Doug M wrote:

"Discussion about why the advanced culture of the Nile Valley never permeated deep into the heart of Africa is a good one."

Indeed. There are lots of cultural similarities with other Africans in the interior of the Continent, though.

Some Egyptians, like Moustafa Gadalla, have theorized that ancient Egyptians actually migrated to some of these regions and founded some of the Kingdoms that flourished there prior to non-African contact. Though I doubt this diffusionist theory, I do note that Africans elsewhere developed well-organized societies that need not be as spectacular as ancient Egypt or Nubia to be considered advanced societies.

"Why did building in stone not spread into interior Africa, and so on?"

It did in places like Zimbabwe, Meroe, ancient Ghana, Songhai and the like.


"European colonization would not have stopped advanced culture from taking root in Africa, since European colonization is a relatively recent event."

I wouldn't go that far. We can only conjecture what could have happened had Europeans and Arabs not uprooted Africa's human potential and ciphoned its material wealth to build or promote advanced civilizations elsewhere. Practically all of Africa, including Egypt, was colonized. Only Ethiopia was saved the hassle, to a certain extent. Colonial policies were not uniform, either, though designed largely to benefit the colonial power. A lot of African nations were also subjected to slavery. One should not ignore this fact and its impact on African advancement.

Besides, it depends on what you mean by "advanced culture" since some African Kingdoms had developed into complex societies at different periods before non-African contact. Colonial powers even recognized this fact by deliberately retaining most of the structures and systems already established by the colonized Africans. The fact that they were not as advanced as European systems does not mean that advanced culture did not take root in Africa prior to non-African contact - unless, of course, you are speaking in relative terms.

"There are advanced ancient cultures from America, India and Asia that have no contemporaries in Africa"

I would consider ancient African civilizations as Ghana, Songhai, Zimbabwe, Meroe and the like as spectacular or "advanced" enough for their times. It would be hard to make "contemporaries" of civilizations since civilizations rise and decline sometimes at different periods. People are still grappling with what "civilization" means anyway.

"...many tribes disdain modern practices and continue their ancient primitive way of living,..."

Fellahin who still practice some of the pharoanic customs and engage in rural farming are considered to be living the "ancient primitive way," at least, by the Egyptian government and many Cairenes. Ergo, what was the "advanced culture" of ancient Egypt is now considered "ancient primitive way of living."

Things change, don't they? Indeed, a great way to embrace and benefit from modernity is to be open-minded; but that still doesn't mean you have to ditch all your "ancient primitive way of living;" only those that hinder your development. Some Africans from the interior of the Continent that I know in the United States have proved this to me.

Egypt is no longer the most advanced civilization it once was, so are Greece, Italy (Rome), Turkey (the Ottoman Empire), the U.K. (the British Empire), and the like. You never know which country (could well be "sub-Saharan" African) or continents (EU, AU) would hold sway in several thousand years down the road.

The bottom line is, "every dog has its day."