The Bible is not meant to be taken literally

For centuries, the Bible has been used both as a tool of oppression and a vehicle of encoded wisdom. Many of us grew up with its stories — but felt something deeper was being overlooked.

What if: Adam and Eve were metaphors for consciousness and polarity? Solomon’s Temple was a blueprint for the human body?Jesus and Heru (Horus) were versions of the same inner myth? The Two Pillars — Boaz and Jachin — symbolized the dual gateways of spiritual initiation?

To decode the Bible is to restore its true meaning — and reclaim its ancestral, universal relevance.

The Papal Bull 'Romanus Pontifex'

The Papal Bull Romanus Pontifex of 1455 is a critically important document for Abantu and all African peoples, as it gave religious and legal justification to the colonial project and the horrific enslavement of Black Africans that followed. Understanding its significance is crucial to comprehending the roots of systemic racism, land dispossession, and the lingering effects of colonialism on the continent.

Expansion of slavery: As a follow-up to the 1452 Bull Dum Diversas, Romanus Pontifex expanded upon the authority granted to King Afonso V of Portugal to “invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever” and “reduce their persons to perpetual slavery”. This papal declaration essentially sanctioned the purchase and trade of enslaved Black Africans from that point forward.
Monopoly on exploration: The bull granted Portugal a monopoly on trade and colonization along the west African coast, forbidding other Christian nations from interfering. This was a politically motivated move to prevent competition with Spain and other European powers.
Theological justification: The bull portrayed the enslavement and subjugation of African peoples as a pious act that would lead to their conversion to Christianity. This warped logic transformed enslavement into a supposedly charitable act, providing a moral and religious cover for the violent and exploitative system that followed.
The Doctrine of Discovery: Romanus Pontifex is a foundational component of the Doctrine of Discovery, a legal and religious framework used by European powers to claim land inhabited by non-Christians. This doctrine established the concept of terra nullius, or “empty land,” which disregarded the existence and sovereignty of Indigenous peoples.

Direct impacts on aBantu

Accelerated transatlantic slave trade: The papal bull provided powerful religious and legal backing for the Portuguese to escalate their slave trading activities in West Africa. This set a dangerous precedent that would be emulated and expanded by other European powers in the centuries to come.
Justification for colonisation: The authorization to seize the land and property of non-Christians laid the groundwork for the brutal colonial period. The idea that African nations were “infidel” or “pagan” became a pretext for European powers to disregard existing political, ethnic, and cultural boundaries.
Perpetual dehumanization: The bull categorized African peoples as worthy of “perpetual slavery,” an act that codified their dehumanization in the eyes of the church and European powers. This theological and legal stance fueled the racial prejudices that continue to exist today.

The ongoing legacy and efforts toward change

Lingering legal and cultural effects: The legal constructs originating from this and other papal bulls were incorporated into the laws of colonial powers and, later, countries like the United States. They have been used for centuries to deny the land rights of Indigenous peoples around the world.
Vatican repudiation: After years of pressure from Indigenous groups, the Vatican officially repudiated the Doctrine of Discovery in 2023, acknowledging its role in the dispossession and suffering of Indigenous peoples.
Need for ongoing education: For Abantu, understanding the role of Romanus Pontifex and the broader Doctrine of Discovery is critical to understanding the history of European intervention in Africa. It provides the historical context for the theft of resources, the disruption of societies, and the creation of economic and social disparities that persist today. Education on this topic is an essential tool for decolonization and healing.

The Bull did not use the local names for these lands because, in the eyes of the Pope and the Portuguese crown, the specific names of the local nations were legally irrelevant. The document used broad, European-coined geographical terms.

What The Europeans Called the Lands

At that time, Europeans referred to the entire coastal region of West Africa with a single, generic name: Guinea. The name itself is thought to derive from a Berber word meaning “land of the Black people.” It wasn’t a specific kingdom but a vast, undefined coastal territory.

The Bull specifically mentions:

Cape Bojador and Cape Nao (or Non): These capes, on the coast of modern-day Western Sahara, were famous psychological barriers for European sailors. For centuries, they were considered the southern limit of safe navigation, the “point of no return.” Prince Henry’s expeditions finally pushed past them, opening the way to the south.
The entire coast of Guinea: This referred to everything south of Cape Bojador that the Portuguese had explored and would explore. It was a catch-all term for the West African coastline.

Later, the Portuguese and other Europeans would break “Guinea” into smaller regions based on the primary trade goods they could extract: the Grain Coast (for Malagueta pepper), the Ivory Coast, the Gold Coast, and the Slave Coast.

The Actual Nations and Kingdoms in Question

While Europeans used the blanket term “Guinea,” the region was a vibrant and complex tapestry of hundreds of different ethnic groups, city-states, kingdoms, and empires. The people living there were not waiting to be “discovered.”

Some of the major political powers in the region around 1455 included:

The Mali Empire: Although past its golden age, the Mali Empire was still a significant power in the interior, controlling vast trade routes. Its influence was felt all the way to the coast.
The Jolof (Wolof) Empire: A powerful state controlling much of the area of modern-day Senegal and Gambia. They were one of the first groups to have significant contact with the Portuguese.
The Kingdom of Benin: A highly centralized and powerful kingdom in what is now Nigeria, renowned for its sophisticated political structure and extraordinary bronze art.
The Akan States: A collection of various small kingdoms and city-states in the region of modern-day Ghana, which was the heart of the Gold Coast.
The Songhai Empire: Located further inland, the Songhai was rapidly expanding and would soon conquer the remnants of the Mali Empire to become the dominant power in the Western Sahel.

These were not scattered tribes; they were organized societies with their own laws, economies, and international relations. The Papal Bull effectively provided a legal and spiritual license for the Portuguese to ignore the sovereignty of all these established nations.

The Maps They Used 🗺️

Yes, they absolutely had maps, but they looked very different from ours. The maps used by Prince Henry’s explorers were called portolan charts.

These charts were remarkably accurate for their time, but only for the coastline. Their key features were:

Extreme Coastal Detail: They showed every bay, river mouth, and cape with great precision because they were tools for navigating by sea.
Rhumb Lines: Crisscrossing lines radiated from compass roses, allowing sailors to plot a course from one point to another.
Empty Interiors: The inland areas were almost always left blank or filled with illustrations of mythical animals, monsters, or hypothetical kings.

The portolan chart perfectly illustrates the European perspective at the time: the coast of Africa was a series of points to be navigated and exploited, while the interior, with its complex societies and millions of people, was a literal and figurative blank space on their map.