how come Native North Americans didn’t have vast empires of wealth and cities like Montezuma had down in Mexico?
In: 2227
Some did(as other comments point out even as they don’t answer the question), some didn’t.
Some rose to that level and fell of their own accord(it can be easy to settle, but over a couple of generations overpopulate and/or overhunt and wind up with not enough food) or were wiped out by weather or sickness, not to mention warring with neighbors or the more recent infamous European colonization.
It is somewhat popular to assume that all of mankind is on a progressive slope of advancement but this really is *not* the case. It takes a certain spark to really innovate even when there are ample resources to exploit, and while that can be catching(lead to more innovation)…. without that spark, things can muddle along indefinitely.
It does not take much to wipe out a village or city that would barely qualify is a society or civilization through most of history.
Famine, disease(of the populace or a food source), flood(or worse, eg earthquake, ice age, wildfire, etc), war/invasion.
You have to remember that a lot of the US has *extreme* weather, even in comparison to Northern Europe. Northern North America is still a lot of tree-filled wild land even with today’s technological advancement.
When you can’t build 6 months out of the year, or more, can barely even reach neighbors, see massive melt-offs and flooding that can change the landscape…not to mention landscape which is incredibly difficult to transverse in the first place.
It begins to be progressively more difficult as you move to the north.
It is a wonder people even crossed the bearing straight and kept migrating south and survived to make it to South America. Meaning, the ‘native’ U.S. population’s very beginning was exceedingly harsh. This is the opposite of the other side of the world that slowly expanded into the cold from the warmer climates.
People could advance and adapt in stages, and fall back where they failed, as where in the America’s it was the opposite.
This is a good portion of why it remained virtually isolated for so long, and why some of these cultures only bear passing resemblance to Europe/Asia/Africa.
Think of it this way.
Being born on a plain of abundance makes it easier to build(gather food, educate, build society).
Being born on the frozen precipice of a mountain, you’re very likely to just fall down and die….and if you do survive to reach more favorable climates, you are basically starting from scratch, can’t go back to neighbors to learn a new skill or one we’d forgotten.
Once people crossed over to the America’s by land, it was the ultimate historical example of “the point of no return”.
Barely survive the crossing in the first place and people will be loathe to try to return, it’s difficult enough just trying to survive in this new land with literally no support from anyone but the few survivors and what little knowledge you brought with you that was all passed down verbally.
As such, a lot of ‘native’ Americans remained explorers / nomads right up until discovery/rediscovery from the east, because that was the best way to survive at that stage of technological development.
Latest Answers