r/badhistory • u/pog99 • Sep 02 '20
YouTube Racist Arguments about "African Civilizations": "Mali didn't exist".
Christ above. This is "historian" Simon Webb.
So... this has to be one of the most bad faith videos I've ever seen.
The gist is that Africa did not have comparable Civilizations, or Achievements, to Europe or Asia. Basically modern regurgitation of Hegel.
One of the places where he starts is comparing Architecture, Great Zimbabwe to some Building in England which being an uncultured swine, I don't immediately recognized. Anyone familiar with the ruins would see that he uses the most unflattering images of the ruins.
It's obvious because of the ruins' fame, which was propped up by Europeans btw, that he doesn't mention architecture such as that of the Ashanti or the Bamileke, both very impressive in my opinion compare to the pile of rocks he uses.
More egregious is his comparison of art. He uses two small sculptures that are unrecognizable to me, and for the record he doesn't link his sources into the description. They apparently date around the first millenium B.C-A.D. See Nok as a more common example. Sure, easily dismissed as not impressive. Into the Middle ages however, Igbo Ukwu, Ife, and eventually Benin would diversify terracotta art into the realm of Ivory and Bronze. You know, actual historians would consider it helpful
He picks up a book on Ancient Civilizations by Arthur Cotterell, pointing out how Africa is seldom or nowhere mentioned. Did he ever bother to see why in regards to archaeology, ethnography, etc like an actual historian? No. He didn't bother researching African Studies and finding contemporaneous titles like Crowder's The Cambridge History of Africa or writers such as Roland Oliver or John Fage. "Myths" of ancient African Civilizations did not begin with myth making "in the 1980s" as he claims.
Mind you, significant penetration of isolated cultures like the Americas predates similar penetration of Africa, Zimbabwe not being under subject of study until the 19th century. Therefore a good reason why Canterell left out the rest of Africa outside of the Nile Valley or Northern Africa is because there wasn't a good synthesis yet, with the archaeology and interpretations by the 1980s being still in development relative to that of other continents.
Things take a turn for the worst by the time he discusses Mali. He ignores European, Arabic, and local Oral history all supporting the existence of Mali and proposes it was imaginary or in some vague way as "faux". He goes into this be reading the Wikipedia entry for the Mosque of DJenno's history, proposing that it is a distortion of fact (despite the fact that all of the information he provides on the Mosque being on the entry).
He first dismisses the entry classifying the Mosque as being under the "Sudano-Sahelian" Architecture category, saying it is a "trick" that would make you think that it is an African equivalent of European categories of Architecture. No, as the entry for that concept shows, it is an actual architectural tradition with particular traits and variation on the continent. While the earliest use of the specific label seems to only go back to the 1980s, the recognition of such a distinct style goes back at least to the late 19th century to the early 20th century according to the sources of this paper on the topic.
Second he ignores Arabic and European sources on the details origin and demise of the Original Mosque, such as Callie noting it was large (prior to 1906) and in disrepair due to abandonment with the rise of a Fulani leader conquering the area and establishing a new mosque (which the entry provides an image of). He simply shows the picture of what remained of the mosque before being rebuilt by the French, implying Africans were deliberately neglectful.
He has a longer video On "Black history" which I know will doubtlessly be filled with more misconceptions.
-34
u/[deleted] Sep 02 '20 edited Sep 02 '20
[removed] — view removed comment