Chel’s answer to “Many historians have reexamined and abandoned the notion that Africa was always primitive and poor.…” > Likes and Comments

Well, I gave you the name of one already: John K. Thornton. The work of his to look up is "Africa, Africans, and the Making of the Atlantic World," which shows pretty compelling evidence that West and Central African societies were just as wealthy and technologically advanced as European ones during the Early Modern Period.

Thornton focuses on large portions of Africa; a number of other historians have focused on individual regions of the continent, but come to similar conclusions about those regions. These historians include Andrea Mosterman (for work on the Kongo Kingdom), Richard Grey (for work on the Zambezi region), and S.I. Mudenge (for work on the Rozvi Empire).

I'd also recommend you take a look at Daron Acemolglu and James Robinson's paper, "Why is Africa Poor?" Unlike Thornton, Acemolglu and Robinson argue that Sub-Saharan Africa *in general* has always been poorer than Eurasia, but make exceptions for civilizations from certain parts of the continent, including Ethiopia, the Sahel, and the Swahili Coast. This is still a problem for Diamond's thesis, though not to the same degree that Thornton's work is.

Chel, as a counterpoint to this book, may I suggest Voyages of the Pyramid Builders? The author believes that civilization began in what is now called Austronesia and moved, not outward from Africa,but from west to east! Besides, who in the world decided that nuclear weapons=civilization???

There are not any except those who use "alternative facts," which are not truths. Read Mega's post.