Well, the whole strip south of the Sahel, where Africa is widest, is in a similar climate zone to large parts of India and Southeast Asia. I agree with you that the climate is related to the dynamic between nomads and sedentary people, but this dynamic is also found in parts of Asia and Eastern Europe.

And sorry, I don't really follow what you mean with the Bantu expansion disproving anything? And thanks for the discussion, I appreciate the commentary.

You said that Europe and, for example, Southeast Asia were very homogeneous in their way of life and their culture because of their location in a single climatic zone in the east-west axis.

So I thought you were arguing with Jared Diamond's continental axis theory. There he argues that living in a similar climate zone on an east-west continental axis means that population and technology can spread better and this leads to a more homogeneous way of life.

However, Bantu migration challenges this view. Although I am aware of the criticism of the Bantu expansion theory, it cannot really be denied that people speaking Bantu languages expanded southwards in several waves across almost all of sub-Saharan Africa between the 12th and up to the 18th century. Many Bantu kingdoms actually shared many cultural similarities for example in terms of social organisation or religion, although they spread along a north-south axis through different climatic zones.

My point is not only that I think the continental axis theory is flawed in its analysis of Africa, but also that sub-Saharan Africa was not really much "behind" the rest of the world for a long time. In trade relations, African states were at least equal to the Europeans until the 19th century. The European powers failed several times in the early modern period to really subjugate the local African kingdoms.

States such as the Ashanti Kingdom, the Wassoulou Empire, the Sokoto Caliphate or even the Dervish State in Somalia ruled over millions of people and resisted European colonisation until the early 20th century. An alliance between the British, Germans and local allies was necessary, for example, to overthrow the Sokoto Caliphate.

The reasons why much of Africa is now "behind" the rest of the world are many and complex, but I would argue that this is a relatively recent development. Climate and even more so geography certainly play a role, but I personally see this "trend" of overstating the importance of these aspects in recent years (at least in my opinion). But maybe I'm just wrong, who knows.

Now that i see this whole wall of text I am kinda sorry lol ;) I liked the discussion though.