular sense of history. It is not just the case however we look at it. We may see the point from a point of the numbers facts about European history after 15 century, but enhanced Navy power of Spain and Europe was not born overnight, it has a staying power that goes in time.

In addition to the fact that Columbus identified with the Moro, and that he descended in many ways than one from a place that is now Morocco, means that he is in fact an African without doubt, his 15 ship, was made in the form of stripped Viking’s Ship, the popular Dragon Ship. If we give in to the fact that Columbus was a ‘vikein’ an ‘explorer’, that he is a Moro, that he is African in guise of a Ship lord after a certain man of Genoa, whereas his father, Demico, a certain Lankra man, was from Córdoba, then we are looking at the fallacy of the claims about the man and his voyage and the bad interpretation given to the heroes of the age of European Discovery or Re-discovery. Columbus was another fact is that Vespucci was from the same place as Columbus, and since his name is not exactly Latin or Spanish, there is a great deal about Amerigo as a name that would placate the country. It is said that Vespucci was from Genoa and same with Columbus, need exists for that to be false too, because Columbus is from North Africa, on the side of the continent that is 30 miles away from Europe. It is quite possible that Vespucci is also from Cordoba, and possible from North Africa and perhaps in between Africa and Italy.

This also applies to Alfonso Ojeda, one of Columbus’s Travel Guide, who also came from North Africa. The man who was the Captain of the flagship of Columbus’s 15 Ship called Santa Maria, was also a Moor, by name Pietro. It all makes sense, that these people who lead the Ship to the so called New World, were no easy fellows, there is a possibility that they were aware of the line that thread between Spain and America, or between Europe and America. Or even between the Red Sea, parts of North Africa, Indus Valley, Arabian Peninsula, Petra and Arabian Desert, Syria, to Asia Minor, to Mainland China and India which came increasingly under threat from Turkey in the 14th century, to Islands of Europe and the ‘outer’ world, which reduced or re-translated from Columbus’s ‘otro mundo’ ‘other world’ to the language of ‘mundus novus’ ‘new world’ which is purported to have come from Vespucci’s 1502 letter from Lisbon.

Yet we know what these things will exactly mean, for it seems that Columbus’ language was one of re-discovery based on the childhood fancy and not necessarily one of pure and previously unknown places. One can also understand that these so called explorers of the 15c came to the scene ‘already made’, they were coming up with something new, and they know, they were claiming to have discovered a New World altogether and Spain, Portugal, the World in the time knew it that very much. Perhaps the essence of Posterity is that ‘one’ has to take a stage in the unfolding of the events beyond the world in a given era or time. In essence, historians forced Columbus and Vespucci to be the ‘discoverers’ of a world that they could not have claimed to have discovered.

It is my view that these discoveries as we reduced them were so authenticity of their discoveries was in many ways a form of re-discovery, part based on reality, part on synthesis form Nautical and they were happy to get the credit for it since the abandoned Quatra pars was for a time the Domain of Eri, which illiterate Spanish and Portuguese of 14 and 15 century Spanish could not attempt. The reader must under that Spanish Christian population was 10-20 percent literacy, 80 -90 percent illiteracy. Before 14c and 15C, there was virtually no record of sea travels. As such our world is saturated with inadequacy of history, which were enhanced through and through by redactors, which is only from 15C, as if Europe, when in reality it has always been, only that a certain Christian coalition and Conversos in Spain and Portugal, were now new masters of their world and it was only a question of time that they began to dare sea Navigation which was for many years, essentially the preserve of the Moors, the Arabs, and Jewish others.

Part II,... a response to professor Harris .... Joseph E. Harris, with his Ph.D in ‘Africans and Their History’, may be part of the same interpretation of Africa. His work is very monumental to the point that only little can done be added in terms of its content to expedite on African synthetic history. Yet his work is not deep enough and general graft misleads the untrained historian. There is so much that we find to be generally missing in his book, beginning for instance with the new discoveries in archeology and what the stones tell us about Africa. His major contribution however is on what the African languages tell us about the past of the continent, a point he only briefly torched on and did not expand.

Harris emphasized the history of Egypt from ancient times to perhaps the time of the last dynastic, with special emphasis on the 12th, yet much of the history of Egypt so to speak was severely limited to Africa and to the documentary retention of Egyptian history, as if nothing exist for the contention. We learn about the psychological influences of the thinkers of history, much about the view of blacks as wanting in just about anything we know about the continent. For instance, Professor Harris reminded the reader of the story concerning a certain John C. Calhoun, on his challenge to the world that if he could find a ‘black man’ able to read the ‘Greek syntax’, he will then consider ‘the black race human’. Ali Mazrui was supposed to have responded to have cited Kwame Nkrumah’s reaction to Calhoun, saying “what might have been the sensation kindled by the Greek syntax in the mind of the famous Southerner, I have so far been unable to discover, but…I could show him among black men of pure African blood those who could repeat the Koran from memory, skilled in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, Arabic and Chaldaic”.

What was the point of raising this in African history? It was perhaps to disabuse the mind of the readers and the listening crowd, perhaps to encourage and lead them into a certain direction for instance - , history of Africa is one that we are yet to understand, perhaps it was to expedite on the obstacles to African history and knowledge, which he may or may not be suggesting is intricately bound with the Black race. There is no denying that Professor Harris was making a case for Africa since he highlighted the influences guiding world historians and the perception if not pre-occupation of such history. Assuming that is not the case, we may look at other instances where other reflections on African history essentially appeared in part of his book.

He cited the comments about world history concerning a misguiding view of Babylonian Talmud of the 6th century on the nature of Noah’s course that “it must Canaan, your first born, whom they enslave…Canaan’s children shall be born ugly and black…your grand – Children’s hair shall be twisted into kinks…(their lips) shall swell. Men of his race are called Negroes, their forefather Canaan, commanded them to love theft and fornication, to be banded together in hatred of their masters and never to tell the truth”.

Such position is genuinely laughable. For anyone unaccustomed to Jewish history and tradition, he or she may just take in the bad jest from these writings. (1) There is no doubt that some versions of Christian and Jewish history make outrages claims about Canaan and the sons of Ham, but the story as we note from these lines are seriously misleading, so misleading that the much later bigoted injection into the lines, and the gyration of the bad characters of these sons of Ham, may have altogether reduced itself to blacks and their Africans. Beginning with the word ‘Negro’, we can tell right on that the word is very recent addition to the text, such that no one in the 6th century through fall of the Moors, perhaps several centuries or so later, used the word Negro.

The root of the word ‘Negro’ is in all likelihood is a 19th century invention and suggest to a large extent the age of the altering and insertion into the Talmudic. Such position goes even to a large extent in demonstrating that something is perhaps wrong with the overall statement, since the word was perhaps quoted verbatim by Harris and perhaps by others of latter day histrionic.

(2) Secondly the statement seems to have descended from the 6th century Babylonian Talmudic. We are supposed to believe that the presence of the Talmudic makes the case that the quote is accurate. In many ways than one, we can say, that if tortured quote is accurate it may or may not be the official position of the school of Rabbis, that the Talmudic has a history of its own, such that one Rabbi’s exegesis on a particular topic is more than likely to differ from some others. In essence, the Talmudic is just a school of pronunciation and commentary, a school that go back to the fall of Jerusalem and Nebuchadnezzar in 586 BCE. In that, the school remains part of the Jewish intellectual liturgy but no longer central to the society from around the time of Zerubabel and the rebuilding of Jerusalem, at the time when Cyrus the Great allowed Jews to return home.

In essence, we can say that from the time of Nehemiah of the Minor Prophets - who is more or less Ezra the Priest - to the Second fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, Babylon as the center of Jewish life was no longer relevant. Even if we say that the Sadducees who came much later and the Pharisees of the Edom and Hebrew reconnaissance, Jerusalem was the focal point of Jewish life and commentary and not Babylon. Altogether we can also say that when we really look at the period in Babylon, which is the 6th century after Christ, we are talking about a time of deciding African history where much of the world and its intellectual activity had been decided by early fathers.

(3) Much of the early fathers themselves were seriously Africans for instance natives, and most popular of whom was St Augustine of Hippo. It is no joke that the much of the world had substantial faith on these people and so on, in fact, Memphis which was far from whoever ruled Alexandria. St Augustine himself, considered the founding father of Western Intellectual society lived in these Hamitic places so to speak, and lived a century earlier than the 6th Babylonian school of Rabbis. And by 6th century we dare not contemplate anything less than 6th century AD, for mistakes are little to take place with the very date. The main point and perhaps the only concern is that Harris himself did not treat the subject very well. For we still know that even the so called Torah in standard notation began in 2nd century but reached the adopted form in the 3rd century AD.

(4) By Sixth Century, much of Jewish society has already been run over, first the persecution of a Christ-like people – followers of Jesus of Nazareth, second the conquest of Jerusalem in AD 70 and in 72, where 998 Jews of mostly priestly descent, committed suicide while protecting the inner Sancta, an action that further disintegrated the people of Israel. That action was accomplished either by poison as accomplished by the two remaining women, or by Jews who eviscerated themselves, yet it was the death of the cream of the society and vanquishing that brought Titus and the Menorah to Rome Then the persecution broke in many ways than, and the remnant were dislocated to various parts of the world.

(5) It was in the context of the breakdown that many of the Jewish parties, numbering eight at the time of Christ’s death were forced in the mountains, into the deserts, into parts of Syria, into places that we may now call Turkey, modern day Turkey covering provinces of Asia, Cappadocia, Pamphilia, parts of Phrygia, etc. At the time of Christ, there were already Jews from different parts of the world, but after the great revolt in Syria led by Bar Choba and after the accounts of I and II Maccabees – written a century or so from each other, then the Jews really sparse all over the world.

Yet one area which dominated their world even at time of Nebuchadnezzar was Egypt and the Aswan - the first Cataract into Africa. Africa dominate everything Jewish from its earliest years to much later years of Gnostic, in fact then and as much as now, nothing can be called Jewish that is not entirely African. Too early to dwell on that statement, especially the fact that they were Jews in many parts of Southern Arabia, whose culture through years have grudgingly changed in many ways than one.

(6) That they were Jews through Syrian deserts and mountains, may have also given some impetus to the evolution of Islam itself. Yet Islam however wonderful, only managed appears as an institution in Africa. All three religions copying the Memphite priest, then the position of the Christian in their early years was fully enhanced by foreign element in the area. What is happening in this interpretation is that Africa, in terms of the issues concerning the culture and people of the world, is no strangers at least to three religions, especially Christianity and Judaism, that even the Muslims has a lot of bragging about the continent and tell us about the people and about their cultures so to speak. We need suggest that Eusebius himself pointed to a few Christians who knew how to speak Hebrew, one whom was a certain Origen.

(7) The breakdown of these religious groups in terms of their 6th century history promotes the difficulty in even contemplating the probable official status of the so called Babylonian Talmud regarding the Negro apostrophe and Hamites culture. It does not mean that it did not take or was not taken into canvas by some Rabbi, yet a lettered one, much yet a Rabbi unfamiliar Judaism can reduce certain teachings to the above lines as exactly stated by Harris. It is important to note that throughout History such issue regarding Ham has always entered in the fore of the history of Africa, and even in terms of the very place we can Afro-Asiatic – both in terms of the people and language – there has always been the issue of Hamitic stock.

(7b) This stock is supposed to include everything we know from much of the Bible and its history, on the greater count that the view much of us have been influence by same process, bleaches away any form indication and claim very closely, noting that a place for instance called Canaan is many times larger than anything we know and associate with Israel. That Israel is itself is situated in that part of the world we ultimately we refer to Canaan. In that sense therefore, much need to be said about the place and time of the statement concerning children of Ham, not that it interferes with any particular version of history as far as Africa is concerned, but allows to give label to Ham and give Ham a picture which cannot necessarily fit into a posture by the statement about the Kinky hair Africans.

It is the stubble lips that is an issue, since many races of the world so speak has it, it is not the wooly hair, since many races of the world has it, it is not the dark skin since of the culture in the world boast of their very dark ones not necessarily from Africa. It is the prevailing psychology and the time of the psychology that really matters. For one thing, the prevailing psychology of the 6th century is one last revival of the African history since the end of 3rd century. In a sense, much of the world in the war it has survived to us, survive as if the rest of Sub-Sahara had little to offer the world.

By sixth century, the culture of the North is just a culture of the so called Asians, it was a culture of Native Africans, many of them very wholly hair, many of them very dark, many of them very kinky hair. These individuals as we have noted in time past also did the world all kinds of favor, they were the spiritual and intellectual center of whatever happened in either the Christian or the Jewish society. Even in Babylon in the 6th century, Babylon and Iran was seriously bejeweled by Blacks, so much so, that much of their very native races in Iran then as well as now, are among the very dark. In a way, the mixed quality of the Iraq of today and not necessarily Iraq of the 19th century, results from three possible groups and three possible influences.

Besides the natives - among who were light skinned, were migrants from deep parts of Asia – some of whom are light skinned. The case of Darius is not very complete, he is in fact rumored to wooly haired and smooth skinned. Many Assyrians are like that, many of the ancient Babylonians were noted with same wooly hair and otherwise blacks. As the case may be, we can believing against the fact that rest of these Asian group were so pure in white or strange dark and different from the Africans, that we find the color that sufficient to create all kinds of distinction.

(8) These places mentioned, including Babylon where the Jews rested and was saved, are no strangers to dark skinned people. These people are rather used to all kinds of people, and in fact down the coast and around Mesopotamia or through Jordan, Trans-Euphrates were known very well for one the darkest people known to man. Like we have mentioned, a place such as Jordan, remained a dark hue till the coming of Turks of different variety. It was not the Arabs of the 6th and 7th century that created this headache with race, in fact these invading Turks of the 14 and 15th centuries, did not see themselves as white Europeans. All thing in many ways than, relegate the color issue to at 17th century and perhaps 18th century.
What the redactors were trying to accomplish is not clear, but providing explanation to certain things or providing justification for certain laws is not unlike Judaism of the 18th century, hence a picture of a certain people believed as philosophers and writers, Luxurio once called them to be the ‘most beautiful of men’. The time frame of the learning and the writing can only be due to the incidents of 18th century, for if we bold enough to take a step back, to the centuries preceding the slave trade, it is impossible to even contemplate the legacy of such talk. Why the great professor Harris did not treat issues is not quite certain, but that leaves us is the influences of the professor in jotting his own synthesis on the ink.

Still at the issue of the 6th century AD, we know also from Christian history we may indicate that as far Christian history was concerned, third century Africa was so full of traffic that anyone not used to the Natives who became it all, was not entirely human. The Jews themselves were not the main event, they were only part of the so many. It was Christianity that enabled Jews rise to the prominence, it happened when enough Christian prejudice against Jews were no longer significant.

For Strabo, the writing much earlier indicated that a connection between Jews and Egyptians - essentially Black or the Hamitic stock, citing how they are together inside the area that is called Palestine, he said “for the most part each region is inhabited by a mixture of tribes drawn from Egyptian and Arabs and Phoenician, for such are those who dwelt in Galilee and Jericho and Philadelphia and Samaria, which Herod Sebaste.

Although they are so mixed, the predominant opinion among the beliefs concerning the temple at Jerusalem represents the ancestors of those now called Jews as Egyptians.” And these two if not three have remained very close, such that in the later part of the 6th century, we begin to notice great changes in the languages. As in the 6th century, much of the salvation of the Jews came from Africans themselves, especially the Alexandrians, for when Byzantine and the Western church got upper hand in the affairs of the world, they seethes with resentment on the Jews.

(9) In a book written by Henry Wolfram “Roman Empire and Its Germanic Peoples’, the author mentioned an instance of the Berber and the Moors of Africa, that “the eyewitness and contemporary Procopius, one must realize, wrote in the dialectical tradition of an ethnography that gained its insights through comparison and contrast. While Caesar had compared the wild and utterly uncivilized Germans with the far less barbaric Gaul, Procopius concerned himself with the striking contrast that existed between the Vandals and Moors. The Berbers – the word means ‘barbarians’ –

….When they prepared for battle, they were careful “to abstain from all injustices and from all foods tending toward luxury and most of all from association with women.” (10) We know from Archives of English Historical review and from LaTourette’s ‘History of Christianity’ that the Aryan Heresy did not entirely end the separation between one group and another as far as the church was concerned. There was the rising issue of church property which many of them had accused the Jews of being the necessary instrument and accessory.

What the church did was to dislocate the Jews from among them, accusing of profiteering. So well did they that Jews essentially forced into defensive position, and in places such as Toledo and parts of Spain, the Jews were barred from any form of lending to Christians and from usury. The Jews were barred from major public observance and forbidden to ‘celebrate’ or to conduct official Jewish days, and the edit that proclaimed such outcome was 9th council of Toledo in 655.

In the 12th council and in 681, Jews were stripped of further entitlement and in 16th council of Toledo in 693 BC, Jews were forbidden to meet in any open water prayer or cleansing which was not Christian baptism, and in 17th council, following issues of property confiscation and riots in major parts of what was Toledo, Jews were forced to Slavery so to speak. These episodes were enacted through Europe and throughout the places that Byzantine willed influence and ruled.

(10) The rest is not a new story to the rest of at all, largely for the fact that stories are repeated all the time through the ranks of Christian history and Christian doctrines. The book that perhaps added a clear and deciding dimension to the actions of the Jews is James Westfall’s ‘Economic and Social History of the Middle Ages’, a book that first introduced the bibliography on the Archives of the English Historical Review, also treated part of the Toledo issues but went on to describe the reaction of the Jews, that they turned to Berbers in Africa and so on, that “in their desperate plight the Jew connived with the Mohammadized Berber across the straight in Africa, where Jews enjoyed the protection of Islam.”

It goes without saying that rest of what happened in Africa and in Spain, has always been a theme of history, that these same blacks were the saviors of these Jews, and were the bearers of great cultures and warriors of the world, who defeated Rodrigo and his high ranking officers, a feat that Arabians could not achieve. If there is only one explanation to the whole episode is these Berbers and other tribes of the continent from Germanic tribes and mothers, were perhaps the most powerful force along the straits and perhaps inside Syria.

Since they were not Muslims initially means that they were perhaps hired by Musa, perhaps in connived with the Governor of Morocco, altogether indicating that a conflict between these Germanic tribes and African counterparts was still evident. Victor of Vita indicated that it was Vandals and one of the tribes that began the conflict that these groups of invaders first settled in what was Phoenician off the coast of Tunis, but then the entered into Africa from Tunis.

If James Westfall, whose poor knowledge of Ancient Egypt essentially manifested in context of his book and whose knowledge of evolution of the sea power was seriously lacking and exposed is his book, sympathized with Jews of being stripped of their property, and then using lines such ‘conniving’ with Berbers, for people who were almost reduced to slavery, seem to tell more about the individual than his sympathy essential suggest.

The author did not indicate that the people in question called the Berbers, were the masters of the North Africa, that Berbers have already removed much of Germanic tribes from Phoenician were they initiated rested to parts of North Africa where they lived, that same people were in liaison with arriving Seljuks from Turkey, all of whom more less formed the bulk of the Germanic tribes. The author however mentioned that the arrival of Muslims in 697 was led Musa, but did not indicate that Musa’s effort did not pay off until the Berbers and a new brand of leaders, familiar with the sea coast along the straights of Africa came in.

 It was not Musa who led the fight against Rodrigo and his Germanic group, it was a certain Tarik the Great, or at least a leader remembered for such incident that completely defeated Rodrigo and the remnant of the Germanic tribes in 711. The Visigoth’s defeat by Berbers only ended in 711, they began almost immediately to penetrate and conquer all of Spain, a case in point that unified successfully all of Spain in wake of Rodrigo who albeit briefly succeeded in unifying the kingdom of Spain. The route which some ridiculous history still speak in droves, explicit the depth we owe the rest of the world and its culture.

And then into South of France, where they were halted occasional by Damascus Syria which was the seat of Muslims all of world and which felt threatened by rising group and the force. Musa himself was caught in between Damascus and his loyalty to the ‘brothers of covenant’ in Spain under Tarik and Company, but he was removed eventually by Damascus Caliphate who was concerned about the growing powers of these Africans in Spain.

(11) The reign of Muslims in the 7th century which is now taken as solely the work of Arabs, began in earnest in the reign of Abu Bakr (632-634) where a substantial period of the North East African began to collapse into Islam. Then the decaying trunk of the Persian Empire, so to speak cracked at the heels of these Muslims and the Arabs.

Then there was theme of brotherhood was eventually carried forth by the next chain commanders, Omar (634-644), and Othman who was elected to represent Abu-Bakr, who also witnessed a large mass of people from none traditional background of Islam and rising Muslim. The divided city of Alexander Egypt, separated between many groups of the world present in Alexandria, and those in deeper parts of the Memphis, all collapsed in some respect and another to a form of crisis.

We are looking at Africa, of the 6th century when skin torn, leprous groups of people from several parts of the world were feasting off the African continent, the people of smooth skin and lined back who ate drink the wild milk and whose hair ranged from kinky to jelly dark hair, whose skin and lips were fully rounded and some stubby were the real Africans, the image of man. It was these remnants of the Natives and then Ethiopians, who were the envy of the world.

These people and this race of men and women were noted for master work of art and stone masons and designed much of the art from that era, designed much of the Grecian Stone Motif. They were the masters of Maritime, especially the navigation of the Atlantic and the Red Sea. These were the descendants of the Merinde, the oldest African Civilization who made it to the fore of the world, and provided the platform for the like of Ptolemy Philadelphus II, much control over the Naval Sea in the 3rd century before Christ.

(12) Yet the story in that 6th century offered interesting highlight to the rise of Islam, for when these Merinde group of Egyptians joined forces, or began to join forces with Islam, they created the motion for brothers of covenant which many Arabs and some Turkey group speak well of. Is Amazing how the rest of the story regarding these people are thrown away as if a small portion of Middle East, populated by the Blacks until lately was always the crown jewel of world history away from Africa.

Both in ancient and modern times, it isn’t the case that they were likely the same after many years - above all slaves from the time of Abraham till the 12th century - slaves may come from Africa as the issue of war may mean, but in terms of Biblical documentation, Abraham lived at a time when African history and greatness was witnessing an end.

For sure, not many people live beyond the Sahara as the case will determine, even at this time and in parts of Sudan and beyond, we know through history that these places were belts of Gold which was literally picked from the ground. Case in point is the incidents of the 13th and 14th century at the time of Mansa Musa. Above all, South of Egypt was were the best cattle, herbs, minerals, and so on was, and even if we add the facts of Upper and Lower Egypt, the reader must remember that Upper Egypt was essentially the capital of Egypt and much of Libya, and Memphis was the home of that Capital which was inside Africa.

 Lower Egypt which was the beginning of the pre-monarchic Egypt was closer to Aswan and first Cataract. Slaves may have occasional roved in and out of the place but these slaves were not the norm, let alone the indication that African of immortal historical classic were to reduce to a mere statement by some scrupulous fellows.

(13) Then we speak of the Architecture of the 6th century and beyond, contrary to what anyone would have otherwise believe, the styles of Architecture notable in parts of Alexander Egypt was the outcome of these Africans, from the remnant of the briefly lived Meiotic, to the rise and decline of King Ezana of Kush who the professor mentioned in the book, to the time of Azum Empire and Kandac (Candice), a name that appear in the Christian history as the name of Queens of a Berber tribe, who according to LaTourette’s ‘History of Christianity’ nearly stopped the advances of the Arabs in Africa in the desert frontiers. In fact they did as other sources confirm.

These Berbers were dislocated from the Ancient Azum and Meiotic Empires, dislocated in the reign of Emperor Aurelian, ravaged by sickness and Vandals of the fourth century, and who moved in deeper parts of the continent with the map of the African deserts in the backs of their notable soldiers and messengers, an African custom that was eventually copied by the incoming Arabs with little or no tradition. These people routed Arabs in the 7th century, drove Camels as well Horses – knew that horses were always afraid of Camels, captured an Arab boy which Candice or Kandac as she was called, nurtured and who betrayed these Berbers of older African Empires into the Arabs contingent.

What happened later was that the Arabs managed to isolate the two groups of soldier class, one group been the Soldiers who attended to the royalty who came behind the main group who roved securely from one season to another. By confiscating their Godmother and her retinue, the Berbers late in 6th century were forced to surrender to Arabs on certain condition.

Yet there other tribes of Africa in the fore mentioned places, and these people were however challenged for many years by Arabs who were one of the toughest fighters who made it to the continent. The war between Arabs in Africa and much of the tribes inside the continent was finally decided in the rise of the Alhoravids and Almoravids.

The history concerning the book of Jordanes on the tribes in the straights of Africa, as the leader of their tribes who was almost always their Queen, to the Obelisk that celebrated the birth of Modern civilization in Africa, the culture had (14) Coptic buildings of the Christian church scattered around the North Africa in the 6th century were legendary, especially the Mosaic and the Murals on their building walls, such that Islam acquired much of what was left of the Architecture which they celebrated as the beginning of modern civilization.

In fact, the claim that Byzantine was built by slave labor is only a 19th century acceptance that Africans built the palaces and decorated the Mosaic of Byzantine. No major training in Architecture is necessary in coming to grips with the reasons why the Byzantine required African experts. This can only be true in the sense of what we know to be much greater; power of the training Yet the 6th century Africa was noted for forces from Persia, the Sassanid fighting it out with Byzantine as both groups sought control over Syria and over much of the Red Sea. The Romans and the Sassanid wore each other out, but in parts of Ghazzar was the last king of Jordan before the approaching Khalid Ibn al-Walid, himself an ally of the Arab but not Arabic, by name Jabla Al Aihan.

The role that he played in helping to force Syria out of the hands of the Roman is not easily noted and as such we can say that there is enough to dwell on the open and mildly noted through course of history, largely because of the great victories of the Khalid yet builders of the Byzantine, were not that farfetched from Africa and so on. In that Sixth Century, the most decisive battle over Syria was fought between Romans and Arabs and between Arabs and the Sassanid, and a unified Arab hegemony was able to overcome them all, especially in the battle on the Yarmouk.

The rise of Abu Bakr forced the Arab tribes to disintegrate, because the man was not directly one of them, yet the decision to re-instate the man arose from several groups of Arabs at the time of the conflicts. The Arab coalition forced their way into parts of what is now Syria and made it to shore of Africa. It was in these places that everything we know concerning Africa in context of Arabia history began to play. It is worthy of note that everything we have come to expect from Arabia is not that far from evidence of much incidents at the time of the issue and so on.

Yet Babylonian still was in the 6th century coming to an end, it was the coming of Moawiya, that the foundation of Umuyyad dynasty was formalized. The Umuyyad took advantage of the materials from the Coptic buildings, and it was the Umuyyad mainly derived from the labor of the Egyptian masons, many of them of seriously African descent and same insulted blacks, essentially built much of Byzantine into what it was in later years became the toast of the New World. I shall not refrain from hitting out that existing commentary on the culture and the people of Syria do not deny the influence of the Arabia on Byzantine, nor shy from the claim that the control of the sea and Mesopotamia, was in the hands of the Saracens – themselves a mixture of Africans and Arabs, not necessarily Arabs – but nonetheless Muslims.

Yet Christians do believe that the open sea was not altogether Islamic, that it remained Byzantine till quite late, that Byzantine was in control of Syria and their forth until the beginning of the crusade. Yet this is not true, in terms of everything that was known to them we can say that not exist to defeat such claims given the nature of Islam and the force that was taking over the world in those time. They repeatedly war fights in much of the Asia Minor and repeated did what was important to them in many ways than one.

In all these changes and the art forms, one place that eventually demonstrated the scientific use of light and space, was not Asia or Asia Minor, it was not Romans per se as the story goes, it was rather the fact that changes in the world as we understand took over the dynamics and achieves of the history of the world. Left out the picture was the role of Arabia in conquering much of Syria, much of Asia Minor which opened the sea to them. These people did not call themselves Arabic nor did anyone among themselves earn the basic language that became Arabic.

In the same context, Harris also cited a certain Benjamin Ben Jonah, a ‘twelve century merchant and traveler from Spain Navarre’, that “There is a people…who, like animals eat of the herbs that grow on the banks of the Nile and in the fields. They go about naked and have not the intelligence of ordinary men. They cohabit with their sisters and anyone they find…These sons of Ham are black slaves.” While this statement is not false, it is not true either. It is not false to make such claim since that interior of Africa was full of people who never left their old pyramids, who lived in the interior and who like the Bantu and their migratory routes, roved around the continent.

The Bantu migratory routes may have started in Nigeria Cameroonian boundary, on the claim that nothing in the whole history of the world and so on, make and break with Now the natural question is what did the professor had in mind in introducing these things in the context of African history? He had to demonstrate that the continent and their culture has always existed in the cultural backwaters of the world, as a people cast in some light where much of the world saw them from a perspective that came under the perception of the other, the black.

The issue may be not necessarily dwell on how and why the professor failed to do what was necessary in correcting the faulty impressions of the fellow historians who so far demonstrated that it wasn’t always the case, but how he hinted on the quotation without seeking to point the significance of such view, and how he left the fault with such claim furlough and above why such position was never at any time part of the academic institutions of the world until the 19th century ear mark the professor as intellect descended from European academic institution.

In essence, the professor explains his influences and upbringing by making unusual and unnecessary citation without looking to expose the scam in the sentence and such things seriously wrong from the very beginning. That the traveler even mentioned black slaves makes the whole sentence impossible to answer given the 12th century social conditions of the world. At no time in the history of the last 2000 was the Africans that solid than the 9-12th century.

Professor Harris may have started off with good details of his writing on Africa and may have conducted himself with good intentions so to speak, but the professor’s authorship reflected essential versions of African history which converged in a story of dark people and slavery, stories that none the less made more harm than good. There was perhaps tribes of Africa in the deeper swampy regions of Africa, a fact only mean lot in term of Australia whites with blue eyes, but live in very bushy areas of the continent.

Look at the statement of this Jewish traveler and time of his travel? We notice that he is supposed to have come down from Spain in the 12th century, at a time when the Jews were at all-time low in social status and when the likes of Abraham Ibn Ezra were lamenting the plight of Jews under the rule of Islam. Historians of Jewish descent may only speak of themselves as people of pure race, that their faces may be black as they say, but their heart was pure. In Yemen at the 12th and 13th century, these Jews who migrated to parts of Yemen and North Africa lived under the protection and guide of Muslims, yet they carried away their grid to the farthest part of the World were general rejection from just about all cultures of the world has forced them into the shell.

Many of us may have read of Shakespeare’s ‘sun for spit will not show his face’, a theme in humanity that runs the line of Romeo and Juliet, but what we soon forget that the origin was from Abraham Ibn Ezra lamentation of the gross injustices inside Spain, saying ‘sun for spit would not show….’

The story of the Jews in Spain, the story of this forgotten people in Spain, has not been fully written and when they become available especially the 12th and 13th centuries, we may see that this theme of Spanish traveler commenting on Africans is possible but not probable. Judaism was facing revival in Spain, facing the grasping of time in the context of the academic show of that era. It was a time when the civil wars between the Almoravids and Alhoravids were still very significant and was entirely decided by loyalty to the course of Islam. The Masoretic Text has just been completed and the civil war between Arabs and Africans in Spain has come to an end.

The undisputed powers were Muslims, who in reality were the blacks Africans, and the Khazars themselves of Persia remnant and of Sassanid; literarily meaning the Sassanid (Saxons), were moving into the farthest part of Russia, and what remained of these people were littered throughout Europe. We still know for sure that in the 13th century, everything that existed about Judaism was still practiced through the help of these Muslims – many of them the Moors.

It will mean much to the rest of the world if we carefully indicate that the Moors of Spain as we note them hence, were not that unpopular until the very 18th century and so on. In many, many, ways than one, the principal architect of the world order and businesses, were these Moors – who are no different from Maori, a people scattered all over the world and suffered in the hands of traveling Spaniards throwing away their unwanted from the world. These people who may or may not have travelled as far as the Americans as the charts and history of the 9th, 10th, 11th, 13th, 14th, and in even 15th century charts of the Ptolemy Atlas suggested, last of these Atlases in was published in the 15th by Muller, a name suggesting Moorish origin, with Vespucci as the discoverer of what showed the fourth part of the world, Quattro pars, and terra incognito, America.

History of Judaism and Israel! Where do we start and where do we end? Perhaps we can start with time of Adam and Eve, perhaps we can start with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or perhaps we can start with Moses and his wife? May be not these Africans whose language actual speak to us today. Perhaps, we can speak of David and Solomon? What we have to ask is why? Why do have to start with David, perhaps because he sought to seek out a woman of Sheba or Bathsheba (meaning daughter of Sheba or simply from Sheba) as an object of lust? Perhaps it was curiosity, yet the woman gave birth to a son, called Solomon who of all sons in his house, David chose as King over Israel. The same Solomon lavished on a certain queen Sheba, who may or may not have come from the outskirts of Ethiopia, but definitely from Sabea or what is known as Sheba.

Sabeans are part of Africa, they were noted as sea trotters and travelled widely and occasional settled in Asia. They also settled in the Eastern Desert which is now called South Arabia, they may have also constituted the interior of the people and place. Between Africa and much of Asia, these people are not different from today’s Kenyan and Ethiopians. However we stretch that history of Africa away from Israel, we only realize that all the while we are talking about Africa, all the while discussing a religion and a people that couldn’t have made any sense to the rest of the world besides Africa. ….. We have to put in the extra effort to show how misleading some of the general conclusions about the above statements are, since in many ways than one, these statements would show how Professor Harris was influenced in his synthesis of African history. In that case, we may see the influences in that statement may have indirectly blinded the man into seeing much of Africa and the rest of the world in terms of just about everything.

How Professor Harris managed to pull himself out of the hole of building African history as an informal defense to the general claim that African history did not exist, seem to suggest something of the man’s ability and perhaps his earnest drive in on matters concerning the continent. The history of Africa is redaction is the story of Africa in terms of how it was essentially conceived as opposed to the verity of the evidence of such history through much of African history and beyond.

Professor Harris may have started his book with these lines about the future of yesteryears and its presentations in terms of academic life which descended through the last century, but his leniency and perhaps acceptance of several stances of slavery, makes a hard case for the man as a intellect immune to the intimidations of African slave trade, which only lasted a century or less for Europeans, and for Arabs perhaps a century or less before 1840.

Yielding perhaps to the new and biased sciences of Darwinian evolution….but there is no doubt that he vied into degree recesses of the languages. In many than one, his book sponsor a false faith on right facts, faith that assumes with literati of the age, that the presence or in some cases absence of Blacks in many parts of words - Iraq and in India were for several reasons the bi product of slave trade, else he implies, their presence is inexplicable aside the atrocities of slave era. For that to be correct, we have to draw aside the flaws in the book, with especially emphasis on slave trade, not that the subject offends on the linguistics, but the issue of synthesis and view in very current periods of the world can only be redeemed through vistas on the older architecture of world history and now of languages.

What many Chinese who discovered heroic figures of blacks in their backyard of Xi-an province of Tang tombs have said, we can add that these figures show voluntary settlement, and Harris added also ‘involuntary settlement’, that these people who Chinese indicate as Nobles, and Harris added as ‘slaves of Chinese Nobles’, were part of the older history of the world, history go back to the expansion of Islam and the rise of Vikings. These Vikings (Vikeins) or whatever names, Sarakins, we also give them, were mainly from the area we refer to the Red Sea and Mesopotamia, they carried along with trade of different sought, they were familiar with parts of India, they crossed the “Gates of India”, they penetrated mainland China, they were disconnected from their immortal home land.

In Eritrea the languages that we have today are born of the geography and the people, languages such as the Tigre, Saho, Bilen, Afar, Kunama, Nara, and Hedareb, are found in various versions throughout Europe and so on. That is to suggest that the relationship between something of Ethiopia and the much of ancient Persia may not be that enough in demonstrating that the people in question have a lot to do with the rest of it all. In terms of a historian holding indubitable command of his student’s attention, there is no doubt that Harris meant well in repeating that “papal bulls of Nicholas V (1454) and Calixtus (1456) had provided the justification for the slave trade by proclaiming Portugal’s expansion into Africa as a Christian crusade.

The enslavement of Africans therefore was regarded as advantageous to the “savages.” Our world collide from the loftily of these lines and sentences, largely from concern of the bad interpretations of the papal edits of Nicholas V and Calixtus. For one thing, Africa was never assigned to Portugal until about 1493 when Sextus 1V awarded West Africa to Portugal following the defeat of Moors in Spain it was to absolve the conflict raging between Spaniards and the Portuguese searching out these rich Moors and a certain Prester John.

The highly disputed 143 leagues of West Africa were an inhabitable riverside choke ends to begin with, and the Portuguese nearly rejected it initially because it didn’t offer anything that specific, but also, it was full of these Muslims who were also Moors. It must also be said that no Spanish royalty existed at any point in Europe until the 1494 by acts of the same pope Sextus IV, who organized the Christian coalition that fought the Moors to stand still in 1485. The Spain went further into areas below the 143 river choke ends and were said to have gone as far Brazil. From vintage point of many historians and others of certain likes, this was supposed to be the beginning of the conquest of the dark continent of Africa.

Why these are mere and serious balderdash, there is no escape from the imagination that much of world history has been badly educated in Africa in such a way that to describe as misleading and inaccurate. Given that the issue of slave trade and conquest of Africa which no longer appeal to the rest of world, Africans of common descent has often found a way around the history as if to suffer from the fear that welcomes the acceptance. But fear is unknown since in the history of Europe, there is nothing to hide from the greater fact that the injury such interpretation has done to Africans, and West African especially, will not be measured in very simply words.

For sure, we have the world telling us stories about slave trade over and through, and then the teachers seeking to avoid offending their institutions do not care to bother why we have already accepted that comments made Elizabeth I about the many ‘Blackmoors’ in England who should be deported to Africa, should only refer to slaves. Then the likes of Harris carefully hinted that a certain William Hawkins sailed to Africa in 1530, and then the comment by Elizabeth I in 1556. Is it really possible that slaves came from England through William Hawkins or that they were others who followed in his footsteps.

Such reduction view of Africa has dominated much of what we know of the world, and in terms of blacks found in Anjou, Lyon, Orleans, Nantes, Paris, and Poitheis, in France, the general easy conclusion has always been, as Harris concluded, that they came through slavery. Whether or not Harris is promoting his own view of History or that he is promoting his view of slave trade is not clear, but Harris they say is awarded an emeritus in African History, there is so much to question about the man’s validity as a teacher of African history. Joseph Harris like many recent historians of Africa, including Basil Davidson, have always gentrified the fact that Blacks in Spain and Portugal were slaves from Africa even as late or early as 16c.

As much as the record of the slave trade between Spain and Portugal is that meager and in some cases does not exist, the attention about the influence of Spanish in Africa and the presence of Africans in Spain would always been tainted in slavery. Whatever may be the issue about the problems in Spain, it reached Africa alright and it reached everything else than was later known about the languages of the world. Harris in his book even gentrified the more that these blacks in Barcelona, Cadiz, Seville, and Valencia worked as concubines and construction guards. And many of them were slaves.

It is that difficult to even contemplate such irascibility, when history everywhere in the world indicated that 16c Spain was noted for violence against non-Catholics, many who were themselves Muslims, some Jews, or those who were forced to be Christian conversos had to endure the very stripping of rights inside Spain. Have any Nigerian so to speak taken time to look into the contents of the Decree of Alhambra in 1492. The Decree was not to be borne by the defeated royalty of Spain, who left Spain, who are now romanticized as Arabs so to speak.

We need not spend time explicating the serious and rather confounding fact that in Spain was born the modern adjective, slavery, a fact the. Largely on the account Spanish inquisition was not so much a matter of one religion over the other rather not also means that these Black moors were also visiting some of these areas in these places as said and so on. There is no doubt that stories abound about blacks in antiquity visiting many of the places in Europe, for instance the very celebrated descent of Ethiopian ambassador to Russia, Alexander Pushkin who composed for the theater ‘Oniegan’, but the story as we make note of him are now regarded by fact as sons and descendants of slaves. As we mentioned concerning Harris and his conclusion, there is no to spare the presence of presence of blacks in Venice, in Italy, in Greece, in Persian Gulf, in Muslim Gulf around ‘Bandar Abbas’ and ‘Shiraz’ and Arabian peninsula. He made a significant claim in page 97 that “far too little research has been published to allow a satisfactory identification of the global scope of the African Diaspora in Asia. However, Arabs continued to conduct a trade in Africa across the Sahara desert, the Mediterranean Sea, Red Sea, and Indian Ocean and took them to Turkey, Arabia, the Persian Gulf region, India, and the Far East. These enslaved Africans worked in the salt mines, coconut groves, and date plantations of the Persian Gulf region; as pearl divers in Bahrain; as palace guards, domestics, farmers, dock workers, craftspeople, etc. in Arabia and India. They as eunuchs and concubines throughout much of the Muslim world” The Dutch he said took their African slaves to Indonesia, and the French and English took many of their African slaves to India and the ‘Mascarene Islands in the Indian Ocean’. And not the least people who say that Africans were also noted to her reached parts of what is Malaysia, and parts of Arabia. Historians of Africa go out of their way to speak of Arabian history of African slave trade and how slave trade continues across ‘the Sahara desert, the Mediterranean Sea, Red Sea, and the Indian Ocean, and took them to Turkey, Arabia, the Persian Gulf region, India, and the Far East’