There's a lot of archaeological evidence showing up recently that seems to be saying the Amazon has been more advanced for far longer than has previously been thought. So, who knows, maybe an Amazon civilization is OTL.
I think the Amazon is a great place for a complex society to develop: Huge amounts of domesticable plants, relative lack of natural disasters, great fishing grounds in huge rivers, the ability to make terra preta from waste so that the soil is more fertile than most others on Earth... It seems that, had some Amazonian leader came along and unified a large area, a strong, more developed civilization could rise out of the relatively small chiefdoms and protostates.
The Amazon could also withstand an Iberian attack if it was large and developed enough; indeed, to me it seems that the Spaniards going to nearby Tawantinsuyu only conquered the empire due to a succession crisis, without which Tawantinsuyu would not have had the Civil War (as in "Inca: The Scarlet Fringe.")
Thus, I think the Amazon is one's best choice, seconded by an earlier civilization in the Congo River basin, which, although having fewer domesticable crops, would not suffer from the disease problem, would be less isolated and would also be able to use many of the same advantages as the Amazon.
The northwest pacific shore of North America? The natives there had a pretty complex culture based on whaling and fishing. Add a domesticate (reindeer maybe? Or tame sea mammals even?) and some crops (harder), and it could be interesting.
The northwest pacific shore of North America? The natives there had a pretty complex culture based on whaling and fishing. Add a domesticate (reindeer maybe? Or tame sea mammals even?) and some crops (harder), and it could be interesting.
The northwest pacific shore of North America? The natives there had a pretty complex culture based on whaling and fishing. Add a domesticate (reindeer maybe? Or tame sea mammals even?) and some crops (harder), and it could be interesting.
How about Yemen?
It had some large cities and impressive construction projects-check out the Ma'rib Dam-and it exported incense to the Levant and the Mediterranean. However, its agriculture was fragile and relied on the Dam which needed constant repairing and maintenance, so that if there was a civil war or a slip in state revenue or control then there would be mass famine. Also, it's relatively inhospitable so populations were always lower than in the Fertile Crescent or Greece.
Actually the Pacific Northwest wouldn't need much more than an agriculturally productive cultivar of Hemp. We already know how well it grows there.
They have everything else in pretty much abundance, maybe a domesticated sea otter to aid in shellfish harvest but that isn't even necessary.
Give them good hemp and the whole area takes off. Smell that? That's the smell of a good TL in the making, man... (if I had a hippy toking smiley I'd insert it)
The British Columbia coast is not suitable for corn (maize to you Brits), which is the only major staple crop to which they might have access. Besides, the people there had a good thing going, why would they change? Further south, in Washington and Oregon, it could happen (the Willamette has been mentioned). One needs to consider what crops people in any region might have access to. Oats and potatoes would work in BC, wheat in Australia, but how do they get there?