Lack of knowledge annoyance

[Incongruous]

It is because History/history is just a representation for a country of itself.
It is a myth, a construction of identity.

E.g.: English, you didn’t win Waterloo. A coalition under the command of an English general did. Trafalgar didn’t prevent England to speak French because the Grande Armée was yet marching to Austerlitz… And Nelson destroyed “only” half the Franco-Spanish fleet… Advantage which was lost immediately after because the storm…

French: Joan of Arc was not a maid from Lorraine, and didn’t lead armies to victories… She was most probably the natural daughter of the Duc of Lorraine and was invented by the future King of France PR. La Hire and Gilles de Rais were in charge of the armies…

And we can find a lot of example like these…

It is less a lack of knowledge than a self-centre attitude, encouraged how our history is is taught.
Who really realise when we study Egypt that it is in fact African’s history? Who just realise than when we speak of Alexander the Great, the Chinese had a full history of great kingdom builders?

I think you will have a hard time of it, proving to anyone that the British (not the English) claim sole responsability for the defeat of Nappy, in almost (a few exceptions) every book I have read about the battle due credit is given where it is merited by all sides.

As to Trafalgar, true the actual battle was only part of the full story, but it was the climax. France had been teetering on verge of naval collapse for some time before Trafalgar, even before the Nile due to the stupidity of the Revolutionaries and Napoleon, who somehow beleived that wars in Europe were still won on the continent alone. But the Nile and Trafalgar did illustrate the superiority of the British navy and its officer class once and for all over those of its contemporaries, this "advantage" was not lossed after the storm. It reaffirmed Britains naval supremecy and condemned the continental efforts (with the aid of the Russians) of the French to failure, if Russia and Britain could not be brought to heel, then it was always a lost cause.

On Egypt, well no not in the way most people undertsand Africa. Egyptian civilization belongs to that group of Eastern and latter Hellenistic civilizations rather than those of sub-sahharan Africa, Hellas, Asia minor and Mesopotamia were far more important to Egypt, in terms of both being influenced by and influencing the country, thus I find it hard to call it African history.