something interesting about west africa is that the kinship systems and forms of succession were WILD. when the british were doing their thing in i wanna say ghana, they abducted the two sons of this king thinking that they would steal the state on succession, and then the king died and it passed to the son of his sister, which is how succession worked. ck3 is so focused around dynasty, and reflecting the different ways that family was structured would be a sick dlc.
Yes!! EK2 has fun succession and that's just a mod, having a whole dev team and the funds behind it has to be better than a mod team. But ig they're more focused on adding new features...
East Africa, I agree. West Africa is never gonna be fleshed out based on the fact that we know almost no precise historical details of anything. I guess you could simulate the Trans-Saharan camel trade, that might be kinda fun.
All my games are primarily played in Africa simply because I like carving out vast empires amongst the chaos, and I try to unite the vast cultures into 1. I 100% agree with your points however, and I found myself thinking about that a lot.
I think a great struggle for Africa could be based on the rise of the Ifat Sultanate in East Africa. It mainly took place from the late 12th century to the 13th century so it could easily be placed in the 1178 start date. The First Ifat Sultan Umar Walasma started his rule in 1197 which isn't too far off the 1178 start date. He began a series of military conquests against his neighbours (namely the sultanate of Shewa) slowly growing the strength of the Ifat Sultanate. After His death the expansion would be continued by his son Sultan Ali Baziyu. It was a historic rivalry between the Christian Abyssinian Kingdoms and the Muslim Cushitic (Afar, Harari and Somali) Sultanates. It would be a good struggle mechanic to add because it suits the theme of CK3 well (the Islamic world coming into confrontation with the Christian world). The rivalry lasted centuries with each side raiding and warring against each other for dominance in the east African region where each side periodically gained an upper foot from time to time. The history of this conflict is filled with examples of espionage, assassination, geostrategic moves, rebellions, betrayals. This rivalry was fuelled by the muslim Cushitic sultanates desire to conquer and convert one of the last and oldest bastions of christendom in Africa as well as become inheritors to the famed ancient Kingdom of Aksum (A bit like how Mehmet the conqueror wanted to conquer Contantinople to become successor to the Roman Empire). And it is in such a religiously diverse region too, I would compare it to Iberia as it was a melting pot of Jews, Christians and Muslims as well as those who still had pagan beliefs. This rivalry climaxed in one of the biggest wars in the 16th century where the Muslim Sultanate of Adal (a successor state to Ifat) that was supported by the Ottomans almost crushed the Abysinians who were supported by the Portuguese before the Christian Abyssinians turned the tide on them finally ending the centuries long rivalry and cementing Abyssinian dominance in the region. Not only does this suit CK3's themes and makes East Africa more interesting, it can also better explain the start date of EU4 and what led up to it. And it is a great way of giving east africa some love since it is the most neglected region of Africa with no special buildings unlike west and north africa.
Incredibly well written comment brother. I’m not knowledgeable on this region. Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is the conflict that highlighted the Oromo Calvary? Maybe I’m mistaken. With struggles and flavor pacts we usually get unique units and throne rooms as well. Something I would love for Africa as a whole. A good example is the Kurdish unique Calvary which sets them apart in mountains and hills, and they counter the heavy infantry which much their region uses. This makes a Kurdish play through very unique and when they fight in their own territory they do so extremely effectively. I don’t know anything about East Africa, but I would assume they also had unique military capabilities to suit their environments and solve their problems.
@@xjuncewski Well the Oromo are not native to the Horn of Africa, hence why they are not represented as a culture in the game. Instead Oromos are native to Northern Kenya. And Ironically after the Abyssinian-Adal war concluded, both sides were exhausted from centuries of on and off conflict with the Adal sultanate having collapsed due to their defeat by the Abyssinians under Emperor Gelawdewos. Due to geological changes in their homeland, the Oromos began a series of military expansions during the 16th century. The Oromo cavalry proved crushing when it came to their expansion into Abyssinian lands. Unfortunately they can't be included in CK3 due to the timeframe but it would've been cool to see a mechanic similar to the Magyar expansion implemented. If you play as an east african country in EU4 you will experience their expansion though. In terms for special military units though during a possible struggle mechanic there are loads such as the Chewa regiments of Abyssinia and Ifat would use Argobba Auxiliaries in their military. Their recruitment was similar to the Janissary system the Ottomans had in which the Ifat sultanate would expand into non muslim lands and take non muslim soldiers to be their soldiers.
@@xjuncewski I'm still optimistic since we are still in the early days of CK3. There is still a lot more flavour that I expect to be added over the years. Don’t lose hope!
I've been saying a rework is necessary for yearssss. Paradox neglects Africa for most of their games, from ck3 to Vicky 3. How does Africa have such low development when it's one of the most plundered lands in the world to this day. I would love more historical leaders and characters in the game that bring forth interesting achievements, like they have for several European nations and folks.
because... it never really did develop. the sheer amount of disease and predation both adapted quite well to deal with humanity combined with the terrible geography for transportation or empire building really set especially west and south Africa back. (northern Africa actually did pretty well keeping up with Europe and the rest of the Med. and East Africa developed heavily along the Nile. hence the Egyptian power base there and the Ethiopian ability to resist even Italian Colonization though they too did eventually fall behind and get defeated right before ww2.) there were a handful of powerful kingdoms (like Ghana in this era or Mansa Musa's Mali in roughly the same region) but they splintered and imploded hard. the only reason west Africa was worth plundering when the Portuguese showed up is because Mali was mid implosion and the absolute redicous amount of gold Mansa Musa had gained was up for grabs... the only other major thing that Africa had to plunder for the Europeans for centuries was the people hence the triangle trade. Guns for people (yes most slaves were sold to white people by other local tribes and kings) people for cash crops (both to make and in trade for) and cash crops for guns... (once the raw resources made it back to europe from the americas.) the resources were too dangerous and difficult to dig out of the ground. the infrastructure to reach them even today being prohibitive in most of africa even when people are more motivated than ever to reach those resources. America was easier to plunder even when they had to import an involuntary and resistive work force than africa was be even when allying with local kings and chiefs to do the extraction willingly. African Colonies on average actually cost the empires that had them more than they got out of them. which is why even though they could have overpowered most African polities from the early 1400s most European countries didn't bother even trying until the 19th century. France post Napoleon is the nation that kicks it off mostly as an effort to bolster their failing prestige and find new lands for the French to settle. this kicks off a race for Africa where in every colonial power feels they need to get their piece just in case there is something valuable... (this is an oversimplification. things like treatments to help prevent the spread of major diseases invented in this century also significantly reduced the cost of such an operation while the empires of Europe had never been stronger. if they were ever going to spend more than they make on a vanity project of human suffering. that was the time. but things like malaria that made it so hard to colonize Africa also made it just as hard to develop Africa natively) that being said there is still a ton they could do with the region. there were entirely unique dynastic and religious systems in particularly west Africa. and this era is the beginning of the gradual Islamification of eastern west Africa. the clash between Islam and the various local peoples could easily be the center of another entire struggle style system. and development in game doesn't at all follow the rules of how real development works (as there is no trade system and the tech system is.... eh...) so there is no reason a player can't turn west Africa into a power house if they just had something interesting to do there.
@@scorpioneldar I read everything in your comment. I don’t agree with your general framing of Africa seeming like some helpless, stupid, poor region, ultimately reluctantly colonised by Europeans for prestige. I also don’t know where you got that Napoleon kick started major colonisation in Africa? From his campaign in Egypt? Africa was obviously wealthy or European powers wouldn’t have been interested in trade and exploitation in the first place. From my understanding of your comment you think the only wealth they had to offer was labour value?? This comment reads like a southern plantation owners diary. There is also no historical development tree like in paradox games, but you seem to think Africa was just not getting enough tech or something and they just can’t play meta for some reason. I know it has nothing to do with Africa, but there’s a video by History Dose about the Inca Empire I think u should watch. It does a fantastic job giving a brief look into an extremely prosperous non-European society. I’ll go get the link bc even though we argue I still care ab u….
@xjuncewski i think you misunderstood what i was trying to say. I was trying to say they didn't develop the kind of powerful empires that Europe did. That they hae geographic constraints that made such developments harder and an environment uniquely poorly suited to the kind of power projection that Europe became capable of. By no means am I saying African people were lesser. I am saying that the circumstances they were in made getting the kind of large interconnected trade and administrative empires that Europe did much harder. There is plenty of value there. But extraction of that value is much harder than in, say, India or Europe or the America's. There are tons of reasons for that, but the most critical in my view is the lack of navigable rivers that lead to the ocean. Ck3 doesn't really model how important that is to human development, so it's hardly a major factor here. But if your society isn't costal and doesn't have ocean access by river... well, historically, being land locked is the worst possible thing that can happen to a sovereign state. Sometimes, it is even worse than being conquered outright depending on who is doing the Conquering. Most of West Africa's major powers grew up along the internal river Ghana sits on in game rather than near the coast, and that river isn't navigable all the way to the ocean though it does flow all the way there. The mali empires most important trade routes for instance required crossing the Sahara desert severely restricting their ability to profit off any resources they had In abundance. Massively slowing migration and communication and leaving them relatively isolated from other communities. Also Europe largely wasn't interested in Trade with West or south Africa except for slaves. Which they largely traded guns for. With eastern Africa trade was quite extensive. The Nile vastly facilitated the kind of waterborn transport required for trade when modern infrastructure doesn't exist and also supported a vast agricultural production far exceeding what it's local people needed. No such conditions existed almost anywhere else on the continent. North Africa saw a lot of trade as well connected as it was to the Mediterranean and due to its extensive history as a trade center dating all the way back to Carthage through the Roman conquest and then being a major stop on the haj after the Muslim conquest of Iberia. But west Africa? Goes mostly ignored except for small trade outposts designed to repair ships for the journey around Africa to reach the west indies and for the slave trade. Also I didn't say napoleon kicked things off. I said it was after napoleon. After France was defeated and needed to prove itself again that it went to Algeria (which is in north africa) and kicked off the great power competition over Africa as a whole in the 1830's. By 1914 90%of the entire continent would be controlled by Europe. With only 5 countries remaining independent. That is one person's lifetime. Actually much shorter. Since though France England and Portugal got involved immediately most of the rest of Europe didn't begin colonizing Africa till the 1870's and at that point only about 10% of the continent was under their control. In 44 years we go from 10%to 90% control and most African colonies end up costing their Conquer more than they gained. Key exceptions being Portugal England France and Belgium (the first 3 because the took the most valuable regions as the first movers and Belgium because of the insane level of brutality their monarch ruled the congo with) even still the west African colonies were particularly expensive to maintain due to the insane amount of infrastructure spending required to access anything of value to the colonizers.
@@razier5299 Paradox could easily bank on the Alternate history aspect of African Regions. It wouldn't be difficult to do. I create Mods for Eu4, and I've tinkered with CK2 and CK3 before, designing something that is both complex, yet fun, Isn't hard to do. The Issues stem mainly from geographical, technological, and bureaucratical hinderance. It is not impossible to Fabricate a Ghana the size of the entirety of West Africa, but the logistics of making such an Empire last, aren't realistic to the region. Many of the Playable areas of Africa, are, just like today, deeply decentralized along Ethnic boundaries. And the only way for a lasting cohesive blob to settle, is if one tribe usurps the others, over hundreds of years, unless there is an outside pressure to maintain the empire from within.
Ethiopia has been christian since 330 AD, when king Ezana of the Aksumite empire converted and declared it the state religion. Also they werent jewish? Or even semitic. Although some tribes in northern ethiopia claim to be, there isnt very much evidence to support this. Apart from some traditions and arab influence on their language. Genetically at least they dont seem to be semitic/jewish at all
@henkhenk1601 Ethiopia has been Christian since Christ was risen, and they have been Jewish for far longer… I understand king Ezana was important but I feel like people overstate his role in “converting” his people and making Christianity the “state religion” of Ethiopia
Place, Europe: 😠
Place, Africa: 😳
something interesting about west africa is that the kinship systems and forms of succession were WILD. when the british were doing their thing in i wanna say ghana, they abducted the two sons of this king thinking that they would steal the state on succession, and then the king died and it passed to the son of his sister, which is how succession worked. ck3 is so focused around dynasty, and reflecting the different ways that family was structured would be a sick dlc.
Yes!! EK2 has fun succession and that's just a mod, having a whole dev team and the funds behind it has to be better than a mod team. But ig they're more focused on adding new features...
Well, theres RICE mod that realy help with some regions that underdeveloped. You would like it, im sure.
Ghana can be made administrative. And very few people care about Africa, but by all means make or download a mod for it.
Problem is how to use said mods for the new player
on the roadmap they said they gonnna expand the map so we might get china or more Africa
I love your channel so much
u…. make me blush
Ethiopia lore goes hard, Aksumites are on par with Romans, Chinese and Iranians according to Mani
Who is Mani🇪🇹🇪🇹
East Africa, I agree.
West Africa is never gonna be fleshed out based on the fact that we know almost no precise historical details of anything. I guess you could simulate the Trans-Saharan camel trade, that might be kinda fun.
Marinate in the mystery😏….
there used to be a great mod called africa plus
Totally agree, mods like RICE are almost required
All my games are primarily played in Africa simply because I like carving out vast empires amongst the chaos, and I try to unite the vast cultures into 1. I 100% agree with your points however, and I found myself thinking about that a lot.
You are inevitable
If Asia was expanded, it would get more love than Africa ever got.
I think a great struggle for Africa could be based on the rise of the Ifat Sultanate in East Africa. It mainly took place from the late 12th century to the 13th century so it could easily be placed in the 1178 start date.
The First Ifat Sultan Umar Walasma started his rule in 1197 which isn't too far off the 1178 start date. He began a series of military conquests against his neighbours (namely the sultanate of Shewa) slowly growing the strength of the Ifat Sultanate. After His death the expansion would be continued by his son Sultan Ali Baziyu.
It was a historic rivalry between the Christian Abyssinian Kingdoms and the Muslim Cushitic (Afar, Harari and Somali) Sultanates.
It would be a good struggle mechanic to add because it suits the theme of CK3 well (the Islamic world coming into confrontation with the Christian world).
The rivalry lasted centuries with each side raiding and warring against each other for dominance in the east African region where each side periodically gained an upper foot from time to time.
The history of this conflict is filled with examples of espionage, assassination, geostrategic moves, rebellions, betrayals.
This rivalry was fuelled by the muslim Cushitic sultanates desire to conquer and convert one of the last and oldest bastions of christendom in Africa as well as become inheritors to the famed ancient Kingdom of Aksum (A bit like how Mehmet the conqueror wanted to conquer Contantinople to become successor to the Roman Empire).
And it is in such a religiously diverse region too, I would compare it to Iberia as it was a melting pot of Jews, Christians and Muslims as well as those who still had pagan beliefs.
This rivalry climaxed in one of the biggest wars in the 16th century where the Muslim Sultanate of Adal (a successor state to Ifat) that was supported by the Ottomans almost crushed the Abysinians who were supported by the Portuguese before the Christian Abyssinians turned the tide on them finally ending the centuries long rivalry and cementing Abyssinian dominance in the region.
Not only does this suit CK3's themes and makes East Africa more interesting, it can also better explain the start date of EU4 and what led up to it.
And it is a great way of giving east africa some love since it is the most neglected region of Africa with no special buildings unlike west and north africa.
Incredibly well written comment brother. I’m not knowledgeable on this region. Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is the conflict that highlighted the Oromo Calvary? Maybe I’m mistaken.
With struggles and flavor pacts we usually get unique units and throne rooms as well. Something I would love for Africa as a whole.
A good example is the Kurdish unique Calvary which sets them apart in mountains and hills, and they counter the heavy infantry which much their region uses. This makes a Kurdish play through very unique and when they fight in their own territory they do so extremely effectively.
I don’t know anything about East Africa, but I would assume they also had unique military capabilities to suit their environments and solve their problems.
@@xjuncewski Well the Oromo are not native to the Horn of Africa, hence why they are not represented as a culture in the game. Instead Oromos are native to Northern Kenya.
And Ironically after the Abyssinian-Adal war concluded, both sides were exhausted from centuries of on and off conflict with the Adal sultanate having collapsed due to their defeat by the Abyssinians under Emperor Gelawdewos.
Due to geological changes in their homeland, the Oromos began a series of military expansions during the 16th century. The Oromo cavalry proved crushing when it came to their expansion into Abyssinian lands.
Unfortunately they can't be included in CK3 due to the timeframe but it would've been cool to see a mechanic similar to the Magyar expansion implemented. If you play as an east african country in EU4 you will experience their expansion though.
In terms for special military units though during a possible struggle mechanic there are loads such as the Chewa regiments of Abyssinia and Ifat would use Argobba Auxiliaries in their military.
Their recruitment was similar to the Janissary system the Ottomans had in which the Ifat sultanate would expand into non muslim lands and take non muslim soldiers to be their soldiers.
Aha thanks for clarifying. This region is so much more flavourful in real history than in the game. So much lost potential…
@@xjuncewski I'm still optimistic since we are still in the early days of CK3. There is still a lot more flavour that I expect to be added over the years. Don’t lose hope!
Interesting vid
My boys Abyssinia and Makuria! 💪🏼
I've been saying a rework is necessary for yearssss. Paradox neglects Africa for most of their games, from ck3 to Vicky 3. How does Africa have such low development when it's one of the most plundered lands in the world to this day. I would love more historical leaders and characters in the game that bring forth interesting achievements, like they have for several European nations and folks.
@@amandapearson8922 in some of the games half the globe doesn’t even have nations😭😭
because... it never really did develop. the sheer amount of disease and predation both adapted quite well to deal with humanity combined with the terrible geography for transportation or empire building really set especially west and south Africa back. (northern Africa actually did pretty well keeping up with Europe and the rest of the Med. and East Africa developed heavily along the Nile. hence the Egyptian power base there and the Ethiopian ability to resist even Italian Colonization though they too did eventually fall behind and get defeated right before ww2.) there were a handful of powerful kingdoms (like Ghana in this era or Mansa Musa's Mali in roughly the same region) but they splintered and imploded hard. the only reason west Africa was worth plundering when the Portuguese showed up is because Mali was mid implosion and the absolute redicous amount of gold Mansa Musa had gained was up for grabs... the only other major thing that Africa had to plunder for the Europeans for centuries was the people hence the triangle trade. Guns for people (yes most slaves were sold to white people by other local tribes and kings) people for cash crops (both to make and in trade for) and cash crops for guns... (once the raw resources made it back to europe from the americas.) the resources were too dangerous and difficult to dig out of the ground. the infrastructure to reach them even today being prohibitive in most of africa even when people are more motivated than ever to reach those resources. America was easier to plunder even when they had to import an involuntary and resistive work force than africa was be even when allying with local kings and chiefs to do the extraction willingly.
African Colonies on average actually cost the empires that had them more than they got out of them. which is why even though they could have overpowered most African polities from the early 1400s most European countries didn't bother even trying until the 19th century. France post Napoleon is the nation that kicks it off mostly as an effort to bolster their failing prestige and find new lands for the French to settle. this kicks off a race for Africa where in every colonial power feels they need to get their piece just in case there is something valuable... (this is an oversimplification. things like treatments to help prevent the spread of major diseases invented in this century also significantly reduced the cost of such an operation while the empires of Europe had never been stronger. if they were ever going to spend more than they make on a vanity project of human suffering. that was the time. but things like malaria that made it so hard to colonize Africa also made it just as hard to develop Africa natively)
that being said there is still a ton they could do with the region. there were entirely unique dynastic and religious systems in particularly west Africa. and this era is the beginning of the gradual Islamification of eastern west Africa. the clash between Islam and the various local peoples could easily be the center of another entire struggle style system. and development in game doesn't at all follow the rules of how real development works (as there is no trade system and the tech system is.... eh...) so there is no reason a player can't turn west Africa into a power house if they just had something interesting to do there.
@@scorpioneldar I read everything in your comment. I don’t agree with your general framing of Africa seeming like some helpless, stupid, poor region, ultimately reluctantly colonised by Europeans for prestige. I also don’t know where you got that Napoleon kick started major colonisation in Africa? From his campaign in Egypt?
Africa was obviously wealthy or European powers wouldn’t have been interested in trade and exploitation in the first place. From my understanding of your comment you think the only wealth they had to offer was labour value??
This comment reads like a southern plantation owners diary. There is also no historical development tree like in paradox games, but you seem to think Africa was just not getting enough tech or something and they just can’t play meta for some reason.
I know it has nothing to do with Africa, but there’s a video by History Dose about the Inca Empire I think u should watch. It does a fantastic job giving a brief look into an extremely prosperous non-European society. I’ll go get the link bc even though we argue I still care ab u….
@@scorpioneldar th-cam.com/video/dJItS44gRQM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=d1S4IBl7CxEI-lB5
@xjuncewski i think you misunderstood what i was trying to say. I was trying to say they didn't develop the kind of powerful empires that Europe did. That they hae geographic constraints that made such developments harder and an environment uniquely poorly suited to the kind of power projection that Europe became capable of. By no means am I saying African people were lesser. I am saying that the circumstances they were in made getting the kind of large interconnected trade and administrative empires that Europe did much harder. There is plenty of value there. But extraction of that value is much harder than in, say, India or Europe or the America's. There are tons of reasons for that, but the most critical in my view is the lack of navigable rivers that lead to the ocean. Ck3 doesn't really model how important that is to human development, so it's hardly a major factor here. But if your society isn't costal and doesn't have ocean access by river... well, historically, being land locked is the worst possible thing that can happen to a sovereign state. Sometimes, it is even worse than being conquered outright depending on who is doing the Conquering. Most of West Africa's major powers grew up along the internal river Ghana sits on in game rather than near the coast, and that river isn't navigable all the way to the ocean though it does flow all the way there. The mali empires most important trade routes for instance required crossing the Sahara desert severely restricting their ability to profit off any resources they had In abundance. Massively slowing migration and communication and leaving them relatively isolated from other communities.
Also Europe largely wasn't interested in Trade with West or south Africa except for slaves. Which they largely traded guns for. With eastern Africa trade was quite extensive. The Nile vastly facilitated the kind of waterborn transport required for trade when modern infrastructure doesn't exist and also supported a vast agricultural production far exceeding what it's local people needed. No such conditions existed almost anywhere else on the continent. North Africa saw a lot of trade as well connected as it was to the Mediterranean and due to its extensive history as a trade center dating all the way back to Carthage through the Roman conquest and then being a major stop on the haj after the Muslim conquest of Iberia. But west Africa? Goes mostly ignored except for small trade outposts designed to repair ships for the journey around Africa to reach the west indies and for the slave trade.
Also I didn't say napoleon kicked things off. I said it was after napoleon. After France was defeated and needed to prove itself again that it went to Algeria (which is in north africa) and kicked off the great power competition over Africa as a whole in the 1830's. By 1914 90%of the entire continent would be controlled by Europe. With only 5 countries remaining independent. That is one person's lifetime. Actually much shorter. Since though France England and Portugal got involved immediately most of the rest of Europe didn't begin colonizing Africa till the 1870's and at that point only about 10% of the continent was under their control.
In 44 years we go from 10%to 90% control and most African colonies end up costing their Conquer more than they gained. Key exceptions being Portugal England France and Belgium (the first 3 because the took the most valuable regions as the first movers and Belgium because of the insane level of brutality their monarch ruled the congo with) even still the west African colonies were particularly expensive to maintain due to the insane amount of infrastructure spending required to access anything of value to the colonizers.
Not many people play in Africa comparatively.
A tragedy beyond belief..
I mean if there is nothing to do why would you?
The vibes 😞
@@razier5299 Paradox could easily bank on the Alternate history aspect of African Regions. It wouldn't be difficult to do. I create Mods for Eu4, and I've tinkered with CK2 and CK3 before, designing something that is both complex, yet fun, Isn't hard to do. The Issues stem mainly from geographical, technological, and bureaucratical hinderance. It is not impossible to Fabricate a Ghana the size of the entirety of West Africa, but the logistics of making such an Empire last, aren't realistic to the region. Many of the Playable areas of Africa, are, just like today, deeply decentralized along Ethnic boundaries. And the only way for a lasting cohesive blob to settle, is if one tribe usurps the others, over hundreds of years, unless there is an outside pressure to maintain the empire from within.
You sound Canadian
How did you know
@ idk I can just hear the Toronto accent
ethopia was jewish at the time
Ethiopia 🇪🇹
My friend told me they see themselves as a Semitic people
Ethiopia has been christian since 330 AD, when king Ezana of the Aksumite empire converted and declared it the state religion. Also they werent jewish? Or even semitic. Although some tribes in northern ethiopia claim to be, there isnt very much evidence to support this. Apart from some traditions and arab influence on their language. Genetically at least they dont seem to be semitic/jewish at all
@henkhenk1601 Ethiopia has been Christian since Christ was risen, and they have been Jewish for far longer… I understand king Ezana was important but I feel like people overstate his role in “converting” his people and making Christianity the “state religion” of Ethiopia
@@xjuncewski you hover over the flag and you see the star of david on it
I play kong
u could be lying…
@@xjuncewski haram
Cool
Nobody plays in Africa
I did for Mother of us all.