What African nations would 1600-1800 Europe consider "civilized"?

This is of course excluding North African Arab states, which would be considered more Middle Eastern than African. I'm pretty sure Ethiopia would. What about say, Songhai? What are good candidates?
 

wormyguy

Banned
In terms of being willing to negotiate with them as equals?

None of them.

In terms of being willing to negotiate with them as another legitimate state and regularly send emissaries?

Probably only Ethiopia. Muslim countries would probably lend the same respect to any other Muslim countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.
 
European powers will accept no african country as their equal - they didn't accept Asian countries as equals IOTL.

However, they accepted wealth and power. If you want European powers to treat some African country like, say, China or Siam or something, make them rich. Make them powerful, that is let them have large cities, well established infrastructure and administration, gunpowder, horses, standing army, good military tradition, large numbers of both military and civilians. Note that due to geographic proximity, European powers are more capable to project power into Africa than into Asia. Therefore, the African country should be rather more powerful than its Asian counterparts.

Finally, a good strategic situation (east African coast, provinces in the interior and not only coastal, Ethopia being an example) and being christian should help as well.

Jared's "Land of Red and Gold" gives an example of what civiilizations should be to be more on par with the Europeans.
 
1600-1800 is a sea change in European opinion.

In 1600, European powers would, by and large, consider any state that had a form of government effective enough to generate revenues and maintain a military they had to take seriously (and, maybe, keep records) as 'civilised' in the sense that they would have diplomatic and political relations and try to find a modus vivendi. The Kongo kingdom, the North African states and IIRC Songhai (I'm not very good on African political history) were more or less treated that way. Europeans abroad at the time were, of course, by and large barbarians, but they were smart barbarians more often than not.

By 1800, the going opinion in Europe was, by and large, that you couldn't possibly be civilised in any meaningful, authentic, soul-deep sense unless you were Christian and white (and being Mediterranean and Catholic or Slavic and Orthodox was already more than a bit dubious). By that time, no African power - not the Zulu, not Ethipoia,. not even Egypt whch had effing colonies of its own - could qualify.
 
European powers will accept no african country as their equal - they didn't accept Asian countries as equals IOTL.

However, they accepted wealth and power. If you want European powers to treat some African country like, say, China or Siam or something, make them rich. Make them powerful, that is let them have large cities, well established infrastructure and administration, gunpowder, horses, standing army, good military tradition, large numbers of both military and civilians. Note that due to geographic proximity, European powers are more capable to project power into Africa than into Asia. Therefore, the African country should be rather more powerful than its Asian counterparts.

Finally, a good strategic situation (east African coast, provinces in the interior and not only coastal, Ethopia being an example) and being christian should help as well.

Jared's "Land of Red and Gold" gives an example of what civiilizations should be to be more on par with the Europeans.
This would be a good description for the Benin Empire. Rich, urbanized, good army and infrastructure. IIRC some of their rulers did convert to Christianity, but not enough to please the Brits. They were only outright conquered when they allegedly killed British officials to prevent them from witnessing a sacrifice. But until then, they were treated with some degree of respect, even if not as equals.
 
So, let me list the suggestions:

-Benin
-Songhai
-Kongo
-Ashanti

And let me rephrase the question a bit:
Which African nations around this period could plausibly "Meiji" to a point that they woukd be considered as such?
 
The Kongolese rulers were treated as equals by the Portuguese (during state visits, they were honored as visiting Christian monarchs, even though they were black), although that might have been earlier than 1600.
 

wormyguy

Banned
And let me rephrase the question a bit:
Which African nations around this period could plausibly "Meiji" to a point that they woukd be considered as such?
None, really. Sub-Saharan Africa is very unsuitable territory for trade, modern centralized states, large-yield farming, or horses. Of the African countries, Ethiopia is probably most suitable for development, but even so it's a very long shot that depends on solving their Muslim problem* quickly and permanently.

*(i.e. constant religious wars)
 
The Kongolese rulers were treated as equals by the Portuguese (during state visits, they were honored as visiting Christian monarchs, even though they were black), although that might have been earlier than 1600.

It lasted through the entire 17th century. Even the Portuguese kings didn't consider it as a vassal state, but rather as an equal kingdom. Kongo and Portugal mantained ambassadors in both capitals, the Pope recognized the Kongolese kings as Christian monarchs and the Holy See also had diplomatic relations with them as with any European state. It was only after the crisis of early 18th century that this scenario would be changed.
 
European powers will accept no african country as their equal - they didn't accept Asian countries as equals IOTL.

The Japanese taught them to think otherwise. Russian Navy? What Russian Navy? Earlier explorers (this would be more on the 1600 end of things) did not view China as weak; that came about with industrialization in Europe after 1800, when the Europeans started to act real arrogent.
 
What is "civilization"? This is quite the racist/eurocentric question.
What's racist about asking how other people viewed yet another group of other people? If I enquire about Apartheid, does that make me racist?
And ofcourse, asking about how Europeans looked at something is inherently eurocentric. No way around that. One can barely look at that from a Japanese perspective.
 

ninebucks

Banned
The idea that Europeans believed themselves to have the monopoly on civilisation isn't as old as a lot of people believe it is. Europeans throughout the world were quite happy to view other cultures as their near-equals, (not equals, but then no culture has ever considered any other culture to be its equal).

The notion that everyone outside of Western Europe was barbaric and uncivilised was invented much later on, after colonialism was already going strong, to justify colonialism in retrospect.

What is "civilization"? This is quite the racist/eurocentric question.

Did you read the question?
 
What is "civilization"? This is quite the racist/eurocentric question.
No it's not. Why do you think it got "s in the title? The OP specifically asked what the people at the time would consider civilized.

Hmm, so what places in Africa are viable to create the kind Ethiopia type states that would been seen as equals longer? Congo was already mentioned but what kind of resources would it take? I presume that an earlier Zulu analogue might have a chance to develop in this way too in the south.
 
Top