Why doesn't the USA have any medieval history that is detailed?

[L7. D4N]

Just look at Europe, there's so much to discuss when it comes to the Middle Ages. Heck even East Asia (or the rest of the world outside the Americas) has history during that era: Japan with the Samurai, China with the dynasties, Korea with Joseon, Middle East with the Caliphates also Christianity & Islam, the crusades, etc...

I mean why are there barely any recorded events between 500-1450 AD with the same amount of detail Middle Eastern, European & Asian history has, do you see a "castle" built in the USA that is exactly the same age as a German one for instance? Does the USA have any interesting history that predates European contact?

[Ulfrinn]

Native American groups were mostly stone age some were starting to scrape the beginning of the copper age. Compare it more to like 5000BC Europe.

[Skkooomer Lord]

You do know I live where the police force was invented? It's Anglo Saxon.
Sir Robert Peel.

[Incarnate]

The indigenous peoples (in NA) generally were not as populous and lived in their area a much shorter span of time, many being nomadic. Also, the Indians lacked an alphabet to record history and built wood not stone structures (basically they rotted away or were burned in wars.)

[Electric Cupcake]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine_Wheel/Medicine_Mountain_National_Historic_Landmark

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

The Indians had no written language. No domesticated animals. They were basically hunter/gatherers. The horse was something that was brought over from settlers in the 16th century.

As for their history...I don't think it'd be the type of thing that would fit the "woke" history books. Look at the attempt to relabel Indians as Native Americans. This almost makes them sound like a single nation which I think is kind of disrespectful to the individual tribes which weren't all friends, and some of the tribes had very different cultures/beliefs then others. The Cherokee for instance have a very very brutal history

Tribes wiped out other tribes, took over each others land. People talk about giving the land back to certain tribes, but the problem is it's likely that land is going back to only the last owners and that if you looked into history you'd find another tribe owned it before.

[76561198356019466]

[zeke]

More of a general note than an answer to the OP's question:

Despite popular (mis)conception, I wouldn't exactly look to the castle as being any sort cultural pinnacle.

The entire reason that castles were so popular in Europe (for a period of time) was that, ultimately, the real power that any given lord had pretty much only extended locally. Sure a castle is great if all you're worried about is defending a town or two and the surrounding lands (and holding onto it at all costs), but as soon as your 'real' power/control actually extends beyond local borders, the 'all your eggs in one basket approach' of building castles no longer makes any sense from neither a military nor economic standpoint. Walling off important cities and building basic-to-moderate forts/garrisons provides you with a lot more flexibility in the allocation of resources and the 'how' and 'where' you choose to fight. The prevalence of castles in Europe is just a reflection of the local-focused power structure that became common under European feudal systems.
------------------------
In other words, while castles were notable undertaking they are, for the reasons outlined above, one of the poorer examples a civilization can put forward of its wealth/technological prowess/military might. You'd be better served by altogether forgetting about them than placing any notable value/emphasis on them as an object of comparison. Instead I'd recommend placing a greater emphasis on the presence of large cities and other notable works/undertakings in general.

[Moogal™]

Obviously because there were only dinosaurs there back in the day. Now there are mostly dinos too but they are smaller.

[Astrallight]

Because US history did not start before Columbus discovered America. Everything before people could care less about when it comes to USA:

[Pocahawtness]

Publicado originalmente por Chunk Norris ☯:

Tribes wiped out other tribes, took over each others land. People talk about giving the land back to certain tribes, but the problem is it's likely that land is going back to only the last owners and that if you looked into history you'd find another tribe owned it before.

What happened in the past, stays in the past.

If we start the game or reparations there is no end.

Yes, it was terrible what our ancestors did, but that's history.

[↑↑↓↓←→←→BASelect]

Columbus didn't discover america as the native americans was here before columbus even showed his face here and started stealing land from them.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Publicado originalmente por Pocahawtness:

Publicado originalmente por Chunk Norris ☯:

Tribes wiped out other tribes, took over each others land. People talk about giving the land back to certain tribes, but the problem is it's likely that land is going back to only the last owners and that if you looked into history you'd find another tribe owned it before.

What happened in the past, stays in the past.

If we start the game or reparations there is no end.

Yes, it was terrible what our ancestors did, but that's history.

What our ancestors did was human.

Most of the tribes were wiped out from disease. And while it's true that we warred with various tribes including the Cherokee, we also had Indian tribe allies that wanted to wipe out their rival tribes and were happy to have such a strong ally even not a very reliable one.

[Pronoun Paladin ☯]

Publicado originalmente por ↑↑↓↓←→←→BASelect:

Columbus didn't discover america as the native americans was here before columbus even showed his face here and started stealing land from them.

There's also some evidence to suggest that a civlization MUCH older then any documented tribe was here before. But a revelation like that would be HIGHLY HIGHLY political in nature in it would threaten first nations status with Indians.

They've found some skeletal remains that pre-date any tribe bones found. And they've found evidnce of some type of ore mines.

[CaractacusRex]

The native Americans of the plains and coasts had no written language. All their history is oral. However you can find plenty of books on Amazon with titles like:
'Indigenous War Painting of the Plains: An Illustrated History'
and transcribed narratives by some of the last independent native Americans like Geronimo

However the Aztecs did have a written language and when the Conquistadors arrived in Tenochtitlan they were given tours of the city and at the market, every market stall even had a book of accounts. Many Aztec writings were recovered after the fall of the city and so we have a pretty good grounding of Aztec history, which you will find in any decent textbook.

[libadwaita (she/her)]

Native Americans preferred to pass down their history verbally compared to writing it down. When the European colonizers came and launched their various genocides and unintentional mass killings via disease, much of that history was lost forever.

That is to say, Native Americans don't (appear to) have as rich of a history because all the knowledge of it has been wiped off the face of the earth by European colonizers.