Why did Egypt do so little to advance humanity despite lasting so long?

Yes, the way the Sumerians, Greeks and Romans did.
>Progress myth
oh yes thats right nothing has ever progressed, whether you meme it or not history is generally a gradual progression until now

Yes, but they weren't incentivized to develop technology or think about the future. They were more present and past oriented than anything. Any advances were often in the methodology of dealing with and preparing for death.

>set
But that's anubis, not set.

>Their religion was centered around death more than it was around life, and so their culture was stagnant

Ah yes their culture "failed". Despite having lasted longer than AD/CE has existed, where countless cultures have fell. They were the ones who fucked up by lasting longer than anyone ever could, right.

>GOAT
>not based Rock Raiders
lol

You like art? You like culture? They were part of the initial spark that created the entire concept of classical art that Greece and the Fertile Crescent carried. Egypt contributed enormous amounts to civilization through osmosis over time.

It took a certain knowledge to build pyramids, you know

is it one of those jimmy thunder sets? they were pretty cool

Did he fucking say failed? No he said stagnant? And in the end it did fail, the rest of the world advanced past it and easily made Egypt their bitch.

>weren't incentive to develop technology
Didn't they have elaborate industry related to the floodplains, construction, crafts?
I think OP's assertion that the Ancient Egypt didn't "advance humanity" anything is not even valid at all, much less we should extrapolate upon it.

>I think OP's assertion that the Ancient Egypt didn't "advance humanity" anything is not even valid at all, much less we should extrapolate upon it.
They aren't considered particularly important in how we got from caveman to now. While Mesopotamians led the way and then the Greeks and Romans, Egypt did very little other than build pyramids and farm the nile.

>Mathematics, geometry, atchitecture, statuary
>no advancments

Kys and stay kissed

I said stagnant. Not failed. They were greatly successful for what they were trying to do, and they lasted a long time. My only point was that without much cultural focus on the future, they were bound to be invaded and outmaneuvered eventually.

I also forgot to mention their relative isolationism compared to other ancient cultures, and their geographical position meant they didn't trade as much as the Greek or Mesopotamian civs, and this contributed to their cultural stagnation and focus on death.

This is just my impression of the Egyptians based on sub-scholarly hobbyist study. So please feel free to read primary sources and not mind my dumb ass.

>Did he fucking say failed? No he said stagnant?
Fail is relative here. To say it is stagnant is to say it failed. It did not. To stay it was "stagnant", is also horse shit. You don't know anything about Ancient Egypt or their culture and it's obvious. Pharaohs could edit mostly whatever they wanted in Egypt's polytheism, up to having monotheism for a reign.

>And in the end it did fail, the rest of the world advanced past it and easily made Egypt their bitch.

No culture has yet to "make Egypt their bitch", as no culture has lasted as long, the only second being the conglomerate of them sharing commonalities through the Fertile Crescent at the times.

>Egypt did very little other than build pyramids and farm the nile.

Lol, end your life.

>What is Egyptian statuary
>What are Egyptian temples which influenced Greek temples
>what is Egyptian mathematics and geometry

Also I don't see how the Egyptians did less than the Sumerians

>I also forgot to mention their relative isolationism compared to other ancient cultures, and their geographical position meant they didn't trade as much as the Greek or Mesopotamian civs, and this contributed to their cultural stagnation and focus on death.

Their focus on death was more than others, but other cultures at the time had a significant focus on death as well. I don't think it was due to trade, it was entirely due to high mortality.

>They aren't considered particularly important

That's just incorrect, even more so when you yourself bring up Greeks, where do you think the greeks got their conception of Gods and mythos, their ideas of archetecture?
During the entire Hellenistic/Roman era you are crowing about, Egypt STILL remained a vital and powerful economic center.

I know a lot about Egypt. It was very stagnant, their later culture is almost identical to their early culture. They had 3000 years and basically didn't do anything other than build tombs. They never had a great empire, they never invented anything particularly important to the human race, they didn't give us any ground breaking new political ideas, they just stayed the same until the end.

The Persians ended up ruling them, then even the Kushites, and eventually the Greeks and Romans, who when they rolled in basically found Egypt a backwater, which it had become.

They didn't really need to go anywhere because they were already at the best spot they could be. Plus it's not like there were a fuck ton of organized societies at the time for diplomacy (aside from the Hittites but we all know how that turned out)

They kept to themselves and only ventures outside to steal from kikes and other sandniggers. Sounds like a pretty sweet gig to be honest family

You'll have to define your terms.
What does "advance humanity" mean?
How does one do such a thing?

By the time the Greeks were getting involved with the Egyptians their time had passed. Greek mythology is Indo-European. Egypt became the farm of Rome because it was very fertile.

>it's a user knows nothing about history but still think his opinion matters thread

Those were built by Apocalypse from x-men you silly goose.

>All these Egyptboos butthurt to hades that Egypt basically did nothing but stack stones

>It was very stagnant, their later culture is almost identical to their early culture.
Not for lack of trying on your part, but have you ever heard the term "If it ain't broke, don't fix it?". It wasn't the same, and it wasn't identitcal.

Their art style changed dramatically from Archaic, to Old, to Middle, to New Kingdoms. Their beliefs changed rapidly, you don't have to mention their attempt at monotheism..

>They never had a great empire, they never invented anything particularly important to the human race, they didn't give us any ground breaking new political ideas, they just stayed the same until the end.

That's horse shit, without the Egyptians obsession over idealism in Greek art wouldn't have gotten traction, and without that, the world would be entirely different.

>he Persians ended up ruling them, then even the Kushites, and eventually the Greeks and Romans, who when they rolled in basically found Egypt a backwater, which it had become.

Towards the end yes. But, in that end, they lasted longer than all who lay claim on them. All those cultures managed to do was look upon a wreck of a culture that existed longer than they could comprehend and say they conquered all of its history in hubris. They couldn't manage what the Egyptians managed no matter how hard they could try.

>Egyptboos
Disgusting

>T. knows nothing of ancient history

Both the Minoans first and the Myceneans later had frequent contacts witht eh Egyptians

Sure thing buddy
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_mathematics
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_medicine

You don't have to be a fan of a culture to realize that criticism over it can be wrong. And it is wrong to say among the first substantial human civilizations wasn't impactful. It was. It influenced the Near East and to the north the Mediterranean in styles and ways we can't hope to understand in toto thousands of years later. What we do know, is that without them, Classical Greek art wouldn't have existed, and that's a large back bone of Western culture.