From the earliest times, man has sought to understand human actions. Philosophy emerges within the social framework of the society at a given time. However, there has been debate to which civilization created the environment for thinking and theorizing to flourish (Siddiqui, 2015). A commentary will be made on three theoretical materials that look to clarify the emergence of philosophy. The first theoretical material is a book by George G. M. James called 'Stolen Legacy', the second theoretical material is an article by Mary Lefkowitz called 'The Myth of a Stolen Legacy' and the third theoretical material is an article by Andrea Wilson Nightingale called 'Spectacles of truth in classical Greek philosophy'. This commentary will focus on a signature theme. The main theme that can be clearly identified within these three theoretical materials is the misrepresentation of history. For instance, according to James (2009, p. 7), Greek philosophy was "stolen" from Egypt. Whereas Lefkowitz (1994, p. 1) suggest that Greek philosophy is in fact not stolen from the ancient Egyptians. On the other hand, Nightingale (2004, p. 34) points out that Greek philosophy is not stolen from the Ancient Egyptians. For the Greeks, it was not considered as stealing rather the Greek traditional practice of theoria. This commentary will discuss these three theoretical materials in more detail.
First, we shall discuss the different views towards Egyptian Mystery System. According to James (2009, p. 7), the Ancient Egyptians developed a complex religious system called the Mysteries. The Ancient Egyptians developed a belief system whereby they interpreted the human body as a vessel that stores the soul. That could be freed through means of arts, science and the transition from mortal to God (James, 2009, p. 7). The Egyptian Mystery System was also the first secret order in history that established a secret system of writing and teaching. That forbade members from spreading its knowledge (James, 2009, p. 7). We are led to believe that the Greeks were able to steal these secret teachings because the Greek language was used to translate the unwritten philosophy of the Ancient Egyptians. James theoretical material argues that the Ancient Egyptians were the first system of salvation that provided an environment for thinking and theorizing to emerge, not the Greeks. However, Lefkowitz view of the Egyptian Mystery System contradicts the Egyptian Mystery System described in the stolen legacy by James. Lefkowitz (1994, p. 29) points out that the 'Egyptian' mystery System was in fact not developed by the Ancient Egyptians instead it was based on 18th century French reconstruction of neoplatonic philosophy. This is linked to the Greeks. It's clear that both James and Lefkowitz's theoretical material have a different view about Egyptian Mystery System. James suggests that Greek stole the ideals about the Mystery System. Whereas Lefkowitz statement suggests that the Egyptian Mystery System was not developed by the Ancient Egyptians but instead by the Greeks. Lefkowitz and James representation of the 'Egyptian Mystery System' is debatable as their facts clash with each other.
Secondly, the idea of whether or not the Greeks stole knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians illustrates a misrepresentation of history. Looking at the three theoretical materials in more detail. James points out that the Greeks stole knowledge from Egyptians and passed the knowledge off as their own. According to James, the Greeks started to study in Ancient Egypt during when the Persians ruled Ancient Egypt. But things changed when Alexander the Great invaded Ancient Egypt. The Greeks began to steal knowledge from Egypt. James mentions that Aristotle was able to steal books of Egyptian philosophy and science from the Royal Library of Alexandria. Then later the Greeks converted the library into a Greek research center (James, 2009, p. 37). James also points out that as a result of the Greeks stealing knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians. The African Continent was robbed of their legacy. James goes on to suggest that the Ancient Egyptians are the true authors of Greek Philosophy not the Greeks. The credit given to the Greeks actually belongs to the African continent (James, 2009, p. 11). On the contrary, Lefkowitz (1994, p. 29) argues that James' claims of the Greeks stealing knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians by stealing books of Egyptian philosophy is false. Lefkowitz points out that James did not give much detail about the sources used to support his claims that the Greeks stole knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians by stealing books of Egyptian philosophy. For instance, James made no mention that the al Library of Alexandria was actually established after the death of Aristotle around 322 B.C. Therefore, James' claim that Aristotle was involved in stealing books of Egyptian philosophy and science from the Royal Library of Alexandria is false (Lefkowitz, 1994, p. 28). Lefkowitz also adds that uses of repetition to clarify that the Greeks stole knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians, is James' ploy to convince the reader that it was in fact the Greeks that stole knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians (Lefkowitz, 1994, p. 29). On the other hand, Nightingale (2004, p. 35) argues that Greeks did not actually 'steal' knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians. Instead the Greeks were there to observe Alexander the Great's conquest of Egypt. According to Nightingale (2004, p. 3), The Greeks philosophers also went on pilgrimages to Egypt. Not to steal knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians but to try to conceptualize and legitimize theoretical philosophy that was done through traditional practice called theoria. This was done by journeying to an event and returning home with an official eyewitness report of the event. Nightingale also suggests there were two types of pilgrimages that Greek philosophers went to. Which are private theoria and civic theoria. Private theoria involved journeying to events solely on one's personal interest and not needing to publicize their findings after returning from their journey. While civic theoria involved one journeying to events as an official ambassador and to publicize their findings after returning from their journey. The idea of whether or not the Greeks stole knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians illustrates a misrepresentation of history as there are different views to this point (Nightingale, 2004, p. 3).
Thirdly, there are different claims to the term philosophy from the three theoretical materials shows that there is a misrepresentation of history. James' theoretical material points out that the term Greek philosophy is a misleading term, that it actually does not exist. For instance, James argues that even the Athenian Government did not recognize this 'so-called Greek philosophy' that is believed to have been developed by the Greeks (James, 2009, p. 8). According to James, Greek philosophers were mistreated even in their own country and were persecuted for their practice by the Athenian Government. Famous Greek philosophers such as Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and Pythagoras were all persecuted. We are also led to believe by James' theoretical material that Greek philosophers were not the original authors of Greek philosophy. But instead it was the Egyptian priests and Hierophants (James, 2009, p. 8). However, Lefkowitz argues that Egyptian priests and Hierophants did not develop the term philosophy. For instance, Lefkowitz (1994, p. 32) points out that although there are claims that suggests Pythagoras stole his teachings about Religion, Geometry, Numbers theory and The theory about soul from the Ancient Egyptians. Pythagoras theory about the soul did not come from Egyptian priest and hierophants instead it come from India. On other hand, Nightingale (2004, p. 3) also points out that the Greeks developed the term philosophy. She mentions that the Greeks were actually the first to define the term philosophy as a specialized academic discipline with a unique cultural practice. The Greek philosophers created rules for philosophy. This differentiated the practice of philosophy from other modes of knowledge. It is clear that there are different claims to the term philosophy from the three theoretical materials. James claims that Egyptian priests and hierophants developed the term philosophy. While Lefkowitz and Nightingale both agree that the Greek philosophers developed the term philosophy.
Another point of considerable interest is the account the Greek philosophers' visits to Egypt suggest that there is a misrepresentation of history. According to James (2009, p. 12), Pythagoras visited Egypt to receive training then returned back to his native island of Samos. Where he established his own secret order for a short time then he moved to a place called Croton in the Southern Italy. James mentioned that Plato visited many places such as Cyrene, Italy and especially Egypt. Where he received training from Egyptians Priests. James also tells us that Aristotle visited Egypt (James, 2009, p. 35). Nevertheless, Lefkowitz argues that (1994, p. 32) there is no concrete proof that Great Greek philosophers ever visited Egypt. For instance, there is no evidence that suggest that Socrates or Aristotle visited Egypt. There is no proof that suggests that Plato actually travelled to Egypt. According to Socrates, during Plato's lifetime, he suggested that Plato never travelled abroad except for a military campaign. Lefkowitz (1994, p. 32) also notes that since the prime source material used to verify whether Greeks philosophers did actually visit Egypt relied mostly on ancient biographers written by ancient Authors. This source is only as reliable as the ancient Authors that produced the information. For example, if there was no information mentioning that Greek philosophers did or did not visit Egypt by an ancient author. Then, it would be difficult to know whether Greek philosophers visited Egypt. On the other hand, Nightingale (2004, p. 35) does not mention that Greek philosophers actually visited Egypt in particular, instead in his journal article he points out that the Greeks philosophers travelled abroad. Another thing worth mentioning is that James acknowledges that the information about Greek philosophers' doctrines is doubtful. For example, the ancient biographies about Greek philosopher life were not written by the original Greek philosophers (James, 2009, p. 14). These different accounts of the Greek philosophers suggest that there is a misrepresentation of history.
One more noticeable point to consider is that there seems to be a racial bias, which can be identified in the theoretical material. This could have led to a misrepresentation of history. There seems to be racial bias that can be identified in both Lefkowitz and James' theoretical materials. Lefkowitz's theoretical material, points out James theoretical material is referring to the acknowledgement of black people in particular. Lefkowitz suggests that James' theoretical material offers a "new philosophy of redemption for black peoples." (Lefkowitz, 1994, p. 1). Whereas, James theoretical material does not in fact refer to black people. Instead it looks at North Africa, in general talks about the African continent itself. James states that for centuries the world has been misinformed about the real origins of the arts and science. By believing that the European continent was where arts and science was established, by great thinkers such Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Instead of acknowledging that the African continent was where the real origins of arts and science emerged (James, 2009, p. 11). On the other hand, Nightingale's theoretical material does not refer to either black people or the African Continent in general. However, there seems to be a racial bias in both Lefkowitz and James' theoretical materials compared to Nightingale's theoretical material. Lefkowitz and James' theoretical materials seem to focus on whether Europe was where arts and science originated. This could mean that Lefkowitz's sources for her theoretical material could be more focused on supporting the fact that Europe was where arts and science originated. While James' sources for his theoretical material could be more focused on supporting the fact that Europe was not where arts and science originated. For example, if a researcher wanted to prove a theory to prove their own personal vendetta, the researcher could give surveys to people that they feel will prove their theory instead of disturbing the survey randomly to people. There seems to be racial bias that can be identified in both Lefkowitz and James' theoretical materials. This could have led to a misrepresentation of history.
In conclusion, looking at these three theoretical materials. We find out that there many different misrepresentations of history. For instance; there are different views towards the Egyptian Mystery System, There are mixed debates to whether or not the Greeks stole knowledge from the Ancient Egyptians, there are different claims to the term philosophy, there are accounts to whether or not the Greek philosophers' visited Egypt and there also seems to be a racial bias, which can be identified in the theoretical material that could led to misrepresentations of history. These different misrepresentations of history from the three theoretical materials make it different to rely on which statement is true or false. It is evident that there is no right or wrong statement.