What do you think?
Rate this book
Mdw Dtr: Divine Speech: A Historiographical Reflection of African Deep Thought from the Time of the Pharaohs to the Present
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
May 25, 2026
HISTORICAL STUDIES OF AFRICAN ‘DEEP THOUGHT’ AND ITS INFLUENCE ON GREECE
Jacob Hudson Carruthers (1930-2004; aka ‘Mzee Jedi Shemsu Jehewty’) was an African-centered historian who taught at the Center for Inner City Studies of Northeastern Illinois University for 32 years.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1995 book, “Each of the essays in this work is aimed at the liberation of the deep thought of Africa. Such liberation has also been the often implicit purpose of the tradition of the Champions of African thought. In this light the present effort is merely an extension of the tradition that extends from David Walker through Cheikh Anta Diop. The moments of the liberation project deserve some delineation and explication. The first moment… is liberation from nonexistence… Hegel in the early 19th century … asserted that African Deep Thought did not exist… The champions who dashed to the rescue of the suppressed truth… asserted that African Deep Thought was the foundation of all deep thought, especially the deep thought of the ancient Greeks…
“The other moment emerged in the defense project was the volunteering of allies from among the community of European scholars who took issue with their colleagues [such as Hegel] and decided to assist in the defense… We can say at this point that the battle to liberate African thought from nonexistence has been decisively won! The African defenders and European saviors have demolished the fabricators… on that front.”
He wrote in the Introduction, “Now that most African people have been freed of the most tangible and obvious symbols of oppression such as chattel and political colonialism, the African dialogue has turned to the more subtle humiliations imposed by European domination. The most serious threat to African dignity is in the domain of intellectual ability… Both camps of African thinkers … [have entered] a great debate over the question of whether African philosophy exists and if so in what sense… each stream embarks on a quest for African philosophy, one in Africa’s past and the other in its future… Much of the argument is semantic. The two camps define philosophy differently. The ‘authentic African philosophers; use a narrow definition of philosophy and the champions use a broad one… One fundamental difference concerns the nature, quality and prospect of traditional African thought. That tradition and the African debate about it, in an historical context, are the foci of this study.”
He notes, “many of the ideas and theories advanced by Cheikh Anta Diop had emerged much earlier, especially in the thought of [David] Walker, [Hosea] Easton, and [Martin R.] Delany. Diop’s most significant contribution in this regard was the level of systematic examination and analysis to which he subjected the theories, always relating the assumptions and conclusions to specific empirical evidence… Diop began by pointing out that the Kemites produced four great ‘philosophical systems,’ i.e., the Hermopolitan, Memphite and Theban…. Diop’s view stressed that the various methods explained the basic system of deep thought from different perspectives but were basically united on theological issues.” (Pg. 22-23)
He summarizes, “Let us now attempt to focus on the significant points of difference between the two camps… both schools affirm the existence of African philosophy in some sense. There the agreement virtually ends… The ‘authentic philosophers’ accuse the defenders of African traditional philosophy as pandering to the paternalistic analysis of the liberal anthropological school who find virtue and wisdom in primitive African thought. The defenders on the other hand accuse the ‘young philosophers’ of accepting the European fabrication of African intellectual inferiority and the European origin of philosophy in the broad sense. The authentic school argues that African philosophy must be developed on the foundations of universal philosophy, i.e., from the ancient Greeks through the modern Europeans… On the other hand, the traditionalists argue that the only foundation for African philosophy is the ancient traditions of African Deep Thought that stem from the African worldview. They assert that the whole world borrowed or stole the philosophy of ancient Africa and that the restoration of that tradition is absolutely essential to the liberation of the African mind.” (Pg. 31-32)
He explains, “The proper designations of the deep thought of Kemet are ‘mdw ntr’ ‘Medew Netcher’ (God Speech) and ‘mdw nfr’ ‘Medew Nefer’ (Good Speech). These terms approximate the Greek terms ‘theology’ (divine speech) and ‘logos’ (reasoned speech) rather than the more popular term ‘philosophy.’ … In the narrow sense, Medew Netcher is the Kemetic concept which is used to denote the formal written language especially the drama written and depicted on the temple and tomb walls. Thus, when the Greeks called the written language hieroglyphs (sacred inscriptions), they were not only describing what they saw, they were also translating the Kemetic term in the narrow sense… In the more profound sense, Medew Netcher refers to human speech in general. Speech itself is divine… Medew Netcher, or Divine Speech, this encompasses what the Europeans designate as metaphysics, the branch of philosophy which deals with origins… Good Speech, however, was the domain of humanity… it is only through the consistent practice of Medew Netcher … that human beings finally obtained Medew Netcher, Divine Speech.” (Pg. 39-40)
He critiques George G.M. James’ book ‘Stolen Legacy,’ where James concluded, “These similarities make it evident that Laplace obtained his [cosmoogical] hypothesis from the Memphite Theology or other Egyptian sources.” Carruthers counters, “With all due respect to Professor James, whose profound thesis was an invaluable inspiration to those of us who probe into these matters, I hold that the materialism and alienation inherent in the Big Bang Theory of the origin of the universe is a prime example of Diop’s Two Cradle Theory. The interpretation James refers to may well have been the original inspiration for Greek philosophy and modern science, but… such an interpretation represents a misreading of the Kemetic meaning by the Greeks.” (Pg. 49-50)
He argues, “The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus … along with other mathematical books supports Diop’s assertion that Egyptian mathematics was not a mere aggregate of imperial ‘recipes,’ but was rather highly elaborate and theoretical. In his study of the texts he found that the Kemites first developed the formula for the areas of the circle and sphere and the so-called ‘Pythagorean Theorem.’ The Kemites also invented trigonometry, arithmetic and geometric progressions and algebra, among other feats… Needless to say, Kemetic mathematical processes are among the intellectual accomplishments the ancient Greeks borrowed or stole (although Aristotle did admit the debt in a passing reference in the book ‘Metaphysics’).” (Pg. 58) He documents Aristotle’s words: “the mathematical arts were founded in Egypt.” [Metaphysics, Book I, 1:691] “Aristotle’s other two ‘theoretical sciences’ were identified as ‘physics and what we call theology’ [Book VI, 1:799)(Pg. 97)
He continues, “My interpretation also differs from the view that modern science is directly attributable to the ideas and inventions of the Kemites. This view… gives the Kemites too much credit. I will here and now assert that even though the Greeks ‘borrowed’ a great deal and ‘stole’ a lot more, they did have something that they did not get from the Africans. That something may well have been stolen from somebody else. The fact is that the culture of alienation, which makes European thought diametrically opposite to African thought, is not a product of Africa or its people.” (Pg. 59)
He summarizes, “In a very significant sense… existence in Africa consisted of a hierarchy of speeches. At the Apex is the Divine Word, the creative speech of God. Next comes the sayings of the ancestors who have unified with the Creator and whose wisdom must be consulted periodically. Following the ancestors, comes the sacred speech of the priests… through whom God and the ancestors speak and whom in turn speak with God and/or the ancestors. In many societies the King is a special kind of priest or diving spokesperson whose words command obedience as do those of God and the ancestors… This is the context in which one must understand the oral and written traditions of the African heritage. Human life is to a large extent an intergenerational conversation which is defined through Divine Speech and Good Speech.” (Pg. 83-84)
He states, “Maat was emphasized in the maxims concerning relations with ordinary people. A man endures when he advances Maat (Justice and Truth)… Maat is not only the essence of wisdom but also the measure or prudence… Maat is discipline because in most instances Maat is equated with balancing and measuring which in qualitative terms is reciprocity.” (Pg. 131)
He concludes, “It is now clear that African thought has contributed indispensable, major ideas and concepts to the three major thought systems of the ‘Western World’… African thought also produced the great civilizations and cultures of Africa… African thought has … exposed the true bases of European thought. This includes not only what it borrowed but also what it did not get from Africans…. This permits us to separate African thought from European theology, philosophy and science.” (Pg. 173-174)
This book will be of great interest to those studying the origins and influence of ancient African thought.
Jacob Hudson Carruthers (1930-2004; aka ‘Mzee Jedi Shemsu Jehewty’) was an African-centered historian who taught at the Center for Inner City Studies of Northeastern Illinois University for 32 years.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1995 book, “Each of the essays in this work is aimed at the liberation of the deep thought of Africa. Such liberation has also been the often implicit purpose of the tradition of the Champions of African thought. In this light the present effort is merely an extension of the tradition that extends from David Walker through Cheikh Anta Diop. The moments of the liberation project deserve some delineation and explication. The first moment… is liberation from nonexistence… Hegel in the early 19th century … asserted that African Deep Thought did not exist… The champions who dashed to the rescue of the suppressed truth… asserted that African Deep Thought was the foundation of all deep thought, especially the deep thought of the ancient Greeks…
“The other moment emerged in the defense project was the volunteering of allies from among the community of European scholars who took issue with their colleagues [such as Hegel] and decided to assist in the defense… We can say at this point that the battle to liberate African thought from nonexistence has been decisively won! The African defenders and European saviors have demolished the fabricators… on that front.”
He wrote in the Introduction, “Now that most African people have been freed of the most tangible and obvious symbols of oppression such as chattel and political colonialism, the African dialogue has turned to the more subtle humiliations imposed by European domination. The most serious threat to African dignity is in the domain of intellectual ability… Both camps of African thinkers … [have entered] a great debate over the question of whether African philosophy exists and if so in what sense… each stream embarks on a quest for African philosophy, one in Africa’s past and the other in its future… Much of the argument is semantic. The two camps define philosophy differently. The ‘authentic African philosophers; use a narrow definition of philosophy and the champions use a broad one… One fundamental difference concerns the nature, quality and prospect of traditional African thought. That tradition and the African debate about it, in an historical context, are the foci of this study.”
He notes, “many of the ideas and theories advanced by Cheikh Anta Diop had emerged much earlier, especially in the thought of [David] Walker, [Hosea] Easton, and [Martin R.] Delany. Diop’s most significant contribution in this regard was the level of systematic examination and analysis to which he subjected the theories, always relating the assumptions and conclusions to specific empirical evidence… Diop began by pointing out that the Kemites produced four great ‘philosophical systems,’ i.e., the Hermopolitan, Memphite and Theban…. Diop’s view stressed that the various methods explained the basic system of deep thought from different perspectives but were basically united on theological issues.” (Pg. 22-23)
He summarizes, “Let us now attempt to focus on the significant points of difference between the two camps… both schools affirm the existence of African philosophy in some sense. There the agreement virtually ends… The ‘authentic philosophers’ accuse the defenders of African traditional philosophy as pandering to the paternalistic analysis of the liberal anthropological school who find virtue and wisdom in primitive African thought. The defenders on the other hand accuse the ‘young philosophers’ of accepting the European fabrication of African intellectual inferiority and the European origin of philosophy in the broad sense. The authentic school argues that African philosophy must be developed on the foundations of universal philosophy, i.e., from the ancient Greeks through the modern Europeans… On the other hand, the traditionalists argue that the only foundation for African philosophy is the ancient traditions of African Deep Thought that stem from the African worldview. They assert that the whole world borrowed or stole the philosophy of ancient Africa and that the restoration of that tradition is absolutely essential to the liberation of the African mind.” (Pg. 31-32)
He explains, “The proper designations of the deep thought of Kemet are ‘mdw ntr’ ‘Medew Netcher’ (God Speech) and ‘mdw nfr’ ‘Medew Nefer’ (Good Speech). These terms approximate the Greek terms ‘theology’ (divine speech) and ‘logos’ (reasoned speech) rather than the more popular term ‘philosophy.’ … In the narrow sense, Medew Netcher is the Kemetic concept which is used to denote the formal written language especially the drama written and depicted on the temple and tomb walls. Thus, when the Greeks called the written language hieroglyphs (sacred inscriptions), they were not only describing what they saw, they were also translating the Kemetic term in the narrow sense… In the more profound sense, Medew Netcher refers to human speech in general. Speech itself is divine… Medew Netcher, or Divine Speech, this encompasses what the Europeans designate as metaphysics, the branch of philosophy which deals with origins… Good Speech, however, was the domain of humanity… it is only through the consistent practice of Medew Netcher … that human beings finally obtained Medew Netcher, Divine Speech.” (Pg. 39-40)
He critiques George G.M. James’ book ‘Stolen Legacy,’ where James concluded, “These similarities make it evident that Laplace obtained his [cosmoogical] hypothesis from the Memphite Theology or other Egyptian sources.” Carruthers counters, “With all due respect to Professor James, whose profound thesis was an invaluable inspiration to those of us who probe into these matters, I hold that the materialism and alienation inherent in the Big Bang Theory of the origin of the universe is a prime example of Diop’s Two Cradle Theory. The interpretation James refers to may well have been the original inspiration for Greek philosophy and modern science, but… such an interpretation represents a misreading of the Kemetic meaning by the Greeks.” (Pg. 49-50)
He argues, “The Rhind Mathematical Papyrus … along with other mathematical books supports Diop’s assertion that Egyptian mathematics was not a mere aggregate of imperial ‘recipes,’ but was rather highly elaborate and theoretical. In his study of the texts he found that the Kemites first developed the formula for the areas of the circle and sphere and the so-called ‘Pythagorean Theorem.’ The Kemites also invented trigonometry, arithmetic and geometric progressions and algebra, among other feats… Needless to say, Kemetic mathematical processes are among the intellectual accomplishments the ancient Greeks borrowed or stole (although Aristotle did admit the debt in a passing reference in the book ‘Metaphysics’).” (Pg. 58) He documents Aristotle’s words: “the mathematical arts were founded in Egypt.” [Metaphysics, Book I, 1:691] “Aristotle’s other two ‘theoretical sciences’ were identified as ‘physics and what we call theology’ [Book VI, 1:799)(Pg. 97)
He continues, “My interpretation also differs from the view that modern science is directly attributable to the ideas and inventions of the Kemites. This view… gives the Kemites too much credit. I will here and now assert that even though the Greeks ‘borrowed’ a great deal and ‘stole’ a lot more, they did have something that they did not get from the Africans. That something may well have been stolen from somebody else. The fact is that the culture of alienation, which makes European thought diametrically opposite to African thought, is not a product of Africa or its people.” (Pg. 59)
He summarizes, “In a very significant sense… existence in Africa consisted of a hierarchy of speeches. At the Apex is the Divine Word, the creative speech of God. Next comes the sayings of the ancestors who have unified with the Creator and whose wisdom must be consulted periodically. Following the ancestors, comes the sacred speech of the priests… through whom God and the ancestors speak and whom in turn speak with God and/or the ancestors. In many societies the King is a special kind of priest or diving spokesperson whose words command obedience as do those of God and the ancestors… This is the context in which one must understand the oral and written traditions of the African heritage. Human life is to a large extent an intergenerational conversation which is defined through Divine Speech and Good Speech.” (Pg. 83-84)
He states, “Maat was emphasized in the maxims concerning relations with ordinary people. A man endures when he advances Maat (Justice and Truth)… Maat is not only the essence of wisdom but also the measure or prudence… Maat is discipline because in most instances Maat is equated with balancing and measuring which in qualitative terms is reciprocity.” (Pg. 131)
He concludes, “It is now clear that African thought has contributed indispensable, major ideas and concepts to the three major thought systems of the ‘Western World’… African thought also produced the great civilizations and cultures of Africa… African thought has … exposed the true bases of European thought. This includes not only what it borrowed but also what it did not get from Africans…. This permits us to separate African thought from European theology, philosophy and science.” (Pg. 173-174)
This book will be of great interest to those studying the origins and influence of ancient African thought.
Displaying 1 of 1 review