Benin City, originally known as Edo, was once the capital of a pre-colonial African empire located in what is now southern Nigeria.
According to estimates by the New Scientist’s Fred Pearce, Benin City’s walls were “four times longer than the Great Wall of China, and consumed a hundred times more material than the Great Pyramid of Cheops”.
Beyond the city walls, numerous further walls were erected that separated the surroundings of the capital into around 500 distinct villages. Pearce writes that these walls “extended for some 16,000 km in all, in a mosaic of more than 500 interconnected settlement boundaries.
Benin City was also one of the first cities to have a semblance of street lighting. Huge metal lamps, many feet high, were built and placed around the city, especially near the king’s palace. Fuelled by palm oil, their burning wicks were lit at night to provide illumination for traffic to and from the palace.
When the Portuguese first “discovered” the city in 1485, they classified Benin City as one of the most beautiful and best planned cities in the world.
In 1691, the Portuguese ship captain Lourenco Pinto observed: “Great Benin, where the king resides, is larger than Lisbon. The city is wealthy and industrious. It is so well governed that theft is unknown and the people live in such security that they have no doors to their houses.”
Benin City’s planning and design was done according to careful rules of symmetry, proportionality and repetition now known as fractal design.
The main streets had underground drainage made of a sunken impluvium with an outlet to carry away storm water. Many narrower side and intersecting streets extended off them. In the middle of the streets were turf on which animals fed.
“Houses are built alongside the streets in good order, the one close to the other,” writes the 17th-century Dutch visitor Olfert Dapper. “Adorned with gables and steps … they are usually broad with long galleries inside. Moreover, every house is provided with a well for the supply of fresh water”.
The city was split into 11 divisions, comprising a sprawling series of compounds containing accommodation, workshops and public buildings.
The exterior walls of the courts and compounds were decorated with horizontal ridge designs (agben) and clay carvings portraying animals, warriors and other symbols of power.
At the height of its greatness in the 12th century, the kings and nobles of Benin City patronised craftsmen and lavished them with gifts and wealth, in return for their depiction of the kings’ and dignitaries’ great exploits in intricate bronze sculptures.
“These works from Benin are equal to the very finest examples of European casting technique,” wrote Professor Felix von Luschan, formerly of the Berlin Ethnological Museum.
What impressed the first visiting Europeans most was the wealth, artistic beauty and magnificence of the city. Immediately European nations saw the opportunity to develop trade with the wealthy kingdom, importing ivory, palm oil and pepper – and exporting guns.
Now, however, the great Benin City is lost to history. Its decline began in the 15th century, sparked by internal conflicts linked to the increasing European intrusion and slavery trade at the borders of the Benin empire.
Then in 1897, the city was destroyed by British soldiers – looted, blown up and burnt to the ground.
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/mar/18/story-of-cities-5-benin-city-edo-nigeria-mighty-medieval-capital-lost-without-trace
Benin's cool, but its walls are a meme. I have no idea why people act like a bunch of earth banks and ditches were something special. Those claims about the walls being longer than the great wall of China are only true if you count every tiny little ditch and bank anywhere within miles of the city. You could probably make the same claims if you took all the stone field walls in Ireland and called them 'the Great Walls of Ireland'. It's stupid.
>Fractals
Never heard of this. Doesn't look like one to me (pic related).
>The main streets had underground drainage made of a sunken impluvium with an outlet to carry away storm water.
Is there a source for this? I've never heard anything about this.
>At the height of its greatness in the 12th century, the kings and nobles of Benin City patronised craftsmen and lavished them with gifts and wealth, in return for their depiction of the kings’ and dignitaries’ great exploits in intricate bronze sculptures.
>Now, however, the great Benin City is lost to history. Its decline began in the 15th century, sparked by internal conflicts linked to the increasing European intrusion and slavery trade at the borders of the Benin empire.
This chronology is garbage. Benin's height was the 15th-17th century, and its decline was the 18th and 19th. It didn't even exist in the 12th. Also Benin generally had very little to do with the slave trade, though I suppose the effects of the slave trade in the wider region might have contributed to its decline.
It's Constantinople all over again.
But just to be precise, Beninglings started chimping out bevause of Euro economic takeover and because the wealthier niggers were selling slaves?
Damn, maybe those Wewuzes really did have superpowers and built the pyramids with their minds until whitey came and took their powers.
>>853063
Impressive. Yakub was right all along. How will the white devil try to lie and diminish the role of the melanoid peoples now?
>>853083
Btfo.
A fractal could be quite simple, I suppose. I guess it could be as simple as making a right-turn
>>853108
>/pol/ stealing old /int/ memes and reddit capping it
>>853111
>s making a right-turn
(repeatedly)
>>853083
The walls were quite substantial for the most part and only destroyed after European contact what is left is largely grown over but still impressive and beautiful
>>853130
That's not Benin, it's Sungbo's Eredo. It's a much larger and earlier construction, which definitely deserves more study.
The walls of Benin were just the basic earth walls that surrounded most Nigerian cities. There was nothing special about them. Kano's walls look more impressive to me, though even those are pretty basic.
>>853133
Kano's walls.
>>853084
Benin collapsed after the british banned slave trade.
Their whole civilization was build on slavery, since before the age of discovery, and their economy exploded when they could sell slaves not only to locals, but also to the colonies in the New World, which payed premium price and bought huge amounts.
Basically their tradition, culture, songs, tales, customs were all related to fighting other tribes and taking prisoners of war to work to death or sell away for profit, and when the british banned it they lost their identity and power.
>>853150
Like I said, Benin generally had very little to do with the slave trade. Their decline, and the decline of West African civilization in general, was largely in the 18th century when the slave trade was at its height. The slave trade gave power to militaristic states like Dahomey and Oyo at the expense of more organized and cultured states like Benin an Ife.
>>853133
As if Benin and SE aren't related to one another, both being Nigerian city states who construction earthworks one after another also Benin was more extensive than SE
>>853166
>As if Benin and SE aren't related to one another
I don't see your point. It doesn't matter if they're related, they're different things.
>Benin was more extensive than SE
Only if you count every tiny rampart in the city's hinterland. The walls of the city itself are nowhere near the size of scale of Sungo's Eredo. Compare >>853083 with pic related.
>>853155
I should correct this, I was wrong here. I haven't studied this in a while. Benin was involved in the slave trade, but it had nothing to do with Benin's rise and the height of its involvement was actually during its decline as a state and seems to have contributed to that decline.
>http://www.academia.edu/1903485/Benin_and_the_Slave_Trade
>>853063
Come on bro, the city LITERALLY looks like any Middle Eastern poor neighborhood/slum just with smaller buildings.
>Pearce writes that these walls “extended for some 16,000 km
Yeah because they used walls to separate their backyards. It's basically a fence of stone.
I'm not saying the city was shit, but it was like any other third world city.
The only reason sub Saharan ancient African cities get so much exposure is that they're so few and far between. Timbuktu, Benin city, the Great Zimbabwe, anything else? Other than their rarity they're no different from the thousands of similar cities in India, Middle East, ancient America or any other cities from relatively less developed parts of the world.
It's just that they're embellished with fairytale tier descriptions and exaggerations.
>>853217
The density of African polities is based first and foremost on their ability to sustain populations with the right amount of food production, tradeable goods and access to technologies and knowledge.
Given the fact of innumerable hindrances in the food production in the Sahara, Kalahari and Congolian lowlands means the western Sudan, Sahel, Guinean woodland and Southeastern miombo could and would be packed with a number of nations.
Personally I don't see the lack of African States you're seeing given the context of the continent.
>>853217
You're right, this stuff is exaggerated, but it's also true that early European visitors to Benin did give very favourable accounts of the city (though of course they condemned their practice of human sacrifice). OP's picture is a sketch made of a random suburb of the city in the 19th century, by which point it was just a washed-up shithole. It hardly reflects what the royal parts of the city would a looked like at its height in the 16th-early 17th centuries.
I think the best way to appreciate southern Nigerian cities like Benin and Ife is to remember that this was basically an independent development of civilization akin to the rise of Sumer or the Shang dynasty, only one which arose much later in history (c. 1000 AD) because of the much later arrival of agriculture in the region. Considering that they had amazing art, large cities, stratified states, and large construction projects I don't see them as any less impressive than many other independent civilizations.
>>853063
>According to estimates by the New Scientist’s Fred Pearce, Benin City’s walls were “four times longer than the Great Wall of China, and consumed a hundred times more material than the Great Pyramid of Cheops”.
Seriously now, why they don't even try to keep it realistic.
>>853254
>Fred Pearce
After looking this guy up, he doesn't seem like a credible source at all. He's just some journalist and science writer, not an archaeologist.
>>853244
>Personally I don't see the lack of African States you're seeing given the context of the continent.
You missed the point I was making.
My point wasn't to just shit on Africa, it was to explain that the fact there were some cities doesn't mean that Africa is now comparable to India, China, Middle East, the Americas or Europe.
>>853249
>but it's also true that early European visitors to Benin did give very favourable accounts of the city
It's because they didn't expect to find anything of the sort.
>19th century, by which point it was just a washed-up shithole
Any sources for that? Did they also demolish all of their advanced buildings during their decline?
>that this was basically an independent development of civilization
But almost every civilization began independently. The Americas, Middle East, India, and China all sprang up independently. Sure it's interesting seeing something like that happen so recently, but other than a possibility for observation and understanding of our ancient history it doesn't make it anything extraordinary.
>because of the much later arrival of agriculture in the region
That is not how agriculture became a thing.
It was not an expansion of knowledge. It was the result of the changing climate. The Northern Europeans didn't start farming because "hey Tom you heard of this thing called agriculture? Apparently it's this awesome thing someone in the ME discovered!", but because the climate became warmer as the ice age and cold climate retreated. Everyone around the world started farming pretty much as soon as it became possible in their climates.
>they had amazing art, large cities, stratified states, and large construction projects
Can you cite any? Not denying the possibility, but I want to know if there's any actual proof besides folklore.
>>853293
Why even compare distant cities that developed under different circumstances? This isn't a video game or some table top game, there isn't some arbitrary way of measuring Inca cities to Sahelian states to the kingdoms in Southeast Asia. All are testaments to the environment they developed in and will thus be quite varied.
>>853293
>It's because they didn't expect to find anything of the sort.
I have no idea where you're drawing that conclusion from.
>Any sources for that? Did they also demolish all of their advanced buildings during their decline?
Much of the city was destroyed in a civil war in the late 17th century. Still, it probably never had advanced architecture, though the royal palace was very large. I'd compare them with the likes of the Olmecs or the Shang; better known for their art than architecture.
>But almost every civilization began independently. The Americas, Middle East, India, and China all sprang up independently. Sure it's interesting seeing something like that happen so recently, but other than a possibility for observation and understanding of our ancient history it doesn't make it anything extraordinary.
I never said it was extraordinary or even especially important. I just think these are interesting civilizations and deserve to be appreciated for what they are; not exaggerated by Afrocentrists and not dismissed because they make Stormfags uncomfortable.
>Can you cite any? Not denying the possibility, but I want to know if there's any actual proof besides folklore
For art, the metal and terracotta sculpture of Ife (pic related) as well as the brasswork of Benin. For cities and states, see the European accounts of Benin or basically any book on the archaeology or history of the region. For large constructions, see the Sungo's Eredo embankment posted earlier.
>>853293
>That is not how agriculture became a thing.
>It was not an expansion of knowledge. It was the result of the changing climate. The Northern Europeans didn't start farming because "hey Tom you heard of this thing called agriculture? Apparently it's this awesome thing someone in the ME discovered!", but because the climate became warmer as the ice age and cold climate retreated. Everyone around the world started farming pretty much as soon as it became possible in their climates.
Agriculture did emerge because of climate change in most places, but the way you present it is completely wrong. Agriculture only emerged in a small number of locations after climate change encouraged populations to rely increasingly on wild cereal to the point that they settled down and eventually domesticated crops. This happened at different time in different places and in different ways. As that happened, populations grew and rather than compete for land among each other they just expanded into new soil. This way agriculture moved with populations, who spread out in every direction and generally replaced (but to some extent mixed with) the native hunter-gatherer populations who were typically very small and easily overwhelmed and out-bred by much larger agricultural populations. Agriculture entered Northern Europe as populations migrated from Anatolia into Greece and up the Danube. It's the reason why Southeast Asians look like the Chinese instead of Aborigines.
In Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle Eastern crops wouldn't grow so agriculture never spread there except for basic pastoralism. Instead, crop-based agriculture in West Africa didn't emerge until about when the Sahara as expanding and pushing Sahelian pastoralists to rely more on the cultivation of grains, eventually leading to domestication around 2500 BC, spreading across West Africa by 2000 BC, and spreading with the Bantu into subtropical Africa after about 1000 BC.
Here's a depiction of one of the city's buildings.
>>853343
That was from the 16th-17th, this is from the 17th-18th.
>>853310
>Why even compare distant cities
I don't know why DO people compare them?
Why DO people feel the need to make Africa into something it wasn't?
I wouldn't be so dismissing if the mentioning of these cities and civilizations in Africa didn't in almost every instance lead to exaggerations and then the blaming of western civilization in their demise and their subsequent irrelevancy/non mentioning in world history alluding to some western conspiracy.
>>853323
>I have no idea where you're drawing that conclusion from.
Are you telling me they weren't surprised by the city once they came upon it?
I'm not saying they didn't know there was a city or that they didn't come into contact with its people or merchants before, but I'm saying they most probably were pleasantly surprised to see something indeed resembling a city and not some tribal village.
>and not dismissed because they make Stormfags uncomfortable.
I'm not dismissing the civilizations themselves, but merely insane claims made about them. Just take a look at the OP again. Just try and tell me his goal is an objective representation of the civilization and not some ulterior bullshittery. He may be baiting but this idea is still relevant.
>>853332
I stand corrected.
>>853379
You seem to be projecting some sort of insecurity because all I am stating is the comparison of cities and States with vastly different environments and histories is foolhardy and seeing the expansive and unique construction/formation/expression of West African city states as complex and dynamic expressions of Agro-pastoralists on the edge of tsetse territory.
I find the remains of several African States to be exquisite examples of urban living just as I would Kilwa or pre-industrial Shanghai.
The only person who is not able to accept the city for what it was is you, more than anything else it seems you just want to call it something it's not to appease your own biases.
>>853332
I remember being taught that early agriculture is basically just planting wild crops and that's it. No watering, no fertilizers, no cattles, etc. That theory seems to relate with how people still semi-nomadic, i.e. finding new fertile lands.
How much of that is true? It's a long time ago, so I'm most likely wrong at least in some details.
>>853431
If planting wild crops were agriculture most hunter-gatherer populations would be considered agriculturalists.
>>853399
Yes because OP is full of such good claims as:
>According to estimates by the New Scientist’s Fred Pearce, Benin City’s walls were “four times longer than the Great Wall of China, and consumed a hundred times more material than the Great Pyramid of Cheops”.
>Benin City was also one of the first cities to have a semblance of street lighting
In the article it references you can also see shit like
>At the height of its greatness in the 12th century – well before the start of the European Renaissance
>The early foreign explorers’ descriptions of Benin City portrayed it as a place free of crime and hunger, with large streets and houses kept clean; a city filled with courteous, honest people, and run by a centralised and highly sophisticated bureaucracy.
>In contrast, London at the same time is described by Bruce Holsinger, professor of English at the University of Virginia, as being a city of “thievery, prostitution, murder, bribery and a thriving black market made the medieval city ripe for exploitation by those with a skill for the quick blade or picking a pocket”.
>As he puts it: “When Europeans first came to Africa, they considered the architecture very disorganised and thus primitive. It never occurred to them that the Africans might have been using a form of mathematics that they hadn’t even discovered yet.”
>>853399
>>853502
>When the Portuguese first “discovered” the city in 1485, they were stunned to find this vast kingdom made of hundreds of interlocked cities and villages in the middle of the African jungle. They called it the “Great City of Benin”, at a time when there were hardly any other places in Africa the Europeans acknowledged as a city. Indeed, they classified Benin City as one of the most beautiful and best planned cities in the world.
>Then in 1897, the city was destroyed by British soldiers – looted, blown up and burnt to the ground.
It's riddled with bullfuckingshit like that and constant attacks on western civilization. The whole article is carefully written to put this city on a pedestal and to make it feel as if its existence somehow goes against the western mainstream understanding of history. As if its some groundbreaking thing that nobody ever could've even imagined. Like it was the fucking Atlantis itself, all the while shitting on western civilization and CONSTANTLY trying to compare the two "whereas Europe had shit like X, HERE'S WHAT COOL THINGS WERE IN THIS CITY". If you can't see the premise that's being slowly built then I don't know what to tell you, but I won't take this shit.
A comment under the article perfectly sums up what this is creating:
>A fairly shallow knowledge of history would teach anyone that up until the early 1800's whole swathes of West Africa was on a par with most of Europe by any measure.
>>853399
>>853502
>>853504
Yes there were civilizations in Africa. Yes they built cities. Now can we fucking study them as they were without pretending they're some groundbreaking shit, or is that impossible unless we're constantly making shitty remarks about Europe and painting the civilizations in particular as some heaven on Earth while constantly pitting them against the west? Oh and lets not delve into the complex politics between Africans and the West and lets just simply paint the whole situation as West shitting on everyone and then killing and burning everyone and everything that didn't open their mouths wide enough.
>>853516
Anti western afrocentrist.
Paint me surprised.
>>853516
http://www.siliconafrica.com/debate-on-africa-overpopulation/
>>853542
http://www.siliconafrica.com/why-they-continue-to-celebrate-christopher-columbus/
>>853546
http://www.siliconafrica.com/what-is-your-tribe/
http://www.siliconafrica.com/help-europe-black-man-burden/
http://www.siliconafrica.com/what-i-like-very-much-in-europeans/
>>853568
First impressions aren't a valid source of information, anon.
There's no sources for these claims.
There's also a lot of missing information that could shed light on the subject. We don't know their laws. We don't know how they solved disputes. We however do know they had human sacrifices and participated in slave trade. If you think neither was used to punish criminals then you're really naive. We also don't know the population of the city. Crime generally increases in cities that are growing fast and have a large population already. You can't pick pockets in a city of 10 000.
>You seem to be really triggered by this article anon.
Yes I am, since in addition to making insane claims it also shits on West.
Good thread. Got any other illustrations like reconstructions of the city or images of the people, daily life etc.? I'm an artist who does historical illustrations so it'd be interested to see any.
>>853063
we wuz text n shiet
>>853379
Sorry I didn't respond earlier.
>Are you telling me they weren't surprised by the city once they came upon it?
Maybe at first, but plenty of favorable accounts of the city appear well after it was first visited by Europeans so there's no reason for them to be especially surprised by it. Modern ideas that Africa was nothing but unga-bunga tribes didn't exist back then. Africa was seen much like Asia, it was even where they expected to find Prester John.
>I'm not dismissing the civilizations themselves, but merely insane claims made about them. Just take a look at the OP again. Just try and tell me his goal is an objective representation of the civilization and not some ulterior bullshittery. He may be baiting but this idea is still relevant.
I'm not accusing you of being on of those Stormfags and I actually agree with what your saying here. That article OP posted is pretty shit, and I hate the way people exaggerate African achievements. But the fact is, there are also plenty of people who would just as easily dismiss any accomplishment, and even outside of Stormfaggotry Africa's past is generally slighted in society as a whole. The average person thinks it was nothing but tribes, poverty, and slavery.
>>854400
Pic related is a fairly good artist's impression of Benin's palace. The only problem I have with it is that the roof looks thatched, when it would have been covered in wooden shingles like in >>853343 and >>853344. There are a few other reconstructions I've seen, but they're very inaccurate.
>>854400
Here ya go:
https://www.google.de/search?q=benin+illustration+precolonial&client=opera&hs=pXi&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjRgNeEicvLAhVGGw8KHZUuBLEQ_AUIBygB&biw=1745&bih=856
>>854914
I thought that was showing off Mali?
>>854904
There are also some photographs surviving from just after the city's destruction, though they only show it in a dilapidated state. Pic related was a 'chief' (more like a city official)'s house.
Also I should mention that the popular image of Benin in this post >>853066 is based on second hand accounts. It gives an idea of how European's saw the city, but it's generally not accurate. It does have some accurate features, like the spires topped with brass birds, but even those are shaped wrong.
>look up Benin City on Wikipedia
>all these Japanese-sounding names and places
Did Japs come directly from Africa or something?
>>854945
An ancestral shrine in the city. Sorry about the quality.
>>854914
>>854934
This is actually one of the inaccurate reconstructions I was talking about. It does have some good points; the designs of the costumes are good (but there's way too much gold), the leopards and slit-drums, etc. But the architecture is a mix of some accurate points (the wooden shingles, snake and bird decorations) and a lot of inaccuracies like the stone buildings (polished adobe and wood were exclusively used), the shape and layout of the buildings, the pyramidal spire in the background, etc.
>>854999
A surviving part of the palace, most of which burned as far as I remember. You can see the same snake decoration on the roof as in >>853343
and >>853344.
>>853063
Ok, so what if they wuz kings. doesn't matter jack shit. Just look at Greece, Spain & Portugal. They're down the shitter as well and were mighty some hundreds of years ago
>>855011
Part of the palace's interior. The whole building basically consisted of a complex of interconnected courtyards (courtyard enclosures being the basic form of architecture in this part of Africa).
>>855029
The interior of a chief/official's house.
>>855039
Shit.
>>855041
>>855044
Man it sucks they took pics of only interiors and even those aren't really good. Would've been great to see some exteriors or maybe even a couple pictures of the streets or maybe looking over the entire off some hilltop.
>>855117
>looking over the entire city* off some hilltop.
>>855117
I don't think there were any hilltops around. It's a very flat country. Still, OP's pic does give an idea of what much of the city would have looked like. Also here's one photo of one of Benin's side streets.
Early European reports of Benin said it had long wide avenues and they praised how well organized and neat it all was, but the city seems to have become much more disorganized after the civil war in the late 17th century, after which accounts of the city become much less favourable. These photos only show the city after its decline.
You seem to know a lot about African History, didn't the Congolese by their own wit send people over to Portugal on the Portuguese trade ships to learn about Portuguese things, such as their alphabet?
>>855220
Man that's kinda claustraphobic.
Are there any estimations of the population of the city? From any period?
>"""Empire"""
>>855239
I don't really know anything about the Kongo, sorry. I do know that they had close relations with Portugal and adopted some of their culture at an elite level, and I assume they did send diplomats to Portugal (as did Benin). Relations broke down over time though as the slave trade became a greater interest than diplomacy. The Kongolese actually sent a letter to the Portuguese complaining about it; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afonso_I_of_Kongo#The_Slave_Trade
>>855252
>Are there any estimations of the population of the city?
I'm sure there are, but I'm afraid I haven't seen them (or don't remember them, I haven't studied this in years).
>>855253
It was really a hegemonic city state that sometimes dominated nearby cities. I don't know where the name 'empire' comes from.
>>853083
>Never heard of this. Doesn't look like one to me (pic related).
i was able to find this
http://www.academia.edu/3164162/Fractals_in_Global_Africa
http://g13.cgpublisher.com/proposals/18/index_html
>>853600
>since in addition to making insane claims it also shits on West
>>853506
>we're constantly making shitty remarks about Europe
>>853504
>and constant attacks on western civilization
this seems to be a reaction to many Western countries pushing the 'africans were stone age hunter gatherers when the europeans arrived' meme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s32eInxqubw
>>855850
>this seems to be a reaction to many Western countries pushing the 'africans were stone age hunter gatherers when the europeans arrived' meme
Well firstly that premise isn't entirely wrong. Large parts of (sub-Saharan) Africa were literally hunter gatherers, and even the developed parts were thousands of years behind of the contemporary high end technology and knowledge. The Western pursuit of its interests didn't necessarily go against the interests of Africa because the resources the West was after were largely irrelevant to the Africans. As a side effect of this pursuit of interests the Africans, however, received modern cities, technology, education, laws, medicine and whatnot.
Just because the abrupt end of colonization brought instability to the region doesn't mean colonization didn't have a net positive effect on the continent overall.
And secondly the proper response to that would not be shitting on the West but instead proving the notion wrong by pointing out evidence to the contrary.
Thirdly what worries me the most is that these attacks are largely made by Westerners themselves.
