Who made them? The houses made have been made of mud, but Africans did not usually know how to make houses like this.
>>401457
Ayyliens
>>401457
Aryans traveling down from Europe to build them and then returning. After all, as you said, Africans can't build houses.
>>401457
Natural formations of the wind eroding away the landscape
think about it...
>>401468
Be serious now. I think Europeans came, built some houses with the resources they could find, and then taught the natives how to make smaller houses
>>401482
The smaller houses.
Arabic Phoenician Tutsi aliens.
>>401496
They obviously were not built by Arabs, but ask your self why Africans today who still live without technology can not build houses like that? Setters taught the people how to make those types of living spaces
>>401507
I can't really tell if this is a joke or not.
Modern Africans don't build stuff like this because they use modern architecture now. The only ones who don't are small villages that never would have built stuff like this in the first place.
>>401518
Yea whatever
>>401482
Why the fuck would they do that?
Surely Occam's razor would suggest that Africans built buildings in Africa.
>>401550
They were exploring
>>401518
I bet you think Africans built not all that great Zimbabwe
What era were those houses built in? Where are they, apart from 'in Africa' which is like saying that the Eiffel Tower is in Eurasia. Who took these photos? Who lives in these houses? What has already been written about this architecture? You've not given us enough information.
>>401563
It's Ashanti architecture from the late 19th-early 20th century in Kumasi, though there are depictions of it from 1817. The Ashanti flourished in the 18th century so presumably that's when a lot of this was built.
Not the autistic OP.
>>401457
I was surprised to learn a while back that Africa was not always the mudhut shithole we think it to have been today. I'm still basically clueless about African history, but you could educate yourself at least a very tiny bit before you post on a history board. Much of the issues we see now in Africa is a result of colonialism. Although (AFAIK) they have never been on par with their counterparts to the North, there were some pretty advanced African civilisations throughout the times,
>>401550
You're forgetting they're African. It doesn't make sense for people who have wide noses because their poor eyesight and keep running into shit in the jungle would be able to make houses.
>>401662
Pretty unoriginal joke my friend.
>>401630
>Much of the issues we see now in Africa is a result of colonialism
I think the slave trade was a bigger cause. It completely corrupted African societies, and there's a regional correlation between modern poverty rates and degree of participation in the slave trade. Colonialism probably actually improved things (except in places like the Congo Free State), but failed to actually set down the foundations for social, political, and economic development, as well as sometimes causing even more problems with retarded borders or aggravating ethnic conflict (which is what lead to the Rwandan genocide and the general crisis in central Africa).
>>401674
>Colonialism probably actually improved things
It depends on who was doing the colonizing and why they were there.
Botswana's doing very well right now because the British didn't think the Tswana had anything worth stealing (diamonds weren't discovered until after independence) and they asked them to come in the first place.
Meanwhile, in Angola, the Portuguese basically stormed off in a huff and destroyed all the infrastructure they had built out of spite.
Most colonies didn't have much in the way of infrastructure in the first place. The aim wasn't to establish viable state mechanisms, just the bare minimum for resource extraction and transportation.
>>401833
I agree, but even in the worse colonies I still think it improved things, not because colonialism was good in itself, but because what came before was so bad it couldn't really be made worse (except in the Congo of course). Before colonialism East and Central Africa were victims to the Indian Ocean and Sudanese slave trades, Southern Africa was being ravaged by the Zulu and the Mfecane, and much of West Africa saw countless jihads and civil wars. Colonialism, however shitty, was generally better than that.
You're still right about how ineffective colonialism generally was though, especially when it came to things like education and industry.
>>401873
It is true that colonialism introduced many Sub-Saharans to modernity and it can't be denied that there was constant tribal warfare, but do you not think that the same inferior tribal conflicts would have created an Era of innovation if these areas were left unimpeded? I would draw similarities to the conflicts in western Europ that created competition between warring kingdoms.
>>401457
Not really sure why the whole HERP DERP DA AFRIKANS CANT CREATE NOTHIN may may is so popular here. I mean, there were kingdoms in sub-Saharan Africa. They weren't as grand as Eurasian ones, but they were functioning societies nonetheless.
>>401550
Incorrect.
Also Chinese didn't invent gunpowder. Europeans sailed to China and taught them how to make it.
>>402162
>The jump from "African societies were significantly less developed and prosperous to their European counterparts" to "Africans ain't build nothin lmao" is one that is only made by Americans who unironically think all Africans are black and all Europeans are white.
>>402132
Not really. By the 19th century it was far too late for any African polities to catch up with the rest of the world. Maybe if you had cut Africa off from the rest of the world completely and then left them alone for thousands of years they might have reached a higher level of civilization, but that's not possible.
If Africa hadn't been colonized by Europeans, it probably would have mostly come under Arab and African Muslim domination. Maybe some areas would have turned out better, but I can't imagine most of the continent being any less backward.
