Why Europeans Colonized The World (And Not Someone Else)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 сер 2024
- Why did history unfold differently in different places? Why were Europeans able to dominate the world and not Native Americans? Stick around and find out!
Subscribe to our channel to view more videos like this one: goo.gl/Y9RH3v
Like the video if you enjoyed it and leave us your thoughts in the comments below!
Europeans called it the Age of Discovery, whereas for others it was more the age of colonization and theft. Upon arriving to new shores, Europeans were responsible for a lot of wrongdoings, but they were still outdone by diseases.
Furthermore, different environment greatly impacted different peoples. For example, Native Americans didn’t have horses and had to rely on llamas, which are not as adapted for human food production and warfare. When Europeans arrived, the indigenous people were going up against diseases and more advanced army.
In Africa, people were facing deadly animals who were preying on them daily. The deadliest of all were the most inevitable ones - mosquitoes. Malaria caused most of the passing away and also significantly slowed down the development of African civilization. It’s also responsible for the fact that Africa was the last continent to be colonized.
Now, let’s take a look at what happened in New Zealand some 1000 years ago. The same group of people split up between the island of New Zealand, becoming the Maori, and the Chatham Islands, becoming the Moriori.
They developed differently due to the resourcefulness of New Zealand and the lack of it for the Moriori. Once the Maori found out about them thanks to European explorers, they went over and slaughtered the Moriori, bringing an end to a peace-loving people.
Still, if you look behind in history, you’d expect China and Asia to do what Europeans achieved. So, what stopped them? Well, China was nearly always unified throughout its history, thanks to its geographical layout - unlike Europe, the land is not split up into islands and peninsulas with mountain chains.
One Chinese emperor was enough to put a stop to exploring the world, even though China ruled the Indian Ocean. In Europe however, Christopher Columbus had the luxury of going around asking different kings for funding before Spain finally agreed.
The rest is history.
Follow us on Twitter: goo.gl/WpwGLg
Like us on Facebook: goo.gl/atnWNh
Welcome to Tooky History, we’re making videos about people who led astonishing lives and who you probably don't know a lot about!
On Thursdays, we’ll greet you with a new video about a new person. Hope you enjoy it!
Sound effects from www.zapsplat.com
Hey, everybody! I know it’s been a bit of a wait, but welcome to our first video that’s not about a specific historical figure, so please leave a comment and tell us your thoughts!
We hope you enjoyed it and we wish you all the very best in 2019. Happy holidays!
Chatham is pronounced chat ham
one of the best and most underrated channels, they shoukd quit history classes in school and just watch tooky histors XD
I think it will be a best idea if you create video title "why china did not colonize the world ?" Instead of native American
Likewise
Nice summary of guns germs and steel but it's still not the whole picture. Evolution takes place in humans and some humans did become "better" in certain ways.
You sound like a drunk uncle trying to explain the world to his nephews and nieces at the family party.
😆😆
Congratulations, you are now misinformed by your drunk uncle
he is crazy
He sounds like a young Joe Swanson
The actual reason why China didn't colonize is because they were already wealthy and plentiful. The Europeans started colonizing in search for routes to the east for their riches, especially since the ottomans took control of the silk route which pretty much kickstarted the exploring.
More like after Africa showed them how wealthy they were while Europe was on its knees from the plague. Mansa Musa literally crashed economies giving away some of his wealth on his pilgrimage.
@@LetsJustTalk... except that, well, he didn't go to China. In what way is mansa musa's wealth in any way relevant to China's wealth, which was accumulated through the silk road?
@Mr Football yes I know this but that is kind of irrelevant in regards to colonizing places...
@Mr Football
Let me just start off with stating that Spain didn't exist yet during the rule of Mansa Musa. It consisted of the Kingdom of Aragon Kingdom of Leon Kingdom of Navarra and Kingdom of Castille.
Secondly the first time Portugal went on sub saharan exploration under Prince Henry the navigator was about 100 years after Mansu Musa's reign and they actually set sail in search for a southern route to the Indies rather than searching for the Mali empire.
Thirdly, the Europeans kickstarted the search for the Indies due to the collapse of the Mongol empire and the rise of the Ottomans which made trade through the Silk route more dangerouse and again had nothing to do with Mansa Musa (who had already died well before this).
Also, Africa didn't show Europe wealth as it had already seen that during the Roman Empire and the Byzantines were also wealthy. Mansa Musa and the Mali empire were the largest manufacturers of gold causing Europeans to trade goods for gold in Timbuktu which has nothing to do with exploration and colonization.
Nuff said.
@Mr Football When Columbus set sail to the Indies there was already evidense of the world being a globe (Egyptians already knew this a lot earlier) When the Portugese went south they went in Search for the Indies since trade with African kingdoms had already been established through timbuktu and the Trading settlements they set up along the coast were set up for slave trade. And you kinda contradicted that trade between Africa and Europe started in the late 1500s yourself by making the Carthage argument.
In any way everything you said is inevitably irrelevant to the exploration of Europeans during the age of exploration since the Mali empire had no contribution to it. Just the fact the they were wealthy and traded with Europeans is no constructive argument as to why the Europeans started exploring the world, especially since they did that in search for trade routes to the east, not to Africa.
Nuff Said.
“China was nearly always unified”
Not always unified but always unified after separation. That it self is amazing
@@adohmnail6445 quotes indicate sarcasm. The joke is that China was basically never unified.
I stopped there. Couldn’t believe anything past that.
He said "nearly".
Some of the biggest wars were fought in China.
Wait, Natives never fought each other or stole or enslaved others right?
Africans never conquered other tribes, enslaved them, sold them into slavery.
Wow I was so misinformed.
Yes, but these tribes had equal technology. Europeans had horses and diseases and guns. It wasn't a fair fight since Columbus came. It would have been more fair if America was 'discovered' before Europeans had livestock and iron tools and weapons, for example 6000 years ago, when they just started to breed livestock.
@@milekrizman yeah but without all those advances in technology (through endless war). Europeans wouldn't have been able to build good enough ships to cross the ocean.
@@milekrizman that's BS. The Aztecs and Incas were incomparably more advanced than the hunter gatherer tribes of the Americas. They used to raid and enslave them all the time.
@@milekrizman Indians weren't resistant to flu, measles and pox precisely because they didn't discover and learn animal husbandry for thousands of years. This are all diseases that came from animals when humans first started keeping them under the same roof. What ultimately killed Indians was the inability to change their way of life. Instead of domesticating the north american horse, contracting some diseases and immunizing against them, they hunted it to extinction for easy meat.
The author of the video does mention some atrocities of the natives, in the case of the Maori. But he says it in the way that implies that he finds it evident that any group of people would behave like that (except those who forgot the warfare...). I'm not sure if I got the point of the part about the Maori but it definitely emphasises this being a natural thing of the human character (of human societies).
It is always difficult to choose which specific information you should put in* a history lesson where you mention historical guilts and merits. I guess he wants us to not forget the character of the colonizations (nationalism and lying about one's history, it happens) but in the same time he finds it a matter of course that other populations/civilizations were already massacring and enslaving each other already.
*In Russia, they've closed a gulag museum to the public
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11481113/Russias-only-gulag-museum-faces-closure.html
Because Europe is absolutely the best place in Midgame, Bunch of coal and iron, easily defensible positions, and well connected when you discover medieval shipbuilding. Shit in an early game and resource-poor in late, but if you manage to take a large part of America and Africa in mid you will be set for the rest of the game.
fancy playing some civ
Europe op please nerf
That's very CIV to me.... THAT's not how real history works. I'm sorry but please try again
@@clarksorenes7106 psst! Psst! He meant it as a joke :)
Europe used to be full of wolves and bears, but we killed them all.
Because we had better marching songs
Nope we had Jews financing it
@@whitepolicy9120 i bet you have jew dna in you hahahahahahahahaahah
@@yourworstnightmare1488 ok? That's just good. Stupid imbecile
When your guns are aight and your cannons are a little better but you're marching to the British army theme and the whole squad gets lit...and then the enemy gets lit in a different way
Kuomintang ftw
your channel is great man rly love it found it a few days ago .. i think if u could do vids on a weakly basis it will rly boust your presence on the platform this channel deserves way more than 32k subs
So Europeans didn't have Bears, Wolves and Ice cold winters?
Northern Europe did.
@@ebimd1851 ya the poor north was a crap shoot till late midgame
Jonathan Muertter haahahahah what are you talking about the whole reason we won ww2 was because of the Soviet winter
@@r.o.b8728 ya thats the real winter. Ther is a reason russia was always starving
And developed through its own slave trade not europe tho that's asia so they also had access to trade from yellow river
Prepper TECH be ready um no the Germans only reached close to Moscow which is in Europe and no Russia is starving because of transportation of food because it’s so big
Oh these comments are gonna be juicy.
so juicy
@Faiq Toppa yeah me too
J U I C Y
@Random Luck k
@Proger13 10 Have Europeans ever built a powerful nation that didnt implode on itself in 600 years? Or have some major reduction in borders? Or rely heavily on imaginary money systems to throttle their economies?
Well, it was less that China was always united, it was more that they had taken all valuable land and had no easy route of conquest left open. To the south, shitty jungle that could easily become the grave of a superpower, to the north a bunch of steps with no real resources, to the west a desert. So for China there was no easy route to expand anymore, and more importantly no nation that was their equal....except maybe Rome during it's glory days. There where only tributaries and nations to far away to be tributarys. So China basicaly went like. "We got all the good land. Noone else comes even close to us... why would we want to conquer lessers civiliasation if we can just get tribute by asking."
Meanwhile in Europa everyone had Rivals and was desperatly looking for a way to get the upper edge. So they where willing to fund some high risk gambles, like sending someone over into the open sea. Or arround africa in the hopes that they actually find something of worth.
Yes, Europe had necessity to "survive" its opponents while china was just chilling and making nap, not really worrying
@Lance Svensson Grave of a superpower in the sense that a superpower could waste a ton of resources into it without much gains and suffer for it. For example AMerica and Vietnam. Also Prussia had a bunch of resources needed for German hegemonie. You can't rise from nothing to everything. You need something.
If you think the forests of Europe are comparable to the jungles of South East Asia, you're sorely mistaken.
@Lance Svensson Apples to oranges. Southern China at the time was a sweltering hellscape of disease from the POV of the Chinese, and the cost-to-benefit ratio wasn't great for developing it when you could invest resources elsewhere. It was developed over centuries, but there wasn't anything like the sort of incentive the Prussians had.
Sounds like capitalism if you ask me.
Great video!
Just found your channel, this video is very funny, great humor in your videos.
One thing slightly mentioned here was how various countries were tribal. Before the Europeans arrived tribes in both the Americas and Africa opposed each other and were willing to trade with the Europeans to get weaponry to fight their traditional enemies. The slave trade was used by the African tribes to get rid of their enemies and to arm themselves off the proceeds. It was tribalism that allowed the Europeans to take over in various nations.
I
You have said a bunch of nothing. Everyone was tribal, including the Europeans who were always fighting each other... 25 people agree with you... Truly disconcerting.
@@ministryoftruth8499 it would depend on what stage of society Europe you're talking about for them to count as tribe.
If there's roads, buildings, and a banking system the civilization can't be called a tribal society.
@@idavisband Another bunch of nothing.
tribalism noun
trib·al·ism | \ˈtrī-bə-ˌli-zəm \
Definition of tribalism
1 : tribal consciousness and loyalty
especially : exaltation of the tribe above other groups
2 : strong in-group loyalty
Source: Merriam-Webster dictionary
There were empires in Africa. It wasn’t all tribal. Some empires resisted for a long while too.
You think this is history? You're just throwing out random theories as to why sub-saharan africans and native americans were so unsuccessful without any data or further argumentation to back it up.
Furthermore the whole thing with how Australians notfied the Maori about the Moriori seems highly historically inaccurate. I know you try to simplify things but this version of things seems ridiculous
Thanks for pointing this out. It feels like nothing he says is actually backed up by any literature. I mean, he thinks that other nation leaders just said NO to the idea of expanding their influence and that is the whole reason????? That is ridiculous to the point of stupidity! And with this very shallow and short sighted way of presenting the topic, this video attracts all the dim wits who spam the comment section with "Cus da white race is da supreme race duh!".
I came here to maybe find a serious discussion of this topic. But instead I found a kind of parody and a bunch of white supremacists.
@@somedudeok1451 I think the funniest part of this entire comments section is the sheer amount of people who cannot live up to their supposed 'birthright'.
Lol I can't wait until I meet someone at work who learned history through a UA-cam cartoon channel
@@greenbrickbox3392 well there are some really good history channels on youtube, not this one though.
Videos idea was Africans did not have time and chance to invent new things ,because they were busy surviving in wild. And Asians had everything they needed and Asia was most the time under one rule and peace. And their empires have always fallen because they were too big to keep together. Maori and Maori was example people that are pro violence will kill those that are not for right benefits. And same time if someone lacks something they will take it with force if needed. And Native Americans were busy to fight each other and lacked animals to push their food production and that took time from inventing new things. Europe were very easy terrain to defend for each other and had lots of little nations in small space so Europeans seeked lands and islands and new trade routes for surviving in such of small space surrounded by hostile nations. And Europe was lacking materials to produce their inventions that they invented because they had time, because wars were so slow in terrain and they had time because that make better defensive weapon and inventions to turn war. And when Europeans saw their inventions were superior to others and others had more resources than other European nation they decided to not fight each other so often than old days.
Loved the narration 😜
Why didn’t the Vikings develop advanced ships and spread out and beat empires found nations and lend themselves out as elite fighting forces? Cold land harsh weather and difficult land to farm. They had to learn to get along and live together peacefully.
🤣🤣😂😂
lol
You are talking as if its so easy lol
africa was like that because of the sahara that was a big wall for communication
now china is going to take africa....
The belt and road is how
*”Oh, oh oh, oohh oohh”*
@@Tsukiko.97 i know but the problem is that china are stealing lands from our mother africa
Justin Y, because every wester nation after ww1 decided colonialism was bad and they threw Africa to the wolves and SA/Rhodesia along with it
@@TheRealRusDaddy world war 2 actually. Thr british empire grew after world war 1
now Africa is taking over Europe with the deportation of refugees.
2:20 Europeans: *This time for Africa*
no u
Now time of africa after 10 or 30 year
No europe to for asians
Does Carthage count?
This entertaining as hell and educational.... ..and super funny!👍👍👍👍
I love your presentation funny and on point.
Because Europe is best
THE BEST OF THE BEST
Well.
We are so great that we actually pay Africans and Arabs to colonize us nowadays.
@Albert The Scientist Sad but true.
Pølcifer Pøffer Colonize? I don’t think my mother is trying to colonize Sweden
@@plciferpffer3048 That is the product of the weak among us
A couple of really important things you left out (and yes, yes, I know in such an oversimplified, eight and a half minute video, a LOT is going to be left out, but these two things really are significant enough they should have been put in). First, one other thing holding Africa back was simple geography. The continent is huge, with abundant resources, but one thing it doesn't have many of are great natural harbors, and navigable rivers. That makes a HUGE difference in pre-industrial times, when it was always much cheaper and easier to move people and goods over water. Africa simply has far fewer good harbors and navigable rivers than Europe has, despite being so much larger. This makes developing advanced civilizations enormously more difficult, because it's so much harder to move goods and people around.
The second thing pertains to Asia. For centuries Asia, specifically China, had been far more advanced. Technologically, Europe RAPIDLY overtook China, however, beginning in about the mid-fifteenth century. The reason for this is the printing press. Like so many other inventions, it had been developed in China first. But whereas it spread like wildfire in Europe, once it had been invented (which Gutenberg seems to have done independently), but it stalled in China and Korea, despite appearing centuries earlier. The reason was the different writing systems. Logographic writing systems, like Chinese characters demand the production of thousands, or even tens of thousands of different printing types just to start up a printing operation. Alphabetic writing systems, on the other hand, can be established with just a few hundred duplicates of a small number of characters. This makes the initial startup cost of setting up a print shop orders of magnitude less expensive, and facilitated the spread of printing all over Europe. This triggered a cascade effect in the spread of knowledge, as a well as a feedback loop. When books had to be laboriously copied by hand, they were slow and expensive to produce, and cost a LOT. So few people could afford them, and this limited the demand for literacy, and knowledge was confined to a tiny, literate class (in Europe, for centuries, almost exclusively the clergy). Printing made books cheap and abundant, and this increased the demand for literacy in society as a whole, as more people could afford books, and investing in education made more economic sense. The increased number of literate people increased the demand for more books, and this caused more printing presses to be built to meet the rising demand (and more schools to spread literacy and education), and this created a positive feedback loop. With an ever-expanding number of literate, and educated people in European society, the rapid exchange of ideas among educated people sparked more and more innovation and invention, and Europe definitively surpassed Asia in science and technology within just a few generations.
add another thing for military technology had china not have the mongols and the steppe up north the chances of a chinese nation state colonising the world wouldve been higher, the reason is that we see western europe dominating the world, I theorise geography had something to do with it ie the more eastern european nations never colonised and were cavalry based while once you get more west the incentive for infantry increases due to the fact horses become less useful in rough terrain, this means more infantry technology, on the other hand china while also posessing that nice geography has the mongols forcing them to focus more on cavalry to defeat cavalry since the mongols dont typically have to fight pitched battles they can just run away, this disincentivises infantry in favour of cavalry and finally, china had never been a sea based nation it had always been more connected to land than to sea, while the british isles are well isles, and spain and portugal have large sea borders and have mountanous terrain protecting them from france, add to that the importance of the strait they have down south and you can see the incentive for a navy
As an asian I can confirm this
That is very insightful comment. Thank you.
India and the Middle East also had alphabetic writing systems. Why didn’t the printing press spark literacy and innovation over there?
@@theorangecoco they had innovation of their own you need to learn of them
😂“Wait a sec, I don’t feel like we’ve isolated ourselves enough here, let’s go further”
One thing I've read as well is seasons shaped cultures. If you had to harvest and plan for a winter it taught independence and structure. This isn't just a pro European thing only, you also see it in Asia as well. Very structured in Japan and Korea.
Very well. Then why didn't it work in Russia and in amongst Native Canadians and Northern Natives of USA?
Because we had invented a thingy called the wheel and that we can have animals help us farm which produces more food which in turn means more people and more technology and so on.
But still if your maximum movement speed is limited to a human's walk then a wheel won't do you much good. :p
And wheel isn't a "European" invention lol, why would you even mention it? Even ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians knew of the wheel (for chariots, carts). A wheel is a pretty human invention in general.
@@Ivanus59 Yet the natives had not 'invented' it nor animal husbandry, two basic things a society once needed to evolve. The wheel is pretty damn important so that's why i mentioned it. Native societies had reached their "tech cap". Their societies could not have advanced any further.
Fraz
China did everything you just said and failed, Tooky explains.
@@snowhole2625 lol, his comment basically explained 1% of what the video already explained. :]
The natives in the Americas made wheels also along with the people's in Asia who actual had the animals to use them effectively which they did
I believe one of the factors is "choice". Europeans saw an opportunity and chose take it, which led them to dominated World Stage.
Whiles the Chinese had the same opportunity and could have easily done the same things that Europeans did, but instead chose a state isolationism and refused to interaction both in land and sea with the rest of the World.
One of the most sensible comments I've read so far 👏🏾
ambition and europe was just well connected to each other than other isolatated societies which makes you wonder how lucky is europe in terms of georgraphy they have a lot of connection before better yet the roman empire really help europe rise through the ranks of civilization.
Colonization is not a positive type of interaction though... The colonized nations are still suffering the consequences of centuries of colonization.. European interference is still present til Today... I find it always hilarious that in the modern days China is the one that's vilified for wanting to do what the Europeans did and still do..
@@emojicaptain7285 Spell much?
I watched another video that explained that because of the lack of unity in Europe and the proximity of the many kingdoms lead to European kingdoms being in fear of being conquered by one another. This fear motivated the kingdoms to advance their own prosperity, resources, and technology through exploration. China who didn’t have any competition was sitting pretty and prosperous and didn’t have a necessary reason to expand. My theory is the Chinese emperor was afraid that exploring too far would bring doom and thus took on the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” mentality.
It was..... entertaining.... Keep up the good work.
not what i wanted, but still smth thanks for the video !
It’s always Geography.
Now you wish you were listening in Geo class, now don’t you?
geography is destiny since the united states success of becoming a superpower was due to it's geography
jacondo gaming brain4breakfast viewer?
@@amarjitsaggu7869 yes why he brought more to this concept
Native Americans had the same geography but didn't become a super power. Geography becomes encoded as genetics over the generations. You could say its all environmental factors if you also include the environment of the past generations, thousands or even millions of years ago@@jacondo2731
Jake Dee You’re right. It not only geography but the geography of North America allowed the new country of the United States that was expanding on it to develop into a superpower
Most Inaccurate shit I’ve heard in a while
Whats your reasoning Martinez boy
For example 6:52 China was constantly splitting into dynasties ALOT.
@@jaidenmartinez4359 Each couple of centuries that isn't alot the Yuan dynasty lasted 100 years the Ming 280 years the last Qing lasted 270 years that is alot of years for each of them and they are the last 3 dynasties
He was right about diseases and alike wasn't he?
@@abyssstrider2547 Not really, Europe was swarming with malaria but in the middle ages christian monks went to dry out and deforest a lot of land to make farms. Granted, you couldn't dry out wetland so easily in Africa because you either need it or the rain season undermines the effort.
Rly enjoyed this video
great vid
2:50 Reminder: Europe in fact did have lions
No it didn't it had dogs and wolf like animals. It also had Horses. Lions are only native to Sub-Saharan Africa.
Shotty ua-cam.com/video/3F2_LHhyzqw/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/AjPlKUGmjTs/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/L0ohQGEnovY/v-deo.html
@@mrmister1657 Yup. Europe had its fair share of epidemics too, like the bubonic plague. Horses died off in North America, where they originally evolved, right around the time native americans arrived from Asia. This video wasn't really informative; more like a subjective persuasion speech.
@@XXXShottyThottyXXXYt Rome had lions very early on, and they are in Europe
@@Daniellasanche those are brought over from Afrika. That’s why Lions are often associated with Afrika.
There are a lot of answers to this question. This video toutched on some good ones but I believe the Europeans were hungry for wealth, had the drive to expand, and had the means to do so...
They also got into competition with each other over who could become the wealthiest and most powerful.
that last point lol people had 'social media' and status powers for Likes even back then
The Industrial Revolution had a pretty bloody big impact on the efficacy of European colonization efforts during the latter part of the 18th & the 19th .Century. Talk about bringing guns to a knife fight…
Fortuna audaces iuvat (Fortune favours the bold)
Became Wealth and powerful by inflicting suffering to people, stealing lands, arts works and natural resources and committing genocide and slavery business.
I never comment on UA-cam videos but wow this was really good
Excellent!! Thank you
Alright video I guess.
Fair point that China could well have been a colonial empire. It really was an 'internal view' that meant they never went far beyond the territory of the Han peoples. They were extremely numerous of course and it is a huge country, and a pretty united one too, unlike India (which was very rich and also populous, but deeply divided along religious lines and with complex dynastic politics and struggles).
I highly recommended viewers look up "Great Divergence", which is the academic key-word of sorts for writing about why Europe and NOT China became the dominant force in the world.
It was all about competition, Europe had plenty, China had none most of the time...
Giannis Kos that's exactly what i thought, why colonize if you are fine where you are?
The division of Europe was the key to its success
@@joanmasdeu4600 And its complex mountainous terrain with lots of isolated pockets brought its inevitable division
Most success is due to competition. Think about celebrities, politicians, musicians, athletes, etc. they all see other people doing things and say “I’m going to do that but better” while China had nobody to compete with, nobody to outdo China and further encourage them to do more.
The Mongols would have dominated the entire world if Genghis Khan's sons hadn't fought with one another. They conquered more land and killed more people than anyone else in history. Genghis Khan was a tactical genius, absolutely brutal, but a genius.
It‘s not like there were no dangerous animals in Europe, but we killed all those.
That we were not united helped as in the way that we were always competiting against each other.
The most successful lands are those, which give you enough struggle, so that you need to improve, but also enough possibilities so you can cope with it.
They are signifactly worse in africa
Name an animal ill name a Larger or mor dangerious one in africa
Its actually seems you didnt kill them all you out hunted the limited amount of prey
So most of them starved then you killed the remaining few
To many prey items in africa.
And hunting is more risky a scrapped knee is deadlier in africa
@@preppertechnicianee6013 and also, Africans fought with each other all the time before colonization.
But not so much during B.C. Times.The fighting started in the medieval times, conflicts skyrocketed though. A lot of advancements came as well, some societies in Africa even had actual plumbing prior to colonization. The British were shocked to find things they themselves hadn't even discovered or adapted yet. I truly think that given enough time, Africans would have advanced. At least West Africa, because Africa is a huge freaking place.
@@mixtapemania6769
Yup the main issue was diseases.
It seems africa was fairly advanced in c sections having higher survival rates then europe
Use of sterilization ect
It seems africa was taking a different tech tree
The devopment of the blast furnace didnt happen instead they had the hottest furnaces in the world 2000
But is was a different style of bloomery
East africa
As well from asian trade was developing
Prepper TECH be ready I’ll name the most dangerous of them all, a person with intent to kill you. Just like entire nations in Europe did.
I'm no history major but this seemed wildly over simplified and inaccurate. Also you jumped all over the time line made the video very sloppy
It is true and accurate. Let me just ask you one simple question. Why are the world speak English. Two reason Frist because of British colonization around the globe/world and second American bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki which that time was the most powerful country
@@ericwang1036 Well technicly German had most influence in terms of Language around the World.
Germanstates(Prussia,Bayern,Austria,Switz,Northern,western,)
Netherland
Scandi
and English are all German languages.
And Europeans are just more developed because its harder to life in Europe. Spring Sommer Fall Winter. Weather like Storms Icerain Snow Europeans.
Its all started with the Wheel. African didnt had Wheel same for Southamericans or the Middleeast
@@ericwang1036 uh most of the world spoke English prior to the Bombings. English speaking is solely because of the Brits and their Navy which helped them colonize 1\4th of the world.
@@ericwang1036 You're just painfully wrong, smh... Those two you named are cities, not a country. Second, Japan wasn't the most powerful country in the world either. Third, English is very globalized but not to the point "the whole world speaks it" and its not even that big because of Britain but because of the USA, the only superpower in the world (research it)
Australian sailors: we found some islands
Maori: looks like meats Back on the menu boys
Other Maori
Bud we just had kangaroo
Lmao yup
@Apeman Commeth Say that to Mansa Musa hahahaha
@Lucas Rush Look up the mali empire
The internet is the innovation of information it's the dictionary 3 point o or something
I take it you've read "Guns, Germs, And Steel" by Jared Diamond?
I believe you mean "Germs, Germs, Germs, Germs, Germs, Guns, Germs, Germs, Steel, Germs, and did I mention Germs?"
Dont forget "Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed", also by Jared Diamond.
@adam west It wasn't an accident but most of the death was. Europe became the best because of Ottoman greed which blockaded trade, disunion which led to ruthless internal competition, and ideological openness as compared to the rest of the world. Islam(represented by the Ottomans) closed off new technology leading to major military downfalls, India was too fragmented, China was to isolated to care enough about innovation in the serious way that Europe was. Africa was blocked off by the Sahara as well as having terrible geography.
Finally.
ALSO, China broke up a LOT of times.
Europe was never a single nation either. Also the Mongols created the biggest empire of all time. Of ALL TIME.
@@violet-trash No, Great Britian was larger.
@@h1story643 Prior to the rise of British Empire, the Mongolian Empire was the biggest in modern history
@Ivan Baez Mongolian Empire was largest *CONTINENTAL* Empire, while Great Britain was largest *MARITIME* and *COLONIAL* Empire. 😎😎
Doesn't matter, Europe have the same religion witch united it enough to stop the Ottoman Empire from conquest.
Otherwise division helped Europe evolve. Competition was a significant factor.
Liked and subscribed
I'm very pleased with your description on Native history.
Another problem with Africa is the lack of farmland. An African farmer has to constantly move from place to place just to grow crops.
@Pecu Alex Not just that, but the soil in Africa was already of poor quality.
@@jessegoodfellow6188 Many European colonists were able to set up decent farms due to their technology.
Alas, modern day Africans refuse to adapt to those ways, instead cutting down the few ways they have for creating, or sustaining, any sort of farming.
@@dutchpatriot17 Yes, with their technology, technology that Africa didn't have easy access to. Requiring an already existing infrastructure.
@@dutchpatriot17 "refuse" you are wrong mate ,african governments do not care about agriculture and europe is exporting cheap subsidized food that make local farmers out of business .
@@jessegoodfellow6188 Pretty sure Egypt already had a pretty prosperous society prior to most civilized life on Europe.
In short:
Some Chinese man said “no”, resulting in China not exploring the world, and then a European guy bored everyone to death till he could go to America, but everyone else got so jealous that they joined him.
H I S T O R Y
@Proger13 10 today Chinese have just landed a rover on the dark side of the Moon,
Basicly nothing this video claims is backed up by literature. And with this shallow and overly simple presentation of the topic come all the white supremacist dim wits that spam the comments with "Da white race is da superior race". I know the author of this video is trying to be funny, but it just ends up being sad.
loveyour voice is hillarious for this
This is awesome
All clear now. How Cortez with 500 men won with advanced Aztec empire? Because lama. 😂
mr nikt actually the aztecs defeated the Spanish for a long time until the disease kicked in. The llama analogy was to show the lack of livestock in the new world.
They created division among the Aztec people. They did not take them head on, they couldn't
@@RHR199X not in the initial engagements. It took them resorting to asymmetric warfare to begin winning
@The Canadian Crusader yep
I believe the reason why native Americans were primitive because the lack of trade networks not beast of burden.
Thanks for putting it bluntly. You got yourself a subscriber.
Good video
I enjoyed the hell out of this
“Guns, Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond is a must read for anyone with an interest in this subject.
what about India? That does not play into Jared Diamonds hypothesis in that book.
@@vesputia Can you elaborate? What is it about India that doesn’t fit with Jared Diamond’s book?
@@brido88 Indians shared immunity to diseases such as smallpox that killed off native people in America.
@@ves5080 google it.
It’s a garbage book
Also Europe experienced many advanced civilizations that brought new ideas to the nations to they made contact, Greek and Roman civilizations was passed to the Successor Kingdoms that followed the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Renaissance brought the Italian renaissance which led to the beginning of new ideas, human rights and astronomical advantage on the rest of the world. You don't need to be united to dominate, you need good basic for a civilization such great ideas and technologies, wisdom. Europe really was unique throughout its history thanks to the many advanced civilization that shaped its destiny
Much of those ideas were from other parts of the world through the silk route , one has to look no further than the house of wisdom in Baghdad with the likes of Al khwarizmi ( translated in greek to Al gorimi which eventually became the word algorithm you can thank this guy for al gabr which became algebra) , Chinese inventions such as paper, gunpowder , minds such as Aryabhatta in India who developed the concept of zero , Ibn Khaldun whose works indirectly affected Adam Smith and was also far ahead of his time ( ua-cam.com/video/8baR8u-Wf3A/v-deo.html ) , all great ideas and inventions are a result of mixing of multiple ideas and a free exchange of thought among variety of people , so calling Europe special is a narrow look at history.
@@thelakeman2538 Nah you misunderstood me. Unless you know another country who brought such amount of cultural and scientific features to the world called "Westernization" if you have rights to criticize your government is thanks to "Demokratia" if you learn math its because of "Aritmos" if you have a judicial problem its thanks to the "CORPUS IURUS CIVILIS" of Justinian I and his historian Tribonius. If you can print something its thanks to Johannes Gutenburg i could go on. No major achievements were so important as the western brought and if you can't understand it its your problem. Deny as long as you want but its the truth.
Well you can thank Arabs and Indians for modern numerals , good luck figuring out maths with roman numerals and without zero , you can thank Ibn Khaldun for modern economics and the science of history, Chinese had developed early block printing and this would be brought by Marco Polo to Europe , also good luck good luck printing things on I don't know parchment because paper was a Chinese invention , then you've gunpowder , also without zero and algebra you aren't gonna have science and computers . Yes there are many great thoughts from Europe such as democracy , liberty , human rights , etc but calling one civilization "special" is disingenuous this is why I don't like some people who call their civilization special like Chinese , Indians and Arabs , when we're on the topic you want to know of the reasons why the Chinese didn't want to expand further and colonise , it was because they had too much pride behind their ass , they saw themselves as the "middle kingdom" or "Gongzhou" they had too much pride to say that they were good enough without the outside world and closed their country , we all know what happened from there.
@@thelakeman2538 Saying that Ibn Khaldun started history and Economics is waaay too much. He was ahead of his time on some things but his River People/Plains People model is anti-civilisational neopaganism that together with Al-Ghazali still looms large over the Muslim world as anti-philosophy and anti-civilisational. The Byzantine court had, in the 8th century, golden coloured lions in the court that were powered by under-floor water-driven turbines that would cause them to 'roar' when a cord was pulled. The modern depiction of Byzantium as decaying and anti-science is a contrivance by the Anglo-Dutch-Venetian oligarchial faction of history, because they hate the Christian Imperium, as they cant rule it financially. Once you understand the structure of their propaganda you can see their anti-platonic, anti-Russian anti-German (HRE) and most of all..anti-Byzantine bias in context. For the record I am an Anglo so Im not saying this out of nativism, I regard English history as being split into pre- and post oligarchy selves.
The muslim conquest of iberia also boosted the age of discovery in the peninsula since they left many naval knowledge
Horses are originally native to the Americas. They died out many years ago and were reintroduced by Europeans.
Inaccuracies in this video is incredible 😂
How about listing them? I'm really curious
Incredible on a massive scale 😂
@@karrey2706 Well, my question still stands .Would you please do me the favour of telling me what the inaccuracies are?
no, not the demise of the world but the enlightenment of the world.
Finer word for demise. "We are gonna enlighten you to death! "
@@harpe9415 so? Atleast they would be free.
@@harpe9415 you destroyed their culture and civilization because it was different. You are evil if you defend this
@@arawn1061 Defend what? I am Swedish, we sure as fucking hell didn't destroy any native american cultures. And they weren't "destroyed" because they were different, but because they were weak and easy targets.
@@arawn1061 They were constantly warring amongst each other. Some tribes being cannibals.
Fun fact: before the 21st century the Western most point Chinese forces had ever claimed was the Eastern shore of the Caspian sea in 90s A.D. That record was broken last decade. Took them a sweet time
That was awsom !!!!
If only Jared Diamond knew how many vloggers he would inspire with his "Guns Germs and Steel"
Guns germs and steel is absolute garbage
When you talk about Spain on the video you should talk about Portugal
Portugal was the first european country to start colonisation
@@felipemilian178 lol spain is a joke for us, europeans. Got conquered by arabs. What a joke
No
@@eishitsukasa3613 Portugal was also conquered by the moors
@@mitonaarea5856 why?😕😕😕
@Vanessa Mane 🤣🤣🤣
*Because of capitalism!* Well, specifically capitalism styled competition.
Europeans were constantly competing with each other; culturally, politically, economically, and militarily. This competition gave them a leg up on technology around the Renaissance era, and motivation to explore, trade, and colonize to "keep up with the Joneses (Spanish)."
China in contrast, was like, "I have everything I need. Why would I need to improve the perfection of my empire."
19th Cent China: "Oh.... Oh that is why...."
So it's not capitalism but *competition*
Like I mentioned above, the Europeans lucked out in that the Spanish found a mountain of silver in Potosi which is today part of Bolivia. Silver was in short supply in Europe thus economic growth was affected. The silver from the Americas kick started the first global trade. Even the Chinese profited since 40% of the Silver ended up in China for the purchase of Chinese goods. Both China and Spain declined at the same time.
2:22 I nearly clicked off😏...but u got me🤣🤣
I love this video.
China doesnt need to colonize since they are so rich already.
Alexander Chohan you go learn history. Most Chinese dynasty are very wealthy in ancient standards
@@papercat2599 But somehow they got their ass kicked by europeans. Hmmmm
@Alexander Chohan I do know my fellow asian history.
Paper Cat You do know China is taking part of Africa till this day.
@Swapper Hopper2.0 you do know that it was Europe who colonized the world and fucked up Africa. So typical of them to play the blame game on China and deny all the atrocities they caused
You are 100% comedy. 😂🤣😂
Sometimes history research can be bland, but not with this guy! Id love to have a drink and let him ramble on about the domestication of horses lmao
6:27 The last one is Vlad Țepeș :)) 👍🏽👍🏽
Greetings from România!
In Europe there was competition with other equally strong neighbors i.e. England, France, Spain, Portugal. Always trying to one up each other. China had no such competition, so in turn no desire to improve. Competition breeds success.
They dealt with massive internal strife+ mongols& the japanese too. The reason we did better was just as much to do with democracy, education & enlightenment
naming portugal in line with england france and spain, facepalm
Yeah, it's not like Portugal was the first European power to reach India or anything...
@@denpadolt9242 are you able to read?
are you able to understand what you read?
"In Europe there was competition with other equally strong neighbors i.e. England, France, Spain, Portugal. "
what does this sentence mean?
thats a very high hint-level i gave you there Mr. Dumbfk
are you able to solve ur false thoughts?
Does Brazil's status as one of the largest countries in the world mean nothing to you?
This comment section is now C O L O N I S E D by an European
Hey guy you blew my freaking ears out friend dang buddy funny video
What a shame. Awesome video by the way. Very engaging from beginning to end with a dab of comedy 🎭 .
Geography, culture(geography, genetics and history) and bellcurve/genetics(result of millions of years of evolution through Geography). So, the reason is geography.
No that's been debunked. Geography alone is not enough of a factor to build up a nation. East and west Germany, north and South Korea are good examples of such.
I would agree with everything except for Genetics.
@@travisbarnes1698 Genetics are influenced by the geography at some extent
Intelligence can increase or decrease in a relatively short amount of time evolutionary speaking. Just look at the deference between dogs and wolves despite the fact that they are the same species. Even a border collie is put to shame by a wolf.
@@flawlessbinary7449 East and West Germany were no real nations. The only true nation is Germany. West-Germany never saw the East as a legitimate state and had still claims on the GDR's territory. Also the people had still the same culture and language. Something similar goes for Korea. The people are still the same. Although that can change if the seperation holds for much longer.
A very important aspect of european discoveries and colonization often ignored is personal initiative. The first sailors and conquistadores were people interested in improving their own lives, even if at the expense of someone else.
India and China had the technology and resources to explore the world as Europe did, but not the drive, ambition and yes, greed. And to this day, the focus on the individual is still a defining factor in western civilization.
Remember, the whole point of the era of discoveries including Colon's voyage was that europeans wanted to make contact with India and China while these couldn't be bothered to find out more about the world they lived in.
Europeans: Nothing or barely anything to loose
Chinese: Hmm, not worth it, we are rich but we won’t waste ressources with a winning formula
The things he talked about played a role but the four biggest things that played very important roles were their government, geography, religion, and culture
You left out so many factors along with entire Civilizations (like Islamic,Mongolian conquests and it's global effects) that I don't know where to begin!
Columbus wasn't sent just get him away, he was sent because Portugal was already colonizing Africa and Castile needed a place to do that themselves.
I like the animations, pretty cool. But the 'history' depicted has so many mistakes that drove me nuts.
The China part is 'mostly' correct, but, as usual, Cristóvão Colombo was late to the party, the Portuguese had been exploring for almost 100 years before Colombo. European expansion did not started in the 15th century but in the 14th (its debatable if it was in the 13th) and the first settlements of European origin were made in Africa by Portuguese.
The main message - Llamas Vs Horses, Tropical diseases vs Mild climates - are correct. This has a lot of potential as a cool funny project, but please, be more though with your research.
I hope you get this as a constructive comment, not a hater. Wish you a good Year and lots of views and followers.
And portoguese explorers were already late to the party
Exploring new zone started with the italian renaissance (usually Venice seeking more trade route and goods)
Then other country years later (like 200 years later) followed the example
@@stylesheetra9411 Italian Renaissance is a myth perpetued by recent scholars, go to any Iberian museum or church and see the "RENAISSANCE" in any work of art from the 11TH CENTURY (Portugal is from the 12TH and modern Spain is from the 14th). ITALIC people were awsome Mediterranean mariners and we learnt from them, no doubt, but the best exploring they did pass the pillars os Hercules was the Canary Islands. There was no money to be made beyond the pillars, that's why they did not explored further beyond. They have their place in history, I hope one day Portuguese history can be acknowledged by everyone as such, not only as slave owners and indo-china pirates, but also as the first and last modern world empire. From the 13th century to 1999.
@@stylesheetra9411 OK, last answer: you fell again in the Historian trap, they were Italic, not Italian. Same is calling a Castilian of the 14th century, Spanish. Nowadays we tend to associate to a modern country deeds of assimilated or conquered past nations. That is the myth. Being Portuguese I am well aware of this because it was a propaganda trick used by our previous dictatorship and we were warned in school to avoid these traps. Modern history is written by the winners of WWII with a western view. Change language (I can read 4, still not enough) and you'll see that the same event is described very differently. I am bias, like everyone, but try to weight the different versions and take my own conclusions. Sorry for the long answer, have a nice weekend.
@@Manuel-sf4zk Nope Italy was already a thing in the middle ages (for Italian were considered people from what now is called "north Italy" and a bit of "central Italy")
It was not united, but they were already a clear definiton between everything above the alps and everything under.
Unifying was not really an option and was just a dream of scholars and intellectual, but everyone were ok about being part of other cities state because they were still Italy
Meanwhile in the other parts of europe norhen Italy was called "Lombardy" and so bankers became know as "lombard".
Also a good thing about renaissance in Italy is the huge amount of sources you have for everything plus the peculiarity of the italian situation made historian from all over the west (the major ones I think are french, english, americans) and from every branch of history write about this ages
Did midvale middle school make this video
(This is a joke but really his logo looks like midvale middle school' maskot from Utah)
Can you make a vidio about Norway' s history
I would say it is all to do with ingenuity. Some cultures focused on inventing and some focused on interpersonal relationships.
That’s a good point there’s cultures in SEA who spent more time of decorating thier women and creating crappy cultures rather than contributing to the human race I mean tell my what value does a Dayak have over a Hungarian
Technology played a role too. All of these people shared one thing, their technology was in the stone age. They shared another thing too. They weren't a united people. They were fighting an murdering each other long before Europeans got there. Europeans have that past too. Until some clever warlords took over the lands and declared them a nation. Without that single strategy, Europeans couldn't have done anything.
What is that creature at 2:43? Looks adorable and terrifying at the same time
happy christmas Tooky History
"Conquer and domination in teh name of god!"
Lol ironically what they did was ungodly 😆
@@wiseguy240Winston they are hellanist.
@Princess Lea Heh, "existing nation" is a bit of a stretch here. The africans and native americans didn't have any real civilization, just a few random tribes living under big trees. The vast majority of those continents were doubtless complete wilderness, and it had things we wanted. Colonization is perfectly justifiable and it's the reason why we have things like the internet today.
@@thewordoflynx8095 Why are you talking if you don’t know history? 🤦🏾♂️ my god you ppl are uneducated. Malian empire, Songhai empire, Kushite empire, Benin Empire, Zulu Empire all african civilizations and SO much more. The richest man in human history is African have you not learned that in middle school? European empires have made contact with African ones before. Learn history. But I agree, colonization is necessary especially for the time but it’s things like racism, slavery and genocide that came from it that were evil.
@@1mnot4rrogant90 Racism, slavery, and genocide were not new. In fact slavery was a much larger practice in Arabia or Africa it self than the new world. Genocide? Where? North America? Not even there, the only large decreases in the native population (wars happened between Europeans and tribes, but did not conclude with the tribe involved ceasing to exist) were do to disease, and intermarriage, the latter especially.
That little joke about leaving the car in a safari is no joke. My dad was on a safari and a guy stepped out for one second to pee and a lion instantly rushed him
6:25 that s Vlad the Impaler on the right, am i right?
Animals and disease weren't the only big obstacles to African kingdoms. I'd write wild animals off entirely, since many African Kingdoms sprouted up in areas where there were fewer dangerous animals, while others simply worked around the presence of dangerous animals (I'll remind you that Egypt and Kush were both built along a river full of the most dangerous animals in Africa, during a time when Lions,Leopards, and Hyenas ranged all along the Nile Valley. Also, interesting fact, the kings of Benin (in modern day Nigeria) actually kept an entourage of tamed leopards to demonstrate their command over nature.). The most serious obstacles preventing them from becoming colonial powers were geographical, just as geographical features helped European states to develop in the directions they did. First of all, the Sahara created a partial barrier to trade. While Sub-Saharan states did have contact with Eurasia, largely through desert nomad intermediaries, this contact wasn't as intensive as the contact between other old world states. As such, while different parts of Eurasia benefited from advancements made by other parts of Eurasia, many of these advancements were not passed on to most of Africa. This resulted in Africa missing out on a lot of technology and other developments from other parts of the old world. Moreover, Africa itself is divided up geographically; immediately south of the Sahara is a strip of grassland, where many African states used cavalry, but at the south of this strip, there is a large band of thick forest. In addition to limiting navigation directly, this forest region is also occupied by the tsetse fly, which carries a disease deadly to horses. Because of this, all the territory below the northern edge of this forest region was impenetrable to horses, further slowing trade.
More importantly for why they didn't develop any sea faring colonial Empires, Africa doesn't have a lot of peninsulas or large islands, so seafaring vessels were relatively rare; some African states built impressive river fleets, but few ventured out past the coast, because there was little pressure to do so. The major exceptions to this were North Africans, who famously participated in slave raids into Europe, but simply lost out to European competition, and the Swahili, which participated in a great deal of maritime trading, directly trading with India and even China. The Swahili never had much pressure to switch from trading to conquest, though, and never forged any large maritime empires.
Well, the moors did went to Europe (Hispania, Sicily) after the arabs took over it.
In all cases there were advanced african realms or ones that invaded Europe (almoravids, almohads) or very rich kingdoms like mali. That didn’t made them the masters of the world
6:31 they'd say Cathay but I'm just being semantic
I sent you a private message on your profile's "community" tab. My discord is Proletariado#4420
i have been wondering this question
after going on binge watching world history ..most common question
European power supreme.
Emanuel Petreski
*EURABIA*
Not now kid
Supreme European circumstances
@@adityanawani8134 *DAY OF THE ROPE*
@@RHR199X not really
Your Maori history and pronounciation and accuracy is amazing!! They purposely don't teach Maori culture in Nz only the white version so I'm surprised how correct you got it. Cheers bro from Nz
Uhhh, nah mate.
@@jamesdavey5104 oh really? Could you elaborate
@@Team_Killer_NZ dont think he will
Through all my schooling I've learned about maori history and culture. Maori history and the treaty is taught every year and through out the year we learned culture. We learned maori legends songs and dances we learned how to say a karakia before cutting flax and weaving we learned maori art and carving and a lot of the language.
We even learned how to dig and prepare a hungi many times.
We did trips to stay at kaikora marae which taught us so much and in high school it was compulsory to have maori as one of our classes several times a week in our 1st year and could be chosen for following years.
Kapa haka groups have always been available to join.
Im 36 and from a mainly white small town so none of this is new or to be politically correct. we even built a marae for students on the high school grounds and I've noticed many of the high schools now have built maraes in the city i now live.
The only thing I've ever been taught about my own history is speaking and writing English and the rest is wars and land issues.
It's basically if you're white you have no culture and every white person is just labeled European.
I honestly wish we could learn the best from all cultures and just be one people working together to make this beautiful country a wonderful place for us all.
Dam didn't mean to rant lol sorry
Rubbish we have had maori culture taught, the cannibalising murdering and violence is a well known fact, the maori culture has gone and rightly so they were breaking every sacred law of God and needed Law and Order. Now, because of European settlement the Country is great and one of the best places to be!
3:38 Rest In Peace Huayna Cápac, the empire started with me... an my grandsons death is already the reason for its colapse... It was at it's height just before he died, a country larger then India, he did a great job putting an end to the rebellions, but... as soon as it began the empire collapsed...
Your voice is way to happy about this topic
Because they had more advanced technology.
But why ? It didn't fall out of the sky.
@@jakedee4117 Geography played a very big role.
Sure. I'm not saying it didn't. You can't make metal tools on islands without metals. But there are genetic and cultural factors in that mix too. We make our buildings and then our buildings make us.@@tricolourbearer2435
@@jakedee4117 yeah.
@@tricolourbearer2435 Geography played a very small role. This is why we see no overlap in results with any other non-human inhabitant having no empires, technologies or powers comparable under the exact same geographic circumstances.
Instead we see a human-like cognitive nature surpassing all the powers among species in a rapid boom unprecedented before.
I was wondering where are you from?
Chinese explorer Zheng He had explored South East Asia, Middle East and Africa well before Christopher Columbus. They did not colonise the countries, instead they traveled to build relationships with these countries. All they took from Africa was a giraffe. They did not need to colonise because they respect other cultures and their native people. It is unfortunate that many people do not know this.
That conquest& domination in the name of God bit tho 😆 I almost peed