There are many different opinions on how to write African history properly. One US-American historian, J.E. Philips, recently opined his views quite dogmatically. In an article published in 2005 he compared the writing of African history in three countries ¿ Japan, France, and the US. His comparison follows three premises: Firstly, US-historiography of Africa is the most progressive. Secondly, Japanese history writing on Africa, in contrast, is characterized by ignorance, falsity, and bad faith. Thirdly, Philips holds responsible for this allegedly bad state of the discipline in Japan the influence of the ¿ allegedly anti-historical ¿ French social anthropologists Georges Balandier and Claude Lévi-Strauss. Obviously, Philips` treatment of the distinct national schools of thought is polemical in style. What is worse, however, is the lack of expertise on the very topics he deals with. Ignorance is displayed by Philips throughout his article. The present contribution sets out to substantiate these points, for there is more to say in favour of French and Japanese ways of writing African history than the impertinent allegations of Philips forebode.