It appears that I need to give greater weight to South Africa. I am not sure whether this is because there are actually more remains in South Africa; whether conditions for preservation of remains have been more favorable, whether the social and political climate for research have been more favorable, or whether there has been more publicity given to the discoveries of Louis and Mary Leakey. I also have a few more entries in the history of archeological discovery, which will be useful, since I only have a few highlights.

Every so often, I decide to go back to the beginning of human history and see what I can develop from it. To some extent, this serves as motivation to examine later periods, but some subjects can be considered. Most of what is known about early prehistory has been discovered in modern times, beginning in the 19th century. For early prehistory in general, I want to give special attention to African peoples.

One of the things I want to do with the knowledge base is to track the history of social changes and movements: such as the spread of major religions, political movements, cultural fashions, and so on.  I have been doing some of this with the history of nations and major cities.

I decided to concentrate on the development of social change, particular changes and movements, and on the industrial revolution in particular. I’m pleased with the progress I am making, but there is still quite a bit to do with the addition of nations and cities.

I misremembered which group of people I had assigned Burundi to. All is well.

In the century-by century review, I have reached the point of examining specific nations. I am currently extending the history of China back through classical and medieval times.

European nations had been exploring and colonizing the world for most of three centuries, before they finally came to the interior of Africa in the latter 19th century. At that time, there was a mad scramble to claim pieces of it as colonies. France, Britain, Portugal, Germany, Belgium, and Spain all established claims after 1880.  Starting after World War II, these African colonies began demanding, and were granted, independence in a wave of decolonization.  These newly independent nations followed the borders of the various European colonial dominions, which sometimes had nothing to do with the affinities of the native tribes.

This poses a problem for me, because when I began assigning nations to various peoples of the world, I did so roughly on a geographic basis, without knowing the details of which peoples lived where.  because the African nations are so far down on the list, it has taken some time to get to their histories.  I was familiar with  the names of the Hutus and the Tutsis because of the publicity given to the Rwanda’ genocide.  I had assigned Rwanda to South Central Africa.  So, when I finally got around to summarizing Burundi which I had assigned to a different division, Southern Africa in the 1980s and 1990s, I found reference to the Hutus and Tutsis there.

Big bust. This means that Rwanda and Burundi (which are neighboring nations, after all)  ought to be in the same region, not different ones.   The easiest fix will probably by going through and reassigning Burundi from Southern Africa to southern East Africa.  I’m not looking forward to it, but it must be done. A little at a time. as opportunity arises.

Progress prompted by the late 3rd millennium BC includes better development of the 18th century and 19th century. The history of France now includes mention of the French Revolution. I have been concentrating more on the connection and development of cities, but this was an important milestone.

I have been using Wikipedia as  source, but I am not entirely happy with it.  It is weak on the recording of recent events. However, many of the most recent events require some background to understand them, so I am trying to balance recent coverage with historical background.

One of my favorite fictional characters described the feeling of success as somewhat disorienting. I’m reminded of that because I finished several things I had been working on, all at the same time.

The review of aids to history in general has shifted abruptly from institutions to culture.  For antiquity in general, I am now making connections to elements of culture. For Classical and medieval history, I have finished adding nations as far as presently possible, and I have begun a review of the importance of various peoples. For modern history, I have reviews of the importance of Mainland Southeast Asian peoples. The 18th century has also finished connection to cities, and I will be beginning review of peoples. For the 19th century, I am working on a review of religion. The 20th century is going through a review of government, and the early 21st century still through social mechanics, I think.

For sociology in general, I am going through a review of religion. I am still working on reviewing the history of peoples of the world. For communities, I have finished connecting to details of culture as far as they have been developed and have started in on human geography, Social mechanics are also going for a review of government or history.

For institutions in general, I am close to finishing a review of history. With all the focus on religion, I am still working on a review of the application of Western Civilization.   For culture in general, I have finished a review of peoples and I am currently working on reviewing the application of social mechanics. Anthropology has finished connection of nations and cities, and I will be beginning a review of peoples. Personal studies is being connected to nations.