Which region was relatively poorer in ancient times? a. Asia, b. Africa, c. Europe?

Question

The reasons if any like;

low population density,

adverse climatic conditions for livestock, crops, other flora and faunasn etc.

resource scarcity

etc.etc.

Answer 1

Europe .. Both asia and africa had much HIGHER population, many moure resources, and much better climate. Europe is actually a ridiculously poor continent. That is that reason for colonialism ... its just that european are more agressive and smarter than everyone else... :)

Answer 2

Before this question can be accurately answered, you must define "relatively" (in relation to what?) "poorer" (poorer than what or whom and in what way?) and "ancient times" is a rather broad time span. However, the simplest answer would be c. Europe, since the Great Wall of a. Asia and the Pyramids of b. Africa would both seem to qualify as being "relatively richer" (economically and culturally) than anything still extant in c. Europe since "ancient times."

Considering the additional details, Europe definitely is your winner. Europeans colonized both of the other contending continents as a result of scarcity of their resources and the "poorer" climate conditions (not to mention geographical size!), and although Europe had, and still has a comparitively low population density, the decendants of Europeans now live throughout the world to a greater extent than do the decendents of Asia or Africa.

Answer 3

Europe

Answer 4

Define "ancient" times. Regardless, the answer will definitely be Europe pre-Rome and probably still Europe until about the Renaissance and the advent of African slavery.

Answer 5

i would say africa, because europe and asia had larger populations, and africa had poorer technology.

Answer 6

think it's africa coz china and india in asia while france and spain were dominant in europe

Answer 7

europe

Answer 8

i think all of them was poor. asia was relatively rich that included china, india, persia that had sound finance system.

Answer 9

C.EUROPE