So what noteworthy civilizations did Africa actually have besides the Egypt and Ethiopia which had continues ties with the Mediterranean and Arabic world?
Civilization = centralization, urbanization, agriculture, permanent armies, organized religion, bureaucracy (tax, law, accounting, etc.), class society, specialization of work--and as a bonus--expanding influence (territory, culture, trade), creation of culture and awe-inspiring propaganda due to affluence (statues, buildings, artists, philosophers, etc).
>>420767
Carthage.
Benin to some extent,
>>420767
How many European civilizations existed without Mediterranean influences that were note worthy?
Set the bar OP
>>420775
Carthage were Phoenician colonies though
>>420782
>thinks I'm some /pol/lution who wants to stick it to blacks
I'm genuinely curious, but the topic is so poisoned with this crap. So you have apologists who pretend wooden miniatures are the epitome of civilization and /pol/tards who think they all lived in caves.
>>420786
Still in Africa.
>>420796
Answer my question and set the bar, name European civilizations that weren't influenced by Mediterraneans at all.
>>420805
>So what noteworthy civilizations did Africa actually have
Hard question because it depends on what you consider noteworthy. Africa has had plenty of major civilizations and empires in pre-colonial history, particularly in West Africa. North Africa hardly counts as Africa because it's part of that Mediterranean sphere of countries.
If your real question is "did pre-colonial Sub-Saharan Africa ever really contribute anything to the big picture what the world is today?" then the answer is no, not really.
However, the idea that in Sub-Saharan Africa was full of mud huds and starving dindus is a meme. They had their own cities, cultures, politics, metallurgy, etc.
But to bring it back the other way again, the only reason anyone asks this question is because they're trying to smear the descendants of the African slave populations who now live in many western countries. And yes, those people were typically among the more primitive groups in the area at the time they were enslaved. Although a large part of that is because the slaves they were shipping overseas to do manual labor were just the ones suitable for manual labor. The ones with skills in craftsmanship commanded a higher price, and were mostly sold to other Africans to do that labor.
So as usual, there's a grain of truth to all of it. Pol wants you to think that they were a bunch of lurching automatons picking up rocks and eating caterpillars until the white man rescued them with welfare. Lit wants you to think that Sub-Saharan Africa is the same as North Africa. Your school curriculum wants you to think that they were the Na'Vi from Avatar.
>name European civilizations that weren't influenced by Mediterraneans at all.
Europe borders the Mediterranean so that's a stupid request.
>>420872
Africa borders the Mediterranean and Arabia.
>>420872
>If your real question is "did pre-colonial Sub-Saharan Africa ever really contribute anything to the big picture what the world is today?" then the answer is no, not really.
It wasn't, they don't have to be particular relevant or grand. Just NAME civilizations that subscribed to the fundamentals of what we call civilization as listed in the OP.
>>420872
Africa Borders the Mediterranean we have clear archeological and genetic evidence shows the extent of black Africans being above the western imaginary line of "Sub Sahara"
Answer the question: Name Europeans civilizations not influenced by the Mediterranean.
>>420767
Somalia was a very interesting civilization. Basically the phoenicians of africa.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_history_of_Somalia
Pic related, their naval enterprises until the euros came to "enrich them". We all know how that ended.
![waterman-butterfly-map[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/oXHGVGC.jpg "waterman-butterfly-map[1].jpg")
>>420890
Sub-Saharan Africa doesn't, which is the part of Africa that people are discussing when they discuss this topic. See the image, most maps lie, Africa is actually enormous.
>>420898
>we have clear archeological and genetic evidence shows the extent of black Africans being above the western imaginary line of "Sub Sahara"
I've never had to talk down to someone so much on here, but let me make this very simple for you. Africa big. Part of Africa slaves from far, far away from Mediterranean over big scary places. People from far away place across big scary places less influenced by Mediterranean than people living next to Mediterranean.
>>420898
The Mediterranean is shorter than the Sahara. Places like Carthage and Egypt differed from the rest of "Africa" as much as Greece differed from Scandinavia.
It's generalists like this dumbass >>420933 that feel they are doing Africans a favor when they really are only creating more misinformation
>The results show that the most ancient haplogroup is L3*, which would have been introduced to North Africa from eastern sub-Saharan populations around 20,000 years ago. Our results also point to a less ancient western sub-Saharan gene flow to Tunisia, including haplogroups L2a and L3b. This conclusion points to an ancient African gene flow to Tunisia before 20,000 BP. These findings parallel the more recent findings of both archaeology and linguistics on the prehistory of Africa. The present work suggests that sub-Saharan contributions to North Africa have experienced several complex population processes after the occupation of the region by anatomically modern humans. Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21082907
Clearly you don't know jack about African History and you subscribe to Jared Diamond tier levels of knowledge.
Now answer me, Black Africa went up to the Mediterranean. Find me a European Civilization that was not influenced by civilizations in and around the Mediterranean Sea.
If you cannot do that, then don't put a different set of rules of Africans
>>420767
Songhay empire, Mali empire and Oyo (yoruba) empire. Great thread about yoruba people was active about two weeks ago. Does anybody have screenshots of that guy who had like really old book about Yoruba cities and their traditions? I remember that he BTFOd some /pol/ guy.
Oh and you have ethiopia and somalia in east coast. They were connected to India, Arabia and China via Indian ocean trade. I remember that Zheng He went to Somalia and brought back to emperor bunch of giraffes and zebras and shit.
Were there any empires in south Africa? Only one that comes to my mind is Zulu but they are hated by /his/. Can anyone explain why?
>>420965
Can you explain what are you trying to say? So what that European counries try to be like Roman empire?
Wow, that's a fairly arbitrary and rigid definition of civilization, one that many cultures all over the place don't fit into fully from times we would almost certainly declare them civilized. Almost as if you were seeding a specific answer...
>>420913
if sub Saharan Africa does not border the Mediterranean, then by extension neither do Russia or Scandinavia.
>>421451
Thanks captain obvious.
>>421421
In OP they state that Ethiopia and Egypt don't count because of Mediterranean or Arab influence and so I asked using the same rules to name a European civilization influenced neither by Mediterraneans to set the bar with.
>>420767
You had quite a few West African civilizations like Mali, Songhai, and Benin.
Further to the south, there was the kingdom of Kongo, but there wasn't much else on the west coast of Africa past the equator.
On the other side, you had a bunch of city-states trading with the Arabs. Mogadishu was a big trade hub, and Mombasa was apparently already a prosperous city by the time the Arabs discovered it. Arab traders went quite far down the coast, apparently making it as far as Mozambique.
There was also the Kingdom of Zimbabwe, but they seemed to dry up for whatever reason (probably changes in trade patterns).
>>421483
>There was also the Kingdom of Zimbabwe, but they seemed to dry up for whatever reason (probably changes in trade patterns).
Its arabic founders were killed
>>420782
Kek so defensive
>>421497
Not likely. Arab trade (direct or indirect) likely had something to do with their success, but there really isn't any evidence to suggest that Arabs built the place. The architecture in particular follows that of local structures (even the mud-hut villages, just replacing fences and palisades with stone) and shares nothing with contemporary arabic architecture.
>>421524
>but there really isn't any evidence to suggest that Arabs built the place.
Apart from genetic evidence, and the fact that their descendants fucking claim to have built Great Zimbabwe but are ignored due to the blackwashing of history.
The blackwashing of Great Zimbabwe is one of the worst "we wuz kangz n sheeit" of history. These are the true descendants of the builders of great zimbabwe :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemba_people
>>421500
I'm Ethiopian, it's annoying as hell to see people say we aren't really African only when it suits them.
>>421547
Funny, I knew an eritrean who hated when people called him black. He said he was "middle eastern".
You amhara or shanquella?
>>421540
Lemba weren't even around during the formation of Great Zimbabwe, secondly they claim descent from Yemenite Merchants not nation builders
Beyond that circumcision is pre-Judaic, it was around in Africa before Jews even existed as a distinct people.
Even in the Wikipedia article it's recognized that they were not the implementers of GZs construction.
Black people did things, deal with it.
>>421540
Yes, and if you'd actually bother to read the source you posted you'll see that the majority of historians agree that the Kingdom of Zimbabwe was built by the Shona, not the Lemba. It's thought to be the successor to the Kingdom of Mapungubwe, which predated the Lemba people and had similar architecture and artifacts.
>>421460
Black's near the Mediterranean got given the information whereas Europeans made it themselves
>>421552
1. Amhara is not a stable identity, it's also quite "new"
2. You are ignoring the largest population aka Oromo
3. Shanquelle is a collective term that denotes dozens of groups and languages
I'm Beta Israeli
>>421568
Nice generalization when you ignore the fact that Mediterranean populations had more in common with one another than those further from the coast surrounding them.
Your ignoring the fact that you can't say for sure Greeks and Romans could have formed without Middle Eastern inventions, tools and crafts.
>>421583
Stop trolling
>>421564
>Lemba weren't even around during the formation of Great Zimbabwe
Of course they were!
>secondly they claim descent from Yemenite Merchants not nation builders
...Yemenite merchants who migrated and built cities!
>Beyond that circumcision is pre-Judaic, it was around in Africa
That is not for the area around Zimbabwe. You are directly contradicting the article.
>Even in the Wikipedia article it's recognized that they were not the implementers of GZs construction.
There's a feel good sentence with no citation so that the article isn't "racist".
>>421566
>Yes, and if you'd actually bother to read the source you posted you'll see that the majority of historians agree that the Kingdom of Zimbabwe was built by the Shona
There is no citation for that.
When portugese explorers first explored the area in the 16th century, they were told by the Shona that the ruins of Great Zimbabwe "were built by the devil". And this is the people who supposedly built the complex? Pffft
>>421600
>1. Amhara is not a stable identity, it's also quite "new"
Literally what? Please explain.
>>420897
Sahelian, West African Ethiopian, East African.
The fit all of the criteria from OP.
Political incarnations of these include Oyo, Benin, Mali, Songhai, Ghana, Axum, Zanzibar, Meroe, Ashanti, Mogadishu and Kilwa sultanates.
>>421612
Circumcision is practiced by near every Bantu group.
It's not unique to Lemba. It's stated throughout that Shana are the builders.
>>420767
Mali, Timbuktu, Songhai, Nubia, Benin, Zimbabwe, Jenne, Trade cities of the Somali coast.
Are people seriously this illiterate about basic history?
>>421612
>There is no citation for that.
Yes, there was. Say what you want about the source itself ("African Holocaust"), but the claim was cited. If you want even more citations, check out the wiki page on Great Zimbabwe itself.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Zimbabwe
All the claims of it being Lemba-built are pre-20th century, and all recent evidence has pointed towards the Kingdom of Zimbabwe being Shona, or at the very least sharing the same culture and language as the Shona.
>And this is the people who supposedly built the complex?
Civilizations regressing isn't unheard of. It happened to the Mayans, and nearly the entire civilized world regressed as well during the Bronze Age collapse. In the absence of a written language, history can be forgotten in just a couple of generations
>>421619
Amhara is the ethnicity and culture that is adopted by many groups, one is/becomes Amhara because they speak what was once a formerly peasant language, adopt said names and customs. It's connected with Ethiopian Nationalism, there were once an Amhara people but most how in days are so mixed it's not all that accurate to say they are the same
A better term is Habesha.
>>421656
It's those annoying Kulanu fags. They go all around the world to proselytize and make people the descendants of Lost Tribes.
It was far fetched for us to be recognized back then but now they go to Papua New Guinea and North Eastern India to claim people, force them to go through an orthodox Ashkenazi religious conversion and then try and settle them in disputed territories.
It's fucked up but basically they and other similar groups have been throwing large amounts of propaganda to give Lemba legitimacy and make then superior to other Africans so Israelis and Jews abroad will receive them better.
>>421497
Lol if Arabs did go there, there would have been blatant as fuck signs like I dunno Muslims, Arab architecture, Arab influence in language, arab admixture since despite blatant feelings on non Arabs especially blacks they have no qualms with mixing.
>>421460
the fuck is the point of this deraliing motherfucker. OP asked a question, and you respond by asking another irrelevant one. the fuck is wrong with you nigga
A couple. Obviously no where near the glory of Rome and shit like that. But if you compare all ancient civilizations to the one Rome built, it's not really fair, because most don't hold a candle. Sure, Carthage did for a time, and Ancient Egypt was the Bronze Age superpower, but they both faded relatively quickly, compared to Rome.
I'm assuming you're talking about Sub-Saharan Africa. In which case, there are few noteworthy civilizations. The ones that did crop up were based mostly along the West coast, near the rivers. They thrived off of trade with the East, but they were little more than tribal confederations where the kings made a lot of money. They didn't carve out their kingdoms from war and conquest. Rather, it was more like a couple guys with power getting together and realizing they could get filthy stinking rich if they boxed up their negroes and shipped them out.
Naturally, this thread will be filled with two types of people: SJWs who refuse to admit that blacks never really built anything even comparable to white people or Asians, and /pol/tards who refuse to believe that blacks are capable of anything more than chucking spears.
>>421552
I am Eritrean and that guy is a cuCK.
Like middle easterners would laugh themselves blue if they heard him. Let alone his ignorance that to them we are no different to any other Blacks socially.
>>421741
I am an Ethiopian, I am an African. We are a civilization in Africa. That's not derailing, that's me correcting him by showing his inability to understand how stupid he sound creating some fake line.
>>421766
Yeah I agree that his question should have ended after the word 'Ethiopia,' but simply calling him an arbitrary line drawing faggot would have sufficed.
>>421779
Nah because I see this shit everyday on 4Chan and it's annoying as fuck.
People call us niggers today and talk about us having low IQs and no food but as soon as the topic of our golden eras come up we aren't really African.
It's bullshit.
>>421756
Really I don't understand why people see it as a bad thing that civilization took a while to develop in the relative isolation of sub-saharan Africa.
Outside of a few lucky places that happened to be the birthplaces of civilization, it generally takes outside involvement for a civilization to start. Civilization expanded like it did in Europe in Asia thanks to trade networks, but when you're isolated by geographic barriers like the world's largest desert and a similarly inhospitable jungle, it's hard to establish trade.
And that's why we see civilizations popping up where they did in Africa. The most noteworthy sub-Saharan African civilizations all became prominent thanks to foreign (usually Arab) trade.
>>421803
You're implying that African civilizations came as a result of Arab trade which is incorrect and not Arabs coming into already existing markets and city states.
>>421843
Shit you got me there. Still, geographical barriers are a huge issue with civilizations. Didn't Sub-Saharan Africa develop agriculture comparatively late?
>>421766
Is Ethiopia a relatively nice place to live?
>>421756
>Egypt
>Faded relatively quickly
what the fuck am I reading.
>>421912
Late to who? It developed as a response to the Sahara was drying. Climatic change was the catalyst for food production around the world.
>>422068
Not when people believe you and your people caste the evil eye and turn into hyena.
>>422398
It's because we are raised to see ourselves better than tropical Africans but to do so ignores the genetic variances of Africans as a whole.
>>421912
>Shit you got me there. Still, geographical barriers are a huge issue with civilizations. Didn't Sub-Saharan Africa develop agriculture comparatively late?
1000 BC
I don't know how late we should consider this. It's only a few thousand years after North Africa-Eurasia, and most people say that the two regions had about 40,000 years of independent development.
>>422542
I disagree on that accessment, although the physical evidence of most crops goes to about 3-4 thousand years ago, it's only part of a bigger genetic, farm tool, earth shaping complex of remains that hints to dates even older.
Also you most not forget, African Cattle came before African Crops (though like today lack of crops does not mean lack of sedentarism or grain dependency. There were other means to attain them)
>>420767
Honestly most civilization in subsaharan africa revolved around tiny trade ports during the european dark ages. Most trade was conducted between south asian and middle eastern nations.
When whites (venitians and Iberians) learned of these trade routes they were able to use high value goods to edge out arab traders and set up protectorates.
These regions were hubs for the pre existing ivory, spice, gold, and slave trade the arabs used. The portuguese and spanish however sold goods to the black kings and thus ended much control over their cultural expansion. The African tribes then resorted to enslavement of conquered tribes and would trade slaves to the spaniards, any remaining arab traders, and independent trade fleets.
Tl,dr. Africans had some forms of culture, albeit primitive due to a lack of access to nearby modernized cultures.they traded slaves, spice, logs, and Ivory with arabs but this trade exploded when europeans entered the market due to colonial expansion
Most non mediterranean european civilization was the russians and the scandinavian vikings. They really entered relevance in the 6-700s.
