User Panel
|
Quoted:
I think he's googling stuff up right now, to avoid being embarrassed like that. Likewise, I tried to google some basic information up, and apparently Google has tampered with the results. I couldn't find any simple, basic information. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: I'll be happy to be Educated. Standing by to be informed. Facts please, not opinions. Likewise, I tried to google some basic information up, and apparently Google has tampered with the results. I couldn't find any simple, basic information. |
|
Quoted:
Medicine, hell they had trouble feeding large populations prior to the introduction of European agriculture. I once had a co-worker insist that the British Army took on and lost to Millions of Zulu during the Zulu wars. I countered that considering African and in particular Zulu farming techniques the area just couldn't have supported millions of Africans let alone millions of Zulu. I stated that the Zulu forces fielded actually numbered closer to 35-40,000. Needless to say, my former co-worker had little historical knowledge. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Granted, there was the Mali Empire... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire Didn't have much of an impact globally, though. Not in the way countries and empires in Europe and Asia did. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: I think he's googling stuff up right now, to avoid being embarrassed like that. Likewise, I tried to google some basic information up, and apparently Google has tampered with the results. I couldn't find any simple, basic information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire Didn't have much of an impact globally, though. Not in the way countries and empires in Europe and Asia did. Wagons? Roads? Iron? Stone masonry? Cement? Bricks? Architecture? I honesty don't know. Not presenting myself as an expert. I'm the type of guy that goes to museums to learn this stuff, just for fun. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
Holy shit. “European” agriculture? Lol. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Medicine, hell they had trouble feeding large populations prior to the introduction of European agriculture. I once had a co-worker insist that the British Army took on and lost to Millions of Zulu during the Zulu wars. I countered that considering African and in particular Zulu farming techniques the area just couldn't have supported millions of Africans let alone millions of Zulu. I stated that the Zulu forces fielded actually numbered closer to 35-40,000. Needless to say, my former co-worker had little historical knowledge. |
|
Quoted:
That was very late in History. Did Sub-Sahara Africa have Bronze armor and weapons? Domestication of Horses, swine, cattle, chickens, etc? Dairy products? Organized Agriculture? The Wheel? Wagons? Roads? Iron? Stone masonry? Cement? Bricks? Architecture? I honesty don't know. Not presenting myself as an expert. I'm the type of guy that goes to museums to learn this stuff, just for fun. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: I think he's googling stuff up right now, to avoid being embarrassed like that. Likewise, I tried to google some basic information up, and apparently Google has tampered with the results. I couldn't find any simple, basic information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire Didn't have much of an impact globally, though. Not in the way countries and empires in Europe and Asia did. Wagons? Roads? Iron? Stone masonry? Cement? Bricks? Architecture? I honesty don't know. Not presenting myself as an expert. I'm the type of guy that goes to museums to learn this stuff, just for fun. |
|
Quoted:
The Romans conquered Egypt AFTER it had been conquered by Alexander the Great. A Macedonian. Another white dude. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemaic dynasty after Alexander left. Cleopatra was the last descendant of the Ptolemies. She was white too. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
This assuming no external person would have ever visited and taken modern artifacts to give or sell or they would have not established any commerce with anyone outside the continent? The countries would probably have the borders set by the tribes' dominions instead of the artificial borders designed to keep enemy tribes within the same space, thus fighting each other. Wars would likely happen but not so frequently because they would not be artificially created. The way the tribes were "investing in technology" they would likely still be in their preliminary stages of hunter-gatherers. Also, if we assume that Romans were also considered "whites" and had never set any colonies, conquered Egypt, etc. Egypt might be still a local super-power. ETA: I wonder what Egyptians might have came up with. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemaic dynasty after Alexander left. Cleopatra was the last descendant of the Ptolemies. She was white too. By the way... the guy who unified the north and south was also of white ancestry? |
|
|
Quoted:
Countries? If a large powerful group formed it would likely engage in conquest. There is no reason to believe wars would be less frequent. You are leaving out the whole "Arab conquest of North Africa" bit. The Arabs pushed deep into Africa taking slaves and engaging in conquest. Arabs are also white, but not the Christian European whites the OP intended. Roman involvement was much more distant in time, consequently it is hard to see its effects. But the absence of Roman power allowed Arab Muslim expansion. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
This assuming no external person would have ever visited and taken modern artifacts to give or sell or they would have not established any commerce with anyone outside the continent? The countries would probably have the borders set by the tribes' dominions instead of the artificial borders designed to keep enemy tribes within the same space, thus fighting each other. Wars would likely happen but not so frequently because they would not be artificially created. If a large powerful group formed it would likely engage in conquest. There is no reason to believe wars would be less frequent. Quoted:
The way the tribes were "investing in technology" they would likely still be in their preliminary stages of hunter-gatherers. Also, if we assume that Romans were also considered "whites" and had never set any colonies, conquered Egypt, etc. Egypt might be still a local super-power. ETA: I wonder what Egyptians might have came up with. Roman involvement was much more distant in time, consequently it is hard to see its effects. But the absence of Roman power allowed Arab Muslim expansion. |
|
Quoted:
Kush had most of that stuff and conquered egypt. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: I think he's googling stuff up right now, to avoid being embarrassed like that. Likewise, I tried to google some basic information up, and apparently Google has tampered with the results. I couldn't find any simple, basic information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali_Empire Didn't have much of an impact globally, though. Not in the way countries and empires in Europe and Asia did. Wagons? Roads? Iron? Stone masonry? Cement? Bricks? Architecture? I honesty don't know. Not presenting myself as an expert. I'm the type of guy that goes to museums to learn this stuff, just for fun. |
|
Quoted:
Let's go back prior to that then. If not conquered, would Egypt be a super-power and what technologies it might have came up with? It's the only African country I can see would have any chance. By the way... the guy who unified the north and south was also of white ancestry? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This assuming no external person would have ever visited and taken modern artifacts to give or sell or they would have not established any commerce with anyone outside the continent? The countries would probably have the borders set by the tribes' dominions instead of the artificial borders designed to keep enemy tribes within the same space, thus fighting each other. Wars would likely happen but not so frequently because they would not be artificially created. The way the tribes were "investing in technology" they would likely still be in their preliminary stages of hunter-gatherers. Also, if we assume that Romans were also considered "whites" and had never set any colonies, conquered Egypt, etc. Egypt might be still a local super-power. ETA: I wonder what Egyptians might have came up with. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemaic dynasty after Alexander left. Cleopatra was the last descendant of the Ptolemies. She was white too. By the way... the guy who unified the north and south was also of white ancestry? |
|
|
Quoted:
Are you Racist? Yes or No. Tell the truth. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
|
Quoted:
Carthage Egypt Kush all might have developed interesting things. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This assuming no external person would have ever visited and taken modern artifacts to give or sell or they would have not established any commerce with anyone outside the continent? The countries would probably have the borders set by the tribes' dominions instead of the artificial borders designed to keep enemy tribes within the same space, thus fighting each other. Wars would likely happen but not so frequently because they would not be artificially created. The way the tribes were "investing in technology" they would likely still be in their preliminary stages of hunter-gatherers. Also, if we assume that Romans were also considered "whites" and had never set any colonies, conquered Egypt, etc. Egypt might be still a local super-power. ETA: I wonder what Egyptians might have came up with. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemaic dynasty after Alexander left. Cleopatra was the last descendant of the Ptolemies. She was white too. By the way... the guy who unified the north and south was also of white ancestry? Kush is interesting. It would probably depend on how its skirmishes with Egypt would end-up. One might finally take over the other and develop some interesting stuff. |
|
Quoted: Why is this a sensitive, hot button topic? Stop being emotional and post your information. View Quote Henry the navigator basically created a 2 generation jump in tech with the Spanish caravel. After 1500 it was all over for the rest of the world. The Portuguese then Spanish then British, etc. take turns siphoning off the rest of the world. Like ANY other culture would when given the chance. Europe was a pack of backwoods retards until the “sea people’s” crushing of the old world (Mesopotamia) gave Greece the chance to breathe around 700 BCE. They started right off from the architecture and knowledge of the Egyptians. This is well established. Rome took similar lessons and used a fantastic culture to conquer much of the western world. They handed the baton back to the Arab world when Rome died off. Europe went back to its backwoods retard witch doctor using bullshit save the Roman Catholic Church. Jared diamond and most historians understand human development through a number of factors. Domesticatable animals, available metals/materials, local predators, concentration of humans, etc. Same reasons for Egypt and native Americans(Mayans) were far far ahead of the whole world for a while. 80% of Europe lagged behind the leaders of the world till 1500. ETA: y’all can get back to your 88er circle jerk now. |
|
Quoted:
Kush was long gone well before Christ. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes |
|
Quoted:
this thread wasn't started to discuss the prolification of technology in ancient times View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So they would be on par with the Americas in the same situation? Yes or No. Tell the truth. I wish everybody could see it that way, unencumbered by their modern day hangups. |
|
Quoted: Does Carthage count? It was founded by Phoenicians (white foreigners?) Kush is interesting. It would probably depend on how its skirmishes with Egypt would end-up. One might finally take over the other and develop some interesting stuff. View Quote |
|
|
|
|
Quoted:
Until 1500 central/northern Europe was not rich or powerful or knowledgeable save for Rome’s day or Greece’s day. Henry the navigator basically created a 2 generation jump in tech with the Spanish caravel. After 1500 it was all over for the rest of the world. The Portuguese then Spanish then British, etc. take turns siphoning off the rest of the world. Like ANY other culture would when given the chance. Europe was a pack of backwoods retards until the “sea people’s” crushing of the old world (Mesopotamia) gave Greece the chance to breathe around 700 BCE. They started right off from the architecture and knowledge of the Egyptians. This is well established. Rome took similar lessons and used a fantastic culture to conquer much of the western world. They handed the baton back to the Arab world when Rome died off. Europe went back to its backwoods retard witch doctor using bullshit save the Roman Catholic Church. Jared diamond and most historians understand human development through a number of factors. Domesticatable animals, available metals/materials, local predators, concentration of humans, etc. Same reasons for Egypt and native Americans(Mayans) were far far ahead of the whole world for a while. 80% of Europe lagged behind the leaders of the world till 1500. ETA: y’all can get back to your 88er circle jerk now. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: Why is this a sensitive, hot button topic? Stop being emotional and post your information. Henry the navigator basically created a 2 generation jump in tech with the Spanish caravel. After 1500 it was all over for the rest of the world. The Portuguese then Spanish then British, etc. take turns siphoning off the rest of the world. Like ANY other culture would when given the chance. Europe was a pack of backwoods retards until the “sea people’s” crushing of the old world (Mesopotamia) gave Greece the chance to breathe around 700 BCE. They started right off from the architecture and knowledge of the Egyptians. This is well established. Rome took similar lessons and used a fantastic culture to conquer much of the western world. They handed the baton back to the Arab world when Rome died off. Europe went back to its backwoods retard witch doctor using bullshit save the Roman Catholic Church. Jared diamond and most historians understand human development through a number of factors. Domesticatable animals, available metals/materials, local predators, concentration of humans, etc. Same reasons for Egypt and native Americans(Mayans) were far far ahead of the whole world for a while. 80% of Europe lagged behind the leaders of the world till 1500. ETA: y’all can get back to your 88er circle jerk now. You should also apply for a refund on your schooling. Where did you go to college? How long was "Rome's Day". The Greeks? Phoenicians? Carthage? I saw Bronze Age swords in the London museum, which pre-dated the Roman conquest. Also, they had horses and chariots. Please cite where I was misinformed about the technological progress of sub-Saharan Africa. |
|
Quoted:
History is a bit more complex than that. Human migration to and from Africa is fairly vast. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
You should open your mind to learning about History, without all the racial baggage. To me, History is interesting and beautiful in its complexity. I wish everybody could see it that way, unencumbered by their modern day hangups. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So they would be on par with the Americas in the same situation? Yes or No. Tell the truth. I wish everybody could see it that way, unencumbered by their modern day hangups. |
|
hard to say say but I can guarantee you it wouldn't be half as fucked up as it is now.
also in this thread the closet racists conveniently out themselves. |
|
Quoted:
Until 1500 central/northern Europe was not rich or powerful or knowledgeable save for Rome’s day or Greece’s day. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Until 1500 central/northern Europe was not rich or powerful or knowledgeable save for Rome’s day or Greece’s day. Quoted:
They handed the baton back to the Arab world when Rome died off. Europe went back to its backwoods retard witch doctor using bullshit save the Roman Catholic Church. Quoted:
Jared diamond and most historians understand human development through a number of factors. |
|
Well they wouldn t have internet. That's a fact.
Considering that Africa is the lowest IQ continent, it would be shittier. Just a little shittier |
|
|
Lots of plump lions and not very many natives
A bunch of skinny bitches with long titles in National Geographic magazine |
|
Quoted:
Does Carthage count? It was founded by Phoenicians (white foreigners?) Kush is interesting. It would probably depend on how its skirmishes with Egypt would end-up. One might finally take over the other and develop some interesting stuff. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This assuming no external person would have ever visited and taken modern artifacts to give or sell or they would have not established any commerce with anyone outside the continent? The countries would probably have the borders set by the tribes' dominions instead of the artificial borders designed to keep enemy tribes within the same space, thus fighting each other. Wars would likely happen but not so frequently because they would not be artificially created. The way the tribes were "investing in technology" they would likely still be in their preliminary stages of hunter-gatherers. Also, if we assume that Romans were also considered "whites" and had never set any colonies, conquered Egypt, etc. Egypt might be still a local super-power. ETA: I wonder what Egyptians might have came up with. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemaic dynasty after Alexander left. Cleopatra was the last descendant of the Ptolemies. She was white too. By the way... the guy who unified the north and south was also of white ancestry? Kush is interesting. It would probably depend on how its skirmishes with Egypt would end-up. One might finally take over the other and develop some interesting stuff. |
|
Quoted:
You should understand that maybe people don't want the modern ideas of what is proper in California and New York. The same kind of modern views people like you would put on the savages of concurred lands View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So they would be on par with the Americas in the same situation? Yes or No. Tell the truth. I wish everybody could see it that way, unencumbered by their modern day hangups. |
|
|
Quoted:
That's why the original question is a bit flawed as it is hard to seperate the importance of Mediterranean trade and racial migrations from historic outcomes. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This assuming no external person would have ever visited and taken modern artifacts to give or sell or they would have not established any commerce with anyone outside the continent? The countries would probably have the borders set by the tribes' dominions instead of the artificial borders designed to keep enemy tribes within the same space, thus fighting each other. Wars would likely happen but not so frequently because they would not be artificially created. The way the tribes were "investing in technology" they would likely still be in their preliminary stages of hunter-gatherers. Also, if we assume that Romans were also considered "whites" and had never set any colonies, conquered Egypt, etc. Egypt might be still a local super-power. ETA: I wonder what Egyptians might have came up with. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemaic dynasty after Alexander left. Cleopatra was the last descendant of the Ptolemies. She was white too. By the way... the guy who unified the north and south was also of white ancestry? Kush is interesting. It would probably depend on how its skirmishes with Egypt would end-up. One might finally take over the other and develop some interesting stuff. |
|
Quoted:
This. Sadly, Africa is not isolated like Australia. So OP's question is moot. Since they are not isolated, thus for them to develop on their own unmolested is impossible. But the fact that even with constant interaction with other people, they still get stuck in the stone age is very telling. Same can be said of the native North/South Americans. I can only guess that the abundance of food source stymied their desire for advancement? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
History is a bit more complex than that. Human migration to and from Africa is fairly vast. |
|
Quoted:
Carthage Egypt Kush all might have developed interesting things. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This assuming no external person would have ever visited and taken modern artifacts to give or sell or they would have not established any commerce with anyone outside the continent? The countries would probably have the borders set by the tribes' dominions instead of the artificial borders designed to keep enemy tribes within the same space, thus fighting each other. Wars would likely happen but not so frequently because they would not be artificially created. The way the tribes were "investing in technology" they would likely still be in their preliminary stages of hunter-gatherers. Also, if we assume that Romans were also considered "whites" and had never set any colonies, conquered Egypt, etc. Egypt might be still a local super-power. ETA: I wonder what Egyptians might have came up with. Egypt was ruled by the Ptolemaic dynasty after Alexander left. Cleopatra was the last descendant of the Ptolemies. She was white too. By the way... the guy who unified the north and south was also of white ancestry? That area is known to be a rather important place in the development of civilization. It was quite well documented with carving and large stone buildings. The most interesting thing is how, or why, that technology never made it south of the Sahara. Australia and America, was isolated by Oceans. And yet, European explorers encountered Stone Age tribes when they got to Africa. Why? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So they would be on par with the Americas in the same situation? Yes or No. Tell the truth. I wish everybody could see it that way, unencumbered by their modern day hangups. |
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.