I believe Bernal did the academic world a service by presenting the theory that our view of history may be wrong. He brings up some interesting points to think about academically. However, I noticed that quite a few of the theories he brought up were not supported by evidence in his texts. He would simply state he’d done the research without citing the direct passages.

His theory is provocative, and it is quite possible there was a white-washing of the true origins of Ancient Greece, as there has been a white-washing of many of the contributions of Africans to Western society. However, I doubt the transition from the Ancient Model to the Aryan Model was done on purpose.

Also, after reading the critiques of his work, it became clear he misquoted some of his sources to support his own views on the issues. The difference between what he paraphrased and what the sources wrote was marked in some cases.

I think that for a layman, he did a very good job in presenting his views, although the original Black Athena was hard for me to get through. His sequel Black Athena Writes Back was much easier to get through for me
.
In conclusion, I think Bernal writes a pseudo-historical vision of the past. He seems to tailor other people’s research to suit his own needs; many of his detractors cite many inconsistencies and errors in his research.

I also think that at some point, he should desist in replying to every single academic who negatively criticizes his work. To me, it seems more than a bit unprofessional.