[hunter10]

i just recently started using this forum and was worried about the tales people chat of no black civilizations or nations prior to european contact. and i wanted to correct that. i also wanted to say something about the belief that savage blacks captured savage blacks and sold them to whites. i recently asked my great grand dad, who showed me some writigs by an african ruler in the oyo empire in western nigeria. apparantly he was worried that the british where selling guns to another black nation the dahomey and that because their attempts to replicate the rifles where successful they needed to trade more with the english. unfortunately gold was not what the english wanted but slaves. in most african society prior to european colonialism. slavery was only used on people who commited grievious criminal acts and prisoners of war. and the slaves could work their way out to freedom, they could also have children who where free and their relatives could buy their freedom. some black nations like the nri kingdom even outlawed slavery and any slave that set foot on their land wes free. u see slavery in west africa was seen as being more humane than executing someone for murder as spilling blood was often seen as taboo. and they where many laws concerning the treatment of slaves. but when white people arrived the game changed because of guns. u see guns gave a nation advantages and when whites sold it to a particular black kingdom other kingdoms where afraid they would be dis advantaged and also sought after guns. at first gold and spices and cloth was enough for europeans, but with the discovery of gold and spices in north and south america, slaves where needed to covert these resources. and the only thing blacks had to trade where slaves for guns. so as a result blacks started selling their criminals into slavery thinking the same rules of slavery applied to whites, but we all know now that was different. so the slave raids only started when the kingdoms ran out of criminals and then started raiding other kingdoms and sometimes going to all out war just for slaves to get more guns. why more guns u say what did they need them for. well many people have forgotten that for centuries black africans have been resisting arab muslim invaders who wanted to forcefully enslave and convert them and needed every edge they could get get guns was to sell slaves and thus a vicious circle began. of course they where blacks who sold their own people out simply fo profit, but in what culture or race has such people not existed. i apologise to west african descendants of the slavery diaspora. and now i will list west african civilizations, which black people in america can take pride in.

from what i can tell the nok civilization is west africas oldest as it started in 1000bc and from what i can tell it started up isolated as they where no advanced cultural influences nearby. i still dont understand why when ancient africa is potrayed on tv is always mud huts. i mean the where walled cites roads, written languages , science, universities like in ancient timbuktu. some had flags and constitutions. an some where even democratic. so why are they not mentioned. mind u these links are only from west africa they are many more in central east and southern africa



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nri_kingdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songhay_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashanti_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghana_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanem-Bornu_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulani_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benin_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyo_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Dahomey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolof_Empire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nok
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hausa_Kingdoms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandinka_Empire

[politburo player]

i still dont understand why when ancient africa is potrayed on tv is always mud huts.

Ok, then where are all the great castles and ancient fortresses in Sub Saharan Africa? It's a simple question...

You'd think there would be some buried somewhere in the jungle, wouldn't you?

Here is a list of African castles; the list is short, and includes structures that were built by Egyptians and Europeans, not the Sub Saharan demographic you claim has been stereotyped so negatively.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_castles_in_Africa

[Ombrageux]

Not every civilization is into slaving away to build monuments to tyrants and mummified kings.

[Kaspar]

Interesting. So the greatness of a civilization is dependent upon the number of castles it builds. According to your hypothesis, does this mean that feudal Europe was the most civilized era in the history of mankind? That's some groundbreaking social analysis going on there politburo player.

[XAdamX]

Can you dig up a link of American castles from Wikipedia while you're at it?

[Zyx]

Is politburo player doubting that there were African civilizations that rivaled their European counterparts? That's plain kooky.

[XAdamX]

[Mod edit: Don't.]

[hunter10]

u want evidence here

http://www.archaeology.org/9807/abstracts/africa.html
that was for great zimbabwe an ancient african city with stone walls

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nok_culture

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walls_of_Benin

u can read here that the walls of benin where the largest man made structure length wise next to the wall of china.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Great ... 3%A9_1.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sungbo%27s_Eredo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Djenn ... er_407.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudano-Sahelian.

unfortunately i dont have enough time to post more pictures but i find it interesting that none of u seemed to have read the links in the previous posts because the would clearly talk about the architecture in this kingdoms and also the political structures and organisation

ps politburo west africa is mostly made of woodlands and rain forests with some grass savanahs and deserts. if u want to see a jungle u should head to central africa. so that out of the jungle statement dosent fly.

[Mod edit: Double posts make baby Jesus cry.]

[politburo player]

This mosque looks like the most advanced structure attempted out of the links you provided, but it still looks like it's made out of mud.

At the same time in history, other civilizations were working on projects like this:

[Potemkin]

You build structures out of the building materials you have access to. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there aren't that many quarries in Dakar. They had only mud to build with, so they build with mud. They did a pretty good job of it too.

It's also worth pointing out that the Chinese build most of their structures out of wood and, yes, mud. This is why very few buildings have survived in China from ancient times.

[politburo player]

You build structures out of the building materials you have access to. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there aren't that many quarries in Dakar. They had only mud to build with, so they build with mud. They did a pretty good job of it too.

To assume that building the massive cathedrals of Europe did not involve transporting materials great distances is incorrect. Ancient civilizations that used substandard materials did so because they did not know how to use anything else. As smart as the Chinese were, they were not masons. Having seen many of them them first hand, the level of engineering and know how required to build European cathedrals is unmatched anywhere else in the world IMO. European masons had a monopoly on building massive, elaborate structures that would last thousands of years. Any attempts to compare these structures to the mud mosques that the OP is referring to is absurd.

[Wolfman]

Who cares. You're trying to compare apples to oranges. [Mod note: Refrain from using slurs.]

[Kaspar]

Any attempts to compare these structures to the mud mosques that the OP is referring to is absurd.

Which is exactly what you're doing and exactly why everyone is criticizing you.

And anyways, just like what Potemkin was saying, there are a number of important environmental factors to consider when comparing European civilization with African civilization and deciding which one is 'greater.'

A major factor that comes to mind was that Africa does not have the mountain coverage that Europe has. Historically, many civilizations that you would define as being advanced began in mountain ranges. Compared to the vast, arid plains that make up much of Africa, mountains are much easier to live in and provide a place for peoples to develop before attempting to colonize naturally inhospitable plains. This partly explains why one of Sub-Saharan Africa's most European-esque civilizations began in the highlands of Ethiopia, where you will in fact find castles and impressive architecture. Do you think it's a coincidence that the Inca Empire was centered around the Andes, while every other part of South America remained practically uninhabited?

And then of course there is the obvious fact that much of Africa is tropical jungle, which is completely inhospitable for an advanced civilization.

[politburo player]

And anyways, just like what Potemkin was saying, there are a number of important environmental factors to consider when comparing European civilization with African civilization and deciding which one is 'greater.'

Nobody is calling any particular civilization 'greater'. From an architectural perspective, most ancient African structures are clearly nothing to brag about.

And then of course there is the obvious fact that much of Africa is tropical jungle, which is completely inhospitable for an advanced civilization.

Many countries in South America and SE Asia would resent that statement!

[Wolfman]

Nobody is calling any particular civilization 'greater'.

Except of course for the guy denying the existence of Sub-Saharan Civilization.

[Kaspar]

Nobody is calling any particular civilization 'greater'. From an architectural perspective, most ancient African structures are clearly nothing to brag about.

Oh, so now this is just an argument about what style of architecture is better.

Nice try

Many countries in South America and SE Asia would resent that statement!

Just because there are a few oddball exceptions doesn't prove that the jungles are a conducive environment to build civilizations in.

[Wolfman]

That depends on how you define Civilization.

[Igor Antunov]

The Mali and Songhai empires are noteworthy, and were certainly fully fledged imperial powers with developed economies, high political organization and vast power over their regions.

It is sad to consider that if Africa had been allowed to simply develop on it's own, if it hadn't been raped much like the middle east has been raped recently, we would have a far more stable and prosperous africa today.

[politburo player]

Oh, so now this is just an argument about what style of architecture is better.

Nice try

I think it is obvious that some cultures are too deeply rooted in ritual and mysticism to grasp certain concepts, including advanced architectural engineering.

[Potemkin]

I think it is obvious that some cultures are too deeply rooted in ritual and mysticism to grasp certain concepts, including advanced architectural engineering.

You mean like medieval Europe?