I usually hear 50,000 years, and the research I did into it seem to support about that time period.

this is taken a little out of context of the original conversation, where someoen had asserted that the whites were the first to settle the americas (besides the indians)
so I said, the above

that is not even to mention all the evidence that exists that black africans were in the americas before white europeans, even when the vikings are considered

How did Africans get to the americas before Europeans?

well, africans are nto stupid, as your eurocentric textbook may point out.
Every textbook account of the European exploration of the Americas begins with Prince Henry the Navigator, of Portugal ... The textbook authors seem unaware that ancient Phoenicians and Egyptians sailed at least as far as Ireland and England, reached Madeira and the Azores, traded with the aboriginal inhabitants of the Canary Islands, and sailed all the way around Africa before 600 B.C. ... Omitting the accomplishments of the Afro-Phoenicians is ironic, because it was Prince Henry's knowledge of their feats that inspired him to replicate them!
secondly, several scientists have made the voyage from africa to the americans in ships that would have been available at the time.Starting in 1952, Dr. Alain Bombard sailed from Casablanca to Barbados in an African raft. In 1955, Dr. Hannes Lindemann sailed for fifty-two days from the Cape Verde Islands to the South American coast. Both journeys were made alone and the men arrived in good health. In 1969, Thor Heyerdahl conducted two experiments, one with the Ra I and the other with the Ra II. The Ra I and the Ra II were ships built identical to an earlier model African ship. The ships were built out of papyrus and were constructed the way they would have been during the Pre-Columbian era. The Ra I was built by the Buduma people first. The Ra I started at Safi in North Africa and sailed to Barbados. The Ra I fell short of making the journey across the Atlantic. The Ra II was built by a native American tribe, the Aymara, this ship made it from Africa to America successfully. These experiments prove that if these simple vessels could negotiate the Atlantic Ocean using one of the two currents, then some of Africa's more sophisticated ships could have made the trip.

I would also like to point out that african precense in the americas is well documented, columbus' journals themselves mention africans, as do his sons. then there are the taino making spears out of african metal, the olmec carving "amazingly negroid" statues, this goes on and on
I believe that the africans were indeed here beofre columbus!

I also see that the proof is not as concrete as other explorers, and I can see why some might not be convinced. this I can understand.
but I think to discount the theory entirley is mere ignorance

" The civilization of Africa developed very sophisticated vessels. They built reed boats with a and without sails, log rafts lashed together, dugouts as wide-berthed, Viking ships, double-canoes, lateen-rigged dhows, jointed boats, and rope sewn plank vessels with straw cabins and cooking facilities. These vessels could be found navigating the Nile and Niger rivers. The vessels covered a distance of 2,600 miles carrying cargo from food and people, to elephants and building material. Africa at it's nearest point is 1,500 miles away from America. This point puts a possible voyage to the Americas in perspective. "

"It has been documented that two different African civilizations made the voyage to the Americas. The first one was the 25th Dynasty of Egypt (751-656 B.C.E.). Any voyages made during this time would have resulted accidentally. The Nubians quest for iron ore deposits took them up and down the African coast. They might have journeyed into the Atlantic after iron ore deposits or a storm could have driven them into the Atlantic. Once in the currents it would have delivered them to the Americas. This would put them in the Olmec heartlands at the time of the founding of the Olmec civilization. The second voyage was made by the Mandiga people of the Mali Empire in 1310 and 1311. In 1324 Mansa Kankan Musa stopped in Cairo and reported that his predecessor, Prince Abubakari II, launched two expeditions to explore the limits of the Atlantic Ocean. The first expedition he sent out 200 ships of men, and 200 ships of trade material, food, water. One ship returned and told of the current that seemed like a river in the middle of the ocean. The captain watched the ships get sucked away, and then returned with the news. Prince Abubakari II, after listening to the captain, decided he would lead the next voyage himself. He took 1,000 ships of men and 1,000 ships loaded with supplies. Some of these Africans must have made it to the Americas, because there were sightings that indicated their presence in the New World. Columbus himself reported as such. "

I think that most people understand that there were more than a few Pre-Columbian trips from the "old" to "new" worlds. But it's not a knock on any of these groups (Africans, Vikings, or whomever) to say that Columbus's trip was the *important* one. It was his and other European explorers' journeys that have had by far the largest social impact on our current world.

Said another way: For those of us living in the Americas today, it is extremely unlikely that we would be here without those Spanish and Portuguese explorers. It is a lot more likely we'd be here even if there had been 0 earlier voyages between Africa and America.

I agree that columbus' was the 'important' one. he sparked colonization and exploration of the americas. he is regarded as a hero (god knows why he is a terrible person)

I disagree to your other points
WHITE people may not be here. and without columbus I still say they would be.
I also disagree with your second statement, columbus would not have come if it wernt for earleir explorers.

That is interesting. I never knew that any Africans went to the New World. Then again, their impact sounds like it was completely negligible compared to the later rides they took on European vessels for the purpose of slavery.

Not that I care too much about the nitty gritty, but the fact that people are capable of making such voyages in the 20th century with ancient technology does not indicate that the ancient people actually did make the voyages. I think the will of a people determines far more about what they do than their particular technological advancements/limitations. It sounds like Africans didn't really have a strong will to get to the New World.

Also, I don't think I've ever read a text book that points out that Africans are not stupid. These days, it's definitely not cool to make such racialist statements.

well columbus only went for gold and slaves

maybe the africans will wasnt any less burning, just more peaceful.
for example they brought many kinds of plants, including cotten, and they taught various cultures to build pyramids, olmecs for example

I do agree though, that they did not make a large impact

Early african civilization probably did not go to the Americas via a sea route. They did not know how to navigate with a compass or by the stars, and they did not know how to preserve potable water long enough to make the trip. If the Egyptians had come to mesoamerica, they would have brought bronzeworking, canal irrigation, the colonnade, and the practice of statuary with them. There is no evidence for any of these things is central america. Further, if the Egyptians did found the Olmec culture, they would have brought their own system of writing with them. Instead, the Olmecs (and all mesoamerican cultures) have their own distinct system of writing.

Columbus called the natives "Africans" because they had dark skin. Had he landed in Australia, he would have called the people there "Africans" as well, even though the Aboriginal peoples there had been on the island for at least 60 millennia.

Your sources both say that it "must" have happened that some of the fleets that apparently set out from Africa reached the Americas, but the faster, sturdier, and better-equipped ships of the Age of Discovery barely made the trip themselves, and by then they had colonies on the Azores to replenish their food and drink.

Muslims from the 13th century certainly would have introduced Islam and taught the Qu'ran, as it is a requirement of their religion to convert heathens. They would not have tolerated human sacrifice, and probably would have caused the early americans to attempt pilgrimages to Mecca.

The most insulting thing about afro-centric theories of american colonization is the assumption that it is impossible for the native americans to develop the rudiments of civilization by themselves. The Black Man's burden, and all that.

saying that africans couldnt figure out how to navigate or build seaworthy ship is at best eurocentrism, and at worst racism

I'm not saying they DID I'm saying they could, and I think that yes they did
there was metal working in the americas. the tainos had guanine, which was a alloy unique to africa, there was also canal irrigation, as evidenced by mexico city (cant spell real name) and various other desert agriculturists

coulumbus called them africans because they were africans. he could tell the difference, as is evident in his, and his sons personal journals

the afro phonecians rounded africa, so to say that their ships were not seawothy is again, eurocentrism. they had ships that included kitchens and throne rooms!!!
also, if one man in an african built raft could make the journey I'm sure experienved african sailors could.

it is not a requirment. they are (at least were) very tolerent, and at a time when christians killed those of other religions, the muslims allowed jews and christians the freedom to practice.


I never said egyptians by the way...
I also didnt say (at least didnt mean to say) that they founded the olmec civilization, just that they influenced it.

hey where is thucydides anyway?

You know how damned "ethocentric" it is to say that the native American cultures couldn't have come up with irrigation, writing, or pyramids?

First off, any 'alloys' would be geological. Keep in mind that there's a reason why South America and Africa fit so nicely together if you pull out the ocean - they're geologically very similar because they came from the same land mass. That has absolutely nothing to do with trade of any sort. Period. Moving on.

Bother showing a little bit of respect for the indigenous folk who were here long before any other travelers. Contrary to popular (and very ethnocentric) belief, they were not mindless idiots who had to be taught how to place food-in-mouth. As a descendant of that lineage and someone who's studying their history, I take a good bit offense to the insinuation. The fact that you're trying to promote Afro-centric history means *nothing* when you're so willing to trounce over the actual indigenous peoples. This has nothing to do with whether or not Africans came over (for the first place, Phoenicians were Arabic. Read your maps and note they were based out of Lebanon/Syria/Israel and spread along the Mediterranean. Second place, Egyptians were Arabic, or rather 'light skinned.' Using them as evidence of 'dark skinned' Africans running around teaching Indians how to live properly is.. Again, downright offensive. Just as offensive as knowing how Europeans treated Africans).

Culture in MesoAmerica, from Mexico down through South America, was thoroughly originated locally. Period. To say that those groups *had* to have some sort of an outside contact to build what they did *is* racist and ethnocentric... No matter if you're using the Africans as your changing force.

I never said they had to have their culture handed to them! I'm a skin myself and I know what we are capable of.

about the alloy, the big evidence there is not that they had it, it's that they called it the same name. imagine if you met an alien in space, and he had steel. not amazing. but if he called it steel...

afro-centrism is just as dumb as any ethnocentrism

I also never said, ugh jesus christ it's like you didnt read any of that shit. you take offense at things I never said!!

look my whole point is that africans were here before europeans. nothing really came of it, and major change only came with the europeans. I think it is ethnocentic to think that only white men can invent, and progress.
I dont mean this at all to say that only africans can, to be honest I think it equally likely that native americans crossed the atlantic as well, though there is much less evidence for it.

but one thing I wont stand for, is being accused of downplaying the accomplishments of our people, or belittling them in any way.
to be honest, I think that the lifestyle they had was the optimum of any there was at the time (and now as well) which is why so many whites were absorbed into the tribes.

"for example they brought many kinds of plants, including cotten, and they taught various cultures to build pyramids, olmecs for example"

Yeah, you didn't at all say that Indigenous people weren't able to build their own pyramids, based upon the historical knowledge that most archaeologists would pin the rest of Mexican development to the Olmecs :P

Where did you get the cotton business from anyways? I couldn't find anything to back up that in a quick, granted, google search.

If my response seemed volatile, I was picking up on aspects of your posts that sounded dangerously close to what I responded about, particularly as no one (here) had ever gotten around to saying what you were arguing about so vehemently... Which didn't make sense, outside of including what I was harping on.

In terms of the metal, who's translating both languages and are you comparing the correct time periods?

No one here ever said that 'only white men could invent' - you do need to look at your own examples though, particularly in the case of anything regarding Phoenicians or Egyptians. Because those weren't in any manner related to what is attributed to African culture; it's disingenuous to Arabic peoples.

I'll say one thing for the Native Americans. They sure respected the environment and lived as a part of it instead of destroying it.

Unfortunately ( for us all maybe ) they were not sufficiently ruthless in defending this lifestyle.

some believe that men are the rulers of the world, and that it belongs to them

some believed that men are part of the world, and that they belonged to the earth


one of them is wrong