Anthony Browder recently posted to his blog a piece titled 5 Patterns of Historical Erasure That Have Hidden Africa’s Greatest Civilization in Plain Sight promoting his final two tours to Luxor, Egypt (which he calls by its ancient name Waset). Although I’m sure Mr. Browder is well-intentioned (for Black people) in writing this post, his five patterns of historical erasure are weak, ill-informed, and antiquated. Not only are some of his assertions simply not true but they speak to the lack of sophistication and intellectual integrity that plagues Black Conscious circles that keep open-minded and educated individuals from ascribing to their theories. In the post, he wishes to highlight five recurring ways an unnamed villain uses to hide African history:
- The Name Change Pattern
- The Impossible Achievement Pattern
- The Religious Theft Pattern
- The Systematic Burial Pattern
- The Compartmentalization Pattern
Beyond the fact that the article reads like an AI generated blog post, I will take issue with points 1, 3, 4, and 5, and the anti-intellectual dichotomy between seeing primary evidence and textbooks.

Rebuttal of #1 The Name Change Pattern
Mr. Browder contends that the name of the city of Waset was changed by “conquerors” for sinister reasons. He does not mention what those reasons were, but the reader is left to assume that the Greeks, Arabs, and (Western) Europeans wanted to make their mark on the great civilization they conquered.
His claim that the name Luxur, the European pronunciation of the Arabic name al-’Uqṣur meaning castles is the origin of the word “luxury” is false. The English word actually has two Latin roots: luxus (excess) and luxuria (offensiveness). The two meanings were merged when it reached old English. As such, the word not only meant lasciviousness, but also debauchery and adultery. Spreading the idea that the word luxury has an African origin is not only wrong, but demonstrates a lack of academic negligence on his part. Furthermore, it might lead to some cognitive dissonance for his Afrocentric constituents who may consider Arabic, the language from which the name Luxor is derived, as non-African.

What is the issue with changing the name of a place if its history is preserved anyway? Many places around the world have undergone name changes, from ancient names to modern ones and vice versa. The people that live there have a right to change the name based on their current sentiments. Oftentimes, cities built around ancient sites have boarders and residences beyond the ancient city limits. So they are not the same exact cities from ancient times. Why can’t Afrocentrists acknowledge that over time people change, languages change, cultures change, and even religions change?
Rebuttal of #3 The Religious Theft Pattern
Mr. Browder claims that religious concepts such as the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, Virgin Birth, and the Trinity of Ausar, Auset, and Heru were carved into the ancient monuments of Luxor. However, these concepts were appropriated and then plastered over and replaced with images of Jesus Christ and the 12 disciples by something he calls the “Coptic occupation” of 450 ACE. While it is true that certain religious concepts pass from one tradition to another and that there are Christians known as Copts in Egypt, Mr. Browder’s characterization of them is completely wrong.
First, the religious and linguistic traditions from ancient Egypt have been lost for at least two millennia (the coming of the Age of Pisces according to Bernal’s explanation of Egypt’s embrace of Christianity (Bernal and Gaballa, 1987, p. 125)). The Copts are the indigenous Egyptians. In fact, the name Egypt is a modern adaption of the word Copt, which the name of an Egyptian city Qifṭ. According to Medieval sources written by Egyptians themselves, Qifṭ was an ancestor of theirs. In some sources he is considered the son of Hermes (Ibn Nadīm, 1970) and in other sources he is one of the grandchildren of Ham (Suyuti and Ibrahim, 1968, page 35-36 vol. 1).
The Copts freely embraced Christianity shortly after what they consider the ascension of Christ by St. Mark, making them one of the oldest Christian traditions in the world. The fact that Copts are indigenous to Egypt and that their church dates back to the time of Christ makes me wonder what Mr. Browder is referring to when he says “Coptic occupation” at the date of 450.

Perhaps a source of confusion for him is the Roman occupation of Egypt that extended from about 30 BCE until the Arab Muslim conquest of 641 CE. During that period the Copts were oppressed by the Romans, first due to the fact that they were Christians. Then, once the Romans officially embraced Christianity, they oppressed the Coptic Christians again because they did not accept the doctrine set at the Council of Chalcedon of 451 CE. The Copts, who see their version of Christianity and language as a continuation of their ancient religion and language, fled Roman persecution in the north of Egypt and naturally took refuge in the tombs and temples of southern Egypt. They repurposed those temples as monasteries and libraries for their monks and scholars. They added writing and imagery that reflected their current beliefs to some of the temples but did not deface all of them. Or else, we would not know about the ancient writing and imagery today.
It was the Muslims who ended Roman persecution of the Copts with their conquest. There was only a small faction of Arab Muslims who conquered Egypt in the 7th century, so the Muslim majority that you find in Egypt nowadays is largely pulled from Coptic converts as well as a myriad of non-Arab, non-Coptic ethnic groups who settled in the region. While Muslim – Coptic relations were turbulent at times in their history, Coptic Christians still make up about 10% of the population. In the same vein, while neither Muslims or Christians worship at the ancient Egyptian temples, they did not set out to systematically destroy or cover them up, which I will address in the next section.
Mr. Browder’s mischaracterizations of the Copts and their religion speaks to his dearth of knowledge about the full range of Egyptian language and history. Mr. Browder and other Egyptophiles only immerse themselves in a selective part of Egyptian history, to the neglect of other parts. This would not be so bad if only they would remain silent on aspects of history they have no knowledge of. Yet, they continually adopt/concoct spurious versions of subsequent Egyptian history that has no basis in reality.
Rebuttal of #4 The Systematic Burial Pattern
With regards to Mr. Browder’s points about “systematic burial,” this is yet another mischaracterization based on an ignorance of Egyptian history, environment, religion, and sociology. One need only to look at some of the early paintings and photos of ancient Egyptian monuments to find that many of the monuments we know and love today were actually covered in sand after being unused for several hundred years. This is why they required excavations to uncover. I lived in Egypt for several years and I can attest to the fact that if you leave your home for a few days without a thorough dusting, your home can easily succumb to the same fate.
Jokes aside. Obviously, this is not what Mr. Browder means by a “systematic burial.” Rather, he speaks of the Mosque of Abū al-Ḥaggāg (which he misspells as Abu el-Haggar). When I visited Karnak, I too was surprised to find a mosque decorated with hieroglyphs on its walls sitting on top of the temples. I entered and took a tour of the mosque. Unlike Mr. Browder in his 38 years of touring Egypt, I wanted to know the history of the mosque rather than just make my own assumptions.
Prior to becoming a mosque, it was a Coptic basilica and once occupied by a Coptic woman, Therese bint al-Qums. Yūsuf ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥīm ibn ʿĪsā al-Zāhid, known as Abū al-Ḥajjāj, was a Sufi teacher from Baghdad. He moved to the area teaching Sufism and ultimately attracting most of the inhabitants to Islam (who were predominantly Coptic Christians by then). He acquired a piece of property from Therese, and his son made the basilica into a mosque after the death of his father in 1286 CE.

The mosque speaks to the continuity of socio-religious culture in Luxor rather than “systematic burial.” In fact, nothing is covered up or systematically destroyed. The structure and material is actually preserved by its repurposing. This is nothing new. All over Coptic, Fatimad, Mamluk, and Ayyubid Cairo, one will find mosques, schools, and other structures used from the same materials of structures that once lay in ruins. In contrast to our present sentiments, preservation of unused structures was not always a priority for the people of Egypt. Our current-day obsession with artifacts is partially the result of the European materialist mindset that has been programmed in us, which ties civilization with advancements in technology and buildings. However, for most societies it appears that preservation of culture and traditions takes a higher priority, even after their material wealth and imperial power diminishes and their religion and language change. Although, celebrations like the Mawlid of Abū al-Ḥajjāj (El-Daly, 2005, p. 92) and the planting fenugreek seeds in remembrance of Osiris (El-Daly, 2005, p. 82) retain some pre-Islamic elements, they are largely considered Egyptian cultural holidays.
Misunderstanding these facts and immediately casting suspicions of a cover up of African civilizations makes me question the veracity of Mr. Browder’s conclusions and ability to give a tour based on sound information, not just his personal beliefs. Such a methodology defeats the purpose of in-depth study and traveling in the pursuit of knowledge. As someone who was immersed in Afrocentric thought as a youth, I dared to put my beliefs about ancient Egypt to the test while living and studying there. I believe Mr. Browder can do the same.
Rebuttal to #5 The Compartmentalization Pattern
Mr. Browder’s fifth point is embarrassingly oblivious to how knowledge works and it makes me cringe to have to explain this. Mr. Browder claims that “compartmentalized knowledge” keeps people from seeing the “bigger picture” of how spirituality was embedded into ancient Egyptian structures. First, we call them temples because we imagine they were used for a spiritual purpose. That is obvious to anyone reading about them or seeing images of them. It has only been in recent years that people have begun to theorize that ancient Egyptian structures were built for non-religious reasons like celestial observatories, to mark a king’s legacy, or simply to awe visitors.
Secondly, he may not realize it, but every building and piece of technology we use today is a result of “integrated knowledge systems,” or as academics call it “interdisciplinary knowledge.” Art, philosophy, architecture, and even religion are employed to create the many gadgets, buildings, and objects we use everyday. I will give the example of an apartment building found in an urban or suburban area of the U.S. Every apartment building is a complex integration of architectural design, carpentry, electrical work, plumbing, thermodynamics, and legal codes among other things. Each building has a philosophy – no matter how dumb – about how people should live or want to live. To only look at an apartment as a unified system i.e., as just an apartment building, is to not appreciate its complexity. Therefore, we must argue the opposite of what Mr. Browder is trying to say. The only way to proper appreciate the ancient Egyptian temples is through the various disciplines it took to create them.
Thirdly, I would take issue with his uncritical use of R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz as a source of information on this topic. For one, this is a selective use of European authors. If Mr. Browder, as an Afrocentrist, is going to cite an Egyptologist, he should at least cite someone who is respected in the field. Schwaller was not just a “mathematician” as Mr. Browder would have you believe, he was an occultist and Theosophist, who read his beliefs and theories into what he found in ancient Egypt. While interesting, his work, which was never accepted by other archaeologists, cannot serve as a definitive view on the temples of Luxor.
Rebuttal to “Why Primary Evidence Matters More Than Textbooks”
Finally, this faux pas in logic and scholarship have led him to make the statement:
“You cannot truly understand these patterns until you see the evidence with your own eyes.”
This is actually wrong. Many people think they can travel to Cairo and see all the sites they were shown on videos and in books, not realizing that only the pyramids and the Sphinx are located there. They will need to take another plane ride to Aswan or Luxor in the south of Egypt, and maybe take a ground trip to Abu Simbel and a boat ride down north (since the Nile flows north). This should let us know that a little bit of preliminary research can go a long way.
Mr. Browder’s above-mentioned quote also contradicts the point he was trying to make about “integrated knowledge systems.” It is possible to witness a thing and not understand it. Many of us use smart phones, but have no understanding of haptics or nanotechnology. Unless we have particular knowledge of a discipline it is difficult to appreciate a thing from that perspective.
Conclusion
It will behoove the potential traveler to learn all they can about Egypt (ancient, medieval, and modern) before traveling there. They should travel there with a well-researched an open-mind, rather than stirred by the emotionalism and anti-intellectualism Mr. Browder seeks to lure you with. Americans traveling to Egypt looking for remnants of ancient Egypt is like Egyptians traveling to the U.S. looking for remnants of the Native Americans. You can find what you are looking for if you researched it properly, but it might not be obvious in contemporary society. A lot has happened in America in the last 500 years. This is even more true of Egypt over the last 4000 years.
References
Bernal, Martin, and G. A. Gaballa. Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization. Rutgers University Press, 1987.
El-Daly, Okasha. Egyptology: The Missing Millennium, Ancient Egypt in Medieval Arabic Writings. UCL Press, 2005.
Ibn al-Nadīm, Abū al-Faraj Muḥammad ibn Isḥaq. The Fihrist of Al-Nadim: A Tenth Century Survey of Muslim Culture. Translated by Bayard Dodge, vol. 2, Columbia University Press, 1970.
Redford, Donald, et al. “East Karnak Excavations, 1987-1989.” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, vol. 28, 1991, pp. 75–106. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/40000573.
al-Suyuti, Jalal al-Din, and Muhammad Abu’l Faḍl Ibrahim. Ḥusn Al-Muḥāḍara Fī Tārīkh Miṣr Wa’l Qāhira. Dār Iḥyā’ al-Kutub al-’Arabīyya, 1968.




