How did the Europeans Conquer Africa so Quickly? | History of Africa 1895-1903 Documentary 5/6
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 03. 2022
- / jabzy
/ jabzyjoe
Scramble for Africa, Cecil Rhodes, mahdist rebellion, Congo Free State, Arab Slave Trade, British Empire, German Empire, French Empire, History of South Africa, History of Nigeria, History of Egypt, History of Zimbabwe, History of Sudan, History of Ethiopia, History of Somalia, History of Congo, Portuguese Empire, Spanish Empire, Colonization of Africa, Kingdom of Benin, Moroccan History, Sokoto, Jihad Africa, Uganda History, Rwanda History, Burundi History
As someone of Nigerian ancestry, this is all immensely satisfying.
By the way the last time I went to visit my grandparents in Nigeria, I went to museum where they had the panicked letters the native rulers sent to each other as the British moved up north.
Completely fascinating.
Edit: You mentioned the place - Adamawa
This sounds really interesting. It's probably similar to the clay tablets sent during the bronze age collapse.
@@MegaTang1234 this here is just bullshit alot of africa state before the interference of the european have advance society so the idea of bronze age is just retarted as the time european made contact with west,central and south africa they already where working with iron have you ever heard about the iron of benin
@@MegaTang1234 except those last by themselves without persistent human preservation efforts.
Finally! A big mainstream history channel that talks about African history.
I'm with you all the way that we need more African history, but I wouldn't call Jabzy a 'big mainstream history channel' compared to some (FWIW, it's my favourite channel on CZcams but...)
@@kensearle4451 he might not be a heavyweight but he definetly has a presence in the community and so its a start
@taharqa @@abdiabdi3225 Absolutely true. No disrespect to the man intended. If you want more African history, Mythological Africans, New Africa and Postcolonialism are all great.
@@kensearle4451 From Nothing, Hometeam History, and HiddenHistory are good too!
@@kensearle4451 New Africa is terrible. It is propaganda.
The scramble for Africa is a very interesting, yet underrated part of history.
And sad
It isn’t interesting.
Yep. When you get into the details you can see how many different actors were vying with each other. Fundamentally stronger military powers destabalised what were already warring African kingdoms that had already been poisoned by the slave trade. Although it's not sensible to hypothesise about what would happen if there hadn't been a scramble for Africa, I suspect that slavery may have been less intense but much much longer lasting (probably to today).
@@jacklaurentius6130 then why'd you click on the video and read through comments to reply here?
i wouldn't say its underrated, it appears a lot in modern discussions of African economics and politics as well as history. It's just not covered much in American history classes because the US's involvement was minuscule and was done as an effort to counter the Scramble by establishing a colony of democratically minded freed men in Liberia (kind of went to shit but still). Also the US wasn't a huge fan of the Scramble since it both blocked them out of African markets forcing them to go through European intermediaries and controlling what they could do in African. Since the US media is insanely widespread that means if the US doesn't talk about it that it seems like the subject isn't talked about at all. Doesnt help that Europeans often prefer to forget about their own colonial regimes and prefer to focus on their own local histories (i.e. European history) and pre-colonial world history.
The historical context of Africa is so underrated. Glad to see you complete this series.
i wish they'd teach it more in schools. My school was pretty good but the history lessons ended up being pretty crappy when it came to anything outside North America and Europe. They literally taught us that slaves in America (which they also taught us was the only country outside the Caribbean African slaves ended up) were literally captured by Americans sailing up and down the African coast with big nets, capturing Africans like big chattel butterflies. They also didnt really teach us much about colonialism beyond "one day Europeans showed up and conquered everything and then got kicked out after WW2" and they never even touched on how that happened or much about pre-colonial history. Kind of crazy to think that the second largest continent, the one humanity evolved on, only gets mentioned in history books when it comes to Ancient Egypt, the Punic Wars, Cleopatra, and then nothing for 1600 years until Europeans started conquering the place.
Ive been expecting the continuation of this series. I had thought you decided on not continuing. Glad to see the latest installment
Happy my country Rwanda was mentioned and true we did fight off the Zanzibar Slave traders.
Always love your videos about rather unknown parts of history!
Because in Africa at that time there was no sense of African nationalism. Much like the Romans were able to conquer what is now England and Welsh because they took advantage of the division among Celtic tribes. As one Roman general put it they resisted individually but were universally conquered.
true too tribalistic
The Central and South African regions were always underdeveloped and no major power has ever managed to arise from that part of the continent so its not only about "african nationalism" and a specific period of time
There is and was no African nation, so of course.
@@nenenindonu
Because the climate and geographic barriers made it impossible for the Central & Southern African tribes to develop in an advanced way.
Facts.
Africa's best bet was if Ethiopia conquered most of Africa when they were the Axum Empire and then once each African Kingdom broke off from being conquered there would've been a sense of African identity.
I LOVE THIS 1080p PLEASE MAKE ALL VIDEOS LIKE THIS. Its so crispy and detailed. Love it
This is one of best series in history of youtube history channels. You should really have 1 million subs for this you deserve 1 million subs
yeah absolutely
Yo Jabzy, great work as always. It's Oba of Benin, not Oda.
Damn it. There's always something I stupidly bugger up in these vids.
@@JabzyJoe It's fine man.😄, You're covering so many cultures and languages so it's understandable
Very interesting! Thank you for sharing quite a bit of history that's usually not taught.
Great work jabzy
Interesting video! I had this video come at the top of the recommended. I just subscribed, I love history. Keep it up!
Bravo for your great job
Favorite series of yours.
As a Nigerian and a descendant of Chief Olomu of Iwere Kingdom ( cousins of the Benin's ) this was nice to watch.
Great video 👍
I love your channel keep up the great stuff!
What I like about the Dervish State of Somalia is that it build some of Africa's largest fortresses across the region when most of the continent was already conquered. They also had a diplomatic corps that sought support from the German and Ottoman Empires, and managed to persuade the Emperor of Ethiopia lij Iyasu to convert to Islam. Twenty years after their rise, they were simply outclassed by a superior military invention; warplanes, same way the Japanese were outclassed by Nukes in WWII.
The Dervish dealt with a few issues beyond just the planes. For starters their fortress were severely outdated, being stone fortresses that didn't have slopped walls, reinforced concrete, ditches, or other features you'd see even in a 19th century or 18th Napoleonic era fort and weren't really built to withstand modern artillery so even standard British artillery would have been a threat to the forts. The 700 camel troops and native troops would be a much bigger threat to the Dervish than the handful of anemic WW1 light bombers.
That's all kind of reflective of the biggest issue the Dervish faced: in equipment, tactics, and technology they were at least a century out of date and facing a modern, well armed enemy who'd just fought the bloodiest war in human history and had both experience fighting in the desert and in taking far better defended fortresses while the Dervish were only experienced in fighting fellow African nations like the Ethiopians and scattered Somali tribes. Tactics and training can often mean more than technology and that's reflective in the causalities both sides took: the British 1 man for every 20 they killed despite being outnumbered by the Dervish. We can see the opposite of this in the Italian invasion of Ethiopia where the Italians had modern equipment, hundreds of planes and tanks, thousands of artillery, and a similar number of soldiers but still needed to resort to chemical weapons to push back the Ethiopians who barely even had any vehicles and had outdated weaponry.
There is infact no solid evidence to suggest iyasu ever converted to Islam.
I find all your content exquisite, finally someone mentioning all the sides involved in history, it’s a mixed reality, you can’t say that one did this while they other ones didn’t… it’s history. I’m learning a lot and this is what I was looking for. Of all my previous searches they mostly talk about elephants and lions mixed with gangs and violence.
Glad to finally see the latest episode of your current major series. I'm guessing the addition of another episode is symptomatic of the delay...
Great video
Very good video :)
LETS GOOOO MY FAVORITE SERIES
Outstanding! 👍
"even today we have not permitted ourselves to reject or feel remorse for this shameful episode. Our literature, our films, our drama, our folklore all exalt it. Our children are still taught to respect the violence which reduced a red-skinned people of an earlier culture into a few fragmented groups herded into impoverished reservations.”
― Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Definitely not true since the 50s though.
I know this is gonna sound a bit racist but hear me out
How is it that Jews get to have Israel but the native Americans can't even get a state
Vie victus
Fantastic use of maps to display such a difficult topic
It's cool that you are adding a 6th part. I'm looking forward to coverage of Africa during WW1, the Italian conquest of Libya and the brutal "Pacification" in the 20s, and other odd events, like the communist white supremacist Rand Rebellion in South Africa
I always find things like the Rand Rebellion (which i didn't know about until now so thank you) really interesting. It's always kind of crazy to me that despite racism and nationalism supposedly being against their ideology at a fundamental level most communist countries are also among the most racist and nationalism is often a major issue. Even during the time of Mao China had a problem with "Chinese exceptionalism" similar to the US, they had severe repression of minorities by the majority Han including destroying cultures and trying to change or erase history, and through to today nationalism in general has gotten worse and worse to the point now that ultra nationalism is almost the default for most Chinese. China is and always has been very racist as well, most westerners (read: white people) are viewed negatively by Chinese, most Chinese view themselves as the center of Asia and other Asians as either threats/enemies (like Japan or India) or inferior (like the Thai, Tibetans, and Uyghurs) and they're infamously racist towards Africans with things like blackface and servile caricatures in media both being common in China today even though both those things were rare in Western media by the 1960s.
@@arthas640 I'd say racism is more a thing that predates communism (1600s vs 1800s, although xenophobia is prehistoric). I'm not an expert on Chinese history, but Sinocentrism predates Marx by *a lot*, so it's more Mao making it "racism with Chinese characteristics". I don't think the Nationalists were less racist.
It depends, there is Def some White-worshipping in China too (although it's worse in South Korea and Japan), but yeah, there's no real taboo against racism there (except against Han Chinese).
America is kinda unusual in that open casual racism isn't acceptable here (in Brazil, there is Habib's, a restaurant with a kinda racist logo. That would never fly here).
There needs to be movies about ancient and medieval African Kingdoms and mythology, it will change a lot of people's perspective about Africa and its history, who else agrees?
Edit: I've just realized that Hollywood is making a movie set in the Dahomey Kingdom based on the Dahomey Amazons.
@Leo The British-Eurasian Poverty/riches are measured in GDP (GDP is just counting the sum of all money transactions). The end result is that a country with lots of natural beauty, whose society is largely built on extended families (who basically do the work that would show up on GDP via day care, child minders, tuition fees for tutoring) will not have large GDP. Conversely, in a sick society where families are nuclear or broken (mostly broken in the West), where people live isolated lives and where natural beauty is destroyed to build infrastructure, residential and commercial buildings, GDP is subsequently sky high, despite their sick society. The way we measure is sick
No
It’s kinda strange that they’d make a film about them, considering they were some of the most brutal slavers who sold tons of slaves to Europeans, if they’re going to address that point then cool
@@pyrrhusofepirus8491 The slaves were sold as part of forced peace treaties with the Arabs / Europeans and if you're gonna talk about brutal slavery don't even get me started on the Roman Empire and the Greeks Kinda weird how they made several movies on those guys to huh ?
@@JcoleMc yeah, but it’s not what the Romans are entirely known for, the Romans and Greeks did have slaves, tons of them, but they also did many other things aside from it. With Dahomey, Dahomey wasn’t unique in West Africa, in that it sold slaves, it was just the level of which they did it was astonishing, I think there’s literally a quote by their king which basically said their entire society revolves around slaves.
Also, correct me if I’m wrong about the West African Kingdoms, considering how okay the Arab and Islamic world was with Slavery, with slaves being trodded from all over Africa to the slave markets in the Middle East, including whites with the Burbur slavers, and still is in a couple places, I’m pretty sure they looked at the peace treaty involving the fact they had to sell slaves to Europeans with ‘okay, more business partners’. Considering they’d also get guns from these affairs, I’m fairly sure they weren’t exactly heart broken about the slavery thing.
As a South African thank you for the history,I have always wondered how colonization ensued in other nations,South Africa today is well developed along racial lines because of those Anglo-Boer wars,the Boers moved from a sense of nationalism for South Africa to ultranationalism and they began secret societies and the National Party that led to Apartheid and the decades worth of black oppression,unrest and the many many discrimination laws that the nation is still seeing its echoes to this very day .As a nation it's always in my heart that we document and remember but as well as learn from these mistakes so as to not repeat them,but sadly we aren't and we are repeating these mistakes as we've started the hate once more through the manipulation of politicians,media and few oligarchs in our country
Well let's not make the mistake of hating each other.
The 🐐 is back!
Also I'm guessing the title isn't supposed to say 1885 to 1895?
Quickly? In what world did we "colonize Africa quickly". Lmao wtf. It took us over 500 years since the 1400s, and we just ended up using africans to fight each other because we couldn't win militarily. We used these same tactics in the Americas. How do you think we conquered the Incas so fast? We asked other south americans to fight for us.
Yeah, the colonization of Africa started in the 19th century, not in the 15th.
Exactly
Who’s “we”?
You’re black African and ashamed it took Europeans a few decades to conquer your entire continent.
@@tamaszlav Are you daft? The first battles and wars occurs in the 15th and 16th century. Stop changing history to make yourself feel better
The conquest way or colonization path, always brutal in human civilization, sadly it's cannot be avoid. This struggle for resources never will ended.
Winston Churchill's description of the Fashoda incident almost reads like a Star Wars prequel meme
"The woodwork of the hull was marked with many newly made holes, and cutting into these with their penknives the officers extracted bullets-not the roughly cast leaden balls, the bits of telegraph wire, or old iron which savages use, but the conical nickel-covered bullets of small-bore rifles such as are fired by civilised forces alone. Here was positive proof. A European Power was on the Upper Nile: which? Some said it was the Belgians from the Congo; some that an Italian expedition had arrived; others thought that the strangers were French; others, again, believed in the Foreign Office-it was a British expedition, after all. The Arab crew were cross-examined as to the flag they had seen. Their replies were inconclusive. It had bright colours, they declared; but what those colours were and what their arrangement might be they could not tell; they were poor men, and God was very great."-The River War
Some European boi: *discovers Africa*
The British Empire: the tea must flow
The french empire:......
@@darius684 it's a joke, I know France and other countries were involved in the scramble for Africa
@@oliversherman2414 i was just adding to the joke
Great video man it is all ways interesting to learn about the colonialisation of Africa Year by year it makes is to understand the whole topic much more easily and shows us the good and bad impact of this
Good? Children are dying of hunger in the whole Africa because of Europe and their fake president puppets that have been ruling our continent. I’m from Mozambique 🇲🇿 1984 and we still being ruled by European puppets. Africa is Europes money laundering harbour. And this guy should stop talking about boers as Africans. It’s never going to stick in a smart person’s mind.
19:07- Was the similarity of the "Golden Stool" to the Stone of Scone lost on Hodgson?
****30:35** - **32:00** arochukwu & old south eastern region, igbo’s etc.**
As an African I tell you religion also paid a huge part. Our converted chiefs and Kings were puppets.
The last colonial war was fought in my kingdom location Otukpo. It was the Igedde wars in 1923-26.
When Leopold 2 annexed Katanga to Congo the tribesmen had never even seen a firearm and charged at machinegun nests with bow & arrow. It did not end well.
I just realized how badly the algorithm appears to have hit this video.
Its a really good so a bit sad, that it is not promoted the way the previous videos in the series have been.
Also the words in the thumbnail seem a bit odd though. Asking who were the last africans to be colonized?
when colonization is not yet complete as of the end of this video feels odd.
Tbh I couldn't think of another question to ask in the thumbnail ha.
@@JabzyJoe hmm how about something like: How did the central african kindoms fall?. Or how did French Africa expand?
Anyway, great work on this series It's by far the most in-depth coverage of the scramble for Africa I've seen. As someone who knew relatively little about exactly how the timeline went on this. Its been really helpful to improve my understanding of the situation, in context.
32:20 ahhh so this guy in the tintin in africa comic was real
The times are changing.
You left out katanga esp buluba where 1904 the reistance slowed
*19:34** The Queen mother's name is pronounced "Asantewaa" not "Ashantiwaa".*
Where is Episode 6/6 ?
Really interesting how European states would use the justification of "abolishing slavery/sacrifice" to convince their populations to support imperialism. Reminds me a lot of similar justifications used today to justify other foreign interventions.
Careful with the term European, lots of nations didnt take part and its a little uncomfortable to be an outsider to that shitshow and find yourself lumped in :P be specific!
If we can do "good" then we can ignore the atrocities wrought upon them. The abolishment of slavery by the British was a pawn move.
I don't get why you're acting like its surprising, while we can both agree they were bad, Slavery and Imperialism are still different things that different people could have seen differently.
Feminism being used as a justification in the Afghan war, for instance.
@@ayanlethesomali7357 Exactly what I thought of
2:08 they sure had a tendency to put “a bother” on the throne
6/6 please
CZcams didn't show me this video until 2 days after it came out. They know I like watching these and they hid it
during the 17th and 18th centuries a number of new nations emerged as a result of migrations of Europeans, Khoisan and Bantu-speaking peooles. Many of these nations adopted and developed varieties of Dutch as their lingua francas. Some of these nations, such as the Basters and the Griquas, exist to this day
This is actually based on a true story
I went and looked up the Battle of Togbao, and you said European, but it was five Frenchmen (the officers Bretonnet, Braun, Durand-Autier, Martin), 44 Senegalese tirailleurs, two Arabs, 20 armed Bakongos, 3 cannons and 400 Baguirmians. Versus 2,700 rifles and 10,000 bows. The overwhelming force won.
Mistake: Arochukwu wasn’t under British rule. Next mistake. Aro confederacy was not easily absorbed. Especially not compared to the Sokoto caliphate, and especially when you went into so much detail with sokoto.
It was these wars when Baden-Powell learned he needed to get boys trained for basic military skills, so he wrote Scouting for Boys and took it back to the UK. Wild how a youth program started out of colonialism 0_0 I'm an ex boy scout
Calling these "kingdoms" is awfully generous. They really were chiefdoms at best.
Everyone who says this doesn't have a reason; it's deny African history and the try to downplay it
Love this! African history without European is very interesting - didn't know there were so many slavers in Africa even after slavery was abolished in Europe and the States
In the US it’s controversial to point out that it was African slavers who sold slaves to the Europeans…
Still to this day
It’s still occurring
Europeans and Asians outnumbered Africans. After they discovered agriculture they needed laborers so they started having more babies. Africa is full of wild animals meaning Africa had a small human population. South Africa was pretty much uninhabited. Check out 'human population over time' videos on CZcams. czcams.com/video/PUwmA3Q0_OE/video.html
The title is somewhat misleading. It took more than 300 years before Africa was colonized.
For Zambia mwata kazembe wasnt the only Kingdom, there was the Bemba kingdom which actually had more control of northern Zambia most historians skip that part😑
was born in Adamawa
Good content but about the asantes they still fought the British but a defeated state needs to regroup and strategize
African king: *Exists
British: Here we go again *Sends a punitive expedition
24:49 The original rap battles.
because they were powerful kungs
Whatever happens we have got the Maxim gun and they have not
tjesus christ i just realised this is part 5 of six XD XD
Wanna join the legion?
Finally
1:01 hmm Buganda, wonder what modern country that could have become
The Fashoda incident could start a world war 😬
Its the "Oba" of Benin, not "Oda"
3 way standoff spider man meme
Arochukwu kwenu
igbo imperialists?
@@igbotimehopper64yearsago46 what do you mean?
@@tonyjeffers2606 do you support the idea that it is the Devin right of the igbos to rule all land east of the Niger south of the benue and north of the Congo?
You think after the thousandth time a ruler said "Help me in my civil war and I'll give you rights" and then they instantly turn into a subordinate colony at least ONE of them would stop falling for it.
I wouldn’t say they “fall for it”, in most cases they’re probably fully aware that they’ll become a vassal but that’s preferable to being deposed/remaining out of power politically. It’s a gambit that provides an almost certain payoff (gaining or cementing power) with the opportunity to rebel or regain autonomy down the line as the situation of their puppeteers changes.
Gun powder and sea ports made it all possible.
Nah the Africans had those it was the maxim gun that did it. Alot of kingdoms eventually got some but they didn't have the factories to reproduce them at a fast enough rate.
@@franzjoseph1837 that too, bit what I mentioned gave them the jump start.
Beware, Beware the Bights of Benin, few come out though many go in.
That’s ironic. Muslims launching a war against colonizers lol. That’s be like the British empire being anti imperialist.
Presumably, because they had superior industrial technology and organization. And intelligent and rational expansionist leaders and governments who were situated in advantageous positions to receive accurate data and to make balanced and prudent judgements, and show willingness to assert their countrie's global interests
Oh me, me, I know this answer. It's simple. Show up in Africa, point at an elephant over there, pull out a stick to everyone's amazement and tell them you can take out that huge elephant from here with this stick. Point at the animal, stick goes ka-boom! Elephant falls dead. Then tell them you can give them this new technology or weapon to use against their local rival tribes or political opponents if they pledge to you, with X and Y. This has always worked like magic, for 700 years.
Unfortunately true
A lot of African kingdoms already had guns when the Europeans arrived
@@JcoleMc That is not correct. Guns found their way into the continent through slave traders. They were the ones who brought guns from other continents. And no, "lots of African Kingdoms" did not use guns, until they began exchanging captured people with the Europeans for guns. Before then, only a few settlements on the Eastern and Mediterranean coast obtained hunting rifles from their interactions with (guess who) slave traders and foreign poachers! Go read about Arab slave traders and stop limiting your knowledge to European slave traders.
@@oslonorway547 And you aren’t correct either. African states did not cede their sovereignty to acquire guns. This is about the scramble for Africa. So what on Earth are you talking about.
@@dokorobia8713 Did they show up and tell you we came to scramble for Africa, hence here are some guns? Nope, they came, asked you for slaves, you asked them what they had to batter with, and they gave you stuff you could use to defeat your political rivals and enemy tribes and in the process get rich by giving them capture enemies as slaves. And when it was time to allocate you and your neighboring tribes to the Western Empires scrambling to own your resources, guess who had to suffer defeat or pledge allegiance? Your greedy ancestors did this to yourselves. Next time, do what China did for hundreds of years: Tell them No Entry, and make it punishable offence to disclose anything to foreigners about your language and geography. Maybe that'll keep the great empires at bay for centuries, just like the Chinese did.
Big guns🤔
You made a mistake by including parts of Ethiopia as Ogaaden. The Ogaaden is a desert in the farthest eastern part of Ethiopia, yet you also highlighted the Ethiopian provinces of Harrarghe and Bale. The British didn't give Ethiopians the Ogaaden either, rather it was conquered by Ras Mekonnen took it. Even in the last video you mentioned this.
The British did give ir
@@Bell_plejdo568p Learn the history instead of passing on Soomaali campfire tales. Ras Mekonnen took Ogaaden before British ruled soomaalis, but when British Somaliland existed they claimed the Ogaaden desert. With the creation of Somalia, Ogaaden was given to Haile Selassie though.
Ogaden wasn’t given to Haile sellasie it was only when Haile sellasie was re instated as the emperor of Ethiopia. Britain have back all the lands Ethiopia previously owned rightlfully. Or not rightfully though I agree it was menelik that conquered the Somali kilil. And the British had no role in that . But was it right to take some thing which doesn’t belong to te Abyssinians. Somalis and and Abyssinians are not the same if somalis conquered parts of Amhara or Tigray. Would it be right or just I don’t think so
@@khalidqawdhan3265 Are u somali because he didn't fully capture the region until the british gave it to him he was also tried to expand into campture barwwwe and mercka
@@Bell_plejdo568p the British came in 1884 to somaliland menelik captured in the 1870s right after he captured harar he captered the Somali kilil . This whole British captured the Somali kilil and gave to to menelik is bogus and made up. Why would the brits give up something they have conquered for them selves the brits never do that. You could say after the Italians defeated the Ethiopians in the second. World war and the British helpers defeat the Italians when they captured all of Ethiopia they gave that whole land as as a whole back to Ethiopia. One could say that the only territory the British handed over the Haile sellasie was a small portion of the head and reserve area. Which was British controlled up to 1948 and they only gave it to Ethiopia after the Second World War for the support Haile sellasie gave to the allied forces . But it was a very small territory the bulk of the Ogaden region was always owned conquered and administered by menelik and later his successors. Before the menelik conquest yes it was owned by Somalis I say it is wrong for the Ethiopians to conquer it but Tosay the British conquered it for them is just being dishonest and yes I am a somali
,,,,,,,, 2Esdras 2: 31 -100
Big guns and lots of bullets.
We were not united and lacked modern weaponry!!!
They did not, Africans helped them whilst some fought against them. They could not have done it alone???
How did the Europeans Conquer Africa so Quickly..... I guess guns!
How? Hundreds if not thousands of tribes constantly warring against each other. A small geographical area like Liberia has 16 tribes. I can only imagine other parts of Africa.
Like you said, tribes/them warring with each other which made it easier for Europeans to conquer them.
They’re technically just nations of peoples rather than being called tribes.
@@SlapstickGenius23 Who drew those nations borderlines?
Europeans conquered Africa so quickly because they are all-consuming, and now we get to watch the snake eat itself.
The Spanish territory on the Morocco coast is Melilla, not "Melila." The spelling is wrong and the pronunciation is wrong.
Common for Brits to pronounce everything wrong, but this isn't a casual conversation.
It's not important
@@siyacer It distracts from the topic of the video.
It's important if you want to make a video that isn't garbage.
@@miroslavputinovic6650 It's still not a big deal. It barely detracts from the video and it's easy to ignore. No need to be so pretentious.
@@siyacer your ignorance is enviable.
@@miroslavputinovic6650 your pettiness is not
and look what we have today in Africa. They aint living in huts anymore. They dont have to be hunter gatherers anymore.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_and_technology_in_Africa
You know nothing about history. Plenty of african nations were high developed before Europeans even arrived.
@@elimartinez7704 😂😂😂oh really? Funny how they were conquered. Times change though, everyone knows Africa is the cutting edge of technology.🤪🤪🤪
@@gandalfstormcrow8439 so, by your logic, being conquered = being inferior? no ifs ands or buts?
@@elimartinez7704 technologically, yes. Stop black washing history. It's racist.
European malls today: having all kinds of product with the the European use on a daily basis
European malls back then: Africa
Pure bullshit, Africa was never a major trading partner of Europe during European Empires.
Very Sad Ottoman noises
They didnt!
Western Europe has always been the champions and leaders of death technology. They were superior at destruction, pilfering and subjugating a vast amount of people and cultures, but they were not necessarily a superior, moral and humanitarian people.
Did you see the slavery going on in Africa before the Europeans got there?
@@soda8736 No... But I saw the Slavery once the Europeans got There..
@@eugenehicks3859 well you should do a little research. Slavery had been going on in Africa..
Post nose or skin color
@@eugenehicks3859 You are just ignorant who is resentful of white people because your kind lost to them and is still not a match so you try to portay them as the only evil in the world to convince yourself and feed your hatred.
Boers are not Africans and you talk like if it’s their land why?
@@messianic_scamthat does not make it there land
@@THEWORLDROCKSSS
then america isn't the today americans land either whites or blax and have no right to live there and have a say in what happens there and shall leave?! how?!!
Get a clue
DO YOU, ME, WE KNOW OUR TRUE HISTORY OR 🤔 HIS-STORY???
WE HAVE BEEN TAUGHT IN THE COLONIZERS' BIBLE:
"SEEK & YE SHALL FIND."
The most functional ones, the rest are a dis functional mess
😐
You're in Al Muqqaddima videos
@@Buurba_Jolof 🙃
Whenever you have a commentary that includes the phrase that someone went "a little too far with the cannibalism", you know it's a god-forsaken hellhole.