|
Post by Springa on Mar 11, 2005 11:45:22 GMT -5
Yeah, you may be right. I was thinking of high in terms of Greece and Egypt, who were much more evolved than anywhere else at the time. Also, I don't really know anything about Loango, so I must have been a bit prejudiced and sort of equaled wood buildings with uncomplex social organization, which in retrospect, makes no sense really. First it depends on what your definiton of "high" is and then further on how it stacks up to your definition subjectively speaking ofcourse. Nubia was roughly equal in sophistication to egypt in many ways, but little is mentioned of it. I think it has to do with the general lack of much information about pre-colonial tropical africa, archeologically speaking, it is perhaps the most neglected part of the world. I would rate the civilization as high or moderately high (relatively speaking) just from observation. It looks like a sort of garden city with well-tended, maybe irrigated fields. I see a carriage (indicating wheeled transportation), I see a large palace area in the back, sophisticated architecture, city walls, central organisation and authority. It has a sense of law (prisoners being transpoted in the front). sophisticated artistry. All or most of the the trappings of greece or rome, just developed a little later in history.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 19, 2005 16:59:29 GMT -5
More examples of technical sophistication:
African civilizations Precolonial cities and states in tropical Africa: an archaeological perspective Graham Connah p. 200 Cambridge University Press, 1987
Documentary and oral indicate that the kingdom of the Mwene Mutapa, on the northern end of the Zimbabwe Plateau, the immediate successor of the state that had been centred on Great Zimbabwe but it was in the south-western part of the plateau that the zimbabwe tradition of building in stone was to survive and indeed develop. The sites Khami, Dholo Dholo, and Naletale are particularly remarkable examples of this phenomenon. These and a number of less well-known, similar sites belong to the period from the late fifteenth to the eighteenth century AD. The stone structures typical of this later period consist mainly of revetment walls for building-platforms, on which daga huts were erected. These walls made considerable use of decorative features (Garlake 1973: 166-7). The most extensively investigated of these sites is Khami, where Keith Robinson (1959) excavated parts of a group of elite buildings, some of which were approached by underground passages and many were provided with 'drains of a rather advanced type' (Robinson 1959: 105). Khami is thought to have been the capital of the Torwa state, where many people moved when Great Zimbabwe was abandoned. For this reason, Huffman (1981: 15-16) has used the settlement pattern at Khami to throw light on the earlier one at Great Zimbabwe and in doing so has provided us with a plan of the Khami site. This demonstrates that Khami, like Great Zimbabwe, consisted in the main of the peasant housing, with the buildings of the elite occupying only a small part of the total area of the settlement.
African civilizations Precolonial cities and states in tropical Africa: an archaeological perspective Graham Connah p. 172 Cambridge University Press, 1987
The most remarkable aspect of East African coastal technology, however, was undoubtedly seen in building craftsmanship. Coral was quarried, either on land or from offshore reefs, and used both as dressed pieces and as rubble mixed with a lime-mortar that was obtained by burning coral. Plaster and concrete were also made with a similar lime base. Stone structures were built which were sometimes of considerable height and scaffolding, presumably with lashed mangrove poles, seems to have been well understood. Roofs consisted usually of a combination of mangrove rafters, stone and concrete but they could also be supported with columns and beams or could consist of vaults or domes . Doors and windows usually had fitted woodwork, most houses possessed internal pit-toilets and washing places and drainage was provided both inside and outside of some buildings (Garlake 1966). All of this implies considerable craftsmanship: there must have been quarrymen, lime-burners, stone-masons, plasterers and carpenters, to name only the most obvious. In addition, some knowledge of architectural skills was obviously present. Whatever the contributions to this overall expertise from alien sources, the bulk of the actual work must have been done by local craftsmen and it is worth pointing out that the so-called 'pillar tomb' that is so common on the East African coast has no known parallels elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Igu on Mar 19, 2005 17:04:03 GMT -5
Doors and windows usually had fitted woodwork, most houses possessed internal pit-toilets and washing places and drainage was provided both inside and outside of some buildings (Garlake 1966). you should write a book : "AFRICA WC (toilets) CIVILIZATION" by topdog (without egypt he's nothing).
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 19, 2005 17:10:42 GMT -5
you should write a book : "AFRICA WC (toilets) CIVILIZATION" by topdog (without egypt he's nothing). Now you're trolling(insert rolling eyes here). I have nothing else to say to you.
|
|
|
Post by Igu on Mar 19, 2005 17:19:46 GMT -5
Now you're trolling(insert rolling eyes here). I have nothing else to say to you. All your posts could be considered as trolling so don't try to be serious!!! My answer was ironic, the title speaks about "little high civilization" and you bring some data about primitive technology from a book called "African civilizations" (sic).
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 19, 2005 19:09:44 GMT -5
The Minoans of Crete and the Dravidians of the Indus River Valley both had very sophisticated drainage systems, as well. And East Africans weren't the only ones to erect pillar tombs. Lycian Pillar Tomb at Xanthos (erected by Caucasoid Anatolians) Swahili Pillar Tomb at Shanga (erected by Congoid East Africans)
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 20, 2005 12:48:24 GMT -5
The real problem with allot of those civilizations though is not their lack of complexity its their illiteracy it much easier to be awed by the wonders of anciant greece cause we can read so much about it. True to a certain degree, but how much? Africa Counts Number and Pattern in African Cultures, Third Edition Claudia Zaslavsky Lawrence Hill Books p. 93 [Although most African socities did not, as far as we know, have alphabetic writing, it would be incorrect to say they had no written language. Some- the Hausa, Kanuri, Fulani, Malinke, and Swahili- adapted the Arabic alphabet to their own languages, just as many Europeans adapted the Latin alphabet to their languages. Others, such as the ancient peoples of Nubia and Kush, as well as the Vai of Liberia in recent times, developed their own scripts. There is evidence of the existence of both hieroglyphic and more advanced writing before the colonial invasion. Much more research needs to be done. We know that Africans used pictographs and ideographs to send secret messages, and to mark property. Proverbs are inscribed on Asante coldweights and Igbo calabashes and love messages are incorporated into Zulu beadwork. Tally sticks and knotted strings were used for all sorts of numerical records- the passage of time, financial transactions, scores in games.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 20, 2005 12:51:49 GMT -5
The Minoans of Crete and the Dravidians of the Indus River Valley both had very sophisticated drainage systems, as well. Who said they didn't? Who said East Africans were the only ones? by using 'Caucasoid' and 'Congoid'(?) what are you implying?
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 20, 2005 13:13:29 GMT -5
[quote author=Topdog link=board=history&thread=1110333349&start=22#1 date=1111341109]Who said they didn't?[/quote] Nobody. Just pointing out an interesting fact. Who said East Africans were the only ones? by using 'Caucasoid' and 'Congoid'(?) what are you implying? Your source: "...and it is worth pointing out that the so-called 'pillar tomb' that is so common on the East African coast has no known parallels elsewhere." I'm not implying anything. This is a site about race. I wanted to show that two completely different races a thousand miles apart achieved the same pillar tomb design.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on Mar 20, 2005 13:36:56 GMT -5
Nobody. Just pointing out an interesting fact. Your source: "...and it is worth pointing out that the so-called 'pillar tomb' that is so common on the East African coast has no known parallels elsewhere." Meaning the style it was created in was unique and wasn't imported, you should have read the entire sentence and you would have gotten the point the author was conveying. The race of both peoples had nothing to do with the pillar tombs themselves. Their race was a non-factor in determining design.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Mar 20, 2005 13:54:01 GMT -5
I'd probably have more luck arguing with a Jew. If anything I was giving the Africans who built the tombs a compliment but noooo, anytime good ol' Mike the Teuton responds it must always be in hostilility. There's nothing wrong with pointing out that two different races built similar structures independent of each other.
|
|
|
Post by slick on May 29, 2005 14:27:11 GMT -5
It is quite interesting that we tend to latch on whether or not the Egyptians were black or white, yet Mali, Songhai, Axsum (in Ethiopia), Nubia, or Kush are rarely if ever studied in our American schools, colleges, and universities. Especially Mali in West Africa where most blacks, and some whites and amerindians can trace our ancestry from. Egypt was an African empire ruled by Caucasoid Egyptians, blacks, and other peoples over time. Now it is considered an Arab country.
|
|