Hey /his/, I'm interested in learning more about the history of Sub-Saharan Africa. I currently know absolutely nothing on this topic, which I think is why I find it so intriguing.
Can you point me to certain time periods or civilizations that I should read about? Are there any that you find particularly interesting?
The empire of Mali. Is a good point to start. Jenne-Jeno is interesting, as well. There's also the ancient iron workers of SS Africa. The most interesting thing about Sub-Saharan Africa would probably be the effects the Islamic world had on it after the Saharan was crossed by traders.
If you speak French try reading the epic of Sundiata translated from Mandinka.
It's heavily legend, but it displays a lost age similar to the Greek, Persian, Germanic, Celtic, and Hindu epics.
Well the whole area is pretty uneventful. You see while North, West, and most of East Africa had thriving populations and really interesting history, sub Saharan Africa never really had the population density needed to start large scale civilization. Plus the land was so great agriculture didn't catch on as much as North Africa. And their only real connection with the rest of the world was the salt trade.
I feel like what we learn the most from Sub Saharan Africa is that by observing it's "historical uneventfulness" we can work to understand the factors, forces and interactions that thrive history and civilization.
People for some reason consider the people of the central African rainforest the quintessential "Africans" despite it being the most remote and depopulated area.
It's like looking to Siberia for "authentic" Asia.
Most of the European viewpoint probably developed around encounters there during Colonization.
Kinda hard to develop Civilization when crops are shit and there is disease everywhere. Most painful to the Europeans were several that had killed Beasts of Burden. People always point to Africa being rich in resources like gold and diamond, but those resources are kinda useless when you have a) No civlizational framework to make use of them, and b) isolation that leaves you unable to trade for them.
This board is about history, not the modern day. Sub Saharan Africa had multiple civilizations which rose and fell like all do.
Africa is ENORMOUS. Like Asia.
But trying to treat siberian hunters, mongolian hordes, khmer rajas, and warring japanese states as one entity is equally stupid.
Does anyone here go to Rationalwiki? I am super disapointed with their Africa article. They more or less define the continent by Europe.
During the winter break I wouldn't mind doing some research to update the article.
>/pol/ is only muh left vs muh right
If you cared to ignore the obvious bullshit threads and bait/meme replies,
You'd see that /pol/ offers a vast wealth of opinion.
But I suppose that an idiot would see facts which hurt his feefees as an all consuming stormfront circlejerk.
>Does anyone here go to Rationalwiki?
Someone legitimately just asked this question.
On my Asiatic birdwatching imageboard.
I can't do it.
Since I basically admitted to being a /pol/ browser from the start,
Your final suggestion is not only redundant but also indicative of a complete lack of mental objectivity (as well as an unwelcome predisposed bias toward others who may see things differently)
Again, I reiterate, behind the troll threads and baiting replies (and 4chan isn't 80% or more of that?) /pol/ has good arguments, factual discussions, and a wealth of factually based opinion.
If discussion of facts isn't your thing, why the hell are you on a history board?
How could you be trusted to provide objective viewpoints on history?
The term "history is written by the victors" comes to mind. That is, popular history is spread by the people who were not defeated. And more plainly, common historical teachings come from the BIAS of those who defeated others. The general written viewpoint is biased against all thoughts which would question the winner.
I wouldn't consider myself capable of discussing a topic/genre if I were unable to wade through the baiting, unable to discern true thought versus the mindplay.
Neither should you.
And so, you ask me to abandon a thought viewpoint that goes against the commonly accepted angle.
I ask you to question where you real motivations lie and where they have come from.
is somewhat right. history is often spotty because Africans often did not keep good written records.
If you are genuinely interested, i would advise looking up Nubian, Ethiopian and Swahili history. All grew at the fringes of the civilized known world at the time, and have very interesting histories to them
Well, there the Ethiopians and Nubians. At one point, Mali, and the Somali/Swahili city-states. Some peoples in the Sahel. The Hausa and Fon, on the fringes of Islamic expansion.
The rest were, frankly, too barbaric and insignificant to merit mention.
Also dont forget the Kongolese. Ran the biggest hustle in history and were able to stay independent much longer than most of Africa
>Portuguese looking to go around Africa because fuck the ottomans
>meet a society at the mouth of the Kongo river
>We give you these novelty black slaves that cost you a pretty penny because its a 50% attrition rate when the Arabs take them north through the Sahara
>just gib guns so we can keep getting you all these slaves
>rinse and repeat for 350 years
It was literally Europe's abolition movement that took away the Kongolese power.