Most Important City in History?

[Xen]

Originally posted by andrewgprv
Xen keep in mind that their are about 10,000 years of civilisation. I'm not trying to say the west hasn't been important, it has been very important to history and has had it's fair share of contributions to human development (espically in the last 500 years)

But most people on these boards have a slanted view of history, slanted in favor of the west. Not that I can blame them, in my high school education I could easily have thought that all of human accomplishment revolved around Europe. Xen may I suggest you read the book Guns, Germs and Steel for a less bias account of what made the west what it is.

Guns, germs and Steel, IIRC, is all about how the wests military gusto made it the predomiant culture on earth oh yes, ithink a great deal of people underestimate just what i havem and have not read

 

[andrewgprv]

Originally posted by Xen


Guns, germs and Steel, IIRC, is all about how the wests military gusto made it the predomiant culture on earth oh yes, ithink a great deal of people underestimate just what i havem and have not read

you mean how the west's guns, germs, steel and most importantly food production which were for the large part it's cause of success and which most of which were imported technologies.

 

[Xen]

one thing that i disagree with is "impoted' technology- sure, inventions like gunpowder were imported, but then most, if not all historians who know what they are tralking about can tell you very plainlly, that due in no small part to alchemy, that europe was well on its to developing the stuff anyway

while other inventions, such as the catapult, Crossbow(no confusion though, it wa sinvented indipendentlly as with many nvetions, in both the west, and the far east), and one of my favorites, greek fire

even iron has some doubt as to who was using it first- balc sea tribes iron, IIRC, has some dates associated with it that might give the hittites a run for thier money (though i tend to group the hitties as a semi western natrion anyway)

 

[andrewgprv]

Xen I think there's no debate that the west has clearly dominated the world for the last 500 years but would you not agree that pre-1500 the west did not stand out uniquely, it was if anything on par with the near east and far east.

I can understand people voting for Rome in this type of poll, as Rome greatly influenced classic history up to modern history, but London? come on London has been an important site of civilisation for a mere blip in history.

 

[Tavenier]

Originally posted by andrewgprv
Xen keep in mind that their are about 10,000 years of civilisation. I'm not trying to say the west hasn't been important, it has been very important to history and has had it's fair share of contributions to human development (espically in the last 500 years)

But most people on these boards have a slanted view of history, slanted in favor of the west. Not that I can blame them, in my high school education I could easily have thought that all of human accomplishment revolved around Europe. Xen may I suggest you read the book Guns, Germs and Steel for a less bias account of what made the west what it is.

I read it (Jared Diamond is a good auteur).
But still I think the west or Europe has played the most important role in history. Maybe not in length, but in significance. Rome and Greece were by far not the first real civilization, but still had a much greater impact on history then, say, Egypt.
In the centuries after the fall of Rome Europe was indeed pretty backwards, but still more 'civilized' then most regions, except those like Arabia or China.
The last 600 years (I count Portuguese exploration, reconquista and some other developments too) Europe was dominant again. And again its impact and significance is unequalled.
China or Persia or Arabia were great civs throughout history, but never had the impact on the world like England, Rome, France or Germany.
Length or quantity isn't important, but it is significance/quality.

 

[Xen]

Originally posted by andrewgprv
Xen I think there's no debate that the west has clearly dominated the world for the last 500 years but would you not agree that pre-1500 the west did not stand out uniquely, it was if anything on par with the near east and far east.

I can understand people voting for Rome in this type of poll, as Rome greatly influenced classic history up to modern history, but London? come on London has been an important site of civilisation for a mere blip in history.

hence why london is not at the top of my list but fact is, London has influence the world infantley more times, then say Chang'an, or Louyang ever has.

also, with the exception of the high period of ancient Imperialism, one shoudl note that no single empire has influenced tyhe world, except for the too shocking to really count empire of the united Mongols, thus, any pre, and post roman era civs must be looked at how far their own regional impact goes

 

[SanPellegrino]

Originally posted by Xen
one thing that i disagree with is "impoted' technology- sure, inventions like gunpowder were imported, but then most, if not all historians who know what they are tralking about can tell you very plainlly, that due in no small part to alchemy, that europe was well on its to developing the stuff anyway

That is a very good example for the qualities of the West. They didn't invent it in the first place (but second, Berthold Schwarz 1380?, in german it is called "Schwarzpulver"), but they were the first that discovered its great use. Which lead to long-range cannons and handfireguns in 2 centuries, while the Chinese, sitting 500 years on the stuff only came up with some rockets.

 

[puglover]

Bethlehem, Israel

 

[sebanaj]

Islam was superior til around 1500...
The spreading ideals of the classical age and the printing press made the difference. With the books extended to more people, new interpretations appeared... etc... Anyway these may not be the last truth, because probably the priests wrote only what they wanted people to know about the world of that time, and they monopolized the high culture.

Rome, Constantinople, Venice

Not Jerusalen really, as it was more of a religious center, nothing relevant in my eyes.
I'm obviously against any type of religion.
Don't missunderestimate Bush

 

[Emperor Xerxes]

I stand by my statement of Ur.

It may not be the truely first city but evidence stongly suggests it was the nucleus that kick stated advanced civilization.

 

[Achinz]

The Chinese cities get my vote - need to redress the Western bias

 

[EdwardTking]

Jerusalem

 

[Lord_Sidious]

Rome:
Because it was a city with quick grow (in 700 bc was a bunch of huts, in 300 was the most glorious city of the world and nowadays is still one of the most important cities in the world)
it was the center of the roman empire (very powerful).

Lisbon:
It isn't there in the poll but was one of the most important roman city in Iberia(modern Portugal and Spain)right behind Hispalis, Tarraco, Bracara and Gades(the romans called Lisbon Olissipo)
During Arab ruling was on of the "crown jewls" of the moors.
In the middle ages was the "door" between the Atlantic and the Mediterean. Lisbon resisted many sieges. In Age of Decovery (portugal's first golden age) was one of the most important(or not to say the most) harbor in Europe. In that time Lisbon was considered the modern Babylon. Lisbon until the 1700' lost its importance but with the independence(in 1640). But with the King John V Lisbon was back in its former glory with many gold.
In 1775 an earthquake shaked Lisbon it was the longest ever registed and the worst in Europe (8.3 Ritcher)Now Lisbon is a beautiful city with old (we are the city in Europe with more statues right behind Rome and we have many palaces and monuments)and the new.

Others in the top of my list

Byzantium/Contantinople/Istambul
Paris
London
Baghdad
Ur
Jerusalem

 

[MCdread]

In my view, it would definitely be Rome.Capital city of one of the world's most important civilizations and empires, birthplace of so many characteristics of nowaday's society (after 2 millenia), center of the catholic faith and home of so many of the world's greatest works of art.

As for the poll, it clearly lacks Paris.

 

[Pangur Bán]

AH, you nationalist Portuguese Gotta love ye.
(Reference is not to MCDread)

 

[MCdread]

Originally posted by calgacus
AH, you nationalist Portuguese Gotta love ye.
(Reference is not to MCDread)

The funny thing is that at home, a favourite national hobby is bashing ourselves. But this compatriots of mine at CFC seem to be from a different breed.

Hmm... now that I think of it, and having noticed the smile that Rolo Master gave our current prime-minister in another thread and knowing that another proeminent poster (a good friend of yours calgacus ) is a member of the prime-minister party's youth, it must a thing of them.

 

[Lord_Sidious]

you are joking. where i did that?

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by SeleucusNicator
I can't think of a city that has been more important than Rome. Nothing else comes close.

Agreed. Rome has everything of importance.

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by SeleucusNicator
I can't think of a city that has been more important than Rome. Nothing else comes close.

Agreed. Rome has everything of importance.

 

[raen]

Originally posted by calgacus
AH, you nationalist Portuguese Gotta love ye.
(Reference is not to MCDread)

Hahahahaha, I have to say you nationalistic Scotish Gotta love ye

In-topic: I voted for Alexandria

@Rolo: Do you really like The current prime-minister? if yes, this is very bad...

Originally posted by McDread

The funny thing is that at home, a favourite national hobby is bashing ourselves. But this compatriots of mine at CFC seem to be from a different breed.

Yes is true, when things go wrong we bash ourselves. Am I in this different breed you say? This means you bash the Portuguese?

In my case I not consider myself nationalistic, but I dont like people to say lies about Portugal. And when I am proven wrong I stop, when not I will never stop