How did this massive land area inhabited by millions of people only produce two real civilizations?

How did this massive land area inhabited by millions of people only produce two real civilizations?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    What the frick is a civilization? Meme culture groups?

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      You can only post here if your country has been featured in a Civ game.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        I hate Civ 6s artstyle. Looks like clash of clans

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        for me, it's catherine de medici

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Joao III for Portugal
        Are Firaxis (or whoever make civ these days) doing any research? Joao I and II are more revered than Joao III, and so is Manuel I and also a bunch of king from the reconquest era like Denis I, Afonso III of Afonso Henriques . They picked the most random king of all. Black folk.

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    I guess because whatever civilization arises in these areas depends solely on whatever European countries are powerful enough to colonize them

  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Low average IQ

  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    the old world only produced four, 2/6 is about what you'd expect

  5. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Mississipian, Amazonian and Puebloan civilisation? The first two collapsed after the initial Euro disease outbreaks and the latter had already collapsed centuries before then, and of course none of the three were as advanced as Mesoamerica and the Andes, but they were civs nonetheless.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      The disease and smallpox crap is fake. Obviously you're a moron so you'll keep pretending people died of disease in large numbers.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      The disease and smallpox crap is fake. Obviously you're a moron so you'll keep pretending people died of disease in large numbers.

      >What's 2+2?
      >And don't give me 4, give me a proper answer.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      The concept of civilization is moronic anyways. Especially in the Americas, there's a whole spectrum of cultures that ranged from urban hunter-gatherers to seasonal agrarians etc.

      But yeah, in the classic conception of civilizations, those 3 fit very well. If we consider the Muisca as separated from the Andeans, we have one more.

      So there were:
      - Mesoamericans
      - Andeans
      - Mississippians
      - Amazonians
      - Oasisamericans (Pueblo, Hohokam, etc.)
      - Colombian (Muisca)

      And this without considering other pretty advanced non-agricultural cultures such as the Northwest Pacific.

  6. 3 months ago
    Anonymous
  7. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why post with such authority when you've clearly not bothered researching anything on this question?

  8. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Animals, probably.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's actually this. They didn't have any domesticated animals like horses or camels. Except llamas which are shit. Hinders development and trade.

      That said there were quite complex societies other than the ones you mentioned like the Mississippians.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        llamas are based. Also both camels and llamas used to be in America, but they died out a long, long time ago.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          *camels and horses

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        llamas are based. Also both camels and llamas used to be in America, but they died out a long, long time ago.

        Horses used to live in north america too.

  9. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    because they started the race thousands of years later in more rugged territories.

  10. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    The continent is vertically aligned, unlike afroeurasia which is horizontally aligned, the cradles of civilization all happened in warm climates which are better suited for the creation of the first city-states, 2 cradles of civilization in the americas is what I would expect

  11. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Even the most normie, bullheaded, basic b***h bro history counts 3
    Congratulation on being extremely moronic

  12. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    The answer is cultural diffusion. In the old world information (and genes) diffused across extremely divergent civilizations, from China to India to Europe, back to China to the middle East, etc. These civilizations were different enough that this information could be useful to them, for instance the Chinese discovered gunpowder and paper, which made its way to Europe, who did more with it, like modern firearms and printing.

    In contrast the native Americans were practically monolithic in terms of culture, genetics and advancements. This was largely due to the entire continent being settled by what was essentially 200 people.

  13. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Maybe because humans arrived there much later and they were isolated from the rest of the world and the technological advances.

  14. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Late to human civilization because the land was the last place where humans came and started civilizations

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *