ancestors

Return to Khuti Part 2: The Mesintu and Anu Ancestors of the Balanta

In Return to Khuti: The Great Pyramid and Balanta we learned that the Great Pyramid is properly called “Khuti” and was built by the old Stellar Cult people of Egypt, the followers of Horus called Mesinu, who were descendants of the earlier Mesenti/Mesintu, or followers of Horus Behutet. Now we are going to learn about the conflict with the Mesintu and why our Balanta ancestors migrated from the Nile Valley just prior to the conquest of Menes (Narmer) and the establishment of the first dynasty in Kemet (Egypt).

Siphiwe in front of Egyptian Wall contemplating.JPG

Excerpt from Balanta B’urassa, My Sons: Those Who Resist Remain Volume 1:

The Mesintu Blacksmiths and Cult of Horus at Edfu

 

“Metals were introduced into Egypt in very ancient times, since the class of blacksmiths is associated with the worship of Horus of Edfu and appears in the account of the mythical wars of that God.” “The earliest tools we possess in copper or bronze date from the Fourth Dynasty.” (Gladstone on “Metallic Copper, Tin and Antimony form Ancient Egypt,” in the Proceedings of the Biblical Archaeological Society, 1891-92, pp. 223-26).

“…. Copper, tin, and antimony were known to these ancient Egyptians from the earliest times of their Totemic Sociology, thousands of years before the Stellar Mythos, at which period of time the Pyramids of Gizeh were built.”

Maspero is right in associating the blacksmiths with Horus of Edfu.

As I have stated, the Kavirondo Nilotic Negroes work in iron, and also in copper, and amongst these people their blacksmiths are called Yothetth. There is a separate caste called “Uvino,” and amongst the Gemi tribe the blacksmiths were formed into a religious secret society, and still possess all the myths of Horus of Edfu. Horus I was the great chief in their Hero Cult, and “the Chief Artificer in Metals, “i.e. he was recognized as the Chief Hero of this clan or secret society.”

It was these ‘blacksmiths’ – men who knew how to smelt iron ore and to forge the metal into weapons of offence and defense – who formed themselves into the ‘big clan of Blacksmiths,’ having Horus as their astronomical Chief, that came up from the South to the North in pre-dynastic times, and , having conquered the Masaba Negroes and the Nilotic  Negroes (Balanta ancestors), who were then the inhabitants of Egypt, established themselves in Egypt, making Edfu their chief city and center. They possessed the knowledge of working in metals, brick-making, and pottery. . . . They could not but meet with success when warring, because they were armed with superior weapons; troops armed with weapons of iron must be successful against those armed with weapons of flint. The Egyptians called these ‘followers of Horus’ Mesintu or Mesinti, which I believe was the original name for all those tribes, and which may now be applied to the Masai group.  As we know, Horus was their deified God, and as Edfu became their center, he was styled “Lord of the forge city,’ The Great Master Blacksmith. It was here that they first built a sanctuary or temple which was called ‘Mesnet” The hieroglyphic here proves that these people were those belonging to the Masai ancestors.”

Article JE 34210 in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Egypt. Pre-dynastic period. It is likely that this knife was not used in daily life, but rather for religious purposes.

Article JE 34210 in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Egypt. Pre-dynastic period. It is likely that this knife was not used in daily life, but rather for religious purposes.

Now, my sons, reconsider what Credo Mutwa (the last living sangoma, or traditional Bantu healer, to undergo the thwasa sangoma training and initiation) has said: “the Watu-Tu-Tsi and the Masai – the Children of the Dragon (according to legend, spawned by the evil serpent with the sole purpose of oppressing and destroying the Bantu).”

In the book, Black Arabia & The African Origin of Islam, Wesley Muhammad writes,

“Even S.O.Y. Ketia, in a number of meticulous studies, found that:

‘The peopling of what is now the Egyptian Nile Valley, judging from archaeological and biological data, was apparently the result of a complex interaction between coastal northern Africans, ‘neolithic’ Saharans, Nilotic hunters, and riverine proto-Nubians with some influence and migration from the Levant. The major variability of early ‘Egyptians’ is thus seen to have been mainly established in the proto-predynastic period by the settling of all these people.’”

Thus, there was a mix of various different people in the Nile Valley area where the ancient ancestors of the Balanta lived. Coming into contact with these different groups of people created conflicts. Diop continues in “Political and Social Evolution of Ancient Egypt”:

“The political unification of the Nile Valley was effected for the first time from the south, from the kingdom of Nekhen in Upper Egypt. Narmer’s Tablet, discovered by Quibell in Hierakonpolis, retraced its various episodes.

Nekhen Map.JPG

The capital of the united kingdom was transferred to Tjenu (Thinis) near Abydos. This was the period of the first two Tjenu (Thinite) dynasties (3000-2778). By the Third Dynasty (2778-2723), centralization of the monarchy was complete. All the technological and cultural elements of Egyptian civilization were already in place and had only to be perpetuated. . . . Petrie affirmed that this dynasty, the first to give Egyptian civilization its almost definitive form and expression, was of Sudanese Nubian origin. It was easier to recognize the Negro origin of the Egyptians when the initial display of their civilization coincided with an unquestionably Negro dynasty. The equally Negro features of the protodynastic face of Tera Neter and those of the first king to unify the valley, also prove that this is the only valid hypothesis….

‘With administrative centralization in the Third Dynasty,’ writes Jacques Piernne, ‘there was no longer any noble or privileged class.’ However, the clergy, guardian of the faith that established the king’s authority, was a corps apart, well organized and relatively independent. Until then it had exercised its spiritual guardianship at the coronation of the king in the temple at Heliopolis. But, to make his power absolute, the king clashed with the clergy. From then on he renounced the Heliopolis coronation and had himself crowned in his own palace at Memphis. He proclaimed the principle of his omnipotence by divine right, added ‘Great God’ to his titles, and was free from any human control. The advent of the Fourth Dynasty, with the Giza pyramids, showed that the monarchy had reached its zenith.

Thereafter, the regime again evolved toward feudalism. The courtiers constituted a special corps of dignitaries which would make itself hereditary by usage, and soon by right. The cycle just described was twice more repeated almost identically and the history of ancient Egypt was to end without ever developing into a republic nor creating true secular thought. The feudal system that had just triumphed with the Fifth Dynasty reached its peak with the Sixth. It then engendered general stagnation in the economy and the administration of the State in urban as well as rural areas. And the Sixth Dynasty was to end with the first popular uprising in Egyptian history.

Obviously, division of labor on the basis of craftmanship already existed. The cities doubtless were active centers of trade with the eastern Mediterranean. Their idle poverty-stricken masses would take an active pat in the revolt. The mores of the nobility created a special class of men: servants contracted for varying tenure. The text describing these events shows that the country had plunged into anarchy; insecurity reigned, especially in the Delta with the raids by “Asiatics”. The latter monopolized the jobs intended for Egyptians in the various workshops and urban building yards.

The wretched of Memphis, capital and sanctuary of royalty, pillaged the city, robbing the rich and driving them into the streets. The movement soon spread to other cities. Sais was temporarily governed by a group of ten notables. The situation throughout the city was poignantly described in that text:

‘Thieves become proprietors and the former rich are robbed. Those dressed in fine garments are beaten. Ladies who had never set foot outside now go out. The children of nobles are dashed against the walls. Towns are abandoned. Doors, walls, columns are set aflame. The offspring of the great are thrown into the street. Nobles are hungry and in distress. Servants now are served. Noble ladies flee hungry and in distress. Servants now are served. Noble ladies flee… [their children] cringe in fear of death. The country is full of malcontents. Peasants wear shields into the fields. Man slays his own brother. The roads are traps. People lie in ambush until [the farmer] returns in the evening; then they steal whatever he is carrying. Beaten with cudgels, he is shamefully killed. Cattle roam at will; no one attends to them . . .

Each man leads away any animals he has branded. . . . Everywhere crops are rotting; clothing, spices, oil are lacking. Filth covers the earth. The government stores are looted, and their guards struck down. People eat grass and drink water. So great is their hunger that they eat the food intended for swine. The dead are thrown into the river; the Nile is a sepulcher. Public records are no longer secret.’

Apparently, the poor, at least for a time, retained the position thus acquired, for economic life and trade regained their normal course; wealth reappeared, though no longer in the same hands: ‘Luxury is widespread, but it is the poor who now are affluent. He who had nothing, possesses treasures, and the great flatter him . . .’

So, the first cycle of Egyptian history ended with the collapse of the Old Kingdom. It had begun with the feudalism that preceded the first political unification.; it closed in anarchy and feudalism. Monarchy sank into feudalism without being directly attacked. In fact, the principle of monarchy could not have been gravely threatened. Perhaps there were a few timid attempts at self-government in the Delta cities, as at Sais. But this was probably a temporary solution dictated by the suddenness of the crisis and the lack of public authority that followed the invasion of the Delta by the Asiatics. Cities on the invasion route were abruptly compelled to assure their own safety as the faced the common enemy. Confronted by this situation, the former provincial governors in Upper and Middle Egypt set themselves up as independent feudal lords, freed henceforth from any royal overlordship, though they did not ever question the principle of monarchy itself. On the contrary, each in his own way was trying to be king; they called themselves kings of their own regions. Apparently the bureaucratic apparatus, which weighed so heavily on the poor, along with royal absolutism, was the main target. . . . After that revolution, all Egyptians had a right to the ‘Osirian death,’ the privilege of survival in the hereafter, previously reserved for the Pharaoh as the only one with a Ka, a soul, in the sky.

Item JE 40679, Third Triad Statue of Menkaure in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Egypt. 4th Dynasty, Old Kingdom, Valley Temple of Menkaure, Giza. King Menkaure with Hathor and the Goddess of the nome Cynopolis

Item JE 40679, Third Triad Statue of Menkaure in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Egypt. 4th Dynasty, Old Kingdom, Valley Temple of Menkaure, Giza. King Menkaure with Hathor and the Goddess of the nome Cynopolis

Two facts, however, must be noted. The discontent was strong enough completely to disrupt Egyptian society throughout the entire country. But it lacked direction and coordination, the strength of modern movements. That would have required a level of popular education incompatible with the possibilities and forms of education at the time. Above all, it was the size of the territory that overcame the insurgents. The country was already unified, and royalty could take temporary refuge in the surrounding provinces, if only in the guise of an embryonic feudalism. The sack of Memphis shows that the monarchy could have been definitely conquered and swept away if the Egyptian kingdom were reduced to the size of a single city comparable to the Greek city-state.

In reality, whatever may have been the ‘virtues’ of Egypt’s social organization, it finally created. . . . intolerable abuses and uprisings . . .”

Finally, Chancellor Williams has this to say:

“ [The Anu] refused to accept the cult of Hours that dominated the Nile delta. They, therefore, formed a ‘second nation’ in Upper Egypt [Nubia] and established their national religious shrines at Omnos, Thebes, Thinis and Napata.”

And now my sons, a concluding observation. Our Balanta ancestors, a mix of Bantu and Sudanese origins, traveled from the foot of the Mountains of the Moon and traveled along the river until they reached Wadi Kubbaniya around 17,500 BC.  About 5000 BC they started migrating, some going west all the way to Lake Chad and then following the Niger River and others. Known as the Anu, going north to Nekhen (Hierakonpolis), where they established the first city in human history.

When the traditional ANU culture OF THE BALANTA ANCESTORS became violated with the concepts of leadership and inequality, and faced with the weapons of the murderous Mesintu and cult of Hours at Edfu, our Balanta ancestors chose to migrate to unpopulated areas to continue their egalitarian way of life.

Those who remained in the land of Ta-Meri revolted against the Pharaoh. Thus, it was literally our ancestors, as indicated by the DNA markers E3a*-M2 (also called E1b1a), E-V38, M1 and L0a1 in the Balanta, who created civilization, the first city and the culture of the first dynasty in Kemet.

However, from the perspective of our Balanta ancestors, the establishment of Kemet was not the great and glorious achievement that everyone seems to make it. In fact, it was the END of our great and glorious achievement. That is why they left.

Now you can understand Dr. John Henrik Clarke when he said,

“The early Africans, in building great river civilizations, built a concept which they did not call religion, though your religions came out of them. They called it ‘spirituality’. What they created was a concept of a Force of the Universe, that was much larger than denominations, much larger than the one-dimensional things that eventually man called religions. It had gone beyond the narrow concepts that we live under right now. And it is difficult for you to understand, but that age was man’s highest spiritual and moral age. And that by seizing upon this age, mostly by foreigners who did not understand the original African creation, the spirituality of man regressed, and did not leap forward, but regressed. They organized into pockets and gave it names. But before the African gave it a name but practiced it as a great force of the universe, it was then when it had its greatest value. And foreigners picked out of it little pieces and departmentalized it into religious pockets and started war between one pocket and another, then broke the pockets down into something called denominations, then started war between one denomination and the other”

Now you understand why Credo Mutwa says,

“Tribal historians today still sigh for those days when there was only one race of man and the Spirit of Peace walked the land – when every man woman and child, yea, every beast felt the soothing protection of the soft-eyed, infinitely wise Mothers of the People.

This was the first and last instance in the whole record of the Black People of Africa when pure witchcraft and black magic were used, not to terrorize people, but to keep peace in the land. For hundreds of years peace reigned in the land of the Ba-Ntu and in this atmosphere of peace the Great Belief was born. When eventually this nation broke up into the various tribes the Great Belief had taken such a strong hold on the souls and minds of people that they were completely lost without it."

Our ancestors left Ta-Meri and Ta-Nihisi again during the invasion of the Hyksos, whom our ancestors called ‘the ignoble Asians,’ after the end of the Middle Kingdom from 2500 BC to 2333 BC according to the old chronology and 1675 BC to 1600 BC according to the new chronology. From the first migration out of Ta-Nihisi and Ta-Meri in Nubia and Kemet to the last, there were thirty -three dynasties in Kemet lasting more than three thousand years. However, our concern is with those that left, for it is from them that we are descended.

King Senuseret.JPG
King Senuseret 2.JPG
Colossus of King Senwosret I.JPG

NOTE: BE CAREFUL OF STUDYING HISTORY WHEN YOU DON’T KNOW WHO YOU ARE. AFRICAN AMERICANS LOST THEIR ANCESTRAL IDENTITIES DURING THE TRANSATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE. MOST HAVE NOT TAKEN GENETIC TESTING TO IDENTIFY THEIR ACTUAL ANCESTORS. IN THEIR SEARCH FOR IDENTITY, THEY OFTEN ATTACH TO ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING RELATED TO AFRICA. KEMET, OR EGYPT, IS A GREAT EXAMPLE. NOT KNOWING HOW TO READ HIEROGLYPHICS, NOT STUDYING ACTUAL KEMETIC HISTORY FROM THEIR OWN ANCESTRAL PERSPECTIVE, THEY TEND TO GLORIFY THE ‘GREAT’ ACHIEVEMENTS AND ALL THINGS RELATED TO EGYPT WITHOUT KNOWING THAT THEY COULD BE GLORIFYING THEIR HISTORICAL ENEMIES. THE LESSON IS: KNOW THYSELF AND BE DISCRIMINATING IN WHAT YOU STUDY AND PROMOTE. IF I DIDN’T KNOW ANY BETTER, I WOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE GREAT KING SENWOSRET AS IF THAT WERE A CREDIT TO MY ANCESTORS …..