Thank you so much, Mr. Team History, whoever you are, for everything you have done for the people of this country. I have gained a lot of knowledge from you since I began watching your video. Once again, thank you; you are among the most sincere pan-Africanists out there.
Lack of this knowledge is why desantis and others falsely believe that the enslaved Africans learned skills as a result of slavery. The truth of the matter is that Africans brought their farming and other skills and knowledge with them. In fact, Africans have been blacksmithing since 1500 BCE.
@@jason4275Supondo que os Africanos e Asiáticos tenham inventado alguma ou até muitas coisas, mas de que adiantou? Se não serviu pra ninguém, se não espalhou pelo mundo como conhecimento e benefícios de outras pessoas, fazer algo que beneficia só você uma minoria não resolve nada,mas a culpa disso é das próprias populações da África e Ásia muito submissas, subservientes, dominadas e sem atitude, sempre viveram e aceitaram passivamente o controle através de seus ditadores locais ou estrangeiros, diferentemente aconteceu com a Europa e por isso a Europa é o que é, sua população desde sempre foi muito mais autônoma , pouco aceitou viver debaixo dos pés dos tiranos locais ou estrangeiros, sempre fizeram o que tinham que fazer, sempre os povos Europeus foram mais destemidos e práticos e tudo que faziam levavam consigo pra onde iam e através disso espalhavam seus conhecimentos e beneficiavam muita gente, por isso a Europa é o que é
@@blackagent4754 , A great help? You mean like the slave markets, clitoridectomies, Boko Haram and child brides? Which modern day African nation is flourishing under Islam?
@@blackagent4754 Both sides should be shown. Mandinka people were Africans long before they were Muslims. Nubians had their own religion before Islam, Christianity and even before Khemet.
Abu l-Hasan Ali Ibn Nafi(a negroid), also known as Ziryab, was born in modern day Iran circa 789 CE to a freed Ethiopian slave. His nickname, Ziryab, means blackbird and was given to him in reference to his dark complexion and stunning singing voice. He is known as the innovator of those hygienic practices such as bathing, shaving and the use of toothpaste, perfumes, fragrant oils and deodorant. Moor was a term Europeans used to describe indigenous Africans and while many people may have heard of the term, Ziryab is not a name circulated in Western history and not many people don’t understand the weight of his influence. During the 10th century these weren’t African leaders only contributions to European society. During the formation of Europe's first civilization in Greece, it was the Black Africans from the Nile Valley who civilized the Greeks. Later, as Greece handed over the acquired culture to the Romans who almost lost it, initiating the Dark Ages, the Moors came onto the scene and helped restore civilization. In 711 AD, after the collapse of the Roman empire, the warring tribes from the Caucus were pushed to western Europe while the Moors invaded the Spanish shores bringing culture to these barbaric tribes. The African Muslims ruled over Spain, Portugal, southern France and North Africa for over seven hundred years. Civilization The Middle Ages are often referred to as the Dark Ages because there was little to no scientific or cultural progress. This might hold true for Christian Europe but not for Muslim Spain. While the monarchs of France, Germany and England dwelled in barns with no ventilation systems and were convinced that their subjects shouldn't indulge in cleanliness as it amounted to sinning, Muslim Spain was always ahead, building 600 public baths. In the 10th century, Cordoba, the capital of Moorish Spain was deemed the most modern city in Europe. The city with half a million inhabitants boasted street lighting, 50 hospitals with running water, 70 libraries and 500 mosques. Ruled by the Catholic Church, cities such as London and Paris did not see street lamps and paved roads until hundreds of years later. Education According to the center for research in globalization, in Christian Europe, nearly 99 percent of the population was illiterate, even a majority of the monarchs themselves couldn't read or write, while education was universal in Muslim Spain. At a time when Europe had a meager two universities, Spain boasted 17. The founders of the Oxford University of England, the epitome of Western European education, took inspiration from the educational institutions of Spain. According to UNESCO’s Education Sector, the oldest operating university in the world today, the University of Al-Karaouine of Morocco was founded during the height of the Moorish Empire in 859 AD by a Black woman, Fatima al-Fihri. Exploration The Muslims of Spain were also responsible for the scientific revolution in Europe. They introduced the number zero and the decimal system that was a game-changer in solving mathematical problems. Historical evidence suggests Africans took to the skies nearly 600 years before Leonardo Da Vinci invented a hand glider. In 875 AD, Abbas ibn Firnas made the world's first scientific attempt to fly and was partially successful. Muslim Spain was known to have great navigational technology with skills in cartography and craftsmanship in shipbuilding, which were taken great advantage of by the monarchies of Spain and Portugal after defeating and putting an end to African Muslim rule in the region in the 1400s, helping to launch the colonization of the Americas. Around 800 years ago, in what is today known as 'Mali', there stood an ancient city called Timbuktu, which was well known for its rich resources, such as gold, ivory and salt, as well as its interesting culture. It was also in Timbuktu that the first university was created. Was built by an Moorish Emperor (Mansa Musa) This Moorish ruler is named Musse Melly [Mansa Musa], lord of the negroes of Guinea," reads the map's description. "This king is the richest and most distinguished ruler of this whole region on account of the great quantity of gold that is found in his lands
Its because they have taken control of the discourse about civilization through colonization and war. North Western Europe was no more civilized right up to the 10th century BC than Africa was. Keep in mind that the traditional buildings of ancient Britain were thatched (crannog) huts prior to that time and dugout dwellings (grubenhaus or pit house). Civilization as we know it only emerged in certain places in the world and then spread due to the influence of Empires like the Romans. And we know that Africa had some of the earliest civilizations on the planet. However, the primary "model" of civilization since the Romans has been one based on conquest because that is how western Europe became civilized (even though they later lost it). That model of conquest and colonization are what they claim as "western civilization" due to the history of Greece and Rome as colonial empires in the ancient world. But even then, those are late arrivals to the game of civilization having been influenced by far older precurors. But today, what they call civilization is the result of European colonization since the 1500s and the neo-feudal system based on European social and economic inequality of the Middle Ages. That is not the blueprint for civilization and is only a blueprint for theft to steal the land, resources and labor of others to build up your own. And Africans historically have never been interested in stealing everybody elses wealth to build themselves up, not to mention that Africa is a huge place and not as densely populated as Western Europe.
A lot of people do not understand this. That Europeans are recent to civilization. And I tell them if they want to debate with me on said subject. Just go read what Rome spoke when concerning them
Everybody gets their turn in the universe everyone, now we can be you... But you can bet your bottom dollar tomorrow it'll be someone else and so on and so forth that's the way of it@@user-pj3pp7ul4n
I am a history postgraduate and teach African histories at a university level. I've watched a few videos on your channel and it's so refreshing to see short informative videos that have actually been researched and included their sources in videos! Keep up the great work!
Another factor, which i think also affects this video, is that african civilizations like the ones along the Swahili-coast, or even the west-african ones, which show clear external _influence_ are unjustly treated as being non-african. I.e. the logic being that since the swahili civilization had influences from arabia and india, it is an arab/indian/non-black civilization. On the other end, western civilization, though influenced and sometimes seeded by near-easterners and north-africans, is often treated as pure-white, with maybe a little bit of foreign influence to spice things up. Similarly: You state that the iron-civilization of the CAR had no influence, but it did influence large parts of Africa. Just because the influenced people weren't "white", that does not mean it had no influence. That is, I think there are often still strong, evil western-colonialist biases in how both westerners, the world through westerners, and importantly africans, see african history.
@@levimehoffYou can dishonest for your YT supremacy cause but we know the truth. Your WS ego and dishonesty is being exposed globally. That’s why 5 African countries are kicking y’all out.
@levimehoff " a tribal leader ruling over other tribes doesn't constitute an empire" yes it does lol 💀. That's why the many empires formed in the eurasian steppe by nomadic steppe tribes are still referred to as empires. Also african civilizations such as mali and nubia do not really fit your description of tribes conquering other tribes.
It's crazy how geographical position is rarely brought up in debates regarding the continent. Many critics and detractors speak as if the natives CHOOSE to live in regional & global isolation, and that it's mainly an "IQ problem". Vincent Benziger was one of the few authors (that I know of) who have actually spoke about the geographical bearers
Yes I think it’s why regions like Egypt,Ethiopia, North Africa. And some north west African kingdoms were prominent in culture. Central Africa and West Africa were mostly isolated from Red Sea and the Mediterranean which were the most important trade hubs at the time.
It kind of is an IQ problem though. They don't have the mental threshold to impose themselves on those around them; thus instead they get walked over. Sub-Saharan tribes are known to conquer enemies they *can*. But the ones they can are limited to ones on their level. If you want to argue they lack a propensity for war, conquering, etc., then I strongly disagree. We all have the same r-complex and IQ is irrelevant in that regard. We all have the same part of the brain that seeks war, comfort, status, sex, and so-on.
@@abominationdesolation8322 IQ doesn't measure specific knowledge. There are 9 types of intelligence. If you're geographically isolated from the rest of the world, then how can you even fathom conquering those outside of your region? (Ex. Big fish, little pond). In the end, desperation breeds innovation and historically speaking, Sub-Saharan African tribes never really needed to innovate beyond what they already had. "Certain tech can't be used, if they're not useful." Different needs & philosophy.
Knowing that the Sahara was a barrier that blocked connection is something many fail to pay attention to. The ability to mix the many different studies together when speaking on a specific time or topic is such a rare gift that so many miss. How you bring together multiple forms of information to show the similarities and differences between African societies and the others is powerful. Continue in your work, as we come together to get that foundation needed.
Exactly. All Mesopotamia, Levante, North African and South European early Civilizations gathered and learn from eachother for thousands of years around the Mediterranean Sea. Southern Africans as Northern Europeans didn't beneficiated of those interactions in the same Era.
😅 bro what?? People been causing the Sahara desert for thousands of years. I'm not sure if you know anybody from Niger, Mauritania and places like that people always have been crossing the Sahara desert for trade and sometimes expansion. Morocco invaded the kingdom of Songhai, so I wouldn't say it's a barrier at all.
@@seanmikaeel90s50 But there is a few thousands years before a few years AD that West Africa was isolated from the rest of the world. It first really became part of the world when the camel was introduced.
I seek out and watch a lot of right-wing content on UA-cam as well as reading incel forums. I used to read a lot of Daily Stormer but I was just getting too angry so I stopped. Take in mind, I don't engage with it because I believe it, it's just so interesting to see how far people's minds can go once they've been isolated and to see the end result of that. One thing I've noticed with racists, they call African civilisation a myth, yet they still deem racism to be non-existent in our modern world. Despite openly believing that higher melanin directly correlates with an inability to sustain a complex economy, large-scale trade or diplomatic relationships. They'll claim the science is on their side, but only ever have sort-of tangentially related evidence that "just so happened" to come from a non-peer-reviewed study from a eugenicist. Not understanding people as a very common trait amongst right-wingers. There's a lot of individualism, refusal to except how social dynamics can affect otherwise very cold, mathematical systems, and no self-awareness. They all tend to be simultaneous victims and zealots of their own culture, yet don't understand how other people can be affected by culture, and deem other societies weird and "different" (in a bad way) because of that. I live in Australia, a surprisingly racist country, specifically toward the indigenous population. Before colonialists invaded, Aboriginals had farming, small communes and dozens of individual nations and languages. Yet a common belief amongst older white people is that all indigenous populations were nomadic, because they didn't know how to do anything else. Their art and mythology was and is seen as nothing more than gibberish on the level of Neanderthal-esque non-sense. I hate this country.
South of the sahara? Its crazy how white history isnt chronological and doesnt align or correlate 100% with original people/Afrikan history. Isnt sumer south of the sahara? Werent the nubians south of sahara?
@@MichaelClayton64 thanks for the info! According to what youve studied is there a specific Country in Africa that can be considered the cradle of humanity? Ive read a lot of different places ranging from East/Central Africa, Mesopotamia(present day middle east). If you can cite a source id like to check it out. Thanks again for the feedback
African history was erased in order to create the current socioeconomic order and it is in their best interest to maintain that status quo. Due to the sanitized version of colonial history that is mainstream most people (including black people) are not even aware that the most widespread destruction of cities in human history occurred in Africa between the 18th and 19th centuries. Architects, craftsmen, record keepers were slaughtered in the thousands in the process of rewriting history. In fact most of those weapons and tech used during the world wars were first used to destroy Africa.
If Africa was so technically advanced why didn’t they use all their advanced technologies to defend themselves. They certainly had the numbers to do it.
i like this take tbh, it takes a lot more than accomplishment to be considered influential and alot of the geographical barriers in africa made it difficult for the independent discoveries and inventions to be spread throughout
Before they allied with Portuguese in 1483 you mean. Before the King of the Kingdom of Kongo, Nzinga a Nkuwu, became so impressed by Portuguese developments that converted to Christianity by his own initiative and chose his Christian Name to be João as the King of Portugal João II to honor him. They were kind of evolved when compared to other African Kingdoms but nothing like Egypt or Mali. And ages behind the developments that Portuguese had by that time. By that time Portuguese had already settled in Ghana in 1470 trading gold and ivory with local tribes. The Elmina Castle in Ghana was built in 1482 due to the alliance with those tribes. The Jerónimos Monastery in Lisbon was built in 1500 few years later. There was nothing like that in Africa. Not even in Egypt. Much less in Congo. ❤🇨🇳🇯🇵🇲🇾🇮🇳🇪🇹🇲🇿🇦🇴🇬🇼🇸🇹🇨🇻🇲🇦🇵🇹🇧🇷
@@brixcosmoWhat has any of that got to do with what he asked. If he wanted to learn about Portuguese history he would have gone to a Portuguese history channel.
@@WilliamGarrow When you reference Portugal in that ... What are you waiting on !? The Alliance between the Portuguese Kingdom and the Kingdom of Kongo is also part of the History of Kongo and in the end you still have to go through Portuguese records to know about it 'cause they didn't know how to write. In fact the King Nzinga a Nkuwu (João) sent noble members of the Kingdom of Kongo to Portugal where they stayed for years learning Writting and Christianism but who cares right!? You Americans know nothing about Africa and are stuck in that binary, biased views of Black vs White. Africa vs Europe. That blinds you. There were several alliances between Africans and Europeans in the 1400's, 1500's. As the Portuguese Kingdom alliance with Ghana Tribes in 1470, Kingdom of Kongo in 1483. Or even Ethiopia that was a Portuguese Ally much before the Age of Discovery. Ethiopian embassadeurs were received in Portugal and in the Vatican in the 14th Century. And in 1540 when Ethiopia was about to be conquered by the Turquish-Ottoman Empire asked for help to the Portuguese Kingdom and they were saved by the Portuguese Kingdom. We know it. They know it and are grateful for that part of their history. From that the "Birtukan" were born. 'Cause Portuguese Muskateers remained in the Region and married Ethiopian Woman. "Birtukan" was what Ethiopian called Portuguese and Portuguese-Ethiopian descendents. It means "Orange" 'cause Portuguese introduced Oranges to Ethiopia. "Birtukan" also became a common Ethiopian female name to this day. But who cares about history right, American!? You guys rather see divisions where there were a lot of bridges. Not you're fault. That 247yo vortex of ignorance, lack of education and racism called USA made you that way. May God a.k.a. Eusébio da Silva Ferreira, bless your life! ❤️🇯🇵🇨🇳🇲🇾🇮🇳🇪🇹🇲🇿🇦🇴🇬🇼🇸🇹🇨🇻🇲🇦🇵🇹🇧🇷
@@Jean_Jacques148 Go check Portuguese records of it 'cause they didn't know how to write... The Kingdom of Kongo history is indissociable of Portuguese records about it. That's part of the History of Congo, Angola and Portugal. Get it American!?
It makes sense that the fields of science, archeology, history, etc. were being documented by Europeans, who saw other races as primitive, so wouldnt even consider they could have great achievements and so couldnt see them, and didnt look for them. And so this was taught to us. Now, in our time, we can fill in the whole of Human history as we learn it from many peoples, and see the full achievements of Humankind.
Great presentation. John Henry Clarke mentioned how in order to have a civilization one must first be civilized. Europeans seem to measure what a civilization is by certain material achievements, so a village that has people working together collectively would not be seen or deemed as a civilization by their standards. I also think another reason for African societies below the Sahara being excluded from being seen as civilizations are due to the fact that they saw them as civilizations and had all the complexities of a civilization, but with the Atlantic slave trade they forcefully made themselves forget and omit those facts so they could justify obtaining Africans that were enslaved and sent to the Americas and Europe.
They weren't seen as actual civilizations. Europeans barely knew what these people's societies even looked like since they didn't really venture into Africa. All they knew is that they were technologically less advanced. It has nothing to do with justifying slavery. What justification did Africans use to enslave their neighbours and sell them to Europeans? Not sure about this "sent to Europe" you are talking about. The slave trade went to the New World, where there was massive demand for manual labour. Europe had serfdom. There was no mass movement of Africans to Europe.
are ants a civilisation because they can cooperate together to make anthills? Whats the point of taking any hunter gatherer society, and putting it next to something like ancient egypt with their pyramids and saying "yup they were in the same stage of development, both a civilisation" Like why make these weird arguments when you can appreciate places like axum, mali, ghana, etc.
Thank you for this. I have only recently been learning how “civilisation” is a loaded word. I always took it to mean what it literally means - “living in cities” - which is not massively hard to define. Never understood the debate until now. And, yes, I think geography is very influential in how societies develop and interact.
I'm with you on this one. I destroyed an anthill once and it was rebuilt.thats when I took a curiosity to insects and I ask this question.... looking at how they operate aren't they a "civilization" also.they may lack written records but science says they keep records in pheromones some how
Is it not also an issue that archeological investigations have been relatively limited when it comes to the areas of African civilization outside Egypt?
It's very relevant. Most of Africa sees much less archaeology than Europe, and central Africa has acidic soil that destroys a lot of organic objects. That's why most things are found in the deserts. When the little bit of Africa's archaeology finds something, it's usually something extremely old and preserved by petrification.
@@braincells1020 But that doe snot change the fact that West Africa is not mentioned anywhere properly, while East Africa is. In fact, the trade ports of Tanzania have Roman coins all over the place, while nothing found in West Africa.
Thank you for this fantastic video. I think your hypothesis is spot on - isolation is an extremely limiting factor in influence. I'd like to point out that the Medditerrian literally means "middle earth" and another, even older cradle of civilization than the so-called Euro-centric version, China, 中国, literally means middle kingdom. They were surrounded by other societies that made information/technology/culture exchange feasible! It seems strange to me that influence (I presume, leading to our modern societies) would need to be demonstrated to be classified as a civilization anyway. Consider Mezo-America. Would we consider the Incas, Mayas and Aztecs not civilizations? And yet what sort of influence did that have to our modern world, particularly in the US? Don't get me wrong, there definitely are some, maize/corn culture, there is evidence that certain forms of democracy from indigenous Americans impacted colonial thinkers. But It would seem a great stretch to think that given their isolation for the vast majority of their existence, and the very short period of time relatively that the civilizations existed before getting wiped of the map, that the much longer trickle of influence coming intermittently from less isolated sub-Saharan Africa wouldn't have much deeper, much more foundational influence to where aggregate modern culture, technology, etc are at today.
"very short period" are you really talking mesoamerica? Yeah they were around for at least 2000 years and mutual "influencing" can be seen between the various cultures that were emerging in there, they were sharing their inventions like say, the calendar or writing across the whole region. Besides, since as you mentioned, being somewhat isolated was normal for human societies until europeans started sailing around the world, i think when judging whether some peoples were a civilisation based on the influence they produced, we should be taking into account how big the world they could access actually was.
That was an interesting theory HomeTeam, I understand where you are coming from. Africa below the sahara has indeed Civilizations but due to the Hollywood deception and white supremacist thinking people think that a cavillation has to have big buildings like in Europe and Asia, but that is not true. And for the Sahara barrier, I disagree a bit because people been trading between that desert for years, so I don't think its a location problem it's a racism problem personally.
Another point to consider is that the majority of Western countries were constantly at war. Being in a state of constant turmoil caused them to form large alliance's and complex political and military civilizations that spanned many nations. Where as African tribes focused on peaceful conflict resolution. Which resulted in smaller cities/communities seeking to live in harmony versus conquest! IMHO
Wow, that's just dumb. Bantus went to war with khoi for hundreds of years. King ghezo was plundering other tribes famously for his whole reign. How can you say something so dumb?
I disagree. Many African civilizations have been ignored/overlooked because of their failure to record their historical existence. That only leaves archeological discovery to learn of them. That my friend means digging randomly on a large continent and finding something. Not a very reliable or timely method of discovery.
It’s also worth mentioning the kingdom of Great Zimbabwe. They had stonework, creating stone towers, which Europeans consider a necessary feature of civilisation, looking down on building made of wood, clay or bricks. Africans are just as intellectually capable of innovation as Europeans. All races are one species, meaning we are all equal in intellectually and spiritually. Europeans - especially those of Germanic stoke - are just very arrogant, due to their wealth. They should be reminded that they used to live in mudhuts and wooden houses before raiding Rome and stealing their civilisation. They started off jealous, then after getting rich they had historical amnesia and became boastful. But the truth can never be censored forever. Good work comrade.
@@OpenPayment it does make sense because skin cells and brain cells are both subject to genetics and genetics are subject to changes fo to selective breeding based on the environment. I'm sorry that hurts your feelings so much you would deny the obvious.
@georgekirby7150 it doesn't. Having more eumelanin than pheomelanin to adapt to the heat of Sahara and the tropics doesn't impact brain cells, and you have no proof to back it up, you just made that claim up and implied it as if it were reality while not even explaining why it would be the case that they affect brain cells It didnt hurt my feelings, I couldnt care less. You just made the claim up and put it under the guise of "its reality" trying to sound edgy. Do your research next time because there's nothing backing up your claim
@@OpenPayment EVERY. SINGLE. ASPECT. OF. A. PERSON. IS. SUBJECT. TO. GENETICS. from height, eye color, skintone, shape of teeth, hair color, even propensity for illness, and every other trait But, sure, grey matter density is the one thing outside of genetics effects. Sure, believe that...
Very Nice Scholarly sources used !! Africa was somewhat self contained and had its own vibrant markets and more than enough "fresh" water, food, agricultural land as Humans and civilization began there in the interior and left only about 60,000 years to populate the world so they did have more than sporadic contact with the outside world before Mega Lake Chad shrunk and the Sahara grew larger.
Only the portion of land that has access to the Mediteranean sea is called Ifriqiya (in modern times called Tunisia), the name Africa was developed from that name (forget about Scipio!), that further became the name of the entire continent, that is actually (called) Etiopia, Alkebulan, Axum etc.
That was in Roman Empire and Phoenicians-Carthaginian Empire Era. Romans took that name "Ifriqyia" a.k.a "Al-Maghrib Al-Adna", what the Amazighs called to the region of Tunisia and Eastern Algeria, and called it "Africa". That's why there's several Roman Maps were Africa is just that Area and the rest of the Continent is named with other Kingdoms names like the ones you've cited. Even the Concept of Continents didn't even existed back then That's a creation of the Age of Discovery (15th-17th Centuries) when all Continents became known on a global scale and Continents were named for Cartography reasons. What i don't understand is you saying that tgat was the only portion of land that had access to the Mediterranean Sea. All North Africa, Levante, South Europe and Iberian Peninsula were in contact for thousands of years before that precisely due to trading in the Mediterranean Sea. Phoenicians emerged in Levante (Lebanon, Syria) in 3000BC. Spread all around the Mediterranean Sea around 1100BC following tge decline of most cultures in the Late Bronze Age collapse. They had territories, cities and trade ports in Levante (Cyprus,Lebanon,Syria), Lybia, Tunisia where they built Carthage, Argelia, Morocco, South Portugal, South Spain, South Italy (Sardinia, Corsica, Sicilly), Malta, South Greece. By that time Roman Republic hadn't expanded into Roman Empire yet. Carthage, the Capital of the Phoenician-Carthaginian Empire was built in 900BC and it was only conquered by Romans in 146BC. Phoenicians are known has the first rulers of the Mediterranean Sea and renowned among contemporaries as skilled traders and mariners. They served as intermediaries between Civilizations in Middle-East, South Europe and North Africa, facilitating the exchange of goods, knowledge, culture and religious traditions. Their expansive and enduring trade network is credited with laying the foundations of an economically and culturally cohesive Mediterranean which would be continued by tge Greeks and especially the Romans.
@@brixcosmo , i know, ik, is a bad generalisation, only meant to offer some perspective or some context, being that Ifriqiya occupied a somewhat middle portion of the coast (including the thin stretch that is now Libya's land). So, yeah, there's a whole lot of access to the Mediteranean besides what Ifriqiya had.
I think that Africa and Africans did originate and influence the dissemination of culture, (civilization). They were not credited for their contributions then and just now we are seeing Africa's contributions to the world being revealed.
What do think of Candace Owen's "white men ended slavery" video? In this video, Candace says that the concept of Black Africans that lived like pharaohs was a "fantasy". This statement insinuates that Black Africans weren't pharaohs despite the 25th dynasty. Would the Hometeam make a video about the Haitian revolution, and the Mexican independence from Spain because the president of Mexico at that time was half Black? Would the Hometeam also talk about the African wars against slavery?
Yes you are right, you can be African but not Black, nevertheless, I believe that no matter your race, ethnicity, tribe, or skin tone you are all "African". I"m a descendant of Black Africans. If Africa is united despite race, ethnicity, tribes, or creeds I think Africa will be the most powerful and prosperous continent on the planet again.
You're misrepresenting what he said. She was using a figure of speech. Her claim was that the idea of Africa being a paradise where everyone lived peacefully and well fed until the Europeans came, is a myth.
Europeans: Lol Africans have no cvilizations Egypt and Carthage: Uhh yeah. we'll just stand over here and- Mali, Great Zimbabwe, Zanzibar, etc: ARE WE A JOKE TO YOU?!?!?!
Geographical barrier is the important point that people tend to ignore a lot when it comes to this topic. It's true, you can't develop or be on the same level of civilization as others if you are geographical isolated. Knowledge sharing is what makes civilization to grow and grow much faster. If you are doing things on your own far way from others then it's be gonna hard.
I think that’s a important point about land barriers. If you look at the 50 states you will see the same thing but not as bad. You have the east coast 13 colonies along with west coast being the wealthiest. While the inland’s parts of Appalachia and the south are riddled with poverty and worse conditions in most variables.
Another major factor is the climate. Evidence of some civilizations would be sparse if they were in a tropical environment, because the humidity would destroy, over time, writings and architecture unless information and structures were made from materials resistant to erosion and breakdown.
Bro, this video was way too convoluted and it took too long for you to get to the point everyone already knows. Blacks are dehumanized and the dehumanization is cultural racism. Ive never heard any black country in anywhere else in the world be considered a civilization either. From Jaimaca to Papau New Guinea. Dehumanizing an enemy gives everyone involved conviction to destroy that enemy. That's why the descendants of slaves in the Americas (black americans, black latinos, black carribbeans, etc) get negative stereotypes despite being the biggest source cultural influence worldwide since the beginning of colonization in the new world. Aside from the fact african slaves being mostly the best of the best europeans could buy, also dismantled vast regions of civilizations on the African continent. You're talking about enslaved soldiers, experts and professionals being specifically targeted to be shipped off by the millions to build brand new civilizations. The majority of the competence to do that came from them at a barrel of gun. Then you get hit by the Scramble for Africa and the scorch earth "decolonization". So you lost the majority of your experts, got reduced to deprived drones by colonization that justified no more need for slavery since the slaves built such a good platform it ushered the industrial revolution (and too many negros around). And then whatever you were forced to build for the europeans was sacked and destroyed on top of generations of subversion. It go so bad that yeah, even african societies believed they were uncivilized because they were miseducated for generations at hands of pro white administrations. And they go as far as praising the groups that destroyed them. See if you're people didnt believe yall were uncivilized and you checked these white people and kunes everytime they gaslight you, the world wouldnt believe you were uncivilized. But what can you expect when all of the warrior class were killed or broken like over a century ago.
Wisdom and knowledge comes in different sequences in time It’s like learning a little of life in twelve thousand years and finding out it may be just a sequence of time in the love of humanity. How could one understand South Africa, where as they can’t get it right in the place that they claim in North Africa
I feel like UA-cam keeps unsubscribing me from this channel. I’ve been a member for over a year receive notifications etc but keep having to resubscribe. You are doing something right sir.
Technologically, structurally, and tool wise they were more afvanced then The Arctic Native, Native American, And Native Oceanian civilizations just not as high up as most of the European And Asian ones yeah.
It is easy to misunderstand civilization. Civilisation is primarily about human behaviour. Civilisation is comprised of two parts, namely, non-material culture and material culture. Non-material culture such as spirituality and related beliefs and moral values preceded material culture such as agriculture, pastoralism, stone buildings etc. why? This is because civilization is, first and foremost, about mutually respectful relations between and among humans, acknowledging our common humanity. Without this we would have simply exterminated each other and some, who are yet to progress past this first stage, would have done some of this extermination of humans. The corpus of values includes a wide spectrum of beliefs, traditions, customs, laws, and habits that condition behaviour of the people involved, e.g. treatment of human life, family and community, treatment of the dead, ancestor veneration, governance and the governed, voluntary compliance with beliefs, traditions, customs, freedom vs duty and responsibilities, social order and structure, work and play, honor, honesty, health, and wellness. These, together, are the foundations for continuity. These are the bases upon which material culture rises. When these are debased material cultural growth stops, stagnates and reverses. Therefore, the greatest, the longest surviving, and enduring civilisations are therefore those with the highest achievements in non-material culture, like ancient Kemet in the Nile Basin. One of the reasons why this is true is because civilisations crumble first from within themselves; that is, disintegration begins with the non-material cultural foundation upon which they were built. Non-material cultural elements are not visible; the mind of the people as it were, the corpus of values, the cosmological mind, the spiritual mind, the educational mind, the scientific mind.
Henry ford brought Africans from Togo to show them how to fordge the v8 engine in the 1930s. So Africa had the best smelting techniques even into the 1900s
Wonderful presentation but I have to disagree with the theory that Africa had geological disadvantages. Look at the Vikings for example, they were able to design what was considered then as one of the fastest ships known to man, and crossed the Atlantic Ocean to Europe they sought out other lands to better their civilization
To the folks who think every black tribe in west,central and southern Africa originally came from Egypt. Doesn't this demonstrate that this is unlikely? If all those west Africans came from Egypt because of invasions wouldn't there be more examples of direct Egyptian civilization in west Africa and in other parts below the Sahara? Especially as far as writing and Egyptian architecture.
Another great leap into the abyss...Different environments, different resources = different cultures. Why don't modern Egyptians value education, science and innovation, or speak and write the old Egyptian language?
@@lydiaedwards8100 why would you say modern Egyptians ,don't value education , science, or Innovation? Modern Egypt is the fourth most developed country in Africa. The ancients language was replaced by Arabic in 641ce do to the Arab conquest
@@CrowdPleeza anyone who is suggesting that is delusional. There isn't one pyramid, tomb, mummy, language, spinx or piece of evidence to say Egyptians migrated to west/ central Africa. Matter fact ancient Egyptians didn't know west Africa existed and west Africans didn't know Egypt existed
I liked you channel. But really man... if you want to watch movies about african civilization, there are many good movies that are made in Ghana and Nigeria. Or if you understand french, ivorian movies are also nice. Stop waiting for Hollywood to make it. Go and explore Nollywood or any other african movie industries. I'm from Thailand and my partner is ivorian. He wants me to know more about african culture, so he gave me sources from africa! That is it. The production nowadays improved a lot. You will definitely enjoy African historical movies that made in africa 🙏🏻
Africa is huge, and it doesn't really make sense to say "Africans" discovered iron-smelting because of this, or to compare it to small Anatolia. because that hides the real historical question: when those people in central Africa discovered how to work iron, why didn't it spread? that's the real difference with Anatolia, the technology spread out of that small region to many others, but it didn't spread from central Africa across the peoples in west or to the African great lakes, creating a dominant and lasting industry. there were native American societies in the American great lakes region that learned to work copper really early, but it also never spread far beyond their home, and died out eventually, without creating a metal-working industry in north America.
That isn't the problem. The problem is that people are still looking at African societies as homogeneous, and that Africa is a country. Ironworking did spread. It spread all over Africa to numerous societies. The Yoruba and the Mende and the Buganda aren't the same people, with the same societal structures. The problem is that people need to read more African scholars writing about their own societies. Africa is far larger than Europe or Anatolia. So saying African societies didn't have influence is like just flat saying I don't respect African sovereignty, and because all the people are dark skinned the spread of their knowledge doesn't count. Which is ridiculous.
How did Japan manage to go from a preindustrial empire complete with samurai. To a World war 2 axis of evil power house? From weilding swords to suicide pilots and a war industry that fueled their entire way of life. What stops Africa from acheiving anything?
@@NanakiRowanjapan isn't a small island, their were plenty of islands and nations in Africa the size of Japan. The real difference is that Japan successfully modernised and managed to navigate through the European to by times but the africans weren't able to do thar and in most cases didn't even attempt to modernise leaving them to languish. Its ashame etheopia didn't but they lacked the same degree of centralisation of Japan but still it might have been possible
I mean in school in us they mostly foucsed on egypt greece rome but of course we learned about the sumerians indus valley and later civilzations like the maya aztec inca
To understand why subsaharan Africa was underdeveloped you to look at geography. Let’s not forget that up until Industrial Revolution, the main source for transportation were horses 🐎 .In subsaharan Africa horses were very rare or not present at all . Therefore communication and transport between groups relied only on foot making it extremely difficult for groups to communicate in the long range . Also lack navigable waters and rivers, no natural harbors , isolated by saharan desert in the north and oceans in other parts, subsaharan Africa was landlocked. And when you’re isolated you tend to lack behind other groups who have more natural access to communication. If you look the geography of Western Europe you see there were extremely positive advantages especially for communication between groups of people. You can see that patterns even more to aboriginals of Australia who were even more underdeveloped that subsaharan Africa. In the past , people didn’t make social analysis to understand how geography impacts human development, therefore they tended to interpret these events with race ideas . That is what created racism . It is not racism that created underdeveloped of subsaharan Africa. It was the other way around.
@ExLucifer-i3h Yes it was landlocked. Coastal areas did not connect subsaharan Africans with other parts of the world. They just communicated with their neighbors but outside of the region.
@ExLucifer-i3h Did you understand what I said ?! I said landlocked from other parts of the world not that it didn’t have coastline. I never said that .
@@st3019 He created his account 3 days ago with the sole purpose of trolling this channel. Don't take him seriously. He also did not grow up in Nigeria. He has never been to Africa.
One question here. Why should the caliber for civilization be left to the north? Isn't the South a globe? Did Sub-Saharan civilization influence other larts of Africa or India, Chinese or Arab peninsula? One example I know is the glorious Axumite civilization, which was recorded as one of the superpowers of its time at the world stage.
I don't remember hearing the various kingdoms, barons and feudal lords referred to as "uncivilized"? But somehow, similar kingdoms and villages in Sudsaharan Africa were?!
The definition of civilization is simple. Did you develop a writing system? Yes or No? Large differences exist between a political entity based on written vs oral traditions. An entity based on an oral tradition limits you in terms of what can be communicated across distance and time.
To avoid my usual “giant wall of text” habits, I will give my opinion on the subject itself: “Why African Societies Were Viewed As 'Non Civilizations'” I think it is important to remember that “civilization” is normally a word used for a large scale or a unified people. For example, the individual factions in Japan’s Warring States are not considered civilizations, but Japanese civilization is. The same is true for such times in China, Europe, etc. So, the term “African civilization” is commonly used but refers to the whole rather than any particular group within Africa.
The racist ideology of many early archeologists refused to highlight subsaharan African accomplishments but over emphasize Greek and Roman endeavors and Ancient Rome literally stole ideas from everyone. Also subsaharan African societies did not have as many environmental issues as the northern nations because subsaharan Africa was rich in all resources so not too many issues with daily life to have to constantly build and conquer
Are accomplishments in the present much more important than past or future accomplishments? Do we have much work to do, and must we be about that work? Should our concern be what they think of us or what we think of ourselves?
What are you even referring to? Africa is a continent and it was full of diverse kingdoms and empires. Even if we were to go by your logic, it is impossible for a civilization to just steal and Kill as that would obviously lead to an extinction of the culture.
The notion that a society is democratic because the monarch required input and oversight from elders is a very bizarre and peculiar one to me. So, I looked into the man referenced, Chancellor WIlliams, and while I'm sure his work has plenty of merit, it's important to understand his doctorate was in sociology, not necessarily history, and as a prominent afrocentrist, his work should be viewed and represented accordingly: as being from an afrocentric perspective. A perspective which, at least based on the experiences I've had with them of which is perhaps a small cohort of people within the grouping who are not representative of the majority, posits that everything ever is supposed to have originated in africa and the rest of the world just stole from it. Still, this is some fascinating information and if remotely true does warrant some additional visibility.
Because they didn't lash out in stone, and because they were in an area unpopular with Westerners. Why did the pre-Illyrian cultures in the Balkans and the Danube region (Vinča, Vučedol, etc.) not get the name Civilization, even though they were the first in the world in many technological aspects (Series production, casting, bronzes, calendar, even different shoes for left and right feet, for example) and the size of the settlements. Because they didn't lash out in stone, and because they were in an area unpopular with Westerners. I am talking about the period 5000 years ago, approximately at the time of the early beginnings of Egypt and Mesopotamia. Many who came much later to similar achievements were exalted as "civilizations"
Very surprised by this take. I’d argue Subsaharan Africa had an immense impact on global innovation. The Sudanese (Nubia), Great Zimbabwe, Mali, Benine, all had trade routes through India and China. Many of India’s great Kings were Africans. There was much in terms of cultural exchange which allowed Africans to share knowledge and wealth with the known world. Let’s not forget the impact of the Moors who conquered Spain..majority of which were from west Africa (Stan Van Poole). I’d argue the growth of the Sahara diminished trade between Africa, Rome and other powers but it did not diminish African influence. The diminished trade also hurt Africa because they were slow in understanding the development of new tech, like firearms, before it was to late.
@@samkelombambo916 Malik Andil Khan Sultan, Jamal al-Din Yaqut, Malik Sarwar, and General Malik Ambar Please who do you think you messing with. Stop your ish
I'm so sorry, but "Great Zimbabwe" is a very modest set of structures built by Arab slavers as a regional base. It's very embarrassing that Africans push it as the remains of a "civilisation". It isn't. It's rock-bottom basic quick architecture built by Arabs for their slaving. Nothing more. I'm so sorry. Sudan and Nubia are "civilised" only under Middle Eastern influence. Stop claiming our culture. Stop stealing our ancestors. Stop looting our history.
@@samkelombambo916 These fantasies are a total embarrassment aren't they? They will lay claim to everyone else's civilisation, as if the world owes Africa something for their lack of advancement.
SSAs were blocked by the Sahara to the north and large oceans to the east, west and south. The europeans could travel south and east easily to encounter new civilizations. The asians could travel south and west to encounter new civilizations. Middle East could travel east, west and north to encounter new civilizations.
The crazy thing is I gotta watch this video knowing that no matter what Africa was gonna always seem uncivilized to early settlers because there were on a mission to get land and spices
History is not a snapshot in time and Africa is not a monolith and never was. There were societies on the continent where blacksmithing, agriculture, and other skills existed prior and during the TransAtlantic slave period. However, a vast majority of those societies had already declined, making the less advanced societies vulnerable to kidnap, losing battles, being captured, and sold into slavery.
We were told someny lies so we would not know were or who we are that is why it took us long to know who we are. We were at first taken with our king and Queens and the family's and workers. That is why they started getting men and women from different village. The less they understand each other the better that is why they were successful in enslaving the black people. One of the group was the people from Brazil.
Was everything done to the Africans and to the first peoples of the African Continent the was that part of civilization. just a question now peoples know those were brutal deeds to humans and you very well knew these were human
This is a very bad episode. The only reason African societies have not been viewed as civilizations is racism. There’s no other reason. All of your points are elementary and I could point out the same issues with western cultures. Africans had buildings, great walls, borders, armies, art! I highly suggest you and your “hometeam” read some books like When We Ruled, Before the Mayflower, 1619 Project, Moors of Spain, etc…Even white authors have explained in details great African civilizations. The last few episodes HomeTeam have posted have been uncomfortable team west and lacks any historical expansive research.
Purchase Herbal Results Olive Leaf Extract Here:
herbalresults.net/shop
Now that you advertise weird herbal remedies I lost my faith in you.
@@GNWP67 rude
@@GNWP67 good! Take your disrespect elsewhere.
Anyone reading this and thinking that this man is a herbal tonic salesman is a fool. Your cultural origins and past are genuinely unknown to you.
Thank you so much, Mr. Team History, whoever you are, for everything you have done for the people of this country. I have gained a lot of knowledge from you since I began watching your video. Once again, thank you; you are among the most sincere pan-Africanists out there.
Lack of this knowledge is why desantis and others falsely believe that the enslaved Africans learned skills as a result of slavery. The truth of the matter is that Africans brought their farming and other skills and knowledge with them. In fact, Africans have been blacksmithing since 1500 BCE.
They could care less about the truth, unfortunately. That is why I love this channel and others like it.
Facts
Yes. It’s his attempt to use his bigoted beliefs to sabotage black Floridans and Afro Americans in general
Farming is a skill that was passed on from one tribe to another it was never a European invention.
@@jason4275Supondo que os Africanos e Asiáticos tenham inventado alguma ou até muitas coisas, mas de que adiantou? Se não serviu pra ninguém, se não espalhou pelo mundo como conhecimento e benefícios de outras pessoas, fazer algo que beneficia só você uma minoria não resolve nada,mas a culpa disso é das próprias populações da África e Ásia muito submissas, subservientes, dominadas e sem atitude, sempre viveram e aceitaram passivamente o controle através de seus ditadores locais ou estrangeiros, diferentemente aconteceu com a Europa e por isso a Europa é o que é, sua população desde sempre foi muito mais autônoma , pouco aceitou viver debaixo dos pés dos tiranos locais ou estrangeiros, sempre fizeram o que tinham que fazer, sempre os povos Europeus foram mais destemidos e práticos e tudo que faziam levavam consigo pra onde iam e através disso espalhavam seus conhecimentos e beneficiavam muita gente, por isso a Europa é o que é
The sad thing regarding Mansa Musa, is that his greatness is attributed to his being a Muslim ruler; not a West African sovereign.
As i see it as both
Nothing wrong with that. If anything, it shows how Islam is a great help for Africa .
@@blackagent4754 , A great help? You mean like the slave markets, clitoridectomies, Boko Haram and child brides? Which modern day African nation is flourishing under Islam?
@@blackagent4754
Both sides should be shown. Mandinka people were Africans long before they were Muslims. Nubians had their own religion before Islam, Christianity and even before Khemet.
Abu l-Hasan Ali Ibn Nafi(a negroid), also known as Ziryab, was born in modern day Iran circa 789 CE to a freed Ethiopian slave. His nickname, Ziryab, means blackbird and was given to him in reference to his dark complexion and stunning singing voice. He is known as the innovator of those hygienic practices such as bathing, shaving and the use of toothpaste, perfumes, fragrant oils and deodorant. Moor was a term Europeans used to describe indigenous Africans and while many people may have heard of the term, Ziryab is not a name circulated in Western history and not many people don’t understand the weight of his influence. During the 10th century these weren’t African leaders only contributions to European society.
During the formation of Europe's first civilization in Greece, it was the Black Africans from the Nile Valley who civilized the Greeks. Later, as Greece handed over the acquired culture to the Romans who almost lost it, initiating the Dark Ages, the Moors came onto the scene and helped restore civilization.
In 711 AD, after the collapse of the Roman empire, the warring tribes from the Caucus were pushed to western Europe while the Moors invaded the Spanish shores bringing culture to these barbaric tribes. The African Muslims ruled over Spain, Portugal, southern France and North Africa for over seven hundred years.
Civilization
The Middle Ages are often referred to as the Dark Ages because there was little to no scientific or cultural progress. This might hold true for Christian Europe but not for Muslim Spain.
While the monarchs of France, Germany and England dwelled in barns with no ventilation systems and were convinced that their subjects shouldn't indulge in cleanliness as it amounted to sinning, Muslim Spain was always ahead, building 600 public baths.
In the 10th century, Cordoba, the capital of Moorish Spain was deemed the most modern city in Europe. The city with half a million inhabitants boasted street lighting, 50 hospitals with running water, 70 libraries and 500 mosques. Ruled by the Catholic Church, cities such as London and Paris did not see street lamps and paved roads until hundreds of years later.
Education
According to the center for research in globalization, in Christian Europe, nearly 99 percent of the population was illiterate, even a majority of the monarchs themselves couldn't read or write, while education was universal in Muslim Spain. At a time when Europe had a meager two universities, Spain boasted 17.
The founders of the Oxford University of England, the epitome of Western European education, took inspiration from the educational institutions of Spain. According to UNESCO’s Education Sector, the oldest operating university in the world today, the University of Al-Karaouine of Morocco was founded during the height of the Moorish Empire in 859 AD by a Black woman, Fatima al-Fihri.
Exploration
The Muslims of Spain were also responsible for the scientific revolution in Europe. They introduced the number zero and the decimal system that was a game-changer in solving mathematical problems. Historical evidence suggests Africans took to the skies nearly 600 years before Leonardo Da Vinci invented a hand glider.
In 875 AD, Abbas ibn Firnas made the world's first scientific attempt to fly and was partially successful. Muslim Spain was known to have great navigational technology with skills in cartography and craftsmanship in shipbuilding, which were taken great advantage of by the monarchies of Spain and Portugal after defeating and putting an end to African Muslim rule in the region in the 1400s, helping to launch the colonization of the Americas.
Around 800 years ago, in what is today known as 'Mali', there stood an ancient city called Timbuktu, which was well known for its rich resources, such as gold, ivory and salt, as well as its interesting culture. It was also in Timbuktu that the first university was created. Was built by an Moorish Emperor (Mansa Musa) This Moorish ruler is named Musse Melly [Mansa Musa], lord of the negroes of Guinea," reads the map's description. "This king is the richest and most distinguished ruler of this whole region on account of the great quantity of gold that is found in his lands
Its because they have taken control of the discourse about civilization through colonization and war. North Western Europe was no more civilized right up to the 10th century BC than Africa was. Keep in mind that the traditional buildings of ancient Britain were thatched (crannog) huts prior to that time and dugout dwellings (grubenhaus or pit house). Civilization as we know it only emerged in certain places in the world and then spread due to the influence of Empires like the Romans. And we know that Africa had some of the earliest civilizations on the planet. However, the primary "model" of civilization since the Romans has been one based on conquest because that is how western Europe became civilized (even though they later lost it). That model of conquest and colonization are what they claim as "western civilization" due to the history of Greece and Rome as colonial empires in the ancient world. But even then, those are late arrivals to the game of civilization having been influenced by far older precurors. But today, what they call civilization is the result of European colonization since the 1500s and the neo-feudal system based on European social and economic inequality of the Middle Ages. That is not the blueprint for civilization and is only a blueprint for theft to steal the land, resources and labor of others to build up your own. And Africans historically have never been interested in stealing everybody elses wealth to build themselves up, not to mention that Africa is a huge place and not as densely populated as Western Europe.
A lot of people do not understand this. That Europeans are recent to civilization. And I tell them if they want to debate with me on said subject. Just go read what Rome spoke when concerning them
@@Zimaalalaughs in modern tanks and infantry
Everybody gets their turn in the universe everyone, now we can be you... But you can bet your bottom dollar tomorrow it'll be someone else and so on and so forth that's the way of it@@user-pj3pp7ul4n
I am a history postgraduate and teach African histories at a university level. I've watched a few videos on your channel and it's so refreshing to see short informative videos that have actually been researched and included their sources in videos! Keep up the great work!
We dont need validation from NON africans to teach about OUR own history.
@ExLucifer-i3h No, he isn't.
Another factor, which i think also affects this video, is that african civilizations like the ones along the Swahili-coast, or even the west-african ones, which show clear external _influence_ are unjustly treated as being non-african. I.e. the logic being that since the swahili civilization had influences from arabia and india, it is an arab/indian/non-black civilization. On the other end, western civilization, though influenced and sometimes seeded by near-easterners and north-africans, is often treated as pure-white, with maybe a little bit of foreign influence to spice things up.
Similarly: You state that the iron-civilization of the CAR had no influence, but it did influence large parts of Africa. Just because the influenced people weren't "white", that does not mean it had no influence.
That is, I think there are often still strong, evil western-colonialist biases in how both westerners, the world through westerners, and importantly africans, see african history.
This is one of the best comments I've seen on this video. It's a clear double standard.
There was no such a thing as African civilization, or african empire. A tribal leader ruling over some tribes does not constitute an empire
@@levimehoffYou can dishonest for your YT supremacy cause but we know the truth. Your WS ego and dishonesty is being exposed globally. That’s why 5 African countries are kicking y’all out.
@levimehoff " a tribal leader ruling over other tribes doesn't constitute an empire" yes it does lol 💀. That's why the many empires formed in the eurasian steppe by nomadic steppe tribes are still referred to as empires. Also african civilizations such as mali and nubia do not really fit your description of tribes conquering other tribes.
It's crazy how geographical position is rarely brought up in debates regarding the continent. Many critics and detractors speak as if the natives CHOOSE to live in regional & global isolation, and that it's mainly an "IQ problem". Vincent Benziger was one of the few authors (that I know of) who have actually spoke about the geographical bearers
Yes I think it’s why regions like Egypt,Ethiopia, North Africa. And some north west African kingdoms were prominent in culture. Central Africa and West Africa were mostly isolated from Red Sea and the Mediterranean which were the most important trade hubs at the time.
@@Jean_Jacques148 Agreed
It kind of is an IQ problem though. They don't have the mental threshold to impose themselves on those around them; thus instead they get walked over. Sub-Saharan tribes are known to conquer enemies they *can*. But the ones they can are limited to ones on their level. If you want to argue they lack a propensity for war, conquering, etc., then I strongly disagree. We all have the same r-complex and IQ is irrelevant in that regard. We all have the same part of the brain that seeks war, comfort, status, sex, and so-on.
@@abominationdesolation8322 IQ doesn't measure specific knowledge. There are 9 types of intelligence. If you're geographically isolated from the rest of the world, then how can you even fathom conquering those outside of your region? (Ex. Big fish, little pond). In the end, desperation breeds innovation and historically speaking, Sub-Saharan African tribes never really needed to innovate beyond what they already had. "Certain tech can't be used, if they're not useful." Different needs & philosophy.
@@Jean_Jacques148The introduction of Islam allowed for diffusion of knowledge into West Africa, but their empires collapsed due to infighting.
That’s very true.The Africans had knowledge of agriculture ,irrigation systems,art, etc.
Can you give an example? I doubt it.
@@ArabSocialNationalist
Read wiki
@@ArabSocialNationalistget out of Black spaces demon
When? Where? And how long did it last?
@@liamwinter4512 Go document yourself on irrigation systems in precolonial Tanzania then allow yourself to talk again.
Knowing that the Sahara was a barrier that blocked connection is something many fail to pay attention to. The ability to mix the many different studies together when speaking on a specific time or topic is such a rare gift that so many miss. How you bring together multiple forms of information to show the similarities and differences between African societies and the others is powerful. Continue in your work, as we come together to get that foundation needed.
Exactly. All Mesopotamia, Levante, North African and South European early Civilizations gathered and learn from eachother for thousands of years around the Mediterranean Sea. Southern Africans as Northern Europeans didn't beneficiated of those interactions in the same Era.
😅 bro what?? People been causing the Sahara desert for thousands of years. I'm not sure if you know anybody from Niger, Mauritania and places like that people always have been crossing the Sahara desert for trade and sometimes expansion. Morocco invaded the kingdom of Songhai, so I wouldn't say it's a barrier at all.
@@seanmikaeel90s50 But there is a few thousands years before a few years AD that West Africa was isolated from the rest of the world. It first really became part of the world when the camel was introduced.
@@steinarvilnes3954false they always either went thru or around please stop while your behind.
They knew how to cross the Sahara. They lived in it...
The Europeans used it as an excuse for invading.
I seek out and watch a lot of right-wing content on UA-cam as well as reading incel forums. I used to read a lot of Daily Stormer but I was just getting too angry so I stopped. Take in mind, I don't engage with it because I believe it, it's just so interesting to see how far people's minds can go once they've been isolated and to see the end result of that.
One thing I've noticed with racists, they call African civilisation a myth, yet they still deem racism to be non-existent in our modern world. Despite openly believing that higher melanin directly correlates with an inability to sustain a complex economy, large-scale trade or diplomatic relationships. They'll claim the science is on their side, but only ever have sort-of tangentially related evidence that "just so happened" to come from a non-peer-reviewed study from a eugenicist.
Not understanding people as a very common trait amongst right-wingers. There's a lot of individualism, refusal to except how social dynamics can affect otherwise very cold, mathematical systems, and no self-awareness. They all tend to be simultaneous victims and zealots of their own culture, yet don't understand how other people can be affected by culture, and deem other societies weird and "different" (in a bad way) because of that.
I live in Australia, a surprisingly racist country, specifically toward the indigenous population. Before colonialists invaded, Aboriginals had farming, small communes and dozens of individual nations and languages. Yet a common belief amongst older white people is that all indigenous populations were nomadic, because they didn't know how to do anything else. Their art and mythology was and is seen as nothing more than gibberish on the level of Neanderthal-esque non-sense. I hate this country.
South of the sahara? Its crazy how white history isnt chronological and doesnt align or correlate 100% with original people/Afrikan history. Isnt sumer south of the sahara? Werent the nubians south of sahara?
Nubia is a region located in present-day Sudan, a country in East Africa, so yes its below the Sahara. Sumer however was not.
@@MichaelClayton64 thanks for the info! According to what youve studied is there a specific Country in Africa that can be considered the cradle of humanity? Ive read a lot of different places ranging from East/Central Africa, Mesopotamia(present day middle east). If you can cite a source id like to check it out. Thanks again for the feedback
African history was erased in order to create the current socioeconomic order and it is in their best interest to maintain that status quo. Due to the sanitized version of colonial history that is mainstream most people (including black people) are not even aware that the most widespread destruction of cities in human history occurred in Africa between the 18th and 19th centuries. Architects, craftsmen, record keepers were slaughtered in the thousands in the process of rewriting history. In fact most of those weapons and tech used during the world wars were first used to destroy Africa.
Nothing was "erased". There was nothing there. I'm sorry.
If Africa was so technically advanced why didn’t they use all their advanced technologies to defend themselves. They certainly had the numbers to do it.
@@thomasb1813
Numbers aren't everything because they are millions of diversity people in a big large mass.
Why just go back to your own space
@@thomasb1813your straw manning his point. Ppl like you come here to debate, not learn history.
@@thomasb1813 what are you, three?? here's another, if American is super power with nukes why did you it lose in Vietnam?
i like this take tbh, it takes a lot more than accomplishment to be considered influential and alot of the geographical barriers in africa made it difficult for the independent discoveries and inventions to be spread throughout
Great video guys. Can you make a video on the Kingdom of Kongo before the Portuguese?
Before they allied with Portuguese in 1483 you mean. Before the King of the Kingdom of Kongo, Nzinga a Nkuwu, became so impressed by Portuguese developments that converted to Christianity by his own initiative and chose his Christian Name to be João as the King of Portugal João II to honor him.
They were kind of evolved when compared to other African Kingdoms but nothing like Egypt or Mali. And ages behind the developments that Portuguese had by that time. By that time Portuguese had already settled in Ghana in 1470 trading gold and ivory with local tribes. The Elmina Castle in Ghana was built in 1482 due to the alliance with those tribes. The Jerónimos Monastery in Lisbon was built in 1500 few years later. There was nothing like that in Africa. Not even in Egypt. Much less in Congo.
❤🇨🇳🇯🇵🇲🇾🇮🇳🇪🇹🇲🇿🇦🇴🇬🇼🇸🇹🇨🇻🇲🇦🇵🇹🇧🇷
@@brixcosmoWhat has any of that got to do with what he asked. If he wanted to learn about Portuguese history he would have gone to a Portuguese history channel.
@@brixcosmo I don’t “mean” anything I know what I asked. I’m talking about The Kongo *before* Portugal.
@@WilliamGarrow When you reference Portugal in that ... What are you waiting on !? The Alliance between the Portuguese Kingdom and the Kingdom of Kongo is also part of the History of Kongo and in the end you still have to go through Portuguese records to know about it 'cause they didn't know how to write. In fact the King Nzinga a Nkuwu (João) sent noble members of the Kingdom of Kongo to Portugal where they stayed for years learning Writting and Christianism but who cares right!? You Americans know nothing about Africa and are stuck in that binary, biased views of Black vs White. Africa vs Europe. That blinds you. There were several alliances between Africans and Europeans in the 1400's, 1500's. As the Portuguese Kingdom alliance with Ghana Tribes in 1470, Kingdom of Kongo in 1483. Or even Ethiopia that was a Portuguese Ally much before the Age of Discovery. Ethiopian embassadeurs were received in Portugal and in the Vatican in the 14th Century. And in 1540 when Ethiopia was about to be conquered by the Turquish-Ottoman Empire asked for help to the Portuguese Kingdom and they were saved by the Portuguese Kingdom. We know it. They know it and are grateful for that part of their history. From that the "Birtukan" were born. 'Cause Portuguese Muskateers remained in the Region and married Ethiopian Woman. "Birtukan" was what Ethiopian called Portuguese and Portuguese-Ethiopian descendents. It means "Orange" 'cause Portuguese introduced Oranges to Ethiopia. "Birtukan" also became a common Ethiopian female name to this day.
But who cares about history right, American!? You guys rather see divisions where there were a lot of bridges. Not you're fault. That 247yo vortex of ignorance, lack of education and racism called USA made you that way. May God a.k.a. Eusébio da Silva Ferreira, bless your life!
❤️🇯🇵🇨🇳🇲🇾🇮🇳🇪🇹🇲🇿🇦🇴🇬🇼🇸🇹🇨🇻🇲🇦🇵🇹🇧🇷
@@Jean_Jacques148 Go check Portuguese records of it 'cause they didn't know how to write... The Kingdom of Kongo history is indissociable of Portuguese records about it. That's part of the History of Congo, Angola and Portugal. Get it American!?
I wondered at the barrier of the Sahara too bad it didn't keep us safer, the recap at the really is a good aspect of your episodes. Thank You
It makes sense that the fields of science, archeology, history, etc. were being documented by Europeans, who saw other races as primitive, so wouldnt even consider they could have great achievements and so couldnt see them, and didnt look for them. And so this was taught to us. Now, in our time, we can fill in the whole of Human history as we learn it from many peoples, and see the full achievements of Humankind.
Great presentation. John Henry Clarke mentioned how in order to have a civilization one must first be civilized. Europeans seem to measure what a civilization is by certain material achievements, so a village that has people working together collectively would not be seen or deemed as a civilization by their standards. I also think another reason for African societies below the Sahara being excluded from being seen as civilizations are due to the fact that they saw them as civilizations and had all the complexities of a civilization, but with the Atlantic slave trade they forcefully made themselves forget and omit those facts so they could justify obtaining Africans that were enslaved and sent to the Americas and Europe.
They weren't seen as actual civilizations. Europeans barely knew what these people's societies even looked like since they didn't really venture into Africa. All they knew is that they were technologically less advanced.
It has nothing to do with justifying slavery. What justification did Africans use to enslave their neighbours and sell them to Europeans?
Not sure about this "sent to Europe" you are talking about. The slave trade went to the New World, where there was massive demand for manual labour. Europe had serfdom. There was no mass movement of Africans to Europe.
You know what Muslims medieval travels said about Africans?
are ants a civilisation because they can cooperate together to make anthills? Whats the point of taking any hunter gatherer society, and putting it next to something like ancient egypt with their pyramids and saying "yup they were in the same stage of development, both a civilisation" Like why make these weird arguments when you can appreciate places like axum, mali, ghana, etc.
This video is really bad. Hometeam really fucked up on this one
Thank you for this. I have only recently been learning how “civilisation” is a loaded word. I always took it to mean what it literally means - “living in cities” - which is not massively hard to define. Never understood the debate until now. And, yes, I think geography is very influential in how societies develop and interact.
I'm with you on this one. I destroyed an anthill once and it was rebuilt.thats when I took a curiosity to insects and I ask this question.... looking at how they operate aren't they a "civilization" also.they may lack written records but science says they keep records in pheromones some how
Even with this simple definition people start splitting hairs and say stuff like "well these aren't cities, they're just TOWNS"
Is it not also an issue that archeological investigations have been relatively limited when it comes to the areas of African civilization outside Egypt?
It's very relevant. Most of Africa sees much less archaeology than Europe, and central Africa has acidic soil that destroys a lot of organic objects. That's why most things are found in the deserts. When the little bit of Africa's archaeology finds something, it's usually something extremely old and preserved by petrification.
@@braincells1020 But that doe snot change the fact that West Africa is not mentioned anywhere properly, while East Africa is. In fact, the trade ports of Tanzania have Roman coins all over the place, while nothing found in West Africa.
There’s finally a growing interest in Nubia.
Thats not true Mali is an exception of a West African Society that was talked about and the ghana empire@@steinarvilnes3954
@@steinarvilnes3954climate
Always appreciate your content is so spiritual
Excellent video and research as always HomeTeam History!
Thank you for this fantastic video. I think your hypothesis is spot on - isolation is an extremely limiting factor in influence. I'd like to point out that the Medditerrian literally means "middle earth" and another, even older cradle of civilization than the so-called Euro-centric version, China, 中国, literally means middle kingdom. They were surrounded by other societies that made information/technology/culture exchange feasible!
It seems strange to me that influence (I presume, leading to our modern societies) would need to be demonstrated to be classified as a civilization anyway. Consider Mezo-America. Would we consider the Incas, Mayas and Aztecs not civilizations? And yet what sort of influence did that have to our modern world, particularly in the US? Don't get me wrong, there definitely are some, maize/corn culture, there is evidence that certain forms of democracy from indigenous Americans impacted colonial thinkers. But It would seem a great stretch to think that given their isolation for the vast majority of their existence, and the very short period of time relatively that the civilizations existed before getting wiped of the map, that the much longer trickle of influence coming intermittently from less isolated sub-Saharan Africa wouldn't have much deeper, much more foundational influence to where aggregate modern culture, technology, etc are at today.
"very short period" are you really talking mesoamerica? Yeah they were around for at least 2000 years and mutual "influencing" can be seen between the various cultures that were emerging in there, they were sharing their inventions like say, the calendar or writing across the whole region. Besides, since as you mentioned, being somewhat isolated was normal for human societies until europeans started sailing around the world, i think when judging whether some peoples were a civilisation based on the influence they produced, we should be taking into account how big the world they could access actually was.
Amazing content ❤
That was an interesting theory HomeTeam, I understand where you are coming from. Africa below the sahara has indeed Civilizations but due to the Hollywood deception and white supremacist thinking people think that a cavillation has to have big buildings like in Europe and Asia, but that is not true. And for the Sahara barrier, I disagree a bit because people been trading between that desert for years, so I don't think its a location problem it's a racism problem personally.
Another point to consider is that the majority of Western countries were constantly at war. Being in a state of constant turmoil caused them to form large alliance's and complex political and military civilizations that spanned many nations. Where as African tribes focused on peaceful conflict resolution. Which resulted in smaller cities/communities seeking to live in harmony versus conquest! IMHO
Wow, that's just dumb. Bantus went to war with khoi for hundreds of years. King ghezo was plundering other tribes famously for his whole reign. How can you say something so dumb?
Civilization began in Africa as it was the birth of all mankind.
Because they never amassed global powerful social standing that make others fear and respect their accomplishments
I disagree. Many African civilizations have been ignored/overlooked because of their failure to record their historical existence. That only leaves archeological discovery to learn of them. That my friend means digging randomly on a large continent and finding something. Not a very reliable or timely method of discovery.
Well the one's with historical records are not spoken about either in popular culture.
Always love your videos. Im so grateful for your education of our African history 🙏🏾 ❤🙏🏾
FROM MALIKU MUHAMMAD ALLAH
Keep preaching the truth!!!!!
It’s also worth mentioning the kingdom of Great Zimbabwe. They had stonework, creating stone towers, which Europeans consider a necessary feature of civilisation, looking down on building made of wood, clay or bricks. Africans are just as intellectually capable of innovation as Europeans. All races are one species, meaning we are all equal in intellectually and spiritually. Europeans - especially those of Germanic stoke - are just very arrogant, due to their wealth. They should be reminded that they used to live in mudhuts and wooden houses before raiding Rome and stealing their civilisation. They started off jealous, then after getting rich they had historical amnesia and became boastful.
But the truth can never be censored forever. Good work comrade.
The truth is there are intellectual differences due to genetics. Stop coping and accept reality
@georgekirby7150 not really. Skin cells don't mean different brain cells, it is a correlation that makes no sense
@@OpenPayment it does make sense because skin cells and brain cells are both subject to genetics and genetics are subject to changes fo to selective breeding based on the environment. I'm sorry that hurts your feelings so much you would deny the obvious.
@georgekirby7150 it doesn't. Having more eumelanin than pheomelanin to adapt to the heat of Sahara and the tropics doesn't impact brain cells, and you have no proof to back it up, you just made that claim up and implied it as if it were reality while not even explaining why it would be the case that they affect brain cells
It didnt hurt my feelings, I couldnt care less. You just made the claim up and put it under the guise of "its reality" trying to sound edgy. Do your research next time because there's nothing backing up your claim
@@OpenPayment EVERY. SINGLE. ASPECT. OF. A. PERSON. IS. SUBJECT. TO. GENETICS.
from height, eye color, skintone, shape of teeth, hair color, even propensity for illness, and every other trait
But, sure, grey matter density is the one thing outside of genetics effects. Sure, believe that...
The world will soon find out. We must stand together.
For sure, its coming soon about the truth of who we are.
Find out about what?!
Very Nice Scholarly sources used !! Africa was somewhat self contained and had its own vibrant markets and more than enough "fresh" water, food, agricultural land as Humans and civilization began there in the interior and left only about 60,000 years to populate the world so they did have more than sporadic contact with the outside world before Mega Lake Chad shrunk and the Sahara grew larger.
Only the portion of land that has access to the Mediteranean sea is called Ifriqiya (in modern times called Tunisia), the name Africa was developed from that name (forget about Scipio!), that further became the name of the entire continent, that is actually (called) Etiopia, Alkebulan, Axum etc.
That was in Roman Empire and Phoenicians-Carthaginian Empire Era. Romans took that name "Ifriqyia" a.k.a "Al-Maghrib Al-Adna", what the Amazighs called to the region of Tunisia and Eastern Algeria, and called it "Africa". That's why there's several Roman Maps were Africa is just that Area and the rest of the Continent is named with other Kingdoms names like the ones you've cited. Even the Concept of Continents didn't even existed back then
That's a creation of the Age of Discovery (15th-17th Centuries) when all Continents became known on a global scale and Continents were named for Cartography reasons.
What i don't understand is you saying that tgat was the only portion of land that had access to the Mediterranean Sea. All North Africa, Levante, South Europe and Iberian Peninsula were in contact for thousands of years before that precisely due to trading in the Mediterranean Sea.
Phoenicians emerged in Levante (Lebanon, Syria) in 3000BC. Spread all around the Mediterranean Sea around 1100BC following tge decline of most cultures in the Late Bronze Age collapse. They had territories, cities and trade ports in Levante (Cyprus,Lebanon,Syria), Lybia, Tunisia where they built Carthage, Argelia, Morocco, South Portugal, South Spain, South Italy (Sardinia, Corsica, Sicilly), Malta, South Greece.
By that time Roman Republic hadn't expanded into Roman Empire yet. Carthage, the Capital of the Phoenician-Carthaginian Empire was built in 900BC and it was only conquered by Romans in 146BC.
Phoenicians are known has the first rulers of the Mediterranean Sea and renowned among contemporaries as skilled traders and mariners. They served as intermediaries between Civilizations in Middle-East, South Europe and North Africa, facilitating the exchange of goods, knowledge, culture and religious traditions. Their expansive and enduring trade network is credited with laying the foundations of an economically and culturally cohesive Mediterranean which would be continued by tge Greeks and especially the Romans.
@@brixcosmo , i know, ik, is a bad generalisation, only meant to offer some perspective or some context, being that Ifriqiya occupied a somewhat middle portion of the coast (including the thin stretch that is now Libya's land). So, yeah, there's a whole lot of access to the Mediteranean besides what Ifriqiya had.
@@brixcosmo, "Phoenicians" / Venetians!
I think that Africa and Africans did originate and influence the dissemination of culture, (civilization). They were not credited for their contributions then and just now we are seeing Africa's contributions to the world being revealed.
What do think of Candace Owen's "white men ended slavery" video? In this video, Candace says that the concept of Black Africans that lived like pharaohs was a "fantasy". This statement insinuates that Black Africans weren't pharaohs despite the 25th dynasty. Would the Hometeam make a video about the Haitian revolution, and the Mexican independence from Spain because the president of Mexico at that time was half Black? Would the Hometeam also talk about the African wars against slavery?
dont listen to sheba
Your confusing black with African.. you can be not black and stil African.
Yes you are right, you can be African but not Black, nevertheless, I believe that no matter your race, ethnicity, tribe, or skin tone you are all "African". I"m a descendant of Black Africans. If Africa is united despite race, ethnicity, tribes, or creeds I think Africa will be the most powerful and prosperous continent on the planet again.
@@afrotexas1920 do you think all of Europe or Asia is united? Does Pakistan care what Japan is doing?
You're misrepresenting what he said. She was using a figure of speech.
Her claim was that the idea of Africa being a paradise where everyone lived peacefully and well fed until the Europeans came, is a myth.
Europeans: Lol Africans have no cvilizations
Egypt and Carthage: Uhh yeah. we'll just stand over here and-
Mali, Great Zimbabwe, Zanzibar, etc: ARE WE A JOKE TO YOU?!?!?!
Egypt and Carthage were not african.
@@TraderBenthey were African mabye not black though. Just like Asians can be Japanese or Pakistani
@ExLucifer-i3h Mali and Great Zimbabwe are not part of the Mediterranean coast.
@ExLucifer-i3h Can 2 things be true, meaning someone can be African because they leave on the continent and be Mediterranean
@ExLucifer-i3h You did. Unless you meant "they" to somehow exclude Mali and Great Zimbabwe.
Africa isn't Europe that's why they say this
Geographical barrier is the important point that people tend to ignore a lot when it comes to this topic. It's true, you can't develop or be on the same level of civilization as others if you are geographical isolated. Knowledge sharing is what makes civilization to grow and grow much faster. If you are doing things on your own far way from others then it's be gonna hard.
I think that’s a important point about land barriers. If you look at the 50 states you will see the same thing but not as bad. You have the east coast 13 colonies along with west coast being the wealthiest. While the inland’s parts of Appalachia and the south are riddled with poverty and worse conditions in most variables.
Another major factor is the climate. Evidence of some civilizations would be sparse if they were in a tropical environment, because the humidity would destroy, over time, writings and architecture unless information and structures were made from materials resistant to erosion and breakdown.
I know you're never gonna see this
But you have helped a man BEYOND questioning his EXISTENCE
And that has to mean SOMETHING
Please NEVER stop 🙏🏿
I enjoy watching videos from this channel.
Kindly keep it up sir.
It's a good source of information for me as well.
Bro, this video was way too convoluted and it took too long for you to get to the point everyone already knows. Blacks are dehumanized and the dehumanization is cultural racism. Ive never heard any black country in anywhere else in the world be considered a civilization either. From Jaimaca to Papau New Guinea. Dehumanizing an enemy gives everyone involved conviction to destroy that enemy. That's why the descendants of slaves in the Americas (black americans, black latinos, black carribbeans, etc) get negative stereotypes despite being the biggest source cultural influence worldwide since the beginning of colonization in the new world. Aside from the fact african slaves being mostly the best of the best europeans could buy, also dismantled vast regions of civilizations on the African continent.
You're talking about enslaved soldiers, experts and professionals being specifically targeted to be shipped off by the millions to build brand new civilizations. The majority of the competence to do that came from them at a barrel of gun. Then you get hit by the Scramble for Africa and the scorch earth "decolonization". So you lost the majority of your experts, got reduced to deprived drones by colonization that justified no more need for slavery since the slaves built such a good platform it ushered the industrial revolution (and too many negros around). And then whatever you were forced to build for the europeans was sacked and destroyed on top of generations of subversion. It go so bad that yeah, even african societies believed they were uncivilized because they were miseducated for generations at hands of pro white administrations. And they go as far as praising the groups that destroyed them.
See if you're people didnt believe yall were uncivilized and you checked these white people and kunes everytime they gaslight you, the world wouldnt believe you were uncivilized. But what can you expect when all of the warrior class were killed or broken like over a century ago.
I love listening to these to fall asleep but only if ive heard them before so i dont miss any content. His voice is so soothing
Wisdom and knowledge comes in different sequences in time It’s like learning a little of life in twelve thousand years and finding out it may be just a sequence of time in the love of humanity. How could one understand South Africa, where as they can’t get it right in the place that they claim in North Africa
I had never thought about these issues before. Thank you for bringing them to my attention.
I feel like UA-cam keeps unsubscribing me from this channel. I’ve been a member for over a year receive notifications etc but keep having to resubscribe. You are doing something right sir.
Put that bass in your voice, king!
Thank you for posting this big dawg
Technologically, structurally, and tool wise they were more afvanced then The Arctic Native, Native American, And Native Oceanian civilizations just not as high up as most of the European And Asian ones yeah.
Home team ❤❤❤
It is easy to misunderstand civilization. Civilisation is primarily about human behaviour.
Civilisation is comprised of two parts, namely, non-material culture and material culture.
Non-material culture such as spirituality and related beliefs and moral values preceded material culture such as agriculture, pastoralism, stone buildings etc. why? This is because civilization is, first and foremost, about mutually respectful relations between and among humans, acknowledging our common humanity. Without this we would have simply exterminated each other and some, who are yet to progress past this first stage, would have done some of this extermination of humans.
The corpus of values includes a wide spectrum of beliefs, traditions, customs, laws, and habits that condition behaviour of the people involved, e.g. treatment of human life, family and community, treatment of the dead, ancestor veneration, governance and the governed, voluntary compliance with beliefs, traditions, customs, freedom vs duty and responsibilities, social order and structure, work and play, honor, honesty, health, and wellness. These, together, are the foundations for continuity.
These are the bases upon which material culture rises. When these are debased material cultural growth stops, stagnates and reverses.
Therefore, the greatest, the longest surviving, and enduring civilisations are therefore those with the highest achievements in non-material culture, like ancient Kemet in the Nile Basin.
One of the reasons why this is true is because civilisations crumble first from within themselves; that is, disintegration begins with the non-material cultural foundation upon which they were built. Non-material cultural elements are not visible; the mind of the people as it were, the corpus of values, the cosmological mind, the spiritual mind, the educational mind, the scientific mind.
We should use Human Rights as an indicator. That's enough.
Henry ford brought Africans from Togo to show them how to fordge the v8 engine in the 1930s. So Africa had the best smelting techniques even into the 1900s
Wonderful presentation but I have to disagree with the theory that Africa had geological disadvantages. Look at the Vikings for example, they were able to design what was considered then as one of the fastest ships known to man, and crossed the Atlantic Ocean to Europe they sought out other lands to better their civilization
Error..but you get the point.@ExLucifer-i3h
Damn they should have left us alone.
To the folks who think every black tribe in west,central and southern Africa originally came from Egypt. Doesn't this demonstrate that this is unlikely? If all those west Africans came from Egypt because of invasions wouldn't there be more examples of direct Egyptian civilization in west Africa and in other parts below the Sahara? Especially as far as writing and Egyptian architecture.
It's because it didn't happen
Another great leap into the abyss...Different environments, different resources = different cultures. Why don't modern Egyptians value education, science and innovation, or speak and write the old Egyptian language?
@@lydiaedwards8100 why would you say modern Egyptians ,don't value education , science, or Innovation? Modern Egypt is the fourth most developed country in Africa. The ancients language was replaced by Arabic in 641ce do to the Arab conquest
@@lydiaedwards8100
So are you suggesting that Egyptians did migrate to west,central and southern Africa?
@@CrowdPleeza anyone who is suggesting that is delusional. There isn't one pyramid, tomb, mummy, language, spinx or piece of evidence to say Egyptians migrated to west/ central Africa. Matter fact ancient Egyptians didn't know west Africa existed and west Africans didn't know Egypt existed
I liked you channel. But really man... if you want to watch movies about african civilization, there are many good movies that are made in Ghana and Nigeria. Or if you understand french, ivorian movies are also nice. Stop waiting for Hollywood to make it. Go and explore Nollywood or any other african movie industries. I'm from Thailand and my partner is ivorian. He wants me to know more about african culture, so he gave me sources from africa! That is it. The production nowadays improved a lot. You will definitely enjoy African historical movies that made in africa 🙏🏻
perspective changer🍃
Africa is huge, and it doesn't really make sense to say "Africans" discovered iron-smelting because of this, or to compare it to small Anatolia. because that hides the real historical question: when those people in central Africa discovered how to work iron, why didn't it spread? that's the real difference with Anatolia, the technology spread out of that small region to many others, but it didn't spread from central Africa across the peoples in west or to the African great lakes, creating a dominant and lasting industry. there were native American societies in the American great lakes region that learned to work copper really early, but it also never spread far beyond their home, and died out eventually, without creating a metal-working industry in north America.
That isn't the problem. The problem is that people are still looking at African societies as homogeneous, and that Africa is a country. Ironworking did spread. It spread all over Africa to numerous societies. The Yoruba and the Mende and the Buganda aren't the same people, with the same societal structures. The problem is that people need to read more African scholars writing about their own societies.
Africa is far larger than Europe or Anatolia. So saying African societies didn't have influence is like just flat saying I don't respect African sovereignty, and because all the people are dark skinned the spread of their knowledge doesn't count. Which is ridiculous.
@@ladybluelotus🎯
I agree. I love @hometeams content but this one was weak and missing a lot of analysis. It took a minute to find wholes in this one
Cous 90% sand and 10% hungry is not such a good achievement
New things being discovered in Africa every day.
How did Japan manage to go from a preindustrial empire complete with samurai. To a World war 2 axis of evil power house? From weilding swords to suicide pilots and a war industry that fueled their entire way of life.
What stops Africa from acheiving anything?
Only a complete moron would compare one small island country to a continent.
@@NanakiRowanJapan was bout bout it sword 🗡️ 🔫 😂
What do you mean sir
@@NanakiRowanjapan isn't a small island, their were plenty of islands and nations in Africa the size of Japan. The real difference is that Japan successfully modernised and managed to navigate through the European to by times but the africans weren't able to do thar and in most cases didn't even attempt to modernise leaving them to languish. Its ashame etheopia didn't but they lacked the same degree of centralisation of Japan but still it might have been possible
@@baileygregory9192 Japan is not a continent as the moronic OP was suggesting, which again, is a moronic comparison.
I mean in school in us they mostly foucsed on egypt greece rome but of course we learned about the sumerians indus valley and later civilzations like the maya aztec inca
Because those civilization have the most records and writers history as well as architecture still here. Could it be that simple ?
To understand why subsaharan Africa was underdeveloped you to look at geography. Let’s not forget that up until Industrial Revolution, the main source for transportation were horses 🐎 .In subsaharan Africa horses were very rare or not present at all . Therefore communication and transport between groups relied only on foot making it extremely difficult for groups to communicate in the long range . Also lack navigable waters and rivers, no natural harbors , isolated by saharan desert in the north and oceans in other parts, subsaharan Africa was landlocked. And when you’re isolated you tend to lack behind other groups who have more natural access to communication. If you look the geography of Western Europe you see there were extremely positive advantages especially for communication between groups of people. You can see that patterns even more to aboriginals of Australia who were even more underdeveloped that subsaharan Africa.
In the past , people didn’t make social analysis to understand how geography impacts human development, therefore they tended to interpret these events with race ideas . That is what created racism . It is not racism that created underdeveloped of subsaharan Africa. It was the other way around.
@ExLucifer-i3h Yes it was landlocked. Coastal areas did not connect subsaharan Africans with other parts of the world. They just communicated with their neighbors but outside of the region.
@ExLucifer-i3h Did you understand what I said ?! I said landlocked from other parts of the world not that it didn’t have coastline. I never said that .
@@st3019 He created his account 3 days ago with the sole purpose of trolling this channel. Don't take him seriously. He also did not grow up in Nigeria. He has never been to Africa.
One question here. Why should the caliber for civilization be left to the north? Isn't the South a globe? Did Sub-Saharan civilization influence other larts of Africa or India, Chinese or Arab peninsula? One example I know is the glorious Axumite civilization, which was recorded as one of the superpowers of its time at the world stage.
I don't remember hearing the various kingdoms, barons and feudal lords referred to as "uncivilized"? But somehow, similar kingdoms and villages in Sudsaharan Africa were?!
@ExLucifer-i3h Not possible, as they had civilizations.
@ExLucifer-i3h I'm sorry, but all African civilizations, are civilizations. You absolutely cannot prove otherwise unfortunately. Sorry.
The definition of civilization is simple. Did you develop a writing system? Yes or No? Large differences exist between a political entity based on written vs oral traditions. An entity based on an oral tradition limits you in terms of what can be communicated across distance and time.
Because wt people think it’s their right to decide these things. Them days are over🙏🏿
Cant disagree but where did they learn that from!!
Being trapped beneath snow and ice for a millennia without fire is a civilization???
Just starting this video, but curious what your thoughts are on what’s happening in Niger? Interesting times!
Facts and it's at least hundreds of years old and there is an invention called dudu osun unparallel
The Gold King 👑? His wealth rivaled King Solomon.
To avoid my usual “giant wall of text” habits, I will give my opinion on the subject itself:
“Why African Societies Were Viewed As 'Non Civilizations'”
I think it is important to remember that “civilization” is normally a word used for a large scale or a unified people. For example, the individual factions in Japan’s Warring States are not considered civilizations, but Japanese civilization is. The same is true for such times in China, Europe, etc. So, the term “African civilization” is commonly used but refers to the whole rather than any particular group within Africa.
The racist ideology of many early archeologists refused to highlight subsaharan African accomplishments but over emphasize Greek and Roman endeavors and Ancient Rome literally stole ideas from everyone. Also subsaharan African societies did not have as many environmental issues as the northern nations because subsaharan Africa was rich in all resources so not too many issues with daily life to have to constantly build and conquer
Sub saharan Africal conquerers like anyone else.. How did they have an already established slave trade if people weren't conquering?
Are accomplishments in the present much more important than past or future accomplishments? Do we have much work to do, and must we be about that work? Should our concern be what they think of us or what we think of ourselves?
Y'all call stealing from and killin people civilized???That's all they did
The same thing could be said about your people now. Just saying.
@@thomasb1813 how?
What are you even referring to? Africa is a continent and it was full of diverse kingdoms and empires. Even if we were to go by your logic, it is impossible for a civilization to just steal and Kill as that would obviously lead to an extinction of the culture.
@@Niani23455 I didn’t say that’s all they did. Just that europeans weren’t the only ones that’s ever done it.
@@thomasb1813 I think you responded to the wrong person.
Because western man made these current classifications even considered many of middle eastern civilizations as his history
Thank you
BEWARE of the popular thought of the new school of whatcivilized means...🤔
Never heard of ancient african mathematician, african astronomer, african philosopher or a physician
Check out
1. Mahmud Kati
2. Abd al-Qadir dan Tafa
3. Nana Asmaʼu
4. Mohammed Bagayogo
They are
havent looked hard enough, plenty in north african history not sure about the rest of africa
@@cracksmoker1506 there are plenty at west africa like Ghana.
@@itsbeyondme5560 not surprising sadly not enough is spoken about our peoples
The notion that a society is democratic because the monarch required input and oversight from elders is a very bizarre and peculiar one to me. So, I looked into the man referenced, Chancellor WIlliams, and while I'm sure his work has plenty of merit, it's important to understand his doctorate was in sociology, not necessarily history, and as a prominent afrocentrist, his work should be viewed and represented accordingly: as being from an afrocentric perspective. A perspective which, at least based on the experiences I've had with them of which is perhaps a small cohort of people within the grouping who are not representative of the majority, posits that everything ever is supposed to have originated in africa and the rest of the world just stole from it.
Still, this is some fascinating information and if remotely true does warrant some additional visibility.
Because they didn't lash out in stone, and because they were in an area unpopular with Westerners.
Why did the pre-Illyrian cultures in the Balkans and the Danube region (Vinča, Vučedol, etc.) not get the name Civilization, even though they were the first in the world in many technological aspects (Series production, casting, bronzes, calendar, even different shoes for left and right feet, for example) and the size of the settlements. Because they didn't lash out in stone, and because they were in an area unpopular with Westerners.
I am talking about the period 5000 years ago, approximately at the time of the early beginnings of Egypt and Mesopotamia. Many who came much later to similar achievements were exalted as "civilizations"
Very surprised by this take. I’d argue Subsaharan Africa had an immense impact on global innovation. The Sudanese (Nubia), Great Zimbabwe, Mali, Benine, all had trade routes through India and China. Many of India’s great Kings were Africans. There was much in terms of cultural exchange which allowed Africans to share knowledge and wealth with the known world.
Let’s not forget the impact of the Moors who conquered Spain..majority of which were from west Africa (Stan Van Poole). I’d argue the growth of the Sahara diminished trade between Africa, Rome and other powers but it did not diminish African influence. The diminished trade also hurt Africa because they were slow in understanding the development of new tech, like firearms, before it was to late.
Please name 5 or 3 African kings who "ruled" India
@@samkelombambo916 Malik Andil Khan Sultan, Jamal al-Din Yaqut, Malik Sarwar, and General Malik Ambar
Please who do you think you messing with. Stop your ish
I'm so sorry, but "Great Zimbabwe" is a very modest set of structures built by Arab slavers as a regional base.
It's very embarrassing that Africans push it as the remains of a "civilisation".
It isn't.
It's rock-bottom basic quick architecture built by Arabs for their slaving.
Nothing more.
I'm so sorry.
Sudan and Nubia are "civilised" only under Middle Eastern influence.
Stop claiming our culture.
Stop stealing our ancestors.
Stop looting our history.
@@samkelombambo916 These fantasies are a total embarrassment aren't they? They will lay claim to everyone else's civilisation, as if the world owes Africa something for their lack of advancement.
@@Will-bn3vtthey won’t respond to your reply😂
SSAs were blocked by the Sahara to the north and large oceans to the east, west and south.
The europeans could travel south and east easily to encounter new civilizations.
The asians could travel south and west to encounter new civilizations.
Middle East could travel east, west and north to encounter new civilizations.
The crazy thing is I gotta watch this video knowing that no matter what Africa was gonna always seem uncivilized to early settlers because there were on a mission to get land and spices
Eurocentrc or Colonist Psychology ruled out African Civilizations but artifacts were stolen. DUH
History is not a snapshot in time and Africa is not a monolith and never was. There were societies on the continent where blacksmithing, agriculture, and other skills existed prior and during the TransAtlantic slave period. However, a vast majority of those societies had already declined, making the less advanced societies vulnerable to kidnap, losing battles, being captured, and sold into slavery.
@ExLucifer-i3h Go to the Smithsonian and British Museum of Natural History. My personal favorite is the Ngulu execution sword.
Peace
My motto is to believe none of what you hear and half of what you see
Who wants to tell DeSantis that it was Africans that invented Blacksmithing?😂😅
13:40 “our western minds”? Who are you?
We were told someny lies so we would not know were or who we are that is why it took us long to know who we are. We were at first taken with our king and Queens and the family's and workers. That is why they started getting men and women from different village. The less they understand each other the better that is why they were successful in enslaving the black people. One of the group was the people from Brazil.
Just remind them the next time they try to include us in the Global Warming crisises if it is true...
The European Albanoid has happily left out the Asiatic Black Man of Civilization Day.
Hello and peace my friend hoe tour doing well...please could you provide me with a way to may my ringtone the same as your intro
Was everything done to the Africans and to the first peoples of the African Continent the was that part of civilization. just a question now peoples know those were brutal deeds to humans and you very well knew these were human
This is a very bad episode. The only reason African societies have not been viewed as civilizations is racism. There’s no other reason. All of your points are elementary and I could point out the same issues with western cultures. Africans had buildings, great walls, borders, armies, art! I highly suggest you and your “hometeam” read some books like When We Ruled, Before the Mayflower, 1619 Project, Moors of Spain, etc…Even white authors have explained in details great African civilizations. The last few episodes HomeTeam have posted have been uncomfortable team west and lacks any historical expansive research.
Who is “we”…