I'd like to be recommended some literature on the different indigenous societies and their histories. My current perception of things is that those in West-Africa existed on a cline from neolithic to bronze-age in terms of civilizational advancement/structure. I believe those ran by Cushites were more advanced to some degree, though all I'd be able to confidently list to support that is the fact that they had a proper indigenous writing system (I imagine the proto-writing systems in West-Africa failed to develop due to the presence of Arabic?)
>>18436209>ssa>south south africawhy is this board full of retards?
>>18436213"SSA" as in "Sub-Saharan Africa".
>>18436209>I'd like to be recommended some literature on the different indigenous societies and their historiesI'm too lazy to make a list just check out Isaac Samuel's articles about, he always cite his sources. https://www.africanhistoryextra.com/>neolithic to bronze-age in terms of civilizational advancement/structureThe three-age system is not an indicator of social development, but rather a convenient framework for dividing prehistory, and it applies only to Europe and some areas of North Africa and Western Asia.
They skipped bronze and had iron very early on, they used their rivers for farming and there is very little archeological stone work found so you couldn't be more wrong.
>>18436752> They skipped bronze and had iron very early onI knew that, I just used the terms "neolithic" and "bronze age" as the two states are associated with distinct levels of societal/state structure and whatnot.>in terms of civilizational advancement/structure
>>18437292But that isn't what those terms mean, their ability to work with those tools along with farming and long reaching trade routes demonstrates a certain level of industry.
>>18436209>I believe those ran by Cushites were more advanced to some degree, though all I'd be able to confidently list to support that is the fact that they had a proper indigenous writing systemThat doesn't mean much, many regions have not developed their own writing system, Northern Europe is one of them, if we want to be technical the Latin script derives from the Etruscan which in turn still derives from the Euboean Greek which derives from the Phoenician.The lack of writing didn't prevent the development of centralized states with sophisticated bureacracies in the non-Islamic areas. For example, the Ashanti Empire easily integrated literate Muslims into its bureaucracy.
>>18436209>though all I'd be able to confidently list to support that is the fact that they had a proper indigenous writing systemNo they didn't, sub saharans didn't invent writing independently
>>18437455By "indigenous" I mean that the language(Ge'ez) became distinct there due to the efforts of locals. This is semantic, but I'd also consider proto-writing a form of writing, which originated independently in West-Africa.
>>18437455A proto writing system called Nsibidi developed in parts of Nigeria and Cameroon
>>18436209Imagine if an African Black girl turned into a normal white girl.
>>18438212Now imagine if she was Chinese...
>>18437545>>18437578this is true, but it seems to have developed from the locals finding out that others were doing it first.Like the Armenians or, better, the Cherokee. The Cherokee didn't write down shit until they saw Spaniards and Englishmen doing it.
>>18438289Nsibidi is definitely 2k years old, which is about the same time that contact with MENA was established if I'm not mistaken. Some claim it's actually older than agriculture in the region, which while certainly not impossible (European and Australian HG had proto-writing too) I personally doubt it's *that* old.
>>18438289>>18438295I'm probably just uninformed. I'd like to know why you think that.
