Have there ever been any serious inquiries into the claim that Abu Bakr II launched an expedition across the Atlantic? All I can find is overeager Hotep bullshit and archaeologists protesting a little too emphatically that there's absolutely no evidence. It would have been extremely weird for a civilization as wealthy and well-educated as the one that housed Timbuktu not to have tried some sort to seafaring expedition; even societies as insular as ancient Egypt and China sent boats out. It also doesn't radically change our view of history if we were to find that someone sent out a bunch of boats that sank and that the next ruler was so embarrassed by his predecessor that he didn't bring it up again. I have to wonder if there's really no evidence or if we're just in the, "There's this obscure reference to it but no one has bothered to really look into it," phase.
Have there ever been any serious inquiries into the claim that Abu Bakr II launched an expedition across the Atlantic...
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
What part of "absolutely no evidence" don't you understand?
He was trying to find a trade route by sea up the west coast of Africa.
>It would have been extremely weird for a civilization as wealthy and well-educated as the one that housed Timbuktu not to have tried some sort to seafaring expedition
Take a look at a map. Notice how no matter which way you sail from the mouth of the Niger, you have thousands of miles of jungles and niggers to get past before you reach anything remotely worth trading with.
WE WUZ TRANSATLANTIC NAVIGATORS N SHIET
The Mali Empire reached the Atlantic.
So did the Irish, and they didn't discover the Americas either.
U wot m8? The first half of the Niger is full of merchants, the second half is full of bush goods
You're fucking retarded. You wouldn't happen to be a nigger by any chance?
I'm not saying they did. Can you read?
read more books
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
What I don't understand is why people want to see "discoverers" of the americas everywhere.
In case this expedition existed and was proved to exist, wouldn't it be more logical for this malian wannabe explorers to try to discover maritime routes to reach N. Africa/Europe to the north or Kongo (even east africa) to the south? Why would they go west without the reasons that made Leif and Columbus go west?
Then what was your point, moron? Mali had a coastline? Well no shit, so fucking what?
>WE
So what you're saying is that you can't read. Got it.
>HURR
So yes, you are a moron. Okay then.
That's legit. It definitely smacks of a post-Columbian mindset. That said, if there was even an inkling of a completely untapped trade venture much closer to your shores than Europe's, that would be reason enough. Mansa Musa's pilgrimage to Mecca was also an attempt to gain trading partners, though via a shock-and-awe publicity campaign rather than a shot at an unknown market/resource base.
Also, the knowledge base of that part of the world was rooted in intellectual abstraction of navigational methods (by land rather than sea). Hypothetically-speaking, it's not that big of a leap for someone to take those skills and to try to apply them to maritime navigation.
West Africa's bias towards oral tradition (and modern scholarship's bias against it) is super-frustrating. It would be nice to know what the hell was going on down there in detail.
Do you even have a point? Are you just blindly contrarian in the hopes that people won't notice when you lamely strike at shadows? Does your ego rest so precariously upon a spear tip? Why are you such a faggot?
Fuck off back to /pol/
Islamic societies started out degenerate and vile and went downhill from there.
Not an argument, stormtard
So yes, then.