Which nation was more developed and impressive in the BCs?

Nubia (Kush) or Britain?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=VLQkhnc2JUc
youtube.com/watch?v=I3mR9Gu93-M
youtube.com/watch?v=6dYw40tSKko
youtube.com/watch?v=k5PXRKEdtvs
youtube.com/watch?v=UluOlHEqseo
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

If we were speaking in the BCs which nation would seem genetically superior?

Rome.
And before that, Greece.
Before that, Egypt.

The 2 choices are Nubia and Britain. Not Egypt, Greece or Rome.

Britain, it was actually more advanced than somebody people think

You’ve got sites like Skara Brae, New Grane and Stonehenge being built. That must have required at least some level of organisation, which the Numidians don’t even have to this day

Also stop spamming this thread, I literally just saw the exact same post in /his/

>we wuz kanga
>muh nubian Mudhenge

Yeah right

Stonhenge? You mean the glorified pile of rocks that took 1500 years to build?

Never heard of Skara Brae or New Grane before. I assume they're more impressive than Stonehenge. If only because it's almost impossible for a site to be less impressive than Stonehenge.

WE

wuzzianism died like chanology.

Congrats on taking the period of time from Jesus' birth until Christopher Columbus' voyage to build this.

There is evidence that Britain had an trading empire pre recorded history. Copper axe heads from Wales have been found spread widely. Stonehenge was started before the unification of the Egyptian kingdoms. Contact with the middle east, and eastern Europe, is proved. It seems to have been a trading and religious hub, of great importance.

Britain didn't need big ass pyramids so that their god-king could ascend to the afterlife with his servants.
Chariots were also in use in Britain just as much as they were in Egypt.
Meaning that except in architecture and agricultural techniques, they were roughly on the same level.

Britain had Stonehenge and other structures like said, yes.
Nubia's advancements were solely because of Egyptian influence if not direct conquest of the region.
So Britain was technically more advanced than them without any foreign influence to help (like Nubia and the Egyptians)

>entire culture copied off the Wegyptians

cool cool

That was built long before Jesus' birth, like at least a thousand years or so

Britain actually had alot of crypts and impressive stone structures around 4000BC or so, we still have some of the oldest buildings in the world here, 6500 years old and still standing.

The celts were pretty advanced until greece and rome made that leap forward

Is Wuzism related to Dinduism?

Which seems to point to continual use for 1500 years.

Can somebody rationally explain to me how the Nubian pyramids are not more impressive than Stonehenge? (And yes I agree that the Nubian pyramids are not as impressive as the Egyptian ones.)

the pyramid thing on the left looks really good

I'm guessing because:
>muh iq
and
>muh wite power

they did do way better than other african nations against the brits, but that question would only make sence if they had the same wepons at the time

>>>
> Anonymous (ID: bg+Z2Yo8) 02/01/18(Thu)10:55:46 No.158819358▶
> (You)
>That was built long before Jesus' birth, like at least a thousand years or so
>>>
> Anonymous (ID: 7SGLEbC7) 02/01/18(Thu)10:55:47 No.158819362▶
> (OP)
>Britain actually had alot of crypts and impressive stone structures around 4000BC or so, we still have some of the oldest buildings in the world here, 6500 years old and still standing.
>The celts were pretty advanced until greece and rome made that leap forward
>>>
> Anonymous (ID: FVJa27//) 02/01/18(Thu)10:56:35 No.158819418▶
>
>Is Wuzism related to Dinduism?


I meant that the length of time it took to build Stonehenge was the same length of time there was between Jesus' birth to Chris Columbus' voyage. Stonehenge was built from 3100 to 1600 BC (1500 years), and the length of time between Jesus' birth and Chris Columbus was about 1500 years. (Actually pretty much exactly 1500 years if you assume Jesus was born in the 5-10 BC range.)

Basically the Britons took 1500 years to build an unbelievably crappy momument. And that unbelievably crappy momument is somehow cited to defend pre-Roman Britain.

Piling rocks is a sign of a high IQ. Interesting idea. But I disagree.

Nubia, all of northern Europe was an irrelevant desolate shithole back then. And it still sort of are.

>Stonhenge? You mean the glorified pile of rocks that took 1500 years to build?

Stonehenge is impressive and didnt take 1,500 years to build

>Skara Brae


This is Skara Brae. (Which I'd never even heard of before you posted.) It looks slightly less crappy than Stonehedge. Which isn't saying a lot. It's basically a pile of bricks. Which I guess is a slight upgrade from a pile of rocks.

You seriously find this to be impressive?

1. Stonehenge is a pile of rocks.
2. Yes it did take 1500 years to build. 3100 BC to 1600 BC.

What you talking about lad, that dwelling looks cosy as fuck.

Neolithic Orcadians invented Minecraft 5,000 years before Notch.
I'd say that's pretty impressive.

>In the BCs
Retarded question, should've been something like
>500 years BC

The obvious answer is Rome.

Stonehenge has much bigger stones. You'd absolutely need some kind of basic machines to lift and transport them. The ones in Nubian pyramids, unless I'm mistaken, look small enough to carry with 1-2 people.

1. What you're referring to is Newgrange, not New Grane.
2. Newgrange is in Ireland, not Britain. And it's in the Republic of Ireland, not Northern Ireland. I was asking about Britain and did not throw Ireland into the question.
3. I still don't find Newgrange to be all that amazing, although it's better than Stonehenge and Skara Brae.

the irish

The reason you never hear about ancient Nordic, and also Scottish architecture wasn't because it was primitive, it was because 90% of it was wooden and rotted away.

I never threw the Irish into the question. Some British idiot was using an Irish monument in order to defend how primitive Britons were in the past. And to make things even more embarrassing he didn't even write the name of the monument correctly.

Stonehenge is one of the religious sites/ solar calendars. That remains. That a mutt can't get his head round maintenance and development, is not surprising. Coming from a country that was basically stone age prior to Christopher Columbus and even its developed southern half hadn't invented the wheel.

Nordic excuses?

I take offense to this. As a proud descendant of the Menapii, who had many colonies on the British Isles and Eire, I'd like to add that our muthuts from the same time period were much more advanced. Pic related. dated 1st century BC

Ireland is part of the British isles and is formally part of Great Britain. Also you have no idea if the "Irish" built stonehenge and the "Brits" build newgrange or if neither did or one did both.

"There are two principal races of the Britons, the Caledonians and the Maeatae, and the names of the others have been merged in these two. The Maeatae live next to the cross-wall which cuts the island in half, and the Caledonians are beyond them. Both tribes inhabit wild and waterless mountains and desolate and swampy plains, and possess neither walls, cities, nor tilled fields, but live on their flocks, wild game, and certain fruits...They dwell in tents, naked and unshod, possess their women in common, and in common rear all the offspring. Their form of rule is democratic for the most part, and they are very fond of plundering; consequently they choose their boldest men as rulers....They can endure hunger and cold and any kind of hardship; for they plunge into the swamps and exist there for many days with only their heads above water, and in the forests they support themselves upon bark and roots, and for all emergencies they prepare a certain kind of food, the eating of a small portion of which, the size of a bean, prevents them from feeling either hunger or thirst"

Cassius Dio on the Britons.

Looks comfy.

Ireland and Britain are 2 separate countries. Newgrange is in the Republic of Ireland, not Northern Ireland.

Tell an Irishman that they are the same ethnic group as Britons, and see how they respond. (Hint: they'll punch you in the face.)

*blocks your path*

For fucksake, yanks. Let me try to make this as simple as possible. The USA is in America, Canada is in America, but Canada is not the USA. There are 5000, islands in the British isles, some are Scottish islands some are Irish islands. But hey are all British islands.

"Most of Britain is marshland because it is flooded by the continual ocean tides. The barbarians usually swim in these swamps or run along in them, submerged up to the waist. Of course, they are practically naked and do not mind the mud because they are unfamiliar with the use of clothing, and they adorn their waists and necks with iron, valuing this metal as an ornament and a token of wealth in the way that other barbarians value gold. They also tattoo their bodies with various patterns and pictures of all sorts of animals. Hence the reason why they do not wear clothes, so as not to cover the pictures on their bodies. They are very fierce and dangerous fighters, protected only by a narrow shield and a spear, with a sword slung from their naked bodies. They are not familiar with the use of breast-plates and helmets, considering them to be an impediment to crossing the marshes. Because of the thick mist which rises from the marshes, the atmosphere in this region is always gloomy"

Herodian on the Britons.

Thick fuck

Ireland (all of it) was at one stage part of Great Britain. They weren't a unified country until the Brits came along and did it to them

And the Irish are more than likely the same ethnic group now because Cromwell and his men raped the shit out of the ones they didn't kill.

Also Dublin was founded by Vikings we really have no idea who was there building shit, it certainly wasn't "celts" a nonsense made up in the 1700's not documented by even the Romans before that

yep, here's some more

they were primitive, but advanced enough to build sea-worthy vessels and create trading colonies all across the English, Welsh, Scottish, and Irish coast. Also Isle of Man and Anglesey (formerly Monapia) were also started by us.
We have established trading routes by sea all across NW Europe

we respected each others privacy too, every dwelling and surrounding piece of land was about a stone-throw from its neighbour, amidst forest land. So you had privacy, were not in plain sight, but if anything happened, mobilisation was quick.

Britain and Ireland were only the same country for about 100 years. And even then their unification was rather nominal. Considering that Ireland was suffering through the potato famine when it was technically part of the UK and supposed to be on equal terms with England, Scotland and Wales.

And even if Britain "raped the shit" out of Ireland, that doesn't mean Britons are genetically the same people who built Newgrange. What that would actually mean is that neither Irish people or Brits are the same people who built Newgrange, and essentially the Newgrange builders are genetically extinct.

Seems Britain had a long history of being invaded until they had enough and took over the world.

I said we don't know who did build it

I do know who didn't though. it wasn't "celts"

They all lookrf like that but some dumb italian blew them all because he wanted some hidden treasure.

Meds dindu nuffin

*looked

Dont try to position yourself as the people who built the Pyramids you stupid stenching nigger. you were slaves and dickwashers to them. nothing more.

You can swim to the island, literally anyone could have conquered the savaged britons, just by standing vertical.

Still South-England is rightfully ours though. Atrabatia, Regia, Kent... We used to be their aristocracy, Caesar confirms. They learned all their tricks from us. Reminder that we wuz also Salian Franks who united Europe under charlemagne.

France and England are our children. Very proud of them. They did well.

true,, that's actually a yearly contest here, swim the Channel unaided

Stop believing that Britain grass hut meme the establishment keeps pushing on everyone

Those are Nubian ruins not Egyptian you ignorant schmuck, even the KKK knows nubians were darkies.

This is what niggers were in Egypt. Either slaves, or inferior fighters who hadnt even gotten around to making a wheel, as they are trampled under Egyptian chariots.

PS Irish people hate being referred to as British Isles inhabitants. It's similar to how North Africans hate being called African. Even though it's technically the case they hate the designation anyway.

I know because my dad is Irish and I sometimes tease him about how Ireland is in the British Isles. My dad openly roots against Britain every World Cup, regardless of what opponent they're playing. He also hates the 3 or 4% Great Britain results he got in his ancestry test, and is convinced it's either statistical noise or a mistake for Irish ancestry.

I can't imagine what he'd think of a British person taking credit for Irish monuments and arguing Brits and Irish are the same people.

technically, in Celtic denomination, it's Alba and Eire, British was a later creation, by the Romans mostly in fact, of course romanticised in the 18-19th century

Stop posting Irish monuments and pretending they're in Britain. Seriously my dad would destroy the world if he saw this thread and people crediting Britain for Ireland's monuments.

For the last time, Newgrange is in Ireland, not Britain.

No one has said China or Mesopotamia?

Aren't you the guy with the huge Irishboo dad, who went to a trip to Ireland, and saw your dad kissing the soil, and get thrown out of a pub for openly praising the IRA while drunk?

There was a 2000 year gap between the early Egyptian Pyramids and those Nubian copies. 2000 years later and they could only muster up midget pyramids 6 to 30meter high. you stupid ugly nigger

They are all part of the global megalithic (pre flood) society. No matter where you go, the architecture is same.

>nations
>BCs

also sorry to say but things like newgrange and stonehenge were built during the neolithic, when Britain/Ireland were inhabited by people rather different from the modern inhabitants

I doubt nubian niggers would be able to build a 30 meter high pyramid.

What's even more laughable is that the establishment keeps trying to push the narrative they built all these stone structures with copper and stone tools while wearing caveman clothing.

youtube.com/watch?v=VLQkhnc2JUc
Go to 5:29

If you go back far enough we're all monkeys. Which nation is more developed today?

I love how in my college they teach us Levi-Strauss and Boas and tell us
>What matters is the IDEA behind the tools and the FUNCTIONALITY of the buildings and tools
>If a mudhut works for the tribe, there's no need to improve it.
But instantly post pics like yours to point out how "uncivilized" Europeans were.

Also, Pic is Caral Temple in Peru, it is about 4.500 years old. We still know very little about ancient Americans.

That said, I do agree the (((Levi-Strauss))) that the improvement of tools and construction, if the ones used did worked, had no sense at all.
But the whole idea of "nothing is more advanced that other things but serves different purposes" goes totally in contrasts with those same ideas.

You'd have to drag him out off the pub.
Face facts, your British, that you decided to turn traitor and stab your own people in the back, in support of the Kaiser. Using the excuse of republic to excuse murder torture and the genocide of your own people.

>ID
have a (You)

>I literally just saw the exact same post in /his/

Well now that's rather sexist. How come there is no /her/

...

Before that, Mesopotamia

be more specific, before the collapse the galics had an incredible society on the main island. Afterwards it was shite especially modern England's borders. And past that period Nubia was more advanced for about 200 years

Egypt is a joke

>Black people
You stupid nigger. The Egyptians either killed or enslaved the niggers. Dont flatter yourself. your history is empty.

>Black people

>Newgrange isn't impressive
Brainlet of the highest order detected. The neolithic people of Ireland were actually good at construction, using a technique with ropes to flip rocks over long distances to make megaliths, and had a decent knowledge of astronomy, enough to know how to build Newgrange to have light shine into directly into it it at the winter solstice and only the solstice. That's impressive if you ask me.

ancient egyptians were unironically a mix between mediterranean populations during the iron and bronze age.
On a pca genetic "map" ancient egyptian elite are closer to southern greeks and italians than to modern egyptians.

youtube.com/watch?v=I3mR9Gu93-M

This clown believes the pyramids were power stations:
youtube.com/watch?v=6dYw40tSKko

Britain's pre-Roman "history" is pretty embarrassing. No point in denying it. Or citing Irish monuments and pretending they're in Britain.

Germany was even worse than Britain was.

They were and it's not the only place these megalithic power stations were used. South American, China, Japan etc.... They tap into the discreet energy that's available all the time. Stop buying into our dark age oil reliance. Telsa rediscovered this.

Blacks and whites collide

With that being said Kushite wasn't the greatest kingdom either. Especially if you consider it was right by Egypt and copied practically everything they did.

Kush was better than Britain (and Germany) but that really is no big achievement in the least.

Also

youtube.com/watch?v=k5PXRKEdtvs

>Roman guy defects and founds the Britannian empire for a short time
Historians say this crucial moment in history is directly responsible for the British empire some thousand years later.

Lucius Artorius Castus = King Arthur

Now watch this one

youtube.com/watch?v=UluOlHEqseo

BTW I've known about all this stuff long before this guy made it known on his channel

which one had an environment more conducive for development with the technology they had at the time?

Irrelevant, the descendants of those guys are in Britain and ireland

The "English" (technically, English refers to the Anglo-Saxon settlers) and Irish at that time were near-identical ethnically. So his point was correct.