Why north africa has such a rich history (Carthage, moors..) when the sub-saharian part was stone age tier until the 19th?
>implying
West African trading empires, East African kingdoms, and the Swahili city states were pretty cool
>>909834
Because it was colonized by semites, greeks and romans and not sub-saharans
They are close to Europe, so trade. And they were part of the Roman Empire, so they experienced hundreds of years of relative peace. I don't know about the complexity of African governmental systems, but thanks to Rome they had a history of relatively good government.
>>909865
There were pockets of sub-saharans though.
>>909874
>thanks to Rome they had a history of relatively good government
Egyptians and Carthaginians laughing.claytablet
>>909834
Lack of contact and trade with Eurasia. Ideas get passed around and it's extremely hard to have an advance society without outside influence. Every major civilization from Rome to Persia was influenced by outsiders. The first time major contacts were made were muslims hence the rise of Islamic West African empires.
Some might bring up intelligence as a reason for Sub Saharan lack of sucess but that has little impact compares to the above reason. If Sub Saharans had an ok iq, we would have saw something like Mesoamerica and Aztecs. Those guys weren't influenced by out side sources during their development.
>>909921
Egypt and Carthage both skillfully governed the portions of North Africa that they controlled. The Romans united the African Mediterranean coast. All three contributed to why North Africa is generally more successful.
>>909921
Guess who's not delenda.
Were there any significant Nubian (or otherwise) SSA kingdoms besides that one Egyptian dynasty that blacks keep riding the coattails of?
>>909834
Same reason the Horn of Africa was historicly on par with The Near East, Europe and Asia
The Silk Road
>>909961
The Kingdom of Numidia immediately comes to mind. But I have no idea if the Berbers were black.
But that's wrong you bloody ignoramus
>>909976
>But I have no idea if the Berbers were black.
They're usually white-ish. Tuaregs, included in the Berber group, may sometimes look more black than white. It's more of a culture thing - Arabs also intermarriage a lot.
>>909961
Kerma
Meroe
Askum
Swahililand
Ghana
Mali
Songhai
>>909940
>The Romans united the African Mediterranean coast
Eh, on paper. In reality they just stayed in Carthage and Egypt for the most part and only had a few, sporadic, and relatively small colonies elsewhere that quickly crumbled until only the big two regions remained.
Present day Morocco and Algeria really start hitting their stride in the Medieval era (before it crumbles for a while in the Late Medieval/Renaissance period).
>>909834
North Africa = No blacks
Sub-Sahara = Blacks
It's really quite simple.
>>910023
True, however the middle regions were part of the imperial land portfolio and were solidly Roman enough that they stayed loyal during the crisis of the third century. The province of Numidia's legion Gordian. Though they were the only legion deemed necessary in North Africa
>>910068
*took down Gordian
>>910068
Sure, but Numidia as a middle region is kind of a stretch. It wasn't any broader than Carthage, and just next door. It's kind of like how Judaea was to Egypt. The rest of Africa wasn't anywhere near as substantial comparatively speaking.
Assuming a community wants to develop a civilization with writing, monumental architecture and all that jazz it's an enormous help if they don't have to come up with everything endemically.
>>909834
Because of the Sahara Desert? What's not to get? North Africa could get direct contact with Europe and the Middle East with lots of foreign settlers and natives returning from their studies abroad. Subsaharan Africa had to get what managed to survive the huge and very dangerous trip overland through the world's largest desert.
>>909904
WE
