Why did Africa not advance before Europeans came?
Because of a lack of a large body of water to facilitate trading
>>1291657
Probably the same reasons Europeans didn't advance until middle easterners came.
>>1291657
"advance"
They were fine as they were. This "civilization" crap is destroying the earth
>>1291667
But Middle easterners interacted with Africans and they still did not advance
>>1291657
>tfw /his/ thinks reality is Sid Meier's civilization
What the fuck is wrong with you people. Why do you make this thread every single goddamn day.
Read:
African Archaeology (Third Edition), by David. W. Phillipson
The Oxford Handbook of African Archaeology, ed. Peter Mitchell and Paul Lane
Literally get off the internet and go read these books right now, it'll answer every question you could possibly have.
>>1291675
No they didn't; the biggest desert on Earth is in the way.
>>1291683
>Why do you make this thread every single goddamn day
Because education systems around the world have zero interest in African history and people's knowledge reflects that. This is even true for most African countries, sadly enough. And there is no interest for self-study because Africa doesn't have the right "memes" for people to be interested in it.
Nobody wants there to be a focus on African history in Western schooling but just the basic brush over to dispel such gaping ignorance would be nice
>>1291685
Yes they did.
Advance how?
>>1291685
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Saharan_trade
I bet you think Arabs didn't have shittons of African slaves either, right?
What is Egypt?
civilizations dont 'advance' linearly. There are different cultures in different parts of the world. Africa not being as technologically advanced as Europe doesn't make it worse; it just makes it different.
>>1291694
What information could be included in a high school curriculum on African history course?
>>1291657
Because real life isn't Civ or some Paradox game and civilizations don't have tech trees and technologies to research
>>1291675
No not really.
Slave trading is not what you call ideal interactions.
>>1291715
and that correlates directly to when Africa started to develop some serious civilisation.
hmmmm
>>1291657
Their imperial seed Carthage was not a nice people and animal based kind of thing. So they did not get miraculous powers of economy and military and got sacked by Rome. Because instead of developing their continent, Africa, they wanted to conquer Rome by this megaloman expedition trough the Alps.
>>1291745
You can't touch someone without being touched yourself
Much like the German tribes in their interactions with Rome
>>1291657
Dinduism.
Spoiled by tropical environment acquiring provision was never taxing enough to change course, it was a lateral move.
>>1291683
You forgot the UNESCO General History of Africa volumes.
>>1291777
>hotbed of disease
>constant droughts
>literally a giant plateau
>regular coastline
>no native staple foods
>nigh unnavigable rivers
Gee whiz, what a paradise
>>1291725
Not him but honestly I don't know.
Like do a world history class but honestly in many schools history is the first thing that goes down.
>>1291798
Exactly all reasons to be r-selected
They didn't have to put up with winters or environmental (ans genetically incorporated) stimuli demanding foresight.
>>1291809
Oh God you are applying r/k theory to people bro?
>>1291725
>Human origins
>Egypt, Nubia, Axum, Libya, Carthage
>Bantu expansion
>Malagasy arrival in Madagascar
>Arrival of Islam
>Rise of sahelian empires
>Berber emirates
>Mamluks
>Ethiopia
>Islamic conquest of Nubia
>Rise of Bantu cities and kingdoms
>The slave trades
>Slaver kingdoms
>Colonization and it's after affects
Just a rough idea
>>1291723
>muh noble savage
>>1291683
This is just nice to remember Carthage's whoring with doing anything other than becoming a nice people and animal based land. The whole of Africa.
It is even most interesting for black people in the U.S. or elsewhere.
>>1291809
Did you read my post?
Europe was a temperate paradise
In Africa people who could not prepare for the dry season died
>>1291827
First the Royal African resources and producing capabilities, like any civilisation has, were used to move the Roman empire.
After that nothing happened with this for the Africans themselves.
So the Europeans came.
And now still nothing is really happening with it for the Africans themselves.
>>1291819
You materialists keks don't even take evolution to its fullest extent?
>>1291893
What are you even saying?
>>1291985
Bon appetite eating his dinner tonight!
What can he have in return? That old plastic tub?
Or would they become this genocidal murder machine?
>>1292030
the only proper response to such an imbecilic argument is: WE WUZ KANGS N SHIEET
The whole "why did X not advance" threads are missing the point.
Sub-Saharan Africa is fucking huge. Both Americas are huge. Siberia is huge. Australia is huge.
Civilization was not the norm.
It happened in a handful of places and tended to spread from there. It's not like people's all over Eurasia suddenly figured out civilization. Some places civilized, notably in the Fertile Crescent, Egypt, India, and China, and then the technologies and arts they developed spread.
Most of the world is pretty isolated. Civilization spread throughout Eurasia because it was easier to connect with than the rest of the globe.
Because sub-saharan Africa had everything the people needed to survive with the tools they had at their disposal at the time.
There was no need to build advanced civilizations since they had all the food, warmth and water needed to survive.
In fact, they were far more advanced than us to this day considering they can live without depleting all the natural resources in the area or hunt the game out of existence. They were pretty much living in harmony with mother nature while our overpollution and hunting is slowly killing the planet.
>>1291893
A lot is happening in Africa. It may not be good, but it is interesting. Also, Africa is getting more peaceful and the AU is actually developing some power.
1980-2010 Africa is pretty much like reading about the Middle Ages. Tribalism and religious extremism. Shamanism and magic still play a role in politics. Cannibalism. An epic plague (AIDS). Endless internecine wars with shifting factions, and full out genocides.
Africa in the 1990's particularly was about as apocalyptic as a region gets. It makes the wars in the Middle East look tame in comparison.
I read Things Fall Apart and am well versed in African history.
The reason they did not advance is mostly due to their genetics. In case you haven't noticed, they are black. Blacks in our society don't work, and a spear-chucking monkey doesn't have much work ethic either.
No work=No civilization
>>1291694
Deja vu
>>1291657
Well north africa did advance, but I guess your talking about the rest of it (some parts of the rest did create some type of civilisation, but nvm).
I thought the reason was always quite simple, they had no need to advance as they were living in the climate the human body was designed to inhabit, while other groups of humans (that left Africa) had to adapt to their new enviorment, bringing technological advancement
>>1292080
>Because sub-saharan Africa had everything the people needed to survive
Then why was pastoral agrarianism the norm throughout the entire continent apart from the San and the Twa
>They were pretty much living in harmony with mother nature
Then why was urban living found on every part of the continent? West, North, East and West?
>>1292111
The people that settled in Europe for example, had to come up with new ways of getting food and other necessities in the harsher climate. Necessities that the people left in Africa could get by just hunting and gathering. All of this obviously very simplified
>>1292121
>Necessities that the people left in Africa could get by just hunting and gathering.
But there were barely any hunter gatherers in Africa. There were some in the extreme centre of the Congo jungle and some in Kalahari desert and what is now South Africa, but that's it. Everyone else farmed or reared cattle.
>>1292121
How was Europe more "harsh"?
It's a lush fertile green land once teeming with wild game and fruit
>>1292098
You are being genocidal in your words. Here from a local clean situation they did make it work
http://emmanuel.tv/
>>1292135
Winters. Its why the Asians whose ancestors had an even greater glacial influences have flatter facial features to keep heat as well as more foresight as a population than whites.
>>1292150
>there are no extreme climates in Africa
>>1292158
>>1292150
>>1292158
Still a more tolerable climate to be homeless in
>>1292171
It's actually godawful just like everywhere else.
>>1292177
And what sort of behavior would have incentive? Being nomadic perhaps? You can't really build a civilization when you have to be shifting around look at Jewry for instance.
>>1292111
>they had no need to advance as they were living in the climate the human body was designed to inhabit
Just because a species evolved in a certain part of the world doesn't mean there aren't other places where they'd be more prosperous if they were to somehow get there.
>An invasive species is a plant, fungus, or animal species that is not native to a specific location (an introduced species), and which has a tendency to spread to a degree believed to cause damage to the environment, human economy or human health.
Mankind is an invasive species.
>>1291905
Hey /pol/
>>1292182
Are you saying people didn't live in home or shelter in Africa?
>>1292098
Stormfag go
>>1291723
>>1291667
Seems you forgot about that period when the Roman empire had significantly advanced construction techniques and philosophy while Arabs were still backwater tribes in the desert.
Europe fell into somewhat of a technological slump after the empire fell, and interaction with the middle east did help rouse them out of it, but they weren't primitive savages, and many of the advancements that pulled Europe out of the dark ages were done entirely without middle eastern interaction, like the Ottonian renaissance.
>>1292221
>Seems you forgot about that period when the Roman empire had significantly advanced construction techniques and philosophy while Arabs were still backwater tribes in the desert.
>There is literally no one living in the middle east who is not an arab and there never has been
>>1292200
Animals have better mudhuts
>>1292150
Winter was a simple matter of wearing fur and building fires
Not rocket science
I doubt prehistoric europeans has the need to maintain water resources during droughts
>>1292236
Doubtful that animals are capable of building typical african compounds
>>1292236
Animals can't build mudhuts anon although a few animals use mud to construct their habitats but no mud huts which aren't a bad thing at all..
>>1292080
Oh look, an environmentalist who thinks native Africans lived in magical nature tribes.
>they were far more advanced than us to this day considering they can live without depleting all the natural resources in the area or hunt the game out of existence.
Wow, they're starving because they can't distribute food properly, so advanced!
Also, Europe had sustainable environments in the middle ages, it was only around the industrial evolution that things really started to get out of control.
>>1292260
India has a higher ratio of malnutrition than Africa
>>1292240
30 below keeps riffraff out
>>1292293
That's completely out of context that refers to North Dakota (I think) and the homeless.
>>1292098
>I read things fall apart
Yea so did everyone else for summer reading in 8th grade
>>1292080
Read "Green Land, Brown Land, Black Land" by James McCann if you wanna read into Africa's environmental history. He talks about how much of Africa's recent environmental degradation is due to European incursion vs. the long history of native African's influence on the human landscape.
What do you mean by advance?
just read guns germs and steel it's all you need to know :^)
>>1292589
I see these threads all the time. I'm still trying to figure out what they would define as an advanced civilization.
Sub-Saharan Africa simply developed in a different manner than other places. Advancement isn't a linear path that leads to A, then B, and finally C.
>>1291667
Bait
>>1291657
Africa is doing a good job advancing now guys
>>1292714
Angola's GDP was literally 98% oil exports and the other 2% was copper manufacture. Obviously with the oil price crash they're having a hard time right now and they had nothing to fall back on.
>>1292768
José Eduardo dos Santos is a total idiot and corrupt as fuck. Not developing any industry hurt the country super hard.
>>1291662
This and relatively harsh climate barriers, including deserts and jungles.
>>1291674
t. Salty African
>>1292768
What a wonderful economic mind that dictator must of had. Really understood the concepts of free markets it seems.
>>1291744
Are the moorish and ottoman invasions ideal?
>>1294670
> aves existed 100 million years ago
fuck, /pol/ is retarded
>>1294670
notice the environment of the himba woman? do you really think deforestation of near xeric environments is the best thing? Like do you realize how dumb you are.
>>1294670
That background sure looks like it's ripe with resources to build a sprawling city. /sarcasm/
>>1297461
>/sarcasm/
>>1291832
What's wrong with that?
>>1292098
Kek
Can we all just realize that different races have differing IQs? Black Africans have the second lowest IQs out of any race. Aboriginal Australians have the lowest. They didn't develop civilizations or any real form of technology because blacks simply have low IQs and that's not just me being racist, that's backed up by hundreds of studies on intelligence in Africa. Why are most of the predominately black areas in the US crime infested blighted neighborhoods? Because they are too stupid to know how to build communities. Of course there are exceptions to the rule as there obviously are intelligent blacks but they are few and far between.
Iq by country
>>1297541
Kill yourself /pol/ we address this every fucking day
Go the fuck away already, you are not welcome, and neither are these daily threads
>>1291657
Areas of Africa did kick off very successful civilizations. the big names being Egypt and Carthage, with very rich farmland and short trading distances to places like Italy, the Levant, Greece, and Anatolia, Northern Africa saw some of the time's most advanced states.
Even the Swahili states on Africa's East coast found relative success based on the sufficient farmlands of Kenya and ready-access trade routes through the Red Sea/Persian Gulf.
What damned the rest of the Continent is mainly lack of arable land and dense geographic barriers.
Rainforest is not ideal for cutting the trees and placing crops, the soil just doesn't cooperate with human hands tilling it for growth, and the forests themselves as well as the Sahara desert were immense shields that prevented peoples from having ready access trade with other people-groups.
There were caravans that would brave the deserts and set up outposts like Timbuktu and Gao, but these were just barely enough to create a lifeline for trade that Mali and the Songhai used to create working empires.
Other than that, crossing the rainforest was impossible, making West and Central Africa essentially doomed with no viable communication with the outside world and no arable land to grow a working food supply with.
>>1291657
They didn't need to "advance" to survive. The land provided everything they needed.
They didn't have to build giant cities because they followed the food.
They didn't have to use advanced agricultural practices because all the food was right on the land, etc etc
>>1291657
Why did Gaul not advance before Romans came?
>>1297699
Here are some suggestions, feel free to add yours:
>The data is biased
>The data is invented
>The data was only valid at the very moment the tests were taken, that's to say a long time after Mesopotamian civilizations
>Developing a great civilisation doesn't require a specific average IQ
>IQ doesn't mean anything
>>1294450
Russia and Scandinavia did fine, in spite of harsh climate barriers. Russia has no large body of water near it either.
>>1297699
iq is effected by education
>>1297611
Why do people keep repeating this even when it's obviously untrue? Pre-modern Africa was almost entirely agricultural, the only hunter-gatherers on the continent were some isolated pockets in the very south and the very center.
>>1292221
>hurr durr Islam
Use your brain retard and think a bit further back. Middle Eastern cultures definitley helped spread agriculture into Europe and it's absurd to pretend that the Bronze Age cultures of Greece weren't heavily influenced by Eastern palace economies, which kept the ball of civilisation rolling westwards
One simple difference with Africa is that the distance involved is far smaller and the climate differences as well. There wasn't really an opportunity for knowledge and culture to diffuse southwards in the same way as it could in Europe. Hence why we only see civilisation in the southern half of the continent after the Bantus developed enough to move there and kill the native hunters.
>>1297479
Look how you don't even try to counter the other guys.
>>1298798
its called conter u stopid fug
>>1297623
To be frank, Gauls were more technologically advanced than early 19th century Africans...
>>1294450
>harsh climate
>jungles
the tropics have the most comfy climate on earth
THAT'S why they never evolved
they never needed to develop planning or intelligent strategies
that's why arctic climates make smart peoples
>>1298807
How?
I hate to say it but...
NIGGERS
>>1298854
Yep.
>>1291657
#NotAllAfrica
joking aside though, Africa is a fucking huge continent and you should not lump it all together. The Northern coastal regions and Nilotic countries actually played a pretty big role in world history. sub-Saharan Africa not so much, though there was still some involvement in trade.
>>1291657
DUDE ZEBRAS LMAO
"advancement" or technological progress or whatever you want to call it is NOT LINEAR.
The things that happened to us Eurasians (this term, eurasian, is important because information and ideas flowed between europe and asia while africa and america was in the "dark") ONCE and most of the time by chance
You don't start of somewhere with stones and sticks and then assume a constant linear increase in technology from there on. There are still tribes of people who still live in the jungle and hunt boars for a living to this day.
Basically we're just lucky. I know a lot of people like to shit on Guns Germs and Steel, but it's a good book except for the fact that it's too deterministic but brings up an excellent point that information and knowledge flowed throughout Eurasia while native americans and africans were basically isolated and therefore didn't grow like we did
>>1299027
And before anyone says I'm a guns germs and steel fanboy, I subscribe to the idea that IQ determines the advancement of a civilizaiton. Europeans and Asians are just on average more intelligent than sub-saharan africans which can help to explain the holes in Jared Diamond's proposition.
Resources alone don't explain shit, Japan don't have a lick of resources yet are one of the most successful countries in the world because of their human brain capital
>>1299008
Africa has almost no animals that can be domesticated.
Thats basically it.
>>1298961
Funny how none of those are from Ibn Battuta who ACTUALLY visited black africa
>>1299045
>Cattle
>Goats
>Chickens
>Dogs
>Cats
>Donkeys
>Camels
>Pigs
>Sheep
>Rats
>Horses
But yeah apart from those almost none :^)
They were in the perfect human habitat, so no need to evolve to make civilization and tools.
>>1299190
>rats?
> not knowing horses are european
>>1299190
>>Cattle
>>Goats
>>Chickens
>>Dogs
>>Cats
>>Donkeys
>>Camels
>>Pigs
>>Sheep
>>Rats
>>Horses
none of those were domesticated in Europe, absolutely none of them.
Donkeys, african cattle, camels and guinea fowl were domesticated in africa.
Also fyi donkey and zebra are closely related, and once domesticated animals were spread the pastoralist response was not to further domesticate but rather in the case of Africans it was to kill wild animals because they were passive carriers of animal diseases and viruses.
Goats and sheep are early adoptions along with long horn cattle then later horses. Again none from Europe!
>>1299258
no.
>>1298852
Gauls before Roman conquest: stone houses and iron forging
Africans in early 19th century before colonization: mudhuts and wooden spears
>>1299294
Cane rats are reared as pets and as a supply of meat in some areas of West Africa.
They're about the size of chickens so it's quite efficient.
>>1299413
Pretty much every society in Africa had metalworking in the 19th century. The Zulus are probably the most primitive African power of that period and even they had it. There are isolated pygmy tribes in the Congo who made swords, even.
I'm not even going to comment on the "mud huts" thing because it's so stupid.
>>1291819
He's 100% right.
Explain niggers, poo in loos and early Europeans having dozens of kids
>>1292080
>They were pretty much living in harmony with mother nature while our overpollution and hunting is slowly killing the planet
You mongoloid. You absolute cock mongler. You dare prate about "noble savages" when you know as much about history as you do about not being a retard.
Do you know why Australia is a fucking desert? Because the degenerate abos burnt all the forests down. This is not a joke, those diesel huffing fucks literally burnt it all down.
So how about you leave your misconceptions alongside your idiocy at the door?
>>1297699
Despite what liberals will have you believe, it is absolutely possible for civilizations to get dumber
>>1291809
What a fundamentally flawed understanding of an ecological concept you absoluteabsolute fuckhead. A having 250 000 babies is not the same as two parents having 5 babies. Your stupidity is fucking unbelievable. By your logic any animal that has more then two offspring is r-selected.
Fucking go to school and stop reading so much pol, your giving science a bad name
>>1291905
Are you willing to concede that orientals are the superior race then?
>>1299654
I would say advanced but sure
>>1299654
Sadly, that title goes to the Jews
>>1299579
What an idiot. the abos did controlled burns to help promote the environment their best protein source (kangaroos in wild grasslands) can thrive in. Australia still was going to undergo huge desertification either way.
>>1291798
Such an easy paradise it took Europeans until the 1860s to penetrate the interior.
Europeans took longer to Navigate their way up the Nile than it took them to find Antarctica.
>>1292260
>Also, Europe had sustainable environments in the middle ages, it was only around the industrial evolution that things really started to get out of control.
Nah, you were closer earlier in the post. White and Black People were fucking up the environment since the BC era.
The Middle Ages saw the extirpation of species through most of Europe, and the wide scale destruction of natural habitats.
