Why didn't anything worthwhile happen here? Why weren't there any empires that rival Rome, Persia, or Han China? Why is there a lack of historical records for such a large continent?
>inb4 muh sandcastles
>inb4 muh trade
>inb4 muh ethiopia
>inb4 muh evil whitey
The Sahara is pretty big.
What the Sahara didn't block off, the jungles usually did.
You're talking about similar levels of geographical isolation to Australia or the New World.
This thread will not be deleted. There will be several hundred replies. A few will be somewhat insightful, but these will be ignored. 90% of it will be shitposting, memes, incoherent garbage, pseudoscience, memes, /pol/shit, tumblrshit, memes and also memes. No conclusion or consensus will be reached, nobody will leave the thread having learned anything new, no opinions will be changed, absolutely nothing will be achieved.
Once the thread 404's, the exact same thing will happen. And again, and again, and again until this board finally implodes, or far less likely, we get some competent moderation.
>>1372688
Not really
>>1372680
>>inb4 muh evil whitey
I'm getting really fucking sick of this reverse-SJW crusaders who have to act up all uppity before anybody ever even says anything. Go onto youtube comments, chances are somebody will be ranting about "cultural Marxists" and SJWs when nobody said anything nor where anybody going to say anything. Its really fucking stupid.
>inb4 muh ethiopia
Whats wrong about Ethiopia? Or the Nubians, while we are at it.
>>1372709
>Whats wrong about Ethiopia? Or the Nubians, while we are at it.
They were influenced by the Middle East. Unlike Europeans, who of course created all civilization without any influence from anywhere else on Earth.
>>1372709
It's always the go-to civilization that kangz apologists use. They hardly left a lasting legacy or influenced world history in the long run compared to European or Asian civilizations.
>buildings don't count if they're not made of what I like
>trade is irrelevant
>ethiopia didn't exist
>anyone who isn't retarded hates white people
>>1372706
>he said, posting a picture that demonstrated the other man's point
You see how the civilizations in Ethiopia and Somalia actually mattered in the ancient world?
>>1372705
Its pole posting but the hundreds of replies defending savages is leftist posting
>>1372724
No. It's just that there is plenty of habitable and fertile lands for the spread of ideas and an abundance of resources.
>>1372680
>inb4 OP writes off all the legitimate reasons.
Oh wait, I'm too slow.
>>1372733
In the steppe and savanna, you had what were called "cattle kingdoms" that traded for goods with the civilizations further north that were more literate and connected to the outside world.
But yeah, rain forest is a tremendous natural barrier.
Even basic things like ironworking took a long time to diffuse south.
>>1372705
The question itself is retarded. That's why.
>>1372680
>inb4 muh evil whitey
/his/ is /pol/
>>1372746
/his/ was a fucking mistake. The redditors got here before us.
>>1372680
Because only blacks lived there duh, what have blacks ever done really oh right nothing nada squat JACK FUCKING SHIT other than live tribal nomadic primitive lives.
>>1372758
Only logical explanation
/thread
Garmantes, Mali, Ghana, the Swahili city states, Axum, punt, ancient Somali civilization, the Unamed African Great Lakes civilization, whatever weird ethnic group has that old kingship in Zambia, the nok civilization that traded with Rome, great Zimbabwe, etc
This is a 'blacks are inherently inferior, prove me wrong' thread and OP is a total fag.
>>1372825
Hello, Reddit
we've been through this a dozen times, /pol/, it has a shitty climate for agriculture with tsetse flies and rinderpest wiping out cattle
despite this West Africa, muh Ethiopia and trade on the east coast did well (which is how knights got their magnificent ostrich plumes), Mbanza Kongo in the kingdom of the Kongo reached a population of 100000 making use of a variety of crops since it lacked a staple, palm, bananas, yam, millet after the introduction of maize and expansion of trade, nations like the zulu appeared in South Africa
It's one of those loaded questions threads where the op will throw a hissyfit if his viewpoint is not confirmed.
>>1372709
Here's the thing though, the narrative being pushed by YouTube comments is vastly less influential than the narrative pushed by academia and guess which narrative academia pushes? You guessed it: blame whitey.
why did nothing worthwhile happen in this thread?
>>1372931
No not at all. You just say it is so it feeds your persecution complex so even I I were to say anything that offends you, you blame it on "Academia".
>>1372941
Yeah ok anon, memes like 'white guilt' and 'white privilege' totally didn't originate in the ivory tower. Next you're going to tell me that my professors didn't tell me to read Frantz 'Kill Whitey' Fanon...
>>1372751
>everyone who doesn't parrot my stormshit and objects to my making every board a spooky /pol/ hugbox is a redditor
ebin
>>1372720
But compare them to AmerIndian and Australian civilizations
>>1372706
Wait, what?
I always believed the whole of Central Africa was rain-forest. From that picture, it seems like a trade network between Ethiopia and the various Western African kingdoms could easily have developed, as well as trade networks between Ethiopia and the Kikongo (with small kingdoms in modern Malawi.
I know it may not have looked appealing, but Eurasian-like civilizations could easily have arose surrounding the rain-forest. The Sahara wasn't even the deal breaker, considering trans-desert trade routes did exist.
Why didn't that happen? Are you telling me the lack of a river connecting the Benue with the upstream Nile was all that doomed the continent? That seems like livable climate for villages and over-land trade routes.
wtf i hate africa now
Since no worthwhile discussion is going to take place anyway, I'm just gonna go ahead and leave this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyJFRTJgPbU
>>1372931
Similar to how Racism only is a thing if combined with institutionalized power? Seriously that's dindu tier logic right there.
>>1373536
He's literally 100% right.
Stuff that is taught at universities and school trumps some autist's comment on youtube, because the first one has a certain gravitas and authority attached to it, while the latter has none
>>1373449
>no worthwhile discussion
What wasn't worthwhile about this >>1372905 .
Civilization needs a large surplus. Even in renaissance Europe ~90% of the population were farmers, you needed 9 men to feed a sailor or a stonemason. It is completely feasible that some parts of the world did not have a very good environment for agriculture and as you would expect would end up being left behind.
>>1373144
>everything that doesn't linebup with my negrocentric fantasies is "stormshit"
Fuck off leftypol
>>1372936
The real question is why has not op doneanything worthwhile in his life
>>1372680
>Human intelligence up to 75% inheritible
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12061787/Intelligence-genes-discovered-by-scientists.html
>Human intelligence is highly heritable.
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v16/n10/abs/mp201185a.html
>The average African IQ is estimated at 79.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741
The real question is why an evolutionary pressure for increased intelligence didn't appear in Africa.
>>1372680
Lack of written language?
Stuff could've happened, and we'd never know because of this.
Knowledge from oral history gets lost through the ages.
>>1373589
>I'm a stupid dick who can't resist the validation I get from maymay accusations
>>1373437
>Why didnt that happen?
Because if its not jungle or desert it's pic related.
Plus Africans live in Africa
>>1372680
On the historical records, an article points:
-little or no written history
-lack of trust in oral history
-hard to do field work due to political problems
-historical work is not your priority when people die of hunger
-if you are not only interested in kings then tough luck finding any info
-plus climate is unfit for preservation of many archeological resources
Thus African history depends largely on post-colonial era works of European scholars.
>>1373660
Not this meme again. Africa has the largest stock of unused arable land in the world.
Also many subhuman retards think Africa is mostly covered by desert because they don't understand how the Mercator Projection underestimates sizes near the Equator
>>1373676
Nice meme. Africa is quite shit for farming, its either rainforest, desert, or savannah. The best place to farm is south Africa which is why it was settled so much by Boers, literally farmer.
>>1373660
I know, I can read.
It isn't impossible to traverse savannas, though. And even if it were, you can just move closer to the desert or closer to the jungle, whichever way makes life easier.
A couple of villages a day's distance away from each other close to water deposits and food sources (probably doable in the outskirts of the jungle, and you can even use rivers along the way) and you have a perfectly serviceable trade route.
I know I might be underselling the hardships, but if Swahili speakers could come from the west all the way to the Horn of Africa, it should be possible to do better with actual infrastructure.
>>1373694
Yields are low because farming practices are bad.
>Africa is quite shit for farming
Source? Do you have any evidence that potential yields are lower than Europe because of climate poor soils or whatever?
>>1373676
Just because the land is arable doesnt mean it erases everything else negative about africa talked about in this thread
>"Look guise! i know what de eart actual looks like!"
Man that shit was taught like day 2 of geography in middleschool. I know that Africa has a lot of land but alot of it is big, open, expanses of fucking nothingness.
>>1373437
No rivers, little water sources, little arable land at least for early man to make use of. Theres just nothing there to make sure of. Trade routes follow rivers, coastlines or chains of waterholes.
>>1373708
Rainforest and savannah make terrible farmland and need a lot of work done to them to make them arable. What land is good for farming is mostly given over to coffee farming to supply the world with its coffee which is very profitable but doesnt give anybody any food. Its similar to Brazil except they have less control over raping their rainforest.
>>1373717
>big, open, expanses of fucking nothingness
The US midwest used to be a large expanse of nothingness and nowdays it is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the world.
>Africa has around 600 million hectares of uncultivated arable land, roughly 60 percent of the global total.
http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/middle-east-and-africa/lions-on-the-move
Africa has fertile land excellent climate conditions and abundant natural resources. The idea that Africa was always a backwater because of geographical or environmental reasons is a myth popularised by pop science
>>1373731
and is this arable land suitable for grains
>>1373730
>make terrible farmland
No they don't with modern farm practices. Most of the world's soaybeans are grown in savannah biomes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerrado
>coffee farming
Why is every cuck here pretending to be an expert? Most coffee is grown in Asia and Latin America. You probably meant cocoa beans. It's pretty clear you have no clue what you are talking about. Also cash crops for export are good for African countries you giant retard.
>>1373735
In subtropical areas. Maize is cultivated all around Southern Africa (South Africa Angola Zambia Zimbabwe etc). Western Africa is excellent for growing rice. Wheat is not very suitable but there are many alternative crops
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassava
>>1373705
>A couple of vilages a day's distance away
I think you're seriously underestimating the big nothing that is africa. Im no expert either, and I couldnt tell you how many Kilometers you can travel in a day on flat land, but whatever it is it wont be a couple of villages.
Plus from what I understand about historic African culture (Which is borderline nothing so correct me if im totaly wrong) Africans were pretty nomadic.Even if there was villages then I would guess their tribal culture would fuck up the trade route if there was a feud going on between villages.
>>1373742
Soy beans arent staple food.
Most african crops are coffee, cocoa, cotton, tea, rubber and fruit. Not the staple foods they need but just ways of making the rich richer
>For example, in Burkina Faso 85% of its residents (over two million people) are reliant upon cotton production for income, and over half of the country's population lives in poverty.[8] Larger farms tend to grow cash crops such as coffee,[9] tea,[9] cotton, cocoa, fruit[9] and rubber. These farms, typically operated by large corporations, cover tens of square kilometres and employ large numbers of laborers. Subsistence farms provide a source of food and a relatively small income for families, but generally fail to produce enough to make re-investment possible.
>cash crops are good
Yeah but not for the people, they're hungry, they're poor, but they're growing coffee and cotton
>>1372776
Garamantes wasn't subsaharan. It was oddly Saharan.
>>1373759
You are batshit retarded. Cash crops are good because they enable investement and bring in foreign currency that can be used to import capital goods and upgrade infrastructure and farming productivity. The average nigger farme is poor because he has low productivity and has no money to buy crops from the market. By growing cash crops he can specialise in a crop get a higher income by selling to a market. Niggers are not starving because there isn't enough food around they are starving because they don't have money to buy crops and it is very expensive to move crops because there are no roads. Fucking clueless 16 year old leftist redditor trash
>>1372680
I agree with you about Sub-Saharan Africa having no outstanding civilizations. But face it, Axum was one of the top 10 (if not top 5) greatest civilization during its time.
>>1373731
Pre-industrial economies depend on agriculture and Africa has a very different environment from latitudes where wheat, oats, barley, rye and rice thrive.
Until the 50s there was little demand for industry in much of Africa, it couldn't compete with more temperate locations.
Until the 90s cold war proxy wars stunted progress and echos of those wars and islamism contributed to continuing instability.
Regions that have achieved stability are seeing economic growth that you would expect from a continental region where transportation costs limit access to the global market.
None of this is popsci, you will find most redditors and liberals imagine wealth as being like a big bag of diamonds and evil colonialists came and stole Africa's. Very few academics are interested in nonmeme history and actually look at economics and geography.
>>1373770
If cash crops were so good the population wouldn't be exploited to hell and back and half starving, the wealth isn't distributed, it isn't spread.
You keep contradicting yourself too, first you claim Africa is excellent for farming but they are poor and hungry because they don't make use of the land for food crops, then you say they do make use of it by growing cash craps and that this is a great idea because it gets them rich, while simultaneously saying they are poor and acknowledging that the land is put to the wrong use.
>>1373731
>The US midwest used to be a large expanse of nothingness and nowdays it is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the world.
keyword NOW. Sure ranchers and farmers existed in the area since the Oregon trail but in less then 100 years the fucking dust bowl happened. Plus what >>1373694 said
>>1373777
>exploited
"exploitation" doesn't exist it's a marxist meme kill yourself.
>the wealth isn't distributed
African countries are extremely poor there is no wealth to be "distributed" you blithering double digit IQ mongoloid redditor. The entire country of Ethiopis has a Gross Domestic Product of 50 billion $ less than most US states.
>Africa is excellent for farming
It is
>but they are poor and hungry because they don't make use of the land
Yes 60% of unused arable land in the world is located in Africa.
>then you say they do make use of it by growing cash craps
They don't use it exclusively to cultivate cash crops I said cash crops are good for Africa
>while simultaneously saying they are poor
They are poor because 90% of them are subsistence farmers that grow staple foods in small farms with terrible productivity and yields.
>that the land is put to the wrong use
No it is not. Every country whether in the Americas Asia or Europe has a mix of cash crops for export and staple food production.
>>1373776
reddit bullshit
Africa has fertile land excellent climate conditions and abundant natural resources. The idea that Africa was always a backwater because of geographical or environmental reasons is a myth popularised by pop science
>>1373742
Wait wait wait, I thought we were talking about why Africa DIDN'T have anything worthwhile happen.
>>1373777
nothimbut cash crops are just one step along the way to development, it is a way to start making slightly more money than you used to and encourage investment which will lead to other things
>>1373795
It's funny how many African countries have a lower GDP per capita today than they did in the 60s right after decolonisation.
>>1373793
MAN you do not like to be wrong.
SO tell us Mr. 160 IQ, How do you fix Africa
shouldnt be hard considering its a contenent filled with magic land that can grow all sorts of crops.
P.S. Thank god you came when you did, apparently you're smarter than everyone who lives in Africa
>>1373795
look at the following evidence
the map I posted
>worldkoppenmap.png
another map someone else posted
>>1372706
you can confirm their accuracy as there are countless sources showing the same thing, very different environments from the ones where grain thrived in eurasia
https://www.google.co.uk/#q=africa+terrain
I will find one
http://nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/africa-physical-geography/
saharra, sahel, savannah, terrain like this is rare elsewhere, savanna is much hotter than the steppes so disease is a big problem for pastoralists
>>1373827
>How do you fix Africa
As Dr Watson said stop assuming that Africans have the same capabilities and congitive skills as Europeans. It is a scientific fact that they don't.
>The average African IQ is estimated at 79.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741
When it comes to African agriculture you need to encourage more land to come under cultivation. Move more subsistence farmers to cash crops. You need to mechanise and increase the productivity of staple crops. A good idea is for the state to subsidise the purchase of inputs (fertiliser seeds machinery) for farmers. Some African countries give fertiliser for free to farmers and this has increased food production. Farms run by White people are some of the most productive and profitable in the world. But I wouldn't hold my breath Africa would ever develop and become prosperous. Their IQ is too low.
>>1373844
*farms run by White people in Africa...
Also bonus pic correlation between average IQ and GDP per capita
>>1372705
You fucking faggot, way to start the thread off with your own angst-ridden edge fest of an off topic shitpost, you whore.
>>1373844
I honestly cant tell if you're just that egotistic, or maybe this is bait and you're this >>1372705 guy, or maybe you're just from /pol/. But I can safeley assume you're pulling these facts from you did no in depth research into, nor do you have the experiance to back them up. So me and the other guy you were arguing with are probably just gonna ignore you for the rest of the thread.
>>1373847
What a shit regression, you can't have negative GDP, why not adjust the data to a parabola or something?
>>1373620
>up to 75% inheritible
ehm, 75% times 100 iq is 75 iq
so 25% makes all the difference and these links do not support your point of view
>>1372680
Define worthwhile.
Then think about whether you definition is worth a damn
>>1372680
Don't think anyone will ever read this, but I'll give it a shot...
Most of the historically progressive, developing and human index progressive countries have had their population take themselves out of the food chain and settled before they started advancing.
All but North Africa has had little chance to do this in primitive times due to the largest biodiversity on the planet. Whereas areas like the Sahara desert, Saudi Arabia and Iraq have been amongst the most developing... before Islam, that is. year 800-1,100 A.D. has had one of the highest ammount of scientifical development in human history, even compared to today. This occurred in Baghdad.
That also explains why the currenet development is taking place in nordic countries. Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Denmark, Germany, Russia, Estonia, Canada, etc.
>>1373620
The realer question is whether or not iq is a good indicator of intelegence across cultures.
>>1372776
could you name some important inventions from these tribes, and if there was none, they were neither relevant or great
>>1373844
>Implying the elites in control of African nations have any incentive to invest capital from cash crops into developing infrastructure and bettering the lives of the masses
>>1372705
>Once the thread 404's, the exact same thing will happen. And again, and again, and again
You must be new on 4chan.
>Why weren't there any empires that rival Rome, Persia, or Han China?
Mani lived in the 3rd century and considered Axum to be on equal footing with Rome, Persia and China
>>1372680
1) Isolated from the rest of the world because of the Sahara and many other jungles.
2) The land was abundant in food and thus no one felt any drive to progress further from basic agriculture.
That's basically it. Asking why someone couldn't Rival Rome or Persia or China is absurd; very few peoples could rival them. Neither snowniggers nor even poo-in-loos could manage to rival these empires.
In case you are wondering there were small Sub-Saharan kingdoms to the north.
>>1372709
Probably because there is no other way to express discontent with this kinda shit and people are getting tired of it.
What, you want people to have an idea hammered down their throats and have zero reaction?
>>1374045
Look at the types of plants African people were growing. Until the colonial area crops from the Fertile Crescent had not been brought down, and African people grew other food sources.
For example, the staple cassava is actually very high in cyanide and those 0.5 billion people who eat it very frequently have chronic mild cyanide poisoning.
You can't really create a civilization when every single person is chronically ill. It just doesn't work.
>>1372931
Had Africa not been colonized, it wouldn't be like this today, there would be civilizations, the societies would have started westernizing slowly through trade with Europeans, they would've progressed naturally instead of being ripped out of their development stage and then left without the capital or infrastructure to support western style development. So yes, actually, in essence it is the fault of European monarchs and leaders, all of whom were white. It's unrealistic to expect that an area that had its capital completely drained and was split up along arbitrary colonial lines to suddenly develop after 50 years. Imperialism doomed them to at least another 50 years of war, collapse, dictatorship, and mild economic development.
Is it the fault of EVERY white person to have existed? Hell no, and most Africans and Black people know that. It's the fault of the leaders, and their system. Sorry, exploitation and imperialism destroy people and countries.
>>1373992
WE don't know what/if they invented anything, we haven't spend enough time and money to find out what they developed. We know they all had written language and agriculture as well as at the very least iron-age development.
To be fair to Africans, Germanics did fucking nothing until the 16th century, and everything they did relied on the Korean printing press. Due to it's remoteness, Sub-Saharan Africa never got that.
>>1374798
>everything they did relied on the Korean printing press. Due to it's remoteness, Sub-Saharan Africa never got that
Nice fucking disingenuity.
Comparing Gutenberg's press to the Korean printing press is like comparing an AR-15 to a matchlock
>>1372680
Slavers and imperialists got to it when they were still primitive.
>>1374819
How much do you think they would have developed in 500 years?
Strong European peoples were usually built in 1500+ years.
>>1372688
>What the Sahara didn't block off, the jungles usually did.
More so then the entire Atlantic and Pacific oceans?
Because Mesoamerican Indians managed to create FAR more advance societies then anything in sub-Sahara Africa and they had zero contact with the Old World.
Sorry, but you can't blame the lack of civilization in Africa on geography.
>>1374810
Ah, that's true, his press was based off of the Roman Screw press. Point is, he didn't invent anything.
>>1372717
Persians influenced Greeks who influenced Romans who influenced Europeans
I mean just thinking about the amount that India influenced England just in the past few centuries- no one lived in a bubble.
>>1373694
>Africa is quite shit for farming
Nonsense, that map is showing where farming could be improved, not where farming is possible.
Zimbabwe for example is shown as “blow potential” because when it was Rhodesia, it was _exporting_ food.
>>1372680
>inb4 all the legitimate reasons
Classic tactic OP. Please disembowel yourself.
>>1374814
>Mongolia has still developed properly
I've lived in both Gaborone and Ulan Bator and if you asked me which one I would rather stay in permanently I could not say Gaborone fast enough. Mongolia is the most depressing place I've ever been to, it's a bit of a stretch to call it developed.
>>1374827
They also never developed the wheel, and barely got anywhere with metallurgy. The Aztecs literally drug wheelless wheelbarrows by hand to move everything that couldn't be shipped by boat.
>>1374837
He improved markedly on the previous design too
>>1374827
You are too raycis, whitey!
>>1374852
I was speaking about what happened centuries ago.
And about the current year, I would choose Mongolia over Botswana any day.
Mongolia is developing fast, because the people are intelligent; and furthermore I would live amongst yellow people rather than black ones.
>>1374857
>They also never developed the wheel, and barely got anywhere with metallurgy.
Neither did the Africans, who didn’t use the wheel despite having domesticable beasts of burden, unlike American Indians and only used the most primitive of metal implements (again, the process and designs being imported from Europe/Asia and not native developments).
Africa was in contact with the rest of the world the whole time, yet Africans never managed to do shit with this knowledge.
>>1372680
Somalia had empires: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Somalia
>>1374898
Read Oxford Handbook of African Archaeology (ed. Peter Mitchell and Paul Lane), everything you've posted is pretty much bullshit
>>1372680
Das rayciss OP. They wuz kings n shit
>>1374916
>Read Oxford Handbook of African Archaeology (ed. Peter Mitchell and Paul Lane)
Feel free to quote them in your arguments, then show us one sub-Saharan African society that was even remotely close to what the American Indians managed to do (with zero old world contact).
>>1372705
It's mostly just one guy who keeps making this thread over and over since the very first week of /his/. You can tell by his posting style. He gets BTFO by the facts every time and has a meltdown every time, but he keeps coming back for more.
>>1373793
>"exploitation" doesn't exist it's a marxist meme kill yourself.
WEW
LAD
>>1373828
That image is so fucking true though. A lot of argumentation on this board is over the given premises of an argument, and trying to prove the argument isn't valid by way of not accepting it as true. Beyond that, /his/ is shit at recognizing the validity of even the simplest arguments.
Does Sub-Saharan Africa have many good river valleys for ancient civilizations that flood regularly?
>>1374798
>THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED BECAUSE MY FEELINGS SAYS SO
>>1374916
>haha i lost so you should read this book that would take a few days but i can't quote anything from it or refute you but you should still read it and then come back when the thread is gone haha got you xd tricked
Every single time
If IQ determines historical progress, I dont know how you can justify fall of Rome and perpetual eras of Chaos that came afterwards. Africa's lack of development in certain regions are most likely due to their lack of contact with other civilizations. Trade and contact == exchanging ideas, which means civilization progress.
>>1374986
He's not wrong. When people claim that machinists or autoworkers making $30 an hour are still being "exploited" because "they are robbed of the full value of their labor" I can only shake my head and wonder what planet they think they're on.
>>1372706
>Mediterranean evergreen forest - hard-leaf scrub
Chaparral!
>>1372680
Other places were easier to get to and trade with. Trade brings the exchange of ideas and is ESSENTIAL for the development of civilization
>>1375254
Surely it's a good thing to educate yourself? The Oxford handbooks are fairly reputable so I can't see why it would be a bad thing
>>1373992
These threads always move the goalposts so much
>Why didn't subsaharan Africa have any civilizations
>Why didn't subsaharan Africa have any BIG civilizations
>Why didn't subsaharan African civilizations invent anything
>Why didn't subsaharan African civilizations invent anything that hadn't been independently invented somewhere else
>Only rock huts count as civilization, other building materials are for savages
>Why didn't subsaharan Africans leave records
>What do you mean they haven't been translated
>>1375348
If you believe the value of labor has nothing to do with productivity, then sure exploitation doesn't exist
>>1375505
and my favorite:
>the implication that harsh jungles are conductive to recording information in conventional means
>the double-think it comes with, considering that all but early earth and stonework have survived millennia of European humidity
>the utter and willing ignorance of oral, generational knowledge of things such as metal-working in many african tribes
and
>not understanding the immediate, comparative benefits of pastoralism and why it de-incentvizes concrete record keeping
>"Why haven't here been any African empires/great states?"
There have: Nubia, Ethiopia, Songhai, Mali, Great Zimbabwe, Matamba, Ndongo, Somali city states, Benin, Ashanti Empire, etc.
>"No, they have to be completely independent from foreign influence (even though almost every European state has been heavily influenced by Rome/Greece)"
Cool, Zimbabwe, Benin, and the Bantu Kingdoms both developed independently.
>b-but they didn't invent anything!
The Zulu independently developed battle tactics and formations, age-grade regimental systems, and military hierarchy that which is often compared to that of Rome. West African militaries also utilized war canoes, which often devastated European naval crews (the Portuguese had to make peace with African leaders for this).
With that being said, I'm sure you will deny it as sufficient evidence. However, you must realize that Sub-Saharan Africa at this time was like pre-Shokugawa Japan multiplied by 10. Division makes it hard for progress, especially on a large continent such as Africa. In addition, you have things like Tsetse Fly that lead to many illnesses/deaths. Nevertheless, multiple empires and great states arose in Sub-Saharan Africa.
>"b-but muh agriculture!"
Sub-Saharans were self-sufficient with their own agricultural systems and as such had no need to advance upon it. Colonialism and its aftermath forced African economies to be reliant upon cash crop exports. Thus, African states have to choose between being poor but having starving people or being extremely poor and having decently-fed people.
>"n-no that's jewish propaganda you sjw cuck!"
And this is how the discussion usually devolves with /pol/.
>>1375513
But we are spending all of excess productivity per capita on stuff that helps everyone like science and medicine, r-right?
>>1374810
Not everyone is so autistic to know what those are
>>1373540
>Stuff that is taught at universities
Gender and Women's Studies say hello.
>>1373694
Trillions of dollars of aid were spent on developing African agriculture but the niggers just wasted it.
>>1375754
Well, I'm not economist, but people like Varoufakis say that there's is a double sided effect at work, besides the increasing debt, there's an increasing pile of univested money (fear of investment, rates of return aren't seen as high enough, etc.) coming from increased production, that, through it's nature of being a huge pile of uninvested money in a capitalist system is contributing heavily towards effects like recessions, wealth inequality, etc.
>>1373827
As nigger IQ is lower on average, he probably is
>>1373827
Bring back colonialism.
>>1375816
>the ultra-wealthy are hoarding the wealth
This is how civilizations end.
TAKING THE WEALTH BACK WHEN?
>>1375810
>Trillions of denarius of aid were spent on developing British infrastructure but the snowniggers just wasted it
Don't forget what you descend from, you anglo scum.
Also, instability caused by faulty borders makes way for the rise of self-serving dictators and warlords. Colonial powers had a chance to leave Africa in a better state than they found it and they fucked it up.
>>1372776
>axum
>>1375831
Never.
Neither of the major parties will ever confront tax evasion, regulatory capture, financial fraud or corporate influence over elected officials.
In case you haven't noticed, anyone who threatens the bottom line of a Fortune 500 company is labelled a socialist by the billionaire controlled media, or just ignored.
Our current political discussion is just identity politics designed to keep people busy while the men in suits make the real decisions.
Hence why the average American is more likely to know about the transgender bathroom arguments than something like the TPP.
>>1375844
someone just listened to a Dan Carlin podcast :^)
>>1375834
>Triilons of
England's doing pretty well now. Most African shitholes not so much.
>instability
Like in Europe and North America ? They turned out alright.
>>1375848
Brah, this is shit everyone has known about since the 90s.
>>1375804
Still trumps you tube speculation on gender and women's studies, regardless of the isolated merit of the classes.
Are you too retarded to apply relative comparisons?
>>1375855
of course, in fact, i'd say it's almost a truthism and was known by some people even millenia ago, but they way you wrote it out is very reminiscent of the podcast released just days ago.
>>1375880
Found the chompsky fanboy
>>1375851
>le logarithmic perspective of time meme
doing great anon
>>1375851
>England's doing pretty well now.
Because it literally extorted multiple lesser peoples via force. Meanwhile the anglos were always defeated by other European powers.
>Europe
The church kept Europe from tearing itself apart, and often times the church nearly failed at this role. And you'll see that whenever the pope isn't in charge, Europeans chimp out (see Napoleonic Wars and WW1).
Sub-Saharan Africa lacked any kind of unifying political force like this. What's more is figures that wanted to see greater African unity like pic related and Gaddafi ended up being killed by Western powers.
>>1375902
>if my tin-pot socialist dictators hadn't gotten killed, things would be so different
Europe did a lot of terrible things to Africa, but this is dumb.
>>1375910
I never claimed things would be "so different". I'm just showing that the West has clearly proved that African unity is counterproductive to Western interests.
>>1375933
African unity is irrelevant to the decisive factor, which is the environment for local business.
If you look at the Ease of Doing Business Index, you will find very few African countries.
>>1375844
The only option is to kill the bourgeois.
>>1374940
Great Zimbabwe developed in the miombo, an isolated largely agro-pastoralist space. It was created from the ground up as a completely sedentary development only a couple centuries after the expansion of Bantu farmers and is in and of itself a beautiful manifestation of pioneer bantu farmers and "khoisan" herders originally found in Kingdom of Mapungubwe.
Its a false equivalency to bring up the Inca, who themselves had only recently unified various peoples (1438 to be exact)
what people don't really understand about the Andean nations that existed is the climatic and environmental variances that existed in such a densely packed space. From the xeric chala with extremely large quantities of guano fertilizer and dried fish roes (absolutely necessary iodine for montane peoples) to the cloud drenched Yungas, to the Quechua, to the Puna and back down to the amazonian highland forests.
The elevations and the climatic consequences/opportunities that came with that were vast trading networks.
There were many tiny and medium kingdoms that developed along the way, they all needed critical products to sustain themselves on a individual and societal level. It was the Inca that forced entire populations to uproot and expand into newly conquered territory. They forced the newly mingle populations to speak a lingua franca and created or I should say attempted to create a monolithic peoples with which Sapa Inca could extend his power.
The reality is their use of stone came from a paucity of trees kept to undermine erosion, they developed because they had long been farmers of tubers and lacked a pastoralist tradition, they had been there for thousands of years longer than pioneer bantu.
both are beautifual in their own right, hewned from the context of different peoples.
>>1375979
I was thinking advocacy groups, on the model of the Tea Party, to push for things like fixing gerrymandered districts, eliminating tax loopholes, prosecuting financial crime, pushing back the state security apparatus, and a laundry list of other things designed to reduce the general level of decay.
People start listening if their asses are on the line, and focusing popular outrage onto specific races on the state level or in the House of Representatives works well to make politicians more accountable.
>>1376007
Nope. Lynch the rich.
>>1375834
Dumb picture. The Romani-Britaini were conquered by Saxons after all their forces were pulled out to both conquer and protect Rome. The situation's not comparable.
>>1375724
>they invented tactics
so we wuz logic n shiiet?
>war canoes
shiiet, we wuz flyin on water
yet again we can conclude that there hasn't been a single important invention
>>1376118
nothing has come from europe and european knowledge. "their innovations" come from ultimately Middle Eastern and Chinese sources, whether it be the language we type in or say gunpowder.
so we wuz all you want, you guys are the biggest we wuzzers there are and have the nerve to speak down on others not handed such things on a silver platter.
>>1372680
Progress and civilization are tied to the environment. In places where food and other resources were readily available, like the Middle East and China, civilization advanced quickly. In places like Australia, tiny populations of hunter-gatherers were all that the land could support, and so they never banded together with enough population to do anything significant. In general, high population growth = high levels of technological and cultural advancement.
So why does Africa suck so much ass? Well, civilization could never arise independently on the same level as in Eurasia because they didn't have good, easily farmable food, like wheat or rice, and so they could never support an extremely high level of population growth. The Sahara also separated sub-Saharan Africa from the more advanced civilizations to the north, prohibiting cultural diffusion. Rainforests, deserts, and grasslands all suck at developing civilizations, which includes most of Africa. Just in general, Africa is a bad continent to live on. Too many predators, bad climate, bad terrain, bad native species. Rome thrived because it had the resources to thrive. Africa never did.
>>1376146
>"their innovations" come from ultimately Middle Eastern and Chinese sources,
that doesn't make sense. an innovation comes from where it was innovated. give credit where credit is due fuckhead
>>1376150
I mean we do have rice but never were there too many areas outside of there, namely because of tropical soils in the central forests being terrible and the adoption of banana was more efficient in calories to use in swidden agriculture.
>>1376161
credit comes from the people who civilized europeans with the introduction of middle eastern agriculture and later middle eastern innovations such as written language.
Its not european, you guys just we wuz them into whiteness
>>1376150
good succinct description (though disease was probably several orders of magnitude more deleterious than predators)
>>1374857
The Mayans invented the wheel but only used it in children's toys. There was no incentive to continue its development because of the lack of beasts of burden.
>>1376176
>introduction of middle eastern agriculture
Agriculture of barley and oats started in western Anatolia along the coast of the Aegean sea. For most people, that's already Europe. /pol/ will argue that it isn't, though, so might as well count it as Near East.
> later middle eastern innovations such as written language.
That one's debatable. We don't know for sure if Cuneiform or Hieroglyphs were first. If Cuneiform were first, we don't know if Egyptians started using Hieroglyphs on their own without any outside cues or if they were inspired by Cuneiform. If they weren't, there's another point of contention is how much of an innovation proto-sinaitic script was compared to the Egyptian phonetic proto-abjad.
But yes, written language comes either the Near East or North Africa.
>>1372680
Makesya itch doesn't it?
>>1376321
agriculture started with grains around the eastern most Mediterranean by a non-european peoples whose genetics are distinct from the Mesolithic Europeans they dominated and civilized.
>>1376395
>by a non-european peoples
Genetically Southern Europeans are extremely close to those people, so I'd say they can be considered European by today's standards
You can split Africa into three regions; the North/Northeast, the West and the Bantu South/Central. You can split these further into cultural regions.
In North/Northeast Africa there was constant and longstanding contact with the Middle East, which it partially overlaps with, where civilization had developed around 3000 BC in Mesopotamia and Egypt and agriculture had developed around 8000 BC, and they fully inherited and built upon these developments, just as Europeans did. These parts of Africa thus tapped into over 10,000 years of development across Afro-Eurasia and hosted ancient civilizations like Egypt, Carthage, Kush, D'mt, Aksum, Nubia, the Zagwe and Solomonic dynasties and the Somali city-states.
West Africa did not derive its civilization or its agriculture from outside, except in the case of cattle which were introduced from the Nile valley during the Neolithic Subpluvial. Crop-based agriculture was pioneered only at the end of this period around 3000 BC, and the earliest evidence for agriculture only dates from 2500 BC. Consider that around 5000 years passed between the beginning of Middle Eastern agriculture around 8000 BC and Middle Eastern civilization around 3000 BC. We see roughly the same thing in China and Mesoamerica. Agriculture being less than 5000 years old in West Africa, it's surprising civilization arose at all.
>>1376416
Nope. closest people on average are Samaritans who themselves are also mixed
This is what I mean by we wuzing
>>1376433
And yet it did, after about 700 AD, in places like Ghana and Yorubaland, and Europeans encountered massive cities and well-organized states when they explored the region after the 15th century. Of course these were not on par with Rome and China, most having less than a millennium to develop with only limited influence from outside. Cultural influence from North Africa on West Africa only began around the 8th century and was only limited to a small Islamic class of merchants and urbanites who weren't even always the ruling party. Eurasian/North African civilizations grew so large and so great because of the huge amount of time they had to develop (as did many American civilizations) and the constant cultural and technological interactions between different centers of development from China to the Mediterranean, encouraged by trade, conquest, migration, proselytism, colonization and other means. West Africa had none of this.
It might also be worth noting that in Europe north of the Alps, despite agriculture being thousands of years older than it was in West Africa, civilization never emerged independently and had to be introduced from the Mediterranean.
Bantu Africa is another story. The only very fertile lands here capable of supporting complex civilization are in the tsetse-free highlands of the Rift Valley. Crop-based agriculture only spread here after about 500 BC and only reached South Africa in the 1st millennium AD. There was absolutely no time for the development of civilization. Chiefdoms emerged, in the Great Lakes region and notably in Zimbabwe, but urban civilization was limited to the Islamic Swahili coast of the 2nd millennium AD. States did develop to some extent in the Atlantic Coast where agriculture was somewhat older, but the slave trade destroyed this region in the 17th and 18th centuries.
>>1376438
Source?
>>1376395
No, it didn't.
The first cities were in Mesopotamia, but agricultural revolution happened on its own only in western Anatolia, China and Mesoamerica.
>>1376395
>>1376623
Oh, wait, I misread. I still maintain that it's by the Aegean sea and not by the Levant though.
I don't know if we know the genetic make up of these people, but I would believe they mixed with the Hellenes when they got there, thousands of years later.
Not that it matters, I was just correcting the "middle eastern" part. I'm not a faggot obsessed with genetics.
>>1372776
Garamantes were Berber you stupid nigger.
>>1376629
>I don't know if we know the genetic make up of these people
We do, they're genetically the closest to Sardinians and Iberians.
>>1376194
jhe wheel is not the big thing it's the development of the wheel and axle and the extension wheel barrels and carts.
>>1372688
Don't forget about parasites
>>1376623
Also West Africa and Papua New Guinea and North America.
>>1376656
Berber is not a race and Berber are Africans with deep roots in sub-Saharan Africa. The original inhabitants at any case should show you they were "black" like Uan Muhuggiag's Tashwinat Mummy the oldest example of intentional mummification in Africa.
>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.
>>1376446
On my phone, I can only get things I saved or bookmarked.
they were oppressed man it was all jeorge butch
>>1372680
Simply put, niggers
>>1375851
And it took them over a millenium to do so
>>1373574
but the problem is africa /doesnt/ have a bad climate for agriculture
>>1376873
The places are mentioned are the only ones we're reasonably sure it happened without outside influence. The ones you listed are equally proposed places but, like with Cuneiform and Hieroglyphs, we aren't sure if the former influenced the latter before the latter developed on its own.
>>1377017
>The places are mentioned
The places I mentioned
>>1374894
>I was speaking about what happened centuries ago.
The Eurasian steppe is adjacent to the heart of medieval civilization. Do you really think sub-Saharan Africans could have united into one people and crossed thousands of miles of jungle and desert to conquer the middle east?
>>1376623
>>1377017
Agriculture emerged completely independently in the Levant/Fertile Crescent, China, North America, Mesopotamia, New Guinea and the Andes. Crop-based agriculture also emerged independently in West Africa, though after cattle were introduced from outside.
I don't know what you're going on about.
>>1377042
What are your sources?
Everywhere I read only mentioned three places where it had been developed completely independently with reasonable certainty, and seven total places where it most likely had.
>>1377066
Dude you need to read newer sources
>>1377009
It's not like only climate bra.
Weather and weather trends, diseases, pests, soil issues like soil erosion and overfarminh, available crop and the huge issues in building up a population base to form a good political power and currently the massive costs in subsidies and fertilizer prices as well as the massive environmental damage using it and stability all come together.
>>1377166
Brazil is in a completely different continent with a different history and get political environment as well as the silly comparison between 1 whole continent where each state has different issue and environment and 1 whole huge ass nation on the other side of the Atlantic.
>>1377166
Brazil is rapidly chopping down their forests to cope with infertility, erosion and deforestation induced drought/deforestation
>>1377210
That is only on the Amazon.
Meanwhile the South and Mato Grosso produce a stupid large amount of soy, rice and other grains.
>>1377182
And it shows that climate is not an excuse for the abysmal food production in Africa.
>>1376873
There was a study on the DNA of the Garamantes showing L3. Also another studying saying how they mostly cluster with sub saharans.
>>1377166
The maritime temperate and "humid subtropical" regions of Southern Brazil and Argentina are only found along the coast of South Africa and these areas started to become developed at about the same time in the 18th century.
Agriculture and environment were the main factors until the 50s when technology limited the effects of disase and the green revolution improved productivity, though at the same time other factors came into play.
I am surprised you haven't asked why the tropical wet and dry climate of India and South East Asia did better than similar climates in Africa, that would have been more difficult and a more interesting course for discussion. It seems though you are so biased you can't think properly and can't get up to that level of understanding.
Someday we can have a real discussion about this without anyone calling each other racist or cuckolds.
>>1377249
The south gets could and is rather temperate unlike tropical Africa
>>1377140
You didn't answer my question.
>>1376146
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_historic_inventions
check m8
>>1376438
>no sources
>>1376146
You honestly dont believe that do you? Look a lot of innovations come from China, middle East etc... But most come from Europe.
>>1373730
>Brazil
>bad for farming
wat
>>1375840
Why the smug face?
>>1378064
Tropical climate agriculture was a pain in the ass in pre-industrial societies? I don't know, though.
>>1378071
If you don't know why do you post? Plenty of populous countries since ancient times were in tropical climates, South east asia for example, or the Mayans and other messo-north american tribes/polis from Mexico. Fucking India mang.
Look at this map a great deak if africa is in the same wave than India, Thailand Brasil and other south american countries or even china. Plenty of good crops only grow in tropical crops and nearly all the spices and best cas crops only grow there in fact.>>1373776 the map. Also swamps, forest and steppe were converted in farm lands since ancient times, if there's a will there's a way, fucking holland was mostly grabbed from the water. They first build a dike around the area they want to reclaim, then pump out all the water with windmills or equivalent. While still pumping out water from inside the dike, they planted reeds. Then after the water is gone, they burned the reeds off and planted rapeseed, then rye, wheat, and barley in that order. This process took many years, but after that the land was good for any type of agricultural activity you choose
>>1378071
>>1378460
People complaining about 'tropical agriculture' are over-simplifying. Look at the map here >>1376439. Some of the most productive agricultural areas are the tropical rainforests of the Guinea Coast, where yam-growing supported some of the most prosperous societies in sub-Saharan Africa like Ife, Benin and the Ashanti. Then look at the Cong rainforest, completely empty and never hosting any complex society (before someone mentions the Kingdom of Kongo, that was actually below the forest-belt itself).
I don't know exactly what made one area productive and the other useless, maybe different types of soils, but clearly there are multiple factors at work and tropical regions can't all be lumped together. You could argue the same in the Americas by comparing the Mexican rainforests with the Amazon, or in Southeast Asia by comparing Java with Borneo.
Anyway, as you can also see from that map most of Africa is shit for farming, largely because tsetse flies kill cattle and prevent the use of ploughs outside of highland areas. These are one of the biggest reasons for Africa's underdevelopment; http://healthpolicy.fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/tsetse_working_paper.pdf
>>1372680
No winter + abundant food
The people never developed higher order problem solving and intellectual capacity on a broad scale the same way Caucasoids and Mongoloids did simply because they didn't have to.
>>1372717
>Unlike Europeans, who of course created all civilization without any influence from anywhere else on Earth.
This is what /pol/ actually believes
also
>aliens
>>1375988
>Great Zimbabwe
Was more than likely built by Arab slavers.
>>1372680
Fula Toro, now get that black dick out of your mouth and look that up
All i know is that if i fall down on the streets of Cairo, people will help me. People will steal food to give me.
Meanwhile in 1st world countries, people live on their flats, completely alone, detached, nobody cares.
Fuck off all of you and your definition of "progress" and "civilization"
>>1378745
Zimbabwe is both far inland and far to the south of Africa. The Arab construction theory was invented by European racists so they could ignore the evidence that Africans were able to form civilizations.
>>1374033
He was wrong though. Even at their greatest the ethiopians could only bully a couple of arab states in the red sea. The second the persians sent a few hundred of troops to Yemen the ethiopians were expulsed from Arabia and beaten so hard they became isolated for centuries.
Aksum was a powerful (and rich) kingdom but by no means on equal footing with Rome, Persia and China. Mani's perception was probably influenced by aksumite influence in the profitable indian trade.
>>1378068
Just another butthurt Italo-Eritrean
>>1376118
What matters is that they did create and maintain empires
>>1372705
>>1377255
actually, it shows how more shithole brazil was before colonization (inb4 >brazil still shithole)
due to the huge rainforest, incan civilization that was prosperous in the west, did not even touch eastern south america, and when portugeses arrived, they found shitty tribes that could be defeated with 20 men with gunpowder weapons and got easier to set colonies. further south, were rainforest dissapears (from corrientes, argentina to the south) natives were much more populous and organized wich allowed them to offer a more considerable resistance (for example, buenos aires had to be founded once again because the original founders got tired of native raidings and coulnd't defeat them easily and abandoned the colony)
>>1373847
Lol it's like you don't even understand correlation and causation. Has it ever occurred to you that people in developed environs have a greater chance of developing an high iq?
This iq meme needs to stop.
>>1374798
Kongo was pretty westernized, but it was highly dependant on slave trade too.
>>1373437
Pro-tip
Trade only historically happens along rivers or oceans
>>1381444
>the silk road didn't exist
>trans-Saharan trade didn't exist
>>1372680
Muh Aksum trading hub.
Seriously though, Ethiopia has a ton of written history dating back almost 2000 years. Unfortunately most of it is written in Ge'ez (a writing system they developed) and no one outside of Ethiopia cares. I heard some universities in Germany and Italy have some stuff, but it isn't easy to find anything in English.
Mani, the founder of Manichaeism, considered it one of the 4 great empires (the others of course being Persia, Rome, and China). There power was based on control of maritime trade between India and the Mediterranean.
>>1381549
Don't forget the Ethiopians in positions of power in India :3
>>1373952
>before Islam
>800-1,100 A.D.
I actually wish I hadn't read this.
>>1372928
basically this
this is a rehashed thread where no discussion of value is made
>>1381549
>and no one outside of Ethiopia cares
I find it hard to believe that
a) Ethiopians haven't cared to translate it themselves, and
b) No one actually cares.
I mean, if it really is 2000 years of well recorded history, that should sound like a gold mine to any historian.
Doubly so for lefty historians wanting to shed like on how awesome Africans wuz and sheit.
>>1381756
>like
light
>>1376146
Ayy lmao, don't you know that middle easterns were indo European? Europeans literally created civilization on the Grand scale and then the Arab savages and Asian steppe people came to fuck the ME up.
Libertarian revisionist scum
>>1382222
Quads of Truth nigga
>>1381756
>a) Ethiopians haven't cared to translate it themselves
Ethiopia is poor as shit and they have better things to do than translate ancient books. I doubt their unversities are worth a damn and I doubt that anyone who goes to university gives a shit about anything other than engineering or medicine or something else that will make them money.
>b) No one actually cares.
Literally nobody gives a shit.
It's the same with the Malian manuscripts, everyone forgot they existed until Al Qaeda tried to burn them all. There were two intiatives to translate them, one by a Danish university which gave up because of a lack of funds and one by some cultural institute which gave up for the same reason. There's currently a third one since like 2013 but progress is slow as fuck and they don't have much funding.
>>1381756
>>1382249
Oh, my life experiences are relevant to this thread.
One of my professors was part of an initiative to translate Ethiopian manuscripts in the 90s. Literally nobody would give them money. Their fundraisers were underattended and in the end the only things they could get their hands on were some Sudanese Arabic manuscripts that had found their way into Ethiopia.
>>1382249
Literally nobody cares, if those KANGZ were worth a dollar there would be interest, it's just petty tribalism and mud castles to use OP'S term, the entirety of Africa downwards of equator levels could be erased 2000 years ago and we would lack nothing, nothing
>>1373952
>translating books from the people you conquered is scientific development
when will these pop-pseudo redditors leave
>>1382266
Again, what would we learn?
>>1382277
...history?
You know, like on a history board.
>>1382279
Yeah, but even the interesting periods don't get a lot of attention, actually history ha always been very much about what's selling well, a lot of shit would've never been found if it wasn't for some smart archeologists or self taught guys who knew how to sell investors on an idea, there are so many things we still don't know about early middle eastern history which was significantly more important in every aspect, yet there is little incentive to do so. Some scandi cucks and liberals who just want to find out more about their black bulls' ancestors who don't have any nice relics or buildings to gain any interest with won't get funding easily
>>1382270
I notice you have to say south of the equator.
>>1372688
The new world had notable achievements. The Incas, the Mayas, the Aztecs were all in the new world.
>>1382222
Indo-European in a linguistic family not a race
>>1382292
I support your stance
to confirm it, consider the following as an example
take the Baltic Sea region during about 1000AD. what do we know about it? it had vikings and shit. But surely there lived more people around that time than only norsemen. But most people can only conjure up some kind of response like "uhh, ohh vikings settled some places on Balitc Sea coast". But what about other peoples besides Norsemen. No one gives a shit about them, so barely no one studies them, no one makes any popular culture works about them. And for the common Joe, Baltic Sea was indeed pretty much empty, inhabited only by norsemen until norsemen colonized the other parts of the shore aswell.
So, yea.
